movement in architectural urbanism

7/27/2019 MOVEMENT IN ARCHITECTURAL URBANISM

1/37

MOVEMENT IN ARCHITECTURAL URBANISM

TACKLING COMPLEXITIES OF THE CONTEMPORARY URBAN CONDITION

byKonstantin Seufert

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

(Housing & Urbanism)

in the Architectural Association School of Architecture.

September 2013


2/37

1

INTRODUCTION 02

1. REDIFINING THE CITY FROM WITHIN 03

THE RENEWED FOCUS ON THE URBAN 04

MOVEMENT THROUGH STRATEGIC LAYOUT 05

GUIDING SPATIAL ORGANISATION 09

2. STRATEGIES FOR THE COLLECTIVE 12

CRYSTALLIZED ACTIVITY PATTERNS 13

THE PART AND THE WHOLE 14

MOVEMENT BETWEEN GENERATIVE ELEMENTS 17

3. THE EVOLUTION OF THE MIX 20

INHABITING THE CITY OF MANY CENTRES 21

THE IDEAL METROPOLIS REACHES DEADLOCK 23

MOVEMENT AND THE URBAN ECONOMY 25

MOVEMENT DRIVEN URBANISM 29


3/37

2

INTRODUCTION

These days, the reputation of the professions dealing with the development of

cities are stagnating on being acceptable as they are either blamed for

negligence in matters of urban decay, sprawl and fragmentation or forbeing

held co-responsible for 20th century legacies such as pessimistic mono-

functional mass-housing districts or generallyincoherent spatial logics, which

are still prevailing in the contemporary city.

Architects equally have resigned from the task to fully understand or direct the

citys multiple layers of complex dynamics. While accepting that traditional tools

like the large plan have become impracticable, the designing spatial disciplines

are overwhelmed by a multitude of stakeholders and constantly changing

conditions. Being faced with obvious misplanning in the city, they regularly

plead for merciless capitalisation processes against which they seem to be

impotent.In doing so,they undermine parts of their obligation to engage in

debates on the city or to oppose in any case of impending failure.

Regardless of any crisis, cities are expanding at impressive scaleand fears are

high that they will become mere manifestationsof many autonomous and

competing systems acting according to their own logic.

In order to analyse and evaluate how contemporary urban planning projects are

forming the urban condition, the area which ones attention would be drawn to,

eventually, must be the inner city. There, the spatial disciplines are not

deedless. As these numerous urban renewal projects show, architect-planners

and their theories do actually play a role.

They are developing strategies to cope with the 21th urban condition and they

are trying to find a common ground to steer a citys dynamic growth.The study

of movement, mobility and the activity patterns of our society is such an attempt

to find an adequate understanding of the contemporary urban condition. Uniting

these findings with state-of-the-art design strategies in architectural urbanism

could make urban planning and design a more integrated process.


4/37

3

01 REDIFINING THE CITY FROM WITHIN


5/37

4

THE RENEWED FOCUS ON THE URBAN

The increasing number of urban renewal projects in cities worldwide can be

understood as an indication that these relevant cities are increasingly in

possession of less fortunate central locations which need redefinition.Areas

which one would - out of experience - tendentially rather expect to find in

suburban regions or at the city fringe. Naturally, the otherwise well located

zones in the city possess great connectivity. There is usually a fine mesh of

streets, pedestrian paths and efficient public transport systems linking to the

rest of the city and to the larger metropolitan area. The proximity to high-speed

train connections and the possible availability of an international airport are

further connecting the city to continental and to more global destinations. These

typically metropolitan characteristics are strong location factors and put

pressure on development.

The suburbs, on the other hand, which were favoured by the city dweller for a

long time, have lost their attractivity and it seems that today we are faced with a

variety of processes which render downtown in a new blossoming appeal. It

would be quite an oversimplification to try to explain this shift with a newly risen

interest towards historic preserved city cores, where one then expects to find

picturesque morphologies at pedestrian scale. Nor is there a newly established

collective need for the proliferation of identity distinguishable in our society. Aneventual longing for something, we would hope to find exclusively through some

kind of backward orientation towards a sublime atmosphere or sense of space

which presumably can only be provided by ancient fabric having had once an

actual meaning.

There must be more solid reasons for the awareness of downtown in the public

consciousness, as well as, among the professions dealing with the built

environment. Above all, it is highly likely that this phenomenon can be tracedback to rather rational reasons. Major shifts in the global and subsequently in

the urban economy are fundamentally changing the socio-economic activity

patterns and therefore the urban condition in general. Consequently, in recent

decades, parts of the centre accumulated a demand for adaption to the

changing needs of a modern1 post-industrial society as they have become

deprived of their original purpose over time. The role they used to play within

the larger urban system became less relevant.For that reason, urban renewal

1The term modern is used here as a substitute for contemporary relating to the present time , asopposed to Modernism or Modernist era which describes mainly the pre -war period startingaround the turn of the century.


6/37

5

projects there can also be studied as direct physical responses to a set of

worldwide on-going socio-economic processes which affect our daily life a great

deal. They are circumscribed by notions such as globalisation, meaning

processes which increase globality2or the information age, a notion Manuel

Castell uses to define our new era, which favours information and knowledge3.

Both terms are quite often in use these days summarising the increased flow of

information, funds, goods, people, etc.

As cities are according to scholars like Sassen and Castells more than ever

places of economical concentration4, the rise of the knowledge economy

renders the urban as an incubatory environment. Now, city authorities have

understood their duty. They are engaging in exploiting their relevant sites with

intelligent urban designs and are trying to apply economically sustainable

marketing strategies5. Although these interventions in the city are naturally

limited in size, cities have high hopes that the subsequent catalytic influence of

these projects will go beyond the borders of the adjacent fabric. In fact, the

whole urban system or even the greater regions shall benefit from synergetic

effects.

MOVEMENT THROUGH STRATEGIC LAYOUT

However, what is crucial for us and our study of urban form is the sum of

intriguing consequences inherent in these developments. The tangible realities

with which urban planners are confronted are, amongst others, reflected in our

will to live where one is working, to move downtown and, in a more general

sense, to be as highly connected as possible. It is the urban planners task to

create the urban environment where multiple functions are juxtaposed and

synergetic effects are supported.

