mobility, mood and place semester 1 brief · 2014-09-04 · mobility, mood and place semester 1...

1 M O B I L I T Y M O O D & P L A C E S E M E S T E R 1 2 0 1 4 – 1 5

MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE

MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

SESSION 2014-15

MOBILITY, MOOD AND PLACE SEMESTER 1 BRIEF

MMP - Manchester 2013-14.

Both images feature work by

S. Lawson, E. Rasmussen, M. Scott, M. Sim

The MMP Studio is part of a 3 year long research

project (2013-2016), funded by the EPSRC

through the Lifelong Health and Wellbeing Cross-

Council programme, bringing together

academics from the Universities of Edinburgh,

Heriot-Watt, York and King’s College London, the

research is partnered by a network of

stakeholder bodies and involves co-design with

a range of older participants. The project will also

employ and develop innovative mobile neural

imaging methods to map and explore real-time

emotional responses to place. It will also explore

the impact of place based forces on human

health over the life-course employing innovative

methods of analyzing existing archive data from

a variety of sources.

WEB-SITE: https://sites.eca.ed.ac.uk/mmp/

https://sites.eca.ed.ac.uk/mmp/


Mobility, Mood and Place.

Older People & the City

“Mobility in the built environment is vital for the health and well-being of older people.

To date much design guidance has focused on overcoming barriers in the environment and

establishing minimum design standards. Removing barriers is necessary but not sufficient to

increase mobility. We need to understand the positive qualities that encourage people to go

out, remain active and give them pleasure into very old age. Our proposal will build on

evidence that mood, emotion and affect influence people’s willingness to be active, which is in

turn influenced by the experience of place. Our project will attempt to create a virtuous cycle

of mobility, mood and place through research and design”.

MMP EPSRC Proposal. Autumn 2012

The inhabitants of a place feel safer, more independent and more mobile when in a positive

mood. They will be more likely to recall positive experiences, have fewer accidents, recover

quickly from stressful events, plan better and learn more effectively. Positive and negative

moods are vital in human coping strategies. Life is more pleasant and we are more effective

when circumstances encourage us to be interested, enthusiastic, inspired, excited, alert, and

determined, than if we feel isolated, vulnerable, nervous, or afraid. Studies show that positive

emotions broaden an individual's thought-action repertoire and mind-set. Happiness promotes

more engagement, including raised levels of curiosity, in the environment, in turn encouraging

people to explore and be more mobile, and contentment sparks mental restoration and the

building of social bonds.

Interventions in the built environment designed to improve the mobility and independence of

older people commonly focus on security, accessibility and functional performance: ramps,

handrails, surface treatments, signage, seating, visibility, security, alarm systems, legibility, toilet

provision, and assistive technologies. But researchers and designers need to pay attention to

what makes a place attractive and enabling, environmentally, socially and emotionally, as well

as accessible to people at different stages in the life-course. We propose that such measures

are most effective if there is a close fit between the needs and aspirations of the person and

their social, psychological, health and environmental conditions, which is to say, the conditions

are right for the person to sustain a positive frame of mind, thought-action mind-set, and an

enabling mood. As well as directly affecting people’s everyday competencies, an enabling

environment and positive mood form a virtuous circle for wellbeing and mobility. Affect (mood,

motivation, emotion and feeling) is an essential component of human reason and action, and

positive moods for everyone are desirable social goals. Our research incorporates the extensive

literature on place and place making foregrounding social, cultural, historical and meaning

structures. We will focus on mood among older adults, recognising the wider sociological and

cultural understandings of what constitutes the mood of an individual, community and place.

We will engage with older people from the east end of London during field-work activities early

in semester 1 and during a design review session early in semester 2. Students will employ

qualitative ethnographic research techniques and will test out neural-imaging technology

being employed on work package 2 of ‘Mobility, Mood and Place’, to gain an understanding

of older people’s experience and cultural memory of Hackney Wick and the Olympic Park site.

The MMP London studio will incorporate students from years 1 and 2 of the ESALA Master of

Architecture degree and also final year students from the Master of Landscape Architecture.


