The Impact of Site Contexts in Increasing the Diversity of Architectural Concepts: Using an Interactive Architectural Approach

Abstract

Recently, new alternatives have been applied to enhance the architectural design process through comprehensive interaction with all variables. This approach suggests a dynamic scheme to collect all factors comprehensively. This research introduces approaches to better cognition of architectural concepts based on the site context parameter. It investigates the role of site context in generating architectural ideas by formulating a model of analysis to find similarities and differences in senior architects’ strategies. This approach aims to adapt context to explore aspects that may create diversity in architectural products. The reality is that creating original architectural concepts has received progressively less attention in the professional practice of architecture in recent decades. The research applied a mixed methodology, checklist factors and graphical analysis. It used a two-level method with several steps to evaluate the twelve international cases related to deconstructive architects (Eisenman, Koolhaas, and Hadid). This study concludes that creating a site context that supports the surrounding context can enrich the design concept and create unexpected results.

1. Introduction

Architectural design is about creating several solutions at various levels to adapt a suitable one. Architectural design is a variety of non-limited fields in architecture that require complex mental abilities for gathering a wide range of information, combining it into a set of ideas, and creating a unique form of those ideas. Therefore, there is no complete response to a design problem; each design problem has different resolutions [1]. In the words of Frank Gehry, architecture should speak of its time and place but yearn for timelessness. Architecture should be connected to when and where it is being built, yet it should still stand out as the positioning of new designs in a space between past and future designs [2]. Following World War II, architecture focused on site-specific, anti-international design. At the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, it is more important than ever for designers to review their understanding of the site and its relationship to its surroundings [3]. Between 1945 and 1951, Robert Venturi’s master’s thesis, “Context in Architectural Composition”, included analyses of historical structures using Gestalt principles and revealed that context gives an architectural structure meaning [4]. Site identification is a generative core of architecture; it is to architecture as meaning is to language [5].

The word “context” originated in linguistics and spread to other creation disciplines. In architecture, context refers to where architecture is located, and it greatly impacts how ideas for new projects are developed. Context builds an artificial identity for architectural projects [6]. Either architecture is integrated as part of its environment or reacts against it; the resultant buildings are contrasted by their surroundings. In both ways, what matters most is that the context has been carefully considered, examined, and addressed [7]. Moreover, contextual architecture becomes challenging while studying how the different cultural identities are formed and translated into the design. Learnings from the context provide a link between history, society, and culture, thus allowing the design to utilize the features of the place and become integrated with the city roots [8]. The contextual design approach greatly influences a designer’s decision-making process. If the original context is lost, the situation can be remedied by gathering, compiling, and making available all existing information about the place [4]. In this detail, site context is effective and contributes positively to constructing architectural identity by merging physical settings with sociocultural parameters [9]. The integration of the building with its surroundings will create an architectural form based on several environmental influences. Therefore, the site context means the background in which a building is located to create an environment that creates a defined place. It is the reflection of the topography of the site on the adjacent buildings that conveys the architectural message. Understanding the context is considered the most important stage in architectural design, as well as the history of the site and its previous and present uses. Contextualism reflects the adaptation of the form to the context of its surroundings by looking at different contextual types such as natural, historical, sociocultural, and human-made contexts [10,11]. In this regard, architects’ design approaches, such as Eisenman’s, consider the physical and cultural archaeology layers at each site, not just the obvious contexts [12]. Contextualism in architectural design came from the desire to resolve the problems regarding the placement of new buildings within the historic environment. Therefore, it became significant in the relationship between the architectural object and the fabric of the urban surroundings. In architectural theory and practice, the contextualist perspective was the basis for increased critique and evaluation of the design product [13]. Eisenman stated that the architectural forms are no longer derived from the transformation or decomposition of an ideal form like the cube but result from the superposition and scaling of artificial figures derived from the project’s archeological or topographic texture [14]. The architecture of both Le Corbusier and Eisenman shows remarkable interest in the methods of site reading. They focused on the historical and mythopoetic concepts that the site contexts offer; they started with methods of first deconstructing and later re-constructing the site context as part of the design process. Le Corbusier reviews the site for its historical and poetic essence; his approach is about clarification through reduction, whereas Eisenman’s approach, resisting reduction, sought decadent immersion in the opulence of the site’s historically and culturally layered nature [3]. In architecture, there are various kinds of reference techniques. The form-creating process relies on other existing forms because it is impossible to create new forms from nothing; forms exist in forms [15]. The liberation of formal expression is considered one of the major developments in architecture in the past twenty years to reflect the diverse nature of cultures and contexts [16].

There is a fundamental need for an architect to understand the site that a building is located on. The site proposes a series of parameters that will impact the architectural design. The project site cultivates design as the starting point and main idea and even becomes a source for concept development. The site is both a limitation to design and a provider of incredible opportunities. It is what makes the architecture-specific and unique, as no two sites are the same. The purpose of this study is to discover the role of site context in increasing the diversity of architectural concepts and draw strategies related to site context that can be used in architectural design. The study objectives are to explore the role of site context in architectural design, including how elements and concepts found in a specific site are adapted to design. Additionally, this study aims to investigate the diversity of architectural products resulting from these adaptations. This approach will provide insights into the relationship between site context and design innovation.

