This is one of my final year of diploma project. a bit messy, a bit boring but i need some help on this.

Objective/Subject Requirement

Propose either a concept store or a restaurant for a brand. the design and function of the building must reflect the image of the brand chosen.

Location: Sibu, Sarawak, Borneo (there is no .kmz cos the town is not shown in google earth. sorry. i'll try to post the site plan ASAP)

Solution

I decided to propose a concept store cum restaurant for the brand Sony. The idea behind it is to reflect Sony's products flexibilty that they are ready to use anywhere, anytime. the concept of this building is based on one of Sony's marketing strategy - The Sony Experience. The idea of the restaurant to also promote Sony's image as a Japanese as well as an international brand. Two types of eatery was proposed, a sushi bar and a japanese cuisine restaurant.

a. sushi bar
A sushi bar was chosen because it represents Sony's portable devices which are multi-funtional and yet small and futuristic like the sushi which comprises of several ingredients yet able to maintain its small and easy to eat size.

b. restaurant
the restaurant is used to promote Sony's products which are used at home as well as at work. The restaurant itself is a theme restaurant where each room is a diorama of the workspace as as well as at home and Sony products are placed in there for the patrons to experience them.

Design

The idea of the design is a futuristic one. The building is designed to resemble a docking spaceship. This is ideal as Sony is a leading brand in ground-breaking electronics appliances. The deisgn approach is to have a seperated concept store and restaurants while maintaining a relationship within both functions.

a. concept store
the concept store functions as the core of the building and also as the main circulaion area. this is because the main idea of the building is the concept store. By functioning as the main access zone to the restaurants, it fulfills Sony's idea of experiencing its products.

b. sushi bar
the sushi bar is designed with portability in mind. revolving belts carrying display products and sushi shows the similarity betwenn the two japanese products. Display shelves which wraps around the sushi bar displays Sony's products which patrons are allowed to try them for free hence the Sony experience. This strategy is a two thronged fork as it allows patrons to try and judge by themselves the quality of Sony's products while they themselves unconciously advertise these products to passer-bys outside the building who see them trying the products.

c.restaurant
The strategy for the restaurant is similar to the sushi bar's except that its done at a bigger scale. Rooms designed to replicate living rooms, dining rooms at home as well as workspaces in the office allows customers to fully understand the flexibility and the advantages of Sony products in those scenarios.

its a floating building on the river's edge. here lies the problem. i have a problem with the columns. my lecturer wants something more futuristic in sense of construction. i have no idea. help, please?

view from land

another view from land (also with old columns)

view from river. the two boxes there are removable kitchen units made of cargo containers because next to the site is a cargo dock.

another view from the river

aerial view from front

the fins are not final. still requires some work.

left elevation

right elevation

Can you show some context; how does the building relate to the site?

section

view of sushi bar with shelves not very creative though. needs some work too.

i'll get some site pics ASAP. funny, as an architecture student, i don't have my own camera. sigh.

i'll post the floor plans tmr. they need to be resized first.

When I saw your project, I first thought about Neil Denari work to enhance your design.
http://www.nmda-inc.com
One way you should explore to give a more "futuristic" face to your project could to re-think the underface of your building and eventualy to imagine an enveloping (draping) system. An other way could be to explore the way lunar modules land on the ground. And one last way : did you observe and extrapole the spiders skulls and way of moving ?

your design looks like some Morphisis' (http://www.morphosis.net) stuffs to me. Ok, here's what i think:

first, i need to see the site and it's context.

second, tell me how you've come to get this form....perhaps you can show me your sketches, diagrams and idea developments. Let us know how your building respond to the site and its context.

thirdly, the building definitely doesn't look futuristic enough to me. I know you tried, but I believe you can definitely go further than that.

and i think you need a stronger concept too.

Morphosis was the second (in order of apparence :) ) that came to me when seeing his project.

