THEORIES USED IN DESIGN PROCESS: PA 2 STUDIO PROJECT

Architecture Theory Class Q

Haninati Kirana/08111940000038

1. INTRODUCTION

Design, rather than being an isolated activity or even a discrete discipline, can be seen as a way
of thinking found throughout all of human activity and shared among many disciplines. Architectural theory
is defined by the influences that come from different disciplines that go through the process of translation
to the domain of architecture. (Plowright, 2014).

As a result, theories appear as visual languages in architecture. Theory in architecture itself is a

general statement that deals with what architecture is,what architecture has to achieve, and how the best
way to design. theory is derived from several hypotheses of previous designers who found a similarity in
studies that have been carried out and collected into a single similar topic. The theory in architecture itself
is not used to determine the outcome of a design but as a guide in the design process.

In this essay I will break down the theories I used during my 2nd year undergraduate study studio
project, designing a nature school in an urban setting. The theories used are often established
unconsciously and biased instead of intended during or before the process of designing. I will be focusing
on two different theories approached; Domain to domain transfer I used consciously as a part integrated
to the framework I use and Critical Regionalism I take the liberty to use as an approach, but came to realize
only at the end of the design process.

2. DESIGNING WITH THEORIES

2.1. The Force-Based Framework

In the design process, analysing and utilizing the underlying theories are deeply related to
the design framework. Framing ‘refers to the process by which people develop a particular
conceptualization of an issue or reorient their thinking about an issue’. Biases are formed in the
beginning by the framework used In Plowright’s words, it is often called a point of view, and colours
our interpretation of events, information, and actions. The framework I used is the force-based
framework. It is as if the design framework is what drives the design process and theories are tools
that help define it. In my case, this starting state is where the concepts develop, and I begin to
consciously use theory as a tool in my design process as it develops.

The force-based framework as described in Plowright’s Revealing Architectural Design

Methods, Frameworks and Tools (2014) is a framework that revolves around forces, hence the
name. By identifying forces, designers find ways to act upon them strategically, minimizing
conflicts, maximizing potentials and so on. The staple of this framework is the role of starting points
as the main forces and biases, where some forces will take dominance over others. But This does
not necessarily mean other forces are ignored, but the starting point will predetermine the priorities
and arrangements later in the design proposal.
 Any force can be used in this framework as long as the result of that force can be expressed
in a formal response. This means there is either a natural affinity between the force and
architectural syntax or there is a translation that equates the original force to possible architectural
responses. (Plowright, 2014)

Plowright later in the book gives examples of two interestingly different approaches used in
the force-based framework. The first one is Viollet Le-Duc’s take on How to Build a House where
the forces identified are focused on the site, user, and the context of dwelling itself. This calls for a
more traditional approach, using traditional forces as such and translating it to architectural
language. The second one is Rem Koolhaas’ Seattle Public Library where there is one specific
force, the data of the library’s visitors, that translates in architectural form as the shape of the
building.

Figure 1: traditional and main forces in the design

Following the steps, I identified the forces, traditional ones that are related to the context of
sites and users by breaking them down and categorizing them as context, culture and needs and
specific forces, earthquake, green school facilities and sustainability. By researching definitions
and concepts used in these different disciplines, I was able to start my process of explorative
thinking, translating principles from other domains into architectural language, by using the first
principal reduction as a domain-to-domain transfer.

While the analysis provides the content for making decisions in the design process, it is
also used to organize a bias. This is possible as some forces will take precedence over others for
reasons of decision-making. (Plowright, 2014)
2.2. Example Use of Theory in Topology and Massing

While school buildings in cities are usually at least four stories high, I considered the fact
that I am using green school buildings as a force, and one of the ways that I could integrate this
into my design’s facade is by using local materials, and making the classrooms connected with
nature and landscapes. This consideration led me to design two story buildings for the classrooms
and three story buildings for the administration offices as a more formal architectural response.
This is one of the examples of prioritizing one force after another (cost related).

In doing research for design decisions, it is inevitable to not use other’s interpretations of
the transfer from these domains. For example when researching earthquakes, there are developed
technologies in architecture that have been used before, and I took the liberty of implementing
them into my design. Some iterations I managed to do are based around the spatial programming
of the space, by maximizing the potential of each of the forces when they have a crossover in the
design decision. The example of use in my design process is in the spatial programming of the
space.

Figure 2: Diagrams and example plans for school design.

