Term 3 Design project - Knowledge quarters by ANNU BOBAN

KNOWLEDGE QUARTERS Design responses to trends and challenges

Architectural Association School of Architecture Housing and Urbanism 2015-16 Graduate School Programme Dominic Papa | Lawrence Barth | Anna Shapiro London 2015

Ariel Nicole Westmark Olga Konyukova Fengxu Guo Xu Bingjun Annu Boban Ashwin Bungarnayak Goutham Nijalingappa Satyadeep Sonar Yanchen Lin Elesban Anadon Vargas

The Architectural Association, Inc. is a Registered Charity Incorporated as a Company limited by guarantee. Registered in England No.171402. Registered office: 36 Bedford Square, London WC1B 3ES, 020 7887 4000

Knowledge environments Case studies Location and Background Spatial Strategy Shared knowledge environments in a contained space Shared knowledge environments on multiple grounds Expansion of knowledge environments Conclusions References

contents

What exactly is a “Knowledge Environment?” When it comes to recent trends, the nature culture is changing. Museums and theaters are focusing less on the importance of the permanent or the private collection, and more upon educational outreach and ways to interact and engage the public through shared activities for the everyman. Universities, on the other hand are trying to engage more with the city, projecting outward throughpublic lectures and exhibitions. Both are expanding in research and business, generating many collaborative possibilities between them. And while some of these clusters are forming a the scale of the city, such as London’s Theater District, others are much closer together like the Albertopolis. The making of a “Cultural District” or a “Knowledge Quarter” are not completely novel ideas. Nor is the partnership based upon collaboration by major players. For example, in Malmo, the Knowledge City has been a plan put into effect with great success over the last decade. Similarly to East London, the city lies along a regional network between Copenhagen and Hamburg, and Stockholm, Oslo and Lund. Becoming a key part in the chain of major cities, it began to capitalize on its proximity to these inter nation centers through high-speed rail. Malmo also planned for the opening of a new, specialized university to draw a particular crowd of innovators into the city. Taking into consideration the draw to a specie crowd focused on media and technologies, the city also began expanding housing and start-up incubators within the new Western Harbor plan. Although the final outcome is still undetermined, the transition from industrial city to knowledge city has had success in its early stages, bring new homes, new jobs, and the potentials for educational and cultural growth in a city once in decline. In such cases as these, the role of shared space or the issue of collaboration plays a much more prominent role, because space is limited to begin with. For example, if one were to bring together on a single site, two major museums, a theater, a university, housing and all the supporting functions associated with them, the value of shared space and collaborative networks is imperative to examine. How can grouping together and having joint events, overlapping workshops, and collective leisure space benefit all the partners involved? 1

How is housing effected by the presence of these cultural institutions? People are moving back into the center in search of the cosmopolitan lifestyle. The nature of a knowledge neighborhood means that everything is even closer together. There are possibilities for work, for leisure and for learning just right outside the door; and to be an observer might mean not even having to leave your flat. For example, at the Barbican Estate, the ongoings of the main plaza are viewable from most flats, even if residents don’t wan to participate. The central atrium connecting theater, gallery, concert hall and services acts not only as a welcoming point for visitors to these programs but also as spaces of leisure for those living above, who wish to experience this environment without attending the show. To see the latest show or to simply partake in the evenings festivities at one of the restaurants means a simple stroll down to the ground, while children can stay relatively close in the flat or take part in the children’s activities on offer. Residential life coexists and benefits from this adjacency, rather than being overwhelmed by it. As mentioned previously, cultural institutions are becoming more specialized through their collection and courses on offer. In doing so they can create micro-environments associated with particular neighborhoods and everyday activities. Living in a performance quarter would mean the availability of after school or weekend classes in acting or dance for kids. There would be a multitude of support services because of the clustering of event space, meaning cafes and restaurants, specialized retail and services; the specialty store for music is located on the corner because there is a concert hall on the other side of the street. The use of the knowledge city development model is intended to bring together all of the diversity and intensity of the city to a new location, all at once or in a limited time. As stated in the new Vauxhall Nine Elms project, the “cultural place-making” of the new global city is a logic “embedded into the area and woven into its architectural fabric, helping to engage local residents and foster a sense of belonging.” - David Spittles, Evening Standard, 13 May 2015 It is arguable however, if this model can actually be successful as a plan for the city to achieve something that usually develops organically over time.

West Kowloon Cultural District: Norman Foster

Fosterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposal for West Kowloon project integrates with Kowloon district with special focus given to the juxtaposition of western culture through central avenue with traditional streetscapes of Hong Kong which binds the complimentary activities together.

West Kowloon Cultural District: OMA

OMA strongly emphasizes to create quality of street where â&#x20AC;&#x153;Cultural Productionâ&#x20AC;? occurs by dividing the site into 3 parts. The project aims to create a village whose ambition is to forge deep connections to Kowloon to create vital urban energy as the life blood of West Kowloon Cultural District.

Stratford, located in the heart of the Lea Valley, was once a major industrial center of London. Its connections both regionally to Cambridge and Londonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s financial center, and the international port and rail connections to major cities across Europe, once designated it as a site of unlimited potential. As industry moved further out of the city, and the docks became disused, East London and the Lower Lea Valley became an area of blight. !

The 2012 Olympics became a way to foster support for the regeneration of this entire region of the city through the designation of the Olympic Park Legacy Plan. As seen in the diagram on the right, the Olympics creates a one-time spike in the vitality of the city, bringing both short-term benefits and long-term challenges. Once over, the peripheral land is again empty from any intensity. The Legacy Plan attempts to correct this issue but fails to consider the long term economic possibilities of such a location in East London; limiting the majority of sites to the building of housing and office space without consideration toward the productive networks local to the Lower Lea Valley. Now faced with the possibility of a district disconnected from the center of London, the plan is looking for ways to incorporate some of the productive networks, taking advantage of existing infrastructural improvements left from the Olympics. In doing so, Londonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s planners are trying to bring all of the intensity found within the center, to this peripheral zone of London, while trying to mitigate this pattern of fullness and emptiness as a result of big event spaces the Olympics creates.

Can a knowledge quarter function as the driver of urbanism by a series of continuous events on this site?

The possible networks for consideration within the area fall to biotech, applied materials, housing-office uses, and creative industries. The biotech sector has been booming in recent years within Bloomsbury, with the existence of major hospitals and research centers firmly established in partnership with UCL. Start-up and research potentials not only from practitioners but students, make its current location a more viable option, and with its proximity to King’s Cross and Euston stations, the industry does not gain anything in terms of transport connects by moving to East London. In fact, being in an established part of the city allows new partnerships to form over old networks. And although UCL has firmly grasped the opportunity to move into a site in the Olympic Park, the design and engineering oriented fields are the ones up for relocation. (UCL Knowledge Quarter and Expansion.) Imperial College is a leading knowledge contributor to the applied materials sector, and has recently established itself in the Kings Cross Redevelopment. Expanding a satellite from its main campus within Albertopolis, the school has, like UCL gained the resource of long-distance mobility without the disadvantage of leaving the center. Similarly, new housing, researchers and other universities are also taking advantage of this key site in t!he city center without looking east.

KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY The outcome is the competition for a Culture & Knowledge Quarter, designating a specific parcel as the site for an experimental merging of museums, performance centers, universities and housing. A quarter taking advantage, not only of the creative industries of Hackney Wick, Fish Island and Stratford, but also those of Old Town; doing what a “Knowledge Economy” intends in bringing together all of the new talent of young professionals in specialized sectors, in this case pertaining to the arts. The question is how can a project of such scope possibly be achieved affectively on a site such as the Olympic Park, away from the majority of the traditional draws of being in the center? The quick answer proposed by the competition is in fact, to bring them all together into one site, supplemented by almost doubling the programmatic density through the addition of housing. In other words, the making of an intense urban quarter, to create a new node of urban intensity and vitality away from the center and in an empty plot, can be achieved by the bringing together of multiple actors. In this case specifically, the Victoria & Albert Museum, Sadler’s Wells, University of the Arts London, and the Smithsonian all c!oming together as partners of this experimental quarter.