London - Hackney Wick and the Olympic Park

Panoramic view of the Olympic Park from a rooftop in Hackney Wick

Hackney Wick is an area in the east of London which forms the eastern most tip of the London

Borough of Hackney. It is separated from the 2012 Olympic Park by the River Lee Navigation and

is bounded on the south by the Hertford Union canal which separates ‘The Wick’ from nearby

Fish Island which is part of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

Bronze Age discoveries on the site of the Olympic Park suggest this part of the Lower Lea Valley

was probably a popular settlement area and hunting ground from around 3000 B.C.

The name ‘Hackney Wick’ is probably derived from ‘Wyk’, the Anglo-Saxon word for a dairy

farm. Right up until the 18th century the area is renowned as a centre of agricultural production

until in 1770 the Hackney Cut navigation and a series of smaller canal cuttings were built

transforming the area from farmland into the east end of London’s centre of manufacturing

industry.

Industrial production and worker housing provided the core of The Wick’s economy right up until

the 1970’s when a national decline in manufacturing led to a loss of industry and population.

Very little remains of the Victorian typology of small terraced houses, though many impressive

warehouse and factory type buildings remain.

Since the early 1990’s the area has become renowned as a centre for artistic production and

the urban environment has taken on a bohemian aspect as artists from Hackney and nearby

Tower Hamlets have taken advantage of low rents and grand, adaptable post-industrial

spaces. Many existing warehouse spaces have been converted into studio and living space by

different groups from the creative industries with the omni-presence of high quality graffiti art a

defining characteristic of the urban environment.

Hackney Wick from train station and view of Olympic Park


Part of the area to the north of Hackney Wick and bounded in the north by Wallis Road was

designated a Conservation Area in 2009. Wallis Road incorporates a pedestrian entry to the

Olympic Park and Bridge over the Lea Navigation at its east end.

Hackney Wick is separated from the Olympic Park (Constructed for the 2012 Olympic and

Paralympic Games) by the River Lee Navigation. The park occupies an area straddling four east

London boroughs; Newham, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Waltham Forest.

The London Legacy Development Corporation states in its post games master-plan for the park

and adjoining areas;

‘With the conclusion of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the transformation of the

Olympic Park has begun, building on the success of the Games, and preparing the site to fulfil its

promise for the future. The Olympic Legacy Master-plan builds on the unprecedented

combination of concentrated public investment in land, transport, infrastructure, housing, and

sports amenities at the Olympic Park, as well as significant private investment from Westfield

Stratford City, the largest urban shopping centre in Europe. The challenge of the Master-plan is

to capitalise on these built assets in the unique setting of the River Lea, and create a piece of

the city, built on London’s ‘unique DNA’.

The park Master-plan proposes five new neighbourhoods within the park, each intended to

‘extend the life and character of surrounding communities into the site’. LLDC.

Active public places are planned as focal points for each neighbourhood with nurseries,

schools, community centres, convenience retail and sporting venues providing amenities for

residents. Facilities and amenities are to be planned at the edges of the site to enable them to

bring together existing and new communities.

As the pressure to gentrify Hackney Wick intensifies in the wake of the 2012 Olympics how can

we as Architects attempt to effectively fulfil LLDC’s stated aims without compromising the rich

and vibrant culture which exists within The Wick?

How can we as designers work with ontological forces of place to re-create existing and new

communities which recognise the needs and desires of older people in the creation of

intergenerational environments?

Students will be invited to create architectural proposals which critique the existing Master-plans

for both Hackney Wick and the edge of the Olympic Park at East Wick and Sweetwater.

Co-Created Environments

MMP Year 1

Review of Developing Proposals with older people from The City of Manchester.

We will empower older people to engage with the creative design process, articulate their

visions for environments that help nurture active living, self-development, community, curiosity

and delight, and critique designs that fall short of these aspirations.

Students will receive training in the early part of semester 1 in working with particular research

methods and working with older people.


A field trip to London in week 3 of semester 1 will allow students to engage with older

participants within Hackney Wick and the adjacent Olympic Park and to conduct research

through innovative ethnographic methods and neural imaging technology.

Students will also work in small groups with older people to identify qualities of important sites,

buildings and aspects of the environment and to create and draw preliminary proposals for

those areas.

Upon returning to Edinburgh students will work in groups to analytically position their fieldwork

findings into a series of thematic frameworks which interpret forces of place at Hackney Wick as

seen through the eyes of the older city inhabitant. Based on this work students will propose an

individual manifesto and programme for an architectural exploration which includes housing for

older people and other programmatic activities generated from the research findings.

