museum hours blueprints · an interview with paolo soleri 6 the art of building lightly: an...

BLUEPRINTS VOLUME XXI, NO. 2

INSIDE THIS ISSUE: • Lessons in Arcology:

An Interview with Paolo Soleri

• The Art of Building Lightly:An Interview with Shigeru Ban

• All That Glitters Isn’t Green

Volume XXIV, No. 4 Fall 2006

NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM

The Green House: New Directions in Sustainable Architecture and Design

through June 3, 2007

The second in a series of major

National Building Museum

exhibitions on sustainable

design, The Green House begins

with a full-scale, furnished

replica of an environmentally-

friendly house. Also featured

are photographs and models

of exemplary houses and

apartment buildings from

around the world, plus a

resource room with many

examples of materials that are

both green and attractive.

Building Zone

Long-term

Designed especially for our

youngest visitors, ages two to

six, and their adult companions,

Building Zone introduces

children to the building arts

through engaging activities.

Youngsters can build with

big, soft Legos® and building

blocks; curl up with an archi-

tecture picture book; pretend

to be a craftsperson; and more.

Cityscapes Revealed:Highlights from the Collection

Long-term

The first exhibition presenting

a cross-section of items from

the Museum’s own collection,

including drawings, photo-

graphs, material samples,

and artifacts from National

Historic Landmarks.

Washington: Symbol and City

Long-term

A seminal exhibition about

the complex city that the

Museum calls home.

Spectacular, large-scale historic

and contemporary models

give visitors an intimate

understanding of the city’s

past and possible future.

hibitio

M US E U M HOU RSMonday – Saturday, 10:00 am – 5:00 pm

Sunday, 11:00 am – 5:00 pm

Closed Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s Day

NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM401 F Street NW Washington, DC 20001202.272.2448 / www.NBM.orgRed Line Metro, Judiciary Square

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. Postage PaidWashington, DCPermit No. 488

Blueprints is the quarterly magazine of the

National Building Museum. Subscriptions

are a benefit of Museum membership.

ISSN 0742-0552

editor in chief / G. Martin Moeller, Jr.

managing editor / Julia Neubauer

designer / Nancy Van Meter

art director / Jennifer Byrne

blueprints

TR USTE ES AN D STAFF

B O A R D O F TR U STE E S(as of October 1, 2006)

Officers

ChairMichael J. Glosserman

Vice ChairsGilbert E. DeLormeDavid C. EvansRobert A.M. Stern

SecretaryDavid C. Evans

TreasurerRobert H. Braunohler

PresidentChase W. Rynd

Trustees

William B. Alsup IIIFrank AntonThomas N. Armstrong III David S. BenderDeborah BerkeWilliam M. BrennanCarolyn Schwenker BrodyJoan Baggett CalambokidisDonald A. CapocciaKent W. ColtonDennis J. CotterChristopher DorvalJohn P. Gleason, Jr.Mike GoodrichDelon HamptonGary P. HaneyPhilippe HardouinRobert W. Holleyman IIJoseph F. Horning, Jr.Gerald M. HowardMercy JiménezFrederick A. KoberA. Eugene Kohn Deryl McKissack Hollis S. McLoughlinMelissa A. MossRobert A. PeckWhayne S. QuinStephen M. RossDeborah Ratner SalzbergStephen E. SandherrNorbert W. Young, Jr.

Founding Trustees

Cynthia R. FieldHerbert M. FranklinEdward T. HallNancy StevensonBeverly Willis

Honorary Trustees

Harold L. AdamsHoward M. Bender M. Arthur Gensler Jr.Thomas J. KlutznickStuart A. McFarlandRobert McLean IIIElizabeth B. MoynihanMarilyn PerryJames W. ToddMallory WalkerLeonard A. Zax

Ex Officio Trustees

The Honorable Dirk KempthorneSecretary, U.S. Department of the Interior

The Honorable Alphonso JacksonSecretary, U.S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development

The Honorable James M. Inhofe Chairman, Senate Committee onEnvironment and Public Works

The Honorable Don YoungChairman, House Committee onTransportation and Infrastructure

Lurita DoanAdministrator, General ServicesAdministration

David L. WinsteadCommissioner, Public BuildingsService, General ServicesAdministration

The Honorable Alan M. HantmanArchitect of the Capitol

Allen WeinsteinArchivist of the United States

The Honorable James H. BillingtonLibrarian of Congress

Lawrence M. SmallSecretary, Smithsonian Institution

Richard MoePresident, National Trust forHistoric Preservation

Christine McEnteeExecutive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer The American Institute ofArchitects

STA F F

Administration

Jennifer BertschExecutive Assistant and Manager of Board Relations

Don HolstromSystems Administrator

Betsy May-SalazarVice President for Finance and Administration

G. Martin Moeller, Jr.Senior Vice President and Curator

Chase W. RyndExecutive Director

Rebecca WarwickHuman Resources Manager

Finance

Diane BeckhamController

Laura LeonardAccounting Manager

Curatorial

Chrysanthe B. BroikosCurator

Shelagh M. ColeRegistrar/ Manager of TravelingExhibitions

Catherine Crane FrankelDirector of Exhibitions and Collections

Cecelia GibsonRegistrar

William H. C. GriffithExhibitions Coordinator

Reed HaslachCuratorial Associate

Matthew KuhnertCuratorial Associate

Christopher MaclayPreparator

Susan Piedmont-PalladinoCurator

Laura SchiavoCurator

Deborah SorensenCuratorial Associate

Dana TwerskySenior Registrar

MaryJane E. ValadeExhibitions Designer andPreparator

Education

Corinne CannonYouth Groups Coordinator

Liz GuthrieAssistant Outreach ProgramsCoordinator

Mary HendrickseAssistant Youth GroupsCoordinator

Paul F. KillmerDirector of Public Programs

Scott KratzVice President for Education

Ann LambsonDirector of Youth Education

Kathryn McGillOutreach Programs Coordinator

Jennifer MichaelreeAssociate Youth GroupsCoordinator

Sarah Petty RiceFamily Programs Coordinator

Sarah SmithYouth Education Assistant

Jaime Van MourikPublic Programs Coordinator

Development

Suzanne BissellDirector of Individual Giving

Tim CarriganDonor Relations Coordinator

Sangita ChariFoundation and GovernmentRelations Manager

Michael DunaganDirector of Institutional Giving

Elika HemphillDirector of Development Events

Melinda HungermanCorporate and AssociationRelations Manager

Caitlin IrvinDevelopment Assistant

Melissa SlaughterMembership Manager

Shar TaylorVice President for Development

Mary ZeheAssistant Director of Development

Marketing & Communications

Jennifer ByrnePublications Designer

Johanna DunkelMarketing and CommunicationsAssociate

Bryna LipperDirector of Marketing andCommunications

Kevin MorseWebsite Administrator

Julia NeubauerEditor/Writer

Lauren SearlMarketing and CommunicationsAssociate

Museum Shop

Leslie BradshawAssistant Manager

Marcia DiehlOperations Manager

Scott GlasscoeInventory Specialist

Michael HigdonRetail Manager

Tom ZiolkowskiAssociate

Special Events

Christopher FrameDirector of Special Events

Charles ShelbySpecial Events Coordinator

Visitor Services

John BaneMuseum Operations Coordinator

Kristi CotnerTour and Volunteer Coordinator

Barry EdmundsWeekend Assistant Visitor Services Manager

Danielle FloresAdministrative Assistant/Receptionist

Ronald Keith FulwoodInformation Desk Specialist

Gregory T. HarrisDirector of Visitor Services

Eimear HughesVisitor Services Manager

David KaplanInformation Desk Specialist

Annie KalinowskiTour and Volunteer Assistant

Rose Marie KirwinInformation Desk Specialist

Doris LandauInformation Desk Specialist

Susan MittlemanInformation Desk Specialist

Bryan NormanMuseum Operations Coordinator

Gallery Representatives

Monique AndersonWilliam BarnesPatricia CunninghamHarriet CywinskiBarry EdmundsBeverly FennellJennifer HeimbeckerLouise JohnsonNathaniel KulykBarry LustbergCarla PattersonErma PersonSeymour SeligMatthew SeymourCrystal WatsonMary West Karen WhitehairSarah WhitelowEvelyn WilsonFred WilsonViktor Zavadsky

Museum Teachers

Gale Famisan RobertsonBobbie HertzfeldtNicole IvesEllen JacknainCatherine LeeKaren KonradAnne MilazzoKaren SchulienJamee TelfordAllen Travitz

Contents

1 Message from the Executive Director

2 Lessons in Arcology:

6 The Art of Building Lightly:

An Interview with Shigeru Ban

10 All that Glitters Isn’t Green

14 Museum News

22 Support

23 Trustees

24 Mystery Building

The NationalBuildingMuseumexplores

the world we build

for ourselves—from our homes,

skyscrapers and public buildings to our parks, bridges, and cities. Through exhibitions, education programs, and publications, the Museum seeks to educate the public about achievements in architecture, design, engineering, urban planning, and construction.

The Museum is supported by contributionsfrom individuals, corporations, foundations,associations, and public agencies.

cover / The Arcosanti site viewed from the south. Photo by Chris Ohlinger.

the design world. Increasingly, architectsand designers representing a broad rangeof tastes and philosophies are enthusiasti-cally embracing sustainability as an inte-gral aspect of their work. As a result,clients and consumers are learning that“going green” does not require sacrifices incomfort or aesthetics. In short, greendesign is becoming a win-win propositionfor everyone.

It is in this spirit that the Museumdeveloped the current exhibition TheGreen House: New Directions inSustainable Architecture and Design. Thisshow dramatically demonstrates that agreen lifestyle can be stylish and comfort-able. Visitors have been flocking to see theexhibition, which includes a full-scalereplica of a green house, a survey of exem-plary residential projects from around theworld, and a hands-on resource room thathelps to demystify this complex topic.

This issue of Blueprints directly andindirectly explores various green themes.It includes interviews with two architectswho, while not necessarily known as greendesigners, have consistently producedwork that reflects a sensitivity to the environment and to the well-being of occupants. Another article provides help-ful hints on potential pitfalls in goinggreen. In addition, there are shorter piecesabout recent Museum activities and news.

So enjoy the issue andbe sure to visitThe Green House if you have not alreadydone so. •

M ESSAG E FROM TH E EX ECUT I VE D I R ECTOR

blueprints 1

WASHINGTON, D.C., IN THE NOT-TOO-DISTANT FUTURE — Corporate execu-tives gathered today at the Rachel

Carson Conference Center to celebrate therelease of a scientific study confirmingthat the seemingly inexorable trend ofglobal warming has been reversed, that airquality in U.S. cities is improving steadily,and that per capita health care costsdeclined for the first time in years.Conference participants included the CEOof a major U.S. automaker, who emergedfrom one of the company’s popular solar-powered sedans made almost entirely ofrecycled—and recyclable—components.The chairwoman of an energy conglomeratespoke with reporters about her company’shighly profitable transformation from afossil fuel-based enterprise into one spe-cializing in fully sustainable technologies.A young developer, who became a mediadarling when his small contracting firmgrew rapidly thanks to its green buildingpractices, waved to spectators as he (likemost of the participants) arrived by publictransportation. A highlight was an appear-ance by the president of the United States,resplendent in an organic cotton suit andhemp tie, who proudly described how thevehicles in his motorcade were successfullyconverted to run on biofuel.

Okay, maybe the president wasn’twearing a hemp tie.

Otherwise, though, this scenario isnot as far-fetched as it might seem. Thesedays, people of all stripes, from individualconsumers to Hollywood stars to corporatehonchos, are talking about going green.What gave rise to this sweeping trend?Shock over skyrocketing fuel prices is obvi-ously a factor, but there must be some-thing else afoot.

We at the National Building Museumbelieve that a key impetus behind the bur-geoning green movement is a sea change in

Chase W. Rynd

“Green”— Not Just a Buzzword

Lessons in Arcology:An Interview with Paolo Soleri

SP-P: There's a wing of the green community

that thinks we can engineer ourselves out of our

environmental problems. You're arguing that

some of the fundamentals, and the beauty, of

building sustainably are in older ways of building,

and in passive technologies.

PS: Well, yes, because our biotechnology hasthe wisdom of about a few million years. Thisnew technology has the wisdom of about 10,15, 20 years, so we should be a little cautiousabout coming out with all such ideal solu-tions—in practice or in reality somemight turn out to be problematic, besides[there's] the humbling of the greatness ofour physiology and the organic nature ofour systems. That's the point I'm making.

SP-P: What about the impact of the internet and

communications technology on how we build

and use land? Some people think it will drive us

to sprawl more and others think that we'll begin

to live together out of desire instead of need.

PS: Certainly we are aware that communi-cation is fundamental, and a good networkof communication is one of the best things

LESSONS IN ARCOLOGY: AN INTERVIEW WITH PAOLO SOLERI

2 blueprints blueprints 3

FEATU R E

that can happen to us, but I think we [miss]the target when we do not realize that ashumans—as organisms—we are verydependent on one another physically, notjust intellectually. So a website is a tremen-dous asset, but it lacks the, let's say, thethree-dimensionality of coming together ofpeople and what develops when you engagein activities which are not just your own personal world—but that they develop interms of society and possibly humanity.

SP-P: That's some of the basis of the life of

Arcosanti— the stimulation of human contact.

PS: Yes, in very elementary ways andsometimes very crude ways, but part ofthat is the limitation—our brain limita-tion—the consequence of the number ofpeople involved and the financial difficul-ties that we have.

SP-P: I noticed you have a weekly gathering for

questions and discussion at Arcosanti that you

call “School of Thought”—“SOFT.” That is a

face-to-face gathering, right? It's not a webcast

or a podcast?

PS: Not yet, but we wouldn't mind to enlargethe idea. There is some interest developingnow in people outside of Arcosanti, thatthat should be pursued, but again we arevery limited by affordability and the timethat it takes, and the knowledge that ittakes. We would like to have some, let'ssay, professionals in terms of thinking andtechnology and philosophy and so on.

SP-P: This question of communications brings

up how we educate people to think about their

environment differently. There will be people

reading this, for example, besides just architects

and planners; there will be members of the gen-

eral public, policy makers, and politicians. What

leadership roles might these different groups

play in addressing environmental issues?

PS: I think all of them are very critical. I mean evidently they are necessary. But Ithink that the main problem is that we aretrying to run away from ourselves, andthat's what suburban exurbias are expressingvery well. So this running away doesn't haveonly psychological consequences, it has alsophysical problems, and that's exemplifiedby our moving around. We selected theautomobile and we are paying the pricenow that is becoming enormous.

There's a movie, Who Killed theElectric Car, a very interesting movie towatch. I think that most of us come out of the movie, say, “Oh, my God, what arewe doing to our baby?” Because the auto-mobile is an icon that we cannot evenimagine to eliminate. So what has beendone to the [electric] car? It's shown as avictim of the technocrats of oil and energy,etc. The mistake there is very self-evident,and the problem is not what they do to thecar, the problem is that the car is pollutionby itself, and that's because it tends to separate the life of individuals to theextremes of hermitage, as I put it.

SUSAN PIEDMONT-PALLADINO: The design

community's vocabulary is full of words like

“sustainability,” “green building,” and “smart

growth.” Although you may not have called them

by those names, these are things you've been

talking about for 30 to 40 years. I'm curious about

your perspective on this rising and falling interest.

PAOLO SOLERI: The interest is very impor-tant; evidently we are making many steps,which are the positive steps to do at thispoint. My initiative—and it has been partof my [philosophical] makeup—was to tryto work in a somehow passive way in makinguse of the climate. I'm still very muchattached to that. And one reason is thatwhen we develop a very elaborate technologyto [create a] green building, somehow we aretrying to take away some of the beauty ofthe organism—of the human being—andconsign it to technology. Things that wecan do—that the human organism has beendoing for millions of years—we tend now tobelieve that we can serve them better withtechnology. So we are developing what youmight call a very artificial condition.

by Susan Piedmont-Palladino

The wide use of the term “green,” referring

to sustainable design, is a relatively recent

trend, but the idea that environmental

concerns should be an integral and conscious

aspect of the design process is by no means

new. In the 1960s, for example, Italian-born

architect Paolo Soleri articulated a philosophy

he called “arcology,” a portmanteau word

combining “architecture” and “ecology.”

The fundamental precept of arcology is that

extremely compact communities offer great

environmental and social advantages, and

for decades, Soleri has been putting this

theory into practice by building a community

known as Arcosanti, located about 70 miles

north of Phoenix.

In anticipation of Soleri’s lecture at the

National Building Museum on October 23,

curator Susan Piedmont-Palladino recently

interviewed him by telephone.

opposite / Paolo Soleri. Photo courtesy of the Cosanti Foundation.

below / Hexahedron, Arcology, population 170,000. Page 113 from“City in the Image of Man.” Originaldrawing black ink on vellum. (Note the outline of the Empire StateBuilding at right to indicate the comparative scale of the proposedcommunity.)Courtesy of the Cosanti Foundation.

Lessons in Arcology:An Interview with Paolo Soleri

SP-P: There's a wing of the green community

that thinks we can engineer ourselves out of our

environmental problems. You're arguing that

some of the fundamentals, and the beauty, of

building sustainably are in older ways of building,

and in passive technologies.

PS: Well, yes, because our biotechnology hasthe wisdom of about a few million years. Thisnew technology has the wisdom of about 10,15, 20 years, so we should be a little cautiousabout coming out with all such ideal solu-tions—in practice or in reality somemight turn out to be problematic, besides[there's] the humbling of the greatness ofour physiology and the organic nature ofour systems. That's the point I'm making.

SP-P: What about the impact of the internet and

communications technology on how we build

and use land? Some people think it will drive us

to sprawl more and others think that we'll begin

to live together out of desire instead of need.

PS: Certainly we are aware that communi-cation is fundamental, and a good networkof communication is one of the best things

FEATU R E

that can happen to us, but I think we [miss]the target when we do not realize that ashumans—as organisms—we are verydependent on one another physically, notjust intellectually. So a website is a tremen-dous asset, but it lacks the, let's say, thethree-dimensionality of coming together ofpeople and what develops when you engagein activities which are not just your own personal world—but that they develop interms of society and possibly humanity.

SP-P: That's some of the basis of the life of

Arcosanti— the stimulation of human contact.

