Friday, February 13, 2015

Land Planning in Old... "New France"

An interesting approach to land planning that was once exercised in French colonial holdings. The "Seigneurial System" or "Ribbon Farms" placed an emphasis on ensuring equitable access to roadways, waterways, and public utility access.


The Hidden Link Between Medieval Land Parceling and Modern American Psychology

  • BY TIM DE CHANT  
  •    
  • 3:00 PM  |  
  •  
  • PERMALINK

image: Google Maps satellite via Tim De Chant

The flight from Boston to Chicago isn’t the most scenic, but if you’re lucky enough to snag a window seat – no mean feat these days – study the patchwork landscape with a discerning eye. About 40 minutes into the flight, you’ll notice something a bit peculiar (at least for North America): Instead of the usual tableau of square or rectangular farmsteads, you’ll see ribbons of agronomy.

These ribbon layouts are a ghost of geography: a relic from when France parceled land in Canada back in the 1600s. What’s most intriguing to me, though, is how ribbon farms – or rather the lack thereof in much of the United States – shaped attitudes toward modern transportation, and continue to shape our psychology as a nation today.

Because with ribbon farms, the expectation is that transportation is king.


By starting with the transportation network and then building out from there, ribbon farms come with certain efficiencies. Part of their elegance is how easy it is to transport goods from them. Within a ribbon farm, moving around is a bit more difficult – the farthest part is much farther away from the house and barn than the most distant part of a square farm. Butbetween farms and markets, ribbon farms are superior. Roads running past ribbon farms can serve more addresses over the same distance; neighbors are a short walk away; cities and crossroads closer than you’d expect.

The transportation-centric layout of ribbon farms in North America traces its roots back to medieval times. When France was trying to stabilize its colonial foothold in the New World back in the 17th century, Cardinal Richelieu (an adviser to the king and powerhouse in French politics) hatched a plan. To encourage more intensive settlement, he parceled the land similarly to the way it was divided in France: in long, thin strips oriented perpendicularly to a transportation route – which in Nouvelle France was primarily the St. Lawrence River.

Much of arable North America, however, was not allocated in ribbon farms. The Public Land Survey System carved up large portions of the United States into one square mile sections, each of which were subdivided to create farms and aggregated to form townships. Canada adopted a similar system, the Dominion Land Survey, for its prairie states.

So when the U.S. started with square farms, the process and the results were theexact opposite from ribbon farms: We plotted the farms first and then pondered the logistics. It’s therefore no surprise that Americans feel transportation should come to us instead of the other way around. We pick a place to live and then figure out how to get where we need to go. If no way exists, we build it: roads, arterials, highways, interstates … and so on.
WE PICK A PLACE TO LIVE AND THEN FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET WHERE WE NEED TO GO. IF NO WAY EXISTS, WE BUILD IT…. IT’S THE AMERICAN WAY.
And it’s this quirk of geography – the shape of a typical American farm – that I believe influenced the development of the entire nation.
Here’s how: Roads snaked out to farms where they were needed, which is to say nearly everywhere. Farmsteads, and later suburban houses, were more or less evenly distributed across the landscape rather than concentrated alongside existing roadsides. In regions dominated by ribbon farms, transportation was clearly the foundation. But in much of the rest of North America, parcels were delineated first; transportation routes followed.
The fact that the farm, not the transportation, came first is important. It was a geographic case of the tail wagging the dog.
Flexible and distributed transportation networks are really the only solution compatible with this way of thinking. Trains, which rely on a strong central network, never had a chance. We were destined for the automobile all the way back in 1787, when we first decided to carve up the countryside into tidy squares.
Town, section, range. Pick your plot, worry about the details later. It’s the American way, and it’s driven the psychology of an entire nation.
Editor’s Note: An earlier, unedited version of this article appeared on the author’s blog
Editor: Sonal Chokshi @smc90

Friday, February 6, 2015

A Different Kind of Architecture

MIT Invents A Shapeshifting Display You Can Reach Through And Touch


THE TANGIBLE MEDIA GROUP AT MIT'S MEDIA LAB HAS UNVEILED A FUTURISTIC DISPLAY MADE OF ATOMS, NOT PIXELS.

