Home Architecture Talk

Improving future architecture?

I am currently doing a college project based on 'how would you go about designing a building?' to answer this question I was wondering if you could help me out by answering the questions the below. 1.What do you believe makes a good modern building in Britain? 2.Name a building that shows a good example of modern buildings in Britain and why do you think that is? 3.Why do you think modern buildings are not advancing dramatically? 4.In the future how do you think Modern Buildings will advance? 5.Do you think modern buildings in Britain need to exist to develop the world and why? 6.Do you think the area influences whether a modern building is built and why? This is open to anyone so please write your answer below.

Public Comments

1. 1. Modern sucks at this juncture. Modern buildings use toxic materials, are not weather resistant, and have no real sense of ergonomics. We have the technology now to have buildings that generate their own power but we refuse to bother, even for contingency purposes, because we've got to be 'subservient' to the utility cartel. Buildings are not green, and the overall septic codes need to be completely trashed and started from scratch. Every sewer needs to be re-engineered. Every waste management system needs to be re-tooled from the ground up. Everything about today's construction is bureaucratized waste and an embarrassment to what we like to call 'human accomplishment". 2. I like the one that looks like a pickle, but I don't know what it's called or who owns it. It's in London. It's attractive, and that's about all. 3. Buildings have not advanced dramatically because there is an incestuous relationship between local politicians and building contractors- and the politics only gets more complicated the more regional and national it goes. Any new ideas are a threat to their cash cow infrastructure, not to mention most of the architects gain their careers via nepotism or cronyism, and the more innovative are outcasts if they even get the chance to work in their field. 4. Modern buildings will likely be forced to utilize older methods of construction, such as stone or earth materials (cob, adobe, etc) because the resources are forcing localization and vernacularity. The chances are that these methods will be hybridized with the new technologies and materials still in development. 5. That's an incredibly stupid question and the way it's phrased makes no sense 6. Yes, of course. You have to consider the density of the soil, the materials contained therein to determine the type of foundation needed. You have to consider annual weather cycles and make the building safe for those conditions. You also have demographics, as some locations prefer strict and uniform traditional aesthetics and other areas (such as Dubai- RIP) that are open to pet projects and structural/architectural ingenuity. Population density also plays a role in determining accessibility standards. That's about as succinct as I can provide.
2. hi, I am afraid I agree with much of what Iggy has said, I think that ideally, building technology itself will not become more 'high-tec' but instead designers should implement more intelligently solutions that already exist. 1. I can think of no examples, but it should be truly sustainable and not just be a brick box with windmills stuck on top. 2. I can't. Can I also suggest that you say 'contemporary' rather than 'modern'. 'modern' is not incorrect but is confused by some people with 'modernist' which from a contemporary perspective is a historical style/idea. 3.this question implies that I think modern buildings are not advancing dramatically. How do you mean advance? as time passes we advance but are things getting better? 4. I remain hopeful that we will roll back the high tec stuff and build with benign materials wherever possible. 5. I don't understand. 6. yes; planning permission. that is a fact.