Historical Precedent: Regrettably Overlooked

Architectural thought has continuously evolved alongside human evolution. The passing of time has proven that architecture reacts innately with contemporary social issues as well. Technological advancements, population expansion, and the need for sustainable living have all proven to be direct components of architectural design. Accordingly, with so much debate being centered around the need for environmental awareness, our generation is beginning to be incessantly focused on possibilities for the future. With theoretical design projects preparing for our future’s eco-meltdowns, and award winning websites predicting population impact in twenty years’ time, upcoming events are contacting our lives before they necessarily have to. I am not an opponent of preparatory action and forward thinking global attentiveness. I recognize and applaud the overwhelming growth in popularity of the “global accountability” movement. However, I feel as though the most crucial tool in predicting fated circumstances is lacking in today’s train of thought; historical precedent. With that being said, I decided to scour the blogosphere this week for posts that offer a glimpse to past urban/architectural trends and their possible relevance to society’s future qualms. I analyzed a post on Brand Avenue entitled Edifice Complex which discusses the Sears Tower as an example of the problems associated with labeling a piece of architecture an icon. I also investigated a post on BLDGBLOG entitled The Lost Airfields of Greater Los Angeles which mentions multiple private airstrips that existed within Los Angeles and their possible foreshadowing of the city’s current transportation burdens. My reflections and additions can be found at their respective websites as well as below.

“Edifice Complex”
Comment

What is most intriguing about your post is the notion that Chicago natives are concerned by the possibility of their most significant cultural icon losing its symbolism. It would be interesting to do a polling of Chicago citizens to determine whether they feel the name change (Sears Tower to Willis Tower) or the updated paint job is the driving factor of concern. It is fascinating to consider how large of an emotional impact the changing of a few letters or a different hue of paint could have on an entire culture’s perception of a building. Is it really the paint or name change that is causing the stir? Could it just be an excuse for public outcry that Chicago’s once monumental structure simply isn’t special anymore? After all, the Sears Tower has somehow managed to transform itself from the tallest building in the world to the now minor blip on skyscraper radar. This idea brings forth another interesting debate that would begin to question the evolving nature and symbolism of buildings post completion. How can a building like the Sears Tower keep its iconic labeling while the very reason that it is in fact iconic is being dismissed by much taller skyscrapers like the Nakheel Tower or the Burj Dubai? Maybe what this discussion is really challenging are the qualifications for classification as architecturally iconic. I believe it is impossible to be labeled an icon when your only unique condition is something as vulnerable as height. Categorizing a building like the Sears Tower (or any skyscraper) as an icon is putting unfair pressure on a building to perform beyond reasonable expectations. Chicago natives aren’t disgruntled about the name change or the paint job that their building is going to receive. They are upset at the realization that their icon never was an icon and therefore can be renamed and painted. You don’t see the Acropolis being outfitted with light reflecting paint or the Taj Mahal being renamed the Taj KingFisher. Likewise, the Greeks and Indians don’t fear losing their architectural icons while the Chicagoans do.

“The Lost Airfields of Greater Los Angeles”
Comment

While reading your post, the thought that was constantly fluttering through my mind was how the major developers of Los Angeles were not able to pick up on the fact that even in the 1920’s, people were challenging the spatial dimensions of L.A.’s sprawling landscape. Even with minimal technology and ultimately no urban achievement, the fact that a relevant form of transportation was aviation is astounding. Granted, Los Angeles in the 1920’s mostly consisted of farming land and had very few major roads. However, the fact that airstrips were owned by private individuals and were commonly used in areas where shopping malls now reside speaks wonders for where we went wrong. What possessed us to expand so foolishly? And possibly even more importantly, how was it achievable for there for to be a plethora of airstrips in activity at one given moment in Los Angeles in the 1920’s? I doubt there were air traffic controllers regulating Howard Hughes’ hourly take offs and arrivals making sure he never collided with Charlie Chaplin. The existence and achievements of the airstrips brings light to a time in Los Angeles’ history when anything was possible, when the sky was in fact not the limit, and when daily life was not limited by urban planners’ inefficiencies but rather dictated by practicality. But when practical means of transportation revolve around getting airborne to travel ten to fifteen miles, the urban fabric of a city must begin to be questioned in order to preserve the ingenuity and very uniqueness of the city itself. What William Mulholland was able to imagine and implement for the city of L.A. is comparable to what needed to be done with the other facets of the city. His roads were able to deliver water from hundreds of miles away to all of corners of L.A., why couldn’t anyone else manage to figure out how to get people from Downtown to Santa Monica in under an hour?

