Anyone have any thoughts on Visitor Centres?
I am writing an article for "Building" magazine here in the UK and I would like to poll you lot on the following themes regarding Visitor Centres:
the thing I am starting to realise in researching these building types is that they are in essence microcosms of mixed use. However, they are perhaps even more predetermined by their context and hence the opportunity arises for some really special architecture.
The building has either to be a landmark or iconic in some way. Invariably this leads to greater attention to detail but there are some paradoxes:
1) operational flow is king in a visitor centre so the space has to support ease of navigation, orientation for the visitor and also convey a message about the attraction - much like a museum or gallery
2) the building needs to be a statement - a landmark or iconic. There is a difference between these two concepts. Landmark can be established through its location whilst iconic is far more etheral. In fact, being iconic implies the form has to have a message - this can be derived from the context or the exhibition that resides within the building. But then this fixes the design permanently which can age the building over time.
3) Context vs attraction - which defines the architecture and its form?
I could go on but I really do have to write the damn article!
Do drop any comments you might have on these....
May 28, 07 8:18 am ·
·
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.
Visitor Centres
Anyone have any thoughts on Visitor Centres?
I am writing an article for "Building" magazine here in the UK and I would like to poll you lot on the following themes regarding Visitor Centres:
Emerging Design trends?
Opportunity for architectural expression?
Temporary structures?
Micro Mixed Use?
New Build or Refurb?
Useful or Superfilous?
Much Obliged and decent responses may get a mention in the article. Check out
http://www.davislangdon.com/EME/Research/ResearchFinder/CostModels/MuseumsAndGalleries_Sep06/
for an example of the type of article.
Cheers - ThinKing
toshiko mori architect did a nice competition proposal for a frank lloyd wright bldg in buffalo.
see their website.
http://www.tmarch.com/projects/cultural/darwin_d._martin_house_visitor_center/
arkitekt
mnay thanks for this - v.kool
the thing I am starting to realise in researching these building types is that they are in essence microcosms of mixed use. However, they are perhaps even more predetermined by their context and hence the opportunity arises for some really special architecture.
The building has either to be a landmark or iconic in some way. Invariably this leads to greater attention to detail but there are some paradoxes:
1) operational flow is king in a visitor centre so the space has to support ease of navigation, orientation for the visitor and also convey a message about the attraction - much like a museum or gallery
2) the building needs to be a statement - a landmark or iconic. There is a difference between these two concepts. Landmark can be established through its location whilst iconic is far more etheral. In fact, being iconic implies the form has to have a message - this can be derived from the context or the exhibition that resides within the building. But then this fixes the design permanently which can age the building over time.
3) Context vs attraction - which defines the architecture and its form?
I could go on but I really do have to write the damn article!
Do drop any comments you might have on these....
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.