Infrastructural Urbanism

TopicThis paper is going to look at the how de-sign and practice of FOA reflects the Stan Allen’s theory of infrastructural urbanism. Particular case of Yokohama International Passenger Terminal, a winning proposal of the competition, completed in 2002, would be in foci of investigation, with refer-ence to different critiques and formulated theory onwards. This kind of reflection will later serve strategically as a perspective to examine their new proposal on London Olympic Master Plan in Lea Valley.

Why Infrastructural Urbanism?The reason why infrastructural urbanism is linked to the practice of FOA is not be-cause of the directly infrastructural nature

FOA Yokohama International Passenger Terminal

Louis Kahn , Circulation Studies [0] Program Adapatation on Topographic Field [7]

dernity itself.”[0] This is in line of thinking of FOA thoughts in which objects and image doesn’t shape the project but the process of development and experimentation. As a representation, they are resultant of the materialized process, from which a dia-gram is mediated into architecture back and fore, for instance the circuit diagram and mediated sections. The images carries no driven force of the project, “it develops as

an embodiment of an original idea and has to keep

as much as possible the original integrity is precisely

what we are trying to fight” [2].

The use of DiagramIn the project, much of the investigation starts from the circuit diagram which gives later on the spatial dimensions and spa-

of their project, of course, they deal with flow and movements and multi-disciplin-ary programs, but more because the proj-ect touches in depth the critical tendency of post-modernity proposed by Stan Al-len, which contributes the actualization of material practice and instrumentality of different systems. The process itself carries through a lot of infrastructural ideology which Stan Allen suggests as a contem-porary text guide to architects in the late 90s.

“Modernity tended toward abstract systems of ex-

change and serial production. The passage from con-

crete, material things to ephemeral signs- the dissolu-

tion of objects into flow of information- was in many

ways already anticipated by the abstract logics of mo-

Text by Tang Chin Hong, Jonas (M1)

Programmatic Solenoid [7]

No-return diagram [4]

tial fluidity of the project, the diagram, as referred by FOA as a “no-return diagram” defines the project where spatial experi-ence is one-directional, vector-specific. Another solenoid diagram illustrates the liberty of program where its magnitude is softly imposed as field and its size is under typological investigation. It is energy and activity-embracing and drives the projects on its spatial organization and flow, thus the spatial effect is an overall resultant where aesthetic concern is not justified.

In many ways, this kind of performance-based preference, as Stan Allen stated, “goes

beyond stylistic or formal issues”, “they are less con-

cerned with what things look like and more concerned

with what they can do”.[0] These two diagrams

of the building” “Yokohama is a pier where you never

retrace your steps. The project is generated from a

functional diagram that tries to avoid the characteristic

linear organization of a pier”.[2]

For instance they took the bifurcation na-ture of circuit diagram as an inspiration to double curvature surfaces. They main-tained symmetrical form but asymmetrical structure, where one side cantilevers 15m to air to adapt to typological information. They produced kind of intervention of the cafeteria area and spaces for immigrant organization check-in, as individual com-partments which serve as necessary inter-vention of the overall concept.

These are not directly related to diagram-

provide an adaptive foundation to absorb as much as information for mediating be-tween the diagram and architecture. As a key concept, they “try to allow information of dif-

ferent scale that enters the project only after the initial

stage, to be added into the diagram of the project and

to drive the project forward” [3].

Mediation between Diagram and Drawings

“What is truly productive is the process of feedback

between the diagram and the drawing” It is worth pointing out that the diagram is not so much a direct translation of form or ge-ometries, but mediation took places in between the diagram and architectural plan. “There needs to be several forms of mediation

between the form of the diagram and the final form

Structural Deformation - Differentiation from the global structural system [1][4]

ming practice as form-shaping gover-nance but more as an essence and nature for interpretation and to incubate poten-tials and to make the later-on process flexible and regenerative for architect to stretch, manipulate and materialize. Thus, plan is only a representational tool, a resul-tant from the diagram, which is enriched by different system inputs.