I think the image you are trying to achieve needs to influence your design more in very different ways, one of them being the way the building touches the ground, like A_Minima already said.
To me it seems like you have a trivial stacking of floor levels and then you try to give it a dynamic / futuristic appearance by raising and enveloping them with a more complex and non orthogonal set of surfaces. If that complex image is what you're after, you should look for it in all aspects of your project. Not think the floors bidimensionally and wrap them, but instead play with the floor surfaces as you try to do with the façade ones - fold them, creating stairs / ramps / inclined floor areas, open areas linking different levels,... make things more coherent throughout the object and make its external image a direct consequence of the interior spaciality.
Perhaps you should do this with more hand drawing and physical models instead of being "tied" to computer software.

I would have to suggest that the exterior looks added not involved or evolved from the overall concept.

Sort of building on what Richard said above, I think we need some more information on where these formal decisions came from. A lot of it just seems like form for form's sake right now - of course, this might not be the case, but, without the proper information, we can't know.

Secondly, at passing glance, it just seems like there's a LOT going on. Did you look at Sony's product lineup as part of your research? They are increasingly simplifying their aesthetic (see many of their new laptops). Perhaps something a bit simpler and more refined is in order?

Lastly, I'm very concerned, given the futuristic and highly-customized feel of 90% of the building, about the choice to use shipping containers as removable kitchen units. A) why would the kitchens need to be removable? B) just because something exists as an adjacency doesn't mean you must latch on to it (unless you're trying to be the next Adrian Smith, of course). Perhaps you can incorporate some notions about the shipping yard in a less literal manner?

When I saw your project, I first thought about Neil Denari work to enhance your design.
http://www.nmda-inc.com
One way you should explore to give a more "futuristic" face to your project could to re-think the underface of your building and eventualy to imagine an enveloping (draping) system. An other way could be to explore the way lunar modules land on the ground. And one last way : did you observe and extrapole the spiders skulls and way of moving ?

my lecturer told something similar but in a more general sense. he told me to wrap the whole building rather than just sandwiching it.

your design looks like some Morphisis' (http://www.morphosis.net) stuffs to me. Ok, here's what i think:

first, i need to see the site and it's context.

second, tell me how you've come to get this form....perhaps you can show me your sketches, diagrams and idea developments. Let us know how your building respond to the site and its context.

thirdly, the building definitely doesn't look futuristic enough to me. I know you tried, but I believe you can definitely go further than that.

and i think you need a stronger concept too.


honestly, i think my concept is pretty strong cos i went over with it with my architect friend and she totally took the words out of my mouth before i actually told her the whole idea. its pretty straightforward i guess.

as for the design, i have to admit that it is not that futuristic in sense of the curvatures and stuff but i'm taking consideration my view of aesthetics. i would like to further study this kinda design in the future. its like a trademark design for me just as gehry's Guggenheim is for all his other designs. sorry if my design looks like neil denari or morphosis but honestly, they've never been in my list for design references. although i do try to use morphosis' layouts for references.

basically because my building is located at the river's edge and i only have a public toilet as a neighbour, the respond to the site is pretty minimum which is really a turn off for me cos i would love to have more neighbours(problems).

I think the image you are trying to achieve needs to influence your design more in very different ways, one of them being the way the building touches the ground, like A_Minima already said.
To me it seems like you have a trivial stacking of floor levels and then you try to give it a dynamic / futuristic appearance by raising and enveloping them with a more complex and non orthogonal set of surfaces. If that complex image is what you're after, you should look for it in all aspects of your project. Not think the floors bidimensionally and wrap them, but instead play with the floor surfaces as you try to do with the façade ones - fold them, creating stairs / ramps / inclined floor areas, open areas linking different levels,... make things more coherent throughout the object and make its external image a direct consequence of the interior spaciality.
Perhaps you should do this with more hand drawing and physical models instead of being "tied" to computer software.

yeah, thats the problem i'm experiencing now. i have the difficulty trying to connect my building to the ground. i'm actually planning to play with the levels once i start working on the interior details. the seating arrangements and themed rooms will have different levels and lightings and so on. i'll try to scan my hand drawns ASAP. i have another boring final project to work on - mixed commercial development.

Sort of building on what Richard said above, I think we need some more information on where these formal decisions came from. A lot of it just seems like form for form's sake right now - of course, this might not be the case, but, without the proper information, we can't know.

Secondly, at passing glance, it just seems like there's a LOT going on. Did you look at Sony's product lineup as part of your research? They are increasingly simplifying their aesthetic (see many of their new laptops). Perhaps something a bit simpler and more refined is in order?

Lastly, I'm very concerned, given the futuristic and highly-customized feel of 90% of the building, about the choice to use shipping containers as removable kitchen units. A) why would the kitchens need to be removable? B) just because something exists as an adjacency doesn't mean you must latch on to it (unless you're trying to be the next Adrian Smith, of course). Perhaps you can incorporate some notions about the shipping yard in a less literal manner?

hey, geoff. nice to see you working on me hard. hahaha!! yeah, my friend also asked me to get more info on sony's store design protocol where there is a certain requirement which needs to be followed by those who want to set up a sony store. actually the form of the building is just for form's sake. i actually wanted to do something much more simple and sleek. my initial idea was to have the interior work its way to the exterior but when i went for tutorial with my lecturer that day, he told me to ditch the simple form and go on with that more complicated, futuristic look.

the removable kitchen units is for multi-functionality of the building. if the restaurants were to be closed, the kitchens can be replaced as offices or store rooms. the use of the containers are just a symbol of flexibility like i said however, it does not mean i literally use a cargo container as a kitchen.

I would have to suggest that the exterior looks added not involved or evolved from the overall concept.

beg your pardon? i dont really get what you are trying to say. sorry, could you repeat it in a much easier form?

Mechaneko,

I too am wanting to see more... But one what I have seen so far the first thing that jumped out at me was based from what your professor said in getting rid of the columns. You already have established a central core that seems to be the main structural and central vertical circulation spine. what I was thinking was that this becomes the structure for the whole thing and everything cantilevers off of this. Everything that "floats" above is supported by a healthy structural framing system and possibly this could then start to give some direction to your architectural expression :wondering

There seems to be a lack of coherence at the moment to the whole. Seems you still need that one idea to pull it together. These are just a few "big picture" comments. I do think seeing how this thing relates to context for us is a must for more in depth comments.

Also, check out this link for an idea of structure somewhat similar to what I was suggesting in the previous post.

http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums//showpost.php?p=19666&postcount=36

But be even more imaginative in how this could work for you. Do just make it be a box but to a form that supports what you need and want.

beg your pardon? i dont really get what you are trying to say. sorry, could you repeat it in a much easier form?

Mate what I am trying to say is that your design seems to have features (the exterior) tacked on rather than being intergral with the whole form.

I would have to also add that you suggest you have no neighbours but you actually do! Patrons, passers by, the ground, the water! Yet your form seems alianated from all of these.

Down the road from where I live is a waterfront club / restuarant / night spot that has failed from both a design point of view and a commercial one - these if you talk to a restuaranter very much linked.

Think of it in this way - these aspects need to be linked, how many times have you chosen a restuarant by its appeal, how busy it is, can you see people interacting with the building, layout, surrounds - would you want to go in and sit down.

I think the way your form now floats is not at all interactive, not encouraging and lifts the uses such that they are above you not asking or beckoning you to interact.

Here is just a thought.

i would like to further study this kinda design in the future. its like a trademark design for me just as gehry's Guggenheim is for all his other designs.

it's essential for me to see how you've come to get such a form. I need to know how you started. Let me know that you're having this form for reasons, and tell me how does this form respond to its programme and context. Without all these, i'd just assume your piece of architecture as a piece of sculpture (i mean alien!) standing alone in the site, ignoring its relationship with the surroundings.

I know you're trying to establish your own trademark architecture, but you must have reasons behind your designs. It would be good that you show the same languange in your every design, but don't limit yourself to the almost the same design/ sculpture in your every design.

basically because my building is located at the river's edge and i only have a public toilet as a neighbour, the respond to the site is pretty minimum which is really a turn off for me cos i would love to have more neighbours(problems).

it doesn't mean that you don't have to let us see the context simply because you think there's nothing much at the site!

