This long desolate highway looks vaguely familiar

"Those that do not study history are doomed to repeat it"

That seems like a fair enough assessment given our current woes. I find it increasingly amazing that given our rapid and prolific state of inventiveness (mobile phones on which we can watch full length feature films, voice activated interactive computer systems, global information and telecommunication networks) we still fail to understand how our decisions impact our ever shrinking world.

34 years after our last oil crisis America (and much of the industrialized world) finds ourselves again on the precipice of what some are calling a complete economic breakdown. Once again we see how closely we are tied to international energy production but are unwilling to make the self sacrifice needed to alleviate the burden. I find it so strange that a country who constantly involves itself in international affairs fails to realize how our own personal actions affects said international world. Americans systematically use and discard proportionally the vast majority of our planet's resources. Cities develop massive automotive infrastructure routes to cut commute times by mere minutes which justify further deconcentration of communities resulting in more energy/fuel being needed to navigate sprawling community. We live in a society where it is easier and cheaper to throw out a broken appliance than to have it repaired, the cost subsidized by impoverished foreign workers and the goods shipped to this country with the expense of a massive consumption of energy.

It is intriguing to me how interconnected everything really is if you take the time to examine it.

For those of you with piqued interest I direct you to the 1973; Sorry, Out of Gas exhibit on view at the CCA (Canadian Centre for Architecture) until April which highlights some of the architectural responses to the oil crisis of "green pioneers like Micheal Reynolds and Steve Baer".

Metorpolis magazine also acknowledges that the show is "also a warning to contemporary architects enamored with solely technological-driven solutions, and a call for societal changes to combat looming ecological disaster."

additional resources:
thestar - 35 years on, why we need another gas crisis

Greener gifts for the holiday season thanks to Treehugger.com

Happy Black Friday United States! (I think the rest of the world celebrates tomorrow as the biggest shopping day of the year).

Granted I am against copious consumer consumption as much as I can be however with the holidays gearing up and gift giving being a way to express one's feelings and respect for another I figure I may as well pass along the 2007 Treehugger's Gift Giving Guide - Now in various shades of green! Using the site one can navigate by preferences for who will be receiving the gifts as well as gift types. I find one of the most useful parts a list of holiday tips for reducing consumption and alternative for dealing with non efficient materials (virgin gift wrapping paper). There is also a nice list of foundations one can contribute to in someones name.

All in all a fine idea for those looking to reduce their impact or make a statement with their gift giving this holiday season.

Happy holidays everyone!

Black Friday rears its ugly head

Happy Thanksgiving everyone. I hope all are enjoying good times with family and friends, celebrating the important things in life, our love for each other.

Amazing how quickly fine ideas become sullied. Christmas has been an overly commercialized holiday since as long as I can remember. Halloween, well, that is all about candy, right? Easter was somehow maligned to also be a mall holiday and since Thanksgiving is all about giving thanks for what we have I suppose the only way to properly hi-jack it is to assume that after giving thanks people realize that what they have isn't enough.

Somehow 4am sales on 72" plasma screen TVs is supposed to fix all that emptiness inside?

Well, I am not sold on the idea that buying things will make me happy (actually I hate seeing credit card bills, getting rid of those would make me happier) and so once again I will not be partaking in 'Black Friday' in the usual manner.

Oh, I will enjoy my train ride into work (minus the crush of the work rush), my relatively calm day at the office (lots of people on vacation) and a quiet stroll around Cleveland at lunch. I will also celebrate Buy Nothing Day, the annual "moratorium on consumer spending". There are many reasons. After suffering a flood and losing quite a bit of my material identity I have discovered that those things are not as important as I thought. I also have come to the realization that no one is really impressed by the junk I own and all it really does is tie me to a sedentary lifestyle, locked in a single locale due to the massive amount of things I have accumulated. In fact, I find the more things I 'own' the more trapped feeling I become.

Even if it not all about the accumulation of 'stuff' there is something downright uncomfortable about 1/5 of the world's population consuming 80% of it's resources. Is our consumption based society to blame on our current economic, health and enviromental crisis? Damn straight it is. Do something interesting this Black Friday; read a book, talk to friends, enjoy the outside, draw, paint, enter architecture competitions, work on school assignments, think. Think about what a difference you could make if you really wanted to, then make that difference.

