Local focus connected to a larger grid appears to me to be an excellent approach. The issues that can be help are numerous and so often shared by many. The idea of sharing the solution could in return assist the person sharing almost immediately and later as well. For example, If the individual were to save plenty of water and share it to help stop a fire close by, that could help stop its spreading and then returning to burn the house where the water was saved and shared. The ability to be helpful seems to be very great.
Roy F. Knight, FAIA, NCARB
Original Message:
Sent: 01-15-2025 01:46 PM
From: Hale Takazawa
Subject: Towards a New American Downtown
Thanks so much for this discussion!
Yes, you bring up a great point, and it's something we see playing out in other infrastructures, like computing. For example, a decentralized computing model, like blockchain or distributed cloud storage, allows individual nodes to share resources and maintain operations independently, while still contributing to the larger system. Similarly, a self-sufficient building-a true living building-could share water treatment, power, communication, parking, and other essentials with its peers, forming a dynamic, decentralized network. It's essentially a peer-to-peer system, much like a microgrid, compared to a centralized infrastructure that relies on a single hub for distribution.
The real power of self-sufficiency lies in resilience. Insurance companies-and let's not forget, FEMA is in the insurance business-prefer when people don't need to evacuate or can stay operational after a hazard event. Microgrids or similar solutions that make our cities antifragile are something I fully support.
Getting to microgrids or other networked solutions really comes down to the approach. One way is to advocate for self-sufficiency first and then share or trade the excess-a capitalist perspective. Another is a centralized or mandated approach-a more socialist or communal philosophy. Either way, this is something we'll probably need to approach from both fronts for it to work in cities.
Take water, for example. If a building captures and stores its own water, the uses go far beyond the basics - it might be used and stored for fire sprinklers, thermal mass, stormwater management, irrigation for food deserts, and micro-hydro power. And when there's excess, it could be shared through a network. There's so much potential in systems like this. Imagine shared bioremediation pond systems in an urban downtown setting filled with native ecosystems. Now that's an open space that might make William Whyte proud.
------------------------------
Hale Takazawa AIA
HALE DfRR LLC
Honolulu HI
Original Message:
Sent: 01-15-2025 11:05 AM
From: Nikolaus H. Philipsen FAIA
Subject: Towards a New American Downtown
Thank you for your detailed response which nicely complements that items I gave a bit short thrift in my article.
You are absolutely right, the new American City has to position itself vis a vis climate change and the challenges that come from energy, water, wind and fire.You addressed them all.
The only place where I would have some doubt is the micro-grid or each building on its own energy suggestion. I think in a city we need networked energy solutions, redundancy and sustainable sources that work under all weather conditions such as geothermal district heating/cooling.
------------------------------
[Klaus] Philipsen FAIA
Archplan Inc. Philipsen Architects
Baltimore MD
Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2025 06:49 PM
From: Hale Takazawa AIA
Subject: Towards a New American Downtown
Thank you for posting your thoughts on this! I'm in complete agreement as we are seeing a grasping at straws for a vision of the Honolulu "downtown." It seems like a reinvestment is underway as new ownership takes hold of failing business models, but the problem is that there is no unifying vision of the overall result. I guess we've been looking for this vision for a long time... at least 60 years since we recognized the mistakes of our city centers.
The Case for "De-Building"
In a way, the solution is in "de-building," where we may have overdone ourselves in the pursuit of "highest and best use." This approach calls for rethinking what we value in our urban spaces. It may be that a value change is needed first: one that switches from people-first to land-first principles.
This shift in perspective means understanding that our very infrastructure (wastewater, stormwater, power, potable water) is under siege by climate change and being crushed by inequities in its design and implementation. For example, cities like Rotterdam have begun implementing water plazas and adaptive systems to manage stormwater and sea-level rise. These examples show how a land-first approach can lead to innovative solutions.
Rethinking Infrastructure
To truly address these challenges, we must rethink infrastructure from the ground up. Instead of buildings tied to centralized systems, imagine each structure equipped with its own decentralized utilities. Buildings could generate their own power through renewable sources, capture and clean rainwater for reuse, and process their wastewater on-site.
Projects like the Bullitt Center in Seattle and the Kendeda Building for Innovative Sustainable Design at Georgia Tech demonstrate how decentralized systems can create self-sufficient, resilient buildings. These projects prove that we can achieve socially just, culturally rich, and ecologically regenerative communities by embracing decentralized infrastructure.
Integrating Green and Blue Spaces
Cities also need to prioritize the integration of green (vegetation) and blue (water) spaces. This could mean embracing the concept of "de-building," where we reduce the amount of architecture per acre to create more parks, wetlands, and natural systems that support biodiversity. Alternatively, high-density urban areas can adopt strategies like green roofs, vertical gardens, and water features directly integrated into their architecture to balance built and natural environments.
Examples like Singapore's Gardens by the Bay and Bosco Verticale in Milan show how integrating nature into urban design can create environments that support both ecological health and human well-being. These spaces not only provide aesthetic value but also help mitigate urban heat islands, improve air quality, and manage stormwater naturally.
Returning to Organic Principles
Ultimately, cities thrive when they reflect the natural systems they exist within. Better living comes from fostering balance-more organics, less inorganics. As living, breathing creatures, we belong with other living, breathing creatures. This means creating urban environments where plants, animals, microbes, and humans coexist in sustainable proportions.
Each planner and architect has the responsibility to understand their native influences and integrate them into their work. By drawing on indigenous land stewardship principles, like a city's watershed and ecology systems, planners can align their work with natural cycles and local values. True Modernism, in this sense, is about returning to our organic origins-embracing nature instead of constantly striving to conquer it.
------------------------------
Hale Takazawa AIA
HALE DfRR LLC
Honolulu HI
Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2025 01:58 PM
From: Nikolaus H. Philipsen FAIA
Subject: Towards a New American Downtown
Amazon's is requirement to work from the office will not solve the problems of the American downtown that blew up with Covid, the need for cities as places of interaction and innovation notwithstanding.
"Amazon is reinforcing the importance of its headquarters' location in Seattle and signaling that its mission to embrace and foster innovation is not a spatially distributed endeavor but a socially dependent activity tied to a place" (Uwe Brandes, Director Urban and Regional Planning Georgetown University). The issue isn't "the city" but the American Downtown
Brandes is right, innovation is a socially dependent activity but misses the issue at hand. The future of cities is not in question but the future of the American downtown is. As it is explained in Downtown: A Short History of American Urban Exceptionalism, the American downtown is not the same as centre-ville, Innenstadt or centro historico in France, Germany or Italy respectively. It didn't start of ancient ruins, had no protective walls and no particularly high density. It eventually morphed into what became a term for cities core areas worldwide, namely a bunch of office towers forming a "financial district". Even US cities that have lots of space or
READ FULL ARTICLE
------------------------------
[Klaus] Philipsen FAIA
Archplan Inc. Philipsen Architects
Baltimore MD
------------------------------