The Solar Puff.

Focus on Architecture, Art, Research and Making (FAARM) is a non-profit organization of designers and architects from New York who are passionate about developing innovative and creative solutions for sustainable living. Although FAARM’s mission is building and construction, they embrace research and development as an integral component in helping the global community.

So, it’s not surprising that they tackled the lack of electricity issue both sustainably and economically by creating the Solar Puff, an inflatable light that opens with one puff of air. Inspired by a Japanese origami paper toy balloon, the Solar Puff is versatile and bright enough to lighten any space, either indoors and outdoors. As you can imagine, the Solar Puff is already brightening many lives around the world.  

Electricity in Haiti, like many countries, is neither consistent nor realizable. And out of a population of approximately 10 million people, 75-80% does not even have access to electricity. Daily lives of many Haitians revolve around unsafe and toxic kerosene lamps. It is common to see children coughing and attempting to complete their homework under the light of kerosene lamps or outside under street-lights to illuminate their books. 

Safe lighting in homes should not be a luxury; it should be available to everyone. To make this happen, the FAARM team focused their efforts in creating a lighting camping on a particular area in Haiti-Hinche, a central Haitian town dramatically affected by the influx of a migrating population devastated by the 2010 earthquake. The “Shine a Light” campaign aims to bring light to every resident of Hinche, which now totals over 50,000 people.  

Child reading by the light of the Solar Puff.

 

The Solar Puff is safe for children of any age.

Depending on the region in Haiti, the cost of fuel can be as much as 30% of a Haitians yearly income. In contrast, Solar Puff provides a safe, affordable, long-lasting light that is off-the-grid. It can illuminate a space up to 100 square feet as well as provide quality task lighting which is evident by its color and brightness.

Many designers have created wonderful innovations to assist the Haitian community, but often the expense far exceeds the reach of those in need. One of the lengthy advantages of the Solar Puff is that it’s low cost and can be taken anywhere, and it works in any climate. The Solar Puff is foldable and light weight, weighing approximately 8oz-10oz. Hundreds of the Puffs can be packed and shipped to people anywhere in the world who require emergency relief or assistance.  

The Solar Puff is not solely for residential use; it can help small businesses create better sources of light for selling goods, as well as extend hours of operation into the evening. It can also illuminate certain areas in a neighborhood to reduce vandalism and crime against women and children. The Solar Puff is even waterproof, making it a great tool for fishermen, both on the boat or floating on the water’s surface.

The Solar Puff is a sophisticated balloon that fits in the palm of your hand. Its kit of parts includes a translucent skin that has creases for fold-ability, a reflective surface to amplify the light in one direction and to control it in another, a photovoltaic panel for recharging, and a censor and manual switch. For the Solar Puff to activate its photovoltaic solar panels must be charged in direct sunlight for 4 to 5 hours; this will provide enough light for 8 to 10 hours at a time. The reflector and lens optimize usable light with the 6 LED lights at 4000 mcdc. NiMH batteries will last for up to 1000 cycles. Replacing the lamp when it burns out will not be an issue since the LED will last longer than the battery, which then can be up-cycled. Built within the design-in addition to a manual switch-the Solar Puff contains a light sensor for automatic turning on-and-off.

How to inflate the Solar Panel. Print screen images taken from an instructional video.

The Solar Puff has many compelling advantages:

• Flexibility: Aside from its portability and versatility, the Solar Puff, can be used for hands-free tasks. It also has a handle and its cube-shaped form allows it to sit on a table or floor without movement.
• Cost: While the cost of the Solar Puff is $10 USD (with a one-year warranty), it far exceeds continuously purchasing kerosene or batteries.
• Health and Safety: Kerosene-based lamps can contribute to respiratory troubles, lung disease, as well as eye associated problems. They are also bad for the environment.
• Durability: Made with tough and yet flexible material, the Solar Puff is reliable and non-flammable, neither dangerous nor susceptible to blowing out.

The Solar Puff is the first low-cost, foldable and inflatable solar lamp in the world. I am grateful to the inventor and co- founder of FAARM Alice Min Soo Chun, whose mission and passion is to help the Haitian people and many others around the world. After two years of commitment, research and 20+/- prototypes, 500 Solar Puffs will be sent to Haiti in the next few weeks, and will shine a much needed light of hope for a brighter future for Haiti. I’ll be sure to keep you posted on FAARM’s progress.

Child studying at night using the Solar Puff.

To learn more about FAARM and the Solar Puff, please visit their website. All images in my post are courtesy of FAARM.

9 February 2012

It’s a cold, grey day here in Baku but at least it stopped snowing.  We had a bit of a wild ride on the flight into Baku last night as it was very windy, but overall, given the distances involved in getting here, and the long layover in Istanbul, the trip went well.  A number of cars were off the side of the road on the way into town from the airport, although I was riding in a 4WD SUV and had no problem.  We stopped and helped one driver in a Volvo who had spun out and ended up straddling a concrete median strip.  Contrary to what would happen in the States, about 10 cars stopped along the busy road to help, the good Samaritans literally lifting the car up and placing it back on the road.  I checked into the Excelsior Hotel, which is located across the main road from Zaha Hadid’s Performing Arts Center now under construction–a year late and significantly over budget.  It also looks like they are having a difficult time figuring out some of the construction details.  I was told that the entire glass curtain wall was rejected.   A new high-rise office tower and shopping mall is planned for the site adjacent to the hotel and we (FXFOWLE) have been told that we will design them.  Hopefully, that work will start soon but I would be happy to wait until warmer weather.