Your so called "concept" thing just sounded like some ideas to me. Basiclly you don't have a concept,(we'll see how many people agree with me on that, we'll see!!) but since you refuse to admit that (or perhaps you just don't understand what is a good architecture concept?), i don't plan to argue with you on that anymore. You were saying there's this architect who agrees with your so called "concept" thing and so on....well, who is she? i mean is she good? You have to know that there's a lot of architects are not that good theoritically and conceptually, especially in Malaysia where architects keep making mistakes.

P/s: Richard is right about those issues that he brought up...at least i think so!!

honestly, i think my concept is pretty strong cos i went over with it with my architect friend and she totally took the words out of my mouth before i actually told her the whole idea. its pretty straightforward i guess.

Could you explain your concept again for me, please?
I read through your initial statement which basically says:
1. Sony is 'groundbreaking' with their technology; therefore this building will seem like an alien spaceship which is landing on the ground
2. Sony has 2 distinct areas of sales -- their smaller, more portable devices to be represented by a sushi bar and their larger appliances to be represented by a restaurant

If I completely missed what you are saying, please correct me. That said, this 'concept' is something of a one-liner. This fails to address the importance and meaning of a Sony Concept store in such a location.

This building, whether you intend to do so or not, is making a statement about (among other things) technology (or the search for it) and the subsequent commoditization of that technology.

Assuming that you actually have a more solid concept please tell us what it is.

thx richard for the sketch. i'll put that into consideration. basically my concept is to have a store which gives the visitors/customers to try out all sony products for free. in other words, giving them the Sony experience. thats why i have themed rooms and shelves with sony products for customers to try out all the sony products. by doing so, these customers who are trying out the sony products/ dining there advertise the sony lifestyle and products to passer-bys.

so lemme do a quick explanation on the building. the front(glass facade) faces north and towards the main road. both elevations are designed to block out/ lessen the east and west sun. erhh, gimme some time to write all these out ok?

i did not say i didnt want to give you the site context, its just that i'm bloody busy and i have no time to resize the bloody pictures yet. dammit. dont go off shooting me like that. its pissing me off. so gimme some time. sheesh. and do go off thinking that you're so bloody good that you can say that other architects in malaysia is not as good as you. she is a good architect. she knows what she is doing. if you think that you, denis, are so good then why the hell is your project in the back to the drawing board section. the thing about your design is not even that good. you, yourself are designing sculptures. so stop shooting other people's ass off and give some positive feedback instead.

Could you explain your concept again for me, please?
I read through your initial statement which basically says:
1. Sony is 'groundbreaking' with their technology; therefore this building will seem like an alien spaceship which is landing on the ground
2. Sony has 2 distinct areas of sales -- their smaller, more portable devices to be represented by a sushi bar and their larger appliances to be represented by a restaurant

If I completely missed what you are saying, please correct me. That said, this 'concept' is something of a one-liner. This fails to address the importance and meaning of a Sony Concept store in such a location.

This building, whether you intend to do so or not, is making a statement about (among other things) technology (or the search for it) and the subsequent commoditization of that technology.

Assuming that you actually have a more solid concept please tell us what it is.

that's the layout strategy. my concept idea is the interaction between the diners, the sony products and the passer-bys. the sony store just acts as a stage or a giant lcd screen for these interaction to happen.

actually the form of the building is just for form's sake
oooh... such a dangerous statement! I would stay away from ever saying that to a juror as they will surely hand you your ass on a platter.

At any rate, this statement is exactly what's wrong with the project at the moment - it's what the basis of 90% of the comments are about. The building doesn't necessarily seem to be evolved from the concept (as evidenced by the fact you admit the form is just for form's sake). You either need to refine the concept to match the aesthetic (I know, it's working backwards) or refine the aesthetic to match the concept.

I think there's some really strong ideas in the project visually (it's not entirely my style, but, that's irrelevant). I trust you've looked at Diller + Scofidio's ICA in Boston (Richard's sketch immediately made me think of that project). It might help.

Good luck and I look forward to some revisions!

Hi, Machaneko.
i worry the structure of your design. That's a public building, then it's structure must be able to distribute the load.

another project without sufficient information to help us understand - sort it mate.

and the building is like a candy bar, with a fancy sexy wrapper on the outside. celebrate the chocolate, its flavour, texture etc, don't wrap it up and hide it. i wanna smell it and taste it.

oooh... such a dangerous statement! I would stay away from ever saying that to a juror as they will surely hand you your ass on a platter.

