name
concept-design
description
Parti development, massing studies, spatial organization strategies, design concept generation, and concept-to-form translation methodologies
user-invocable
true
Concept Design
Comprehensive knowledge base for architectural concept design including parti development, massing strategies, spatial organization models, concept-to-form translation, and design iteration protocols. Invoke this skill when developing early-stage design concepts, evaluating massing options, organizing spatial programs, or translating abstract design ideas into architectural form.
Section 1: Parti Development
1.1 What is a Parti?
The parti (from French "parti pris" — a decision taken) is the essential organizational diagram of a building. It is the irreducible idea that governs the relationship between program, structure, circulation, and site. Every design decision should be traceable to the parti. If a move does not reinforce the parti, it weakens the design.
A strong parti:
Can be drawn in 30 seconds with a single line or simple shapes
Explains the building's organization to a non-architect
Resolves the primary design problem (access, view, climate, program)
Generates both plan and section logic
Remains legible in the finished building
1.2 Twelve Archetypal Parti Types
Linear
Diagram:
A single bar or spine — all rooms arranged along one axis. Circulation runs parallel to the primary volume.
Spatial Characteristics:
Single-loaded or double-loaded corridor organization
Clear directionality from one end to the other
Sequential spatial experience (A to B to C)
Depth typically 12-18 m for natural ventilation and daylighting (single-loaded: 6-8 m; double-loaded: 12-15 m)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Museums and galleries (sequential viewing), hospitals (patient wings), schools (classroom wings), linear transit stations, waterfront promenades
Structural Implications:
Repetitive bay structure perpendicular to the spine. Typical bay: 6-9 m wide x 6-12 m deep. Lateral stability via corridor walls or braced bays at intervals (every 30-40 m in steel, every 20-30 m in timber).
Exemplar Buildings:
Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin (Mies, 1968) — 64.8 m x 64.8 m clear-span roof on 8 cruciform columns, but the gallery below is organized as a linear sequence of rooms
Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth (Kahn, 1972) — 6 parallel cycloid vaults, each 30.5 m long x 7.0 m wide, linear gallery rooms beneath
相關技能
Courtyard
Diagram:
Rooms arranged around one or more enclosed open spaces. The void is the organizing principle.
Spatial Characteristics:
Inward-looking — the courtyard provides light, air, and a protected exterior room
All rooms share a visual and physical connection to the open space
Strong definition of public (courtyard) and private (perimeter rooms) zones
Courtyard dimensions for comfortable microclimate: minimum width = 1x surrounding building height in temperate climates; 0.5x in hot climates (for shade)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Housing (traditional Islamic house, European palazzo, contemporary apartment blocks), monasteries, schools, museums, offices, civic buildings
Structural Implications:
Load-bearing perimeter walls or frame structure with courtyard as structural void. Corner conditions require careful resolution (corner columns or cantilevered slabs). Typical perimeter depth: 6-12 m.
Exemplar Buildings:
Salk Institute, La Jolla (Kahn, 1965) — two parallel lab wings flanking a travertine courtyard (61 m x 20 m) open to the Pacific, water channel on axis
Alhambra, Granada (14th century) — Court of the Myrtles (36.6 m x 23.5 m, reflecting pool), Court of the Lions (28.5 m x 15.7 m, columned arcade, fountain)
Clustered
Diagram:
Discrete volumes grouped by proximity and relationship, without a single dominant axis or center. Spaces are connected by short links or shared edges.
Spatial Characteristics:
Non-hierarchical — no single dominant space or axis
Village-like aggregation of semi-independent elements
Interstitial spaces (between clusters) are as important as rooms themselves
Scale range: from a cluster of rooms to a cluster of buildings
Programmatic Best-Fit:
University campuses, research parks, housing communities, primary schools, conference centers, healthcare villages
Structural Implications:
Each cluster can have independent structure. Connections may be lightweight (glazed links, bridges) or substantial (shared walls). Foundation design varies per cluster, advantageous on sloping or irregular sites.
Exemplar Buildings:
Amsterdam Orphanage (van Eyck, 1960) — tartan grid of small pavilions creating an interior village, domed roofs, multiple scales from individual to collective
Maggie's Centre, Edinburgh (Richard Murphy, 2009) — cluster of small rooms around a central kitchen, domestic scale, garden connections
Radial
Diagram:
Elements radiating from a central point or core. Circulation moves outward from center to periphery or along concentric rings.
Spatial Characteristics:
Strong central focal space (atrium, rotunda, hub)
Radial wings or corridors extending outward
Diminishing hierarchy from center to edge
Clear orientation — the center is always identifiable
Plan geometry: circular, hexagonal, octagonal, or triangular subdivision
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Airports (central terminal with radiating concourses), hospitals (nursing hub with radiating wings), prisons (panopticon), convention centers, large-scale commercial (central food court with radiating retail wings)
Structural Implications:
Central core carries vertical loads and provides lateral stability. Radiating wings can be identical (modular) or differentiated. Structural efficiency decreases at the perimeter (wider spans between radial walls). Ring beams at intersections.
