Voids in Architecture - A Study of Unbuilt Spaces

CONTENTS

Page No. Approval

i

Declaration

ii

Acknowledgement

iii

Contents

iv - v

List of illustrations

vi

List of tables

vii

CHAPTER 1: UNBUILT SPACES – AN OVERVIEW

1-3

1.1

Background of the study

1

1.2

Criteria of selection

2

1.3

Hypothesis

2

1.4

Aim

2

1.5

Objectives

2

1.6

Scope& Limitation

2

1.7

Methodology

3

CHAPTER 2: THE LANGUAGE OF SPACE 2.1.

Defining Unbuilt Spaces

2.2.

Significance of Open Spaces

4 - 13 4 5-7

2.1.1 History

5

2.1.2 Urban Open Spaces

6

2.1.3 Genius Loci

7

2.3.1. Spatial Relationships

8 - 13

2.3.1. Masses and Voids

8

2.3.2. Scale and Proportion

8

2.3.3. Degree of Enclosure

9

2.3.4. Degree of Permeability

10

2.3.5. Spatial Organization

10

2.3.6. Hierarchy

11

2.3.7. Aesthetics

12

2.3.8. Function

12 iv

CHAPTER3: CASE STUDIES

14 - 39

3.1.

Aayojan School of Architecture

14 - 19

3.2.

Maharani Gayatri Devi Public School

20 -26

3.3.

Pearl Academy

27 - 31

3.4.

State University of Visual & Performing Arts

32 - 39

CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS

40 - 46

4.1.

Comparison of Spatial Distribution

40 - 41

4.2.

Social Hierarchy

42 - 45

4.3.

Observations

46

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS

47 - 48

5.1.

Organizational pattern

47

5.2.

Inference

47

5.3.

Recommendations

48

Glossary of terms

ix

Bibliography

x

Annexures

xiv

v

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Image No.

Caption

1.1.1

Perception of built form in an isolated environment

2.1.1

Built and unbuilt spaces in a plan form

2.1.2

Built and unbuilt spaces in an orthographic depiction

2.2.1

Distribution of unbuilt spaces

2.2.2

Individual housing units with central open space

2.2.3

Nolli’s map depicting urban grain of Rome

2.2.4

Graphic depiction of Rome’s Genius Loci

2.3.1

Masses and voids enclosed by them

2.3.2

Proportion to built mass to unbuilt space

2.3.3

Perception of built mass with respect to expanse of unbuilt space

2.3.4

Width of unbuilt space determines scale of built form

2.3.5

Degree of permeability of unbuilt spaces

2.3.6

Organization of unbuilt spaces as per Francis D. K Ching

2.3.7

Intimacy gradient in spaces

2.3.8

Physical appearance of ground coverage affects visual intricacy

3.1.1

ASA – Site Plan

3.1.2

ASA – Material expression of the built form and perceived scale

3.1.3

ASA - Depiction of antithetical unbuilt spaces

3.1.4

ASA – Depiction of ground coverage

3.1.5

ASA – Depiction of degree of enclosure

3.2.1

MGD – Site Plan

3.2.2

MGD – Material expression of the built form and perceived scale

3.2.3

MGD - Depiction of antithetical unbuilt spaces

3.2.4

MGD – Depiction of ground coverage

3.2.5

MGD – Depiction of degree of enclosure

3.3.1

PA – Site Plan

3.3.2

PA – Material expression of the built form and perceived scale

3.3.3

PA - Depiction of antithetical unbuilt spaces

3.3.4

PA – Depiction of ground coverage vi

Image No.

Caption

3.3.5

PA – Depiction of degree of enclosure

3.4.1

SUVPA – Site Plan

3.4.2

SUVPA – Material expression of the built form and perceived scale

3.4.3

SUVPA - Depiction of antithetical unbuilt spaces

3.4.4

SUVPA – Depiction of ground coverage

3.4.5

SUVPA – Depiction of degree of enclosure

4.2.1

ASA – determination of social hierarchy through footfall analysis

4.2.2

PA – determination of social hierarchy through footfall analysis

4.2.3

MGD – determination of social hierarchy through footfall analysis

4.2.4

SUVPA – determination of social hierarchy through footfall analysis

5.1.1

Inferential organizational pattern

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

Title

1.1

Methodology of study

2.1

Comparison between built and unbuilt spaces

3.1

ASA – Spatial Analysis

3.2

MGD – Spatial Analysis

3.3

PA – Spatial Analysis

3.4

SUVPA – Spatial Analysis

4.1

Comparison of spatial distribution

4.3

Table of Inference

viii

CHAPTER 1

UNBUILT SPACES – AN OVERVIEW We join spokes together in a wheel, But it is the centre hole That makes the wagon move.

