Stadt entwerfen? / Designing the City? (original) (raw)
Related papers
Il ruolo giocato dalla cultura del Design nell'ambito del progetto dello spazio pubblico, si è evoluto nel tempo. Nell'ambito dell'Architettura, negli anni '90 del secolo scorso, si apre un dibattito internazionale che incoraggia un processo di revisione dei metodi di formazione fino ad allora adottati a favore di nuovi in grado di mettere al centro l'uomo, il vero fruitore di oggetti, spazi e architetture. Ne emerge la possibilità di abbattere alcuni confini disciplinari a favore di una transdisciplina, Design di Spazi e Architetture. Lo Spatial Design rimette in discussione molti degli assunti dell'Urbanistica e dell'Architettura del secolo breve, a partire proprio dal rapporto dello Spazio con il fruitore. Attraverso recenti casi studio, il saggio propone un'embrionale tassonomia dello Spazio pubblico, basandosi sul principio scientifico della ricorrenza di alcune soluzioni progettuali. The role played by the culture of Design in the context of the planning of public space has evolved over time. In the sphere of Architecture, the 1990s saw the opening of an debate that encouraged a process of revising the training methods adopted until that time, in favour of new ones capable of placing people-the true users of objects, spaces, and architectures-at the centre. This raised the possibility of breaking down certain disciplinary boundaries in favour of a transdiscipline, the Design of Spaces and Architectures. Spatial Design calls back into question many of the assumptions of the Urban Planning and Architecture of the short century, starting precisely from the relationship between Space and the user. Through recent case studies, this essay proposes an embryonic taxonomy of public space, basing its perspective upon the scientific principle of the recurrence of certain design solutions. KEYWORDS design dello spazio pubblico, spazi interstiziali, design degli spazi per l'utente, design degli spazi per la natura, design degli spazi per la critica design of public space, interstitial spaces, design of spaces for the user, design of spaces for nature, design of spaces for criticism
Dialogues with cityscape. EMBT' proposals for institutional buildings
2019
in which he coordinates the PhD Programme on Heritage. Senior Lecturer at ILA&UD Laboratory, directed by G. De Carlo (1985, 1986 y 1992). Awarded First Prize of the European Association for Architectural Association (AEEA/ EAAE). Dialogues with cityscape. EMBT' proposals for ins tu onal buildings The interpreta on of context is an ini al step in several Team X architectural proposals (Aldo Van Eyck, Alison and Peter Smithson, De Carlo), it is also the case of their friend Enric Miralles. Mutual infl uences are percep ble in several works, providing a touch of freshness to current architecture, also the understanding of complexity when exchanges between varied layers are produced in built structures and the urban domain in which they are included, demanding a precise reading of exis ng condi ons prior to any project proposal. The affi nity of ideas makes the transference of strategies for abstrac on especially frui ul, with singular methods to analyze scales and the territorial domains in which their ac on is inscribed, aspiring to a con nuity between them.
BUILDING THE SOCIAL LIFE: THE EMBODIED, CONFIGURATIVE AND DIALOGIC KNOWLEDGE EMBEDDED IN ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING BARCELONA COAC- UPC, ETSAB. 31 MAY, 1 AND 2 JUNE, 2017 Research in design is growing very fast thanks to the new tools used by architects, planners and professionals involved in building social life. In education, architectural and urban design, as well as in social planning participation, PHD dissertations and research projects are day by day more needed. In the Venice Biennale 2016 two architects from the research grup GIRAS were elected to represent Catalonia and Chile. This year Biennale was dedicated to the social meaning of architecture and planning. We are proud of Jelena Prokopljevic from Barcelona and Jose Luis Uribe from Chile, for this important nomination and we support their work. 1. What are the best theories and practices on university architectural education for architects and for all professions involved? Case Studies with a clear analysis of purposes and outputs are needed. 2. We welcome Studies using urban quality indicators for planning places for children and also architectural children education studies. 3. Proposals about new models for learning throughout human interaction are welcomed. Not only related to architectural and urban design, but also about all kind of scientific artistic or political learning, such as music, dancing, etc. always related to space and time concepts as the chronotropes by M. Bakhtin. 4. The production of Knowledge on professional design studies is the key topic here. How to analyze the social interdisciplinary and cognitive origin of research by design? 5. From design to construction the path is long and often knowledge changes or disappears. The role of technologies is key at this point, since they can transform the aesthetics and the functionality of buildings. 6. Computer Design is a challenge for doing innovative research framed by new design theories and practices. However the interaction between brains and machine cannot be fully described without ignoring either one or the other. The dialogical feed‐back generated by research can then be made explicit. 7. We welcome Social participation and simulation of research on planning, where knowledge is produced inductively without a priori rules. Special emphasis should be made on the different actors of the planning process, with their ideals, expertise and responsibilities. 8. There are a lot of studios upon environmental impact theories and practices (Post‐occupancy). The analysis on the environmental impact on health and behavior of users is very important. 9. Architectural and Urban Heritage is no longer a secondary field for research. The best architectural and urban designs are now growing in consolidated historical settings, where ideas are converted in objects. Consider the works by P. Zumthor, R. Piano or Wang Shu. We welcome research about Historical Urban Forms transformations.
Never before there have been so many tendencies and formal conventions in architecture. And probably never before there was so much turmoil about understanding of our environment. Indispensable connections betweeen architectural schools with its mission focused on formulation of theoretical guidelines and professional practice definitely rooted in commercial activities, despite the disadvantageous separation and incoherentness, described by Fisher 1 among others, emerge and unfortunately amplify the chaos within the discourse on condition of architecture and its mission. On one hand we can observe the proliferation of fashion driven architecture, playing the role of sculpture or commodity, sometimes being self-contained and unrelated to the surroundings. Thus built environment is adorned with objects that stand out, and below tangled explanations of the authors one can find little connection to what really composes the framing space. On the other hand we face the lowest but the most dynamic process of shortsighted developments, driven mostly by commercial factors. This tendency results in quick and extensive use of resources, in building activities unsupported by deeper understanding of social patterns and their behaviors in urban environment, cultural or civilizational aspects. The most significant danger lies in ignoring the vision of the environment filled with multiplicated objects of that kind and in overpassing the question whether people will be able to adapt and perceive such space as comfortable, safe, marked by humane character.
The querelle between modern and traditional urban design has alimented in the past decades diverging phenomena such as the new urbanism, the so-called vernacular architecture and the landscape urbanism on one hand, and the extreme radical neo or ultra-modernist approaches on the other side, each establishing clearly a different and diverging position within the international debate. The urban morphology approach, as developed in time by the Italian school of Saverio Muratori and Gianfranco Caniggia and their followers, has developed a methodology for architectural and urban design, which is neither the radical reproposal of the ultra-modernist style, nor the nostalgic reference to vernacular forms. The Italian school of Urban Morphology proposes a methodology for urban and architectural design based on the reconstruction of the formation process of the built organism, the types, the aggregates, and the territorial cycles. Upon the full understanding of these multi scalar processes, it is then possible to develop the project as the last phase of an ongoing process. A last phase, conceived as contemporary on one hand, but not opposing itself to history on the other, deriving its vitality from the understanding of the formation process of building types and urban tissues so to be the continuation of the past into the future. The paper illustrates briefly the formation process of palaces and public squares through some well-known examples, and proposes a project that applied the same methodology in the design.
Architecture Beyond Construction
Neo-liberalism and the Architecture of the Post Professional Era
The last decade of urban space-making practices in Turkey has been dominated by a construction frenzy caused by the neoliberal alignment of capitalist market forces and urban governments. Not unlike the current global architectural scene, the effect of this situation toward professional architectural practice in Turkey is twofold: On the one hand, architecture and design in general are becoming booming professions as creative forces of the construction industry that forms the core of the national economy. The job opportunities and commissions for practicing architects are proliferating, and the clientele profile has been expanding with national-international investors as well as the central and local governments promoting large-scale urban development projects. On the other hand, the architectural practice is so immensely dominated by the neoliberal policies focused on "building as a means for economic growth" that there is virtually no room for a professional discourse encompassing disciplinary ethics charged with social agenda, informed by spatial intelligence, formulated with public participation, aiming for the greater good. This paper aims to discuss the current state of the architectural profession and the practicing architect as a spatial intellectual in the globalized world, focusing mainly on the İstanbul experience and reflecting on the possibility of an architectural practice beyond the constraints of the construction industry. In the course of the paper, firstly a brief account on the condition of normative/conventional urban space-making practices at the age of neoliberal urban politics is given through the example of İstanbul. Then, a reflection upon the capabilities and capacities of the architectural profession in terms of producing alternative spatial practices is delved upon. Lastly, concluding remarks underlining the necessity for an architectural practice beyond construction are introduced.