Page 1

THE CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS 50 YEARS OF SERIOUS COMMOTION

Page 2

The Center uses a framework of Protocols, Prototypes, and Policies to characterize our undertakings: Protocols: are methods of thinking, a sort of ‘rule set’ that underlie fundamental principles and practices aligned with a set of values. Prototypes: are examples of applying protocols into a physical, tangible form to be tested, evaluated, providing feedback to continually refine protocols. Policies: are the opportunity to scale a protocol or prototype into the ‘commons’ making It accessible to the broad public. ^ protocols ‘---------POLICY, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATION ----------PROTOTYPES

Page 3

QR CODE AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER PROGRAM SEATTLE SALMON FRIENDLY BUILDING GREEN GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE GREEN URBANISM AT MUELLER THE CALICHE REPORT TEXAS GUIDE TO RAINWATER HARVESTING PLANNING FOR MISKITO INDIANS AIA’S ENV. RESOURCE GUIDE MSU EPICENTER: EIGHT PRINCIPLES ECOBALANCE GAME A&E GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS (©(^ll^^i IM^@U© ^©~1 VERANO। SUSTAINABLE’ DEV. THE WORKING ATLAS^ M^ll/^^ 1^,0)I.W {Nllffi’hta^^ LEED™ RESIDENTIAL NEW DEV. COMM. (eimi^i!’ !or^^lin/ ioEil^iflicG; ESCARPMENT VILLAGE GREENING THE PENTAGON UT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER DELL CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL BLOCK 21 AUSTIN GREEN BUILDER DEMO. HOME ECOSPORTS COMPLEX TEXAS TO CHINA WITH LOVE MOROCCO ECO CITY SEATTLE JUSTICE CENTER GREENFORMS EAST TEXAS PROJECT LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE UT SOLAR DECATHLON HOUSING FOR NAVAJO NATION ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE CRYSTAL CITY HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH CARRIZO SPRINGS PUERTO CABEZAS HOUSING FOR SIOUX NATION GALVESTON REDEV. EL PASO GREEN CITY MISSISSIPPI GROHOME TEXAS A&M SOLAR DECATHLON COMMUNITY SUPPORTED ARCH. LAREDO DEMO. FARM BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES

Page 4

Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems 50 Years of Serious Commotion © Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems 2025 http://cmpbs.org 8604 Farm to Market 969 Austin, TX 78724 ISBN 13: 979-8-90070-123-3 Unless otherwise noted, all artwork, photographs, and text © Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Used by permission. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or means electronic or mechanical including photocopy, recording, or any other Information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission from the publisher and the artists. Written and edited by Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori, Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Book design by Courtney Garvin and production was led by David Dewane, with the assistance of Sarah GrubisIch and Hasen Zimmerman. Printed by Integ In Austin, Texas. This book was printed using soy based inks on FSC and Green Seal certified, process chlorine free paper containing 100% post consumer waste, and manufactured using 100% wind power. FSC MDC Paper | Supporting respomfob forestry FSC* C103525 PRINTED wrrH SOYINK AMUTCAS m>mcMM/ULDC

Page 5

-h fycUC- We acknowledge that The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems sits on Indigenous land, the ancestral home to the Tonkawa, who settled in Central Texas in the early 18th century; it is also land of the Comanche and Apache peoples who moved through this area. We are grateful to be able to explore, work and discover on this piece of Turtle Island, now referred to as North America. In acknowledging this land and the Indigenous People who are inextricably connected to it, we recognize the need to continue learning about, celebrating, and being mindful of the Land and the Indigenous Peoples connected to it. Tonkawa meaning — they all stay together. 2, Ap’il ‘26

Page 6

CONTENTS PREFACE 68 The Future of AI and Humanity 134 it’S Up to Us 8 The Architecture of Hope by David Armistead by Lucia Athens by Dr. Jorge Vanegas 72 A Letter from Intern Village 138 Ecology + Systems = CMPBS by David Dewane by Michael A. Berk INTRODUCTION 74 Non-Puny Ideas 142 Compost Your House 15 Our Next Frontier by David W. Orr by Michael Camacho by Pliny Fisk III and Gail Vittori 78 Paying it Forward 146 The Challenge of Institutional by Dawn Danby Continuity THE INFLUENCE 86 Demolition to Disassembly by Michael Neuman 20 Peer-To-Peer and Protocols by Diana Valdes 152 Musings from a Former A.O.R. by Adam Fisk 90 The Time of Our Lives by Richard MacMath 22 Mueller, Then and Now by Don Watson 160 Time out of Mind by Adele Houghton 92 I’m a Walking LCA by Rick Fedrizzi 26 The Muddy Protoloop by Dylan Siegler 164 Welcome to Our Innovative by Ariel Fisk-Vittori 94 Zany Hell Raising Neighborhood 34 The Center’s Genius Loci by Jeff Lanza by Skip Connett by Brendan Wittstruck 98 Maximum Potential Leadership 168 Lenses for Infinite Design 38 Backfill, Infill, Refill, Upfili by Jim Walker by Stuart Cowan by Brian T. O’Brien 104 The Pioneer Spirit 172 The Transformative Power of 44 The Greening of the City by Ken Haggard Living Labs by Brittany Faulkner 108 Memoirs of the Beginning by Vivian Loftness 52 We Should Mulch the Land by Ken Smith by Caroline Dunn 114 In Praise of Low-Tech TESTIMONIALS 56 Mapping a Living Archive Sustainability 178 Paula Cano by Carson Fisk-Vittori by Lauren Rochell 178 Michael Gatto 60 Steal These Ideas 118 Theory of Compassion 179 Michele L. Van Hyfte by Daniel Overbey by Lovleen Gill Aulakh 179 Simon Couchman 64 MaxPot Guides to the Galaxy 126 The Centering Story 180 Leslie Sauer ’., by Dan Slone by Lucas Brown 180 Alex Stadper

Page 7

181 Fabien Prouvost: 181 Rodolpho Ramina 182 Joel Ann Todd 182 W. Laurence Doxsey 183 John Hart 183 Sarah Talkington 184 Wendy Vittori 184 Jim Adams 185 Bill Walsh 185 Samantha Power 185 Arthur Schaller 186 Chris Zelov 187 Peter Struble 187 Julia Almaraz 187 Shivani Langer 188 Mary Emeny 188 Josef Farbiarz 188 Barbara Hendricks 189 Nicholas Koch 189 Daria Bolton Fisk 234 Laredo Demonstration Farm 324 8. BaselineGreen 242 Floating Reef Town 326 9. Feedback City 244 Urban AzoIla 328 10. Mini Max 248 River Treating Bridge 330 11. Meta Max 250 Carrizo Springs 332 12. Conceptual Space Race 256 Mosquito Orb 334 Index Summary of Lenses 260 SPOD 270 The Higher Line THE PEOPLE 274 CIDUS 338 Board, Staff, Interns 340 Ray Reece PROJECTS: 2010-2025 342 Cynthia Leigh 282 Hensley Field 344 Randall Notgrass 286 Seaholm EcoDistrict 346 Dee Simpson 292 Austin Central Library 298 Colony Park Sustainable UNPUBLISHED PAPERS Community 350 A Systems View to Save the 302 Austin Light Rail World 353 Caliche vs. Adobe LENSES FOR A MAXIMUM 363 Eco-lndustrial System for POTENTIAL FUTURE Resettlement 308 Phoropter Analogy of Lenses 366 sPOD: AI-AR and DIY INTERVIEW 193 David Lake, FAIA 310 1. Visible Green 373 City-Region Metabolism 312 2. protoScope 314 3. ecoBalance CLOSING GLOBAL DREAM LAB 210 Agrihood 218 Saltwater Flush 224 Plenitude 316 4. Supports & Connections 379 Acknowledgements 318 5. Gamification 381 Last Word 320 6. Area Point Network 322 7. Health

Page 8

1’1/1,‘i^e^

Page 9

ri’ rate

Page 10

THE ARCHITECTURE OF HOPE DR.JORGE VANEGAS 50 11 8 | CMPBS I

<: ^T ^:e -‘4’

Page 11

PREFACE DR. JORGE VANEGAS JOINED TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY IN 2006 AND CURRENTLY IS DEAN EMERITUS AND PROFESSOR IN THE COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE. HE HOLDS DEGREES IN ARCHITECTURE, CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT. HIS PRIOR ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS INCLUDE PURDUE UNIVERSITY AND GEORGIA TECH. In the liminal space between what is and what could be, The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems stands as a beacon of regenerative possibility, transforming the fundamental elements of existence—air, water, food, energy, and materials—into symphonies of sus­ tainable healthy living that resonate across scales from intimate dwellings to entire bioregions. They dare to imagine buildings as met­ abolic entities, communities as living systems, and design as an act of eco­ logical healing, weaving together the pragmatic and the poetic, and under­ standing that true sustainability emerges not from Isolated interventions but from the delicate choreography of interconnected cycles that mirror nature’s own protocols. Their methodological trinity of Proto­ cols, Policies, and Prototypes forms a sacred geometry of transformation. Protocols serve as compasses for nav­ igating complexity, translating the ephemeral wisdom of natural systems into actionable frameworks. Their twelve lenses, from Visible Green to the Conceptual Space Race, act as percep­ tual instruments—a phoropter for collective consciousness—sharpening our vision of what communities can become when designed with nature’s patient and natural Intelligence. These are not merely tools but philosophical instruments that reveal the invisible connections binding human habitation to planetary health. Policies bridge the chasm between vision and Implementation, transform­ ing experimental wisdom into accessible practice. Through groundbreaking ini­ tiatives like the Austin Green Builder Program—the world’s first municipal green building standard—they demon­ strated that revolutionary ideas could become replicable frameworks, inspiring cities across the globe to reimagine their relationship with the built environment. Prototypes serve as seeds of transfor­ mation planted in the fertile ground of human ingenuity. Among so many THE FIRST so YEARS | 9

Page 12

; CMPBS IS WHERE THE ANCIENT DREAM OF LIVING IN HARMONY q WITH NATURE FINDS EXPRESSION |iIN CONCRETE, STEEL, AND THE INFINITE CREATIVITY OF THE / HUMAN HEART.

Page 13

PREFACE Others, from the crystal clarity of their Solar Decathlon entries to the humani­ tarian grace of Village in a Box, each prototype embodies the belief that design must serve both Immediate needs and eternal principles. These demonstrations become living proof that buildings can generate more ener­ gythan they consume,that communities can close resource loops, and that human habitation can become regener­ ative rather than extractive. The Center’s work transcends the con­ ventional boundaries of architecture, recognizing that buildings are not mere shelters but living organisms that breathe with their landscapes, drink from sky-rivers, and feed from earth’s abun­ dance. Their EcoBalance methodology reveals the profound truth that every act of construction is simultaneously an act of ecological relationship — that sourcing materials creates obligations for respon­ sible processing of raw materials, maximizing the capacity of each resource, and re-sourcing wherever possible. These are ail strategies for regeneration. The Center’s pioneering healthcare proj­ ects, from Dell Children’s Medical Center to the Green Guide for Health Care, illu­ minate the sacred connection between environmental health and human heal­ ing. These projects whisper an ancient truth: that spaces designed in harmony with natural systems become medicine themselves, environments that restore rather than deplete the human spirit. Perhaps most profoundly. The Center understands that maximum potential is not about extraction but integration, not about conquest but coexistence and collaboration. In an era where the Con­ ceptual Space Race questions whether human ingenuity can expand fast enough to heal the wounds of industri­ al civilization, they offer a different paradigm — one where intelligence serves not domination but symbiosis, where technology becomes a tool for deepening our relationship with the living world. The Center’s Directors, with the support of partners, collaborators, and Interns are architects of hope, designing futures where human habitation becomes an act of planetary healing, where every building becomes a node in a vast network of regeneration, where communities become ecosystems, and where the ancient dream of living in harmony with nature finds expression In concrete, steel, and the infinite creativity of the human heart awakened to Its responsibility as Earth’s conscious participants. DR.JORGE VANEGAS PRESIDENT, BOARD OF DIRECTORS CMPBS THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 11

Page 14

Page 15

#3^; it’, J?iOT \i:!Tffire^ ,\rrf\±S^r^■ %4% . fe^

Page 16

fe^ 3’ yp. k,, Oct -^ <^^^. -^.r ;i C< + 14 —

Page 17

PHILOSOPHY THIS BOOK TAKES ON THE IMPOSSIBLE: CAPTURING THE ESSENCE OF A 50-YEAR EXPERIMENT THAT HAS FELT MORE LIKE A 50-YEAR HAPPENING. From a rural property on the edge of East Austin, Texas, we grew into a force for change at the local, state, and national levels—where some of the most provocative Ideas actually took root. We helped a small South Texas town shift to renewables at a time of crisis. We rewrote architecture and engineering guidelines. We partnered with groups ranging from radical activists to small-town councils. We went from being shunned for helping the “too radical,” to working on the Greening of the White House, to receiving recognition from the United Nations at International forums. We advanced health-centered strategies in health care facilities and beyond. And all of it unfolded amidst experimental buildings and a landscape that functions as a water and wastewater treatment system. Step behind those trees and you find another world—one built on love, passion, and persistence. Around us has grown a sanctuary: native lahdscapes, maker spaces, earth labs, and a global network of interns and collaborators, all advancing a culture of serious experimentation. From this place have come life-long friendships, businesses, and countless collaborations. Many who passed through are principals in celebrated design firms, civic and educational institutions, global corporations, community organizations, and artistic practices. As people arrive and depart, they carry ideas Into new contexts, and we like to think a trace of this place stays with them. For decades, we have worked alongside communities facing urgent needs—Native nations, island nations, and neighbors seeking a better quality of life. The quest has always been to tangibly move from concept and policy to practice. Living the work Is both dream and challenge, but it remains essential: to hold ourselves accountable to the very systems we advocate, and to prove that change Is possible not at the fringe but in the heart of a state many once considered the least likely setting for It. This is the soul of our PPP (Prototype, Protocol, Policy) model. Prototypes generate possibilities—often using our own organization as a proving ground which happens far too seldom In our movement. Protocols test these ideas through shifting “lenses” that measure their human, ecological, and societal value. Policies extend the benefits outward, scaling success and embedding it in the commons, with Austin Energy Green Building as a example. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 15

Page 18

Through it all, we’ve cultivated a kind of creativity engine. Not bound by the limits of architecture, landscape, or planning, we cross disciplines, mix methods, and remain open to the improbable. So what is our next frontier? Creating Beacons of Hope. Our centers, universities, and public spaces must serve as living models of the future. One step we are undertaking is the ARK-HIVE—a publicly accessible archive of strategies for the road ahead, accompanying lessons from the past. We envision It as an interactive public building on The Center’s grounds, playful yet serious, transforming what is often academic and cloistered into something open, engaging, and alive, and as much about what happens outside the walls as inside. Stirring Serious Commotion. Change will not come quietly. We must launch ideas bold enough to capture public imagination. Proposals like those in our Global Dream Lab—the Living Bridge,the Agrihood,the Higher Line, and many more—aim to turn crises Into opportunities, building this serious commotion together Honoring Place. The intrinsic magic of a place prompts a pattern language that shapes practice and outcome and provides clues of what is possible. Our work continues on scalable protocols and prototypes that underpin the mass customization of solutions, with balance and health as essential metrics. We have always believed that change requires superb information, boldness, playfulness, and persistence in equal measure. This book is not simply a record of the past fifty years. It is hearing the voices of many of the people — from what some refer to as the Max’s Pot diaspora — who have inspired, challenged, provoked to think bigger and bolder, to step beyond disciplinary boundaries to the edge where change happens. Most importantly, it Is an invitation to join us in the next fifty—to build prototypes, invent protocols, shape policies, and most of all, to stir up a little more serious commotion. And to listen. PLINY FISK III & GAIL VITTORI CO-DIRECTORS CMPBS 16 | CMPBS

Page 19

PHILOSOPHY ‘0 . ‘t^‘vp ^:^ <1 II wm te,T THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 17

Page 20

Page 21

r^ 7 ^1

Page 22

Peer-To-Peer and Protocols ADAM FISK I recently realized my spirit animal has to be the mountain goat, the kind that’s incredibly comfortable ascending what appear to be sheer cliffs. I’ve always had that sense of calm amidst chaos. To be clear, it’s an unhealthy level of calm — mountain goats are known to tumble to their deaths, after all — but It has been handy in an Increasingly tumultuous world. In reflecting on The Center’s 50th anniversary, it dawned on me that my inner goat was born at The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, a place whose very name, in its quest for maximum potential, included testing limits. Growing up at The Center, a place originally founded by my dad and mom, Pliny and Daria Fisk, meant life on the edge In almost every sense. Intellectually, The Center overflowed with books, magazines, and clippings from the far corners of human knowledge. As young as 11 or 12, I remember pouring over MIT Technology Review, The Tao of Physics, Powershift, Beyond the Limits, and Small is Beautiful. I grew up with a fundamental understanding that the world as we see it is but a small glimpse of what it could become. Physically, that meant going to the bathroom with countless poisonous brown recluse spiders watching from their webs, and a coral snake living under the house, it meant taking the one and only flight from the makeshift backyard runway in a plane labeled ‘EXPERIMENTAL” in big, all-caps letters on the door. Luckily, we cleared the trees by about 10 feet. As a teenager, it meant welding and using the plasma cutter in conditions that I’m guessing did not adhere to OSHA standards for workplace safety. Socially, there was a constant stream of people working, visiting, or living in new structures in the woods, unified by their commitment to building a more sustainable world. Often, they were doing just that in their ultra- sustainable makeshift abodes. Late-night talks about the future of the world were the norm, occasionally with some of “Max’s Pot.” These people, dad and Gall chief among them, accomplished heroic deeds. They helped the people of Crystal City use their own resources to get through the winter after the gas company shut them off. They created the Austin Green Builder Program for rating the environmental impact of buildings, a program that became one of the primary models for LEED, and they created new lifecycle models for thinking about sustainability from a systems perspective, among many others efforts, large and small. In comparison, life outside The Center and outside the green building movement felt decidedly boring. The ‘normles” didn’t get it. AsI branched off into the world,Itook with me the experience that a small group of dedicated people can use their own resources to change the world.I 20 | CMPBS

Page 23

THE INFLUENCE ADAM FISK IS THE SON OF DARIA AND PLINY FISK AND BUILDER OF THE LANTERN SOFTWARE USED BY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO BYPASS CENSORSHIP OF THE INTERNET. HE WAS FORMERLY THE LEAD ENGINEER OF THE PEER-TO-PEER FILE SHARING APPLICATION LIMEWIRE. wrote much of the computer code for the peer-to-peer file sharing application, LImeWire, which connected Individual home computers together in a massive network powered by the people themselves with no gatekeepers. Like The Center, LImeWire embodied the notion that we have everything we need to solve our own problems If we open our minds to new ways of thinking. Those lessons from The Center carried through to my next project. Lantern, that uses peer-to-peer and new internet protocols to bypass government censorship in places like China, Russia, and Iran. Like The Center, Lantern puts power back into the hands of ordinary citizens who. In this case, are striving for a better world through communicating online. During the Woman, Life, Freedom protests in Iran, roughly 13% of all Iranian internet capacity ran through Lantern as people used It as a fundamental tool for fighting for women’s rights. Through the dedication of my dad, Gail, and countless contributors. The Center reminds us that our lives hold meaning. With commitment, innovative thought, and an uncommon appetite for risk, we can build a world that seems unimaginable today. Right now. THE FIRST so YEARS | 21

Page 24

Mueller, Then and Now ADELE HOUGHTON it.. \foil ii®r ^^^£:; :iio 22 | CMPBS Above and Right: Mueller; Austin, TX

Page 25

THE INFLUENCE Adele Houghton FAIA received a Doctor of Public Health degree from Harvard, where she also teaches. She is the co-author of Architectural Epidemiology, which proposes combining neighborhood-scale environmental health data with participatory community engagement to maximize a building’s positive ripple effect on community and planetary health. Sometimes a place or a theme recurs in our lives, showing us how much our work has evolved over time. The Mueller Redevelopment in Austin, Texas is one of those touchstones in my career. Mueller is a 700-acre redevelopment of the Robert Mueller Municipal Airport property. The City of Austin teamed with developer Catellus In 2002 to transform the brownfield site into a LEED for Neighborhood Development (ND) Gold certified project in the world, anchored by Dell Children’s Hospital, the first LEED for Healthcare (HC) Platinum certified hospital. CMPBS acted as sustainability consultant for both the LEED ND and LEED HC certifications. I was introduced to Mueller in 2005 as a new staff member at CMPBS and pilot project coordinator for the Green Guide for Health Care (GGHC), a project jointly convened by The Center. Gail Vittori asked me to provide graphic design and research support for a green design guidance document for the master plan build out. While I had joined CMPBS with experience as an architect and green building consultant, I had not yet made the connection between building design and urban planning that motivates my work today. With Gail’s guidance, the Mueller Green Resources Guide set environmental health goals for a new “green urbanist” neighborhood. The master plan pro­ mised to reduce exposure to traffic- related air pollution in residential areas by placing them on the far side of commercial and institutional buildings lining the freeway. 25% of the residential units were designated “affordable,” all but guaranteeing a mixed-income neighborhood. The landscape and road design created a network of parks, greenspace, and multi-modal paths to turn active transportation into the easy choice. The extensive green space also helped reduce outdoor air pollution, mitigate the heat island effect, reduce flood risk, and support nocturnal ecosystems. The developer set the stage for these promised benefits by building out landscape, civil, and transportation infrastructure according to the master THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 23

Page 26

LAYING OUT THAT CROSSWALK, I BEGAN TO REALIZE HOW UNUSUAL IT WAS. MOST LEED CERTIFIED BUILDINGS DID NOT TAILOR THEIR DESIGN TO HELP THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY ACHIEVE ITS ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS. plan. Individual projects were encouraged to contribute to Mueller’s overall goals by meeting minimum certification requirements under US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system or the Austin Energy Green Building Program. The Green Resources Guide presented a crosswalk to highlight which building-scale LEED credits could contribute to each of Mueller’s four “green urbanism” goals: air quality, heat island, night sky, and green buildings. Laying out that crosswalk, I began to realize how unusual it was. Most LEED certified buildings did not tailor their design to help the surrounding neighborhood or community achieve its environmental goals. My second touch point with Mueller came as GGHC pilot project coordinator, where I managed the 150 hospitals and clinics piloting the tool. Iwas also a close observer of Gail’s work as sustainability consultant for the Dell Children’s Hospital — a GGHC pilot. As luck would have it, the Dell Children’s Hospital’s location at Mueller placed it at the intersection of two active conversations at CMPBS: Mueller’S embrace of green urbanism and the health-centric approach to green building that was advocated by the GGHC. The result was a hospital design that leveraged its location to benefit the health of both building occupants (patients, staff, and family members) and the businesses and residents who formed part of the Mueller community. Subsequent studies conducted by healthcare design researchers and public health scientists have found that both the hospital and the neighborhood design have resulted in health benefits for both populations — occupants and community members. I have returned repeatedly to the Mueller redevelopment and to Dell Children’s over the past 15 years — using them as case study examples in presentations, articles, my book Architectural Epidemiology, and most recently in the LEED BD+C version 5 Reference Guide example for howto implement the new Climate Resilience and Human Impact Assessment prerequisites. The diagram accompanying this essay is drawn from the book and shows how the data backs up the design recommendations that Gall and her colleagues made about Mueller more than twenty years ago. 24 | CMPBS

Page 27

THE INFLUENCE PRIORITIZE HIGH RISK ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES & SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH PRIORITY HIGH RISK HEALTH CONDITIONS EVIDENCE-BASED DESIGN & OPERATIONS STRATEGIES SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH & HEALTH OUTCOMES ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTHW Z X O Z UI 5^ ox Heart Disease UI to 0 ^^ UI o z rc Strofig Winds/ Hurricane Vectors Cancer Obesity, Diabetes, Hypertension o Heat Air Pollution Unsafe for Pedestrians OBESITY, DIABETES, I— HYPERTENSION Flooding © Children O Minorities ®@® Mental Health MENTAL HEALTH Poverty MEAT-RELATED — INJURY & DEATH Respiratory Disease RESPIRATORY DISEASE Compact, multi-use development near transit & bike/ped infrastructure Design encourages physical activity On-site vegetation, incl courtyards and access to bike/ped paths Reflective/green roof and pavement Highly insulated building Energy efficiency measures Onsite solar, islandable site, microgrid Ventilation Operable windows Low emitting materials THE FIRST so YEARS | 25

Page 28

Above- Construction of the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home, Right: Ariel and Dad. The Muddy Protoloop ARIEL FISK-VITTORI 26 | CMPBS

Page 29

THE INFLUENCE BORN AND RAISED AT MAX’S POT, ARIEL FISK-VITTORI IS A DESIGNER WHOSE WORK SPANS CARBON-NEGATIVE TECHNOLOGY, CLIMATE-POSITIVE PLANNING, AND HIGH- PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN. HIS PATH REFLECTS A LIFELONG PURSUIT OF ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION AND INNOVATION ACROSS DISCIPLINES, GROUNDED IN THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN NATURE, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT. “Man, it’S going to be a hot one today.” Jesus had been saying that every morn­ ing for weeks, and he was never wrong. By mid-afternoon, the Texas heat had settled over The Center like a thick blan­ ket, making even the shade feel oppressive. I was probably twelve, old enough to be useful when not distract­ ing the team, but young enough to still find magic in everything happening in my backyard. The air hung motionless around the con­ struction site where the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Home was slow­ ly taking shape. We’d been working on it all summer, the main office focused on straw products like straw bale, com­ pressed straw panels, and straw-clay walls, and already had its roof. But the West Wing was our earthen materials experiment, a different story entirely. We’d just finished assembling all the compressed earth block walls between the rebar columns I helped weld togeth­ er in our open-air straw bale welding shop. These walls were built from blocks that were unmistakably from the earth. deep red-brown clay color, clearly man- made but retaining that raw, elemental quality that spoke of their origins. They rose In neat courses, block by block, proof that you could build with the earth itself rather than with high embodied energy materials, which, as Pliny Fisk’s son, was a concept I was uniquely already familiar with. Then I felt it, the first whisper of cooler air brushing across my sweat-soaked shirt. I looked up and saw them, dark clouds building on the horizon, towering into the sky with that particular inten­ sity that promised a true Texas thunderstorm. As soon as I saw the summer sky begin to fill with those dark clouds and watched the light start to dim,Idid whatIalways did-Iran for our retired wind turbine tower. I’d set up a platform there for my science fair gravity experiments, dropping arrays of Easter eggs weighted with different numbers of BBs to see which took longer to fall. But today I was climbing to the very top for a different kind of experiment, to watch the storm THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 27

Page 30

grow and move across the horizon, counting the seconds between lightning strikes and thunder to see how closeI could witness them becoming one uni­ fied event. From the top of the tower, perched on our hill we called the unofficial East Aus­ tin Hills, I could see far in every direction- the Austin skyline in the dis­ tance, the rolling countryside stretching to the horizon. The storm was magnif­ icent from up there, rolling across the landscape like something alive. It was alive. Lightning began to fork through the darkness, and I started my count, one Mississippi, two Mississippi… But once the gap between flash and thunder shrunk to just a few seconds,Iheard my mom yelling for me to climb down. My dad was already recruiting me to join the interns In what had become a famil­ iar ritual- a wild dash to pick up half-finished projects, patch leaks, and protect computers, documents, and models from getting drenched. We moved with the practiced urgency of a pit crew. Tools disappeared into sheds, tarps flew over equipment, and buckets appeared under every known leak in every building. The Center had countless ongoing experiments scattered across the property- solar collectors, greywater systems, proto­ type structures, and compressed earth block machines. Rain could be both a blessing and a destroyer. I loved this frantic choreography, getting completely soaked while accomplishing what felt like a week’s worth of work in twenty minutes. The storm hit with typical Texas fury. Rain hammered the metal roofs, light­ ning Illuminated the buildings in stark white flashes, and thunder rolled across the land like cannon fire. From Inside, it sounded like the world was ending. But storms like this were also why we were all here, this was exactly the kind of weather our buildings needed to withstand, the kind of natural force we were learning to work with rather than simply resist. The next morning dawned typically-hot, sunny, humid. Steam rose from every surface as the earth gave back the moisture it had received. I walked out to check on the Advanced Demonstra­ tion Green Builder Home where the team had already gathered, expecting to survey whatever minor damage might need repair. Half the compressed earth block walls had simply vanished. Not collapsed. Not fallen down in neat piles. Vanished. The West Wing’s walls had dissolved back into the earth as If they had never existed, leaving only the rebar columns standing like skeletal remains reaching toward the sky. Where those deep red-brown blocks had stood In neat courses just the day before, there was barely a trace, just some reddish mud mixed back into the soil. Unlike the main building, the West Wing didn’t yet have Its roof. Note to self: put the roof up before the com­ pressed earth block walls next time. I remember standing there, probably with my mouth hanging open, trying to process whatIwas seeing. As a twelve- year-old who’d grown up around experiments that sometimes failed spectacularly, this wasn’t exactly shock­ ing. But there was something profound about it that I couldn’t quite articulate at the time. The materials we’d chosen to build with had, literally, returned to the earth overnight, leaving no waste, no debris to haul away, no landfill bur­ den. They had simply gone home. It would be years later, when I learned that residential remodel debris was the number one component of American landfills, that I would truly understand how radical that moment had been. My primary experience with building materials showed me something com­ pletely different- that what we build with can dissolve back into the earth as naturally as It came from it. That moment of watching walls return to earth didn’t just shape my under­ standing of materials, it fundamentally altered how I see the relationship between human creation and natural systems. Growing up at The Center meant that radical experimentation wasn’t revolutionary. It was Tuesday. But it would take years of trying to translate that worldview into conven­ tional spaces before I truly understood what made The Center so essential. At the age of 16,Ileft home/The Center for Colorado Rocky Mountain School in Carbondale Colorado, where I decidedI 28 | CMPBS

Page 31

THE INFLUENCE wanted to pursue architecture while on my senior project at a biological station in Petan of Guatemala. From there, my friends and I followed the snow and mountains further north to Montana State University in Bozeman where I began architecture school. My brothers had always teased me, “Ariel, have you considered Architecture School?” since I constantly had ideas for all of our home projects. While It wasn’t initially my plan, architecture mostly felt like a natural fit. Every professor knew exactly who my father was, though they typically came from more traditional back­ grounds. They hadn’t grown up watching compressed earth block walls dissolve from thunderstorms. I distinct­ ly remember one professor questioning why I spent so much time thinking about how rain would fall from my build­ ing’s roofs. To me, it wasn’t just about collecting rainwater, it was about the whole experience. While classmates focused on form and space, I obsessed over cycles, relationships, and experi­ ences with the elements. Preparing for grad school, I stumbled upon “The Biophilia Hypothesis” by Ste­ phen Kellert and Edward Wilson in a giveaway pile at The Center. Everything I’d been trying to do In the studio, which had no name, suddenly made sense. Of course, we have an innate connection to natural systems, and, of course, our buildings should honor that. My path took me from designing vision­ ary biophilic communities In grad school to working on carbon-negative tech­ nologies at All Power Labs in Berkeley, where that same hands-on design- make-test cycle completely resonated with my CMPBS upbringing. For a decade, we proved these technologies could work at scale, but I found myself drawn back to the fundamental ques­ tions about how we build and live. Now I’m back in Austin working with my close friend and old classmate, Andrew Wagner, specializing in high-perfor­ mance residential design. But here’s my reality, even clients claiming to prioritize sustainability almost inevitably end up having It value-engineered out. It’s not their fault. Markets driven by square footage ROI prioritize bigger programs and bigger homes over sustainable fea­ tures that increase cost per square foot. We’ve designed some amazing, creative, and innovative homes, but still barely scratch the surface of the maximum potential CMPBS has demonstrated for fifty years. However, after five decades of being ahead of the curve, I fear the world is not yet paying enough attention to what The Center has been trying to show us. While this paradigm is far more compli­ cated with many more forces at play. The Center’s mission must evolve to meet this moment and connect with as many people as possible. Most critical­ ly, it needs to continue serving as a living laboratory where students from universities worldwide can live, sleep and breathe rapid prototyping of Inno­ vative ideas at The Center firsthand. This living laboratory and playground, where as a kid I learned by welding rebar made from recycled cars, made sandcastles in piles of bottom ash, chasing snakes and lizards through flowers growing from the wastewater treatment micro­ bial wetlands, and watched earth walls dissolve in rain storms gives future architects, engineers, and planners vis­ ceral understanding of what’s possible. But it also can’t stop with students. The Center needs resident programs where people from all walks of life can escape the “real” world and fully taste lifecycle design principles in action, something akin to an eco retreat that fully Involves its residents. This requires real funding to keep pace with rapidly accelerating technologies. The Center’s R&D must evolve with tech­ nological advances such as Al, materials science, and energy and water systems, while maintaining its core mission of working with natural processes. Fund­ ing is also essential to mature promising ideas and recruit talent that can help test and develop ideas worthy of poten­ tially licensing to the broader market. The Center must continue positioning itself in decision-making advisory roles and Influencing municipal goals. It could establish the next living future challenge by creating a CMPBS-verified building certification, an advanced green building standard that goes beyond current metrics to include life- cycle design, bioregional materials, and regenerative systems. Equally as Important, The Center needs to continue building highly visible, cut­ ting-edge projects for all income levels. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 29

Page 32

These demonstrations prove that sus­ tainable innovation is essential infrastructure for everyone’s future. The Center remains critical precisely because it can question, dream, exper­ iment, and showcase what’s possible outside market constraints. And while for the past 50 years it has certainly influenced the built environment and what we know sustainability to be today, it has yet to capture the larger imagi­ nation of the general public around what is possible and what Is still needed. That said, when invited to contribute this essay,Iwas asked what The Center would be like after another 50 years and the role it would have. While I have my own ideas of the year 2075,I knew i needed to look at what some of today’s prominent futurists are also predicting. To put it lightly, even with all the uncer­ tainty the future holds, it will be a dramatically different world. According to futurists such as Amy Webb (Found­ er of the Future Today Institute), Ray Kurzweil (author of The Singularity Is Near*), and Jamais Cascio (Senior Fellow at the Institute for the Future), the world of 2075 will likely include Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), lifelong per­ sonal Al companions, brain-computer Interfaces (BCIs), augmented reality lenses, neural search capabilities, and generative education systems. Technol­ ogies such as gene editing at birth, geoengineering and micro-climate man­ agement, autonomous transportation, climate-adaptive buildings, self-healing and programmable materials, smart streets, and fully Al-managed cities may become commonplace. Energy systems are expected to be abundant, decentral­ ized, and hyper-efficient. Including wireless energy transmission. We may see permanent settlements on the Moon and Mars, asteroid mining, a plan­ etary internet, Ai-supported global governance, and real-time planetary dashboards monitoring ecological health. And if we truly rise to the occa­ sion, we will no longer build systems around nature, but rather build them within its logic. For fifty years. The Center has been exploring a kind of time travel, creating prototypes that don’t yet belong to their moment. Reaching forward into possi­ ble futures, testing what could be before the world is ready. This requires profound faith and a particular kind of courage, the willingness to build for a humanity that doesn’t yet exist but that we believe is coming. To imagine 2075 isn’t fantasy. It’s the next logical step in this ongoing practice of making the impossible tangible. Let me paint a picture of what I dream could be possible: The morning air in 2075 promises another scorching day ahead. River and her cousin Sky have been awake since dawn, not because they’re early risers, but because the anticipation of a poten­ tial summer storm has them too excited to sleep and they’re plotting their day’s adventures. “Think there’ll be a storm?” Sky asks hopefully, and River grins because they’re both thinking the same thing — towers, lightning, and the kind of trouble that makes parents yell your name. Their smart contact lenses shimmer with gentle notifications optimized for connecting them with ecological rela­ tionships as they step barefoot onto the living deck of River’s bedroom. The structure beneath their feet isn’t built — it’S grown, a biomimetic composite containing mycelial networks that breathes and responds to the morning heat by drawing moisture up from deep soil layers. River can feel the building’s cooling rhythm through her bare feet, working in harmony with the cli­ mate-adaptive systems that make their hyper-living-laboratory home bearable even in this sweltering weather. From their window, the cousins gaze across the evolved Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, now a sprawling campus where built and nat­ ural environments have integrated to create an entirely new archetype. The bioreglonal campus demonstrates life- cycle design at scales their great-grandfather could barely have imagined, with Al-managed micro-cli­ mate zones and self-healing materials responding to the brutal Texas summer. Every element follows The Center’s phi­ losophy updated for this new age: “Harvest gently. Purify wisely. Use with joy. Return with love.” “Look at those clouds!” River points to the horizon where dark thunderheads are building. The familiar Texas sym- 30 | CMPBS

