Maria Johnsen & Vidar André Klavenes
LIVING IN THE NORTH
PRE DIPLOMA
” Far beyond any aesthetics and formal determination, beyond the rules, the programs, the standards, buildings are beautiful when people feel well in them
- Anne Lacaton
TABLE OF CONTENTS
THESIS
OBSERVATIONS
- adaptations - tools
PROGRAM LOCATION HISTORY
POTENTIAL SITES
REFERENCE PROJECTS Bibliography
7 9
15
17
19
24
32
49
THESIS
This diploma will investigate climate responsive architecture in the North.
Exploring how to utilize the local climate conditions to enhance the quality and wellbeing of the residents, and increase the amount of time spent outside. Offer more light, more sun and more connections to the outside.
What type of rooms extends the season? Testing how to create good
microclimate and outdoor spaces for the social community.
9
OBSERVATIONS
During our five years here at Oslo school of architecture we have gained experience and knowledge on how we design and build today’s architecture. We have looked at how architecture has evolved through the times and we recognise that there are still some questions yet not answered. How is architecture adapting to the local climate and living conditions?
The climate is always changing. It is not a stable perpetual phenomena. Global warming is affecting the planet, and the lives of the people who inhabit it. Our objective is not to look at global warming as such, but to examine the impact of local conditions and how architectural strategies can better respond to this. Building specifically for the local climate, it is possible for houses in cold and harsh areas to offer its residents more qualities than an imported typehouse.
We have four seasons that each has its beauty and resistance. We adapt to local variations and look to history to find inspirations and examples of how it’s been handled before. Knowledge has been refined through history, from generation to generation. The local variations will always be present. The path of the sun will be constant.
Norway is an elongated country measuring 1748 km from the southern tip of Lindesnes to the northern tip of Kinnarodden. This will give very different climate conditions throughout the country. We find the north very interesting to work with. It is hard to find research on how you should build in the north, and we want to investigate how a common housing typology can adapt.
The most popular suburban house type in Norway, without the single house, is the row house. It’s efficient in area use, is economical, and reduces heat loss. It also allows for a social community to form around it. This housing first appeared in London in the 1600’s and Philadelphia in the 1700’s. It came to the nordic countries around 1930.
ADAPTATIONS
Building technology is always evolving. At one point in history, the pyramids were the greatest building technology. The technology of today can be replaced by new technology tomorrow. We have the tools to help us work with complicated designs.
Engineering is more complex and it requires architects to be more creative in their pursuit of designing the impossible. We might even be working too fast.
Throughout the times constructions have been built, used and lived in over generations.
By allowing the elements to affect the constructions, we can determine what needs to be improved. This allows us to go back and evaluate what does not work, and learn from it. We adapt to changes and local conditions. By doing this we can build something that relates to us. Providing generous lighting conditions, comfortable spaces and a place where people feel well.
In Norway there are long traditions of working with wood. We have very skilled craftsmen that are able to differentiate each subject. They know what logs they want to use for different parts in the building. Each carpenter is schooled by his father, who was schooled by his father. Skills will always evolve as they pass through generations. New tools are developed and better techniques allow the work to be done faster and more precisely.
Today we don’t work with wood in the traditional way as they did before. We have computers that give us endless possibilities to design what our imaginations desire.
Our tools are guided by machines that give us precise cuts and allow us to erect something that otherwise would take years. We combine our technology, imagination, experience and new ways of processing wood. This gives new and exciting spaces and constructions.
TOOLS
For thousands of years, paper and ink have been the tools for designing architecture. In today’s society we have so many tools it’s hard to choose between them. Our main tool is the computer. The computer gives us the opportunity to test out several scenarios in a very short amount of time. The pen and paper is still the most used tool in the developing process. And most ideas start with pen and paper.
Wind and weather programs collect data over many years, and allows us to investigate a particular site at a specific time and date. In our experience, we work with a variety of programs that analyse different data. Working with the right tools gives us the data we need to understand different designs.
SUMMARY
By combining these elements and looking back into history. We think that there is much more we can learn from how we create architecture. Long traditions are very solid and give us confidence when we build. We want to have the same confidence when we research new and existing architecture. By exploring and working with these tools, creating our confidence in architecture.
When considering the problems of building in the north to talk of an architecture of climate
would be to tell only half of the story. It is people in the climate, the cities and the landscape,
in families or crowds that count.
