Andrew Gaffney by Drexel Architecture Program

Andrew Gaffney Polderen Thesis Advisor : Vresilovic

WHO

INVESTIGATION

William Alexander

PROBLEM

King of the Netherlands

What is an issue the world is currently and collectively facing?

ROTTERDAM NEW YORK

ISSUE

LISBON

Rising sea levels are threatening coastal cities and the people that

Theresa May

TOKYO

Adriana Santos

Prime Minister Bjarke Ingles

Student Dr. Magdy Allen

Architect

MUMBAI

QUESTION

Shanghai E.P.A.

PROGRAM

change, what is the fate of urban

Conference Center

areas in close proximity to water

A place to learn from the past,

RIO DE JANEIRO

analyze the present CAPE TOWN

A Place to Exchange Ideas and Communicate

Environmentalist Li Gangji

SINGAPORE

As sea levels rise due to climate

WHAT

U.N. Secretary General

ALEXANDRIA

MIAMI

live in them.

and can architecture help in any way?

Sir Mark Lowlock

SYDNEY

and prepare for the future.

REASON So people from all over the world can

Cities Impacted by Rising Sea Levels

come together and collectively ďŹ nd solutions.

Rising sea levels are harming coastal cities and the inhabitants who live in them. There needs to be a place where the global community can come together to collectively think how they are going to keep themselves safe.

NETHERLANDS POPULATION

SCALE

FACTS

LANGUAGE

CAPITAL Amsterdam

Vaalserbeg

ART

+1,060 Ft

13,086 M2 2,953 M2

Netherlands : 17,000,000

16,309 M2

New Jersey: 9,000,000

COORDINATES 52.1326° N

5.2913° E

CURRENCY

-22 Ft Zuidplaspolder

488 per Km2

CULTURE

ALTITUDE

CONTEXT

TOPOGRAPHY

World 3

Europe

Netherlands

South Holland

Rotterdam

The Netherlands is the best location for my project because the country has a long history of developing water management sytems to keep the country safe. They Dutch posess the knowledge to help other people who are struggling.

PARTI

TYPOLOGIES

I wanted to learn more about how the Netherlands keeps the country safe from ďŹ&#x201A;ooding. Their system is broken down into four typologies; Dunes, Dike Rings, Storm Surge Barriers and Regional Dikes. Some of these typologies have more then one landscape. Despite the differences these defense systems have there were three consistent design compoents throughout all typologies. Water, human and land are the principle components which became the foundation principles for the parti exploration diagrams. The use of the three elements allowed broad interpretations and ideas without getting too speciďŹ c. I was able to think about the partis in a variety of different landscape conditions inspired by the typology study I conducted.

COMPONENTS

CATEGORIES

OPTIONS

Primary Dunes

Secondary Dike Ring

Water

Tertiary Storm Surge Barrier

Human

Quaternary Regional Dikes

Land

TAKEAWAY By disecting the diagrams down to three elements it allowed me to think about the most important relationships my design needed to address. It allowed me to experiment with versatility and different potential relationships between these three forces. 5

There is a wide variety of water defense typologies in the Netherlands with the same three components. These components served as the foundation for the various parti diagrams. The parti for my project derived from these typologies.

PRECEDENTS In applying the three design principles from the water defense typolgy study and parti development I wanted to look at both architectural and landscape projects. I spent time developing options and ideas on my own but wanted to expand beyond my own initial steps. I looked at precedent studies that explored the different relationships between water, human and land. I used a similar method in cutting a diagrammatic section overtop the image to capture how these three elements were interacting with one another. It became clear that the interactions between these three forces created a variety of experiences and how humans percieved land and water. They were all very powerful and poetic. I established that in the design of my project I wanted the user to have a different feeling about water and land as they moved through the building based off the variety I saw in these precedent studies.