1.1. Site Context and Architectural Concepts

Each project site has numerous contextual traits and histories relevant to architecture, such as cultural, social, spatial, material, and environmental, that can inform the architectural concept. The site contains memories and traces of other buildings, in addition to the surrounding buildings and their essential characteristics, from materials, form, and height to the type of details. However, the site’s physical qualities, topography, geology, and plant life serve as indicators for architectural design [7]. Elements that exist on the site and can be used in the architectural process vary. Neighborhood context, or “the immediate surrounding of the site”, is the first type of site context, which includes site geometric shape, location, size, traffic condition, climate condition, orientation, and accessibility. Natural context is another type of site context that includes actual features of the site, such as trees, rocks, topography, rivers, ponds, and drainage patterns [17].

Site topography and existing fabric are another type of natural context that is used as a design concept in many architectural projects. Topography is a substantial source of concept and material selection. There are two types of topographical context: the immediate context (locale) and the ultimate context (region). Human-made features in the site, such as existing buildings, walls, surrounding vernacular, setbacks, materials, and landscaping, are a type of site context that exists in almost all sites. In addition, historical or time context is another notable type of context that is used in the architectural design process. Time context reconciles the conflicting memories of the pre-existing and the aspirations of the new [3,18]. Historical context includes the historical background of the site, old maps, and previous uses of the site. Ideas and elements of past cities are present in the physical shaping of contemporary cities; therefore, a context urbanist should be able to understand the characteristics of a place and put that as part of his designing process. In designing a new building as a part of the city, the designer should remain committed to the following points: physical contextualism in pre-existing form, historical contextualism, social–cultural contextualism, values, and goals. In contextualism, the city components are not studied alone but in a wider environmental range because architecture work is associated with a larger city system [19].

1.2. The Interactive Architectural Approach

The architectural design process is a complex series of different variables on various levels that interact and affect each other to provide the goals of an architecture project. The design process is a novel approach to combining well-known components and presenting new concepts [1]. Hence, interaction means a mutual relationship among two or more persons, groups, or systems. The American dictionary explains the meaning of interaction as ‘the activity of talking to other people or working together with them’ and also a process by which two or more things affect each other [20]. So, the ‘interactive architectural approach’, also called ‘interactive architecture’, is a process in which the mutual relations between the factors, groups, and systems affect the architectural design process. The final architectural design results in a relative balance of mutual interaction among all these factors, groups, and systems. Moreover, interactive architecture analyzes all aspects of an architectural design and makes a mutual relationship between different aspects of it [1]. Based on this, the interactive architectural approach can be related to contextual architecture. Contextualism is a standpoint that focuses on the specific features of a place and uses them in design. In contextualism, the human aspects as well as the physical aspects are considered. Contextualism means adaption to physical, historical, and social–cultural backgrounds. Interactive architecture, one such contemporary design technique, enables architects to account for multiple contextual parameters simultaneously in real time. The interactive architecture approach enables a building to adapt to its surroundings [21].

Approaches to designing architectural projects through the interactive method are: first, the pastiche approach, which aims to create harmony between the design and its surroundings by mimicking apparent elements and the existing order. Secondly, the conventional method becomes a natural modern approach, references historical quotations, and persists in the present era. In addition, the third approach is the arrogant approach, which is highly separated and ignores the historical context. Fourth is the contemporary approach; the design is in contemporary language, incorporates elements from the present, draws inspiration from the past, and discusses the historical background. Finally, the subtle approach has a more balanced and humbler attitude toward the environment, which has the greatest respect for the historical context [22,23]. The interactive architectural approach tries to replicate the context as closely as possible with the least possible intervention. The purpose is to use the similar language of the existing context in architectural form without replication of the properties of the environment and to maintain the existing uniformity in the architectural language of the context. In this approach, sometimes small differences in context are evaluated positively. In addition, abstract reference creates a dialogue within the context, taking into account the abstract alternative. This approach, sometimes with free and independent ideas, shapes unity [24].

In architectural creation, using a single concept may produce poor architecture. The research problem is the similarity in the architectural product; thus, searching for aspects that may create a diversity of architectural products becomes necessary. The reality is that site considerations have received progressively less attention in architecture’s academic and professional practice in recent decades. Thus, this study will explore how architecture and its site collectively inform one another throughout the interactive approach to achieve different solutions.

1.3. Literature Review

Studies about the interactive approach in the architectural design process are limited. Parsaee offered a new approach to the architectural design process that incorporates the concepts of interaction and multiple relationships. The interactive architecture approach suggested a process in which a dynamic and mutual relation is created among all design parameters, and the effects of each parameter on the final design are considered [1]. In this regard, Schueler interconnected emotional design and complex interactive architectural systems. The study elaborated upon the term complexity and presented interactive design strategies as a possible approach to complying with current architectural demands. Subsequently, the relation between emotions and interactive architecture is discussed [21]. In this regard, Naghibi studied topography as the framework that unites architecture and landscape in Persian architecture. The study suggests the site’s character, considering design strategies influenced by its environmental conditions, natural forms, and functional elements [25]. Burns described the interactive approach to architectural education through collaboration. The study presented a series of exercises to second-year architectural students as opportunities to commemorate the unification of architectural artifacts in a situated contextual environment [26]. An interactive architecture approach can leverage site context as a valuable component in the architectural creation process, adding identity to the final architectural product by integrating site-specific elements. This approach enhances the design’s relevance and coherence, creating a more harmonious and contextually grounded outcome.

In addition, Wong believed in the creation of the modernist form as ‘free-form architecture’ and searched for factors that modernist architects take into account while creating their designs. Using this primary data source, the study employed the qualitative research methodology of grounded theory to analyze the architects’ process and create a hierarchical structure of factors influencing free-form design [16]. In parallel, Stals linked the creation of architectural forms to computer technology development. The study focused on the strategies of parametric modeling tools. Digital challenges like parametric modeling tools reshape the design process architecture [27]. Brösamle and Hölscher studied 22 experienced architects to investigate architectural design practice. The study systematically investigates the sketching and gesture activity as is typical in design practice through the graphical transcription method. The study concluded that it is possible to gain insight into the concepts and work practices of a visual domain [28]. Architectural creation is a broad discipline influenced by numerous variables, with site characteristics and existing elements playing a crucial role in most design processes.

Çizgen discussed contextuality and deliberated the relationship between architecture and context. Contemporary contextual architecture is scrutinized for design activity, design product, and related background [6]. In this regard, Margaroni rethought the relation to textual layering against the project background to reinvest in the layering concept in architecture. The textuality history of the site reactivates the critical force of textual tradition today through a renewed appreciation of its historical embeddedness [29]. Sanghvi studied a context in architectural design and compared designing with the context and contrasted with context. Though contrast makes the building eye-catching at first glance, eventually, adding more contrasting designs, it loses its uniqueness. The goal was to find innovative ways to design while inventing within the existing site context without disturbing the surrounding fabric [30]. Subrahmanian argued about the importance of context in architectural design, as it is a reason every project has its place. Identity as a project on a specific site does not necessarily make sense on another site. The study conceived the design as a dialogue between the artifact and the context [31]. Abrar studied contextuality by details approaches used in a historical context. He studied contextual architecture with further subdivisions that include climatic, geographic, cultural, economic, political, and historical contexts [8]. AlFadalat and Al-Azhari studied the integration between contextual approaches using architectural procedural modeling and augmented reality in residential buildings. A general framework is proposed to create a harmonious context through the new design generation based on the grammar of the existing context and the architectural style of the residential buildings [32]. Contextuality is a crucial discipline in architecture, deeply influencing the design process. It serves as an essential feature in architectural creation, ensuring that designs are not only aesthetically pleasing but also harmoniously integrated with their surroundings.

In parallel, Choi and Park studied contextual compatibility through the relationships among heritage intensity, context density, and regulation degree. Contextual compatibility requires consideration of the broader urban context and its geographical setting, such as the site’s topography, geomorphology, hydrology, natural features, historic and contemporary building environment, land use patterns, spatial organization, perceptions, and visual relationships, among other elements of the urban structure [33]. Costa and Rosado dealt with rural context and urban context to conveyed how the relationship between vernacular architecture reflected a profound change in the ways of living over time. This concludes that the architectural specificity, in both contexts, is subordinate to the same processes of historical change, which nevertheless acquire a circumstantial dimension. [34]. Tarboush and Gurdalli studied the context in architectural education to explore students’ abilities to link the concept with the site context [10].

Based on the literature review, studies that connected interactive architectural approaches to the site context and showed the impact of the site context on the architectural products are limited. Thus, this study aims to investigate the role of site context in generating architectural concepts using an interactive architectural approach. It intends to explore the project’s characteristic features that enhance the multiplicity of architectural concepts by analyzing the pioneers’ professional practices. Consequently, the research question is: what is the impact of site context on increasing the diversity of architectural concepts? Moreover, this study is searching for similarities and differences in senior architects’ strategies in site contexts. In addition, this study is searching for factors that have been concentrated on by architects to increase the diversity of architectural concepts. This research hypothesizes that pioneer architects who utilize site context within specific parameters through interactive architecture methods can significantly enhance the diversity of each project. By examining various case studies and theoretical frameworks, this study seeks to understand the mechanisms of site context and interactive design to enhance project diversity.

2. Interactive Parameters of Site Context

Through analyzing previous studies and investigating senior architects’ design practices, this study extracted the main interactive parameters of site context as follows:

2.1. Objective Background Context

Le Corbusier stated that nothing is more elegant than the pure line of viaducts in a geographically varied site [35]. Context has been perceived as an endless given background that could be objectively described, measured, and transformed. At that time, geometry was superimposed on the organic in a perfect aesthetic balance [36]. The erasing of hierarchies between objects and their backgrounds overturned the meaning of the project and its capacity to intervene in contemporary space, even in the built architecture. A vacuum is perceived as a spatial condition that belongs to artificiality equal to fullness. Junya Ishigami stated that my work is about exploring the atmospheric qualities of transparency and pushing the boundaries of architecture over their limits, as shown in Le Corbusier’s Design, 1930, Figure 1 [36].

The effect of architecture is always conceived in opposition to its background. In this process, the building, in contrast with its surroundings and the site context, has a weak impact on the building, as shown in Figure 2.

Based on the above, the values of this parameter can be formulated as: entirely ignoring the site context, Partial integration between building form and site context Contrast between form and background, disregarding the surrounding pattern.