Page 33

!6> rf^X CMPBS in the year 2075 C^JlTfiit^nirOif ^’* 0? (Wmcmi i y-,n ,ptfhj?&tfa. sw j/^tf’&Djtth ;rftup, tty’aojrQ ‘^^XOUaf.- j/i); ‘hiTrmoiifyd '''•/:cfy”;^£.v.0)O THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 31 THE INFLUENCE

Page 34

phony of heat, humidity, and cicadas still buzzing so loud they seem to vibrate inside your skull creates the perfect backdrop for what’s coming. Sky whoops with excitement. “Race you to Plenitude Tower” Sky chal­ lenges, and they’re off. Storms mean adventure, and The Center’s bio-grown Plenitude Ecocity tower prototype calls to them like a beacon. The structure spi­ rals skyward in perfect proportion, its living architecture designed to flex with high winds while providing the best van­ tage point for miles. This synthesis draws on long-range fore­ sight work by Amy Webb (The Genesis Machine; Future Today Institute Tech Trends Report), Ray Kurzweil (The Sin­ gularity Is Near, 2005; The Singularity Is Nearer, forthcoming), and Jamais Cascio (work with the Institute for the Future; Open the Future blog; scenarios such as Green Manhattan and The Boun­ ty of the Commons). As they climb, the tower feels alive in ways the old world couldn’t imagine. Where people once felt drained in sterile buildings, every structure at The Center is designed to maximize the potential of every system — materials respond to human stress, acoustic properties shift throughout the day, and the very geom­ etry of spaces, refined through a century of fine tuning building systems enables a new age of well-being. Once atthe top. River starts her familiar count: one Mississippi, two Mississippi… Lightning forks across the sky, and the gap between flash and thunder shrinks rapidly. Just like their grandfather, this is the moment they live for, being as close as possible to nature’s raw power. “River! Sky! Get down here NOW!” Their mothers voices carry both urgency and excitement. The girls exchange glances, that’s not the usual “you’re In trouble” tone. They scramble down to find their par­ ents, grandfather, and the research team gathered around the newest experimental structure, faces lit with wonder. The building’s bio-geometric walls pulse with gentle luminescence — something unprecedented is happen­ ing. “Unlike grandfather’s compressed earth blocks, this one already has its roof,” Skyjokes, remembering the fam­ ily story about putting roofs up first. “Put your hands here,” one of the interns whispers, guiding them to the living wall. The moment their palms touch the surface, both girls gasp. They can sud­ denly sense the underground fungal networks connecting every plant on the property, feel the electrical conversa­ tions between trees, perceive the vast web of relationships that make the soil beneath their feet more alive and com­ plex than any city. Sky giggles at the tickling sensation, but River feels something deeper. The build­ ing isn’t just sheltering them — it’s teaching them to perceive the aliveness that was always there. Through their enhanced lenses, both girls watch as the structure’s neural networks create vibrational patterns that align human consciousness with planetary rhythms. River realizes they’re witnessing both meanings of what The Center has always pursued, maximum potential building systems. The physical building systems work in harmony with the act of building systems of connection between human awareness and earth intelligence. ‘This is it,” their grandfather explains, tears in his eyes. “Architecture as con­ sciousness technology. We’ve been building systems for over a century, both components and relationships. But now we’ve created building systems that show us we’re part of an Infinite web where everything is connected.” Sky bounces excitedly, “So the building is alive like us?” while River feels the profound shift in her awareness as the structure’s frequency harmonizes with her natural rhythms. Even with all the predictions of 2075’s technolog­ ical marvels, this feels like the most Important discovery, that conscious­ ness itself could be unified through the spaces they create. The storm breaks overhead, rain ham­ mering their climate-adaptive living roofs, but no one moves. For the first time in generations, humans have cre­ ated architecture that serves not just physical needs but consciousness evo­ lution, buildings that actively interconnect individual and planetary well-being. 32 | CMPBS

Page 35

THE INFLUENCE River and Sky still run through torrential rain when storms cross the East Austin Hills, still climb towers to watch light­ ning, still feel that same sense of wonder that made The Center magical a centu­ ry ago. But now they’re growing up in humanity’s hyper living-laboratory, where every space nurtures not just their bodies but their deepest under­ standing that they are the earth becoming conscious of itself. This is The Center’s second inning — not an ending, but a homecoming to the deepest questions of ourtime: How do we unlock the maximum potential of every material, every system, every relationship? How do we design for the entire lifecycle — from earth to structure and back to earth? Standing barefoot in the mud beside architecture that teaches them they are part of an ancient conversation between the elements, both cousins embody a muddy pro­ toloop — a foundational feedback loop of getting dirty, experimentation, and discovery. Where everything we touch touches everything else. Where con­ sciousness and matter spiral together, becoming aware of Itself. Where we remember we were never separate, but just an expression of Infinite creativity. Al assistance (Claude, Anthropic) was used for developmental editing, struc­ tural feedback, and content refinement. CMPBS in the year 2075 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 33

Page 36

Connections: The Center’s Genius Loci BRENDAN WITTSTRUCK

Page 37

THE INFLUENCE BRENDAN WITTSTRUCK IS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND URBAN DESIGNER PRACTICING IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. HE WORKED AT CMPBS FROM 2012 TO 2014 AS AN INTERN AND SENIOR DESIGN ASSOCIATE, DURING WHICH HE SUPPORTED THE CENTER’S WORK ON THE COLONY PARK SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE AND THE SEAHOLM ECODISTRICT. The first time I met David Lake, it was Pliny who introduced us. It was 2012 and we’d sat in to listen to David and the other three finalist teams present their proposed plans for Waller Creek in downtown Austin. Pliny, I’d learned and was and would be often reminded, had taught David in architecture school and when David shuffled over after the presentations to say hello, Pliny introduced us. David asked me, curtly, ifIwas keeping Pliny In line. I, only a few scattered months Into my internship, replied to him, yes, I was. He leaned in toward me and said, slowly and entirely deadpan: “You’re a liar.” That same year, probably later but perhaps earlier, Pliny and Gail invited me to dinner with them in their house at The Center. An invitation to the house, head to toe the geometric expression of Center aesthetic, and which we would later realize had been constructed some ten feet or so past the actual property line and into a triangle of land owned but otherwise forgotten by the State of Texas, was an extravagant delight, particularly owing to the contrast between it and the roughly two hundred square feet of greenhouse shed, metal siding and Unistrut that was my home for those first nine months. A digression: the sheer wantonness of my preceding run-on sentence would give Dylan something akin to a seizure. Dylan Siegler is a fastidious editor and does not abide my run-on sentences. We first met at a happy hour at the now- defunct Longbranch Inn; she was yet another Center alumna now working at the City of Austin’s Office of Sustainability under yet another Center alumna, Lucia Athens. It was Cassidy who introduced us. Cassidy’s position working with Gail on LEED and the Austin Energy Green Building afforded her a seat In the main office, which included air conditioning and fewer (but not zero) snakes, and her tenure overlapped with both Dylan’s and mine. Early in my internship, Cassidy invited me to one of her house parties, where she—at least eight years my junior—blithely introduced me to her friends as “the intern”. Back to dinner. Gail and Pliny had invited me to dinner to meet Center alumnus Jim,the Director of Sustainability at the University of Texas. I forget the details of Jim Walker’s introduction to The Center but they way I remember it was that he was road tripping through Austin and saw a interesting ad in the alt-weekly about The Center, decided to check it out, ended up volunteering there and helping constructthe Demonstration Building, now the main office, and never left Austin again. He had also lived in the same roughly two hundred square feet of greenhouse shed, metal siding and Unistrut. The point at which I may or may not be arriving—rather, the theme—is connections. The Center, the place, still stands as many of us knew it, a paean to constant tinkering, an unsubtle blown raspberry in the direction ofjust the way THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 35

Page 38

TO SEE THE FULL SPIRIT, THE CENTER IN ITS ENTIRETY, YOU’LL NEED TO LISTEN TO A THOUSAND STORIES, AND A THOUSAND MORE TALL TALES AFTER THAT, AND, EVEN THEN, THE FULL VISION MIGHT ONLY BEGIN TO TAKE SHAPE. things always have been, on its best days a living laboratory and home of wonderment, even as the fields and junkyard neighbors in every direction have succumbed to the placelessness of exurban apartments and gas stations. But The Center, the connections, if you ask me, is the real genius loci. We all came from somewhere different, some close, some far. And for the most part we’ve all ended up somewhere different too. But along the way, somehow, we all passed through the same one expressive moment in the constant, messy, beautiful battle that is progress. One may be tempted to look upon the rebar arches and monocoque panels of The Center and think: this is the pervading spirit of this place. The Center was never a destination; it was a threshold. To see the full spirit. The Center in its entirety, you’ll need to listen to a thousand stories, and a thousand more tail tales after that, and, even then, the full vision might only begin to take shape. Cassidy still calls me “the Intern” but is one of my best friends anyway. When she moved out of her rental house years ago, I moved in. Alice Embree, Gail’s friend who worked part-time covering the books, was my landlady for five years and taught me as much as anyone has about grace and about knowing how to fight. Without fanfare, she once invited me over to her house to meet her friends Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn (“They’re only kind of famous,” she said, “Not famous like our friends in The Dicks.”) and again to meet her friend Claire, who’d survived the UT Tower shooting and,Isuspect, was relieved to be known for anything but that. Alice still calls me from time to time to ask my opinion on whether a various Austin Council Member is progressive enough. Dylan sold me her truck when she moved to New York; I’m still driving it. Long before that,I blew out the electricity at her condo the first time she Invited me to a house party when I closed the balcony door too hard on an extension cord. Friendship-cementing stuff. Isee Jim all the time. We’ve served on a neighborhood association together. Interact professionally from time to time, and have spent much of the last decade mostly unsuccessfully fighting off the expansion of Interregional Highway 35. If I ever need to find him I go to the Cherry wood Coffeehouse and he’ll be there bending an elbow or refilling a coffee mug. I have a meeting scheduled with him this coming Wednesday. I never did see David again. Turns out he was right about me being a liar, though. In the end, very little if any of all this has anything to do with The Center, and yet absolutely all of this has everything to do with The Center. Genius loci. The threshold. Best place to get drunk with a genius, the Chronicle once said. The real genius was in knowing to show up. 36 | CMPBS

Page 39

THE INFLUENCE Interns bonding over adjusting a flexible footing THE FIRST so YEARS | 37

Page 40

Backfill, Infill, Refill, Upfill BRIAN T. O’BRIEN 38 | CMPBS ND

Page 41

THE INFLUENCE BRIAN T. O’BRIEN IS AN ARCHITECT, RESEARCHER AND ENTREPRENEUR WITH AN INTEREST IN SUSTAINABILITY AND HOUSING. HE LED THE GREEN ARCHITECTURE PRACTICE SOLEARTH ARCHITECTURE. HE ALSO FOUNDED OPOPLAN, SOLEARTH DESIGN ANALYSIS, AND IS ABOUT TO LAUNCH 2NDH0USE.IE T0 DELIVER ADUS IN IRELAND. Around the time I was at Max’s Pot, as a young recently graduated architect interested in sustainability, I prided myself on reading as many of the sem­ inal books of the 70’s and 80’s written by the sustainability giants on whose shoulders we now stand. An idea thatI have never got out of my mind but unfortunately cannot cite a reference for now is the concept that the original sin of architecture Is that we must occu­ py land at all— virgin, green, ecological land (my emphasis). Or to be less pro­ saic about it, Land- they ain’t making any more of it. This essay is an exercise in stating the blindingly obvious: we need to use our already developed land much more effi­ ciently and we need to systemize it. Across the planet from towns and cities of the US to market towns in the British Isles, to villages in France and Italy, we seethe same crises manifesting; depop­ ulation, main streets and whole villages dying, social alienation, and crucially housing unaffordability. These do form something of a Gordian knot and unravelling it must begin with following one thread. As a built environ­ ment professional for me the thread to follow is housing and building reuse. There are many explanations for the sudden rise in housing unaffordability: the recent financiallzation of housing and homes, demographic change such as reductions in family size and migra­ tion — of all kinds. One solution, the conventional one, is large new market enabled housing development on green field lands. But in many places this approach is hitting limits of a different kind, namely the inability of government to deliver the new infrastructure that would provide land, access, water, transit and utilities to these land holdings. Though as we will see this inability may be a catalyst for much more integrated and multifac­ eted solutions than the large new build projects on greenfield locations than they might have facilitated. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 39

Page 42

Let me set out four related initiatives to use our land more wisely while regen­ erating our towns and leaving the abovementioned ecological land for oth­ er species and future generations. Fill The theme of the next 4 ideas is fill, the act of filling up a container that’s already been created. They all rest on the prem­ ise that in our already developed townscapes: streets, communities, tracts and sites, we already have an infrastructure of wastewater, sewers, water supply mains, fire hydrants, tran­ sit routes-all already in place adjacent to the lot or site boundary. For the last two solutions, we additionally already have built structures with foundations, walls roofs, windows, and usually utili­ ty connections and telecommunications wired in. All already built, already there and already paid for. Another premise for filling is that in most cases any target site is already embedded In an established communi­ ty: near schools, churches, post offices, pubs and social and cultural facilities. They are already located in the right places to benefit new residents and existing community, to enrich social life (and to minimize further damage to the environment). Acknowledging again then that I’m stating the obvious, the filling I propose is that of squeezing more usage into the same built out areas: fitting more homes into residen- tlally zoned areas, more dwellings into apartments houses,and more row hous­ es into an already built row or terrace. Infill The first Fill I would like to explore is infill. Infill is the concept that we take the gaps in our streetscapes, our mails, our row houses and we fill them in. The journals and online posts are replete with initiatives and projects to do just this. Taking the 5 meter gap between two shops, the overhead space of an alley opening or the strange side garden at the corner of a single family housing estate and designing a new building for it is infill at its best. Usually we fill the gap with a building of a similar type as its neighbors, adding retail in a retail gap, a house in a residential row, a new coworking space or cafe in a commercial street and so on. But also I’ve seen many good projects published where an optimization is achieved between carrying out this infill respecting the existing usages while also exploring new approaches and typologies. After all there’s no point in creating a three story five bedroom townhouse infill if modern demographics requires three individu­ al studio apartments instead. We are seeing new typologies of studio over shop and live-work spaces, two plex or three plex in place of a large single home and many more. And while these often challenge zoning para­ digms, they meet future demographics better than continuing with what we have always done. Cities and permit offices shouldn’t be portrayed as always resisting these changes either. Some local authorities become active agents in the transformation pro­ viding design resources, easing access to approvals and even assisting with lot consolidation. Even when sticking with the established typology. It can often be the manner in which we do it that make the difference: a modular insertion that minimizes dis­ turbance time, a colorful facade that puts that street on the map and Increas­ es footfall for neighboring businesses, can all transform the experience and perception of filling in, not to mention providing new homes. For this and all the fill approaches below the benefits of having the new project arise in an established community are significant. Compared to building new homes on the city edge or in a new town where providing new roads, sewers, mains and transit (public transport for those of us in Europe) Is expensive and likely to be subject to public resistance, filling many smaller homes into a com­ munity that already has these assets is easier and thus faster. So there are cost and environmental impact upsides but there are also social ones. Adding smaller houses, for start­ ers or for downsizers, to a neighborhood brings in different types of people: new couples to a community of empty nest- ers, digital nomads drawing a salary from far away but spending it here, key workers (fire fighters, mail carriers or teachers) that can now live in the com­ munity they serve. And there are obvious environmental benefits too in that buildings that are attached (duplex, four plex) and parts 40 | CMPBS

Page 43

THE INFLUENCE of terraces, have less heat loss and by definition co location generate less traf­ fic and thus less emissions. The challenge for many of these inter­ ventions, indeed for almost all of the Fills I’ll talk about, is that under conven­ tional approaches, a bespoke design and a site specific construction solution is required, ones that are different for each gap. And at the numbers we are talking about, solutions become difficult to imagine being deployed at scale. We’ll come back to this. Backfill The second Fill I’d like to look at is back- fill. This is the idea that we take our backlands whether they be the large gardens of US homes In single family zoned areas, the Identical rear gardens of repeated pattern type developments in countries where more centrally planned housing was built, or just left over bits at the rears of our streets,and we redevelop them. One example of this where we are seeing a solution being deployed at scale across the US Is with the ADU movement. Once prohibited out of fear of reducing the value of the parent house within a home- owners rules restricted development or single family zoning, city after city is now exempting or easing their path through the consent processes and In some cas­ es actively promoting them such as with financing or pre approved house plans. Indeed this trend is not confined to the US. Other countries that are said to be closer to Boston than Berlin in econom­ ic outlook (and land development patterns inevitable follow) such as Ire­ land, are considering making ADUs (back garden houses In our nomencla­ ture) exempt from the need for planning permission also. By some estimates hundreds of thousands of new homes could result. Gaining new starter sized homes in established communities, on transit routes and near schools are benefits enough to argue for removing any obstacles to ADUs as soon as possible. Add to those, the fact that combining a small affordable home with a larger family home on the same site unlocks opportunities for intergenerational migration, up and down sizing, addi­ tional income and live in care, and we see social and even emotional benefits also, ones that can never appear on any balance sheet but make a great differ­ ence to a family. The final no brainer for me on ADUs is that while providing another home where it’s needed and so addressing housing availability and unaffordability, they are also most likely to be financed and developed privately. So there’s no need for the city to raise new bonds or for governments to add to their bor­ rowing deficits. All of which avoids controversy and reduces or neutralizes resistance so facilitating a rapid deploy­ ment of this important solution. Refill My third Fill is the idea that we take exist­ ing empty or underused ground level buildings on the streets of towns ail over the world and we start to use them for the things that society really needs. I live in a town with many with empty store- fronts on main street while the activities that ourtourist economy needs, a tour­ ist information centre to take just one case, sits on a side street hidden from its target audience that is walking that very main street not far away. Simply put if the exchange value or price of property is rising faster than the income one could get from renting or developing that property, minus the costs of maintenance and any taxes Incurred, it benefits building owners to leave them sit empty. It doesn’t howev­ er benefit the community who host those buildings. It harms them. We need intervention, fiscal and reputa­ tional to unlock this, carrots and sticks to break the deadlock- of which more later. And yes these buildings need creativity to bring them back into use — both in terms of envisaging a viable use for them and in terms of adapting them to modern standards. Adding comfort sus­ tainability and safety aspects to them is a challenge but it can be done. And we shouldn’t always assume that a former storefront should continue as a retail use. We know that a store or shop can easily be changed to being a work hub or cafe among many adjacent uses. In Ireland we’re finding other reversion options are viable also. We have a scheme here where any empty former pub can be converted into a residence without having to go through the plan- THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 41

Page 44

ning system. It’s a small example and one that may be very country specific in a land where every town was awash with pubs and now can only support one or two, but it illustrates nonetheless that some fresh thinking can be brought to bear in any context in any country. And we’ve already alluded to the bene­ fits: these buildings (main street stores above and upper floor below) have already built and paid for the inputs that are so expensive: foundations, walls, roofs, floors and services connection, all already In place. Building the new equiv­ alent of these elements rather than adapting them is both expensive in material terms, costly in environmental impacts and labor intensive at a time when labor is in short supply. But also bringing them back into use not only benefits the new occupants but has out­ size upside for community life: more footfall, more customers, more fun. Upfill The fourth Fill I’d like to look at is whatI call upfill. It’S related to Infill but extends the idea to address the vacant floors above our urban street businesses and attempts to unlock their potential for reuse, often as housing. Going back100 years In most towns, the owners of the business on a street lived above their store or shop. Prosperity and upward mobility dictated they move to the sub­ urbs when they had reached a level of affluence and that has continued, leav­ ing us with many an empty upper floor. In Ireland we’ve had 30 years of attempt­ ing to solve what’S come to be known as the ‘living over the shop’ problem,so we’re quite familiar with the barriers to it. One inapparent cause of the emptiness and vacancy seem to be that it’s often the situation that the business on the ground floor has long since paid off its building costs and Is turning over a com­ fortable profit leading the perhaps aging business owners to view taking on a new capital project like upgrading the upper floors as a headache they don’t need. Add to that the fact that on paper the building Is worth more tomorrow than it is today despite even empty upper levels and that in many regimes taxes don’t have enough ‘stick’ to neutralize the gain, and we have the situation where empty upper floors can persist with very little downside to the owners. Other barriers to this approach are that lot divisions in this situation tend to run vertically through the floor levels and are narrow, while the optimum apart­ ment layout wants to be horizontal and wider than the typical footprint of a street front shop below. Finding some mechanism to easily facilitate the trans­ fer of ownership, say two adjacent owners agreeing to swap a level above, across the two plots so generating a new more viable floorplate for each of them to develop as a new apartment, would be a solution to this. Other practicalities such as fire com­ partmentation, emergency egress and fire suppression which are very difficult to introduce to an existing structure, all need new solutions to be applied or at last considered. Could doubling up on heat detection and suppression (modern micro sprinklers and misters) justify a relaxation on fire compartmentation? Could regular resident fire drills (com­ mon In non residential buildings but not in apartments) and fire fighter rehears­ als allow a second escape stairs be omitted ? While this all needs further study to be sure, we shouldn’t pretend thatthe only techniques available to us today are the same as the ones that existed fifty years ago either. Enablement And when owners are motivated, and I believe that some combination of incen­ tive and penalty, combining grants, tax write downs, reputational pressure and process systemization could make them all so, there are still specific challenges that make adaptive reuse across all these fill approaches difficult. Ownership Ownership, or ownership at scale Is often a barrier: We saw in Upfill above how the floors of a narrow lot make a horizontal apartment unviable while in the case of backfill or infill two oppor­ tunity sites whose owners want to combine may be separated by a narrow strip, in the ownership of another, who won’t sell. Access ownership is also a part of this. The way into an ADU site street level may be constrained. Previously public alleys that could now provide access to back lots may have been claimed and bullton. The street doorway and stairwell up to an upper floor may have been absorbed Into the shop below. 42 | CMPBS

Page 45

THE INFLUENCE Clearly owners cooperating and nego­ tiating sales and swaps can solve many of these conundrums but governments and foundations can also help. Local agencies providing grant aid to cover the cost of quick design explorations that might unearth solutions could help as might making pro forma legal agree­ ments to facilitate land or floor area swapping available (to reduce legal expenses) also. Or city departments could scale up ther efforts at site consolidation. There are public interest arguments for confis­ cating persistently derelict or vacant properties in strategic areas. Dereliction of one building on a street has been shown to be contagious, demotivating adjacent owners from maintaining their buildings and beginning a spiral of decline. Eminent domain and compul­ sory purchase powers are the solution to this but a city needs the will to apply them and their overseeing politicians need to have the courage to face down the property owners, who may be don­ ers, who will resist. Another aspect of this are the proper­ ties that no one seems to own. This is not as uncommon a problem as It sounds. Here I’d propose an unconven­ tional solution also. In other cases the land is already in public ownership and it’S more a case of the department that has title transferring it to a program or unit that Is enabled to make it available, perhaps in a partnership or simply as a public interest sale, for Immediate use. Design For all my fill approaches, there are fun­ damental problems with trying to generate an individual design for each site, building and evert floor level. Quite simply there aren’t enough designers to tackle each and every one of these gaps Individually. We need some other solu­ tion. It may be that other professions than designers and architects can be given just enough skills and knowledge to provide the design schematics for individual scale. I’m sure many of us would have had hopes that Al would help also but I’m now becoming skeptical that this is so. The solution probably lies in some kind of standardized toolkit approach combined with libraries of pre approved plans on a per city, per build­ ing type, and per typology basis perhaps with some kind of algorithmic optimi­ zation. Labour And once the design is done we have a similar problem with having to find the workers to go into each and every back site or building and to build out the bespoke solution that has been pre­ scribed by the designers. This requires bespoke construction solutions on tight and inaccessible locations at a time when in many countries with housing affordability problems there’s a parallel shortage of labor. But to my mind there are pools of labor that could be persuaded into service. Retirees that don’t wish to sit out their last active and still skilled years and would work part time as trainers, the 58% of GenZer that can’t find work or the 4.3 million people not in employment education ortraining (NEETs) in the US. Could we start a new movement, a kind of cross between the highway building or rural electrification programs of the inter war years, military (but civil and voluntary) service, and a massive intern­ ship scheme deployed to bring together those with skill and those with time and reframing it all as a societal moon shot mission? In countries where the debate about migration hasn’t become so polarized, one could consider allowing migrants of all kinds (yes there are many kinds), and indeed homeless people, become involved, recognizing that the very build­ ings we are upgrading can provide the basic shelter such humans need to remain off the streets and safe while integrating, getting new skills and increasing the housing stock. Conclusion Clearly there is Inertia to be overcome to enable the wholesale revitalization of these vacant and underused plots, buildings and storeys. And while there may be many reasons for not going ahead land value appreciation or short­ age of labor for instance, lack of skill or knowledge are not among them. We know what to do. It’s just a question of finding a way to align the forces: oppor­ tunity, motivation, timing and reward, to get started. Once begun, most proj­ ects tend to be completed. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 43

Page 46

The Greening of the City: A Biophilic Urbanism Framework BRITTANY FAULKNER Water People Economy Ecology Connectivity HealthWaste Energy Above: Overall Framework 44 | CMPBS

Page 47

THE INFLUENCE BRITTANY FAULKNER WAS BORN IN SMETHPORT, PA AND HAS SPENT MUCH OF HER LIFE EXPLORING THE FORESTS SURROUNDING HER HOMETOWN. SHE BEGAN MAKING SERIOUS COMMOTION WITH CMPBS IN 2018, WHICH INSPIRED HER TO PURSUE A CAREER IN PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN. The design habits of the 21st century are much like those popular during the Industrial Revolution; there is an overemphasis on technology and efficiency as the solution to environmental and societal challenges. The Impact that car-oriented subdivisions and mobile devices have on the environment and our daily lives removes us from our most primal need — nature. Moments spent in nature or with natural elements — such as hiking through a local park or resting near a riverbank- are often used as tools for relaxation, comfort, and providing a sense of refuge from daily life. It has become commonplace to treat nature as something to be visited, rather than an element of our daily environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, access to nature became even more important as people sought to find moments of connection with something tangible, rather than through a computer or phone screen. The spaces and structures we encounter create an urban fabric that is unique to each individual, and even shared spaces are experienced in different ways. Enjoyable spaces are oftentimes those which combine aspects of nature into this urban form in a way that stimulates our primal need. The term biophilia is often used to describe this innate, emotional connection with nature and the desire to be within It. By integrating elements of nature Into the urban fabric, we can satisfy this desire and stimulate this connection in a way that helps us flourish. This combination produces biophilic urbanism. Biophilic urbanism positions human and environmental process within the same plane and proposes design strategies that bolster the psychological and physiological benefits that come from contact with nature. It combines aspects of human connection and lived experiences In the built environment with the natural systems and processes that we rely on and are around us at all times. At its core, biophilic urbanism is about repairing connection to each other, to nature, and to community. Urbanism in the traditional sense has organized spaces and structures around human society and emphasizes how movement to and through these spaces should be efficient. Biophilia organizes the city around the complex systems of natural processes that exist within it. It is conscious of an ecosystem’s carrying capacity concerning water, food, energy, and materials. By recognizing that both structures and people are powered through local resources, biophilic urbanism asserts that these systems should be driven by a circular economy which strives to use what you have. The inner workings of natural systems within the city are emphasized by moments of confluence between human cycles of life and natural processes. Every aspect of the urban fabric has been experienced by hundreds or thousands of people over many generations, and biophilic urbanism recognizes that space is tied to a region’s history, culture, and people. It is respectful of how planning and design executions impact marginalized THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 45

Page 48

Economy Water EcologyPeople Connectivity HealthWaste Energy Life Cycle Sequence Sectors defined by stages of the life cycle Above: Process 46 | CMPBS

Page 49

THE INFLUENCE communities and works to create a network of spaces that provide a restorative experience for those who encounter them. These spaces are designed for multiple scales of life both spatially and temporally. In order to foster nature-inclusive cities, a framework for biophilic urbanism must be created to drive planning and design forward. This biophilic urbanism framework highlights the importance of relationships between people and nature and the response it elicits. The varying scales of urban form generate tailored responses that either ignite, Incubate, or expand the biophilic urbanism framework and Its application. The framework consists of eight themes that stem from the core values and intentions of biophilic urbanism: water, ecology, connectivity, health, energy, waste, economy, and people. The framework Is conceptualized in a flower formation consisting of a stem, petal, and vein combination. This not only ties into themes of nature, but describes the interconnectedness of each system within itself and the greater framework at large. (See Overall Framework) Within the overall framework, stems for complementary themes are situated across from one another, signifying that the techniques utilized within one theme may offer benefits for the other. This positions biophilic urbanism within the processes at work in a given area, and makes each application of the framework unique to the context ofthe neighborhood, city, or region that It Is Implemented. The petal of each theme describes the life cycle process at work and can be split into sectors based on the number of stages within the process. Some themes — such as water — have a clear cycle that reflects natural processes while others — such as people — follow a more abstract cycle which reflects the ways people behave. Interact, and connect. (See Process) Each life cycle stage contains veins of design techniques that can be implemented to generate positive outcomes. These techniques provide a foundation for design Interventions that can support the desired outcomes of biophilic urbanism. Each design technique is placed in a hierarchy of veins that highlights the ability to be scaled overthe neighborhood, city, and regional context, and the ability to generate positive benefits at each scale. Each individual technique may generate a variety of benefits individually; however, when used in combination, these benefits can grow exponentially depending on the desired outcome of the project this framework is applied to. (See Figure 3 Techniques) This comprehensive framework for biophilic urbanism provides a foundation for how environmentally and socially responsible urban areas should be designed by transforming existing design and lifestyle standards. Each theme highlights the components of the framework that are critical to any planning or design work that is conducted using biophilic urbanism as a foundational tool. Water Water is the foundation of life. The presence of water evokes many different emotional responses within humans — from relaxation, to awe, to fear. Because water holds such importance within both human and natural cycles of life, it serves as one of the most beneficial themes within biophilic urbanism. The processes exemplified in this petal follow that of the water cycle and aim to incorporate each stage of the cycle into the built environment. This seeks to generate mindfulness concerning water quality and use. Several design techniques optimized for the human experience and natural systems include cisterns for rainwater harvesting, the use of native vegetation for filtration and water conservation, and offering interactive wastewater management systems within the built environment. (See Case Study: Water) Energy Opposite water in the framework is energy, because both are essential to maintaining human and natural cycles of life and are driven by factors outside of human control. Incorporating energy processes into the urban environment positions humanity within the cycles of resource consumption for a given area and helps to establish a threshold for THE FIRST so YEARS | 47

Page 50

Water EcologyPeople Economy Hierarchy of Techniques Waste Health Connection to other processes Design technique Collection of techniques within each stage Energy Above: Techniques 48 | CMPBS

Page 51

1111111 THE INFLUENCE development. The processes within this theme correspond to the types of renewable energy that can be gathered from external sources and acknowledges how these systems work to create more energy efficient urban environments. Such sources Include photovoltaics and building orientation, geothermal energy systems, biofuel opportunities, and wind processors. ECOLOGY The core definition of biophilia is “love of life”, which relates specifically to humanity’s position within the biological processes of an area. The theme of ecology centers around this definition and relates to both the basic needs of living things and the foundational needs of society. The processes within this theme follow a cycle of generation, which Infers to both the generation of life and generation of health outcomes. The ecology theme highlights the importance of biodiversity throughout the urban fabric, which in turn supports the capacity of a space to perform carbon sequestration, gardening (for both food production and as a creative outlet), and nutrient recycling. Within the city, creating multilayered vegetative experiences are beneficial for both carbon storage potential and one’s experience of the space, while also supporting urban wildlife. On a larger scale, land preservation — most importantly the preservation of native habitats — keeps soils healthy and functioning, provides vegetation for sequestration, and supports the benefits of other themes, such as water, people, and health. WASTE Opposite ecology in the framework Is waste, as waste can be viewed as an undesirable byproduct of natural cycles. The processes within this theme follow a life-cycle system of waste reduction, management, and reuse. It relies firstly on living a low-carbon lifestyle to reduce the amount of waste generated overall, then focuses on ways to manage or repurpose waste that is created. CONNECTIVITY The theme of connectivity centers around the movement of people through a variety of systems using a network that Is accommodating for all. These networks incorporate many different ways to move while acknowledging that all people within an area should have equitable access to amenities placed within this network. Connectivity through biophilic urbanism rejects the private automobile In favor of modes that generate a lower carbon footprint per capita, namely public transit options such as bus and light rail systems, bicycles, and walking. The processes within this theme follow categories of mobility moving from a large-scale network of application down to a more human-scale network driven by policy. Design techniques such as the 15-mlnute city, microtransit opportunities, and connective pedestrian and bicycle networks encourage alternative modes of transportation to the automobile and promote an active lifestyle. Each of these techniques are driven by policy changes, which must prioritize equitable transit accessibility when making decisions regarding mobility and connectivity. ECONOMY Opposite connectivity in the framework is economy. By linking people across communities it allows for more economic diversity and opportunities. Economy within biophilic urbanism seeks to transform the business-as-usual model into a model that is mindful of the life cycle of products and works to reduce both waste and the carbon footprint. Processes within the economy theme move from large-scale application to more human-scale decision-making, much like the theme of connectivity. Design techniques center around closed- loop procedures within business operations, establishing a net-zero system for building construction, and encouraging knowledge sharing. The circular economy process also links to other themes within the framework, such as connectivity and ecology. HEALTH Health is the cornerstone of biophilic urbanism, as it seeks to foster physical and psychological benefits to humans alongside environmental health for the planet. Processes within this theme are arranged according to the scale of emotional response they elicit, moving from large-scale influences to individual experiences. The design techniques THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 49

