Comparing Apartments/Lofts In Miami

These are the same architect’s as yesterday’s project – they may be a respected firm, but their plans are measuring up to the SlowHome text.
Unit E in the NW corner of the N tower gets my vote, though I am not sure about the entire west wall glazed floor to ceiling. My score came to 13. The balcony probably has a good view, but it’s pretty narrow. The kitchen is OK, but there isn’t room for dining except at the kitchen counter. The second bedroom could have a bigger closet at the expense of direct entry into the hall bathroom.
Unit C in the S tower scored 11. There is a lot to like about this unit – I like its broad layout orientated to the NE and probably a terrific view. The living and dining areas are well defined and proportioned. The balcony is eccentrically functional. The entry is a bit weird and the kitchen is really poor.
However … there are all sorts of weird things going on with the plan and its location in the building. There are two mystery indentations – I can’t figure out what they are, and the one larger one is not even indicated in the overall building floor plan. Last, but by no means least, the master bedroom is right up against the elevator shaft – that would drive me up the wall listening to that all day and night. I wouldn’t buy this unit for any price.

Unit E scored 14
Unit C scored 11

Unit E is my choice. Had reservations about living area since the square column impeded on furniture placement. Also had reservations about kitchen. Consider this, the counter space is ok, but the STORAGE is iffy when you factor in the double ovens, dishwasher, sink, frig, and cooktop (sometimes the designer doesn’t include adequate storage under cooktops). These areas got “Yes–with reservations.”

Unit C was bigger but, oh boy, how about the elevators, stairs, and mystery room (mechanical?) flanking the 3 exterior walls. That was the deal breaker, along with a pitiful kitchen. Also, the single North-facing exterior wall might suggest a “cooler” interior (considering you’re in a hot climate), but it would make the interior darker than you might expect. It’s too bad because the living/dining area was nice, and the outdoor space, though oddly shaped, could have 2 siting areas.

The one shining star from both units was the inclusion of the shared bathroom with private access from the 2nd bedroom. (Then they had to go and ruin it by adding the bidets in the Master bathrooms which incur more cost and increase the floor space…they are unnecessary elements.)
***
Does anyone else see a trend in the Miami apartment kitchen? It feels and looks like a second-class citizen…

“Unit E” in Tower 1
Score of 14
1- 3, Walkable
2- 0, No environmental incentives
3- 2 , located on the north west side of the building – get views from 2 sides
4- 2 – very segmented _ choppy plan
5- 0 – no closet
6- 1- no focal point, but views connect to the outdoors. The column interferes with the layout (becomes an unwanted focal point)
7- 1 – SMALL furniture layout (couple of chairs facing out, but would be placed on an angle – not so ideal)
8- 1 small and compact, with lots of layout space on the island
9- 1
10- 1-
11- 0 – layout is ok. Not too sure if a bidet + a toilet are required in the ensuite.
12- 1 – no study
13- 0 – located in a not so private area of the suite
14- 1 –

“Unit C” in Tower 2
Score of 13
1- 3, Walkable
2- 0, No environmental incentives
3- 2 , faces north – large patio
4- 2 – wasted space at the entry
5- 0 – no closet space – wasted space in front of a/c + w/d
6- 1- a focal point, but it is neither in the living or the dining, would be better if it was a central feature in one of the spaces
7- 1 – 2 small groupings could be accommodated
8- 0 oven + cook top could be combined to allow for more counter space
9- 1
10- 1-
11- 0 – no storage / counter space in the 2nd washroom
12- 1 – no study
13- 0 – not so private of an area
14- 1 –

Overall, my choice would be the unit e on the north west side of the building. Kitchen layout is more appropriate. Space seems more efficiently used.

Thanks John & Matthew for pointing out the issues with the mechanical equipment in the second unit.

That was not my last comment about the apartments. Also Unit E is north facing but looks onto the park, water way and overall a better view than you would have received in the other tower. The other tower and apartment faced the parking lot more so and tower 1. Not what you always what you want to look onto too when your paying that penny to live downtown.

