Monthly Archives: April 2013

The architect gives ownership

Posted on by
Reply

Teddy Curz’s proposed system that engages the Tijuana and San Diego borders puts the architect, in this case Cruz, in a unique position. This begins with the question of what an architect does. The classic idea of an architect is that the architect designs space, generally a building, and then the occupant inhabit that space. Cruz on the other rethinks how the architect is involved. The architect does not create space. The architect does not deign the structure. The architect makes a system.

This system is unique in that the architect hands over the process of design to the inhabitants. The idea essentially removes the architect from the process of design. By creating a system where the architect has provided the inhabits with a frame (literally and figuratively), the architects hands over ownership of the project to the inhabitant. In an overly physically sense the architect is the frame while the inhabitants are the infill. This is saying that Cruz is behind the framing system while the inhabitant is behind how the dwelling fills in the frame. The reused and repurposed tires, garage doors, pallets and scaffolding  from San Diego become the tools of decisions and agency of the inhabitant.

This transfer and separation of ownership becomes an extremely contextualized proposition. This system is unique in that it does not attempt to create a new system for the people in ever changing settlements. These settlements have the reputation of being self built and created with whatever means available. The new system does not changes that. It simply creates an interface to expand on that concept. Essentially this system has not created a massive change or upheaval but instead it creates a new tool for the inhabitants to use.

This same idea can be applied to the social side of the architecture. By giving the inhabitants a frame to fill as their own the architect is giving the inhabitants a social frame to fill as their own as well. This is in how the frame becomes the icon. The frame as the enabling tool now becomes the common between all the people. The frame is custom pre-fab. As oxymoronic as that sounds its becomes a reality. The frame is so contextualized and so customized for these settlement just south of the Tijuana and San Diego border that it can become an icon. It is the only building material in the people kit of parts that is not a second hand repurposed left over over San Diego. It did not travel across the border, passing through customs.  It was meant for south of the border and becomes part of south of the border. It’s adds to the community and gives the community an identity but it does not directly change the community. To the inhabitants its simply another material to work with, but it is their material to use.

This can be a result of how the architect has removed themselves from the picture. Their intervention is so minimal that it avoids change but so contextualized that it’s created an icon and potentially custom identity.

The Brief and Business

Posted on by
Reply

In the “Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture” reading, many points and questions are raised regarding how architecture is practiced and how it can be thought of in a more “outside-the-box” way. One particularly direct inquiry raised in the text is on the topic of the brief. The brief is an integral part of architectural practice, and is described in the text as means of communication that “set out in varying degrees of detail the kind of accommodation required, the planning requirements, and often the overall cost” of a project that the client writing the brief wishes to pay the architect to accomplish.

Having worked in a very small firm, the experience from firm to firm is unquestionably different as to how these briefs are obtained, negotiated, and carried out. For a small firm however, much of the livelihood of the employer and employees is dependent upon the ability of the team to obtain a numerous and steady stream of projects, usually on the smaller scale, and complete them as efficiently as possible.

This leads to the issues that this text seems to overlook when discussing how architects can “have a greater impact” or “design the beyond.” While there are many aspects to architectural business and politics I do not grasp, the experience of the small firm, with perhaps one or two licensed architects and a few staff members, is largely dependent on the state of the economy and business from repeat clients. Without the backing of a political entity, high-profile donors, or a significant fundraising campaign, I question how these smaller firms can tackle the broader tasks the text is calling for. These are honest questions however, and I would be interested in expanding my knowledge in the aspect of the profession.

Re-examining the Role of the Architect

Posted on by
Reply

It is clear that we must re-examine the role of the architect, specifically with regard to the developing world. Currently, most architects are stuck working within the boundaries that the “brief writers” have neatly created for them, when in reality, is it the brief writers who truly know best? (Awan, Schneider, Till 70). One single person or entity cannot and should not create or generalize the opinion of an entire neighborhood or city.
We have seen in a variety of case studies such as Paraisopolis and Tijuana/San Diego that there is often an incredible juxtaposition between extreme wealth and extreme poverty in our cities. The gap between classes is only getting wider, thus we need to mediate between these two disparate communities in order to bridge this gap and improve the living conditions of the poor. This requires spatial agency in conjunction with a close examination of the causes of these impoverished conditions. Once we are able to identify these deep seeded causes, architects, designers, engineers, and the communities will be able to work in conjunction with one another in order to create new systems to improve people’s lives. The key to success and invention once the root of the problem is discovered, is working in collaboration with a variety of groups, most importantly the inhabitants, to come up with the best possible solution for each community (Aquilino 162). Social exchange is an underutilized, yet invaluable tool for anyone proposing architectural interventions. Collecting information and input from the largest group possible will provide us with an immense amount of ideas that may not have occurred to an architect or other designer who does not live in the area in which they are working. This is a type of participatory design that will help us as designers see the possibilities of a site, using spatial agency. It will push architecture past being solely a service, into a creative, unencumbered process that can accommodate for any number of variables (Awan, Schneider, Till 72). This is the way that we can begin to push the boundaries and break the status quo. It is possible that instead of focusing on large institutional projects with strict guidelines, the next generation of architects will choose to work outside of their comfort zone and begin to explore the possibilities and potential that is abundant in developing countries and their slums.
Vast quantities of factors determine the success of any given project or neighborhood. As Marie Jeannine Aquilino discusses, the environment and the building stock are vitally linked, and must be considered in conjunction (Aquilino 155). Using spatial agency, and looking outside of the norms for design concepts has the promise of creating new types of space that both respects the environment as well as supports the population. It is irresponsible for architects in the twenty first century to design without the environment in mind, and while it may take time and significant effort to convince others, particularly governments, that this is the inevitable truth of our world, it is something that designers must take on. After all, it truly is a place for architectural experimentation and innovation.

Aquilino, Marie Jeannine. Beyond Shelter: Architecture and Human Dignity. New York, NY: Metropolis, 2010.
Awan, Nishat, Tatjana Schneider, and Jeremy Till. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. Abingdon, Oxon [England: Routledge, 2011.

Story Telling

Posted on by
Reply

In this past week’s reading, “Spatial Agency; Other Ways of Doing Architecture”, the authors started their chapter with a section about briefing. They consider “Briefing” to be, in a sense, the contract or understanding in the client-architect relationship. The client has an agenda to build a specific building with a specific program and gives their agenda to an architect. The architect is paid for their services. But the authors go on to explain that some believe design without, or outside the boundaries of regulations are more appropriate to social conditions. Cedric Price believes, “These instances of space that are found outside the rules and regulations that typically govern the production of space open up a more variable understanding and interpretation of space” (70). Unfortunately clients don’t want experimentation or anything out of the norm because it usually ends in failed attempts, law suits, and over budgeting. The architect must then decide how can you earn a client’s trust to design an unexpected architecture?

This is a question whether you are working in slums or even in the middle of Manhattan. Clients do not want to pay more and developers will strip designs down to the bare minimum. We have seen from case studies that it is easier to cross the legal regulations in the Global South because there are no regulations to cross. These squatter settlements are in themselves illegal. We have seen small information boards put up for news to be shared. We have also seen instances where a can of paint can transform a street into a soccer field or reorganize a market. These projects required no permits or contracts, just planning on construction at the open opportunity. But what about constructing a larger structure that can displace residence for instance? Architects must still find a way to convince not only the client, but the locals.

I thought that the point brought up by the firm DEGW has a good perspective on the client-architect relationship. They mentioned, “The brief is the first stage in the design of a set of social relations” (70). The rules and regulations set prior to the building’s design, is seen as part of the design process. Architects must be included from the start in order to have a productive use of spatial regulations. DEGW is seeing this first process as an opportunity for the architect to have some control of what boundaries can be used or crossed. This is also a good opportunity for the architect to be involved with not only the client but the other organizations involved such as the locals and the government.

Also mentioned by the firm Crimson, “…being able to tell a good story, a gripping story, a touching, exciting, spectacular story is the core of designing and planning” (71). There are many examples of storytelling in architecture from the past and it can be used as a design tool to work with clients. In the past, churches were carved with biblical stories because many people were illiterate. Also seen in the promenade architecturale by Le Corbusier, he tells a story through a montage of views. Architecture has told a story in the past, why can’t it be used to win over clients now. We can make up our own stories which engage the clients and locals. The key is to win over the clients for them to agree with the design.

Now I am not saying that architects should deceive clients and communities. Deceit will end in even more issues and law suits. But architects should learn how to effectively work with clients and the community and I believe that being a part of the process from the beginning and learning to win over clients is productive. Story telling can be understood by everyone, and I believe that it is a tool that is underutilized today. Not only can stories be told to communicate with clients, but also the community at the same time. It is an opportunity to connect everyone to the same space.

