As designers, usually starting a project means looking at some precedents. That is, researching how the problem you have been presented with has been solved in the past, and critically evaluating the various solutions. This healthy exercise can give you perspective, knowledge, and even inspiration on how to discover the project’s identity. This semesters’ project however is a little unique – not in that there is a lack of precedent, but that we are directly inheriting a program that has already been through the mill, seen multiple design iterations, and even been built.
The following image is Crop Stop 1.0
Now, we are looking to take what was learned from Crop Stop 1.0 in Charleston, SC, and bring it to a national scale with Crop Stop 2.0.
That means, we have to change a few things… while Crop Stop 1.0 had no shortage of successes, it also has its shortcomings. Before we move into schematic design of Crop Stop 2.0, it behooves us to look back at 1.0, figure out was what worked really well, identify what didn’t, and try to fix the latter without sacrificing the former. This week our research team has been doing just that.
By categorizing all the observations taking on Crop Stop 1.0, and identifying pros and cons of each, we were able to recognize relationships between the successes and failures of the project. For example, the building is beautifully detailed, and the high quality of craft really makes it an attractive place to work. However, all this detail requires time and skilled labor onsite, and therefore isn’t easily replicable in communities across the nation with limited resources. So how do we solve the cost of labor issue without sacrificing the quality of the project?
Stay tuned to find out! 🙂