UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI March 31, 2005 Date:___________________

Shaun Michael Evans I, _________________________________________________________, hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:

Master of Architecture in:

The School of Architecture and Interior Design It is entitled: Reconciling Man and Nature:

A School for the Advancement of Furniture Craftsmanship

This work and its defense approved by: Gordon Simmons Chair: _______________________________ Robert Burnham _______________________________

_______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________

Reconciling Man and Nature:

A Workshop for the Advancement of Furniture Craftsmanship

A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture in the Department of Architecture of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning 2005 by Shaun Michael Evans B.S. Arch., University of Cincinnati, 2003

Committee Chairs: Gordon Simmons Robert Burnham

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank my parents, Russell and Sandra Evans, who never lost sight of who they knew I would one day become, even when I lost sight of it myself. I love you both. I would also like to thank my thesis professors, Gordon Simmons and Bob Burnham who – not so gently – steered me in the direction of sustainable architecture. I truly appreciate your efforts as I struggled through this topic to develop the ideas presented in this thesis. Finally I would like to thank my peers who challenged my ideas and helped to develop and make them stronger. You know who you are.

ABSTRACT

Architecture in the 20th century began as a celebration of the Age of Industry and Technology. Buildings in this period were created as an expression of machines and technology, having no concern for the ecological issues we face today. Now, 100 years later, we are entering into an Age of Information and Ecology. In the face of current environmental realities, machine ideology no longer applies. The building of shelter consumes one-sixth of the world’s fresh water supply, onequarter of its wood harvest, and two-fifths of its fossil fuels and manufactured materials. As a result, architecture has become one of the primary targets of ecological reform today. The science of ecology has provided the inspirational foundation necessary to carry architecture into the 21st century, in a way that will not compromise the ability of future generations to sustain themselves. In addition to dealing with issues of energy conservation, this thesis will incorporate larger ideas of beauty, longevity, and integration. Beauty in architecture has always been subjective, and ideas of what is beautiful are constantly changing. This thesis is examining beauty in a different light. Can something really be beautiful if it creates ugliness for future generations? Lasting beauty does not – can not – come solely from an aesthetic agenda. Beautiful architecture is that which is derived out of viewing the future as a commodity to be protected by utilizing sustainable technologies to create buildings that cause less stress to the environment, as well as designing with the comfort of the user in mind. In addition, economics plays a huge role in the business of architecture. Clients are mostly concerned with first costs, assuming that the fossil fuel energy to power buildings will always be available. The research suggests that fossil fuels are running out and something must be done to reduce our dependency on them. Sustainable technologies, while having a higher first cost, over time do pay for themselves and, in addition, begin generating income for the owners. That is only one advantage to building sustainably, but ultimately is the one that most people will be convinced by. In addition, adaptability is of prime importance to sustainability. If a building is torn down and replaced at some point in the future because it is not adaptable to changing uses, this hardly represents a sustainable use of resources. On the same note, people are more likely to inhabit a building longer if they are comfortable, and integrated design – a package of design features and building components that supplies fresh air, heat, coolness and light to achieve a pleasant, functional indoor environment – seeks to create an architecture that is comfortable to be in, not just pleasing to look at. These ideas are interrelated and all combine to create an architecture that has the potential to transcend architectural styles, which are everchanging. Implementation of these ideas has one purpose: to shift architecture from ego-centric to eco-centric motivations. The design component of this thesis will apply these ideas to the construction of a school for furniture craftsmanship in New Richmond, Ohio.

RECONCILING MAN AND NATURE:

A School for the Advancement of Furniture Craftsmanship

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1.1 List of Illustrations / Diagrams 1.2 Introduction

2 5

THESIS 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7

State of the Ecology Architects and Energy A Brief History of Ecological Building Influential Thinkers in Ecological Design Beauty in Architecture Living Buildings Architectural Precedents 2.71 Tjibaou Cultural Centre – Renzo Piano Building Workshop 2.72 CBF Philip Merrill Environmental Center – SmithGroup, Inc. 2.73 Thorncrown Chapel – E. Fay Jones

10 14 21 30 36 42 53 53 55 57

PROJECT / LOCATION 3.1 History of Project Type / Project Precedent 3.2 Site Analysis

60 65

PROGRAM 4.1 Spaces / Overall Square Footage 4.2 Individual Space Description and Sq. Ft.

71 72

PROJECT DESIGN 5.1 Thesis Exploration 5.2 Drawings, Diagrams, Photographs

xx xx

BIBLIOGRAPHY 6.1 Bibliography

83 1

1.1

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS/DIAGRAMS

Fig. 1: Green Architecture. p 68. Fig. 2: Building with Vision: Optimizing and Finding Alternatives to Wood. p 18. Fig. 3: [online] Fig. 4: [online] Fig. 5: < http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle> [online] Fig. 6: Metropolis. (Oct 2003) p 103. Fig. 7: Metropolis. (Oct 2003) p 103. Fig. 8: [online] Fig. 9: Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Design Methods for Architects. p 22. Fig. 10: Green Architecture. p 38. Fig. 11: Green Architecture. p 40. Fig. 12: Green Architecture. p 49. Fig. 13: Green Architecture. p 51. Fig. 14: Green Architecture. p 42. Fig. 15: Green Architecture. p 48. Fig. 16: Green Architecture. p 53. Fig. 17: Green Architecture. p 55. Fig. 18: Green Architecture. p 56. Fig. 19: [online] Fig. 20: [online] Fig. 21: [online] Fig. 22: [online] Fig. 23: [online] 2

Fig. 24: [online] Fig. 25: [online] Fig. 26: [online] Fig. 27: [online] Fig. 28: [online] Fig. 29: Green Architecture. npn. Fig. 30: [online] Fig. 31: [online] Fig. 32: [online] Fig. 33: [online] Fig. 34: Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume 4. p 144. Fig. 35: Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume 4. p 147. Fig. 36: Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume 4. p 147. Fig. 37: Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume 4. p 149. Fig. 38: [online] Fig. 39: [online] Fig. 40: [online] Fig. 41: [online] Fig. 42: [online] Fig. 43: [online] Fig. 44: [online] Fig. 45: [online] Fig. 46: image by author Fig. 47: [online] Fig. 48: Soil Survey of Clermont County, Ohio. npn. 3

Fig. 49: [online] Fig. 50: [online] Fig. 51: [online]

4

1.2

INTRODUCTION

Life is right, and the architect is wrong – Le Corbusier (towards the end of his life) Compared to the environmental crisis, all other social, political, economic, and scientific issues pale into insignificance. If humanity expires from global warming, overpopulation, pollution, starvation, or a lack of water, it will matter very little whether civil rights have been achieved, the Middle East is at peace, an AIDS vaccine exists, or the national debts have been paid. All of these threats to our survival are directly or indirectly related to environmental destruction. It is easy to see the problem that faces humankind in the 21st century. The building industry is responsible for depleting a significant portion of the natural earth’s resources. Since the mid-nineteenth century, architectural designs have been a celebration of industry and technology. Machines have been the primary metaphor for buildings of the 20th century, implying a relationship with nature that is exploitative and relies on brute force combined with great amounts of energy to solve problems. In 1921, Le Corbusier described a house as “a machine for living in.” 1 Le Corbusier and others believed that houses should have the purity of form of a well-designed machine. It was believed that natural resources could be exploited indefinitely without fear of consequence. However, we are coming into a new age in history, an Age of Ecology, where architects must embrace the fact that the Earth is running out of natural resources, and adjust

1

Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture. p 10. 5

architectural designs accordingly. There is a new generation of architects who regard the earth as the ultimate ‘machine’ and the human habitat as an extension of the concept of Gaia, or the earth as a living organism. The science of ecology has provided a radically expanded view of the natural environment, leading to the inspirational foundation for a new direction in architecture. This direction cannot be achieved separate from the marriage of sustainability and user comfort. Sustainable architecture, the buzz word of the architectural profession today, has been proposed as an alternative to industrialized society’s wasteful legacy of short-term construction. Unfortunately, sustainable architecture is not typically thought of as beautiful. The word has created connotations of tree-loving hippies, tin can houses, and mud buildings. Speaking for myself, until recently the words meant exactly that – certainly not beautiful by my standards. On the other hand, in these times, without sustainability, beauty in architecture cannot exist. So what is beauty? Beauty is ever-changing, and what we consider beautiful today could be considered ugly at some future point in time. However, certain architecture throughout the ages has survived our changing notions of what is beautiful. A part of this thesis will seek to examine the question of what makes something beautiful. It is safe to say, though, that without a concern for integrating sustainable technologies into overall building design with user comfort as a priority, the architecture of today is destined to follow the path that has already been laid throughout the 20th century: buildings that are deemed worthless – for whatever reason – are destroyed in favor of something new and improved.

6

This thesis will focus on issues of energy conservation, in service of the larger architectural ideas of beauty, longevity and integration. Buildings that have survived from the past generally have three things in common: their understanding of natural systems; simplicity; and the ability to adapt to ever-changing needs. Buildings that integrated these three principles were more likely to survive through the generations. They have been accorded some value that deemed it worthy of preservation, which is of primary importance to sustainability. On the other hand, many contemporary “green” buildings that are crammed with cutting-edge, environmentally favorable features have neither met the test of time nor demonstrated much aesthetic value, quite often at a very substantial cost. Unfortunately, immediate benefits to building sustainably are quite rare. Our focus must shift from the short-term economic gain to a long-term sustainable outlook. Two advantages can be had in thinking longterm: over time a sustainable building will pay for itself and, in fact, start saving money; and thinking long-term goes hand-in-hand with one of the core values of sustainability: adaptability. A key to this new direction in architecture is recognizing the inherent differences between habitat and nature, and seeking a way to reconcile them in a way that engages the user. Architecture, since the beginning of the 20th century, has sought to lock out nature, designing ‘prisons’ that require an uninterrupted supply of fossil fuel energy in order to operate. They insulate themselves against the environment for as long as possible in an effort to preserve their internal conditions.2 Architects have created artificial environments completely isolated from the natural environment.

2

Mazria, Edward. “It’s the Architecture, Stupid!” npn. 7

This creates a number of problems: buildings are very costly to operate; natural systems which could be utilized to influence the building in a positive way instead affect the building negatively, sometimes severely limiting the lifecycle of the building; and isolation from the environment causes emotional and physical health issues that negatively impact the occupants of the building. Architecture in the Age of Ecology must respond to these issues in order to be a viable solution to the problems we face today. Another important component of this thesis is to incorporate these elements in a structure that is more socially responsible and environmentally integrated than the ego-motivated excesses associated with most architecture of the 20th century. Lester R. Brown, President of the Worldwatch Institute, proposes that architecture has one primary mission – to progress from ‘ego-centric’ to ‘eco-centric.’ This evolution refers to a mental state of transference where the habitual notions of an insulated psyche (detached from the natural environment) are exchanged for the re-awakening of an expansive sense of oneness with nature.3 In order to create a lasting architecture, we must reconsider our notion of beauty as primarily aesthetic. Rapidly disappearing natural resources have forced architects to re-examine the way buildings function. Architecture separate from sustainable technologies can only be considered beautiful in the most isolated sense of the word. In addition, buildings that do not consider user comfort to be of primary importance cannot be lasting. When they cease to function well in a pleasing and comfortable

3

Brown, Lester. State of the World, 1999: A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. p 29. 8

way for the user, they are simply torn down in favor of something new and improved. Architecture must change and evolve with the times and the world we live in. If architecture becomes adaptable to changing circumstances, buildings do have the potential to become timeless. The technology is readily available; it is our mindset which must change. We must begin to consider future generations and what type of world we are leaving behind for them. These thesis ideas will be incorporated through the design project, which will be a school for furniture craftsmanship located in the village of New Richmond, Ohio. The site is composed of two adjacent parcels of land between the Ohio River and Main Street downtown. The first parcel is an abandoned parking lot which used to house a motel. The adjacent parcel to the north currently houses truck parking. There are many advantages to building on a site like this, in a community like this, not the least of which is to return the site to a more natural state than it is now. Siting the workshop here will also allow community involvement through housing the students who will be enrolled there. The architecture of the workshop will seek to answer the questions this thesis sets out in built form; namely, creating a timeless architecture by satisfying the criteria in the thesis.