We shape clay into a pot, But it is the emptiness inside That holds whatever we want.

We hammer wood for a house, But it is the inner space That makes it liveable.

We work with being, But non-being is what we use. Lao Tzu

UNBUILT

1

SPACES

1.1. Background of the study A ubiquitous objective of architectural design is to combine the functions required by the user with a conducive design environment sought by the architect. This combination of function and form leads to the formation of a built environment. A built environment is a human-made space in which people live, work and recreate on a day to day basis. It is a material, spatial and cultural product of human labour1ranging in scale from individual buildings to entire cities. For any given building, the space enclosed by the built mass is what generally defines its respective function and form. However, an antithesis of these occupied spaces is unbuilt spaces, or voids in a given built fabric. In a very superfluous manner of speaking, unbuilt spaces are what remain when built spaces are discounted from a given built form. These unbuilt spaces have varying configurations, degree of enclosure as well as function, and work in harmony with the built spaces. They act as determinants of form, functional buffers, multifunctional areas (supplementing the designated function of the built environment that they are a part of), as well as climatic aids.

Fig. 1.1.1 In an isolated environment, perception of the built form changes with change in the enveloping space, or unbuilt form, in the given environment

A holistic approach to design acknowledges that these voids affect our perception and usage of a built space, just as much as the configuration of the built space itself, and hence utilizes unbuilt spaces as a design element in their own right. The 1

J Environ Health (Art. : Public Health: Seattle and King County’s Push for the Built Environment) – Karen Roof, Ngozi Oleru – Jul-Aug 2008

VOIDS IN ARCHITECTURE – A STUDY OF UNBUILT SPACES

ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

UNBUILT

2

SPACES

organizational patterns of unbuilt spaces shape the built form and aid its function, which is being expanded upon in the following study. 1.2. Criteria of selection of study Considering the majoritarian approach, the design process focuses solely on built volume and mass, and its function with respect to the user. However, unbuilt spaces supplement this volume to form the built environment of a given city, neighbourhood, or even a building complex, and their design (consisting of placement, organization, and expanse) plays a major role in shaping this environment, both aesthetically and functionally. Hence, unbuilt spaces are an indispensable design element which affects the way a user perceives and interacts with a given space. It is to understand this perception and utility that this area of study has been chosen. 1.3. Hypothesis Organization of unbuilt spaces enhances the quality of the built environment. 1.4. Aim To establish unbuilt spaces as indispensable design elements in a given built fabric. 1.5. Objectives • To study the organization and interrelation of unbuilt spaces on a site level. • To chart their qualitative and quantitative aspects. • To study the relationship between built and unbuilt spaces, and how their configuration and organization affects the built environment. 1.6. Scope & Limitations The scope of the study is limited to Educational institutional complexes such as schools and colleges.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

UNBUILT

3

SPACES

1.7. Methodology Understanding the relationship between masses and voids Establishing the social, functional and historical importance of open spaces

Exploring unbuilt spaces as an independant design element

Understanding the concept of Genius Loci

Identification of key parameters for evaluation of unbuilt spaces

Identification of pertinent case studies

Collection of data from case studies through primary observation and secondary data collected thrugh questionnaires Analysis of data to determine usage patterns and social heirachy Statement of inferences made from the analysis regarding user perception and quality of built environment Conclusion of study and recommendations made regarding organization of unbuilt spaces and their significance Table 1.1 – Methodology of Study


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CHAPTER 2

THE LANGUAGE OF SPACE [Speaking about Volger’s text on the Kailasa temple at Ellora] “… His principal argument is that the structure, or sculpture, if it may be so portrayed, has been misunderstood all along. All authors, till date have pointed out that since it was carved downward from a living mountain, the resultant pit surrounding the structure is a basic flaw. Volger argues passionately that far from being a flaw, this is its very strength. He focuses on the so-called negative space as being as much sculpted as the vimana or the dhwaja stambha or the caves or the relief sculpture in the periphery. This space just wouldn’t exist if the temple had been a freestanding structure, erected on plain land like a million other temples.” Prof. B. S. Keshav

LANGUAGE OF

4

SPACE

2.1.

