|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:25 pm Post subject: Regarding the Palaces Concept |
    |
|
It is not personal, no offense, but I wish to make a few comments on the Palaces arrangements.
THE INNER CONFINES
1. The palaces arrangement, as proposed by Lion is interesting. However, concerns grow with how the inner confines, out of the reach of such terraces would be treated in terms of windows. We would be forced to use an abundance of light wells, but not actual windows to the exterior in many of the interior spaces. This creates a shopping center type effect, on the majority of interior spaces, except those that are lucky to be on the exterior perimeter of the stepped pyramids. By using interior light wells, we are bringing back light into the interiors, but from on high. Many people would rather look out a window with some type of view, rather then look into a public space.
PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE SPACES
2. Further, we are resolving public spaces, but allowing more sunshine but in effect are obstructing direct winter sunlight from coming into the interiors, as would occur in normal windows. Thus, it is a trade off. We are taking away from the built interior environment and giving it back to public spaces.
THE BLOCK SYSTEM
3. Also, it assumes cities will continue to be organized in the same tired old way of "block", a notion which goes back to thousands of years in essence. Further, it adopts a "palace" mentality similar to the "zigurates" or "mastabas" of ancient times, which many could see as an outdated shape to use for modern buildings. The terracing on the exterior is truly nice, and affords much space for exterior gardens, recreational areas and plenty of sunshine/views and opportunities to explore solar energy. The exposition truly brings up some interesting points with respect to highly dense urban areas and how to design efficient conglomerates of spaces that can house great quantities of people.
STRUCTURAL ISSUES
4. If we brake the palaces into super imposed squares, we have structural issues to consider. Cantilevers may not be an issue on the interior, but they become an issue on the exterior, as well as the bridging of the stacked structures, earthquake resistance and similar issues.
And the structural issues need clarification. Simply using the latest technology of high strength materials brings up concerns of their economic application. If these can be, so to speak, manufactured in everyones back yard, with simple construction store type materials remains to be seen.
FLOODING OF CITIES AS DONE IN ANCIENT EGYPT AS A SOLUTION?
5. If we assume cities will be built on flat areas that can be flooded, this creates all types of issues to deal with.
A PERFECT SYSTEM FOR THE CITIES OF THE FUTURE?
6. Creating a perfect system in every way also is difficult to do, as eventually it rarely is built as city planners envision.
PREDICATE STRUCTURES BASED ON HYDROGEN?
7. As shown, the structures of the future also cannot be predicated on a technology that has not become mainstream as well, such as hydrogen fuel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:12 pm Post subject: Further Considerations on PALACES arrangement |
|
|
BETTER THEN OTHER STRUCTURES ?
8. If this system is better then other structural systems, more easy to produce, manufacture, cut, assemble, then why is the issue of structure still not clear and changing?
THE IMPORTANCE OF BUILDING SECTIONS
9. Also, as some have suggested, truly building sections are important for architects to visualize these palaces. Without such sections, the building becomes somewhat vague. Now, one can state the amount of information does not allow time to produce such detailed architectural drawings, and this can be understood. But some point along the way it will be important, for us to truly understand these structures.
NICE FOR A MARKETING CAMPAIGN, BUT MORE?
10. Further denoting the structures Palaces may be nice for a marketing campaign, but in what way are these truly palaces? What in essence makes them palaces? Can the concept of living in a palace be truly culturally correct for all countries in the world today? Truly, for Arab or Eastern cultures it makes sense. But in the Western world, many will associate this with kings and living back in the ancient times. Today we think of more modern terms or vocabulary to refer to the most modern habitable buildings to live in. The term Palaces may not be culturally correct for every culture today.
THE EXTERIOR SKIN
11. The issue of the exterior skin is important as well, as the cost issues in using large quantities of pv glass in the exteriors brings up economic issues.
URBAN VARIETY AND INDIVIDUAL EXPRESSION
12. Then are issues of urban variety and individual expression. If we have society essentially as a homogeneous grid of equal blocks of buildings, we are not allowing for variety and multiplicity of form, as needed in passive systems to allow the buildings to adjust and respond to their environment, rather then creating an artificial environment in a desert and then figuring out how to make it work and not be flooded out.
Issues also of people distinguishing between buildings, landmarks, important cultural points of reference, and cities of multi spectrum of architectural features and variety ends up being homogenized into a steady rhythm of repetitive structures, which in essence is not allowing for complete freedom in our architecture. Rather, it is suggesting our cities will be completely guided all along the way by a master system that will be followed in every detail, which is rarely the case, as stated.
Last edited by usarender on Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:34 pm Post subject: A few more considerations |
|
|
HONEYCOMB HOUSING SYSTEMS
In the forum on residential design, there is an interesting post on honey comb housing as an alternative. I believe that topic brings up many issues relevant to modern cities that need to be dealt with, if we are to create successful cities for the future. It seems that forum and topic has been one of the most overlooked, in favor of more technical topics.
TECHNICAL TOPICS REALLLY GETTING THE MOST VISITORS?
The technical topics, such as the one on becoming energy free, may seem truly technical, but many posts there also are full of mistakes, are mis statements of technical issues and fact and show incongruent ideas and architectural thought. Simple issues of long standing ideas of passive solar energy are not understood, are revised in a tired way, lacking decent illustrations, and show a complete lack of understanding of passive solar issues, particularly in the thinking on trying to adapt stock plans to passive solar systems. So how can these topics in any way be considered truly the greatest on these forums, and attracting the most visitors? Simply because they are full of technical information? Yes, technical information truly few architects here are taking seriously and truly discussing in a consistent, informed and objective way.
PASSIVE SOLAR DESIGN IN LARGE SYSTEMS
In the palaces arrangement, for example, many traditional passive solar system ideas are used, with some interesting new ideas in this regard. It is difficult, moreover, to apply every single means of passive solar design in such large system. Many techniques we can apply to smaller scale residential housing become an intricate game of trade offs in these larger systems.
Thus, the design of large public spaces, and applying passive solar techniques in an efficient way is not easy. Making our buildings truly ecologically friendly is also determined by cultural views. To some, this has nothing to do with ecological architecture, to simply apply the latest of green technology. There is much debate in this respect. What we consider green technology today will be considered not so green in the near future.
These are just a few issues.
More to follow soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject: Skyscraper Typology:: Problems? |
|
|
In this discussion of vertical versus horizontal living, the problems related to sky-scrapers is an interesting and related thread -->>
Skyscraper Typology:: problems? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:34 am Post subject: The New Vertical City |
|
|
The New Vertical City
The Gateway to the Sky.
The New Global Pyramid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:45 pm Post subject: The Burj Dubai |
|
|
Burj Dubai
| Quote: |
The Burj Dubai is a supertall skyscraper currently under construction in the "New Downtown" of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. When it is completed in late 2008, it will be the tallest man-made structure in the world. Scheduled for occupancy in 2009, the building is part of a 2 km² (1.54 mi²) development called the 'Burj Downtown' and is located at the "First Interchange" (aka "Defence roundabout") along Sheikh Zayed Road at Doha Street. The building was designed by Adrian Smith before he left Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP (SOM) of Chicago to start his own independent practice, Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture in October 2006.[3] SOM continues to lead the architectural, structural engineering and mechanical engineering of the Burj Dubai. The total budget for this project is about $4 billion US dollars. |
There is a video there on this page also.
When the Global Pyramid is built, it will be more then 140 times taller then the tallest sky-scraper in existence, including the Burj Dubai. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
