The Timelessness of Libraries

 

Booked for the Evening 2023.

The Eugene Public Library Foundation’s premier annual fundraising event, Booked for the Evening, took place yesterday evening at the downtown Eugene Public Library. In past years, the soiree took place within conference facilities or large ballrooms, such as at the Graduate Eugene Hotel or the Valley River Inn. The Foundation chose the downtown Library itself as the venue for Booked 2023. The reason? It’s been 20 years since the downtown branch officially opened. To help celebrate this milestone, the Foundation thought it would be fitting for me, being one of the architects who designed the building, to discuss its architecture and speak to the Foundation’s vision of Building for Generations.
 
I’m not a comfortable public speaker. My mind races with self-doubt and I become hyper-aware of every stumble or mistake I make. Despite my preparation and practice, the nerves always seem to get the best of me.
 
For this occasion, I would not have a PowerPoint presentation as a crutch to lean on. The Foundation asked me for an extemporaneous speech, with anecdotes about our process and how the design concept took its shape. Despite my awkward nervousness, I think I pulled it off without totally embarrassing myself. I am happy to have been a featured speaker at Booked for the Evening 2023, but I’m glad the experience is now behind me.
 
Here’s the transcript of my speech:
 
Twenty years. It’s hard to believe the “new” Eugene Public Library is already two decades old. It’s an understatement for me to say I was privileged to be involved with the Library’s genesis, design, and construction as the design team’s project manager. You need to understand how impactful and meaningful the opportunity for an architect to contribute toward such a project is. Libraries are special places. This one is especially so to all of us.
 
Think about how much has changed in our world during the past twenty years. Smart phones and social media were not yet the bane of our existence in 2003. Social equity, climate change, and political division were not as front and center as they are now. Throughout it all, our public libraries have adapted. 

I’m not going to tell you about the way forward, about what I think the library of the future should be. So much about the future is unknowable. Instead, I’ll focus on the timelessness of libraries. I’ll explain to you why libraries are important architectural opportunities, and why this library was and is important to me.
 
Let’s start with this room. I’m happy we’re here, now. I can’t think of a more appropriate place for this celebration. Look around. Look at the room’s size, its windows, how it makes you feel. Think about it for a moment. Think about its counterpart at the other end of the building, the rotunda, and the other reading spaces. Think about the potential of the Library’s expansion to the fourth floor above us, under a grand, vaulted roof. Think about why good rooms are important in a library.

 
One of the great and influential American architects of the 20^th century was Louis Kahn. He said of the room: “The room is the beginning of architecture. It is the place of the mind. You in the room with its dimensions, its structure. Its light responds to its character, its spiritual aura, recognizing that whatever the human proposes and makes becomes a life.”
 
Kahn regarded the room as a place inhabited by the mind. He accommodated the realm of the intellect—learning, commemoration, and appreciation—in his innovative designs.
 
When our team—led by my firm, Robertson/Sherwood/Architects with SBRA Architecture (now Shepley Bulfinch) as our design partners—thought about what the new Eugene Public Library should be, we always envisioned it being an ordered collection of memorable spaces—of rooms. We wanted to create spaces that both welcomed and ennobled everyone who would come to use them.

Louis Kahn also believed that rooms should have a sense of monumentality and timelessness. He believed that architecture should be enduring and that a room should be designed to stand the test of time, both in terms of its physical durability and its ability to remain relevant and meaningful to its occupants.
 
A city needs its enduring monuments, so we also set out to design a building that would stand for many generations, immune to obsolescence. We didn’t want to design an architectural flash in the pan. We wanted to design a library that would never lose its broad appeal. Our senior partner, Jim Robertson, envisioned a building that would endure, one day being worthy of nomination for the National Register of Historic Places.
 
Another 20^th century architect I consider influential was Aldo Rossi. He argued that monuments should be understood as part of a larger urban context, and that their meaning and value should be seen in relation to the city's historical and cultural layers. He believed that monuments should be designed as part of a larger urban system, and that their design should reflect the city's collective memory and cultural identity. Rossi believed that architecture should be accessible to everyone and that it should contribute to the common good of society.
 
