WEEK 5 - Presence & Identity

Most of our perceived identity comes from bastardised sketches of the Sydney Opera House, or a jar of Vegemite, but this is not the true nature or an accurate representation of what Australia looks like.  The purest form of identity, particularly to represent regional Australia is the landscape.  Australia is full of differing regions, harsh terrain, unique flora & fauna and intangible beauty found only here.  An architecture designed to represent these remote areas of Australia, as such should reflect these characteristics, through colour, form, materials, play of light, and how they blend in to their surroundings.  The following are collection of landscape paintings and aboriginal artworks which I felt best capture the feeling of the areas we are intending to design for.  These cover tropical forests, bushland, farming towns, snowy mountains, desert and coastal regions. 

As beautiful as these images might be, we will perhaps be left with a plethora of mobile architectures which read immediately as the region from which they came, but may not form as an appealing collective whole.  In my research to find something that may help to tie these regions together, I suddenly remembered the work of Bernard Tschumi - the "Parc De La Villette".  This public space contained a series of follies laid out in a square grid throughout, linked by a series of parks, ramps, bridges and walkways. 

Each of these follies, while differing in form, read as a single entity due to the simple idea of a common primary red colour scheme.  The space between the individuals merely creates excitement at the thought of getting to discover the next one.  I thought about appropriating a similar idea, where these national follies might become the infrastructure nodes used to disperse the mobile architectures, but also the place where they can come together in one location.  Tourists crossing our plains may witness the regional parliament assembled in the Kimberley's, and then reassembled a week later along the Nullabor Plain, housing a collection/collage/museum of modern australian mobile architectures which respond to these landscapes I have looked at.

The following digrams show the idea of relating a similar system, less obvious than the standard grid, and more responsive to local regions.  This will tie the mobile units together and be identified as a base point for

the "travelling circus" of parliament.

WEEK 4 - Type and Purpose

The following links and information from within are resources from the idea development of adding an additional layer to the existing Australian parliament. As a group we decided that a mobile architecture’s benefit is reaching people, and looking at Australia, we have a lot of people spread out across the middle of the continent in rural remote areas, these areas are generally difficult to physically access (and as such are not frequented by politicians) and make it even harder for these people reach parliament to have their voices heard. The aim of creating an architectural response to this is to return the focus to the fact that the backbone of our nation requires more support, our economy relies in part upon decent management of these areas and the people forming this backbone of our nation deserve appropriate and effective representation.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/topics/docs/rural.pdf

Indigenous Australians, as managers of one-fifth of the land in Australia, could play a major role in rural Australia's future.

A strong and sustainable agricultural sector is the foundation of many of our rural and regional communities.

Tourism offers enormous growth potential as well as diversification benefits.

As Australia is a major commodity exporter, the mining industry will continue to underpin the growth of many of our rural communities.

Climate change creates opportunities as well as challenges for rural and regional areas. Solar, wind and geothermal energy tend to locate in regional areas where large quantities of land are relatively inexpensive.

The provision of biodiversity and carbon abatement are examples of "ecosystem services". They will grow in economic importance to rural and regional Australia in the future.



http://epress.anu.edu.au/anzsog/fra/mobile_devices/ch04s02.html

There is a significant population imbalance in Australia. We are just about the most urbanised country in the world. Approximately 82% of the Australian population lives in major metropolitan regions and within 50 kilometres of the coast.

As the population distribution continues to change, so, naturally, does the level of attention and understanding that governments have of rural issues. It is here that it becomes clear that Australia’s system of government has not adjusted to accommodate these changes.

From the perspective of rural communities and agricultural industries, there are two major reasons why we need to look to reform of our system of government, to overcome and compensate for this institutionalised lack of understanding:

-One is the hidden costs to the entire Australian community of poor decision-making in relation to rural issues.

-The second is the human and social impacts of change affecting rural areas, which are not being effectively addressed by the current system.



http://www.roundtheworldflights.com/rtw-blogs/index.php/news/march/717-the-problem-with-canberra.html

Canberra, it is fair to say, doesn’t have a particularly good reputation. It is seen as a plastic, artificial city which has only one redeeming feature: acting as a holding pen for politicians.

It was built to a plan drawn up by American architect Walter Burley-Griffin, who envisioned a big lake in the middle, created by damming the river. He also came up with grand buildings built around sightlines of each other (in a blatant rip-off of what Washington DC does), plenty of open space and far, far too many roundabouts

It is a city designed for motorists. Motorists who know exactly where they’re going and have no intention of pulling over to check a map or, god forbid, park. Yet seeing a traffic jam in Canberra is something of a rare privilege. This is partly because the design is successful – traffic flow is king here – and partly because of Canberra’s main problem. And that problem is that there’s just too much space.

