COLLECTIVE AGENCY: THE CREATIVE USER AND POLYVANT FORMS
UBC SALA GP1 APPENDIX C J A N L O U I S R O DRI GUEZ APRIL , 2016 GP1 MENTOR: SHERRY MCKAY
2
TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S Thesis Statement
4
Abstract
5
Introduction Part One: Agency
Creative User
8 11
Part Two:
Flexible Architecture
16
Flexibility
20
Adaptability
24
Polyvalency
28
Part Three:
John Habraken and Vancouver
36
Supports
38
40
Open Building
Vancouverism
44
Meta Vancouverism
46
Ville Spatiale
48
Urban Megastructure
50
Part Four:
GP2 Design Proposal
Bibliography
52 54
T H E S I S S TAT E M E N T
Vancouver’s Living First development strategy seeks to create more mixed-use
communities to embrace the demographic changes in recent years, but the restrictive zoning regulations leaves the city unable to adapt to the social changes. This thesis challenges the architect’s role, proposing that it embraces a continuum of change by providing a provisional framework and mode of intervention in the building. This will empower the inhabitants to create a complex and diverse built environment that can adapt to the dynamics of living, by providing them the choice of use and ultimately integrating the layered urban experience into the Vancouver Tower.
4
ABSTRACT
Collective Agency: The Creative User and Polyvalent Forms, is a response
to the fact that contemporary lifestyles change at a more rapid rate than in previous generations. Kronenburg explains how “different ways of living and working are therefore resulting in the demand for buildings that must be flexible for ecological and economic reasons, as well as social and cultural ones.”1 This approach in design requires an attitude that integrates the requirements of the present with the possibility
1. Kronenburg, Robert. Flexible: architecture that responds to change. (London: Laurence King, 2007) 108.
to adapt to changing solutions in the future. Designing a building that adapts to inevitable change consequently reconsiders the roles of the architect and user, because it engenders a design approach that breaks away from conventional techniques of designing buildings. Agency in architecture allows for a collaborative approach in which architect and user have shared responsibility of the building to create a design with transformative potential. The ideas of flexibility and agency in architecture are unified in the Open Building Concept, coined by John Habraken, which designates distinct levels of intervention in the built environment describing how much control a user has in each level. This concept revolves around the idea that the built environment is one that is living and can only persist through change and adaptation. “We continuously reinterpret the world we inhabit shifting one perspective to another in a dialogue with the forms around us, as well as others inhabiting them.”2
The graduation project will attempt to create a prototype for the Vancouver
tower typology that can adapt to various communities and their social, cultural, and
2. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. (Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000) 108
economic needs by devising a ‘kit of parts.’ This project will argue for an open-ended design that accepts the city’s “impulse to become a model of contemporary living through modest, practical and small increments of urban change.”3 The building will provide the necessary framework to accommodate the dichotomy of lifestyles in an
3. Berelowitz, Lance. Dream city: Vancouver and the global imagination. (Vancouver, B.C.: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010) 1.
urbanized built environment. To create this framework there will be an investigation into the design of a generic “frame” structure and the “infill” units conducted in a series of scenarios. The thesis will question how an architect can propose design strategies that refers to use without being deterministic. 5
PA R T O N E
AGENCY 4. Hill, Jonathan. Occupying architecture: between the architect and the user. (London: Routledge, 1998). 140.
“The architect and user both produce architecture, the former by design, the latter by inhabitation” 4
- Jonathan HIll
Form finding in architecture thus far entails a deterministic design process
which results in a program’s function being contingent on its spatial organization. This is known as a ‘hard-use’ of a plan that “is concerned with every single part of the dwelling that can be designed and tuned in a way that first reflects and then determines 5. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007). 131.
the activity within.”5 Magarete Schutte-Lihotzsky’s Frankfurt Kitchen of 1927, seen in figure 1, was designed to address markets demands and social pressures by mapping out and measuring essential actions of food preparations that formed the idea of the ‘Ideal Kitchen.’ The standardization of activities and norms of living has translated into a discipline that prioritizes the high art value of architecture and becomes a paradoxical relationship of power and powerlessness. Hill expands on this notion stating “it appears architecture is demeaned by its user association with habit and the presence of the user is
6. Hill, Jonathan. Occupying architecture: between the architect and the user. (London: Routledge, 1998). 3.
perceived as a direct threat to the authority of the architect.”6 The Salk Institute designed by Louis Kahn, figure 2, is exemplary of this oppositional stance of power and the preservation of the artistic value of the building, because of its controversy concerning the expansion of the complex to accommodate the growing needs of the scientists. The need for additional space was apparent but those who opposed claimed that the addition was “vapid, dull, flat and lifeless. It was an imitation by lesser architects that diminished the original structure… Kahn’s structure is a kind of acropolis; it sits, temple
7. Sax, Joseph L., and Lee C. Bollinger. Playing darts with a Rembrandt: public and private rights in cultural treasures. (Ann Arbor: The U of Michigan Press, 2004). 49.
like, above the sea and an essential part of the way in which this piece of architecture is experienced.”7 Agency challenges this deterministic tendency that conventional architecture has aspired to since the modern movement’s functionalist attitude. It also
8, Mathews, Stanley. The Fun Palace as Virtual Architecture: Cedric Price and the Practices of Indeterminacy. Journal of Architectural Education (1984-), vol. 59, no. 3, 2006, pp. 39–48. www.jstor.org/ stable/40480644.
8
critiques a long-established design process which aims to affect the way designers and non-designers can operate in the production of architecture. The Fun Palace by Cedric Price was an “immense kit of parts with which people could amuse themselves, so that for a few leisure hours each week they might escape from mind-numbing routine
Figure 1. Frankfurt Kitchen. MoMA. Counter Space: Design and the Modern Kitchen. Accessed April 12, 2017 from h t t p s : / / w w w. m o m a . o r g / c a l e n d a r / exhibitions/1059?locale=en.
Figure 1. Figure 2. Salk Institute. Accessed April 9, 2017 from https://commons.wikimedia.org/ wiki/File:Salk_Institute.jpg
Figure 2
9
9. Doucet, Isabelle and Cupers, Kenny. Agency in architecture: reframing Criticality in theory and practice. (The Netherlands: Faculty of Architecture TU Delft, 2009). 97.
and the monotony of serial existence, and embark on an exciting journey of creativity, learning and personal development.”8 The Fun Palace, figure 3, at its core was about the liberation and empowerment of the individual user which celebrated the convergence of architecture and human action. Accepting a collaborative design process with the user
10. Schneider, Tatjana and Jeremy Till, Spatial agency: other Ways of doing architecture. (Abingdon,Oxon: Routledge, 2011). 98.
allows the architect to become an agent, not one who exerts power over someone but one who is able to “effect change through the empowerment of others.”9 The architect acting as agent enables a certain level of risk-taking which redefines the notion of what it may mean to be an architect. One in “which the lack of a predetermined future is seen as an opportunity and not a threat”10 and provides a “new perspective that accepts
11. Slade, Andrew. Reassessing agency: architecture & public-participation. Diss. (Carleton U, Azrieli School of Architecture and Urbanism, 2012). 34.
contamination, encourages struggle, improvisation and adaptation.”11 A discipline that moves away from the sole architect as hero-author to someone who co-authors, begins to open up the possibilities for the user to bring matters of everyday life into architectural discourse.
