Balancing Act
The discussion in the reading and in class on tactics vs strategies is quite thought provoking. I agree architecture needs to be more responsive to the ways people use space evolve over time. And while I like the idea of minimal imposition on the user so he or she is free to use the space in his or her own way, this balance needs to be carefully considered. Put too many restraints and restrictions on a place and it becomes rigid and unable to react to changing needs. Too little restriction, and chaos can ensue.
I think these balances change significantly depending on the scale of the project. With residential, the examples shown in class can work well since it is at a small personal level. Large spaces such as parks and plazas work well due to their open program and spatial freedom. However, the scales in between these ends can be tricky and I feel that the strategic elements need to be stronger but incorporate some opportunity for future change or development as the tactics require it.
I think these balances change significantly depending on the scale of the project. With residential, the examples shown in class can work well since it is at a small personal level. Large spaces such as parks and plazas work well due to their open program and spatial freedom. However, the scales in between these ends can be tricky and I feel that the strategic elements need to be stronger but incorporate some opportunity for future change or development as the tactics require it.
Pop up market at a park in downtown Houston
Diagram for customized modular housing in India
I agree that scale can create an affect on the design of a space. Balancing the restraints and freedoms of a space can be difficult in these situations.Another thought that can be difficult to design for is thinking ahead to the future as well. Keeping things flexible enough to be used for possible different uses that may not even exist currently is important.
ReplyDelete