In semester 2 students will progress these proposals towards a completed design, including an

understanding of technology and materiality. Students will also be asked to do drawings which

evoke affordances which are contained within the scheme and are particular to the conditions

of living for older people.

Staff & Visiting Contributors Studio Leader Iain Scott ESALA Architecture

Studio Tutor Derek Fraser ESALA Architecture

Thomas Oles ESALA Landscape Architecture

Critics Mark Dorrian Professor of Architecture, ESALA

C. Ward-Thompson Professor of Landscape Architecture, ESALA

Contributors Dr. Neil Thin School of Social & Political Science, U of E

Dr. Niamh Shortt Senior Lecturer in Human Geography

Anthea Tinker Professor of Gerontology, Kings College, London

Dr. Katherine Brookfield Research Fellow, Mobility, Mood & Place

Dr. Faozi Ujam Former Head of PhD Programme ECA Architecture


MMP 1

OLDER PEOPLE & THE CITY

INDIVIDUAL Investigation of core concepts, texts and design

exemplars related to older people and the city and an

investigation

Exercise Students will work individually to gain knowledge and understanding of

key concepts and themes related to older people and the city and the

site at Hackney Wick and the London Olympic Park.

Students must work quickly to uncover key texts, theories and hypotheses.

The studio reading list is extensive and all students must work hard to gain

an understanding of the provided literature in the time available. In

addition to this a thematic investigation of Age Friendly concepts &

themes carried out by students during year 1 of MMP will be made

available. The list of themes to be analysed is provided on page 7 of this

document.

All students will in groups of 3 produce a critical investigation of their

selected theme in a Power-Point format. Each presentation will be a

maximum of 15 slides and 15 minutes in length and will be presented to a

group of reviewers during week 4 of semester 1. All presentations will be

gathered together into a booklet with an introduction and bibliography,

to be available to each student. All groups will consist of two MArch

students and one MLA student.

Aims To introduce students to core concepts, texts, theoretical models and

design exemplars related to older people and the environment and

through research and group working to amass a body of knowledge to be

shared within the unit.

To develop a knowledge base of key issues with respect to the MMP site at

Hackney Wick and the Olympic Park.

Submission Students will prepare digital power-point submissions to be presented in 15

minute long slots. Supporting notes for each slide to be included.

Each group presentation is to be no more than 15 slides in length.

Final presentations will be all day from 9.30am – 5.00pm on Wednesday 8th

of October in the Hunter Lecture Theatre, Lauriston Place.

All digital files to be shared amongst the group.

Slides and accompanying text to be bound together into a studio booklet

(A4 Landscape). All referencing to be fully compliant with the Harvard

Style.

Events Project introduction from 9.30am, Tuesday 16th September in J05,

Architecture Building, Lauriston Place.

Age Scotland Seminar: ‘Working with Older People’. 2pm-4.30pm. 16th

September in J05. Laura Dunkel.

MMP London Research Methods Seminar with Dr. Katherine Brookfield.

1.30-5.00pm 17th September in J05.

MMP Work-Package 2 Seminar. ‘Neural Imaging Field-work

Methodologies’ with Dr. Chris Neale and Dr. Sarah Tilley. 1.30-5.00pm

18th September in J05.


MMP Work-Package 3 Seminar. ‘The Life Course of Places’ –

Environmental Epidemiology Dr. Niamh Short 2.30-5.00pm 25th

September in J05, Architecture Building, Lauriston Place.

Studio all day 23rd September and in the morning 24th of September.

London Fieldwork and Research Activities. Monday to Friday 29th

September -2nd October.

Final Review: 9.30am – 5.00pm on Wednesday 8th of October in the

Hunter Lecture Theatre, Lauriston Place.

Readings

Age Friendliness

World Health Organisation. Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide, Geneva: WHO

Press

Biggs, S. et al. (2007). What Makes a City Age Friendly?

Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors (ID’GO) website: http://www.idgo.ac.uk/

Environment & Well-Being

Bloomer & Moore (1978) ‘Body, Memory & Architecture’: Yale

US National Institute of Building Sciences web-page. ‘Design for Well-Being.

http://www.wbdg.org/design/promote_health.php

US National Institute of Building Sciences web-page. ‘Psycho-social Value of

Space’.

http://www.wbdg.org/resources/psychspace_value.php?r=promote_health

Wernick J. (ed) (2008) ‘Building Happiness’. Blackdog Publishing: London

Ward Thompson, C. (2013) Activity, exercise and the planning and design of

outdoor spaces, Journal of Environmental Psychology 34, pp. 79-96.

Co-Design Techniques

Clarkson, J. Langdon, P. and Robinson, P. (2006) Designing Accessible

Technology – Part IV Understanding Users and Involving Them in the Design

Process. London: Springer-Verlag.

Service Design Tools website -

http://www.servicedesigntools.org/taxonomy/term/1

Policy Context

Hackney Wick

Local Development Framework -Area Action Plan (2012)

LDF - Sustainability Appraisal (2012)

LDF – Equality Impact Assessment

LDF 0 Habitat Regulations

Olympic Park

London Legacy Development Corporation – ‘A Walk Around Queen Elizabeth

Olympic Park’.

LLDC – East Wick and Sweetwater Vision Document.

LLDC – ‘Creating the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park’ – Post Games

Transformation.

Health & Well-Being

London Borough of Hackney Health & Well-Being Profile

http://www.hackney.gov.uk/jsna.htm#.U6qt5Z1wbvU

http://www.idgo.ac.uk/




http://www.hackney.gov.uk/jsna.htm#.U6qt5Z1wbvU


Themes

1 Designing Age Friendly Places

What makes a city ‘age friendly’?

Focus principally on mobility issues for designers and the needs and

desires of older people that generate them.

Consider issues at different scales from the body to the urban.

2 Transport & Mobility in The Age Friendly City

Moving around places, towns and cities, using the pedestrian

environment and vehicular transport, can be more difficult for older

people for a variety of reasons. Identify some of these reasons and

analyse how as designers we might we mitigate them through the

thoughtful design of transport systems and the physical environment?

Consider issues at different scales from the body to the urban.

3 Environment & Affect

How do we as designers generate emotionally positive responses to the

built environment in older people? How might the psychological and

emotional needs of older people differ from other people in relation to

their experience of the built environment?

What aspects of the environment affect the mood and emotional state

of older people both positively and negatively?

4 Intergenerational Social space

Include research on different and necessary forms of social space from

the personal to the urban in relation to older people and others. How

might the social needs and desires of older people differ from other

social groups? How can these needs and desires be fulfilled by

designers?

5 Co-Design With User Groups

What is Co-Design and what are the benefits of co-design activities for

designers? What are the potential drawbacks?

Include a survey of innovatory co-design techniques previously

employed in architectural and landscape design with a critical analysis

of the value and usefulness of those methods.

6 Hackney Wick: Local Policy Context

Explore, summarise and critique the key tenets of, the local planning

and development policy for Hackney Wick and the Olympic Park, (with

particular reference to the master-plan and development proposals for

the park at East Wick and Sweetwater). See readings for MMP1.

7 Hackney Wick; Who Lives Here and Why?

‘Demography’ - the scientific study of human populations, especially

with reference to their size, structure, and distribution

Investigate the demographics of Hackney Wick. Consider how these

have changed over time and provide a critical analysis of the reasons

for demographic change. Look for small area data – e.g. Output Area

data.

http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/

http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/


MMP 2

FIELD-WORK/ ANATOMY OF PLACE

INDIVIDUAL/

GROUP

Implementation & Analysis of Field-work/ Research.

Thematic Representation of the Physical, Socio-Cultural

and Economic Forces of Place.

Manifesto for an Age Friendly Architectural Project.

Place Specific Tectonic Installation.

Exercise

The MMP studio intends to reinforce the broad responsibility of

Architecture to people, environment and society and to encourage

proposals which are a response to the natural and cultural forces of a

place. This can only be achieved through a deep and meaningful

understanding of context which acknowledges ontological forces which

exist within physical, social, cultural and economic domains over the

course of time. (These ontological forces will require to be interpreted

through the lens of an Age Friendly agenda). Only through an

understanding of these forces can we begin to consider design

propositions which respond to them. Place there-for is the focus of this

exercise.

