The final review comments were very helpful and allowed me to take a step back. I over edited my presentation at the end and this was not helpful.     Much of the early design sketches and diagrams were not represented in my presentation and questions were asked that would have related well to some early studies.    In terms of program, my concept was convincing and generally well received but my representation fell short of what could have been the more powerful part of the presentation. The massing was also convincing and representative of what I was trying to express with the path. I will look to really get into the plan layout of the spaces to determine rational adjacencies and ways to display the cycle.    In the next semester I will look to improve on the presentations and be more rigorous in what I show and how I show it.   Main items to focus on next semester: Structural systems of the two masses Program layout and adjacencies What is a curating program? What spaces contain this program? How can the exterior exhibit spaces be more powerful Presentation preparation

The Next Steps

Sorry for the delay, I've been trying to catch up on family, friend, and makeup time at the office.

Overall, I was pleased with the constructive feedback from the reviewers on my project, and I am confident that the next phases will allow me to develop a deeper approach to constructing an argument that is self satisfying, fruitful and rich with stimulation.

I felt my presentation needs some finer tuning, and the feedback I received to clarify my argument was something that I have been trying to absorb. The delineation of stilted vs. flooded is an architectural language/parti I plan on carrying throughout the development of the site and interior mechanics of the building. I want my project to be thought of as one with the landscape, and as one that does not fight the climate change, but accepts it for what it is. My project is about the change, its projection, and the potential long term solutions. Climate mediation is a global concern, and I want my project to serve as a catalyst for discussion for the resilence of waterfront cities. 

In efforts to refine my analysis, I must take a more rigorous approach in researching the projected sea level rise (in other words, lets get real with the numbers). What does 1 - 2 meters really look like in section? How does the spaces and activities change as the water is rising? When does it start to become a problem and where/ what does it immediately effect? What does a site model of rising currents look like? Does the model change over time? I feel this will help me with my narrative and analytical thinking of the site.

I also want to investigate the library program much further. What really happens in this building? What specific research occurs and how is it different than a typical research library? I plan to develop my narrative, and start to realize potential client(s). Recently I have attended a conference hosted by the BSA and Urban Land Institute "Preparing Boston for Climage Change and Sea Rise". The conference led me to develop connections and establish repores with people in Boston also concerned with this issue. Perhaps some of these people can become my potential clients.

The attached image is one of my renderings from the presentation on May 17th, 2012. Although it was a bold move, I plan to use it as a reference in the next steps.

Integration

I’m attaching this sketch I did half way into the semester, when I was still very concept oriented, I think that at some point, with rush for reviews, I have neglected the concept of integration of nature into the building, my initial thoughts of bridging and looking at the larger scale connections have not been expressed enough in the current design, and so, I want to take a step back, to reevaluate how my building integrates with its urban environment, and how I create an environmental impact. Taking inspiration from ecotones, as examples of connecting districts and reaching out to make a better biodiversified system, with my building as the seed from where it grows. 

Final Review

The Final review gave feedback to three key points of project:

   

    1.  How is tempo/rhythm portrayed inside the library?  Are there differences between the patterns of program both aesthetically and use?

    2.  How does sound manipulate the spaces within the library?  Can you incorporate tempo changes to the layout of programmatic spaces using the differences of sound?

    3.  The facade of the Library was very simple.  Very different from the way you expressed 'rhythm' on the facade at the mid-term.  You should try and find a middle ground between your expressions.

In moving forward, I am still sketching interior tempo concepts of program layout and rhythmic changes in material, light, visual connection and sound.  I understand that we are not to redesign our projects but I do believe change is going to come in a progressive state of evolvement.  I am pleased with the concept of my program of a library that catalogues the city's musicians to make them available for browsing/collaboration.  Although there is an abundance of musicians n the city, I find that t is still difficult to locate people to jam with, and this is unfortunate.  My musicians resource library will provide the community and appropriate attitude to allow musicians to come out of the wood work and express their creativity on a platform to the city.

I thought the review did well to push back on my formal exploration this semester.  The decisions I made to logistically solve my building began to stray from the initial intent of the project.  The building is a grand move to expose the urban section but only does so through minor glass slits that show layers of dirt.  I basically need to be more aggressive.  I need to actively address the elements of infrastructure, history, and expression.  Each element needs its own space to make the statement I hope will resensitize the use.  Rather than a library of expression with some exposed duct work and pipes, fringed with windows to dirt (trying to hit expression, infrastructure, and history respectively) I need to explore what it would mean to inhabit, adjacentize [new awesome architectural word I invented], and mix the spaces within the urban section I find most important.

The above sketch is an exploration of how each of these urban elements can become part of the same architectural intervention.  My next steps are to do some mappings of site infrastructure (man holes, gas, electric lines, etc.), expressive spaces (what other forms of city expression are there around the site/greater boston), and get specific geological data (so I have something to inform the depth of my building/specific conditions to expose within.)  In addition, I need to put some thought into the kind of library this is.  I have been ruminating on the idea of 'a library of the city.'  I think this has potential but needs organization.  Anybody let me know what you think.

p.s. Everyone lets get Arlen to not cut his hair until the final review.  20 bucks a person...it will be worth it to watch Fabio present a library on climate change.  Trust me.

Arlen...thats 160 dollars, think about all the zap a gap you could buy.                 

Next steps:

-See if the spaces are sized appropriately to do what I want them too. If not, re-size appropriately.

-Determine more specifically the way in which the conversation of  the form of the building manifests itself. Is the conversation balanced? Should it be?

-Think more specifically about the environmental forces and how that will impact the building. (ie. sun, wind, ventilation, etc.

I feel like the image posted represents well our studios approach this semester. For a given Library program there was very little traditional "Library" going on. I even innovatively misspelled innovation in the sketch.

Next steps:

I have found this review to be most constructive as the critics had proposed many interesting suggestions for me to move forward. To summarize, I believe that I can work on the presentation and the graphics as these were not very clear depicting the user as he/she moves through the space as these spaces allow and limit the precession. Mapping the actual sequence of spaces and its relation would be my next diagram;  it would lay out the program spaces, illuminating/ separating  circulation as it should differ for every user group. Second point was to question the site edges and the relationship my building may react to it. This , in turn may reposition my structure, allowing me to have a better connection to the ground and water.

Semester I Final Review - BP

What I find most exciting about taking our designs to the next level is not just in reaching a greater technical depth but also the experiential depth we have the opportunity to explore.  In previous studios, I have always felts that only 20% of what I was thinking made it up on the board. Granted, the fast pace and pressure of this last semester definitely allowed me to produce more "evidence" of design than usual, I still feel there is a lot left in the tank. 

Next semester is where we can truly burn the rest of the tank and see what our designs are made of.  Because, when I look at these renderings...I want better than that!

Final [Mid] Review!

We had our final review on Monday, which was actually our midreview - since we have all of next semester to keep working on these projects! There was a lot of great discussion, and lots of great work up on the walls. Congrats, guys!