Islands: Connected Isolation | DS19w | Handout by fabian neuhaus

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Island: Connected Isolation (Calgary, Alberta) Winter 2019

“Arriving at each new city, the traveler finds again a past of his that he did not know he had: the foreignness of what you no longer are or no longer possess lies in wait for you in foreign, unpossessed places.” ― Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities

Cover Image: Calgary South Islands. Map showing the six communities of Kingsland, Fairview, Haysbro, Acadia, Southwood and Willopark in the south of Calgary along Macleod Trail. Previous spread: Aerial Photgraph of Macload Trail, 1957. Aerial Photograph, University of Calgary Library, Map Archive. Part showing the six community site in south Calgary.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

CONTENTS St 18 design studio

Teaching approach

Course learning outcomes

Site map

Program outline

Schedule

Portland trip

Process design

On the matrix as a working tool

On the precedent as a working tool

Analysis

Programming

Flows

Form

Final presentation

Appendix

Special budgetary requirements

Means of evaluation

Grading scale

Cacb student performance criteria

Notes

Recommended readings

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Course Outline

Environmental Design Planning 644, Advanced Professional Planning Studio (http://www. ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/current/gscourse-desc-main.html) ISLAND: connected isolation Course Number EVDP 644 – B02; 6 units; F(0-8) Term Winter 2019 Class Days: Mo, Tu, We, Fr 14:00-18:00, PF 3140 Instructor Fabian Neuhaus, Contact: fabian.neuhaus@ucalgary.ca Office PF 4182, hours by appointment.

Studio An advanced studio, exploring contemporary themes in planning and professional planning practice. Centres on a real-world problem or client project; involves analysis, synthesis, and formulation of a planning or urban design solution. Culminates in a professional report and presentation. For this studio, we will be working with the communities of Kingsland, Fairview, Haysbro, Acadia, Southwood and Willow Park in the south of Calgary under the title of Island: connected isolation. These six communities share Macleod Trail, leading south from the city centre. This corridor is filled with businesses and trades as well as infrastructures such as road transport and the Calgary Light Rail Transit (CTrain). Each community forms an island in the rough urban see, separated by roads and parking lots. We will be working across the six communities focusing on particular aspects attempting to interconnect and weaving them together to form an archipelago. The communities (all built 60s/70s) have already identified a range of aspects they feel cross the boundaries of their community island and have to be addressed not in isolation but collectively. These include the building stock (replacement and change), the population (elderly and young families), changing lifestyle and housing, businesses adapt to chaining demographics and technology and others. Of interest is what happens between and across the individual community islands. All of these topics circle explicitly around access and permeability. Objectives – Course Learning Outcomes Following this course students are able to: • Understand their own creative process • Formulate and design the creative process, both individually and collaboratively • Engage with real-world settings and their respective communities • Understand the perspective of real-world stakeholders concerning the built environment • Can engage with and respond to the views of community and stakeholders and integrate them into the project processes • To experiment with urban design principles • Translate sustainable concepts into form for a specific context • Refine abilities to use a range of media including drawing, collage, map, modelling and communicate ideas effectively

Previous spread: Schalansky, J., 2010. Atlas of remote islands: fifty islands I have not visited and never will. Translated from the German [orig. 2009]. ed. Translated by C. Lo. London: Particular. pp 72-73.

Teaching Approach The design studio is a problem-based learning environment where students tackle the problem independently, guided by the instructor. The studio is a setting and at the same time a method. The design project is to be developed individually according to the brief (handout). Students are expected to consolidate their knowledge and expertise from theory courses and previous studios into the development of the project for this studio, and they can choose their own focus within the framework of the brief. The focused is on the design of physical form on the ground as a spatially formulated project. The teaching formats vary and includes lectures, group work, group discussions, desk reviews, crit session, panel discussions and presentation. The work is undertaken both individually and in groups. The groups are expected to develop an effective working partnership based on an open and inclusive practice. While the goal is a product, of interest, is the process leading to it. The studio acts as an environment not just to test ideas for this product but to develop them. The students are expected to engage creatively with the topic and experiment with a variety of approaches to evolve their concepts driving their ideas and continuously refine them. As a working tool to design and record the design process, we will be working with the ds-Matrix. The focus for this studio is the community, and we will engage with the real-world local community (Calgary South Central (CSC)as mentioned above) and various stakeholders (connected to CSC) on a continuous basis throughout the studio. These meetings will take place in the community and we will travel down to the Calgary South Central area frequently. The studio consists of six assignments each of which will be presented to and discussed with a panel in a crit session, but also discussed with the communities and their representatives. Desk reviews will take place weekly to discuss the project status and review progress. These six assignments are not to be treated in isolation but form part of the same continuous process leading to the final proposal.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Content: Topic Areas & Detailed Class Schedule Week 1 (Jan 11) Introduction Week 2 (Jan 14-18) Island – explore and map the site (on site) Week 3+4 (Jan 22-28) Inputs – Stakeholder input community, business, developer, transport, services (on site) Week 4,5,6 (Jan 29-Feb 15) Analysis – detailed analysis of the site, exploring of topics of interest and setting agenda for project development Week 7 (Feb 18-22) no class – term break Week 8+9 (Feb 25-Mar 04) incl. Saturday, March 02 Workshop – community workshop, preparation and documentation Week 9+11 (Mar 05-08 and Mar 18-22) Programming – development of strategy and program for the site Week 10 (Mar 11-15) No class – block week Week 12, 13, 14, 15 and16 (Mar 25-Apr20) incl. Saturday, April 20 Proposal – concrete development drawing on all previous phases proposing a project for the site and presenting it at an open house event to the community (Sa, April 20) Note: please take note of the Saturday activities to engage with the community and ensure you plan accordingly to be available for those days. The schedule can change depending on the availability of the community. • • • • •

Means of Evaluation In order to pass the course, a passing grade in each assignment is to be achieved. The combined assignments make up the final course grade. There is no final exam in this course. Assignments are due on the day of the crit, 11:59 - noon, submitted digitally on D2L (individual submission should be no larger than 12mb) and printed (pinup) for a panel discussion. Students are expected to participate in all events actively (see schedule) both on campus and externally in the community and work independently on their project throughout the course.

Evaluation will be based on the project assignments. Some of the work is to be completed in groups and some individually. Students will receive a common grade for work done in groups unless it is clear to the instructors the balance of work has been unfairly distributed between team members. Class participation is a vital component of the grade and will be evaluated based on attendance and participation to class, studio, and group work. Any anticipated absence should be communicated to the teaching team as soon as possible. Note: a passing grade in each individual assignment has to be reached in order to pass the course as a whole. Late submission of work is not acceptable; grades will be deducted for work submitted later than the deadline specified in the assignment brief or as discussed in class. One grade will be deducted per late day for example an A will be downgraded to A-.

10|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Course Outline Program outline - not to scale.

input

archipelago

ANALYSIS

GUIDED TOUR communnity focus busines focus developers focus services focus transport focus

INTRODUCTION

MILESTONES

Pre-Studio

island

TASK what is to be worked on

OBJECTIVES what is to be learned / explored

LEARNING OUTOCOMES

. overview . format . expectations

group

composition of work format

individual

FORMAT

group

individual

TIMELINE

. Psychogeography

. Site Model

. de-composition . re-compos .. density .. combinati .. streets .. corridors and axis .. boundaries .. objects .. islands .. flows

. explore, experience, formalise, connect

. abstraction . overview The students engage in discussions with local stakeholders to learn from their perspective and understand their ideas and expectations for the future development of the site. This is to be process and a personal statement in reaction to it has to be formulated.

. selection . investigation . conclusion

Get to know the site, explore its spaces and experience the atmospheres present. This is then to be reworked in a personal geography represented as a map in the spirit of the phsychogeography movement.

* Conduct an experiential overview of the site (given the constraints of time and space) * Effectively reflect on the experience * Translate the experience into a

* Actively engage in a discussion with stakeholders/experts * Extract relevant information from an

* Understand the various laye an urban site * Plan and Implement an thorough analysis of an urban * Synthesize observations to

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

sition ions

ers of site

reflection

CONSULTATION

PROPOSAL

development group

PROGRAMMING

programming group

summary individual

WORKSHOP

preparation

concept

. engagement . present and listen . record . compile . synthesise

To plan, prepare and hold a community event with the local community based around the topics researched in the analysis phase but open enough to extend to emerging topics. The material should be recorded in a practical manner and then processed to formulate an individual position as to how the project should shape the future of the site.

The group formulates a comprehensive project program for the site based on the analysis and in response to the various inputs. This program is to be understood as a rough draft of the project focusing on functions, flows and stakeholder.

