Student Feedback
The Unit 2 students visited Nairobi, Kenya, for a week at the beginning of August where they observed and documented the local's daily activities and living experiences. The students were given a task to graphically present and describe the intangible processes within the chosen sites in Nairobi that demonstrates various spatial and socio-cultural structures within the area. The following feedback explains the various levels found within the presentations done by the students.
What was understood from the project was that the groups had to explore
some kind of process of decision making that could happen in order for the
Kibera housing project, along the railway line, to be a more successful project
that responds to the changing needs of its inhabitants.
For instance, what could be a
successful output for the housing? Let’s say an area isn’t successful. Through
the use of existing data and observations on site, one could develop an
assumption of what could possibly happen within certain spaces due to the inhabitant’s
needs. What makes this area successful and unsuccessful and what lead up to
the construction of this housing? According to the interpretations of the A3
presentations and student interviews, it seemed as though there was a very
complex process leading up to the final outcome of the housing project. What
informed the tangible occupancy from the intangible negotiations?
How could the everyday spatial activities that occur within the
informal settlements be incorporated into the formal housing scheme? Activities
such as washing and drying of laundry as well as an allocated space for cooking,
that caters to their everyday rituals were observed by certain students.
 |
| Source: Darren Van Gool, Andrea Relling and Ngwato Kekana |
From the presentations, it seemed that the area which was unsuccessful
in its usage was definitely the space that is seen as the back end of the
housing project that faced the railway line. This space is seen as a completely
baron and a wasted space that could have been incorporated in some way within
the housing scheme in a positive way in order to generate revenue via this
extension onto the existing structure. The area that was somewhat
unsuccessful were spaces with narrow pathways, where individuals refused to
demolish certain units in order to widen the space. Pedestrianized spaces that
felt more comfortable were the ones where individuals negotiated between the
housing and informal settlement to widen the pathway.
