http://www.new-territories.com/roche2002bis.htm
toyo-ito-sendai-mediatheque
http://blog.svconline.com/briefingroom/2010/09/20/lightviper-goes-long-for-chivas-stadium-guadalajara-mexico/
http://paavo.tumblr.com/post/1438304915
http://dlarch.xanga.com/702462886/toyo-ito-sendai-mediatheque/
Ariel
ReplyDeleteI have been familiarizing myself with your precedent research and site analysis so I might catch up to where you are at in the progression of your work.
Just fyi, the above links are not working.
I see a lot of energy in your precedent selection, as you've chosen some very interesting pieces to use as inspiration. Many of these are very unique in their context, in that they sort of stand out on their own, such as a bridge or stadium, on a cleared site without a great deal of context to which one would need to adhere. They are, in essence, singular sculpted pieces. I would challenge you to look into precedent work of similar energies and dynamic creation, even from the same designers, yet placed within a more diversely layered context such as is the neighborhood surrounding your site. How do people relate to this piece as they walk by on the sidwalk? As the traffic passes by, what is the approach like? When you're inside, taking part in the activities, what sense of the neighborhood and street do you take just by looking out? Think Interaction... To help with this I will refer to your concept models (again, I am not exactly certain of where you should be at this moment, so bare with me). Your models are beginning to reflect the zoning restrictions (height and area at least in proportion) of the site, and your inspiration from precedents is definitely starting to show. Be careful to fall into the act of trying to find form, or style rather, without first really getting a good understanding of how your program will dictate the outcome of your structural leaps. Concept model #3 is the first to catch my attention, as you lift the pieces off the 'base', suggesting cover, perhaps circulation beneath a plane. #9 begins to take on the idea that the program beneath will require some larger open spaces. I also see some intersting possibilities developing as far as materials. Have you given much thought to this yet? These are the moves that will help you start to define your program. I feel that Concept model #6 is a sharp departure from the flow you had with the others, perhaps I'd put concept model #7 in that category as well. Please keep your inspiration going and find a consistent direction of space discovery, just maybe begin to define actual spaces and apertures based on your chosen program and driven from your bubble diagrams for planning.
Have you visited any of the precedent works you've displayed? I've some firsthand knowledge of Santiago Calatrava and his work, namely the MAM (Milwaukee Art Museum) and Oriente Station in Lisbon. In reference to the station in Lisbon, there is an interesting dichotomy in understanding of this work, depending on where a body is located related to the station. From a distance Calatrava's work reaches up and expresses motion, almost effortlessly, yet when you pass down and through, exiting the subway for example, the feeling is quite cavernous and anchoring, due to the driving program behind this multi-use station. Milwaukee is similar in that I really only feel the motion, or skeletal nature of the structure while in the main concourse. The exhibit halls and interior spaces take on, once again, that grounded sensation of solid anchoring form. I think this is a positive outcome for each, for they are spectacular works. My point is only that in regards to your precedent image studies, many are taken from a distance. Be certain to get a true sense for the other side of this work, that anchoring aesthetic which is derived from their particular nature and typology as as structure. Looking forward to seeing your work progress. Best. acg
Ariel the links above do not work
ReplyDeleteThe websites should work now.
ReplyDeletethank you for letting me know the issue.
I see you're interested in open planning and alternate structural systems.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking of the seattle library and the toyo ito building. The magnetic sculpture with its all-over attraction of adjacent particles also reflects the nonhierarchical blending of program elements that characterize the other two precedents.
The potential for multi-functional space and spatial overlap in the sports facility will present some challenges, because there are practical requirements for separation of the functions in such a facility.
I can think of one precedent that succeeds to some degree in realizing this concept is the Padres baseball park, in San Diego - Petco Park. There the concourses are open to the outside and enable views into the field as well. the overlap allows the general public outside the park to experience a sense of the park's interior space, and occupants of an adjacent hotel can even glimpse a significant extent of the playing field.
the notion that the spectacle of the sports field in Soho might overlap with the surrounding environment is intriguing.
The structure at Petco is quite prosaic, however - even deliberately old-fashioned. there is some potential for gaining greater transparency and so more spatial ambiguity with the use of tensile structures or other more unusual methods demonstrated in the structural precedents you have selected previously.
I like that you've been looking at the Sendai model, as this represents a program that while it addresses a complex and more rigid urban context to it's exterior, opens up and develops a new paradigm of circulation and occupation of space. I think you'll have success in your research to find more examples that approach their planning in a similar way. In my experience, one of the most dynamic buildings in New York remains the Guggenheim. I point this example out primarily for the way FLW addressed ciculation, in that he made it an active part of the overall experience. The program of exposition space and the movement are one. Beyond this, draw what conclusions you may, but I feel your site and program have a similar opportunity. Im thinking back to concept model #3 where you raise the plane off the ground, and what comes to mind is the idea of program spaces, circulation happening simbiotically with the larger sports arena. Where am I going with this?.. well, given the nature of your program, and what we gain from your bubble diagram, for the sake of argument, let's submit that the field and sports store (think merchandising for revenue and the importance therein) represent the anchoring elements. I would say an equally large portion of that program are the white spaces you have in between the context-bubbles, which is the glue, the connective tissue if you will. I think you will ultimately capture the dynamic nature of models such as sendai, while benefiting from the open, tensile structural systems of say Calatrava if there were some focus on having your main programmatic elements (field, store) in continual contact with the users, regardless of where they are in the complex. That said, it would be interesting to see some exploration in this intertwining of uses, as opposed to cut-and-dry separation by partition of each from the other. I am really curious about how you'll develop all these neccessary program elements into an arrangement that remains consistent with the tensile nature and open plan ideas of many of your precedents.
ReplyDeleteYou've got some really great potential here, Ariel. I am curious, which of your concept models currently represents your direction of thinking? I ask because between structures like sendai and the calatrava models, there is a sense of weightlessness, while as some of the other examples (the tumbler model) comes to mind, have a feeling of heaviness and enclosure. Good luck. acg.