So, we designed with monumentality in mind, but at the same time we wanted the Library to offer a sense of community and belonging, foster social interaction, and promote lifelong learning and personal growth. We wanted it to provide a communal space outside of the home and workplace where anyone can engage in social, cultural, and educational activities—a so-called “third place.” We wanted it to help build social capital and create a sense of community. Our challenge was to achieve these goals by architectural means. 
 
Change is a constant in our lives. While our architecture should be mutable and adapt to change, we should also provide anchors in the form of memorable rooms, spaces, and monuments that moor us within the urban fabric and give us refuge from the stress of our daily lives.
 
A library building is important to the city for the reasons I’ve stated. If it is timeless in spirit and form, it will become a monument. It is also more likely to last much longer if people care about it and invest in its maintenance and modernization as necessary. I’m hopeful this building will survive and thrive well beyond my lifetime precisely because this community has been inspired by its architecture and values its timeless qualities.
 
I know all of you value everything the Eugene Public Library has to offer. On behalf of everyone who was involved with the design and construction of the main branch, thank you for your continued support and the opportunity to speak with you this evening—it’s been my honor.
 

*    *    *    *    *    *

 
Do help support literacy and enrichment in Eugene by donating to the Eugene Public Library Foundation. The Foundation responsibly manages contributions from individuals, businesses, and foundations to build community support for the Eugene Public Library.

Art Vandelay, Architect

(image source: @SeinfeldTV on Twitter)

My Twitter feed never fails to entertain if not always inform me. One of the accounts that I follow belongs to Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen), who recently posted an amusing tweet acknowledging actor Jason Alexander’s departure from the platform. Alexander left Twitter to protest Elon Musk’s decision to remove legacy verified checkmarks. Of course, Jason Alexander is best known for portraying the character George Costanza on the 1989-1998 TV series Seinfeld, which is my favorite sitcom ever. Krassenstein thought it might be fun to have ChatGPT write a Seinfeld script about Elon Musk taking away George Costanza’s blue check; he wasn’t wrong; check it out: https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/1649483489429934104

I thought Chat GPT did a remarkable job of capturing the spirit of the series and its characters, in particular George’s neurotic insecurities. George is infamous within architectural circles for inventing the alias of Art Vandelay, who he variously portrays in an assortment of episodes as a corporate CEO, importer/exporter, or an architect. The humor derives from George’s recurring obsession with the idea of becoming an architect. He is fascinated by the perceived glamor and prestige associated with the profession, despite having no actual training or experience in architecture.(1)  
 
So, inspired by Ed Krassenstein’s tweet, I thought it would be fun to have ChatGPT write another Seinfeld script in which George’s alter ego figures prominently. The following is the prompt I gave ChatGPT:
 
“Write a Seinfeld script for an episode in which George (a.k.a. Art Vandelay), without an invitation, attends the Pritzker Prize award ceremony by pretending to be a fellow architect and colleague of the award recipient. He reports afterward to Jerry, Elaine, and Kramer about his interactions with former Pritzker recipients, to comic effect.”
 
And here is what the AI came up with:
 
INT. MONK'S CAFE - DAY
 
Jerry, Elaine, and Kramer are sitting at their usual booth, sipping coffee.
 
JERRY: So, what's the deal with the Pritzker Prize?
 
ELAINE: (rolling her eyes) Please, spare us.
 
KRAMER: (excitedly) No, no, no. The Pritzker Prize is a big deal. It's like the Nobel Prize for architecture.
 
JERRY: (sarcastically) Oh, well then, I'm sure we're all on the edge of our seats.
 
ELAINE: (noticing George entering the cafe) Hey, speak of the devil.
 
George walks up to the booth with a big grin on his face.
 
GEORGE: (triumphantly) Guess who just attended the Pritzker Prize award ceremony?
 
JERRY: (sarcastically) Oh, please do tell.
 
GEORGE: (smiling) Yours truly.
 
ELAINE: (confused) What? How did you get invited?
 
GEORGE: (smugly) I wasn't invited. I just showed up pretending to be a fellow architect and colleague of the award recipient.
 
KRAMER: (impressed) Wow, that's some chutzpah, Georgie boy.
 
JERRY: (shaking his head) I can't believe this.
 
GEORGE: (excitedly) You guys should have been there. I met all the former Pritzker recipients.
 