Exemplar Buildings:
Guggenheim Museum, New York (Wright, 1959) — helical ramp spiraling around a 28 m diameter central void, top-lit atrium
Chandigarh Capitol Complex (Le Corbusier, 1952-63) — radial site plan with Assembly, Secretariat, and High Court radiating from central esplanade
Grid
Diagram:
A regular two-directional matrix of structural bays, typically orthogonal. Program is distributed across the grid; hierarchy emerges through selective void, double-height, or density variation.
Spatial Characteristics:
Neutral, non-directional spatial field
Flexibility — any bay can house any function (within structural capacity)
Hierarchy through exception: voids, double heights, material changes within the grid
Repetitive bay dimensions provide economic efficiency
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Offices (6-9 m grids), parking structures (8-10 m grids), warehouse/industrial (10-15 m grids), exhibition halls, libraries, mixed-use buildings
Structural Implications:
Highly efficient — repetitive columns, beams, and floor plates. Standard grids: 6 m x 6 m (economic minimum for offices), 7.5 m x 7.5 m (popular for parking below offices), 9 m x 9 m (generous open office), 10.8 m x 10.8 m (maximum economic RC flat slab). Column sizes: 300-600 mm diameter for RC, 200-400 mm for steel, depending on load and height.
Exemplar Buildings:
Crown Hall, IIT Chicago (Mies, 1956) — 36.6 m x 67 m clear span, 4 plate girders at 18.3 m spacing, universal space
Sendai Mediatheque (Ito, 2001) — 50 m x 50 m, 13 tube-columns on irregular grid, 7 floor plates, each floor a different program
Pinwheel
Diagram:
Elements rotating around a central point but not connected at center — like windmill blades or a swastika motif (in its pre-symbolic geometric sense). Four (or three) wings extending and rotating around a pivot.
Spatial Characteristics:
Dynamic centrifugal movement outward from center
Each wing extends toward a different landscape or context condition
Center is often a void or transitional space
Asymmetric balance through rotational equilibrium
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Houses (each wing toward different garden aspect), small cultural buildings, pavilions, visitor centers
Structural Implications:
Each wing is structurally semi-independent. Central pivot point may be a column cluster or a core. Wings typically single-story or split-level. Cantilevers at wing terminations create visual dynamism.
Exemplar Buildings:
Barcelona Pavilion (Mies, 1929) — walls and roof planes slide past each other in a pinwheel composition, 8 cruciform chrome columns
Brick Country House project (Mies, 1924) — unbuilt; seminal pinwheel plan with walls extending beyond the building envelope into the landscape
Bar
Diagram:
A single rectangular volume, typically elongated (length:width > 3:1). Simpler than the linear parti — the bar is a single mass rather than rooms along a spine.
Spatial Characteristics:
Maximum perimeter-to-area ratio (good for daylighting and ventilation)
Clear structural logic: short-span direction perpendicular to the long axis
Two primary facades with distinct orientations (north/south or street/garden)
Floor plates 12-18 m deep (optimal for daylighting: daylight penetrates 2-2.5x ceiling height from facade)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Residential (apartment slabs), offices (commercial bars), laboratories (with service spine), schools (classroom bars)
Structural Implications:
Repetitive cross-section. Steel or RC frame with 6-9 m bays. Lateral stability via cores at ends or intervals. For timber: CLT panels at 3.6-6 m bay spacing, typically 5-8 stories maximum.
Exemplar Buildings:
Unite d'Habitation, Marseille (Le Corbusier, 1952) — 137 m x 24 m x 56 m, 337 apartments in a single bar, internal street, pilotis
Narkomfin Building, Moscow (Ginzburg, 1930) — 85 m long bar, skip-stop corridor, duplex apartments, detached communal block
Tower
Diagram:
A vertical extrusion of a compact floor plate, typically with a central or offset core. Height:width > 3:1.
Spatial Characteristics:
Vertical stacking of repetitive floor plates
Core as organizing element (elevators, stairs, risers, restrooms)
Premium floors at top (views, light, prestige)
Ground floor as public interface (lobby, retail, through-block connection)
Core-to-perimeter distance: 9-15 m (optimal for daylighting and leasing depth in offices)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Offices (10-60+ stories), residential (15-80+ stories), hotels, mixed-use towers
Structural Implications:
Core provides gravity and lateral resistance (RC shear walls 300-600 mm thick, or braced steel core). Perimeter frame: steel or RC columns at 3-4.5 m centers. Outrigger trusses at intervals for supertall (> 300 m). Floor plate efficiency: 70-82% net-to-gross (compact core = higher efficiency). Structural premium above 50 stories: 15-25% additional cost.
Exemplar Buildings:
Seagram Building, New York (Mies + Johnson, 1958) — 38 stories, 157 m, bronze I-beam curtain wall, 27 m plaza setback
30 St Mary Axe, London (Foster, 2004) — 41 stories, 180 m, diagrid structure, circular plan tapering at base and top
Podium + Tower
Diagram:
A horizontal base (podium, 2-6 stories) supporting one or more vertical towers. The podium engages the street; the tower engages the sky.