9

2.1

THESIS – STATE OF THE ECOLOGY

The physician can bury his mistakes, but the architect can only advise his clients to plant vines – Frank Lloyd Wright The modern world is a society of consumption. We infiltrate an area; we devour all its natural resources, and then move on, more often than not, leaving the land behind in a state of devastation. There are two fundamental groups of thought on the relationship between humans and natural resources, those of economists and ecologists. Economists note with justifiable pride that the global economy has expanded sevenfold since 1950, raising output from $6 trillion of goods and services to $43 trillion in 2000, boosting living standards to levels not dreamed of before. Ecologists look at this same growth and realize that it is the product of burning vast quantities of artificially cheap fossil fuels, a process that is destabilizing the environment. They look ahead and see more intense heat waves, more destructive storms, melting ice caps, and a rising sea level that will shrink the land area even as population continues to grow.4 Regardless of these two fundamentally divergent Fig. 1: The Architect

schools of thought, the problems we have created are not going away. Global temperatures are rising as a result of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. Increased levels of CO2 come from two sources: the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.5 The majority of the rise has happened in the last 50 years. For example, when the Industrial Revolution began in the mid-eighteenth century, carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels were negligible. But by 1950, they

4 5

Brown, Lester R. Eco-Economy: Building an Economy for the Earth. p 5. Brown. p 28. 10

had reached 1.6 billion tons per year. In 2000, they totaled 6.3 billion tons per year.6 In 1760, the atmospheric CO2 concentration was estimated at 280ppm. By 2000 it had reached 370ppm, a rise of 32 percent from pre-industrial levels. The 54ppm buildup of atmospheric CO2 from 1960 to 2000 far exceeded the 36ppm rise from 1760 to 1960.7 The 14 warmest years since record keeping began have all occurred since 1980.8 Take for example, the heat wave that hit Chicago in July 1995. Temperatures averaged between 100-106 degrees Fahrenheit for five consecutive days. Even with air conditioning, this heat wave claimed more than 500 lives.9 Rising global temperature is not the only result of the way we live. Melting ice caps, rising sea level, more destructive storms, dried-up rivers, disappearing species, and falling water tables are all results of our current patterns of consumption. Deforestation is another product of our consumption trends. In 1900, the earth’s forested area was estimated at 5 billion hectares. In 2000 that number shrunk to 2.9 billion.10 It is estimated that only 4 percent of old-growth forests remain in the world.11 Deforestation is caused by the growing demand for forest products and the growing conversion of forested land to agricultural uses. On average, the developed Fig. 2: Exported Logs from Longview, WA, 1990

world is losing 6.5 percent of its forests per decade. Brazil, for example, destroyed 97 percent of the Atlantic rainforest - mainly by clearing land for agriculture - and then turned their attention to the Amazon rainforest, roughly the size of Europe. Since

Brown. p 28. Brown. p 29. 8 Hansen, James E. “Surface Temperature Analysis.” 9 Brown. p 30. 10 Brown. p 55. 11 Imhoff, Daniel. Building with Visio: Optimizing and Finding Alternatives to Wood. p 16. 6 7

11

1970, 14 percent of Brazil’s rainforest has been lost; 17,000 square kilometers in 1999 alone.12 Aside from deforestation for forest products (3.28 billion cubic meters per year) or agriculture, fire destroys many of the remaining forests in what scientists call a positive feedback loop, meaning certain trends of environmental degradation reinforce other trends (i.e. global warming increases forest fires, which in turn increase carbon emissions into the atmosphere, again increasing global warming).13 One problem with current thinking is that environmentalists are focusing the majority of their efforts on the transportation industry. They complain about the impact sportutility vehicles (SUVs) have on the environment, when in reality, SUVs, minivans, Fig. 3: 2004 Ford Escape Hybrid SUV

and trucks account for only about 6.5 percent of the total US energy consumed each year.14 That is not to say that efforts to make vehicles more environmentally friendly are fruitless. Rather, this represents a narrow viewpoint toward energy consciousness, thereby limiting the scope of potential solutions.15 In fact, many auto makers are in the process of developing hybrid SUVs. First to reach production were the Ford Escape Hybrid and the Lexus RX 400H in mid-2004.16 A survey from the Commission for Environmental Cooperation in 2001 suggested that power plants, namely coal and oil-fired plants, accounted for almost half of all industrial air emissions in 2001. The survey of chemical pollution from industrial

Fig. 4: 2004 Lexus RX 400H

facilities shows that power plants burning coal and oil produced 45 percent of the

Brown. p 56. Bright, Chris. “The Nemesis Effect.” World Watch. (May/June 1999): pp 12-23. 14 Mazria, Edward. “It’s the Architecture Stupid!” npn. 15 Mazria. npn. 16 “First Hybrid SUV: Race between Ford Escape Hybrid SUV and Lexus RX 400H Hybrid SUV.” 12 13

12

755,502 tons of toxic air releases in 2001. Hydrochloric and sulfuric acids were the most common chemicals released as coal and oil was burned to make electricity. Coal plants were also responsible for 64 percent of all mercury emissions, which occur naturally in coal and are released when the fossil fuel is burned to make electricity. Mercury builds up in lakes and streams and comes into the food chain and can cause neurological and developmental damage, especially in children.17 According to British Petroleum’s “Statistical Review of World Energy 2004,” at current rates of production, the world’s proved oil reserves are sufficient to last 40 years. Known reserves of natural gas are sufficient to last for 67 years, with the largest reserves in the countries of the former Soviet Union. Known reserves of coal are sufficient to last 192 years, with the largest reserves in North America, the Asia Pacific region, and Europe. These statistics suggest that something must be done before these reserves, specifically oil, run dry.18

Fig. 5: Oil, Natural Gas, and Coal Reserves, 2003 17 18

Melnbardis, Robert. “Power plants Top Canada-US Air Polluters, Watchdog Says.” British Petroleum. “BP Releases: Statistical Review of World Energy 2004.” 13

2.2

THESIS – ARCHITECTS AND ENERGY

Not only will atomic power be released, but someday we will harness the rise and fall of the tides and imprison the rays of the sun – Albert Einstein A poll conducted by Metropolis magazine in October 2003 showed architecture as the leading culprit in US energy consumption. At 48 percent, it was nearly double both industry at 25 percent and transportation at 27 percent. Within this framework, 21 percent was residential architecture, 17 percent was commercial architecture, and roughly 10 percent was industrial architecture. Another poll in the same issue showed that US energy consumption actually increased by 17 percent through the 1990s, and estimated a 37 percent rise by 2020.19 The building industry, while not 100 percent responsible, does play a large role in the deterioration of the natural environment. Forty percent of the materials in landfills are construction debris. Sixty percent of the electrical power generated is for buildings.20 The majority of urban planning accepts the contemporary norm that the automobile is the primary form of transportation. Most buildings today are designed Fig. 6: US energy consumption by sector

to be totally isolated from their environment. They are completely dependent on fossil fuels in order to operate. Once the supply is interrupted, the building becomes uninhabitable: too hot, too cold, not enough light, etc. Building codes have become more and more stringent, requiring materials to conform to higher standards, while yielding very small returns. In most cases, these higher standards cause manufacturing costs of materials to increase, while producing very little return in

19 20

Hawthorne, Christopher. “Turning Down the Global Thermostat.” Metropolis. (Oct 2003): p 103. Kibert, Charles J. Construction Ecology: Nature as the Basis for Green Buildings. p 7. 14

terms of energy efficiency.21 In fact, US energy consumption per square foot of building has been increasing slightly since 1990, a trend that shows architects and other elements of the building construction industry are moving in the wrong direction.22 The main purpose of the built environment is to mediate between humans and natural systems by providing space for human functions protected from the elements. Modern buildings have increased the sense of separation from the natural environment and have made nature irrelevant for its occupants. Problems resulting Fig. 7: Total US energy consumption 1950-2000

from this increasing separation of ecological feedback loops inherent in the design, construction, and use of buildings since the Industrial Revolution have influenced many architects to reconsider this de-evolutionary and unsustainable path.23 The scale of the built environment is enormous, occupying a significant portion of the earth’s surface. It replaces once productive natural systems with non-productive (in a natural ecological sense) structures. Existing natural systems are usually replaced in part by human-designed landscaping that may not bear any resemblance to the ecological systems that once occupied the site. In addition, the built environment incorporates significant quantities of raw materials such as earth and gravel to create a structural boundary layer between buildings or infrastructure and the ground.

Fig. 8: Satellite image of Earth at night

During its operation, the built environment consumes energy, water, and materials

Mazria, Edward. “It’s the Architecture Stupid!” npn. Mazria. npn. 23 Orr, David W. Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect. p [need page numbers] 21 22

15

and emits solid, liquid and gas contaminants. At the end of their useful lives, these structures contribute vast quantities of waste to the environment.24 As a response to these issues the building industry introduced sustainable construction, which can be defined as “creating a healthy built environment based on ecologically sound principles.” They defined a set of principles to guide this new direction in building: 1. Reduce resource consumption; 2. Reuse resources to the maximum extent possible; 3. Recycle built environment end-of-life resources and use recyclable resources; 4. Protect natural systems and their function in all activities; 5. Eliminate toxic materials and by-products in all phases of the built environment; 6. Incorporate full-cost accounting in all economic decisions; 7. Emphasize quality in all phases of the life cycle of the built environment.25 In the US, numerous entities are driving the emergence of green buildings; however, the US Green Building Council (USGBC) is the foremost resource for architects in green design. The USGBC, established in 1993, represents a wide range of players including architects, engineers, and product manufacturers who concluded that the construction industry must change course in order to be sustainable. The USGBC organized a system of rating buildings that would add new criteria for the siting, design, construction and operation of new and renovated buildings. This system, known as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), classified 24 25

Kibert. p 1. Kibert. p 2. 16

buildings into four categories depending on their level of performance with respect to energy and environmental issues: platinum (highest), gold, silver, and LEEDrated. The LEED standard began beta testing in 1998 with version 1.0 and in 2000 issued version 2.0 that is now being used to rate commercial and institutional buildings.26 Since the beginning of the 1990s, many worldwide organizations have been articulating a concept that seeks to change the nature of how the built environment is designed, built, operated, and disposed of. It is in some ways a return to organic, nature-based design, a return to the principles advocated by Frank Lloyd Wright, Richard Neutra, and Ian McHarg: Sustainable construction considers the life cycle of the built environment as a seamless continuity, from design through disposal. It can be defined as the “creation and maintenance of a healthy built environment using ecologically sound principles.” Its goals are to maximize resource efficiency and minimize waste in the building assembly, operation, and disposal processes. Sustainable construction seeks to dovetail into the global sustainable development movement by moving construction industry onto a path where it adheres to principles that are able to provide a good quality of life for future generations. In doing so, the sustainable construction effort is considering how to altar construction materials cycles to reduce their environmental and resource impacts.27

26 27

Kibert. p 3. Kibert. p 23. 17

Of primary importance to the building industry in seeking to become more sustainable is material choice. There is a wide range of choices in materials for sustainable construction. Many builders and manufacturers are exploring alternative building methods. A great many sources of green building products can be utilized in most projects that would greatly reduce both the embodied and operating costs of the building. Embodied energy is a vital concern in material selection. Embodied energy is the amount of energy it takes to extract raw materials, manufacture a product, then transport said product to the site and install it. Operating energy involves the total amount of energy the building consumes in its lifetime, including space heating and cooling, lighting, refrigeration, water heating and other building functions. According to the Guide to Resource Efficient Building Elements, “Environmentally aware builders, designers, and homeowners can usually identify building products with relatively low embodied energy. Building components made from recycled materials or minimally processed local materials tend to have less embodied energy than building products that are highly engineered, imported, or made from virgin resources. Choosing durable building products that require little maintenance will also help builders reduce the amount of embodied energy in a structure. It is only by addressing both components of energy usage-the operating and the embodied-that Americans can reduce the vast amount of energy consumed by buildings.”28

28

Mumma, Tracy. “Guide to Resource Efficient Building Elements.” 18

Powering buildings today requires a vast amount of fossil fuels. The extraction and consumption of fossil fuels is by far the most significant contributor to global warming, non-renewable resources depletion and toxic pollution. Sixty percent of fossil fuels extracted are used to heat buildings. The answer lies beyond the transportation industry, which tends to be the primary scapegoat for environmentalists. The answer must include building design and construction. Alternative methods of powering and heating buildings have already been found. The next step is utilizing these methods on a global scale. Fig. 9: Energy consumption by source in US

The natural earth provides all the solutions. Geothermal heating, solar ponds, photovoltaic cells, wind farms, water power – these are all possible sources of energy, sources that would decrease or even eliminate our dependency on fossil fuels. Photovoltaic cells have proven to reduce energy costs by over 75 percent in numerous projects. Geothermal electricity could be utilized and, for example, a single plant could power the entire United Kingdom, with none of the harmful pollution that fossil fuels offer. Wind energy is currently providing 14 percent of Denmark’s electrical needs, with more promised in the future.29 These technologies are fast becoming viable economic solutions to the problems faced today with resource depletion. In addition, architects have been given the challenge of designing responsibly. For too long now, architects have relied on technology to solve the problems created by isolation from the environment. Future technologies, with all the advancements

29

Solar Armidale Project. “Renewable Energy.” 19

promised, cannot be relied upon as the final solution. Site orientation, daylighting, shading, passive solar heating and passive cooling must be integrated with the aforementioned measures to further reduce our need for active energy generation. It is time for architects to take advantage of natural conditions instead of continually devising new ways to isolate people from these conditions which, when employed properly, can create a significantly more comfortable environment, as well as reducing our dependency on technology for energy.

