Diagram

Diagrams in

Architecture
An Examination of Diagram Based Desgin Methods
in Contemporary Urban Architecture Projects

FRASER SHIELDS
Diagrams in Architecture
An Examination of Diagram Based Desgin Methods in Contemporary
Urban Architecture Projects

FRASER SHIELDS
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction

of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (PROFESSIONAL)
at the
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
of
VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON
2012
I
Abstract
Abstract
This research explores the relationship between the use of diagrams in

architectural production and an architectural outcome which redefines
conventional relationships between urban built form and open space. Several
prominent architecture practices whose design methodologies are based
extensively on diagrams produce architectural outcomes which relate to their
surrounding physical context in unusual ways, presenting alternative solutions
to conventional urban design principles and representing an emerging trend
in urban design. A variety diagram types are utilised in different ways in the
design processes of these key ‘diagrammatic’ practices.
Design proposals responding to the same brief examine the architectural

and urban design outcomes of different types of diagram use. Two different
diagrammatic design methodologies are executed, producing two design
proposals for a complex mixed use development in central Wellington.
Each diagrammatic design methodology has different implications for the

relationships between built form and open space by emphasising different
factors in the design process and progressing differently from diagram into
built form. One method emphasises continuity and connection, thereby
minimising the typical distinctions between built form and open space.
The other method emphasises a strict functional logic to produce unusual
programmatic organisations which create ambiguity between the building’s
inside and outside. Instrumentalising diagrams in the design process aids in the
management of the project’s complexities, allows the design to develop in an
abstract manner, and presents the often unusual design outcomes on the basis
of an underlying functional logic, thereby providing a significant contribution
to the realisation of new architectural and urban design solutions.
III
Table of Contents
Abstract III
Table of Contents IV
Acknowledgements IX
One | Introduction 1
Research Background 1
Research Aim 1
Research Approach 2
Scope of Research 3
Two | Literature Review 4
Introduction 5
[1] Urban Design 6
Urban Design Background 6

Boundaries: Conventional Urban Design Principles 8
Extending the Boundary: Challenging Conventional Urban Design
Principles 12
Blurring the Boundaries: Building/Landscape Integration 15
[2] Diagrams in Architecture 18
Diagrams: Tools for Extending the Boundary 18
Three | Practice + Case Studies 24
Introduction 25
Foreign Office Architects | Practice Study 27
Practice Ideology 27
Definition of Diagram 27
Diagram Value 28
Diagrammatic Design Methodology 28
Attitude Towards Ground/Landscape 29
Foreign Office Architects | Case Study 30
Project Overview 30
Project Design Methodology 30
IV
Contents
Diagram Methodology 32
Relationship to Urban Design Principles 33
UN Studio | Practice Study 34
Diagram Value 35
UN Studio | Case Study 38
Project Overview 38
MVRDV | Practice Study 43
Diagram Value 44
MVRDV | Case Study 46
Project Overview 46
OMA | Practice Study 50
Diagram Value 50
OMA | Case Study 53
Project Overview 53
V
Case Studies | Discussion 56
Diagram Type Summary 56

Diagram Use Summary 58
Unconventional Diagram Use 59
Common Unconventional Diagram Use 60
Four | Pre-Design 64
Pre-Design | Introduction 65
Design Testing 65
Design Background 65
Design Brief 66
Pre-Design | Site Analysis 67
Urban Context 67
Site Context 68
Site Photographs 70
Existing Building - The Oaks Retail Complex 71
Wellington 2040 72
Five | Design Execution 74
Abstract/Instrumentalising | Design Execution 75
Introduction 75
Design Execution 76
Resulting Form 78
Abstract/Instrumentalising | Design Outcome 80
Design Summary 80
Analytic/Literal | Design Execution 88
Introduction 88
Design Execution 88
Resulting Form 94
Analytic/Literal | Design Outcome 96
Design Summary 96
Design Execution | Discussion 104
VI
Contents
Design One: Areas of Unconventional Building/Open Space

Relationships 104
Design One: Role of diagrams in Design Process 105
Design Two: Areas of Unconventional Building/Open Space
Relationships 106
Design Two: Role of diagrams in Design Process 107
Role of the Designer in the Different Methodologies 108
Architectural Outcomes of the Different Methodologies 108
Limitations of the Different Methodologies 109
Findings for the Instrumentality of Diagrams 110
Six | Conclusions 112
Conclusion One: Different Types of Diagrammatic Practice 113

Conclusion Two: Different Unconventional Urban Design Outcomes 114
Conclusion Three: Contribution of Diagrammatic Design
Methodologies in the Realisation of Unconventional Urban Design
Outcomes 114
Limitations and Further Research 115
Final Conclusion 116
Bibliography 118
List of Figures 121
VII
VIII
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my family, especially my parents, Helen and Hugh, for
their support and encouragement throughout my time at university, and for
pushing me to recognise the importance of a good education. It is thanks to the
values which they have passed on to me that I today have the drive and passion
for learning required to complete this research.
I would secondly like to thank my supervisor, Chris McDonald, for his

thorough feedback and thoughtful guidance, and for maintaining a healthy
and ultimately valuable scepticism of my still-emerging area of research.
Lastly I would like to thank my friends and research studio colleagues whose
couch conversations and innumerable tea breaks provided the welcome
distractions necessary to maintain a MArch (Prof ) student’s sanity.
IX
01
Introduction
One | Introduction
Introduction
Research Background
Diagrams have been used in architecture for centuries, however only attracted
significant written attention as recently as the 20th Century, gaining prominence
in the 1980s. Despite their widespread use and long history in architecture
there are surprisingly few publications dedicated to the topic of diagrams in
architecture, perhaps due to an emphasis on text and images and a prioritised
interest in product over process. Because of this, significant gaps exist in the
knowledge that surrounds the use of diagrams in architecture.
Many contemporary architectural projects designed by key ‘diagrammatic

practices’ - those practices who utilise diagrams extensively in their design
methodologies - seem to challenge contemporary urban design principles
prescribed by urban design texts and publications. These practices utilise
diagrams in new ways to generate and explain new conceptions for the physical
boundaries of architecture and its relationship with what has conventionally been
called the outdoor public realm. No examination of how these ‘diagrammatic’
design methodologies impact on the design of urban architecture projects,
specifically how they influence the architecture’s relationship between built
form and open space, has been published. This represents a serious gap in the
knowledge of how diagrams can be utilised in urban architecture projects to
generate new possibilities and strategies for urban design and the design of
buildings in urban contexts.
Research Aim
The aim of this thesis is to explore the use of ‘diagrammatic’ design methods
in urban architecture projects. It focuses on the instrumentality of diagrams
in generating new possibilities for architecture which challenge conventional
urban design principles concerning the relationship between buildings and
open space.
1
Research Approach
Chapter 2 reviews literature concerning contemporary urban design principles

and theory. It focuses particularly on how the current theory addresses the
physical boundaries between built form and open space, and establishes a
set of ‘conventional’ urban design principles on the topic. Rival views which
challenge these ‘conventional’ principles are then examined to identify emerging
alternative conceptions of built form/open space relationships. Texts include
urban design guides and recent books published on the topic.
The second part of the chapter reviews literature concerning the use of diagrams
in architecture and provides the theoretical basis for contemporary thinking on
their use. It outlines various definitions of architectural diagrams and identifies
their function and value in architectural production. The research identifies four
key architectural practices which feature prominently in literature concerning
both emergent urban design trends and diagrams in architecture. Texts include
periodical articles and edited books on the topic.
Chapter 3 presents practice and case studies of the four key architectural
practices identified by the literature review. The diagrammatic concepts of each
practice are examined and a case study of one key project from each practice is
executed. The case studies examine the diagrammatic design methodology of
each of the projects, and identify the areas of emergent urban design trends for
each design. Following the practice and case studies a discussion identifies the
different types of diagrams used by the practices and identifies two different
types of ‘unconventional’ diagram use, common amongst the key practices.
Chapter 4 outlines the role of design for the research and presents the design
brief and site analysis required before undertaking the design phase of the
research.
Chapter 5 presents the design phase of the research which responds to a

theoretical design brief for a mixed use building in a central urban site. A
diagrammatic design methodology based on each of the two types of diagram
use identified by the case studies is executed, generating two different design
proposals in response to the brief.
The second part of the chapter identifies the findings for the design phase of
the research. Areas of unconventional urban design outcomes in each design
proposal are identified, and the role of diagrams and the designer in each of
the methodologies is discussed. The differences in architectural outcomes
and limitations of the different diagrammatic design methodologies are also
discussed. Following these areas of discussion, findings on the instrumentality
of diagrams in producing unconventional urban design outcomes are identified,
relating to the aim of the research.
Chapter 6 presents the conclusions for the research which are informed by the
2
One | Introduction
literature review, practice and case studies, and the design execution. Three
major conclusions are formulated for this research. Limitations and areas of
further possible research are also identified.
Scope of Research
The primary area of interest for this research is urban buildings which present
a rival conception of built form/open space relationships to those identified as
‘conventional’ according to urban design texts. The research does not argue that
all urban architecture projects could or should challenge conventional urban
design principles, only that for certain projects these emerging strategies could
produce new and different architectural and urban design outcomes. With a
focus on newness and difference and the difficult task of determining suitable
criteria for analysis, the research does not seek to argue points concerning the
urban quality of the design outcomes.
The scope of the research is limited by the availability of published material,

especially concerning the processes of design. A more detailed analysis of a lesser
number of practice and case studies is relied upon for drawing conclusions for
the research.
3
02
Literature
Review
Two | Literature Review
Literature Review|
Introduction
The literature review is structured as two streams of research; urban design and
diagrams in architecture.
Part one, Urban Design, is divided into three sections: Urban Design Background
identifies how urban form has changed over the last century and the impact of
these changes on urban public space. Boundaries: Conventional Urban Design
Principles identifies conventional urban design principles advocated by recent
urban design movements and publications, especially their principles regarding
the relationship between buildings and open space. In Extending the Boundary:
Challenging Conventional Urban Design Principles, emergent rival urban design
movements and practices are identified and the ways in which they challenge
conventional urban design principles are examined, especially those regarding
the relationships between buildings and open space.
Part two, Diagrams in Architecture examines literature concerning the use of

diagrams in architecture and provides the theoretical basis for their use in the
profession. Various definitions of diagrams are examined and their functions
and values in the architectural design process are identified. The architectural
qualities characteristic of buildings produced via diagrams are also identified.
Texts include periodical articles and edited books on the topic.
5
[1] Urban Design

Urban Design Background
Traditional and Modern City Form.
Urban space systems within cities can essentially be understood in two different
ways. The first is where buildings define space and the second is where buildings
are objects-in-space (Carmona, Tiesdell, Heath, & Oc, 2010). The former is
typically referred to as traditional urban space, and the latter Modern urban
space.
Traditional urban space can be considered as the urban space which evolved
prior to large scale industrialisation and urbanisation. Before the industrial
revolution urban development was limited by transport methods, availability
of construction materials, building methods and the absence of mechanical
building technologies such as lifts (Carmona et al, 2010). Urban form during
this time was characterised by continuous compact low rise buildings forming
small scale urban blocks which defined and enclosed urban space into definite
spatial types such as streets and squares. Rowe (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010),
describes this urban form in terms of ‘texture’, where a continuous matrix of
background buildings define urban space; only buildings of significance where
separated from the background urban structure.
Modern urban space planning emerged in opposition to traditional urban form.

It was driven both by “...horror at the squalor and slums of nineteenth century
industrial cities, and by perception of the start of a new age - the Machine
Age” (Carmona et al, 2010, p. 21). Le Corbusier (as cited in Carmona et al,
2010) likened the traditional street to a trench, describing it as oppressing,
constricting and enclosing. In opposition to the traditional city, Modern
city form was characterised by buildings as freestanding objects in landscape
settings; sculptural objects standing freely space. Using figure-ground diagrams,
Rowe and Koetter showed how traditional and modern cities were essentially
an inverse of one another: one represented solid buildings placed in a void;
the other, voids removed from a solid building mass (as cited in Carmona et
al, 2010). According to Carmona et al, (2010) modernist urban space was
intended to “...flow freely around buildings rather than being enclosed and
contained by them,” (p. 85) allowing light in and air to circulate. The form of
the buildings were determined primarily by the functions of the internal spaces
6
which they housed, resulting in buildings which related poorly to the il-defined
public space which surrounded them.
Reactions to Modern Urban Space.

Modernism’s emphasis on ‘object’ buildings in space resulted in sterile urban
environments which, according to Lang (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010) were
a “...failure in terms of the lives of those who inhabited them” (p. 12). Gehl
(2010), suggests the problem was viewing urban development from an aerial
perspective, thereby ignoring the small scale human landscape experienced by
the users of the spaces. He suggests that Modern city spaces were too large and
amorphous, streets too wide and sidewalks too long and straight.
In the early 1960s Modernist ideas of urban space began to be questioned

with increasing force resulting in a number of criticisms and reactions to the
prevailing Modern urban development practices. This reaction was led by a
group of writers including Jane Jacobs, Kevin Lynch, Christopher Alexander
and Jan Gehl who became influential in the newly formed discipline of urban
design. Much of their writing attacked the fundamental concepts of modernist
urban planning, and instead proposed a social usage approach to urban
planning, emphasising the way in which people use space and perceive a sense
of place rather than the design of buildings as objects alone (Carmona et al,
2010).
Urban Design’s Place-Making Tradition.

Since the 1990s a place-making tradition in urban design has emmerged and
exists as the prevailing approach to urban design today, informing conventional
urban design principles. This approach is rooted in the social urban design
tradition of the 1960s, and concerns both the physical design of urban spaces
as well as urban spaces as behavioural settings. The place-making tradition
informs most definitions of urban design today, a useful example of which
comes from the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment
(CABE) (2000) in the United Kingdom:
Urban design is the art of making places for people. It includes the
way places work... as well as how they look. It concerns the connections
between people and places, movement and urban form, nature and the
built fabric, and the processes for ensuring successful villages, towns and cities.
(p. 8)
As part of the place-making tradition, the significance of urban design and the
built environment is its ability to influence the human activity and social life
it supports. Although not able to determine actions or behaviour, Carmona et
al (2010) suggest “...urban design can be seen as a means of manipulating the
probabilities of certain actions or behaviours occurring” (p. 134). According
to Gehl (2010), human activity is directly related to the design quality of the
7
urban environment. Good urban design can thereby enable urban spaces to
realise their full potential by increasing density of use.
A number of urban design manifestos have emerged as part of the place-making

tradition, seeking to identify the qualities of successful urban social places
and ‘good’ urban form. Notable examples include Responsive Environments,
and attempts by Kevin Lynch, Allen Jacobs and Donald Appleyard, Francis
Tibbalds, and the Congress for New Urbanism.
Boundaries: Conventional Urban Design Principles

Buildings Defining Public Space.
An important quality of successful urban spaces identifiable in a number of
place-making manifestos is built form providing definition to urban public
space. Allan Jacobs and Donald Appleyard’s ‘Toward an Urban Design
Manifesto’ (1987) (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010) identifies five prerequisites
of a ‘sound’ urban environment, one of which is a manmade environment,
particularly buildings, defining public space as opposed to buildings existing
in space. The Congress for New Urbanism’s ‘Charter for New Urbanism’
(1993) (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010) also advocates the design of urban
places framed by architecture, and advocates that cities should be shaped by
physically defined public spaces. Buildings defining outdoor public spaces is
now accepted as a conventional principle of urban design and is published in
recent ‘official’ urban design guides such as those by CABE (2000) and the
English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation (2007).
The urban design principle of buildings defining urban public space exists
in opposition to Modern urban planning as it focuses predominantly on the
spaces between buildings rather than the buildings themselves. Trancik (2007),
suggests that by conceiving as public space as ‘figural volume’ the unworkable
relationships between Modern buildings and public space can be reversed. This
strategy sees a reversal of the conception of the role of buildings from ‘objects’
to ‘texture’, where the relatively anonymous buildings described by Kelbaugh
(as cited in Carmona & Tiesdell, The Morphological Dimension, 2007) as
being ‘background’ or ‘collateral’ play an important role in defining public
space; they “...gain their strength from the public space they define” (p.61).
According to Trancik (1986), well defined outdoor spaces are as necessary as
good buildings, which should define exterior space rather than displace it. He
proposes people’s reaction to a space is largely determined by the way it is
enclosed, likening the external spaces of a city to the ‘rooms’ which people
relate to on a daily basis. Buildings establish the ‘walls’ to these external rooms.
Positive Space; Definite Boundaries.

To help describe the visual qualities of external (outdoor) space, Alexander
(as cited in Carmona et al, 2010) proposed that they be considered in terms
8
of ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ space; this terminology is now widely adopted in

urban design publications. Positive space relates to that of traditional city form
and is characterised by clear definition and a sense of enclosure; negative space
relates to Modern city form and is shapeless and inconceivable, possessing no
perceivable boundary or enclosure. Gehl (2010) identifies an example of negative
space as being bounded on all sides by traffic, and describes their function as
impoverished compared to spaces where life is reinforced by buildings. Positive
urban space is a key facet of conventional urban design principles, forming an
important part of good urbanism (Llewelyn-Davies, 2007; Carmona, Tiesdell,
Heath, & Oc, 2010).
Positive urban space possesses the qualities of clear definition and enclosure. It
features a distinct and definite shape and character, and has a positively defined
function with no leftover or ambiguous space and a clear distinction between
public and private areas. Enclosure is provided by clearly perceivable boundaries
which limit the visual field and provide the space with a sense of containment
and a threshold between ‘inside’ and ‘outside’, a principle which, according
to Gehl (2010), makes a “...vital contribution to spatial experience and to the
awareness of individual space as a place” (p. 75). According to Carmona et al
(2010), three enclosing elements exist - “...the surrounding structures (the
walls to the space), the floor; and the imaginary sphere of the sky overhead”
(p. 176). In opposition to a prioritised sense of enclosure, Hillier (as cited in
Carmon et al, 2010), identifies fault in many contemporary public spaces as
being too enclosed compared to allowing visual permeability into the space.
He proposes a more important quality of public space is its connectedness or
‘integration’ with the surrounding city.
Building Facades: Walls of Outdoor Rooms.

Building facades convey a building’s identity and character. Buchanan (1998)
argues it is the role of the facade to go beyond visual and physical definition
of public space to create a sense of place, helping to define the character of the
adjacent space and articulate its function. He suggests important qualities of
facade articulation and composition are visual rhythms, mass and materiality,
and expression of structure, which all help to engage the viewer to interact with
the facade.
Edges: Buildings’ Social Contribution to Public Space.

Urban buildings do more than simply provide definition, enclosure and character
to public space, as CABE (2007) points out, “...the social responsibility of
buildings to contribute positively to civic life has often been neglected” (p. 86).
The notion of buildings contributing positively to their urban environment is
reiterated in the Urban Design Compendium’s summary of ‘urban architecture’
as:
...buildings and open space considered as a totality. Viewed from this
9
perspective, the success of a building is determined by its ability to make

a positive contribution to the public realm - to face the street, animate
it and make sure that all adjacent open space is positively used. It is this
interaction between buildings and the public domain - this edge - that
determines the relationship between inside and outside, built and open,
public and private, individual and community. (p. 89)
This summary adopts the terminology of Gehl and Alexander; referring to

this boundary between built form and open space, public and private, as
‘edge’. Conceptualised as edge rather than boundary, the building/open space
interface takes on a social role rather than simply providing visual definition
to the space. The design of this interface between built form and public space
has an influence on the social life of the space (Gehl, 2010; Carmona, Tiesdell,
Heath, & Oc, 2010). According to Gehl and Alexander, the edge is a defining
factor in the success or failure of public spaces, noting that the social life of
public spaces gravitates towards the edges: “If the edge fails, then the space
never becomes lively” (Alexander et al as cited in Carmona et al, 2010, p. 214).
Gehl (2010) describes this phenomenon as ‘edge effect’.
Gehl (2010) defines edges in terms of ‘soft’ or ‘hard’; the former characterised
is by transparent facades, large windows and many openings, the latter by
blank walls. Studies conducted on the impact of edge quality on city life
point to a direct connection between soft edges and lively cities (Gehl, 2010).
Rather than treating the edge as a line or boundary, Alexander et al (as cited in
Carmona et al, 2010) recommend conceiving it “...as a ‘thing’, a ‘place’, a zone
with volume to it” (p. 214), and suggest the edge of a space can be enhanced
by providing opportunities for sitting. The edge ‘zone’ acts as an interface
between life inside buildings and life outside in city spaces. Gehl (2010),
recommends opening up this interface so the internal and external spaces can
work together. Madanipour (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010), suggests “...the
more ambiguous and articulate the boundary, the more civilised a place appears
to be. When the two realms are separated by rigid walls, the line of interaction
becomes arid, communication limited and the social life poorer for that” (p.
215). A key strategy for ensuring ‘soft’ edges is to locate activities for the public
on the ground floor, creating an ‘active’ frontage. Making a frontage ‘active’
adds interest, vitality, and life to the public realm through increased human
presence. Active frontages are characterised by:
• Frequent doors and windows with few blank walls

• Narrow frontage buildings, giving vertical rhythm to the street scene
• Articulation of facades, with projections such as bays and porches
incorporated
• Lively internal uses visible from the outside, or spilling onto the street
(Llewelyn-Davies, 2007)
10
To encourage the social life of public spaces, the ground floor should house
activities which contribute to, as well as benefit from, interaction with the
public realm, contributing to its vitality.
The Public Realm.

The public realm can be considered as the sites and settings of public life.
Historically this referred primarily to the physical world, however now extends
beyond the physical as public life increasingly exists through the internet.
The physical public realm is defined by Carmona et al (2010) as “...the series of

spaces and settings - which may be publically or privately owned - that support
or facilitate public life and social interaction” (p. 137). They also note it could
be considered as all the spaces shown as white in a figure-ground diagram,
which includes interiors of key public buildings. The public realm extends
to all the spaces accessible to and used by the public however is not always
clearly defined and absolute. Rather, the relative publicness of a space can be
ambiguous and depends on its qualities of ownership, access and use. External
public space which is not privately owned represents public space in its purest
form, whereas internal privately owned quasi-’public’ space such as shopping
malls exists at the other end of the spectrum and for many observers represent
a decline of the public realm.
Topography of the Public Realm.