Streetscape masterplans - Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project

Despite my tirade on masterplans the other day there are some that I do not find entirely objectionable. Take the Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project as an example.

Granted I haven't seem the presentation documentation but from the description and public comments of the 2007 10.17 presentation I can infer some points that I felt were rather pertinent. The overall proposal is for a definitive median on Clifton Boulevard with some planted and some hardscape areas.

- The planted beds may not be effective as a gateway (if they stretch the entire boulevard course then there would be little to no need for it to act as a gateway, Clifton Boulevard itself isn't really that long and is rather distinguishable).
- The median mimics the proposed Shoreway Boulevard creating a sense of continuity.
- Hardscape areas where medians cannot be installed 'could be replicated in Cleveland'. (This was especially nice as it attempts to emphasis the symbiotic relationship of the REGION).
-Local artists would be used to supply any public art. This is important as it personalizes each area in a subtle manner. Now there can be a neighborhood distinction without the typical olde tymey signage/lamp-post/hanging plant debacle, instead each neighborhood can utilize personal creative stock to differentiate itself. Think of Fremont, Washington (north of Seattle). If that doesn't ring a bell think of the Fremont Troll.
There are more points concerning signage, pedestrian protection, demarcating the residential from commercial zones with different plantings, hardscape types and strategies and most importantly the continuity and consistency of a masterplan and its application.

Something to think about.

Dick Feagler: Euclid Corridor signifies nothing, and no one will use it.

Well, that is one opinion. Of course this rebuttal landed in my in-box recently and I thought I would share.

What’s with Dick Feagler? His Sunday column on the Euclid Corridor (Nov. 18, "A corridor; how exciting") begins by saying Cleveland lacks “a certain amount of creativity” suggesting the $220 million, mostly federally-funded project isn’t innovative. Doesn’t he read his own newspaper? Did he miss the numerous Plain Dealer articles over the past 30 years chronicling the project’s evolution from “Dual Hub,” a very expensive rail rapid transit line proposal ($800+ million in 1980’s dollars), to the current bus rapid transit line (BRT)? What about RTA Board Vice Chairman Ed Kelley’s excellent letter to the editor on Friday ("A catalyst for growth") noting numerous benefits from Euclid Corridor such as the $2.3 billion of investments and 10,000 new jobs already in process within the Corridor? I don’t know about Feagler, but when I travel the Corridor, I see thousands of planning, architect, engineering, and construction jobs that wouldn’t otherwise have existed!

How could Feagler not recall the countless PD articles revealing how then-Cleveland Mayor Michael R. White, Cleveland City Council, the NOACA and GCRTA boards, and Cuyahoga County Commissioners ALL agreed at the time that a Euclid Corridor rail line wasn’t the most cost-effective use of taxpayer dollars? In scaling the project back as they did, our leaders at the time promised MORE transportation and development benefits in Cleveland’s main street by proposing to fix badly deteriorated infrastructure along the City’s main drag. Their foresight with that call afforded the region THREE brand new downtown professional sports venues, major airport expansions and huge investments in ongoing highway, bridge, water and sewer projects. Euclid Corridor dollars saved also enabled RTA to open its Waterfront Line in 1996, the region’s first rapid transit expansion since the 1968 Airport line extension. Feagler must surely remember that little innovation? You know, the one that made Cleveland the first city in North America to have a direct rail link between its major airport and downtown.

Feagler also somehow fails to acknowledge PD articles, RTA and national news pronouncing Euclid Corridor as North America’s FIRST-EVER BRT line to be built from the ground up. Hint: RTA didn’t win the 2007 American Public Transportation Association’s Best Large Transit System in North America Award just by for putting pretty new trolleys in downtown Cleveland and bike racks on all its buses.

As with the Airport rapid line extension, planners, architects, engineers, developers and city officials from around the world have already begun traveling here just to see how we're building the BRT. And once the line opens, most likely with naming rights helping to offset costs (pretty innovative for a transit line!), lots more folks will come here to experience Euclid Corridor first-hand. (Can you say “tourism dollars” girls and boys?)