In generating Architectural Propositions we must create and then employ

a series of tools which can influence the reasons for making decisions and

allow us to think about and act upon the project.

This project will involve the creation of three critical tools. A series of

research drawings, a manifesto and a model of place.

This will involve aspects of policy review, environmental analysis, historical

and social survey and field-work research to be conducted with older

people, including neural imaging, ethnographic techniques and co-

design.

In investigating, understanding and representing the forces which act

upon a place students should represent these forces within a thematic

framework. It will be up to each student to decide on their own framework


or group framework.

Having completed a thematic analysis of the forces of place, students will

propose a manifesto and programme related to human well-being which

acknowledges and responds to those forces of place.

The manifesto should respond to the needs of older people and frame the

key hypothesis or hypotheses to be investigated through the critical

vehicle of an architectural project. The resultant urban programme is to

include housing for older people. It will also include related socio-cultural

and commercial activities and programmatic & poetic intentions for

landscape.

The final aspect of MMP2 production is a ‘Place Specific Tectonic

Installation’ to be produced in small groups by students who intend to

work on related sites in Hackney Wick and the Olympic Park.

The MMP studio will seek to create a series of highly crafted architectural

propositions which respond to one another and articulate themselves very

clearly in the context of the surrounding townscape and landscape.

The site based installation will act as a representational tool and will

articulate observations about the physical and experiential landscape of

The Wick and The Park. It will edit and foreground your concerns with

respect to ontological forces of place and will then form the departure for

urban design speculations. To this end the model will require to be

capable of further transformation to accommodate a series design

iterations.

It is anticipated that the site installation, which will be developed through

group working, will be highly crafted and that the material choices,

layering and methods of jointing will all form meaningful representations

related to place. The selection of wood and metal, material treatments,

the direction of grain, jointing techniques, the support frame and the way

it meets the floor will all form a thoughtful engagement with the form and

materiality of the place. It is envisaged that this chosen physical

representational language will begin to inform your subsequent

architectural projects.

Lawson, Scott, Sim, Rasmussen.


Aims To encourage research-based analysis of place specific issues and

opportunities for an age friendly architectural design project and to

enable students to present this analysis within a thematic framework.

To develop skills in building the aims and key questions of an

architectural proposition which are programmatic, physical, socio-

cultural and economic.

To develop physical and material representational skills which reflect a

critical response to place.

Submission 1. Research drawings and text presented within a thematic framework

2. A manifesto and programme document related to human well-being,

which is thematically framed and place specific. The document should

communicate key conceptual concerns, poetic and programmatic

aspirations. What are your key hypotheses to be investigated through

an architectural design project? Hypotheses must relate to the needs

and desires of older people.

3. 1:500 Place Specific Tectonic Installation

Events MMP2 Introduction 9.15-10.15am 24th September in Lower Seminar

Room (I02), Architecture Building at Lauriston Place. This will be

followed by a seminar on ‘Ontological Forces of Place’ to be

presented by Dr. Faozi Ujam, 10.30-12 noon.

29th September – 2nd October. Field-work activities in London. Students

will require to be on site, in London from 9am on Monday 29th

September. Base for Field-work activities will be The White Building in

Hackney Wick.

http://thewhitebuilding.org.uk/

For programme of field-work activities with older people in Hackney

Wick and the Olympic Park – see separate hand-out.

Studio teaching days – see timetable.

MMP2 Review – All day Thursday 6th November and pm 7th November

in studio. Guests: MARK Dorrian & Catharine Ward-Thompson.

MMP

Research

Methods

Students will be expected to conduct research into their chosen site, the

Hackney Wick-Olympic Park and the East End of The City of London.

Research methods will be of the students own choosing and may include

environmental analysis, site survey, archiving etc.

Specific Environment & Behaviour and Co-Design research methods will

be utilised in the engagement with older person participants on the 29th

and 30th of September.

Hackney Wick: White Post Lane with View of the Olympic Energy Centre

http://thewhitebuilding.org.uk/


A separate hand-out will be issued detailing the proposed London

Fieldwork programme.

