Architects in their own words: Desert Infill?
November 27, 2010
Architects Take On Museums in Doha and Abu Dhabi – Interactive Feature – NYTimes.com.
This interactive feature presents four architects describing recent museum commissions in the Middle East. The architect engage both the lack of physical context as well as the contemporary aspirations of their surrounding societies.
Its refreshing to hear architects in their own words. Much like the The Chicago Tapes or The Charlottesville Tapes, this excerpt helps to demystify the nature and intention of the design process that is otherwise left behind closed doors.
Robert Moses and the Bikelane Backlash
November 22, 2010
Bike Lanes’ Growth in New York Brings Backlash – NYTimes.com.
While New York City appears at the forefront of a national trend to increase access to its scarce pavement, a review of the chronology dating to back to the beginning of the 20th century reveals this “forefront” to be more of a “crest” in a cyclical wave of politics. Somewhere in that mush of time Robert Moses transformed New York– how he did it is as important to cyclists today as what he did.
Cyclists should review the techniques and strategies of Mr. Moses for clues as to how to implement their vision through parallel political and a-political processes. Here are my three cents:
First, frame the message: Moses was ‘giving’ parks and parkways to the people. Cyclists appear to be ‘taking’ from the auto and pedestrians. Since there is little debate as to the future demand, need or desire to implement a healthy and sustainable alternative to the auto, the onus will rest squarely on cyclists to reframe their message as a giving and not a taking.
Second, make no small plans: Develop and sell the entire network–not just the individual intersection. Its too easy for individualized local fights to overwhelm the value of an entire network.
Third, follow the money. Moses gave us toll roads (aka “parkways,” ahem) while Bikes remain basically free. Bike coalitions have largely been self financed and their respective political results suggest this meager purse power. Municipalities that want to encourage the muli-tmodal use of their roadways should immediately enforce a drivers/riders license requirement and impose a new use fee for cyclists that use the road (and not just ‘share’ or ‘borrow’ it). The use fee should start out high and decrease with the actual mileage traveled (or perhaps number of consecutive years renewed.)
I’d value your continued comment and thoughts.
Polyvore, a fashion Web site for the masses : The New Yorker
November 21, 2010
Polyvore, a fashion Web site for the masses : The New Yorker.
Thanks to Polyvore’s offering up free version of their mini-editor we can now let our friends and visitors play “dress-up” with an assemblage of interior design objects (instead of shoes and handbags) that we know and love. Come and play with us! Thanks Polyvore!
Visit our interiors editor here.
Q/A: Terry Milne of the Bernal East Slope Design Review Board
April 5, 2010
Can you relate the famous anecdote that lead to the creation of the East Slope Design Review Board?
In 1978, a new building project on the East Slope startled the neighborhood. Neighbors objected to the lack of community review and absence of obvious notification for a project that would obviously affect their properties. Several neighbors literally stood up to the demolition crews and demanded that the work stop. The movement gained support from several San Francisco Chronicle articles and newscasts. As a response, the City of San Francisco and the San Francisco Planning Department created a design review area that required community review before any building permit in that area could be approved. The original boundaries of the East Slope Design Review Area were determined by the Planning Department blight maps, U.S. Census maps and the existing freeways. At that time, the East Slope of Bernal Heights had an above average number of vacant lots per city block.
What role does the East Slope Design Review Board play in the permit-approval process?
The Design Review Board serves as an intermediary between the San Francisco Planning Department and the neighbors in Bernal Heights. Design Review meetings invite Bernal Heights residents to voice their concerns about any new construction in the East Slope Design Review area. The Board relies on built precedent and their knowledge of the codes to weigh the legitimacy of a neighbor’s question. The Planning Department will only accept an application for a building permit from the East Slope Design Review Area with a letter of recommendation from the East Design Review Board. Building projects must then go through regulatory review by the Planning and Building Department.
How has the function of the East Slope Design Review Board changed with the adoption of Planning Code Section 242 (that describes the Bernal Heights Special Use District)?
The primary goal of the board remains to notify neighbors of new building changes and to make sure their objections reach an appropriate forum. The board is also a resource that can clarify the intent, and application of the Bernal Heights Design Guidelines. The Pre-Application meetings are venue for neighbors to pose questions and learn about the goals of the new construction. Recently, economic constraints have had a greater impact of the Design Review Board than any regulatory action by the Planning Department. The Planning Department’s system can still be improved, and so there is still a need for a Design Review Board.
How do the various Bernal Heights Design Review Boards work together?
The Design Review Boards of Bernal Heights are largely separate. We have communicated in the past over particular Design Review Area boundaries, but all review proceedings are separate because of objections by the Planning Department.
What is the most effective action a homeowner can take to move a project through the East Slope Design Review Process?
Use Section 242 and pay close attention to the details that make Bernal Heights unique and different than Noe Valley. The gross area and parking calculations are particularly important. Have good plans that really explain your proposed project. In particular, the board wants to see a detailed site plan that show adjacent properties in plan, adjacent building elevations and an understanding of the changed sight lines onto/from the newly changed property. It is also helpful to have fully descriptive, scaled drawings with annotations and dimensions. The goal of the Board is not prescribe a singular style of house, rather to ensure new designs comply with existing guidelines.
Results are in! Kids’ Digital Design Contest Winners Announced!! www.masonkirby.com/contest
October 9, 2009
1. Age group 13-15 winner Matt N.
2. Age group 10-12 winner Aaron F.
3. Age group 6-9 winner Jackson. M.
4. Age group 0-5 winner Ava R.
Posted via email from Architect Mason Kirby Inc.
Kids’ Digital Design Contest judging underway!
October 8, 2009
The office is officially too small when exterior space becomes the most viable workspace… Mason and I used the front window of AMK Inc. to get a "big-picture" sense of the Kids' Digital Design Contest entries. MORE at http://masonkirby.com/contest/
Posted via email from Architect Mason Kirby Inc.
Job Site Photos: Bernal Heights Residence
October 8, 2009
A look inside a "typical" Bernal Heights front porch and a detail of what improvements can be done. Rather than sit adjacent, the new rail is securely bolted into the stone stair.
Posted via email from Architect Mason Kirby Inc.
Job Site Photos: Bernal Heights Residence
October 8, 2009
Posted via email from Architect Mason Kirby Inc.
Job Site Photos: San Mateo Residence
September 25, 2009
Posted via email from Architect Mason Kirby Inc.
Irrigation: Ins and Outs
August 18, 2009