Because of construction woes and whatever else, many in the region like Feagler are prematurely passing judgment on Euclid Corridor. Just as it took decades to plan and build, it will takes decades to realize the full benefits of the Euclid Corridor. But quite frankly, I already enjoy bicycling the Euclid Corridor bike lanes (rode 'em today to pick up tickets for 12 Angry Men at Playhouse Square). And RTA customers have already begun taking refuge in the fancy new Euclid Corridor shelters. But who could argue that new and renewed water and sewer lines, roads, Cleveland Browns Stadium, Jacobs Field, Quicken Loans Arena and Hopkins Airport haven’t already brought countless major benefits to this region’s residents and visitors? All that should be pretty exciting to a region making a comeback like ours, and the Euclid Corridor Transportation Project and our past and present leaders can be thanked for that!

Richard McDougald Enty
(Transportation Consultant and retired RTA planner who worked on Dual Hub and Euclid Corridor studies, on and off, from 1978 thru 2007; was principal author of three versions of RTA long range plan documents from 1993 thru 2006)

You can also read more thoughts on the article (including mine) at the new ClevelandDesignCity.

Streetscape masterplans, screwing up one city at a time

Discussions of green versus regional design become interesting when compared and contrasted to the modern design typology. Concurring with Peter van Dijk's supposition that modern design (ie. a box glass or otherwise) could be built anywhere due to our building environment controls (Bauhaus in America discussion last Saturday) makes one question whether far reaching movements are responsible design regardless of how interesting they may appear. Regional vernaculars have evolved in a fashion to fit a specific culture and society and show be respected. I know this is an over reaching generalization for today but I am struck by the amount of projects that appear around the world that do not respect a native vernacular. I am not suggesting that we close up our borders and live in fear of change but rather regional design is at least investigated when large projects are being considered. It has become rather simple to build large blocks of glass because we can heat and cool the space inside, it just becomes a dialogue of what has more import, the aesthetic value or the energy used to make the space functional. I am not completely disowning 'crystal' structures because they are typically designed with an attempt to use specialized glass to mitigate the requirements of the HVAC system, I am just stating that there has to be a comprehensive understanding of the cause and effect relationships that every aspect of design involve in order to protect the integrity of the project.

I suppose I am a little off track. I really wanted to just raise awareness of the simple exercise of walking about your city. Recently it has come to my attention that Kauffman Park in Lakewood is in danger of being developed and equally importantly that the strip mall in front of Kauffman Park on Detroit Avenue is facing undergoing the type of change that actually scares me. I don't understand where this mis-appropriation of 'new urbanism' stem from but I am finding it increasingly annoying that 'lifestyle centers (ie, malls you live at) are being billed as living the 'urban lifestyle (without the horrible city around you)' and that communities around the urban core are re-interpreting these lifestyle centers and attempting to adjust their streetscapes to match it by creating false vistas, termini and creating homogeneous, monotonous commercial districts.

Knock it off.

Design of urban (and to an extent exurban/suburban) spaces requires one to visit the idea of how buildings frame the street, creating public rooms for movement, collection, identification and experience. If every room looks the same then how do you know where you are? The worst possible answer to this would be to take a viable commercial strip (such as Detroit or Madison Avenue) and fragment it into segmented miniature districts that somehow are supposed to follow prescribed rules of intent such as an entertainment district or art district. The before mentioned commercial strips are not of such length as to necessitate the inclusion of gateways or banners for one to remember where they are. If a person cannot tell immediately and continuously locate oneself then one starts to re-evaluate the greater area as a whole. This also allows for an intermingling of commercial opportunity (without district typology restrictions) which increases walkability and pedestrian desire. I know that to some of our amazing urban designers this comes as a compete shock that the hanging baskets, lights and banners do very little to make a district successful if the commercial and residential infrastructure isn't there in the first place.

I plan to touch on this topic a little bit more in the future and hopefully include some photos and finger pointing (yes, I plan to name some names, not that anyone will be surprised at that). In the meantime there was a rather fun article in the Metroblog section of the Plain Dealer on footpaths which I found not only interesting but rather timely as one imagines how spaces are interpreted from outside of the automobile.

New ClevelandDesignCity!

There is a new ClevelandDesignCity which is more user friendly and can act as a place for actually discussing the various architecture and design happenings in Cleveland. Currently moderated by a fine chap (I don't know if I can release their name) it has been undergoing testing and is now ready for the big time. Hopefully this will inspire some of us to write more and to write better.

The world knows we need it.

