Architecture SchoolJustin Frank

Site Plan - 1:500@A2

2

1

4

3

3

3 5

1. Workshop2. Cafe + Kitchen3. Offices4. Workshop Storage5 Bicycle Storage Ground Floor Plan - 1:200@A2

1

1

2

2

3

1. Display Area2. Storage3. Plant Room First Floor Plan - 1:200@A2

1

2

4 5

6

3

1. Crit Space2. Studio 13. Reception4. Print Room5. Studio Storage6. Admin Storage Second Floor Plan - 1:200@A2

1

2

1

3 4

3

4

1. Studios 2 + 32. Break-Out and Communal Work Space3. Print Room4. Studio Storage Third Floor Plan - 1:200@A2

Long Section - 1:200@A2

Short Section - 1:200@A2

The university is planning on expand-ing largely over the future, and these pro-posals can be seen in orange, These will be taken into account in the design process.

The campus is set up along a spine that is broadly orientated East-West. Building with relation to this original master-plan will improve the effectiveness of the building, through ease of access as well as proximity to other university buildings. Because of this, site 2 was chosen, as it is connected to the rest of campus as well as 6E.

The building will attempt to facilitate a continuous public space, stretching from Solsbury Green in the north, through the plaza, to the main university park and lake. New access routes will also facilitate more people taking advantage of these spaces.

As can be seen on the above diagram, the “weight-ing” of the university has shifted significantly from the original center outside the library. The building will aim to not further this problem, and potentially even try to solve some of the problems created.

The Competition entry for PARC Paris by Bjarke Ingels Group was chosen as a precedent because of its very sensible way of dealing with context. It creating an access route through the building, con-necting two different levels, It also engages with multiple views, and the facade maintains a good relationship with neighbouring buildings.

Paris PARC University BuildingArchitects: Bjarke Ingels GroupClient: UPMC UniversityLocation: ParisSize; 15000m2

Built: Competition won in 2011, not yet start-

Laban Dance CentreArchitects: Herzog and De MeuronClient: Trinity LabanLocation: LondonSize; 8203m2

Built: 2000-2003

The Laban Dance Centre was chosen as a precedent as it is an educational space, with need for very even lighting, just like the architecture school. Her-zog and De Meuron Achieved this by using sand-blasted translucent glass elements, creating a build-ing that glows at night from the inside out.

The landscape of the plaza area was achieved by overlaying the paths of frequent usage onto the site. This created leading lines “by accident”, that would guide even first time visitors to the center of campus. The rest was left grass, in order to create places for people to enjoy in good weather. Adjacent to the two architecture buildings, there is three reflection pools. These are aligned to the two buildings and the campus geometry, further solidifying the connection of the two buildings, but also their relationship to the rest of campus.

School Philosophy

The philosophy of the school is that anyone who at-tends is willing to give and receive constructive crit-icism from anyone else. This means that mingling between the years is seen as greatly beneficial. This philosophy also extends to tutors, and studio tutors are not given offices in order to be more easily avail-able. As a consequence this creates a very horizontal management, and tutors are not seen as more import-ant than students.

Crits are seen as a vital part of the education, and spe-cial emphasis is placed on communication.

As most work is done on computers now and desks are not always needed, there is a large area for re-laxed work, where discussion between the years is especially prevalent. The Crit Space Doubles up as this when not in use.

The “cranking” of the building makes it immediately apparent that the building is related to the original architecture school, the only other building at an an-gle with relation to the rest of the university, and also creates a “funnel” to the university parade from the newly created plaza.

Although the new building is designed to encourage interaction from the public with the department, this does not apply to the studios. These have been kept deliberately separate. The main entrance to the department is still through 6East, and this is where members of the public would go first.

Pushing the build-ing down creates a larger plaza, as well as keeping the elevation of 6E exposed.

Chamfering the corners creates geometry that better comple-ments 6E. As well as that, it makes the light-heavy contrast stronger, and creates a more delicate connection with 6E.

The building is pulled into 3 piec-es, with a continu-ous window provid-ing light in between the sections. This emphasises the importance of the crit area

The building is pulled into 3 piec-es, with a continu-ous window provid-ing light in between the sections. This emphasises the importance of the crit area

The translucent glass panels are more prevalent on the south facade where solar gain is an issue, the clear glass is more prev-alent on the north facade to allow natural lighting of the studios.