Spatial Characteristics:
Podium: large-floor-plate programs (retail, parking, conference, amenity)
Tower: small-floor-plate programs (residential, hotel, office)
Podium roof as amenity deck (pool, garden, playground)
Podium defines the streetwall; tower is set back from the podium edge (minimum 3 m for many zoning codes)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Mixed-use urban development, hotels above retail, residential above commercial, transit-oriented development
Structural Implications:
Transfer structure at podium-tower interface: transfer beams (1.2-3.0 m deep) or transfer plates (600-1,200 mm thick RC) redistribute tower column loads to wider podium column grids. Podium columns at 8-10 m grids for parking; tower columns at 6-9 m grids.
Exemplar Buildings:
Marina Bay Sands, Singapore (Safdie, 2010) — 3 towers (57 stories each) on a podium with casino, convention, retail; 340 m SkyPark spanning all three towers
VIA 57 West, New York (BIG, 2016) — pyramidal hybrid with podium base, courtyard tower rising from west to east, 76,180 m2
Atrium
Diagram:
A central void (atrium) surrounded by occupied floors on multiple levels. The void connects all levels visually and provides daylight deep into the plan.
Spatial Characteristics:
Central void as social and spatial heart of the building
Visual connection between floors (community, orientation, wayfinding)
Stack effect drives natural ventilation (if atrium is ventilated to exterior)
Daylight delivered to interior spaces via atrium glazing (target: 2% daylight factor at atrium floor)
Atrium proportions: height-to-width ratio 2:1 to 5:1 typical; width minimum 6 m for meaningful daylight penetration
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Hotels, shopping centers, corporate headquarters, hospitals, universities, libraries, civic buildings
Structural Implications:
Long-span roof structure over atrium void (steel trusses, space frames, cable-net, ETFE cushions). Floor plates cantilever or span around the void. Atrium glazing requires careful structural support (spider fittings, cable walls, or mullion systems) and smoke management (minimum 2 m smoke reservoir depth per BS 9999).
Exemplar Buildings:
Ford Foundation, New York (Roche Dinkeloo, 1968) — 12-story atrium garden, L-shaped office floors wrap two sides, first modern office atrium
Bradbury Building, Los Angeles (Wyman, 1893) — 5-story skylit atrium, ornamental iron railings, open-cage elevators, 15 m wide atrium
Spiral
Diagram:
Circulation path spirals upward or outward, with program arranged along the continuous path. The ramp or helical stair is the primary spatial and structural element.
Spatial Characteristics:
Continuous movement rather than floor-by-floor stops
No distinct floor plates — seamless vertical transition
Dramatic spatial experience (compression, expansion, revelation as you ascend)
Challenging for accessibility (requires parallel elevator access)
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Museums and galleries (continuous viewing sequence), parking garages, observation towers, religious/ceremonial buildings, exhibition pavilions
Structural Implications:
Helical ramp acts as structural element (inclined slab, typically 200-300 mm RC). Central column or perimeter walls provide vertical support. Torsional loads must be resolved. Foundation receives asymmetric loads.
Exemplar Buildings:
Guggenheim Museum, New York (Wright, 1959) — continuous helical ramp, 28 m diameter, 6 levels, 430 m total ramp length
National Museum of Qatar, Doha (Nouvel, 2019) — interlocking disc forms creating a spiraling spatial sequence, 52,000 m2
Split-Level
Diagram:
Floor plates at half-story offsets, connected by half-flights of stairs. The section is the primary design tool.
Spatial Characteristics:
Vertical spatial interconnection without full double-height spaces
Half-level offsets create sightlines between adjacent spaces
Efficient use of site slope (embed into hillside)
Complex spatial experience with modest floor-to-floor heights
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Houses on sloping sites, small cultural buildings, retail (half-level browsing), libraries, schools
Structural Implications:
Staggered floor slabs require careful structural coordination. Bearing walls at half-level offsets act as both gravity and lateral systems. Typical half-level: 1.5 m offset (for 3.0 m floor-to-floor). Foundation steps with the slope.
Exemplar Buildings:
Villa Muller, Prague (Loos, 1930) — Raumplan: rooms at different levels within a cubic volume, each sized to its function (salon: high ceiling, bedroom: low ceiling)
Habitat 67, Montreal (Safdie, 1967) — 354 prefabricated boxes stacked in interlocking split-level configurations
Section 2: Massing Strategies
2.1 Additive vs. Subtractive Massing
Additive Massing:
Building form generated by combining discrete volumes. Each volume is legible as a separate element. The composition is the relationship between parts.
Method: Start with the primary volume (the largest program element). Add secondary volumes based on program adjacency, site orientation, and structural logic.