Research activities will include:

Exploring the site – ‘Walk & Talk’

In their teams, participants and students explore the site. Students

explore the site’s effect on the participants’ mood through an informal

go-along / walking interview [short set of open ended questions

provided by research team] – field-notes taken using a form provided

by the research team with conversations recorded. Participants take

photos of aspects of the site which have an effect on mood and

discuss these with the student.

Real-Time Emotional Response to Place Using the Neuro-Headset

Six older participants and six students accompanied by research staff

from the MMP WKP2 team trial the neuro-headset by wearing it while

going for a short walk through part of the site. Participants and

students will be shown the route to be walked.

Mood Research

In teams, participants and students create 2 ‘mood boards’. One

which identifies parts of the site / qualities of the site which effect

mood in a positive way and one listing parts of the site / qualities of the

site which effect mood in a more negative way. Including short written

explanations for the inclusion of each item identified – prompt

questions for this exercise will be provided by the research team.

Save It / Change It

In their teams, participants and students create a ‘save it’ drawing

and a ‘change it’ drawing. One identifies buildings, spaces, features

and qualities of the site they would like to retain – giving the reasons

why. The 2nd identifies all the aspects of the site the participants want

to change with a short written account explaining why and how these

items should be changed. Participants’ photos from the site walk-

round, and materials collected by students during weeks 1 + 2, to be

used to prompt discussion.

Design it / Master-Planning

Using the information collected from the previous two activities, and

building on findings from the site walk-round, students and participants,

(in their teams) develop an initial master-plan for their site – using OS

maps, pictures, sketches, photos, text etc. Groups create an aerial

proposal for their site indicating where redevelopment might occur,

sketches giving an indication of possible building heights and massing.

Share it!

Teams briefly outline their proposals to the wider group setting out the

key, core features of their design with a short question and answer

session.

Field-work

Site Model

In order to facilitate model based Co-Design Activities during the field trip

the group will make a working site model in seven parts. Each of the seven

groups will be responsible for one part of this model as indicated on the

site map provided.

All groups will need to co-ordinate with their ‘site neighbours’ to ensure

accurate joints and overall topography. Each group will transport their

section of the model (ground plane and detachable buildings) to

Hackney Wick for the field-work activities.

The model and buildings will be made of blue foam-board. The model is to

be a working model and is to be made quickly but accurately.


Themes Here are some themes which may be of use in

helping to unravel the anatomy of a place

1. Tension

Tension is a result of conflict that exists between elements and concepts

which have different meanings or characteristics.

2. Transparency

Visually this implies physical properties which allow us to ‘see through’ a

material element. It can however be expanded to include seeing into the

different layers of meaning that are embedded in a place.

3. Boundary

Boundaries imply territorial definitions not only within the physical

environment, i.e. between water and land, but within psychological,

spiritual and temporal realms. Religion & socio - cultural identities.

4. Duality and Opposition

The World consists of dual elements perceptually united in their

oppositions. I.e. Darkness and light, lightness and weight, male and

female, hot and cold etc.

5. Movement and Energy

This is a force which drives every aspect of life both in both the urban and

natural worlds. Once again these forces should be understood not only

within the realm of the physical but as forces which operate within

psychological and spiritual realms.

6. Attachment

Not only humans but animals and objects are tied together through love

and attachment. The environment is a synthesis of elements engaged in

passionate relations. These need to be identified and understood to

maintain and reinforce their emotional resonance.

7. Image-ability and Legibility

How strong is the identity and image-ability of a particular place? What

are the key elements or themes that make up that image-ability and how

powerfully do they exist in the cognitive processes of people in that

place? How legible and understandable is the environment, not just in

relation to way-finding but in terms of the meanings attached to particular

places?

Readings

Research Methods (For Reference Only)

Groat L. & Wang D. (2002) ‘Architectural Research Methods’. Wiley: New York

Kelly, G. (1955). ‘The Psychology of Personal Constructs’. Norton: New York

Zeisel, J. (2006) Inquiry by Design: (Environment/ Behaviour/ Neuroscience in

Architecture, Interiors, Landscape, and Planning) Norton: New York.

Heft, H. (2010). ‘Affordance and the Perception of Landscape: An

Environmental Perception and Aesthetics. (In Ward Thompson, C. Aspinall, P. &

Bell, S. (Eds.)

