Day 25: Paolo returns to Seattle

Paolo returned to Seattle late Monday evening, so today was his first day in studio. For some reason we had not taken a group photo, so we went ahead and did one before getting underway. For the studio day itself, it was a good time for him to catch up with the student projects--which have progressed a lot since he left in mid-April. The conservations ranged widely, but encompassed some detailed issues of structure as well as more general approaches to communicating the projects effectively in drawing. A number of projects will need to carefully consider illustrative diagrams and drawings while others need to develop some final details that have arisen in their designs.  

Day 24: Marion Street as an urban space

The core of the design task for the students remains defining Marion street as an urban space. The projects have now reached a point where they have developed the street space in a complete way. This has involved some fairly detailed ideas about materials and surfaces of the bridge as well as of the ground level. Many students have show a great amount of interest in the use of landscape elements, including considerations of the project as a kind of natural landscape. In addition, considerations of tactility of materials, the experience at night, and even sound have given shape to many of these projects. 

Day 23: Defining the waterfront and ferry terminal

One of the major areas of concentration of the projects has been the area nearby the ferry terminal. Although the terminal design is only schematically defined it is important that each project tackle how their new bridge meets the terminal. In addition, the waterfront design is only defined in the planning documents of the City of Seattle, so students do not have the luxury of direct experience of that waterfront condition. As a result the way that the projects meet the waterfront condition has been challenging, though the recent work shows how many of them have started to respond by finding a way to enhance the waterfront condition. 

Day 22: Finalizing master plans

Following Gijs' departure, the focus of the studio for many of the students is the continuing refinement and development of their master plan for the site. The project has been a continual balancing act between the development of the overall urban approach to the site, including the treatment of Marion Street and the response to the waterfront plan, and the refinement of the walkway—particularly its structure and and related spaces and functions. What appeared to be a simple project has ended up being quite challenging for all. With the master plan, the problem has been to deal with the at-grade condition. The situation at the terminal has been particularly difficult, and in many cases has required a revision to the proposed terminal's design. 

Day 21: Project development 2

This was Gijs' last day in studio and the students effort to refine their project at the level of the master plan continued. In a number of cases some rather useful models were made that tried to sort out the form of the project at an overall scale. Others worked through digital means to try to solve the problem of the form of the project and its relationship to the site. This effort will continue as we move into the final 3 weeks of the quarter, but there is some satisfaction that the projects are reaching a point of clarity at a time where the students will be able to fully represent the range of their concerns and selectively develop some areas in detail. As instructors we have noted that some projects have this capacity for detail and some do not. Rather than a criticism it is an observation that some projects rely more on detail and others provide a more general response. It was hard for Gijs to leave at this point, as it was also for Claudia, but the students have gotten some great input from them and we are all grateful for their participation in the studio.  

Day 20: Project development

We went around the studio, speaking with each student, and in each case trying to clarify the master plan of the project and at the same time define its essential qualities—in form, in materials and in structure. The sectional drawings that we derived for each scheme was a great help in allowing the students to focus on the unique qualities of each scheme. We encouraged the students to re-engage with their overall plan as a way to refine the project and bring it to a point of clarity. For most that involved a combination of working in drawing--many doing this with hand drawing--and doing some small-scaled study models of components. With most of the projects their main qualities have emerged and it is a matter of balancing the overall form with structural and material considerations. Although it is a studio themed about structure (and infrastructure), due to the scale and complexity of the project and its urban situation we have chosen to not impose the most detailed technical considerations. Instead, it is a balancing act in a middle ground where design considerations meet technique. 