The main corridor running through the center of 6E is continued through the new addition, which makes in-teraction between the two buildings easy,

Almost all the prevalent features of the architecture on cam-pus also occur in my building. The campus generally consists of concrete bands with floor to ceiling glazing in all direc-tions, with a strong element of verticality. These all occur on my building, matching the sizes of 6E. There is also a trend of

In keeping with much of the rest of university, my building will have floor to ceiling glazing on all elevations. However my glazing will consist of two different types of U-Channels. The clear ones will be to facilitate views outside the building, much like conventional glazing. The rest will be made up of translucent glazing, that will be filled with insulation. This has a U-Value of only 0.19. It also blocks out most of the incident solar radiation, and removes glare, giving an even spread of light, perfect for studio environment.

The north and south facades will be different, the south containing more translucent and the north more transparent, in order to reduce solar gains and increase natural light. The clear glazing on the south side will also contain louvers within the double skin in order to reduce glare, whilst maintaining a clean facade like the rest of campus.

Although this image is not perfectly accurate, it goes a long way to show the even spread f light throughout the studio space.

Summer

WinterThe double wall also means that through controllable vents, it can be used to heat the building. The sun heats the air in the cavity, and it is circulated through the building. In summer, this can be reversed, and the heat within the cavity exhausted to the outside, further reducing the incident solar energy.When the heating through the double skin façade is not enough, any additional ventilation will use heat exchange to reduce heating energy.

The workshop will be semi-sunken into the ground. This will im-prove the sound insulation, and reduce noise for other parts of the building from loud machinery. The semi sunken workshop also means that the studio receives top level lighting, which is ideal for workshops to increase wall area. The high level windows are also accessible from above for the public, becoming seating steps. The horizontals will be constructed from metal, while the verticals will be glass. This means that only diffuse light will be able to enter during the summer, as all high angle sunlight will be blocked. Low angle sun will be able to enter however during the winter, when additional isolation is wanted.

North Elevation - 1:200@A2

East Elevation - 1:200@A2

2012-13_2nd_Yr_PROJECT_3_-_ARCHITECTURE_SCHOOL_SELF_ASSESSMENT

Year Two Design Studio – AR20017 – Semester One

Project 3: Architecture School (Self Assessment)

Feedback Sheet 2012-13 Design Report final submission date: 15:00 Monday 28th January 2013

STUDENT NAME

The criteria by which the ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL project will be assessed are: On completion of each project each student must: 1. demonstrate the ability to employ appropriate means and conventions of architectural representation. 2. demonstrate the ability to analyse context and use this analysis to inform their design. 3. demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements of a given brief.

The following categories give an indication of the standard reached. Of course not every ILO fits neatly into a particular section. This is why sometimes one or more sections may be circled. This means the ILO is border-line between the two.

1. Demonstrate the ability to employ appropriate means and conventions of architectural representation

Outstanding Excellent Good Competent Adequate Fail at this stage No submission

Comments

2. Demonstrate the ability to analyse context and use this analysis to inform their design

Outstanding Excellent Good Competent Adequate Fail at this stage No submission

Comments

3. Demonstrate the ability to meet the requirements of a given brief

Outstanding Excellent Good Competent Adequate Fail at this stage No submission

Comments

OVERALL MARK

Justin Frank

My drawings and renders are continuing to improve, giving more of an idea of how the spaces feel. However, my parti diagrams are definitely an area in which I can improve, to better convey how I reached my final design. This is a definite need for improve-ment, as i put a lot of thought into my design that is not shown in the brochure. Another issue is that I run out of time at the end of projects because I spend too long designing, and don’t have enough time to get all my drawings up to the best standard i can.

I think my response to context was very good, taking outdated design of the campus and reinterpreting it to modern day standards, as well as creating a very functional architecture department that worked together with the surrounding buildings.

My response to the brief was very different from most peoples designs, and very different from my expectations. However I think I have responded to the brief quite well, and managed to create a working architecture department whilst staying true to my concepts and analysis. The arrangement of spaces was very quickly reached, and executed well. However, some of my rooms in my servant space became rath-er awkward, as I found it difficult to fit these in, with varying uses required on each floor. Fitting rooms together is an area for improvement, as is knowing the right dimension for standard rooms (offices, toilets etc)

68%