| From
CRITICISM we move to the ILLUSTRATION of
my principles and practice of architecture. Below
are 17 TYPES of architecture that are work
in process either as client work, R&D, entrepreneurial
projects or speculative. |
|
| I
have decided to do this Illustration section
by selecting one primary example of my work - with
references to others - from each category of architectural-types
that have the most relevance
to this
Thesis. While this will not be comprehensive of either
my architectural philosophy or work in detail, it
will focus on those aspects of it, as a body, that
most illustrate the process (and examples of building) philosophy-into-form so
as to create authentic, fact-based human environments
on scales ranging from a single room to planet-wide
scope. |
| It
is important that that I do not mean the above statement
to be taken metaphorically. And, that the scope of
these examples be taken as an integrated concept.
No matter what scale of recursion that I am working
on at any moment, with any project, I do not think
or design in isolation and disregard of the total
scope I have described in this document. Each work
is but
a part, a phase in what is, to me, a single project
[link].
With each navCenter, for example, I see the environment
within the Armature of a global network
of Centers
themselves a part of a Planetary project; and, I
see each Center as a way to create the means so
that humanity can collaboratively design
a planet that works for everyone. These goals are
not idle abstractions to me or hopeful ideals; they
are a work in progress. They are part and parcel
of what I consider to be Worthy Problems [link].
The role that architecture plays in all this has
been under rated. The close coupling of process,
environment and tools has been
ignored. For all the “stylistic” advances
and integration of structure, form and function in
architecture,
over the last century, the process embedded
in every building type has hardly changed. The concept
of FUNCTION has remained static. With rare
exception, there
is no new architecture just new ways of doing the
old architecture. The larger issues of integration:
work and living environments to building, buildings
to neighoberhoods, neighoberhoods to cities, cities
to bio-economic-cultural regions, regions to planet,
have been ignored [link].
What is considered to be architecture is largely
building centric and the shell of
the building at that. The process of creating architecture
is fragmented into many different “professions” -
architects, interior designers, builders, contractors,
engineers, developers not to
mention the whole group that comes after construction
to sell it, maintain it and finance it - all often
at war with one another - at best, a careful, cya
focused, cooperation. The consequence of this fragmentation
is a fragmented
planet and a cost to build that exiles the fast
majority from intimate experience with true architecture
let alone a decent place to work [link] and
live [link]. Another generation of this will create a condition
that will
take decades to repair. We are, perhaps, the last
working generation who has, in practical terms, a
full menu of choices as to how we proceed. |
click
on drawings/pictures to go directly to
example projects
planet_works
|
The
sum of human building, today, is
altering the Earth - we are “designing” a
world by default. We are, also,
beginning to design space habitates
and are planning the return to
the moon and a serious expidition
to Mars. Yet, we shrink from the
concept of creating responsible
mega-structures let alone works
that have planetary scale and impact.
Planet
Works, Mega
Structures and Infrastructures,
address the requirements and
challenges of architecture at
continental and global scale.
This concept includes transportation
lanes as these effect “nodes” at
their terminal points and the
migrations of species (plant
and animal) other than ourselves.
I suspect they
even
effect weather - or soon will.
|
|
|
Technically, Xanadu is
not on the scale of what typically
is thought of as a mega-structure
(which would be an oder of magnitude
larger). It could be built on a
larger scale depending on how it
is realized; and, it is the best
described of my works of this sort,
as well as, the most likely to
be be built in the near term (5
to 10 years). So, I will use Xanadu
as my center piece while also exploring
the full range of these self contained
integrated environment types, as
I have conceived them, from Domiciles
(smaller yet) to various mega city
concepts [link] (such
as Wilderness Meg-City) including
designs for
space.
There
is no question that structures
like this are in humanities’s
near future. The question is
if they will be human environments
or not. The fact is we are building
mega-structures now - they are
called cites and they they are
poorly designed.
Properly
designed mega-structures can
allow us to have our cake and
eat it to. Potentially, they
can greatly reduce the foot print
of our cities upon the Earth.
They can, at the same time, provide
more space and greenery per person
than any urban form factor that
we are using today. They can
give us the utility and excitement
of densification and personal
settings nearly rural-likein
ambiance. They can not only be
energy efficient they can be
net energy generators. They can
radically re-frame transportation
requirements.
This
is the potential - the question
is what will be the reality when
it comes?
|
|
|
| The
Bay Area is rich in natural and
human made Armature. This is a
personal project - an extended
landscape that make use of this
Armature and, in modest ways, enhances
it. |
|
|
| There
are Armatures (to use Greene’s
definition) of various scales.
