Compiled by Denver Hendricks
APRL3010 PORTFOLIO EXAM
15 November 2010
The following are the terms of reference discussed and agreed upon with the course master Mr. Solam Mkhabela before commencement of the moderation process.
To act as an independed and impartial advisor in the review, evaluation and moderation of all students’ work as presented.
To allocate a mark to each student’s work based on my judgment and to compare these to those previously awarded by the course master at the end of the moderation session with a view to arriving at a fair mark.
To review and evaluate the assessment process and moderate assessed work on a sampling basis.
To review and evaluate fairness and consistency in the assessment process.
To provide a written report on the standards of student attainment and the validity, reliability and integrity of the assessment process.
To engage the students where necessary and provide them with positive advice for their future improvement.
1. Introduction
A total number of eleven students presented their via Microsift Powerpoint.
My assessments was recorded with comments and notes that highlighted the strengths and the weaknesses of their particular projects.
I have had seen the same projects 2 months prior at an interim critique and therefore had knowledge of there initial schemes.
After the presentations, the course master and I adjudicated on the marks and compiled a revised record of the final marks.
2. General Comment
Given the fact that the students are primarly Planning students and this is an urban design subject, I must commend them for the outstanding work they executed. From getting into the design to the actual drawings, the projects are well done.
3. Content
The amount of content generated for the most was excellent. There was a good balance of recording the site, analysis, interevention and conclusion.
Most of them understood their site, and this showed in their analysis and took critical views. A smaller group were not as critical and this showed in the interventions being bland and unimaginative.
The drawings for the most were relavant, but there is a culture found that drawings are developed without understanding the intention of what the drawings is meant to fulfill as well as choosing the correct style of drawing which could be more impactfull.
Some of the concepts are very exciting and one can pick up that the students are excited about their projects. A smaller group tends to play it safe and not push ideas and end up with random principles of Urban Design of increasing bulk for the sake of it and not understanding why, range, who are the end-users, the market, how this feeds into a greater system, etc.
4. Presentation Style
The powerpoint style for which all students had to present in this fashion was lively, entertaining and interesting.
All students started off well and left one understanding the context and sub-context in which their project resides.
A few students need to work on their verbal presentation to keep it short, succinct yet colourful as one tends to lose interest.
Also they should present such that the idea of analysis feeds into the intervention and show how the anlaysis informed the intervention at a vivid level to render the project with integrity, body and meaning.
5. Conclusions & Recommendations
1. In my opinion the course very exciting and is run very effectively. The students are dealing with the correct aspects of Urban Design in a complex and interesting site & context (Louis Botha Avenue).
2. Given the fact that students are planners it’s evident some students relate easier to the design aspect and are therefore stronger. The weaker ones need more direction and focus.
3. Drawings need more guidance as to the intention, relevance and graphic.
4. Presentation skills are generally weak and they should do a mock presentation for each other and hone it based on their class-mates critiques.
Compiled by Denver Hendricks
EXTERNAL MODERATOR ARPL3012
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Urban Programme_project 2 - segments
these are based on the document submitted
and make up 35% of the final mark.
the complete set of marks is with the department
and should be made available shortly.
and make up 35% of the final mark.
the complete set of marks is with the department
and should be made available shortly.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
project feedback
olga koma - designing community gathering spaces in an era of technological advancements
clever use of font.
fantastic intro + timeline, but a speculation could have been made as to what is post 2010, or is post 2010 what sociologist will love?
why is the cyber-urbanite a he? that said, it’s an innovative way to introduce an actor who uses space.
sagacious design principles.
how does the diagram at district level show the transit route at a different scale? this could have been further articulated.
land use map could use street names for better orientation.
types of paving could have been explored further.
the creation for spaces for different + serendipitous encounters is a novel idea. this should always be promoted.
It is louis botha [a male] not a female as in louise botha.
overall a great project with crisp layout and numerous sensitive innovations [pavegen etc.] the tech aspect could have been interrogated more. that been said, the plans and sections made the project sparkle.
simiso dlamini - proposal for community gathering space
the heading facilitating social integration through the establishment of open spaces which function as gathering spaces is an excellent departure point which, overall the document made an attempt to fulfil but came out wanting.
document suffers from different font sizes.
on existing issues, sidewalk parking is an illegal operation, so what exactly are you saying? other solutions to existing issues are well thought through.
the project has excellent images, but are they the authors? reference is required. it was also erratic, giving generic solutions to urban design principles. it would have helped to see the entire study area as the context and deal with that instead of the piecemeal solutions offered for piecemeal contexts.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
nokulunga gumede
no title.
numerous spelling + grammatical mistakes making the document at times academically inaccessible.
how is a graffiti wall contested space and what exactly is the theme?
clear locational map + a potentially crisp page of the changing form of louis botha. some mistakes on this which detract like sasol garage along . . . . what? are u sure that the photograph of the circular building is the vodacom tower?
on the louis botha and beyond page, what does the size of the white dot markers indicate?
local examples of community gathering spaces would have helped.
difficult to grasp the meaning of the orienteering colours on the existing community gathering spaces.
jack mincer [mtn] as a taxi rank in influences from surrounds is a sizeable rank and should have been exhibited? is it bree or metro mall? bree is a street metro mall a rank.
how did you arrive at the conceptual diagram? what were the influences? as in what is the path from problem areas → to conceptual diagram → to design plan?
is it houyeo road or street? this has to be consistent.
numerous scale problematic issues in the street profile page.
a spirited project with some lovely touches here and there. because it is fraught with grammar + spell errors it distracts from the ‘real’ issues. it was also not linear, trying to do too much of everything which was its downfall. i found the thread not consistent but rather convoluted and confusion. but it made a bold + fresh attempt at rendering the quality of life.
lack of page numbers + a conclusion.
safiya suliman
no title.
on the vision page, the picture of the interior of the radium beerhall is pixelated, which detracts from the overall collage.