In their journal, Designing for adaptation: the school as sociospatial assemblage, Dovey
and Fischer argue that the traditional classrooms are no longer effective and are a constraint to the
emergence of new pedagogies in learning, and typologies of open classrooms are more suitable.
Dovey also noted the new spaces occurring in new school buildings that support learning, such as
commons, semi-closed learning zones that are at least 40-meter square and are adjacent to
learning spaces and street spaces, learning spaces integrated with circulations.
Clusterization also plays an important role in learning typology, as it helps control
circulations and can be used in my design case, to help minimize the chance of bullying occurring
in schools. In implementing the cluster zone, I used Dovey and Fischer’s guides that are more
suited for a green school, semi-outdoor type of learning.
 Figure 3: adapted typology and massing

Since one of the main forces is earthquakes, while being suited for semi outdoor learning,
the zones are located separately from each other to accommodate circulations and areas of
emergency. Emergency Assembly Points during earthquakes.
And since the users are from different age, it only makes sense to adopt the concept of
clusterization to avoid possibility of bullying and to make the circulation more effective. The typology
of the classroom I adapted from the example diagrams illustrated in the journal, the example
diagram, but with access to outdoor to make it a semi outdoor classroom.

Figure 4: site as a traditional force

There is a constant reference back to the listed qualities of each space to make sure that
they are being met in the design proposal. All decision-making and formal selection is checked
against these qualities as judgement criteria. (Plowright, 2014)

Figure 5: Generic framework of a force-based design process

There are also traditional forces that plays part in designing the shape of the building such
as noise, views, and anything related to the site or the standard of a school building (by using
references such as Neufert’s architect’s data and government standard of school facility, etc.) It is
a way to check this decision making of clusterization and massing, and how they affect the
traditional forces. The ‘constant reference bact to each listed qualities’ as Plowright mentioned,
ended up as design iterations, coming back and forth in these three steps (as seen in figure 3)
propose forms, refine and assemble system. To make sure the needs are met or at least
compromised by the key forces, and the traditional forces.
The orientation of the building is slightly tilted sideways, so that it faces the street. The
cluster in my design is a cluster for music rooms, art rooms, labs and other rooms that do not
require conducive acoustics. The locating and again the orientation of the building is also a
response to public-to-private building hierarchy. These are examples of how a decision in my
design were made through determining the forces. Although as a designer, I acknowledge that
there may have been different theories used that could probably never listed down appropriately,
as the use is either unintended or unconscious.

2.3. Critical Regionalism

The term “critical regionalism” first appeared in 1980’s although the idea of it has been
around for much longer. Modernization leads to a capitalist way of life and a sense of placelessness
where regions are gradually losing their traditional identity. These characteristics can be found in
the International Style buildings and postmodernism’s excessive ornaments that do not serve a
purpose of showing one’s identity.

From my understanding, critical regionalism is using a modern architectural language to

interpret local identity in the design process. It is a proposal that local identity should be promoted
and emphasized more. Designing a green school building that revolves around sustainability, when
I look back on my design, I would argue that it resembles what would be called critical regionalism
in architecture. This is merely a subjective observation, as I had not purposely include the concepts
of this theory consciously in my design process. three of the six points of resistance seem to relate
to my design:

1. It may find its governing inspiration in such things as the range and quality of the local light, or
in tectonic derived from a peculiar structural mode, or in the topography of a given site.
(Frampton, 1983)
The concern is associating local ulture with the building The tectonic of the design is inspired
by rumah panggung where the first floor is utilized as an assembling zone. The use of bamboo
as part of the structure has long been a part of the local architecture.

2. Critical regionalism necessarily involves a more directly dialectic relation with nature, more than
abstract, formal traditions of modern avant-garde architecture allow. (Frampton, 1983)
creating a place-form balance for a green school is to integrate the building with the
environment. One of the ways it is presenter in the design is the semi outdoor classrooms, and
an fully open plan in the first floor, and natural landscapes.

3. The climatic condition, culture, myth, and craft of a region are not to be reduced to indigenous
forms. (Frampton, 1983)
To assemble modified bamboo for roof shingles on a parametric design is rather a new practice,
despite using local materials commonly used and a few local bamboo techniques. The design
also utilize new materials such as concrete slabs and acrylic waterproofing.
 Figure 6: tectonics and the materials used

3. CONCLUSION

The theories used during my studio project are from different people in different disciplines,
from Plowright to Frampton, consciously used or not. Theories are interwoven the design element
or overall concept that informs every design decisions made throughout the project, sometimes
deliberate choices that takes one from concept to realization. Theory is necessary, as I learned
during lectures and during studio classes, to challenge ideas. Since architecture encompasses
different things as a discipline, it is important to see theory as a vault of concepts to instrumentalize
in design thinking. Architecture is a highly intellectual pursuit that centres around how we as a
species interact with and change our environment. As Winston Churchill once said: "We shape our
buildings; thereafter they shape us."
 REFERENCES

1. Dovey, K. and Fisher, K., 2014. Designing for adaptation: The school as socio-spatial assemblage. The
Journal of Architecture, 19

2. Frampton, K., 1993. 20 Toward a Critical Regionalism: Six points for an architecture of
resistance. Postmodernism: a reader, 268.

3. Plowright, P., 2014. Revealing architectural design: methods, frameworks and tools. Routledge.
.