Cloak and Dagger Theory in Peter Eisenman Houses covers the apparent ‘rules’ of geometrical composition underlying the design of plan in early houses by architect Peter Eisenman. The effect of these compositional rules, tied to the design process of ‘decomposition’ as described by Eisenman, in the generation of layout in these houses is examined using some basic representational techniques in the space syntax toolkit. 
In particular, this includes the effect in structuring the relationships, if any, between public (e.g. everyday living) and private (e.g. bedrooms) functions as well as the household interface between inhabitants and visitors. The course offers a better understanding of the relationship between the architect’s stated aims in his own theoretical writings and the probable functioning of these houses as architectural objects (1.0 hour course).
NOTE: This course does make use of some basic space syntax analysis. However, even if you are not familiar with space syntax, it should not be considered a deterrent.
Key concepts: architectural theory, composition, deconstructivism, domestic functions, plan geometry, genotypes.
Instructor: Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A
Check here to purchase this course ($9.99), which includes an one-hour video presentation and PDFs of the course supplementary materials and slide handout.
Note: We are beta-testing with these our course offerings so if you have any issues accessing the course material, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Thank you!
The course covers the financial, institutional, and legal hurdles/pitfalls confronting space syntax in the American market, especially in the private sector. Using a series of ‘back-of-the-napkin’ financial calculations common to the American development process, the course demonstrates how these challenges can transform into a distinct advantage for advocating the cause of the space syntax in the United States. The course concludes by discussing the enormous challenges and opportunities for space syntax in America today (1.0 hour course).
Each course includes a prerecorded slide presentation with narration by The Outlaw Urbanist himself, Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A. A brief course synopsis and biography is also provided for self-reporting purposes to your professional organization, employer, and/or academic institution. Slide handouts PDFs can be downloaded for each course. For now, we are asking participants to take advantage of opportunities to self-report continuing education credits. As we develop courses and the functionality of our online learning management system, we hope to eventually provide pre-approved credit opportunities for users, especially AICP planners. In the future, we also intend to supplement courses with written narratives of the presentation with additional opportunities for learning about the topic, e.g. bibliography, videos, exhibits, etc.
Planning Naked | December 2015
Consultation is an activity (a means to an end) and not an accomplishment in itself. Personally, I’m sick of APA members citing all manner of acronym-ed organizations they have consulted as if this was an accomplishment in itself. It is not. Poor Richard: It isn’t the quantity of the acronyms that matter but the quality of their (letter) characters. APA members need to be careful about flying to something shiny (AARP’s Livability Index, e.g. Won’t someone please think of the old people?!?!) and applying it without thought before understanding its underlying assumptions. Count me suspicious. Based on experience, 
I can’t really comment with authority on the validity of Ewing’s arguments since I have not read the submitted paper in question. Of course, Ewing is correct that the larger the city, the more you have of everything including crime. The aggregated population v. crime correlation is interesting at an abstract level (and should be totally expected) but not very useful for planning policy. For that, you need the sensitive street-by-street and block-by-block modeling techniques of the urban network such as space syntax. In this way, you can demonstrate the usefulness of such correlations between population, crime, location/access, and spatial vulnerability and potential proposed design changes to address the problem. There’s a lot of good research on that front. However, what is refreshing about Ewing’s article is the transparency. It is an excellent attempt to ‘unveil’ the scientific process at work. In this sense, it is very valuable. In fact, Ewing’s article makes me wonder whether there is some inherent value in all referred publications printing short summaries by referees for all rejected papers so that the entire scientific, urban planning community can benefit from seeing the process at work. Something worth thinking about as this could be ‘a rising tide lifts all boats’ type of strategy.