Green Initiatives: Too Much, Too Fast

In unison with every other global industry, the architectural community has not managed to escape the tribulations accompanying the global financial status. The Architectural Billing Index reached an all-time low in January, 2009 and has only risen to a still discouraging score of 35.3 for the month of February. McGraw-Hill Construction reported that the value of new construction starts fell 15 percent for 2008, to $547 billion. Given the bleak economic expectations for 2009, experts are already predicting total development starts to slip another 11 percent, with double-digit declines for multifamily housing and commercial building throughout the year. Foster Architects, one of the industry's signature architectural corporations, famous for buildings such as the Reichstag in Berlin and the newly finished Beijing International Airport just announced that they would be laying off more than 300 employees. While one might look at these statistics and assume that the entire state of the architectural business is grim, this is not the case. One component of the industry that is enduring is the field of green design. Architectural firms are busy with inquiries regarding energy efficient upgrades, technology teams are continuously developing more advanced forms of green architectural products, and LEED certification is an almost necessity for a new building proposal. Green initiatives are actually being seen as a key mechanism in lifting up the United States' economy. Within President Barack Obama’s stimulus package, there are approximately $120 billion being allocated to "construction-related spending". Under that umbrella lies a substantial amount of assets specifically intended for technological upgrades. With that being said, I decided to focus this week on controversial trends within the world of green architecture. While green design is gaining steem and contributing to our economy and global initiative, there are many problems associated with such rapid growth of the movement. In order to preserve the social and economic relevance of the idea, we as a society need to be certain that we don't bite off more than we can chew, burning ourselves out before the philosophy has an opportunity to fully mature.

Rich in culture and history, San Francisco is known as one of the most liberal and forward thinking cities in the world. In recent years, San Francisco has also been an extremely ecologically conscious community. As seen in the trendsetting, Morphosis designed Caltrans and San Francisco Federal buildings, city officials have been on the forefront of requiring government structures to be LEED certified. In 2007, San Francisco went as far as to ban styrofoam cups and other utensils from sale in restaurants and stores due to their non-recyclable qualities. While the Golden Gate City has continuously been praised throughout the environmental community, the city’s Board of Supervisors have not long ago come under criticism for their vote to halt the progress of a new ten-story building that is already being dubbed “The greenest building in the west”. Construction on what would be a LEED Platinum building letup due to public outcry claiming that the new project would be imposing upon the historical significance of the site. Critics claim that the structure, located at 110 Embarcadero Street is the former location of the headquarters of the International Longshoreman’s Association and the site of a 1934 police slaying of two ILA workers. The Board of Supervisors have chosen to put the construction on hold in order to investigate the validity of these statements and to then decide whether or not it would be appropriate to erect the building. Currently, the only structure that resides at the site is a battered, dilapidated building that regardless of potential historical significance does not suit the economic importance of the location.

I find it surprising that local residents of San Francisco would protest the creation of a one of a kind environmentally cognizant structure that would double as a neighborhood landmark and an international innovator. While I can recognize the importance of a historical landmark, the site has been nothing more than a decayed mound of concrete for years, serving as no monument to the event. Project developer Paul Paradis describes the site, "This building doesn’t have anything left. It’s been renovated so many times it doesn’t look anything like the building of 1934. There is no physical tie anymore". Whether it is done intentionally or not, a world-renowned architectural gem would be a historical marker that is dissimilar to any other historical event. But the blame cannot be placed exclusively on the citizens. Every architect knows that the first job associated with a new design project is thorough site analysis. This includes any historical incident that might impact a design move. Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects should have had the foresight to know what they were getting themselves into and how they could integrate a historical event into their creation. But this affair also poses a different question that has to do with the limits of green architecture. At what point do people deem sustainability impractical? All it took for San Francisco natives to turn on efficient design was a forgotten longshoreman’s dispute. This event could be seen as an indicator that while this generation is certainly environmentally aware, we may not be ready to practice what we preach. It is more important than ever for the environmental movement to begin to sway from awareness to action.