PS: Yes, in very elementary ways andsometimes very crude ways, but part ofthat is the limitation—our brain limita-tion—the consequence of the number ofpeople involved and the financial difficul-ties that we have.

SP-P: I noticed you have a weekly gathering for

questions and discussion at Arcosanti that you

call “School of Thought”—“SOFT.” That is a

face-to-face gathering, right? It's not a webcast

or a podcast?

PS: Not yet, but we wouldn't mind to enlargethe idea. There is some interest developingnow in people outside of Arcosanti, thatthat should be pursued, but again we arevery limited by affordability and the timethat it takes, and the knowledge that ittakes. We would like to have some, let'ssay, professionals in terms of thinking andtechnology and philosophy and so on.

SP-P: This question of communications brings

up how we educate people to think about their

environment differently. There will be people

reading this, for example, besides just architects

and planners; there will be members of the gen-

eral public, policy makers, and politicians. What

leadership roles might these different groups

play in addressing environmental issues?

PS: I think all of them are very critical. I mean evidently they are necessary. But Ithink that the main problem is that we aretrying to run away from ourselves, andthat's what suburban exurbias are expressingvery well. So this running away doesn't haveonly psychological consequences, it has alsophysical problems, and that's exemplifiedby our moving around. We selected theautomobile and we are paying the pricenow that is becoming enormous.

There's a movie, Who Killed theElectric Car, a very interesting movie towatch. I think that most of us come out of the movie, say, “Oh, my God, what arewe doing to our baby?” Because the auto-mobile is an icon that we cannot evenimagine to eliminate. So what has beendone to the [electric] car? It's shown as avictim of the technocrats of oil and energy,etc. The mistake there is very self-evident,and the problem is not what they do to thecar, the problem is that the car is pollutionby itself, and that's because it tends to separate the life of individuals to theextremes of hermitage, as I put it.

SUSAN PIEDMONT-PALLADINO: The design

community's vocabulary is full of words like

“sustainability,” “green building,” and “smart

growth.” Although you may not have called them

by those names, these are things you've been

talking about for 30 to 40 years. I'm curious about

your perspective on this rising and falling interest.

PAOLO SOLERI: The interest is very impor-tant; evidently we are making many steps,which are the positive steps to do at thispoint. My initiative—and it has been partof my [philosophical] makeup—was to tryto work in a somehow passive way in makinguse of the climate. I'm still very muchattached to that. And one reason is thatwhen we develop a very elaborate technologyto [create a] green building, somehow we aretrying to take away some of the beauty ofthe organism—of the human being—andconsign it to technology. Things that wecan do—that the human organism has beendoing for millions of years—we tend now tobelieve that we can serve them better withtechnology. So we are developing what youmight call a very artificial condition.

by Susan Piedmont-Palladino

The wide use of the term “green,” referring

to sustainable design, is a relatively recent

trend, but the idea that environmental

concerns should be an integral and conscious

aspect of the design process is by no means

new. In the 1960s, for example, Italian-born

architect Paolo Soleri articulated a philosophy

he called “arcology,” a portmanteau word

combining “architecture” and “ecology.”

The fundamental precept of arcology is that

extremely compact communities offer great

environmental and social advantages, and

for decades, Soleri has been putting this

theory into practice by building a community

known as Arcosanti, located about 70 miles

north of Phoenix.

In anticipation of Soleri’s lecture at the

National Building Museum on October 23,

curator Susan Piedmont-Palladino recently

interviewed him by telephone.

opposite / Paolo Soleri. Photo courtesy of the Cosanti Foundation.

below / Hexahedron, Arcology, population 170,000. Page 113 from“City in the Image of Man.” Originaldrawing black ink on vellum. (Note the outline of the Empire StateBuilding at right to indicate the comparative scale of the proposedcommunity.)Courtesy of the Cosanti Foundation.

FEATU R E

SP-P: The car pollutes on two levels. Hybrids

can solve some of that, but you're really talking

about a kind of social and cultural pollution.

PS: Yes, it's physical also because of theenormity of the car network that we donot consider, I mean from mining thematerial to this gigantic network of high-ways, and then the large size of themachines themselves, where you need 300horsepower to move one horsepower likeus. You know the horse was a very goodexample of something that was too big forour well-being, but the horse served a pur-pose which was very simple logistics. Butnow we need 200 or more horsepower, andwe begin to face the consequences.

SP-P: In that sense the development of the clean

automobile only solves one problem, because

people can continue to sprawl but with a little

bit of their guilt assuaged.

PS: Exactly. We are improving somethingto make it worse. Because when we have a very clean car, instead of having one carto every family we might have four carsper family. So all the other problems arethere and they are not going to go away,they're getting worse.

SP-P: Let's talk about your neighboring city,

Phoenix, which now covers 517 square miles,

bigger than Los Angeles. If in a hundred years

the city contracts, can that infrastructure be

redeemed, like a second-growth forest, or does

it become just a ruin? What happens to cities

like Los Angeles and Phoenix?

PS: If it was in another country I wouldsay it would be a question mark. Here itseems to be that the one thing that we love

is to explode buildings; we demolish resi-dential structures, sports stadiums, etc. We demolish just about everything justbecause they're older or because they arein the way of something else and so on.One could imagine a systematic dynamitingof all the city, and that sounds horrendous,but that's what might happen. The thing isto find a way of guiding the transportationwith a better knowledge or wisdom thanthe guidance we're offering now, instead ofdoing the same thing a little better, whichis the wrong way to go about it.

SP-P: Even as things look bleak from many per-

spectives, your work is inspiring on many levels,

including the provocative publications and vivid

drawings and models you produce to convey

your ideas. Can drawings change how people

think about their environment?

PS: Yes, but, you know one question is,people ask “who does he believe himself tobe to tell me what to do?” But that's thetask of the designer: somehow try to tellthe client what might be worth doing.

SP-P: You are publishing a series called Quaderni

—“notebooks”— titled “What if…” You talk

about it as posing an antidote to certainty.

PS: The “What if” comes about because Iam definitely against dogmatism. So, I saidlet's talk about hypothesis because that'sthe most we can do. We don't really knowwhat we are and where we come from, andwhat reality itself is. So it's always a ques-tion mark even when we think we come upwith the best answer. “What if” is thatposition of dealing with hypothesis, notdealing with the truth which doesn't existas far as I know, and it doesn't existbecause of the simple reason that reality isself-creating. And that self-creation meansthat there is not a truth, but there is thetrueness of the process of self-creation.

SP-P: I'm curious about how your own architec-

ture, the project of Arcosanti itself, is possibly

a built version of the question of “What if.”

Do you think that architects should be engaged

in providing questions, “What if's,” through their

architecture, or providing answers?

PS: Architects are in many ways arrogantindividuals in the sense that they knowthe answers and they want to developwhat I call orchids out of those answers.

So the idea of all the architects in generalis to build a beautiful house or whatever,that almost cuts the architect away fromreality because the reality is not just orchids,it's forest—it's the whole substance of theorganic world. But this tendency to be veryself-centered is not giving the architect theright initial impulse, which is the impulse ofserving about six billions of individuals andnot just serving an elite.

We, as architects, tend to be individu-als, which is good, but we forget the factthat if I'm a painter I might become idio-syncratic, but as a painter I'm not going totransform the lives of people. But as anarchitect I am doing that—I am a trans-former. We are visionaries, which meansthat we would like to live our vision, but ithappens to be the wrong vision because it'smarred by and married to this endlessproposition of materialism. There's a dilem-ma there, about the very nature of intellectand knowledge—that is, of human life.

SP-P: What advice might you have for today's

architecture students who may be burdened by

the thought of the world they're about to inherit?

PS: The future doesn't exist so don't getstuck with that. We only create the past;we never create the future because thefuture is nonsense. It doesn't exist, period.But it's difficult because we are not invit-ing the young child today to think interms of generosity or friendship or love orpassion, and so on. You start with the dol-lar bill and go on from there, and you'll besuccessful. And unfortunately that's whatwe are doing now. The achievements oftechnology are miraculous, but they arealso a killer when they become the reasonand not the means for something.

SP-P: Well, if we are really constructing a past,

ideally we would construct a past that we all

value. How do we go about that? Will we return

to the fundamentals you spoke of before, like

passive technologies?

PS: Consider a village, a medieval village inEurope, for instance, where the people werestarving, people had plagues and all sorts ofthings to cope with, and they would will-ingly get engaged in building a cathedral.That's a commitment that's inconceivable tous, and it's rightly inconceivable becausethere is something more important than

building a beautiful building. But there wasa part of that kind of humanity that waswilling to give up so much for somethingthat they felt was so much greater. Thegreatness is escaping us; it's a dilemma,which comes naturally to us—that's why itis so difficult to cope with.

SP-P: Is there anything else you'd like to talk

about that I haven't mentioned?

PS: There are two words—“reformation”and “reformulation”—that I've been using. Ithink what we need now is not reformation,which is a stale mantra after all. So we needto reformulate our position vis-à-vis realityand vis-à-vis all the people and animals andso on, in order to give a new dimension toindividual and collective responsibilities. Weneed the reformulation of the reformation.So I'm pushing the distinction. •

top / Paolo Soleri with residents andworkshop participants in the CeramicsApse at Arcosanti in the early 1970s. Photo by Ivan Pintar.

above / Solare, the Lean Linear City.At the base of the city on the southerlyside are greenhouse aprons and onthe northerly side are orchards. Photo by Dennis Konstantin Gerigk.

above / Arcosanti Foundry Apse,West Housing, and the Vaults, seen in the late afternoon light. Photo by Ivan Pintar.

below / Ceramica Artistica Solimene,Campania, Italy, 1954, as seen in2000. Soleri designed this factory fora family-owned ceramics company. Photo by Robert Vignoli.

FEATU R E

SP-P: The car pollutes on two levels. Hybrids

can solve some of that, but you're really talking

about a kind of social and cultural pollution.

PS: Yes, it's physical also because of theenormity of the car network that we donot consider, I mean from mining thematerial to this gigantic network of high-ways, and then the large size of themachines themselves, where you need 300horsepower to move one horsepower likeus. You know the horse was a very goodexample of something that was too big forour well-being, but the horse served a pur-pose which was very simple logistics. Butnow we need 200 or more horsepower, andwe begin to face the consequences.

SP-P: In that sense the development of the clean

automobile only solves one problem, because

people can continue to sprawl but with a little

bit of their guilt assuaged.

PS: Exactly. We are improving somethingto make it worse. Because when we have a very clean car, instead of having one carto every family we might have four carsper family. So all the other problems arethere and they are not going to go away,they're getting worse.

SP-P: Let's talk about your neighboring city,

Phoenix, which now covers 517 square miles,

bigger than Los Angeles. If in a hundred years

the city contracts, can that infrastructure be

redeemed, like a second-growth forest, or does

it become just a ruin? What happens to cities

like Los Angeles and Phoenix?

PS: If it was in another country I wouldsay it would be a question mark. Here itseems to be that the one thing that we love

is to explode buildings; we demolish resi-dential structures, sports stadiums, etc. We demolish just about everything justbecause they're older or because they arein the way of something else and so on.One could imagine a systematic dynamitingof all the city, and that sounds horrendous,but that's what might happen. The thing isto find a way of guiding the transportationwith a better knowledge or wisdom thanthe guidance we're offering now, instead ofdoing the same thing a little better, whichis the wrong way to go about it.

SP-P: Even as things look bleak from many per-

spectives, your work is inspiring on many levels,

including the provocative publications and vivid

drawings and models you produce to convey

your ideas. Can drawings change how people

think about their environment?

PS: Yes, but, you know one question is,people ask “who does he believe himself tobe to tell me what to do?” But that's thetask of the designer: somehow try to tellthe client what might be worth doing.

SP-P: You are publishing a series called Quaderni

—“notebooks”— titled “What if…” You talk

about it as posing an antidote to certainty.

PS: The “What if” comes about because Iam definitely against dogmatism. So, I saidlet's talk about hypothesis because that'sthe most we can do. We don't really knowwhat we are and where we come from, andwhat reality itself is. So it's always a ques-tion mark even when we think we come upwith the best answer. “What if” is thatposition of dealing with hypothesis, notdealing with the truth which doesn't existas far as I know, and it doesn't existbecause of the simple reason that reality isself-creating. And that self-creation meansthat there is not a truth, but there is thetrueness of the process of self-creation.

SP-P: I'm curious about how your own architec-

ture, the project of Arcosanti itself, is possibly

a built version of the question of “What if.”

Do you think that architects should be engaged

in providing questions, “What if's,” through their

architecture, or providing answers?

PS: Architects are in many ways arrogantindividuals in the sense that they knowthe answers and they want to developwhat I call orchids out of those answers.

So the idea of all the architects in generalis to build a beautiful house or whatever,that almost cuts the architect away fromreality because the reality is not just orchids,it's forest—it's the whole substance of theorganic world. But this tendency to be veryself-centered is not giving the architect theright initial impulse, which is the impulse ofserving about six billions of individuals andnot just serving an elite.

We, as architects, tend to be individu-als, which is good, but we forget the factthat if I'm a painter I might become idio-syncratic, but as a painter I'm not going totransform the lives of people. But as anarchitect I am doing that—I am a trans-former. We are visionaries, which meansthat we would like to live our vision, but ithappens to be the wrong vision because it'smarred by and married to this endlessproposition of materialism. There's a dilem-ma there, about the very nature of intellectand knowledge—that is, of human life.

SP-P: What advice might you have for today's

architecture students who may be burdened by

the thought of the world they're about to inherit?

PS: The future doesn't exist so don't getstuck with that. We only create the past;we never create the future because thefuture is nonsense. It doesn't exist, period.But it's difficult because we are not invit-ing the young child today to think interms of generosity or friendship or love orpassion, and so on. You start with the dol-lar bill and go on from there, and you'll besuccessful. And unfortunately that's whatwe are doing now. The achievements oftechnology are miraculous, but they arealso a killer when they become the reasonand not the means for something.

SP-P: Well, if we are really constructing a past,

ideally we would construct a past that we all

value. How do we go about that? Will we return

to the fundamentals you spoke of before, like

passive technologies?

PS: Consider a village, a medieval village inEurope, for instance, where the people werestarving, people had plagues and all sorts ofthings to cope with, and they would will-ingly get engaged in building a cathedral.That's a commitment that's inconceivable tous, and it's rightly inconceivable becausethere is something more important than

building a beautiful building. But there wasa part of that kind of humanity that waswilling to give up so much for somethingthat they felt was so much greater. Thegreatness is escaping us; it's a dilemma,which comes naturally to us—that's why itis so difficult to cope with.

SP-P: Is there anything else you'd like to talk

about that I haven't mentioned?

PS: There are two words—“reformation”and “reformulation”—that I've been using. Ithink what we need now is not reformation,which is a stale mantra after all. So we needto reformulate our position vis-à-vis realityand vis-à-vis all the people and animals andso on, in order to give a new dimension toindividual and collective responsibilities. Weneed the reformulation of the reformation.So I'm pushing the distinction. •

top / Paolo Soleri with residents andworkshop participants in the CeramicsApse at Arcosanti in the early 1970s. Photo by Ivan Pintar.

above / Solare, the Lean Linear City.At the base of the city on the southerlyside are greenhouse aprons and onthe northerly side are orchards. Photo by Dennis Konstantin Gerigk.

above / Arcosanti Foundry Apse,West Housing, and the Vaults, seen in the late afternoon light. Photo by Ivan Pintar.

below / Ceramica Artistica Solimene,Campania, Italy, 1954, as seen in2000. Soleri designed this factory fora family-owned ceramics company. Photo by Robert Vignoli.

FEATU R E

blueprints 76 blueprints

THE ART OF BUILDING LIGHTLY: AN INTERVIEW WITH SHIGERU BAN

Martin Moeller: Do you consider yourself a

“green” architect?

Shigeru Ban: I started developing the papertube structures in 1986, when people werenot talking very much about recycling,ecology, and sustainability. But the truth isthat I just didn’t want to waste material—it’s as simple as that. And then the so-calledfashion of sustainability or “green” cameafterwards in the 1990s, and so I was putunder the label of “environment-friendlyarchitect,” but that is not my strategy. Ijust want to use any material where it is.

MM: And yet those are all important elements of

sustainable design: using locally available materi-

als, using them wisely, and minimizing waste.

SB: Well, when they made [sustainability agoal] for the Japanese pavilion at theHannover Expo 2000, I was chosen by thegovernment because I had been buildingout of recycled paper. So they were expectingme to design the building out of recycledmaterial. Usually when an architectdesigns a building, the ultimate goal of thedesign process is the completed building.But my ultimate concern as a designer wasnot the completion, but the demolition.Most expo pavilions are built to stand forsix months and then we dismantle themand we create lots of waste. That is theproblem of an expo pavilion. So, that’s why Iwanted to design the building out of recycledmaterial—but also I wanted to reuse orrecycle most of the building materialsafter the building was demolished.

So I started working with the localmanufacturer to have the structure recy-cled [after the expo], and not only thepaper structure, but also the foundation.Concrete is a difficult material to recycle,so I made wooden boxes filled with sand asa foundation instead of concrete. The gen-eral contractor didn’t like the idea, but

that is what I did. So, that was the firsttime I designed something with sustain-ability as a strategy of the design.

MM: Like the expo pavilion, many of your most

famous projects were designed to be temporary.

Do you have a particular interest in buildings

that are intended to exist for only a short time?

SB: First of all, for me there is no differ-ence between permanent structures andtemporary structures; it’s all the same forme. Even a temporary structure has to besafe; you have to make sure it can becomepermanent if it stands for longer thanexpected—it depends on the function ofthe project and also whether people lovethe building or not. For example, even aconcrete building or a steel building can betemporary. During the so-called “bubble”period in Japan, many developers wouldbuy land and destroy the existing buildingto make a new one, so they were throwingout [entire structures].

But the church I built after the Kobeearthquake in 1995 made out of cardboard

tubes—paper tubes—became permanent,because people loved it and it became a sym-bol of the city. And so it was there for tenyears. Then they moved it to Taiwan, wherethey also had an earthquake in 1999. So eventhe paper structure can become permanentand even a concrete structure can be verytemporary. So, there’s no difference for mebetween temporary and permanent.

