Help the development of the site, sharing the article with friends!
What if architects meditated on the future of a building
In theory, all of us who are related to architecture know what is the objective or the functionality that the work we are building is going to perform, but … Have we considered what will happen in 20 years with the building, or 30 or 40 years? ? What if architects considered or pondered, rather than ignored, the future of a building?…
Obviously, predicting the future in such a changing society can become a daunting task and this, without adding other aspects of political, administrative, legislative interests … etc. That have historically influenced and continues to strongly influence the future utility perspective of a building.
But often it seems that all aspects of architectural production, from its conceptualization and design, to its realization and promotion, converge towards the opening day of a building. On the day the wonderful ribbons are cut, the architects are praised and the champagne flows in abundance - the official birth of a building.
In architecture, there is an obsession to officially finish a building, while its actual lifespan is often neglected… By René Boer
In the run-up to this day, press releases have been released, containing perfect images of the building and a statement laden with superlatives. Photoshopped images with shiny surfaces, successful people and blue skies, along with promotional marketing, have been posted on social media and large digital media specialized in architecture.
When a building first opens its doors, journalists flock for the photo opportunity and diligently report on the architect's act of creation. Tenants get their keys, and the dust settles.
Giving full attention to a building's first glorious moment is, of course, nothing new in the world of architecture, but the fact that a building will survive past its opening day is more than ever willfully ignored. In addition to what is said about sustainable materials "that will last", there is usually not a single glimpse of what the real "life" of a building might look like.
Of course, it is difficult to predict the future, but new buildings have a long-term influence on their environment and their inhabitants. It is therefore surprising that projections on how these relationships may develop remain a rarity. What could be the useful life of a building? How will it be inhabited for years to come? Could it be used for other purposes in the (distant) future? What will it be like in a few decades? How can new technologies influence the way the building is used? What will the continued impact of this building on the city be like?.
The "future legacy" of the building is generally little thought, rarely considered in the design process, and almost never shared with a wider audience … from the book "Buildings Must Die"
Architecture, according to Stephan Cairns and Jane M. Jacobs, authors of the book «Buildings Must Die« …Buildings are supposed to have "life." But what about the "death" of buildings? What about the decay, decay, and destruction to which they are inevitably subjected?
Both within the profession and in society at large, it is the actual embodiment of the architect's power and genius that is celebrated, rather than the lasting contribution of a building to society.
This "fixation" is stimulated, of course, by the financial context in which contemporary architecture materializes. Immediate profit is often the rationale for creating a building, reducing stakeholder interest in how it will behave socially, economically, or physically over a longer period of time.
The emerging trend in architecture, which became widespread during the financial crisis of recent years, also illustrates the lack of vision for the future in the sector. While emerging projects, from a pavilion to temporary refugee housing, often take into account the entire useful life of a building, they do not offer any perspective on the long-term urban development of an area beyond that brief and single intervention.
Also of interest:
- Understanding Cities: Living and Ecological Urbanism
- Green Guidelines for Sustainable Cities
- Examples of taking advantage of a lost public space
This is not only due to the fact that these projects have to work with a temporary available space and limited financial means, but also because of the lack of a vision on how it could have a more lasting impact on the city beyond its current role.
And here we would like to add a brief reflection by Jaume Prat about the role of the architect… (See more in the article What is an architect for?
In the past, disregarding the possible future trajectory of a building has often led to them "failing." Unable to adapt to new circumstances and developments, many have become obsolete over time and history confirms this.
In addition to the socio-economic impact - often negative - that abandoned remnants of the past have on their immediate surroundings, the issue of ecological performance is becoming increasingly important. As the demolition and construction sectors contribute heavily to CO2 emissions, we cannot continue to build and tear down buildings at this rate.
Previous image reflects CO2 emissions by sectors. From the article on this portal, how efficient buildings benefit cities.
The fact that most architectural projects of a certain scale leave a spatial legacy of some kind, gives those involved a responsibility. Therefore, professionals involved in architecture might want to broaden their horizon and try to relate to the future of their projects, at least in some way. Without becoming naively utopian, researching and speculating on possible social, technological, political developments and the future transformation of the immediate spatial context deserves more attention, even being able to become an integral part of contemporary design processes.
There are thousands of ways this challenge can be taken seriously without resorting to even more unrealistic interpretations of futures that will not come true. For example…
- Long-term guardianship of buildings
- Physically preparing a building for future changes is another way. Its design could allow its expansion in different ways at some point, facilitating the change of plans or readjusting its "interface" with the urban environment.
- The inevitable deterioration of building components could be taken into account. Instead of ignoring these processes and passing the problem on to future owners, future impairment could be calculated and become part of the actual project.
- Another example is the study of the building as noise. You could try to make sure that it doesn't become an unsightly or potentially dangerous item in a neighborhood, but can be quickly reused even after years of vacancy.
- The study of the deconstruction of a building through an ecologically sustainable process could also be designed before its construction.
We open another door, another possibility, so that a project can be judged by the intelligence with which its future performance is considered. This forward-looking approach could play a decisive role in competitions, but it would also allow citizens, policy makers and policy makers to look at a project from a different angle.
In other words, let's embrace buildings where future legacy is a core asset of the initial design.
This article represents part of the reflections practiced by René Boer in his article "Designing for a buildind's future", who works at the intersection between art, architecture, cities and heritage as a researcher, curator and activist. You can consult more about his articles from his website Failedarchitecture.com with interesting reports.
If you liked this article, share it!