ELAINE: (disinterested) Oh, joy.
 
GEORGE: (ignoring Elaine) I even got to chat with Frank Gehry.
 
KRAMER: (impressed) No way.
 
GEORGE: (nodding) Way. He told me all about his new project in Barcelona.
 
JERRY: (skeptical) And you didn't get caught?
 
GEORGE: (proudly) Not a chance. I blended right in. I even got free champagne and hors d'oeuvres.
 
ELAINE: (sarcastically) Oh, well, then it was all worth it.
 
KRAMER: (curious) So, what did you say to these big-shot architects?
 
GEORGE: (thinking) Well, I told them I was Art Vandelay, of course.
 
JERRY: (rolling his eyes) Of course.
 
GEORGE: (laughing) But seriously, it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience.
 
ELAINE: (sarcastically) Well, I'm glad you had fun breaking the law.
 
GEORGE: (ignoring Elaine) You know what they say, guys, it's not about what you know, it's about who you know.
 
KRAMER: (nodding) That's the truth.
 
JERRY: (shaking his head) I don't even know what to say.
 
ELAINE: (smiling) I do. You're insane.
 
George smiles contentedly, basking in his own glory as the camera fades out.
 

Not bad! ChatGPT perfectly captured the character's comic self-absorption and his glee in pretending to be an architect. 

(1)  Duo Dickson wrote an essay for Common Edge about how architecture has become the mother of all ego projections: We Are Art Vandelay, Architect – Common Edge 

Parking Reform

(Photo by Chris Mok || @cr.mok on Unsplash)

Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order No. 20-04 in March of 2020, which directed all state agencies to take actions to reduce and regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In response, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission updated Oregon’s Transportation Planning Rules to launch the Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) program in July 2022. The program mandates that Oregon municipalities with populations greater than 50,000 legislate changes to municipal land use code regulations to mitigate the impacts of climate change.
 
Parking reform is one of the projects the City of Eugene is expected to tackle in response. Compliance with the CFEC rules requires that compact development and climate-friendly transportation options, such as preparing for a future with more electric vehicles, also be addressed. The City has until the end of this year to enact changes to its Land Use Code to either entirely repeal parking mandates (Option 1) or to reduce them in accordance with new, specific parking reforms or regulations (Options 2A and 2B). If the City chooses Option 1, the State will not require additional action. If the City instead chooses one of the other options, it must adopt specific regulations in order to satisfy OAR 660-012-0445(1)(a) or (b). These regulations would introduce complexity and expense (including costs associated with compliance monitoring).
 

At the invitation of the City of Eugene, I participated in a small group discussion last Thursday regarding the parking reform question. I am by no means an expert on the topic, but I do consider rethinking how we plan for parking to be a necessary part of a comprehensive approach to developing climate-friendly planning and development standards. I share the belief of many that the continued prioritization of cars over sustainable transportation options is anathema to the goal of creating a livable, healthy, and environmentally conscious community. I was happy to learn more and contribute to the discussion.
 
Everyone understands the downside of our culture’s car-centric lifestyle. Cars encourage urban sprawl, leading to fragmented, disconnected, pedestrian-unfriendly communities. Cars are polluting and dangerous. Ironically, cars limit mobility for those who cannot afford them or who are unable to drive. To the matter at hand, cars require a significant amount of real estate merely for the purpose of storing them. Parking mandates increase the cost of development. On average, parking adds $142 per month to the cost to rent an apartment, exacerbating the affordability crisis. A surplus of parking incentivizes driving, even when walking, biking, or taking the bus are options. Overall, our reliance upon and love for cars and the need to park them has been detrimental to sustainable, compact development.
 
The consensus at my table during the break-out session was that the City should proceed with Option 1 and simply repeal all parking mandates in their entirety. Eliminating the off-street minimum parking requirements will not mean developers cannot build parking. Instead, each project can choose the best use for their space and budget. That may still include parking, but it could also be more housing, more commercial space, or more green open space. Most who build housing would undoubtedly continue to provide some parking, but it would be based upon what they deem to be truly necessary as opposed to what the City requires. Importantly, Option 1 would minimize the development of surplus parking capacity and rely upon the marketplace to dictate what is necessary.
 
