Frontier02_One Step Beyond - Thoughts...

As an intuitive start to this Frontier, the "other" that I explore is the phenomenon of Foreign owned spaza shops (Informal Micro Convenience stores) found in South-African townships and Residential neighborhoods...

"White House Spaza" shop, up the road from home. 

 What is a "Spaza"?

A Spaza shop is an informal micro-retail store, usually found in South African townships (1). This informal economy arose in townships during the apartheid era with small entrepreneurs selling every day groceries form their homes. The spatial layout of townships did not include immediate retail facilities, and the Spaza became a valuable economic solution to most township 

An interest of mine in exploring Migrant Owned spaza's in particular is due to the fact that though the spaza is historically a South African occurrence (2), the prevalence of foreign owned spaza's in some neighborhoods seems to advance that of locally owned spaza's. I am curious as to why. 

Comparing the ratio of Migrant to Locally owned Spaza shops. (Dawn Park, Boksburg)

The following statemt from the suggested readings was an interesting provocation in terms of one's "everyday" and aparently normal interactions with this "other."

“There are a you and an I, and there is no mine and yours! For without a you and an I, there is no love, and with mine and yours there is no love but "mine" and "yours" are, of course, formed from a "you" and an "I", and, as a consequence, seem obliged to be present wherever there are a you and an I. This is, indeed, the case everywhere, but not in love, which is a revolution from the ground up. The more profound the revolution, the more completely the distinction mine and yours disappears, and the more perfect is the love.” - Kierkegaard, S.!Works of Love (1847)[36].

Different Spaza in same suburb (Dawn Park, Boksburg)

I'd hope to uncover why it is that the network of foreign owned spaza's seems to me more predominant to the locally owned counterparts. What lessons can be learnt from migrant owned spaza shops around entering into "an other" (different from your own) economy (or system), and thriving in that foreign economy/system..

1. R7bn worth of untapped township potential Lessons from Spaza shop owners.

2. Migrant spaza shops: business lessons from Soweto

Frontier01_Iconoclast - TRACES_Boksburg 2020

Project brief 

"This first project serves as a personal primer, the layer onto which the projects and processes to come will bind onto, or come unstuck from. The aim of this exercise is for you to locate yourself within your own personal development. 

You are tasked to answer one question – Where are you now? – by representing your personal progress in the field of Architecture, projected into the future, within clear physical constraints."

TRACES_Boksburg 2020

Mama's Journal

Boksburg, my home town since the earliest stages of childhood, reflects a spatial allegory of my current position related to architecture. 

Often misunderstood by outsiders (and some insiders), the historic town leaves its impression, traced through life and architecture. I explore five predominant spatial typologies and their hybrid relationships: mining heritage (comparable to traces & history), plantation (the soil), industry (process & production), suburbs and townships (expression & perceptions), and the CBD (complexity & ambition). 

This typological investigation of Boksburg embodies different, yet synchronized, aspects of my architectural progression. 

Simon Ngubeni

Snapshot of Boksburg 2020

Presenting Frontier 1 at MOAD

Architectural Manifesto - Video

The systemic framework
Architecture exists as a part of the complex, dynamic and self-governing system of the built environment, a part of the built fabric of society in which every day behavior, culture and practices, are intricately related to the notion of place. Thus is defined the architect’s field of operation, which involves peoples individual and collective customs & daily rituals, staged on the platform of space. To this, we hold to these principles:

Recognizing complexity, designing simplicity
Understanding the systemic complexity of the collective users, space, and built form of a place; as well as the unique nature of relationships between these, is a driver for context sensitive spatial design responses. Familiarity with the complexity and processes is a generator for simple, meaningful responses. 

People in mind
A place is not only its material, but also its inhabitants, and their complex, layered practices. Thus the dynamic nature of users (collective and individual) in the making and sustaining of a place is to be kept in mind. 

Designing impact
Understanding the complexity of a context, it is within the reach of spatial designers to make an intentional, considered impact, through design, for the benefit of users. 
What architecture does is just as important as what it is, and more important that what it looks like: if what it looks like does not contribute to what it does (This referring to the effect and impact of architecture, rather that programmatic function).

A catalytic agent 
The complex nature of the built environment is greater than the architect. In designing impact, architecture is thus a catalyst, a means to the end of contributing to the system: spatially, aesthetically, functionally or whatever opportunity a place invites of the spatial designer. The architect is thus contributor and not as controller, and architecture is thus a valuable (yet limited) instrument.

Design workshop_Part 1: Spatial Exploration

This past week Unit2 engaged in a design workshop to explore the spatial intentions behind our individual design intervention. Through various short exercises we go to explore and express the spatial possibilities within our sites.

