Urban Communities and their 'Activity' Architecture

urban communities

[designing an architecture that houses activity; suitable for the complexities of existing urban communities.]

and their

‘activity EXEGESIS

architecture’

Blair Parkinson 300062092 Theory

1

2006

Architectural Proposition…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Research Methodology………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6 Academic Context…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Findings……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 8 Architectural Position……………………………………………………….……………………………………………………….. 9 Architectural Argument……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 Research Outcomes………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 Application of Research…………………………….……………………………………………………………………………….. 22 Further Research Fields………………………………………………………………………………………...……………………. 24 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 25 Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 27

Theory

2

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Research Field Definition……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

contents

[1]

Theory

[2]

3

[3]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

An Urban Community can be somewhat defined as a centralised collection of people thriving in a mix of different interests, backgrounds, locations and sociologies. It has a complex structure and an almost viral-like composition.

Their ‘Activity Architecture’ is a provision of needed space and amenity for activity and interaction to aspire from. The common example of this is the community hall.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

research field definition

To propose a building that satisfies client needs is a primary architectural motive. However when the client becomes an urban community as a whole, the defining of the client itself becomes a complexity. The intention of this research is not to try and define this complexity but to acknowledge its improbable one-lined answer and provide appropriate solutions for a design purpose. The research has directed itself at large sociological topics to promote an architectural language to develop the specific architecture of activity.

An Urban Community can be complex but that complexity should not halter a designing for it.

[4]

Theory

[5]

4

[6]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

How can the transition of community building from suburban to urban environment be undertaken successfully?

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

architectural proposition

• • • •

Identify the importance [if any] of a centralised community / public amenity within an urban fabric Identify a ‘scale’ of community through different density urban centres around the world and ultimately relate them back into a New Zealand context Identify the needs and commonalities within existing urban communities Research community hall and large scale community orientated architectural projects from around the world, relate the schemes to the public and location of site and determine the good and bad areas that each has produced.

Account of Project Research The exploration of these vast research fields led to refining and evolving the initial methodology. A concentration on identifying what exactly an urban community is became an exercise in itself that spurred other pursuable topics.

• • • •

The growth of urban communities The motives and interaction aspects of individuals within Urban Communities The location parameters of an urban community The architectural provision for urban communities

It was the ‘architectural provision for urban communities’ which lead to an investigation into the Community Architecture movement and its objective and subjective points of opinion. It brought revitalised the research back into identifying ‘large scale community orientated architectural projects from around the world’. The analysis of this movement, through personal research and other secondary sources lead to proposing the principles of the movement into a single building. Identifying precedents of these buildings could then become a comparative experiment into this form of architecture. How these buildings can work more cohesively within an urban environment then became a task into researching architectural projects which deal with urban community principles, for example, the growth of these communities.

[7]

Theory

[8]

5

[9]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Initial Research Methodology [as at 08/03/2006]:

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

research methodology

The current Community Architecture movement has provided an initial base for relating architecture to this fact but at times falls down through design process or the biased stance of providers. It has outlined key principles but fallen down somewhat in the subsequent execution of its corresponding designs To take these principles and other information deemed useful to supporting an urban community and constrict them to a single community building allows for a cultural experimentation to unfold. The use and interaction of the architecture in question can inform us of current trends, styles, growth patterns, interest patterns and social geography whilst at the same time providing a much needed central activity space.

Theory

6

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

An urban community as a client for architecture can become a possible unexplainable user group. To address the client needs and wants, an understanding of the complexities and consistencies of the urban community must first be evaluated. Addressing the change in attitude form a suburban and rural context to the urban environment furthers this identification.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

abstract

The writings and research of Eduardo E. Lozeno, Nels Anderson, Graham Towers, Wayne Davies and David Herbert on their defining of community and urban interaction

•

The Urban Villages Forum and their views and principles on creating mixed use, sustainable, urban community developments.

•

Ralph Erskine and his architectural stance on community design

•

Chris Murray and his criticism of the community architecture movements

•

Archigram and their expansion and maintenance of urban viable space with Plug-In City

•

LTL Architects and their principles of multi-use space

[10]

Theory

[11]

7

[12]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

•

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

academic context

• • • • • • • • • • •

The accepted definition of an urban community The parametric extents of an urban community The thinking and mind games of an urban man Becoming part of an urban community The consistencies of the complex urban community The design situation addressed when approaching an urban community The history and progression of the Community Architecture Movement / New Urbanism The current views on the movements Ralph Erskine and his involvement with Community Architecture The criticisms and comparisons of the community architecture movement to conventionality The scale properties of ‘community’ that can be incorporated into the movements

Activity Architecture - Community Centres, Halls, Events Centres and Activity Hubs • • • • • •

The definitions and perceptions of what this architecture is about The location intervention into this architecture Provisions of this architecture Precedents and subsequent generic characterisation The idea of community laboratories to inform and provide Addressing the urban community growth process

[13]

Theory

[14]

8

[15]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Urban Communities and Related Architectural Notions

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

findings

My architectural position on the subject is to acknowledge this statement and allow for the designing of a single building; an urban activity hub, in which to provide an urban community.

