About the Sheldon Scenarios:sse

About the Sheldon Scenarios

Sustaining, Structuring, Experiencing
The phase of the project where we we working with key factors, driving forces and moving towards critical uncertainties got very messy. The group was persistent in holding considerations we had determined to be important in suspension rather than submit them to structures that were not working to represent the whole picture. Much work, discussion, study, readings was done in the area of the dynamics of forms, how they effected things. Also, consideration of neighborhood, community, technology, culture, art, economy and how they related to form, planning, building, constructing. Throughout all of this, concern for change, the organizations ability to evolve, the nature of flexibility, and structure. The systems of scenario planning (key factors, driving forces, critical uncertainties) did not seem to hold these diverse concerns. Architectural programming structures, as well, did not hold them for us. (See appendix- Architectural Programming and Scenario Planning)

There was a need to organize these concerns in terms of a relational context. In an effort to configure these diverse concerns for the purpose of an interim presentation to UICA, the construct of Sustaining, Structuring, and Experiencing was formed. Initially the intent was to demonstrate the two main levels of the challenge:
1. How can UICA do what is necessary to move into the Sheldon facility?
2. How can UICA optimally move in and around the Sheldon facility once there?
Again, these are the two challenges that are wrapped up in the design and construction of the building. These concerns were already held in the focal issue: How can UICA move in sheldon? Throughout the struggle of this phase of the work, this statement had held up well.

(See Structuring, Sustaining, Experiencing diagram)

This construct has three distinguishing qualities:

1. The words are participatory- the words imply involvement/management/effort/will/resources. This establishes them as always in the process of being formed or held by people.
2. They are interdependent. While they are separate areas, they are related and dynamically connected in their primary form; they overlap and intertwine. Because in their separation they are not made static, they do not require being set in motion.
3. They are embedded in the context of time. While they can be used to view a moment, that moment is always in the continuity of time. They also work to view spans of time.

These are not intended as a system, but as a construct of related and overlapping considerations. Their differentiation is meant to open up the complexity to gain new understanding, and to prevent the loss of context as a by-product of focussing on narrow detailed concerns. It serves as a way focussing on detail in context with a path back out of this necessary focussing. Overlap, therefore, is not considered negative (because it doesn't fit the system), it is an indication of the multiple values one detail can hold.

Here is a detailed application of these three considerations for the building project for UICA, in three timespans:

1. Designing, Funding, Constructing and Moving Into Sheldon.
2. Operation of the Organization, once it has Moved Into Sheldon.
3. Immediate Scale Individual Movements.

Experiencing	Structuring	Sustaining
The essence of the consideration is making meaningful movement.	The essence of the consideration is preparing for movement.	The essence of the consideration is managing the economies of movement.

1. Designing, Funding, Constructing and Moving Into Sheldon.

Experiencing	Structuring	Sustaining
What kind of institution serves the mission of UICA at sheldon? What might UICA be and do by way of the sheldon facility? What cultural experiences will be meaningful and valued? How is this understood and communicated in structural terms? Timing of cultural change.	What kind of institution can be built at sheldon? What is the method of design and construction? Is it professional or collaborative, path/goal or ongoing? How is the building designed to meet current needs and potential future needs? What is the political process for these determinations? How is the relationship between what organization wants (meaningful cultural experience) and what community prescribes (through its support) mediated? Timing of design and construction.	What kind of institution will the community support at sheldon? What is the realistic balance between what the community will support by giving capital to the campaign and what will work for the organization's activities into the future? What is the influence that capital support has over prescription of experiencing or structuring? Timing of capital campaign.

2. Operation of the organization, once it has moved into Sheldon.

Experiencing	Structuring	Sustaining
What does the structure mean? What meanings are always connected to the structure and the activities that go on? What doing and thinking does the structure prescribe? How does the nature of the structuring and sustaining effect the planning for programs?	How does the building perform politically in the context of the community? What are the politics between the structure and the neighborhood? What are the politics between the institution and the community? Does it work culturally and economically? How does the building perform politically within the organization? What are the politics of organization around the use of space? How easy is it to change the structure? What policies and processes are required to regulate use and change of the structure?	Does the building work for the organization? What are its fixed costs? What opportunities and options are made possible by the building? How does this work with the operating budget? How much control and change is made possible by the building? What is the fit between what the building works well for what people seek and pay for. Market.