Place Psychology

Canter D. (1977) ‘The Psychology of Place’. Architectural Press: London

Tuan, Y.F. (1974) ‘Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes &

Values’. Prentice-Hall: New York.

Cities

Cullen, G. (1961) ‘The Concise Townscape.’ London: Architectural Press.

Lynch, K. (1960) ‘The Image of the City’ MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.

Lynch, K. & Hack, G. (1962) ‘Site Planning’, MIT Press, Cambridge MA and

London.


MMP 3

URBAN INTERVENTION

INDIVIDUAL Architectural and urban design incorporating place

specific themes relating to older people.

Exercise

Having developed a thematic framework, manifesto and programme

related to the needs and desires of older people which responds in a

deep and meaningful way to the forces of place, to propose an urban

and architectural design which responds to and develops those themes

and develops a critical engagement with the place in terms of its situation

and spatial and material language.

Students will work in small groups using the site installations produced

during MMP2 to develop place specific propositions which accommodate

the mass of programme and activity, respond to core aims and questions

articulated in the manifesto document.

Castlefield model, R. Knight, S. Sharpe, J. Phillips

Students will also produce a set of 5 drawings which situate and explain

the proposition, including the rationale for early material and

environmental decisions. Given the early stage of the project, some of

these drawings will still be speculative in nature and may respond more to

aims and aspirations. Drawings may include maps, diagrams, plans and

sections, experiential perspectives, isometrics, cognitive images, serial

vision or others.

Each drawing will represent an aspect of the scheme at one of the 5

‘MMP Studio Scales’ and should be considered as part of a set.


The scales are:

City-scale – Conventional scale 1:2500 and 1:1000.

A drawing which represents the urban proposition in the context of the

city, including its relationship to systems of movement and energy, (water,

goods, people, transport) in the East End of London. Represent how your

proposal can make a positive contribution to living in this city as an older

person.

Neighbourhood Scale – Conventional Scale 1:500.

A drawing of the proposition in the particular urban context of Hackney

Wick and East Wick, (park). This drawing should clearly represent public

and private territories and the relationship of built forms to existing urban

morphologies and elements of infrastructure.

Building Scale – Conventional Scale 1:200 and 1:100.

A drawing which speculates on the relationships of built forms to one

another and to existing elements on the site.

Space Scale – Conventional Scale 1:50/ 1:20.

A drawing which speculates on experiential/ sensorial properties of a key

space in your proposition.

Body-Scale – The conventional scale for this type of drawing would

typically be 1:20, 1:10 or 1:5.

A drawing which speculates on an aspect of the proposition and its

relationship to the human body at rest or in motion.

Hypothesis Drawing, R. Knight, S. Sharpe, J. Phillips

Aims

To explore emerging themes and preliminary hypotheses related to

older people and the city in an architectural & urban design project.

To begin to develop a spatial and material language that responds to

these concerns and which is understood materially and

environmentally.

To develop techniques of representation which communicate

conceptual and contextual architectural proposals.

To develop individual design practice and method through iterative

work in drawings and models.

Submission

1:500 installation of proposals in context.

Drawings at each of the 5 scales. City, Neighbourhood, Building,

Space and Body. These drawings should include the rationale for

spatial and formal arrangements with emphasis on material and

environmental decision making.

Book of all development work from the semester, including

development sketches and photographs of models.


Events

Project Introduction from 4pm on Friday 7th of November. Directly after

completion of MMP2 Review.

‘Urban Design Typologies’ seminar with Derek Fraser. 1.30-4pm in J05,

12th November.

Studio tutorials – see timetable.

Final Review all day on Tuesday 2nd of December and am Wednesday

3rd of December in studio. Guests: Mark Dorrian & Catharine Ward-

Thompson.

Readings

Place Psychology


Tuan, Y.F. (1974) ‘Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes &

Values’. Prentice-Hall: New York.

Cities



Lynch, K. & Hack, G. (1962) ‘Site Planning’, MIT Press, Cambridge MA and

London. 3rd edition, 1984.

Calvino, I. (1972) Invisible Citie


Learning Outcomes

LO1

Conceptual

Framework The ability to develop and act on a productive conceptual

framework both individually and in teams for an architectural project

or proposition, based on critical analysis of relevant issues.

LO2

Architectural

Language The ability to develop an architectural, spatial and material language

that is carefully considered at an experiential level and that is in clear

dialogue with conceptual and contextual concern.