The context of this research will identify these urban communities and relate or collate the information to the more defined topic of ‘activity architecture’, urban recreational architecture as stated in the research field definition. Its focus will be on interaction and relations of the urban community when viewed as architectural client. The primary notion of this project should not only have the described architecture providing for its community on a physical level but it should also propose to market, encourage, engage, provide and spatially correspond to the community responsively.

[16]

Theory

[17]

9

[18]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

The transition of architectural buildings and ideas from a suburban environment to an urban environment must undergo a change in design intuition. The identification of the client, in terms of this report – the urban community, provides for a regulation of this design transition.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

architectural position

Like all questionable and somewhat esoteric topics, definition of the elements within the topic becomes the processor of furthering any discussion. The following architectural argument is a research into the cause, effects and provision of and for urban communities.

It can be fair to say that a large percentage of architecture involves the use of ‘community’. Whether it ranges from a domestic scale to large civic buildings, analogies of architecture seem to inherently be described using the effects upon a community. Defining the use of the term ‘community’ therefore becomes a paramount exercise with this type of research.

An ‘urban community’ in itself starts to define this initial problem somewhat. An urban community is a community of interest, and a community of place with subsequent sub categories. It is relative to the individual within the urban community as to how this form of the word ‘community’ is perceived. This report is set out to research the general form of urban communities and constrict it strictly to these two categories.

2.0 Urban Communities – Complexity through Interaction “It has become, in fact, much too complex for the old double approach of urban sociology on the one side and rural sociology on the other.

For that reason we cannot individually claim the two sociologies. Whatever may be claimed for ruralism, urbanism seems to be a border crossing phenomenon.”1 There has been a lot of research into the properties of the urban community in relation to the suburban and rural community.

Without doubt there is a difference between all three yet it is the specifics of each which tend to become blurred in a parametric mind trap.

Essentially the idea of ‘community’ in itself remains consistent and coherent but it is the forms of interaction, the activities and the mass of each community which tends to change. It is a complex and intricate set of relations that is ever expanding with current events. An individual pursuit of knowledge of the differentiation between ruralism and urbanism is unfortunately all it really is; an individual view.

Nels Anderson strove to identify this differentiation whilst at the same time considering this fact. His works of some 50 years ago advanced the thinking of the subject at hand but were entirely subject to what was happening in the world at the time. Just as no one can predict the future, the same can be said for the identification of complex variables that are themselves completely subject to change. Properties of the urban community can prove to be consistent through time however.

“The urbanized man remains oriented in the crowds. He is not disturbed by the coming and going of people, hence he is always making new acquaintances and forgetting old ones”2 This is a consistency.

1 2

Anderson, Nels. The Urban Community: A World Perspective. [Henry Holt and Company Inc. U.S.A. 1959] Pg iii Ibid: Anderson Pg 1/2

Theory

10

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

1.0 Introduction

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

architectural argument

2.1 [Part of] an Urban Community “For most of human history, people have bonded together for mutual security or to be close to critical resources – water, food and more recently ports, rail hubs and employment centres”4 This statement accentuates a gathering due to common interest and required convenience.

However what defines an individual as being part of an urban community?

Continuing on the previous argument may conclude that to become [part of] an urban community a simple yes or no decision may even become bypassed. Could it be as simple as the change in architectural style, dimension and use? The answers to these questions may be deemed questionable in themselves and perplexes the situation into an individual prognosis over a collective view. An urban community, as stated previously, does have a difference between suburban and rural communities but that difference and the human transition of that difference does not seem to be defined by boundary line. It is more than architecture; it is a state of mind inherent to us through our upbringings. To become part of an urban community however, does not require this specific understanding. It is simply the ‘behind the scenes’ work that produces the psychological mindset.

