Open House International

Beisi, Jia

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0001

Halfway through the first decade of the 21st century, expectation of the future and historical nostalgia co-exist. This tacit uncertainty is compounded by the painfully explicit fact that, in both architectural practice and education, theory and experimental application are awash in confusion.

Kelbaugh, Douglas

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0002

As an architect and educator I worry about the intellectual and pragmatic challenges that currently bedevil architectural practice and pedagogy. There are at least seven design fallacies that in various combinations permeate professional practice and studio culture at most schools of architecture. Some are self-imposed and tractable; others are less easily addressed because they are externally driven by the media, technology, globalization and capital. Some are about form-making; others are about social equity and environmental sustainability. All seven are deeply embedded in our architectural psyches. Changing them will not be easy, but change them we must if we want to recuperate architecture and urbanism, as well as invigorate them as a more positive and progressive force in the world.

Habraken, N. John

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0003

I want to raise a more philosophical question. What fundamental images and ambitions have guided us in the past and may guide us in the future? I want to particularly call attention to the way we explain ourselves to ourselves and to those we work with. This question may not seem practical but, ultimately, our self-image determines the way we design: our buildings reflect how we see ourselves. To let you know right from the beginning what I am aiming at, my talk can be summarized as follows: we come from a tradition of monument builders, but today we are almost entirely immersed in design for everyday environments. Where we come from is very different from what we do now. The way we see ourselves is a product of the past and is becoming increasingly counter productive.

Beisi, Jia

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0004

Habraken points out that the architectural studio failed to bring students to basic questions in the architecture of everyday environments. Till criticizes that in a studio, it is only the professional value represented by the teachers that prevails. To investigate the reasons of the allegation, this paper introduces a learning model defined by David A. Kolb, in which a learning process consists of two dimensional movements: i.e., prehension (concrete experiences vs. abstract conceptualization) and transformation (reflection and experiment). The paper then inquires into Schön's observation in the studio learning mode characterized as reflection-in-action. It is found that this studio is mainly dealing with the transformation dimension, and prehension dimension is either suppressed or represented by the teacher's experiences and conceptions. The paper discovers that the cause of problems raised by Habraken and Till is the inherent lack of substance in the prehension dimension.The paper assesses a studio programme in which the basic questions of built environment were systematically introduced. It analyzes the students' reactions and performance in line with students' learning styles found using Kolb's Learning Style Inventory (LSI). It suggests that the students' learning activities are more diversified than what Schön could perceive. There is a possibility to adapt students' personal experience and abstract conceptualization which may play into the studio. By enhancing diversity of learning styles rather than letting one's learning style (reflection-in-action) prevail, the studio may become a platform in which students may learn from each other.

Herr, Christiane M.; Howe, A. Scott

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0005

Constrained by requirements of efficiency and economy as well as tight building regulations, Hong Kong's high-density residential architecture is very different from architectural approaches that are typically taught in the architectural studio. This paper reports on a second year architectural studio project taught at The University of Hong Kong that uses the Open Building paradigm to integrate the constraints of a high-density environment, community considerations and building technology in the context of a mixed use programme to be constructed on small individual lots.Following a series of short introductory exercises, the main studio assignment required groups of students to negotiate the design of individual projects and community areas within a given generic structural frame. Based on their individual design ideas and architectural programme, students developed a structural solution following a kit-of-parts approach. We describe the tasks and rule sets given as the studio framework and discuss students' response to this new type of architectural programme. Based on our experiences, we critically review initial studio settings, final outcomes and observations made during the teaching and learning process with regard to future implementations of similar open building studio projects.

Kendall, Stephen

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0006

Teaching students of architecture an open building way of designing in a studio setting can be fruitful. To be even more fruitful, however, “warming - up” exercises are useful, but take time to do properly and are not an easy fit in the studio setting. This paper offers some examples of both open building studio projects and “warming-up” exercises given in the studio setting. It also offers comments on lessons learned over the years in teaching in such a way in architectural studios and argues for the development of courses specifically focused on “warming-up” design exercises, not only in support of open building but more generally. These may be most helpful if offered outside but supportive of the design studio. But such opportunities are rare, because “design skill” courses do not exist in architectural curricula.

