Indeterminacy to Architecture (Matrix)

{ Patrick Hwang }

Indeterminacy to Architecture Matrix, Site, Program to Proposition

University of Arizona Arch 402 . Spring 2010

Framework The concept for this studio operates under the assumption and framework that building program and building vessel do not share the same endurance through time. Under the most general conditions, building vessel outlasts building program. Working along this premise, it is the interest of this studio to develop strategies that anticipate change; address adaptability and manage indeterminacy through the exploration of the "In-Between". In-Between as an notion that blurs the distinction between identities. It is not either-or but both. Shoreline could be understood as an example, which belongs to neither the land nor the ocean but to both.

Bottom: } Students began their exploration by analyzing traits of man made fabric or natural plant specimen. The commonalities and the differences between them served as a point of departure to investigate seriality, repetition, structure, organization, order and behavior. } Fruits as subject to understand and reevaluate the notion of program, vis-a-vis grouping fruits by different categories.

MAGNITUDE OF DEVIATION

Right: } From Atlas of Novel Tectonics, Reiser + Umemoto } Diagram of Vessel to Program relationship } Matrix as an instrument to generate design strategy

PROGRAM VESSEL

CHANGE OF USE THRU TIME

REDUCE MAGNITUDE OF DEVIATION

DESIGN SPECIFICITY

PROGRAM VESSEL

INCREASE ADAPTABILITY TO PERMIT ELONGATED SPECIFICITY

MATRIX

INTERSECTION

BEHAVIOR

ORGANIZATION

Joint Connection

Performance Disposition

Order Configuration

METRIC

Matrix Problem 1.1: Analyzing and diagramming a man made fabric (smooth and the straited) and natural plant specimen (hierarchical and the centripetal). Using these two elements as the beginning of their project to extract organizational, structural, patterning ideas and to understand the part to whole relationship. Wire frames were deployed as a design instrument to generate and asssemble.

Top: Romiar Karamooz Right, from top down: Ani Jalalian, Romiar Karamooz, Valerie Pellet

Top, from top down: Paul Frederickson, Marie Taylor Right, from top down: Rachel Tivnan, Paul Frederickson, Marie Taylor, Dani Alvarez,

Top, from top down: Dalal Al-qattan, Justin Hernandez, Virgina Munson Right, from top down: Carlos Vasquez, Dalal Al-qattan, Sean Bollinger, Virgina Munson

Matrix Problem 1.2: With the analysis students conducted, they were asked to transform the characteristics of the man-made and natural by creating the Matrix in both wire frames and in surfaces.

The Matrix became a design instrument to develop notions of movement, flexibility, and organization in a systematic way. The behavior of their Matrix triggered verb(s) and keyword(s) forming a core aspect of their project. Words such as Negotiation, Inversion or Opposition.

Top, from top down: Paul Frederickson, Ani Jalalian, Dani Alvarez, Romiar Karamooz Right, from top down: Sean Bollinger, Paul Fredrickson, Dani Alvarez, Romiar Karamooz

Site The site is located in Downtown LA in the middle of the Fashion District that borders Skid Row and the Toy Districts. It is situated within the urban fabric of an array of scales and textures. The site measures about two acres at 150' x 300' sandwiched between two low rise commercial buildings with Main street to the northwest and a 12 story mid rise building to the southeast. Collectively the studio visited the site multiple times, both during the day and night to get a range of its characteristics.

Program No program was assigned. Instead, students developed their own set of programs deriving from two trajectories.

First, data gathered from site research including topics such as: Built Environment, District and Typology, Circulation Networks, and Urban Compositions. Secondly, students were to assess their Matrix’s conceptual and metaphoric intent. Use verb(s) or key word(s) to help activate the project. Evaluate their spatial and organizational characteristics, consider to what degree the Matrix can accommodate those programs being considered. Reverse the process and evaluate what potential programs the matrix can offer to the site.

Top: Dani Alvarez Right, from top down: Sean Bollinger, Dani Alvarez, Marie Taylor

Top: Dalal Al-qattan Right, from top down: Paul Frederickson, Dalal Al-qattan, Romiar Karamooz

Proposition {1} Sean Bollinger

Proposition {2} Paul Frederickson

Proposition {3} Marie Taylor

Proposition {4} Dani Alvarez

Proposition {5} Romiar Karamooz

Process >

in-between infancy of an idea to fruition of a construct.

Acknowledgement The process implemented for this studio has been greatly influenced by the ideas, pedagogy and writings from Chris Bardt and Kyna Leski (RISD), Elizabeth Grosz (Architecture from the Outside), Alex Wall (Programming the Urban Surface), Bernard Tschumi (Spaces and Events), Jesse Reiser (Atlas of Novel Tectonics), Gilles Delueze (The Smooth and the Striated), Greg Lynn (The Folded, the Pliant and the Supple) and Georg Simmel (The Metropolis and the Mental Life).

Š

2010 Matrix Studio Tucson, Arizona