All good things must come to an end...

Its been a long two weeks of production for the final presentation of my project.  All the process forged into the model, then the drawings is complete and now the semester is over for this studio after the final critique last night.  I feel that I had many break throughs in my process work, but the summation of the process of my final design did not compliment the full potential my project could have had.  My 'rational' thinking held me back, I think, in project that could have been more than just a building.  My 'eureka moment'  hit me just a little too late, although the critiques I received helped in my understanding.  This was by far the most I've ever learned in a studio and I appreciate the patience Luis had for my constant reverting to rational thinking most of the time.  Here's my final presentation layout and some model pictures.

Reinventing the Theater

After much thought, process, and a few words from mr. Archipegster I have come up with my final design.  It consists of 5 main floors (each main floor has level change to it) one above grade, one on-grade, and 3 below.  Entrance is down a ramp starting on grade and going below or also in between the theaters which are the above grade elements.  The circulation is central, unfortunately not drawn in on the plans shown below, but it emphasizes the vertical tension in movement just like my site has horizontal tension between the corners of the existing buildings.  The archive is the most buried levels (along with the mechanical) with light getting in from some light wells.  The first level below grade contains the library, admin offices, one of the lobby/gallery spaces, etc.  the other lobby/gallery is directly above between the theaters.  All the floor heights and changes in level (for floor and ceiling) are reflections of the "bars" of program crossing over one another or what is happening above.  Some bars combine to form larger storage spaces like the archive.  The theaters are my most recent epiphany and they are my reinvention of viewing cinema.  Instead of massing blocks like I could not get out of before ('remember...') I used the bars to generate a new form that also emphasizes the forces and the tension of my site.  They also promote the idea of new experience every visit because every seat will have a different experience of viewing the screen.  The only thing I feel I'm struggling with now is to use my original playing with the grade idea or refine it to the bars again and turn the ground up like in Matt's drawdel and Gianni Pattena's sketch.  Any further suggestions and critiques would be helpful before I finish my model...

quick sketch of a section through the theater bars; the bars would raise up at different heights

Matt Pegolo's critique w/me (some drawing ideas too)

Drawings Without Paper

Lately we've been experimenting with different mediums and materials to create drawings.  Wire, wood, wax, plaster, resin, and concrete were all materials available to create these "drawings without paper".  My final two drawings are comprised of plaster and wire as their mediums.  I chose to "draw" my underground floor plan in a plaster cast and a section axon of a chunk of my building in a wire frame.  Here's the results:

FINALLY!

After much frustration, aggravation and going in circles with designs I finally discovered my design...now to make it fully functioning.  I started with a little fun to get my mind into a different state by taking a piece of corrugated cardboard and crumpling it up.  I covered it in spray paint and stamped it on trace to make some cool designs, I even threw some ink on white paper to loosen the tension in my head.  Finally, I cam up with a model that accentuated and took full advantage of the constricted corner condition that is my site. Introducing ground plane shifts, ramps, and climbing vertical elements led to my current intervention and realization.

Don't force it, Discover it

After much thought, process, and sketching I finally have discovered a building form that pertains to my conceptual ideas.  It derives from my collage-strip model, the first sectional sketch inspired by my cubism landscape, and some ideas taken from our cinema viewing session.  The building is created from a 'strip' that rises up, over, and back down to create the basic form.  The abstract shapes delineate the site and create spaces and places through their relations to the ground, existing buildings, and each other.

Post MidCrit

So its been a while since my last post so I have a lot of info to cover pre- and post-midreview of my intervention.  After completing the collage and basic model I began to design in section to create a realization with the program included in the concept.  I wanted to create the linear, strip-like quality I achieved in the collage with the view diagram/drawdel.  My first sectional sketch was created by using the walls of the cubism landscape model and perceiving them as floor plates in section instead of walls in plan. I continued with a sketch inspired by the small model I posted pictures of with the collage; an underground scheme that pushed up through the ground into a tower.  The drafted section that was presented at my mid review took a different approach and dug into the ground instead of 'erupting' up, but it lost the linear quality and power that I generated in my collage even with my integration of the 'strips' as the structure and even light screens.

After hearing the insightful comments of the guest critiques I know the direction I have to move in and I am looking to infuse my stronger concept into the plan and section of this intervention.  It started with my unfinished model for the mid review when it landed sideways on my desk after I threw it.  It had a linear quality that started to kickstart my rethinking of my design.  Also, the movies watched in studio on tuesday have given me some ideas for rethinking certain spaces with integration of light, objects, and portals to direct views, focus, and even circulation.

Intervention

I finally finished my collage after restarting it because my first attempt was not what I was looking for.  I started the final collage by cutting up strips of any grass in pictures of the site and then proceeded to place them one at a time by making a decision, placing it and leaving it.  I then moved on to the buildings which are adjacent to my intervention's site.  it transitions from grass, to the pathways, to the buildings, to the sky. Something I discovered through this was that the green aspect continues from the ground to the sky through the trees.  Here's the final product:

I proceeded to create a basic model for a conceptual idea I have using aspects of the collage.  It focuses on the brick continuing up the facade of the buildings.  I would like to translate this idea into my building but with grass and greenery.  My concept is to have the ground 'ripple' as it gets close to the building corners and then rise up out of the ground in the empty space between them.

Too Polite!

My architecture studio had a critique today of our three general designs based on cubism, our seeing machines, and our site analysis/mapping.  After this crit I realize that I need to push my ideas farther and revert back to my previous models for reference in my building design.  My three schemes all held to existing lines of the site and were "too polite" for what I need to achieve.  Cubism was executed with an above grade scheme, seeing machines was approached with a below grade scheme, and mapping was done through an on grade scheme.  Now I need to combine some of the good aspects of each design and push them farther than the rational ideas.  Shards is a perfect word to start my new combined design around as I look into a way to fight horizontal circulation tension at the two buildings' corners.  Is it possible to fix a problem of tension by introducing a new form of tension?

Site Drawdel

After visiting the site and getting a better idea of the spaces I moved on to try and combine the diagrams I have as suggested by my professor.  I lightly drafted the regulating lines constructed from the building edges onto the strathmore and cut out the building and street profiles as they are boundaries.  I mounted the strathmore to black foamcore for rigidity and used my 'vision' diagram that showed where the possible site could be within view of the Carpenter Center as what I would raise and lower in my drawdel.  I debated whether the 'ramping' of this element should get higher as it gets to the points of constricted circulation or if it should start high and become part of the drawing plane at these points.  Inclining the paper up to the point of constricted circulation would reflect the idea of it being harder to go up a ramp than down just like going through a tight space rather than an open one.  On the other hand declining the strathmore to the points of constricted circulation would reflect almost a solution for the problem and it was also a more graphical method of showing open circulation vs. constricted circulation.  I chose the second of the two choices creating a decline as circulation became more constricted.  Finally, I placed the actual sidewalk circulation over the drawdel to show contrast to Harvard's building grid and also the current circulation...although it was not necessarily a contributor to the main idea behind the site drawdel.

Choosing a Site

After breaking the overall campus down by diagrams I have come to a better understanding of the possible sites.  One thing that I noticed quickly was that Harvard's buildings are all on the same orthogonal grid except for the few that hold the road edge.  I also noted the points where the circulation is compressed such as at building corner relations or adjacent buildings.  This fragmentation caused by circulation dividing the buildings and open ground is depicted in the third diagram down.  A quick attempt at inverse massing of the buildings was made as well, as a tool to understand the ground plane.  I think developing the inverse massing diagram more could help in a further understanding of the idea that the buildings and objects on the circulation plane subconsciously guide you in getting to your destination.  The fact that the mass of the building going into the earth instead of out of the earth opposes the safety issue in the traveling to a destination also adds a completely different feeling if you had to pass through one of the compressed circulation areas.

Site Possibilities

Constricted Circulation

Fragmentation

Inversion of Massing

I'm going to Harvard

After concluding our cubist analysis of drawings, models, seeing machines, etc. the task at hand is choosing a site on the Harvard campus that is within viewing proximity of the Carpenter Center.  My first mistake was thinking what I was going to put on the site and then picking the place to put it.  After my desk crit today I realize (aka was told) to think about what emotion/feeling I want to achieve and choose part of the campus within the criteria of viewing the Carpenter Center that evokes the sensation.  The question is...'what is the question?' - meaning what am I trying to answer about the site as my reason for selecting a specific area.  I have decided to focus on the idea of a Continuum as the question and now hope to find the answer through my analysis with the Continuum in mind.

Vision Machine cont.

I've created the two viewing machines necessary for the project. The one to view the model reflects the idea of Cubism through the breaking up of the image by reflections of mirrors.  The other to see nothingness was a little more difficult to come up with but the model was easier to construct.  I decided to go with the idea of 'nothingness' meaning 'emptiness' and created an empty space to view through the machine.