View of Baku from our client's office.

Our presentation of the interior design for the Qalaalti Spa went well.  The building design is inspired by the rugged mountain terrain of the site, and modern in its form and materials. On the interiors, we are attempting to balance the modern aesthetic with a more eclectic and somewhat residential feel.  It is not a design direction that is typical in Azerbaijan but we are making progress.  Our client is very appreciative and supportive of what we are trying to do.

 10 February 2012

I woke up at 5:00 AM to get ready to depart for the airport.  It is snowing lightly again but Turkish Airlines shows the flight to be on time.  After a short drive to the airport and checking in, I settled into the Business Class lounge to await boarding.  After a bit of a delay, and de-icing of the plane, we departed about an hour late from Baku on our way to Istanbul.  The flight was uneventful but nerve racking because of the delay.  After landing and having to wait for a gate to open, I ended up with 20 minutes to make the flight to New York.  I was the first one out of the jetway, and thankfully Turkish Airlines was waiting with an agent ready to escort me directly to the departure gate.  We cleared security without stopping longer than to show my passport and boarding pass, and then proceeding through the x-ray screening at the gate.  Gate-to-gate in 5 minutes…..a record!

The journey to Baku is long, especially being there for only one day of meetings but it is worth it.  Azerbaijan is an emerging country with many of the issues that come with growth and development.  There is concern about a “build it and they will come” approach as evidenced in the many high-rise buildings under construction, but as opposed to places like Dubai, there is a more palpable fabric and history to Baku that provides it with a strong foundation.  I look forward to returning.

While I was initially concerned about various aspects of this decision, two years later, I can say it has worked out well.  I am close enough to the school to attend special events and get there quickly if my daughter is sick or the school closes because of an earthquake (yes, they really did close the school when we had that little tremor a few months ago).  If she were in school near home, I would need to skip the events or take a day off to attend a half-hour music recital.  While there is no doubt it would be worth it to sacrifice a day to hear a group of 4 years olds sing a spectacularly off-key version of Raffi’s “All I Really Need”, it is much better to give up just an hour of time.

The Littlest Commuter on her way to school.

The commute on the train each way is not so bad.  The trip is about an hour door-to-door, and my daughter has plenty of entertainment to keep her occupied – two iPads, two iPhones and two loving parents.  Although the electronic devices provide coloring, puzzles and movies, she has an awesome imagination to create her own activities.  For instance, we’ve flown like dragons, take regular trips to the ‘doctor’, tickle, giggle and brush hair.  We try really hard to keep the noise down to a polite level but we never, ever sit in the quiet car.

My daughter is reasonably well behaved and mostly understands the constraints of a crowded train.  That said, she is only 4 ½ years old and she generally starts to lose it after an hour.  I should clarify that the published length of the train ride is about an hour.  The unfortunate reality is that NJ Transit trains are rarely on time.  A normal trip always includes at least a 10-minute delay, and it’s not unusual for our one-hour commute to take two hours, or three if the system collapses completely. 

So what do you do with a kid on a train for three hours?  The last time it happened was one of those mornings when Daddy didn’t make the trip so it was just me and my little girl.  It was an uneventful trip until we were just outside the Hudson Tunnel and then the train stopped…and then the lights went out…and there we sat for two hours.  Well, the train sat.  There was no way I was keeping a kid in her seat for that long.  She bounced on the seat and hung from the overhead rack.  Fortunately, the train wasn’t crowded so the aisles were clear and we proceeded to play a game of hide-and-seek that stretched through two train cars.  The other passengers were very tolerant of our antics and she received mostly smiles as she ran to hide while laughing madly.  I think her giggles took people’s minds off their frustration of being stuck on the train…I’m sure of it!

We finally pulled into the station and as we exited the track level we were met by a NJ Transit customer service representative.  This very nice woman stopped us to ask if there was anything I wanted to say about my experience that she could pass on to upper management to improve service.  I know I had a confused look on my face.  I had my daughter tugging on my hand because she wanted to GO.  I was thinking of the class time and the special gym class she had missed.  I was thinking of the shambles of my now shortened workday.  Most of all I was thinking – seriously, you need me to tell you that I want the trains to run on time!?!?!  I really don’t remember what I said as my daughter pulled me away.  When we finally made it to school, she told everyone who would listen about her train adventure. 

My daughter starts kindergarten in September.  Since we can’t afford private kindergarten in Manhattan (college tuition is less expensive), she will be attending the local public school.  That will be the end of the journeys of the Littlest Commuter.  I will miss the extra time we spent together on the train even when it was just having her snuggle next to me while watching a movie.  I will not miss the long trips with a stir-crazy kid (or watching Disney’s “Tangled” for the umpteenth time), but I will be glad to get back my decompression time on the train between the office and home. 

Of course this means moving on to the next set of coordination issues.  Even full day kindergarten doesn’t match the length of a workday.  Figuring out the logistics of this new schedule will be a spring and summer project.  I’ll let you know how it goes; I have plenty of time to plan during my commutes.

