| In the past weeks I've been neglecting the TESSELLAR>info website. So these are four new posts: The hexagonal pattern sometimes terrify people when I show it to them. I blame the undifferentiated monotony of terrace layouts for this. That is where people get lost. And somehow we see again and again on print: "grid layouts are easy to navigate". In "Getting Lost" in the FAQ section, I show how winding roads form vistas that can be used to create landmarks that differentiate different stretches of roads. Some of our projects are slowly advancing in terms of getting planning and building approvals. I show some of the approval letters in "Getting Approvals". Another early preconception that many people have is that the Honeycomb layout is not suitable for sloping sites. Steeply sloping sites unsuitable for conventional housing is just as unsuitable for Honeycomb housing. But in "Sloping Sites", I show some of the strategies that can be adopted to handle slopes more economically compared to terrace house layouts. Granted the Honeycomb layout has fewer roads, but isn't the infrastructure more complicated and costly? In TESSELLAR>research>cost of infrastructure this issue is tackled by looking at a completed project that has been designed with the conventional layout and compare it with a theoretical Honeycomb alternative. |  Getting Lost?  Getting Approvals?  Sloping Sites  Infrastructure Cost |
Social Bookmarking
No comments:
Post a Comment