Monday, 23 February 2009
Friday, 20 February 2009
Wednesday, 18 February 2009
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
Rem Koolhaas
Toward The Contemporary City
This text is a piece of Rem Koolhaas’s research into emerging form of architecture in contemporary cities and the search for possibilities of actual mutations. It was done as a documentation to interpret a number of spontaneous and independent processes that occur in cities that are as different as Paris, Atlanta and Tokyo. Koolhaas believes that these ‘processes all seem to led to an unforgivable fragmentation of the existing city, a displacement of the center of gravity of urban dynamics from the city center to the urban periphery and a remarkable ingenuity in avoiding urbanistic rules.’ (GUST, 1999. P.32)
He talks about there being a shift of emphasis from the city center to the periphery and the processes that happen on the city edge. These sub areas contain ‘unrecognized beauty’ according Koolhaas who leads to a conclusion that ‘The Contemporary City will be a retro-active manifesto for the yet to be recognized beauty of the last twentieth-century urban landscape.’ (Nesbitt, 1996. P.325) He also claims that the modern city is yet to be realized.
His theories and research seem to oppose postmodern ideals such as Colin Rowe’s collage city. He seems interested in furthering modern architecture but with revisions. Koolhaus is generally characterized as both a Modernist and Deconstructivist, however many critics claim that he leans toward Humanism. ‘The modern is the industrial society of technological, economic, politic and social change, while modernity is the cultural spirit of the modern, and modernism different collective professional forms of cultural expressions and practices as reflections and interpretation of the modern and modernity.’
(http://hjem.get2net.dk/gronlund/Koolhaas.html)
Koolhaas observes that the project of the modern city was built only in fragments of modernity and the challenge is to now remodel and augment the different parts of the city without destroying them. He gives examples in the way Milan and Paris were remodeled in the nineteenth century. By working in between the different fragments, both the idealism of modern urbanism and the scale of the traditional city are compromised, but valuable new themes to work with are opened up that allow us to deal with the complexities of contemporary life.
When looking at Atlanta, the city can be defined as not having a center but having many centers that hinge on a series peripheries or as Koolhaas describes, no periphery and an infinite number of centers. This has made Atlanta iconic in representing a shift in the modern city from center to periphery, to beyond these limits. It can no longer be called suburbia, Koolhaas says:
The contemporary city, the one composed of these peripheries, ought to yield a sort of manifesto, a premature homage to a form of modernity, which when compared to cities of the past might seem devoid of qualities, but in which we will one day recognize as many gains as losses. Leave Paris and Amsterdam - go look at Atlanta, quickly and without preconceptions. (Nesbitt, 1996. P.328)
In Koolhaas' understanding, the contemporary city is the generic city. The word generic has a double meaning: it is general for a whole group or class of phenomena or species, and it has no particularly distinctive quality or application. Meaning that the urban is now so pervasive, that old ways of thinking about cities is not relevant any more. To Koolhaas the generic city, is an expression of general urbanization and globalization. It’s ‘is a displacement to the urban periphery, a territory that can no longer be called suburbia, distorted and stretched beyond precedent, big enough for all, and with a remarkable ingenuity in avoiding urbanistic rules.’ (http://hjem.get2net.dk/gronlund/Koolhaas.html)
By spreading and sprawling, the generic city frees the city from its center and identity. A city that is free from history, it self-destructs and renews according to present needs and abilities almost ‘superficial’ it has become repetitive through its architectural structure.
But the generic city, the general urban condition, is happening everywhere, and just the fact that it occurs in such enormous quantities must mean that it's habitable. Architecture can't do anything that the culture doesn't. We all complain that we are confronted by urban environments that are completely similar. We say we want to create beauty, identity, quality, singularity. And yet, maybe in truth these cities that we have are desired. (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.07/koolhaas_pr.html)
He questions whether it’s the fact that these environments are so characterlessness that makes them the best setting for living. He argues is that in its reflective similarity, the generic city is a more accurate reflection of contemporary urban reality than our nostalgic visions of New York or Paris.
