I would really appreciate any help. I need help regarding starting a main zoning, or conceptual zoning. As in the functions and spaces should follow a certain philosophy/ big umbrella.
How should I start ? What are the different approaches ?
The project I am dealing with at the moment is designing a student's center.
There is really only one approach; look up the designated zoning of your parcel, then look up all the regulations, use, height, setbacks, FAR, Parking, etc., for that zoning. If the municipality you are working in has a pre-design planning review, pay the fee, which is usually minimal, and sit down with a planner to determine if you are interpreting the code the same way.
The impression I got was that the question was more about 'programming' or the layout of spaces in a building, rather than 'zoning' or determining building use and other regulations from city planners. This would change the advice dramatically.
Unless the 'big umbrella' you're following is a form-based zoning code like the Miami 21 and you're trying to design on a more urban scale.
Yes, for some reason at my college they refer to it as "zoning".
Regardless, the situation is that I'm feeling overwhelmed by designing such a big project. There are a lot of functions, offices, lounges, etc. And I need to figure out all the links between them, and come up with a schematic program, that is relevant and proportional to the functions and spaces.
Usually I'll work a plan out in sketch. It helps to have a list made of every single space that is required, as well as any additional interstitial space or evocative statements. It'd help to have the parti written out in bold letters so you're reminded of your overall idea you are working towards. Then at all parts of the design process you reference back to that parti to make sure that your decision strengthens your core idea.
With the list, I've found that using bubble diagrams has helped me for figuring out spatial adjacencies or circulation. It's something that you can use to rough out ideas without worrying too much about final forms or proportions and just think of spatial arrangement of building program.
After that, I usually figure out the average square footage I'd need for each space and draw a box which meets the sizes in AutoCad and label it with the name of the space. These boxes are easy enough to drag around and do a proportional and formal layout.
But each method is specific to the individual. The only correct way is the one which works for you personally.
However, for some reason, everyone seems to agree that the bubble diagrams are so out-dated at this point, and "useless". We are always advised to refrain from using them.
How would "everyone" know what is out of date in school?I'm not saying bubble diagrams are or are not out of date but the point is to keep things loose and allow you to quickly explore ideas and trash them. The computer has a tendency to slow down the process and in my experience people will settle into a flawed design because of the time invested. The computer generated programs and forms based on data mining and conceptual ideas are just a schools way of forcing you out of the box. You need to determine the point of the project and proceed with this in mind. Floor plan layout and adjacency are probably not the point (although they could be). It took me 4 years to learn that school projects are as complicated as you make them. If you're going to complicate something complicate it in a way that explores something you want to know or something you enjoy. Otherwise you'll spend hours "figuring out" a floor plan that no one could give a $hit about, sections that don't mean anything or just making models and renderings of a piece of crap because you were too far into it to back up.
just don't use the bubble diagrams in your presentations as finished work. I don't think it means you shouldn't think about adjacencies and relationships by sketching something by hand while thinking and figuring stuff out.
Given that bubble diagrams are a tool and not an end product, what is the rub against bubble diagrams? Why are they outdated? That's kind of how I've been doing it (and it has worked ok), but if there is another paradigm out there, I would love to hear about it. I've been in the architectural hinterlands for too long.
But according to what I've been hearing for the past 2 years, block diagrams that are proportional and relative to the site are best to use. They are indeed helpful, and save a lot of time. There is nothing wrong with bubble diagrams, but from what I hear, and these are not my word, they tend to not be that helpful, esp. in big programs.
Take a look at some precedents and go from there. You don't need to reinvent the wheel every time.
If you have to start from scratch group things together by function and the people who need to use the spaces (ie public, private, support staff ect) there are some adjacency matrix's you can use for really complicated programs but its a fairly serious undertaking.
Work big to small (major spaces and their adjacency to each other, then the spaces that require adjacency/support t the major spaces and where they should be. Keep negative adjacency in mind as well (ie. loud and quiet) You have to keep the vertical element in mind as well. Stacked spaces need to add up to the same square footage, some spaces need to have higher ceilings than others, putting something with a 20' ceiling beside a bunch of areas that require 9' ceilings creates oddities that can be intentional but if not end up looking like the mistake they are.
This is very important in the real world where people are going to have to live/work in your design, you will get to do this for the rest of your life as an architect. Know this though, you will not do it well with your level of experience and the information you have, give it a shot, make some decisions and move on. You get mired to deep in this stuff on a school project you will drive yourself insane (and end up with a $hitty project). A real project has all kinds of information this type of programming is based on that you don't have.
I work on program-driven buildings, like hospitals and laboratories. Bubble diagrams are especially helpful on large, complex programs because they help you organize and visualize relationships between the spaces. I can't think of any recent projects I've done where I didn't use bubble diagrams.
I bet whoever told you that bubble diagrams are outdated probably hasn't worked in an architecture office for a long time.
Help with zoning, how should I start and what are the different approaches ?
I would really appreciate any help. I need help regarding starting a main zoning, or conceptual zoning. As in the functions and spaces should follow a certain philosophy/ big umbrella.
How should I start ? What are the different approaches ?
The project I am dealing with at the moment is designing a student's center.