Limiting the growth of the Olympic Park area to the uses of residential and commercial space is also a lacking option when faced with the issues of bringing activity to East London and connecting to existing local networks of productivity. This scheme would also fail to effectively use the changes made by the Olympics, such as miles of fibre-optic cables, telecommunications networks, and new road and rail connections. Then, what possibilities are left for consideration in how to make a new quarter as a major driver of regeneration for the overall Park.

... emptiness as a result of big event spaces the Olympics creates...

Olympic Park

Stratford International Station Underground A12 Highway Carpenters Road

Stratford Mall Internation Business Quarter

UCL

The site is constrained by major infrastructural sytems and a large topographical variation; a canal to the South, road and rail to the north, and a steep 8m drop form a sunken island on which the site is located. Achieving the development of the program in relation to the context becomes a complex exercise to integrate the isolated piece of the Olympic Park.

The site, designated as part of the competition, is situated next to the Aquatic Center and near the Stadium, just south of the new International Quarter and Westfield Stratford City Shopping Center. The main access point is a single pedestrian bridge that connects all of these in a straight line. However, the bridge is located at 8 meters above the ground level of the site, only sharing the canal side with the Aquatic Center, but cut off from park and souther plaza by the canal. The pool itself bisects a possible bridge to the new UCL site, leaving the waterfront promenade as the only path to travel between the two sites. This promenade also plays a wider role of connecting to the surrounding neighborhoods of Hackney Wick, Here East, iCity and Fish Island, making the micro-mobility network the dominant role of mobility and transportation of the Park. Major rail and road networks run parallel to the north compounding the problem of a steep grade change with 40 meters of infrastructure, making new bridges difficult, although not impossible. The Stratford Station and DLR stations, while near the site location, are still a 5-10 minute walk away, one path leading through the shopping mall and the other crossing still empty plots of the park. Both are circuitous routes and could benefit from being closer or less obstructed. But the possibilities of being near not only a regional station but also an international station without being right on top of it, means that the site is easily accessible in both the context of Europe and central London. UCL, for example, benefits greatly from its access to the Euston-Kings Cross proximities. As a knowledge environment, it is ideal to bring in the greatest talent from a wider region, for things like special exhibitions or educational events. It is just as important to pull from the closer areas like central London and Cambridge, both new innovators and patrons interested in specific fields.

The topographical conditions, combined with the distinction of waterfront to the south and infrastructure to the north, means that the site can be highly polarized without affecting its character. All of the services can be loaded heavily under the 8 meter drop. Things like loading and unloading deliveries, drop-off and pick-up and storage functions can all occur on grade. This is an extremely important factor to consider when examining the conditions of the ground, of which has larger telecommunications, electrical and water lines running just under the surface, all of which are costly to remove. The site can be polarized laterally as well as vertically. The waterfront part of the micro-mobility network, makes it a prime location for new public space that can begin to define the site i!nto a relative front and back at the ground.

This is not the only area that suffers from these challenges but is on the edge of the site, closest to the station, while still taking advantage of the existing park conditions that can serve as an amenity to the program. The proximity to the Stadium and Aquatic center, however, means an urban area based widely upon the presence of events. Combining leisure and sports with culture and knowledge means a multiplication of user groups and activities within this condensed area of the Park. With event-driven urbanity, the intensity of the neighborhood or the district is based upon the empty-full crowd dichotomy. By bringing knowledge and culture, the events become more stabilized in a way; whereas sports are about the weekend event of thousands for a small time frame, cultural exhibitions and knowledge contributors such as businesses and universities are occupied on a steadier, daily basis. It is less about the big event, and more about the everyday. It is difficult to say at this point whether or not the park will be highly used oncethe International Quarter and UCL sites are built up, but the addition of housing to the brief can in fact serve as a stable population of the area. The proximity of sports and leisure to culture and knowledge means a father and son can catch the game, while mother and daughter enjoy the theater, or friends can meet up at the Museum in the morning and enjoy the park in the afternoon.

What, in fact, is shared space under these conditions? The pattern of use, the means of ownership and regulation, the nature of what occurs in the space can be a determinant as to whether or not it can be shared and under what circumstances. For instance, it is true that to museums can share a single space for temporary exhibitions, but would they want to? A lecture hall can be a small auditorium shared between university and theater, but how do you control its access? Consequently it is becoming less about what the iconography of the institution and more about their content and synergies Based upon the research on trends; work-share environments as part of universities as a way to generate start-ups or independent businesses, void space or outdoor space between museums used for temporary shared events between partner institutions, research exhibitions in culture-science partnerships, and knowledge and learning outreach between cultural institutions and universities that can share resources; there is a varied degreed of collaborative space that can be attributed to the synergies achievable in a scheme of colocaton. More specifically, each institution, as part of the brief has stated that they would like to promote collaboration but do not specify the ways of doing so. As mentioned previously, a productive network of synergies is not the only benefit, but in collaborating the program can become more manageable through a reduction of quantum and cost. Overlaps can be seen in the desire for exhibition space, research and learning possibilities and public outreach through workshops and classes. Shared services or business spheres could also become positive. researchers need controlled environments, so while they are not public, the V&A and UAL could combine study into digital fabrication, which then might be taught in conjunction between V&A and Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells on the uses of digital fabrication in set design, while at the same time it is being expanded by UAL into the market of the adjacent International Quarter for business or to UCL for further research. 19

University of the Arts London will create a 32,000m2 research and education hub for the global fashion industry, near the traditional heart of the East End fashion trade. It will bring together London College of Fashion’s 6,500 students and staff for the first time in the college’s 100 year history.

Victoria & Albert will occupy 20,000m2 and will present the museum’s outstanding collections in never-before-seen ways, greatly enhancing access to 1000 years of design, architecture, art and performance and encouraging public participation in almost every aspect of museum activities.

The new campus will include two major research centres focusing on sustainability and innovation in the fashion industry. It will provide widespread access to advanced fashion technology, business incubators, and a changing programme of public exhibitions.

Permanent galleries on site will include the first dedicated museum space in the UK to document the full breadth of digital design and begin to write the design history of that fast moving field. There will be space for a rolling exhibition programme curated by the V&A with international partners, as well as studio spaces for new and emerging practitioners.

The Smithsonian Institution will occupy the place of the fourth cultural venue, inhabiting 12,000m2 of exhibition space. The collection will rotate with all of these existing museums, frequently bringing a wealth of new and exciting material. From history, to art, to science and culture, the Smithsonian presents an multitude of educational opportunities for all visitors. exhibition space will need to be highly flexible in size to accomodate the wide rang e of material the museum will bring on board. Opportunities for interactive learning and partnership with the V&A should also be explored.

Sadler’s Wells aims to create a 7,000m2 venue with a 600 seat dance theatre to complement its existing venues cementing London’s position as one of the world’s greatest centres for dance. The new venue will provide flexible ‘making’ spaces for research and development and producing new work, facilities for a Choreographic School, and for a Hip Hop Academy.

The Competition Brief, as part of the Olympic Legacy Plan specifies the mixture of UAL, V&A, Sadler’s Wells and a Fourth unidentified institution, which is currently speculated to be the Smithsonian Institute. “We are creating a world class education and cultural district on Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park that will bring together outstanding organisations to showcase exceptional art, dance, history, craft, science, technology and cutting edge design...The scheme is expected to deliver 3,000 jobs, 1.5 million additional visitors and £2.8 billion of economic value to Stratford and the surrounding area.” - Mayor of London

Brief challenge

Spatial Strategy In examining the site and trends together to rethink the competition brief, different possible questions of spatial strategies arose. For example, are the cultural institutions dispersed or are they brought under one roof through hyper-concentration; to what degree are they mixed or separate from housing; how effective can the podium be with dealing with the complexity of program or the tower when considering the need for d!ensity? 3 varying approaches have been chosen to examine some of these issues of spatial strategy, to be tested by comparison in how they solve the problems of the site, the brief, and the introduction of trends into the equation. The first contains the site, respecting both brief and boundaries but considers the new trends and possible synergies between new flexible work environments, particularly those of start-up incubators and home-work lifestyles, and the culture-knowledge quarter in the form of a larger expanse of flexible open space. The second approach begins to open up the container. Although the site and brief are still considered, large reduction in the program and even swapping some functions for those on adjacent sites occurs. In this approach, the specific synergies between institutions play a dominant role with respect to making a more family or neighborhood oriented environment for the community living there. A third approach, while also using trends to reduce the brief somewhat, takes even greater advantage with expanding the site boundaries to the adjacent park. Here, the splitting of the program into multiple nodes is only allowed through this expansion, reducing the density needed and creating micro-environments associated to their specific cultural uses. Housing is extracted as a separate node but still integrated into the environments through the use of p!ublic spaces like the integration of park and plaza into the scheme.