Arup Group / Sydney Opera House

V&A Dundee / Kengo Kuma + Associates

Weiss/Manfredi / Hunter’s Point South Park

Diller Scoﬁdio + Renfro / Inst Contemporary Art

SNOHETTA / Oslo Opera House

Marc Van Vliet / Floating Observatory

Christo / Floating Piers

NEXT Architects / Zalige Bridge

Henning Larsen / Town Hall Eysturkommuna

Gjode & Povlsgaard Arkitekter / Inﬁnite Bridge

Phillip Johnson / Fort Worth Gardens

Project Unknown

Moses Bridge / RO&AD Architecten

SNOHETTA / Under

Carpa Olivera / Colectivo Urbano

TAKEAWAY Each element informs the other and creates a reaction. There is deﬁnitely hierarchy behind each of these projects thats driving the relationship between the remaining two. Together these three components create an experience, all of which one experiences water and land. 7

Using the same language from the parti development for these landscape and architectural precedent studies, the relationship between water human and land was diagrammed. These projects helped create spaces and moves in my design.

CREATURE MODELS To build off the parti and precedent analysis once more and with the help of the site model I built I was able to take my ideas and parti design to transition then from two dimensions to three dimensions. In addition to the basswood creature models I also lasetcut with white matboard the form of the site. It stood out from the brown chipboard and I was able to sketch site ideas creating a more developed design idea. With the addition of the third dimension and the help of the site model I was able to test scale and proportions with the adjacent massings. I wanted to develop a small, medium and large building scheme to get a sense of what felt right on the site.

FEEDBACK The feedback from the Fall ﬁnal review was really positive and gave me a new wave of energy and excitement to start the Winter with. From the powerful, compelling and thorough research I had shown the jury was conﬁdent that my project should be within the city of Rotterdam in the Netherlands. I wanted to end my presentation and term transitioning from research to design development SCHEME 1: SMALL

and parti exploration. The jury was very helpful in their commentary to establish how the research was going to be illustrated in the design of the site and building. The overarching theme of the commentary could be summed up by this statement “The building needs to be the model for design in the 21st Century for water management in architecture.” Because the building is acting as a global conference center the architecture needs to show how a builing needs to be designed to withstand ﬂoods. Much of the commentary surrounded around how the site can take in and store water. How exterior spaces can be designed for both water retention as well as public use. The integration of these systems really needs to be one system that can address both needs. The second most important theme of commentary became how was water going to be introduced to create a poetic and dynamic experience where visitors are always reminded of why they came to this building.

SCHEME 2: MEDIUM

TAKEAWAY The design scheme that was most appropriate for the site was the small option. This allowed for site design options and best ﬁt with the scale and heights of the adjacent building scales. 9

SCHEME 3: LARGE

The creature models initiated a conversation about how the building should become the model for architecture and water management. The building moves needed to support a building that could stand a ﬂood and take on water.

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT The design experience I worked towards in the winter can be seen in the collage images. Water has numerous experiential qualities that these collages document. I wanted water to be seen, heard, felt and inform the scale of spaces. This servied as the principle for the experience throughout winter term. In working through them with hard lines building drawings I developed a process going between hard lines drawings and using prismacolor markets on top. I wanted to go over what I had generated from Revit and see if this was what I was intending going back to a simplier design method. When layering on information I thought about circulation, light, water and views from inside and outside the building.

EXPERIENCE

FEEDBACK From the feedback I recieved I made a very strong attempt to integrate the jury’s commentary into the process. I strongly agreed with the commentary the jury gave me and the direction this project should go. I was happy to be on the same page with the jury as well as the interest in the ideas they had. Unfortunately the design development brought me away from the direction I should have headed. I spent time on matters that should not have really been addressed that I thought should happen, but I was wrong. I was given the impression that my design development was bringing me to a really strong place however the jury assured me that was not the case. The end of Winter term was a very difﬁuclt time because I realized quickly I needed to change gears. I did not have

SECTION DIAGRAMS

alot of time to redesign and ultimately that was the direction I needed to go in. As a result I did completely scrap the building from Winter and start fresh. I went in a completely different direction. I went back to the commentary I recieved in the Fall term and tried to get inspired and energized by their words. I clearly needed help so I reached out to my mentor in the year above to give me the students perspective in this matter. Starting fresh was not an easy choice but ultimately it was the right choice. I worked on a parti scheme that went back to the earlier typology studies I did and the precedent studies to see how the three design components could be addressed. I was able to ﬁnd a more dynamic design and make the most of the remaining time I had left.

TAKEAWAY The experiential goals I set out to accomplish did not come to fruition because the building scale was too large. I never got into the building spaces.

