The
Proscenium Lucy Lever-Brine
Masters of Architecture Design Thesis Studio 11
Part One: Research & Thesis Proposal Studio 11 Introduction 02 Urban Context 04 Defining the Campus Hub 10 Where is the Parville campus centre?
14
History as Identity 22 UoM: Why so serious? 28 Brand to Built Form 30 Thesis Statement 40
Part Two: Interventions & Methodologies The Postmodern Lens Methodology
44
Physicality & Context 48 Semiotics 50 Learning from Las Vegas 52 Site Thoroughfare 54 The Postmodern Lens: Historical Identity
58
The Postmodern Lens: Values & Aspirational Identity
60
Case Studies 64
Contents Part Three: Concept & Sketch Design Preliminary Massing 72 Preliminary Exterior Iteration 78 Functional Zoning 84
Part Four: Final Design Revised Massing Approach 100 External Identity 112 External Material Selection 114 Functional Zoning - Sectional Axonometric
120
Internal Material Selection 126 Performance Requirements 128 Experiential Journey 130
References
158
Part One
Research & Thesis Proposal
Architecture as Identity: The New Fishermans Bend Campus As institutions that lead the world in innovation, creativity and independent thought, universities have long sought to establish their identities on the national and world stage as places that provide generations with the tools and knowledge to better the world as a whole. The university campus is a vessel for ideas and growth, that aims to provide a welcoming environment for students and staff. Universities can be considered as different types of learning machines, that in their own ways provide a range of opportunities and teaching methodologies that are unique to the institutions themselves. Each university offers something different, and this is reflected in that universities identity that it promotes through its brand.
It is vital that the new Campus Hub demonstrate this identity through its architecture, as the University of Melbourne campus will make up only a portion of the new developments on the larger site. Students changing campus, prospective students, staff and visitors will need to be able to orient themselves in a foreign environment and easily identify their first point of contact at the new campus. The following investigation will demonstrate what in particular the Campus Hub will need to be physically and metaphorically, and draw conclusions on the specific characteristics of the University of Melbourne’s identity, serving as a basis for a new design for the Fishermans Bend Campus Hub.
Studio 11 requires students to design a new University of Melbourne Campus Hub Building at the proposed Fishermans Bend site in Port Melbourne. This thesis will focus on how the University of Melbourne’s identity as a whole can be architecturally represented on a new site that does not embody the university’s typical historical sandstone buildings.
Image: Grimshaw Architects’ Master Plan proposal for the new Univeristy of Melbourne campus at Fishermans Bend. The proposed Campus Hub is outlined in red - only identifiable as belonging to the university due to the large logo at its facade. 02
Parkville Campus
Fishermans Bend Campus
VCA
Urban Context The Fishermans Bend campus will be established as the third of the University of Melbourne’s largest metropolitan campuses in Melbourne. Each campus has its own unique identity that can be identified through the faculties and programs run at each site, however it must be stressed that all three campuses (as well as others that belong to the university) are still united through their values as uniquely belonging to the University of Melbourne. In saying this, the use of each campus will undoubtedly have some influence on the architectural form of each campus’ architecture. The three campuses can be generally identified through their use and reputation as follows:
Parkville Campus: Centre of academic learning and research. It is the university’s primary campus with its history marked with several historical buildings, telling the story of the university’s prestigious past, present and future through its architecture. It also sits within Melbourne’s ‘knowledge precinct’ which includes numerous hospitals and research centres.
Southbank Campus (Victoria College of the Arts): Centre of creative arts. The campus’ buildings play host to animation and visual arts studios, cinemas, set and theatre design workshops and stages for acting and dance performances. The precinct consists of both adaptive reused historical buildings, and eclectic, colourful buildings that reflect the performance nature of the campus.
Fishermans Bend Campus: This campus will be the home of the engineering and architecture faculties of the university. The campus will be known predominantly as a place for ‘making and doing’ rather than scholarly research. It will host the most high-tech and up-to-date facilities and equipment in the state that will allow students the best opportunities for innovation and creation.
04
Fishermans Bend University Precinct
In addition to the new University of Melbourne campus, it is also expected that RMIT and Monash universities will begin developments on other portions of the GMH site. Whilst establishing the area as a large university precinct, the University of Melbourne will also be competing against these universities for academic and facility prestige. Due to this proximity, it is important that the campus’ central building, the campus hub, stands out and is easily identifiable as belonging specifically to the University of Melbourne.
The new university precinct at Fishermans Bend will take over the old General Motors Holden (GMH) manufacturing site. The site is currently in the process of having most of its single and double-storey warehouses demolished to offer a clean slate for future developments. The University of Melbourne has purchased a seven-hectare portion of the site for the development of its new campus, which will be constructed in three stages. The campus hub will be built in Stage 1 of the redevelopment, with more faculties and student facilities emerging over the next decade.
GMH Site for redevelopment Potential site for RMIT and Monash campuses University of Melbourne Campus
06
“Can a building promote a brand, and should it? After all, a lot of building is about functional accommodation… [A building] can take a symbolic role, it can become an emblem, it can become a part of a brand and even be a brand in itself. A building can express the identity of an institution through a stylistic language; it can express both an institution’s inspirations and its aspirations; it can reflect a system of values and place those values in a continuum.” - Robert A.M. Stern at the inauguration of the Spangler Campus Centre, Harvard Business School (2001)
This proposal will begin by drawing attention to a quote by Robert A.M. Stern at the inauguration of the Spangler Campus Centre at Harvard Business School in 2001. Stern was one of the leading architects and thinkers of the postmodern movement and contributed greatly to its theoretical discourse. Stern’s thoughtful musings establish the overarching premise for this thesis proposal:
Can the essence of a university be translated through architecture if that essence (namely its values and aspirations) is predominantly expressed through language? This thesis will demonstrate that the University of Melbourne’s identity sits firmly within its brand, and it is indeed possible to reflect this brand through the built form. However, in order to achieve a coherent building that expresses the true nature of the university, a large degree of informed personal interpretation will be required, considering the University of Melbourne’s brand and identity in more abstract terms and viewing the new Fishermans Bend Campus Hub as a symbol of the university’s historical and aspirational values.
08
UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE
Defining the Campus Hub In his book, University Architecture, Brian Edwards discusses the difficulty that many universities face when generating a homogenous visual impact through architecture within the campus. He explains that the university as a building type has largely been ignored in the architectural discourse, the reason for which could be that a campus is usually composed of a collection of disparate buildings that largely act as landmarks in their own right, but fail to create a unity of place (vii). Edwards argues that when it comes to the design of new buildings, it is those that express values, meaning, academic aspirations and identity beyond the utilitarian that distinguishes the ‘best’ university architecture (3). He continues to explain that the visual impact of a positive image projected by a university’s built fabric is vital to attract the best students and staff. The marketing of this image demonstrates the economic value of good design (5). A defining characteristic of universities is that each building at the university will be designed to accommodate needs or identities specific to the faculty that it houses.