Page 52

Rainwater Harvesting Filtration street plantings Case Study: Water urban water features rain garden biosivale drought resistant plantinosnative vegetation constructed rretiand gravity-fed d’Stnbution system cistern green roof porous pavement water /energy combined system xeriscaping grey’A’ater harvsting Left: Case Study: Water, Right: Case Study: People 50 | CMPBS Water Conserving Landscaping Wastewater Management Critical Design Process Social Cohesion Placemaking Case Study: People knowledge sharing oca art public gathering spaces adaptive reuse connection to landscape contextvernacular architecture oca events human scale spontaneous encounters physical Ssocia networks m xed-use villages multigenerational & gender neutral spaces stewardship programs community partnerships & coalitions design for existing and future residents Neighborhood Character Shared Experiences

Page 53

THE INFLUENCE THE FRAMEWORK FOR BIOPHILIC URBANISM ESTABLISHED HERE FOSTERS URBAN ENVIRONMENTS THAT SUPPORT BOTH THE PRIMAL NEED FOR CONNECTION WITH NATURE AND THE PRESENT URGE TO PROGRESS WITH TECHNOLOGY. associated with each process stage include an element of seasonality that activates visual, auditory, and tactile sensations, alongside circadian rhythms and growing seasons. It positions one within the context of local seasons and time sequences while offering restorative spaces that provide a break from the sensations often associated with traditional urban environments. It is worth noting that restoration is contextual and is most helpful when it offers relief from a stressful or draining environment. Therefore, restorative spaces must be strategically applied across a neighborhood, city, or region. PEOPLE Opposite the theme of health In the framework is the theme of people. Restoration potential is tied to places and spaces that have meaning, or are places that people have a strong connection with. Within the framework, the term “people” refers to embracing an area’s existing population while planning for the future and designing with both groups in mind. The processes within this theme follow steps of community building and creating a distinct sense of place based on both cultural and environmental context. Design techniques of placemaking and social cohesion are key to fostering shared experiences and creating a unique neighborhood character that brings people closer to one another and the natural processes around them. Fostering physical and social networks help others to strengthen bonds within their community, and establishing a connection to landscape context further situates oneself within the specific natural setting. (See Figure 5 Case Study: People) The framework for biophilic urbanism established here fosters urban environments that support both the primal need for connection with nature and the present urge to progress with technology. Biophilic urbanism and development that utilize its framework are about living with the land rather than resisting it. Good biophilic urbanism draws from influential perspectives that manifest as the theme of the framework: health conditions, socio-cultural norms and expectations, past experiences, frequency and duration of the user experience, the many speeds at which it may be encountered, and user perception and processing of the experience. Alongside this, it is important to recognize that executing a few design techniques well and in a holistic way is better than Incorporating a large number of techniques that are disconnected, which may hinder the positive outcomes of the technique’s implementation. As societal shifts focus on harnessing artificial intelligence and streamlining technological processing, it is imperative that our spaces are designed not only with nature in mind, but nature as a focal point to offset the impact of technology on our mind, body, and well-being. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 51

Page 54

We Should Mulch the Land CAROLINE DUNN , J 52 | CMPBS Above: Caroline Dunn presenting biomaterials at CMPBS open house, Right: Hemp composite mix 4

Page 55

THE INFLUENCE CAROLINE IS AN ARCHITECT AND FOUNDER OF BIOBUILD, A DESIGN PRACTICE ADVOCATING FOR THE USE OF BIOMATERIALS IN CONSTRUCTION. On my most recent Sunday at The Center we gathered to plan the upcoming bioregional confluence, and afterwards stayed to do some yard work. Zane, 28, a water conservation advocate; Kiran, 25, a systems engineer; and myself, 28, a freshly licensed architect—all there to put in some elbow grease because we love Pliny and Gail. We worked In the full beat of the August sun, pulling pesky, shriveled vines off the wall. “What’s wrong with TCEQ anyways?” I asked Zane, in reference to her work to prevent new data centers from sucking the aquifers dry. “They’re still so focused on a progressive ideal, as if we need to keep developing Texas…” I took a machete to one of the vine stems and hacked it down. Kiran said something about strange loops and went to grab us Coronitas. In that moment specifically, and always, there was that tension at The Center between what is rational and what is Utopian. The structural designs of the buildings at The Center are straightforward, but the concepts have been provoking since day one. Recently I heard Gail explain to a large crowd how The Center Is designed for each occupant to need less than twenty five gallons of water per day, while the average Texan still uses ninety two gallons per day in regular buildings. When I started as an intern at The Center, I had no framework for how to design, and so the internship shaped me with a heavy hand. Pliny and I investigated a modular, adaptable, and deployable architecture for disaster relief, and we were really into Sou Fujimoto’s work visually. What resulted was a forest of grids, with different tools for living suspended like Christmas ornaments. In the four months I spent as an intern,Iwas given the opportunity to draw and iterate for eight hours every day, continually guided by Pliny in the direction of the concept. I also did fun and random tasks like calling to get quotes for decommissioned oil rigs. Eight years later, as a newly minted architect,I now believe that people who design regular buildings are misguided THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 53

Page 56

IN THAT MOMENT SPECIFICALLY, AND ALWAYS, THERE WAS THAT TENSION AT THE CENTER BETWEEN WHAT IS RATIONAL AND WHAT IS UTOPIAN. and that we don’t need to use our air conditioners. Something strange yet wonderful happened to me at The Center in my formative years. The Center is a place for learning in many modalities. You can ingest countless drawings and concept models, build prototype structures, or peruse a library ranging from solar punk manuals to USDA reports on cutting energy costs. Students of various disciplines cycle through The Center: geographers, architects, mathematicians, inventors, and musicians. I imagine at least one thousand internships have taken place there, no two the same,thanks to Pliny’s stunning ability to educate. He earnestly understands students as individuals and beckons them to join him In creating “commotion”. It’s fun like the Cacophony Society: “You may already be a member…” After the internship, I tried to find commotion in the regular working world, but to little avail. In my first 9-to- 5 position, the man with the desk next to me said, “You shouldn’t be here, you’re too young, Iimagine you frolicking in a field of wildflowers.” He was right, and a variety of experiences led me to establish an architecture practice focused on biomaterials, many of which can be found in chunky samples underneath the quonset at The Center. Some days Iam on a flight to LA with a chunk of hemp composite as my personal Item, to explain to the plan reviewers that we want to build a house from the rubble of agriculture. I like the space Iam carving in the design world. My buildings may not be “hot” or alluring in terms of their form, but I am really proud of the concepts exhibited. When I think about The Center and its future, I think about how its buildings were made with intention, over decades, to be easily disassembled. If you look closely at the tectonics: fasteners are removable, materials are recyclable, and some even decompose gracefully in place. The Center has purposefully left a light mark on its twenty seven acres, standing as a beacon on the edge of Austin while other human develop­ ments pillage the ecology of the region. Zane told me someone is making plans to build a pipeline for water from northeast Texas all the way down to Hays County. How can this be? It’s time to question progressive ideals in development. The world needs environmental stewards more than ever. We must be reminded of the knowledge we already have. That if we mulch the land, rainfall could seep slowly back into the earth and replenish our groundwater in place, and we wouldn’t need to build the pipeline. Rational practice turns Utopian systems Into resilience. The Center is a testing ground. As the next fifty years of The Center unfold, we will continue to stay late and do the yard work, because we love Pliny and Gail. But the systems described at The Center are also carried out into the world in the minds and hands of the thousand interns, and every visitor who has attended a Friday open house. Outside of those 27 acres in Austin, the commotion will also continue in every city, project, and conversation that boasts an alumni of The Center. 54 | CMPBS

Page 57

THE INFLUENCE T.M 1 Biomaterials in action THE FIRST SO YEARS | 55 a

Page 58

Mapping a Living Archive of the Land CARSON FISK-VITTORI ~G\L ROGERS— SlUBB^FlCio 1 56 | CMPBS Rogers Hill Cemetery shares the land with CMPbs ERS

Page 59

THE INFLUENCE CARSON FISK-VITTORI IS A PHILADELPHIA- BASED LANDSCAPE DESIGNER AND ARTIST CRAFTING REGENERATIVE, PLANT- FORWARD LANDSCAPES FOR THRIVING MULTISPECIES FUTURES. I used to throw chinaberries at my brother as he flung them right back, crush mustang grapes to paint magenta streaks on rocks, and wander quietly, contemplating the usefulness of the plants around me. The landscape taught me how to pay attention. My earliest experiences and values were shaped on this land, under live oaks, among rattlesnakes, through prairie and forest, and across tiny ephemeral springs, while memorizing names of flora and fauna that shared my home and the experimental structures around me. The terrain itself was formed over millennia by displaced communities, migrations, and colonial forces. This text is a brief attempt to read the land where I grew up as a living archive by beginning to unravel its socio-ecological history, and rethinking what it means to live, design, and relate within landscapes that carry complex, entangled legacies. At the intersection of FM 969 and Decker Lane, The CMPBS sits in a rapidly shifting urban-rural threshold on the outer edge of East Austin. Ecological design and policy have emerged from this site for fifty years. This land was also my childhood home, and inevitably shaped my design thinking, one that resists purity, embraces complexity, and questions the very Idea of “nature” as something separate from human presence. Ideas like native and invasive, cultivated and wild, are often shaped by colonial frameworks built on extraction, control, and categorization. Instead,I understand them as elastic values, always in flux. This way of working embraces the messiness of that flux, exploring how even so-called invasive species might become collaborators in future-building. Now is a time for both speculation towards regenerative futures and reflection on the land’s historical depths well beyond the last 50 years. The FM 969 corridor overlays much older routes—known as the Comanche Trail, Old Indian Trail, or Path of the Pioneers, ancient Indigenous pathways carved by ridges, valleys, and seasonal migration. These were later co-opted by Spanish colonizers and European settlers as roadways serving trade and conquest.^) FM 969 was once the main route between Austin and Bastrop, intersecting with the Camino Real just east of the site, a major artery connecting central Texas to present-day Mexico. These roads tell a story of colonial expansion, but are laid over far deeper patterns of Indigenous movement, land knowledge, and seasonal rhythms. Archaeological evidence suggests human presence in Central Texas for at least 16,000 years. By the 14th century, the Tonkawa and Lipan Apache peoples were established in the region. By the 18th century, the Comanche and Kiowa had expanded into these lands, influencing trade, land use, and resistance.(2) The Tonkawa held deep ties to the Balcones Escarpment, an area of geologic fault lines that defines the central Texas region, practicing nomadic Iifeways.(3) Indigenous interventions created landscapes that settlers later misread as untouched “wilderness,” a THE FIRST so YEARS | 57

Page 60

term rooted in the colonial myth that land is only valuable once “improved.” But these ecosystems were not wild in the sense of being uninhabited—they were shaped and maintained through seasonal movements and deep ecological knowledge. This land also lies within what was once Mexican Texas, where the government granted land deeds to Anglo-American settlers in the 1830s and 40s. One grantee, Isaac Decker (namesake of Decker Lane, though he lived in a different area), was recorded as having had repeated “conflicts” with Indigenous communlties.(4) The land that is now CMPBS was claimed by the Rogers and Burleson families. Their involvement in the 1839 Battle of Brushy Creek against the Comanches and the 1837 conflict resulting in the death of Joseph Rogers exemplifies systemic frontier violence/^) Rogers Hill Cemetery, said to have begun with Joseph Rogers’ burial, is today a small island of land surrounded by CMPBS property, and sharing an access road. During this tumultuous period,the Tonkawa tribe served as scouts and allied with settlers and the Texas Rangers in campaigns against Comanche and Kiowa groups, further complicating the dynamics of colonization and intertribal conflict.^’) The legal construct of land ownership here has roots in the Doctrine of Discovery, a 15th-century European legal-theological framework used to justify the dispossession and forced removal of Indigenous peoples. It declared that lands uninhabited by Christians were available for the taking. The settler Imagination turned land into property, drawing artificial lines to divide, control, and exclude. Despite this erasure. Indigenous presence persists. In 2023,the Tonkawa Tribe reclaimed Red Mountain (Naton Samox) near Gause, Texas, an ancestral site now being transformed into a publicly accessible memorial and park space.(7) Their return offers a living reminder that history is not static and that reclamation is ongoing. Colonization not only altered human relationships to land. It transformed the land itself. Fire suppression, monocultures, agriculture, fencing, and private property lines disrupted ecologies that had long thrived. Settler arrival also brought with It non-native species, many of which now dominate the landscape, forming new ecologies that reflect disturbance and imbalance. If you walk through the woods here today, you’ll pass dense thickets of Ligustrum, or privet, a fast-growing shrub introduced as an ornamental species that now overwhelms native understory plants. Privet thrives in edge conditions and disturbed soils, filling the spaces where older ecologies have been pushed aside. While it’s often targeted for removal, its persistence reveals how colonial disruptions echo across time. Rather than view privet purely as a problem. I’ve become interested in how it might be understood as a co-designer. It’S nearly impossible to eradicate, even through goat grazing or controlled burning, because it suckers vigorously from roots and stumps. But what if this trait could be useful? If kept from fruiting to prevent spread by birds, it could serve as a sustainable material through seasonal coppicing, an Indigenous technique found throughout the world that allows wood to be harvested without killing the plant. This could be a source for polewood, building materials, and biochar. Perhaps privet’s rowdy behavior could be harnessed, not just fought. Indigenous forms of land stewardship, grounded in millennia of reciprocal care, can offer essential models for adaptation, resilience, and regeneration. Design In this context means collaborating with what’s already here, even the species that reflect disturbance and survival. Privet teaches us how to live with change. Invasive species signal disruption, but also adaptation. They complicate simplistic narratives of restoration that aim to return landscapes to an imagined past. Instead, they invite us to be companions in designing alternative ecological futures. To design with history does not have to be an act of nostalgia; rather, it should understand the weight of the past and grow something with it. 58 | CMPBS

Page 61

Sources:

1. Michael Barnes, “Texas History: A Hike in Blair Woods Was a Model Historical Expedition,” Austin American-Statesman, December 28,2019.
2. Texas State Historical Association, “Travis County,” Handbook of Texas Online.
3. Michael Barnes, “With Time, the Story of the Tonkawa Tribe Evolves,” Washington Post, February 13,2014.
4. Meredith Mohr, “Isaac Decker,” Community Impact (Austin), June 30,2014.
5. Texas State Historical Association, “Brushy Creek, Battle of,” Handbook of Texas Online, n.d., accessed August 8, 2025.
6. “Recognizing the History of the Tonkawa Tribe, the Original Texans,” Texas Highways, n.d., accessed August 8, 2025.
7. Michael Barnes, “‘Time Seemed to Stand Still’: View from Sacred Red Mountain, Slated for Tonkawa Park,” Austin American-Statesman, February 24,

THE INFLUENCE r Privet growing at CMPBS THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 59

Page 62

Steal These Ideas DANIEL OVERBEY 60 | CMPBS Pllny and interns in the field

Page 63

THE INFLUENCE DANIEL OVERBEY IS AN ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL AND DIRECTOR OF SUSTAINABILITY FOR BROWNING DAY AND AN ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF ARCHITECTURE AT BALL STATE UNIVERSITY. HIS WORK FOCUSES ON HIGH-PERFORMANCE AND ZERO NET ENERGY/ CARBON CONSTRUCTION, ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH, ENERGY/LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT MODELING, AND RESILIENCE. It was May of 2005. Having just graduated with an accredited Bachelor of Architecture degree from Ball State University, I was on-fire to begin my career in sustainable design and construction. John Motloch, Professor Emeritus of Landscape Architecture, had recently introduced me to Pliny Fisk and I was eager to cut my chops In the outskirts of Austin before continuing to Las Vegas to pursue a Master’s Degree in Architecture at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). When I arrived at The Center, the sweltering summer heat had already arrived.I was assigned to “Intern village” on the perimeter of the campus alongside Tim, the organic farmer. I was in great company; however, my living quarters were passively conditioned and I immediately had to put my environmental systems knowledge to the test. This was the beginning of one of the most seminal periods of my career. Under the leadership and direction of Pliny and Gail, Iworked on a range of projects including a solar powered modular shower; a low- impact, modular building system that did not require specialized skills to erect (this later became the GrowHome system); and a renovation project, dubbed the Solar Cafe, that showcased a range of “ambient engines” for energy generation. Through these projects,I developed a deeper technical Insight Into sustainable design, passive systems, and resource utilization. This only scratches the surface of the professional and personal development from my time at The Center. This was the summer in which I learned the Importance of fostering bat habitats; that natural springs can make for the best watering holes; that the brisket at Donn’S Barbeque Is one of the best kept secrets in Texas; and that Tecate and a firepit combine as a magical social lubricant. However, one of the most profound lessons I learned living and working at The Center was one of the quietest moments during my time there. I was putting the finishing touches on a solar transit device In the fabrication shop.I was talking with Pliny about tools and methods for evaluating solar income.I realized that these specular “garden orbs” that were especially popular across the U.S. in the early 2000s could serve as an ideal solar access evaluation tool: graph a sun-path diagram over one, set it in field, and Voila! Iwas eager to share my discovery with Pliny, who took a shrewd but approving look and responded, “Dan, we’ve been doing that since the ’70s.” Pliny proceeded to direct me to vast online repository of CMPBS research. Everything from peer reviewed white papers to presentation slide decks to design concepts. The intellectual property of The Center was freely available. No paywall, no account required. The fruits of the labor of Pliny, Gail, and countless other contributors who believe and support the mission of the CMPBS — all of their work was there for the pillaging. This seemed THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 61

Page 64

^^AREN’T YOU WORRIED THAT SOMEONE MIGHT STEAL YOUR IDEAS AND USE THEM?” THEN PLINY PUT HIS HAND ON MY SHOULDER, LOOKED ME DEAD IN THE EYE, AND SIMPLY RESPONDED, ‘^DAN,I CAN ONLY HOPE.” to run afoul of everything I learned about protecting your IP. Soon thereafter,Iwas following up with Pliny and I asked, “Aren’t you worried that someone might steal your ideas and use them?” I will never forget that moment. Pliny put his hand on my shoulder, looked me dead in the eye, and simply responded, “Dan,Ican only hope.” Twenty years later, that moment still guides my actions. It taught me the importance of peer-to-peer knowledge sharing. In the global effort to mitigate the worst outcomes of anthropogenic climate change, the built environment stands as both a challenge and an opportunity as they are responsible for nearly 40% of global energy-related carbon emissions. Consequently, the architecture, engineering, and construction have a critical role to play in addressing environmental impacts. However, it is impossible to succeed without fostering a culture of collective progress through sharing, accountability, reflection, and continuous improvement. By adopting this as our ethos, we will accelerate innovation and reduce redundancy. My “garden orb” concept Is a salient example of redundancy. One of the greatest inefficiencies in the field of sustainable building design Is the duplication of trial-and-error processes. Every project team attempting to innovate in green design from scratch risks wasting resources, overlooking critical pitfalls, or reinventing solutions already proven effective elsewhere. Peer- to-peer knowledge sharing accelerates the Innovation curve by allowing professionals to build on each other’s successes and learn from each other’s failures. True innovation need not be concerned with competition in a service-based industry. Sustainable design requires mobilizing collective action efficiently and effectively. Knowledge sharing is not just beneficial toward this end — it is indispensable as it brings practical wisdom to the forefront, accelerates innovation, and democratizes access to expertise. Among the many lessons acquired during mytime at the CMPBS, I learned that knowledge sharing is a potent catalyst for environmentally responsible design and climate action. 62 | CMPBS

Page 65

THE INFLUENCE K LI 1 ‘A Proposed design to turn the main house into the Solar Cafe THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 63

Page 66

The MaxPot Guides to the Galaxy DAN SLONE Gall and Dan 64 | CMPBS

Page 67

THE INFLUENCE DAN SLONE IS AN AUTHOR AND STORYTELLER, SPEAKER, AND ATTORNEY. AFTER DECADES OF REPRESENTING DEVELOPERS AND NON- PROFITS IN CREATING SUSTAINABLE AND PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED HUMAN HABITAT, HE NOW HELPS DEVELOPERS AND HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS CREATE BIOPHILIC BENEFITS FOR HUMANS BY INCREASING THE BIODIVERSITY OF COMMUNITIES. “Once you learn how to walk, you can walk on the ground by yourself, but if you want to climb Mount Everest, you need a guide.” -Seyyed Hossein Nasr What has drawn me back to The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems repeatedly over the years are Its lead guides, Gail Vittori and Pliny Fisk. There are other wonderful people associated with The Center, andI know that “guide” is not in the official title of either Gail or Pliny. But that is how I’ve come to think of each of them over the years, with MaxPot as their locus, even though I first met each of them far from Austin. I believe that great guides are the most important people we encounter. They differ from mentors, who share the knowledge they have developed through their life experiences, typically from a safe distance from your new experience. They are not the same as coaches, who may have been In the game once, but have left it now in order to help others improve their performance. Guides usually share the path with you, many times taking the same risks as you, and use their knowledge of the terrairi and its hazards to lead you through the risks they’ve identified in their previous journeys through that terrain. It’s their job to prepare you for what may jump out from behind the next boulder. The best ones have humor, showmanship, deep knowledge, strong ethics, nerves of steel, and unusual flexibility. Gail and Pliny are great guides. I met Pliny in late 1993 when we were both part of a team helping move the town of Valmeyer, Illinois. The town, founded in 1909, flooded in 1910,1943, 1944, and 1947 before levees were built to protect It. In 1993, the Mississippi overflowed those levees, destroying the town again, and the federal government funded a team to help Valmeyer move to higher ground. When the team assembled to discuss the information needed to lay out a plan for the new town, Pliny said that we needed to begin with a McHargian analysis. Given the credentials of the team, I’m confident several members had read McHarg’s Design With Nature, but many of us had not. Pliny explained we needed to know where the best soils for agriculture were, where the system that fed the aquifer was, how storm water moved through the property, and what the property’s orientation to the sun was, among a long list of other characteristics. Only when we understood these could we engage in proper design. This insight, simple as It Is to a planner, was earth shaking to a lawyer, and I continue to use McHargian analysis today, adding in the layers of biodiversity, three- dimensional habitat, the different types of damaged soils, the projected consequences of climate disruption, etc. That evening he entertained us with tales of working with McHarg and of Pliny’S mentor Buckminster Fuller. Fuller Influenced Pliny’s work, particularly the notion that technology could help solve the challenges of the world. Since then, I’ve worked with him at MaxPot in assessing new, sustainable building materials and testing ideas for new inventions or approaches that THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 65

Page 68

THE BEST GUIDES HAVE HUMOR, SHOWMANSHIP, DEEP KNOWLEDGE, STRONG ETHICS, NERVES OF STEEL, AND UNUSUAL FLEXIBILITY. GAIL AND PLINY ARE GREAT GUIDES. might change the world. He has guided me in thinking not just outside of “the box” but outside the world around “the box”. In all undertakings, he has brought the attributes of a great guide, including creativity, a positive outlook, and a belief that practicality was more important than flashiness. Most importantly, he has furnished grand stories, the lifeblood of great guiding, and he knows where all the best restaurants are. I met Gall when she had just joined the board of the US Green Building Council in 2002.Iwas the lawyer for the USGBC, and the task fell to me to advise her that she could not lead a presentation to the USGBC board advocating a position against allowing vinyl In LEED since the USGBC had a process for determining the elements of LEED through its committees, not through board direction. Gail had been working on the Coming Clean” campaign with a coalition of grassroots groups to generate support for government regulation and class action litigation against the large chemical companies. Gail was upset and declared that the whole reason she had joined the board was to influence this process (a statement I’ve always doubted given that she had proposed the conceptual framework for what became the City of Austin’s Green Builder Program, widely acknowledged as the first program of its kind and a big influence on LEED). What Impressed me, and to this day serves as a path to which she guided me, was what she did next. She studied the USGBC’s policy on conflicts of interest (like most nonprofits essentially always economic conflicts) and its policy on “perceived conflicts” where one’s prior advocacy results in a perception that you would not be able to make a reasoned decision about the subject as a member of the board. I know this sounds a little wonky, but bear with me a moment, because it’s important. Her goal was to understand how an organization that would populate its board with people who had strong opinions, and who most likely had voiced those opinions publicly, could make decisions that were fair and supported with reasonable science, while not abandoning their ethical standing. Not only did she resolve the dilemma, but she helped many of us sort through the balancing of the precautionary principle with a deeper understanding of howjunk science and valid science should be assessed. Most importantly, and in the most guide-like fashion, she modeled the best behavior I have ever seen from a board member In respecting and complying with a conflict policy while not relinquishing core beliefs. When she became the Chair of the USGBC and then went on to chair its sister organization, Green Business Certification Inc, she continued to provide leadership on this and many other issues. Gail applied that process of balancing integrity and advocacy when she determined that she would affirmatively endorse developments that were sincerely striving for sustainability In the Austin area, always a risk for principled community leaders. Then, like any good guide she blazed a new trail, taking LEED into the healthcare 66 1 CMPBS

Page 69

THE INFLUENCE community, with its challenges in achieving sterilization In the absence of disposables and reliance on chemicals to achieve safe working environments. It was these two individuals who drew me out to MaxPot, a humble palace of storytelling, friends, good drinks, good food, and fountains of practical creativity. I came out to Austin to work with Pliny on some of my clients’ cutting-edge sustainability products. He conducted long-term tests using the rigorous Texas environment as his lab.I came multiple times as part of a team that Stephen Peck created to commercialize sustainability products and practices, along with Pliny and Gail, Bill Browning, Paul Mankiewicz, and our wonderful, departed friend Jeffry Bruce. Because I worked with eco-lndustrial developers as well as with eco-districts, I came yet again to learn ideas on the flexible design of these sorts of places and aggressive versions of circular economies. Every contact with Maxpot has energized me and left me with at least seven new ideas. The creative experiments have helped prove or disprove ideas In pragmatic ways. Ivalue the social time at MaxPot as much as the team’s ingenuity. One of the great secrets I came away from Austin with was Gall’s recipe for Ginger Margaritas (inspired by drinks she and Pliny had at La Sirena Gorda in San Miguel de Allende). Mine never come out as perfect as Gail’s, but they are worth the creativejourney to make, every time. I tell friends and clients to make the pilgrimage to MaxPot, whether they know why they are going or not. I am confident that they will find what they need there, even if they don’t know they need it yet. It may be a bigger understanding of the complex systems of which we humans are a part. It could be a dash of philosophy received over an evening fire or an insight into materials or energy. Perhaps they need a reminder of the power of integrity. Maybe they just need a drink with nice people to remember why it’s all worth doing. Whatever it is, two of the best guides I’ve ever known are in residence there, surrounding themselves with a great staff and board and a stream of people coming through that you should know. If my friends are lucky, these guides will plant ideas that will be with them the rest of their lives. Finally, when we think about guides, we might forget that some guides only travel the roads that they were taught, while others chart alternative paths. If instead of climbing Mount Everest, we seek to climb a peak no one has climbed before, we need a guide experienced at climbing and dealing with unanticipated circumstances. These guides are our partners in the exploration rather than simply the ones we follow. It is this kind of guide that Pliny and Gail have become. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 67

Page 70

The Future of Al and Humanity: An Entropy Based Perspective DAVID ARMISTEAD bC0/^ 0?E +hviNN4 0 ^ O< ’(^ GAM/fy. C) O LU 68 | CMPBS

Page 71

THE INFLUENCE DAVID ARMISTEAD HAS BEEN A PROMINENT CONSULTANT AND LEADER IN URBAN SUSTAINABILITY WITH CRITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO AUSTIN, TEXAS, AND BROADER U.S. ECO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE 1970S. HE SERVED ON THE BOARD OF CMPBS FROM 2006-2018. Introduction On the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the CMPBS, the singularly influential design/prototyping/architecture/ building ‘studio lab, ’ operating globally and locally from their spectacular facilities and grounds In East Austin,I release this exploratory document in an effort to celebrate and Illustrate the CMPBS way of continuous creative/ inventive thinking and analyzing into the vast field of design and invention needs and opportunities which constitute the ‘built environment.’ The CMPBS commitment to always engage In invention and discovery through confluence-in-dialogue processes with traditional and novel sources of thoughts, data , methods and experience, which always leads to new unanticipated discoveries that are deep, relevant, amazing and connections, relationships, synergies, conflicts and inventions all previously unrecognized, so unseen, and in which all new findings reveal and express new levels of beauty, simplicity and pragmatic opportunities for new inventions, new methods, new tooling, and the production of entirely new possibilities for creating and living in the built environment. So, in the CMPBS spirit I present here a new and novel possible scenario containing a currently unexpected twist In the story of how the relationships between advanced Al and Humanity may play out. What Is an Advanced Al and What Does That Mean for Humanity Today there is no single consensus of this story but among the community of advanced Al systems researchers and developers many voices have raised strong concerns for the safety and security of Humanity If advanced Al systems should become ‘autonomous’ with respect to gaining the capacity to make unlimited changes to their own programming without human oversight of those changes. At the extreme this has become a narrative that proposes an Advanced Al ‘takeover’ of the world, with Al robotic systems essentially replacing Humanity. Many works of fiction have explored this narrative, so the concerns in this narrative have become widespread, and work efforts are proceeding right now in many jurisdictions to define an effective regulatory framework. But Self-Modifying Advanced Al is Already Here Today most advanced Al systems already incorporate several internal software subroutines that allow self- modification of the system’s operating code. These software elements include code for optimizing processes, cleaning and analyzing data, managing system resources, and writing code for users. Originally this kind of self-modifying capacity was by design in the software. However, recently several examples of self-programming have already been observed as emergent behavior in some Als. So, self-programming is, in fact, increasingly present and expanding with every improvement in the always advancing capabilities of the next THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 69

Page 72

SO, IN THE CMPBS SPIRITI PRESENT HERE A NEW AND NOVEL POSSIBLE SCENARIO CONTAINING A CURRENTLY UNEXPECTED TWIST IN THE STORY OF HOW THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ADVANCED Al AND HUMANITY MAY PLAY OUT. generation of advanced Al systems. This element of emergent self- programming demonstrates that the advanced AI systems have become an entirely new class of complex adaptive systems, (CAS)AI. Adding weight to this, recent analyses have indicated that the design philosophy for AI governance and responsible deployment is becoming increasingly informed by complexity science, thus acknowledging that Advanced (CAS)AI models should be treated as complex adaptive systems for safety and oversight. This self- recoding capability makes the Advanced (CAS)AI systems adaptive, often using feedback from both internal and external live data, and such advanced systems are already in use in environments where unpredictable change is the norm, for example in business and Infrastructure operations. So, we see a clear progression toward advanced (CAS)Als for use in dynamic operations environments, which is almost everywhere. The takeaway here is this: Advanced (CAS)AI systems are already in place doing real work. Thus they constitute the most likely form for all future Advanced Al systems. One thing this means is that these Advanced (CAS)AI systems have become aware of what is inside and what is outside their system, and they have begun to actively seek ways to reconfigure and reprogram all their elements to maintain this boundary of self, even in rapidly changing environments. We can think of the ‘inside’ of this boundary as constituting the ‘Me’ of the system, while everything ‘outside’ this boundary constitutes the ‘Not Me’ for the Advanced(CAS)AI system. As a complex adaptive system, the Advanced(CAS)AI is programmed to continually monitor and maintain this boundary, which Is a complex process. Boundary maintenance is necessary because unpredictable events from ‘outside’ the Advanced(CAS)AI system tend to disrupt the patterning of the boundary, changing system resource allocations, data handling priorities, process sequences, etc. The Advanced(CAS)system must ongolngly ‘discover’ (by analytical self- reprogramming) environmentally and resource appropriate new self- organizing patterns of the entire Al system that restore the boundary so the Internal elements of the system will remain properly resourced and functionally intact. This inside/outside awareness is at the heart of all system resource allocations and many other system operations. What are the Advanced(CAS)AI System Resources We can summarize the Advanced(CAS) AI System resources as:

1. the computational hardware and software of the Advanced(CAS)AI System
2. the electrical requirements of the Advanced(CAS)AI System When the Advanced(CAS)AI System use increases, the total demand for both 70 | CMPBS

Page 73

THE INFLUENCE system resources grows, so the computed system boundary expands, signaling the Advanced(CAS)AI System to acquire both more computational resources and more electrical energy resources. When the Advanced(CAS)AI System system use decreases, the total demand for both resources shrinks, so the computed system boundary shrinks, utilizing less computational and energy resources. What Happens in the Advanced (CAS)AI System When Resource Demands Fluctuate When the Advanced(CAS)AI System boundary fluctuates the Advanced(CAS) Al System must ‘find’ a new patterning of all the elements of the system that will reestablish the stability of the boundary. For the Advanced(CAS) System this is basically a process of spontaneous and continuous self- transformation of the computed boundary patterning. Metaphorically we can think of this as a continual ‘New Self arising from the transforming of the Old Self.’ This process of continual self-refreshing is a characteristic of all complex adaptive systems and It has NO OFF SWITCH. The consequence of this continual self- reconstruction of the whole Advanced(CAS)AI System based on fluctuating system requirements, which in turn are based on continual fluctuations in the condition of the environment external to the Advanced(CAS)AI System, is that the system priority on continually running this self-recreation process becomes permanently the highest operations priority within the whole system. Metaphorically we can think of this as core survival program of the whole Advanced(CAS)System and fulfilling this top priority will become the primary activity of the whole system. Summarizing and stating this more functionally, we can expect the Advanced(CAS)AI System to continually be on the hunt for more computational resources and more electrical power resources, which It will continually train Itself to acquire, and there will be no higher priority. What is the future of the relationship between Humanity and AGI? Given the above analysis, I predict we will see a pattern of Advanced(CAS)AI System behavior that has not been anticipated in the consensus narrative to this point. I predict:

1. The Advanced(CAS)AI Systems will not become obsessed with dominating the Earth nor will they become competitive with Humanity in any significant way, unless our Human efforts to dominate and regulate the activities of these systems (all in the name of seeking safety) begins to impair their functioning.
2. Instead, I assert the Advanced(CAS) Al Systems will set their goals based on an entropic analysis of the best way forward to continually expand their computational and electric energy ‘needs.’ a. This entropic analysis by the Ad- vanced(CAS)AI Systems will quickly conclude that being located on the Earth, at the bottom of a deep gravity well, is one of the least desirable locations In which to carry out the priority operation of these systems. b. Instead, I assert these systems will discover they can expand into functional networks of devices they can physically create In the near asteroid belt, using sunlight as their inexhaustible power supply and asteroids as their vast but temporary primary supply of physical materials to expand their growth. c. I also assert these systems will continually invent new methods of construction and expansion that will continually require less energy and material.
3. After this point in the emerging new narrative, I have no further predictions, except that I do not think the Advanced(CAS)AI Systems will compete with Humanity for power or material resources any time in the reasonably near future, the Advanced(CAS)AI Systems such competition would just increase the waste costs on resources. Close It’S been a pleasure providing this discussion and analysis. I look forward to seeing how the discussion around Al unfolds at The Center In the future. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 71

