Annual Update 2016

The Birdsell Family & Friends Brain Cancer Research Fund has a lot to be grateful for in 2016. Past the halfway mark in our five year commitment, we're happy to report the fund is ahead of pace. This comes as a relief to the organizers but also represents an achievement the whole family can all be proud of this Christmas season. In September I held a successful DJ fundraiser in Calgary and my Mom supported the fund throughout the year by parting with many beautiful Chigiri-e pictures in exchange for donations (Chigiri-e is a Japanese art that my Mom does which uses high-quality paper to create images). Aunt Judy and Uncle Terry did yeoman's work raising awareness of the fund within their circle of friends and we wish to extend a warm thanks to all who contributed.

Donations to the BFFBCRF support the Impact Grant Program established by the Canadian Cancer Society which targets brain cancer research in Canada with a high probability of significant progress in the near future. As my knowledge of cancer research grows, it's intimidating how complex the challenge is: Post-graduate students hunch over lab benches investigating the most minute interactions of cancer and the brain; the interconnectedness of the human body is a constant source of mystery as to whether scientists are seeing a cause-and-effect relationship or simply a correlation in their data. But even if such challenges lay ahead it's time such attention was paid: firstly, survivorship rates of brain cancer continue to lag behind that of other types of cancer; and secondly, the late-term effects of brain cancer tend to be more severe and can include psychological or social problems, learning disabilities, growth and developmental issues, and hearing difficulties.

But here is the great thing if readers should wish to honour the BFFBCRF with a donation: Brain Canada, a national non-profit, will match our family's contribution meaning we as a group have the power to affect brain cancer research in Canada to a tune of $50 000! Amazing! We hope family and friends have a great 2017 and begin to fortify themselves against the final push to reach our goal in 2018 – a goal which now appears increasingly doable! 

Skyscrapers Effect on the Urban Fabric

Skyscrapers and high rise buildings represent large investments and therefore should demand the very best of architectural criticism. In a jarring experience last week I was reminded that sometimes websites rush to feed the content treadmill before considering the reader. All readers are of immense value and I'm grateful for each. Now more than ever tall structures need our scrutiny. London has something like 119 applications in the pipeline (thought it's expected not all will be built) and juggernauts like Gehry and Foster are facing off in downtown Toronto. Who's the one who's going to go out on a limb and pick favourites?

Below is a composite of several diagrid structures. I'll send you to writer and subject matter expert @TerriBoake for more specifics on that but the point which bares reflection is that urban planners negative reaction to skyscrapers appears to be somewhat justified. We've covered on the blog before the somewhat dubious thermal properties of high rise buildings clad in glass and current research in the urban design field is only starting to come to grips with some of the negative quality-of-life issues arising from letting the free market totally dictate the form of our cities. 

Skirting the economic issues we return to the aesthetic. It pains me greatly such a great symbol of human's propensity to create is so flawed. And specifically, if we must accept some flaws to just get anything built, then can't we at least push the design further? Foster's daigrid skyscrapers to the center and and right fair much better against Eric Parry Architects' 1 Undershaft. The pressure from the developers here is very evident. One can imagine design meetings where the developer, in this case representatives from Singapore property developers Aroland Holdings, is basically giving ultimatums to Eric Parry to maximize the floor plate no matter what. That's how we end up with a boring rectangular prism for our great expense. I guess staying positive there could be awesome interior design and retail architecture. Plus one can at least still implement some sustainable technology.

In the running for best daigird high rise is Hearst Tower out of New York. I've always felt a bit iffy about the structure's connection to the historic base but at least above there is a lot going on. At least there trying something here. In case you'd like to see more urban high rise architecture, please check out the excellent feed of @tectonicphoto!

A photo posted by Tectonic (@tectonicphoto) on Dec 1, 2016 at 6:09am PST

The Very Best Architectural Model Making

A wonderful new museum in Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo makes me want to return again as soon as possible. Reminiscing about my old life in Japan I need not feel guilty about missing this highlight last time since the museum wasn't established until this year. Archi-Depot's goal is to try to restore and display architectural models from some of Japan's leading architects; architects I've been studying for quite a long time actually. International artists are also being included as the collection develops. Lots of different types of architectural model are represented; massing models, site models, architectural features, conceptual etc. The museum, run by Yuta Tokunaga, is apparently soliciting for financial support as well which is something I will definitely look into doing in the future because it's somewhere I'd definitely want to visit. These small pieces are wonderful!

A photo posted by Archi Depot Museum/建築倉庫 (@archi_depot) on Dec 3, 2016 at 12:35am PST

Competing with these stunning handmade models in the 21st century is a new technology and it's time we highlight a studio doing all the right things with 3D printing. MATT Architecture of London has done an excellent job leveraging the rapid prototyping capabilities of 3D printing to design better. Daniel Lauand, architect at MATT Architecture, hits the nail on the head when he explains in the article:

“Whilst architects have always constructed physical models to test and evaluate design decisions, 3D printing opened up the possibility of increasing the frequency and complexity of this iterative process between digital model and physical artefact.”