2.2. Artificial Environment

Rem Koolhaas stated that the absence of architecture is not only a preliminary condition but could also be the project’s outcome [37]. What has been conceived in OMA? The Melun Senart project was substantially different from all the other structural urban projects realized since then. OMA placed artifacts and context on the same plane to the point of constantly reversing the figure with its background, as shown in Figure 3 [36].

In the artificiality of absence parameter, the artifact and context act as the source of concept; the project form is in harmony with the site context to melt the form within the site context. The scheme of the artificiality of absence parameter is shown in Figure 4.

In light of the preceding, the values of this parameter can be articulated as follows: absence of site context, form, and context on the same level, melting the form within the context, and absence of form.

2.3. Historical Tracing

The pre-existing elements in the site influence the design concept and the recovery of many places that can obtain new meanings. The necessity of protecting the urban environment should be based on the protection of historical heritage [38]. Mapping a site over a series of significant stages in its history describes the life and memory of a place. Historical tracing can be achieved by overlaying a range of same-scale maps from the same site, each depicting a different stage of the site’s development. Doing so allows all the maps to be read concurrently and produces an image of the site that captures its past and present. Historical tracing can provide important triggers for a design idea. There is a historic route, path, road, or railway line that could suggest a significant axis, which could be acknowledged in a design idea. Similarly, the remains of historical elements on the site could be recognized in a new building proposal. Historical site analysis can inspire a contemporary idea that connects directly with the past archaeology of a site [7]. Historical site mapping can bring together all the significant developments in a site’s lifespan. This provides a ‘complete’ picture of the site, which can then be used as an inspiration source for future concepts.

In Long Beach, Eisenman begins with the duplication of fictional histories and the superposition of real and allegorical features onto a site. These histories concern land division, previous uses, and urban plans related to the specific Long Beach site. This strategy of superposition follows a story about a two-hundred-year condition that records a past Gold Rush (1849), a recent present (1949, the year of the university’s founding), and an imagined future (2049) [39]. A second shift relates to the site and is expressed in ground manipulations, including fictive archaeology, that is, histories that are real but absent or immanent and thus have potential. Eisenman notes that Cannaregio was his ‘first real site plan. This emergent awareness of and concern with sites and traces real and fictional—absent from the Houses series, which were conceived as groundless up to the late House X—becomes perhaps the signal characteristic of the decade’s long investigation. The impact of this shift is clear in his project for Long Beach. There are approaches to encountering the historical context in which they focus on the separation of new structures from old ones, including boundaries, materials, or methods [24]. The historical tracing parameter is shown in Figure 5.

Given the above, the values of this parameter can be classified as pre-existing elements, different maps of the site, overlaying different layers, and identical past and present traces.

2.4. Topographical–Cultural Geometry

Common approaches attempt to represent the nostalgia of culture and tradition about the context-oriented product of the people. There may also be design approaches that are consistent with the context, not only in the physical properties of the environment but also in the social and economic components [24]. The idea behind this parameter is that the design process is derived from an analogous and textual reading of the project and the site. Several urban projects, from the Parc de la Villette to the Elliptic City, proceed from abstract geometries that can be adapted to the geographical or cultural particularities of the sites in which they are located. Eisenman argues that his project is grounded in form-making due to its emphasis on the ‘archaeology of site’, as well as the broader cultural context of the project’s controversy over perceived social failure and architectural decadence. In Goldemberg’s ‘Notes on Rhythmic Effects’. Eisenman is quoted describing the process of composition for the building as an overlaying of ground conditions, combining the physical, analog geometric topologies of the site as a matrix of trace conditions. As Eisenman asserts, ‘The City of Culture evolves from the superposition of three sets of traces. First, the plan of the medieval center of Santiago is placed on the hillside site, which overlooks the city. Second, a Cartesian grid is laid over these medieval routes. Third, the topography of the hillside is allowed to distort the two flat geometries, thus generating a topological surface that superposes old and new in a simultaneous matrix’. Under these conditions of ground, another conceptual trace layer of the digital is added to the compositional matrix of the building as a part of the ‘archaeology of the site’. In this process, the building is in harmony with its built surroundings [14]. In the description of House XIA, Eisenman in turn introduces concepts of topological geometry dealing with the mathematical study of surfaces and forms that are non-metric, such as those in which the measured distances are impossible to describe [40]. The topographical–cultural geometry parameter is shown in Figure 6.

In light of the above, the values of this parameter can be sorted as follows: analog and textual reading, abstract geometry from culture, the archeological impact of the site, and multi-layers of ground condition.