The group formulates a concrete proposal as to how the various inputs are addressed and shape the future of the site physically. This has to engage the various levels of urban planning from policy to urban form and infrastructure to public space.

Develop a mode to present the project effectively to a public audience. This includes talking points and means of recording of feedback. The feedback then is to be reflected upon in comparison to the MX progress report.

* Plan an engagement event * Effectively engage with the community * Recording of input

* Experiment with developing a alternative story line for a site * Formulate a series of functions that tie in with

* Experimenting with urban planning principles * Propose a design of physical form * Understand the implication of form for planning activities - vice

* To communicate ideas clearly and effectively to a specific audience * Engage wit the

|11

12|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Course Outline Term Schedule and Assignment Deadlines

INFO

ISLANDS

INPUT

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 1 (individual)

Fr - 11 Jan Introduction

We - 02 Dec Pre-Studio Info

Mo - 14 Jan Studio/Field Work Tu - 15 Jan Studio/Field Work

Th - 12 Dec Map Launch

We - 16 Jan Studio/Field Work We - 02 Jan Start of Term

Th - 10 Jan Start of Classes

10%

W00

W01

Fr - 18 Jan Review ISLAND KickOﬀ INPUT

W02

ANAL

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 2 (individual)

Mo - 21 Jan INPUT - Guided Tour Model Tu - 22 Jan INPUT - Busines Model We - 23 Jan INPUT - Developer Model Fr - 25 Jan INPUT - Services/Transport Model Mo - 28 Jan Summary Discussion INPUT, Groups, Kick-Oﬀ Analysis

10%

W03

Evaluation and Cours Total Assessment 3

Tu - 29 Jan Input: Zoning Studio Work We - 30 Jan

Fr - 01 Feb Input: People and O Studio Work Mo - 04 Feb Desk Review

W04

Tu - 05 Feb Studio Work We - 06 Feb Desk Review

Fr - 08 Feb Input: Community, D Studio Work Mo - 11 Feb Input: Laser Training Desk Review Tu - 12 Feb Studio Work We - 13 Feb Desk Review

Fr - 15 Feb ANALYSIS Review Mo - 18 Feb Term Break Tu - 19 Feb Term Break We - 20 Feb Term Break Th - 21 Feb Term Break Fr - 22 Feb Term Break

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

ANALYSIS

e Grading (individual)

10%

W03

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 3 (group)

20%

Mo - 04 Feb Desk Review

W04

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 4

Mo - 25 Feb Desk Review

Tu - 29 Jan Input: Zoning Studio Work We - 30 Jan

PROGRAMMING 10%

W08

Tu - 26 Feb Studio Work

Fr - 01 Feb Input: People and Open Space Studio Work

ansport

on INPUT, alysis

WORKSHOP

W05

We - 27 Feb Desk Review

Sa - 02 Mar Community Workshop

We - 06 Feb Desk Review

Mo - 04 Mar Summary Workshop Kick-Oﬀ Programming Input: Design and Policy

Fr - 08 Feb Input: Community, Dr S. Goopy, 2pm Studio Work Mo - 11 Feb Input: Laser Training Desk Review Tu - 12 Feb Studio Work

W06

W09

20%

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 6 (group)

Mo - 25 Mar Desk Review

Tu - 05 Mar Input: Infrastructure Finance Studio Work We - 06 Mar Desk Review Fr - 08 Mar Input: Policy Workshop Studio Work Mo - 11 Mar Block Week

Fr - 01 Mar Studio Work

Tu - 05 Feb Studio Work

Evaluation and Course Grading Total Assessment 5

PROPOSAL

W10

Fr -29 Mar Studio Work Mo - 01 Apr Desk Review

We - 13 Mar Block Week

Tu - 02 Apr Studio Work

Th - 14 Mar Block Week

We - 03 Apr Desk Review

Fr - 15 Mar Block Week

Fr - 05 Apr Studio Work

W11

Mo - 08 Apr Desk Review

We - 13 Feb Desk Review

Tu - 19 Mar Studio Work

Tu - 09 Apr Studio Work

Fr - 15 Feb ANALYSIS Review - Panel

We - 20 Mar Desk Review

We - 10 Apr Desk Review

Fr - 22 Mar PROGRAMMING Review - Panel

Fr - 12 Apr Studio Work

Mo - 18 Feb Term Break

W07

W12

Tu - 26 Mar Input: Planning Law Studio Work We -27 Mar Desk Review

Tu - 12 Mar Block Week

Mo - 18 Mar Desk Review

30%

Tu - 19 Feb Term Break

Mo - 15 Apr

We - 20 Feb Term Break

Tu - 16 Apr

Th - 21 Feb Term Break

We - 17 Apr Final Crit - Panel

Fr - 22 Feb Term Break

Fr - 19 Apr

Sa - 20 Apr Community Consultation Reﬂection Mo - 22 Apr Tu - 23 Apr

W13

W14

W15

W16

|13

14|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Image above: FN, 2018-12-05. Situations on site. Workshop Community Mapping Acadia-Heritage Coalition. Image next page: Survey and Mapping Branch, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. Midnapore 1:25k NTS (1960s). Information current as of 1969. Printed 1972. Available online from the University of Calgary Library: https:// library.ucalgary.ca/c.php?g=382137&p=2589277

16|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Process Design Matrix (MX)

Presentation: Thereafter this forms part of each submission.

On the Matrix as a working tool

Design is a complicated subject where everything and nothing matters. Humans are fundamentally designers — humans create artifacts, shelters, communities, and landscapes. Design involves conceiving, representing, and executing constructions across a wide range of scales. Traditional, or pre-modern, cultures tend to develop well-established design practices that evolve slowly over time and reflect cultural and often religious practices. Modern cultures, since the Renaissance, have placed an emphasis on individual human creativity resulting in the culture of celebrated designers. Postmodern culture uses a wide variety of traditional, modern, and contemporary techniques. Design can be subjective and/or objective, artistic and/or scientific, structured and/or unstructured, borrowed and/or original, material and/or immaterial. Ultimately design is creative and technical and satisfies the needs and aspirations of a culture in that it creates culture. Increasingly, designers are faced with the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Design draws from what some scholars have called practice knowledge (Cross, N., 2006. Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer London.). You as the designer can make this your own process, you take control of it based on your judgment that makes sense in the broader narrative. In other words, you as the designer take ownership of and responsibility for it. To help structure this ongoing decision-making process, we are introducing the matrix (MX) as a working tool. It guides the conversation. The idea is to use the proposed families of keywords as a reference to select a hand full of key areas that are of specific interest to the task at hand or the project at large. The four families are: temporarily, process, place and representation and organised in two layers: keywords and examples. The focus is on the keywords, the examples are for illustrative purposes. See short description of keywords on page 18. For your selection you rate each keyword on a scale of 1 to 3 regarding their importance (personal/group judgment/discussion), 3 bing the most important one. Instead of touching on every subject we want you to focus on the areas that are significant for your proposal. The rating should be distributed about equally in 1/3s. Make sure to be able to support your decision with a clear argument. The top four subjects areas that emerge will guide your tasks for the assignment. As you learn more about your project through the investigation and design work you can make adjustments on the fly to your initial rating, but this must be documented and again be backed up by a coherent argument. Make sure this process is well documented. This process will form part of your assignment submission/presentation where you are required to explain your matrix as a process before and after the phase. This documented decision-making process will be the basis to discuss your proposal. Step by step: . Discuss the subject areas in all four families concerning the assignment and the project at large in the group. . Rate each area on a scale of 1 to 3 with about 1/3 in each classification. . Visualyse your ratings as a spider diagram . Document the arguments for your decision . Focus the work of the assignment according to your selection . Make adjustments as required only as a group after discussion . Always document any changes made to the original choice. Submit the matrix and the documentation together with your assignment.

|17

mix

gr am pr o

n fun

ion

ca tio n

ion

...

ctio

...

ef ic it

ric fa b

attr act

...

ien tat

sity den

ol o rph mo al e sc

ia l

n io at

vig na

po te

land u s

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

cu cir

...

i lat

c pra

refe renc e

tice

eme mov

co n text

lit y ra

mode

of tran

sport

nt se

connection

ity activ

m po

ark

p re

landm

n io time

e pl ac

s rc e

ecolo gy

so u re

pla

fra m

material

phere atmos

clim

ate

ty rolo hyd

ers i div bio

n io

s lu

ics

nom eco

ce practi

ate

public / priv

expression

ics polit

cti era i nt

ps ou gr

ste

lic

c ex

l no ch e t

en er

b na tai us

l cia

y ilit

cod e

...

