“In the context of movement, can efficiency be comfortable?”
Our world has conditioned us to believe that efficient movement (often found in high-traffic spaces such as train stations and airports) aren't always the most comfortable path of travel. Conversely, the most comfortable route of travel tends to not be the most efficient but may be the most enjoyable.
PERSPECTIVE A
When two routes side by side, and given that one is more “smooth,” one would tend to gravitate towards the ramp over the stairs. Thus taking the ramp would be more comfortable than taking the stairs.
PERSPECTIVE B
In this case, taking the stairs would be a shorter path compared to the ramp which requires a turnaround. When considering the length of each path for travel, one would tend to take the stairs.
Keep in mind: the physical construction of the space doesn’t change,
but we’re guided towards paths with the least amount of friction.
ORGANIZED CHAOS
What inspired me to study these forms of circulation was the pursuit to find beauty in movement. What can "pure circulation" architecture teach us about how we can move through a building? In these two images, two paths that visually are interlocked actually do not ever intersect. I decided to explore how I can make more of these visually intriguing forms.
I began to experiment on different arrangements of these parts to further explore the forms derived from only stairs and ramps.
Oftentimes a design is lead by arranging program and spaces first, then circulation is weaved in between. I question what would design look like if we prioritized circulation over program?
Each of these variants hold no specific program except the goal to move a user vertically and laterally.