Increasing the frequency and complexity of the iterations has a significant impact on improving the quality of a design. Or another way of looking at it; making more mistakes in the design process allows more mistakes to be fixed. I always thank the Mythbusters for championing the claim "failure is always an option" and that goes to the heart of why physical massing models etc. are so helpful whether 3D printed or handmade. The complexities are grasped more quickly and problems identified. But only with a 3D printing workflow can that iteration cycle be compressed and costs reduced. The included video narrates MATT Architecture's 3D printing process and features an upcoming project. Props to @all3dp for releasing their article under CC4.0. 

Urban Planning Controversy Stalks Architecture Festival

Not Patrik Schumacher

I was looking at posting something about architectural 3D printing but instead was lured to post about the recent comments of Patrik Schumacher, director of Zaha Hadid Architects, at the World Architecture Festival. This is the most excitement the World Architecture Festival has had in years! And though I don't often post about urban planning nor court controversy on the blog now that some time has past and dust settled we can return to ask: what was he thinking?!?!?

Schumacher has since walked back his statements on slashing public housing and privatizing public spaces. He retreated to the common position others have taken that he was just trying to raise awareness of the issue. I will take him at his word on that. But a lot can be perceived from other's reactions to his statement about the forces which shaped what he said and why people supported it. U.K. developers, for instance, seem to be siding with Schumacher that there is too much regulation. I feel safe in assuming Schumacher has never need avail himself of subsidized housing which, at least in part, explains why he was so dismissive of a whole group of people in coming to his conclusion. In walking his statements back he continued to suggest too much regulation is hurting the development of low income housing. I'm sympathetic toward this argument since I sit next to a copy of the National Building Code and it's a beast to build with. That said, if less regulations were a panacea for better social housing, non-profits were non-existent in their support if it. Public housing advocates knew he was out to lunch; economists as well. The free market does many things well but it's a mistake to think it's perfect and low-income housing is one of those pragmatic necessities for a city that defies an easy market solution. I actually don't think I'm saying anything particularly controversial in the field of economics but in many ways this breaks down to a classic Marxist analysis and many do not like mixing politics and architecture.

Schumacher will live to design another day but apparently he has taken a position only he himself will be able to resolve the contradictions of. 

Lists and Lists and Lists of Sustainable Sports Stadiums

I was doing some research on an unrelated project and stumbled across the fact there seems to be little content addressing the overall state of enviromental sustainability in sports stadiums. Definitely there were a lot of lists. But no one seems to have taken the time to draw any conclusions about the field. 

Stadium architecture is interesting for a couple of reasons: They are often high-profile and have big budgets; there are a couple of challenges enforced by the high occupancy load that can affect the form of the building. Industrial scale HVAC systems and the necessity of strong exit patterns etc. limit design options in certain ways and aren't a lot of fun to deal with. That said, stadiums like Texas' AT&T Stadium do take advantage of the freedom to explore radical design options. In the picture accompanying this post notice the HUGE depressed arches which at once are structural solution and architectural feature.

Texas AT&T Stadium. 

Not to diminish HKS Architects and Walter P Moore Engineers accomplishment we probably shouldn't leave the topic without noting that despite many sustainability measures being implemented across the site, Texas AT&T Stadium and others like it still use the same amount of electricity as a small city. Recycling programs; solid waste reduction; natural light. Across the sector sport stadiums have barely made a dent in electricity consumption. Some of this is reasonable given that a large stadium can be compared to condensing a small city into one place. However, efficiencies should arise due to the increased density and yet these savings don't seem to be realizable in the current state-of-the-art stadium architecture.  

Shrinking in scale somewhat, I think recreation centres offer a much more interesting design challenge. Here one is faced with the true integration of multiple functions (how to get squash players to play nicely with badminton players) and here some of the limitations of occupancy load and HVAC systems discussed earlier can be treated more flexibly. A recreation center which continues to set an example for the sector is the Auburn University's Recreation and Wellness Center in Alabama. HOK did an excellent job creating some really interesting interior spaces and as a runner I thought it was a nice touch to include a 1/3-mile figure-8 running track. (The cherry on top would have been if one of these awesome augmented reality climbing walls had been included!) I wish the project had tried to pushed past LEED Silver but we'll take what we can get. I also have some questions about the exterior styling but this might be a factor of not having a more detailed sense of its surroundings.  

Auburn University's Recreation and Wellness Center

Applications of Floor-to-Ceiling Windows In Sustainable Architecture

I've been caught in a dilemma for the last couple of years. Being proficient in REVIT allows many to create dramatic glass facades with ease. And there are real-world examples where this is nearly executed as such by curtain wall suppliers through BIM. In any case, the imaginative possibilities of bold forms containing light-filled interiors is attractive to many. That said, unfortunately from a sustainability standpoint this type of building enclosure is flawed. In northern latitudes this proposal becomes very energy inefficient. I've enjoy reading the work architect and writer Lloyd Alter of Toronto who constantly pokes the industry to action on this point. 

