Page 1

RESPONSIVE FACADES | developing faรงade systems that address the overall performance, experience and aesthetics of skyscrapers

A thesis investigation by Mykaela Scarpace | Wentworth Institute of Technology, 2018


2


3


3


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


thanks to my parents for all that I have thanks to my professors for all that I have learned thanks to my friends for keeping me sane

5


ABSTRACT


THESIS STATEMENT This thesis emerged from an interest in improving the experience of urban skyscrapers. In attempt to do so, it addresses the performance and aesthetics of skyscrapers which effects an individual’s experience of the building. By retrofitting existing skyscrapers, a new, sustainable façade system can improve the performance of the building with natural light and ventilation. Complex facades systems can also contribute to the overall aesthetic of the building as part of the larger urban fabric. An existing building in downtown Boston serves as the case study to test this thesis. The issues of this building serve as the criteria for other buildings that architects may look at to renovate and improve. The thesis attempts to improve the performance, experience and aesthetics of the building while addressing some of the existing design issues.

7


CONTENTS


10 | key terms 12 | introduction 22 | literature review 52 | precedents 64 | design as research | framing the thesis 74 | design as research | framing the design 82 | design as research | testing the thesis 102 | references 104 | images cited

9


KEY TERMS


The following terms are defined in relation to this thesis to provide an understanding of the topics discussed in the following chapters. BIOPHILIA | the inborn tendency to connect to nature and other forms of life NATURE | any organism including plants, animals and other products of the environment NATURAL ELEMENTS | living organisms themselves and the non-living elements including air, light and water AESTHETICS | (in terms of biophilia) the set of principles that humans find most attractive and pleasing in nature; (in terms of design) the physical appearance of a building as seen by the individual and as seen as part of the larger urban landscape PERFORMANCE | the efficiency of the functioning of a building in regards to the environment and climate EXPERIENCE | the individual’s use of and interaction with architectural elements including light, ventilation and space

11


INTRODUCTION


THESIS STATEMENT By designing new and more complex façade systems to replace aged facades, architects can enhance urban skyscrapers. Improving the performance of the building and considering how the building aesthetically looks will affect the overall experience of skyscrapers.

ARGUMENT There is evidence that we are biologically and psychologically connected to the natural environment and rely on nature for health and happiness. Architects have yet to consider ‘biophilic design’ as a primary concern in contemporary urban architecture. Urban settings and skyscrapers disrupt our connection to the outdoors. In order to improve the urban experience, skyscrapers need to be reimagined. Renovating existing skyscrapers has the potential to address this issue. By designing façade systems that enhance the building with natural light, ventilation and unique facade aesthetics, the experience of skyscrapers can be improved.

13


SETTING CONTEXT The lack of nature in urban settings has resulted in humans becoming detached from the natural environment. In urban areas like Boston, we see people migrate to water and parks to enjoy their leisure time. These public ‘green’ spaces serve as our source of ‘nature’ while in cities. Yet, people only enjoy these spaces when they have time to do so and when the weather permits. Other than these times, people in the urban environment spend the majority of their time indoors or walking the narrow streets, surrounded by the skyscrapers of the city. The biophilia hypothesis serves as proof that humans are inherently connected to the natural environment. Our dependence on nature during evolution led to an aesthetic preference for elements like trees, water and other landscape features that provided us with shelter, resources and protection.1 Studies prove that this aesthetic criteria is still relevant today. People prefer natural settings over urban settings2 and are drawn to landscapes with trails, tree coverage and other cues that provide us with an understanding of the scene – something humans have always looked for when selecting a habitat to protect and provide for them.3 Human dependence on the natural environment as a home led to the dependence on nature for mental health and happiness. The human body relies on circadian rhythms that are almost entirely dependent on the sun and control our everyday cycle. Our exposure 1 Heerwagen, Judith H., and Gordon H. Orians. “Humans, Habitats, and Aesthetics.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 138-172. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993.140. 2 Kaplan, Stephen. “Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective.” In Environment & Behavior 19, no. 1:3, 7. 3 Kaplan, Stephen. “Perception and Landscape: Conceptions and Misconceptions.” In Environmental Aesthetics, 44-55. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988, 44.

Figure 2.1 | (adjacent page) “Inside Outside,” image collaged by author

15


to natural light is essential in maintaining our circadian rhythms and if they become disrupted, an individual can experience confusion, depression or other negative psychological effects.4 Our interpretation of space also derived from our experience of living in the natural environment. We relied on nature for protection and shelter from exterior danger or harmful natural elements. Humans once used trees and caves as forms of shelter before we learned how to use sticks and mud to build sturdier structures.5 As humans evolved, we began to rely less on the environment for shelter, but our interpretation of shelter is still relevant today. We view ‘inside’ as protection from the ‘outside’. We refer to the ‘environment’ as ‘outside’ because it is large, exposed space and unprotected and we find comfort in ‘inside’ spaces.6 Architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies van der Rohe have attempted to connect nature and architecture through different strategies. Some designs physically combine the two by building into the site’s topography. For example, Wright’s Fallingwater is built into the side of a waterfall and reveals rock boulders in the interior space.7 Other designs, like Mies’ Barcelona Pavilion connect nature and architecture through conceptualization of nature in the materials used in the building.8 However, incorporating these elements has not proven to be a main priority in contemporary skyscrapers. 4 Matus, Vladimir. Design for Northern Climates: Cold-Climate Planning and Environmental Design. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988, 14. 5 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 47-51. 6 Shahlaei, Alireza and Marzieh Mohajeri. “In-Between Space, Dialectic of Inside and Outside in Architecture”. In International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development Vol 5, No 3, 2015, 74. 7 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 54.

16

8 Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990, 48-49.


It is necessary to reimagine skyscrapers in a way that can begin to reconnect people to the outdoors. Strategically integrating elements like vegetation, light and air can help improve the experience of urban buildings. These elements can create a connection to the outdoors while in an interior space. In order to begin to reimagine the design of skyscrapers, it is essential to focus on specific elements of the entire building. Focusing on the performance and aesthetics of the building faรงade will allow architects to positively impact the experience of the building. Individuals will view the building from the outside as part of the larger urban fabric, will feel the natural light and ventilation inside the building and will experience skyscrapers as something different and better than the enclosed skyscrapers that exist today.

