Sem 03 / Form and Space Studies
Environment and Architecture
Vastavikta Bhagat
Cover image by Liesha Patkar
Cover image by Liesha Patkar
The studio CC05: Environment and Architecture was framed as an inquiry into the "active" nature of the landscape and recording it as a shifting terrain. Across the four unique site conditions—the Morva Salt Pans, the Tarodi Mangroves, the Mangeshkar Cliff, and Uttan Beach—the students functioned as field researchers. The studio began with the physical collection of "matters of the site": samples of salt-crusted soil, basalt bedrock, and the weathered wood of fishing vessels as well as organic matter like specimens of plants and beings. These were brought back to the studio and integrated into four collective wall- group maps that served as the primary instrument for making sense of the ecological edge. The map went beyond a plan, it was layered with multiple photographs, sections, drawings of textures and observations. The primary methodology allowed an iterative process of thick mapping to incorporate the tactile, the temporal, and the atmospheric.
The map went beyond a plan, it was layered with multiple photographs, sections, drawings of textures and observations. The primary methodology allowed an iterative process of thick mapping to incorporate the tactile, the temporal, and the atmospheric.
From here, the course pushed students to treat climate—not as a backdrop—but as a primary building material where the project of a shelter was to be located in a six-month oscillation between heavy monsoon saturation and the humid and stinging, salt-crusted heat of the salt harvesting season. While the drawings held weather and climate in multiple ways, individual provocations further pushed the class to focus on very specific conditions of comfort/discomfort that they wanted to address while thinking of their shelter.
From here, the course pushed students to treat climate—not as a backdrop—but as a primary building material where the project of a shelter was to be located in a six-month oscillation between heavy monsoon saturation and the humid and stinging, salt-crusted heat of the salt harvesting season. While the drawings held weather and climate in multiple ways, individual provocations further pushed the class to focus on very specific conditions of comfort/discomfort that they wanted to address while thinking of their shelter.
Sukhad Suthar’s project was an exploration of repetitive movement and temporal rhythm on the shifting sands of the Uttan beach. By bringing back observations of how the tide and wind re-pattern the sand, he developed a series of kinetic, rotating walls. His drawings—a mix of technical sections and 'argumentative' sketches—documented how these elements would leave physical traces on the terrain. He designed structures that can move and be repeated, creating a rhythmic pattern across the landscape.
^
^
Aman Nandu’s inquiry began with the observation of wind at Uttan Beach—a force so strong and inconstant that it physically deforms the objects in its path. Rather than designing a rigid shelter to block the wind, Aman observed how everyday objects like nets, umbrellas, and trees adapt to the force of the air. He translated these observations into a structural system where the building elements form and deform based on the wind's intensity.
^
^
Ansh Kanadia’s project is an architectural intervention designed to combat the "harsh environment" of salt and sun. The site is characterized by intense reflected glare from the water and salt beds, high humidity, and a lack of natural wind during the summer months. The project focused on providing "relief from tough conditions" through simple, passive methods rather than mechanical cooling to create a "dark, cool, and ventilated" refuge. His roof is designed to block the intense horizontal and vertical glare characteristic of salt pan landscapes, creating a "protected" interior climate.
^
^
Leisha Patkar’s project is a study of verticality and exposure. Situated on a South-West facing coastal slope, her work engages with the strong, humid, salty breezes, the movement of water, and adaptive vegetation that clings to the basalt hill. She proposed a structure that functions as a geological graft. By mimicking the chiseled, weathered language of the existing boulders, the architecture seeks to disappear into the cliffside while simultaneously acting as a sophisticated catchment system for the elements.
^
^
Rutuja’s work is a departure from the traditional architectural "site." Instead, she treats the earth as a dynamic material state. Her project is a provocation that architecture should not merely rest upon the soil but should "converse" with its varying levels of firmness, slipperiness, and softness. She identified that human movement is fundamentally dictated by the water content of the earth. She mapped the site not by boundaries, but by "gradation"—a series of experiential textures that force the body to react. Her shelter worked towards heightening the user’s awareness of the ground beneath them.
^
^
While the studio succeeded in its deep understanding of climate as a generative force, the transition from analysis to architectural form revealed further opportunities. The spatial interventions could have been more clearly articulated through a rigorous methodology—specifically in defining exactly how the transition from sensory discomfort to design is spatially resolved. Furthermore, while the studio effectively navigated the oscillations of the seasons, the diurnal rhythms of day and night remained a temporal layer that could be further opened up to influence the building’s skin and program.
Ultimately, by embedding these interventions within a larger landscape logic, the projects could move beyond individual shelters to become integral components of a broader, interconnected ecological system.