4 ms·
The depressing counterpoint, I suppose, is that 99% of the time, you're not building the Pantheon, you're building something that was intended to be minimally-a
by Lagged2Death 10y ago
The depressing counterpoint, I suppose, is that 99% of the time, you're not building the Pantheon, you're building something that was intended to be minimally-acceptable, utilitarian, and disposable from the get-go: a parking garage, a tilt-up big-box building, a freeway on-ramp, a strip mall. All of which may well be obsolete in a few decades just because the urban environment changes rapidly.
If you could figure out a systematic way to cut the cost and the lifetime of such lowbrow, mass-produced concrete structures in half, developers wouldn't hesitate, they'd jump on it immediately.
We revere longevity only in retrospect.
- keithpeter 10y agoMost of the big-box buildings I've seen in UK recently are steel frame/breeze block/metal cladding structures on a poured concrete base. The idea being you can basically unbolt the walls when you want to take it down.
- fsloth 10y agoI don't see expendability necessarily as a downside - if the system would support lifetime learning of experts. Building and rebuilding the same thing again and again should be a good way to learn how to make it as good as it can be from design and construction point of view. The problem is if the system does not cherish and support this opportunity to learning and mastery - which many for-profit commercial establishments sadly don't.