17


AUDIENCE With this thesis book, I hope to inspire my professors and peers to design with psychology in mind – specifically concerning the biophilia hypothesis. If people in the architectural field develop a better psychological understanding of our dependence on nature, we can design to enhance our preference for elements like vegetation, light and air. As we become more familiar with psychology, it will become part of our design instinct. Therefore, as urbanization continues, architects can design so that our connection to the natural environment is preserved and even enriched. I also intent to influence psychologists to further develop studies on the human brain. As research continues and expands, the functions of the brain are further understood. These studies can assist architects in comprehending how humans react to space, scale and other architectural details. We can then use this knowledge to design and enhance the experiential qualities of architecture.

18


STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK The first chapter of the book includes the relative research for this thesis. First, it discusses biological evidence proving that humans have an inborn connection to nature. The biophilia hypothesis is introduced and explains how human evolution and dependence on the natural environment formed a set of criteria for habitat selection. The implication of this discussion is to explain what natural element humans are most drawn to and why. This leads to explanations about the psychological relationship between humans and nature. Discussions about cognition and psychological studies prove that nature plays an essential role in human mental health and everyday functioning. This discussion urges for conservation of nature because of human dependence on nature. The third part urges for the architectural acknowledgement of the prior discussions, mainly the integration of nature. This section also includes the ideas of spatial architecture and the effect it has on the experience of the user. Designs and opinions of several architects, including Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies van der Rohe, are shared. This section is important for two main reasons. On one hand, it provides precedents from well-known architects that were interested in the integration of nature and connections between indoor and outdoor spaces. On the other hand, the designs can be critiqued in terms of how well they acknowledge the research discussed previously. The final part includes a discussion of how some architects have begun to address the need for transitions between interior and exterior. Mies van der Rohe’s works is discussed again as an example of the exploration of indoor and outdoor space. This chapter of the

19


book concludes with a brief mentioning of some futurist solutions to this issue as a segue into the second half of the book. The second half of the book contains the exploration of the ideas discussed in the prior chapter. It begins with drawings and images of several precedents that integrate high performance facades into the building. These precedents demonstrate double skin facades and how they can enhance the experience of the interior space. Following the case studies is the start of the design process. In this section, the investigation is framed. It was essential to define the building, performance and experience criteria. This set of guidelines assists in shaping the design iterations in the next section. A thorough design proposal attempts to renovate an existing building faรงade. The proposal attempts to integrate natural light and ventilation into the new faรงade system to improve the performance of the building. The proposal also begins to address the experience and aesthetics of this improved faรงade. The design process is concluded by the outcomes and reflections of the investigation.

20


CLOSING Humans depend on nature for happiness, relaxation and overall mental well-being, but urban skyscrapers lack the integration of natural elements. The following thesis addresses this concern by developing a better understanding of the biophilia hypothesis and the relationship between humans and the environment. It also explores ideas of spatial architecture and transitions between interior and exterior. The thesis is the beginning of an attempt to reimagine skyscrapers. It aims to improve the performance and aesthetics of the building to eventually improve the overall experience of being in an urban setting.

21


LITERATURE REVIEW


INTRODUCTION As the natural environment continues to disappear and urbanization continues to increase, human connection with nature is decreasing. Our biophilia is being disrupted and we are becoming more distant from the natural world. Architecture has the ability to address these issues by integrating natural elements into design and increasing human interaction with the environment. In order to design urban buildings that incorporate nature, it is necessary to gain knowledge about psychology and biology to determine what natural elements should be integrated into architecture. The following research provides an understanding of the relationship between humans and the natural environment. It focuses on the psychological aesthetics and benefits of nature and how and why individuals respond to specific elements in certain ways. This literature review highlights the biology and psychology behind the interconnectivity of humans and nature. Beginning with the biophilia hypothesis and expanding to space and thresholds in architecture, the review makes connections between various researchers and architects that collectively explore the relationship between the human mind and nature.

23


BIOPHILIA HYPOTHESIS Edward O. Wilson was one of the first biologists to discuss the biophilia hypothesis. His theory states that humans have an inborn connection with nature and we strive to connect to it throughout our daily lives. For more than ninety-nine percent of human existence, people lived in hunter-gatherer lifestyles. We depended on the natural environment for survival, alongside other living organisms. Humans have spent most of their evolution in nature and have therefore formed an emotional connection with nature.

ge

ne

s

evo

lut

ion

dian circa

prime

Y BIOLOG

urb

sp

ac

ial

an

a qu

lit

y

We have developed a specific aesthetic preference for nature based

ic

n ga or

r

etr

rio

int e

al

fra ct

geo m

y

ity

erial

mat

brain

light

biophilic

PSYC

form

HOL OGY

exter

ior

CH AR

com

pos

IT

pe

rc e

n

us

cio

con

itio

gn

co

sub

ort comf

emotion

thought

etic

aest h

ing

EC

TU

itio

RE

n

24

exp

we ll-b e

Figure 2.2 | Diagram representing the connections between biology, architecture and psychology, created by author

s

ulu

stim

pt

eri

ion

enc

e


on our interaction with the natural environment throughout evolution. The aesthetics humans find pleasing depend on “the recognition of objects, sounds, and odors to which the organism responds as if it understood their significance for future behavior and success.”1 Stephen Kaplan, an environmental psychologist explains this in more depth. Animals, humans included, have the tendency to like environments in which they thrive. Throughout evolution we spent the majority of our time in environments that benefited our survival. Therefore, it is assumed that our aesthetic preference for certain settings is an evaluation of an environment’s usefulness and functionality.2 Our dependence on the natural environment for protection, resources and other life necessities formed a sort-of aesthetic criteria. Judith H. Heerwagen and Gordon H. Orians name the four main natural cues that humans are drawn to in the environment: “resource availability, shelter and predator protection, hazard cues and wayfinding movement.”3 Kaplan shares studies that prove that these natural cues are accurate in determine the preference of specific settings. He explains that the individuals being observed in the study preferred scenes that either contained a trail that disappeared into the background of the scene or a brightly lit path that was visible through tree foliage. These two scenes were appealing because they provided individuals a sense of wayfinding and comprehension of the setting. This has always been an important factor in habitat selection and remains a part of our aesthetic preference.4 1 Heerwagen, Judith H., and Gordon H. Orians. “Humans, Habitats, and Aesthetics.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 138-172. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993.140. 2 Kaplan, Stephen. “Perception and Landscape: Conceptions and Misconceptions.” In Environmental Aesthetics, 44-55. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988, 44. 3 Heerwagen, Judith H., and Gordon H. Orians. “Humans, Habitats, and Aesthetics.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 138-172. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993, 144. 4 Kaplan, Stephen. “Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective.” In Environment & Behavior 19, no. 1:3, 8.

