LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES LANDSCAPES
OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF
CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE
LANDSCAPES OF CHANGE ENRICHING ‘ROUTINE SPACE’ CONCISE ADR, 2011 MASTERS OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE RMIT UNIVERSITY MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA
NICK JAMES CARTER NEWHAM STUDENT NO. 3167384 EMAIL. NICKNEWHAM@GMAIL.COM
05
Executive Summary
06
Introduction
08
Testing Ground: The ‘Routine Space’
12
Phase 01: Mechanical Change
18
Phase 02: Individuals Change
24
Phase 03: Natural Change
34
Conclusion
36
References
04
One of my ‘routine spaces’ that changes-over-time with new graffiti and its removal.
Executive Summary Landscapes of change Enriching ‘routine space’
How can change-over-time be used as a design tool or strategy for improving everyday urban spaces? My research is focused on the different ways in which people engage with their most commonly used urban spaces; what I term their ‘routine spaces’. Currently, many of the spaces we continually use in our daily journeys offer little in the way of change. These spaces have been designed for one point in time, to endure and in fact, to be changeless. I believe these spaces to be the most important to our lives for the obvious fact that we use them the most, and therefore have the greatest impact on us and how we live. Our ‘routine spaces’ must offer more than a homogenous or monotonous experience; they must invite a multiplicity of engagement and a variety of experience, so that they do not become stale or quickly exhausted over time. This exploration investigates how ‘change’ can be used to improve how we currently design urban ‘routine space’. This is to move from the design of timeless space, to the creation of timely places.
05
Introduction
What if the design of our everyday urban spaces were the product of change-over-time? These spaces would not be driven, nor based upon commonly used practices, such as aesthetics or function, but instead embrace and reflect change-over-time.
06
For myself, Landscape Architecture and Design by definition, is the practice of improving people’s lives. This notion drives my research, focusing on exploring and designing the urban spaces that we most commonly use; what I term our ‘routine spaces’. To me, these spaces are not only those that we use repeatedly, but those that continue to have the greatest impact on us, shaping our lives and who we are as individuals and communities. The exploration of people’s ‘routine spaces’ requires a reflection upon my own urban everyday spaces. This allows me to observe that these spaces, over repetitive experiences, become somewhat homogenous and monotonous. Their familiarity overtime leaves the space feeling stale and exhausted. The lack of new stimuli gives rise to the idea of investigating change as an appropriate new design driver of ‘routine space’. Looking into work and theories by Arakawa + Gins and Claude Parent, introduces exploration of the effects space can have on the user when they engage with it in different ways. Parent’s work, for example, “intended to shake and shock people out of passivity” (Boiteaoutils, 2009) using tilted surface. But their designs set to change how people commonly experience everyday situations, testing and changing the body’s movements and therefore thought processes. This furthers my thoughts on alteration as a means for designing ‘routine space’. Research published by the Florey National Neuroscience Institutes (2006), expresses that by enriching our everyday environments, we could enhance our memory forming and learning
capabilities. Enriching one’s environment, i.e. making it more stimulating, also has further long term effects such as decreasing the risk of developing neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease and dementia, as well as neuropsychological diseases such as depression and addiction. This research confirmed and emphasised the importance of change in stimuli for our ‘routine spaces’ or environments. For me, change is the transformation or modification of one thing by another over-time; cause and effect. But this is very broad and raises questions about what type of change is suitable and appropriate for ‘routine space’? These ideas are expressed through my explorations of three change categories and have been classified as my explorative ‘Phases’. Each one seems as though it is a dramatic step from the other, when it is actually a continuation, evolving to acquire new techniques and methods for designing change within the ‘routine’. This research is explored on a specific site in Melbourne’s CBD, on the corner of William and Collins Street. Suncorp Plaza is a typical building’s forecourt; chosen as it represents aspects of most common ‘routine spaces’, allowing for a wider range of tests to be done. By exploring all of my design and theories in this one testing ground, I am able to fully test, compare and evolve my research; which wouldn’t have been possible if using multiple sites. My research into change-over-time is critiquing the common practice design methods and strategies that have ignored or overlooked the potential of change. Existing Design methodologies tend to design for an exact point in time, seeing the design fixed and changeless. Whereas this research begins exploring and embracing change-over-time as a driver for designing ‘routine space’, with the intent of benefiting people and their everyday lives.
07
Testing Ground The ‘Routine Space’ Considering the design of our everyday spaces is what I believe to be Landscape Architecture’s greatest privileges. These are the spaces we pass through and live within on a regular basis. An example of ‘routine space’ may be a stretch of road between a train station and your car, or perhaps a laneway you walk down as a shortcut to work. It is only when you engage and experience spaces on a repetitive basis that it can become one of your ‘routine spaces’. Thinking about designing urban ‘routine space’ for its users, requires specific strategies and tools. Change-over-time is the basis of this research as a means of improving and designing these particular spaces.
08
To investigate change-over-time in these ‘routine spaces’ I began by exploring Melbourne’s CBD through the eyes of a routine user. Obviously every space within the urban environment is someone’s ‘routine space’, though the one that I determined as my research’s testing-ground incorporates many different types of everyday space. Using a testing-ground in Melbourne allows for frequent site visits, to document and observe, leading to a more refined understanding of the space and ‘routine’ users.
The testing-ground, Suncorp Plaza is located in a very commercial part of Melbourne’s CBD. The site is accessed mainly in two ways, from the top corners. This is partly determined by it fronting onto a busy street at those points, but is also due to the design of the plaza, as it restricts access other multiple entrances. The Suncorp building, which my site is the forecourt for, holds thousands of employees, creating the plaza’s business; although this is mainly because of people using it as a thoroughfare.
Originally the research was to be based on a section of sidewalk, situated between a building and the road, but this space was very limiting to my exploration into change and was discontinued, as it didn’t allow for much scope. A more open ‘routine space’ would allow for wider investigation of my topic. Suncorp Plaza, located on the corner of William and Collins Streets, was designed and built in the 1960’s. Since then, its appearance and uses have changed very little. The space being somewhat locked in time, has a very structured existence, working in a very specific way. The plaza is divided up into its two main functions, movement (walking) and stillness (standing or sitting). The design of the space, a buildings forecourt, has been a directly derived from the building’s design, its entrances and openings.
Aerial of Melbourne’s CBD, with testing-ground location.
Its people operate within it on a daily loop, repeating use of the plaza every weekday. The plaza is used only in a very basic superficial manner. In the morning, people walk across the Aerial of Suncorp Plaza.
John Brack’s painting of Collins Street at 5 p.m. expresses the repetitiveness of our everyday environments, commenting on the fact that the city is very homogenous, its spaces and perhaps its people. This painting shows workers moving along to their destination, as they did yesterday, last week and will do again tomorrow. Although Brack’s painting is an observation of the 1950’s, the same can still be said of today’s urban conditions.
John Brack, Collins Street at 5 p.m., 1955.
09
ARRIVE 8:00 AM
THE ADVENTURES OF
ROUTINE BOB
OFF TO WORK
AT SUNCORP PLAZA
BREAK 10:30 AM
IF ONLY THERE WERE MORE SEATS
LUNCH 12:00 PM
I GUESS I’LL SIT HEARE AGAIN
I NEED TO WAKE UP
45 MINS OF THIS!
BREAK 2:30 PM ANOTHER COFFEE TO KEEP ME GOING
LEAVE 4:30 PM
AND I’LL DO IT ALL AGAIN TOMORROW
A typical day experiencing Suncorp Plaza.
Day in, day out, the use of this space during the weekday never changes. The comic strip depicts a routine user of the plaza and their possible uses of the space. Its situations have been based on real everyday users who I have noted over a number of days. The scenes, only depicting the happenings of one day, could very easily transcribe to any day, of any month, of any year. It is this repetitiveness and lack of new stimulation which this research sets to change.
Direct Sun Diagrams Arriving 6am - 9am January
Break 9am - 12pm
Break 2pm - 4pm
Lunch 12pm - 2pm
8 am
12 pm
1 pm
Leaving 4pm - 7pm
2 pm
6 pm
7 am
5 pm
9 am
9 am
4 pm
4 pm 10 am 3 pm 2 pm 11 am 12 am
June 8 pm
11 am 10 am
12 pm
2 pm
12 pm
2 pm
9 pm 9 am
3 pm
4 pm
1 pm
Shadow diagram for Suncorp Plaza.
With any urban site, especially inner city, the need to determine the shadows that cast across the space is greatly important. Documenting shadows not only express where the best positions for growing plants, but also the places where people like to occupy.
A routine user of Suncorp Plaza engages with the space at specific points in the day, everyday. These points are common amongst most everyday users of the space, as they are the times in which people are not at their desks working. Because of this, the plaza is empty for the most part of the day. The space it self, offers little invitation of outsiders to enter, and stays empty until a work break.
At Suncorp Plaza, the difference in shadows during winter and summer is vast. This diagram allows for the space to be designed in a way that best suits people and their varying need through the entire day.
10
The areas of occupation within the testing site is split into three function types, sitting, standing and walking. These different behaviours are mostly noted in specific locations. The times in which these types of use occur differs through out the day, as the needs of the routine users changes as the day progresses, though they are nearly always exactly the space from day to day.
Collins Street Areas of stillness (standing)
Areas of stillness (sitting)
Collins Street
William Street
Market Street William Street
Market Street
Market Street William Street
Suncorp Plaza at 2 p.m.
Collins Street Area of movement (walking)
plaza to their offices. Morning break, the space is again used as a thoroughfare, though some sit or stand in the plaza before returning. Lunch is reasonably similar, although more people exit and cross the plaza, as well as sitting for longer periods of time. At the end of the working day people leave the building, crossing the plaza to head home. These actions are repeated on a daily basis, somewhat like clockwork.
Plaza just on completion
The plaza’s main use is as a thoroughfare, which is due to its large expanse of empty space and lack of seating. The space offers very little for people to engage with, and for most I believe is seen merely as a ‘means to an end’, getting to and from work. Through observations of the space over-time, I have come to realise that this is an appropriate site to explore ideas of designing with changeover-time for ‘routine space’. Suncorp Plaza is a typical example of an underutilised, nonstimulating everyday space. The research will be drawing on those activities that currently exist, as they are those of the routine users, for whom this research is being done.
Taken day of finished construction, 1964
Taken in April, 2011.
Since completed in the 1960’s, Suncorp Plaza has changes very little. Its configuration, materials, even its uses have stayed the same for the past 50 years. The one difference over the years has been the planting of trees and shrubs in the 90’s. This was done to provide shade and greenery, but judging from the past images and present observations, the usage amount has changed very little even with this addition.
11
Phase 01
Mechanical Change
12
13
Final design for ‘Mechanical Change’ gave the user the ability to alter space
Mechanical Change Phase 01 Mechanical change is the modification of an object through mechanisms, or working parts. Human change is through human intervention. These are methods for implementing changeover-time and became the initial driver of my research. The popular trend of interactive and digital architecture acted as the starter of my investigation of change. I began to be interested in Interactive Designers, who primarily deal with installations. The interesting aspect of interactive design is that they usually manipulate everyday objects. Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, a Mexican-Canadian designer, explores tweaking the use of common object such as chairs and fluorescent light tubes.
14
Inspired by this, my own design focused on a wall, looking into ability to transform and stimulate. The design, Transforming Façade, fluxuated in and out, extending and contracting, making the walking space wider, then narrower. The design aimed at changing peoples’ movements through and around the wall. This concept tended to only deal with the walls, so for the next iteration something grounded was required. My intention with Open Enclosed, was to make the structure work in multiple ways, changing its configuration to alter its use. The structure alters in form allowing for different varieties of use. These two design ideas base their change on moving over-time which, although altering people’s ‘routine space’ physically and mentally, as their random movements had no driver for their transformation. For both of these ideas I looked into possible digital capturing methods for facilitating the change, but this was becoming too software based, not Landscape Architecture based. A different method for movement was needed.
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer, ‘Homographies, Subsculpture 7’, 2006. Art Gallery of New South Wales.
Rafael Lozano-Hemmer’s installation manipulates our knowledge of objects. The sheer absurdity of them creates interest for anyone moving past. The actions of the lights respond to the public and their own movements.
Steven Holl’s facade design uses basic forms and hinges to drastically alter the way the space is used and interacted with. The protruding elements act as beacons for people to investigate, as this is something different within the urban environment. The forms change is also produced by human interaction, allowing for the user to decide how far the space does or doesn’t transform.
While investigating changing façade precedents, I came across Architect Steven Holl’s project ‘Stonefront for Architecture and Art’ in Soho, New York. This design tests how we experience and perceive an object or space. It uses physically transforming elements to achieve this, which only occurs with the physical interaction Steven Holl, ‘Stonefront for Architecture and Art’, New York.
7:30 am
10:30 am
Looking into walls as a possible means for changing a ‘routine space’, produced a number of different transforming facades.
12.00 pm
The design of the facade below acted in two ways, when intending to create change. It firstly acted as an attracter for people, in the way it moved and stood out from its surrounds. The wall also challenges how people interact and move around and through it. As the form moves quite rapidly over time, its direct vicinity changes. In other words, its protrusion onto the sidewalk alters in amount. The doorway through the wall also changes slightly in location, which acts in keeping people alert to their own movements.
Open Enclosed
Creating a space that physically changes can transform the way in which it is used. Open Enclosed, set to explore possible configurations for the one structure, and how it changing would create different opportunities for programs. The design above shows a progression of the space through time. By simply bending the roof from open, to closed, people may associate it with a more intimate space, therefore want to sit. As for, when the space is more open people connection to it maybe lessened, as perhaps it will just be passed by.
12:00 pm
The constant movements, change the way people walk when in close proximity, creating stimulation for a user as they move past the object.
15
12:02 pm
12:04 pm
Transforming facade
Origami manipulation
Origami and model making enables exploration into transformable shapes. This allows for a greater understanding of the working behind the movements.
Suncorp Plaza excitingly tends dead with activities after work hours, so this design incorporated a new program to continue use.
These explorations where aimed at creating forms that people could physically manipulate, thus acting as a stimuli. Each different model created a different type of alteration and starting form.
A bar, opening at night, acts as a continual change within the space. Its existence manipulates the space in a particular way, altering the surface form, which then initiates users to do the same as they occupy the space.
16
Space during the day during work hours.
Space a after work when bar is open.
7:30 am
10:30 am
12:00 pm
4:30 pm
Journey to work
Break
Lunch
Waiting for people
of a person. Thus the user of the space is determining the space itself, its configuration, and the way it is used and engaged with. Holl describes it as a space that is “exact and suddenly changing into a dynamic ‘combinative’ space” (Holl 1991, p. 41). His design is situated on a major thoroughfare and creates a new type of connection between the individual and the space.
The manner in which change occurs in this design is through the combination of human interaction and mechanisms. As required, user of the space are able to lift up the surface, allowing them to create their own environment. Overtime, the space slowly reverts back to its original state of flat, in order for change to be constant.
Working with the existing schedule of use, that occurs for ‘routine’ people, the design acts to accommodate the varying site uses; sitting, standing and walking. By being flexible in its form and configuration, the form is able to be determined by the time of day, i.e. the users needs. The simplistic form of the square allows for ease of use, whilst creating the desired seating options across the site. 7:00 pm
Bar
Daily timeline of routine events.
This idea of people physically interacting to change the form of an object and also the space became my new strategy. The first objective of this was discovering newer and more refined ways for creating movable structures. Origami as a resource for physical change allowed me to explore different folding and manipulative techniques. I produced varying types of origami, each with their own movement abilities and constraints. The moving shapes aimed to create different opportunities for seating, while also being able to be flat for walking across. This would act as stimulation for routine users, as they have the choice of where exactly they want to move the surface. It also acts as a means of constantly creating new obstacles within the space, as others manipulate it. But when implemented within the site, their complexity made them very hard to work with. Therefore 17 a more basic form was preferred, as it could create the necessary stimuli, whilst being easily transformable. After completing this project it became clear that this was giving the space too much freedom, and though it was creating change, it maybe required too much input from the users themselves. Also, it may not actually create the desired result of change-over-time, as the users of this ‘routine space’ would quickly become used to it, finding their common spots to sit and walk through, effectively creating no lasting change. Perhaps this is not an appropriate type of change for ‘routine space’.
Phase 02
Individuals Change
18
19
Final design for ‘Individuals Change’ altered users perceptions of space
Individuals Change Phase 02 Modifying people’s perception as a means of change, by challenging their subconscious and physical everyday behaviours. This phase of my research was mainly inspired by Arakawa + Gins. It focused on changing peoples’ perceptions of the spaces they are in. It lead me to discover a number of methods and processes that could be used to do this. Also taking reference from Juhani Pallasmaa and his theories on how we experience space. This section of work is based around investigating how we perceive space, with the intent of using this knowledge as a means of creating ‘changing’ spaces for routine users. Juhani Pallasmaa is an Architect who advocates phenomenology as a driver for the design of space, a philosophy of exploration through the idea that reality is based on objects and events, as they are human consciousness. He reveals in his book, ‘The eyes of the skin - Architecture and the senses’, how he believes we view and experience space “The very essence 20 of lived experience is moulded by hapticity and peripheral unfocused vision. Focused vision confronts us with the world, whereas peripheral vision envelopes us in the flesh of the world” (Pallasmaa, 1996). His theory leads me to question and investigate how we perceive and experience space as a means for creating change. Having an understanding of how we engage with different elements and configurations within a space, enables me to use these elements to change people’s perception of their environment when using it. Real life tests, in the form of quickly constructed follies, allowed for an insight of my own into why people act in specific ways. Claude Parent, an Architect from the modernist period, developed his ‘oblique function’ theory. “The individual will always be in a state of resistance - whether accelerating as when going down or slowing down as when climbing up, whereas when one walks on a horizontal plane, weight is nil.”(Boiteaoutils, 2009) His work protested against modernity and its lack of stimuli when being experienced and lived in. He constructed spaces, his most famous being in his own apartment, that tested an individual’s common movements and perception of space. As Parent objects to the homogeneity and
Arakawa + Gin’s Bioscleave House, New York.
Arakawa + Gin’s theories are tested through Bioscleave House. The house uses the everyday structure and layout of a typical house, but tweaks its forms and configuration. This produces a new type of engagement for users, constantly testing and stimulating for the occupier, never allowing for their thoughts to rest.
Claude Parent’s French Pavilion, Venice Biennale, 1970.
Parent’s pavilion uses harsh forms that jut-out at the users, as well as sloping surfaces. These obscure shapes asked the user to reconsider their common movements within a space. His work questioned the modernity movement by somewhat creating the opposite of the architectural movement. He critiqued the homogeneity and lack of the ‘new’ in modern design, creating his space to be one of change.
How we interact and experience objects and space is hard to determine as every user is different. To gather a greater understanding of the decisions we make I set up a test that investigated this very idea. The follie produced was quite simple, in form and possible interaction types. It was set up for testing a single decision, whether to step over, or to push through to reach the other side. Upon conducting these tests I would merely ask the user to ‘walk to the other side’, this allowed for no external influence. After the user had made their decision, I would ask as to why they did so. The results tended to be the same. Although the ratio of people going left and going right was exactly 50/50, each individual stated that they had done so because they believed it was easier. For this research this, quite obvious fact, reminded me that our actions are most likely always based on minimal effort, or minimal thought.
Follie to test perception of one’s body parameters.
21 People moving through a space creates greater opportunity for stimulation than them being still. This design, inspired by Parent’s work, uses angled forms as a means to test the users perception of their movements. The simplistic cube shapes are placed at varying height, as well as angles used somewhat randomly within the space. This creates multiple sized gaps, forcing the occupier to constantly consider their ability to fit between. The angles and the different heights intend to catch the user off guard, creating the opportunity for collision, if they become too at ease within the space.
Design testing movement of the body.
This means of stimulation uses forces as its driver, as the workers using the space have to move through in order to reach their work.
Building entrance
22
Design in plan containing methods for changing perception.