Shared knowledge environments in a contained space

Shared knowledge environments in a continous loop

Expansion of knowledge environments

SHARED KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENTS IN A CONTANIED SPACE

The development of a new urban quarter based on the knowledge city model opens to question a series of possible explorations, the first of which will begin with the study of how a contained space can promote new synergies between different culture and knowledge institutions and residential life. Hyper-density is a central challenge to the achievement of the given brief, due to the number and complexity of functions to fit into this small site. At the same time, a container generates a self-sufficient environment, independent from its surroundings. The contained space encourages the use of shared space as a means of making an interactive knowledge environment. Knowledge institutions are communities of a continuous renewal in terms of both population and functions according to the latest trends in city making; they are temporal. The challenge is to give this temporal society a sense of permanence, to give it an identity within the larger city. The combination between knowledge institutions, family housing and public space will create a new synergies, encouraging further development of in the knowledge economy.

KNOWLEDGE NEIGHBOURHOOD AS A CONTAINED SPACE

Typical Neighborhood Plan

SOHO Square, London

Science Village, Lund

Comparison between these three neighborhoods illustrates the square as a main articulator of space. The square, as a contained and defined space, creates a range of interconnected synergies between public and private use.

As a necessity for the city’s development today, as discussed in the introduction, knowledge institutions are becoming integral to the problem of developing new centralities. This opportunity is often is often utilized as a catalyst event for the urban development of the city, particularly in regeneration projects and expansion of the city to peripheral zones. The goal is to plan for the mixture of functions of the city center to create the social and economic intensity from the start, rather than allowing it to development piecemeal over time. The “compact city”, advocating the integration of all urban functions, begins to correlate the relationship between architecture, urbanism and the social environment of the city as highly mixed. A city is filled with spontaneous events, a continuous series of everyday interactions and performances. This emphasis on the event is what is used in the knowledge city model. As previously mentioned, institutions are becoming more concerned with everyday activities from workshops, to lectures, to interactive exhibits and play-space, and it is this event which becomes the basis for a new type of neighborhood. The mixture between leisure, knowledge and family environments is an opportunity to improve the quality of life within the city, where people want more and more activities, or events, available at every turn.

Abstract of Lund’s square

The square, as the traditional English neighborhood public space, is examined for its potential to facilitate crossovers between public and private environments; for example, the square as the meeting point between a research facility, a museum, and a media office within an urban neighborhood. The relationship between the surrounding city functions and the square is developed through an exploration of the ground floor as a means of generating new collaborative environments.

Open Space dynamic

The ground floor of the square becomes a container allowing the exchange of activities and program between surrounding areas as a toll of mobility and integration.

Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Well V&A Smithsonian UAL Housing

The complexity and density of the brief are a starting point for the exploration of a more flexible, contained space for shared functions in a model of hyper-density

The housing is separated from the program within the container to create two major environments.

The container promotes the synergies between the different institutions by the shared ground floor.

These new collaborative environments are drivers for further development of the knowledge city. For this reason, the spatial strategy researched in this first approach focuses on the prospect of the ground floor as a container of activities, a hyper-concentrated exploration for synergies. The connection between the shared culture-knowledge container and housing tower prototypes is achieved through vertical circulation. The multi-layered complexity of the megastructure strives to be both dynamic in its use and densely organized around the issues of the brief.

Housing

Administration Buildings

Knowledge Container

Train

Canal

The integration of the multiple activities is achieved by the continous sequence of platforms unified by a massive cover. 32

The container is accessible and open for the integration of an alternitive â&#x20AC;&#x153;street lifeâ&#x20AC;?. The groundfloor links the indoor and outdoor activties in relation to the continous covered space.

The circulatory system is used as a contained landscape showing the flexibility of space. 34

Columbia University - Renzo Piano

The variation of the ground floor levels becomes a driver of mobility and integration to develop the relationships of the different functions in continuous open space.

The continuous ground floor, based on the principle of collective-shared space at the ground, explores the different synergies between the multiple environments. Renzo Pianoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach establishes a continuous pattern of mobility, integrating a series of mixed functions with a thickened ground. The differentiation of levels allows for the functional hierarchy and identity for each activity. The strategy implemented by KCAP, on the other hand, is based on a perimeter circulation for different access points to the multiple buildings within the contained block. Similarly, the proposed site is pre-established as a place autonomous to its surroundings, making it an ideal site for the contained knowledge quarter strategy. In the proposal, the irregular pattern of the ground floor breaks the homogeneity of the contained space and encourages the creation of microenvironments for social intensity on an isolated site.

Car

Double Bottom

Interior

Quay

Ready mades

Strategic Intervention

Wideness

Wind

Rotterdam KCAP

Isolation from surrounding areas and the limited size of the plot are key constraints of the site to consider when exploring the ground as a container for collaborative space.

The grid is the basis for the distribution of elements, prioritizing the flexibility of space to accommodate a range of functions.

The differentiation of the four institutions is developed by the exploration of identity and integration of shared spaces. The boundaries between each other are broken by the continous collective space that contains them.

The organization of the ground floor consists on a sequence of patios and cores that creates a reference for orientation on the massive deep floor system.

Entrances from the perimeter ramp are aligned with the collective void spaces inside the container

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

The endless, open space of the deep floor plate is broken by the introduction of more private, modular spaces.

The upper levels are positioned relative to the location of the cores at the ground.

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

028

046

064

082

102

122

142

162

The modular spaces are introduced as spaces for more permanent and specialized program specific to each institution.

The existing topography makes the exploration of spatial integration through multiple levels a fundamental challenge.

The upper ground becomes the cove of the contained space.

A sequence of descending platforms connects the waterfront to the main bridge.

Major institutional spaces are identified by the perforations of the platform to form larger volumes of space.

The organization of multifunctional cells is defined by the circulation system of the ramp .

The vertical circulation of the cores organizes the major elements of the program in space.

Three public cores connect the institutional blocks to each other through an undefined interior street.

028

The exploration of vertical housing starts to define the typology between the housing blocks. The private cores connect the housing blocks in a vertical plane.

046 064 082 102 122 142

028

162

046 064 082 102 122 142

1 26

1 24

1 22

1 20

0 28

0 46

1 26

0 64

1 24

0 82

1 22

1 20

0 28

0 46

0 64

0 82

162

2 bedroom

3 bedroom

studio

1 bedroom

The variation of the core system exposes the multiplicity of housing typologies .

Vertical connectivity

Living/Working Together in Merihaka. Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Esprit de Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Escalier. Dogma

The organization of the ground floor consists of a sequence of voids and cores that enclose the space while still illuminating the interior atriums. The core is based on a concentration of services and facilities, acting as a condenser of the inhabitantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; circulation system freeing the surrounding space for a more open, flexible use. Each core is differentiated in scale, services and access according to what is both surrounding and above.

Space is articulated by the arrangement of the cores, patios and galleries. The sequence of these elements organizes the relationships and activities of the different functions.

The development of the groundfloor renounces to the open-ended typology of the factory or office space. It maintains the flexibility of the structure as an essential character for space creation.

The container is used as a collaborative space where living and working functions are mixed all together. At the same time, it is opened to the street for the creation of new knowledge, productive and living environments that will improve the liveliness and interaction between the city and the collective space.

45 1

The variation of levels creates light and dark spaces for the distribution of different functions accordingly.

46 1

In the development of the podium level the core works as a social condenser of multiple activities. At the same time the differentation of the cores between public and private use is layered by the insertion of workshops and retail in different arrangements.

