Tech. is More...
Tech. is More:
Holistic
A
thesis
Integration of into Housing
submitted
on
March
12,
Technology
2020
to
the
Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Architecture in the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning by
Tyler Kennedy B.S. of Science in Architecture, Ball State University May 2018 Committee Chair: Michael McInturf, M. Arch Committee Member: Elizabeth Riorden, M. Arch
[This page is intentionally left blank]
ii
ABSTRACT Technological country
and
development
globe.
has
Innovation
swept
continues
the to
revolutionize every facet of life. Whether it be your iPhone
correcting
spelling
issues
or Uber
saving you from a DUI, technology companies play a key role in improving the quality of life. With the ever expanding possibilities of technology, how can housing actively adapt and implement them? Tracing the historical evolution of homes illustrates how they arrived at the innovation estranged form they take
on
today.
From
that,
further
gaps
are
highlighted in a comparison between technology of the
iii
home
and
that
of
an
automobile.
Sensors,
Figure A.1 arrangement
micro-location,
and the internet
Jollyville Site unit
of things are
detailed and interpreted in a living environment as a
representation
of
a
technologically
thriving
model for the receptive city of Austin, TX.
iv
FIGURES A.1.........................................Author 1.1.........................................Author 1.2.........................................Author 2.1.........................................Author 2.2..........................................Baker 2.3..........................................Baker 2.4..........................................Baker 2.5..........................................Baker 2.6..........................................Baker 2.7..........................................Perez 2.8.......................................... Author 3.1..............................Jardine Motors UK 3.2.....................Ford Model T section views 3.3..........................................Baker 3.4...................................Tesla Motors 3.5........................................Martins 3.6........................................Martins 3.7..............................“San Saba” Source 3.8..............................“San Saba” Source 3.9..............................“San Saba” Source 3.10........................................Author 4.1..............................
v
García et al.
4.2...................
Zafari et al.
4.3..................................... “Smart Ecosystem” Source 5.1..................................... Author 5.2..................................... Author 5.3..................................... Author 5.4..................................... Author 5.5..................................... Author 5.6..................................... Author 5.7..................................... Author 5.8..................................... Author 5.9..................................... Author 5.10.................................... Author 6.1..................................... Author 6.2..................................... Author 6.3..................................... Author 6.4..................................... Author 6.5..................................... Author 6.6..................................... Author 6.7..................................... Author 6.8..................................... Author 6.9..................................... Author 6.10.................................... Author 6.11.................................... Author 6.12.................................... Author 7.1
Author
vi
7.2..................................... Author 7.3..................................... Author 7.4..................................... Author 7.5..................................... Author 7.6..................................... Author 7.7..................................... Author 7.8..................................... Author 7.9..................................... Author 7.10.................................... Author 7.11.................................... Author 7.12.................................... Author 7.13.................................... Author 7.14.................................... Author 7.15.................................... Author 7.16.................................... Author
vii
viii
CONTENTS Abstract....................................iii-iv Contents......................................v-vi Figures...................................vii-viii 1 Introduction.................................1-5 1a) Technology and Style 2 Tracing an Evolution...................... XX-XX 2a) Colonial Homes 2b) Classic Revival 2c) Indigenous Styles 2d) Modernism 2e) Historical Relevance 3 Automobile Comparison......................XX-XX 3a) Model T vs Colonial Revival 3b) Tesla vs Developer Home 4 Tech. of Today.............................XX-XX 4a) Sensors 4b) Micro-location 4c) IoT 4d) Chapter Summary 5 Siteless Tech. Housing.....................XX-XX
ix
5a) Modern Modularity
XX-XX
5b) Scaled Modularity
XX-XX
5c) Building Modularity
iii-iv
5d) Unit Wall Modularity 6 Austin TX................
v-vi vii-viii
6a) Lower East Riverside
1-5
6b) Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Site
XX-XX
6c) Intersection of I-35 and Austin Light Rail 6d) Jollyville Open Space 7 Tech. Interchange.................... 7a) Site Maximization and Structure
XX-XX
7b) Building Interconnectivity 7c) Smart Features Throughout 7d) Final Imagery 8 Conclusion............................. 9 Bibliography.............................
x
1 -INTRODUCTION To devolve is to degenerate. Architecture of the home is devolving. In nature, evolution propels life forward, determines the
strong,
and
eliminates
the
weak.
In
housing,
evolution
corrects past error, adapts to an ever-changing occupant, and utilizes the apex of technology of the time, or at least it should. Housing has become unsuitable. That statement especially rings true
when
considering
the
expansive
developments
of
the
technological world and their impact on people’s daily lives. In the United
States,
we have seen the continual
production
of
stick-framed rectilinear housing for hundreds of years. Most of the technological innovation being incorporated into homes and living spaces has to fit within the 16” between studs. They are a “plug-in” product designed to enhance the user’s life. They take on a passive role within the architecture of the home. What if technology became the architecture of living instead of being placed within the home? Whether Android or Apple, smart phones evolve with you. They constantly absorb pieces of daily life and routine to best satisfy needs. Today, living spaces take on a predominantly passive role in human life. Any evolution of them is a result of the occupant manipulating the space with furniture and items specific to them. Essentially the human evolves and changes, and it is up to them to
1
Figure 1.1 - Author-drawn interpretive
diagram on technology integration to the home
2
make
their
living
space.
This
thesis
seeks
to
discover
the
possibilities of the opposite ideology – living spaces that evolve with
their
practices.
occupant It
will
actively
through
examine
the
modern
newest
technological
advancements
in
life-enhancing technology and implement them into the architecture of the home.
Figure 1.2 - Ground Floor of Tech. Interchange Design
3
The thesis investigation will be conducted as follows. It begins by laying out a timeline of the home, highlighting key moments in its evolution within the United States that lead it to the technologically disconnected state it lies in today. From there, the document cross-examines home design with that of the automobile, and highlight the excessive gaps between the two in
4
terms of innovation. With the level of estrangement established for a home of 2020, the thesis moves onto detailing sensors, micro-location, and the internet of things. These stand as the perceived
apex
of
technology
beneficial
implications
sections,
the
for
concepts
today the
and
home.
culminate
in
could
have
Finally, the
extremely
after
design
those of
a
technologically enhanced housing model for the receptive site of Austin, TX. The design illustrates technology being carefully integrated into architecture, and gives the reader a physical representation of this concept.
1a) Technology and Style Before tracing the steps architecture of the home took to achieve its form today, the terms technology and style must be explained through the lens of this thesis investigation. In this thesis, technology stands for innovation, information, and tooling put to use to solve problems of the present. Particular problems of any time call for specific technological solutions, and some remedy
and
create
more
appropriate
responses.
