Architectural design of the innovation centers public space

Pochtovaia Anastasiia Vladimirovna ORCID: 0000-0003-3630-1529 senior lecturer, Department of Architectural Design, Institute of Architectural and Design, Siberian Federal University 660041, Russia, Krasnoyarsk Territory, Krasnoyarsk, Svobodny Ave., 82A A9029652222@gmail.com Other publications by this author

            Innovation centers are an effective tool for initiating and supporting new technologies, business, as well as socio-economic development of territories ^[1]. The complication of their structure due to the increase in quantitative and meaningful social interactions, increased requirements for working conditions reveals the need to improve laboratory, industrial, and public areas ^[2]. High-quality provision of educational, cultural and educational services is possible through special spaces aimed at creating interdisciplinary communities, conditions for the exchange of ideas and communication between participants in the innovation process, demonstrating the results of scientific activity ^{[3, 4]}. The variability of user needs predetermined the inclusion of public space in the structure of the structure and its division into groups according to the mode of access and the functions performed: elements of internal infrastructure, elements of internal communications, elements of external infrastructure ^{[5, 6]}.

            In this regard, it is important to identify the nature of the interrelationships of the elements of the public space of the innovation center, the architectural embodiment of which is based on the laws of the organization of architectural systems and reflects the essential internal organizational relationships between parts and the whole, integral objects and the external environment. To assess the nature of the relationships, it is possible to use a method based on the materials of I.R. Fedoseeva, A.G. Tokmajyan, I.P. Vasilyeva ^[7]. The authors distinguish the following variants of connectivity: blocking – "formation of a composite, dismembered structure" and integration – "fusion of individual elements". It is also proposed to use the term "dispersal" - a discrete distribution of elements relative to the overall structure of the innovation center.

            To identify the nature of the connections, a sample of 70 innovation centers was carried out, which allows illustrating options for including elements of public space in the overall structure of the structure. A floor plan was drawn up for each object, which reflects a system of main entrances, functional zones, areas of horizontal movement, main vertical communications, multi-light spaces, elements of public space. Thus, the vertical dependencies of the elements of public space and horizontal ones were considered and identified, with an additional definition of connections at the level of the main entrances. 

Through vertical connections, the public core of the innovation center is formed, taking into account the preservation of accessibility conditions, the comfort of office and research areas. The evaluation result showed the use of options for integration, dispersal and combination of elements of public space, their percentage ratio.

Integration (48%) is realized by including multi-light spaces, open staircases with the use of intermediate platforms as communication zones in the structure of the structure. An illustration is the Innovation Center of the Watt Family (Fig.1a).  Dispersal (30%) is used either when there are no elements of public space on some floors of the structure, or when they have different access modes, which can be traced in the Green Energy Laboratory, China (Fig.1b).

 The combination (32%) of vertical connections (alternating integration and dispersal) is used in the case of a floor-by-floor or heterogeneous functional division of the structure of an innovation center, such as in the Center for Physical Research at the University of Chicago, USA (Fig.1b).

Figure 1 – Floor diagram with an illustration of vertical connections of elements of public space: a) integration; b) dispersal; c) combining

Horizontal connections of elements of public space have a direct impact on the effectiveness of the research process, the establishment of working and informal relationships between users. They are considered and quantified both in the overall spatial structure of the structure, and separately at the level of the main entrances, where the highest density of elements is noted.

At the level of the main entrances to the facility, an integration strategy is used (46%), for example, in the German Cancer Research Center (Fig.2a). It should be noted that integration is possible with the predominance of open elements of public space. An example of dispersal (25%) is the innovation center Pomerenean, Poland (Fig.2b). Blocking of elements at the level of the main inputs (20%) can be traced in the Center for the Science of Free Electron Lasers in Germany (Fig.2b). It should be noted that in 9% of cases the elements are missing as in the Kikkomen Research and Development Center, Japan (Fig.2g).

When assessing the horizontal connections of the entire set of floors, the following result was obtained: integration - 31%, dispersal - 40%, blocking - 13%, while elements of public space are absent on one of the floors in 15% of cases.

