Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Paolo - Cooper-Hewitt Lifetime Acheivement Award

Expand Messages
  • George Kosmides
    Hi everyone, Wonderful News, Paolo received the Smithonian s Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum, Lifetime achievement award.
    Message 1 of 23 , Jun 6, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi everyone,

      Wonderful News, Paolo received the Smithonian's Cooper-Hewitt, National
      Design Museum, Lifetime achievement award.

      http://www.cooperhewitt.org/NDA/2006/award.asp?catID=la&nameID=soleri

      http://www.cooperhewitt.org/NDA/2006/press.asp

      Paolo has been invited to the White House on July 10, where he will meet
      Laura Bush, who is this year's patron of the award.

      Cosanti Foundation Press Release is below.

      Best to you all

      Sue

      June 5, 2005

      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

      Media Only: Stefan Grace (928) 632-6225
      pr@...

      Paolo Soleri Announced Winner of the Smithsonian's Cooper-Hewitt, National
      Design Museum, National Design Award for Lifetime Achievement

      The Cosanti Foundation is pleased to announce that its president and
      founder, Dr. Paolo Soleri, will receive the 2006 Cooper-Hewitt National
      Design Award for Lifetime Achievement. First launched at the White House in
      2000, the annual Awards program celebrates design as a vital humanistic tool
      in shaping the world. The Lifetime Achievement Award is given in
      recognition of an individual who has made a profound, long-term contribution
      to contemporary design practice.

      The Italian-born architect came to the United States in 1946 to study with
      Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin West, eventually making Scottsdale, Arizona
      his home. Soleri's career has spanned seven decades, including work in
      ceramics and bronze, as well pioneering the earthcasting process. The bulk
      of his career, however, has been dedicated to addressing the ecological and
      social concerns raised by modern urban existence, through his exploration of
      arcology. Arcology is Soleri's concept for urban environments that embody
      the fusion of architecture with ecology. It advocates compact, dense
      multi-use structures for human habitat that rise three-dimensionally from
      the land, as opposed to the horizontal urban sprawl that dominates the
      landscape of modern society. By making the built environment of the city
      more compact and complex, automobiles are eliminated from the city, energy
      use is greatly reduced through design elements, more land is available for
      agriculture and leisure use, and the city is preserved as a vibrant, vital
      center of human interaction and development. Dr. Soleri has conceived of
      numerous arcologies throughout his long career, for a variety of contexts,
      including deserts, inside bridges and dams, and outer space.

      Since 1970, Dr. Soleri has focused his efforts on the design and
      construction of Arcosanti, the world's first prototype arcology situated on
      a mesa in the high desert of central Arizona. Under continuous inhabitation
      and construction over the last 36 years, Arcosanti seeks to provide a "lean
      alternative" to the hyper-consumptive habits of the modern world. With an
      emerging mass awareness of the planetary energy and environmental crises
      facing us, Soleri's project is now more relevant than ever before.
      Arcosanti offers potential answers at a time when there are increasing
      questions regarding the future of the planet and the sustainability of our
      highly consumptive lifestyles.

      Soleri's work has been included in worldwide exhibitions, and he has
      received fellowships from the Graham and Guggenheim Foundations as well as
      three honorary doctorates and numerous international medals. At the age of
      87, he continues his theoretical exploration of arcology, and overseeing the
      ongoing construction of Arcosanti. His latest arcology design, the Lean
      Linear City, proposes dense urban modules built along existing or new
      mass-transit lines. It features solar and wind energy production systems,
      and integrates continuous greenhouses and atrium spaces that provide
      micro-climate conditions for food production and heating. This design has
      been suggested for the rebuilding of portions of New Orleans and the
      tsunami-ravaged coast of southeast Asia as "Levee Cities," where the levees
      would serve as the city's foundation.

      Dr. Soleri is honored to be the recipient of this prestigious award, and
      would like to extend his gratitude to the selection committee for choosing
      him. He is invited to the White House for the recognition of this award in
      July, prior to the formal award ceremony at the National Design Museum in
      New York in October 2006.

      For further information on Paolo Soleri and Arcosanti, please visit our web
      site: www.arcosanti.org
    • rookzero
      Thats excellent news. Hopefully he ll be able to raise the profile of arcology concepts when he is in the public eye of the Washington elite.
      Message 2 of 23 , Jun 6, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Thats excellent news. Hopefully he'll be able to raise the profile of
        arcology concepts when he is in the public eye of the Washington
        elite.
      • Randall Hunt
        [I just found this in my out box. I must have forgotten to send it before I went on vacation a while back.] Following on the topic of how an arcology might be
        Message 3 of 23 , Jun 14, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          [I just found this in my out box. I must have forgotten to send it before I
          went on vacation a while back.]