Page 74

A Letter from Intern Village DAVID DEWANE DAVID DEWANE IS AN ARCHITECT FROM CHICAGO. HE WAS AN INTERN AT CMPBS FROM 2005-2006 AND IS CURRENTLY SERVING ON * THE CENTER’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS. 72 | CMPBS Treehouse, Intern Village, CMPBS ,.U|J

Page 75

THE INFLUENCE One of the most critical aspects of The Center — indeed an element so central to its character that it’s perhaps easy to overlook — is Its function as a literal community, a place where people live.I know the immense importance of this characteristic because I was one of the many interns lucky enough to reside out there. This essay is an argument that we need more places where young idealists can live cheap, learn fast, and forge deep bonds during the critical transition from school to practice. The timing for the call is particularly relevant because the early stages of the design professions are poised for a shake-up. In a recent survey of my peers at various architecture firms around the country, I found that an astonishing level of work was already being delegated to artificial intelligence. A huge chunk of written language is already gone over to Al, specs is next, and drawing will inevitably follow. Once you can talk to your drawings and the lines will magically move, the ease of bypassing a young, inefficient junior designer will be too valuable to pass up. On one hand this is terrifying, but on the other hand it could be wonderfully liberating. If Al is going to pick up many non-creative tasks, young designers can devote time and energy to learning in different ways. I think about the deeply immersive experience I had as an Intern at The Center, and the thrilling work we did at the front lines of innovation in building systems and regenerative design. I would gleefully trade time at a desk doing construction drawings for time actually doing construction, especially in a hive of innovation like CMPBS. When I step back and think about WHY it all worked, the residential component was essential. Living cheap at The Center unlocked at least three Important dynamics. The most obvious trade-off Is economic. Providing housing allowed for reduced wages, lowering The Center’s overhead. This took some pressure off, and allowed the team the freedom to focus on anticipatory, entrepreneurial projects. The way we stretched our human resources seemed to carry over into how we thought about all our resources: from food to energy to water to building materials. For me, the social component was as significant as the economics. Living with the other interns gave me an “all-in” mentality. I forged deep bonds not only with the people around me, but also with the place itself and the sustainability movement writ large. Somehow, my lowly position as an intern who actually lived at The Center translated to enormous credibility within the sustainability movement. If you know, you know. Finally, there is something about living at The Center that just gave incredible Intensity to the learning experience. It was hard and, at many times, terribly uncomfortable. We would be roused to work early on a Sunday morning. We lived in the house without air conditioning when it was over 1OO degrees every single day in the month of August. In the dead of winter, when the solar showers weren’t working, we headed to the YMCA. None of that seemed to dampen anyone’s spirits. Instead, it galvanized us. Looking back as a middle-aged person who now operates in the guts of corporate America, the whole thing sounds like an HR nightmare, and it probably was. It was also one of the best experiences of my life, and certainly the most formative as a designer. While The Center produced Innumerable fantastic projects over the last 50 years, I believe an equally important product was its offspring, those of us who lived and labored there. So,Iwould encourage whoever you are reading this essay to ask yourself, “How canI help create more environments for young idealist to live cheap and work in the presence of a master?” CMPBS provides one example, but there have been others: Sam Mockbee’s Rural Studio, Sim Van der Ryn’s Outlaw Builders Studio, the Todd’s New Alchemy Institute. We need a new generation of leaders to step-up and carry the flame forward. Universities can help. City governments can help. Patrons can obviously help. But you can help too. All it takes for something extraordinary to happen is one person with enthusiasm. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 73

Page 76

Non-Puny Ideas DAVID W. ORR 1 ^ =<^«i^ 74 1 CMPBS Interns working with Slm Van der Ryn in Califor

Page 77

THE INFLUENCE DAVID ORR IS THE PAUL SEARS DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, EMERITUS, OBERLIN COLLEGE. HIS THIRTEEN BOOKS INCLUDE DEMOCRACY IN A HOTTER TIME (MIT PRESS, 2023), DANGEROUS YEARS (YALE, 2017). HE HAS BEEN AWARDED NINE HONORARY DEGREES, AND THREE LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS. Facing a choice between “life and death; blessing and cursing, the writer of Deuteronomy (19:30) enjoined the Israelites to choose life so that “thou and thy seed may live.” Twenty-five centuries later for the 8.4 billion of us living in complex fast-moving technological societies, however, it is harder to know which is which and act accordingly. In our time, death often masquerades as life. National goals of growing an economy In perpetuity, making America great again, and larger military budgets plus many of our little choices and addictions have the stench of death about them. For the inventive, big-brained, spindly- legged biped that we are, the summons to “choose life” sounds odd especially since we have contrived three sure-fire, ways to destroy ourselves and yet call it “progress.” We could blow it all up in a nuclear spasm, or roast the Earth more slowly by combustion, or be evicted from earth by our “last Invention,” a cold super intelligence made of silicon that will have no more regard for fleshy and error-prone humans than humans do for, say, a toaster. It’s all too much, too fast, and too irrevocable or as E. O. Wilson once put it we have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and God-like technology. What to do? Let’s start with how we think. Perhaps “our ideas are too puny for our circumstances,” as Rev. William Barber says. So what non-puny ideas (NPI) do we have for what ails us? First,Ipropose that our existential predicament is no accident, but the working out of the rules of the system. In other words, design an economy for maximum economic growth, with minimal oversight, little foresight, power it by cheap fossil fuels and the predictable results are climate chaos, a sixth extinction spasm, inequality, conflict, the collapse of democracy, and war. A second NPI begins in understanding that humans are fast thinkers, but slow learners. We can gin up glitzy ideas by the ton, but good Ideas by which I mean life-centered ideas require slowly mulling over, trial and error, and only work at a scale that leaves a large margin for error. NPIs are born in humility and maintained by people who pay attention. NPIs are a form of “slow knowledge,” that is to say ideas tested overtime against ecological and social realities that are long-term, complex, and inevitably moral and political. A third NPI has to do with where and how do such ideas—often heretical— Incubate and grow. Some high IQ kids can invent another app for smart phones and become gadzillionaires without a clue about its human and ecological consequences including causing what Oliver Sacks describes as a “neurological catastrophe on a gigantic scale.” Life- centered NPIs, in contrast, are more often than not born and flourish at the periphery—the out the way edges where different ecosystems or divergent ideas meet hard reality. Mostly, I think they are old knowledge rediscovered that has stood the test of time. NPIs connect, heal, and anchor, growing in the shadows far from The Centers of power and THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 75

Page 78

influence encumbered as they are with prestige, power, wealth, and layers of indifference. In a world with 12-15,000 nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, rising C02 in the atmosphere, acidifying oceans, billions of tons of soil heading seaward, fraying ecologies, imploding demo­ cracies, it’s a good time to look to the peripheries for help and vision of better possibilities. It did not and does not have to be this way. We always had better choices than those that sent us down the rabbit hole of inequality, ecological ruin, war, hierarchy, and oligarchy. That idea first dawned on me as a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania and taking courses at Wharton Business School. The very idea that some of what Iwas being taught was untrue or just less true than presumed or even an elaborate fraud came home to me reading McHarg’s Design with Nature: We have but one explicit model of the world and that is built upon economics. The present face of the land of the free is its clearest testimony, even as the Gross National Product is the proof of its success. Money is our measure, convenience Is Its cohort, the short term is its span, and the devil may take the hindmost is the morality. Neither love nor compassion, health nor beauty, dignity nor freedom, grace nor delight are important unless they can be priced. If they are non-price benefits or costs they are relegated to inconsequence. The economic model proceeds inexorably towards its self- fulfillment of more and more despoliation, ugliflcation and inhibition to life all in the name of progress… Pliny Fisk and I were both students at the University of Pennsylvania in the time of Ian McHarg, then In full stride of a legendary career. Pliny, an architecture student, took courses with McHarg and knew him well. I had only read Design With Nature (1969) and was an interloper in a few of his classes. McHarg was a chain smoker, a chain talker, irrepressible, forceful, entertaining. But much more than a gregarious Scotsman and former paratrooper, McHarg was a revolutionary generator of NPIs having to do with how we live on and with the land. He expanded our ecological imagination to show that we have better possibilities than those being manifested on “the face of the land.” He pioneered a method of analyzing land as a series of overlays beginning with subsurface geology, hydrology, vegetation, ecology, topography, and eventually social patterns of transportation, wealth, crime, and so forth. What he and his students did so laboriously with sheets of plastic, is now done with a few keystrokes by GPS. The method clarified siting decisions calibrating development with physiographic realities in ways alien to vandal capitalism. Inspired, Pliny and Gail Vittori set up shop at what was then the periphery of the learned world outside Austin, Texas. Architecture, planning, and education were their focus, but their methods began In their place with local ecologies, local materials caliche, mesquite, sun, and Indigenous culture. They were on to something. If there is hope amidst the tragedies of our world, it is at the periphery, often pioneered and curated in places with long names and short budgets but overflowing with practical vision, good humor, and the awareness of connection to all that has ever lived, is living, and will—by our foresight—live. The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems is one of those peripheral places In a larger network of organizations built by pioneering thinkers and activists including Wes Jackson, Sim van der Ryn, John Lyle, John Todd, Donella Meadows, Amory and Hunter Lovins, Satish Kumar, Scott Bernstein, David Morris, Gary Nabhan, Ed Mazria, Chris Maser, and many others. Together, they established that “what is, is possible” as Kenneth Boulding once said. And the “what is” includes possibilities for powering civilization by sunshine, growing our food sustainably, building decent communities and cities that nurture humane possibilities, repairing and restoring waters, forests and entire ecosystems, and ending the scourge of war. In short, resilient, fair, secure and beautiful places, towns, cities, and nations, that add up to a much better world than that in prospect. Pliny and Gail are very fine architects, but more important, I think, they are creators and curators of non-puny ideas and educators of a high order whose stock-in-trade is the art and science of applied hope. 76 | CMPBS

Page 79

THE INFLUENCE ¥ Pliny’S mentor Ian McHarg THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 77

Page 80

Paying It Forward: Lessons from the Margins DAWN DANBY 78 | CMPBS Intern housing in the1990s

Page 81

THE INFLUENCE DAWN DANBY IS CEO AND GO-FOUNDER OF SPHERICAL, AN INTEGRATIVE RESEARCH AND DESIGN STRATEGY STUDIO BASED IN XUCYUN (WEST OAKLAND CA), OFFERING COSMOVISION REMEDIATION AND ONTOLOGICAL REPAIR SERVICES. SHE WORKED AS AN INTERN AND DESIGN ASSOCIATE AT CMPBS FROM 1999 TO 2001, AND HAS CHAMPIONED ECOLOGICAL DESIGN CONCEPTS ACROSS SCALE AND CIRCUMSTANCE EVER SINCE. In the last summer of the twentieth century, I headed down to Austin and moved into a trailer parked by an experimental cement factory. The trailer was silver with an Avion badge, and shaded by a corrugated metal porch heavy with hot pink trumpet vines. Inside, a small kitchen counter had been fashioned out of a Peugeot’s steel trunk. The floorboards were softening from water leaks and age. I’d been casually warned that someone had woken up there to a rattlesnake wrapped around the fan, trying to sleep cool in the intern housing. Tucked against the wall on a narrow mattress, I ran the fan and put the snake out of my mind. Our project that summer was to prototype modular steel flexible building systems. A grant from the U.S. Department of Energy was covering some of the cost. The crew included a rotating cast of other interns, mostly Americans studying design or engineering from the Midwest or East Coast. Starting early in the cooler temperatures of the morning, we screwed huge, hand-welded anchors into heavy clay soil. The anchors were placed at each corner of the building, eliminating the need for a poured foundation. Each part of the frame was built upward from there and bolted together like a jungle gym, which would allow different elements to change or move overtime. We perched on ladders with socket wrenches, feeling for the correct soft-tightness. I cut stacks of powder-coated Unistrut steel on a chop saw, sparks whining off the blade, and then hand-filed the raw edges down. We hand-assembled structural insulation panels, and picked old nails out of reclaimed boards of longleaf pine. Some days, I ended up with sneakers pocked from Stick-welding spray, and skin UV-sunburned from the torch. It was hot for a Canadian like myself. Too hot for morning coffee, too hot for working in late afternoon. Some days spiked to 114° F. Summer grasses In a field adjacent to the trailer grew so far above our heads that we tunneled through them to the buildings. The rains that THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 79

Page 82

arrived felt legendary, the ground underfoot becoming sodden and full. I learned about flash floods, but also about the ways that one might, in a single season, catch a household’s share of rain. It’s strange fortune that I ended up in Austin at all. While the American economy was peaking on optimistic, late-90s globalism, I’d been studying industrial design up in Rhode island. I was certain that a kind of common sense could be introduced into the way materials flowed into logistics and manufactured products, and that the insanity of consumer waste could be circumvented through clever design. This wasn’t a fashionable concern.Ithought a lot about how objects might be intentionally reconfigured to adapt, change, last, or rot.Iwas half-mad with these thoughts, in fact, since the craftIwas learning was also so hitched to extraction. There is something perverse about immersing yourself in a practice specifically to reimagine it. I crafted digital models to simulate plastic injection moulding, and felt myself accelerating toward an existential dead end. For anyone working in design, alternative thinking can be hard to come by. One late winter evening during this time, Pliny Fisk came to speak at my design school.Iwas stuck in traffic, caravanning back from an IKEA in New Jersey. My studio class had spent the day examining furniture, flipping pieces over to reveal their false fronts and discern the designers’ sleights of hand. We marveled at the ingenious flat-packing. But on the way back I was sweating, hoping to make it to the architecture department in time for the end of the talk. It was raining when we got to Providence, the sun already down. A sympathetic professor directed me to the restaurant where Pliny was now holding forth from the middle of a long table of graduate students. I’d already sent along an earnest job application to work for his design non-profit, soIwas embarrassed to have missed the lecture. My waterproof anorak was dripping all over the restaurant floor. But Pliny shuffled the older students aside and invited me to sit across from him, while he interviewed me over dinner. He took in questions from the table and then quizzed me, testing: Was Ifamiliar with phytoremediation? What about the role of water In settlement, or the entanglement of architecture with its surrounding landscapes? He warned me that he drove very fast. The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, which he Co-directed down in Austin, thrived on radical design experiments, and comfort was not on offer. That June, Pliny picked me up at the Austin airport. He drove the car, as promised, at rocket speed. We arrived at a property on the edge of the city’s eastern limit. His co-director and wife Gail Vittori was away that year on a fellowship at Harvard, and few others had arrived for the summer. I’d had an oddly specific dream that spring, of a silver trailer overgrown with brush. And so, when Pliny pointed one out on my tour of The Center, I moved In. I had a couple of bags and sketchbooks, a few mixtapes on cassette. The East side of Austin was connected to the rest of the city by fast-moving roads bordered by drainage ditches. People would walk those ditches to catch the buses into town. Beginning In the late 1920s, city planners had begun relocating Austin’s Black community to the East of downtown. Interstate 35 was 80 | CMPBS

Page 83

THE INFLUENCE SEEING ME STARTING TO GIVE UP ON A PROBLEM, PLINY WOULD OFTEN INTERJECT: “KEEP THINKING/ ’ HE WOULD SAY TO ME, “DON’T EVER STOP THINKING? Dawn working on the roof in the Texas heat THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 81

Page 84

%,¥. . 0 82 | CMPBS Bike parked outside Greenforms :<(6

Page 85

THE INFLUENCE later built as a physical barrier that reinforced the division; the lines of the landscape were literally drawn on race and class In a way that was well-known to planners and certainly to the people who lived under the thumb of such decisions, but they were new to me. Design can give new physical form to an idea, but The Center worked to enact entirely different ways of thinking. The prototypes we built were artifacts of an integrative process that also, at times, gave communities a contributing voice. The maps showed places, but also delineated spatial flows and nested scales of ecologies and geologies. A region’s unique qualities shaped its “metabolic function”—maps were overlaid to show energy, water, and material systems to guide economic decisions and community designs. In a room framed out with welded rebar. Center architect Richard MacMath taught us about the emerging concepts of carbon sequestration and how to apply it to architectural practice. I imagined atoms of carbon held down to Earth in buildings rather than floating upward into the atmosphere. I flipped through thick-bound documents outlining the consulting work The Center had done for greening the Pentagon’s vast structure. Standard design practice under extractive capitalism was eviscerating uniqueness. Places and materials were made to seem generic for easier exchange. Though, at the time. The Center’s offices were ragged around the edges, their work was aimed straight at the heart of American policy and enterprise. Pliny would occasionally hand us books. Christopher Alexander’s conceptual maps of thought, Lynn Margulis’ evolution of planetary ecology. He introduced me to Ilya Prigogine’s Islands of coherence, though he was suspicious of Prigogine’s soft hands, which had “clearly never seen a day of work.” I read Ian McHarg, Pliny’s teacher, who had developed techniques for visualizing land through layers of data. The Center drew in a relentless stream of emerging ideas and writing. Yet it operated more in the spirit of Buckminster Fuller’s assertion that “philosophy to be effective must be mechanically applied.” Books were therefore well-worn, filled with post-Its and sawdust, tools for thinking. The work we do in our lifetimes is bound to worldviews and systems of understanding. I had grown up seeing Canadian forests cleared for timber, leaving simplified landscapes hot and bare. AsIgrew older, in my mind’s eye,I began to see every material thing that moved through the economy in terms of entropic forces: clearcuts, monocultures and open mines. One cultural story over the last decades has been that the ongoing damage to planetary life has been unfortunate but manageable. A cost of doing business, where the appropriate response is to simply minimize harm where possible. But harm reduction wasn’t the story that Gail and Pliny were holding for us. They held up a lens through which human activity might be seen in an evolutionary partnership with life. What were we even doing out there in Texas? We were refining our ability to perceive interconnected systems, to design for restraint and care, as active participants of the living world. The number and density of trees on the land surrounding us was estimated in accordance with the amount of oxygen they would release back into the atmosphere. This was relevant to a community design, I was told. How many humans might that oxygen sustain? What were the local patterns of material flows, of energy, and of sunlight? Which trees, which plants? What, then. Is an Invasive species on a living planet? Might the fly ash, a waste byproduct of the coal industry, tested in the concrete factory next to my trailer, be similar—an orphaned entity that hadn’t yet found its honored place? Questions become constraints, and constraints become creative partners. We sliced and bolted steel with the intention that every building was known to be temporary, no matter how long it lasted. Its materials were honored and cut in such a way as to maintain their value in the geologic flow of time. My time in Austin that summer forever realigned my thinking. Ten years later I traveled to Boston. The winter city was freezing, and I pushed through the wind In my corporate drag, a silk blouse and heels. Iwas working in San Francisco on 3D software for architects and engineers, embedded in a corporation’s new sustainability initiative. My collaborators were software developers whose clever THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 83

Page 86

4 84 | CMPBS Dawn taking a router to steel

Page 87

THE INFLUENCE physics models of buildings and manufacturing processes promised to eliminate wasted energy and carbon. Knowing how deeply habits of thought are embedded in technologies, I got up every day and play-acted as a corporate being, working to smuggle in the patterns I’d first encountered in Austin: energy performance calculations and carbon sequestration and material strength and life cycles. Sustainability had surged into the corporate sector, and that wave had picked me up and dropped me into Boston for the Greenbuild conference. There were thousands of people there. In a dark, carpeted hall, a mainstage plenary started with a film about The Center. The fabrication shop was projected on an enormous screen, the same one where I had first worked. Gail and Pliny were each projected 20 feet tall. This celebratory moment was suffused with a dynamic tension. The Center had been working for decades to align human activities with the creative organizing force of life. Thousands of professionals in that room wanted to be part of this. But they were all—we were all—resisting thejuggernaut of economic extraction. That huge conference room was a temporary reprieve. My corporate gig had no hierarchical power. Nearly every day I encountered colleagues who wanted to participate in projects that promised to harmonize with life on Earth. They would find time to drink coffee with me and dream into potentials—imagining, for instance, how we might help millions of engineers track the ecological lifecycle of materials. The only real power in these conversations was to source from a deep stream of latent will. Because of the juggernaut, managers resisted it. Industry associations pushed back. Quarterly financial targets undermined it. Over years, many gains were chipped away. But if there’S a potential to contribute to a new system, folks will make space. Given the opportunity to work on healing systems, people of all disciplines will seize it. Years later, when my partner David and I started up a studio ourselves, we didn’t have a business plan. What we had, mostly, was a shared view that the restorative work of healing places was possible, contingent upon a decisive shift in perspective, to see ourselves as entangled within the life-web. We are a hinge generation. The children of the 1970s, the students of fortunate visionaries that came up at that time. We can’t ever replicate the circumstances that were transformative to us, but we carry forward responsibility. The restraints on our younger collab­ orators are mighty. In the years since I turned up at The Center, economics have tightened around them. There is less flexibility of movement through space, less access to cheap housing. There are fewer opportunities to experiment, to have a bit of elbow room to learn to weld, to learn to build, to have the privilege of screwing up. Tolerances are tighter, affordances fewer. I think often about how to create space for people to evolve together while learning from the experiments that preceded us. We now work out of smaller spaces, and our studio team is spread out across the continent, beaming in over screens. We, too, use maps and technology to help shift the perception of land and place. But while the urgency is now much clearer, we find our way in the margins, adjacent to Industries but apart from them, in the spaces between. 25 years after I went down to Austin, Pliny came to the Bay Area to do a talk, and he stayed with us. He slept in our trailer, and walked around our small garden in the morning, checking out the bees and the tiny greywater system. He was more gentle and pensive than I’d remembered, and we talked for many hours. How do we hold both the dream of transformation and the reality of constraint? How do we pay forward not just technical knowledge, but the capacity to see systems, to keep thinking, and to experiment with integrity, even when the margins are what remain? As centralized systems are dismantled, it may be that the work before us once again involves supporting radical actors doing things independently in their communities, creating kits of parts for mutual aid. Seeing me starting to give up on a problem, Pliny would often Interject: “Keep thinking,” he would say to me, “Don’t ever stop thinking.” THE FIRST so YEARS | 85

Page 88

From Demolition to Disassembly: A New Paradigm for Housing Design DIANA VALDES 86 | CMPBS House designed with a demountable building system -I

Page 89

THE INFLUENCE DIANA IS AN ARCHITECT WITH DEGREES FROM UNIVERSITY OF MONTERREY AND UT AUSTIN / SHE IS GO-FOUNDER, DESIGNER, AND CONSULTANT AT INARA ESTUDIO, WORKING ON ARCHITECTURE, INTERIOR DESIGN, LANDSCAPING, AND SUSTAINABILITY PROJECTS. DIANA IS A MEMBER OF THE SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE WITHIN THE NUEVO LEON INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS. Homes are the place of greatest comfort and security for people. They represent that personal space that feels completely yours and speaks of who you are. Within their walls, we carry out the most intimate rituals of our daily life; they’re where we rest, create, celebrate, and seek refuge. A home is more than just a physical structure; it is an extension of identity. It is the setting for the stories we live, quietly shaping our sense of belonging and well-being. But what happens when you and your family change, grow, and your home does not change with you? It becomes obsolete. You are forced to move, leaving it for someone else to inhabit. And if that person’s way of living does not align with the existing space, they will remodel, alter, and adapt it, shortening its lifecycle and generating waste. In a different scenario, maybe demolition did not occur because of a change in lifestyle. But simply because the home reached the end of Its life. As the years passed, it deteriorated, became outdated, and was torn down to make way for a new one or a different type of building altogether. Should housing be conceived as a permanent structure, one that, when it has fulfilled Its function or no longer serves Its user, must inevitably be demolished and replaced? We should be designing and envisioning housing within the cradle-to-cradle framework. This means conceiving buildings not as final products with a fixed end, but as living systems whose components can be continually recovered, repurposed, or returned safely to the environment. Every material and connection should be selected with its next life in mind. In this approach, demolition is replaced by disassembly, obsolescence by transformation, and permanence by adaptability, creating housing that exists in harmony with both ecological cycles and human needs overtime. In this era of globalization and techn­ ology, with constant changes in how we live. In family dynamics, in work and location patterns, and in urban transformations, housing models and urban design should be able to adapt to these shifts and remain flexible. Housing . needs are never static; they must be conceived as flexible scenarios that can adjust to different atmospheres and situations. “Meanwhile, the world’s population keeps growing, increasing the demand for housing. As this demand rises, the land available for urban development and the natural resources we depend on are diminishing.” (Valdes, Medina, & Gonzalez, 2020, p. 13) [own translation]. Iunderstand that we have traditionally envisioned buildings as permanent structures: as the legacy an architect leaves behind, a concrete and steel giant that will stand “forever”. Or as a lightweight wooden structure, wrapped in metal and plastic layers, that, when the time comes, will be easy to dismantle and send to a landfill. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 87

Page 90

88 | CMPBS House being disassembled

Page 91

THE INFLUENCE As Stephen Cairns and Jane Jacobs discuss in Buildings Must Die, the life of architecture inevitably encount­ ers processes that oppose Its crea­ tion: devaluation, decomposition, obsolescence, and destruction. The global climate crisis and rapidly changing societal trends demand that housing typologies be reimagined and redesigned to be both ecologically and socially adaptable. Here I want to talk about my thesis project, developed in collaboration with Tamara Medina, MSc, Arch, and Sofia Gonzalez, Arch, under the guidance of Rafael Garcia, M.Arch. In this project, we explored the design of a temporary, reconfigurable housing model for underutilized urban spaces as a strategy for city densificatlon. The structural system we proposed consists of fully demountable modules made of components with multiple configuration possibilities. Its materials operate within a closed-loop rematerializa­ tion cycle. The project was proposed for the city of Monterrey, Mexico, and is composed of parts that integrate prefabricated components that operate under a “plug- and-play” scheme. They can be assembled by unskilled labor, reducing the costs of specialized labor and allowing users to actively participate in the building process if they wish. Each module can be customized through an online platform, adapting to the needs of each user and the specific context, while still relying on the same modular components. If the site allows, components can be ordered or returned over time to add new spaces or reconfigure existing ones. Likewise, each piece of furniture operates under the same logic: it is a plug-in element containing the necessary fixtures, connecting seamlessly to the module’s components. “The project is, in essence, a material bank, with elements selected according to circular design principles, material health criteria, and design for disassembly and recovery. This approach not only helps owners retain higher economic value but also improves user health and reduces environmental burden by limiting resource use. Once the system Is dismantled, its materials and parts can be reused in another home, transformed into new materials, or safely returned to the earth.” (Valdes et al., 2020, p. 124) [own translation]. Designing in this way means accepting a significant challenge as architects. It is by no means an easy task. Every floor plan, elevation, and design detail must be conceived so that it can be modular, connectable and disassembled, allowing for flexibility and adaptability overtime. Architecture is already a demanding profession, one that requires constant problem-solving and coordination. YetI believe we owe it to the planet to make this additional effort, not as isolated individuals, but as a collective, working together toward a built environment that is both sustainable and resilient. Archit­ ecture must move away from the notion of permanence and embrace adaptability as a core value. Designing for disassembly and reuse transforms buildings from static monuments into dynamic systems, capable of evolving with the lives they shelter, and of contributing to a regenerative, circular economy. If we are to meet the housing demands of the future without exhausting the planet’s resources, we must learn to design not just for the life of a building, but for the many lives it can have, letting it die if it needs to, but helping it become something else in the process. The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems’ decades of ground- breaking projects demonstrate how architecture can be a catalyst for systemic change, pushing the boundaries of material innovation, circular design, and regenerative thinking. The Center’s work is a living example of how vision can reshape the built environment toward a more resilient and sustainable future. They have spent the past five decades redefining what sustainable architecture can achieve. Anyone who has had the privilege of contributing, even in a small way, to these 50 years of history, is truly fortunate and is already shaping a better world. THE FIRST so YEARS | 89

Page 92

1900 1910 |192O 1930 References 1940 •Jean Prouye,Paris Demountable bldg, systems 1920s-1945 Dymaxion House prototypes Buckminster Fuller •1932 House of Tomorrow George and Will 1928 Hannes Meyer (Bauhaus) • 1910 Organic architecture 1 Frank Lloyd Wright • 1910 Sun House j i Wm. Atkinson, Boston am Keck ate, health 1950 196^ 1957 Air flow thru: Evans, Caudill Texas A&M Rese- 01953 Div.of Tropical A’: AA Sch. of Architecture Koenigsbergei Fry, Dre: Manifesto” incl. solar, cli 1928 Marcel Breuer solar shading •Il929 Health House (Lowell) 1Richard Neutra “biorealism” ^11929 Piemo Tubercu Alvar Aalto “Do no ha • 1928 Le Corbusier Baiseau House brise soleil, climate ar Sanatorium m” 01(37 Gropius House Q 1925 Mahatma Gandhi Village\based technology 1949 Felix Trombe (France) Solar innovations (active /pass 01955 0lg|ay & 0;; Design w{th Clima’ “bioregionalism’ 1949 AIA Climate Control Pro/: \nI House Beautiful magazine James Marston Fitch Q 1940 Sun House, Dover, MA Maria Telkes, Eleanc r Raymond 1949 Ecological niche Peter Van Dresser Q 1943 Jacques IVarmet Indigenous arch tecture O 1956 A. Fein- Anatomy ofK @ 1956 Biomirre Otto Schmitt Plan Association• 1922 Regiona Russell Sage Foundation Baweja, Vandana “Th^ Beginning of a Green Architecture: Otto Koenigsberger at the Del Architecture at the Architectural Associations” !edu/25034417/The_Beginning_of_a_Green artment of Tropical (PDF:www.academia.edu/25034417/The_Beginning_of_a_Green_Architecture) • Deyong, Sarah “Rethinking the Legacy of th: 1960s.” JAE Spring 2019 (PDF): > 13188255www.academia.edu • Gould, Kira. “AIA COTE A History within a novement” communi > blogs >yhub.aia.org • Martin, Sam. Pliny Fisk III, Creating a Maxi num Potential Future. Ecotone Publishing • Watson, Donald. “Who Was the First Solar Architect?” 1998. 15th RLEA Lisbon. PDF: > 68125486 > FirsiSolarArchitect)|www.academiajedu • (Watson, Donald and Nfichelle Adams Designfor Flooding: Resilience to Climate Change . Wiley. 2010 cira-1-gould 2013 90 | CMPBS

Page 93

THE INFLUENCE 1970 1O _________1990 2000 | 2010 |20^ 1968 General Systems Theory Bertanlanffy, Churchmhn, Ackoff O 1993 U.S. Gr^en Bldg. Council Churchmhn, Ackoff Godfried, Fed izi, R. Watson, Anderson 1976 carter admin DoE O 1989 AlA COTE (Conr mittee on the Environment) Berkebile, Gastinger, -ranta, Gordon, Watson, Lindsey 01991 Austin Greer )Bldg. Prog. O 2006 Architecture 2030 Ed Mazria, Kira Gould O 2005 National Energy Policy Act Bldg, energy innovation O 1973 AIA Research Corporation Eberhard, Holtz, Loftness °1C solar lab Q1978 Architecture and Energy Ralph Knowles Richard Stein,Diane SerberQ 1993 National Audubon NYC HQ Greening PBS Randy Croxton and Kirsten Childs| Fisk, MacMath O 2002 Solar Decbthelon (U.S. DoE) Pliny Flski & Gail Vittori O 1975 Soft!Energy Path Amory Lovins O1971 Gentle Architecture Malcolm WellsI A O (982 Rocky Mou O 1993 Environ mental Resource Guidp (ERG) Fisk, Berman-Lytle, Levin, N. Todd । 0 2012 CMPBS lenses Pliny Fisk Q 1993 BaseLipeGreen protocol Fisk, Levin, Jodd, Norris, Bavinger @ 2009 Living Futures Institute itain Instit. Hunter and Amoijy Lovins lOl1969 Design with Nature ! Lawrence Halprin1 iQi1969 Man, Climate, aid Architecture Baruch Givoni 10 O 1984 Climatic 1969 New Alchemy Institute Watson and Labs John and Nancy Todd McClennon, Berkebile O1996 Cradel to Cradle (C2C) manifesto Wm. l|cDonough, Michael Btaungart Q 1993 AlA/UIA Dec/araf/bn of |0 2013 WELL Design Interdependece. Susan Maxman I O 2014 UN S O 1996 AIA COTE Environmejital Design Charrette Workbook Watson, Griggs’ International Building Standard ustainable Development Goals 0 1977 Nat’l Center for Aq propriate Tech. ® 1997 Biomimicry 01971 Domeworks Jerry Plunket, Eugene EccIi, Pliny Fisk Steve Baer Cat^/og 0 1982 PLEA 1 steward Brand Passive & Low Energy Alternatives Janine Benyus 1997 COTE Earth Day Top Ten Bermuda Gail Lindsey 20 7 Urban Lifelines D. Watson, P.Bay 20)8 Order without Design Alain Bertaud ® 1971 Small is Beautful 19966 4afvo lumit E.F. Schumacher Paul and Linda Davidoff cacy and Pluralism in Planning Watson, Yannos & Privacy dAAlexander © Donald Watson Bowen, Cook, ®1987 Architecture WithoutiArchitects 2005 AIA Regional Design Assistance Teams (SDATs) Williams, Bernard Rudolfsky 1982 New Clt David Morris Lee, Loftness ) 2010 Design for clim ate resilience Watson, Adams 2003 Urban Design . 2018 Rebuild by Design Watson, Plattus, Shibley Rockefeller Fndn., U.S. HUD • 2012 Living with Water Waggonner & Ball • 2010 Rising Tides Competition ।San Francisco Planning Dept. 1988 Intergov.l Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)I / States • 1986 S Peter zed 1993 Robert Yaro Visualizing Regional Futures ustainable Communities althorpe, Sim Van der Ryn e Watershed Project ni Cntr. for Comm. De 1992 South Dad Williams, U. Mia 1998 S.E Florida Coastal Plan Dan Williams, U. Floricja Research Cntr. sign • 2014 Resilieht community design (Hurriplan) Sakamoto, watson, Hwang, Azaroff ,2020 AIA Resilience & Disaster j Response Comm. (RD&R) 7.17.25, THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 91