3 4

Ibid: Anderson Pg 17/18 Katz, Peter. The New Urbanism, Toward an Architecture of Community. [McGraw Hill Inc, U.S.A. 1994] Pg ix

Theory

11

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

“The idea of individualism as a characteristic of urbanism can be over emphasised……. The same urban situation that stimulated individuation also tends to create uniformities and conformities. The individual must see large groups and in stereotype terms; he finds stereotyped patterns of behaving which he accepts and helps to maintain.”3

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

It seems that the urban individual forms the urban community not primarily through interaction but through becoming part of the whole. Anderson goes on to state that the urbanized man subsequently displays three interaction characteristics: Transiency, Superficiality and Anonymity. These characteristics define individualism within an urban community yet when discussing the community itself there comes a point of inflection. It is quite peculiar the change in attitude one faces when confronted with a suburban setting in comparison to an urban setting. The characteristics that Anderson identified really do become apparent when traversing through an urban scene. Whether it is merely to do with populous or the [anti] notion of safety, one would tend to keep to his or her self much more so in the urban setting than in a suburban setting. The idea that you would only really properly converse or acknowledge someone that you actually know relates to the complexity of defining an urban community. Maybe an urban community is not just one broad community but a collection of smaller communities linking together to form a mega community. Or maybe urban architecture itself provides a mindset for the individuals to act within. Anderson concludes with:

• •

The urbanite – An individual who is part of the urban community because he or she lives within a regional city central district.

A dweller; terrestrial by location primarily The temporary inhabitant – Defined by their use of the urban district locale. A common individual as it can be related to the business man or the frequent shopper The tourist – A foreigner to the scene yet imposes their persona upon the urban community through subsequent interaction. A brief and transparent visitor

These characterizations are pronounced through ‘location’ terms and the length of stay in the urban area. Subsequent further categorization can then follow which will focus upon interests of that specific user. The complexity of defining an urban community seems to be driven by this fact. Whilst it may be possible to sum up a primary characterization to three main areas, the expansion of those categories to proposed or perceived interest or use of the urban district appears incomprehensible.

2.2 The Urban Community Design Situation “As designers struggle to improve their understanding of community form, many urban areas continue to experience an accelerated rate of change that increases their uniqueness as community forms”5 To persist the complexity of urban communities is the fact that it is not a current complex matter searching to be defined but an ‘organism’ that is growing, evolving and constantly changing. Eduardo E. Lozano recognizes this fact. His agreement with consistencies to the urban community definition is reciprocated also: “Not everything has changed, however, there are important elements common to every urban area and community that have remained constants of human settlements. These are, among others, the need for interaction among people individually and in groups, the development of common concerns and the potential for vitality and uniqueness. The future evolution of urban areas will continue to combine new characteristics with permanent features”6 This growth of community is unavoidable and exists as a producer of permanence and [im]permanence. The transitory of fashion, social change and architecture in itself leads to an increasingly fluid understanding of an urban community. Acknowledging this fact seems integral. To design for this, as Lozano stated, becomes impossible. The understanding of the consistencies or permanent features of urban communities therefore defines design. Certain boundaries for these consistencies in architectural terms may have already been conducted through a community architecture movement [refer to section 3.0].

5 6

Lozano, Eduardo E. Community Design and the Culture of Cities: The Crossroad and the Wall [Cambridge University Press, U.S.A. 1990] Pg 36 Ibid: Lozano Pg 37

Theory

12

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

•

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

It seems that the make up of an urban community can be broken down into the purpose or function of the individual. There are three main areas of characterization:

• • • • • • •

Transiency – The temporary nature of the being within the urban community relates to the basis of interaction between individuals and groups alike.

Anonymity – Dependant on the size of the district in which the urban being is temporarily placed. This is also relevant to the anonymity between the communities that make up the [mega] urban community Superficiality Activity – The urban community is attracted to the notion of activity. Whether it is regulated or spontaneous the notion of ‘activity creates activity’ is highly evident Conformity – The urban being moves through the urban community along the same general flows as the surrounding public.

Pedestrianisation is a group task.

Individualism – The variety of culture and mindset de-constructs the appearance of conformity into that of individualism. The being that forms part of the whole is unique in nature but not always in uniformity Belonging – A furthering of Lozano’s argument in that the need for interaction between other people and groups becomes a considering factor in communities in general

Tensional categories are discovered. Those that oppose can also occasionally unite and convict.

[19]

Theory

[20]

13

[21]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

These consistencies provide the theoretical basis for expanding the knowledge of what an urban being in an urban community experiences. The limits of just how many consistencies there are is undefined.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

2.3 Certain Consistencies of the Urban Being within the Urban Community

In the 1960’s the world was initiated into the community architecture movement. It was a way for the citizens not to fight back but more to regain harmony with their city. Community architecture allowed society to have an integral opinion into the planning and operation of their communities. The whole notion was aimed at providing the guidelines of the movement to become a strong reality. Among the organizations were architects, planners and building designers, who applied consultancy and assistance to furthering the ideals of the community. By the late 1970’s they had banded under a ‘community architecture’ umbrella and had sought some basic applicable principles.7 Amongst these basic principles lay a dominant school of thought which could be summed up within three fundamental characteristics8: • • •

People willingly take responsibility for their environment and participate both individually and collectively in it’s creation and management.

