The Nature of Order

 

Photo by Roberto Nickson on Unsplash

As I write this blog post, it’s Christmas morning. I’m not a religious person nor am I a particularly spiritual individual, yet I am moved by the “Christmas Spirit.” The yuletide season is a time to be selfless, to forgive, share with others, take stock of what is important, and become better versions of ourselves. It’s also a time to seek meaning and purpose in life, to connect with something beyond the self, and embrace awe and wonder. Additionally, Christmas is marked by reflection upon a range of traditions that link us to our past, to the world, and to the people and communities that are important to us.

I’ve always believed the best architecture is likewise moving. The best architecture is meaningful and purposeful. It is supportive, provides us with comfort, venerates nature, and sustains traditions. Like Christmas, the best architecture is an expression of positive values, of connections with community and a greater good. 

So, is there a formula or theory that we can draw upon to improve the odds of designing buildings and places that are humane, full of life and meaning, immediately and inextricably connected with place, culture, and tradition—in a word, that are “moving?” Many architects and theorists have sought to provide such a prescription, but a successful, fundamental, objective, and all-encompassing model has proven elusive.      

In his four-volume magnum opus, The Nature of Order, the late Christopher Alexander attempted to define the “patterns of life” essential for creating a sense of well-being and connection to the natural world in the places where we live and work. His theory is based on the idea that there is a fundamental unity to the world, and that this unity can be seen in the patterns and structures found in nature. He believed these patterns are essential for creating a sense of life and vitality in the built environment, and that they can be used to create spaces that are both functional and aesthetically pleasing.

Book One of The Nature of Order is The Phenomenon of Life, in which Alexander proposed a scientific view of the world wherein all things have a perceptible degree of “life.”

Book Two is The Process of Creating Life. In it, Alexander claimed life and beauty only arise from processes which allow living structure and structure-preserving transformations to unfold.

In Book Three, A Vision of a Living World, Alexander presented hundreds of examples to illustrate what a world built in accordance with the principles outlined in Books One and Two is like.

Book Four is The Luminous Ground, which revealed Alexander at his most spiritual. In this volume, he described a new cosmology uniting matter and consciousness.

To elucidate the concepts throughout all four volumes, Alexander drew upon a wide range of examples from architecture, urban design, and the natural world. He introduced a set of principles for designing buildings and spaces that reflect natural patterns. These principles include ideas such as the importance of creating a sense of order and coherence in the built environment, the use of natural materials and forms, and the creation of spaces that are adaptable and flexible over time.

One of the key concepts throughout The Nature of Order is Alexander’s concept of “wholeness.” He argued that we should design buildings and spaces with a sense of wholeness, with each element fitting together seamlessly to create a harmonious whole. This sense of wholeness is essential to well-being and connection with the natural world. Harmony is a function of wholeness, and Alexander described how we perceive it, describe it, and achieve it in the formulation of things.

Photo by Ronincmc, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

To illustrate the concept of wholeness, Alexander used the example of a traditional Japanese tea house. He argued that the tea house is a perfect example of a building that possesses wholeness, with each element fitting together seamlessly to create a harmonious whole. The classic tea house displays a clear hierarchy of structure, with the tearoom at its center, surrounded by a series of smaller rooms and spaces. The materials used, such as wood and stone, are natural and authentic, and the layout of the tea house is changeable.  

Beyond wholeness, Alexander further defined “order” as the arrangement of elements in a way that creates coherence and unity. The concept of order and the patterns and structures that comprise it are closely linked to the idea of an essential quality of buildings and spaces that are deeply satisfying to be in.

The Nature of Order builds upon the ideas Alexander and his colleagues presented earlier in the enormously influential book A Pattern Language. While both argue for the importance of the “patterns of life” to the creation of the places in which we live and work, The Nature of Order goes into greater depth, providing a comprehensive and systematic exploration of how these patterns fundamentally underlie the creation of architecture.   

The Nature of Order does touch on spiritual themes, in the sense that Alexander explored ideas bordering on the ineffable. In another earlier volume, The Timeless Way of Building, Alexander writes of The Quality Without a Name, which he described as a central quality of life in a man, a town, a building, or wilderness. He said this quality is objective and precise, but it cannot be named. This quality permeates all 2,200 pages bound within the four books of The Nature of Order.

