Opportunities for architects and urban designers

Opportunities of Architect and Urban Designer

Introduction

 

The opportunities which new mapping technologies afford the architect and the urban designer throughout architectural practices offers the capabilities in decomposing the existing architectural image to integrate the human interaction. Offering to the architect the possibility articulate the mechanics of living, adapting to the technological environment while conceptualizing and transferring the  the image of the nature to become the tool in organizing compositions and spaces in interior, exterior and urban design for further generations.

The technological environment has provided to the architect the tools in developing the architectural image by extending the image of architecture through various media and wired capabilities.

The new enhanced material capabilities afford the architect to better structure the realm of possibilities, providing more interaction between nature and the built form, a jungle matrix through the architectural image provided by the theories of Peter Eisenman, Antonio Saggio and Derick de Kerchove, which will provide the analysis for the materials with memory capacity.

Man has built spaces, interpreted after the natural form, transferring the graphical reproduction of the natural form into architectural form as described by the theories of David Gissen and the conceptual thought of John Tierney and Dan O’Sullivan.

Human interaction is essential for architect in developing spaces, such as the new mapping technologies would inter-connect the mechanical and the computational generating new sets of forms and surfaces articulated throughout dwellings and urban environments; structural thought provided by Patrick Schumacher and Brett Steele from Architectural Association London and related  dwelling case studies of Le Corbusier.

Another urban development is analysed by the University of Tokyo, and on which senses of the places become the realm of structural and functional understanding to bridge the tools for the architect to cultivate architecture’s other environments into integrated places, mapping and integrating the architecture’s environments into the whole building continuum.

 

 

Man and the technological environment

 

“We cultivate and theorize our technological environment today in strange and partial ways, without ever admitting to ourselves that this is what it is, an environment. ”  (Kwinter, Sanford 2007:18)

 Architecture is the product of our imagination, as Leon van Schaik (2008) has mentioned, ‘architecture is a product of mental space’, which brings together the world, to generate the connections in developing extensive environments, in which we live and share as a community as Furion Barzon (2003) has mentioned.

The mental space is the place where man engages into the journey through space. Dan O’Sullivan (1994) has mentioned, man would engage into its journey to constantly looking for points and signage to interact with, engaging in connected relations between nature and the built environment, engaging into matrix of possibilities as Peter Eisenman (2003) points out.

The journey offers the representation of the projected consciousness, in other terms the built reality, which is in fact a product of repetitive information packets interacting through the built environment into one physical environment as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) points out.

            “The architecture of intelligence is the architecture of connectivity. It is the architecture that brings together the three main spatial environments that we live in and with today : mind, world and networks. “ (Derrick de Kerchove 2001:7)

The architectural image developed by interacting connections within our mental space becomes the product in sensing the spatial environments, to become the main interaction into extending the boundary of the architectural image, as Peter Eisenman (2003) has mentioned.

The projected image becomes the main spatial environment in which we live, and which is transferring the mind, the world and the network into becoming the system of connection, as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) has mentioned.

The architecture of intelligence which engages into being the information package embedded with artificial networks, interpreted as infrastructure between physical and the virtual, as Peter Eisenman (2003) points out.

            “Connected architecture tackles the management of thresholds and infrastructures between first the physical and the virtual space, but ultimately also the thresholds  between mental and virtual spaces even as more and more designers are called upon to interpret new cognitives possibilities.” (Kerchove, de Derick 2001:18)

The projected image of architecture becomes the image of the intelligent architecture. It is consisting of information clusters which is connecting multiple instances of time between different thresholds, between mental and virtual as Derrick de Kerchove (2001) points out, between solid and fluid.

Mapping Options

FIG.1 Intelligent environment characteristics (Addington and Shcodek 2005)

 

The parameters of reasoning and evaluation as defined in Fig.1 reflect within our mental space producing the visual structure which is managing our view and our perception of the built environment through the surrounding space. The interaction between space and the perception of the build environment, is developing the sensorial synthesis, as Paul Adam (2007) has mentioned,  ‘the sensorial synthesis is  based and formed from patterns interacting impressions, sensations and ideas’.

The sensorial synthesis is the organizational mechanism which is developed not only to give us the sense of space, but also to place us inside, and outside the inhabited space, and in the atmosphere within our physical environment, as shown in Fig.1. It constitutes models for implemented awareness through the organizational mechanism.

            “The image of the building boundary as the demarcation between two different environments defined as single states – a homogeneous interior and an ambient exterior – could possibly be replaced by the idea of multiple energy environments  fluidly interacting with the moving body.” (Addington and Shcodek 2005:8)

The building boundary of the built environment as Addington and Shcodek (2005) points out is the demarcation between different homogeneous and ambient states of intersecting bodies through space. The interaction generated by the moving body through this particular environment would create multiple energy points, defined as environments which would fluidly interact with the organizational components of the system.

Leave a Reply