Expression: articulated joints between volumes (recessed glazed links, material changes, setbacks)
Example: Vitra Fire Station (Hadid, 1993) — sharp-angled volumes colliding and separating
Subtractive Massing:
Building form generated by carving voids from a solid. The starting point is a maximum envelope; the final form is what remains after removals.
Method: Start with the maximum buildable envelope (site boundary, height limit, setback requirements, FAR). Subtract for: solar access (cut south-facing voids), views (cut toward view corridors), entry (carve entrance volumes), outdoor space (cut courtyards, terraces).
Expression: the void is the design move — what is removed matters more than what remains
Example: Simmons Hall, MIT (Holl, 2002) — 10-story slab with 5 large conical voids cut through the mass for light, air, and communal space
2.2 Solid-Void Relationships
The relationship between occupied (solid) and unoccupied (void) space defines the character of the building:
Solid-Void Ratio
Character
Example
90% solid / 10% void
Fortress, bunker, introversion
Therme Vals (Zumthor)
70% solid / 30% void
Institutional gravitas, courtyard types
Salk Institute (Kahn)
50% solid / 50% void
Balanced, civic, campus types
IIT Campus (Mies)
30% solid / 70% void
Open, transparent, pavilion types
Farnsworth House (Mies)
10% solid / 90% void
Canopy, shelter, minimal enclosure
Serpentine Pavilions (various)
2.3 Articulation Methods
Setbacks:
Upper floors recessed from lower floors. Creates terraces, reduces perceived bulk, defines a streetwall at lower levels while allowing height above. Zoning-driven setback: New York 1916 Zoning (wedding cake massing). Design-driven setback: VIA 57 West (BIG, 2016).
Cantilevers:
Volumes projecting beyond the support structure below. Creates shelter at ground level, visual drama, and architectural assertion. Structural limit for RC: 3-6 m typical; for steel: 6-15 m; for post-tensioned: up to 20 m. Example: CCTV Headquarters (OMA, 2012) — 75 m cantilever at the top connecting two leaning towers.
Terracing:
Stepping the building mass with the topography or in response to solar access requirements. Each terrace creates an outdoor room for the floor below. Example: Habitat 67 — each unit has a garden on the roof of the unit below.
Stepping:
Incremental vertical offsets creating a stepped profile. Responds to zoning envelopes, reduces shadow impact on neighbors, creates a varied skyline. Example: 8 House, Copenhagen (BIG, 2010) — figure-eight plan with ramping cross-section, 476 apartments.
2.4 Solar Massing
Orientation for Passive Solar (Northern Hemisphere):
Elongate the building on the east-west axis (long facades face north and south)
South facade: maximum glazing with horizontal shading (overhangs sized to block summer sun at 70+ degrees altitude but admit winter sun at 25-35 degrees)
East facade: moderate glazing with vertical fins (morning sun is desirable for wake-up in residential)
West facade: minimize glazing or use deep vertical louvers (late afternoon sun causes overheating — west facade receives 2-3x the solar gain of south in summer)
North facade: maximize glazing for diffuse daylight without direct solar gain (ideal for studios, galleries, offices)
Solar Envelope (Ralph Knowles):
The maximum buildable volume that will not shadow adjacent properties beyond specified limits. Defined by: latitude, time of day (typically 10:00-14:00 access required), date (winter solstice for worst case), and shadow fence height on adjacent property. Results in sloped/stepped massing that creates optimal solar access for the neighborhood.
2.5 Wind-Responsive Massing
Aerodynamic shaping:
Rounded corners reduce wind acceleration around buildings by 30-40% compared to sharp corners. Tapered or setback forms reduce vortex shedding (critical for supertall towers).
Podium sheltering:
A 2-4 story podium creates a wind-protected zone at ground level. Wind speed at pedestrian level behind a podium is 40-60% lower than at the exposed tower face.
Porosity:
Through-building openings (sky gardens, ventilation slots) can reduce overall wind load by 10-20% and provide natural ventilation to interior spaces.
Orientation:
Orient the narrow facade toward the prevailing winter wind. Typical prevailing wind in mid-latitudes: west to northwest in winter.
Comfort criteria (Lawson):
Sitting: < 4 m/s (Beaufort 2-3); Standing/entrance: < 6 m/s; Walking: < 8 m/s; Uncomfortable: > 8 m/s. These targets must be tested via CFD or wind tunnel (at 1:300 scale minimum).
2.6 View-Responsive Massing
Map significant views from the site: ocean, mountains, skyline, landmarks, gardens
Orient primary living/working spaces toward the primary view
Stagger floor plates to prevent upper floors from blocking lower-floor views
Angle facades to capture oblique views (10-15 degree rotation can capture a view not visible from an orthogonal facade)
Create framed views through carefully positioned openings (minimum 1.5 m wide for a meaningful view frame)
Example: Absolute Towers, Mississauga (MAD, 2012) — each floor rotated 1-8 degrees to maximize views of Lake Ontario from every unit
2.7 Contextual Massing
Datum:
Align key horizontal lines (cornice, string course, floor levels) with adjacent buildings. The streetwall datum creates visual continuity. Typical datum reference: adjacent cornice height (+/- 300 mm).
