HERE’S WHY FLEXIBLE ARCHITECTURE IS TAKING OVER THE A&D WORLD
The mindful intention spurring the sharing economy is also evident in the world of design and
architecture. It’s not prudent or smart to have spaces that aren’t capable of doing double or triple
time. Creating multi-functional spaces introduces both challenges and exciting new approaches to
the built environment. Crowdfunding. Ridesharing. And, now Flexible Architecture. Hyper
consumerism is dead. Collaborative consumption and collaborative, multi-use spaces have arrived.
What is Flexible Architecture?
The term “flexible architecture” was popularized in the book Flexible: Architecture that Responds to
Change by Robert Kronenburg. Kronenburg noted that the majority of architecture is static and
doesn’t change or adapt over time. This stands in contrast to the natural world, which adapts to its
surroundings. Kronenburg’s big idea was that architecture could be as flexible as nature. He posited
that the built environment should be able to change to meet shifting needs, whether social or
environmental.
Basically, flexible architecture is designed to be malleable, movable, and multi-purpose. Think of it as
modular design on a grand scale. Forward thinkers like Kronenburg are realizing that we live in a
constantly changing world where we have constantly changing needs. Think of the workspace as an
example. At any given moment, workers might need a conference room, collaboration space, or solo
work area. In response, designers have created modular workspaces that allow workers to modify
the environment around them to fit their needs.
The Benefits of Flexible Architecture
The largest benefit of flexible architecture is the ability to keep the built environment relevant and
useful as time goes on. Occupant needs can change drastically even in the span of just a decade, and
this typically results in the need for buildings to undergo renovations or other updates.
Flexible architecture proposes a solution to this problem by conceptualizing how a built environment
can be constructed to adapt. It focuses on the long term by considering how occupants’ needs may
change and designing with those changes in mind. Theoretically, this reduces the need for redesigns.
The Matsumoto Performing Arts Centre in Japan is an exemplar of flexible architecture. Designed by
Pritzker Prize-winning architect Toyo Ito, the Centre is beautiful and responsive. In a paper,
Kronenburg noted the myriad flexible qualities that the Centre boasts. He broke these qualities
down into three key categories: changeable spaces, multipurpose spaces, and freedom of operation.
For example, the Centre’s largest theatre features a ceiling that can be raised or lowered to change
the space’s acoustics or even shrink the space for more intimate performances. These sorts of
changeable spaces are essentially modular design taken to the next level. Multipurpose design was
another crucial aspect of the centre. Mobile furnishings allow for occupants to rearrange and split up
the space as needed, and open design ensures that the entire campus encourages multipurpose use.
Finally, the design encourages occupant movement and flow, enhancing the flexible nature of the
space.
https://www.terramai.com/blog/flexible-architecture/
Andrew Rabeneck, David Sheppard and Peter Town published two articles related to flexibility and
adaptability. The articled entitled “Housing Flexibility” (1973) and “Housing Flexibility/Adaptability?”
(1974)
“Flexibility”is proposed against “tight-fit functionalism” (p.698)
They introduced the term ”tight-fit functionalism” that refers to the unhealthy situation of mass
housing in the twentieth century of Europe.They explain it as miniaturized living areas with the cell
types rooms which do not allow any changes(1973,p.698)
The unsuccessful attempts in flexibility are criticized for they may lead to what they call the ‘fallacy
of freedom through control”.(1973,p.701)
Flexibility housing should be capable of offering “choice” and “personalization”. (1973,p.701)
Rabeneck, Sheppard and Town involve the scope of flexibility in housing project. They see flexibility
as a tool to make the minimal housing environments capable of offering for ‘choice’ and
‘personalization’. They criticize flexibility can lead to too technical or complicated housing projects.
The adaptability approach,in contrast to the flexible,emphasizes planning and layout rather than
constructional technique and services distribution.It is based on carefully considered variations in
room sizes, relationship between rooms,slightly generous openings between spaces and little overt
expression of room function.(Rabeneck, Sheppard & Town, 1974, p.86)
Rabeneck, Sheppard and Town claim that flexibility relates to design decisions about the permanent
and fixed parts of the building:the structural system and service spaces, whilst adaptability related to
consideration about the architectural layouts of the remaining spaces such as the organization of the
rooms, their dimensions, the relation between the rooms and their functions.
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/architecture/the-concept-of-flexibility.php