For Suncorp Plaza the points at which different perception changing activities were situated was determined by common movements and actions existing on site. As most enter the space from the two bottom corners of this plan, the paths towards the building’s entrance would require interventions that utilised fast walking. In other areas where fast walking was not prioritised, designs that used changing of people’s perceived environment and the combination of slow movements and seating were able to be used. This creates a space of many simulative types.
When questioning people’s decisions on the basis of ease, I designed a form which somewhat challenged how users would perceive an easy path. The design used two paths, one that was long but easy to move across, and the other that was short but required greater physical input. Users’ initial decision may then vary over time, as they come to believe the other path is best. Design to possible change one’s movement across the plaza.
Representing ease of moving across flat surface
Depiction of our common judgements to a flat wall.
These diagrams represent a series on different ways to manipulate the everyday in order to stimulate. The grey line depicts the standard method of doing so, where as the orange refers to possible alterations in behaviour that may occur from design intervention.
simplicity of modernity, Arakawa + Gins also embrace this thinking but as a means of eluding death.
Stimulating through testing physical movements and actions.
Within the common urban environment there are typical behaviours and actions people take. One that does not occur is climbing, as it requires too much effort for reaching ones destination. This acts to question ‘routine’ users’ movements in the everyday. The form of the balls provide for perfect points to sit, yet to reach them one must physically climb, creating more thought than required for usual everyday movements.
Some of the forms being explored were quite difficult to represent with conventional drawing methods. By creating models, I was not only able to create the forms that I desired, but also see the spatial conditions that these were creating.
Arakawa + Gins, base many of their theories on the Situationists, and focus their work on what effect architecture has on the body. They believe architecture holds the key to immortality, “...we can reinvent ourselves as immortal beings by changing and challenging our perceptions”(20). Their designs force their users to interact and engage with their environments in new ways. This most famously being expressed in their Bioscleave House in New York and The Site of Reversible Destiny - Yoro, Japan. The ideas published in their text ‘Architectural Body’, expresses how in order to cheat death, the individual needs to be continually questioning and being tested by their surroundings. The space is never to become comfortable, as that means the user has become complacent and un-stimulated, whereas it should be experienced as re-invented and reevaluated whilst in use. Both Arakawa + Gins’ and Claude Parent’s work mainly deals with the private sector (the home). How could their design approach, combined with my research into change-over-time, apply to ‘routine space’ in the public sector? The main body of my work deals with people’s movements, creating opportunities for people to behave differently through the space, resulting in a more stimulating experience. Without in depth exploration it is impossible to confirm that these designs would have the desired effect of continually changing-over-time people’s perceptions, i.e. creating new stimuli upon every use. I also began to question the concept of forcing people’s behaviours, and if that was the best method for creating change. Could these designs have the opposite effect, pushing ‘routine’ users so far that perhaps they would begin to avoid the space altogether. It was apparent that the sheer intensity, for the user, needed scaling down. Leading to questing the subtlety of spatial changes and using it as means to explore change for ‘routine space’. It became clear that this type of space was too invasive for the everyday user’s routine. It forced rather than acting as a driver or mechanism for change to occur. This manner of research was perhaps the wrong direction for the design of ‘routine space’, as the need for a more subtle or scaled down design became obvious.
Designing of situations through plasticine.
23
Phase 03
Natural Change
24
25
Design for ‘Natural Change’ materials evolve through everyday change
Natural Change Phase 03 Changes vary by many degrees. The previous work into change-over-time as a driver for designing ‘routine space’ acted as a very harsh means of change. But what if the design had varying degrees or levels of change, i.e. those that are subtle and those that are not. What instances of change are appropriate for this? My mind-set, now changed and challenged, altered my view of my world. I became aware of existing changes within landscape environment. These changes act from natural processes, such as weathering, movement of the sun, climatic conditions and growth. What they did achieve, in a collaborative sense, was the ability to cover the various degrees of modification, attained only with time. Change-over-time had been the backbone of this research, but until now how the space itself changed through time had never been fully explored.
26
Working with Natural Change within my testing ground created four changing elements; sun and shadows, rainwater, living materials and ‘inert’ materials. To clarify, although they are often thusly termed, there is no such thing as ‘Inert’ materials, as all things in one-way or another change-over-time. These natural changes occur in two ways, sequentially or cyclically.
Grasping change through existing elements.
Harnessing natural processes found on the testing-ground, Suncorp Plaza, allows for greater means by which change can occur. As every site is different, so too are the elements that can be designed with.
Marti Franch’s theories and designs were my greatest source of inspiration when dealing with natural change. His work, such as that below, is designed for and with time, allowing it to benefit the design. Through his horticultural knowledge, he is able to work with the changes that occur naturally with plants and other living materials. The spaces he produces not only look beautiful, but also continue to evolve, creating constant difference in the site.
Marti Franch, a Catalonian Landscape Architect, bases his practice on his theory that time is the forth dimension. He uses an observational approach into living materials, “you observe the object itself, and then you see how it performs”(Franch, 2011). He states that it’s a very Darwinist approach to Design, observing change then discovering why it has done so. During my talks with Marti, he discussed the importance of acknowledging these processes when designing for time. He was very adamant that, as a Landscape Architect, he is not a theorist but a practitioner, and that we should predict and design with change through experience and not through guessing. Progressing from Marti’s theory on acknowledging these processes, I felt it necessary to begin to build up a catalogue of Natural Changes. This catalogue, along with my design work, would act similarly to Architectural catalogues of the 19th century. These expressed
Marti Franch (EMF), Laroque Des Alberes Cemetery, France
Designing with change requires depictions of how the space will transform over-time. These images show change through four time scales. The design of this space utilised a large frame structure, to create constant changing shadowing on the ground, but also as a support for a vine to be grown. This vine would also alter the shadow’s form as it grows.
