|
This article originally appeared in Connections: The Journal of New England Board of Higher Education (Summer 2002).
Among all the achievements of his long and productive life,
Thomas Jefferson wanted to be remembered for three things.
They are inscribed on a stone obelisk over his grave at
Monticello. "Here was buried Thomas Jefferson,"
the inscription reads, "Author of the Declaration of
Independence, Of the Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom,
And Father of the University of Virginia." This from
a man whose distinguished career included eight years as
President of the United States. For Jefferson, his activities
were not as important as the things that he designed, which
suggests a mind keenly attuned to the ways in which the
thoughtful and poetic ordering of things could create a
vital legacy.
While we daily experience the legacies of the Declaration
of Independence and the Statute of Virginia for Religious
Freedom, which matured into the Bill of Rights, one can
see the physical embodiment of Jeffersonian design on the
campus of the University of Virginia. Moved by the belief
that public education is the keystone of a democratic republic,
Jefferson secured land for the university, developed its
curriculum, pursued distinguished professors, stocked the
library, and perhaps most importantly, designed the campus.
His "little academical village" was laid out
around a central, tree-lined lawn. Students and professors
lived in sturdy brick residences linked by open arcades
to the stately presence of the central Rotunda, which housed
the library and classrooms. At the other end of the lawn,
one could gaze out on the nearby peaks of the Blue Ridge
Mountains. The campus was, and is, a beautiful place-by
design. Jefferson's collegial village was intended to be
an inspiring setting for the dynamic activity of a community,
a place where students and faculty could mingle, gather,
learn and create a vibrant academic institution. It remains
a living monument to that ideal, and on the quads of universities
from New England to the West we see that it is a much-copied
icon of American campus architecture.
What legacy is today's campus architecture leaving for
the future? Like other regions, development on many New
England campuses over the past 30 years has tended to be
more random than planned. Following the same patterns of
sprawl that have defined most development in our era, the
placement of new campus buildings often separated them from
the life of the university, while a hodgepodge of architectural
styles clashed with the vocabulary of the historic quad.
Lost, or diminished, is a fundamental asset of academic
life in New England: the experience of community on a campus
uniquely and beautifully attuned to its surroundings. In
recent years, an evolving understanding of the environmental
impacts of new buildings has further separated campus architecture
from a legacy universities can wholeheartedly embrace.
The University of Rhode Island is trying to change that. There, planning is underway for a cluster of new buildings many hope will mend the fracture between forward-thinking new development and the historic campus. Though pencils have not yet been put to paper, planners foresee the new buildings as the foundation of a sustainable academic community, a model of "green design" that will project the values of environmental responsibility while enhancing the traditional assets of New England campus life. This melding of sustainability with strategic planning is not only the shape of things to come in campus architecture but the signal of a deeper cultural shift that may well change our understanding of literacy.
What is sustainability? Sustainability is a descriptive
term for a range of cultural responses to the environmental
impacts of economic growth. It is often defined as "development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
Described in this way, sustainability is just a minimum
precondition of survival-not very inspiring. More richly
defined, it as an intelligent, creative, and hopeful stance
towards the future. In Jeffersonian terms, we might say
sustainability is an appreciation for the legacy of your
designs, an interest in the long-term health of nature and
human culture.
Sustainable design puts that sensibility into practice.
Conventional approaches to sustainable design focus primarily
on outlining strategies for architectural systems that make
efficient use of energy and materials. Sustainable land
planning and site design strategies emphasize an environmentally
responsive use of vegetation, water, and other natural systems.
While these strategies represent a marked improvement over
land development patterns over the past decades, they tend
to rely on minimizing human impact on the environment, striving
only to be "less bad."
And being less bad, or in this case, being more efficient,
is not necessarily good. This is especially true when it
comes to selecting architectural materials. Most building
materials are not designed with human health in mind. Many
commonly contain toxic substances such as formaldehyde and
volatile organic compounds, which off-gas into building
interiors. In energy-efficient buildings, which tend to
be tightly sealed to reduce heating and cooling costs, toxic
chemicals accumulate in concentrations that make indoor
air quality on average three times worse than the most noxious
urban air. In buildings such as these one might hope for
a draft of cool New England air.
Thankfully, sustainable design is not about being efficient.
Instead, we encourage an affirmative design agenda, one
that allows the human impact on the environment to be positive,
vital and good. This new conception of sustainable design
finds its roots in the desire to discover fit and fitting
spaces for human habitation-the desire to become native
to one's place. For us, natural communities and ecosystems
serve as models of interdependence, with each member relying
on and contributing to the well being of the whole. Informing
good design, this vision affirms the possibility of developing
healthy and creatively interactive relationships between
the natural environment and human settlements.
The design process begins with an assessment of the natural
systems of a place-its landforms, hydrology, vegetation,
and climate. Combining an understanding of building and
energy systems with the site's natural flows of sun, wind,
water, and vegetation, designers discover an "essay
of clues" that suggests appropriate patterns for development
of the landscape. Building materials are selected with the
same care; they are chosen only after careful assessments
of a variety of characteristics, ranging from their design
chemistry to the environmental impacts of their use, harvesting
or manufacture. With this emphasis on sustaining and enhancing
the qualities of the local landscape, the resulting architectural
and community designs meet exceptional levels of performance
and create beautiful, healthy environments for human and
natural communities.
We like to think that every landscape can be fecund, every building a life-support system. The Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies at Oberlin College is such a building. Designed to reverse environmental stresses and restore the local landscape, the building is like a tree: Enmeshed in local energy flows, it accrues solar income, filters water-absorbing it quickly and releasing it slowly-and creates habitat for living things.
With 3,700 square feet of photovoltaic panels, The Lewis Center will one day be a net energy exporter. Its other sustainable design features include geothermal wells for heating and cooling, daylighting and fresh air delivery throughout, an extended botanical garden that recovers nutrients from circulating water on-site, and a landscape that offers social gathering spaces, instructional gardens and orchards, and a newly planted forest grove, which has begun the long process of re-establishing the habitat of the building's northern Ohio location.
The building and its surroundings have become the center of a learning community. The comfortable sunlit classrooms and public gathering areas encourage mingling, communication, and reflection. Inside and out, the building offers students and teachers opportunities for learning about the natural world. In fact, encouraging fluency in the language of natural systems, what Oberlin's David Orr calls "ecological literacy," was the guiding intention of the building's design. As Orr has written, architecture always serves a pedagogical function; the design of buildings teaches us how we use resources, how we relate to nature, and what our culture values. It is absurd, he believes, to teach young people about the world in buildings that have no relation to their surroundings and express ignorance of how nature works. Instead, The Lewis Center teaches ecological literacy, the cultural currency of this new century, and the next.
This is an entirely new, restorative legacy, one that is
within the grasp of any campus building or landscape in
New England-old or new. On the campus of the Woods Hole
Research Center, for example, we are renovating a 17-room,
120 year-old Victorian summer home, transforming it into
a model of sustainable design while preserving its historic
character. And at URI, the university community will be
determining the shape and feel of new buildings, imagining
what fits in the landscape of coastal Rhode Island.
Seeking a sustainable campus, they will probably be looking
at the region's natural energy flows, its soil and vegetation
and climate. New England's rich tradition of vernacular
architecture might be evoked, or the building could be a
contemporary design that suggests the university's future
relationship to human culture and nature in the region.
Though similar design principles will be applied, the URI
sustainable community will not be a carbon copy of Oberlin's.
Sustainable design is not an ideology that imposes foregone
conclusions on a setting. But as planning proceeds, students
and professors at URI just may decide they too want a building
like a tree-and a campus like a New England forest.
|