Another green breakthrough that is causing some debate within the design community is a new applied science that has been developed by Konarka that incorporates solar powering into clothing. Researchers have developed an uber-efficient photovoltaic that could be applied liberally and discretely to clothing, shop awnings, bags, and even umbrella linings. The light would then be used to generate renewable electricity in the form of LED lighting, battery chargers, and heaters. The technology has the potential to revolutionize the clothing industry and create the most widespread form of environmentally conscious activity in history. However, Konarka is not the first company to attempt to apply renewable energy to clothing. The trend began to pop up in the fashion world as early as 1996 with the Lapidus designed solar parka that was displayed in New York for the illustrious Fashion Week. Ever since, high fashion designers such as Ermenegildo Zegna, Willy Bogner, and Andrew Schneider have continually tried to integrate viable power into couture with no avail. The problem with eco-clothing is that it is too small scale and inefficient to move into a mainstream social circuit such as couture. Also, the clothing market is too vulnerable to public norms and popular train of thought for the green movement to have a significant impact. Another legitimate concern is the message being displayed by wearing a heat lamp jacket or an LED infused I-pod charging pair of pants might be too bold of a public statement. I do not think there are many people that are so dedicated to the movement as to be a walking billboard for renewable energy. If we as a society cannot get a self-sustaining building get developed without public protest, how can we expect people to purchase and wear solar panels around their necks? Since the fashion industry has already proven itself unprepared and too fragile for the green movement, Konarka needs to invest in market research to determine which market to inject their fabric into. Another problem plaguing the eco-garment industry is the overhwhelming costs associated with the manufacturing of goods classifyable as enviornmentally neutral. Olsen Haus, the designer of Pure Vegan Shoes notes, "The cost of organic, eco, raw materials is more expensive, so designers are spending more money to make a product that is better for the environment, humans and animals". With the price of these clothes being significantly higher than standard brands, evolution of the potentially revolutionary industry is stymied. In order for the trend to gain significant momentum, a grassroots industry approach would be a way to investigate high material costs while also gradually introducing the product to consumers.

As environmental awareness continues to dictate trends in the creative community, architects and engineers need to be cognizant of their role in conserving the longevity of the trend. Actions ranging from engaging local citizens in the design process to carefully planning the application of modern technology are critical in establishing new eco-systems as realistic means of power. For ddeas are only as effective as their applications, and when factoring in the avant-garde nature of clean energy careful planning is necessary for success.

Subterranean Developments: Outdated Technology Yields Revolutionary Thought

Architecture has always been an evolutionary field operating within multiple dimensions and growing symbiotically with technology and the rapid pace of human evolution. The most primitive urbanist thinking began as two-dimensional reactionary expansion to geological terrain. Dwelling within the realm of verticality was only presented at times of crevices and ditches already existing within the earth’s natural form. With the passing of time, minor technological advancements began to pave the way for human occupation along the z-axis. Today, our opportunities for urban evolution in the third dimension are virtually limitless. Hundred story buildings such as the Nakheel Tower and the Burj Dubai have demolished once existing spatial barriers and reinvented the way humans can occupy earth. While most contemporary architectural trends have been primarily focused in vertical expansion, I am choosing to focus my blog entry this week on the possibilities for urban advancements within the subterranean realm. In my search for precedents offering innovative concepts for underground dwelling, I found that the most intriguing and inventive ideas were coming from some of the most ancient and outdated forms of architecture. I examined a post by Bryan Finoki entitled "Snake Tunnels in Taliban Territory" in which the organization’s intricate system of cave dwellings have been examples of urban-engineering marvels existing within one of the most treacherous mountain landscapes on earth. Furthermore, the U.S. Army’s failure to eradicate the tunnel systems is a reminder that indigenous knowledge is often times superior to technological advancements. I also examined a post by John from A Daily Dose of Architecture entitled "New Wave Bunkers" which analyzes three new architectural projects that rethink the way ideological principles of underground military bunkers are being adapted today. My reactions to these posts can be found below as well as on their respective blogs.

“Snake Tunnels in Taliban Territory”
Comment

My initial response to this post comes in the form of the irony associated with the world's most technologically advanced military force struggling to cope with the alliance that has formed between a primitive guerrilla military troop and landscape. I do not know which is a more crowning achievement, America developing the technology to create bunker-busting missiles that can be fired and controlled with pinpoint precision, or the Taliban rendering the technology useless through inhabiting their landscape? I find it intriguing how the international fight between capitalism and terrorism has, in Afghanistan, been reduced to a duel between technology and sustainability. It was not tear gas, bombs, armed assault, or food deprivation that forced John Walker Lindh and others to flee from an underground stronghold. Thousands of gallons of water had to be pumped into the caves to have the men flooded out. Nevertheless, the parts of this post that I would like to dig deeper into are the architectural implications affiliated with underground tunnels combating modern technology. What were the basic architectural principles that Attila the Hun followed in his early establishment of mountain caves? More importantly, why were these principles of environmental habitat lost or misunderstood in Western societies’ advancements? In regards to architectural evolution, the caves offer insight on the complex meaning of interior dwelling. Architects have always dealt with spatial projects in terms of interior versus exterior. But what can we architects make of a community existing purely at an interior level? Not only are the Taliban fighters challenging Western democratic thought, but apparently they are now angry at Western architectural principles as well. In the upcoming quest for sustainable development strategies, it is essential for innovative thinkers to consider the obvious advantages to subterranean climates that have been found in Afghanistan.

