Johnson House, Johnson Fain Architects

johnson-facade.jpg
(John­son House street facade)

THE EVOLUTION OF LOS ANGELES
The image and iden­tity of Los An­ge­les archi­tec­ture, es­pe­cially its hou­sing ty­po­logy can best be un­ders­tood th­rough the evo­lu­tion of the city as a cul­tu­ral entity.

Los An­ge­les al­ways has been a me­tro­po­lis with great dis­tinc­tions and as Michael Webb has sta­ted: “Los An­ge­les has lu­red the strug­gling and the am­bi­tious from all around the world.” For archi­tects, the city is a uni­que te­rri­tory to test news forms, pro­grams and arran­ge­ments as well as to ex­plore au­da­cious and ec­cen­tric buil­ding design.

For all new­co­mers in search of a new life or iden­tity, Los An­ge­les has been a dream land. Af­ter World War II, and for many years af­ter, mi­llions of peo­ple mo­ved from other parts of the Uni­tes Sta­tes into the me­tro­po­lis. What these new­co­mers wan­ted more than anything was to own a sin­gle fa­mily house on a piece of land. More spe­ci­fi­cally, a one or two story home with ope­nings on four si­des with a front yard, back­yard and gar­den. This phe­no­me­non ge­ne­ra­ted a whole new in­dustry. Then, bet­ween 1950 and 1980, this all chan­ged as Los An­ge­les ex­pe­rien­ced a con­si­de­ra­ble dec­rease in po­pu­la­tion. Peo­ple be­gan mo­ving ou­tside the city so as to live the su­bur­ban ideal. Ac­cor­ding to the archi­tect, Scott John­son, “This si­tua­tion ge­ne­ra­ted a race to pro­duce sin­gle fa­mily hou­ses.” Du­ring the se­cond half of the 21st cen­tury, Los An­ge­les grew as a su­bur­ban city; a city of pri­vate hou­ses without any sig­ni­fi­cant pu­blic spa­ces or ci­vic ame­ni­ties. This so­cial and ur­ban phe­no­me­non chan­ged the way re­si­den­tial archi­tec­ture was con­cei­ved and de­ve­lo­ped. The ag­glo­me­ra­tion of in­di­vi­dual ho­mes ou­tside Los An­ge­les city crea­ted a multi-town towns­cape with many dis­con­nec­ted ci­ties. It is pre­ci­sely at this time that the su­bur­ban single-family house, the base unit of ur­ba­nism in LA, be­came the point of de­par­ture in the or­ga­ni­za­tio­nal sys­tem of the city. Also, du­ring this time, se­ve­ral fe­de­ral fun­ding pro­grams were crea­ted for the cons­truc­tion of free­ways in or­der to con­nect the su­burbs to the city and to them­sel­ves. The de­ve­lop­ment of the free­ways cou­pled with the ex­pan­sion of the bou­le­vard be­came the subs­ti­tute for the ur­ban pu­blic space. “Things like the roads and si­de­walks be­came the pu­blic space of the city,” says Johnson.

Ho­we­ver, th­roughout the last two de­ca­des, more peo­ple have star­ted arri­ving from other parts of the world. This si­tua­tion has crea­ted a shor­tage of avai­la­ble space in­side su­bur­ban ci­ties. A lot of these areas were al­ready so den­sely de­ve­lo­ped that no more open ground was left for these im­mi­grants. Mo­reo­ver, city of­fi­cials be­gan to rea­lize that it was not cost ef­fec­tive to change the in­fras­truc­ture of the “track house” fto ac­com­mo­date large scale hou­sing de­ve­lop­ments and all the ser­vi­ces that must be built around them. In the end, pa­ra­do­xi­cally the mo­del of the su­burb upon which LA was ini­tially built could no lon­ger sup­port its gro­wing population.

From there, the exo­dus of the po­pu­la­tion to the su­burb re­ver­sed around the 1990’s. Since then, peo­ple have shown an in­te­rest to move back into the ur­ban cen­ter for­ming a more di­ver­si­fied and youn­ger de­mo­graphic po­pu­la­tion. Los An­ge­les is get­ting den­ser and con­se­quently, there is a ten­sion that now exists bet­ween the need for more peo­ple to find a place to live and the de­sire of the An­ge­le­nos to keep the low den­sity of the su­bur­bia alive. In the mean­time, the real es­tate es­ca­la­ted so ra­pidly that it be­came ex­tre­mely dif­fi­cult for peo­ple to own a house. Ho­we­ver, a lot of these peo­ple were able to purchase a con­do­mi­nium or an at­tached unit in a mul­ti­fa­mily buil­ding or du­plex with a ren­ta­ble unit. These ur­ban ty­po­lo­gies made the city a de­si­ra­ble place to live. Op­por­tu­ni­ties have chan­ged and within this con­text every pos­si­ble space was fi­lled. Empty lots, back­yards, guest hou­ses and ga­ra­ges, were all get­ting trans­for­med to ac­com­mo­date the gro­wing po­pu­la­tion as well as to ge­ne­rate an ad­di­tio­nal source of in­come for their ow­ners. To­day, ur­ban in­fill has be­come a wi­des­pread so­lu­tion for peo­ple who want to own a dwe­lling. Con­se­quently, the iden­tity of the do­mes­tic archi­tec­ture as well as the ur­ban cha­rac­ter of LA is star­ting to shift from its ori­gi­nal shape. Dwe­llings now de­mons­trate a sense of plu­ra­lity and a cul­tu­ral cross over, which can be seen in the dif­fe­rent tra­di­tions which the iden­tity de­ri­ves from its cul­tu­ral heritage.