If this is the case, is it also is possible to design a singular building that can express a university’s values and identity as a whole? As the intention of this thesis is to do just that, it might then be concluded that the Campus Hub will need to serve a dual purpose: expressing the overarching University of Melbourne, whilst at the same time reflecting its specific function as a Welcome Hub, or first point of contact for the campus. Edwards argues the importance of establishing both a centre and defining edge for a campus as key buildings that have the power to demonstrate a university’s identity through the built fabric (46). The Fishermans Bend campus hub, situated on the edge of the new site, can be considered both the centre and the defining edge of the campus. Edwards extrapolates that this building will have a distinctive presence in the university’s skyline, and will serve as both a symbol of the university’s identity and values as a whole on the campus, as well as act as an external point of reference in the cityscape (50).
10
Lurie Tower Charles Moore (1997), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA Moore’s tower is the literal embodiment of a centre of a campus due to it’ s tower-shaped form that clearly establishes the building as a point of reference amongst the campus skyline. As towers and spires have traditionally symbolised the centre or focal point of a city, Moore’s interpretation of classical elements into a new, contemporary stand-out structure proposes an eye-catching, postmodern monument that allows students to orientate themselves within the campus.
Ruskin Library Sir Richard MacCormac (1998), University of Lancaster, Lancashire, UK MacCormac’s building acts as a gateway – the definition of the campus edge that acts as a linkage between the campus and the world beyond. Its role as a campus building symbolises the university through the approach to the building, its gesture towards the university, and its definition of symbolic values through its external form.
“The centre should be defined by building volume, an eye-catching façade and a considerable setback.” Edwards sets up a series of characteristics that a campus centre should embody. As both a landmark and an external point of reference, it should embody strong architectural elements that can visually and obviously define it amongst the other buildings on campus. Edwards suggests that the centre should be defined by building volume, an eye-catching façade and a considerable setback to allow it to be distinguished. (46) The setback will create considerable external space to allow for rhythm of human activity, as this movement can identify a building just as much as its built fabric. An effective landmark will require such a zone of uninterrupted external space to allow for its singularity in the campus skyline, that could be paired with its scale, shape, colour, texture and proportion to create a memorable design (49).
12
Where is the Parkville campus centre? With Edwards’ guidelines in mind, a study of the Parkville campus was undertaken to determine whether there was a building that could be distinctly identified through its built form as the centre of the university, or the university’s campus hub. Through this analysis, three buildings were identified as potentially assuming the title of the ‘centre’ of the campus, however there was considerable ambiguity and confusion, as architecturally, none of the buildings appear to embody the qualities outlined by Edwards to determine the campus centre, nor do they demonstrate any type of welcoming physicality.
Union House possesses arguably the most qualities to determine a campus hub with union square offering a large expanse of open space to allow for the building to stand out, and a column-like façade that could be loosely attributed to the columns of classical architecture. Amongst the other buildings that surround it however, the Union house does not stand out as a landmark architecturally. Distinction should also be made that the Union House functions as a student hub rather than a campus hub, and so programmatically and circulation-wise it is not considered the welcome hub of the campus. This is also true for the Baillieu Library, which functions as a learning hub, but not a first point of contact for the university. The library, too, built in the modernist era lends itself to function over form. Stop 1 is the place that most embodies the campus ‘centre’ through its function, but similarly to the other two buildings, it does not stand out architecturally, nor does its design evoke the university’s values and aspirations.
Top: Union House Centre: Baillieu Library Bottom: Stop 1 14
The Old Quadrangle Although not demonstrating a functional centrality today, the Old Quad is considered by many to be the true centre of the Parkville campus. I moved to Melbourne specifically to undertake my Masters of Architecture, and upon arriving at the new campus as a future University of Melbourne student, my first memorable point of contact was the Old Quad. What exited me about the building was the immense historical prestige that accompanied the building – I felt like I was at an ancient learning institution, rubbing shoulders with globally revered thinkers and creators, and becoming a part of history. I had never experienced such a grand place that I would be able to call my own, and the thought of being a part of such a distinguished institution filled me with pride. Philip Goad and George Tibbits have both undertaken extensive research on the nature and history of the Parkville Campus buildings. Their analyses of the Quadrangle support Edwards’ claims of a central building that must be physically established within a campus. In 1853, an architectural competition for a central building on the proposed university site was won by architect Francis Maloney White.
His proposal (with significant changes) became the Quadrangle, known during the time as The University. It was designed to be built on a principal axis that determined its main access points and was intended to influence and control all development decisions that surrounded it. This placement also created a kind of “socio-spatial” division on the site between what became known as the “front” and “back” of the university. The building itself was modelled in the Tudor Gothic style, after prestigious British learning institutions including the Belfast and Cork campuses of Queen’s College in Ireland (1516), and its design was intended to demonstrate both tradition and a connection with esteemed historical knowledge. Although it may not be functionally relevant, its design processes can serve as useful tools for the design of the Fishermans Bend Campus Hub – a place that physically demonstrates orientation through the use of axes the centrality of the campus, as well as a place that symbolises a prestigious place of learning.
16
The Proposed University designed by F. M. White. Lithograph by S. T. Gill, 1857. (Melbourne University Archives)
18
What is the identity or “essence� of the University of Melbourne?
Demonstrated analysis determines that the true centre of the University of Melbourne is difficult to determine architecturally. If a building cannot demonstrate this through architectural language, it cannot begin to attempt to demonstrate the university’s identity. Indeed, the findings propose that none of the case studies demonstrate a single tangible architectural language or form that demonstrate the university’s essence, instead relying on designs that predominantly focus on the buildings’ internal functions. First and foremost, the new campus hub at Fishermans Bend will need to demonstrate physical qualities determined by Edwards to establish itself as both the centre and the defining edge of the campus, allowing it to be easily identifiable.
However, additional architectural characteristics will need to be implemented in order to establish the building as a symbol of the university’s identity as a whole, so it may be identified as a landmark building on the campus. For the building to project an image of this identity, the values of the university as outlined by its brand team would need to be first metaphorically interpreted, and then administered to the building fabric. These values also extend to symbolic aspirations that can be interpreted through analysis of the Guidelines for the Campus as outlined by Grimshaw. Together with the qualities that establish the building as the centre and defining edge of the campus, they form the overall brand and symbol of the University of Melbourne that can then be translated into an architectural form.
20
Top: Oxford University, Oxford, UK Centre: Harvard University, Massachusetts, USA Bottom: The Sorbonne, Paris, France
History and Identity The longevity of a campus allows for a university to establish a strong identity (Edwards, 14). It is reasonable to argue that when most people try to visualise the most well-known universities in the world, it is the old, historic buildings that first come to mind. These people can immediately recall the towering, gothic steeples of Oxford University, the grand, colonial columns of Harvard University, and the divine, Baroque motifs of the Sorbonne. Very few new buildings seem to have made as much of an impression, demonstrating that older universities and their buildings are more memorable because of what they represent and signify, namely that with age comes prestige, reputation, stability, security, and a tradition of excellence. The popularity of such universities exemplifies that their history is a core part of their brand and identity, despite these values having been actualised architecturally in countless different ways.
