TEDU Architecture Department has curated the second volume of the works designed by its students during the last years in order to showcase them into a broader audience. I am very happy that two of my projects from the second year studio has been published in this TeduArch WorkBook.
After the Critic, we revised our guest understanding to include somethings. First of all the circulation, residential and common service areas are programmed to be in an intricate relationship. The staircase have been criticized for being L-shaped which reduced the required motion and therefore either needed to be u-shaped or be linear directly. We designed the main vertical circulation to be directly allowing the lower portion to connect to our main axis.
The guest house is located to be in the entrance axis to our complex. The strategy for producing spaces was that the residential spaces were located according to the direct south sunlight that is suitable for staying and residing and allowed the more private portion to be located on a higher level. The restaurant and kitchen space are directly allowing for the use of the community and allow for an interration location that is very easily accesible to Cebeci.
In order to produce the model the walls needed to be very carefully designed. One of the main struggles was to understand to topographical relationship.
In order to respond to our Problem Definition, we need to bring together different functioning groups and users under the same umbrella. But realistically speaking, this kind of an approach can be chaotic if it is not carefully designed. The site is very big and there is a very characteristic slope that helps us to have 22 m level difference on the vertical direction from one site to another.
Therefore, we are stretching the mass, adding voids on all directions, producing transitions between functions and introducing cuts and openings on the periphery of the complex. We looked on many examples of Case Studies but the Rolex Learning Center which is a very different programmed design but shares the common goal of designing a learning environment gave us the inspiration to blur the lines of function and give many transition spaces that have a duality of function to them.
Before our Second Pre-jury, our instructors decided to have a before submission of drawings where they tried to see whether we were fit to be presented to any jury members. The sad truth is that our drawings are not very understandable and overall show a lack of architectural conventions and proper drawing skills at this stage considering the fact that this is our first time designing such multi-functional and such large-scale programs. Therefore They transformed the Second Prejury to a Closed Submission where that gained time would allow us to better discuss the proper ways of presentation and drawing techniques.