One example of the different approaches to site specific design is that both campuses have a very different attitude toward main circulation. At the Campus La Contador the passage mostly occurred through the interstitial space between buildings. As the site is small a lot of the buildings must be accommodated by squeezing them in tightly next to one another. This means there is no central axis or point that guides the circulation. San Joaquin Campus definitely has a central axis which you are meant to use to branch off into different paved ground. The buildings generally line up with this main axis so it is very much a key driver of the design.
Another example of the difference in attitude is how the landscape is created. San Joaquin definitely makes use of its vast sight and spreads out as many kinds of vegetation as possible. It also makes use of large planters that become furniture or objects on the site to encourage interaction with the landscape. On the other hand, Campus Lo Contador had the restriction of the small site to work with. They deal with this small site by gathering their many types of vegetation into one courtyard. The courtyard at Lo Contador does not have as much of an idea of interaction in place. Most of the vegetation feels as if is on display and non approachable by people.
Overall I had a great time learning the differences between the two campuses today. It also gave me a lot inspiration for my new studio project, which is a mixed-use building like UC Innovation Center. Also, seeing the campuses gave me a lot of ideas on how to improve our own campuses.
San Joaquin’s large site allows for bigger formal opportunities
Proximity of buildings at Lo Contador make courtyard spaces like this important for bringing in light
Courtyard at UC Innovation center is also used to bring in light at a larger scale