Gehl (2010) describes one quality of an inviting urban environment as one
which exists on a single level, providing better opportunities to engage with
fellow pedestrians. Loukaitou-Sideris (as cited in Carmona et al, 2010),
describes sunken or elevated plazas as ‘cracks’ in the urban environment which
disrupt pedestrian activity. Considering this, Gehl (2010) recommends stairs
should be avoided wherever possible as they present a physical and psychological
obstacle to pedestrian movement and are more difficult than staying on the
same level or alternatively being transported up or down mechanically. If stairs
are necessary they can be thoughtfully designed using ‘staircase psychology,’
whereby the climb is divided into smaller sections so pedestrians do not get
to see the full course of the climb at any point. One example of successful
stair design in public space is the Spanish Steps in Rome, where the climb
is combined with interesting experiences and social interaction. Ramps are a
more desirable option for pedestrians than stairs however do not always possess
the same opportunity as stairs to provide character.
Although Gehl (2010) recommends public space remains on one level, he does
recognise “Topography and height differences...provide good opportunities to
add value. Any differences in height can enhance experiences for pedestrians
compared to walking on flat surfaces” (p. 177). If appropriately managed,
topographical differences can provide drama at eye level and contribute
positively to the urban environment.
11
Extending the Boundary: Challenging Conventional Urban

Design Principles
The previous section identified conventional urban design principles concerning
the relationship between buildings and open space which arose in opposition
to Modern urban form. These principles can be summarised as follows:
• Built form providing definition and enclosure to urban public space

rather than buildings standing in space
• Clear distinction between public and private areas
• ‘Soft’ edges
• Conceptualising the building/open space edge as a zone with
thickness; not just a line
• Interaction between activities inside and outside buildings through
active frontages
• Minimum topographical variation in urban public space
This section identifies rival urban design movements and practices which have
emerged in opposition to, or as an alternative or extension of conventional
urban design principles. Rival conceptions of boundaries between buildings
and open space and building/open space duality are examined to identify
emerging trends in urban architecture.
Integral Urbanism.
Integral urbanism is an emergent urbanism reacting against both Modern and
Postmodern urban form, seeking to ‘heal wounds’ inflicted on the landscape
by these movements. The principles of Integral Urbanism represent a synthesis
of the ‘most compelling’ aspects of contemporary trends in urban design
and architecture, so represent some of the most current and emergent ideas
in urban design. As its name suggests, Integral Urbanism seeks to integrate
a wide range of systems present in urban design, namely: Functions or uses,
urban and suburban, public and private, centre and periphery, horizontal and
vertical, architecture and landscape, figure and ground, indoor and outdoor,
people, design professions, theory and practice, process and product, system
and serendipity (Ellin, 2006). As well as synthesising some of the most recent
urban architecture and urban design trends, Integral Urbanism is important
in the discussion of the relationship between buildings and open space as its
principles have a specific focus on borders, edges and ‘in-between’ spaces as
concepts and as actual places.
According to Nan Ellin, the goal of Integral Urbanism is to achieve ‘flow’,

which is characterised by places that are animated, spirited, soulful and lively.
Five qualities for places to be in flow are identified, and include: hybridity,
connectivity, porosity, authenticity and vulnerability:
12
Hybridity and connectivity are about bringing activities and people

together at all scales (from local to global). Porosity is about the nature
of the relationship between these. Authenticity is about engaging real
social and physical conditions with an ethic of care, respect, and honesty.
Vulnerability is about relinquishing control while remaining engaged,
valuing process as well as product, dynamism, and reintegrating space
and time. (Ellin, 2006, p. 136)
The qualities most important to the relationship between buildings and open
space are hybridity, connectivity and porosity, as they deal with the bringing
together of a variety of activities and the nature of the relationship between
them. These qualities are relevant as many emergent urban architecture projects
seek to combine activities in new and unexpected ways, developing new
conditions for urban architecture.
Hybridity and Connectivity.

Hybridity and connectivity seek to bring activities and people together rather
than isolating separate functions. These qualities treat people and nature and,
importantly, buildings and landscape as symbiotic rather than oppositional
(Ellin, 2006). Many architects and architectural theorists recognise the value
of hybridity, including most notably Steven Holl, Roger Trancik, and Rem
Koolhaas (Ellin, 2006). Koolhaas (as cited in Ellin, 2006) describes how “...
programmatic elements react with each other to create new events” (p. 20),
referring to this as ‘programmatic alchemy’. Koolhaas also introduced hybrid
terms that connect separated phenomena, most notably ‘SCAPE’, which,
according to Ellin (2006), erases “...distinctions between figure and ground
inside and outside, centre and periphery” and “...allows for the convergence of
architecture, landscape, and infrastructure” (p. 54).
The dissolving of the distinctions between building and landscape is an

important development for urban architecture as it has definite implications on
the conventional duality between buildings and open space and the boundaries
present between built and unbuilt. Mark Lee (as cited in Ellin, 2006)
introduced the term ‘topological landscape’ to describe the hybrid condition
between architecture and landscape. He explains that rather than represent “...
spaciousness by merely dissolving spatial confines, the topological landscape
actively seeks to redefine new boundaries while simultaneously transgressing
established ones ... It is not a stable entity but a performative state...” (p. 35).
Connectivity is another important term, and sometimes principle generator, of

urban design interventions (Ellin, 2006). Architect Alex Wall (as cited in Ellin,
2006) notes a rise in interest of designing ‘flexible, multifunctional surfaces’
which create connections between different programmes and users over time.
UN Studio’s design for Arnhem Central transport interchange in Holland is
an example of a building generated by circulation which employs flexibility
13
of surfaces. Conventionally, circulation is thought of primarily in terms of
horizontal movement, however by thinking about it vertically as well, qualities
of hybridity and connectivity can be generated in section also.
Porosity.
Porosity seeks to preserve the integrity of that which is brought together by
hybridity and connectivity by allowing a level of accessibility between the
different systems through permeable membranes (Ellin, 2006). As porosity deals
with the relationship and interaction between different systems, it has a focus
on the nature of edges, boundaries, and borders. This quality introduces the
condition of translucency to the urban environment which allows articulated
interaction between elements but not free flow (as with Modernism through
transparency) or exclusion (as with Postmodernism through fortification).
According to Ellin (2006), too much porosity or no porosity diminishes
quality of life, however the combination of concealment and revelation in a
translucent urbanism adds accessibility, interest and life to the city.
Ellin recognises sixteen different categories of porosity, most importantly, visual,

functional and urban porosity. Visual porosity allows visual but not physical
access to a space and is most commonly accomplished with the use of glass,
or, more recently, metallic wire mesh screens, slatted wood and sandblasted
glass. Functional porosity allows access to a place or modulates access to it,
and is commonly achieved with ‘permeable’ building edges featuring balconies,
arcades and outdoor seating. Urban porosity is “...achieved when permeable
membranes separate and unite buildings from and with the surrounding
physical and cultural landscape” (Ellin, 2006, p. 77), and is achieved through
strategies such as interpreting indoors with outdoors and buildings with
cityscapes, creating hybrid conditions between public and private space.
Porosity engages with the articulation of boundaries and is concerned with
bringing places together whilst preserving the integrity of each, in doing so
enhancing the social experience by bringing differences of people and places
together.
Summary.
Integral urbanism is important to consider as it represents a synthesis of some
of the most compelling trends in contemporary urban design. With a focus
on borders and edges, the principles advocated by this urbanism have clear
implications on how the relationship between buildings and open space are
considered in urban design. These principles can be summarised as:
• Integration of public/private, horizontal/vertical, indoor/outdoor

• Minimising distinction between figure and ground, integrating
architecture, landscape and infrastructure
• Hybridization of functions - bringing people and activities together
14
• Permeable building edges and translucency
These principles represent a rival conception of building/open space duality

as prescribed by conventional urban design principles. Rather than a clear
distinction between buildings and open space, these principle seek to integrate
buildings with their urban contexts, blurring the boundaries between building
and landscape, indoors and outdoors, and public and private. In the following
section, architectural implications of these principles will be identified and
summarised.
Blurring the Boundaries: Building/Landscape Integration
Origins of Building/Landscape Integration.

The most compelling emergent urban design trend identified as part of Integral
Urbanism is the integration of architecture and landscape. Rather than present
a clear duality between buildings and open space and a clear articulation of the
boundary between the two, some emergent projects seek to integrate building
and site together; the building forms an extension to its surrounding landscape.
Taking this integration to the extreme, some projects aim for a complete fusion
of the individual building with the site. According to Mallgrave and Goodman
(2011), “...these projects would attempt to blur the boundaries between
figure and ground becoming themselves, reconstituted, folded, and punctured
versions of the ground surface” (p. 171), thereby blurring the boundaries
between architecture and landscape. They suggest it is possible to trace this
line of thinking to Deleuze’s Le Pli (The Fold) which appeared in French in
1988 and was translated to English in 1993, and was interpreted by architects
as the idea of formal continuity through physical folds. Greg Lynn (as cited in
Mallgrave & Goodman, 2011) argued that folding in architecture allowed the
integration of unrelated elements within a new continuous mixture.
This line of thinking can be traced back further still to the 1960s and the work of
Architecture Principe formed by Claude Parent and Paul Virilio, whose work it
is suggested anticipated the recent exploration of folding and the integration of
building with landscape (Alison, Jones, Spiller, & Vaughan, 2006). In the view
of Parent and Virilio, the Modern city was unable to master the incompatibility
between the fixity of stop and the fluidity of circulation; an incompatibility
they saw as paralysing to Modern architecture. To combat this, they proposed
a new form of urbanism where oblique angles and tilted planes would animate
and set in motion its inhabitants with the aim of stimulating human social
activity. In this theory of urbanism the ground was no longer conceived as
absolute and was rather conceived as an architectonic manipulation (Alison,
Jones, Spiller, & Vaughan, 2006).
15
Building/Landscape Integration: Terms and Definitions
A number of different terms and definitions exist which describe the integration
of architecture with the landscape; building with site. In his 1993 essay “Towards
a New Architecture”, Jeffrey Kipnis introduced the notions if InFormation
and DeFormation, the former being the fusion of different programmes and
forms into a Modernist monolith. The latter, DeFormation, represents the
‘new’ of the essay’s title and is described as “...the generation of novel forms
that in themselves lead to new programmes, ultimately effecting political and
social changes” (Mallgrave & Goodman, 2011, p. 163). DeFormation leads
to smoothness, continuity and folding, and in the words of Kipnis (as cited in
Mallgrave & Goodman, 2011), a new ‘abstract monolithicity’.
Mark Lee introduced the term ‘topological landscape’ to describe hybrid

conditions between architecture and landscape (Ellin, 2006). According to
Lee, the aim of this architecture is not to represent spaciousness by diminishing
enclosure, but rather seeks to redefine boundaries by going beyond the
established principles of building/open space duality.
Rem Koolhaas of OMA introduced the hybrid term ‘SCAPE’ which

encompasses townscape and landscape, minimising the distinctions between
figure and ground and inside and outside, allowing for the convergence of
architecture, landscape and infrastructure (Ellin, 2006). Floris Alkemade,
also of OMA, refers to the interrelationship between levels as ‘ground level
manipulations,’ where building levels are not separated by a two dimensional
surface but rather flow into each other by raising, lowering, bending and
folding, resulting in a more intensive use of surface area (von Meijenfeldt &
Geluk, 2003); a principle which could easily be applied to buildings and their
surrounding context.
Aaron Betsky uses the term ‘landscrapers’ in his 2002 book of the same name
to describe buildings which “...unfold the land, promising to lay a new ground
on which we can erect an architecture of the land” (p. 13). Looking to the
future, he suggests building/landscape integration could see the disappearance
of distinct architectural objects in favour of “...fluid, open-ended structures that
rise naturally from the land” (p. 139) which remain open to interpretation and
use. He suggests such structures could make us regain a sense of reality of place
as we become aware of the ground we inhabit in a culture more dependent on
the abstraction of digital manipulation and virtual spaces, and maintains that
the edges of these forms will be progressively omitted by the movement of
information and people.
Practitioners of Building/Landscape Integration

Common architectural practitioners whose projects seek to integrate buildings
with landscape identified in Ellin (2006), Betsky (2002), and Mallgrave &
Goodman (2011) include London based Foreign Office Architects (FOA),
16
and Dutch practices MVRDV, UN Studio and the Office for Metropolitan
Architecture (OMA) led by Rem Koolhaas. According to Betsky (2002),
Koolhaas “...makes buildings as landscapes in which the land becomes a
building face and the interior is only a seamless convolution of the exterior’s
order into labyrinth caves” (p. 143). This strategy has resulted in the layer-
cake structure of the Seattle public library, as well as the continuous surface of
ramped floors of the Jussieu library project of 1993. It is from OMA’s Jussieu
project that Mallgrave and Goodman (2011) argue that perhaps one of the
most influential buildings of this type descends; the Yokohama ferry terminal
completed in 2002 by FOA:
Their project...aimed to extend the surface of the earth surrounding

the terminal up and over the building itself, transforming the roof
into a park. Into and upon this undulating park-like surface they
introduced a series of interwoven, looping pathways that would create
a nonlinear circulation system for the pier. ...The pleats and folds of
the roof create a landscape of varied but continuous spaces, while
simultaneously forming the building’s structural system... (Mallgrave
& Goodman, 2011, p. 172)
According to Betsky (2002), MVRDV have designed some of the most

fantastically complex building/landscape hybrids, including the Villa Vpro and
the Dutch Pavilion, the latter of which is described as a layer-cake of synthetic
landscapes. UN Studio’s Arnhem stations has been described as “...a landscape
of continual curves that will dip down for us to walk on, rise up to shelter us,
and open up to allow us to move through...” (Betsky, 2002, p. 139). These
four identified practices, Foreign Office Architects, UN Studio, MVRDV and
OMA, feature prominently throughout the remainder of the research.
17
[2] Diagrams in Architecture

Diagrams: Tools for Extending the Boundary
A significant observation about the four emergent urban design practitioners
identified in the previous section is that they have all, in some way or another,
utilised diagrams extensively as part of their design methodologies. Based on
this observation, the research aims to identify the nature of the relationship
between ‘diagrammatic’ design methodologies and their architectural
outcomes which reinterpret conventional urban design principles as they relate
to building/open space duality.
This section examines literature concerned with the use of diagrams in

architecture. Relatively little has been written on the topic, and that which is
written finds little definitive consensus, resulting in a number of ambiguities
on the topic. The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of the
use of diagrams in architecture rather than an exhaustive analysis of their use
and definition; this would require an extensive piece of research in its own
right. A more detailed treatment of the subject will occur in the practice and
case studies which follow.
Diagrams: Rise of Importance.

Diagrams in architecture are as old as architecture itself, with examples dating
back to prehistoric artefacts. Their use has been a staple of architectural texts
at least as far back as Vitruvius’ ‘Ten Books on Architecture’ (c 25 BC), which
featured basic geometric diagrams. Based on the diagram’s long history of use
in architecture it is surprising there is not more criticism and research into their
relationship with architecture; their theorisation remains incomplete. Despite
being often fundamental to works of architecture, they usually remain hidden
and difficult to interpret and decipher; their status is relegated below that of
written text, perspective drawing and scale model.
In contrast with their historically relegated status, the diagram has now infiltrated
every aspect of architectural theory (Garcia, 2010), becoming a leading term in
architecture’s theoretical discourse (Somol, 2010). Robert Somol (2010) argues
that over the second half of the twentieth century the fundamental technique
and procedure of architectural knowledge shifted from the drawing to the
diagram, and maintains that architects of the neo-avant-garde are drawn to
18
the diagram over drawing or text. Although there are practical reasons behind
the rise of the diagram such as changes in the architect’s work conditions in
a ‘fragmented and ever changing’ post-industrial society, those who promote
the diagram in architecture see it as a return from the significance of form to a
rehabilitation of function and reality (Confurius, 2000). There have been many
strong claims made of the ‘emancipating’ effects of diagrams, but regardless of
the motivations behind their use, diagrams are valuable and used in seemingly
every aspect of architecture today (Garcia, 2010).
Diagram: Definition.
An important problem facing any project related to the history or theorisation
of diagrams is the definition of ‘diagram’ itself. A diverse range of definitions for
the diagram exist which consequently leads to very different conceptualisations
of their properties, function and use (Garcia, 2010). There is little consensus
on how to definitively distinguish between diagrams and other related concepts
such as drawings, sketches, illustrations, visualisations, models, maps, processes
and metaphors (Garcia, 2010). These overlapping terms and concepts bring
confusion and ambiguity to the understanding and definition of diagrams and
dilutes the meaning of the term.
Most definitions of the diagram in architectural theory draw on the works of

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914), Michel Foucault (1926-84), and Gilles
Deleuze (1925-95) with Felix Guattari (1930-92). Influenced by Foucault and
his writing on the panopticon, Deleuze and Guattari’s A Thousand Plateaus
(1988) remains the most influential writing forming the basis for almost all
contemporary theory on diagrams in architecture, specifically their concept of
the diagram as ‘abstract machine’ (Garcia, 2010):
An abstract machine in itself is not physical or corporeal, any more

than it is semiotic; it is diagrammatic... It operates by matter, not by
substance; by function, not by form... The diagrammatic or abstract
machine does not function to represent, even something real, but
rather constructs a real that is yet to come, a new type of reality”.
(Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus, as Cited in
Allen, 1998)
In a definition influenced by the writing of Deleuze and Guattari, Anthony

Vidler (2004) suggests the diagram specifies “...the relations between
unformed/unorganised matter and unformalised/unfinalised functions” (p.
24), maintaining the importance of the diagram lies in its function rather
than the qualities of its appearance. He goes on to propose the diagram is
“...a neutral zone, where certain relations are mapped precisely but without
aura, with no qualitative information” (p. 36). Architect and theorist Stan
Allen (1998) defines the diagram as “...a graphic assemblage that specifies
relationships between activity and form, organising the structure and
19
distribution of functions” (p.17). Mark Garcia (2010) suggests “...a diagram

is the spatialisation of a selective abstraction and/or reduction of a concept
or phenomenon. ...a diagram is the architecture of an idea or entity” (p. 18).
This research does not seek to formulate its own definitive definition of the
diagram, however it is clear from these published definitions that literature on
the topic is concerned principally with diagrams of a functional nature - those
relating function with form. The varying qualities and purposes of diagrams
are examined below to identify their value within the context of architecture.
Architectural Diagrams: Function and Value.

Influenced by Deleuze and Guattari’s concept of the diagram as ‘abstract
machine,’ Stan Allen (1998) suggests the primary utility (or function) of the
diagram is as an abstract means of thinking about organisation, which, in the
context of architecture, applies to both programme and its distribution in space.
The abstracted nature of the diagram is fundamental to its instrumentality in
architecture; it is described by Robert Somol (2010) as a “...tool of the virtual
rather than the real” (p. 89). The value of the diagram’s abstraction lies in
its momentary and flexible configurations of potential relationships, which
allows for continual modification, transformation and mutation. As such,
the diagram presents an open, generative process of design which frees the
designing process from formal decisions and delays formal considerations for
as long as possible; the design does not tend toward fixed formal typologies so
allows for greater diversity (Confurius, 2000).
Another important function of the diagram in architecture is its ability to

organise a variety of different types of information within a single graphic
configuration. It functions as an instrument of visualisation which mediates
between the ‘disordered complexity of the information society’ and the demands
of the architectural project (Confurius, 2000). The diagram makes visible the
various complexities of matter and activity surrounding the project and allows
this diverse field of information to be related. As such, Stan Allen (1998)
suggests “...diagrams are architecture’s best means to engage the complexity of
the real” (p. 17).
Diagrams also function to shift architecture away from the ambiguities of

personal poetics (Allen, 1998), minimising the importance of the architect
as a creative individual. Gerrit Confurius (2000) suggests this “...reflects the
spirit of the time” (p. 5); the architect becomes an organiser and channeller
of information (Somol, 2010). Rather than a product of creative genius,
architecture is presented as something that is socially constituted by the various
‘forces’ surrounding the project - economic, political, local and global. In
this model, Robert Somol (2010) suggests “...architecture is understood as a
discursive-material field of cultural-political plasticity” (p. 90).
20
‘Diagram Architecture.’
Toyo Ito coined the term ‘diagram architecture’ in 1996 while writing about
the architecture of Kazuyo Sejima. Stan Allen (1998) adopts the same term,
and describes diagram architecture as “... an architecture that travels light... No
complex mysteries to untangle, no hidden messages to translate, no elaborate
transformational process to decode...” (p. 18), and explains:
• It is concerned with function and the architecture’s ability to multiply

effects and scenarios; not embedded content and questions of meaning
and interpretation
• It establishes a loose fit of programme and form, creating maximum

performative effects with minimum architectural means
Both Allen and Robert Somol (2010) make the distinction between working
‘diagrammatically’ and simply working with diagrams. According to Somol,
working diagrammatically “...implies a particular orientation, one which
displays at once both a social and disciplinary project... Diagrammatic work is
projective in that it opens new, or more accurately, ‘virtual’ territories for the
practice” (p. 90). He goes on to suggest the work of diagrammatic practices
attempts to displace design with the diagram, and deliver “...form without
beauty and function without efficiency” (p. 90).
The prominent use of diagrams in architecture and the increasingly

diagrammatic nature of architecture are not without opposition. Some find
the prominent use of diagrams disturbing as the technique acts in opposition
to architecture’s traditionally dominant methods and hierarchies. Common
criticisms of diagrams identified by Mark Garcia (2010) include: Diagrams
lack the aesthetic qualities of drawings; they deal poorly with multisensory and
phenomenological content; they are ideological, they are not logically or clearly
connected with the final building they are associated with; they do not fully
engage with society and social issues; and they are used pointlessly to determine
architecture. These criticisms raise questions of the significance of diagrams
and any future innovations still left for diagrams.
Contemporary Diagram Practice.

