We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
The nonprofit North Coast Community Homes, which operates more than group homes for more than 1, developmentally disabled people in Northeast Ohio, announced four winning designs Thursday evening at the Ariel International Center in Cleveland. The idea of the competition, called Zero Threshold, was to encourage architects and landscape architects to envision affordable barrier-free environments beautiful enough to appeal to anyone — not just the physically disabled. The show was part of a gradual evolution in designing for people with disabilities. Congress approved the Americans with Disabilities Act in and amended it in in part with the goal of removing physical barriers in public facilities. The winning concepts and their designers were:. To follow up on the competition, North Coast Community Homes is raising money to build one or more of the winning designs in Old Brooklyn.
WATCH RELATED VIDEO: Quick Landscape Design Concept with Morpholio TraceContent:
- Glass Garden Cloche – Threshold
- Courtyard Garden - Threshold.
- What We Do
- Bachelor of Landscape Architectural Design
- Sign up to our newsletter
- The path. The space. The threshold. Some highway transcripts
- Interior Design Students Create Large-Scale Installations Based on the Concept of a Threshold
- County of San Mateo
- DAHLIN Participates in the Zero Threshold Design Competition
- Nature on the Threshold
Glass Garden Cloche – Threshold
Architecture constantly negotiates the ideal and the real. These two conditions, being a reflection of cultural values and practices, change over time. I suggest that what remains constant to architecture are the lasting spatial and formal qualities that engage in constructing the physical and cultural landscape: how it channels natural light and air, how its permanent structures organize space, frame and supports life, shelter, protect and comfort.
There are the qualities that make architecture endure and adapt to a changing cultural and natural environment. The placement of architecture in the real world often seems contaminated by a multiplicity of socio-economic structures and processes, but its situation in the world is also what provides an opportunity to engage in the making of a landscape where over time architecture finds a critical autonomy and relevance.
The role of architecture in making or responding to the landscape is one of the critical questions in current debates about autonomy and contingency. The ideal world was transformed into a real work because what characterized architecture was the fact that it should be built. Recently the Fall ACSA conference invited scholars to revisit the debate on the tension between autonomy and contingency, between architecture that is an autonomous discipline and architecture that is a cultural product, citing the work of K.
I could not help but reflect on the nature of a conceptual space in itself. I argue that the closest the discipline of architecture has been to creating this presumably vacuous conceptual space has been the times when in search for disciplinary autonomy the discourse centered on the creation of typological forms, codified in handbooks and manuals of the nineteenth century.
Typology as a theory seeking autonomous form was ultimately contingent on social needs program and historical precedent. Thus as a theory it had little power or desire to engage with the city or the landscape in any other way than visual. As a result, the formulation of these rules and categories of form had the unintended consequence of creating a mechanical repetition of formal strategies, the emergence of style as a source of differentiation, and thus the loss of criticality and singularity that a quest for autonomy can ultimately be justified on.
Typological or compositional rules in architecture have always allowed formal accommodations to site geometry, but in any form of objectification of architecture is easy to neglect the critical engagement with the space of the landscape.
In the nineteenth century, an internal crisis in architecture resulted from what Manfredo Tafuri described as the increasing primacy of formal invention perhaps the goal of autonomy and the simultaneous repetition of those formal inventions to a point of obsession, which generated an urban condition characterized by the accumulation of fragments that attested to how useless was the effort to invent them.
The argument made in this paper is that rather than purely a reflection of the processes that make the city, a critical architecture has emerged out of the abstraction of the landscape as a conceptual space, allowing ideas that range from the notion of region to the science of ecology to provide a new theoretical lens for architecture to observe, select, heighten and transform aspects of its situation, and to critically engage in proposing new formal, spatial and performance agendas for built form.
It is important to differentiate site, which can be naturally conflated, with landscape. Landscape as a conceptual space, has always been more abstract and therefore broadly aligned with the idealized. Whereas site, as a political or physical limit, has always been a found condition, connected to reality, and it can be more commonly tied to the immediate social, political, economic and technological conditions.
A critical difference is that landscape theory has given architecture new frameworks to select and edit attributes of its site or region, and to create a more meaningful dialogue with the broader cultural construct of landscape—as an evolving idealized space. This was only possible with the emergence in the late nineteenth century of a new disciplinary autonomy for landscape theory.
This discourse in landscape transformed the idea of landscape itself from what Elizabeth Meyer described as a passive setting or ground for architecture—and James Corner characterized as a passive product of culture—into an active and strategic agent of culture. Examining this evolution in landscape theory, and the corresponding theories and practices emerging in architecture as a response, elucidates how ecological concepts of scale, site and systems have been translated into a new conceptual space or framework for formal investigation in architecture.
