As a continuation from last semester's St. Olaf landscape project, I've been thinking a lot about the design of our campus. Environmental issues weren't really on the radar when Holland or Mellby were built, but the structures still incorportate a lot of light, are inviting, inspire intellectual activity (this is mostly attributed to the Norman Gothic architectural style of this building era), and are solid pieces of architecture.
Wendell Berry gave these critera for intelligent and ecological building design:
*right scale
*simplicity
*efficient use of resources
*close fit between means and ends
*durability
*redundance (as in there are backup systems in case something goes wrong)
*resilience
Are these characteristics exemplified in our campus buildings?
What about Buntrock Commons which makes an effective use of natural lighting, carpet squares that can be easily replaced, cleaned, and reused, durable furniture and building materials (e.g. limestone is much more durable than brick and was once produced locally), but it very grandiose and perhaps too ambitious for a campus center? Is it an efficient use of resources for the college? Will the new Science Center be well-designed? What about the older buildings? Holland Hall, Old Main, Mellby Hall, Rolvaag Library? Do these exemplify good design values?
What kind of impression does our overall campus plan (look, placement, landscaping) have on visitors and students?
I'm very curious to see what you all think...
Friday, February 25, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment