First off I am now all the more glad that I am doing my graduate studies here in Portland. I can not imagine paying money for a degree where they throw early year undergraduate and graduate students in the same classes. I thought being inter mixed with fifth years undergraduates in our final thesis studios was odd.
From a design point of view I found most of the ideas and proposals to be very elementary in thought. The general notion that one can sustain and celebrate a natural environment simply by building next to it seemed quite off track. I also found the Eugene students general notion of sustainability to be very idealistic and un grounded. Lots of green washing and large sweeping gestures that showed little to no understanding of the larger urban context. To cap it off many if not all of the designs were formulated based on a parking ratio of .5 or lower. So far from a legitimate real world ratio that would allow for a workable proforma to pan out.
Stepping off the soap box I did come away with a few key points. First it seams that the general area of the wetland habitat happens to be in the logical location for a pathway or substantial element to break up and help define place on the site. Secondly the idea of the syncratic nature of a transit stop and wildlife stop had not surfaced yet in our investigation. Lastly it was interesting to see there plans all called for a plaza on the south side of the tracks. (perhaps Eugene is in the southern hemisphere).
Never the less I believe it was a helpful meeting. The discussions that issued were nice but I would have like to see the crit format abandoned and a true markers and sketch on tables charrette format adopted
Great post! Please check out breast cancer treatment South Jersey here.
awesome, thank you