To match existing means exactly that
This is a part of the Retrofit and renovation feature
Too often in renovations, poor communication and unclear expectations can mean ‘to match existing’ turns into ‘to almost match existing’, leading to disappointment in the finished job.
Regardless of where you may fit in the circle of people involved in a building renovation – as owner, architect, builder, building inspector or the next door neighbour taking a sticky beak after completion – it never fails to surprise just how many different interpretations the phrase ‘to match existing’ can have and these interpretations can end in disappointment unless documentation is effective and detailed and contract communication lines are kept clear and open.
Communicating expectations
Take the skirting board as an example. Would the building owner expect a seamless match in profile, dimensions and building material between existing and new skirtings? You would expect so.
One would expect the architect to document the drawings and specifications to require this. Accordingly, the builder would source the appropriate material from a suitable supplier or even have a joiner make up knives for a special run of a unique profile. Both routes taken to provide the job with the appropriate skirting to match existing are right, unless communication lines are unclear.
Was it the architect’s expectation that the builder would closely match the bevelled profile skirting with one from his merchant, only to find that the board was thinner and shorter than the original? This I doubt.
And was it the owner’s expectation that the colonial moulding from bedroom two be matched in the new bedroom four? No, they understood it was the unique skirting from bedroom one to be matched, as there are several profiles throughout the house.
There are no small issues
In this industry, we come across ‘to match existing’ all the time, and unless we are all crystal clear about even the smallest of details, we too experience the ‘almost match existing’ scenario.
More often than not, small issues can be handled before they become big issues. Many ‘almost matches’ don’t even rise to the surface to become issues. It is that old lesson of being clear in your communication that we can never let slip, regardless of how seemingly unimportant the issue is.
It’s easy to see how the innocuous skirting board can be considered ‘matched’ in many individuals’ heads in many different ways. The potential for large scale building issues to ‘not exactly match existing’ is clear and ever present, with much greater consequences if any party chooses to contest the outcome.
Let’s be clear about this and no skirting around the issue: ‘to match existing’ means exactly and precisely that.
A faithful renovation
And how important is it, anyway, ‘to match existing’ every time?
So, we have a happy client in Mr and Mrs Smith. The building process has been successful – on time and more or less to budget. The Victorian villa was long overdue for some attention, and the additional rooms added to the rear were designed to enhance the views and provide indoor-outdoor flow and another living area in the house.
The architect, although looked at sideways at many of the site meetings, came through, and in the end, both client and builder appreciated the design.
Many favourable comments were made about how faithful the additions and alterations were, especially how it was impossible to tell the new elements, such as the skirting boards, from the old.
Clarity in design wins every time
Across the street, the Browns have also made recent changes to their old house.
While the street view of their working man’s cottage is unchanged, all the action has taken place in the rear yard with traditional building materials of native timber weatherboards, sash windows and corrugated steel roofs giving way to preformed concrete panels, plantation grown hardwood screens and lots and lots of double glazing. Views were enhanced, access to the vegetable garden gained, and the teenagers and parents can live together in harmony once more.
These scenarios continue to go on year in, year out. The aspirations and styles of clients and designers may be different, but both home renovations are successful for one fundamental reason: clarity in design.
Relating instead of replicating
Where the Smiths’ architect made a conscious effort to exactly match existing materials, profiles, timber species, dimensions and applications, the Browns’ architect was always going to make a statement and put their design signature on the additions.
While the Browns’ architect chose to maintain like for like with the existing building, they chose to draw a line in the sand with the new work. They adopted a clear break from tradition with no finishing lines and plain, unadorned building wall and ceiling planes in new volumes, which related agreeably with the old house.
The Browns’ house was a success, and stepping from the old into the new was always a lucid experience.
The Browns and their architect were wary of so-called improvements made to buildings where frilly bits were applied throughout the new work, under the premise that they were ‘to match existing’.
Honour the old or take on the future
It is the hope of this architect that such blurry architecture, with token references to yesteryear, is banished to make way for positive statements promoting either a sound understanding in proportion, materials and details of old buildings, or new frontiers in design thought, forms and materials.
Either way, clarity rules, OK.
Download the PDF
Articles are correct at the time of publication but may have since become outdated.