Project 7: "Agency"
Third year thesis project Studio 3.2 A.Y. 2017-2018 BA Hons Architecture Kingston School of Art
Third year thesis project
Studio 3.2 A.Y. 2017-2018
BA Hons Architecture
Kingston School of Art
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Academic <strong>Project</strong> 7<br />
A.Y. 2017/2018<br />
Holland Park<br />
“ Agency ”: A polemical response to Grenfell tower and social housing<br />
School of Architecture and Landscape<br />
Kingston University London<br />
Camille Trinidad<br />
BA Hons Architecture
The Brief<br />
Designing a polemical intervention to claim back the agency in architecture for the<br />
benefit of the “many and not the few”, can stand as an advocacy to resolve current<br />
issues in regards to the current housing crisis.<br />
In response to the unfortunate fire that happened in Grenfell tower and the demolition<br />
of Robin Hood gardens, our studio brief is propose a housing infrastructure<br />
project that provides structural framework and building services to house and<br />
serve 129 flats that coincides with the number of families that lost their home in the<br />
Grenfell fire. It includes pre-requisites such as to design a pre-cast concrete framework<br />
to be filled in by the resident’s flats and to provide a self-build flat scheme for<br />
the residents in which they have the opportunity to be able to choose materials that<br />
they can afford rather than settling for what is given to them.<br />
Disclaimer: The brief states that a radical strategy to demolish possible existing<br />
structures can be used to make way for the social housing. The location and brief of<br />
this project has been quite a controversial topic of conversation amongst students,<br />
tutors and the critics of this project. This is because the brief itself is radical yet political<br />
in its agenda which has not been considered a type of project the particular<br />
educational institution adheres as a “their” architecture.
The Site<br />
The four sites are located at the middle<br />
of the Royal Borough of Kensington<br />
and Chelsea. The four selected sites has<br />
a common typology of residential villas<br />
which may or may not have been divided<br />
into flats and is situated on the higher<br />
ground. Another common typology<br />
found are streets dedicated to mews<br />
which are historically been used as<br />
servants’ street for horse stables. They’re<br />
situated on a lower ground, quite hidden<br />
from the main street.<br />
Not far from the area, about 20 minute<br />
walk north-west is Grenfell tower.<br />
The topography of the contextual site<br />
has quite a medium to quite dramatic<br />
slope. Some streets have 1 to 6 metre<br />
height differences in less than a<br />
kilometre. But nonetheless, the area is<br />
considered a walkable neighbourhood.<br />
Meaning, that within 10 to 20 minute<br />
walk, depending on your location, one<br />
can find micro community which includes<br />
residential housing and a small
The site model was made to realise the height<br />
differences between the structures surrounding<br />
the area but it was difficult to study as the<br />
ground base was considered as flat. This has<br />
quite ruled out the probability of creating a<br />
proposition with the help of its topography.<br />
But when the Digimap data was studied, it<br />
showed quite complex topography that created<br />
a view that heightens the villas towards<br />
Chelsea more so than often.<br />
In this proposal, the chosen site is the residential<br />
area between Holland Park station<br />
and Holland Park. It has been chosen by 98<br />
percent of the studio due to its condition. The<br />
villas are grade 2 listed buildings and houses<br />
the wealthy.<br />
The villas are not only used as houses but<br />
as well as embassies. Some of these villas<br />
are owned by wealthy offshore landowners<br />
thus leaving the structure, un-inhabited. The<br />
mews are really small in size as compared to<br />
the villas but each would have cost at least £5<br />
million per flat. It is also easily accessible and<br />
a walkable neighbourhood with its own park,<br />
high street, train station and a shopping centre<br />
that is a 10 minute walk from the site. The<br />
land value itself is high. And with the listed<br />
buildings located here, proposing a social<br />
housing scheme within the area is somewhat<br />
a strategy to begin with considering “taking<br />
back our agency and having a polemical proposal”<br />
is our brief.
Site Analysis<br />
We did a thorough group site analysis<br />
about the Royal Borough of Kensington<br />
and Chelsea. A full complete<br />
presentation was dedicated to context<br />
and planning research. It includes its<br />
history, land use, types of business and<br />
structures, the English Heritage, its<br />
consolidated local plan, its policy maps,<br />
stat analysis on household and income,<br />
possible planning permissions, building<br />
control and stakeholders diagram.<br />
Also, as a group, we did a separate regulatory<br />
context research using Robin<br />
Hood gardens as guide, we identified<br />
fire safety, construction, design and<br />
management, health and safety, party<br />
wall and right to light issues needed to<br />
be addressed on our projects.<br />
A1<br />
A2<br />
A3<br />
A4<br />
C1<br />
Town and country p<br />
Hostel<br />
C3<br />
C4<br />
D1<br />
(Use classes) orde<br />
Shops, hairdr<br />
ticket agencie<br />
Banks, buildi<br />
professional s<br />
(other than h<br />
services)<br />
Restaurants a<br />
Public house<br />
other drinkin<br />
Hotels, guest<br />
YMCA<br />
Dwellinghou<br />
Houses in mu<br />
Clinics, healt<br />
nurseries, sch<br />
museums, lib<br />
worship, law<br />
Underground station<br />
Sui generis<br />
Embassies an<br />
high commis<br />
0 5 10 20 50<br />
The thing that stood out in this research<br />
is there is a segregation of social status<br />
and ethnicity within the borough, and<br />
that the social housing catering the<br />
residents of RBKC are mostly housed<br />
outside of the borough (through the<br />
depressed area diagram RBKC LCP<br />
2018). Bias is also plausible as the overall<br />
character of the site reflects the type<br />
of community they considered to be<br />
“good”.<br />
Situationist map<br />
Conservation areas according to the<br />
English Heritage<br />
Building types according to planning<br />
use classes<br />
Statistic analysis<br />
Possible stakeholders diagram<br />
Possible planning application diagram<br />
for the type of project
APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO LODON BOROUGH OF<br />
KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA COUNCIL<br />
APPLICATION VALID<br />
ON RECEIPT<br />
APPLICATION<br />
INVALID<br />
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION<br />
TO BE RECEIVED WITHIN 21 DAYS<br />
ALLOCATED TO<br />
CASE OFFICER<br />
INFORMAITION RECEIVED AND<br />
APPLICATION VALIDATED<br />
INFORMAITION NOT RECEIVED<br />
AND APPLICATION SENT BACK<br />
PUBLIC<br />
CONSULTATION<br />
SITE VISIT<br />
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES<br />
AND COMMENTS RECEIVED<br />
(IF ANY)<br />
RECOMMENDATION<br />
PREPARED FOR DEL-<br />
EGATED DECISION<br />
IF MORE THAN THREE OBJECTIONS<br />
RECEIVE CASE WILL GO TO PLAN-<br />
NING COMMITTEE<br />
RECOMMENDATION<br />
REFUSED PERMISSION<br />
RECOMMENDATION TO<br />
GRANT PERMISSION<br />
DRAFT REPORT PRE-<br />
PARED FOR COMMITTEE<br />
AGENDAS PUBLISHED<br />
DECISION APPROVED<br />
BY EXECUTIVE<br />
DIRECTOR<br />
COMMITTEE MEETING<br />
DECISION ISSUED<br />
COMMITTEE ACCEPT<br />
RECOMMENATION<br />
COMMITTEE DO NOT AC-<br />
CEPT RECOMMENATION<br />
NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK<br />
APPLICATION DEFERRED<br />
ADDITIONAL INFORMA-<br />
TION SOUGHT<br />
THE LONDON PLAN<br />
BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA<br />
PLANNING APPLICATION<br />
STRATEGY AND DESIGN<br />
BUILDING CONTROL<br />
FULL PLANNING<br />
CONSENT<br />
LISTED BUILDING<br />
CONSENT<br />
REMOVAL/VARIATION<br />
OF CONDITIONS<br />
APPROVAL OF<br />
CONDITIONS<br />
PRE SITE APPLICATION<br />
CONSERVATION<br />
AREA CONSENT<br />
COMMUNITY<br />
INFRASTRUCTURE<br />
LEVY<br />
FULL PLANS<br />
(INDIVIDUAL SELF BUILD UNITS)<br />
FULL PLANS<br />
(STRUCTURAL AND SERVICES)<br />
RESERVED<br />
MATTERS<br />
DESIGN AND ACCESS<br />
STATEMENTS<br />
PART A - STRUCTURE<br />
PART B - FIRE SAFETY<br />
PART A - STRUCTURE<br />
PART B - FIRE SAFETY<br />
OUTLINE PLANNING<br />
CONSENT<br />
PLANNING PER-<br />
FORMANCE<br />
AGREEMENTS<br />
PRIOR<br />
CONSERVATION AREAS<br />
NOTIFICATION<br />
DEMOLITION APPLICATION<br />
ENVIRONMENTAL<br />
PERMITS<br />
NOTIFICATION OF PROPOSED WORKS<br />
TO TREES IN CONSERVATION AREAS<br />
