|
Click any of the images for
a larger version
When the winter newsletter a
year ago last reported on the dilemma of this
seminal modernist building, the house had already
stood empty for several years. The tug-of-war
between its owners who were determined to maximize
on the economic value of the building’s location
and the local authorities that held the steadfast
position that the large landscaped setting was
not to be released for speculative redevelopment
was already taking its toll: The building was
showing serious signs of neglect. The Twentieth
Century Society had submitted a request to the
DCMS to upgrade the listing to Grade II* hoping
that the enhanced status would draw a potential
buyer’s attention to the historic relevance
of the place. Only five percent of all listed
buildings are afforded this rank of protection.
Miramonte certainly occupies
a special place in the history of modernism in
England.
It was built for Gerry Green,
himself a property developer, from1936-37. The
site is in close proximity to the Coombe Hill
Golf Club, which was a popular location at the
time for the building of large freestanding private
homes. The architect, Maxwell Fry, was at the
time in partnership with Walter Gropius, a three-year
relationship that lasted till 1937 when the Bauhaus
master decided to leave for America. Miramonte
was conceived at the height of Maxwell Fry’s
creativity.
The L-shaped building is squeezed
into the northwestern corner of the sloping site.
To the left of the driveway a cubic building,
housing the garage and chauffeur’s flat above,
guards the courtyard just beyond. A covered walkway
on the right leads us to the front entrance, passing
firstly a closed door placed exactly halfway down
the flanking wall and then an oblong and high
placed window (now walled in). From here we are
unaware of the façade above the cantilevered
canopy. Above the walkway, on the fist floor,
two further rectangular windows are placed just
so high as to permit the owner to glance into
the courtyard from the sleeping quarters without
disclosing anything of what lies behind. A band
of three openings punctures the length of this
wall at roof level. Behind lies the sun terrace,
yet it is positioned too high for our sight to
glean anything of this.
The large double height glazing
that dominates the wall immediately ahead once
showed an elegant yet anonymous stairwell. The
front door was a smooth white surface punctured
only by the slit of the letterbox. The openings
that exist in the walls framing the courtyard
on two sides are mute; they reveal nothing of
the building’s private interior or even of
the immense scale of the land on which it has
been placed.
A service yard lies beyond the
main courtyard yet concealed from it by a wall
that extends in line with the eastern flank of
the building. Adjacent to this yard service quarters
are provided for at ground floor level, on the
other side of which is a kitchen garden. The kitchen
garden again is hidden from visibility by a long
garden wall: this one extends from the southern
façade along the line of the building’s
south facing terrace. A swimming pool lies immediately
beyond and then below there is a tennis court,
but these are clearly separate from any utilitarian
activities taking place just out of view. The
public, private and practical spheres have been
consciously segregated from one another. They
hint at a complex social organization with minimal
interface or overlap.
In stark contrast to the closed
area of the courtyard or the hidden service realm
the southern aspect of the house opens itself
entirely to the mature garden below. Here the
horizontal walls, terraces and balconies merge
with their site. Large bands of continuous glazing
allow a permeation of the inside with the outside.
The principal rooms of the house, it’s living
and dining room, the study and sunroom at ground
floor level and the three bedrooms above are flooded
with light.
When the building was first
put on the market it was considered for acquisition
by the National Trust. The loss of the internal
furnishings that had been an integral part of
Maxwell Fry’s design finally became the decisive
factor for not obtaining it. A cacophony of insensitive
redecorations has left only remnants of the built-in
furniture. The wood lined study as well as a Vitrolite
bathroom are still intact. None of the moveable
furniture remains. Most recently there has been
further damage caused by the "repair works"
following water penetration.
Our attempts for upgrading Miramonte’s
statutory protection have remained unsuccessful.
The new landlord is now putting the Grade II listing
to the test. He would like to virtually double
the footprint of the building, albeit in a trade-off
for a proper refurbishment of the original fabric.
The service quarters will be elevated a storey
above the courtyard wall and will no longer be
concealed. The kitchen garden and pool area will
be virtually transformed by the extensions that
they are to accommodate. New windows will alter
the careful composition of wall and void at various
key points. But perhaps most critically, if these
extensive works are to go forward, the complexity
of the original spatial separation and the social
context of which they now still tell us will be
ultimately lost.
As yet Miramonte is a pivotal
building in the history of modern English architecture.
Back
|