reg ula tio n

r inf

a sp

re ctu u r st

cultur

lic ub

develo

lit

p sup

sequence

ua (q

es servic ities facil

history

s es oc pr

...

or k

pmen t

18|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Process Design Matrix (MX) Families

The Matrix Families *TEMPORALITY *Function - The workings and usages of a planning program that give space to an activity. See also Functionalism: Theory that good design results from or is identical with functional efficiency, i.e. architecture should be determined by function alone. (Curl, J.S., 2015. The Oxford dictionary of architecture. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.297.) Example: *land use, *mix, *program *Activity - The doing of sorts, usually human activity in the sense of doing something, going somewhere. At the same time, this refers to the act as well as the provision thereof/therefor. Example: *circulation, *practice, *movement,*mode of transport *History - the connection to the broader context in the past concerning the aging and processional change of all things. Includes both physical and conceptual arrangements and focuses profoundly on temporal sequences/ narratives. History is dynamic rather than static (Giedion, S., 1982. Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition. 5th ed., rev. and enl. ed. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. p5). To look at, investigate history means to change it: every spectator at every period - at every moment, indeed - inevitably transforms the past according to his own nature. Example: *time, *sequence, *development, *continuity *PROCESS *Regulation - collective agreements on defined aspects that tie to specific requirements to full fill and meet the required standards. Example: *code, *policy, *framework, *plan *Social - an attitude or behavior which takes the interests or needs of others into account as the organisational principles of humans as social beings and their implications for social relationships and social interaction. With a focus on the tendency to form groups in various ways including the division of labor as economics and the possible moments of friction, e.g. power. Example: *exclusion, *groups, *religion, *interaction, *economics *Culture - the ways social interaction and

organisation principles manifest themselves in both practice and physical form. Example: *politics, *public / private, *expression, *practice, *technology *PLACE *Ecology - understood as an interconnected system of natural factors that make up the environment. Example: *material, *atmosphere, *climate, *hydrology, *biodiversity *Resources - raw material or supply available. Often associated with a benefit or potential product. A resource can both be physical and intellectual. It is in the form of energy of the constrained by the idea of a closed energy circle in which energy can be transformed and reshaped, but not be lost. Example: *waste, *energy, *sustainability, * human resource *Infrastructure - the provision of facilities and systems for specific *function or *activities. Not exclusively physical but instead defined as hard and soft infrastructure. It can range from Bridges to social services and belong both to the public or private domain. Example: *public space, *supply, *facilities, *services *REPRESENTATION *Context - the surroundings to which a piece in both a physical and theoretical sense is linked or can be linked. Often requires a narrative. There is always a context. Example: *connection, *landmark, *reference, *attraction *Location - place in both a geographical and imaginary sense and the ways it relates to other sites. It can be well defined or fuzzy by physical objects, memories, references or narratives. As an entity, it can carry attributes and also influences its occupancy, neighbors and interactions. Example: *orientation, *navigation, *potential/deficit *Fabric - the build-up of structures and *processes in the context of a cultural landscape as a result of human activity. Example: *scale, *morphology, *density

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|19

Process Design Readings

RECOMMENDED READINGS

Alexander, C., 1965. A City is not a Tree - Part I+ II. Architectural Forum, 122(1), pp.58–62. Burckhardt, L., 2015. Why is landscape beautiful?: the science of strollology. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser. Calvino, I., 1997. Invisible Cities. New Ed ed. London: Vintage. Castree, N., 2013. A Dictionary of Human Geography. Oxford paperback reference A Dictionary of human geography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Defoe, D. (1719). The life, and strange surprizing adventures of Robinson Crusoe, mariner: Who lived eight and twenty years alone in an un-inhabited island on the coast of America, near the mouth of the Great River Oroonoque. Who having been cast on shore by shipwreck, wherein all the ship’s crue perished but himself. With an account how he was at last taken up and preserv’d by pyrates. Written by himself and deliver’d to a friend. London: Printed for the book-sellers of London and Westminster. Deleuze, G., 2004. Desert Islands. In: Desert Islands and Other Texts, 1953-1974, Semiotext(e) foreign agents series. Los Angeles, CA : Cambridge, Mass.: Semiotexte ; distributed by MIT Press, pp.9–14. Jackson, J.B., 1970. The Stranger’s Path. In: Landscape in Sight, Published in 2000. London: Yale University Press. Latour, B., 1996. On actor-network theory. Soziale Welt, 47(4), pp.369–381. Lehnerer, A., 2008. Grand Urban Rules. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Lynch, K., 1960. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Maas, W., ESARQ and MVRDV, 2000. Costa Iberica: Upbeat to the Leisure City. Barcelona: Actar. Perec, G., 2010. An attempt at exhausting a place in Paris. Imagining science. Translated by M. Lowenthal. Cambridge, MA : New York: Wakefield Press. Rowe, C. and Koetter, F., 1978. Collage City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Shane, D.G., 2005. Recombinant Urbanism: Conceptual Modelling in Architecture, Urban Design and City Theory. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot, S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin : a Green Archipelago. Zürich: Lars Müller Publishers. Whyte, W.H., 1980. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Washington, D.C: Conservation Foundation.

Perec, G., 2010. An attempt at exhausting a place in Paris. Imagining science. Translated by M. Lowenthal. Cambridge, MA : New York: Wakefield Press.

Defoe, D. (1719). The life, and strange surprizing adventures of Robinson Crusoe, mariner: Who lived eight and twenty years alone in an un-inhabited island on the coast of America, near the mouth of the Great River Oroonoque. Who having been cast on shore by shipwreck, wherein all the ship’s crue perished but himself. With an account how he was at last taken up and preserv’d by pyrates. Written by himself and deliver’d to a friend. London: Printed for the book-sellers of London and Westminster.

Calvino, I., 1997. Invisible Cities. New Ed. London: Vintage.

20|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Introduction

Instructor: Dr. Fabian Neuhaus (MPLan), fabian.neuhaus@ucalgary.ca

1 Studio

An advanced studio exploring contemporary themes in planning and professional planning practice. Centres on a real world problem or client project; involves analysis, synthesis, and formulation of a planning or urban design solution. Culminates in a professional report and presentation. (Graduate Course description online: https://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/ current/environmental-design-planning.html#41902 )

1.1 Island Islands are clearly defined in their outline. They therefore have a distinct form that is defined by a boundary. This boundary draws the distinction between inside and outside. Being on either side of this demarcation line is part of its identity as an island. The Oxford English Dictoinary (online [REF http://www.oed.com/view/ Entry/99986?rskey=F48sUP&result=1#eid]) defines island amongst others as: “An elevated piece of land surrounded by marsh or ‘intervale’ land; a piece of woodland surrounded by prairie or flat open country; a block of buildings [= Latin insula]; also an individual or a race, detached or standing out by itself; †to stand in island, to be detached or isolated (obsolete).”There are some combinations thereof, mos interestingly the: “island-universe n. [apparently translating German weltinsel (von Humboldt), though the term has been attributed to Sir William Herschel] a distinct stellar system, such as that to which the sun belongs, occupying a detached position in space. As used fr example in: [1845 tr. A. von Humboldt Κοσμος I. 93 Unter den vielen selbstleuchtenden ihren Ort verändernden Sonnen..welche unsre Weltinsel bilden.] 1867 A. J. Davis Stellar Key to Summer Land vi. 32 The expression ‘Island Universe’ was suggested by the immense distance of the fixed stars from our Sun and Planets; giving the impression that our Solar System occupies an isolated position in the boundless ocean of space.” This identity created by a boundary support internally a cohesiveness. A sameness that identifies against the otherness outside. Through its sameness the form issues power and asserts its control over the territory created. Islands are models of the world [German: Weltmodelle] as the philosopher Peter Sloterdijkwrites in Phären III, 2004. Such an observation is based on the fact that islands are singularities that are separated through the framing power forming the boundaries [REF Sloterdijk, P., 2004. Sphären 3. Suhrkamp. pp. 311]. It is the isolation that makes the island. It is separated enough from the surroundings to host an experiment of totality to become a world-model. Images by DigitalGlobe; via the CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative; and CNES; via Airbus DS and IHS Jane’s. Fiery Cross Reef. From Reef to Island in Less Than a Year. Published as Watkins, D., 2015. What China Has Been Building in the South China Sea. The New York Times. [online] 31 Jul. Available at: <https://www.nytimes. com/interactive/2015/07/30/world/asia/what-china-hasbeen-building-in-the-south-china-sea.html> [Accessed 4 Dec. 2018].