CONSENT UNDER TREE<br />
PRESERVATION ORDER<br />
FOOTPATHS, BRIDLEWAYS OR RESTRICTED<br />
BYWAYS - STOPPING UP/DIVERTING<br />
HIGHWAY - STOPPING UP<br />
OR DIVERSION ORDERS<br />
FLOOD DEFENCE<br />
CONSENTS<br />
MAKING A NAME AND<br />
NUMBERING APPLICATION<br />
PART C - SITE PREPARATION<br />
AND RESISTANCE TO CON-<br />
TAMINATES AND MOISTURE<br />
PART D - TOXIC SUBSTANCES<br />
(CAVITY INSULATION)<br />
PART E - RESISTANCE TO<br />
THE PASSAGE OF SOUND<br />
PART F - VENTILATION<br />
(BUILDING SERVICES)<br />
PART J - COMBUSTION AP-<br />
PLIANCES AND FUEL STOR-<br />
AGE SYSTEMS<br />
PART K - PROTECTION FROM<br />
FALLING COLLISION AND<br />
IMPACT<br />
PART L - CONSERVATION OF<br />
FUEL AND POWER<br />
PART M - ACCESS TO AND<br />
USE OF BUILDINGS<br />
PART P - ELECTICAL SAFETY<br />
PART Q - SECURITY (PUBLIC<br />
ACCESS TO SERVICES)<br />
PART C - SITE PREPARATION<br />
AND RESISTANCE TO CON-<br />
TAMINATES AND MOISTURE<br />
PART F - VENTILATION<br />
(BUILDING SERVICES)<br />
PART G - SANITATION, HOT<br />
WATER, SAFETY AND WATER<br />
PART H - DRAINAGE AND<br />
WATER DISPOSAL<br />
PART J - COMBUSTION AP-<br />
PLIANCES AND FUEL STOR-<br />
AGE SYSTEMS<br />
PART K - PROTECTION FROM<br />
FALLING COLLISION AND<br />
IMPACT<br />
PART L - CONSERVATION OF<br />
FUEL AND POWER<br />
PART M - ACCESS TO AND<br />
USE OF BUILDINGS<br />
PART P - ELECTICAL SAFETY<br />
PART Q - SECURITY (PUBLIC<br />
ACCESS TO SERVICES)<br />
REGULATION 7 -MATERIALS<br />
AND WORKMANSHIP<br />
PART R - ELECTRIC COMMU-<br />
NICATIONS<br />
NEIGHBOURHOOD<br />
PLANNING<br />
NORLAND NEIGHBOURHOOD<br />
PLAN<br />
REGULATION 7 -MATERIALS<br />
AND WORKMANSHIP<br />
OTHER APPLICATIONS AND<br />
CONSIDERATIONS TO APPLY FOR<br />
HYBRID APPLICATIONS<br />
A local planning authority<br />
may accept a ‘hybrid’ application;<br />
that is, one that seeks<br />
outline planning permission<br />
for one part and full planning<br />
permission for another part of<br />
the same site.<br />
FIRST SECRETARY STATE APPROVAL<br />
Occassionally, large proposal or controversial<br />
applications of national significance<br />
are “called in” to be decided by the<br />
First Secretary of State instead of the LPA<br />
HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE FUND (2017)<br />
£ 2.3 billion fund offers funding to local authorities<br />
on a competitive basis, for infrastructure<br />
support up to 100,000 new homes<br />
MARGINAL VIABILITY FUND<br />
To provide broadly-defined<br />
‘infrastructure’ funding to get<br />
additional housing sites allocated<br />
or existing sites unblocked<br />
SELF BUILDHOME SCHEME<br />
(can be applied on each individual<br />
unit space rather than land<br />
space)
ROBIN HOOD GARDENS SITE PLAN<br />
Scale: 1:1000
The Proposal<br />
The response are two interconnected, (5 storey<br />
plus ground and roof level) continuous modular<br />
structure that provide new residents a chance to<br />
build a community with the existing residents<br />
while introducing the site to the pedestrians - by<br />
designing the ground floor as public space with<br />
a walkway that connects the high street and the<br />
park. The repetitive grids reflect on the standard<br />
measurement of the ordinary materials while the<br />
designation of each space was precedented by<br />
Herman Hertzberger’s spatial organisation theory<br />
and analysed through the point of view of inhabitants’<br />
use of space that could take place.<br />
The proposal was to take away 7 villas and 6 mews<br />
that are aligned with each other from North to<br />
South to make way for the housing infrastructure.<br />
It is in the middle of the site that houses Grade 2<br />
listed villas and mews mostly bought by offshore<br />
land owners and commonly house the richest 1%<br />
of the population. The strategy to cut through the<br />
orderly streets of wealth and privilege and the<br />
aggressive approach to the existing fabric were<br />
aimed to represent the project as a decisive architectural<br />
polemic in taking back the agency in<br />
Architecture that prioritise the many and not the<br />
few. This strongly emphasises that there is a divisive<br />
line between the rich and the poor. Hence,<br />
proving that some existing architecture thus discriminate<br />
people according to their social class.<br />
Positively, it is also a way to introduce the social<br />
housing typology in a particular area with the<br />
hopes of encouraging neighbourhood interaction<br />
to cultivate a strong sense of community and intercross-pollination<br />
of social, economic and cultural<br />
unity within the new and the existing residents.<br />
The shape and form of the building was constricted<br />
through the pre-requisites of the strategy to<br />
demolish as little as possible of the existing structures<br />
whilst almost quadrupling its density. The<br />
angled approach was done to imitate the historical<br />
un-orderly streets that maximises the possibility<br />
of “accidental meetings”. The concept was initially<br />
driven by the possible entrances and access of the<br />
building, putting the pedestrian and residents first<br />
as an objective. Secondly, the location of the site is<br />
one of the iconic residential areas in London due<br />
to its listed Victorian buildings which meant that<br />
the project will greatly affect both the architectural<br />
and social fabric for this part of the city. And<br />
lastly, I question myself all of these, “what good<br />
can the project bring to the site? Will the design<br />
leave a better living condition to both existing and<br />
new residents? Will it be a successful example as<br />
a statement that architecture should not discriminate?”.<br />
I needed to make a decision to either play<br />
it safe or design it with a strong approach as if almost<br />
imposing. I chose the later.<br />
“Seventy percent of the buildings that make up London are housing. Housing<br />
STUDIO is what 3.2creates the very fabric of the city. It is what is all around us; it forms<br />
the boundaries of public space. We can say, therefore that when we design urban<br />
housing AGENCY<br />
we design cities. Housing schemes should never begin as housing<br />
THESIS:<br />
SITE: HOLLAND PARK<br />
schemes but as urban designs. Designs for housing should be driven in the first<br />
- housing instance - project by an to to take idea take back about back the the agency the city. of of the We the people should design streets and public spaces<br />
- structural first - - domestic proposal layouts which will will should stand as follow.” as an an infrastructure - Peter Barber project for architects for 129 129 flats flats for for the the residents of of<br />
Grenfell<br />
- a - design a of of 1 flat 1 flat that that will will be be an an example of of self self build scheme for for the the resident’s of of Grenfell<br />
- an - an urban proposal to to integrate the the community of of Grenfell to to Holland Park Park<br />
SITE SITE ANALYSIS:<br />
- The - The borough has has the the most most number of of wealthy residents all all around London<br />
- The - The site site is is located in in a conservation a area area and and contains mostly listed buildings<br />
- It - It is is a very a very accessible yet yet very very quiet part part of of London<br />
- The - The site site was was historically built built to to build housing villas for for the the wealthy e.g. e.g. merchants, foreigners,<br />
artists and and the the like like<br />
- There - is is a segregation a of of social status and and ethnicity within the the borough (seen through the the depressed<br />
area area diagram found in in their their local local consolidated plan plan<br />
de-<br />
- The - The character of of the the site site reflects the the type type of of community they they consider to to be be “good”<br />
Other types of of expenditure to to consider:<br />
- demolition - of of listed buildings<br />
- landscaping Key - concepts that drive the project<br />
- infilling - and and creating a new a new gradient for for the the site site<br />
- value 1. - Own of of property structural (purchasing system of of houses)<br />
precast concrete elements<br />
- planning - applications might be be time time costly<br />
2. Flexible grid system that supports self build housing using easily accessible<br />
materials (affordable housing)<br />
3. Pedestrian walkway that connects the main street, residential streets and<br />
Holland park can be used in many ways e.g. public us, retail space, community<br />
space, playground, etc.<br />
4. Urban strategy that introduces a new type of community integration and<br />
street pattern that creates “accidental meeting” spaces<br />
5. A polemical approach to show the desperate need of taking back the people’s<br />
agency in both society and architecture.
