Permeable house: an alternative project methodology for designing single family dwellings
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X35509Keywords:
Architecture, Single Family Dwellings, MethodologyAbstract
Permeable House is the title of the present paper produced for the “Projeto III” course at the Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (Campus Cachoeira do Sul) as part of the Architecture and Urbanism program in the first semester of 2017, related to single family housing projects. Facing the traditional single-family dwelling, we were guided by a unique work methodology that emphasizes certain requests and elicits a mindset concerned about unexpected vital issues. This paper aims to present the specific features of this design planning method towards a specific outcome: Permeable house – an experimental alternative to the usual organization of house designing – identifying the refreshed understanding of architecture from the point of view of this methodology that emphasizes the structure – and the opportunity of designing it along with the initial concerns over form –, the city – considering architecture as an entity that creates the urban space – and the environment – highlighting the role architecture has when it comes to dialoguing with its natural and built surroundings.Downloads
References
ARCHDAILY [Internet]. Casa das Pérgolas Deslizantes / FGMF Arquitetos. [cited 2017 apr 21]. Available from: https://www.archdaily.com.br/br/759465/casa-das-pergulas-deslizantes-fgmf-arquitetos.
PORTAL VITRUVIUS. Casa Grelha. No sopé da Serra da Mantiqueira. [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2017 apr 21]; 8(92.01). Available from: http://www.vitruvius.com.br/revistas/read/projetos/08.092/2918.
ROCHA, Ricardo S. Atelier em Processo: uma Proposta de Projeto e Ecologia da Paisagem. In: XXXVI ENSEA - Encontro Nacional sobre Ensino de Arquitetura e Urbanismo: Ensino e Aprendizagem presencial e o Papel Social do Arquiteto e Urbanista; 2017; Brasília, Brasil.
SUMMA+. Densidade Residencial. [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 apr 21]; (148). Available from: http://www.revistasummamas.com.ar/pt/revista/148.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
