THE RESTAURANT
PRECEDENT - El Tico Beach Cantina, Jersey
'El Tico' was redeveloped by Richard Le Sueur Architects in 2006. It is a beach side restaurant in a protected national trust area on the Channel Island of Jersey.
El Tico shares two key similarities with the Essoldo restaurant site. Both are singular aspect sites, and both have linear footprints. Therefore it can help inform some decisions in programming the new restaurant.
With a car park to the rear, the restaurant has one aspect towards the beach
The footprint is long and thin, so the size of the side with the view is maximised.
STRIP PROGRAMME
The programme of the restaurant is laid out in strips. The functional parts are at the back, entrance and circulation in the middle, and tables at the front, where the view is.
WINDOWS AND ASPECT
There are no windows on the side of the car park, where there is no view. All the windows are on the west side facing the beach. This also dicates the programme.
CONCEPTS TO TAKE FORWARD
1) Organise programme according to the aspect. I.e functions to the rear by Chester Road.
2) Only have windows where there is a view. This puts focus on the aspect, whilst blocking out the undesirable views.
SHAPE AND SITE
From making marks, we have zoned a rough space and geometry for the restaurant's footprint. This is the starting point for developing a scheme for the building
​
The starting point is based on the restaurant massing being part of a barrier to Chester Road, and a corner stone to the site.
ADPATING SHAPE TO SITE
The overarching aim for the restaurant is to create an interface and relationship with the garden, whilst expelling Chester Road.
​
Hence the orientation should be towards the garden. To do this, we can change the shape and materiality of the facade to create a direct visual connection.
​
However, this does reduce the size of the footprint, so extra space is needed to accommodate all the aspects of the restaurant.
ADDING MORE SPACE
More space is required than the initial footprint affords, but where should it be added? There are two areas where this is possible.
second floor:
​
Adding a second floor will balance the visual mass from the north western elevation between the Essoldo and new restaurant.
​
This ensures that the importance of the restaurant to the scheme is reflected visually.
the rear:
​
The interface between restaurant and garden is important to maintaining a cohesive relationship through the programme of the site. Therefore adding to the rear (NW side) maintains the integrity of this connection,
​
Furthermore, extending to the rear lends itself to the programme adjacency, as the smaller, modular aspects are easier to 'tag on' off the man dining area.
​
Adding to the rear further builds the barrier to the road, orientating the geometry to the canal and garden.
APPLYING A BASIC PROGRAMME
Having established a rough shape, we can begin to consider the elements that make up the restaurant.
​
The elements can be roughly split into three categories: space for public use, interface, and function.
​
By taking into consideration the idea of forming a visual relationship to the site and the concepts learn from the precedent, an adjacency can be drawn which organises the space that reflects these concepts.
diners would like to look out onto the garden, so in plan and section, rough areas to place each element in can be drawn up, and help form an initial layout...
hover
REFINING THE PROGRAMME
Having mapped out roughly where different areas will be placed, a more specific programme can be applied.
A FIRST ITERATION
hover
This first iteration adds a small space to the rear for the kitchen, store and loading bay. This allows for the rest of the elements to be placed in accordance with the programme. The stairs are placed close to the entrance to fit with the circulation through to the second floor.
is it any good?
​
In short, no. Although the floor areas align with the initial assumptions, the usable space is small - particularly once doors and travel routes are considered.
​
The dining area by the kitchen is isolated, and the entrance is not distinctive enough in having a sense of arrival. If we think about a patrons journey through a restaurant, this layout doesn't fit very well.
​
Furthermore, once the link is added, a new entrance is needed which requires an adaptation of where things fit.
hover
The aims to solve the issues are:
​
-
To add more kitchen space.
-
Better circulation, namely around the entrance and kitchen to dining.
-
Increase the openness and space to reflect the nature of the scheme.
ADAPT AND DEVELOP
changing the entrance:
​
-
As the link directs people past the side of the restaurant, there is a natural path to enter.
-
This creates an opportunity for 'arrival', which starts to create a better interface point between the outside and the interior space for public use.
move kitchen:
​
-
Moving the entrance creates a clash between the transfer from kitchen to dining.
-
Swapping the location of the bar over solves this. The bar is now adjacent to the entrance and the kitchen by the dining area, as they should be.
-
This does however require further extension to the north east.
extension and entrance:
​
-
making use of a second floor for dining allows for a large entrance, resulting in a better journey through the spaces.
-
further extending to the rear to accommodate the functional elements frees up the dining area and entrance to be completely open.
FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Each element has to be a certain size in order for the restaurant to function properly. Determining these sizes can help test the layout and further refine the plan.
entry​
The entrance space needs to be big enough to accommodate comfortable circulation between the different spaces, in order to connect them.
dining
​
According to anthropometric data in 'The Architects Pocket Book' a table for ten needs 4100x2400mm of space to be used. This would give us a minimum of 80sqm of dining space in order to host 80 people.
WCs
​
To meet regulation, 1 disabled toilet, min 1500x2200mm, 1 urinal per 25 and 1 WC per 100 men, and 2 WCs per 100 women must be provided. The male and female WCS can fit into 3600x3500mm units
RESULT
The programme now allows for more space and a definitive arrival point. It fits the journey people take when eating at a restaurant, meaning that the space 'makes sense' and does not clash.
​
The second floor dining area ensures that the reduction in dining space downstairs does not diminish the ability of the restaurant to meet demand.
​
The original entrance point will also be kept as a secondary threshold/ fire exit.
store/load
​
the total area of both the store and loading areas should be roughly equal to the area of the kitchen as a starting point in determining their size
kitchen
​
According to POS Systems, who supply restaurant management software, a kitchen must be between 25 and 30% of the dining area, depending on the quality of food served in order to meet demand
service
​
The service area link the dining and the kitchen, so its size needs to be able to cope with the comings and goings. As it is directly linked to the kitchen, on dimension of the service area is likely to match.
bar
​
A typical counter top depth and width is 600mm, with a minimum of 1200mm needed between units. This guidance helps decide how big the bar needs to be.