To a degree, Alexander’s metaphysical, oracular tone and his commitment to absolute certainty undercut the legitimacy of his utopian principles; nevertheless, it is this very tone that I find compelling about The Nature of Order and Alexander’s other work. It may be because it helps to satisfy a spiritual deficit, a void I reluctantly acknowledge. Perhaps it is because it touches me in the same place, in a different way, as the spirit of Christmas does.

Though I have owned them for many years already, I have yet to completely read all four books of The Nature of Order from cover to cover. They are so unimaginably sweeping, both in terms of their scope and their transformative vision for architecture, that I cannot absorb in one take the entirety of the framework for design that Alexander created. I fully expect it will take multiple re-readings and years for me to appreciate his grand unified theory of everything truly and fully.

Eugene/Architecture/Alphabet: M

 

The Miner Building (color photos by me)

This is the next in my Eugene/Architecture/Alphabet series of blog posts, the focus of each being a landmark building here in Eugene. Many of these will be familiar to most who live here but there are likely to be a few buildings that are less so. My selection criteria for each will be threefold:  

1. The building must be of architectural interest, local importance, or historically significant.
2. The building must be extant so you or I can visit it in person.
3. Each building’s name will begin with a particular letter of the alphabet, and I must select one (and only one) for each of the twenty-six letters. This is easier said than done for some letters, whereas for other characters there is a surfeit of worthy candidates (so I’ll be discriminating and explain my choice in those instances).

This entry’s selection begins with the letter M, for which my choice is the Miner Building.
 
Miner Building
At a resolute 8-stories in height and nearly a century in age, the Miner Building is a historic downtown landmark. Upon its completion in 1925, it was the city’s tallest building, a distinction it would hold until the 18-story Ya-Po-Ah Terrace high-rise apartment building arrived on the scene more than four decades later. Over its life, the Miner Building has been home to many important enterprises, among them the Slocum Center for Orthopedics & Sports Medicine and Nike (legend has it Bill Bowerman infamously churned out the initial prototypes of his waffle-soled trainers in the building’s basement).
 

The Miner Building, shortly after its completion in 1925.

I gleaned much of the information that follows from The Miner Building website.
 
Architect John Hunziker designed the Miner Building for two brothers—W.E. and Henry T. Miner—who came to Eugene from Wisconsin after establishing their credentials in the timber and real estate businesses. Filled with optimism in the future of Eugene and by the prosperity of the Willamette Valley, the brothers developed the 68,000 SF, cast-in-place concrete office building, which their architect executed in an economical, stripped-down aesthetic with subtle Art Deco flourishes. The narrow upper floor plates attracted a variety of tenants, proving especially attractive to private medical practices.
 
Devoted supporters of education, the brothers donated the building as a gift in trust to the University of Oregon in February of 1933 to serve as a permanent endowment for teaching and research in the School of Business Administration. The State Board of Higher Education ultimately sold the property in 1947 to 38 local doctors, whereupon it became known as the Eugene Professional Building. At the time, the entire 68,000 sq ft was occupied by over 100 tenants.
 
Fast forward to 2016: A local investment group purchased the Eugene Professional Building. Their aim was to bring it new life, reimagining the building as an attractive incubator for emerging companies To do this, the new owners decided to double down on the building’s history and significance to Eugene, and also chose to rechristen it as the Miner Building to play up that history. The building’s age and character are especially appealing today because so many of The Miner Building’s contemporaries were razed in the name of urban renewal.

Lobby views

My company—Robertson/Sherwood/Architects—has occupied a fifth-floor suite in the Miner Building since 1990. The building is likewise home to an eclectic collection of businesses, among them Modern Betty Salon, Revolution Design Group, XS Media, Passionflower Design, Eugene Rheumatology, Insight Northwest Counseling, the Center for Renewable Energy and Appropriate Technology, Pacific Cascade Legal, and others.
 
TBG Architects + Planners is another tenant. TBG provided design services for the $2.4 million renovation project in 2016 that revitalized the Miner Building’s entrances and main lobby, modernized the elevators, and provided a new bicycle storage room. Ordell Construction was the contractor for the renovation.
 
I enjoy working in the Miner Building for many reasons, most notably its location near the historic center of downtown Eugene, which rates a Walk Score of 98 (a “walker’s paradise”) and a Bike Score of 100. Other bonuses include ample daylight and the east-facing vista from my office windows (on clear days, the peaks of the Three Sisters are viewable on the horizon, and the morning sunrise is always a treat). The building is an important asset and destined to remain so as Eugene continues its efforts to attract new businesses and residents to its downtown.
 

