Working at Home

 

There are times in everyone’s life when both pleasant and unpleasant surprises can throw you for a loop. An unexpected health issue is an example of the unpleasant sort. My wife was hospitalized this past Christmas Day due to a sudden medical emergency. She spent three nights in the hospital while her condition stabilized. She’s now recovering at home but because of my concern for her welfare, I’ve temporarily reduced my hours at Robertson/Sherwood/Architects so that I can spend as much time with her as possible. 

I’m adjusting to this change in my work schedule. My coworkers have been great, picking up the slack on the projects I’m working on despite how full their own plates are. I’m also doing some work at home, which, because of today’s communication and computer technologies, is an increasingly practical option. 

Telecommuting, remote working—whatever you call it—makes a great deal of sense. I don’t have to be in the same building (or country for that matter) as my colleagues in order for us to work together. Experts say about 20 percent of workers around the world work remotely, with almost 3 in 10 dividing their working week between home and the office. The ability to work from home has especially proven to be a boon for parents of young children. 

Most people understand both the advantages and disadvantages of working remotely from the office:

The advantages include:

• Flexibility
• Reduced cost
• Work at your own pace
• Fewer sick days
• Proximity to home and family
• Reduced stress
• Increased productivity
• Better work/life balance

The disadvantages are equally well-known:

• Lack of routine
• No workplace social life
• The challenge of the work/life balance
• Difficulty separating home from work
• Need for high self-discipline
• Distractions
• Complete dependence upon technology

I do not foresee working remotely becoming a regular part of my routine. I know myself too well: the disadvantages listed above would eventually outweigh the benefits. Additionally, the way my coworkers and I practice architecture is very much reliant upon face-to-face interaction on a daily basis. By its nature, architecture is a collaborative pursuit, demanding efficient teamwork. Despite rapid improvements in the technology, teleconferencing by Skype, GoTo Meeting, WebEx, or other platforms cannot yet fully replace the freewheeling, spontaneous dynamic typical of architectural offices. Real-time, online collaboration and sharing of documents in the “cloud” are certainly a reality today, but virtual interactions are still hindered by the limitations of the technology. In too many instances there remains no substitute for literally being able to sit side-by-side with a close collaborator, pencils in hands, scribbling on the same drawing. 

Thankfully, my wife is doing well and improving daily. I hope to quickly return to a full-time schedule, maybe as soon as a week or two from now. I also hope to resume a more regular pace of blog posts; my blogging has definitely taken a back seat to my concerns about my wife’s health. I’ve needed some time away from both work and my various extracurricular interests (which include blogging but also my taiko drumming) for both her sake and my own. 

The ability to effectively work from my home is definitely a benefit today’s technology affords many of us. I appreciate being able to work remotely when I need to, especially when my life’s circumstances compel me to do so.

2016 CSI Certification Classes

 

The Construction Specifications Institute –Willamette Valley Chapter (CSI-WVC) is once again pleased to offer a series of classes on Construction Contract Documents (CDT) in addition to another set covering Construction Contract Administration (CCCA). The principal purpose of the courses (each consisting of 10 classes, one each per week) is to assist those who are planning to take one or more of the CSI-sponsored Certification Exams. The classes can also be of significant value to architectural interns and to the firms for whom they work, as well as very helpful to those preparing to take the State Architectural Licensing Exams. 

 

The two sets of classes both begin next week but it’s not too late to register. Click on the link below to download information about the classes and registration forms for them: 

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/witt6g5u6lx8wih/AADc6Yov4sBXtg4WYF3aAInFa?dl=0 

 

If you believe you or any member of your staff would benefit from taking either the CDT or CCCA classes, don’t hesitate and enroll now. The early bird rate for the registration fees may no longer be available but the classes are truly a bargain at any price. 

 

Incidentally, any profit generated by the registration fees is assigned to CSI-Willamette Valley Chapter education programs.

 

Architects can earn up to 20 Continuing Professional Education (CPE) hours to apply toward maintaining Oregon State Board of Architect Examiners professional licensure; AIA Members can earn up 20 Continuing Education Learning Units (LU) which CSI will report directly to AIA/CES. 

 

FYI, I happen to be one of the instructors for the CDT and CCCA classes and also co-chair of the CSI-Willamette Valley Chapter Certification Committee (Linn West is the other co-chair). In addition to Linn and me, the other instructors include Larry Banks, Jon Texter, Tom Deines, Brian Hamilton, Jerry Boucock, and Jim Chaney (an august group indeed!). 