Cornice Alignment:
Match the cornice height of neighboring buildings for the podium or lower portion. Tower elements can rise above the contextual datum if set back from the streetwall (minimum 3-6 m setback per most zoning codes).
Streetwall:
Maintain a continuous building face at the property line for the lower 2-6 stories. Streetwall continuity creates comfortable pedestrian enclosure (target: > 70% of block face built to streetwall line). Gaps in the streetwall should be intentional public spaces, not residual voids.
2.8 Massing Evaluation Matrix
Criterion
Weight
Option A
Option B
Option C
Solar access (south facade area, m2)
15%
Shadow impact on neighbors (hrs/day at equinox)
10%
View capture (% units with primary view)
10%
Wind comfort (% ground area meeting Lawson sitting)
10%
FAR achieved (m2 GFA / site area)
15%
Streetwall continuity (% of frontage)
10%
Structural efficiency (estimated kg steel/m2)
10%
Open space quality (usable outdoor m2)
10%
Daylight factor (average across typical floor)
10%
Score each option 1-5 per criterion, multiply by weight, sum for total. Select the option with the highest weighted score, then refine.
Section 3: Spatial Organization
3.1 Six Organizational Models (after Francis D.K. Ching)
Centralized Organization
Definition:
A dominant central space surrounded by secondary spaces. The center is the focus; periphery is subordinate.
When to Use:
Programs with a single primary gathering space — concert halls, worship spaces, legislatures, courts, sports arenas
Advantages:
Clear hierarchy — the center is undeniable
Strong orientation — users always know where the main event is
Efficient for spectator programs (radial sightlines)
Disadvantages:
Inflexible — the center must remain central
Difficult to expand without disrupting the hierarchy
Peripheral spaces may feel secondary or residual
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Concert halls (2,000 m2 floor area at 0.7-0.9 m2/seat), courthouses (central courtroom), religious buildings (nave/sanctuary), libraries (central reading room)
Structural Implications:
Long-span roof over central space (steel trusses: 30-60 m; space frame: 40-100 m; cable-net: 50-200 m). Peripheral spaces can use conventional framing. Central space volume: 6-20 m clear height depending on acoustic and programmatic requirements.
Linear Organization
Definition:
Spaces arranged in a row along a path. The path may be straight, curved, segmented, or branching.
When to Use:
Programs that require sequential access — galleries, hospitals, corridors of power, processing plants
Advantages:
Clear wayfinding — one path, one direction
Natural ventilation potential (cross-ventilation perpendicular to path)
Can adapt to site geometry (curve with a river, follow a contour)
Disadvantages:
Long walking distances (mitigate by limiting to 150 m before a vertical core or break)
Dead-end conditions if path does not loop or branch
Monotonous if rhythm and variation are not introduced
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Museums (100-150 m maximum viewing sequence before fatigue), hospital wards (45-60 m nursing corridor maximum), schools (double-loaded corridor with 60-80 m wing lengths), airport terminals (linear concourses: 500-1,500 m with moving walkways)
Structural Implications:
Repetitive bay structure. Expansion joints every 40-60 m in RC and masonry, every 60-90 m in steel (per climate — more frequent in extreme temperature ranges).
Radial Organization
Definition:
Linear arms extending outward from a central point. Combines the focus of centralized with the directionality of linear.
When to Use:
Programs requiring both a central hub and directional extensions — airports, hospitals, conference centers
Advantages:
Central hub serves as orientation and distribution point
Each arm can respond to different site conditions (view, sun, access)
Expandable by adding arms without disrupting the center
Disadvantages:
Intersection geometry at center becomes complex
Peripheral ends of arms may be far from center (limit arm length to 100-150 m)
Wedge-shaped interstitial spaces between arms may be difficult to program
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Airport terminals (central check-in, radiating concourses), hospitals (nursing hub with 3-4 wings, maximum 30 beds per wing), campuses (central commons with radiating academic buildings)
Structural Implications:
Hub structure carries concentrated loads from multiple arms. Ring beams at hub perimeter distribute loads. Each arm can use independent structural systems. Differential settlement between hub and arms requires movement joints.
Clustered Organization
Definition:
Groups of spaces related by proximity, shared visual or circulatory properties, or common function. No dominant axis or center.
When to Use:
Programs with multiple semi-autonomous units — university departments, housing communities, research centers, healthcare villages
Advantages:
Flexible — clusters can be added, removed, or modified independently
Creates varied, village-like spatial experience
Responds well to irregular sites and topography
Allows phased construction
Disadvantages:
Weak overall legibility — users may not grasp the whole
Circulation can be indirect (target maximum 1.3x the direct distance between any two points)
Difficult to create a strong institutional identity
Programmatic Best-Fit:
University campuses (cluster by department), housing (cluster by community group: 20-40 units per cluster per Dunbar-inspired social scaling), healthcare (cluster by patient acuity), research (cluster by discipline with shared equipment zones)
Structural Implications:
Each cluster is structurally independent. Connections between clusters can be lightweight (covered walkways: steel or timber, 3-6 m wide) or substantial (shared walls). Variable foundation types per cluster (advantage on mixed soil conditions).