“The ambiguity is one of the great potentials of operat-

ing with diagrams. In Yokohama, the material ‘ground’

is deployed to turn the no-return diagram into a

three-dimensional diagram. Ergonomic and functional

information are then incorporated in the diagram to

determine the scale and geometry of the surface de-

formations. Technical information about the scale of

the load-bearing structures is also incorporated. Only

If the Yokohama terminal would be viewed as set of directed field, which is strongly conceived in the early solenoid diagram, it is especially successful in terms of program and event, as inductive paths and places.

This is by many ways brought about through system integration and its system instrumentality, for key instance the actu-alization of structures, and it is in a more advanced version of structural attitude of Stan Allen design, the “Logistic Activity Zone of Barcelona”. In Stan Allen design, structure serves as individual instrument to be manipulated to generate field where in FOA design, structure serves as integra-tive components. The degree of instru-mentality is much higher and as it affects

after the diagram has absorbed all this information

does it becomes an actualized, acquiring metrical and

geometrical determinations.”[2]

This draws somehow a similar attitude towards Stan Allen theory of immersing architecture in the” world of things”, in which architecture gain complexity and subjectivity. In Stan Allen infrastructural view, such kind of urbanism is not expres-sive and doesn’t necessarily gain identity of personal taste, architect point of view or collective will of society. Its ultimate goal is not to produce autonomous objects but “the directed field in which program, event and activ-

ity can play out.”[0]

Directed Field and Structural Instrumentality

Site Contextual Diagram [7]

the resultant surface, the effect is much more spatial and programmatic and that allows multi-disciplinary inputs.

The Yokohama project adopted its longi-tudinal continuity from around 40 trans-verse sections of bridge structures. The uniformity of structures doesn’t limit it as an all-time identical but as gene to pro-liferate and liberate to a certain critical dimensions. What’s interesting is that the actual construction of the building was made by 3 different contractors due to the tight schedule of the project. It further organizes the steel structures to a deeper and richer level of variations, and archi-tect’s control on the overall consistency was still kept due to a keen design of sys-

philosophy on public space of the Yoko-hama project. Stan Allen states “Infrastructure

works not so much to propose specific buildings on

given site, but to construct the site itself, it prepares

the ground for future building and creates the condi-

tions for future events” [0] Although the project doesn’t really prepares for flexibility for future modifications, but as a site re-con-struction strategy, it prepares the undulat-ing surface for events and activities occurs on roof, and prepares the large column-less chamber in the interior space. You can see the temporary enclosure for the im-migrant checking, you can see temporary set-up for outdoor gathering of families. It is not producing directly specific types of architecture, but a dynamic space, in terms it changes on different time. The site itself

tem, rather than intervention.

Technically, the structural system has its own parametric outfits and potentials for alternation. With the aid of computer pro-grams, the specific geometry with refer-ence to deformed vector of program and typological necessity is generated and at the same time the overall surfaces. Later on, rigidity is added, in terms of “origami” secondary structures, the kind of folding mechanism, which strengthen the sur-face-structure as a whole.

Territorization and Site-reconstructionAs Stan Allen early advice to infrastructural urbanism, the first of the seven proposi-tions is perhaps the most related to FOA

Local Contingency : Differentiation of Ramp Details [3]

prepares potential and opportunities rath-er than rules and obligations. The merging of space is seamless and the control of the space of users is liberated. FOA used the word of “battlefield” to delineate the un-limited support for future programs.What Stan Allen elaborated in the theory is a set of architectural device which is pos-sible for site-reconstruction to occur and most of these have been taken radically in Yokohama project.

The double curvature “surface” and bifur-cating as a spatial dividing elements for above and below and accommodate pos-sible program, the “service” of drainage, fire-emergency, hygienic equipment and air-handling to allow future program. The

torted distinctively.

Another example is the small compart-ment for immigrant checkers; they are necessary but somehow break the conti-nuity of the chamber spaces. However, the visual continuity is maintained as they are made transparent as possible by the use of self-supported glass. Such visual con-tinuity may not be as pragmatic that ac-cess continuity, but it helps as directional guides.