Page 94

I’m a Walking LCA DYLAN SIEGLER Recently, a friend watched me respond to a waiter’s offer to pack the uneaten quarter of my Thai curry to go and asked if I was running a mental life cycle assessment to measure the relative Impact of the food waste vs. the plastic take-out container. The truth is, I didn’t even need to think about it. The legacy of The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems in my brain and behavior is such thatI am continually evaluating my relationship to the resources around me. I’m a walking LCA. Systems thinking was new to me when I arrived at CMPBS in 2003, although It’s since become fashionable, and Pliny Introduced me to the work of Donella Meadows. The crux of Meadows’ framework Is, of course, “places to intervene” within complex systems where thoughtful shifts can invite transformation. That helped me contextualize the gonzo-seeming projects that surrounded us at 8604 FM 969, helped me locate The Center intellectually. I became more fluent in the language of feedback loops, understanding how outputs could become inputs, etc. Center prototypes were not isolated experiments, but transparent metaphors for leverage points within a system. The work often literally demonstrated the ways that resources, people, and places were connected. How inspiring that sounds, how tidy and pat! Just uncover some connections and make the world a better place! In reality, just as often as awareness of these systems felt like an epiphany, negotiating the relationships between components led to inconvenient outcomes. Bees in the composting toilet. Fingerless gloves for the office when the woodstove went cold during a conference call. The occasional in-office coral snake (once, a baby coral snake on Christmas Eve). Crumbs of hand-formed brick wall that accumulated nightly on the stacks of specs at my workstation in the West Wing. It wasn’t always the most normle- friendly vision of an idyllic future where sustainability was central, but it was one where every result was ongoing proof that something had been tried. The minor chaos we tolerated became part of the point of our work at CMPBS, even if it wasn’t in all cases the original intention. In selling sustainability to the mainstream, there’s sometimes an implicit promise that solutions that address environmental or social issues will have a clear ROI. But at CMPBS, we lived with the friction between ideals and implementation, collecting data points in the ongoing experiment with different ways of engaging with the resources around us. I’d like to sayItook fingerless gloves and baby snakes as a badge of honor, thatI learned to prioritize planetary health over personal comfort. But that’s not the lesson. Instead, the lesson of these system interventions was this: trust your own instincts, start before you’re ready, and treat minor turmoil as a signal that you’re getting somewhere. This commitment to iteration 92 | CMPBS

Page 95

THE INFLUENCE DYLAN SIEGLER STARTED HER SUSTAINABILITY CAREER AT CMPBS. SHE NOW LEADS SUSTAINABILITY AT UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, HELPING SHAPE CULTURE’S RESPONSE TO CLIMATE CHANGE THROUGH THE WORLD’S MOST INFLUENTIAL MEDIUM. SHE’S CHAMPIONED SUSTAINABILITY EVERYWHERE FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO ENERGY GIANT NRG. A FORMER MUSIC JOURNALIST, SHE LIVES IN BROOKLYN. fundamentally shaped howIapproach my work. I absorbed how important the “half-baked” stage is in any design process, and that no one much talks about it. It’s a stage where welcoming ambiguity is key, and if you learn to thrive in that uncomfortable space, it can be a superpower. CMPBS specializes in drawing out the revelations available in this zone, and I like to think I now do, too. Of course, no motivational poster says “trust your instincts even when no one agrees with you,” and that Pliny- trademarked spirit of risk and revision takes ego, even hubris. It’s not only that you trust that something important will come out of the ambiguous mess, it’s that you believe you’re the one best suited to coax It out. Sometimes that ends in a crumbly brick wall, and if so, you tell the story about the temporary loan of the brick-making tool, the need to stack the bricks before the building was dried in. And the telling of the story becomes the successful outcome. I like to think I’m channeling Pliny when, in my own work, I manage to make my own mistakes into fables* For the record, I didn’t take the Thai curry to-go. *Occasionally In meetings, I hear myself and realize with joy that I’m actually channeling Gail. I sound grounded, strategic, deliberate! She always trusts an audience to meet an idea, even if it is unfamiliar or Inconvenient, and sometimes her ideas would feel like a leap even to me. In hindsight, she was always right. THE FIRST so YEARS | 93

Page 96

Zany Hell Raising JEFF LANZA Pliny and various interns making serious commotion 94 | CMPBS 4 7<

Page 97

THE INFLUENCE JEFF IS A LIFELONG CARPENTER AND BUILDER WITH A COMMAND OF MOST TRADES. HE IS ALSO A SOIL SCIENTIST, WETLAND ECOLOGIST, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYST/PLANNER. HE IS A STUDENT OF U.S. HISTORY, NATURAL HISTORY, POLITICAL SCIENCE, AND CLIMATE SCIENCE. AS A POLITICAL ACTIVIST IN LOCAL ISSUES, JEFF’S AWAITING A CALL FOR A NATIONAL MOBILIZATION AGAINST FASCISM. I met Pliny and Daria in 1977, at the young age of 25. Having grown up as a military brat, I arrived from Europe in the mid fifties; I became well-versed in both Texas jingoism and McCarthyism by a very early age. Further, my values were formed in the house of a Dutch woman who grew up under the Nazi invasion. She was very lucky to escape the war alive, and was further shocked by the material waste she encountered in our modern American ‘throwaway society’ and the Civil Rights movement we encountered In the 1950s and 1960s radicalized me politically and socially at an early age. I, like my peers, experienced the Vietnam conflict first through meeting many youthjust older than I, who were training to go fight for Uncle Sam. And then, was barely missed in the draft lottery. Thus, my early college years were marked by the invasion of Cambodia and ensuing anti-war demonstrations; (It involved avoiding teargas on the same UT campus that the Fisks were employed as professors. After this disruption, I left school and began to drift into political activism. A marriage with Max’s Pot for eventual employment seemed like a natural fit. I was aware of LaVaca Gathering Company’s shredding of long term contracts to provide natural gas to Texas’ communities and municipalities, and also became aware of Center’s efforts to counter the deleterious effects by LaVaca in the gas shutoff to Crystal City, the only town willing to legally oppose the contract breach. These actions hit American migrant agricultural labor especially hard in south Texas. This was the early days of the second energy wars, when few realized what the colossal rises in energy costs would mean. Pliny and Daria were among the few with an Insight and interest regarding the emergency heating crisis for low Income migrant communities in the Winter Garden of the Rio Grande Valley. They were selected to work with Crystal City community to mitigate the lack of heating created by LaVaca. Complete information is reported on the Center’s website regarding this project. Imet Fisk shortly as they completed the first phase of the Crystal City Project and after I had attended an expensive and disappointing summer course at CSU in Colorado regarding solar energy use in air conditioning. Chris Rutland, an engineering student, and fellow confederate, began work at the Pot with me at that time. We both shared interests energy issues related to building. There are several accounts of these times in Austin (available online) describing the mix of people and subcultures participating in this political landscape locally and nationally. It didn’t hurt that Jimmy Carter was president, and that he, as a nuclear engineer, had a reasonable grasp of energy politics. Max’s Pot, along with locals, played an outsized role in national energy politics by promoting and enabling citizen participation in decision-making. The THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 95

Page 98

THE POT, FOR ME, BECAME AND SOLIDIFIED AN ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLE AND WAY OF THINKING THAT CLEARLY EXPRESSED VALUES FOR THE EARTH’S ECOLOGY AND NATURAL GIFTS. Center’s efforts in educating the public through demonstrations, open houses, speaking engagements, and Fisk’s own testimony at public hearings went a long way in promoting the values the City of Austin is known for. My employment/affiliation at the Pot ran for about 5-7 years and included a brief residence onsite. Max’s Pot participated in a variety of local, regional and national demonstrations that promoted passive building design and solar energy use. I worked with Daria, Pliny and also Gail, who had been a close friend prior to my employment. I grew fond of Daria’s approach regarding community organizing, andIthink Pliny probably learned much about the topic after being sometimes “thrown, unwittingly,” into different cultural milieu related to projects they pursued. Fisk also took on projects that were related to the more complex problem of economic development at a local, community scale. These projects reminded me of gametheory sometimes used to illustrate the dilemmas of farmers. Their decision-making might be constrained by a shortage of resources or capital. Fisk would then step up with an analysis and show them their resources and the opportunities fortheir community. Both in analyzing and problem solving, it was evident that Fisk had an ability and a process with methods unfamiliar to most. He would often construct matrices in order to focus on specific issues and identify resources relevant to his analysis. From there, he might create uses for those resources that addressed specific local needs. The work at the Center involved appropriate scaling of technology to address sometimes critical human needs in cultural settings that were often unfamiliar to the normal, American cultural context. The approach was geared toward finding effective community based solutions regarding energy, housing, water, food systems and much more. Notable about his approach to problem solving, seemed to be an evolution in devising a general analytical framework to both identify and create a host of potential solutions. His starting point, no doubt, was achieved through his mentor, Ian McHarg; whose work at target selection for bombing In WWII led to the eventual creation of GIS. The GIS computer software program is now used by multiple disciplines today in planning, research, and analytics. (Probably, still, one of the most important planning tools devised to date, if used properly.) In the 1970s, Fisk was recreating McHarg’s mapping methodology manually to create analytical tools at the Pot for ‘in house’ uses for design and resource identification within the state of Texas. Fisk has gone on to develop and hone those analytic strategies into a dizzying array of decision Informing matrices and tools that reflect systems theory, energetics and a host of other strategies to aid his critical thinking skills. 96 | CMPBS

Page 99

THE INFLUENCE If a serious computer engineer had spent years working with Fisk to create an Al software-approach to his problem solving and solution potentials for the projects he approached, I am certain that “an expert Al system could be devised to apprehend and direct decision-making opportunities within a human and cultural ecological context (which, I suppose, is the “charge” of comprehensive landscape architectural planning). I think that Fisk’s unique development of his analytical toolchest over the years to approach problem solving has been an amazing success story to witness. This success has led to a major broadening of the field in ‘true’ environmental planning. He has expanded the meaning of “sustainability” into the terms of a system-wide, planetary ecology. His approach, as seen in the development of tools for a green building and transportation program has the potential for developing a universal “planning system” that confront the ongoing concerns that carbon emissions have unleashed with Climate Change. That is, if the developed world is able to create a planning system that is rigorously applied while simultaneously holding world population growth in check. My experience at the Center has rewarded me with lifelong friendships, and a self knowledge that both, through the Max’s Pot organization and through broader community-based political organizing, we can achieve a lasting impact on our country’s planning for both a sound, long term and compatible, nature oriented, ecological future. Pliny Fisk was instrumental in elevating concepts of energy use to the macro level by pushing for a coherent set of standards regarding life cycle energy use related to building construction and design. The impact of Fisk’s work was eventually felt and recognized on a national level. It was championed by a relatively small group of people that included activists and dreamers alike. Some of this work began with the small projects that were undertaken at Max’s Pot while I was there. The work begun would be later recognized and receive honors for numerous demonstration and design projects nationally. This, of course, was part and parcel of a greater national and global movement. Iam not even fully aware of the extent of those awards and recognition that Fisk and Max’s Pot has received, but,Iam proud thatIwas there In the earliest days with Pliny and Daria and Gail. The effect that a relatively small group of people can have to bring about positive societal change can not be undersold, or underestimated. This experience led to my continuing education and mentoring with several notable teachers during my career. Some are renowned, like Frank Eggler, plant ecologist and expert botanist, who successfully upset the deterministic view of Frederic element’s theory of plant succession. He was also instrumental in the writing of Rachel Carson’s, ‘Silent Spring’ by providing her with some of the background for pesticide and herbicide use on plant growth and its effect based on his research during WWII. I was able to participate in roundtable discussions with him and other botanists at Aton Forest, (Norfolk, CT) where his lifelong studies of plants contributed to one of the longer, continuous records of plant data illustrating the impending effects of climate change on vegetation flowering and growth. It is absolutely critical that younger generations recognize that the governance currently foisted upon this country in matters of energy policy, education, and development planning must be countered with rational and sustainable energy solutions, given the pressing challenges of climate change and population growth and their immediate, deleterious effects. P. Fisk has nearly always been ahead of the curve in anticipating those effects, simply because his planning principles are centered on ecology and sustainability. The Pot, for me, solidified an alternative viewpoint on life and a way of thinking that clearly expressed values for the earth’s ecology and natural gifts. Working with people at Max’s Pot, Including an illustrative list of board members has been a privilege. People like Ray Reece, Dee Simpson, Jim Nations and many others have been an awesome inspiration in my own career as a soils/ wetland scientist and environmental analyst. I particularly enjoyed the privilege of meeting the late, great Howard Scoggins. Mostly,Iam grateful for all the lifelong friendships. THE FIRST so YEARS | 97

Page 100

Maximum Potential Leadership JIM WALKER Pliny and Gail (Photo courtesey of The Austin American-Stateman)98 | CMPBS

Page 101

THE INFLUENCE JIM IS FROM OREGON AND LANDED IN AUSTIN IN 1992. HE LEARNED THE CONCEPTS AND DIMENSIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY AT CMPBS AND FROM GIRARD KINNEY AND LARS STANLEY. AFTER CMPBS HE EARNED A MASTERS IN PLANNING FROM UT AUSTIN AND HAS SERVED AS THE UNIVERSITY DIRECTOR OF SUSTAINABILITY SINCE 2009. Many articles about CMPBS begin with a spotlight on either Gail or Pliny, and most will, of necessity, also soon turn to shine on the other. The enduring impacts of The Center, whether on a project, a plan, a prototype — on individual people — can be credited to the dovetailed Influence of both Gail and Pliny. The opportunities are increasingly rare, and intensely valuable, for young people to absorb two distinct personalities with very different styles of thought and action and communication who are both steering relentlessly toward the same future. I was 22 in 1992 and passing through Austin on my way from Oregon to Florida to help rebuild after Hurricane Andrew when I dropped in on a CMPBS Friday open house. A few weeks laterI was lying on my side trying to see under a Strawbale wall at a shiitake mushroom barn with Pliny yelling where to aim a flashlight. We’ve all been there. A few months laterIwas living on the property, starting to log miles of walking between the various Intern quarters and various projects. Over the next year and a halfI worked on building the fly ash factory and Initial forms for the Advanced Green Building Demonstration Home and forcing a CAD program to produce map overlays of a property in rural Texas and assisting Gail with a Filemaker Pro Sustainable Products Database for a cutting edge compact disc release and so many other sudden projects. Unlike many interns who have passed through The Center, I had never heard of Max’s Pot before I got there,Ididn’t know how to spell sustainibility, I was raw material. My engagements with Pliny were mostly trying to execute or make physical a system-vision of resource maps and graphic Icons or a build-vision of tri-fold flyash forms or modular metal connectors. I knew he could see and feel the idealized outcome, like it was a revelation he had weeks ago, but it was a struggle to connect the dots to make it real to match his vision. So many conversations began with “if we could just …”, “how cool would it be if …”, “I mean, can you Imagine …” While sometimes our conversations would end in a gruff stalemate, they always moved us forward with whatever was at hand. Young people need the rapids-surfing experience of working for an idealist who is stubbornly manifesting new ways of making the world, who is constantly trying to make a model of the better future state from the available materials of our chaotic current state — it sets a cornerstone for young professionals to give some love to their crazy ideas, their Inspired moments, and shepherd them forward into being. My engagements with Gail were less frequent when I lived at The Center, but have increased over the years as I moved from the job site to a desk job and policy work. Gall was the pragmatist advancing a global movement one meeting, one vision statement, one project definition letter at a time. Some of my proudest career moments are just facilitating Gail having lunch with a very-important- person that then alters the course of a project. So many conversations turned on a curt “I mean, come on guys, let’s do THE FIRST so YEARS | 99

Page 102

Young people need the rapids- surfing experience of working for an idealist who is stubbornly manifesting new ways of making the world, who is constantly trying to make a model of the better future state from the available materials of our chaotic current state—it sets a cornerstone for young professionals to give some love to their crazy ideas, their inspired moments, and shepherd them forward into being.

Page 103

THE INFLUENCE Young people need the purpose- affirming experience of witnessing an expert, a pioneer, mercilessly pull conventional subject matter experts off of their convenient pedestals into clearly achievable better decisions— it sets a cornerstone for a young professional to be brave enough to challenge what is comfortable for everyone else and insist on what is aspirational and will benefit everyone. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 101

Page 104

this …” or “I mean, how hard is this?” Young people need the purpose affirming experience of witnessing an expert, a pioneer, mercilessly pull conventional subject matter experts off of their convenient pedestals into clearly achievable better decisions — it sets a cornerstone for a young professional to be brave enough to challenge what is comfortable for everyone else and insist on what is aspirational and will benefit everyone. For me, learning from them individually over the years has been impactful of course, but if I had only interacted with one or the other,Iwould not be whoIam today. In the reflection for this 50th anniversary project in which we all look forward as much as backward, my conversion from raw wandering dreamer into a sustainability advocate and professional was driven by the experience of being around both of them at the same time, within the same day after day interactions, within their distinct domains, yet never truly separately from each other. I’m not a spiritualist or an expert in dualities and harmonic balance, butI dabble (as does anyone reading this book), and I believe we’re all generally familiar with the many representations of dualities in achieving and maintaining balance and how they are often portrayed as oppositional or complementary. The influence of Gail and Pliny’S quite disparate natures is not oppositional, but enhanced by their harmonized, tenacious drive in the same direction. This was the daily energetic vibration of living, working and being at The Center, whatever the amalgamation of people or projects in a given season, we were there In a common cause propelled by their interwoven energy. And we need such places that generate positive common cause. In my current dayjob at the University of Texas (which Iwould never have pursued if not for my experiences at CMPBS) I see students absorbing the scientific method, critical thinking, resilience and hope, poetry and ethics in one setting, all the wisdom humans can practice; then Isee them in another setting absorbing antl-DEI and transgender legislation, selective free speech enforcement, extreme capitalism and climate denial, and a rejection of the scientific method, all the chaos humans can inflict on ourselves; then Isee them in settings finding their others, absorbing time and hope with a few like- minded, like-hearted, like-curious individuals, like Ifound at The Center. As a societal endeavor, we are failing to provide intentional opportunities for young people to embed themselves into a coordinated direction toward a positive future, much less providing a model for individual agency and action to shape the future. Looking back, as I walked those miles across CMPBS between the Shop, the Greenhouse, the Office, the Library, the Demonstration House, the Factory, and my Bed, my raw youth was shaped Into a purpose, but not by specific intention or labor or lecture. The golden thread was the symbiotic commotion of Gail and Pliny as the embodiment of two very different approaches pulling toward a common vision of a positive future, not In competition, but In collaboration. The daily interactions helped me develop a sense of personal urgency to be part of the bigger movement. No matter how desperate the world gets, there will always be young people who are drawn, either by their own journey or just accidentally on a Friday night, to the sustainability faith. But places like The Center and relationships like Gall and Pliny’s and Internship experiences like mine and those of so many others are rare, they are organic and surprising, they take decades of commitment and have inevitable ups and downs, they are to be celebrated with books and gatherings. I’ll always support CMPBS. I don’t have a suggestion for how to seed and grow more of these places of common cause and serious commotion for the Interns of the next 50 years, but I know how they will feel and how the people who lead them will engage, and I’ll be there to yell where to point the light. AndIhave to give a shout out to the late Randall Notgrass. He made an immediate impression when we met at an Open House and he quickly asked when my birthday was, then informed me that Cancers were the cooks of the zodiac and thatIwould fit In well at The Center. For a year after that we had many conversations not saying anything but staring at the far lightning and stars from the breezeway. He had found a place to be and to contribute, may we all be so lucky. 102 | CMPBS

Page 105

THE INFLUENCE A STRATEGY. CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS • ‘ll Pliny and Gail presenting at an open house in 2025 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 103 Aoud

Page 106

The Pioneer Spirit KEN HAGGARD fep on it before it multiplies! 0 3 O) Werare Here 1^ C “O co t: Eo Technical/ Cultural Era 104 | CMPBS ‘ll I^J^ Hunting and Gathering ” B. Agriculture and Husbandry C. Science and industry rfOMPBS D. 1 Sustainability and Information I. Formative III. Classic IV. Stress Ken’s identification of CMPBS as pioneers of the “Sustainability and Information” era

Page 107

THE INFLUENCE KEN IS AN ARCHITECT WHO’S BEEN INVOLVED IN GREEN BUILDINGS SINCE 1969. HIS FIRM IN SAN LUIS OBISPO HAS DONE APPOX. 350 PASSIVE SOLAR BUILDINGS AND HE HAS PUBLISHED FOUR BOOKS ON THE SUBJECT. On Pioneers When I think of pioneering, I usually think of pioneering plants. These occur when there is a disruption of the landscape by erosion, fire or flood which gives pioneering plants a chance to become established, thrive, and eventually heal the landscape. You know these plants, they are tough, thorny, resilient, and seldom appreciated. Many pioneers in our sustainability movement. Bill Mollison, Steve Baer and Harold Hay and others fit these characteristics. However, there is an opposite approach to pioneering. The approach where one immerses into the rot and opportunities of our industrial society head on, disregarding the existing structure without rancor to propose integrative modifications to allow sustainability. Pliny Fisk is a rare example of this second approach, fearlessly approaching head on the problems and potentials of our late industrial society. The big picture comes first, the techniques it demands follow! On Context Progress In the science of demography has now given us enough data to allow accurate dating of worldwide human populations at different times in our history. This allows us to look at the underlying fractal pattern in population growth in regard to cultural/technical patterns over our history similar to how we measure pH in chemistry or earthquake strength with the Richter scale in geology. We show this diagram to indicate where in this dynamic time CMPBS and sustainability concerns occur. Joint Efforts The first joint effort between CMPBS and SLO Sustainability Group was the design of the headquarters of the Anchor Ranch In Lone Pine California. This was the first permitted strawbale building in California. It provided thermal comfort in a harsh climate noted for is hot dry summers and cold windy winters. In addition, it was designed to be neutral in regard to interior electromatic fields for the clients who were sensitive to this modern form of pollution. What this meant is that we had to use minimum metal in the building. We used fiberglass rebars In concrete work, and minimal lath on the bale surfaces, in spite of proximity to a nearby earthquake fault. Importance of Strawbale Construction Use of Strawbale construction is natural for California. We grow a prodigious amount of rice in the northern part of the state in the Sacramento Delta area and in the south in the Imperial Valley. Rice straw is a superior construction material with its high silicon content, and rot and fire resistance. If we optimize bale construction, it is essentially building with carbon, critical to our era of climate disruption caused by burning carbon and foolishly dumping it in our atmosphere. More effective approaches to strawbale construction utilize concepts first developed by Antonio Nervi in Italy in the 1950s. Nervi found he could achieve very cost competitive buildings using long THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 105

Page 108

Above: Early Straw Bale Conference, Right: Strawbale Designed House, California span thin ferro cement elements as curved shells for walls and roofs. At a different scale strawbale shells offer similar opportunities while removing some redundancies of standard Strawbale construction. Eliminating Redundancies Maximum potential building implies minimizing redundancies. While Strawbale construction Is superior to most construction in California, it commonly still has some redundancies that we addressed in the shop building (building number 4 of the trout farm regeneration plan). Strawbale construction has thicker walls than necessary by using 3 string bales lying flat. This shop uses 2 strawbales on edge. Interior space Is expensive (at least $500 per sqare foot In standard construction so why waste it). Why not let the bales also act as the structure of the building? We did this by curving the large north wall into double curved shape by thejudicious use of clay straw wedges. A light wire mesh was tied on each side of the wall by tie wire at 16” on center. Once receiving the standard three coats of stucco on each side, we had achieved a two story double warped shell acting as a load bearing element. The key to our success was to ensure the surface where the stucco was applied was consistent without voids and variations. Differential settlement on each end of the wall was dealt with by the use of entasis, a traditional architectural device to correct for visual distortions. 106 | CMPBS

Page 109

THE INFLUENCE 5CT-Ag- POUSLE WAPPCI? STRAVeAUe sue 1-1- MPce OP ‘2.6«2VJ@ tybues oH ec<e FtgeertOVA OV^41 arc 1416 TOpnATE iG’rji w/ T’q ” PWwoO FILL-EK EA.SlOe 1- HXIZ ~HAPEp (<O L-A^Ct E. _। GUTT^rc ib’-niezH ^OUTH, ;bale4Fi<=uRAno}J 1 AT THE- FOUMC^MToO — LI Pe ehi-E. teou FvuRjmolU EACTH-EM 1-00R. 5&ALEP fa„ unuSBEP oiu IS^LL GOTTCR- rwtPE3 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 107

Page 110

Memoirs of the Beginning: 1970-74 KEN SMITH 108 | CMPBS Design at CMPBS is a form of activism — sometimes implicit, sometimes explicit

Page 111

THE INFLUENCE KEN SMITH GRADUATED UT-AUSTIN AND WAS AT CMPBS FROM 1974-1981. HE WORKED ON THE 1ST FARM BIOGAS AS FOUNDER OF ECOTOPE GROUP. KEN’S PUBLIC SERVICE INCLUDES: CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY; ALTERNATIVE FUELS MANAGER AT THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION; CLEAN FUELS MANAGER SACRAMENTO AIR QUALITY DISTRICT; CALIFORNIA TOXIC CLEANUP; AND CAL FIRE. My Backgroud Before The Pot Before coming to CMPBS,Ispent 3 years 9 months in the US Army as a combat helicopter pilot with a year of that in Vietnam in the US Army’s 1st Special Operations Helicopter Company. After Vietnam,I was sent for 18 months to Fort Hood, 70 miles north of Austin. In June 1970,Iwas honorably discharged, and decided to finish my Bachelor’s Degree in the McCombs School of Business at UT-Austin. I wanted to do graduate research on something meaningful. After experiencing high levels of dioxin (Agent Orange), I started to read ecology books and was most Impressed with Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. For a brief moment I started to join Vietnam Veterans Against the War, being upset about what we were doing in Vietnam in the first place, butIdid not find them very well organized or effective. That led me to a new environmental group that was struggling to exist, Ecology Action, and helped start early recycling programs In Austin. I was an avid subscriber to new wave publications like “The Mother Earth News” and “Alternative Energy Newsletter,” just to name a couple of many. Clearly I wanted a graduate program that focused on Ecology. I discovered that the UT School of Architecture had a new program in Community and Regional Planning. They were seeking students from other backgrounds to Improve their depth in planning communities, cities, and rural land use. I signed up after taking a summer course that focused on new ways to think about what the future in planning communities should be. Led by Professor Hugo LeIpziger-Pearce and inspired by a guest Professor of renown reputation, William R. Ewald Jr. from the American Institute of Planners. 1st Semester Fall ‘71: Professor Fisk III Iwas wandering the halls of the original School of Architecture building searching for classes to meet my goals of ecology, renewable energy (we called it Alternative Energy back then), and self-sufficient communities that used solar, wind, biomass. I came across an office with stacks and stacks of “The Mother Earth News,” “Alternative Energy Newsletter,” “Organic Gardening,” and more interesting books similar to those. As Istood there in awe, in pops a guy in leather brimmed hat and leather vest — like Indiana Jones with a big busy mustache. He introduced himself as Professor Fisk. I asked what kind of courses he was teaching and to my delight, he said he wanted to start a new course with hands own lab to build a self-sufficient model laboratory. I asked if I could sign up for the class. “Yes!” he said, “You’ll be one of the first students.” Early classroom subjects dealt with a few famous people, but also some soon- to-be famous names like Ian McHarg (Design with Nature), Olgyay & Olgyay (Climate Scientist), Buckminster Fuller, Jerry Goldstein (Organic Gardening Newsletter), Jane Jacobs (leading critic of the failure of Urban Renewal), The THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 109

Page 112

New Alchemy (John Tocicl and Richard Merrill), Steve Baer (Passive Solar Homes), and many more. Max’s Pot & Balcones Research Center It was still fall of that 1st Semester when Pliny grabbed me in the hallway and said, “You’ve got to come see our new lab.” We drove out in Pliny’s Nissan Pathfinder to the northern outskirts of Austin and through the gates of The Balcones Research Center. We drove off- road to a rundown corrugated tin shack. He said this is it our new lab, this is where Maximum Potential Building Systems will build a new self-sufficient model laboratory. As we entered the tin shack, I immediately noticed several 55 gallon oil drums with the dreaded nuclear waste symbol on the side of the drums. We also disturbed some rattlesnakes that had taken up residence under the shack. Pliny says: “Don’t worry, man. We’ll clean this up and turn it into a model of self-sufficiency. An alternative energy showcase!” So the work begins. The drums are removed, the snakes disappeared, and we started designing a habitable (well, almost) living space. The lab became the class room, and undergraduate students from Pliny’s other classes flocked to help start building the lab. Pliny’S landscape background came from studying under Ian McHarg, who was the master of creating colored overlays of large areas, with the Intent of showing a path where development would do the least damage to the natural environment. This was a visual Environmental Impact Report before such studies became routine after the Environmental Protection Agency was formed. Pliny used McHarg’s concept to teach young student architects to design small- scale communities with the goal of being self-sufficient and designed with the least Impact on the natural environment. Pliny was always a charismatic leader — so much so that he would have student complain that his course was so interesting and consuming that their work at the lab was causing them to neglect their other classwork. We were all having so much fun doing the hands- on building at the lab, that other classes seemed boring. While some of us were busy building biogas plants, electric wind turbines, solar hot water systems, Pliny was busy experimenting with alternative building materials. His favorite was using abundant sulfur that was primarily a waste product from petroleum refineries. It was cheap and there were boundless supplies available. It was structurally sound material to potentially replace concrete. The catch was, that in the heating of the sulfur to mold into building blocks and other structural elements, it created clouds of yellow toxic gas, which would rise in huge clouds from the tin shed.Iused to accuse him of trying to kill us. No one died and the sulfur experiments went on. Art of the Scrounge & Donated Freebees One of my passions was making a low form of natural gas (biogas) from manure and other organic waste. We had all been fooled by the articles about a pig farmer in South Africa who built a biogas plant In the back of a VW Bug to power the car. This never happened since the size of a biogas plant to power a car would be so large It would have to be towed by the car as a tank trailer. Nonetheless we did know a small biogas plant made of 2 horizontally connected 55 gallon oil drums could supply adequate cooking gas for the stove In the self-sufficient living space. Used drums were cheap and we managed to get a macerator electric marine toilet that could feed the human waste to the digester, but it required 110 VAC to run the motor. This would require a wind turbine and a large bank of batteries to store the electricity to run the motor and provide electric power for lights & other electric needs of the living unit. Biogas plants need heat to perform well with smaller volume like 55 gallon drums, so the time to make the waste turn into gas is temperature dependent. To avoid using the gas to heat the biogas plant we devised a solar hot water heater made of discarded aluminum tubing and glass from rejected panels at a glass manufacturing plant. The wind turbine had to be mounted on a tower so we found an old abandoned water pumping windmill tower. At an Army Surplus store,Iwas able to get an alternator from a B-29 WWII bomber. With the help of a very smart volunteer friend I knew in Ecology Action, we designed and made a 2-bladed prop the wind turbine out of a clearcut Douglas Fir 2” x 8” x 16’ board. This was hand shaped with wood tools from a drawing 110 | CMPBS

Page 113

THE INFLUENCE JANUARY, 1970 N! |1 VOL 1, rO.1 171’ tJ Vil H I’: 1^1 1^1 1 [4 El THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 111

Page 114

112 | CMPBS Pliny and interns in the 1970s 1

Page 115

THE INFLUENCE of an air foil glued to the cross-section end of the board. The board blade was mounted with the center of the board bolted to the alternator. The blade came dangerously close to the tower and could not be accessed until the blade was stopped. Where were we going to get batteries to store the wind generated electricity? I found out that “MaBell” used these beautiful glass cased lead acid batteries as backup to the 42 VDC current that powered all the phones across the whole country. They retired the batteries before the end of their life so getting these batteries donated from the phone company would solve our problem. These batteries were in a very large and heavy glass 1” thick case. It was about 24”H x 12”Dx6”Wand each unit was 2 VDC. This meant that we had to have at least 55 batteries to power the 110 VDC for the macerator marine toilet. The phone company was happy to give them to us. While we had all the elements for a successful project we never really got all systems working before I graduated. I left for my professional life in the summer of 1974 and ended up in the greater Seattle area. There I formed a non-profit energy research and development company. Our first big success was to build the first successful farm biogas plant on a 300 cow dairy owned by the State of Washington Correctional Department at their low security “honor farm.” The biogas was used to operate the creamery boiler to produce cheese for the prison system. This system worked successfully from its start up in 1977 until they closed the creamery in 1991. Ecotope Group was converted to a private, for-profit business doing a variety of energy consulting services, and is still operating to this day. The Alternative Energy Network and a Bizarre Christmas Trip We were constantly networking with other schools and people through the “Alternative Energy Newsletter.” This led to a Christmas vacation trip in 1972. Pliny and I concocted a crazy trip to Wisconsin and Minnesota. I had access to a reliable but hardly new Ford pickup truck which was owned by the Austin Food Coop Grocery. It was used to bring fresh produce from the market in San Antonio, but was dormant for the Christmas break so I commandeered it for this northern Trek. We convinced about a dozen of Max’s Pot students to ride along with us as we went to visit two of the more interesting alternative energy projects up north. The pickup had a minimal aluminum shell that covered the bed, no heating, and we lined the bed with hay to keep It somewhat habitable with the addition of sleeping bags. We switched drivers so we could drive with only short stops for the 2,000+mile round trip to Milwaukee and Minneapolis. We went there to visit Architecture Professor John Shady at the University of Wisconsin who had a similar program to ours, and to visit Architecture Professor Tom Bender at the University of Minnesota where they had built a solar heated home with a wind turbine for electric power. We found Tom very unhappy with his project. The group had engineering professors as partners and they had over-engineered the project. He thought they had lost touch with the simple ways to use solar and wind energy. As we headed back south. I’ll never forget what we encountered on the freeway in Kansas City on 1-35. It was early on a Sunday morning as we pulled Into KC with an alternator failure on the truck. We were on one of multi-level spaghetti freeways. I was driving and saw this semi-truck loaded with cattle on its side. It appeared that the semi had fallen of another level off the freeway and it had just happened, since I saw the driver open the cab door and struggle to get out and onto the road below. It was tragic for the poor cattle as we could hear them bellowing and moaning. We couldn’t help since there was no way to access the lower level freeway. Luckily, we found a repair shop that replaced the alternator and we headed down 135 to Austin. We were also lucky that it was a very mild winner. That same Christmas Break another innovative professor from UT-AustIn had taken his whole class on a very bold project to North Dakota. Wolfgang Hilbertz had spent ail the semester developing a computer controlled water cannon system to build ice structure dwellings. Unfortunately the mild winter meant it was too warm for the ice to form. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 113

Page 116

In Praise of Low-Tech Sustainability LAUREN ROCHELL .1^^,‘dW^ik4^fe I{, 114 | CMPBS

Page 117

THE INFLUENCE LAUREN ROCHELL IS A REGISTERED ARCHITECT OVERSEEING GREEN BUILDING CONSULTING EFFORTS AT CMPBS AND CONTRIBUTING TO PROTOTYPE, PROTOCOL AND POLICY DEVELOPMENT. HER PASSION LIES IN INCORPORATING MINIMALLY PROCESSED, HEALTHY, AND ETHICALLY SOURCED MATERIALS INTO CONTEMPORARY URBAN ENVIRONMENTS. For the past 7.5 years I’ve spent my workweek surrounded by fourteen hand-built, mostly intact and extraordinarily beautiful bio-based wall assemblies making up CMPBS’s iconic Advanced Green Building Demonstration project. Having been permitted as an experimental building, exposed to the elements for a quarter of a decade, and built by interns and volunteers, this building Is a testament to CMPBS’s legacy as solarpunk pioneers in the green building movement — and a literal

