Having just completed our first review with outside reviewers, landscape architects Mira Engler and Ben Shirtcliff, it was exciting to hear their suggestions and discover any unclear design decisions had been made on our part. The image below, also serving as this post’s cover image, shows the most recent work that my group and I have compiled. The majority of the information is research of the existing site, its application to our design processes and how it influenced our programming decisions, in addition to various precedent studies of similar to our idea of each program such as the social club and revitalizing the alleyway.
First to critique our work was Mira, who appreciated the obvious amount of work placed into our project but was desiring more convincing of our specific program. Rather than taking on the idea that “if [we] build it they will come” the MADmen should display the immediate needs of the surrounding areas applicable to the proposed needs on our site. Dividing our site into the prescribed uses retail, housing, grocery, social club, art, and quick eateries, we were requested to locate each of these uses on a series of maps in the area to see if these programs area actually needed. By presenting this type of research it could easily convince others of the proposed programs without the need to verbally explain each use. Additionally, Mira suggested for the vegetation on site to diagram clearly how green wall systems and other greenery within the site would thrive by showing their watering systems as well as the specific plant selection for each location. Portions of Mira’s advice to us was surprisingly similar to what Ben would later suggest.
Our other review started quite differently than the other, Ben asked to know MADmen’s goals and objectives for the end product at the beginning before even the introduction to the project’s context. I image that knowing the objectives in advance would allow an easier transition from topic to topic on this multi-programmed site, but also gives Ben the ability to see, or not see, the connections between our conclusion and objectives when presented with the appropriate information. The main disconnect he found was that we were working the site within a vacuum, which was a previously desired quality but now needed to be discarded. The adjacent site conditions, the large parking lot, the Golden Nugget casino and parking structure, Clark County employee parking structure, Clark County Jail, and the back of Las Vegas City Hall, needed to be considered more seriously in our design. Suggestions of having the residential portion of our program could be changed to short-term housing where rent contracts are don’t on a month-to-month basis due to the actual demographics of the area. A more thorough analysis of the area’s current demographics would be able to demonstrate the relationship between people staying in the hotel and apartment units and those already on the site offering their commodities. Additionally, both Mira and Ben suggested comparing both the before images of the site and our designed after images side-by-side as to show the difference and the appealing nature the design would hold.
The advice given to us by Mira and Ben will be helpful in driving us towards a better and more refined end design product. It was reassuring that both were mostly convinced of our rehabilitation of the Victory Hotel into the social club, but more so they did not seem to question the potential success of our alleyway designs. Next week will be the beginning of an even more rigorous design process for MADmen in addressing the Victory social club, the end of the art trail, creating an incredible alleyway, etc., and representing and presenting them well to communicate with others easily. The excitement for this week is overlapping with spring arriving is fantastic! I can only hope to enjoy the weather while designing inside studio this upcoming week.
- kp