          Following on the topic of how an arcology might be governed, Karen Sheppard
          wrote:

          >Well, I can't really see any democracy or anarchist
          >influenced government constructing arcologies. This
          >is considering the fact that in such a government
          >they'd have to be privately funded. I see a
          >government that advocates a large amount of state
          >control being responsible for building arcologies.
          >What do you think?

          Regarding control... Depending on how power is distributed throughout a
          society (and around the world), and to whom various powers specifically
          falls, that control may or may not reflect the will of a people. So much
          depends on those who would have it (arcology) happen: a few people with a
          lot of power (e.g.: private enterprise, dictatorship) or many many people
          with a lot of aggregate power (democracy, for instance*). Will-power
          directs realities.

          Arcology is possible. But irrespective of how the thing is produced, it is
          first necessary to have a design for one that is seen either/both as a
          profitable enterprise or as a comprehensive solution to documented
          problems, depending on who you are talking to. One must still present a
          physical plan and economic analysis, or be told to come back when you have
          one.


          *Even anarchy, theoretically. Just because anarchists would have no one
          govern them does not necessarily mean they could not work together for a
          common goal. Still, there aren't enough anarchists to make a difference.
          Hmmm, how about an Organization of Independent Anarchologists...
        • Gervas Douglas
          Launching any major urban project is inherently a political act. Even if you find a rich individual to fund it, you are still going to have to get some sort
          Message 4 of 23 , Jun 15, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Launching any major urban project is inherently a political act. Even
            if you find a rich individual to fund it, you are still going to have
            to get some sort of planning permission in most countries. That
            automatically introduces a political element.

            Anyone who wants to build an Arcology development could do worse than
            look at the example of Poundbury. This is a new development in a
            traditional style which was instigated by the Prince of Wales, who had
            the requisite economic resources and political influence.
            Historically when cities have been built or rebuilt from scratch
            according to the grand design of one man, it has always been done
            under the local ruler's patronage.

            Now if you could get the Prince of Wales interested in the concept of
            Arcology.....

            Gervas


            --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, Randall Hunt <randhunt@...> wrote:
            >
            > [I just found this in my out box. I must have forgotten to send it
            before I
            > went on vacation a while back.]
            >
            > Following on the topic of how an arcology might be governed, Karen
            Sheppard
            > wrote:
            >
            > >Well, I can't really see any democracy or anarchist
            > >influenced government constructing arcologies. This
            > >is considering the fact that in such a government
            > >they'd have to be privately funded. I see a
            > >government that advocates a large amount of state
            > >control being responsible for building arcologies.
            > >What do you think?
            >
            > Regarding control... Depending on how power is distributed throughout a
            > society (and around the world), and to whom various powers specifically
            > falls, that control may or may not reflect the will of a people. So much
            > depends on those who would have it (arcology) happen: a few people
            with a
            > lot of power (e.g.: private enterprise, dictatorship) or many many
            people
            > with a lot of aggregate power (democracy, for instance*). Will-power
            > directs realities.
            >
            > Arcology is possible. But irrespective of how the thing is produced,
            it is
            > first necessary to have a design for one that is seen either/both as a
            > profitable enterprise or as a comprehensive solution to documented
            > problems, depending on who you are talking to. One must still present a
            > physical plan and economic analysis, or be told to come back when
            you have
            > one.
            >
            >
            > *Even anarchy, theoretically. Just because anarchists would have no one
            > govern them does not necessarily mean they could not work together for a
            > common goal. Still, there aren't enough anarchists to make a difference.
            > Hmmm, how about an Organization of Independent Anarchologists...
