Issue: Today, most cultures pursue a more or les stationary life style.
However, with the arrival of the sustainability revolution, our world is once
again leaning towards more flexible living environments; thus encouraging a new
form of existence. To be sustainable, to design for the changing fashions and
increasing growth of our dynamic cities, architecture must become more
adaptable, flexible and less fixed.
Position: This concept provides a driver for this
sustainable revolution to produce architectural proposals that have
transformable qualities that can make physical and/or experiential spatial
changes over a span of time.
What does it mean to be flexible? Is it designing architecture that possesses morphological qualities - creating new spaces, formations both on the interior and exterior faces for the different uses? What are these uses and how do they overlap?
How do you design for change without designing emptiness? What elements within architecture need to possess this changing quality?
Challenge: Controlling flexibility | Creating architecture that is less fixed, more flexible, adaptable but with control, a predictable nature. Perhaps - creating flexibility within permanence | controlled barriers?
Studio Sketches: Site Analysis
Initial Sketches
Site: Fort York Car Park.
Access points x2
Historical Landmark.
Flat land sloping down below the Gardner Highway.
Old edge of Toronto. - Water's Edge -
Reasons for chosen site: Mixed use area. A combination of history |Museum|, live/work (Condos) Medium to high rise. Gardner Highway. A place for entertainment - outdoor & Indoor events/festivals (New Visitor's Centre) already multi use building located on the site - mainly a museum - drawing people in to the importance of the site and Toronto's development around that site. Any alteration to this site is therefore in direct relationship to that of the old Fort York. - A place of permanence that will remain untouched.
The site stands today as a key step in Toronto's development as a City, a City that started somewhere but never stops growing/changing.
Design Proposal: A performing arts centre with controlled elements within its flexible make up. Perhaps this centre will work with a given timeline like that of the 'Fun House' project [?] A structure that adapts to the seasons? Type of events? Number of occupants?
A playful flexible structure that 'dances|morphs' with that of its performers and intrigued audience within a rather permanent sense of place. - historical Fort York. -
Concept Models to come.
Strategy 1. Further understanding the difference between adaptability and flexibility. Designing Adaptable|Flexible uses of space within more controlled parameters...An exterior facade of permanence with a playful interior of diversity or architecture that moves like a breathing organism?
Aim: avoid designing emptiness.Permanence/control within this adaptable sense of place.
Idea: Slinky Architecture. Concept models to come.
Strategy 2. To relate back to this revolution of sustainability, the design will focus on the choice of design materials and energy independent strategies.So not only is the architecture sustainable with its adaptable nature, the sourcing of materials, production, maintenance and means of operating will all be taken into consideration with regards to its level of sustainability.
Strategy 3. Dealing with sense of place & connectivity. Connecting the structure, as 'temporary' or non-fixed as it may be, with its given surroundings (its untouchable/permanent historic site) and its changing users.
Case studies thus far..
You will need to identify the following:
ReplyDelete-are you working to a specific performing art or a general all-encompassing program?
-what scale of operation are you operating at (for example, blackbox theatre or full opera company)?
-how will this combination of program and typology be utilized effectively to showcase your thesis ideas and strategies developed in the P1 exercise?
A few additional comments:
-the scale of the site and that shown in your sketches will quickly have to be examined as the site is quite large and the drawing you have sketched out indicates quite a large building relative to the Gardiner
-so far the sketch that you have presented is more focused on circulation which (though is a relevant component of the design) does not immediately resonate with key architectural ideas you raised in P1; try focusing on how you can use the project to really go into detail in showcasing your architectural thesis ideas
-each site is quite unique and it is unclear as to how you are connecting and drawing upon the context factors such as the historic dimensions of Fort York, the challenge of the Gardiner, the potential development emerging in the area, and the relationship to the open spaces of the city
-perhaps it might be better to start with the architectural ideas first before sprawling out beyond the site