- Ralph Erskine
”
PROGRAM
The task is to make a realistic housing project where the design strategies are directly influenced by the local climate conditions.
The rooms of importance are those connecting the inside to the
outside. Working with the rooms that actively addresses each
other, this may be a winter garden outside the kitchen, or a porch
to the living room. Focusing on views, connections and light
quality, as well as good outdoor spaces.
17
LOCATION
The location we want to work with is situated in the North of Norway, above the arctic circle. The north consists of Nordland, Troms and Finnmark. We want to explore different sites in the north as its landscape changes a lot from inland to coast to mountain. The coast deals with more stable temperatures and harsh winds. Innland has much more snow and colder winter, and the mountain a bit of both.
We’re looking for conditions where the house is usually not adapted to its site. Where you typically find a house designed in the south and placed in the north. Where we can explore how wind, snow and rain create different climate conditions and how to adapt to each particular micro climate.
The north has different qualities and challenges we find interesting to work with. We find architecture built in the north is hardly ever built for the north. We design and build for the south where the climate conditions are easier and we construct the same in the north where it does not adapt to its location. We want to focus on this, and adapt to the long country that we have. Norway is the longest country in Europe, and nearly one third of it is north of the arctic circle (measured in length).
We also want to help Northern Norway become more self-sufficient and not have to rely on bigger offices in the south to complete tasks. We can also find more untouched land here, and want to look into how we can adapt to it and set a statement on how to look at and adapt to new sites.
If we are to use the land as we should, the north is not to be excluded in the
future. We hardly ever look to the north for any answers, only to the central
south and we want to help change that vision.
A HISTORY OF BUILDING IN THE NORTH
It seems that the most usual way to build houses in the North, is building in the same fashion as the rest of the country. Different countries have different styles, but the approach is the same. There are also similarities historically. The first settlers of the North build themselves small huts or
”gammer” of the available material. Turf, moss, skins and hides, branches if there was some. And where trees were scarce or nonexistent, bones or ice worked constructively. The design of the entrance, heat source, and the size of the rooms was important to stay warm and sheltered.
Later on people from further South settled in the North and brought their building customs with them. In Norway they discovered the benefits of having the houses in a cluster, for reasons of practicality, efficiency and social structure, and sheltering from wind and weather as you walk to and from the outhouse or farm buildings.
With times and needs changing so would the way of building and the
design of the dwellings. The need for service buildings connected to the
house fell away with the industry of food production and water supply, and
the post-war period demanded a huge amount of housing that could be
build fast and with as little effort and material as possible. So house types
changed and the thought of adapting to place and climate faded.
20
The regular house works fine in mild weathers, but when the winter sets in, snow packs up in inconvenient places, entrance doors disappears, the amount of heating is extensive and at a few occasions buildings collapse and give in for wind or snow loads.
Still, at most northern locations, even in the arctic, the prevalent type of house is the ”regular” one. In greenland the iconic colorful wooden houses were shipped in as construction sets from scandinavia, as it also is for Svalbard. At least they build on poles to protect the frozen soil from thawing.
The russians build their blocks of brick at all of their territory. In Antarctica we mostly find research stations, some more futuristic than others, but many of them do respond to their climatic conditions in varying degree.
It seems to be pretty recent that architects has tried to take northern local
climate into consideration when designing buildings, and we mostly see
climate responsive architecture in public buildings. The first attempts of
achieving this leaned on experience, intuition and learned knowledge, but
later research has developed more tools and digital aids for calculating the
impact of wind, snow and other weather phenomena so we can develop
houses and building types that better respond to the climate at their site.
Ralph Erskine
Kulden kan vi til en viss grad klare med thermopane og vinterfrakker, men hva gjør vi med sneen? Har vi noen gang tatt den med i vår arkitektoniske tankegang, – praktisk og estetisk? Vi er tydeligvis så vant til den, at vi later som en ikke er der. Det er først når engelskmannen Erskine kommer med friske øyne og forteller oss at vi har et klima, at vi kanskje begynner å tenke oss litt om.
The cold we can manage to a certain degree with thermopane and winter coats, but what about the snow? Have we ever included it in our architectonic way of thinking, – practically and aesthetically? We are obviously so used to it that we pretend it is’nt there. First when the englisman Erskine with his fresh look tells us that we have a climate may we begin to think it over.