The task(s)

Sketch Sections

The first task was to explore, in section, a key space within our interventions and explore the spatial possibilities. This involved looking at the relationships between the various spaces, the (vertical and horizontal) planes and points that define that core space. The exercises were very short to get us to make quick, intuitive decisions based on our findings from site analysis.  

Initial Sections through core spaces of intervention. 

The task was quite helpful in pushing me to intentionally consider, spatially, what my intentions are (in relation to the overall themes I am dealing with.) Although at the beginning of the task I wasn’t quite settled on what the functions should be, but I considered the exercise as a tool to assist in that direction.

Open Recreational Spaces   -   Internal workshop and "making space" -  Route and Interface between structure and outdoor workshop.

The core space I considered was a portion through what would be workshops, related to other spaces of less activity (internally), as well as a route through the intervention connecting various parts of the site, the building thus acting as a gateway through the site.

Getting this idea across in section was a slight challenge, explored the spatial intentions in perspectives, making intuitive decisions as i go. These also furhther informed the sections.

Sketch Models

From the sections, we were also tasked to explore the spatial intentions through models informed by the sketches through a core space.

Model 1

Exploration sketch model 1. Considering the intervention within its relation to the existing buildings, and the urban fabric. 

In the beginning of the exercises, I found that I was considering the models more as massing, rather than expressing the spatial experience and the intentions behind them. 

Model 2

To further explore the spatial intentions, I decided to consider the model at a larger scale. 

Personally, considering the spatial experience in perspective was a helpful tool in exploring the possibilities.
Here I consider the spatial relationship between the intervention and the public realm, and what positive spaces are created. 

The idea is that of a route through the intervention, the spatial experience being as of a gateway through the demolished sites. 

Model 3

Further explorations began getting a bit more character after sketching over the previous models.
These models better express a sense of lightness, structure, and the relationship with the street edge and the public spaces on the previously demolished sites. 

The intention is to have an increased scale in the intervention, while still being contextually relevant. With the sites location at the entrance into Fietas, the architectural intervention defines the threshold into Fietas.  

While making these models, a slight challenge was to express  the same spatial expression that I expressed in the sketches. This challenge was better resolved through Part2 of the design workshop later in the week. 

Personal reflections from the exercise

I really enjoyed the push to consider the spatial intentions of my individual projects intentions. This exercise forced me to test the abstract ideas spatially, relative to the actual site. 

I found myself going back and forth with the various exercises. Considering the intervention from various perspectives, was helpful.

Allowing oneself to make the intuitive decisions (without necessarily discarding the more rational ones) made me consider the whole intervention with more creativity. 

Although during the process I felt as though I had not settled on the spatial intentions, the exercises assisted me to consider what I really mean with some of my intentions. 

In retrospect,I find that my intentions (spatially) seem to focus on:

- The idea of filling the spatial gaps made by the demolitions

- Spatial for connectivity and legibility through the intervention and adjacent spaces

- Giving Fietas a presence spatially as a part of the city, rather than a gap within the city. 

From here 

From the exercise, I think I need to take a bit of a step back to consider what my overall urban drivers are. 
These short exercises were followed by another short exercise with Tuliza Sindi

1 Week with visiting professor Phil Astley

This past week UJ_Unit2 got to spend the week with Phil Astley from the UK. At this relatively early stage in our thesis process (completing site analysis & generating concepts), the week spent with Phil has been very helpful in helping to focus the direction of my project and the themes I am dealing with.

Although the emphasis of Phil’s presentations had to do with health, the various methods and strategic planning approaches were practically relevant to our own various projects in the unit.

It was interesting to consider the idea of healthcare within the overall scope of the "wider determinants of health" which Phil spoke of. This considered things such as the environment, communities/the social environment, as well as the space and the connections thereof. 

What we got up to: 

Together with a few short lectures that dealt with various aspects of strategic planning in delivering healthcare infrastructure, Phil also had us engage in a few short exercises to apply what was being learnt to our specific sites.

The exercises were on

1. What are the drivers for change, at a strategic level, for our individual schemes

a.  Where do these various drivers sit in relation to each other in terms of importance and certainty/uncertainty

2. Who are our the potential users, and understanding their various criteria and needs

3. Scenario planning. Bringing in the time factor and building up the “narrative” of our individual projects.

Group exercise with Unit2 Colleagues on scenario planning

I really enjoyed these. Although, due to time ,we didn’t go into much detail with these various approaches on our individual projects, one looks forward to applying these tools to one’s current process.