Cost and value management<br />
Individually, we created a report that focuses on<br />
the cost and value management of the project. I<br />
found that the following are some types of expenditure<br />
to be considered:<br />
Demolition of listed buildings<br />
Landscaping<br />
Infilling and creating a new gradient for the site -<br />
value of property (purchasing of houses)<br />
planning applications might be time costly<br />
A small part of the project was to produce a report<br />
through following some guidelines for the<br />
calculations of GEA and taking examples on the<br />
2018 Spons publication to compute a probable<br />
estimated cost for the project. Although it was<br />
evaluated before the final design proposal, the<br />
report would at least suggest an amount which<br />
can help when presenting initial design proposal<br />
to clients. It was a bit difficult to use the computations<br />
as the social housing brief contains a selfbuild<br />
scheme flat proposal which would bring<br />
some anomaly to the studied cost. But more or<br />
less, it makes us aware as professionals that designing<br />
within the budget is also our responsibility.<br />
It also makes it easier for the architect to back<br />
up the design when costs are accounted from the<br />
very beginning of the project.<br />
Factors that will affect the cost, programme and<br />
value:<br />
Cost<br />
GROSS EXTERAL AREA (GEA)<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED) FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED) FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
93.083 m 2 77.722 m 2 76.436 m 2<br />
1. Prefabricated materials are easier to maintain,<br />
build, replace and disassemble (life cycle cost)<br />
2. Easily accessible building materials for the self<br />
build scheme will provide agency to the residents<br />
as to how much they could spend on their property<br />
Programme<br />
The self build scheme will affect greatly on the<br />
schedule of building works as each individual occupant/family<br />
would have a varying time frame<br />
and budget<br />
EFFECTIVE FLOOR AREA (EFA)<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED) FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED) FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
58.652 m 2 45.631 m 2 45.122 m 2<br />
Value<br />
NET TO GROSS RATIO<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
58.652/93.083<br />
=0.630<br />
INIDAD K1457716<br />
FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
1. Site location 45.631/77.722 is expensive and 45.122/76.436 thus the project<br />
needs income =0.587 returns from the =0.590 available public<br />
space which can be rented to sustain maintenance<br />
of the building services and the affordable<br />
housing price.<br />
2. Recent unfortunate fire at Grenfell caused<br />
a huge change on building regulations which<br />
hopefully result in better living conditions.<br />
CAMILLE TRINIDAD K1457716<br />
GROSS EXTERAL AREA (GEA)<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED) FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED) FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
93.083 m 2 77.722 m 2 76.436 m 2<br />
EFFECTIVE FLOOR AREA (EFA)<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED) FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED) FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
58.652 m 2 45.631 m 2 45.122 m 2<br />
NET TO GROSS RATIO<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
58.652/93.083<br />
=0.630<br />
SAMPLE FLATS HAB. ROOMS = 10 PER 11.5 NO. OF GRID<br />
TOTAL NUMBER OF GRID ALLOTED FOR FLATS = 425<br />
TOTAL NUMBER OF HABITABLE ROOMS:<br />
(10/11.5) = (X/425)<br />
X = [(10)(425)]/11.5<br />
X = 369.5652174<br />
X ≈ 370<br />
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL SITE AREA = 0.6171473 ha<br />
DENSITY = TOTAL NUMBER OF HABITABLE ROOMS/ TOTAL RESIDENTIAL SITE AREA (ha)<br />
DENSITY = 369.5652174/0.6171473<br />
DENSITY = 598.8282172<br />
DENSITY ≈ 599 dwellings per hectare<br />
FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
45.631/77.722<br />
=0.587<br />
FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
EFA/GEA<br />
45.122/76.436<br />
=0.590<br />
SAMPLE F<br />
TOTAL N<br />
TOTAL N<br />
(10/11.5) =<br />
X = [(10)(<br />
X = 369.56<br />
X ≈ 370<br />
TOTAL RE<br />
DENSITY<br />
DENSITY<br />
DENSITY<br />
DENSITY
taken from Spons publication 2018<br />
TOTAL TARGET COST = (TOTAL GEA)(BUILDING<br />
PRICES PER SQM FOR [MEDIUM RISE FLATS])<br />
MINIMUM COST<br />
(11,615.506)(£1375.00) = £ 15,971320<br />
MAXIMUM COST<br />
(11,615.506)(£1750.00) = £ 20,327,135<br />
NOTE: SOME ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT LIKE THE<br />
WALK WAY, LANDSCAPING AND OPEN STAIR AC-<br />
CESS ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE LIST WHEN CAL-<br />
CULATING THE (GEA) AND WILL STILL ADD UP TO<br />
ITS TOTAL COST<br />
GROUND FLOORPLAN<br />
GEA = 437.87<br />
1ST & 2ND FLOORPLAN<br />
GEA = 2426.373 m 2<br />
3RD FLOORPLAN<br />
GEA = 2257231 m 2<br />
4TH FLOORPLAN<br />
GEA = 2305.28 m 2<br />
5TH FLOORPLAN<br />
GEA = 1762.379 m 2<br />
TOTAL PROPOSAL<br />
GEA = 11,615.506 m 2<br />
CAMILLE TRINIDAD K1457716<br />
GROSS EXTERAL AREA (GEA)<br />
FLAT TYPE 1 (3 BED) FLAT TYPE 2 (2 BED) FLAT TYPE 3 (2 BED)<br />
93.083 m 2 77.722 m 2 76.436 m 2<br />
TOTAL GEA = TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA = 247.241 m 2<br />
TOTAL ENVELOPE AREA<br />
GEA 247.241 m 2<br />
TOTAL PERIMETER<br />
76092m<br />
AREA OF ENVELOPE [(T.PERIMETER X 2.7) - AREA OF WALLS AND<br />
DOORS]<br />
205448.4m 2 - 51657.8 m 2 = 153790.6 m 2<br />
WALL TO FLOOR RATIO = AREA OF ENVELOPE/GEA 153790.6 m 2 / 247.241 m 2 = 622<br />
NOTE: CALCULATION FOR WALL TO FLOOR RATIO SEEMS A BIT ODD AS IT WAS ONLY APPLIED TO A SINGLE FLOOR AND ONLY TO<br />
A SMALL SECTION OF THE WHOLE RESIDENTIAL PROPOSAL. NOT SURE IF THIS TYPE OF CALCULATION IS APPLICABLE FOR THE<br />
TYPE OF PROJECT<br />
CAMILLE TRINIDAD K1457716
2017 2018<br />
RIBA stages<br />
DURATION<br />
SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN<br />
START OF PHASE 1 OF PROJECT (URBAN PROPOSAL, ACCESS. BUILDING SERVICES AND<br />
FEB<br />
Stage 0: Strategic Definition<br />
4 w<br />
Identify client's business Case and other core project requirements and<br />
1w<br />
Core<br />
contribute to development of Strategic Brief as required<br />
Identify strategic brief<br />
1 w<br />
Procurement Initial consideration for assembling project team 1 w<br />
Programme Establish project programme 2 w<br />
(Town) planning<br />
Ensure that a strategic sustainability review of client needs and potential sites has<br />
been carried out, including reuse of existing facilities, building components or 2 w<br />
materials.<br />
Sustainability check point - 0 Pre-application discussions: discuss project with appropriate planning authority 1 w<br />
Stage 1: Preparation and Brief<br />
4 w<br />
Sustainability aspirations<br />
The site/context: collating site information including building surveys<br />
Initial <strong>Project</strong> Brief and project strategy<br />
2 w<br />
<strong>Project</strong> objective<br />
2 w<br />
Core<br />
Develop project objective: Quality objectives<br />
2 w<br />
Develop project objective: <strong>Project</strong> outcomes<br />
2 w<br />
<strong>Project</strong> budget<br />
2 w<br />
Check other parameters/constraints and develop initial project brief<br />
3 w<br />
Undertake feasibility studies<br />
3 w<br />
Prepare project roles table<br />
1 w<br />
Procurement Prepare contractual tree<br />
1 w<br />
Continue assembling project team<br />
1 w<br />
Programme Review project programme 2 d<br />
Pre-application discussions - to discuss and determine the suitability of Feasibility<br />
(Town) planning<br />
1 w<br />
Studies with appropriate planning authority<br />
Prepare and review hand over strategy and risk assessments<br />
1 w<br />
Prepare and agree schedule of services<br />
1 w<br />
Prepare and agree design responsibility matrix<br />
1 w<br />
Suggested key support task<br />
Agree information changes<br />
1 d<br />
Prepare project execution plan - Technology and communication strategies and<br />
1 w<br />
consideration of standards to be used<br />
Confirm that formal sustainability targets are stated in the Initial <strong>Project</strong> Brief<br />
Confirm that environmental requirements, building lifespan and future climate<br />
parameters are stated in the Initial <strong>Project</strong> Brief<br />
Have early stage consultations, surveys or monitoring been undertaken as<br />
Sustainability checkpoint - 1<br />
2 w<br />
necessary to meet sustainability criteria or assessment procedures?<br />
Check that the principles of the Handover Strategy and post-completion services<br />
are included in each party’s Schedule of Services<br />
Confirm that the Site Waste Management Plan has been implemented<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges Initial <strong>Project</strong> Brief<br />
1 d<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government Information<br />
Required<br />
1 d<br />
Exchanges<br />
Stage 2: Concept Design<br />
8 w<br />
Prepare and develop concept design - outline specification<br />
5 w<br />
Prepare and develop concept design - outline for structural design<br />
5 w<br />
Prepare and develop concept design - building services system<br />
4 w<br />
Core<br />
Preliminary cost information report<br />
2 w<br />
<strong>Project</strong> strategy review in accordance to design programme<br />
3 d<br />
Collate and agree alterations to the initial project brief and issue Final project brief 2 w<br />
Review and sign-off Concept design and Final <strong>Project</strong> Brief<br />
1 d<br />
Procurement Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> Team 1 w<br />
Programme Review and update: design project programme 1 d<br />
Pre-application discussions (consultation with planning officer)<br />
5 w<br />
(Town) planning<br />
Sumbit pre-application<br />
1 d<br />
Prepare and update: Sustainability strategy<br />
2 w<br />
Prepare and update: Maintenance and operational strategy<br />
2 w<br />
Prepare and update: Handover strategy<br />
1 w<br />
Prepare and update: Risk assessments<br />
1 w<br />
Suggested key support tasks<br />
Undertake third party consultation and research and development aspects 5 w<br />
Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> execution plan<br />
2 w<br />
Consider: Construction strategy (including offsite fabrication)<br />
2 w<br />
Consider: Health and safety strategy<br />
1 w<br />
Sustainability checkpoint - 2<br />
5 w<br />
Information<br />
Concept design including: Outline structural and building services design,<br />
Exchanges<br />
1 d<br />
associated project strategies, preliminary cost information and Final <strong>Project</strong> Brief<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information Required<br />
1 d<br />
Stage 3: Developed Design<br />
52 w<br />
Prepare developed design - coordinated and updated proposals for structural<br />
20 w<br />
design<br />
Prepare developed design - building services system<br />
20 w<br />
Prepare developed design - outline specifications<br />
20 w<br />
Core<br />
<strong>Project</strong> strategies review according to the design programme<br />
2 days<br />
Stakeholders consultation<br />
3 d<br />
Issue/present detailed design<br />
4 d<br />
Cost information<br />
4 d<br />
Client sign-off Developed design<br />
1 d<br />
Programme Review and update: project programme 1 w<br />
Planning application preparation, drawn up and finalised<br />