Dubai’s ‘Waterfront City’ (above picture) is fast becoming the realization of what Koolhaas calls ‘The Generic City’. The enclosed island is an elaborate vision by OMA with a mixture of unremarkable skyscrapers and few architectural masterpieces, set inside an urban experiment covering six and a half square miles.
This text is a piece of Rem Koolhaas’s research into emerging form of architecture in contemporary cities and the search for possibilities of actual mutations. It was done as a documentation to interpret a number of spontaneous and independent processes that occur in cities that are as different as Paris, Atlanta and Tokyo. Koolhaas believes that these ‘processes all seem to led to an unforgivable fragmentation of the existing city, a displacement of the center of gravity of urban dynamics from the city center to the urban periphery and a remarkable ingenuity in avoiding urbanistic rules.’ (GUST, 1999. P.32)
He talks about there being a shift of emphasis from the city center to the periphery and the processes that happen on the city edge. These sub areas contain ‘unrecognized beauty’ according Koolhaas who leads to a conclusion that ‘The Contemporary City will be a retro-active manifesto for the yet to be recognized beauty of the last twentieth-century urban landscape.’ (Nesbitt, 1996. P.325) He also claims that the modern city is yet to be realized.
His theories and research seem to oppose postmodern ideals such as Colin Rowe’s collage city. He seems interested in furthering modern architecture but with revisions. Koolhaus is generally characterized as both a Modernist and Deconstructivist, however many critics claim that he leans toward Humanism. ‘The modern is the industrial society of technological, economic, politic and social change, while modernity is the cultural spirit of the modern, and modernism different collective professional forms of cultural expressions and practices as reflections and interpretation of the modern and modernity.’
(http://hjem.get2net.dk/gronlund/Koolhaas.html)
Koolhaas observes that the project of the modern city was built only in fragments of modernity and the challenge is to now remodel and augment the different parts of the city without destroying them. He gives examples in the way Milan and Paris were remodeled in the nineteenth century. By working in between the different fragments, both the idealism of modern urbanism and the scale of the traditional city are compromised, but valuable new themes to work with are opened up that allow us to deal with the complexities of contemporary life.
When looking at Atlanta, the city can be defined as not having a center but having many centers that hinge on a series peripheries or as Koolhaas describes, no periphery and an infinite number of centers. This has made Atlanta iconic in representing a shift in the modern city from center to periphery, to beyond these limits. It can no longer be called suburbia, Koolhaas says:
The contemporary city, the one composed of these peripheries, ought to yield a sort of manifesto, a premature homage to a form of modernity, which when compared to cities of the past might seem devoid of qualities, but in which we will one day recognize as many gains as losses. Leave Paris and Amsterdam - go look at Atlanta, quickly and without preconceptions. (Nesbitt, 1996. P.328)
In Koolhaas' understanding, the contemporary city is the generic city. The word generic has a double meaning: it is general for a whole group or class of phenomena or species, and it has no particularly distinctive quality or application. Meaning that the urban is now so pervasive, that old ways of thinking about cities is not relevant any more. To Koolhaas the generic city, is an expression of general urbanization and globalization. It’s ‘is a displacement to the urban periphery, a territory that can no longer be called suburbia, distorted and stretched beyond precedent, big enough for all, and with a remarkable ingenuity in avoiding urbanistic rules.’ (http://hjem.get2net.dk/gronlund/Koolhaas.html)
By spreading and sprawling, the generic city frees the city from its center and identity. A city that is free from history, it self-destructs and renews according to present needs and abilities almost ‘superficial’ it has become repetitive through its architectural structure.
But the generic city, the general urban condition, is happening everywhere, and just the fact that it occurs in such enormous quantities must mean that it's habitable. Architecture can't do anything that the culture doesn't. We all complain that we are confronted by urban environments that are completely similar. We say we want to create beauty, identity, quality, singularity. And yet, maybe in truth these cities that we have are desired. (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.07/koolhaas_pr.html)
He questions whether it’s the fact that these environments are so characterlessness that makes them the best setting for living. He argues is that in its reflective similarity, the generic city is a more accurate reflection of contemporary urban reality than our nostalgic visions of New York or Paris.