Structure, circulation and program into artificial ecologiesIn Stan Allen theory, “the energy inputs and

outputs”, “the calibration of force and resistance”, “the

generative force for a renewed investment in infra-

“network establishment”, in association with wheelchair access, solenoid program and activities are of the same ramp and induced path has been generated and in-put into the consideration of the surface geometries.

Local contingency and overall continuityOne of the propositions that Stan Allen suggest for infrastructural urbanism is that “It accommodate local contingency while maintaining

overall continuity” [0] This is perhaps very obvi-ous in the Yokohama project that the sur-face continuity shapes access .Further dis-junction of surface, where the 2 deformed surface bifurcate, provide necessary gaps and threshold for entrance/exit to interior spaces as ramps. Those 4 ramps are dis-

From diagram into interrelation of space , structure and program Circulation density, Zone of Gradient of 6% slope, Gradient under 6%(dark), gradient more than 6% (light grey), no gradient (white) [5]

structure”, “the imaginative and technical efforts” [0]

have all be transferred into reality of the Yokohama project, where these ideas are not only central to discussion, but really research to confront with and to answer through creative processes. It is pragmatic and at the same time idealistic.

“What interests us is to explore system of construc-

tion, system of planning….So in Yokohama the system

emerges from function, from circulation, from struc-

ture…We are less interested in practice purely to pro-

vide service, and more in turning the act of providing

service into research that opens up hidden possibilities

by the common practice.” [2]

When it applies to the terminal project, the FOA has very much in detail investi-

ing the incomers and local visitors, they develops kind of mutant angle and softly induced path to hybrid the circulation of the two. They achieve it in parallel in the fire escape requirement where the roof is the open-to-air platform for the singular interior chamber to be escaped to. They produced a structure deformation due to the inscribing of upper surface solenoid field and the interfacial access between the upper and the lower surface, the ramps. In terms of function, they placed civic exchange at the sea end and several individual function boxes on the 2 sides, but leaving the gap, the corridor for pass-ing through its transverse section. Thoses boxes produce certain kind of structural stiffness to the ramp and are therefore

gation of a building which can accom-modates different activities, based on the competition brief in early 1995, “garden and infrastructure, external passengers and local visitors” were critical ideas to be formulated. To FOA, the issue of how the Passenger Ferry Terminal would mix with civic facilities. “It demands a kind of space that

is able to produce continuities and hybrid fields.”[4]

And the team, in design principle, is look-ing into the very nature of the project by investigating into a kind of deep research and thinking of how landscape and infra-structure work together, to develop the project into a specific form from potentials of different systems and information.

They explored the circulation as weav-

Bifurcation Sequence - an representational spatial organization [4] Program and Acitivity Distribution - a conceptual field of pos-sibilities [7]

interrelated to the structure and direct ac-cess of the activity.

Such kind of co-relation between struc-ture, circulation and program contrib-utes to the generative field or an artificial ecology, established as an infrastructural concept by Stan Allen, where there is no fix plan, but dynamics of energy. “Infrastruc-

ture systems work like artificial ecologies. They man-

age the flows of energy and resources on a site, and

they direct the density and distribution of a habitat.”

[0]One can make an attempt to map, the flow of energy with pedestrian mobility, the resources with capacity of view and program, what density and distribution refer to maybe the ramp geometries and threshold distribution. All these are inter-

completed task.

However, upon its progress, there still exist many traces of flexible and antici-patory quality, from which the plan has been involving in versions upon typo-logical changes, functional requirements and optimum configuration. For instance, they have constrained the building edge adjacent to the traffic plaza further due to the ownership of land. They cancelled the basement layer such that only 2 deformed plane exists. They have merged the two entrances from civic facilities to roof plaza into one. Still, the underlying principle and concept doesn’t change but evolve in depth. Such kind of flexibility is not only by the immediate intelligent of the architect,

related strategically and form a complex ecological system. Such complicated re-lationship, as a strategic result, produces flexibilities and multiple readabilities for later on design stages.

