Post-City of Bits Development | Week 7-8 Design Process

Once we established our stance on William J. Mitchell’s ‘City of Bits’, we scrapped the ‘three fields + courtyard’ scheme in favour of our new discourse. Hinging on the maxim “Divide to Connect”, we wanted to separate the library into two ‘realms’:

The divided realm – The digital library itself would function to isolate its occupants. We want to create a condition where one enters the library for short periods; requiring them to exit into…

The ‘connected’ realm – A space that re-assimilates occupants back into the physical world. These spaces would include elements that encourage social interaction; allowing people to reconnect in their fullest form vs their “fragmented” internet personas.

To further accentuate both realms, we have decided to sink our Library into the ground; creating a roof space that flows with Sector 100’s natural topography. This gesture has two effects:

Firstly, it further disconnects the library space from the physical world. The subterranean nature of the library limits the amount of natural light flowing into the library space, while also creating a stronger physical divide from the outside. We felt this gesture was justified, since people engaging with digital media would not require much sunlight to function.

Secondly, we open the core of Sector 100. We believed that the Commerce A/Elam B building acted as barriers on the site; limiting the site as a Social/Learning Hub. By sinking down our building, we broaden sightline conditions along the site; for example, a person standing at the Barracks Wall can now see as far as Old Government House. This reinforces the roof space as the ‘connection’ realm; widening the site into an active congregation point in Sector 100.

Designing Programme

Early on, Ethan and Noah were absent, so Jien and I started to brainstorm the roof space. We focussed on ways to connect different people across the university; treating the roof as a tertiary ‘reconnect’ space.

Brainstorming the Roof Programme

Initially, I decided to break apart how people interact in the physical realm. We categorised these interactions under ‘active’ and ‘passive’ means. However, Jien believed this process to be too narrowed down and thus, unproductive. Jien would then lay out a large bubble diagram for us to list out the roof space functions. From this process, we conceptualised several elements inspired by existing social ‘activators’. These included garden spaces, seating, and even a ‘tertiary playground’. The most interesting of these (in my opinion) – the scaled-up instruments – was inspired by public pianos. For these elements, I envisioned people collaborating with one another to create music. However, the group consensus agreed these elements were contrived and thus, unconvincing. For the most part, these ideas were set back on our priority list in favour of the library programme.

Reuniting the next day, we explored the spatial arrangement of our new digital library. Specifically, we experimented with organising a set of digital study pods within the Library, and how this space links with the ‘connected’ realm. Jien and Noah focussed on the organisation of the pods, while Ethan and I brainstormed a wide range of entry conditions into the library. As a group, we experimented with courtyard ‘nodes’ scattered throughout the library. Like the ‘social hubs’ of the previous schemes, these courtyards guide people through the library space; creating as readable spatial hierarchy occupants can use to navigate.

Jien and Noah experimented with applying the Fibonacci sequence to organise a hierarchy for the study pods. However, we concluded that these experiments appeared too machinic; it was too simple for a Second Year Design formally.

Jien’s experiments with the Fibonacci Sequence

Through an extensive sketch process, Ethan and I experimented with a variety of entry conditions; some were interesting, some questionable, some just plain ridiculous.

Brainstorming entry conditions into the Library

In the end, we felt that these experiments proved unsuccessful. All of the entry conditions we created felt quite awkward to fit into a square courtyard, thus most of these ideas were dismissed. Instead, we were introduced to RCR Arquitectes’ Bell-Loc Winery; a long promenade that flows down into the underground space. As a group, we felt this entry condition felt much more natural than our previous iterations; thus we chose to move forward with a side entry condition.

In response to the machinic nature of a single-typology library, Ethan proposed three major gestures:

Firstly, we decrease the footprint of the design. We believed that the 75-100 pods in the library was too much, thus we have reduced the library footprint to facilitate this.

Secondly, we reintroduce digitally oriented typologies into the digital library (i.e. Makerspace, Exhibition, Café, Lecture Hall, and Cinema). These spaces integrate into our ‘isolation’ hierarchy as medium to high ‘noise’ typologies; leading them to be organised near entry points in our Library. Furthermore, this gesture aligns with my view on typology, and its health benefits.

Lastly, we decrease the number of study pods. We felt the short occupancy period of the pods means more people can use less pods. Because of this, we decided to use only 15 pods in our design. Personally, I argued against this gesture; 15 pods was insufficient to accommodate a whole university. However, when considering the digital library typology, and the study space as an experience, we accepted this reduced number of pods.