site locational maps are helpful but could have dome with some text especially stating which street is louis botha.
point a: current section is thin. as in what is it pointing out and where is it taken? osborn? louis botha? if it is louis botha, judging from the images, the project says there are is no lighting [streetlight] whereas the photographs show street lights. is it accurate to say the land use is residential and that the buildings back faces the sidewalk?
point a: proposed section amongst other things states informal trading at designated areas. where are these? section is misleading and inaccurate with extremely high impractical curbs.
why should there be informal trading along this strip? what is the rationale?
on point b: proposed section the mixed- (incubator factory) appears too thin to be practical. what is it exactly?
project only starts coming alive with point b: proposed picture. this direction would have enhanced the project as it deals with issues of scale, residue + materiality. this is more convincing place making. pity this was not explored further.
not quite sure what the current and proposed densities + point c: proposed plan pages are showing.
project slowly begins to be something with the design principles for high streets in jhb, but these are spatial and should have been explored spatially.
overall disappointingly thin scant work with no theory + latent potential graphics.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
raeesa ghoor
no title but tight theme as a beautiful intro to the project.
neat packaging and quality paper.
the linkages and connectivity: vision map is an excellent point of departure conceptually. very strong.
a well thought through and surprisingly sensitive project.
beautiful maps and drawings. clear + crisp with a minimalistic sensitive essence to them.
would have been wonderful to layer the sections with text explaining what some of the spaces are, especially on the after.
excellent massing drawing of the recommended densities and as a project very convincing in meeting the set out theme: designing for diversity.
an attempt to render [with collages, sections, photomontages -- ANYTHING!] the proposed community gathering spaces + semi-private community spaces, especially around the victory theatre, along louis botha + osborn, by the author would have made an even more in-depth, comprehensive + “complete” project. also an attempt at rendering the new building typologies along the two streets would have been worth it. this was a lost opportunity.
that being said, well done + excellent quotes.
the only drawback is a lack of page numbers, conclusion + reference page.
thandeka tshabalala - louis botha avenue business district 2011
good intro but betrayed by different font sizes and some spelling errors.
challenges + principles are clear but how do you arrive at the design plan? from concepts → to connectivity?
the design looks interesting but could have been enhanced by the 3d model of design + land uses being the same scale for easier conceptual connection.
zinzi offers an insightful and fresh narrative to deconstruction the avenue business district and in making the reader accessible to the design.
clear and well done graphics.
a crisp project that is somewhat undone by ‘the missing link” from concept to design + a lack of conclusion.
ntombenhle ndwandwe - area action plan
nice paper -- as in quality of the paper the project is printed on.
intriguing opening page but the preceding page is difficult to read. the text gets lost amidst the graphic.
what is anti social behaviour within communities and how do we design against it?
map of the transport and mobility along louis botha ave is incomplete. there are more main + secondary routes likely to be used. difficulty in deciphering what is residential + business in following map. kes incorrectly positioned.
excellent orientation on the area action plan- lost spaces and potential site for development.
the orientation of the new building and open space in open space design- proposed design is not clear. in this context, the east side of louis botha would have been enhanced by an open space design to complement site 1 as a community space.
overall an exciting, well thought through + easy to grasp project with excellent maps and graphics. this is what louis botha craves. the only criticism is that some of the photographs are printed too dark and the repetition of the louis botha avenue furniture pages. if this is the case, the furniture should be demonstrated spatially and specifically to the sites. a conclusion would have helped. but a very nice touch to the louis botha avenue new experience in 2020 [bring it on]-- perhaps this was the conclusion?
a lack of page numbers.
thulani maphalala
no title.
document suffers from different font sizes.
the methodology states interviews, personal observation + academic literature - where is then the reference page?
in brief analysis, where is zone y, the inside life?
text location of the site is difficult to grasp + follow and the key is confusing.
land use page is erratic with too many spelling errors.
with each page the document should reinforce the goals stated in the brief analysis.
interesting interview page and fresh to have it, but the interviews could have been interrogated further to lend structure to the project. it’s misleading to say: our perceptions as a group were to investigate why that part of louis botha avenue was like that compared to norwood (grant avenue). why is norwood doing better that area yet it is not along a busy street.[?] not quite clear of what this means and too many spell + grammatical errors.
movement page has a lot of potential which suffers due to spelling + grammar. text + graphic could have been married for clarity.
what, exactly, is the purpose of the street analysis page + where is it? how does it inform the project?
goals are slightly different in the conclusion and the only ones demonstrated are: density and pedestrian improvement. how is local economy + integration addressed?
lack of page numbers + reference page.
phiwokuhle nkosi - sociophysical integration
cover image is too pixelated or is that the idea. if it is, what does it mean? does it mean that the city is blurry? what does it have to do with the title.
great title matrix but the surveillance in the ensuing page is difficult to understand + the different font sizes disturbs the flow.
what does sociophysical integration mean?
new urbanism page is confusing.
in the zoning map - densification page, the legend stipulates an empty study area. the lineweight should be consistent.
projects needs to be strongly articulated from the word go, in this instance, after the physical built form page so that its clear that main street is the focus.
project suffers from spelling errors.
although the project has crisp and very beautiful drawings, it suffers from being thin in content and critical interrogation. more urban literature + philosophy would have enhanced the project, as in if + why?
lack of a conclusion page + page numbers.
hashim molvi - blurring the role of louis botha as a barrier
excellent maps + graphics. project would have been enhanced with the analysing of the blocks west of ash street + east of cavendish especially re: concept, design intervention, figure ground, land use + density.
excellent principles page especially the translucent glass sky reflection. this would have been further enhanced with the use of images to illustrate the current ‘deadness’ condition.
a section showing the pedestrian bridge is needed to see whether it’s a viable option + its practical z plane [ steepness, height etc.]
a very strong and pertinent project – a pleasure to read through. keep at it.
wonderful to have page numbers.