“New Wave Bunkers”
Comment

I find this post especially pertinent in regards to the dynamic characteristics of each type of bunker you describe. The first question I have considers which architectural elements of the original Federal Reserve Communications and Records Center were preserved in the customization that exists today. While I applaud the architect’s willingness to revise an outdated architectural form, I have to scrutinize whether or not this design is technically classified as a full refurbishing rather than an adaptive reuse. The recyclable qualities that are inherently associated with adaptive re-use are not commonly affiliated with recondition. I imagine that the construction elements that make a “nuke proof” bunker actually nuke proof would be extremely large in size and not easily capable of resuscitation. Also, what qualities of the Reserve bunker’s structural pieces are in any way applicable to the programmatic needs of a library? At first glance, the Svalbard Global Seed Vault (see image at right) looks like an unbelievable project. Its simple diagrammatic form is clearly correlated to the function of the system. As the design of the structure is clearly magnificent, I have to scrutinize the practical relevance of a building like this. As you mention yourself, in the even of a global meltdown or catastrophic geothermal collapse, what good is a giant population of plant seedlings going to do? In other words, while the architecture of the vault is effective in its protective qualities, beautiful design, and responsiveness to its surroundings, it is important to question whether the building needs to exist in the first place. An architect is obviously not going to pass up a job opportunity, but it is part of the architect’s role to question the intentions of a job and bring the most out of an assignment. Encompassed in that mindset is the rudimentary architectural understanding that the most critical aspect of any design problem is function. Le Corbusier famously noted, "To create architecture is to put in order. Put what in order? Function of objects".

Regarding the Capital Visitor’s Center, I have to wonder whether the underlying reason for subterranean construction is safety related. After looking at the images, I can not imagine the addition providing too much protection from terrorist attack. I see the design choice having more to do with appropriating programmatic elements in relevant spaces without disrupting the function of the adjacent Capital Building. As stated in your post, the reason to construct below ground might have to do with the architect not wanting his building to compete with the primary structure. This is obviously the case. The visitor’s center to the Capital Building is just that, the visitor’s center. Any attempt to contend architecturally, spatially, or figuratively was never an option.

New Urban Strategies: Changes for the Future

As I have a lightly touched upon in previous blog entries, the urban growth of global cities is a contemporary issue that is affecting the lives of every world citizen. The dense metropolitan city of Delhi is similar to a quiet suburb in Iowa in regards to its urban landscape impacting the lives of its inhabitants on a daily basis. Whether it is a subway route dictating a residents’ daily commute time, or city officials regulating residential building heights, the inhabitant of a city is the powerless victim of municipal circumstances. Here in Los Angeles, we know all too well the pitfalls of living in a city with such lack of consideration given to successful urban strategy. In 1967, Le Corbusier (arguably the most famous of all modern architects and urban strategists) mocked American cities when saying, “I shall live 30 miles from my office in one direction, under a pine tree; my secretary will live 30 miles away from it too, in the other direction, under another pine tree. We shall both have our own car. We shall use up tires, wear out road surfaces and gears, consume oil and gasoline. All of which will necessitate a great deal of work ... enough for all”. While Le Corbusier was able to diagnose the problem with American cities back in 1967, it took the rest of us a slightly longer time to question the illogical nature our cities. Due to the fragility of the world economic state coupled with increased environmental awareness, emphasis is finally beginning to be placed on efficient and responsible urban development. With that in mind, I decided to focus this week on current issues regarding three of the most important areas to consider when aspiring for successful urban growth: management of impoverished communities, public transportation, and green living.