The venue for both classes is new this year. It will be the main conference room at Eugene Mindworks, located at 5th and Pearl in Eugene. We're excited to see how the classes work out in this new (to us) space.
 

If you have any questions, please call Linn West at 541-342-6511 or e-mail him at

linn@awjarchitects.com.

 

Don’t delay, enroll today!

O Tannenbaum!

This is our Christmas tree. It’s a very modest 6-foot tall Nordmann fir but we’re very happy with it. We purchased it from a local grower who raises trees organically, with no chemical spraying. We like its shape, height, proportions, and the strength and density of its limbs (perfect for our particular selection of lights and ornaments). We like that it is festive and how it makes us feel the holiday season has arrived in our home. 

It is the history of the Christmas tree (which actually traces back to pre-Christian winter rites) and its persistence as a cultural icon that fascinate me. Trees in general have long been symbols of eternal life. Many regard the characteristically triangular shape of Christmas trees (like our Nordmann fir) as signifying the holy Trinity and a pointing skyward toward Heaven. Historians say the custom of hanging shiny ornaments on Christmas trees originated in medieval times when worshipers began decorating trees with apples (to represent the forbidden fruit) and wafers (to represent the Eucharist and redemption). Notwithstanding our personal religious beliefs, we all immediately associate them with the joyous spirit of the Christmas holiday. 

The effectiveness of Christmas trees as symbols is amazing (albeit culturally dependent), but perhaps no more so than many other visual images or signs we are familiar with. The Christian cross, the Jewish Star of David, and the Star & Crescent of Islam are iconic representations of religious beliefs. Likewise recognizable (and burdened by association) are the Nazi swastika, the Daoist yin and yang, flags of many nations, and corporate logos (such as the Nike swoosh and McDonald’s golden arches). 

Of course, humans have always designed buildings with the express goal of creating monuments to represent beliefs, ideas, or principles. The U.S. Capitol building is an example, with its central dome & rotunda signifying the Union flanked by separate wings housing the legislative bodies. The Eiffel Tower is another case in point, a grandiose celebration of technological prowess and Gallic pride constructed for the 1889 Exposition Universelle. We unthinkingly associate the expansive interior light and soaring height of the great Gothic cathedrals with the Divine and the power of institution they represent. Symbolism, whether intended or not, has been an inherent property of architecture throughout history. 

The geometry of many buildings is itself the key to understanding their meaning. For instance, the semi-subterranean, round forms of Chacoan kivas—symbolizing the peoples’ place of origin— distinguished them from the more common square or rectangular forms of pueblo residential architecture. The use of circles and spheres to express notions of perfection, wholeness, and the cycle of life has been widespread across many cultures. The potency of their symbolism is almost universal. Skilled architects are fluent with the grammar of all shapes and use it to achieve additional desired effects: conveying mood and emotion, directing movement, emphasizing points of interest, organizing, connecting and separating, etc. 

All Charlie Brown's Christmas tree needed was a little loving care.

 

Early worshipers favored the simple tapering profile of the decorated Yule tree for its symbolism. Today, the Christmas tree remains iconic (though perhaps too often coopted by the over-commercialization of the holiday). The point of this post is to remind myself once again how simple forms can express complex, layered meanings while also being beautiful and joyful—a timely lesson for any dispirited, world-weary architect.

I hope everyone is enjoying this holiday season. Best wishes to all of you! 

A Train Quiet Zone for Eugene?

The December meeting of Willamette Valley Chapter of the Construction Specifications Institute featured a timely presentation by Kerry Werner, civil engineer and project manager for the City of Eugene, on the topic of three interrelated projects associated with the Union Pacific Railway corridor that passes through downtown Eugene. If implemented, the projects are certain to shape the future quality of life, development prospects, and safety of the Whiteaker and downtown areas. Their significance in these regards cannot be overstated. 

The three potential projects are: 

1. Establishment of a train horn quiet zone in the Whiteaker and downtown neighborhoods;
2. Relocation of a rail crossing at 8th and Hilyard (to enhance access to the EWEB riverfront site); and 
3. Accommodations for a new Amtrak siding west of Willamette Street (to allow Amtrak trains to conveniently overnight in Eugene).