raessa soomar - eco grating
in eco-gration explained what does it mean when you say the community of rouxville live with extreme hostility?
in justification, what does “little or no relationship to louis botha” mean? who or what?
some of the images are pixelated.
goals could have been illustrated.
on location, the representative of segment 3 from the locational map is difficult to grasp and incorrect.
types of bicycle lanes - on the major movement spine, its impractical to remove a lane because of traffic volumes. this would work as a quiet neighbourhood street.
scenario section through site - what is the use of the wall separating bicycle repairs + sidewalk? the streets section, after a, is impractical. after c is most practical.
overall a well thought through project with interesting nuances + well written. the bicycle network concept by the project is doable and highly practical – we just have to make the design crisp + confident.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
clever use of font.
fantastic intro + timeline, but a speculation could have been made as to what is post 2010, or is post 2010 what sociologist will love?
why is the cyber-urbanite a he? that said, it’s an innovative way to introduce an actor who uses space.
sagacious design principles.
how does the diagram at district level show the transit route at a different scale? this could have been further articulated.
land use map could use street names for better orientation.
types of paving could have been explored further.
the creation for spaces for different + serendipitous encounters is a novel idea. this should always be promoted.
It is louis botha [a male] not a female as in louise botha.
overall a great project with crisp layout and numerous sensitive innovations [pavegen etc.] the tech aspect could have been interrogated more. that been said, the plans and sections made the project sparkle.
simiso dlamini - proposal for community gathering space
the heading facilitating social integration through the establishment of open spaces which function as gathering spaces is an excellent departure point which, overall the document made an attempt to fulfil but came out wanting.
document suffers from different font sizes.
on existing issues, sidewalk parking is an illegal operation, so what exactly are you saying? other solutions to existing issues are well thought through.
the project has excellent images, but are they the authors? reference is required. it was also erratic, giving generic solutions to urban design principles. it would have helped to see the entire study area as the context and deal with that instead of the piecemeal solutions offered for piecemeal contexts.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
nokulunga gumede
no title.
numerous spelling + grammatical mistakes making the document at times academically inaccessible.
how is a graffiti wall contested space and what exactly is the theme?
clear locational map + a potentially crisp page of the changing form of louis botha. some mistakes on this which detract like sasol garage along . . . . what? are u sure that the photograph of the circular building is the vodacom tower?
on the louis botha and beyond page, what does the size of the white dot markers indicate?
local examples of community gathering spaces would have helped.
difficult to grasp the meaning of the orienteering colours on the existing community gathering spaces.
jack mincer [mtn] as a taxi rank in influences from surrounds is a sizeable rank and should have been exhibited? is it bree or metro mall? bree is a street metro mall a rank.
how did you arrive at the conceptual diagram? what were the influences? as in what is the path from problem areas → to conceptual diagram → to design plan?
is it houyeo road or street? this has to be consistent.
numerous scale problematic issues in the street profile page.
a spirited project with some lovely touches here and there. because it is fraught with grammar + spell errors it distracts from the ‘real’ issues. it was also not linear, trying to do too much of everything which was its downfall. i found the thread not consistent but rather convoluted and confusion. but it made a bold + fresh attempt at rendering the quality of life.
lack of page numbers + a conclusion.
safiya suliman
no title.
on the vision page, the picture of the interior of the radium beerhall is pixelated, which detracts from the overall collage.
site locational maps are helpful but could have dome with some text especially stating which street is louis botha.
point a: current section is thin. as in what is it pointing out and where is it taken? osborn? louis botha? if it is louis botha, judging from the images, the project says there are is no lighting [streetlight] whereas the photographs show street lights. is it accurate to say the land use is residential and that the buildings back faces the sidewalk?
point a: proposed section amongst other things states informal trading at designated areas. where are these? section is misleading and inaccurate with extremely high impractical curbs.
why should there be informal trading along this strip? what is the rationale?
on point b: proposed section the mixed- (incubator factory) appears too thin to be practical. what is it exactly?
project only starts coming alive with point b: proposed picture. this direction would have enhanced the project as it deals with issues of scale, residue + materiality. this is more convincing place making. pity this was not explored further.
not quite sure what the current and proposed densities + point c: proposed plan pages are showing.
project slowly begins to be something with the design principles for high streets in jhb, but these are spatial and should have been explored spatially.
overall disappointingly thin scant work with no theory + latent potential graphics.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
raeesa ghoor
no title but tight theme as a beautiful intro to the project.
neat packaging and quality paper.
the linkages and connectivity: vision map is an excellent point of departure conceptually. very strong.
a well thought through and surprisingly sensitive project.
beautiful maps and drawings. clear + crisp with a minimalistic sensitive essence to them.
would have been wonderful to layer the sections with text explaining what some of the spaces are, especially on the after.
excellent massing drawing of the recommended densities and as a project very convincing in meeting the set out theme: designing for diversity.
an attempt to render [with collages, sections, photomontages -- ANYTHING!] the proposed community gathering spaces + semi-private community spaces, especially around the victory theatre, along louis botha + osborn, by the author would have made an even more in-depth, comprehensive + “complete” project. also an attempt at rendering the new building typologies along the two streets would have been worth it. this was a lost opportunity.
that being said, well done + excellent quotes.
the only drawback is a lack of page numbers, conclusion + reference page.
thandeka tshabalala - louis botha avenue business district 2011
good intro but betrayed by different font sizes and some spelling errors.
challenges + principles are clear but how do you arrive at the design plan? from concepts → to connectivity?
the design looks interesting but could have been enhanced by the 3d model of design + land uses being the same scale for easier conceptual connection.
zinzi offers an insightful and fresh narrative to deconstruction the avenue business district and in making the reader accessible to the design.
clear and well done graphics.
a crisp project that is somewhat undone by ‘the missing link” from concept to design + a lack of conclusion.
ntombenhle ndwandwe - area action plan
nice paper -- as in quality of the paper the project is printed on.