            >
          • chris
            It seems no one wants to consider a rule of law where every one agrees on a simple set of laws that prevent the use of force apon it s citizens or threat of
            Message 5 of 23 , Jun 23, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              It seems no one wants to consider a rule of law where every one
              agrees on a simple set of laws that prevent the use of force apon
              it's citizens or threat of force the government only job should be
              to protect it's citizens from force either between it's citizens or
              from the outside and only use force in retaliation from outside
              force. the laws of it's citizens should be enforced both by it's
              citizens and the government it's not a pasive right. only in this
              case can we truly be free to profit. all else is slavery to some
              degree.
              --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, "Gervas Douglas"
              <gervas.douglas@...> wrote:
              >
              > Launching any major urban project is inherently a political act.
              Even
              > if you find a rich individual to fund it, you are still going to
              have
              > to get some sort of planning permission in most countries. That
              > automatically introduces a political element.
              >
              > Anyone who wants to build an Arcology development could do worse
              than
              > look at the example of Poundbury. This is a new development in a
              > traditional style which was instigated by the Prince of Wales, who
              had
              > the requisite economic resources and political influence.
              > Historically when cities have been built or rebuilt from scratch
              > according to the grand design of one man, it has always been done
              > under the local ruler's patronage.
              >
              > Now if you could get the Prince of Wales interested in the concept
              of
              > Arcology.....
              >
              > Gervas
              >
              >
              > --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, Randall Hunt <randhunt@> wrote:
              > >
              > > [I just found this in my out box. I must have forgotten to send
              it
              > before I
              > > went on vacation a while back.]
              > >
              > > Following on the topic of how an arcology might be governed,
              Karen
              > Sheppard
              > > wrote:
              > >
              > > >Well, I can't really see any democracy or anarchist
              > > >influenced government constructing arcologies. This
              > > >is considering the fact that in such a government
              > > >they'd have to be privately funded. I see a
              > > >government that advocates a large amount of state
              > > >control being responsible for building arcologies.
              > > >What do you think?
              > >
              > > Regarding control... Depending on how power is distributed
              throughout a
              > > society (and around the world), and to whom various powers
              specifically
              > > falls, that control may or may not reflect the will of a people.
              So much
              > > depends on those who would have it (arcology) happen: a few
              people
              > with a
              > > lot of power (e.g.: private enterprise, dictatorship) or many
              many
              > people
              > > with a lot of aggregate power (democracy, for instance*). Will-
              power
              > > directs realities.
              > >
              > > Arcology is possible. But irrespective of how the thing is
              produced,
              > it is
              > > first necessary to have a design for one that is seen
              either/both as a
              > > profitable enterprise or as a comprehensive solution to
              documented
              > > problems, depending on who you are talking to. One must still
              present a
              > > physical plan and economic analysis, or be told to come back when
              > you have
              > > one.
              > >
              > >
              > > *Even anarchy, theoretically. Just because anarchists would have
              no one
              > > govern them does not necessarily mean they could not work
              together for a
              > > common goal. Still, there aren't enough anarchists to make a
              difference.
              > > Hmmm, how about an Organization of Independent Anarchologists...
              > >
              >
            • Gervas Douglas
              Let’s cut the political discussion. We need to build a piano before we can talk about the music. I am sure many people have considered it, but it is unlikely
              Message 6 of 23 , Jun 24, 2006
              • 0 Attachment