2.5. Context Fragmentation

This process is against the site, resulting in losing the site’s identity. It is about changing or losing the character of the site. There should be a contrast between the new and old architectures, but not continuity. It is because they believe new buildings have to show their new features compared with the old ones. An example of fragmentation in the site process is the Berlin Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe (1998–2005). manifests the instability inherent in what seems to be a system, here a rational grid, and its potential for dissolution in time. It suggests that when a supposedly rational and ordered system grows too large and out of proportion to its intended purpose, it loses touch with human reason. It then begins to reveal the innate disturbances and potential for chaos in all systems of apparent order, as shown in Figure 7. The design begins with a rigid grid structure composed of 2711 concrete pillars, or stelae, each 95 cm wide and 2.375 m long, with heights varying from zero to 4 m. The pillars are spaced 95 cm apart to allow only for individual passage through the grid. Each plane is determined by the intersections of the voids of the pillar grid and the gridlines of the larger context of Berlin. A slippage in the grid structure occurs, causing indeterminate spaces to develop. These spaces condense, narrow, and deepen to provide a multi-layered experience from any point. Remaining intact, however, is the idea that the pillars extend between two undulating grids. The way these two systems interact describes a zone of instability between them. These instabilities, or irregularities, are superimposed on both the topography of the site and on the top plane of the field of concrete pillars. A perceptual and conceptual divergence between the topography of the ground and the top plane of the stelae is thus created. It denotes a difference in time. The monument’s registration of this difference makes for a place of loss and contemplation, elements of memory. In this monument, there is no goal, no end, and no working one’s way in or out. The duration of an individual’s experience with it grants no further understanding since understanding the Holocaust is impossible. The time of the monument, its duration from top surface to ground, is disjointed from the time of experience. In this context, there is no nostalgia, no memory of the past, only the living memory of the individual experience [12]. The context fragmentation parameter is shown in Figure 8.

Based on the above, the values of this parameter can be organized as follows: mislay site identity, create dominant context, alter site features, and scan site history.

2.6. Natural Context Integration

This process is about coping a curtain shape from the site. The project form follows the site shape and responds to the site’s natural topography. This process is used at strong, highly characterized sites. Guggenheim Helsinki Museum Competition, 2016, as shown in Figure 9. Guggenheim Museum buildings are typically iconic objects that act as magnets; both the prominent waterfront site and the building scale of Helsinki demand an urban architecture that generates a dialogue between the object, its context, and its users. To produce an experience rather than an iconic object, Eisenman extended and overlaid the two dominant grid structures of Helsinki on the north–south linear site. This creates a diagrammatic structural datum that serves as the basis for an overlay of functional volumes. These volumes produce a series of horizontal sections, which are fractured in such a way that there is no dominant formal order other than the directional shape of the site. This results in three scales of galleries, each determined by size, section, the need for light, and various means of movement to and through them. Two exterior ramps link the museum to the city: one is a north–south linear axis that runs along the west side of the museum, linking the city to the parkland south of the site; the other is a girding circular ramp that links to the promenade and penetrates the building but does not allow for entry into it. The Guggenheim Helsinki is an agent of change: an experience building with multiple points of accessibility and a variety of uses that invite both city residents and tourists to interact with the waterfront building in the same ways they interact with the city itself [12]. Muge Riza defined context by taking into account uniformity, continuity, juxtaposition, and non-contextual. In this way, the paper states that a variety of relationships can be found about the context, but there should be a balance between context and contrast, or else recognition of new and old structures is impossible; it would not harmonize itself with the natural changes in time, facilities, needs, requirements, and conditions of the day [41]. The natural-context integration parameter is shown in Figure 10.

Accordingly, the values of this parameter can be classified as keeping the shape of the site, responding to the topography, Following the site condition, and harmony between site and form.

3. Research Methodology

The research used a two-level method with several steps to identify the role of site context in enhancing architectural concepts using an interactive architectural approach. It adopted a mixed methodology, deriving checklist factors from designer themes and concepts that were issued as texts in previous literature, then transforming these themes into graphical analysis (quantitative measurements). Using graphical analysis to simplify the design process measures and arrange for further study. It is a significant instrument for accepting sources of variation in the related data about the role of site context in enhancing architectural concepts for better understanding.

The checklist factors have been designed to include a set of variables in the theoretical model based on specific relevant literature as a qualitative methodology. It is a common procedure to assess information and offers a solid base for evaluating information. Converting the previous literature (concept descriptions) as part of the interactive architectural approach to graphical diagrams is the first step in creating an assessment scale. The measuring scale includes two levels of insight: the first is related to adjustments of site context variables within the project’s plot of land, while the second is related to the surrounding environment at the urban scale. The scale includes a set of variables to measure the effect of site context parameters on enhancing architectural concepts. It is the process of assembling several factors derived from previous studies and formulating a new measuring scale through graphical analysis methods.

The second step was establishing checklist factors to ensure interactive strategies of site context by assessing the following parameters: objective background context, artificial environment, historical tracing, topographical–cultural geometry, context fragmentation, and natural context integration. Each parameter has several values to measure the overall impact. Interestingly, these values were characterized by being implicit in previous literature, as they were not isolated in a way that would enable the concept to be described. Collecting these variables in a theoretical framework was the first contribution of this study. It involves interpreting data from graphs, such as identifying key features and shaping design parameters based on site circumstances. It provides a path for determining the site features of a particular project design.

Graphical analysis is about studying cases and analyzing them in three steps. first, the situation of the project plot, including lines of building form and landscapes, and then comparing the site context with the project’s surrounding environment. The third level is measuring the interactive architectural approach parameters to identify the similarities and differences between senior architects’ strategies. Determining checklist factors via graphical analysis will guide things to be specified and easily recorded. In parallel, using the qualitative case study method (choosing the case study involves 12 projects by three pioneering architects, (Peter Eisenman, Rem Koolhaas, and Zaha Hadid) offers an in-depth analysis of the research problem and answers research questions to support its assumption. The rationale behind selecting these cases (see

Table 1. Case study used in this study.