This is a new post in a series about balancing (or lack thereof) work and being a mother.  It’s not always easy, but it is always interesting.

I recently participated in a FXFOWLE pro bono project that challenged me as a designer unlike any other – to design and construct a shelter for a colony of feral cats in New York City. According to current estimates, tens of thousands of homeless, stray, and free-roaming cats live on the streets and in alleyways, back yards, and abandoned lots throughout the city. Many of the cats live in groups known as “colonies.” The winter months are particularly difficult for these cats, when inclement weather creates serious and life-threatening challenges, including finding food, water, and shelter. Shelter is vitally important and that is where the NYC architectural community comes in.

Architects for Animals “Giving Shelter” benefits the Mayor’s Alliance for New York City Animals. Architectural firms participating in this endeavor design, build, and donate creative and fun outdoor shelters to provide the city’s homeless cats with refuge from the cold/freezing temperatures in winter as part of the NYC Feral Cat Initiative. The only “rules” for the shelter was that it had to hold at least one colony a feral cats (anywhere from 3-5), be warm, and weather-proof.

Initial Design Concepts Pin-Up

During initial meetings with other FXFOWLE volunteers, we focused our cat structure concept as a dual-purpose public bench and shelter, but through various design meetings and researching feral cat behavior, we decided on pursuing a more sculptural/object approach. Primarily, our design evolved into a kitty “pod hotel” with an interstitial space and plywood frame serving as a “kitty jungle gym”, with a central “atrium” providing access to each pod.  The structure contains 3 fully-insulated pods varying in length, which serve as shelter for the cats during the colder, winter months. Two non-insulated pods can be inserted into the structure for the summer if additional housing is needed. Each pod contains a pair of hinged doors to allow entry from either end, as well as to provide two means of egress in case of a threat. The pods are easily removable from the plywood frame for maintenance and repair, and can be retrofitted or swapped out to accommodate growing colonies or different seasons.

1:5 Scale Chipboard Model

Using the concept of a vacuum flask (thermos) to house the cats, each insulated pod was fabricated by placing a tube within a larger tube and filling the void between the two with insulation. A 10” PVC tube wrapped with recycled plastic insulation was placed into a 12” PVC tube and the two ends were filled with expanding foam insulation and capped with a laser cut white acrylic ring onto which the cat doors were fixed. All joints and seams were filled with silicone sealant to make the pods water resistant. Each non-insulated pod was produced using a 10” PVC tube wrapped in ½” sisal rope and capped at each end with cat doors. The sisal rope provides a scratch surface for sharpening claws and a textured surface for cats to climb and lounge on. The frame, milled by students and faculty from Columbia University GSAPP Laboratory for Applied Building Science, was painted using a polyurethane based wood stain to seal the plywood and give it rich walnut color. Each of the vertical ribs and horizontal struts were fastened together using brad nails and flat-head screws.

Lucio checks the fit of the first pod

I am happy to have played a small role in bringing awareness to the issue of feral cats in the city. Our shelter is located somewhere in one of the city’s five boroughs, and it’s my hope our “clients” are using it as we imagined.

Thanks to Philip Anzalone, Brigette Borders, & Ray Ho from Columbia University GSAPP Laboratory for Applied Building Science for CNC milling the plywood. Also, thanks to Nobu Arai and Gerardo Sustaeta for assembly and fabrication of the pods and many thanks to Brien McDaniel for organizing the initiative.

ALL MATERIALS USED IN FXFOWLE’S SHELTER
2.5m long x 1.1m wide x .8m high
25 vertical ribs – 33 notches/rib
33 horizontal struts – 25 notches/strut
(10) ¾” sheets baltic birch plywood
(4) ½ pint Minwax American Chestnut Gloss Polyshade
(1) 10 foot 12” PVC tube
(1) 10 foot 10” PVC tube
(1)  Roll recycled plastic insulation
(2) Expanding Foam Insulation spray cans
(10) Glaztec Catwalk cat doors
400 feet ½” sisal rope

Additional Links:

http://architectsforanimals.com/

http://www.facebook.com/mayorsalliancenyc

http://www.animalalliancenyc.org/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54612307@N06

http://www.arch.columbia.edu/labs/fablab

Watching a building come to fruition is the ultimate thrill of being an architect.  This is what we live for and what sleep-deprived architecture students dream of. One of the perks of being an architect (aside from being the life of the party) is witnessing what you conceived becoming a reality. Each time I walk a construction site of a project I helped design, I’m reminded of the day I laid out the structural grid or that time I struggled with a curtain wall detail. Seeing something that I sketched and conceptualized right in front of me is really an amazing experience.

But with that thrill also comes the realization that as much as we perform our due diligence during the design development and construction document phases, unexpected problems do occur. And there is a commonality among the problems in that many begin outside the confines of our architectural offices. After years of working on construction sites, I’ve noticed some recurring themes that I find to be helpful reminders for when I’m back in the office:

1. Don’t design a Swiss Watch. Since Rolex won’t be bidding on my job, I’ll keep the Swiss watch making to those who know best. But there is no denying that over the past 25 years, the infrastructure needed to support a building’s functions has become increasingly complicated, not unlike the workings of a timepiece. Combine the IT revolution with the rise of LEED and spatial requirements for consulting engineers (including, but not limited to MEP, FP, FA, IT, AV, BMS, Geotechnical, Vertical Transport, Lighting, Acoustics, Security, etc. For brevity, blogger will use MEP) have literally gone through the roof……and ceiling and floor.  Compounding this complexity, some buildings have limited area for equipment or reduced floor to floor heights for any number of reasons. Others have mandated programmatic or performance requirements that need to be achieved to meet regulatory guidelines. So, to avoid the Swiss watch making:

Note to Self: Place special emphasis on avoiding MEP bottlenecks that might otherwise increase the likelihood of RFIs, bulletins, or field modifications that might lead to change orders or delay claims by the contractor.