Recently, landscape has dominated the discourse of ecological design and urbanism, inviting introspection in the field of architecture, as it seeks to redefines its role and relationship to the landscape. Over the last ten years the theoretical discourse of architecture has shown increased activity and interest surrounding to notions of site, region and landscape—terms that are likely borrowed from landscape theory.
The publication of the book Site Matters in , edited by Andrea Kahn and Carol Burns, was presented as the first significant effort at formalizing a theory for site as a conceptual structure in architecture, a subject in which the editors stated there was scanty literature.
The theory of landscape urbanism, compiled in a volume edited by the architect Charles Waldheim, brings together multiple disciplines in conceptualizing urbanism as landscape, and describing new forms of collaboration, what James Corner has referred to as hybrid forms of practice.
However, it is important to recognize that, although more visible in the discourse now, the exchange of ideas between landscape and architecture theory is not a recent development, and in fact has been a part of critical architecture practice for a long time. What we can see in a brief historical survey is that the notion of landscape has provided a conceptual space for architecture for over a century.
In this conceptual space the discipline of architecture has engaged with theories of place, regional identity, nature and lately the ecological.
Through the following sections this paper examines some of the ideas exchanged between the fields of architecture and landscape theory at critical moments in history. The objective is to understand how the cultural and collective imagination of a territory — whether it is imagined as a natural condition or a constructed ecology —defines a conceptual space for critical architecture to be practiced.
Before the twentieth century, early theories of landscape, with its origins in painting, transformed observations of reality through subjective experience and imagination, into scenery where not only the human subject and the architecture object, but also the city, were minimized against the dominance of an immense and dominant Nature. This coincides with the rise of typological study of architecture, a search for formal autonomy that exploited the picturesque notion of idealized architecture objects placed in an imaged and heightened natural condition.
Tafuri claims that this selectivity of context or a site-less conceptual space developed for architecture was similar to the landscape painter that selects the parts of Nature that should be heightened. We can find similar critical responses and moral questions in earlier landscape theory. These alternative theories prioritized scale and local or regional ecology rather than the imported aesthetic principles of idealized typologies. A parallel but rather abstract alternative emerged in architecture in the early twenty century when the discipline rejected typology and engaged in an examination of space.
However abstract that alternative may have been, the notion of continuous space is where architecture first engaged with the landscape as part of its internal logic, albeit sometimes still in purely visual terms. Typologically derived architecture often borrowed the imaginary and distant landscape as passive ground for autonomous forms that could undermine the contingencies of its real situation. But the emergence of critical landscape theory that addressed local ecology, and the evolution of disciplinary tools in the last century that facilitated measuring, representation, and analysis of the landscape, have made landscape systems more legible in their multiplicity and complexity, allowing the evolution of the conceptual basis of landscape from the pictorial to the ecological.
The city as a natural condition is no longer an excuse to avoid political and moral questions. It is in fact the acknowledgement of the most important moral questions of our time, the expansion of the effect of human action in the natural environment, the degradation of the rural landscape, and the understanding that cities have become unique constructed ecologies with their own logic and processes.
The conceptualization of mechanisms and organizing principles of ecosystems is fostering a new collective imagination of what comprises the landscape. Through this lens, in the context of urbanism, the conceptual space of the city is a dynamic system in which all parts, buildings and natural systems, are designed and constructed as interconnected, and interdependent.
This changing paradigm of landscape has profoundly shifted the conceptual ground on which architecture is built. Therefore the urban landscape is not a vacuous or pure conceptual space where architecture exists in isolation. Instead, much like the discipline of landscape ecology has transformed design through systems thinking, architecture in the urban landscape no longer designs autonomous objects in sites, but instead defines different conceptual boundaries to define ecosystems at different scales.
The autonomy of the architecture object emerges from occupying a unique niche in the landscape ecology. Critical reinterpretations emerged of a modern architecture that was conceived as a constructed landscape, rejecting the notion of landscape as purely external condition bounded to nature. For example, in the Villa Savoye Le Corbusier explored architecture as both framed view that borrowed the distant landscape, and as constructed landscape through the device of the architectural promenade that culminated in the roof terrace.
According to K. This contradicts the anti-formalist position of Mies van der Rohe, and other modernists who rejected the nineteenth century formal manipulations of architecture types to conform to existing configurations of urban space, but in its place these proposals did not always succeed in engaging with the urban landscape in meaningful ways.
Once that form becomes part of a real condition, similar to any typological condition, its repetition and export is no longer critical. While it is true that abstraction of modernism was challenged by site concerns, as Meyer suggested, some manifestations of modernism did engage with the conceptual space of the regional landscape, as a reaction to that same abstraction, and as a form of criticism in architecture.
