Vertical Vs Horizontal Living another direction?

For discussion of structural innovations ranging from 3D Honeycomb to genomic and self-generating formal systems. All welcome.

Postby P.C. » Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:35 am

Exchouse me --- is somthing like this what you discuss ?

Image

Such things will not come with bricks and timbers , it will only come with a new way to put things together, inly when you can form and shape in detail on a screen and have a direct link allowing the computer to calculate the building part and a N.C. controlled mashin to cut the frames in a new universal way , a way that allow a house to grow a system that give full freedom in designing and allow the standard P.C. to be the tool of that.
P.C.
millennium club
 
Posts: 2160
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 7:25 am
Location: Denmark

Postby lekizz » Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:10 am

Ah, so the labels 'horizontal' and 'vertical' actually refer to an attitude towards nature. Not necessarily upwards or sideways :)

Well, I refer back to my earlier contribution about Hermann Barges. Nature goes up as well as sideways. Therefore there is not a barrier to tall buildings acting in a more harmonious way with natural processes. They can grow alpine plants. They can vertically filter rainwater or utilise vertical air currents for ventilation. They can harness the wind or sun via turbines or solar panels.

I agree completely that there needs to be a better understanding of the whole process of city living. City dwellers are more divorced from food production, waste disposal, water collection etc. than the rural population. There is a tendency towards a selfish, indulgent individualism which is as much of the problem as our disconnection from nature. And suburban dwellers aspire to a detached property in a private garden with privatised transport, which is an untenable way for society to develop.

In that case, I think the problems are not just our lack of empathy with nature, but also social and economic ones.
lekizz
millennium club
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:22 am
Location: UK

Postby lekizz » Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:25 am

Exchouse me --- is somthing like this what you discuss ?


ANSWER = NO, you are in the wrong thread, mate
lekizz
millennium club
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:22 am
Location: UK

Postby BJR » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:04 pm

message removed
Last edited by BJR on Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BJR
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:05 pm

Postby mx2 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:25 pm

I designed my thesis loosely on this topic...I even entitled it "Vertical House(s)". Long story short, economics is what has propelled the highrise like a middle finger to nature and harmony. In fact I always start a discussion about "eco-friendly" architecture by pointing out that architecture is not eco-friendly at all! We supplant nature with a built thing. How is that eco-friendly? We can build in a LESS intrusive and damaging manner but unless we start living in trees and begin to hunt fna dgather our food again I predict we will continue to surface our planet with impervious materials...

But the core issue was in search of an alternative to both "vertical" and "horizontal" architecture. Diagonal and loopty-loop (spelling?) come to mind...(see blobitecture)...but they are more "schtick" then merit. I just think this issue is being over analyzed. The answer, in my humble opinion, is simply to continue to improve our designs and thus our built environments. In other words, both the horizontal and vertical cities have great positive aspects that need to be identified and exploited. For one, it's been an interesting phenomenon observing city after city reclaim their waterfronts....

mx2
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Postby mx2 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:27 pm

p.s. what the hell did PC post? WTF is that monstrocity? Tongue firmly in cheek...

mx2
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Postby lekizz » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:38 pm

In other words, both the horizontal and vertical cities have great positive aspects that need to be identified and exploited. For one, it's been an interesting phenomenon observing city after city reclaim their waterfronts....


Certainly in the example of my home city, they have 'reclaimed' the waterfront at great expense to the environment. We now have an architectural theme park of widely varying standard set in from of a stagnant, poisonous green lake full of posh yachts. Oxygen has to be pumped into the lake at great expense. A Site of Special Scientific Interest was destroyed during the construction!

I totally agree that economic priorities are a problem. But I remember at college reviewing the work of Ian McHarg. He was a prominent landscape architect who proposed new ways of calculating a cost to the environment of our activities. If the actual (rather than the financial) cost of city development was charged, maybe through taxation or other incentives, then maybe our cities would start to look different.
lekizz
millennium club
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:22 am
Location: UK

Postby mx2 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:15 pm

Ah yes, legislation through taxation...that's what spurned the great Mansard roof. I assume you know the story...?