22
This idea holds true at the University of Melbourne with one of its core defining characteristics being its history that establishes an acquired identity achieved due to its use over time. Founded in 1853, the University of Melbourne demonstrates over 160 years of prestige as a learning institution, which the university exclaims on the front page of its brand website. It is these deep-rooted historical characteristics and values that sets the university apart from its competitors.
There is a range of architectural qualities that could be implemented in the new campus hub to demonstrate the university’s historical identity. The use of sandstone in several of its historical buildings could provide inspiration for the materiality, whilst classical or gothic forms present in the Old Quad and Newman College could be interpreted and implemented in new, contemporary ways.
Prestige Reputation History (Age)
Stability Security Tradition of Excellence
Top: The Old Quadrangle Centre: Newman College Bottom: Elisabeth Murdoch Building 24
“HISTORIE”
PAST
FUTURE
PRESENT
“GESCHICHTSPHILOSOPHIE”
PAST
FUTURE
PRESENT
“Geschichtsphilosophie”
In his book, Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society, Raymond Williams (a Marxist theorist) introduced the distinction between the linear form of history, and the philosophy of history. He stresses the importance of distinguishing history as a story of events, and history as organized knowledge of the past that may be used to influence both the present and the future (119). Williams explains that history must be considered in terms of human self-development, and past events must not be seen as separate, finished occurrences, but part of a continuous, connected process (119). Interpretations of this process embody history in a more abstract sense, and propose a concept that steps away from exclusive association with the past and forms a continuum with the present and future.
In the German language, this distinction becomes clearer, with the word Historie referring exclusively to the past, whilst the word Geschichtsphilosophie refers to the continuing process of the past, present and future (119). This may be interpreted into the idea that to consider the future, we must look back to the past, as the past will always have a continuing effect on how things are done in the present and the future. This is particularly relevant when considering the University of Melbourne’s historical characteristics that form a large part of its identity. This thesis will employ the theory of Geschichtsphilosophie to demonstrate the university’s historical identity that can be used to influence the future design of the campus hub.
26
UoM: Why so serious?
As the buildings on the Parkville campus have been incrementally built over the last 160 years, it is not surprising that their architectural styles are varied, reflecting the times within which they were built. Simple categorisations reveal that the campus consists of mainly historical sandstone buildings such as the Old Quad, heavy block-like mid-century buildings, and flashy new hi-tech buildings that aim to demonstrate the university as a leading contender for future-focused facilities. Although the nature of these buildings is disparate, they share a common stand-out characteristic: most of them (save for only perhaps a couple of exceptions) are extremely serious. As a research university, it is understandable that the University of Melbourne intends to be taken seriously to ensure respect and most importantly continued funding. However, this suggests that the university seems to be predominantly focused on money and reputation rather than the wellbeing and satisfaction of its students.
Seriousness can easily be connected to intimidation, and although many students are attracted to institutions because of their promoted world-class facilities, there is a degree of coldness in the serious, intimidating buildings at the Parkville campus. With newer, competing universities such as RMIT and Monash demonstrating more approachable and less intimidating campuses and buildings, there seems to be a need for the University of Melbourne to perhaps take itself a little less seriously, and bring some fun back into its architecture. Implementing this perspective in the design for a new Campus Hub and new campus in general would result in a more approachable campus for prospective students that promoted a friendly and welcoming demeanour, and would potentially appeal to a much wider range of students and teachers, especially women who are often turned away by the intimidating, male-dominated industries of architecture and engineering.
28
Brand to Built Form
The University of Melbourne’s Current System of Values As discussed, it will be vital for the campus hub to architecturally express the university of melbourne’s distinct values through the design of the campus hub. A building that acts as the centre and defining edge of the campus must also act as a symbol of the university, but how can this be done when the university’s values are predominantly expressed through language? The university’s brand hub outlines a series of qualities that it hopes to express through its brand. These qualities will need to be interpreted and subsequently materialised in the built form of the camps to establish the building as one that is uniquely belonging to the University of Melbourne, whilst acting as a signpost or portal through which the university’s other buildings may be accessed. These values must be abstractly interpreted, as no recommendations exist as to how they can be translated into a built form.
Several key values as outlined by the university’s brand team can be translated into the built form through the following recommendations. The new campus hub building will need to be exciting, positive, and engaging, providing a space that draws students in and encourages them to interact with the building as eye-catching the first point of contact at the university. The form could achieve these values through colour, unexpected materiality, and smooth, aesthetically pleasing forms. A thought-provoking building that “says something new”could implement new technologies or techniques of construction to create a building that demonstrates the progressiveness of the new campus. Essentially, the campus hub will need to be a spectacular monument that students will be attracted to and proud of, as opposed to a cold, uninviting or intimidating structure.
WHAT WE ARE Collaboration for social gain Interesting and unusual truths Exciting possibilities Positive Engaging Thought Provoking Says something new Friendly juxtaposition Unexpected outcomes Beautiful, new, and interesting images that show the outcome of collaboration
WHAT WE’RE NOT Individual contribution for personal gain Fanciful and embellished outcomes Conventional Sombre or negative Generic Embedded norms of working Predictable results Aggressive clashing Expected Cliche and manufactured stock images 30
The ‘home’ for making and doing A place for world-class facilities Prototyping and pilot scale research Global hub for industry engagement and networking Centre of advanced manufacturing precinct Living laboratory of sustainable development
Masterplan Vision: Inspirations and Aspirations To establish the university’s identity, demonstration of its aspirations must accompany its values. The vision or aspirations for the University of Melbourne’s Fishermans Bend campus may be interpreted through analysis of the Guidelines for the campus as outlined by Grimshaw Architects. Together with the values outlined by the university’s Brand Hub, these aspirations form the overall brand of the University of Melbourne that must be translated through the built form of the campus hub building. It should be noted that these guidelines aim to serve as a basis for the campus as a whole, rather than the individual campus hub, and so it is not necessarily up to the campus hub to embody all the guidelines in a single building. Indeed, this would result in a garish patchwork blanket of architectural features of other campus buildings rather than establishing the hub’s own unique identity.
The guidelines will also require an abstract interpretation in order to be actualised in the built form. If the guidelines are predominantly serving the faculty buildings on the campus, then the campus hub will need to act as a portal through which these buildings may be accessed, or a symbol for the rest of the campus. The building should indicate world-class facilities, advanced manufacturing and sustainability through its design that must surely embody several technologically innovative characteristics. However, these characteristics will be used to entice the visitor or student in through the building, encouraging movement, engagement, and directing them to where they need to go next.
32
Update!
“The content of this Hub is being updated as we lift our sights to equip the University to meet its future aspirations. We are consulting with our constituents as to what distinguishes Melbourne and importantly, to ensure resonance with the core academic mission of teaching and learning and research for the benefit of those we serve.�
At the beginning of the semester during the research component of this thesis, I demonstrably undertook research into the University of Melbourne’s brand stipulated by the Brand Hub on their website, and used this as one of the key elements to analyse the University of Melbourne’s identity. It came a as a surprise to recently discover that all the information gathered from the website (and seen here in this booklet) has been removed, only to be replaced by a short notice explaining that the content of the Brand Hub and presumably the university’s notion of the brand itself is currently being updated.