Contemporary diagrammatic practices have developed critical designs
and theories that engage with these criticisms. New theories and methods
related to diagrams have been sourced from outside of architecture, leading
to methodologies based on multiple disciplines and medias (Garcia, 2010).
This new generation of diagrammatic practitioners is exemplified by the
Dutch practices of OMA (led by Rem Koolhaas), UN Studio, and MVRDV,
and British practice Foreign Office Architects (FOA). These practices feature
prominently in literature concerning diagrams in architecture, and as noted
previously, they are all practices which challenge the conventional principles
of urban design, blurring the boundaries between buildings and open space.
21
This consistency of practices begs the question: is there a connection that exists
between a diagrammatic design methodology and architectural outcomes which
reconceptualise the architectural boundary, seeking to integrate building with
landscape? If this exists, what is the nature of the connection? Is a diagrammatic
methodology causal to the generation of emergent urban design outcomes and
architecture, or is it utilised as an instrument to achieve a predetermined design
intention?
While it would be impossible to prove the existence of a causal relationship,

closer examination of the design methodologies of these four key practices in
the following chapter offers important insight on the role and significance of
diagrams in generating architecture. The role of diagrams in each practice’s
design methodologies is examined via case studies which examine the
connection between diagrams and architecture.
22
23
03
Practice +
Case Studies
Three | Practice + Case Studies
Practice + Case Studies |

Introduction
The literature review identified conventional and emergent urban design

principles and trends which relate to the interface between urban buildings and
public open space, and identified several key practices whose work exemplifies
these emergent trends. It then examined the use of diagrams in architecture and
identified the same practices as key ‘diagrammatic’ practices. The four practices
which feature prominently in each stream of research and are therefore most
suited for further examination into the relationship between the two research
streams are Foreign Office Architects (FOA), UN Studio, MVRDV and the
Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA). A practice study and project case
study has been undertaken for each of these four key practices to begin to
explore possible relationships between the two streams of research: emergent
urban design trends and ‘diagrammatic’ design practice.
The practice studies examine literature written by the practitioners, interviews

with the practitioners and literature written by others about the practices. Each
practice study is divided into five sections:
Practice Ideology - Identifies the key values and interests of the practice and
provides a good background and context for the study.
Definition of Diagram - Identifies the practice’s definition or conception of

architectural diagrams.
Diagram Value - Identifies the value of diagrams as part of the practice’s design
methodology.
Diagrammatic Design Methodology - Identifies the role of diagrams in the

practice’s design methodology - how the practice utilises diagrams.
Attitude Towards Ground/Landscape - Identifies the practice’s attitude towards

the ground and landscape. This section provides valuable background insight for a
later case study investigation into one of the practice’s projects which relates to its
25
surroundings in an unconventional way.
The general findings from the practice studies are refined by a case study of
one project from each of the four key practices, where more specific findings
into the role of diagrams in each design process are identified. The projects
have been selected based primarily on the availability of published information
about the project’s design process. Each case study is divided into four sections:
Project Overview - A brief description of the project
Project Design Methodology - A step-by-step summary of the design methodology

used to generate the project, including diagrams. The design steps involving the use
of diagrams are written in black, while other influences are identified by grey italic.
The project is summarised as it is presented in published literature - as a step-by-
step, linear process. The reality of each project’s development will of course be far less
straightforward, no doubt featuring branching ideas and areas of development, of
which only the strongest survive to be retrospectively published as the project’s design
process.
Diagram Methodology - Refines the project’s design process into a step-by-step

design methodology.
Relationship to Urban Design Principles - Briefly analyses the project against

the urban design principles identified in the literature review to identify the ways in
which the project deviates from urban design convention, especially the relationship
between the building and its adjacent open space.
A discussion section lastly identifies findings from the practice and case studies,
examining further the various ways diagrams are used in the design process.
These findings will inform the execution of the design phase of the research
which is featured in the following chapter.
26
Foreign Office Architects |

Practice Study
Practice Ideology
The founding partners of Foreign Office Architects, Farshid Moussavi and

Alejandro Zaera-Polo share a principle interest in the processes of architectural
production and observe a progressive shift towards a focus in architecture
on methodology and instrumentality (Zaera-Polo, 2010). For the pair,
architectural process is more interesting than architectural ideas which they
associate with pre-existing codes and systems and critical practice, which often
relies on straightforward ideological statements, metaphors and architectural
reproductions (Moussavi & Zaera-Polo, 2002). The practice’s focus on devising
new and experimental architectural processes is driven by the desire to explore
emergent possibilities and discover new aesthetics and forms for architecture
(Moussavi & Zaera-Polo, 2004). A central issue for the practice is generating
coherent, non-representational forms which create projective arguments
and transcend cultural constructs in an increasingly hybridised world due
to globalisation (Zaera-Polo, 2010). Their work is characterised by complex
surfaces, however an interest in the ‘engineering of material life’ rather than
form is what they hope distinguishes their work from other complex-surface
architecture (Moussavi & Zaera-Polo, 2002).
Definition Of Diagram
Moussavi and Zaera-Polo define the diagram as...
...a tool that describes and prescribes performances in space. It does not
necessarily contain metric or geometric information: those emerge once
the diagram starts processing matter. A diagram is usually specific to
a space; it may be a specific location, a scale, a temporal frame, but it
always has a spatial correlation... The diagram relates to processes that
may occur not only in three-dimensional space but in several other
dimensions of reality (Zaera-Polo, 2010).
They also explain that “a diagram is able to absorb and embody increasing levels
of complexity and information, without necessarily altering the nature of its
performance” (Moussavi & Zaera Polo, 2006).
27
Diagram Value
Diagrams are valued as an instrumental part of Foreign Office Architects’

design methodology. For the practice, diagrams, as opposed to drawings
which they see as being constrained to architectural conventions, do not play a
representational role for their architectural object and instead mediate between
the physical constructs and concepts on an organisational level (Zaera-Polo,
2010). Rather than symbolic operations, they claim working diagrammatically
produces organisations capable of multiple readings (Zaera-Polo, 2010). In
the diagrammatic design process, the project retains its virtualities and allows
for re-evaluation and evolution of the project (Zaera-Polo, 2010), retaining
the capacity to trigger new possibilities for as long as possible (Moussavi &
Zaera Polo, 2006). The capacity to trigger or generate the new is what the
practice seems to value most about the diagrammatic design methodology; the
diagram is utilised as a projective rather than representational tool which they
claim produces new organisations, sensations and moods, allowing for “...the
emergence of another possible world” (Zaera-Polo, 2010, p. 239).
Diagrammatic Design Methodology
Foreign Office Architects utilise diagrams as a tool to describe and prescribe

performances in space. For the practice, it is crucial that the performance is
clearly determined. They explain that operating diagrammatically should not be
confused or unclear; rather, it is about knowing precisely the level of knowledge
and determination that can be exerted on the project at any one time (Moussavi
& Zaera Polo, 2006). Moussavi explains that each project is ‘grown’ rather
than deployed, as its working diagram is manipulated, analysed, and injected
with further parameters (Kleinman, 2006). This explanation re-emphasises the
practice’s process-based and evolutionary approach to design, suggesting that a
project may start very simply and gain complexity as its organisational diagram
embodies more information as the project progresses. Such information is
known to include raw contextual data concerning circulation, use, topography,
demographics and building and shipping logistics, which is distilled into
generative models and diagrams (Kleinman, 2006). According to Moussavi
and Zaera-Polo (2006), it is in the middle of the design process that the
strategies and aims of the project need to be deployed - not at the beginning
or end. This would suggest a highly rational approach to the design process,
where perhaps the more experimental parameters or influences unique to the
project are deployed only after the more fundamental parameters surrounding
the pragmatics of the project - its fundamental ‘performances’ - have been
prescribed by an organisational diagram. These fundamental parameters may
provide a context or framework for the project which is then subjected to
the additional parameters determined to achieve the strategies or aims of the
project.
Moussavi and Zaera-Polo (2010) identify the most common problem with
28
contemporary experimental architecture as literally turning the ‘space’ of the

diagram or graph into the space of the drawing, and therefore the building.
They explain that in principle the diagram doesn’t need to be similar in form
to the spatial or functional organisation it prescribes: “...a very simple diagram
may generate very complex organisations” (Zaera-Polo, 2010, p. 239). In the
diagrammatic methodology of the practice, additional information is added
to the diagram before the building’s final form is determined. The diagram
requires several forms of mediation to become a drawing and enter the
‘real space’, gaining coarseness and complexity as it processes the building’s
constructional and material factors (Zaera-Polo, 2010). Moussavi and Zaera-
Polo recognise a prototypical aspect of diagrammatic design methodologies,
in the sense that a project’s diagrams can be applied to other contexts. It is
through the process of mediation between the diagram and the building’s final
form that the building develops in a particular way to become unique to that
location (Kleinman, 2006). The computer is described by Zaera-Polo (2010)
as “...an ideal instrument for the production of the virtual” (p. 238), and is
utilised extensively in the mediation process.
Attitude Towards Ground/Landscape
According to Moussavi and Zaera-Polo (1998) “...we can no longer rely on

the classical relationship between building and ground, or on the conventional
definition of the ground as delimited, stable, horizontal, determined and
homogenous” (p. 36). This attitude brings forth a new conception of the
ground which they refer to as ‘new grounds’ - which is described as having
a complex, active, and operative nature, and being ‘hollow’ and ‘diagonally’
structured (Zaera-Polo & Moussavi, 1998/1999). Many of the practice’s
projects involving complex topological surfaces reflect this redefinition of the
ground. These structures are characterised by an ambiguity between surface
and space, ground and envelope, three dimensional and two dimensional, and
are presented as an alternative to the traditional opposition between the ground
and the architectural figure (Zaera-Polo & Moussavi, 1998). Significantly,
Moussavi and Zaera-Polo (1998/1999) claim that only through the use of
certain tools and techniques have they been able to produce such organisations,
and that certain structures actually start to arise from these practices. Such a
claim would suggest the architects believe in a strong contributing connection
between a diagrammatic design process and a redefinition of the ground as an
architectural element.
29
Foreign Office Architects |

Case Study
Project Overview
The project is for a new international port terminal for the city of Yokohama,
Japan. The project is developed on the basis of a particular spatial performance
rather than as a formal or cultural statement, creating the experience that you
are never returning or retracing your steps.
Figure 3.1. Yokohama International Project Design Methodology

Port Terminal, arial perspective.
(n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012, The project seeks to explore the possibility of transport infrastructure as a field of
from http://www.idesignarch.com/ movements rather than a ‘gate,’ challenging the strongly oriented linear space typical
wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Yokoha-
maInternationalPortTerminal-1.jpg. of the existing typology. The project centres around the possibility of generating
organisation from a circulation pattern.
I. A circulation diagram structured around a series of interlaced loops that

allow for multiple return paths and avoid circulatory ‘dead-ends’ was
created - the ‘no-return’ diagram. This diagram provides the building with
a particular spatial performance.
Figure 3.2. No-Return Diagram

From The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 10), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo,
A, 2002, Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
The architects wanted a flat building which didn’t appear on the skyline; an idea
consistent with not wanting to create a ‘gate’. This led to the conceptualisation of the
building as a ground, hybridising an enclosure with a topography. They decided the
building would be a warped surface; this required relating the no-return diagram
with surface geometry.
30
II. A surface was associated with every line segment of the no-return diagram,
and a surface bifurcation to every bifurcation of the line.
Site massing was determined, based on the maximum allowable footprint to keep
the building as low as possible, and the requirement for straight boarding decks 15m
from the edge of the pier.
III. Each surface applied to the segments of the no-return diagram was allocated
a size in square metres, which, divided by the width of the pier provided
the length of every surface between bifurcations.
IV. A three-dimensional version of the no-return diagram emerged, resembling

a ‘lasagne’ of warped surfaces [Figure 3.3]. The diagram absorbed certain
ergonomic requirements such as ceiling heights, to give an approximation
of the final form [Figure X].
Figure 3.3. Three-Dimensional No-Return Diagram

Figure 3.4. Three-Dimensional No-Return Diagram developed to show inhabitation

The architects wanted a column-free construction, as columns would have turned

back to the idea that the architecture is deployed on the diagram a posteriori, and
wasn’t consistent with the aim to produce space and organisation literally out of the Figure 3.5. Diagram of building struc-
circulation diagram. tural strategy
From The Yokohama Project: Foreign
V. A structural strategy for the resulting form was created [Figure 3.5]. Folded Office Architects (p. 15), by Moussavi,
F., & Zaera-Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona,
surfaces were used, blending circulation and structure together in a Spain: Actar.
31
metamorphic manner.
VI. Secondary programme was deployed as though it were furniture placed

onto the building’s warped surface, and was located based on desired
relationships with the various circulation flows of people [Figure 3.6].
Through this process a basic building ‘embryo’ emerged, loosely resembling the form
of the final building.
Figure 3.6. Diagram showing distribu-

tion of secondary programme
Figure 3.7. Early building development
From The Yokohama Project: Foreign
Office Architects (p. 19), by Moussavi, From The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 19), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-
F., & Zaera-Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona, Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
Spain: Actar.
Over a period of several years this basic design was intensively developed and
subjected to the various inputs and influences required for such a complex building
to be realised [Figure 3.8]. The architects refer to the project as being ‘grown’ rather
than designed.
Figure 3.8. Building plans showing design evolution from January 1996 (far left) to January
2000 (far right).
From The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 55-59), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-
Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
Diagram Methodology
The following is a step by step summary of the methodology utilised by

Foreign Office Architects for the design of the Yokohama International Port
Terminal, a project which explored the possibility of generating architecture
from circulation.
Identify goals for circulation

I. Develop Circulation diagram
II. Associate surfaces with circulation diagram
Determine allowable site massing and location of fixed programmes within this
32
massing
III. Scale the associated surfaces according to programmatic requirements
IV. Manipulate the diagram in three dimensions, relating different surfaces to
one another
V. Identify structural strategy for resultant form

VI. Further develop the distribution of programme within the resultant form
This process generates a flexible form and organisation which is subject to further
development
Relationship to Urban Design Principles
Conventional urban design principles prescribe that buildings provide

definition and enclosure to urban public space and possess a clear distinction
between public and private areas. A key aspect of this principle is the distinct
duality between built form and open space. Yokohama International Port
Terminal represents a challenge to these conventions by breaking down the
distinctions between the typically private built form, public open space, and
the landscape in which the building stands. The building rises from its urban
setting at the base of the pier to provide the visitor with gently sloping ramps Figure 3.9. Yokohama International
Port Terminal ramping from urban sur-
up to the building’s public roof level [Figure 3.9]. Pedestrian circulation up to roundings.
this level blends seamlessly with the building’s urban surroundings, minimising (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012, from
the distinction between figure and ground. The undulating, warped surfaces http://archis.org/action/2010/01/16/
reasoning-with-waves-and-the-dia-
of the roof provide visitors with an artificial landscape protruding into the
grams/.
bay, creating a public space rich in aesthetic interest and topographic variety,
whilst also helping to structure the building. Public circulation paths ramp and
swerve long the length of the building, creating continuity and connection
between the building’s interior and exterior and between its various levels
and integrating horizontal and vertical movement and structure [Figure 3.10].
The Yokohama International Port terminal is one of the most successful and
influential contemporary exemplars of an urban building integrated with a
public landscape. Figure 3.10. Yokohama International
Port Terminal, ramped circulation.
Sayo, M. (Photographer). (2008).

Retrieved January 28, 2012, from
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lilmis-
sayo/3164457942/
33
UN Studio | Practice Study

Practice Ideology
Ben van Berkel and Caroline Bos’ Amsterdam based UN Studio is one of the
most explicitly diagrammatic architecture practices. The pair express a distrust
of contemporary theory-driven architecture whose concepts, design decisions
and processes they claim are articulated by post-rationalisations (Berkel &
Bos, 1998, p. 19). The practice is opposed to a representational approach to
architectural production and claim that buildings designed in this way cannot
escape existing typologies, which they say leads to meaningless repetition
(Berkel & Bos, 2010). Rather than a representational approach, the practice
has developed an experimental, instrumental design technique. This technique,
driven by diagrams, does not proceed as literally from pre-existing architectural
signs so provides an escape or ‘liberation’ from typology that drives the forward-
looking vision of the practice in its quest for the ‘new’ in architecture (Berkel
& Bos, 2010).
Definition of Diagram
UN Studio have a highly instrumental, process-based idea of the diagram,

interpreting its use in practice as a ‘proliferating machine’ (Berkel & Bos, 1998).
They describe them as generative, productive, projective and interactive tools
capable of creating innovative efficiencies and ‘instrumental meanings’ (Berkel
& Bos, 2010). They explain that the diagram is not a metaphor, but is rather an
‘abstract machine’ that is both content and expression, whose meanings are not
fixed: “Diagrams are packed with information on many levels. A diagram is an
assemblage of solidified situations, techniques, tactics and functionings” (Berkel
& Bos, 2010, p. 224). Their different notions of diagrams include ideograms,
line diagrams, operational diagrams and ‘image diagrams’ - reproductions of
paintings or random images which are used in a diagrammatic manner to
suggest possible, virtual organisation. Read diagrammatically, these images
become infrastructural, and can be read as maps of possible movement (Berkel
& Bos, 2010).
34
Diagram Value
The diagrammatic design methodology is valued by UN Studio for its non-

representational, process driven approach to the design development. Their
‘abstract machine’ does not function to represent an existing situation but is
rather instrumental in the production of new ones. They explain that external
concepts are introduced to the design in a specific shape; as figure, not as image
or sign. This delayed ‘intrusion of signs’ provides architecture with a forward
looking alternative to a representational design technique, and prevents
typological fixation. Rather than resorting to typologies, diagrams provide the
practice with the tools to generate new, instrumental meanings for architecture,
as they introduce into the work “...qualities that are unspoken, disconnected
from an ideal or ideology, random, intuitive, subjective, not bound by linear
logic - qualities that can be physical, spatial, or technical” (Berkel & Bos, 2010,
p. 224).
In the early diagrammatic work of Berkel and Bos, the diagram was a ‘found’
element existing outside of the project, which was used to introduce themes
and organisations into a project. The primary role of the diagram was to
generate ideas for the organisation of the project, without acting symbolically
or metaphorically. Highly abstract organisational diagrams where sometimes
established in advance of other programmatic aspects such as building form or
use to establish a direction for the design, providing a ‘mould’ for the project’s
analysis.
When appropriate diagrams for a project could not be found Berkel and Bos
began to construct their own. These diagrams where not concerned with
building typologies, or strict parameters such as floor area, but where rather used
to relate project information such as user categories with time, accentuating
the effects of the interaction between the different actors. By relating different
information, hard parameters for the project were constructed out of the ‘soft
notion of flow’ (Berkel & Bos, 2007).
Berkel and Bos identify three stages to the diagram: selection, application,
and operation. Each stage is referenced to Deleuze, from whose writing they
interpret three different ‘moods’ or ‘tonalities’ of the diagram, summarised as:
the figure of the diagram is not representational, diagrams can be playfully
selected and applied, and time and matter can be introduced to the diagram.
It is worth quoting at length Berkel and Bos’s description of their diagram
methodology:
In architecture, it goes something like this: the project is set on its course.
Before the work diverts into typology a diagram, rich in meaning, full of
potential movement and loaded with structure, which connects to some
35
important aspect of the project, is found. The specific properties of this
diagram throw a new light on to the work. As a result, the work becomes
unfixed; new directions and new meanings are triggered. The diagram
operates like a black hole, which radically changes the course of the project,
transforming and liberating architecture (Berkel & Bos, 2010).
The search for a diagram is instigated by specific questions relating to the

project such as its location, programme or construction rather than on the basis
of representational information (Berkel & Bos, 2010), however there need not
always be an overlap between the specific project and the field where it looks
for inspiration (Berkel & Bos, 2007). The process of selecting one diagram over
another is not described, as Berkel and Bos explain the focus of the practice
is how the diagram is instrumentalised rather than how it is selected (Berkel
& Bos, 2007). Its application is described as the “...insertion of an element
that contains within its dense information something that our thoughts can
latch on to, something that is suggestive, to distract us from spiralling into
cliché” (Berkel & Bos, 2010, p. 227). They explain that instrumentalising the
diagram is the most difficult part to understand, setting the ‘abstract machine’
in motion and allowing the transformative process to begin, interweaving time
and action (Berkel & Bos, 1998). The practice does not utilise the diagram as a
morphogenetic device for the overall form of the building; the diagram is not a
blueprint or a working drawing as it exists only at a more abstract level (Berkel
& Bos, 2010).
Through the repeated use of specific diagrams their application in the design
process became more refined (Berkel & Bos, 2007). This repetition occurred
at a highly abstract level of the design process and allowed for certain diagrams
to be manipulated and applied in different ways. Through repetition, the use
of specific diagrams became integrated into a broader ‘design model’. For
example, the diagrams of the Moebius strip, Klein bottle, trefoil and spiral are
all variations of the ‘mathematical design model’ which can be used in various
ways in different projects: “Diagrams turned design models are profoundly
abstracted, yet fully formed, basic design concepts that are developed further
by working out a catalogue of options and transformations, culminating in
distinctive projects” (Berkel & Bos, 2007). They are ‘packages’ of organisational
or compositional principles which exists at an abstract level, independent
from any site specific information and often involve organisational schemes
or matrixes with lists of parameters showing possible interactions between
elements (Berkel & Bos, 2007). Design models enable a cyclical design
procession, where new inputs can be evaluated and the design allowed to evolve
and grow. The architects claim they condense complexity as information such
as routing, construction and programme are already contained within each
model.
Some of the practice’s most important design models are the mathematical
model, the V model, and the blob-to-box model. Mathematical models are
36
based on mathematic knots such as the Moebius strip, the Klein bottle and the
double helix. For Berkel and Bos, these diagrams possess topological qualities,
movement, direction and combinatorial and serial themes through which
they relate to architecture, though never literally. Rather, they are read and
translated in many different ways - for example as construction, landscape,
routing, material, spatiality, or atmosphere (Berkel & Bos, 2007). The V model
is used to address the issue of stacking programmes, and is used to fuse together
different use typologies whilst existing simultaneously as construction and
useable space. Its application seeks to intensify the uses of diagonally inclined
architectural forms (Berkel & Bos, 2007). The blob-to-box model introduces
the principle that an organisation can change from a box to a freer, more fluent
system (Berkel & Bos, 2007). Berkel and Bos describe the implications of the
blob-to-box model as going from: oppositions to connectivity, unit-based to
time-based, static programme to programme of flows, rigidity to flexibility,
generic to specific, and transcendence to engagement (Berkel & Bos, 2006).
UN Studio do not write extensively about their attitude towards the ground and
landscape, however it is clear from their projects that their building interiors
are conceptualised as or at least feature qualities of landscapes, extending the
buildings’ surroundings within. Arnhem Central station (further examined in
the following case study) is one particularly strong example of this strategy,
described by the architects as a “landscape of interrelated movements” (Berkel
& Bos, 1998, p. 22).
37
UN Studio | Case Study

