UNIVERSITY OF ART DORMITORY
201 Dormitory” was one of my earliest undergraduate conceptual projects, and it played a key role in shaping my architectural thinking around “minor spaces” and spatial perception. Centered on themes of privacy, independence, and contextual analysis, the design process was organized into five phases.
201
Phase 1: Dorm As Prison
Inspired by Alcatraz movie, I began to notice subtle parallels between dormitories and prisons. In both environments, repetitive routines and limited spatial conditions naturally make shared games one of the most common forms of activity. This observation informed my approach to the project: to expand opportunities for recreation and interaction, while deliberately removing any sense of confinement.
In parallel, I conducted a series of spatial experiments using four bricks, a spool of thread, a chair, and my own body to approximate areas of 15 m², 10 m², 9 m², 6 m², 4 m², and 3 m². This exercise, which I refer to as the “Spatial Analysis of Minor Areas,” explores how different dimensions shape perception and behavior. I consider this type of study essential for junior architects, as smaller spatial scales are often overlooked despite their richness and complexity. The “Compact Double Room” was then developed as a pilot project leading into the main design. It seeks to accommodate the everyday needs of two individuals while supporting a variety of uses within a limited footprint, all while maintaining clear spatial separation and preserving each occupant’s privacy.
Phase 2: Residence Definition
At this stage, I reinterpreted the idea of residence across three spatial scales from a personal perspective. The intention was to define a dwelling typology that responds fundamentally to core human needs—natural light, fresh air, a connection to nature, and privacy. This exploration ultimately led me to an apartment inspired by the protagonist of the Iranian film Santouri. For me, this reference captures an honest and grounded condition of living in central Tehran, where density, isolation, and intimacy coexist within a single domestic space.
Phase 3: Morphology of Dorms
Phase 4: Physical Analyses
Through a process of spatial analysis, the required program is first grouped into functional clusters and then distributed between the ground and upper levels. This classification is guided by key spatial factors, including access to open space and natural light, exposure to noise, levels of privacy, accessibility, and relationships between adjacent functions.
Phase 5: Proposal Design
In order to develop a more precise spatial understanding, over 200 wooden modules measuring 2 × 2 × 3 cm were fabricated and used as a physical modeling system. By assembling these elements in different configurations, double, triple, and quadruple room typologies were tested, allowing the remaining program to be evaluated and distributed within a 1:100 scale model.
Three structural diaphragms, each measuring 15 × 15 × 0.5 meters, were then introduced as organizing elements within the procedural model. These diaphragms were designed to be permeable, allowing units to selectively puncture and occupy them. This structural logic established a framework of three rows and columns on each side of the site, ultimately subdividing it into nine distinct parcels, each assigned to an individual block.
Maintaining continuity between these fragmented volumes, the blocks are linked through a system of bridges. This configuration results in a dispersed massing strategy that enhances permeability, promotes visual and physical connections, and improves overall airflow circulation across the site.