MM: You once said that you actually prefer to

use “weak” materials.

SB: First of all, it’s not only weak. It’s justthat I always try to use any available mate-rial, whatever is available. Usually forbuildings we use only concrete, steel,wood, and brick. But whatever is aroundus—even glass, plastic, paper—anythingcan be a structural material.

For most of the projects I did in thebeginning of my career, I didn’t have a bigbudget for the building, so always I had touse inexpensive material—or somethingaround us. And I also like to use the mater-ial where it is. Historically engineers havebeen developing structures to make every-thing stronger—the structures havebecome more acrobatic and high tech. Buteven using a weak material where it is, wecan build the structure just like any otherstructure, as long as we test the materialand we calculate and we develop it fur-ther. Anything can be a building material.Also, when engineers develop some newmaterial or new structural system, newarchitecture can come out of that.Otherwise we would just be repeatingstyles of the past.

I want to develop my own structures—unique structures—instead of follow-ing or copying other styles or architects.

MM: Using new and untried materials can be

very difficult for a variety of reasons. Often

there are building codes and nervous clients

who prevent experimentation in building

designs. How do you get over those challenges

in order to ensure that the building is completed

according to your design?

SB: Well, I always work with a specialist,engineer, and consultant from the verybeginning. And since I’ve been using theunusual materials for structures, I alwayshave to get government permission byshowing the testing data and calculations.So, I have a different engineer dependingon the type of structure. And also I have atesting engineer. So, this collaboration isvery important and I start choosing theappropriate consultant and engineer fromthe beginning of the project.

MM: Some of your earliest projects were designs

for exhibitions, which are temporary and of course

often have very limited budgets. Does that early

experience continue to inform your work?

SB: I started designing exhibitions because Ididn’t have any working experience as anarchitect. I had just started my own practiceimmediately after I graduated from universi-ty. So, the only thing I could do was designexhibitions. Even after I got some small com-missions to design houses, always the bud-gets were very low. So, I always had to useraw materials interestingly.

So, you are right—working at design-ing exhibitions really did help me to devel-op this kind of idea further.

MM: You have designed temporary shelters for

the victims of natural disasters. As you know,

we had a terrible disaster—Hurricane Katrina—

here in the United States last year. Governmental

agencies have had difficulty providing shelter to

The Art of Building Lightly:An Interview with Shigeru Ban

by Martin Moeller

The term “paper architect” is often used to

describe one whose work is mostly theoretical,

with little experience in actually getting

projects built. In the case of Shigeru Ban, the

moniker could be equally apt, but for a very

different reason. The Japanese architect has

become famous worldwide for his “paper

tube” structures. Made of what we would

more typically call cardboard, these tubes

have surprising strength and durability, and

Ban has used them to create a variety of

delicate, even fragile-looking buildings that

are in fact extremely sturdy.

While his use of paper tubes began before the

current green design movement really took

off, Ban is well regarded by many environ-

mentalists because of the inherent sustain-

ability of his projects, which rely on materials

with low embodied energy and use common-

sense strategies to take advantage of natural

light and ventilation. In this interview,

conducted before his public lecture at the

National Building Museum on March 27,

2006, Ban shares his views on green design,

post-disaster construction, and the architec-

tural culture of his native Japan.

top / Rendering of Centre Pompidou-Metz project in Metz, France. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

above / Paper Temporary Studio,erected at the Centre Pompidou in Paris, 2004. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

opposite / Shigeru Ban during theinterview at the National BuildingMuseum.Photo by Museum staff.

FEATU R E

THE ART OF BUILDING LIGHTLY: AN INTERVIEW WITH SHIGERU BAN

Martin Moeller: Do you consider yourself a

“green” architect?

Shigeru Ban: I started developing the papertube structures in 1986, when people werenot talking very much about recycling,ecology, and sustainability. But the truth isthat I just didn’t want to waste material—it’s as simple as that. And then the so-calledfashion of sustainability or “green” cameafterwards in the 1990s, and so I was putunder the label of “environment-friendlyarchitect,” but that is not my strategy. Ijust want to use any material where it is.

MM: And yet those are all important elements of

sustainable design: using locally available materi-

als, using them wisely, and minimizing waste.

SB: Well, when they made [sustainability agoal] for the Japanese pavilion at theHannover Expo 2000, I was chosen by thegovernment because I had been buildingout of recycled paper. So they were expectingme to design the building out of recycledmaterial. Usually when an architectdesigns a building, the ultimate goal of thedesign process is the completed building.But my ultimate concern as a designer wasnot the completion, but the demolition.Most expo pavilions are built to stand forsix months and then we dismantle themand we create lots of waste. That is theproblem of an expo pavilion. So, that’s why Iwanted to design the building out of recycledmaterial—but also I wanted to reuse orrecycle most of the building materialsafter the building was demolished.

So I started working with the localmanufacturer to have the structure recy-cled [after the expo], and not only thepaper structure, but also the foundation.Concrete is a difficult material to recycle,so I made wooden boxes filled with sand asa foundation instead of concrete. The gen-eral contractor didn’t like the idea, but

that is what I did. So, that was the firsttime I designed something with sustain-ability as a strategy of the design.

MM: Like the expo pavilion, many of your most

famous projects were designed to be temporary.

Do you have a particular interest in buildings

that are intended to exist for only a short time?

SB: First of all, for me there is no differ-ence between permanent structures andtemporary structures; it’s all the same forme. Even a temporary structure has to besafe; you have to make sure it can becomepermanent if it stands for longer thanexpected—it depends on the function ofthe project and also whether people lovethe building or not. For example, even aconcrete building or a steel building can betemporary. During the so-called “bubble”period in Japan, many developers wouldbuy land and destroy the existing buildingto make a new one, so they were throwingout [entire structures].

But the church I built after the Kobeearthquake in 1995 made out of cardboard

tubes—paper tubes—became permanent,because people loved it and it became a sym-bol of the city. And so it was there for tenyears. Then they moved it to Taiwan, wherethey also had an earthquake in 1999. So eventhe paper structure can become permanentand even a concrete structure can be verytemporary. So, there’s no difference for mebetween temporary and permanent.

MM: You once said that you actually prefer to

use “weak” materials.

SB: First of all, it’s not only weak. It’s justthat I always try to use any available mate-rial, whatever is available. Usually forbuildings we use only concrete, steel,wood, and brick. But whatever is aroundus—even glass, plastic, paper—anythingcan be a structural material.

For most of the projects I did in thebeginning of my career, I didn’t have a bigbudget for the building, so always I had touse inexpensive material—or somethingaround us. And I also like to use the mater-ial where it is. Historically engineers havebeen developing structures to make every-thing stronger—the structures havebecome more acrobatic and high tech. Buteven using a weak material where it is, wecan build the structure just like any otherstructure, as long as we test the materialand we calculate and we develop it fur-ther. Anything can be a building material.Also, when engineers develop some newmaterial or new structural system, newarchitecture can come out of that.Otherwise we would just be repeatingstyles of the past.

I want to develop my own structures—unique structures—instead of follow-ing or copying other styles or architects.

MM: Using new and untried materials can be

very difficult for a variety of reasons. Often

there are building codes and nervous clients

who prevent experimentation in building

designs. How do you get over those challenges

in order to ensure that the building is completed

according to your design?

SB: Well, I always work with a specialist,engineer, and consultant from the verybeginning. And since I’ve been using theunusual materials for structures, I alwayshave to get government permission byshowing the testing data and calculations.So, I have a different engineer dependingon the type of structure. And also I have atesting engineer. So, this collaboration isvery important and I start choosing theappropriate consultant and engineer fromthe beginning of the project.

MM: Some of your earliest projects were designs

for exhibitions, which are temporary and of course

often have very limited budgets. Does that early

experience continue to inform your work?

SB: I started designing exhibitions because Ididn’t have any working experience as anarchitect. I had just started my own practiceimmediately after I graduated from universi-ty. So, the only thing I could do was designexhibitions. Even after I got some small com-missions to design houses, always the bud-gets were very low. So, I always had to useraw materials interestingly.

So, you are right—working at design-ing exhibitions really did help me to devel-op this kind of idea further.

MM: You have designed temporary shelters for

the victims of natural disasters. As you know,

we had a terrible disaster—Hurricane Katrina—

here in the United States last year. Governmental

agencies have had difficulty providing shelter to

The Art of Building Lightly:An Interview with Shigeru Ban

by Martin Moeller

The term “paper architect” is often used to

describe one whose work is mostly theoretical,

with little experience in actually getting

projects built. In the case of Shigeru Ban, the

moniker could be equally apt, but for a very

different reason. The Japanese architect has

become famous worldwide for his “paper

tube” structures. Made of what we would

more typically call cardboard, these tubes

have surprising strength and durability, and

Ban has used them to create a variety of

delicate, even fragile-looking buildings that

are in fact extremely sturdy.

While his use of paper tubes began before the

current green design movement really took

off, Ban is well regarded by many environ-

mentalists because of the inherent sustain-

ability of his projects, which rely on materials

with low embodied energy and use common-

sense strategies to take advantage of natural

light and ventilation. In this interview,

conducted before his public lecture at the

National Building Museum on March 27,

2006, Ban shares his views on green design,

post-disaster construction, and the architec-

tural culture of his native Japan.

top / Rendering of Centre Pompidou-Metz project in Metz, France. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

above / Paper Temporary Studio,erected at the Centre Pompidou in Paris, 2004. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

opposite / Shigeru Ban during theinterview at the National BuildingMuseum.Photo by Museum staff.

FEATU R E THE ART OF BUILDING LIGHTLY: AN INTERVIEW WITH SHIGERU BAN

space only when people are awake. Whenwe sleep we stop all the heating.

Japanese people have more flexibilityover their lifestyles and also, depending onthe generation, the lifestyle is totallychanging. Like my grandparents’ genera-tion—they have to have a tatami, Japanesemat, to sleep on the floor. And my parents’generation, they had to have both a westernstyle room and also tatami floor mats. Inmy generation, the tatami floor mat hasbecome just a symbol. We cannot live inthat kind of lifestyle any more. So thelifestyle is constantly changing.

And also we don’t have the strong liability that you have. We don’t sue eachother! So that really gives us more freedomto do something experimental.

MM: In Japan, there is a very strong tradition

of cooperation throughout a project among the

architect, the engineer, the client, and the con-

tractor that doesn’t exist here in the United

States. Is it easier to produce a good building

in Japan than in America?

SB: Actually, it’s true. It’s easier to createthe better building [in Japan]. First of all,contractors there have very good crafts-

them out of the park, because they wereafraid the park was turning into a slum.But I think we needed to build temporaryhouses for them because they could notmove into the common housing. So I wentto the city to ask permission but they saidno. But the person whom I met—I wasvery lucky, because he [ignored] what I wasdoing. So, sometimes I do like the guerillamethod—just do it and prove how good[the results] are. City officials [are always]so strict and they don’t want to make anyexceptions. But sometimes we need excep-tions, but without showing how good [suchprojects can be], it’s impossible to convincethem, that’s why I just do it without per-mission, even against the government policy.This is what I’ve been doing in Kobe, Turkey,India, or in Sri Lanka.

MM: How much has the traditional architectural

culture of Japan influenced your work?

SB: I have an office in Tokyo and mynationality is Japanese, but all my architec-ture education is from the United States.So, it’s very difficult to say [whether] I am an American architect or a Japanesearchitect. Also now I’m working in manydifferent countries.

Some people always ask me, “Becauseyou’re a Japanese architect you use paper?”But we don’t have any culture of usingpaper as a structural element in Japanesearchitecture. We just use the paper as ascreen. For me the paper tube structuralsystem is more like [ancient] Greek archi-tecture proportionally, so it really hasnothing to do with Japanese culture.

MM: How does the contemporary architectural cul-

ture of Japan differ from that of the United States?

SB: In Japan, even middle class peopleoften hire architects to design their ownhouses. That doesn’t happen as much inthe United States, Europe, and developingcountries, where only the rich people hirearchitects to build big houses. Even middleclass people have hired architects to designinteresting, but small houses. And that is avery interesting opportunity for youngarchitects to develop themselves.

And also the Japanese lifestyle is stillvery flexible. Traditionally we don’t heatthe whole house, we just heat whereverpeople eat and work—also we heat the

the people who were displaced. How have

you worked with political agencies to ensure

that your designs get built and people are

actually housed?

SB: First of all, I created [my own] so-calledNGO, or non-governmental organization.Besides when I was working for UnitedNations High Commissioner for refugees in Rwanda, I have never worked directlyfor a government.

For the architect, it’s impossible to pro-vide 100,000 houses for the majority of thevictims of a natural disaster. But what I cando is look for some minority people who havea particular problem. For example, in Kobe,the government built temporary houses out-side the city, because there was land [there].And some of the Vietnamese refugees whohad just been accepted by the governmentten years ago could not move into the govern-ment temporary housing because they hadonly worked in a particular factory not inthat area, and if they would leave their original place they would lose their jobs.That’s why they had to keep sleeping intheir very small apartments covered withplastic sheets. So, then I found that I couldsolve their particular problems by making a shelter for them.

And sometimes I’m going against gov-ernment policy. Even Kobe—the govern-ment didn’t want us to continue buildingtemporary houses. And there were localneighborhood people who tried to kick

manship and skill. Always we depend ontrust, not on contractual agreements.Always we try to keep a good relationshipwith the client.

If you do an experimental building, itis likely that there will be some problemsafterwards. But as long as I keep a goodrelationship with the client and as long asthe client likes the house, it’s no problem—we just have to fix it. And we never sueeach other! And the contractor is usuallyvery helpful in suggesting how to help us[solve the problems that arise].

Since I started working in other coun-tries, I always feel that architects in Japanenjoy broad public support because of this.And with Japanese clients, not only for theresidential projects, they try to build whatyou designed. However, in other countries,even if I have won a competition, it’s noteasy to realize what I designed. Alwaysthere’s a big debate and I have to convincethe client and the contractor little by little.And also the contractors are not as helpfulas Japanese contractors.

In Japan, it’s much easier, so we are really spoiled. •

above / Paper Log Houses built toaccommodate people left homeless byan earthquake in Kobe, Japan, 1995. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

above / “Naked House,” Saitama,Japan, 2000, as featured in the bookThe Green House: New Directionsin Sustainable Architecture andDesign, published by the NationalBuilding Museum and PrincetonArchitectural Press to accompanythe exhibition of the same title. Photo by Hiroyuki Hirai of Hirai Photo OfficeCo. Ltd.

below / Shigeru Ban observes a presentation by a student who participated in the Design ApprenticeProgram for spring 2006, whichfocused on temporary housing fordisaster victims.Photo by Museum staff.

FEATU R E THE ART OF BUILDING LIGHTLY: AN INTERVIEW WITH SHIGERU BAN

space only when people are awake. Whenwe sleep we stop all the heating.

Japanese people have more flexibilityover their lifestyles and also, depending onthe generation, the lifestyle is totallychanging. Like my grandparents’ genera-tion—they have to have a tatami, Japanesemat, to sleep on the floor. And my parents’generation, they had to have both a westernstyle room and also tatami floor mats. Inmy generation, the tatami floor mat hasbecome just a symbol. We cannot live inthat kind of lifestyle any more. So thelifestyle is constantly changing.

And also we don’t have the strong liability that you have. We don’t sue eachother! So that really gives us more freedomto do something experimental.

MM: In Japan, there is a very strong tradition

of cooperation throughout a project among the

architect, the engineer, the client, and the con-

tractor that doesn’t exist here in the United

States. Is it easier to produce a good building

in Japan than in America?

SB: Actually, it’s true. It’s easier to createthe better building [in Japan]. First of all,contractors there have very good crafts-

them out of the park, because they wereafraid the park was turning into a slum.But I think we needed to build temporaryhouses for them because they could notmove into the common housing. So I wentto the city to ask permission but they saidno. But the person whom I met—I wasvery lucky, because he [ignored] what I wasdoing. So, sometimes I do like the guerillamethod—just do it and prove how good[the results] are. City officials [are always]so strict and they don’t want to make anyexceptions. But sometimes we need excep-tions, but without showing how good [suchprojects can be], it’s impossible to convincethem, that’s why I just do it without per-mission, even against the government policy.This is what I’ve been doing in Kobe, Turkey,India, or in Sri Lanka.

MM: How much has the traditional architectural

culture of Japan influenced your work?

SB: I have an office in Tokyo and mynationality is Japanese, but all my architec-ture education is from the United States.So, it’s very difficult to say [whether] I am an American architect or a Japanesearchitect. Also now I’m working in manydifferent countries.

Some people always ask me, “Becauseyou’re a Japanese architect you use paper?”But we don’t have any culture of usingpaper as a structural element in Japanesearchitecture. We just use the paper as ascreen. For me the paper tube structuralsystem is more like [ancient] Greek archi-tecture proportionally, so it really hasnothing to do with Japanese culture.

MM: How does the contemporary architectural cul-

ture of Japan differ from that of the United States?

SB: In Japan, even middle class peopleoften hire architects to design their ownhouses. That doesn’t happen as much inthe United States, Europe, and developingcountries, where only the rich people hirearchitects to build big houses. Even middleclass people have hired architects to designinteresting, but small houses. And that is avery interesting opportunity for youngarchitects to develop themselves.

And also the Japanese lifestyle is stillvery flexible. Traditionally we don’t heatthe whole house, we just heat whereverpeople eat and work—also we heat the

the people who were displaced. How have

you worked with political agencies to ensure

that your designs get built and people are

actually housed?

SB: First of all, I created [my own] so-calledNGO, or non-governmental organization.Besides when I was working for UnitedNations High Commissioner for refugees in Rwanda, I have never worked directlyfor a government.

For the architect, it’s impossible to pro-vide 100,000 houses for the majority of thevictims of a natural disaster. But what I cando is look for some minority people who havea particular problem. For example, in Kobe,the government built temporary houses out-side the city, because there was land [there].And some of the Vietnamese refugees whohad just been accepted by the governmentten years ago could not move into the govern-ment temporary housing because they hadonly worked in a particular factory not inthat area, and if they would leave their original place they would lose their jobs.That’s why they had to keep sleeping intheir very small apartments covered withplastic sheets. So, then I found that I couldsolve their particular problems by making a shelter for them.