Martin-Chavez, Andrea

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0007

After more than five years of teaching Open Building to students in the last year of their architectural training we have learned one thing: it is easier to master the Open Building methodologies if we first apply some of its main ideas to extract the urban and architectural rules from the reality and only afterwards, students have an easier time learning and applying the methodology to make new OB design proposals. To achieve this we work either in downtown Mexico City or in other Mexican colonial cities where the historical urban fabric provides an easier reading of the urban and architectural typologies.In this article I am going to talk about our last year's teaching experience and the results we achieved. There are three main objectives to be met in this last year of architectural training. The main one is to deal with socially relevant problems that involve real communities. The second one is that the teaching resembles the practice of architecture as much as possible. And one that we have added to the curricula is to train students to understand, learn and apply OB ideas in their urban and architectural work.Architectural competitions have turned into important part of the practice. For that reason we encourage students to enter at least one of the multiple options that occur during the year. This time there was the opportunity to enter a competition aimed for students organized by ARQUINE (a well known international trimester architectural publication). The competition objective was to design studios and housing for art students in an empty lot in historical downtown Mexico City.To achieve the objectives of the course, as well as to participate in the competition, we divided the course in three parts. In the first part students made an urban diagnosis of the area, a site analysis and a design proposal for the competition. In the second part they studied traditional housing vecindades as well as the families living in that particular area. They applied the support idea to these typologies to get acquainted with the generals of the method. In the third part they studied the methodology thoroughly to be able to design a support building to relocate the studied families. In the end, each student designed a different support building in an empty lot nearby to the studied area.In our experience, students are very enthusiastic and responsible when working with users and applying OB ideas. Most students from this last generation are now working in housing related agencies. Two of these students work for the Mexican Architectural Association and recently promoted a new competition jointly with the local government Program of Housing Improvement. The competition goal is to design incremental housing in the periphery or in downtown areas, avoiding prototypes. They are strongly supporting the use of OB ideas for the competition and this year's students will participate in it.

Shadar, Hadas

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0008

A theoretical social trend prevailed in the Western World during the mid-20th century aimed at creating a sense of belonging to the community, a physical and personal identity and affiliation to a place through planning and architecture. This trend gained popularity especially after the dismantling of CIAM in 1956 at Dubrovnik, the organization of Team X, and in light of research by the SAR group (Stichting Architecten Research).A short-lived project initiated by the Public Housing Project in the State of Israel expressed this trend. During the years 1956-1959, small one-story row houses were built in order to provide housing for newly arrived immigrants. The houses were initially partially built; the dweller was expected to complete the remainder of work using his own resources and during his free time. The perception whereby the resident is expected to extend his home on his own and bear the responsibility for building his house corresponded with the prevailing belief that social pluralistic contents could be implemented using architecture. The addition to the house was determined in advance. The one-story row house was to be extended along its length while incorporating a small patio that would serve as a source of light and ventilation. Due to the existence of the patio, the above-mentioned extended house was called “The Patio House,” and is the subject of this paper. This paper examines the design of the house in light of the prevailing theoretical background, the attempts made to implement it, and the results. The conclusions relate to the implementation of support system buildings in the context of public housing.

Dursun, Pelin; Saðlamer, Gülsün

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0009

In morphological studies analysis, rather than intuitive explanations, of differences pertaining to the man-made environment requires an understanding of the relational or configurational structure of that specific spatial system. Space Syntax is a set of techniques for describing and analyzing those relational or configurational properties of man made environments. Space Syntax tries to clarify these properties and their meanings by mathematical and graphical analysis to interpret them on a scientific basis. Originally conceived by Prof. B. Hillier and his colloquies in the 1980's as a tool to help architects simulate the likely affects of their designs, it has since grown to become a tool used in a variety of research areas and design applications. This study attempts to formulate the various spatial patterns that have been formed through the history of Trabzon, by means of Space Syntax techniques in a concrete way. It is suggested that the analysis techniques of Space Syntax, supported by a wide range of knowledge, have contributed greatly in the formulation of spatial models in concrete form, further intuition, and can be accepted as a useful tool for defining similarities and differences between different home environments.

Hürol, Yonca; Martirena, Julia Koschinsky; Graham, Stephen; Datta, Ayona

2006 Open House International

doi: 10.1108/OHI-02-2006-B0010

TIME-BASED ARCHITECTUREMETHODOLOGIES IN HOUSING RESEARCHAT WAR WITH THE CITYDESIGNING SOCIAL INNOVATION-PLANNING-BUILDING-EVALUATING