Tuesday, 18 March 2008

too much of circulation = no good???

Ian, i came out with something new, will let u check tmr..

for the last crit, keith said the circulation of my design is "too much". >_<"
He said a normal building, circulation is more or less 25% and space takes about 65%. (is it true??? )
then, in my case, its the other way round, so he wants me to reduce the circulation and try to think of a new design..

But my intention still the same, to enliven the "deadly site', connection of both different races,(Chinese, Muslim & Indian) architecture, culture..

As i mentioned to you before, my trade is Chinese paper cutting, one solid piece of paper, and you cut small holes on it, it will becomes something fragile and see through and delicate, enliven the solid piece of paper, so its just like the site.

The site right now, there is this void between the Chinese architecture and Muslim/Indian architecture, can clearly see its different races architecture, so right now placing a building in the middle is basically cutting through the site, this is the delicate point of the site.


ian ng said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ian ng said...

More or less right...but depending on type of building. Public buildings, like airports, can have an even higher % of circulation. Commercial buildings such as office towers can have as low as 10% on a typical floor--i.e. the % of non-lettable space (circulation, toilets, machine rooms) to total floor space.

For efficiency of space planning the lesser the amount of space dedicated to solely circulation the better. So, making multi-use spaces wherever possible is always a good idea.

Building of different ethnic expressions can all share a communal space without the need for segregation. Just like it's ok to be in a class and we're happily looking at and working with colleagues of various ethnic backgrounds. The unifying factor is our respect for each other.

An architecture of perforation as an allusion to the nature of the trade products it houses is ok--as long as the basic requirement of shelter is not compromised. Yes, there can be great poetics in the play of perforation and decimated mass. Good approach.

All this is, of course, tempered by our discussion in class this morning. Make sure your live creature doesn't dominate the square so much that it makes the civic space unusable.