HEXA Living

The shape of the cover is excessive. Its simplification could allow faster construction and save on the resources.

Generaly, the idea can work in a real life. Can be refined in sense of deep connections between space and structures, materials, furnishing and space, natural ventilation ( on that climatic area became conpulsory).

Concept / Idea [2/10] Analysis of natural conditions, such as climate (wind, solar, heat). Adaptation to local conditions: Very schematic and large scale. Not informative in terms of the specific location nor design solution./ Feasibility of the idea: Questionable./ Use of local materials, techniques, labour skills: Unrealistic, very general. Combination of aluminum and concrete produces an oven-like structure. Ventilation not properly considered, resulting in overheated, non-livable conditions. Local skills not consider./ Waste management & sanitation: Poor (not even mentioned)./ Ecological consideration: Poor./ Flooding: Elevated plate, no flexibility./ Design Output [5/10] Structural clarity and feasibility: Very sketchy./ Architectural quality: Spatial organization quite interesting./ Presentation [4/10] Clarity and quality of images, detailing and overall layout: Good./ Clarity of textual material, narratives, justification of design choices: Contradictory. “Empathy” presented as a guiding principle, yet completely neglected in the design./ Spaces/Design Programme [3/10] Site plan, logistics: Interesting, providing flexibility, and ease of logistics. Moderately scalable./ Consideration of local socio-cultural features: Very generic or non-existent./ Community engagement, communal spaces: None presented./ Privacy: Good./ Safety: Good. The site plan allows escape routes, sanitation in privacy. Materials do not cause fire risk./ Adaptability to changing conditions over time: Quite possible.