Figure 3. Conceptual Drawing of Fun Palace. World Architecture New. Accessed on February 1, 207 from http://www. w o r l d a rc h i t e c t u re n e w s . c o m / p ro j e c t images/2012/21461/cedric-price/readerreview-fun-palace.html?img=1
Figure 3
10
C R E AT I V E U S E R “Users are far from uniform and the experience of the user is unlikely to conform to that of the architect” 1
12. Hill, Jonathan. Actions of architecture: architects and creative users. (London: Routledge, 2003). 11.
- Jonathan HIll
This thesis defines the co-author as a creative user which is someone who “either
creates a new space or gives an existing one new meanings and uses while reacting to aspects of the building she or he relates to.”13 Acknowledging a creative user subverts the conventional perception of the user as a stable, predictable and passive subject that
13. Hill, Jonathan. Actions of architecture: architects and creative users. (London: Routledge, 2003) 28.
is unable to transform the use or meaning of a space. It grants the user the authority to “take control over their environment, for something that is participative without being opportunistic and for something that is pro-active instead of re -active.”14 Empowerment in the context of agency is not about transferring the decision making of the design completely over to the user, but is to be understood as a product of ongoing negotiation.
14. Schneider, Tatjana and Jeremy Till, Spatial agency: other Ways of doing architecture. (Abingdon,Oxon: Routledge, 2011). 99.
The building’s function is therefore focused on longer term desires and needs and this focus on temporality engenders a design process which “inherently tie the architect and user into a temporal chain of social responsibility over the building’s life span.”15 Participatory architecture aims to provide housing that is democratic and emphasizes the
15. Doucet, Isabelle and Cupers, Kenny. Agency in architecture: reframing Criticality in theory and practice. (The Netherlands: Faculty of Architecture TU Delft, 2009) 98
Figure 4. Quinta Monroy. Arc Space. Accessed February 10 from http://www. arcspace.com/features/elemental/quintamonroy/
Figure 4
11
involvement of the user in the design and construction phases by leaving the completion of the project to the inhabitants. Elemental’s Quinta Monroy project demonstrates a democratic process of housing by “building the half that a family individually will never be able to achieve on its own” which meant the “kitchens bathrooms, stairs, partitions and all the difficult parts of the house had to be designed for final scenario of a 72 sq. 16. ArchDaily. Quinta Monroy / ELEMENTAL Accessed 14 Apr 2017 from http://www. archdaily.com/10775/quinta-monroyelemental. (2008). 5.
m house.”16 The family was then able to fit out the other half of their house according to their future needs. This altruistic ambition of involving the user in the design process does not necessarily produce autonomous architecture in usual circumstances of an urban city, because “most users are detached from the commissioning, design and ownership
17. Hill, Jonathan. Actions of architecture: architects and creative users. (London: Routledge, 2003). 60.
or management of the space.”17 Therefore the forms and spaces produced should allow the users to transform them and “recognizing appropriation as key to user creativity because it allows people to become attached to the environment where they reside and
18. Havik, Klaske, Hans Teerds, and Véronique Patteeuw. Productive uncertainty: indeterminacy in spatial design, planning and management. (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers 2011), 8.
live.”18 The focus then is for architecture to provide a flexible framework and mode of intervention which allows the users the choice-of-use of the spaces in which they dwell, work, play, pray, learn etc. The framework will encourage interpretations and allow the resulting building to form its own identity through usage.
Figure 5. Section Drawing of Quinta Monroy. Accessed April 8, 2017 fromhttp://www. archdaily.com/10775/quinta-monroy-elem ental/57098adbe58ece29ac00014a-quintamonroy-elemental-corte-longitudinal.
Figure 5
12
CONCLUSION
This thesis proposes an alternative to conventional architecture that advocates
for the architect acting as agent to empower the user in appropriating the forms and spaces that are designed. This understanding engenders a new role for the profession, the ‘Illegal Architect’. This is someone that “questions and subverts conventions, codes, and laws of architecture… and acknowledges that architecture has two occupants; the activities of the architect and the actions of the user.”19 This alternative to the conventional is meant to expand and invigorate the architectural profession and in
19. Hill, Jonathan. Occupying architecture: between the architect and the user (London: Routledge, 1998), 3.
doing so, can strengthen a discipline that many criticize as “weak” because of its lack of boundaries between the professional and the layman. To achieve this involves “listening to people, then preparing ‘variables’ to be discussed and turned into design, and finally, delivering a manual for flexible building instructions.”20 The proposed kit-of-parts enables open communication with the design professionals and the public we provide services for. Using concepts of flexibility, adaptability and polyvalency will aid in devising the flexible
20. Kossak, Florian, Doina Petrescu, and Tatjana Schneider. Agency: working with uncertain architectures. (New York: Routledge, 2010), 135.
design strategies.
Figure 6. Example of a “kit of parts” Accessed April 13, 2017 from http:// archleague.org/main/wp-content/ uploads/2015/01/Slide232.jpg
Figure 6
13
PA R T T W O
FLEXIBLE ARCHITECTURE 21. Penda. Accessed February 29, 2017 from http://www.home-of-penda.com/.
“The static years of architecture are over and architecture needs to be able to
communicate with its surrounding in a direct way. Life in a city is constantly changing and so should our buildings to adapt to the flexibility of our urban fabric” 21 - Christ Precht
Our contemporary society is in a state of continuous social, cultural and
economic evolution, yet much of what is built today is thought of a single and stagnate entity awaiting commodification. Most buildings today are constructed under the influence of capitalism which requires “continual construction and destruction of 22. Hill, Jonathan. Immaterial architecture. (New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006), 27.
objects, goods and ideas in the search for new markets”22 and this has negatively affected the construction industry with adverse effects to the architectural discipline. The “contemporary building industry operates under a niche-market, highly customized approach that restricts the use, the life of the building and ultimately the vibrancy of
23. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 15.
the city.”23 Flexible architecture has increasingly become a necessary measure rather than an experimental ambition of an architect and their one-off masterpieces such as Gerrit Rietveld’s Schröder House. The Schröder House, figure 8, was a highly customized project that allowed the owner of the house to adapt the functionality of her spaces to respond to daily needs. Although the house allowed for day-to-day configurations, this type of flexible architecture inevitably becomes inflexible because of its inability for the future users to appropriate the space due to its highly customized design that only the original owner had knowledge of. There is now a demand for architecture that can adapt to changing lifestyles and changing users because the “home and workplace are becoming more about a set of activities than just a specific geographic location. People
24. Kronenburg, Robert. Flexible: architecture that responds to change. (London: Laurence King, 2007), 108.
are demanding more of choice in not only how they live but also where they live.”24
The motivation to provide the user more choice in their environment has
historically been in response to economic, social and cultural changes with the intention to fulfill the needs of the present while allowing for adaptability in the future. Flexible architecture is used here to encompass three concepts; flexibility, adaptability and polyvalence which will be explored to understand how architects have attempted to 16
Figure 7. Accessed February 20, 2017 from https://www.instagram.com/chrisprecht_ penda/?hl=en
Figure 7
Figure 8. Accessed April 10, 2017 from https://s-media-cache-ak0. pinimg.com/originals/d1/bd/2b/ d1bd2b038c7c4eafbd57bfcc53250131.jpg
Figure 8
17
provide the user more choice in the production of architecture. The case studies were chosen for each concept to explain how they can be achieved architecturally and also to describe the three main approaches architects have taken to achieve each concept; the 25. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007) 18,
minimal dwelling, the industrialization of housing and participation and user choice.25
To analyze the case studies, Jeremy Till’s Manual for Flexible Housing and
Bernard Leupen’s Frame and Generic Space will be used to further an understanding of the three aforementioned concepts. The Manual for Flexible Housing offers a range of strategies and tactics a designer can choose from and he has organized them into what relates to design in the plan and use, and those relating to the technical construction consideratinos. Till is aware that housing design is contingent on many factors such as social, cultural, technological and contextual, therefore the design strategies acknowledge that not all are compatible and might not work for certain situations. Bernard Leupen “calls the elements of the building that represent the permanent, 26. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 13.
