|
|
Potential Building Designs & Graphics
If Council adopted the proposed Multifamily Code Update, with no amendments, what kind of projects would we see? Reading 277-pages of code language can only explain so much, so the City Council recruited three teams made of architects, builders and designers to create the best and worst lowrise projects possible using the proposed code.
On September 24, 2009, the three design teams presented their renderings in Council Chambers to the Planning, Land Use & Neighborhoods Committee. (Available to watch on Seattle Channel here)
On this page you’ll those real designs, created by professionals. Notice how street-facing doors can connect a home to the neighborhood. It’s an example of a small, but significant, change from the current code that prevents walls of blank facades as you walk down your street.
For each building, you’ll see the following views:
- as a person standing on the street;
- from the air, looking diagonally down on the building;
- at the building cut in half from the front;
- at the building cut in half from the side;
- and a site plan.
Each file also includes background information about the site, and how they met their "green factor" requirements, which means advanced landscaping and water treatment requirements.
Team 1:
David Neiman, David Neiman Architects; Brad Khouri, b9 architects;
David Foster, David Foster Architects; Jeff Reibman, Weber Thompson;
Matt Hutchins, Cast Architecture; Sam Castro, Webster Thompson;
Brandon Nicholson, Nicholson Kovalchick Architects
|
Common MFC Acronyms:
- C - Commercial
- DPD - Department of Planning and Development
- HR - Highrise
- LDT - Lowrise Duplex Triplex
- MFC - Multifamily Code
- MR - Midrise
- NC - Neighborhood Commercial
- COBE - Council’s Committee on the Built Environment
|
|
Set 1:
- L1, street access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 40’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, no parking, lot size 60’ x 120’
Set 2:
- L1, alley access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L1, alley access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- LDT, street access, lot size 40’ x 120’
- L1, street access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L1, no parking, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, 40’ x 91’
Set 3:
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street parking, lot size 60’ x 100’
Team 2:
Pb Elemental; Ard Consulting; Master Builders Association
- L1, alley access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L1, alley access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L1, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L1, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
Team 3:
Alex Sandoval, IBI Group; Greg Hill, IBI Group; Anna Nissen, Nissen/Nissen;
Vlad Oustimovitch, Voka, Inc
Set:
- L1, alley access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L1, street access, lot size 40’ x 100’
- L1, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 50’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 100’ x 100’
- L3, street access, lot size 60’ x 120’
- L3, street access, lot size 100’ x 100’
Teams also provided analysis of the code as they used it to make the projects, which is available here:
Click here to see the full criteria teams were asked to use as they developed their renderings
A big thank you to the three teams who were able to make quality renderings with limited time! |
|