THE JOHNSON HOUSE
To­day the con­ven­tio­nal ur­ban lin­kage, or how buil­dings and open spa­ces have been con­nec­ted, has been bro­ken, rethought and re­con­nec­ted. His­to­ri­cally, most bun­ga­lows in LA had the pu­blic space on the ground floor loo­king out to the court­yard and in some ca­ses to the guest house or ga­rage. But now, with more peo­ple and con­se­quently more cars to fit on same size lots, the ru­les have chan­ged. The au­to­mo­bile has cer­tain di­men­sio­nal re­qui­re­ments and these lots, which are ge­ne­rally 50 to 60 feet wide, are now too small and too na­rrow to de­ve­lop re­gu­lar high-density in­fill. Thus, the cars be­gan to un­glue the re­la­tionship bet­ween the archi­tec­ture and the ground. From there, archi­tects have set up new forms in or­der to work within the res­tric­tions they have; in this case the par­cel size.

The John­son house, de­sig­ned by Scott John­son of John­son Fain Part­ners, is an ex­ce­llent exam­ple of this trend. Lo­ca­ted into the com­mer­cial heart of the Larch­mont Vi­llage, the re­si­dence is one out of a large num­ber of ty­po­lo­gies in one of the ol­dest and most his­to­ri­cally sig­ni­fi­cant neigh­borhoods in Los An­ge­les: “It is bor­de­red by some of the most well pre­ser­ved ol­der ho­mes in the city, ran­ging from 1920’s Ca­li­for­nia bun­ga­lows to grand old es­ta­tes, such as one may see in the En­glish country­side. It is also su­rroun­ded by a va­riety of won­der­ful eth­nic res­tau­rants, si­de­walk ca­fes and ups­cale bou­ti­ques. The Larch­mont Vi­llage ser­ves as a Main Street re­tail dis­trict to Han­cock Park, Wind­sor Square and nearby Pa­ra­mount Studios.”

johnson-facade.jpg
(John­son House street facade)

This re­si­dence ap­proaches the size of all the other pro­per­ties in the dis­trict, but with every foot of the ground used for par­king and ser­vi­ces the John­son House breaks all the ru­les for this area.

johnson-house-context-4.jpg

johnson-house-context1.jpg
(Neigh­borhood pro­per­ties, cour­tesy of Paul Bielenberg)

De­sig­ned as a long floa­ting box, 60’ wide by 140’ long, the front and side yards are used as out­door multi-functional rooms such as a car­port. Like many apart­ments built du­ring the 1940’s and 1950’s, the vehicle stand un­der­neath the house. Ho­we­ver, this sys­tem crea­tes a strange con­di­tion. The li­ving areas, te­rrace and pool are un-expectantly lif­ted on to the se­cond floor.

On the other hand, even if: “The rule in Los An­ge­les is that every out­door space starts with the car,” there is in some de­gree, more pe­des­trian traf­fic in the city, and es­pe­cially on the Larch­mont Bou­le­vard. This si­tua­tion starts to re-define the mea­ning of the single-family house in ur­ban area. More and more archi­tects, like Scott John­son, are of­fe­ring a cer­tain de­gree of so­cial in­te­rac­tion within the city. The John­son House beau­ti­fully illus­tra­tes this new genre of re­si­dence that not only re­cog­ni­zes the ad­van­tage of the pu­blic realm, but also is in­fluence by it.