The Red Tread Project is
an example of an Armature on
a national Infrastructure scale
and, as such, an example of
how to turn an accident of
growth into an economic and
ecological opportunity. |
|
|
|
| A
cityscape to me is a complex of
distinct purpose and sensibility
set within a larger existing urban
context. Speranova was
my answer to the rebuilding of
the World Trade Center. The project
was not developed beyond the bare
concept level yet it clearly illustrates
a different approach to the urban
setting and to the social-economic
and political implications of Ground
Zero. On the program level, if
any one project could illustrate
by different approach to the conventional
architecture-as-real estate practiced
today this would be it. |
|
|
| I
am a complete advocate of mixed
use. Even in a landscape largely
devoted to condominium residences
shopping and office space has to
be provided. Even in the 50s when
I designed this project, I was
concerned with issues of transportation.
The idea of this project was to
return green space to the urban
and suburban landscape. |
|
|
There
is a purpose for the remote conclave
where relative physical and social
isolation is in itself an intrinsic
value. The Crystal Cave Project
is one such example and intended
to house the design team that
will steward the Master Planning
Process.
This
particular project is interesting
because of how it makes use
of the ability of the earth
to shelter. It can be a prototype
for building on other planets
like Mars, for example.
|
|
|
| The
Boulder “Affordable Housing” project,
as I developed it with this design,
was not built. The concept remains,
however, one of my best in terms
of making an Armature and infrastructure
for sustainable and economical
community development. |
|
|
archit_projects3.htm#red_thread |
We
are working on two campus environments
at this time one, urban and one
suburban in their setting. Both
of these have very broad programs
and constitute full communities
in themselves.
The
SDC Campus is interesting given
its setting and position in
a community in transition.
|
|
|
| I
have worked on the concept of portable,
shippable buildings as a solution
for dealing with the complexity
of real estate land development
cycles for over 45 years. These
concepts also have intrinsic values
of their own such as small footprints, “soft” footings
and, usually, a life style intimacy
more like a boat than a traditional
building. These are dynamic structures
and technical systems rather than
the stasis so common to our societies
structures. Buildings of this sort
can take on many tasks and role,
thus forms. I will use EcoSphere
as my illustration because it is
one of my earliest developments
along this line. |
|
|
| The
RDS concept is the work version
of the the idea of deployable housing.
There are three major applications:
disaster deployments which is the
purpose of the original concept
[link];
DesignShop deployments for businesses
and government which has been the
principle use since 1995 [link];
and, the ability to create quality,
full up architectural environments
that can be installed quickly and
moved
when
required.
This completely changes the lease-real
estate equation and relationship
between the shell of a building
and the actual environment that
people experience. |
|
|
| It
is in this realm that the majority
of my effort has been focused since
1979. Even so, I am just beginning
to scratch the surface of the potential
of the workplace. |
|
|
I
still find the single residence
to be the noblest and complex
task of the architect. And, it
is a realm where the serious
architect has nearly totally
withdrawn - defeated by the onslaught
of development. If I had been
asked to choose, or guess where
I would have spent the bulk of
my time in architecture, I would
have said designing homes. Yet,
I have not even been offered
a house commission in over 30
years.
Not necessarily in the specific
but in the generality and for what
it represents (as a pattern language),
the Cooper House still stands as
my seminal statement of what the
American home can be. I would build
it today without hesitation.
|
|
|
| I
use here, as an example, not of
low cost affordable housing; instead,
I offer the postUsonian Project
as an alternative to what the “average” American
home has become (which is a means
for keeping a population as “wage-slaves” while
turning the American landscape
into an asphalt covered commodity). |
|
|
preserves_parks_educ_recreation |
The
Visitor center at Hat Creek for
SETI embodies a lifetime of my
agendas from a theory of education,
a concept of human-nature ecology
to the role of architecture in
human transformation.
The
Hat Creek Visitor Center is
like a NavCenter but spread
all over a landscape creating
a series of user interactive
learning hubs that change with
use. Each visitor defines their
own experience by the choices
they make. The Human context
and aspiration is the subject
as visitors engage with the
science of and the search for
life.
This
project has an interesting
set of challenges: How for
it to remain a place of serious
science while at the same time
allowing a level of intimacy
that is necessary for the science
to be experienced and appreciated.
In addition, how to protect
the technology used from the“ pollution” of
the technology brought to the
site by visitors. Radio telescope
arrays are sensitive to RV
signals. This is a case where
the technology is as “at
risk” as is the ecology.
A nice metaphor among many
that the project affords.
|
|
|
Master
Plans and Planning Processes
|
| The “Kansas
City Strip” was the original
idea for a local, regional and
global collaborative, non-governmental,
non-code based planning process
to replace a system that was clearly
failing 30 years ago and still
is now. We have the tools to see
our globe as a whole system but
not the processes necessary to
do something about it; nor, do
we have the organization that can
act without, time waste, corruption
and coercion. |
|
|
| Although
every act of building IS an expression
of manifested philosophy and every
building does have expression;
and, remembering
that I regard EXPRESSION to be
one of the three attributes of
architecture [link];
it is important to recognize that
some works have a functional
requirement to be particularly
expressive in their make-up. This
can be termed “art” architecture
although one has to be careful
not to go too far with this. So,
even
with expression as part of every
project, it is important to look
at it as a type. |
|
|
| There
are many types not represented by the samples
illustrated above among them shopping centers, government
buildings, entertainment and production faciliities.