A creative working partnership is established with specialists from one or more disciplines All aspects of peoples environmental needs are considered simultaneously and on a continuing evolutionary basis.

These characteristics can relate to the consistencies of the urban community on a cohesive level. They allow for interaction and an acknowledgement of community design and human relation to their built environment. The community architecture movement had taken full flight and its pledge was aimed at bettering urban communities through thorough design. The metaphorical battle between council and community had begun and the movement itself became an echo into the world of developing cities.

3.1 Ralph Erskine and his Involvement At the forefront of this movement, Ralph Erskine realised certain efficiencies with Community Architecture and strove to develop and market these ideas through his interaction with British communities. His works, mainly large scale, focused on the priorities of living and upbringing. His identification of public amenities and space allowed for a design interchange between user and provider. He argued that the enormous importance of natural contact from early childhood with larger groups lead to a sense of de-isolation. Isolation leads to contact

7

Towers, Graham. Building Democracy – Community Architecture in the Inner Cities. [UCL Press Limited, London 1995] Pg xv Wates, Nick and Knievitt, Charles. Community Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment. [Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987] Pg 113 8

Theory

14

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

The community architecture movement defined a set regime of urban community interaction and relation guidelines that correspond to inhabiting the urban environment. Spawned within the mid to late 20th century it was ultimately brought about through the vast acceleration in growth of urban centres. The rapid expansion of cities denoted a loss in the quality and integral urban planning required for the cities to encourage prosperity. Urban communities found themselves faced with the industrial age and were compromised due to the introduction of highway systems and modern corporate districts.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

3.0 Community Architecture – The Establishment of a Movement

His commissions for community developments often lead him to live within the community and work at less than ‘arms length’ away from the user to allow for a collaboration of his work to the surrounding social structure

3.2 The Report and The Points of [In] Difference The notions of application to this movement can become quite generically specific. In 1992 the United Kingdom, under the direction of HRH the Prince of Wales established the Urban Villages Forum (UVF) Report to provide guidelines, developed from these specifics (appendix 1). Concentrating primarily upon housing a community and providing necessities for it, an exclusion of cultural facilities (sports, arts, leisure, social, community, learning) became quite a downfall to this ultimately progressive step in community architecture. Chris Murray in his analysis of the report states: “It is as if all people do is go from home, to work, to the shops and back again.”11 Self-sufficiency is here seen by the UVF to be the responsibility of the individual, home working and spending locally; but successful neighbourhoods are living, vibrant organic entities, not a collection of isolated individuals12 Debate over community architecture has continued since. Some critics see the end result of these urban village developments as that of an obscene gesture towards true design principles. The provision of community needs is accomplished but architecture in the true sense of the word seems lagging.

The seemingly opposing elements of community architecture to conventional architecture have also been defined (appendix 2).

When analysing these differences it is evident that the idea of designing architecture for the urban community cannot really correlate directly to principles of the community architectural movement or the conventional architectural stance. A blending of the two is required to achieve coherence. With this the whole idea of community architecture is somewhat challenged. Is the movement more suited to the housing of community and not the provisional enrichment of community through other architecture? It would seem that the success of the movement in community groups far and wide is dependant upon one parameter – the size of the community and the relative scale of the established community.

9

Collymore, Peter. The Architecture of Ralph Erskine. [Academy Group Limited, London, 1994] Pg 21 Ibid. Collymore Pg 21 11 Murray, Chris. Rethinking Neighbourhoods – From Urban Villages to Cultural Hubs. – Essay within: City of Quarters – Urban Villages within the Contemporary City. Edited by David Bell and Mark Jayne. [Ashgate Publishing Limited, United Kingdom, 2004] Pg 192 12 Ibid. Murray Pg 192 10

Theory

15

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

“Well equipped Community Centres can be justified financially by savings on the local authorities social rehabilitation account”10

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

difficulties and becomes especially obvious when noticed within an urban community scene. “Social People” develop if they have the possibility of living in an all-round social group.9 The community hall and idea of activity architecture spurred these comments.

[22]

Theory

[23]

16

[24]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Working with or determining a scale of a community becomes the necessary key to applying a cross breed of architecture principles.

A range of community is as simple as the characteristics evident within urban, suburban and rural communities – a range of location rather than interest. Therefore from each of these, communities of interest, or activity, or culture help to further define the range much in the same way that they help to define becoming part of an urban community.

