UJ_Unit2: Mid-Year portfolio review

As we wrap up the second quarter of 2015, each of the GPA students were requested to submit a condensed compilation of our work thus far. Below is a summary of what I got up to thus far in Unit together with a short reflection.

Through the neighbourhood immersion project, one critically considers the concept of what defines “community”. The idea of community stood out as involving a complex network of people within a place (physical or not). In the second project, infrastructure was understood as systems (physical and social) needed for a society to function. Infrastructure as an interface between the individual and shared needs of a community was explored. Architecture as a response to urban transients and social networks was explored in Newtown. All of these themes are in the backdrop of a growing understanding and unpacking of Open Building principles.

The best lessons of the context were learnt from unforeseen encounters through engagement revealing realities and complexities that lie far beneath the surface of observations. Exploring Jeppestown as a user raised questions tested in project 2. One questioned how infrastructure delivery can consider the societal realities, to contribute and reinforce these. Newtown’s opportunities explored through the lens of both subjective and objective analysis. The context revealed networks of transition and the site as a transition point for various mixed users, purposes and time periods. Denver was considered through Identifying levels, differentiating between permanent and temporary elements, territorial boundaries, and actors.

One sought to represent the complexity of “community”, and also appreciate this complexity; developing one’s own personal tools of site immersion. Understanding infrastructure as a response to collective housing needs identified in Jeppestown: one disentangled the housing need and tested infrastructures possible response. Noting user-defined communal space as an opportunity, infrastructure was considered as a framework for user-defined communal spaces. Newtown as a point of transition was responded to through a mixed-use, transitional-housing development accessible to low-income groups. Questions towards designing for transformation in view of the complexities of an informal, local site were tested in a hostel transformation.

The possibility of the pavement as shared space, enabled by its infrastructure (surfaces, lighting, barriers and furniture) was tested as a response to the observed housing need of the complex Jeppestown neighbourhood observed from immersion. Newtown saw one transforming a neglected heritage building to respond to unique urban realities. Questions towards time-base design were tested, drawn from realities identified in Denver. Exploring the possibilities and negotiations between permanent and temporary elements, and who control these. Possibilities of what open building can offer in an informal settlement/local context are raised for further exploration as the year progresses.

Open Building Intensive with Prof. Stephen Kendall (Part 2)

The Base Building transformations exercise was a task to take an existing Hostel and transform it into an Open Building, a building with the capacity for change and adaptation by its occupants, and transformation over time.

The exercise was a purely technical task. I enjoyed it mostly because the architectural nature of it was my first real encounter with the more technical aspect of time based design, beyond the abstract concepts. 

Not finding a plan for a hostel online, I used a "single-loaded corridor" typology, similar to the Denver Hostel. The above is me testing the capacity of the building, + what can be permanent/temporary elements.
What is shared and what is occupant owned?

Transforming the existing layout, taking away and adding to the overall layout. Keeping circulation, structural elements and shafts, also adding a new layout of service shafts. 

Possible variations and change of layouts with the new framework of the Base building. 

With the increased capacity of the hostel, the various subsystems set the bounds/restrictions for the smaller systems. (Where the shafts are determines what spaces can/cannot become.)
Questions raised throughout the process...

From the above exercise, questions in ones mind were that within the context of Denver, should such a transformation happen within the hostel, who would control which elements of the base building? 

-Between the occupant and the owner, who would control where the pipes go?

- Would economic factors affect whether occupants can define the infill walls? 

- Who would provide/own the infill walls/ service pipes and fixed elements ie. ablutions.?

I look forward to exploring these ideas in my own individual base Building design. 

Open Building intensive with Prof. Sephen Kendall (Part 1)

Professor Stephen Kendall is a registered architect whose academic and research career spans more than 35 years. He has a professional degree from the University of Cincinnati, a Masters of Architecture and Urban Design from Washington University in St. Louis, and a PhD in Design Theory and Methods from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dr. Kendall has taught architectural design and urban design studios, and courses in building technology and design theory at all levels of professional curricula in several universities in the US, as well as in Taiwan, Italy, Indonesia, South Africa, Japan and China. He has experience in guiding professional, post professional and PhD studies at US and several foreign universities.

For 2 Weeks we were privileged to have prof. Kendall with us for a 2 week intensive workshop on "Warm up exercises in Open Building." 

Really learnt a lot during prof. Kendall's visit, some of the highlights include:
- Applying the abstract concepts of open building through very practical, technical exercises.
- Open building is not an entirely new/foreign concept. The idea of change within a stable environment, allowing for different users and functions over time is somewhat already in practice through common retail and commercial projects.  
- Developing a growing understanding of open building terminology (in practice). Ie. Tissue model, Base Building and Infill. 

During Prof. Kendalls Visit we also engaged in a short exercise of transforming an existing hostel/row house using open building principles.