​

​

"The thin bar of mass (Art Center Collage of Design) juxtaposes itself with the landscape around it, almost becoming the horizon line within the scenery. It is interesting that the building does not conform to the shape of the terrain, and it almost ignores the existence of it, so the architecture and the ground can be read as two separate entities that might not have any direct relationship with one another.

 

The programs only operate in one axis, from left to right  and the valley underneath is only used for driveway. As you can see on plan, the building has two main entry points, here and here, and that’s the driveway that connects the two ends. So essentially this building has the spectacle image with its juxtaposition with the landscape.But frankly it can operate in the same way as it does, when it's placed on a flat land, because of its programmatic logic that does not operate in Z-axis. Within the discipline of ground in relationship to architecture, the architecture and ground wants to either merge into one, or disconnect completely.

 

Of course in Craig Ellwood’s project, he disconnects the two. But I think in his project, it informs us that one, architecture and ground can be seen as separate entities, architecture being the ‘constant’ that operates with system, grid and repetition, and the ground being the autonomous and flexible part of the building, in order to cater to diverse programs and activities of different sizes. And two, the ground can be seen as an evident structural element to architecture that wants to levitate, in order to give porosity to spaces below."

​

​

The Groundscraper explores the relationship between autonomy of ground and the constant form of architecture. Within the discipline of ground in relationship to architecture, the architecture and ground wants to either merge into one, or disconnect completely. Craig Ellwood’s Art Center College of Design informs us that architecture and ground can be seen as separate entities, architecture being the constant that operates with system, grid and repetition, and the ground being the autonomous and flexible part of the building, in order to cater to diverse programs and activities of different sizes. The ground can also be seen as an evident structural element to architecture that wants to levitate, in order to give porosity to spaces below.

 

​

“The program is divided in three layers. The first layer is the space under the so-called “carpet” and it is a hardscape that would contain a fully indoor and semi-outdoor plaza. Towards the hospital, I’ve brought back the programs that were there before, such as cafes and restaurants. And there is a lack of infor Ho mal sports facilities in the area, so I brought in small indoor sports halls, public gym, and the plaza would contain informal skate parks and rings. The second layer is the landscape. It would be more about creating a linear park that has grass and trees for shading, where people can picnic and enjoy the outdoors. The last layer is within the mass above, and it would contain residential units with communal gardens between small blocks.”

 

​

The construction logic follows the perimeter dome rib structures that vary in their radius, based on the span and the program sizes that it needs to contain below. The ground operates independently from the mass above and is able to provide layers of spaces that is porous throughout the site and can be broken free from the system of grid and repetition that the mass above would comprise of. The way the mass touches the ground above is also very minimal, as it expresses the concentration of structural forces, giving it a monolithic, top-heavy look. The facade also exaggerates the concentration of structural forces. They almost seem like heavy slabs suspended with thin steel truss. The structural system between the mass and the ground also operates in a different way.

​

​