As there is no updated information available, I will continue to draw from the values outlined on the old Brand Hub website, as it is presumed that the generalised language used to describe the values will likely be echoed once again with slight variations once the new website is up and running. It is also highly likely that the university’s historical identity will remain as a determining feature of its brand. However, this also affords me a larger degree of freedom to interpret what might constitute the university’s updated system of values for the future. It is evident that the seriousness of the university may be outdated, and it is looking to promote a more lively, fun, student-focused image as suggested previously in this booklet. Moving forward, the nature of the university’s future aspirations will be interpreted to adhere to what would constitute a more joyful campus from a student’s point of view.
36
ical r o t s Hi ntity Ide
Values & tional Identi ty
Aspira
Physicality & Context
Research and findings have led to the establishment of three main philosophies that will allow the campus hub to demonstrate the university’s unique identity both physically and symbolically. The first will aim to place the university hub physically on the campus as an easily identifiable focus point or central beacon in the campus skyline. As the transition space between the exterior and the interior of the campus, the hub will also be placed on an axis that will act as a defining edge, ensuring its power to demonstrate the university’s identity through its position and function.
. The remaining two philosophies identify what has been determined as the two most important characteristics that define the University of Melbourne’s brand. The first is its historical identity, which sets itself apart from the other universities in the state, and demonstrates the university’s prestige, reputation, stability, security and tradition of excellence. The second is the university’s aspirational identity, which determines the university’s values and what it wants to be in the future. These three philosophies will serve as a basis for a thorough interpretation of the university’s identity into the built form.
38
Thesis Statement The disparate nature of the University of Melbourne’s current buildings brings into question how a new building will be able to be identified as one uniquely belonging to the University on the blank canvas that is the Fishermans Bend site. As the University’s brand is predominantly expressed through language, characteristics deemed to be most important to strongly establish the new Campus Hub in the new campus skyline must be interpreted abstractly to achieve a framework upon which an architectural design may emerge. This thesis will propose a campus hub that will be the centre, as well as the defining edge of the new Fishermans Bend Campus, which will result in the building acting as a symbol of the university’s brand and identity as a whole. The university’s brand will be identified through its tangible characteristics as a historical, prestigious institution of learning, as well as its values and aspirations for the future, further establishing the Campus Hub a welcoming space that excites and entices students, staff and visitors alike.
40
Part Two
Interventions & Methodologies
Design Intervention: The Postmodern Lens The transition from theory to concept design in the case of this thesis is particularly challenging. Considering much of the university’s essence is expressed through language, it is vital to employ a methodology in order to translate the philosophies into the built form. If the purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate an abstract interpretation of the University of Melbourne’s values and aspirations through architecture, then it is necessary to approach the design and analysis through the framework of literary theory. There are several indications throughout this proposal to suggest a natural exploration through the theory and architectural characteristics of postmodernism and semiotics. The Dictionary of Architecture & Landscape Architecture reveals that the postmodern movement found its feet through an “uninhibited kind of favouring of elements which are hybrid rather than pure” and “messy vitality over obvious unity” as described by Robert Venturi, the leading architect of the postmodern movement, in his book Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (347).
Venturi also argued that postmodernism A postmodern approach to design makes sense, as the campus hub will attempt to demonstrate several different aspects of the university’s identity, creating a hybrid, vibrant form. The postmodern approach can be further rationalised when we consider the importance placed on the University of Melbourne’s historical identity as part of its brand. A key feature of postmodern architecture is the use of historical architectural elements to inform contemporary design. This feature combines seamlessly with Williams’ description of Geschichtsphilosophie, to form an architectural process of considering time in a continuum, recognising historical elements and applying them to a new design in contemporary ways.
44
Physicality & Context
Contextualism & Symbolism
Historical Identity
Historical Forms & Characteristics
Values & Aspirational Identity
Humour, camp, hybridity, juxtaposition & complexity
Methodology
The postmodern lens will act as the threshold through which the three philosophies outlined in part one may be translated or interpreted. It will aid in creating and investigating different architectural typologies and recommendations that will enable the translation from language to architecture, resulting in a contemporary postmodern design that will demonstrate the university’s unique identity and bring liveliness back into the sombre, serious image long projected by the university.
Each philosophy reflects an aspect of postmodern theory that is often implemented in design. The physicality and context of the Campus Hub will predominantly focus on the building as a sign and signifier of the university and the campus beyond, relying on the theory of semiotics that is often embedded within postmodern theory. The translation of the university’s historical identity is relatively self-explanatory, and will involve the use of historical architectural elements and typologies in the implementation of the new design. The aspirational identity is what can be most loosely interpreted, and will embody postmodern characteristics of hybridity, colour, humour, complexity and juxtaposition.
46
01 3 5
10
20
40
Physicality & Context
The predetermined position of the campus hub on the site gives it the best opportunity to be defined as both the centre and defining edge of the campus, as proscribed by Brain Edwards in his book, University Architecture (discussed in Part One). It sits directly opposite the transit hub which will be the primary point of access for those wishing to visit the campus. The new transport line will make the notoriously difficult-to-get-to Fishermans Bend easily accessible from Melbourne’s CBD and western suburbs. The uninterrupted expanse of space between the transit hub and the campus hub allows for one main point of access into the hub and the campus beyond, allowing the visitor to the campus to easily identify the building amongst the others on the campus skyline.
The Postmodern Lens:
Contextualism A defining characteristic of postmodern architecture is its relationship and sensitivity to context. In particular, this relates to a building’s relationship with others around it. In the case of the campus hub, it is important that the building both respects and enhances the other buildings surrounding it by offering signals of what its context contains. This has often been expressed architecturally through humourous and decorative elements in postmodern design.
48
Semiotics
When it comes to semiotics, Umberto Eco explains that our use of architecture is driven by our understanding of the meanings connected with architectural elements and objects (15). This allows architecture to be considered a system of signs or symbols intended to be interpreted and understood in order to for the building to function and for certain types of behaviour to occur within that building.
To revisit Stern’s statement at the beginning of this proposal: “a building can take on a symbolic role, it can become an emblem, and even be a brand in itself.” Establishing the campus hub physically as both the centre and the defining edge of the campus suggests that the building will act as a sign that indicates what lies beyond within the rest of the campus. It will act as a symbol or sign of the university’s identity, namely its values and vision and express meaning through its historical characteristics.
50
Learning from Las Vegas
Along with his partner, the urban planner Denise Scott Brown and student, Steven Izenour, Robert Venturi expanded his postmodern thinking in a book that is perhaps one of the most notable and discussed in the architectural postmodern discourse. Learning From Las Vegas proposed that the Las Vegas strip should be a model from which architects should gain inspiration. Rather than a kitsch, oversized, aggressive assault of the senses, Venturi and Scott Brown suggested that the unrelenting frontages and signs on the strip should be considered a design solution that appropriately addresses the needs of the public.
