Thursday, August 25, 2011

Do it all again!

The new plan for Slussen is a true evidence of the fact that city planning is not intrinsically consulting firms' business. The pen is trembling in planner's hand with each single stroke on the paper in fear of harsh criticism from high-ranked decision-making authorities and public now and then.

Social Democrats are not satisfied with the proposal for new Slussen and this means that the construction will be postponed again. SD is looking for a more functional and spectacular Slussen. So many stairs will cause problems for handicaps and women with baby strollers commuting between Gamla Stan and Södermalm, they assume. They also think that there is too much room for motor traffic in current proposal considering the vision for a car-free Gamla Stan. SD will therefore ask the City Planning Board not to approve the proposal. Christian Democrats condemn SD's decision for being irresponsible regarding the delay it will cause also for speaking out so late just a couple of months before decision making.

Social Democrats put forth three major arguments for their opposition to Nya Slussen:
  • Existing serene skyline will be obstructed by new additions.
  • Future underground transportation route to Nacka is not taken into account.
  • There is too much room for car in current plan.
Nevertheless, the problem with the 3-year delay in the project required for planning a new solution is how to cope with threatening rise in Mälaren lake's level of water. In current plan, a new water-circulation system has been devised to transfer greater amounts of water from Mälaren to the Baltic Sea ...

The thing is that planning is all a matter of prioritizing. This does not entail that an urban plan can by no means be functional, visually appealing, economical, eco-friendly and collaborative at the same time; but that the necessity for making sacrifices on some aspects in favor of some gains somewhere else should always be perceived when judging final outcome of an urban planning procedure.

Source:
http://www.dn.se/sthlm/s-domer-ut-slussenforslaget
http://www.dn.se/sthlm/s-far-inget-medhall-om-slussenforslaget

Friday, August 12, 2011

Back to the topic

While searching avidly for pioneer practitioners in the field of visualization as part of my thesis work, I came across the visionary product of the Brisbane-based infrastructure visualization company, Urban CircusUrban Circus is a powerful tool for real-time visualization of large-scale multi-disciplinary urban projects. Its interface is ideally user-friendly and to a great degree interactive. Base models are imported from 3DSMax, Maya, ArchiCAD, etc. Outputs range from 2d rendered scenes, 3d panoramic views, 3d videos and 4d planning environments to interactive web pages featuring all the above-mentioned. Created scenes are fairly realistic and delicately detailed. Urban Circus Company was founded by an urban planner, Dr. Ben Guy in 2004.

As part of a recent conversation among Dr. Ben Guy and me and in response to an inquiry on my opinion about key centres for 3D visualisation study and analysis around the world and where we are standing here at KTH, I made an effort to conclude my findings in the field as followed: 
Diagram 3
Diagram 4
Firstly, the definition and delimitation of 3d visualization is not fully agreed upon among scholars and practitioners. So, I try to delimit the term and clarify in which sense I would prefer to use it before proceeding. As depicted in diagrams 3 and 4, visualization may address the transitory process with an input from the modelling phase and an output for the simulation phase. The term can also be used in a wider sense describing the entire process. Throughout my studies, the latter definition has proved to be more appropriate when mentioning visualization as a means for participatory planning. 
Secondly, contemporary practitioners in the field take different approaches to the very nature of visualization tools and techniques. The variety of categories can - in my opinion - be summarized to two major groups. These two classifications are in turn derived from Raper, McCarthy and Williams' (1999)* categorization of virtual reality tools: Some institutes such as MIT Media Lab are mainly equipment-oriented which can correspond to Raper and others' immersive (egocentric) VR. Batty, Longley and others at UCL's CASA, on the other hand, are more focused on the through-the-window or exocentric definition of VR tools. Again, I find the latter better addressing contemporary needs for 3d visualization and more compatible with participatory approaches. 
Sweden is a pioneer in visualization in Scandinavia and among top ones in Europe with a number of active visualization centers such as those in Norrköping and Göteborg. They are however still more into immersive VR approaches and somehow more specialised in other uses of visualization such as medical applications rather than planning. In recent years, KTH has been offering various programs on visualization which are unique in the sense that they are closely linked to satellite imagery, semi-automated modeling and GIS utilities from one side and visualization of social aspects of planning using Space Syntax, Place Syntax, etc. on the other hand. 
There are in fact vast grounds and potentials for further developments, but still much to be done for integrating the variety of visualization-related activities and research programs within the department before strengthening our links with pioneers in the field. I have much hope and enthusiasm in our recent activities for better embracing the topic at our planning school in the future.

Sources:
Raper, J., McCarthy, T., & Williams, N. (1999). Georeferenced four-dimensional virtual environments: principles and applications.Computers, Environment and Urban Systems , 22 (6), 529-539.
Ball, J., Capanni, N., & Watt, S. (2008). Virtual Reality for Mutual Understanding in Landscape Planning. International
Journal of Social Sciences , Volume 2 Number 2 2008 ISSN 1306‐973X.
Parsanezhad, P., (2010). Towards an Optimal Web-based Visualization Tool for Planning : A Comparative Analytical Survey over Visualization Techniques for Enhancing Stakeholders’ Participation in Planning. Master thesis report, KTH, Stockholm.

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Beauty out of Beast



Current KTH School of Architecture
No one is cheered up by an abrupt fire on a stately edifice in a reputed neighbourhood of the city. Burning of KTH School of Architecture in Stockholm, however, triggered ambivalent feelings for many who had longly suffered this arrogant, obstructive and gloomy mass of concrete boasting right in the middle of delicate harmonic urban environment of Östermalm and in the vicinity of the elaborate structure of Engelbrek Church.

After the fire
The catastrophe paved the way for realizing the 10-year dream of integrating the two isolated bodies of KTH through establishment of an accumulative building accommodating both the entrance to the campus and architectural school. It is planned to be located where the three streets of Osquarsbacke, Lindstedtsvägen and Drottning Kristinas vägen meet. Currently, Info Center and administrative units are located there.

The new KTH School of Architecture designed by Tham & Videgård will be a round building with a glassy-steel facade. As part of the project, the building located south of KTH library will be ruined and greenery and artworks in the surroundings will be transferred to other places around the campus. The new school of architecture is expected to be ready to use for spring semester 2014 and will also serve as a meeting place with a number of mini galleries.

New design
Sources: