Author Archives: twalsh4

[embeddoc url=”https://blogs.uoregon.edu/ecotopia/files/2017/06/2FinalDraftSubmittal_M22-2mr83vv.pdf” download=”logged” viewer=”google” ]

Concept:

Roughly after the World War II, the American Dream was born which was one of the causes of suburban sprawl. Suburban sprawl has been attractive to every American because it offered the promise of community, safety, connection to nature, and ownership of their own homes. The goal of this project is to redefine the American dream to prove that living in cities can provide the same elements we seek in suburban developments. This is accomplished through sensitive design to the climate of waterfront district in Portland, Oregon and the goals of the American people in mind.

1. What were the most useful review comments, applicable to several student projects?

Based on some of the comments I got back on my project, I found that it was helpful to have some sort of iteration for what the top and pavilion (bottom) would look like. They appreciated that I had some thought behind it. Additionally, the project lacked a clear goal or big idea. The goal and idea was there, it was just convoluted by other drawings and needed a more clear articulation.

2.What did you learn from seeing other students’ visual and verbal presentations?

From some of the presentations, I saw some boards that started to get at that clear idea and main goal. Namely Mike and Frank’s boards were clearly pushing very hard towards one direction and that made it very easy to understand their projects right off the bat. From experience and what I saw, it is best to have a planned set of points you want to go over before you give your presentation.

3.What would you like to adjust on your panel for the CTBUH submission (July 17, 2017 registration deadline).

I need to get rid of the night/day graphic in the center. During the review they could not stop talking about how it wasn’t helping me at all. Replacing it with an orthographic, informational graphic that explains the bigger picture a little bit better would be better I think. Also showing the renderings with no sun. Opening up the mass drastically as well.

[embeddoc url=”https://blogs.uoregon.edu/ecotopia/files/2017/05/RoughDraftSubmittal_M2-1j3udjp.pdf” download=”none” viewer=”google” ]

Reflection:

From what I could gather from my reviews it seems like the different scales of the tower were received quite well. Turns out that the floor plan and units create a nice diverse aesthetic in perspective that is village-esque and friendly to the human scale. The overall scheme and idea communicated is strong. If I wasn’t there to explain it though, I don’t think that the graphics themselves would say enough to get the idea accross. So the biggest thing I need to work on is how to better represent my ideas graphically in a more clear, enticing way.

We talked about moving my vertical circulation cores to the park/community areas so that residents of the tower really had to walk through parks on their way to work. My facade idea of the operable panels that interact with the wind was received well. Also I need to work on the crown and podium of my building since there are no big moves made there yet.

Moving forward, I am going to work on my facade and how the structure could inform the that. Also thinking about the ground floor and maybe breaking the ground plane. Finally, graphical representation.

[embeddoc url=”https://blogs.uoregon.edu/ecotopia/files/2017/05/BlogPost_midterm_Walsh2-101pgym.pdf” download=”all” viewer=”google” ]

What is Working:

• Park cascades
• Idea of Folding/living Façade
• Creating Powerful Story
• Private/Public in the Unit
• Cube as a Unit
• Programming

My reviewers liked my ideas of the architecture being a “living” thing. Also this idea that the program of the space can change is probably how we will live in the future (one of them said).

What is not working:

• The pit/ elevation change in the floor
  • Just wants to be a flat floor
• Circulation
• Privacy of public spaces for the units
• Space Efficiency
• Walking Cycle?
• Folding
  • Studies need to be connected to program

Overall, the floor plans were not successful in achieving what I wanted. I think my process of trying to discover how this idea will be architecturally articulated needs to change again. I think it will be worth the chase to keep trying this idea.

Next Steps:

Commit to a form that will work for the program and idea of changing façade. Study how these units work together to create the in-between spaces and park spaces. Incorporate the environmental aspects of the site into the project. Think about how the environment will drive the design of the overall building and the individual units. Design in section not just plan. I need to simplify and consolidate my ideas. I had a thought during the review that maybe the form of the unit doesn’t change but maybe a small detail of the unit does, like a light that changes color. I think I am stuck on this folding idea but its not about folding, it is more about the change that folding implies. The social and functional aspects tied to it is what I am really after so I need to drop the folding thing and think more simply about this. Design for me has always been a process of boiling down my ideas so I need to turn up the heat.