Fletcher Demolition Progress

Hi Sam, 

Hope you're enjoying the xmas break. Just wanted to share these photos of Fletcher low rise and Fletcher Tower with you. You can see that in the low rise now they are well on their way with the demolition of it and you can really see the skeletal frame of the building. 

I hope to have a similar structure in my building too as I discussed with you in our last tutorial (May have to double up the RHS columns in the workshop spaces in order to make them work). 

I'm currently working on an environmental strategy for the building, I want to make use of the river alongside the site but as it's stagnant it's proving difficult so I think i need to look at other methods. In my tutorial with Rob Atherton, he mentioned I'd need mechanical ventilation in the workshops for the extraction etc. 

Anyway, just wanted to share these photos with you.

Have a nice Christmas! 

Veena :) 

Workshop 2 Thoughts

Hi Sam,

Just thought I would make a quick post to review the feedback I received from the workshop. Looking at my review sheet and my own recollection the key questions raised were:

1. The tower element was not visually designed.
2. The hangar element was not visually designed.
3. Issues relating to the large elements (tower/hangar) in terms bulk and scale of in the context of a planning application, Tom also mentioned the issue of infrastructure briefly.
4. Key sections through hangar an tower missing.
5. The pod loading system was questioned, is it quicker? is it necessary? although I think that this was resolved when I finally got round to talking through the arrivals terminal. 
6. How do the airships anchor to the building.

I'll comment on these now and attempt to address some of these for our meeting on Thursday, but for now to get the ball rolling

1,2,3 and 4
For the review I focused on the layout of my terminal rather than the tower and hangar elements, I suppose that I had been making sure I tried to get the bread and butter of this project functioning correctly before I started the hangar, tower and mechanical elements of the project. Although I had massed them out in model form and worked out the circulation of pods/ airship hangar entry etc. the form itself was not resolved at all.

Tom mentioned bulk and scale as an issue in the review, would it be fair to argue that because the nature of the project as one of the flagship terminals for a worldwide network that some leeway would be afforded on the bulk an scale of the project? This is the kind of exceptional project that would be given this kind of leeway for both its social and economic benefits it brings to the local area.

Finally Tom also mentioned the infrastructural issues this is something which I highlighted in my Town Plan, which highlighted both the connection of Farnborough to existing transport infrastructure as well as the flight path of incoming and outgoing aircraft at the existing aerodrome.

Site Plan, highlighting the local transport infrastructure.

5&6
I feel that the design of the pods and the mechanism by which they are circulated through both the hangar and the tower is the next step in the design of the project, I have avoided getting bogged down in the specifics of the mechanism up until now however I think that this is the element of the architecture which will give the project it's theater, with visible circulation of the pods and docking and disembarking of the airships.


Review 2 Board Layout

I have looked at the requirements for Review 2 and they say:

"APART FROM THE REPORT AND CD, THERE ARE NO REQUIRED OUTPUTS FOR REVIEW 2. STUDENTS CAN
PRESENT WHATEVER THEY WISH.
The outputs listed are suggested only, although some of them may be necessary for a successful outcome at Review 3.
They are therefore shown in grey text."

They are:

"recommended drawings
• A complete set of plans, elevations, and sections. At least the ground floor plan, one of the sections, and one of the
elevations, should be at 1:200. All drawings should show the relationship of the project to its immediate context.
• A location plan or location model, showing the surrounding context and the new building itself.
• At least two 3D views of the project (one internal and one external) depicting the life of the building, in its context
recommended models
(in addition to any location model as mentioned above): a model or models of the building, to any scale. Models must be
placed where the jury can see them. This model will be the most important item you present."

From this I have drawn up a board layout and I am currently working through some ideas in my head for the digital presentation which was beyond poor in the previous review, however i intend to utilise GIFs and use it to go through areas of my terminal at a larger scale. I think this is important to nail down early due to the large nature of my project fitting it all on the board in a cohesive manner is a challenge.

2 Projects I Aspire To

Just as a quick addition I though I would include some images from a couple of projects which I aspire for my own to resemble. Just to give you and idea of where I want to head, with large 3D's to give the overview, then breaking the project down into drawings of its individual parts.

Slow Fish Market

Frackpool

This week I just aim to finish my site model, sketch some proposals for the tower/ hangar elements, produce an outline proposal for the tower/pod mechanism and possibly begin modelling it.


Thanks,
Andrew



As an appendix I though I would attach some pages from my review:

Site Plan

Departures, arrivals and baggage circulation.

Section through departures terminal,
highlighting environmental approach.