Grid Organization
Definition:
Spaces organized within a regular, two-dimensional framework of intersecting parallel lines. Program is distributed across grid cells.
When to Use:
Programs requiring maximum flexibility, equal access, and systematic expansion — offices, laboratories, museums, storage, industrial
Advantages:
Maximum flexibility — any cell can serve any function
Repetitive structure is economical
Easy to expand (add rows or columns)
Clear addressing system (row + column)
Disadvantages:
Can be monotonous without variation (introduce hierarchy through voids, double heights, material changes)
Inflexible at the macro scale (responds poorly to irregular sites)
Produces deep floor plates that require artificial lighting at core
Programmatic Best-Fit:
Open-plan offices (7.5-9 m grid), laboratories (3.3-3.6 m module perpendicular to lab benches, 6.6-10.8 m bay along corridor), warehouses and distribution centers (10-15 m grid), parking (7.5-8.4 m x 15-16.8 m)
Structural Implications:
Highly repetitive and efficient. Standard systems: RC flat slab (spans 6-10 m, depth L/30 to L/26), steel composite (spans 9-18 m, depth L/20), CLT (spans 3.6-7.2 m, depth 140-240 mm). Column drops or capitals for punching shear in flat slabs.
Hybrid Organization
Definition:
Two or more organizational models combined in a single building. The hybrid responds to the reality that most complex programs cannot be served by a single model.
When to Use:
Almost every building of significant complexity is a hybrid. The skill is in selecting the right combination and managing the transitions.
Common Hybrids:
Linear + Centralized: gallery wings radiating from a central hall (British Museum, Foster's Great Court, 2000)
Grid + Atrium: regular office grid surrounding a central void (Commerzbank, Foster, 1997 — 53-story tower with 12-story sky gardens)
Podium + Tower: horizontal public base with vertical private stack (Marina Bay Sands)
Cluster + Linear: clusters connected by a linear spine (university campus model)
Centralized + Radial: domed central space with radiating wings (US Capitol)
Design Strategy for Hybrids:
Identify the 2-3 dominant program groups
Assign each group the most appropriate organizational model
Design the transition/interface between models (this is where the architectural magic happens)
Ensure that circulation connects all models without dead ends
Test the hybrid with adjacency diagrams, then plan studies
Section 4: Concept-to-Form Translation
4.1 Eight Concept Drivers
Every architectural concept begins with an abstract idea. The challenge is translating that idea into three-dimensional form. The following eight drivers provide distinct pathways from concept to architecture.
Driver 1: Narrative / Metaphor
Method:
The building tells a story or embodies a metaphor. Form, material, and sequence are composed to communicate meaning.
Process:
Define the narrative in one sentence. Identify the key scenes/episodes. Assign architectural moments to each episode (entry = prologue, main space = climax, exit = denouement). Select materials and light conditions that reinforce the narrative mood.
Example:
Jewish Museum, Berlin (Libeskind, 2001) — the building is a narrative of absence and displacement. The zigzag plan traces the disconnected addresses of deported Jewish Berliners. Void spaces cut through all floors represent irretrievable loss. The Garden of Exile is disorienting (columns tilted 12 degrees).
Risk:
Narrative can become literal or illustrative. The best narrative architecture communicates through spatial experience, not symbolism.
Driver 2: Material Logic
Method:
The inherent properties of a material — its strength, weight, texture, weathering, and workability — generate the building's form and detail.
Process:
Select the primary material based on site context, budget, and desired atmospheric quality. Study its structural properties (compressive strength, tensile strength, modulus). Design the structural system to express those properties. Detail connections to reveal material behavior.
Example:
Therme Vals (Zumthor, 1996) — local Vals gneiss quartzite generates everything: wall thickness (600 mm composite: 2 layers of stone with insulated cavity), coursing rhythm (31/47/63 mm), bath temperatures etched into stone, even the light is filtered through stone edges.
Risk:
Material fetishism — the building becomes a material sample board rather than a spatial experience.
Driver 3: Structural Expression
Method:
Structure is not concealed but becomes the primary architectural expression. The load path is the parti.
Process:
Define the span, load, and lateral requirements. Select the structural system that most elegantly resolves these forces. Expose the structure. Detail connections as expressive moments. Celebrate the hierarchy of primary/secondary/tertiary structure.
Example:
Sendai Mediatheque (Ito, 2001) — 13 seaweed-like tube-columns of bundled steel pipes support 7 flat steel plates. Structure IS the architecture — there are no walls, no hidden frames, no false ceilings.
Risk:
Structural exhibitionism — complexity for its own sake. The best structural expression achieves elegance through economy.
Driver 4: Environmental Response
Method:
Climate, sun path, wind patterns, and site ecology generate the building's form, orientation, and envelope.