intriguing opening page but the preceding page is difficult to read. the text gets lost amidst the graphic.
what is anti social behaviour within communities and how do we design against it?
map of the transport and mobility along louis botha ave is incomplete. there are more main + secondary routes likely to be used. difficulty in deciphering what is residential + business in following map. kes incorrectly positioned.
excellent orientation on the area action plan- lost spaces and potential site for development.
the orientation of the new building and open space in open space design- proposed design is not clear. in this context, the east side of louis botha would have been enhanced by an open space design to complement site 1 as a community space.
overall an exciting, well thought through + easy to grasp project with excellent maps and graphics. this is what louis botha craves. the only criticism is that some of the photographs are printed too dark and the repetition of the louis botha avenue furniture pages. if this is the case, the furniture should be demonstrated spatially and specifically to the sites. a conclusion would have helped. but a very nice touch to the louis botha avenue new experience in 2020 [bring it on]-- perhaps this was the conclusion?
a lack of page numbers.
thulani maphalala
no title.
document suffers from different font sizes.
the methodology states interviews, personal observation + academic literature - where is then the reference page?
in brief analysis, where is zone y, the inside life?
text location of the site is difficult to grasp + follow and the key is confusing.
land use page is erratic with too many spelling errors.
with each page the document should reinforce the goals stated in the brief analysis.
interesting interview page and fresh to have it, but the interviews could have been interrogated further to lend structure to the project. it’s misleading to say: our perceptions as a group were to investigate why that part of louis botha avenue was like that compared to norwood (grant avenue). why is norwood doing better that area yet it is not along a busy street.[?] not quite clear of what this means and too many spell + grammatical errors.
movement page has a lot of potential which suffers due to spelling + grammar. text + graphic could have been married for clarity.
what, exactly, is the purpose of the street analysis page + where is it? how does it inform the project?
goals are slightly different in the conclusion and the only ones demonstrated are: density and pedestrian improvement. how is local economy + integration addressed?
lack of page numbers + reference page.
phiwokuhle nkosi - sociophysical integration
cover image is too pixelated or is that the idea. if it is, what does it mean? does it mean that the city is blurry? what does it have to do with the title.
great title matrix but the surveillance in the ensuing page is difficult to understand + the different font sizes disturbs the flow.
what does sociophysical integration mean?
new urbanism page is confusing.
in the zoning map - densification page, the legend stipulates an empty study area. the lineweight should be consistent.
projects needs to be strongly articulated from the word go, in this instance, after the physical built form page so that its clear that main street is the focus.
project suffers from spelling errors.
although the project has crisp and very beautiful drawings, it suffers from being thin in content and critical interrogation. more urban literature + philosophy would have enhanced the project, as in if + why?
lack of a conclusion page + page numbers.
hashim molvi - blurring the role of louis botha as a barrier
excellent maps + graphics. project would have been enhanced with the analysing of the blocks west of ash street + east of cavendish especially re: concept, design intervention, figure ground, land use + density.
excellent principles page especially the translucent glass sky reflection. this would have been further enhanced with the use of images to illustrate the current ‘deadness’ condition.
a section showing the pedestrian bridge is needed to see whether it’s a viable option + its practical z plane [ steepness, height etc.]
a very strong and pertinent project – a pleasure to read through. keep at it.
wonderful to have page numbers.
raessa soomar - eco grating
in eco-gration explained what does it mean when you say the community of rouxville live with extreme hostility?
in justification, what does “little or no relationship to louis botha” mean? who or what?
some of the images are pixelated.
goals could have been illustrated.
on location, the representative of segment 3 from the locational map is difficult to grasp and incorrect.
types of bicycle lanes - on the major movement spine, its impractical to remove a lane because of traffic volumes. this would work as a quiet neighbourhood street.
scenario section through site - what is the use of the wall separating bicycle repairs + sidewalk? the streets section, after a, is impractical. after c is most practical.
overall a well thought through project with interesting nuances + well written. the bicycle network concept by the project is doable and highly practical – we just have to make the design crisp + confident.
lack of page numbers + reference page.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
final oral presentations
will take place on
mon 15 nov 2010
@09:00
you are to be there
@08:30 to place your presentation
on the computer.
order is:
group 1
thandeka tshabalala 09:00 – 09:30
hashim molvi 09:30 – 10:00
ntombenhle ndwandwe 10:00 – 10:30
nokulunga gumede 10:30 – 11:00
group 2
raeesa ghoor 11:00 – 11:30
thulani maphalala 11:30 – 12:00
safiya suliman 12:00 – 12:30
break 12:30 – 13:00
simiso dlamini 13:00 – 13:30
group 3
olga koma 13:30 – 14:00
phiwokuhle nkosi 14:00 – 14:30
raeesa soomar 14:30 – 15:30
discussion 15:30 – 16:00
will place the preliminary marks + comments
shortly.
mon 15 nov 2010
@09:00
you are to be there
@08:30 to place your presentation
on the computer.
order is:
group 1
thandeka tshabalala 09:00 – 09:30
hashim molvi 09:30 – 10:00
ntombenhle ndwandwe 10:00 – 10:30
nokulunga gumede 10:30 – 11:00
group 2
raeesa ghoor 11:00 – 11:30
thulani maphalala 11:30 – 12:00
safiya suliman 12:00 – 12:30
break 12:30 – 13:00
simiso dlamini 13:00 – 13:30
group 3
olga koma 13:30 – 14:00
phiwokuhle nkosi 14:00 – 14:30
raeesa soomar 14:30 – 15:30
discussion 15:30 – 16:00
will place the preliminary marks + comments
shortly.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Thursday, October 7, 2010
a place called home
have a look see . . .
http://arpl3012.blogspot.com/2009/09/read-below-article-in-preparation-for.html
http://arpl3012.blogspot.com/2009/09/read-below-article-in-preparation-for.html
streetlife
check out the streetlife presentations
downstairs in the archi studio
they will be up till kusasa . . .
downstairs in the archi studio
they will be up till kusasa . . .