We live in an age of touch-screen interfaces, but what will the UIs of the future look like? Will they continue to be made up of ghostly pixels, or will they be made of atoms that you can reach out and touch?


At the MIT Media Lab, the Tangible Media Groupbelieves the future of computing is tactile. Unveiled today, the inFORM is MIT's new scrying pool for imagining the interfaces of tomorrow. Almost like a table of living clay, the inFORM is a surface that three-dimensionally changes shape, allowing users to not only interact with digital content in meatspace, but even hold hands with a person hundreds of miles away. And that's only the beginning.



To put it in the simplest terms, the inFORM is a self-aware computer monitor that doesn't just display light, but shape as well. Remotely, two people Skyping could physically interact by playing catch, for example, or manipulating an object together, or even slapping high five from across the planet. Another use is to physically manipulate purely digital objects. A 3-D model, for example, can be brought to life with the inFORM, and then manipulated with your hands to adjust, tweak, or even radically transform the digital blueprint.



But what really interests the Tangible Media Group is the transformable UIs of the future. As the world increasingly embraces touch screens, the pullable knobs, twisting dials, and pushable buttons that defined the interfaces of the past have become digital ghosts. The tactile is gone and the Tangible Media Group sees that as a huge problem.

"Right now, the things designers can create with graphics are more powerful and flexible than in hardware," Leithinger tells Co.Design. "The result is our gadgets have been consumed by the screen and become indistinguishable black rectangles with barely any physical controls. That's why BlackBerry is dying."


In other words, our devices have been designed to simulateaffordances—the quality which allows an object to perform a function, such as a handle, a dial or a wheel—but not actually have them. Follmer says that's not the way it's supposed to be. "As humans, we have evolved to interact physically with our environments, but in the 21st century, we're missing out on all of this tactile sensation that is meant to guide us, limit us, and make us feel more connected," he says. "In the transition to purely digital interfaces, something profound has been lost."


The solution is programmable matter, and the inFORM is one possible interpretation of an interface that can transform itself to physically be whatever it needs to be. It's an interesting (and literal) analogue toskeuomorphism: while in the touch-screen age we have started rejecting interfaces that ape the look of real world affordances as "tacky" in favor of more pure digital UIs, the guys at the Tangible Media Group believe that interface of the future won't be skeuomorphic. They'll be supermorphic, growing the affordances they need on the fly.

Although the inFORM is primarily a sandbox for MIT to experiment with the tactile interfaces to come, it would be wrong to dismiss this project as mere spitballing. "We like to think of ourselves as imagining the futures, plural," Follmer says. "The inFORM is a look at one of them." But while the actual consumer implementation may very well differ, but both Follmer and Leithinger agree that tangible interfaces are coming.


"Ten years ago, we had people at Media Lab working on gestural interactions, and now they're everywhere, from the Microsoft Kinect to the Nintendo Wiimote," says Follmer. "Whatever it ends up looking like, the UI of the future won't be made of just pixels, but time and form as well. And that future is only five or ten years away. It's time for designers to start thinking about what that means now."

For more information see link below:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3021522/innovation-by-design/mit-invents-a-shapeshifting-display-you-can-reach-through-and-touch




Friday, January 16, 2015

Bridged Living Space



© Kei Sugino
 

Structural Consultants: Seiji Kimura, Nathumi Kondou/ Kimura Structural Engineers
General Constructors: Takayoshi Seko, Terayama Brothers / Arai Construction
Landscape Gardener: Hidemasa Takada/ Souzouen
Site Area: 359.53 sq m
Total Floor Area: 141.82 sq m
© Kei Sugino

