Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Jenga 6.0

For the next iteration of our Jenga project as we continued to work in our groups of six our focus was now directed to choosing a site for which our building would be located. Between our group we looked ate sites like Cancun Mexico, Panama City, Canada, and Madrid, however our group came to the decision of selecting Darwin city Australia as our location. This felt like one of the most idea places because of its warm tropical climate which speaks to our desired use for the building as a time share or vacation get away.

Darwin City, Australia
Photo Montage

Jenga 5.0

In this iteration of the Jenga process our group of 3 merged with another group of 3. This ended up being team circuit. When combining each of our concept words we came up with a totally new design for our group that combined both of our group ideas. The culmination of our merger became known as "Pinnacle". This emphasized on the idea of upward stacking and the interlocking of our buildings. Our choice of deliverable for this project included a power point which we used to capture the essence of what it would feel like to be in the space that we designed.

Digital Renderings

Illustrator Rendering

Photoshop rendering

Tuesday, March 15, 2011


On Monday our Individual groups were asked to participate in a charrette process that paired each of our individual groups with two other groups that had similar design layouts. Our group worked with two teams that had well thought out design ideas for each of their buildings, however bringing both their ideas and ours together based on materiality and similarities proved to be a tough challenge with the time allowed. The first group that our team worked with was team circuit. When going through the design process of combining our two buildings the idea of stacking and interlocking our two units shaped most of our ideas and the direction in which we wanted to handle the challenge of creating an eight story building. I felt like our groups worked well together and were able to make quick and reasonable decisions given the time frame that we had to work. Our group evenly divided up the work with two people working on the diagrams, statement, and sketches. The second group that we worked with was team evolve. I felt that this was our most challenging group to work with out of the two, since the main focus of the project was materiality, and none of ours were the same. While we were able to evenly distribute the work load and come to somewhat of a consensus of the group design. I found that there were certain things that the group was not willing to sacrifice in order to merge the two projects cohesively. While both our group and team evolve had good ideas I feel like our systems and designs would not be able to coincide as well as they would with team circuit to form a well designed combination of both teams.

Friday, March 4, 2011 digital the way?...

Over the course of the semester one of my goals was to find out what is one of the ways for me to best communicate my ideas. I have found that digital rendering is a form of media that has began to catch my attention. I love the fact that you have the control to do virtually anything that you want. Where as by hand some of my designs were limited because I felt that I didn't have the ability to clearly communicate them, digitally I can push my ideas further. I can also study and explore ideas of lighting and texture more so that by hand. One of the common downsides in working digitally is the fact that it can take a lot of time and space on the computer. Thus "the spinning wheel of death" a digital rendering's sworn enemy, however this is a problem that can be addressed with making sure you mange your time according to how long it may take to render each image.

Jenga 4.0

"Focusing on the Interlocking of our public space."For Jenga 4.0, our group came together combining our spaces into one cohesive unit that interlocked around a central public area for congregation. Each of our individual structures helped to define the pubic space as a whole. In addition, incorporating individual elements from each unit into the public areas, gave the complex a cohesive theme, both inside and out.. The complex of units that we designed combines the idea of interlocking ambiguity with in a grid like order; acting like pieces of a puzzle to form an interior courtyard area. Our group was able to clearly communicate a design that incorporated ideas and themes that were seen in our individual books we read previously. Brian’s “The 10 Books on Architecture” by Vitruvius, Audra’s “Delirious New York” by Rem Koolhaus and Jamaan’s “Nature of Order” by Christopher Alexander; each assisted in helping to communicate that each of the buildings came together to interlock around an intensified and defined pleasing space. Our group agrees that each of the books we read individually helped us to form and shape our design and will be important in pushing our design further along in the process.

Using our expanded understanding of our individual spaces and how they fit together in our first project will assist us in moving forward into Jenga 4.0. The expansion of our complex, both vertically and horizontally in this next project will only create more opportunity to communicate our concept words while creating interesting and thoughtful design. Not only will our final presentation help the viewer visualize themselves in the complex, but it will include additional views to understand how the space comes together as a whole.

Our group decided to go in the direction of giving the space some context based off of where we would have liked to see the buildings. One of my ideas which was on the sea front in Seattle was well received by the group, which is why the Olympic Mountains can be seen in some of our background images.

Jenga 3.0

We were faced with the challenge to create a public space that would communicate our team’s three themes Twist, Tilt and Beehive, while still maintaining a pleasing area of congregation for public use.
To begin, we were required to provide two means of egress of this space. We were limited to a 31’ height for our private buildings, however no limitations were given to the height requirements of the pubic areas. Our team chose to create a complex that had the appearance of being on a grid, much like the order of a beehive. In doing this, we chose to ground one structure along a straight line to form the beginning of our grid. From here, we chose to tilt our other two structures. This gives the effect of hiding entranceways and allowing the occupants to twist through the pathways in the space to find them, questioning where the grid lies.

On the main level, there are various gateways into the complex that lead to the first floor public space. This area creates the center of the common courtyard where all occupants can enter their respective private spaces. This area has an informal feel with greenery, winding paths and a center lounge area with modular and moveable cushioned platforms.
The second floor public area is accessible from all three units and creates different zones of use. There is a main congregation area that is in the center of the complex. This may be where a crowd would gather for large social events. In addition, another zone is created away from the center space to provide a more intimate environment for enjoying a glass of wine or having subdued conversations with friends.

In viewing the scale model we have provided, one would notice that the three private structures are removable from the public area. We envisioned the public space becoming the grounding piece that keeps all spaces together. Not only is this apparent with how people will socialize with each other, but also it creates a puzzle in which the structures can fit only as we had planned. Once they are removed, what is left is the skeleton of the public space showing both first and second levels, the means of egress and the angular fashion that is created around the private spaces respectively.