The city has more suburb names than houses (or so it seems). There’s nothing high rise, and it all just sprawls merrily into seemingly infinite space. Living must be incredibly pleasant – no congestion, no overcrowding, parks and nature reserves at every corner – but it doesn’t half make the city a chore for the visitor.

Canberra’s roads are eerily quiet. The huge pavements never have anyone walking on them. Only the car parks are full. It’s like someone has designed the perfect big city and forgotten to fill it with people. As such, it feels as ridiculous, as lost, as forlorn and hollow as a tiny child clad in clothes that it’ll “grow into”.

To create a fire, you need to rub sticks together. If those sticks are miles apart, it doesn’t work. A city needs a certain element of claustrophobia, it needs frictions, it needs people having to fight to create their own space. Maybe, when they finally fill it, Canberra will have that.



http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/The-costs-of-Canberra-pd20100325-3URWK?OpenDocument
Politicians are asking talented people to make two sacrifices, should they ever want to serve the country,” Neville says. “A financial one and a lifestyle sacrifice. The financial sacrifice can be overcome, but the lifestyle sacrifice is very hard. Either Canberra has to triple in size to a population of about 2 million, or we need to devolve the Canberra bureaucracy out to the capital cities. Another problem with Canberra in its current form is that it is no more than a large company town and so susceptible to the problems of group-think.”



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/roots-of-the-rural-revolt/story-fn59niix-1225913605950

The bush is littered with issues such as globalisation, satellite towns v regional centres v cities, and multinational lobbyists v grassroots movements. This rural revolt also reflects Australia's love of the underdog.
Political scientist and former University of Canberra vice-chancellor Don Aitkin said that, "Australia depends on its primary producers for its high standard of living, for only those who produce a physical good add to the country's wealth".

All the major parties have decided to back a framework which will have very little regard for distance, remoteness, smallness and social equity . . . the very policies that are emanating from this place, whether they be fuel policy or aged care policy -- even policies relating to country doctors or the lack thereof -- are emanating from that basic policy framework, which has not delivered equity to country constituents in particular.

"The message that the policy sends to country communities is to proceed to your nearest major regional centre, go to the coast, go to Sydney or go to buggery."



http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/ruraltour?navtype=TOUR&navid=TOUR_MISSION
Policy precedent?

-similar scheme?



http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/regional_australia.html

The healthy, friendly and safe environment and community lifestyle of regional Australia attracts many people from the cities.
In 2006, regional Australia contributed around $65 billion, or about 67 per cent, of the country’s export revenue.

Major sectors of the Australian economy—resources, energy and primary industries—are located in regional Australia.
Regional Australia continues to be the economic backbone of the nation’s prosperity, especially with exports like minerals, grain, wool, beef, seafood and wine.
Regional Australia is home to some of the most geographically isolated and remote communities in the world



http://www.nff.org.au/farm-facts.html

Australian farms and their closely related sectors generate $155 billion-a-year in production - underpinning 12% of GDP.

Australian farmers produce almost 93% of Australia's daily domestic food supply, yet Australia exports a massive 60% (in volume) of total agricultural production.

Australian agriculture has important linkages with other sectors of the economy and, therefore, contributes to these flow-on industries. Agriculture supports the jobs of 1.6 million Australians, in farming and related industries, across our cities and regions – accounting for 17.2% of the national workforce.

Farmers occupy and manage 61% of Australia’s landmass, as such, they are at the frontline in delivering environmental outcomes on behalf of the broader community.



The following maps are our look at the various climatic,social,infrastructural zones etc. of Australia.  These may inform how mobile architecture might best be used in regional Australia:

As such we responded by proposing that regional Australia may be subdivided into smaller zones, each allocated a particular mobile architecture to represent them.  This would rely on existing and new infrastructure to link the regional zones, and would also have to project into the future some form of estimate to growing areas of population, climate change, available resources etc.  Below are some conceptual diagrams whic to begin to show this idea:

Mobile Infrastructure

A mobile architecture will need a unique way of dealing with infrastructure.  Firstly though, how long will this mobile architecture be required in a certain location?

Short term visits mean that the architecture could constantly refuel/restock/recharge as it moves whereas long term stays means that it will need to be more self-sufficient in terms of sustaining the inhabitants’ lives and required functions.

TRANSPORT:

Traditional modes – Car – Truck – Bus – Boat – Walking – Train – Plane etc.

Could the mobile architecture utilise existing roads, tracks, airports, ports, rivers etc?