In most cases, the waterfronts are remnants of old industries abondoned to decline. As of the past few decades, cities have been renovating these typically decadent zones and creating livable cities...in sharp contrast to the previous concrete jungles where chaos reigned and was touted as the urban style. But to "claim" natural environments at this point in time for urban development seems ludicrous. Eons ago we could have claimed ignorance but not anymore....now it's near criminal. Certainly not eco-friendly. :roll:

mx2
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Postby lekizz » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:55 pm

Hmmmm, let me guess... there was a building tax based on the number of storeys, so some clever bvgger disguised a storey in the roof?
lekizz
millennium club
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 9:22 am
Location: UK

Postby mx2 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:46 pm

Good guess...a gold star for you! To the head of the class...!! 8)

mx2
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: continuing the quest

Postby Lion » Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:12 am

giventofly wrote:I'm more looking for specific examples like Plan Voisin Paris or the Broad Acre scheme or the Bionic Tower, Buckminster Fuller and Yona Friedman's work.
Large scale urban regeneration schemes or New build thats openly address the issues of transport density politics(to an extent)the environment and scale.
Where architects designers artists theoreticians and planners have attempted to address the City as an entity that can be design or planned in a 3 dimensional sense.
Most of these schemes such like the Mile high or Plan voisin were never built but the ideas are still very relevant and incredibly influential. I have read many books on the subject but feel i am still missing obvious examples....


Image
http://ecosyn.us/ecocity/Proposal/proposal1.html

The city of the future hasn't been built yet.

In August 2002 there was the 5th ECOCITY Conference in Szechan, China. In August 2006 the 6th ECOCITY Conference will be held in Bangalore, India. The circle is closing. In February 2003 there was a post-conference rehash of the 5th ECOCITY Conference, where papers were posted online and authors made themselves available for followup questions over a series of sessions that went on through June.

I posted a website beginning in February and continually added ever since, which began with the premise of living entirely on your natural resources budget. Whatever sun, wind and rain fell within your property lines was yours to consume, AND NOTHING MORE.

Given those constraints as initial parameters I set out to prove that very affordable luxury housing and mixed-use integration was possible and feasible.

Since two papers had been presented by boosters of projects in Erlingen and Freiburg, Germany, I used those papers to present the differences in shadow studies which showed what rational designed buildings would do compared to irrational "green paintjobs" on same-old-same-old blocky buildings.

Image
http://www.ecosyn.us/ecocity/Palaces/Er ... index.html

Image
http://www.ecosyn.us/ecocity/Palaces/Sh ... index.html

Image
http://www.ecosyn.us/ecocity/Palaces/Blocky/index.html

The first rule of design is good neighborliness -- you can't steal your neighbor's solar access and nobody can steal yours. That puts a limit on the maximum height and the general outline of the building form.

The shadow studies were conclusive.

Image
This one block building is roughly the floorspace and size of a PALACES For The People building.

Here is a building by Sim Van der Ryn, the Gregory Bateson State Office Building in Sacramento, California, completed in 1980. We are more than two decades later and people still are making energy inefficient buildings that can't match the energy-consumption, daylight, natural ventilation, and solar-assisted heating-cooling performance of this one.

Image
The interior Atrium means the building is roughly a square donut shape with the atrium as the hole in the middle for daylighting interior of building. This square donut shape also emulates the San Francisco architecture where it is common to have four story streewalls of connected "townhouse style" buildings with an "atrium courtyard" in the block center.

Image
San Franciso blocks seen from aerial view
http://www.ecosyn.us/ecocity/Palaces/City/index.html

The computed floorspace under roof is equal to PALACES, but the 4 story blocky construction has detrimental environmental effects as shown in the shadow studies. The 4 story buildings also appear to be bigger from sidewalk views than the taller 6 story PALACE.

Image

Given that the optimal shape has sloped shoulders and setbacks, and that 6 stories is all you can have without robbing your neighbor of their solar access, then the best architecture is decided by physics, not brute force taking neighbor's solar power at the point of a gun because you have zoning laws and demented politicians giving you permission and have police enforcing these bad laws.