25


Our preferences for certain habitats was directly related to our dependence on the natural environment for survival, but these natural cues are still relevant today. In a case study of the Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal, Daniel Campo shares the importance of water to city dwellers. People living in a city look to parks and greenways as an escape or oasis from the city. People often gravitate towards water because it gives them a sense of nature. Their experience is enhanced even more if they can actually touch and interact the water. Finding resources like water used to be an important part of survival, but water now serves as a natural element that is relaxing and enjoyable for us.5

26

5 Campo, Daniel. The Accidental Playground. New York, NY: Fordham University Press, 2013, 21.


Figure 2.3 | A photo of people on the Charles River Esplanade, retreating to water as a source of relaxation and serenity in Boston’s dense urban setting

27


VALUES OF THE NATURAL WORLD Stephen R. Kellert expands on Wilson’s biophilia hypothesis with a list of characteristics that help explain human evolution and dependency on nature. The characteristics address the value of survival, but also value of individual fulfillment in life. The chart below taken from Kellert’s writing, summarizes the values.6

VALUE

Figure 2.4 | A chart summarizing the values of nature, adopted from Stephen R. Kellert’s “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature”

DEFINITION

FUNCTION

Utilitarian

Practical and material exploitation of nature

Physical sustenance/security

Naturalistic

Satisfaction from direct experience/contact with nature

Curiosity, outdoor skills, mental/physical development

Ecologistic Scientific

Systematic study of structure, function, and relationship in nature

Knowledge, understanding, observation skills

Aesthetic

Physical appeal and beauty of nature

Inspiration, harmony, peace, security

Humanistic

Strong affection, emotional attachment, “love” for nature

Group bonding, sharing, cooperation, companionship

Moralistic

Strong affinity, spiritual reverence, ethical concern for nature

Order and meaning in life, kinship and affiliational ties

Kaplan elaborates on some of Kellert’s values, but provides new names. He classifies “making sense” and “involvement” as the primary values that have existed throughout human evolution. Making sense is the desire to comprehend and understand the resources of the natural world, while involvement is the aspiration to learn and be stimulated by the complexity of nature.7 6 Kellert, Stephen R. “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 42-69. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993, 59.

28

7 Kaplan, Stephen. “Perception and Landscape: Conceptions and Misconceptions.” In Environmental Aesthetics, 44-55. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988, 44-55.


Steven Pinker, a cognitive psychologist, also expands on the ideas that Kellert mentioned. He explains that our ecological intelligence grew as humans evolved. As we began to master the natural environment, humans developed a sort-of internal knowledge and understanding of the world. Our desire to understand the complexities of the natural world has become a basis of our connection to nature and it still exists today. Whether through scientific research or everyday life, we enjoy understanding the environment, the natural cycles and the complexity of nature. Pinker writers that, “People everywhere are fine amateur biologists. They enjoy looking at animals and plants, classify them into groups that biologists recognize, predict their movements and life cycles‌â€?8

8 Pinker, Steven. How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009, 323.

29


NATURE’S PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT Humans rely on circadian rhythms that control our body cycle throughout each day including sleep and heartbeat. Circadian rhythms are dependent almost solely on the sun. Our mental and physical health is dependent on these rhythms and therefore our exposure to natural light is essential. In areas where sun is limited, an individual’s circadian rhythm will be disrupted. This often results in confusion, depression and other negative psychological effects.9 In her book, The Nature Fix, Florence Williams expands on the psychological impact of nature. She states that nature has become more than just a tool for survival, it evokes happiness and peacefulness - helping us stay composed, clear-minded and positive. Because humans have spent the majority of our time in nature, our brains are still adapted to the natural environment. She writes that “during everyday life, a feeling of comfort can be achieved if our rhythms are synchronized with those of the environment.”10 Subconsciously or not, our brains are happier and more alive when in a natural environment. Harry Mallgrave explains that when we have a positive emotional response to something, like a sunset or a beautiful mountain view, a hedonic sensation is activated. Dopamine is then released into our blood and we experience happiness.11 Although happiness can be brought on by experiences not having to deal with nature, research proves the impact that nature has on our 9 Matus, Vladimir. Design for Northern Climates: Cold-Climate Planning and Environmental Design. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988, 14. 10 Williams, Florence. The Nature Fix: Why Nature Makes Us Happier, Healthier, and More Creative. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2017, 23. 11 Mallgrave, Harry Francis. “Cognition in the Flesh… The Human in Design”. Thresholds no. 42: 76-87. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 81.

30


mental state. It is found that blood pressure and heart rate decrease while in nature and serotonin is increased.12 Humans have formed a preference for natural environments over built environments as Kaplan tested through reactions to scenes of natural and built environments. He states that “natural scenes were so uniformly preferred over scenes of the built environment that only a single built environment (an urban park) was as preferred as the lowest rated natural scene.”13 12 Williams, Florence. The Nature Fix: Why Nature Makes Us Happier, Healthier, and More Creative. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2017, 24. 13 Kaplan, Stephen. “Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an

Figure 2.5 | “Nature and the Human Brain,” image collaged by author

31


NATURE IS DISAPPEARING Throughout human existence, ten or twenty percent of the earth’s species have been eliminated. It is estimated that twenty or more percent of the current species will go extinct or become close to extinction in the next couple of decades.14 As nature diminishes, there is a loss of biodiversity in the environment and humans become more disconnected from it. The rapid growth in the world’s population and the increase in urbanization are accelerating this process. As populations increase, more people are migrating to cities and the earth’s resources are being exploited. The more the natural environment disappears, the harder it will be to recover, therefore preservation is becoming a more urgent issue.15 Kaplan warns of the danger of theories that lack the acknowledgement of the relationship between humans and landscape. He states that without an understanding of the relationship between the two, there is no justification in the concern for landscape. If urban settings were in fact preferred over natural settings, then there would not be a desire to conserve the natural environment. However, as Kaplan states, there is scientific evidence as well as legislation and other movements proving the aspiration to do so.16

Evolutionary Perspective.” In Environment & Behavior 19, no. 1:3, 7. 14 Wilson, Edward O. “Biophilia and the Conservation Ethic.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 31-40. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993, 36. 15 Mostafavi, Mohsen. “Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?” In Landscape Urbanism Vol 71, 2011, 30. 16 Kaplan, Stephen. “Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective.” In Environment & Behavior 19, no. 1:3, 4.

Figure 2.6 | (adjacent page) “Nature is Disappearing,” image collaged by author

33


CONSERVATION OF NATURE Mallgrave states his concern that architects in the twentieth century do not consider people’s enjoyment of natural elements like scale and light. He emphasizes the importance of nature in our lives because we are biophilic species. He questions, “If we are biologically fitted to view the world with certain visual or environmental propensities, for instance, should not our built designs accommodate these propensities.”17 Moshen Mostafavi addresses this concern as well and insists that there needs to be more awareness of the environment in architecture and urban design. He writes that there is a need for a new theory of ecological urbanism that incorporates the earth’s resources with design. Mostafavi emphasizes the role that humans play in ecological practice.18 This relates to the characteristics that Kellert claims display biophilia. He classifies the characteristics as “humanistic” and “moralistic” values of nature. This classification explains that because of our connection to nature, humans have a feeling of responsibility to care for the natural environment.19 Yet, according to Andy Wasowski, humans have and are continuing to become distanced from nature. He explains that you can see this disconnect just by looking at suburban and urban neighborhoods. Wasowski writes, “Where in nature do we see plants lined up in perfect rows? Where in nature do we see shrubs that look like mush-

34

17 Mallgrave, Harry Francis. “Cognition in the Flesh… The Human in Design”. Thresholds no. 42: 76-87. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 78. 18 Mostafavi, Mohsen. “Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?” In Landscape Urbanism Vol 71, 2011, 35. 19 Kellert, Stephen R. “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 42-69. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993, 52.


rooms and lollipops?”20 He goes on to state that we have become so disconnected from nature that we forget that plants thrive on their own and do not depend on our planting, watering and manicuring. Wasowski explains that plants do not exist as individuals but thrive as part of a larger system and make nature a self-sustaining environment.21

20 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 9. 21 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 9-30.

Figure 2.7 | “A Green City,” image collaged by author

35


SPATIAL ARCHITECTURE Architecture is dependent on space and space is dependent on the individual. Therefore, these three cannot be separated. Alireza Shahlaei and Marzieh Mohajeri argue that there is not enough focus on the psychological aspects of space and the acknowledgement that space and user cannot exist without each other. In order to understand this further, we must understand how humans view space. They write, “we as humans inhabit the ‘environment’ which is large and very exposed, often referred to as the ‘outside’, which to some pose the threat of danger and exposure, which in turn leads us ‘humans’ to a need for protection, shelter and privacy, this space can be known as the ‘inside’.”22 Shahlaei and Mohajeri explain that the outside generally refers to the environment and exposure to natural conditions and the living world. Wind, rain, heat, cold and dangerous animals forced humans to create the indoors as protection from these elements. The inside has become a safe place where we can exist separately from the environment. We do not need to follow season changes or day and night cycles. When inside, we chose how, when and where we live. Understanding the difference and relationship between inside and outside can help architects design quality space. Shahlaei and Mohajeri insist that architectural space be viewed as a dynamic movement between barriers and voids. Every building creates an interior and an exterior through the arrangement of architectural elements – the barriers create space while the voids provide connections. Sometimes the connections become an intermediate space between

36

22 Shahlaei, Alireza and Marzieh Mohajeri. “In-Between Space, Dialectic of Inside and Outside in Architecture”. In International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development Vol 5, No 3, 2015, 74.


spaces and even between interior and exterior. This is somewhat a contradiction to architecture because the inside was intended to be closed off and protected from the outside. However, transitions or thresholds between interior and exterior can enhance the quality of a design. In-between space has the ability to determine movement and privacy and establish a relationship between the outside and inside for the user to experience.23

23 Shahlaei, Alireza and Marzieh Mohajeri. “In-Between Space, Dialectic of Inside and Outside in Architecture�. In International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development Vol 5, No 3, 2015, 74-75.

Figure 2.8 | The Prairie House by Frank Lloyd Wright as an example of spatial relationships, transitions and integration of nature in architecture

37


LANDSCAPE & ARCHITECTURE Often, a building disturbs the landscape that it sits on. However, it is possible for architecture to establish a “reciprocal”24 relationship between the building and the surrounding landscape through several strategies. One strategy is the physical incorporation of the building and the surrounding topography. Frank Lloyd Wright insists that buildings should be designed to exist harmonically with nature. He believes that the form and scale of a building should relate to its surroundings. He expressed importance on color and material as elements that have a large effect on the experience of the user. Wright explains that preserving and enhancing the colors and materials of a site through the building assists in making the design unique and therefore desirable.25 We can see this belief expressed in Wright’s best-known design, Fallingwater. The house sits on a waterfall, embedded in woodlands with no formal gardens, only nature itself. Large boulders and oak trees were incorporated into the structure and interior of the design. Wright’s house is a prime example of incorporation of nature into architecture. 26 The Barnes Residence, another example, sits between two rock ridge openings and the site involves a large amount of grade change. The interior spaces are designed so that they sit between or on top of the ridges. The circulation through the house rises as the topography does - entering at one level and exiting to the patio at another level.

38

24 Berrizbeitia, Anita, and Linda Pollak. Inside Outside: Between Architecture and Landscape. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers, 1999, 14. 25 Wright, F.L.. “In the Cause of Architecture.” In Frank Lloyd Wright: Essential Texts, 81102. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009, 87. 26 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 54.


Figure 2.9 | Fallingwater by Frank Lloyd Wright is a prime example of architecture in a natural setting with the surrounding nature incorporated into the design.

39


Another strategy for connecting architecture and landscape is the conceptualization of the surroundings. The scale and shape of the interior space in the Barnes Residence mimics the variation in the structure of a landscape. The structure of the roof also references the surrounding tree canopies through its materiality and detailed structure similar to that of tree branches.27 Mies van der Rohe’s design for the Barcelona Pavilion was also inspired by nature. Mies incorporated natural elements like vines that sat in planters on top of the wall and grew down. He used green 27 Berrizbeitia, Anita, and Linda Pollak. Inside Outside: Between Architecture and Landscape. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers, 1999, 42-47.

Figure 2.10 | The Barnes Residence is an example of a design that is physically incorporated into the surrounding site and topography

40


marble to resemble the nearby trees and connect the architecture with the surrounding nature. Mies also integrated water into the design and considered it as much of a material as he did marble and steel. The shallow pool lined with blue glass tiles reflected the sky. These natural elements assisted the pavilion and the surrounding landscape become a continuous space.28 Carlo Scarpa’s renovation of the Querini Stampalia Foundation displays another strategy for designing architecture and landscape together. He envisioned the interior as exterior space by incorporating 28 Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990, 48-49.