And sometimes I’m going against gov-ernment policy. Even Kobe—the govern-ment didn’t want us to continue buildingtemporary houses. And there were localneighborhood people who tried to kick

manship and skill. Always we depend ontrust, not on contractual agreements.Always we try to keep a good relationshipwith the client.

If you do an experimental building, itis likely that there will be some problemsafterwards. But as long as I keep a goodrelationship with the client and as long asthe client likes the house, it’s no problem—we just have to fix it. And we never sueeach other! And the contractor is usuallyvery helpful in suggesting how to help us[solve the problems that arise].

Since I started working in other coun-tries, I always feel that architects in Japanenjoy broad public support because of this.And with Japanese clients, not only for theresidential projects, they try to build whatyou designed. However, in other countries,even if I have won a competition, it’s noteasy to realize what I designed. Alwaysthere’s a big debate and I have to convincethe client and the contractor little by little.And also the contractors are not as helpfulas Japanese contractors.

In Japan, it’s much easier, so we are really spoiled. •

above / Paper Log Houses built toaccommodate people left homeless byan earthquake in Kobe, Japan, 1995. Courtesy Shigeru Ban Architects.

above / “Naked House,” Saitama,Japan, 2000, as featured in the bookThe Green House: New Directionsin Sustainable Architecture andDesign, published by the NationalBuilding Museum and PrincetonArchitectural Press to accompanythe exhibition of the same title. Photo by Hiroyuki Hirai of Hirai Photo OfficeCo. Ltd.

below / Shigeru Ban observes a presentation by a student who participated in the Design ApprenticeProgram for spring 2006, whichfocused on temporary housing fordisaster victims.Photo by Museum staff.

blueprints 11

ALL THAT GLITTERS ISN’T GREENFEATU R E

10 blueprints

what they mean not only to the indivi-dual car owner but also to the economy as a whole.

Nonetheless, leading green buildingadvocates were calling for dramatic actionwell before these perceived crises, thoughnot always using term “green.” Greenbuilding was discussed in contemporaryterms since as far back as the 1960s “appro-priate technology” movement and the 1970soil crisis (though, as a recent HarvardUniversity report by Becky Russell demon-strates, “green” building during thesecrises generally meant working towardreduced energy consumption rather thanwholesale remodeling of existing struc-tures or rethinking of basic building prac-tices). So, the green building movementcertainly owes much of its public promi-nence to recent energy concerns, but theywere not necessarily its direct impetus.

THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, ESPECIALLY THE

DESIGN PROFESSION, has paid increasingattention to green practices in the past

decade. Though many of the relevant tech-niques and underlying knowledge havebeen around since the early days of theenvironmental movement (if not muchearlier), the issue currently enjoys anunprecedented primacy in both the industryand the popular imagination.

Recent events only partially explainthe growing sense of urgency associatedwith the green building movement. Thenation was riveted by the 2000–01 rollingblackouts in California, and feared otherstates would share a similar fate—at leastuntil the whiff of price gouging convincedthem that it was okay to leave the lightson. Nowadays, price fluctuations at the gas pump are causing consternation amongconsumers of all kinds, who are wondering

washing—building homes with large gar-dens or shopping at their local architecturalsalvage shops—as their sole contributionto green building practices.

The most tragic green-washing,though, is one that is found just as com-monly among building professionals as itis among the general public. In the con-sumable products world, consumers areoften advised to “buy green,” even whenthey may have no precipitating need for agiven product—in either green or non-green version. In that vein, far too often,the building community’s impulse is tobuild an entirely new structure; virtuallyall of the prized examples of green building,in fact, are new construction. The concep-tual flaw in this approach lies in buying orbuilding green when simply not buying orbuilding at all would be a more sustainablechoice. Often, this is not an option—witha growing population, for instance, inmany cases new construction is inevitable.Yet rehabilitating an existing building isoften the truly green choice, even thoughit is one that does not carry as much marketing appeal, design cachet, or professional imprint.

In short, the building industry mustrealize that in addition to its specific practices, its very professional purpose—that of creating anew—requires some fundamental adjustment. Meanwhile, atthe risk of becoming purists, green buildingadvocates need to be a bit more critical ofthe claims of green products and practices.

Green with Envy

The construction industry is not alone inhaving undergone a quiet revolution inpractices that reduce energy use and/orenvironmental damage. As in other indus-tries, designers and builders face manychallenges in determining how best toaccomplish green goals.

One of the most disturbing trends inthe green movement of late is the preva-lence of “green-washing”—the deliberate(or occasionally subconscious) effort tomisrepresent the environmental impact ofa product or initiative. Green-washing hasgained a significant foothold in construc-tion as it has in other industries. Manybuilding products promoted as green aregreen in name only (and are occasionallyeven painted green for effect!). Such exam-ples, though fairly easy for the seasonedbuilding professional to spot, are often afalse bill of goods sold to the eager home-buying public.

But even professionals have been thetarget of green scams. There are productswhose actual energy or environmental per-formance is either exaggerated or entirelyfabricated. The most common aspects inwhich the truth about a product’s green-ness is stretched are those that are moredifficult to quantify, such as the amount ofembodied energy in a material (i.e., theenergy required to manufacture and trans-port the material, which is often highlyundercalculated) or its contribution to acompleted building’s impact on the localenvironmental quality (which most oftencannot be predicted without knowingexactly how it will be used).

Many products and practices actuallydo accomplish some green goals, but theiroverall effect is either limited or ultimatelynegative when combined with other designor construction characteristics. For example,there are many examples of housing subdivisions being sold as “green” or“Earth-friendly” because of the acreage of open land around each house, ignoringthe fact that such large lots depend on disproportionately large amounts of infra-structure, such as roads and power lines,and typically compel land owners to drivegreat distances. Many consumers havesadly taken on this version of green-

and Other Thoughts on Sustainable BuildingAll that Glitters Isn’t Greenby Carlos Martín and Asa Foss

for the PATH Partners

Dr. Martín and Mr. Foss are, respectively,

an administrator of and a consultant to the

Partnership for Advancing Technology in

Housing (PATH), a national public-private

organization created to increase the avail-

ability and use of innovative housing prod-

ucts and practices across a variety of home

performance areas (www.PATHNet.org).

Martín has both academic and governmental

experience in tracking building technology

changes, while Foss has consulted for

several years on energy-efficient design

and construction.

This article represents the views of the

authors only, and does not necessarily

represent the explicit views of either the

Partnership for Advancing Technology

in Housing or any of its affiliated organ-

izations in government or the private

sector in any way.

opposite / The garden of this deserthouse in Santa Fe is watered solelywith rainwater collected from the roof.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

below / This 12,000-gallon storagetank collects rainwater through downspouts from the roof.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

blueprints 11

ALL THAT GLITTERS ISN’T GREENFEATU R E

10 blueprints

what they mean not only to the indivi-dual car owner but also to the economy as a whole.

Nonetheless, leading green buildingadvocates were calling for dramatic actionwell before these perceived crises, thoughnot always using term “green.” Greenbuilding was discussed in contemporaryterms since as far back as the 1960s “appro-priate technology” movement and the 1970soil crisis (though, as a recent HarvardUniversity report by Becky Russell demon-strates, “green” building during thesecrises generally meant working towardreduced energy consumption rather thanwholesale remodeling of existing struc-tures or rethinking of basic building prac-tices). So, the green building movementcertainly owes much of its public promi-nence to recent energy concerns, but theywere not necessarily its direct impetus.

THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, ESPECIALLY THE

DESIGN PROFESSION, has paid increasingattention to green practices in the past

decade. Though many of the relevant tech-niques and underlying knowledge havebeen around since the early days of theenvironmental movement (if not muchearlier), the issue currently enjoys anunprecedented primacy in both the industryand the popular imagination.

Recent events only partially explainthe growing sense of urgency associatedwith the green building movement. Thenation was riveted by the 2000–01 rollingblackouts in California, and feared otherstates would share a similar fate—at leastuntil the whiff of price gouging convincedthem that it was okay to leave the lightson. Nowadays, price fluctuations at the gas pump are causing consternation amongconsumers of all kinds, who are wondering

washing—building homes with large gar-dens or shopping at their local architecturalsalvage shops—as their sole contributionto green building practices.

The most tragic green-washing,though, is one that is found just as com-monly among building professionals as itis among the general public. In the con-sumable products world, consumers areoften advised to “buy green,” even whenthey may have no precipitating need for agiven product—in either green or non-green version. In that vein, far too often,the building community’s impulse is tobuild an entirely new structure; virtuallyall of the prized examples of green building,in fact, are new construction. The concep-tual flaw in this approach lies in buying orbuilding green when simply not buying orbuilding at all would be a more sustainablechoice. Often, this is not an option—witha growing population, for instance, inmany cases new construction is inevitable.Yet rehabilitating an existing building isoften the truly green choice, even thoughit is one that does not carry as much marketing appeal, design cachet, or professional imprint.

In short, the building industry mustrealize that in addition to its specific practices, its very professional purpose—that of creating anew—requires some fundamental adjustment. Meanwhile, atthe risk of becoming purists, green buildingadvocates need to be a bit more critical ofthe claims of green products and practices.

Green with Envy

The construction industry is not alone inhaving undergone a quiet revolution inpractices that reduce energy use and/orenvironmental damage. As in other indus-tries, designers and builders face manychallenges in determining how best toaccomplish green goals.

One of the most disturbing trends inthe green movement of late is the preva-lence of “green-washing”—the deliberate(or occasionally subconscious) effort tomisrepresent the environmental impact ofa product or initiative. Green-washing hasgained a significant foothold in construc-tion as it has in other industries. Manybuilding products promoted as green aregreen in name only (and are occasionallyeven painted green for effect!). Such exam-ples, though fairly easy for the seasonedbuilding professional to spot, are often afalse bill of goods sold to the eager home-buying public.

But even professionals have been thetarget of green scams. There are productswhose actual energy or environmental per-formance is either exaggerated or entirelyfabricated. The most common aspects inwhich the truth about a product’s green-ness is stretched are those that are moredifficult to quantify, such as the amount ofembodied energy in a material (i.e., theenergy required to manufacture and trans-port the material, which is often highlyundercalculated) or its contribution to acompleted building’s impact on the localenvironmental quality (which most oftencannot be predicted without knowingexactly how it will be used).

Many products and practices actuallydo accomplish some green goals, but theiroverall effect is either limited or ultimatelynegative when combined with other designor construction characteristics. For example,there are many examples of housing subdivisions being sold as “green” or“Earth-friendly” because of the acreage of open land around each house, ignoringthe fact that such large lots depend on disproportionately large amounts of infra-structure, such as roads and power lines,and typically compel land owners to drivegreat distances. Many consumers havesadly taken on this version of green-

and Other Thoughts on Sustainable BuildingAll that Glitters Isn’t Greenby Carlos Martín and Asa Foss

for the PATH Partners

Dr. Martín and Mr. Foss are, respectively,

an administrator of and a consultant to the

Partnership for Advancing Technology in

Housing (PATH), a national public-private

organization created to increase the avail-

ability and use of innovative housing prod-

ucts and practices across a variety of home

performance areas (www.PATHNet.org).

Martín has both academic and governmental

experience in tracking building technology

changes, while Foss has consulted for

several years on energy-efficient design

and construction.

This article represents the views of the

authors only, and does not necessarily

represent the explicit views of either the

Partnership for Advancing Technology

in Housing or any of its affiliated organ-

izations in government or the private

sector in any way.

opposite / The garden of this deserthouse in Santa Fe is watered solelywith rainwater collected from the roof.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

below / This 12,000-gallon storagetank collects rainwater through downspouts from the roof.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

sites to be developed as infill. One exampleis how architect Katherine Austin, AIA,was able to help the Burbank HousingDevelopment Corporation build on a SantaRosa, California, brownfield site wherepetroleum had been dumped many yearsbefore. Even after all the detectably conta-minated soil was removed, concerns per-sisted about deep vapors that might latersurface, with detrimental health impactson the planned Timothy Commons afford-able housing community. Austin and thedeveloper discovered a solution in theLiquid Boot, a system that collects below-ground fumes through buried, perforatedpiping and vents them through standpipesthat discharge above the building roof.This innovative green technology thusenabled affordable development in an areawith existing infrastructure that wouldotherwise have remained abandoned.

Low-impact development (LID) is a cost-effective and visually appealing approachto managing stormwater. LID practicescontrol stormwater runoff, protect water-sheds, lower maintenance costs, and addaesthetic value. The primary goal of thisapproach is to protect natural water flowin order to minimize the ecologicalimpacts of construction.

One of the best ways to controlstormwater on a specific site is to mini-mize the amount of asphalt and otherimpervious surfaces. Permeable materialsreduce the amount of runoff and pollu-tants, allowing the rainwater to be filteredand cleaned as it percolates into the earthand, eventually, the aquifer. Rainwateralso may be “harvested” from a building’sroof in above-ground barrels or below-ground cisterns, thereby minimizing theamount of stormwater that leaves the siteand yielding a reserve that can be used towater the landscape. Chapman Homes ofSanta Fe, New Mexico, installed a 1,200-gallon cistern at a cost of $3,000 for aPATH field evaluation. Rainwater from thecistern currently supplies about half of thelandscaping needs in this arid region.

More Durable, Mold-Resistant Walls

In a demonstration project in Melbourne,Florida, Mercedes Homes along with PATH

ALL THAT GLITTERS ISN’T GREEN

blueprints 13

about trouble clearing the bowl and fre-quent clogging. Now manufacturers usewider flush valves and trapways, pressure-assisted flushing, and even dual-flush toi-lets to allow toilets to use less than 2.5 gal-lons per flush effectively. Low-flow toiletscarry little or no price premium comparedto more water-intensive models.

Laminar flow fixtures, which makelower water flow feel more vigorous, alsohelped reduce water consumption in theBowie homes. Manufacturers claim thatlaminar flow controls can reduce water useby as much as 90 percent compared to con-ventional faucets, showerheads, and hoses.Like faucet aerators that reduce water useby adding air into the stream, laminarcontrols are simply screwed into place onthe faucet head.

Recycled Wood/Plastic Composite Lumber

Builders working on the Model reModelproject, a row house renovation showcasein Philadelphia, chose wood/plastic com-posite lumber for the decking because it ismade from recycled material and is moredurable than conventional wood products.This composite lumber typically consists ofa 50/50 mix of wood fibers from recoveredsawdust and waste plastics, and is morerigid than 100 percent recycled plastic lum-ber. The plastic encapsulates and binds thewood together to resist moisture penetra-tion and degradation from fungal rot.

Green But Ripe

The green rubric, though often flawedtechnically and in perception, is stillstrong. The ironic benefit of green-washingis that it aids in awareness of the broadergreen movement—the building equivalentof the old adage that being spoken of badlyis better than not being spoken of at all.Green building, as a professional, stylistic,and social movement, is comprehensiveand comprehensible to most people. Itspeaks to American building traditionswhile also liberating the imagination. Itusually looks and feels good. Yet, as designprofessionals, advocates, and consumers,we must always educate ourselves and lookbeneath the surface when consideringproducts and projects that claim to beenvironment-friendly. •

and FEMA studied ways to make homes morehurricane resistant and resilient. One effec-tive way to improve the post-storm recoveryis by using paperless drywall, or mold-resis-tant gypsum. Because paper facing supportsmold growth, most drywall manufacturershave now introduced products with alternatefacings. They come in the same sizes, and areinstalled identically to conventional drywall,with only about a 10 percent price premium.

Limiting mold growth in any homesubjected to water intrusion could savethousands of dollars in repairs andreplacement materials while protectingindoor air quality. Using mold-resistantdrywall cost an additional $760 for the2,000-square-foot Melbourne house.

Properly Installing Mechanical Equipment

Ventilation ductwork routed throughunconditioned (i.e., not mechanicallyheated or cooled) spaces must be very wellinsulated or it will lose energy to the sur-rounding ambient air. Locating the ductsin conditioned spaces eliminates this prob-lem and can reduce the energy required toheat and cool the building by 5 to 30 per-cent. Insulating and sealing the atticroofline is a straightforward way of plac-ing the system in conditioned space.

Bob Black of Access of Sarasota usedthis practice in a 2,000-square-foot, single-story house he built for a former employee.Black established the attic as a conditionedspace by insulating the attic kneewalls androofline, and as a result was able to down-size the mechanical unit by half a ton. Itcost Black $5,000 to spray Icynene insula-tion along the attic roofline, much morethan the cost of conventional fiberglassbatts. But this additional cost will be morethan recouped over time through lowerenergy bills. Spraying the roofline also pro-vided additional useable storage in theattic, which now averages only 10 degreeswarmer than the living areas, instead ofthe more typical 60.

Low-flow fixtures

Water conservation is an important tenetof green building. Four entry-level single-family houses located in Bowie, Maryland,used low-flow fixtures to minimize theirwater consumption. When introduced,low-flow toilets generated complaints

12 blueprints

F EATU R E

I Know Green When I See It

Green buildings, as broad as this label canbe—which is why rating systems likeLEED (Leadership in Energy and Environ-mental Design) have been developed—all share a number of characteristics. Allaspects of green construction are meant tooptimize both performance and efficiencyin land use and siting; material consump-tion and durability; indoor air quality;energy use; and water consumption. Thesegreen performance goals can be achievedin a variety of ways, with products andpractices both conventional and innova-tive. The following examples, which reflectthese core green building attributes, areoffered as touchstones for those seeking adeeper understanding—and a more faithfuldefinition—of green building.

Infill Development

One of the fundamental principles of greenbuilding is controlling growth to minimizesprawl. The easiest and most resource-efficient way to do that is with infill development—that is, redevelopingvacant and underused properties in andaround existing communities. Such projectsactually connect adjacent neighborhoods,helping surrounding cities, towns, or metropolitan areas evolve into healthiercommunities that depend less upon auto-mobiles and asphalt.