 

1. Spatial Agency

The Role of an Architect; Past, Present, Future

Posted on by
Reply

The role of the architect has changed quite drastically throughout the years of the professions existence. The architect began as a jack of all trades in which along with designing buildings the architect was typically a painter, sculpture, and an engineer. Years later the role of architect focused to simply buildings but still kept some remnants of being a jack of all trades. Architects fashioned themselves with knowledge of a great number of subjects rather than actually having the abilities themselves, in a sense they became the overarching organizer. I would argue that this is the state of the architecture profession as I write, however where will it go?

As the world becomes further networked and our resources become further stressed, architecture will become less of an elite art and instead make its way into the common forum. The reason for this is twofold. First, the expanding number of people living in informal/unrecognized settlements which demand architecture solutions to their problems. Second, and also concurrently,  the formal cultures in which architecture is designed is also changing. To fill this new requirement the role of the architect must shift towards a spatial agent, or in other words, an instigator, someone who sets the ball rolling and then steps back to see the amazing outcomes.

Several architects have already begun the transition and have made the jump quite successfully. What is most compelling about this new order of architecture is that both the formal and informal benefit through collaborative learning especially with ideas for sustainability, technology, and community. It is unfortunate however that the formal typically does not see the good that has come of this cross pollination and instead focuses on the negative, this almost always leads to pushing the informal away. It could be said that the informal through this paradigm becomes somewhat of a laboratory in which no one is afraid to innovate through trial and error. (2)

One example of two cities learning from each other is that of Tijuana and San Diego which Teddy Cruz writes about in great detail. Through improvisational construction techniques and the distribution of debris from San Diego, Tijuana has been constructed; Tijuana is a city which “constructs itself from the waste of the other.” (2) So Tijuana gets America’s trash and uses it to their advantage, great, but what are we really doing to help?

Running with the premise that we have established (Tijuana uses our trash to build their city), Teddy Cruz has fashioned a frame which can be hinged to create any sort of form. This frame acts as the glue combined with the discarded materials from San Diego to create a substantially more desirable dwelling. It does not simply stop there. These frames can also be used as infrastructure. In some cases a refillable, clip clip-on fiber-glass water tank containing a weeks worth of water can be strapped to the frame.(2)

It was hinted before, but what exactly are those in the formal settlements gaining from all of this. What we have here is an free, open, and exciting laboratory in which we can test a plethora of infrastructural and construction techniques which can then be applied to any city. This is an increasingly exciting premise which we should take full advantage of.

1) Spatial Agency

2) Tijuana Case Study: Teddy Cruz

Infrastructure as Architecture

Posted on by
Reply

While the ecological and humanitarian crises facing our species are daunting, doomsday scenarios and statistics often overlook two important considerations: the crises are not matters of scarcity, but of overabundance and the unequal distribution of wealth and second, humanity’s impact on the planet is not necessarily malevolent.  While carbon emissions stemming from the global industrial economy are driving patterns of climate change, humans are also capable of remediating environmental disasters and have the potential to consciously regenerate the planet.  It is with these considerations in mind that projects such as slum networking on the Indore River and infrastructural upgrades in Sao Paolo have a greater significance.

The project in Indore, though ripe with shortcomings, demonstrates the potential of understanding informal urban conditions as necessarily tied to questions of ecology and infrastructure.  If the city was traditionally conceived of as the antithesis of the country, today’s informal settlements are often constructed in “rural” or peripheral zones that the traditional city was unable to conquer.  Consequently, infrastructural adjustments that both address basic human needs on the level of a network have the potential to regenerate entire landscapes.  In the case of Indore, upgrading and formalizing the sewage system within slum neighborhoods is already having an impact on the level of untreated sewage in the Indore River.

Although also starting on the level of infrastructure, MMBB’s practice demonstrates that public urban infrastructural projects also have the potential to become public space activators.  In this case, the creation of a network of reservoirs to deal with drainage issues creates the raw space that can be sculpted into a public good.  These innovations demonstrate that what was previously considering outside of the discipline of architecture, environmental engineering and public infrastructure can actually have massive positive architectural results with a minimal amount of design intervention.  While the past treated these spaces as dead zones of necessity and public hygiene, there is an imbedded element of whimsy and the public realm.  While MMBB consciously explored the architectural potential of the new spaces generated, the project in Indore also shows that changes to the landscape prompt aesthetic/architectural shifts.  When the river began to be cleared of sewage and was once again more habitable, a traditional river walkway was restored and many of the adjacent buildings were beautified to reflect the renewed public quality of the space.