Throughout
the
architectural history of the home, technology relates to the guts and process arriving at a building, wall, ceiling, roof, etc. Essentially, “what is in the wall?” and “how is it made?” Style refers to architectural character. This can be in the form of materiality, aesthetic, or spatial aura. Style exists as a direct result of the technologies implored in any architectural work. For
3
instance, numerous skyscraper styles emerged as a result of the technological development of steel – the Eiffel Tower stands as the epitome of this logic. The reverse can also be true, but is often a digression, meaning new technology can be arranged and implemented in order to achieve a representation of past style. Take the saturated city of Las Vegas for example. Numerous casinos and
hotels
along
its
strip
strive
to
appear
as
ancient
or
historical architecture, and many do so with moderate success. Success is found in repurposing modern building cladding, skin, and structural technologies in such a way they appear as if they were
Roman,
Parisian,
etc.
architectures.
In
this
practice,
architects become limited in design by striving to achieve past style. Implementation of modern innovation becomes a tertiary goal at best. Technology driven design frequently relates to evolving design
and
style
often
represents
stagnancy,
especially
in
reference to innovation. These two terms are defined in order to shed light on their meaning in the rest of the document.
4
2 - TRACING AN EVOLUTION 2a) Colonial Homes In order to highlight the unsuitability of the housing for today’s society, an examination of how it devolved through history stands
necessary.
Marshall
B.
Davidson
writes
on
the
early
evolution of the American home in his book, The American Heritage History of Notable American Houses. “Emigrants to the New World, like their middle and lower class countrymen who stayed at home, neglected
matters
of
style
and
fashion
in
favor
of
more
elementary, practical, and traditional construction” (as cited in Baker 1994, 26). The earliest Colonial times in the United States called
for
utility
over
flare
in
housing.
From
interior
to
exterior, homes were arranged pragmatically to ensure the most suitable
living
conditions
for
occupants.
Early
northern
and
southern colonial styles relied on local materials and adopted European
construction.
Homes
in
New
England
were
sided
with
“wooden clapboard” and roofed by shake shingles to ward off the severe winter conditions while using the extensive forests of the region. Chimneys were programmed in the center of the home to radiate heat throughout all spaces. Southern colonial homes were
xx
Figure 2.1 - Author-drawn interpretive history of the home vs technology diagram
xx
a transplanted copy of English structures. Brick made of southern clay was commonly utilized in cladding and chimneys were arranged on the exterior of the home rather than centralized (Baker, 1994, 22-25). As Baker describes in his writing and imagery, the earliest American homes utilized the technology of the time to the fullest, essentially because people of the time had to. Home design stood as a matter of survival, protection, and access to basic needs. Layouts were logic driven. Consider the chimney in both of the homes drawn in Figures 2.2 and 2.3. In the New England example, the chimney is the only ornate feature of the home, separating itself in material quality and weight within the space. It serves as an anchor point for the rest of the home, rooting it in the apex of available heating technology to satisfy an essential living need of the occupant – thermal comfort. The chimney of the Southern example corresponds with the ornate masonry of the rest of the home and stylistically flows into the rest of the exterior envelope. In Southern Colonies such as Virginia or the Carolinas, there existed a need for heating technology within the home, but its place was along the exterior of the home as to not over-heat during the harshly humid summers. Both examples include the chimney as a necessity in their form and spatial layout, but they differ in the implementation of this technology. Climate and site conditions play a crucial role in the early evolution of the home. That point is easily discernable in these examples. These designs serve as an
xx
Figure 2.2 - Plan and Elevation of Early Southern Colonial housing in U.S.
xx
Figure 2.3 - Plan and Elevation of Early New England Colonial housing in U.S.
xx
efficient and appropriate use of technology within architecture, especially considering they would have been constructed in the 17th century. Today, home developers attempt to pay homage to historical technologies such as the chimney, shake shingles, or diamond framed windows, but they do so for stylistic market appeal and rarely do so to exemplify the old technology. Many homes today illustrate crude attempts at showcasing utilitarian features of the
past,
they
exists
as
“slap-on”
aesthetic
that
is
not
site-specific.
2b) Classic Revival As the United States asserted itself in power, wealth, and character through the 1800’s, so did the architecture of the home. With
little
architectural
perceived revival
precedents
styles
such
to as
pull
Greek
and
from
within,
Gothic
were
imported for homes in the country high on Manifest Destiny. “With the diversity, growth, and energy of the early 19th century… we began to see ourselves as the successors to the democracy of ancient Greece. Our Greek Revival style was surely the first national fad to sweep this country” (Baker 1994, 60-61). Baker highlights the movement of revival as a turning point in the American home, where it moved away from basic needs technologies of colonial America and onto ones of representation and metaphor of style.
xx
In the drawings depicted in Figures 7 and 8, Baker alludes to the direct use of ancient Greek building technology and style in an American home. Structural elements such as the exterior columns, the post and beam sloped gable roofs, and interior cased opening supports are transplanted from the past into the home. While these elements relate strongly to a metaphor of grounded strength, they limit flexibility in the plan. Throughout time, the American home utilizes partitions. In the Greek Revival model, these have to be created within the strict confines of a past building typology that strove for openness and gathering. The scale of designs of Greek architecture was far greater than what was required in the home for living purposes. Gothic revival principles “were much more suitable to varied building complexes and creative massing of disparate forms” (Baker 1994, 63). In that model, rooms and spaces take on their own shape and masses. They are expressed in the exterior push and pull of the building as well as the unique delineation of craft between different parts of the program and elevation. Revival technology can be found in that delineation. Verandahs and balconies are decorated with brackets and railings thick with hints at an upward-pointing Gothic style. Greek and Gothic revival of the 19th century serve this thesis as an early example of copying technology of historic past and transforming it into a living space. In each style, elements such as moldings, columns, window finishing, and cornice details relate directly to their respective revival source. Technology and
xx
style of a different time was implored to achieve a metaphorical effect – the strength and freewill of the United States. That concept can surely be translated to homes of today. Within the United States, homes are ornamented with elements of the past to assert an idea about the owner or occupant. Often they are done crudely instead of holistically like the revival homes of the 19th century.
xx
Figure 2.4 - Plan and Elevation of Gothic Revival housing in U.S.
xx
Figure 2.5 - Plan and Elevation of Greek Revival housing in U.S.
xx
2c) Indigenous Styles In the late 1800’s through the early 1900’s, numerous other forms
or
revival
included,
but
Renaissance,
ensued
are
not
Elizabethan,
after
these
limited and
two
to:
even
early
forms.
Neoclassical,
Colonial.
Each
They
Italian exhibited
spatial, technical, and aesthetic qualities of the respective source in the same manner as the Greek and Gothic revivals. Towards the end of this period of revival in the architecture of the home came styles indigenous to the United States. John Milnes Baker quotes Horatio Greenough’s Structure and Organization to begin describing these styles. “The redundant must be pared down, the superfluous dropped, the necessary reduced to its simplest expression, and then we shall find, whatever the organization may be, that beauty that is waiting for us” (as cited in Baker 1994, 106). The indigenous homes born out of the logic described above were Shingle Style, Prairie Style, and Craftsman style. For the conciseness
of
investigated
this
for
its
thesis,
only
technological
Prairie and
Style
stylistic
will
be
qualities.