2. Build the entire building before you get to the site. With the advent of BIM, it’s much easier than it used to be.  Now I’m not yet a BIM user, but a colleague familiar with BIM once told me that the model is only as good as the information being put into it.  For me, this means not assuming the 24” high duct on the mechanical drawings is really 24”.  In reality, that 24” high duct has 1-1/2” flanges, is wrapped in 2” of insulation and supported on 1-1/2” unistruts which adds up to 33” (I know it doesn’t add up, it never does).  Pipes, ducts and conduit always have accessories that need to be accounted for when modeling what will be built in the field. So, to ensure I don’t miss anything:

Note to Self: Bombard consultants with questions about what exactly they need to physically support and maintain the performance of their systems.  Also, contact structural engineer to inquire about anticipated slab and beam deflection at critical ceiling heights where MEP is highly congested.

3. Constantly meet with your consultants. Most problems I experience on the construction site are not related to the architectural drawings per se. More likely problems occur in those special voids that exist between us and our consultants. Orbiting those voids are differing world views of the same object. Our consultants are trained to design mechanical systems, determine head pressure, and calculate amps on panel boards.  I’ve learned the hard way not to assume they’re looking at the spatial and structural implications for these assemblies the same way I would.  And I shouldn’t assume they’re communicating among themselves.  So to avoid  any miscommunication:

Note to Self: Above and beyond the weekly coordination meetings, visit each consultant’s office every other week to ensure the lines of communication between them remain open and that everyone is on the same page.

4. Think like a contractor. Their agenda is different than ours. We want to get on the cover of a prestigious architectural magazine; they want to get in, build it, and get out. And that’s the way it should be.  But all too often the process is not so clear cut.  On my shelf in the construction trailer I keep a copy of The Contractor’s Guide to Change Orders by Anthony Civitello Jr. This is a great reference manual for any architect who wants to get into the head of a contractor. More importantly, it provides a window into why change orders occur. The book, when read from a contractor’s perspective, provides a detailed change order process analogous to a fishing expedition. But when read from the architect’s point of view, it provides a preemptive strategy for not swallowing the bait. So, when putting a set of drawings together:

Note to Self: Think about the project from the contractor’s perspective. Refer back to Anthony Civitello’s ‘Contractor’s Guide to Change Orders’ in order to mitigate potential construction site problems.

For me, the challenge of the construction site is navigating our design through the confluence of time and money. As architects, we are a highly focused bunch; designing buildings, meeting deadlines and staying on budget, not to mention keeping everyone happy. But an understanding of how others parties perceive a project often affects how we perform on the construction site and ultimately how the project turns out. This understanding alone cannot prevent the unexpected from occurring during construction, but it can make life easier out in the field.

Mark on Hunters Point South Intermediate & High School Construction Site

This is the first in a series of an architect’s observations and perspectives from a construction site.

The major points I came away with are:

(1)    Simplifying zoning is not realistic although the accretion of laws should be cleaned up.

(2)   Use regulations may no longer make sense, environmental laws can control incompatible uses.

(3)   Manufacturing has evolved and can be compatible with other uses; mixed use is to be encouraged.

(4)  Demographic change calls for new models of housing.

(5)   Public improvements create value which can be captured for public benefit through tax increment finance.

(6)  Technology can be a tool for making zoning more transparent.

The conference was well attended by architects, planners and land use attorneys, and the following are my observations and notes from the eventful day.

Robert K. Steel, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, presented the opening remarks in lieu of Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Steel spoke about the anticipated growth of NYC’s population by one million people by 2035 and the steps the Bloomberg administration has taken over the past 10 years to make the City economically competitive, socially equitable, physically attractive, and sustainable. There have been 114 rezoning actions which have covered 37% of the area of the City. Professor Jerold S. Kayden set the stage for later speakers by emphasizing that zoning is a tool for implementing a comprehensive plan. Zoning has typically controlled use, shape and bulk, but has evolved beyond these traditional planning concerns with incentives for open space, affordable housing, grocery stores, bikes, sustainability, etc.  New York City is fairly unique in that its administrative model is “as-of-right” zoning; most other jurisdictions have “discretionary” zoning. NYC zoning is prescriptive, other models are “form based” or “performance based”.