At any rate, this statement is exactly what's wrong with the project at the moment - it's what the basis of 90% of the comments are about. The building doesn't necessarily seem to be evolved from the concept (as evidenced by the fact you admit the form is just for form's sake). You either need to refine the concept to match the aesthetic (I know, it's working backwards) or refine the aesthetic to match the concept.

I think there's some really strong ideas in the project visually (it's not entirely my style, but, that's irrelevant). I trust you've looked at Diller + Scofidio's ICA in Boston (Richard's sketch immediately made me think of that project). It might help.

Good luck and I look forward to some revisions!

yeah, i realized it myself. then after a few nights of drowning in shame, i just remembered that i do have an explanaation to some of the design concept. its just that my bloody bad memory is killing it. anyway, i've written it down and i'll post it later. in your opinion, is it ok if i have this mentality that the layout and function matters more than the design and that the design whatever it does, it doesn't really matter if it is coherent with the layout or not. i'm pretty afraid of this type of thinking thats going in my mind now.

Hi, Machaneko.
i worry the structure of your design. That's a public building, then it's structure must be able to distribute the load.

yeah, thats why i posted this project here. i have problem with the structure. so far, only one or two person answered my question. some noticed the problem, like you while the others are still complaining about the lack of context and the horrible design. hahaha!!! anyway, if you have an idea to solve it, help me will you? please?

grd floor plan with some revision

sorry about the really small pics. i'll try to resize them again. 1st flr plan

2nd flr plan

a rough drawing of the site and surroundings. the local municipal has not updated their plans yet. the park was completed last year. umm, the small blue box next to the restored hospital is the public toilet.

site photo

something eeriely similar. scares the hell out of me.

would you guys like to help me in this too? its a hotel podium.

hey, dont post another project here. lets keep with the concept store.

i see you threw in a load of columns on the ground floor - easy option. your concept should solve this structural problem. so essentially i shouldnt see any typical columns or box shaped toilets hugging the skin of the building.

have you tried making a small 1:200 model. they'll be small enough to fit in your hand and you could probably make them from a postcard size scrap of cardboard. should only take 10 minutes. when u make it try to make the piece from as little as one piece of card, like origami. look at that kinda stuff.

as a student, theres not much use designing in SU, make 3d models from materials. yeah real stuff, not virtual stuff.

make 10 models, dont be precious about anything, just knock out loads. you kinda know what your doing so shouldnt take u long.

i wont post that project in this thread. i'm just asking if you guys are interested, i'll put up another thread for it. as for the columns, i felt that they are okay although simple but my lecturer insists that i change them to give the whole building that spaceship feel. i was considering doing legs like zaha's phaeno. would that work? i'll be building the model soon. its all part of the requirement of the course. when the model starts, there will be more changes to the design. its true, you cant actually grasp everything via SU or any 3d programs. the feeling of space is really distorted to me.

yeah, make models. lots.

you need to honour your concept man. dont pick and mix different languages and solutions. its like commiting adultery to your real concept.

u are right, the columns work structurally - cos ur spans arent that big...but conceptually they dont work at all. spaceship is a good metaphor.

zaha, good place to start.

spaceship is a good metaphor.

Exactly wath I thaught when I wrote my first post about it.;)

yeah, thanks for all the advice guys. actually i find out i learn more in here than i do in my college. i guess its the professional advice you guys give. plus its easier to take your advice since i cant see you guys in person and get all pissed off. i am a very stubborn sad bastard (thanks mikem oz) ahahhaa!!!

anyway, this is a little more info about my project:

site context

my site is allocated within a park which faces the river edge. this park is one of the main attraction of the town as it is loacted within the tourism precinct of Sibu town. the surrounding area which wraps around the park is an commercial/tourism zone with plenty of hotels. the distance between the park and the centre of town is about a 5-10 minutes walk. opposite the park from the main road is the town's square and the tallest building in Sibu.