Day 19: Eleven Projects

On Monday of week 7, immediately following the mid-review, Gijs and I had a general discussion with the students about the review. One of the things we mentioned, was that in reviewing their work we found it interesting that each of their sections across Marion Street were distinctive--and characteristic of their projects in an almost symbolic way. Gijs had done a drawing when we discussed the projects, which he formalized and we sent to the students to show this. This drawing was a reminder to us and to the students that in designing a pedestrian bridge, each of their projects took a unique approach to the urban space of Marion Street. We also mentioned that we will be providing them with a fixed format for their drawings, as the intention will be to make the final review like an exhibition and then assemble the projects in a publication--with details to follow. In that context, those emblematic sections along Marion Street can be an identifying marker for each project.  

Day 18: Mid-review

We had our mid-review today with four invited critics, Wyn Bielaska from Chihuly Studios, Lisa Chun from Zero-Plus Architects, Brian Court from the Miller|Hull Partnership and Tyler Sprague from the UW Architecture Department. It was a lively afternoon of discussion covering a wide range of issues; from the response to the urban context to detailed considerations of form and structure. At the end of the review the critics expressed their enthusiasm for the projects and were impressed with the variety of approaches to what seems like a simple task of designing a replacement for the Marion Street pedestrian bridge. This was also the last day that Claudia Pagani was in the studio as she will return to Rome and communicate the progress of the students to Paolo Desideri. 

Day 17: From Site to Detail

A number of the students have continued to work on their detailed model as they try to balance that effort with the general approach to the site. Claudia, Gijs and I went around to each of the students to provide some final input before the mid-review on Friday. With a number of the projects the detailed model clearly provoked some new ideas in the broader design of the site. It is evident with this project that even as you develop some aspects in greater detail, they cannot fail to influence the larger scale considerations of the site. In discussing the review with the students, we emphasized the importance of addressing the urban condition of Marion Street and the waterfront condition by the ferry terminal through their perspective drawings. We hope that each student will have a full range of scales of thinking at the review so that they can get the most comprehensive (and detailed) input possible. 

Day 16: Model Workshop

On the first day that Gijs Pyckevet was in the studio, the students were asked to build a detailed model--mostly at 1/4" scale--of a portion of their project to look at the most detailed issues of structure and material. Through this 4 hour exercise, Gijs was introduced to all of the student projects while also providing input on their ideas of structure and material. For a number of students the exercise was quite useful to clarify the ideas of the project in such a way that it gave input to their general urban proposal. Of course, in any architectural project the relationship between the detail and the larger scale of the site and the broader conception of the project is crucial. In this week leading up to the mid-review it allowed all students to consider what, at this time, is their most detailed moment.  

Day 15: From Site to Detail

In our desk critiques on May Day, we began to increasingly discuss the detailed implications of the projects. Though some students are still clarifying their urban intervention, most are looking at their project in terms of structure and detail. With a number of projects that issue of structure has become a major force in their conception of the project, where issues of support and suspension have taken on an iconic character. In particular there has been a lot of attention on the transition between the urban space of Marion Street--which has a particular scale and character--and the space of the waterfront--which relates much more to the piers, the proposed waterfront design and even the ferries. That transition has been challenging for many as they seek a certain coherence in their projects while responding to these different site conditions.  

Day 14: Claudia presents Roma Tre projects

At the beginning of studio, Claudia Pagani presented some thesis projects from students taught by Paolo Desideri at Roma Tre. The two thesis projects that were shown were part of a larger master plan that was aimed at connecting many of the dispersed archeological sites around the ancient fora in Rome while also dealing with the new urban conditions and infrastructure of roads and subways. The first was a project that dealt with the area around the Colosseum, and it responded to the existing subway station as well as to the need to redefine the traffic pattern in that area. It also connected to the many archeological sites in that area that are presently not connected by taking advantage of the fact that they can be linked below the current street level. A second project dealt with the Foro Boario which was similarly dealing with traffic while making below grade connections. The third engaged the Ponte Rotto through a set of new pedestrian links across the Tiber and to the banks on both sides of the river. This project had some quite interesting details that dealt with structural issues while managing the complex series of levels that needed to be connected. Following the presentation, we both saw the student projects in a series of desk critiques.