The formation of small world model is an interesting point of discussion, lets start with the island. One would think of the water as the main agent with no subject to form islands. But are they simply results of mechanical processes? Sloterdijk proposes three ways for islands to come into being. Based on the Italian “isolare” - making an island in the sense of doing. Water and other natural forces

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|21

can do so, as we have seen. But there are also subjects that can create such results. A story from the Greek Mythologies tells of a great battle between the gods of Olympus and the Titans of Mount Othrys, the old gods. The battle turned into a throwing contest of large rocks. As recounted by Danke Graves: “ Discouraged, the remaining giants fled back to earth, pursued by the Olympians. Athene threw a vast missile at Enceladus, who crushed him flat and became the island of Sicily. And Poseidon brought off part of Cos with his trident and threw it at Polybutes; this became the nearby islet of Nisyros, beneath which he lies buried” [REF Danke Graves, 1960 (first published 1955). The Greek Myths. Online: http://www.24grammata.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ Robert-Graves-The-Greek-Myths-24grammata.com_.pdf]. Jpanese mythology has its own story of the creation of Japan as told in Kuniumi (literally “birth or formation of the country”) in which the story is told about the, literal “birth” of the Japanese Archipelago. Islands are places of death, but at the same time are born onto the world. They are a result of practice whether thrown projectiles or mating ceremonies. The isolation hence is not only brought about by the sea but by gods in the form of life and death. Fast forward from the past to the current creation of island creation as a power play of politics and territorial claims. Such as it is currently playing out in the South China Sea [REF for examples Derek Watkins for The New York Times, 2015. What China Has Been Building in the South China Sea. Online: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/30/world/asia/what-china-hasbeen-building-in-the-south-china-sea.html. Terraforming and land creation is big business to exert power and influence. Islands are no longer found objects but made objects of the island building modernist. From finding to making implies that the islands are networked such as in the work by Morphosis on “Connected Isolation” [REF Mayne, T., 1993. Morphosis: Connected Isolation. Architectural monographs (London, England) ; 23. London: Academy Editions. ]. It is a critique of the modernist practice of the isolation of living through the division of function. Housing as the absolute isolation, the last island, my house is my castle. It is cultivating the feeling and culture of the fencing-in of space. Sloterdijk distinguishes between three technological types of islands. This is the detached or absolute island such as a boat, a airplane or a space station. Transitioning from water to air to space to describe the isolation. The second is the creation of atmosphere island such as conservatories or greenhouses where a kind of nature island is imitated by technical means to create specific conditions. And finally the anthropomorphic island shaped by the being-together of tool wielding humans. This creates a cradle like situation, an isolating breeding ground for society.

Izanagi (right) and Izanami (left) consolidating the earth with the spear Ama-no-Nuboko. Painting by Eitaku Kobayashi (Meiji period).

There are different kinds of Islands. None of these however possess any meaning or have any consequences if they are not embedded in some kind of social practice. This is to say that everything we deal with in the city ultimately is tied to the social and cultural practice that created it and that it is creating in turn. Whilst the island evokes the romantic image of nice sandy beaches, tropical forest and an array of exotic plants and animals - time of, maybe holiday - of interest here however, is the urban island

Images by DigitalGlobe, via CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative. Dredgers pump sediment onto Mischief Reef, March 2015. Published as Watkins, D., 2015. What China Has Been Building in the South China Sea. The New York Times. [online] 31 Jul. Available at: <https://www.nytimes. com/interactive/2015/07/30/world/asia/what-china-hasbeen-building-in-the-south-china-sea.html> [Accessed 4 Dec. 2018].

22|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

that is defined not so much by the division of land and water, but by the segmentation of land through usage, ownership, political designations, function, buildings, atmospheres, infrastructure and so on. The city is a conglomerate of a vast number of diverging interests and practices. This cacophony of activity keeps the urban fabric in a state of constant change and transformation. Layer upon layer of development builds to make up the evolving identity of the place. Going back to the paragraph above the city therefor is shaped ultimately to the social and cultural practices it creates. Within the city some interests often start to align in order to assert greater power. Such an alignment can be based on interest, function or location. Communities are smaller units within the city that have a number of overlapping interests to align themselves. An important factor is of course location or proximity that binds communities together. Translating these communal interests onto the land in practice means occupying this territory by creating some kind of boundary, creating an urban island. An island that is distinct and identifiable against the sea of otherness. This identity is the source of power and control. There are of course a number of other interests that support the creation of these urban islands. The same concept that leads to the creation of a territory from each community can be scaled up to the city itself. In order to control and plan internally the land is broken up into manageable chunks - communities. A perspective that leads to a range of additional questions. What is the nature of the unit we are working with, who is pulling the strings, how is power distributed and is everything as it seems? On the other hand even within the islands, social practice, everyday activities and physical structures lead to the creation of distinct places, some of which themselves wield enough power to create their own identity and form an island of their own. We want to call them Objects. Such objects mainly come to live through their capacity to map memories and project desires. They are larger than life, but often there is more small and screen - pretence. These are the drivers for the islands creating Situations. Situations are created by practices in relation to the Object. Maybe a detour or a draw pulling in passer-bys. In short the city is a set of islands stacked and enclosed on different scales like Russian dolls. Each with its own set of Objects and Situations asserting power to form a territory. The question now is however, what happens along the boundary lines and in between the islands? Is there such a thing as the in-between and who shapes it and what qualities does this space have? There too must be ways of exchange some form of trade, traffic and overlapping interests across these borders. Just like a living cell structure there are ways and means mitigating this hierarchical structure in the no-man-land between land and water, between same and otherness, between the form and its context. 1.1.1 Location For this studio we will be working with the communities of Kingsland, Fairview, Haysbro, Acadia, Southwood and Willow Park in the south of Calgary. The area is between Glenmore Trail in the north and Anderson Road in the south as well as 14th Street in the west and Deerfoot Trail or the Bow River in the east. These communities are all sharing Macleod Trail, the main corridor leading south from the city centre. This corridor is home to businesses and trades as well as the Calgary Light Transit (LRT) with the stations Heritage, Southland and Anderson all of which have their individual transit oriented development areas (TOD). They are also sharing a whole range of topics related to economics, population and building stock that leads to the creation of a temporal super community in order to engage with the constant change of the urban fabric more effectively. Several layers of the island concept are inscribed here including, the south, the super community, the individual community and potential locations within each community. 1.1.2 Topic Of interest is what happens between and across the islands. The communities themselves have already identified a range of aspects they feel cross the boundaries and that they need to address these, in order to be effective, collectively. The communities are part of the 1960s/70s ring around Calgary. Communities that were built during that time in a wave of expansion of the city. This has

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

implication for the building stock, demographics and businesses. Based on the lifecycle, after 50 years a phase of transformation has started with building stock being renewed, replaced and changed, the population has become elderly which brings along a change in lifestyle and housing and young families are starting to move in and the businesses adapt to both the chaining demographics as well as technology, plus their building stock too is to be renewed to either accommodated new directions and/or refurbish. This setting creates unique challenges for the communities but at the same time presents opportunities to establish new directions and set the foundations for future development to support the needs of the community in the future. 1.1.3 Focus The island identity is of great interest as well as what shapes it and how. A second focus is the in-between space both between islands of the same scale and between different scales. Built form is the media that expresses the activity and the shaping force . It is the product of process and politics. There are very practical every day functions attached to this very abstract characterization. On the level of business there are concerns about accessibility for both logistics and customers, on the level of the population circulation and connectivity, especially east west are of special interest and on the level of the built form there are concerns regarding identity and the politics of no mans land. Put differently the focus is on permeability of the urban fabric allowing access - creating good public space and the creation of identity managing territorial claims inclusively.