Hamburgs HafenCity is claiming to be an ambitious project where many ideas

are supposed to merge and find their way to materialisation. But still, HafenCity

redevelopment is a typical example of a new generation of worldwide on-going

projects to restructure our inner cities. Hamburg, like many traditional port cities,

was struggling with the impacts of technological progress in the fields of goods

traffic and shipping manufacturing. These developments changed the way ports

2

(Steger, 2009, p. 8)3 (Castells, 1997)4 (Sassen, 2002; Sassen, 2000)5 Cities are greatly encouraged in their efforts through means of funding by a range of municipalagencies and superior authorities.(Kunzmann, 2009)


7/37

6

had to be organised and where they should later be ideally located6. As a

consequence the functional und spatial relationship between the port and the

city decreased and the proximity to the centre was no longer crucial. In their

need to expand, ports had to move to more remote areas outside the city,

leaving abandoned spaces behind. The attempt to redefine Hamburgs

waterfront stands for many numerous former industrial zones in cities worldwide

where areas have become obsolete and thus urge for a more substantial role in

the future.

As the brownfield project is an extension of the centre towards the waterfront it

also has to tackle a problem which the old core developed over the decades.

Although a typical downtown atmosphere of vibrant urbanity exists at daytime,

residential uses depleted over time for the sake of businesses and tourist

daytime amenities. This means to turn the fabric into a silent almost abandoned

seeming spot after working hours. As an example of a contemporary

development project where a new piece of the city is being designed from

scratch with a limited amount of starting points in the vicinity, a closer look at

HafenCitys structure will shed light on the matter. We will witness how active

planning is shaping the development process and above all, we explore the

design strategies that are shaping the urban morphology which targets to serve

the needs and activity patterns of metropolitan life today.

Obviously, one notices upon first look that a monotonous land use pattern which

is continuously repeated has not been applied. Unlike Amsterdams IJ-Plein

masterplan, which is coined solely by residential use, or unlike pure business

high-rise districts such as the Docklands in London, HafenCity is providing a

mix of different building types, eventually not mono-functional. Bringing

6(Hoyle, 1989).

Fig. 1 Hamburg's old and new street pattern: the old city core(black) and its extension into HafenCity (red).

Fig. 2 Grain in HafenCity. Indicated in red arethe main axes leading into the centre.


8/37

7

residential uses back to the very centre while integrating more typical downtown

uses is key to the strategy. In detail this means to support premises for living

and working with a variety of civic institutions

such as cultural, social and educational

facilities with their associated networks. This

diversity is expressed in morphological terms

as well. The distributed buildings range from

rather simple single detached multi residential

units to smaller opened-up block structures

which are formally more complex mix use

entities but internally constituted of equal rather

conventional and expectable urban typology.

Yet HafenCity manages to maintain an urban

grain which is slightly differentiated but still

looks coherent. It is ranging from rather fine to

mid-size scales.

This design approach is proliferating inner

patterns of partial irregularity but the fabric

keeps its legibility throughout the area. While

this is usually ensuring the substantial capacityof movement and while the built-up area has a

tendency to possess more or less distinct

grades of porosity, one has to admit that in the

specific case of HafenCity, some topographic

complications due to flood protection measures

and a limited amount of one way streets are

locally restraining from unimpeded flow.

Nevertheless, its undeniable space legibility isachieved, furthermore, through the net of street

systems which are hierarchically organised,

ranging from main axes leading out and into

the city to a system of side roads and one way

streets, which are further helping to

differentiate the fabric. We see different urban

areas with neighbourhood characteristics

which are tied together by a strong concept of interconnectivity linking the sets

of different areas with specific conditions and different grades of privacy. These

Fig. 5 Ground floor uses in HafenCity

Fig. 3 Abstract Drawing showing accessible openspace in grey. No distinction is made between

pedestrian ways, public or private-but-publicly-accessible open space.

Fig. 4 Main uses within buildings in HafenCity West:Housing (orange), office spaces (blue) and buildingsfor education, culture and civic institutions (red).Different ground floor uses for shops and services arenot marked.


9/37

8

distinguished functional assets of HafenCity are enhanced by extensive public

ground floor uses oriented towards squares and streets, which provide a

multitude of shops and services to serve the new community. Between this

street-based morphology and spaces for businesses and civic institutions the

more private living areas are thoughtfully interspersed. In applying an allocation

formula for the creation of urban life, they understand housing as a key quality

for the new area and embrace diversity instead of mono-functionality. This is not

solely a market driven calculating manoeuvre in accordance with statutory

provisions. The ambitious program is aiming at both serving the needs of a

productive society and setting the preconditions for their economic relations in

the urban field.

Fig. 7 Mixed agglomeration around Sandtorpark. Live,work, educate and play in the city

Fig. 6 Orientation and Layout in HafenCity are supporting maximum movement through thefabric.


10/37

9

Again, together with the variation of the building types, their layout leaving a

diversity of open spaces in between and the intended programmatic diversity

prevalent throughout the quarter, Hamburgs vision for the 21.-century-city is

beginning to revealits potential.

GUIDING SPATIAL ORGANISATION

Shifting from a rather selective and specific description to a broader study of the

HafenCity plan, crucial characteristics which are significant for the performance

of this and similar strategies seem worth to recite: Together they build an

intriguing interplay of the combinatory spatial organisation, the synergetic

juxtaposition of functions and above all the inherent affirmative strategy in terms

of planning and guidance of the land development.

Like architect-planners and theorists of the spatial practises, we could witness

that the relation between urban space and our society has significantly changed

for a variety of social and economic reasons. This is realised, amongst others,

mostly through looking at our changed prevalent concept of the public realm

which has become less definable, less tangible and much more pervasive7. In

our example, this is physically represented in the layout and the performative

quality of the buildings especially regarding their ground floor uses and their

7(Koolhaas , 1996, p. 45)

Fig 8 Different sets of urban areas with different grades of privacy


11/37

10

orientation towards open spaces. Furthermore, despite their typical internal

structure, some buildings give up the traditional relation between front and

backside. They reveal their capacity to possess more than actually one

orientation. Their ground floor uses and their frontages may typically be street

centred but on a second look they appear to have a second or third frontage

alike, addressing the side or the back where it is difficult to distinguish a priority.

They perform towards each side differently and in particular ways to support

different grades of privacy and they suggest multiple ways to be read, accessed

and passed through. The buildings act consequently in synergy with the

adjacent fabric where different mobility systems such as roads, pedestrian

paths and bridges enable different ways to explore and make use of the fabric.

An organisation like this is paying attention to the increased different ways

people live, work and play in the city; Not only by physically moving through

narrower streets, shopping alleys, towards vibrant courtyards or other open

spaces but also to be for oneself8, to exchange information, to dwell and to work

in close vicinity.

