Regional and Urban Design Committee

Rather than looking principally at streets and other infrastructure as the warp and woof of a gentrified, botique urban fabric and buildings as its tufts, perhaps it is time to take a very critical look at not only how cities have come to be and at their palimpsest traces, but also their modern raisons d'etre, the fundamentals of design for the future in both personal and environmental terms.  Livability should first be approached, in my view, from four major perspectives: childrearing, economic accesibility, political integration, and active aging.  This would be another step away from a mechanistic toward a humanistic view of cities, where man is the measure of all things, and the city in its totality is a machine for living first, for commerce and industry, second.

-------------------------------------------
Gary Collins AIA
Principal
Gary R. Collins, AIA
Jacksonville OR
-------------------------------------------

Excellent post (although I confess I had to look up palimpsest).

As architects, is our main responsibility designing the structures ensuring we leave "adequate" open space to allow for parking, green space and/or stormwater treatment as required by the mathetical calculations in the various codes? So many of the recent posts address the humanistic approach to architecture, but are we really addressing the human relationships in our designs? In my forty years of practice, I have see the evolution from being involved with the total project development to creating the most efficient/sustainable building with an in depth focus on the latest materials with usage determined by powerful software packages. Knowing this is a very generalized statement, it seems the majority of architects feel safest dealing with what they feel comfortable - the building package itself, but they do not feel comfortable dealing with the human side of the equation. How do humas interact with what we have created? Understanding human interaction was once very important to design - both interior and exterior interaction. We leave open space as required by the calculations but is it left for someone else to determine the design of that space? Why aren't we as architects treating the exterior space created by the structure as important as the structure itself? The exterior space design sets the stage for the interior perception whether in a downtown urban setting or a large expanse of campus acreage; whether it is an urban rowhouse or a surburban ranch home.

There is so much discussion now of a new direction in architecture... maybe we should take a step back and think about our relationship with society and what we are called to do to be leaders in our communities. To do that we have to consider human emotions... Obviously the structures take up the majority of our efforts as that is the major risk factor we face. But we need to be spending more of that effort focusing on the the human factor, the human relationships within the buildings and the EXTERIOR spaces that create the settings for our buildings.
  -------------------------------------------
Thomas Bailey AIA
Senior Program Manager
Bergmann Associates
Rochester, NY-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 06-17-2011 07:36
From: Edward Shriver
Subject: Urban Design as Humanistic Enterprise

Excellent post (although I confess I had to look up palimpsest).

This would make an excellent panel discussion.  If you could have 4 panelists discuss humanism and urban form, who would they be?  That's the kind of continuing education program I think AIA needs more of.  We need more intellectual stimulation.  Thomas Friedman's keynote at the New Orleans convention was like that, and got great response.  This topic would be a great thought provoking session.

Good stuff Gary!  Thanks for the input.  A great way to start a Friday morning. 

-------------------------------------------
Edward Shriver AIA
Principal
Strada Architecture, LLC
Pittsburgh PA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 06-16-2011 17:33
From: Gary Collins
Subject: Urban Design as Humanistic Enterprise


Rather than looking principally at streets and other infrastructure as the warp and woof of a gentrified, botique urban fabric and buildings as its tufts, perhaps it is time to take a very critical look at not only how cities have come to be and at their palimpsest traces, but also their modern raisons d'etre, the fundamentals of design for the future in both personal and environmental terms.  Livability should first be approached, in my view, from four major perspectives: childrearing, economic accesibility, political integration, and active aging.  This would be another step away from a mechanistic toward a humanistic view of cities, where man is the measure of all things, and the city in its totality is a machine for living first, for commerce and industry, second.

-------------------------------------------
Gary Collins AIA
Principal
Gary R. Collins, AIA
Jacksonville OR
-------------------------------------------

Re: Thomas Bailey's commentary, I think we can agree the history of architecture is not that of urban planning.  With few notable exceptions, architects have been largely content to occupy themselves with contracts for individual buildings and complexes, and have left urban decay and sprawl to the dictates of others. 

Even now, we are content with sniping from the sidelines, "greening" the edges of the profession rather than facing what I believe to be the core issue: cities as the primary engines of sprawl, environmental destruction, and unsustainable energy consumption.  The AIA offers no consistent alternative program for urban design, nor political action to realize one.  We remain industry lackeys, by en large, because we are a profession dependent on patronage of folks wealthier and more influential than most of us can ever hope to be.  We pay AIA dues to perpetuate that system, not to alter it. 

We go from shibboleth to catchphrase on an annual basis to generate a theme for conferences, symposia, and conventions, a focus for action rarely realized because little of social substance can be matured in a single year.  Hence, we are always proceding to the next big idea, not a sustained program supported by a passionate dedication to a vision for sustainable urban habitat.  When we convene cyclicly as a profession over a period of years with dedication to a singular cause other than perpetuation of the profession-as-business, I believe we will not only gain enhanced professional - and political - credibilty, but have a far better chance of accomplishing results with enduring social value greater than our own professional survival.

-------------------------------------------
Gary Collins AIA
Principal
Gary R. Collins, AIA
Jacksonville OR
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 07-11-2011 10:43
From: Thomas Bailey
Subject: Urban Design as Humanistic Enterprise

As architects, is our main responsibility designing the structures ensuring we leave "adequate" open space to allow for parking, green space and/or stormwater treatment as required by the mathetical calculations in the various codes? So many of the recent posts address the humanistic approach to architecture, but are we really addressing the human relationships in our designs? In my forty years of practice, I have see the evolution from being involved with the total project development to creating the most efficient/sustainable building with an in depth focus on the latest materials with usage determined by powerful software packages. Knowing this is a very generalized statement, it seems the majority of architects feel safest dealing with what they feel comfortable - the building package itself, but they do not feel comfortable dealing with the human side of the equation. How do humas interact with what we have created? Understanding human interaction was once very important to design - both interior and exterior interaction. We leave open space as required by the calculations but is it left for someone else to determine the design of that space? Why aren't we as architects treating the exterior space created by the structure as important as the structure itself? The exterior space design sets the stage for the interior perception whether in a downtown urban setting or a large expanse of campus acreage; whether it is an urban rowhouse or a surburban ranch home.

There is so much discussion now of a new direction in architecture... maybe we should take a step back and think about our relationship with society and what we are called to do to be leaders in our communities. To do that we have to consider human emotions... Obviously the structures take up the majority of our efforts as that is the major risk factor we face. But we need to be spending more of that effort focusing on the the human factor, the human relationships within the buildings and the EXTERIOR spaces that create the settings for our buildings.
  -------------------------------------------
Thomas Bailey AIA
Senior Program Manager
Bergmann Associates
Rochester, NY-------------------------------------------