Studies & Design of Building Types

Studio Co-ordinator:- Rupali Gupte, Prasad Khanolkar, Samir Raut, Vaibhavi Dave, Rushikesh Hirulkar, Manish Shravane

-Ritika Bagad

This studio invites us to explore the powerful intersection of architecture and human experience, where form meets function and spatial organization shapes behavior, culture, and life practices. At the heart of this exploration is architectural typology—understanding the ways in which spaces, materials, and systems come together to create environments that influence and enhance the daily lives of their inhabitants. Through a spatio-ethnographic approach, we studied existing building types, critically analyzing their successes and limitations in terms of social, cultural, and environmental contexts.

In the first week, we studied the intricate relationship between architecture and human behavior, with a specific focus on the settlement structure of Palghar. The aim was to identify and analyze the building types within the area and examine how these types both influenced and were influenced by social dynamics, hierarchies, and changing life practices. Through this study, we gained insight into how spatial configurations—shaped by scale, proportion, and materiality—impacted the daily lives and behaviors of the inhabitants.

We began with site drawings made at a 1:200 scale to map out the settlement’s overall structure and layout. This macro view allowed us to see the larger spatial organization of the area—its roads, courtyards, open spaces, and relationships between buildings. By analyzing these patterns, we began to see how the settlement was structured to accommodate the needs of its inhabitants, both individually and collectively. Next, we zoomed in on the individual house scale, creating drawings at 1:50 or 1:75 scale to capture the nuances of private, domestic space. These drawings allowed us to look closely at the specific configurations of rooms, circulation, and interaction within the home. Here, the relationship between architecture and human behavior became even more apparent: we examined how different types of spaces (e.g., sleeping areas, open spaces, kitchens) interacted with each other, and how these interactions shaped daily routines, social relations, and family dynamics.

Additionally, a key part of this study involved the use of a questionnaire to better understand the lived experience of the people in the settlement. By directly engaging with the residents, we gathered insights into how the current architectural type supported or failed to support contemporary needs. We asked questions about how the space was used, how it affected relationships within the family or community, and how it aligned or conflicted with the shifting needs. By collecting this data, we began to speculate on what a new architectural type might look like—one that would respond to both the existing conditions and the evolving needs of the settlement. This speculation was where the true creativity of the exercise lay. We imagined how the future development of the settlement might unfold at the scale of individual houses or even larger domestic institutions, keeping in mind the social and experiential requirements that needed to be addressed. We explored how we might rethink the traditional house type to better suit future family structures, design spaces that allow for more flexible living arrangements, provide new ways of connecting private and public spheres, and allow for more control over the scale and proportion of spaces.

This course intended to develop a deeper understanding of how architectural typology could evolve in response to both social and environmental changes. By maintaining a sketchbook throughout the process, we documented the iterative steps of our design thinking, from the initial observations to the final conceptualization of a new type. These sketches became a valuable tool for reflecting on our thought process and refining our ideas.

In conclusion, studying architectural typology offered a valuable framework for understanding how buildings are organized and how these structures address the needs of people within their contexts. By concentrating on spatial diagrams and relationships, we developed a better understanding of designing spaces that respect existing context while addressing the needs of both the present and the future.