Canal Court Codan Block 3 Tokyo Bay, Japan Camille Esquival + Darcy Keester
about Block 3 connects living, working, and socializing within the same building and distributes it throughout multiple levels. The design helps to blur the boundaries between public and private, to create a shared realm, and work and live, to create a social realm. The building consists of two portions joined by bridges. The part in between the two portions where the bridges are is called the communication atrium because of its ability to join the two halves. One portion is designated as the living portion and has units that are 60 m2. The other portion consists of 25 m2 annex units which can be used for any purpose the owner wishes, for example a small office, an extended bedroom, a shop, a study, or a workshop. The idea behind the annex units is for extended families to live in the same network and for inhabitants to be able to run a business or work from the same building, thus they are very flexible. Throughout both portions, there are voids carved out of the building which create ‘terraces’. Most terraces are public and become common spaces which are flexible and allow inhabitants to use as they please, either for socializing or working. Some however are private and belong to specific units. These voids are meant to create a “3-dimensional structure from the random chaos of the street,” by bringing the ground level up and dispersing it throughout various levels of the building. Block 3 was designed as part of a larger neighborhood consisting of 6 like-minded buildings in Tokyo, built initially on an artificial island. This neighborhood has the same aim for each building: to provide better social housing, to provide possibility for work/live, and to use the theme of voids to accommodate shared space. The neighborhood itself is very island-like in that it is surrounded by taller buildings and creates its own personal space by facing each building inward and creating voids on a larger scale thus somewhat isolating it from the surrounding street and city network.
East elevation 1/600
2
11F-12F SECTION
ION
3
11F PLAN
West elevation 1/600
Top: West-facing Facade Bottom: East-facing Facade
East Public elevation Space 1/600
Private Space
2 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
3 1
9
4
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 8
1 5
7
6 6 1 residence 2 roof garden 3 common terrace 4 private terrace 5 small office 6 parking 7 shop 8 community atrium 9 community bridge
Cross section 1/600
1
Circulation
Living Space Working Space
Flexible Space
Public Space Private Space
Layout of unit has services on edges to provide through space in unit. Occupants can choose between what is their “outside.�
parcel—building—street
“Creating 3-dimensional structure from the random chaos of the street”
Living Space Working Space
- Kengo Kuma
Public Space Private Space Flexible Space Ground floor connections to street
Voids are carved out of the buildings’ interior to create triple height spaces that are used for common areas or personalterraces. The common areas are flexible in program and are at the discretion of the users. They create a 3-D street environment by bringing the social areas up into the building.
Working and living spaces are in separate parts of the building but connected through bridges. A person changes space to work rather than changing mindset. The private units are facing the interior of the neighborhood, while the more public work space is adjacent to the street.
Circulation: showing bridges, hallways, elevators, and stairways.
Flexible Space: These units can be used for live or work: they can be used for extended family bedrooms, office space, workshops, etc.
parcel pattern—block—district
Block consists of like-minded buildings that were all built for the same purpose Block is unified with buildings of the same height while surrounding buildings are taller, effectively isolating it
Not spatially connected to the city: it has no streets that go through it, effectively isolating it
Buildings in the block are facing inwards and leave a very hard edge to the public street side
Main connection to the units is on the inside of the block
Block itself is unified: the carved out patterns of the building are repeated in the block pattern
Has most of its own necesary amenities within S-street making it unnecesary for people to leave
conclusion
Through our research and analysis, it was evident that Block 3 worked using systems within systems. As previously mentioned, its island-like nature on a neighbourhood, parcel and unit scale was consistent in the different degrees of privacy throughout the project. The facade and building material itself is very cold (uncharacteristic of Japanese architecture) and does not lend itself well to portraying itself as a connected, open network of living. The bridges are relatively narrow; although open to the elements and other bridges may breed interactions on multiple levels. The multi-story “terrace” space is unique and seems like a good idea in theory but due to insufficient information, we can only infer its success especially to those units not directly beside one. It appears that those whose units do not directly reside beside a common terrace, are forced to access it through the shared hallways which are covered but have no walls. Therefore, in the cold winters in Japan - are they used? The building’s attempt to bring the street level to multiple floors is commendable but depending on how the “SOHO” - small offices, home offices are used, it is unclear how accessible this is to the public. Overall, Block 3 is an interesting project and with its surrounding neighbours, designed by different architects, with one goal in mind. Did Block 3 have the best approach? Lobby
references
Bognar, Botond. Kengo Kuma: Selected Works.
New York, NY, USA: Princeton Architectural Press, 2005.
ProQuest ebrary. Web. 9 September 2014. Copyright 2005.
“Canal Court Codan Block 3.” Kengo Kuma and Associates. http://kkaa.co.jp/works/architecture/canal-court-cordanblock-3/. Dimmer, Christian and Golani, Erez.
“Shinonome Canal Court, Tokyo- The Private Case of Public Space.”
Architecture of Israel Quarterly. 2003.
http://www.aiq.co.il/pages/EnglishArticle.asp?id=245. Zeballos Carlos. “Toyo Ito, Kengo Kuma, Etc: Shinonome Canal Court.”
October 24, 2011.
http://architecturalmoleskine.blogspot.ca/2011/10/ toyo-ito-kengo-kuma-etc-shinonome-canal.html.