the frame, and the open space in which change occurs the generic space.”26 Leupen describes flexible architecture in five layers: structure, scenery, skin, and access and services. Leupen uses these layers in combinations, as seen in figure 10, to analyza case studies to determine which layers are the frame and which are the generic space. In the list of combinations, the icons to the left of the dot the frame and the right is the genric space. Leupen’s view on flexible architecture about designing the permanent and durable frame first which allows for the generic space to become manifest. In contrast, Till’s focus is looking first at the “soft” indeterminate strategies and Leupen begins with the”hard” determinate strategies. These contrasting views allow for an analysis of flexible housing from two perspectives. Although the following ideas and concepts about flexible architecture relate to housing, the intent is to reveal the architectural design strategies that can be scaled for a larger project; such as the design of a mixed-use tower in Vancouver that can adapt to different ways of living and working.
18
Figure 9. Descriptions of each layers can be found in Leupen, Bernard. Frame and generic space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 32.
STRUCTURE
Columns, beams, load-bearing walls, trusses and structural floors. The structure transmits the loads to the ground
S C E N E RY
Interior cladding, internal doors, walls, finish of floors, walls and ceilings. The scenery orders and bounds the space
SKIN
Cladding for facade, base and roof. The skin separates inside and outside.
ACCESS
Stairs, corridors, lifts, galleries. This layer takes care of the accessibility of the spaces
SERVICES
Stairs, corridors, lifts, galleries. This layer takes care of the accessibility of the spaces
Figure 9
List of Combinations
Figure 10. Flexbile Housing Diagram. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007)
Figure 11. Frame and Generic Space Combinations. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and generic space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006).
Figure 10
Figure 11
19
FLEXIBILITY
Flexibility is “achieved by altering the physical fabric of the building; by joining
together rooms or units, by extending them, or through sliding or folding walls and 27. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 4.
furniture.”27 Flexibility refers to changes on the interior and exterior of a building, and to changes that are both temporary and permanent. The case study chosen for this concept is Gary Chang’s Transformer Apartment which questions how long and how big a volume do you need to complete various household tasks. The 32 square meter metamorphic apartments contains walls that move on tracks, to reveal a myriad of 24 different configurations. Among them “a rather large kitchen, bedroom, library, dining
28. Design Boom. Gary Chang on Urbanism and his Metamorphic Apartment. Accessed February 9, 2017 from http:// www.designboom.com/architecture/garychang-on-urbanism-and-his-metamorphicapartment/. July 2013.
room, laundry room and most luxuriously, a full spa.”28 Chang did not envision this project as an ecologically conscious design, it was about how flexibility can blur the boundary of the public and private programs of a home. The consolidated space of the apartment determines the necessary spatial requirements of each program by its function. The concept of flexibility relates to the approach of flexible housing in the 1920’s of The Minimal Dwelling where “Europe experienced a drastic housing shortage there was a desire to make the minimal dwelling as cheap and habitable as possible by using
29. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 4.
movable elements, folding furniture etc. as a means of maximizing space.“29 There was a focus on having less space to be used in an efficient and flexible manner by allowing internal variability. The emphasis on the temporal aspect of the functions in the home, illustrates Hughes and Sadler’s idea that “we are building a short-term plaything in which all of us can realize the possibilities and delights that a twentieth-century city environment
30. Hughes, Jonathan, and Simon Sadler. Non-plan: essays on freedom participation and change in modern architecture and urbanism. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2000. Print.
owes us. It must last no longer than we need it.”30 The approach of the minimal dwelling was an attempt to align flexibility to broader cultural forces. Because of this, flexible housing became both a social and moral imperative in shaping the pragmatic response to the demands of a housing crisis. The overwhelming demands of the housing crises inevitably resulted in a “tension between the realities of flexibility and the rhetoric of
31. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 20.
20
flexibility”31 and its promises could not deliver in responding to new modes of living and mechanized technology.
Figure 12. Transformer Apartment Interior Views of Walls on Tracks. Accessed February 12, 2017 from http:// www.designboom.com/architecture/garychang-on-urbanism-and-his-metamorphicapartment/
Figure 12 Figure 13. Transformer Apartment floor plan showing 24 configurations Accessed February 8, 2017 from http://www. designboom.com/architecture/garychang-on-urbanism-and-his-metamorphicapartment/
Figure 13
21
FLEXIBILITY In terms of the Manual for Flexible Housing, the strategies of Plan and Use are: Movable and Sliding Walls Figure 14. Movable Sliding Walls. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007) 191.
Figure 14 Figure 15. Foldable Furniture. Ibid., 190.
Foldable Furniture
Shared Room
Moving and sliding walls allow the open plan of the apartment to be divided up to create space for the kitchen, bedroom
Figure 16. Shared Room. Ibid., 189.
and living areas. The foldable furniture such as the bed and tables allow for multifuncitonality of the room. The kitchen and bathroom remain the constant rooms that change in dimension depending on the walls that are moved. Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 17, 18. Interior Views of the foldable tabel and bed. Accessed February 8, 2017 from http://www.designboom.com/ architecture/gary-chang-on-urbanism-andhis-metamorphic-apartment/
22
In terms of Frame and Generic Space the frame is constituted by the structure and services which allows the generic space to be the scenery, interior partitions, that changes throughout the day.
STRUCTURE
SERVICES
S C E N E RY
Because the apartment is a unit as part of a larger building, the structure and services form the frame and the flexible housing techniques used, allowed Chang to modify his apartment for 30 years to accomodate various stages of his life. Figure 19. Transformer Apartment plan changes for 30 years. Views. Accessed February 12, 2017 from http://www. designboom.com/architecture/garychang-on-urbanism-and-his-metamorphicapartment/
Figure 19
23
A D A P TA B I L I T Y 32. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 5.
