Comments from Jury

Oliver- density of housing too low. How does it fit within the city? Glorifying the car with the large ramps? Too many empty voids very great apartment layouts.

GR-architecturally the project is thoughtful and worked out, but does not integrate as clearly with the landscape. The exit from the BQE is too prominent.

JK-The atrium needs to be studies more. This could be a very nice space, but needs solar studies. Much developed since midterm. Very good to design balconies with depth.

Rafia-

GR- If I only saw the first and last image I would be convinced. The clarity of the images and presentation is very thoughtful and the graphics are strong. Curious about the façade – next steps. Maybe this building in completely screened and balconies can open – operable? Placement of buildings is nice. Scale relates to neighborhood. Rotating to specific moments

JK- questions about the façade- balconies, much improved since midterm. Impressive public/private/semi-public. Architectural language is strong and organized.

Melissa

GR – Scale of building seems small, needs better abstraction with concept models, more density. Needs to understand better the experience of apartments, greenway, location of plaza – do you want it there?

 

JK-Materialiality – better to show 2-3 views with a bit more detail than multiple view will little details. White models do not validate concept and design. Solar panels a few? Look at Morphosis Building at Cornell

 

Scott

GR-Concept development lacking. Keep looking at concept throughout the process. Good ground plan – maybe grade changes should be podiums on which the building sits.

 

JS – Public benefit + use. Losing dialog between buildings and site. Look at cactus towers by BIG. Use rectilinear forms to create the circular forms. Show people in views

 

JK- Similar comments from midterm. Lacking concept. Commercial spaces without windows. Balconies with railings will change design,

 

Luis-

AV- reinforce concept – different entry/connections- more diagrams of this. More blended geometry.

MD-Private to public spaces addressing. This is vague still on hierarchy. The center area could be an opportunity for a common space/connection to lobby.

JS- Design park first – strong concept with movement and bridging. Connection to site. Need to command the site. Building blocks views from Hicks Street. Hard/soft/play/relaxing spaces – what are you offering the public?

 

Jamaisi

JK-façade development. Many microclimates. Broken concrete does not work for housing as there are many different solutions that must be solved. Use your solar information to design your project.

AV-Clear concept and inspiration. Outdoor space – access it is important. Draw neighborhood to community through circulation. Create a hierarchy of sizes of paths. Connected terraces.

JS-Formal language that could be used. Did in plan, but should continue to develop this in section and elevation. Collage is literal, sketching was much more abstract.

MD- View inbetween the long buildings may be undesirable. Lacking the other views of water and city.

 

Farai – https://dsrny.com

AV-sent via email – Clear concept moves and execution!

Great presentation love the consistency in angular geometries across site and building. Would love to see iterations of courtyard placement and the relationships they create (maybe one facing water and one facing the neighborhood and creating inviting experiences between the two!)

JS-Landscape and architecture combination. Formal language of the urban and landscape merging. Terraces, different tree canopies and landscapes push design, but could push further. Keep exploring the idea of spaces under the landscape areas – especially at street level. Look at Diller and scofidios Lincoln Center. 10x more people at least. Wider paths – hierarchy. Green elements could be interesting exploration. BIG uses variations in balconies in plan and sections.

MD- Street elevations – adjust landscapes at fill

JK-Too small for site?

 

Damian

MD-Post Modern application of design on building. Huge site why are buildings placed in the proposed location? Views? Very applied design not developed.

JS- Grabbing by horns – needs to be more convincing and believe in your design. Communicate intention to bridge large building to different scale. Come together – range: small, medium, large building blocks. Buildings, Landscapes, seating,

 

Albert

MD-Complex- solved a lot of problems well. Evolved into complex studies. Connection of building to the streets.

JS-balanced green and building/private vs public. IS there connection from Hicks to the water for the public? Diagram of private vs public vs semi-public? Amazing work, great diagrams, next level of detail than others, different types of landscaping – good. Too many ideas- needs to simplify and clarify your design language. i.e. bending – are the radiuses sharp or smooth? Too many materials.

 

Hifza

MD- done a great deal of work. Interesting concept, but the then the execution of concept into massing/design is lost. Concept/collage is very interesting/exciting but final desing is too straightforward.

JS- site location of building is ok, but relationship of concept to final design has been lost. Pill shape is ok, but façade and landscape need articulation and connection to buildings. Possibly the loops in the concept model could create “pocket parks” of outdoor programs. Look at Philadelphia Navy Yard Central Green by Field Operations.

 

Jesse

JS- scale = right Need to have architectural experience. You understand building/work experience, but your project lacks connection of the massings with the site. The L shapes are not successful urbanesque

MD- views that show elevations are more elegant. Floor plans seem to have many gaps and unplanned. Work on the connection – physical and with views from Hicks to the water.

 

 

 

Dante

JS- What is the reasoning for your forms? Maybe stronger if you terraced the landscaping with the building as a concept. Use the wireframed drawings from the computer and then hand sketch over for presentations. The community garden is very strong in your design bringing the community toghether.

MD- Semi-circular gestures with vortex brings people around and into the shapes of the site. Open corridor to ends with windows to allow for an opening in a long corridor.

General notes:

  • Give and take
  • Public realm
  • Public benefit
  • Green Space
  • Diversity
  • No pancake buildings
  • Problems beyond architecture – current events
  • Architects solve – urban, social, ecological, public, economical issues

 

Jury:

  • Jeremy Siegel, BIG
  • Autumn Visconti, BIG
  • Gustavo Rodriguez, FX Collective
  • Michael Duddy, CityTech
  • Jihun Kim, CityTech
This entry was posted in Announcements, Day 27. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.