Dubai’s ‘Waterfront City’ (above picture) is fast becoming the realization of what Koolhaas calls ‘The Generic City’. The enclosed island is an elaborate vision by OMA with a mixture of unremarkable skyscrapers and few architectural masterpieces, set inside an urban experiment covering six and a half square miles.
Monday, 16 February 2009
Suitable homes from birth to death
Please follow links to view online pdf versions of the documents I have read and analysed;
CABE = Building for life
http://www.cabe.org.uk/AssetLibrary/12320.pdf
LTH = Lifetime homes
http://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk/lifetime_docs/LTH%20Booklet.pdf
Building Regulations Part M 2004, Access and Facilities for Disabled People
http://www.fylde.gov.uk/documents/original/note15d.pdf
CABE = Building for life
http://www.cabe.org.uk/AssetLibrary/12320.pdf
LTH = Lifetime homes
http://www.lifetimehomes.org.uk/lifetime_docs/LTH%20Booklet.pdf
Building Regulations Part M 2004, Access and Facilities for Disabled People
http://www.fylde.gov.uk/documents/original/note15d.pdf
Micro Architecture
Micro Architecture – Richard Horden
Micro Architecture 
Micro architecture is made from diverse purpose by necessity.
It is result that made by function along of need and extremity situation which is seems to have too hard that cannot be made possible only through power of people, such as a tent which is shelter from the intense cold as a tool when people climb up Alps, a functional rest place for a mountaineer who needs to take a rest on an inaccessible precipice and a functional structure for keep checking safety on the beach.
“… Our guiding principle is to ‘touch the mountain lightly’ meaning to arrive and leave with the mountain nature least disturbed and with the minimum of energy use for construction and installation. Ironically the helicopter offers a relatively low-energy option for transport to otherwise inaccessible locations, providing the elements of the building are designed for that method of delivery. It takes approximately 15minutes to deliver a weight of 700kilos from 1600m to 4000m i.e., …”(114p.)
In addition, in micro architecture, one of the important points is the delivery method which relates with design process. Micro architecture should be moved and used through various aim. Therefore, when people moved micro architecture, they are used by a helicopter, truck or container as progress of installation. So, micro architecture project have to think about dimension and weight by starting point when we consider usable and valuable.
“Weight and dimensions are valuable and highly specific constraints on the design process, and these primary considerations lead to a greater understanding of reducing mass of material and strength and efficiency in structure.”
According to the condition, micro architecture has a part of holism architecture which has diverse function through various situation of need and limit proposal of structures and materials by situation like delivery. Normally, micro architecture is light weight, moveable, foldable and assemlable. It has diverse possibility of practical use and a function of a building as one unit that have holism property in the unit of small size. But, in case of ‘Micro Compact Home’ and ‘Family Compact Home’, it has potentiality that can promoted new environment gathering many units of micro architecture not only independent building as itself such as ‘Tree Tent’ (184-185p.) and ‘Family Compact Home’ (254-259p.).
Micro Architecture
Allows us to tap into this area of innovation, and benefits not only from research in form and materials but in the development of prefabrication methods. The micro compact home and, in future, the family compact home, can be built in a factory where the construction and use of material is much more controlled and efficient. The factory method also offers the opportunity to fit furniture to architecture in a more integrated and functional use of space.
This holistic approach is a fundamental part of micro architecture teaching. In addition to designing a small building, students develop skills in integrated product design. (39p.)
Small Buildings as terrific examples of mobile designs that use ‘crossover’ technologies (such as in aviation and boat design) to maximize efficiency in material, energy use and space. The next volume, XS Green, included the ’micro compact home’ because it had been designed to do so many of the things that a genuinely environmentally friendly project should and to the minimum scale necessary to meet basic (as well as very high-tech) living requirements. (14p.)
Nature inspires micro architecture not only through form but through our awareness of the need for conservation of land and resources. (34p.)
Micro Architecture: Practicable holism architecture as individual unit, or a part of an aggregate.
