As TEDU Architecture, for all the juries we have jury buddy to take notes for us during the jury. Jury buddy has an important role for the one that in the jury, because during the jury we are not fully capable to understand what was said in jury. So, we have jury buddies. For final jury of ARCH202 I was jury buddy of Dilara Aldemir. You can read my report for her and for more detailed information, because I think her design was good, you can go her blog.
Her site is Mardin and the road is on the north, semi-detached house is on the west, detached houses are on the east, panoramic view is on the south. She has 3 main references. Firstly, she quoted ribs from Vennesla Library. This library was formed by ribs. This ribs provide circulation in the library and also have programmatic element as bookshelf and reading area. Second reference is Bibliotheca Alexandrina’s flowing idea between the levels. This library is like amphitheathre. Every floor has a relationship between the each other. That’s why she thought that “What if the ribs of Vennesla defines the different level of spaces instead of the only circulation.” and she refered different level of spaces with Alexandrina. Third one is Seashore Library. When she anlyze the library, she realizes the some special part that provide relation between the outside and inside. She tried to combine this part with the slit idea. Her library was formed by units and 2 part. The cause of the 2 part is sound issue. So, library is 2 part as a quite silent and we can say that somehow noisy. This part attached to each other from under the ground.
Her design approach was seeing through the section drawing. Jury said that she could add more sections in order to have a change to the roof, however because of the area limitation that much of change was not possible. They wanted to see ribs more obvious in plan and as a result they thought there could be some changes in the roof as well. The idea about buried down the building found as a positive approach to respond the climate since the city is in Mardin. Jury also find her idea about separating two units and an outdoor space between them well and they suggested to add more outdoor spaces, they said that it would be also good for climate. There are some opening that formed by the relation while two masses coming together. That gaps found very promising however since the drawings and model have some differences those gaps in model found too much bigger. She was also aware of this situation. So, she said the real one was the drawings. In order to look for climatic condition, jury suggested her to look Hassan Fathy, since his designs has been built in the same condition with Dilara.
There are photos of the model and the poster below:
As usual, we have final juries at the end of the semester. You know, this semester we were assigned to design a library with the help of references. From the beginning I have two main references an I tried to improve those references. First one is pods from Bishan Public Library and the second one is dominant transparent element from the Beinecke Rare Book Library. I tried to modify the pods around this transparent element. In Bishan Public Library those pods are using for isolation and only for reading areas. So, I tried to expand this idea as a whole library. You can find my previous jury by clicking here and here.
About the jury… Well, I have a lot of confusion about the Jury because it was in an unexpected time. Any way… Before Jury, I made a mistake, I didn’t include the floor because I thought they were blocking the seeing the pods. I drew them you can see them in the poster but not in the model. So, it was a crucial mistake and it was criticized.
As a positive point, jury members have positive thoughts on my drawings. And I took some useful comments as well. For example, the wall of the pods can be movable pods so that they can change according to need. I think, this idea has potential in my design. During jury, I was like I wish I thought this before 😀
You can see the photographs and poster of the project below:
This week, we had our second pre-jury. Since the first one, there are some changes and tons of inputs and lots of tears, I faced with. Okay, then what’s changed? The idea about pods is still valid. There is only some changes about their positions and their dimensions. I have a circulation system which acts as continuation of topography and take people from road to pods. It is a reference from TESKİ 3. Mansiyon. There is an attached mass in above the ramp, served as stuff area and wet spaces. Since it is a long building, there should be some other wet spaces, and I am aware of that. I also tried to work on structural system but, it was not something I like, and we barely discussed it during the jury.
The main critic about the position of the shelves. The problem was I think them but not design them yet. I have to immediately design them and took critics before final, and we have only 5 critics left. Let’s be calm and try not to scream ‘cause it won’t help. (I know, I tried ☹)
This week we assigned to work with drawing rather than making a model of the library. It is because we were working more exterior of the building, not programmatic division. So, we drew. These one in below are drawing of the library that I design before the pre-jury. I was aiming to examine the pods more and find their possibilities and find a way to relate the building with topography.