Prior to joining the City of Eugene, Kerry worked for ODOT, Douglas County, and Lane County on a variety of large, complex projects whose impact and reach called for substantial public input. The rail-related projects definitely fall within this category. Kerry chose the Willamette Valley Chapter to be the guinea pig for the rollout of his presentation about them. I think our audience rewarded him with confidence he hit the mark in terms of completeness and educational value.

Like most every issue related to the future of Eugene, we cannot analyze anything as impactful as rail travel through the city fabric in isolation. Too many considerations are intertwined. Nothing is simple. Regardless, informing the public and rendering the issues with as much clarity as possible is essential. The decisions the City makes today will shape the future prospects of the areas the rail lines pass through for many years to come, and it’s best if those decisions are made knowledgeably. Kerry framed the challenge well, doing his best to simplify a set of complex challenges. For the further sake of brevity, I’ll focus my blog post on only one of the three projects Kerry described—the City’s consideration of a train horn quiet zone. 

Silencing the Train Horns
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and Congress enacted the Train Horn Rule in 2005 to improve safety at railway crossings. Under the rule, locomotive engineers must begin to sound train horns at least 15 seconds, and no more than 20 seconds, in advance of all public at-grade crossings. The horns must be sounded in a standardized pattern of 2 long blasts, 1 short blast, and an additional long blast following the short one. The pattern must be repeated or prolonged until the lead locomotive or lead cab car occupies the grade crossing. The rule does not stipulate the durations of long and short blasts.

The maximum volume level for the train horn is 110 decibels measured 100 feet in front of the train. The minimum sound level is 96 decibels. Therein lays the issue: 96 to 110 decibels is loud, and with 23 Union Pacific and Amtrak trains traveling through Eugene each day and night, the blare of the horns impacts the quality of life for nearby residents and the potential for desirable developments flanking the rail corridor.

The FRA rule does provide an opportunity for localities nationwide to mitigate the effects of train horn noise by establishing “quiet zones.” In a quiet zone (QZ), trains must cease the routine sounding of their horns when approaching public street at-grade crossings of railroad tracks (however, they may use their horns in emergency situations or to comply with other Federal regulations or operating rules). As Kerry explained, the City of Eugene chose to explore the potential of establishing a quiet zone in response to calls from the public and also because of the City’s own desire to make the neighborhoods along the rail corridor as attractive as possible to vibrant, high-value future developments (the EWEB riverfront site being the most obvious case in point).

 

There are 15 major public, at-grade rail crossings (and 13 additional minor crossings) within Eugene’s urban growth boundary. Because of their proximity to one another and to the most significantly impacted neighborhoods, Kerry said the City has included ten contiguous crossings in its QZ study (see the map above). According to the FRA rule, any new quiet zone must be a minimum of one-half mile in length, so the incorporation of the ten crossings easily meets this criterion.

In order to create an FRA-sanctioned QZ the City must follow a Quiet Zone Establishment Process. This process includes initiating a feasibility study, collecting data, conducting a Quiet Zone Risk Index Calculation, identifying funding sources, and designing and implementing supplemental safety improvements. Accordingly, the City formed a diagnostic team with the FRA, the railroad companies (which besides Union Pacific and Amtrak also include Portland & Western and the Coos Bay Rail Link), and ODOT’s Rail Division to assess the risk of a train-vehicle collision at each grade crossing within the proposed QZ.

The diagnostic team is collecting vehicle traffic counts at the various crossings and analyzing their physical characteristics, including existing safety devices. In order to secure FRA approval of a new QZ, the City will have to implement engineered, supplemental safety measures (SSMs) at the crossings under consideration to reduce the risk of train-vehicle collisions. Kerry enumerated these specific, acceptable measures:

• Permanently closing a crossing to vehicle traffic;
• Providing raised medians on one both sides of the railroad tracks to prevent motorists from driving around lowered crossing gates;
• Converting two-way streets to one-way travel; and
• Installing 4-quadrant gates.

A quad-gate crossing

When an SSM is not possible at a particular crossing, the FRA will consider the use of an Alternative Safety Measures (ASM). An ASM may be a SSM with only slight changes from the strict guidelines provided by the FRA. The FRA must approve any ASM before construction begins, whereas the prescribed SSMs do not require prior approval.

The safety modifications (SSMs or ASMs) will impact all forms of transportation: cars, bicycles, and pedestrians at each of the crossings within the QZ. How they also impact access to the properties and neighborhoods on either side of the crossings is a key consideration. The City definitely wishes to minimize the potential for harming their well-being.