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
05 october presentations
40 minutes per group
10 minutes per person
05 minutes presentation
05 minutes feedback
14.15 -- 14.55 group three
15.00 -- 15.40 group two
15.45 -- 16.25 group one
present your design project
not analysis
so start from the back
prepare questions if you have
10 minutes per person
05 minutes presentation
05 minutes feedback
14.15 -- 14.55 group three
15.00 -- 15.40 group two
15.45 -- 16.25 group one
present your design project
not analysis
so start from the back
prepare questions if you have
Thursday, September 30, 2010
non-motorised transport
Transportation department
http://www.joburg.org.za/content/view/1226/78/1/4/
click on the different pdf's
http://www.joburg.org.za/content/view/1226/78/1/4/
click on the different pdf's
Rea Vaya Joburg BRT: WITS Town Planning & Urban Design Talk
Tuesday, 10:15
two presentations that may be of interest:
1. “Joburg United” a ten-minute paper prepared for AZA2010 on the impact of Rea Vaya on public space and urban transformation
2. A powerpoint on the 2009 BRT Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines project for City of Johannesburg DPF
come with questions.
two presentations that may be of interest:
1. “Joburg United” a ten-minute paper prepared for AZA2010 on the impact of Rea Vaya on public space and urban transformation
2. A powerpoint on the 2009 BRT Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines project for City of Johannesburg DPF
come with questions.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
comments + mo to come
General comment from 1 of the panelists
- All the groups should look at the movement along and onto Louis
Botha more (particularly group 3). They should look at who is moving
along the street, how they are moving, where do they stop etc. The
speed of movement and frequency of traffic lights is very important to
the character and usability of the different segments of the street.
- If possible it would be a good idea to identify buildings or urban
design interventions in their segments that do work and use these as
case studies for their future projects.
Group 1 –
- The group needs to work on simplifying their presentation – making
it clearer, more legible and not read the presentation.
- The point that the road is a barrier did not come across. This
needs to be understood and later on dealt with.
- The detail that they went into and the 3d modelling was good.
- I liked the fact that the identified opportunities and started to
look at urban design principles / interventions. They must be careful
not to make assumptions without backing them up – e.g. shop front have
to be transparent etc.
- They need look at and understand the two communities on the
different sides of the road. This was lacking.
- They should look at buildings that have a positive interaction with
the street – the Bedford Centre corner to see how they work. They
seemed to miss this.
Group 2 – - Presentation was good and clear.
- I question the portion of the segment that they chose – it is
atypical for the segment.
- They should look at what is working along the street – institutions
that have lasted – and understand why they work and what they can
learn from these.
- They need to look more at the movement along the street – vehicular
particularly. The speed, type and number of vehicles. They are what
make the street both functional and dysfunctional. All of the groups
should look at this.
- I thought the detail they went into was great – pavements etc.
- They should look at understanding the community as much as they do
the physical environment.
- I like the fact that they started to question what they found.
- They should map in more than 1 dimension.
Group 3 –
- I like the idea of giving the project a theme – they must be careful
not to set them selves unreachable goals…
- I enjoyed some of their graphics – especially the hand drawings.
- I think that they need to look more carefully at Louis Botha, the
shops and communities along it, how it is used, the traffic and
movement etc. I didn’t get the feeling that they were connected to
their research area. They should give us a sense of both sides of the
road.
- Better three dimensional mapping would be great.
- I suggest that they look for points where the two communities interact.
- I admire how involved they have become in trying to understand the
Jewish community. I think that they should look at their experience –
as traumatic as it was – and try to understand why they were treated
with such hostility (the community obviously feels threatened). This
could be a great opportunity for their intervention later on in the
project. I am however a bit concerned that they could get bogged down
in the politics of it all…
- I think that they are on the right track – they just have a lot more
work to do.
- All the groups should look at the movement along and onto Louis
Botha more (particularly group 3). They should look at who is moving
along the street, how they are moving, where do they stop etc. The
speed of movement and frequency of traffic lights is very important to
the character and usability of the different segments of the street.
- If possible it would be a good idea to identify buildings or urban
design interventions in their segments that do work and use these as
case studies for their future projects.
Group 1 –
- The group needs to work on simplifying their presentation – making
it clearer, more legible and not read the presentation.
- The point that the road is a barrier did not come across. This
needs to be understood and later on dealt with.
- The detail that they went into and the 3d modelling was good.
- I liked the fact that the identified opportunities and started to
look at urban design principles / interventions. They must be careful
not to make assumptions without backing them up – e.g. shop front have
to be transparent etc.
- They need look at and understand the two communities on the
different sides of the road. This was lacking.
- They should look at buildings that have a positive interaction with
the street – the Bedford Centre corner to see how they work. They
seemed to miss this.
Group 2 – - Presentation was good and clear.
- I question the portion of the segment that they chose – it is
atypical for the segment.
- They should look at what is working along the street – institutions
that have lasted – and understand why they work and what they can
learn from these.
- They need to look more at the movement along the street – vehicular
particularly. The speed, type and number of vehicles. They are what
make the street both functional and dysfunctional. All of the groups
should look at this.
- I thought the detail they went into was great – pavements etc.
- They should look at understanding the community as much as they do
the physical environment.
- I like the fact that they started to question what they found.
- They should map in more than 1 dimension.
Group 3 –
- I like the idea of giving the project a theme – they must be careful
not to set them selves unreachable goals…
- I enjoyed some of their graphics – especially the hand drawings.
- I think that they need to look more carefully at Louis Botha, the
shops and communities along it, how it is used, the traffic and
movement etc. I didn’t get the feeling that they were connected to
their research area. They should give us a sense of both sides of the
road.
- Better three dimensional mapping would be great.
- I suggest that they look for points where the two communities interact.