- Christian Norberg Schulz
”
25 24
POTENTIAL SITES
The landscape and climate of northern Norway varies a lot. From mountains to big flat ranges, and different exposure to wind and snowfall. We’ve been interested in three potential sites that faces different climate challenges, and are already connected to infrastructure in established settlements.
- Ballstad in Lofoten, representing wind - Tromsø representing snow
- Karasjok representing extreme cold temperatures
POTENTIAL SITE #1
TROMSØ
CHARACTERISTICS:
Windy at times
Varying amount of sun
Quite stabile temperature, but cold A lot of snow!
SUMMER:
June-August 11°C average
(2°C coldest, 25°C warmest) WINTER:
November-April -1 °C average
(-12°C coldest, 6°C warmest)
28
POTENTIAL SITE #2
BALLSTAD, LOFOTEN
CHARACTERISTICS:
Strong wind
Varying amount of sun Stable temperature Very little snow
SUMMER:
June-August 11°C average
(4 °C coldest, 25° warmest) WINTER:
November-April 2°C average
(-11 coldest 11°C warmest)
POTENTIAL SITE #3
KARASJOK
CHARACTERISTICS:
Windy
Moderate amount of snow, little snowfall Very cold
SUMMER:
12 °C average WINTER:
- 16 °C average
33 32
REFERENCE PROJECTS
The first half of these projects focus on responding to harsh climate, specifically in the north or the arctic. They study how to create different typologies or design choices to respond to the local climate. They also take into account the architecture ideals of the time in wchich they were built.
The second half is working with houses of a denser typology than detached houses, that works with the interactions between nature and neighbours, and how the volumes act together to create good utdoor spaces, firstly considering the social interaction of the inhabitants, but also concerning microclimate.
All of the projects have existed for long enough time that the results and
longterm consequences of the various approaches can be observed and be
learnt from. We can get an insight of what works and what does’nt,and use
these experiences to find the most suitable solutions in our own project.
ORMEN LÅNGE
Ralph Erskine 1965
Svappavaara, Sweden
OBJECTIVE
The project is one of the first building blocks in scandinavia where the architect highlighted the importance of adapting the building to the local climate and topography. Erskine wanted to create ”An Ecological Arctic Town”, a climate adaptive town in the North, and The block in Svappavaara is just a small part of what he wanted to build.
For the architects in the 1960’s the important climate aspect was the microclimate and making it nice and comfortable for the inhabitants of the building, as well as securing a good environment for social conditions.
Erskine was pretty early with talking about the ecological town already in the 50’s, the theme would not be a common one until the 70’s. By ecology he means the interaction between architecture, outer environment and people, and energy efficiency is an obvious part of it.
To achieve this he uses materials, construction, organisation of rooms and situation of the building. It’s also important with
”social and cultural” sustainability, and ”the art of building communities”.
DESIGN
Erskine studied the building traditions of natives in arctic areas, like the gamme and igloo, and emphasized the significance of the climate as the definer of the design, not mainly as something to protect ourself from, but as aesthetic potential, thus his slogan ”’form follows climate”.
The sculptural shape of the building in Svappavaara is a result of giving the roof distinctive design to protect against wind and snow and the corners of the building are rounded to avoid accumulation of snow. The windows varies according to the rough terrain.
The long volume is slightly partitioned and mimics the surrounding landscape. It also envelopes and embraces the cluster of small houses that lies below it, and creates some sheltered parks and places.
The materials are mostly in accordance with the ideals of the time, like concrete and prefab elements, as well as the colors.
37 36
HESTESKOBLOKKA
Knut Astrup 1965
Hammerfest
OBJECTIVE
The ”Hesteskoblokka” has a lot in common with Erskines
”Ormen Långe” and ideals for arctic city, mixed with the ideals of the time, like using concrete and having long horizontal bands of windows. Free view to the outside, light and air, was important. The main goal was to cover the need for housing for settling factory workers, and the ideas of a social way of living and the building as community was promoted, but the adaption to climate and terrain was just as important, and may actually have set aside some of the human aspects in advantage for building physics.
The architects has seen the climate and topography as the ruling guide for the placement of the block. To the North it overlooks the lake ”Storvannet”, and to the south it embraces an outdoor area. The architects wanted to showcase the building as just a part of the landscape. they used a lot of analysis to develop the buildings shape and direction, but they later turned out to be a little insufficient, or faulty.
