≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«9

No doubt we are witnessing today achallenging era. Many debates aboutarchitectural design theory and its possibleinspiring sources have become chronicsubjects with the current growing pace ofdevelopment in the Gulf Region. Shouldwe go wild speeding in heights anddevelop beyond-imagination forms, orshould we rather conventionalize ourmoves? Is it true that identity and creatinga meaningful environment should alwaysape the past? Should the Arab, as they arealways preoccupied in their poetry andother arts remained trapped in a goldenage that once manifested their merits inarts and sciences centuries ago; yet it isnothing now but heritage. Moreover,identity and character cannot be imposed.They should come as a responsiveexpression about the actual needs andconcepts of a certain community/ culturemanifested through physical expressions,such as architecture. On the other handtotal alienation of the above mightsequence an out-of place ambiance.

Ÿ«b�û� —b?BL?� W?ODO�?L‡�« �«—U?��?�ô«

The Contextual as Source of Creativityw� W�—U?L?F*« W�u?N�« ‰u� Ÿ«d?� ZOK)« W?IDM?� h�_U�Ë WO?�dF�« W?IDM*« b?N?A

W«b??(« U??N??�b� …d??�U?F??� �ö??OJA n?K� YNK Ê√ V?�� q� ÆwN??�M ô W??O�b??�

øÀ«d ô≈ UNF�«Ë w� ÂuO�« X�O� ◊U/√ Ë– w{U0 ‚UB��_« UMOK� q� ¬ W«b�K�

l�«u�« —U??�?�??�√Ë W?H??O�u�« q�??� ÎUU?� d??�?�√ W??OK�√ W?O??F?�d??� s� Y�??��« V�Ë «c�

ÆWOLOLB W�öD √ Í_ ”uLK� ”U�Q� w�UI��«Ë jO;«

b�U??F??�Ë ”—«b0 W??O�b??'« pK —U??�??�?�√ r?�� Ê√ V�� Èb??� Í√ v�≈ ∫Êü« ‰«R??��«

r�I� W��U?��« WM��« »öD� ¥ rOLB��« u�œu?�� rOLB - p�c� ÆW?IDM*U� …—ULF�«

oO�D�� W�ËU?�L� ÊœU?F*«Ë ‰Ëd��K� bN?� pK*« WF�U?�� W�O��« rO?�UB WOKJ� …—U?LF�«

w�U?I??��«Ë w�«d?G?'« U?MDO?�?� �«—U??�?�?�« Âd?�??�� W?O ö?I??� d?�?�√ »uK�√ ÃU??N?� √Ë

Õu?�?H*« ‘U?IM�«Ë …U?�U?;« �U�K?�� W U?F�?�ô« ‰ö?� s� «c�Ë a�«ÆÆÆw�U?L?�?�ô«Ë

U?� u�Ë WO?�«b�ù«Ë WO?LO?L?B��« »öD�« �«—U?N� d�uD?�� ‚öD « …b�U?I� Y�?��«Ë

lL?�??� U?N?�u?{u??� ƉU?I*« «c?N� U??N?C?F� ÷d?� - …e??O?L?�?� �U??L?O?L?B? tM� Z�

ÆW�œu?F??��« W?O�d?F?�« WJKL*U� d??�?)« WM�b0 ZOK?)« ·U?H?{ vK� ‚bM?�Ë �«d9R?�

w�b� bL�√ Æœ

Dr. Ahmed SidkyW�O��« rO�UB WOK� ¨…—ULF�« r�� ¨b�U�� –U��√

ÊœUF*«Ë ‰Ëd��K� bN� pK*« WF�U�

Assistant Professor, Architecture DepartmentCollege of Environmental Design

King Fahad University of Petroleum & MineralsDhahran, KSA.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2 Fig. 3

Waves: Indicates to changing anddifferent levels.

Whale: Indicates enormity vast and stateliness.

Oyster: Indicates to the center and distributesmooth branches.

Fin: It has horizontal surface and it ismaking protection.

