Studio Final: Program

Program

The client for the project is asking us to provide a facility that houses the intensive part of a distance learning program. It will be located in the vicinity of the Boston Architectural College to allow for easy access to support functions (Library, IT, etc.)

The facility will offer living quarters for 24 students, three class rooms for up to 14 students each and a dining/lounge/exhibit area.

The facility will be open to students 24 hours, scanning, printing and model making is possible on site. Desk work, lectures and critiques will happen in class rooms and the lounge area. The exhibit space shall be open at times to the larger community.

A break room will offer snacks and beverages, breakfast and sandwiches will be catered (other meals will have to take place off site).

It is desired to have a small outdoor space for recreational or contemplative use on the site.

This blog section has a requirement, but I think the requirement is met by the many other documents that have been posted to this blog, SO, Instead of listing the rooms, spaces and square footages that I have applied to a physical building, I am going to take this space to make a few comments on the design process, and how it can affect a client, or a user, to truly investigate a program and how space is used. Often clients ask for one thing, but through the design process (with their beloved architect)… and work… and strife… arrive at something much, much greater. Which answers one of the questions from this cohorts first semester, Why are architects important?

It is important to realize how a program can go through a metamorphosis during the period of time where a client or user (which happened to be ourselves) begins the design process, and where it ends. The design process is a very emotional, provocative, outrageous process. Additionally, the constraints of physics, locale, code, and aesthetics can cause a great deal of stress on a program. But, the design process in itself often brings out changes in how a user will actually use a space. For example, many people in the class during the first round of schematics had programmed a fairly large or extensive exhibit space, (as you will see in my original program) but during the conversation of the following weeks in class with the professor and the users, it became clear that an exhibit space was… under utilized in places where they currently exist, and maybe not so important as originally considered.

As you look at the bubble diagram that I started out with, all of the spaces are included in the proposed building, but the sizes and relationships may have changed. In my particular scheme, after I arrived in Boston and became acquainted with the site, (and re- acquainted with what it was like to participate in an intensive) my overwhelming theme for the project became very clear: which is the separation between the studio space and the living space. This singular idea really developed the largest part of the relationship of space. How can I design a building on a 2/3 of an acre that has a feeling of separation from one use to the other. Individual buildings became an obvious choice in my design. After this, I began to think about an architectural education, and how I could metaphorically represent this in form. I really believe that observation is an important part of being an architect, so raising the height of the studio building was important, along with having a great deal of glass. This particular program is based on bridging what you learn in experiencing the profession, and what you learn in school… so the bridge became a symbolic form. In the end, it was those ideas that really drove the program, not the sizes of spaces, and how many vending machines I had in a particular space. Really.


Week 2 Program