- I admire how involved they have become in trying to understand the
Jewish community. I think that they should look at their experience –
as traumatic as it was – and try to understand why they were treated
with such hostility (the community obviously feels threatened). This
could be a great opportunity for their intervention later on in the
project. I am however a bit concerned that they could get bogged down
in the politics of it all…
- I think that they are on the right track – they just have a lot more
work to do.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
thursday 19.08.2010
crits on louis botha from 8-10am.
please be prepared and there.
30 min per group/ 30 min general.
please put a digital copy of braamfontain on a cd
it will be corrected on a b&w print out over the w-end.
please be prepared and there.
30 min per group/ 30 min general.
please put a digital copy of braamfontain on a cd
it will be corrected on a b&w print out over the w-end.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
project 1
prometheus
put the vast space
of sky and earth
like a ball in one’s hand
The goal is a Design Guidelines document should provide an important tool for helping stakeholders through decision-making process. Before we get to that we need to record our observations to better understand the context. The purpose of draw the walk is that.
using the following as a guide:
Place Type Characteristics The following characteristics are used to differentiate the place types: Urban Form Building Placement Frontage Types Enclosure Edge Treatments |Open Space
group 1.
excellent contents page
text is too small
layout of intro page, text is amputated.
progressive primary school - what is that? articulate.
its too difficult to decipher the material when you cannot read what is on the page.
land use -- what does it mean to being a mix land use? articulate.
if one went there now, would one find the orange + blue dots? -- you have to say time, place + date.
good to see an attempt at sketchup.
what does flaneurs mean? its counterproductive to quote and not comprehend components of the quote within its totality.
colors on the sidewalk slide are difficult to decipher.
text has to be 1 font -- sidewalk analysis slide.
a statement was “sidewalk is not meant to be just a place for movement but also a place to rest -- is this for all sidewalks?
in the north elevation slide, the diagrams don’t necessary articulate the blocks -- this needs to be further explained.
sections have to do more than just be cool drawings.
when there are dimensions heights are also required.
movement map needs more work + clarity.
future public realm -- what does the legend tell us? and what does the site within braamfontein actually say + mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.7/10
group 2.
text to small, layout needs work + graphics could be enhanced.
could have used an introductory page -- as in what u are going to show -- contents page
narrative is disjointed and it makes it complex and difficult to follow the story.
on the land use + movement slide, the tertiary activity is the same as the phone booths. the info is misleading.
it is curious to see the phone booths not being used on the presented image, esp. when it is stated that they are there to encourage pedestrian movement.
population vs time, we need units to articulate volume + clarify the information on the graph.
a better logo for south point has to be sourced.
the drainage component is difficult to access, as in, it is not visible in the slides.
repetition of images doesn’t enhance the presentation.
key is not visible or clear on the physical aspects slides.
interesting perception of the trash cans, but these would have been made clear in a plan.
presentation needs more plans to guide.
cannot read the conclusion matrix -- also not legible, as in what do the pie chart mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.9/10
group 3.
excellent intro with the eland + orange lines.
context page text is too small. source of images has to be stated - captions also required.
what does it mean “site plan with elevations”? -- where are the elevations?
morphology, typology, and land use -- great -- but show where the images are taken from.
what is the difference between travelers, pedestrians, workers passing by + passers by? -- clarity required.
during the presentation, a member of the group said its a pity the resolution is not good -- why is that? resolution issues have to be solved prior to presenting.
furniture on juta street is great, but the graphics need to be enhanced for better visibility.
street paving could have had an image to show the 3 different types.
remove the north point when its not needed.
on section d-d the yellow is deceptive? its looks like a screen on the sidewalk. clarify.
the use of color + b|w images is very effective - push the graphic to say + do more.
no conclusion + a lack of design guidelines.
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 6.1/10
font arial
electronic copy 18 + 36
hardcopy 12 +16
put the vast space
of sky and earth
like a ball in one’s hand
The goal is a Design Guidelines document should provide an important tool for helping stakeholders through decision-making process. Before we get to that we need to record our observations to better understand the context. The purpose of draw the walk is that.
using the following as a guide:
Place Type Characteristics The following characteristics are used to differentiate the place types: Urban Form Building Placement Frontage Types Enclosure Edge Treatments |Open Space
group 1.
excellent contents page
text is too small
layout of intro page, text is amputated.
progressive primary school - what is that? articulate.
its too difficult to decipher the material when you cannot read what is on the page.
land use -- what does it mean to being a mix land use? articulate.
if one went there now, would one find the orange + blue dots? -- you have to say time, place + date.
good to see an attempt at sketchup.
what does flaneurs mean? its counterproductive to quote and not comprehend components of the quote within its totality.
colors on the sidewalk slide are difficult to decipher.
text has to be 1 font -- sidewalk analysis slide.
a statement was “sidewalk is not meant to be just a place for movement but also a place to rest -- is this for all sidewalks?
in the north elevation slide, the diagrams don’t necessary articulate the blocks -- this needs to be further explained.
sections have to do more than just be cool drawings.
when there are dimensions heights are also required.
movement map needs more work + clarity.
future public realm -- what does the legend tell us? and what does the site within braamfontein actually say + mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.7/10
group 2.
text to small, layout needs work + graphics could be enhanced.
could have used an introductory page -- as in what u are going to show -- contents page
narrative is disjointed and it makes it complex and difficult to follow the story.
on the land use + movement slide, the tertiary activity is the same as the phone booths. the info is misleading.
it is curious to see the phone booths not being used on the presented image, esp. when it is stated that they are there to encourage pedestrian movement.
population vs time, we need units to articulate volume + clarify the information on the graph.
a better logo for south point has to be sourced.
the drainage component is difficult to access, as in, it is not visible in the slides.
repetition of images doesn’t enhance the presentation.
key is not visible or clear on the physical aspects slides.
interesting perception of the trash cans, but these would have been made clear in a plan.
presentation needs more plans to guide.
cannot read the conclusion matrix -- also not legible, as in what do the pie chart mean?
