wks 12 + 13> discussion of taks 05 + 06

For week 12 we all prepared some basic plans to bring to class and compare, based off our initial discussions and intentions for the space. We chose to continue developing Andy's plan, while possibly incorporating the idea of an operable stage from my design, inspired by Diller and Scofidio's 1986 ‘Withdrawing Room’ (beside). I had partially designed my plan based on the assumption we may need to integrate our folie from the previous project into our new design in a physical sense, but after talking with Zuzana we understood that integration of our concepts from that project (ie the operable wall/drawer system) was all that was required.

Andy further designed and uploaded plans before week 13, from which I began a massing model (beside) to double check the spaces were functional + how they operated in 3D.
--Turquoise indicates the location of the operable walls and their tracing systems, massed in thin slices of stacked foamcore.
--Grass green indicates stairs and movement between levels while the orange indicates the trellises that will extend over the bikeway on the Northern side. 

Wk 13 discussion with Zuzana: 

-adjacencies

-walkway
  --> pull-out stairs can act as seats (like NY cafe whose benches etc fold onto street)
  -->bikeway under trellis... interaction with bikeway
-planes vs volumes moving
-Zuzana asked us to be critical about kinks in the buildings
  --> how big they are and what could those spaces be used for
-step back to site
  -->move through scales to show detail
-materials: do some sections to develop it
-metal screen
-up to us how we incorporate folie

wk11> operative drawing section + plan (sketchy)

These are super sketchy but just ideas as we begin brainstorming for the final project.

space planning in plan view

[1: non-programmed public space [internal and/or external] 80sqm

2: general performance/class space [with stage + small backstage area] 100sqm

3: space for performance/classes of ‘aerial silks’ [6-9m high] 50sqm

4: room for life drawing [needs to be divisible into 2 spaces] 20sqm

5: a small cafe [restricted to 3.5m width] 35sqm

6: administration/offices 40sqm

7: entry foyer]

section showing how the building may 'move'.

[use of bi-fold doors- simple... considering segments of the building which  may slide out. folding roof?}

operative plan .
[brief stipulates the room for life drawing needs to be divisible into 2 spaces... perhaps these spaces extend out and separate from each other in that way]

wk 10> massing exercise

[presence, tectonic, experience, theme, communication]

wk10> consideration of broader site strategies

We reinvestigated where the building should be positioned on the site. While it was fine to have the folie wedged within the cliff due to its small size, we identified the identified the possibly of moving our proposal away from the cliff face. Andy saw the potential this had in terms of interaction with the bikeway, while I supported the move do to the very notion of the project: that is, impermeability and motion. To have our proposal wedged and essentially stuck in between a rock would leave us in a hard place in terms of developing the volatility of the building. (terrible pun but I couldn't resist!!!).  We have shifted the building closer towards the river -in fact almost on the bank - but still roughly in line with the placement of the previous folie design so as to continue capturing the views down the river towards both the city and kangaroo point.

wk9> interim presentation

The bound form acted as the volatile conception of the body from which this project developed. Its instability and distorted measurements counteract our preconceived notions of the body within the built environment.

Binding was chosen as a means to create an abstracted form that would be used to adapt the original folie design. Through the analysis of this transformative form, conceptual ideas of access and use of space lead to an incorporated understanding of the previously developed folie. 

New user needs and implications were identified and explored as ‘a room for the transformative body’ was developed. Drawing from the transformative quality of the body, an adaptable wall was designed to cater for these new implications. The wall acts both as an operable opening and threshold, with the ability to function as a seat, bench, support or table, or be pushed all the way back to allow for movement all the way through the space.

This idea was further developed during the construction of an analogue model in which the operable elements could be considered in more detail. The wall operates on a steel track system, where the user can push or pull – extend or retract – different segments based on their requirements. On top of fulfilling these purposes, the transformative wall serves a secondary purpose of filtering and framing different views of the Howard Smith Wharves to further intensify the user experience.
Broader views further down the river beyond Kangaroo Point and to the city were considered in the placement of the folie on the site. Access around the Wharves influenced the positioning of the folie within the cliffs, to allow for a certain detachment from pedestrian access. This area of the site is exposed to significant natural light which can be also be filtered via the operable wall.