In order to initiate the desired concert of socio-economic processes to form

what we call vibrancy or urbanity in the city, stakeholders must be motivated to

engage in the process and to actually invest in the new district. For that reason,

the question of governance is very crucial and has to be answered adequately.Planning consortiums are formed and they are increasingly beginning to set

aside their scepticism concerning large-scale planning, which has fallen into

disrepute for a long time and they have affirmatively decided to engage in active

guidance and governance of the process. This is happening notwithstanding

being under a huge pressure to succeed as there are many participants

involved. On the one hand, it is applied not exclusively but with a major focus on

the attempt to control the citys growth. Well-resourced and aggressive capitalist

forces, which are merely driven by their eagerness to gain fast profits, must berestrained as they would rather not contribute to the greater agenda which is

aiming at sustainability. But on the other hand, there are quite pragmatic

reasons such as reducing the economic risk for the involved stakeholders and

maintaining the capacity to stay flexible and responsive.

The HafenCity agenda brought forth a planning strategy which is trying to set up

a resilient development framework, accepting that a traditional masterplan

would be too static. As they understand the city as a set of heterogeneous

8(Maki, 2008, p.73)


12/37

11

processes and as they have the will to stay flexible, the gradual implementation

of autonomous entities on a larger time scale plays a key role. In the case of

Hamburg this means a collaborative action by a strong state as investor for

infrastructure and open spaces, private-public partnerships and a professional

planning management9. The area is built up in small steps starting with small

housing units and further on more complex mix-use buildings and even major

business headquarters in some particular locations. Development is pursued

gradually from west to east and concentrically from the edge of the centre to the

waterfront. This is what Fumihiko Maki already in the 60s in his innovative work

on collective form called incremental planning10 and which is making it

possible to react to changing conditions. When authorities claim that a powerful

regulatory regime and the partitioned activation of the market by a public

developer are contributing to the character of a public good 11, they are also

expressing an idea which was for decades going around among architects and

planners: The responsiveness and recognition of the citizens role and his

involvement into the development process. That means a rather non-elitist

approach is allowing for feedback throughout the process.A feedback which is

replacing deliberate scientific reasoning but enabling adaption before final

materialisation. It is a de facto attention towards how the urban condition may

change over time and how it may be influenced by the city dwellers chan ging

activity patterns within the fabric and what urban space means to him.

9 (HafenCity Hamburg GmbH, 2012)10 (Maki, 2008, p. 70)11 (Bruns-Berentelg, 2012)


13/37

12

02 STRATEGIES FOR THE COLLECTIVE


14/37

13

CRYSTALLIZED ACTIVITY PATTERNS

Fumihiko Maki claimed that the Human quality which determines form has to

do with way of life, movement, and the relation between individuals in society. If

the function of urban design is the pattern of human activities expressed in city

life, then the functional patterns are crystallized activity patterns.12 When werecognise how much attention is paid to the very diverse shape of the built

environment in HafenCity, to which a variety of different architects could

contribute, one may start to believe that this approach may best represent our

societys contemporary diversity and their social and economic relations. It

seems that a particular focus has been set on movement, social relations

between people and their different manifestations and on the new role housing

plays as it is an integrated component of the citys concept for creating a fertile

environment for the emergence of both livable urban areas and the

contemporary urban economy. Furthermore, it could mean that outdated

legacies of postulations such as architecture and urbanism which are supposed

to shape social relations have been inverted.

Maki as an urban designer was from early on engaged in finding adequate

architectural solutions in order to deal with the upheaval processes within

society. He ascertains that technological progress and societys adaption is

making it clear that cities must change as social and economic uses dictate. 13

He is writing:

The reason, in fact, for searching for new formal concepts in contemporary

cities lies in the magnitude of relatively recent changes in urban problems. Our

urban society is characterized by (1) coexistence and conflict of amazingly

heterogeneous institutions and individuals; (2) unprecedented rapid and

extensive transformations in the physical structure of society; (3) rapid

communications methods; (4) technological progress and its impact upon

regional culture.

For him it is, furthermore, quite clear that the citys problems cannot be solved

with pure formal concepts like the Renaissance city plan nor can we easily

perceive a hierarchical order [in society], as did the original CIAM theorists in

the quite recent past who were convinced of segregating different components

12(Maki, 2008, p. 55)13(Maki, 2008, p. 45)


15/37

14

of society into different functional zones. Instead he pleads that we must now

see our urban society as a dynamic field of interrelated forces. 14

THE PART AND THE WHOLE

Being also at that time a member of the well-known Japanese Metabolist group,

Maki was a typical representative of the generation of architects and theorists

who witnessed the decline and dissolution of the last era of the Congrs

Internationaux dArchitecture Moderne (CIAM). He was thoroughly sharing the

scepticism and critics of the late movements dependants, the TeamX, who

were beginning to oppose to foregoing ideologies on architecture and urbanism.

In his rejection of earlier theories, he was then elaborating deeper own thoughts

on the metropolis and the role of architecture within. The part and its relation to

the whole was Makis agenda and he believed that architecture and cities

share a distinct relationship to time15. Maki in his work on collective form

distinguishes three different design strategies to create a collective and

differentiates between Compositional-, Mega- and Group Form. Fig. 9

Compositional Form is a commonly accepted and widely applied technique

where the focus lies on formal geometric principles stemming from a functional

diagram where the relation between buildings is mainly created on a two -

dimensional level. He rejects this rather traditional design strategy despite the

fact that it is still applied today as this concept - typically for the period around

the 1920s - seems to him to be of too static character and largely too limiting:

14(Maki, 2008, p. 44)15(Maki, 2008, p. 68)

Fig.9 Different forms of collective form


16/37

15

As it is related to classical concepts of the master plan16 it cannot be adequate

in performative terms such as flexibility and adaptability.

The megastructural approach, in his view, possessed a strong potential at that

time not for the sole purpose that it was the favoured chosen vehicle with which

Metabolism transported its vision for the urban future. The concepts potential

nourishes from its capability to group a variety of uses in one structure and that

it almost embodies an entire artificial landscape of its own made by man 17.

Although he acknowledges the capacity to cope with different paces of change

occurring within one structure and despite its producibility in both economic and

technological terms, he rejects this approach as well in the end. Mainly, he

criticizes that an all-overarching structure would also not be able to tackle the

problem of technological progress and fears that it might become rapidly

obsolete18. He only grants the megaform a potential right to exist if a kind of

master form can move into ever new states of equilibrium, yet maintain visual

consistency and a sense of continuing order in the long run19 and without

having an underlying rigid hierarchical system20 which would limit

transformation. He claims for independent systems that contribute to the whole

while still maintaining its identity and longevity21 without the interference of

other parts.

These last notions already introduce his favourite own concept to create

meaningful collective form. The ideas behind the category of Group Form will

also turn out to be of great significance concerning our contemporary urban

challenges as we are also still intrigued to pin down what is actually forming our

cities the way they are and how we can in fact understand and guide these

processes. Maki is writing:

That we have not previously adequately identified form - giving forces isperhaps due to the fact that they seem to defy formulation. At a particular scale

of urban activity, they have more to do with movement through space than with

a standard vision of the shape of a space.22

16(Maki & Ohtaka, 1961, p. 118)17(Maki, 2008, p. 47)18

(Maki, 2008, p. 50)19 Ibid.20 Ibid.21 Ibid.22(Maki, 2008, p. 59)


17/37

16

Therefore, our patterns of movement are Makis declared describing and linking

processes in the city. They are building the common ground on which self-

organising complex juxtapositions are taking place. Originally derived from his

observations on ancient Mediterranean European cities, he believes that there

must be distinct linkages between the buildings in collective forms which go

beyond their formal relationships of geometric complexity. He constitutes there

not only a clear structural relationship between the village and the houses23

but also - what is more important to him - that the elements of [this] group form

are often the essence of collectivity, [which is] a unifying force, functionally,

socially and spatially.24 Where compositional form is regarded as a closed

system, Maki conceives the major very important difference in group form in its

elements ability to become generative, not to be limited in extension which

means that it is able to evolve into an openended system of urban form.

Furthermore, he distinguishes an inherent kind of bottom-up principle at work

where form is generated by society and not from a top down design method

opposed by an authority which is then trying to link the buildings by means of

planning. He is convinced that societys activity patterns are expressing the

present urban condition while they are responsible for the heterogeneity in our

contemporary city in terms of simultaneousness of different lifestyles, working

patterns and so forth.

23(Maki, 2008, p. 52)24(Maki, 2008, p. 53)

Fig.10 Fumihiko Maki, Hillside Terrace project 1985-1992


18/37

17

MOVEMENT BETWEEN GENERATIVE ELEMENTS

Group-form is an effort to express the vitality of our society, at the same

time embracing individuality and retaining the identity of individual elements25.

For better understanding of the applicability of Makis group form concept, we

can turn to his Hillside Terrace project in Tokyo where Maki could already in his

early days as a young architect start to practically apply his ideas on collective

form in an environment where the conditions were very exceptional.

Earlier Maki himself admits that it is clear to him that in order for his desired

form-giving process of Group Form to set substantially in motion, what would

be needed today is a strong dedication from both the city and its governing

authorities and their social institutions26. Albeit these rare phased and

incremental approaches to planning are pursued in a relatively limited period of

time and are influenced by many often contradictory forces, Maki was offered

the extraordinary chance to almost exclusively design a sophisticated mixed

used quarter over an extended timeframe. Starting from 1965, Makis project

was given time to evolve within

a quarter of a century to

produce what he called a

collection of not unrelated,

separate buildings, but of

buildings that have reasons to

be together27. Over the pace of

time architectural character,

functional programme and

expression change as well as

Makis own perception of the

relationship between society

and the built environment.28

He manages to place and

shape his white masses in an

intriguing way, from phase to

25(Maki & Ohtaka, 1961, p. 120)26(Maki, 2008) Ibid.27(Maki, 2008, p. 45)28(Maki, 2008, p. 68)

Fig. 11 Creation of sense of depth through the layersof space at Hillside Terrace


19/37

18

phase adding volumes, letting the area evolve from a residential neighbourhood

towards a mixed use collective. The character of the architecture and space

changed perceptibly as people walked from one end of the site to the other. 29

His modern architecture [is] engaging, even creating, its urban context30 while

it is managing to keep the different linkages among the elements although the

design and programme is changing. The architectural expression may have

changed from phase to phase, but what they share are more significant

characteristics like basic architectural design elements such as scale of

massing, volume, geometric complexity, comparable height, visual transparency

of the ground floors, corner entrances or orientation of the inner stairs.

In his approach to establish a formal dialogue between the entities, Maki is also

assigning importance to the task of designing the public accessible open

spaces between the buildings. With a great intuition, Makis courtyards and

pedestrian ways seem to be carefully carved out of the volumes or extending

adjacent buildings public accessible spaces on the ground-floor level. He is

adding shifts in the ground to further differentiate and he is opening up entrance

halls by glazing them to extent the experience of depths. Maki applies different

layers of public spaces and meanings31 in order to differentiate in grades of

privacy and complexity. They are created through a deliberate design approach

[which is continuously] unfolding sequences of spaces and views. Space isexperienced through sequential movement and is allowing people to enjoy

solitude32, interact with each other or generally speaking, to enjoy urbanity.

As it is learned so far, Maki puts a focus on the role of movement within time

based developments and he is interested to comprehend the ways buildings

build up meaningful relationships among each other. For that purpose, he

favours his design strategy to create Group Form, which is sequentially

created through a system of generative elements in space.33Makis narrationson the collective form are proposing a more expedient way of looking at the

evolving city. A time based development which is able to adapt to changing

circumstances and which makes inherent feedback processes possible is an

effective way to cope with all the different movement patterns our modern

society is performing within the urban environment. Maki is likewise offering us

29

(Maki, 2008, p. 70)30 Ibid p.6831(Maki, 2008, p. 73)32(Maki, 2008, p. 74)33(Maki, 2008, p. 51)
http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/circumstance.htmlhttp://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/circumstance.html


20/37

19

concrete propositions of what he thinks would be an adequate strategy to

organise a site with architectural elements and how those could be generated.

With his bold architectural proficiency Maki develops a master form, a model,

which is supposed to meet all the possible present and future performative

attributes within the relevant location. Having once found and established this

model, Maki is then initiating a generative process where he is using geometry

as a tool to explore the model, to differentiate, to add complexity and to finally

apply them as concrete, autonomous architectural objects on the site. This

process of repetition and differentiation is what is defining his search for group

form. He is developing a design strategy where the structures of the buildings

share a certain design code to support changing programs over time and all the

different patterns of movement which occupy the fabric.

In this collective, symbiotic relations do matter. Finally, we can see Aristotles

famous quote fulfilling where the resultant whole is greater than the sum of its

parts.


21/37

20

03 THE EVOLUTION OF THE MIX


22/37

21

INHABITING THE CITY OF MANY CENTRES

Mobility and movement play a key role in design and evaluation of the

contemporary city. So does the reintegration of residential uses into the urban

centre contribute to a more diverse and productive environment. Mix-Use,

multi-functionality and other notions, which are heavily in use these days are

visionary key words in contemporary urban design, which mainly describe

simultaneousness and diverse programmatic juxtapositions. They describe

different interconnected economic and social networks. Yet, many decades ago,

our patterns of movement and the economic systems in and around the city

were quite different and seen in a greater historical context; therefore, one

realises that the urban condition of today is quite a recent phenomenon. Pinning

down the morphological and organisational evolutions the city has gone through

and matching them with our contemporary understanding of the urban will

further deepen our understanding of the socio economic processes the city of

today is constituted of.