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«8

Such a debate is certainly endlessand cannot be resolved just bydetermining or adopting any specificarchitectural style or character;otherwise we would becompromising the authenticity/meaning of our built environment.Needless to say, the samesophisticated nature of debate wouldimmerge when we discuss how toteach architectural design, how torun and design a design studio. Thereis certainly a need for some basicrules complementing an academynature of delivering and runningtheoretical and conceptual debate tohelp design students articulating theirown views. Chasing the different as atool to stimulate their creativity andenhance their design skills is a mustbut also rationalizing such moves isalso a need. Consequently, holdingto context and its actual forces, e.g.,geographical, cultural, economic etc.furnished as a rather more rationaland balanced approach toarchitectural design than thecurrently more dominatingretrogressive and nostalgic pedagogicparadigms or those after alienatingforms: weird for weird. The above served as a design rationalfor the third year architecturalstudents at King Fahd University.Their studio (ARC 304) was designedin a rather unconventional approach,of an experimental nature seekingstimulating student’s critical thinking.Given that ARC-304 as a junior-levelstudio is meant to introduce studentsto complexity and programming indesign as well as develop their sensewith technical and culturalconsiderations in design, there was areal challenge that really necessitateda shift from the ‘conventional’paradigm. Basically, I avoided theestablished practice of architecturalpedagogy envisaging architecturaldesign as only an art, trapping whichwithin an intuitive thinking processoverlooking its practical andscientific aspects. ‘Think wild butgive a reason why’ was theconceptual slogan frequentlyexercised during that studio. The studio was launched through acompetitive and a challengingatmosphere stimulating students’enthusiasm thanks to the coursesponsorship program and thecompetition sponsored by RIKAZDevelopment Corporation. Thestudents were requested toacknowledge the market and its

Fig. 4 (a): Northern Elevation by Night.

First Level Plan

Second Level Plan

Fig. 5

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«7

Fig. 6: Bird eye view showing the conference center to the left and the hotel and its different facilities stretching alongan artificial canal to extend the sea view for the different hotel units.

Fig. 7

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«6

economic forces, especially whentheir work was to be reviewed by theRIKAZ team in a separate jury. It wasalso designed to simulate a real-lifeproblem. A design of a conferencecenter that was meant to be alandmark for the city of Al-Khobar inthe Eastern Province of KSA, asymbol of its city, to enable the cityclaiming its intellectual role. Awaterfront location adjacent toAl-Khobar Causeway (Fig.1) wasselected. A very tentative programwas suggested in order to encouragethem to debate and restructure it topromote for creative answers. Thedebate as a studio culture was rootedfrom a very initial phase starting witha field trip to select the mostappropriate site based on criteria theydeveloped themselves up to furtherphases of design through role-playand group discussion and evaluationsessions. This stimulated students’enthusiasm. A holistic perspectivetowards design was promotedthrough adopting a participatoryapproach to design thinking.Role-play sessions were thussuggested together with variousgroup discussion and disk crit.Accordingly, each student developeda considerable degree of sensitivity tothe context. Each reflected that on thedeveloped program and his designbased on how he conceptualized hisproject, Al-Khobar City InternationalConference Center and its annexedhotel. At the beginning students leanedtowards an over simplisticinterpretations abstracting theirconcepts. Al-Khobar as a pearl of theGulf, as envisaged by one of thestudents, should reflect such a spiritwhere the main building, theconference center, should berepresented as an oyster on the sand(fig.2). Nevertheless, such anoutcome was rather naive. Yet thistriggered series of conceptualdiscussions with the students aboutthe level of meaning guiding them tomore profound ways to abstract theirnotions. Function and location mightalso lead to distinguishable results ifinterpreted through meaningfulforms. How to abstract your idealeading to a remarkable visual resultwithout compromising the abovequality of the building was certainlythe design virtue students had toexperience and exercise. Such a debate encouraged thestudent (Ibrahim Wali) to back hisvision, still tenacious to marine life as

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 11

Fig. 10

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«5

the inspiring source yet deployed in amore sophisticated architecturallanguage (Fig.3). Ibrahim designed aform full of wavy lines,complementing marine life in variousaspects. The sail columns of shipsexist in the pillars holding thesuspended cables, the structuralsystem of the main auditorium and itsoyster like roof (Fig.4). All areoriented toward the Gulf to provide apanoramic view for those using theupper level foyer and the otherrecreational outlets of the center(Fig.5). In general the center wasdecided by the students as a centerthat is not only to accommodateinternational and regional events butalso to provide facilities, e.g. cafés &restaurants and exhibition halls ofinternational quality, for the visitorsand the people of Al-Khobar. The hotel design was integrated withthe building. Both the conferencecenter and the hotel buildings form acomplex of landscape integratedwithin a canal along which the aislesof the hotel complex are aligned(Figs. 6, 7 and 8). The main buildingis located to the south where thelobby and other hotel facilities andservices are accommodated. It isintegrated with ribbon like forms thatstretches along the canal to link thehotel main building with the hotelsuites fashioned also in a ribbon likeform that end with a tent likerestaurants and cafés. Other students like AbdulazizAl-Sharif and Eyad Moghazel stressedon the fact that they are not justdesigning a conference center butrather they are contributing toAl-Khobar waterfront. To them thebuilding should be fashioned as thecity’s symbol, distinguishedlandmark. With such a motivationAbdulaziz accommodated his twoauditoria and other facilitiesdistinguishing his internationalconference center in a folded form. Itis oriented toward the Gulf withdistinguished sharp edges and anglesthat challenge gravity as expressed bythe student (Fig.9). Abdulazizhowever had to furnish a structuralviability for his daring composition aswell as to prove the functionality ofhis spaces, a task which he managedskillfully as illustrated in Figs 10 and11. Another attempt to designpredominantly a city landmark wasthat of Eyad. His exceptionally daringcomposition was based on his notionof towering rather than stacking the

