I think this reading very accurately portrays Urban Sites porous and plural in many dimensions. Resource usage, questions of their physical bounds, access - nearly every element has multiple readings and approaches when considered en tout. I really enjoyed the implications of the word "multivalent". In relation to chemistry, valence is the combining power of atoms. Similar definitions in psychology and biology exist. With an atom, valence is determined by an electrons ability to "jump" between states and exist there until either the stimulus goes away or it is acted upon by another outside force. Sites seem to act in the same way, responding to visitors' predilictions and the urban context in different ways all suitable to the stimulus. In describing what they call "Mobile Ground", the authors determine that "[Sites] inscribe a
mobile ground where urban sites are understood as dynamic and provisional spaces, as points of departure to parts unknown rather than places of arrival of fixed address...reminding designers that sites remain subject to change beyond their control."
Also of great importance is the definition of a site's reach. I like how the distinction is made from site scale, to emphasize the definition of a project's impact outside of its property boundary. Considering, as I am, a site in Doha, the reach of my potential site is international (even just because I -a foreigner- am considering designing there) and regional and local and a question of physical resources and access to human-designed facilities.
I think an Open Architecture would use the networking capacity of technology to highlight the many in which this building is conceived. An occupant would likely only be aware of the heating load of a building if they were part of Facilities Management or were shown it in a presentation from a similar group. All buildings necessarily tie into infrastructure and we can tap into those flows to educate and inform.