Speakers who reviewed the history of zoning in New York City included Hilary Ballon, Deputy Vice Chancellor NYU Abu Dhabi; Carol Willis founder of the Skyscraper Museum; and Professor Alex Garvin of Yale University. NYC established the nation’s first zoning resolution in 1916. Subsequent changes in social and economic forces led to a complete revamping by 1961. It was feared that the 1916 zoning would permit a population of 55 million! The 1961 zoning was sized to accommodate a population of 12 million. “Plan for Rezoning the City of NY” by Harrison Ballard & Allen came out in 1950; it introduced the concept of floor area ratio (FAR), open space ratio (OSR), and sky exposure plane, with building forms modeled on Corbusier’s “tower in the park”. A second attempt in 1958 “Zoning NYC” by Voorhees Walker Smith & Smith used the earlier study but increased bulk in commercial zones, protected one- and two-family houses, and extended the grace period to 1963. It was successfully passed in 1961 under the leadership of Mayor Robert Wagner and City Planning Commissioner James Feldt. 

The 1961 Zoning Resolution accepted the need for larger floor plate office buildings, automobiles, shopping malls, and introduced incentive zoning to create plazas in congested pedestrian areas. The highest commercial use areas were permitted 15 FAR, with a 20% bonus for providing a plaza.  Office towers could have 40% coverage instead of the 25% formerly permitted. The 1961 Zoning Resolution has continued to evolve in response to changing conditions.  Incentives for pedestrian open space have created a new cityscape, including interior spaces. Transfer of development rights has allowed the preservation of historic landmarks but historic districts are de facto zoning. Special districts have protected areas like the theater district. Contextual zoning regulations were created as an alternative to “height factor” regulations of FAR and OSR in response to neighborhood concerns with out of scale development. Requirements for Inclusionary Housing, bike parking, environmental concerns have all been added to the Resolution. Over time the Zoning Resolution has increased in complexity, as it tries to keep up with changing markets and social conditions. Professor Garvin said Paris has the ideal model of a public street, that NYC zoning should be about creating great streets, parks and civic buildings. The balance between open space and density continues to be an issue for the future. Use regulations may no longer make sense with the loss of heavy industry and other social changes. There are industrial business zones such as the Brooklyn Navy Yard (green technology, movie and TV studios); the Brooklyn Army Terminal (biotechnology). The loss of heavy industry has allowed the creation of waterfront parks and new sites for housing. Subsequent speakers focused on the challenges facing NYC in the 21st century. 

“THE COMPETITIVE CITY” was addressed by Daniel L. Doctoroff, President and CEO of Bloomberg LP and former deputy mayor, and later by Vishaan Chakrabarti and Kairos Shen. Mr. Doctoroff noted that there is an intense global competition for business, residents, and visitors and that the Bloomberg administration has addressed many issues to retain NYC’s competitive edge. NYC will remain the financial capital for decades, it may be losing market share but it is still the leader. Since 1970 there has been a great de-industrialization of NYC, with manufacturing down 89%; as a result huge areas had inappropriate zoning designations, which created new opportunities. There have been major rezoning such as Hudson Yards; contextual rezoning to preserve communities; new infrastructure such as the extension of the #7 subway line and new ferry routes; attractions like Brooklyn Bridge Park and the High Line; economic development initiatives that have grown the film and TV industries, and kept tourism robust with 90,000 hotel rooms; transit-centric rezoning to encourage density within a half-mile of transit; and forward looking sustainability initiatives like PlaNYC. Mayor Bloomberg is looking to the future by strengthening NYC as an intellectual center; the City is now evaluating proposals by Stanford NYC, Cornell NYC Tech Campus and others to establish a new $2 billion engineering technology campus in New York City. 

Vishaan Chakrabarti, Director of the Center for Urban Real Estate and professor at Columbia University, spoke about “sprawl versus tall”; that Midtown should be rezoned to create a modern CBD at 30+FAR. Affordability and greater mixed use could be achieved by increasing density along transit corridors. Parks could provide wind energy and waste-to-energy. He introduced the concept of cap & trade air rights, not just limited to landmarks, to make use of the four billion square feet of existing but unused air rights. For resilience in dealing with climate change, his students looked at the New York harbor as an opportunity to use landfill to create barrier islands, and ultimately to extend Lower Manhattan to Governors Island with a land bridge. 

Kairos Shen, Chief Planner, City of Boston, spoke about zoning as a competitive tool and provided examples of recent experience in Boston where a former industrial waterfront area has been rezoned as an Innovation District.  Boston sees its universities as an incredible asset, but to retain these young smart people, incubate business and create housing new zoning has been established allowing Boston Planning to curate a mix of uses with inclusionary housing at 15%; micro units at 15% (co-housing, shared spaces); and business incubator space at 25%. They have also created Quick Zones, which is tailor made zoning in response to market and global competition. 

“THE EQUITABLE CITY” was addressed by Rosanne Haggerty, President, Community Solutions; and later by Professor Toni Griffin of City College, and John Rahaim, Director of Planning, San Francisco. Ms. Haggerty noted that New York is a city of contrasts, and the gap between rich and poor is widening; 1.6 million people live in poverty with tremendous need in areas of employment, housing, health, and education.  Instead of investment in social progress, public financing currently goes to incarceration. This is money better spent on public infrastructure (safety, work, parks, schools, housing).  She suggested that innovative design should be located in the neediest areas; that a range of housing options, as recently proposed by Citizens Housing and Planning Council, provide options for the future. She noted that as shown by grass roots movements like Occupy Wall Street or the Tea Party, policy is not always driven by elites.

