P R E S E N T A T I O N G R O U P 4
ADAM ZHARIFF QAMEIL BIN ZAMRY
2020312085
AHMAD SAFWAN BIN AHMAD RAZAN
2020385807
AZZRI FAZRIL BIN ROSMAN
2020916259
NURUL NASIHAH BINTI MUHD NOOR
2020108193
SYAZWINA ZAFIRA BINTI ZAMANUDDIN
2020130413
Sit Dolor Amet
De’ GARDEN LOUNGE A
D E S I G N
T H I N K I N G
A P P R O A C H
01
02
03
04
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2 DESIGN BRIEF
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
CHAPTER 4 DESIGN PROPOSAL
• Student Lounge • Student Lounge and Cafe • Design thinking Module • Architecture Design process
• Issues • Aim & Objectives • Site Location
• SWOT Analysis • Target user • Questionnaire Survey • Case Study
• Design Concept • Diagram Sketches • Perspective view
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
What is Student Lounge? • Student lounge are room/space designed to give a student a space for relaxation & study. • “The primary function of a student lounge space is to provide a welcoming area in which students feel comfortable to socialize and spend downtime.” (Academia Group, Western USC Strategic Planning Survey)
Student Lounge with Cafeteria • Our idea is about providing a space that offers not just delicious food, but also a pleasant atmosphere that extends the learning experience. • We know college students love food. Wherever there’s a food, people will gather. Students lounge will be enhanced by leveraging this space to be more easily adapted and multi-purpose social spaces that combine food service, individual work space, group meeting space and relaxation with facilities.
DESIGN THINKING MODULE ✓ Analyze ✓ Problems/Issues ✓ S.W.O.T Analysis
✓ Demonstrate ideas ✓ Storyboard ✓ Keep simple
✓ Observation ✓ Deep-dive ✓ Survey & Interview ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Brainstorming Generate ideas Share Ideas Solutions
✓ Presentation ✓ Ready for improvement ✓ Client Approval
ARCHITECTURE DESIGN PROCESS
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN • Space Program • Site Analysis • Building Schedule • Budget Estimation • Codes & Regulation
SCHEMATIC DESIGN • Design alternative • Schematic Sketches • 3D rough models
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
“This design is rarely a linear process. Sometimes, one typically moves back and forth between the phases, allowing ideas from more detailed designs to influence and modify the overall design direction until final design has been agreed by all parties.”
•3D Models • Cost Estimation Update • Arrangements and Circulation elements •Outline Specification • Doors, Windows & • Interior Elevations Partitions Assembly • Reflected Ceiling • Fixtures and Fittings plans • Interior Finishes • Site Plan • Materials and • Floor Plans building envelope • Elevations • Sections
DESIGN OUTPUT •Construction Drawings & Approval • Contractor provide final pricing • Review shop drawing • Works with fabricator
CHAPTER 2 DESIGN BRIEF
GENERAL ISSUE EXISTING STUDENT LOUNGE
UNUTILIZED SPACE Isolated space that is not constantly used by the lecturers/ students and only be used as shortcut walkway from classes to classes. .
INSUFFICIENT FACILITIES & AMENITIES Insufficient facilities & amenities especially for items like furniture (tables/chairs) for convenient study will likely cause non-ergonomic study space for students who wish to do group discussion in between classes. The insufficient of wireless internet also will contribute to the area to remain unutilized.
NO CLEAR DEMARCATION AREA No demarcation or proper signage in this area that makes it look less attractive and have less aesthetic value. .
9
AIM & OBJECTIVES
01
To provide conducive study & discussion area that is available for 24 hours
02
To provide sufficient amenities and facilities
03
To provide aesthetically pleasing spaces with nature concept
04
To provide ergonomics' study area
10
AIM & OBJECTIVES (cont’d)
05
To have demarcated area for activities
06
To maximize spaces to accommodate students’ needs
07
To minimize the cost by using cabin container
11
2
1
Site Location
1
CURRENT LOCATION SUDENT LOUNGE
2
NEW PROPOSED LOCATION
Site View
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
“A
SWOT Analysis had
been done to study anything that can potentially impact the success of a new project. Besides that, in order to know what is the perceptions and opinions of FSPU students regarding current student facilities, a simple
Questionnaire Survey had been conduct toward the people that include Undergraduate Students, Post Graduate Students, lecturers and Supporting Staff at FSPU, UiTM Shah Alam�
S.W.O.T ANALYSIS STRENGTH
WEAKNESS
A beneficial quality or attribute of a subject •Systematic area •Green Environment Vibes •Big Space •Centre of Faculty
Those characteristics of a subject that gives disadvantage relative to others •Disorganized during Raining Season •Pricey Lounge Café •Exposed to Malaysia High Temperature •High Maintenance
OPPURTUNITY
THREATS
External factors that could give a subject a competitive advantage •Available open space at faculty •Student Attraction •Accessible from Outside •24 Hours Facility
Refer to factors that have the potential to harm a subject •Limited seat during peak hour •Insignificant during semester break •Establish current student lounge •Overpriced food & beverage
TARGET USER
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
POST GRADUATE STUDENTS
LECTURER
SUPPORTING STAFF
DEMOGRAPHICS
CATEGORY 2: POST GRADUATE STUDENT
CATEGORY 1: UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT
37.5% 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
6 5
4
S1
S2
S3
37.5%
Lorem Ipsum
From 40 numbers of respondents interviewied from 3 sessions (Morning, Afternoon and Evening), 15 respondents (37.5%) are from Undergraduate Student.
6 5
4
S1
S2
S3
Lorem Ipsum Lorem Ipsum From 40 numbers of respondents interviewed from 3 sessions (Morning, Afternoon and Evening), 15 respondents (37.5%) are from Post Graduate Student.
DEMOGRAPHICS
CATEGORY 3: ACADEMICIAN & LECTURER
CATEGORY 4: SUPPORTING/ ADMIN STAFF
15% 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
10% 2.5
3
2
2
2
1.5 1
1
1
1
S1
S2
0.5 S1
S2
S3
Lorem Ipsum Lorem Ipsum
From 40 Numbers of respondents interviewed from 3 sessions (Morning, Afternoon and Evening), 6 respondents (15.0%) are from Acedemician & Lecturer.
0 S3
Lorem Ipsum Lorem Ipsum From 40 Numbers of respondents interviewed from 3 sessions, (Morning, Afternoon and Evening), 4 respondents (10.0%) are from Supporting & Academian Staff
CURRENT FACULTY FACILITIES ARE ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY
FINDINGS 1
➢
5% of respondents Strongly Agree current faculty facilities are environmental friendly
➢
5% of respondents Agree that the current faculty facilities are environmental friendly
➢
20% of respondents Not Agree that current faculty facilities are environmental friendly
➢
70% of respondents Strongly Not Agree that current faculty facilities are environment friendly
5% 5% 20%
70%
Strongly Not Agree
Not Agree
Agree
Strongly Agree
FINDINGS 2
CURRENT STUDENT LOUNGE ARE CONDUCIVE AND FIT FOR PURPOSE
➢
60.0% of respondents said that they did not have experience use the student lounge due to it is provided to the postgraduate student
➢
No respondent Strongly Agree that the current student lounge are conducive for use
➢
5.0% of respondents Agree that the current student lounge are conducive for use
➢
5.0% of respondents Not Agree that the current student lounge are conducive for use
➢
30.0% respondents Strongly Not Agree that the current student lounge are conducive for use
30%
60%
5% 5%
No use
0%
Strongly Not Agree
Not Agree
Agree
Strongly Agree
CURRENT CAFÉ SUITS THEIR PREFERENCE
FINDINGS 3 5%
➢
5.0% of respondents Strongly Agree current café are really suit their preference
➢
5.0% of respondents Agree current café are really suit their preference
➢
40% of respondents Not Agree that current café are really suit their preference
➢
50% of respondents Strongly Not Agree that current café are really suit their preference
5%
50% 40%
Strongly Not Agree
Not Agree
Agree
Strongly Agree
FINDINGS 4 What people wants? PERCEPTION
Aesthetic & Functional Primary
Secondary
Tertiary
Insignificant
Good Vibes
Discussion Space
Modern
Complexity
Postgraduate
Big Space
Pretty
Integrated Student Lounge
Cool
Academician & Lecturer
Relevant
Green Building
Outdoor Concept
Variety
Supporting/Admin Staff
Hygiene
Entertainment
Reliable
Simple
Undergraduate
Case studies
“Several had been made to investigate contemporary reallife situations and has provided a foundation of application of ideas and extension of methods. This case studies are highlighted based on the issues that been highlighted by the respondents during the questionnaire survey. The information will be the basis in preparing the Design Proposal” ”
CASE STUDY 1
GOBOX CONCEPT, KL •
GOBOX CONCEPT is a container food center with an open air concept. It’s located a stone’s throw away from KLCC and it’s a mere 300m walk from KLCC to GOBOX CONCEPT.
•
GOBOX CONCEPT, which is a play on the words “go” and “box”, is essentially a box-shaped food court housing 10+ food stalls.
•
GOBOX CONCEPT includes 2 storey containers that designed as a food stall and also dining place at the second level.
