studio

ARCHITECTURE|DESIGN
as

problem solving an idea or a question which

functionality (requirements) could contribute to the
adding the aesthetics larger discourse.

independent|coexisting
le corb/ hadid / archigram
safer|contribution to the larger research criticized | contribution of a new research
 PROCESS
CONTEXT

USER PHILO.
each has an independent existance

STYLE
 CONTEXT

USER PHILO.

earth cube

memory axis

frozen anachrony

cage

imageless house
studio

PROJECTS
REQUIREMENTS!!!
1. 3BHK residence with all
rooms on ground floor
2. conserving the trees and the
pond in front
3. sustainable earthy volumes
4. a prayer space which fits an
aethist and a believer
5. kula kadav
USER PHILO.
an ethical marxist and outskirts of alappuzha, a volume which
aethist, his old retired an old nalukettu, an respects its users/
mom and brother. abandoned pond and
some good trees.
context but is loud
enough to mark its
presence.
memory axis
project team: niranjan c w
|reemu salim |anil prasad
leela
 ancestral home

pond

entry road
 ancestral home

the zone of memories

the axis of experiance

me view
the ho

new living space

pond and related spaces

pond

entry road
final diagram/ zoning
traditional kadav
library/meditation living space kadavu
REQUIREMENTS!!! CONTEXT

1. a doctor couple, with an

animal loving wife and a
husband who doesnt like them.
USER PHILO.
a doctor couple,a
grand mother, two kids
lush green site in the
residential area of
exploring the idea of
caging.
a friendly labrador trivandrum.
and a lot of pet birds.

2. a grandmother who is
disappointed that her old
house is being demolished (its
was in a bad condition)

3. iconic house, wanted a

cube shaped house.

4. need spaces for the pets to

interact with the users.

5. wanted to conserve the

trees in the site.

cage

project team: abhirami

prabhakaran|niranjan c w
| anil prasad leela
 if people could put rainbows in ZOOs, they’d do it
CHAINING
men caged his pets
in metal, sky and
the
wind in his frames
and bragged of his
WORLD
freedom within the
four walls. The
project caged
everything, its user
in fortifications,
animals in iron, the
sky in frames and
its designer in his
pseudo realistic
ideologies…
arent we all in cages ?
pets perspective human perspective human perspective human perspective

nature’s perspective
human spaces

bird spaces

plant spaces
puppy path
human spaces

bird spaces

plant spaces
puppy path
 TRUSS ROOF (rain/heat buffer) VOID- SKY

Bird space

en
uous gard
Contin Connector
dog space
MAIN ROAD
CAR SPACE Living/dining

SITE LINE
Garage
CAGING THE HORIZON CAGING THE HORIZON
REQUIREMENTS!!! CONTEXT

1. the client demanded

USER PHILO.
victorian style but he had
images which actually were an
demanded
NRI who
an
outskirts of kottiyam, a
large site with a lot of
questioning the idea
of relavance in a
pseudo victorian style expressive built form trees society
celebrates
which
pseudo
styles.

2. loud expressive residence

3. isolating personal and

common spaces from
eachother

frozen anachrony
project team: jerry sam
joseph|niranjan c w |sud-
hesh s |abhilash u a | anil
prasad leela
RELAVANCE : TIME/ CONTEXT / CLIMATE
 RELEVANCE ?
THE VOID / TRANSITION SPACE

THE GLASS AND STEEL INSERT

E N G L I S H ENGLISH STYLE
STRIPPED OF
S T Y L E ORNAMENT

STRIPPED OF
ORNAMENT GROUND LINE

COMMON SPACES PERSONAL SPACES

CONTEXTUAL RELEVANCE
BALCONY BED ROOM passage FAMILY LIVING BALCONY
406 x 150 420 x 336 (bridge) 420 x 450 420 x 180

STAIR ROOM
708 x 504
PATIO LIVING ROOM ENTRANCE FOYER
468 x 180
DINING 420 x 444 420 x 157

PORCH
670 x 450
 BALCONY
406 x 150
+360 FFL

PATIO
468 x 216
+65 FFL

BED ROOM
420 x 336
+365 FFL

KITCHEN DINING FAMILY LIVING

450 x 420 714 x 420
+65 FFL
+65 FFL
W/A
246 x 300 DRESS
+65 FFL
138 x 240
+365 FFL

TOILET
138 x 240
+360 FFL

C TOILET
STORE 252 x 157
252 x 157 +90 FFL
+65 FFL

GRAND STAIR CASE

708 x 539
+95 FFL

passage
(bridge)

seen below seen below

TOILET TOILET TOILET TOILET

276 x 150 276 x 150
276 x 150 276 x 150
+90 FFL
+85 UFL +360 FFL
+360 FFL

DRESS DRESS DRESS

300 x 180
DRESS
276 x 180 +95 FFL
276 x 180 FAMILY LIVING 276 x 180
+90 UFL +365 FFL
420 x 450 +365 FFL

LIVING ROOM +365 FFL

420 x 444
+65 FFL

BED ROOM BED ROOM BED ROOM BALCONY

BED ROOM 420 x 360
BALCONY
420 x 360 +95 FFL 150 x 408 420 x 360 420 x 360 150 x 408
+360 FFL +365 FFL +365 FFL
+95 FFL +360 FFL