The ‘duck’ was intended to represent modernism as a simple object void of any meaning other than its external form. On the other hand, the decorated shed uses signs and symbols to convey meaning, which allows for values and aspirations to be implied, as is required in the case of the Campus Hub. As our use of architecture is dictated by our understanding of meanings connected with architectural elements and objects, the campus hub’s façade must clearly symbolise how the building is intended to be used: as a first point of contact that welcomes students and visitors into the campus beyond.
The analysis of signs and symbols displayed so obviously on the strip began the premise for the authors’ critique and contrast of their work to modernism in the form of the ‘duck’ and the ‘decorated shed’.
The building can be considered the antithesis of modernism, an ideal at the heart of postmodernism, straying away from functionalism and instead portraying a certain image and idea (the university’s identity) through its main external façade.
52
01 3 5
10
20
40
Site Thoroughfare
As the campus hub will be the first point of contact for visitors and students at the Fishermans Bend campus, semiotics didctates that it will need to act as a signpost to facilitate orientation towards the rest of the campus. In a way, the building can be considered a vessel that receives the visitor at the exterior of the campus and delivers them to the interior. In this sense, the campus hub works as a portal from the outside of the university to the inside, forming a direct line of extension from the transit hub into the campus. Consequently, the design of the campus hub will need to mimic this clear line of thoroughfare through the building at the ground level, with all activities centring around or constantly returning to this central line of circulation.
54
Markthal
MVRDV (2014), Rotterdam, Netherlands
MVRDV’s Markthal can be considered an exemplary form of contemporary postmodern architecture. Its giant, curved and arch allows for a market hall in its hollowed out middle, and apartments in its outside shell. The surface beneath the arch is clad in panels that are projected with murals by artists displaying bright, technicolour images of food, flowers and insects. The building has been described as a ‘portal’ by some, and a ‘sistine chapel of produce’ by others. The building serves as a landmark in the centre of Rotterdam, with its projected surface acting as a gigantic sign or symbol of identity of the market hall. he building’s form serves as a strong precedent of what the Campus Hub is attempting to achieve – to act as a landmark that demonstrates identity whilst acting as a portal to the rest of the campus.
“Built over 160 years of history, the University of Melbourne brand is arguably our greatest asset� - University of Melbourne Brand Hub home page
Historical Identity As previously determined, the University of Melbourne’s historical identity is considered one of its defining characteristics. Its longevity as an institution is what sets it apart from its competitors, and although the Fishermans Bend campus is a blank slate for redevelopment, it is still extremely important to carry the university’s historical identity into the new campus. As historical buildings are one of the most tangible ways of demonstrating historic identity (and this thesis is attempting to translate such a historic identity into a new built form), an array of architectural elements from different time periods discovered through analysis of historic buildings on the Parkville campus will be implemented in the new design for the university’s Fishermans Bend campus hub.
The Postmodern Lens:
Historical forms and inspiration A key feature of postmodern architecture is its use of historical architectural elements in contemporary design. This performed to counteract and address the limitations of the modern movement. Indeed, many architects of the postmodern movement felt that modernism did not meet the humanistic needs for comfort for both the eye and the body, with architects attempting to remediate this issue through the implementation of colour, boldness, humour and decoration into their designs, taking inspiration from a hybrid of older building styles to create something completely unique, yet familiar.
Several current Parkville campus buildings demonstrate historical architectural styles including those of the Gothic, Neoclassical, Art Deco and Baroque periods. Architecture influenced by or created during these times bore a range of characteristics, the most prominent being the arch, column or colonnade, towers or spires, heavy masonry, and proportion and symmetry. 58
Values & Aspirational Identity As well as historical identity, the University of Melbourne’s identity is formed by its brand, which encapsulates its values, aspirations, and vision for the future. This is perhaps the most difficult aspect of the university’s identity that must be translated through the built form, as the university’s brand is expressed through language, and its values do not have direct correlations with a clear form of architectural language. In this case, the ambiguity roused by its brand language allows for interpretation for a translation into the built form. The University of Melbourne’s brand website clearly outlines (in language terms) what the university IS and what it IS NOT (see Part One, pages 21-20). From this, it is possible to extract a collection of key words or sentences that must be stripped down and interpreted into typologies that can be implemented in the design of the campus hub. With the help of the Postmodern Lens, architectural elements begin to emerge that echo the values and identity of the university.
“Positive & Engaging” Bold colours and tactile textures; transparent or semi-transparent thresholds
“Unexpected Outcomes” Stairs or pathways that lead to somewhere unexpected
ic
nv ni i
u best best e w h e l t come... to the ome... to
in uni
vic
“Thought Provoking” Humorous, camp decoration or forms; (literal) signs and posters or screens, slanted or seemingly collapsing walls
“Friendly Juxtaposition” Different architectural styles forming a pastiche or collage in the one building; themed rooms
60
As mentioned previously, the vision for the Fishermans Bend campus must also be addressed when considering the University of Melbourne’s aspirational identity, or “what it wants to be”. The new campus will first and foremost be a hub for innovative making. This does not have to exemplified solely through the display of high-tech facilities and implementation of the newest, state-of-the-art architectural materials. It could instead represent an amalgamation of different aspects that demonstrate the university’s identity. Together with the fifth and final brand characteristic that will be interpreted in this thesis: “beautiful, new and interesting image that shows the outcome of collaboration”, the last typology proposed in this section will transform the idea of the Fishermans Bend campus as a makerspace, into “building blocks”. Blocks demonstrate the primitive act of making something or putting something together. The blocks do not have to be uniform, and in fact a range of different types of blocks can be used to create a larger structure.
The Postmodern Lens:
Hybridity and complexity To revisit Robert Venturi’s infamous description of postmodern architecture, the proposed design will emulate an “uninhibited kind of favouring of elements which are hybrid rather than pure” and consist of “messy vitality over obvious unity.” It has become evident that the campus hub will need to consist of a range of elements (building blocks) in order to promote its unique identity, hence its natural transformation into a contemporary postmodern design.
62
Neue Staatsgalerie
James Stirling (1983), Stuttgart, Germany
Coined by many as the “best postmodern structure ever built”, the Neue Staatsgalerie embodies several tangible qualities that stand out as features of postmodern architecture. The structure was an extension to an existing historic museum, implementing classical materials and forms inspired by the original structure, and juxtaposing them with contemporary elements including ‘high-tech metalwork’that Stirling referred to as the building’s ‘jewellery’. These elements were clad in bright colours of blue, green, pink and red, and were reflected in the building’s bold interior that also implemented rubber in a contemporary style.
This example demonstrates many elements that could be implemented in the design of the Fishermans Bend campus hub. A strong structure is evoked through classical forms and the use of robust, historically inspired masonry and blockwork. The insertion of contemporary elements into these bold, classical forms creates an engaging structure aimed to entice the visitor, whilst remaining playful and friendly.