the reason is decided to make an elongated shaped building is to avoid taking too much frontage space from the nearby waterfront strip. by doing so, i can also avoid the sony store in the center to be swallowed by its secondary function by size. i thought it was better to avoid blocking too much view of the river. the reason for a not-so-futuristic design is also to increase the number of visitors to the park and also to provide more activities within the park. currently the park is only used for jogging and skateboarding (as well as dating).

the fragments which makes up the left and right facade, i intended to put services in there such as electrical, water and air-conditioning thus maximizing the height of the ceiling. as the building faces north, i thought i would want to take advantage of the east-west sun by placing photovoltaic panels on both sides. however, this is not my final decision yet. i also have this idea of using translucent materials to curtain the facades thus allowing the services outline to be seen.

p/s: i decided to drop the idea of putting the aircon pipes in there cos the facades are gonna heat up the air in the pipes thus making the aircon useless.

Don't worry about finding other work that's similar to yours. It's becoming impossible to have truly original ideas any more - everything's been done before somewhere, somehow. If I had a nickel for every time I finished something I thought was brilliant and then found someone else's work that was the exact same thing I'd have at least a few dollars. You should take it as a positive thing that you're obviously not doing something too stupid. :)

At any rate, I don't think there's anything wrong with your thought-pattern regarding making sure that the functionality comes first. As architects, our primary responsibility is to make spaces that work - above all else. Secondary goals are far more up for debate (many people would argue that it's equally important for us to try and change social situations in a given context) - I, myself, think that creating something beautiful is the second most important part of our jobs.

So, just one man's opinion - first, make it work, second, make it pretty.

dont talk about your site - words are vague. draw it instead. seriously mate. we are architects, we read drawings. its what we do. sure little passages are nice to read, but drawings are better, clearer, no grey areas, just black and white - easy to understand.

moving on... your sony store is in a park. who uses a park to buy a sony playstation 3? not me, not anyone. i cannot imagine how your building sits in the site, hence no drawing. but i would imagine that pavilions like your 'concept store' quickly become abandoned because no one uses them and skateboarders typically like to vandalises any vertical surface. oh yeah, parks become dark places at night, not nice. but now you have the opportunity to change this. if your building was like a beacon of light, a giant street lamp you could brighten the place, make a welcoming public space.

fancy architecture? surely an eye catching architecture will somehow provoke people to engage and enter the store. therefore the building should present itself as something very cool and modern. the architecture will be like the incentive to enter a park. especially if it was illuminated at night.

its very critical how the building sits in relation to this 'path' you mentioned. a close relationship with the street and path will help the building work in an urban sense. remember geoff, its gotta work.

i remember seeing your building - the ground floor was elevated to 1st floor.
how are you blocking views. i feel the project would be more beautiful if you confronted the river like a street, the same applies to the path. like the parthenon on the acropolis, as you engage with the structure it makes itself as big as possible in perspective.

at the same time, denying views can be very nice too. deny views to the river until the person enters the building, only then at 1st floor level will they be hit with wonderful views of the river. a very nice suprise for coming all this way to buy a sony playstation 3.

keep it up, where are the models?

geoff, i was not surprised in a pessimistic way but optimistic way in fact cos it shows that other people have the same thoughts and that i'm not wrong to have these kinda ideas to and that they can be built. so i'm actually partly happy with it. hahaha!! anyway, thanks for your advice.

b.a. i've actually posted the site plan. maybe its too small to see. so i'll enlarge it. umm, do you want to see perspective sketches of the building too? i'll try to sketch em up for you since it might help me in my final presentation too. you're right. nobody wants to buy a ps3 in the middle of a park. but my real intention was to let people experience sony's product more than to just go there and purchase them. thats why i decided to incorporate restaurants into the store so that the people will spend more time there. if they wanna buy a ps3 they can go to any shop to buy one. i'm more concern on selling every product that sony has from mp3s to wide screen lcds. so how can you justify the high price of sony products unless you've experienced them?

umm. i think if i were to answer all your doubts b.a., i better sketch em all out. so, pls be patient as i start sketching and scanning. thx.

