Committee Prep III: The Prepening (Four of Three)

Design Considerations

(this is where the slides and images stop because I haven't put this part of the PPT presentation together yet. Sorry!)
There are certain issues that concern UBC Properties regarding the Underground bus loop and the new University Boulevard Plaza.

• Limited space in the underground waiting area: While more students use the UBC Bus Loop in the morning peak hours than in the afternoon, afternoon use causes a significant problem because students will be waiting in the underground space instead of merely moving through it. While there is adequate space for most buses, there is not enough room for the afternoon B-Line peak (roughly 700 passengers for about 10 minutes)
• UBC Properties Trust has suggested that a good way to mitigate this problem is to use the SUB plaza as a buffer to slow down the movement of students to the 99 B-Line queue.Commercial Impression of Campus: the Campus Community Poll Results (Appendix B) show that many students, faculty and staff are concerned about the impact of a commercial space being the first contact point of visitors with the university of British Columbia.
• Un-public space: By creating a retail plaza as compared to an open space, the commercial space undermines the public nature of the plaza and therefore the University. There should be no question that the university and this space are welcome to all, even if they are unable to support these businesses. In the same vein, students should feel free to act in ways that retailers may feel is not helpful to their businesses.
• Little Green Space: Appendix B also shows that many students/faculty/staff are concerned about losing the Grassy Knoll: one of the few open green spaces left in the centre of campus. They also register concern about a lack of connection to the current use and history of the site.

Proposed action: Redesign the interface between the underground bus loop and the SUB plaza using microarchitectural articulations to address concerns about:

• Limited space in the bus loop
• Limited daylighting in bus loop
• Commercial impressions of campus
• Un-public space
• Lack of green space

Committee Prep III: The Prepening (Three of Three)

I want to apply MA's to the interface between the new UBC underground transit loop and the university proper.

UBC held the UBC Boulevard competition in 2005. Firms were invited to submit designs for the University Boulevard Area, which is surrounded by the green line as shown. This space includes the Bosque, the Grassy Knoll, the lower SUB plaza, the old Bus Loop and parts of University Boulevard. While the competition included these areas, it did not include the underground transit hub then being designed by VIA Architecture.

While much of this space is currently parking and/or driving space, the Grassy Knoll and the lower SUB Plaza are frequently used by students in many different ways. The Grassy Knoll provides a place for students to sit in warmer weather, and the SUB plaza is used for all kinds of demonstrations as well as Storm the Wall.

Due to proximity to the old Bus Loop and the Student Union Building, these two spaces can be identified as some of the most diversely used areas of campus. In addition they are not adjacent to any faculty or department buildings: they are in a neutral part of campus and so 'belong' to all students equally.

The new design for the Unversity boulevard Project was initiated by Moore Yudell Ruble (sp?) and Hughes Condon Marler. MYR has recently dropped the project, which has been picked up by Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg. The two firms have also taken over the work of VIA Architects for the underground station design.

The area includes 100 student residents, a 5 storey office tower and a sizeable amount of retail space. Access to the underground transit loop is limited to one large stairway and two elevators accessed through the adjacent buildings. Paths across the stair stitch together the plaza.

The terminal is divided into three portions: a parking area for buses not in use, a loading area, and a waiting area. The loading and parking areas are separated from the waiting area by a glass wall, with doors that open electronically when buses approach. The parking area is not visible from the waiting area. The parking and loading areas are mechanically vented with most fresh air coming from the entry tunnel, and the waiting area is ventilated through the main stairway. There is no room for commercial space in the underground loop and it will be lit by a mixture of natural and artificial light.

Committee Prep III: The Prepening (Two of Three)

These precedents lead to Microarchitectural Articulations.

Microarchitectural Articulations are drawings that begin to investigate how the relationship between different surfaces can produce ambiguities and encourage different kinds of occupation. Using user requirements from Architectural Graphic Standards, the MA's blend different functions into a single space, allowing different uses at different times.

For example, this Seat/Envelope combination can be used in different ways depending on whether the envelope is closed. Because the surfaces are separated by specific distances derived from relationships to the human body, they imply certain uses. Because they can be used in more than one way, the uses they imply remain somewhat ambiguous.

This ambiguity becomes even more visible when the sectional moments of microarchitectural articulations are combined in three dimensions. Seats, tables, bleachers and counters combine to create different kinds of use opportunities.

Committee Prep III: The Prepening (One of Three)

I've assembled a series of slides that should adequately describe both the microarchitectural articulations (MA's) and the site for the presentation this evening. They're all fancy with a nice font, title pages and citations.



Welcome to this committee meeting. I'm really glad to have everyone here together.

I wrote my Directed Studies about the dichotomy between articulated and flexible space. For a space to be really flexible, it should be able to support a lot of different functions, but in many cases this diminishes the potential for uses not imagined by the designers. I spent some time last semester looking at articulations that can support many different kinds of use.





Vernor Panton's Living Environments from the 1970's are one example how spaces can be articulated and scaled to the human body without regulating how the space is used. Because the shapes all use the same vocabulary the group of different elements work as a single unit composed of many small parts. The result of these articulations is an environment that is ambiguous. Use of the projections is unclear: while they are scaled to the body the lack of definition between floor, ceiling and walls allow users to invent new uses for the landscape. People can lean, sit and lie down: they can sit far apart or close together.

This kind of ambiguity is important for creating a space that is articulated and unprogrammed.

The Weitere Projecktbeteilgte is another example of how ambiguity can create many use possibilities. These pink blocks are made of foam rubber and can be assembled in different ways. They activate a large plaza between two galleries by creating inhabitation spaces in an otherwise empty space. Because of their material they are both comfortable to occupy, and because they are not shaped as benches or chairs users feel free to use them in many different ways.

Joel Sanders' 24/7 Hotel Room Prototype uses ambiguous surfaces in a different way. Because hotel rooms need to be compact, but much of the room is not used for a significant portion of the day, the 24/7 Hotel allows spaces to change from private to public with the deployment of a wall. The articulated surfaces are designed to meet more than one need and so their use can shift as user requirements vary during the day.