12 w<br />
Planning application re-submitted<br />
1 d<br />
Approval period<br />
20 w<br />
Granting of consent<br />
1 d<br />
(Town) Planning<br />
Judicial review<br />
6 w<br />
Planning conditions reviewed and Discharge conditions required before start on<br />
12 w<br />
site<br />
Submit detailed proposal to neighbours<br />
1 d<br />
Review and update: Sustainability strategy<br />
4 w<br />
Review and update: Maintenance and operational<br />
4 w<br />
Review and update: Handover strategy<br />
4 w<br />
Review and update: Risks assessments<br />
4 w<br />
Suggested key support tasks<br />
Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> execution plan including change control procedures 4 w<br />
Review and update: Construction and health and safety strategies<br />
4 w<br />
Undertake third party consultants and conclude research and development<br />
20 w<br />
aspects<br />
Sustainability checkpoint - 3<br />
8 w<br />
Information Developed design including coordinated architectural, structural and building<br />
8 w<br />
Exchanges services design<br />
(at stage completion) Updated Cost information<br />
4 w<br />
CHRIS<br />
TMAS<br />
HOLI<br />
DAY<br />
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS<br />
HISTORIC ENGLAND<br />
GRENFELL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION<br />
HOLLAND PARK RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATIO<br />
HOLLAND PARK AVENUE 133-159<br />
RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION<br />
HOLLAND WALK RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATIO<br />
HOLLAND PARK WEST<br />
RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION<br />
FRIENDS OF HOLLAND PARK<br />
GRENFELL ACTION GROUP<br />
MILLE TRINIDAD K1457716<br />
Stage 4: Technical Design<br />
48 w<br />
Prepare and develop technical design in accordance with design responsibility<br />
18 w<br />
matrix<br />
Prepare and develop technical design in accordance with project strategies to<br />
include all architectural, structural, building services information and specialist 18 w<br />
Core<br />
subcontractors design and specifications in accordance with design programme<br />
Review and update cost report<br />
3 w<br />
Client comment on updated Technical design and <strong>Project</strong> Strategies as requested 3w<br />
Issue technical design report<br />
1d<br />
Client sign off<br />
1 d<br />
Develop tender information<br />
30 w<br />
Design team stage 4 output issued for tender<br />
1 d<br />
Pre-qualification Questionnaire and pre-tender interview<br />
3 w<br />
Invitation to tender (short listed tenderers - contractor and prefabricated<br />
1 d<br />
suppliers)<br />
Bidding period<br />
6 w<br />
Tender returns<br />
1 d<br />
Mid interview for construction contract<br />
4 w<br />
Procurement (Public<br />
Tender evaluation<br />
4 w<br />
projects: PFI Tender stages)<br />
Tender negotiation with preferred bidder<br />
4 w<br />
Gateway 3 review: investment decision<br />
4 w<br />
Client identified the preferred tenderer<br />
1 d<br />
Tender report and settlement meeting (preparation for construction stage and<br />
4 w<br />
mobilisation)<br />
Contract engrossment<br />
2 w<br />
Cost reporting<br />
4 w<br />
Building contract awarded and contract execution<br />
1 d<br />
Specialist subcontractor design work in accordance with design and construction<br />
Programme<br />
ongoing<br />
programme (in parallel with Stage 5: Construction)<br />
Prepare and submit building regulations submission<br />
4 w<br />
(Town) Planning Prepare and submit third party submissions requiring consent<br />
4 w<br />
Consent granted<br />
Review and update: Sustainability<br />
Review and update: Maintenance and Operational<br />
Review and update: Hand over strategies<br />
Review and update: Risk Assessments<br />
Suggested key support tasks Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> execution plan<br />
4 w<br />
Review: Construction strategy, including sequencing and updated health and<br />
safety strategy<br />
Required: further review of the <strong>Project</strong> Strategies and documentation previously<br />
generated<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 4<br />
4 w<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges Completed technical design of the project<br />
1 d<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
AUG SEP OCT NOV<br />
DEC<br />
JAN<br />
FEB<br />
2019<br />
MAR APR AUG MAY SEP JUN OCT JUL NOV AUG DEC SEP JAN OCT<br />
FEB NOV<br />
Stage 5: Construction<br />
74 w<br />
Suggested key support tasks Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> execution plan<br />
4 w<br />
Surveys and investigations<br />
9 w<br />
Review: Construction strategy, including sequencing and updated health and<br />
Demolition<br />
16 w<br />
safety strategy<br />
Excavation<br />
20 w<br />
Required: further review of the <strong>Project</strong> Strategies and documentation previously<br />
Offsite manufacturing pre-fabricated elements<br />
20 w<br />
generated<br />
Enabling works<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 4<br />
4 w<br />
Ground works<br />
20 w<br />
Information Core<br />
Onsite framework construction in accordance with construction programme and<br />
Exchanges Completed technical design of the project<br />
1 d 32 w<br />
resolution of design queries from site as they arise<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
External works: Building services<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
External works: Landscaping<br />
32 w<br />
External works: Work for external services<br />
Stage 5: Construction<br />
74 w<br />
External works: General clean-up<br />
Surveys and investigations<br />
9 w<br />
Administration of building contract<br />
Procurement Demolition<br />
16 w<br />
Regular site inspections and review of progress<br />
weekly<br />
Excavation<br />
20 w<br />
Specialist subcontractor design work in accordance with design and construction ongoing till<br />
Programme Offsite manufacturing pre-fabricated elements<br />
20 w<br />
programme (in parallel with Stage 4)<br />
end of stage 5<br />
Enabling works<br />
Review and update: Sustainability strategy<br />
Ground works<br />
20 w<br />
Core<br />
Implement: Handover strategy including agreement of information required for<br />
Onsite framework construction in accordance with construction programme and<br />
commissioning, training, handover, asset management, future monitoring and 32 w<br />
resolution of design queries from site as they arise<br />
maintenance<br />
Suggested key suppot tasks<br />
External works: Building services<br />
Ongoing compilation of "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" monthly<br />
External works: Landscaping<br />
information<br />
32 w<br />
External works: Work for external services<br />
Update: Construction strategy<br />
External works: General clean-up<br />
Update: Health and Safety strategy<br />
Administration of building contract<br />
Procurement<br />
Client respond to queries raised and cost report<br />
Regular site inspections and review of progress<br />
weekly<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 5<br />
monthly<br />
Specialist subcontractor design work in accordance with design and construction ongoing till<br />
Programme Information<br />
programme (in parallel with Stage 4)<br />
end of stage 5<br />
Exchanges "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information<br />
1 d<br />
Review and update: Sustainability strategy<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
Implement: Handover strategy including agreement of information required for<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
commissioning, training, handover, asset management, future monitoring and<br />
maintenance<br />
Stage 6: Handover and Close Out<br />
varies<br />
Suggested key suppot tasks Ongoing compilation of "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" monthly<br />
Core<br />
Handover of Building to residents (Phase 2: dwelling construction)<br />
information<br />
Conclude administration of Building contract<br />
Procurement Update: Construction strategy<br />
Appoint Building Management and Housing Management team<br />
Update: Health and Safety strategy<br />
Handover period for phase 2: residents self build (varies) - allocation of residents,<br />
Programme Client respond to queries raised and cost report<br />
discussion of self build scheme etc.<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 5<br />
monthly<br />
(Town) Planning Handover period for phase 2: residents self build (varies)<br />
Information<br />
Carry out activities listed in Handover strategy including feedback for use during<br />
Exchanges "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information<br />
1 d<br />
the future life of the building and future projects (Phase 2)<br />
(at Suggested stage completion) key support tasks<br />
Updating project information as required<br />
regularly<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
Respond to queries in relation to handover of building as required<br />
regularly<br />
Sustainability Chekcpoint - 6<br />
Stage 6: Handover and Close Out<br />
varies<br />
Information<br />
Core<br />
Handover of Building to residents (Phase 2: dwelling construction)<br />
Exchanges Updated "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information as required<br />
Conclude administration of Building contract<br />
Procurement<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
Appoint Building Management and Housing Management team<br />
UK Government information<br />
Handover Required period for phase 2: residents self build (varies) - allocation of residents, as required<br />
Programme exchanges<br />
discussion of self build scheme etc.<br />
(Town) Planning Handover period for phase 2: residents self build (varies)<br />
Stage 7: In Use<br />
varies<br />
Carry out activities listed in Handover strategy including feedback for use during<br />
the future life of the building and future projects (Phase 2)<br />
Suggested key support tasks<br />
Updating project information as required<br />
regularly<br />
Respond to queries in relation to handover of building as required<br />
regularly<br />
Sustainability Chekcpoint - 6<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges Updated "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information as required<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information<br />
Required<br />
as required<br />
exchanges<br />
Stage 7: In Use<br />
varies<br />
Client undertake in use services in accordance with schedule of services<br />
Core<br />
Client undertake tasks listed in Handover Strategy<br />
Conclude activities listed in handover strategy and residents inuse strategy<br />
including: Post occupancy evaluation, review of project performance, project<br />
Suggested Key support task outcomes, research and development aspects<br />
Updating of <strong>Project</strong> information as required in response to ongoing client<br />
regularly<br />
feedback until the end of building's life<br />
Sustainability checkpoint - 7<br />
Information<br />
‘As-constructed’ Information updated in response to ongoing client Feedback and<br />
Exchanges<br />
as required<br />
maintenance or operational developments.<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government Information<br />
As required<br />
as required<br />
Exchanges<br />
Suggested key support tasks Review and update: <strong>Project</strong> execution plan<br />
4 w<br />
Review: Construction strategy, including sequencing and updated health and<br />
