Diagnostics and Monitoring

Architecture students are no stranger to the technical dynamics of building construction.  But one aspect of architectural design that has fascinated me for a while is the shortsightedness of those in the building trade.  When a client approaches a contractor, architect, or engineer to solicit their work on a new building, does the client think "I want this building to stand the test of time" or does he/she think "I just want a good return on my investment".  Perhaps these two desires are more closely related than we think-- that the value of a building is equally tied to its ability to endure and its capacity to interpret culture (or perhaps project culture) through contemporary design and construction

With this in mind, I have been enjoying Michael Henry's building diagnostics and monitoring course, in which we explore building pathology and the ways in which time and elements take their toll on the built environment.

I'd like to also suggest that while contemporary building design seems to fall closer to the side of Return on Investment and Speed of Construction, most architecture students receive little to no training about how their building design will perform over of time.  Design studios seem to focus almost exclusively on concept and quality of design (with, every so often, a nod to context).  But while architecture students most likely imagine that the buildings they are proposing will last forever, there is scant consideration of the corrosive/erosive/decaying dynamics of architecture that inevitably undo the best laid design plans.  This small diagram lays out the gap between architecture studio theory (ideal), the theoretically normative place that I believe architecture should seek to design for, and the actual (positive) place that most buildings are built today.

The LEEDers and the Followers

This morning I put myself through something no normal person willingly endures - two strenuous hours of Saturday morning standardized-testing. Grueling, to be sure, but the results were worth the stress. I'm now officially a LEED-accredited Green Associate!

So what does this mean, anyway? Besides the official privilege of using "LEED GA" after my name, I am now in a better position to work on sustainability-oriented projects and market myself as an architecture student and pre-professional who is knowledgeable about the standardized procedures of the government's USGBC programs.

But what does this REALLY mean. This whole sustainability "green-washing" and sudden rush for environmental concern? Sustainability is a very popular topic today, and it seems like every person and every corporation is trying to get their own edge or corner of the sustainability craze that's sweeping the United States. Businesses from Walmart to Herman-Miller are re-branding and re-marketing their practices as "Environmentally Friendly" and politicians are even beginning to talk about "Green Collar" jobs to jump start the white- and blue-collar slumps of the construction and financial economies.

So am I just playing right into the system? Does earning my LEED Green Associate accreditation make me anything more than a pawn in the larger schemes of the architecture industry, the latest economic trends, and the current political systems of the United States?

Thirty years from now, all architects who want to get any sort of government or corporate-sector job will HAVE to be LEED accredited. Period. It's the only way to survive. But is it any way to thrive, and is it even the best option to begin with?

Is it in the best interest of an architecture student to go with the flow and pursue LEED AP accreditation? Or is it better to go against the grain and be a rebel, traditional designer who doesn't need any sort of accreditation in order to practice?

These and many more questions are especially pertinent to architecture students and recent graduates/interns who are in desperate need of a job and will do almost anything to differentiate themselves from the pack. Does LEED accreditation act as a sort of measuring point giving employers preference in hiring procedures? Do students who have accreditation gain the upper hand in head-to-head employment competition?

I could talk about this for hours but I don't want to bore you. I hope to blog more about sustainability and the whole LEED system for later, but for now I'll just leave you with two these two questions -

What more is LEED than just a business-enhancing shiny object applied to a building? What does LEED do other than reward architects, designers, and clients for doing what they should already be doing in the first place?

Sustainably yours,
Nate Hammitt, LEED GA

International Employment

“The world has been flattened… Global collaboration and competition… has been made cheaper, easier, more friction-free, and more productive for more people from more corners of the earth than at any time in the history of the world.”
Thomas Friedman

In the national economy it is no secret that jobs are hard to come by. The United States faces the harsh reality of job outsourcing and as a country we must rely on our solid base of office and service commercial industries, as well as several stalwart production industries, in order to compete in the global economy. More and more American jobs are being assumed by foreign workers who are able to do the same jobs that Americans do, but at far lower prices.

So what is the solution to this national economic issue? We can either embrace the coming change and accept our role as a “creativity economy” or we can take a stand, much as the National Romantics and Arts & Crafts designers of Europe and America did in the late 1800s and early 1900s following the industrial revolution, and we can demand higher quality local services from ourselves instead of cheaper outsourced goods and products. This means we will have to give up such “necessities” as Wal-Mart, Target, and Amazon.com, and turn to local producers who produce at a generally higher quality and retail price.

But truthfully, are Americans ready to make this shift? I think not. The typical American is too afraid to life a life without commercial securities. As a nation, we have become attached to large corporations and we would flounder hopelessly in a nation of mom-and-pop retail stores. There must be some happy medium.

What does this mean to design students? Any American design student that wishes to find a place in the global economy must recognize this trend towards domestic reliance on international supply and the role of a designer to take products that would otherwise be viewed as foreign and we must make them appear (or even be) local, relatable, and vernacular.

In the end, a job overseas may not be out of the question for design students wishing to take advantage of architectural development in other countries. Only time will tell, but as Thomas Friedman emphasizes, “There is no substitute for face-to-face reporting and research.” Outsourced design and fabrication can only go so far. Where that limit lies is anyone’s guess, but as the world flattens the possibilities for international trade, manufacturing, and yes, even design, expand into new frontiers every day.

"Death to starchitecture."
-Lance Hosey, 2010

Published last week by Lance Hosey of architecturemagazine.com, “10 for ‘20” is a list that sets out to predict what could (or should) happen next in over the coming decade in a “greening” building industry.

The article focuses on the technical, systemic, and operations management side of architecture, with an emphasis on the potential of integrative design, community development, and ecological inspiration. Hosey centers on how automated process is one of the credos architects should swear by, and the article champions the possibilities of LEED, a system whose impact has grown far beyond its initial expectations and is likely to expand even more in the coming years.

For students, the author writes that an increased valuation of “ecological literary could reform education at every level and transform design schools around a more aggressively interdisciplinary curricula.” This focus, according to Hosey, forecasts how “the glamorization of the individual architect could become less and less appealing as design becomes valued more for how it serves the communities.”

Among its many predictions for the coming decade, the article champions how architects should subscribe to new forms and applications of technology to meet energy needs and community requirements. Students should also embrace this aspect of architecture – being knowledgeable of design potentials and professional practices will lead to a more holistic and genuine form of long-lasting and well-conceived design.