Flexibility and AnticipatoryStan Allen emphasizes on infrastructural nature as flexible and anticipatory device which “work with time and are open to change”. It is certainly cannot be directly interpreted from the final workout of Yokohama as any of the tactical deformation has been taken into rigidity of the building which doesn’t induce physical change of itself or absorb further drastic changes. The flexibility and anticipatory is virtually over once the building has bee pinned to be a

Material Practice leads to structural organization [7]

Actualization [7]

Illustration Here

by tactical involvement but more impor-tantly is how the system laid out is antici-patory and flexible. Using Stan Allen word, “They can be precise and indeterminate at the same

time…They do not progress toward a predetermined

state, but are always evolving within a loose envelope

of constraint.”[0] Although the final outcome is geometrically precise and structural rigid, the project itself, within the process between design and actualization, has al-ready taken and demonstrated the loose field manipulation. The outcome is plastic spatial organization. “Your spacing idea is plastic.

It can suit the change of the program, depending on

situations.”[2]

Construction materials/methods as ma-terial practice

In doing so, a coordinated and material-ized research happened through a consis-tent and on-going effort of the architect and structural engineer. Such kind of re-search practice is not mentally crucial to contractor and the public or even difficult in many countries. As FOA mentioned, “These (Spain and Japan) are countries where it is still

possible to make architecture because there is a cer-

tain cultural or social interest and a structure of prod-

uct that perhaps is already obsolete, but allows you

to make architecture. Japan, for example, has a very

advanced system of construction, probably the best

construction industry in the world, within a culture

that in many aspects is almost medieval.” [7] It is not hard to believe that FOA has, no matter intentionally or coincidentally taken the greatest potential for the project benefits

From its very beginning, the project has its very short duration of 3 months to complete its feasibility stage. FOA didn’t respond in a fixed and rigid structure but a general space-framing strategy to add stiffness to the structure. Later on, they discussed with the structural consultant, SDG and discovered that the third layer of structure was unnecessary, and it is more relevant to the idea of “origami” when the second layer of folding structure in the below interior space is exposed to air. “In

the competition we had a folded plate in between the

two main plates that were curved but that was obvi-

ously too expensive to do. Now they are plates that are

hinged. It is more and more like an origami, which was

the main idea of the competition project in terms of

the material organization of the structure.”[7]

as a reaction to not only the immediate site context but the real context of mak-ing building, the method of construction, its techniques and cultural awareness as background. They wanted to somehow investigate how much detail and effort would design bring about to real practice and this could be an exhaustive attitude into material practice.

In reflection of Stan Allen ideology, FOA has taken the real power of architecture of transforming the reality. It is not simply done by paper and drawings, but through material practice and constant investiga-tion and reaction to direct manipulation of material. It is distinctive from any other means of media of production. It embodies

len final thought to urbanism: “Infrastructure

allow detailed design of typical elements or repetitive

structures, facilitating an architectural approach to ur-

banism” [0]

The Japan construction cultures allow FOA to stretch their design into the latest phase of actualization. The design absorbs any possibilities from the contractor, as a real project. “Most of the good ideas appear on site,

working with contractors. Nobody can solve an entire

building on paper; you need to react to the real scale”

This perhaps explains the openness of the project, to different system and flows of information. FOA success is not about a rigid structure but an adaptive system in which detail can be parametrically en-riched. As Stan Allen stated “Material practice

the transformation process as an indirect interplay between materials and abstract images, unlike other media disciplines.

Details, Direct Manipulation and Tactical Improvisation“Infrastructure itself works strategically, but it encour-

ages tactical improvisation.” This laid out Stan Allen ideology of the liberty to directly manipulate material. In which detail give a principle relationship between materials and its variations. The geometries of them are not fixed or limited to the overall or-ganization. It rather has a proliferate ability to adapt to constantly-changing local sce-narios, which is self-definitive by itself. The detail approach perhaps matches Stan Al-

Glazing details and handrail details which was designed globally and differentiated locally. [4]

Flow is controlled in a inducive way for roofscape but is controlled efficiently internally. [4]

deploy an open catalog of techniques without precon-

ceived formal ends”.[0]

For FOA, “every detail that we do is re-peated in a differentiated form”, such that no ad-hoc or any other kind of specially standalone intervention would be made. This architectural homogeneous intention keeps the project consistent through but also allows direct manipulation. “Although

these material practices work instrumentally, they are

not limited to the direct manipulation of given mate-

rial.” [0]

The tension between liberation and con-trol of the detail is resolved by the achiev-ing the number of details to a minimum in the project. In the project they tried to

an infrastructural design. “Infrastructural de-

sign begins with the precise delineation of specific

architecture elements within specific limits.” “We are

planning few details because we are interested in ex-

ploring how a consistent piece of matter can generate

difference through continuous variation in form, rather

than producing differentiation in building by treating

the building with many different details.” [2] The de-tail gain specificity and variation (when it applies to different region).