In part, this is because I have designed few of these
but more so because I believe they should be integrated
into a mixed use fabric. I am a total advocate of
mixed use in almost all instances and even the types
I do describe here have to be viewed in this context.
They should not be taken in isolation. |
| The
greatest difficulty of advocating my theory and practice
of architecture is that there are not enough examples
of built work to fully explicate what I am proposing
nor to demonstrate that the work has intrinsic and
enduring social value. The fact that so few of the
designs illustrated above are realized is ready evidence
of this as is the reality that my projects fall victim
to the segmentation of land and structures so common
in our real estate obsessed society. |
| This
is a liability I expect to repair over the coming
decades. To do this will not be an easy matter. The
scope of my concept of practice requires that I engage
in an extraordinary number of different kinds of
architectural practices in order to cover the entire
range of work types that makes up my model. This,
in turn, means that to build even a small number
of examples of each kind of work means a total output
of several hundred projects, at minimum. My output
of built projects will have to be four times the
number of my total output of the last 48 years (designs
and realized works) in about half the time. There
is no single valid practice model that can reasonably
account for this magnitude of scope or range. The
ValueWeb organizational architecture, of course,
is my answer to this dilemma. And, the ongoing success
of organizations such as MG Taylor, AI and SFIA Architects
- Master Builders will form the foundation for my
efforts. Given this, I expect to accomplish the following
number of works in these various categories in my
remaining professional time. These are the minimum,
from today’s viewpoint, number of works necessary
to accomplish my goals and objectify/document the
range of my specific architectural concepts. For
simplicity, I divide these (below) into PUBLIC (commonwealth)
and PRIVATE (individual wealth) categories.
I do not believe, however, that these distinctions
should be taken too seriously. It is interesting
to note that the projects used above in the ILLUSTRATION of
my work, if completed, would make a large contribution
to the task of demonstrating the reality of my approach
to architecture. Although the record would still
be sketchy in terms of detail, it would be, reasonably
comprehensive. |
| If
there was one project in the public
realm that would come closest to “saying
it all” it would, of course,
be Xanadu [link].
Xanadu will facilitate the full
expression of my work in design
process and the creation of GroupGenius.
As a structure, it is of a “middle” size
that will demonstrate the feasibility
of Mega-City designs (larger than
Xanadu), at the same time, the
feasibility of more modest applications
(smaller than Xanadu) such as Domicile
co-housing projects. As a total
complex, Xanadu can demonstrate
many of the Armature, Cityscape
and Mixed Use principles that I
which to see built. In an extended
landscape of support housing even
many of these works can be realized.
It is comforting to think that
so much can be done with one project
although it has to be realized
that this one project is no trivial
matter. |
| Unless
Xandu were to be manifested at
the very largest end of its range,
there are, however, a number of
issues that will not fall within
its scope. Real Mega-City scale
projects and National, International
scale Infrastructure projects. |
|
|
| Without
question, the single most important
private work is the recreation
of the single family dwelling making
an affordable, sustainable work
of art within the reach of the
average income family. I have created
several approaches to this most
complex architectural challenge. |
|
|
| Until
now, I have taken such work as has come my way and
turned many a sows ear into a silk purse. Now, however,
the time has come to approach selecting this work
strategically. This is only so much time and a very
large agenda to complete. Presumably, I will have
an entire ValueWeb to do this, and, presumably,
I will have the years necessary to do it. One never
knows about these things and one goal of this Thesis
is to at least get the basic idea of this approach
to architecture outlined so its basic premises can
be examined. It is fortunate that my working style
is collaborative. Not only does this augment my capabilities,
it is the best was to build a school of
work, which is in my view, the only way to accomplish
sustainable change. Otherwise authentic architecture
will stay in the margins while cliches, stylistic
trends and distorted real estate continues to rule. |
| There
is one arena where I have accomplished a high level
of documentation, although not necessarily recognized
as such, and that is in the realm of the workplace.
Here, the beneficial effect that architecture can
have on the quality, quantity and sustainability
of knowledge work is substantiated beyond question.
Also, here the thesis that the close integration
of process design, with technical systems and the
architectural environment yields unique results cannot
be questioned. We have 25 years of experience and
data to back this up. Does this integration of process,
tooling and environment extend to all realms of human
activity? Yes, I believe so. This is what I intend
to show. And, it is this discovery, along
with my D/B/U ValueWeb practice model, that
makes up the core of my contribution, to date, to
the art of architecture. The individual works, as
art,
are
transitory;
the IDEA of this way of making habitat will
go on forever. |
 |
Continue
Overview and Introduction
Part 2 - LESSONS
|
|
|
|
Return
to Overview
and Introduction
Part 2 - CRITICISM
|
|
|
|
|
|