Figure 2 – Floor diagram with an illustration of horizontal connections of elements of public space: a) integration; b) dispersal; c) blocking; d) lack of connections

In addition, the establishment of the interconnection of elements of public space in the context of a unified system should be correlated with such a category of architecture as movement, which "binds an architectural object, an internal spatial structure and an external space into a single whole" ^[8]. The identification of traffic patterns – the predominant ways of horizontal movement of users – in innovation centers seems appropriate and partly determines the formation of public space.  The analysis showed the presence of five schemes: facade, composite, ring, two-part, three-part.

 The facade traffic pattern represents transit routes adjacent to the facade of the structure. It is distinguished by the presence of multi-light spaces, to which the main entrances, elements of public space tend to gravitate. The facade traffic pattern is illustrated in the American Interdisciplinary Research Complex Kenwood and is mainly used in the linear planning structure of innovation centers (Fig.3a).

A composite traffic scheme is a combination of various schemes in the floor layout structure, mainly in the block layout of the structure, for example, in the Building of Life Sciences and Bioengineering, Denmark (Fig. 3b).

The circular traffic pattern is a continuous communication space. It can either be adjacent to the facade of the structure, or located in depth around a multi-light space, technical or laboratory area. It is used in the linear and compact planning structure of the innovation center. The ring facade traffic pattern can be attributed to the Institute of Biotechnology Teknia, Mexico (Fig. 3b). A deep circular motion scheme is presented at the Netherlands Institute of Ecology (Fig.

The two-part traffic pattern is determined by transit routes that divide the planning structure of the structure into two blocks, for example, the Ridchardson Innovation Center, Canada. It should be noted that the elements of public space gravitate towards the ways of movement, through which various functional zones can be combined (Fig. 3d).

The three-part traffic pattern forms three blocks of the planning structure of the structure and is manifested in such innovative centers as the Global Cosmeceutical Center, South Korea. The use of this scheme is detected mainly on the floors accommodating laboratory and office areas. Often, the central block of the three-part structure houses light-sensitive laboratory rooms and technical rooms (Fig.3e).

            Figure 3 – Traffic patterns: a) facade; b) composite; c) ring facade; d) ring deep; e) two-part f) three-part

            The identification of the stable nature of the relationships between the elements with the establishment of traffic patterns demonstrate the need to formulate techniques for the architectural formation of the public space of the innovation center in order to create an individual program for the stay of participants in research and production processes, a flexible scenario for the use of the structure. This is possible with the help of variants of the ratio of the basic structure of the innovation center ^[9] and additional modules. An extension module is an add–on to the basic structure that allows you to organize a multi-variant type of use of the structure based on existing user requests. In view of the possible horizontal and vertical connections of elements of public space, two approaches are proposed:

- planar formation, in which elements and connections between them are identified at separate levels;

- multi-level formation, which is based on elements and multidirectional connections between them at several levels of the structure.

Planar formation involves the organization of single-level additional modules compiled on the basis of tables in which elements of public space from floor schemes are fixed. Structuring of the obtained data allowed us to identify such techniques as integration, blocking and dispersal (Fig.4).

Figure 4 – Techniques of planar formation of the public space of the innovation center

Integration is considered as the formation of an integral structure of elements, which makes it possible to significantly reduce the occupied volume, the total area of public areas while preserving their usefulness and functional saturation. The analysis of spatial schemes showed the presence of compact and linear types of integration.

Compact integration forms a system of elements of public space located in close proximity to each other. 4 additional modules were allocated, for example, the K1 module combines various elements such as street pedestrian transit, a dining terrace, a square, a living room, an open coffee shop, an exhibition space, an amphitheater, open and closed meeting places (Fig.5).

Figure 5 – Compact integration module

Linear integration is built on the basis of movement paths as spaces of social communication. 4 additional modules were received, for example, the L1 module combines a courtyard, a terrace, open and closed meeting places (Fig.6).