Currently in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, scrutiny is finally beginning to arise regarding the country’s decade long strategy towards impoverished communities. Compared to the likes of infamously indigent cities such as Johannesburg, Buenos Aires, and Mexico City, Rio’s stance towards management of poor communities is comparable to an urban-apartheid. Lacking an agenda revolving around social enrichment, the government’s hyper-disintegrated strategy towards urban rehabilitation has consisted of mass segregation and quarantining of poor communities. Existing within Rio is the slum of Dona Marta. Regarded as the most poverty stricken, and crime ridden neighborhoods in all of Brazil, the government has taken an even more drastic policy towards containment of this 7,500 person community. The project (which is already undergoing construction) involves the erection of a 650-meter long by 1-meter tall concrete wall encircling the entire neighborhood. This impoverished island prison will then be under constant supervision of the Brazilian military. State officials say that there are two main goals that will be reached through the implementation of this plan. One being that construction of the wall will prevent squatters from occupying an eco-preserve on the outskirts of the neighborhood. The second purpose is that a constant military watch will supposedly deter drug trafficking in and around the neighborhood. If people are squatting on hillsides because they have no place to live, why not implement a public work project to help construct affordable housing? If there is too much allure to pursue a career in drug trafficking, why not create a legitimate program that could create realistic job opportunities? In constructing a massive barrier around an insolvent community, the Brazilian government is simply digging itself into a deeper socio-economic hole. Their action is not ensuring Dona Marta (or any neighboring community) any long-term good and it is merely another act of abandonment that will lead to no civic revival.

Another example of a fatally flawed strategy for urban strategy can be found in Beijing, China. Avoiding Beijing’s obvious industrial waste and community housing issues, the biggest problem that Beijing faces today is its lack of sufficient public transportation. The urban layout of the city was originally established in a manner that is not suitable for the size of city that Beijing has become. The center of the problem can be linked back to Beijing’s execution of a ring road street system. The ring road system for urban planning involves the implementation of main street systems traveling in a circle around the center of the city. Smaller sub-streets branch off from the main circular roads in a traditional grid form. The idea behind the system is that as the city expands, more and more ring roads will be constructed outwards. There are currently six ring roads existing in China with plans for at least two more being constructed within the next ten years. The problem with the ring road system is that as a city expands, a true center of a city begins to disappear and natural fragmentation occurs. So while the street system was originally aligned with the notion that there is a true centralized point of the city, the reality of the matter is that there is no center anymore. The very existence of the ring roads themselves contradicts the very idea of efficient public transportation. While most forms of public transportation are operating around the inefficient ring road routes, most people opt for private vehicles or taxi cabs that are able to operate on minor streets. This causes a ridiculous amount of traffic, as well as an overwhelming amount of excess air, noise, and visual pollution. So far in 2009, there have been a recorded 1466 new private car registrations every day in Beijing. While the Chinese government is already in the process of constructing an expansive underground subway line to counter the ring roads, more action needs to be taken to implement multiple strategies. Projects that are effective at multiple scales and that can impact the nearly 17-million people that inhabit the city are essential to urban success. There needs to be projects that complement Beijing’s massive subway plan. Plans like rerouting already inefficient bus lines to necessary areas. Or public policy changes such as city expansion restrictions. Without integrating multiple public transportation projects to Beijing, the city will never be able to effectively support it’s ever increasing population.

In regards to the pursuit for efficient green dwelling, I will take a more creative approach through the analysis of a recent art sculpture created by Dutch artist Pim Palsgraaf. In his recent sculpture entitled “multiscape”, Palsgraaf proposes the theoretical idea of a sustainable city that is resting upon the back of a chicken. The artist’s idea of a transportable, famine avoiding city that has constant access to food (eggs) is a playful look at the idea of a self-sustaining city. When contemplating a city resting on a chicken what immediately crosses my mind is not the absurdity of practical application of this idea, but rather the debate that would arise if the chicken-city were to be real. The question that I pose that links the multiscape to our urban discussion is how long is it going to take for the inhabitants of the city to become tired of eating eggs and kill their home to eat its meat? Only when pondering this question does the realization that the city on the chicken already exists, and we have been slowly eating away at its breasts and thighs for years.

Green Solutions: What Equation Are We Really Solving?