Project Overview
Figure 3.11. Arnhem Central Design
Proposal, arial view. Arnhem Central is a complex infrastructural project - a transport interchange
which integrates train, bus, taxi, car, bicycle, and pedestrian movement.
UN Studio (n.d.). Retrieved January
26, 2012, from http://www.unstudio. The enclosed pedestrian zone which mediates between the various modes of
com/projects/arnhem-central-master- transport forms the most complex element of the project, and is the focus of
plan.
this case study.
Project Design Methodology
I. The problem of fitting 160,000m2 of programme onto a 40,000m2 site is

visualised on a scaled diagram [Figure 3.12].
Figure 3.12. Scaled diagram showing
floor areas of programmes to be ac-
commodated on site. The decision was made to separate the regional and trolley bus services and use the
From UNStudio: Design Models: Ar- central space to configure the pedestrian flows between them.
chitecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p.
275), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006, II. A diagram illustrates the basic organisational outcome of this decision
London, United Kingdom: Thames &
[Figure 3.13]. The separate bus services are shown with a square representing
Hudson.
the pedestrian area which mediates between them.
III. A network graph displays the connections to be constructed between the

various modes of transport [Figure 3.14]. Each mode is represented as a
node scaled in size based on its number of passengers. The hierarchy of
links is represented by line weight.
IV. The original network graph is transposed onto a scaled plan of the site
[Figure 3.15]. The density of originating pedestrian traffic and transfer
traffic is quantified.
The previous two network graphs present the problem of the transport interchange
in diagrammatic terms of nodes and links between nodes.
V. The scaled network graph was then developed into a ‘branching figure’,
Figure 3.13. Diagram showing separa- which Schumacher (1999) observes as a leap from a language of straight
tion of bus services lines, paths and nodes to one of branches featuring irregular curves [Figure
From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflec- 3.16]. This diagram appears to be focused on movement and pedestrian
tions on the Logic of Rationality in Re-
cent Design,” by Schumacher, P, 1999, flows between the different programmatic elements.
AA Files , 38, p. 33.
38
Figure 3.14. Network graph

From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections
on the Logic of Rationality in Recent De-
sign,” by Schumacher, P, 1999, AA Files ,
38, p. 33. Figure 3.16. ‘Branching figure’ diagram
From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,”
by Schumacher, P, 1999, AA Files , 38, p. 34.
Figure 3.15. Network graph transposed

onto the site
From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections
on the Logic of Rationality in Recent De-
sign,” by Schumacher, P, 1999, AA Files ,
38, p. 33.
Figure 3.17. Schematic matrix of internal and external forces, regulations and other con-
straints
From UNStudio: Design Models: Architecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 275), by
Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006, London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
39
The method of translation between the network graph and ‘branching figure’
diagram is not described by the architects, however Schumacher (1999) suggests
the strategy of ‘branching’ could have been selected from a variety of other possible
organisations, e.g. linear, grid, ring. Figure 17, published seven years later in Design
Models (2006) would suggest Schumacher was correct in suggesting this strategy of
selection from a range of possibilities. The schematic matrix is used to generate an
overview of the potential of combining different parameters, however it is unclear
exactly where this fits into the design process at Arnhem.
VI. The ‘branching figure’ diagram is developed into a three-dimensional

diagram showing the vertical relationships of pedestrian flows transposed
onto the site.
Figure 3.18. Three-dimensional branching diagram transposed onto site

From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by
Schumacher, P, 1999, AA Files , 38, p. 34.
VII. The branching diagram is developed into several three-dimensional models;

the first, smoothly bent ‘cones’ which intersect, merge and branch, allowing
Figure 3.19. Three-dimensional ‘cone’ pedestrian flows to be funnelled and spread smoothly [Figure 3.19]. The
diagram
‘cones’ are presumably scaled in relation to pedestrian flows identified by
From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflec-
tions on the Logic of Rationality in Re- the network graph.
cent Design,” by Schumacher, P, 1999,
AA Files , 38, p. 35. VIII. The second model presents the transfer of pedestrian flows as a single
surface which peels smoothly at different levels [Figure 3.20]. Unlike the
‘cone’ diagram, the single surface doesn’t delimit the space of movement
or enclose the separate flows, creating what Schumacher (1999) terms a
‘movement landscape’.
The translation of the branching figure diagram into various three-dimensional

diagrammatic languages triggers new possibilities for the physical realisation of
the project’s organisation. For example, the single surface diagram opens up new
Figure 3.20. Single surface diagram cre-
ates a ‘movement landscape’ possibilities for the project by providing the advantage of increased transfer surface
From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflec- and avoidance of bottlenecks due to lifts and staircases. User disorientation due to
tions on the Logic of Rationality in Re- stacked spaces is also avoided.
cent Design,” by Schumacher, P, 1999,
AA Files , 38, p. 35.
40
IX. A diagram external to the project is then introduced as an infrastructural

element. This is the Klein bottle (an example of one of the practice’s
‘mathematical models’) which is used as an organisational model for
passenger movement [Figure 3.21]. The element is treated as a diagram,
connecting the different levels of the station in a hermetic way whilst also
triggering new structural and spatial possibilities for the project. Figure 3.21. Klein bottle introduced as
diagram
The architects explain the Klein bottle diagram was not a serendipitous find, but From UNStudio: Design Models: Ar-
was discovered as part of a search for a new way of understanding the station area; chitecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p.
274), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006,
an understanding that was provided by mathematical knots (Berkel & Bos, 1998) London, United Kingdom: Thames &
Hudson.
X. A diagram emerges as a hybrid of the three-dimensional ‘cone’ diagram
and the single surface diagram, which are stitched together using the
organisational and spatial language of the Klein bottle diagram. A
topographic landscape of curves is created.
Figure 3.22. Hybrid diagram encompassing the ‘cone’ and single surface diagrams, related
to one another using the Klein bottle diagram
From UNStudio: Design Models: Architecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 274), by Berkel, B.
v., & Bos, C, 2006, London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
This hybrid diagram provides the basic form and organisation of the pedestrian
transfer hall, which is further developed to become the final form of the building.
The diagram is also a good illustration of the practice’s retrospectively formulated
‘design models’ (as described in the UN Studio practice study). Visible in the diagram
are the ‘V’, Blob-to-Box and Klein Bottle design models, illustrated by Figure 3.23. Figure 3.23. Diagrams of the ‘V’, blob-
to-box and Klein bottle design models
From UNStudio: Design Models: Ar-
Diagram Methodology chitecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p.
274), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006,
The following is a step by step summary of the methodology utilised by UN London, United Kingdom: Thames &
Hudson.
Studio for the design of Arnhem Central. The study of pedestrian movements
forms a cornerstone of the design.
I. Visualise programme area and ratios on a scaled diagram in relation to site

Determine fundamental programme distribution on site
II. Diagram the basic organisational outcome of the fundamental distribution
of programme, identifying organisational challenges and opportunities for
innovation
41
III. Prepare network graph, scaled to illustrate key information (passenger

numbers in the case of Arnhem) with hierarchy of relationships identified
IV. Transpose network graph onto site, quantifying key influences where
possible
Select a more detailed organisational strategy from a variety of possible strategies
(a branching strategy in the case of Arnhem), whose interaction with other project
influences could be explored in a schematic matrix
V. Translate organisational strategy onto a scaled diagram of the site
VI. Develop the diagram of the organisational strategy into a three-dimensional
diagram
VII. Translate this diagram into a variety of diagrammatic languages (Cones
and single surface in the case of Arnhem).
Experiment with the organisational possibilities these other diagram ‘worlds’ trigger
for the project, and somehow select the strongest strategies
VIII. Identify a diagram external to the project which can be used in an
infrastructural manner to relate different influences of the project and
introduce it to the organisation of the project (In Arnhem, the Klein bottle
is used to relate the ‘cone’ and single surface diagrams and also triggers
further organisational possibilities)
This process generates a flexible organisation and form which is subject to further
development
Rather than a clear distinction between built form and the ground, the transfer
hall of Arnhem Central ramps upwards from its urban surroundings, blending
the pedestrian approach to the building with its urban landscape [Figure
Proposal, ramping from urban sur- 3.24]. The building’s ramped pedestrian surfaces are continued through to the
roundings.
building’s interior, minimising the distinction and sense of threshold between
UN Studio (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, the building’s various indoor levels and its outdoor urban surroundings. Within
2012, from http://www.unstudio.com/
projects/arnhem-central-transfer-hall
the vast space of the transfer hall the pedestrian surfaces begin to warp, merge
and spiral, creating an internal landscape of curved surfaces and movement
whose topological variation is central to the organisation of the space [Figure
3.25]. Horizontal and vertical movement and structure are integrated into a
series of warped surface which also curve up to create enclosure for the building.

Proposal, transfer hall.
UN Studio (n.d.). Retrieved January 26,

2012, from http://www.unstudio.com/
projects/arnhem-central-transfer-hall
42
MVRDV | Practice Study

Practice Ideology
Central to MVRDV’s practice is the belief that the reality in which they operate
is to a large degree quantifiable. Bart Lootsma (2003) identifies the origins of
this rigorous academic basis of MVRDV’s working method in the office of
OMA, where Maas and van Rijs worked with Koolhaas in the 1980s. Through
their analytical approach the design emerges as though it were the solution
to a mathematical equation (Adam, 2002), appearing as the concretisation
of abstract statistical information. Their work does not depend on theoretical
justifications but is rather presented as an examination of the data surrounding
the project. Stan Allen (1997) describes their work as “...a systematic effort
to find the cracks in the system where something new can happen in spite of
its overarching logic” (p. 33). Maas explains their practice is projective as it is
concerned with developing tools to investigate and construct the future (Van
Sande & Schoonjans, 2007). The focus of the practice is not on the aesthetic
aspect of their architecture, which is described by Lootsma (2003) as the most
neglected and uninspired aspect of their work, and is mainly rectangular and
practically Modernist. Instead the practice is heavily concerned with issues
such as density, mixed functions, juxtaposed programmes, floor plan variation
and the building as an extension to the (urban) landscape (Lootsma, 1997).
MVRDV uses a variety of diagrams and diagrammatic techniques. A central

diagrammatic technique of the practice is the construction of ‘Datascapes’,
which are described by Bart Lootsma (1997) as:
...visual representations of all the quantifiable forces that may influence

the work of the architect or even steer or regulate it... Each datascape
deals with only one or two of these influences and reveals their impact
on the design process by showing their most extreme effects (p. 38).
Statistic information surrounding a project is turned into a Datascape which

operates as a diagram, displaying the limitations of the project, and in many
cases generates schemes that appear to come close to architectural projects,
although they are not (Lootsma, 1997).
43
The practice’s diagrammatic techniques have also extended to the development

of software such as the ‘Functionmixer’ which operates diagrammatically,
building an abstract world based on the optimisation of a range of parameters
chosen by the operator.
Datascapes and Functionmixer could be considered as analytical or optimised

diagrams, however the practice also uses diagrams in a conceptual manner.
Maas explains that diagrams are used to condense the information of a project
into a central, essential concept, which is often coupled to a word such as bend,
flip, lift, stretch or squeeze, to enhance the communication of the diagram
(Van Sande & Schoonjans, 2007). This technique was utilised in the design
of their Dutch Pavilion, which was constructed as a “...direct and unfiltered
translation from diagram into architecture” (Mallgrave & Goodman, 2011).
Diagram Value
Datascapes provide MVRDV with a tool to analyse and visualise the various
forces surrounding a project, which are often so complex that statistical
techniques are seen as the only way to fully understand the situation of the
project and decide on a direction. When visualised through Datascapes, a
more complex version of the site plan emerges, displaying the possibilities and
constraints imposed by society on the project. This presents a highly rational
approach to the design process, where the artistic role in architectural design
is limited and mostly supplanted with explanatory diagrams, tables and charts.
In spite of this logical and rational approach, surprising solutions emerge.
Datascapes are utilised to describe the problem in new ways, exaggerating the
constraints of the project and forcing it to extremes where known solutions are
incapable of solving the problem and new and unexpected forms are generated
(Allen, 1997). Conceptual diagrams are valued by the practice as a method of
clarifying and maintaining consistency with a central concept and tracking
developments throughout the design process.
MVRDV publicise very little about their process of design and talk little
about the art of design - which plays a very small part in their projects. Most
information about their design methodology comes from interviews and critics
writing about their work. MVRDV have however published information about
some of the tools and techniques which play an important role in their design
methodology, particularly their use of datascapes, which are essentially used to
translate mapped data into architecture.
MVRDV’s projects typically start with extensive research and the assembly
of massive quantities of data, not concerned with the determination of the
building’s form but focusing on understanding the situation of the project. The
research is often on a range of topics which could include natural conditions
44
like sun and wind, legislation such as minimum working conditions, economic
influences and urban issues such as settlement patterns and density. Once
collected, the statistical information is assembled into datascapes which visualise
the complex constraints surrounding the project. The data can be presented in
any number of ways, but it is up to the architects to decide the most useful
form for it to take for the purposes of the project. The form of the constructed
datascapes are superficially simple with regard to the information they contain,
and often resemble architectural projects and have been interpreted and
criticised by some critics as such, although they are not. After visualising the
data, the architectural problem is identified and analysed and visions, directions
and possibilities for the project are determined.
Datascapes make visible the often contradictory forces which play a role in the
project, so the design develops as a process of negotiation and confrontation
between the different constraints, possibilities and participants in the design
process. This process of negotiation can function to generate the building itself
or help illustrate the possibilities and limitations of the project.
The building form emerges as a result of the datascapes being loaded with
programmes, illustrating at the same time the restrictions and possible outer
limits of the design. The creativity and inventiveness of the project is not
expressed in the creation of new forms but rather as the re-formulation of the
existing constraints, causing new and unexpected solutions and performative
complexities to emerge: “...a stubborn logic yields fresh, improbable results”
(Allen, 1997, p. 29).
A central concern of MVRDV is the increasing population density of the

Netherlands, which is approaching that of Japan. As a consequence the
boundary between the city and the landscape is becoming increasingly blurred,
leading to the observation of the urban phenomenon termed by the practice
as ‘interiorisation’. Interiorisation occurs when buildings are constructed close
to one another and space between them takes on an interiorised identity,
expressed through an increased sense of enclosure and a more intensive design
and use of the space. The practice observes in these instances the building’s
facade beginning to ‘disappear,’ resulting in hybrids between buildings and
the surrounding urban fabric (Mansilla & Tunon, 1997). In this context the
architectural project is seen less as the insertion of a building on the site, as it is
the construction of the site itself through the architecture (Allen, 1997). This
idea is manifest architecturally in the projects of MVRDV as the prolongation
of the site or ground floor into the building, and a continuation or gradual
transition between indoor and outdoor, public and private, introducing
landscape into the architecture. Their buildings often feature intermediate
‘third’ spaces which exist as neither indoor nor outdoor in the residual space
leftover after the stacking of programmes which facilitate transversal interior
45
views through complex cross-sections, enlivening users’ perceptions of the

space (Mansilla & Tunon, 1997).
MVRDV | Case Study

Project Overview
The Villa VPRO is a new headquarters for a not-for-profit broadcasting

organisation in the Netherlands, which was previously housed in eleven
separate villas. The project seeks to maintain the informal and varied working
spaces of the villas at the increased scale of the an office building.
Figure 3.26. The Villa VPRO

Project Design Methodology
Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008).
Retrieved January 26, 2012, from MVRDV publish very little about their process of design, so based on published
h t t p : / / w w w.f l i c k r. c o m / p h o t o s /
ettubrute/2357171915/ material it is not possible to reconstruct a step-by-step design methodology
for their projects. Their projects are described as emerging out of a process of
negotiation between different influences rather than as a result of a more linear
and well-defined design process.
Instead of a step-by-step methodology, this case study will identify several of

the diagrammatic techniques used to generate the design outcome. The Villa
VPRO project is not the most ‘diagrammatic’ of MVRDV’s projects, however
has the most published information on its process of design.
Project Aim:
The project seeks to preserve the characteristics of the organisation’s existing
villas at the enlarged scale of an office building - specifically compactness (no
corridors), the stacking of spaces and relationship to landscape. The desire for
compactness was likely a pragmatic concern also to minimise circulation space
and promote communication. The requirement for more flexible working
spaces was also identified based on research into changing work habits [Figure
Figure 3.27. Graph showing the per-
centage of time spent doing certain 3.27].
activities during a normal working day
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 47), by
Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Building Footprint:
Volume and plan layout studies illustrate the footprints and layouts possible to
achieve the desired 9,000m2 floor area [Figure 3.28, Figure 3.29]. The footprints
46
were informed by town planning restrictions such as zoning, plan boundaries

and building heights, as well as the wish to make the smallest possible intrusion
on the site.
Figure 3.29. Plan layout study showing

the possible plan configurations of the
various possible building footprints
From FARMAX: Excursions on Density
Figure 3.28. Building volume study (p. 684, 685), by Mass, W., van Rijs, J.,
& Richard, K. (Eds.), 1998, Rotterdam:
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 48, 49), by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar. 010 Publishers.
A square building footprint was selected which provided the greatest

compactness but also created a building which was very deep in plan - possibly
the deepest office building in the Netherlands according to the architects.
Light+air+view:
The deep plan presented a challenge for getting light and air into the depths
of the building and allowing views out to the landscape. Rather than a
conventional court solution which would not have met the project’s requirement
for compactness, a ‘precision bombardment’ of penetrations in the building’s
volume was conceived [Figure 3.30].
The resulting form is described by the practice as an ‘office landscape’, where

the difference between the inside and outside blurs (Salazar, 1999). The views Figure 3.30. Conventional court versus
and patio areas created by the subtracted voids compensate for the depth of the ‘precision bombardment’ of penetra-
tions
building.
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 51), by
The process for determining the size and shape of the voids is not detailed,
however could be based on a negotiation of parameters such as programmatic
requirements for daylight and air or separation of the building’s internal
programme with other design influences.
Conceptual Diagram:
As a continuation of the reduced distinction between inside and outside due to
the building’s subtracted voids, the concept of the building as the landscape is Figure 3.31. Conceptual diagram show-
ing the idea of building as landscape
visualised via a simple conceptual diagram [Figure 3.31].
From mvrdv Maas vanRijs deVries
1991-1997 (p. 88), by Maas, W., de
Vries, N., & van Rijs, J, Croquis , 86.
47
Spatial Moulding:
The floors of the building are connected by various spatial means in an effort
to stimulate communication between the levels. Diagrams illustrate the various
possible strategies for connecting floors and their location within the building
[Figure 3.32]. The diagram of each strategy is transposed into built form in a
very literal sense, resulting in unorthodox spatial connections unlikely to be
achieved by working within conventional means of architectural design. The
varying connections between floors create a variety of office types throughout
the building.
Distribution of Programme:
The different programmes are broken down into office space, non-office space
and circulation space [Figure 3.33] and distributed throughout the building,
‘urbanising’ the floors.
Figure 3.32. Diagrams showing the var-
ious spatial means of connection which
are transposed into built form very di-
rectly
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 66, 67), by
Figure 3.33. Diagrammatic break down

of programmed floor areas, showing
the office, non-office and circulation
space of each
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 70), by Figure 3.34. Distribution of programme throughout the building
From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 72), by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Structure:
The building is supported by a regular grid of columns with cross-bracing
resisting lateral loads. This strategy was selected to provide maximum flexibility
for the floor plans and maximum transparency. The process of structuring the
building is not documented, however it is possible the grid of columns with
cross bracing was selected from a variety of different structural possibilities -
e.g. structural walls and moment frames.
48
Building Envelope:
The building frontage is described by the architects as the outcome of a
datascape of requirements (Salazar, 1999). The building envelope is made up
of thirty-five different sorts of glass, positioned according to the requirements
of colour, reflectivity, heating and cooling demands and degree of transparency
for the rooms behind them. This mix of glass types creates a rose window effect
for the facade.
Figure 3.35. Rose window effect due to
the use of different types of glass
Diagram Methodology Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008).