Developed by the renowned Frank Lloyd Wright, Prairie Style homes “featured sheltering abstract
open
planning;
overhangs; patterns
of
shallow-pitched
bands
of
stained
casement glass;
roofs
with
windows,
and
strong
broad,
often
with
horizontal
emphasis” (Baker 1994, 112). All the horizontal moves in form relate to the low horizon of the Midwestern prairie. These homes
xx
Figure 2.6 - Plan and Elevation of Prairie Style housing in U.S.
xx
illustrated
a
succinct
relationship
with
the
landscape
while
utilizing new decorative motifs that rejected details from the prior European-based designs (Baker 1994, 112). Prairie homes separated themselves from the past-replicating homes constructed by the masses in the country. While their spatial and agreeability to
landscape
differed
from
predecessor
housing
styles,
the
building technologies were not new. Take the stained glass windows Wright
exhibits
in many of his homes.
The technology
behind
patterned stain glass existed for centuries before this time. Prairie homes gain uniqueness in the innovative arrangement and programming of these features. In taking principles from the past like a shingled pitch roof, stained glass, and stucco molding and rearranging them to fit a Midwestern site, an innovative style emerges. This relates to a typology that gently pays homage to past practice and technology while maintaining site specificity and an evolved design. Prairie
style,
along
with
other
indigenous
styles,
acknowledge an evolution of the home in America, as they only pull from parts of the past and rearrange them uniquely. While existing as proud moments in architecture history, these styles still highlight a disconnection between thriving technology of the time and the home. At the same time indigenous styles were being erected across the United States, Henry Ford designed and mass produced the Model T. That comparison will be detailed more in depth later in the document.
xx
2d) Modernism Since
the
beginning
of
the
industrial
revolution,
home
innovation and technological innovation existed separately, only overlapping at brief inserts and hardly changing design of the home. Why do the two rarely acknowledge each other? This thesis theorizes the reason for this to be the home solely evolves in its own realm. Meaning residential architects rarely reach for design answers outside of home design. The best designers were able to reassemble
those
innovative
styles,
concepts but
and
practices
nonetheless,
they
uniquely exhibited
to
create
recursive
technological principles that had been repeated for centuries. Even architects of the modern movement strongly acknowledged past home design, in their attempts to oppose it.
They abandoned
pitched roofs, casement windows, and trims for acute engineering
Figure 2.7 - Perspective of Philip Johnson’s Glass House, New Canaan, Connecticut
xx
principles and simplicity of program. They began to venture away from archaic centuries old tactics, but only scratched the surface of integrating the advanced technology of the time into design. Take Philip Johnson’s Glass House for example. “The one-story house has a 32' x 56' open floor plan enclosed in 18 feet-wide floor-to-ceiling sheets of glass between black steel piers and stock H-beams that anchored the glass in place” (Perez 2010). Constructed between 1947 and 1949, this unique arrangement of engineering feats and expansive glass create a precise criticism of what had become the traditional stick frame home design. It stands innovative to that end, but the design still drew from technologies within architecture and repurposed them for a small scale home. Johnson implemented existing technology outstandingly to fit an architectural agenda. Can the opposite work too? How can architecture
fit
technology’s
agenda
rather
than
technology
fitting architecture’s?
2e) Historical Relevance Earlier
in
this
section,
there
was
mention
of
specific
moments where innovation overlapped with the home. Some recent notable inserts include electric lighting, and products such as the
automobile,
washer,
and
refrigerator.
Electric
lighting
replaced gas-powered lighting, but still occupied similar overhead space, and the wiring was commonly hidden in the already existing space between studs. While the automobile drastically manipulated
xx
the urban fabric of the United States, and certainly triggered additional programming to homes, its thriving technology hardly becomes integrated into the fabric of them. Items such as the washer and fridge frequently run in line with the existing layouts
Figure 2.8 - Perspective of Philip Johnson’s Glass House, New Canaan, Connecticut
xx
of the home, by simply subtracting a single cabinet or occupying the base space in a closet. Again, these pieces are placed to align with the preconceived architectural idea of the home, rather than being celebrated for their contributions to everyday life. Figure 2.8
represents
this
phenomena.
The
graph
illustrates
both
innovation within the home and general innovation in technology throughout time. It acknowledges that at one time in the distant past, the two were relatively equal, and the home was the apex of technology for humanity. The closest example mentioned in this section would be the Early Colonial home. As time progresses past the point of equality, and due to historical mechanisms such as the
industrial
revolution
and
precise
inventions,
technology
clearly evolves further and more rapidly than the home. The dots represent moments that impact and spark further progression in either homes or technology. Some bridge the gap and exist in both – these are moments like the car or electric lighting. Further, the home line exhibits digression. This occurrence represents the recursive nature of home design to revert to past practice through periods
of revival
and revitalization.
It also hints
at the
American tendency to crudely attempt to illustrate past style through cheap modern means, i.e.: vinyl siding en lieu of wood. The architecture of the home plays a sporadic game of ping pong, where its movements bounce all around its timeline, re-erecting the past or repurposing it in a new fashion. All are contributors to the excessive gap that exists between technology and the home
xx
today.
This
thesis
does
not
aim
to
implement
every
single
technology into the home, as most would not fit, but it does strive to investigate closing the gap between the two. It will consider evolving
technology
as
the
driver
in
design,
rather
than
architectural integrity. This will begin to create more bridge points between technology and the home. Eventually the two will coevolve. While this section does not precisely trace the evolution of the home from Philip Johnson’s glass house up to modern day, those years can be considered synonymous to the trends depicted in the prior explained moments of the American home. This time period exhibits
responses
to
modernism
in
the
home
as
well
as
resurrection of all kinds of past practice. Those resurrections become cheaper and cruder as the American Dream fuels the need for quick mass production of homes. In general, technology’s place within the home remains the same, plugged in and fitted for the architecture – if it can even be called that. As a whole, this section of writing demonstrates the timeline of the home and how its design arrived at the technologically estranged form present today. This sets the foundation for any ideology seeking to break away from this.
xx
3 - AUTOMOBILE COMPARISON Comparison of architecture of the home to the expansive evolution of the car illustrates the stagnant nature of the home throughout
time.
In
the
brief
history
of
the
automobile,
innovations have transformed it from a horse carriage with an internal combustion engine to a zero-emission, fully electric, human adapting vehicle. See Figure 13, an infographic from Jardine Motors
Group
for
technological
highlights
from
the
134
year
history of the automobile. Figure 3.1 illustrates a continual evolution for automobiles. At any given point in the 20th and 21st century, they adapt to new innovation and implemented it in vehicles. 1908 marked the start of mass production of the Model T, by Ford, since then, the industry exhibited multiple peaks in every decade. Over the same time period, the home morphed from one architectural movement to another,
while
clinging
to
representations
of
the
past
in
innovation and technology. Today, the automobile represents a culmination of additive and transformative evolution while the home is one of sporadic nature. A review of the state of the home versus that of the automobile at select moments since the
xx
Figure 3.1 - Jardine Motors automobile history graphic with author color change
xx
automobile’s invention highlights how the two adapt and implement innovation and technology vastly differently.