Readings

Before Phil’s visit, we were tasked to go through a document on Planning Healthcare and Infrastructure (PHI).  The document provided an interesting systematic approach to planning and implementing primary and community healthcare services that are context sensitive and relevant to local communities.

Summary from reading PHI document.

This systematic approach provided a few helpful ideas that can also be applied to our own sites.

Pecha Kutcha slideshow presentation

As one of the tasks for to end off the week, and to sum up the weeks lessons, we were also tasked to prepare a 3 minute (max) PowerPoint presentation of no more than 10 slides (See slides and notes). The intention of this was to present, in a concise but clear manner, the findings from our sites, our approach and process thus far (including the week). 

Slide: Testing the tools learnt during the week on my project. 

This exercise was helpful in considering what the most crucial elements in one’s narrative/ process are thus far.

Lessons and reflections

It was interesting to see Phil applying ideas of Open Building in strategic planning. Open Building really stood out as an approach for laying out and specifying the systems of a development. Phil focused much on the higher planning level of development. The use of the terms "primary system", "secondary systems" and "tertiary systems" in referring to the different levels of planning, is what initially helped me in grasping the idea of levels. 

Together with the individual crit/ consultation received from Phil, the week spent really challenged me to focus my scheme more, as well as assisted in how to achieve a more contextually relevant response.

The idea of considering the potential users, “getting into their heads” so to say, has been very helpful to my own process. This being mostly because of one of my major themes being to respond to the shared social-spatial conditions in  Fietas.

I look forward to the scenario planning in view of the specific drivers for change relative to my site for consideration. 

Site visits & Updates:

Site visits and update 

Site visit 3-4
To gain entrance into the community and find out more about the social aspects, I got a chance to volunteer at the Jan Hofmeyer community center (Soup Kitchen). This was my tool for immersing myself into the site. 

Jan Hofmeyer Community Services Board 

A bit about the community services

• Founded in 2000 by Frances Botha and Rosaline Wallace (Residents of Fietas)
• Non-Profit Company Serving residents of Jan Hofmeyer, Vredepark and Vrededorp neighbourhoods
• Soup Kitchen Serves 350 people (ave.) daily
• From young children to elderly residents. 

Change Agents

The community center appears to serve a valuable role in the neighbourhood. In providing a daily meal for the residents, the center seeks to make a positive contribution to the neighbourhood and residents. 

The managers at the centre see themselves as agents of positive change in the Fietas. 

“Even If we can make a change in the life of one person, that goes a long way...”

-Rosaline -  Owner at the soup kitchen

Jan Hofmeyer Community Services. various initiatives serving residents

From a few of the community members spoken to at the soup kitchen, as well as from the the volunteers at the centre, I received a deeper insight into the various issues faced by the community as well as where some of the issues happen. 

Substance abuse. 

Substance abuse seems to stand out as a prevalent issue related to the various challenges in the neighborhood.

Visiting the centre a few times has been a great help in learning more about Fietas, more especially with regards to the social realities in Fietas

Opportunities for intervention

A few points/ findings that seem to stand out from the engagement with the community 

• The crime and drug condition
• Majority of young people being unemployed
• A reported sense of entitlement among a number of local residents
• Discouraging environment and public realm
• Prevalence of elderly people 

Another Opportunity: 8th Street, Active transport route and
early stages of Corridors of Freedom development. 

 From Here

From here I look to going deeper into considering these conditions, their causes and possible responses. In breaking them down I intend to consider which of them have spatial implications and opportunities to intervene. 

The Future of Open Building Conference_Reflections

Zurich West skyline

This past week I had the privilege to travel to Zurich, Switzerland with prof. Amira Osman to attend the Future of Open Buildingconference (9-11 September 2015). There were 2 main objectives to the conference in looking “at the future. Mainly:

• The clearly articulate and clarify the focus’ and principles of Open Building (OB)
•  And to explore further the possibilities of Open Building within the 21^st century.

“How can we design large projects without necessarily imposing uniformity and rigidity where variety and adaptability over time are desirable? 

- Habraken N.J. 1967. The control of complexity. Places 4 (2) 3 (Conference “theme” question)

What took place

In the 3 days of the conference, there were a number of interesting and thought provoking key note presentations, panel discussions, parallel paper presentation sessions, case studies as well as informal conversations set on the above objectives.

With the many lessons learnt and thoughts gathered, I will only consider a few highlights from the experience.

Panel discussions and Key note presentations

The panel discussions and presentations were joint sessions on a variety of topics related to open building. The various speakers gave very interesting insights and approaches to open building applied to various scenarios.