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

3.3 Scale of Urban Communities – The transcending range

A community hall is an obvious example where the actual building in itself becomes an integral part of the community by its provision of needed space and amenities. Quite interestingly, when one thinks of a community hall, they tend to think of the local hall in their suburb where they grew up. The hall itself is a therefore quite a relatively domesticated idea, a suburban icon that in turn becomes a flagstone of the suburb and the surrounding community in itself.

The introduction of this widely suburban idea into an urban context tends to concern different objectives. The notion that a simple transplantation of a suburban building into an urban setting can bring about the same perceived interest and involvement is somewhat flawed. Elements are taken through. The local corner store is transformed to a 24 / 7 ‘Food-mart’ which can relate and prosper more efficiently due to recognising and meeting a different typology of demands.

4.2 The Cultural Laboratory “No community can be successful or sustainable without catering for and raising the expectations of a cultural life for that community.

People come together to create and participate in a cultural existence as much as to get a roof over their heads or a job. Communities share joint projects to use, celebrate, claim, or appropriate the physical and psychological space around them”13 The community architecture movement practically considered towards the establishment of a centralised urban community is globally acknowledgeable. However what should be considered in an already established urban community should revolve around sustaining of existing community, the progression of the area and the provision of activity. The principles that were stated as an overall design objective for the Urban Villages Forum Report can actually provide for a strong motive in this provision. Activity, or ‘culture’ as what Chris Murray refers to, is imminent in developing a distinctive ‘way of life’ for the community. The allowance for them to become cultural players within a cultural entity is not only important to the success of the community but to the city for which they are located in as well. Urban Neighbourhoods are places where unique cultural mixes and events take place that influence the development of that city and can be regarded variously as the ‘nightmare’ or ‘critical conscience’ of a city, or alternatively as an engine for social change.14 “The potential of neighbourhoods to act as cultural laboratories should be recognized, maximising their contribution to the development of societies as a whole and helping cities to learn as cultural entities”15 The idea of using society as a lab rat is not to be discouraged. A city can ultimately grow towards a more provisional future by learning about current trends and ideologies. Urban communities ‘activity’ architecture can become the conveyor of this. The activity hall or centre provides necessary space for community usage usually in a sport or leisure sense; however it is the coming together of the people and 13

Ibid. Murray Pg 195 Council for Cultural Co-operation. Council for Cultural Co-operation, Volume 2. [Council of Europe Publishing, Netherlands, 1997] Pg 96 15 Op cit. Murray Pg 201 14

Theory

17

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

4.1 The Community Hall – Crossing a boundary

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

4.0 Designing ‘Activity Architecture’ for the Urban Community

A collective response to needs and problems The importance of co-participation between providers and users Recognition of the value of indigenous resources within community groups Emphasis of the needs of disadvantaged people Recognition of cultural diversity Appreciation of the significance of different dimensions of community

4.3 Location, location, location “Many believe that these activities would be better centred on one location which recognises what the sports council termed ‘the limits of many peoples mobility and the access benefits of proximity’”17 An argument to the design of a large centralised building could be that it will absorb the tiny pieces of activity that currently prosper within an urban community locale. Rather than a suburban community hall, urban communities currently tend to decentralise their activities on the urban map not through shear choice but through availability of space and application of activity to nearby surroundings.

Why should a centralisation of activity be discouraged?

A current way of thinking may assume that a building of this nature will act like a sponge of activity. Key ideas for location and centralisation of urban activity architecture now become a prominent design element. An encourager and promoter of activity as a whole to the surrounding urban community can accentuate the ideals of activities within the surrounding environment. A building itself though can house activity but not define them to a location specific. The idea of architectural landmark becomes involved. A city map is not defined by streets and road signs but instead by buildings. Landscaping becomes the processor of geographical information for the individual of the urban community. Providing a centralised ‘taste tester’ of activity creates not only interest between activities but the idea of building as a landmark for meeting and interaction.

16 17

Haywood, Les. Community Leisure and Recreation [Butter Worth Heinemann Limited, Oxford, 1994] Pg 26 Op cit. Davis + Herbert Pg 141

Theory

18

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

• • • • • •

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

the reflection of this activity upon the rest of the community which creates the hall as this processor of information. An urban community will prosper from this only if one other action occurs – the combining of information between community and council is expressed.

This idea is nothing new nor should it be. Common perceptions seem to establish a battle between community and council, reciprocated in the same way to the battle between community architecture and conventional architecture. To produce quality architecture that is thorough to the public main goals have been conceptually established within the theoretical environment16:

The Large and Monolithic [1] •

Previous built examples can provide for site heavy or at times brutalistic architecture. The focus of these community and recreation centres is the accommodation of large activities and events that require housing and shelter. Human dimension at times seems to become a secondary thought. The provision of large space is the generator of the architecture.