Most descriptively, one can see that in tracing the developments of 18th century

Victorian London, which was at its time about to develop into a radio-centric city

with satellite centres. As a consequence of the industrial revolution, London

witnessed dramatic population growth and it was rapidly expanding to become

the largest city in the world at that time. The existing fabric and new housing

developments in the city could hardly cope with and absorb the masses. The

problems which resulted from congestion in terms of pollution and level of

hygiene were enormous. Then technological progress made the installation of

different networks of metropolitan railways possible, improving the connectivity

among the suburbs and the city to a great extent. As commuting was now made

possible, people began to move out of the centre as soon as they could afford

to.

In that sense, at least some parts of society could profit from the technological

developments of the time. There, increased industrial productivity and a more

liberal market economy could redeem the promises of the foregoing

enlightenment in terms of greater personal freedom, adequate spaces and also

a greater mobility. With the help of the new mobility systems, these suburban

satellite centres were functioning as local communities because they were

providing all the necessary shops and services which to some extent made

them work autonomously. They were attractive living environments inasmuch asthey were supplying the essential needs and as they were reflecting the

prevalent patterns of movement quite well. The working part of the population


23/37

22

at that time supposedly exclusively men were commuting for work from these

remote centres into the centre and after that leaving for home again. There was

a clear separation between the suburb to live in and the centre to work.

The inner most densely populated areas were more and more left to the less

fortunate inhabitants of the industrial city and suffered from inhumane

conditions. While new places for production with adjacent cheap and improvised

housing for the workers were emerging on the city fringe, these newly formed

satellite settlements were likewise contributing to the overall image of the city

region being coined by social segregation, urban sprawl and fragmentation34.

Nevertheless, London at that time seemed to be a prosperous city of many

communities with many different centres and vibrant places.

However, out of the necessity to cope with the developments the industrial

revolution brought with it, one started to think from the late 19th century on about

how to better guide a citys development. Where straightforward infrastructure

projects were then rigorously cutting through the dense fabric to fight

congestion and to enable a better flow - like Haussmanns radical

reorganisation of central Paris - the reality of city planning to solve the so called

housing question at that time was mainly coined by the concepts of a geometric

grid35 in order to control growth and to ensure access, which was

accommodating the typical closed block to acquire a higher populationdensity36. In their admiration of the technological developments of their time

amongst others the new mobility systems - the 1920s gave rise to more radical

and ground-breaking city concepts. Considering his architectural ideology

reflected in his projects le Corbusier, as a key figure of the modern movement,

may have successfully paid respect to the changing society of his time and his

contributions are without doubt unrivalled and pivotal. But despite his

achievements such as the disruption with the traditional closed block type, a

closer look upon his urban projects for the ideal metropolis could be a subject ofcriticism. Not only does one acknowledge that the prevalent hierarchical

segregation of social classes of that era were still overtaken throughout his

plans, but they were even driven further regarding his attempt to subdivide

horizontally into different functions. He distinguished zones for business,

housing, industries and so on37.

34 (Benevolo, 1995)35 (Panerai, 2004, p. 162)36 (Lichtenberger, 1986, p. 181)37 (Corbusier, 1929)
http://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/cheap.htmlhttp://www.dict.cc/englisch-deutsch/cheap.html


24/37

23

THE IDEAL METROPOLIS REACHES DEADLOCK

Only in rare cases was the modernist paradigm of zoning and its distinct types

for separate functions interrupted. Besides very early utopian ideas of the 18 th

century38, the vision of the vertical city in 1929 by Ludwig Hilbersheimer

(Fig.12) was one of the rare if not only ideas of that time to be based on

integrating residential and workplace functions into dense structures39.

Corbusiers and comparable utopian concepts of the past suffered from some

comparable conceptual and formal features which prevented them from

successful deployment at their time and why they must seem even more

anachronistic and obsolete in our time. Corbusiers version of an open city40

indeed was rather meant literally fulfilling mainly the triad of air, light and open

space: Groups of detached buildings of one type were hovering over

excessively wide open spaces, which were laid out in the shape of a green

carpet. One had the impression that this carpet seemed to be dotted with neatly

distributed objects according to a geometric pattern. These vast green spaces

now arouse incomprehension in us as their proposition back then can only be

38 The anthropologist Robert Owen envisioned industrial communities outside the city, wheredecent living was attempted to make compatible with industrial labour. While attempts to realisehis visions failed they can be understood as critics towards the prevalent problems of organisationwithin the industrial city from which later experiments of town planning benefitted significantly(Benevolo, 1971; Benevolo, 1995, p. 208).39

(Abalos, 2003, p. 222)40 The open city concept is derived from its inhabitants the open society and describes animaginative positive condition within a city or at least in parts of it, where city planners help toovercome the social differences within a population by means of architecture and urbanism. Itsideology is coined and described by scholars like Jane Jacobs, Richard Sennett and others.

Fig. 12 Ludwig Hilbersheimer, Vertical City 1924. "For the first time vertical layeringreplaced horizontal segregation of functions"


25/37

24

explained with the intention to function as an all-underlying recreation park for

the sanctuary of the industrial worker41.

Moreover, except for a graphically appealing geometry, the layout of the

buildings and their orientation did not pay attention to specific characteristics of

the site nor is another deeper intention such as socio-economic relations

distinguishable. Urban form had the function to work as a physical extension of

social rules and had to stand as an ethic metaphor for coherence and order42

within society. The idea to promote the emergence of a desired ideal social

structure with the help of a graphically aesthetic all-embracing geometrical

layout, like in Corbusiers Ville Radieuse (Fig. 13), never proved to sustain, nor

were they really practicable - merely considering the requirement of a very

powerful and supporting greater authority.

As also shown in the approach to be an end in itself as they were intended for

a fixed number of inhabitants, these utopian city concepts were more about

capturing a snapshot of social and economic relationships then to support the

emergence of suchlike. In doing so, they neglected the citys very own

characteristic of evolution and transformation.

Our observations make equally clear that the heritage of Modernitys concepts

circling around notions such as mobility, movement, speed, simultaneousness

or [inter]connectivity, which were tied to the movements main agenda, have

paradoxically only been able to fully unfold their all-pervading complexity later at

the movements abatement.

41(Mumford, 1986)42(Mumford, 1986)

Fig.13 The centre of a contemporary city


26/37

25

In the middle of the sixties, a paradigm shift in the architectural discourse was

initiated throughout the scene. Within this atmosphere, architects and theorists

like Fumihiko Maki and Kevin Lynch in the South-Asian and North-American

hemisphere or the Smithsons in the United Kingdom developed their influential

ideas. They introduced a new way of dealing with architectural tasks with a

greater focus on the object in relation to its surrounding or to other entities.