Defining Unbuilt Spaces

A primary element of architecture – its basic building block, in fact - is space. Space, literally speaking, is an intangible entity, one which may be perceived solely through personal traversing, but not explicitly quantified. The major concern of architecture, however, is to provide solutions through manipulation of the natural environment and the space it provides us with, which we do through creating smaller units of this unquantifiable space into less abstract, more substantial pockets. Space is best defined when occupied by an object, or in this case, a built form, and hence, space comes to be characterized by the physical envelope or constraints within which it is enveloped. Everything, however, has a compliment. The space occupied by an object, or within a built form, is not defined solely by the physical configuration of the physical envelope, but also by the unbound space around it. Hence, at all times, space is continuously in a state of being split between the tangible and the intangible, the built and the unbuilt. In an isolated environment with finite dimensions, the other increase Fig. 2.1.1 Built and unbuilt spaces in a plan form

when the other diminishes, and vice versa. Hence, the two are constantly in

a state of interplay, each affecting the way the other is perceived and used. The built environment of any given space is hence a summation of all built forms and the unbuilt spaces. For the purpose of this study, a criterion for the built forms has been set as spaces with a reasonable amount of physical enclosure, and/or a roof. Hence, an antithesis of all such spaces shall be termed as unbuilt spaces, subjectively, and examined. Fig. 2.1.2 Built and unbuilt spaces in a an orthographic depiction


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

5

SPACE

2.2.

Significance of Open Spaces

The term open spaces may be loosely used for distinct pockets in the built fabric which remain unoccupied or built upon. These spaces maybe incidental in nature, or planned, and characteristically belong to the public realm. While all open spaces are unbuilt spaces, all unbuilt spaces may not necessarily classify as open spaces, due to the discerning factor of ownership and extent.

Fig. 2.2.1 Distribution of unbuilt spaces Left – Built forms in an isolated environment, unbuilt spaces depicted in white Right – Unbuilt spaces divided into incidental open spaces (light grey), planned open spaces (dark grey) and circulation space (blue)

2.2.1. History The practice of “creating spaces” by erecting peripheral boundaries is the basis of architecture, as well as of creation of human settlements. The first civilizations blossomed when nomadic people began to settle down and claim portions of land as their own, erecting makeshift boundaries to declare their boundaries, and creating communities based on shared resources. One of the most shared resources was public space. Most settlements have a radial pattern of growth, with shared resources being pooled in a central spot, acting as an informal space of trade and congregation. This open space developed into a focal point, geographical as well as communal, evolving eventually into town squares, which became the social hub of the settlement. VOIDS IN ARCHITECTURE – A STUDY OF UNBUILT SPACES

ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

6

SPACE

Open spaces, hence, became shared resources in themselves, acting as a climatic aids, play areas, congregational Fig. 2.2.2 Individual housing units with a central open space

spaces, as well as

circulation junctions. They also acted as transitional zones or buffers between the open spaces enclosed within personal properties and the street. Hence, unbuilt spaces of any settlement became the discerning factor in regards to building user interface and microclimate

2.2.2. Urban Open Spaces The interplay between open and enclosed spaces, as described above, has become an important aspect of urban design. Starting with Giambattista Nolli’s 2 mapping of the urban fabric, unbuilt spaces have long come to associate themselves with the quality of the spatial organization and distribution of settlements, as well as the ‘feel’ of these spaces. In the context of modern urban design, open spaces may be defined as parts of a settlement where myriad groups, personalities, events and activities intermingle to recreate all the complexities of human lives. These are spaces which acquire their identity through human activity. 3 Fig. 2.2.3 Nolli’s map depicting urban grain of Rome

2

Italian architect and surveyor (circa 1701-1756) Inclusive cities: Challenges for Urban Diversity (Art. : Collective Culture and Urban Public Space) – Ash Amin – 2006 3


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

7

SPACE

2.2.3. Genius Loci In classical Roman religion, a Genius Loci was the protective spirit of a place. Historically, it was often depicted in religious iconography as a figure holding attributes such as a cornucopia, patera (libation bowl) or a snake. Many Roman altars found throughout the Western Roman Empire were dedicated to a particular genius loci. This usage was then adapted into modern architectural lexicon - in contemporary usage, genius loci usually refers to a location's distinctive atmosphere, or the "spirit of place" rather than necessarily a guardian spirit. The physical environment of roads, buildings, parks, and related infrastructure is in a continuous interaction with the contextual environment – the realm of people, and how they interact within these built spaces. It is what gives the built environment its ‘life’ and directly shapes our spatial experience. Each city has a unique ‘spirit of place,’ or a distinctive atmosphere, that goes beyond the built environment. 4 3F

The same can be extrapolated for any distinct collection of buildings, with a common identity and interdependent functions. In the scope of this study, it refers directly to an institutional campus. Fig. 2.2.4 Graphic depiction of Rome’s Genius Loci, as seen on pottery unearthed at Pompeii

4

Yuriartibise.com (Art. : What is Genius Loci? ) – Yuri Artibise – May 2010


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

8

SPACE

2.3.