Relationship of the core and corridor: The understanding of the core allows for three possible variations of interaction between core and lobby. 1. Core at the center: Traditionally located in the center of the plan to maximize the footprint and views for market value by minimizing circulation. Characterised as a vertical shaft, devoid of natural light and ventilation, it is ultimately a poor quality space if used as the main articulator of collective space within a tower.. 2. Core at the edge or corner: an alternative version of locating the core to allow natural light and ventilation, but compromises the possibility of dual aspect views by being on the perimeter. 3. Core outside the building: Moving the major vertical circulation out of the building complicates the horizontal circulation, but does allow opportunities to explore and include different functions in the corridor space, evolving the circulation space from a transitional environment to something more.. As the concept of cores is significant throughout the approach, the housing strategy explores the use of all three types discussed above, looking at the available variations of the core and lobby relationship for a better living standard.

Living/Working Together in Merihaka. Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Esprit de Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Escalier. Dogma The housing prototype organizes the residential functions within the tower with variations of space and services as an exploration of a flexible housing type for the integration of multiple lifestyles. Multi-use work spaces are pair with residential units, providing specialized housing for the livework lifestyle. Trends in housing show the major difference between family housing and student or young professional housing to be the provision of these shared spaces for leisure and for work. The tower, as a type, organizes these shared environments vertically. Shared work and leisure environments within the tower give flexibility to the residential lifestyle of this knowledge quarterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach. While a business might rent space within the container or visitors come to explore the latest exhibit, the resident of the knowledge neighbourhood has the freedom to choose their degree of interaction with the highly active space below. They are both separate and integrated from the ground below, with a semi-public upper ground and the cores as the interface between the two, and the elevated ground is an amenity to residents, opening views to not only the immediate areas but into larger city as well because of the added height of the plinth.

Floor plan - Tower prototype

From the trends of young professionals housing, it was clear the major difference between family housing and student living was the emphasis and presence of shared spaces.But with the density of housing to be achieved, towers seemed to be the typology that would work both as an anchor as well as the elements to break the horizontality of the structure. Thus, instead of integrating the housing units into the shared knowledge environment, it was disintegrated from the contained space as a step to increase efficiency of circulation. 1

Centralization of the main facilities 50

The disintegration of housing towers forms the boundary for differentiating public and private. Hence, the housing provides calm and stillness in contrast to the continuously active plinth. The endless debate of the perfect floorplan was dealt in a way of a flexible space grid which could be formulated into studios, onebedroom apartments, two-bedroom apartments and so on. The decision of refraining from actually designing a typical floor-plan was a conscious decision to create an interactive and adaptable floor-plate according to needs of the user.

Living environments

The grid used in the cultural container, is seen again within the tower. Although at a different scale, the purpose of the grid remains the same; to provide flexibility for the adaptable live-work lifestyle. Different unit types can be accommodated within the grid without changing the perimeter dimensions or the facade, so the appearance to the tower remains the same, while the interior is filled with variation. New activities can be introduced to the tower within this grid system, focusing on the lifestyles of families and young professionals. Some of these functions could be crĂ¨che, work cells, lounges, etc. Emergent trends of flexi-working or home-working space is available within the tower, without necessarily compromising the private environment of the home. The benefit is, for example, a parent can work from home, in a professionally oriented environment separate from their individual flat, but still within their tower, in case of a family emergency. The space-grid layout can be adapted to house either housing or working typologies according to the preferences of the user which makes these towers unique to routine housing towers equipped only with housing functions. The floor-plates can be arranged in ways to create diverse range of aesthetic and functional aspects and since the structure remains more or less the same, it becomes economically viable.

Leissure environments

Working environments

Conclusion: This first strategy is only one of many possible solutions for achieving the project brief on the given site. The contained cultureknowledge quarter approaches the questions of synergies and shared space through a universally open environment, but has both is merits and challenges. On one hand it creates an opportunity for an extremely flexible, active and autonomous environment, fostering crossovers between institutions with different scales and functions. On the other the, as a large megastructure, it may prove difficult to integrate to the future adjacent developments of the UCL Quarter and International Quarter. The structural challenges of making such a large contained volume have not been resolved either. The grid, while allowing smaller enclosed functions, like workshops and classroom, to move without issues, becomes a bigger problem for the exhibition and performance halls. The cultural institution is typically composed of large open volumes, the fewer structural obstructions there are means the more flexible the exhibition space is. A second approach attempts to alleviate some of the challenges of the container by opening it up.

SHARED KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENTS ON MULTIPLE GROUNDS

The Continous Cultural Loop The ambition is a 24-hour environment, heterogeneous in lifestyles and intense in its functions, through the implementation of the Knowledge City model. Providing urban vitality through the mix of culture, knowledge, living and working for a new community in the Olympic Park, this Quarter brings all the activity of the city to a regeneration site at the periphery of London. The container of the first approach offers a universally shared environment, a large flexible space used by all, but this same degree of openness can be a detriment to the individual institution. If everything is shared, how are crowds controlled when entering and exiting special exhibits or performances; how is the childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s environment separate from the professional. In another matter, the structural grid that allows institutions to be placed anywhere, causes problems when larger column-free spaces are needed as in the theater and exhibition halls. The container itself is a large mass, and while the scale can compete effectively with the other sporting events adjacent to it, the large undifferentiated expanse has little orientation or direction within it, making finding the exhibits and workshops inside difficult for visitors. Unlike the first approach, the second questions how the container can be opened. How can a collective public realm be maintained for shared space? How can this shared space promote synergies and a reduction of program? How can housing become more integral to the scheme as the cultural environment becomes an asset to family life? Although the site and brief are still considered, large reduction in the program and even swapping some functions for those on adjacent sites occurs. In this approach, the specific synergies between institutions play a dominant role with respect to making a more family or neighbourhood oriented environment for the community living there.

Does Morphology Matter: Opening the block, identity and flexibility This approach begins with the examination of the linear block as method to open or break the contained cultureknowledge quarter. The linear block offers both consistency of the exterior, if desired, but also a high degree of diversity within the interior. If a series of linear blocks occur along the length of the site, this means that each institution could occupy its own block, allowing them a degree of separation, so that for example, the permanent collection of the V&A does not have to share space with the studios of UAL, etc. A separation of user groups can occur so that visitors, students and professionals do not overlap unnecessarily.

Continuous Linear Block

Breaking Linear Block fo light, views and identity

Flexibility of interior program maintained?

Can deviation mainain continous circulation?

Can the combination of a continuous ground and the broken linear block function as an integrated culture-knowledge quarter?

The Linear Block Denys Lasdun: Institute of Education: London In Lasdunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s building, the linear block faces the street with an austere presence. It signifies an unbroken plan for larger functions, and separates top, middle and bottom through a change of materials and repetition of elements. The bottom is broken for entrances that step up off of the street in multiple locations, the top carries this rhythm into stack-like elements, mimicking the Georgian block opposite the street. The middle is a single volume of enclosed space. The rear of the building is a different story. The large mass seen from the street is broken into smaller terracing grounds spilling into a large plaza for a collective, social environment. While people either pass or enter from the street front, the rear encourages one to linger.

The linear block provides a distinction between front and back, the street and the plaza. The flexible interior is independent from the exterior articulation.

Breaking the Linear Block MVRDV: Bar Code: Oslo Opera Quarter

Unlike the use of Lasdun’s singular linear block, MVRDV’s Bar Code project has broken the block, for a repetition of smaller masses. The same pattern occurs at the ground of open and solid to allow streets and passages through the block, and the orientation toward the street is similar, but the scheme lacks the flexibility of the long, uninterrupted plan of the Institute of Education. Instead, the separation of blocks means that one can change while the others remain unaltered. This flexibility works for the Olympicopolis plan by giving the institutions the ability to move or for new partners to become involved in the quarter over time. In this case, for example, the bank occupies more than one block and is identified through the shared facades. As culture is becoming more about whats on offer and less about the grand structure, the repeated linear block means that the cultural institutions can become more a part of the neighborhood, actually giving character to the housing above, rather than juxtaposing it.

Oslo “Opera Quarter” - MVRDV

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

In a broken block, individual institutions can function separately. Shared voids occur between the built.

