The complexity of living goes beyond segregation of functions and typology. The order of city as we define in the planning today has incorporated yet failed to harmonize the various elements of the built and natural environment. At the scale of city planning, there still seems to be a clear demarcation of the public, the private and the natural. The core seemingly harbors more public while the residences form the outer layers. We define pockets of natural environment which are constricted to a piece of land. There always seems to be pieces of land functioning in correlation to the location. The ‘city’ becomes more dynamic than the ‘suburb’. While the city centers grow into suburbs, there are new rings of suburban forming with time, leading to a very horizontal dissemination.
The constructed world is spreading like wildfire destroying the traditional landscapes. The ‘new’ seems to be the only way. What existed yesterday might not live tomorrow. And while that stands true to life cycle that corresponds to every living thing on earth, it must happen in its own time. We are moving towards change faster than ever; the natural withering, whether it be of nature or the built environment, is being replaced by forceful destruction. We are hurriedly unrooting our pasts to make way for the ever-increasing dynamic needs of this world. Architecture is conventionally conceived with a pre-established need/use. But the need of the world we are moving towards expeditious changes in those needs. Architecture is surging towards a very individualistic approach both in terms of the user and it’s architect.
The ‘future’ architecture should be able to acknowledge the past. It should be able to co-exist in harmony with natural world and reflect its characteristics. The landscapes that existed can be restored if we give time and space to the ground. Instead of invading the nature, we let it invade the built. And to address the dynamics of this ever-changing world, architecture should be able to disregard its function and conceive flexible/adaptive spaces. Without defining the typology of the building, it should be able to change function with time. Architecture of the future can be built by the user themselves, decentralizing the need for ‘architect’. Pre-established systems can help control and centralize while pre-fabrication and convenient recycling of materials can control the material production itself.
A new permeable skeleton devoid of any pre-defined function or space itself. The frames lifted off the ground to restore the naturally occurring landscape. A new city is birthed above the ground using advanced technology against tradition, transcending time itself. A city that starts as platforms in the frame, that slowly shape commerce and life around it. The skeletons will allow for an architecture of no-boundaries. The spaces within being invaded by their own kind with time. A city that grows withing itself by invading the absence of ‘boundaries’ and densifying among each other before disseminating outwards. This attempts to decelerate the horizontal augmentation generally associated with the growth of a city. The spaces thus are formed by the users themselves, breathing a diverse character into the rigid frames. A new kind of organism that reveals all the systems in place. The architectural system that can breathe through time and grows within itself, harmonizing the nature with the built and the various typologies within that built.
The constructed world is spreading like wildfire destroying the traditional landscapes. The ‘new’ seems to be the only way. What existed yesterday might not live tomorrow. And while that stands true to life cycle that corresponds to every living thing on earth, it must happen in its own time. We are moving towards change faster than ever; the natural withering, whether it be of nature or the built environment, is being replaced by forceful destruction. We are hurriedly unrooting our pasts to make way for the ever-increasing dynamic needs of this world. Architecture is conventionally conceived with a pre-established need/use. But the need of the world we are moving towards expeditious changes in those needs. Architecture is surging towards a very individualistic approach both in terms of the user and it’s architect.
The ‘future’ architecture should be able to acknowledge the past. It should be able to co-exist in harmony with natural world and reflect its characteristics. The landscapes that existed can be restored if we give time and space to the ground. Instead of invading the nature, we let it invade the built. And to address the dynamics of this ever-changing world, architecture should be able to disregard its function and conceive flexible/adaptive spaces. Without defining the typology of the building, it should be able to change function with time. Architecture of the future can be built by the user themselves, decentralizing the need for ‘architect’. Pre-established systems can help control and centralize while pre-fabrication and convenient recycling of materials can control the material production itself.
A new permeable skeleton devoid of any pre-defined function or space itself. The frames lifted off the ground to restore the naturally occurring landscape. A new city is birthed above the ground using advanced technology against tradition, transcending time itself. A city that starts as platforms in the frame, that slowly shape commerce and life around it. The skeletons will allow for an architecture of no-boundaries. The spaces within being invaded by their own kind with time. A city that grows withing itself by invading the absence of ‘boundaries’ and densifying among each other before disseminating outwards. This attempts to decelerate the horizontal augmentation generally associated with the growth of a city. The spaces thus are formed by the users themselves, breathing a diverse character into the rigid frames. A new kind of organism that reveals all the systems in place. The architectural system that can breathe through time and grows within itself, harmonizing the nature with the built and the various typologies within that built.
T H E S I T E
T H E D E S I G N P R O P O S A L
T H E E N D