                I am sure many people have considered it, but it is unlikely to happen with what we call “democracy” nowadays, i.e. representative universal suffrage.  I never understand why politicians have the nerve to consider this system “sacred”, apart from the fact that it enables to achieve their aim of inflicting their twisted, greed, power-hungry will on the unthinking masses.  While a vast proportion of the electorate is stupid and bigoted enough to vote in crooks who promise them a share of their successful neighbours’ wealth and know how to pander to the same electorate’s fears and prejudices, you will never achieve a system of minimalist government.

                 

                Gervas

                 

                Posted by: "chris" dox11@...   dox11

                Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:29 am (PST)

                It seems no one wants to consider a rule of law where every one
                agrees on a simple set of laws that prevent the use of force apon
                it's citizens or threat of force the government only job should be
                to protect it's citizens from force either between it's citizens or
                from the outside and only use force in retaliation from outside
                force. the laws of it's citizens should be enforced both by it's
                citizens and the government it's not a pasive right. only in this
                case can we truly be free to profit. all else is slavery to some
                degree.
                --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, "Gervas Douglas"
                <gervas.douglas@...> wrote:

                >
                > Launching any major urban project is inherently a political act.
                Even
                > if you find a rich individual to fund it, you are still going to
                have
                > to get some sort of planning permission in most countries. That
                > automatically introduces a political element.
                >
                > Anyone who wants to build an Arcology development could do worse
                than
                > look at the example of Poundbury. This is a new development in a
                > traditional style which was instigated by the Prince of Wales, who
                had
                > the requisite economic resources and political influence.
                > Historically when cities have been built or rebuilt from scratch
                > according to the grand design of one man, it has always been done
                > under the local ruler's patronage.
                >
                > Now if you could get the Prince of Wales interested in the concept
                of
                > Arcology.....
                >
                > Gervas
                >
                >
                > --- In
                title="mailto:arcology@yahoogroups.com">arcology@yahoogroups.com, Randall Hunt <randhunt@> wrote:
                > >
                > > [I just found this in my out box. I must have forgotten to send
                it
                > before I
                > > went on vacation a while back.]
                > >
                > > Following on the topic of how an arcology might be governed,
                Karen
                > Sheppard
                > > wrote:
                > >
                > > >Well, I can't really see any democracy or anarchist
                > > >influenced government constructing arcologies. This
                > > >is considering the fact that in such a government
                > > >they'd have to be privately funded. I see a
                > > >government that advocates a large amount of state
                > > >control being responsible for building arcologies.
                > > >What do you think?
                > >
                > > Regarding control... Depending on how power is distributed
                throughout a
                > > society (and around the world), and to whom various powers
                specifically
                > > falls, that control may or may not reflect the will of a people.
                So much
                > > depends on those who would have it (arcology) happen: a few
                people
                > with a
                > > lot of power (e.g.: private enterprise, dictatorship) or many
                many
                > people
                > > with a lot of aggregate power (democracy, for instance*). Will-
                power
                > > directs realities.
                > >
                > > Arcology is possible. But irrespective of how the thing is
                produced,
                > it is
                > > first necessary to have a design for one that is seen
                either/both as a
                > > profitable enterprise or as a comprehensive solution to
                documented
                > > problems, depending on who you are talking to. One must still
                present a
                > > physical plan and economic analysis, or be told to come back when
                > you have
                > > one.
                > >
                > >
                > > *Even anarchy, theoretically. Just because anarchists would have
                no one
                > > govern them does not necessarily mean they could not work
                together for a
                > > common goal. Still, there aren't enough anarchists to make a
                difference.
                > > Hmmm, how about an Organization of Independent Anarchologists...
                > >
                >

                 

                 

                Gervas

                http://www.aisl-services.com

                 



              • Karen Sheppard
                Let’s cut the political discussion. We need to build a piano before we can talk about the music. I heartily agree with you Chris, if the government uses any
                Message 7 of 23 , Jun 24, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  I heartily agree with you Chris, if the government uses any kind of force internally against the people, it is to some degree slavery.  I feel one of the main causes of this, would be that the government largely seperates itself from the population.  Ordinary people are not part of the government, nor do many of them want to be.  It is because of this that power hungry men may pass and enforce any sort of law they want.  This continues to happen, over and over, yet no one lifts a finger to speak out.  It's sad really.
                • rookzero
                  ... I don t agree. Mostly likely, an arcology will be built using private funds and private means if it is to be built at all.
                  Message 8 of 23 , Jul 1, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, Karen Sheppard <tzeentch01@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Well, I can't really see any democracy or anarchist
                    > influenced government constructing arcologies. This
                    > is considering the fact that in such a government
                    > they'd have to be privately funded. I see a
                    > government that advocates a large amount of state
                    > control being responsible for building arcologies.
                    > What do you think?

                    I don't agree. Mostly likely, an arcology will be built using private
                    funds and private means if it is to be built at all.
                  • Karen Sheppard
                    What would be the purpose or incentive for a private investor though?
                    Message 9 of 23 , Jul 3, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      What would be the purpose or incentive for a private investor though?
                    • Chris ScottHanson
                      Profit, comes to mind. Or a simple return on their investment. If you investigate the world of socially responsible investments, you will find standards and
                      Message 10 of 23 , Jul 8, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Profit, comes to mind.

                        Or a simple return on their investment.

                        If you investigate the world of socially responsible investments, you will find standards and minimums and assumptions about the return on investments that are out of the normal main stream.

                        Chris

                        On Jul 3, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Karen Sheppard wrote:

                        What would be the purpose or incentive for a private investor though?


                      • Jim Galasyn
                        Hey all, I have a design idea I ve been working on for about three years now, and I m finally to point where I have something to show for it. The idea is to
                        Message 11 of 23 , Jul 8, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment

                          Hey all,

                           

                          I have a design idea I’ve been working on for about three years now, and I’m finally to point where I have something to show for it.

                           

                          The idea is to create a support structure that integrates urban space with natural habitat in a way that maximizes the surface area of landscape. This can be done efficiently with two interconnected fractal structures. I have implemented a genetic algorithm which allows me to explore the design space of these structures. Preliminary visualizations are posted here:

                           

                          http://www.leftopia.com/zs_arcology_studies.htm

                           

                          The essential design goals of these structures are as follows.

                           

                          ·        Provide livable urban habitat.

                          ·        Maximize surface area of wild habitat.

                          ·        Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.

                          ·        Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing water.

                          ·        Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.

                          ·        Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.

                           

                          These goals can be represented in the “objective function” of a genetic algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple problems, such as maximizing surface area or height.

                           

                          Recently, I was introduced to the idea of the Zwischenstadt, or “intermediate city”. It neatly encompasses my thoughts on these arcologies. My solution is a particular realization of a Zwischenstadt, which relies on computation to produce fractal land use pattern.

