Louvre, Paris
Tag: architecture
-
🖼 Fondation Marguerite et Aimé Maeght
Saint-Paul-de-Vence
-
✈️ Off to France and trying something new
Neat B and I are off to France for the next two weeks. We optimistically booked this trip at the beginning of the year and assumed that the world would be fairly normal and well-vaccinated by now. While there remains uncertainty, things are at least better than they were last winter when we were all caved at home.
Regular readers of this blog will know that I aim to post 365 days a year, regardless of what may be going on in my life. And that will remain the case for the next two weeks. But I have decided to challenge myself and try something new.
I’m going to exercise my photography passion a little and instead post a single photo each day. On some days it may have a caption or a short description, but on other days there may be no accompanying text at all. The plan is to shoot entirely on my Fujifilm X-T3. Or at least that’s the thinking right now.
I’m sure that there will end up being some great content for those of you who are interested in the built environment (architecture, design, planning, real estate). But if travel and beautiful photos aren’t your thing, feel free to check back in two weeks for our regularly scheduled programming.
-
DDG Partners + GS Invest = Azur
Last week I wrote about a project in New York by DDG Partners called 100 Franklin. If you missed it, go here.
I didn’t, however, say much about the developer. Though at the time I was wondering why their website was no longer up.
DDG Partners is a firm that I have written about several times over the years. They are a firm that I have always admired because of 1) their commitment to design and 2) their vertically-integrated approach to development. They do things like design, construction, and asset management all in-house.
So I was interested to learn that back in May they announced a merger with French real estate firm, GS Invest. Prior to the union, GS had a portfolio of more than 3 million square feet across Europe. The new investment and development company is called Azur.
Also interesting is the fact that Azur has started making proptech investments. Their first investment is in a company called Whiterock AI.
For more about Azur, click here.
-
Risk and architecture
Building things, as we all know, is a risky endeavor. I think of myself as an optimist, but the reality is that there are countless things that can go wrong. There’s approvals risk, political risk, market risk, construction risk, design risk, and many other kinds of risk, some/many of which will be entirely unforeseen. If you asked me two years ago, I wouldn’t have listed pandemic risk as being all that high up on the list.
So one way to think about the process of building/developing is that it is an exercise in risk mitigation. This makes it sound a lot less sexy than “city building.” Given this, there can be a natural and understandable tendency to want to repeat what worked the last time around. Why make a change and introduce more risk into the system if you don’t have to, right? This is arguably one of the reasons why it is often said that the real state industry isn’t all that innovative. Too busy managing risk.
To give a specific example, let’s say you’re really focused on managing design risk. In this case, you might make the decision to always work with the same architect. This way you can establish a set of typical approaches and a standard spec. You know how to work together and you know what you’re getting when it comes to working drawings. Rinse and repeat as best you can.
There is also something to be said about a kind of product-driven or branded approach to development. In this case you want some consistency to help build a specific brand and experience. And just because you’re using the same firm, doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t innovate and be design forward. This is what great architects do. Think Foster + Partners and Apple. Their stores are powerful brand symbols but also wonderful and highly site specific.
An alternative approach might be to continually use different (design) architects. And maybe partnering with an array of celebrated firms is part of your brand story. You introduce a certain degree of design risk because you’re now trying out and building new relationships, but you could perhaps argue that you’re mitigating other risks. Does using a brand name architect help to reduce market risk, for example? In some markets, it’s almost essential.
I don’t think there’s a right or wrong approach here. Use the same firm, or don’t. Use international starchitects, or don’t. The point is simply that development is fraught with risks that need to be managed. Design is one of many. How you choose to do that depends on what you’re trying to do and what you’re after.
-
The general theory of urbanization
I have come to the realization that I don’t get nearly enough emails throughout the day (sarcasm), and so I’ve just subscribed to Overview’s daily post.
Overview is a company that uses satellite and aerial imagery to show how humans and natural forces are shaping the earth. In addition to a daily post, their work includes stories, books, prints, and various other projects and collaborations. It’s pretty cool stuff.
One example of a partnership is this one here with ArchDaily, where they look at urban block patterns around the world. Everywhere from Barcelona to Belo Horizonte. I think many of you will enjoy flipping through these aerials.
And if you’re interested in this topic (you know, urban morphology), you may also enjoy this book by Ildefons Cerdà called, The General Theory of Urbanization 1867. Cerdà, and his work, were instrumental in shaping Barcelona at a time when the word “urbanization” didn’t even really exist.