Present
1 Hour
1 year
10 years
The second major aspect of this design is the grass patch and its situation within the space. Its location is at the front of the plaza, where people tend to wait for others. Though through time, because of its front position, it is walked across repetitively, creating a wearing of the grass.
The production of change when one element is combined with another, is shown in this design. The design of a window, which is able to accommodate the growth of moss, changes the way the window functions overtime. Over the years, as the moss grows, the ability to see through the glass is restricted.
Moss growing alters view through glass.
27
Rainfall can be observed in changing the colour of materials that soak up amounts of water, such as concrete or stone. With this in mind, this design utilises shallow water drains and human interaction as walking. As the drains fill with water, people begin to step into them, and then onto the surrounding concrete. This transfer of water on a users shoe is then imprinted onto the concrete, changing the look of the surface.
Rainfall provides opportunity for footsteps to be seen.
Catalogue ‘Inert’ Materials
Exposing paint layers.
Human traffic wearing.
Rot weathering.
Bird poo on tiled surface.
Cracked tiles from age.
Rainfall discolouration.
Weather produced destruction.
Hairline cracks in marble.
Chipped terra-cotta surface.
Build up of dirt changes colour.
Weathering of paint.
Scratched surface from vine.
Stone absorbs rainwater.
Stucco cracking from sun.
Stone discolouration from water.
Skateboard induced wearing.
Graffiti removal change.
Wearing on nodes from traffic.
Human scratching of corten.
Scratching of metal with tool.
Metal changing view through.
Reflection as change.
Growth of moss on glass.
Dew build up on glass.
Human wearing of fibrous mat.
Build up of gravel.
Expansion of rubber by heat.
Wearing of timber finish can occur through exposure to sun. Image left is out of direct light, where as right is in direct sunlight.
Splashes of dirt onto tiled surface is much more visible as it is a gloss surface. Most likely cause by rainfall splashing ground dirt.
28
Crack in pavers produced by expansion of stone. This is caused by climatic conditions,ie; heat expanding, then cool contracting.
Discolouration of concrete surface from the absorption of rust. Rusted metal below has slowly crept up staining the concrete.
Weathering and climatic change to bronze surface over many years of exposure.
The spread of granitic sand onto the pavement from people walking across the space. This changes the texture and colour of the pavers.
Change from oiled surface.
Wearing from human sitting.
Change from human touch.
Destruction from plant growth.
Paint weathering.
Destruction from weathering.
Discolouration from water.
Mould growing on concrete,
Dirt build up on points of no rain.
Fading and flaking of paint.
Chipping caused by trucks.
Wearing of surface from water.
Water stain on rust.
Wear from human touch.
Transparency of plastic.
Multiple colours from glass.
Moss growing on gravel surface.
Patterns created by gravel.
various possibilities for architectural features, such as the detailing of a pillar, and also showed a possible scenario combining these elements into a design. This gave Architects the ability to morph different elements and styles together to create new ones, which is quite similar to this phase’s intent. The varying levels of change-over-time, act as a means to having the space in constant flux throughout. I have chosen to do this by looking at different time increments, minutes, hours, days, seasons, etc. This has become my time spectrum, as the design as a whole acts to create continual stimulation for the routine users of the space. In order to observe change, something requires a constant in order to base the modification upon. The time spectrum, where different types of change are occurring at varying rates and cycles, creates the effect of a constant. Although, as explained previously, in Landscape Architecture there is no constant, the long rate of change that some processes take can act as a constant, creating the point for which change can be observed. Marti Franch’s theory where he takes a Darwinist approach to change, inspired my most recent investigations into natural change. This made me question how evolution could inspire and play its part in change, as evolution in a nutshell, is change produced through variation. By morphing the four changing elements found on site, rainwater, sun and shadow, ‘inert’ and living materials, this could act as triggers for new types of change. In other words, the combination of multiple change processes can evolve into entirely new types of stimuli. Producing the conditions for relationships between the four types of change is where the Designer comes into the equation. It is the knowledge of these four types of change that allow me to design new morphing combinations. The interesting and exciting aspect of changeover-time is that we can never fully know the exact result, it is only completely known when left to time. But by designing the conditions for change to occur, constant stimuli will transpire for the routine user.
29
Catalogue Sun & Shadow
Multiple holes create pattern.
Openings intensify light.
Obvious spotlight movement.
Sunlight passing through coloured plastic alters gives the shadow a colour, which when combined with another creates a new colour. Long shadow moves slowly.
Human shadows become noticed at the end of the day when they are at their darkest, from the low position of the sun.
Transformation of tree shadow over seasons.
Difference in shadow produced by dense or a sparse tree.
Change in shadow form.
