A building is hard to judge. It takes many years to find out whether it works. It's not as simple as asking the people in the office whether they like it.
The difference between good and bad architecture is the time you spend on it.
Homes and buildings, many of which are old and drafty, eat up 40 percent of the energy America uses. Such inefficiencies perpetuate our reliance on foreign oil, imperiling our national security and increasing our contribution to climate change.
Chinese buildings are like American buildings, with big footprints. People don't care about daylight or fresh air.
The demands of the time for objectivity and functionality must be fulfilled. If that clearly happens, then the buildings of our day will convey the greatness of which the age is capable, and only a fool will maintain that they lack it.
I think that the point of being an architect is to help raise the experience of everyday living, even a little. Putting a window where people would really like one. Making sure a shaving mirror in a hotel bathroom is at the right angle. Making bureaucratic buildings that are somehow cheerful.
Good buildings come from good people, and all problems are solved by good design.
And autos are not the only product that could be made more energy efficient if we just put in place sensible requirements. This is also true of many appliances and even of entire buildings.
If we are ever going to fix our housing affordability crisis, we have to make significant changes to how we plan and construct, and we have to be open to solutions that make it easier and faster to build much-needed housing.
Architecture is about aging well, about precision and authenticity. There is much more to the success of a building than what you can see. I'm not suggesting that gestural architecture is always superficial, but solid reasoning has its place.
New York's buildings must be cleaner and more energy-efficient.