Process:
Analyze the site's solar geometry (altitude/azimuth at solstices and equinoxes), prevailing winds (seasonal direction and velocity), rainfall (annual total and peak hourly), and temperature (annual range, diurnal swing). Design the section as a climate-modifying device. Optimize the envelope for thermal performance.
Example:
Manitoba Hydro Place, Winnipeg (KPMB, 2009) — extreme continental climate (-35 C winter, +35 C summer). Double-skin curtain wall acts as thermal buffer. 115 m solar chimney drives stack-effect ventilation. South-facing wintergarden preheats ventilation air. Result: 60% energy reduction vs. MNECB.
Driver 5: Programmatic Diagram
Method:
The relationships between program elements — adjacencies, hierarchies, separations, and flows — directly generate the building's form.
Process:
Create a detailed program with areas (m2) for every space. Map adjacency requirements (must be adjacent, should be near, must be separated). Diagram circulation flows (public, staff, service, emergency). Translate the diagram into plan and section. The form is the program made spatial.
Example:
Seattle Central Library (OMA/LMN, 2004) — program sorted into 5 "stable" platforms (parking, staff, meeting, book spiral, headquarters) and 4 "unstable" in-between zones (living room, mixing chamber, reading room, viewing room). Each platform is the size its program demands. The form is the section.
Driver 6: Contextual Response
Method:
The existing urban or landscape context — its geometries, rhythms, materials, scales, and histories — generates the new building's form.
Process:
Map the site's contextual grid (street angles, parcel lines, adjacent building footprints). Identify the prevailing scale (cornice heights, floor-to-floor, facade rhythm). Study the material palette within 200 m radius. Design the new building to extend, complete, or strategically contrast with the context.
Example:
Kolumba Museum, Cologne (Zumthor, 2007) — built atop the ruins of Gothic St. Kolumba church. New grey brick walls rise from the ruin fragments. Custom perforated "filter brick" creates lace-like walls over the archaeological zone. The new building is simultaneously modern and ancient.
Driver 7: Phenomenological Intention
Method:
A desired experiential quality — stillness, mystery, weightlessness, warmth — drives all design decisions.
Process:
Define the target atmosphere in sensory terms (not formal terms). Specify: light quality (direct/diffuse, warm/cool, 2700K/4000K), acoustic character (reverberant/absorptive, RT60 target), material temperature (warm wood/cool stone), spatial proportion (compressive/expansive). Design every element to achieve that atmosphere.
Example:
Bruder Klaus Field Chapel (Zumthor, 2007) — target atmosphere: primal shelter, vertical aspiration, connection to sky. 112 tree trunks stacked as formwork, concrete poured over 24 days, trunks burned out over 3 weeks leaving charred interior. Oculus open to rain and sky. Floor of molten lead. 350 hand-blown glass orbs as light points. Every decision serves the atmosphere.
Driver 8: Tectonic Expression
Method:
The way materials are joined — the tectonics of assembly — becomes the primary design content.
Process:
Select the construction method (in-situ cast, precast, prefabricated, hand-laid, CNC-cut). Design the joint vocabulary (revealed/concealed, expressed/suppressed, same-material/contrasting). Detail the hierarchy of connections: primary (structure-to-structure), secondary (structure-to-envelope), tertiary (envelope-to-finish).
Example:
Castelvecchio Museum renovation (Scarpa, 1973) — every joint between new (steel, concrete) and old (stone, brick, plaster) is a meticulously detailed micro-composition. Steel brackets are expressed, not hidden. Concrete meets stone with a deliberate gap. Each material retains its identity.
4.2 Concept Driver Decision Tree
START: What is the project's PRIMARY design challenge?
IF the challenge is MEANING/IDENTITY:
→ Narrative/Metaphor (Driver 1) or Contextual Response (Driver 6)
IF the challenge is CONSTRUCTION BUDGET/METHOD:
→ Material Logic (Driver 2) or Tectonic Expression (Driver 8)
IF the challenge is STRUCTURAL SPAN or INNOVATION:
→ Structural Expression (Driver 3)
IF the challenge is CLIMATE/ENERGY PERFORMANCE:
→ Environmental Response (Driver 4)
IF the challenge is COMPLEX PROGRAM with many adjacencies:
→ Programmatic Diagram (Driver 5)
IF the challenge is EXPERIENCE/ATMOSPHERE:
→ Phenomenological Intention (Driver 7)
NOTE: Select ONE primary driver and ONE secondary driver.
The primary driver generates the parti; the secondary
driver refines it. Using more than two drivers
simultaneously dilutes the concept.
Section 5: Design Iteration Protocol
5.1 Structured Option Development
Develop 3-5 concept options, each exploring a different parti or primary concept driver. The purpose is not to find the "right" answer immediately but to explore the solution space and identify the strongest direction through comparison.
