Concept submission was a little more rushed than I would of hoped, but I suppose that’s almost always the case. I suspect the scheme will be changing considerably over the next few weeks based on my own misgivings and feedback from the crit panel. In particular,the scheme needs to work a lot harder to make use of the unique nature of the floating dock and respect the implications of modifying a ship regarding structure, buoyancy, etc.
The strategy developed for this submission envisioned a symbiotic relationship between the floating dock and a similarly sized slice of adjacent land. The dock – itself used for deconstruction and repair – is subjected to large cuts that provide light and aspect to give the dock a new function. The newly harvested material is then used in the land component of the house of making. In plan, these elements follow the same progression of back of house, making, exhibition. The central zone contains the design workshop in the dock and the design studio in the existing shed. Following the Bauhaus model of on-campus accommodation close to the studio, student accommodation is located above, with dormitories to the north-east and communal hovering into the central space.
As mentioned at the beginning, I think this submission is very much under-valuing the unique opportunities the dock can offer. As I still don’t have anything in CAD, the project is quite literally back to the drawing board.