Day 3 Panel discussion: (Left to right) Prof. Yung Ho Chang, Hiromi Hosaya, Marin Denn, Prof. Renee Chow 

With the broad spectrum of speakers, many of the panelists spoke on the ideas of “openness” in various (sometimes disconnected) interpretations. I noted the slightly varying ideas around the concept of “Open Building” (verb and noun). There is however quite an opportunity in this regard though, especially looking at the second objective of the conference.

The panel discussions, in considering the idea of “openness” stimulated quite a bit of discussion outside the sessions.

Key note presentation - Frank Bijdendijk

The key note presentations gave strong insights on the relevance of OB in various applications: from economics to environmental concerns, real estate to designing for openness.

I was impressed with how OB can play a key role in not just architecture, but in the built environment as a whole. OB’s consideration of the BE as a whole brings the benefits the economic and politics into the picture. A number of the keynote presentations noted the idea of distributed control, levels and openness within defined restrictions.

“Openness without rules doesn’t work”

Parallel paper sessions

On the first day of the conference attendees split up to listen to a number of short presentations based on submitted papers showcasing various case studies, research projects and perspectives on the principles of Open Building.

The session I attended involved papers covering various projects at an urban and architectural scale. I chose it in particular because of the relevance of the various papers to my current thesis process.

I enjoyed was seeing practical applications of OB principles in various complex circumstances and contexts around the world. The presentations tied together well from themes such as Designed Self-Help, Urban Infill Spaces, to Transformations of Territorial Structures.

Paper presentation_ Comparing Levels of Urban form and culture in the city China

What I enjoy about the principles of Open Building is that they are based on the understanding of the built environment as a system with specific principles and behaviors that are present in every context. Recognizing levels and distributing control with a focus on designing for change over time is relevant in every field.

“Participation doesn’t necessarily mean consensus… Conflict can also play a generative role for creativity in design” -  Nelson Mota

Taking into consideration the 3 orders of the built environment (discussed in the Structure of the Ordinary by Habraken) brought to view the economic and social influences on the various case studies.

Informal discussions and networking sessions

Getting to meet and discuss with a number of various thinkers, academics and fellow students from around the world was among the most fruitful and informative part of the conference.

One gathered that the movement is broad yet made up of few: which I see as an opportunity. Discussing “The Future of Open Building” based on the various presentations offered very interesting ideas in advancing the ideals of a systemic approach to design.

It also became clear to me that the definition of what is OB is not necessarily fixed. Like myself, some of the attendees discussed with are also developing their own grasp on OB.

Networking and informal discussions

A number of various people met also had similar reflections form the panel discussions and key note addresses. It was quite refreshing however to gain insights from others with a similar approach to architecture.

Transformations of East Zurich tour

An interesting part of the conference included a walk around the previously industrial context of Zurich West.  It was interesting to see the urban renewal projects that took place in the area, including high end residential developments, retail and transforming old industrial space to market spaces.

Transformed brewery to new art gallery, high-end residential and commercial development. 

Zurich West remindend me a lot of the Maboneng Precinct in South Africa. There were many similarities in old industrial buildings being converted to art galleries, retail spaces and high-end residential developments with excessive rates.

Viaduct transformation_New Life in Old Viaduct Arches

Underside of Railway Bridge transformed to accommodate various mixed retail developments; generating economic opportunities within the new precinct.

Frietag Flagship Store_ The Smallest "High-rise" in town. Prime tower in the background

Prime tower_The second tallest sky scraper in Switzerland (previously the tallest from 2011-2014)

Other personal reflections

The” Open” of Open Building

From the various presentations, I found that the term “Open” can be a somewhat limited term in getting across the various principles of OB especially because of its parallel relation to the “Open design” movement. As both consider the idea of users being part of the design decision making process, Open Building considers the restrictions of various levels in the built environment. OB, as I currently understand it, recognizes the hierarchy (for lack of better words) of levels, whereas the Open design movement almost seeks to put everyone on an equal level.

I left the conference with an understanding of the term “open” in OB as referring to openness of decision making and agency within the constraints of a specific level of the built environment: the idea of flexibility and freedom within a fixed framework.  

“Perhaps one of the greatest dangers as we discuss the future of open Building is the term “openness” – Dietmar Eberle (Closing Address)

Slight disparity between old and new

Both among the presenters as well as attendees there were younger academics & practitioners as well as those older who had been involved with open building for a longer time.  To a number of us newly attending the conference, the idea of OB was relatively new. I would say this is evidence of progress.

From the various presentations and panel discussions, I saw the pattern of a somewhat “traditional” view of open building (especially among those who had seemed to be acquainted with OB for much longer) and another, perhaps more forward-thinking perspective which paid much attention to the idea of  openness.