3a) Model T vs Colonial Revival Beginning with an analysis of the first mass produced car and the
single
family
home
of
the
time,
technological
variation
becomes apparent. As seen in Figure 3.2, the Model T demonstrates use of innovation to the fullest. A section of this vehicle reveals a balance of componentry and human interaction. Mechanisms such as the
“spark
plug,
radiator
rod,
drive
shaft,
and
combustion
chamber” link up sinuously beneath the hood and under the chasse to galvanize the vehicle. Just as involved as the mechanical features
are
those
designed
for
humans.
Elements
such
as
“cushions, cushion springs, doors, steering wheel, hand brake lever, and pedals” are organized to create an interactive mold for the
human
body
to
sit
and
operate
the
automobile.
Both
technological innovation and a person have a clear role within the design of the Model T. While the engine and componentry of the car are separate from the human, they connect at calculated moments through the form of ergonomic cranks, levers, and pedals. This illustrates a working balance between innovative technology of a time and human contact. The Model T sparked the beginning of a world-wide transportation evolution that continues to this day. Does this spark translate into the architecture of the home?
xx
Figure 3.2 - Cross section of original Ford Model T
Figure 3.3 - Plan and Elevation of Early 1900’s housing in U.S. Fig. 14
xx
As deduced from Figure 3.3, and previously laid out history, the design of the home in the early 20th century exhibited little innovation or technological advancement, especially in comparison to the Model T. Ornament and past representation of style drive the
architecture
of
the
Colonial
Revival
home.
Traditional
colonial wood siding, stick framing, and mid-pitched shake shingle roof serve as a colonial canvas to accentuate ornate features such as shutters, railing, columns, and acute trims both inside and out. The same home could have been constructed 150 years prior – relating to the lack of innovation in the home at the time. In 1908, the newfound technology of the internal combustion engine propelled the Model T kinetically into mass production. The home stepped backwards in its design. The architecture of the home and
Figure 3.4 - Image collage by author of Tesla’s Model 3 interior, exterior, and technology - sources in Figures section
xx
innovation of the time remained entirely separate, with little to no integration between the two. This theme proves prevalent even in today’s time.
3b) Tesla vs Developer Home To
illustrate
the
continuation
of
the
home
lacking
technologically in reference to the times, this section will transition
into
cross
examining
the
self-driving,
constantly
evolving, vehicle designs produced by Tesla Motors with a 2020 developer single family home model for the greater Austin, TX area. Tesla’s Model 3 became available to consumers in 2017. This vehicle exhibits an extensive integration of the latest innovation
xx
in safety, comfort, and user adaptability. As seen in Figure 16 and laid out in Matthew DeBord’s Business Insider article, “The Tesla Model 3 interior sets a radical new standard for auto design” (DeBord 2018). The design of the car expresses minimalism. This is prevalent both inside and out. DeBord explains there are extremely view buttons within the car, control is reduced to the expansive touch screen, steering wheel, pedals, and smart phone. Human contact points are carefully controlled and predicted in the design. The vehicle utilizes sensors throughout to create a safe, comfortable, and efficient model for transportation (Model 3). The design questions the role of a human within a car as it offers the choice of autopilot – where the car navigates the road without human error. While questioning that role, it still gives a precise space and program for the body, and in that sense, it aligns with its predecessor, the Model T.
The Model 3 exists as an example of
pushing modern technology to the fullest through the lens of its specific industry. Further, Tesla sparks innovation far beyond the realm of self-driving cars. Fábio
Martins,
a
distinguished
automotive
designer
for
Almadesign, designed and imagined a plausible scheme stemming from Tesla technology. He titles the design Tesla Pod, and it serves as his master’s thesis. Figure 3.5 and 3.6 depict concept images. Yanko
Design,
and
online
magazine
for
international
product
design, published his exemplary work. They explain: “The idea for the Pod is simple. The electric powertrain base
01
Figure 3.5 - Fabio Martins design of Tesla Pod System - assembly rendering
Figure 3.6 - Fabio Martins design of Tesla Pod System - sketches
02
is
common
to
all
modes
of
transport,
while
the
upper
part
alternates between three different pods that serve three different purposes… one for public transport, one for private transport, and one for commercial transport. The platforms and pods/modules are produced independently” (Sheth 2019). Martins’ interpretation of Tesla’s technology stands as a simple
concept,
but
represents
a
vehicle
that
properly
acknowledges innovation of the time while improving quality of life for people. The private module relates most directly to the architecture of the home: “The Private Module below has 4 rotating seats that allow for various interior setups, ranging from the traditional 2×2 seating to seats that face each other like a recreational room. The module is composed of a Carbon Fiber Composite body, with electrochromic windows that lighten and darken to provide passengers with the option of a view or privacy. It also has Sliding Pantograph doors, allowing for minimum amplitude of motion, optimal for close urban spaces” (Sheth 2019). All the features mentioned above exhibit sensor technology that measure and adjusts according to human comfort and safety. The
body
has
its
specific
role,
which
is
to
be
seamlessly
transported from one place to another in whatever comfortable position a person desires. The
modularity
exhibited
in
Martins’
design
contributes
heavily to this thesis. Modularity offers numerous benefits in
01
creating
a
technologically
advanced
device.
It
allows
for
interchangeable parts. Interchangeable parts allow for the new and improved designs to be plugged in and take the place of past, outdated ones, or they can be added into the module system to enhance the existing technology. While Martin exhibits modules in a holistic sense, this thesis could do so on a smaller scale within the home – modulating particular parts of living architecture as to receive technological advancement and innovation. As a preface to an exploration of the 2020 Austin home and its comparison to the technology of and inspired by Tesla, below is a quote from the National Association of Home Builders’ news article, “Housing Starts Finish 2019 Strong”: “Total housing starts for 2019 were 1.29 million, a 3.2 percent gain over the 1.25 total from 2018. Single-family starts in 2019 totaled 888,200, up 1.4 percent from the previous year. Multifamily starts in 2019 totaled 401,600, up 7.3 percent from the previous year” (Housing Starts 2020). These statistics provide proof that developer homes are being constructed
constantly
and
more
each
year
within
the
United
States. The model below serves as a single style that can be multiplied and related to those numbers. Austin, TX displays numerous qualities proving it capable of accepting innovative housing models. Those will be laid out in detail
later
in
this
document.
With
that,
the
2020
housing
counterpart to the thriving Tesla Motors technology aims to fill
02
neighborhoods within its metro area. Century Communities’ San Saba home
model
utilizes
three
elevation
styles
in
its
slender,
alley-loaded design. Figures 19 through 21 depict this home design and the developer describes it as follows: “Over 1600 square feet of admirable space… This home features a well-lit flex room towards the front of the home, which has the option to become a fourth bedroom and third bath. The kitchen overlooks the dining area and spacious great room, providing a comfortable open feel. Located upstairs, you will discover the owner’s suite and two secondary bedrooms that share a common area bathroom. A detached two-bay garage with alleyway access sits directly behind this home, where you also have the option to add a covered patio” (Century Communities). The San Saba starts at $283,990. The dollar amount must be mentioned as it stands as the key driver for developer-driven home design. Also, Century Communities highlights the square footage before delving into any qualitative elements of the home. Dollar amount combines with square footage to create worth for homes like the San Saba. Descriptors like “spacious, open, and great” create a sense of freedom within the space. Further, the design exhibits optional street elevations and a flex room that pushes the theme of spatial freedom. Upon completion, the San Saba exists as four exterior
façades,
one
of
which
latently
refers
to
either
farmhouse, craftsman, or mid-century modern style, with blank studded drywall partitions, clipped into place cabinetry,
01
fixtures, and appliances, all beneath a low pitched prefabricated truss roof. Buyers receive their chunk of conditioned square footage.