All of the agencies involved in the process must agree to the results of the analysis, proposed means of funding, and implementation plans; however, the FRA ultimately has the authority to approve/disapprove the implementation of the quiet zone. The QZ process, from initiation to establishment, can take 12 to 24 months. Notably, there are already over 600 quiet zones across the country, including in Portland and Salem.

The City estimates the cost of implementing the SSMs at the ten crossings within the proposed QZ to be in the millions of dollars. The cost of a single quad-crossing alone ranges between $750,000 and $1 million; add to that $9,000 per year in maintenance costs and it’s clear establishing a QZ will not come cheaply.

Fundamentally, whether or not the City’s continues its steps toward a QZ will be contingent upon weighing the associated benefits and risks. Silencing the train horns would eliminate a source of undue stress and sleep-disturbance, which affects the productivity and mental well-being of many Eugene residents. Silencing the horns would also significantly enhance the attractiveness of the properties alongside the tracks, most notably those within the historic core of the city. Without a QZ, it’s questionable whether developers would be willing to invest in those locations and bring the density and mix of uses the City wants to see. At stake is the potential for increased property tax revenue and employment associated with desirable new developments. On the other hand, it’s difficult to place a value upon a person’s life. If implementing a QZ results in a statistically significant increase in fatalities or injuries, it will certainly not have been worth the cost and would likely necessitate its rescinding.(1)

As someone who grew up near railroad tracks, I used to equate the sounding of train horns with the hustle and bustle of commerce: people on the move and delivering freight, doing the work of a prosperous nation. Their signaling induces nostalgia for a time when the railways served as the essential backbone for the country. Regardless, I fully understand the reasons why silencing them is desirable. I’m interested to see if implementing a quiet zone in Eugene comes to pass and if the hoped-for benefits materialize.

Big thanks to Kerry for providing a thorough description of the pros and cons, and process of implementing a train horn quiet zone in Eugene!

(1)   Kerry said there were 178 fatalities and 697 injuries nationwide last year associated with rail crossing accidents. Eugene has seen 2 pedestrian fatalities and 2 pedestrian injuries since 2010, but none associated with vehicle/train conflicts.  

4th Annual Gingerbread Competition

 

The American Institute of Architects-Southwestern Oregon Chapter and Architects Building Community invite everybody to participate in Eugene’s 4th Annual Gingerbread Competition and Silent Auction. The contest is an opportunity for gingerbread architects and artisans of all ages and abilities to show off their creativity and culinary crafting skills! An expert jury of confectioners and lovers of all things wonderfully sweet and beautiful will award prizes to the gingerbread creations they deem the most deserving. 

Each entrant will design, bake, assemble, and decorate a fully edible or compostable gingerbread structure. The organizers will prominently display all of the submitted entries between Friday, December 11 and December 25, 2015 in an assortment of downtown Eugene storefronts. The competition is without question a festive tradition worth supporting and participating in! 

Interested in taking part? If so, be sure to submit your entry form online before this coming Thursday, December 10. Once you’ve entered, use every ounce of your imagination to design your own inimitable gingerbread fantasy. Delight, whimsy, inventiveness, and enchantment are definitely the order of the day. 

Note that the displayed structures will be unrefrigerated. Build your entry upon a sturdy decorated base no larger than 24” x 24”. The base doesn’t have to be compostable but the rest of the structure should be. The finished design should not overhang the base. There are no height restrictions, but like all good architecture, your gingerbread handiwork must be structurally sound (just in case the “big one” rattles us this holiday season!).

Deliver your creation between 6:00pm and 8:00pm on Thursday, December 10 OR between 11:00am and 1:00pm on Friday, December 11 to the Octagon, Center for Architecture, located at 92 East Broadway.  

Judging will take place on Saturday, December 12 and will be based on the creativity of approach, quality of construction, and observation of the rules. Awards include, but are not limited to: 

• People’s Choice Award
• Best in Show
• Most Unusual
• Most Innovative use of Materials
• Most Accurate Recreation of an Existing Building 

Since its inception just a few short years ago, the Gingerbread Competition has grown to become a Eugene holiday tradition. I expect this year’s addition to be bigger and better than ever and a seasonally welcome addition to the downtown scene! 

What: 4th Annual Gingerbread Competition 

When: December 11-25, 2015 

Where (display): Assorted downtown Eugene storefronts 

Entry Deadline: December 10, 2015 

Cost:  FREE

Entry Forms: HERE