64
Teatro Olimpico
Andrea Palladio (1580-1585), Vicenza, Italy
The theatre is an architectural typology that encompasses all philosophies outlined in this thesis. Palladio’s Teatro Olimpico is an explosion of ornamentation and architectural classical motifs utilised as a backdrop for grand performances. The entire structure is intended to entertain, and the onstage scenery gives the illusion of long Roman-style street scenes. The optical illusions created on stage use one-point perspective to make things appear farther away than they actually are. These techniques were also used in postmodern design to create optical illusions, teasing the viewer’s senses. Theatre seating is also a strong typology that creates a dichotomy between spaces. Perhaps not in this example, but certainly in other theatres, balconette seating is common, which is a useful characteristic that may be used in atriums. The openness of the theatre and its contrasting back of house will allow functional configuration as well as symbolic and architectural implementation in the Campus Hub.
Arts West
ARM Architecture (2016), Parkville Campus
ARM’s Art West building at the University of Melbourne Parkville campus can be considered a contemporary postmodern example of an attempt to express a university’s identity through the built form. Indeed, the choice of ARM as architect for the building seemed an odd choice, considering the seriousness of many of the university’s high-tech, function-focused buildings of the past few decades. ARM are well-known for their postmodern works, and one would think a more appropriate choice for an institution such as RMIT, who encourage much more experimentation in their buildings. Perhaps it was the desire to emulate the creative essence of the faculty of Arts and humanities that drove the university to choose a more experimental practice to undertake the design for the new building.
The design employs historical elements through the use of arches externally at the building’s base, as well as the internal atrium, with a large, sweeping staircase and staggered marble tilework and patterning. The interior learning and study spaces are given different themes, which represent the kitsch and colourful side of postmodern design, offering relief from the often monotonous and uninviting study spaces present in so many university buildings today. The building’s façade demonstrates imprints of the internal museum’s artefacts, quite literally projecting images of the building’s contents on its surface. This eclectic façade has rendered the building one of the most wellknown and eye-catching on campus, and offers much inspiration to those wanting to create a contemporary postmodern structure amongst a sea of quite frankly, boring buildings.
68
Part Three
Concept & Sketch Design
Preliminary Massing
The following exercise aims implement several suggested architectural forms that will demonstrate elements of the University of Melbourne’s identity. As is the case with much postmodern architecture, the massing will consist of a pastiche of often juxtaposing styles, typologies, and influences.
1. First the building establishes it-
self physically in the landscape, with a strong façade required to establish an unforgettable symbol of the university.
2. The portal is then propelled through the building to connect the outside of the campus with the inside.
72
3. Classical architectural rules of
symmetry and proportion are applied, dividing the building into three sections lengthways.
building is split in half 4. The across to form a front and back of house, alluding to the functions of a theatre stage and its behind-the-scenes workings.
74
5. Postmodern design often dis-
torts once-present symmetry and proportion, and so the rear sections of the building are designed to follow opposite paths: one half steps down to create a habitable exterior, while the other rises up to form a uniform tower. Although separated, the front and rear of the building is still connected by the portal, and the front half employs stepped theatre seating forming a grand entrance, with the rear demonstrably taking on a more functional role.
circulation towers in6. Finally, dicate the building’s cores, and the rear of the building begins to take on a life of its own as it responds to the site conditions and surrounding buildings. 76
Preliminary Exterior Iteration
The conceptual massing exercises and architectural typology investigations form the basis for this preliminary synthesised sketch design. The front of the building is uniform, demonstrating characteristics of symmetry and proportion found in postmodern design. The windows at the front faรงade create a picture of classical columns that flank the large, semi-transparent window that gives the illusion of a large door or portal. The building is also opened up at the bottom, to provide a softer transition into the building, whilst echoing its surrounding buildings which all offer showcase spaces in the same design format (at the ground floor of their structures).
Contrasting to the front of the building, the rear takes on a life of its own, as part of it becomes externally inhabitable, with stepped floors to make use of the north-western sun. The other half becomes both uniform, curved, and transparent, indicating a change of program into more private, learning spaces, with less public informal spaces.
78
The building has a strong connection with the transit plaza, and provides both a grand sense of arrival into the building, and acts as an obvious signpost directing the student or visitor into its interior, whilst acting as a symbolic embodiment of the university. Such a large expanse of uninterrupted glazing is possible due to the building’s orientation towards the south, which ensures minimal heat gain and glare entering through the glazing. Whilst the building looks uniform with mainly historical elements, certain contemporary devices will be employed to mix the old with the new. The large, central expanse of glazing panels that indicates the building’s portal-like qualities will be projected with digital still and moving images of exemplary projects produced by students at the university. This will further help to contribute to the demonstration of the university’s brand, as well as visually projecting to prospective students and visitors what is going on inside the campus as soon as they begin to approach it.
The rear of the building responds to the plans for the surrounding buildings in the Grimshaw Master Plan. The north-western portion of the campus hub is stepped down to allow for greater student interaction with the building, and providing a solution to the open space surrounding by the Stage 1 buildings that receives little sunlight due to most of the buildings’ heights. The design for the campus hub allows students to move up and into the building from its rear, giving them a more private and personal open space rather than the public spaces near the plaza and park. This gives the students a feeling of owning a space and will make them more inclined to use and interact with it, and one another within the space. The glazed learning tower sits above the workshop that is connected to the rear of the campus hub. It allows for dedicated learning spaces outlined in the functional brief in a more delicate way, responding to the heights of its surroundings buildings, whilst not impeding on the experience of the external rear spaces of the campus hub.
WORKSHOP
UP
BREAK OUT ROOMS VISITOR CENTRE DN
DN
STUDENT SUPPORT
UP
EXHIBITION
POST OFFICE
UP
ENTRANCE HALL
CAFE SECURITY
RECEPTION
SHOP
5
10
20
CAFE SEATING
Functional Zoning - Plans Ground Floor The following plans demonstrate the preliminary functional zoning of the building. The ground floor will play host to the most public activities, allowing for smooth movement through the building to the upper floors as the programs become more learning and student-focused. The great hall formed as one enters the building gives a grand sense of arrival with two large staircases flanking a corridor that can be considered the oesophagus of the building – it ingests the visitor at the entrance, and expels them at the exit.
The exhibition space at the left of the plan will demonstrate works by the students in the university, and will be publicly accessible, acting as a museum most of the time, save for events such as the MSDx. In the case of larger events, there is an ability to expand into the entrance hall and to the upper floors. The reception and security offices are naturally at the front of the building, making it easy for newcomers to immediately enquire as to where their next stop might be. Retail and a café also sit at the front of the building, allowing for casual expansion into the building’s surrounds. The visitor and student support centre will provide functions akin to those at Parkville’s Stop 1 building, and offer counselling and career advice sessions to students.