In some cases, green technologies canmake it possible for previously undesirable

above / The Timothy Commonsdevelopment in Santa Rosa,California, built on a brownfield siterequiring ventilation using the Liquid Boot system.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

top / In the Liquid Boot system, perforated vents are embedded ingravel below the foundation.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

above / Sprayed Icynene insulation in the attic space of this house inSarasota, Florida, prevents unwantedloss of warm or cool air from the duct-work placed above the ceiling joists. Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

sites to be developed as infill. One exampleis how architect Katherine Austin, AIA,was able to help the Burbank HousingDevelopment Corporation build on a SantaRosa, California, brownfield site wherepetroleum had been dumped many yearsbefore. Even after all the detectably conta-minated soil was removed, concerns per-sisted about deep vapors that might latersurface, with detrimental health impactson the planned Timothy Commons afford-able housing community. Austin and thedeveloper discovered a solution in theLiquid Boot, a system that collects below-ground fumes through buried, perforatedpiping and vents them through standpipesthat discharge above the building roof.This innovative green technology thusenabled affordable development in an areawith existing infrastructure that wouldotherwise have remained abandoned.

Low-impact development (LID) is a cost-effective and visually appealing approachto managing stormwater. LID practicescontrol stormwater runoff, protect water-sheds, lower maintenance costs, and addaesthetic value. The primary goal of thisapproach is to protect natural water flowin order to minimize the ecologicalimpacts of construction.

One of the best ways to controlstormwater on a specific site is to mini-mize the amount of asphalt and otherimpervious surfaces. Permeable materialsreduce the amount of runoff and pollu-tants, allowing the rainwater to be filteredand cleaned as it percolates into the earthand, eventually, the aquifer. Rainwateralso may be “harvested” from a building’sroof in above-ground barrels or below-ground cisterns, thereby minimizing theamount of stormwater that leaves the siteand yielding a reserve that can be used towater the landscape. Chapman Homes ofSanta Fe, New Mexico, installed a 1,200-gallon cistern at a cost of $3,000 for aPATH field evaluation. Rainwater from thecistern currently supplies about half of thelandscaping needs in this arid region.

More Durable, Mold-Resistant Walls

In a demonstration project in Melbourne,Florida, Mercedes Homes along with PATH

ALL THAT GLITTERS ISN’T GREEN

blueprints 13

about trouble clearing the bowl and fre-quent clogging. Now manufacturers usewider flush valves and trapways, pressure-assisted flushing, and even dual-flush toi-lets to allow toilets to use less than 2.5 gal-lons per flush effectively. Low-flow toiletscarry little or no price premium comparedto more water-intensive models.

Laminar flow fixtures, which makelower water flow feel more vigorous, alsohelped reduce water consumption in theBowie homes. Manufacturers claim thatlaminar flow controls can reduce water useby as much as 90 percent compared to con-ventional faucets, showerheads, and hoses.Like faucet aerators that reduce water useby adding air into the stream, laminarcontrols are simply screwed into place onthe faucet head.

Recycled Wood/Plastic Composite Lumber

Builders working on the Model reModelproject, a row house renovation showcasein Philadelphia, chose wood/plastic com-posite lumber for the decking because it ismade from recycled material and is moredurable than conventional wood products.This composite lumber typically consists ofa 50/50 mix of wood fibers from recoveredsawdust and waste plastics, and is morerigid than 100 percent recycled plastic lum-ber. The plastic encapsulates and binds thewood together to resist moisture penetra-tion and degradation from fungal rot.

Green But Ripe

The green rubric, though often flawedtechnically and in perception, is stillstrong. The ironic benefit of green-washingis that it aids in awareness of the broadergreen movement—the building equivalentof the old adage that being spoken of badlyis better than not being spoken of at all.Green building, as a professional, stylistic,and social movement, is comprehensiveand comprehensible to most people. Itspeaks to American building traditionswhile also liberating the imagination. Itusually looks and feels good. Yet, as designprofessionals, advocates, and consumers,we must always educate ourselves and lookbeneath the surface when consideringproducts and projects that claim to beenvironment-friendly. •

and FEMA studied ways to make homes morehurricane resistant and resilient. One effec-tive way to improve the post-storm recoveryis by using paperless drywall, or mold-resis-tant gypsum. Because paper facing supportsmold growth, most drywall manufacturershave now introduced products with alternatefacings. They come in the same sizes, and areinstalled identically to conventional drywall,with only about a 10 percent price premium.

Limiting mold growth in any homesubjected to water intrusion could savethousands of dollars in repairs andreplacement materials while protectingindoor air quality. Using mold-resistantdrywall cost an additional $760 for the2,000-square-foot Melbourne house.

Properly Installing Mechanical Equipment

Ventilation ductwork routed throughunconditioned (i.e., not mechanicallyheated or cooled) spaces must be very wellinsulated or it will lose energy to the sur-rounding ambient air. Locating the ductsin conditioned spaces eliminates this prob-lem and can reduce the energy required toheat and cool the building by 5 to 30 per-cent. Insulating and sealing the atticroofline is a straightforward way of plac-ing the system in conditioned space.

Bob Black of Access of Sarasota usedthis practice in a 2,000-square-foot, single-story house he built for a former employee.Black established the attic as a conditionedspace by insulating the attic kneewalls androofline, and as a result was able to down-size the mechanical unit by half a ton. Itcost Black $5,000 to spray Icynene insula-tion along the attic roofline, much morethan the cost of conventional fiberglassbatts. But this additional cost will be morethan recouped over time through lowerenergy bills. Spraying the roofline also pro-vided additional useable storage in theattic, which now averages only 10 degreeswarmer than the living areas, instead ofthe more typical 60.

Low-flow fixtures

Water conservation is an important tenetof green building. Four entry-level single-family houses located in Bowie, Maryland,used low-flow fixtures to minimize theirwater consumption. When introduced,low-flow toilets generated complaints

12 blueprints

F EATU R E

I Know Green When I See It

Green buildings, as broad as this label canbe—which is why rating systems likeLEED (Leadership in Energy and Environ-mental Design) have been developed—all share a number of characteristics. Allaspects of green construction are meant tooptimize both performance and efficiencyin land use and siting; material consump-tion and durability; indoor air quality;energy use; and water consumption. Thesegreen performance goals can be achievedin a variety of ways, with products andpractices both conventional and innova-tive. The following examples, which reflectthese core green building attributes, areoffered as touchstones for those seeking adeeper understanding—and a more faithfuldefinition—of green building.

Infill Development

One of the fundamental principles of greenbuilding is controlling growth to minimizesprawl. The easiest and most resource-efficient way to do that is with infill development—that is, redevelopingvacant and underused properties in andaround existing communities. Such projectsactually connect adjacent neighborhoods,helping surrounding cities, towns, or metropolitan areas evolve into healthiercommunities that depend less upon auto-mobiles and asphalt.

In some cases, green technologies canmake it possible for previously undesirable

above / The Timothy Commonsdevelopment in Santa Rosa,California, built on a brownfield siterequiring ventilation using the Liquid Boot system.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

top / In the Liquid Boot system, perforated vents are embedded ingravel below the foundation.Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

above / Sprayed Icynene insulation in the attic space of this house inSarasota, Florida, prevents unwantedloss of warm or cool air from the duct-work placed above the ceiling joists. Courtesy of the U.S. Department of Housingand Urban Development.

GOING GREEN

blueprints 15

IN ADDITION TO PRESENTING The GreenHouse, the Museum is fulfilling the needfor more information on going green by

publishing the Green Resource Guide and acomprehensive exhibition website, and byoffering complementary education pro-grams. The guide is available for free inthe exhibition and includes details onprinciples of sustainability, a glossary ofgreen terms and rating systems, informa-tion about green materials, and more. Theexhibition website includes the informa-tion found in the exhibition and the guide,plus regularly updated green news.

The Museum’s green-oriented educa-tion programs have been drawing visitorsof all ages. Families have participated inmaking a model green roof, professionalshave attended lectures by experts likearchitect David Hertz, and Museum mem-bers have toured construction sites ofgreen projects in the area. The MuseumShop is promoting green living, too, byoffering a myriad of environmentally-friendly products and resources.

The Museum is not slowing down this fall, with a full suite of programs cov-ering off-the-grid strategies and improvingbuilding energy consumption, school pro-grams like Be a Green Builder, and a greenhome renovation expo. Visit www.nbm.orgfor details on green events and join theMuseum in going green.

Many of the Museum’s supporters ofThe Green House are also going green. Readmore on the following pages to learn abouthow the exhibition presenting and leadsponsors are making sustainability part oftheir business models and philosophies. •

14 Blueprints14 blueprints

M USE U M N EWS

FOR SEVERAL YEARS the Museum has beenpromoting the importance of sustain-able building through exhibitions like

Big & Green and education programs high-lighting innovative sustainable strategiesand technologies. This spring, the Museumlaunched its most recent green initiativewith the groundbreaking exhibition TheGreen House: New Directions in SustainableArchitecture and Design. The showinspires visitors to make environmentally-friendly, stylish, healthy, and cost-efficientchoices for their homes. The special exhibi-tion opening reception for Museum mem-bers on May 17th drew the largest crowdever for such an event, with more than1,700 guests claiming a sneak preview ofthe show before it opened to the public.

Just a few hours prior to the revelry,First Lady Laura Bush made a surprise visitto see the exhibition. She received a per-sonal tour led by executive director ChaseRynd, curator Donald Albrecht, andGlidehouse architect Michelle Kaufmann.

The First Lady’s visit invigorated thepreparations for the reception where BobNardelli, president and CEO of The HomeDepot; Catherine Fraser, director of devel-opment for the ASID Foundation; MichaelBohn, director of brand marketing forBosch home appliances; and ChristopherHawthorne, architecture critic at The LosAngeles Times, offered remarks of support.Those joining in the celebration enjoyedgreen martinis, an hors d’oeuvres buffetwith salmon skewers and samosas, anddesserts served from neon green displays.The opening was followed by an intimatedinner co-hosted by the Museum and TheHome Depot Foundation for exhibition con-tributors and sponsors.

Reception and dinner guests departedwith a Green House gift bag which includedan issue of Dwell magazine, a profile of the new Benjamin Moore® low-VOC paintcollection, a compact fluorescent light bulbcourtesy of The Home Depot, and more.

Executive Director Chase Ryndremarked at the reception, “There is an obvi-ous imperative to tell the story of The GreenHouse because of the ecological impact ofbuilding. But it’s also important to tell thestory because the country has evolved—America wants to build sustainably.”

And indeed, America does want tobuild sustainably. More than 30,000 peoplevisited The Green House during its firstthree months on view. Newsweek deemedit a “must see” and Interior Design maga-zine said the exhibition “detangles themysteries of sustainable living withaplomb.” Local news coverage includedNBC and Fox affiliates, and CNBC aired livefrom the exhibition in late May. The over-whelmingly positive response to the exhi-bition demonstrates that interest in greenliving and building is growing, and thatthe Museum is meeting the demand forinformation and expertise. •

A Splash of Green Green

SupportersThe American Institute of ArchitectsNational Association of Home BuildersSmith & Fong Plyboo®U.S. Green Building Council

Contributors3Form, Inc.Andersen CorporationBrighton Cabinetry, Inc.Goldman, Sachs & Co.Hardwood Manufacturers AssociationKohn Pedersen Fox Associates PCMBCINATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®Pelli Clarke Pelli ArchitectsThe Tower Companies

Media Partner

by Julia Neubauer

above / A full-scale replica of a portion of the prefabricatedGlidehouse, as installed in the exhibition The Green House.Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

inset / Cover of the Green ResourceGuide, published by the Museum to complement the exhibition. Graphic design by Celery Design.

top / First Lady Laura Bush listens to architect Michelle Kaufmanndescribe the Glidehouse while visitingthe exhibition The Green House on its opening day. Photo by Museum staff.

above / View of the crowd at the opening reception for The Green House. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

ResourcesThe Green House: New Directions in Sustainable Architecture and Designis made possible by:

Presenting Sponsor

Lead Sponsors

Major Sponsors

THE•NATHAN•CUMMINGS•FOUNDATION

Patrons

ENERGY STAR

US Department of Energy

GOING GREEN

blueprints 15

IN ADDITION TO PRESENTING The GreenHouse, the Museum is fulfilling the needfor more information on going green by

publishing the Green Resource Guide and acomprehensive exhibition website, and byoffering complementary education pro-grams. The guide is available for free inthe exhibition and includes details onprinciples of sustainability, a glossary ofgreen terms and rating systems, informa-tion about green materials, and more. Theexhibition website includes the informa-tion found in the exhibition and the guide,plus regularly updated green news.

The Museum’s green-oriented educa-tion programs have been drawing visitorsof all ages. Families have participated inmaking a model green roof, professionalshave attended lectures by experts likearchitect David Hertz, and Museum mem-bers have toured construction sites ofgreen projects in the area. The MuseumShop is promoting green living, too, byoffering a myriad of environmentally-friendly products and resources.

The Museum is not slowing down this fall, with a full suite of programs cov-ering off-the-grid strategies and improvingbuilding energy consumption, school pro-grams like Be a Green Builder, and a greenhome renovation expo. Visit www.nbm.orgfor details on green events and join theMuseum in going green.

Many of the Museum’s supporters ofThe Green House are also going green. Readmore on the following pages to learn abouthow the exhibition presenting and leadsponsors are making sustainability part oftheir business models and philosophies. •

14 Blueprints14 blueprints

M USE U M N EWS

FOR SEVERAL YEARS the Museum has beenpromoting the importance of sustain-able building through exhibitions like

Big & Green and education programs high-lighting innovative sustainable strategiesand technologies. This spring, the Museumlaunched its most recent green initiativewith the groundbreaking exhibition TheGreen House: New Directions in SustainableArchitecture and Design. The showinspires visitors to make environmentally-friendly, stylish, healthy, and cost-efficientchoices for their homes. The special exhibi-tion opening reception for Museum mem-bers on May 17th drew the largest crowdever for such an event, with more than1,700 guests claiming a sneak preview ofthe show before it opened to the public.

Just a few hours prior to the revelry,First Lady Laura Bush made a surprise visitto see the exhibition. She received a per-sonal tour led by executive director ChaseRynd, curator Donald Albrecht, andGlidehouse architect Michelle Kaufmann.

The First Lady’s visit invigorated thepreparations for the reception where BobNardelli, president and CEO of The HomeDepot; Catherine Fraser, director of devel-opment for the ASID Foundation; MichaelBohn, director of brand marketing forBosch home appliances; and ChristopherHawthorne, architecture critic at The LosAngeles Times, offered remarks of support.Those joining in the celebration enjoyedgreen martinis, an hors d’oeuvres buffetwith salmon skewers and samosas, anddesserts served from neon green displays.The opening was followed by an intimatedinner co-hosted by the Museum and TheHome Depot Foundation for exhibition con-tributors and sponsors.

Reception and dinner guests departedwith a Green House gift bag which includedan issue of Dwell magazine, a profile of the new Benjamin Moore® low-VOC paintcollection, a compact fluorescent light bulbcourtesy of The Home Depot, and more.

Executive Director Chase Ryndremarked at the reception, “There is an obvi-ous imperative to tell the story of The GreenHouse because of the ecological impact ofbuilding. But it’s also important to tell thestory because the country has evolved—America wants to build sustainably.”

And indeed, America does want tobuild sustainably. More than 30,000 peoplevisited The Green House during its firstthree months on view. Newsweek deemedit a “must see” and Interior Design maga-zine said the exhibition “detangles themysteries of sustainable living withaplomb.” Local news coverage includedNBC and Fox affiliates, and CNBC aired livefrom the exhibition in late May. The over-whelmingly positive response to the exhi-bition demonstrates that interest in greenliving and building is growing, and thatthe Museum is meeting the demand forinformation and expertise. •

A Splash of Green Green

SupportersThe American Institute of ArchitectsNational Association of Home BuildersSmith & Fong Plyboo®U.S. Green Building Council

Contributors3Form, Inc.Andersen CorporationBrighton Cabinetry, Inc.Goldman, Sachs & Co.Hardwood Manufacturers AssociationKohn Pedersen Fox Associates PCMBCINATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®Pelli Clarke Pelli ArchitectsThe Tower Companies

Media Partner

by Julia Neubauer

above / A full-scale replica of a portion of the prefabricatedGlidehouse, as installed in the exhibition The Green House.Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

inset / Cover of the Green ResourceGuide, published by the Museum to complement the exhibition. Graphic design by Celery Design.

top / First Lady Laura Bush listens to architect Michelle Kaufmanndescribe the Glidehouse while visitingthe exhibition The Green House on its opening day. Photo by Museum staff.

above / View of the crowd at the opening reception for The Green House. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

ResourcesThe Green House: New Directions in Sustainable Architecture and Designis made possible by:

Presenting Sponsor

Lead Sponsors

Major Sponsors

THE•NATHAN•CUMMINGS•FOUNDATION

Patrons

ENERGY STAR

US Department of Energy

blueprints 17

Lead SponsorsASID FOUNDATION

The ASID Foundation, Inc., a nonprofitorganization affiliated with the AmericanSociety of Interior Designers (ASID), is dedicated to promoting the health, safety,and welfare of the general public throughresearch, scholarships, and education pro-grams. Moreover, the foundation’s commit-ment to sustainability requires that its activi-ties always respect the “limits of nature.”

“The Green House exhibition fits thefoundation’s goals magnificently,” saysASID Foundation Chair Juliana Catlin,FASID. “It is a tremendous opportunity toreach hundreds of thousands of individualsfrom across the United States and abroadwith important messages about the impor-tance of interiors in sustainable design.”SunTrust Bank served as the foundation’spartner in sponsoring the exhibition.

ASID is the oldest and largest associationfor professional interior designers with some38,000 members—including designers,industry representatives, educators, and students—who share an interest in interiordesign and its potential for improving thequality of people’s lives. The association’swebsite includes a section that providesdetailed information about sustainabledesign strategies, a roster of green resources,and other valuable information for designersand clients alike. www.asid.org

BENJAMIN MOORE & CO.

Long before the “green movement” waseven articulated, Benjamin Moore & Co.made a commitment to reduce or eliminateany harmful impact on the environmentfrom its operations and products. Today,the company continues to develop and produce new paint products—such as Eco Spec®, a solvent-free, low-odor and -VOC, water-thinnable coating systemthat utilizes its own advanced materialstechnology.

Looking to the future, BenjaminMoore continues to explore ways to increasethe quality of all its products while maintaining compatibility with the environment and spearheading research on paint disposal and recycling programs.It is a long-term voluntary commitment to the environment and to the people whomanufacture, sell, and use their products.www.benjaminmoore.com

BOSCH HOME APPLIANCES

Bosch’s long-standing commitment to environmentally-friendly practices and themanufacture of energy- and water-efficientappliances are perfectly aligned with theMuseum’s initiative to raise public awarenessof green home design.