Retrieved January 26, 2012, from
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/
The following is a broad summary of MVRDV’s process of design as identified
ettubrute/tags/netherlands/
in the practice study and is not specific to the Villa VPRO project.
I. Perform extensive research not necessarily aimed at the determination of

final form, but rather understanding the situation of the project.
II. Assemble the data into datascapes - visual representations of the constraints
of the project. The method of representation is up to the designer.
Identify, architectural problem, direction and aims of the project
III. Execute a process of negotiation and confrontation between the often
contradictory datascapes. This process can generate an organisation or
form for the building or at least displays the outer limits of the project.
Of the four case studies, the Villa VPRO appears as the most conventional in
terms of its architectural style and construction. It is also the only case study
which exists in a non-urban setting, located in a business park surrounded by
forest. This being the case, an analysis against criteria formulated for buildings
in an urban setting will not be entirely suitable for this case study. The building
Figure 3.36. The Villa VPRO internal void
displays similar architectural characteristics as some of the other case studies space
however, which are consistent with emergent urban design trends and could be Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008).
deployed in urban locations. Retrieved January 26, 2012, from
h t t p : / / w w w.f l i c k r. c o m / p h o t o s /
ettubrute/2358017442/sizes/z/in/
The building seeks to minimise its impact on the landscape and appears from photostream/
the outside as a densely packed volume realised in relatively conventional
construction and materials, standing quite distinct from its surroundings. This
seemingly dense volume is penetrated with a series of unusually deep holes or
voids, which create intermediate spaces that are neither inside nor outside the
building, generating ambiguity and integration between inside and out [Figure
3.36]. The voids provide light and air to the depths of the building, and also
provide greater visual accessibility into the centre of the building and between
its various levels. Physical accessibility is also increased through unconventional Figure 3.37. The Villa VPRO connection
connections between the building’s floorplates [Figure 3.37], appearing as between floorplates
though conceptualised as landscapes and capped by an accessible green roof. Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008).
Retrieved January 26, 2012,
fromhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/
ettubrute/2358004198/
49
OMA | Practice Study

Practice Ideology
The sudden rise in the importance of pragmatism in architectural practice

during the 1990’s is credited in a large part to Rem Koolhaas and his Office
for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) (Mallgrave & Goodman, 2011). The
office’s attitude to design centres around research, which they use to develop
new readings on contemporary conditions and strive to formulate new
architectural solutions (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010). Areas for their research
are not restricted to the realm of architecture, “...the implicit hypothesis seems
to be that any piece of information can potentially generate an architectural
theme or concept” (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010, p. 228). The office’s projects
are driven by information and an interest in the modern metropolis rather than
an interest in form. In recent years, an important area of research for OMA
has been “...accentuating the functional logic of the programme in the creative
process, in pursuit of an ideal Diagrammatic Metropolitan Architecture”
(Gargiani, 2008, p. 302).
Although considered one of the most convincing contemporary exemplars of

a diagrammatic practice (Vidler, 2004), relatively little is written about the
diagrams of OMA. The only published text dedicated to the subject is a 1998
article written by Udo Garritzmann, a former project architect at the practice
and Wouter Deen, a student research assistant of Rem Koolhaas. It is clear
from the text that OMA uses an eclectic variety of diagrams that range from
metaphors (linguistic diagrams) to cartoons to visual representations of data,
which allow for an “...optimistic but practical focus on newness” (Deen &
Garritzmann, 2010, p. 228).
Diagram Value
Diagrams are valued by OMA first of all in a conventional sense for their powers
of reduction and simplification. Used in this way the diagram is described as
a cartoon and is utilised in a process of ‘amplification through simplification’.
This process focuses attention on the essential information such as building
50
type without requiring detailed architectural elaboration, and is valued for its
rhetorical and evocative powers (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010). These powers
are identified in the diagram’s ability to connect visual perception with rational
thought; the diagram is likened to ‘thinking in images’ (Deen & Garritzmann,
2010).
Diagrams are also valued by OMA for their ability to represent graphically
the abstract and invisible data which structures contemporary society. When
visualised, this data can reveal the essence of a concept or at least provide the
practice with a point of departure for a project. (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010)
The visualised data also makes possible a process termed ‘romanticising’ - a
‘systematic idealisation’ which blurs the border between data analysis and the
conception of the project, whereby “...analysis becomes identical to creation”
(Deen & Garritzmann, 2010, p. 230). Robert Somol (2010) identifies in this
approach an attempt to “...supplant design with the diagram, to deliver form
without beauty and function without efficiency” (p. 90).
OMA’s conception of the diagram is extended to linguistics through the use of

metaphors and analogies, which are described as the linguistic equivalent of the
diagram (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010). These linguistic ‘diagrams’ are used in
an instrumentalising manner, describing operating mechanisms or organising
principles and conceptually ‘charging’ the elements which they associate (Deen
& Garritzmann, 2010). This process introduces influences from disciplines
outside of architecture and is claimed to lead to the development of innovative
organisations, implying a projective and instrumentalising role of the linguistic
diagram: “It is this organising potential that makes of the metaphor a diagram...”
(Deen & Garritzmann, 2010, p. 230).
Diagrams are utilised by OMA as both instruments of analysis as well as

projective tools in a quest for the new in architecture, addressing simultaneously
“...intellect and imagination ... analysis and vision crystallise in the diagram
into a pregnantly visualised thought of the new” (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010,
p. 235).
The diagrammatic design methods of the office of OMA generate buildings

described as literal transpositions of their diagrams (Mallgrave & Goodman,
2011), to the extent that they incorporate the qualities of the diagram (Vidler,
2004). Rem Koolhaas is extremely reluctant to speak about his working methods
(Attali, 2003), so little is known about the exact diagrammatic methodology of
his Office for Metropolitan Architecture.
Research forms an integral part of the OMA design method. The initial research
for a project is broad in focus, and includes studies of programme, volume,
densities, typologies, building codes and laws. The collected data is mapped in
51
an abstract graphic visualisation which allows the outer limits of the project to be
identified and explored. This is where the creative moment lies - in the decision
of what is charted and how (Deen & Garritzmann, 2010). Koolhaas (As cited
in Lootsma, 1998/1999) describes a process of ‘systematic idealisation’ - a “...
spontaneous overestimation of the existing situation” (p. 16), which is referred
to as ‘romanticising’. Through this process, the border between analysis and
conception of the project is blurred, “...analysis becomes identical to creation”
(Deen & Garritzmann, 2010, p. 230). Deen and Garritzmann (2010) explain
that a scheme is developed when analysis, reduction and simplification, and
exaggeration of the original situation (romanticising) are brought together
where the relationship between separate components (data, phenomenoa,
ideas and forms) can be examined. The resulting scheme exists as a synthesis of
analysis and a vision of the new which are ‘crystallised’ in the diagram.
Many of the projects by Rem Koolhaas display a preoccupation with exploring

the potential of continuous architectural surfaces to create new programmatic
combinations (Lootsma, 1998/1999). An exemplary example of this approach
is OMA’s Jussieu Library project of 1993, which features a spiral of continuously
ramped floors. This continuously ascending pathway is termed the ‘trajectory’,
and its variety and scale has been compared to an urban street, introducing
urban elements like plazas, parks, cafes, and shops into the building’s interior
(Gargiani, 2008). Each floor is conceptualised as a ‘pliable surface’ or ‘social
magic carpet’ (Gargiani, 2008). Aaron Betsky (2002) explains that Koolhaas
“...makes buildings as landscapes in which the land becomes a building
face and the interior is only a seamless convolution of the exterior’s order
into labyrinthine caves” (p. 143). Bart Lootsma (1998/1999) identifies the
emergence of a series of new architectural concepts and typologies as a product
of the working methods of OMA, “...the most important example of which is
the large building as a folded and stacked continuation of the landscape” (p.
16).
52
OMA | Practice Study

Project Overview
The project is for a new central library for the city of Seattle. It seeks to redefine
the modern library, balancing the presentation of all forms of media with the
increase in social functions and programmatic intricacies typical of modern
libraries.
Project Design Methodology Figure 3.38. Seattle Public Library

(n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012,
from http://plusmood.com/2008/09/
The project begins with research focusing on the expansion of media types and
seattle-public-library-rem-koolhaas-
social functions of modern libraries. The flexibility of generic floors common in oma/
library design is observed as a shortcoming of the building type, as the expanding
collection encroaches on the public space of the library. To counter this, a strategy
of spatial and functional compartmentalisation is proposed, eliminating the threat
of one function encroaching on others. This organising principle is expressed using
conceptual diagrams.
Figure 3.39. Conceptual diagrams explaining the organising principles of uniform flexibility
(left) and compartmentalised flexibility (right)
From Seattle Public Library: OMA / LMN (p. 16, 17), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005,
Barcelona: bActar.
I. The proposed library programme was visualised and consolidated into

various functional groupings, illustrating the proportions of floor area
Figure 3.40. Floor area proportions
occupied by each function [Figure 3.40]. This visualisation communicates of proposed library programme. The
essentially the same information as a pie chart, however its vertical stratified central column illustrates the propor-
tion of the total floor area dedicated to
organisation creates associations with the form and organisation of office books (shown in blue)
high rises, providing the notion of a formal correlation for the diagram. From Seattle Public Library: OMA /
LMN (p. 18), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R.
(Eds.), 2005, Barcelona: bActar.
53
II. Nine different functional clusters are determined and visualised; five
are classified as ‘stable,’ four ‘unstable.’ A black outline encloses and
compartmentalises the stable clusters, while the unstable clusters are offset
or ‘pushed out’ in the diagram [Figure 3.41].
III. The next diagrams show the mechanistic translation of the programmatic
diagram. Each of the ‘stable’ compartments is scaled according to
programmatic requirements and site constraints and stacked on top of
one another [Figure 3.42]. The previous abstract diagrammatic operation
of offsetting the compartments has been adapted in this diagram, whose
Figure 3.41. ‘Unstable’ functional seemingly arbitrary offsets of the programmatic compartments are justified
clusters are ‘pushed out’ in the dia- by the logic of the programme (Gargiani, 2008). Figure 3.43 shows the
gram
From Seattle Public Library: OMA /
residual spaces between the stacked ‘stable’ compartments which are
LMN (p. 18), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. used to organise the interface between the compartments and house the
more informal, social functions of the library. An abstract indication of
circulation appears in this diagram.
IV. The specific offsets of the different compartments are influenced by shade
and sunlight requirements and the desire to maximise specific views from
the library, as well as the urban requirements of the streets surrounding the
building. Diagrams illustrate some of the forces influencing the offsets of
the compartments [Figure 3.44, Figure 3.45].
Figure 3.42. Offset stacking of pro-

grammatic compartments
Figure 3.43. Flexible residual spaces

Figure 3.44. Diagram illustrating the influences of view and sun requirements
between ‘stable’ programmatic com-
partments From Seattle Public Library: OMA / LMN (p. 30), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005, Barce-
lona: bActar.
(Eds.), 2005, Barcelona: bActar. This series of diagrams illustrates the project’s initial process of development, which
provides the basic organising principles and form for the building, which emerges
out of a relatively literal translation of diagram into built form.
Diagram Methodology
Undertake research aimed at understanding the situation of the project. Identify
54
problems, aims and possible organising strategies for the project and visualise these
strategies through diagrams
I. Visualise the programme of the project
II. Identify functional groupings of the programme according to the project’s
organising strategies - differentiate between the functional groupings using
an abstract diagrammatic operation
III. Scale the functional groupings and transpose them to site, relating them Figure 3.45. Diagram illustrating views-
hafts to and from the building
according to the previous diagrammatic operation From Seattle Public Library: OMA /
IV. Organise the specific locations of the functional groupings according to LMN (p. 30), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R.
pragmatic requirements and outside influences of the project
This process generates the basic organising principles and form for the building
which is subject to further development as other design parameters influence the
project
Although clearly distinct from its urban surroundings, the Seattle public
library features an unconventional level of integration with its public urban
surroundings, beginning with a pedestrian thoroughfare through the building
and generous public lobby which work together to create a more permeable
building edge. The interior of the building, whose programmatic compartments
are stacked up and offset as though pushed by some geological force, feature
Figure 3.46. Seattle Public Library con-
qualities of landscapes. The compartmental offsets create continuous interiors tinutous interior
which spiral up through the building, allowing physical and especially visual (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012,
connections between the layers of the building [Figure 3.46]. This continuous from http://pcj.typepad.com/plan-
ning_commissioners_jo/2008/05/
interior acts as a continuation of the building’s urban surroundings, which downtown-librar.html
are stacked and spiralled up into ‘labyrinthine caves’ (Betsky, 2002, p. 143).
Although this strategy does not strive to generate ambiguity between the
building’s inside and outside, it does encourage ambiguity between what is
typically read as public (external space), and private (internal space). The city’s
urban order is seemingly continued into the building’s interior and up through
its levels, generating a prolonged sense of urbanity [Figure 3.47].
Figure 3.47. Seattle Public Library ‘ur-
ban’ interior
Norsworthy, S. (Photographer).
(2011). Retrieved January 26, 2012,
from http://www.flickr.com/photos/
scottnorsworthy/6490546513/.
55
Case Studies | Discussion

Diagram Type Summary
Following the practice and case studies it is clear that the four key practices
each utilise diagrams in a variety of ways as part of their design methodologies.
By examining the ways diagrams are used by these practices, it is possible to
identify a range of diagram types, which are classified based on the information
they contain relevant to specific aspects of the design development. Many of
the diagram types are common amongst several of the practices. The following
is a summary of diagram types which can be identified in the studies.
Analysis Diagram:
This type of diagram is a relatively conventional tool used to visualise the
quantifiable programmatic information of a project. Analytical in nature, these
diagrams do not generate the form of the building, but often make visible the
architectural problem and can help to construct parameters for the project.
Figure 3.48. Examples of analysis diagrams identified in case studies

Adapted from previously referenced images
Datascape Diagram:
This type of diagram makes visible the quantifiable forces that influence the
project, particularly the massing of the building, illustrating simultaneously the
constraints and outer limits of the project. It can also illustrate the effects of the
forces on the building rather than the forces themselves. This type of diagram
is sometimes very literally translated into built form as the diagram is loaded
with programme.
56
Figure 3.49. Examples of datascape diagrams identified in case studies

Organisational Diagram:
This type of diagram is widely used in conventional practice to visualise
the organising principles of a project. It is not typically concerned with the
generation of form but rather communicates the strategies for programmatic
organisation and circulation in a project.
Figure 3.50. Examples of organisational diagrams identified in case studies

Operational Diagram:
This type of diagram communicates the operational strategies of the project
- the strategies for materialising the project’s organisation, translating it into
physical terms which begin to influence the form of the building. This type of
diagram often closely relates to an organisational diagram.
Figure 3.51. Examples of operational diagrams identified in case studies

Conceptual Diagram:
This type of diagram is used to visually condense the information of a project
into one central concept and track developments throughout the design
process. This type of diagram is widely used in conventional practice and is
focused towards communicating a concept which will influence formal and
organisation principles for a project but does not directly generate them.
57
Figure 3.52. Examples of conceptual diagrams identified in case studies

Abstract Diagram:
This type of diagram is highly abstract and is instrumentalised to generate new
ideas for possible organisations for a project. It can be translated to architecture
in many different ways for example as construction, landscape, routing, or
spatiality. The diagram itself is less important than the manner in which it is
instrumentalised.
Figure 3.53. Examples of abstract diagrams identified in case studies

Diagram Use Summary
The previous section proposed a system of classifying the diagrams featured

in the case studies based on the information they contain and the way they
are utilised in the design process. Further examination of the ways in which
the different types of diagrams are used is necessary to determine the areas
of different or unconventional diagram use in the design process, especially
as many of the case studies feature diagrams which are commonplace in
conventional practice, such as organisational and conceptual diagrams.
Figure 3.54 identifies the types of diagrams used to generate various aspects
of each project, which are identified in the UTILISATION column. These
aspects are arranged from those of the broadest to scope to those of the
narrowest. Visualising Problem provides an understanding of the project’s
situation and challenges and identifies the architectural problem; Visualising
Concept communicates at a conceptual level a response to the project’s
problem; Building Massing/Form is the determination of the project’s massing
on site; Programmatic Organisation is the determination of how the project’s
programmatic elements are organised and related to one another; Spatialisation
is the making physical of the project’s organisation into three-demensional
space and the architectural strategies used to accomplish this.
58
Scope
Spatialisation
Building Massing/
Form 2. Three | Practice + Case Studies
Programmatic
UTILISATION
Organisation FOA UN STUDIO MVRDV OMA
Narrowest
Scope Abstract
Visualising Problem
Broadest Spatialisation
1.
Scope Conceptual
Visualising Concept Organisational
Operational
Building Massing/
Form Datascape
Programmatic Analysis
Organisation
Narrowest
Scope
Spatialisation
Figure 3.54. Diagram use comparison between the different practices
Unconventional Diagram Use
Figure 3.55 identifies the areas of unconventional diagram use in the four case
studies, each of which will be further examined below.
UTILISATION FOA UN STUDIO MVRDV OMA
Visualising Problem Abstract

Broadest
Scope Conceptual
Operational
Building Massing/
Form Datascape
Organisation
Narrowest Unconventional Use
Scope
Spatialisation
Figure 3.55. Areas of unconventional diagram use
Foreign Office Architects:

The unconventional diagram use in this case study is based on the development
of the organisational diagram into an operational diagram, which is used to
generate the form of the building. The project begins with a circulation diagram
which is a common tool in architectural practice. By applying surfaces to the
circulation diagram and manipulating it in three dimensions, the diagram
becomes operational and begins to encompass architectural strategies for
materialising the building’s organisation. This results in a building whose final
form and organisation features an unusually close relationship to the circulation
diagram which helped to generate it - the circulation diagram seems to be
developed into architecture with minimal design input from the architects.
59
UN Studio:
The unconventional diagram use in this case study is the development of the
organisational diagram into an operational diagram using two diagrammatic
languages (cones, single surface), each of which influence the architecture
in different ways. The project’s operational diagrams are related using an
abstract diagram, which further influences the organisation and spatialisation
of the project. Unusually, the abstract diagram is sourced from outside the
project and is used to trigger new possibilities on many levels: structurally,
spatially, organisationally and conceptually. The project seems to emerge from
an accumulative process of diagramming; first visualising the problem, then
generating organisation in two and then three dimensions, next exploring
various operational strategies, and lastly relating these strategies with an abstract
diagram.
MVRDV:
In this case study, many of the wide range of diagrams used to visualise the various
aspects of the project are utilised in relatively conventional ways. Individually,
the most unconventional diagram use was determining the building’s massing
using a datascape, but what is more interesting is the unconventional ways the
various diagrams relate to one another as they come together to generate the
project. No one diagram describes the building’s form; instead the building
emerges as a negotiation of the different diagrams, which are often transposed
quite literally and with seemingly minimal designer input into built form. The
integrity of the project’s diagrams are maintained and carried through into
built form.
OMA:
The unconventional diagram use in this case study was using an abstract
diagram in combination with a datascape diagram to generate the form of the
building. The use of this abstract diagram illustrates the importance of how this
diagram type is instrumentalised, rather than what it looks like. The abstract
and seemingly arbitrary diagrammatic operation of ‘pushing out’ programmatic
compartments is instrumentalised to generate the building’s massing. The
specific offsets are determined by requirements for sunlight, shade and views,
and are justified by the logic of the building’s internal programme and its
relationship to the site. This project features an unusually literal transposition
from diagram into built form, with the building retaining many of the qualities
of the diagrams used to generate it.
Common Unconventional Diagram Use
Through closer examination of the four case studies, areas of common

unconventional diagram use can be identified between the practices. These
60
Organisation
Narrowest
Scope
Spatialisation Three | Practice + Case Studies
common areas are identified in the following table.
UTILISATION FOA UN STUDIO MVRDV OMA
Visualising Problem Abstract

Broadest
Scope Conceptual
Operational
Building Massing/
Form 2. Datascape
Organisation
Narrowest Unconventional Use
Scope
Spatialisation
1.
Figure 3.56. Areas of common unconventional diagram use
1. Foreign Office Architects and UN Studio:

Common between the case studies of these two practices is an unconventional
relationship between the projects’ organisational and operational diagrams.
Organisational diagrams are not typically concerned with the generation of
form; rather, they are abstract representations of the organising principles of
a project, used to better understand the relationships between the different
actors. They are typically visualised in terms of lines (one dimension) or blocks
(two dimensions), and possess no spatial correlation.
In these two case studies, the final buildings share unusually close relationships
to their organisational diagrams. Rather than retaining the virtual and abstract
qualities typical of this diagram type, these practices instrumentalise the
diagrams by applying surfaces to the usually abstract lines, thereby spatialising
the diagrams into three dimensional entities and making them operational. As
the diagrams are made operational they develop architectural qualities which
help to generate the form and spatial qualities of the building.
The close relationship between the organisational diagram which is developed

into an operational diagram which generates formal and spatial outcomes is
what makes this type of practice unconventional. The role of the designer
appears limited or designer input is at least delayed for as long as possible in
the design process, which is instead governed by the seemingly pure logic of the
materialised organisational diagram.
This type of diagrammatic practice can be summarised as:
• Prioritising organisation
• Translation and materialisation of an abstract ideal
• Instrumentalising, proliferating, projective
61
For the purposes of this research, this type of diagrammatic practice is termed
Abstract/Instrumentalising, based on its abstract organisational foundation
which is instrumentalised to generate the building’s form.
2. MVRDV and OMA:

Common between the case studies of these two practices is the use of quantified
data which is visualised into a datascape diagram to help generate the form of
the building. Datascapes are visual representations of the quantifiable forces
that influence a project. These forces provide the limits of the project in more
conventional architectural practice, however in the case studies the built form
shares an unusually close relationship to its datascape, as if directly shaped by
its forces. The built form could be considered as a diagram of the forces which
helped to shape it.
The design emerges as a negotiation between the different constraints and

opportunities of the project as they interact with other conceptual and
diagrammatic influences. The diagrams driving the project are translated
quite literally into built form - the buildings resemble the diagrams which
generated them and begin to take on some of their qualities. The generation
of the building’s massing and form appears to be given over to the logic of the
diagrams and the data they embody, reducing the role of the designer in the
project’s initial design stages.
This type of diagrammatic practice can be summarised as:
• Focused on the invisible forces which influence form and massing

• Literal translation of diagram into built form- focused on the invisible
forces which influence form and massing
• Research, data, and analytically focused
For the purposes of this research, this type of diagrammatic practice is termed
Analytic/Literal, based on the analytic and data focused nature of its diagrams
and the literal translation of these into built form.
The identification of the two different types of diagrammatic design practice -

Abstract/Instrumentalising and Analytic/Literal - has implications for the design
phase of the research. Because of their different methodologies it is likely that
each type of practice has different implications for the project’s urban design
outcomes and the relationships generated between built form and open space.
A closer examination of each type of practice is required to draw conclusions
for the research, which will be undertaken as part of a speculative design project
in the Design Execution chapter.
62
63
04
Pre-Design
Four | Pre-Design
Pre-Design | Introduction
Design Testing
The previous chapter described the two different types of diagrammatic practice
identified in the case studies section. A design methodology based on each of
the two types of diagrammatic practice will be executed in the design phase.
This will test each of the two types of diagrammatic practice and will provide a
better understanding of each of the design processes, allowing conclusions for
the research to be drawn based on both research and design experience.
Each type of diagrammatic design methodology will be executed to generate

two proposals for the basic organisation and massing for the project, as it is at
these larger scales of organisation and massing (rather than small scale detailed
design) that unconventional building/open space relationships are generated.
Each of the proposals will be developed to a stage where they can be roughly
visualised and analysed in context, allowing areas of unconventional building/
open space relationships to be identified. With a focus on organisation and
massing, this research does not seek to develop each proposal into a fully
resolved design.
Design Background
The brief for the design phase is for a mixed-use development in Te Aro,
Wellington. The site is located in the wedge shape created between Manners
Street, Dixon Street and Cuba Mall. The Oaks, a low quality two-storey retail
complex currently occupies the Western end of the site, and the poorly used Te
Aro Park currently exists on the Eastern end. The original design for the retail
complex featured a two storey atrium space down the centre of the building,
connecting Cuba Mall with Te Aro park. The atrium has since failed as a retail
space and has been enclosed by shops, isolating the retail areas in the upper
floor of the building. The existing Te Aro Park is of poor urban quality and
is bounded by roads along its two longest sides, isolating it from adjacent
pedestrian movement. The park also suffers from isolation from the leisure
node of Cuba Mall.
In their current condition and configuration, neither the Oaks retail complex
nor Te Aro park are highly successful in terms of their urban design value.
65
Wellington 2040, Wellington City Council’s recent urban design framework

proposes the demolition of the Oaks retail complex and the creation of a
large public park covering the entire site including Cuba Mall. Existing on
Wellington’s ‘Golden Mile,’ the site possesses the potential for more intensive
development than what is proposed, and so the design project will present an
alternative to the Wellington 2040 proposal, whilst still including the provision
of quality public space.
Design Brief
The programme for the building is varied to reflect the mix of uses in the
area surrounding the site, and consists of retail, office space and residential
apartments. A covered market is also included in the programme which
will benefit from proximity to the high pedestrian flows of the Golden Mile
and will feed off of as well as contribute to the leisure and culture node of
Wellington’s Cuba Mall. The covered market will also provide a trade-off for
any lost public open space at ground level, and will provide low-cost start-up
opportunities for small retailers which will feed into the surrounding retail
areas as businesses grow. The site is clearly identified as a suitable location for
public space, so the project will explore the possibilities of combining public
space with commercial developments. The project also seeks to enhance the
cross-site pedestrian connection between Eva Street and Opera House Lane.
The hypothetical nature of the project affords the building a relatively flexible
brief in terms of floor area requirements, allowing each design to develop with
a high degree of freedom independent of strict design constraints typical in
urban developments. This allows a more accurate analysis of the relationship
between the project’s methods of production and architectural output. The
required programmed floor areas are outlined as follows:
Residential: 4000-5000m2
Office: 3000-3500 m2
Commercial: 3000-3500 m2
Public open space: 2500-3000 m2
Covered market: 1000-1500 m2
The brief is designed to create the challenge of accommodating the 6,500+m2

of public functions on the 3,400m2 site. This creates the challenge of providing
public inhabitation on several levels of the building, thereby encouraging a
less conventional architectural outcome typical of the surrounding area. It is
assumed the public functions (commercial, public space, covered market) will
be located on the lower floors of the building.
66
Four | Pre-Design
Pre-Design | Site Analysis

Urban Context
Figure 4.1. Wellington, New Zealand’s

capital city, located at the South-East-
ern point of the North Island. The cen-
tral city is arranged around an inner
harbour, and is characterised by differ-
ent districts, compactness and walk-
ability and proximity to the waterfront
Adapted from Google Earth
Figure 4.2. Wellington’s topography.