DESIGN
The curved shape was supposed to capture the heat from the sun, shield from wind and frame a good place for people to meet, and the kids to play. Even vegetation was hoped to gain some sheltering. The building volume is stepping up with the terrain on the sides to make it a part of the landscape.
The apartments stretches through the width of the volume, giving them continuos flow of light, and everyone has access to balconies that are set back into the volume. The entrances goes out to common hall that is half climatized and receives light from bands of windows.
The local climate around the block turned out to be quite dissatisfying. The southfaced inward arc embraced winter winds and snow as well as sun, there was little maintenance, and some apartements was left empty. After years of decay and bad reputation the building was renovated by Steinsvik architects in the 90’s. They suggested building windscreens, glassing in the balconies so they could be more usable, subdividing the long corridors to make it feel less like an institutional building, and they wanted to add social functions like a swimming pool or an elevator.
Anne Brit Børve / Husbanken 1987-89
Hammerfest, Norway
HOUSING IN HARD CLIMATE
OBJECTIVE
The area of Fuglenesdalen in Hammerfest was planned as a housing area with numerous detached houses. The area lies on a terrain ridge with sparse vegetation. There is excessive snowfall and strong winds and snowdrift.
Architect Anne Brit Børve and professor Arne K. Sterten was researching how to build houses acclimatised to extreme climate conditions, and got involved with The Norwegian Housing Bank to develop good houses for this area.
The goal was to reduce the impact of snow, keeping entrances and windows clear, extending the warm season and the possibility to be outside, and building houses that generally looked better in relation to landscape and each other.
Børve designed some houses that would work good in the climate, but the apperance of the building was a bit foreign to most people and were not too popular, but maybe would be more attractive today. The Housing bank developed some types that were more common and familiar in shape.
DESIGN
based on the research of Anne Brit Børve on how make the houses best suited to the place and climate, the Housing Bank developed a list of terms that would give homebuilders extra financial support/loan.
- Keeping the Garage and entrance near the road to reduce the amount of shoveling.
- Creating a backside with a low wall and roof angle to control wind loads and snow drift. Rooms that is typically cold and dark is placed in the back, like storage, laundry room and bedrooms.
- Outdoor spaces are retracted into the building volume, with the plan of adding windscreens, espalier or plants to increase sheltering. Also they are placed in the south-west wchich is the most attractive direction in this case considering the climate. Theres outdoor spaces over 2 stories to expand the contact to the outside.
- Variation in building volume to break up the bare landscape - Nearly square footorint to reduce heat loss and material use.
41 40
Steinsvik Arkitekter 2005-2008
Tromsø, Norway
STORELVA
OBJECTIVE
The Norwegian technical housing regulations published a manual on moist in buildings in 2002. It takes on the new superinsulated design creating a multi layer wall that consists of 9-13 or more elements to reach a low power consumption goal. This demands technical solutions with complicated HVAC systems to prevent moist and mold. Based on this manual Steinsvik arkitekter took the opportunity to develop a concept for an airtight, moisture-proof and zero cold-bridged exterior wall construction based on solid wood elements
DESIGN
The design is a row house with 7 homes. The site is next to and north of the main road on Kvaløya. They build the houses closest to the road, acting as a sound barrier and working with the river running next to it giving the north side good outdoor conditions. The south is given the best view with the fjord and island of Tromsø. It is clad with pine heart wood and sun collectors generating 5Kvm to each home. Each home is designed around the CLT timber so that it is working with its properties in making it a very efficient climatically project. It’s clear that this is a project that focuses on energy and climate.
They work with sun collectors, different heating solutions, and coolings solutions. They build on a scale that is easy and efficient to heat and cool. And adapt to summer and winter conditions. They use more timber and focus on materials that act as carbon storage.
Niels Torp + 1983
Oslo
GISKEHAGEN
OBJECTIVE
Giskehagen is a project in an established villa area. It is located to the north west of Oslo, 4km from the city center.
The site is somewhat hilly and bumpy, a typical norwegian landscape. Nils torp, the architect, has taken on this project trying to establish a set of rules to make buildings of the same type efficient and more cost effective. And at the same time keeping it different and not giving it a copy paste project. His goal is to establish an area that feels warm and welcoming yet providing the resident with privacy and the feeling of having something of their own. He is working physically with the terrain and site to achieve a building mass that relates to the site.
