urban gestures

This is a picture of the dry moat that surrounds part of the James Farley Post Office in Manhattan. As an urban gesture I find it acutely medieval and awful. I also am starting to form an opinion of the building (which I didn't know existed until a few days ago) which is acutely negative and unsympathetic. I regard it as an anachronism in the city of New York--a throwback to an earlier era, bereft of function, and a burden on the citizens of that illustrious metropolis.

But, it's a Historic Landmark, protected by the full force and blind might of the preservation movement. It's built on 8 acres of train tracks, so a vertical intervention would be astonishly expensive.

More on this subject later.

building form

Interesting article by John Straube at Building Science Corporation. http://www.buildingscience.com/documents/insights/bsi-061-function-form-building-shape-and-energy/

Straube points out that building form for large buildings is less important for energy use than it is for small buildings. In many respects, this is a corollary to the mass/scale/surface area rule in biology. I don't construe Straube's position as giving carte blanche to Architects to get away with crazy geometry and being able to claim that it's inherently green.

Straube also asserts that floor area to surface area of enclosure is a more meaningful way to assess building energy than building volume to surface area of enclosure. I agree with him on this issue, but I'm cautious about advocating minimized ceiling heights as a good idea for buildings. In my experience and observation, ceiling height is a much more important determinant of architectural quality than plan shape or size. I've also seen many examples in residential architecture where low ceilings have been the deciding factor in the renovate vs. demolish debate. Higher ceilings in commercial buildings can mean better daylight penetration to interior spaces.

the last floor plan

In some earlier discussions on the subject of terminal design, I didn't have the courage to point out that residential architecture seems to have reached a plateau in terms of quality and function. Adjacency of rooms, types of rooms, and proportions of spaces have been well established since the post-war construction boom. My opinion is heavily biased towards North America, but since we seemed to have exported architectural aspirations to everywhere else it's reasonable to expect suburban sprawl in China, Africa, and India. I wouldn't be surprised if it's already in place.

Houses have bedrooms, kitchens, bathrooms, and living rooms. They have storage spaces, both in the form of closets as well as dedicated volumes like basements and attics. Protection from the elements is the primary mission of residential design, but the standards of construction have improved to such a level that most people are unaware of the great progress that has been made in enclosure technology (okay, I'm getting a bit hyperbolic there).

important announcement

Towers of Ilium will become a cat blog. Since architecture really isn't very useful or interesting, I've decided that I need to reach a broader audience with content that is meaningful, astonishing and uplifting. In other words, all things cat, all the time.

How does Facebook have a business model?

no photo monday

The Architectural Billings Index declined in May, which is bad news in general for the economy as a whole. Our business has been doing marginally better because of an uptick in residential remodeling projects--a trend that is consistent with a recovery of the housing market.

In my last post I should have been more explicit about how I think that the distinction between "public" and "private" is stupid and misleading. "Private" generally means profit-oriented, but a "Public" government is concerned with profits as well, whether they are measured in productivity gains as a the result of a relatively stable social structure or increasing life expectancy. The method of measurement cannot always be turned into dollars or some other type of numerical entity (now that there is a contradiction, ain't it?). Concepts like "better" and "worse" are inherently qualitative. A successful private company offers an easier measurement system.

But, I'm getting sidetracked and I return to my original point. There is no substantial difference between private and public. The actions of one affect many, and the actions of many effect one.

bury my heart in sandy springs georgia

I just read an article about Sandy Springs, Georgia, a suburb of 94,000 people located near Atlanta. The story describes how the community has outsourced the majority of city services, like building inspection, courts, public works and 911 calls, to private companies. According to sources interviewed, things are working out well.

The story was framed in the context of national debates about public vs. private management and governance. I believe this debate is flawed, and there are significant clues in the story about why the character of an organization has less to do with the teachings of Marx or Hayek and more about the competence and will of the people who are responsible for its management.  Human organizations, whether they number two people or two billion can separated into two categories--those that work and those that do not.

Peter Drucker made this observation, but his teachings seem to have been forgotten by the talking heads who populate the airwaves and bookshelves these days. Sandy Springs has many advantages, not least of which is a core of leadership that is focused on providing services for the people in the community. The same cannot be said for many private corporations, or the kleptocratic regimes that dominate so many nations.

architecture and productivity (#9)

There is a company in China that is building a modular high rise in 90 days. I would be impressed, but such spectacular and misleading examples of productivity have been around since the 1920's. My long running argument is that productivity in architecture and construction has flatlined, and with increasing planning and building complexity, has even begun to decline in certain areas.

This post-war house in Levittown could be efficiently built in a few weeks or a few months. Some production builders in the America south are capable of erecting homes twice this size with 3 bathrooms in under two weeks. To my eye, that's a lateral improvement.

Compared to the cathedrals, modern design and construction moves at a fast pace. But, every project is different. The planning and permitting process for a high rise in Boston can sometime take more than a decade. The building in China I referred to above looks like it is being built in a wilderness, on a flat, uncrowded site.