When it comes to large-scale residential buildings, a complex set of economic, urban, and regulatory systems sometimes seem to have left little room for architectural exploration. Architects often struggle to find a point of entry for inserting their creative perspective in a way that would rethink or progress the typology. The resulting buildings typically reflect the reality of the efficiency-driven market - maximized footprint, relentless repetition, and lowest common denominator design appeal.
Yet, Oyler Wu collaborative has built a library of success on finding the smallest of details, the nuances of nuance, and developing them into refined, varied manifestoes of architecture and design.
When they were first approached by a prominent Taiwanese development company to work on the design of a brand new residential high rise, they expressed interest in finding an architectural approach that challenged these conventions. They were interested in a building that pushed architectural boundaries while simultaneously meeting their economic requirements.
Cautiously optimistic, the developer proposed an arrangement that separated the development of the interior floor plans from the exterior elements, which included balcony floor plans, the front lobby, and all facade design. This left Oyler Wu with 2.5 meters at the front elevation and 1.5m on the side elevations. While it certainly wasn't what most architects would consider ideal, it was just enough to be their point of entry into what would be the office's biggest project to date. While many offices would view such a sliver of space as a limitation, Oyler Wu saw it as an expansion, one that could allow their tendencies and architectural approaches space to explore new territories. Oyler Wu has long turned pages of charcoal, pen, and visions into breathtaking feats of design and structure and with this thickened facade, they discovered a potent freedom where others see only restraint.
Their proposal utilized subtle variations in the geometry of the exterior paneling and layering of material to create a scheme that is not based on repetition but still accommodates the needs of the client. They deployed a strategy of “pixilated lines” by applying a set of exterior paneling in varying materials and differing geometries to run along the façade of the building as a series of pixilated lines. They also deployed a system of incrementally shifting balconies in conjunction with the panels to add more depth to the facade. These “lines” of panels extend from the ground to the top floor to give the illusion of depth and movement as well as formal continuity to the overall project. These “lines” often split to change material and the voids between “lines” of panels to add depth to the reading of the façade. By shifting sections of fritted glass, expanded aluminum screen, solid panels, and steel structure, the buildup of these small differences create large variations in the façade of the building.
The building includes a carefully considered weaving of four materials: 1) expanded aluminum mesh, 2) fritted glass, 3) solid panel, and 4) steel structure. This is to disrupt the repetitious and occasionally quirky floor plans, while still allowing for views beyond and providing a sun-shading system. The interplay between metal screens, glass, and solid panels is not merely aesthetic but it also performs functionally. This strategy simultaneously allows for natural light while reducing heat gain, provides privacy for rooms beyond, and it creates a buffer between the interior of the building adjacent elevated highway. And importantly, the exterior of the building communicates a more dynamic building- one that captures the spirit, scale, and multi-layered nature of the city.
This is good. Why can't we get this quality in US residential buildings? Taipei, from what i've seen, has a higher social value/respect for good design, while the CityLab-NYT big urbanists in US fetishize banal developer junk.
All 3 Comments
Love this project. I had the pleasure of watching Dwayne Oyler present it to a small gathering of architects in Indy not long ago and it sounds like it was a very fun project that they worked through with their typical poetic/pragmatic process of drawing and modeling. Beautiful.
This is great project. I feel like the design process is almost illustrated by the materials that are used.
This is good. Why can't we get this quality in US residential buildings? Taipei, from what i've seen, has a higher social value/respect for good design, while the CityLab-NYT big urbanists in US fetishize banal developer junk.
Honestly, Chemex, I really wonder this too. The dreck that goes up in my town is appalling, and while this kind of project would get a lot of negative attention from the traditional folk it would also draw a lot of positive attention that would result in high occupancy, I am sure.
I mean, is there really that much to wonder about? The equity that architects have in the building/construction industry is laughable. Developers drive the project and cut the checks, so when something interesting and/or elegant is presented that doesn't align with their objectives, then it's rejected.
It seems the only way this is bypassed is if their is a patron/artist relationship between the architect and client, or if there is a way to do it cheaply enough that the developer approves.
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.