The Colonial Refurbishment [2] •

The immediate requirement of small or medium space seems to produce a low standard of architectural thinking and analysis into the user groups. As space is of the essence in any urban fabric, the provision of but a small amount is certain to be deemed conclusively useable. This architecture is driven by finances and time limits and is most common with the refurbishment or ‘taking over’ of an existing floor or building.

The Multi Disciplinary and Multi Use [3] •

The most adaptive of the community centres, this style takes on building to conform and relate to the existing urban fabric and urban use. This method is identified as the most relevant to designing inner city and multi-use activity structures. Architectural precedents seem to become few and far between when relating specifically to the idea of activity spaces.

[25]

Theory

[26]

19

[27]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Current Community Centres and other recreational architecture that promote an architectural precedence to the idea of an Urban Activities Hub can be characterised into a following portfolio:

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

4.4 The Current Activity Architecture Collection

As change is the only true constant in the universe, designing for that change and growth should always be a factor. For an architecture servicing the urban community this fact becomes an integral part of the design process. Not accommodating for a change in use or an increase in use from initial conceptions will by all means limit the project from the start.

“You cannot increase the size of structures indefinitely in nature or in art…. For increase can be affected only by using a stronger material or by changing the shape to a monstrosity”19 Galileo’s words ring true. The growth process may be closely connected to an urban community but direct provision of this fact needs adjustment for suitable practicality. Lozano bases his community analysis and architectural motives upon this stipulation. Urban growth alters the relationship among the parts causing a rearrangement of the urban structure and changes in the urban form. The recognition or development of growth forecasts should be key parameters in the design process, to ensure that urban form will evolve in a suitable manner as size increases.20 The theories and architectural experimentations of Archigram address the notion of urban growth. Their ‘plug in city’ proposal allowed for a expansion of space through addition of units. Plug in city combined elements of all of these precedents – the principle of collectivity, of interchangeable apartment units, and the incorporation of rapid transport links. In this there was a disarming reasonableness with the plug in proposal, with its attempt to keep cities viable in an era of rapid change.21 Refer to appendix 3.

Lewis Tsurumaki Lewis [LTL] Architects, a New York based architectural firm take on a different view to the matter. They propose a change in the multi-usage of space; singular spaces that may adapt to different use. Although predominantly designed for apartment living and domestic application the ideas of their change in use may become a strong motive for furthering architectural design notions of an urban activity architecture (refer to appendix 4).

[28]

[29]

[30]

18

Op cit: Lozano Pg 109 Ibid Lozano Pg 109 20 Ibid Lozano Pg 109 21 Sadler, Simon. Archigram – Architecture without Architecture [Massachusetts Institute of Technology Publishers. U.S.A. 2005] Pg 14 19

Theory

20

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

“One of the most important lessons to be gained from the growth process is that it is not an independent phenomenon but is closely interconnected with the form of the community”18

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

4.4 The Growth Process and Multi-use Spaces

The centralised Urban Community provides unique and culturally different behaviour patterns from other suburban or rural communities that must be addressed in a separate manner to that normality.

•

Design for an urban community does not become a simple objective. By working off key urban community consistencies and permanent elements within them, the designer can provide a basis for the architecture in question to formulate.

•

The Community Architecture movement has been a dramatic step in designing and developing for communities yet requires a change in stance when considering community projects outside the range that the movement encompasses.

•

Combining strong advantageous notions from community architecture and conventional architecture could assist greatly in determining an architectural bearing when considering a symbiotic nature of urban community to architecture itself.

•

Size of a community and scale of the established community should be determined before a finalised aesthetic of architecture is considered.

•

When defining the theories and analysis of urban communities to a singular building, in particular one that houses activity, we can start to define design motives through past experiences, larger examples and ongoing research.

•

The idea of a community building to act like a cultural laboratory can inform and in turn redefine its provision to the user

•

Location aspects of specific community architectural buildings should become a key factor in purveying.

•

Current Activity Architecture precedents define themselves through use, size, time and financial backing. A relation to the surrounding community, on most occasions, becomes a secondary activity. If we strive to utilise all these design aspects onto a single direction then the architecture will prosper through its strong relation to client and user.

Theory

21

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

•

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

research outcomes

6.1 Urban Scale / Dimension Urban scale and context addresses questions relating to movement to and through the site specific. Community interaction and associated change spawns from sequential shifts in the urban fabric. Brief conceptual notions of urban transfusion with a community applicable building can involve: • • •

Furthering joints, linkages and traffic flows from nearby or adjoining sites and urban nodes Establishing new or re-invigorating existing visual connections. Focal Points, Visual Paths, Sight Barriers etc.

