When Apple Inc. announced its enterprise upgrades to the iPhone and the accompanying software development kit, the company also announced a $100-million venture capital fund for software development. What would this look like in architecture for small firms? Imagine if a consortium of energy firms and construction materials suppliers announced the establishment of a $500-million venture capital development fund to specifically fund sustainable community projects being managed and developed by innovative small architecture firms. The fund requires the firm size be under 15 people and that the project size be under $20 million. What innovative project would you propose that would profitably change the nature of sustainable community development? How would this change the way your firm operates? How would it change your goals and methods? Please do not reveal any actual projects or project locations as they may preclude actually carrying out your vision if such a fund should ever be developed.
—Louis B. Smith Jr., AIA, NOMA
Comments (3)
I love the idea! I'm trying to make smaller strides locally. Anytime I have a chance to meet or chat with a realtor or developer, I'll spin the idea as a "what if *your* project could do all these things?... think of the press you'd get!" It seems like those who have the money to fund such a venture are willing to do so for a payout. Often, the idea can be massaged so the "payout" is higher visibility, rather than only the $ ROI... stay tuned.
Posted by Lisa Stacholy, AIA, NCARB | April 24, 2008 1:48 PM
Posted on April 24, 2008 13:48
Because water will be the next "shortage," it seems opportune to think about collaborating with municipalities for "funding" to design measures into residential and small commercial projects that implement strategies that remove dependence on city or municipal water.
"Imagin(ing) a consortium of firms and construction materials suppliers (that include water conservation) in the establishment of a $500-million venture capital development fund to specifically fund sustainable community projects being managed and developed by innovative small architecture firms" seems like a great idea.
Posted by eps | April 24, 2008 11:08 AM
Posted on April 24, 2008 11:08
It seems self-evident to me that architects should take on the sites that require the most insight and vision to develop. An easy site will result in a conventional design in most cases. This can be left to relatively unsophisticated developers who are expert in core and shell promotion and development.
It is the sites that are too narrow or that have political restrictions or challenging changes in grade that offer opportunity for architects. Architects possess the knowledge tools to envision uses for such a site that would be beyond the vision of those who are looking for conventional returns.
This also suggests that the site and the resulting project should have some significance beyond providing a few more square feet of whatever kind of use. It should be symbol and landmark, proclamation and monument. Not in homage to the architect's genius but rather to those values that the community holds as dear and necessary. It should bring beauty and integration with the environment. It should set standards for concern for people, including pedestrians. Its green attributes should be so deep as to be studied by others on how being green creates profit. It need not be a large project to be significant.
Posted by Lbs | April 22, 2008 7:00 AM
Posted on April 22, 2008 07:00