Bosch is dedicated to preserving naturalresources by creating energy- and water-savingproducts, developing low-impact manufac-turing processes, and supporting nonprofitenvironmental causes. Bosch actively participates in the voluntary ENERGY STAR®and Energy Guide programs and utilizesprogressive production techniques at itsstate-of-the-art factory complex in New Bern,North Carolina, that have resulted in majorreductions of energy and waste per appliance.Bosch is honored that its appliances—including an ultra-quiet dishwasher, front-loading washer and dryer, and an ENERGYSTAR®-rated refrigerator—were chosen for Michelle Kaufmann’s pre-fabricatedGlidehouse™, a highlight in The Green House.Bosch hopes that visitors will be enlightenedand inspired by the demonstration of sustainable designs and products thatcontribute to a home that is healthier, safer, and more comfortable for its owners.www.boschappliances.com

PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOCIATION

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) wasfounded in 1916 to “improve and expand theuses of Portland cement and concrete,” and today represents more than 40 cementcompanies across the United States andCanada. PCA is actively engaged and committedto sustainable development—a philosophythat focuses on meeting today’s constructionneeds without depleting future resources—and dedicated to increasing the public’sunderstanding of green home construction.

Cement is already a durable and recyclable product, and PCA and its memberscontinually seek ways to make the cement inconcrete systems and products more sustain-able by implementing energy-efficient manu-facturing technologies and using industrialbyproducts that otherwise end up in landfills.The cement industry has voluntarily set goalsto decrease emissions, make its plants moreenergy efficient, and to reduce waste; it is on course to achieve those goals.www.cement.org

THE GREEN HOUSE SPONSORSM USE U M N EWS

16 blueprints

The Home Depot Foundation was created in 2002 to further the communitybuilding goals of The Home Depot by pro-viding additional resources to assist non-profit organizations building affordable,efficient, and healthy homes throughoutthe United States and Canada. The HomeDepot Foundation is dedicated to creatinghealthy, livable communities through theintegration of affordable housing builtresponsibly and the preservation andrestoration of community trees. Since itsformation, The Home Depot Foundationhas granted more than $25 million to non-profit and government organizationsthroughout North America.www.homedepotfoundation.org

Presenting SponsorTHE HOME DEPOT FOUNDATION

The Home Depot Foundation is proud toparticipate as the Presenting Sponsor ofthe National Building Museum’s environ-mentally aware exhibition, The GreenHouse: New Directions in SustainableArchitecture and Design.

The Foundation firmly believes thatbuilding responsibly is a form of stewardshipand is simply a smart way to build high-quality, efficient, affordable housing. Whilethe goals of building sustainable, affordablehousing are easy to embrace—they areoften more difficult to achieve in practice.

“For homeowners and home builders,sustainable design is fast becoming a partof mainstream living and resonates withgood business sense. The Green House exhibi-tion will educate hundreds of thousands ofpeople on what makes a home more com-fortable, safe, and green,” says The HomeDepot Foundation Executive Director KellyCaffarelli. “We believe that by helpingfamilies and individuals secure healthy,affordable housing, we are increasingtheir chances of success in all areas oftheir lives and are creating stable, strongcommunities.”

The Green House

top / Robert L. Nardelli, chairman,president, and chief executive officerof The Home Depot, addresses thecrowd at the opening reception forThe Green House. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

below / View of The Green Houseexhibition. Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

above / View of the interior of the Glidehouse, as installed in The Green House exhibition. Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

blueprints 17

Lead SponsorsASID FOUNDATION

The ASID Foundation, Inc., a nonprofitorganization affiliated with the AmericanSociety of Interior Designers (ASID), is dedicated to promoting the health, safety,and welfare of the general public throughresearch, scholarships, and education pro-grams. Moreover, the foundation’s commit-ment to sustainability requires that its activi-ties always respect the “limits of nature.”

“The Green House exhibition fits thefoundation’s goals magnificently,” saysASID Foundation Chair Juliana Catlin,FASID. “It is a tremendous opportunity toreach hundreds of thousands of individualsfrom across the United States and abroadwith important messages about the impor-tance of interiors in sustainable design.”SunTrust Bank served as the foundation’spartner in sponsoring the exhibition.

ASID is the oldest and largest associationfor professional interior designers with some38,000 members—including designers,industry representatives, educators, and students—who share an interest in interiordesign and its potential for improving thequality of people’s lives. The association’swebsite includes a section that providesdetailed information about sustainabledesign strategies, a roster of green resources,and other valuable information for designersand clients alike. www.asid.org

BENJAMIN MOORE & CO.

Long before the “green movement” waseven articulated, Benjamin Moore & Co.made a commitment to reduce or eliminateany harmful impact on the environmentfrom its operations and products. Today,the company continues to develop and produce new paint products—such as Eco Spec®, a solvent-free, low-odor and -VOC, water-thinnable coating systemthat utilizes its own advanced materialstechnology.

Looking to the future, BenjaminMoore continues to explore ways to increasethe quality of all its products while maintaining compatibility with the environment and spearheading research on paint disposal and recycling programs.It is a long-term voluntary commitment to the environment and to the people whomanufacture, sell, and use their products.www.benjaminmoore.com

BOSCH HOME APPLIANCES

Bosch’s long-standing commitment to environmentally-friendly practices and themanufacture of energy- and water-efficientappliances are perfectly aligned with theMuseum’s initiative to raise public awarenessof green home design.

Bosch is dedicated to preserving naturalresources by creating energy- and water-savingproducts, developing low-impact manufac-turing processes, and supporting nonprofitenvironmental causes. Bosch actively participates in the voluntary ENERGY STAR®and Energy Guide programs and utilizesprogressive production techniques at itsstate-of-the-art factory complex in New Bern,North Carolina, that have resulted in majorreductions of energy and waste per appliance.Bosch is honored that its appliances—including an ultra-quiet dishwasher, front-loading washer and dryer, and an ENERGYSTAR®-rated refrigerator—were chosen for Michelle Kaufmann’s pre-fabricatedGlidehouse™, a highlight in The Green House.Bosch hopes that visitors will be enlightenedand inspired by the demonstration of sustainable designs and products thatcontribute to a home that is healthier, safer, and more comfortable for its owners.www.boschappliances.com

PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOCIATION

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) wasfounded in 1916 to “improve and expand theuses of Portland cement and concrete,” and today represents more than 40 cementcompanies across the United States andCanada. PCA is actively engaged and committedto sustainable development—a philosophythat focuses on meeting today’s constructionneeds without depleting future resources—and dedicated to increasing the public’sunderstanding of green home construction.

Cement is already a durable and recyclable product, and PCA and its memberscontinually seek ways to make the cement inconcrete systems and products more sustain-able by implementing energy-efficient manu-facturing technologies and using industrialbyproducts that otherwise end up in landfills.The cement industry has voluntarily set goalsto decrease emissions, make its plants moreenergy efficient, and to reduce waste; it is on course to achieve those goals.www.cement.org

THE GREEN HOUSE SPONSORSM USE U M N EWS

16 blueprints

The Home Depot Foundation was created in 2002 to further the communitybuilding goals of The Home Depot by pro-viding additional resources to assist non-profit organizations building affordable,efficient, and healthy homes throughoutthe United States and Canada. The HomeDepot Foundation is dedicated to creatinghealthy, livable communities through theintegration of affordable housing builtresponsibly and the preservation andrestoration of community trees. Since itsformation, The Home Depot Foundationhas granted more than $25 million to non-profit and government organizationsthroughout North America.www.homedepotfoundation.org

Presenting SponsorTHE HOME DEPOT FOUNDATION

The Home Depot Foundation is proud toparticipate as the Presenting Sponsor ofthe National Building Museum’s environ-mentally aware exhibition, The GreenHouse: New Directions in SustainableArchitecture and Design.

The Foundation firmly believes thatbuilding responsibly is a form of stewardshipand is simply a smart way to build high-quality, efficient, affordable housing. Whilethe goals of building sustainable, affordablehousing are easy to embrace—they areoften more difficult to achieve in practice.

“For homeowners and home builders,sustainable design is fast becoming a partof mainstream living and resonates withgood business sense. The Green House exhibi-tion will educate hundreds of thousands ofpeople on what makes a home more com-fortable, safe, and green,” says The HomeDepot Foundation Executive Director KellyCaffarelli. “We believe that by helpingfamilies and individuals secure healthy,affordable housing, we are increasingtheir chances of success in all areas oftheir lives and are creating stable, strongcommunities.”

The Green House

top / Robert L. Nardelli, chairman,president, and chief executive officerof The Home Depot, addresses thecrowd at the opening reception forThe Green House. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

below / View of The Green Houseexhibition. Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

above / View of the interior of the Glidehouse, as installed in The Green House exhibition. Photo by Hoachlander Davis Photography.

DEVELOPMENT EVENTS

blueprints 19

ON THURSDAY, JUNE 8, THE MUSEUM

presented its 2006 Honor Award toClark Construction Group, LLC, at

a black-tie celebration in the Museum’shistoric Great Hall. The Honor Award recognizes outstanding individuals andcompanies who have made significant contributions in the fields of architecture,planning, construction, and engineering.Over the years this prestigious award galahas become a premier industry event, witha sponsorship list that reads as a “who’swho” of the building arts. This year’s galawas the most successful in the 20-year history of the award, drawing more than1,200 cultural, corporate, and buildingindustry leaders and raising more than$1.2 million for Museum exhibitions andeducation programs.

Clark Construction, celebrating its100th anniversary in 2006, has shaped thecommercial, residential, public, and infra-structure sectors of American cities whileupholding the highest standards of safety,craftsmanship, and technical excellence.Clark has also demonstrated a longstandingcommitment to community service with a strong presence in the capital area. With headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland,and regional offices nationwide, Clark hasbuilt a portfolio in urban areas with projectsincluding the National Museum of theAmerican Indian in Washington, DC, theJohn Joseph Moakley Federal Courthouse inBoston, and the San Francisco Civic Center.

The gala enjoyed the support of manynotable Washingtonians, among them B.F.Saul of Chevy Chase Bank, and Abe Pollin,chairman of the board and chief executiveof Washington Sports and Entertainment.In support of Clark’s newest project—constructing Washington, DC’s Major LeagueBallpark—architects Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK) and Nationals ownersLerner Enterprises also attended the gala.

The evening was marked with tributesby close friends of both the Museum andthe honoree: David Childs, FAIA, partner atSkidmore, Owings & Merrill and formerMuseum trustee; Dr. C.D. “Dan” Mote, Jr.,president of The University of Maryland,College Park; and Oliver T. Carr, Jr., chair-man of The Oliver Carr Company, andrecipient of the Museum’s 1997 Honor Award.

“In the course of my career, I and myfirm have had the good fortune to workwith Clark Construction Group on projectswhich, in aggregate, equal the size of thecity of Cincinnati. Clark Construction isthat rare thing—a construction firm com-mitted to the creation of excellence inarchitecture,” said David Childs.

18 blueprints

DINING ON MEDITERRANEAN DELICACIES setout amid purple orchids, members ofthe Museum’s Builders group enjoyed

a special evening in the historic Great Hallon July 27. More than 130 Builders attendedthe exclusive green-themed reception, heldin their honor to thank them for their continued support. While socializing withother building arts enthusiasts, guestslearned about sustainability by visiting the exhibition The Green House and hearinga presentation by interior designer KatieLeavy, ASID. The exhibition—featuring anactual, full-scale green house, photographsand models of contemporary green homesaround the world, and a materials resourceroom—set the scene for Leavy’s presenta-tion, during which she outlined strategies

for going green. “Our responsibility liestoday in understanding the trends, doingour research, making small changes, andspreading the word,” Leavy said. “As smartbusiness people, we want to interpret thistrend. As consumers, we want to supportit. And as good designers and architects,we have a responsibility to lead it.”Everyone could raise a glass to that. •

The Builders are a dedicated group of Museum members at the $125 level or above whose supporthelps fund exhibitions and education programs.Builders enjoy exclusive programs throughout the yearamong other added benefits. To inquire about theBuilders membership group, contact the membershipdepartment at 202.272.2448, ext. 3200 or [email protected].

M USE U M N EWS

2006 Honor AwardCelebrating Clark ConstructionBuilding Support

right / Greg Barnard, Gregory Hoss,and Lars Etzkorn at the July 27Builders event. Photo by Museum staff.

above / A. James Clark, Dan T. Montgomery, and Peter C. Forster of ClarkEnterprises accept the HonorAward from Museum chairCarolyn Brody and chair-elect Michael Glosserman. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

by Melissa Slaughter

by Elika Hemphill

DEVELOPMENT EVENTS

blueprints 19

ON THURSDAY, JUNE 8, THE MUSEUM

presented its 2006 Honor Award toClark Construction Group, LLC, at

a black-tie celebration in the Museum’shistoric Great Hall. The Honor Award recognizes outstanding individuals andcompanies who have made significant contributions in the fields of architecture,planning, construction, and engineering.Over the years this prestigious award galahas become a premier industry event, witha sponsorship list that reads as a “who’swho” of the building arts. This year’s galawas the most successful in the 20-year history of the award, drawing more than1,200 cultural, corporate, and buildingindustry leaders and raising more than$1.2 million for Museum exhibitions andeducation programs.

Clark Construction, celebrating its100th anniversary in 2006, has shaped thecommercial, residential, public, and infra-structure sectors of American cities whileupholding the highest standards of safety,craftsmanship, and technical excellence.Clark has also demonstrated a longstandingcommitment to community service with a strong presence in the capital area. With headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland,and regional offices nationwide, Clark hasbuilt a portfolio in urban areas with projectsincluding the National Museum of theAmerican Indian in Washington, DC, theJohn Joseph Moakley Federal Courthouse inBoston, and the San Francisco Civic Center.

The gala enjoyed the support of manynotable Washingtonians, among them B.F.Saul of Chevy Chase Bank, and Abe Pollin,chairman of the board and chief executiveof Washington Sports and Entertainment.In support of Clark’s newest project—constructing Washington, DC’s Major LeagueBallpark—architects Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum (HOK) and Nationals ownersLerner Enterprises also attended the gala.

The evening was marked with tributesby close friends of both the Museum andthe honoree: David Childs, FAIA, partner atSkidmore, Owings & Merrill and formerMuseum trustee; Dr. C.D. “Dan” Mote, Jr.,president of The University of Maryland,College Park; and Oliver T. Carr, Jr., chair-man of The Oliver Carr Company, andrecipient of the Museum’s 1997 Honor Award.

“In the course of my career, I and myfirm have had the good fortune to workwith Clark Construction Group on projectswhich, in aggregate, equal the size of thecity of Cincinnati. Clark Construction isthat rare thing—a construction firm com-mitted to the creation of excellence inarchitecture,” said David Childs.

18 blueprints

DINING ON MEDITERRANEAN DELICACIES setout amid purple orchids, members ofthe Museum’s Builders group enjoyed

a special evening in the historic Great Hallon July 27. More than 130 Builders attendedthe exclusive green-themed reception, heldin their honor to thank them for their continued support. While socializing withother building arts enthusiasts, guestslearned about sustainability by visiting the exhibition The Green House and hearinga presentation by interior designer KatieLeavy, ASID. The exhibition—featuring anactual, full-scale green house, photographsand models of contemporary green homesaround the world, and a materials resourceroom—set the scene for Leavy’s presenta-tion, during which she outlined strategies

for going green. “Our responsibility liestoday in understanding the trends, doingour research, making small changes, andspreading the word,” Leavy said. “As smartbusiness people, we want to interpret thistrend. As consumers, we want to supportit. And as good designers and architects,we have a responsibility to lead it.”Everyone could raise a glass to that. •

The Builders are a dedicated group of Museum members at the $125 level or above whose supporthelps fund exhibitions and education programs.Builders enjoy exclusive programs throughout the yearamong other added benefits. To inquire about theBuilders membership group, contact the membershipdepartment at 202.272.2448, ext. 3200 or [email protected].

M USE U M N EWS

2006 Honor AwardCelebrating Clark ConstructionBuilding Support

right / Greg Barnard, Gregory Hoss,and Lars Etzkorn at the July 27Builders event. Photo by Museum staff.

above / A. James Clark, Dan T. Montgomery, and Peter C. Forster of ClarkEnterprises accept the HonorAward from Museum chairCarolyn Brody and chair-elect Michael Glosserman. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

by Melissa Slaughter

by Elika Hemphill

blueprints 21

HONOR AWARD

20 blueprints

Many thanks to the corporations,

organizations, and individuals who

made the 2006 Honor Award its most

successful ever, raising $1.2 million

to support Museum exhibitions

and education programs.

Lead BenefactorClark Construction Group, LLC

PatronsCarolyn and Kenneth D. Brody

Oliver T. Carr, Jr.