Phase 1: Divergent Generation (3-5 days)
For each option, produce:
Parti diagram (one sketch, 30 seconds)
Site plan at 1:500 showing building footprint, access, and landscape
Ground floor plan at 1:200 showing primary spaces, circulation, and entry
Typical upper floor plan at 1:200
Two key sections at 1:200 (longitudinal and transverse)
Massing model (physical or digital) — axonometric view
One-paragraph concept statement (50-100 words)
Phase 2: Comparative Evaluation (1-2 days)
Score each option against the following criteria using a 1-5 scale:
Criterion
Weight
Description
Program Resolution
20%
Does the option accommodate all program areas within the area budget (+/- 5%)? Are adjacencies correct?
Site Response
15%
Does the option respond to access, views, solar orientation, wind, and context?
Structural Feasibility
10%
Can the option be built with available structural systems and within budget? Span limits respected?
Environmental Performance
15%
Does the option enable passive strategies (daylight, ventilation, solar control)? Estimated EUI?
Spatial Quality
15%
Does the option create memorable spatial experiences? Is there a clear spatial sequence?
Budget Alignment
10%
Is the option achievable within the cost/m2 target? (Simple forms: lower cost; complex forms: higher cost)
Flexibility / Adaptability
5%
Can the option accommodate future program changes? Is the structure adaptable?
Client Vision Alignment
10%
Does the option respond to the client's stated aspirations and values?
Phase 3: Selection and Justification (1 day)
Present all options to the design team (and client, if appropriate) with scoring matrix
Identify the highest-scoring option as the preferred direction
If scores are close (within 10%), consider a hybrid that combines the strongest elements of the top 2 options
Document the selection rationale in writing (minimum 200 words)
Document what was learned from rejected options (transferable insights)
Phase 4: Convergent Development (5-10 days)
Develop the selected option through iterative refinement:
Cycle 1 — Plan Resolution:
Resolve all room layouts at 1:100. Confirm area compliance. Locate all vertical cores (stairs, elevators, risers). Confirm fire egress (maximum 45 m travel distance to exit stair in sprinklered buildings per IBC, or per local code).
Cycle 2 — Section Development:
Resolve all floor-to-floor heights. Locate all MEP zones (typically 1.0-1.5 m above structural floor for office, 0.6-0.9 m for residential). Confirm key spatial volumes (double heights, atriums, feature spaces). Coordinate with structural engineer on beam depths.
Cycle 3 — Envelope and Material:
Select facade system (curtain wall, rainscreen, masonry, precast, timber cladding). Confirm window-to-wall ratio (25-40% optimal for energy in temperate climates per Arup research). Select 2-3 primary materials. Develop one key detail at 1:20 (the detail that defines the building's tectonic character).
Cycle 4 — Integration:
Overlay structural grid, MEP zones, and fire strategy onto the architectural plan. Resolve all conflicts. Confirm that the parti is still legible after technical integration. If technical requirements have compromised the parti, revise the technical approach rather than abandoning the concept.
5.2 Pin-Up Protocol
At the end of each cycle, conduct a 30-minute pin-up review:
Present
(10 min): Designer presents the current state of the option with key decisions and open questions
Clarify
(5 min): Reviewers ask factual questions only (no opinions yet)
Critique
(10 min): Reviewers provide feedback using the "What's working / What's not working / What if..." framework
Action items
(5 min): Designer records 3-5 specific next steps
5.3 Common Iteration Failures
Premature convergence:
Selecting an option before exploring alternatives. Mandate minimum 3 options.
Concept drift:
The parti becomes unrecognizable through incremental compromises. Test every decision against the parti diagram.
Detail before diagram:
Resolving window mullion profiles before confirming the massing. Work from large to small: site → mass → plan → section → elevation → detail.
Ignoring the section:
Plans are easier to draw, so designers default to plan-based thinking. The section reveals spatial quality, structure, environmental strategy, and experiential sequence. Draw sections at every iteration.
Solo design:
Concept design benefits from collaborative critique. Schedule pin-ups at minimum weekly intervals. Show work before it feels "finished."
Appendix: Concept Design Checklist
Pre-Design Verification
Project brief reviewed and confirmed with client
Area schedule complete (m2 per space, total GFA, target net-to-gross ratio)
Site survey data received (topographic, geotechnical, services, trees)
Planning/zoning constraints documented (height, FAR, setbacks, parking ratios)
Budget established (total and cost/m2 target)
Sustainability targets set (BREEAM/LEED/Passivhaus/Living Building Challenge)
Concept Design Deliverables
3-5 concept options developed and evaluated
Preferred option selected with written justification
Parti diagram
Site plan at 1:500
Floor plans at 1:200 (ground + typical + roof)
Sections at 1:200 (minimum 2: longitudinal and transverse)
Elevations at 1:200 (all significant faces)
3D massing model (physical or digital)
Concept statement (200-500 words)
Outline structural strategy (system, grid, material)
Outline environmental strategy (passive strategies, orientation, shading)
Preliminary area reconciliation (actual vs. brief, +/- 5%)
Order-of-magnitude cost estimate (+/- 15-25%)