The design development in the Winter term explored the experiential properties of water and how they could create unique moments on the interior and exterior. The spatial qualities water offered were explored by collaging inﬂuential images.

FINAL DRAWINGS It was really important to have a aerial view of my project to capture how the building sits on the site. You can see how the parti development really informed the overall building mass to the final design. It was important to landscape the site that allowed for the general public to come and eventually go up to the berm. The scale of the final design fits well within the context offering an external experience.

PARTI AXONOMETRIC

The site is located on a peninsula in the heart of Rotterdam. Establishing a connection between my site and the water was facilitated by creating a berm. The berm allows the building and the people to experience both land and water when visiting.

FINAL DRAWINGS + 112’

The building uses the land to connect to the ground and the water. The berm has two points of outreach. By gradually sloping them the space can be occupied by people wishing to experience the exterior conditions.

+ 95’ + 80’

+ 65’ + 50’

+ 35’

+ 20’ B

+ 0’ - 5’

SECTION C

1/16” = 1’-0”

+ 112’

+ 95’ + 80’

+ 65’ + 50’

+ 35’

+ 20’

+ 0’ - 10’ BERM LEVEL 1/16” = 1’-0”

SECTION D

1/16” = 1’-0”

The interior spatial experience consists of an informal cascade designed for informal conversations between visitors. The cascade is where users congregate together and meet one another and start a conversation about water management.

FINAL PRESENTATION The ďŹ nal presentation drawings were comprised of two plots. Overall the two plots made a larger composition of three feet high and fourteen feet long. This plot which is the left plot contains important exterior drawings and views. I wanted to have one large image that highlighted the overll site, massing and form aspects in one. I felt that having an aerial axonometric drawing captured the most aspects in one drawing. The North and South elevations show how the building actually revels itself towards the waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge showing there is in fact a building underneath this berm. It appears that the building sits atop this landscaped plinth but in fact it does occupy the ground level. By gradually sloping the berm, it makes a gesture to the public and those around the building that the top of the berm can be occupied by the general public giving them an opportunity to use the exterior spaces. The landscape does not stop as it moves up the berm. It looks like one cohesive piece of earth rising.

The building becomes a part of the land by sloping the typography gradually to connect to the site and the water. The activity and conversation that occur in the building are a combination and outreach to land and water.

FINAL PRESENTATION The right presentation board has information regarding the interior spaces of the building and the key moments which can be seen with the four vignettes. When designing this building I wanted water to be always present in the spaces people were gathering in and congregating. Water is the uniting factor as to why these people are here. It is the topic of conversation. Water has visual, textural, acoustical and reflective properties. I wanted to use those properties to help create the experience in the interior. The circulation within the building consists of two cascades on the North and South elevations creating one large flowing space offering users a chance to sit down and take a break from a meeting. By sitting in informal spaces with other uers the idea would be that this typology would help to generate a dialogue between two visitors and build a connection. In the center of the building and along some edges I wanted to include break out office rooms for a more formal conversation. The cascade initiates a conversation while the conference room helps establish a deeped more specific conversation between users.

The spaces within the building create an informal cascade allowing users to establish a genuine and organic dialogue with one another. These spaces are always activated by the acoustical, kinetic, textural and reﬂective properties water posesses.

FINAL THOUGHTS Thesis is an incredibly difﬁcult and rewarding year. You have to believe in yourself and your project. You have to ﬁght for yourself and push through alot of uncertainty. The biggest lesson I take away from thesis is that you have to listen to your gut and be proactive about it. You have to take that responsibility and be your own catalyst. You have to initiate and lead the conversation and directon. There is a tremendous amount of responsibility and pressure one faces. I learned asking oneself questions can be really effective. When doing research I asked myself how does this help or inform my argument? Always analyze the takeaway. When designing I asked myself does this enhance the spirit of my thesis question? Although thesis is a year long project it goes by tremendously quick. Every minute counts. Take a step back and remind yourself where you want to end up, compare it to what you are learning and discovering and use that as your frame of reference when you can not decided on your course of action. Quotes By Andrew Gaffney “The best ideas are the ones you can draw with the fewest lines.” “Nothing good happens after 2A.M.” “I have learned the value of picking up the pen, I have also learned the value of putting it down.”