ANALYSIS
oliver hessian sustainable studio
STREET HIERARCHY
BLOCK SIZE
granville
study area: existing
Existing Typologies
A
• •
An analysis of the existing examples of densification in the study area revealed a range of typologies that have attempted to achieve this.
B
single dwelling plot single storey
• • •
single plot 11 sub plots private yard
*** ***** ** ** *** * **** * *** ***** 29 = 319
• • •
double plot apartments shared central access 2 storeys
D
• • •
E
double plot apartments shared central access 2 storeys
• • •
double plot apartments parking under building 3/4 storeys
• • •
single plot 17 sub plots 4 with yard space
• • •
** *** ** * ** * **** * *** *****
25 = 425
24 = 432
•
= Development potential
•
What is desirable? • • •
space light community
• • •
single plot 20 sub plots shared green
All plots orientated north-south Square plots are roughly 5x5m Square plots use shared green space All plots utilise roof terrace for additional private space Square subdivision assumes no on site parking therefor a car share system is in place and parking is on the street. Vehicle access is for emergency or one off use
connection flexibility safety
• • •
longevity? temporary? nature?
30 = 540
• • •
• •
• •
• •
amalgamated plot apartments shared driveway access 3/4 storeys
• •
double plot 36 sub plots
***** ***** ***** *** ***** ***** **** ** **** *****
35 = 648
43 = 774
What is flexible?
What isn’t flexible
• • •
•
potential for change architectural evolution maintained quality
• • •
8: Cluster Community Plots
double plot 37 sub plots
**** ***** **** **** **** *** *** ** **** **
29 = 508
density? flexibility? photovoltaics?
•
G
Plot sizes need to be more generous to leave room for flexibility and future development Cluster housing effective as a typology but only within an off street area. Closed Courtyard plots are effective All plots need a release for movement
7: Closed Courtyard Plots
double plot 35 sub plots
*** ***** **** *** *** ** ** * *** ***
What is sustainable? • • •
6: Open Courtyard Plots
double plot 36 sub plots front yard space
* ***** *** **** *** *** *** ** **** **
24 = 480
triple plot apartments shared cul de sac access 2 storeys
• • • •
5: Back to Back Plots
** *** ** ** *** * ** * *** *****
• • •
Conclusions:
4: Central Access Plots
single plot 18 sub plots shared green
F
Assumptions:
•
3: Split Access Plots
study area: connection
This lead me to question what the criteria might be in order to understand, judge and ultimately create desire in a dense suburban area.
Sub plots/plots x desire total
Total out of 50
* ** *** ** *** *** *** * ** *****
Sustainable Plot Size
study area: intensified
This would then be weighed up with how many dwellings are achievable per plot.
* = unacceptable ** = poor *** = ok **** = good ***** = desirable
2: Meandering Access Plots • • •
study area: existing
However what was clear from studying these examples was that there was a lack of desirability in all cases.
Strategies marked out of 5 in same order:
i. Quality of green space ii. Proximity of green space iii. Community atmosphere iv. Daylight v. Ventilation vi. Pedestrian Friendliness vii. Privacy viii. Connectivity ix. Growth Potential x. Development Distribution
• • •
C
double dwelling plot side access single storey
Desire Criteria:
1: Side Access Plots
study area: intensified
ROUTES
•
100% building to plot ratio permanent structure
•
un-recyclable materials
typical 2 bed house:
65 m
minimum 25 sqm
master bed bedroom toilet bathroom storage stair kitchen living flexible Plot Size
15 sqm 9 sqm 2 sqm 6 sqm 2 sqm 5 sqm 7 sqm 16 sqm + 70 % ? 100 sqm approx.
bungalow arrangement:
bedroom
flexible
stair
kitchen
5x5m
bathroom
storage
15 m
toilet
master bed
existing 975 sqm
living
100 sqm
60 sqm