                           

                          I can go on at length on this, but I just needed to get this into the open for discussion. I would be very interested to hear the educated opinions of this list.

                           

                          Jim Galasyn

                           

                             

                           

                           

                        • chris
                          well I don t exactly understand the picturs relation to these problems . Provide livable urban habitat. if the population where underground that I could
                          Message 12 of 23 , Jul 9, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            well I don't exactly understand the picturs relation to these problems .
                            Provide livable urban habitat.
                            if the population where underground that I could understand
                            Maximize surface area of wild habitat.
                            if your underground that leaves the surface open to the wild and
                            agriculture
                            Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.
                            if the surface is a large hill shaped structure for maximum solor
                            exposer and different drainage levels for plants
                            Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing water.
                            again a hill structure so all water not used by plants gose to a moat
                            resevoir
                            Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.
                            the moat needs to drain, hydro the moat can float solar panals. and
                            windmill on top of the hill to pump the waterto a tower for use in
                            homes or as potential when power demands are high.
                            Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.
                            this minimizes the need for power for the individual for their home
                            earths temp is about 56f natural light through insulated glass
                            provides lighting the human footprint is underground so as not impact
                            the usefull parts of the surface old air exchanged with new air
                            filtered through the moat to prevent poluting the environment inside
                            also the moat can be used to grow fish and dispose of some crop waste
                            in the form of fish food over ripe vegies and the like.
                            >
                            >
                            > These goals can be represented in the "objective function" of a genetic
                            > algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple problems,
                            such as
                            > maximizing surface area or height.
                            I would go for depth but hight for the hill structure is a factor
                            thnks for the idea though. most people on this forum see things as you
                            do and disagree with me I just think the smallest footprint is
                            underground to save the surface for agri and leisure. it's safer more
                            stabil and uses less energy. it's designed to last forever not just
                            till we come up with some new fad in building. it's also cheaper to
                            build as far as purchase of land you can always expand down and their
                            are mines quaries and pits for sale that no one wants.
                            thats my two cents I like the ideas I just thing we should go down
                            not up.
                          • Kevin Burgess
                            Since you can fit more people in an Arcology or any other city with a dramatically reduced number of roadways, you have therefore a vast increase in billable
                            Message 13 of 23 , Jul 10, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Since you can fit more people in an Arcology or any
                              other city with a dramatically reduced number of
                              roadways, you have therefore a vast increase in
                              billable living space.

                              Not to mention a megolithic structure which advertises
                              itself.


                              What most students of Arcologies fail to consider is
                              WHERE to place these superstructures. Since people
                              want to live closest, within easy reach of work and
                              entertainment, the best places for them are in cities
                              which are ALREADY densely crowded: Singapore, New
                              Delhi, Shanghai, Rome, Paris, New Your, and Los
                              Angeles.

                              Donald Trump is already doing it, and making multiple
                              fortunes. Yes he loses them too, on other ventures,
                              but his main income still comes from monolithic
                              construction projects.

                              No, his stuff doesn't look like Paolo Soleri's
                              work, but then again look at where he's placing these
                              massive developments, and the customers he cultivates.

                              The next step in metro engineering, is getting the
                              vast general public interested in their Condo's &
                              Apartments looking like the Arcologies we have all
                              come to admire.... or that we must tailor our
                              expectations and designs to the taste of our potential
                              clients.




                              On Jul 3, 2006, at 11:14 AM, Karen Sheppard wrote:

                              > What would be the purpose or incentive for a private
                              investor though?
                              >
                              >



                              __________________________________________________
                              Do You Yahoo!?
                              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                              http://mail.yahoo.com
                            • Chris ScottHanson
                              Jim, This is VERY interesting. Keep us informed as your work progresses. Chris ScottHanson Cohousing Resources LLC & Ecodevelopments LLC Ecovillages, Cohousing
                              Message 14 of 23 , Jul 10, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Jim,

                                This is VERY interesting.

                                Keep us informed as your work progresses.  


                                Chris ScottHanson


                                Cohousing Resources LLC & Ecodevelopments LLC

                                Ecovillages, Cohousing & Sustainable Communities

                                Development and Consulting for a Sustainable Future 

                                   based on the Natural Power of Community


                                PO Box 1288
                                Langley, WA 98260

                                (360) 321-7850 new office
                                (206) 260-2800 eFAX1

                                (617) 894-7661 Boston cell
                                (617) 344-8563 eFAX2



                                email1:          Chris@...

                                email2:          cscotthanson@...