View from my office window, looking east from the Miner Building: the Eugene Hotel, framed by a rainbow.

I could easily have selected another downtown Eugene landmark—the McDonald Theatre—as my entry under the letter M. Like the Miner Building, it also opened in 1925 (as did the Eugene Hotel—that was clearly a watershed year for architecture in downtown Eugene) and is of equal if not greater import to the history of the community. Regardless, I chose the Miner Building not only because I work there, but also because it stands as a clear example of how older buildings can be rebranded and revitalized during an uncertain time of constant change.
 

City of Eugene Pre-Approved ADU Library

 

"The Reach," an ADU design by Aligned Architecture (photo by Mike Dean)

I appreciate receiving AIA Oregon’s Thursdays @ Three emailed newsletter each week, as it often includes news of events or programs I otherwise would not be aware of. Last Thursday’s edition was no exception as it brought to my attention the City of Eugene’s Pre-Approved Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Program.
 
The City intends its ADU program to “significantly and thoughtfully reduce barriers to housing by fast-tracking the permitting process.” It does this by supplying free or low-cost ADU plans developed by local architects. Currently, there are three pre-approved plans in the City’s pre-approved ADU library. The City has already reviewed these designs for compliance with the building code, so owners/builders save time and money. The pre-approved designs are:

• The Original Məxiɫp ("Maheeshp") ADU by CedarStone 
• The Reach by Aligned Architecture
• The Pine by studio.e

Eugene officials are seeking more, calling on additional entries from other designers. The goal is to provide a wide variety of plan types and styles, suitable for property owners of varying means and needs.
 
An ADU is a secondary housing unit located on a single-family residential lot. Some ADUs are detached, and variously referred to as backyard cottages, granny flats, or laneway houses. The City of Eugene ADU Program facilitates the construction of these detached types. Some ADUs are conversions of existing garages or workshops. Additions to the primary residence on the lot or conversions of basements or other parts of the house are still other ADU types. What all ADUs have in common is that they are accessory to and significantly smaller than the average house in the U.S.
 
The City of Eugene is just one of many municipalities across North America that have or are in the process of revising their development regulations to encourage the addition of ADUs within established residential neighborhoods (in Eugene’s case, the impetus is also a need to comply with State of Oregon mandates intended to make the path toward the development of ADUs less onerous).
 
ADUs make sense because most of our legacy housing stock consists of homes that do not reflect current demographics. 62 percent of U.S. households today are comprised of 1-2 persons; only 38 percent of residences house the traditional nuclear family of parents with multiple children. Paradoxically, the average number of people in American households has declined even as the median size of a new home has doubled since the 1970s. We need housing types that reflect the full diversity of our community: people of all ages and abilities, renters, homeowners, families, childless couples, and singles. The housing needs of such a varied population warrant the introduction of a correspondingly diverse range of housing options. ADUs can be one of those options.
 
ADUs also provide housing with a small environmental footprint when compared with traditional single-family detached homes. If introduced within established neighborhoods, ADUs eliminate the demand for expanding infrastructure to the fringes of the developed metropolitan area.
 
ADUs are not without their critics or shortcomings. New ADU construction is not inexpensive, and too often property owners construct them as short-term rentals (e.g. Airbnb) rather than as affordable housing alternatives. On balance though, easing the path toward increasing the stock of ADUs is desirable because fostering housing innovation, as opposed to stifling it, is necessary if we are to have any hope of addressing the affordability crisis.

Electrification & Decarbonization of Buildings

 

Photo by Doris Morgan on Unsplash

Jan Filinger of Studio.e Architecture brought to my attention the advocacy efforts of many in our community to transition away from the built environment’s reliance upon fossil fuels. The impacts of climate change—including catastrophic drought and wildfires here in the western United States—are increasingly evident and intensifying exponentially. We cannot stop climate change, but we can attempt to slow its inexorable progress. Jan’s entreaty to his fellow professionals in the building sector was to add their names to a letter addressed to the mayor and city council that supports policies to transition structures from polluting fossil fuels to renewable electricity.

Electrification is a prevalent building decarbonization strategy. Switching space and water heating from natural gas-powered systems to electric alternatives (such as electric heat pumps) can slash carbon emissions and provide an effective path toward net zero (balancing the amount of greenhouse gases produced and the amount removed from the atmosphere).

