The result is my new massing model and partial section, which I drew at the same scale as the model to compare the two side by side. The following photos are my attempt at making some sense out of this building and how the masses relate to one another.
I was thinking of constructing the building with angled glass walls (angled to match the optical illusion of the perspective angle of the Prudential Tower behind the site) - but as you will see from the model, it is not as readily recognized, so it might be something to reconsider.
I also wanted to see what the perspective from the Prudential Tower is - I am thinking about creating a glass roof above the pool area (as seen on model) which would emphasize the long element of the pool, stretching throughout the building (from the food court wall to the overhanging waterfall).
Now, I can cut/paste (basically destroy) the model to help develop the concept further.
3 comments:
Michelle,
I like how you use the same scale for your elevations as you did in the model, it probably helps translate ideas back and forth easier.
When I read your plan, it looked like you had a small delicate tower for the diving board that was mostly hollow to allow a view to the pool below. Your model shows this as a substantial mass, the glass you wrote about may change the feel of this tower substantially. Does this particular ramp up need to be covered or could it be open?
I think one of the nice things the model illustrates is the dynamic relationships created where the “ramp to street”, “outdoor pool”, and the diving platform are located. I wonder if this dynamic could be incorporated into your building’s interaction with the other existing buildings. Looks great (remember, never build more than your willing to destroy, well….maybe a little more)
Have fun!
Michelle,
These are great studies! You show your project very clearly and I really like combining the sections with model! Overall your project work is convincing except for the below details:
My main comment is on the expression of the roof and the pseudo structure framing it. You can already tell that I think this gesture is a bad idea and I can give you three reasons for it:
1. The relation between the thin roof and the structure is off. This little overhang does not really require this and the structure becomes decorative.
2. The way the two volumes interlock does not leave enough separation in height to make this even a "pure" gesture: it just seems muddled and neither connects the two volumes, nor does it hightlight the taller one.
3. The best reson why this does not work rests with you desire to highlight the real tower on the site an mirror it in the pool. Instead of terminating your highest volume with a crown (which assumes that this is the highest point) it should defer to the real vertical dominating element, by not accentuating the roof line. Try the opposite and make the top of your building disappear!
Also, the area between the food court facade and your building has been reduced to a narrow slot, which certainly does not work, perhaps your tower building needs to get smaller to provide some relief.
What facade materials are you imagining? What are the stripes on the sections? Looks like a large boat house?
Smiling
Enno
Michelle,
Your race also? Thanks for taking time to look at my post. I've made several additional post which will probably clear-up you questions. Like how your project is developing. Keep up the hard work.
Post a Comment