Spatial Relationships

Unbuilt spaces, despite their intangibility, can be characterised by their relationship with the built mass in the given built environment. Like built spaces, unbuilt spaces are also characterized by the parameters of evaluating tangible spatial relationships, and hence can be studies antithetically as well as objectively. 2.3.1. Masses and Voids Space can be either full or empty. A void is an empty volume, while a mass is a filled volume. Voids occur in conjunction with masses – they can either be geometrical, or organic. Unbuilt spaces formed by the creation of geometric

Fig. 2.3.1 Masses and voids enclosed by them. Left – Geometric void Right – Organic void

forms and shapes can be considered as geometric voids. These play a very important role in the final composition, because geometric forms have sharp outlines and adjust themselves in the space articulation. To counterbalance the dynamic interplays of form and space, voids become significantly important. On the other hand, organic voids are generated by the creation of organic shapes and forms, and they together behave like hands in gloves, where the forms are the hands and the voids are the gloves. Created by smooth, flowing forms and shapes, organic voids are also free flowing and gentle. 5

2.3.2. Scale and Proportion The scale of an open space affects the perception of built mass in its vicinity. Scale and proportion are characteristics of any given space, relevant through its

5

Artinarch.com (Core Theory : Voids) – Shirish Sukhatme


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

9

SPACE

size. While scale relates to the user, proportion relates to the form’s position within and relation with the environment in which it’s placed The same is true for unbuilt spaces – they are in a constant interaction with the built forms, and hence their scale and proportion is affected by their own configuration and the degree of enclosure accorded to them by

Fig. 2.3.2Proportion of built mass to unbuilt space changes the perception of both, despite the configuration of built space remaining constant.

their surroundings.

Fig. 2.3.3 Perception of built space changes in respect with vantage point, which is determined by size of unbuilt space. Built spaces appear bigger and more dominating when unbuilt spaces diminish.

2.3.3. Degree of Enclosure The degree of enclosure of a space can be defined as the extent to which a space can be isolated. 6 A fully enclosed space creates a cohesive, isolate space, whereas a low degree of enclosure creates a space which is loosely 6

Form and Fabric in Landscape Architecture: A Visual Introduction (Chap. – Space Enclosure) – Catherine Dee – Sep 2001


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

10

SPACE

bound and has a fluid configuration. Degree of enclosure affects the scale of a space, and in turn is affected by the permeability of a space, and dictates user preference and comfort in the space. It also affects circulational hierarchy by creating variations in the intimacy gradient for any given area.

Fig. 2.3.4 Width of unbuilt space determines scale of built environment and degree of enclosure accorded by each case.

2.3.4. Degree of Permeability The degree of permeability of a space can be defined physically as well as visually, and is characterized by the nature of openings as well as visual character of the surrounding build mass. It correlates directly with the access and connectivity of a given space. In case of open unbuilt spaces, plant forms and landforms also affect the degree of permeability of a given space.

Fig. 2.3.5 Degree of permeability is affected by the nature of openings and pattern of access, and affects enclosure on the base plane.

2.3.5. Spatial Organization The arrangement of various elements in respect with one another in a given plane is Spatial Organization. 7 The organization of spaces, both built and unbuilt,

7

Form, Space & Order (Organization of Space) – Francis. D. K. Ching – Third Edition, 2007


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

11

SPACE

shapes the experience of the user in that by affecting the enclosure and permeability of the space.

Linear

Concentric

Radial

Clustered

Centralized

Grid

Fig. 2.3.6 Organization of space as per the principles introduced by Francis D. K. Ching. The above diagrams focus on the distribution of unbuilt spaces, and their organization with respect to the built form.

Spatial organization lends legibility to a space and affects the path finding patterns of the user. It also affects the social and visual hierarchy of a built environment by providing clear visual cues and axes, along which users align themselves. 2.3.6. Hierarchy Hierarchy can be defined as the arrangement of various elements on the basis of their rank or by a specific order. Hierarchy may be physical (depending on size), visual (depending on how conspicuous and visually engaging an object is) or social (defined by user preference and footfall. Identifying the social hierarchy of VOIDS IN ARCHITECTURE – A STUDY OF UNBUILT SPACES

ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

12

SPACE

spaces helps us understand the patterns of circulation and spatial organization of space, as well as about efficacy of the intended purposes of these spaces. Social hierarchy also helps us identify the intimacy

Private

gradient 8 of a space.

2.3.7.

Aesthetics

Semi public Private Public

The aesthetics of a space are shaped by many factors, such as colour, light and shadows, and material expression. In the scope of this study, the aesthetics of unbuilt spaces is judged

Fig. 2.3.7 Intimacy gradient in spaces

solely through their ground cover. Visual intricacy is an integral part of aesthetics – it indicates how engaging a pattern is to the human eye. It also affects our perception of the scale of a space. The higher the visual intricacy of a space, the smaller the scale appears to be.