The first unit is “Unit E” in Tower 1 gets my vote but just barely both unites are very similar. However i like the use of space in the master bathroom in E better because it doesn’t have wasted space in the middle of the room. I also like the guest/bedroom bathroom better in E because there is no conflict between the doors like the other plan. the living/dinning room seems a little small but it has a window focal point and a spot to create a television focal point as well. Finally, the unobstructed view is another huge bonus and seals the deal on choosing this unit.

Unit E:

Location-3:

Environmental Performance-3 (Not contributing to suburban sprawl, efficient compact living space. Great views

Siting-2 All the major rooms make good use of the expansive windows (master bedroom, living/dining, second bedroom) Two sides of the condo are floor to ceiling windows which is nice versus one side which is usually common.

Organization-2: The principal rooms are all well-connected with the outdoors and the windows

Entry-0 The entrance is very secluded from the main area of the house. They should have taken advantage of the majestic views and open spaces when planning the entry so visitors could be breathtaken by the view when walking in.

Indoor living-1 Focal point is the view. Modern, open area.

Outdoor living-1: nice deck for a few chairs. Not sure if its large enough for a table unfortunately though.

Kitchen-1: Kitchen overlooks the dining/living and has a good view of the windows. Island and room for bar chairs.

Dining-1 Large area so you can decide what size of table you want to put as long as you dont take up to much living room space.

Bedrooms-1 Both bedrooms have large windows. Even the second bedroom which is a nice extra.

Bathrooms-1

Study-1 there is no study. If there was a single person or couple living there though with no children, the second bedroom could be easily converted into a study with an amazing view.

Laundry-1 conveniently located and doesnt take up to much space.

parking-1

Unit E has a total score from me of 18/20. A well thought out plan except for the entryway.

___________
Unit C

Location-3 (walkable, great location)

Environmental Performance-3 (same reasons as before. in comparison to a single-family home, its environmental footprint is considerably smaller).

Siting-2

Organization-0- I dont like the laundry area in the entrance way. It is far removed from the bedrooms.

Entry-1- I like this entry better than the prior unit because it capitalizes on the view and allows visitors a view into the apartment and of Miami. (There is some wasted space in the entry though still)

Indoor living-1 Strong focal point with the triangled window. Main bedrooms and living areas have a great view and patio access.

Outdoor living-1 Patio is easily accessed from all important areas

Kitchen-0-More counter space would be nice.

Dining-1

Bedrooms-1 (All have great view)

Bathrooms-1

Study-1 The second bedroom could be converted into a personal study if someone needed one.

Laundry-0 (dont like the location in the entry)

Parking-1

Unit C has a total score of 17/20

Despite Unit C having a lower score on the slow home test, I would personally rather live in it. Although Unit E has a view from two sides, I think the larger pillar in the living/dining area might be difficult in the placement of furniture. The living/dining area is considerably smaller in Unit E and I would much rather the larger space there in Unit E. I also like the large triangular window which is very dramatic as you walk into the condo and would make it seem much larger. I dont like the kitchen as much in Unit E however and would rather some space be taken out of the entryway to make extra counter space in the kitchen. (Or a front closet in the entry would be a nice addition)

I’m inclined to agree with everyone’s comments and also vote to go with Unit E. Although both apartments are quite similar there are a few characteristics that separate them. I found that both units have quite a lot of wasted space in the entrance that could be better used if there was a different design. I am not fond of either of the kitchens, but it seems like a pretty generic design for apartments. Overall I went with Unit E because being right beside the elevator is a nightmare – I used to have my living room against the elevator in an apartment I lived in, and that drove me nuts. Can’t imagine having it beside the bedroom. So although the scores were pretty close, Unit E wins by default simply because of the elevator and the view.