Is it independently mobile but using this existing infrastructure OR independently mobile using new infrastructure or not requiring any infrastructure at all?

Mechanisms/modes of movement:

-Wheels-tracks-Propellers-Sails-Motor-Pedals-Legs/muscle-Wings-Fins-Rolling-Magnets-Sliding-Jet engine-Rockets-Slingshot-Catapult-Linear-Hydraulics-Crane-Towing-Leeching-Symbiosis-Migration etc etc etc.

Whatever the mode is, this has to be durable to withstand our harsh , varied climates and long distances across Australia.  It will also have to be maintainable on the go.  Does this require specialised service persons to travel with the architecture?

Is the architecture capable of self-repair, or assisted repair?

Is it capable of mining/gathering and producing its own parts as it moves?

Is it made of recycled parts or waste?

Is it made of readily available materials sourced from the location/s it is intended to travel?

Would this make it more responsive to local climates? Or would it need to adapt constantly?

OR

Are there multiple distributed units which are region specific and as a result of this, could they each have a unique character that represents these regions?

Once united do they form a collage of Australia?

SETTING:

How would mobile architecture sit in a new location?

Is it capable of laying its own foundations/slab/footings/piles.  Would this be a waste if the architecture isn’t going to set down in the same location again?  Yes it probably is.

Can it instead already contain this form of base structure – it should aim to have minimum impact on its environment.

Limiting the use of heavy bases/piles means that the height of the architecture will be restricted in order to maintain its stability.  It may need to be more of a spread out base.  This feature will also allow inhabitants to retain a closer connection to the land.

Could it rest on stilts/legs to minimise its footprint, or in the extreme case, could it float above the ground, anchored to the location through some type of minimal connection?

POWER:

There is no doubt that this architecture will require power of some form, either to aid its mobility or to be technologically capable of performing its function.  But how could a building generate its own power?

Could it simply tap into the existing electricity grids wherever it rests?  What if there is not enough supporting infrastructure capable of powering a possibly large entity?

Wind generators could be used, either fixed mounted or capable of popping up?  Maybe as the building moves, the forced air flow through the generator blades increases, therefore by mobility it is more efficient as a wind generator.   Aerodynamics then come into play with the form so to channel maximum air flow though the generator!  This would also reduce any drag of the entity and create greater efficiency in the use of movement power.

Solar panels could be utilised as a fold out system or permanent skin on the building, these could also act as shading devices against the harsh Australian sun.  Could mirrors be used as a building material to focus/gather/direct more sunlight into the panels?

The building could be equipped with mechanical generators, utilising renewable fuel sources, possibly using waste produced as biofuel?  The building will need to have some form of integrated waste management system, capable of converting the resource into a variety of forms.

These generators could also be driven by motion, the more the building moves, the more power is generated.  This might come through additional wheels, rotational forces, or as previously mentioned, wind driven turbines.

In combination with all of these possible power sources, batteries/power storage will be required to manage this, and backup supply is essential so that a mobile architecture doesn’t become stranded.

WATER:

Basic system requirements will be water storage tanks, possible expandable so the building may take advantage of water when it becomes available, especially precious outback rain.

To make maximum use of supplies, there should also be some form of recycling system.

This should be able to recycle greywater and also blackwater.

The building could be capable of refilling from existing potable/treated water sources, but also capable of drawing water from natural sources such as ponds, dams, billabongs etc.  This water will all need to be treated on board prior to human consumption.  The building could also store saltwater when near coastal locations, meaning there will also be the requirement for a desalinator in this case.

The building could also utilise our humid climate regions, condensing moisture from the air, slowly supplying a minimal amount to aid in extreme survival situations should the mobile architecture become crippled and static for a period.

Could the building “tap” into underground wells or basins?  Eg. The Great Artesian Basin or the Murray Darling Basin, both of which are huge resources of inland Australia’s fresh water supply.

Could this ability utilise a windmill or similar feature to retain a strong identity of Australia?  Could this then double up as power production in conjunction with the wind power generation system?

FOOD:

The mobile architecture, while utilising existing transport systems, could double as food transport to and from rural farming areas, as a carrier of grains or cattle etc.  The mobile infrastructure could also utilise small gardens, capable of being fertilised by treated human waste, in a similar/linked system to that of the water processing.  The facilities may also incorporate a food gathering system such as a built in harvester, to enable the architecture to drive through permitted fields and take what it needs on its travels, sustaing the inhabitants with staple products to boost initial supplies.  In line with food carrying, production, harvesting, the architecture will also need spaces to store/refrigerate/freeze goods for tranportation.