The Broken Block and Continuity However, what happens if the singular block is broken and connected to a continuous circulation system, can there be both integration and distinction in varying degrees? One block running the length of the site means a highly flexible deep plan so that large exhibits and small workshops can both take place in the same axis but it is difficult to get light or views into a deep linear block. Instead, breaking the block still allows the flexibility of a deep plan, but also opens it up. Each break between blocks can be used as a plaza between institutions, a shared lobby, a garden, or a spontaneous event space, taking advantage of the trends on unprogrammed voids as optimal shared environments. It allows the transition from public to private through vertical or horizontal transitions, and can be broken into multiple programs because of the deep floor plan. Light is allowed deep into the scheme at each shared void. Facades can be treated separately or together to give the impression of multiple buildings or a single megastructure; for example, if the canal view of the quarter shows a unified scheme of horizontal and vertical layers, the face to the north can distinguish each institution as a separate block. Because of the untested nature of the brief, the more generic nature of the linear block provides a degree of flexibility for the exhibits and even the institutions to change; and over time if UAL or the new International business Quarter expand making the neighborhood another node of iCity East.

Reduce Text Diagrams

How does mobility work to connect the multiple instiutions? Not a straight line; the dominate pattern of mobility instead moves diagonally connecting bridge and waterfront, the International Village and the park, weaving solid and void, interior and exterior space.

The Continous Ground: Mobility, Orientation and shared environments The continuous ground is not referring to the water from. In this case, it is at the elevated level of the bridge. If the advantage of the linear block is its continuity and subsequent flexibility of its interior, how can this also be achieve once the block is broken? One solution is to maintain multiple, continuous paths, or streets, connecting all of the blocks. Weaving through open and closed space, the continuous ground becomes a place of transition and interaction between the multiple functions and user groups. But like the singular block, this connection takes place on more than one level. The ground is multiplied. Orientation becomes a principle organizer of the plan. Like in Lasdunâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Institute, the linear block polarizes the street and the plaza, the front and the back. One side prioritizes a continuous, and monumental institutional face. The other is all about humanizing the grand scale and relating the building back to the public realm at the plaza through terraces that multiply the social spaces. The terraced facade also provides multiple vantages and interactions between the interior and exterior.

Continuous grounds link the multiple blocks. Spaces of transition become spaces of interaction.

A Polarized Site: The waterfront as public realm Typically (Copenhagen Theater, Tate Modern, etc.), Cultural buildings and the like are all oriented toward waterfront. They often have grand entrances with a large plaza or boardwalks to signifying their public-ness. Here, the site conditions do not allow for street entrances nor expansive canal side leisure in the traditional sense. The ground, riddled with pipes and cables left from the Olympics, makes placing parking underground a difficult and expensive solution. This means that parking and servicing occur at the ground, from the street to the waterfront, creating a podium level matching the height of the bridge. The North is distinctly the back of the building at the ground, for servicing and for enclosed exhibit space, while the South overlooks the park and waterfront, making it optimal for leisure aspects. With a â&#x20AC;&#x153;streetâ&#x20AC;? level now at the bridge, eight meters above the existing promenade, and three level of parking below, connecting the waterfront to the quarter is a challenge. Limited space at further complicates any means of stepping or terracing down. While on the opposite bank is a large park already existing a key neighborhood amenity. Instead of becoming a crowded part of the cultural realm, always overloaded with visitors, the waterfront is quiet. The crowd moves across the canal to the park, and the promenade, punctuated by the occasional shop or cafe, is the place for a quite stroll, stepping down to the water taxi, or a place to teach you children to ride a bike. The facade at this level is left mostly solid; a richly texture backdrop that grounds the charge atmosphere above.

The waterfront is uncomplicated; the place for a quite stroll, stepping down to the water taxi, or a place to teach you children to ride a bike.

South Elevation

The continuity of the thickened ground is emphasised facing the canal. The podium is a backdrop of texture on which the quarter appears to sit.

North Elevation

From the main bridge, each block is articulated. Institutions have a distinct identity which influences the housing above.

If the â&#x20AC;&#x153;groundâ&#x20AC;? is actually at the level of the bridge, what happens to the linear block? The entrances to the institutions occur on the bridge level, creating a network of open and closed space moving through each block in a pattern of shared and separate public environments. As seen in the Barbican, multiple institutions benefit from the shared void space of the entrance or plaza. This way it is always active, and can remain open at all hours for leisure outside of planned events. Similarly, the connected ground affords the possibility of always connect entrance and void space while the programmed space can be separate.

Variation in the linear block should include a large gradient between light and dark spaces.

Bridge Level Plan: The continuous cultural ground

The new path moves transitions from solid to void through a series of entrances on the main bridge level. A rhythym of solid and transparent organizes functions on the interior according to light and dark space.

Voids spaces connecting the blocks become the â&#x20AC;&#x153;public living roomsâ&#x20AC;? as spaces for unprogrammed leisure and spontaneous events.

A continuous loop of mobility connects the cultural ground to a series of workshops, studios cafes and shops creating a dynamic, layered environment filled with activity.

Shared Space & Synergies Studies of cultural institutions (Design Museum, etc) show trends in use. Because museums are emphasizing educational outreach and interactive workshops more and more, it is not uncommon for these spaces to have separate entry. As part of a neighborhood, these spaces may be filled with after school or weekend activities for children. Another use might be to teach courses in fabrication or curatorship sponsored by the museum. Professionals may have open-acess work space connected to specialty retail stores, and visitors might simply want to enjoy the atmosphere of the quarter while waiting to meet friends at a cafe. None of these functions require entering the programmed event to take in the theater performance or exhibition space, so how can these shared uses be organized within the block? There is a degree of overlap between the V&A, Smithsonian, Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells, and UAL as discussed in the introduction. Shared space, as an exploration, can begin to determine possible synergies of use and ownership. If each institution needs its own controlled entrance, but benefit from shared void space or a shared ground for temporary events, then entrances can be multiplied at a single level. These spaces are for the spontaneous event and entry. The permanent exhibition space, university studios, and main theater are all functions that need a direct connection to entrance and also separation from each other, therefore are organized in separate blocks. These functions will be referred to as the programmed or the fixed event. Workshops, studios, retail, food&beverage, classrooms, and lecture halls are all functions repeated between institutions but have different entrance requirements than the main programmed space. These functions, collectively referred to as everyday events, in other words, uses that are constantly changing but increasing interactive with the everyday life of the neighborhood.

The new path moves transitions from solid to void through a series of entrances on the main bridge level. A rhythm of solid and transparent organizes functions on the interior according to light and dark space.

The Continous, Everyday Event These everyday spaces, like the voids between blocks, can be commonly held by all institutions to use or rent out. Looking at the dispersed model, with the linear block system, the program of the everyday event can be spread throughout the site. However, since access is a priority, they will always need a separate entry from the main museum or theater. These entry points should be open and connected in the manner of a street.

The everyday event is based on the principle of openness. It is always accessible, always active. Separated from the main cultural ground below, the realm of everyday events is dispersed through the site as part of the neighbourhood and its inhabitants daily lifestyles

Upper Street Plan: A bridge of everyday events

Because these events are dispersed through the broken linear block, a secondary network of mobility works to link them in a continuous loop of interactive learning and play environments, connecting back to the ground on either end of the site.

Dispersed Museum As trends prioritize the everyday event, people want greater and easier access to these functions. Workshops, classrooms, cafes, and retail are often located close to the street with separate entrances. When cultural institutions cluster together, these functions are multiplied and can be dispersed at the level of the neighborhood or quarter to make a truly cultural neighborhood. These everyday event spaces might supersede the normal shops for on the street in a neighborhood, activating the street in a different manner shared between cultural institution and housing in a new way 55

Design Museum

The Design Museum shows trends in the separation of the everyday event from the main exhibition space, so all activities can happen in parallel within the same environment.

E EXPOSITION

EXPOSITION RETAIL

A.R

RETAIL

WORKSHOPS

ART. RESIDENCE

WORKSHOPS

W R

ART. RESIDENCE

A.R

A.R E

diffusing functions or "disperse museum"

W R

A.R

S RK

H KS

O SH

W RETAIL

AI ET

Can the museum be dispersed through a neighbourhood? Workshops, cafes and retail can function as places for the community rather than solely for the institution.