Thanks, in advance.
When you look at the dark side, careful you must be...for the dark side looks back
There is really only one approach; look up the designated zoning of your parcel, then look up all the regulations, use, height, setbacks, FAR, Parking, etc., for that zoning. If the municipality you are working in has a pre-design planning review, pay the fee, which is usually minimal, and sit down with a planner to determine if you are interpreting the code the same way.
The impression I got was that the question was more about 'programming' or the layout of spaces in a building, rather than 'zoning' or determining building use and other regulations from city planners. This would change the advice dramatically.
Unless the 'big umbrella' you're following is a form-based zoning code like the Miami 21 and you're trying to design on a more urban scale.
Yes, for some reason at my college they refer to it as "zoning".
Regardless, the situation is that I'm feeling overwhelmed by designing such a big project. There are a lot of functions, offices, lounges, etc. And I need to figure out all the links between them, and come up with a schematic program, that is relevant and proportional to the functions and spaces.
Thanks for the replies.
Usually I'll work a plan out in sketch. It helps to have a list made of every single space that is required, as well as any additional interstitial space or evocative statements. It'd help to have the parti written out in bold letters so you're reminded of your overall idea you are working towards. Then at all parts of the design process you reference back to that parti to make sure that your decision strengthens your core idea.
With the list, I've found that using bubble diagrams has helped me for figuring out spatial adjacencies or circulation. It's something that you can use to rough out ideas without worrying too much about final forms or proportions and just think of spatial arrangement of building program.
http://www.marksusser.com/images/concept/bubble_diagram_w.jpg
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/1a/09/50/1a095068966e342476013e80cfbf16df.jpg
After that, I usually figure out the average square footage I'd need for each space and draw a box which meets the sizes in AutoCad and label it with the name of the space. These boxes are easy enough to drag around and do a proportional and formal layout.
But each method is specific to the individual. The only correct way is the one which works for you personally.
great... another chinese copycat
Where is Balkins when we need him?
Yepp, thanks much. That was informative.
However, for some reason, everyone seems to agree that the bubble diagrams are so out-dated at this point, and "useless". We are always advised to refrain from using them.
How would "everyone" know what is out of date in school?I'm not saying bubble diagrams are or are not out of date but the point is to keep things loose and allow you to quickly explore ideas and trash them. The computer has a tendency to slow down the process and in my experience people will settle into a flawed design because of the time invested. The computer generated programs and forms based on data mining and conceptual ideas are just a schools way of forcing you out of the box. You need to determine the point of the project and proceed with this in mind. Floor plan layout and adjacency are probably not the point (although they could be). It took me 4 years to learn that school projects are as complicated as you make them. If you're going to complicate something complicate it in a way that explores something you want to know or something you enjoy. Otherwise you'll spend hours "figuring out" a floor plan that no one could give a $hit about, sections that don't mean anything or just making models and renderings of a piece of crap because you were too far into it to back up.
just don't use the bubble diagrams in your presentations as finished work. I don't think it means you shouldn't think about adjacencies and relationships by sketching something by hand while thinking and figuring stuff out.
Given that bubble diagrams are a tool and not an end product, what is the rub against bubble diagrams? Why are they outdated? That's kind of how I've been doing it (and it has worked ok), but if there is another paradigm out there, I would love to hear about it. I've been in the architectural hinterlands for too long.
I apologize for not making my point more clear.
But according to what I've been hearing for the past 2 years, block diagrams that are proportional and relative to the site are best to use. They are indeed helpful, and save a lot of time. There is nothing wrong with bubble diagrams, but from what I hear, and these are not my word, they tend to not be that helpful, esp. in big programs.
holy shit, problem #1 is that you have schools throwing around the term "zoning" like it can mean whatever the fuck they want.
Take a look at some precedents and go from there. You don't need to reinvent the wheel every time.
If you have to start from scratch group things together by function and the people who need to use the spaces (ie public, private, support staff ect) there are some adjacency matrix's you can use for really complicated programs but its a fairly serious undertaking.
Work big to small (major spaces and their adjacency to each other, then the spaces that require adjacency/support t the major spaces and where they should be. Keep negative adjacency in mind as well (ie. loud and quiet) You have to keep the vertical element in mind as well. Stacked spaces need to add up to the same square footage, some spaces need to have higher ceilings than others, putting something with a 20' ceiling beside a bunch of areas that require 9' ceilings creates oddities that can be intentional but if not end up looking like the mistake they are.
This is very important in the real world where people are going to have to live/work in your design, you will get to do this for the rest of your life as an architect. Know this though, you will not do it well with your level of experience and the information you have, give it a shot, make some decisions and move on. You get mired to deep in this stuff on a school project you will drive yourself insane (and end up with a $hitty project). A real project has all kinds of information this type of programming is based on that you don't have.
I work on program-driven buildings, like hospitals and laboratories. Bubble diagrams are especially helpful on large, complex programs because they help you organize and visualize relationships between the spaces. I can't think of any recent projects I've done where I didn't use bubble diagrams.
I bet whoever told you that bubble diagrams are outdated probably hasn't worked in an architecture office for a long time.
get out of that school... zoning and programming aren't the same xD
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.