20

2.3 THESIS – A HISTORY OF ECOLOGICAL BUILDING We know that the white man does not understand our ways. He is a stranger who comes in the night and takes from the land whatever he needs. The earth is not his friend, but his enemy, and when he’s conquered it, he moves on. He kidnaps the earth from his children. His appetite will devour the earth and leave behind a desert. If all the beasts were gone, we would die from a great loneliness of the spirit, for whatever happens to the beasts happens to us. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the Earth befalls the children of the Earth – American Indian Chief Seattle Shelter throughout history has generally followed a path from anthropomorphism to anthropocentrism. Anthropomorphism, according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, is defined as “attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.”30 The earliest inhabitants of the earth understood nature to be a blessing, and these civilizations took measures to secure her continued benevolence. They understood and took advantage of nature’s provisions, and this can be seen most clearly through their dwellings. As time went on, a more anthropocentric view of the world took hold, which suggests that human beings are the most significant entity in the universe.31 It reinforced the growing conceit that nature exists for the convenience of humans. In most of the ancient world, a generally benign climate helped create the illusion of mankind’s power over nature, and the occasional natural disaster could be explained away as expressions of displeasure by the gods. In recent times, anthropocentrism has essentially catapulted the world into the ecological crisis it faces today.

30 31

Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition [online]. Ibid. 21

Architecture of the 20th century is certainly guilty of this phenomenon, preferring to view the environment as something to be isolated and protected from. A new ecological approach to design, which views the environment as an asset rather than a hindrance, must be pushed to the forefront of architecture. One source of enlightenment is to look to the past, to those ancient cultures that were founded on a state of connectedness with nature. The lessons of these civilizations reveal a wealth of information in the evolution of the human habitat that cannot be ignored. These cultures offer the basis for rethinking our relationship with the earth. The origin of all habitats is troglodyte living (cave dwellings).32 These original inhabitants Fig. 10: Cave Dwellings, Turkey, c.1000

saw shelter as an extension of nature’s provisions, not as an imposition. Cave dwellings and structures made of sun-baked mud and other indigenous materials were ecologically friendly. Caves and underground habitats – including the subterranean villages of Shensi and Kansu in China, Cappadocia in Turkey, the Malmata area of Tunisia and the Siwa region in Egypt – took advantage of virtually all that nature provides.33 They did not impose unreasonably on their environment, they did not negatively affect regional ecology, and they did not require high levels of energy consumption for heating or cooling. The earliest examples of this type of architecture were based on the needs of the builders, who simply used their intelligence and imagination to construct accommodations out of locally available

Fig. 11: The Great Mosque, Mali, c.1400

resources. However, as time went on, each of these examples became more and more consciously designed, resulting in beautiful examples, such as the fresco-

32 33

Wines, James. Green Architecture. p 38. Wines. p 39. 22

covered cave churches of Cappadocia, or the tower mosques of Mali in Africa. The fundamental aesthetic beauty derives from the sense that every architectural detail is an extension of context.34 The earliest records of an agriculturally and politically well developed civilization can be found in Jericho of 8000 B.C. The culture had a strong sense of environmental stewardship, and there is physical evidence that the community maintained a system of irrigation canals, kept a sustainable balance between farmland and natural vegetation, and understood the principle of soil conservation.35 However, unlike earlier communities, Jericho eventually set itself up for destruction. In 3000 B.C. Jericho was overtaken by Sumerians. In immeasurable acts of greed, the canals were expanded to the point where the critical balance between the built and natural world Fig. 12: Excavations of Tel al-Sultan, Jericho

collapsed, and in a very short time a once flourishing agricultural economy ground to a halt, causing the entire civilization to decline rapidly. It is interesting to note that the mistakes that eventually led to the decline of this civilization were made by the same people who understood the bounties and limitations of nature and planned accordingly, but sacrificed everything for short-term profits. Sound familiar? To have knowledge is important, but to have the discipline to execute what is right is even more important. Human beings are once again at this critical point in history, although what took nearly 5,000 years to occur in Jericho has essentially happened to our culture within the last 150 years.

34 35

Schubert-Weller, Christoph and Wagner, Erhard. Earth and Cave Architecture. p 125. Wines. p 48. 23

Egyptian societies from about 4000 to 2000 B.C. appear to have had a productive program of environmental conservation, based on an understanding of how the Nile Valley functioned. The Nile Valley flourished for millennia primarily because land and water were well-managed without advanced technology, and cities deferred to the climate by constructing buildings in protective clusters based on solar principles.36 The anthropomorphic associations in Egyptian religious life succeeded well since it provided the link between a multitheistic mythology rooted in nature and a monotheistic structure essentially placing the monarchy above nature. On the one hand, the representative god system paid homage to every environmental force Fig. 13: Nile Valley civilization, Egypt

(assuring the continuous fertility of the Nile Valley); at the same time, it invested the Pharaoh with all of the transcendental qualifications needed to rule the kingdom as an unchallenged divinity.37 Up until around 3,000 B.C., man had conceded to nature. Nature was understood to be a blessing, not a curse. There was a strong connection between nature and religion which can probably best be understood in aboriginal cultures. One aspect is the concept of ‘totemism,’ where the tribal member at birth assumes the soul and identity of a part of nature. This view of the earth and its riches as an intrinsic part of oneself – called ‘animism’ – precludes abuse of the environment because this would only constitute a destruction of self. The aborigines see their relationship to the

Fig. 14: Aboriginal shelter, Australia

environment as a single harmonious continuum, a cosmology that places them at one with the earth, and behavior patterns that respect ecological balance.38 While many

Wines. p 49. Wines. p 50. 38 Croft, David B. Australian People and Animals in Today’s Dreamtime. p 6. 36 37

24

consider aborigine culture to be primitive and not worthy of respect by today’s standards, they offer valuable lessons for living in balance and harmony with the natural environment. From this point forward in history, an anthropocentric concept of Man at the center of the universe has dominated thinking. The Greeks further advanced the idea of anthropocentrism by using scientia, knowledge, as a foundational basis. The human brain was seen as the center of the universe, and mankind’s role on earth was then deemed primarily analytical. Greek philosophy also seems to have been the origin of the Western idea of man over nature. As a result, their approach to architecture was less an effect of environmental factors than a desire to express the superiority of mind over matter: the building of massive temples where form, scale, proportion, Fig. 15: The Parthenon, Athens, Greece

and geometry became the ultimate measure of aesthetic standards. They treated landscape as a functional surface to be exploited (causing one of history’s first recorded ecological disasters through the deforestation of Athens).39 As authors of the original concept of democracy, they have heavily contributed to our detachment from nature, in terms of private ownership of property, freedom of expression, parliamentary procedure, equity under law, and the cult of the individual. In addition, Greek civic architecture created an iconography for the times which, interestingly enough, has survived to this very day to express power and wealth (i.e. banks, stock exchanges, courthouses).40

Fig. 16: New York Stock Exchange

39 40

Wines. p 53. Ibid. 25

By the 10th century, secular influences of Greek scientia had declined to the point where they held no real influence any longer. In its place rose the Catholic Church and their doctrine, which was not so much a reaction against science, but had more to do with the power implicit in controlling the masses. Medieval anthropocentrism was espoused from a theology where everything was conceded as subject to the will of God, and in fact, anthropocentrism gave way to theocentrism. Man was not expected to be the caretaker of nature, but merely a recipient who had no particular responsibility to maintain or respect its presence. Humanity’s only duty was to praise God, bow to the will of the Church, and reject any ideas in conflict with these purposes.41 To keep the masses from questioning these ideals, the Church instituted some of the world’s most persuasive architecture, calculated to dispel any doubts Fig. 17: Gothic cathedral, Italy

among the population. Gothic cathedrals, in addition to their sheer mass, displayed feats of engineering and beauty that were unlike anything seen before in history. Needless to say, they were more than sufficient in inspiring devotion to the Church and their God, while at the same time, dispelling any prior devotion to nature and the environment. The last two civilizations to be examined, which are both a return to anthropomorphic values, are the Chinese and Japanese interpretations of humanity’s connections to the environment. These connections are based on Taoist and Zen philosophies, respectively. They believe that the practice of living should be a reflection of nature’s infinite harmony. Under Taoism, the best that buildings could achieve was to engage landscape in a reverent way, reflecting the organic and asymmetrical characteristics of

41

Wines. p 54. 26

a perceived paradise.42 As opposed to the Greek concept of geometric order imposed on a landscape, Taoist architecture was seen as a reinforcement of landscape, generally secondary to nature. Taoist architecture took inspiration from the site it inhabited and grew out of the inspiration provided by the landscape. In historic Japan, the Zen Buddhist vision conceived of the entire universe as a system of interrelated parts, translated into architecture as an expression of the relationship between interior and exterior spaces. The space organization of the traditional Japanese house reflected the theology of dual realms and was designed as a constant flow from inside to outside. Just as the interior was like a garden, the exterior was like a living room. In this way, the architecture was seen as conversing with nature.43 The early followers of Zen could not have understood the Western idea of Fig. 18: Japanese garden rendering

conquering nature. In their minds, one only ‘conquers an enemy,’ and, since there is nothing to be feared in nature, the earth was regarded as the ultimate friend and benefactor.44 Although contemporary Japan currently reflects very little of its traditional Zen environmental philosophy, the few surviving examples present perhaps the most telling image of an eco-centric philosophy. The realities of history indicate that exemplary civilizations such as the garden architecture of Persia and the hill towns of Italy were more often than not the product of expedient construction techniques than any attempt at environmentally

Fig. 19: Zen Buddhist garden, Japan

conscious design. Much of their compelling beauty was simply a result of the lack of

Wines. p 56. Wines. p 57. 44 Ibid. 42 43

27

fossil-fuel driven machinery, the unavailability of industrially manufactured building products, and the inherent appeal of hand-made architecture. The interesting thing to note is that much of this architecture is still viable in today’s vastly different culture. Certainly the needs of the users have changed, as well as the levels of thermal comfort that we have come to expect, but the architecture itself is unchanged over hundreds of years. The reasons are simple. The cultures that constructed this architecture understood that the environment was an asset and the design of the buildings took full advantage of what the environment had to offer, as opposed to today’s standards of creating artificial environments and sealing out the natural environment. The cultures studied in this chapter are certainly not meant to be an all-inclusive list. There are other cultures throughout history that were incredibly destructive to the environment. There are two primary differences between these cultures and the culture we live in today. Until the 20th century and the Industrial Revolution, there was a basic need to work with the environment in order to survive, which commanded a certain respect of environmental conditions, a respect that is decidedly absent today. The other difference is scale. While certain cultures did impose negatively on the environment, the damage was generally contained to their immediate surroundings, simply because they didn’t have the means or the technology to impose on a global scale. Because of the Industrial Revolution, we now have the power to affect the environment on a global scale. The building industry and architecture contribute greatly to the environmental crisis. This thesis is not proposing a return to primitive living standards; that would, in fact, be ridiculous. This thesis is asking the question why. Why are we creating buildings that cost a small fortune to operate? Why are we creating buildings that are not lasting? Why are we creating buildings that do not respond to site and context issues? 28

Architecture in the past has been shown to respond to external forces, both environmental and otherwise. Why are we still creating architecture that is not relevant to the environmental crisis we face today?