Adaptability in architecture is the ability for a space to have “different social
uses achieved through the way rooms are spatially organized.”32 Designing a building to be adaptable is concerned with the entire life span and its ability to react to the unpredictable functions and uses. The case study chosen for this concept is the Moriyama House by SANAA consists of 10 independent volumes scattered on the site, accommodating different requirements such as bedrooms, washrooms, kitchens and common areas. The client is given freedom to decide which cluster of rooms will be used as their residence or rent out and can also change the function of certain buildings depending on the season. The ability of the building to accommodate various uses by virtue of separating the programs volumetrically, is able to “extend the useful life of a building so that it is both transfunctional and multifunctional — from living to work,
33. MacCreanor, Gerard. The Sustainable City is the Adaptable City. In Time-Based Architecture. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2005), 101.
working into leisure — or to be the container of several uses simultaneously.”33 It is the adaptability of the structure which enables it create new forms of urban contact and sociability. Davies explains how in “terms of demographics, economics, technology, and the environment, the [concept] of adaptability promotes a mindset that does not
34. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 8.
ignore, but looks past the needs of the present and considers future generations.”34The Moriyama house is made of prefabricated steel boxes which relates to the Industrialization of Housing in the mid 1900’s. There was an argument that the mass production of pre-fab houses would be “inherently flexible because the standardized component would allow for adaptation over time, with the possibility of elements being replaced or added to
35. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 21.
with minimum fuss.”35 Many architects presumed that prefabrication and that economics it generated would lead to providing wider choices to future users. But because of the short-term market demands of providing immediate client satisfaction, “it overrode any
36. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 27.
consideration of how the customer might use their ‘product’ over the longer term.”36 Many prefabricated projects during this era of standardization, such as Otto Bartnig’s Werfthaus of 1932, proves that technological advancement of mass production alone does not lead to inherent flexibility because it must be considered with the actual use of the project.
24
Figure 20. Moriyama Floor Plan. Accessed February 9, 2017 from http:// amassingdesign.blogspot.ca/2010/03/ moriyama-house-sanaa-kazuyo-sejima-ryue. html
Figure 20
Figure 21. Moriyama Street level View. Accessed February 9, 2017 from http:// amassingdesign.blogspot.ca/2010/03/ moriyama-house-sanaa-kazuyo-sejima-ryue. html
Figure 21
25
A D A P TA B I L I T Y The interchangeability of functions in the Moriyama House allows it to accomplish the goal that the industrialization of housing sought to achieve. In terms of the Manual for Flexible Housing,the strategies of Plan and Use are: Functionally Neutral Rooms
Slack Space
Figure 22. Functionally Neutral Rooms Diagram.Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 186. Figure 14
Figure 23. Ibid., 186.
Figure 22
Figure 23
Communal Circulation Figure 24. Communal Circulation Diagram. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www. pages.drexel.edu/~jbf45/images/se%20 iso%20with%20promenade.jpg
Figure 24
By removing the hierarchical order contained in the labelling of rooms - i.e. dining room, living room, master bedroom - each space becomes an independent entity which can be used according to needs of the users, which inevitably change over time. Slack space is typically outside the housing units that can be appropriated by 26
the users over time, providing more flexiblity in use. The communal circulation and courtyards acts as the slack space in the Moriyama house because it is big enough to be occupied by user for various uses. In terms of Frame and Generic Space the frame is constituted by Structure,
Scenery, Access and Service. This allows the generic space to be the Skin which allows circulation into the walkways.
STRUCTURE
SERVICES
ACCESS
S C E N E RY
SKIN
Figure 25. Moriyama House Exterior View. Accessed February 9, 2017 from http:// www.metalocus.es/en/news/moriyamahouse
Figure 25
27
P O LY VA L E N C Y 37. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 2.
Polyvalent forms are “in themselves lucid and permanent but are able to change
in the sense of how they are interpreted.”37 The concept postulates that the formal aspect of a space is retained but the way they are interpreted changes according to various users. Hertzberger, who coined the term, makes a distinction between multipurpose and polyvalent spaces where the former is “intentionally designed to suit different predetermined ends and the latter, is where it is not established beforehand how a form
38. Hertzberger, Herman. Polyvalence: The Competence of Form and Space with Regard to Different Interpretations. (Architectural Design 84.5, 2014), 109.
or space will act in unspecified situations.”38 The aforementioned concept of adaptability can be considered “multipurpose” and polyvalency is an extension of it. Here the concept of flexibility is rejected and instead this concept looks towards encouraging users to find meaning in architecture associated with his or her cultural and historical background. Giancarlo De Carlo states that you “cannot programme meaning in advance and instead of being results that one arrives at, they become goals that are assumed before one
39. McKean, John. Giancarlo De Carlo: Layered Places. (Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2004), 12.
starts.”39 The case study chosen for this concept is The Diagoon Houses by Herman Hertzberger where the basic idea was to provide spaces, both internal and external, that can be interpreted in different ways according to an individuals personal needs. Davies states that polyvalency is about a “balance between permanence and adaptability; neutrality and expressiveness; minimums and maximums; and the limits between the
40. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic over- dimensioning. (Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009), 2.
architect and the identity of the user.”40 The provisional framework in the Diagoon Houses that anticipates completion by the owner and not the architect allows for this balance to be made manifest through appropriation of use. Hertzberger’s project implies the quality of the house is in inciting the inhabitants to “turn their living environment into familiar
41. Hertzberger, Herman. Polyvalence: The Competence of Form and Space with Regard to Different Interpretations. (Architectural Design 84.5, 2014), 112.
ground while leaving how this is done up to the individual.”41 The Diagoon Houses were built in 1970’s when flexible housing was influenced by participation and user choice which has been defined earlier as Participatory Architecture. Rabeneck et al. explains three principles of this approach:42
42. Rabeneck, Andrew, David Sheppard, and Peter Town. Housing Flexibility. Architectural Design 43, 1973), 702
1. Everyone should be able to fit out his home as he wishes, including the right to make mistakes as part of that freedom. 2. Each person ought to be able to express himself as a function of his choices, his home
28
should be personalizable. 3. Each person should be able, in his home, to make a creative act by organizing his space, based on the context within which he finds himself. Even being a co-author brings a measure of satisfaction. Participatory architecture in the concept of Polyalency, is not about “predictive design, as predictions can be wrong. It is about allowing future users and designers, who will know their own situations best, the leeway to make appropriate
43. Kronenburg, Robert. Flexible: architecture that responds to change. (London: Laurence King, 2007), 110.
decisions when they are needed.�43 Figure 26. Diagoon Houses Axonometric Accessed February 9, 2017 from http:// amassingdesign.blogspot.ca/2010/03/ moriyama-house-sanaa-kazuyo-sejima-ryue. html
Figure 26
Figure 27. Diagoon Houses Site Section. Accessed February 5, 2017 from http:// www.hertzberger.nl/images/nieuws/ DiagoonHousingDelft2016.pdf
Figure 27
29
P O LY VA L E N C Y In terms of the Manual for Flexible Housing,the strategies of Plan and Use are: Functionally Neutral Rooms
Slack Space
Figure 28, 29. Functionally Neutral Rooms Diagram.Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. (Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007), 186.
Figure 28
Shared Room
Figure 29
Additions - Horiztonal
Figure 30, 31. Ibid, 189.
Figure 30
Figure 31
The functionally neutral rooms of the Diagoon houses are “stacks of four equal living units, figure 30, that can be dedicated by the residents as they see fit and in accordance with family make-up, preferences of orientation and desired relative 44. 45. Hertzberger, Herman. Polyvalence: The Competence of Form and Space with Regard to Different Interpretations. (Architectural Design 84.5, 2014), 112.
positions of domestic activities.”44 The slack space within the houses and the possibility for additions at the exterior at the house, allows for uncertainty for future uses and the shared room strategy allows the houses to be a ‘programmeless’ building. Hertzbger saw this project as a “buidling that listens more than it speaks”45 and the Diagoon houses becomes an unfinished building that anticipates
30
changing times and situations by using the shared room strategy.