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«4

design program within a compactbuilding. To Eyad, the conferencecenter as a city landmark should bealso sculpturally fashioneddismantling the program into itsdifferent components that arebranched from the main trunk, thevertical connector. The two mainauditoria and the other facilities andoutlets are branched and suspendedin different levels and directions(Fig.12). Such an exploded form represented astructural challenge which wassuccessfully confronted by Eyad. Hiscreative answer came in a randomlybut structurally justified outerstructural system (Fig.13) generatedthrough using Inductive DesignSoftware. The different componentsof the projects are floating on air; stillconnected via tilted, suspendedelevator system, which granted thebuilding a unique and dynamicimage. The previous two projects howeverlost the ground providing viable hotelas part of the complex. The industry(RIKAZ representatives), reviewingthe project, reflected much concernsabout the economic aspects of suchprojects; yet they expressed muchinterest in their creativity anddistinguished forms. Another project attempted to reach acompromise. Ziad Ashour’s conceptfor the conference center was a formof free composition, emphasized withedges, a form that is conflicting/challenging with surroundingmassive walls. The buildingchallenged the walls with punchedopenings to permit clear visibilitythrough them but still providing avisual enclosure effect for the mainconference building. The walls havealso an ecological function,especially those facing the directionsof undesirable winds and heat. Thebuilding itself (Fig. 14) enjoyed theGulf vista with a yacht marina infront with a floating main restaurantenjoying the marina and Gulf siteconnected with the conference centerdesigned for the holidaymakers andyacht-sport lovers as a Gulf center forsuch a port and regional events.The Hotel and the landscape camevery integrated with the conferencecenter. It was designed along a canalsimilar to Ibrahim’s (Fig. 15) wherethe main hotel building (Fig.16) islocated to the south overlooking thelagoon terminating the canal. On theother hand the hotel units were

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«3

unique in being stationed in floatingunits accessible through a landscapedsite and mainly through the canal.Each group of rooms is combined ina small hotel unit of different levels(Fig. 17). The design of each unitreflects well understanding to thenature of the Gulfian holidaymakers,granting them the opportunity to renta range of single room to anadjustable extended suites, hotel

apartment on the upper levels (Fig.18). This granted the users muchprivacy sanctioned by the prospectiveusers/ guests while still providing thecommunal hotel services providedthrough a common lobby and abreakfast restaurant at the groundlevel and an atrium in each unit (Fig.19). The design was meant to beintegrated with and to complementthat of the conference center with a

special focus on the significantunique Venice-like ambianceextending the water view andenriching the site, as well asproviding an interesting view foreach room in all the hotel units (Fig.20). In general, ARC-304 studio wasdesigned to bridge the gapscharacterizing the conventionaldesign studio in the region. The gap

Fig. 18

Typical Floor Plan Ground Floor Plan

3rd Floor Plan 4th Floor Plan

≤∞∞∑ fD��√ØuO�u| ≠ ±∞π œb‡F�«2

between the theoretical coursesand the design studio wasconfronted through focusedhandouts and presentations tointroduce the students to thearchitecture theory in practice tofamiliarize them with theapproaches to creative thinkingas an inspiring tool toconceptualize their designtendencies and processeslaunching their design venturesfrom contextual basis.Furthermore, the discussion anddebate-oriented nature of thestudio made the studio not thedomain of the instructor to givemuch room for students’ freearchitectural expressions. The adopted holistic approach, ofa multidisciplinary nature, todesign was adopted addressingreal-life considerations: political,social, economic etc. throughgroup activities. This was madepossible through introducingexperimental models to teachdesign studio that were selectedbased on the students emergingneeds and the variations of theirdesign skills and knowledge. Theabove are the outcomes of astudio that is designed and run asa pedagogic experiment, which ispart of a collaborative researchproject on effective architecturaldesign pedagogy coordinated bythe author.

Fig. 19

Fig. 20