Architectural Programming
Architectural Programming
Introduction
Architectural programming began when architecture began. Structures have always been based on programs: decisions were made, something was designed, built and occupied. In a way, archaeologists excavate buildings to try to determine their programs.
Today, we define architectural programming as the research and decision-making process that identifies the scope of work to be designed. Synonyms include "facility programming," "functional and operational requirements," and "scoping." In the early 1960s, William Peña, John Focke, and Bill Caudill of Caudill, Rowlett, and Scott (CRS) developed a process for organizing programming efforts. Their work was documented in Problem Seeking, the text that guided many architects and clients who sought to identify the scope of a design problem prior to beginning the design, which is intended to solve the problem.
In the 1980s and 1990s, some architectural schools began to drop architectural programming from their curricula. The emphasis of the Post-Modern and Deconstruction agendas was instead on form-making. Programming and its attention to the users of buildings was not a priority. Now, several generations of architects have little familiarity with architectural programming and the advantages it offers: • Involvement of interested parties in the definition of the scope of work prior to the design effort • Emphasis on gathering and analyzing data early in the process so that the design is based upon sound decisions • Efficiencies gained by avoiding redesign and more redesign as requirements emerge during architectural design.
[pic]
The most cost-effective time to make changes is during programming. This phase of a project is the best time for interested parties to influence the outcome of a project.
The "whole building" design approach is intended "to create a successful high-performance building." To achieve that goal, we must apply the integrated design approach to
Introduction
Architectural programming began when architecture began. Structures have always been based on programs: decisions were made, something was designed, built and occupied. In a way, archaeologists excavate buildings to try to determine their programs.
Today, we define architectural programming as the research and decision-making process that identifies the scope of work to be designed. Synonyms include "facility programming," "functional and operational requirements," and "scoping." In the early 1960s, William Peña, John Focke, and Bill Caudill of Caudill, Rowlett, and Scott (CRS) developed a process for organizing programming efforts. Their work was documented in Problem Seeking, the text that guided many architects and clients who sought to identify the scope of a design problem prior to beginning the design, which is intended to solve the problem.
In the 1980s and 1990s, some architectural schools began to drop architectural programming from their curricula. The emphasis of the Post-Modern and Deconstruction agendas was instead on form-making. Programming and its attention to the users of buildings was not a priority. Now, several generations of architects have little familiarity with architectural programming and the advantages it offers: • Involvement of interested parties in the definition of the scope of work prior to the design effort • Emphasis on gathering and analyzing data early in the process so that the design is based upon sound decisions • Efficiencies gained by avoiding redesign and more redesign as requirements emerge during architectural design.
[pic]
The most cost-effective time to make changes is during programming. This phase of a project is the best time for interested parties to influence the outcome of a project.
The "whole building" design approach is intended "to create a successful high-performance building." To achieve that goal, we must apply the integrated design approach to