This holistic approach is a fundamental part of micro architecture teaching. In addition to designing a small building, students develop skills in integrated product design. (39p.)
Small Buildings as terrific examples of mobile designs that use ‘crossover’ technologies (such as in aviation and boat design) to maximize efficiency in material, energy use and space. The next volume, XS Green, included the ’micro compact home’ because it had been designed to do so many of the things that a genuinely environmentally friendly project should and to the minimum scale necessary to meet basic (as well as very high-tech) living requirements. (14p.)
Nature inspires micro architecture not only through form but through our awareness of the need for conservation of land and resources. (34p.)
Micro Architecture: Practicable holism architecture as individual unit, or a part of an aggregate.
Micro architecture is made from diverse purpose by necessity.
It is result that made by function along of need and extremity situation which is seems to have too hard that cannot be made possible only through power of people, such as a tent which is shelter from the intense cold as a tool when people climb up Alps, a functional rest place for a mountaineer who needs to take a rest on an inaccessible precipice and a functional structure for keep checking safety on the beach.
“… Our guiding principle is to ‘touch the mountain lightly’ meaning to arrive and leave with the mountain nature least disturbed and with the minimum of energy use for construction and installation. Ironically the helicopter offers a relatively low-energy option for transport to otherwise inaccessible locations, providing the elements of the building are designed for that method of delivery. It takes approximately 15minutes to deliver a weight of 700kilos from 1600m to 4000m i.e., …”(114p.)
In addition, in micro architecture, one of the important points is the delivery method which relates with design process. Micro architecture should be moved and used through various aim. Therefore, when people moved micro architecture, they are used by a helicopter, truck or container as progress of installation. So, micro architecture project have to think about dimension and weight by starting point when we consider usable and valuable.
“Weight and dimensions are valuable and highly specific constraints on the design process, and these primary considerations lead to a greater understanding of reducing mass of material and strength and efficiency in structure.”
According to the condition, micro architecture has a part of holism architecture which has diverse function through various situation of need and limit proposal of structures and materials by situation like delivery. Normally, micro architecture is light weight, moveable, foldable and assemlable. It has diverse possibility of practical use and a function of a building as one unit that have holism property in the unit of small size. But, in case of ‘Micro Compact Home’ and ‘Family Compact Home’, it has potentiality that can promoted new environment gathering many units of micro architecture not only independent building as itself such as ‘Tree Tent’ (184-185p.) and ‘Family Compact Home’ (254-259p.).
Personal Space
Personal space
Personal space is the region surrounding each person, or that area which a person considers their domain or territory.[1] Often if entered by another being without this being desired, it makes them feel uncomfortable. The amount of space a being (person, plant, animal) needs falls into two categories, immediate individual physical space (determined by imagined boundaries), and the space an individual considers theirs to live in (often called habitat). These are dependent on many things, such as growth needs, habits, courtships, etc. Hall's spacing models, to note, were themselves based on Heini Hediger's 1955 psychological studies of zoo animals.[2]
Diagram of Edward T. Hall's personal reaction bubbles (1966), showing radius in feet
Overview
Two people not affecting each other's personal space.
Reaction of two people whose personal space are in conflict.
Personal space is highly variable. Those who live in a densely populated environment tend to have smaller personal space requirements. Thus a resident of India may have a smaller personal space than someone who is home on the Mongolian steppe, both in regard to home and individual. For a more detailed example, see Body contact and personal space in the United States.
//Body contact and personal space in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The personal proximities generally utilized by Americans according to Edward T. Hall.
Intimate distance: extends roughly 18 inches (46 cm) from the individual and is reserved for family, pets and very close friends. Displays of affection and comforting are commonly conducted within this space. The only strangers an individual typically accepts within his or her intimate space are health care professionals.
Personal distance: extends 1.5 to 4 feet (0.46–1.2 m) is reserved for friends and acquaintances. A handshake will typically place strangers at least 2 to 4 feet (0.61–1.2 m) apart, preserving the personal distance.