29

2.4

THESIS – INFLUENTIAL THINKERS IN ECOLOGICAL DESIGN

We shall require substantially a new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive – Albert Einstein

The word sustainable, according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, is defined as follows: “Of, relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged.”45 The concept of sustainability was first identified in an international commission sponsored by the United Nations in 1983 in order to propose strategies for sustainable development. The Commission was chaired by former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, and its report, “Our Common Future,” published in 1987, later became known as “The Brundtland Report.” Over the course of the 20th century the relationship between the human world and the planet that sustains it has undergone a profound change…major, unintended changes are occurring in the atmosphere, in soils, in waters, among plants and animals, and in the relationships among all of these. The rate of change is outstripping the ability of scientific disciplines and our current capabilities to assess and advise. It is frustrating the attempts of political and economic institutions, which evolved in a different, more fragmented world, to adapt and cope…To keep options open for future generations, the present generation must begin now, and begin together, nationally and internationally. 46 From this groundbreaking commission, environmentally responsible design has exploded outward and is heading toward a worldwide revolution not seen since the 45 46

Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition [online]. Brundtland, Gro Harlem. Our Common Future / World Commission on Environment and Development. npn. 30

Industrial Revolution. Aside from the early innovators in this movement, there are literally thousands of other individuals and organizations worldwide who have brought this issue of sustainable design to the forefront. A few of the innovators of this movement include Robert Berkebile, William McDonough, and James Wines. These individuals stand out among the masses not only because of the contributions they have made architecturally, but also the contributions they have made in influencing government policy, technology, and manufacturing. It is not laws, policies, codes, or standards that will lead us into a new 21st century idea of what environmentally conscious architecture is; it is individuals, and these are just a few who have gone a long way in helping to define this new direction in architecture. As founding chairperson of the American Institute of Architects’ Committee on the Environment, Robert Berkebile shaped a partnership with the US Environmental Protection Agency, manufacturers, and environmental groups to create the criteria, methodology, and database of information that have become the AIA Environmental Resource Guide, a comprehensive and continually updated publication about the ecological impact of architectural decisions.47 Berkebile is a founding member of the Union of International Architects Road from Rio Working Group and cochairperson of the Scientific Advisory Group on the Environment. Through these and other activities, he has become a leader of an international effort by architects to develop the information that will be needed to create healthy buildings and communities. He is also a partner in the architectural firm BNIM Architects. A redefining moment in his life came after the Kansas City Hyatt Regency Hotel

47

Zeiher, Laura C. The Ecology of Architecture. p 31. 31

tragedy in 1981.48 As the project architect, he was forced to re-evaluate the real impact of design on those we (architects) intended to serve and on their neighborhood, the community, and the planet. This disaster, in essence, helped to shape his move into the environmental design realm. According to Berkebile, each design decision must be an act of restoration and renewal, contributing to the social, economic, and environmental vitality of the individual and the community. “It has become clear that if we care about our children’s future, we can no longer be satisfied with reducing the environmental impact of our designs.” 49

Fig. 20: Hyatt Regency walkway collapse

Many of the early and influential ideas concerning ecologically sound architecture stemmed from philosopher, innovator, and architect William McDonough. His ideas and professional accomplishments continue to establish groundbreaking trends, not only in architecture, but also in business practices, product manufacturing, and public policy. In 1992 William McDonough Architects was commissioned by the German government to develop design principles for the EXPO 2000 World’s Fair in Hannover, Germany under the theme “Humanity, Nature and Technology.” McDonough, at first opposed to the idea of having anything to do with the idea of another World’s Fair, eventually agreed to support the exposition, but decided to make its purpose instructive to designers, planners, government officials and all others involved in the building construction industry. Hence were born the Hannover Principles:

Glendale Technology High School. “The Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse.” 49 Rosenbaum, David. “Pioneers Plead for Green Design.” Engineering News Record. (13 May 1991): p 26. 48

32

1. Insist on rights of humanity and nature to co-exist. 2. Recognize interdependence. 3. Respect relationships between spirit and matter. 4. Accept responsibility for the consequences of design. 5. Create safe objects of long-term value. 6. Eliminate the concept of waste. 7. Rely on natural energy flows. 8. Understand the limitations of design. 9. Seek constant improvement by the sharing of knowledge.50 In the Hannover Principles, McDonough offers the following definition of sustainability: “Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”51 In order to do that, we need an entirely new perspective on what encompasses sustainable architecture. McDonough is concerned that the current trends will repeat the pattern of the 1970s during the energy crisis. To quote Albert Einstein, “No problem can be solved with the same consciousness that created it.” An example of that quote in action would be the solar effort of the 1970s. According to McDonough, the solar effort failed because it wasn’t beautiful, it wasn’t lasting, and was cost-prohibitive. The materials used in solar panels were so energy intensive to produce that it would take a collector twelve years to pay back the energy necessary to make them. In addition, understanding of passive 50 51

McDonough, William. The Hannover Principles. Ibid. 33

solar design was limited and buildings were created with too much glazing and not enough thermal mass to balance the heat collected by the glass. As a result, buildings were uncomfortably hot all year round. An ecologically friendly architecture answers two fundamental questions – how to make a building that collects more energy than it requires, and is a net power exporter; and how to make buildings that purify water, creating better quality water than they receive.52 McDonough is seeking to answer these questions through his architecture. One of his overriding principles in relating architecture to nature is his ‘cradle-to-cradle’ philosophy, which basically states that everything humans make must not only rise from the ground but return to it, soil to soil, water to water, so everything that is received from the earth can be freely given back without causing harm to any living system. Fig. 21: Adam Joseph Lewis Center, Oberlin, Ohio

In “Architecture in the Age of Ecology,” a February 1994 article James Wines wrote for Earthword journal, he calls for a ‘new spirit’ in architecture: Architecture is desperately in need of a conceptual, theoretical, and philosophical reunion with nature. During the crest of the Modern Age, architects passionately believed that there was a direct equation with the combustion engine and a spiritual vision for the design of shelter. What began as a great socialist and technological vision has become the symbol of oppression and isolation from nature.53

52 53

Zeiher. p 50. Wines, James. “Architecture in the Age of Ecology.” Earthword. (Feb 1994): p 4. 34

Never formally trained in architecture, James Wines, a sculptor, is internationally recognized for his philosophical and artistic approach to architecture and ecology. He is head of the Department of Architecture at Pennsylvania State University. He believes that the best examples of sustainable architecture can be found in historic buildings and cities around the world that have survived more than five hundred years and are still in active use today. He suggests that architecture of this type has survived for two reasons: it is well-constructed with quality materials, and it is a beautiful architecture that is worthy of preserving. 54 Wines feels that the industrial and technological influences that have shaped 20th century architecture are predicated on the notion that the earth is an obstacle to be ‘conquered.’ This idea comes from religions that place man at the center of the universe and negate the importance of the natural world (anthropocentrism). He says there must be a radical change of priorities and philosophies in architecture and a return to the earth as a major source of inspiration. It is not enough just to add a few environmentally friendly features to a building. The basic building type needs to change, and a new iconography for the 21st century Age of Ecology needs to be created; otherwise, the sustainable movement will eventually fade into oblivion.55

54 55

Zeiher. p 60. Zeiher. p 66. 35

2.5

THESIS – BEAUTY IN ARCHITECTURE

Man can hardly recognize the devils of his own creation – Albert Schweitzer A truly lasting architecture must incorporate several qualities. Aesthetics is certainly an important concern to architects and in fact, aesthetics is of prime importance to our society in general. However, aesthetic concerns by themselves do not create a lasting architecture, which is one of the mistakes of the Modern Movement. Modernism created thousands of ‘beautiful’ buildings, praised by their profession, only to be destroyed prematurely. Why? Many Modernist examples attempted to create timeless architecture through purity of form and gave little to no concern for the users who would inhabit the building. Architecture separate from user comfort cannot work, because eventually it will be rejected by the very people for when it was built. As well, architecture without a concern for sustainability, especially in these times, cannot be considered beautiful by the very nature that they do not consider the needs of future generations. Take the design of the office building, for example. Designs currently tend to be directed solely by economic efficiency rather than user needs. The typical design of the floor plate is governed by the maximization of usable floor area within the limits of the building codes. Compare this to William McDonough’s approach to the design of Fig. 22: Environmental Defense Fund interior, NY

the offices of the Environmental Defense Fund Offices in New York where light and ventilation for all the staff were critical in the development of the design.56 The hierarchy of the corner office and the lightless cubicles in the building’s center were

56

William McDonough + Partners. “Environmental Defense Fund Executive Headquarters.” 36

regarded as antithetical to the architect’s design philosophy. Will this office building still be standing in 50 or 100 years? It is impossible to say, but it is easy to say that the building will not be destroyed because it ceased to function well for the users. Our notions of what is beautiful naturally change over time. We like to think of beauty as timeless, but invariably, beauty is directly related to a period of time. For example, in 1952, the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex in St. Louis was considered by the AIA to be one of the best designed groups of buildings in the country. Its architect, Minuro Yamasaki, won a prestigious design award for it. A mere 20 years later, the 2,700 units of housing were blown up by city officials because the project was deemed unsalvageable. It went from being an example of the best design in the country to the worst in the space of 20 years – a single generation. All the financial, material and intellectual resources that went into that design idea have been wasted. This Fig. 23: Pruitt-Igoe housing complex, c.1955

hardly represents a sustainable use of resources. The design, ultimately, was more responsive to a purely aesthetic ideology than it was to the people who were using the completed project.57 As long as user comfort is considered secondary to a design aesthetic, the mistakes of Pruitt-Igoe will continue to be repeated. As long as the façades of buildings are the same on all four faces, there is proof of the priority of a narrow aesthetic ideology over the larger concept of sustainability. As long as architects disregard the facts of the physical environment

Fig. 24: Pruitt-Igoe demolition, c.1972

(and throw technology at the problems created out of that disregard) for the sake of a particular vision of what is beautiful, nothing will change. Architecture will

57

Bristol, Graeme. “Some Reflections on Sustainability and Beauty.” < http://www.arch.kmutt.ac.th/researches/SUSTAINABILITY%20AND%20BEAUTY-r.htm> 37

continue to be limited by its time period. The fact is, architecture must respond to multiple influences. Two influences that must be considered in order for architecture to be regarded as beautiful, and perhaps even timeless, in the 21st century are user comfort and sustainable considerations. Much of the Modern Movement of the 20th century sought the timeless in architecture from the purity of form. That search generally excluded the people who would use the buildings created out of that search for purity. If people didn’t appreciate the results, their negative reaction was dismissed as evidence of the public’s philistine ignorance or conservative values.58 But can we separate ideas of the beautiful from the function such objects perform? Can something be beautiful that oppresses people? To derive a form separate from the needs of the users is destined to fail, as has been shown many times throughout the history of Modernism, and is even being shown today. Aesthetics is of primary importance to the architect, as well it should, but beauty separate from user considerations is nothing more than an attempt to satisfy the ego of the architect, and is not, in fact, beautiful at all. Similarly, architecture that fails to meet the standards and expectations of sustainability can only be called beautiful in the most isolated sense. Implementing these two criteria does not mean that the aesthetic is ignored or deemed unimportant. It simply means that the building looks the way it looks for a deeper reason, not just the architect’s surface idea of what he considers beautiful. There are several architects who put sustainable theories to work in their architecture and have

58

Wines, James. Green Architecture. p 19. 38

influenced numerous architects to design with ecology as an inherent design component that influences the overall aesthetic. A student of Frank Lloyd Wright for several years, architect Rudolf Schindler was known for blurring inside and outside in a beautiful way, although his preoccupation with nature was not consciously driven by a concern for sustainability. An example of his work which showcases his sensitivities to the outside environment is the Pueblo Ribera Housing Complex in La Jolla, California. Completed in the early 1920’s, this complex stands as a fabulous example of communion with the natural environment. Originally, each unit consisted of one bedroom on a single level, with the upper level designed as a sleeping porch. Each unit shares a common wall with one another, with privacy and a spectacular view of historic Windansea Beach. His material palette was very simple, consisting of redwood beams found locally, and concrete utilizing sand from the nearby beach. Fig. 25: Pueblo Ribera housing complex, La Jolla, CA

His environmentally sensitive work pioneered a new generation of architects to create ecologically friendly architecture in an aesthetically pleasing way. Warren Wagner, a practicing architect in California, was influenced deeply by Schindler’s work. It is his integration of aesthetic concern with resource-conserving design and construction processes that drives his practice and sets it apart from other architectural firms. His buildings are much more than a showcase of sustainable products and processes; his buildings show that architects can incorporate these products into their buildings without sacrificing the aesthetic qualities of their architecture.59 Take, for example, the McRight-Wagner Studios in Venice, California, a project he designed for himself and his wife. This building illustrates Wagner's

59

Kimm, Alice. “A Stylish Sustainability.” 39

belief that “the creation of denser live/work environments that eliminate commuting and reduce auto emissions and the consumption of fossil fuel is the single most important environmental contribution of resource-conserving design.”60 One of the most intriguing elements in this building is the radiant floor heating system mated to a passive solar water heater. It is a fairly common technology. What makes it worth mentioning, however, is his integration of this system into the overall architectural design. The location of the water heater provides one strong example of his integration of a resource conserving tool with inventive architectural expression. Rather than hiding it, Wagner placed the heater in a glass box located at the top southwest corner of the building, facing directly onto the street. The observer sees a well-composed corner cutout, one of the most important elements that make up the composition of the dynamic front façade. Looking closely, one sees the tanks and the box’s black lining to help in energy absorption.61 The rigor and clarity of Fig. 26: McRight-Wagner Studios, Venice, CA

Wagner’s buildings showcase sustainable products and processes – without sacrificing the aesthetic quality that makes his work so pleasing. Architecture must move beyond styles. Aesthetics, while important, must become secondary to both user needs and sustainable considerations. It has been argued that beauty cannot exist separate from sustainable building practices, nor can the users of the building remain subordinate to an aesthetic ideology, forced to endure uncomfortable architecture. We must embrace this relatively new adaptation in the ever-changing world that is the architecture profession. We must make it both a part

60 61

Ibid. Kimm, Alice. “A Stylish Sustainability.” 40

of our lives and a part of our practice. Architecture separate from these ideas is destined to fade into obscurity.