In terms of Frame and Generic Space the frame is constituted by all five layers
the Structure, Scenery, Skin, Access and Service. This allows the generic space to be a system Polyvalent Spaces inside and outside the house. The frame of the Diagoon houses accomplishes what Leupen calls ‘Polyvalent Base Building’ which provides the ‘skeleton’ or ‘carcass’ and the inhabitants are allowed to fit out the interior or exterior of the building to their wishes.
STRUCTURE
S C E N E RY
SKIN
ACCESS
SERVICES
Figure 32. Diagoon Houses. Perspective Section Drawing.Accessed February 5, 2017 from http://www.hertzberger.nl/images/ nieuws/DiagoonHousingDelft2016.pdf
Figure 32
31
32
CONCLUSION
The concepts of flexibility, adaptability and polyvalency have been explored
extensively in housing which aimed to contribute to the “alleviation of great social challenges involving health, energy, space and time limitations, social cohesion and value creation.”46 The case studies revealed the strategies that can be scaled to a larger tower project such as how physical flexibility can blur the boundary of the public and
46 Feireiss, Lukas, and Ole Bouman. Testify!: the consequences of architecture. (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2011), 16.
private programs in a building. Adaptability affirms that the interchangeability of the functions allows the structure to create new forms of urban contact and sociability. And Polyvalency speaks of creating a balance between the temporal aspect of flexibility and the appropriation of use in adaptable architecture. Therefore, a polyvalent proposition will allow for the creation of a “kit of parts” which will become the provisional framework. It will equip the design of a Vancouver tower with concealed availability47 which awaits discovery by current and future inhabitants. The Open Building concept by John Habraken, is the most formalized strategy to date that proposes buildings that are
47. Hertzberger, Herman. Polyvalence: The Competence of Form and Space with Regard to Different Interpretations. (Architectural Design 84.5, 2014), 112.
polyvalent by identifying distinct levels of intervention in the built environment that range from city scale urban design to individual rooms of a building. An investigation into Habraken’s concept will inform the manner in which the various parts of the kit will manifest in terms of their scale, permanency, changeability and level of intervention they influence.
33
PA R T T H R E E
J O H N H A B R A K E N A N D VA N C O U V E R 48. Havik, Klaske, Hans Teerds, and Véronique Patteeuw. Productive uncertainty: indeterminacy in spatial design, planning and management. (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers 2011), 8.
John Habraken’s Support and Infill concept which he writes extensively about
in his book Supports: An Alternative to Mass Housing (1972) “argues that it is people themselves who make their surroundings with the support, making it possible for them to do this within the broad sociocultural context of society.”48 The Molenvilet project from 1974 designed by Frans van der Werf, figure 32, is a tangible case study of Habkraken’s theory of support and infill. The “project was set up as an urban tissue in which buildings form courtyards from where access to houses is given and because the houses were
49. Habkraken, John. Open Building: Molenvilet project. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.habraken.com/html/ molenvliet.htm.
designed by users, no two floor plans are alike”49 Stephen Kendall expanded on Habraken’ ideas to create the Open Building Concept which understand that the built environments“have lives of their own, they grow, renew themselves and the continuous renewal and replacement of individual cells preserves it, giving it the ability to persist.”50
50. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000), 2.
This way of understanding the built environment is a response to the economic crises that have negatively impacted spatial planning and architectural practice because it has inhibited future changes in use or programming over the lifespan of buildings. Many cities, including Vancouver, has used zoning as a means to mitigate the effects of economic crises by “protecting development against the encroachment of undesirable uses and helps maintain and enhance property values.”51 The zoning bylaws of Vancouver
51. Harney, Benjamin. The Economics of Exclusionary Zoning and Affordable Housing. (Stetson L. Rev. 38, 2008), 459.
were established with the best of intentions but has slowly become an impediment to many architects and urban planners who pursue innovative design proposals. MacCreanor claims that “zoning is inflexible, restricts diversity, and limits the development of distinct characteristics and natural growth of a city.”52 A reimagining of mixed-use zoning may
52. MacCreanor, Gerard. The Sustainable City is the Adaptable City. In Time-Based Architecture. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2005), 101.
be an alternative way of thinking about Vancouver’s Living First sustainable development strategy whose bylaws designate land use and inevitably shapes its urban form. Part three will provide a commentary of the urban development in Vancouver to understand how the kit engages in what is known as Vancouverism that affects architecture and urban design. Three case studies have been chosen to speculate how such a project that challenges the usual approach of city making may be manifest; Meta Vancouverism (2012), Ville Spatiale (1967) and Urban Mega Structure (1966).
36
Figure 33. Molenvliet Concept Drawing. Accessed April 9, 2017 from http://www. carovandijk.nl/stories/unfinished-businessdesigning-for-the-unknown/
Figure 33
Figure 34. Molenvilet by Frans van der Wrerf. Accessed April 11, 2017 from http:// www.mae.co.uk/research/make-and-break
Figure 34
37
SUPPORTS
Habraken’s Support and Infill concept was inspired Metabolism which culminated
in the 1950’s and was based on providing a solution to the problem of mass housing. In Habraken’s perspective, “the government would have to provide large structures, 53. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 161.
supports, inside or on top of which the occupants could build their own homes.”53 He envision such as support as follows:
‘The support structure consists of a concrete construction of a number of floors one above
the other, stretching out through the town. Between these floors are the dwellings, side by side. A zone at one side remains free as a walking gallery which connects freestanding staircases and lift shafts placed at regular intervals. Between two floors there is an open space, until recently taken up by a dwelling but now removed. This space is limited top and bottom by the support floors, and to 54. Habraken, N. J. Supports: an alternative to mass housing. (London: Architectural Press, 1972), 60.
left and right by the blind walls of the other dwellings.”54
In1964 the support concept was further developed in collaboration with
Stichting Architecten Research or S A R. The team sought to achieve these aims by focusing on, amongst other things, “the possibility of introducing standardized support 55. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 162.
structures; of designing them and advancing their construction.”55 The collaboration with S A R resulted in Habraken’s word Support being replaced with standardized support structure which shifted the focus on industrial production. S A R’s proposal to industrialize the building meant that “modular coordination was a means of harmoniously integrating decisions regarding the dimensioning and positioning of both spatial and built
56. Berg, H. C. Manifest Open Bouwen. 1984. 5.
components.”56 The system developed from this perspective was defined by three zones Alpha, Beta and Gamma; the alpha zone consists of ‘dedicated spaces’ such as living rooms and bedrooms; the beta zone consists of ‘utility spaces’ such as plumbing and electrical service; and the gamma zone is set aside for access spaces such as galleries and stair halls. “The dimensions for the zone were based on a modular system of standard
57. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 164.
measurements, 10 and 20 cm. This resulted in the 10 by 20 grid, a grid of 30 cm bands in which the standard measure of 10 and 20 alternate.”57 This system of rules ingeniously determined which zones required materials the construct the built components and
38
which zones required there to be spatial allowances. The grid system also allowed for the coordination of support and infill ‘packages’ that aimed to distinguish between different elements of the building — such as structure, facade, services, etc. — to be combined or changed during the construction process. S A R’s influence on the changeability of the Supports is unquestionably valuable, but the emphasis on modular coordination overshadowed the fundamental ideas embodied by the support structure. In Habraken’s perspective, “a dwelling is not a thing that can be designed or made, a dwelling is a result of a housing process. The last act in this process is that of the occupant who goes to live there. The act of living there is the only one act which makes a dwelling of something whether its a space, a building, a hole in the ground.”58 The extensive man power and technology required to construct and maintain the modular elements,
58. Habraken, N. J. Aap noot mies huis. (Amsterdam, Scheltema & Holkema. 1970), 3.
ultimately went against from the main ethos of the Supports which only to provide a built environment where the occupants can demonstrate the ‘art of living.’59
59 Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 31.