“THE SUSTAINABLE CITY” was addressed by Rohit Aggarwala, of C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group; and later by Harriet Tregoning and Jonathan Rose. Mr. Aggarwala noted that while outdoor air quality was improving, indoor air pollution and noise continue to be issues. He spoke about how NYC is fuel efficient due to density and mass transit, but our supply chain, amount of air travel and degree of waste are issues in terms of energy use. Mr. Aggarwala cautioned that climate change will have an impact on the City; we should look to the future and act on those things we can control, such as buildings and infrastructure.

Harriet Tregoning, Director of Planning, District of Columbia, spoke about the limitations of zoning in implementing sustainable practice, that it requires intergovernmental cooperation with zoning, building codes, and tax codes acting in concert. She described initiatives in Washington DC such as transit oriented development (no parking required, mixed use, active ground floor); accessory dwelling units for one-family houses; walkable neighborhoods (corner stores in residential districts); no minimum parking requirements and capability of first floor conversion. Sustainability initiatives also include removing rooftop restrictions to permit solar panels or wind turbines; a Green Area Ratio; protection of flood plains; requirement for 35% tree canopy; encouraging farmers markets and grocery stores; and density incentives to permit live-near-work. Jonathan Rose, President, Jonathan Rose Companies, noted that climate change requires a 100 year investment; that sustainability is about resilience.  We should reinforce natural solutions and learn from other communities about flood resistance. The Second Avenue subway corridor should be upzoned; mixed use should be encouraged. Solutions to housing such as the old boarding house with smaller individual space/bigger social space more closely match the new demographic conditions. Notions of being more flexible, such as weekend pop up shops and zip cars point to other incremental solutions.

“THE PHYSICAL CITY” was addressed by Paul Goldberger, New Yorker architecture critic, New School Chair in Design & Architecture, and later by Professor Matthew Carmona and Peter Park. Mr. Goldberger noted that the City needs to grow while maintaining its character; the preciousness of preservation must be balanced by the vitality of the new.  History is important but it must allow for change. NYC has an excellent 19^th century framework: the grid, the transit system, and its neighborhoods. Investment in the public realm including the High Line, new parks, waterfront access, streets and infrastructure are critical. There is enormous need for housing, new models to reflect changes in demographics and work arrangements need to be explored. He cautioned that there is a risk in over planning, that there are limits to zoning, that urban design is not de facto architecture, that there must be room for serendipity and happy accidents. Factors of history, geography, and landscape impact the city, not just the political act/intervention; regulations come out of a particular culture. Great cities require the calibration of old and new, of maintaining the elusive factor of time, layering, and authenticity while permitting new development. Urban places are messy, a result of multiple players over time.

Professor Matthew Carmona of the Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, noted that in London all projects are negotiated in great detail, it is zoning by other means as interpreted through a discretionary and political process. There are some Conservation Areas, these are seen as adding value, and are areas of opportunity and intensification. Other controls include Public Transport Accessibility Levels which establish habitable rooms per hectare; Protected View Corridor and Backdrop (river prospects, linear views, townscape views, panoramas). There are planning agreements, which are a negotiated tax for development; and a community infrastructure levy is coming. Peter Park, a Loeb Fellow at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, has provided new form based zoning codes for Milwaukee and Denver. He suggested that this type of zoning code promotes design excellence, and due to its predictability hastens desirable investment.

Jerold Kayden moderated the final panel discussion: “WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?” Mary Ann Tighe, CEO NY Tri-State Region, CB Richard Ellis, and Chair REBNY, said that New York has become a romantic 20th century city of overbuilt old buildings with no renewal of office stock near transit; Midtown should be upzoned. The average age of office buildings is 71 years in NYC, and 58 years in London (Robert Stern pointed out that WWII might be responsible for that!). All the Manufacturing districts should be rezoned; the definition of uses needs to be broadened to reflect live/work; and back of house functions like loading and curb cuts need to be addressed.

Thom Mayne, founder of Morphosis, stated he is not interested in zoning, he wants to approach design problems without the constraints it imposes. Zoning rules should be evaluated by their ability to create great urbanism and architecture. He compared the loss of confidence in US culture with the vitality of Chinese cities; he urged that NYC be seen as a three dimensional environment. Robert A. M. Stern, Dean of Yale School of Architecture, countered that the NYC skyline should be protected, that while the skyline will evolve, “a city is more than a bunch of phalluses on the skyline”. Mr. Stern was concerned that we have private splendor and public squalor. He also thought that the public sector should be subject to the same codes that regulate the private sector.

Two years ago, CHPC Executive Director, Jerilyn Perine, and Senior Policy Analyst, Sarah Watson, launched a program, “One Size Fits Some,” which examined housing standards in New York City, in comparison to other regions of the country as well as the world. The objective was to learn from other cultures as a means of redefining allowable housing units in New York City, in response to changing lifestyle and demographic patterns. Subsequent investigations identified key parts of New York City housing laws and codes that are currently acting as regulatory barriers to the development of new housing types, critically needed for the safety and continued prosperity of New York City.

This past week, CHPC in collaboration with The Architectural League presented a sequel to the previous analysis, “Making Room,” a daylong program that was presented on Monday, November 7, 2011, at the Japan Society. Making Room included presentations from four New York City teams of architects led by Peter Gluck, Stan Allen and Rafi Segal, Deborah Gans, and Jonathan Kirschenfeld, which suggested ways of redefining how we live in New York.

