Beauty is excluded (does it fit in the existing area?), while important to discuss for acceptance (although subjective)

What holds us back from meaningful, sustainable & aesthetic buildings

Sustainable architecture has to adress & stimulate the senses of its users (interaction):
experience/extra layer, like clothing as extention of human (body/life)

I did not assume any academic person ask a architecture to participate to ecological urbanism, we collectively produce unsustainable buildings

Some of the most sustainable buildings (LEED) are depressing/ugly (small windows etc.) and don't add cultural/architectural value, while perhaps being ecological

Sustainability needs meaningfulness and is therefore not possible to generate "aesthetics"

There is no form of aesthetics of sustainability as that of modernis architecture

Sustainable development = development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generation to meet their own needs.

Sustainability has become a issue, because of new legalities (NL: wettigheid), caused by building regulations

Sustainability in architecture: first enthousias, but in reality becomes something you have to fink of at the end of the proces for mandatory reasons
(act according to the rules): how sustainable is it really? -> not really

Since the first cities, we have always seperated nature & culture: architecture/cities

Vitruvius: started to construct structures and so passed from barbarous lifestyle to civilization & refinement

By taking the concept of architecture of landscape, solving the oppositions between
nature<->culture & sustainability <-> architecture

Landscape is an aesthetic mediation between the natural & artificial world (landscape = human interface with nature)

Aesthetics & planned, but is also nature: combined

NEW DESIGN APPROACH, in which aesthetics and sustainability are the core of the proces

Dutch planning example: building below sea level: for flood safety: just heighten the site before building, destroying/denying existing the (ecological) situation

The landscape as a Palimpsest of layers of the historic events (cultrual, infrastructural & geological

Stop thinking in projects, but see the development of sites as a process (incompleteness of design / never finished), takes time to develop in a certain way)

Spatial sequencing (designing as moving through from eye perspective)

People go from A -> B, they never stop at 1 place (the parking lot of a landscape park to look from it from a distance and then leave again, no, people walk trough the park)

Looking out of the window towards nature (like a painting on the wall), but also thought about how you see/experience it when you move through the building

dense functional, visual & spatial relations that are connected to a landscape (place making: create a context, not react to one)

Collin Rowe - collage city (modernist = state of placelessness: call for context)

Lines between architecture & landscape are already blurring, but on in an integrated way

Foreign Office Architects (FOA) - Yokohama ferry terminal

Mediation between realms of landscape, urban fabric & architecture

When it becomes part of people's life stories; positively: LOVE): building as a narrative (represents . . .)

Architecture represents a certain time view (ideal, problems, fears etc.), so becomes part of culture

Hotel: painter lived in it (paid with her art), a lot of famous people came by, thereby the building became part of stories (memories), by this you can nudge (playfully make small adjustments to people's behaviour): speak to the people imagination, or trigger seduction or advertising life styles)

Judges subjectively, by triggering senses (feelings)

Don't fall into the trap of avand-garde (cliche & kitch: enstragned from the imaginations of normal people)

Base of eco-architecture lies in the movement of the 60'ies: apolitical loners (freaks: hippies):
vague notion of a pre-civilization state, myth of a better past

progress = optimizing systems, solution in tech (examples: design with climate)

City based on optimal city (natural cooling/heating), but only focused on optimal working entity, not focused on people

Better way (but all not subjective relationship based on senses): Victor Olgyay

Architecture of passively desing (low-tech, without mechanical devices) created environments

He saw that he needed several sciences: biology (comfort), meteorology (climatic conditions), engineers (rational solutions)

Thomas Herzog: .

manifesto for sustainable design: the passive approach should take priority over technological solutions

Buildings in mountain (cooler), small windows, high buildings, small streets

20th century: replacement with mechinical tech

Material quality, lightning and color stimulate the senses.

The facade acts as mediator or external & internal climate and is adapable (like a layered zone between inside & outside: like clothing)