alternative car park tower - competition hong-kong

http://www.ac-ca.org/en/home

check the brief for inspiration

term 3+4

external exam pud4

the year long course work will be reviewed by an external examiner twice
a) after term 2
b) after term 4
and thus moderate the overall year mark.

the date of the first review will be in the beginning of term3.

braamfontein comments - general - external examiner's

PUD4] Making the open city

The Brief

Brief is concise and clear in its objective, it generates interest and allows for meaningful, in-depth study of the city as well personal discovery and expression.

Was encouraged by the setting which allows for learning to take place through the analysis of problems and possible solutions, through the use of video, photographs, drawings and modeling.

Students learn and locate answers by doing, and are provided an opportunity to ruminate on their work, to exchange critical ideas, to clarify meanings, and to develop the ability to discuss their work. This process helps students to separate work from self and to acquire the maturity and perspective needed in order to benefit from intelligent criticism. These evaluations are a fundamental and imperative exercise in critical thinking.

Glad to have taken part.

braamfontein comments - group 3 - external examiner's

Good body of work. The work came across as bold and confident with a clear grasp of what to acquaint the audience with, although it must be said that it was rather one-paced. Views observations where well communicated, good lexicon, accept for the use of “I” by some group members. Interviews were held with a number of local players yet none of these dialogues were discussed in the presentation.

Some good sections with others needing some work to be read more legibly, need to revise colours utilized. Information compiled seemed comprehensive, group was let down by fragmented work parcels, one can’t help but feel that some of the work slipped through the cracks as a result. Day/Night video was an excellent venture, it incorporated sound as heard on the street, the presentation really came alive at this point for me, but alas was short lived [this is a powerful tool, would recommend it to be worked on and better utilized].

Would suggest a study on land uses, they are a number of public /state run entities on the site and this must have a particular effect on the area.

Suggest the group engages council urban planners, their plans, objectives policies etc.

braamfontein comments - group 2 - external examiner's

3D model/photographic walk through presented an excellent opportunity to introduce the site to the audience. A pity that this opportunity was not seized; the video, which was meant to be used as tool to deconstruct the site, sadly abandoned its artisan. It is important for the speaker to own the presentation.

Interesting observations made e.g. dustbin count [supposed oversupply due to advertising benefits], traffic light sequencing, Braamfontein branding identity. Some overly apparent observations were seemingly over-looked e.g. The Pick n Pay at Braamfontein Centre, one could question its location which lends to a somewhat disruptive sidewalk experience at certain times of the day [possibly better location across the street, with courtyard and ample space for people to gather?]

Drawings/ Photographs/ Sections were delectable, the attention to detail and creativity worthy of eulogy. Very well done.

The group evidently put in a great deal of work into their presentation but this was negated by it coming across rather fragmented with members lacking the verbal skills, or content to explain and unpack certain urban components. Views, when expressed, where overly private with the repeated use of the word “I” by various group members. I think the group members lost out on their most lucrative asset; “each other”. Would propose a “logic” in unpacking their work – e.g. – Social, Economical, Political, Physical components.

Suggest the group engages council urban planners, their plans, objectives policies etc.

braamfontein comments - group 1 - external examiner's

Video walk through of the site was a brilliant medium to employ and was well executed, good use of effects and accents to highlight/pinpoint pertinent observations. Would suggest that sound be incorporated into film to capture the sound-scape and add another layer to composition.

Good observations and analysis, ranging from obstacles along sidewalks or pathways to sun studies. Analysis seemed to focus exclusively on the negative aspects of the site, with little mention of elements that ‘worked’ on the site. Would have appreciated to hear what the local urban voices that traverse and habit the site [employees, entrepreneurs, students, car marshals etc] had to say about the site.

3D model was exceptional in that it was able to communicate the volumes/ heights/ depths/ spaces within the site.

Would suggest that group undertakes study of various land uses and integrate data already compiled to construct a narrative that will plot how the different uses on the site contribute and are a component of the type of person [diversity] who, lives, works, plays, studies etc on the site.

Suggest the group engages council urban planners, their plans, objectives policies etc.

Good collaborative work. The group members’ observations and views came across as one continuous thread. One could a positive team spirit.