Kaikki aineistot
Lisää
Architecture constructed in the Nordic countries has often been regarded as having a special affinity with nature. This has been linked to the use of natural materials and to the way built structures are connected with their environment. This connection has also been described in language that emphasizes the mysterious qualities of Northern nature. However, such descriptions may often be too simple to provide an adequate interpretation of the constructed environment. At the same time, they could be used to say something about the process of architectural creation. If so, are the descriptions related to the way architects themselves explain their design process? Indeed, architects may have emphasized mysterious or intuitive qualities in the process of creating their designs. Design processes are both individual and collectively similar, with the contexts being both unique and landscape-specific at the same time. Universality is thus intertwined with the place-specificity of architecture, for example in the work of Finnish twentieth-century architects from Eliel Saarinen to Alvar Aalto and Reima Pietilä. This article examines interpretative texts emphasizing nature in the work of these well-known architects. They are juxtaposed with the architects’ own texts describing their design process. The comparison sheds light on the constructed narrative of one specific aspect of Nordic architecture, while raising questions of individuality and universality in the architectural design process.
This article looks at Finnish suburbs as a resource for urban growth. It explo-res the process of suburban transformation following the case of Otaniemi, an area which is actively changing following the regional development and the needs of the growing university campus. The main focus of the study is the extent to which the suburbs, designed between 1960 and 1980 in accordance with modernist planning principles, can be transformed into livable and attractive urban spaces. Informed by two theoretical perspectives—social production and construction of space—this study outlines the factors which both enable and constrain suburban trans-formation using the data collected from 2015 to 2018. Study findings demon-strate that successful suburban transformation results from a combination of material and social factors. The article suggests that social diversity is as important for a post-suburb as density, land use mix, and street connectivity, and that it calls for more attention towards non-material factors in urban design and planning.
The dynamic between change and continuity represents the fundamental tension within the urban planning of historically valuable, protected environments. This study examines a less well-known area of cultural heritage: a historical urban park and the problematics of preservation and renewal. The case study of this research analyses the planning discourse of Kaisaniemi Park, one of the oldest city parks in Finland, situated in the centre of Helsinki. Divergent planning and renewal projects have been an almost constant part of Kaisaniemi Park’s nearly 200 years of history. This article focuses on the three central planning phases of the park: the renewal discourse of the 1910s; the design competition of 2000; and the master plan of 2007, connected to the local detailed plan. Opposing ideals and styles collided in the park renewal process of the 1910s. The architectural competition in 2000 aimed at redefining the identity of the park and replacing the historical structure with new meanings and contents. The master plan of 2007 sought a new balance between continuity and transition. With the case study of Kaisaniemi, we explore how the renewal and preservation intentions appear in the planning discourse. What were the arguments and who were the actors behind this discourse? We link our case study to a wider framework of the preservation of urban parks and examine how continuity materializes in this context. We also consider how to preserve cultural heritage, its essential dimension being change, and the contradictory interpretations of different eras.
Densification is a much-used concept in urban planning in Finland today. Big cities are dealing with a growing population, and a reasonable solution to housing needs seems to be infill construction. Along with the demand for density comes a discussion about vertical building and the role of tall buildings in the city skyline and the townscape. Today’s discussion is updating a similar discussion from the early decades of the 20th century, when the future seemed vertical in many urban planners’ visions, on both sides of the Atlantic. In this article, two such visions from the 1920s are re-visited: Swiss-French architect Le Corbusier’s famous plan for the centre of Paris and Finnish-American architect Eliel Saarinen’s plan for the lakefront of Chicago. These plans reflected a contemporary belief in technological advancement and showed a master planner attitude with a focus on the whole urban environment. Both planners were also looking upward, although seeing the possibilities of a vertically constructed city somewhat differently. In spite of their forward-reaching visionary qualities, both plans remained on paper, depicting a possible future that is now looked at as an alternate past. These visions and discussions of the previous century could still offer a comprehensive view for the contemporary discussion on urban density and one of its results: the vertical city. Many of the questions that should be answered when increasing densities in today’s cities already had their beginnings in the visions that the 20th century architects offered for the future.