DESIGN
His work on the masterplan shows how he carefully places each row in a pattern that looks like it is unorganized, yet when you study it you can see how he carefully creates outdoor spaces of high quality to ensure privacy and a healthy sosial neighborhood. The houses are all pre fabricated plans.
It consists of four different houses, or so it seams. The prefab house is only 90% finished from the factory. The remaining 10% gives the houses the ability to connect and react in different ways. Adding different qualities and shapes making each house personal. This to ensure the neighborhood’s vision of individual houses. The terrasse houses consist of houses with 5 - 10 units in each row creating streets, corridors and open spaces in the neighborhood. The houses are all made from quality materials, built to last and constructed in a way that allows for change during its lifetime.
Det er arkitektens ansvar å lage sosiale treffpunkter.
Uten dem er det ikke et sted. Da er det bare hus.
It is the architect’s responsibility to create social meeting points. Without them there is no place.
Then it’s just house.
- Niels Torp
”
45 44
Bengt Bilèn 1994-1996 Stockholm
OBJECTIVE
EBBA (ekologisk byggande i Björkhagen) had a vision on building a ecological housing project outside Stockholm that would relate and adapt to the site and become a sustainable project by focusing on material use, energy and housing democracy.
DESIGN
The work started four years after the forming of EBBA and almost all houses were erected in a two year period. Some residents chose to do most of the work themselves and others decided to have workers do most of the work.
The buildings were all a result of carefully chosen material and design. The project focuses on sustainability,materiality, ecology and environment . Most floors were heart wood spruce that was oiled or soap treated, with central heating.
The walls are all insulated with cellulose. The cladding is treated with iron sulfate that blends with nature and has very good anti mold and rot properties. And most the houses are placed on stilts to not damage the ground.
The housing area also has a common house for everyone to use. The common house consists of a playroom for the kids, large rooms for different events with kitchen and laundry machines for the residents.
UNDERSTENSHÖJDEN
Far beyond any aesthetic and formal determination, beyond the rules, standards and programs, buildings are beautiful when people feel good in them
when the light inside is beautiful and the air is pleasant, when the exchange with the outside seems easy and gentle, and when uses and sensations are unexpected. We base all our projects on the principle of generosity of space and economy, serving the life, the uses and the appropriation, with the aim of changing the standard.
- Anne Lacaton
”
49
The velux Group. (2017, 4. mail). Anne Lavaton -”freedom of use” [Videoklipp]
Hentet fra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbVvEZyPZ2s http://primaryresearch.org/row-house-1800-1860/
https://snl.no/bolig_-_historikk
Ralph Erskine. (1968). “Architecture and Town Planning in the North”. Polar Record, 1968, 165 Christian Norberg Schulz. (1966). Sne. Arkitektnytt, 1966(2), 21.
Elin Haugdal. (2015). Boligblokker i hardt klima. Nordlit, 2015(36), 79-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.7557/13.3681 Husbankhus for hardt klima : husbankhus i felt IV, Fuglenesdalen, Hammerfest : tegninger og beskrivelser av hustyper utviklet på oppdrag fra Husbanken : erfaringer og synspunkter. (1987)
Anne Brit Børve. (1989). Hus og husgrupper i klimautsatte, kalde strøk : utforming og virkemåte (Doktoravhandling).
Arkitekthøgskolen i Oslo, Oslo.
Arkitektur N. (nr 2 - 2009). s42-49. Passivhus ved Storelva, Bærekraft i praksis.
https://arkitektur-n.no/prosjekter/passivhus-ved-storelva?cat=19 Ramm, B. (2019, 30. oktober). -Her bor arkitektene, Giskehagen. D2.
Hentet fra https://www.dn.no/staticprojects/special/d2/herborarkitektene/giskehagen/
Understenshöyden. (2020) Ekoby i Björkhagen
Hentet fra https://understenshojden.se/om-understenshojden/
Understenshöyden. (2020) Hur kom området till?
Hentet fra https://understenshojden.se/hur-kom-omradet-till/
The Velux Group. (2017, 4. mail). Anne Lavaton -”freedom of use” [Videoklipp]
Hentet fra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbVvEZyPZ2s 3
9
13 29 32 -35
36
38
40
42
45 PAGE
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Erskine, R. (1960). Plan for Svappavaara [Foto].
Foto: Matti Östling, Statens centrum för arkitektur och designs samlingar.