                                web site 1:      http://www.CohousingResources.com

                                web site 2:      http://www.EcoDevelopments.com



                                On Jul 8, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Jim Galasyn wrote:


                                Hey all,

                                 

                                I have a design idea I’ve been working on for about three years now, and I’m finally to point where I have something to show for it.

                                 

                                The idea is to create a support structure that integrates urban space with natural habitat in a way that maximizes the surface area of landscape. This can be done efficiently with two interconnected fractal structures. I have implemented a genetic algorithm which allows me to explore the design space of these structures. Preliminary visualizations are posted here:

                                 

                                http://www.leftopia.com/zs_arcology_studies.htm

                                 

                                The essential design goals of these structures are as follows.

                                 

                                ·        Provide livable urban habitat.

                                ·        Maximize surface area of wild habitat.

                                ·        Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.

                                ·        Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing water.

                                ·        Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.

                                ·        Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.

                                 

                                These goals can be represented in the “objective function” of a genetic algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple problems, such as maximizing surface area or height.

                                 

                                Recently, I was introduced to the idea of the Zwischenstadt, or “intermediate city”. It neatly encompasses my thoughts on these arcologies. My solution is a particular realization of a Zwischenstadt, which relies on computation to produce fractal land use pattern.

                                 

                                I can go on at length on this, but I just needed to get this into the open for discussion. I would be very interested to hear the educated opinions of this list.

                                 

                                Jim Galasyn


                              • James
                                Maybe I m not getting something; I can see why why you d want a high surface area for solar energy etc., but I always thought a low surface area was a benefit
                                Message 15 of 23 , Jul 11, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Maybe I'm not getting something; I can see why why you'd want a high
                                  surface area for solar energy etc., but I always thought a low
                                  surface area was a benefit of an arcology, since it makes heating
                                  and cooling the living space more efficient than in the equivalent
                                  number of single-family homes.

                                  --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Galasyn" <jim@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Hey all,
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > I have a design idea I've been working on for about three years
                                  now, and I'm
                                  > finally to point where I have something to show for it.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > The idea is to create a support structure that integrates urban
                                  space with
                                  > natural habitat in a way that maximizes the surface area of
                                  landscape. This
                                  > can be done efficiently with two interconnected fractal
                                  structures. I have
                                  > implemented a genetic algorithm which allows me to explore the
                                  design space
                                  > of these structures. Preliminary visualizations are posted here:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > http://www.leftopia.com/zs_arcology_studies.htm
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > The essential design goals of these structures are as follows.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > . Provide livable urban habitat.
                                  >
                                  > . Maximize surface area of wild habitat.
                                  >
                                  > . Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.
                                  >
                                  > . Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing
                                  water.
                                  >
                                  > . Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.
                                  >
                                  > . Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > These goals can be represented in the "objective function" of a
                                  genetic
                                  > algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple problems,
                                  such as
                                  > maximizing surface area or height.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Recently, I was introduced to the idea of the Zwischenstadt, or
                                  > "intermediate city". It neatly encompasses my thoughts on these
                                  arcologies.
                                  > My solution is a particular realization of a Zwischenstadt, which
                                  relies on
                                  > computation to produce fractal land use pattern.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > I can go on at length on this, but I just needed to get this into
                                  the open
                                  > for discussion. I would be very interested to hear the educated
                                  opinions of
                                  > this list.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Jim Galasyn
                                  >
                                • Jim Galasyn
                                  The overriding design principle for what I m calling Z arcologies is to maximize the surface area of natural habitat. The Z arcology satisfies three boundary
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Jul 15, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment

                                    The overriding design principle for what I’m calling “Z arcologies” is to maximize the surface area of natural habitat. The Z arcology satisfies three boundary conditions:

                                     

                                    1.      Maximizes surface area of natural habitat;

                                    2.      Is decoupled from the human habitat;

                                    3.      Provides continuous connection with surrounding natural habitat.

                                     

                                    The first boundary condition is the essential design element. For background, let me quote Sieverts:

                                     

                                    The city has, for a long time, become a ‘second nature’, with a diversity of plant and animal life which exceeds the richness of the surrounding agrarian landscape. The larger the city, the greater its natural diversity. … Yet, the distinction between ‘original nature’ and ‘technically manipulated’ nature becomes more and more difficult. … There is no longer any escape from this inter-permeation of nature and human technology.

                                     

                                    …Buildings could, for example, interpreted as ‘artificial rock formations’, which can shelter specific plants and animals. … Accordingly ‘building’ should not be assessed as an intervention in nature but should be understood as a seed of change, which in the long term will lead to new spaces and areas which merit protection.

                                    -        Thomas Sieverts, Cities Without Cities: An interpretation of the Zwischenstadt, pp 39-40.