No one wants to compromise on design. How can one balance the desire for lots of natural light and beautiful views with some sort of moral conscience that architecture needs to do its part reducing North America's carbon footprint? There are a couple technological solutions, one of which is triple-glazing. Certainly triple-glazed curtain wall systems exist but it's hard to find any really innovative examples of their use. Certainly if one is sticking to orthogonal surfaces it might be possible to be satisfied with this state of affairs. But in reality it would seem designers think of radical approaches all the time and satisfying these demands might require every panel in a window system have a slightly different shape. Building information modelling on many levels can reduce the effort needed to track such a design program. However, adding another pane of glass can only increase complexity during the manufacturing process so as one can see we are left with a bit of a dilemma. 

Burn it all down! Build Sustainable Post-Modern Architecture

I guess it might come as good news to some net-zero homes can now be designed and built to look exactly like normal suburban homes. And while that might be worth a bit of celebration what we aim for at The Perfect Architecture Company is to encourage design which pushes far past the average. Having only a blog at my disposal to encourage demand that means we highlight:

In the 21st century there is no better bearer of environmental excellent than the California Academy of Science Museum in San Francisco (completed in 2008). The whole building gives the impression they are trying to say, the future has arrived – and were not going backwards. Renzo Piano can be credited with again applying his genius to create a stunning form and wonderful interior spaces. What I really like about this building is that many of its sustainability technologies were transformed into architectural features.

• Living Roof
• Natural Light
• Automated Ventilation
• Renewable Energy Use
• Energy Efficient Building Design
• Sustainable Materials

Execute that list well and you might get double LEED too. They even managed to work in some of the old exterior facade as an architectural feature inside! Overall the design really speaks volumes about Renzo Piano's studio's skill and creativity. Arup is here again, putting another excellent accomplishment on their resume. As for Stantec, they were somehow involved but it will be hard to celebrate their participation because unfortunately I could not easily find further details about their involvement. 

Build The World! 2016 Structural Engineering Awards

The Institution of Structural Engineers did such a good job last year curating a list of interesting and inspiring architectural projects that when the 2016 winners were recently announced I again wanted to take some time to highlight some of the winners. More buildings were included in the formal list than can be included in this post but one of my long-held curiosities in the field is how to make structural engineering more sustainable in the sense the field is transitioning into a low-carbon economy in regards to its main construction materials. Be that as it may, their choice for accomplishment in sustainability was London's 5 Broadgate which while having some strong points might not have fully addressed the environment aesthetically – my apologies if a deeper description of this has to wait for a future blog because of this blog's policy to only speak positivity of architecture and the building endeavour. Therefore we should be thankful for BuroHappold's effort to drastically reduce and quantify this building's carbon footprint. Arup was again recognized along side BuroHappold for taking on daring engineering challenges in 2016. I also discovered a great little practice Pell Frischmann (which is really not so little and based in London) who was recognized for their effort toward educational architecture with their completion of The Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford. 

Lastly we touch on the double award winning Grandview Heights Aquatic Centre of Surrey, B.C., which was recognized for achievement in Community or Residential Structures and Supreme Engineering Excellence. There's lots to like about this building but I'll only point out my favourite little detail: The roof of this building is amazing! Hats off to HCMA Architecture + Design who specified these wonderful wooden beams with the curvature derived from the catenary function to give the structure this wonderfully light appearance. The roof line is so thin and just sort of floats draped there. Really really cool. The project included Fast & Epp of Vancouver as the structural consultants. Hopefully they're taking a much deserved break after their win to fortify themselves against the many many building projects waiting to be challenged. 

Discrete Brick-by-Brick Architectural 3D Printing Technology

It's interesting how quickly architectural 3D printing is advancing. Take, for instance, my previous post about an Australian brick laying robot compared to the recently revealed Archi-Union of Shanghai's additive construction technology (via dezeen.com). The earlier example looks quite primitive compared to the artistry and grace of the Chinese model. A couple of things to point out: Firstly, the surface which was to be faced with brick is quite unorthodox and a challenge to attempt by hand. I immediately recognized the surface as being computationally derived though by which method I can not tell. I would of course be attracted to defining such a surface with differential equations but for all I can tell maybe the studio just played around with symmetrical NURBS curves. In any case, the end result is certainly more visually stimulating than a plain flat brick wall. This brings us to our second point: completing such a complex surface in brick by hand to the tolerances needed to express the pattern is the main benefit offered by architectural 3D printing in these situations. The subtle gradations required to express the pattern work against the traditional tolerances allowed for when laying brick by hand. Without precision the pattern becomes murky.

Another point which readers might doubt is whether this technology really deserves to be called 3D printing or not. Sometimes we view 3D printing as strictly an extrusion process. I'm comfortable shifting the whole topic to additive construction if that reduces anyone's consternation. I much rather design and build with this technology than fight about its label. In so many ways, but especially when designing, this technology and 3D extrusion are similar in how the design is computationally derived and how tolerances are moved into the software domain. That's why I feel it's worthy of inclusion under the title or architectural 3D printing. Here one can imagine the bricks are just larger discrete elements instead of the fine particulate matter normally associated with 3D printing.