Project - Speculative Apartment building. We are in Sketch plan stage, the scheme will then be submitted for a land Re-zoning Application.

Location - Mosselbay (South Africa), old quarry site, great views north over the sea. Level 1 & some of level 2 views are restricted.

Design Parameters - We are applying for 5 stories high, (9 units) should the 9 units be turned down we will lose the top floor (2 units).

Layout -

Level 1. Ground floor - parking, entrance etc. 2x parking bays / unit, some tandem.

Level 2+3 - Row of 5x Double story units, entry on top level with bedrooms below.

Level 4+5 - Pent house units, 2x per floor on single level.

Site

2 bed unit

2 bed unit lower floor....

site looking south east.....

Mate the individual unit layout of the one shown looks good but not certain without more information how it relates to the site or the structure itself.

Are you sure the photo of the site is not looking south east?

Ok, here's the first elevation study, please comment, is it sucsessfull?

I need to get it out this week.....

.....elevation study, don't worry about the side elevation, need lots of work...

...elev study...

entrance.... early days...

koos,
My initial reaction is I like it, especially as an initial architectural image proposal to a developer and financier.

On a conceptual level I like the horizontal separations. The slit opening just above the base is quite subtle and is a fine visual clue as to the removal of one use to another. The visual mix of units is interesting. The units read very and I think most people appreciate that.

Would like to see the penthouse plans obviously.

I'm not seeing just how the building hangs onto the site. Looks like grade gets very high very fast to the rear left. IS the building embedded?

I'm assuming this building is a single loaded corridor on the rear? Open or enclosed? Hard to say much without floor plate plans.

What is the construction materials? Precast concrete walls with cast in place concrete floor slabs?

Looking forward to seeing more to be more helpful. :)


PS It looks like it will be the highest quality building in the neighborhood. Will it fit the economics of the area?

Koos, I like what you are doing and believe this project has potential once it gets past the re-zoning effort. Here are some of my comments.

The circulation sequence of the units plans seem rather tight, getting from the entrance door to the stair. I wonder if having the entry and stair collected to one side of the unit would help the kitchen/dining and living room by opening up the space?

I like the facade and would continue to articulate the planes/walls that define the units. It needs some hierarchy between major and minor walls. I think this would add another layer of design refinement.

Overall... great effort!

I would like to see a site layout to determine how the structure sits to the site firstly.

At present I'll make these comments:

1. The pedestrian entry for me is very understated, needs to be wider, possibly higher and certainly more 'incorporated' not just a hole in the undercroft,

2. The buidling in general although it clearly sits upon a carpark seems to have little consideration as to how it touches the ground. Here we would attempt to push the carpark back and bring the lower units to the ground providing individual entry to those units through individual forecourts,

3. The straight stacking of the development seems heavy and repositioning more to the rear the carpark, pulling foreward and down of the lower units would allow the penthouses relief from the front facade and address better the slope of the existing terrain. This current standing up for such a small development opposed to addressing the existing terrain I'm rather opposed to (sorry)!

4. Smaller developments like this I feel should advantage best as possible some expression of the individual units providing a better feel of ownership of one and not part of a whole,

5. I think the idea of two storey units accessed by a single corridor is ok but not so certain it is the best configuration. Two stair cores permitting single storey flow through units, lesser traffic through a single core and better consideration to the slope for me would or may be a option to consider,

6. Site layout and an idea of how you calculate your yield relative to your planning requirements is certainly relative to what I suggest above,

7. In all I'm concerned from what I'm seeing in context and site area / slope your proposal sits toaster like upon the landscape rather than subtly where some terracing has not been considered carefully.

Here is a project of similar scale (units not as big and seven only) that may give some ideas of how we are actually more required to consider such issues, the option to stand up against context is now rather frowned upon here, although as we know culture is a different matter.

Hope I'm not being too hard hitting?

The 5 units in a row is the total building evelope, so units is a fix. I struggled with the units, I do not see a better layout, I'll post a SU plan.. Having the stair down in that position resolves my planning downstairs with minimal sirculation / unessesary passages.

Parking level will be cut horizontally, so parking garage wall will retain some land.

Proposing a single corridor to back with glazed screens that will still alow ventilation.

Organisation is based on uninterrupted views from Level 3 up...

Building is in an old neighbourhood, 'best adress in town'.

Ill post the plans later today...

Koos

Here mate is a rough section of how I thought you may consider the stacking, it certainly lowers the top floor but allows each unit a ground level courtyard area. Also possibly does away with need for lift access as units all gain access one floor up from parking.

If this could be considered and width would allow you could have three centre modules of two bedroom two storey units front and three bedroom penthouse, with end modules of three bedroom two storey units front and again three bedroom penthouse (10 units total).

The juggle would be obvious view v's courtyard v's yield v's construction cost v's ease of argument to planning regs.

Ok Richard, nice 'architectural' section, here's the section in realtion to the site... will post plans later...

Plans?

Nice retaining wall is needed.

The general expression of the elevation looks decent. I worry about symmetry generally, i worry about it more so when it isnt followed through. Of course cellular building types will tend towards that when common elements are being stacked up and its then somewhat dishonest to express some differently but there should be a means of weighting your elevations towards the entrance or to relocate the entrance should the axial symmetrical thing be what is required.