Study Co-Working Hub
Objective :
Development of a documentation package for a new Study Co-Working Hub for students studying at The University of Melbourne and surrounding high schools.
Category | Architecture
Subject | Architectural Tectonics
Period | Semester 2, 2024 (12 weeks)
Preliminary Study
Study Co-Working Hub
Architectural Tectonics explores construction as a process that involves both cultural and technical decision-making. Unlike Architectural Technology, which delves into the internal mechanics of building systems, this subject shifts from analyzing architectural concepts to assessing and selecting appropriate implementation methods. Through a combination of built examples and project proposals, students learn to identify, evaluate, and interact with the technological foundations of architecture. The main project for this subject is the design of a Study Co-Working Hub, catering to university students and pedestrians across University Square at the University of Melbourne, allowing them to apply these principles in a real-world context.
Assessment 1: Schematic Design Response
Assessment 1 focuses on the Precinct and Site Analysis for the Study Co-Working Hub, requiring students to investigate and respond to key contextual factors influencing their design. The analysis should inform the intended design response, which can be communicated through schematic drawings and diagrams. The deliverables include a Site Plan (integrating preliminary investigations and a roof plan) at 1:200 scale, a Ground Floor Plan at 1:100 scale, and General Sections (East-West and North-South) at 1:100 scale. Additionally, students must provide structural ‘sketch’ layout diagrams illustrating the structural arrangement of footings, the ground floor, and the second floor beneath the green roof. A structural schedule in tabulated form should summarize key design intents and materials, ensuring clarity in structural planning. These components collectively establish a foundational understanding of the site, guiding the development of a coherent and contextually responsive design.
Site Analysis & Ground Floor Plan
Sections, Footing System, & Structural Plans
General Feedback
Overall, the sections are well-developed, but the representation of gravel and soil should better reflect the 1.2-meter slope difference between the east and west ends of the site. For the structural boundary, using a strip footing is a more cost-effective and sustainable option compared to pad footings throughout, as it provides continuous support along the perimeter while requiring less material and excavation. Pad footings, on the other hand, are isolated supports that may lead to inefficient material use and increased costs when applied across the entire structure. Additionally, the footing system must accommodate the elevator in the northeast corner, necessitating significantly deeper footings to handle the increased load and ensure structural stability. Proper adjustments to these elements will enhance both the feasibility and efficiency of the design.
3D Modeling
Draft Drawings (Based on Previous feedback
General Feedback
Overall, a good analysis but its important to considder stakeholder perspectives, material costs, and sustainability factors across manufacturing, transportation, and construction, which are crucial for a well-rounded design approach. When selecting a structural system and material, it is essential to carefully evaluate the pros and cons of each option, considering factors such as durability, environmental impact, and long-term efficiency. Balancing these considerations will help ensure a design that is both structurally sound and contextually appropriate, aligning with the project's sustainability and cost-effectiveness goals.
Final Drawings (Based on Previous feedback)
Updated Site Analysis & Ground Floor Plan
General Feedback & Future Considerations
This version of the assignment demonstrates a strong response to the National Construction Code, with well-explained structural elements and load paths. The analysis effectively evaluates these aspects, showing a solid understanding of construction principles. However, the answers could be more concise while maintaining essential details. It’s important to focus on well-developed areas of the assignment for explanation rather than going too in-depth on aspects that were not fully investigated, such as slab reinforcement. Streamlining the discussion in this way will enhance clarity and readability without sacrificing key insights.
Northcote House 02
Home