This development paralleled what Elizabeth Meyer described happening in landscape theory: the reaction to the transposition of idealized types and the formulation of concepts tied to place. Frank Lloyd Wright appropriated the landscape of the Midwestern prairie as a conceptual space for a new language, which generalized and systematized formal relationships to solar orientation, climate, views, spatial continuity, scale and hierarchy in the production of architecture that was specific to the northern American landscape, but that was flexible enough to engage with multiplicity and specificity by being site-inflected.
This language emerged from the abstraction of formal qualities of a region. Region as a concept had been prevalent in the discourse of landscape theory. The translation of region to architecture was more formal than ecological, but it provided a renewed autonomy to the discipline so that the boundaries of the region were reinterpreted as cultural in many different sites.
Similarly, the work of Alvar Aalto adapted modern functionalism to the regional landscape of Finland through formal, material and tectonic expression of an architecture that was conceived as landscape. This project has been described as inspired by the landscape of the Italian hilltop town center.
The Aaltos situated and generated a new language for modern architecture by importing a traditional image of the civic landscape as an architectural typology, transforming it through the material and topological integration of the building with the Finnish landscape.
Although the building emerges from the abstraction and importation of the image of a foreign landscape, the spatial, formal and material operations engaged with the real site and the Finnish landscape in meaningful and humanizing ways.
This results in millions of flexible combinations that never become schematic. It results in unlimited riches and perpetual variation in organically grown forms. We must follow the same path in architectural standardization.
The building creates a terraced landscape the opens the courtyard of the town hall along one corner to spill into the surrounding woodland.
The evolution from landscape as natural condition, against which the technical object sits, to architecture as a constructed landscape, has given way to a recent view of landscape as ecology. The metrics of ecological landscape are defined by performance, process and relationships of its parts. The contemporary discourse of landscape and urbanism is less concerned with visual or formal qualities, but with the ecological performance of form.
According to the landscape architect and theorist James Corner, this new view of landscape invites a reinterpretation of the most significant spaces of the nineteenth century landscapes through an ecological lens. In the current state of environmental crisis, engaging landscape ecology as a conceptual space for architectural production is critical to make the discipline relevant to contemporary life.
Architecture can engage the current agenda of the landscape discipline in constructing or restoring designed ecologies, by building on the notions of city as nature and architecture as landscape.
A critical contemporary practice understands the performance of architectural form as an experiential and environmental device integral to landscape ecologies. The concepts and aesthetics of sustainability and ecological performance, long a part of the conceptual territory of landscape theory, have permeated architecture practice. For a scholar interested in the dialogue between architecture and the natural environment, it seems worth studying the cultural and technical implications of concepts and intellectual frameworks, such as resilience, that are transferred from ecology to design fields.
The ecologist C. It is hard to think of architecture as object in this context. Systems thinking implies that architecture is only a boundary describing a system of systems, and that when we expand the boundary to include its site, or territory, those systems can be understood as connected to much larger ecological, cultural and infrastructural systems.
The term resilience has been in use in landscape and infrastructure systems for some time, but it is still new in the field of architecture, often used loosely, and without consensus in its definition and application to buildings. However, its value as a metaphor has been suggested as fostering the ability to rethink institutional structures that encourage slow restructuring, pattern behavior and preservation of current practices.
In contrast, sustainability in design, its metrics and aesthetics, has been explored for quite some time. But sustainability is focused on optimization, often pursuing notions of self-sufficiency. In that conceptual framework, the building can be conceived as an island, or its performance measured in terms of degrees of independence e.
A shift to true ecological thinking focuses on relationships. Most importantly, it recognizes that any act of building transforms and reconstructs a large territory, will affect or connect to infrastructural networks far beyond what we usually comprehend, and to an existing ecology that is complex and diverse. Therefore it demands that the landscape and the architecture are not reductive, and instead be thought of as integral to each other, in terms of systems and not objects.
Form is generative of performance, and although conceptual frameworks and a degree of abstraction from the real world are still needed to comprehend those complex systems and relationships, this generates a different kind of autonomy.
Some notable collaborations between architecture and landscape practices are resulting in an ecological approach to urbanism that reframes architecture as an active agent of the landscape. These projects not only are contingent to ecological conditions, but in their effort to construct a new landscape ecology, they create ecosystems and define ecotones in the urban environment, restore relationships, provide ecosystem services and heighten the awareness of the systems that support urban life.
The architecture and landscape generated from this way of thinking become singular forms, responding to climate and assertively creating new micro-climates. The field of ecology is inherently about relationships, developing abstract models of representation to diagram and explain complex and contingent systems.
As a conceptual space for architecture landscape ecology provides a framework to categorize, analyze, select, and engage with the contingencies and performance of systems. Frameworks of ecological performance allow architectural form to engage complexity, and to define its active role as consumer and producer of ecosystem services. Architecture in this context is not a passive object sitting on scenery, but instead must become an active agent in restoring or constructing new urban ecologies.