                                     

                                    Sieverts describes how the figure-ground relationship of the city to the landscape has been reversed; the landscape is now the figure against the ground of the city. The Z arcology is a built environment which multiples the area of the landscape many times over the original natural area. High efficiencies, on the order of 10x or 100x, should be achievable with fractal structures.  

                                     

                                    Does that answer your question?

                                     

                                    Jim

                                     

                                     

                                    From: arcology@yahoogroups.com [mailto:arcology@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of James
                                    Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:40 AM
                                    To: arcology@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [arcology] Re: Zwischenstadt and Arcology

                                     

                                    Maybe I'm not getting something; I can see why why you'd want a high
                                    surface area for solar energy etc., but I always thought a low
                                    surface area was a benefit of an arcology, since it makes heating
                                    and cooling the living space more efficient than in the equivalent
                                    number of single-family homes.

                                    --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Galasyn" <jim@...> wrote:

                                    >
                                    > Hey all,
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > I have a design idea I've been working on for about three years
                                    now, and I'm
                                    > finally to point where I have something to show for it.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > The idea is to create a support structure that integrates urban
                                    space with
                                    > natural habitat in a way that maximizes the surface area of
                                    landscape. This
                                    > can be done efficiently with two interconnected fractal
                                    structures. I have
                                    > implemented a genetic algorithm which allows me to explore the
                                    design space
                                    > of these structures. Preliminary visualizations are posted here:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > http://www.leftopia.com/zs_arcology_studies.htm
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > The essential design goals of these structures are as follows.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > . Provide livable urban habitat.
                                    >
                                    > . Maximize surface area of wild habitat.
                                    >
                                    > . Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.
                                    >
                                    > . Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing
                                    water.
                                    >
                                    > . Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.
                                    >
                                    > . Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > These goals can be represented in the "objective function" of a
                                    genetic
                                    > algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple problems,
                                    such as
                                    > maximizing surface area or height.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Recently, I was introduced to the idea of the Zwischenstadt, or
                                    > "intermediate city". It neatly encompasses my thoughts on these
                                    arcologies.
                                    > My solution is a particular realization of a Zwischenstadt, which
                                    relies on
                                    > computation to produce fractal land use pattern.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > I can go on at length on this, but I just needed to get this into
                                    the open
                                    > for discussion. I would be very interested to hear the educated
                                    opinions of
                                    > this list.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Jim Galasyn
                                    >

                                  • James
                                    That would answer my question if you re implying that my concern is not a problem. You discussed the surface area of natural habitat while I asked about the
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Jul 16, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      That would answer my question if you're implying that my concern is
                                      not a problem. You discussed the surface area of natural habitat
                                      while I asked about the surface area of the living space.

                                      Maybe I need an explanation of #2 - how is it decoupled from the
                                      human habitat? The only arcologies I've heard about ARE the human
                                      habitat.