The program opened with an introduction from Linda Gibbs, New York City Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services. As she explained, “the major issue is that the traditional household is changing; New York has more people living alone than ever before.” Additionally, as the baby boomer population is aging, we are about to enter a period where there will be more people over 65 than below 18 years of age, for the first time in New York City’s history.

It was explained that most housing units in New York are designed to serve the typical nuclear family; however we are increasingly living in more diverse, non-traditional household configurations. As a consequence, young professionals, low wage workers, and members of the “creative class,” have highly limited housing options that are safe, legal, affordable, and suit their needs. Additionally, the typical unit does not support the lifestyle of a single parent, a transient worker, or our ever-increasing aging population.

As part of the program, I participated as a respondent to Jonathan Kirschenfeld’s presentation, “The Pleasures of Density: Flexible Single and Shared Housing Typologies.” Kirschenfeld began the presentation by showing how affordable housing options for single persons have disappeared over the last 50 years. He explained that supportive housing regulations in Use Group 2 permit small unit sizes and reduced areas for rearyard courtyards in community facilities. However, for the typical residential tenant, housing standards are defined by Use Group 3 that requires a much larger unit and an extensive rear-yard setback and/or courtyard. Additionally, shared facilities are not easily accommodated.

Plan and perspective cut at the duplex apartment level of ‘The Mix’ building, showing a planted roof terrace and coffee bar, overlooking a ‘greened’ Grand Concourse. Such shared amenities for building residents link the individual dwelling units to the dense city beyond.

As a consequence, Kirschenfeld suggested that if we were allowed to design residential buildings for single tenants under Use Group 2, we could create greater densities, create more affordable units, and offer more housing options. He showed a scheme for a new residential building, “The Mix,” on the Grand Concourse in the Bronx. The building included very small single room units with shared common space. It also included live-work duplexes and loft units for a multiple of lifestyles. What was unique about Kirschenfeld’s approach was that it also suggested an attitude about blurring the distinction between inside and outside by greening the Grand Concourse and creating more opportunities to let activity to spill out on the street.

I reminded the participants of the quote from Eliel Saarinen, “Always design a thing by considering it in its next larger context–a chair in a room, a room in a house, a house in an environment, and an environment in a city plan.” By embracing the city as a whole as a part of the program, we are creating a city that supports our future needs.

What I appreciated most about the “Making Room” discussion is that architects are having a voice in public policy in the City. Five years ago, when I was President of the AIA New York Chapter, my theme was “Architecture and Public Policy,” and I spoke about the need for architects to have a voice, as policy decisions are defined by our governing bodies. What has been great about working with CHPC and the Architectural League in concert with City officials on this program is that there is an appreciation that architects are part of the dialogue as we define the city to respond to our future needs. Now we need to stop talking and make some of these ideas really happen.

Being a Canadian, albeit that I am from Montreal and we have somewhat of a rivalry with Toronto, I was excited that the event was taking place in my native land. Growing up in Canada is part of the reason I feel a strong connection to the natural world. The country has 10 percent of the world’s forests, 25 percent of the world’s wetlands, and 7 percent of the world’s renewable water supply. Even the staunchest urban dwellers have experienced a night of camping under the stars, swimming in a freshwater lake, or being munched on by black flies during a trek through the woods. In fact, Canadians take nature and its resources so much for granted that we shamefully use more oil per capita than the US and almost as much water.

I was naturally curious as to what would distinguish this year’s event from previous Greenbuild conferences I had attended in Chicago, Boston or Phoenix. Now that the event was in its tenth year, what new and innovative topics would be discussed, and would any be Canuck-specific? How were environmental issues in Canada translated with respect to the global green building industry? Would there be lessons learned from the world’s top producer of hydropower? And how were some of the more controversial topics, such as certified wood, which has tremendous impacts on the Canadian lumber industry, being addressed?

In many respects, this was the best Greenbuild I have attended. FXFOWLE had a tremendous opportunity to share our work by presenting at two educational sessions, giving an interview to GreenSource magazine, and participating in a benchmarking roundtable between New York and Canadian governments. Unfortunately, this did not leave much room to attend many educational sessions, but those I did attend were well worthwhile. Other colleagues I spoke with also felt that the content at this year’s event was of a high caliber.

Yet at one point during the conference, I caught myself feeling as though I was not in Canada. True, there was a smattering of introductory words in French. Tom Friedman gave his eloquent keynote address under the old Stanley Cup banners at Maple Leaf Gardens, and to the credit of the conference organizers, there was a dedicated educational track entitled “The Best of Canada.”

However, these tokens of recognition did not get to the critical issues. Perhaps I missed them, but where were the discussions and debates about the Alberta tar sands – which are toxic, extremely greenhouse gas, energy, and water intensive? Or that the US imports more crude oil and petroleum from Canada than any other country in the world, much of which comes from this controversial source? What about the Boreal forests – which take up more than half of the country’s landmass and contain almost 40% of the planet’s carbon? In a country who is the third largest exporter of forestry products, why were there no sessions addressing issues of wood sourcing?

At future Greenbuild conferences, I hope that this opportunity to deeply educate and inform from a regional perspective is not missed. We must recognize that we build in a global society where a single construction product or commodity can have very complex international DNA. As sustainable designers and builders, we cannot afford to avoid controversial environmental questions, nor draw borders around them.