Figure 2.11 | In the interior of the Barnes Residence, stairs provide circulation across the change in topography and windows provide views to the exterior rock faces

41


water into the design. Water from the outside pours into the interior space and represents the fluctuations of water in Venice. This aspect of Scarpa’s design provided physical continuity between inside and outside through the exposure to natural elements. It also created a conceptualized representation of the natural environment and “ultimately conceive the interior of the building as a landscape.”29

29 Berrizbeitia, Anita, and Linda Pollak. Inside Outside: Between Architecture and Landscape. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers, 1999, 16.

Figure 2.12 | In Carlo Scarpa’s Querini Stampalia Foundation water floods the room from the surrounding Venice canals creating a literal and conceptual interpretation of the site

42


TRANSITIONS BETWEEN INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR Mies’s exploration ideas of expression of space in the Barcelona Pavilion. The concept of the pavilion is shown through the experience of the space. Constant writes that the pavilion served as “momentary pause in an itinerary through the exposition grounds.”30 There was no division between the interior and exterior. The doors were removed during the exposition to enhance the spatial continuity through the pavilion. Mies used glass in the design because he claimed that it allows us to give “shape to space, open it, and link it to the landscape, thereby satisfying modern man’s spatial needs”31 The statue, various marble walls and columns guided the individual through the pavilion, provided focal points and connected architecture and landscape. Constant explains that these elements do not unite the space, but rather separate it and the experience of the space is emphasized. Mies’s choice of site also addressed transitional aspects. He rejected a site that was on the main axis of the exposition and chose a site at the end of one of the axes. The pavilion only had one extended view in the direction of approach. It became “a threshold between the formal layout of the Exposition ground and a picturesque pastiche of Spanish vernacular house types.”32 Similarly, Aldo Van Eyck was concerned with the effect architecture has on people including the relationship with nature and spatial qualities. Van Eyck studied these concerns by investigating the 30 Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990, 47. 31 Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990, 49. 32 Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990, 47.

43


in-between of architecture. He designed with the intent to provide transitions between interior and exterior in order to create more desirable spaces and also connect people to the outdoors. He urged other architects to follow his acknowledgement of the enjoyment and experience of the user.33 Transitions in design were also of high interest to Wright and his architecture. He studied the relationship between public and private and inside and outside. The transitional elements that he used in his residential work often pertained to the function of the house or space. Wright expressed the importance of understanding the function and experience of a building in order to connect the public exterior and private interior. He believed that certain elements enhanced the experience and social interaction of the users. Therefore, in many of his designs, Wright “focused on various combinations of central public spaces – garden courts, hallways, and entrances – which shielded occupants from the street and dramatized the points where they came together.”34 Wright designed the Prairie House, a residential type that “represented a practical, new way of life – full of light, air, and prospect.”35 The public rooms were open to each other making the design open and continuous from space to space. Instead of enclosing space, the walls in the house defined space and allowed movement throughout the house. Rudolph Schindler commended Wright for his work, “His art is spatial art in the true sense of the word and has completely shed the characteristics of sculpture which all architecture of

44

33 Ligtelijn, Vincent. Aldo van Eyck, Works. Bussum, The Netherlands: THOTH Publishers, 1999, 11. 34 Bolon, Carol R., Robert S. Nelson, and Linda Seidel. The Nature of Frank Lloyd Wright. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1988, 104-108. 35 Smith, Kathryn, and Grant Mudford. Schindler House. NY, New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001, 9.


Figure 2.13 | The statue, marble walls and glass curtain walls in the Barcelona Pavilion by Mies van der Rohe address the separation of space and relation to the surrounding nature

45


the past possessed. The room is not a box – the walls have disappeared and free nature flows through his house as in a forest. He is a complete and perfect master of any material – and modern machine techniques are at the base of his form-making.”36 Wright expands on his thoughts about nature and shares his experiences with Japanese architecture. He explains that architects have integrated nature into buildings through systems of gardens on the ground, balconies, roofs and walls. Wright appreciated the sculptured forms that allowed vegetation to grow throughout. He commends Japanese architecture for its indigenous design and states that American architecture needs to be as unique and thoughtful in terms of the experience of buildings.37 Wright was an inspirational figure for Schindler as we can see in the Schindler House that he designed for his family. The house, its courtyards and terrace sat on a raised surface, a few feet about the ground plan. Rudolph Schindler treated the entire site as an architectural exploration with the intent of designing architecture and landscape equally. The same geometry, materiality and spatial quality existed in the architecture and landscape creating a smooth transition from the interior to exterior spaces. The house consisted of three parts: the architectural studio, the residence and the farm wing. The design was composed of transparent and solid planes contained between the roof and floor, removing distinction between doors, walls and windows. Schindler designed each studio with an open-concept in mind where the space

46

36 Smith, Kathryn, and Grant Mudford. Schindler House. NY, New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001, 11. 37 Wright, F.L.. “In the Cause of Architecture.” In Frank Lloyd Wright: Essential Texts, 81-102. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009, 194-196.


was framed by furniture rather than enclosed by walls. This provided connection as well as versatility in the design. Projecting glass corners also framed the space in some of the studios and allowed an uninterrupted continuity between the interior and exterior. Each studio had screens that could be opened or removed and provided a relationship between the interior space and the gardens outside.38

38 Smith, Kathryn, and Grant Mudford. Schindler House. NY, New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001, 30-37.

Figure 2.14 | The Schindler House addresses spatial qualities, thresholds between interior and exterior and the surrounding landscape

47


TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES & THE EFFECTS Unlike Wright, some architect’s designed buildings without a connection between the interior and exterior. Matt Johnson writes about the invention of air conditioning and how that allowed us to regulate building temperature. Buildings became less physically sustainable as architects designed completely enclosed buildings. Windows and glass facades provided transparency, yet were fully sealed and only opened during warm weather and therefore prevented any connection between the inside and outside.39 Firms and architects began to propose bubble-like structures that would allow us to regulate interior and exterior temperatures. Some projects enclosed an entire city in the bubble, others only one building or even just one balcony.40 The envelope does not necessarily have to span across an entire neighborhood or city. It can exist around one building situated between two conventional buildings. This will make the building unique, creative and innovative.41 These types of proposals would allow us to open windows and go outside without venturing into cold temperatures or harsh conditions. With these inventions “walls might dissipate completely, allowing us to live inside nothing more than a cloud of scented, purified air.”42 Johnson fears that as technology advances, building skins are becoming thicker and more resistant to the exterior environment. Therefore, the interior of buildings is becoming progres-

48

39 Johnson, Matt. “The Milieu Intérieur”. Thresholds no. 42: 120-133. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 123-124. 40 Johnson, Matt. “The Milieu Intérieur”. Thresholds no. 42: 120-133. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 124-127. 41 Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000, 109. 42 Johnson, Matt. “The Milieu Intérieur”. Thresholds no. 42: 120-133. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 127.


sively more separated from the exterior and there is no connection between the spaces.43

43 Johnson, Matt. “The Milieu Intérieur”. Thresholds no. 42: 120-133. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014, 133.

