This is the blog I open for my one-year long architecture project which mainly focuses on collective housing on a personally selected site in Bang-bae district in Seoul, Korea. The posts below are my studies and working process starting from the beginning of March, 2013.

Tuesday, April 2, 2013



























































2nd SITE VISIT
  •  Architectural language: diverse, largely urbanized. Westernized single-family villas, multi-family villas/small apartments ranging from 3-7 floors, apartments.
  • Texture and facade of buildings: decoration bricks, cold concrete, glass, window frames, invisible balconies. 
  • Typical architecture: low-rise villas having half of the first floor under ground. So normally a 4 floor house is actually only 3 and a half floor high.




Monday, April 1, 2013



WEEK ONE - THREE

So, here comes 4th year! This is kind of the first project I have EVER done that touches larger scale of urbanism: COLLECTIVE HOUSING, under the instruction of the loveliest and most kind-hearted professor I EVER met, Lee Eun-kyung [He is a she]. 

During the first and second week, we spent a lot of time on struggling with the question what is 'collective space'. In my humble opinion, it is the space shared among a group of households with least interruption from public; both private and public at the same time. So, the project aims to design a form of housing (scale and location are personal choices) which embraces and improve the availability and quality of collective space.

NOTES
 
Here are some thoughts just for now:
  • In the context of a dense and strongly urbanized city like Seoul, where single family houses are becoming less and less typical to give way to multi-family residences, what are the expectations for a house and a neighborhood? Are neighborhoods going to be merely seen as a group of concrete shelters?
  • According to the fact that people in dense cities are asking for more privacy and security while becoming less willing to involve themselves in public activities to avoid interaction with one another, how big are the chances for architects to convince people to trade what they actually do not need (ie, physical protections, security...) for more of what they ultimately need in their lives, such as a socially rich life and restoration of belief in human being?