Image
http://ecosyn.us/1/ACROS_Fukuoka/ACROS_Fukuoka.html

Once one accepts that the natural size for city buildings is one block, then the whole panoply of other issues is the main concern of architecture for cities.

DAYLIGHTING:

Image
Lightwell NRDC headquarters.

Image
Gaudi lightwell

Image
Palace of Justice Lightwell

Image
Mall Atrium and indoor street

Image
Atrium lobby

Image
Terrace

Image
Terraces

Image
Terraces.

PALACES has up to 96% of the lot available as terrraces for outdoor patios, blue-sky, fresh air space, secure places for children to play without worrying about pedophiles; semi-private, private or common spaces for residents to enjoy.

Image

View a proposed cluster development of eight buildings around a central park as an Ecovilliage, or see an entire city of the size of Berkeley California inside of 4 square miles without sacricicing a single thing or lowering anybody's standard of living...

http://www.ecosyn.us/Ecovillage/
Image
Image

Image
http://ecosyn.us/ecocity/Palaces/New_Ci ... ocity.html

Hypothetically the entire population of the United States could happily reside in less than half of the State of Connecticut, leaving the entire rest of America empty except for agriculture. There is no "NEED" to go upwards any time soon, and it's time rational architecture had equal voice to vanity architecture.
Lion
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:52 am

just stumbled upon this again

Postby giventofly » Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:03 am

thank you all for your comments. That last project seems fascinating and the notion that one could house the entire population of the US in one state is incredible. reminds me of Broad Acre a little, the fear however is that a scheme like this would result in the sterile mess of Milton Keynes in London.
I think in the end of that paper i concluded that the modern city of ethically/environmentally aware consumers are beginning to sway the balance between the hyper consumerist notions of the vertical city and the ecologically aware horizontal city the change there is a slowly growing change in consciousness. However as ever i called for further research to be done into the de-humanising of cities so as not to let this disconnection continuing continue and simply planting trees in a city centre isn't enough. there is a third direction but it is not found solely in form but in a change in societies belief and social structure as well media.

Its easy to say this now sitting in England, where green issues in the media have shot to the top of the political agenda if you are to believe all this hype, we can begin to be optimistic. However be careful green issues are now being used to erode civil liberties. misinformation could potentially do as much damage as over-information .
giventofly
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:58 pm

The Cities of the Future

Postby usarender » Sun Sep 30, 2007 3:55 pm

This discussion is interesting. What one needs to realize, when planning the cities of the future, is that the dictates of new technology and new life styles will also determine the new direction of cities.

This will be possible by de-centralized production facilities, offices, and urban centers. Further, it will be possible by new mass transportation systems, and by new ways to organize society based on an impending new reality of technological development.

This new reality will bring about a new way to organize our cities, as man no longer becomes dependent solely on the phenomenon of urban sprawl to conduct business, socialize, travel and live on planet earth. This will allow for the planning of the new cities of the future, based on a changing society and new possibilities brought on by these and other new technological developments. It will allow for cities to be distributed along new transportation routes, new types vertical cities, new ways of going to work, traveling and meeting one's basic needs, that will result in essence that cities expand vertically, without a loss of quality of life on planet earth.

With the changing technology, they will be able to expand horizontally as well, but in a more sensible manner. The new cities will need be sustainable, ecologically friendly and be more distributed along a larger geographical area. This will allow them to respect existing geography without completely filling up every square inch with concrete, as modern cities currently do. The materials and methods of construction of the present will be substituted for new lighter technologies and materials that will allow the cities to expand in various dimensions, without a need for the insane current urban sprawl and massive land use, as seen all over the globe currently.
usarender
millennium club
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:22 am
Location: San Diego, Ca

A PiCk Quick

Postby usarender » Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:46 pm

PC has been around here for 10 years using his pc and iq, and there are still those who do not understand the image pc posted ? It is an integral part of his structural system!