From the architect. The two dwellings are connected by a “bridged” living space, providing continuity of the outdoor space.
Floor Plan
Located in a quiet space near a local primary school, the concept for this dwelling started with a dual yard layout, the front for guest parking and an aesthetically prioritised garden at the rear. To effectively use the large amount of outdoor space, we divided the land into two areas, a western garden facing the road and a southern garden which has good sun coverage. The bridged living space serves as a suspended partition between both areas, while also functioning as a carport.
© Kei Sugino
Connecting both gardens allows for optimal utilisation, such as camping in the backyard while using the bridged living space as a roof for a barbeque, or accommodating the cards of guests.
Floor Plan
We designed the interior according to the wishes of the occupants, who are both engaged professionally and wanted a design which minimised housework. As a result, the house features a central stair room, in which all rooms are easily accessible and results in the block based façade. The design also facilitates sun access to every room and effective ventilation. Each room also has visual access to the garden, allowing the occupants to feel the changes of each season.
Article from: http://www.archdaily.com/587924/bridged-living-space-tt-architects/

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Fixing the Kennedy Center's Physical Isolation

TGIF to the viewers!


For this week’s YEOW, we’d like to share with you a recent Greater Greater Washington Post by Neil Flanagan about Fixing the Kennedy Center's Physical Isolation. It's an interesting article that explores elements import to architects, landscape architects, urban designers, and planners.  Enjoy!
The blog post is copied below:
"The Kennedy Center is getting a great addition, but the design throws a spotlight on the institution's physical isolation from the rest of the city.
Proposal seen from the Roosevelt Bridge. Image by the Kennedy Center/Steven Holl Architects.
  The new 60,000-square foot building will include a large base tucked under an intensivegreen roof and three house-sized pavilions made of glass and ultra-white concrete. Two pavilions would sit on land, while the third would literally float in the Potomac.
The new design cuts the Kennedy Center off from the rest of the city
If I were to pick a word to describe the project, it'd be "islands." To me, the project creates a string of beautiful islands near the Kennedy Center.
Unfortunately, my word choice is also an appropriate metaphor for the Center's relationship with DC's fabric.
In J. G. Ballard's novel Concrete Island, an architect crashes on a London highway, stranding himself alone on a median. Penned in by speeding traffic, he can't leave. Unable to get anyone's attention, he watches as the city hum along without him. He ends up realizing he can't get out and makes do with his tiny domain.
Ballard's story is satire, but it's not that far from what has happened at the Kennedy Center.
On one side of the building, the Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway's flow keeps the Potomac in sight but out of reach. On the other, a vast highway trench stands between the Center, downtown, and the national memorials. A visitor could spend an evening at the Kennedy Center and come away feeling more tied to Rosslyn than the District.
A beautiful plan proves too expensive
When Congress created the Kennedy Center, federal leaders had a bold vision todisperse the city and rebuild it around a series of highways. The I-66 trench is one of the few parts of that project that ever got built, a small piece of the inner beltway.
Even before the Kennedy Center opened in 1971, writers were fighting for a less dislocated site. The New York Times architecture critic, Ada Louise Huxtable, went after the Center's car-dependent design in a 1965 column. After its construction, proposals to make a connection other than an off-ramp came from every direction for years.
The closest DC has come to bridging the gap between the arts center and downtown came in a 2003 plan designed by Rafael Viñoly. It proposed extending E Street out to a monumental plaza on a deck, with I-66 below. Buildings on each side of the connection would have served two of the Center's most cramped activities: arts education and rehearsal.
But decks over transportation infrastructure are hugely expensive, even for the modest buildings proposed. The plan required $400M in federal funding to reconstruct the intersection, and it would cover only a fraction of the I-66 spaghetti. After the Iraq War,the money dried up and the Kennedy Center decided to make do.
The two land pavilions frame the Lincoln Memorial, but how do you get there? Image by the Kennedy Center/Steven Holl Architects.
A more pragmatic design