Figure 3.7 - San Saba housing model - Elevation
Figure 3.8 - San Saba housing model - Interior
Figure 3.9 - San Saba housing model - Interior
02
What is the role of the human within the blank box?
Until
populated with furniture, electronics, and wall décor, most spaces exhibit
absolutely
no
functionality.
The
architecture
hardly
stands alone or represents what it is – a space for living. Occupants take on full responsibility for fitting the home to their
lifestyle.
opportunity
to
Occupant
advance
chosen
the
home
products closer
serve
to
the
as
the
only
technological
potential of 2020. Compared to Tesla Motors, this home illustrates the extreme gap between capabilities of modern innovation and that found in developer homes. While Tesla inspires fully modulated vehicles exhibiting sensor control and adherence to occupant needs and safety, the San Saba stick frames a two story conditioned space that serves its occupant as a semi-habitable blank canvas. Home design
has
been
stripped
of
innovation,
spaces
speaking
for
themselves, and technological integration. These are replaced by excessive open square footage – as it has become the benchmark for what
is
considered
a
“nice
home.”
This
thesis
strives
to
experiment with the opposite ideology – limiting square footage by integrating and activating spaces through modern technology and innovation.
01
Figure 3.10 - Author-drawn design of tech-enhanced housing for Austin, TX
02
4 - TECH. OF TODAY After laying out the evolution of technology in the home, and comparing it to automobile innovation, clearly there exists a dissonance between it and the rapid evolution of technological practices. In 2020, society accepts a living architecture that hardly agrees with the technological feats available. This section dissects some of those technological feats. Rather than delving into
precise
technologies architecture
company will
be
setting.
products detailed Those
and
services,
and
imagined
technologies
broader in are
backing
a
living Sensors,
Micro-location, and the Internet of Things (IoT).
4a) Sensors Without sensors, neither of the other listed technologies work. Further, neither would work without a sensors counterpart – actuators. Cristian González García et al. explain the difference between sensors and actuators in their research piece, “A review about Smart Objects, Sensors, and Actuators.” They state: “Sensors are specific physical elements that allow us to measure a concrete physical parameter or detect something of the
xx
sensor’s
immediate
actuators
which
environment…
allow
actions
actuators
over
can
themselves
be or
mechanic
over
other
devices, and actions which a specific object allow to perform” (García et al. 2017, 7-8).
Figure 4.1 - Break-down of objects - smart objects vs not-smart ones
xx
Sensors detect and translate into computational data and actuators take that data and respond in a physical sense. As García et al. explain, while sensors and actuators collect and respond to excessive amounts of information in the physical world, they are considered “Not-Smart Objects.” See Figure 22 for a more concise division of smart and not-smart objects. “A Smart Object, also known as Intelligent Product, is a physical element that can be identified throughout its life and interact with the environment and other objects. Moreover, it can act
in
an
intelligent
way
and
independently
under
certain
conditions. Furthermore, Smart Objects have an embedded operating system and they usually can have actuators, sensors, or both [5]” (García et al. 2017, 8). Smart objects can be anything from a smart phone, to a car, to a coffeepot. Each has a specific, guided set of sensors and actuators that help the object become near sentient. The smart phone
diagrammatically
exhibits
the
functions
of
sensors,
actuators, and a single intelligent device. When enabled to do so, your
phone
listens
to
you
through
its
microphones.
These
mechanisms serve as sensors that detect key words or phrases you mention.
Internally,
whether
through
algorithmic
means
or
otherwise, a system serving as the actuator translates those words and phrases into ads, preferences, and communication. All of which are physical elements that are fully viewable on the device and otherwise. The device works even without the touch of a human, thus
xx
making it one of intelligence, and a smart-object. Many smart-objects exhibit much more direct and observable interaction
with
physical
environments.
Relating
back
to
the
previous section on Tesla and smart cars, Giles Kirkland mentions intelligent activity within a Google Car in his article, “How new technologies
have
changed
the
automotive
industry”.
He
says,
“Another autonomous system that recently featured in the Google Car, is road user interpretive software that has been programmed to interpret the common road behavior of other drivers. Shape and motion descriptors allow the cars central processing unit to make intelligent decisions in response to the movements of other road users” (Kirkland 2019). In this example, sensors and actuators work together to physically measure and assert themselves into the world, as they aid in the safe control on a multi-ton vehicle. Sensors and actuators comprise smart objects, and because of that, they belong in this thesis investigation. Within a residential architecture setting, sensors and actuators can be engrained in the architecture, measuring occupants living habits, and then projecting
themselves
as fit onto the occupants
in order to
improve life.
4b) Micro-location Micro-location
finds
objects,
humans,
or
occurrences
geospatially. While most common implementations have been outside in the form of Global Position System (GPS), micro-location can
xx
also be implemented within an architectural setting. Researchers Faheem Zafari, Ioannis Papapanagiotou, and Konstantinos Christidis detail in their article, Micro-location for Internet of Things equipped Smart Buildings, “In smart buildings, due to the indoor nature, it is of primary importance to locate the user in order to enable the interaction with the rest of the interconnected things. Furthermore, the location of the user can be used to provide a wide range of novel services” (Zafari et al. 2017, 4). Without user location, systems do not have points of contact or interaction with a user. In an architectural application, pinpointing people and action within a space allow the space to respond
to
Geo-fencing.
it.
Further,
micro-location
“[Geo-fencing]
defines
a
includes
virtual
the
fence
idea
of
around
a
certain Point of Interest (PoI). This fence can take various geometric shapes, be it rectangular, circular, or polygonal. The goal of a geo-fence is to provide targeted services related to a predefined area” (Zafari et al. 2017, 4). A product that has begun implementing
both
micro-location
and
geo-fencing
is
Apple’s
iBeacon. The device utilizes Bluetooth signal to position devices and people within a space. “The iBeacon periodically transmits a beacon that can be picked up by the [Bluetooth] enabled device that subsequently building”
allows
(Zafari
et
them al.
to
position
2017,
5).
In
themselves a
table
within within
the their
document, Zafari et al. explain Bluetooth enabled locating devices can pinpoint a person within 10cm of their location at any given
xx
point within the detectable space (Zafari et al. 2017, 7). This level
of
precision
can
be
incredibly
informative
for
an
architectural system. For instance, on the scale of a single apartment unit, if micro-location and geo-fencing were engrained in
the
architecture,
the
unit
and
occupant
gain
a
better
understanding of activity in each area of the unit. With this knowledge, the architecture can evolve to the needs and change of the user and manipulate to create new geo-fencing aligning with the users actions.