1.2 Objectives / Format / Teaching Approach This design studio is a problem based learning environment. It means that the students tackle the problem independently, guided by the instructor. The studio is a setting and at the same time a method. The task is to independently develop a project in the given time frame over the duration of this studio course based on the brief (handout). Students are expected to bring their knowledge and expertise from theory courses and previous studios into the development of the project for this studio. It is hence no isolated task, but essentially a culmination of everything they know poured into the investigation and manifestation of a spatially formulated project. Whilst the project is a product that is to be presented at the end, of interest is the development process that leads to this product. The studio acts as an environment not just to test ideas but to develop them. In other words the students are expected to engage creatively with the topic and experiment with a variety of approaches to evolve their concepts driving their ideas and continuously develop them. As a working tool to design and record the design process we will be working with the design Matrix. We know more than we can tell - Michael Polany, tacit knowledge - and this translates both to designing and planning. We can only now the outcome as it is observable, but are unable to specify what leads to it. Even though we “know” since we are part of it - you are the city. This applies to the peruse of a design problem not only in the form of knowledge but also in the form of practice. Urban planning often enough states to solve a problem. However Plato has discussed the self-contradiction of any problem in the Meno. He says that the search for the solution of a problem is an absurdity; for either you know what you are looking for, and then there is no problem; or you do not know what you are looking for, and then you cannot expect to find anything [REF Polany pp.22]. As practitioners we have to find other ways to deal with uncertainty and change that stating them as problems. The project is one of them and it is not based on a problem but on a process that is described though media in a narrative. It creates essentially a parallel world to express all the knowledge we are unable to tell in a comprehensive and logical or at least relatable manner. This acts as the basis of future decision making by formulating new thoughts that can be adopted. As Polany states in his introduction to The Tacit Dimension [REF Polany, pp.XI] “we cannot choose explicitly a set of new value, but must submit to them by the very act of creating or adopting them. This precisely describes the planning process which essentially is creating an narrative on an alternative vision in order to enable its adoption. Essentially it is a process of getting to know something (problem), hence

|23

24|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

the method of exploration and enquiry. The format for this design studio is community engagement and we are working in partnership with the community. The project is a real world setting with input from a range of stakeholders from that context. We will be engaging with the local residents, services, businesses, developers, politicians and planners in a range of different settings both to inform and reflect on the ideas and concepts that students are developing. The formats will include panel discussions, presentation, guided tours and workshops, most of which take place on site and we will travel down frequently. The format of the design studio is a mix of individual tasks and group work. The majority of the project work will be done in groups of two. These groups are expected to develop an effective working partnership based on an open and inclusive practice. The studio guides the student work in crit sessions. These sessions take the format of a discussion of the work undertaken by the student. There are weekly two sessions of desk reviews with the instructor. One session (Tuesday) is mostly used to reflect on the process and discuss progress and next steps and the second session (Friday) is primarily used to discuss the project. In addition there are periodical crit panel sessions which are more formal and the discussion includes a panel of invited experts and presentations to the community boards in the interest of exchange. Each phase (assignment) will conclude with a crit session. The panel is to be confirmed, but will include: community association, developer, planners and community services.

1.4 Expectations A proposal - project - that addresses the brief and particular perspectives of all stakeholders we engage with for this studio. It is a future vision of what central south Calgary can be as an accessible community for all. This is to be communicated in media as well as in a presentation and summarized in a final report. The media ranges from drawing, plan, map, collage, rendering, illustration to physical models and text. The presentation has to both address a panel of experts in one format and the community at large in another. The report has to balance the media with text and present both the final product as well as the process including a comprehensive reflection thereof.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Design Studio

2 Assignments

The design studio is organized in a sequence of phases where each has its own assignment. The individual phases align with specific content and input but also support the development of the project by scaffolding the process. In this sense each phase contributes to the over all aim of the design studio not just linear, but by looping back and forth between them. For the assignments this means even though they are graded and the grading is finally making up the overall mark, they are mere stepping stones and not only product in themselves. Essentially they can be viewed as progress assessment [Standortbestimmung].

|25

26|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio The site - a group of six communities in the south of Calgary along Macleod Trail are the perimeter for our study of urban islands. The communities are: Kingsland, Fairview, Haysbro, Acadia, Southwood and Willopark. Whilst there is a strong enphasys on north-south connections there is little to no east-west permability especially for none car based mobility.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Images both Google Maps 2018

|27

28|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 1

--Start: Jan. 11, 2019, 2:00 pm Deadline: Jan. 18, 2019, 2:00 pm --Verbal Presentation: Jan. 18, 2:00 pm – 10 minutes Submission: D2L by Jan. 18, 2:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 1 (individual) 10 ---

In a dérive one or more persons during a certain period drop their relations, their work and leisure activities, and all their other usual motives for movement and action, and let themselves be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there. Chance is a less important factor in this activity than one might think: from a dérive point of view cities have psychogeographical contours, with constant currents, fixed points and vortexes that strongly discourage entry into or exit from certain zones. Guy Debord Les Lèvres Nues #9 (November 1956) reprinted in Internationale Situationniste #2 (December 1958) Translated by Ken Knabb https://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/ theory.html

2.1 Island:Situation

The urban fabric is a vast sea of objects and structures out of which places are formed. Some are more formal and static others are hidden or ephemeral situations. A range of theorists over the past century have explored the nature of space and place through practice. A lot of it was inspired as a critique of the modernist vision of a functional city of separation. For examples Guy Debord and the the Situationists developed the Dérive in Paris [REF]. A randomized walking tour to explore the urban realm based on often randomized or changing set for decision making. The objective is as Wark summarizes, to “discover the a new city [the city anew] via a calculated drifting (French: dérive) through the old one” [REF Wark, M., 2009. The Secretary. Translated by S. Kendall. and Translated by J. McHale. In: G. Debord, Correspondence: the foundation of the Situationist International (June 1957-August 1960), Semiotext(e) foreign agents series. Los Angeles : Cambridge, Mass.: Semiotexte ; Distributed by the MIT Press, pp.5– 27. pp.6.]. The Situationist movement are born out of other movements at the time in Europe. It incorporated the Movement for an Imaginist Bauhaus (Bauhaus is the reference to the famous school in Germany), the Lettrist International (who split from the Letterist’s lead by Isidore Isou) and the London Phsychogeographical Association (who’s only member was Ralph Rumney). It conceived a movement without a doctrine, as Debort writes in a letter to Simondo on August 22, 1957: “situationism, as a body of doctrine, does not exist and must not exist. What exists is a Situationist experimental attitude” [REF Debord, G., 2009. Correspondence: the foundation of the Situationist International (June 1957-August 1960). Semiotext(e) foreign agents series. Translated by S. Kendall. and Translated by J. McHale. Los Angeles : Cambridge, Mass.: Semiotexte ; Distributed by the MIT Press.p.42] . This means it is not a set of rules, no protocol, but a journey of discovery base on the moment. Lucius Burckhardt developed the strollogy (German: Spaziergangswissenschaften) along similar lines to explore the urban environment while walking [REF]. Both methods share the emphasis on perception and the investigation into how the environment is perceived. The goal is to actively perceive the context and through this extend the perception. Seeing is being forced to actual recognizing. Later Burckhardt will go on to coin the term “Design is Invisible” (German: Design ist unsichtbar) and ask questions such as “Who plans the planning?” (German: Were plant die Planning?). This harks back to the experience, design is only good if it is invisible in the sense of blending in with the context, operating and not disrupting. These methods emphasis the importance of perception in the sense of participation. Being present is part of the space, it shapes the space itself. As an observer we can not completely remove ourselves from the moment and therefore are part of the scene. This features strongly in other theories such as Henry Lefevre’s “The Creation of Space” [REF]. Space, place or in deed the situation is never objective especially in the socially and culturally constructed context of the urban environment. Present, past and even the future constantly influence the moment. Whilst modern technology might distort this perception it brings to bare its consequences even stronger. The tool always influences the result and planners have to be especially aware in order to accommodate for its distortion. The creation of Situations and the mapping was at the core of one of Debord’s most famous works the Naked City Map featuring Paris, broken up into islands, rearranged and stitched together with read arrows of connectivity of sorts [Debord, G., 1957. The Naked City. Available at: <http:// www.frac-centre.fr/collection/collection-art-architecture/index-des-auteurs/auteurs/projets-64. html?authID=53&ensembleID=705> [Accessed 24 Aug. 2012]. It describes or visualises an experince journey through various districts in Paris. x.1 Outline/task Visit the site several times explore it actively in the spirit of the Situationists or Lucius Burckhardt and create your very own situations. Define your own method for the dérive and let it guide you. This drifting is to be documented with a journal and photographs in order to frame the “seeing” aspect and then be transferred into a map of situations inspired by the Naked City map of 1954. x.2 Objectives

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|29

Getting to know the site, exploring its spaces and experience the atmospheres present. Experiment with personal perception, experience and alternative forms of data collection and mapping.

x.3 Learning Outcomes • Conduct an experiential overview of the site (given the constraints of time and space) • Effectively reflect on the experience • Translate the experience into representations

x.x Deliverables • Personal psychogeography map of the site, identifying: ◦ Important/significant areas, groups of buildings/objects, places ◦ Perceived significant flows of movement/connections between these places • Consists of cut out sections of a paper map and red arrows, both labeled • Key with description for each item as to what it is, what constitutes it and what it does. • Trace map of exploration route (Hand drawing) • Photographs documenting the observations and journeys (Curated selection) • Journal documenting the dérive (Mapped and Methods of decision making)

Lucius Burckhardt, Autofahrerspaziergang [Car Driver Walk], Kassel 1993, Seminar Wahrnehmung und Verkehr [Workshop Perception and Traffic] Photo: Bertram Weisshaar

x.5 Evaluation Presentation of individual work.