In the various informal discussions however, I noted the similar ideas around the concepts of time based design, levels of the built environment and agency.

Communication and (mis)understanding

I would say that one of the difficulties faced in discussing the idea of OB is that it is widely misunderstood (As with the example of an empty structure).  I would say this has much to do with how the various concepts of OB are communicated.

At the conference I really I appreciated the power of language (visual and otherwise) to get across ideas. This is where I think opportunity lies for getting across the very misunderstood principles of OB. Clearly documented and represented projects, may be of great help in this regard.

Panel Presentation_Ute Schneider

Frans vd Werf presented a well-illustrated paper session on A Thematic Designed District after 35years. It gave a clear depiction of the idea of “the Urban Tissue” related to OB.

In considering “The Future of Open Building”, communication and language is where I see opportunity for growth in various OB projects and practices. Various terms seem to be understood mainly within the OB circles.

OB and its far reaching influence

OB brings to view the far reaching impacts of architecture in the built environment, and its influence on various agents. I currently see my role as an (aspiring) architect as being to contribute to the built environment as a spatial practitioner.

As much as I think architecture must take into consideration economic, political and social factors, I still believe that the role of the architect is not to try and control these fields. OB brings to my view the possibilities of influencing and contributing to the various agents of the built environment through negotiation and design.

Lessons to take into thesis

Got to share my thesis project with various people I met at the conference and I was challenged and encouraged by the discussions to take some of the lessons learnt further and push forward my ideas as they develop from the experience at the conference.

I look forward to seeing what future Open Building will hold in the architectural industry and how the lessons learnt may apply personally. 

Site Visit 2: Lunch time activity

Site visit: 11:30 - 13:00, Tuesday 

Just got back from another site visit. Going into it, the main intention was to try and identify the social patterns/ systems taking place around the site.

What I did

• Started of by taking a walk around the possible sites to find out who were the main actors around the immediate site. Taking photo's along the way. 

• At first I only saw people passing through the site (with very little other activity), and decided to take another walk around the neighborhood.
• In this second walk, I started documenting what activities were taking place on the plots that were left over after the demolitions from the forced removals, hoping to find further clues.

Things I found 
There are various trades/ industries within Fietas that use some of the old plots to operate their businesses. A discussion with a carpenter revealed a broader network of those who work within various trades and how they interact with each other and the rest of the neighborhood. 

Activities on previously left over sites:

• Dumping 
• Carpenters workshop
• Vacant/ Closed off and unused 
• Scrap yards
• Mechanic/ Car repair
• Brick yard
• New private developments 
• Outdoor "social" activities. (Gathering, drinking, drying yards)
• Pedestrian Shortcuts

Interesting encounter

I then went back to my initial possible site to further observe activity, sitting down to sketch what activities I saw and record peoples activities. 

While sketching, 2 of the local residents passing by paused to see what I was doing. This was somewhat of a breakthrough opportunity. This discussion was possibly the most fruitful part of the site visit. 

Patric and Dirkie
Through the discussion with the 2 residents, I got to find out the the most about the locals and their practices. 

• Long time residents of Fietas, 20-30 years 
• Staying in flats adjacent to the possible

Walk up residential, home to some residents who eat at the soup kitchen 

• Related to the Community Center worked with previously in the FADA joint community project. 
• Because it was around lunch time, a number of the local residents came out to go to the soup kitchen for an afternoon meal. These are very familiar to each other and I was introduced to some of them. 
• Through the impromptu discussion with the residents, one found clues to a greater network, not easily seen at the surface level. "I can show you where all the other young people.

Sketch of Dirkie from memory

• I was welcome back to the community centre and to Dirkies private residents for the next site visit. "I can show you where all the things are happening..."
• A number of the local residents are skilled and able. (Trade abilities, various skills, bilingual). Although the environment offers very little opportunity.

Serious social challenges

From the discussion, one found out more about a few of the social challenges prevalent in Fietas. 

• "Be careful, or they will rob you"
• A majority of young people are engaged in drugs and associated crimes to support their habits. 
• Crime. One of the residents had been recently robbed, (across from the cemetery) a seemingly prevalent issue.

Opportunities

From my interaction with the few local residents, I see opportunities for exploration in the network of residents who get their afternoon meal at the soup kitchen, most especially young people.

• Contacts made offer opportunity for first hand experiences with locals
• The fact that much of this activity  was taking place immediately adjacent to the 
• One considers the concern with the nature of some of the issued faced. 

Opportunity for exploration also exists in the various trades/ industries that operate on the vacant sites within the Fietas neigbourhood.