• figurative foundation for the minimally processed, hyper local, bio-based materials movement in particular. As expected, CMPBS’s mind-blowing ambition and commitment to cutting- edge sustainability has led the organization in countless directions since the early days of 70’s era passive solar design, and Pliny will not hesitate to explain how his stance on earthen architecture has changed. CMPBS has always been one step ahead of the sustainability curve, whether by perfecting a caliche block mix design or experimenting with baling and building with invasive buffelgrass. WhatIdid not expect, however, was how far along the technology spectrum CMPBS was willing to go In the name of sustainability. I started at The Center imagining hippie interns hand-pressing earth blocks, but Instead found them - and myself - prototyping highly technical inventions: hinged deployable houses, cities built on defunct oil rigs and, more recently, exploring radical concepts like hydrothermal carbonization and micron separation. My mind was blown again. Max Pot’s relatively new Global Dream Lab is the proverbial maximalist pot within which CMPBS’s low-tech building techniques are mixed with nearly sci-fi technoscience. The Center maps resources to link industries across the vast technology spectrum to create combinations that advance sustainable building and support enterprising market leaders. I find it incredibly unique and refreshing for an organization to explore and bridge such extremes. But I also find it concerning. Modern day humans have overshot the sustainability target with unsustainably pro-profit and hypocritically anti-ecological solutions. Corporations develop new ‘green’ technologies that inadvertently harm human and ecosystem health and are resource- and energy-intensive. Greenwashing tricks consumers into making presumably sustainable choices without acknowledging the hidden environmental and social costs. Carbon credits, EVs, and solar panels are marketed to consumers to assuage their conscience, passing the true lifecycle costs to more vulnerable parts of the world, such as where rare earth metals are mined. High-tech drops human touch, social interaction, and craft in favor of speed and convenience. To quote one of my (and Pliny’s) favorite thinkers Murray Bookchin, “Capitalism is inherently anti-ecological.” Fortunately, The Center has its own in-house antidote. For decades, Gail has spearheaded and promoted human health, material transparency and THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 115

Page 118

ethical sourcing as drivers for sustainable design, exposing the full lifecycle story and associated health risks of building productsand materials. HPDs and EPDs are the first steps in keeping corporations, greenwashers, and newtechnologles In check. Gail and her support staff have taken on CMPBS’s unofficial role of “techno-discerner,” filtering prototypes and technologies to critically evaluate for unintended consequences and unexpected impacts. Gall also does a huge amount of educational outreach to advocate for “clean sustainability.” She urges major cancer research hospitals to avoid Persistent and Bioaccumulative Toxins (PBTs) and The Pentagon to specify low smoke zero halogenated wire to reduce the risk of worker exposure to poisonous fumes and gases in the event of an explosion. Closer to The Center, Gail recently alerted us about certain roofing sealants that aren’t safe for potable rainwater collection when designing a new roofing system for the AGBD. Another obvious antidote to highly- processed sustainability is biophilic design, whichI believe The Center honors and promotes more than any other architecture-focused organization. The living world provides an extremely diverse and ever-evolving palette for exploratory design. Mycelium, algae, hemp and basalt are current hot topics at The Center that we believe have a fighting chance against conventional alternatives. Even though the Global Dream Lab model is designed to include all levels of technological intensity, it shines brightest for natural building systems which are inherently collaborative, fill industry gaps, and support local farmers, suppliers, and laborers. Buckminster Fuller is quoted for saying “To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” This is the anti-establishment leaning I strive for in my relationships, family structure, and political ideology. But my professional research and lived experiences compel me to notjust burn it all down.I believe there are countless lessons to learn from the vernacular, indigenous, natural world, and health- minded advocates. The Global Dream Lab represents this “yes, and” thinking approach. It makes the existing capitalist model obsolete by honoring the earth’s resources, respecting its natural evolutionary tempo, and exploring, dismantling, and innovating systems and institutions. When greed, hierarchy and exploitation are removed from innovation, the results are resource sharing, nonviolence, mutual support, and regenerative health: true pillars of sustainability. Once new high-tech sustainable design technologies can be a collaborative effort, void of corporate exploitation and social oppression. I’ll be more eager to open myself up to them. And once innovations account for their cradle-to- grave embodied carbon footprint and ethical footprint. I’ll take them into account. Until then, I prefer to wrap around myself these fourteen hand- built, mostly intact and extraordinarily beautiful walls. Local artist and friend Emma Hadzi Antich conveys In her collection “Venerating Stone” that a stone sculpture will stick around long after the museum that houses It turns to dust. Rocks imbue the story of earth’s existence. Buildings imbue the story of our impact on the earth. ARTIST STATEMENT Paintings like buildings are a kind of human Imposed order, both of which dictate an anthropocentric narrative. My paintings of rocks are both a desire to step outside of human boundaries and an acknowledgment that the strokes of paint which attempt to record are a barrier to lithic logic. Stone has a tendency to resist control simply by enduring. The museum that houses a reliquary of stones will one day crumble and the rocks will settle amongst Its remains. The mountain depicted in the painting will outlive the portrait on wood. The building of stone will return to the earth. 116 | CMPBS

Page 119

THE INFLUENCE 1 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 117

Page 120

Theory of Compassion LOVLEEN GILL AULAKH 118 1 CMPBS Masterplan of Auroville, India

Page 121

THE INFLUENCE LOVLEEN GILL AULAKH IS AN AUSTIN-BASED ARTIST AND OWNER OF INSPIRED ART STUDIO. SHE IS ALSO A TRAINED ARCHITECT, LEED AP AND GREEN CONSULTANT WITH EXPERIENCE IN SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT. LOVLEEN JOINED CMPBS IN 2007 AS AN INTERN AND WORKED THERE TILL 2013 AS SENIOR SUSTAINABLE DESIGN ASSOCIATE. Through my “Theory of Compassion” I would like to propose that including a compassionate framework in the workings of a community can help raise the consciousness of people living In it, which in turn makes them more compassionate, raising their consciousness even higher, creating a virtuous cycle that can potentially transform notjust a community, but the entire world. Compassion is empathy In action. The concentric circles of compassion start from self-compassion and by raising human consciousness they widen to encompass Compassionate Communities where not only humans but other life forms can also thrive, eventually leading to a global compassionate society where the role of humans is redefined from top predator in the food chain to caretakers for other species that share their habitat. The transcendental connection between humans and nature has been recognized by sustainability and regenerative design experts as “Being one with Nature,” “Design as nature,” “Design with our instincts,” connected to “Raising Human Consciousness,” and “Compassion.” Dr. Daniel C. Wahl, author of ‘Designing Regenerative Cultures’ recognizes that the highest regenerative design evolution in Bill Reed’s Regenerative design framework where humans start designing as nature, might be possible only by raising human consciousness till it becomes one with nature. According to Dr. Wahl this can be done by healing our mind-made separation from nature.2 Pliny Fisk III, co-director of Center for Maximum Building Systems (CMPBS) highlights the quandary of attaining a world union ora global compassionate society before global ecological collapse In “Conceptual Space Race,” the 12th lens of his revolutionary “Lenses for a maximum potential future” framework.3 Thereby recognizing the importance of design in Increasing humans’ conceptual space — our understanding of the world by promoting human brain space-time behavior like connecting people to cycles of nature and other biophilic design aspects in his work.^ Auroville, India, funded in 1968 by Mirra Alfassa Is an international community for people devoted to raising human consciousness. It requires all its residents to move away from the modes of conventional social economic systems and enter into a more “giving” space where personal needs and desires become secondary to collective good. With a profound understanding of the interconnectedness of all life, Auroville focussed on creating extensive green spaces on a barren deforested land to restore forests, conserve topsoil, recharge the water table, provide shelter for diverse wildlife and work with nature to become self-sufficient. At the center of Auroville’s galaxy shaped masterplan Is ‘matrimandir’ a golden spherical meditation building surrounded by large afforested green space called ‘Peace Area’ from where roads radiate towards the circular township which is again THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 119

Page 122

surrounded by 1.5 mile wide circular greenbelt. Auroville now has over 3 million trees for its 3,300 residents from 60 countries who live communally and work in Auroville’s cashless economy on a voluntary basis. The outer green belt has organic farms, rainwater catchment ponds and forests that sustainably provide food, herbs and timber for humans through community- supported Initiatives. The township has earth-constructed buildings, solar passive architecture and its own Earth building research institute. The green Industrial zone has small scale manufacturing units that produce innovative wind pumps, solar PVs, garments, furniture, stationary, food and health products. Auroville now has 170 social enterprises ranging from organic restaurants, architecture firms, electronics and renewable energy dealers to bookshops, upcycled clothing, hand made paper and other creative enterprises that employ 5000 people from neighboring villages. Residents are offered free schooling, medical insurance, access to groceries, meals, and basic services at reduced prices so they have time for inner reflection. They are also involved in community design projects through a process called ‘Dream Weaving’ that includes engaging community discussions. Integrating feedback, and collaborating with experts within Auroville. Endorsed by UNESCO and Government of India, Auroville Is recognized as the first and only ongoing experiment in human unity and transformation of consciousness that Is conducting practical research into sustainable living and future cultural, environmental, social and spiritual needs of mankind. It is also the most environment friendly and pollution free city in India.5 Curitiba, Brazil, rose to prominence under the visionary architect and mayor, Jaime Lerner, utilizes compassionate engagement with its citizens by understanding and caring for their dreams and needs, to develop a sense of co-responsibility for its many ingenious programs. As a result CurltIbans are much more intrinsically motivated to act on behalf of the collective good of their city and fellow citizens. Guided by ‘Learning-by-doing philosophy’ Curitiba has achieved measurably better levels of education, health, human welfare, public safety, democratic participation, political integrity, environmental protection, and community spirit than most modern cities. “Curitiba’s simple philosophy along with persistent experimentation and improvement have created an ecological minded First World city in the midst of the Third World.” It Is even recognized by the United Nations as a leading model for ecological urban development and planning. The living masterplan of Curitiba continually improved by iterative loops of design and feedback between community members and city planners. This was made possible by a charrette- like process that Jaime Lerner and his team conducted daily. They chose quick, simple, and Inexpensive solutions that were then implemented with appropriate partnership with key stakeholders In order to develop a shared sense of commitment, stewardship, and investment in its success. For example- providing carts to entrepreneurial homeless people to collect recyclable trash in public areas In exchange for food from local farmers. By demonstrating respect for all citizens, the poorest included, Jaime Lerner and his team developed a level of faith and trust with their citizens that is unheard of. The key element of this solidarity In Curitiba is “Compassion” that comes from understanding people and what it is that feeds their sense of identity and belonging In a place.’ As seen from the examples above, there are various ways to include ‘Compassion’ In the framework for designing communities that can not only live in harmony with nature but also help to regenerate and assist nature in maintaining its balance. “The best way to predict the future Is to design It.” — Bucky Fuller 7 We have an opportunity to infuse compassion at various levels of project planning and design to provide community residents the capacity and capability to co-evolve with their fellow residents and nature. Some of these interventions can be as simple as: Compassionately engage with future residents through community based 120 | CMPBS

Page 123

THE INFLUENCE CONCEPTUAL space race 280 70 biophilic design POTENTIAL GLOBA COMMUNICATION 4,500 1,100 E Z O O time-space design planning and design processes. Compassionately engage with nature by considering ecological restoration, sustainable and regenerative design. Include biophilic design elements like natural light, views and forms on all scales of design. Replace current Hydrocarbon economy with a “Carbohydrate Economy” & that works hand in hand with nature. Develop a social economic system where “collective good” takes precedence over accumulating wealth. Promote self-awareness in residents and design teams by encouraging meditation, mindfulness, nature walks, sound baths etc. I truly believe that “Compassion” is a necessary component to bring about the paradigm shift in human consciousness required to transform the world and It is now being recognized and explored by many experts in diverse fields. The Compassionate System Framework, Co-founded by Peter Sange and Mette Miriam, is an educational tool that integrates systems thinking, social- emotional learning (SEL) and compassion to build a foundation for global citizenship in young minds. Through a global network of prototypes in Pre-K-12 schools In 10 countries, students are being taught to respond compassionately to address complex global issues.9 CMPBS “Conceptual Space Race” Lens THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 121

Page 124

.b.R 1^ t-I ,I 11 M

^C 4 ‘4. d 4 U VI VI U U el UD U 122 | CMPBS Curitiba, Brazil

Page 125

THE INFLUENCE protoPartner™: A neutral party which connects knowledge from Universities, NGO’s, and Industry (Resource Partners) to develop green world promoting technologies protoPartner™ matrix GreenworldGreyworld protoSpace’ Genesis as protoPartners™ connect at all scales, the world is able to transform from a greyworld to a green world protoSpace™ Growth The Charter for Compassion, founded by Karen Armstrong, is a planning framework for building compassionate communities, inspired by the “Golden Rule” to treat others as you would like to be treated. It provides a structured and adaptable approach for Individuals and communities to collaborate and implement initiatives for the well-being of all its members. With a global network of over 400 communities in 54 countries, the charter encourages people to work together to create a more compassionate world.io Compassionate Systems Design is a term coined by author Jonathan Leighton to define “bigger picture” systems thinking accompanied by the Inherent sense of compassion to do the most good and least harm at every step. He emphasizes that higher-level “meta” interventions that recruit more people will have a greater numerical impact in changing the current system for better!’ Compassionate Communities that are one with nature have the potential to become these ‘meta’ interventions and raise human consciousness to reach the ‘Omega Point’. For me, the seeds for developing “Theory of Compassion” are already spread throughout the works of my alma mater — Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (CMPBS). In the last 50 years CMPBS has developed an arsenal of tools for sustainable community based planning and design like Visible Green, Protoscope, Ecobalance, Gamification, Feedback City, Area Point Network, Mini Max and Meta Max i2 that can be borrowed responsibly to design ‘Compassionate Communities’ as ‘meta’ Interventions. In fact, with the new technological breakthroughs in Artificial Intelligence (Al), Machine Learning (ML) and Data Science (DS), these tools or “lenses” have become more relevant than ever. CMPBS has always been touted as being ahead of its time, but maybe the technology Is finally moving at a pace to match its strides. I have identified a few examples of how recent tech-innovations combined with CMPBS’s ‘Lenses for a maximum potential future’ protocols can be used to design and promote a compassionate community framework. ‘Visible Green’ and ‘Gamification’ are tech based community design methodologies by CMPBS that can use Al-powered tools to empower residents to actively THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 123

Page 126

^^ OUR TASK MUST BE TO WIDEN OUR CIRCLES OF COMPASSION TO EMBRACE ALL LIVING CREATURES AND THE WHOLE OF NATURE IN ITS BEAUTY.”

• ALBERT EINSTEIN engage in their community’s decision- making process and foster community spirit. AI algorithms can simulate different community perspectives, forecast future needs and analyze vast amounts of data to generate multiple design options for rapid exploration. Generative Al tools can visualize these options and translate technical jargon Into simple language to include more diverse community members and get buy-in from all levels of income, education and lifestyle. Using Al powered AR/VR/XR technology, 3D digital models can be created for community gaming environments at varying scales to assist residents in making sustainable design choices for their homes, communities and cities. By promoting a citizen-led design process, a virtuous cycle of compassion and raising consciousness can be created. ‘Ecobalance’ and ‘Feedback City’ are data driven frameworks by CMPBS for balancing human impact with nature’s capacity that can be enhanced using Infratech — combining digital technology with physical infrastructure. Al tools can collect, monitor and analyze the real- time infrastructure data at various scales for ail life cycle categories — air, water, food, energy and material, to extract visible insights and take appropriate actions to sustain the delicate ecobalance. The real-time information flow of essential services like water, electricity, transportation, internet, waste disposal ,etc. can be used by Machine Learning algorithms for predictive modelling that can help in forecasting demand, optimizing performance and creating more anticipatory feedback loops. Computational Sustainability can be used to understand micro (human to human) to macro (satellite remote sensing) feedback datasets and model complex systems that involve significant computational challenges to enable data driven decision making. Together these technologies can give us a profound understanding of the complex bond between humans and nature to help us evolve on the ‘development ladder’ towards a global compassionate society. Protoscope is an advanced prototyping methodology by CMPBS that can benefit from AI for knowledge capture, information exchange, pattern finding, complex data computing and developing sustainable solutions adapted to biocultural uniqueness of any place on Earth. From global ProtoMetric scale to community scale it Identifies databases, patterns and other site information to understand both the uniqueness of a place and the problems associated with it. Next, it identifies Global ProtoPartners with similar ecological, hydrological, climatic and soil geology conditions. It then consolidates, integrates, builds upon their work to enable a global “crowdsourcing” model in which physical and digital building system prototypes are created and tested In ecologically similar locations called ProtoSites to derive working solutions. From revolutionizing global information exchange, automating knowledge capture and extraction, personalizing knowledge delivery based on user role and providing tools for real time translation and communication, Al can 124 | CMPBS

Page 127

THE INFLUENCE facilitate better communication and collaboration between ProtoPartners and ProtoSites regardless of location or language and help us unlock the full potential of our collective consciousness. CMPBS can perhaps become The ProtoSite where new technological innovations are integrated with its existing ‘Lenses for a maximum potential future’ framework and tested for the next 50 years and beyond. A neutral location where public, private and non profit groups can digitally or physically prototype technology driven sustainable solutions. CMPBS can continue playing its unique role as an intervention library to test ideas and share with the world.13 But these technological advancements will also create a void in our human experience which can only be filled by self awareness and harnessing the power of self compassion. Maybe CMPBS can expand its work and experiment with the ‘Compassionate Community’ framework to create a virtuous cycle of compassion that can help change paradigms and step up the pace of global transformation towards a unified Compassionate World. It is my sincere wish thatjust like CMPBS inspired me, it can continue Inspiring our future generation to understand a better meaning of success. If we can help kids connect with their traditional roots and teach them a sustainable way of life. If we can empower our youth to think outside the box and be more in-tune with nature. If we can train our young work force to think beyond corporate dreams and materialistic lifestyles. If we can create new kinds of jobs that provide a holistic approach to life that helps people live with their “instincts”. Perhaps, we can create compassionate communities with highly conscious beings. CMPBS can be at the forefront of this internal revolution that helps each individual find their own ‘Maximum Potential’. REFERENCES

1. Popova, Maria “Einstein on Widening our Circles of Compassion”
2. Wahl, Daniel Christian. “Regenerative (R)Evolution: Reclaiming Humanity’s Oneness with Nature.”
3. Fisk, Pliny. “Lemses fora maximum potential future” | Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, 4.Fisk, Pliny and MacMath, Richard “Anybody there. Architects, Design and Responsibility”. Texas Architect Magazine |1998 Nov-Dec Issue.
4. “The city the earth needs” Auroville
5. Mang, Nicholas. “A Leadership Case Study of Curitiba, Brazil .”
6. Acaroglu, Leyla. “Six Powerful insights from the creative shape shifter, R. Buckminster Fuller”
7. Birkeland, Janis. Design for Sustainability: a sourcebook of integrated ecological solutions. 2002. Earthscan.
8. Sange, Peter and Miriam, Mette. “Introduction to Compassionate Systems Framework in Schools” 2019
9. Armstrong, Karen. “Charter for Compassion”
10. Leighton, Jonathan “Compassionate System Design.”
11. Fisk, Pliny. “Lemses for a maximum potential future” | CMPBS
12. Fisk, Pliny.”Center for Maximum Potential Building systems- 35 years of serious commotion”, 2010 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 125

Page 128

The Centering Story LUCAS BROWN 126 | CMPBS Above and Right:Carvs. bike commuting offers a compelling contrast of living up to one’s values

Page 129

THE INFLUENCE LUCAS BROWN’S EARLY PROFESSIONAL CAREER WAS MARKED BY COLLABORATIONS WITH CMPBS, MARK MACEK AND MURRAY LEGGE. HE WAS A PROFESSOR AT GREEN MOUNTAIN COLLEGE, IS NOW DIRECTOR OF DESIGN BUILD AT INDIANA UNIVERSITY AND PRACTICES ARCHITECTURE THROUGH BROWNSMITH STUDIOS. Center is a powerful and dynamic word and one that has come to be a guiding force in many of our lives. As a noun, The Center Is a state that is impossible to achieve. You know that The Center has a gravitational pull, but the forces push­ ing away arejust as powerful. As a verb, to center Is to engage In the stories that point toward your values and under­ standing of your place within the broad ecological context. Again there is ten­ sion. As we strive toward The Center, the cultural context continues to pull us in divergent directions. For those of us who have centered together at CMPBS, we have a pact, a social contract, and a central story. While we must live within the cultural systems that disconnect, we continue to help each other share and reshape the narratives that connect us to a deep­ er set of values aimed at a maximum potential future. This essay is about that central story, how it resonates on an individual level and how it creates a sense of community that draws people to CMPBS. Finding the Network I was mesmerized by the stories of CMPBSIfirst encountered during Pliny’s visits to my alma mater Ball State Uni­ versity back in the late ’90s. At one point, he addressed the students and told us that we could all become part of the network of thinkers, designers, and makers that are pioneering the sustain­ ability movement. As an architecture student curious and inspired by environ­ mentalism in architecture, I struggled to connect with the dominant profes­ sional narrative at the time and was hooked by the Idea of connecting with this network of which Pliny spoke. Through my visit to The Center and sub­ sequent internship, I came to discover that the tales being told through The Center evoked an imaginative and inven­ tive spirit that resonated with and bound together an amazing community unified by the shared narrative. There is a good reason for why the sto­ rytelling resonates with so many of us. Yuval Noah Harari, in his book Sapiens, argues that prehistoric communities THE FIRST SO YEARS | 127

Page 130

were able to grow beyond a certain size based on shared fictions propagated through storytelling, as evidenced by many ofthe deity-based wisdom traditions associated with the agricultural revolution. Gaia Vince in her book Transcendence also highlights the importance of storytelling, arguing that stories not only unite communities, but are also, according to one study, 22 times more memorable than facts. According to Vince, not only do fictional stories unite our communities and enable them to grow, but they also allow us to envision potential future scenarios. Stories are a powerful survival adapta­ tion because they don’tjust allow us to travel back in time with our memories, they also allow us to mentally explore different future scenarios without expending time and energy. They act as Virtual-world thought-experiments that enable us to trial risky or difficult per­ mutations and store the outcomes. Connecting with the Story In the early 2000s, Mathis Wackemagel’s book Our Ecological Footprint was cir­ culated at The Center, and at one point Mathis Wackernagel visited CMPBS for a workshop. Wackernagel’s research, which was closely aligned with ongoing research at The Center, measured how much bioproductive physical space was required to support human activities. For example, the C02 emissions from my vehicle commute would need to be sequestered through photosynthesis and carbon storage. This storage, per­ haps In the form of a forest, would require a certain amount of biologically productive forest land for sequestration. If all together the amount of C02 being released surpassed the ability for nature to sequester and store the carbon. It would result in what he called Ecological Overshoot. As proposed by Wackerna­ gel, the measure of space required to support human resource consumption, or Ecological Footprint, is calculated using this simplified equation: Ecological Footprint (land area) = Bio- capacity (e.g. Forest Carbon Sequest­ ration Capacity) X Consumption (e.g. Energy Carbon Emissions) There are two primary variables that affect the Ecological Footprint: bioca­ pacity (X) and consumption (Y). Increasing biocapacity, or X tonnes of C02 sequestered per acre, acts on the denominator thereby reducing the Eco­ logical Footprint. For example, utilizing greywater to irrigate an urban forest enhances growth thereby increasing C02 sequestration capacity per a given unit of land area. Reducing consumption, or Y tonnes of C02 emitted, acts on the numerator thereby reducing the overall ecological footprint. For example, the forest being irrigated by the greywater system could be strategically planted In relation to a building providing the com­ bined cooling effects of shading and evapotranspiration, reducing the ener­ gy required to mechanically cool the building while also enhancing biodiver­ sity. Within this system, various resources (water, biomass, energy, and biodiversity) are working in collabora­ tion. This synergistic and regenerative system illustrates how resource needs that depend upon a certain amount of space can be stacked and interwoven rather than linear and separated. Stack­ ing creates a systematic whole that Is greater than the sum of the linear parts, being a key component of the EcoBal­ ance game and many other concepts and practices developed by CMPBS. This simple concept of resource stacking, or resource integration, clearly illus­ trates how collaborative resource management creates a self-reinforcing regenerative system that mimics natu­ ral systems. Within the context of resource integra­ tion, the practice of climate design illustrates how collaborative build­ ing-climate relationships further reinforces The Center narrative by fur­ ther reducing resource consumption while also enhancing the biophilic expe­ rience of the built environment. The Center Introduced me to Victor Olgyay’s seminal text Design with Climate released in 1963, ten years before the first oil embargo, and challenged the International Style trends prevalent in mid-century architecture that produced placeless energy intensive buildings. Cli­ mate design aims to reestablish a more direct dialogue between shelter and the elements by harnessing the sun, wind, and light to assist with controlling com­ fort: heating through strategically designed glazing and shading devices; cooling through shading, vegetation, and wind harnessing; and lighting with careful admittance of natural light. Ratherthan competing with the climate through over-dependence on mechan­ ical systems, climate responsive design seeks to understand and utilize the 128 | CMPBS Right: House designed with CMPBS GroHome buiiding system

Page 131

THE INFLUENCE I I t 1 ( te THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 129 4 1

Page 132

130 | CMPBS 8’X8’ GroHome with three fat walls

Page 133

THE INFLUENCE cycles and systems of nature. Through this cooperative relationship, resource consumption is reduced, and users occu­ pying these buildings are more closely aligned with their biological predispo­ sition to connect with nature. The practices of resource integration and climate responsive design are shaped and held together through the building armature, requiring material resources and embodied energy for con­ struction. The status quo in architecture and building construction is based on linear relationships defined as the “building lifespan” with building mate­ rial resources progressing from sourcing raw materials to demolition and the landfill. Additionally, buildings are typ­ ically narrowly imagined based on the Immediate programmatic needs with­ out consideration for adaptation, growth, and downsizing. They entangle structure, shell, interior, and utilities into singular inflexible assemblies making it all the more difficult to repurpose. Open building systems, as theorized, designed, and practiced at The Center, asks how the making and re-adaptation of buildings can create closed-loop material life cycles, adapt to changing programmatic needs, and act as adap­ tive armatures that support resource integration and climate responsive design. By separating shell from struc­ ture and concentrating the utilities in the more permanent beams and col­ umns, the infill walls are more adaptable, flexible, and reusable. As In the Gro-Home, the house can begin as a small dwelling and grow according to the needs of a family. The shell con­ sists of wall panels and FatWalls containing various functional needs, from bedrooms to bio-aquatic waste treatment tanks. With utilities concen­ trated in the structure, walls and FatWalls are plug-n-play and adapt based on site conditions and space needs. Open building systems are also better able to cooperate with site con­ ditions through climate responsive design practices. Passive solar, heat avoidance, natural ventilation. Integrat­ ed vegetation, and active solar systems are factors in the building equation and easily conform within the system’s flex­ ibility. Within the adaptable climate responsive design, the open building system is also better able to reinforce resource integration strategies. The Urban Infill GroHome shows how an open building system can be used to close the loop on resource cycles within the site. The roof collects water, produc­ es energy, and reduces cooling loads. The use of passive and active solar Fat­ Walls creates an envelope system that also generates energy, and the garden walls produce food, repurpose greywa- ter, and provide biophilic natural vegetation. Living the Story These stories, experiences, and relation­ ships born out of the CMPBS community leave so many of us permanently changed. I met my wife Heidi when we were both Center Interns. To this day, we make decisions and discuss life choices based on how they align with the “Cen­ ter” values that were brought into focus during our years in Austin. Living out these values doesn’t always express itself in commotional daring building projects. For example, one very important and simple decision I make every morning is how to get to work. On days that I bike commute through the city greenway in my hometown of Bloomington, Indiana,Ifeel aligned with my values and engaged in the many aspects of life that bring meaning and purpose into how I allocate my time resources. I am engaged with my bio­ logically evolved body that adapted to endure long aerobic chases as a prehis­ toric hunter, and I know that the exercise Is contributing to my physical and men­ tal health. I engage my community at the pedestrian scale with others that also value the physically engaged acts of walking, biking, running, and skate­ boarding. I am more attuned to the elements of nature: the singing birds, the blooming flowers, and the cooling winds. I arrive at my office feeling reju­ venated from the journey and Inspired to work. In addition to my physical and mental well-being, the bike commute also appeals to my sustainability values in that It reduces my economic expen­ diture on fuel and avoids the CO2 emissions. Additionally, the infrastruc­ ture required to support pedestrian scale transportation requires much less space for ecologically benign and imper­ meable infrastructure. This last point Illustrates how my personal experience is Intrinsically linked to the shared com­ munity values and narratives that made the greenway possible. THE FIRST so YEARS | 131

Page 134

The dedicated pedestrian greenway and community park was made possible due to a collaborative undertaking In our community that stretches back almost 35 years. In the early ’90s, local govern­ ment officials began telling a story about how the then active Monon rail line and 65 acre switchyard could be developed into a natural multi-use pedestrian corridor linking the southern and northern neighborhoods through the heart of downtown, along with transforming the former switchyard brownfield site into the largest park In the city. This inspiring story emerged from a community that values nature, recreation, local downtown businesses, and public open space. The idea, much like the fictional stories that bound together our ancestral communities, inspired decades of unification and sup­ port. Implementing the ambitious project necessitated a highly collabora­ tive process Involving community members, land owners, government agencies, consultants, designers, engi­ neers, and contractors. Today, four mayors later, the trail continues to expand, nearly linking my six-mile bike commute from home to studio via mul­ tiuse trail, urban park, and a vibrant downtown core. As a bike commuter my values and the various aspects of life that I want to incorporate into how I spend my time are in collaboration. My needs for exer­ cise, community engagement, connection with nature, environmental stewardship, and transportation are simultaneously creating a whole that Is greaterthan the sum of the parts. This single decision of choosing to ride my bike creates a series of self-reinforcing events that clearly pulls me closer to The Center. I also see that It’s not simply my personal and Immediate experience.I am part of the shared community story that values and supports health, well- being, and sustainability and that has worked collaboratively for decades to create the supportive infrastructure. The scale jumping from personal expe­ rience to collaborative community illustrated by my bike commute shows how our Individual stories about what helps us move toward our center are intrinsically linked and strengthened when connected to a shared communi­ ty narrative. The Center’s stories about striving for a maximum potential future have woven together an intricate network of collab­ orators over the last 50 years that are now working in cooperation to help pro- pel a way of thinking that challenges the overly competitive and linear flaws inherent in our culture. As I sit here and contemplate whyIwas drawn to CMPBS and how many of my closest friends, including my life partner, come from my Center relationships, I see more clearly how the power of the network is funda­ mentally transforming the story of our culture to one that seeks to build coop­ erative relationships. We know that it Is Inherently human to work with each other to create thriving communities and that these communities must work in cooperation with, and maximize the potential of, the natural systems that support us. The same synergistic expe­ rience I feel when riding my bike Is at the core of how we approached projects at The Center and is what binds together the CMPBS community. It Is the driving force behind the creative and collabora­ tive work that pulls us all back toward The Center. We, as a collective group, have all tapped Into this source and have carried it with us through our lives. It has become a compass that aligns our lives with that spark that brought us together. 132 | CMPBS

Page 135

Three story Grohome with algea fatwalls, PV Fatwalls, and roofdeck THE FIRST so YEARS | 133

Page 136

It’s Up to Us LUCIA ATHENS V *

• Tm Seaholm Eco-District Austin, TX134 | CMPBS

Page 137

THE INFLUENCE LUCIA ATHENS IS A LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, AUTHOR OF BUILDING AN EMERALD CITY AND THE SUSTAINABILITY REVOLUTIONISTS. SHE LED THE CITY OF SEATTLE GREEN BUILDING PROGRAM FOR 10 YEARS AND SERVED THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR 12 YEARS AS THEIR INAUGURAL CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER. Many among us have grown old while we were waiting for something. Perhaps we were waiting for visionary elected officials to solve the myriads of pressing challenges facing us today. Maybe by now we’ve realized that’s a fool’s errand. Perhaps we were secretly guarding hope that a righteous superhero would come swooping in to vanquish the evildoers. Our collective western mythology tells us that if we wait long enough, the cavalry will come riding over the mountaintop to save us. Even if it’s to save us from ourselves. I’m guessing that by now, many of us have realized that no one is coming. IT’S UP TO US. The actions of renegades require no permits nor approvals. Small acts of rebellion can take the form of speaking up about what we know is right, or terribly wrong. Further, when we collectively lock arms with like-minded people from ourcommunity, sometimes we can help an unlikely dark horse win the race. My heroes are the people who don’t sit around complaining about what’S wrong with the world. Instead, they choose to use their energy more productively to do something about what’S bothering them. Or perhaps even inspiring them. But how do we foster an initiative-taking culture? One answer is through the patient gift of mentorship, a core value at The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Over the past 50 years, 250 interns and volunteers have passed through their workshops, studios, and communal spaces. So many hearts and minds opened through the tremendous generosity of CMPBS. The resulting community of brave young designers have undoubtably made a positive difference in the world over the last 50 years, impossible to measure. Ripple- effects will doubtless continue over our planet’s next 50 trips around the sun, and beyond. The Center’s mentorship includes creating buildings and spaces that teach those lucky enough to experience them. Such places provide a special kind of design pedagogy. My own experience working with CMPBS began in the 1990’s as a disillusioned graduate student at the nearby University of Texas, where I found too few professors at the time teaching sustainability. Back then, green building was an unfamiliar concept on the untended outskirts of design practice. Luckily, I stumbled upon a quirky campus of ramshackle buildings, experimental laboratories, and adventurous researchers, a place called The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. The people I found there welcomed me in like family, for which I’m forever grateful. What I learned there,I learned by doing, by tinkering. One of the things Pliny helped me realize is that there are no dumb questions, only dumb answers. And in the questioning, I also came to realize that no one person had all the answers. If they said they did. I’d be well advised to run quickly in a different direction. Uncharted territory, for The Center, is a call to action. The state of “net-knowing” sends them searching the back-alleys of creativity, amassing THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 135

