C hapter 3 the Design Context
58
conceived, designed, built, and marketed much more like a product.
A salient example here might be modular housing, which is now
so ubiquitous. Multiple units are built in a factory and marketed
and sold more like a product than a building. Specific sites are not
considered, but broad locational dependencies remain important.
The same is true for various kinds of premade “industrial” buildings. In current practice, however, these are usually fairly low-end
products resistant to significant innovations, despite many attempts
to the contrary.
Building types
One of the most important characteristics of buildings to always
keep in mind is that they must provide habitable spatial environments for living, work, or other common life activities that range
from the cultural to entertainment; thus we can think about buildings in terms of different kinds of fundamental spatial environments. One way of looking at these environments is simply by
building type—hospitals, laboratories, housing, and the like. A
whole host of defining characteristics spring to mind when thinking about each, as do differences among types. Essential differences between hospitals and housing complexes are patently
obvious and suggestive of not only uses but differences in overall
forms and spatial organizations, types and uses of spaces, types
of infrastructures (mechanical, electrical, telecommunications,
etc.)—all the way down to images of specific material requirements or needs (as might be present in hospital operating rooms,
for example, with their needs for surfaces that do not host bacteria
and that are easily cleanable). Thus, a building types perspective
can suggest a whole host of design requirements and subsequently
stated design objectives that are useful for designers and engineers.
The perspective becomes considerably less useful in other instances,
particularly in cases where buildings serve multiple functions and
must be designed to adapt to different uses over time. Building
types also come and go; we have very few harness shops being
built today. More generally, a types perspective can detrimentally
lead to framing broad design questions in a restrictive way. Nonetheless, the approach is often used and it is valuable within the
context of this book.
Other approaches to thinking about buildings are from the perspective of physical assemblies and systems (structural, mechanical,
and so on). The following section briefly explores the idea of
systems, particularly their functional definition.
58
conceived, designed, built, and marketed much more like a product.
A salient example here might be modular housing, which is now
so ubiquitous. Multiple units are built in a factory and marketed
and sold more like a product than a building. Specific sites are not
considered, but broad locational dependencies remain important.
The same is true for various kinds of premade “industrial” buildings. In current practice, however, these are usually fairly low-end
products resistant to significant innovations, despite many attempts
to the contrary.
Building types
One of the most important characteristics of buildings to always
keep in mind is that they must provide habitable spatial environments for living, work, or other common life activities that range
from the cultural to entertainment; thus we can think about buildings in terms of different kinds of fundamental spatial environments. One way of looking at these environments is simply by
building type—hospitals, laboratories, housing, and the like. A
whole host of defining characteristics spring to mind when thinking about each, as do differences among types. Essential differences between hospitals and housing complexes are patently
obvious and suggestive of not only uses but differences in overall
forms and spatial organizations, types and uses of spaces, types
of infrastructures (mechanical, electrical, telecommunications,
etc.)—all the way down to images of specific material requirements or needs (as might be present in hospital operating rooms,
for example, with their needs for surfaces that do not host bacteria
and that are easily cleanable). Thus, a building types perspective
can suggest a whole host of design requirements and subsequently
stated design objectives that are useful for designers and engineers.
The perspective becomes considerably less useful in other instances,
particularly in cases where buildings serve multiple functions and
must be designed to adapt to different uses over time. Building
types also come and go; we have very few harness shops being
built today. More generally, a types perspective can detrimentally
lead to framing broad design questions in a restrictive way. Nonetheless, the approach is often used and it is valuable within the
context of this book.
Other approaches to thinking about buildings are from the perspective of physical assemblies and systems (structural, mechanical,
and so on). The following section briefly explores the idea of
systems, particularly their functional definition.