search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
PROJECT REPORT: MIXED USE SCHEMES


architect. “The staircase then fits perfectly to the new surroundings and helps to create a kind of landmark.”


Challenges


Though there was much inspiration from a previously successful project, there were still some practical hurdles for the architects in implementing the designs. One of the biggest challenges, according to Schuster, was the structural requirements posed by existing buildings on the site, chiefly a parking garage that defined the structural system with a maximum load the building could permit. The “complexity of the structural analysis” was therefore increased by the two-storey underground structure which would remain under the building. This meant that “all load assumptions and load points that could be introduced were already determined before the first line was even drawn.”


Further complexity was then introduced by the fact that the architects were presented with an evolving set of uses as the project progressed: “Originally, office use was planned, then a fitness studio came in as an anchor tenant and with it a 25 x 8 metre swimming pool. This was on the third floor, where all load reserves were already utilised.” This was made possible by the project’s structural advisor (Wolf+). Another tricky challenge presented itself during the design, namely the combination of meeting the client’s “desire for maximum transparency” while dealing with high winds at the building’s upper levels, alongside issues of solar gain and protection from the sun’s rays. “But, in the end it worked out well,” says Schuster, citing the fact that the team were given “adequate time to solve these individually.”


One way in which some of these issues arising from the building’s height were addressed was through the structural concept of slab and column, braced by the cascading external stair. Since these are also used as escape routes, they were able to be made wider – which the architect describes as “a win for the project.” Also, by reducing the building by one floor but increasing the room height (including the potential mezzanine), usable square metres and volume remain the same “but offer new freedom through the interpretation of the regulations.” Lastly, the design of the interior also presented obstacles: “The floor height of 5.5 metres is generous, but once galleries are added, the clear room height shrinks,”


ADF JUNE 2021 WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


29


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84