3. Immediate Scale Individual Movements.

Experiencing	Structuring	Sustaining
What experiences (movements, thoughts) does it make possible? What kinds of experiencing is it a good place for: contemplation, collaboration, coordination, interaction, fabrication, hanging out, recreation, looking, listening, eating, drinking . . . Is the place comfortable, stimulating, interactive. How does the nature of structuring and sustaining effect the experiencing?	How easy is the building to use? What doing is made possible by the nature of the structure? How supportive is it of specific uses? How flexible is it to varied uses? Does the organization and form of things serve what the organization needs to do? What policies and procedures are required to regulate access to the building and within the building? How does the building function as a system? Does it work as a whole? What maintenance and repairs are required to keep the structure working?	Do people come to events and participate in the organization? Do people support the organization economically? What is the relationship between the seeking and supporting? (i.e. do people seek what the organization does and pay market price for that contact OR is there open access to what the organization does and it is supported indirectly through gifts, grants, membership, government).

A few notes about the interaction among these three considerations. The following is intended as a description of the dynamic between the areas not an explication of the paths through which they relate and interact as if in a closed system.

Interactions

Experiencing	Structuring	Sustaining
Experiencing is involved in movement in meaningful ways. It operates in relation to the survival of the organization (sustaining) to the extent the organizations survival makes possible the desired movement. It operates in relation to the form of the structure to the extent that that form facilitates, supports, and makes possible the desired movement. This process provides important feedback in terms of how structuring and sustaining limit or prescribe movement. Its highest aim is the creation of movements that are meaningful in relation to sustenance and structuring. It offers to the other two an understanding of what movement (experiencing) is meaningful. It becomes involved in the mediation between sustaining and structuring as it relates to living. It is not substantiated by its relation to time or space. It is engaged in the creation of meaningful cultural experiences. This has to do with the making, use, and valuation of forms.	Structuring is involved in the organization of things for the purposes of assuring continued survival of the organization (sustaining) and facilitating meaningful movement (experiencing). This organizing of things works toward solutions that minimize the human energy and capital inputs needed to build, hold, will together, and maintain the structure, while it works to optimize and support options for meaningful movement. The feedback from structuring is communicated directly by way of its form and existence, and is mostly noticed when it limits or prescribes the ability to sustain or move. It focuses on the forming, maintenance, and evolution of structures that serve the practices of healthy sustaining and meaningful cultural movement. It offers to the other two an understanding of what structures are possible. It becomes involved in the mediation between sustaining and experiencing as it relates to politics. This has to do with the regulation of space (with a significant effect on future time), and operates in the realm of planning.	Sustaining is involved in the balancing of resources to support both the optimization of meaningful movement (experiencing), and the survival of the organization (structuring). Its focus is the creation of healthy flow of provisions for the ease of holding together the structure, and the facilitation (but not prescription) of meaningful movement. It offers to the other two an understanding of what is really practical. This process provides important feedback in terms of how both the nature of the structure, and the nature of the experiencing effects the activity of sustaining. It becomes involved in the mediation between structuring and experiencing as it relates to the economy. Its scope is primarily in the flow of time in the present and near future. This has to do with the regulation of the market, which is largely zoning.

This construct is unique in its emphasis of experiencing as an ever-present concern. Other processes of programming (see appendix.)work to assess needs in terms of Form, Function, Time and Economy. Still other analysis of design address the issues of Utility and Style. Inclusion of this element throughout the process always keeps the user close to the form.
The critical uncertainties in the scenarios fit with this construct. Sustaining has to do largely with the economy and how UICA relates to it for support. (Critical uncertainty #2) Experiencing has to do largely with the culture and what meaningful cultural forms people seek. (critical uncertainty #1) Structuring is the actions of UICA to design and build a form that facilitates meaningful cultural experience and allows for the survival of the organization through the appropriate accommodation of sustenance.

Next Section

ABOUT
SCENARIOS Index Intro Build here Proceed Appendix

SCENARIO TEXTS

send comments: