Designed in Hackney: Mapledene Road
by Platform 5 Architects

| 7 comments

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

Designed in Hackney: it's week four in our celebration of design from the London borough of Hackney and today's featured project is a modest glass extension to a house in Dalston by Shoreditch-based architects Platform 5.

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

Located at the back of the house, a glass roof and wall project out from the side of a renovated kitchen and bridge across to a brick garden wall.

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

On sunny days the glass wall can pivot open, connecting the kitchen and small dining area to a terrace with the same concrete floor.

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

A glass structure also extends through the existing brick walls on the other side of the kitchen, creating an oriel window that houses a chunky wooden daybed.

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

The project was completed at the end of 2007 and was named best new extension in London at New London Architecture's Don’t Move, Improve! awards in 2009.

Mapledene Road by Platform 5 Architects

Platform 5 Architects were founded in 2006 and are headed up by partners Patrick Michell and Peter Allen. Their offices are located on Waterson Street in Shoreditch.


Designed in Hackney map:

.

Key:

Blue = designers
Red = architects
Yellow = brands

See a larger version of this map

Designed in Hackney is a Dezeen initiative to showcase world-class architecture and design created in the borough, which is one of the five host boroughs for the London 2012 Olympic Games as well as being home to Dezeen’s offices. We’ll publish buildings, interiors and objects that have been designed in Hackney each day until the games this summer.

More information and details of how to get involved can be found at www.designedinhackney.com.

Photography is by Alan Williams.

  • Dave Gronlie

    I like what I've seen from the photos provided. However, a couple of things concern me about this design:

    1.) for the roof of the dining area off the kitchen, it looks like there is no drainage (unless it's hidden in back or I just missed it). Is it the designers intention to have the water pour off the roof and along the wall, possibly seeping in along the seam of the glass door?

    2.) the oriel window looks great. The concern I have with it is that it looks flat and that there doesn't appear to be a means to shed water after a rainfall. Any water up there might pool against the side of the building (leading to leaks) or it will just evaporate up there, resulting in a stain on the glass which will require constant cleaning.

    regards,
    G.

    • Pearley

      Dining kitchen looks as if it is falling toward a concealed drainage channel, which I'd say is just hard to make out in the photos, highly unlikely the Architects fell the glazing toward a solid wall.

      That oriel window could have a very shallow drainage channel concealed partly under the masonary wall which could be wrapped and packed with high performace thermal insulation, creating a slight bulkhead at the internal reveal.

      Re the thermal properties of the glazing, you can get amazing performance out of glazing these days, but it is obviously incredibly expensive.

      I may be wrong and the architects have ballsed it up as you say! Tidy job though!

    • Chris

      Well I see drainage, it's just well hidden, as should all drainage. Unless you suggest Architects make drainage as visible as possible so as to satisfy pedantic people like yourself?

  • hotte

    looks nice, but…

    looks like they will freeze in winter and have dripping condesate on their heads…

  • rock

    it looks very neatly made, + if any sun reaches the bay window it'd be a great place to hang out.

  • http://www.tallulahward.com Lulu

    I like it but for the roof, which if it is see through glass means that the neigbours can see in from their back bedroom window.

  • Andy

    Does anyone know how they have got around the minimum glazing % here? I was of the understanding that this was around 30% of the area? Have they achieved this by combing the spaces and therefore getting below the 30%?