Taken from: Heilig, M. L. (1992). EL Cine del Futuro: The Cinema of the Future. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(3), 279–294, p. 285.

John Horton Conway, 1970. Game of Life. Computer model / cellular automaton.

Guy Debord, 1957. The Naked City: Illustration de l’hypothèse des plaques tournantes en psychogéographique. Lithograph, Encre sur papier, 33.3 x 48.3 cm, 009 05 01, © François Lauginie, FRAC Centre-Val de Loire.

30|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 2

--Start: Jan. 21, 2019, 2:00 pm Deadline: Jan. 28, 2019, 2:00 pm --Verbal Presentation: Jan. 28, 2:00 pm – 10 minutes Submission: D2L by Jan. 28, 2:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 2 (individual) 10 ---

2.2 Input

A series of inputs augment the project design work with knowledge and information to extend the scope of the investigation. We have a specific input week with input directly linked to the site and more general inputs on topics related to the work undertaken across the term. Beyond the physicality of the site we also want to hear from the locals, the people who make the area what it is. A series of stakeholder inputs are organized in order to hear about the area from a diverse range of perspectives. These inputs take place across the site and on different forms. The different stakeholders are: Community association, local businesses, developers, community services and transport. The stakeholders are asked to present their perspective and we will then open the discussion for questions and comments to start a dialogue that is lead by the students. This is the opportunity to get the insight and detailed on the ground information.

x.1 Outline/task Prepare for each stakeholder panel with ideas and a list of questions to ask contributors and probe for new insight. The personal experience of the site from the phase 1 is a good stating point, but do some additional and topic specific research in order to prepare. Additionally, in parallel over this week the model is to be built. Everyone should contribute and take on an equal share of the work.

x.2 Objectives The students engage in discussions with local stakeholders to learn from their perspective and understand their ideas and expectations for the future development of the site. This is to be process and a personal statement in reaction to it has to be formulated.

x.3 Learning Outcomes

•

Actively engage in a discussion with stakeholders/experts

•

Extract relevant information from an expert discussion

•

Formulate a personal position in reaction to the extracted information

x.x Deliverables

•

List of questions for each stakeholder

•

Record of discussion

•

Personal statement based on information and process

•

Site model 1:2000 [4mx4m] collective (group)

x.5 Evaluation Summary discussion and deliverables, specific for site focus inputs and model.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Site Focus

2019-01-21

Community

2019-01-22

Business

2019-01-23

Developer

2019-01-25

Services

General

2019-01-29

Zoning

2019-02-01

People and Open Space

2019-02-11

Laser Training

2019-02-13, 14:00

Engagement Dr. Suzann Goopy, Associate Professor - Community Health, Faculty of Nursing, UofC Wednesday, 13 February, 2019, 14:00

2019-03-05

Infrastructure Finance

2019-03-08

Policy Workshop

2019-03-26

Planning Law

Date

Transport

Date

Planning City of Calgary

|31

32|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 3

--Start: Jan. 28, 2019, 2:00 pm Deadline: Feb. 15, 2019, 2:00 pm --Verbal Presentation: Feb. 15, 2:00 pm – 15 minutes Submission: D2L by Feb. 15, 2:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 3 (individual) 20 --Crit Panel: David Downs, City of Calgary, Head Urban Design Team Lisette Burga Ghersi, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 Kate Van Fraassen, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 xxxxx xxxxx, Planner

Pictures at an exhibition; Cities within the city. Taken from: Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot, S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago. Zürich: Lars Müller Publishers. pp 50

2.3 Island:Archipelago x.1 Outline/task

x.2 Objectives Plan and carry out the analysis of the site covering relevant aspects as defined at the outset. Previous work and the input sessions form the starting point and topics touch upon there should be investigated and detailed, branching out into related and emerging topics. The classic layers of infrastructure, ecology, demographics, building stock, program and building code should be covered in detail. Additional topics will emerge from those. However analyzing is not a mere observation. The aim is to process the observations to generate learning outcomes. The analysis has to be synthesized to formulate cohesieve findings. To support these findings each has to be paired with a historic precedent from planning history to illustrate the point. • • • • • • • • • •

x.3 Learning Outcomes Understand the various layers of an urban site Plan and Implement an thorough analysis of an urban site Synthesize observations to formulate findings Relate to the wider body of planing history by using precedents to support the findings Develop individual and specific positions in response to the findings x.x Deliverables Analysis of layers ◦ Town map ◦ Figure ground plan [REF Rowe, C. and Koetter, F., 1978. Collage City. ] ◦ Density areas ◦ Water ◦ Green ◦ Streets ◦ Land Use ◦ Topography ◦ Objects ◦ Signs and the language of the street [REF Venturi, R., Scott Brown, D. and Izenour, S., 1972. Learning from Las Vegas. ] Combination of layer Islands [REF Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot, S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago.] ◦ Aerial photo ◦ Plan ◦ Built Structure ◦ Object ◦ Reference ◦ Collage Diagram linking to the Situations (2.1) Diagram linking it to the INPUTS (2.2)

x.5 Evaluation The analysis and progress is to be discussed weekly during desk crit and presented at final crit to the panel. The mark is the conbination of overall progress, reflection, presentation and project. x.6 Reading List Rowe, C. and Koetter, F., 1978. Collage City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot,

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|33

S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago. Zürich: Lars Müller Publishers. Venturi, R., Scott Brown, D. and Izenour, S., 1972. Learning from Las Vegas. Cambridge, Mass. ; London: MIT Press. x.7 Precedent Projects The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago

Pictures at an Exhibition; Analytical Maps: decomposition and recomposition od West-Berlin. Taken from: Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot, S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago. Zürich: Lars Müller Publishers. pp. 48

Denise Scott Brown, 1966. Architettura Minore on The Strip, Las Vegas. Part of the show, Denise Scott Brown Photographs 1956–1966 in New York, China Town, Carriage Trade, 2018. Pictures at an Exhibition; Morphological sequences: Unter den Eichen, Neuköln 1, Kreuzberg/Görlitzer Bahnhof, Südliche Friederichstadt. Taken from: Ungers, O.M., Koolhaas, R., Riemann, P., Kollhoff, H., Ovaska, A., Hertweck, F., Marot, S. and Ungers Archiv für Architekturwissenschaft, 2013. The City in the City: Berlin: a Green Archipelago. Zürich: Lars Müller Publishers. pp. 52-53

34|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 4

--Start: Feb. 25, 2019, 14:00 Deadline: Mar. 04, 2019, 14:00 --Workshop: Mar. 02, 9:00 – 12:00 Submission: D2L by Mar. 01, 17:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 4 (group) 10 ---

2.4 Workshop

x.1 Outline/task In addition to the stakeholder inputs 2.2 the community engagement workshop focuses on the residents and the general population of the area. This event will provide a platform to engage with the community directly and hear from their experiences, their ideas, hopes and wishes for the site. The workshop will be based on round table discussions that each are led by one student. The personal investigation, the input and the analysis form the basis for an open discuss. The focus of which should be the extraction of information for the development of a project proposal. This is an individual task, but everyone contributes to the knowledge of the whole group. We will develop the organization of the workshop as one and share the findings after the event to create a collective repository of what the various different community members have contributed. The round table are loosely set up around the same list of topics to be discussed, but take the format of a semistructured interview where topics can be explored in depth according to how the discussion evolves and what the participants are willing to contribute. A set piece for the workshop is to get every participant to draw his or her own personal mental map of the site. The mental landscape of the site will be a good indicator of important areas and missing landscapes. Recording will be critical and a simple but effective format has to be developed in order to be able to capture the content. After the workshop the recorded material is to be consolidated and prepared for sharing and presenting at the group event following the workshop. Based on this an individual statement is formulated describing a position as to how the future the site is envisioned. x.2 Objectives To plan, prepare and hold a community event with the local community based around the topics researched in the analysis phase but open enough to extend to emerging topics. The material should be recorded in a practical manner and then processed to formulate an individual position as to how the project should shape the future of the site.

x.3 Learning Outcomes • Plan an engagement event • Effectively engage with the community • Recording of input and feedback • Formulate a position based on the knowledge and insight

x.x Deliverables • Questions • Material for the workshop • Recordings • Summarizing of content and grouping into clusters • Personal observations

x.5 Evaluation The evaluation is based on the contribution to the development of the workshop, engagement and contribution as well as the personal statement. x.6 Reading List x.7 Precedent Projects

