Wednesday, August 22, 2012

A Place to Build Relationships


The favorite moment in the life of a building for most architects is that time between when the building is done and when the client moves in and starts to use the building. It is the moment when their work is un-marred by the messiness of people actually using the building. Reason #37 why I dance to a different drum than most architects, is that I prefer grand openings and dedication ceremonies to the pristine emptiness of pre-occupancy.

I love making buildings. I love walking through a building being framed. I love that new-building smell (which, ironically, is being eliminated by minimizing VOC’s). But as much as I love architecture, I believe it is not an end in itself. Rather the value of well-designed buildings and space, the importance of what I do as an architect is its impact on the  quality of human interaction that takes place in the building.

Winston Churchill said it best, “We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us.” I believe the quality of gathering whether for learning, worship, or caregiving is profoundly influenced by the quality of the building in which these activities are housed. Sure, we can learn, worship and live in any setting, but well-designed environments can exponentially improve our effectiveness.

Our own office at 61 S. Main Street in Harrisonburg is an interesting case study. Built in 1902, the space in which we work is little changed from original construction. It’s too hot in the summer, too cold in the winter, the floors sag and there is only one bathroom for three floors of people. Yet we enjoy people stopping by our office on the 2nd floor and chatting as they climb stairs to their own offices above. Because we’re on Main Street, people stop in while running other errands. Clients and contractors like our accessibility. We’d be more comfortable and perhaps more efficient in a newer, more commodious building, but we would sacrifice a sense of community. 
Too often architects inflict building that look good but are hostile to healthy human interaction. Good design, if it is to have any value at all must deliver spaces that improve the quality of human interaction.  Our goal at Blue Ridge Architects is to make buildings that dramatically enhance the experience of people coming together and building relationships.

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Big Idea Meets the Devil in the Details


While on vacation I had the opportunity to visit the Institute of Contemporary Art (ICA) in Boston, designed by Diller, Scofidio + Renfro and completed in 2006, ICA is a key part of Boston's Fan Pier re-development efforts www.icaboston.org/about/thenewica/design-announcement/ Our time there got me thinking about how important it is for the "Big Idea" to matched by "Attention to Detail."

It is the building's "Big Idea" that first grabs your attention as you approach.  Four stories in the air, the main gallery cantilevers 60 feet out over the harbor.  A monumental exterior stair leading to the studio theater, rises three stories beneath the cantilever.  Inside an all glass elevator as big as an executive office rises to the main gallery with spectacular views both inside and out.  The stadium-style media labs frame a view of the water which one tour guide described as "the world's coolest screen-saver."  Along the east side of the fourth floor is the Founders' Gallery with riveting views of Boston Harbor.  These and many other large-scale gestures create civic building worthy of its prominent location and the accolades it has received from architectural critics: www.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/arts/design/08ica.html

But after spending some time there and getting over my country-boy-in-the-big-city wonder, I began to see details that didn't match the expectations set by the "Big Idea". Little things -- like sloppy drywall finishing, cracks in concrete floors, paint drippings and materials that scream "value-engineering" no matter how creatively they are used -- all add up to a building that struggles to live up to its first impression.  A review from a year after it opened, confirmed my suspicions: 

On one hand it's exciting to see an organization and a city like Boston try something bold and innovative.  But cost and quality control too often mean doing it the way it's always been done.  When audacious ideas meet bureaucracy, too often the result is a building like the ICA -- best viewed from afar, not up close.