Social distance: extends from about 4 to 12 feet (1.2–3.7 m) and is used for formal, business and other impersonal interactions such as meeting a client.
Public Space: extends more than 12 feet (3.7 m) and is not guarded. Secret Service agents will commonly attempt to ensure 12 feet (3.7 m) of open space around dignitaries and high ranking officials.
^ a b "Edward Hall, the hidden dimension online abstract". Retrieved on 2006-12-14.
^ Thompson, William; Joseph Hickey (2005). 'Society in Focus'. Boston, MA: Pearson. 0-205-41365-X.
^ Hall, Edward (1966). The Hidden Dimension. New York, NY: Peter Smith Publisher Inc. 0-385-08476-5.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_contact_and_personal_space_in_the_United_States"//
It can be determined on a habitat level by profession, livelihood, and occupation. Personal space can also be heavily affected by a person's position in society, with the more affluent a person being the larger personal space they demand. While it is highly variable and difficult to measure accurately the best estimates for personal physical space place it at about 24.5 inches (60 centimeters) on either side, 27.5 inches (70 centimeters) in front and 15.75 inches (40 centimeters) behind for an average westerner. 
Attitudes of people regarding someone else entering their personal space may depend on the sex of both people. Some train cars are women-only, to allow women to avoid men entering their personal space, providing privacy, and safety from the possibility of being groped. Changing perceptions about personal space and the fluctuating boundaries of public and private in European culture since the Roman Empire have been explored in A History of Private Life, under the general editorship of Philippe Ariès and Georges Duby, published in English by the Belknap Press.
Neuropsychology further describes personal space through three subdivisions which denote the 'near-ness' to ones person. 1. Extrapersonal Space: Extrapersonal Space refers to all space that occurs outside the reach of the individual in question. 2. Peripersonal Space: Peripersonal Space refers to all space within reach of any limb of the individual. Thus to be 'within-arm's length' is to be within one's peripersonal space. 3. Pericutaneous Space: Pericutaneous Space refers to the space just outside our bodies. It is generally accepted that the visual-tactile perceptive fields overlaps in the pericutaneous space, such that in example, one might see a feather as not touching themselves, but still feel the inklings of being tickled when it hovers just about their hand.[3] 
References
^ Hall, Edward T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. Anchor Books. ISBN 0-385-08476-5.
^ Hediger, Heini (1955). The Psychology and Behavior of Animals in Zoos and Circuses. Dover Publications. SBN 486622185.
^ Elias, L.J., M.S., Saucier, (2006) Neuropsychology: Clinical and Experimental Foundations. Boston; MA. Pearson Education Inc.ISBN:0-205-34361-9
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Personal space is the region surrounding each person, or that area which a person considers their domain or territory.[1] Often if entered by another being without this being desired, it makes them feel uncomfortable. The amount of space a being (person, plant, animal) needs falls into two categories, immediate individual physical space (determined by imagined boundaries), and the space an individual considers theirs to live in (often called habitat). These are dependent on many things, such as growth needs, habits, courtships, etc. Hall's spacing models, to note, were themselves based on Heini Hediger's 1955 psychological studies of zoo animals.[2]
Diagram of Edward T. Hall's personal reaction bubbles (1966), showing radius in feet
Overview
Two people not affecting each other's personal space.
Reaction of two people whose personal space are in conflict.
Personal space is highly variable. Those who live in a densely populated environment tend to have smaller personal space requirements. Thus a resident of India may have a smaller personal space than someone who is home on the Mongolian steppe, both in regard to home and individual. For a more detailed example, see Body contact and personal space in the United States.
//Body contact and personal space in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The personal proximities generally utilized by Americans according to Edward T. Hall.