Rainwater
Waterfall manipulates water.
30
Water attracts interaction.
Rainfall darkening surface.
Pooling of water.
Events using moving water.
Slashed water changes surface.
Form altering water intensity.
Manipulation of water flows.
Creeper spreads.
Tree roots alters ground surface.
Seasonal creeper.
Production of new growth in days
Flowering of plants.
Fallen leaves change ground.
Plants growth trough structure.
Flowers attract animals.
Water produces muddy surface.
A body of water, preferably shallow, can act as a mirror that changes that reflects its surrounds, altering their view of environment.
Water movements when acted onto a graded surface leaves an indication of this change, most noticed on particular surface types.
Living Materials
Sedum turf surface varies in colours when laid. This is intensified over-time as the plants grow.
Growth of plants changes the spatial volume it inhabits. Using grasses the density will continue to fill and act as a single plant.
To produce change from natural processes, an amount of knowledge is required. This, for me, came about through observation of my own environment. These observations were then able to be collaborated into a catalogue style format. The ‘change catalogue’, to which that shown in this document is only an overview, gives me the tools for designing with change. It acknowledges what the change is, and the reason for it. The important aspect of this is that it allows for easy discovery of possible morphing combinations of different change. One must only look at the various types, choose two or more, then design with them. Without the catalogue this process would be much more time consuming, and possible combinations may not be noticed.
Continual movement on surface.
Gradual screening of views.
Plants can soften edges & views.
Some trees produce flowers that becoming an event for the space.
Seasonal difference in tree flora.
Fallen tree limbs alter ground.
Creepers growing up structure.
Weeds grown in unusual places.
Number of trees changes the spatial volume.
31
MINUTES
HOURS
1 YEAR DAYS
MONTHS
5 YEARS
SEASONS
10 YEARS
20 YEARS
Time sequence diagram.
In order to have a space which continues to offer stimuli for its ‘routine’ users over a lifetime, the design of the space might be structured to fill all the time scales. The diagram above represents a ‘natural change’ design for Suncorp Plaza. It expresses how throughout time the space offers continual change.
32
For this to work a large number of different types of changing processes must be designed with. Each process has its own time scale of change, and therefore is a cog in the overall site machine.
Day one
Human interaction is an element within ‘natural change’. It can offer more instant forms of change, as well as prolonged ones. This design combines the growing of plants with human interaction. The plant zones for growth are located within a thoroughfare on the site, which restricts some areas from growing. Over a longer period, people could begin to realise that where the plants are growing is actually a pleasant spot to sit, as it’s in the sun during winter. People may then create their own paths and form seating zones.
3 months
7 months
Human interaction creating difference.
Natural change also refers to non-human interaction. The sequence of views through time, depicts an area within the design which has been created to change dramatically. 12 p.m. The process used is pooling, which occurs through the form of the ground surface. A small water body is mostly constant in this location, though it may differ slightly with evaporation.
12:00 pm
2 p.m. Within the two hours it has rained and due to the drains that funnel water towards this section of the site, a waterfall has been created. People perhaps come and view the fall, as it fills up the pool below. 2:30 p.m. The water from else where on site, continues to flow creating a waterfall. The amount of water has now pushed the observer from his seat. 1 year. Over many rain events the water has left its mark on the corten steel, as well as the ground surface. Mould has also begun to appear on the ground. Moss on the glass, through the dam conditions, has begun to grow.
2:00 pm
33
2:30 pm
5 years. Further through time, the water stains have become darker. The stone seating has weathered and crumbled onto the ground below. The moss has continued to grow and now drastically alters people’ s abilities to look through the glass. 1 year
5 year
Non-human interaction creating change over time.