So kick your shoes off, grab a beer and join us for some talk about the city, architecture, art or whatever general questions of that realm you have on your mind. We'll leave the light on for you.

Bauhaus in America - summations

Having just returned from a rather archi-centric evening I am eager to get the last vestiges of discussion off my chest. There were so many issues raised by this rather interesting exposition of thetranslation of the Bauhaus pedagogy to American society that it is hard to rationalize on where to begin.

The movie itself was rather interesting. Granted, from a film perspective, the 90's techniques of video documentary shows rather evidently however the subject matter, already having evolved into what some would name a 'post-modern' movement seems rather timeless. Concentrating primarily on how the main educators of the Bauhaus in Dessau translated their work to American educational institutions (IIT, Harvard, Yale, Black Mountain) and into work that somehow became synonymous with a mythical 'international' style. Historically it was a nice traipse down memory lane for fans of Mies, Albers, Rohe, Breuer and of course Gropius.

For fans of the Bauhaus model it was a jarring experience when one starts to relate to modern design schools. There seems to be a lack of willingness to allow the exploration of the idea, the investigation of the intent to be paramount. One asked at the discussion afterwards about current Bauhaus type schools to little response. I would offer the Rural Studio and Jersey Devil design/build as two such programs where the exploration into the materiality and social concern is paramount.

Which of course leads to my question of concern for the evening. If the Bauhaus was founded with the hope of maximizing recent industrial innovations to further production and therefore mixing design with purity could be argued as paramount then what is to occur as schools move to concentrate on theoretical design, computer renderings and sections that further remove the understanding of space and texture from the curriculum. It seems architecture is becoming more graphic design than more having anything to do with the insides of a building or space. (Feel free to argue with me on that one, it could turn out rather well).

I am willing to accept that computer renderings are shiny and new and possibly as a school preparing students to produce the very objects that firms want most to attract perspective clients is nice, but I would very vehemently argue that unless the student knows how to think, collect and express an idea then all the pretty pictures are meaningless rubbish that detract from what architectural design really is.

While the jury is out on the Breuer building and whether or not the connection to the Bauhaus is enough to rally the creative design of Cleveland to stand up for it the individual film/discussion was a resounding success and I would like to thank Christopher Diehl, Peter van Dijk and Carol Salus for spending the afternoon/evening with us and with Susan Miller for putting this thing together.

Don't forget that the next one "Green building and modernism: are they antithetical?" with Carl Stein will be next Wednesday, Novemeber 28th, 6.00pm at Judson Manor.
Greening the Modern Preservation Movement

Cleveland Went Modern

Last night's "Cleveland Goes Modern: building modern from a client's perspective" seminar nicely tied up the recent "Cleveland Goes Modern" exhibit with a panel discussion moderated by Nina Gibans which included first and second generation clients of some of the modern homes shown in the exhibition. We were treated to a remembrance of what it was like dealing with the architect, living and growing up in an unconventional home, and maintaining the homes as they aged.

I am saddened that the exhibition with close a chapter of conversation which had some rather interesting repercussions. What happened to the modern movement in Cleveland? Did it taper off, are there still some real hidden jewels nestled among us? Did the market prove unsubstantial? Were we not ready for the innovation, intellectually or emotionally? Is there a new vanguard? Who are the contemporaries? What do they have to show us?

The exhibition did open my eyes. I also had the opportunity to meet some extremely wonderful people. Caretakers of artifacts, collectors of knowledge, teachers, practitioners, students all hungry to share and explore design and the theory of living in design. While the exhibit is winding down (officially closing the 24th at the CAF) there are rumors that it may resurface in a new format. Something that can be shared and taught to the younger generation. There is great potential there. Potential that can be cultivated and focused if presented properly. Luckily someone is already taking the steps to create those tools.

Architecture of Cleveland

Architecture embraces so many disciplines that it begs to be used as a core for teaching. What people experience daily in their private homes and public spaces—banks, religious institutions, libraries--is always the result of an amalgamation of skills involving math, science, social studies, language arts, and, of course art. In Cleveland, in the 70s, a group of us were working with teachers in a course called Education for Aesthetic Awareness that included Architecture. It was obvious that more could and should be developed for students in our schools. In 2002, The Chicago Architecture Foundation published Schoolyards to Skyscrapers, a monumental prizewinning book developed for teaching with architecture. There it is-- the teaching tool with ideas for every city, every teacher, every grade level. We are indebted to Jennifer Masengarb who worked with Jean Linsner and dozens of teachers through the possible ideas to the usable formats. Several chapters of the American Institute of Architects – notably in Michigan, Boston and Cincinnati – have created materials for classrooms.

