Part 2A: Concept Development
Requirements for the Project
The development should have a mix of programs, including commercial components, public areas & parks, articulated circulation spaces, and a variety of residential apartments for current residents and temporary visitors. The building footprint: 2000–2500 sqm, minimum 100 residential units, divided 50/50 between temporary affordable units and permanent compensated units. Additional required elements include commercial, public spaces (indoor/outdoor), circulation, ancillary, parking, and added programs that activate the broader masterplan
We selected this site because, within the masterplan framework, it was one of the designated plots allocated for a 14–15 storey affordable housing prototype on a 2,000–2,500 sqm footprint. All three groups were required to work within the same height and plot parameters to ensure comparable scope and architectural outcomes.
From the plots developed in our group’s masterplan, this specific plot aligned with the required height and land area criteria. Additionally, the masterplan strategy reduces building heights progressively toward the edge of Malé, allowing each structure to gain partial or unobstructed sea views. Positioning our prototype on this plot ensures it benefits from this height gradient, maintaining visual access to the waterfront while contributing to the intended skyline transition.
When collecting data for the masterplan study, the site revealed a dual nature. During the day, it functions as a fast-paced corridor — people in motion, rarely stopping. As night falls, the atmosphere shifts: pockets become lively, people gather, socialize, play, and occupy the space.
The site holds two distinct temporal identities — movement and haste by day; pause and connection by night. The built form remains static and unresponsive to this behavioral rhythm. The critical realization: the site’s main characteristic is its temporal pulse — its changing rhythm shaped by time
While researching the site characteristics, I came across a term called "chronotope".
The term chronotope comes from the Russian philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin (1895–1975).
It literally means “time–space” (chronos = time, topos = place).
In literature, Bakhtin used it to describe how time and space are woven together in narratives — e.g., a journey, a city, a house — each setting organizes time differently.
In architecture, this translates into the idea that every space has its own temporal logic — it’s not just located somewhere, but also somewhen.
After reflecting on the site’s behavior, it became clear that as time flows through a place, different types of people flow with it — workers in transit, residents moving slowly, social groups gathering, and temporary visitors passing through. Yet, despite these shifting temporal rhythms, the architecture remains rigid and unresponsive. The space does not accommodate the changing pace or patterns of movement, highlighting a disconnect between time, people, and the built environment. This insight became the foundation of the touchstone.
I tried to show this in the touchstone.
Initially, I used a fixed light source to represent the constant flow of time, accompanied by a rotating disk with various cutouts symbolizing the movement of people — some fast, some slow, some irregular. Beside it, a second disk remained stationary, representing the built space. The interaction of these layers made the concept visible: time and people move, shift, and adapt, while the space remains still and unresponsive.
After tutorial feedback, the initial concept lacked clarity — the relationship between light, shadow, and meaning was not fully legible. This led to a rethinking of the touchstone.
A single light represents the presence and rhythm of people in the site.
A rotating disc with curved and straight cuts symbolizes time — fluid yet interrupted — while a fixed grid frame represents the rigid built environment. As light passes through these layers, shifting shadows reveal how movement and stillness interact, exposing where architecture adapts and where it resists.
Areas of constant shadow or constant light reflect stagnation and restlessness, while the changing zones between them demonstrate balance — where life and structure coexist. The piece illustrates that meaningful architecture emerges only when it responds to the temporal rhythms of its users.