Figure 35. S A R Zoning principle using the grid 10-20 grid system. Heyning (1969)
Figure 35
39
OPEN BUILDING
Open building is an extension of Supports which is “fundamentally concerned
with cultivating the quality of everyday environments and its methods therefore address distribution of control or responsibility, a key ingredient of a healthy everyday 60. Kendall, Stephen. Open Building Concepts. Accessed March 17, 2017 from http://open-building.org/about/objectives. html. 2014.
environment.”60 The concept revolves around some key points:
•
The idea of distinct Levels of intervention in the built environment, such as those represented by ‘base building’ and ‘fit-out’, or by urban design and architecture.
•
The idea that users / inhabitants may make design decisions as well as professionals.
•
The idea that, more generally, designing is a process with multiple participants also including different kinds of professionals.
•
The idea that the interface between technical systems allows the replacement of one system with another performing the same function. (such as different fit-out systems applied in a given base building)
•
The idea that built environment is in constant transformation and change must be recognized and understood.
• 61. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. (Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000)
The idea that built environment is the product of an ongoing, never ending design process, in which environment transforms part by part.61
Architecture that is envisioned through the Open Building concept aims to
maintain a balance of control between a top-down approach and bottom-up approach, to avoid “centralization from the top or conversely the chaos from a lack of responsibility 62. Kendall, Stephen. Reflections on the History and Future of the Open Building Network. Accessed March 21, 2017 from (www.open-building.org. 2015.
from the bottom.”62 To distribute control Habraken has established the distinct levels of intervention in the built environment seen in figure 36 which illustrates the range of levels from the district to the room occupant, city structure level to layout level and the affect of each level on the collective vs the individual. Habraken describes that each level has “agents” who operate on different levels by virtue of what they control and when elements of each level are changed or transformed by the agent, they are called ‘Live
40
Configurations.’63 For example, furniture in the infill level may be freely arranged which forms a configuration that reflects the preferences of the occupant therefore each level
63, 64. 65. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. (Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000) 18, 33.
represents a territory of control. One level can influence another layer as an exercise of control in a certain manner, for example walls cannot freely move without disturbing furniture, but furniture can be rearranged without disturbing walls. At these “points in the environmental hierarchy where dominance inherently occurs as a result of form of interrelated configurations, levels emerge.”64 The relationship of the levels to each other are asymmetrical in the sense of how change of live configurations in one level affects change in another. In essence, “higher-level configurations dominates the lower level; the latter is dependent on the former.”65 The higher-level street network and the lower-level houses oriented along them is an example of this because change of individual houses can happen independently and does not affect the street network, but a realignment of the street network requires a readjustment of the houses. The hierarchy of levels recognizes that live configurations in each level have different lifespans and that change happens at different rates. A city block endures many centuries relatively unchanged while
Figure 36. Habraken’s Environmental Levels of Intervention. Accessed April 8, 2017 from https://www.researchgate.net/ figure/278849415_fig1_Figure-1-Openbuilding-John-Habraken-1961
Figure 36
41
OPEN BUILDING the built environment at the house allocation (building) level, over time are transformed or completely changed. 66. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. (Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000) 41.
The building level can change primarily in two ways:66 1.
When the building remains in place, its volume may change. For example, in tight urban settings, expansion may happen in two directions; upward by adding floors or horizontally into the backyard.
2.
When the building volume remains constant, parts may change. For example, old doorways are filled in and new ones cut into old masonry. It is not surprising to find original stairwells closed off, and other framed in elsewhere.
The lower-level configurations of the building can transform more frequently with ease while the higher-level configuration of the city block remains continuous and durable. Durability here is “not only a question of applying sustainable materials and a study on construction methods, but of treating these with great care.” The configurations “become its own set of instructions that can bring out the distinction between the permanent and 67. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 225.
the changeable.”67
Supports and infill began the investigation into thinking about an alternative
to mass housing which S A R explored through the standardization of modular elements and Kendall’s Open Building concept. Standardization and industrialization was thought to provide the answer for every element of the building. Collective Agency proposes that only the beta and gamma spaces — services and access — are modular systems of standardized measurements while the alpha, inhabitable spaces, is designed as the arena for the inhabitants to demonstrate the ‘art of living’ that can be interpreted in various ways. This understanding of support and infill is coupled with Open Building’s emphasis on hierarchy of levels and acknowledging the life-cycles of the live configurations in each level. This engenders a perspective about the built environment as dynamic, full of change and can allow individuality in the way the polyvalent forms of the alpha spaces are interpreted. Bernard Leupen’s ideas from frame and generic Space is reintroduced here to understand how the frame can be explored in modular elements dealing with 42
the dimension of time. And how the generic space can be explored with the levels of intervention that contain live configurations, which reveal the amount of control the inhabitants have and “last act in the process of dwelling.”68 Leupen distinguishes three categories of changeability: the alterable, the extendable and the polyvalent. These
68. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 163.
definitions can be unified with S A R’s zones where: •
Alpha = Polyvalent
•
Beta = Alterable
•
Gamma = Extendable
Leupen’s idea of 5 building layers described in flexible architecture, can be categorized as well into the unified definitions where: •
Alpha Polyvalent = Scenery
•
Beta Alterable = Services and Skin
•
Gamma Extendable = Access Structure
•
Therefore: Frame = The structure and beta-alterable services and skin,
•
Generic Space = Polyvalent-Scenery and Extendable-Access.
Figure 37. Twin Structure support based on the S A R zoning method (1967). Habraken, Olphen et al, (1967)
Figure 37
43
VA N C O U V E R I S M
The ‘Living First Strategy’ of the 1990’s coined by Larry Beasley, was a
response to “increasing land prices and decreasing supply, coupled with changing local demographics which has seen a significant influx of new residents from older cities and 69. Berelowitz, Lance. Dream city: Vancouver and the global imagination. (Vancouver, B.C.: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010), 219.
other cultures.”69 There was a focus on sustainable development which sought to produce compact, integrated and mixed-use neighbourhoods in Vancouver’s downtown core. Punter explains how “a main plank of the strategy was to create neighbourhood with
70. Punter, John. The Vancouver Achievement: Urban Planning and Design. (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2003), 244.
a mix of lifestyles, life-cycle stages, and income levels with a high level of livability.”70 An architectural type that emerged from this strategy was the podium tower which is emblematic of “Vancouverism,” and revolves around the ideology of a dense but green and pedestrian friendly urban environment. Thiws tower typology of the podium commercial level and living atop has become a lucrative model for developers because they can adjust their residential buildings to market conditions while selling the utopic ideal that Vancouverism has to offer. Densification appears to be the future of the city but the current urban design model in Vancouver does not allow for affordability and high quality public space. It becomes model of speculative urbanism because of the flashy sales tactic that combines “blue/green towers, low plinths filled with high end walk ups and shops, and protected view corridors to ensure high property values.” In neighbourhoods such as Coal Harbour, Yaletown and Downtown South, the “high rises are the equivalent to suburban speculation of profit-driven pro-formas that constrict the quality of the city to what fits on a real estate sales sheet; number, types of rooms,
71. Andjelic, Jessie and Philip Vandermey. Meta Vancouverism. Accessed April 11, 2017 from http://www.spectacle-bureau.com/ Meta_Vancouverism.html. 2012.