ENTRANCE FOYER BALCONY

420 x 157 420 x 180
+65 FFL +365 FFL

seen below
(porch double height)

PORCH
670 x 576
REQUIREMENTS!!!
1. a house subtle and less
expressive in nature
2. spaces that recreate the
memories of his childhood
3. calm and comfortable
writing spaces and a lot of
landscape
CONTEXT
USER PHILO.
an up coming movie a featureless site in a exploring the idea of
director/artist and newly made resid- image and memory
family with two little
kids
ential area and expression.
untitled
project team: abhirami
prabhakaran|niranjan c w
|anil prasad leela
INSIDE THE BOX : breaks the idea of the image deviating from the conventional pseudo traditional practice
being followed through out the state . Kerala traditional architecture was an architecture of tactile senses
which has been tampered in the name of image these days. INSIDE the BOX explores the coziness of the
traditional living keeping aside its image value. The plain stark exterior revels nothing of the spaces inside.

THE MEMORY BOX

BREAKING THE IMAGE
 to the sky
to the sky

Private space Transparency

Adjacent
Building

Adjacent
Building CONTEXT AND SITE
Interaction space
 The client is an artist and an amateur movie director who was struggling for a balance between his art and a stable socially determined lifestyle. The small
5cent plot was located far away from city in a predominantly residential locality. The space had no interesting features other than the beautiful sky. The design
was an inward looking house, facilitating small intimate open to sky landscape spaces strictly isolated from the interest less exterior. The ground floor also
facilitated a small neighborhood space for the kids and the mother. The plain white bland cube engulfed within in it traditional intimate spaces close to the
client’s nostalgic childhood memories.

GROUND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR ATTIC

REQUIREMENTS!!! CONTEXT

1. 3BHK residence with most

USER PHILO.
rooms preferably on ground
floor retired (early
teacher/manager
60s) barren land in reomte
location|relatively
reinventing the
traditional nalukettu
couple|kids not in young teak plantation typology to the
town|family members in front present day.

2. thermally comfortable near by

spaces which could be used

without the help of
mechanical ventilation systems
owing to health issues

3. a simple clean space suiting

calm comfortable spiritual life/
large spaces to
accommodate family
gatherings

4. an interpretation of their old

ancestoral home rectifying the

earth cube
problems of darkness and dust
they once faced.

project team: niranjan c w

|abhilash ua | sudheesh s
|jayaram gs | rijo joseph
 translation

The design programme and

volumetric stacking was derived from
kitchen the study of the client’s ancestral
bedrooms home which was a NALUKETTU. It courtyard
supported a joint family of about

the heat buffer and the family sitting space

20-25 members with guests almost the flexible living space court
pooja every time of the year. The building yard
a n d
g r a i n has an extremely stunning flexibility
courtyard
and thermal quality which made it a
the heat buffer

dine storage
purely experiential space which
catered to almost all functional
bedrooms
purposes.
5
the flexible living space which
acts as the kids and guest the heat buffer and the
bedrooms
sleeping space bedrooms family sitting space (evening)

the heat buffer and the family sitting space (evening)

 flexible common
public connector space family court/connector private buffer/connector exteriors

front yard verandah living courtyard bed verandah

exteriors buffer/ pourous compound wall semi exteriors connectors interiors exteriors

the buffer wall and the built volume generates a court-A FAMILY MEETING SPACE, with ample visual
connection to both interiors and exteriors and at the same time creating an enclosed intimate space
 9
10

11

2 5 6
1. Combined Living and Dining
2. Court yard
3. Combined Kitchen and work area 3 1 2
4. Pooja
5. Master bed room
6
6. Dress and Toilet
7. Bedroom I
7
8. Car porch
first floor
9. Lounge
10. Bedroom II
11. Green roof
8

ground floor

ZONING : the interiors and exteriors are continuous interconnected spaces which can
accomodate family agglomerations
FORM EVOLUTION
 pvt.
road the barren site main
teak plantation
road
 earthcube

the rural context street teak plantation

borrowing the landscape

existing site soil and local vegetation topping

teak plantation seasonal change in landscape

the infinite gard
en extending ov
er the surronding
landscape

road
SUMMER
MONSOONS
RESEARCH ? DATA COLLECTION
CASE STUDIES
MODELS
nor just project specific

EXPERIANCES
research as a daily process | research as observations | research as a way of life
HABITS INTUTION

AMO
independent entity
STYLES: the attempt is to be style independent but there are obvious influances of
adapted modernism and traditional kerala architecture.

the philosophical styles have been on similar lines where each project tries to explore
different potentials of similar ideologies.
 CONTEXT

USER PHILO.
dictators of style

formal spatial

modernism :|

images

dictators of style
analytical intutive

independent|coexisting
memory axis earthcube
frozen anachrony cage
untitled*

top down bottom up

DES IGN
studio