The central city is located on the rela-
tively flat land between two bounding
hills. Large portions of the city are built
on reclaimed land.
Adapted from Google Earth and &
Koordinates.com
Figure 4.3. Wellington City grid

Koordinates.com
67
Figure 4.4. Wellington City building

footprints
Koordinates.com
Civic
Cuba
Cour
Centr
Gove
Thorn
Figure 4.5. Wellington City districts
Koordinates.com
Civic Centre
Cuba Street
Courtenay Place
Central Business District
Government
Thorndon
Site Context
Figure 4.6. Arial photograph of site and

immediate surroundings
Adapted from Google Earth
Figure 4.7. Figure-ground diagram

showing surrounding building foot-
et
prints and open space

Stre
et
a
tre
Cub
Adapted from Koordinates.com

ia S
tor
Vic
M
an
ne
rs
Str
ee
Dix t
on
Stre
et
all
aM
Cub
t
ree
Cou
i St
Ghu rten
zne ay P
nak
e St lace
ree
a
t
Tar
68
Four | Pre-Design
Figure 4.8. Building height restrictions

of site and surrounding area. The site
exists at a location where Wellington’s
‘low’ city area of Te Aro begins to in-
crease in height towards the ‘high’ city
0m
area of the central business district
27.0m [6 storeys]
43.8m [10 storeys] Adapted from Koordinates.com
55.0m
60.0m
65.0m
75.0m
Figure 4.9. Vehicle network. The site

is not located on any primary vehicle
thoroughfares. Private vehicle access
to the site is possible via Manners or
Dixon Streets, however both streets
are one directional.
Golden Mile Adapted from Koordinates.com

Arterial
Principle
Collector
Bus Only
Figure 4.10. Transport infrastructure.

The area is well serviced by carparks
which are provided by both surface
parking and parking buildings. Many
of the city’s major bus routes run adja-
cent to the site.
Bus Route
Bus Stop
Surface Carpark
Parking Building
Figure 4.11. Pedestrian network. The

site is located on Wellington’s ‘Golden
Mile’ - the primary pedestrian con-
nection linking Courtenay Place with
Golden Mile Lambton Quay. Adjacent to the site is
Pedestrian Mall pedestrian-only Cuba Mall. Pedestrian
Primary Pedestrian alleyways are located to the North and
South of the site, providing shortcuts
Route
through the blocks. The design project
Pedestrian has the opportunity to improve the
Thoroughfare cross-site connection between these
Public Open Space pedestrian alleyways
Golden Mile
Pedestrian Mall
Primary Pedestrian Route
69
Pedestrian Thoroughfare
Public Open Space
Site Photographs
Figure 4.12. Photograph of site taken from corner of Dixon Street and Cuba Mall
Figure 4.13. Photograph of site taken from corner of Manners Street and Cuba Mall
Figure 4.14. Photograph of Te Aro Park taken from Figure 4.15. Photograph of The Oaks retail complex taken from Manners
Manners Street Street
70
Four | Pre-Design
Existing Building - The Oaks Retail Complex
The site is currently occupied by The Oaks retail complex, designed by Warren
and Mahoney in 1980. Originally constructed with a central atrium space
allowing access to the building’s upper level, this space proved unsuccessful
and has since been enclosed by shops. The upper floors are now accessible via a
narrow staircase from Cuba Mall. The building currently houses a mix of retail
and hospitality functions, with the prime retail frontages existing towards the
Cuba Mall end of the building. The remainder of the building houses typically
lower tier retailers, with the exception of a popular second hand bookshop, a
trendy cafe, a nightclub and a restaurant.
Figure 4.16. Sectional perspective of The Oaks retail complex as it was proposed in 1980.
The central atrium space has since been enclosed.
From Wellington City Archives
Figure 4.17. Ground floor plan of The Oaks retail complex as it was proposed in 1980.
From Wellington City Archives
71
Wellington 2040
Wellington 2040 is the Wellington City Council’s recent urban design

framework which provides a vision for the city’s future development. Featured
in the framework are proposals for urban interventions which specifically
impact on the site and its immediate surroundings. These proposals include
the development of Wellington’s existing laneways [Figure 4.18], and the
demolition of the existing Oaks retail complex [Figure 4.20].
all
aM
Cub
Dix
on M
Stre an
et ne
rs
Str
ee
t
Figure 4.19. Diagram showing the op-

portunity to improve the cross-site
connection between the two existing
Figure 4.18. Wellington 2040 proposal for development of existing laneways into more at-
laneways of Eva Street (South) and Op-
tractive , destinctive and pedestrian-friendly environments. This image shows the proposed
era House Lane (North).
development of Opera House Lane, opposite the site
From WGTN2040: Reshaping Wellington’s Future, Wellington City Council, 2011, Re-
trieved from http://www.wellington2040.co.nz/sites/default/files/attachments/WCC9663_
WN2040%20Project%20Single%20Cards.pdf
Figure 4.20. Wellington 2040 proposal for the demolition of the existing Oaks retail complex
to be replaced by an urban park. This image shows the perspective from the corner of Dixon
Street and Cuba Mall
From WGTN2040: Reshaping Wellington’s Future, Wellington City Council, 2011, Re-
trieved from http://www.wellington2040.co.nz/sites/default/files/attachments/WCC9663_
72
Four | Pre-Design
73
05
Design
Execution
Five | Design Execution
Abstract/Instrumentalising |
Design Execution
Introduction
The first design methodology is based on the Abstract/Instrumentalising

type of diagrammatic practice. The specific design methodology is modelled
on Foreign Office Architects’ design methodology which was identified in
the case study of their Yokohama International Port Terminal project, and is
paraphrased below:
I. Identify goals for circulation

II. Develop circulation diagram
III. Associate scaled surfaces with circulation diagram
one another
This process generates a flexible form and organisation which is subject to
further development.
The Yokohama project sought to generate form from an organisational diagram

based on circulation which is of central importance to a transport infrastructural
project, so forms a suitable basis for the project’s development. The importance
of circulation in a mixed-use urban development is less obvious, however due
to the density of programme proposed for the site the necessity for public
access beyond the ground floor becomes evident. The existing Oaks retail
complex is constructed as a two-storey publically accessible building however
the upper storey of this complex suffers from isolation from the street and has
largely failed commercially. By developing a design proposal on the basis of
circulation, a more successful connection between the elevated public levels
and the street could be realised, resulting in a more successful elevated public
realm. The pedestrian connection between Eva Street and Opera House Lane
could also form a significant aspect of the design proposal by allowing more
effective circulation across the site.
75
Design Execution
I. Identify goals for circulation:

The goal for the project’s circulation is to create the sense that the building is
an extension to the public space of the street. It seeks to provide continuity,
connection and orientation with the surrounding streetscape by promoting
permeability and opposing the discrete stacking of volumes.
II. Develop circulation diagram:

A circulation diagram for the project is developed. This diagram uses pedestrian
movement to relate the different programmatic elements with one another and
with the adjacent streets. The diagram exists as an abstract organisation; the
location of most programmatic elements are not defined apart from retail and
the market entrance which are located adjacent to Manners and Dixon Streets.
OPERA HOUSE LANE
MANNERS ST WEST MANNERS ST EAST

RETAIL MARKET ENTRANCE
PUBLIC SPACE COVERED MARKET
CUBA MALL
OFFICES RESIDENTIAL
HOSPITALITY HOSPITALITY
DIXON ST WEST DIXON ST EAST

RETAIL RETAIL
EVA ST
Figure 5.1. Circulation Diagram
For the design of the Yokohama project, Foreign Office Architects developed
a circulation diagram based on a diagrammatic language of loops, which they
titled the no-return diagram. The looped diagrammatic language related to
their circulation goal to oppose the linearity typical of pier structures and
create a building with multiple return paths, and also produced a relatively
closed system suited to the geometry of a pier which is isolated and discrete.
Early attempts to develop a circulation diagram for this project used a similar
diagrammatic language of loops, however it soon became evident that this
type of language did not lend itself well to an urban setting with multiple
points of access. A more open diagrammatic language of waves was instead
developed which was more conceptually consistent with the circulation goal
of connection and continuity with the adjacent streets. The waved language of
curves branching smoothly from the streets visually expresses the circulation
goals. The relationship of the building’s programmatic elements within the
diagram is determined by desired programmatic adjacencies (e.g. access to
public space from Cuba Mall) as well as other urban considerations.
76
III. Associate scaled surfaces with circulation diagram:

Surfaces are associated with the circulation diagram. Each surface is a scaled
representation of a the floor area required for a particular programme, and its
width is based on the average width of the site.
RESIDENTIAL
OFFICES
COMMERCIAL
Figure 5.2. Scaled Surfaces Diagram [RETAIL + HOSPITALITY]
COVERED MARKET
PUBLIC SPACE

one another:
The scaled surfaces diagram is manipulated in three dimensions, elevating certain
programmes above the level of others. The abstract diagrammatic language of
waves influences the development of the three dimensional formal language
of the project. The project now exists as a three-dimensional organisation of
layered programmatic elements whose associated surfaces begin to inform the
operation of the project, as a series of ramps branching from street level.
Figure 5.3. Three-dimensionally manipulated diagram
The previous diagram exists in abstract space outside the limits of the site.
The following diagram represents the next phase of development where
site constraints are introduced. The introduction of the physical boundary
constraints results in the programmatic surfaces being squashed and stretched
to fit within the limits of the site. Considerations concerning inhabitation are
also introduced, which results in a reduced area of ramped surfaces. Urban
considerations are also introduced to the organisation which influences the
location of programmatic elements and circulation ramps. At this stage in the
development the three-dimensional diagrammatic manipulations have little
77
influence on the building’s upper office and residential floors.
Figure 5.4. Three-dimensional diagram manipulated within site constraints
This process generates the basic form and organisation of the project, which is
then developed by introducing architectural considerations such as construction,
building regulations, and the relationship between the different programmatic
elements. The desire to maximise sunlight exposure to the public space and
Cuba Mall also influences the massing of the project.
Resulting Form
Figure 5.6. Resulting form visualised in Figure 5.5. Resulting form after first stage of development
context of surrounding building masses
The resulting form is taken through a relatively conventional process of

design development requiring rapid design decisions to present the building
in an architectural language encompassing construction and materials. This
allows the design to be considered in its urban context and allows areas of
unconventional building/open space relationships to be identified.
78
79
80
Abstract/Instrumentalising | Design Outcome
Design Summary
The building covers the maximum allowable footprint of the site. Retail
t
ree
and commercial functions are located on the ground and first floors and are
a St
Cub
concentrated at opposite ends of the site, creating a pedestrian thoroughfare
through the centre of the site linking Eva Street with Opera House Lane.
ane
se L
Adjacent to this thoroughfare is the lobby space of the office and residential
ou
aH
all
functions, as well as an area of covered market which connects with the larger
Oper
aM
covered market on the first floor. A ramped pedestrian thoroughfare connects
Cub
M
Cuba Mall and Manners Street and provides access to sloping public space at an
n er
sS
tre
roof level adjacent to Cuba Mall. This elevated open space is also accessible et
from the covered market and Dixon Street. A sloping green roof visually Dix
on
Stre
connects the elevated public space to the building’s roof. The main massing of et
t
the building’s upper floors which house the office and residential functions is
ree
St
Eva
located in the centre of the site, minimising negative visual impact and shading
t
on Cuba Street. Apartments are located on the top two storeys and overlooking
tree
ki S
the elevated public space on storeys two to four, which they share with the
ana
Tar
office functions. The building is broken up visually using variation of materials

and construction to distinguish between the different building functions.
Figure 5.7. Site Plan
Figure 5.8. Perspective image showing design proposal from the corner of Manners Street
and Cuba Mall (foreground). Retail frontages open out onto the street and are broken
midway along the Cuba mall facade to provide access to an elevated public space via a
pedestrian ramp. Apartments can be seen stepping up the end of the building to the upper
floors.
81
82
Figure 5.9. Elevated perspective image showing the design proposal from the corner of
Dixon Street and Cuba Mall. Retail frontages face the street while an elevated public space
is provided above. The majority of the building’s mass is concentrated away from Cuba Mall
to minimise visual impact and maximise sunlight access to the mall and public space.
Figure 5.10. Perspective image showing the design from Dixon Street looking towards the
Cuba Mall end of the building. Pedestrian access to the first floor retail is visible in the centre
of the image.
Figure 5.11. Perspective image showing the design proposal from the elevated public space.
Timber decking provides a lightweight and constructionally flexible surface at this level
while a green roof ramps up over the building’s upper floors, the lower portion of which is
publically accessible. Spaces for seating and informal gatherings are provided in this public
space which is overlooked by 1st floor commercial functions and residential balconies.
Access to the covered market is also possible from this public space.
Figure 5.12. Perspective image showing the design proposal from the elevated public space
and the pedestrian ramps between the levels.
83
84
Figure 5.13. Perspective image showing design proposal from Manners Street. The cross-
site pedestrian thoroughfare is visible on the right of the image, adjacent to the ground
floor lobbies of the office and residential functions. The covered market is visible on the 1st
floor, and the office levels are above this. Large structural cross-bracing elements provide a
permeable building edge between the street and the building’s public functions.
Figure 5.14. Perspective image showing design proposal from Manners Street looking
towards the Cuba Mall end of the building. The pedestrian ramp up to the elevated public
space is visible in the centre of the image.
Figure 5.15. Elevated perspective image looking towards the Cuba Mall end of the design
proposal and the area of elevated public space. The residential and office functions are
shown in the foreground. The apartment balconies overlook the pubic space.
85
Figure 5.16. Ground floor plan
Figure 5.17. 1st floor plan
Figure 5.18. 4th floor plan - typical office plan
0 5 10 20
86
Figure 5.19. 5th floor plan. The apartments on the upper floors of the building are two
storeys. This level provides access to the lower floors of these apartments.
Figure 5.20. 6th floor plan. The upper floors of the apartments are accessed via internal
staircases. The apartments are configured to provide each apartment with views from both
sides of the building, e.g. an apartment whose lower level is on the building’s Southern side
will have an upper level on the Northern side.
Commercial Space
Public Space
Covered Market
Oﬃce Space
0 5 10 20 Residential Space
87
Analytic/Literal |
Design Execution
Introduction
The second design methodology is based on the Analytic/Literal type of

diagrammatic practice. This type of diagrammatic practice, identified in the
case studies of MVRDV and OMA is based less on a well defined design process
than a negotiation of the different constraints and influences of a project. The
design development will seek influence from the diagrammatic techniques of
both practices and will seek to apply a similarly rigorous logic to the project’s
development as is evident in the practices’ case studies. A predefined design
methodology is impossible to formulate for this type of diagrammatic practice,
however the process of design development has been ordered as follows for
presentation purposes:
• Formulation of massing logic

• Determination of site massing
• Accommodation of programme/configuration of lower floors
• Provision of daylight/configuration of upper floors
These headings provide recognisable markers in the presentation of the design
process, although they do not represent discrete, linear ‘steps’ in the design
development.
The logic, rationale, and design instincts and intentions of the designer have
a significant influence in the Analytic/Literal design methodology (as will be
further discussed following the design execution). Therefore, every effort has
been made to distinguish the strictly diagrammatic influences on the project
from those due to the logic of the designer.
Design Execution
Formulation of Massing Logic:

An important aspect of the project, as identified in the Design Background
section, is the provision of public space as part of commercial development.
88
If the provision of quality public space is to be maximised for the project, it

is logical to pack internal programmes within the smallest possible building
footprint, thereby maximising public space at ground level where it will be the
most easily accessed.
This massing logic [Figure 5.21], a product of the designer’s rationale and
informed in part by MVRDV’s central concern for increased density in order
to preserve open space, forms the basis for the project’s subsequent site massing
Figure 5.21. Diagram showing the
exploration. massing logic for the project
Determination of Site Massing:

The floor area proportions of the project’s programme are visualised, as are the
floor area proportions of the project’s internal (residential, office, commercial)
and external (public space, covered market) programmes.
RESIDENTIAL X 1.5
INTERNAL FUNCTIONS X 3.5

OFFICE X 1
COMMERCIAL X 1
PUBLIC SPACE X 1 EXTERNAL FUNCTIONS X 1.5

COVERED MARKET X 0.5
Figure 5.22. Diagrams showing the floor area proportions of the different programmes to be
accommodated on the site. Each programme’s floor area is quantified in terms of the total
site area (e.g. residential floor area = site area X 1.5)
The project’s internal programmes are packed within a single volume and the
possibilities for locating this on the site are explored. The height of the volume
is at the maximum allowed under the district plan (43.8m) to fulfil the massing
logic of a minimum building footprint.
A sunlight and shading study is completed for various massing options which
are located at the extremes and centre of the site. The study examines direct
sunlight exposure to the open public space in the different site configurations
for the hours between 0800 and 1600 on both the summer and winter solstices.
89
THREE-DIMENSIONAL SITE MASSING SUMMER SOLSTICE WINTER SOLSTICE
Mass 1
Mass 2
Mass 3
Mass 4
Mass 5
Figure 5.23. Sunlight and shading study
Masses 1&2 perform relatively poorly for sunlight exposure to the public
spaces, so are ruled out of further analysis. Masses 3-5 perform similarly well,
with Mass 3 allowing the maximum sunlight exposure. These remaining masses
are analysed in terms of promotion of the cross-site connection between Eva
Street and Opera House Lane and the compactness of the floor-plate they create
[Figure 5.24]. The central concern for compactness in the project’s development
is informed by MVRDV’s development of VPRO, whose footprint was
determined by compactness studies [Figure 3.29], and the logic that the most
compact form will minimise both internal circulation space and exterior visual
impact.
90
MOST COMPACT LEAST COMPACT
Figure 5.24. Compactness and cross-site connection study
Following an analysis of sunlight penetration, compactness and cross-

site connection, mass 5 is selected as the most suitable solution. Urban
considerations also feature in the rationale behind this decision, specifically the
desire to maintain an active street frontage along the valuable retail location of
Cuba Mall.
Diagrams in this stage of development are used as tools of analysis; they are not
projective as they are not instrumentalised to generate the form or organisation
of the building. Diagrams facilitate the comparative analysis of the massing
options identified by the designer, but it is the designer’s logic and rationale
that decides the most suitable massing.
Accommodation of Programme/Configuration of Lower Floors

With the project’s basic massing for the internal functions determined, the
additional space requirement for the external programmes (public space,
covered market) is visualised.
INTERNAL FUNCTIONS
EXTERNAL FUNCTIONS
Figure 5.25. Diagram showing the requirement of additional space to accommodate the
project’s external functions
To meet the external space requirements the project seeks influence from
OMA’s Seattle Public Library project. In the Seattle project the abstract
diagrammatic operation of ‘pushing out’ programmatic compartments is used
to meet requirements for sunlight, shading and views, and begins to influence
the massing of the building [Figure 3.41]. A similar abstract diagrammatic
operation is utilised in this project to provide additional horizontal surfaces for
the external programmes.
91
Figure 5.26. Abstract diagrammatic ‘pushing’ operation
In an abstract diagrammatic operation adapted from the internal compartmental

offsets featured in OMA’s library project, the possibility of ‘pushing’ the project’s
external programmatic compartments into the diagram of internal functions
is identified, thereby deforming the diagram’s rectangular shape. The formal
implication of this compartmental ‘pushing’ operation is the offsetting of floor
plates within the tower, which is justified by the logic of the programmatic
requirement for additional floor area.
The abstract diagrammatic ‘pushing’ operation is refined into a ‘precision

push,’ where the external programmes are fragmented and pushed into the
rectangular diagram of internal functions at various levels.
COVERED MARKET
PUBLIC SPACE
Figure 5.27. ‘Precision push’ diagrammatic operation
Through this operation a covered market area is created at ground level and on
the first floor, and an elevated public space is created, providing a public terrace
for the city.
In this stage of the project’s development the abstract diagrammatic ‘pushing’

operation is instrumentalised to generate formal and organisational possibilities
for the project, which will be translated from diagrammatic figure into built
form relatively directly. The configuration of the diagram’s ‘pushing’ operation is
rationalised by the designer and is influenced by urban and site considerations.
92
Provision of Daylight/Configuration of Upper Floors

