Sep. 13, 2011 at 10:37am
Small Lot Design
I've been imagining what kind of changes could take place in the 6th Ave URX zone. The new zoning allows for buildings without setbacks and increased units per acre. Here is a concept I came up with. Let me know what you think.
Here's the link
comments  | posted under 6th ave, architecture, URXComments
by KevinFreitas on 9/13/2011 @ 11:37am
|I'm a fan of mixing places like this into the neighborhood. Would you say this design is the same/similar?|
Saw this place a few weeks ago just off 6th Ave. and was both shocked and impressed to see that kind of style around there. Pretty refreshing, I have to say.
by two9seven on 9/13/2011 @ 11:43am
|That place is 4 units I believe and the parking is uncovered. Its made up of two buildings mirrored so that the backs are butted to one another. There is a 8' or so space between them. Kinda too squished in there for me. My concept is more comfortable I think.
by seejane on 9/13/2011 @ 1:23pm
|Across the street from this development is another pair of duplex condos - with the same small space between.
It's less expensive to build two duplexes because it's considered to be residential, not commercial, so you don't have to repave the street.
FYI the same builder built on N.8th & State
p.s. I can't open www.box.net/shared/vmpc3q17rfnfij9y1va6
by seejane on 9/13/2011 @ 1:25pm
|Oh I forgot... with that lot's zoning you couldn't built single family, minimum is a duplex. It's been like that for at least 8 years.|
by Erik on 9/13/2011 @ 1:28pm
|Compared to the average snub nose suburban housing being built today, the modern design is pretty good.
Not as nice as the craftsman housing, but very good when compared to anything built after WWII.
by two9seven on 9/13/2011 @ 2:42pm
|Thanks for commenting. The original post has now been updated with an image of the concept. Seejane mentioned the increased density and my concept accommodates that.
There are two units. There is an apt at street level and a 3 bedroom condo above.
There could be two of these side by side and still provide similar density to the new building posted by Kevin. My solution orients all the units to the street which I believe is better for day-lighting and views.
by L.S.Erhardt on 9/13/2011 @ 4:23pm
|I like the hell out of those designs.|
by seejane on 9/14/2011 @ 9:46am
|Love the concept of the studio apartments - a way to generate a little income or a place for an aging parent or boomerang kid.
I think you need a powder room and a pantry on the living/kitchen level.
by KevinFreitas on 9/14/2011 @ 9:49am
|Agreed about the powder room and pantry and also with the studio. Moving into an apartment myself for the first time ever here soon it's great to see people thinking creatively about how space is used.|
by Paolo on 9/14/2011 @ 10:02am
|This is a few blocks away from my home. Not a fan. Those pictures you took look great, but next to the homes next to them, it just doesn't look like part of the neighborhood.
Similar architecture in a group of condos near Jason Lee and I thought those worked well on the corner where they had some land between buildings. These are just sandwiched in. Design aside, I'm sure these are efficient use of land and environmentally sound, so kudos for the intent.
by two9seven on 9/14/2011 @ 11:50am
|You make a good point Paolo. It makes sense for buildings to fit in otherwise it can be a jarring experience. The scary thing is that there are no design guidelines for this zone. You can build a big tall box and it's ok. The first design shows this.
My goal is not to just copy surrounding buildings but to design and build for a new generation and time that can coexist with history. I chose brick for that reason. I think there is room for more detail however.