safety strategy<br />
Required: further review of the <strong>Project</strong> Strategies and documentation previously<br />
generated<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 4<br />
4 w<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges Completed technical design of the project<br />
1 d<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
Stage 5: Construction<br />
74 w<br />
Surveys and investigations<br />
9 w<br />
Demolition<br />
16 w<br />
Excavation<br />
20 w<br />
Offsite manufacturing pre-fabricated elements<br />
20 w<br />
Enabling works<br />
Ground works<br />
20 w<br />
Core<br />
Onsite framework construction in accordance with construction programme and<br />
32 w<br />
resolution of design queries from site as they arise<br />
External works: Building services<br />
External works: Landscaping<br />
32 w<br />
External works: Work for external services<br />
External works: General clean-up<br />
Administration of building contract<br />
Procurement<br />
Regular site inspections and review of progress<br />
weekly<br />
Specialist subcontractor design work in accordance with design and construction ongoing till<br />
Programme<br />
programme (in parallel with Stage 4)<br />
end of stage 5<br />
Review and update: Sustainability strategy<br />
Implement: Handover strategy including agreement of information required for<br />
commissioning, training, handover, asset management, future monitoring and<br />
maintenance<br />
Suggested key suppot tasks Ongoing compilation of "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" monthly<br />
information<br />
Update: Construction strategy<br />
Update: Health and Safety strategy<br />
Client respond to queries raised and cost report<br />
Sustainability Checkpoint - 5<br />
monthly<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information<br />
1 d<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information Not Required<br />
Stage 6: Handover and Close Out<br />
varies<br />
Core<br />
Handover of Building to residents (Phase 2: dwelling construction)<br />
Conclude administration of Building contract<br />
Procurement<br />
Appoint Building Management and Housing Management team<br />
Handover period for phase 2: residents self build (varies) - allocation of residents,<br />
Programme<br />
discussion of self build scheme etc.<br />
(Town) Planning Handover period for phase 2: residents self build (varies)<br />
Carry out activities listed in Handover strategy including feedback for use during<br />
the future life of the building and future projects (Phase 2)<br />
Suggested key support tasks<br />
Updating project information as required<br />
regularly<br />
Respond to queries in relation to handover of building as required<br />
regularly<br />
Sustainability Chekcpoint - 6<br />
Information<br />
Exchanges Updated "As Constructed: As built drawings and record drawings" information as required<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government information<br />
Required<br />
as required<br />
exchanges<br />
Stage 7: In Use<br />
varies<br />
Client undertake in use services in accordance with schedule of services<br />
Core<br />
Client undertake tasks listed in Handover Strategy<br />
Conclude activities listed in handover strategy and residents inuse strategy<br />
including: Post occupancy evaluation, review of project performance, project<br />
Suggested Key support task outcomes, research and development aspects<br />
Updating of <strong>Project</strong> information as required in response to ongoing client<br />
regularly<br />
feedback until the end of building's life<br />
Sustainability checkpoint - 7<br />
Information<br />
‘As-constructed’ Information updated in response to ongoing client Feedback and<br />
Exchanges<br />
as required<br />
maintenance or operational developments.<br />
(at stage completion)<br />
UK Government Information<br />
As required<br />
as required<br />
Exchanges<br />
ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSE
NOV<br />
MAR APR MAY<br />
2019 2020<br />
JUL<br />
AUG SEP OCT<br />
JUN DEC JAN FEB MAR APR<br />
ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA<br />
GRENFELL RESIDENTS<br />
PROJECT MANAGER<br />
N<br />
BUILDING SERVICES<br />
MAIN CONTRACTOR<br />
(principal contractor)<br />
ARCHITECT<br />
(principal designer & lead consultant)<br />
COST CONSULTANT<br />
SUSTAINABILITY CONSULTANT<br />
N<br />
SUB CONTRACTOR<br />
DESIGNERS<br />
HEALTH AND SAFETY ADVISOR<br />
LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT<br />
HERITAGE CONSULTANT<br />
CONTRACTUAL<br />
NON CONTRACTUAL<br />
PLANNING CONSULTANT<br />
FIRE SAFETY<br />
2019<br />
2020 2019<br />
JUN<br />
JUL<br />
AUG SEP OCT<br />
NOV<br />
DEC<br />
FEB<br />
MAR APR MAY JUN<br />
JUL<br />
AUG SEP OCT<br />
MAR APR MAY NOV<br />
JAN DEC JAN FEB<br />
ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA<br />
GRENFELL RESIDENTS
3D STRUCTURE SAMPLE<br />
Structural strategy: proposal<br />
The project brief requires a pre-cast concrete structure which is a<br />
building infrastructure designed with structural frames and building<br />
services which will then be inhabited by the residents to build their<br />
own flats with the use of cost-efficient and accessible materials.<br />
Architectural objectives:<br />
There will be two phases for the construction. The first involves the designing<br />
and building of the urban scale of the project (spatial organisation)<br />
where the major stakeholder is the royal borough of kensington<br />
and chelsea. The second phase of the project involves a more domestic<br />
scale where the major stakeholders are the families or residents of<br />
grenfell where they have the freedom to choose materials, design and<br />
build their own flats with the help of the design guide of sample flat<br />
plans.<br />
6<br />
Scale: 1:50<br />
A. Phase 1: organisation of space (urban scale)<br />
1. Street level public walkway<br />
2. Pockets of public and green spaces<br />
3. Building framework<br />
4. Site and building access<br />
5. Building services such as gas, electric, water and drainage<br />
B. Phase 2: inhabitation of space (domestic scale)<br />
1. One floor flats<br />
2. Deck access balconies<br />
6<br />
3D STRUCTURE SAMPLE<br />
Scale: 1:50<br />
3. Possible extension of the flat (flexibility on future changes of the<br />
flats)<br />
The framework is made out of number of precast reinforced concrete<br />
elements that are manufactured off-site and hence reduces site programme<br />
times. They are then delivered and assembled on site.<br />
7<br />
JOINT DETAILS<br />
Scale: 1:20<br />
The building skeleton is made up of t and c beams connected in 4’s<br />
which are supported by a double column system. Both are arranged<br />
formally in regular grids and strategised by using multi-storey columns<br />
system. The floor and roof systems are made up of double-t<br />
slabs which spans over and supported by the primary and secondary<br />
beams. There is also a separate precast joining element for the beams<br />
and columns. Some walls are non-bearing which meant that they are<br />
only designed to carry their deadweight and is independent of the primary<br />
structure.<br />
Since the site has a slope, using pile foundations that are spread between<br />
2.4 M (midpoint of each grid) which are topped with pile caps<br />
and then installed with ground beams to support columns are more<br />
appropriate solution for this type of construction. Augered piling is<br />
commonly used in clay subsoil which is present on site. It involves<br />
drilling on site, auger withdrawal and filling the hole with reinforced<br />
concrete. It is the least expensive and virtually vibration free. It is also<br />
possible for the site which could have a very restricted access.
Structural design<br />
For the structure of the building, i have included and designed my own<br />
system which was inspired and precedented from timber construction<br />
methods and angelo mangiarotti’s projects respectively. As explained<br />
on the previous page the precast system was designed in a certain system<br />
that i think suitable due to the aspect of flexibility and changes in<br />
a growing family.<br />
Although it focuses more on the domestic changes, a larger scale of<br />
change is also be possible as one of the construction system’s philosophy<br />
was the ability to extend its structure through disassembling a<br />
part of structural framework without affecting the whole building. It<br />
was done in a way where each floor is independent of each other. This<br />
is precedented with park hill estate in sheffield which recently went<br />
through regeneration where the structure was mended and reused.<br />
This shows that the sustainability of a structure was also thought of.<br />
It was arranged in a grided layout where the vertex are placed in the<br />
midpoint of the double column. This type of layout is easier to build<br />
and will produce a minimum number of precast elements which is<br />
more cost-effective. Repetitive precast concrete bays also adds to the<br />
unity of the design aspect of the building. The structural organisation<br />
will also reflect on the spacial organisation of the design which made<br />
it easier to produce pockets of spaces that can be flexible of use. It was<br />
a design strategy that allows a lot of possibility. Hence, the free flowing<br />
walls which was an option for the design solution for some flats with<br />
privacy and daylight issues.<br />
The design of each element shows that each of them exist in pairs. There<br />
is a prefabricated elemental joint that connects the primary beams to<br />
the columns per storey. The primary c and t beams sit on top of the<br />
columns and is designed to slot in and support the secondary beams in<br />
each bay. The floor slabs in double-t system then sits on the top of each<br />
secondary beam which is more of a standard design. This is preferable<br />
than the hollow core slabs as the double t is much thinner in thickness<br />
so it will leave a lot of room for underfloor heating and services to run<br />
through with the possibility of exposing the structure on the interior<br />
spaces.<br />
Even though the system is designed to have some fixed end strategy<br />
and others are joint through their protruding part, all elements are put<br />
together through different types of joints depending on each individual<br />
element. E.G. Tie bars, weld plates, hooks and bends in reinforcement<br />
of the precast element, steel angle and webplate connections which are<br />
casted to the beams for de-mountability.<br />
Load bearing elements: How these spans can support various types of<br />
loads and what how much of design was involved in mitigating issues<br />
( Connections)<br />
Depending on which element, the system is arranged in a heirarchy.<br />
The primary elements support and are usually aligned in perpendicular<br />
to the secondary elements. Tertiary elements are used to stiffen<br />
the structure to provide additional strength to its framework design.<br />
The measurement of individual elements are designed using the standard<br />
ratio requirement e.g. 1:20 For beams (depth/span) and columns<br />
(width/height). The design tested its stability and capability to support<br />
a load through model making.<br />
Modular components<br />
The measurements are also based to co-relate to the standard sizes of<br />
building materials and elements such as plywood, doors, windows. It<br />
was created to attain a modular and sustainable use of materials.