71. Berelowitz, Lance. Dream city: Vancouver and the global imagination. (Vancouver, B.C.: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010), 224.
floor number and area.”71 The monotonous landscape of shimmering glass towers has inevitable affected the apparent “natural” experience of Vancouver, turning it into sterile and empty public spaces with “passive landscapes manicured to within an inch of their lives and empty lobbies on the ground floor of residential tower.”71 Collective Agency proposes a rethinking of Vancouver’s “choice-of-use” or “swing zones” designation for mixed-used towers in downtown to respond to the city’s centrifugal public life and in doing so, encourages active and collective participation.
44
Figure 38. Meta Vancouverism. Map of Vancouver. Jessie Andjelic, Albert Dijk and Philip Vandermey. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.archdaily.com/278461/ rethink-housing-competition-entry-jessieandjelic-albert-dijk-and-philip-vandermey
Figure 38
Figure 39. Meta Vancouverism. Diagramming Arthur Erickson’s sketch. Jessie Andjelic, Albert Dijk and Philip Vandermey. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.buro-ad. com/work-3/meta-vancouverism/
Figure 39
45
M E TA VA N C O U V E R I S M ( 2 0 1 2 )
Meta Vancouverism, see figure 36 and 37, was an exploration by Jessie Andjelic
and Philip Vandermey into Arthur Erickson’s sketch for urban density in the Vancouver’s downtown core that envisioned large megastructural towers to make the most of the city while preserving the nature. They hypothesized that “cities that lack long term structural vision to direct physical growth tackling issues as independent rather than complex interrelated ones, become slaves rather than benefiters of their own chaotic processes. Beautiful cities balance planning and structure with flexibility to become functional and 72., 73. Andjelic, Jessie and Philip Vandermey. Meta Vancouverism. Accessed April 11, 2017 from http://www.spectaclebureau.com/Meta_Vancouverism.html. 2012.
recognizable urban landscapes.”72 Their solution was to: “strategically combine the benefits of Vancouverism with the open spaces and suburbs people love, and the efficient multicentric urban models already in place. Green spaces for pedestrians and dense multifunctional urban corridors which can form along the existing transit network. And by stretching and diving Erickson’s sketch (see figure 39), a new topographical urban form is created. A gradated density map emerges, one which eases traffic issues, increases density and enhances the multicentric urban model. A vertical limit topography creates density where it’s needed, maintains views, and eases the transition from urban centres and corridors to low density zones. As the city grows, municipal restrictions can respond, allowing the city to expand vertically rather than horizontally. Multifunctional towers can provide for a range of programs, and the base design can be coordinated to reclaim transportation spaces for public transit, pedestrians and cyclists.”73
This speculative project fulfills many of the goals that the Living First Strategy aimed for including the “encouragement of housing intensification and diversity; the development of coherent neighbourhood structure plans; focus on transportation alternatives such as public transit, walking and cycling; and filtering of more domestic urban design and 74. Berelowitz, Lance. Dream city: Vancouver and the global imagination. (Vancouver, B.C.: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010), 219.
public realm to mitigate the effects of high density residential living.”74 Although this project seeks to provide a larger urban design alternative, there is potential for the Kit of Parts to place itself within the dialogue about how planning and architecture can work together to create high quality spaces for both public and domestic living which can bring public activity from the waterfront edges of the city to dense cores.
46
Figure 40. Meta Vancouverism concept rendering. Jessie Andjelic, Albert Dijk and Philip Vandermey. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.buro-ad.com/work-3/metavancouverism/
Figure 40
Figure 41. Meta Vancouverism. Diagramming Arthur Erickson’s sketch. Jessie Andjelic, Albert Dijk and Philip Vandermey. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.buro-ad. com/work-3/meta-vancouverism/
sketch by Arthur Erickson
transformation 1
transformation 2
Figure 41
47
V I L L E S PAT I A L E ( 1 9 6 7 )
Yona Friedman insisted that there important role that visual communication had
in explaining architecture and urban planning comprehensible to all. Ville Spatiale (1967) was his first complete project for a megastructure that would help in the reconstruction of Europe after World War II. There were many proposed visions of Utopia during this time but Friedman’s project was different because the megastructure is “laid on top of an along with the existing city, and this becomes integral part of his design, the base on 75. Friedman, Yona, Luca Cerizza, and Anna Daneri. Yona Friedman. (Milano: Charta, 2008), 85.
which a second level of city grows.”75 Friendman envisioned creating a megastructure that can house various methods of choice for future inhabitants of Ville Spatiale to enable them to create and orient their living space to their needs. These were published in the so called Manuals and integrated in a computer program called The Flatwriter in 1967. Ville Spatiale incorporates ideas of agency and the open building concept with his focus on creating a ‘spatial city’ which “assigns citizens/users great freedom in defining their own habitat where indeterminacy and improvisation were fundamental components of his
76. Friedman, Yona, Luca Cerizza, and Anna Daneri. Yona Friedman. (Milano: Charta, 2008), 85.
philosophy.”76 He opened a discussion about the fundamental rights to self expression and individuality by challenging the influence of capitalism in urbanism. Friedman’s project can be compared to Michiel Dehaene and Els Vervloesem’s concept of the ‘open city’ which pictures the urban habitat as a scenario able to evolve over time and accommodate the various desires and ambitions of new individuals and groups that were not previously part of this habitat. “The notion of the open city categorizes the urban environment as an opportunity structure, a spatial ecosystem filled with options and choices. The notion of the open city categorizes the urban environment as an opportunity
77. Havik, Klaske, Hans Teerds, and Véronique Patteeuw. Productive uncertainty: indeterminacy in spatial design, planning and management. (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers 2011), 18.
structure, a spatial ecosystem filled with options and choices.”77 Indeterminacy was an important part of Ville Spatiale and Friedman thought that in order to satisfy the people who live in a building you built, you have to let them conceive the building. The child-like drawings, cartoons and coloured collages were purposeful as it was able to communicate the grand vision of Ville Spatiale to as many as people as possible, the professionals and non-professionals. The Kit of Parts must be communicated in a way that many different professionals and many different inhabitants can understand and connect with.
