Conclusions & takeaways
To finalise this chapter, I conclude with some of my key learnings. The precedent analysis was an important part of my research since it allowed me to find patterns and parameters that could be applied to Market Square during the design process. Those key points defined my design principles later on. In regards to hybrid buildings (Mental Ecology), I found it interesting that the three precedents had the massive scale as a common quality. That made me think about the impact that a typology like this might cause in Market Square. Even though authors like Fernandez Per and Holl ensure that community backlash is highly expected and must happen, I wonder whether it is not necessary an intermediate scale that may act as a transition in contexts more local like Geelong - contrary to large cities like the precedents, which perhaps are more open to radical changes. Rather than understanding the typology as a ‘machine’, I should be more sensitive to human interactions (Social Ecology). This point made me think about the concept of landmark, and how I imagine a landmark for Geelong should be.
The idea of Porosity, which is a constant in the three precedents, also captured my interest and I thought that it was worth it to be explored further since undoubtedly would be related to Environmental Ecology. Learning that hybrid buildings not only have a diverse programme but also had to be related to their context was also key since respond to one of my research question about this topic. The answer is no, they do not have to be impost they must understand the context. Somehow, this approach that value the site, place this typology closer to Social Ecology, whereas the impact that the scale produces, mentioned in the previous paragraph, moves them away. In regards to the precedents analysed for Biophilic design (Environmental Ecology), I took two main learnings. Before starting my research, and being a neophyte in the topic, the visual and physical connection with nature (Nature in Space) was for me the only one possible, which of course was the most evident and obvious. In that sense, One Central Park by considering only this parameter, it is safe to say that gave a response quite superficial - perhaps limited to the ‘marketing’ it
can be done about biophilic design since this parameter is the most evident for those who do not know the topic in-depth?. Contrary, the other two precedents go beyond the obvious and incorporate the contact with Nature through other elements (Natural Analogues). For example, form in the Botanic Garden and materiality in the Steno Diabetes Centre. This was one of my major learning, that certainly made a difference in my final design. Another point that I found interesting and is shown in the Steno Diabetes Centre is the connection with natural systems. I believed it worth further explorations about how the building may offer programmes that encourage people to get engaged with the place. In that aspect, I might be addressing both ecologies, the Environmental and the Social. How through learning and cultural programmes, I might ‘plant a seed’ in the occupants’ soul; being this a very valuable strategy to make the building transcend, create memories within the community, create a place.
A Three-Ecologies Approach to Market Square | Sandra Anahi Mansilla Hsyu
45
