Final Presentation

Project 3:

After spending much of my time in Project 2 perfecting the cradle, I was content that it should remain unchanged for project 3. Tutorial meetings with Davor confirmed that my next task would be to finalise spacial requirements and floorplans for my building component. For my project 2 presentation I had designed a modular system of buildings to exist within the cradle. I set to work planning my spaces within these modules.

Early idea for a bar.

Left to Right: Restaurant, Bar, Foyer.

I quickly became evident that my spaces would be too small to accommodate their served purpose. I had to amalgamate my modules into permanent structures.

Amalgamation of modules

Restaurant floor and offices (right).

Apartment floorplan

Once I was satisfied with my spacial arrangements, floorplans were created digitally.

Exploded view of floorplates.

1st Floor: Foyer

1st Floor: Axonometric.

2nd Floor: Axonometric.

3rd Floor: Apartment (required residential component)

3rd Floor: Axonometric.

Floors in position.

Once the floorplans were finalised I began to work on my siteplan. After further research into the Howard Smith Wharves site revealed that the existings WWII bunkers were actually positioned further to the left and right of the Story Bridge than what I had first been led to beleive. Restricted access into the site (due to construction) proved to make site analysis difficult and research material on the bunkers was minimal and difficult to find.

My original beleif was that the bunkers were positioned below the bridge, I therefore designed an underground museum to showcase the bunkers, however this was no longer required. My response to this was to use hard landscaping to surround the bunkers and draw interest from users of the site. I designed retaining walls around the bunkers in the fashion of solid concrete walls (1m thick) to reflect the bunker ideology. These walls would house information on the history of the site.

Site Plan: showing new landscape proposal.

Site Plan: Bridge removed to reveal landscape treatment.

WWII Bunkers located to the west side of bridge.

WWII Bunkers located to the east side of bridge.

Perspective view of site with new landscape sceme.

It was now time to place my new floorplans within the cradle.

Floors placed within cradle.

Approach from west.

Rampway approach from west.

Rampway approach from east.

Approach from west.

The following images are renders of the interior.

1st floor foyer.

2nd floor restaurant reception.

2nd floor restaurant: public kitchen counter.

2nd floor alfresco dining area.

2nd floor formal restaurant.

2nd floor office reception.

3rd floor apartment: Kitchen and living areas.

3rd floor apartment: Bedroom.

3rd floor apartment: Ensuite.

The ferry terminal from my project 2 submission was left as it was. I found no need to improve on the design as it suits the current design and reflects the forms of the ICON.

View of ferry terminal on site.

View of Howard Smith Wharves proposal.

Response to critique:

I will take this opportunity to thank Davor for his priceless input into my project throughout the semester and also to thank guest critics Sheona and Mirko for their feedback. I'm sure to put their points into practice in the future. I would also like to respond to the post presentation critique with some thoughts that I did not convey during my presentation.

Point raised: Some of the exposed structural elements in my design diminish the "magic" of the hanging cradle effect.

My response: I find it hard not to take into consideration how this building will actually be built. The structural column that I positioned beneath the cradle was an attempt to offset the weight of the structure and releave the weight from the bridge. In reflection to critic comments I have devised a new theoretical approach to this problem (basic images below).

This is how my current design proposes structural integrity (red).

Post critique: This is how I could better the structural design to retain the "magic" of the hanging cradle (red).

Point raised: The structural columns within my floorplans could have been better incorporated into my design so as to not be noticable.

My response:  I have, where possible, amalgamated my column into walls or cabinetry, but in some occasions I needed open plan spaces eg: restaurant. I did not want to place the columns in the curtain wall, so my answer was to place them within the building. I set them far enough into the building to be able to use the space around them. I also beleive that perhaps in my presentation that I had left them as bare concrete posts. I have, in fact, lined them with stained teak and set downlights around the top of them so as to use them as detail items. In saying this, I appreciate the comments and will endevour to "hide" them in future projects.

Point raised: I could have added more rooms and embelished my apartment further to justify the high cost of living accociated with such a prestigious address.

My response: In hindsight, yes, I could have made better use of the expansive balcony and resumed some of it for more bedrooms, however, I was designing it with a "couple" in mind. The expansive balcony was loosely based on the balcony of John Lautner's (a hero of mine) Arango Residence.

In Conclusion:

This has been my favourite project to date and I look forward to semester 2.

I look forward to taking what I have learned in this project and putting it into practice in my future projects.

The End.