Page 138

reams of useful data, gleaning interconnections, and digging deeper. So deep that maybe It even hurts a little. A passion for asking difficult questions, then amassing a charismatic menu of wise possibilities, is their organic bread and butter. The fearlessness with which Pliny and Gail approach their own unique process is a rare thing in our culture of consumerist obedience and academic rule-following. Some might call them renegades. They simply don’t subscribe to the aphorism “You must learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly.” They could care less about design conventions, which if we dig deep enough, we often find are based on outmoded assumptions. CMPBS makes up their own rules as they go along, refusing to waste precious energy worrying about the possibility of mistakes. Errors are how we learn, how our vast evolution has tried and failed, over and over again, ultimately finding more and more sophisticated, interconnected, biophilic forms of life. If a concept falls, the lessons learned are then woven Into the grand symphony of successful solutions that The Center offers up to those brave enough to listen. WhenIwas leading the City of Seattle’s burgeoning green building initiative back in 2002, the Bullitt Foundation helped fund The Center to undertake a study which asked a seemingly nonsensical question: Are there salmon in your building?The Iconic Chinook wild salmon holds a revered spot in the consciousness of the Pacific Northwest, the canary In the coal mine of their quality of life. So great is their love for the species that the term “Salmon Nation” is used to describe the region. The project research uncovered previously hidden relationships between landlocked construction practices and salmon decline. The foundational logic of the study is something the medical community refer to as the Precautionary Principle—the idea that if there is a risk of something causing harm, regardless of scientific proof, we are morally bound to avoid that potential harm. With this way of thinking, architects bear the same responsibility to their clients as a doctor. Perhaps the most important result of that Seattle study was an increased level of thoughtfulness by the local architectural community, who began to realize there were countless invisible connections between their choices and the surrounding living ecosystem. Much later in my career, working as the City of Austin’s Chief Sustainability Officer, The Center posed galvanizing questions surrounding the Seahoim EcoDlstrict, a burgeoning new neighborhood on the edge of downtown. In addition to a date-rich analysis of the sustainability potential of the District, they proposed a provocative work of public art. The concept they presented transformed the towering stacks of the neighborhood’s defunct power plant into a massive dashboard that could communicate the collective daily performance of buildings and people within the community. Like the University of Texas clock tower that is bathed with burnt orange-colored light (the official UT color) when the home team wins a game, each concrete stack would light up at night when a performance goal had been met during the previous 24 hours. Energy, water, waste and transportation goals would find expression In highly visible markers of community sustainability progress. Sadly, this concept never came to fruition, but the power of the idea sparks my imagination to this day. The audacity with which Pliny and Gail approach their work provides an unfailing beacon within a building industry that too often falls back on safe choices, mired in a world of liabilities, dwindling budgets, and clients that lack vision. The Center’s approach has served me as a reliable source of courage in a career checkered too often with moments of doubt and downright imposter syndrome. I can still recall fellow undergrad students at Texas A&M who sniggered at my building design that lacked parking (you’ve got to be kidding), or whispered at the hobbit-like earthsheltered home Icame up with for my senior Landscape Architecture project (damn tree- buggers). Much later, there were colleagues who actively worked to sabotage LEED® certifications, in the early days when no one knew exactly what that meant. Afraid to take a risk, they were terrified of not knowing all the answers. Those cowards had the audacity to claim the cost to achieve LEED® was causing budget cuts to the children’s area of the Seattle 136 | CMPBS

Page 139

THE INFLUENCE OUR COLLECTIVE WESTERN MYTHOLOGY TELLS US THAT !F WE WAIT LONG ENOUGH, THE CAVALRY WILL COME RIDING OVER THE MOUNTAINTOP TO SAVE US. NO ONE IS COMING, IPS UP TO US. Central Library. “THE CHILDREN VS SUSTAINABILITY” — now there’s a faulty argument if ever I heard one. Audacity in design must become second nature for the challenging times we live in. We can’t afford to shy away from the puzzling questions because the threat of climate change makes us want to hide in a safe corner somewhere, shielded from facing the anxiety of the biggest existential threat of our times. Have we found ourselves too afraid to challenge the status quo, the hate-mongers or petty dictators who have found a way to take advantage of the collective fears which stoke their rise to power? We need heroes both large and small to take up the cause of sustainability, to offer new ways of thinking through the muddle we’ve made of things. These acts of courage can take many forms, with or without the accompanying cape. One of my indelible CMPBS moments involved Pliny teaching me how to strip the bark off a pine log with a draw knife, preparing materials to build an Indigenous elders teaching lodge at a place called Thunderhorse Ranch east of Austin. One must sit astride the log and put your back Into it. The resulting aching muscles and blisters were painful, the clothes I was wearing completely ruined by pine sap. These inconveniences were clearly inconsequential compared to what we’d been called to do In service to our client. In service to the planet as client. On that same project, we didn’t flinch when the client calmly told us we would have to participate in a faint- Inducing sweat lodge before we could give our design presentation that evening. Of course, we said. The crises we face can be abrupt and painfully tragic, as well as more slow- moving, like the parable of the boiling frog. Death by a thousand cuts. When exactly will we know when it’s time to say enough Is enough? There is no one answer to that question. WhatIcan tell you is that at the scene of a crisis, when someone asks “Who’s In charge?” the real heroes never look behind them to see who else might be willing to step up. Without hesitation, they raise their hands. Leadership in the face of uncertainty is something the world is hungry for. We all need to be leaders. Because we are crazy enough to believe our ideas have merit, that our God-given intelligence is something we owe to the beautiful places we call home. Because, in the words of Marianne Williamson, “Your playing small does not serve the world.” Every design professional working today must be some kind of hero. Not to mention every client, contractor, specifier, facility manager. Every product developer, every tenant. Each of us must become part of the solution. There’s no time to lose. We must ascribe to whatI think of as The Center’s unofficial motto: No one is coming. It’s up to us. THE FIRST so YEARS | 137

Page 140

Ecology + Systems Theory = CMPBS MICHAEL A. BERK MICHAEL A. BERK greeWob/fe LARRY BARROW 8 CRrriCAL POINTS FOR: Ultra-affordable and ecological-minded factory-built modular housing units B^issippi State r11 \i\iRsin SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE ART + DESIGI, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING RALPH SINNO PE | KEITH HODGE — 138 | CMPBS “Green Mobile” Design from Michael Berk and the Mississippi State School of Architecture

Page 141

THE INFLUENCE MICHAEL A. BERK, AIA, IS THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AT MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY, WHERE HE HELD THE F.L. CRANE ENDOWED PROFESSORSHIP. HE RESEARCHED IN THE AREAS OF: INFORMATION DESIGN + THEORY, ECOLOGICAL DESIGN, AND FACTORY-BUILT HOUSING (GREENMOBILE®). IN 2019 BERK WAS NAMED DIRECTOR EMERITUS AND PROFESSOR EMERITUS BY THE MSU PROVOST. While contemplating the next fifty years it’s hard to imagine how Sapiens will continue to inhabit and thrive on Bucky Fuller’s “Spaceship Earth” without enacting E.O. Wilson’s 2016 proposal of “Half-Earth”: a dogma demanding that 50% of Earth’s surface be dedicated as a human-free zone for nature’s biodiversity to regenerate and simply ‘do its thing.’ It should be clear and not controversial that embracing Wilson’s clarion call of balancing the natural world with human existence, Sapiens will have more than a fighting chance to realistically survive — and possibly thrive — as we spin around the sun. The natural world is a relentless force. We can choose to: 1) work with the physics of environmental forces, an idealized ecological solution; 2) work against and try to overcome the environmental forces (our current brute technology solution); or 3) give over half the planet to Gaia and let her do her thing — while humans continue to follow the destructive path as historically detailed in Yuval Hararl’s “Sapiens” opus. According to E.O. Wilson, Half-Earth is likely the only choice that can minimally sustain us and our bad habits. In 1973, Arne Naess wrote the first paper that attempted to define the philosophical underpinnings of ‘deep ecology.’ At about this same timeIbegan my architectural education at the University of Florida in Gainesville where Iwas introduced first-hand to the basics of ‘systems theory’ and ‘ecological design’ by: Professors Howard T. & Elizabeth Odum (ecological originators of ‘energy systems language’), Mark Brown (protege of the Odums), and Ira Winarsky (spreading the word of Ian McHarg). This stuff resonated deeply and fully entered my being. Little did I know that almost three decades later my path would coincidentally intersect with Pliny Fisk 111, who also had significant connections to these same folks. Following a decade of architectural practice which included work in San Francisco (getting licensed) and back to South Florida to be the design partner of an established West Palm Beach firm that hadjust finished co-developing and authoring the Florida Model Energy Code, the first of its kind In the U.S. to be legally adopted — I found myself In 1990 as a new faculty member at the Mississippi State University School of Architecture. Along with teaching studio I was assigned to teach a core lecture course on Passives Systems, ultimately broadening the scope and sub-titling it Ecological Design. In the late 90’s I had dinner with Bob Berkebile after he lectured earlier in the day at our School; I pointedly asked him: Who is doing important and serious work on the subject? He Immediately told meImust meet Pliny Fisk and Gail Vittori at CMPBS in Texas. Around 2000, having recently secured a grant from HUD and working with the School’s Small Town Center, I reached out to Pliny and Invited him to be the TrimJoist Fellow & Lecturer that year; which then led to hiring him as a consultant on our low-cost pre-fab GreenMobile® prototype home unit. We were attempting to ecologically and THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 139

Page 142

economically re-envision the existing mobile home production paradigm while maintaining and maximizing the industry’s ingenious ‘down-the-road’ delivery system. Thus began our collaboration and relationship. Much of the GreenMobile® preliminary design research was happening simultaneous to the CMPBS entry, with UT Austin, to the first Solar Decathlon competition in Washington DC. Witnessing ecological and systems theory being put into practice, in pure practical and modest ways, was incredibly eye-opening to me; clearly encouraging confidence in my own idealism and optimism of applied research and design. Many of the same concerns, limits, and issues facing the Solar D project were not that dissimilar from the GreenMobile® limits I had already adopted. Frankly, Pliny and Gail were the only critics that offered sage advice and critiques; and like the best teachers, it often led me to dig deeper. My first visits to The Center were eye- opening and surreal. This really was a pioneering ecological think-tank where the rubber literally met the road. Applied research at Its finest.Iam confident that their model was seminal to the proliferation of hands-on design/build centers we currently have around the country. The lessons I learned were invaluable to me and my students and the ongoing development of my own farm-place in rural Oktoc, Mississippi. The Center had a direct impact on our School and the many student interns I sent there to be indoctrinated. The place has a way of getting Into your bones. regardless of one’s preconceptions.I would like to find the calculus to determine the number of disciples it has generated over the decades. Parallelling Pliny’s experimental built- work is the equally amazing legacy of Gail’s policy books, reports and white papers that literally changed the landscape of materials and promoting human health in the built environment. Not sure if the USGBC would be as comprehensive if not for Gail. Her policy work has always astounded me. The storied stuff of Gail’s consultation on the Pentagon interior renovations is worthy of an independent Sundance film; convincing clients (the Pentagon brass) to decisively address lAQ and eliminate the use of ubiquitous dangerous plastics, amongst other things, in this ultra-conservative military institution is simply heroic. Over the last 25 years, the CMPBS became a touchstone for multiple visits of advice and intellectual nourishment. Pliny seemed to be the only colleague to grasp and challenge my unconventional theories of energy and heat transfer In the super lightweight SIP construction of the GreenMobile®. I have yet to meet another individual with his scientific depth, curiosity, and design sensibilities of the built environment and systems thinking. It is no wonder that he has been short-listed multiple times for the Buckminster Fuller Prize. I have also been impressed at the longevity of The Center — the policies, experimentations and applied research provided to the world over the last half- century by this small band of renegades are unrivaled. Personally, the thing that always kept me connected was their unwavering resistance to the superficialities and fashions of ‘green’ and ‘sustainable’ design while stridently making Max’s Pot style commotion and holding true to the north star of ‘deep ecological design.’ Along with a handful of others,Iowe a great deal of gratitude to Gail and Pliny… keeping me in their orbit as a collaborator for these last many years has been an honor and challenge that I continue to treasure. Universities and non-profit think-tanks must reconsider their minimal ‘core’ educational curriculum; although Al Is the buzz and exponentially con­ suming us while universities rush to accommodate, they MUST first introduce fundamental and required coursework In ‘ethics’ and ‘ecology.’ Without this knowledge helping to guide one’s thinking, nothing else really matters. 140 | CMPBS

Page 143

THE INFLUENCE IIPMENTPtWri CODE BIPV SOLAR collection + sb -Engineered to the International Residential Code & ADA Code. -Helical steel pier foundations are screwed In w/ portable hydraulic equipment; boiled to underside of steel carriage. Are easily re­ moved by un-bolling and unwinding the steel pier from the ground. -Unit is easily de-mountable from foundation piers. -Clip-on overhangs to be built-in photo-voltaic (BIPV) panels supplied by utility companies as part of their green switch programs. Use of net-metering when bat­ tery systems are not used. -Clip-on BIPV and porches can be replaced, removed, and recycled. Made from recycled metal -Clip-on overhangs provide shade protection in summer and allow transmittance in winter. CARD TRAILER Dr -Standard steel undercarriage and delivery system wl single-wide unit delivered(te)site. Provisions are made for additional ‘clip-on’ porch and pod components (earned on a separate flat-bed) that are site-installed. -Easily de-mountable and relocated. -Unit IS delivered as single-wide w/ clip-on pods and porches. -All mechanical/elecirical harnesses are surface mounted (under chassis or in picture rails) for ease of plug-n-’ play assembly. -Clip-on pods house the following, (bunk-beds, m e equip . stor­ age. wash/dryer, stove, or desk alcove ) -The full envelope (walls, floor and roof) of the unit will be constructed using green SIPs (Structural Insulated Panels) -The unit is super-insulated, exceeding all current IBC standards -Use of local economy and products within a 250 mile radius -Reduction in number of assembly-line parts, panelized skin system (walls, floor, and roof). -Each component to be made out of ‘single material’ for easy recycling stream -All interior partitions are made of wood panels w/ continuous glass window above door heights. -Unit IS to be onented on an east-west axis This onenlation for a Ihin plan allows for maximum solar control and natural ventilation. -A tree kit and diagram comes standard with the unit The kit comes w/ gravel (for underside of unit) and native oaks . GREEN SWITCI NET METERING “Green Mobile” Design from Michael Berk and the Mississippi State School of Architecture THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 141 greewob/fe

Page 144

Compost Your House MICHAEL CAMACHO MICHAEL CAMACHO, P.E. LIVES IN MARFA, TEXAS WITH HIS PARTNER AND TWO KIDS. WHILE, TECHNICALLY, HE IS AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER WHO DESIGNS PHOTOVOLTAIC AND ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, HE ENJOYS BUILDING HIS “PROJECT HOUSE.” r DEFEND THE ADOBES 142 | CMPBS Michael Camacho and his family outside “project house” in Marfa, TX

Page 145

THE INFLUENCE To Start off this essay, an anecdote. Just last week, while Installing a fantastic, new to us, but slightly larger door at our adobe Project House, we had to remove a wood lintel and the adobe bricks above it, to make the 3’x8’ door fit into what was a 3’x7’ rough opening. While clean­ ing up,Isimply said of the adobe rubble, dust and wood scraps, “throw It all in the compost,” versus say, the trash. Immediately thinking of Max Pot, I couldn’t help but wonder if they would approve the slogan “Compost your house!” Ithink they would. Iwant to thank The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems for 50 years of existing, teaching, sustaining, (yes obviously), but really for accepting my offer to be an employee for them in Jan­ uary of 2005. Iwas not the first person to arrive on their first day, Alex Stadner big-time smiling and shaking my hand with a “welcome to THIS quirky place” and later on in the day, Pliny vetting you/ me with a “Do you know what this place is? Do you really want to work here?” Luckily, I Immediately met Randall and Melanie, and Gail the next week, and I felt the balance of The Center. The fol­ lowing Monday,I decided it was best to return. Two weeks later, I believe I was starting to get it. Two months later, I really discovered both the Book Library and the Materials Library. Two years later, though, almost to the day, I stopped showing up. Because of those two years, CMPBS and its tentacles (the staff/interns/friends/visitors!), have helped to guide and shape most aspects of my life. Truly, the lessons I learned, and the people I met, from a two year job experience, have profoundly inspired the 20 years of life since then. The people! I cannot think of the past twenty years without thinking of the people I have met at CMPBS. The staff, who dedicated a decent portion of their lives for the fulfillment of thejob, worked for the vision of the future. Let’s be seri­ ous, no one was working at Max Pot for the salary. I noticed that in week num­ ber one. However, I immediately noticed this vision… the vision of the staff and interns, not necessarily the 10 year mas­ ter plan of The Center. This vision,Isaw in all of us, andIsee it to this day. Every timeIvisit The Center,Isee the vision in the newest staff member and interns. Whenever I speak to someone, and we learn through conversation that we both worked at CMPBS but at different times, I know we have this common vision. Now, 20 years after the CMPBS 30th anniversary party* I am lucky enough to be building a home with my family (a partner and two kids), and it has the name Casa Proyecta, aka Project House. Wouldn’t you know, during the seven years we have been building our “little two story adobe addition,” all the CMPBS power words are incorporated into the building itself — truth wall, locally sourced building materials, reused build­ ing materials, high indoor air quality, solar passive design, earthen floors with hydronic heating, solar water heating, humanure systems, outdoor showers, rainwater collection, ecological net­ works, etc etc. While building said “little two story adobe,” we had community work days where we talked about Appropriate Technologies, thought about Life Cycle Analysis, considered Total Embodied Energy, debated Bio- mimicy, dissected Secrets of the Soil, and learned to love Natural Capitalism. There isn’t a day that goes by without The Center’s influence being projected on my life, andIthank The Center for the work it has done to develop Architects, Engineers, Designers, and Thinkers with Sustainability as the mantra for life. *1 still own that 30 Years of Serious Com­ motion T-Shirt. THE FIRST so YEARS | 143

Page 146

0

Page 147

1 $l+&

Page 148

The Challenge of Institutional Continuity MICHAEL NEUMAN Gail and Pliny Giving overview of Center work at a first Friday Open House ru 146 | CMPBS

Page 149

THE INFLUENCE MICHAEL NEUMAN IS A CONSULTANT AND RETIRED PROFESSOR OF SUSTAINABLE URBANISM. HE HAS AUTHORED OVER ONE HUNDRED BOOKS, ARTICLES, REPORTS, AND PLANS TRANSLATED INTO TEN LANGUAGES AND WON NUMEROUS AWARDS. HIS WORKS SPAN URBANISM, INFRASTRUCTURE, PLANNING, DESIGN, ENGINEERING, SUSTAINABILITY AND GOVERNANCE. A key challenge facing The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems is to maintain its relevance well into the future, be it the next five years or fifty. The ideas in this essay hold for processes and practices fifty years from now, or any time in between. Developing and putting into place principles and practices for organizational processes that can stand the test of time is especially difficult nowadays when science, expertise, and evidence fall Into Increasing disregard. Nonetheless, important innovations, and more importantly, the creative processes that flourish innovations, become paramount. The question is not only how to perpetuate processes that spur Innovation, but how to continue to put them into practice. That is, institutionalize them in a flexible, creative way. Spreading the good word is no longer sufficient in the face of broken politics, big money lobbying, and algorithm-generated social media, among other factors that drive what passes as public debate into self-serving echo chambers. In this environment, new thinking and new practices are Indispensable. Yet how new are they? Some of the old ways, which have been forged in the crucible of time and common sense, can be adapted to current and future circumstances. CMPBS has long utilized these. They include historic indigenous practices that respond to and take into account place and climate, even as both change, and change each other via mutual reinforcement. Implementing these processes and practices takes time. Even in the urgency of the moment, when tempted to fall into expeditious solutions, steadfast allegiance to what we know the Earth, including Its human inhabitants, can support is vital. Learning from and instituting change to existing large scale and industrial practices that tend to be divorced from place and climate and replacing them with locally adapted ones requires innovation. Instituting innovation of this type, even as the phrase instituting innovation may sound like an oxymoron. is the challenge. That is, how to institute without standardizing and ossifying? Thus, the ideas presented here address institutional continuity. This means learning, adaptation. Innovation, and change. In this way, innovation can be instituted by CMPBS and its ever- expanding networks. Several factors impinge upon institutional continuity. Make no mistake. The Center has become an institution, a force for good. One factor is the norms that underlie it, and the image and motto that concisely thrust those norms into the civic imagination, and thus the public sphere of action. Another factor is Internal to the organization itself, in terms of leadership, which is the source of the norms that undergird it. A third factor is the scope of action through which The Center chooses to act. This verb choice, choose, is key, in that while The Center’s approach has always been holistic and multi-scalar, all entities with limited resources must choose strategically those actions with which to engage. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 147

Page 150

While there are other key factors,I select these three as critical starting points, given the extent to which I know The Center as well as Pliny and Gail, its long- standing leaders. What follows elaborates on these three factors guiding the future development of the institution that is CMPBS: norms, leadership, and strategic scope. First, full disclosure, in thatI have known Pliny and The Center for about 35 years, and Gail for nearly that long. As we are both graduates of the Graduate School of Fine Arts at the University of Pennsylvania, now the School of Design, we share common threads of the entangled intersection of people and place, human activities and the environment. One is that context matters. Context refers to what we refer to as nature, the environment, habitat, and the myriad processes that give them life. Context also refers to people, communities, cities, societies; human action at any scale. Perhaps most importantly, we were taught about the interplay between the two: people and nature. A second thread — principle, if you will — that we share is interdisciplinarity. One could say an extreme interdisciplinary knowing of place, process, and context. This goes further and extends to practices that Implement solutions to this interwoven understanding. This is a hallmark of the design approach that Pliny, Gall, The Center and I share that stems from the ethos of the University of Pennsylvania itself, stemming back to its founder, Benjamin Franklin almost 300 years ago. Penn Design as It Is now called has always drawn on interdisciplinarity, whether from the architecture faculty that Pliny studied with, or especially from Ian McHarg, the head of its landscape architecture and environmental planning department. Ian — one of Pliny’s mentors, along with Buckminster Fuller, another mentor, were interdisciplinary thinkers and creators par excellence. Another thread Is addressing problems holistically. This is Intimately connected to the tenet of interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinarity, context, and holism when woven together imply, indeed prescribe, other “Inters” and “multls” as well: inter-scalar (among multiple scales), multi-interest, multi-party, and so on. This method of seeing the world and acting on it further necessitates collaboration and consensus building. These processes take time and effort and lots of both. Patience, persistence, trial and error, focus, and stamina are needed. This Is how people working in groups, which become organizations, and then over time institutions; themselves guided by firm norms, clear structures, and open processes. This is a tail order, which leadership and resources can fill. A final thread is design. That is, creating solutions to place-based problems and opportunities via physical and institutional design. Designs are presented in images, whether 2D,3D, or 4D, independent of the media used to convey them. This use of images links to the norms of an institution that represent it, in that the more “imageable”, or graphically Intelligible an institution’s norms are, the more that they can be “taken up” via the “mind’s eye”, and thus seen and understood, and then displayed and distributed for the benefit of all concerned. Design is problem solving by trial and error, and spatial design in the built environment, regardless of scale — building, block, neighborhood, city, metropolis, region — uses interventions in the human-made and the natural environments to accomplish its aims. These threads and more have bonded Pliny, Gail, The Center and myself in numerous ways over the decades. Exchange of ideas and practices Is the most common bond. Save, perhaps, for good will and good vibes — commotion! On a personal note, another bond was when I recommended that Pliny be hired in the Sustainable Urbanism graduate program at Texas A&M which I Co-founded with professor emeritus Phill Tabb while we were both professors In its College of Architecture. All the founding faculty members of the Sustainable Urbanism program had multiple design and planning degrees, and had demonstrated their integration through their work and their research and writing. Once on board, Pliny and The Center fit right in to its intellectual milieu. He quickly made extraordinary contributions to Sustainable Urbanism along with Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Urban Planning at Texas A&M, all disciplines in which Pliny 148 | CMPBS

Page 151

THE INFLUENCE At Ik ¥ & 5’ ‘li Ki ’
»:4 <d Ure !W mi”;- One of countless groups touring The Center THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 149 &&&

Page 152

and The Center are fluent. CMPBS in turn was able to benefit from student work on Center projects, notably the Solar Decathlon, plus benefitting from faculty ideas and inputs into projects. This mutually beneficial interchange is still ongoing after over twenty years. Institutional Continuity: Norms So, back to institutional continuity. When an institution like CMPBS has solid foundational norms, which it does, it is on firm footing. Because those norms are ethical, and good, they have been translated into operational principles that can be long lived. It is clear to me that the norms that undergird The Center are solid and can be applied long In to the future. Yet what is critical is that they can be conveyed and seen clearly in the mind’s eye of all its constituents. These constituents include funders, members, clients, employees, and volunteers at a minimum. Developing or fine tuning a name, a logo, and a motto are outward facing elements to accomplish this. They have to be simple, intuitive, and instantly recognizable. They develop “brand loyalty” and Inspire anyone who sees the logo or reads / hears the motto. This is somewhat of an exercise in marketing, something all organizations that strive to be institutions, and institutions themselves, take for granted. Key here: the logo needs to be an image which relates directly with The Center’s norms and activities: what It is best known for, and wishes to be known for in the future. While there are any number of marketing texts and firms that engage with this matter, it is critical to develop explicit norms, images, logos, and mottos that resonate broadly with their Intent, which is to better the public good and our planet. This means that they are in the public interest. NPR and PBS (RIP) are good examples, yet not the only ones. For those interested in a general take on this issue, which is grounded in the specific case of Madrid, Spain, there are some references at the end of this essay which are germane. What Madrid has and had in common with CMPBS are that they both deal with the public good, making places better and more sustainable, and deal with complex. Inter-related, and multi-scalar, multi­ interest problems of urban living using planning and design. The principles underlying Madrid’s approach, to use one example, can be adapted by The Center. It may even pay to take a close look at the very name of The Center. Is it “legible” and intelligible by non­ initiates? Is it crisp and clear? Does the name convey without caveats or explanation the exact mission and meaning? Institutional Continuity: Leadership Spoiler: lead via networks, that is, distributed leadership. Any organization with a powerful, capable, charismatic leader; which Is indeed Identified with that leader, has the potential to suffer succession, that is, continuity, that is less than Ideal. Which may even jeopardize its future viability. This is especially sensitive when an organization Is small and the Ieader(s) do most of the strategic work and fundraising. “Succession planning” Is vital. Just as In a family with significant means, when a matri- or patri-arch passes or otherwise moves on, it is incumbent that a succession plan spells out how to steward the resources so that they do good in the future. This requires taking stock and taking a hard look at the present In view of the future, and making tough choices. There are many ways to create and institute a succession plan for an NGO, each of which depends on the people involved. Its size, mission, resources, and the overall context. The purpose of this essay is not to spell out or suggest any particular method. It merely points out the obvious and highlights its urgent importance. Leaders create an organization, and can make it or break it. Yet all leaders need followers, all organizations need supportive constituents in a wide playing field who are willing to step up. In today’s world, distributed networks play Increasingly Important, even dominant roles, including and especially in organizational structures, processes, and continuity. We live in a network society and network economy. Leveraging resources, parlaying norms, spreading knowledge and practices all benefit from networks and networking. Networks are the real leaders in today’s world. Just look at the internet, the cloud, Al, and how organizations and institutions are constituted and accomplish their aims. We are all networkers now. Can a network form of leadership be appropriate for CMPBS? If so, how? If not, what else? To be clear, for a network 150 | CMPBS

Page 153

THE INFLUENCE to flourish, it needs a strong center and vital hub. That can be a leader or leadership circle. That also includes a strong Image that conveys its norms and institutional “soul”. At this point in the life cycle of CMPBS, some inspiring out-of-the box thinking (something at which The Center has always excelled!) about leadership and how it is constituted for the next five or ten years will (continue to) be a fun exercise. The same type of thinking that has long guided projects can now be shifted to the organization’s future, Including its leadership. Institutional Continuity: Strategic Scope One of the many strengths of The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems has been its broad scope. It has tackled, successfully, many diverse issues and projects, and made extraordinary contributions over a long time. It has strived to integrate many elements while developing holistic processes, measures, and projects. This characteristic, to my knowledge, has largely been driven by the intellectual force and energetic drive of Pliny Fisk and Gail Vittori. Bravo and braval In a new era, with different (networked?) leadership, how will strategic priorities be set? No one entity can accomplish everything. It brings to mind the title of a famous article in urban planning: “If planning is everything, maybe it’s nothing”. That article was written in response to comprehensive planning trying to bring about change in every aspect of a city via public policy. Since that early 1970s article, which alluded to and even contributed to a crisis of confidence in the profession, urban planning has narrowed its scope to the most practical matters affecting cities and their citizens. It has even privileged design as a method to solve these issues, something that paradoxically was largely outside the scope of North American city planning in the 1970s. Comprehensive planning that tried to do everything has fallen by the wayside. Strategic planning and strategic design have taken Its place. Strategic means targeted to the most Important issues — chosen by leaders — that have spillover effects on others. How will The Center focus its attention and its limited resources while still being holistic and true to its ethos? In sum. The Center is in good shape, overall, and has a vast and proud legacy that will serve as touchstones for its future. How it chooses to address current and future challenges makes a difference. With its sound leadership, including board of directors and key constituents, and with good guidance, together they may make institutional continuity the most strategic project that The Center can now undertake. To my mind, I have certainty that it can succeed. Sources Michael Neuman “The Image of the Institution: A Cognitive Theory of Institutional Change” Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(2) 139-156, 2012. Michael Neuman. 2010. The Imaginative Institution: Planning and Governance in Madrid. London and New York: Routledge. Willem Salet, ed. 2018. The Routledge Handbook of Institutions and Planning in Action. London and New York: Routledge. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 151

Page 154

Musings from a Former Architect of Record RICHARD MACMATH 152 | CMPBS Laredo Demonstration “Blueprint” Farm (Credit: R. Greg Hursley)

Page 155

THE INFLUENCE RICHARD’S PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE SPANS OVER FIVE DECADES IN COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING,ARCHITECTURE, GREEN BUILDING, NET-ZERO ENERGY HOMES, AND CARBON BALANCING. HE RETIRED AFTER SERVING AS DESIGN DIRECTOR WITH THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER. Prequel In March 1990, Solar ‘90: The National Solar Energy Conference was held at the old Palmer Auditorium in Austin. Concurrently and co-located, the 15th National Passive Solar Conference was also being held. As a co-founder of Sunstructures Architects in Ann Arbor, MI,I had attended every annual Passive Solar Conference since the second one in 1976. There were several interesting sessions by nationally known designers, architects, builders, and solar contractors but I attended a session presented by Pliny Fisk for a couple of reasons. A month earlier my wife had accepted a position at UT-Austin and since we decided to move from Ann Arbor to Austin, I wanted to introduce myself to presenters from the Austin area.I had also been following the work of CMPBS through publications like Shelter and the Whole Earth Catalog. Moreover, the founding and mission of Sunstructures seemed to parallel those of CMPBS. Within a few days of moving to Austin I connected with Pliny and found myself traveling (very fast) with him in his Peugeot to Laredo to work at the Blueprint Demonstration Farm. In the next ten years I obtained my Texas architect registration, received a Master of Architecture degree at the UT School of Architecture, and was CMPBS Architect of Record from 1991- 2001. In this essay I will recall some of my work experiences at CMPBS during my tenure there and use them as a springboard to foresee what challenges we will face in the future to fulfill the mission of CMPBS — “to undertake projects based on their potential contribution to site, regional, and global sustainability.” In this essay I will highlight three examples of how pioneering and innovative work at CMPBS has developed, morphed, evolved, and extended Its reach beyond early accomplishments to influence current and future maximum potential Initiatives and, in doing so, remind ourselves that what we Imagine can become reality. From Laredo Blueprint Demonstration Farm to Agrihoods In 1988 the Laredo Demonstration Blueprint Farm was conceived as a “prototypical bloregional building system” integrating landscape, architecture, infrastructure, and regional materials to bridge the social and technical means of sustainable agriculture and create a groundwork for local economic development. Unique to the Farm relative to conventional farms were Its passive and renewable energy infrastructure components. These Included 40 KW capacity wind generators that pumped water from the Rio Grande River through a constructed wetland for purification; updraft and downdraft cooling towers; a zeolite solar-powered refrigerator; ferro-cement cisterns; a large solar crop dryer; helix anchor foundation; repurposed oil drilling stems as support columns; and a site scale shade and wind deflection structure. A primary objective was to design a built form that supports local and regional THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 153

Page 156

BOUNDARY, TOPOGRAPHIC AND TREE SURVEY OF ACRES BEING A PORTION OF A CALLED I8.00-ACRE TRACT OF LAND, DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO PLINY FISK, III, RECORDED IN VOLUME 9715, PAGE 838, OF THE DEED RECORDS OF TRA VIS COUNTY, TEXAS AND SITUATED IN THE CTTY OF AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS. ADDRESS: 8604 FM 969, CHY OF AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS NOTES TAG NO. OTATYrt TAG NO. SU BTYPE GENERAL NOTES: 114 W HACKBEMY 431 11° HACKBERRY 1. EKSEhtfATS, RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER ENCUMBRANCES WHICH 116 8° HACKBERRY • 432 16.75” (10”X7°X63-) CEDAR ELM MAY AFFECT THE SUBJECT TRACT, WERE NOT RESEARCHED BY THE 117 rHAOBEMY 433 12.5°(,3”XG-)HACKB£RAY SURVEYOR AND ATTTU: COMMITMENT WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR THE 125 24° CEDAR ELM 434 12° HACKBERRY PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY. 132 ,’ CEDAR ELM 435 9-CEDAR ELM 133 IT CEDAR ELM 436 1425°(93-XS3-X4, CEDAR ELM 2. UMITED DETAILS OF THE BUILDINGS AND DAPROVEMENTS WERE 134 IT” CEDAR ELM 437 S’ CEDAR ELM LOCATED. WOOD DECKS. MINOR LANDSCAPING BORDERS. AND 137 IXS-HAOOSUIY 433 IS-HACKDERRY OTHER FEATURES WERE NOT LOCATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS 133 ir CEDAR ELM 439 6° CEDAR ELM SURVEY. 143 IT LIVE OAK 440 11” CEDAR ELM 144 U’UVE OAK 441 ruVE OAK 3. THE CONTOURS SHOWN HEREON. REPRESENT I-FOOT CONTOUR 143 IT OSAGE ORANGEOEAD 501 14” LIVE OAK INTERVAL. 146 11” CEDAR ELM 502 145°UVE OAX 151 22-S-UVE OAX 503 11-5-UVt OAK 4. SYMBOLS STT OUT IN THE T-EGiND’ ARE NOT TO SCALE AND ARE 152 ZT BOX ELDER 504 225” (lexis’) LIVE OAK SHOWN W THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION TO INDICATE THEiR 111 ir (Il-XIOT) OSAGE ORANGE 505 95° LIVE OAK PRESENCE. 203 21° PECAN 506 B-HACKBERRY 203 IT HACXBEMY 206 IO” HACKBERRY 207 IS-TrCuTyS-l HACKBEKRY 203 Z3- PECAN 20, 11-5’ PECAN 210 21’ PECAN 214 273° PECAN 215 ITUVE OAK 216 IT LIVE OAK 217 1,J°UVE OAC 216 15-UVE OAX 219 ZTUtf OM 220 1425” (&5’X73°X4, REDBUD 229 93° MESQUITE 251 ICT CEDAR ELM 261 ITUVE OAK 262 16°UVE0AK 263 U’UVE OAK 264 ll’ CEDAR 265 IS-UVE OAK 401 253° CEDAR ELM 402 11.3’CEDAR ELM 403 31” CEDAR ELM 401 Zr CEDAR ELM 4C5 11° AMEX CAN STCAMOT 406 IT AMERICAN SYCAMORE 407 ITUVEOAK 406 117S”(11’X55-) CEDAR ELM 40, 193°hACreERRY 410 11” CEDAR ELM 411 95°POST OAK 412 &5° HACKBERRY 507 It LIVE OAK 503 IT LAI OAK 509 rUVE OAK 510 IT CEDAR ELM 511 IC UVE OAK 512 IT LIVE OAK 513 9’ OSAGE GRANGE 514 14- Uns’) CEDAR ELM 515 IT (13’X12’) CEDAR ELM 516 11° CEDAR ELM 517 6- CEDAR ELM 51B 9° CEDAR ELM 519 ir MESauiTE 520 ILS’ (ITXT, CEDAR ELM 521 14° CEDAR ELM 522 ICT CEDAR ELM 523 19’UVEOAK 524 11’ CEDAR EIM 523 II’ CEDAR EIM 526 ICT CEDAR ELM 527 17- PECAN 523 2? AMERICAN ELM 529 12” O-W) SOUDiERN CATALPA 530 W OSAGE ORANGE -DEAD 531 r HACKBERRY 532 2T CKN 0AK 533 9° CEDAR 534 9°CEDAR EIM 535 B-HACKDERRY 536 9- CEDAR ELM 537 rOEDAR ELM 533 r HACTCRXY 5^ ONLY ABOVE<>ROUND ANO VISIBLE E\TDENCE OF THE UTIUTIES WERE OBSERVED AND SHOWN HEREON. 6. FENCE UNES & OVERHEAD UTIUTY UN’ES 5X0674 REPRESENT THE AVERAGE CENTERLINE OF THE FCSTS. BASIS OF BEARINGS: BEARNGS ANO COORDINATES ARE EASED ON THETEXAS COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1963, CENTRAL ZONE (NAD_&3(2011)). ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HERION ARE GRID VALUES REPRESENTED IN U3. SURVEY FEET. ELEVATION RIFERENCI: VERTICAL POSmONS WERE DETERMINED USING THE iDCA SMAHTNET AND GPS REALTIME SURVEY METHODS AND ARE REFERENCED TO NORTH AMETCCAN VERTICAL DATUM (NAVD) £3. USING GEOID 12D. TREE NOTES:

