Abstract
This paper presents a methodology to assess spatial adaptability by means of a broad range of criteria from intertwined research cultures, from a more analytical to a more cultural analysis of space use. In order to thoroughly assess all these stages of the building’s lifecycle that impact on its adaptability, it focuses on several procedures undertaken for collecting data on this regard, but foremost, on the formal methods in architecture and spatial visualisation of the results. Thus, it proposes a multi-criteria methodology composed by three sequential milestones that describe specific building conditions on this behalf, towards a final retrieval of the building’s adaptability. Milestone I describes the building’s physical features and overall configuration, Milestone II describes all the possible activities it can allocate and Milestone III describes its effective appropriation. Finally, the retrieval of spatial adaptability is undertaken by a correlation of the most representative variables prior obtained in each stage. It is proposed that the three milestones enable the collection of a wide array of complementary data, whose representations also vary, but that overall provide a robust outlook on spatial adaptability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Translation from the original quote in Portuguese.
- 2.
See Coelho, C.: Life within architecture from design process to space use. Adaptability in school buildings today—A methodological approach. Ph.D. Thesis in Architecture, Departamento de Arquitetura da Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra [4].
- 3.
Translation from the original quote in Portuguese.
References
Benedikt, M. (1979). To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning B, 6, 47–65.
Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. New York: Viking Adult.
Brubaker, W. (1998). Planning and designing schools. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Coelho, C. (2017). Life within architecture from design process to space use. Adaptability in school buildings today—A methodological approach. Ph.D. Thesis in Architecture, Departamento de Arquitetura da Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra.
Coelho, C., & Heitor, T. (2017). Adaptability retrieval in artistic learning environments. In T. Heitor, M. Serra, J. Silva, M. Bacharel & L. Silva (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 7: 1–19). Lisbon: Instituto Superior Técnico, Departamento de Engenharia Civil, Arquitetura e Georrecursos.
Coelho, C., & Krüger, M. (2015). Towards a methodology to assess adaptability in educational spaces: An entropy approach to space syntax. In K. Karimi, L. Vaughan, K. Sailer, G. Palaiologou, & T. Bolton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 17: 1–20). London: Space Syntax Laboratory, The Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London.
Fawcett, W. (1976). School management and school design. Journal of Architectural Research, 5, 10–21.
Fawcett, W. (1978). A mathematical approach to adaptability in buildings. Doctoral Thesis. S.l., University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
Fawcett, W. (1979a). All possible and most probable schedules in organizations. Environment & Planning B, 6(2), 123–154.
Fawcett, W. (1979b). Catalogue of activity schedules for small organisations. Environment & Planning B, 6(3), 293–300.
Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings: Using public space. Washington, DC: Island Press (Original edition from 1987).
Habraken, N. (1972). Supports: An alternative to mass housing. London: The Architectural Press (Original edition in Dutch from 1961).
Habraken, N. (1998). The structure of the ordinary: form and control in the built environment. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Hertzberger, H. (2008). Space and learning: Lessons in architecture 3. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers.
Hillier, B, Leaman, A., Stansall, P., & Bedford, M. (1976). Space Syntax. Environment and Planning B, 3, 147–185.
Hillier, B., Hanson, J, Peponis, J., Hudson, J., & Burdett, R. (1983, November 30). Space syntax: a different urban perspective. The Architects’ Journal, 178(48), 47–54, 59–63.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jaynes, E. (1957). Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review, Series II, 106(4), 620–630.
Krüger, M. (1979a). An approach to built-form connectivity at an urban scale: System description and its representation. Environment and Planning B, 6, 67–88.
Krüger, M. (1979b). An approach to built-form connectivity at an urban scale: Variations of connectivity and adjacency measures amongst zones and other related topics. Environment and Planning B, 6, 305–320.
Krüger, M. (1981). Maximização da adaptabilidade. Ciência e Cultura, 33(9), 1169–1182.
Krüger, M. (1992). Caracterização e Programação de Edifícios Complexos. Departamento de Engenharia Civil. Instituto Superior Técnico: Universidade Técnica de Lisboa.
March, L. (1998). [8+(6)+11] = 25+x. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Anniversary Issue, 10–19.
OECD—Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2001). Designs for learning: 55 exemplary educational facilities. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Peponis, J. (2001). Interacting questions and descriptions. How do they look from here? In J. Peponis, J. Wineman, & S. Bafna (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. xiii–xxvi). Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology.
Psarra, S. (2003). A bird’s eye view from the ground. In J. Hanson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 1–8). London: University College London.
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces. Washington, D.C.: Conservation Foundation.
Worthington, J. (2007). Enabling place-making: The role of the school in supporting the community. In Building excellence: Exploring the implications of the curriculum for Excellence for school buildings. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Coelho, C. (2021). Space, Adaptability and Use: Triangulating Research Criteria for Adaptability Retrieval. In: Eloy, S., Leite Viana, D., Morais, F., Vieira Vaz, J. (eds) Formal Methods in Architecture. Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57509-0_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57509-0_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57508-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57509-0
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)