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|35

spread taken from: Venhuizen, H., Landry, C. and Westrenen, F.V., 2010. Game Urbanism: Manual for Cultural Spatial Planning. Amsterdam: Valiz. pp. 118-119

36|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 5

--Start: Mar. 04, 2019, 14:00 Deadline: Mar. 22, 2019, 14:00 --Verbal Presentation: Mar. 22, 2:00 pm – 15 minutes Submission: D2L by Mar. 22, 14:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 5 (group) 20 --Crit Panel: David Downs, City of Calgary, Head Urban Design Team Lisette Burga Ghersi, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 Kate Van Fraassen, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 xxxxx xxxxx, Planner

Isand:Programming

x.1 Outline/task The development of a vision in the form of a project proposal starts with the programming of the site. During the previous phases ideas and concepts have already been developed and these can now grow in to a cohesive plan to develop the site towards a vision for the future. This is in many ways imagined in a direct response to the previous phases, the community input the discussions with the stakeholder and not least the personal experience and interpretation of the site. The specific objectives and topics are not set out but have emerged by now for each group through the previous phases. It is part of the task to put together a comprehensive statement as to what the goals are. This is then developed into a program for the site. This can be based on existing program and extend these or introduce new program to be merged with the existing fabric. Of importance are still the aspects of island and identity focusing on permeability, accessibility and connectivity. The program should describe in detail the functions the site can perform in the future and how these are related to or impact on built form. Functions provide the basis for activity and hence flows are an important aspect of program. Things and people need to get from a to b, back and everywhere in between. This generates a whole range of different circulation networks and links in a host or actors each of which performs several roles [REF actor network theory - Bruno Latour]. These will have to be mapped out exploratively. Of special interest will be how building codes and bylaw can hinder or support the programming. The laws are a distinct tool to shape and form program in distinct way. Often it provides interesting opportunity to make use of this tool to support and promote a proposal. x.2 Objectives The group formulates a comprehensive project program for the site based on the analysis and in response to the various inputs. This program is to be understood as a rough draft of the project focusing on functions, flows and actors.

x.3 Learning Outcomes • Experiment with developing a alternative story line for a site • Formulate a series of functions that tie in with the existing characteristics and create new ones. • Anticipate implication of the proposal for individual stakeholders

x.x Deliverables • Program diagram identifying functions and flows ◦ Showing all program in relation to existing features • Detailed description of all programs ◦ Requirements

Peter Calthorp Associates, 2018. El Camino Real study. Available online at https://urbanfootprint.com/revolutionizing-transit-while-solving-the-housing-crisis/

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

◦ ◦ ◦ • • • • •

|37

Size Numbers Workings Anchor map, how does it link to existing program and how is it implemented Reference programs/projects with these kind of programs Visualized on model Two collages visualizing the program Diagram how it links to the previous phases

x.5 Evaluation The project and progress is to be discussed weekly during desk crit and presented at final crit to the panel. The mark is made up of overall progress, reflection, presentation and project. x.6 Reading List x.7 Precedent Projects

Bernard Tschumi, 1986. Parc de la Villette, Paris, France, Follies and Galleries, Isometrics. Moma collection, NY.

Bernard Tschumi, 1982-96. Parc de la Villette, Paris, France, Four Follies intersecting North-South Gallery. Moma collection, NY.

Bernard Tschumi, 1984. Parc de la Villette, Paris, France, Le Case Vide, Paris, France, Axonometric of Folly. Moma collection, NY.

38|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 6

--Start: Mar. 25, 2019, 14:00 Deadline: Apr. 17, 2019, 14:00 --Verbal Presentation: Apr. 17, 2:00 pm – 15 minutes Submission: D2L by Apr. 16, 17:00 pm. PDF format, Maximum 25MB/file. --Evaluation % of Course Grade: Assignment 6 (group) 30 --Crit Panel: David Downs, City of Calgary, Head Urban Design Team Lisette Burga Ghersi, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 Kate Van Fraassen, City of Calgary, Planning, Area 31 xxxxx xxxxx, Planner

Superstudio, 1969. The Continuous Monument: On the Rocky Coast.

Rem Koolhaas, and Elia Zenghelis, Madelon Vriesendorp, Zoe Zenghelis, 1972. Exodus, or the Voluntary Prisoners of Architecture: The Strip (Aerial Perspective).

Island:Proposal

x.1 Outline/task In this phases the proposed project is given its final physical form. It spells out the three dimensional consequences and its accompanying atmospheres and resulting identities. It should cover a range of scales to describe detailed functions and scenes on the level of the street concerning public realm and pedestrian experience for various groups as well as on a strategic level describing landmarks and circulation as part of the overall concept. To do so it obviously draws on the previous phases whilst in itself develop a clear strategy to implement the proposal this goes beyond mere physical form, but includes strategies for phasing building code and stakeholder involvement. It overall presents a coherent strategy for the implementation of a future vision. This includes possible small scale activities that could be part of the final community engagement event all the way to visionary master plan documents and possible changes to the bylaw to enable such a development. x.2 Objectives The group formulates a concrete proposal as to how the various inputs are addressed and shape the future of the site physically. This has to engage the various levels of urban planning from policy to urban form and infrastructure to public space. x.3 Learning Outcomes • Experimenting with urban planning principles

•

Propose a design of physical form

•

Understand the implication of form for planning activities - vice versa

•

Understand the implication of form for the stakeholder - vice versa

x.x Deliverables • Project title

• • ◦ ◦ • • • • ◦ ◦

Site map with proposal 1:5000 Detail map of various important locations 1:200 Plan Section, min. Two Collage, min. two Proposal insert for Model1:2000, smaller scale if needed for detail areas 1:200 Diagram linking proposal to all previous phases Strategy to present it to the community How it integrates with existing planning efforts by stakeholders incl. City of Calgary Implementation

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

◦ • ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦

Phasing Report Title Image Blurb Introduction statement Spread with each phase

x.5 Evaluation The analysis and progress is to be discussed weekly during desk crit and presented at final crit to the panel. The mark is made up of overall progress, reflection, presentation and project. x.6 Reading List x.7 Precedent Projects

Maas, W., ESARQ and MVRDV, 2000. Costa Iberica: Upbeat to the Leisure City. Barcelona: Actar. pp.194

|39

40|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Design Studio Assignment 8

2.7 Consultation and Reflection - REPORT

The final proposal is to be presented to the communities of the central south at a consultation event. It follows o from the workshop and is organized by the community association but is run by the students. The idea is to inform the communities about the ideas developed and support them in understanding the thinking behind it and the possible meanings this could have for the future of their community. It is part of the process to shape a collective vision for the community and the central south.

x.1 Outline/task The project is to be presented in appropriate media at a venue on site to the general public. The content is based on the work presented and discussed at the final crit with the necessary adjustments both regarding content and format. The exchange and reactions that are provoked by the presentation of the work should be recorded in some format and will be discussed in the reflection session.

x.2 Objectives Develop a mode to present the project effectively to a public audience. This includes talking points and means of recording of feedback. The feedback then is to be reflected upon in comparison to the MX progress report.

x.3 Learning Outcomes

•To communicate ideas clearly and effectively to a specific audience

•Engage wit the reaction of the audience

•Translate the reaction for future project

x.x Deliverables

•Project presentation

•Recordings of feedback and reaction

•Report

◦Project documentation

◦Critical reflection on feedback and engagement

◦Reflection on the process

x.5 Evaluation x.6 Reading List x.7 Precedent Projects

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

LOCAL

Eight Islands and their possible connections towards an archipelago of isolation - Calgary SOuth Central (re)imagined

Title

Course Outline

Island

Input

Open House

Contribution

Contents

Program

Proposal

Analysis

Workshop

|41

42|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Appendix

Means of Evaluation • • • • •

In order to pass the course, a passing grade in each assignment is to be achieved. The combined assignments make up the final course grade. There is no final exam in this course. Assignments are due on the day of the crit, 11:59 - noon, submitted digitally on D2L (individual submission should be no larger than 12mb) and printed (pinup) for a panel discussion. Students are expected to participate in all events actively (see schedule) both on campus and externally in the community and work independently on their project throughout the course.

Evaluation will be based on the project assignments. Some of the work is to be completed in groups and some individually. Students will receive a common grade for work done in groups unless it is clear to the instructors the balance of work has been unfairly distributed between team members. Class participation is a vital component of the grade and will be evaluated based on attendance and participation to class, studio, and group work. Any anticipated absence should be communicated to the teaching team as soon as possible. Assignments, grading and due dates: Island (indiv.) 10% Jan 18, Friday, 14:00 Input (indivi.) 10% Jan 28, Monday, 14:00 Analysis (group) 20% Feb 15, Friday, 14:00 Workshop (indivi.) 10% Mar 04, Monday, 14:00 crit and Mar 02, Saturday, Workshop Program (group) 20% Mar 22, Friday, 14:00 Proposal (group) 30% Apr 17, Wednesday, 09:00 crit and Apr 20, Saturday, Open House Total 100% Note: a passing grade in each individual assignment has to be reached in order to pass the course as a whole. Late submission of work is not acceptable; grades will be deducted for work submitted later than the deadline specified in the assignment brief or as discussed in class. One grade will be deducted per late day for example an A will be downgraded to A-.

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

Appendix

Grading Scale

Final grades will be reported as letter grades, with the final grade calculated according to the 4-point range. Grade Grade 4-Point Point Range Value

Percent

A+ 4.00 4.00 95-100 A 4.00 3.85-4.00 90-94.99 A- 3.70 3.50-3.84 85-89.99 B+ 3.30 3.15-3.49 80-84.99 B 3.00 2.85-3.14 75-79.99 B- 2.70 2.50-2.84 70-74.99 C+ 2.30 2.15-2.49 65-69.99 C 2.00 1.85-2.14 60-64.99 C- 1.70 1.50-1.84 55-59.99 D+ 1.30 1.15-1.49 50-54.99 D 1.00 0.50-1.14 45-49.99 F 0.00 0-0.49 0-44.99

Description

Outstanding - evaluated by instructor Excellent - superior performance showing comprehensive understanding of the subject matter Very good performance Good performance Satisfactory performance Minimum pass for students in the Faculty of Graduate Studies All final grades below B- are indicative of failure at the graduate level and cannot be counted toward Faculty of Graduate Studies course requirements.

Notes: A student who receives a “C+” or lower in any one course will be required to withdraw regardless of their grade point average (GPA) unless the program recommends otherwise. If the program permits the student to retake a failed course, the second grade will replace the initial grade in the calculation of the GPA, and both grades will appear on the transcript. Students are expected to complete all course assignments on time. There will be no final exam. Students must obtain an overall passing grade to pass this course, however, if a student fails any phase of the course worth 10% or more they will fail the course. A student who feels that a piece of graded term work (term paper, essay, test, etc.) has been unfairly graded may have the paper re-graded. The student shall discuss the work with the instructor within fifteen days of being notified about the mark or of the item’s return to the class. More information can be found in the Graduate Calendar: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/current/gs-o.html

Special Budgetary Requirements

There are no additional budgetary requirements, however students are to cover their own travel to and from the site as well as their own cost for printing and materials. The $150 supplemental fees for all studio courses is charged to cover workshop costs of use and maintenance of hand tools, assorted power tools, CNC routers, laser cutters, 3D printers, and robotics.

|43

44|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Appendix

Notes: 1. Written work, term assignments and other course related work may only be submitted by e-mail if prior permission to do so has been obtained from the course instructor. Submissions must come from an official University of Calgary (ucalgary) email account. 2. Academic Accommodations. Students who require an accommodation in relation to their coursework or to fulfil requirements for a graduate degree, based on a protected ground other than disability, should communicate this need, preferably in writing, to their Instructor or the designated contact person in EVDS, Jennifer Taillefer (jtaillef@ucalgary.ca). Students who require an accommodation unrelated to their coursework or the requirements for a graduate degree, based on a protected ground other than disability, should communicate this need, preferably in writing, to the Vice-Provost (Student Experience). For additional information on support services and accommodations for students with disabilities, visit www.ucalgary.ca/ access/ 3. Plagiarism - Plagiarism involves submitting or presenting work in a course as if it were the student’s own work done expressly for that particular course when, in fact, it is not. Most commonly plagiarism exists when:(a) the work submitted or presented was done, in whole or in part, by an individual other than the one submitting or presenting the work (this includes having another impersonate the student or otherwise substituting the work of another for one’s own in an examination or test),(b) parts of the work are taken from another source without reference to the original author,(c) the whole work (e.g., an essay) is copied from another source, and/or,(d) a student submits or presents work in one course which has also been submitted in another course(although it may be completely original with that student) without the knowledge of or prior agreement of the instructor involved. While it is recognized that scholarly work often involves reference to the ideas, data and conclusions of other scholars, intellectual honesty requires that such references be explicitly and clearly noted. Plagiarism is an extremely serious academic offence. It is recognized that clause (d) does not prevent a graduate student incorporating work previously done by him or her in a thesis. Any suspicion of plagiarism will be reported to the Dean, and dealt with as per the regulations in the University of Calgary Graduate Calendar. 4. Appeals: If a student has a concern about the course, academic matter, or a grade that they have been assigned, they must first communicate this concern with the instructor. If the concern cannot be resolved with the instructor, the student can proceed with an academic appeal, which normally begins with the Faculty: http://www.ucalgary.ca/provost/students/ ombuds/appeals 5. Information regarding the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (https:// www.ucalgary.ca/legalservices/foip) 6. Emergency Evacuation/Assembly Points (http://www.ucalgary.ca/emergencyplan/ assemblypoints) 7. Safewalk information (http://www.ucalgary.ca/security/safewalk) 8. Contact Info for: Student Union (https://www.su.ucalgary.ca/contact/); Graduate Student representativehttps://gsa.ucalgary.ca/about-the-gsa/gsa-executive-board/) Student Union Wellness Centre: https://www.ucalgary.ca/wellnesscentre/; Library Resources: http:// library.ucalgary.ca/ and Student Ombudsman’s Office (http://www.ucalgary.ca/ombuds/).

Planning | Ds19w | EVDS 644-B02 Advanced Proffessional Planning Studio

|45

RECOMMEN READINGS

Allen, S., Points + Lines, Diagrams and Projects for Banis, D. and H. Shobe, Portlandness: A Cultural A Boelens, L., The Urban Connection: An Actor-rela Bullivant, L., Masterplanning Futures. Calthorpe, P., The Next American Metropolis. Calvino, I., Invisible Cities. Chermayeff, S. and Alexander, C., Community and Corner, J., ed., Recovering Landscape: Essays in Co Cranz, G. The Politics of Park Design: A History o Dernie, David. Architectural Drawing. Erickson, D., MetroGreen: Connecting Open Spac Europan 7, Suburban Challenge: Urban Intensity a Farr, D., Sustainable Urbanism: Urban Design with Farrelly, L., Drawing for Urban Design. Fleming, S., Cycle Space. Forman, Richard T.T., Urban Ecology: Science of Gatje, R., Great Public Squares. Gausa, M., Housing: New Alternatives, New System Giradet, H., Creating Sustainable Cities. Hillier, B. and J. Hanson, The Social Logic of Spac Hough, M., City Form and Natural Process. Hutchison, E. Drawing for Landscape Architecture Jackson, J.B., The Stranger Path. Jacobs, J., Death and Life in Great American Cities Lefebvre, H., Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Ev Lehnerer, A., Grand Urban Rules. Lukez, P., Suburban Transformations. Lynch, K., The Image of the City. McGrath, B. and Marshall, V., Designing Patch Dy McHarg, I. Design With Nature. Michael Sorkin Studio, Wiggle. Morphosis, Combinatory Urbanism: The Complex Mostafavi, M. and Ciro Najle, eds. Landscape Urb Mostafavi, M. et al, Ecological Urbanism. OMA and B. Mau, S, M, L, XL. Perec, G., An Attempt at Exhausting a Place in Par Pont, M.B. and P. Haupt, Space Matrix: Space, De Reed, P., Groundswell: Constructing the Contempo Rowe, C. and F. Koetter, Collage City. Sandalack, Beverly A. & Andrei Nicolai The Calga Schwanke, D., Mixed-Use Development Handbook Shane, G., Recombinant Urbanism. Sorkin, M., “Future Zones, Eleven Tasks for Urban Perspecta). Steffen, A., ed., World Changing: A User’s Guide f Thomas, R., Sustainable Urban Design: An Enviro Turner, M.G., R.H. Gardener, and R.V. O’Neill, L Waldheim, C., ed., The Landscape Urbanism Read Waldheim, C., Landscape as Urbanism: A General

46|

University of Calgary | Faculty of Environmental Design

Islands: Connected Isolation | DS19w | Handout

Articles inside

Notes

Analysis

On the precedent as a working tool

Form

Portland trip

Final presentation

Programming

Site map