mindshift innovation: "Little Green Lies" - Green Romance and Reality#links
Rex is right on with this. Who is going to take the risks involved to climb the learning curve and pull this off?
The focus of a client's decision to do or not do a LEED certified buildings, let alone a Platinum one, would no longer be on up front cost if as an industry we could solve and reduce the incredible amount of wasted effort and non-value-added work that seems to be part and parcel of the status quo that architects, engineers, and contractors labor within. Just look at how slowly the industry is adapting to the new CSI specification format. It's been in place for 4 years now and we still have contractors who do not want us to use the new specification format. We still design and construct buildings under a century-old model.
Showing posts with label architecture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label architecture. Show all posts
Friday, November 2, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
Blogging - And so it begins
It's about time I've done this - with so many thoughts about culture, technology, the church, design, environmentalism, and change.
Here's a start: an apparent paradox.
In discussions or presentations about the emerging church, I've experienced some leaders speak of buildings as though they are a dirty word. And many should be. There are some monstrosities out there that get used for 90 minutes a week, tops. During the latter part of the 20th Century, the mainstream church seemed to have a scorecard of "Butts", "Buildings", and "Budgets". Bigger in each category must equate to success. Very little mention was made of transformation, of servanthood, of environmental record, of influence, of social programs, or of even area crime rates or truancy stats. (Interesting metrics to track for a church!) Does God only bless through numerical growth? So it is no wonder that the building got thrown out with the bathwater when discussing the excesses that some claim the North American mega-church was and is capable of. And it is easy to accept: Yes, the church is not a building, the church is people! I buy that 100%.
Contrast this with the mass customization and designer-awareness of the experience economy we live in. Go to Target - you can buy dozens of types of toilet brushes. (Does there need to be more than 3 types of toilet brushes?) In this design-aware culture, clearly design matters, and environment matters. Sustainability matters. Sustainable environments matter. For churches, environments that foster communication and relationships matter. Worship spaces that aid the spoken word, for music, places that allow people to concentrate, learn, pray, and in the words of Fay Jones, "think their highest thoughts" matter. People can want to build relationships in one, and want to be left alone in another. People can want to linger in one, and want to leave another.
So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, which is more on target:
More than ever, the missional church must view itself as a force, not a fortress, and the building they are in is somewhat incidental to their mission, if they have a building at all.
With today's design-savvy culture and knowledge of what makes for a good environment, worship and gathering space matters more than ever; it cannot be neutral.
... probably one of those both/and postmodern things...
Here's a start: an apparent paradox.
In discussions or presentations about the emerging church, I've experienced some leaders speak of buildings as though they are a dirty word. And many should be. There are some monstrosities out there that get used for 90 minutes a week, tops. During the latter part of the 20th Century, the mainstream church seemed to have a scorecard of "Butts", "Buildings", and "Budgets". Bigger in each category must equate to success. Very little mention was made of transformation, of servanthood, of environmental record, of influence, of social programs, or of even area crime rates or truancy stats. (Interesting metrics to track for a church!) Does God only bless through numerical growth? So it is no wonder that the building got thrown out with the bathwater when discussing the excesses that some claim the North American mega-church was and is capable of. And it is easy to accept: Yes, the church is not a building, the church is people! I buy that 100%.
Contrast this with the mass customization and designer-awareness of the experience economy we live in. Go to Target - you can buy dozens of types of toilet brushes. (Does there need to be more than 3 types of toilet brushes?) In this design-aware culture, clearly design matters, and environment matters. Sustainability matters. Sustainable environments matter. For churches, environments that foster communication and relationships matter. Worship spaces that aid the spoken word, for music, places that allow people to concentrate, learn, pray, and in the words of Fay Jones, "think their highest thoughts" matter. People can want to build relationships in one, and want to be left alone in another. People can want to linger in one, and want to leave another.
So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, which is more on target:
More than ever, the missional church must view itself as a force, not a fortress, and the building they are in is somewhat incidental to their mission, if they have a building at all.
With today's design-savvy culture and knowledge of what makes for a good environment, worship and gathering space matters more than ever; it cannot be neutral.
... probably one of those both/and postmodern things...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