Fig. 2.3.8 The physical appearance of ground coverage displays varying degrees of visual intricacy, and each of these types lends a different sense of formality to the space, as well as affect the perception of scale.

2.3.8.

Function

A discerning feature of unbuilt spaces is that they have informalized functions. Open spaces in the urban fabric are considered public-owned recreational pockets, and hence, as an extension, unbuilt spaces in an institutional campus are informal spaces which aid the function of built spaces. The usage of unbuilt spaces may be planned, incidental, or ancillary. They also act as climatic aids by regulating the microclimate through differential heating and cooling, as well as transitional spaces between two built forms. 8

Term coined by Christopher Alexander in 1977 in his book A Pattern Language : Towns, Buildings, Construction


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

LANGUAGE OF

13

SPACE

Hence, the following conclusion can be drawn regarding the relationship between built and unbuilt spaces.

Table 2.1 – Comparison between built spaces and unbuilt spaces


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CHAPTER 3

CASE STUDIES “Design is about creating spaces for people to enjoy, creating moments here you elevate the spirit…” Ar. Cameron Sinclair

CASE STUDY 14

3.1.

Aayojan School of Architecture

Location – Jaipur Site Area – 11653 sq.m Ground Coverage – 3087sq.m ASA is a college of architecture, with the campus consisting of an academic block, administrative services, and two hostel blocks.

Fig. 3.1.1 Site Plan

The campus is accessed through a single, decentralised entrance, with a pergola aligned perpendicularly to it, leading to the centre of the site, around which congregational open spaces are arranged, with the built forms arranged on their periphery. The central open spaces are of a human scale, with intricate ground coverage of stone and grass. Peripheral open spaces are of a larger size, with uniform ground coverage, and aligned along the boundary wall of the campus. The built form is clad with exposed brick, giving an earthly feel to the built environment.

Fig. 3.1.2 The material expression of the façade of the built forms has a high degree of visual intricacy, helping make the scale more accessible to the user. The grass cover in open spaces, whether partial or full, helps increase the level of informality of the space.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 15

Fig. 3.1.3 Depiction of antithetical unbuilt spaces, with major axes of circulation

Fig. 3.1.4 Depiction of ground coverage


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 16

Fig. 3.1.5 Depiction of degree of enclosure of various pockets of unbuilt spaces


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 17

Table 3.1 – Spatial Analysis Space No.

1

2

3

4

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Paved with stone slabs with interstitial grassy patches.

Highly permeable – open on one side, pergolas on other two sides

Acts as receptacle space for main entrance



Paved with cement concrete

Higher visual than physical permeability Surrounded by built mass on two sides, pergola raised on retaining wall on the other two

Spillover space from girls’ hostel and mess

Medium degree of permeability – built mass on two sides, pergola on one, and trees on the fourth

Seating space for the canteen

Low permeability due to linear axis Built mass on one side, boundary wall on another.

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Play area; spillover from canteen seating area


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 18

Space No.

5

6

7

8

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Paved with cement concrete


Basketball court


Covered with loose soil

Cement block pavers

Paved with patterned cement tiles

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Volleyball court; spillover from structure lab

Highly permeable Boundary wall on Path connecting one side, built campus entry and mass and spillover main block open spaces on another

Very low degree of permeability - High wall on two adjacent sides, built mass on the other two sides

Congregational space and foyer for hostel


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 19

Space No.

9

10

11

12

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Cement block pavers

Medium physical permeability due to linear axis of access - Built mass on one side, boundary wall on another

Parking

Medium physical permeability due to linear axis of access – staggered built mass on one side, boundary wall on another

Congregational ground

Medium degree of permeability – built mass on all sides, defined openings

Light and ventilation; spillover from main block; congregational space

Grass cover

Kota stone flooring


Low permeability Built mass on all sides, with minimal openings

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Light and ventilation; spillover from classrooms and workshops


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 20

3.2.

Maharani Gayatri Devi Public School

Location – Jaipur Site Area – 106666sq.m Ground Coverage – 16437sq.m MGD is a boarding school, with the campus consisting of three academic blocks, an activity centre, six hostel blocks, three residential buildings, and several sports activities. The campus


consists of large swathes of unbuilt space, with a high density of built form along the north and south side of the site, with high permeability in these areas. The built forms are arranged parallel to each other, with central congregational spaces with high density of plantations. The built form is characterised by plaster finish with Jaipur pink façade with high degree of fenestration cover. The access is from the west side of the site, onto an open porch, fronted by the main academic block.