41

2.6

THESIS – LIVING BUILDINGS

We do not seek to imitate nature, but rather to find the principles she uses – Buckminster Fuller Jason Frederick McLennan of BNIM Architects in Kansas City, Missouri, first proposed the idea of living buildings in a talk he gave in Northern California on the future of architecture. Using metaphors to describe architecture, he said, “For too long now the machine has been the primary metaphor for our buildings, which implies a relationship with nature that is exploitative and relies on brute force combined with great amounts of energy to solve problems.”62 Using the metaphor of a flower, he decided to call the future of architecture a future of living buildings. Like their flowering counterparts, living buildings will operate from seven simple principles. Fig. 27: Combustion engine as metaphor for architecture

Living buildings will: • Harvest all their own water and energy needs on site. • Be adapted specifically to site and climate and evolve as conditions change. • Operate pollution-free and generate no wastes that aren’t useful for some other process in the building or immediate environment. • Promote the health and well-being of all inhabitants, as a healthy ecosystem does. • Be comprised of integrated systems that maximize efficiency and comfort. • Improve the health and diversity of the local ecosystem rather than degrade it. • Be beautiful and inspire us to dream.63

Fig. 28: Flower as metaphor for architecture

62 63

The design component of this thesis will seek to satisfy these criteria in the design of a school for furniture craftsmanship. All of these principles are dedicated to

McLennan, Jason Frederick. Sustainable Architecture White Papers. “Living Buildings.” p 25. McLennan. pp 27-28. 42

sustainable attributes as well as user comfort. Successful implementation of these criteria will culminate in a beautiful architecture that creates a pleasing indoor environment and does not impose on the natural environment. In order to understand how these ideas become a “living building,” it is necessary to explain each of the criteria in detail and show what measures will be incorporated in the design to satisfy the criteria set forth by Jason McLennan. 1. Harvest all their own water and energy needs on site. The Greater Cincinnati area, including New Richmond, receives an average annual rainfall of 43 inches. Not only would a rainwater collection system make sense in this climate, but in these times, it would be irresponsible not to incorporate this system within the building. Rainwater can be used for non-potable uses such as flushing toilets, janitorial uses, and landscaping needs without treatment. Rainwater storage is fairly simple to incorporate in a building and can contribute to a significant reduction in water usage. All buildings have roofs, which means all buildings shed water. Most water shed from buildings collects in the landscape, potentially causing flooding, erosion, and degradation of the natural environment. Rainwater collection has been shown to reduce water needs in a building by up to 90 percent, significantly reducing costs associated with water usage.64 The design component of this thesis will incorporate a rainwater collection system with a storage tank underground mated to a filtration system. In addition, to further reduce water consumption needs, the building will be supplied with composting toilets. Composting toilets produce sterile 64

United States Green Building Council. “LEED Case Study - CBF Merrill Environmental Center.” 43

compost on-site, which can be used as mulch for landscaping. Composting toilets create economic benefits as well, in that conventional sewage systems require substantial investments in piped infrastructure, considerable maintenance and replacement for the system, energy to pump sewage, and up to 30 percent of a building’s water supply.65 Modern composting toilets are normally odorless and clean when properly maintained. Small solar fans and pumps may be used to keep the composting process active. A rainwater collection system coupled with the use of composting toilets will be combined in this building to drastically reduce the need for external water sources. Photovoltaic (PV) cells will be utilized to generate electricity on site. The technology behind PV cells has come a long way since the solar houses of the 1970s. Early PV systems were very large and bulky, creating an awkward appearance on a building. It is much easier to integrate this technology into buildings today without detracting from the overall aesthetic. Building-integrated PV systems are becoming economically feasible due to progress in two critical areas: material flexibility and cost. State-of-the-art PV modules are thin layers of semiconductor material deposited on glass, sheet metal, or (in the near future) recycled plastics. Additionally, PV modules are steadily approaching price parity with similar non-solar materials. Ten years ago the average cost of solar modules was over $60 per square foot. Today the lowest market price for PV panels is a little less than $10 per square foot – lower than stone, metal panels, and even high-end architectural glass. 66 PV arrays will be

65 66

Sorvig, Kim and Thompson, William J. Sustainable Landscape Construction. p 282. Kiss, Gregory. Sustainable Architecture White Papers. “Building Integrated Photovoltaics.” p 31. 44

utilized to generate electricity to run the machines in the workshop. Additional electricity will be sold back to the electric company, establishing a 1 to 1 relationship. Space conditioning needs will utilize a combination of passive and active generation methods. Passive solar heating and passive cooling – also known as natural conditioning – provides comfort by reducing, or even eliminating, the need for fossil fuel. The techniques required to heat and cool a building passively have been used for hundreds of years, but with the advent of the Industrial Revolution and machines, passive conditioning took a back seat to new advanced mechanical systems. Due to the oil crisis of the 1970s, passive solar architecture returned to the forefront of the building industry. With limited knowledge (and sometimes little common sense), architects and builders created a wide variety of solar homes. Some worked pretty well, but looked more like laboratories than houses. Others performed poorly, overheating in the summer because of excessive or misplaced windows and skylights, and growing chilly in the colder months because of insufficient thermal mass and insulation and poor siting. Proven passive solar heating and cooling guidelines will be coupled with a geo-exchange heating and cooling system to help provide comfortable indoor temperatures year-round, while eliminating the use of fossil fuels to condition the building. Geothermal heating and cooling – also known as geo-exchange – will be utilized to compensate where passive conditioning leaves off. Geothermal heating and cooling is a cost-effective and environmentally friendly technology that takes advantage of the earth’s capacity to store energy in the form of heat. The geothermal heat pump accomplishes its heating and cooling tasks by obtaining heat through a connection to 45

the earth known as a loop. The loop consists of a piping system circulating a water/antifreeze mixture from the earth to the geothermal heat pump and back. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that geo-exchange systems can reduce energy consumption and corresponding emissions by over 40 percent compared to air source heat pumps and by over 70 percent compared to electric resistance heating with standard air-conditioning equipment.67 Geothermal heat pumps cost more to install than conventional space conditioning systems, but the additional investment typically can be recovered in as little as three to five years through lower heating and cooling bills.68 Geothermal space conditioning will be the primary tool for conditioning the building, with passive solar providing additional comfort both in the winter and summer months. It is important to note that active sustainable measures do have a slightly higher initial cost. However, this thesis is proposing a shift in thinking from short-term immediate benefits to long-term benefits. Active measures do pay for themselves over time and, in fact, begin saving the owners money. In addition, they have the peace of mind in knowing that their building is not contributing to the environmental crisis we face today. As architects, it is our responsibility to inform clients of the necessity of sustainable building and to clear up common misconceptions about the term sustainability; i.e. it costs too much money, it is ugly, etc.

67 68

Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. “GeoExchange: How it Works.” State and Local Climate Change Program. “Geothermal Heat Pumps.” 46

2. Be adapted specifically to site and climate and evolve as conditions change. As already discussed above, the thesis design project will respond in part to the climatic conditions. Instead of isolating the building and occupants from the environment, the design will seek to reach a harmony with the natural environment, including taking advantage of environmental conditions. The design will conform to established passive solar guidelines, adapted specifically for the chosen site. A major design constraint (or opportunity) is that the site is located within the flood plain of the Ohio River. The building codes of Clermont County state that the first occupiable floor must be 10 feet above grade lines. The design must respond to that requirement, and do it in a way that is appropriate to the established design language of the village of New Richmond. In addition, the design will not be so specific as to suggest that the building must always function as a type of school. It is important to understand and consider future uses of the building and design flexibly. It is a given that this building will eventually outlast its current use, and instead of destroying it, the design will allow easy adaptation to a different use without much modification. After all, adaptation and longevity are key values of sustainability, and a building cannot truly be called sustainable without thinking long-term. Perhaps the most important idea in this thesis exploration is the idea of sustainability through longevity. One example to look to is certain Italian hill towns. These 13th century buildings were ideally situated to take advantage of natural conditions when originally constructed, suggesting a consideration of site and context in planning. They utilized thermally efficient walls (meaning they had at least a basic Fig. 29: 13th century Italian hill town

understanding of passive solar design) and were constructed of regionally available materials. They utilized regional materials simply because they did not have the 47

infrastructure necessary for transporting materials long distances. Their interior spaces have proven adaptable over hundreds of years of changing uses. In addition to all of this, these buildings survived through the ages because they had an unmistakable beauty worth preserving. Today, these buildings are filled with the latest technology and accommodate various industries with little trouble.69 These buildings have survived and adapted for over 600 years. There is no reason to believe that the architecture we create today cannot survive and adapt for 600 more years. However, the current methods of using fossil fuels to make buildings habitable are not the solution. After all, oil supplies are being shown to run dry in 40 years. How will buildings survive for the next 540 years? The answer lies in nature, learning from and incorporating her techniques into our architecture. 3. Operate pollution-free and generate no wastes that aren’t useful for some other process in the building or immediate environment. Since the design component of the thesis is a school for furniture craftsmanship, primary waste will be that of scrap wood and sawdust. Sawdust can be utilized as mulch in gardens, particularly that of the wastewater treatment system and the wetland plants. Humus, the product of decayed wood, gives soil nutrition and structure, which is important to plant health. Additionally, the design will incorporate an area for drying lumber. Typically, a boiler is used to heat a kiln which dries the lumber. Sawdust can be utilized to heat the boiler, resulting in lowered energy costs associated with drying lumber. Chapman Lumber Company, in association with Alliant Energy, patented this process of using sawdust to dry lumber.70 Clearly, a shop with a limited capacity 69 70

Wines, James. Green Architecture. p 32. Alliant Energy. “Success Stories: Manufacturing – Chapman Lumber Company.” 48

such as this one cannot generate enough sawdust to sufficiently heat the kilns. A passive solar heater will work in tandem with the above process to heat the kilns. Larger wood scraps can be used as fuel for fires during the winter months to help heat the spaces inside the building. 4. Promote the health and well-being of all inhabitants, as a healthy ecosystem does. Good indoor air quality (IAQ) is important to the health of a building’s occupants. Superior IAQ minimizes the presence of indoor pollutants, humidity, and odors. Indoor pollution sources that release gases or particles into the air are the primary cause of indoor air quality problems. Inadequate ventilation can increase indoor pollutant levels by not bringing in enough outdoor air to dilute emissions from indoor sources and by not carrying indoor air pollutants out of the building. This is especially true in a woodshop, where dust particles can cause great harm to the users of the space. High temperature and humidity levels can also increase concentrations of some pollutants.71 The rate at which outdoor air replaces indoor air is known as the air exchange rate. When there is little infiltration, natural ventilation, or mechanical ventilation, the air exchange rate is low and pollutant levels can increase, leading to sickness and disease for the building occupants. A primary design component will be natural ventilation to attain a high air exchange rate, leading to decreased levels of contaminants that may cause illnesses. In addition, air passing over the skin creates a physiological cooling effect by evaporating moisture from the surface of the skin. Comfort ventilation will be utilized to further reduce the cooling load in the summer.

71

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Indoor Air Quality.” 49

In addition to ventilation concerns, daylighting will be of primary importance to this building. Daylighting not only enhances the mental and physical well-being of the building occupants, but it dramatically reduces energy use for artificial lighting, which also helps reduce cooling loads because lighting generates heat. According to the Natural Lighting Company, daylighting has several advantages: • Save energy: Lights can be turned off during daylight hours. • Maximize color perception: Daylighting has a color rendition index of 100 percent; cool-white fluorescent lights have an index of 67 percent. Therefore, colors are rich, true and vibrant. • Enhance object definition: Improves visual acuity by providing superior recognition of surface detail, text and graphics. • Is cooler: Daylighting contains half as much heat per unit of illumination as other light sources. • Easy on the eyes: Daylighting has no harsh glare, intense brightness, hot spots or flicker.72 Natural daylighting will be integrated into the design project through the use of south and north facing windows, skylights, and/or light wells. East and west facing windows will be minimized to mitigate heat gain in the summer.

