With + For
Sometimes the spaces people use daily just don’t “make sense.” From office buildings, to community centers, and everything in between. I think this derives from when designers and architects design for the users and not with the users. (Just as Giancarlo de Carlo’s philosophy stated.) This is such an interesting theory to me, and one that I agree with! It’s easy to do research and understand a relevant idea of who you are designing for, but once you implement the actual users into the process of how it will be used and the best way to design the space, the success of the building becomes prominent to the actual users and not just infrequent occupants.
I was fortunate enough to be in the community build studio in Charleston over the past year. This was truly a learning experience where we worked alongside the Charleston Parks Conservancy and City of Charleston. This past semester (Fall 2020) it was our task to design a bridge for the community that linked the West Ashley Bikeway to Forest Park. Something interesting was that the park had a miracle league field where children with disabilities (often those in wheelchairs) were provided the opportunity play baseball. It was important to design for those children in particular, but something I regret is not getting them involved to help with the design process. See, we take all of these notions we see and hear/read about, while trying to implement the best design for the user, and believe we create a successful structure, however, often times it could be even better if really considering the users perspective. All that to say, yes, we did work with the client which was the Conservancy and City, but to design for the users, and not with them. There is a difference in a client and a user in most circumstances.
Perhaps that’s why I appreciate residential architecture so much. I feel like it is a rare and special collaborative focus where it is the architect/designer and the clients (who are also the users in this case) work with each other to come up with the best functioning and appealing home that will be a part of their everyday lives. This is something I will strive to carry forth in all of my future designs, whether commercial, government, education, or residential design.
Collaboration Image Link: https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/participatory-design-open-architecture-collaborative
Claire, I appreciate the way you explained the client perspective in different projects. I agree with your idea of carrying forward this Idea of involving users into design in all types of buildings. There are case studies in which clients and core users got involved in design process. Especially for the hospitals, the nurses and duty doctors are the most frequent users of inpatient department and can get a very good design inputs from them.
ReplyDelete"It was important to design for those children in particular, but something I regret is not getting them involved to help with the design process" this would have been such a cool conversation with the kids and leaders of that group. I often wondered if we were going to be able to talk to them as well. I feel that the design may have had slight changes in it to be more accomodating for them. I think we should all keep in mind of the end user as we design, and if possible, interact with them directly during the design phase for a more successful project.
ReplyDeleteClaire I agree with this on so many levels. I agree with the residential reference and also enjoyed hearing the comparison to the bridge that I've heard so much about. Designing with the user needs to be more of a "must" if we are to create successful architecture that works for the user for as long as possible. It should be a common practice.
ReplyDelete