Wednesday 13th of July 2011
If the aim of the studio is to propose a plan implemented as a vast investment than the design of it is different than one for incremental growth. (Or is it not different at all? )The most likely is the more realistic approach of erection of 50 to 200 units at once over may years very much based on percolation and land ownership.
The discussion of which scenario is most likely to happen has been unclear and confusing us for the last couple of weeks and as such has been ignored within studio work until today's visit by an UN-Habitat representative Filiep Decorte . He has exposed our lack of understating of the site and questioned the IPCC ways brief writing. The top-down typology and precedence exercises are absolutely alien to the Palestinian context, topography of land and anthropology of human life. The experiential bottom up research doesn't propose any valid development as it is concerned with moments and singular characters. We are lacking a middle.
One interesting point raised is to assume scenario where all owners of land of the site are given right to build. How would than site develop, which spaces will open up and give possibility civic cervices. Which spaces would remain open, how than could those be stitched together to create public open space, series of open spaces and a network of civic life for the neighbourhood. To begin with this approach and observations could generate interesting plan, plan which takes account of anthropology of life and the constant of change.
No comments:
Post a Comment