A P I Ck Q uick

And The Topic

"SPACE: DWELLING AND BEING (part 1)"

http://www.designcommunity.com/forums/v ... hp?t=15851

Contains a very interesting exposition on SPACE in architecture and also on our notions of "in front of", "behind", linearity in architecture and the idea of 3d space, vertical horizontal space.
usarender
millennium club
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:22 am
Location: San Diego, Ca

The Lion Palaces Approach

Postby usarender » Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:44 pm

Now, a topic of concern to all -->>

Uncle sam and private enterprise is spying on you.

Soon all you do will be under their control -->>
(Posted on the news approximately ONE MONTH before we posted our main thread on this site design community -->>

http://www.theregister.com/2007/06/23/sentient_worlds/

"The DOD is developing a parallel to Planet Earth, with billions of individual "nodes" to reflect every man, woman, and child this side of the dividing line between reality and AR."


"Called the Sentient World Simulation (SWS), it will be a "synthetic mirror of the real world with automated continuous calibration with respect to current real-world information", according to a concept paper for the project."

http://www.simulexinc.com/products/case_studies/

"SWS also replicates financial institutions, utilities, media outlets, and street corner shops. By applying theories of economics and human psychology, its developers believe they can predict how individuals and mobs will respond to various stressors.


Uncle sam claims they are doing tests on statistical analysis, for strategic planning, for scenarios of the future, geographic analysis and the like, but the true goal is ultimate global integration and control under a government controlled system. They will know everything about who you are, where you are and what you do. If we do not make this effort to bring this into the public domain and universal quickly, the result will be dire for all.

The answer, Project Liquid Universe.

Why allow the uncle sam, the DOD, private interest groups, and private companies spy on everything you do, from your personal, to your business, to your corporate life ? If is high time we globally unite in this project, and remove this data from private or government interest groups and keep it where it belongs - in the free public domain !

Now there are those who think this does not concern us as architects and designers ? It is high time we join forces and create the future together, including the architecture of the future.

This is all what project Liquid Universe is about and has been about since the beginning. We seek to create this exact same type DOD SWS system and the various Simulex Case study types projects within the PUBLIC DOMAIN, where they should be. Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, unite with us! Why allow one government and one company to set the stage for the future? It is high time we bring this into the public domain, where it belongs.

Together, as one voice, we need to request our politicians and leaders to open this information and these projects to public access! Why hand these projects over to one single company, to monopolize, control this information and thus monopolize the future of humanity? Whether you agree or not, either we do this together, or government and single companies will do it, and it will be too late for us to join efforts!

The government is already doing this, and some on this forum call us all sci fy fantasy, illusions? It is high time we as architects and designers WAKE UP, and realize urgently what is going on around us! Either we design our own alternate reality and re-shape the future together, or the government will do it for us, and it will be too late to go back!

If this does not concern us as leading architects, as environmental designers, as those who lead and shape the reality around us, then who does it concern? If we do not act and do something about this, who will?

This is a new government project and there is still time for us to unite and bring this into the public realm, before it is too late!

The time is here and now.

New World Economics: Simulations Controlling Reality in 2007

http://plausiblefutures.wordpress.com/

"This is not particularly science fiction. I’ve discussed aspects of the surveillance state before, but I am far from an expert and the field is vast and mostly secretive. I would point you towards recent articles at Global Research and Cryptogon for more knowledgeable takes on the surveillance enclosure. The peeks we do get are significant, such as the Sentient World Simulator that DARPA and Simulex have been working on, which is a fully-functional model of planet Earth, all it’s nations, and their people. The system is based off an earlier technology called Synthetic Environments for Analysis and Simulation (SEAS), which markets this super-computer power to the corporate world."

There is much information out there of concern to all regarding privacy issues. Most are not taking it seriously.
Last edited by usarender on Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
usarender
millennium club
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:22 am
Location: San Diego, Ca

PreviousNext

Return to New Structure Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

cron

User Control Panel

Login

Who is online

In this forum zone there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 508 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:21 am

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest
DesignCommunity   ·   ArchitectureWeek   ·   Great Buildings   ·   Archiplanet   ·   Books   ·   Blogs   ·   Search
Special thanks to our sustaining subscribers Building Design UK, Building Design News UK, and Building Design Tenders UK.