84
WORKSHOP
UP
EQUIPMENT LOANS
UP
MATERIALS LIBRARY
BOARD/SEMINAR ROOM
COMPUTER LABS
KITCHEN UP
STORAGE
UP
DN UP
DN
INFORMAL LEARNING SPACES
INFORMAL LEARNING SPACES
DN
5
10
20
Level 1 This level is the most dedicated, with two wings separated by the central portal that propels through the building. The left side is dedicated to the Architecture, Building and Planning faculty, with closed off computer labs and materials library only accessible by the students. The right side is intended for private visitor use, with a board/seminar room allowing for guests to present their work or attend meetings. Informal learning spaces are provided for students to undertake private study, and the front of the building steps down to an even more informal or relax-space at a lower mezzanine level, where students become part of the large window display of the building.
86
LECTURE THEATRE
UP
DN
UNI BAR
DIGITAL STUDIOS AR/VR
CONTROL ROOM/ DIGITAL MEDIA LAB DN
UP
UP
DN
UP
DN
DN
INFORMAL LEARNING SPACES
INFORMAL LEARNING SPACES
REHEAT AREA
KITCHEN
5
10
20
Level 2 At level two the back of the building undergoes a drastic transformation, with the left side becoming externally inhabitable, and the right side functioning as the dedicated teaching and learning space. The front half of the building remains as a more informal, social space. It is at level two that the back of the building undergoes a drastic transformation (as demonstrated in previous renders), with the left side becoming externally inhabitable, and the right side functioning as the dedicated teaching and learning space. The front half of the building that encompasses the entrance hall remains as a more informal, social space.
The university’s ‘Uni Bar’ acts as the glue that melds the exterior of the building’s rear with the interior, encouraging social activities within the building rather than a serious teaching building. Since the Social Hub of the university is intended for Stage 2 or 3 of the project, it is important to implement some facilities in the campus hub that encourages student life from the inception of the campus. The extra outdoor space provides a pleasant place for students to get outside and enjoy the sunshine during their study breaks. It is at this level, too, that the rear of the building extends over the workshop to provide extra space for programs required in the functional brief. A lecture theatre extends over this workshop as an extra space for ABP or MSE inhouse or guest lectures.
88
LECTURE THEATRE
DN
UP
TEACHING LAB
DN
UP
DN
DN
INFORMAL BREAK OUT AREA
INFORMAL BREAK OUT AREA
REHEAT AREA
KITCHEN
5
10
20
Level 3 The spaces surrounding the entrance hall become narrower as they step up to allude to seating one would see in a theatre. This removes the possibility for enclosed rooms at each side, and the spaces remain open, and therefore become informal break-out spaces for study or socialising. The balconette extrusions into the void allow for sight lines throughout the building, and little study nooks to enhance students’ comfort whilst making them feel like they are in a theatre, observing the goings-on below.
The spaces surrounding the entrance hall become narrower as they step up to allude to seating one would see in a theatre. This removes the possibility for enclosed rooms at each side, and the spaces remain open, and therefore become informal break-out spaces for study or socialising. The balconette extrusions into the void allow for sight lines throughout the building, and little study nooks to enhance students’ comfort whilst making them feel like they are in a theatre, observing the goings-on below. The teaching lab opens up to the rear outdoor space to encourage movement and interactive learning that can take place either outside or in. The lecture theatre at the north of the plan extends the double-height space from Level Two, allowing access from both levels.
90
VR/DIGITAL INTERFACE
UP
DN
FLEX LAB
KITCHEN
UP
DN
TEACHING LAB
TEACHING LAB
BREAK OUT ROOMS
5
10
20
Level 4 At Level Four the theatre seating around the entrance hall ceases, and is replaced by a more closedoff collection of teaching spaces, that centre around a void. The corridor will have glazing to the void so sight lines can continue, however, it will not be open-air space. Indeed, it is at this level that the hub loses most of its public functions, and becomes more akin to a learning hub where classes are conducted as well as private study and discussion groups. The flex-lab by name is still considered a flexible space, however will only be available for student and teacher use. This is a large space where an array of activities may take place, but will be predominantly uses by the MSE students and staff.
92
VR/DIGITAL INTERFACE
DN
FLEX LAB
DN
5
10
20
Level 5 Due to height restrictions (reducing shadows cast on the park and plaza), the front of the buildings that face the south edge of the campus must not be higher than 29m. As the functional brief requires a large amount of dedicated teaching spaces, the building must extend higher than 29m at the rear to accommodate them. At level five, the campus hub’s front public area ceases to exist, with the rear of the building extending three floors higher to accommodate additional teaching spaces.
The plan for Level five is identical to those at Levels Six and Seven, which have consequently not been provided. Due to the much smaller floor area of these levels, no break-out spaces are provided, as there is ample space for more informal activities at the lower levels of the building. There is also opportunity for activities to spill out at the roof level at Level Five (above the entrance hall), and has also been suggested in the Grimshaw Masterplan. If not appropriate for student access, this space may also be used for Plant & Services functions.
94
The grandeur of the interiors are created using historical references, symmetry and proportion. These are juxtaposed with bright colours and contrasting materials that turn the space into a theatrical, lively social space that students will want to interact with. The stairs and balconies allow for numerous sight lines throughout the building as well as intriguing pathways that entice people into the building. These qualities will help to demonstrate the university’s brand through employing historical typologies in new and interesting ways, whilst physically demonstrating the building’s importance as a first point of contact for the Fishermans Bend campus.
96
Part Four
Final Design
Revised Massing Approach
1.
The mass ascends five floors to reach the height of 22 metres – below the maximum height allowance for the façade of the building. This height matches the expected building height on the west side, and is lower than that of the right. The mass is established at the perimeter of the campus with the transit hub offering a large expanse rather than a setback outlined by Edwards to establish a building that stands out as the main feature and focus point of the campus.
100
2. Once again the mass is divided
into three sections, as is common in many spectacular classical buildings. The left and right flanking sections are pushed down one level, allowing the symmetrical mass to further signify its prominence as a central building. The three sections may be considered to embody qualities of a triptych painting: the central piece is the main attraction, and the flanking sides must support it, each seemingly identical, however, upon a closer look, one will realise its differing characteristics, as if it were telling a story.
102
3. The building is split again, this
time in half across. This demonstrates the functional aspects of the building that can be likened to the configuration of a theatre: the front of the building is the stage where the play takes place – it is public and intended to entertain and excite. On the other hand, the rear is considered the back of house where countless functional activities take place to ensure the working of the theatre
104
4. It is at this point that the rear
half of the building takes on a life of its own. The west side steps down again to create a rooftop Roman Garden that will make use of the afternoon sun exposure to an otherwise sunlight-deprived site. The open space at the rear of the building is completely cast in shadow for most of the day, and so it is vital for the exterior of the Campus Hub to provide additional outdoor area that will be pleasant for the students to spend time in. The front section of the building is reduced again whilst maintaining its height above the two wings, with the front remaining high to accentuate the triptych.
106
5. The rear east wing moves in the
opposite direction to its western counterpart, ascending seven levels high to meet the height of its neighbouring building to the east. This wing forms the predominant functional section of the building, as much space is dedicated to an open atrium at the front.