The deep plan of the building, a result of its site massing, presents a challenge
for providing natural light and ventilation to its upper office and residential
floors. The strategy of subtracting ‘voids’ from the building’s volume is adapted
from MVRDV’s VPRO project. This strategy allows the clarity of the tower’s
simple geometry to be maintained whilst providing outdoor space, natural
light and ventilation for the building’s upper floors.
Figure 5.28. Subtracted ‘voids’ allow sunlight penetration and provide external views
The configuration of the voids will be generated based on a negotiation of

the various constraints concerning their operation. These constraints will be
concerned with both the building’s interior programme requirements (light,
shading, views, ventilation, plan shapes, min/max floor-plate depths) and
requirements for the subtracted outdoor void spaces (spatial proportions, variety
of outlooks, direct sunlight access, circulation between voids). The fulfilment of
some of these requirements will be achieved based on a data driven process of
development (e.g. interior natural daylight levels, min/max floor-plate depths),
and others will be fulfilled based on the judgement of the designer (e.g. views,
circulation), resulting in a built form generated by the complex negotiation
and confrontation of a ‘datascape’ of requirements, a reference to MVRDV’s
working method.
For the purposes of this research, a full execution of this working method
has not been undertaken due to its complex nature and deviation from the
identified scope of research. The configuration of the voids for the project’s
presentation is based on the designer’s judgement [Figure 5.29] and provides
an indication of how their shape may have been configured had the full
method been executed. While the configuration of the voids is essential for the
operation of the building’s upper floors, their impact on the project’s urban
design outcomes is relatively insignificant, and does not depend primarily on Figure 5.29. Configuration of ‘voids’
based on designer’s judgement.
their precise shape. The configuration of the voids are
developed further in the project’s later
Had the full datascape method had been executed for this stage of development, stages of design development
diagrams would have played both a projective and analytical role for the formal
and organisational development of the project. Once the strategy of subtracting
voids from the building’s mass had been selected by the designer (a strategy
93
which finds precedent in MVRDV’s VPRO project), diagrams would have

been used to optimise the various constraints to generate the specific shape of
the voids and analyse the impact of any decisions made by the designer.
This process generates the basic form and organisation of the project which
is also further developed into an architectural proposition and visualised in
context.
Resulting Form
Figure 5.31. Resulting form visualised Figure 5.30. Resulting form after first stage of development
in context of surrounding building
masses
As with design one, the resulting form is taken through a relatively conventional
process of design development requiring rapid design decisions to present the
building in an architectural language encompassing construction and materials.
Again this allows the design to be considered in its urban context and allows
areas of unconventional building/open space relationships to be identified.
94
95
96
Analytic/Literal | Design Outcome
Design Summary
The building is a ten storey tower block located at the widest end of the site,
t
ree
adjacent to Cuba Mall. The ground floor contains retail functions and features
a St
Cub
a public atrium accessible from Manners and Dixon Streets. The atrium
provides access to the office and residential lobbies, and provides public access
ane
se L
via escalators to additional retail space on the first and second floors. A covered
ou
aH
all
market is located at ground level adjacent to Te Aro Park and continues up per
O
aM
to the first storey. The elevated area of the covered market is also accessible
Cub
M
from the retail functions of levels one and two, and directly from Cuba Mall. an
ne
rs
Str
Levels three to five contain the office functions which are penetrated by a void e et
which provides access to outdoor space as well as light, views and ventilation. Dix
on
Stre
Levels six to nine contain apartments which feature similar voids. An elevated et
t
public space is located on levels two and three which overlooks Te Aro Park
ree
St
Eva
and is accessible from the second storey retail and covered market functions.
t
The building is of concrete and steel construction and uses different facade
tree
ki S
treatments to visually distinguish the different functions. Curved concrete

ana
Tar
elements create visual and physical connections between the public levels of
the building.
Figure 5.32. Site Plan
Figure 5.33. Perspective image showing the design from Manners Street. First floor retail is
accessed via the staircase to the left of the image, and an elevated public terrace overlooks
Te Aro Park from above. A large portion of the covered market is located at ground level .
97
98
Figure 5.34. Elevated perspective image showing the design from above Manners Street. The
elevated public terrace is visible overlooking Te Aro Park - a cafe could open out onto this
space. The terrace is accessible both internally and from the 1st floor covered market visible
to the left of the image. A subtracted void is visible in the centre of the image, providing
light, air and views to the office levels and creating ambiguity between the building’s inside
and outside.
Figure 5.35. Perspective image showing the public atrium space which connects Manners
and Dixon Streets. Vertical circulation is located within the atrium, as well as lift access to
the office and residential floor above.
Figure 5.36. Elevated perspective showing the design from above Dixon Street. The large,
two storey covered market space opens out above Cuba Mall, and is accessible via a
staircase from the street. From the covered market the second floor retail is also accessible.
A subtracted void is visible in the office levels, and apartment balconies can be seen above.
Figure 5.37. Perspective image showing the covered market area which opens out above
Cuba Mall. Retail is located on the ground floor.
99
100
Figure 5.38. Perspective image showing the design from Manners Street, looking towards
Cuba Mall. From this angle a subtracted void in the residential floors is visible.
Figure 5.39. Perspective image showing access from the covered market up to the public
terrace. Circulation within the public atrium is also visible.
Figure 5.40. Perspective image showing the design from Manners Street, looking towards
Taranaki Street. The three levels of retail are visible, as is the covered market which faces
out onto Cuba Mall. Ground floor retail is concentrated at the most valuable location at the
Cuba Mall end of the site.
Figure 5.41. Perspective image showing the 1st floor covered market above Cuba Mall. The
market is a double height space, overlooked by 2nd floor retail which is accessed from the
market by stairs.
101
Commercial Space
Public Space
Covered Market
Oﬃce Space
Residential Space
Figure 5.42. Ground floor plan
Figure 5.43. 1st floor plan
Figure 5.44. 2nd floor plan
102
Figure 5.45. 3rd floor plan
Figure 5.46. 5th floor plan
Figure 5.47. 6th floor plan
103
Design Execution | Discussion

Two different diagrammatic design methodologies identified by case studies
were executed in the previous chapter to generate different design proposals
in response to the brief. This chapter discusses the execution and outcomes of
the two diagrammatic design methodologies. For each design proposal, aspects
of unconventional building/open space relationships are firstly identified, and
the role of diagrams in their development are examined. Following this an
examination of the role of the designer, and the differences in the architectural
outcomes produced by the different methodologies is undertaken. Lastly, the
limitations of the different methodologies are addressed.
Following these areas of discussion, the aim of the research is comprehensively

addressed in a discussion of the instrumentality of diagrams in generating the
unconventional urban design outcomes identified in the two design proposals.
This section draws on the previous areas of discussion to produce a conclusive
summary of the findings for the design phase of the research, answering the
question: “what contribution do diagram-based design methods make towards
the realisation of non-conventional urban design outcomes?”
Design One: Areas of Unconventional Building/Open Space

Relationships
Figure 5.48. The typical boundary between public and private occupation, the
building’s footprint, is transcended as the public open space of Cuba Mall is
extended via a ramped surface onto the public roof of the building
Figure 5.49. This same ramped and warped surface reduces the distinction
between figure and ground, as it blends the public roof level with the surrounding
urban landscape
104
Figure 5.50. The extension of public space onto the warped surface of the building’s
roof creates a public realm rich in topographical variation - public occupation is
extended beyond the level of the street and the occupied surface is not horizontal
Figure 5.51. The sloping surfaces of the building integrate conventionally horizontal
elements (roof, floor) with vertical elements (walls), creating ambiguity between
occupied surfaces and enclosure
Figure 5.52. The permeable building edges of the covered market area minimise
the distinction between the building’s inside and outside
Design One: Role of Diagrams in Design Process
Many of the unconventional urban design outcomes of this design, such as the
minimisation of both the boundary between public and private occupation
and the distinction between figure and ground, were directly generated
from the Abstract/Instrumentalising diagrammatic design methodology. The
circulation goals of the project, formulated prior to any diagrammatic design
input, also emphasised the spatial qualities of continuity and connection
which contributed to the generation of unconventional building/open space
relationships.
The circulation goals of the project influenced the first diagrammatic step
of the design methodology - the development of the circulation diagram;
specifically the use of the diagrammatic language of waves [Figure 5.53]. In an
adaptation of Foreign Office Architect’s ‘closed loop’ diagram, the circulation
diagram’s language of waves embodies the circulation goals of the project; the
curved ‘wave’ lines branch seamlessly from the diagram’s otherwise orthogonal
lines, existing as the diagrammatic expression of continuity and connection.
The ‘waved’ diagrammatic language was selected as a more appropriate Figure 5.53. Diagrammatic language of
waves
diagrammatic language for an urban site compared to the ‘closed loop’ diagram
which is better suited to the linearity of a pier.
The development of the project is based on the optimised, abstract organisation

of the circulation diagram rather than on the primary basis of formal
105
considerations, as would be the case, for example, when working from an

initial concept sketch. Surfaces are applied to the circulation diagram [Figure
5.3], thereby providing the diagram with an operational strategy (interpreted
architecturally as continuous ramped surfaces) and forming the basis for the
development of the building’s form and massing as it is transposed from the
abstract space of the diagram onto the site.
By transposing the project’s operational diagram onto the site and developing it
into an architectural proposition, unconventional solutions emerge; solutions
which would have unlikely been generated had the project developed on the
basis of form, inhabitation, and a conventional architectural language. The
primary example of such an unconventional solution is the warped inhabitable
Figure 5.54. Warped surface of public surface of the elevated public space [Figure 5.54], whose unusual geometry is an
space
outcome of the building’s close relationship to the circulation diagram which
generated it. This surface is an unusual architectural outcome as it minimises
the distinction between surface and enclosure and integrates vertical and
horizontal elements.
Design Two: Areas of Unconventional Building/Open Space

Relationships
Figure 5.55. The public realm is extended within the building’s footprint to allow
access to the multiple levels of retail, extending a sense of publicness and urbanity
within the building
Figure 5.56. The multiple levels of retail, covered market and public space
elevated above the level of the street create topographical variation for the public
occupation of the building
Figure 5.57. The permeable building edges of the covered market area minimise
the distinction between the building’s inside and outside, as do the voids which
penetrate the upper floors of the building to create ambiguous ‘third’ spaces
which are neither inside nor out
106
Figure 5.58. The elevated outdoor public space which features no direct connection
to the ground is an unusually public addition to the normally private upper floors
of the building, creating an elevated terrace for the city
Design Two: Role of Diagrams in Design Process
The unconventional urban design outcomes of this design were a product

of the Analytic/Literal diagrammatic design methodology, however were not
always directly generated by diagrams. Input from the designer is an important
component of this design method, as will be discussed in the following section.
The building’s massing, selected by the designer following a diagrammatic

analysis of the various massing options, created the necessity for three levels
of public functions. The multiple levels of public functions extend the public
realm inside the building and also create topographical variation for the public
occupation, however these unconventional urban outcomes were not directly
generated by a diagram; rather they are the necessary result of the logic dictating
the building’s massing.
The high degree of permeability of the building’s volume which creates

ambiguities between the building’s inside and outside is an architectural
outcome influenced by diagrams. The permeability of the covered market
which creates a strong sense of visual and physical connection with Cuba Mall
is the direct architectural outcome of an abstract diagrammatic ‘pushing out’
operation, which was generated at the abstract level of the building’s massing
diagram. This operation generated the void space in the building’s massing to
house the market and also generated the elevated public terrace.
The subtracted void spaces which penetrate the upper levels of the building
and create ambiguities between inside and outside were an architectural
strategy selected by the designer as an adaptation of MVRDV’s VPRO project.
The shapes of these spaces were to be directly generated by a diagrammatic
negotiation and confrontation of the various constraints and influences
effecting their operation - a ‘datascape’ of requirements.
In the Analytic/Literal methodology, the influence of the designer’s logic is

equally as important as the influence of diagrams in the development of the
project. It is impossible to consider the diagrammatic influences alone, as they
are intrinsically linked to the designer’s logic which dictates what information
the diagrams engage with.
107
Role of the Designer in the Different Methodologies
Just as the role of diagrams varies between each of the methodologies, so too
does the role of the designer. In the Abstract/Instrumentalising methodology,
the design intentions of the designer have a lesser influence on the project’s
formal development, which is developed primarily on the basis of the
manipulated circulation diagram. The designer’s role in this relatively linear
design process is predefined as manipulating the diagram in three dimensions.
Although this process does require architectural judgement from the designer,
the logic dictated by the diagram dominates the project’s development rather
than the designer rationalising each design move. Materials and construction
are selected partly by the designer and are partly dictated by the formal
outcome of the diagrammatic design methodology; e.g. the wooden decking of
the elevated public space is required to construct the warped surfaces generated
by diagrams.
In the Analytic/Literal methodology the intentions of the designer have a more

significant impact on the development of the project. This methodology does
not feature a predetermined design process, so the designer must decide what
information to diagram and how best to present it. For some aspects of the
design, diagrams are used to explore and analyse the alternate options, leaving
the selection of the most effective solution to the judgement and rationalisation
of the designer. An example of this approach is the determination of the
building’s site massing, which was selected based on a study of sunlight,
compactness and cross-site connection. The rationale of the designer dictates
which design factors are considered in the process of analysis. In other cases the
designer identifies an architectural problem (e.g. daylight penetration to upper
floors) and a strategy for solving this problem (e.g. subtracting voids), then
deploys a diagram to generate the most effective configuration of the strategy.
Neither methodology has a primary concern for context or the experience

of inhabitation, so it is up to the judgement of the designer to ensure these
important aspects of the design are effectively addressed. The development
of the design is never left solely to the logic of the diagram - the values and
intuition of the designer still inevitably influence the design outcome, therefore
different designers executing the same methodology would produce entirely
different results.
Architectural Outcomes of the Different Methodologies
Not surprisingly, the different diagrammatic design methodologies produce

different architectural outcomes. The Abstract/Instrumentalising methodology
produces an architectural outcome realised in a relatively complex architectural
and constructional language, as is illustrated by the warped and sloping surface
of the elevated public space. These less conventional outcomes are direct
products of the diagrammatic design methodology, as the ‘stuff’ of the diagram
108
- it’s sloping programmatic surfaces - is transposed to the site and manipulated

to become the ‘stuff’ of the final building, thereby maintaining a close formal
relationship between building and diagram.
By contrast, the Analytic/Literal methodology produces an architectural

outcome realised in a relatively mainstream architectural and constructional
language. This diagrammatic methodology is concerned more with the
generation of organisation rather than the direct generation of built form,
allowing a relatively conventional architectural language to be deployed on the
diagrammatically generated organisation later in the design process.
Limitations of the Different Methodologies
Design One:
The Abstract/Instrumentalising design methodology produced a building
whose upper office and residential levels are realised in a relatively conventional
architectural language and organisation. The circulation diagram which was
used to generate the organisation for the project had very little influence on
the design of these floors, whereas on the lowest two public floors the diagram’s
surfaces are materialised to directly generate the building’s form. The programme
of these floors allowed this less conventional architectural response, however
office and residential functions typically require a more standard architectural
language. Furthermore, the design driver of circulation doesn’t lend itself to the
creation of office space (large, flexible floor plates) or the creation of apartments
(discrete packets of space), resulting in a relatively conventional response to the
brief for the design of these programmes.
This methodology also prioritises the large scale organisation and generation
of form at the expense of a more considered response to the constraints of
the project. An illustration of this is the ground level of the building which
is underutilised in terms of usable floor area as the sloping pedestrian ramps
create significant uninhabitable areas at ground level due to low ceiling heights.
The design constraints of minimum ceiling height and maximising floor area
are not a primary consideration for the building’s development.
Design Two:
The Analytic/Literal design methodology works primarily with the constraints
of a project, however the execution of this methodology considered relatively
few constraints so the development of the project was somewhat lacking in
complexity - especially as managing complexity is one of the most highly
valued aspects of this methodology. The lack of constraints is due partly
to the hypothetical nature of the project due to the absence of a real client
who would have introduced a multitude of new constraints, such as a more
complex functional programme. Also, with a greater understanding and level
109
of experience with the methodology many other constraints could have been
identified and considered by the designer, increasing the complexity of the
developed building. Therefore, the designer’s limited experience designing in
this way is another limitation of the design execution.
Another limitation of the project is the form given to the ‘voids’ or penetrations
in the upper floors of the building. The shape of these voids were intended to be
developed diagrammatically, based on an optimisation of the requirements for
sunlight, natural light, views and ventilation. For the purposes of this research
the shape of the voids were designed by the designer to illustrate their possible
urban outcomes as their specific shape was not deemed to be a significant factor
for the project’s urban design outcomes. The practicalities of time constraints
and the need for the rapid development of each design proposal also influenced
this part of the project’s development. Had the voids been developed in a more
diagrammatic manner, a more unexpected architectural outcome could have
emerged.
Some of the most significant formal outcomes of the project were design
decisions made by the designer rather than the outcome of any diagrammatic
generator; for example the curve of the pedestrian ramps. It could be argued
that this design move lacks integrity as it is a purely formal gesture and is not
informed by any underlying functional logic. The necessity of such a formal
gesture is questionable. On the one hand the curve of the ramps allow them
to blend seamlessly with the two horizontal levels they connect, promoting
continuity between the levels whilst also enhancing the aesthetic interest of
the design (the building’s construction would be entirely conventional were it
not for these curved elements). On the other hand it could be argued that the
highly unconventional programmatic organisation of the project would suffice
in generating mass appeal for the building without the need for formal design
gestures. Furthermore, had the shape of the subtracted voids in the building’s
upper volume been generated diagrammatically, they might have taken on a
less conventional appearance. The architectural identity of the building might
have relied on these elements rather than the curved elements which might
have become unnecessary.
Findings for the Instrumentality of Diagrams
The execution of the diagrammatic design methodologies has produced

buildings which challenge conventional urban design principles relating to
the interface between built form and open space. The architectural outcomes
variously reduce the distinction between public and private, built form and
open space, and indoors and outdoors, in each case extending and generating
new possibilities for the public occupation of the building. Based on the research
it would be difficult to argue a causal relationship between the diagrammatic
design methods and these unconventional urban design outcomes as the design
phase was predisposed to produce such outcomes - it was the focus of the
110
design research after all.
What can be argued, however, is that diagrams where instrumentalised in

each design process, becoming more than explanatory or analytic devices
and actually driving each project forward, generating new possibilities which
would have unlikely been conceived had the projects been developed on a more
conventional basis. This is not to say that diagrammatic design methods are the
only way unconventional outcomes are produced; other methods, for example
working primarily with form, could of course produce new, perhaps even
similar, outcomes. How the diagrammatic design methods differ however, is the
unconventional design outcomes are developed on the basis of an underlying
functional rigour, and are presented as a logical, even probable response to
the constraints of the brief. Unusual forms and organisations are not created
based on the artistic whim of the designer, but are generated based on idealised
information, forming a more defensible basis for the project’s development.
The functional logic which forms the basis for each project’s development is
present in the architectural outcome, however its translation into built form
generates an unconventional architectural response.
The projects are developed not on the basis of form, but as organisations
which exist in the abstract space of the diagram, exclusive of architectural or
constructional considerations. Problems are posed and solved in this abstract
space with little concern for architectural convention. For example in the early
development of design one the ground-plane is of little special significance,
and is just as open to manipulation as the rest of the project’s elements; spatial
compartmentalisation is non-existent as the circulation diagram promotes
continuity and connection. In the development of design two the building’s
massing is manipulated as though conceived out of weightless blocks; entire
floors are ‘pushed’ outwards from the building’s volume, to be replaced by the
building’s ‘external’ functions. It is in this abstract space of the diagram where
the project’s unconventional urban outcomes are conceived as the by-products
of an overriding logic. The architectural outcome’s distinction between figure
and ground is minimised because in the space of the diagram this distinction
is non-existent, as is also the case with public and private, horizontal and
vertical, and inside and outside. The buildings’ unconventional interface with
their surrounding open space is the result of their formulation in the non-
contextual, non-physical space of the diagram.
Developing the project through diagrams allows the complexities of the

projects to be effectively managed. The inevitably complex unconventional
architectural outcomes are achievable thanks to a working method which
facilitates the management of these complexities. The diagrammatic design
methodologies manage the complexities of the project by allowing multiple
paths of development to be explored without physical effect, and by combining
both functional and formal influences into a single operational tool.
111
06
Conclusions
Six | Conclusions
Conclusions
The main intention of this research was to examine the contribution made by
diagrammatic design methods in the design of urban architecture projects. The
observation forming the basis for this research was that many practices who
utilised diagrams extensively in their design methodologies seem to produce
buildings which relate to their surrounding urban space in unconventional ways.
These buildings challenge conventional urban design principles relating to the
interface between built form and open space, representing part of an emerging
trend in urban design. The research therefore examined the instrumentality of
diagrams in the production of unconventional urban design outcomes relating
to the interface between built form and open space.
Three conclusions have been produced for this topic of research. The first
conclusion relates to the different types of diagrammatic design practice. The
second relates to the different urban design outcomes produced by the different
methodologies. The third conclusion is composed of three subsidiary findings,
and addresses the aim of the research by concluding what contribution
diagrammatic design methods make in the realisation of unconventional urban
design outcomes.
Conclusion One: Different types of diagrammatic practice
The first conclusion, supported by case studies of four key diagrammatic

practitioners, is the prevalence of two different types of diagrammatic design
practice: Abstract/Instrumentalising and Analytic/Literal. Case studies
identified common aspects of unconventional diagram use between the practices
and allowed them to be grouped into the different types of diagrammatic
design practice. The Abstract/instrumentalising type is characterised by an
instrumentalisation of an organisational diagram into an operative diagram,
prioritising the translation of an abstract, optimised organisational diagram
into built form. The Analytic/Literal type is characterised by a utilisation of
diagrams to prioritise data, analysis and the invisible forces which influence
a project’s development, often resulting in a relatively literal translation of
diagram into built form. A significant difference between the two types
of diagrammatic practice, supported by findings from an execution of each
methodology, is the role of the designer in each design process. In the Abstract/
113
Instrumentalising methodology the designer’s role is reduced as the logic of

the diagram drives the project’s development, whereas in the Analytic/Literal
methodology input from the designer forms a more significant component of
the project’s development.
Conclusion Two: Different unconventional urban design outcomes
The second conclusion is that different types of diagrammatic practice

produce different outcomes for their architecture and subsequently different
unconventional urban design outcomes. This conclusion is supported by case
studies of four key diagrammatic practitioners and a design execution of each
type of diagrammatic practice. It also refers back to the unconventional urban
design principles identified in the literature review.
The architectural outcomes of the Abstract/Instrumentalising diagrammatic

design methodology are typically geometrically complex, featuring curved
and sloping surfaces requiring relatively non-conventional constructional
techniques. The most significant unconventional urban design outcomes of
this type of practice are the minimisation of the distinction between built
form and open space, public and private, and typically horizontal and vertical
elements. Circulation and an emphasis on continuity and connection typically
form the basis for projects developed in this way, resulting in built forms which
physically integrate with their urban surroundings, minimising the threshold
between building and open space and integrating horizontal circulation with
vertical and inhabitable surface with enclosure.
The architectural outcomes of the Analytic/Literal diagrammatic design

methodology are typically relatively geometrically simple. This type of
diagrammatic practice is more concerned with the generation of a project’s
organisation rather than form, producing buildings which are largely realised
in conventional building elements, however do feature aspects of formal and
constructional complexity. The most significant unconventional urban design
outcome of this type of practice is an ambiguity between the building’s inside
and outside, creating a prolonged sense of public urbanity within the typically
private built volume. A primary concern for programme and a strict functional
logic typically form the basis for projects developed in this way, resulting
in architectural solutions which oppose convention and create unusual
programmatic organisations and spaces.
Conclusion Three: Contribution of diagrammatic design

methodologies in the realisation of unconventional urban design
outcomes
The third conclusion relates to the specific contributions that diagrammatic

