Heritage Café: Seating, Service and Accessibility in 62 m²
A 62 m² ground-floor tenancy in a 1904 heritage building in Ōtautahi Christchurch is to become a café. The client wants 28 seats, a 4 m service counter, an accessible toilet, and a kitchenette. The ceiling is 3.1 m high. Two original sash windows, each 1.2 m wide and starting 900 mm above floor level, face the street; a rear door is 820 mm wide. The heritage covenant prevents altering the street facade and requires any new partitions to be free-standing and reversible. Staff report that during the 8–9 am rush, about 40 customers per hour, collisions occur at the till and the drink pickup point. The client asks for 'a warm, calm atmosphere' but the budget covers only standard commercial fittings. You are producing a spatial design proposal.
1. Identify the three most significant spatial conflicts in this brief and explain how you would resolve each with specific design moves.
Read the worked answer
Conflict 1 - order/pickup congestion. At 40 customers/hour the till and pickup compete for the same 1.5 m of counter. Move the pickup point 2.5 m along the counter and mark a 1.2 m wide queue lane parallel to the counter, separate from the seated zone. This gives two distinct service points and keeps the queue from crossing tables.
Conflict 2 - heritage constraint vs accessible toilet. The toilet needs a 1.5 m turning circle plus fixtures, so roughly 2.2 × 2.2 m. The covenant forbids new fixed partitions, so use a free-standing, self-contained accessible pod placed in the rear corner, away from the street windows. Run the accessible route (min. 1.2 m) from the entrance to the pod without passing through the queue.
Conflict 3 - seat count vs circulation. 28 seats plus counter, kitchenette, toilet and circulation is likely to overfill 62 m². Resolve by using a mix of 20 chairs at 600 mm-deep tables and a 3 m standing ledge at the window, which serves 8 people without the 1.2 m chair-clearance zone. This preserves the 'calm' feel by keeping a clear 1.2 m spine from door to counter.
2. The accessible toilet requires a 1.5 m turning circle. Where would you place it and why, given the constraints?
Read the worked answer
Place the pod in the rear corner furthest from the street windows, adjacent to the rear door. Reasoning: (1) The 1.5 m circle plus a 900 mm outward door swing needs a clear 2.2 × 2.2 m envelope; the rear corner is the only zone that does not consume the daylit window edge, which is the café's main asset. (2) Plumbing can be run to the rear wall, avoiding excavation through the heritage floor slab near the facade. (3) The rear door (820 mm) is too narrow for a standard accessible route, so the pod must be reached from the main entrance; place it so the route from the entrance is a straight 1.2 m minimum path that does not cross the queue. (4) A free-standing pod satisfies the reversible-partition rule. Do not place it beside the till: it would add to the 8–9 am congestion and reduce sightlines. The trade-off is losing one window-adjacent table, which is acceptable because the pod is a legal requirement.
3. Evaluate whether 28 seats is realistic. Show your reasoning with area calculations.
Read the worked answer
Start with 62 m² gross. Deduct: counter 4.0 × 0.7 = 2.8 m²; kitchenette 3.0 × 2.0 = 6.0 m²; accessible pod 2.2 × 2.2 = 4.8 m²; circulation at 20% of gross = 12.4 m². Remaining for seating = 62 − 2.8 − 6.0 − 4.8 − 12.4 = 36 m². At a tight café standard of 1.2 m² per seat (including share of circulation), 36 ÷ 1.2 = 30 seats. At a more comfortable 1.5 m² per seat, 36 ÷ 1.5 = 24 seats. So 28 is possible only at the tight end, and the 1.2 m² figure assumes chairs are tucked and the queue does not enter the seating zone. Given the 40/hour peak and the heritage constraint that prevents removing the counter, I would propose 22 seated covers plus a 3 m standing ledge for 6–8 people. This meets the client's social intent without creating the collisions that already occur. Recommend reducing to 24 maximum if the client insists on table service.