Rather than viewing the discipline of architecture as a building-only practice that can be involved with infrastructural/engineering projects, these projects should be viewed as less efficient if they do not tap imbedded architectural potentials.  Some of the most influential contemporary architects base their practices on innovative programmatic combinations that are celebrated formally.  If more infrastructural projects were treated this way, such as Urban Think Tank’s cable car station/gym, informal settlements would not only see an improvement in access to vital goods and services but access to the sought-after “right to the city.”

Franco de Mello: Filling Voids

Himanshu Parikh, “Slum Networking Along the Inodre River”

Sao Paulo

Posted on by
Reply

Sao Paulo is transforming favelas and informal cities into a new middle class through new ways of urban design and infrastructure.  This gives Sao Paulo a chance to rejuvenate their city and break the barriers between what is considered the slums and formal cities.  To me this is an exciting moment for Sao Paulo and possibly the rest of the world.  Sao Paulo is solving problems that the rest of the world has not yet met head on.  They are designing a city in which poverty is mitigated simply through well thought out design.  Sao Paulo may become a new precedent for the world to follow once this design is proven efficient.

The fact that they are braking the barriers between the poor, middle class, and affluent individuals within the city is amazing.  With the help of programs such as Programa de Aceleracao (PAC) and Plano Municipal de Habitacao (PMH), the transformation of the informal city is made possible.  The reading states Sao Paulo still needs work, however they are moving in the right direction.  The reading refers to the rise of the people in the slums as the “new middle class” who will provide an opportunity to investigate new demands for the city’s urbanity.  This is very exciting, the simple fact the new ways to treat the urban fabric in Sao Paulo will emerge through meeting the new demands of this city’s urbanity is quite exciting.

Projects such as the Antonio Creek Urban Project shows the new methods of design taking place for Sao Paulo, the project is to design a drainage system and the to reconfigure open spaces while simultaneously appropriate this system in a way the prevents future illegal activities.   These projects are finding ways to appropriate the use of space through thoughtful design strategies while changing the urban infrastructure at the same time.

Mapping for Informal

Posted on by
Reply

Corner regards the agency of mapping as speculation, critique and invention. By introducing terms and techniques about his understanding of maps, Corner develops the idea that formal expression does not evolve quick enough to be relevant as long as the informal settlement starts getting more demand and rights.

Conventionally, neutrality is one of the conventional characteristics of “mapping”. However, the position, orientation, and differences of focus in maps all indicate certain socio-political statement. In Corner’s opinion, the abstractness of the map already brings in a subjective position of the mapmaker. “The application of judgment, subjectively constituted, is precisely what makes a map more a project than a ‘mere’ empirical description.”(Corner, 223)

The subjectivity of mapping leads to the re-thinking of the perspective in mapping. Banham, mentioned by Corner, suggests more attention on the problem that some mappings “adopt a somewhat naïve and insular, even elitist, position.”(Corner, 226)
“ The implications of a world derived more from cultural invention than from a pre-formed ‘nature’ have barely begun to be explored.” (Corner, 223) The mapping for the Watery Void project discovers the potential and pushes the design into a level with reconciled metropolitan and local scale. (Franco, 85)

As Corner mentions in the essay, he discusses “mapping as an active agent of cultural intervention.” Mapping is more like a creative activity that is not only a simple mirror of the existing reality, but also the design process for disclosing new reality. Comparing to “tracing”, mapping is a process of discovering and adding new elements in design.

Another comparison of concepts in Corner’s article is “mapping” and “planning”. He uses Harvey’s idea of “utopia of form” vs. “utopia of process” explaining the difference between “mapping” and “planning”. According to Corner’s description, mapping is definitely more useful and suitable for informal settlement, as mapping entails searching in the existing milieu instead of top-down imposed idealized formal project. Corner believes that various hidden forces underlie the workings of a place, which makes the reality more complex. Mapping of Sao Paulo’s infrastructure should not only be considered as a “technical and functional artifact”; but instead, the interrelationships and interactions between the rising middle class, the new demands coming together, as well as the interest of both central and peripheral residence cannot be ignored any more. One main concept of the Watery Void project is to use and serve for these interrelationships that form the complexity of mapping. Water, more than a nature resource in planning, becomes one main element bridging favelas with formal sector of the city.

James Corner: Agency of Mapping
Franco de Mello: Filling Voids