According to the Community Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory, natural gas—which is predominantly comprised of methane, a potent greenhouse gas and major contributor to global warming—accounts for 40 percent of Eugene’s fossil fuel use, while homes and buildings consume nearly 43 percent of all energy in Oregon. Building energy accounts for 32 percent of local emissions. Remarkably, merely swapping out gas appliances for electric ones would reduce the average household’s climate footprint by 50 percent. 

Building energy accounts for 32 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Eugene.

Fossil Free Eugene—a coalition of grassroots organizations calling on the City of Eugene to take immediate action reduce our reliance on natural gas—points out our electrical grid is already very clean, largely reliant upon renewable energy sources (as much as 77 percent coming from hydroelectric generation). Fossil Free Eugene argues the obstacles toward total electrification of our new and existing building inventory, while substantial, are not so great that we should not immediately move toward that goal.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, NW Natural—the primary distributor of natural gas in western Oregon—is actively countering the evidence of climate risks through misleading advertising promoting continued consumption of their product. 

The letter Jan asked everyone to sign strongly encourages the City of Eugene to follow through with its climate commitments by reducing dependence on fossil fuels in our buildings and homes. The technology to build high-performance all-electric homes and buildings already exists, and innovation is driving even more advanced technology. To its credit, the City of Eugene passed its Climate Recovery Ordinance (CRO) in 2014, which set bold targets to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. Toward meeting these targets, the City is drafting ordinances prohibiting fossil fuel infrastructure in new low-rise residential buildings after June 1, 2023; in turn, new commercial construction will be required to do likewise. In 2021, the City Council directed the City Manager to formalize Eugene’s Climate Action Plan commitment to completely decarbonizing the entire existing stock of residential and commercial buildings by 2045. 

The council’s work session last week focused upon the development of a plan for community engagement in consideration of building electrification and decarbonization initiatives. I tuned in to the work session and was impressed by the depth and breadth of the discussion and the obvious appreciation by the mayor, the city councilors, and city staff of the significant charge they have assumed. Kudos to all for their commitment and dedication to realizing the CRO goals. 

Below is the letter Jan asked us to sign to demonstrate our support for policies intended to expedite the electrification and decarbonization of buildings here in Eugene. I added my signature today.

Mayor Vinis and Eugene City Council:
 
We, the undersigned Eugene and Oregon-based building industry professionals, urge you to adopt policies to transition homes and buildings in Eugene from polluting fossil fuels to renewable electricity as a proactive measure to address the climate crisis. We especially support programs to encourage the adoption of high efficiency heat pump systems in new construction, as well as in existing homes and buildings.
 
Homes and buildings represent approximately 32% of Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions and are one of the fastest growing sources of emissions in the City. Since Eugene’s Climate Recovery Ordinance (CRO), initiated in 2014, calls for an average annual emissions reduction of 7.6% across sectors and a 50% reduction in fossil fuel use of 2010 levels by 2030, the City is far from achieving its goals. 

To achieve our ambitious climate targets, protect our residents, and build a viable future for coming generations, we must utilize the best building techniques and technologies that are currently fully adopted in the marketplace, readily available, affordable, and environmentally preferable. That is why we support the policies currently being considered by the City of Eugene to transition our city to renewable electricity by requiring that new commercial and residential buildings be constructed with all electric heating and water heating, and to create a program to transition existing residential and commercial buildings to all-electric systems for heating and water heating by 2035. In the Eugene Climate Action Plan 2.0 Gap Analysis, policies similar to those that the City is currently considering were suggested by City staff as a means of achieving our CRO goals, goals which the city is quickly falling behind on. 

These policies will strongly increase the rate of adoption of heat pumps, which is critical both to reducing emissions in the City, as well as increasing our community’s resilience to climate-driven heat waves, wildfires, cold spells, and reducing strain on the local electrical grid. 

In addition to being all-electric, the immediately tangible benefits of heat pump systems are multifold: 

• Heat pump air conditioners provide both cooling in summer and heat in winter, offering increased resilience in climate-driven extreme weather conditions
• Heat pump air conditioners are between 300% and 500% more efficient than traditional gas furnaces
• Heat pump air conditioners and some heat pump water heaters are effective even when outdoor temperatures are as low as negative 25 F
• Heat pump water heaters are between 300% and 500% more efficient than gas water heater
• Heat pumps can be scaled to any project – from residential and educational to large scale commercial and industrial buildings

Furthermore, new electric construction has significant benefits for health and safety, and the climate, including:

