I mentioned in early posts about this project that i would try to cover the design process as well as document construction, and so I am offering up a few sketches that show at least a little of that.  I guess the diagrams i put up last week tell some of the story too, but even with those diagrams we could have made an entirely different design – and to be perfectly honest there were few times when we really thought we would.
for instance, after we had worked out the basic approach – to flip the housing typology and put the living on the top floor and the bedrooms below – our very first idea was to make a visible connection to the roof deck a feature of the living floor.

This was an idea we ended up keeping, actually, although we did end up flipping the stairs around to the other side of the house, for the simple reason that the stairs placed in the first version required walking through the kitchen to get to the living area. In hindsight i like the way things worked out because it means that it is possible to step outside from 3 of the 4 walls of the living room floor. That would not have been possible in this earlier version.
Other design decisions were not so easy though. the kitchen for example was very difficult to resolve, because we had to work out a way for the dumbwaiter to be close to the kitchen and work on the floors below as well. We were also trying to work out a way to use the stairs to bring light down to the ground floor at the same time, leading to an elaborately additive design like this

which did not quite work, and had the disadvantage of cutting the top floor into two areas and exposed the kitchen too much. It did lead us to propose a more dynamic stairway to the roof however that i still fancy a wee bit, myself.
Unfortunately, this version meant far too much of the legally limited plot coverage area was being “wasted” for the exterior stairs, so we set the design aside. perhaps it will be used another day for another project.
You might also notice we were in early days thinking of using columns on the building perimeter on the ground floor. Shortly after this point we spoke to our engineer (alan burden, a very talented engineer here in tokyo) who showed us how we could do away with them entirely…and so we did.

These sketches are not really a fair representation. We also made about a dozen study models and a couple of sketchbooks worth of designs, but these are probably the most interesting images of the lot. In the end the design took about five or six months to sort out entirely, and work our way towards getting the building permit from the city. We went through many variations and redesigns in the process, which is pretty normal for us. In comparison to my old firms i think we spend more time working out ways to get higher quality for our clients without increasing the budget, and that necessarily means working through more design variations. But it also means we get a better design in the end. In economically difficult times like we are in right now I am glad for the pressure to perform that way actually. It means we spend our time working out ways to get more effect for less cost, but i think makes for a building with lasting impact and quality. Which is surprisingly not as common a goal in the building industry as one might expect.