We were not enthusiastic about either Options 2a or 2b, not only for the added cost and complexity associated with them, but also because neither is as conceptually simple as Option 1. Most people would find the specific parking reforms and regulations they would entail (such as introducing a new tax on commercial parking lot revenue or requiring that landlords separately charge for parking associated with existing and new multiunit housing) confusing if not inequitable.
 
What I found enlightening in listening to the others was why some might object to doing away with minimum parking mandates. The downsides of Option 1 might include opposition from individual neighborhood associations who would resist the absence of required minimum off-street parking for new, neighboring developments and the spillover demand they might cause (this concern could be addressed by limiting the duration of curbside parking or by issuing resident-only parking permits). They also might include CC&Rs or HOA parking rules that mandate provision of minimum numbers of off-street spaces. Banks are also notoriously conservative and may be disinclined to approve loans for developments that do not incorporate the number of parking spaces they deem necessary.
 
Regardless of whether the City does away with minimum off-street parking requirements, my table-mates agreed that the parking reforms should continue to include minimum requirements for accessible parking and bicycle storage. This means providing accessible parking and bicycle spaces even if the developer otherwise chooses to not provide off-street vehicular parking.  
 
It’s worth noting that as of December 31 of last year, the City of Eugene reduced parking minimums for new residential developments (new residential applications may require no more than one parking space per dwelling unit), and no requirements now exist for properties located within a half-mile walking distance of frequent transit corridors. So, the CFEC mandate and current determination of which option to pursue applies to revision of the citywide requirements.
 
The City’s next steps toward parking reform include soliciting further input from interested parties and a public survey; you can find the survey here:  www.engage.eugene-or.gov/CFEC. The Eugene Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on June 27 prior to submitting its recommendation to the City Council. As I mentioned above, the City must formally change the Land Use Code no later than December 31 of this year.
 
If you’d like to learn more about Eugene’s Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities work or wish to sign up for project updates, click on the link below:
www.eugene-or.gov/5022/Climate-Friendly-Rules

AI and Generative Design

(Image attribution: Cryteria, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)

In their most recent Life of an Architect podcast, Andrew Hawkins and Bob Borson discussed how the development of artificial intelligence is intersecting with both the practice of architecture and the education process for students in schools of architecture. For this episode, Andrew and Bob brought in Kory Bieg, Associate Professor of Architecture at the University of Texas at Austin, and founder of OTA+, an architecture, design, and research, an office that specializes in the development and use of current, new, and emerging digital technologies in design and construction. Andrew, Bob, and Kory tackled the “Everest-sized” task of discussing the Wild West reality of AI and its increasing accessibility. How AI will increasingly impact the way we design and think about architecture is certain to be profound.
 
Computers are great at sorting tons of data. Machine-learning models can analyze patterns humans have trained them to recognize within massive data sets. Andrew, Bob, and Kory speculated that extrapolation beyond text-to-image platforms, such as Midjourney or Dall-E, may lead to the translation of imagery to actual building projects. As they noted, such a capability may be down the road a bit, but it is coming quickly. Despite AI’s potential for destabilizing and disruptive change, the three concluded it will not completely transform the architectural profession. Optimistically, Kory believes machine platforms will never entirely replace humans in the design of buildings, precisely because they are not human. The three concluded there is plenty to be positive about this innovative technology, and I agree.
 
One way it is conceivable artificial general intelligence (AGI) could autonomously design a building is through a process called generative design. Generative design uses algorithms and AI to generate multiple design options based on a set of input parameters, such as site constraints, functional requirements, and material properties. The AI can analyze and learn from a vast amount of data on building design, construction techniques, and environmental factors to optimize the design process and generate solutions that meet specific goals and constraints. If programmed with the necessary knowledge of architectural design principles, building codes, and construction methods, an AGI system could analyze countless options and use optimization algorithms to refine a project based on specific criteria, such as cost, energy efficiency, or aesthetic appeal. The system could consider real-time data, such as local weather or energy usage, to further refine the design.
 