They adapted ideas from prior movements like historicism43 but in a more

neutral, clearer and unbiased way. This new approach revised the functional

ideas of the early century and linked them to both more architectural and also

economic issues. On the one hand, they were engaging in topics such as

legibility44, frontality, how and where to enter it, how to integrate different, how

to move within the fabric or towards a building45, what is the relation between

the part and whole46 and so forth. On the other hand, they were intrigued to find

out which socio-economic processes are taking place within the post-industrial

society and where they do actually shape the urban condition and how a

building or the fabric is then shaped by these external forces47.

The early post-war generation of architects48 began to foresee where the focus

on the urban would lie today. What their rational ideas were introducing was a

more tangible and pragmatic understanding of the city which facilitated the

emergence of an ideology which is both bringing back the human - economical

scale to the city and helping us to develop adequate architectural strategies for

this purpose.

MOVEMENT AND THE URBAN ECONOMY

Having a look at the aforementioned mixed-use project, some basic questions

about this human-economic scale shall be answered. What is precisely meant,

by movement in these inner areas of the city? The answers to this will not

satisfy if they are limited to touch upon simple explanations like from A to B

via spaces in between C by means of pedestrian, public transport etc.. If one

accepts that there is reciprocity between built form and activity patterns, what

are these patterns then constituted of in detail? And to what extent are these

43 (Wilkens, 2000)44(Lynch, 1959, p. 135)45

(Lynch, 1960 , p. 89)46(Maki, 2008)47(Maki, 2008, p. 45)48Generally architects, planners and theorists who were members of the Team X of the CIAM orin line with their ideologies.


27/37

26

socio-economic patterns then essential to what we might call an urban- or work-

culture. After all, where are the linkages to the spatial disciplines and in what

sense is their influence represented?

Again, explanations can be found in the ruptures which pervaded the global

economic system: The Fordist mass-production system of the manufacturing

industries once had a strong impact on global economy and so did later, in the

post-war era, the rapidly growing information and communication technologies,

which were beginning to dramatically increase the speed and quantity of

information exchange. It is an established fact49 that the urban environment

today is a fertile ground for the predominant economic sector in the developed

world which can be summarised as industries based on knowledge and

innovation. We now face the substantial consequences they have towards our

work culture and our patterns of movement in the city. These developments are

circumscribed with notions such as workplace reform and post -bureaucracy50

to name but a few.

Firstly, there is common belief in the working society that work itself has

become more flexible and also demands more flexibility in return. An obvious

example can be seen in the decline of traditional gender roles: Family life is not

organised exclusively around women anymore and also their engagement inwork life has significantly increased and is aiming at full equality. Furthermore,

the contemporary work culture is coined by more autonomous working patterns

as it shifts from strictly following formal rules or accepting a formal chain of

command to rather acting in accordance to - sometimes own established -

principles. Being results-oriented is key while working on projects or

respectively on problem solving strategies. A strictly regulated working day with

predefined working hours is also less common. To achieve our targeted goals

and that is very designating we are Sharing information rather than hoardingand hiding information. Naturally we navigate within looser organizational

boundaries that tolerate outsiders coming in and insiders going out.51

The processes of urbanisation show vividly how labour related mobility is

increasing. They have been picking up speed in recent decades and are still

growing with no sign to mitigate. They are composed by domestic and

49(OECD, 1996, p. 3; Sassen, 2002, pp. 19-20)

50(Powell & Snellman, 2004; Heckscher, 1994)51 (Heckscher, 1994)


28/37

27

international migration to cities in large quantities. Here, the image of the global

talent migrant, who is willing to be highly mobile and who is significantly

populating cities worldwide, quickly comes to ones mind.

The need to exchange information contributes to the impression that patterns of

work related mobility are evolving. Referring not only to business trips but ingeneral to the increased flexibility concerning the question where work is

actually done, it seems that many people are almost constantly on the move

these days. This shouldnt be misunderstood and lead to oversimplifications: It

does not mean that we are in the constant state of travelling. Researches on

this field of transport geography actually show that the actual time we spend on

the road has only increased to a limited extent. Nevertheless, this perception

may stem from the fact that the amount of time we actually spent for activities

outside our home and that the speed, distance and easiness of being on the

move have considerably increased52.

Routines and destinations to work are also differentiated, so the

predominant pattern of journey from the periphery to the centre has become

supplemented by many different journey patterns between many different

locations.53

However, despite the fact that the urban economy is producing intangible

products and although new communication and better transport technologies

are fostering (physical) independence, facts are rejecting the misassumption

that these industries are indifferent from place and physical connectivity.

Exchanges of tacit knowledge induce experts meeting each other and that

necessitates labour market mobility and social networks54. They need

geographic proximity as information in general and precisely the relevant kind of

information is simply easier spread. Forms of purest and most direct interactioncreate the intimacy which is still needed for social interaction and mercantile

activity. Co-presence is a fundamental characteristic of social life and virtual

travel or such like cannot truly compensate for physical and unhindered

dialogue. We still depend on eye-to-eye contact, on unplanned encounter and

52(van Wee, et al., 2006, p. 112; Urry, 2007, p. 4)53 (Madanipour, 2011, p. 171)54 (Simmie, 2003)


29/37

28

exchange of information in the real world55. Logically corporeal mobility in real

space is vital for socio-economic processes.

It seems obvious, that these implications must find their spatial and architectural

implications in the urban condition. It makes sense that especially the

aforementioned economic sector like other industries for instance themanufacturing sector have the tendency even more to develop patterns of

building up clusters. As these businesses rely on the same infrastructure and

networks of information supply, they need to benefit from knowledge spill over

effects and potential synergies. Specialised providers of resources such as

cultural, educational, and science and research institutions generate and draw

on the same pool of labour. This makes them very compatible with central

urban environments where they are integrated into the ecology. Consequently

residents as well as urban industries can therefore draw on maximum

movement capacity and the urban mix.