Peter Eisenman	Rem Kolhaass	Zaha Hadid
A1: The Modern Museum and School of Fashion	B1: Jojutla Bridge	C1: Jinghe New City Culture and Art Centre
A2: Babynyar Holocaust Memorial Center	B2: Brooklyn Academy of Music	C2: BMW Showroom
A3: Liget Budapest House of Music	B3: Ile Seguin	C3: Astana EXPO 2017 FUTURE Energy
A4: Yenikapi Archaeological Museum and Archeo-park	B4: S Project	C4: Beethoven Concert Hall

) is related to the following criteria:

• Cases are designed by influential architects or theorists specializing in contextual architecture.
• Cases are to be internationally recognized as an interactive architectural approach.
• The projects have an open site plan that is not adjusted by other buildings.
• The projects are well-known internationally and have enough literature descriptions in architectural references.
• The projects have a diversity of concepts and fall under the umbrella of a deconstruction strategy.
• Availability of project data.

All cases have been analyzed according to the table created from two levels of research methods separately.

Table 2. Sample of case study analysis used in this study.

Project Code:	A1
Project Name:	Modern Museum & School of Fashion
Designer:	Peter Eisenman
Location:	Milano, Italy, 2005–2006
Eisenman’s proposal attempts to put fashion in the museum back in motion. Therefore, instead of separating the functions of teaching and exhibiting, this project suspends this difference. The idea of fashion in motion can be seen in the building itself. Instead of being seen as an object in the landscape, the building is a fabric itself, a landscape with the folds and pleats of a piece of cloth, torqued against the static forms of the adjacent building complex. As fashion repeatedly breaks from established boundaries, so too does this building break from the boundaries of site and object to become a vortex, only here, instead of spiraling outward, this museum creates a centripetal vortex that pulls its being and program into a centric energy that animates the interior [12].
Interactive Parameters of Site Context				Graphical Analysis
1   Objective Background Context				A  Surrounding Context
1.1 Entirely ignoring the site context,
1.2 Partial integration (form and site context)
1.3 Contrast Between Form and Background
1.4 Disregarding Surrounding Pattern
2   Artificial Environment
2.1 Absence of Site Context
2.2 Form & Context on the Same Level
2.3 Melting the Form within the Context
2.4 Absence of Form
3   Historical Tracing				B  Site Context with Building
3.1 Pre-existing Element
3.2 Different Maps of the Site
3.3 Overlaying Different Layers
3.4 Identical Past and Present Traces
4   Topographical-Cultural Geometry
4.1 Analogue & Textual Reading
4.2 Abstract Geometry from Culture
4.3 Archeological Impact of the Site
4.4 Multi Layers of Ground Condition
5   Context Fragmentation				C  The Building Form
5.1 Mislay Site Identity
5.2 Created Dominant Context
5.3 Altering Site Features
5.4 Scratching Site History
6   Natural Context Integration
6.1 Keeping the Shape of the Site
6.2 Response to the Topography
6.3 Form follows the Site Condition
6.4 Harmony between Site & Form

shows an example of a case study analysis, while the other 11 cases can be found in Appendix A.

4. Results

4.1. Graphical Analysis Results

The graphical analysis results that use geometric fundamentals to embody the building components and site boundaries in

Table 3. Graphical analysis of the relation between building plot contexts and surrounding environments.

Peter Eisenman	Rem Kolhaass	Zaha Hadid
A1: Ignoring the Surrounding Context	B1: Supporting the Surrounding Context	C1: Ignoring the Surrounding Context
A2: Ignoring the Surrounding Context	B2: Supporting the Surrounding Context	C2: Supporting the Surrounding Context
A3: Supporting the Surrounding Context	B3: Supporting the Surrounding Context	C3: Supporting the Surrounding Context
A4: Supporting the Surrounding Context	B4: Supporting the Surrounding Context	C4: Supporting the Surrounding Context

indicate that Eisenman’s design process ranged between neglecting the surrounding context in cases (A1, A2) and emphasizing the contiguous background, utilizing the shape of the project to be created by the extension of adjacent lines in cases (A3, A4). It indicates that the area of variation between upper and lower limits on a particular scale is neutral due to the spatial relationships among variables. Kolhaass’s procedure can be classified as a perfect combination of the building form and the surrounding environments as specified in cases (B1, B2, B3, and B4). Interestingly, the building form contributed positively to the topographic surrounding lines in all cases designed by Kolaass. Hence, this process led to a new strategy by dominating the site backgrounds.

It is interesting to note that, Hadid’s strategy varies from contrasting the surrounding pattern as indicated in case (C1) to creating a dominant form and supporting the contiguous context using a balanced form in cases (C2, C3, and C4) Consequently, the building shape reinforced the site topography and led to a clear dominance of project forms.

On the other hand, the relation between the building mass and the project site context as clarified in (

Table 4. Graphical analysis of the relation between building mass and project site contexts.