In 2012, the Center asked New York architect Steven Holl to design a scheme that would at least fulfill its needs for practice facilities, multipurpose rooms, bus parking, and offices. Atop the building, a new park would pull do double-duty as an amphitheater for free simulcasts of performances inside. In general, the spaces support the more diversecultural offerings that have become the norm for arts institutions since the 1960s.
Plan of the proposed design, oriented so the top part of the map is east. Image from the Kennedy Center.
To connect the Center to the river, a bridge would cross the parkway to the floating pavilion, which would house a cafe and an informal event space. Pedestrians could walk from the Kennedy Center to the trail below, while people walking by could stop in for a show. It's not the grand steps Viñoly's plan imagined, but adding activity to a relatively isolated stretch of the trail might actually be better than building a big bridge that suffocates the trail below.
I think the new building's design would quickly earn it a place among DC's great landmarks. Holl's architecture focuses visitors' attention onto experiences of aspects of the physical world, particularly the ground, sky, water and light. For years, his designs have toyed with how they sit on the ground and how spending time in a particular place changes the one's perception of it. The floating pavilion, with views subject to the tide as much as sunlight, will be a world-class extension of Holl's history.
Model of the main "Glissando" pavilion interior. Image from the Kennedy Center.
It's a good project, and it's great that it doesn't get in the way of bigger plans.
An institution can only be as urban as its site.
At the National Capital Planning Commission's December meeting, members criticized the addition for only making a visual connection and nothing more. "It does nothing to tell you that there's an entire city on the other side of that gap," DC's acting director of planning, Ellen McCarthy, said bluntly.
Mina Wright of the US General Services Administration went further, calling the proposalan "opportunity lost to fix some ill-conceived traffic patterns, which will be fixed one day." She brought up her agency's ongoing redesign of the Potomac Hill complex which sits directly across I-66 from the Kennedy Center. To her, the design means giving up on a grander vision and limiting what the GSA can do with its site.
I-66 interchange dwarfs DC's biggest buildings and cultural centers. Image from Bing with edits by the author.
But maybe it's wrong to expect the Kennedy Center to put forth a grand vision for the site. The Viñoly plan offered yet another grand plaza, with swooping roads enabled by even more grade separation. It only solved connectivity issues that were within the Kennedy Center complex; it didn't provide ways for the Kennedy Center to be one point in a richer fabric.
Relying on a prestige project to patch up basic infrastructure, whether it's an arts institution or the Olympics, places a lot of trust in an organization that has narrow goals. The design process would never be as inclusive as it could be if it focused on restoring a lost neighborhood.
Image of the 2009 Framework Plan by CFA/NCPC.
Repairing the fabric is already the long-term goal, set by NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts in 2010. The problem is that their plan still assumed a massive deck over a sprawling highway even though the exorbitant costs of a smaller deck sank the last project.
The highway was the problem in 1958, it was the problem in 1971, and it's still the problem. The solution is to replace it with surface streets.
Freeway removal is not the radical idea it was in 2003. There are multiple examples of traffic dissipating into the grid at speeds safer for everyone. That's particularly true if transit substitutes capacity is replaced in a plan like Metro Forward, which would ease Virginia's capacity crunch.
A city-led infill project is the most promising way to put the Kennedy Center back into Washington. There's more potential in the site than just a grand entry. It would give DC a much richer public realm in a neighborhood trying to break out of its beige boxes. The proposed design fits well into a future that corrects the mistakes that got the Kennedy Center stuck on a freeway island."
Holl's watercolor suggests a future bridge across the highway. Can't we do better? Image by the Kennedy Center.
The original blog post is found here: http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/25086/the-kennedy-center-is-isolated-from-the-rest-of-dc-but-it-cant-fix-the-problem-by-itself/

A link to the NCPC Monumental Core Framework Plan, which includes this area, is found here: http://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main(T2)/Publications(Tr2)/Publications(Tr3)/CompleteCatalogue.html?ccpage=6