After pre-jury 1, we were introduced by site data 2. We have been given different cities from different countries, different road conditions, in short different site conditions. For my case, I was assigned to worked on Vladivostok, Russia, with a site that has two roads, a park and a low-rise building. So, in this post I want to give some information about Vladivostok.
This city is close to North Korea, so it has nice weather, not cold but not hot either because of the Musson. The architecture of the city has some conditions. First of all, while designing a building, architect should have a certain distance from the nearby building. Since there is not much sun, shadow of the building should be considered. Also, the era is rainy, so it should be also considered.
Actually, these data improved my design. In first there is a park that should be considered. Since two side of the area are road and there is one building in west, the building should have a view to park. At least this was my first interpretation. Let see what we will do next.
This week we have pre-jury and it was horrible in one word. Before moving on what happened in the jury let me explain what I did since previous step.
I worked on the relation and the circulation among pods. I tried to use ramps, but I couldn’t solve the height conditions. So, I tried to find another circulation. I found a staircase that has inner -outside relation, however the usage of them is different from mine. I tried to use inner-outside relation of it, but I couldn’t. Also, because I don’t want a huge mass that only have pods, I added a mass that and somehow assist the vertical mass pop-up from it. Buuuut, it was a mistake. Let’s move to jury…
The first thing that I heard from jury was ‘what did you do to your project?’ and I wish to take my model and go away. They said that I don’t need any other mass that block the valley of topography. I am suggested to make my mass taller and other masses can occur from it. Also, I need to find another circulation system that fit my project more.
Last time, I talked about what I tried to quote and how it exploded. Now, we are expected to work also with a topography and because there is topography we have to find an adaption of the topography. This time I took something small that it can easily fix to topography. It was ‘Pods’ from Bishan Public Library. Those pods used as reading areas in Bishan Public Library and they were inside and façade of the building, so I thought ‘WHAT IF THOSE PODS IN BISHAN PUBLIC LIBRARY FORMED AROUND A CENTRAL MASS?’ and this became the general approach of my design. I put the pods around the rare books area in The Beinecke Library.
I got some critics from our instructors. They said it has potential because of its transparency feature and the books that occur from empty areas and so on. But they don’t like the relation with the topography. Actually, I also don’t like it but times you just did even you don’t like it. Also, the position of the pods seems as problematic. They can be more related, have some shifts among themselves. I got my critics and I will work on more.
You can see the photos of the model and quotation sheet below.
Actually, we are still able to add and change our ADS, but that was the last time we graded from ADS. I didn’t change so much thing about my ADS. I completed it and add some other diagrams so on. That’s why actually I don’t have lots to say, so you can see latest version of my ADS below.
While we were studying our ADS, we assigned to quote a part of the buildings. It was hard assignment, you may think how because we are taking something directly from an existing building but that was the problem. I mean what can I quote or in which circumstances, it become a quote or so on. I faced a lot of questions and those were only some minor problems.
I decided to look for other groups assigned buildings and after that I saw The Beinecke Library. It grasped my attention because it was a library that has no window. I tried to find the reason of it then I saw a mass inside the building which includes only rare books. Because those rare books can damage by sunlight, architects applied a special façade. I wanted to quote the rare books area. I tried to make an area that can not experienced directly by visitors but only visual. Also, because there is a visual dominance of that area and because I wanted to save it I merged it with The Grimm Center’s floors. The point is that was not a quotation because I changed their dimensions, but I learned at least.
Here, you can see model and quotation sheet.
Hi! This time I came with a revision. This semester, ADS will help us a lot and we are always free to add new analysis. So, I tried to change my ADS. I generally focused on diagrams this time. I analyzed assigned buildings according to some aspects. I, also, tried to make them as diagrammatic version of the building. It is because, in first submission I drew all buildings in different scale which is a problem and also, I couldn’t analyze the buildings properly. So, this time I tried to draw my analysis. You can see them below.