Peter Eisenman	Rem Kolhaass	Zaha Hadid
X1: Supporting the Site Context	Y1: Ignoring the Site Context	Z1: Supporting the Site Context
X2: Supporting the Site Context	Y2: Ignoring the Site Context	Z2: Supporting the Site Context
X3: Supporting the Site Context	Y3: Ignoring the Site Context	Z3: Supporting the Site Context
X4: Supporting the Site Context	Y4: Ignoring the Site Context	Z4: Supporting the Site Context

), the results show that Zaha Hadid adapted a homogeneous consequence to sustain the project site context in all cases entirely (Z1, Z2, Z3, and Z4). However, the integration between the site’s surrounding circumstances and the project site context was applied in only three-thirds of the cases (A1, A2, and A3). In this regard, none of Rem Kolhaass’s building masses supported the project site context, but the building plot contexts supported the site’s surrounding environments completely (B1, B2, B3, and B4). In parallel, Peter Eisenman in all projects used forms that support the project site context (X1, X2, X3, and X4), but only 50% of Eisenman’s projects support the site’s surrounding environments (A3, and A4).

Regarding the first parameter objective background context, the results show that the value of (partial integration of building form and site context) is recorded in 50% of cases, followed by the value of (entirely ignoring the site context) in 33.3% of cases, and only 16.7% of cases detailed as (disregarding the surrounding patterns). In light of the above, this study reveals that Eisenman’s design strategy regarding the objective background context is mostly performed by merging building form with site context, while Koolhaas intended to ignore the site context at the expense of building mass in most cases, as shown in Figure 11.

The second parameter of this study is projected to be an artificial environment. In half of the cases, the value of (architectural form and site context are at the same level) is repeated frequently, followed by (absence of site context) at a rate of 25% of cases, and in 17% of cases, the building was missing due to the absence of the form. It is interesting to note that 8% of cases are documented as melting the form of the building within the context. In the third parameter (Historical tracing parameter), the values of pre-existing elements as well as identifying traces from the past and present are the common features of cases that are repeated commonly in 33% of cases, respectively. Meanwhile, the values of different maps of the site and overlaying different layers are still at a low rate of 16.7% for each value separately. In this regard, using different maps of the same location over different periods is considered a complicated strategy and can be adapted to sites that have been built several times, as shown in Figure 12.

In the topographical–cultural geometry parameter, 66.7% of cases used site topography as a multi-layer of the ground condition. values of (abstract geometry from culture) and (archeological impact of the site) performed at a rate of 17% of cases, respectively.

In the context fragmentation parameter, three values (missing site identity, altering site features, and scratching site history) are presented at a low rate of 17% for each value separately, while 49% of cases created a dominant new context, which is about highlighting the existing context (see Figure 13). In parallel, results indicate that values in the last parameter (natural context integration) are distributed as follows: 67% of cases keep the shape of the site as it is without any editing, while the value of (form follows the site condition) is verified at a rate of 17%. and the low values of 8.3% are noted in (response to the site topography) and (harmony between the site and the form), respectively.

4.2. Architects Strategies Comparison

Quantitative results show the value of the comprehensive similarity calculation of architects’ strategies in terms of objective background context is as follows: Eisenman integrated the form of the building with the site context in most of the projects at a rate of 75%, while Kolhaass adopted another process by disregarding the site context as a rate of 75%, with 25% Partial integration between form and context. On the other hand, Hadid conversely selected a mixed strategy, integrating the building form with the site context in 50% of cases, ignoring the site context in 25% of cases, and ignoring the surrounding patterns in the rest cases (see Figure 14). These values clarify that each architect adapted a dissimilar scenario in dealing with the objective background context.

Regarding the artificial environment, the qualitative results clarify that the value of the sub-variable named Form and Context at the Same Level is the dominant feature that has been frequented in most cases. Hence, Similarity is detected in architects’ strategies in dealing with this parameter, they are used in half of the cases at a rate of 50%. This result indicates that all senior architects trying to merge the form and context as a preferred design strategy in dealing with artificial environments. The results show similar scenarios in dealing with this parameter, concentrating on the value of Form and Context on the same level by mixing both in one bubble.

It may be worth mentioning that the value of (absent of form features) is recorded in half of the cases designed by Kolhaass while the (absence of site landscapes) is documented at a rate of 50% in Eisenman’s design. See Figure 15.

Regarding the historical tracing parameter, the quantitative results clarified three different scenarios in dealing with project concepts. Koolhaas focused on pre-existing elements in the design of projects in most cases at a rate of 75%. While Eisenman used all values of historical tracing in equal percentages, Hadid concentrated on two values of historical tracing parameters, which are (overlaying different layers of the history of the site) and (pre-existing elements and identical past the present traces). In the process of creating architectural forms from the topography and the culture, all three architects followed similar methods. Hadid and Kolhaass utilized the topography of the site by creating the form from multi-layers of ground condition in 75% of cases. Eisenman also used this method in half of the cases and another half of the cases (abstracting the geometry from the culture and archeology). In terms of the context fragmentation parameter, the three designers attempt to create a dominant context as the best scheme in the design process, recording a rate of 50% of overall cases. Finally, Regarding the natural context integration, the value of keeping the shape of the site was the dominant feature in the design process of all senior architects. All three designers emphasize this value at different ranges; Koolhaas’s strategy was to retain the shape of the site completely, but Eisenman and Hadid’s strategy was to use this value plus (response to the topography of the site) equally.