108
6. Circulation towers are situated
at the centre of both wings to allow for easy egress into side laneways. As well as serving functional adequacy, the two towers also give the impression that the building is like some sort of mechanical heart that is pumping life through the university. The different heights accentuate the distortion that the building experiences once the symmetry of the front section morphs into the rear. The two ‘engines’ demonstrate a kind of humour and camp-ness to the building’s structure that aid in symbolising its identity.
110
External Material Selection
The excessive use of colour in the external material selection will help to identify the Campus Hub amongst the other buildings that sit against the edge of the campus. Colour is one of the predominant characteristics used in postmodern design, demonstrating a cheerful and approachable demeanour encouraging visitors to enter and explore the rest of the building. The colours chosen offer a stark contrast to the sleek, hi-tech buildings that the University of Melbourne is used to. Although not suggested to be used in every building, the colour choice demonstrates a move to bring back the fun into the university’s identity, intending it to be more approachable to a wider range of people. Pink and purple brickwork, tiles and marble will help to differentiated the two wings of the building, contrasting with a large expanse of sandstone blockwork that hails to the historical buildings at the Parkville campus. Accents of red aluminium and dark blue slate bring further dynamicity to the building.
114
Roman Garden Level 2
Roman Garden Student Services
Casual Study Exhibition Centre Informal Learning
Security
120
Uni Bar Casual Study Colonnade Entrance Hall Study Nook
122
Flex Lab
Teach
Lecture Theatre Workshop
Materials Library Computer Lab
Printing Room Casual Study Area
hing Lab
VR Lab Cafe
124
Internal Material Selection
Whilst employing external materiality at the interior to offer continuity between the internal and external of the building, the interior material selection goes even further to create excitement at every turn. Every floor in the building will rely heavily on different materials such as terrazzo and patterned floor tiles to allow the visitor to identify what floor they are on, creating ease of movement in a building that’s very job is to help orientate the visitor. Marble-clad columns accentuate the bright materials and demonstrate further use of historical architectural elements. Different types of wallpaper will also help to differentiate spaces and act as detailed elements, whilst the atrium will have a sky-painted fresco to lighten the space, hail to the frescos of old, and encourage students that the sky is the limit.
126
Performance Requirements Construction Regulatory Framework The Campus Hub is classified as a CLASS 9b BUILDING by the Australian Building Codes Board. Museums are classified as CLASS 9b BUILDINGS by the Australian Building Codes Board “Class 9b buildings are assembly buildings in which people may gather for social, theatrical, political, religious or civil purposes. They include schools, universities, childcare centres, pre-schools, sporting facilities, night clubs, or public transport buildings.�
Fire Hazard Properties Exit travel distances in accordance with Clause D1.4 of the National Construction Code 2019 are no more than 20 metres from any given point in the Campus Hub.
Slip Resistance Due to the tiled and concrete floors, slip resistant materials will be required at entrances.
128
G
H
I
1
Workshop 2
3
4 5
UP
Student Services
General Store
6
Casual Study
UP
UP
7
Reception/ Info 8
UP
UP
Entrance Hall Exhibition 9
Security
Cafe
10
A
B
C
D
E
F
Ground Floor
Atrium stair circulation General circulation Rear external circulation Circulation Cores
Atrium
Workshop (connecting building)
5
10
20
130
Entrance Hall Ground Floor
Exhibition Centre Ground Floor
Student Services Centre Ground Floor
Colonnade Portal Ground Floor
G
H
I
1
Workshop 2
3
4 UP UP
5
Board Room Computer Labs 6
Printing Room
UP
7
8
UP
DN UP
DN
Informal Learning
Informal Learning
9 DN
Kitchen 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
Level One
Atrium stair circulation General circulation Rear external circulation Circulation Cores
Atrium
Workshop (connecting building)
5
10
20
140
Entrance Hall Level 1
G
H
I
1
Equipment Storage
2
Lecture Theatre 3
Roman Garden
Equipment Loans
Uni Bar
4 DN
UP
5
Materials Library
6
DN
UP
UP
DN
7
8
UP
DN
DN
Informal Learning
Informal Learning
9
Kitchen 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
Level Two
Atrium stair circulation General circulation Rear external circulation Circulation Cores
Atrium
5
10
20
144
Materials Library Level 2
G
H
I
1
2
3
4 DN
UP
5
Teaching Lab
Teaching Lab
6
DN
7
UP
DN
DN
8
Living Frieze Study Area
Living Frieze Study Area
9 10
VR Lab A
VR Lab B
C
D
E
F
Level Three
Atrium stair circulation General circulation Rear external circulation Circulation Cores
Atrium
5
10
20
148
“Living Frieze” Study Area Level 3
G
H
I
1
Flex Lab
2
3
4 UP
DN
5
Teaching Lab
Teaching Lab
6
Casual Seating
7
Kitchen UP
DN
8
9 10
Study nooks
A
B
C
D
E
F
Level Four
General circulation
Circulation Cores
Atrium
5
10
20
152
G
H
I
1
Flex Lab 2
3
4 DN
5
Teaching Lab
Teaching Lab
6
7
DN
8
9 10
A
B
C
D
E
F
Level Five
General circulation
Circulation Cores
Atrium
5
10
20
154
References Eco, Umberto. “Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture.” in Signs, Symbols and Architecture (1980): 11-69. Drori, Gili S., Guiseppe Delmestri, and Achim Oberg. “Branding the university: Relational strategy of identity construction in a competitive field.” Trust in higher education institutions (2013): 134-147. Edwards, Brian. University Architecture. Routledge, London & New York (2000). Goad, Philip, and George Tibbits. Architecture On Campus. Melbourne University Press (2003). Güven, Yilmaz Burak. Postmodernism as an Interior Space Design Approach. Biklent University (1993). Hollier, Denis. Against Architecture: the writings of Georges Bataille. MIT Press (1989). Honour, Hugh, John Fleming and Nikolaus Pevsner. Dictionary of Architecture & Landscape Architecture. Pengiun Press (1991). Jencks, Charles. “Jencks’s theory of evolution: an overview of twentieth-century architecture.” Architectural Review (2000): 76-79. Jencks, Charles. “The Architectural Sign.” in Signs, Symbols and Architecture (1980): 71-118. Kroll, Andrew. “AD Classics: Neue Staatsgalerie/James Stirling.” Archdaily (2011). Web: https://www.archdaily.com/124725/ad-classics-neue-staatsgalerie-james-stirling Souttar, James. “Keeping it together: Brand hierarchy for higher education.” Brand Fabrik (2017). Web: https://fabrikbrands.com/brand-hierarchy-for-higher-education/ Vinegar, Aron. I am a monument: on Learning from Las Vegas. MIT Press (2008). Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Routledge (1981). The University of Melbourne Brand Hub: https://brandhub.unimelb.edu.au/ Grimshaw Architects: University of Melbourne - Fishermans Bend Campus Design Guidelines: The Vision for the Fishermans Bend Campus (2019) 158