L03

Technology/

Environment The ability to investigate, appraise and develop clear strategies for

technological and environmental decision making in an architectural

project.

LO4

Representation

Skills A critical understanding of, and the development of skills in using,

differing forms of representation (eg. Verbal, drawing, modelling,

photography, film, computer, and workshop techniques), especially

in relation to individual and group work.

Note: MArch 1 students only have Learning Outcomes 1, 2 and 4 (3).

ARB Criteria

GC1 – 1 3

GC2 – 1 2 3

GC3 – 1 2 3

GC5 – 1 3

GC7 – 1 2 3

GC8 – 1 2 3

GC9 – 1 2 3

Assessment

LO1 Will be assessed on the submissions for MMP1, 2 & 3.

LO2 Will be assessed on the submission for MMP 3.

LO3 Will be assessed on the submission for MMP 2 & 3.

LO4 Will be assessed on the submissions for MMP 1, 2 & 3.


Bibliography/ Web

Age Friendliness

World Health Organisation. Global Age-friendly Cities: A Guide, Geneva: WHO Press

Biggs, S. et al. (2007). What Makes a City Age Friendly?

Inclusive Design for Getting Outdoors (ID’GO) website: http://www.idgo.ac.uk/

Schaie, K.W. et al. (1998). Handbook of Theories of Ageing 174-195.

Roe, J. et al, (2011). Health and Place, 17: 103–113.

Environment & Well-Being

Bloomer & Moore (1978) ‘Body, Memory & Architecture’: Yale

US National Institute of Building Sciences web-page. ‘Design for Well-Being.


US National Institute of Building Sciences web-page. ‘Psycho-social Value of Space’.


Wernick J. (ed) (2008) ‘Building Happiness’. Blackdog Publishing: London

Ward Thompson, C. (2013) Activity, exercise and the planning and design of outdoor spaces, Journal

of Environmental Psychology 34, pp. 79-96.

Co-Design Techniques

Clarkson, J. Langdon, P. and Robinson, P. (2006) Designing Accessible Technology – Part IV

Understanding Users and Involving Them in the Design Process. London: Springer-Verlag.

Service Design Tools website - http://www.servicedesigntools.org/taxonomy/term/1

Research Methods (For Reference Only)

Groat L. & Wang D. (2002) ‘Architectural Research Methods’. Wiley: New York

Kelly, G. (1955). ‘The Psychology of Personal Constructs’. Norton: New York

Zeisel, J. (2006) Inquiry by Design: (Environment/ Behaviour/ Neuroscience in Architecture, Interiors,

Landscape, and Planning) Norton: New York.

Heft, H. (2010). ‘Affordance and the Perception of Landscape: An Environmental Perception and

Aesthetics. (In Ward Thompson, C. Aspinall, P. & Bell, S. (Eds.), ‘Innovative Approaches to Researching

Landscape and Health: Open-Space: People-Space 2 (pp. 9-32), Abingdon: Routledge.

Place Psychology


Tuan, Y.F. (1974) ‘Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes & Values’. Prentice-Hall:

New York.

Cities



Lynch, K. & Hack, G. (1962) ‘Site Planning’, MIT Press, Cambridge MA and London. 3rd edition, 1984.

Calvino, I. (1972) Invisible Cities

Affordance Theory

Gibson, J. J (1977), The Theory of Affordances. In Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing, edited by Robert

Shaw and John Bransford.

Gibson, J. J (1979), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.

Image Credits

Page 3 image 1 https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5236/14071509537_f669507745_z.jpg

Page 3 image 2 http://www.influxpress.com/author-interviews/interviewsiddharthabose/

Page 3 image 3: http://www.flickr.com/photos/egfocus/6944380312/

Page 9 image 1: http://hoklife.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Hackney-Wick-LMF-Vision.bmp

http://www.idgo.ac.uk/




https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5236/14071509537_f669507745_z.jpg

http://www.influxpress.com/author-interviews/interviewsiddharthabose/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/egfocus/6944380312/

http://hoklife.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Hackney-Wick-LMF-Vision.bmp

mobility, mood and place semester 1 brief · 2014-09-04 · mobility, mood and place semester 1...

Documents