design methods make towards the realisation of non-conventional urban
design outcomes. The conclusion is composed of three subsidiary findings for
114
Six | Conclusions
the contribution of diagrams: Abstract Development, Managing Complexity,

and Powers of Rhetoric. Practice studies of four key diagrammatic practitioners
and a design execution of each type of diagrammatic practice support these
findings and conclusion.
Abstract Development:
The first subsidiary finding is that diagrammatic design methods contribute to
the realisation of non-conventional urban design outcomes by prolonging the
virtualities of the project, allowing it to develop in an abstract manner with
minimal concern for architectural convention. Unconventional urban design
outcomes are conceived in abstract diagrammatic space as the bi-products of
an overriding functional logic. Architectural conventions such as built form
and open space, public and private and interior and exterior space do not exist
within the non-physical, non-contextual space of the diagram, resulting in
unconventional relationships between the project’s elements once transposed
to site and realised in architectural terms.
Managing Complexity:
The second subsidiary finding is that diagrammatic design methods allow
control of a high degree of complexity in the design process, often common
for the realisation of non-conventional urban design outcomes. Diagrams
manage the complex process of optimisation and confrontation of a project’s
constraints which concern both form and function. The project’s constraints
are combined with a single operational tool, allowing them to be effectively
managed to facilitate the realisation of more complex organisational and formal
architectural solutions.
Powers of Rhetoric:
The third subsidiary finding is that diagrammatic design methods contribute
to the realisation of non-conventional urban design outcomes by presenting
the often unusual design as the outcome of an underlying functional logic.
Diagrammatic design methods are not the only way unconventional
urban design outcomes are achieved, however these methods present the
unconventional outcome as the logical result of an underlying functional
rigour, providing a persuasive, defensible and clearly articulated rhetoric for
the unusual architectural outcome.
Limitations and Further Research
It would be useful to conduct further research into the public spaces and
built form/open space relationships produced by diagrammatic design
methodologies. This research focused on identifying the unconventional and
emergent outcomes produced by the methodologies and examined how they
115
were conceived. With a focus on difference, the urban quality of the architectural
outcomes was not of principle concern - the outcomes were different, but were
they better? Further analysis into the quality of the architectural outcomes
could provide significant insight into the applicability of diagrammatic design
methodologies in the design of urban architecture and public space, and would
also provide a broader, more general insight into the applicability of recent
emergent urban design trends.
Further research into the application of the diagrammatic design methodologies

for different programmes, scales and in different contexts would also be useful.
This research could address whether certain types of diagrammatic practice
are more applicable for certain programmes or contexts. It is interesting to
note that between the design proposals the Abstract/Instrumentalising method
imparted more influence on the lower public floors of the building, whereas
the Analytic/Literal method engaged with the building’s private upper floors
to a higher degree. Further research could also engage with the possibility of
combining the two types of diagrammatic practice within a single diagrammatic
strategy, exploiting the most valuable aspects of each methodology.
One of the obvious barriers to the realisation of urban buildings which

challenge conventional urban design principles is the cost of construction as
significant areas of non-standard construction are required. Feasibility studies
of the design proposals would be useful to comment on the feasibility of the
buildings produced. Both proposals provide outdoor public space and areas for
a covered market; programmes which contribute positively to the surrounding
urban environment. Because of this, it could be possible that local councils
would subsidise part of the development, increasing the likelihood of the
projects’ feasibility.
Final Conclusion
New conceptions of the relationships between built form and open space
represent a contemporary emerging trend in urban design which minimises
many of the conventional distinctions typical in urban architecture projects,
promoting hybridity, connectivity and porosity in their place. Diagrams
provide a useful tool to engage with these new and evolving relationships in
the design of urban architecture projects. Instrumentalising diagrams in the
design process generates new possibilities for the future relationships between
built form and urban open space, and develops the often unconventional
architectural outcome on the basis of an underlying functional logic. With
further research and effective use, diagrams could play a more important role in
the generation of yet to be conceived solutions for urban architecture projects.
116
Six | Conclusions
117
Bibliography
Adam, H. (2002). Stacking and Layering. In MVRDV: 1997-2002: Stacking

and Layering (pp. 30-38). Madrid, Spain: El Croquis Editorial.
Alison, J., Jones, M., Spiller, N., & Vaughan, L. (Eds.). (2006). Future City:
Experiment and Utopia in Architecture. London, United Kingdom: Thames
& Hudson Ltd.
Allen, S. (1997). Artificial Ecologies: the Work of MVRDV. In Maas vanRijs

deVries 1991-1997: MvRdV (pp. 26-33). Madrid, Spain: El Croquis Editorial.
Allen, S. (1998). Diagrams Matter. ANY , 23, 16-29.
Attali, J. (2003). Vertical Labyrinths. In Reading MVRDV (pp. 72-81).

Rotterdam: NAi Publishers.
Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C. (1998). Diagrams - Interactive Instruments in

Operation. ANY , 23, 19-23.
Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C. (2010). Diagrams. In M. Garcia (Ed.), The Diagrams
of Architecture (pp. 222-227). Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley &
Sons Ltd.
Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C. (2007). UNStudio: After Images. Beijing: United Asia
Art & Design Cooperation.
Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C. (2006). UNStudio: Design Models: Architecture

Urbanism Infrastructure. London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
Betsky, A. (2002). Landscrapers: Building with the Land. New York, USA:
Thames & Hudson Inc.
Buchanan, P. (1988). A Report from the Front. In M. Carmona, & S. Tiesdell

(Eds.), Urban Design Reader (pp. 204-207). Oxford, United Kingdom:
Architectural Press.
Carmona, M., & Tiesdell, S. (2007). The Morphological Dimension. In M.
118
Bibliography
Carmona, & S. Tiesdell (Eds.), Urban Design Reader (pp. 59-62). Oxford,
United Kingdom: Architectural Press.
Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T., & Oc, T. (2010). Public Places, Urban
Spaces: The Dimensions of Urban Design. Oxford, United Kingdom:
Architectural Press.
Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment. (2000). By Design:

Urban Design in the Planning System: Towards Better Practice. London,
England: Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment.
Confurius, G. (2000). Editorial. Daidalos , 74, 4-5.
Deen, W., & Garritzmann, U. (2010). Diagramming the Contemporary:

OMA’s Little Helper in the Quest for the New. In M. Garcia (Ed.), The
Diagrams of Architecture (pp. 228-235). Chichester, United Kingdom: John
Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Ellin, N. (2006). Integral Urbanism. New York: Routledge.
Garcia, M. (2010). The Diagrams of Architecture. Chichester, United

Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Gargiani, R. (2008). Rem Koolhaas, OMA: The Construction of Merveilles.

Oxford, United Kingdom: Routledge.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities For People. Washington, United states of America:

Island Press.
Kleinman, A. (2006). Interview with Farshid Moussavi. X-TRA , 8 (4).
Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.). (2005). Seattle Public Library: OMA / LMN.
Barcelona: bActar.
Llewelyn-Davies. (2007). Urban Design Compendium. London, United

Kingdom: English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation.
Lootsma, B. (1998/1999, December/January). Reality Bytes: The Meaning of

Research in the Second Modern Age. Daidalos , 69/70, pp. 8-21.
Lootsma, B. (1997). Towards a Reflexive Architecture. In Maas vanRijs deVries

1991-1997: MvRdV (pp. 35-42). Madrid, Spain: El Croquis Editorial.
Mass, W., van Rijs, J., & Richard, K. (Eds.). (1998). FARMAX: Excursions on
Density. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers.
119
Maas, W., de Vries, N., & van Rijs, J. (1997). mvrdv Maas vanRijs deVries
1991-1997. Croquis , 86.
Mallgrave, H. F., & Goodman, D. (2011). An Introduction to Architectural

Theory: 1968 to the Present. West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley &
Sons Ltd.
Mansilla, L. M., & Tunon, E. (1997). The Space of Optimism: A Conversation

with Winy Maas, Jacob van Rijs and Nathalie de Vries. In Maas vanRijs deVries
1991-1997: MvRdV (pp. 6-25). Madrid, Spain: El Croquis Editorial.
Moussavi, F., & Zaera Polo, A. (2006, January). Foreign Office Architects.
Architectural Review , 219 (1307), p. 61.
Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo, A. (2002). The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office
Architects. Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo, A. (2004, May/June). Types, Style and Phylogenesis.
Architectural Design , 74 (3), pp. 34-39.
Salazar, J. (Ed.). (1999). MVRDV at VPRO. Barcelona: Actar.
Schumacher, P. (1999). Rational in Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of

Rationality in Recent Design. AA Files , 38, pp. 32-36.
Somol, R. E. (2010). Dummy Text, or the Diagrammatic Basis of Contemporary

Architecture. In M. Garcia (Ed.), The Diagrams of Architecture (pp. 88-91).
Chichester, United Kindom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Trancik, R. (2007). What is Lost Space? In M. Carmona, & S. Tiesdell (Eds.),

Urban Design Reader (pp. 63-69). Oxford, United Kingdom: Architectural
Press.
Van Sande, H., & Schoonjans, Y. (2007, January). Interview - Part 2: Research
by Design. Architecture and Urbanism , pp. 80-85.
Van Sande, H., & Schoonjans, Y. (2007, January). Interview - Part 3: Space
Transformers. Architecture and Urbanism , pp. 122-123.
Vidler, A. (2004). Diagrams of Utopia: The Activist Drawing. Lotus

International , 123, 28-41.
von Meijenfeldt, E., & Geluk, M. (2003). Below Ground Level: Creating New
Spaces for Contemporary Architecture. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser.
120
List of Figures
Zaera-Polo, A. (2010). Between Ideas and Matters: Icons, Indexes, Diagrams,

Drawings and Graphs. In M. Garcia (Ed.), The Diagrams of Architecture (pp.
237-243). Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Zaera-Polo, A., & Moussavi, F. (1998/1999). New Grounds. Scroope , 10, pp.
10-16.
Zaera-Polo, A., & Moussavi, F. (1998). Reformulating the Ground. Quaderns

, 220, pp. 36-41.
List of Figures
Chapter 3:
Figure 3.1. Yokohama International Port Terminal. (n.d.). Retrieved January

26, 2012, from http://www.idesignarch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/
YokohamaInternationalPortTerminal-1.jpg.
Figure 3.2. No Return Diagram. From The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office
Architects (p. 10), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona, Spain:
Actar.
Figure 3.3. Three Dimensional No-Return Diagram. From The Yokohama

Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 41), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo, A,
2002, Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
Figure 3.4. Three-Dimensional No-Return Diagram. From The Yokohama

Figure 3.5. Diagram of Building Structural Strategy. From The Yokohama

Figure 3.6. Diagram Showing Distribution of Secondary Programme. From

The Yokohama Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 19), by Moussavi, F., &
Zaera-Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona, Spain: Actar.
Figure 3.7. Early Building Development. From The Yokohama Project: Foreign
Office Architects (p. 29), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo, A, 2002, Barcelona,
Spain: Actar.
Figure 3.8. Building Plans Showing Design Evolution. From The Yokohama
Project: Foreign Office Architects (p. 55-59), by Moussavi, F., & Zaera-Polo,
Figure 3.9. Yokohama International Port Terminal. (n.d.). Retrieved January
121
26, 2012, from http://archis.org/action/2010/01/16/reasoning-with-waves-

and-the-diagrams/.
Figure 3.10. Yokohama International Port Terminal. Sayo, M. (Photographer).

(2008). Retrieved January 28, 2012, from http://www.flickr.com/photos/
lilmissayo/3164457942/
Figure 3.11. Arnhem Central Design Proposal. UN Studio (n.d.). Retrieved

January 26, 2012, from http://www.unstudio.com/projects/arnhem-central-
masterplan.
Figure 3.12. Scaled Diagram of Programme Floor Areas. From UNStudio:

Design Models: Architecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 275), by Berkel, B.
v., & Bos, C, 2006, London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
Figure 3.13. Diagram Showing Separation of Bus Services. From “Rational

in Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by
Figure 3.14. Network Graph. From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections on

the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by Schumacher, P, 1999, AA Files
, 38, p. 33.
Figure 3.15. Network Graph Transposed onto the Site. From “Rational in
Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by
Figure 3.16. ‘Branching Figure’ Diagram. From “Rational in Retrospect:

Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by Schumacher, P,
1999, AA Files , 38, p. 34.
Figure 3.17. Schematic Matrix. From UNStudio: Design Models: Architecture

Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 275), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006, London,
United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
Figure 3.18. Three Dimensional Branching Diagram. From “Rational in

Retrospect: Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by
Figure 3.19. Three Dimensional ‘Cone’ Diagram. From “Rational in Retrospect:

Reflections on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by Schumacher, P,
1999, AA Files , 38, p. 35.
Figure 3.20. Single Surface Diagram. From “Rational in Retrospect: Reflections

on the Logic of Rationality in Recent Design,” by Schumacher, P, 1999, AA
Files , 38, p. 35.
Figure 3.21. Klein Bottle Diagram. From UNStudio: Design Models:

Architecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 274), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C,
2006, London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
Figure 3.22. Hybrid Diagram. From UNStudio: Design Models: Architecture
122
List of Figures
Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 274), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C, 2006, London,
United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.
Figure 3.23. Diagram of Design Models. From UNStudio: Design Models:

Architecture Urbanism Infrastructure (p. 274), by Berkel, B. v., & Bos, C,
2006, London, United Kingdom: Thames & Hudson.

transfer-hall

transfer-hall
Figure 3.26. The Villa VPRO. Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008). Retrieved

January 26, 2012, from http://www.flickr.com/photos/ettubrute/2357171915/
Figure 3.27. Graph of Daily Work Activities. From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 47),
by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Figure 3.28. Building Volume Study. From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 48, 49), by
Figure 3.29. Plan Layout Study. From FARMAX: Excursions on Density (p.
684, 685), by Mass, W., van Rijs, J., & Richard, K. (Eds.), 1998, Rotterdam:
010 Publishers.
Figure 3.30. Precision Bombardment Diagram. From MVRDV at VPRO (p.

51), by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Figure 3.31. Conceptual Diagram. From mvrdv Maas vanRijs deVries 1991-
1997 (p. 88), by Maas, W., de Vries, N., & van Rijs, J, Croquis , 86.
Figure 3.32. Diagrams Showing Spatial Moulding. From MVRDV at VPRO

(p. 66, 67), by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Figure 3.33. Diagrammatic Break-down of Programmed Floor Areas. From

MVRDV at VPRO (p. 70), by Salazar, J. (Ed.), 1999, Barcelona: Actar.
Figure 3.34. Distribution of Programme. From MVRDV at VPRO (p. 72), by

Figure 3.35. Rose Window Effect. Leng, J. (Photographer). (2008). Retrieved

January 26, 2012, from http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ettubrute/tags/
netherlands/

sizes/z/in/photostream/

123
Figure 3.38. Seattle Public Library. (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012, from
http://plusmood.com/2008/09/seattle-public-library-rem-koolhaas-oma/
Figure 3.39. Conceptual Diagram Showing Organising Principles. From

Seattle Public Library: OMA / LMN (p. 16, 17), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R.
Figure 3.40. Floor Area Proportions of Programme. From Seattle Public Library:
OMA / LMN (p. 18), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005, Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.41. Unstable Compartments Pushed Out. From Seattle Public Library:
OMA / LMN (p. 18), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005, Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.42. Offset Stacking of Programmatic Compartments. From Seattle

Public Library: OMA / LMN (p. 22), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005,
Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.43. Flexible Spaces Between Compartments. From Seattle Public

Library: OMA / LMN (p. 26), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005,
Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.44. Influences of View and Sun Requirements. From Seattle Public
Library: OMA / LMN (p. 30), by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005,
Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.45. View-shafts. From Seattle Public Library: OMA / LMN (p. 30),
by Kubo, M., & Prat, R. (Eds.), 2005, Barcelona: bActar.
Figure 3.46. Seattle Public Library. (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2012, from
http://pcj.typepad.com/planning_commissioners_jo/2008/05/downtown-
librar.html
Figure 3.47. Seattle Public Library. Norsworthy, S. (Photographer).

(2011). Retrieved January 26, 2012, from http://www.flickr.com/photos/
scottnorsworthy/6490546513/.
Figure 3.48. Analysis Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced images

(Figures 3.12, 3.14, 3.15, 3.27, 3.33, 3.40).
Figure 3.49. Datascape Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced images

(Figures 3.28, 3.29, 3.44, 3.45).
Figure 3.50. Organisational Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced

images (Figures 3.2, 3.13, 3.16, 3.18, 3.34, 3.42, 3.43).
Figure 3.51. Operational Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced

images (Figures 3.3, 3.19, 3.20, 3.22, 3.30, 3.32).
Figure 3.52. Conceptual Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced images

(Figures 3.31, 3.39)
Figure 3.53. Abstract Diagrams. Adapted from previously referenced images

(Figures 3.21, 3.41)
124
List of Figures
Figure 3.54. Diagram Use Comparison Between the Different Practices.
Figure 3.55. Areas of Unconventional Diagram Use
Figure 3.56. Areas of Common Unconventional Diagram Use
Chapter 4:
Figure 4.1. Wellington Arial View. Adapted from Google Earth.
Figure 4.2. Wellington City Contours. Adapted from Google Earth and
Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.3. Wellington City Grid. Adapted from Google Earth and Koordinates.
com.
Figure 4.4. Wellington City Building Footprints. Adapted from Google Earth
and Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.5. Wellington City Districts. Adapted from Google Earth and
Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.6. Arial View of Site. Adapted from Google Earth.
Figure 4.7. Site Figure-Ground Diagram. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.8. Height Restrictions. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.9. Vehicle Network. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.10. Transport Infrastructure. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.11. Pedestrian Network. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.12. Photograph of Existing Building. Photograph by Author, 2011.
Figure 4.16. The Oaks Sectional Perspective. Wellington City Archives,

accessed 2011.
Figure 4.17. The Oaks Ground Floor Plan. Wellington City Archives, accessed
2011.
Figure 4.18. Proposed Wellington Laneway Development. From WGTN2040:

Reshaping Wellington’s Future, Wellington City Council, 2011, Retrieved from
http://www.wellington2040.co.nz/sites/default/files/attachments/WCC9663_
Figure 4.19. Cross-site Connection Diagram. Adapted from Koordinates.com.
Figure 4.20. Proposed Te Aro Park Development. From WGTN2040:

Reshaping Wellington’s Future, Wellington City Council, 2011, Retrieved
125
from http://www.wellington2040.co.nz/sites/default/files/attachments/
WCC9663_WN2040%20Project%20Single%20Cards.pdf
Chapter 5:
Figure 5.1. Circulation Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.2. Scaled Surfaces Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.3. Three-Dimensionally Manipulated Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.4. Three Dimensional Diagram Manipulated within Site Constraints.

Image by Author.
Figure 5.5. Resulting Form. Image by Author.
Figure 5.6. Resulting Form in Context. Image by Author.
Figure 5.7. Site Plan. Image by Author.
Figure 5.8. Perspective Image. Image by Author.
Figure 5.16. Plan. Image by Author.
Figure 5.21. Massing Logic Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.22. Diagram showing Floor Area Proportions. Image by Author.
Figure 5.23. Sunlight and Shading Study. Image by Author.
Figure 5.24. Compactness and Cross-site Connection Study. Image by Author.
Figure 5.25. Additional Space Requirement Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.26. Abstract Diagrammatic ‘Pushing Out’ Operation. Image by

Author.
Figure 5.27. Precision Push Diagrammatic Operation. Image by Author.
126
List of Figures
Figure 5.28. Subtracted Voids Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.29. Configuration of Voids. Image by Author.
Figure 5.30. Resulting Form. Image by Author.
Figure 5.31. Resulting Form in Context. Image by Author.
Figure 5.32. Site Plan. Image by Author.
Figure 5.48. Public/Private Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.49. Figure/Ground Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.50. Warped Surface Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.51. Horizontal/Vertical Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.52. Permeable Edge Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.53. Wave Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.54. Warped Surface of Public Space. Image by Author.
Figure 5.55. Urban Extension Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.56. Topographical Variation Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.57. Permeable Edges Diagram. Image by Author.
Figure 5.58. Elevated Public Space Diagram. Image by Author.
127

Diagram

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diagram

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diagram

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the overall topic being discussed in the document?

What is the overall topic being discussed in the document?

What design methodologies are being examined?

What design methodologies are being examined?

Diagrams in

A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction

MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (PROFESSIONAL)

This research explores the relationship between the use of diagrams in

Design proposals responding to the same brief examine the architectural

Each diagrammatic design methodology has different implications for the

Two | Literature Review 4

[1] Urban Design 6

Urban Design Background 6

[2] Diagrams in Architecture 18

Diagrams: Tools for Extending the Boundary 18

Three | Practice + Case Studies 24

Foreign Office Architects | Practice Study 27

Foreign Office Architects | Case Study 30

UN Studio | Practice Study 34

UN Studio | Case Study 38

MVRDV | Practice Study 43

MVRDV | Case Study 46

OMA | Practice Study 50

OMA | Case Study 53

Case Studies | Discussion 56

Diagram Type Summary 56

Pre-Design | Site Analysis 67

Five | Design Execution 74

Abstract/Instrumentalising | Design Execution 75

Abstract/Instrumentalising | Design Outcome 80

Analytic/Literal | Design Execution 88

Analytic/Literal | Design Outcome 96

Design Execution | Discussion 104

Design One: Areas of Unconventional Building/Open Space

Six | Conclusions 112

Conclusion One: Different Types of Diagrammatic Practice 113

List of Figures 121

I would secondly like to thank my supervisor, Chris McDonald, for his

Many contemporary architectural projects designed by key ‘diagrammatic

Chapter 2 reviews literature concerning contemporary urban design principles

Chapter 5 presents the design phase of the research which responds to a

The scope of the research is limited by the availability of published material,

Part two, Diagrams in Architecture examines literature concerning the use of

[1] Urban Design

Modern urban space planning emerged in opposition to traditional urban form.

Reactions to Modern Urban Space.

In the early 1960s Modernist ideas of urban space began to be questioned

Urban Design’s Place-Making Tradition.

A number of urban design manifestos have emerged as part of the place-making

Boundaries: Conventional Urban Design Principles

Positive Space; Definite Boundaries.

of ‘negative’ and ‘positive’ space; this terminology is now widely adopted in

Building Facades: Walls of Outdoor Rooms.

Edges: Buildings’ Social Contribution to Public Space.

...buildings and open space considered as a totality. Viewed from this

perspective, the success of a building is determined by its ability to make

This summary adopts the terminology of Gehl and Alexander; referring to

• Frequent doors and windows with few blank walls

The Public Realm.