55(Urry, 2002; Castells, 2000; Madanipour, 2011)


30/37

29

MOVEMENT DRIVEN URBANISM

The urban centre is the breeding ground for what we might call a movement

driven urbanism. There we observe how mono-functionality is replaced by an

urban condition which is coined by diversity and vibrancy. Urban economies

and residential uses shall benefit together from the amenities and civicinstitutions the city is offering. We have rejected clearly the application of

traditional urban elements such as the closed block in favour of a more

functionally differentiated and geometrically more complex typology. This is

done not in favour of a market strategy but to incorporate a particular kind of

urban culture. Richard Rogers notes:

Present day concern for single objects will be replaced by concern for

relationships. Shelters will no longer be static objects, but dynamic frameworks.Accommodation will be responsive, ever-changing and ever-adjusting. Cities of

the future will no longer be zoned as today in isolated one activity ghettos;

rather, they will resemble the more richly layered cities of the past. Living, work,

shopping, learning and leisure will overlap and be housed in continuous, varied

and changing structures.56

Makis architectural strategies can be understood as a reaction towards his

perception of the city being a self-organising system. As he is putting emphasis

on relationships between the parts and the whole, he recognises the importance

of thinking in networks and ecologies in the city in order to sustainably plan and

design portions of it. In his studies on collective form, he describes many

inherent characteristics of the city such as that form changes slower than the

functions they contain and that movement is the dominating factor of influence

in the urban morphology. From these perceptions, he derives his architectural

theory and consequently a strategy for architectural urbanism.

He was intrigued by relational forces and identified means to create those

linkages in his own design of collective urban forms. In his generative design

approach Maki relies on the concept of the master model from which he

derives the characteristics such as a deep structure and linkages to form and

place the actual building. Makis white masses hardly reveal what is taking

place in the inside. Nevertheless, he is sure that they are in possession of an

adequate inner organisation. It enables them to perform internally and externally

in a satisfactory way, which means that they support and guide different

56(Rogers, 1990, p. 60)


31/37

30

patterns of movement, as this is the major criteria to evaluate a structures

performative quality.

As shown before in the analysis of the contemporary city, more than ever, his

propositions seem to be very applicable and promising to us. The argument is

therefore that the spatial configuration of the urban form correlates with the

patterns of movement which perform in it. Movement is the underlying concept

of the city, the domain to architecture which relates to planning and other

spatial disciplines. In architectural urbanism, the capacity to guide movement is

key to establish a symbiosis between a single building and its vicinity or

between sets of urban areas and morphologically different parts of the city. How

we understand the complexities of cities is representing the way how we intend

to design them. To follow Maki means to understand the process of design not

as an end in itself but as a strategy aiming at an open-ended generative

process.


32/37

31

IMAGE CREDITS

Fig. 1 Hamburg's old and new street pattern: the old city core (black) and its

extension into HafenCity (red). 6

Fig. 2 Grain in HafenCity. Indicated in red are the main axes leading into the

centre. 6

Fig. 3 Abstract Drawing showing accessible open space in grey. No distinction

is made between pedestrian ways, public or private-but-publicly-accessible

open space. 7

Fig. 4 Main uses within buildings in HafenCity West: Housing (orange), office

spaces (blue) and buildings for education, culture and civic institutions

(red). Different ground floor uses for shops and services are not marked. 7

Fig. 5 Ground floor uses in HafenCity. Source: Jrgen Bruns-Berentelg, ULI

Conference Amsterdam, 10.06.2008 7

Fig. 6 Orientation and Layout in HafenCity supporting maximum movement

through the fabric. 8

Fig. 7 Mixed agglomeration around Sandtorpark. Live, work, educate and play

in the city 8

Fig 8 Different sets of urban areas with different grades of privacy 9

Fig. 9 Different forms of collective form (Maki & Ohtaka, 1961, p. 118) 1

Fig. 10 Fumihiko Maki, Hillside Terrace project 1985-1992. Source: (Maki,

2008, p. 69) 1Fig. 11 Creation of sense of depth through the layers of space at Hillside

Terrace. Source: (Maki, 2008, p. 75) 1

Fig. 12 Ludwig Hilbersheimer, Vertical City 1924. "For the first time vertical

layering replaced horizontal segregation of functions". Source: (Abalos,

2003, p. 233) 23

Fig. 13 The centre of a contemporary city. Source: (Corbusier, 1929, p.

2139, Kindle Edition) 1
http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415467http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415467http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415468http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415468http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415471http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415471http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415472http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415472http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415473http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415473http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415474http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415475http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415476http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415476http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415477http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415477http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415479http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415479http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415479http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415479http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415478http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415477http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415477http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415477http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415476http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415476http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415475http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415474http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415473http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415473http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415472http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415472http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415471http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415471http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415469http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415470http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415468http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415468http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415467http://c/Users/kose/SkyDrive/Desktop/AA%20-%20MA%20Thesis/word/THESIS5.docx%23_Toc367415467


33/37

32

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abalos, I., 2003. Tower and Office - From Modernist Theory to Contemporary

Practise. Cambridge (Mass.): The M.I.T. Press.

Bassanini, A., Scarpetta, S. & Visco, I., 2000. Knowledge, Technology and

Economic Growth: Recent Evidence from OECD Countries. OECD Economics

Department Working Papers, Issue 259.

Benevolo, L., 1971. The origins of modern town planning. 1 Hrsg. Cambridge

(Mass.): M.I.T. Press.

Benevolo, L., 1995. European City (Making of Europe). New Edition Hrsg.

Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Bruns-Berentelg, J., 2012. Die Kreation einer New Downtown und dieMechanismen der Urbanittsentwicklung. In: H. H. GmbH, Hrsg. HafenCity

Hamburg - das erste Jahrzehnt. Hamburg: Junius Verlag, pp. 69-87.

Calabrese, L. M., 2003. Mobility: A Room with a View. Rotterdam: NAI

Publishers.

Canzler, W., Kaufmann, V. & Kesselring, S., 2008. Tracing Mobilities - An

Introduction. In: Tracing Mobilities - Towards a Cosmopolitan Perspektive.

London: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Castells, M., 1997. An Introduction to the Information Age. City, Issue 7, pp. 6-

16.

Castells, M., 2000. The Space of Flows. In: The Rise of the Network Society:

Economy, Society and Culture . West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 407-459.

Christiaanse, K., 2012. Masterplanung ist Zukunftsplanung. In: H. H. GmbH,

Hrsg. HafenCity - das erste Jahrzehnt. Hamburg: Junius Verlag, pp. 29-34.

Corbusier, L., 1924. Vers une Architecture. 2nd Hrsg. s.l.:G. Cres et Cie.

Corbusier, L., 1929. The City of To-Morrow and its planning. Kindle Edition

Hrsg. New York: Dover Publications.

Frampton, K., 2007. Modern Architecture: A Critical History. 4 Hrsg. London:

Thames & Hudson.

Frisby, D., 1994. Simmel on Culture. London: Sage Publications.


34/37

33

HafenCity Hamburg GmbH, 2000. HafenCity Hamburg Masterplan. Hamburg:

HafenCity Hamburg GmbH.

HafenCity Hamburg GmbH, 2012. A City for the 21st Century. [Online]

Available at: www.hafencity.com/print.php?type=artikel&language=en&id=17

[Zugriff am 17 08 2012].

