The first one's a doozy...

So, next steps:

Look at sorted ambiguous spatial conditions. Cull: determine which should be kept and which need to go. 15-20 is probably the max to start with, although others could be gradually reintroduced as required.

Produce Maya combinations for all ambiguous spatial conditions: remember, project is most creative when not taken too seriously. Have fun!

Move up scale: look at mechanism for combining conditions. Begin to consider general site: rain, sun, ground plane, envelope, doors, etc. Possibility of a matrix to consider options?

Produced 24 hr. use diagram for site. Look at FOA for precedent.

Assemble midterm presentation. Identify key points. Remember to begin meeting with the intent and idea of project. Clarity is key.

Project intent

In my thesis I would like to investigate the effects of small scale articulations on underprogrammed and empty space. Warehouses and open plazas often do not meet the needs of users because they do not incorporate a human scale. By beginning with human dimensions, ambiguous spatial conditions can begin to indicate use without dictating program. In addition they provide possibilities for users to occupy spaces as they see fit.

In order to test the robustness of ambiguous spatial conditions they will be applied to the programmatically diverse transit plaza intended for the UBC Student Union Building area. The open exterior plaza and food court are both possible sites for design, as each is required to support many different programs simultaneously.

Note: This project and my vocabulary no longer include the terms 'kit of parts', 'tool', 'deploy' or 'useful assembly'.

Post committee meeting update

I've spent a significant part of this week working on a paper for another course and trying to make up for the big work push from last weekend. But I'm back on thesis duty full time until the midterm review, which happens Feb 28th.

I was extremely happy with the last meeting. On Monday night I was finally able to spatialize the MA's (which will hereafter be known as ambiguous spatial conditions) by using Maya to loft between three conditions, producing this:

The consensus among my committee members was this is a productive direction and it's time for me to change scale and move up to what I think of as car size: find rules for assembling these guys.

I was shocked to find out that Thesis Advisor M, Big D and the Flame are unable to read my mind. They pointed out to me that the final intent of the project is still unclear to them and that I should really state that at the beginning of my presentation. I think one of the biggest things for the midterm is not so much that I need to move forward with my project as I need to find a way to clearly show what I've been working on, particularly with my DS, so that everyone watching the presentation is clear about where I am going. I'm totally going to rope Team into critiquing what I show so everything is clear. This is the first time I'll be presenting to people who haven't read my DS so it's a great experience, but I never know what's important about my own project.

The idea of a 24 hour diagram of use for the site came up again, so I'll try to produce one for the next meeting, and Thesis Advisor M suggested I be more specific about what I'm looking to critique in my site. I really enjoyed the conversation about how my project subverts all these givens in Vancouver architecture: it isn't anything I was thinking about at all, but I can see how it would apply. It's strange to have people ascribing motives to you that you haven't considered, but I'd like to play with some of the ideas and see what comes up.

Next post: intent!