Top: Erskine, R. (1958). Arctic Town [Foto]
Bottom: Ormen Långe Foto: Elin Haugdal 2010.
https://digitaltmuseum.no/021015742051/hesteskoblokka-bybo-pa-folkemunne-speiler-seg-i-storvannet-til- hoyre-for
Top: Arkitekt Astrup og Hellerns analyse av mikroklimaet rundt Hesteskoblokka Illustrasjon fra Byggekunst 3/1965.
Middle: https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/G1pk9/slik-mente-de-at-folk-skulle-bo-paa-60-tallet?
Bottom: https://www.ifinnmark.no/hesteskoblokka
Husbankhus for hardt klima : husbankhus i felt IV, Fuglenesdalen, Hammerfest : tegninger og beskrivelser av hustyper utviklet på oppdrag fra Husbanken : erfaringer og synspunkter. (1987)
Right side bottom: House drawn by Anne Brit Børve in front of the fuglenesdalen.
https://arkitekturguide.uit.no/items/show/1136 Passivhus i rekke, Storelva
Stensvik, R. (u.å) [fotografi]
Hentet fra https://www.steinsvikarkitekt.no/Prosjekter/Storelva Ramm, B. (2019, 30. oktober). -Her bor arkitektene, Giskehagen. D2.
Hentet fra: https://www.dn.no/staticprojects/special/d2/herborarkitektene/giskehagen/
Understenshöjden
Snidare Arkitekter. (u.å) [fotografi]
Hentet fra https://www.snidare.se/bostder#/warten/
Foto: Jeff Speckman
Hentet fra: https://issyparis.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/faroe-islands/
Lofoten
Stian Norum Herlofsen Photography Erskine, R. (1968). The Polar Record [Foto].
Hentet fra http://hiddenarchitecture.net/arctic-town/
Erskine, R. (1958). Arctic town [Foto].
Hentet fra http://hiddenarchitecture.net/arctic-town/
Greenland.
Fra Pinterest, oppgitt kilde: http://appleblossomdreams.blogspot.com/
Havråtunet
Steinar Myhr / NN / Samfoto | Credit: Samfoto, Keysersgt. 5, 0165 Oslo
https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC31NDF_havratunet?guid=8618afe6-a4df-4297-ac92-6d5228f96192 Hammerfest
Philip Arthur LRPS
https://sophies-cottage.tumblr.com/post/152209074224/allthingseurope-hammerfest-norway-by-philip Erskine, R. (1963). Plan for Svappavaara
Greenland
https://no.pinterest.com/pin/622904192190747259/
Greenland
Hentet fra: https://visitgreenland.com/about-greenland/architecture/
Top: https://hbarchitects.co.uk/halley-vi-british-antarctic-research-station/
Middle: Sanae IV, The South African Antarctic Expedition Reasearch Station https://www.wired.com/2010/04/ff_antarctica/4/
Bottom: https://inhabitat.com/dorte-mandrups-subtle-new-icefiord-center-will-be-built-on-greenlands-glacial- landscape/
Erskine, R. (1970). Resolute Bay [Foto].
Hentet fra http://hiddenarchitecture.net/arctic-town/
Oppe: https://www.norgeskart.no/#!?project=norgeskart&layers=1005&zoom=10&lat=7733793.52&lon=6524 91.82&sok=ottars%20veg&markerLat=7731811.000044403&markerLon=652470.9980991936&panel=sear- chOptionsPanel&showSelection=false
Nede: Foto av Tromsø, fotograf: Konrad Konieczny
Oppe : https://www.norgeskart.no/#!?project=norgeskart&layers=1005&zoom=13&lat=7551782.81&lon=439 793.39&sok=ottars%20veg&markerLat=7731811.000044403&markerLon=652470.9980991936&panel=sear- chOptionsPanel&showSelection=false
Nede: https://www.google.no/maps/@68.0745282,13.5409659,3a,75y,273.33h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s- bljuHjKBobYY38NhB2DcIg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Oppe: https://www.norgeskart.no
Nede: Foto av Karajok, fotograf: Geir Tårnesvik Erskine, R. (1968). Arctic Town [Foto].
Hentet fra http://hiddenarchitecture.net/arctic-town/
34
35
36
37
38-39
40-41
42-43
44-45
46
48 1
4
6
8
11
12 14
18
21
22
27
29
31
32
PAGE PAGE