How does the structural elements contribute to the architectural<br />
character of the building?<br />
The concrete structural elements itself were designed to be a part of<br />
the subtle ornamentation of the structure which is a character like<br />
some brutalist buildings.<br />
The effects of texture, change in colour, heaviness of concrete itself<br />
were used to create a character of the building as a whole. It manifests<br />
a mood that the material makes when it behaves differently on<br />
various times during the day or due to weathering e.G. Concrete<br />
getting wet when it rains or dry during the summer.<br />
Structure as architecture is a continuing challenge for architects as<br />
modern applied technology are more associated with contemporary<br />
and modern living in this generation. By using the structure<br />
as a starting point for layout and composition is a logical approach<br />
when designing buildings as this tends to be more cost efficient<br />
and clearly a more sustainable and sensible approach when thinking<br />
about the future life of the building.<br />
By designing a repetitive/grid layout for a structural system creates<br />
a uniform architectural character for the building despite the individual<br />
identity of the flats.<br />
For the elevation, the repetition of bays reflects from formality of<br />
the plan which makes it easier to identify level/building storeys<br />
and access. This strategy brings out a modular approach and thus<br />
makes it more flexible in organising spaces. Meanwhile, using a<br />
singular type of material strategy makes the architecture of the<br />
building more coherent and explicitly shows that brutalism was<br />
used as a precedent architectural style. It also reflects on the aesthetics<br />
issues on social housing which is widely debatable in the<br />
architectural world and specifically in united kingdom e.G robinhood<br />
gardens, park hill estate in sheffield, trellick tower, alexandra<br />
road estate, etc.<br />
The structure also affects the quality of spaces and how can it be<br />
more feasible to inhabit and sustain. Using new technology with<br />
precast concrete can create a sophisticated approach on the topic<br />
of ornamentation which was a preferred style used during the post<br />
war period of building of social housing estates and low cost housing<br />
around the world.<br />
Collective inhabitation of materials<br />
How does this approach affect the overall design?<br />
The subtle design approach of brutalism becomes the neutral approach<br />
for this type of project as it will tend to equalise or tone<br />
down the explicit use of different types of materials for the flats.<br />
Hence the structure will act as a folder or container for the variety<br />
of texture, colour, feel and mood of the building envelope. If<br />
it was to be compared to another building, it can be compared to<br />
how the silodam by mvrdv architects in amsterdam used the shape<br />
and form of the building to create singularity without affecting the<br />
freedom of the residents when designing their own houses. It becomes<br />
a collective group which has both freedom and restriction<br />
to balance each other out.<br />
For structural ornamentation, examples where the structure has affected<br />
the design of the facade e.g. bracings and mies van de rohe’s<br />
approach on making the structural elements as the ornaments for<br />
his buildings and how the smithsons were also referencing Mies for<br />
Robinhood gardens.
Public space<br />
Atmosphere: One particular design strategy that aroused from the lumiere video<br />
study for the context and planning was a space dedicated solely to pedestrians. This<br />
is a result of the comments taken that the existing streets are designed to prioritise<br />
vehicles. There is little to none outdoor or street activity happening that involves<br />
the existing residents besides the Holland Park Avenue high street. The existing<br />
villas had their backs turned against the main road, creating the feel of exclusivity<br />
of the residential area creating an invisible gate against the public.<br />
The design concept for the ground floor was a pedestrian led street thus the plan<br />
shows a continuous public pathway where the pedestrians are prioritised. It serves<br />
as shared public and residential covered walk with a series of courtyards.<br />
Using Cambridge’s St. John’s College - Cripps Building by Powell and Moya as<br />
precedents, I designed two types of ground floor public spaces that can be differentiated<br />
through its level, height, accessibility and enclosure. The idea is to provide<br />
a flexible space for pedestrian circulation where static and in flux movements are<br />
separated through spaces.<br />
The elevated space serves as the walkway and entrances to the flats (located to<br />
its upper storeys) through an open-access, non-gated stairs and residential lift. In<br />
here, the flats are considered as houses on their own right. Most houses in the UK<br />
do not have a gate, leaving its threshold as boundary line between private and<br />
public. For this project, it is that stairs that acts as a threshold for the residents;<br />
designating the ground floor as public and upper storeys as private.
The typology is commonly used in high streets where land value is quite<br />
costly hence the flats are always located on the first floor and the ground<br />
floor dedicated for business or public use.<br />
Meanwhile, the ground spaces serves as a series of voids that have different<br />
hierarchies. This is to create a layer of invisible enclosure in open areas,<br />
creating different types of spaces in a repetitive grid and making the people<br />
aware of the spaces they use. The idea is that each space could provide<br />
a make-shift room or setting to different activities that could take place<br />
depending on the day, time and weather. Hence, the users becomes the<br />
identifiers of space. The spaces can transform or mimic particular setting,<br />
acting as a chameleon depending of the needs of its users.
Flats<br />
Historically, the site was a rural area until<br />
the purchase of the Holland Estate in which<br />
marked the urban development of the area.<br />
The two sloped parallel roads to Holland Park<br />
Avenue and two perpendicular ones on both<br />
ends were built as an access road to 4 rows<br />
of identical detached villas that were generally<br />
set together to mimic a terrace housing<br />
effect. The Holland Park Mews that are situated<br />
in between were preserved due to their<br />
lavish coach-houses and stable designs. The<br />
villas housed wealthy merchants, foreigners<br />
and mostly artists. It is due to the fact that<br />
the original floor plans of the villas have their<br />
saloons facing just about North which is important<br />
for painters and artists because there<br />
is only daylight coming through the windows<br />
- as sunlight affects the visual perception of<br />
colours. The mews’ household consisted of<br />
servants with living accommodation located<br />
in the first floor, accessible through an exterior<br />
stairs.<br />
Even around 1870’s, most villas only housed<br />
the caretakers rather than the home owners<br />
themselves. This has been the truth about<br />
these lavish structures and has been continuing<br />
through out the 21st century.<br />
Both the mews and the villas has a common<br />
theme for central hallways that cuts<br />
through the structure from north to south.<br />
It also serves as a space for interior access<br />
and exterior entrances for the front and rear<br />
elevation in which throughout the years, has<br />
been preserved. Although, some were altered<br />
due to the owners dividing the villas into a<br />
number of flats. The central hallway was used<br />
as a historical precedent for the location of<br />
the proposal in which it mimics the movement<br />
circulation of the users of the villas and<br />
transferring it to the streets.<br />
For the whole structure, across each floor<br />
there are 11 open stair access, 3 residential<br />
lifts and 7 rooms dedicated to communal water,<br />
electric and gas connections. Waste and<br />
recycling are located at the ground floor for<br />
communal use. Over all gas, electric and water<br />
main rooms are located on ground floor<br />
with provider only access. Posts and parcels<br />
will be delivered door to door.<br />
In total, there are 122 flats across 5 storeys<br />
within both structure.<br />
First and second floor: total of 25 flats with<br />
(9) 1-bedroom, (9) 2-bedroom and (7)<br />
3-bedroom flats<br />
Third, fourth and fifth floor: total of 24 flats<br />
with with (10) 1-bedroom, (8) 2-bedroom<br />
and (6) 3-bedroom flats
The concept of “pedestrian first” continues to the semi-public access of the flats<br />
which was precedented by Park Hill’s streets in the sky - where the deck access was<br />
designed as a street to highlight and encourage neighbourhood interactions. The<br />
initial idea was to provide ample space and enough accessible exits for each flats<br />
for fire safety to prevent unfortunate events like what happened at Grenfell tower.<br />
Each bay that corresponds a part of a flat has always a corresponding bay dedicated<br />
to outside access, allowing ample amount of communal space.<br />
The structural strategy is designed to reflect the division of flats. Each bay can be<br />
used as a single use of space but at the same time, is flexible to be divided in half,<br />
etc. to accommodate the need for space. For example, a single bedroom flat will<br />
take 2 bays but the fact that one can extend and buy another bay in the future incase<br />
they get married or have a family is possible. There is always an opportunity<br />
for extension as the resident’s living situation changes. There is also a possibility of<br />
extending the flats towards the semi-public bays, providing that there will be no<br />
disruption to both communal and disabled access.
Iteration of flat design<br />
There was a brief to follow for the flats and the<br />
theme was living from the centre. Initially, the<br />
flat was octagonal in shape and as the structural<br />
framework of the project developed, the flat progressed<br />
into having angled walls that mimic the<br />
fabric of the repetition of existing bay windows<br />
of the villas. This was studied along with the<br />
form of the building and was used as a solution<br />
to privacy by creating window views that does<br />
not directly facing towards its neighbouring<br />
villas. But as the scheme is big, it was difficult<br />
to have each flat be tapered to a particular view<br />
and at the same time providing enough space to<br />
live in according to the national housing space<br />
standards. The brief for the flat design thus takes<br />
another interpretation where it was taken as a<br />
literal prescription for the living room as a central<br />
space that divides the private and the public.<br />
The strategy sketch for placement of flats shows<br />
that each flat’s living room corresponds to the<br />
deck access as their balcony which solves the<br />
need for personal exterior space. But it also<br />
serves as a street, leaving the spaces to act as a<br />
threshold for each flat. Thus, blurring the line<br />
between public and private.
The final flat design development approach<br />
was a flat that still has dual aspect to provide<br />
cross ventilation and enough daylight<br />
to pass through the rooms. Building service<br />
routes influenced the placement of the<br />
kitchens and toilets to make sure the MEP<br />
design is suitable to fit the structural design.<br />
Each flat would have different but similar<br />
solutions on their interior spatial design.<br />
This is because some flats face the stairs -<br />
making it difficult to project the interior to<br />
exterior. Also, depending on which part of<br />
the structure they are located, there is a limitation<br />
in how much windows they can have<br />
and as well as the different need for heating<br />
and cooling strategy. But nonetheless, the<br />
voids are driven by the bays and maximum<br />
open spaces making it flexible to transform<br />
the room into the residents’ particular need.<br />
The following examples of inhabited designed<br />
flats shows how the altered interior<br />
spaces has affected the enclosures and zoning<br />
of the “streets in the sky”.
Inhabitation<br />
The deck access is designed to be a living street. It is a residential area with communal responsibility.<br />
By creating a space that inspire collective living we create an idea of a village<br />
within a building. The drawing shows an idea how it can be perceived ideally.<br />
Designing the deck access space includes the identification of zoning and enclosures which<br />
were configured by the voids left by the stairs, flats (immovable) and public furniture (movable).<br />
Use of plants were inspired from my childhood home where instead of building a fence,<br />
we used potted plants to define the boundary of our premises. This is due to a fact that it is<br />
cheaper and they looked more appealing.<br />
Meanwhile, the available spaces left can be used by the residents up to a certain extent. E.g<br />
possible communal space for neighbourhood event such as birthday parties, outside afternoon<br />
tea or whenever they feel like hanging out. To identify how much space a resident is<br />
responsible of was decided by whether a space is a shared or sole responsibility. Since events<br />
are rather temporary, it should not be a reason for traffic obstruction. This proposes the idea<br />
of belonging within the residents, meaning they also need to exert an effort to build that<br />
community to feel more safe with each other. In architectural perspective, the decks act as a<br />
tertiary type of street and becomes a centre that connects all the flats in site.
Long elevation<br />
The elevation drawings in context show how the character of the site will change<br />
with the proposal cutting through the parallel rows of villas and mews. The way<br />
that the proposal intervenes and placed tangent to the existing fabric is a polemical<br />
statement. The drawing highlights the villas and mews with the proposal existing<br />
as a background. This outlook changes when observing the sectional elevation<br />
where the proposal relates its section to the elevation of the existing structures;<br />
for the social housing is highlighted as the villas and mews become a repetitive<br />
background.<br />
The fact that precast concrete structure signifies an architectural period where<br />
there are less resources available and hence ornamentation is omitted completely<br />
juxtaposes the villas’ intricate stucco design and decorative cast ironwork. This<br />
is evident in the elevational section drawing with the front elevation of the villas<br />
where the proposal seems to mimic the Greek embassy (1A Holland Park) on the<br />
end of the street which was built after the war. This is due to a fact that the original<br />
villa was damaged and demolished during the WW2, hence its renovation was<br />
done after the war.<br />
Because of the differences in heights, the proposal creates a new building landscape<br />
that seemed to disturb the organisation of existing fabric. The shape and<br />
form of the building is projected through the elevation drawing revealing different<br />
layer of spaces. Like the mews’ original use, the proposal’s accommodation is<br />
located on the upper storeys of the structure. The sudden change in height on the<br />
rear part of the first building was to respect the vertical relationship between the<br />
villas and mews.<br />
The Holland Park Avenue elevation shows that the access stairs acts as the connection<br />
between the main road and the Holland Park street. The raised entrance<br />
and walkway was designed to resemble public arcades that function as shortcuts;<br />
as well as to be a form of temporary public shelter and access to some businesses<br />
inside.
CROSS SECTION<br />
Scale: 1:200<br />
REAR ELEVATION<br />
Scale: 1:200
Long section<br />
Drawing the section of the proposal in context shows a comparison between the<br />
social housing and the villa’s presence. It seems like as much as the villas’ lavish<br />
condition, the social housing seemed much more interesting due to the density<br />
and the amount of activities happening on each level. It shows a massive difference<br />
in social context most importantly if the villa compared is empty.<br />
The cross section shows how the layer of privacy is applied to the design both<br />
vertically and horizontally. It reveals the vertical circulation and order of activities<br />
happening at different levels and bays. We can see that as we transitioned along the<br />
series of bays, we also traveled from an open space into an intimate one.<br />
The section helps the designer to easily identify ventilation and lightning strategies,<br />
as well as the vertical circulation of movement. This thus help in determining<br />
the loads applied to the structure, which is clearly seen to be integrated within the<br />
overall design of the scheme, creating repetitive grids that are flexible in adapting<br />
variety of use of space.<br />
The courtyards provide a particular identity for their area highlighting a hierarchy<br />
within the exterior spaces. There is a connection between the floors above and<br />
the ground floor courtyards. It shows that human interaction exist between floors<br />
through the deck balconies which juxtaposes the repetitive and static design of the<br />
structure. There are minimal changes in height across each floor e.g. through the<br />
walk way and the private projected balconies that usually has a difference of 400-<br />
300 mm respectively.
Self build scheme<br />
One part of the brief of the project is to help create self built housing for<br />
the people which is quite impossible to execute individually as the proposal<br />
scheme is designed as two singular structures. This is due to healthy and safety,<br />
the procurement stage and construction stage as it becomes a 129 individual<br />
project when it is handed over to the residents. There are a lot of factors<br />
that will affect the cost, programme and value that will affect the results for<br />
planning application.<br />
But with the brief in mind, the initial idea was to provide a flexible structure<br />
hence the use of grid. Whilst the flats would have a guide and hence<br />
restrictions in terms of alteration. Each floor and area has its own designated<br />
services room that house water, gas and electricity. Deep ceiling, party walls<br />
and floor voids act as circulation route for ventilation and servicing pipes,<br />
and cables.<br />
Each flat can be designed according to the needs and affordability of the resident<br />
by choosing their own materials and method of heating (e.g. underfloor<br />
heating or using radiators). Thermal and sound insulation runs through external<br />
and party walls, ceilings and floors.<br />
The residents can also decide if they want to expose the concrete structure in<br />
their interior or not, how high the ceiling or floor will be. The proposed design<br />
of the structure, plan and integration will act as an example of standard<br />
build up that was precedented with passive house design samples.<br />
The strategy of wide deck access was precedented from Park Hill Estate in<br />
Sheffield to act as both circulation route and balcony for the residents of the<br />
flats to encourage the residents to grow as community. Meanwhile the presence<br />
of the structure is there to act as a grid to identify a space.<br />
Although there is freedom to designate or change the spaces on each flat, it<br />
is somehow restricted to follow a few from the unoccupied design proposal<br />
as there is restriction due to the placing of the integrated systems. This is also<br />
applied for the exposed exterior structure. The structural presence on the exterior<br />
of the building is made to create a unified scheme and the use of precast<br />
concrete is intended from the very beginning. This unified design of the<br />
structure then creates a contrast to the individuality of the materials used in<br />
each flats; which shows the modularity of the design.<br />
Lastly, the material used for the structural framework and slab is precast reinforced<br />
concrete without painting it or covering it. This is a way to show and<br />
appreciate raw design and texture of the material. As this is precast, there will<br />
be improvement on resource efficiency, less waste, quicker construction time<br />
frame and ensuring that environmental management systems compliant to<br />
ISO 14001 and EMAS are maintained.
Integration<br />
The project was thoroughly designed using precedents, research and by<br />
studying its contextual analysis. Besides costings, we also did a sustainability<br />
design statement, a value management report to understand fully<br />
the value of our project and as well as technical detail studies for structure,<br />
MEP and the fabric. This is to ensure that we understood how the structure<br />
is made up to the smallest details and to make sure that the construction<br />
strategy can be realised.