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 4.9/10
group 3.
excellent intro with the eland + orange lines.
context page text is too small. source of images has to be stated - captions also required.
what does it mean “site plan with elevations”? -- where are the elevations?
morphology, typology, and land use -- great -- but show where the images are taken from.
what is the difference between travelers, pedestrians, workers passing by + passers by? -- clarity required.
during the presentation, a member of the group said its a pity the resolution is not good -- why is that? resolution issues have to be solved prior to presenting.
furniture on juta street is great, but the graphics need to be enhanced for better visibility.
street paving could have had an image to show the 3 different types.
remove the north point when its not needed.
on section d-d the yellow is deceptive? its looks like a screen on the sidewalk. clarify.
the use of color + b|w images is very effective - push the graphic to say + do more.
no conclusion + a lack of design guidelines.
limited exploration given the said themes + work is incomplete. preliminary mark 6.1/10
font arial
electronic copy 18 + 36
hardcopy 12 +16
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Stonehurst Mountain Estate ARC H I T E CTURAL & LANDSCAPING design manual
http://www.stonehurstmountainestate.com/Images/Architectural%20Manual.pdf
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
Guideline Document for the design of general
residential properties situated in Phases 12, 13 and 14
Parklands in accordance with the Subdivisional
Approval issued by the City of Cape Town dated
07/12/2007. Prepared by mlh architects & planners.
http://www.askaproperty.com/guidelines/gr-design-guidelines-7th-dec.pdf
residential properties situated in Phases 12, 13 and 14
Parklands in accordance with the Subdivisional
Approval issued by the City of Cape Town dated
07/12/2007. Prepared by mlh architects & planners.
http://www.askaproperty.com/guidelines/gr-design-guidelines-7th-dec.pdf
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES -- Schonenberg Estate,
http://www.schonenberg.co.za/files//Schonenberg%20Arch%20Guidelines%20Revision%208%20Mar%202009.pdf
architectural conditions, rules + regulations
http://www.tezula.co.za/docs/Architectural%20Guidelines%20and%20Conditions%20-%20R2.pdf
this in an example of bylaws that architects would have to deal with at the tezula lifestyle estate, which would, on some scale, have been determined by urban planners et al. take note from 3.0 onwards . basically, urban designers set up urban design guidelines, i.e., we apply a larger scale. the rules stay the same. our quest is to design normative + inclusive guidelines. the clock ticks + tocks . . .
this in an example of bylaws that architects would have to deal with at the tezula lifestyle estate, which would, on some scale, have been determined by urban planners et al. take note from 3.0 onwards . basically, urban designers set up urban design guidelines, i.e., we apply a larger scale. the rules stay the same. our quest is to design normative + inclusive guidelines. the clock ticks + tocks . . .
Project 1
15 July – 27 July
Sub | Urban Sections
Mapping in terms of drawings, photography, interviews and personal observation of 3 city block within the Braamfontein locale. Comparison of the different block contexts XYZ. Evaluation + analysing of existing street life. Designing urban design outline for inclusive street design and frontage development (guidelines, text and illustration). The class works as a whole in teams of 4 along dedicated sections. Hand in of work as hard + electronic copy as indicated on hand out.
prelimenary marks + comments to be posted on thursday 12 august
Sub | Urban Sections
Mapping in terms of drawings, photography, interviews and personal observation of 3 city block within the Braamfontein locale. Comparison of the different block contexts XYZ. Evaluation + analysing of existing street life. Designing urban design outline for inclusive street design and frontage development (guidelines, text and illustration). The class works as a whole in teams of 4 along dedicated sections. Hand in of work as hard + electronic copy as indicated on hand out.
prelimenary marks + comments to be posted on thursday 12 august
Project 2
24 august Group Presentation Segment 1, 2 + 3 PinUp Presentation
there will be a jury consisiting of several people. be aware that this phase will be marked as per stated in the handout.
Project 2 (30%)
11 August – 27 August
Urban Programme
Mapping in terms of drawings, photography, interviews and personal observation. Applying lessons learned from relevant case studies. Designing an urban design proposal for the development of the area, with specific regards to recreational public space, movement systems and communal residential development. The class to work as teams of 4 along dedicated sections of the Avenue for the mapping part of the project, which is followed by individual design proposals. Hand in of work as hard copy as indicated on hand out.
there will be a jury consisiting of several people. be aware that this phase will be marked as per stated in the handout.
Project 2 (30%)
11 August – 27 August
Urban Programme
Mapping in terms of drawings, photography, interviews and personal observation. Applying lessons learned from relevant case studies. Designing an urban design proposal for the development of the area, with specific regards to recreational public space, movement systems and communal residential development. The class to work as teams of 4 along dedicated sections of the Avenue for the mapping part of the project, which is followed by individual design proposals. Hand in of work as hard copy as indicated on hand out.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
link to JANE JACOB SIDEWALKS
http://tebeau400.clevelandhistory.org/files/2009/09/Jacobs-The-Uses-of-Sidewalks.pdf
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
AIMS
The course deals with place-making in different social and cultural contexts with specific regards to the cross over of the disciplines of architecture, planning and urban design. Students will look into its past, present and (projected) future and will be exposed to different methods of reading and making the city, recent urban morphologies and architectural topologies. The research will enable them to formulate their own approach and design an urban framework at a later stage.
PARAMETERS
DESIGN GUIDANCE
The final component of the process will be an individual synthesis of the themes uncovered during the semester leading to an appraisal of the site with focus on the specific themes and formulating a design guidance employing the following headings:
§ Vision Statement – general + theme specific
§ Background – Site and context appraisal – general + theme specific
§ Policy Review
§ Planning and Design Principles – including: (a) Indicative design concepts, proposals and (b) Details of the proposed development process
§ Phasing
Primary Focus
Public Edge
Retail Commercial Edge
Dwelling Housing Edge
Vision
What vision of the futures of the place has inspired this guidance?