Flow, movement, exchange…It can be seen from the circuit diagram that the Ferry Terminal project primarily deals with flow. The circuit diagram sug-gests a kind of one-off, directional and de-parture sense of fluidity. This is surely not regulative but indicative. The combina-

produce a minimum amount of detail, as principal design to comprehend. For in-stance the wood decking cutting meth-odology is similar for inside and outside, but the material are of different thickness and anti-slippery surfaces. For the glass separating inside and outside, the ma-jor principle is to fold to make it become self supportable. The handrail with using metal edge as faces geometrically contain 2 lines, which can be adjusted to a resul-tant angle satisfactory for local adaptation of the slope of the decking surfaces.

Described by FOA, the project has one floor detail, one glass detail and one hand-rail detail. Making the assemblies into en-tity production, the approach is very likely

Plans absorbed input from differnet materials and system, evolved in different times. [7]

Illustration Here

tion of routes, by vector and magnitudes, generates pattern of circulation, which facilitated the intention of non-oriented program and activities. Unlike Stan Allen, FOA want to hide the obvious part of the infrastructure, “We wanted a non-oriented space

that would be part of the city. We wanted to make the

infrastructure disappear, so that it would be more like

the relationship between a typical city and its metro

system.”[7] This specific approach challenges the typical infrastructural quality of the project nature. In a detail sense, however, it merges architecture and infrastructure to a great extent.

Similar to Stan Allen, FOA inscribes infra-structural quality into architecture, “Not only

do they provide a network of pathways, they also work

access between the above and below has been well conceived as “field of pos-sible gates” which liberate flow, or as what Stan Allen called, the net gain of freedom through new network.

Beyond infrastructural urbanism

The London Olympic Master-plan is con-ditionally better for implementing the in-frastructural ideology into its architecture due to its large scale, multiple authors, which FOA is only one of the members of the team, with EDAW, HOK and Zaha Hadid Architect. The project is on-going and the scheme is on its preliminary stage which suggests

through systems of locks, gates and valves: - a series if

checks that control and regulate flow.”(Stan Allen)[0] One may argue that the flow is not regu-lated and it leads to ultimate freedom and liberty. It could not be true even though the path is loosely regulated; the degree of control to such looseness is carefully taken into the issue for design for Yokohama. Such looseness has its precious control of geometries, in terms of vector field and typological dimensions, by diagrammatic solenoid, by construction field, etc.

Being a basic unit of ferry terminal, the generic flow of passengers has been considered, typical gates and valves has been turned into smooth and transpar-ent booth. As much as city like, the ramp

Strategic Plan by EDAW [16]

the issue of regeneration after Olympics, ecological sustainability of the Lea Val-ley and its immediate context and infra-structural efficiency. With tight control of budget and scale, the London Olympic authorities have been refrained from total destruction or total construction.

“Infrastructural work recognizes the collective nature

of the city and allows for the participation of multiple

authors.” However, how do the collabora-tive force aggregates remain a challenge to architect, Seeing that the London mas-ter-plan is sort of top to bottom situation where building again work as object and the Olympic park serves as field. The in-strumentality of building is still codes and regulation, by prohibition, rather than lib-

the team.

“The firm walked out on the consortium last week over

what are understood to be fears that the design qual-

ity of the plan had been dumbed down.”

This draws on the limitations of Infrastruc-tural Urbanism that one could not escape from reality that the implementation cost of time and labor is surprising high, espe-cially when it involves restructuring and reengineering architectural materials, non-conventional building methods, etc. While the public may not see the field, and are akin to determinate image and object, there is limited potential for architect’s own power or wish to implement the ide-ology thoughtfully.

eration of elements and encourages kind of bottom-up thinking. Of course, Zaha Hadid and other expressive architect sure-ly want to stamp a signature, an identifica-tion of individuality and character of work which works very close to object.

The potential of material practice in the construction context and culture in Lon-don seems lower than that of Japan due to heavy claims from contractor for not obeying to earlier document. It is there-fore, the carrying through of energy from design to practice may not be so smooth. In additional to cost constraints, dedicated and slight variations of components to form the whole system is limited, those may be why FOA recent decision to quit

Bibiography 0. Stan Allen, Points + lines : diagrams and projects for the city, New York : Princeton Architectural Press, c1999.

1. Zaera-Polo, Alejandro,; Moussavi, Farshid, Inter-view with Alejandro Zaera-Polo and Farshid Moussavi, FOA (Foreign Office Architects Ltd) on YIPT , A + U: architecture and urbanism 2000 Feb., n.2(353), p.4-31

2. Kipnis, Jeffrey. ; Najle, Ciro ; Ito, Toyo , Foreign Of-fice Architects: obras y proyectos = Works and projects., 2G: re-vista internacional de arquitectura = international architecture review 2000, n.16, entire issue (144 p.)

3. Scalbert, Irenee. ,Foreign Office Architects: Yoko-hama International Port Terminal [exhibition review] ,AA files 1995 Autumn, n.30, p.86-87

4. Sanford Kwinter, Mark Wigley, Detlef Mertins, Jef-frey Kipnis, Phylogenesis: Foa’s Ark / Foreign Office Architects, Actar, 2004

5. Tomoko Sakamoto, Alberto Ferre, Michael Kubo, The Yokohama Projects / Foreign Office Architects, Actar, Barce-lona, Spain, 2002

6. Moussavi, Farshid; Zaera Polo, Alejandro; Wa-tanabe, Kunio; Kanebako, Yoshiharu.; Suzuki, Takanori.; Miura,

14. Hays, K. Michael; Kogod, Lauren. , Twenty projects at the boundaries of the architectural discipline examined in relation to the historical and contemporary debates over au-tonomy, Perspecta 2002, n.33, p.54-71

15. Klauser, Wilhelm. , Zaera & Moussavi - olas en el puerto: terminal maritima, Yokohama = harbor waves: maritime terminal, Yokohama, AV monografias = AV monographs 2002 July-Aug., n.96, p.110-123

16. Lea Valley regeneration: challenges and opportu-nities, http://www.capitasymonds.co.uk/talkingpoint/talking-pointarchive/article.asp?id=18

Takenori., Yokohama International Passenger Terminal., Ken-chiku bunka 2002 Aug., v.57, n.660, p.17-58

7. Zaera-Polo, Alejandro,; Moussavi, Farshid, Zaera-Polo and Moussavi: young dark horses win Yokohama Port Terminal competition ,Kenchiku bunka 1995 June, v.50, n.584, p.73-110

8. Genovese, Paolo Vincenzo., Architettura topologi-ca: teoria e pratica della progettazione, 2 = Topological architec-ture: theory and practice, 2 , Architettura 2004 May, v.50, n.583, p.419-421

9. Foreign Office Architects: Yokohama International Passenger Terminal, Japan architect 2003 Winter, n.48, p.62-63

10. Moore, Rowan., Point of departure [Yokohama Port Terminal] ,Domus 2002 Sept., n.851, p.[64]-[75]

11. Daniell, Thomas. , Strange attractor: the Yokohama International Port Terminal , Archis 2002, n.5, p.105-109

12. Zaera-Polo, Alejandro,; Moussavi, Farshid, Foreign Office Architects Ltd: Terminal passeggeri del porto di Yoko-hama (2002) , Osanbashi Pier, Yokohama, Giappone /, Casabella 2001 Dec.-2002 Jan., v.65, n.695-696, p.108-115

13. Bullivant, Lucy. , Yokohama’s custom-made ferry terminal: two young architects pull off the commission of a life-time, Metropolis 2002 Nov., v.22, n.3, p.100-105