Thus, the archi­tect used the front yard to in­tro­duce a se­ries of open spa­ces that or­ga­nize the se­quence and pro­gram of the en­tire house. The fa­cade, wrap­ped in co­rru­ga­ted me­tal, is pier­ced with a 2 story glass cur­tain wall. From there, the li­ving areas, such as the kitchen, di­ning room, li­ving room, me­dia room and ga­llery, are or­ga­ni­zed to­ward the pu­blic tho­rough­fare. The glass ope­ning allows the oc­cu­pant to con­nect with the ac­ti­vi­ties on street be­low. Like John­son ex­plains: “The house ex­plo­res a range from very pri­vate to very pu­blic space in fa­vor of the more pu­blic. Whe­ne­ver a space is de­ter­mi­ned not to be com­ple­tely sec­lu­ded it is mo­ved to­ward the street.” Con­cep­tually, this re­si­dence is de­sig­ned like a la­te­ral ex­tru­sion from the pu­blic space, the front part of the pro­perty, to the pri­vate, the rear part. So, the house empha­si­zes the fact that any space that does not re­quire or need to be com­ple­tely pri­vate can open up and unite the life ou­tside the walls with the semi-public life in­side the house.

johnson-plan.jpg
(First and se­cond floor plans)

Ho­we­ver, like more con­ven­tio­nal dwe­llings, this house needs to pro­vide some very pri­vate spa­ces. Thus, the mas­ter be­droom, the only pri­vate space lo­ca­ted on the se­cond floor, is de­ve­lo­ped like a sound proof cham­ber and it is se­pa­ra­ted from the li­ving room by the pool te­rrace which is si­tua­ted at the back of the house. The study and children’s be­drooms are on the third floor and have ex­pan­sive north-facing windows.

One ad­van­tage that emer­ges from rai­sing the li­ving areas on the se­cond floor is that the light starts to carve and shape the struc­ture so to even­tually illu­mi­na­tes each le­vel. This idea de­mands archi­tects to rethink and re-align the prin­ci­pal ele­ments of the house, like the lo­ca­tion of the space, uti­li­ties and cir­cu­la­tion areas. For ins­tance, ins­tead of ha­ving a tra­di­tio­nal leafy yard, the archi­tect took ad­van­tage of the po­si­tion of the li­ving area and de­ve­lo­ped an out­door te­rrace within the buil­ding that fra­med the end­less views of the Holly­wood moun­tains. Thus, rather than con­nec­ting with a tra­di­tio­nal yard, the oc­cu­pants feel as if the city is the back­yard. For John­son, this si­tua­tion is very po­si­tive: “Life has chan­ged, and when you have to de­sign a sin­gle fa­mily re­si­dence, stack it on a na­rrow lot on a com­mer­cial street, the en­tire no­tion of a home has to be re-thought. The image of the con­ven­tio­nal house ty­po­logy is trans­for­med by cul­tu­ral events, such as the mag­ni­tude of the au­to­mo­bile. This is the new iden­tity of Los An­ge­les; it is all about di­ver­sity.” Further­more, this arran­ge­ment re­de­fi­ned what a so­cial space is in Los An­ge­les and desc­ri­bes what hap­pens in its so­ciety. Like the Stan­dard Ho­tel roof­top, the John­son House rew­ri­tes all the rules.

johnson-terrace.jpg
(The di­ning room opens up to the second-floor pool terrace)

standard-hotel6.jpg

standard-hotel.jpg
(Stan­dard Ho­tel, Down­town Los Angeles)

In con­tem­po­rary so­ciety, more things are mer­ging and con­nec­ting to­gether. The idea of living/working, working/playing, entertaining/retail, etc has be­gun to mean dif­fe­rent things in dif­fe­rent con­texts. Like John­son ex­plai­ned: “In Ame­rica, the con­cept of ‘’fa­mily for­ma­tion’’ used to be a clearly de­fine idea and peo­ple be­lie­ved in it, but to­day it is a re­for­ming idea.” The con­cept of space is now de­fi­ned by the ack­now­ledg­ment of the art of mo­dern li­ving. This idea is also va­lid at the scale of the ma­te­rials. The for­mal lan­guage of a house which con­veys an image to the vie­wer can take the en­ve­lope as a point of de­par­ture for a se­ries of sur­pri­ses. The ma­te­rials of a buil­ding can be re­con­fi­gu­red to mean so­mething dif­fe­rent de­pen­ding in which con­text they are em­plo­yed. For ins­tance, the John­son House can be seen as a co­llage which af­fects the ap­pea­rance of con­tem­po­rary dwellings.

De­sig­ned with a ra­tio­nal ap­proach, the buil­ding is wrap­ped with white plas­ter, co­rru­ga­ted me­tal and pier­ced with a large steel cur­tain wall on the pu­blic space. The house is es­sen­tially an in­dus­trial box. In some way, it is a ge­ne­ric ty­po­logy that could be ap­pli­ca­ble as a sys­tem to any num­ber of si­tes along the Larch­mont Bou­le­vard, but in rea­lity, in its con­text, the John­son house is an ope­ra­tion to what is there. For the vie­wers, this re­si­dence is a very unu­sual struc­ture. “A lot of peo­ple look at the house and won­der if it’s a YMCA or an of­fice buil­ding, be­cause there is so­mething dif­fe­rent than a tra­di­tio­nal house,” says John­son. The way the ma­te­rials are com­bi­ned to­gether crea­tes a cer­tain am­bi­guity on how peo­ple read it. Mo­reo­ver, this re­si­dence doesn’t have all the reas­su­ring ele­ments and signs that say house; it doesn’t have brick, fra­med win­dows, shut­ters or a tra­di­tio­nal front yard. In the end, this re­si­dence is not for­med by a spe­ci­fic style, ins­tead it is a no­vel re­pre­sen­ta­tion en­gen­de­red by its context.

johnson-facade.jpg
(Co­rru­ga­ted steel and glass cur­tain wall wrap the street facade)

THE GRID
‘’The Los An­ge­les house sits on a tight ur­ban lot and draws upon the im­pli­cit grid of the city to de­fine the buil­ding. The foot­print of the house per se co­rres­ponds al­most exactly to the long-standing pat­tern or re­si­den­tial lots, which in turn gi­ves it a strong re­la­tionship to the street grid and neighboring.”

The grid is an im­por­tant con­cept in the city as well as for archi­tec­ture. At the scale of the city, the grid can be de­ve­lo­ped as a guide line to set up the scale of a dis­trict (to di­sag­gre­gate buil­dings and par­cels), to con­nect buil­dings and open spa­ces to­gether, sup­port views co­rri­dors or as a stra­tegy to ge­ne­rate open-ended struc­tu­res, free­dom and fle­xi­bi­lity within the con­text. In archi­tec­ture, “The grid is an open se­man­tic form” and it can be use as a de­sign tool to or­ga­nize and ar­ti­cu­late dif­fe­rent spa­tial con­cepts, like ope­ning up the house rather than de­fi­ning it by in­di­vi­dual rooms.

For exam­ple, in the John­son house, the grid is vi­sibly em­bed­ded, but at the same time it is frac­tio­na­li­zed in a way that it crea­tes am­bi­guous bor­ders within it. The prin­ci­pal ele­ments of the plan are car­ved away and de­ma­te­ria­li­zed. Some ele­ments are opa­que, par­tially open, trans­lu­cent, co­lo­red, and trans­pa­rent and a few walls do not hit the cei­ling. “From the street, if you walk th­rough the cur­tain wall you arrive in a rec­tan­gle space, which is the li­ving room, then you pass the steel stair­case that sli­ces up th­rough the cen­ter of the house, then you pass a se­ries of co­lo­red bo­xes, one which is the fire place, another rec­tan­gu­lar space, the di­ning room and a 12 foot high glass sli­ding door to fi­nally arrive ou­tside on the te­rrace and to the cu­bic pool be­yond,” says John­son. Thus, the or­der of the house is taught as a pro­gres­sion th­rough a se­ries of trans­lu­cent la­yers that of­fi­cially ela­bo­rate the grid, but at the same time ma­ni­pu­la­tes it. The pro­gres­sion from the front to back, from the pu­blic to the pri­vate desc­ribe all the am­bi­guous con­di­tions that se­pa­rate or sug­gest the tran­si­tion from one thing to another. This archi­tec­ture not only ack­now­led­ges the am­bi­guity of life, but also con­firms that the ope­ra­tion on the DNA of the house par­ti­ci­pate to de­fine it image and identity.

johnson-living.jpg
(Loft­like li­ving room)

Fi­nally, the John­son House can be com­pa­red to other mo­dels, like the Vi­lla Sa­voie of le Cor­bu­sier. The Vi­lla Sa­voie, is a for­ma­li­zed ob­ject that is si­tua­ted on an un-differential plane, so the house really is an art ob­ject. Ho­we­ver, the John­son house is a more di­rect res­ponse to the real con­di­tion that po­ses itself upon the dwe­lling. The way the cars have to work, the idea of the com­mon gar­den fa­cing a very busy street, the way the pu­blic spa­ces go th­rough the en­tire lot and the idea of car­ving a qua­drant of the house, on the se­cond and third floor, to let the light come down into the struc­ture are all es­sen­tial ele­ments that pose them­sel­ves on the house. Like John­son says: “In a par­ti­cu­lar ur­ban en­vi­ron­ment, a dwe­lling has to res­pond to these con­tex­tual cons­traints to be suc­cess­ful.” Thus, the John­son House is an ho­nest res­pond to the tan­gi­ble ur­ban con­di­tions of Los An­ge­les. In a cer­tain way, it is a cus­tom for­mula, a cus­tom machine that cha­llen­ges the im­por­tant idea of what an ur­ban house should look like, where it should be lo­ca­ted, and its re­la­tionship to its su­rroun­ding context.

0 Responses to “Johnson House, Johnson Fain Architects”


  1. No Comments

Leave a Reply