With consideration being given to contemporary global issues, the architecture industry is focusing its aim evermore precisely on advancements in green technologies / industries. Revolutionary design teams throughout the world are thinking up innovative and environmentally-conscious constructions that are pushing the boundary of what we once thought were the capabilities of our “green initiative”. Morris Architects, an architecture firm based in Houston, Texas recently proposed an arousing renovation project that could turn an approximate 4,000 out of commission oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico into eco-resorts. At a slightly smaller scale, the New Hampshire based design team Bensonwood just displayed their design for a low cost, zero-energy prefabricated home available for purchase in upcoming months. The home, which was awarded LEED Platinum Status (U.S. Green Building Council's highest rating for green building construction) is available for installation for approximately $300,000. While revolutionary thinkers in the design industry are doing their part to expand upon green initiatives, I decided to explore the blogosphere in search relevant political and urban planning related issues. I examined a post by Brian Merchant entitled California’s New Budget Delays Regulation of Deadly Diesel Pollution on the TreeHugger.com blog. In the post, Merchant brings forth the ecological shortcomings of California’s new budget. In addition, I observed a post by Clark Williams-Derry entitled Cities Greener than Suburbs from the WorldChanging.com blog. Williams-Derry’s post analyzes a recent study which deduced that living in a dense urban environment creates a smaller carbon footprint than living in the suburbs. My insight and analysis to these two articles can be found below and on their particular websites.

“California Budget Delays Regulation of Deadly Diesel Pollution”
Comment

Being a resident of California my entire life, I too am concerned for the condition of the state as a whole. I appreciate your diligent analysis of the irresponsibility’s of the state legislature in passing the new budget with its lack of green initiative. While I can recognize the serious ramifications of passing the budget with the absence of ecological reform, I think it is also important to consider how grave the California financial crisis is as a whole. The California unemployment rate is almost at 10%, the state’s total debt ($42 billion) rivals that of many developed countries, and the darkest clouds of the recession are still to come. With no end in sight, it is a top priority to have a budget laid out and initiated as quickly as possible, even if that means that some obvious issues are negated. I can appreciate you mentioning the serious health factors at stake, but you might be expecting a slight bit too much from California. It is quite the feat to have our state’s most important budget proposal thought up, written out, passed in legislature, and executed. Arguably the toughest of those processes is going through the legislative process. I’m sure it is safe to assume that careful consideration was given to the grueling nature of the process while the budget was being drafted. You mentioned yourself, “…months of ugly stalemate” were the cause of the premature nature of the budget proposal.

While I recognize the importance of a speedy budget proposal, I do agree with you in that there are many environmental issues being neglected in the package. In addition to the diesel fuel crisis, the budget approval will also be lifting many already existing environmental hurdles in order to speed up the permit process for 10 major road construction projects. While I’m sure this is successful in stimulating the state economy, this is certainly one of the evident slaps in the face to all green thinkers. The state budget also plans to exempt many crucial environmental regulations in the hopes of creating a more efficient excess state property sale process. It would be safe to assume that there are probably hundreds of other social groups with legitimate concerns and complaints about the budget plan. It is unfair to place the environmental agenda above any others’. When analyzing the legitimacy of the budget proposal, it is important to consider the first priority of the state budget proposal… to financially stabilize the state.

“Cities Greener than Suburbs”
Comment

I find it interesting how it was only 20 years ago that the notion of moving to the suburbs was deemed the most socially accepted / conscious choice an American young professional could make. It’s exciting to watch as writers like yourself are beginning to note the obvious inconveniences and general incompetence associated with the suburban American lifestyle. It’s encouraging to hear intelligent factual analysis begin to be incorporated in discussion of the fallacies of suburban neighborhoods. As a designer, the notion of a makeshift community evolving arbitrarily 30 miles away from all relevant forms of life is innately flawed. I am glad to hear the scientific community contribute to the hopeful demise of the suburban routine. I think it is going to be extremely thrilling to watch as environmental concerns begin to play a greater factor in determining urban sprawl than out of date social norms.

While I agree that city suburbs’ mistreatment of transportation and clean electricity supplies contribute heavily to hazardous C02 emissions, I think that the fundamental ideologies that are existent within our societies are more of a concern than individual urban strategies. I live in an extremely urban neighborhood in Los Angeles, a neighborhood where people drive to the supermarket that is five walking minutes away from their home. As much as I would love to imagine it, I don’t ever imagine myself using any form of transportation other than my car to reach the supermarket. This is partly due to the environment I live in, but it is mostly due to the fact that I am a product of the American lifestyle that hasn’t placed enough of an emphasis on efficiency and global responsibility in our day to day lives. I would blame this on a (general) lack of eco-initiative coming from Washington and state departments. It is only now that environmental concerns are beginning to impact the way government policy is formed. Only through actions like the current California State budget proposal’s 12% gasoline tax will people begin to realize and question the inefficiencies that exist in their lives.

