Sorted by date | |||
page159from Nordic Architects Writes
Richards Medical Research Building. The
solution is based on a skillful grouping of building masses of the same shape
and made to square plan. The system has good external flexibility – it
withstands very well the addition of similar units – but the internal,
functional flexibility is hampered by the fact that internal changes can only
take place within the square sections. In other words, the plan has no internal
flexibility in the horizontal.
Striving
towards continuity leads naturally to a system which finds expression in the
form of a network or grid. Growth can occur in various directions along the
arms of the network or grid via the points where they meet without hampering
continuity. In a labyrinth, only one road leads through, but in the grid or
network each road does so.
The
flexibility of the grid is, however, questionable if the internal properties of
its arms do no permit the building on them of various kinds of premises or if
there are no internal reserves in a network system. Internal reserves in this
case mean that there must be unconstructed areas within the network. A grid,
which is built up right away and which lacks internal flexibility in its arms,
is an inflexible structure, and the grid form is then just a bluff as far as
flexibility is concerned. The hidden potential of a network system arises from
the fact that the system is unfinished, but already clearly formed as an entity.
The
use of totally formed, though at the same time incomplete, systems without any
doubt offers a promising, though difficult, answer to the planner aiming at
flexibility. It is then important to work out the flexibility field of each
system. The old grid plan for urban construction offers a suitable example. This
is a clear rectangular network with an overall form, and contains built-up
blocks and blocks left unconstructed, that is empty spaces and squares. If a
single building is missing in a built-up block the grid plan require the space
to be filled in, since it will not stand the void. But when a new building is
put up in place of an old one and the old façade changes, the system usually
stands up to this quite well. In other words, we can consider the flexibility
field of the grid plan the façades of the blocks. There is no need – indeed no
reason – to build the same kind of façades as the block next door, and this is
also an important factor. The urban entity is complete and even an unsuccessful
façade cannot spoil the townscape too much. The grid plan has another
flexibility field, the yards of blind blocks, where architecture can flower in
peace, close to life as it is lived.
The
grid plan system has worked almost perfectly for centuries now. Each new
generation has made its own fruitful contribution to this townscape. There
would be no reason to abandon it if only it were able to cope with the needs of
today’s dominant motor traffic. This it usually cannot do without basic
structural alterations. The most important job of urban planners at the moment
is to try to find new comprehensive systems with flexibility fields which can
be defined exactly in advance. The recently decide Espoo centre international
competition showed clearly how difficult this is.
In
countries with a fast population growth in particular, for example Japan,
planners have developed various megastructures, even entire town areas, where
housing is sited inside a gigantic construction. Although the reason for these
plans is usually the lack of suitable land for construction, they can also be
considered interesting efforts to find new comprehensive systems. The technical
structure is
|
|||
|
|||
|