Peer Design Review: Lindsay – Balance

Lindsay’s project focuses on the balance of the site. Her project seeks to bring together the urban world and the park world while maintaining a harmonious balance the function of a firehouse as both home and work for the firefighters. Her project incorporates garden spaces into the building and uses built spaces integrating into the park to maintain this balance between the urban and park worlds. Additionally, she uses the organization of collaborative and private spaces to maintain the balance between work and home for the firefighters.

I think the presentation would benefit greatly from a little more description about the built spaces of the park. Additionally, more explanation about how the layout of the building is maintaining the balance between home and work for the firefighters would make the presentation much stronger. Also, because your concept involves a lot of integration between inside and outside, it would make your drawings more understandable to also have perspective views, especially to show the areas where that integration takes place, such as the indoor gardens in the lobby, or the built spaces in the site outside the building.

The concept for the project is very strong however it is not quite clear enough in current plans and building layout. The presentation mentioned things about the concept and aims for the building and site that are not currently developed in the plans. The idea of bringing gardens into the building is very successful in your project. However, the built spaces in the park are unclear. The built space was mentioned in the presentation however it appears to be relatively small and undetailed. Currently it is not noticeable enough that the balance concept can be seen in the existing outdoor spaces. Extending and detailing these outdoor built spaces would make the balance between urban and park much clearer.

The balance concept between work and home is overall less clear. The building itself is organized and functional, however the concept is not as evident. The presentation mentioned collaborative and private spaces, which are clear on the second floor plan, however the connection of those to the balance between work and home is unclear as most of those spaces are considered home. Additionally, the few work spaces on the second floor are right in the middle between the two major parts of the home designated spaces. In terms of balance, I believe a relocation of these areas, possibly to the first floor, would be very beneficial.

The lobby is a really nice space, but it seems very large. I think making the lobby a little smaller and using that space for something else such as the education/training room would help. Another space that is unclear is the connection between the fire station and the Monitor Museum. The connection is supposed to be the outdoor courtyard however I would not have seen that without it being mentioned. I think if you could add details to the courtyard and possibly tie the courtyard into the rest the built spaces of the site design it would make a really great project.

The first thing the reviewers asked was what the relationship between the fire station and the Monitor Museum is. The courtyard connection was not mentioned in the initial presentation and the reviewers thought it was unclear from the plans. They also mentioned that the free form landscaped edge of the water was very different from the orthogonal lines of the building and the site immediately surrounding the building. Additionally, they wanted to know how the shape of the landscaped edge shows the balance between the orthogonal and free form parts of the site. The intermediate garden space out side the building needs to connect the orthogonal building to the free form landscape. They stated that the presence of the rigid perimeter on the site is contrary to the scattered green spaces. They also suggested bringing more urban built space into the park. Additionally they said the museum appeared equivalent to the courtyard.

Overall, the reviewers felt that the plan showed promises that were not evident in the model or in the sections. Additionally, based on the presentation, the reviewers thought the relationship between the natural and the built spaces would be more fluid than the plans show. The reviewers stated that they felt this was not a building but an operation with spaces. They suggested making the concept of balance between urban and park more extreme. This would allow the concept to become the site. This would replace the free form shoreline, which the reviewers felt was an entirely separate project. Additionally, the reviewers wanted to know better what the symbolic aspect of the building to the surrounding is.

The reviewers spent a lot of time talking about the concept, specifically the urban and park balance. However, they neglected to talk about some important aspects of the project. They didn’t talk at all about the structure of the building or notice that the boat dock appears to be missing from the plans. Additionally, they did not really address how the organization of the spaces in the building shows the balance between work and home. They only discussed the indoor garden spaces in relation to the outdoor built spaces.

In terms of the Orders of Worth, the reviewer’s comments fall into the inspired category. They were mostly concerned with the concept and the site. They did not really address things like efficiency, competition, or any of the aspects in the other categories of the Orders of Worth.

Overall, the concept is very strong and with a few changes the project will be very strong and interesting. Minor changes to the presentation will also go a very long way to helping others understand the project.

Leave a Reply