In conversations with Vince today we
were discussing successful adaptive reuse projects and how the new
content draws on the existing context to inform the design. See RDH's
Gladstone Library and Galt Post Office.
And I was asked how we can respond to
context without having a physical artifact to draw on. An adaptive
reuse of place, not of building.
So when you do an addition to a
heritage building, you draw on visible or implied themes.
So in keeping with this, a resolved
first strategy would be to identify and respond to common themes
of place (past, present, and future).
So for the area of Bayview Village we
have these two very distinct waves of development
- 1950s: initial development in response to highway 401 (primarily North of Sheppard)
- Last 15 years: high rise development in response to the Sheppard Subway line. (South of Sheppard)Concord Place Condo development directly South-East of my site.
Both are a sort of rapid “sprawl” –
one horizontal and one vertical.
And both waves have common themes
- optimism
- enthusiasm
- luxury/affluence
- promise
- park-like setting
- open and airy
- response to infrastructure
In terms of demographics, there doesn't seem to be a huge disconnect between the residents of the older
established neighbourhood North of Sheppard, and the new high rise
community South of Sheppard. Many of the residents of the houses
could be long-time owners, but not necessarily.
The new condos and townhouses are
certainly not cheap, but still cheaper than the large houses. The new
condo owners are generally younger. If anything the high-rises have
diversified the neighbourhood in terms of age, income, and culture. A
lot the new residents of this area (for both land-use conditions) are
recent immigrants, but immigrants with money. They are attracted to
the promise of this area, and feel that it is a good investment.
So these seemingly disimilar
neighbourhood conditions can be brought together through a shared
meaning of place, defined by this new library.
I've been thinking a lot about what is
positive about suburban conditions. And I think the thing that gets
me most is the sheer optismism
that inspired them. This idea that this was the way of the future and
that everyone deserved their own home, with lots of space and nature
around them. I see a similar sort of blind optimism with the new
condo developments. We have this huge residential boom where more
people can own property and have all these amenities at their feet.
It actually is marketed very similarly; “you too can own your own
home!”
There is a song by Arcade Fire on their
album the Suburbs (which is all relevent and amazing by the way), but
the one I'm talking about is called Sprawl II. It captures that unbridled optimism of the mid century suburbs, and
then a search for identity after it's prime. “Dead
shopping malls rise like mountains beyond mountains. And there's no
end in sight”
This
spirit of optimism has cultural merit, and ought to be celebrated. If
we just discount mid century suburbia as bad planning, and elimate
it's traces completely, we essentually erasing a unique cultural landscape.
So are there architectural strategies
to excude optimism and enthusism?
Mid-century modern architecture was
very optimistic. It embraced new forms, fluidity, new structural systems, new technologies, supergraphics, bright colours, etc. An
overall embrace of newness. I might be able to take some
nods from that.
Does anybody have any examples of projects which exude optimism?
________________________________________________________________
I'm mainly focused on working out my
first strategy right now but the 2nd and 3rd
are currently as follows:
2nd strategy
Provide spatial opportunities for
public engagement and shared experience of place
- the design will create public space,
but outside of and inside the building.
3rd strategy
Provide further public engagement
through the stimulation of the senses
- interesting shape of the building
- facade system
- textures and colours
- allow for sitting and walking on the site
I think it is difficult to convey sentiment in architecture as there is such a diversity of stakeholders that can misinterpret the medium. After all, you may have looked up various things such as architecture and happiness and realized that there is quite a disparity among even those precedents. It would be worthwhile to have your strategies executed in some sort of design so that we can actually see how you would articulate that strategy in a building. The second strategy has some merit so we can leave it up to you to see how it is executed upon in the design. The third strategy feels a bit forced so you might want to revisit it after you present a formative design.
ReplyDelete