72

Natural Lighting Company, Inc. “Daylighting.” 50

5. Be comprised of integrated systems that maximize efficiency and comfort. One of the goals of the thesis design project is the integration of sustainable technologies into the overall aesthetic of the building design. The design seeks to be the antithesis of the ‘star’ mentality – that which suggests the architecture is built for the sake of architecture. Everything about the design will speak to something much deeper than the architect’s vision of what he considers beautiful. Passive guidelines will be the driving influence in the form of the building. The design is about creating a building that is pleasing to be in, not just pleasing to look at. 6. Improve the health and diversity of the local ecosystem rather than degrade it. The site chosen for the thesis design project is currently an asphalt and concrete parking lot that acts as storage for semi-truck trailers. Building on this site in an environmentally responsible way would return it to a greener state. Paving that is permeable to allow natural drainage will be an important factor to the site design of this thesis. Even though a rainwater collection system will be utilized, water that falls on impermeable surfaces still must be dealt with in a manner that will not overwhelm the existing drainage patterns. In addition, native plantings will be introduced to the site to further slow water run-off, as well as lending a beautiful aesthetic to the site that does not currently exist. Plantings also reduce the heat island effect that plagues so many large cities. The design will seek to remedy these issues in a way that is architecturally unified with the building design, allowing the building to become an extension of the site.

51

7. Be beautiful and inspire us to dream. This criterion is not as cut and dried as the other six criteria. It begs the question, “What is beautiful?” What is beautiful to some may not be beautiful to others. That is why this thesis seeks to look beyond the surface notion and delve into a deeper definition of beauty. Perhaps a more important question to ask is this: “Can something be beautiful that creates ugliness for future generations?” In times such as these, in order to create beautiful architecture, it absolutely must take into consideration sustainable building practices. To do otherwise would simply be irresponsible. The design component of this thesis seeks, among the other issues already discussed, issues of renewable and recycled materials. It also seeks a return to fine craftsmanship, where buildings are designed to last by way of quality construction methods and materials. As well, there is a natural appeal to hand-made architecture, and while the design will not duplicate methodology from the past, it will be an example of beautiful and quality craftsmanship. The building will become a showcase of the skills that are being taught within. It is understood that this building may not always be a school for furniture craftsmanship. As times and needs change, this building will also adapt and change to fit the needs of the future. It is impossible to know if the architecture of today will be in use, or even standing, in 600 years. Architects have always taken design cues from the past. Some would argue that nothing original has been done in hundreds of years. Logic suggests that the past has many lessons to draw from. The point is not to imitate – that would in fact be a step backward. The point is to use proven solutions and apply them to the current problems architecture – and the world – faces. 52

2.7

THESIS - PRECEDENTS 2.71 CBF Philip Merrill Environmental Center – SmithGroup, Inc. Annapolis, Maryland 2000

There is much to be learned from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Philip Merrill Environmental Center located on the Chesapeake Bay in Annapolis, MD. It was completed in December 2000, and was the first building to receive a Platinum rating through the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED Rating System. SmithGroup, Inc. was the project architect for the building and J. Harrison Architects were the LEED coordinators. Of importance to the Center, among other issues, was energy consumption. To address Fig. 30: Entrance to CBF

this, a number of features were employed. The building was sited to take advantage of southern solar exposure as well as prevailing winds for natural ventilation. Daylighting is emphasized by large windows, clerestories, and an open interior design. The south wall of the center uses photovoltaic panels to produce energy on site. Solar panels on the roof heat water for indoor use. Geothermal wells are used for heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. Another strategy incorporated into the construction of the building is the “cradle-tocradle” rather than the “cradle-to-grave” philosophy. This philosophy, proposed by William McDonough, requires consideration of all materials not only for what they

Fig. 31: South façade of CBF

are made of, but what they can be made into at the end of their useful lives.

53

Materials came from a number of sources. Existing structures on the site were deconstructed rather than demolished and all products were auctioned, reused, or recycled. Other materials were selected based on recycled content (i.e. galvanized siding made from cans, cars, and guns). Also, materials from renewable or regenerable resources were incorporated, such as cork and bamboo flooring. All wood used in the building came from renewable resources. Roof and wall enclosures use Structurally Insulated Panels (SIPs), resulting in a high performance building envelope using a fraction of the wood in conventionally framed structures. Parallel Strand Timber (PST) beams came from new-growth trees, harvested and quickly Fig. 32: CBF interior

regenerated, which are structurally stronger than conventional timbers. In addition, over 50 percent of the materials came from within a 300-mile radius to reduce environmental costs associated with travel. There are a number of other environmental features of this building that helped to contribute to the Platinum rating given to it. Rainwater collection systems and composting toilets contribute to the building using 90 percent less water than a conventional office building of a comparable size. Building on already developed land as opposed to non-developed land meant that native habitats, already dwindling, were not disturbed. Placing the building on stilts allowed parking to be placed underneath the building, not disturbing native vegetation. In all, the CBF Philip Merrill Environmental Center is considered to be one of the “greenest” building in

Fig. 33: Rainwater storage system

73

America.73

US Green Building Council. “LEED Case Study - CBF Merrill Environmental Center.” . 54

2.7

THESIS – PRECEDENTS 2.72 Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center – Renzo Piano Building Workshop Noumea, New Caledonia 1991-1998

The Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center, designed by Renzo Piano Building Workshop was completed in 1998. It is devoted to the cultural origins of the native Kanak people of New Caledonia and the South Pacific. As the architect observed in developing his vision, “…it was not feasible to offer a standard product of Western architecture, with a layer of camouflage on top; it would have looked like an armored car covered with palm fronds.”74 Fig. 34: Early design sketch, Renzo Piano

The Center is similar to the village in which the Kanak tribes live. These huts, called cases in French, distinguish the different hierarchies and functions of the tribes. The Cultural Center is comprised of three ‘villages’ made up of ten ‘Great Houses’ of varying sizes and functions. They are all linked by a long, gently curving enclosed walkway. The building utilizes native materials for the ribs and slats called iroko, a stable, termite resistant wood, similar to bamboo, eliminating the need for long-distance transport. The use of iroko creates an imagery that fits comfortably into its context. The wood deteriorates back to the earth after the lifecycle of the building is exhausted, and all the steel connections are 100 percent recyclable. This building is a great example of

Fig. 35: Aerial view of Tjibaou Cultural Centre

74

“cradle-to-cradle” design.

Wines, James. Green Architecture. p 130. 55

The location, a peninsula between the Pacific Ocean and a calm lagoon, allows the building to take advantage of the prevailing winds from the ocean side through its system of natural ventilation. Horizontal wood slats on the outer façade filter the wind into a second layer of skin, an inner façade of glass louvers which open or close according to wind speed, allowing wind to flow through the building for natural Fig. 36: Village 3, Tjibaou

ventilation. In addition, the double layer of skin filters the warm air upward and out of the building. This has eliminated the need for mechanical systems of any kind, allowing the building to be conditioned by natural ventilation. In keeping with the history of the Kanak culture, a series of exterior spaces reinforce the connection to nature and the landscape. A pathway winds through the dense natural vegetation, connecting the various outdoor spaces. These spaces, as well as the main building, integrate themselves beautifully and do not detract from the natural beauty of the site.75

Fig. 37: View along walkway, Tjibaou

75

Buchanan, Peter. Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume Four. p 151. 56

2.7

THESIS – PRECEDENTS 2.73 Thorncrown Chapel – E. Fay Jones Eureka Springs, Arkansas 1980

Nestled in a woodland setting outside Eureka Springs, Arkansas, Thorncrown Chapel rises forty-eight feet into the sky. This magnificent wooden structure contains 425 windows and over 6,000 square feet of glass. It sits atop over 100 tons of native stone and colored flagstone. The chapel’s simple design and majestic beauty combine to make it what critics have called “one of the finest religious spaces of modern times.”76 Thorncrown Chapel, completed in July 1980, has won numerous architectural design awards such as the American Institute of Architect’s (AIA) Design of the Year Award for 1981 and the AIA Design of the Decade Award for the 1980s. Recently, members of the AIA placed Thorncrown Chapel fourth on its list of the top buildings of the twentieth century.77 Thorncrown Chapel is a masterpiece of integration. This small elegant chapel in the woods, with its latticework of trusses, is a metaphor for its place – a forest within a forest. The interior of the chapel welcomes the forest, inviting the users to immerse themselves within the environment. The original concept was to make a chapel that Fig. 38: Thorncrown Chapel, Eureka Springs, AK

allowed the congregation to view God’s creations from the inside of the church. In order to satisfy this goal, the building had to be very low impact. Thorncrown was

76 77

Thorncrown Chapel. “The Story of Thorncrown Chapel.” The American Institute of Architects. “Honor Awards 1980-1989.” 57

designed in such a way that each piece of the building could be carried and placed by two people, eliminating the need for machinery. He succeeded in this until the very end of the project. He had to resort to the use of a small crane and put it on the stone path in order to place the roof on the building. The reason he went to all of this trouble was to keep the project low impact so that the chapel would be surrounded by trees. Thorncrown Chapel is an exquisite example of the design of the building fading into the background of the beauty of the natural environment. Rising across from two parallel stone walls are wood columns that soar to the roof level Fig. 39: Inside vs. outside composition

like slender tree trunks with outstretched branches reaching across the interior space to join with branches reaching from the opposite side. This rhythmical joinery is the structural system that supports the roof and stabilizes the building. It also becomes a beautiful overhead pattern of crossing timbers that leads the viewer’s attention forward to the chapel area. Here the view passes on through the end wall of glass to the forest beyond. Tall panes of glass fill the spaces between the wood columns, so the forest becomes an extension of the building. The columns at midpoint are accented by wood and glass light fixtures that at twilight are reflected and counterreflected in opposing glass walls. The reflections disappear as diminishing points of light in the growing darkness. Thorncrown Chapel is a wonderful example of

Fig. 40: Interior of worship hall

combining architecture and nature into a timeless composition. Author Paul Heyer described Thorncrown Chapel in a way that suggests the building and the landscape could not exist separate from one another:

58

“So it is not only the form of elements and their relationship in and to the landscape that is fundamental in site considerations, but shapes and materials, methods of building character, and associative cultural and remembered image evocations are also important. Such is Thorncrown Chapel by Fay Jones in rural Arkansas, an architecture which complements and, in creating a special sense of place, ‘almost’ completes the site. The character of the site dictated the method of construction, by ‘not using anything too big for two men to carry along a narrow hillside path.’ Jones’ use of wooden tensile members in an overhead cross-lattice system holding the structure together in fragility of the building and its surroundings, just as life and nature itself is fragile and special. The rhythmic quality of the structure set against the calm magnitude of nature creates a sense of sacred space: just as the music of the forest is a layering of vertical trunks and raking branches, so is the building a canopy of layered and mesh like space. Thorncrown Chapel succeeds on yet another level, that of the symbolic: Using massing reminiscent of rural covered bridges, the image of shelter on the road of life is in keeping with the ecclesiastical understanding of nature. This is where regionalism through site and climate can play a vital role in making architecture not personally idiosyncratic in an ego or alternatively abstract-rule-applied sense, but special in a locally sensitive and relative sense.”78

Fig. 41: Path to Thorncrown Chapel

78

Heyer, Paul. American Architecture: Ideas and Ideologies in the Late Twentieth Century. pp 102-103. 59

3.1

PROJECT / LOCATION – HISTORY OF PROJECT TYPE / PROJECT PRECEDENT

The Center for Furniture Craftsmanship is a year-round woodworking school located on the coast of Maine in Rockport. They encourage individual excellence in furniture making, design, and related skills such as carving, turning, marquetry, and finishing. They have programs geared towards novice, intermediate, advanced, and professional woodworkers who seek an inspiring learning experience in a supportive environment. The mission of the Center for Furniture Craftsmanship is to “provide the best possible education for people who want to design and build functional, beautiful, expressive Fig. 42: View of campus and buildings

furniture out of wood to the highest standard of craftsmanship.” Students come from across the United States and around the world. In 2002 the school had 272 course enrollments from 37 states and six foreign countries, 19 percent of whom were Maine residents. Participants are professional and vocational woodworkers for whom furniture making is, fundamentally, a means of self-expression and an opportunity to add meaning to their lives. The Center is widely recognized as one of the top furniture making schools for those who want to achieve uncompromising standards of excellence in craftsmanship and design. The Center's perspective is that training future generations of furniture makers goes well beyond the need to pass on technical information. It involves keeping a traditional craft such as woodworking relevant to social issues, individual concerns, and economic realities of 60

contemporary society. This teaching philosophy reflects the change in commercial furniture making from a traditional trade to a production industry over the course of the industrial revolution and into the present. During this time, the motivations and roles of individual craftsmen have evolved from those of skilled tradesmen to, essentially, those of visual artists. Through the process of creating furniture, studio furniture makers engage in the same personal and cultural exploration as do all visual artists. The Center was founded in 1993 by Executive Director Peter Korn and quickly attracted a distinguished visiting faculty, including internationally-respected furniture makers such as Alan Peters from Devon, England, Michael Fortune from Petersborough, Canada and James Krenov from Fort Bragg, California. In 1996 the Center moved to a purpose-built, 4,200-square-foot Workshop Building on 12 acres in Rockport, Maine. In January, 1999, as the result of a successful $250,000 capital campaign, generously supported by alumni, the school became a non-profit, 501(c)(3) educational organization and acquired its campus. In July 2001, in response to swelling enrollment demand, the school launched a second Capital Campaign with a goal of $2.4 million. Its primary purposes were to create three new buildings and endowment, in order to institute a Nine-month Comprehensive course, an additional Twelve-week Intensive course, a Studio Fellowship Program, a Gallery, and a Library. The campaign came to a successful conclusion in January 2004 with the support of 394 donors, including alumni, foundations, corporations, the Midcoast Maine community, furniture collectors, our Board of Directors, and other friends. The new Gallery

