Architect Notebook ..... THE SPACES AROUND 1

Piazzetta San Marco, Venice

Our judgments of towns and cities tend to be based much more upon the nature of spaces between buildings than upon the perceived qualities of the buildings themselves. And just as there are accepted ways of form-making in the arena of architectural design, so are there 

 accepted ways of making external spaces. 

• CENTRIFUGAL AND CENTRIPETAL SPACE

Ways of making spaces within buildings are, not surprisingly, equally applicable to establishing external spaces and a sense of enclosure induced within them. Furthermore, when considering the creation of external spaces between and around buildings, it is helpful
to return to the notion of type in considering two distinct spatial types; centrifugal space and centripetal space (Ashihara).

The distinction between the two spatial types is best expressed by considering the role of the column as a spatial generator. A single column in space can define a space around it, the size of which depends upon the height of the column but the definition of which depends upon the interaction of the column and the observer. Therefore, a column defines a space around it in a radial fashion; this is centrifugal space.

But four columns positioned in some proximity with each other to form a ‘square’ will interact and induce a space enclosure. A centripetal order is established to define a space which even at this most basic level approximates to ‘architecture without a roof’. This is centripetal space. If four walls are used to define this centripetal space rather than four columns, then the sense of enclosure is enhanced, but the corners are less well defined and space tends to ‘leak’ from the voids thus created.

However if eight planes are used to enclose the same space by clearly defining the corners, then the perceived sense of enclosure is strengthened still further. This phenomenon is best demonstrated when town ‘squares’ are established within the order of a town grid. If the square is formed merely by the removal of a block or blocks from the grid, then corner voids will result with a consequent loss of perceived space enclosure. But should the square be offset from the grid, then the corners remain intact thus heightening the sense of enclosure and giving views from the center of the square along principal access routes.

Sheffield University, 1956 Master Plan

The Saint Die´ model was employed by Gollins, Melvin and Ward, albeit in much diluted form, to extend the university campus at Sheffield in their competition-winning entry of 1953. However, whereas Le Corbusier’s plan for Saint Die´ represented a symbolic rebirth of a town destroyed by war, Gollins’ arrangement of rectilinear slabs and towers was extending the courtyard (centripetal) typology of a typical late Victorian British university. But the same devices emerge; a massive tower addresses the major open space and provides a visual focus for the entire campus with lower slab blocks providing a secondary rectilinear order.

The Economist Building, St. James Street, London, provides an equally potent application of centrifugal principles to urban space. Here, three towers of varying height and of similarly exquisite detailing emerge from a plaza slightly raised above the level of St. James Street.  The buildings, themselves raised on delicate pilot-is, appear to hover over the paved plaza which again forms the backdrop to considerable architectural incident.