Building #1 Floor Plan

This floor plan is for the more typical structures. More specifically, this floor plan is for the building closest to the street. I am sticking with an all glazed building, with limited hard perimeter wall. I originally had the stair and building mechanical spaces located in the center of the floor plan. I have since pulled those components outward and away from the center. The reason being is that when those components were in the middle, it disrupted the flow of traffic and even possibly those actual sales transactions.

I am thinking that the view completely through the space is important to maintain. I have taken the idea of connecting the structures together with something and developed it into a walkway connecting the three more rigid structures together with it. This will allow the user to travel between the structures on an easier level.

Building #2 Floor Plan

This floor plan represents the rotated and suspended building. My floor plans are so simple, it feels like I am missing something. A curved stair instead of a 90 degree stair? That would help tie in the free flow nature of the exterior plaza stair to the rigid structure of each building. Each floor is about the right size for one tenant, which brings the traffic flow question up. Meaning, how do people get to the second floor without interfering with the first (suspended floor)?

Are these floor plates to small? 45’x45’ is the perimeter.

Site Analysis Board

I am in the process of adding a site plan as well as a site section.

Concept Statement Board

Re-Cap of the Boston Intensive - Video

Re-Cap of the Boston Intensive

CR: What are the materials?
Response: Glass structures w/ slats

Tom: How does the cube float?
Response: Small structures

Herb: You are subverting the original nature of the statue. I hope you are doing this purposely. Other thing, modern edge, with apple. 10-30 years ago is dated. Allow the buildings to be eternally changeable, and control the site plan.

Lady: The two first buildings are the strongest. Maybe these are how you experience the site. Maybe you sink the back two. Is it hip enough to put a stair on the floating building or an elevator room.

Herb: Building at street-scape needs to draw people in. The ones in back not sure what programming could this be.

Enno: Since the two back buildings are small, maybe you can combine the four into two.

Herb: Combine in a way to have a relationship, keep the cubic nature but combine the structure.

CR: What’s the relationship to the food court and your building?

Herb: Burning man site festival. Take a look.

Tom: First to celebrate street level to building. That’s a good thing. Not sure what prerogative is.

Herb: Public has a multiplicity of options.

Tom: Stair, no connection between the objects on the site. There seems to be no sense of what the buildings are and how to get into them. What do the punched opening get at? Like to see 4 site plans because all are different. Need an experience into the building and then we can look back at the stair.

Herb: You have expressed the experience of the site by the benches. Maybe that can be carried out through out the space.

The Countdown Begins...

See you all in just a few days...
Good luck traveling...

Task #1 - Final: Graceful

Task #1 - Final: Nature

Task #1 - Final: Deception

Group Two: Illusion

Illusion / Mystery:

The second group of images that was strongly evident is what I call the act of illusion. What I mean by this is that of a sense of illusion, mystery, “how in the world did they…” I have a deep engineering background and understand structure and some of the challenges behind the structure. These designs have that aspect. I like designs that make me sit there a try to analyze the structure, determine where the structure is, how the structural loading is handled. All of this while the design is still a major component to what I am looking at as well.

Some people may argue that this kind of design is a waste of money. My response to that theory and questioning is that the resources, knowledge, and desire are out there why let it go to waste. As designers and architects, I feel that we should continue to challenge ourselves and push our comfort level each and every time.

These designs all have a combination of points listed above that I am beginning to look for in a design.

As a note, one of the designs (Vontz Center for Molecular Design, designed by Frank Gehry) is on the campus that I received my bachelors degree from, The University of Cincinnati.

Group One: Nature

Nature:

When I was in the process of compiling the images for this task, I compiled images that I liked and could have a connection with and even make a comment on. Going in to selecting the pictures I did not have a notion as to what I was looking for, just choosing what I felt was right. After compiling the images, I organized them and it was almost clear as to the three groups of feeling and connection. Surprisingly.

The first group is that of nature. After looking at a lot of images and realizing my personal experiences, it was a pleasure to find designs that utilized the surrounding site. So many times a designer will completely modify the site to match the building. In a lot of ways I like the theory of having the challenge to design a building to flow with the site. It is almost to have a respect for the site and the surrounding nature.

In all of the images that were included in this group all of the designs have the appearance that none of the surrounding site was touched in the construction or design phases of these projects. The designs all flow with the surrounding terrain. The designs put the client/tourist/critic directly in the flow of nature. All of these experiences should be a consideration in design when possible.

The other fascinating aspect that I found between these images is that they are from different aspects of architecture. Two of the designs are residential, one is commercial, and the last is that of public interest.

Lets hope this is a good first stab and in the end clean it up a little.

Understanding the reading of John Berger

I am not sure if I completely understand what John Berger is trying to achieve in the essay that he wrote titled "The White Bird." Hopefully someone can help me with this. I am thinking that what he is trying to say is summed up in the following paragraph:

The aesthetic emotion we feel before a man-made object - such as the white bird with which I started - is a derivative of the emotion we feel before nature. The white bird is an attempt to translate a message received from a real bird. All the languages of art have been developed as an attempt to transform the instantaneous into the permanent. Art supposes that beauty in not an exception - is not in despite of - but is the basis for an order.

I think that what John Berger is trying to say is that art and nature are the primary basis for what should be utilized for, in our case, design.

I am probably going to have to re-read this one...

The BEGINNING

So this is the start of it...
Lets see how it goes!!!