oh yeah, about the model, i'll start posting them when i begin with it. i'll show you the model building process too. is that alrite?

dont enlarge that thing you call a site plan. its useless

27201

now that is a site plan.

you talk a lot about air con and ducts n stuff - forget it. this will not help. you are very early in design and i think you are using these subserviant devices and technologies to justify moves you make. the big moves are concerned with light, space, circulation, material, site etc.

i suppose i am quite late in the debate of your project, and whether your project will be socially successful is up in the air. perhaps it would work better as just a restaurant and bar in a park. opens mainly on the weekends and nights kinda thing. sony stores like this are only visited once, they are a novelty. but what will keep the people coming cos its not mp3 players. good food, atmosphere, nice environment. btw large overhangs usually attract less savoury characters, like the homeless. think about it.

i seem to be the only one posting as well, can i get some support guys?

yeah, i guess you are right. i always felt that i was missing something at one point. i guess you really pointed it out. i'm pretty thankful for your help. the lecturers in my school are under-qualified and they only can talk about facades and circulations without any architecture-based academic talks. this is why i feel very unsecure especially knowing that the level of education overseas is way too far for me to catch up now.

the prove is that, b.a., u still think that this project is at a very early stage of development but in actual fact, its a finalized design by my lecturer and i have to go on whether you and i like it or not. thats why, honestly, i really feel like i dont learn much from my design classes until now. it lacks that academic depth. and i really thank you for being like a personal tutor to me. i'm very happy to have people like you guys here who can actually point out everything that is lacking in this project. i get to see problems that i never thought of before and i really get to feel the pressure now. which is great. cause i'm a pressure whore. i am unable to do my best with the lack of pressure. although a few ugly arguments broke out too, i really am glad they did happen and i take that as a learning process.

ok, back to the project. yeah, b.a., you're right. people might just go there once maybe twice. thats why i brought in the idea of the multi-themed rooms in the restaurant. plus the idea of testing new sony products will ensure people flowing in. perhaps that would be under the management section of sony to decide. maybe, you know, like every time you dine there you get to test 2-3 sony products. and there are hundreds of them. so, i guess it keeps the people coming.

i would love to just propose a restaurant and a bar too but the course syllabus requires us to do a concept store + <something> so thats why i dont really have a choice. the large overhangs are like viewing piers. beneath them are all water. will that solve the homeless problems? plus i've decided to take richard's advice on turning the ground floor into an open air cafe to make the building much more street friendly.

as for the materials, other than the use of concrete, glass and steel, i would like to use translucent materials on the facade fragments to give the building a soft glow during the night. is that alrite? are there any materials you would suggest?

and sorry about the crappy site plan. i had to draw the whole site by my own since the local council does not provide detailed maps like yours. even if i asked for a more detailed and enlarged map, it would be just as general. thats why local architects here have to hire site surveyors if they want detailed site plans.

as for your earlier post, umm, the building is positioned at a right angle from the street path rather than following the curve of the path. the waterfront aint very big. if i were to put it parallel to the waterfront, it would take up almost 50% of the waterfront.

thanks.

stop talking, start drawing.

stop talking, start drawing.

yes sir!!!

...actually the form of the building is just for form's sake...

i did not say i didnt want to give you the site context, its just that ....... so stop shooting other people's ass off and give some positive feedback instead.

hmm...looks like there's too much that i've missed after the long vacation....well, dsarchs said "this 'concept' is something of a one-liner. This fails to address the importance and meaning of a Sony Concept store in such a location...", and i say, that's almost what i've been trying to say since earlier on...i know you don't want to talk about that anymore, so let's just forget it and move on.

i'd been asking you to show us sketches and rough models of how you've come to get this form, but only now i realise that you're saying "actually the form of the building is just for form's sake..."... nothing to comment. that's just so not my style...i hope to see your model in your site in perspectives just to find out how you make your building respond to the site.

oh yeah, dude, don't be too sensitive towards other people's crit...especially you as an architecture student should be able to accepts comments and crits, otherwise, how are you going to make it out there? Have an open heart to listen to what other people say and improve your design. don't argue when the design itself is poor.


Don't you think so?