48
Figure 42. Ville Spatiale. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.yonafriedman. nl/?page_id=78
Figure 42 Figure 43. Ville Spatiale. Accessed April 12, 2017 from http://www.yonafriedman. nl/?page_id=78
Figure 43
49
URBAN MEGASTRUCTURE (1966)
The Japanese Metabolist movement, founded by Kisho Kurokawa, was an
architectural movement and philosophy of change. Metabolism “became an extended biological analogy meant to replace the mechanical analogy of orthodox modern architecture. It compared buildings and cities to an energy process found in all of life: 78. Kurokawa, Kisho. Metabolism in architecture. (London: Studio Vista, 1977), 9.
the cycles of change, the constant renewal and destruction of organic tissue.”78 The Metabolist principles are apparent in Urban Mega Structure which was a competition design entry by Akira Shibuya. The “separation of structure and individual unit as explored by Le Corbusier in the Unite are taken a stage further in line with Metabolist ideas. Whereas Le Corbusier’s design resulted in a static building, Urban Megastructure is a changeable system. Here, Le Corbusier’s bottle rack concept for the Unite has become
79. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 159.
the building itself.”79 The project, seen in figure 40, was an enormous concrete assembly that integrated services and unit entrances where half of the unit was built into the structure and half of it suspending from it. The colossal concrete structure housed the services and vertical circulation cores and attached to them are capsules of living which can be hitched and unhitched at will. The enables the units to accomodate change in domestic requirements through the standardization of living capsules. Shibuya envisioned the industrialization of the units would enable for exchangeability of capsules but the “megastructure has proved impractiable as the Unite. Firstly, there has never been mass production of dwelling units at a sufficient scale. Secondly, here again it would be difficult
80. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and Generic Space. (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006), 161.
to organize up-front investment in the gargantuan frame that makes this all possible.”80 This project remains a very theoretical proposition but the core ideas of distinguishing between different rates of obsolensence in the structure and living units speaks to Habraken’s ideas about the Support. He believed that the “support was the communal; the collective space, entrances, the corridors, the stairwells, spaces for meeting. All these are the architect’s responsibility, they have always been condeded with the communal,
81. Havik, Klaske, Hans Teerds, and Véronique Patteeuw. Productive uncertainty: indeterminacy in spatial design, planning and management. (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers 2011), 180
50
and the support is the communal: that is genuine architecture.”81 The Kit of Parts can potentially engage urban design, urban structure and architectural infill altogether that focuses on the communal support as the framework for changeability.
Figure 44. Shibuya Urban Megastructure (1966). Nitschke 1968, 764.
Figure 44
Figure 45. Shibuya, Urban Megastructure (1966). Unit Floor Plans. Nitschke, 1968. 763.
Figure 45
51
GP2 DESIGN PROPOSAL
Collective Agency will investigate various design strategies presented in the
chapter Flexible Architecture where physical flexibility can blur the boundary of the public and private programs in a building. Adaptability affirms that the interchangeability of the functions allows the structure to create new forms of urban contact and sociability. And Polyvalency speaks of creating a balance between the temporal aspect of flexibility and the appropriation of use in adaptable architecture. Therefore, a polyvalent proposition will allow for the creation of a “kit of parts” which will become the provisional framework. It will equip the design of a Vancouver tower with concealed availability which awaits discovery by current and future inhabitants. The Kit of Parts will be explored through diagramming the combined concepts S A R ’s zones
and Leupen’s 3 aspects of changeability and 5 layers where:
•
Alpha Polyvalent = Scenery
•
Beta Alterable = Services and Skin
•
Gamma Extendable = Access Structure
•
Therefore: Frame = The structure and beta-alterable services and skin,
•
Generic Space = Polyvalent-Scenery and Extendable-Access.
A series of combinations of the various Parts will be applied to the typology of the Vancouver Podium Tower to reimagine Vancouverism and its ambition to achive a wider choice of lifestyles, and more diverse and dense neighbourhoods within the central area. To test the strategies, three sites of differing zoning designations, demographics, neighborhood plans and community needs will be chosen and communicated through animating various scenarious and projective conceptual drawings. The Kit will place itself within the dialogue about how planning and architecture can work together to create high quality spaces for both public and domestic living which can bring public activity from the waterfront edges of the city to dense cores. And can potentially engage urban design, urban structure and architectural infill altogether that focuses on the communal support as the premanent frame for changeability and adaptation.
52
BIBLIOGRAPHY Berelowitz, Lance. Dream City: Vancouver and the global imagination. Vancouver, B.C.: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010. Print. Berg, H.C. Manifest Open Bouwen. 1984. Print Ćetković, Alexander. “Flexibility in architecture and its relevance for the ubiquitous house.” Technoetic Arts 10.2 (2012): 213-19. Web. Davies, Paul B. Designing for change: distinction of building layers and stretegic overdimensioning. Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie U, 2009. Print. Doucet, Isabelle and Cupers, Kenny. Agency in Architecture: Reframing Criticality in Theory and Practice. The Netherlands: Faculty of Architecture TU Delft, 2009. Groak, Steven. 1992. The Idea of Building: Thought and Action in the Design and Production of Buildings. London: E & FN Spon. Habraken, N.J, and Jonathan Teicher. The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. Cambridge, Mass: Mit Press, 2000. Print. Habraken, N. J. Supports: an alternative to mass housing. London: Architectural Press, 1972. Print. Habraken, John. Change and the Distribution of Time. In Time-Based Architecture, Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. 2005. Print Habraken, N. J. Aap noot mies huis. Amsterdam, Scheltema & Holkema. 1970. Print Harney, Benjamin. “The Economics of Exclusionary Zoning and Affordable Housing.” Stetson L. Rev. 38, 2008. Print Havik, Klaske, Hans Teerds, and Véronique Patteeuw. Productive uncertainty: indeterminacy in spatial design, planning and management. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers 2011. Print.
54
Hertzberger, Herman. “Polyvalence: The Competence of Form and Space with Regard to Different Interpretations.� Architectural Design 84.5 (2014): 106-13. Web. Hertzberger, Herman. Lessons for students in architecture. Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010, 1991. Print. Hertzberger, Herman. Lessons for Students in Architecture. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. 2005. Print Hill, Jonathan. Immaterial architecture. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006. Print. Hill, Jonathan. Occupying architecture: between the architect and the user. London: Routledge, 1998. Print. Hill, Jonathan. Actions of architecture: architects and creative users. London: Routledge, 2003. Print. Hughes, Jonathan, and Simon Sadler. Non-plan: essays on freedom participation and change in modern architecture and urbanism. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2000. Print. Kalman, Harold, Ron Phillips, and Robin Ward. Exploring Vancouver: the Essential Architectural Guide. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2014. Print. Kossak, Florian, Doina Petrescu, and Tatjana Schneider. Agency: working with uncertain architectures. New York: Routledge, 2010. PDF. Kronenburg, Robert. Flexible: architecture that responds to change. London: Laurence King, 2007. Print. Leupen, Bernard. Frame and generic space. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006. Print. MacCreanor, Gerard. 2005. The Sustainable City is the Adaptable City. In Time-Based Architecture. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Print. 55
McKean, John. Giancarlo De Carlo: Layered Places. Stuttgart: Edition Axel Menges, 2004. Print. Rabeneck, Andrew, David Sheppard, and Peter Town. Housing Flexibility. Architectural Design 43, no. 11: 702. . 1973. Print Reflections on the History and Future of the Open Building Network, Stephen Kendall, July 2015 SAR. Voorstellan van de stichting Architecten Research. Eindhoven, 1965. Print. Schneider, Tatjana, and Jeremy Till. Flexible housing. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press, 2007. Print. Slade, Andrew. Reassessing agency: architecture & public-participation. Diss. Carleton U, Azrieli School of Architecture and Urbanism, 2012. Print. Tatjana Schneider, Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. Abingdon,Oxon: Routledge, 2011.
56
57