Wk 3 Lecture/Reading...A Pattern Language

The lecture introduced A Pattern Language, an approach to architecture and planning developed in the 1970s in response to student unrest at the University of Oregon. A Pattern Language outlines a language for building and planning where "people can plan and build their community in a participatory, democratic manner, even if that community is responsible to a much larger system" http://www.rainmagazine.com/archive/1991-1/the-oregon-experiment-revisited

What is a pattern? In Christopher Alexander's (who developed the language) own words, "... we may define a pattern as any general planning principle, which states a clear problem that may occur repeatedly in the environment, states the range of contexts in which this problem will occur, and gives the general features required by all buildings or plans which will solve this problem." (The Oregon Experiment, p. 101) 

A pattern is an alternative to a fixed-image masterplan.

As described in A Pattern Language "each pattern describes a problem which occurs over and over again in our environment, and then describes the core of the solution to that problem, in such a way that you can use this solution a million times over, without ever doing it the same way twice" (Alexander, p.x).

What is there to learn from the actual implementation of A Pattern Language and The Oregon Experiment? The following outlines some findings...

http://www.rainmagazine.com/archive/1991-1/the-oregon-experiment-revisited

• "the University has mostly put aside the idea of pattern research. This is a major practical difficulty with Alexander’s approach. Such introspection takes valuable time needed for more immediate planning problems."

• "patterns are, by their nature, either dogmatic, incomplete or partly redundant, so drafting them is an unsatisfying task. The solutions seem to beg questions."

• "Unfortunately, Alexander’s pattern 'Independent Regions' (pictured) does not suggest how to achieve decentralized politics when most of the world is already heavily centralized. 'Gaining Independence' is a much tougher problem, and there is no pattern for it in Alexander’s book."

• Piecemeal approach..."Tiny committees working 'within the system' on tiny aspects of major problems have no way of coping with the city without political mandates. Their impotence is directly visible in issues of transportation and housing."

• "The majority of the student body has no idea that the University is carrying out a planning experiment.  The faculty and staff generally understand their rights under The Experiment -- many of the principles of planning are understood by anyone who stays on the campus for very long."

• "The students, however, do not know that they can initiate projects. Certainly schoolwork and play interfere with participation, and their brief stay in town hinders their interest in long-term planning. But they are apathetic in part because no one asks them anything."

• "At the University, a small committee will talk about a problem until they are sick of it, while others who would be keenly interested do not even know that it is being discussed."

• "Wresting control and money from city, county, state and federal government is a problem familiar to most advocates of social change. Although Alexander has no pattern for effecting political change, The Experiment has helped to provide a forum for these issues."

• "The transition from an ideology to a working system of full participation, a genuine community and culture of egalitarianism, would be a great leap at any University. Hierarchical and authoritarian relationships are the norm at schools with the authority of accreditation. This limits equitable discussion."

...and from the University of Oregon's website...
http://uplan.uoregon.edu/faq/FAQPatternLanquage.html

• "Alexander's suggestion to have the user group develop a schematic design before hiring an architect has not been effective. Users still participate in the schematic design process, but it has been much more effective for them to work with the assistance of architects."

• "Another principle that has not been fully implemented is that of 'piecemeal growth.' The idea of piecemeal growth is to distribute funds in a way that allows for incremental improvements across campus through small building projects. This strategy has been difficult to implement because all campus projects must go through the Oregon State Legislature, which tends to favor larger building projects. Small projects are still accomplished, but not to the extent originally envisioned in the Oregon Experiment by the principle of piecemeal growth."