UNIT E – 14
UNIT C – 10

My vote goes for Unit E. Although both units have design issues, Unit E has used the space more efficiently than Unit C. Somehow, I’m still surprised at the design choices made in these apartments. Especially with the laundry rooms, outdoor living and indoor living. I mean, its common sense to have a spacious outdoor living area considering the whole point is to enjoy the lovely bay side views. That’s a flop more so in the Unit E than in the bigger balcony in Unit C, where there is a possibility to place a furniture grouping on one end.

With the laundry area in Unit E, if the tub in the bathroom adjacent to it was removed, it would allow for a more spacious laundry room, possibly access from the bathroom would give it a private entrance as well. The laundry in Unit C is down right awkward. I agree with John and Matthew, would have been a good space for a study, small office or even a nice closet.

The indoor living areas pose some challenges, especially in terms of furniture placement. I would probably have to install a TV stand or something to make a focal point in the room. There is no real wall area that can be utilized for a focal point around which the living furniture can be arranged. These are a concern in both the Units for me.

I do really like how natural light is accessible in both units. Unit E has a much better geometry than Unit C that has too many awkward walls, niches and wasted spaces. I’m definitely for Unit E on this one!

I’d like to nominate Matt B for SlowHomer of the Week for finding the link to the Icon Brickell article. We aren’t privy to that information on the Icon’s website or Google map. It was invaluable.

With all due respect to those who gave the Icon the environmental performance points, take a look at Matt’s link and review the Rules of Thumb for environmental performance from John & Matthew’s book, “What’s Wrong With This House?” provided below:

“In a Slow Home, the environmental performance should

* be oriented for passive solar heating and feature windows that facilitate natural ventilation.
* include an efficient building envelope with appropriate insulation.
* incorporate fixtures, equipment, and materials with a low environmental impact.
* operate on renewable or clean energy sources.”

On the surface the individual unit may meet some of the criteria above. But when you factor in that there are 1000+ units in the building plus swimming pools, restaurants, spa/gym rooms, elevators, parking garages, landscape needs, etc. the environmental footprint grows exponentially. It may not physically sprawl like suburbia, but its impact is just as costly.

Slow Homers,

I found a really good site for finding miami condo plans – it’s quite comprehensive!
http://www.kafka-franz.com

I have NO idea how Franz Kafka (or his work) has anything to do with Miami or condominiums, but trust me, it is a condo-search website run by a Miami realtor.

Using the test, both units received the approx. same amount of points. They both lacked closet space in their front entrance; however, a closet could be installed in unit C without compromising space.
I also found the kitchen location in unit C is the better choice compared to the kitchen in unit E except I liked the idea of a breakfast nook in unit E.
The balconies in both designs are quite poor- the available space is compromised by the atheistic. I would probably not use the balcony at all in either designs.
I liked the design of C but after reading a couple of postings regarding the designated elevator space- that dropped my opinion real fast. I can probably live with all my comments in peace but I would not be able to live beside an elevator. I choose E as well.

Unit E 14/20 Unit C 10/20. I found the first unit to be a slightly better design, with less awkward shaped spaces and also a better location and view.

[img]3237451506359ae0e1c3m.jpg[/img][img]3237451632843603038am.jpg[/img]

I would recommend unit E over unit c.
for their respective scores: 15 for E, 11 for C…
HOWEVER… one issue I have, after looking into this building and researching how it places in the urban context I am reluctantly giving it the points for siting. I will explain. Although the building does take advantage of its location (views), and it does add a nice addition to the skyline, the street level is suffering. The building is designed to be autocentric, with loading docks and parking taking up the street level, the parks adjacent are disconnected and not integrated into the landscaping that has been used on site (the developer planted hedges to fill-in and obscure the numerous roadways flowing around the site. The pedestrian experience of the area is great, but the building does not react properly to it in that it does not embrace the pedestrian activity. I have included photos to show it (these are before the hedges were planted…)

getting back on subject, e, while being smaller and lacking the outdoor space, does have a better flow and circulation to it in my opinion. The kitchen is usable, there is space to place the dining table, and living room furniture and the bathrooms work. The laundry on both units fails, but at least the entry on E doesn’t feel like wasted space.