Body contact and personal space in the United States shows considerable similarities to that in northern and central European regions, such as Germany, the Benelux, Scandinavia and the United Kingdom. The main difference is, however, that Americans like to keep more open space in between themselves and their conversation partners (roughly 4 feet (1.2 m) compared to 2 to 3 feet (0.6–0.9 m) in Europe).[1] Greeting rituals tend to be the same in these regions and in the United States, consisting of minimal body contact which often remains confined to a simple handshake. In 1966 Anthropologist Edward Hall identified four different zones of personal space Americans like to keep around them:[2][3][1]
Intimate distance: extends roughly 18 inches (46 cm) from the individual and is reserved for family, pets and very close friends. Displays of affection and comforting are commonly conducted within this space. The only strangers an individual typically accepts within his or her intimate space are health care professionals.
Personal distance: extends 1.5 to 4 feet (0.46–1.2 m) is reserved for friends and acquaintances. A handshake will typically place strangers at least 2 to 4 feet (0.61–1.2 m) apart, preserving the personal distance.
Social distance: extends from about 4 to 12 feet (1.2–3.7 m) and is used for formal, business and other impersonal interactions such as meeting a client.
Public Space: extends more than 12 feet (3.7 m) and is not guarded. Secret Service agents will commonly attempt to ensure 12 feet (3.7 m) of open space around dignitaries and high ranking officials.
References
^ a b "Edward Hall, the hidden dimension online abstract". Retrieved on 2006-12-14.
^ Thompson, William; Joseph Hickey (2005). 'Society in Focus'. Boston, MA: Pearson. 0-205-41365-X.
^ Hall, Edward (1966). The Hidden Dimension. New York, NY: Peter Smith Publisher Inc. 0-385-08476-5.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_contact_and_personal_space_in_the_United_States"//
It can be determined on a habitat level by profession, livelihood, and occupation. Personal space can also be heavily affected by a person's position in society, with the more affluent a person being the larger personal space they demand. While it is highly variable and difficult to measure accurately the best estimates for personal physical space place it at about 24.5 inches (60 centimeters) on either side, 27.5 inches (70 centimeters) in front and 15.75 inches (40 centimeters) behind for an average westerner.
People usually make exceptions to, and modify their space requirements, when they see an immediate need or reason to temporarily allow a change in their usual personal space needs. Often a person's comfort zone is different depending upon where they are and who they are with. In certain circumstances people can accept having their personal space violated. For instance in romantic encounters the stress from allowing closer personal space distances can be reinterpreted into emotional fervour. Another method of dealing with violated personal space, according to psychologist Robert Sommer, is dehumanization. He argues that (for example) on the subway, crowded people often imagine those intruding on their personal space as inanimate. Differences in personal space distances by culture (such as a person from India attempting to talk to someone from the Midwestern US) can often cause situations where one person steps forward to enter what they perceive as a conversational distance, and the person they are talking to reflexively steps back to restore their personal space.
Attitudes of people regarding someone else entering their personal space may depend on the sex of both people. Some train cars are women-only, to allow women to avoid men entering their personal space, providing privacy, and safety from the possibility of being groped. Changing perceptions about personal space and the fluctuating boundaries of public and private in European culture since the Roman Empire have been explored in A History of Private Life, under the general editorship of Philippe Ariès and Georges Duby, published in English by the Belknap Press.
Neuropsychology further describes personal space through three subdivisions which denote the 'near-ness' to ones person. 1. Extrapersonal Space: Extrapersonal Space refers to all space that occurs outside the reach of the individual in question. 2. Peripersonal Space: Peripersonal Space refers to all space within reach of any limb of the individual. Thus to be 'within-arm's length' is to be within one's peripersonal space. 3. Pericutaneous Space: Pericutaneous Space refers to the space just outside our bodies. It is generally accepted that the visual-tactile perceptive fields overlaps in the pericutaneous space, such that in example, one might see a feather as not touching themselves, but still feel the inklings of being tickled when it hovers just about their hand.[3]
References
^ Hall, Edward T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. Anchor Books. ISBN 0-385-08476-5.
^ Hediger, Heini (1955). The Psychology and Behavior of Animals in Zoos and Circuses. Dover Publications. SBN 486622185.
^ Elias, L.J., M.S., Saucier, (2006) Neuropsychology: Clinical and Experimental Foundations. Boston; MA. Pearson Education Inc.ISBN:0-205-34361-9
Thursday, 12 February 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)