Conclusion
34
In general our urban environments tends to be designed on the basis of it being a fixed or single point in time. This may be fine for infrequent visitors to these spaces, but for the everyday or ‘routine’ user, their repetitive use offers little more then a homogeneous and monotonous experience. Studies show the importance of our ‘routine spaces’ to our memory forming and learning capabilities, as well as some theories into its ability to cheat death. Personally, and on the basis of this research, it is these spaces that I believe are our most vital. As a Landscape Architect, due to these spaces having the greatest effect on our lives, the design of them is paramount. My research into the design of ‘routine space’ has been explored using change-over-time, investigating this through three main strategies or phases. The now popular field of Kinetic Architecture gave me an initial avenue for this research. I termed this body of work ‘mechanical change’ and designed various iterations of motor and human forced transformations. Through these, I discovered that this particular method was inappropriate for the everyday space, which pushed my research in a new direction. Dealing with altering perception as a means for change, became the second major phase of this work, ‘individuals change’. But upon multiple designs of a space that forced the occupier to act in particular behaviours, it became clear that this too was not necessarily suitable for improving ‘routine space’. It became clear that these past two phases focused very much the Architecture side of Landscape Architecture. It was through re-evaluating my own environment that I became aware of the vast amounts of change happening all around me. I called this phase ‘natural changes’ for obvious
reasons. What set this phase apart from the others, was not only that I could physically observe and document these changes, but the multiplicity of these changes occur at varying timescales, which could act as a constant source of stimuli for the ‘routine users’. The realisation that harnessing and investigating natural (ecological) processes for the creation of change is the focus of Julian Ruxworthy explosion in his text ‘Landscape Symphonies. His article concludes that “perhaps Landscape Architecture practice is not suited to this inquiry (change): rather, the humble and amateur gardener is more able to do so.” (Ruxworthy, 2006) Though I tend to agree that the Landscape Architect will never have the same instant impact as the gardener has with change (ie planting and pruning), as we cannot physically alter the space once drawn, I do believe that the Landscape Architect can create a greater variety of change. With our tool of design, we can create change in an entirely different manner, one that leans on somewhat predicting the future, but this is where the sophistication of design can be shown. The difference is that the design creates the relationships between the landscape elements. We can design new ways for relationships to occur, becoming different than what has been seen before. It is how we choreograph and morph the elements that create the greatest instances of change. This research into the designs of our urban environments, I believe is to have great implications for the public everyday realm. Through this body of work I have great belief that the need for change within our ‘routine spaces’ is very necessary. Although at this point in my practice of Landscape Architecture, I have come to some conclusions, are there other types of change which I haven’t
discovered and explored? Such as, questioning the amount of change necessary? How do the changes differ in other locations, such as a cramped laneway, or a busy streetscape? Will the same effects occur, or can the different locational conditions allow for other outcomes? These questions cannot be answered at this point. The research’s importance warrants further investigation, creating an ongoing exploration for tools and strategies for designing change-over-time. When dealing with change-over-time for ‘routine space’, Landscape Architects are quite privileged, as our discipline’s location in the exterior includes a vast variety of change. Unlike our cousins the Architects, whose ability to create change is restricted to mechanisms or perhaps perception, our field can harness and really exploit those changes that come ‘naturally’. Change-over-time is Landscape Architecture.
35
References Nithiananthajah and Hannan, J N and A H, 2006. Enriched environments, experience-dependent plasticity and disorders of the nervous system. Nature Reviews, Volume 7 September, 697-709. de Certeau, M C, 1984. The Practice of Everyday Life. 3rd ed. California: University of California Press. Gins and Arawaka, MG and A, 2002. Architectural Body. 1st ed. tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press van Schaik, LvS, 2008. Spatial Intelligence. 1st ed. West Susses: John Wiley and Son Ltd Loidi and Bernard, HL and SB, 2003. Opening Spaces. 1st ed. Basel, Switerland: Birkhauser - Publishers for Architecture Kirsh, DK, 1995. The intelligent use of space. The intelligent use of space, Artificial Intelligence 73, 31-68 Pallasmaa, JP, 1996. The eyes of the skin-Architecture and the senses. 1st ed. Academy Editions. The Funambulist. 2010. Architectures of Joy. A spinozist reading or Parent/Virilio and Arakawa/Gins’ architecture. [ONLINE] Available at: http://thefunambulist.net/2010/12/18/philosophy-architectures-of-joy-a-spinozist-readingof-parentvirilio-and-arakawagins’-architecture/. [Accessed 28 May 11] Duvall, JD, 2010. Enhancing the benefits our outdoor walking with cognitive engagement stategies . Enhancing the benefits our outdoor walking with cognitive engagement stategies , Journal of Environmental psychology 31, 27-35 Lawrence, RJL, 1982. A psychological . Spatial approach for architectural design and research, Journal of Environmental psychology 2, 37-51
36
Thwaites and Simkins, KT, IS, 2007. Experiential Landscape: An Approach to people, place and space. 1st ed. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. McHarg, I H, 1969. Design with Nature. 1st ed. Philadelphia, USA: NHP. Juracek, J J, 1996. Surfaces: Visual research for artists, architects and designers. 3rd ed. London, UK: Thames & Hudson. Juracek, J J, 2005. Architectural Surfaces. 1st ed. London, UK: Thames & Hudson. Kaltenbach, F K, 2004. Translucent Materials: Glass, Plastic, Metals. 1st ed. Munich: Birkhauser. Franch, M F, 2009. 4D. Paisea Journal: PLANT ELEMENT, 10, 8-15. Ruxworthy, J R, 2003. “Landscape Symphonies”: Gardening as a source of landscape architectural practice, engaged with change. PROGRESS, University of Sydney, Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand. Bachelard, G B, 1994. The Poetics of space. 3rd ed. France: Presses Universitaires de France. Robinson, J R, 2005. From Clockwork Bodies to Reversible Destinies. Artpapers, March/April 2005, 35 - 39. Lefebvre, H L, 1961, Group of Research on Everyday Life, www.libcom.org, 5 June 2011.
Quotes Boiteaoutils. 2009. Claude Parent for the Venice Biennale 1970. [ONLINE] Available at: http://boiteaoutils. blogspot.com/2009/11/ claude-parent-for-venice-biennale-1970.html. [Accessed 06 April 11] Pallasmaa, JP, 1996. The eyes of the skin-Architecture and the senses. 1st ed. Academy Editions, p.10 Franch, M F, 2011, Recorded in August 2011 by Nick Newham Ruxworthy, J R, 2003. “Landscape Symphonies�: Gardening as a source of landscape architectural practice, engaged with change. PROGRESS, University of Sydney, Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.
37