I was assigned to attend to John’s review and make comments on his work. His concept for his project is basically the shape of the apparatus bays and the orientation of them. He did a lot of site manipulation regarding the extension of one of the roads of the site and then he shaped his building based on the orientation of the apparatus bay sizes going hand by hand with the extended road. He has some interesting aspects in his project. One of them is the idea of having the residential area on a second level, above the apparatus bays and storage areas. By doing this, he had an interesting view from the residential area, looking down into the apparatus bay. I think that this idea is really strong because there is a clear emphasis in the views and the connection between the upper floor and the apparatus bay. Regarding daylight and natural ventilation, John decided to go with the idea of having a glass roof above the apparatus bay that brings sunlight into that space and also there is an opportunity for natural ventilation if that roof has operable windows to some extent. He also tried to address the idea of circulation, especially for the fire fighters on how to get from the residential area into the apparatus bay in order to maximize efficiency. I think that the comments on John’s review were both positive and negative but all of them helpful in order for him to move forward regarding the next steps of design process even though we don’t have a lot of time until the final project is due.

Regarding John’s board and presentation, I think he did a great job in terms of board composition including drawings both in plan and section, diagrams that explained his concept in a clear way, two perspectives showing important spaces of his building, and a site plan that addresses the connection between his building and the landscape and how is the making that connection. I think that in terms of the perspective that he showed in his review, for the next one I will make them bigger so they can occupy more space in the boards and emphasize its importance. I suggest to John also the idea of having a perspective form the second floor, overlooking the apparatus bay because I think that space is an important one in his project and it will be good if that space is emphasized in a good way. Also other suggestion includes the idea of making the diagrams in a different way. I think that the diagrams that John showed in his review were very clear but at the same time very simple. Maybe for the next review he can try making them as axonometric and include more information. Also one other thing that John did a pretty good job on is including pictures of precedents. I think this is a very important aspect that a lot of people don’t pay close attention to. Including precedents in any presentation shows that the designer took the time to investigate projects that presented similar ideas to have he/she wanted to do. It makes the project look better and stronger.

Like I previously mentioned, there were positive and negative comments that the reviewers had for John’s project in his review. They often expressed the simplicity of his design being a positive aspect and how he look part of site manipulation and building placement in a good way. Some of the other comments included the articulation of the elevations in order to show the building as a continuous bar. They mentioned that in plan view, his project shows a clear continuous bar going from one corner of the building to another. That idea was not expressed in a good way in the sides of the building and that is one of the things that John has to work on. Also they mentioned the idea of having a big massive circulation on the second floor and the idea of having the roof also served as part of the second floor and not only the first one. One of the other aspects of his building that they focused on was the extension of the road in order to create boundaries for the site in the area of his building. They said that there is a really tight space in between the edge of the building and the road in order for the trucks to maneuver and get out of the building or get in. He has to articulate that space in a better way and give more space for the trucks to go through the road and get inside or outside the building in an efficient and fast way. The reviewers, especially Jamie Cooper, kept talking about the facades of John’s building and that they don’t express the same idea that the roof is. Focusing on the fire trucks side façade, they mentioned that it was kind of simple and not articulated in a good way and that he had to rethink this approach to that. They suggested the idea of articulating the bay size (or door) all around the building and make it speak the same language. Regarding natural ventilation and sunlight, they suggested the idea of having solar panels in the roof for light and electricity and in that way make the building serve as a sustainable place as well.

I think that the reviewers gave John good feedback in order for him to move forward on his design. I think that they focused more on the articulation of the facades and how to make the building speak the same language in every part of it. They also focused on how is John treating the connection between the building and the site, and they said that he might want to consider that aspect and make it look more clear and better. I think that the organization of the landscape is simple and clear but maybe John will want to emphasize more the circulation paths of the users around the building and the connections from the doors of the building to the landscape and the outside spaces. Overall I think that John’s project is strong and clear. His concept is clear and the way in which he treated all the parts of the program to fit his concept was done in a good way. Like all projects always, there is some stuff that has to be change or modified to make the project stronger and to look better. I think that if John takes the advise from the reviewers on how to move forward and the things that he has to change in his project, he will make his project stronger and better for the final review.