Your floor plans are very inefficient. I think once you have a sense of scale behind some of your organizational plans, you will realize that the long spans of corridor that you put between zones is a problem, not to mention that some of the spaces you have created are too small (i.e. the waiting or loading area) or too large (the units themselves seem to be too consistent with each other despite being for multiple groupings). There are hints of ideas about your DMZ presence that are interesting such as the hamster wheel (which should be more prominent) and the cantilevered box (which is still ambiguous). With the latter, one immediately wonders what the difference between the cantilevered condition and a continuation of the slab (but with a lowered ceiling condition). Does anyone really pick up on what is supposed to be presented by this? The loading area is nice to have but you have not indicated an appropriate scale of space. Take a look at Time Saver Standards for Architects (if you can find it online even better) as it will indicate rough sizes for loading areas with comparable precedents). Your layouts for the residential floors suffer from the same criticisms in terms of layout and organization that the DMZ floors do. I would have thought that the elevators would be oriented 90 to what you have put and also would have really considered potentially tying the fire stair into the equation as well. The step back (is that why that is supposed to be?) on the residential plate (north side?) is understood but either you have made a singly-loaded corridor that feels more like a hotel than a residence, or you begin to establish a quiet and "active" gradient in your units as you go towards the kitchen zone. I would highly recommend looking at the examples of multi-unit residential projects and their common spaces as you proceed as it is clear that that particular topic is a weakness in what you have proposed thus far.
Your floor plans are very inefficient. I think once you have a sense of scale behind some of your organizational plans, you will realize that the long spans of corridor that you put between zones is a problem, not to mention that some of the spaces you have created are too small (i.e. the waiting or loading area) or too large (the units themselves seem to be too consistent with each other despite being for multiple groupings).
ReplyDeleteThere are hints of ideas about your DMZ presence that are interesting such as the hamster wheel (which should be more prominent) and the cantilevered box (which is still ambiguous). With the latter, one immediately wonders what the difference between the cantilevered condition and a continuation of the slab (but with a lowered ceiling condition). Does anyone really pick up on what is supposed to be presented by this?
The loading area is nice to have but you have not indicated an appropriate scale of space. Take a look at Time Saver Standards for Architects (if you can find it online even better) as it will indicate rough sizes for loading areas with comparable precedents). Your layouts for the residential floors suffer from the same criticisms in terms of layout and organization that the DMZ floors do. I would have thought that the elevators would be oriented 90 to what you have put and also would have really considered potentially tying the fire stair into the equation as well. The step back (is that why that is supposed to be?) on the residential plate (north side?) is understood but either you have made a singly-loaded corridor that feels more like a hotel than a residence, or you begin to establish a quiet and "active" gradient in your units as you go towards the kitchen zone. I would highly recommend looking at the examples of multi-unit residential projects and their common spaces as you proceed as it is clear that that particular topic is a weakness in what you have proposed thus far.