Fig. 3.2.2 The built environment is characterized by low rise built forms and repetitive, harmonious facades, providing a high degree of visual intricacy. The unbuilt spaces are large and sweeping in counterpoint to the built forms.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 21

.




ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 22



ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 23


1

2

3

4

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Kota stone Flooring

Low permeability – surrounded on all sides by built mass, minimal openings

Congregation al space

Kota stone Flooring

Loose clay

Tarmac paving

Low permeability – surrounded on all sides by built mass, minimal openings

High visual permeability – trees on one side, high wired fence on other three sides

High permeability – built mass on three sides, wide openings

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24


Tennis courts

Path junction; spillover from school block


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 24

Space No.

5

6

7

8

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Grass cover

Medium permeability – linear access of axis, intermittent built forms on periphery

Hockey ground

Cement concrete paving

Loose soil

Grass cover lined with cement concrete paving

High visual permeability – high wired fences on all sides

High permeability – Built mass on one side, roads on the other

Medium permeability – built mass on one side, trees on another

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Basketball courts

Assembly area

Assembly area; spillover from dining hall


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 25

Space No.

9

10

11

12

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Grass cover

Low permeability – trees on all sides

Lawn; space for yoga

Grass cover

Stone slab paving

Grass cover

Low physical permeability, trees on all sides

Low permeability – space enclosed by built mass

Low physical permeability – trees on all sides

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Archery ground

Light and ventilation; assembly area; spillover from classrooms

Party lawn; rose garden


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 26

Space No.

13

14

15

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Tarmac paving

Medium permeability – built mass on one side, boundary wall on another, trees on remaining sides

Entrance to campus; parking

Medium physical permeability – built mass along one side, intermittent trees along other sides

Cricket ground

High permeability – linear form with multiple openings

Spillover from hostels

Grass cover

Tarmac paving


Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 27

3.3.

Pearl Academy

Location – Kukas Site Area – 11873sq.m Ground Coverage – 3564sq.m PA is an institute of fashion studies, with academic facilities, several multipurpose Fig. 3.3.1 Site Plan

spaces which are

used for display of students’ works, administrative services, and a cafeteria. The campus has a predominant built envelope, characterised by cement jaalis, providing a high degree of visual intricacy. The interior, however, is characterised by voids which act as one fluid whole, dominating over the built environment. The open spaces are hardscaped, but lent vitality through a large water body and numerous planters, and variation in paving material and patterns breaks down these unbuilt spaces into visually contrasting units. The built form provides a high degree of enclosure.

Fig. 3.3.2 The built environment is characterized by dominant built forms which loom over the open spaces, providing a high degree of enclosure. All corridors open onto these voids and hence provide visual permeability across the campus.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 28




ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 29



ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 30


1

2

3

4

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Polished kota stone flooring, lined with grass

Low physical permeability – built mass on one side, water body on the other

Badminton court; ramp for performances

Tarmac paving

Tarmac paving

Water body, lined by kota stone flooring

High physical permeability; medium visual permeability


High physical permeability from three sides

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Entrance to campus; parking

Parking

Stepwell; congregation al space


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 31

Space No.

5

6

7

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Grass cover

Low physical permeability – area enclosed by hedges

Green space

Buff stone paving crisscrossed with black stone

Tarmac paving

Medium physical permeability – built mass on one side, green space on other


Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Space for exhibition of arts & crafts

Parking

8

Tarmac paving


Parking


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 32

3.4. State University of Visual & Performing Arts Location – Rohtak Site Area – 60793sq.m Ground Coverage – 14752sq.m SUVPA is an integrated university campus which provides education in the field of film making, fashion, architecture and fine arts. The


campus consists of the four colleges, a central library and auditorium, a guest house, and administrative services. The unbuilt spaces in this campus have monumental proportions and compliment the intermittent built form. The congregational spaces are located centrally, on a site level as well as individual building level, with large peripheral open spaces with no assigned purpose, which serve as vantage points for the imposing built form. The buildings are clad in red and yellow sandstone with well-articulated fenestrations arranged in a repetitive, harmonious fashion.

Fig. 3.4.2 The built environment is characterized by monumental open spaces which complement the massing of the built form, with a low degree of enclosure due to complimentary proportions of the two.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 33




ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 34



ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 35


1

2

3

4

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Grass cover and tarmac paving

Medium permeability – access from the ends

Parking


Paved with sandstone with interstitial grassy patches.


Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

High permeability – access from Spillover from three sides, guest house built mass on opposing sides

Low permeability – enclosed within built mass

Medium permeability – visual connectivity broken by earth berm

Light and ventilation; spillover from school of film and TV; congregation al space

Parking


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 36

Space No.