• Reduced indoor and outdoor air pollution and the associated health risks caused by unhealthy air quality from gas appliances 
• Reduced upfront construction costs and consumer utility expenses, thanks to the elimination of gas plumbing and necessary exhaust ductwork and to the great energy-efficiency of heat pumps and heat pump hot water heaters
• Reduced risk of consumers being stuck with stranded assets as the local, state and federal government pass policies to transition off of gas infrastructure 

It is time to signal to the market that we need to move away from fossil fuels in our homes and buildings. In our professional practices we have found that building all-electric new homes and buildings is a proven, robust, efficient, and economically viable solution already adopted across the marketplace. The market for electric-only HVAC and hot water equipment is mature and poses very little risk to developers and engineers alike. In Eugene alone, a significant number of new housing developments have been successful in adopting all-electric energy strategies including St. Vincent DePaul’s Iris Place, St. Vincent DePaul’s Stellar Apartments, and Square One Villages’ Opportunity Village. 

All-electric new construction will contribute to Eugene’s stated climate goals and will protect its citizens and future generations from the accelerating physical and economic impacts of climate change. Given this fact, we can no longer justify prolonging the use of gas in new construction when there are more viable, more sustainable, more profitable, and healthier alternatives readily available today. This is especially true as Eugene’s electrical grid is already one of the cleanest in the nation, and, with the implementation of Oregon House Bill 2021, Oregon’s electricity will be increasingly generated by renewable technology. 

A recent analysis from the highly respected non-partisan, non-profit think-tank RMI, demonstrated the significant economic and climate benefits of all-electric residential construction in Eugene. Specifically, RMI’s Eugene-specific analysis shows that: 

• All-electric homes constructed with an Energy Star-rated heat pump cost $3,446 less to build than a similar mixed-fuel home. 
• Because of low electricity rates and a mild climate, heat pumps in Eugene were also found to significantly lower annual utility bills, saving rate payers up to $390 a year in utilities compared to a mixed-fuel home. 
• All-electric homes in Eugene emit 70% less carbon over a 15-year period than a mixed-fuel home. 

The technology to build high-performance all-electric homes and buildings already exists in the market today and innovation is driving more advanced products. Concrete policies like the ones that the City of Eugene is considering meet a triple bottom line of benefiting our climate, our economy, and our community. 

Detailed research has shown that such policies are not only critical to meeting the City’s carbon reduction goals but will save Eugene residents money, particularly low-income and historically marginalized populations who suffer disproportionate energy burdens and harms from the health effects of gas in the home. 

The feasibility of successfully realizing such an ordinance is demonstrated by the ever-growing list of cities and states implementing electrification policies, including: 

• New York City, NY
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Denver, CO
• Los Angeles, CA
• Washington D.C.
• Boston, MA
• Berkeley, CA
• Brookline, MA

In 2010, when Eugene created its first Community Climate and Energy Action Plan, it joined a growing list of forward-thinking cities around the world that are addressing climate change and energy challenges through dedicated planning efforts. Eugene’s CRO continues to include some of the strongest greenhouse gas emission reduction goals in the nation. 

Thanks to these strong commitments, Eugene is already a national leader in climate policy. At this critical point in time we, the architects, designers, builders, engineers, and suppliers at work in our community, urge you to uphold the bold commitments that you made a decade ago and have reaffirmed countless times since, and to push forward in taking this important step to effectively address the climate crisis. Let’s create a better future for our community by transitioning our homes and buildings from polluting fossil-fuel to clean, renewable electricity. 