Promoting a pedestrian developed zone. Identifying vehicle trafficking areas yet defining the footpath.

To bring the populous into the site will become an initiation into the use of the architecture. Creating or furthering pedestrian links, as stated, will sub consciously promote an architectural enquiry through use of these connections themselves. An Architectural Marketing procedure may be developed to push the building itself into a dominating urban sense.

6.2 Edifice Scale / Dimension Immediate surrounding buildings and their nature will impact upon layout and formation of the architecture in question. An activities building is developed to provide its urban user the following: • •

Spatially fulfilling activity areas. An area where the defined activities to accommodate the architecture will prosper due to their space scale, dimensioning and enclosurement.

Interaction space. The ambition to further latent connections between user, onlooker and passer-by. Descriptions of an ‘Activity creates Activity’ primary concept can be developed into these interaction spaces.

Historically, the church and its associated hall often acted as the venue for many social events in inner city communities.22 The lineage of the community hall and church hall is to be treated as a relative ancestor to the design of such urban activity architecture.

6.3 Bodily Scale / Dimension The human dimension to useable architectural scale is paramount. Breaking down the monolithic, defined in the architectural argument, proposes a more sensitive design to the user and community. Interaction spaces, viability and availability are to subsequently dealt with

22

Op cit: Davis + Herbert Pg 6

Theory

22

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

6.0 Dimensional Application

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

application of research

The permanence or [im]permanence of site and building are ultimately indefinable. Relating an urban building to its perceived lifetime must be addressed however. The relation between historical and current use of site and surrounding context combined with the adversary implications of the local urban community should become a notion of architectural position.

The input of new activity architecture into an existing urban fabric itself brings about connotations of individuality and conformity at the same time. Discussing and experimenting with this idea in an architectural sense can allow the building to be welcomed into the community structure and progress the urban fabric in itself.

7.0 Usage Application What currently occurs is a use of activity architecture. To respond this use to the actual user group or client will create a perceived influx in application. Usage foresight for activity architecture should respond to this. Growth of a building does not necessarily have to occur for architecture to maximise usage.

However, as stated in the architectural argument, designing for a predicted change in growth and activity fashion, as what is the nature of urban communities, will allow for a sensitive building to prosper.

[31]

Theory

[32]

23

[33]

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

6.4 Temporal Scale / Dimension

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

upon realisation of this dimensional issue. The use of landscaping, seating, stairways, ramping and materiality are a few design topics that address this matter.

The furthering in understanding of urban communities

•

The furthering of perceived ‘consistencies’ that assist in defining an urban community

•

The re-application of transitory architecture from suburban to urban

•

New Urbanism and other Community Architecture movements

•

The expansion of the differences and similarities of attribute between community architecture and conventional architecture

•

The relation of this subsequent transfusion of movements to architectural edifice

•

Further identification of activity architecture precedents

•

The future role of activity architecture and subsequent interaction architecture to the urban community

•

The experimentation results of addressing building as a cultural laboratory

Theory

24

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

•

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

further research fields

Anderson, Nels. The

for creating mixed-use urban developments on a sustainable scale.

Urban Community: A World Perspective. [Henry Holt and Company Inc. U.S.A. 1959]

Collymore, Peter. The

Architecture of Ralph Erskine. [Academy Group Limited, London, 1994]

Council for Cultural Co-operation. Council 1997]

for Cultural Co-operation, Volume 2. [Council of Europe Publishing, Netherlands,

Davies, Wayne + Herbert, David. Communities Haywood, Les. Community Katz, Peter. The

within Cities – An Urban Social Geography [Belhaven Press, London, 1993]

Leisure and Recreation [Butter Worth Heinemann Limited, Oxford, 1994]

New Urbanism, Toward an Architecture of Community. [McGraw Hill Inc, U.S.A. 1994]

Lewis, Paul + Tsurumaki, Marc + Lewis, David J. Situation Lozano, Eduardo E. Community Press, U.S.A. 1990]

Normal [ Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1998]

Design and the Culture of Cities: The Crossroad and the Wall [Cambridge University

Murray, Chris. Rethinking

Neighbourhoods – From Urban Villages to Cultural Hubs. – Essay within: City of Quarters – Urban Villages within the Contemporary City. Edited by David Bell and Mark Jayne. [Ashgate Publishing Limited, United Kingdom, 2004] Sadler, Simon. Archigram Scully, Vincent. 1996 1996]

– Architecture without Architecture [Massachusetts Institute of Technology Publishers. U.S.A. 2005]

Raoul Wallenberg Lecture – The Architecture of Community. [University of Michigan Press. U.S.A.