•
GOBOX CONCEPT also open concept food center that suitable place for enjoy the dishes and also suitable for gathering place.
CASE STUDY 2
RESTAURANT BRIX 0.1 •
A sculptural building in Bressanone / Italy is the landmark in the Lido Park and is the home for the restaurant & bar Brix 0.1
•
Like a landmark the building fits inside the natural environment. A simple, but plastically shaped building opens consciously like a funnel to the pond and framed so visually beneficial the shore as well as 2 forward, protected trumpet trees.
•
This pavilion thus forms the backbone of the overall composition and becomes the new attraction in the park. The new restaurant BRIX 0.1 in the Lidopark is created in a spatial interplay with a pushed in cuboid space volume, in which the service facilities are accommodated.
•
Spacious glazed windows allow views and views into the new restaurant and link the exterior and interior, making the visit to the park an experience. The skin of volume is formed by corten steel´s leaves that makes an elegant coating for the restaurant
•
Inside a front-cooking kitchen finds a dialogue with the tables of the clients showing the preparation of her prestigious food. In the night the construction becomes a lantern and the water, almost by magic, turns into a mirror for the structure.
CHAPTER 4 DESIGN PROPOSAL
DESIGN CONCEPT 01
03 ATTRACTIVE
05 MEET
Provide and Attractive Place that have a great and attractive view
RELAX
Provide a place where student can spend their time
Provide an open space at the foyer of the propose building to studnt relax their mind
NATURE
EAT
Provide a development that maintain, remain and improve the nature
02
Provide an attractive place for eating
04
“To design a student hub that consist of element Attractive, Nature, Meet, Eat, & Relax�
DESIGN PROPOSAL
De’ Garden Lounge
DESIGN PROCESS
Bubble Diagram
DESIGN PROCESS
Activities Diagram
DESIGN PROCESS
Schematic Diagram
DESIGN PROCESS
Main Building Cafe
Proposal Design
Annex
Amphitheater
Design Overview
✓ This design proposal consist of 2 parts of site consider ‘Area A’ and ‘Area B’ with the size each of them is 625m2 (total 1250m2) with dimension 25m length with 25m width. ✓ ‘Area A’ for this proposal will involve eight (8) numbers of container and for ‘Area B’ will involve two numbers’ of containers which each of them are 6meters length (20feet) ✓ ‘Area A’ locate with Main Building that consist of Café and Open Space Area while ‘Area B’ are Annex that consist of Open Concept Student Lounge complete with mini library. ✓ Both of the ‘Area’ will come out with free wi-fi amenities, open concept study area, and for ‘Area A’ have 24 hours café.
✓ Both of the ‘Area’ will include outdoor natural space for outdoor activity where for ‘Area B’ we remain the Amphitheater and improve the aesthetic value of that place. .
Annex
Main Building
35
Main Building
Main Building
Main Building
✓ 1 Storey Café with Flat roof ✓ Closed- air Cond Café ✓ 3 Storeys Open Concept Container ✓ Wi-fi Amenities ✓ Outdoor Tables
Annex
✓ 1 Storey Café with Flat roof ✓ Open Concept Student Lounge
Annex
✓ Wi-fi Amenities ✓ Outdoor Tables ✓ Mini Library
EXTERIOR VIEW Main Building
EXTERIOR VIEW Annex
INTERIOR VIEW
INTERIOR VIEW
The estimation cost for this project is approximately RM403,000.00
PRELIMINARIES
BUILDERS WORK & EXTERNAL WORKS
FURNITURE & ASSOCIATED WORKS
MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL WORKS
CONTIGENCIES
9%
64%
9%
9%
10%
RM35,000
RM258,000
RM35,000
RM35,000
RM40,000
Allowance of 10% from the builders work
Including Structural & Architectural Works
External & Internal
Allowance for mechanical and Electrical Works
Allowance for contingencies
CONCLUSION
OBJECTIVE
CONCLUSION
STATUS
TO PROVIDE CONDUCIVE STUDY & DISCUSSION AREA THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR 24 HOURS
ACHIEVED
TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT AMENITIES AND FACILITIES
ACHIEVED
TO PROVIDE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING SPACES WITH NATURE CONCEPT
ACHIEVED
TO PROVIDE ERGONOMICS' STUDY AREA
ACHIEVED
TO HAVE DEMARCATED AREA FOR ACTIVITIES
ACHIEVED
TO MAXIMIZE SPACES TO ACCOMMODATE STUDENTS’ NEEDS
ACHIEVED
TO MINIMIZE THE COST BY USING CABIN CONTAINER
ACHIEVED
De’ GARDEN LOUNGE
G4.com