So I'm hoping for one last crit before I start producing diagrams and presentation material for Interim. Here are the perspectives of my Third spaces. On the ground floor, the third space is defined by changes in elevation. The entire building sits 200mm above grade, with 3 steps along the Gould street facade that counter the future Snohetta buildings stairs. They act as an outdoor third space in the summer, when the sliding doors open up to support greater public interaction. Another reason I wanted to raise the third space is because I wanted to create a sense of street security, with eyes on the street (Jane Jacobs). The mezzanine that over looks the first floor will have tables, unlike the bottom Third space, as it is meant to be a quieter study space, away from the street.
I realize my DMZ office space is weak, and Would like some suggestion to fix it. I want to keep an open concept atmosphere, and the conference rooms to over look to third space (possibly more colours, for a more creative, dynamic atmosphere).
I hope my residential spacial planning makes sense, and is logical. Not much has changed since the last iteration.
Along the facade, is my kinetic sunshading system. Each residential unit will have 2 or 3 panels that can be individually controlled from the inside, allowing the users to control privacy and lighting, as well as constantly adapting and changing the facade.
I also need a transfer beam at the cantilever by the Gould street entrance but have no idea how those work..
The immediate response to this would be that the design is still schematic as it will need a higher level of refinement on the architectural properties; though it is a decent amount of work, we can make it better:
ReplyDelete-seriously consider using AESS (architecturally exposed structural steel) as it accomplishes few things: A) adds a level of detail to the design that would likely make it more robust, B)encourage you to design with a bit more character and aesthetic energy, C) prepare you for the next phase of P3, and D) allow you to flesh out a greater steel entry for the ACSA competition
-AESS offers a great deal of exquisite detailing and depth that showcases well in competitions; one need only look at the more successful P1 projects for a precedent
-AESS also opens up great opportunity for really interesting design (currently this reads like a generic KPMB office block); take on some design initiative which I suspect you really wish to engage with
-your interior spaces are bland and do not really serve as a testament to the nature of the design possibilities via materiality, construction type, and even functional programming; one should be able to read into the spaces what is going on at a base level (i.e. congregation, circulation, display, isolation, etc.) without the need for furnishings and people; there are instances where this happens but some of your interior spaces are not really strong, most notably the last interior rendering
-you may find that quickly sketching over the base renders from Revit/Rhino/3DS/VRay will help you develop better qualities of space (i.e. your retail and DMZ spaces)
-please ensure that you follow real architectural drawing convention (NOT the quasi-convention presentation drawings from Revit); things such as drawing scale detail, open to above indicators, etc.)
-what is going on in the amenity space your have provided (residential floors)? you still must articulate the difference between those spaces and the typical work space on each plate
-this is the quintessential layer cake Revit project (as demonstrated by the repetition of floor plates and highlighted by the elevation); again, try your best to liberate yourself from this to be a designer as opposed to simply a proficient CAD technician; there is much to be said about design ambition here
-the space that your create with the inverted ziggurat overhang is quite high and one must question what effect this would actually have on the typical pedestrian/student; it could be interesting to see the openness/variable relationship between interior and exterior on the Gould Street elevation (i.e. garage doors, pivot systems, etc.) that make for a better response to the complement to the Snohetta project as well as general engagement of student life in the Third Place
-your Third place has potential but again, it lacks clarity; though there are lounge furnishings, and you have shown the volume of the space, it remains vague and no different than a poor student simply articulating a boxed area with "Lounge" on a floor plan; you are better than that
-this needs a strong section that outlines the real qualities of the double height spaces and mezzanine
-your Third place feels a bit awkward especially in the corridor condition with the columns; it seems as though at busy peak periods there will be clustering of people wondering who put columns right in the middle of the East-West circulation
-not a big fan of the idea that colours will create "a more creative, dynamic atmosphere"; that is a naive and superficial notion that I think should never be said again or better refined; it is hard to believe that colour makes people creative
ReplyDelete-the facade system you continuously refer to is sounding more and more like a design crutch as you have constantly been referring to it as dynamic and changing; this is no different than looking at the elevation of a condo and noticing that different windows have shades drawn between units; is that any different from what you are proposing?; and if not, then why are you making such a big deal out of it; even if physical elements are moving, the geometry that emerges really is not all to impressive and your design seems to be reliant on the veneer of cladding as your "design" as opposed to the architecture; once again, look to designing beyond the currently under-developed tool set you have with software exclusivity
-we can talk about structure at a desk review but please do yourself a favor and consult some AESS precedents (i.e. Foster, Rogers, 80's high-tech, Herzog & de Meuron, Coop Himmelb(l)au)