�

PHASE �

TIM MIDDLETON2003�6830

2

SOME PROPOSED EXPERIMENTS

�. UTILISE COLUMNS AS CARTOGRAPHIC INFORMATION POINTS...

2. RESPONSIVE SPACE; REACTS WITH THE PEOPLE WHO WALK THROUGH...

3. NON-VISUAL NAVIGATION SYSTEM...

4. MOVING STRUCTURE-MOVING SPACE...

5. DESIGN A NEW TUNNEL FOR THE WORKERS AT THE BARANGAROO SITE

3

THEORETICAL STANCE

Discrepancy is interpreted as existence of points of difference between the representations and an individual's perception of architecture. In our understanding of the perceivable world there are discrepancies from individual to individual. The experience of architectural space is highly subjective, evoking responses from distinct experiences and associations, sometimes even leading to variation in emotions or feelings. Representing architecture presents a challenge as even the 'Image' gained from a single word can linguistically be captured in a number of ways (鈴木孝夫, “ことばと文化”).

In our understanding and representation of architecture, we attempt to unify perception through techniques, media and conscious decisions of what architecture to convey. Resulting from this is usually a representation that defines the structure and form as the primary means to organise and capture the architectural space (Lally, Sean, 'Softspace'). In other words, the space that is created by architecture is residual or secondary in its conception.

Initially the interpretation of Station was a place where an object enters/arrives and exits/departs. It is a point in space which is recognised as a place where change in movement occurs, therefore it is also often a place of high activity. This raises the question of the role of this station

4

in its implied network. When a station is used as a destination, it can be considered as a reference point in reaching a certain place. On a large scale map we recognise that a dot for a city such as London does not reflect the character of the place, it just gives it the coordinate of a roughly determined centre. Stations even more so act as these points of reference on a travel scale and they often represent an area around and accessible by the station itself. This is particularly true in places where public transport is highly used. For example, in Japanese cities, directions or maps to a certain location will always be generated using the station as start point. Stations are also points by which one can move to other stations on the network to access other places.

The station, is not literally a 'point', therefore complex stations generate their own internal ambiguity and confusion in navigation. They are the collision of 2 networks, the public transport network (people must understand which line, which bus, which station, what kind of train service?) and also a network of spaces that links them to the neighbourhood (people must navigate to get into the station, tickets, where the wickets are, which way they want to go once they arrive, where they want to exit?). This leads to some interesting complexities and phenomena including following the flow and a number of navigational systems.

5

THE SITE

Upon visiting Wynyard station, some site observations were:- space of the station is almost all circulation space (usually wide paths)- reasonably dirty from traffic- multiple entry points- feeling of “descending” and division between a very public zone and an exclusive (ticketed) zone.

Wynyard Station was opened in 1932 with 6 platforms on 3 levels. Platforms 1 and 2 were used until 1958 for terminating trams but were originally intended to be used for train services that were to run on the eastern side of the harbour bridge. Since the tram lines closed up, platforms 1 and 2 have been incorporated into an underground car park. Even now the platforms are numbered 3 to 6 and the original stairs to platforms 1 and 2 still exist, but are boarded up.

Wynyard seems to have missed much work being done on it in recent years although in 2003 there was talk of potentially funding half of the upgrade by allowing Menzies Hotel (above Wynyard) to demolish the current building and rebuild their own building (Sydney Morning Herald, 01.10.2003). The current building they use is on lease from Railcorp. Wynyard has also been identified as a weakpoint in the Northwest Metro proposal Morris Iema. Not only are

Railcorp concerned about the extra ridership from the new line, but they are also concerned about the 12 500 employees expected to catch the train to work once the Barangaroo site is developed. A tunnel to the Barangaroo site connecting it to Wynyard is also planned.The Site I will be dealing with for the next phase of the project is the station floor and concourse. Part of the project will actually be defining what the edge limit of the station is and identifying points that may be linked up or simplified. This definition of site in these terms is to allow freedom for it to intrude to other parts of Wynyard depending on the necessities of function as mentioned above.

The site is underground and so has an unlimited conceptual dimension to it however the project will most likely involve a few of the buildings above the station being demolished to account for more of a relationship with the above ground world.

6

FUNCTION + METHODOLOGY

The space of a station has the simple function of allowing people to go where they need to go, however it is the number of possible destinations which makes it a very complex matter. In Wynyard they have the destinations of the cityrail network on 6 different lines (to be 7 with the Northwest Metro line) all over Sydney. The destinations in the immediate area of Wynyard are various office buildings, retail outlets and bus stops around station.

People prefer not to stop in a station. While some people may wander into a shop on the way home or grab something to eat or drink in between destinations, the primary goal of users of the station is to get somewhere else. I would like to respect this fact in the design, however Wynyard is likely to become a growing station, with more underground funnelling through walkways and escalators. I would like my design to add dynamic to that experience, so that it could at the very least be a pleasant experience, if possible be a varying experience which could be in the form of information.

I itend on drawing on examples such as MIT’s waterwall at the Zaragoza World Expo as well as some of the other experiments with the “digital wall” concept as well as interactive digital architecture, Interactive Table by Droog (http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=H36kW2wheEU) and “Reactable” (http://reactable.iua.upf.edu/).

Architecture is an iterative process. The following diagram explains my understanding of the cycle of architectural development. The left hand side shows the process of Architecture and the right is the result, a building or structure and space. Until the construction of the physical manifestation, the design cycle is run through a number of times, often restrained only by time, or when the design reaches a certain satisfactory goal. I put a person in there, who only experiences the physical piece of architecture, but can also be an onlooker to the outputs of the architect.