Chevy Chase Bank

Colonial Parking

Fannie Mae Foundation

The JBG Companies

Alan Meltzer / The Meltzer Group

Miller & Long

The Peterson Family Foundation

Turner Construction Company

ContributorsBoston Properties / KEG Associates 1

Candy and Greg Fazakerley

Delon Hampton & Associates

Sharon and Jim Todd

The Tower Companies

SponsorsACS

Aon Corporation

Associated Builders and Contractors

The Associated General Contractors of America

Shalom Baranes Associates

Blake Real Estate

CarrAmerica Realty Corporation

The Conco Companies

James G. Davis Construction Corporation

The Walt Disney Companies

Forest City Washington

Freddie Mac

Gould Property Company

Gary P. Haney / SOM

Harmon

Anne and Til Hazel

Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum

Holland & Knight

International Masonry Institute

International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers

KCE Structural Engineers

Frederick A. Kober

Kohn Pedersen Fox

Lerner Enterprises

Lynne Maguire and Will Miller

McGraw-Hill Construction

McKissack & McKissack

Mesirow Financial Real Estate

Perkins + Will

Phillips Development Corporation

Pierce Associates

Abe Pollin

The Shooshan Company

Small / Gewirz / Kaplan Partnership

SmithGroup

Smoot Construction of Washington, DC

Thornton Tomasetti

Truland Group

A. James Clark School of Engineering,University of Maryland

WDG Architecture

FellowsAkridge

Arent Fox

Cushman & Wakefield of Virginia

Dewberry

Discovery Communications

Mike Goodrich

JCM Associates

Louis Dreyfus Property Group

ULI – the Urban Land Institute

Wells Fargo

FriendsAmerican Iron Works

Atlantic Valet

AvalonBay Communities

Bank of America

BDO Seidman

Brophy Properties

Burt Hill

Cassidy & Pinkard

CB Richard Ellis

Children’s National Medical Center

Component Assembly Systems

Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA)

ECS Mid-Atlantic

Federal Realty Investment Trust

FOX Architects

Gensler

Greenstein, DeLorme & Luchs

Grid Properties and Gotham Organization

Harris Nesbitt

Hensel Phelps Construction Company

Hess Mechanical / Comfort Systems USA

HITT Contracting

Host Hotels & Resorts

John J. Kirlin

Mr. and Mrs. Russell C. Lindner

Madison Homes

Monument Realtyggs

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®

Parsons Brinckerhoff

Patton Boggs

Perseus Realty Partners

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman

The Poole and Kent Corporation /Dynalectric Company

Red Coats

ReedSmith

Rockwood Capital Corporation

Fred Schnider Company

Shapiro & Duncan

SK&A Structural Engineers

Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty, a division of Vornado Realty Trust

Thelen Reid & Priest

Torti Gallas and Partners

Trammell Crow

Trizec / RTKL

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust

Weidlinger Associates

West*Group

West, Lane & Schlager / ONCORInternational

2006 Honor Award Co-ChairsAlbert AbramsonThe Tower CompaniesWilliam B. Alsup, IIIHinesShalom Baranes, FAIAShalom Baranes AssociatesRobert H. BraunohlerLouis Dreyfus Property GroupCarolyn Schwenker BrodyNational Building MuseumMark S. CainSmoot Construction Washington, DCJoan Baggett CalambokidisInternational Masonry InstituteOliver T. Carr, Jr.The Oliver Carr CompanyThomas A. CarrCarrAmerica Realty CorporationDavid M. Childs, FAIASkidmore, Owings & MerrillDaniel A. CuocoThornton TomasettiC.R. George DoveWDG ArchitectureDr. Nariman FarvardinA. James Clark School of Engineering,

University of MarylandGreg FazakerleyCG InvestmentsMichael J. GlossermanThe JBG CompaniesDelon Hampton, PhD, PEDelon Hampton and AssociatesWilliam K. Hellmuth, AIAHellmuth, Obata & KassabaumThomas HenneberryForest City WashingtonDr. Azer KehnemuiSK&A Structural EngineersAllyn E. KilsheimerKCE Structural EngineersDavid R.H. King, FAIASmithGroupFrederick A. KoberThe Christopher Companies

A. Eugene Kohn, FAIA, RIBA, JIAKohn Pedersen FoxRussell C. LindnerColonial ParkingJohn McMahonMiller & LongBrian T. McVayCushman & Wakefield of VirginiaRusty MeadowsPerkins + WillAlan MeltzerThe Meltzer GroupDavid M. OsnosArent Fox PLLCMilton V. PetersonThe Peterson CompaniesLeland H. PhillipsPhillips Development CorporationM. Kirk PickerelAssociated Builders and ContractorsStephen C. PiercePierce AssociatesRaymond A. RitcheyBoston PropertiesChase W. RyndNational Building MuseumStephen E. SandherrThe Associated General Contractors

of AmericaB. Francis Saul, IIChevy Chase BankRichard A. SteinMesirow Financial Real EstateJames W. ToddThe Peterson CompaniesRobert TrulandTruland GroupNorbert Young, Jr., FAIAMcGraw-Hill Construction

M USE U M N EWS

above / A. James Clark, MuseumExecutive Director Chase Rynd, andPeter C. Forster in the Great Hall justbefore the beginning of the gala. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

below / The Performing Arts ShowChoir from the Duke Ellington Schoolof the Performing Arts sings from thebalcony at the culmination of theHonor Award gala. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

The evening’s celebration began with a cocktail hour, complete with floatinglanterns and sprays of red orchids adorningthe West Court of the Great Hall. Gueststhen enjoyed an elegant seated dinner inthe Center and East Courts during the program, which culminated with the

Museum’s presentation of the Honor Awardto A. James Clark, executive chairman ofClark Enterprises; Peter C. Forster, chairmanand chief executive officer of ClarkConstruction Group, LLC; and Dan T.Montgomery, president and chief operatingofficer of Clark Construction Group.Carolyn Brody, the Museum’s chair, andMichael J. Glosserman, chair-elect andmanaging partner of The JBG Companies,presented the special honor.

In celebration of Clark’s 100thanniversary, the Duke Ellington School ofthe Performing Arts Show Choir gave aspectacular surprise performance from thesecond floor balcony above the stage, andthen continued to entertain guests in theWest Court following the dinner.

“It is an honor to receive this recogni-tion from the National Building Museum,”said Forster. “Clark has had the privilege tocollaborate with so many partners in thebuilding industry and the communities inwhich we work. Celebrating this Award withour colleagues is a tremendous way to markthe company’s first 100 years in business.” •

blueprints 21

HONOR AWARD

20 blueprints

Many thanks to the corporations,

organizations, and individuals who

made the 2006 Honor Award its most

successful ever, raising $1.2 million

to support Museum exhibitions

and education programs.

Lead BenefactorClark Construction Group, LLC

PatronsCarolyn and Kenneth D. Brody

Oliver T. Carr, Jr.

Chevy Chase Bank

Colonial Parking

Fannie Mae Foundation

The JBG Companies

Alan Meltzer / The Meltzer Group

Miller & Long

The Peterson Family Foundation

ContributorsBoston Properties / KEG Associates 1

Candy and Greg Fazakerley

Delon Hampton & Associates

Sharon and Jim Todd

The Tower Companies

SponsorsACS

Aon Corporation

Associated Builders and Contractors

Shalom Baranes Associates

Blake Real Estate

CarrAmerica Realty Corporation

The Conco Companies

The Walt Disney Companies

Forest City Washington

Freddie Mac

Gould Property Company

Gary P. Haney / SOM

Harmon

Anne and Til Hazel

Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum

Holland & Knight

International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers

KCE Structural Engineers

Frederick A. Kober

Kohn Pedersen Fox

Lerner Enterprises

Lynne Maguire and Will Miller

McGraw-Hill Construction

McKissack & McKissack

Mesirow Financial Real Estate

Perkins + Will

Phillips Development Corporation

Pierce Associates

Abe Pollin

The Shooshan Company

Small / Gewirz / Kaplan Partnership

SmithGroup

Thornton Tomasetti

Truland Group

A. James Clark School of Engineering,University of Maryland

WDG Architecture

FellowsAkridge

Arent Fox

Cushman & Wakefield of Virginia

Dewberry

Mike Goodrich

JCM Associates

Louis Dreyfus Property Group

ULI – the Urban Land Institute

Wells Fargo

FriendsAmerican Iron Works

Atlantic Valet

AvalonBay Communities

Bank of America

BDO Seidman

Brophy Properties

Burt Hill

Cassidy & Pinkard

CB Richard Ellis

Component Assembly Systems

Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA)

ECS Mid-Atlantic

Federal Realty Investment Trust

FOX Architects

Gensler

Grid Properties and Gotham Organization

Harris Nesbitt

Hensel Phelps Construction Company

Hess Mechanical / Comfort Systems USA

HITT Contracting

John J. Kirlin

Mr. and Mrs. Russell C. Lindner

Madison Homes

Monument Realtyggs

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®

Parsons Brinckerhoff

Patton Boggs

Perseus Realty Partners

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman

The Poole and Kent Corporation /Dynalectric Company

Red Coats

ReedSmith

Rockwood Capital Corporation

Fred Schnider Company

Shapiro & Duncan

SK&A Structural Engineers

Charles E. Smith Commercial Realty, a division of Vornado Realty Trust

Thelen Reid & Priest

Torti Gallas and Partners

Trammell Crow

Trizec / RTKL

Washington Real Estate Investment Trust

Weidlinger Associates

West*Group

West, Lane & Schlager / ONCORInternational

2006 Honor Award Co-ChairsAlbert AbramsonThe Tower CompaniesWilliam B. Alsup, IIIHinesShalom Baranes, FAIAShalom Baranes AssociatesRobert H. BraunohlerLouis Dreyfus Property GroupCarolyn Schwenker BrodyNational Building MuseumMark S. CainSmoot Construction Washington, DCJoan Baggett CalambokidisInternational Masonry InstituteOliver T. Carr, Jr.The Oliver Carr CompanyThomas A. CarrCarrAmerica Realty CorporationDavid M. Childs, FAIASkidmore, Owings & MerrillDaniel A. CuocoThornton TomasettiC.R. George DoveWDG ArchitectureDr. Nariman FarvardinA. James Clark School of Engineering,

University of MarylandGreg FazakerleyCG InvestmentsMichael J. GlossermanThe JBG CompaniesDelon Hampton, PhD, PEDelon Hampton and AssociatesWilliam K. Hellmuth, AIAHellmuth, Obata & KassabaumThomas HenneberryForest City WashingtonDr. Azer KehnemuiSK&A Structural EngineersAllyn E. KilsheimerKCE Structural EngineersDavid R.H. King, FAIASmithGroupFrederick A. KoberThe Christopher Companies

A. Eugene Kohn, FAIA, RIBA, JIAKohn Pedersen FoxRussell C. LindnerColonial ParkingJohn McMahonMiller & LongBrian T. McVayCushman & Wakefield of VirginiaRusty MeadowsPerkins + WillAlan MeltzerThe Meltzer GroupDavid M. OsnosArent Fox PLLCMilton V. PetersonThe Peterson CompaniesLeland H. PhillipsPhillips Development CorporationM. Kirk PickerelAssociated Builders and ContractorsStephen C. PiercePierce AssociatesRaymond A. RitcheyBoston PropertiesChase W. RyndNational Building MuseumStephen E. SandherrThe Associated General Contractors

of AmericaB. Francis Saul, IIChevy Chase BankRichard A. SteinMesirow Financial Real EstateJames W. ToddThe Peterson CompaniesRobert TrulandTruland GroupNorbert Young, Jr., FAIAMcGraw-Hill Construction

M USE U M N EWS

above / A. James Clark, MuseumExecutive Director Chase Rynd, andPeter C. Forster in the Great Hall justbefore the beginning of the gala. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

below / The Performing Arts ShowChoir from the Duke Ellington Schoolof the Performing Arts sings from thebalcony at the culmination of theHonor Award gala. Photo by ImageLink Photography.

The evening’s celebration began with a cocktail hour, complete with floatinglanterns and sprays of red orchids adorningthe West Court of the Great Hall. Gueststhen enjoyed an elegant seated dinner inthe Center and East Courts during the program, which culminated with the

Museum’s presentation of the Honor Awardto A. James Clark, executive chairman ofClark Enterprises; Peter C. Forster, chairmanand chief executive officer of ClarkConstruction Group, LLC; and Dan T.Montgomery, president and chief operatingofficer of Clark Construction Group.Carolyn Brody, the Museum’s chair, andMichael J. Glosserman, chair-elect andmanaging partner of The JBG Companies,presented the special honor.

In celebration of Clark’s 100thanniversary, the Duke Ellington School ofthe Performing Arts Show Choir gave aspectacular surprise performance from thesecond floor balcony above the stage, andthen continued to entertain guests in theWest Court following the dinner.

“It is an honor to receive this recogni-tion from the National Building Museum,”said Forster. “Clark has had the privilege tocollaborate with so many partners in thebuilding industry and the communities inwhich we work. Celebrating this Award withour colleagues is a tremendous way to markthe company’s first 100 years in business.” •

TR USTE ES

The Museum thanks the

following individuals,

companies, associations and

agencies for gifts of $250 or

more received from June 1–

July 31, 2006. These generous

gifts provide essential support

for the Museum’s exhibitions,

education programs, and

endowment funds. Some of

the contributions listed here

are in partial fulfillment of

larger pledges.

$100,000 and aboveNational Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs

Program and the U.S. Commission ofFine Arts

$50,000–$99,000Fannie Mae Foundation Fund of The

Community Foundation for the NationalCapital Region

Hanley Wood

$25,000–$49,999Autodesk Inc.

Copper Development Association

Freddie Mac Foundation/Freddie MacCommunity Relations Donor AssistedFund of The Community Foundation for the National Capital Region

Alan Meltzer/The Meltzer Group

U.S. Green Building Council

$10,000–$24,999ACS, Inc.

Aon Corporation

Bloomberg

The Walt Disney Company

KCE Structural Engineers, PC

Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates

Samuel H. Kress Foundation

National Association of Home Builders

National Housing Endowment

U.S. Department of Labor—Employment and Training Administration

$5,000–$9,999American Society of Landscape Architects

Bank of America

BDO Seidman, LLP

Hess Mechanical/Comfort Systems USA

John J. Kirlin

Lafarge

Annette and Theodore Lerner FamilyFoundation

Mr. and Mrs. Russell C. Linder

The Pool and Kent Corporation /Dynalectric Company

Emily Malino Scheuer

SK&A Structural Engineers, PLLC

ULI–the Urban Land Institute

$2,500–$4,999The American Architectural Foundation

D.C. Commission on the Arts & Humanitieswith the National Endowment for the Arts

M. Arthur Gensler, Jr.

Independence Excavating, Inc.

Miller & Long Co., Inc.

The Oklahoma State Society

$1,000–$2,499All Stage & Sound, Inc.

Anacostia Waterfront Corporation

The Honorable Mahlon Apgar, IV

Boston Red Sox Foundation

The Bozzuto Group

Carolyn and Kenneth D. Brody

Cardinal Bank

Steve Deggendorf and Dennis McClellan

Lisa Delplace and Chris McGahey

Leonard Forkas, Jr.

Freedom Forum

Friedlander, Misler, Sloan, Kletzkin & Ochsman

Hickok Cole Architects

The Home Depot Foundation

Hyde Family Foundation

Mary Roberta Jones

Kalos Construction Co., Inc.

Linda B. and Jonathan S. Lyons

Sandra and David Mayhood

Theresa A. Meyer and Bob Ranck

Melissa Moss

Pulte Homes

Quadrangle Development Co.

Ross Development & Investment, Realty Management Services, Inc.

Stephen E. Sandherr

Leslie C. and Leonard A. Shapiro FamilyFoundation

Mark R. Sullenberger, AIA/Custom Design Concepts

Tompkins Builders, Inc.

Transwestern Commercial Services

Neal L. Wood

Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership

$250–$999American Planning Association

Beery Rio Architects & Interiors

Sally Berk and Sanders H. Berk, M.D.

Bernstein Global Wealth Management

Suzanne and Richard Bissell

Robert P. Brennan, AIA

Centria Architectural Systems

Dorsky Hodgson + Partners

Ginny Dyson

ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC

Steven Ehrlich, AIA

Fadley Construction

Christine E. Fisher

Leslie J. Goldman

Allan Greenberg, Architect LLC

Reginald Griffith

Gregory M. Hoss and Lars Etzkorn

Michael A. Joy

Frederick A. Kober

Anita T. Lager

Mary E. Lawrence and Peter Buck

Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers

Kathy J. and Richard B. Nettler

NFL Charities

Thomas E. O’Brien

Parkinson Construction Company

Peak Corporation

Susan Piedmont-Palladino and Douglas Palladino

David Ralston

Edna R. Ranck and Martin Fleischer

The Rogers Group

Bernard Slosberg and Mary Chor

Alvin Smith–POST Construction

Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.

Jack Taylor

Donald Tucker, RA

United Way of the National Capital Region

Joseph Valerio

James V. Waugh and Kate Meenan-Waugh

Beth Wehrle

Dean Westman and Andrea Putscher

Beverly A. Willis, FAIA

Leonard A. Zax

Matching GiftsExxonMobil Foundation

GannettMatch

Thank You!SU PPORT

OCTOBER 1, 2006 MARKED NOT ONLY THE

beginning of a new fiscal year for theNational Building Museum, but also a

change in the leadership of the Museum’sboard for the first time in six years.Having served two full, three-year terms—the maximum period allowed under thebylaws—Carolyn Brody stepped down aschair of the Board of Trustees, and wassucceeded by Michael J. Glosserman, whoserved as chair-elect for the past year.

Carolyn joined the board in 1996, andwas elected chair in 2000. Throughout hertenure, she has consistently representedthe Museum with grace, wit, and charm,while calmly and thoughtfully directingour steady progress. With a master’s degreein city planning from the University ofPennsylvania (as well as an M.B.A. fromHarvard University), Carolyn has a directprofessional interest in the subject matterof the Museum. She also has a track recordas a dedicated patron of the arts, and thisunique combination of interests and experience gave her an extraordinary per-spective on all aspects of our mission andoperations. The Museum’s board, staff,

members, and other fans shall be foreverindebted to Carolyn Brody for her legacy ofwise leadership, and we are gratified thatshe has agreed to remain on the board as a trustee for the next year.

Michael J. Glosserman, managing partner of The JBG Companies, joined theMuseum board in 2005 and quickly becameone of its most active and engaged members.As head of a major development company,he, like Carolyn, has a strong professionalinterest in the work of the National BuildingMuseum. Michael has been involved in anumber of civic organizations, such as theFederal City Council, and has developed awide array of personal contacts throughoutthe local business community. Having earnedan undergraduate degree from the WhartonSchool at the University of Pennsylvaniaand a law degree from the University ofTexas, Michael brings broad knowledge tohis role as the Museum’s new chair.

We are sorry to see Carolyn’s termcome to an end, but simultaneously lookforward to an exciting future underMichael’s leadership. •

A Leadership Transitionby Chase W. Rynd

top / Carolyn Brody.

middle / Michael Glosserman.

bottom / Michael Glosserman presents Carolyn Brody with awatercolor by trustee GeneKohn, as Mr. Kohn looks on.Photo by Museum staff.

TR USTE ES

The Museum thanks the

following individuals,

companies, associations and

agencies for gifts of $250 or

more received from June 1–

July 31, 2006. These generous

gifts provide essential support

for the Museum’s exhibitions,

education programs, and

endowment funds. Some of

the contributions listed here

are in partial fulfillment of

larger pledges.