Currently, designers are already using AI to automate complex, data-driven tasks such as the analysis of a building’s probable energy performance. These applications are likely to expand and improve over the next decade, leading to greater automation and optimization in the building design process. However, for the near future human input will remain necessary and critical to the production of real architecture. My prediction is AI tools will soon become powerful enough that architects can simply use natural speech or text as prompts to communicate with a comprehensive AI in the process of generating successive design iterations. These iterations would reflect the inclusion, integration, and synthesis of many essential design concerns. Human architects would successively refine the output by providing the AI with feedback for each design iteration until the design reaches a point they (the humans) deem optimal. As Kory pointed out in the podcast, how people analyze the iterations will prove more important than their initial prompts.
 
Some people fear the advent of AGI and the Singularity, that hypothetical moment in the future when an AI system becomes capable of recursive self-improvement. They are afraid the development of AGI may have significant and unpredictable consequences for humanity. Recent news headlines about a Google software engineer claiming that the company’s LaMDA chatbot had become sentient have fueled this fear. The proliferation of other rapidly improving language models such as ChatGPT additionally has furthered the widespread belief the Singularity is imminent. And of course, there is the hackneyed science fiction trope about artificial intelligence going haywire and killing the human species to dominate the world.
 
Tech companies are promising to use AI to revolutionize how we do everything, including architecture. But for now, much of the current AI hype is exactly just that—hype. AGI capable of fully autonomous building design is still a long way off. Achieving true AGI will require significant breakthroughs in AI research and development, as well as dramatic advances in computing power and data processing. Notwithstanding what some may believe, this will continue to be a gradual process that occurs over many years. Rest easy—the robots are not coming for us anytime soon. The AI needs us and our humanity for input.
 
If not yet fully AGI, rudimentary artificial intelligence is nevertheless here. It is improving with exponential speed. AI promises to make the future work of architects better and easier so we can focus on what fundamentally distinguishes real architecture from mere building.
 
 

The Highrises Collection

 

Every now and then when perusing my Twitter feed or otherwise surfing the web, I stumble upon something truly remarkable. Such was the case earlier this week when I discovered the photography of Chris Hytha (@Hythacg). What caught my eye was a collection of his stunning images of Art Deco towers, part of a larger project to document historic skyscrapers across the USA entitled the Highrises Collection.
 
Chris is a young designer and visual artist based in the city of Philadelphia. Back in 2015, a passion for photography sparked when he moved from his small hometown just outside the city to Philadelphia to begin architecture school at Drexel University. Chris’s visual art developed alongside his growing skills as a designer, and this architectural influence is integral to his work. His main inspirations to create are light and the built environment.
 
Chris uses a drone-mounted camera to take multiple high-resolution photos of the top of each building. He then stitches the shots together to create an elevation scan with a flattened perspective and enhanced lighting effects to accentuate depth and form. Creative and artistic liberties celebrate the unique character of each structure.
 
The results are nothing less than striking. The surreal quality of the images and the consistency of their presentation accentuates their graphic appeal. The symmetrical framing and saturated color are reminiscent of stills from a Wes Anderson movie. At the same time, they suggest hand-drawn documentary art, not altogether unlike the illustrations of bird species by John James Audubon. Focusing on the character and craftsmanship on display at the top of landmark buildings in a way that can’t be seen from street level, his images reveal fascinating details and stories of these distinctly American icons.

So, what is it about the Art Deco skyscrapers of the 1920s and 1930s that Chris (and I) find so appealing? Firstly, they are landmarks that often serve as symbols of a city’s identity and cultural heritage. Secondly, the Art Deco style is characterized by a unique combination of classic elegance and modernity. Their geometric shapes and streamlined profiles are often packaged in forms that emphasize their height and verticality. Lastly, their elaborate decorative elements—intricate metalwork, colorful mosaics, and stylized sculptures—and evident craftsmanship are distinctive, setting these towers apart from their more ponderous forebears and coldly mute post-WWII successors. We nostalgically associate the Art Deco style with the glamour, luxury, and sophistication of a bygone era.
 
The Highrises Collection is an ongoing project. When done, Chris hopes to have documented 200 buildings across nearly 70 cities.
 
Check out Chris’ work at https://highrises.hythacg.com. His website includes a shop from which you can purchase his photo collage prints, 4K smartphone wallpapers, NFTs, and sketches. He plans to release a coffee table book before the end of this year, something I eagerly look forward to buying.