Cleveland is not Chicago with its examples of major internationally recognized architecture. But we have elegant historic buildings, honored architects, and skilled craftspersons of all kinds. And, the earlier students understand what it takes to produce good looking buildings like many around us, the better we are prepared to consider other basics: how we use our land, restore deteriorating buildings, use old and new technologies, consider careers that may have an impact on the look of our city.

We ask teachers of all disciplines -- math, science, social studies, language arts, and, of course art -- to consider where they can use materials taken right from this website that match their grade level needs and infuse exciting ways to meet the requirements that we know they face.

Cleveland Goes Modern Lecture Reminder

Building Modern from the Client's Standpoint
Thursday, November 15th
6pm
Cleveland Artists Foundation
17801 Detroit Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio

Just a reminder that tonight will be the last 'Third Thursday' seminar of the "Cleveland Goes Modern" exhibition. Tonight's talk will focus on how the intent of these buildings was achieved, how they got the local review boards to allow them to be built and hopefully some discussion on how they have held up.

Practice, preach, see who pays attention.

I suppose when asked to sum up in one thought the recent Bruce Mau lecture at Kent State University (which I hope to expound upon later) I would simply reiterate the idea of the vast potential that each singular problem presents itself. With a local consideration (beyond the centralized assimilation of Arnold Toynbee's views on the welfare of mankind which leads to the inclusion of the the local placement of the Tonybee Tiles) one could argue that the multiple instances of singular obstacles are created within the urban environment could actually be manipulated to create an interesting dialogue either resulting in an event or an icon.

Just as a quick and simple example I would like to mention some of the changes made to New York construction sites in order to make them more interesting and to offer something back to their location besides acting as an impediment.

Recently the Cuyahoga County Office of Sustainability has attempted to raise awareness of the County's mission to create an environmentally progressive community although some may argue that the construction fence around the Ameritrust Tower would be an inappropriate location for a campaign entitled "Preserve Conserve". While I applaud the County attempting to showcase an initiative that speaks to their environmental goals I would like to point out that one must be careful of the medium as well as the message (which includes location).

Perhaps with a little creative thinking Cleveland/Cuyahoga County can capitalize on our construction, make our spaces beautiful and interesting instead of looking constantly torn up and create temporary spaces that are worth remembering.

You can also design your own poster and leave comments for the County's Office of Sustainability.

GCRTA budget adjustments may affect Cleveland commute patterns

Yesterday the RTA Board Committee met, presented the 2008 budget and discussed upcoming service changes. Some issues discussed included the ECTP (Euclid Corridor Transportation Project) work milestones (Public Square to be completed 'within the week', scheduling for the utility work around the Cleveland Clinic area and the $5.3 million shortfall of the GCRTA budget.

There is currently a discussion to poise the GCRTA in preparation for the inevitable fuel cost increases which will have a direct effect upon the GCRTA's budget by "consolidating" routes. This "consolidation" includes utilizing transit nodules for maximum efficiency by rescheduling and rerouting bus routes to coincide with the Rapid Transit lines. In essence direct bus routes from the outer laying suburbs to downtown may be rerouted to converge upon suburban Rapid Stations.

With ridership currently on the rise (total ridership up about 4% (560,000 rides) and weekday ridership up about 4.4% (about 20,000 rides)) one has to wonder how an adjustment of this nature will affect the image of public transportation as being a convenient way to get from the suburbs to downtown. One would also wonder if the fuel increase wouldn't directly increase ridership resulting in more earnings driving down the current deficit.

I suppose that speculation may have to be put on hold until and re-evaluated when the ECTP starts running it's Public Square to East Cleveland routes to decide whether or not a change in route patterns would be effective. As I stood on the full Rapid on the way in this morning I wondered if perhaps adding more riders to an already seemingly crowded line was a good idea. Would more train cars or more runs be added to the Rapid to offset commuter population gains? Would the answer lay in more careful planning and staggering of route departures to maximize Rapid comfort and efficiency?