61

and Main Buildings were built in 2003 and a Studio Fellowship Building is to be constructed in 2004.” 79 The center has one and two-week workshops that are opportunities to immerse oneself in woodworking with the guidance of outstanding, professional craftsmen dedicated to sharing their skills, and the companionship of other enthusiastic participants. They have workshops in furniture-making, which is broken down into basic woodworking, intermediate furniture making, elegant case pieces, really basic woodworking, hand tool skills, veneering, advanced furniture making, design and craftsmanship, chair making, and designing multiples. Their workshops in carving include ornamental carving, relief carving, and a carving tutorial. They have a workshop in marquetry, a workshop in finishing, which includes finishing, advanced finishing, and repair and refinishing. They also have workshops in turning, which include introduction to turning, creativity on the lathe, turning fundamentals, and turning bowls. The center also has a twelve-week intensive which is specially designed to meet the needs of aspiring professional furniture makers and amateurs on sabbatical from other professions. The skills taught in this curriculum include design, drawing, lumber selection, joinery, traditional hand skills, machine techniques, advanced techniques, Fig. 43: 4,200 square-foot workshop

surface preparation and finishing, shop maintenance, and professional practices. The program is divided into three segments. The first two weeks are devoted to basic woodworking, where each student designs and builds a project with an emphasis on hand skills. The second segment, weeks three through eight, focuses on solid-wood

79

Center for Furniture Craftsmanship. “Mission and History.” 62

carcase construction, including door-making and drawer-making. Each student creates a case piece with at least one door and one drawer. The third segment, weeks nine through twelve, focus on advanced techniques such as steam bending, laminate bending, and veneer work. Each student’s third project is to design and construct a project using one or more of said techniques. The center’s nine-month comprehensive program is for aspiring professional furniture makers and dedicated amateurs who seek in-depth training at the highest standard of excellence. Students spend three weeks on a basic woodworking project, which reinforces the student’s knowledge of the furniture making process from drafting through finishing. They spend three weeks on machine joinery, examining the use of power tools in the construction process. The next six weeks is spent designing and constructing a case piece construction, introducing the student to door and drawer construction utilizing both hand and machine skills. The next week is spent on veneering, with the student learning to work with veneer and inlays by creating two tabletops. The next five weeks are devoted to bending techniques, including steam and laminate bending. The next five weeks focus on chair making, where each student builds a chair after an extensive design process. The next five weeks are spent on multiples, where the student focuses on making multiple furniture pieces within a set price range, emphasizing real-world concerns such as speed, efficiency, Fig. 44: 2,300 square-foot gallery building

and marketing. The final eight weeks are self-directed, where the student takes what they have learned and apply it in a deeper exploration in those areas of furniture making they find most interesting.

63

The Center for Furniture Craftsmanship is situated on eleven acres of meadow and woods along the Oyster River in Rockport, Maine. There are four buildings on campus. The 4,200 square-foot Workshop Building consists of a bench room, a classroom, and a machine room. The 5,600 square-foot Main Building consists of a bench room, a classroom, a machine room, and a lumber storage facility. The 2,300 square-foot Gallery Building consists of the Gallery, the Fine Woodworking Library, and the administrative office. Bench rooms in the Workshop and Main Buildings are outfitted with European-style workbenches. The classrooms are furnished with tables and benches suitable to specialized courses such as carving and finishing. The machine rooms are equipped with high-quality woodworking machinery of a scale appropriate to the advanced amateur and small professional shop. The machine rooms have full dust-collection and are furnished with 10” tablesaws, 8” and 12” joiners, 14” and 15” thickness planers, 14” and 20” bandsaws, drill presses, lathes, chop saws, scroll saws, slot mortisers, grinder, stationary disc/belt sanders, and oscillating spindle sanders. The Main Building also has a shaper. Both facilities are Fig. 45: Fine woodworking library

stocked with an assortment of hand tools and hand-held power tools for the student’s use.

64

3.2

PROJECT / LOCATION – SITE ANALYSIS / FEATURES

LOCATION – The site for the workshop is located on two adjacent parcels of land between Front Street and the Ohio River in New Richmond, Ohio in Clermont County. The western edge of the site drops off steeply to the Ohio River. The eastern edge of the site is bordered by Front Street. The site is oriented on a north-south axis, and the smaller parcel – which currently houses semi-truck parking - is to the north of the larger parcel, which is an abandoned parking lot that once housed a small motel. To the south of the site is a two-story residence that will not hinder the southern exposure to the sun. To the west beyond Front Street are two residences, both multistory, and a park. To the north lies a one-story market that will remain.

Fig. 46: Proximity map of New Richmond, Ohio

DESCRIPTION – New Richmond is located at 38°57'18" North, 84°16'54" West.80 It is approximately 25 miles southeast of Cincinnati on the Ohio River. The village was originally laid out on two surveys. David Jackson’s survey was entered on June 3, 1778 for 333 acres. In 1804, the Jackson survey became the property of Jacob Light, who, on September 22, 1814, laid out the 85 acres that became the original village of New Richmond. Robert Beal’s survey of 1,000 acres was also entered on June 3, 1778. The Beal survey eventually became the property of General William Lytle, who in 1813

80

United States Census Bureau, 2000. 65

conveyed 875 of those acres to Thomas Ashburn. In February of 1816, Ashburn laid out the part of New Richmond beginning at Union Street and extending 10 blocks. He named the village Susanna in honor of his wife. By a special act of the General Assembly, passed January 11, 1928, the villages of new Richmond and Susanna were to be known by the name “New Richmond.” Thus was born the village of New Richmond, Ohio. New Richmond has a population of approximately 2,219.81 There are 888 households with a median household value of $96,200. There are 2.96 persons per household Fig. 47: Jacob Light’s survey of New Richmond, 1814

and the median income is $44,271. The median age is 33. The amount of land in New Richmond is 8.918 square kilometers. The amount of surface water (excluding the Ohio River) is 0.25 square kilometers. New Richmond is 25 miles southeast of Cincinnati, lending a proximity to the city that is appropriate, as many of the students will likely commute from the city. The site lies in the Ohio River Valley, which is entirely within the glaciated region of Ohio. All of Clermont County is covered by old, deeply leached glacial drift of Illinoian age. The drainage waters of the southern third of Clermont County (in which New Richmond is a part) flow directly into the Ohio River. Climatic and soil data comes from The Soil Survey of Clermont County, Ohio, supplemented in June 2002. The majority of the data was compiled between 1961-1990. In winter, the average temperature is 31.6 degrees and the average daily minimum temperature

81

United States Census Bureau, 2000. 66

is 21.9 degrees. The lowest temperature on record, which occurred at Chilo Meldahl Lock & Dam on January 19, 1994, was -22 degrees. In summer, the average temperature is 73.3 degrees and the average daily maximum temperature is 85.0 degrees. The highest temperature, which occurred at Chilo Meldahl Lock & Dam on August 22, 1983, was 107 degrees.82 The average annual total precipitation is about 43.16 inches. Of this, about 26.2 inches, or 61 percent, usually falls in April through October. The heaviest 1-day rainfall during the period of record was 7.20 inches at Chilo Meldahl Lock & Dam on March 2, 1997. Thunderstorms occur on about 42 days each year, most between May and August.83 The average seasonal snowfall is around 18 inches. The greatest snow depth at any one time during the period of record was 17 inches recorded on January 20, 1978. On an average, around 20 days per year have at least 1 inch of snow on the ground. The heaviest one-day snowfall on record was 10.0 inches recorded on February 13, 1940.84 The average relative humidity in mid-afternoon is about 59 percent. Humidity is higher at night, and the average at dawn is about 81 percent. The sun shines 63 percent of the time in summer and 40 percent in winter. The prevailing wind is from the

US Department of Agriculture, Soil Survey of Clermont County, Ohio; 13. Ibid. 84 Ibid. 82 83

67

southwest. Average wind speed is highest, around 11 miles per hour, from January to April.85 The proposed site is divided into two classifications of soil; along the western edge of the site bordering the Ohio River is Alluvial Land, Sloping.86 This soil is generally a sloping to very steep land type in riverbanks along the Ohio River and its tributaries. In most places, including the proposed site, this subsoil is very similar to that of Huntington silt loam. Most of the eastern (flat) portion of the site lies within the Huntington Association of soils, which consists of deep, nearly level, well-drained soils on the Ohio River flood plains. The soil, classified as Huntington silt loam is generally found between US 52 and the Ohio River, which is where the Village of New Richmond lies. It occupies nearly level areas located within the flood plain. The surface layer is dark brown silt loam that is 8 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil, to a depth of 20 inches, is dark brown silty clay loam. Below this, to a depth Fig. 48: Soil associations of New Richmond

of 110 inches, is dark brown clay loam or loam that is structureless. Below a depth of 110 inches and extending to a depth of 133 inches or more are stratified layers of brown sandy loam and loam.87 The buildable area of the site is relatively flat and is at an elevation of 495’ M.S.L. The western edge of the site slopes steeply down to the river’s edge. The 100-year flood levels for this site is set at 505’ M.S.L.88 The site is located in a region that has a fairly common occurrence of flooding. Major flooding to the region has occurred in 1937,

Ibid. US Department of Agriculture. p 52. 87 US Department of Agriculture. pp 18, 69, 170. 88 Army Corps of Engineers. 85 86

68

1964, 1972, 1991, 1996 and 1997.89 The flood stage for New Richmond is set at 52’ (488’ M.S.L.).90 The highest recorded flood occurring in New Richmond occurred on January 26, 1937. The river peaked at 80’, or 517’ M.S.L.91 The normal (low level) river level is at 455’ M.S.L.92 Prevailing winds are from the southwest according to the Wind Rose Diagram for Cincinnati. Measured from April 1-October 1, 1988-1992, prevailing winds came out of the southwest an average of 13 percent of the time. Winds came out of the southFig. 49: 1937 flood

southwest 10 percent of the time, and from west-southwest 8 percent of the time. Average wind speed is between 17-21 knots.93

Fig. 50: Wind rose diagram for Cincinnati

National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service, Kennedy, David. Village Administrator, Village of New Richmond. 91 National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service. 92 Kennedy, David. Village Administrator, Village of New Richmond. 93 US Environmental Protection Agency. “Wind Roses for Selected Areas.” < http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/areas/wind.htm> 89 90

69

Fig. 51: Climatic summary for Greater Cincinnati

70

4.1

PROGRAM – SPACES, OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE

Program Spaces: Machine Shop:

3,000sf

Lumber Storage:

1,000sf

Project Storage:

1,000sf

Finishing Room:

500sf

Lobby:

500sf

Library:

1,000sf

Gallery:

1,000sf

Classrooms:

(2) 500sf

Offices:

(2) 500sf

Restrooms:

(4) 250sf

Kitchen / Lunch Room:

1,000sf

Circulation – 25%:

3,250sf

Mechanical:

1,000sf

Total:

17,250sf

71

4.2

PROGRAM – INDIVIDUAL SPACE DESCRIPTION AND SQ. FT.

Machine Shop – 3,000sf Occupants: -

A maximum of 30 students and 2 instructors will be utilizing the machine shop at any given time.

-

The age range for the users in this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85.

Activities: -

Will consist of the production of furniture pieces and practical instruction from the faculty.

-

Will be equipped for both machine production and the use of hand tools.

Health/Safety and Security: -

Main shut-off switch for all the electrical machinery.

-

Easy access to emergency eye-wash basins and sinks.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

-

The doors to this space should be lockable.

-

Cabinet stocked with safety equipment: first-aid kit, safety goggles, dust mask/respirators, gloves, face shields, ear plugs, etc.

Functional Requirements: -

Wood top workbenches will provide a stable area to work.

-

Racks on the walls will store the hand tools, while lockable cabinets under the workbenches will contain power tools.