Our Future: Up In Flames

With the world economy at the beginning of a seemingly disastrous recession, many global industries are experiencing the toughest times in decades. The field of architecture is no exception. The Architectural Billing Index (ABI) is a fairly new but highly recognized tool that is known as the profession’s best economic indicator. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) administers a business survey to the largest commercial architects in the United States. The responses to the survey reflect a precise correlation between architectural billings and construction spending records. A total score of 50 or above indicates a rise in billings, a score below 50 indicates a decrease. With the score reaching its lowest total in the ABI’s thirteen year history (34.7 for the month of November 2008) and having consistently scored below 50 for the past eleven months, it is no secret that the industry is going through a major slump. With projects ranging from billion-dollar high-rises to 300k home renovations stalling or closing, the industry’s shortcoming are evident at all levels.

Dubai, which just months ago was considered the forefront for architectural and real estate prowess, is now suffering from some of the hardest design and development setbacks the U.A.E. has ever seen. Just days ago, Nakheel PJSC, the developer that is financing the construction of the latest “tallest building in the world” was forced to merge some of the available units. This move takes a crucial toll on the original design of the building as well as the building’s overall intentions and purpose. The decision to make this move is more startling to architects than it is developers, considering it is the architect’s design that is being compromised in order to preserve the overall project. This announcement follows last months traumatizing decree that construction on the building itself will be delayed. The two main culprits of this stop in architectural progress are the global financial market’s current limitations in lending as well as Dubai’s 25% drop in property prices from their peak in September. Seen more as an inspirational blow to architects than anything else, the come down of Dubai’s architectural aptitude is a depressing sign of the field’s current status. It was only months ago that “starchitects” such as Zaha Hadid, Rem Koolhaas, and Herzog & de Meuron were unveiling projects that were incomparable to anything else in the world. Projects that were viewed as inspirational masterpieces to the whole architectural community are now being subject to doubt. For architects, this event is comparable to a small child watching as Disneyland is forced to close its doors or if a musician heard the news that Coachella was being cancelled. Is it possible that that which Dubai represents architecturally will survive the financial climate? Hopefully. But how much of an impact will this have on architects, developers that finance projects, and our creative ideas themselves?

Another incident that is being seen as a bizarre but catastrophic morale bruiser is the recent torching of the TVCC building in Beijing, China. The giant CCTV complex buildings consist of the China Central Television Station tower, and a separate but adjacent Television Cultural Center tower which was meant to contain a luxury hotel, cultural center, and retail establishments. Both buildings are questionably Rem Koolhaas’ and Ole Scheeren’s greatest design achievements yet. While the CCTV building opened in December of 2008, the TVCC was due to open in May 2009. In the peculiar incident, a Lantern Festival fireworks accident was the cause of the ignition of the building. A tradition in Chinese culture, the Lantern Festival commemorates the conclusion of the Chinese New Year and involves children going out at night to play under the light of fireworks. Ironically, a CCTV employee ignited the firework that lit the neighboring building aflame. The firework hit the ground floor of the TVCC building, and then grew to consume the building. Koolhaas and Scheeren were originally criticized for their participation in the construction of an $800 million building housing an organization (CCTV) who’s goal is wide spread censorship and questionable human rights activities. However, Koolhaas later expressed his intentions for design contributing to political evolution when he said, “with an effort to support within [China's] current situation the forces that we think are progressive and well-intentioned… We’ve given them a building that will allow them to mutate.” While the intentions of the building might have been in question, there is no denying the architectural masterpiece that the CCTV campus is. Clad in a beautiful zinc titanium alloy and shaped as a distorted boot, the TVCC building was intended to be the “little brother” to the giant CCTV building. Nicknamed the “fun place” by architects that designed the two towers, TVCC was supposed to be the more lighthearted piece of the monolithic CCTV structure. While the children of Beijing might have been treated with the greatest fire display in recent Lantern Festival history, the architectural community is shocked at the destruction of an icon that didn’t get to be. While it is uncertain what the plans are for restoring the burnt tower, the emotional impact of watching the masterpiece erupt in flames is devastating. But almost more shocking than the fire itself, the cause of hundreds of millions of dollars in damage was a $5 bottle rocket. The ability of a colossal structure like the TVCC building to be so easily destroyed must shock the core of an architect’s thought process.