The vision will be developed through a process of appraisals, consultation and collaboration, and creative thinking about planning and design principles. The process may involve any of the methods of planning, urban design and architecture, and in particular techniques of vision-building. Particularly in illustrating the vision, the document should make clear whether these are ideas for which the costings, phasing, timing and implementation have been worked out, or if these are merely visualisations of some initial ideas about what the place could become.
What sort of place should this become? Theme related.
§ What are the key words or phrases describe the qualities that it is hoped development will achieve?
§ What character and uses would achieve these qualities?
§ What timescale is the guidance looking to: temporary uses, short-term uses, or long-term?
What objectives should development aim for, and which of them are most important?
Background
§ The site
What are the boundaries of the site?
§ Purpose of the guidance
Why has the guidance been prepared?
Reasons such as:
§ Provide a starting point for dialogue or negotiation with developers
§ Tackle particular problems that the place presents
§ Respond to 2010+ development pressures
§ Promote high standards of design
§ Identify development opportunities
§ Provide a framework for developmental control
Policy Review
With regards to your theme:
What policies and guidance apply, and how should they be interpreted in relation to this site?
§ Regional planning policy and guidance
What regional policy and guidance is relevant here?
What requirement of public bodies need to be taken into account?
Site and context appraisal
What aspects of the site should be taken into account in planning and designing development?
§ Plans
What are the appropriate plans?
§ Illustration of the site + area
These should include:
§ Photographs
§ Drawings
§ Contextual plans and diagrams (annotated diagrams showing the significance of the various features of the area, summarizing what the area appraisal describes in greater detail in regards to the below themes).
Planning and Design Principles
What planning and design principles should be followed in developing the site?
§ Performance criteria.
This is a means of assessing the extent to which a development achieves a particular functional requirement based on:
What is the central idea on which the design is based?
What land uses would be preferred, acceptable or unacceptable?
What mix of uses is appropriate?
How should future uses be arranged on the site?
Which of the area’s buildings or landscape features should be kept?
Key issue
In the form of new development eight aspects of development form will be identified. These are; urban structure; urban grain; landscape; density and mix; height; massing; details; and materials. (Urban structure and urban grain are aspects of layout; height and massing are aspects of scale; and details and materials are aspects of appearance).
The guidance should describe how development form can help achieve the seven objects of urban design (character; continuity and enclosure; quality of the public realm; ease of movement; legibility; adaptability; and diversity).
Phasing
In what stages should the development be phased?
Conclusion
A summary of the above, problem statement, lessons learnt, a way forward and future projections.
PARAMETERS
DESIGN GUIDANCE
The final component of the process will be an individual synthesis of the themes uncovered during the semester leading to an appraisal of the site with focus on the specific themes and formulating a design guidance employing the following headings:
§ Vision Statement – general + theme specific
§ Background – Site and context appraisal – general + theme specific
§ Policy Review
§ Planning and Design Principles – including: (a) Indicative design concepts, proposals and (b) Details of the proposed development process
§ Phasing
Primary Focus
Public Edge
Retail Commercial Edge
Dwelling Housing Edge
Vision
What vision of the futures of the place has inspired this guidance?
The vision will be developed through a process of appraisals, consultation and collaboration, and creative thinking about planning and design principles. The process may involve any of the methods of planning, urban design and architecture, and in particular techniques of vision-building. Particularly in illustrating the vision, the document should make clear whether these are ideas for which the costings, phasing, timing and implementation have been worked out, or if these are merely visualisations of some initial ideas about what the place could become.
What sort of place should this become? Theme related.
§ What are the key words or phrases describe the qualities that it is hoped development will achieve?
§ What character and uses would achieve these qualities?
§ What timescale is the guidance looking to: temporary uses, short-term uses, or long-term?
What objectives should development aim for, and which of them are most important?
Background
§ The site
What are the boundaries of the site?
§ Purpose of the guidance
Why has the guidance been prepared?
Reasons such as:
§ Provide a starting point for dialogue or negotiation with developers
§ Tackle particular problems that the place presents
§ Respond to 2010+ development pressures
§ Promote high standards of design
§ Identify development opportunities
§ Provide a framework for developmental control
Policy Review
With regards to your theme:
What policies and guidance apply, and how should they be interpreted in relation to this site?
§ Regional planning policy and guidance
What regional policy and guidance is relevant here?
What requirement of public bodies need to be taken into account?
Site and context appraisal
What aspects of the site should be taken into account in planning and designing development?
§ Plans
What are the appropriate plans?
§ Illustration of the site + area
These should include:
§ Photographs
§ Drawings
§ Contextual plans and diagrams (annotated diagrams showing the significance of the various features of the area, summarizing what the area appraisal describes in greater detail in regards to the below themes).
Planning and Design Principles
What planning and design principles should be followed in developing the site?
§ Performance criteria.
This is a means of assessing the extent to which a development achieves a particular functional requirement based on:
What is the central idea on which the design is based?
What land uses would be preferred, acceptable or unacceptable?
What mix of uses is appropriate?
How should future uses be arranged on the site?
Which of the area’s buildings or landscape features should be kept?
Key issue
In the form of new development eight aspects of development form will be identified. These are; urban structure; urban grain; landscape; density and mix; height; massing; details; and materials. (Urban structure and urban grain are aspects of layout; height and massing are aspects of scale; and details and materials are aspects of appearance).
The guidance should describe how development form can help achieve the seven objects of urban design (character; continuity and enclosure; quality of the public realm; ease of movement; legibility; adaptability; and diversity).
Phasing
In what stages should the development be phased?
Conclusion
A summary of the above, problem statement, lessons learnt, a way forward and future projections.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
tuesday 27 july 2010 presentations
must have
- plans
- sections
- elevations
- panorama
- supporting relevant data
- observations
more later . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)