Services integration<br />
Integrating building services to the structure creates an issue<br />
with spaces that is why they are well considered from<br />
the very beginning due to the fact that the project’s nature<br />
includes a lot of distribution routes for different servicing.<br />
Designing the skeletal framework (structural design) has<br />
taken building services in consideration by making structural<br />
components<br />
That would have design characteristics with enough space<br />
for cables, servicing pipes, ventilation, etc. Individually<br />
and when they are connected together. Although, concrete<br />
is a lot more restrictive than steel which means that<br />
it cannot be produced like steel cellular beams but can be<br />
mitigated through another approach by tweaking on its<br />
component design.<br />
The connecting spaces within the building were also reserved<br />
to be used for plant rooms and access lifts. There<br />
is also a consideration for enough space to allow future<br />
changes in accommodating the needs of the residents.<br />
Exposing structural component is an option for easier<br />
maintenance but should be well thought of as the pipes<br />
should be located on a well insulated and ventilated space<br />
to reduce risks of bursting pipes due to accidents and extreme<br />
weather. There is also a flexibility on the structural<br />
system to move structural elements according to the need<br />
of servicing in the future.<br />
Most importantly, as the project develops, there became<br />
some building services route constraints to allow these<br />
services to be distributed efficiently. So even if the structure<br />
was created to adapt to the service requirements,<br />
the routes also has to adjust to the structural form of the<br />
building and the location of the flats.<br />
11. Built-in wooden chair doubles as fence<br />
15. Plant layer<br />
Growing medium<br />
Filter layer<br />
40 mm drainage layer<br />
6mm building protection mat + 2 ply bitumen seal<br />
Waterproof membrane<br />
200 mm EPS thermal insulation<br />
40 mm PUR foam soundproofing sheet<br />
Vapour barrier<br />
60 mm Protection board<br />
Precast concrete slab with T-beam system<br />
16. Double glazing folding door with wood framing<br />
17. Double glazing sliding door with metal framing<br />
18. Lights fixed on suspended outdoor ceiling trellis<br />
19. Floor joist<br />
20. 10 mm concrete flooring tiles<br />
10 mm acoustic insulation sheet<br />
20 mm wood floor board<br />
Underfloor void for servicing pipes, cables and UFH<br />
100 mm acoustic mineral wool<br />
Vapour barrier<br />
21. Interior wall finish<br />
Sound insulation sheet supported by header<br />
22. Interior wood casing<br />
23. Interior wood door
24. Gypsum board supported by furring<br />
channels and hung as suspended ceiling,<br />
Hanger wire<br />
25. Adjustable ceiling spotlight<br />
26. Galvanised steel cable trunk<br />
27. Galvanised steel conduit trunk and fittings<br />
28. 2 way push dimmer steel light switches<br />
29. Galvanised steel double socket with USB<br />
30. 12 mm laminated wood flooring<br />
65 mm screed with UFH pipes<br />
Polythene waterproof lining<br />
35 mm sound insulation sheet<br />
100 mm EPS thermal insulation sheet<br />
Vapour barrier<br />
Precast concrete slab with T-beam system<br />
100 mm acoustic foam<br />
Acoustic foam mount<br />
31. Light switch<br />
32. Cast iron radiator<br />
33. Outdoor pendant LED lighting mounted<br />
into the T-slab used for deck access and public<br />
walkways<br />
34. Precast concrete element that serves as<br />
eave and shading mount<br />
35. Steel anchor to secure the window frame<br />
to the wall construction<br />
36. Double glazed window with galvanised<br />
steel frame<br />
37. Snap-in glazing beads<br />
38. Window flashing<br />
39. Resident’s choice of exterior material<br />
cladding e.g. wood tile, weatherboard, corten<br />
steel, fibre cement sheet, corrugated aluminium<br />
sheet, etc.<br />
Cladding rail<br />
Air gap<br />
Vapour barrier<br />
12 mm fibreboard sheathing e.g. OSB<br />
150 mm EPS thermal insulation (between<br />
a wood stud wall)<br />
9 mm fibreboard sheathing<br />
60 mm cellulose acoustic insulation<br />
Resident’s choice of interior material cladding<br />
i.e. plywood, magnesium oxide board,<br />
dry wall, plaster or gypsum board, tiles, etc.<br />
Skirting board<br />
40. Precast concrete element seating<br />
41. Drainage<br />
42. Precast concrete ground beam<br />
43. Dowel reinforcement bar interlocking the<br />
precast concrete ground beam and precast<br />
concrete pile cap, non-shrink grout<br />
44. Precast concrete pile cap<br />
45. Precast concrete pile
1. Photovoltaic solar panels<br />
2. 60 mm concrete paving slab<br />
3. Wood balustrade<br />
4. Flashing<br />
5. Concrete Parapet<br />
6. Reinforced concrete beam<br />
7. Reinforced concrete column<br />
8. Wood balustrade<br />
9. Balustrade metal baseplate mount<br />
10. 200 mm RFC element with PMMA resin coating<br />
12. 400 mm precast RFC slab element with PMMA resin<br />
coating<br />
200 mm precast concrete planks<br />
13. 700 mm precast concrete ground beam used as plinth<br />
14. 100 mm brick paving slab<br />
Tamped sand base<br />
Landscape fabric<br />
Gravel base<br />
Soil
Reflection<br />
How does the proposal could affect the site and potentially the city<br />
fabric and the future of social housing?<br />
The concept and placement of the proposal was a polemical example<br />
in questioning the ideals of an orderly society. We tend to<br />
agree on what the institution in power deemed to be good and acceptable.<br />
The approach in building and design strategy adheres the<br />
politics in architecture where the industry tends to be subjective<br />
but bias in regards to certain aesthetic tastes. It has come to a point<br />
that the project must defend its narrative to justify the aggressive<br />
demolition of few listed buildings in which some are proven to be<br />
uninhabited. We always deny the fact that architectural discrimination<br />
is present. Thus the aim of this project is to build, design<br />
and dedicate a project for the ordinary people which constitutes<br />
more than 90 percent of the population.<br />
The end goal was to use architecture to create an awareness about<br />
our bias towards the typology of affordable housing and to remove<br />
the negative connotations about it. Because of this bias, the<br />
project location seemed to be unorthodox and seemingly angry<br />
towards the rich although it is not the case when a “depressed”<br />
area goes under regeneration. That is why I think that the project<br />
would cause a controversial conversation which is needed when<br />
challenging the ‘norm’.<br />
Compared to the existing buildings in context, the villas have different<br />
type of construction method than the one that was this thesis’<br />
pre-requisite. The structure did not intended to blend in within<br />
the context but rather to stand out within it.<br />
In all aspects of the design, regularity and repetition are the subtle<br />
themes that organically developed on my project. This is because<br />
it solves the pragmatic issues of the design concept of accidental<br />
spaces which was a main idea that transpired the angled forms of<br />
the building. Going back to my previous tutorials, i found out that<br />
my decisions on the design development of the project were carefully<br />
thought of through considerations of dropping some ideas<br />
that has been there from the beginning but does not work out.<br />
Not a single part of the design was accidentally made but rather a<br />
product of trial and error.<br />
To be able to reflect on the very heart of the project every iteration,<br />
the site strategy of building where the framework cuts across the<br />
site was a reminder of the thesis theme. This have affected a lot of<br />
structural decisions that was made; if a singular aspect of the design<br />
changes, it will affect the whole of it. All aspect of the project<br />
should work together to be able to make sense of it.<br />
Ideally, the proposal would be a positive contribution to Holland<br />
Park and will nurture its social diversity by integrating a new type<br />
of community to an existing one. Architecturally, it will greatly<br />
affect the fabric of the city. By putting a break on a series of villa<br />
mansions using a public housing could potentially bring the housing<br />
estates towards the front, saving them and as well as encourage<br />
treating them as good government assets. It is the same approach<br />
as to the change and tightening of building regulations for this<br />
type of housing typology after the Grenfell fire. Although this<br />
time, we do not need an unfortunate event to happen before we<br />
make an action. We know that regeneration and privatisation of<br />
property developers cause communities to break up and continues<br />
to further segregate the inhabitants according to their social status<br />
e.g. postcode envy.<br />
Architecture evolved out of the dynamics between the needs and<br />
means of the people but later formalised into a craft. Throughout<br />
history, architectural styles and technology advanced so much and<br />
so the ever changing fabric of the city. But it should not discriminate<br />
and aesthetics should only come second to the the needs of<br />
the people. An architect is a master builder capable of creating cities<br />
but first, he is human.<br />
On structure:<br />
The system of construction using prefabricated materials has been<br />
set as a part of the project from the very beginning. This restrict us<br />
in some way but this worked well with the fact that the project is in<br />
a massive scale. Prefabrication is preferable for projects that might<br />
take a long time as this lessens the time frame of on-site building<br />
because most of the materials are made off-site. This is also preferable<br />
for a very restrictive site such as this as only minimum site<br />
storage is needed. Minimising both the site disruption and construction<br />
timeline are valid arguments for planning application in<br />
this type of project. This minimises the inconvenience it brings to<br />
the existing residents.<br />
Meanwhile, integrating the services to the structure by making the<br />
services fit to the actual purpose of the building makes it easier for<br />
both the authorities and residents. Applying the building regulation<br />
requirements also affects the design in way and creates some<br />
regularity on the structure. These restrictions makes it easier to<br />
finalise design decisions during the iteration process. It also makes<br />
it easier id the building’s function changes in the future.<br />
In terms of building strategy in the domestic scale, through my iterations<br />
and choosing design decisions and solutions, i found that<br />
premeditating a concept of free flowing walls around the structural<br />
framework will benefit the theme of agency to a certain degree<br />
for the owners but restricts the design to be able to do more. That<br />
is why the sample flat plans are done in a way to touch the skeletal<br />
framework to create much more regularity and hence make it<br />
more flexible in terms of changes.