Towers, Graham. Building

Democracy – Community Architecture in the Inner Cities. [UCL Press Limited, London 1995]

Wates, Nick + Knievitt, Charles. Community [Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987]

Theory

Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment.

25

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Aldous, Tony. Urban Villages. A concept [Urban Villages Group, Cheltenham, 1992]

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

bibliography

Theory

26

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

[1] Streetscape Chess. www.flickr.com [2] Urban Community Location Lines. Personal Drawing [3] Urban Bridge. www.flickr.com [4] Petone City Suburban Street. www.flickr.com [5] Community Interaction Groups. Personal Drawing [6] Wellington Civic Centre, New Zealand. Personal Image [7] Urban Setting Silhouette. Personal Drawing [8] Community Architecture – A Cartoonists View. Wates, Nick + Knievitt, Charles. Community Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment. [Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987] [9] Geometric Growth. Personal Drawing [10] New York Metropolitan Plan View. Lozano, Eduardo E. Community Design and the Culture of Cities: The Crossroad and the Wall [Cambridge University Press, U.S.A. 1990] [11] Archigrams Plug In City. Personal Drawing [12] Ralph Erskine in the Community Environment. Wates, Nick + Knievitt, Charles. Community Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment.

[Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987] [13] Urban Orientation Activities. www.flickr.com [14] Plan Variety. www.flickr.com [15] Active Landscapes. Sternberg, Eugene and Barbara. Community Centres and Student Unions [Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1971] [16] Rod Hackney – President of Royal Institute of British Architects with surrounding community. Wates, Nick + Knievitt, Charles. Community Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment. [Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987] [17] Community Design Models. Ibid [18] Public Participation in Neighbourhood Architecture. Ibid [19] Playing in the City. www.flickr.com [20] Communities with communities. The Complexity of Interaction. Personal Drawing [21] City Crowds – The Temporary Urban Community. www.flickr.com [22] Poundbury, Dorset - 2002. Neal, Peter. Urban Villages and the Making of Communities [Spon Press, London, 2003] [23] Rye, East Sussex. Neal, Peter. Urban Villages and the Making of Communities [Spon Press, London, 2003] [24] Millennium Village. Neal, Peter. Urban Villages and the Making of Communities [Spon Press, London, 2003] [25] The Large and Monolithic – North Vancouver Community Centre. Sternberg, Eugene and Barbara. Community Centres and Student Unions [Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1971] [26] The Colonial Refurbishment – New Zion Community Centre. Sternberg, Eugene and Barbara. Community Centres and Student Unions [Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1971] [27] The Multi-disciplinary and Multi-use – Dunelm House, Durham, England. Sternberg, Eugene and Barbara. Community Centres and Student Unions [Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1971] [28] Urban Growth of the Pre-Industrial City. Lozano, Eduardo E. Community Design and the Culture of Cities: The Crossroad and the Wall [Cambridge University Press, U.S.A. 1990] [29] Archigrams Plug In City. Sadler, Simon. Archigram – Architecture without Architecture [Massachusetts Institute of Technology Publishers. U.S.A. 2005] [30] LTL’s Multi-Use Domestic Living. Lewis, Paul + Tsurumaki, Marc + Lewis, David J. Situation Normal [ Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1998] [31] Design Application 1 – Urban Activities Hub. Personal Image [32] Design Application 2 – Urban Activities Hub. Personal Image [33] Design Application 3 – Urban Activities Hub. Personal Image

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

Images Sourced From:

A formalised summary of the Urban Villages Forum Report issued in 1992 Urban Villages Forum, Urban Villages – An Introduction. www.ice.org.uk

Appendix 2:

Community Architecture vs. Conventional Architecture Reformatted from the book: Wates, Nick and Knievitt, Charles. Community Architecture – How People are Creating their own Environment. [Penguin Books Ltd, London, 1987] Pg 24 Sentences and words in red are where the possible collation of styles can meet

Appendix 3:

Archigrams’ Plug in City Proposal Sadler, Simon. Archigram – Architecture without Architecture [Massachusetts Institute of Technology Publishers. U.S.A. 2005]

Appendix 4:

Examples of LTL Architects change in space and multi-usage Lewis, Paul + Tsurumaki, Marc + Lewis, David J. Situation New York, 1998]

Theory

27

Normal [ Princeton Architectural Press,

2006

application of research, further research fields, bibliography, appendices

Appendix 1:

contents, research field definition, architectural proposition, research methodology, abstract, academic context, findings, architectural position, architectural argument, research outcomes,

appendices