Building envelope & tectonics.

The final stage of project 2 was to start exploring tectonics. As previously mentioned, I decided to separate the programs of the museum and research centre. I am really inspired by the National Museum of Underwater Archaeology and the way its 2 programs are demarcated through materials, form and tectonics. I want the research centre to be an extension of the cliff - therefore to have a solid, rigid and heavy aesthetic. The nature museum, on the other hand, will be transparent, fluid and light to respond to the river. 

The next phase leading into project 3 will be exploring some possible forms and materials that effectively convey these aesthetics. The next stage of design will also be refining the internal spaces and connections between them, as well as their specific floor areas.

Biomimicry: inspiration for the physical functions of the building.

I was really interested in looking to biomimicry to answer questions like:


- How would nature provide shade but still allow ample ventilation in a space?
- How would nature shade the facade of a building?
- How would nature inspire a moving facade?

As mentioned in the previous post, I wanted to explore options for an extendable shading device for the cavity in the roof garden, to provide cover for the path during the hottest part of the day and still allow penetration of breezes. I discovered the COMOLEVI forest canopy which is inspired by the patterns in a tree canopy, which allows dappled sunlight and breezes to penetrate the space.

I also looked at moving façade technologies, and the one below was my favourite. It is comprised of elastomers with a silver coating that send an electric charge over the surface when there is a high concentration of sunlight. Therefore these elastomers expand and contract in relation to how much light is penetrating the surface.

These are the types of technologies that I am really interested in adapting and incorporating into my project 3 design. 

space planning.

From here, I started mapping out the individual zones that would be required in each building and the adjacencies and access that should occur between each.

The museum is comprised of 2 levels. The ground level will house a ferry terminal, public toilets, and flexible exhibition space. The first floor contains the café and part of the roof garden.

The research centre will be comprised of 3 levels with an elevator running through its core. The ground floor is accessible to the public and contains the reception and foyer area, and two conference rooms. The first floor will accommodate staff facilities. The second floor will provide access to the café and roof garden.

I recognized that these 2 programs should be related by some kind of connecting element. After talking to Yvonne last week I decided that a roof garden would be a good option. It will be publicly accessible and provide a recreational area for users to sit and have a coffee and enjoy the views and natural surroundings.

The next two diagrams deal with the circulation that will occur between the 2 programs. I wanted to preserve the pedestrian and cyclist path as an axis between the two programs. This led me to explore options for an extendable shading device for the cavity in the roof garden to provide cover for the path during the hottest part of the day.

 

exemplar 1: dividing the programs.

THE MUSEUM OF UNDERWATER ARCHAELOGY

[estudio vazquez consuegra]

The first relevant exemplar I discovered for the project is the National Museum of Underwater Archaelogy, which has both a research centre and museum as two separate entities with different aesthetics. The research centre is straight, opaque and relates to the land and city, while the museum is transparent and more fluid, relating to the sea. 

This inspired me to divide the museum & research centre programs, so that the research centre will be an extension of the cliffs, while the museum will be an extension of the Brisbane river. 

subtropical design principles.

In designing a building in Brisbane that emphasises the presence of nature and importance of sustainability, there is no way around considering subtropical design principles. As seen above, I selected the design principles that will be most relevant to this kind of program/type. These guidelines correlate really well with the intended vision for the project anyway. 

the program: adding another dimension.

I talked to Yvonne about the idea for a nature museum. At this point I was still unconvinced that this would be 'enough.' And I was playing around with the idea of introducing a research centre as opposed to the museum. Yvonne suggested that I use both programs, which I was really happy to take on board. The museum is great as an educational forum for the 'students' (general public), but I also need to accommodate the 'educators' (being the researchers, professionals, collaborators, curators, etc). I think combining these 2 programs offers some great opportunities for the built form and social interactions.

the program: what is needed there?

I initially struggled with determining what program I would want my building to accommodate, but I came across the above quote in one of my favourite design books, Architecture of Change: Sustainability & Humanity in the Built Environment. I wanted the function of the building to correlate very strongly with my main concept: to make people aware of the presence and importance of nature. The issue of sustainability is not only high on the political agenda, but architects, urban planners, artists, and the like are bringing attention to it in their works like never before, and the general public are forced to recognize that it is a pressing issue that we cannot ignore. However, currently there seems to be a lack of a physical forum for the exchange of this kind of information and knowledge to take place. My proposal, therefore, is to design a space in which artists, architects, urban planners, and environmental scientists can exhibit their works and research, from photographs, to sculptures, to digital installations, to physical models. 

From this point I began to research 'nature museums and exhibits' and the radical nature exhibition in London, which occurred in 2009, caught my attention. Below are some of the projects that were exhibited.

Source

"Radical nature draws on ideas that have emerged out of Land Art, environmental activism, experimental architecture and utopianism. The exhibition is designed as one fantastical landscape, with each piece introducing into the gallery space a dramatic portion of nature."

 

site issues.

As mentioned in the last post, we were asked to select specific site issues that we wished to address in our design.  Firstly, a mobility analysis of the surrounding area demonstrates that the site is very static, especially in contrast to the several networks of vehicular, cyclist, pedestrian and river movement that occurs all around it. I also wanted to highlight the fact that the two main natural features of the site, the cliff and the river, are very disconnected influences due to their differences in height and aesthetic. Further, the site is narrow, forming negative space that people tend to only move through. It is therefore necessary to position a positive, dwelling space on the site where people will feel safe and will desire to congregate in.