She’s four years old and everything she does is captivating. Recently, I watched her work on a jigsaw puzzle and seeing how she evaluated each piece for proper placement fascinated me.  How could email possibly compete?  It shouldn’t, but somehow it slips in and takes over and I find myself staring at a tiny screen instead of a little person.

As an architect I have deadlines and construction emergencies, and other people waiting for my work so they can complete their assignments. Thanks to the fabulous advances in technology (tiny bit of sarcasm here), I can access my work computer from home and get things done without going into the office.  None of this is unexpected or even much different from the way architects have worked for many years. We are deadline driven and even the best of us tend to procrastinate…I mean, continue to design…up until the last moment. The constant access to email is another thing entirely.

My cell phone is mostly for emergencies or on-the-fly coordination. Really, I don’t spend much time on the phone. However, my phone happens to live in the same device as my portable email.  There are downsides but in general, I think email is a good thing, especially for work.  That is, until it started following me around.

I don’t constantly check my email but there are other things on my PDA that cause me to look at it on a regular basis. I don’t wear a watch so it serves as my timepiece. I have books on my device so if I’m stuck waiting for something or someone, I might read a few pages. It’s inevitable that once I open my PDA for whatever reason, there is the likelihood that the email icon will be there. My problem is that once I see the icon, I have to check my email. If I don’t, I am distracted and wondering what it might be. I know it’s not a good thing – cats and curiosity and all, but I can’t help myself.

And that brings me back to my daughter’s demand that I put down the phone. I have never received an email that is an actual emergency. No one sends a letter in an emergency, even one that arrives instantly. I just need to work on convincing myself that if there is an email waiting for me, I don’t have to read it immediately and there are more important things to do than respond to emails on a Saturday afternoon.

It’s a hard habit to break. Fortunately, I have that little voice to help me. Besides, I need to set a good phone etiquette example so when I tell my teenage daughter to put down her phone.

This is the second post in a series about balancing (or lack thereof) work and being a mother.  It’s not always easy, but it is always interesting.

I married into the district of Bayside – a waterfront area in northeastern Queens. I am happy to say that I enjoy living there immensely, and find that I am never lonely with an in-law around every corner. One of my favorite parts of Bayside is Little Bay Park and Joe Michael’s Mile. It is an uninterrupted three-mile stretch of parks down under the Throgs Neck Bridge that borders Little Neck Bay on one side, and the Cross Island Parkway on the other. In the spring, summer, and fall I am one of the many people who run, walk, skate and bike (and sometimes fish) the Greenway. The far end is a wildlife preserve where I frequently see new mother ducks walking their ducklings. There is a marina mid-way down, where you can board your boat, launch your jet-ski, crab fish, or have some fries in the snack bar. But just in case you forgot you were in still in urban Queens, turn around and find a busy highway whizzing by at 60MPH.

The Greenway is also the home to what I think is one of the most curious places in all of Queens: Fort Totten.

A giant stone gate with wrought iron fences gives way to an intimidating security booth, complete with intimidating vehicles passing though – NYPD cruisers, FDNY Scuba Unit vans, and Hum Vs. Passage into the fort is typically not for the light of heart. Most people don’t know that the security is for vehicular traffic only; pedestrians and cyclist may enter without interrogation.

What lies beyond the security gate is an unexpected journey through time. Designed by General Robert E Lee, Fort Totten was built as a civil war fort used to protect Manhattan from battleships coming off the Long Island Sound. There is a lot of interesting history inside the fort – ruins of the battery, monuments, landmarked buildings – it is almost like stepping into Bayside’s own little version of Williamsburg…or Gettysbury.

The fort is still home to US Army Reserve, but has been home to a rotating list of civic organizations. Currently you will find the US Coast Guard, NYPD, and FDNY among its residents. Recently several acres have been gifted to the NYC Parks Department, who operate the Bayside Historic Society, ball fields, parade grounds, and even a public pool.

Like most places of historic importance, Fort Totten has a very unique vibe. A presence. I have heard rumored Bayside ghost stories from time to time, from friends, from neighbors, and sometimes from bloggers. All reports lead to the Little Neck Bay. Taking a closer look at the history of Fort Totten, physically and historically, Fort Totten was best known for “casualty support and hospital care (1864-1965)” [1]. In the dead center of its land sits the largest architectural structure – an ominous three-story brick monster sprinkled with tiny windows. Almost entirely covered in ivy, one immediately wonders if there are any doors, as the perimeter has been protected by a chain-link fence that appears as old as the 6-foot weeds it encases. There is hardly any doubt that this sanitarium holds memories of the horrors of historic war and mid 19th-century medical trials. The bricks seem to scream it. The ivy appears to choke it. What has become of the interior hallways and patient wards? Do they warrant an unattained minimum condition of preservation and respect for the heroes who once inhabited their walls? I can’t help but wonder when the last time a living person walked its corridors. Does it have a keeper? Do our civil servants living in Fort Totten roam the hallways at night for fun? Do the rumored ghosts who allegedly frequent the Bay all live inside and roam my Greenway by night?

…but now I head home on my getaway bike…

1  http://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/forttotten

Additional Information on the history of Fort Totten:
http://www.preserve2.org/qpl/s96pt1.htm#historical
http://www.nycgovparks.org/parks/forttotten/dailyplant/20601