When will we be out of the glass box phase?

[Chicano3000X]

It's better than the concrete box phase, but I hope they bring back creative architecture.

Enough glass boxes, bring back the architecture that formed the empire state building. Architecture with detail.

[Chief Blackhawk]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

It's better than the concrete box phase, but I hope they bring back creative architecture.

Enough glass boxes, bring back the architecture that formed the empire state building. Architecture with detail.

Just because a building is built with detail doesn't entail that it will be a more idiosyncratic in nature nor a more appealing structure....EXAMPLE

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by Chief Blackhawk

Just because a building is built with detail doesn't entail that it will be a more idiosyncratic in nature nor a more appealing structure....EXAMPLE

hahah... using PoMo as an example of a detailed building? Come on now.

[M II A II R II K]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oneill244/6703979131

This skyline at least makes an effort to not create boring glass boxes.

[Chief Blackhawk]

Originally Posted by untitledreality

hahah... using PoMo as an example of a detailed building? Come on now.

Sorry, first thing that came to my mind... I arbitrarily picked it to show how detailing can go REALLY WRONG.

[The_Architect]

Considering we've gone from stone to brick, back to stone, to concrete and steel to glass, I wonder what building material will define the next major architectural style to come.

[Chief Blackhawk]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Considering we've gone from stone to brick, back to stone, to concrete and steel to glass, I wonder what building material will define the next major architectural style to come.

Granted, this is looking some time forward; I think carbon nano tubes will be the next structural support material to catalyse the next significant movement.

[Tyler Xyroadia]

BAH!

The problem today is due to advances in structral design, we can build virtually ANYTHING.
In the past, we went from Stone, to Brick to concrete to glass, because that was the progression of building materials.

If Frank Gehry was born in 1900, he would never be able to build any of his melted monstrosities simply because the structural engineering of the time made it impossible.

Now, we have no such constrains. So, sadly, thee question of "When will we be out of the glass box phase' is a bit moot.

As more and more advanced structures come to be, nano tubes and such, my sad prediction is we shall see more and more bizzare and mind numbing designs.

OH! For us to be forced back to be using Brick stone and steel again!

[MolsonExport]

The NYC masterpieces of the 20s/30s are largely the product of zoning (setbacks).


Midtown Manhattan in 1932, showing the results of the Zoning Resolution(wikipedia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1916_Zoning_Resolution

[Illithid Dude]

Pretty much, as construction prices go up, buildings must be built cheaper. It costs a lot of money for limestone and ornament. Glass is cheap and easy. And besides, I like glass boxes! Sure, I like pre-war architecture, but I also like glassy modernism. But yeah, it's mostly because of cost.

[mrnyc]

glass boxes? i cant wait until the mesh scrim era is over -- ha!


but seriously, i wonder if the next step past the glass box will be green towers, meaning not just environmentally friendly materials and design, but with even more green-friendly organic features. for example alternating floors of actual greenery.

[CGII]

It seems like there was a sentiment raised earlier in this thread about homogeneity in modernism and it felt like a consensus was reach (if not here then in other places on this forum) that 'traditional' Beaux Arts neoclassicism and postmodernism are the solutions to providing regionality and uniqueness. For that I would like to propose an example such as this. Where is it? Rome? New York? London? Philadelphia? Berlin? Madrid? Mexico City? St Petersburg? Washington DC?


fotopedia.com

It's in Budabest, and there would be no way of knowing that minus the flag pinned above the frieze.

Originally Posted by mrnyc

glass boxes? i cant wait until the mesh scrim era is over -- ha!


but seriously, i wonder if the next step past the glass box will be green towers, meaning not just environmentally friendly materials and design, but with even more green-friendly organic features. for example alternating floors of actual greenery.

Those 'mesh scrims' are only the beginning. Advancements in technology are challenging the idea of buildings being solid, closed objects, and mesh scrim is only the first stage of architects playing with expanding and dissolving a wall surface.

As a pracitioner, my opinion is that new material development will be focused on destabilizing what we consider a material to be. For example, structural glass is now becoming a real possibility, and we will probably one day have entirely transparent buildings. Concrete embedded with glass fiber is now enabling buildings to have hulking, concrete appearances that also turn translucent depending on light and angle of view (ex. the Italian pavilion of the Shanghai world expo)


thedesignhome.com

Also worth considering are new biometric materials, our future buildings will likely live and grow like plants do, and facades will be flexible systems that more or less permit growth than simply exist as a glass panel. I find it very possible that the ecological crises our species faces could dictate self-replicating biomorphic cities, probably a lot dirtier and chaotic but not terribly unlike what I picture below:


archivenue.com

[Uptowngirl]

^ Just no... sometimes bad design is bad design, and that sucks.

[plinko]

It's not bad design, because it isn't a real design. It's a theoretical design exploration, which is almost always worth the effort put in, even when the idea turns out to be a bad one.

I for one welcome new advances in building materials. While I and others certainly can put together classical styled buildings there simply isn't any reason to ignore the fact that we don't live in the 19th Century. Learn from the past, drive it kicking and screaming into the future.

[The_Architect]

Geez that would get any Trypophobic in the city fleeing for the hills.

[gmsalpha]

Isn't it possible to simply reclad an ugly building? Sure, the interior and structure itself will remain as it was, unless that's gutted and rebuilt. But for a building such as the PoMo, just strip the facade and put it to better use?

I love a lot of the old buildings in NYC, but perhaps in the 80s, a lot of buildings (I'm thinking Dallas, for instance) have quickly become outdated. Is it so different from a house remodel? Or do the developers/owners only consider a remodel/reclad in cases of the building being severely damaged?

[Jasoncw]

Originally Posted by gmsalpha

Isn't it possible to simply reclad an ugly building? Sure, the interior and structure itself will remain as it was, unless that's gutted and rebuilt. But for a building such as the PoMo, just strip the facade and put it to better use?

I love a lot of the old buildings in NYC, but perhaps in the 80s, a lot of buildings (I'm thinking Dallas, for instance) have quickly become outdated. Is it so different from a house remodel? Or do the developers/owners only consider a remodel/reclad in cases of the building being severely damaged?

It's definitely possible. But you have to remember those modernizations in the 50s and 60s and accept that you'd be doing the same thing. I think it's best to respect the original architecture even though it's unpopular right now.

[thomax]

Canada has some solutions to the glass box phase

Absolute World Condos (A.k.a. Marilyn Monroe Towers). These are for sure no boring glass box





One Park Tower (A few blocks away from the Absolute World Condos). It reminds me of the Empire State building.


The L Tower (U/C)


These are just a few new buildings in Canada that I have seen that seem to try to change the look of boring glass box buildings or go with something more classic.

[mhays]

Originally Posted by CGII

archivenue.com

This is what can happen when the artist (presumably not an architect) hasn't thought about daylight inside the building, the need for some type of security at every window, people walking around falling into window holes, people sliding down the hill unintentionally or intentionally, the need to water something with people's windows in the middle of it....

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by CGII

It seems like there was a sentiment raised earlier in this thread about homogeneity in modernism and it felt like a consensus was reach (if not here then in other places on this forum) that 'traditional' Beaux Arts neoclassicism and postmodernism are the solutions to providing regionality and uniqueness. For that I would like to propose an example such as this. Where is it? Rome? New York? London? Philadelphia? Berlin? Madrid? Mexico City? St Petersburg? Washington DC?


fotopedia.com

It's in Budabest, and there would be no way of knowing that minus the flag pinned above the frieze.

This. 100x this.