tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31641099.post1102939360676016079..comments2023-08-27T19:33:49.657+08:00Comments on Architectural Learning: too much of circulation = no good???ian nghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02547837716485499855noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31641099.post-22321419666242895282008-03-18T15:42:00.000+08:002008-03-18T15:42:00.000+08:00More or less right...but depending on type of buil...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.<BR/><BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.ian nghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02547837716485499855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31641099.post-19448990827771776842008-03-18T15:22:00.000+08:002008-03-18T15:22:00.000+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.ian nghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02547837716485499855noreply@blogger.com