if by underground they mean taking it (sustainable design) "to the grave" aka f^ck it! - then yeah! heck yeah!
i think the concept of sustainability is understood by 1% of the educated public - the inverted pyramid - underground yeahhh!! and so no relationship to the sky here - what about exiting requirements lol ? - all mechanical means to get people to safety at grade ABOVE?! - natural ventilation, really? natural daylighting, you really think so? (no chance here) - i thought these were sustainable precepts - i must be wrong, perhaps a droid designed this with some algorithmic idea of what sustainable design embodies
and the cultural response / design intent ? - as reflected in the article, talks about the unique quality of the stratified city layers thru time of the architecture in mexico city. this isn't anything special among cultural landmarks/cities - i found this to be my most interesting discovery while studying in rome -
but in Rome they celebrate, respond to, and maintain the history and beautiful architecture of the past - (i wish more of our american cities did this with early 1890-1920s work) .... THIS project does the opposite - ignores the significance of Mexico City's architecture (it's like saying, yes chopin, i can play an etude nearly as beautiful as yours, but i will put it on "mute"), ignores the city street where people EXIST - responds with a "ehh f-k it, let's build a freakin inverted pyramid, maverick, and put this whole thing on it's head metaphorically AND physically.
don't get me wrong, cave-like / underground environments can be extremely inspiring when the hard,stone,sectional quality of the earth is experienced - think peter zumthor architecture - but i also think the 9/11 memorial will be a beautiful example of this underground architecture (granted it's a memorial and not a city in the ground)
Last time I looked, excavating and removing the required quantity of earth, and then building an inverted 775,000m2 structure underground wasn't particularly sustainable.
Does this strike anyone as, at long last, the anatomical "answer" (as it were) to the supposedly everpresent phallus in skyscraper design? Rather pointy, yes, but finally a welcome opening for, say, the TransAmerica Pyramid...?
This is a idea that you have to admire for the stupidity of it -- not for the reality. No one really wants to live in a jackass movie -- they just want to see it. This is what your professors meant by paper architecture. To me, it looks like an attempt to call Smith+Gill copyists of Violet-le-Duc.
underground buildings were the latest thinking back in the 1970s, but after a few attempts at subterranean living and working the idea was buried as a bad idea. so why are folks bothering to resurrect something better left for dead? what a waste of time and talent. underground ain't sustainable or a good place to be.
Earthscraper
Earthscraper Concept Takes Sustainable Design Underground
if by underground they mean taking it (sustainable design) "to the grave" aka f^ck it! - then yeah! heck yeah!
i think the concept of sustainability is understood by 1% of the educated public - the inverted pyramid - underground yeahhh!! and so no relationship to the sky here - what about exiting requirements lol ? - all mechanical means to get people to safety at grade ABOVE?! - natural ventilation, really? natural daylighting, you really think so? (no chance here) - i thought these were sustainable precepts - i must be wrong, perhaps a droid designed this with some algorithmic idea of what sustainable design embodies
and the cultural response / design intent ? - as reflected in the article, talks about the unique quality of the stratified city layers thru time of the architecture in mexico city. this isn't anything special among cultural landmarks/cities - i found this to be my most interesting discovery while studying in rome -
but in Rome they celebrate, respond to, and maintain the history and beautiful architecture of the past - (i wish more of our american cities did this with early 1890-1920s work) .... THIS project does the opposite - ignores the significance of Mexico City's architecture (it's like saying, yes chopin, i can play an etude nearly as beautiful as yours, but i will put it on "mute"), ignores the city street where people EXIST - responds with a "ehh f-k it, let's build a freakin inverted pyramid, maverick, and put this whole thing on it's head metaphorically AND physically.
don't get me wrong, cave-like / underground environments can be extremely inspiring when the hard,stone,sectional quality of the earth is experienced - think peter zumthor architecture - but i also think the 9/11 memorial will be a beautiful example of this underground architecture (granted it's a memorial and not a city in the ground)
Fun!
Last time I looked, excavating and removing the required quantity of earth, and then building an inverted 775,000m2 structure underground wasn't particularly sustainable.
Does this strike anyone as, at long last, the anatomical "answer" (as it were) to the supposedly everpresent phallus in skyscraper design? Rather pointy, yes, but finally a welcome opening for, say, the TransAmerica Pyramid...?
evacuating upward in a fire seems dangerous.
just plain dumb
this would be incalculably expensive
This is a idea that you have to admire for the stupidity of it -- not for the reality. No one really wants to live in a jackass movie -- they just want to see it. This is what your professors meant by paper architecture. To me, it looks like an attempt to call Smith+Gill copyists of Violet-le-Duc.
underground buildings were the latest thinking back in the 1970s, but after a few attempts at subterranean living and working the idea was buried as a bad idea. so why are folks bothering to resurrect something better left for dead? what a waste of time and talent. underground ain't sustainable or a good place to be.
LOL citizen I like the way you think!
I'm just sayin'...
pretty model
http://youtu.be/i7900th4Ec8
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.