5

6

7

8

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function


Low permeability – access from two edges

Green space



Grass cover

Very low permeability – enclosed within built mass

High permeability – access from all edges

Medium permeability – built mass on all four sides, with access from two adjacent sides

Light and ventilation; spillover from school of architecture; congregation al space

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Green space

Congregation al space; green cover


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 37

Space No.

9

10

11

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function

Sandstone paving

High permeability – access from all sides





High permeability – enclosed within intermittent built form

Light and ventilation; spillover from school of fine arts; congregation al space

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Congregation al space; spillover from all schools, library and auditorium


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 38

Space No.

12

13

14

15

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function



Green space; spillover from services




High permeability – access from all edges


Medium permeability – visual connectivity broken by earth berm

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Green space; entrance to central area; spillover from OAT

Light and ventilation; spillover from school of fashion; congregation al space

Green space


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 39

Space No.

16

17

Plan

Section

Ground Cover

Permeability

Function



Entrance to campus; green space


Medium permeability – access from the ends

Footfall

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

0-3

3-6

6-9

9-12 12-15 15-18 18-21 21-24

Green space


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS “…People measure the world with their movement, their bodies and their senses…they set the measure of the buildings they use, but buildings also set the measure of the lives they accommodate.” Ar. Simon Unwin

CASE STUDY 40

4.1. Comparison of spatial distribution Case Study

ASA

MGD

PA

SUVPA

Site Area

11653

106666

11873

60793

Ground coverage

3087

16437

3564

14752

Unbuilt Area

8566

90229

8309

46041

73%

84%

69%

75%

% Unbuilt Area Built Area

Ratio b/w Unbuilt & Built

Unbuilt Area

2.7:1

Built Area

Unbuilt Area

5.5:1

Built Area

Unbuilt Area

2.3:1

Built Area

Unbuilt Area

3:1

Ground Coverage Hardscaped

Softscaped

Hardscaped

Softscaped

Hardscaped

Softscaped

Hardscaped

Softscaped

Circulation

Water Body

Circulation

Water Body

Circulation

Water Body

Circulation

Water Body


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 41

Case Study

ASA

MGD

PA

SUVPA

Developmental pattern

Central block planned first, followed by peripheral development.

Organic development over large swathe of land

Single phase planning (executed) – another phase to follow

Single phase planning - Rigid distinction between built and open spaces

Incidental peripheral open spaces, with zones of high activity in the central open spaces

Intermittent placement of open spaces (based on allocation of required functions), with incidental open spaces converted into large gardens.

Concentric model, with one large, fluid central open space

Concentric model, followed by nodal open spaces which cater to individual building blocks

Organizational Pattern


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 42

4.2. Determination of social hierarchy through footfall analysis

Fig. 4.2.1 ASA – Dark blue indicates highest footfall


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CASE STUDY 43

Fig. 4.2.2 MGD – Dark blue indicates highest footfall


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

ANALYSIS 44

Fig. 4.2.3 PA – Dark blue indicates highest footfall


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

ANALYSIS 45

Fig. 4.2.4 SUVPA – Dark blue indicates highest footfall


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CONCLUSION & 46

RECOMMENDATIONS 4.3.

Deriving observations from the unbuilt spaces with the highest footfall from all four case studies, the following inferences can be made.

PA

Case Study

ASA

MGD

Scale

The unbuilt spaces are on a human scale, further accentuated by high degree of visual intricacy of ground cover.

The unbuilt spaces are on a monumental scale, with monotony broken down by plantation

The unbuilt spaces are expansive, with spaces brought to a humans scale by visual cues rather than physical ones

SUVPA

The unbuilt spaces are on a monumental scale, with high degree of visual intricacy of ground cover.

The scale must be relatable to the user, and compliment the scale of the built form. The higher the degree of visual intricacy, the lesser the scale appears to be. People are drawn to such spaces.

Degree of Enclosure

High degree of enclosure

Very high degree of enclosure

Low degree of enclosure

Medium degree of enclosure

The degree of enclosure provides a sense of intimacy and spatial comfort. The higher the spatial comfort, the higher the footfall.

Degree of Permeability

High degree of permeability

Low degree of permeability

Very high degree of permeability

Medium degree of permeability

High degree of permeability correlates with the extent of connectivity of a space. The higher the degree of visual and physical permeability, the more accessible a space seems.

Function

Congregational space; abutting with the canteen

Congregational space; acts as spillover from classrooms

Congregational space; abutting with multipurpose area used for displaying student’s works

Congregational space; acts as spillover from auditorium and library, and common space between all four institutes

People seek spaces for recourse and respite. Spaces with a high level of spatial comfort are invariably used for informal congregational purposes due to their adaptability and high level of enclosure. VOIDS IN ARCHITECTURE – A STUDY OF UNBUILT SPACES

ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION “Design is the method of putting form and content together. Design, just as art, has multiple definitions; there is no single definition. Design can be art. Design can be aesthetics. Design is so simple, that’s why it’s so complicated.”

Ar. Paul Rand

CONCLUSION & 47

RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1.

Organizational Pattern

A careful study of the aforementioned cases displays the following patterns: The unbuilt space in a given environment can be broken down into: • • •

Planned open spaces Buffers/zones of transition Incidental open spaces

Built form

Planned open spaces

The focus of a design process ostensibly lays maximum focus on the center of the given site. These area in the site can be left unbuilt, with due attention to size and scale of this

Incidental open spaces

space, along with its accessibility and permeability.

Fig. 5.1.1 Inferential organizational pattern

Zones of transition

It was observed that unbuilt spaces in each of the cases were organized in a roughly similar manner, with planned open spaces placed in the center of the site, transitional buffers placed around them, and incidental open spaces on the outermost side, along the site boundaries. The central open spaces also acted as crucial climatic aids, provided much needed congregational space, and acted as spillover spaces from the planned functions of the adjoining built spaces. 5.2.

Inference

Especially in the context of institutional buildings, the built form signifies rigidity of function and formality of organization, hence indicating the requirement of the unbuilt spaces to provide respite through development of areas of recourse and social interaction. These open spaces are areas of optional usage, and hence their design, location and organization are of utmost importance, and enhance the overall quality of a built environment. Hence, the built spaces signify the purpose of the built form, whereas the unbuilt spaces signify the spirit of the place. Buildings are a direct outcome of the function within, and these functions interpret themselves in the built form as well as the unbuilt spaces. In essence, unbuilt spaces in institutional campuses act as the genius loci of the built environment.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

CONCLUSION & 48

RECOMMENDATIONS 5.3. •

•

•

Recommendations A centric model of development can be followed while designing an institutional campus, with a central unbuilt space acting as social interaction place, transitional buffers in close vicinity, and peripheral open spaces to accommodate services. The user circulation can be guided using these unbuilt spaces, by influencing permeability and accessibility, and arranging built forms around the open spaces so that maximum functions can be complimented Degree of enclosure and intimacy of an unbuilt space is characterized by the built forms in its vicinity, and their usage is determined by user preference, and not solely assigned formal functions. Hence, pockets of unbuilt space must be configured such that they can be adopted and adapted by the end user at their own discretion, hence perpetuating the spirit of the place.


ANUPRIYA SARASWAT

GLOSSARY

Built Environment– A built environment is a human-made space in which people live, work and recreate on a day to day basis. It is a material, spatial and cultural product of human labor ranging in scale from individual buildings to entire cities Conceptual Order– Comprehension of the ordered or disordered relationships among a buildings elements and systems, and responding to the meanings they evoke Degree of Enclosure–The extent which a space can be isolated by physical constraints. Form– An integrated whole having a coherent structure Genius Loci– Historical term for the guardian spirit of a city; contemporary definition for spirit of a place Permeability – It refers to the number and nature of openings on the periphery of a space. It may be physical or visual in nature. Proportion– It refers to the proper or harmonious relation of one part to another or to the whole. Scale – It alludes to the size of something compared to a reference standard or to the size of something else. Visual intricacy – The visual complexity of a surface. The degree of visual intricacy increases as the patterns on a surface get denser or more complicated.

ix

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Published Works •

Form, Space and Order – D.K. Ching – Van Nostrand Reinhold – Feb 1996 (2nd Edition)

•

Architectural Research Methods – Linda N. Groat, David Wang – April 2013 (2nd Edition)

•

Opening Spaces: Design as landscape Architecture – Hans Loidl, Stefan Bernard – October 2003 (1st Edition)

Unpublished Works •

Urban Open Spaces – Resham Tyagi – Aayojan School of Architecture – 2012

•

Freedom of the Human Spirit ( A Study of Built and Unbuilt Spaces in Institutions) - Swastika Mukherjee – Aayojan School of Architecture – 2010

x

ANNEXURES

Annex 1: Questionnaire – ASA

In conjunction with the areas referred to in the above diagram: •

What hours of the day do you spend in each of the numbered areas?

•

Kindly write down the number markers for the spaces in accordance with your preference for these places i.e. the place you like the most being the first on the list to places you like the least at the end of the list.

xi

Annex 2: Questionnaire – MGD



•


xii

Annex 3: Questionnaire – PA



•


xiii

Annex 4: Questionnaire – SUVPA



•


xiv

Voids in Architecture - A Study of Unbuilt Spaces

Recommend Documents