4c) IoT With Sensors, and Micro-Location detailed, the Internet of Things (IoT) can now be explained and explored. “The fundamental idea for IoT is the interconnection of various
‘Things’
physical
items
such
as
sensors,
tagged/embedded
with
smartphones, sensors
actuators,
such
as
or
chemical
containers with temperature sensors… The cooperation among these devices forms the basic pillar upon which IoT stands and makes it possible for them to achieve the common goals” (Zafari et al. 2017, 3). Essentially IoT serves as a blanket term for the connection of the previously mentioned “smart objects.” Further, the US National Intelligence Council lists IoT on their list of six disruptive technologies for the country and world. In their 2008 report, Disruptive Civil Technologies, the organization measures
xx
Figure 4.2 - Internet of things throughout society
xx
IoT activity of the time and interprets its trajectory for 2025. They examine possible outcomes. In their most extreme vision of IoT in society in 2025 they explain: “Strong demand [for IoT] arises across several major sectors of the economy, as technological wizardry combined with creative business developments
stimulate people’s appetites
for killer
applications that reduce labor and tedium, confer peace of mind, and blur the lines between work, play, and commerce” (NIC 2008, 30). While that quote represents the most extreme integration of IoT
into
society,
it
was
published
in
2008.
Devices
and
applications exhibited in other parts of this thesis paint a technological picture for 2020 that is not far from the one listed above. Cars drive themselves, phones listen while dormant and respond to users, and beacons locate objects and people with exact precision. IoT possesses endless potential of connecting all parts of our increasingly technologically innovative world. Figure 23, drawn from Zafari et al. highlights this potential. Figure 4.2 illustrates IoT operating on a macro-scale and interconnection of devices and practices on a city, state, or country level. Before those possibilities can be fully realized, this thesis argues there must be a more precise and calculated interconnection within the blue circled sub-parts. The arrangement of the residential “bubble” above highlights disadvantages of the current IoT model at that scale. Icons for televisions, phones,
xx
printers, vacuums, etc. are depicted independently. In this sense, they
each
connect
into
the
greater
internet
of
things
by
themselves, with little or no ties to each other. Design of unit or
home
that
adheres
the
actions
of
separate
devices,
interconnects within the residence, and plugs in a cohesive piece to
the
macro
internet
of
things
stands
as
an
architectural
opportunity. Plug-in devices can be combined and evolve together through an architectural framework that allows them to. Current home models limit their interconnection, as laid out previously in the history and car comparison sections.
4d) Chapter Summary Sensors, Micro-Location, and the Internet of Things exist as their own technological concepts, but none of them can operate without the others. These three concepts serve the thesis as instigators for a more evolved living architecture. Throughout this document, there have been hints eluding to a home design that separates itself from current home ideologies and assumptions in order to effectively receive and utilize modern innovation and technologies to better a living environment. Through a combination of sensors, micro-location, and connection to IoT, the design of that home stands possible.
xx
Figure 4.3 - Internet of things, Micro-Location, and Sensors in Buildings
xx
5 - SITELESS TECH. HOUSING 5a) Modern Modularity Modularity is no foreign concept to architecture, especially that of the home. It serves as a source of regulation to design. Le Corbusier expounds upon the concept in Towards a New Architecture, saying, “The regulating line is means to an end; it’s not a recipe. Its choice and modalities of expression given to it are an integral part
of
architectural
acknowledges choice
of
creation”
architectural those
architectural
concepts
regulating
quality
of
(Le
a
Corbusier
1923,
67).
He
need
regulation,
and
the
principles
contribute
to
the
design.
This
thesis
exercises
modularity on multiple scales in order to regulate and make sense of the extreme technological feats of today in an architectural style.
5b) Scaled Modularity Human scale is most important in the architecture of the home. In the design of housing that responds to and includes the latest technological feats of the time, modularity at this scale
v
Figure 5.1 - Author-drawn interpretive modern modularity diagram
vi
stands paramount. Figure 5.1 illustrates an interpretation of modulation. In this concept, it is achieved through division of the unit into blocks, each with their own concept and programmatic technology. Meaning one piece would be technologies related to entertainment, another could be hygiene, and yet another could be relaxation. Within these innovatively programmed elements, further modulation divides them into smaller pieces. Each of the smaller pieces can represent and express a specific innovation related to the program of the larger modular element. All pieces of the design, from the smallest module to the module that is the entire unit,
learn
from
the
occupant
through
embedded
sensors,
micro-location, and connection to IoT. The architecture learns from people inhabiting the space so it can regulate itself and adjust to the specific needs of the occupants. For instance, sensors in a living module detect an occupant’s return on a Sunday afternoon. From voice activity and past observation, actuators prepare the furniture modules for comforted viewing of football, direct airflow to this section of the unit to maintain thermal comfort,
and
modify
window
shading
technology
to
create
a
desirable game viewing experience. Modularity from the building to the human scale allows for opportunity to exchange pieces of the architecture out for new and improved technological modules. Similar to how an iPhone 4 is obsolete in 2020, with ever-evolving innovation in modern times, modules will also need upgrades and exchanges. The modulation on
v
Figure 5.2 - Author-sourced rendering - interior of smart unit
Figure 5.3 - Author-sourced rendering - interior of smart unit
vi
Figure 5.4 - Author-sourced rendering - interior of smart unit
v
vi
all scales allows for this in adherence to trends and occupant preferences. Further, units exhibit the possibility of limited technology
as
much
technology.
This
technology.
A
65
as
they
relates year
exhibit
to
old
a
the
perceived
couple
will
possibility spectrum interact
of
of and
full
use
of
utilize
different amounts and styles of innovation than a 24 year old student, so their unit may have less smart modules and more that represent traditional walled architecture. Figures 5.2 through 5.4 depict a series of images of the same view inside one of these technologically modulated units. In this series, the first image represents the unit in a more dormant state – the occupant has not activated smart features to adhere to their needs. The second image depicts a layer of smart features coming on as the occupant sits in the space. Control of which can be totally learned by the unit or at the hands of the occupant through a device or switch. The final image in the series illustrates the space fully animated by embedded smart devices and features. Monitor modules are turned on and represent the occupant, the bedroom partition screen is lowered for privacy, window modules are tinted, and the furniture morphs to receive the body. Another aspect depicted in the previous figures is the perceived spectrum of
technology
use.
Elements
in
these
renderings
represent
traditional architectural features such as shelving, cabinetry, and the bed. Design of these receives the infill of adjacent technology enhanced modules while relating to an occupant that
v
does not fully desire a totally enhanced unit. Also, it begins to hint at the construction and detailing of the unit, where both smart elements and dormant traditional architectural elements are erected
simultaneously
in
their
prefabricated
process.
That
process will be detailed next.