Sincerely,

• Jan Fillinger, AIA, LEED ap, Principal, Studio.e Architecture PC
• Kaley Fought, AIA, AIA Oregon President 2022-2023, American Institute of Architects (AIA) Oregon
• David Heslam, Executive Director, Earth Advantage
• Alexi Miller, Acting Director of Building Innovation, New Buildings Institute
• Joe Emerson, Founder, The Zero Energy Project
• Jeff Bissonnette, Policy & Legislative Consultant, NW Energy Coalition
• Josh Salinger, Founder & CEO, Passive House Northwest, Founder & CEO, Birdsmouth
• Mike Steffen, Director of Innovation, Walsh Construction
• Alex Boetzel, Director of Operations and Sustainability, Green Hammer
• Cameo Konfrst, Communications & Development Director, Community Energy Project
• Mark Perepelitza, Principal, SERA Architects
• Neil Baunsgard, Transportation and Climate Advocacy Manager, The Environmental Center
• Mike Ardeljan, Owner, Dream Home Building and Design
• Peter Grube, Founder, NorthWest AeroBarrier
• Heather DeGrella, Sustainable Design Director, Opsis Architecture
• Angela Crowley-Koch, Executive Director, Oregon Solar + Storage Industries Association
• Pat Schellerup, Director of Operations, Imagine Energy
• Ashley Haight, ZERO Coalition Manager, ZERO Coalition
• Alain Rebeyrol, Architect, Composite Architecture LLC
• Carl Christianson, Owner, G. Christianson Construction
• James McDonald, Green Home Builder, Ecobuilding Collaborative of Oregon 
• Anita Van Asperdt, Landscape Architect, LandCurrent landscape architects
• Nir Pearlson, Architect, Aligned Architecture
• Teri Reifer, Manager, Covision LLC
• Quince A Sterry, Architect, Q Sterry - Inspired Architecture, LLC
• Dylan Lamar, Architect, Passive House Consultant, Cultivate, Inc.
• Jeremiah Chavez, Solar Installation Contractor-Project Manager, Energy Design Co.
• Rick Robertson, Builder-Owner, Six Degrees Construction 
• Rob Cellini, Owner, Home Rehab PDX
• Win Swafford, Owner/Member, Domestic Tranquility
• Jesse Elliott, Architecture, Voussoir Architecture, Inc.
• Eric Corey Freed, Architect, Director of Sustainability
• Mia Kalatzes, Architectural Design Associate
• Dean Lamoureux, Residential Design + Build construction
• Colin Dean, AIA, Architect
• Cameron Murray Ewing, Designer
• Gene Johnson, Professional Engineering / Principal
• Jocelyn Reynolds, Architecture/Associate Designer
• Justen Stiles, Architectural Designer, CPHC
• Nancy Yen-wen Chen, Associate Professor of Architecture
• Eli Nafziger, Architect
• Matthew Bokar, Architect
• Anne DeLaney, Architect
• Mark Young, Architect
• Alison Kwok, PhD., FAIA
• Gene Mowery, Owner's Representative/Project Manager
• Alec Dakers, Lead Designer and Partner, Rainbow Valley Design and Construction
• Tobin Newburgh, Lead Designer and Partner, Rainbow Valley Design and Construction
• Howard A Houseknecht, Residential builder
• Scott Stolarczyk, AIA, Architect
• Randy Nishimura, AIA, Architect

 

Clash Detection

Screenshot of the coordinated Navisworks model for the Lane Community College Health Professions Building, now under construction.

In the parlance of the construction industry a “clash” is the result of two elements in the design of a building unintentionally occupying the same space. An example may be a conflict between a duct and a beam, which both optimally would occur where their respective designers initially intend them to be but cannot. Clash detection is the process of identifying where such conflicts occur and how the systems interfere with one another. Ideally, the project team resolves these clashes before they become an issue in the field.

According to a McKinsey report, almost 30% of the overall construction cost on a typical project is attributable to inefficiencies in productivity and the need to resolve conflicts between the myriad systems that comprise a building. The design and construction processes are inherently complex undertakings, ever more so with each passing year. The probability of conflicts between building systems is only increasing as their complexity grows. Clash detection tools like Navisworks have thus become invaluable: the ability to compile data in a single platform greatly enhances overall coordination of a building’s design, reducing costs in the long run by flagging errors before they become an issue in the field.   

The Sheffield, UK company Lightwork Design Ltd. developed Navisworks back in 1997, eventually selling it to industry giant AutoDesk in 2007. Since then, Navisworks has become a de facto standard in the construction industry. AutoDesk’s Revit software has likewise dominated the Building Information Modeling (BIM) marketplace; the seamless interoperability of Navisworks and Revit has mutually enhanced their wholesale adoption by all members of the project team. I fully expect the two platforms will further converge into a single offering, additionally streamlining already available cloud-based, QA/QC, design collaboration, and integration processes.

In the past, clash detection too often occurred during construction rather than during the design or pre-construction processes. The result was the urgent need for design changes on the spot, inevitably leading to cessation and sometime scrapping of the involved work, with concomitant schedule delays. As you can imagine, such an occurrence comes with significant expense.

There are “hard” clashes and “soft” clashes. A hard clash occurs when two or more components are occupying the same space or otherwise interfering with one another. A soft clash indicates that an object lacks sufficient geometric tolerances; an example is an absence of sufficient space for maintenance purposes around an above-ceiling fan-coil unit. If the building design lacks such space, it triggers a soft clash. Geometry- and rule-based algorithms embedded with the BIM object provide the basis for detecting hard and soft clashes.