$100,000 and aboveNational Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs

Program and the U.S. Commission ofFine Arts

$50,000–$99,000Fannie Mae Foundation Fund of The

Community Foundation for the NationalCapital Region

Hanley Wood

$25,000–$49,999Autodesk Inc.

Copper Development Association

Freddie Mac Foundation/Freddie MacCommunity Relations Donor AssistedFund of The Community Foundation for the National Capital Region

Alan Meltzer/The Meltzer Group

U.S. Green Building Council

$10,000–$24,999ACS, Inc.

Aon Corporation

Bloomberg

The Walt Disney Company

KCE Structural Engineers, PC

Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates

Samuel H. Kress Foundation

National Association of Home Builders

National Housing Endowment

U.S. Department of Labor—Employment and Training Administration

$5,000–$9,999American Society of Landscape Architects

Bank of America

BDO Seidman, LLP

Hess Mechanical/Comfort Systems USA

John J. Kirlin

Lafarge

Annette and Theodore Lerner FamilyFoundation

Mr. and Mrs. Russell C. Linder

The Pool and Kent Corporation /Dynalectric Company

Emily Malino Scheuer

SK&A Structural Engineers, PLLC

ULI–the Urban Land Institute

$2,500–$4,999The American Architectural Foundation

D.C. Commission on the Arts & Humanitieswith the National Endowment for the Arts

M. Arthur Gensler, Jr.

Independence Excavating, Inc.

Miller & Long Co., Inc.

The Oklahoma State Society

$1,000–$2,499All Stage & Sound, Inc.

Anacostia Waterfront Corporation

The Honorable Mahlon Apgar, IV

Boston Red Sox Foundation

The Bozzuto Group

Carolyn and Kenneth D. Brody

Cardinal Bank

Steve Deggendorf and Dennis McClellan

Lisa Delplace and Chris McGahey

Leonard Forkas, Jr.

Freedom Forum

Friedlander, Misler, Sloan, Kletzkin & Ochsman

Hickok Cole Architects

The Home Depot Foundation

Hyde Family Foundation

Mary Roberta Jones

Kalos Construction Co., Inc.

Linda B. and Jonathan S. Lyons

Sandra and David Mayhood

Theresa A. Meyer and Bob Ranck

Melissa Moss

Pulte Homes

Quadrangle Development Co.

Ross Development & Investment, Realty Management Services, Inc.

Stephen E. Sandherr

Leslie C. and Leonard A. Shapiro FamilyFoundation

Mark R. Sullenberger, AIA/Custom Design Concepts

Tompkins Builders, Inc.

Transwestern Commercial Services

Neal L. Wood

Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership

$250–$999American Planning Association

Beery Rio Architects & Interiors

Sally Berk and Sanders H. Berk, M.D.

Bernstein Global Wealth Management

Suzanne and Richard Bissell

Robert P. Brennan, AIA

Centria Architectural Systems

Dorsky Hodgson + Partners

Ginny Dyson

ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC

Steven Ehrlich, AIA

Fadley Construction

Christine E. Fisher

Leslie J. Goldman

Allan Greenberg, Architect LLC

Reginald Griffith

Gregory M. Hoss and Lars Etzkorn

Michael A. Joy

Frederick A. Kober

Anita T. Lager

Mary E. Lawrence and Peter Buck

Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers

Kathy J. and Richard B. Nettler

NFL Charities

Thomas E. O’Brien

Parkinson Construction Company

Peak Corporation

Susan Piedmont-Palladino and Douglas Palladino

David Ralston

Edna R. Ranck and Martin Fleischer

The Rogers Group

Bernard Slosberg and Mary Chor

Alvin Smith–POST Construction

Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.

Jack Taylor

Donald Tucker, RA

United Way of the National Capital Region

Joseph Valerio

James V. Waugh and Kate Meenan-Waugh

Beth Wehrle

Dean Westman and Andrea Putscher

Beverly A. Willis, FAIA

Leonard A. Zax

Matching GiftsExxonMobil Foundation

GannettMatch

Thank You!SU PPORT

OCTOBER 1, 2006 MARKED NOT ONLY THE

beginning of a new fiscal year for theNational Building Museum, but also a

change in the leadership of the Museum’sboard for the first time in six years.Having served two full, three-year terms—the maximum period allowed under thebylaws—Carolyn Brody stepped down aschair of the Board of Trustees, and wassucceeded by Michael J. Glosserman, whoserved as chair-elect for the past year.

Carolyn joined the board in 1996, andwas elected chair in 2000. Throughout hertenure, she has consistently representedthe Museum with grace, wit, and charm,while calmly and thoughtfully directingour steady progress. With a master’s degreein city planning from the University ofPennsylvania (as well as an M.B.A. fromHarvard University), Carolyn has a directprofessional interest in the subject matterof the Museum. She also has a track recordas a dedicated patron of the arts, and thisunique combination of interests and experience gave her an extraordinary per-spective on all aspects of our mission andoperations. The Museum’s board, staff,

members, and other fans shall be foreverindebted to Carolyn Brody for her legacy ofwise leadership, and we are gratified thatshe has agreed to remain on the board as a trustee for the next year.

Michael J. Glosserman, managing partner of The JBG Companies, joined theMuseum board in 2005 and quickly becameone of its most active and engaged members.As head of a major development company,he, like Carolyn, has a strong professionalinterest in the work of the National BuildingMuseum. Michael has been involved in anumber of civic organizations, such as theFederal City Council, and has developed awide array of personal contacts throughoutthe local business community. Having earnedan undergraduate degree from the WhartonSchool at the University of Pennsylvaniaand a law degree from the University ofTexas, Michael brings broad knowledge tohis role as the Museum’s new chair.

We are sorry to see Carolyn’s termcome to an end, but simultaneously lookforward to an exciting future underMichael’s leadership. •

A Leadership Transitionby Chase W. Rynd

top / Carolyn Brody.

middle / Michael Glosserman.

bottom / Michael Glosserman presents Carolyn Brody with awatercolor by trustee GeneKohn, as Mr. Kohn looks on.Photo by Museum staff.

Members receive reduced admission to education programs, subscriptionsto Blueprints and the Calendar of Events, invitations to exhibition openings, and discounts on Museum Shop purchases. For more informationabout benefits, as well as corporate membership opportunities, please call 202.272.2448, ext. 3200.

j Yes, I want to become a member of the National Building Museum!Please begin my membership at the following level:

j Corinthian Pillar $2500 j Family $80

j Corinthian Cornerstone $1000 j Dual $70

j Sustaining Member $500 j Individual $50

j Supporting Member $250 j Senior $40

j Contributing Member $125 j Student $30

N A M E

A D D R E S S

C I T Y/S TAT E / Z I P

E M A I L DAY T I M E P H O N E

j My check payable to the National Building Museum is enclosed.

Please charge my credit card: j American Express

j Visa

j MasterCard

A C C O U N T # E X P I R AT I O N DAT E

N A M E A S I T A P P E A R S O N C R E D I T C A R D S I G N AT U R E

You can become a Museum member in any of the following ways:

BY MAIL: National Building Museum

401 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20001

BY FAX: 202.376.3436

BY PHONE: 202.272.2448

BY INTERNET: www.NBM.org

The National Building Museum is a nonprofit organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal

Revenue Code. Contributions are tax-deductible to the maximum allowable extent of the law. To obtain

a copy of the organization’s most recent audited financial statement, please call 202.272.2448 ext. 3500.

M E M B E RSH I P APPL I CAT I ON

24 blueprints

Mystery Building ?MYSTE RY B U I LD I N G

THE WEATHERED BUT STILL STURDY GreekRevival façade of the Summer 2006Mystery Building led several readers to

believe that the structure was located inEurope or in the northeastern U.S. Lookcarefully at the buildings on either side ofthe main subject, however, and you willsee some strong clues to its actual location:namely, New Orleans. The Mystery Buildingis known as the Arsenal, and it is locatedjust around the corner from Jackson Square,in the heart of the French Quarter. Designedby the architecture firm of Dakin andDakin and completed in 1839, the buildingwas originally used, as it name suggests, to store artillery. After New Orleans wascaptured by Union forces during the Civil War, the building served briefly as afederal military prison. In 1915, it becamea component of the Louisiana StateMuseum, and remains so today. Like manyhistoric structures on the relatively highground of the French Quarter, the Arsenalsurvived the ravages of Hurricane Katrinavirtually unscathed.

The Arsenal was correctly identified bysix readers (one of whom guessed the name ofthe architect incorrectly, but we’ll let thatslide this time!): Carl Thomas Engel, ofPainesville, Ohio; Jim Heegeman, ofArlington, Virginia; Larry Levine, of NewCastle, Delaware; Cindy Manto, of Metairie,Louisiana; Michelle Rinehart, of Washington,D.C.; and Robert Swan, of New Orleans.

With this issue’s Mystery Building—or perhaps “Mystery Structure” would bemore accurate—we are throwing you a bitof a curve. No, it’s not a giant carportdesigned to shelter a Jeep from the tropicalsun. Perhaps if you look closely, you’ll pickup on some useful signals. Can you identifythe structure and its location?

Mystery Building, National BuildingMuseum, 401 F Street NW, Washington, DC20001

above / The ArsenalPhoto: Library of Congress, Prints andPhotographs Division, Historic AmericanBuildings Survey, HABS LA, 36-NEWOR, 6-1

TR USTE ES AN D STAFF

B O A R D O F TR U STE E S(as of October 1, 2006)

Officers

ChairMichael J. Glosserman

Vice ChairsGilbert E. DeLormeDavid C. EvansRobert A.M. Stern

SecretaryDavid C. Evans

TreasurerRobert H. Braunohler

PresidentChase W. Rynd

Trustees

William B. Alsup IIIFrank AntonThomas N. Armstrong III David S. BenderDeborah BerkeWilliam M. BrennanCarolyn Schwenker BrodyJoan Baggett CalambokidisDonald A. CapocciaKent W. ColtonDennis J. CotterChristopher DorvalJohn P. Gleason, Jr.Mike GoodrichDelon HamptonGary P. HaneyPhilippe HardouinRobert W. Holleyman IIJoseph F. Horning, Jr.Gerald M. HowardMercy JiménezFrederick A. KoberA. Eugene Kohn Deryl McKissack Hollis S. McLoughlinMelissa A. MossRobert A. PeckWhayne S. QuinStephen M. RossDeborah Ratner SalzbergStephen E. SandherrNorbert W. Young, Jr.

Founding Trustees

Cynthia R. FieldHerbert M. FranklinEdward T. HallNancy StevensonBeverly Willis

Honorary Trustees

Harold L. AdamsHoward M. Bender M. Arthur Gensler Jr.Thomas J. KlutznickStuart A. McFarlandRobert McLean IIIElizabeth B. MoynihanMarilyn PerryJames W. ToddMallory WalkerLeonard A. Zax

Ex Officio Trustees

The Honorable Dirk KempthorneSecretary, U.S. Department of the Interior

The Honorable Alphonso JacksonSecretary, U.S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development

The Honorable James M. Inhofe Chairman, Senate Committee onEnvironment and Public Works

The Honorable Don YoungChairman, House Committee onTransportation and Infrastructure

Lurita DoanAdministrator, General ServicesAdministration

David L. WinsteadCommissioner, Public BuildingsService, General ServicesAdministration

The Honorable Alan M. HantmanArchitect of the Capitol

Allen WeinsteinArchivist of the United States

The Honorable James H. BillingtonLibrarian of Congress

Lawrence M. SmallSecretary, Smithsonian Institution

Richard MoePresident, National Trust forHistoric Preservation

Christine McEnteeExecutive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer The American Institute ofArchitects

STA F F

Administration

Jennifer BertschExecutive Assistant and Manager of Board Relations

Don HolstromSystems Administrator

Betsy May-SalazarVice President for Finance and Administration

G. Martin Moeller, Jr.Senior Vice President and Curator

Rebecca WarwickHuman Resources Manager

Finance

Diane BeckhamController

Laura LeonardAccounting Manager

Curatorial

Chrysanthe B. BroikosCurator

Shelagh M. ColeRegistrar/ Manager of TravelingExhibitions

Catherine Crane FrankelDirector of Exhibitions and Collections

Cecelia GibsonRegistrar

William H. C. GriffithExhibitions Coordinator

Reed HaslachCuratorial Associate

Matthew KuhnertCuratorial Associate

Christopher MaclayPreparator

Susan Piedmont-PalladinoCurator

Laura SchiavoCurator

Deborah SorensenCuratorial Associate

Dana TwerskySenior Registrar

MaryJane E. ValadeExhibitions Designer andPreparator

Education

Corinne CannonYouth Groups Coordinator

Liz GuthrieAssistant Outreach ProgramsCoordinator

Mary HendrickseAssistant Youth GroupsCoordinator

Paul F. KillmerDirector of Public Programs

Scott KratzVice President for Education

Ann LambsonDirector of Youth Education

Kathryn McGillOutreach Programs Coordinator

Jennifer MichaelreeAssociate Youth GroupsCoordinator

Sarah Petty RiceFamily Programs Coordinator

Sarah SmithYouth Education Assistant

Jaime Van MourikPublic Programs Coordinator

Development

Suzanne BissellDirector of Individual Giving

Tim CarriganDonor Relations Coordinator

Sangita ChariFoundation and GovernmentRelations Manager

Michael DunaganDirector of Institutional Giving

Elika HemphillDirector of Development Events

Melinda HungermanCorporate and AssociationRelations Manager

Caitlin IrvinDevelopment Assistant

Melissa SlaughterMembership Manager

Shar TaylorVice President for Development

Mary ZeheAssistant Director of Development

Marketing & Communications

Jennifer ByrnePublications Designer

Johanna DunkelMarketing and CommunicationsAssociate

Bryna LipperDirector of Marketing andCommunications

Kevin MorseWebsite Administrator

Julia NeubauerEditor/Writer

Lauren SearlMarketing and CommunicationsAssociate

Museum Shop

Leslie BradshawAssistant Manager

Marcia DiehlOperations Manager

Scott GlasscoeInventory Specialist

Michael HigdonRetail Manager

Tom ZiolkowskiAssociate

Special Events

Christopher FrameDirector of Special Events

Charles ShelbySpecial Events Coordinator

Visitor Services

John BaneMuseum Operations Coordinator

Kristi CotnerTour and Volunteer Coordinator

Barry EdmundsWeekend Assistant Visitor Services Manager

Danielle FloresAdministrative Assistant/Receptionist

Ronald Keith FulwoodInformation Desk Specialist

Gregory T. HarrisDirector of Visitor Services

Eimear HughesVisitor Services Manager

David KaplanInformation Desk Specialist

Annie KalinowskiTour and Volunteer Assistant

Rose Marie KirwinInformation Desk Specialist

Doris LandauInformation Desk Specialist

Susan MittlemanInformation Desk Specialist

Bryan NormanMuseum Operations Coordinator

Gallery Representatives

Monique AndersonWilliam BarnesPatricia CunninghamHarriet CywinskiBarry EdmundsBeverly FennellJennifer HeimbeckerLouise JohnsonNathaniel KulykBarry LustbergCarla PattersonErma PersonSeymour SeligMatthew SeymourCrystal WatsonMary West Karen WhitehairSarah WhitelowEvelyn WilsonFred WilsonViktor Zavadsky

Museum Teachers

Gale Famisan RobertsonBobbie HertzfeldtNicole IvesEllen JacknainCatherine LeeKaren KonradAnne MilazzoKaren SchulienJamee TelfordAllen Travitz

Contents

1 Message from the Executive Director

2 Lessons in Arcology:

6 The Art of Building Lightly:

An Interview with Shigeru Ban

10 All that Glitters Isn’t Green

14 Museum News

22 Support

23 Trustees

24 Mystery Building

The NationalBuildingMuseumexplores

the world we build

for ourselves—from our homes,

skyscrapers and public buildings to our parks, bridges, and cities. Through exhibitions, education programs, and publications, the Museum seeks to educate the public about achievements in architecture, design, engineering, urban planning, and construction.

The Museum is supported by contributionsfrom individuals, corporations, foundations,associations, and public agencies.

cover / The Arcosanti site viewed from the south. Photo by Chris Ohlinger.

BLUEPRINTS VOLUME XXI, NO. 2

INSIDE THIS ISSUE: • Lessons in Arcology:

• The Art of Building Lightly:An Interview with Shigeru Ban

• All That Glitters Isn’t Green

Volume XXIV, No. 4 Fall 2006

NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM

The Green House: New Directions in Sustainable Architecture and Design

through June 3, 2007

The second in a series of major

National Building Museum

exhibitions on sustainable

design, The Green House begins

with a full-scale, furnished

replica of an environmentally-

friendly house. Also featured

are photographs and models

of exemplary houses and

apartment buildings from

around the world, plus a

resource room with many

examples of materials that are

both green and attractive.

Building Zone

Long-term

Designed especially for our

youngest visitors, ages two to

six, and their adult companions,

Building Zone introduces

children to the building arts

through engaging activities.

Youngsters can build with

big, soft Legos® and building

blocks; curl up with an archi-

tecture picture book; pretend

to be a craftsperson; and more.

Cityscapes Revealed:Highlights from the Collection

Long-term

The first exhibition presenting

a cross-section of items from

the Museum’s own collection,

including drawings, photo-

graphs, material samples,

and artifacts from National

Historic Landmarks.

Washington: Symbol and City

Long-term

A seminal exhibition about

the complex city that the

Museum calls home.

Spectacular, large-scale historic

and contemporary models

give visitors an intimate

understanding of the city’s

past and possible future.

hibitio

M US E U M HOU RSMonday – Saturday, 10:00 am – 5:00 pm

Sunday, 11:00 am – 5:00 pm

Closed Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s Day

NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM401 F Street NW Washington, DC 20001202.272.2448 / www.NBM.orgRed Line Metro, Judiciary Square

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. Postage PaidWashington, DCPermit No. 488

Blueprints is the quarterly magazine of the

National Building Museum. Subscriptions

are a benefit of Museum membership.

ISSN 0742-0552

editor in chief / G. Martin Moeller, Jr.

managing editor / Julia Neubauer

designer / Nancy Van Meter

art director / Jennifer Byrne

blueprints

museum hours blueprints · an interview with paolo soleri 6 the art of building lightly: an...

Documents