Architecture and Design methods often insist that, the best solutions are derived from an intentional response to site or subject vernacular – and often hinge on the exploration and personification of said object or space. Since the 20th century, the saying, 'form follows function' has been a ubiquitous term to represent best design practices; ranging from architecture and landscape urbanism, to industrial design and materials innovation. This idea is particularly effective and holds true when discussing tangible objects and spaces, but how will it be applied when the spaces we inhabit ultimately become uniquely individual and contextually curated sensory interfaces? Moreover, who will design these spatial interfaces, and ultimately what effect will Augmented Reality have on our already existing tangible urban fabric?
It is no secret that urban environments are to be the setting for the societies of the future, and with developing countries adding exponentially to the global population and development density, urban typologies and planning methods are evolving faster than ever before. Innovative solutions and social experiments are being introduced everyday, and seemingly every vocation has a channeled opinion as to what is best for the population.
Historically, architects have been the ones responsible for the design and aesthetics of our buildings; with landscape architects and urban planners playing a remediation role, in contrasting urban density and sprawl with larger scale injections of pedestrian and transportation infrastructure. However, with the arrival of the technological revolution, exponentially expanding computational power and visual mediums are changing the way in which we interface with the tactile world at all scales. Libraries have been replaced by search engines, Photo albums by Instagram, Post-It Notes by Twitter, Rolodex's by LinkedIn, Blueprints by CAD, Architectural Models by BIM – and the list goes on. Programmers and computer scientists are quickly making traditional practitioners and methods obsolete. Short of uploading consciousness into a Matrix-like reality, the urban typology is seemingly the next setting for augmented applications and immersive UI.
The relationship between hardware and software is a seemingly reciprocal leapfrogging pattern where one cannot advance maximally without the other; indifferent to the positive or negative connotations associated with the progress. The same principles hold true with humans and our built environment – we evolve to become a product of our environment and our environment has evolved to become a sum of our collective consciousness. In this metaphor, humans and our dynamic spatial presence are the software existing within the confines of our urban palimpsests – the hardware.
Although neural network interfaces conceptually seem to offer the most efficient means of delivering truly augmented realities, the next logical comparable scenario would be corneal overlays that project onto and augment contextual surfaces and human scaled space – via the arguably ambiguous IoT. Although the hardware and underlying networks are yet to be agreed upon and functionally secure, the conceptual possibility is sound – and architects, landscape architects, and urban planners should be taking serious note.
With an augmented palimpsest, comes an expanded project envelope and diligent consideration for the seemingly endless opportunities for the psychological and sociological relationships that humans will have – with buildings, sidewalks, storefronts, transportation, and most importantly other people. Smartphones have already drastically changed human interactions within constructed space, and the methodology used to determine priority. Whether it be people becoming excessively introverted in transient public settings, using homogeneously aggregated GPS to navigate city blocks, or the overwhelming desire for pedestrian focused public realm – our attention and focus as designers is to understand the human condition and progress accordingly. As inhabitant focus is becoming increasingly insular and quarantined within the tactile realm, digital platforms and social media are becoming the public squares of yesterday’s cities. They simultaneously exist everywhere and nowhere – a paradigm anthropological theory which has never historically been confronted in architectural practice.
Within an AR urban context, information and data will be overwhelming vast. Visuals will be unique and tailored to every individual, making contextual data-mining and analysis even more lucrative than it has become today. It wouldn’t be far off to imagine that everyone would be running different OS platforms in choosing the overall functionality and aesthetic in which their AR exists. UI’s will be parsed and filtered to display only relevant information – walking directions, places of interest, weather and air quality, etc. With augmented space where you can change the aesthetic of a building facade, and inhabit spaces with forms that defy physics, it is hard to determine if priority will be placed on maintaining our static urban infrastructure or will revitalization simply exist in the projected overlays. With the rise of the Web 2.0, global society became interconnected like never before and every industry has been influenced. With 3.0 on the horizon, cross-industry collaboration will intensify and designated lines of responsibility and ownership will be further blurred.
Urban Design Professionals aren't the only practitioners that will be impacted by a potential Augmented Layer being draped over our cities and infinitely present. Economists, Marketers, and Media Curators are only a few of the many people and professions that will be impacted by these changes. For traditional financial institutions, an integrated and widely adopted open source public network poses questions as to how universal transactions and exchanges take place, where they exist, and in what capacity. Marketers will soon have to understand the new paradigm of advertising within the infinitely vast and dynamic space which will be available. Thus posing the question as to which reality would be more valuable in targeting consumer insights and emotions. The archetypal relationship of tactility and human emotion will again influence a paradigm shift in media consumption – just as podcasts have taken over radio by harping on the same sensory interaction simply deployed on a different hardware platform and UI.
Given the climate of robotic manufacturing, AI, and autonomous infrastructure, the traditional architectural design industry is under the increasing threat of losing intellectual influence and a precipitously shrinking market share in the global AEC economy. Rather than trying to assert exclusive intellectual ownership over the urban archetype, architects must welcome collaboration with emerging technologies. Time and again, traditional establishments have fallen prey to the innovation of unicorn startups due to their lack of humility, and preparedness for the rapid dynamism of a digitized world.
The coveted ability to create tactile hyperbole, influence human emotion, and determining the historical remembrance of current society is no longer exclusive to architects or urban designers. Form must be hybridized with Function when creating our augmented spaces. Our urban infrastructure and formal layouts must become the foundational catalysts unto which society can thrive. The hardware of our society must not conflict with the software, but must also play host to its ever changing dynamic presence. Our urban topology is evolving faster than ever before, and if not assertive and honest in evaluating the role of designers and creatives in society – the future physical manifestation of our collective consciousness might not even be tactile at all.