HafenCity Hamburg GmbH, 2012. HafenCity - facts and figures. [Online]

Available at: Source: http://www.hafencity.com/en/overview/hafencity-facts-and-

figures.html

[Zugriff am 07 2013].

HafenCity Hamburg GmbH, 2012. The Foundation of HafenCity: the

Masterplan. [Online]

Available at: http://www.hafencity.com/en/concepts/the-foundation-of-hafencity-

the-masterplan.html

[Zugriff am 20 08 2012].

Heckscher, C., 1994. Defining the Post-Bureaucratic Type. In: The Post

Bureaucratic Organization. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, pp. 25-28.

Hooks, B., 1991. Yearning: Race, Gender and Cultural Politics.. London:

Turnaround.

Hoyle, B. S., 1989. The portCity interface: Trends, problems and examples.

Geoforum, 20(4), pp. 429-435.

Jaffee, D., 2000. Organizational Theory. Burr Ridge: Mcgraw-Hill Higher

Education.

Jensen, O. B., 2007. City of Layers: Bangkok's Sky Train and How it Works in

socially segregating Mobility Patterns. Swiss Journal of Sociaology, Issue 33,

pp. 387-405.

Jensen, O. B., 2009. Foreword: Mobilities as Culture. In: P. Vannini, Hrsg. The

Cultures of Alternative Mobilities. s.l.:Ashgate.

Kaplan, C., 1996. Questions of Travel: Postmodern Discourses of Displacement

(Post-Contemporary Interventions). s.l.:Duke University Press.

Koolhaas , R., 1996. Conversations with students. Houston: Rice School of

Architecture.


35/37

34

Koolhaas, R. & Mau, B., 1998. S,M,L,XL. 2 Hrsg. New York: The Monacelli

Press Inc..

Kunzmann, K. R., 2009. Creativity and strategical city development. In:

Governance der Kreativwirtschaft - Diagnosen und Handlungsoptionen.

Bielefeld: transcript - Urban Studies, pp. 33-45.

Lehrer, J., 2010. A Physicist solves the City. The New York Times - Sunday

Magazine, 19 November.p. MM46.

Lichtenberger, E., 1986. Stadtgeographie - Band 1. Stuttgart: Teubner.

Lynch, K., 1959. Good City Form. Massachusetts: Mit Press.

Lynch, K., 1960 . The Image of the City. Massachusetts: Mit Press.

Madanipour, A., 2011. Knowledge Economy and the City. 1 Hrsg. Abingdon:

Routledge.

Maki, F., 2008. Investigations in collective form. In: M. I. o. Technology, Hrsg.

Nurturing Dreams. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 44-66.

Maki, F., 2008. Nurturing Dreams - Collected essays on architecture and the

city. Cambridge (Mass.): The MIT Press.

Maki, F., 2008. Time and Landscape: Collective Form at Hillside Terrace. In:

Nurturing Dreams. Cambridge (Mass.): The MIT Press, pp. 68-79.

Maki, F. & Ohtaka, M., 1961. Some Thoughts On Collective Form. Washington

D.C.: Washington University.

Mumford, E., 2011. Fumihiko Maki's Mildred Lane Kemper Art Museum.

Spotlight, November.

Mumford, L., 1986. Yesterday's City of Tomorrow. In: The Lewis Mumford

reader. New York: Pantheon Books.

OECD, 1996. The Knowledge Economy, Pairs: Organisation for Economic Co-

Operation and Development.

Panerai, P., 2004. URBAN FORMS - THE DEATH AND LIFE OF THE URBAN

BLOCK. Oxford (MA): Architectural Press.

Powell, W. W. & Snellman, K., 2004. The Knowledge Economy. Annu. Rev.

Sociol., Issue 30, pp. 199-220.


36/37

35

Prato, P. & Trivero, G., 1985. The Spectacle of Travel. Band 3.

Ramsey, K., 2010. Urban Waterfront Transformation as a Politics of Mobility. In:

G. Desfor, J. Laidley, Q. Stevens & D. Schubert, Hrsg. Transformung Urban

Waterfronts: Fixity and Flow. s.l.:Routledge, pp. 101-.

Rogers, R., 1990.Architecture: A Modern View. London: Thames and Hudson.

Sassen, S., 2000. The Global City: Strategic Site / New Frontier. American

Studies, 41(2/3), pp. 79-95.

Sassen, S., 2001. The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. 2 Hrsg.

Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.

Sassen, S., 2002. Locating cities on global circuits. Environment&Urbanization ,

14(1), pp. 13-30.

Schubert, D., 2010. Waterfront Revitalizations - From a Local to a Regonal

Perspective in London, Barcelona, Rotterdam, and Hamburg. In: G. Desfor, J.

Laidley, Q. Stevens & Schubert Dirk, Hrsg. Transforming Urban Waterfronts:

Fixity and Flow. s.l.:Routledge, pp. 74-97.

Sennett, R., 1977. The Fall of Public Man. London / Boston: Faber and Faber.

Sennett, R., 1990. The Conscience of the Eye - The Design and Social Life of

Cities. 1 Hrsg. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc..

Sennett, R., 1996. Flesh and Stone. s.l.:s.n.

Simmel, G., 1903. The Metropolis and Modern Life. s.l.:s.n.

Simmie, J., 2003. Innovation and urban regions as national and international

nodes for the transfer and sharing of knowledge. Regional Studies, Issue 37.

Soja, E. & Kanai, M., 2007. The Urbanization of the World. In: R. Burdett & D.

Sudjic, Hrsg. The Endless City. London: Phaidon Press Ltd, pp. 54-69.

Steger, M. B., 2009. Globalization - A Very Short Introduction. New York:

Oxford University Press Inc..

Urry, J., 2000. Sociology beyond Societies - mobilities for the twenty-forst

century. London: Routledge.

Urry, J., 2002. Mobility and Proximity. Sociology, 36(2), pp. 255-274.

Urry, J., 2007. mobilities. s.l.:Polity.


37/37

van Wee, B., Rietveld, P. & Meurs, H., 2006. Is average daily travel time

expenditure constant? In search of explanations for an increase in average

travel time. Journal of Transport Geography, Band 14, pp. 109-122.

Vannini, P., 2009. The Cultures of Alternative Mobilities. London: Ashgate.

Wellmann, B., 2001. Physical Place and cyber place: the rise of networked

individualism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.

Wilkens, M., 2000. ber die Kunst der Auen- und Zwischenrume. In:

Architektur als Komposition. Basel: Birkhuser, pp. 152-167.

Zukin, S., 1989. Loft Living: Culture and Capital in Urban Change. s.l.:Rutgers

University Press.

movement in architectural urbanism

Documents