5. Discussion

The quantitative results detected three strategies of deconstructive unconventional pioneers (Eisenman, Koolhaas, and Hadid) in terms of the interactive design approach regarding site context transactions which include:

• Eisenman’s strategies in dealing with site context are unpredictable due to the project environment and content. In some cases, the architectural form dominates the vista by overlooking the site contexts while the homogeneous mixture between form and surroundings can be found in other cases. This approach guides toward variety in architectural concepts and decoding of different design processes.
• Koolhaas’s strategy emphasizes the mixture of building form with the topographic surrounding lines. This scenario aims to produce the physical conditions of the site, from which a building is derived. Koolhaas focuses on the void design approach, as a design instrument in his design process.
• Hadid’s strategy comprises using the site’s landscaping, topography, and landform, as a base for the remarkable concepts. The purpose of this strategy is to have wide-ranging parameters that contribute positively to making a well-organized interactive model with the surroundings. Based on the result analysis two kinds of scenarios are noticed, the first is related to opposing the surrounding pattern to create a dominant form while the second is related to a homogenous pattern to make a balanced curvature form.

The similarity of design strategies differentiates senior deconstruction architects in the ways of expressing the relation between site context and architectural form through realizing imaginal concepts. Overall, the analysis has shown that the context can primarily be seen as a base element of design.

Despite the similarities, different design approaches are observed. This study reveals that Eisenman’s design strategy regarding the objective background context is mostly performed by merging building form with site context; however, Koolhaas intended to ignore the site context at the expense of building mass. Hadid selected a mixed strategy, integrating the building form with the site context in some cases and ignoring the site context or the surrounding patterns in others.

Based on the results enlightened in the previous section, the interactive architecture approach operational definition can be stated as a process of collecting various factors and parameters in a shared design procedure. It is a dynamic, comprehensive collaboration with all different aspects of design through a special arrangement technique. This approach is in line with the Parsaee [1] perspective.

This study reveals that site context is an effective factor that assimilates with other variables to produce architectural form. It is an inclusive environment that sets the project’s outline via a combination of site topography, site history, local culture, architectural style, microclimate conditions, political situations, and governmental policy. In this regard, Baper clarifies [9] that site context is an effective parameter in measuring architectural identity.

The quantitative results reveal that the diversity of architectural concepts will enrich productive environments in which the site context is melting within the building form. It summarizes the fundamental meaning and appears as a new design approach to avant-garde design strategies. These new tactics emphasize architectural design elements such as different forms mixed with layers of site context, which led to an effective multi-layered architectural culture.

Converting description text paragraphs to graphical analysis is a new methodology that has been used for analysis. This approach matches Fasolo’s methodological guide for the study of architectural history. Graphical analysis plays an important role in the analysis and interpretation of architectural physical appearance visualization.

The diversity of architectural concepts will enrich productive environments in which the site context is melting within the building form. It summarizes the fundamental meaning and appears as a new design approach to avant-garde design strategies. These new tactics emphasize architectural design elements such as different forms mixed with layers of site context, which led to an effective multi-layered architectural culture. This approach matches Michael Hensel’s [42] suggestions for performance-oriented architecture as an integrative approach to architectural design and built environment.

The interactive architecture approach applied in the architecture discipline by senior architects in different ways to develop architectural themes, Zaha Hadid emphasizes flexible forms to improve the quality of life by adapting the site’s particular. In parallel, Koolhaas mixes building form with the topographic surrounding lines to create novel and unique compositions. Meanwhile, Eisenman’s strategy endeavored to use the concept of fragmentation of architectural form using site-characteristic landscapes.

Understanding the site context in which a building is placed can bring to mind the impact on the surroundings. In this regard, Eisenman, Hadid, and Koolhaas use site context as an effective parameter in the interactive design process to enhance the unique physical, cultural, and environmental circumstances. This approach is a guide toward contextualism in architecture, which highlights the significance of natural elements in integration with the building’s physical settings.

6. Conclusions

The assumption of this study is interrelated to the interactive design approach by comparing the design strategies of three pioneer deconstructive architects through an investigation of how site context enhances the diversity of architectural concepts. The analytical results reveal three different design strategies under the umbrella of the interactive design approach. This involves understanding the site context parameters (objective background context, artificial environment, historical tracing, topographical–cultural geometry, context fragmentation, and natural context integration) in developing design solutions responsive to user needs. This study established a new analysis model by enhancing checklist factors with graphical analysis. This study concluded that:

• In terms of objective background context, the three pioneer architects concentrate on similar scenarios in dealing with surrounding patterns to create a dominant form. All scenarios partially integrated the form of the building with the site context. This approach realized architectural form as part of its indispensable context.
• Creativity in architectural design is the process of combining innovative solutions within a specified site framework boundary. This association is a key factor in the development of architectural projects, which enables a building to adapt to its surroundings through multiple levels of interaction. This study concludes that developing site context (the relation between building plot contexts and surrounding environments on the one hand and the relation between building mass and project site contexts within the surrounding background) will enrich the design issues and create unexpected results.
• Despite the similarities, different design approaches are observed. This study reveals that Eisenman’s design strategy regarding the objective background context is mostly performed by merging building form with site context; however, Koolhaas intended to ignore the site context at the expense of building mass. Hadid selected a mixed strategy, sometimes integrating the building form with the site context and ignoring the site context or the surrounding patterns in others.