Peter, What I am missing is your intention for the project. I do not know how to judge which bubble diagram is the 'better' one b/c I don't know YOUR parameters. The link to the water might be a good move in one scenario, but exactly the wrong move in another. I would suggest that you need the intention to start making these important decisions.
My thoughts on intention: It comes in 3 parts, Why? What? How?
Why: this explains (in 1-2 sentences) why you are even doing the project. This you have in your early writings.
What: this is the intention. What drives your design work? What makes your project YOUR project, and not just the design of the civic center? (ideally 1-2 sentences)
How: how will your intention be achieved in the design work? Not specifically (b/c you don't know that yet) but rather what architectural tools do you plan to use to achieve the intention? (view, connection to landscape i.e. river, invitation to community). Ideally these have some relationship to the ideas of the intention. (1-2 sentences)
I would suggest thinking of this piece as a basic description of the project. If you were not the designer, but if another designer were going to do this work, what would you give him/her as a guide toward your intention and ideals?
Maybe most of this is somewhere in the postings, and I just don't see it. But I would argue that it wants to be evident, both for critics, but especially for you.
****
Site analysis is clear and concise, good work. Clearly leads you to your conclusions, yet you are willing to look beyond and cross the tracks, wonderful.
****
Program needs analysis. If you are making bubble diagrams you are speaking to relationships (don't forget that the site, the festival, the river are also part of these relationships). I believe you need to analyze at least the major relationships to best understand how they are working. The relationships are not just bubbles in plan.
****
Finally, I am new this the blog thing, so if I have missed some information please point me in the right direction.
1 comment:
Peter,
What I am missing is your intention for the project. I do not know how to judge which bubble diagram is the 'better' one b/c I don't know YOUR parameters. The link to the water might be a good move in one scenario, but exactly the wrong move in another. I would suggest that you need the intention to start making these important decisions.
My thoughts on intention:
It comes in 3 parts, Why? What? How?
Why: this explains (in 1-2 sentences) why you are even doing the project. This you have in your early writings.
What: this is the intention. What drives your design work? What makes your project YOUR project, and not just the design of the civic center? (ideally 1-2 sentences)
How: how will your intention be achieved in the design work? Not specifically (b/c you don't know that yet) but rather what architectural tools do you plan to use to achieve the intention? (view, connection to landscape i.e. river, invitation to community). Ideally these have some relationship to the ideas of the intention. (1-2 sentences)
I would suggest thinking of this piece as a basic description of the project. If you were not the designer, but if another designer were going to do this work, what would you give him/her as a guide toward your intention and ideals?
Maybe most of this is somewhere in the postings, and I just don't see it. But I would argue that it wants to be evident, both for critics, but especially for you.
****
Site analysis is clear and concise, good work. Clearly leads you to your conclusions, yet you are willing to look beyond and cross the tracks, wonderful.
****
Program needs analysis. If you are making bubble diagrams you are speaking to relationships (don't forget that the site, the festival, the river are also part of these relationships). I believe you need to analyze at least the major relationships to best understand how they are working. The relationships are not just bubbles in plan.
****
Finally, I am new this the blog thing, so if I have missed some information please point me in the right direction.
Thanks.
Eric Stark
Post a Comment