The â&#x20AC;&#x153;streetâ&#x20AC;? of everyday events winds through the block, overlapping the voids to create multiple grounds. A sense of transparency is created when looking above and below.

ELEVATIONs

As the events are constantly changing, they influence the character of the quarter in new ways. The same space may be used as an extended plaza for the theater and an impromptu dance studio.

Multiplied Ground These everyday spaces, like the voids between blocks, can be commonly held by all institutions to use or rent out. Looking at the dispersed model, with the linear block system, the program of the everyday event can be spread throughout the site. However, since access is a priority, they will always need a separate entry from the main museum or theater. These entry points should be open and connected in the manner of a street. Because of the plot density and main entrances located on the ground, these everyday events are organized on a secondary ground, with a continuous street-like connection. They are always independently accessible from the main museum, but connect back to the entrance of the quarter on existing bridge.

The organisation of the fixed event and the everyday create a network of vertically organized public spaces linked through a layered circulation that results in a thickened ground condition.

Multiplied Ground Chamberlin, Bon & Powell: Barbican Estate In the case of the Barbican Estate, and Imperial college, multiple grounds are used to differentiate between service areas and public areas. In Barbican, the multiple grounds on the interior act similarly to the terraces of the National theater. The area becomes charged with layered activities. People moving above ground become part of the spectacle for those below and vice-versa. It also becomes a way to separate the entrances of different functions. On the exterior, the podium level is a main public ground connecting blocks through a series of ramps and bridges, while the lower ground is more for residents, filled with large courtyards and playground.

Imperial College: Imperial College uses an upper level as the main realm for student activities. On the compact Albertopolis site, the ground is given to servicing, so open space must be made above. Bridges and ramps connect different areas of the campus; all the mobility network occurs above ground.

Lecture Hall

There is a linear connection of multiple perfomrance venues with a shared serviced perimeter.

Clustering of activity and support functions is concentrated within one main void on multiple level.

Clustering vertically multiplies the public ground

Clustering occurs as nodes in multiple locations.

What if clusters are formed vertically?

The void is used as for the spontaneous event.

As the â&#x20AC;&#x153;streetâ&#x20AC;? intersects the block, a void is cared from the mass for the everday event, in this case utilizing the void in the block left by the theatre. 81

Moving upwards, the ground splits into two levels with the entrance to the V&A on the lower ground and a creative hub on the â&#x20AC;&#x153;streetâ&#x20AC;? above.

The first block houses the resourse centre and busness hub. Program such as workshops, classrooms and auditorium to support the University ofve welcome visitors into the highly charged culture-knowledge quarter.

Resource Center & Business Hub The nature of the knowledge city shows new trends in working that prioritize collaboration and speed of communication. Housing all of the business functions together means that the common spaces; staff lunges, canteens, professional workshops and studios can be held in common by all of the institutions while still maintaining separate office areas for each. Less focus on individual or privatized workspace and more focus on teamwork areas and common spaces promote greater collaborative networks not only within a single institution, but also between multiple institutions.

COLLEGE

business cultural outreach research

RESOURCE, RESEARCH AND BUSINESS CENTER

CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS

Welcome Trust Gibbs Building - Hopkins Architects

Vilinius University Library, Science and Communication Center - Paleko Arch Studija

Helsinki Central Library (Proposal) - COBE

Resource Centre & Business Hub The first block also houses the major shared resources, functioning like a research and development library held in common for all the institutions. Its key location on the corner of the site makes it an amenity for not only the cultural quarter, but also to the adjacent UCL, and International Quarters, as a hub of knowledge. UAL is located directly above the resource centre, providing students with the privacy needed to work in studios separate from the general public, but still with direct access to the shared cultural ground-scape. A business centre occupies the first tower. Administrative functions of all the institutions are extracted from the exhibition space for public use.

Living in a Culture-Knowledge Quarter - A better urban lifestyle for families Housing is not separate from the public activity as in other schemes. Instead, residential point blocks are extruded from the cultural linear blocks in an alternating fashion. The zig-zag of blocks means more light and views for the dwellings not only to the wider city, but down into the cultural realm. Terraces project from individual units for a more private interaction with the cultural. Share roof gardens occupy the top of the cultural linear blocks serving as a communal space for each residential tower. The layered environment makes the neighborhood an ideal place for family life, with both a high degree of privacy afforded to the flats from the general public through control access points and a gradient of semi-public and private spaces; and a place of highly secured play or leisure. Parents can allow their children to roam freely with the street as it is always visible from the towers above and activities always planned for educational interaction. Rather than staying in the flat for the afternoon, adults can relax or play in the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;living roomsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; below while taking in the latest event or just enjoying the view of the park. The open spaces are separate from the main hustle of the museum environment for this reason.

The thickened ground not only provides residents with a higly active, mixed neighbourhood, but also acts as a surface for an artificial park to the housing above.

An interface between public culture and family life Marco Polo Tower: Unilever: Hafencity Hamburg Interconnected terraces are one method of achieving an thickened interface between the residential blocks and the cultural ground. Communally shared, these terraces act to make micro-communities within a high-density family housing type. The benefit of this approach would follows the idea of â&#x20AC;&#x153;getting to know your neighborâ&#x20AC;? but the outward facing units provide privacy between each unit. Young children can play under parental supervision or inhabitants can overlook the activity below.

Varied entry points connect the multiple grounds to the residential tower. The core pentrates all levels, organising crowd flows and separating public from private.

Semi-private gardens, courtyards, and playspaces pentrate the residential atmosphere.

Conclusion Although this second approach alleviates some of the challenges of the container, there are still equal, but different difficulties that evolve with such a complex spatial strategy. Because the environments overlap so much, the management of shared spaces is unclear. The complex organisation, while flexible in theory, would be costly to adjust or change if institutions change rapidly. The multiple grounds make for a charged atmosphere always filled with movement, but the same mobility network to connect them will most likely cause problems with small children or the elderly. The dissociation from the waterfront may also detract from the attractiveness of such a solution, but the inherent trend of institutions is one of inward facing environments. Despite the challenges of this approach the ambition remains the same: to bring together people who live, work, learn and play within the knowledge-culture quarter as an ideal quality for urban living, the vitality provided through mixing functions provides a continuously active, highly charged environment, providing a urban vitality in a currently empty place.

EXPANSION OF KNOWLEDGE ENVIRONMENTS

The approach revolves around formation of nodes of varied volumes containing specific activites while enabling crossovers between them through connecting bridges and open spaces to achieve enhanced quality spaces. Specific crossovers are available with the presence of different institutions, both cultural and educational. As mentioned previously, they have become globally established within the city centre and are looking to expand their audiences. In doing so, the nature of co-location affords not only the possibility of new strategies but also is a method of cost reduction and insurance for expansion. Approach by establishing a heterogeneous neighbourhood by articulating volumes of individual and collaborative spaces by extension of programmes on to the emptiness of the Olympic park to create a hyper dense environment of distinct yet overlapping spaces. The subterranean comprehension of the site reveals the presence of rigid lines formed by the built and unbuilt. Likewise, the nodes created through the separation of cultural instituions and housing afford greater distinction between these spaces. The distinction formed by the built volumes and unbuilt space begin to inhale the vast open park into the quarter, beyond the limits of the site. The project aims to reflect Centre of Pompidouâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strategy of incorporating its surrounding areas to enhance its value spatially. 99

100

Building Morphology as tool of organisation ?

Roof Terrace

Library 3XN, who designed the cultural center in Norway intended to design “A building which is a showcase of celebration, from the inside and outside”. Multi use of spaces such as roof as amphitheater increase the performance of the building both inside and outdoor, with supporting elements like galleries and library on higher floors and concert hall as its primary function of the “big event”. The organisation of the activities is laid out according to event based uses, with the Concert Hall in the spotlight, due to its high intensity usage at specific time intervals. The supporting functions, such as the library and gallery, are located separately from the Concert Hall to enable parallel uses of space at peak performance times, and when the Concert Hall is closed.

