On the 14th of December '01 the session at
the SAWCHU building was attended by 15 people.
At our previous meeting we decided to
make 'the street' and 'spaces between buildings' the theme of
this week's session. Some different papers in this regard were
presented from city planning literature relating to the
following questions from various angles:
1) Simultaneous Movement systems (all
kinds of movement within a city) are based on:
a) relationship between mass and space
b) continuity of experience
c) simultaneous continuities.
The first step is to respond to space as a
basic element in itself. Space and movement are interconnected.
Movement through space creates a continuity of experience
derived from the spaces through which the movement occurs. The
movement system is a dominant organising force in architectural
design.
2) 'Closure' of sections of a street is
effected by some irregularity and asymmetry of layout whereby
the source and goal of the path is not automatically revealed to
the eye as one moves through the city. The street in this sense
is a series of recognisable visual statements, each one
effectively and sometimes surprisingly linked to the other. This
brings about a progressive unfolding of the city in both an
anticipating and unpredictable manner. And as the progression
unfolds towards the main center it draws nearer to a climax of
the experience.
3) The Modern movement in the 1920s
introduced a separation of the mass of structure from the land.
Buildings were designed independent of each other and extended
in a rigid geometrical pattern over the landscape. This led to a
concentration on the buildings as separated from the land and
total design principles. In this context the street and the
value of the spaces between buildings as active and living areas
ceased to be relevant. All emphasis was focused on individual
architectural qualities independent of the environment.
For more than half a century urban planning has suffered the
consequences of this approach. It has resulted in monotonous
'new towns' and suburbs, and since the very idea was to plan for
the use of individual motor vehicles it necessitated an
explosive increase of traffic.
4) Our perception and understanding of the
composition of built mass and open spaces depend on our
comprehension of them as not being opposite elements. Together
they form an inseparable reality. For that one needs to regard
space as an equal figure to mass in the urban fabric.
5) Pedestrian areas in 'spaces between
buildings' depend for their vitality on the near vicinity of
diverse uses (residences, work, services, social and cultural
activities). But without effective public transport to prevent
congestion of traffic and parking places in the neighborhood the
pedestrian areas somehow defeat their own purpose.
At the end of the session slides were
shown from Venice and Weimar, illustrating different street
scenarios.
