Comments on MIT students designs:

Questions:

1. Is the assumption of block as a form, (its shape, size and deepness) goal for itself?

2. Do you agree it is acceptable that the culture express itself through the way of living and behavior, social and physiological needs, individual needs, relationship to the nature, work, and similar, should influence on the organization of living units and concept of the building?

-In my opinion a form of block shouldn’t be aim for itself and it must be result of logical construction adequate organized living units. From this aspect Dan’s proposal looks unclearly defined.

Housing units must have:

a) Appropriate cardinal orientation (orientation of particular units only on north side isn’t accordant with our standards)

b) Living on the ground floor in central city area isn’t recommended because of loosing privacy (Greg’s proposal)

c) Because of economic reason, one staircase should serve minimum two living units (Quan Yi Lin)

d) Staircase is always located on worse side in terms of insulation –north (2^nd and 3^rd Hongyu’s variants are opposite in this aspect; the first variant in my opinion is better because it define the corner of the building with it’s form, internal court as positive open space has adequate form and dimensions – but in this variant the position of the elevator is unclear regarding needs of unable persons)

Probably because of similarity in culture of living the concept of living units organization in YTU students designs is closer with our understanding of way of living.

–The concept of living unit organization in Onur’s design suits to common and acceptable organization of living units in our understanding. Maybe it could be better to achieve in duplex units more privacy in relation with gallery (individual into collective living). Orientation of particular living units isn’t so clear.

Koksal has a positive approach with process of parallel resolving of dispositions and third dimension as well as positive approach in integration of individual into collective living. The depth of the building isn’t rational in compare with the width of infrastructure, façade and similar. Optimal depth of the building in terms of achieving appropriate cross ventilation is 11-12 m.

I wasn’t in opportunity to see the living units organization from other students because of two reasons: some of them didn’t present them, or there were some technical problems.

Designing of the forms and façades of the buildings I will evaluate at the end of this semester, because majority of students will start to work on them after this presentation, in spite of the fact that design should be parallel process. Some of them were already accept this approach.

Rajka Mandic