Photo by Kaspars Upmanis on Unsplash
-
Brazilian architect Paulo Mendes da Rocha dies at 92
“The city has to be for everybody, not just for the very few.” –Paulo Mendes da Rocha
Brazilian architect, Paulo Mendes da Rocha, died this past weekend. He was 92. Though he hadn’t really completed many buildings outside of his home country, his work and his contributions to São Paulo are widely celebrated. Some of his accolades include the Mies van der Rohe Prize for Latin American Architecture (2000), the Pritzker Prize (2006), the Venice Biennale Golden Lion for Lifetime Achievement (2016), and the Royal Institute of British Architect’s Royal Gold Medal for Architecture (2017). I’ve always had a soft spot for Brazilian modernism. They were early adopters of European modernism and ultimately made it their own. I don’t think Mendes da Rocha would necessarily appreciate this classification, but as I’ve mentioned here before, modernism, and more particularly brutalism, took on very different qualities in Latin America. Exposed concrete just seems to hit differently in a tropical setting. Here and here are some examples of his more famous projects.
Photo by Leonardo Finotti via Dezeen
-
One big tower split into two
The OMA-designed Greenpoint Landing Towers in northern Brooklyn recently topped out. Photos and announcement over here. If you aren’t familiar with the project, it’s very OMA. What I mean by that is that there’s a kind of simple rationality to it. (I just made up this architecture speak.) Big bold moves with a certain logic behind it. Here’s the story and thinking behind Greenpoint Landing:
Supposedly this project is in a part of Brooklyn that stipulates a maximum tower floor plate size of 11,000 square feet. Following this rule, you get a two-tower design that looks something like image number one in the top left hand corner of the above diagram. The resulting tower separation would be 40 feet, or just over 12 meters. (Are you seeing these numbers, Toronto?)
What OMA did was taper one tower (diagram image #2) and then create an inverted ziggurat form for the second tower (diagram image #3). The effect is two towers that look like they were almost one giant tower that had been simply pulled apart. The resulting tower separation distance in this final scenario is 60 feet, or just over 18 meters.
I am assuming that there’s some area loss in this design because of the increased tower separation, though maybe the larger podium makes it up. Either way, from what I can tell, there are two main benefits to this design: (1) you get a tower with stepbacks facing the water (so places for outdoor spaces) and (2) it breaks up the visual monotony of two equally extruded towers.
If any of you are more familiar with this project, I would welcome your thoughts in the comment section below.
Image: OMA
-
From back of house to front of house
Daniel Foch, Daniel Clark, and Adam Darvay recently stopped by Mackay Laneway House to film a last-minute video tour before the new tenants move in. They had quite the rig setup (see above). There was also a drone flying around that is not pictured here. The full house tour should be available in about two weeks and I’ll be sure to share here on the blog.
One of the things we talked about during the tour was the future of laneway housing in Toronto. Will we see strong adoption going forward and, if yes, what does that mean for Toronto’s laneways? I think we will continue to see a steady increase in the number of laneway suites that get built in Toronto each year. And so eventually this form of living will become a ubiquitous part of the urban landscape. It’s happening fast.
Now consider what this could mean for Toronto’s laneways. As garages and parking spaces get slowly replaced by new housing, it will mean that our laneways could at some point flip from being vehicle first to pedestrian first. Mackay Laneway House does not have any vehicular parking. The front door is off the laneway. You enter on foot. That’s how you experience the lane. And Gabriel and I thought it should be celebrated.
If or when this tipping point occurs, it will trigger a perception change. Slowly but surely we will start to think of our lanes not as back of house, but as front of house. And when that happens, it’ll almost certainly force us to rethink how we design them. Forget utilitarian. Our laneways have the potential to become some of the most pedestrian-friendly streets in the city, especially with a few streetscape and landscape improvements.
Pushing this idea even further, could you imagine a world where our laneways not only become more front of house, but where the laneway side becomes the more desirable side of the property? If we gave people the option, how many would prefer to build their main house on what is today considered to be the backside? (Remember how things once flipped in Paris?)
But for the fact that we have an entrenched built form that could make this “inversion” challenging, I think there are people who would prefer to have their front door on the quieter and more pedestrian-friendly side of their property. Either way, I continue to believe that we are in the early stages of an ADU/laneway housing revolution. And things are just getting started.
-
Who should win the 2021 Pritzker Prize?
The winner of the 2021 Pritzker Prize — which is often considered to be the highest honor in the world of architecture — is expected to be announced sometime in “early March.” In anticipation of that, ArchDaily is asking its readers to opine on who they think should win the prize. This is something they usually do each year. I just casted my vote (for someone who happens to be pictured above). If you’d like to do the same, click here. And if you’d like to see who the jury members are for this year, go here.
Image: ArchDaily