Figure 2.15 | Dome Over Manhattan by Buckminster Fuller as an example of a design attempt to regulate temperature and protect users from the natural elements

49


50


CONCLUSION It is clear that our time spent in nature and our dependence on natural resources has evolved into a preference for and connection to the natural environment. As technology, urbanization and other aspects of today’s world progress, humans are becoming disconnected from the natural world. Some individuals are oblivious to this concern, yet it remains an important issue essential our health and happiness. The integration of natural elements into architecture, can reconnect humans to nature. Through the understanding of psychology, spatial qualities and thresholds in architecture, it is possible to enhance the quality of interior, exterior and in-between spaces.

Figure 2.16 | (adjacent page) “Dropping in Nature,� image collaged by author

51


PRECEDENTS


INTRODUCTION The buildings in the following section serve as precedents for the design portion of this thesis. Each building relies on a double skin faรงade to enhance the building with natural light, ventilation or both. Included is a diagram and photograph of each faรงade. These precedents address the performance and aesthetics of sustainable facades. In each building, design elements like exterior shading devices, interior blinds and operable windows assist in providing daylight and fresh air to the interior space. These elements provide a basic understanding of double skin facades that allowed this thesis to progress to the next stage. While these precedents have been included as a section of this book, they only serve as a portion of the precedents that influenced this thesis.

53


PRECEDENT | The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, New York, New York

Figure 3.1 | Section showing how the double sking facade system enhances the ventilation of the building

54


Figure 3.2 | photo showing the composition of the facade of the building

55


PRECEDENT | MGM City Center, Las Vegas, Nevada

Figure 3.3 | Section showing how the double sking facade system enhances the natural light of the building

56


Figure 3.4 | photo showing the composition of the facade of the building

57


PRECEDENT | Cambridge Public Library, Boston, Massachusetts

Figure 3.5 | Section showing how the double sking facade system enhances the natural light of the building

58


Figure 3.6 | photo showing the composition of the facade of the building

59


PRECEDENT | Manitoba Hydro Place, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Figure 3.7 | Section showing how the double sking facade system enhances the ventilation and natural light of the building

60


Figure 3.8 | photo showing the composition of the facade of the building

61


PRECEDENT | Weill Cornell Medical College Belfer Research Center, New York, New York

Figure 3.9 | Section showing how the double sking facade system enhances the ventilation and natural light of the building

62


Figure 3.10 | photo showing the composition of the facade of the building

63


DESIGN AS RESEARCH | FRAMING THE THESIS


INTRODUCTION After gaining a better understanding of high performance facades, it was essential to further frame the thesis. This portion of the book assists in determining the performance criteria for the design process. Gaining a better understanding of existing sustainable efforts allowed the thesis to be narrowed down to include three sustainable aspects: light, air and program. A chart in the following section compares these aspects from four existing sustainable efforts. Developing a basic understanding of factors that affect sustainability was also essential to determine which factors this thesis would focus on. This portion of the book also includes diagrams displaying Boston’s sun, wind, temperature and other climate factors.

65


PERFORMANCE CRITERIA | The following chart includes exisiting sustainable efforts that contributed to the framing of this thesis.

LIGHT

AIR

Figure 4.1 | Adopted from sustainability criteria documents including LEED, Green Mark, BREEAM and IGBC

66

PROGRAM

LEED

GREEN MARK

United States

Singapore

- reduce electrical lighting by bringing in daylight

- orientate building to optimize sun exposure

- monitor mechanically & naturally ventilated spaces

- windows facing directions of site’s wind paths - natural ventilation in common areas

- provide outdoor space greater than or equal to 30% of site area - 25% of that outdoor space must be vegetated

- vegetation included in rooftop gardens, green roofs, vertical greenery, etc.


BREEAM

IGBC

United Kingdom

India

- reduce night time light pollution - glare control system to ensure daylight reaches interior spaces, but reduces glare

- redirect exterior lighting to reduce light pollution - passive design system to increase amount of natural light in livable spaces

- use of natural and mechanical ventilation strategies that adapt to climate scenarios

- passive design systems to increase natural ventilation in livable spaces

- outdoor spaces must be accessible to all occupants and large enough to allow occupants to sit outside

- design caters to dierent people - provide adequate views from the interior to the sky or exterior vegetation

67


UNDERSTANDING CLIMATE FACTORS | These sun diagrams help provide a basic understanding of the sun path in Boston.

12:00pm

7:11am

E

S

4:12pm

N W

Figure 4.2

12:00pm

E

5:49am

S

Figure 4.2 | Boston’s winter sun path Figure 4.3 | Boston’s summer sun path N

68

5:54pm

Figure 4.3

W


12:00pm

E S

4:09am

N W

7:22pm

Figure 4.4

12:00pm

E

5:32am

S

Figure 4.4 | Boston’s spring sun path Figure 4.5 | Boston’s fall sun path N

5:41pm

Figure 4.5

W

69


UNDERSTANDING CLIMATE FACTORS | The following diagrams provide a basic understanding of the climate in Boston. N

NW

NE

E

W

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.6 Jan Feb

Dec

Nov

90

Mar 70 50 30 10 Apr

Oct

Figure 4.6 | Boston’s average wind direction Figure 4.7 | Boston’s average hours of daylight

Sep

May

Aug

Jun Jul

70

Figure 4.7


Jan Feb

Dec

Nov

90

Mar 70 50 30 10 Apr

Oct

Sep

May

Aug

Jun Jul

Figure 4.8 Jan Feb

Dec

Nov

90

Mar 70 50 30 10 Apr

Oct

Sep

May

Aug

Figure 4.8 | Boston’s average high temperature Figure 4.9 | Boston’s average low temperature

Jun Jul

Figure 4.9

71


UNDERSTANDING COMFORT LEVELS | The following diagrams show the comfort levels depending on different exterior wall types. N

NW

NE

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0.7

E

W

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.10 N

NW

NE

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0.7

E

W

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.11

Figure 4.10 | Double clear argon glass curtain wall Figure 4.11 | Triple clear argon glass curtain wall

72


N

NW

NE

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0.7

E

W

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.12 N

NW

NE

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0.7

E

W

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.13 N

NW

NE

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0.7

E

W

Figure 4.12 | Double clear argon glass curtain wall with night insulation Figure 4.13 | Triple clear argon glass curtain wall with night insulation Figure 4.14 | Low E argon glass curtain wall with night insulation

SE

SW

S

Figure 4.14

73


DESIGN AS RESEARCH | FRAMING THE DESIGN


INTRODUCTION Before continuing to the design phase of this thesis, it was essential to further establish the intentions of the thesis. This portion of the book includes diagrams that frame the proposed design at the end of this book. The diagrams assist in determining the type of building that will be renovated in the design portion, the experiences that the design intends to enhance and the issues of the existing building.