The world economy’s impact on the architecture community is also being seen closer to home. Plans for Downtown Los Angeles’ revitalization are being grounded as funds for projects are dwindling. Four separate plans for $1 billion plus projects have been frozen in past weeks. Related Cos.’ $3 billion development was just put on hold, Moinian Group’s $1 billion project has been halted, Houk Development Company’s $1.3 billion skyscraper has been arrested, and IDS Real Estate Group’s $1 billion residential tower has also been stopped. Oskar Brecher, director of development for the New York-based Moinian Group said, “The credit markets are all seized up, especially for a project of this size. The ability of banks to finance large projects... is just nonexistent.” Developers of downtown Los Angeles which have had such ambitious plans for revitalization are being forced to sit back and wait while the larger powers that be are trying to deal with the economic situation. As a resident of downtown Los Angeles I too am being forced to sit back and watch idly as my neighborhood sits at a middle-ground between successful urban metropolis and desolate cityscape. I can only hope that developers, residents, and those thinking of future plans for downtown stick the course and understand that times will eventually change. It is important for people to consider the success of L.A. Live when considering whether or not to follow through with plans for other billion dollar projects downtown. While I understand that my professional expertise probably isn’t as relevant in solving this problem as a developer’s, it is important to acknowledge the architect’s role in the equation at hand. A designer’s fundamental upbringing could play an integral part in the diagnosis and prevention of future meltdowns.

Understanding that architecture and construction comprise a large portion of the nation's economic status, Congress recently passed President Obama’s $838 billion economic stimulus package that incorporates many architecturally related proposals. The package primarily focuses on the demand for energy-efficient buildings and the proposal for federal facilities. The details of the plan consist of $7.7 billion for the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) $6 billion being allocated specifically towards energy-efficient upgrades, $1 billion for border station construction projects/upgrades, and $10 billion for U.S. defense projects. While this proposal offers a great deal of encouragement to the architectural community, many are already doubting whether this is enough of a spark to affect the architectural community itself. One crucial issue is that the government is saying that there are approximately $10 billion in projects that are “ready-to-go”, meaning that groundwork could begin as soon as needed. If this were the case, the role of the architect is being skipped. The priorities of the GSA have a lot to do with who gets to benefit from the stimulus package. Kevin Kampschroer, director of the GSA’s Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings said, “If we have a design that was done five years ago, before the Energy Policy Act of 2005 was passed, there would be work needed to bring it up to today’s expectations.” This is promising, but the beginnings of a neglecting undertone already seem to be forming in the statement. Another issue at stake is what role the small architecture firms might play in the package. In order to nurture long term economic success, the stimulus package needs to include smaller firms in some way. It is unclear at this point how it will plan to do so.

While the economy has caused a lot of decline in design community, there are still dynamic projects that have remained afloat. For instance, the $198 million Spaceport America Project is still underway in the desert of Upham, New Mexico. Architect Norman Foster designed the project which is intended to accommodate up to five spacecraft. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson announced that the state just signed a 20 year lease with Virgin Galactic to solidify the project. Another intriguing art project that has taken form due to the economy is a collection of photographs taken by Japanese artist Todd Hido. The exhibit documents the interior of foreclosed homes. Now we can sleep peacefully at night knowing that while artists wallets might be hurting during the economic crunch, at least their creative spirit hasn’t been harmed.

Phase 1: The Linkroll

As a new and eager contributor to the architectural blogosphere, I have decided to first compile a database of pertinent websites to my blog’s linkroll in order to establish a standard for what a successfully managed and operated architectural web commentary consists of. I researched and logged successful organizational and commercial websites, individual and group blogs, and other news database sources that are relevant to the field of architecture. Through blog search engines such as Technorati and Blog Flux, web directories Artslynx and Internet Public Library, and word of mouth through colleagues in the field, a strong catalogue of relevant webpage’s were accumulated. Personal analysis and filtration was then made based upon the content, interactive capabilities, visual design, and significance of the websites. The Webby Awards and IMSA blog standards of functionality, structure, authorship, sophistication, and overall experience were then applied for further refinement of found websites. After appropriate standards of relevance and accountability were used as filters, final sites were then added to my blogs linkroll. Some of those qualified sites include Floating Podium (an organizational architectural news and blog compilation page), Inhabitat (a well renowned group architectural blog), and Newscientist (a daily updated science and design news database). The contents of my linkroll act as standards for my own blog’s content while also acting as an addition to the blog itself. This linkroll will be a constantly evolving piece of my blog that will contribute to the interest, insight, and sophistication of my blog as well as the field of contemporary architectural issues.