As we take a deeper dive into the process, we have started to uncover particular constraints that actually begin to shape what our schematic designs may look like. Constraints, at first, may seem like banes to designers, however, if the alternative is a world in which anything is possible (kids, I’m not saying anything isn’t possible…), sometimes that degree of open-endedness makes things more difficult for the designers to effectively find solutions. If designing is to be likened to a dialogue, some well-researched and well-understood constraints make for a mutual and understanding conversation between the designer and the problems they are trying to overcome through design.
Having said that, ah yes, our constraints. So apart from general aesthetics, narrative, budget, and programmatic targets, we have more recently fleshed out equally important, if not more important aspects of the design that we need to adhere to. Based on our meeting with Charleston Water System yesterday, we learned specifically how important it is for our proposals to take into consideration the need to spontaneous removal, should the utilities beneath the Greenway need maintenance, update, or repair. Which is why all of our proposals will technically not be considered permanent structures, and will be another level that has the ability to shape our design. So as of recently, we have been developing further ideas as to how these structures can easily be relocated, more content to follow. And for this post’s lack of images, I apologize, it’s been a busy week for me. But thank you for tuning in and I hope you have a great day!