72

Location / Adjacencies: -

Should be located adjacent to the lumber storage and project storage rooms. Should also be near the finishing room.

Equipment Requirements: -

Workbenches located throughout the shop will provide a steady surface for the assembly and production of the user’s pieces. The workbenches will be equipped with vices, a row of dogholes, and will be adjustable in height to tailor to the needs of the user.

-

Heavy woodworking machinery including one table saw, one planer, one jointer, two compound miter saws, one radial arm saw, one panel saw, three band saws of varying sizes, two lathes, one mortising machine, two drill presses, one router table, two spindle sanders, two belt sanders, two drum sanders, one scroll saw, and equipment necessary for a spray/finishing room.

-

Wide variety of power tools such as circular saws, jig saws, drills, hand-held routers, etc.

-

Wide variety of clamps.

-

Multiple extension cords.

-

Wide variety of hand tools for shaping and finishing furniture pieces.

-

Electrical outlets for each tool will be located as near as possible to the tool to prevent any cables that may be a hazard.

-

220 volt outlets will be provided for larger machines.

Area: -

3,000 square feet

73

Lumber Storage Area – 1,000sf Occupants: -

Approximately 1-3 students/instructors will be sorting and choosing from various materials at any given time.

-

The age range for the users in this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85.

Activities: -

Will consist of sorting and choosing from various materials.

Health/Safety and Security: -

The door to this area should be lockable.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

-

Wood storage racks should be secure to prevent tipping or collapsing.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Racks for drying and storing wood.

-

Bins for small pieces of wood.

-

Floor space and/or racks for large sheet goods.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located adjacent to the machine shop.

-

Should be located with easy access to street for delivery of materials.

Area: -

1,000 square feet

74

Project Storage Area – 1,000sf Occupants: -

Approximately 1-5 students/instructors in the area at any given time.

-

The age range for the users in this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85.

Activities: -

Will consist of storing and retrieving projects.

Health/Safety and Security: -

The door to this area should be lockable.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Large racks for storing projects.

-

Floor space for large projects.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located adjacent to the machine shop.

Area: -

1,000sf

Finishing Room – 500sf Occupants: -

Approximately 1-2 students will be using the space at any given time.

-

The age range for the users in this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85. 75

Activities: -

Will consist of the staining and finishing of furniture pieces.

Health/Safety and Security: -

The door to this area should be lockable.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

-

Adequate ventilation is essential for this space.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Bench tops of varying height for finishing process.

-

Air equipment for spray finishing.

-

Various applicator pads for hand finishing.

Location/Adjacencies: - Should be located adjacent to the machine shop. Area: -

500 square feet

Lobby – 500sf Occupants: -

Approximately 1-5 individuals will be using this space at any given time.

-

Individuals of any age would be able to utilize this space.

Activities: -

Collect and orient incoming visitors throughout the operating hours of the facility.

Health/Safety and Security: 76

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

-

Access to security monitors for all the spaces.

-

Access to keys for spaces within the building.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Lobby desk incorporating security monitors.

-

Ample seating for visitors and guests.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located adjacent to gallery and library, near the main entrance to control access to the building.

-

Should be located away from the machine shop to minimize noise levels.

Area: - 500 square feet

Library – 1,000sf Occupants: -

Approximately 1-5 students, instructors and the public will be using the space at any given time.

-

Individuals of any age would be able to utilize this space.

Activities: -

Locating and reading books pertaining to woodworking and furniture craft.

Health/Safety and Security: -

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: 77

-

Storage for books/videos and a small, comfortable reading area.

-

Should be a quiet area that allows users to read and study the materials.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located in the public realm of the building near the main entrance.

-

Will be adjacent to the gallery.

-

Should be located away from the machine shop to minimize noise levels.

Area: -

1,000 square feet

Gallery – 1,000sf Occupants: -

The gallery will be used by the students, instructors and the public.

-

Individuals of any age would be able to utilize this space.

Activities: -

Will consist of displaying and discussing exemplary projects produced in the workshop.

Health/Safety and Security: -

This area will be accessible by the public yet monitored.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Stands for the display of small items, turnings, etc.

-

Floor space for larger projects. 78

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located adjacent to the main entrance lobby.

Area: -

1,000 square feet

Classrooms – (2) 500sf Occupants: -

Maximum of 15 students plus an instructor will be using the classroom at any given time.

-

The age range for the users in this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85.

Activities: -

Will consist of academic instruction in varying areas of furniture craft.

Health/Safety and Security: -

The door to these spaces should be lockable.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Tools for classroom instruction (i.e. blackboards, etc.)

-

Workbenches for students.

-

Storage lockers for academic assignments/materials.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located on the mezzanine level overlooking the machine shop.

Area: 79

-

1,000 square feet

Offices – (2) 500sf Occupants: -

The offices will be for the use of the administrative staff of the workshop.

-

2-3 instructors/staff per office.

Activities: -

Will consist of office related duties, paperwork and classroom preparation.

Health/Safety and Security: -

Easy access to fire extinguisher and sprinklers.

-

The doors to these spaces should be lockable.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Storage for papers/books and desks with necessary office equipment.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Will be located on a mezzanine level with views into the workshop.

Area: -

1,000 square feet

Restrooms – (4) 250sf Occupants: 80

-

The restrooms will be used by the students, instructors and the public.

-

Individuals of any age would be able to utilize these spaces.

Health/Safety and Security: -

ADA code compliant.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

All necessary plumbing.

-

One shower per restroom.

-

GFCI per code compliance.

-

Ultra low-flow fixtures.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located at accessible locations throughout the building.

-

One set of restrooms for public use.

-

One set of restrooms for student/instructor use.

Area: -

1,000 square feet

Kitchen/Lunch Room – 1,000sf Occupants: -

Approximately 15-20 students will be using this space at any given time.

-

The age range for the users of this space would be quite broad from 18 to 85.

Health/Safety and Security: -

Compliant to all building codes for applicable spaces. 81

-

Non-slip floor, stain resistant floor.

-

Easy access to fire extinguishers and sprinklers.

Functional/Equipment Requirements: -

Tables for students/instructors to eat lunch and take breaks.

-

Kitchen equipment to include two industrial grade refrigerators, two microwaves, storage for dishware, etc., industrial grade sink, dishwasher, trash disposal.

-

220 volt outlets for required equipment.

-

GFCI outlets near water sources.

Location/Adjacencies: -

Should be located on mezzanine level, away from workshop.

-

Will have access to outdoor eating terrace.

-

Will be located to allow views to Ohio River.

Area: -

1,000 square feet (250sf for kitchen, remainder for eating area).

82

6.1 BIBLIOGRAPHY Aguar, Charles and Berdeana. Wrightscapes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002. Alliant Energy. “Success Stories: Manufacturing – Chapman Lumber Company.” alliantenergy.com; viewed 18 Jan 2005. < http://www.alliantenergy.com/stellent/groups/public/documents/pub/bus_ss_man_012420.hcsp> Army Corps of Engineers. viewed 22 Nov 2004. Berman, Bradley. “First Hybrid SUV: Race between Ford Escape Hybrid SUV and Lexus RX 400H Hybrid SUV.” Hybridcars.com; viewed 21 Nov 2004. Berrizbeitia, Anita and Pollak, Linda. Inside Outside: Between Architecture and Landscape. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Rockport Publishers, Inc., 1999. Bright, Chris. “The Nemesis Effect.” World Watch. (May/June 1999): pp 12-23. Bristol, Graeme. “Some Reflections on Sustainability and Beauty.” KMUTT School of Architecture and Design; viewed 23 Nov 2004. British Petroleum. “BP Releases: Statistical Review of World Energy 2004.” BP.com; 15 Jun 2004. viewed 21 Nov 2004. Brown, Lester R. State of the World, 1999: A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. New York: W.W. Norton, 1999. Brown, Lester R. Eco-Economy: Building an Economy for the Earth. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. Brundtland, Gro Harlem. Our Common Future / World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford; New York: Oxford University press, 1987. Buchanan, Peter. Renzo Piano Building Workshop: Complete Works – Volume Four. London: Phaidon Press, 2000. Center for Furniture Craftsmanship. “Mission and History.” viewed 30 Nov 2004. Cheung, Harvey. Modernity in East-West Literary Criticism. London; Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 2001. 83

Chiras, Daniel D. The Solar House: Passive Heating and Cooling. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 2002. Croft, David B. Australian People and Animals in Today’s Dreamtime. New York: Prager Publishers, 1991. Elman, Kimberly. “Frank Lloyd Wright and the Principles of Organic Architecture.” pbs.org; viewed 18 Jan 2005. Glendale Technology High School. “The Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse.” Glendale THS; viewed 23 Nov 2004. Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. “GeoExchange: How it Works.” geoexchange.org; viewed 18 Jan 2005. Hansen, James E. “Surface Temperature Analysis.” Goddard Institute for Space Studies; viewed 8 Jan 2005. Hawthorne, Christopher. “Turning Down the Global Thermostat.” Metropolis. (Oct 2003): pp. 102-107, 149, 151-152. Heyer, Paul. American Architecture: Ideas and Ideologies in the Late Twentieth Century. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993. Imhoff, Daniel. Building with Vision: Optimizing and Finding Alternatives to Wood. Healdsburg, California: Watershed Media, 2001. Kibert, Charles J. Construction Ecology: Nature as the Basis for Green Building. London; New York: Spon Press, 2002. Kimm, Alice. “A Stylish Sustainability.” ArchitectureWeek.com; viewed 23 Nov 2004. Kiss, Gregory. Sustainable Architecture White Papers. “Building Integrated Photovoltaics.” New York: Earth Pledge Foundation, 2000. Le Corbusier. Towards a New Architecture. [translated] New York: Brewer & Warren, 1927. Lechner, Norbert. Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Design methods for Architects. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2001. McDonough, William. The Hannover Principles. Prepared for EXPO 2000 World’s Fair, 1992. McLennan, Jason Frederick. Sustainable Architecture White Papers. “Living Buildings.” New York: Earth Pledge Foundation, 2000. 84

Mazria, Edward. “It’s the Architecture, Stupid!” Solar Today. (May/June 2003): pp. 48-51. Melnbardis, Robert. “Power Plants Top Canada-US Air Polluters, Watchdog Says.” Planet Ark; 3 Jun 2004. viewed 21 Nov 2004. Mendler, Sandra F. and Odell, William. The HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2000. Mumford, Lewis. The Culture of Cities. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1938. Mumma, Tracy. “Guide to Resource Efficient Building Elements.” Center for Resourceful Building Technology; viewed 21 Nov 2004. National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service. viewed 22 Nov 2004. Natural Lighting Company, Inc. “Daylighting.” daylighting.com; viewed 18 Jan 2005. Orr, David W. Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect. Washington, DC: Island Press, 1994. Pearson, David. Earth to Spirit: In Search of Natural Architecture. San Francisco, California: Chronicle Books, 1994. Rosenbaum, David. “Pioneers Plead for Green Design.” Engineering News Record. (13 May 1991): pp. 26-28. Schubert-Weller, Christoph and Wagner, Erhard. Earth and Cave Architecture. Sulgen, Switzerland: Verlag Niggli, 1999. Solar Armidale Project. “Renewable Energy.” Solar Armidale; viewed 22 Nov 2004. Sorvig, Kim and Thompson, William J. Sustainable Landscape Construction. Covelo, California: Island Press, 2000. State and Local Climate Change Program. “Geothermal Heat Pumps.” epa.gov; Jan 2000. viewed 18 Jan 2005. Sustainable Architecture and Building Design (SABD). “Sustainable Architecture.” viewed 18 Jan 2005.

85

The American Institute of Architects. “Honor Awards 1980-1989.” aia.org; viewed 18 Jan 2005. Thorncrown Chapel. “The Story of Thorncrown Chapel.” thorncrown.com; viewed 18 Jan 2005. United States Census Bureau, 2000. viewed 22 Nov 2004. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey of Clermont County, Ohio. September 1975. United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Indoor Air Quality.” epa.gov; viewed 18 Jan 2005. United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Wind Roses for Selected Areas.” epa.gov; viewed 23 Nov 2004. United States Green Building Council. “LEED Case Study - CBF Merrill Environmental Center.” usgbc.org; viewed 22 Nov 2004. William McDonough + Partners. “Environmental Defense Fund Executive Headquarters.” mcdonoughpartners.com; viewed 10 Jan 2005. Wines, James. “Architecture in the Age of Ecology.” Earthword. (Feb 1994): pp. 4-5. Wines, James. De-Architecture. New York: Rizzoli, 1987. Wines, James. Green Architecture. Köln; New York: Taschen, 2000. Wright, Frank Lloyd. The Natural House. New York: Horizon Press, 1954. Zeiher, Laura C. The Ecology of Architecture. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1996.

86