101

Rehersal

Concert Hall Gallery

Superposing functions using typology of building

Exploring volume of space along public front

Institutional edge to waterfront The intital research was directed towards understanding the role of morphology of a designing spaces as studied in the Cultural center. The resultant spaces derived gave rise to activities such a workshops delivering volumes for alliance between institutions. The synergy created incorporated the building but the obstacle rose with most spaces catering to specific activity rendering them for static usage. Treatment of Residential & waterfront junction 102

Rethinking museum in a cultural district 1

The museum being a generic public magnet has changed since its inception towards catering to specific crowd. The trend today is aligned towards museums being a part of a larger network of cultural event nodes. The change from introverted buildings as shown above being built to stand as a symbol of celebration and exhibition of its historical culture to todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s use as spaces of informal learning catering to specific crowd. The physicality of the building also portrays the change from opaque structures to transparent structures inclined towards openness of the building. Newer activities injected into the museum such as workshops, kidsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; activity, research laboratories all aid in re-structuring the network of spaces in the museum.

1) Leo von Klenze, Glyptothek, Munich, 1830. 2) Mies van der Rohe,Barcelona Pavilion, 1929 3) Frank Lloyd Wright, Guggenheim Museum, New York, 1959 4) Renzo Piano & Richard Rogers, Centre Pompidou, Paris, 1977 5) Steven Holl, Kiasma Museum, Helsinki, 1998 6) Frank Gehry, Guggenheim, Museum, Bilbao, 1999 7) Daniel Libeskind, Jewish Museum, Berlin, 1999 8) Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Mill City Museum, Minneapolis.

103

COLLECTIONS WAREHOUSE

EXHIBITS

PROGRAMS

VISITORS

ARCHIVES

STORE

MEMBERSHIP

PUBLICATIONS HISTORICAL RESEARCH

Mobility pattern of museum

Programatic network links in museum

The design of museums today rest on the logic of exhaling and inhaling activity from and to its proximity. Center of Pompidou showcases the notion by the creation of large plaza in front as a continuation of the existing square into the building. The light glass faรงade reveals the bustle from either sides enabling a flow in activity across the building. The nature of a central temporal space allows periodic changes in the content exhibited, continuously attracting new crowds. The presence of vertical circulation on the exterior coupled with horizontal movement on each floor provides a view of consistent activity. An open plan on the lower floor exaggerates the volume of space through activities filtering across the building, while vertical movement on the facade encloses the controlled environments.

Centre of Pompidou emphasis on transparent facade

Interpretation of Centre of Pompidou section 104

Placement of institutes

Museum-1 V&A

Performing centre- Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells Movement Analysis of programme

Aimed towards the regenaration of olympic park as a new urban area of London, the project begins to establish the site as a network of different activities usually found at the city scale, within a neighbourhood scheme. The nucleus of the quarter, as a point of regeneration is based on the colocation of complimentary functions and spaces. The demands of several institutions on such a limited site create an environment of high intensity, but require a complex spatial distribution. If the programs are extended onto the adjacent park just across the canal, the institutions and housing only better meet their spatial demands, but the unique environment presented within a park begins to enrich the program itself, tying together nature and culture into a new lifestyle of the city.

Museum-2 Smithsonian

Education Institute- UAL

105 Residential Complex

The existing heirarchy of the site suggests a clear access of large public spaces with the stadium to the south, the aquatic centre to the north and Westfield Stratford City and the new International Quarter to the north. This axis occurs along the eastern edge of the site at the existing bridge. A cultural node, therefore, becomes the first point of interaction parallel to the established line. The university and theatre become the second node, moving away from the main bridge and a residential take place at the furthest point within the expanded site. The presence of the vast span of the park opposite the canal is seen as an advantage to this approach. By extending the programmes into the emptiness of the park, pressures of density can be reduced and the knowledge quarter extended to better integrate to future developments. The culture-knowledge quarter, which plays a pivotal role in the generation of a new neighbourhood; including housing, the International Business Quarter, knowledge environments such as the future UCL Quarter, and Fish Island; creates a diverse urban community specific to the Olympic Park. The development of the site begins with the identification of an existing event based axis used as primary circulation axis and organizer of public based institutions creating a hierarchy of public functions for sports, leisure, culture and knowledge.

106

Examining the change in role of Educational institutions in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urban neighbourhood.

Origin & growth of campus

Buildings used by UCL

Building usage-Day

Building usage-Night

The study shows the UCL campus in Bloomsbury, London, its origins and expansion through time into the neighburhood due to infrastructure barriers. The study also shows the usage of these buildings during different times of the day. to achieve varied activity around the clock. The study of micro mobility helps to establish the mobility pattern with intensity of usage. This study enables us to develop a heirarchy in spatial usage in public engagement. The exploration establishes the quality of space created in the neighborhood. Being places off the main roads, UCL is supported by the commercial edge on Tottenham Court road, the residential part of Bloomsbury, the creative media industry places in Fitzrovia, cultural spaces such a British Museum reinforce a rich assortment of neighborhood bustle.

107 Mobility pattern in Library

Micro-mobility Pattern

Lower floor used as tool of integration into neighbourhood

The Columbia University extension by Renzo Piano is an attempt of juxtaposing educational and cultural activities. The master plan reveals the hierarchy of privacy whistle creating moments in the campus as nodes for public engagement. The vertical and lateral hierarchy created across the campus with more intimate and private spaces in the core of the campus reveals the quality of campus. The cross overs along the periphery include exhibition spaces, galleries, concert halls and museums engages with the neighborhood.

Inviting facade fronting campus

Public engagement nodes 108

The changing trend of juxtaposition of cultural and institutional activities resulted in public engagement in lower floors. The earlier exploration reveals the opportunity to use the change in topography as a responce to challenges of site conditions to create collaborative spaces between institutes. The required volume of space in each instance is defined by the activity of institute it holds complimenting the inhabited park.

109

110

The natural topographical variation is used to build spaces of interaction between institutions and are key public domains of the site. These public areas are built landscape through the use of horizontal platforms/ terraces and bridges. The existing event-based axis is formed by the presence of the stadium to the South, the pool to the East and Westfield Stratford City to the North. The bridge acts as a main street for this axis, and as such, is the organizer of the public space hierarchy. As the anchor point of events in relation to the site, greater public environments are loaded toward the East and graduate to more semi-public and private uses as a visitor moves west.

Plan at Bridge Level (+8.0m lvl) 111

112

Housing Complex

Student Accomodation

Waterfront Elevation 113

University of Arts London

Victoria & Albert Museum

London Aquatic Centre

Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells

114

Water-Front Plan (0.00m lvl) 115

Plan at 4th Floor (+16m lvl) 116

View revealing expansion of site, laterally while maintaining required density.

117

Site as a network of activities in neighbourhood scale by creating infilteration through open spaces

118

Waterfront engagement at â&#x20AC;&#x153;Cultural Nodeâ&#x20AC;?

119

The first node houses the V&A and Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells the as an anchor point of the culture-based event. Visitors move from the existing bridge down to the waterfront, a major amenity to the public ground. Located across the canal, in a secondary node, is Smithsonian. UAL being more privatized institutions, they are located further down the event axis. Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells utilizes the waterfront to develop engaging rehearsal spaces and workshops in partnership with UAL. A library and amphitheater front the building, adding to the public character and connection between culture, knowledge and nature highlighted in this scheme. A new bridge connecting the two public nodes on either side of the canal is an inhabitable space, reducing the volume needed by the institutions. This bridge begins to realize the spaces as temporary interchanging spaces for exhibits, dance rehearsals & workshops. This enables a variety of collaborative programs into the rentable spaces enabling creation of synergy and regular income at the same time. The park, where Smithsonian is located, is bracketed by housing on the far side, making the park a neighborhood amenity specific to the cultureknowledge quarter as a semi-closed space. In doing so, this side of the park becomes a protected environment from crowds attending match day at the stadium. It becomes a cultural landscape, a space of temporary events and everyday interaction.

Void assembling V&A, Sadlerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wells & Bridge.