75


BUILDING CRITERIA | The following diagrams display the criteria for the buildings that architects may look at to renovate.

Figure 5.1 | the building is located in a dense urban fabric

Figure 5.2 | the form and the orientation of the building do not respond to directional aspects

Figure 5.3 | the east, south and west facades are exposed to the sun without any external shading strategies

76


Figure 5.4 | the building is more than 25 years old meaning that the facade system is at the end of its lifetime

Figure 5.5 | the form and the orientation of the building do not respond to wind direction

Figure 5.6 | all of the building facades are treated the same way regardless of the direction that they face

77


EXPERIENCE CRITERIA | The following diagrams depict the design intentions regarding the experience aspect of the thesis.

Figure 5.7 | connection between the user and the inner facade

Figure 5.8 | connection between the user and the space

Figure 5.9 | connection between the pedestrian and the facade

78


Figure 5.10 | connection between the inner and the outer space

Figure 5.11 | connection between the user and the outer facade

Figure 5.12 | connection between the users

79


BUILDING ANALYSIS | The following diagrams serve as analysis of the existing building including both performance and design issues.

Figure 5.13 | the east, south and west facades are completely exposed to the sun, resulting in closed blinds

Figure 5.14 | the program is pushed to the exterior of the building with a central core

Figure 5.15 | there is no connection between floors or between interior and exterior

80


Figure 5.16 | the ribbon windows prevent individuals from relating to the scale and composition of the building

Figure 5.17 | the atrium does not take advantage of sustainable strategies and does not enhance the inner part of the building

Figure 5.18 | the building interrupts the path of the greenway, but does not relate to the green space

81


DESIGN AS RESEARCH | TESTING THE THESIS


INTRODUCTION After outlining the investigation, discussed in the previous section, it was possible to begin testing the thesis through design. This chapter features a thorough design proposal that attempts to renovate an existing building and improve the performance, experience and aesthetics of the building. The proposal features a double skin façade to replace the old, existing façade. The space between the double skin façade changes in size – sometimes only serving as a circulation space and at other points allowing large numbers of people to occupy the space. Operable shading devices and vents on the exterior skin allow natural light and air to enter the building and improve the performance of the building. The façade system also affects the composition of the building as part of the larger urban context. The façade system and the interior spaces work together to improve the performance of the building, create a positive experience and contribute a unique appearance to the rest of the city.

83


NORTH FACADE

Figure 6.1 | (above) section perspective showing the existing interior experience on the North side of the building Figure 6.2 | (right) section axon showing the existing facade system on the North side of the building

84


Figure 6.3 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the lower levels of the North side of the building Figure 6.4 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the lower levels of the North side of the building

85


Figure 6.5 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the lower levels of the North side of the building Figure 6.6 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the middle levels of the North side of the building

86


Figure 6.7 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the upper levels of the North side of the building Figure 6.8 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the upper levels of the North side of the building

87


EAST FACADE

Figure 6.9 | (above) section perspective showing the existing interior experience on the East side of the building Figure 6.10 | (right) section axon showing the existing facade system on the East side of the building

88


Figure 6.11 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the lower levels of the East side of the building Figure 6.12 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the lower levels of the East side of the building

89


Figure 6.13 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the middle levels of the East side of the building Figure 6.14 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the middle levels of the East side of the building

90


Figure 6.15 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the upper levels of the East side of the building Figure 6.16 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the upper levels of the East side of the building

91


SOUTH FACADE

Figure 6.17 | (above) section perspective showing the existing interior experience on the South side of the building Figure 6.18 | (right) section axon showing the existing facade system on the South side of the building

92


Figure 6.19 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the lower levels of the South side of the building Figure 6.20 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the lower levels of the South side of the building

93


Figure 6.21 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the middle levels of the South side of the building Figure 6.22 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the middle levels of the South side of the building

94


Figure 6.23 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the upper levels of the South side of the building Figure 6.24 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the upper levels of the South side of the building

95


WEST FACADE

Figure 6.25 | (above) section perspective showing the existing interior experience on the West side of the building Figure 6.26 | (right) section axon showing the existing facade system on the West side of the building

96


Figure 6.27 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the lower levels of the West side of the building Figure 6.28 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the lower levels of the West side of the building

97


Figure 6.29 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the middle levels of the West side of the building Figure 6.30 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the middle levels of the West side of the building

98


Figure 6.31 | (above) section perspective showing the proposed interior experience on the upper levels of the West side of the building Figure 6.32 | (right) section axon showing the proposed facade system on the upper levels of the West side of the building

99


DESIGN OUTCOMES & REFLECTIONS While this design proposal concludes this book, it only serves as a beginning to this thesis. The four different facades and different levels of the building rely on different faรงade and sustainable techniques. This creates different experiences on the interior and exterior of the building. The varying facades also assist in creating a unique faรงade composition compared to the rest of the urban fabric. The proposal begins to address the performance, experience and aesthetics of the designed skyscraper. Yet, these aspects can be pushed further to truly test the thesis. Because of the scale and complexity of a skyscraper, this thesis needs more time to develop. This proposal serves as a starting point to better reimagining the contemporary skyscraper and how better designed urban buildings can enhance the experience of the city.