In terms of unit c, the separation of the two bedrooms with the central living space seems like they were simply tacking on a bedroom to increase saleability of a unit bordered by the elevator bank (nice catch guys!).

I chose apartment E. Not only did it score better on my test but I live in a master bedroom against an elevator and between a stairwell and after listening to John and Matthew when I was done my evaluation, I was sold.

3 Location- great location in both as John and Matthew explain, good walk ability score.

0-Enviro Performance, Its rather sad that this doesn’t seem to be part of the marketing strategy in a lot of homes we are looking at and not just in Miami. I think the environmental implications are paramount to what I would consider a good design. Perhaps the slow home test need to find a way to evaluate this more harshly? Although 3 points are given, it seems like this should be worth more?

2-Siting- Having the west and north view beat have the primarily north views in my opinion, so E wins for siting

2-Organization- I like the orientation of the west north unit. Having the two views is great and beats having purely northern light. I don’t think the balcony is any good. It would take some seriously creative thinking to make the space work. Perhaps a lounger? I am still giving it a point. The bedrooms are in good places and it’s a tight space so you need to expect less.

1-Entry
but no closet in either unit? Unit C making the front entry into a laundry room is odd. A lot of dead space. I think it is strange and wasteful.

1- Great views in both

0-No for outdoor living in my unit of choice. To oddly shapped. I am sure there was an architectural intent for the design but it is meaningless if the space ceases to function.

1- The kitchen works in both units although it is bigger in E with much more counter space.

0-Dining is undefined. Personally I can envision my furniture but it may seem to be floating in the space.

1-Bathrooms- they work pretty well in this space. I would say better than in C.

1-bedroom are great considering the compact space. I am glad they are at separate ends for privacy

1-study points for default but that front room could work okay.

0-laundry sucks in both of this units but you need to remember it is a small space. Nonetheless you could find a better place to put it
1-parking? I guess

14/20
Overall good design E. I can for one of the first times in a house we are reviewing imagine comfortable existing in this space. Glad to hear Matthew and John were on the space page with me for the most part and thanks guys for responding to my suggestion last week! Cheers

I gave both units a slow home test score of 12 and I would just marginally recommend Unit E over Unit C. Though both apartments lack a closet at the entrance, and I actually find both entrances a bit awkward, the entrance for Unit C a too long and narrow. Also, Unit C is a bit too disconnected and sprawling for my liking and the kitchen is very compact. But I like how both units utilize outdoor terrace space and also take advantage of day lighting with plenty of windows, especially in the case of Unit E. I felt that Unit E resolved the unusual trapezoidal plan of the home quite well.

I gave unit E:15 and unit C:12. One of the main reasons that unit E is getting so much praise is mostly because it is a corner unit and the kitchen is far superior than that of the second units. I like the entertainment area of the second unit and how its all open and all of the balcony space is very usable unlike unit E’s balcony which would probably require some custom furniture pieces to furnish properly, since it is so narrow and on top of that it tappers at the end. Privacy is another factor why i would choose unit E over C, in unit E there is no one in front of you, and you have a full view of the water, while in unit C there is another building in front of you that is partially obstructing your view. The entry in both homes is problematic but unit E has done it better than unit C. The kitchen problem in unit C raises a few issues, it is very small and compact for such a large space. It might have been more effective if they enlarged the island to accommodate an eat in kitchen and more counter space for prep work. I would definitely consider unit E over unit C as it is more functional and a plus point being that it is a corner unit.

Unit E gets a 14 for not being energy efficient, not having an entry closet, poor outdoor living, and not enough space for dining room table.

Unit C definitely shows that bigger isn’t better, even though it has 200 more square feet most of the space is poorly utilized and the bedrooms and principle space are awkwardly angled because of the shape of the the building. overall Unit C got a 10.

My choice is unit E.