r a y m o n d c h i n gARCH103 learning portfolio | spring2013

The purpose of this site analyst is to discover the valuable aspects that need to be taken

into consideration when designing. For example, traffic of different paths will help

determine where to put entrances and exits; sun path will affect programming as shadow

takes in place; surrounding nodes will have an effect on both program and circulation etc.

It also helps us understand more about the site.

MASSING

Through massing, I get to think about the

relationship between different programs. I

grouped the museum shop, main museum and

the two exhibit spaces into one structure,

because they share similar properties. I

grouped the market place and the organic

gardens into another structure. In between,

where both structures meets, I placed the

amphitheater there to celebrate the transition. I

also lowered part of the amphitheater under the

ground so that I’m “crafting” the landscape.

Even though I was relating the programs, I was not responding to the site. So I stepped

back and looked at a bigger picture. I started by developing the interesting shape created

by my nodal map I made during the site analyst. I wanted to have a building that’s not

only for the people who lives at the mission creek area, but for the whole bay area, I

visualize that statement by pointing to different areas of San Francisco.

I wanted it to be a place for people to relax, so I took the idea of a cruise, and blended it

into my design.

As I’ve changed the design, the unrelated programs are

no longer separated. I solved that problem by splitting the

circulation. I’ve extended on of the corners of the

marketplace all the way to the pedestrian, so people

coming from the Bridgeview Way faces a folk road. At

that point, they have a decision to make, whether to go to

the marketplace or the museums. By doing this, even

though the programs are linked internally, from outside,

they are still separated.

I’ve extended the waterfront by placing a shallow pool at the east, during day time,

people can relax and enjoy the sunlight with the marvelous view of the sea and sky; at

night, the pool acts as a mirror, people can dip the feet into the water and enjoy the

reflection of moonlight. It is amazing how these simples things are so hard to find in cities

like San Francisco.

I’ve also changed the location of the amphitheater. I’ve moved it to the top of the

structure. The decision is made after considering the undeveloped land on the south side.

To decrease the chance of it being under shadow, moving it to the top is the best

solution.

Next, I’ve added a viewing area on

second floor. Just to emphasis the

importance of the view and strengthen

the feeling of them being on a cruise.

I’ve also changed the form of the

amphitheater, so that it speaks the

same language as the structure itself.

RENDERING

In the next iteration,

I’ve added exterior

circulation and

organic garden. I

placed at the south

side because

there’s where it will

receive most

sunlight. It also acts

as a path from the

ground to the

amphitheater. I’ve

also assigned

spaces for outdoor

exhibition and

outdoor café.

For the

amphitheater, I’ve

turned it 90 degrees

clockwise, so that it

would receive more

sunlight.

outdoor exhibition

outdoor café

The United States Air Force Academy Cadet Chapel took seven years to design and five

years to build. We had about two months. There are still a lot of details that I want to add

and problem that I want to solve. For example, I failed to come up with a satisfactory

design for the amphitheater. I’ve changed its location, form, orientation etc. but still, it

feels something’s not right. I’m the kind of person Professor Chandler described, I wanted

to solve every single problem before moving on and that’s not the right strategy for the

given amount of time. However, it is just hard to ignore those “unhappy” places when you

know they aren’t right.

He commented during my presentation that I’ve been overly relying on computer, which I

agree. I was overwhelmed by the beautiful rendering and how quick and easy it is to

change between ideas. They also have down sides. When you have big files like this,

computers tend to crush and I often end up restarting with unsaved files.

My vision of Utopian Garden is full of green, that’s why have that many amount of green

areas. So when Professor Chandler commented about me using the full site, I wasn’t

100% agree with him. Sure it is a big site, but what’s so bad about creating extra spaces

for more greens? I came from a place where it’s called “The Concrete City”, people beg

for a greener city. But that’s just my opinion for now, I might have a different view as I

continue my education.

CONCLUSION

thank you