100


Figure 6.33 | perspective showing the proposed facade system as part of the entire building composition

101


REFERENCES


Berrizbeitia, Anita, and Linda Pollak. Inside Outside: Between Architecture and Landscape. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers, 1999. Bolon, Carol R., Robert S. Nelson, and Linda Seidel. The Nature of Frank Lloyd Wright. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1988. Campo, Daniel. The Accidental Playground. New York, NY: Fordham University Press, 2013. Caroline, Constant. “The Barcelona Pavilion as Landscape Garden: Modernity and the Picturesque.” AA Files no. 20: 46-54. 1990. Heerwagen, Judith H., and Gordon H. Orians. “Humans, Habitats, and Aesthetics.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 138-172. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993. Johnson, Matt. “The Milieu Intérieur”. Thresholds no. 42: 120-133. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014. Kaplan, Stephen. “Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective.” In Environment & Behavior 19, no. 1:3, 3-32. Kaplan, Stephen. “Perception and Landscape: Conceptions and Misconceptions.” In Environmental Aesthetics, 44-55. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Kellert, Stephen R. “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 42-69. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993. Ligtelijn, Vincent. Aldo van Eyck, Works. Bussum, The Netherlands: THOTH Publishers, 1999. Mallgrave, Harry Francis. “Cognition in the Flesh… The Human in Design”. Thresholds no. 42: 76-87. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, 2014. Matus, Vladimir. Design for Northern Climates: Cold-Climate Planning and Environmental Design. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988. Mostafavi, Mohsen. “Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?” In Landscape Urbanism Vol 71, 2011. Pinker, Steven. How the Mind Works. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009. Shahlaei, Alireza and Marzieh Mohajeri. “In-Between Space, Dialectic of Inside and Outside in Architecture”. In International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development Vol 5, No 3, 2015. Smith, Kathryn, and Grant Mudford. Schindler House. NY, New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001. Wasowski, Andy, and Sally Wasowski. Building Inside Nature’s Envelope: How New Construction and Preservation Can Work Together. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000. Williams, Florence. The Nature Fix: Why Nature Makes Us Happier, Healthier, and More Creative. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2017. Wilson, Edward O. “Biophilia and the Conservation Ethic.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 31-40. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993. Wright, F.L.. “In the Cause of Architecture: The New Imperial Hotel, Tokio.” In Frank Lloyd Wright: Essential Texts, 187-203. NY, New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2009.

103


IMAGES CITED


INTRODUCTION Figure 1.1

Image created by author, collaged from sources below: 5 Star Designs. Accessed October 11, 2017. http://www.5stardesigns.co.uk/5stardesigns _ suzanne/sue19/SUE19-68/2.jpg iStock. Accessed October 11, 2017. https://www.istockphoto.com/photo/beautiful-nature-at-morning-in-mistyspring-forest-with-sun-gm506856658-84421597?esource=SEO _ GIS _ CDN _ Redirect LITERATURE REVIEW

Figure 2.1

Created by author

Figure 2.2

Provided by author

Figure 2.3

Created by author, information adopted from source below: Kellert, Stephen R. “The Biological Basis for Human Values of Nature.” In The Biophilia Hypothesis, 42-69. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993.

Figure 2.4

Created by author, collaged from sources below: Pixabay. Accessed December 1, 2017. https://pixabay.com/p-291024/?no _ redirect. Dreams of Animals. Accessed December 1, 2017. http://animal-dream.com/data _ images/leaves/leaves4.html.

Figure 2.5

Created by author, collaged from sources below: Clip Art Library. Accessed November 15, 2017. http://clipart-library.com/clipart/rcLoj9MXi.htm. 100 Resilient Cities. Accessed November 15, 2017. http://www.100resilientcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/cities-nyc _ optimized.jpg. Flickr. Accessed November 15, 2017. https://www.flickr.com/photos/photosbysomeguy/6320890701/

Figure 2.6

Created by author, collaged from sources below: Fotolia. Accessed November 15, 2017. https://t3.ftcdn.net/jpg/00/75/60/98/240 _ F _ 75609872 _ CM0w8lxFr0GEh4kgPvQNUToSpLlM912C.jpg GZLegalCase. Accessed November 15, 2017. http://www.gzlegalcase.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ Depositphotos _ 23575269 _ m-2015-825x510.jpg

Figure 2.7

Frank Lloyd Wright Trust. Accessed December 2, 2017. https://flwright.org/researchexplore/prairiestyle.

Figure 2.9

Chicago Tribune. Accessed December 1, 2017.

105


http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/travel/ct-wright-homes-laurel-highlands-pennsylvania-travel-0514-20170428-story.html. Figure 2.10

Patkau Architects. Accessed December 1, 2017. https://patkau.ca/projects/barnes/.

Figure 2.11

Patkau Architects. Accessed December 1, 2017. https://patkau.ca/projects/barnes/.

Figure 2.12

Design Life Network. Accessed December 3, 2017. http://designlifenetwork.com/interior-alchemy-carlo-scarpas-palazzo-querini-stampalia/.

Figure 2.13

Provided by author

Figure 2.14

ArchDaily. Accessed December 3, 2017. https://www.archdaily.com/783384/ad-classics-kings-road-house-rudolf-schindler.

Figure 2.15

Medium. Accessed December 1, 2017. https://medium.com/@jasoncstone/relative-omniscience-relative-omnipotence-fa te-and-chance-a0571576391d. Created by author, collaged from sources below: PNG ALL. Accessed December 6, 2017 http://www.pngall.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Tree.png PNG ALL. Accessed December 6, 2017 http://www.pngall.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Tree-PNG-Image.png PNG ALL. Accessed December 6, 2017 http://www.pngall.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Tree-PNG-Clipart.png PNG Images Free. Accessed December 6, 2017 http://pngimagesfree.com/Vines/falling _ vines _ leaf.png

Figure 2.16

PRECEDENTS

106

Figure 3.1

Created by author

Figure 3.2

Modlar. Accessed April 5, 2018. https://www.modlar.com/photos/869/the-cooper-union-for-the-advancement-ofscience-and-art-exterior/

Figure 3.3

Created by author

Figure 3.4

Turning Left for Less. Accessed April 5, 2018. https://www.turningleftforless.com/sky-suites-aria-hotel-las-vegas-spa-review/

Figure 3.5

Created by author


Figure 3.6

RawnArch. Accessed April 5, 2018. http://www.rawnarch.com/cambridge _ public _ library

Figure 3.7

Created by author

Figure 3.8

ArchDaily. Accessed April 5, 2018. https://www.archdaily.com/44596/manitoba-hydro-kpmb-architects

Figure 3.9

Created by author

Fgure 3.10

ArchPaper. Accessed April 5, 2018. https://archpaper.com/2014/02/weill-cornell-medical-colleges-double-skin/

Figure 4.1 - 4.14 DESIGN AS RESEARCH | FRAMING THE THESIS All images created by author Figure 5.1 - 5.18 DESIGN AS RESEARCH | FRAMING THE DESIGN All images created by author Figure 6.1 - 6.33 DESIGN AS RESEARCH | TESTING THE THESIS All images created by author

107

Mykaela Scarpace | Thesis Book 2018  
Mykaela Scarpace | Thesis Book 2018  
Advertisement