Figure 6 – Linear integration module

Blocking implies the organization of a composite, dismembered structure of elements of public space. The reception is dominated by closed elements, so a closed cafe, a recreation room and meeting places are allocated in module B1 (Fig. 7). In total, 5 additional modules were received.

Figure 7 – Blocking module

Dispersal implies a dispersed type of relationship between a building and a public space ^[10]. Despite the fact that the elements are distributed according to the level of the structure and are separated relative to the planning structure, they represent a single system of open and closed elements that meet the strategy of forming a public space.Module P1 assumes the possibility of having a square, a square, a living room, a closed dining area, a cafeteria, meeting places, an open exhibition area and a universal hall on the same level (Fig.8).

Figure 8 – The dispersal module

The techniques of multilevel formation are based on the use of modules based on communication systems and multi-light spaces that are additional to the basic structure of the innovation center. Comparison and systematization of horizontal and vertical connections of elements of public space, their repeatability (Fig.9) revealed the main method of architectural formation used – multilevel integration with division into several types: atrium, stair?atrium, linear-atrium.

Figure 9 – Atrium integration of the multilevel formation of the public space of the innovation center

Atrium integration was obtained during a comprehensive floor-by-floor analysis of elements of public space. The resulting three-level organization is seen as reliable due to the predominance of mid-rise innovation centers in the sample. The atrium integration module on the first level combines a living room, an open exhibition space, a dining area and a coffee shop, meeting places, and a closed cafe. The second level consists of meeting places and a closed bar, the third consists of closed and open meeting places (Fig.10).

Figure 10 - Atrium integration module

Staircase-atrium integration is formed on the basis of the staircase communication space, an integral part of which are intermediate platforms for communication and meetings, areas for work and experiments. The first level of the staircase-atrium integration module forms a set of elements such as a closed exhibition space, a living room, a corridor, an amphitheater, an open cafeteria, a dining area, a coffee shop. The second level is an amphitheater, a recreation room, meeting places, a terrace, an outdoor dining area and a kitchen. The third is meeting places and a terrace. The fourth is open meeting places. (Fig. 11)

Figure 11 – Linear-atrium integration module

Linear-atrium integration is built on the basis of the adjacency of the main ways of movement of users and elements of the public area to the multi-light space. The module consists of such elements as a living room, a corridor, meeting places, an open exhibition space and a cafe on the first level. The second level is a similar set of elements, excluding the function of catering. The third level is enclosed meeting places and open exhibition areas (Fig.12).

Figure 12 – Linear-atrium integration module

An obvious feature of the multi–level formation modules is a floor-by-floor decrease in the saturation of the structure of the innovation center with a social function, where the public space on the first and second levels is provided mainly with publicly accessible guest elements, and the subsequent ones with elements of internal infrastructure with limited access.

As a result of the study , it is possible to formulate a number of provisions:

It is established that public space is one of the determining factors of the success of the innovation center. They contribute to the processes of generating and implementing new ideas through strengthening user interactions, communication and cooperation in a comfortable and safe environment.

The vertical and horizontal connections of the elements of public space are determined and the patterns of movement of users through the innovation center are revealed based on the analysis of the main entrances, areas of horizontal movement, main vertical communications, multi-light spaces. Thus, public space manifests itself as a multi-component structure, including regulated (the presence of a scenario of movement, limited access) and unregulated (open access and free movement for users) typological groups of elements.

The techniques of planar (compact integration, linear integration, blocking, dispersal) and multilevel (atrium, stair-atrium, linear-atrium integration) formation of public space are revealed.

Separate self–sufficient units are proposed - modules of public space that affect the mode of operation of the innovation center. Single-level and multi-level modules have been identified, the use of which makes it possible to assess the sufficiency of filling the structure with elements of public space for maximum efficiency of using available resources, improving the conditions of users' stay.

Thus, based on the ratio of the basic structure of the innovation center and additional modules, it is possible to obtain various scenarios for the use of the facility, adapt the structure to changing external factors.