 

Clashes also occur in time. For example, failing to coordinate the required installation sequence of various building systems can lead to unnecessary removal and reinstallation of components, consequent wastage, and inevitable delays and cost overruns. Clash detection of this type relies upon the time data project stakeholders embed within the shared model (i.e., when deliveries of critical systems and components to the jobsite will occur).

Clash detection tools work by combining and coordinating many independently generated BIM models, such as those created by the architect, the structural engineer, the mechanical and electrical engineers, and the contractor’s design partners. In my experience, it is primarily the general contractor who coordinates and manages the combined model. Because of this, its use often occurs after the initial design work is complete but before shovels hit the ground. Ideally, all the members of a project team would share a single, federated BIM model as soon as detailed design begins; however, this remains more the exception than the rule (again, in my experience). With the increased proliferation of “non-traditional” project delivery methods (such as Design-Build, Construction Manager/General Contractor, and Integrated Project Delivery), this is changing, and quickly. The upshot is reliance on electronic collaboration and coordination tools, of which clash detection software is prominent, is increasing by leaps and bounds.

Another screenshot from a construction coordination session for the LCC Health Professions Building project. Note the large number of meeting participants. 

As I touched on earlier this year, the future of clash detection will inextricably be tied to developments in artificial intelligence. AI will lead to generative design tools that automatically route ductwork and piping to avoid conflicts with the building structure and other MEP elements. The AI algorithms will save enormous amounts of time. Though Navisworks presently allows stakeholders to comprehensively visualize project data in a coordinated 3D model, they still must resolve any identified conflicts manually. AI will largely obviate this burden by avoiding clashes from the get-go, while optimizing cost, embodied energy, energy performance, code compliance, etc. in the form of immediate and actionable feedback during all stages of design.

My point in writing this post is to offer readers not involved in design and construction a glimpse into one of the activities critical to the success of a building project today. In a nutshell, clash detection is essential to more efficient and error-free construction processes. Clash detection is synonymous with the prompt and seamless transfer of knowledge, design coordination, and team collaboration.

Architecture is Awesome #26: Details

 

This is another in my series of posts inspired by 1000 Awesome Things, the Webby Award-winning blog written by Neil Pasricha. The series is my meditation on the awesome reasons why I was and continue to be attracted to the art of architecture. 
 
Good architecture demands the many components that comprise a building work together to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Skilled architects plan every detail with care and an eye toward its role in achieving an overall design intent. They consider both the technical and aesthetic qualities of a detail.
 
On the technical side, a building fundamentally must perform many jobs well. It must protect its inhabitants by keeping them comfortable. This means protecting them from the elements: controlling temperature, humidity, light, and such. It also means supporting often complex and diverse functional needs. A good building does so efficiently if it is not to be wasteful. Even small, outwardly simple structures are comprised of countless details, each of which is crucial to the building’s overall performance.
 
Proper construction detailing requires a comprehensive understanding of the buildings sciences: the properties of building materials (their qualities, strengths & weaknesses, etc.), the interrelatedness of various systems, and a working knowledge of best detailing practices. First-rate details—grounded in proven science and experience—are typically elegant, economical, and effective. Invariably, most architects only acquire the necessary know-how to achieve such details through extensive study and/or research and real-world experience. Today’s rapid pace of technological innovation heightens the importance of continued education and expansion of the architect’s technical knowledgebase.
 
Preparing details takes time. Architects earn their keep in no small part through their ability to efficiently convey their design intent to builders by means of many carefully crafted detail drawings. The amount of effort necessary to consider and produce these drawings consumes a substantial portion of an architect’s fee, but in the big picture this is money well-spent. Good details help ensure more precise bids, fewer change orders, and limited cost overruns.
 
The aesthetic aspect of preparing details is of equal importance to achieving a complete work of architecture. Details take many forms, but those that address transitions in material have often presented the most fertile design opportunities.
 
The 20th century Italian architect Carlo Scarpa was renowned for how he mastered the detailing of materials through his unmatched appreciation for a level of craft down to the smallest of elements. Good details marry form and function in harmony. Scarpa—whose oeuvre mostly consisted of interventions within or about existing structures in his native Veneto region—was as much an artisan in spirit as he was an architect. His idiosyncratic details combined Venetian glass, concrete, mosaics, wood, brass, and water as architectural elements. He indulged in the haptic and aural qualities of architecture as much as he did the visual. His approach to architecture was largely informed by his detailing of varied building materials and their sensory properties.
 

Wood detailing by Carlo Scarpa in the Aula Mario Baratto Room within the Ca’Foscari, University of Venice (photo by Cafoscaritour, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)

 
Many other famous architects have likewise obsessed over details. Among them, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe infamously proclaimed that “God is in the details.” Peter Zumthor said of details “. . . when they are successful, [they] are not mere decoration. They do not distract or entertain. They lead to an understanding of the whole of which they are an inherent part.” Curtis Fentress averred “A bold architectural statement turns a public building into a landmark, but it is in the details where the architect becomes the real storyteller.” And Charles Eames succinctly stated “The details are not the details. They make the design.”
 
Another famous architect, Arthur Erickson, lamented that “. . . details are the very source of expression in architecture. But we are caught in a vise between art and the bottom line.” That vise is omnipresent, but it is incumbent upon architects to do their best with the resources at hand. Using an economy of means to develop details that are both expressive and efficacious is a Holy Grail of architectural design.
 
Architectural details are at their AWESOME best when they support a project’s overall design intent, considerately express the concept of craft, and excel at fulfilling their functional mandate. When architects pay details their due respect, the overall results are designs that seamlessly blend technology and aesthetics in the service of real architecture.
 
Next Architecture is Awesome:  #27 Asymmetry

America ByDesign: Architecture

 

The Elm, one of the projects featured on America ByDesign: Architecture (screenshot from the video).

America ByDesign: Architecture is a primetime television series viewable on the CBS News Streaming Network consisting of six episodes filled with “energy, creativity, and architectural design.” The series premise is a search for America’s best recent architectural design among numerous projects submitted for consideration by an international jury of award-winning designers, industry leaders, and esteemed educators. Each episode showcases a few of these projects and features interviews with their architects. Along the way, American ByDesign will also shine a spotlight on architectural luminaries Robert Stern, Francis Kéré, Lakisha Ann Woods, and Thomas Wong. The series will crown the season’s winner in the sixth and final installment.
 
Though broadcast on the CBS News Streaming Network, America ByDesign is a franchise of the Australian media company MWC Productions. The Australia ByDesign: Architecture series is in its fifth season, whereas this is the first for its U.S. counterpart. Additionally, MWC Productions includes separate series in its Australian lineup devoted to innovations, interiors, and landscapes.
 
I watched the first episode this morning, which premiered yesterday. It’s not clear if the network will release each episode on a weekly or another basis as part of its regular broadcast schedule. Regardless, you can watch the series on-demand as I did by simply visiting the America ByDesign website. The production values are high, with excellent videography documenting the submitted projects.
 
Episode 1 features the following projects:

• The Elm (Shalom Baranes Associates)
• Harbor Hideaway (Up Studio)
• The School of the Art Institute of Chicago’s Sustainable Future (two projects by Cannon Design and Eastlake Studio, respectively).  

Based on their presentation by the architects and the series hosts, I personally find all the Episode 1 designs to be outstanding and worthy of recognition. Each presents valuable lessons for architects, architecture students, and the public alike. Regardless, I do have my reservations about the series.
 
Ostensibly, the goal of America ByDesign: Architecture is to reach out to a broader public and make it more aware of the built environment. To do so, its format capitalizes upon a hackneyed, albeit accessible, trope: the reality-based competition show. Though none of the projects are “voted off the island” at the end of each episode, the jury decides which projects advance to be one of the final ten entries. The implication is the season’s winning project will be the last one standing by virtue of its superiority over the others. This distorts what should be the overriding message (that good design comes in many forms) and fails to encourage a broader point of view.

 

The monochromatically attired members of the America ByDesign: Architecture jury (screenshot from the video).

Fourteen projects will be featured throughout the series. Of these, three are in New York and three more are in Chicago. Only one west coast project will be included. It would have been nice to see greater regional diversity among the projects. On the positive side of the ledger, the featured submissions do include a welcome variety and scale of project types.
 
The series “partners” include Marvin, Porcelanosa, Keim, Lendlease, and Lumion. While these companies undoubtedly helped underwrite the costs of production, I already sense the series will not fail to reciprocate by highlighting product placement in the featured projects.
 
Notwithstanding these misgivings, I do expect to take in the remaining America ByDesign: Architecture episodes. It’s never a bad thing to see good architecture take center stage in such an accessible and informative manner. If you can spare a half-hour each week, I suspect you’ll find watching the series to be well worth your valuable time.