Solid vs Void bleed 120

Workshops

Library

Sadler’s Wells

Waterfront engagement at “Educational Node”

121

Bridge as a Cultural Hub

Open building embracing park across canal

View from Aquatic centre towards West

Spatial notion of public engagement of UAL

122

London Aquatic Centre

Student Accomodation

Knowledge-Cultural Hub

Dual View duplex-residences

123

The residential node is located on the western end of the site, separate from, but connected to the cultureknowledge environment through the use of outdoor elements of plaza, terraces and bridges. If the housing acts as another node within the scheme, pulled apart physically from the narrow site, the result is lowered density, better light and views and using the park as an expansive back garden of the residents to share with the museum as sculputural courts. Family living takes advantage of the proximity of the culture-knowledge quarter as a safe learning environment for children to grow up in. It also caters to different lifestyles with the addition of sports, shopping, and a park, all in less than 10 mins walking distance of one another. A secondary bridge, replicating the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Culture Bridge,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; caters to the housing node, primarily as a connector between the two communities across the canal. The residential bridge is inhabitable on the roof, with a large garden terrace overlooking the culturalknowledge park below. It is also used as servicing for the residences across the canal. The roof also provides residents with essential neighborhood spaces such as a gym, supermarket, and community halls.

Private exclusive green terrace

Residential Plaza overlooking Cultural district

124

The housing typology is based on the location. The lower floors of the linear block contain duplex livework environments, supported by student living on the upper floors. The point blocks, floating over the canal hold up to 5 bedroom flats with luxury living on higher floors. The quality of living is derived primarily from the location in close proximity to cultureknowledge park, reinforced with an orientation for better light and views.

Live-work units on lower floor with student living on higher floor introverted towards series of courtyards.

125

Duplex flats with â&#x20AC;&#x153;Living on waterâ&#x20AC;? feature

The typology of the floor plans is derived from the Kunchunjunga in Mumbai, designed by Charles Correa. The housing is distinctive in its urban landscape. The apartments are well ventilated with a complex interior-exterior relationship formed by double height terraces that deliver dual-sided views from the living rooms and bedrooms presenting the inhabitants with an ever changing panorama.

126

Conclusion:

Moving beyond the first two strategies by defying the existing site boundaries, this approach achieves an increased spatial quality of the given brief. Overlapping the multiple institutions with housing and extending beyond the boundaries of the site to integrate the surrounding park, establishes the intentions of a new type of urban neighbourhood. Void spaces between the different institutions become stimulating environments for new synergies through the use of exterior public spaces like the terrace, the plaza and the park. The potentials of the culture-knowledge quarter begin to make sense in light of the siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s expansion for multiple reasons, such as micro-environments for each institution and a reduction of overall density. However, difficulties arise with the inhabitation of the park. It reduces the public footprint becoming a controversy of privatisation. With the extension, each institution gains its own building, but consequently there is little room for the specific partners to change or drop from the project once it has begun. The specification of environments may also limit the types of crossovers. Bearing these constraints in mind, the project aims to give rise to new activities and spaces across all platforms of public engagement.

127

128

Conclusion: As illustrated through the comparison of these three approaches, the challenges of the Culture & Knowledge Quarter brief are difficult to resolve with any single solution. While the container condenses to social atmosphere of a knowledge city within the limited site conditions, it faces extreme difficulties when face with the integration to surrounding sites. The second approach of the connected linear block, while beginning to think about the problem of integration through the use of outdoor environments and connecting bridges, is a complex system of layers that is difficult to achieve unless all partners within the project are cooperative. The third approach makes significant advances through the expansion of the quarter on to multiple nodes, releasing some of the pressures of high density. However, it too calls to question the nature of public and private space one the housing has been extended to the park opposite the site. The nature of the knowledge city as a model for development is constantly changing in relation to new trends in urbanity. The collaboration of multiple institutions, while not an entirely new concept, has not yet had time to mature. Planning for intensity in the city’s periphery is a fairly new concept as well, moving away from piecemeal planning that develops organically overtime. It is difficult to see whether the effect is successful in the making of new neighborhoods, new districts, and in some cases, entirely new city’s through the potential networks made by synergies. Synergies not only in the institutional realm, but also taking into consideration the integration of housing as more people are moving into city centers to take part in this highly active lifestyle. Although the knowledge quarter is used as a driver for regeneration, in this case to spark a new node of the city within East London, there are competing projects already in place. The King’s Cross development is already underway and has attracted many institutions due to its central location within the city, building upon an already existing social fabric. The new Vauxhall-Nine Elms project is also a competitor in this aspect. At a much larger and cohesive scale, the project is planning around the potentials generated by the redevelopment of London’s South Bank cultural district. 129

There are still many other considerations for this projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ambition and methods of approach, some of which are left open at this point. These approaches offer a number of things but there remains a series of difficulties; here are some of the key problems (from the intro) and here are the remaining or new difficulties generated by these approaches. Since it is difficult to spread things onto multiple sites due to the topographical challenges present in the Olympic Park, is the brief really wrong in trying to bring them all together? With other major developments, like the Nine Elms Balersea redevelopment, will this culture- knowledge quarter out of the center be able to compete? Should the scheme be thought of in broader terms; its adjacent sites of the UCL quarter, the International Quarter, and the new housing development over immediately west of the canal in the current plaza? ďżź Does putting all of these things together in one quarter really created vitality or a good enough point of intensity to influence the growth of new networks around it?

130

References

- City Planning Department, Helsinki - Dogma. (2014). Living/Working Together in Merihaka. L’Esprit de L’Escalier. - Heynen, H. (2005). Modernity and domesticity: tensions and contradictions. na. - Petrova, Yana (2014). Collaborative Spaces of Production and Reproduction in the Science City. - 3XN Plassen Cultural centre- http://www.3xn.com/architecture/by-year/18-cultural-centre--plassen- Leo von Klenze, Glyptothek, Munich- http://www.antike-am-koenigsplatz.mwn.de/en/glyptothek-munich/das-haus.html - Mies van der Rohe, Barcelona Pavilion- http://www.archdaily.com/109135/ad-classics-barcelona-pavilion-mies-van-der-rohe/ - Frank Lloyd Wright, Guggenheim Museum, New York- http://www.archdaily.com/60392/ad-classics-solomon-r-guggenheim-museum-frank-lloyd-wright/ - Renzo Piano & Richard Rogers, Centre Pompidou, Paris- http://www.archdaily.com/64028/ad-classics-centre-georges-pompidou-renzo-piano-richard-rogers/ - Steven Holl, Kiasma Museum, Helsinki- http://www.stevenholl.com/project-detail.php?id=18 - Frank Gehry, Guggenheim, Museum, Bilbao- http://www.archdaily.com/422470/ad-classics-the-guggenheim-museum-bilbao-frank-gehry/ - Daniel Libeskind, Jewish Museum, Berlin- http://www.archdaily.com/91273/ad-classics-jewish-museum-berlin-daniel-libeskind/ - Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle, Mill City Museum, Minneapolis- http://architizer.com/projects/mill-city-museum/ - Renzo piano- Columbia University Extension- http://www.rpbw.com/project/73/columbia-university-campus-plan/ - Kunchunjunga Apartments by Charles Correa http://archnet.org/system/publications/contents/7084/original/DPC3960.pdf?1384808050 - Barbican Estate - Chamberlin, Powell & Bon - London - Institute of Education - Denys Lasdun - TATE BRITAIN- James Stirling - DESIGN MUSEUM- Conran group - EDUCATORIUM- OMA - IMPERIAL COLLEGE- Forster+Partners - UNILEVER Headquarters- Behnisch Architekten - Cultural Center of EU Space Technologies- Dekleva Gregoric Arhiteki+SADAR+VUGA+OFIS architects+Bevk Perovic Arhiteki HAY-ON-WYE - HELSINKI CENTRAL LIBRARY(PROPOSAL)- COBE - NOVARTIS CAMPUS- Weiss/Manfredi - NEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR LONDON’S SCIENCE MUSEUM- Coffey Architects - VILNIUS UNIVERSITY LIBRARY, SCIENCE COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION CENTER- Paleko Arch Studija - WELLCOME TRUST GIBBS BUILDING- Hopkins Architects - ZKM CENTER FOR ART AND MEDIA TECHNOLOGY- Bernard Tschumi Architects

131