There is a very careful line to be aware of. Public transportation already has to overcome a perceived (incorrectly) stigma by constantly and consistently being cheaper, quicker and more convenient then an automotive commute. Once deviation from that formula (or the interjection of a less successful pattern) is achieved the GCRTA may find itself in a very uncomfortable situation. While I would love to argue that the GCRTA should immediately counter the deficit by increasing routes, serving more people and becoming 'super-convenient' the plan must be fiscally sound to be successful. There are already multiple Rapid upgrades already occurring whose affects have yet to be empirically measured who may play a large role in reconceiving GCRTA's image. I am extremely curious (and concerned) to see what develops.

Resources: RTA Board Committee Highlights

Bruce Mau - Kent 'Design Practice' Lecture

Bruce Mau DesignTuesday, November 13th, 2007
University Auditorium, Cartwright Hall
Kent State University
7pm

Lots of good lectures and events are happening this month. It is wonderfully overwhelming.

Criticism and Critique - The necessity and the fine line

After Jane Weinzapfel's 'Made to Measure' lecture and her comments upon the sporadic and segmented creative community of Cleveland I found myself wondering more then usual about how creative disciplines have become disjointed, arguing over fiefdoms and markets instead of creating a sort of standard with which to use as a base for acceptable design. I understand to a certain extent the hesitation with taking a stand upon a specific topic. On one hand unpopular opinion may result in a loss of credibility or perhaps even patronage. On the other creating a stir may spur an attempt of improvement instead of a careful plodding along an already tiresome path. I would argue that unpopular opinion spurs discussion more then a popular one and that repercussions would only be felt if there was either a sense of dangerous truth to the opinion and/or if the awarding of commissions were not based solely on merit.

When then is it proper to criticize and in what way is criticism actually useful? Well, now this is the crux of the argument. In some way criticism is only given to show an unfavorable reaction and in a way I am slightly insulted by this. It is rather simple to say something is boorish and ugly without any real offerings of better solutions. Perhaps this is a major concern, that criticism is offered not only in solely a negative capacity but with no attempt to correct the mistakes being made. Comments of this nature are easy to dismiss and do nothing to contribute to a possible dialogue about how something(the critiqued object/act) could be better achieved. Granted, criticising something with an actual attempt to understand or to offer alternative solutions takes not only time, but a grasp of what the original undertaking was meaning to accomplish and to some extent (granted not much) the limitations placed upon the artist in the first place.

I would also offer that perhaps there is a hidden code of ethics, that publicly stating an opinion on a contemporary's work somehow diminishes not only their attempt but also your own credibility. Again I would suggest that this is due mostly to the depth of the criticism. If grounded in intelligent and logical foundations then it should be easy to ascertain that the criticism is in no way a personal attack but rather a reaction to a specific problem's solution. I would also offer that without a set of standards, base minimums, that design (specifically architectural) should achieve then it becomes increasingly difficult to educate the public about design and/or hold architects to a set of standards. I am not in any way suggesting that a specific rule set be created for what is considered 'beauty' but rather that it become acceptable to point out a proposed project as one that does not achieve a certain level of aesthetics regardless of the school of thought that the design is grounded in.

At some point criticism should lead into discourse and investigation to possible design solutions that would respond to relevant and informed design reviews and would further make it possible for designers to not only inform their clients but also each other. There would have to exist a level of respect. Not so much as personal validation, but from the critic to the designer to make a comment that exemplified study and investigation, and from the designer to the critic to actually consider the comment. The worst critiques I had ever received are tied between two statements. One was a dismissal of a design based upon an inferred set of arbitrary standards ("It's ugly") and the other was approval for the same reason ("That's perfect"). Nothing led me to understand what about the project was creating the reaction and nothing helped inform me as to what the end goal was supposed to be. Both cases are of unhelpful, useless and dismissible criticism that I fear is too easy and vapid to completely avoid. However, by including observations in the critique (not guidelines or answer) as to how possible solutions could be realized one can earn not only the designers respect but also allow them to revisualize the problem and possibly solve it in a manner that the critic couldn't even foresee.

There is indeed an art to critique, one that I am sometimes guilty of ignoring, that I hope to usefully and successfully master in order to further creative discussions in this town.