                                      --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Galasyn" <jim@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > The overriding design principle for what I'm calling "Z
                                      arcologies" is to
                                      > maximize the surface area of natural habitat. The Z arcology
                                      satisfies three
                                      > boundary conditions:
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > 1. Maximizes surface area of natural habitat;
                                      >
                                      > 2. Is decoupled from the human habitat;
                                      >
                                      > 3. Provides continuous connection with surrounding natural
                                      habitat.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > The first boundary condition is the essential design element. For
                                      > background, let me quote Sieverts:
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > The city has, for a long time, become a 'second nature', with a
                                      diversity of
                                      > plant and animal life which exceeds the richness of the
                                      surrounding agrarian
                                      > landscape. The larger the city, the greater its natural
                                      diversity. . Yet,
                                      > the distinction between 'original nature' and 'technically
                                      manipulated'
                                      > nature becomes more and more difficult. . There is no longer any
                                      escape from
                                      > this inter-permeation of nature and human technology.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > .Buildings could, for example, interpreted as 'artificial rock
                                      formations',
                                      > which can shelter specific plants and animals. .
                                      Accordingly 'building'
                                      > should not be assessed as an intervention in nature but should be
                                      understood
                                      > as a seed of change, which in the long term will lead to new
                                      spaces and
                                      > areas which merit protection.
                                      >
                                      > - Thomas Sieverts, Cities Without Cities: An interpretation
                                      of the
                                      > Zwischenstadt, pp 39-40.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Sieverts describes how the figure-ground relationship of the city
                                      to the
                                      > landscape has been reversed; the landscape is now the figure
                                      against the
                                      > ground of the city. The Z arcology is a built environment which
                                      multiples
                                      > the area of the landscape many times over the original natural
                                      area. High
                                      > efficiencies, on the order of 10x or 100x, should be achievable
                                      with fractal
                                      > structures.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Does that answer your question?
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Jim
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > From: arcology@yahoogroups.com [mailto:arcology@yahoogroups.com]
                                      On Behalf
                                      > Of James
                                      > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:40 AM
                                      > To: arcology@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Subject: [arcology] Re: Zwischenstadt and Arcology
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Maybe I'm not getting something; I can see why why you'd want a
                                      high
                                      > surface area for solar energy etc., but I always thought a low
                                      > surface area was a benefit of an arcology, since it makes heating
                                      > and cooling the living space more efficient than in the equivalent
                                      > number of single-family homes.
                                      >
                                      > --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com <mailto:arcology%
                                      40yahoogroups.com> , "Jim
                                      > Galasyn" <jim@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > Hey all,
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > I have a design idea I've been working on for about three years
                                      > now, and I'm
                                      > > finally to point where I have something to show for it.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > The idea is to create a support structure that integrates urban
                                      > space with
                                      > > natural habitat in a way that maximizes the surface area of
                                      > landscape. This
                                      > > can be done efficiently with two interconnected fractal
                                      > structures. I have
                                      > > implemented a genetic algorithm which allows me to explore the
                                      > design space
                                      > > of these structures. Preliminary visualizations are posted here:
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > http://www.leftopia.com/zs_arcology_studies.htm
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > The essential design goals of these structures are as follows.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > . Provide livable urban habitat.
                                      > >
                                      > > . Maximize surface area of wild habitat.
                                      > >
                                      > > . Maximize surface area for fixing atmospheric carbon.
                                      > >
                                      > > . Provide ecosystem services, such as capturing and storing
                                      > water.
                                      > >
                                      > > . Produce energy: Solar, wind, hydro.
                                      > >
                                      > > . Minimize footprints: plot area, resources.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > These goals can be represented in the "objective function" of a
                                      > genetic
                                      > > algorithm. The posted structures are solutions to simple
                                      problems,
                                      > such as
                                      > > maximizing surface area or height.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Recently, I was introduced to the idea of the Zwischenstadt, or
                                      > > "intermediate city". It neatly encompasses my thoughts on these
                                      > arcologies.
                                      > > My solution is a particular realization of a Zwischenstadt,
                                      which
                                      > relies on
                                      > > computation to produce fractal land use pattern.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > I can go on at length on this, but I just needed to get this
                                      into
                                      > the open
                                      > > for discussion. I would be very interested to hear the educated
                                      > opinions of
                                      > > this list.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Jim Galasyn
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • rookzero
                                      ... Hence why any building is above one story. ... Yep. ... Thats one possiblity. There are pros and cons to all possible locations. I suspect Arcos will be
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Jul 21, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In arcology@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Burgess <burgesskj@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Since you can fit more people in an Arcology or any
                                        > other city with a dramatically reduced number of
                                        > roadways, you have therefore a vast increase in
                                        > billable living space.

                                        Hence why any building is above one story.

                                        > Not to mention a megolithic structure which advertises
                                        > itself.

                                        Yep.

                                        >
                                        > What most students of Arcologies fail to consider is
                                        > WHERE to place these superstructures. Since people
                                        > want to live closest, within easy reach of work and
                                        > entertainment, the best places for them are in cities
                                        > which are ALREADY densely crowded: Singapore, New
                                        > Delhi, Shanghai, Rome, Paris, New Your, and Los
                                        > Angeles.

                                        Thats one possiblity. There are pros and cons to all possible
                                        locations. I suspect Arcos will be built first in cities if at
                                        all.

                                        >
                                        > Donald Trump is already doing it, and making multiple
                                        > fortunes. Yes he loses them too, on other ventures,
                                        > but his main income still comes from monolithic
                                        > construction projects.
                                        >

                                        Negative on that one though. Trump's towers don't really qualify as
                                        arcos, even though they are a vast improvement over standard
                                        suburban fare.

                                        > No, his stuff doesn't look like Paolo Soleri's
                                        > work, but then again look at where he's placing these
                                        > massive developments, and the customers he cultivates.

                                        Its not so much the look that is the differance as what is inside.


                                        > The next step in metro engineering, is getting the
                                        > vast general public interested in their Condo's &
                                        > Apartments looking like the Arcologies we have all
                                        > come to admire.... or that we must tailor our
                                        > expectations and designs to the taste of our potential
                                        > clients.

                                        Well, we have to sell people on some of the mixed-use theory too...
                                        one of the central features of arcology is the idea of living and
                                        working and shopping and eating all in the same structure. Simply
                                        building a huge building and planting lots of trees doesn't count as
                                        an arcology.
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.