5c) Building Modularity On
a
larger
scale,
modularity
acts
as
a
principle
for
assembling buildings and neighborhoods efficiently. Relating to the same principles as on smaller scales, units can be assembled in a user prescribed way off-site, then shipped to site and placed accordingly. Prefabrication significantly cuts down on the cost for each unit while still offering a diversity of unit types per the choices of the inhabitants. The modulation allows for numerous assemblages as shown in Figure 5.5. Also, this figure depicts the concept of vertical sites. Architectural uniqueness can be found in unit assemblages as each will be unique to a specific site and to respond to it demographics, economy, and environment. Austin, TX serves this thesis as an investigative ground for interpreting technologically enhanced homes. The reasoning for that can be found in the next section.
vi
Figure 5.5 - Author-sourced drawing - modularity at building scale and vertical yard space
v
vi
5d) Unit Wall Modularity The first diagrams depict the concept of modularity and exchangeability within the walls of each technologically-enriched unit. The first series illustrates a diversity of possible unit shapes per occupant specifications. Figure 5.6 through 5.10 show the constuctability of this kind of system. Modules are found at the smalled scale. They allow for a diverse wall make-up that can fit in and around traditional program elements as depicted in earlier renderings.
Figure 5.6 - Author-sourced drawing - modular technology and unit shape diversity v
Figure 5.7 - Author-sourced drawing - modular technology in walls vi
Figure 5.8 - Author-sourced drawing - Wall Assembly v
Figure 5.9 - Author-sourced drawing - Wall Assembly with traditional elements vi
Figure 5.10 - Author-sourced drawing - Wall Assembly from exterior v
6 - AUSTIN, TX Technology and innovation plant themselves firmly within the rolling hills of central Texas. Specifically, the thriving metro area of Austin exhibits an extreme flocking of tech companies in recent years. Those thrive in all areas of the city as illustrated in Figure 6.1. The expansion of industry of this nature in Austin recently earned it the name “Silicon Hills.” This technological boom, demographic factors, and recent developmental planning and projections depict Austin as a receptive city for innovative housing design. The city of Austin diligently monitors demographic, economic, and developmental trends to plan its future. Two representations of this exist in the publications City of Austin Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis and Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan. The first
is an analysis
performed
by Root Policy
Research
that
“examines demographic and housing market trends since a [2014] study was conducted and identifies the greatest housing needs in Austin” (Root Policy Research 2020, 1). The second source serves as an evolving plan adopted by the City Council of Austin that aims to sustainably grow the city in a 21st century context. Both serve as sources that illustrate the agreeability of Austin as a suitor for innovative housing.
vi
Figure 6.1 - Author-sourced drawing -
Figure 6.2 - Author-sourced drawing -
Figure 6.3 - Author-sourced drawing -
Figure 6.4 - Author-sourced drawing -
Austin, TX Tech Companies
Austin, TX Trains and Highways
Austin, TX 1-35 wealth divide
Austin, TX Sites
4
3
v
In the investigation of technologically innovative housing, a diversity of sites must be considered in order to demonstrate its
successes
depicted
in
diversity.
and
failures
Figure
The
6.2
following
in
several
through four
6.4,
macro
typological Austin
scale
forms.
exhibits
sites
are
As
that to
be
considered for the design of Tech. Living. They are chosen for their diverse demographic, economic, and developmental nature. 1.
Lower East Riverside – Oltorf Neighborhood
2.
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd / University of Texas
3.
Intersection of I-35 and Austin Light Rail (Orange Line)
4.
Jollyville Open Space
6a) Lower East Riverside The Lower East Riverside site fully sits on the east side of I-35, the main vehicular artery that dissects the city of Austin. The
highlights this and the following information. The City of
Austin
Comprehensive
Housing
Market
Analysis
explains,
“High
poverty areas are very concentrated in east Austin and along I-35” and “Many areas in north and south-central Austin have relatively high levels of residents with less than a college degree.” The analysis also explains the same area of the city exhibits above average
unemployment
(Root
Policy
Research
2020,
12-16).
Essentially, the interstate serves as a massive redline through the city, segregating much of its flourishing economy from lower income neighborhoods. Also, adjacent this site exists the largest
vi
concentration of jobs in the city, see Figure 31 (Imagine Austin 2018, 103). Numerous business parks, logistical warehouses, and corporations Developing
densely
occupy
tech-living
city
typologies
space east
south of
the
of
this
site.
interstate
is
paramount in determining their agreeability among a full diversity of occupants. Interpreted from the City of Austin Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis graphics, the Lower East Riverside site indicates an occupant type of 18 - 55 year olds, with income split evenly between middle and low levels, who are primarily renters with small households of four people max. All are signs that lend themselves to low-density and modest technological typologies with space for vehicles and support structures.
6b) Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Site The Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. site connects downtown density to the University of Texas. As interpreted from City of Austin Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis graphics, this macro site sits firmly plugged into Austin’s transit infrastructure – both bus and light rail. More so than any of the others, this site exhibits walkability and much lower personal vehicle use. The occupant
type
is
primarily
young
wealthy
(56%
high
income)
individuals between 18-40 years old. There is a high population of aging adults (65+) compared to other comparable cities as well (Root Policy Research 2020 - Appendix A, 7). People in this area rent alone or with few roommates. As it sits between the dense core
v
Figure 6.5 - Author-sourced drawing - Lower East Riverside site
vi
of Austin and the university, the Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. site transitions from the high density of downtown to the mid density of the university.
This leaves
possible
sites in the spaces
between these programs, such as around fast food restaurants, between high-rises, and within interstate turnpikes. This coupled with the occupant type lend the site to high and mid density infill and vertical unit arrangement. The units could be smaller in scale to relate to the smaller household size.
6c) Intersection of I-35 and Austin Light Rail Along
with
its
transit
infrastructural
potential,
the
Intersection of I-35 and Austin Light Rail site parades massive potential for acceptability for a tech-living design. It aligns most directly with the averages of the whole city. Where the city of Austin exhibits 33% high, 43% middle, and 24% low income residents, this area shows 27% high, 41% middle, and 32% low income (Root Policy Research 2020 - Appendix A, 35). Further, this macro site stretches across I-35 in an attempt to bridge the previously mentioned redline in the urban fabric. At the north end of the macro site, there exists a massive regional center within the city. Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan details the implications of this. “Regional centers are the most urban places in the region. These
centers
are
and
will
become
the
retail,
cultural,
recreational, and entertainment destinations for Central Texas.
v
Figure 6.6 - Author-sourced drawing - Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. site
vi
These are the places where the greatest density of people and jobs and the tallest buildings in the region will be located. Housing in regional apartments,
centers mixed
will mostly
use
consist
buildings,
row
of low to high-rise
houses,
and
townhouses.
However, other housing types, such as single-family units, may be included depending on the location and character of the center.” Any desired site within this area is a short light-rail or bus ride from this center or the regional center of downtown Austin. vacant
Unit mall
arrangements lots,
and
will
behind
fit
within
big
box
interstate
buildings.
spaces,
They
will
primarily be low to mid-level density infill of these sites.
6d) Jollyville Open Space The Jollyville Open Space site exists as the most suburban of the four sites. Situated around an abandoned quarry and in the town of Jollyville, the area exhibits the lowest residential density, a
rate
of
technological
43%
home
ownership,
companies.
and
proximity
Specifically,
to
EBay’s
suburban regional
headquarters sit on the western edge of the site and Apple’s proposed regional headquarters are going to be erected in its southern open space. The occupant type for the site would be primarily small families living in multi-bedroom units. Homes would be comprised of a vast majority of middle and high income people. Also, there is an above average demographic of people 65+ years old (Root Policy Research 2020 - Appendix A, 18). Even though
v
Figure 6.7 - Author-sourced drawing - Intersection of 1-35 and Austin Light Rail site
vi
the macro site touches the light-rail system, no station currently exists, so households in this area often utilize multiple vehicles per home. At the building scale, sites in this region must be creatively deduced, as to not impede on the environmental quality of the site. They can be found along an existing dam, about the abandoned quarry, and within the existing and proposed parking areas for the corporations. In order to align with the occupant and regional residential ideologies, the Jollyville tech-living wants to be a low density, primarily single-family, detached typology with arrangement in neighborhood fashion.
v
Figure 6.8 - Author-sourced drawing - Jollyville Open Space site
vi
Figure 6.9 - Author-sourced drawing - Site design for Lower East Riverside
Figure 6.10 - Author-sourced drawing - Site design for Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
v
Figure 6.11 - Author-sourced drawing - Site design for Intersection of 1-35 and Austin Light Rail
Figure 6.12 - Author-sourced drawing - Site design for Jollyville Open Space
vi
7 - TECH. INTERCHANGE 7a) Site Maximization and Structure Figure 7.1 through 7.6 depict the design tactic implored to create a form for the Tech. Interchange Housing Project. The series
begins
with
the
underutilized
interchange
site.
This
relates to the idea that a technologically advanced housing model can fit nearly anywhere in an urban fabric. It moves along to depict the addition and connection to a proposed train station as part of a future with little to no required cars for occupants. The series
of diagrams
culminates
in an image detailing
the
structural system and then a conceptual diagram illustrating the interconnectivity within the building. The structural system has precast,
prefabricated,
poured
in
place,
and
heavy
timber
elements. The prefabricated and precast parts limit cost and are more
technologically
responsible.
The
erected-in-place
pieces
related to the infrastructure needed to support an innovative system. The concept diagram at the end highlights the idea of a building that learns and evolves from within and by observing occupants and actions around the building.
v
Figure 7.1 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Site
vi
Figure 7.2 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Site Extruded
v
Figure 7.3 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Train Station and Setback
vi
Figure 7.4 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE
v
- Carved and Connected
Figure 7.5 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Heavy timber, precast concrete, and poured on site concrete structure
vi
7b) Building Interconnectivity
v
Figure 7.6 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Technology connectivity
vi
Figure 7.7 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - connections in section
Figure 7.8 - Author-sourced drawing TECH. INTERCHANGE - connections in section
v
Figure 7.9 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - connections in section
vi
7c) Smart Features Throughout
Figure 7.10 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Running Track Tech.
v
Figure 7.11 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - floor sweep tech.
Figure 7.12 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - solar tech.
vi
7d) Final Imagery
v
Figure 7.13 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE vi
v
Figure 7.13 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE
vi
Figure 7.14 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Ground Floor Plan
v
Figure 7.15 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Train Connection
Level Plan
vi
Figure 7.16 - Author-sourced drawing - TECH. INTERCHANGE - Typical Floor Plan
v
8 - CONCLUSION XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
vi
Baker, John Milnes. American House Styles: a Concise Guide. New York: W.W. Norton, 1994. City of Austin. “Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan.” austintexas.gov, June 2018. https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Planning/Im agineAustin/webiacpreduced.pdf. Davidson, Marshall Bowman. The American Heritage: History of Notable American Houses. New York: American Heritage Publishing Co., 1971. DeBord, Matthew. “The Tesla Model 3 Interior Sets a Radical New Standard for Auto Design.” Business Insider. Business Insider, July 20, 2018. https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-model-3-interior-is-agamechanger-pictures-2018-2.
Perez, Adelyn. “AD Classics: The Glass House / Philip Johnson.” ArchDaily. ArchDaily, May 17, 2010. https://www.archdaily.com/60259/ad-classics-the-glass-housephilip-johnson. Ford Model T section views, January 1, 1970. http://progress-isfine.blogspot.com/2015/08/ford-model-t-sections.html.
García, Cristian González, Daniel B. Meana-Llorián, Cristina Pelayo GBustelo, and Juan Manuel Cueva Lovelle. “A Review about Smart Objects, Sensors, and Actuators.” Special Issue on Advances and Applications in the Internet of Things and Cloud Computing, n.d. https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2017.431. “Housing Starts Finish 2019 Strong.” NAHB. Accessed November 23, 2020. https://www.nahb.org/News-and-Economics/IndustryNews/Press-Releases/2020/01/Housing-Starts-Finish-2019Strong#:~:text=Total%20housing%20starts%20for%202019,percent%20fr om%20the%20previous%20year. Jardine Motors UK. “The History of Car Technology.” Driving Seat. Accessed November 23, 2020. https://news.jardinemotors.co.uk/lifestyle/the-history-of-cartechnology. “Tesla Self-Driving Demonstration.” Tesla, Inc, November 19, 2016. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot. Kirkland, Giles. “How New Technologies Have Changed the Automotive Industry.” Oponeo.co.uk, July 11, 2019. https://www.oponeo.co.uk/blog/how-new-technologies-have-changedthe-automotiveindustry#:~:text=The%20biggest%20change%20that%20has,technology%2 0is%20that%20of%20autonomy.&text=Most%20modern%20cars%20feature%2 0autonomous,and%20work%20out%20potential%20collisions. Le Corbusier. Toward a New Architecture. Dover Publications, Inc., 1986.
“Model 3.” Tesla. Accessed January 27, 2021. https://www.tesla.com/model3. Root Policy Research. “City of Austin Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis.” austintexas.gov, 2020. https://austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Housing/Austin% 20HMA_final.pdf. “San Saba New Floor Plan at Crystal Springs - The Coves in Leander, TX.” New Floor Plan at Crystal Springs - The Coves in Leander, TX. Accessed November 23, 2020. https://www.centurycommunities.com/find-your-home/texas/austinmetro/leander/crystal-springs/crystal-springs-thecoves/plans/san-saba-1684. Sheth, Sarang. “Sarang Sheth.” Yanko Design - Modern Industrial Design News, January 22, 2019. https://www.yankodesign.com/2019/01/22/teslas-interchangeabletravel-pod-system-shows-modularity-in-transportation/. “Smart Ecosystem: Secrets of the Successful Smart Building.” WORKTECH Academy, May 21, 2020. https://www.worktechacademy.com/smartecosystem-secrets-successful-smart-building/. SRI Consulting Business Intelligence. Disruptive Civil Technologies Six Technologies with Potential Impacts on US Interests out to 2025. National Intelligence Council, 2008. Zafari, Faheem, Ioannis Papapanagiotou, and Konstantinos Christidis. “Micro Location for Internet of Things Equipped Smart Buildings,” May 25, 2017.