These classifications are in themselves problematic, as an ecological view of this landscape would suggest there is nothing strictly natural about the open space, and nothing strictly unnatural about the urban fabric.
The terminology has been discussed elsewhere at length, and that can be the topic of another paper. What is relevant about this distinction is that these two spaces, designed at two very different times in history, perform important ecological functions in the cultural and physical landscape of the city.
Courtyard Garden - Threshold.
The appropriately landscaped highway scenes may not only help improve road safety and comfort but also help protect ecological environment. Yet there is very little research data on highway length threshold with consideration of distinctive landscape patterns. The statistical analysis was based on data collected in a driving simulator and electrocardiograph. Specifically, vehicle-related data, ECG data, and supplemental subjective stress perception were collected. The results revealed that the theoretical highway length threshold tended to increase when the landscape pattern was switched to open, semiopen, and vertical ones.
Freeway landscape design is closely related to driver performance. How to stimulate drivers' positive physiological condition and improve overall driving.
What We Do
Bachelor of Landscape Architectural Design
Our ramps reduce tripping hazards and provide safe transition for walk-in bathtubs and showers as well as smooth access into garages. Amramp has a large selection of options including aluminum, rubber, composite, and our steel Amramp Adjustable Threshold Ramp. All of these options will fit easily in front of a residential or commercial door, sliders, or other vertical barriers and provide easy transition from one height to another. These ramps are great solutions for homes, businesses, retail stores, schools, hospitals and more.
Jasmine Jetton, left, and Jessica Phan, both interior design students in the Fay Jones School of Architecture and Design, present their large-scale project that explored thresholds on Oct. They hoped to entice the busy students walking by to sit and relax and interact with the Fulbright Peace Fountain area.
Sign up to our newsletter
Log In. A foundation of IPM in urban landscapes is to put the right plant in the right place. This reduces plant stress and thus the long term costs of pest management. Many urban trees have more pests than the same tree species in natural areas. This is due in part to the stress created by impervious surfaces such as roads and sidewalks. Impervious surfaces increase air temperature, reduce soil moisture and oxygen, and increase soil compaction.
The path. The space. The threshold. Some highway transcripts
Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit their full application by the following dates to be considered for a Commonwealth Supported Place. The Master of Landscape Architecture provides students with the opportunity to collaborate alongside celebrated practitioners from award-winning international design studios and leading experts in the area of urban design. Students engage in a variety of projects that are based upon the big questions that face global contemporary cities and landscapes: urban densification, climate change, declining resource supply land, food and water and the loss of biological diversity through ecological fragmentation and habitat destruction. Using the most relevant and up-to-date methodologies and technologies, students participate in practice-based studios to develop their complex problem-solving skills in order to address the critical role of landscape in the cities of the future. By building advanced specialist knowledge, UTS students graduate with a range of advocacy, political and professional agency, project management and financial skills in order to tackle contemporary issues in local and global contexts.
Hill Thalis + Urban Projects design a mountainside house with contours of the landscape, and the thresholds within and around the house.
Interior Design Students Create Large-Scale Installations Based on the Concept of a Threshold
To browse Academia. Log in with Facebook Log in with Google. Remember me on this computer. Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
County of San Mateo
With defined functionality attributed to space by designers, it is the production of static space where most of our interventions are limited. The dynamic spaces, often the more engaging ones, result as leftovers, most times without any conscious thought and deliberation. The root word — limen is derived from original Latin, literally meaning being on a threshold. The concept of liminality has been appropriated in varying contexts, from social, cultural, and also percolating into the spatial, where it refers to an intermediate state and an in-between condition. The liminal entity, the threshold spaces, have the primary characteristics of being in-between, of what it connects or separates, though most times are separate and distinct entities in itself. This liminal stage, the being of threshold spaces, is ambiguous and a state of pure possibilities, where the realms of conscious and unconscious, and different ends of the spectrum find their place.
Controls of the threshold and pool level on this hillside home present serious constraints on the design.
DAHLIN Participates in the Zero Threshold Design Competition
The concept of threshold can potentially be applied to conservation planning of species, habitats, and ecosystems. It also has significance in managing social—ecological systems for resilience. However, our understanding and use of threshold has been scattered among various disciplines, and the link to conservation planning and social—ecological system management has not been strongly established. The review of the use of threshold in various disciplines reveals that the term is used in a similar manner in both natural and social sciences: a threshold is a point or a zone on an independent variable, and if it is crossed, a sudden, large change in the state of a dependent variable occurs. Even a small change in the independent variable brings this drastic change; nonlinear relationship characterizes the threshold response. Thresholds also separate alternative regimes in a social—ecological system.
Nature on the Threshold
When designing residential landscapes, there are many things to consider. Landscapes must be designed to be both functional and aesthetically pleasing. One way to address functional issues is to think about landscape design in the same way as a house.