Rethinking the Atrium

This study compares the structure and framework of the Ancient Roman Domus to Central California homes designed by Joseph Eichler, in hopes of bridging the two to find a design that lends itself more to sustainability.

These designs have clear similarities architecturally, but couldn’t be more different when it comes to purpose and motive.

Domus were the home of the high status and wealthy, seen often in cities like Rome or Pompeii, and were for the purpose of flaunting their luxurious and lavish lifestyles.

Eichler, on the other hand, prioritized something Roman designs did not: ethical and fair housing, regardless of social or economic differences. With this value at the forefront of his designs, he opposes the luxurious and ostentatious roots of Roman Domus architecture, but almost directly reflects the features utilized. While these two designs directly oppose each other ideologically, they utilize floor plans and architectural features that are strikingly similar, the largest parallel being the atrium. This study is centered around the shared structure of the Atrium and will explore potential solutions to creating a contemporary adaptation.

Domus were divided clearly into public and private spaces. A grandiose entrance that led directly to the large central atrium. One long hallway connected the atrium to the peristyle garden, and along it were rooms for record keeping, sitting rooms, libraries. Rooms that were deemed less glamorous, but pivotal, like servant quarters and the kitchen, were kept out of sight. Private rooms, like sleeping quarters, were usually on the second floor.

Domus had to be self regulating. This meant that very specific features were included to aid in climate control, water collection, and light and air flow. Domus regulated temperature through a well-rounded system of hypocausts, impluvium, and vented roofs. The heart of this system lies in the atrium and works to direct light and air, making for a sustainable home in the temperate climate of the Mediterranean.

The atrium at the center of the Domus home had a double layered, vented roof with an opening in the center . This opening was placed directly over the impluvium in order to collect rainwater and help with cooling. Rainwater was channeled through the opening and collected in the impluvium where overflow was filtered through small gaps between porous stone tiles and would be stored in a holding area below where cool filtered water would be abundant.

Air traveled freely around the Domus until it was too warm and ultimately rose out the roof opening. The basement was equipped with hypocaust, or ceramic pillars that were heated via furnaces as another mode of climate control The pillars would extend as high as the basement ceiling, allowing them to act as radiant floor heating for the ground floor above as well serving as a water heater. This heat also did its part to aid in air circulation, as it helped heat old air allowing it to rise out of the home, ushering new air in.

The Eichler home was designed to navigate very mild temperature changes quite gracefully, and because of this, was able to include an atrium.

It would be naive to assume Eichler’s team wasn’t savvy to the ancient concept of the atrium, which has been seen all over the world and throughout history. With this said, there is very little evidence that Eichler’s developments were specifically inspired by Domus' structure. The Eichler does. however, reflect the structure of the Domus concept. While using a much smaller scale, the Eichler still has a central room (in this case the atrium) that orients the flow of traffic toward the accessible, public spaces. However, Eichler doesn’t seem to emphasize the similarities, as that wasn’t the purpose of his developments.

With features like radiant heating, few public facing windows, and an interior atrium, we see a clear divide of public and private space in a way that utilizes the format of more densely compacted suburbia, something that wasn’t of concern to those who were living in Domus two thousand years prior.

Eichler prioritizes equity in his developments making the inclusion of Domus-like features somewhat ironic, but proves a point nonetheless: That these features are applicable to everyone. Eichler has already updated many of these features in his conceptualizing of the Eichler home.

There are many parallel features between the Eichler and Domus, despite not being directly inspired by the Roman design. Eichler’s son may have looked to ancient Greece when naming the Atrium. That being said, beyond that, there is very little evidence that Eichler’s developments were specifically inspired by Domus' structure. In these differences, we are able to discern which features were for stylistic reasons and which others performed a specific function. The Eichler home was designed to navigate very mild temperature changes quite gracefully, and because of this, was able to include an atrium. It reflects the structure of the Domus concept, using a much smaller scale. The Eichler still has a central room (atrium) that directs traffic toward the accessible, public spaces. However, Eichler doesn’t seem to emphasize the similarities, as that wasn’t the purpose of his developments.

The sustainable systems of the ancient Domus can be applied to the more contemporary atrium structure of Eichler homes to create something that can not only be efficient, but self-sufficient.

This proposal draws from both the Domus and the Eichler designs to create an entirely independent design which strives to solve relevant regional environmental issues and cater to the commonality between the climates of Italy and California.

The ultimate goal of changing the atrium structure is to create a foundation of renewable energy systems and efficient living.

Modern technological advancements in plumbing and electricity allow resource collection to be accessible on a large scale, rendering peristyle gardens unnecessary. Instead, we can implement the psychological and environmental benefits of the peristyle garden in the atrium.

Implementing the Roman roof and gutter structure could allow for the inclusion of solar panels on the top section of roof, generating energy, while remaining out of view from dwellers. The vented roof opening could be altered to reflect that of Eichler’s design, featuring a larger opening. Oftentimes, Eichler roof openings could be covered and uncovered manually, with a supplemental cover, to help with temperature control. Maintaining the cover—whether automatic or manual—would allow residents to control the climate of the home in seasons with more wind or temperature fluctuation, without using single use energy.

Water collection begins with rain runoff from the slanted roof where it’s caught in the impluvium below. By altering the impluvium to be smaller allows water collection to be efficient and subtle. A slightly slanted patio would help guide runoff into the impluvium and features like gutters and rain-chains help direct water flow to maximize collection.

Maintaining some type of filtration system between the impluvium and the surplus area below, natural or man-made, would be particularly helpful when prepping water for the gray water system. From this holding area, water can be distributed through the gray water system, sending new water to top priority appliances that rely on access to clean water first, then sending them to the secondary appliances and lastly tertiary uses. Top priorities would be considered bathing, cooking, and washing clothing. Secondary uses would be hydronic heating (or radiant heating using water pipes in the subfloor), while tertiary uses would be considered toilet water and irrigation water. After the tertiary cycles the water would be reintroduced into the atmosphere or be expelled to sewage, either through public plumbing services or septic. This gray water system ensures that the water is used up to three times more efficiently than typical homes.