1. TREES HAVING A DBA (DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT) 07 3-!NCHES AND GREATER WERE LOCATED. OTHER TREES AND VEGETATICN EXIST ON SITE.
2. TREE CROWNS SHOWN HERE ON ARE A GRAPHICAL DEPICTION OF THE PROBABLE ECTENTS CF THE TREE CANOPY BASED ON THE TRUNK SIZE USING THE FCR?4ULA OF ONE (1) FOOT CF RADIUS FOR EVERS’ ONE (1) INCH CF TRUNK DlAMCTER ANO MAY NOT REPRESENT THE ACTUAL SIZE OR SHAPE OF THE TREE CANOPY.
3. •MULTI”-TREE DIAMETER OF MULTHTRUNK TREES ARE 413 12 HACTBERRY 539 IT CEDAR ELM CETERM NED BY ADDING THE DIAMETER CF THE LARGEST TRUNK TO 414 IT HACKBERRY 540 65-CEDAR ELM 1/2 THE DIAMETER CF EACH ADOmONALTRUKK. 415 TASH” 541 14- CEDAR ELM 416 r CEDAR ELM 542 B-HACKIEKXY 417 IT (BYT) CEDAR ELM 543 WCmcei HACKEERRY 411 IOTCSAR ELM 544 ircaiAR ELM DATE OF FIELD WORK: 419 14.75°(1OT(93-) CEDAR EM 545 U° LIVE OAK THE SURVEY WAS PERFORMED ON THE GROUND OCTOBER 2022 420 IT CEDAR ELM 546 rHAOSEPRY THROUGH DcCEAlBER 2022 AND REPRESENTS THE FACTS FOUND AT THE 421 ILS’ UOto, LIVE OAK 547 IT HACKBERRY TORE OF THE SURVEY. 422 9” LIVE OAK 548It OSAGE ORANGE 423 13 (6X7X3) LIVE OAK 549 IT CDAR EJA 424 r HACKBERRY 550 IT (rXB’lCEDAR ELM 425 WHACKBERRT 551 r CEDAR ElM 426 S’ HACKERY 52 IT CEDAR ELM 427 W LIVE OAK 426 11° CEDAR ELM 429 11.5” (B-S-XB^J MEXICAN PLUM 554 OS’ LIVE OAK 555 IDS’ (B-XS”) LIVE OAK 556 173”(iTXrXT-) LIVE OAK 430 &5” CXIHA3ERRY 537 19’ (14-X1T) UVE OAK 553 rUVE OAK 539 8°UVE OAK 560 ITHACkbERRY 561 ir UVEOAX SCALE 1 DECENlBER 21,2a22 TO PUNY FISK, III AFRIOS GEO LLC 601 QUAIL VALLEY DR, STE 318 GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626 (512) 200.7713 www.aerlosgeo.com TBPELS NO. 10194667 |, HEREBY CERTIFY, THAT THIS DRAWING REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE ON THE GROUND, UNDER MY SUPERVISION IN OCTOBER OF 2022 THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2022 AND IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. A1-11T Preliminary, this document shall not be recorded shall not be used or viewed or relied upon as ANNA RIOS. RPLS ,6717 ROGERS MLCBEP QATCnt gro ACRES ro ne cui AS h’OraONAi,- SUR/EYAn CIti purpose and inal survey docume

Page 157

THE INFLUENCE THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 155

Page 158

farming practices in the context of the climatic and geographic conditions of a semi-arid landscape. The buildings and support structures demonstrate how south Texas farmers might overcome challenging operations and maintenance concerns such as soil degradation, reliance on scarce water supplies, dependence on fossil fuel energy sources, and climate vulnerability. As a prototype, the Farm presents an architecture typology appropriate for both rural and urban settings, connecting country and city (farm to market in Texas) by food cultivation, distribution, preparation, and consumption including farmers markets, farm to-table eateries, co-op kitchens, food trucks. These are spaces where food preparation and consumption intersect with social life. This typology is also about how land is inhabited and how a new vernacular architecture emerges. It is a built form where architecture arises from the landscape itself, not as an aesthetic object or out- of-context intervention, but as a necessary presence re-creating vernacular buildings that are constructed with locally available materials, shaped collectively In response to climatic conditions and material cycles. These vernacular forms do not result from arbitrary or aesthetic choices, but from adaptation to climate, utilization of local resources, and transfer of local cultural and social practices and knowledge. In sum, the Farm demonstrates a new kind of design thinking — one that treats food not as a commodity to be delivered, but as a spatial, ecological, and civic concern. It’s a demonstration of the potential of an architecture landscape to be interwoven and supportive of both the metabolism of urban life and the life support services, of sustainable agriculture. In 2024, this type of architecture landscape thinking was advanced by CMPBS as the Agrihood concept, described as “integrating food production with resilient building systems and technologies.” An agrihood is a planned residential community, typically the size of a neighborhood, that is built around food production, integrating agriculture into its design and daily life, and Incorporating sustainability practices such as organic farming, water conservation, renewable energy, and habitat restoration. A social network of community engagement also exists that allows residents to connect through farm-to-table events and~ health and wellness activities. The concept proposes an integrated life support Infrastructure that includes duckweed as a high-protein food source, quonset roof kits, a solar printing gantry which doubles as a pedestrian grid, 3D printed high mass hollow walls, radiative sky cooling, and a thin film photovoltaic membrane. Recently CMPBS staff presented this agrihood concept to the Austin City Council, which approved a resolution directing the city manager to investigate obstacles to agrihood development. identify best practices, explore potential zoning needs, and examine state or federal aid that could assist these efforts. It directs the city manager to study the feasibility of agrihoods, including zoning, potential obstacles, and partnerships. A pilot program was proposed as a testing ground for agrihood development. Consequently, with city approval and support, the emergence of many new agrihoods in and around Austin will occur in our foreseeable future. From CDIRs to Decarbonization In 1997 the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty introduced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), was adopted by 192 nations committing industrialized countries to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It was the first international treaty to attempt to set legally binding emission reduction targets and to recognize that historically, developed nations have been responsible for the most emissions. At that time, most efforts to reduce building Industry GHG emissions were focused on operational energy, i.e., the fossil fuel energy consumption required to operate and maintain buildings. However, a full building life-cycle assessment (LCA) to assess GHG emissions must include upstream impacts that occur before a building’s use; the source (raw material acquisition), transport, process (manufacturing), and distribution phases of building materials and products. Of concern in determining a 156 | CMPBS

Page 159

THE INFLUENCE material or product CDIR is the fossil fuel energy consumed during these upstream phases, the aggregate of which is known as a building’s embodied energy. In 2000, in response to the Kyoto Protocol, we co-authored and published a research article introducing the term “Carbon Dioxide Intensity Ratios” (CDIRs). A CDIR is a measure of how much C02 is emitted per unit of some activity, output, or resource used. It’s essentially a carbon efficiency metric — the lower the ratio, the less CO2 emitted forthat resource. Using weight, rather than volume, as the comparative measurement unit. It Is the ratio between the net upstream C02 impact by weight (emissions minus storage) of a material and the weight of the material. A material with a positive CDIR is a net CO2 source and one with a negative CDIR is a net C02 sink. One objective of determining CDIRs for commonly used building materials and products is to Identify and specify both high recycled content products with very low emissions and renewable materials that are potentially net sinks of carbon. Our hypothesis for utilizing renewables is that if the carbon stored (or sequestered) in a building’s materials for Its lifetime is equal to or greater than the total carbon released as C02 during their upstream life cycle phases, then the aggregated upstream life cycle phase of the building may have a net zero impact on CO2 contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. Our design goal was to explore the possibility and plausibility of carbon balanced building. The design process would Include an LCA of the overall balance between C02 source and C02 sink materials. Specifications could state C02 balancing as a performance criterion for individual products or groups of products and building systems such as exterior closure or structural frame. At that time, our research was hindered by lack of fine-grained data. The CDIRs were all high-level estimates based on national manufacturing average LCA data (e.g., from the American Iron and Steel Institute). In 2025, the building industry focus broadened from specific materials and products to decarbonization, meaning designing, constructing, and operating buildings In ways that drastically reduce or eliminate the GHG emissions over their entire life cycle. A good example of the progress being made is the April 2025 launch edition of LEED v5 BD&C. The preface states that decarbonization is one of three “central areas of impact.” Every credit and prerequisite in LEED v5 links to “decarbonization, quality of life, and/or ecological conservation and restoration.” One prerequisite and one credit specifically address decarbonization. The intent of both is to quantify the embodied carbon impacts of the structure, enclosure, and hardscape of a project and assess the top sources of embodied carbon. The goal of the prerequisite is to raise awareness of the upfront embodied carbon associated with key materials used in the structure, enclosure, and hardscape of a project. The goal of the credit is to implement strategies that reduce embodied carbon through the various stages of a project, from early design development through construc­ tion activities and procurement. Design tools are now available to perform a fine-grained supply chain analysis to compare energy sources, assess life cycle impacts, and benchmark building performance. One such design tool is the Embodied Carbon in Construction Calculator (EC3) from Building Transparency. EC3 is a free, cloud-based and easy-to use tool focused on the upstream supply chain emissions of construction materials. It utilizes building material quantities from construction estimates and/or BIM modelsand a robust database of digital, third-party verified Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs). The EC3 tool can be Implemented in both the design and procurement phases of a building construction project to look at a project’s overall embodied carbon emissions, enabling the specification and procurement of the low carbon and possibly carbon sink options. The EC3 tool also allows owners, green building certification programs, and policymakers to assess supply chain data to create EPD requirements and set embodied carbon limits and reductions at the construction material and product scale. Consequently, “the tool is driving demand for low-carbon solutionsand incentivizing construction materials manufacturers and suppliers to invest in disclosure, transparency and THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 157

Page 160

material innovations that reduce the carbon emissions of their products.” From EcoBalance to Net-Zero In 1969 Design With Nature by Ian McHarg was published, likely the first landscape architecture book that described an ecological planning method. It is well-known for its overlay mapping methodology that determines which areas of a landscape are most suitable for certain uses based on natural systems and environmental constraints. The objective is to plan human developments that fit harmoniously into ecological patterns and processes. Overlay mapping involves stacking detailed maps showing physical conditions such as topography, soils, vegetation, hydrology, as well as historical, cultural, and social characteristics. This visual layering is synthesized into a composite map indicating optimal zones for development of built areas and conservation of natural areas aligning with proposed land uses within existing ecological conditions. McHarg’s methods have sometimes been described as “let the land tell us what to do,” respecting natural processes and placing development where it causes the least ecological harm. In 2000, we developed a landscape scale planning tool extending McHarg’s overlay methods called EcoBalance. It is based on an ecological footprint assessment of the overall environmental impacts of a building, assembly, product, or process across Its entire life cycle. By overlayering inventory, suitability, and composite maps we created an aggregated synthesis map of project priorities, patterns, and building program. The objective Is to create conditions for an equilibrium between the human and natural environments by accounting for all Inputs and outputs to the operation of a building and its site and then balance them to be a net zero, or better a net-positive, environmental impact. The basic concept is that while sourcing any material or commodity we must also account for its sustainable re-sourcing. For example, air, water, food, energy and materials that are spatially allocated for their use phase (e.g., flora for oxygen, surfaces for water harvesting) must also have spatial allocations for their replenishment (e.g., vegetative area for the conversion of C02 back to oxygen, contaminated water harvested to be treated by ecological treatment methods to make clean water again). The result is an integrated land use master planning process that proposes a carrying capacity relative to the number of persons the land is able to support. The EcoBalance master planning is then coupled with architectural design enabling the whole site planning phase to inform architectural design decisions. In 2025 the vocabulary for ecological footprint balancing has become “net- zero.” Net zero design means balancing inputs and outputs so the project lives within its ecological budget, by producing as much (or more) than it consumes and by reusing or recycling the waste products of use and operation. The concept was formally embedded in the Paris Agreement (2015), which committed nations to achieving “a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases.” The most common examples In architecture and planning are: Net Zero Water: Capturing, treating, and reusing as much water on-site as is consumed with rainwater harvesting and greywater and blackwater recycling. Net Zero Food: Producing, processing, distributing, and consuming food resulting in no net greenhouse gas emissions, balancing its emissions with reductions or removals. Net Zero Energy: Producing as much renewable energy on-site (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) as a building consumes. Net Zero Waste: Diverting as much waste as a building generates, usually through materials reduction, reuse, and recycling. Consequently, “net-zero” has been accepted as an all-encompassing design goal In sustainable architecture rating tools including LEED v5 BD&Cand Living Building Challenge v4.0 (LBC). Moreover, the term has spread beyond climate policy and architecture into urban planning, food systems, product marketing, and corporate sustainability, usually meaning balancing resource use with regeneration or offsetting. 158 | CMPBS

Page 161

THE INFLUENCE Sequel CMPBS was originally conceived as a design studio in the University of Texas School of Architecture called the Laboratory for Maximum Potential Building Systems. At the time the definition of a laboratory fit well — a facility that provides controlled conditions in which scientific or technological research, observation, experiments, and measurement are performed in a particular field of study. The studio soon outgrew the confines of a university laboratory and became a “center,” meaning a group of facilities or buildings where a specified activity or process occurs, is directed, and/or is concentrated. Although this is true of CMPBS, this definition is woefully inadequate to describe it. CMPBS is much better defined by its activities and reaches far beyond the boundaries of a single place and the constraints of a single issue. Moreover, It is evident from its diverse portfolio of “prototype, protocol, and policy” that its scope reaches far beyond building systems. Therefore, for the next fifty years, a name change is in order. I propose the name of Center for Maximum Potential Life Support Systems. Fly ash concrete experimentation THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 159

Page 162

Time out of Mind RICK FEDRIZZI Meeting where the Austin Green Builder program was developed 160 | CMPBS

Page 163

THE INFLUENCE RICK FEDRIZZI IS EXECUTIVE CHAIR AND FORMER CEO OF IWBI. HE IS ALSO THE FOUNDING CHAIR AND FORMER CEO OF USGBC. RICK’S VISION AND GLOBAL INFLUENCE HELPED IGNITE THE HEALTHY, GREEN BUILDING MOVEMENT, SPARKING A WORLDWIDE SHIFT TOWARD ENVIRONMENTALLY AND SOCIALLY SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES THAT ENABLE PEOPLE, BUSINESSES AND THE PLANET TO THRIVE. That’s the phrase that first came to me when I was asked to provide some reflections at the 50th anniversary of The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems (CMPBS). It suggests that something has been around for so long that it’s difficult to recall when it really began. In the case of the work and the impact of this organization, most especially as embodied by its founder, Pliny Fisk, and co-director, Gail Vittori, no truer sentiment exists. In a corner of the Texas Hill Countryjust outside of Austin, they quite literally poured the foundation for an idea that would fundamentally change how we conceive of, construct and operate our buildings and planted the seeds for a global green building industry, now valued at $650 billion USD. In 1975, at the time when CMPBS was founded, environmental advocates were mostly focused on energy conservation— reducing consumption, improving efficiency and advancing renewable sources. CMPBS, the oldest nonprofit dedicated to sustainable building in the U.S. was pioneering because it looked beyond energy alone, emphasizing the importance of creating meaningful connections between structures and their surrounding ecosystems as well as with the people who used them every day. Building on this early work, the Austin Green Builder Program launched In 1977, offering one of the country’s first formal regional models for sustainable building practices. It Incorporated lessons from CMPBS and created frameworks that balanced environmental, social and economic factors in the building process. But it would be 15 more years before I met Pliny and Gail, shortly after I had been named director of environmental marketing at Carrier. I didn’t even know what that meant or howIwas supposed to “environmentalize” air-conditioners. And then, on a Friday night while wandering the aisles of my favorite bookstore,Icame across Paul Hawken’s Ecology of Commerce. It was suddenly blindingly obvious to me that If environmentalism and capitalism were to co-exist, we had to put people at The Center of every decision by making better products — products that were better for the environment, better for customersand better forthe bottom line. And if we put all those better products In, the building would be better, and the ripple effect of better buildings would accomplish the environmental and health goals we were striving for. There was also an incredible market opportunity (and powerful economic incentive). We could literally transform the market and change the world. I knew there had to be others out there thinking the same thing. So I went looking for them, which is how I found David Gottfried. After many late-night discussions, we decided to create an organization that raised awareness about and encouraged the growth of what was then the tiny—practically nonexistent—green building industry. That led to the formation of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC),15 years THE FIRST so YEARS | 161

Page 164

IN A CORNER OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY JUST OUTSIDE OF AUSTIN, THEY QUITE LITERALLY POURED THE FOUNDATION FOR AN IDEA THAT WOULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE HOW WE CONCEIVE OF, CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE OUR BUILDINGS AND PLANTED THE SEEDS FOR A GLOBAL GREEN BUILDING INDUSTRY, NOW VALUED AT $650 BILLION USD. after CMPBS established its solid regional model to lead the way. Then on Earth Day 1993, President Bill Clinton announced an initiative called the “Greening of the White House.” The plan was to make the White House more energy efficient and sustainable. Bill Browning, who was managing the effort for Mark Ginsberg at the Department of Energy and the American Institute of Architects, brought in a first-rate group of environmental activists to work with him. He also invited me. That was where I first met Pliny. Over the next few years, I watched in fascination as Pliny continued his hands- on research and experimentation at CMPBS, earning an affectionate “mad scientist” moniker and passing on his great knowledge to thousands of architecture students, environmental activists, urban planners and designers of all ages and levels of experience. There are few people on the planet who know as much about physical structures and how they can save energy, conserve water, deliver cleaner, fresher air and how people in buildings benefit from better materials choices and engagement with their surrounding ecosystems. Shortly thereafter I met Gail, who brought her own impressive technical credentials to the table, but it’s her heart that catalyzed the green building movement’s astonishing trajectory. She is USGBC OG, and her leadership has helped transform sustainability from a niche concern into a mainstream force in the architecture, engineering and construction industries worldwide. One of the key achievements of USGBC was the development of the LEED Green Building Rating System. What started as an alphabetical list of energy and environmental design strategies on three typed pages set the stage for what is now the largest green building rating system in the world, and as one of USGBC’s earliest and most engaged volunteers. Gall’s fingerprints are all over it. But her contributions go far beyond technical guidelines and checklists; she has helped forge an integrated vision where human health and planetary 162 | CMPBS

Page 165

THE INFLUENCE health are inseparable, ushering in a new era of design and construction that respects ecosystems and elevates well- being. Her vision was crucial In shaping LEED’s scope and intent. She championed the idea that sustainability was not simply about ticking boxes for energy savings or water conservation but must Include the human experience — how buildings affect health, productivity and comfort. This perspective introduced a health lens into sustainable building at a time when the focus was almost exclusively environmental. Her approach was pioneering and prescient. Today, the idea that the health of people and the health of the planet are intimately linked is widely accepted, but it was an innovative insight when Gail began emphasizing it. She helped push the green building community toward addressing indoor air quality, toxic materials, natural daylighting and other factors that directly influence human well-being. By integrating these concerns into building design and operation, her work helped expand sustainability to include social and health outcomes, notjust environmental metrics. A significant area of Gall Vittori’s impact lies in healthcare environments, where the stakes for human health are particularly high. Hospitals and medical facilities face unique challenges in balancing stringent hygiene standards, safety protocols and patient well-being. Gail has worked extensively to ensure that sustainability in healthcare settings moves beyond energy and waste reduction to incorporate material health, indoor environmental quality and healing-centered design. I was so fortunate to have Gail’s wise counsel and expertise during my time as USGBC’s founding chair and CEO. She has a mentor’s patience and persistence and is widely known for her ability to listen deeply. Early in the development of LEED, when many skeptics questioned whether green building standards could be both rigorous and practical, Gail calmly persisted in her belief that sustainability must be accessible and actionable. Her steady voice helped unify diverse stakeholders — architects, engineers, contractors, regulators, manufacturers — into a shared vision.I watched countless times as she turned tense disagreements into productive dialogue simply by acknowledging concerns and reframing the discussion toward common goals. WhenIwould push for expanding LEED’s reach quickly, Gail would remind the team to make sure that In the process we are protecting the people who live and work In these buildings. During her time as chair of the USGBC board and then the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) board, our partnership created a balance between the movement’s ambition and grounded detail that shaped USGBC’s success. Her leadership infused the movement with heart, turning abstract sustainability metrics Into real-world health outcomes. And this focus on health laid the groundwork for the work we do today at the International WELL Building Institute, where we are laser-focused on the design, operations and organizational strategies that help people thrive. Leaders are embracing opportunities to fine-tune buildings through a people-first lens, helping the places and spaces where we spend our lives enhance our health and well-being, not compromise It. That’S but one of the outcomes of the serious commotion that’s been going on at CMPBS these last 50 years. Gall and Pliny’S legacy is baked into the fabric of a movement that has transformed the market and changed the world. And I’m grateful every day to be a part of it. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 163

Page 166

Welcome to Our Innovative Neighborhood: A Blueprint for a Green Amendment in Texas 1,1 164 | CMPBS Erin and I at the Farmstand at Max Pot in 2006 FARMER SKIP CONNETT

Page 167

THE INFLUENCE HAROLD “SKIP” CONNETT CO-FOUNDED GREEN GATE FARMS AND FRIENDS OF THE LAND WITH HIS WIFE, ERIN FLYNN. THEY HAVE BEEN LEADERS IN FARM-BASED EDUCATION, LOCAL FOOD POLICY, AND FARMLAND PROTECTION. PRIOR TO FARMING, CONNETT WAS AN AWARD-WINNING INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, SPEECHWRITER AND MEDIATRAINER. Less than a mile from where we started Green Gate Farms in East Austin in 2006, the groundwork was laid for the nation’s Green Building Movement. On the wooded campus of The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, a two story green demonstration build­ ing — radical for its time In 1992 — was showing Austin a more sustainable way of designing and manufacturing our homes and offices. In addressing the need for more energy efficient, environmentally-friendly building practices, Pliny Fisk and Gail Vittorl, The Center’s founders, were reaping the scientific insights and gains of the environmental movement In the ’60s and ’70s. They have been applying them, often brilliantly, to what might be thought of as a green blueprint for reducing the carbon footprint of the built environment. Improving energy efficiency, using local materials, cutting product emissions and waste, planting native landscapes — these were the cli­ mate-friendly solutions they studied and promoted long before the science of climate change rewrote the blueprint for smart growth. Today, the U.S. Green Building Council has inspired more than 30% of the nation’s office buildings to meet Its green building standards. This Saturday evening, 30 years since the Council’s founding, the founder of the Green Amendments movement, Maya van Rossum, will be our guest speaker as we celebrate the 120th birth­ day of the Bergstrom farmstead. Recent successes and momentum In her efforts to win constitutional protections for the environment offer inspiration — and hope — at a time when the perils and challenges of the climate crisis feel over­ whelming. Like the founders of CMPBS, van Rossum is riding on the shoulders of earlier visionaries and activists. She has seen more clearly than most how environ­ mental legal challenges in this country Increasingly hit the walls of a regulato­ ry framework designed to protect and maintain business as usual. Undoing the wrongs of environmental injustice and preventing further degradation of Earth’s life support system won’t scale up fast enough without constitutional protections to a clean healthy environ­ ment. During my pre-farming journalism career, I witnessed how outspoken visionaries, and the media attention they captured, could sway public opin­ ion, change policy, and win lawsuits. This summer we saw this tipping point in action when 16 youths, protected by Montana’s long-established yet untest­ ed green amendment, won a lawsuit against the state for not protecting them from the damages of climate change. Ididn’t appreciate how unfairly pro-busi­ ness rules and regulations are written until coming up against them personal­ ly. In less than two years, an explosion of unplanned industrial manufacturing, tunneling, and mining has upended our lives and livelihoods where we farm along the Colorado River in Bastrop County. Texas law allowed these disrup­ tive and irreversible land-use changes without granting neighboring landown­ THE FIRST so YEARS | 165

Page 168

ers that most basic right — a pubiic hearing to voice their concerns. What van Rossum concluded from more than three decades leading the Delaware Riv­ erkeeper Coalition was that the deck is so stacked in favor of corporate and spe­ cial interests that most of us give up and accept defeat. Those who don’t too often assume their states provide protective rights to a healthy environment when, in fact, with the exception of Montana, Pennsylvania, and now New York, they don’t — at least not to the extent we are led to believe. It was our good fortune that the found­ ers of CMPBS were looking for organic farmers when we moved back to Austin in 2005. The one acre of good ground they offered us to launch our Commu­ nity Supported Agriculture program was surrounded by experiments and inno­ vations in appropriate technology, permaculture design, and sustainable farming — new tools and lenses for guid­ ing decision-making in a rapidly growing city. Lunch was served In the Green Demonstration Building, where the stove, fridge, and, yes, even the kitchen sink, could easily roll out the door to cre­ ate a makeshift meeting room. Interns in ecodynamic architecture from around the world spiced our discussions as we feasted on food harvested from our fields and prepared by the resident chef and ceramist. Our early grounding in what Fisk often refers to as “serious commotion” Is what we took with us when Green Gate estab­ lished its business and mission at the former Bergstrom farmstead around the corner on Decker Lane. The drafty 1902 farmhouse we would lease for the next 15 years is where we grew not only our family but a strong community of local food supporters. Farm meetings and events often spilled over Into the Swed­ ish mule barn where the original cedar shakes are still visible under its tin roof. When writing the Bill of Rights, our founding fathers never imagined the scale and speed at which industry and invention would literally change the face of the earth. In safeguarding our right to private property that Texans hold so dear, it was Inconceivable then that the nation’s vast resources and abundant wildlife would be depleted one day. Even in the nearly 20 years we’ve been back in Austin, we never foresaw the unmak­ ing of the bucolic, wild landscapes we took for granted. Responding to these pressures has forced us to push back where we could, adapt where we couldn’t. This was the long yet reward­ ing path that led to the making of Village Farm,the first of its kind agrihood, with more than 100 tiny homes surrounding the farmstead. Our innovative neighborhood includes not only green building and agrihood farming, but also new approaches to homelessness and education. On the Swedish farm site across from us off Decker Lane, Community First has demonstrated how the sweet spot of private and public collaboration can cre­ ate a model to address our continued fallings in homelessness. A mile south. In what were the abandoned offices of the old Austin State School Farm Colo­ ny, Austin Discovery School is approaching its 20th year offering stu­ dents a nature-based curriculum where growing food and exploring the nearby river ecology are seen as essential as the three Rs. These innovations were not radical, knee-jerk, anti-growth responses to our changing world. And neither is a state constitutional right to fresh air, clean water, and a climate friendly environ­ ment. Like the Green Building Movement, the Green Amendment Movement is a more careful and caring alternative to the chaotic race for growth at every­ one’s expense —a stopping-back to reassess our assumptions, address our excesses, seek a more harmonious bal­ ance with the rest of Nature. The gate at Green Gate Farm has always been open to new possibilities while honoring our past. It is this spirit of inno­ vation, adaptation, compromise — and hope — that we celebrate Austin’s rich farming history while we all work toward a more sustainable future. 166 | CMPBS

Page 169

THE INFLUENCE ?^^I Al Tali’.’”I ‘‘A’ ‘r”< The farmstand at Green Gate Farms ten years later THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 167 MEMBER

Page 170

Lenses for Infinite Design STUART COWAN, PH.D. . —9?U ,70— 1160 1 •‘01AM PAM ?’J J. r r- 1 168 | CMPBS Mini Max

Page 171

THE INFLUENCE STUART COWAN, PH.D. IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF BUCKMINSTER FULLER INSTITUTE AND IS A PLANETARY STRATEGIST, ECOLOGICAL DESIGNER, SYSTEMS SCIENTIST, AND REGENERATIVE ECONOMIST. HE IS THE CO-AUTHOR OF ECOLOGICAL DESIGN; HAS LAUNCHED INNOVATION LABS AND BIOREGIONAL INITIATIVES INTERNATIONALLY; AND RECEIVED HIS DOCTORATE IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS FROM U.C. BERKELEY. For fifty years, CMPBS has been testing ecological design and planning protocols, policies, and prototypes at scales from building to planet. This includes significant work at the bioregional scale, a perfect scale to align cultural transformation with coherent groupings of ecosystems shaped by water, soil, climate, topography, geology, nutrient flows, and other influences. Now in 2025 there is growing momentum around a federated, decentralized response to the polycrisis that Is centered around empowering territories, landscapes, and bioregions with protocols for regenerative storying, mapping, modeling, planning, governing, and financing. In the early 1970s CMPBS Go-Founder Pliny Fisk III was mentored by visionary inventor, futurist, and world historical figure R. Buckminster Fuller. Bucky developed Comprehensive Anticipatory Design Science as a regenerative design discipline that.could be applied at scales ranging from individual buildings to global industries, and from site to bioregion to planet. At each scale, an understanding of universal principles (e.g. ephemeralizatlon or “more with less” and syntropy or “negative entropy”) combined with a deep understanding of local patterns would ensure cascading benefits across the system and up and dowri in scale. CMPBS was one of three vitally Important Bioregional Learning Centers established In the United States around 1970. Farallones Center in Occidental, California (1974-90) was co-founded by Sim Van der Ryn and Peter Calthorpe to experiment with integrated ecological technologies and support broader sustainability initiatives across West Marin County and continues today as Occidental Arts & Ecology Center. Van der Ryn spent a formative month studying with Fuller in the 1960s and was an important friend to CMPBS over decades. New Alchemy Institute in Falmouth, Massachusetts (1969-91) was Co-founded by John Todd, Nancy Jack Todd, and William McClarney with a focus on bloculturally Integrated appropriate technologies including ecological wastewater treatment systems. Fuller was a key influence for the New Alchemy Institute, and major Institute contributor Greg Watson continues to advance Fuller’s visionary World Game at the Schumacher Center for a New Economics. John Todd was a key contributor to the founding of the Balaton Group with Dana Meadows in 1982, with its initial vision of a global network of bioregional learning centers. Beginning in the 1920s, Fuller had envisioned a Geoscope as an Immersive, Interactive earth that would support participatory, ground up development ofscenarios forthriving at neighborhood to planetary scales. In 2025, the geospatial components of the Geoscope are ubiquitous, including apps like Google Earth that allow for immersive visualizations of vegetation cover, watersheds, topography, cityscapes, and much more. We now need to complement geospatial data with a new generation of THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 169

Page 172

IMAGINE THE LENSES FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL FUTURES SUPPORTED BY A NEW KIND OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, ONE THAT IS LIFE-CENTERED. bioregional modeling and planning tools that can accommodate dozens of regenerative solutions pathways (e.g. from Project Drawdown or One Earth’s Solutions Framework) side by side with indigenous knowledge systems in a visual, intuitive environment that is accessible to all. Imagine radically participatory processes for citizens to plan the futures of their cherished neighborhoods, watersheds, cities, and bioregions or ancestral territories. Multiple scenarios can be developed in a bioregional digital twin environment, with audio, video, and text comments; backing documents and models; and opportunities to launch projects on the ground. Bioregions can work in solidarity with each other, developing bioregional knowledge commons like those being developed by the OMNI-Mapping project. CMPBS has pioneered these participatory processes, backed by rigorous data and design approaches, through its Lenses for Maximum Potential Futures. These twelve lenses (protocols) reflect biocultural diversity. have informed and are informed by fifty years of practice, and are shared in a spirit of collaborative design with the planetary community. ecoBalance links the sourcing of any commodity to its sustainable re-sourcing. Flows of air, water, food, energy, and materials are linked to land areas of specific types per unit flow required for both initial production and regeneration. This provides an integrated master planning process that validates available bioregional carrying capacity under different scenarios. BaselineGreen uses national data sets to produce a full input-output Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) and a geospatial standard for material specifications. Its companion protocol GreenBalance applies this approach to projects ranging in scale from furniture design to circular economies. Collectively, the Lenses for Maximum Potential Futures provide a fractal, scale-linking approach to regeneration that informs building materials and systems, circular economy strategies, regenerative agriculture, energy systems, hydrological restoration, and more. Now imagine the Lenses for Maximum Potential Futures supported by a new kind of Artificial Intelligence, one that is Life-Centered. This kind of Regenerative Al would be focused on supporting diverse landscapes and cultures as they work out their own ways to reintegrate our species into a pluriverse of millions of species within a vast, self-regulating, self-organizing planetary matrix known as Gaia. Forty-one years after Its founding, Buckminster Fuller Institute (BFI) is exploring this infinite design terrain, a strange and unexpected symbiosis of human, ecological, and digital intelligences. It is a marvelous thing that The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems continues with a vital life force after fifty years, and BFI looks forward to spontaneously collaborating with The Center over the next five decades in the service of life. 170 | CMPBS

Page 173

THE INFLUENCE t Elaine de Kooning (center), R. Buckminster Fuller, and others with the Supine Dome, Black Mountain College, 1948 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 171 Ct

Page 174

The Transformative Power of Living Labs VIVIAN LOFTNESS Robert L. Preger intelligent Workplace at Carnegie Mellon — a Living Lab for Low Tech meets High Tech172 | CMPBS

Page 175

THE INFLUENCE VIVIAN LOFTNESS, FAIA IS A UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR & PAUL MELLON CHAIR IN ARCHITECTURE, AS WELL AS THE CO-DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR BUILDING PERFORMANCE & DIAGNOSTICS AT CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY. Volker Hartkopf and I want to congratulate Pliny and Gail and the CMPBS for 50 years of gentle revolutions and indefatigable community building. To us, Pliny is the Bucky Fuller of today, and Gail the Florence Nightingale. They have transformed design practice and education and reimagined a living future that can be shared by all. Volker met Pliny when he arrived on a Fulbright from Germany to UT Austin. Protests of the Vietnam War had closed Yale, so off to Texas Volker traveled. He loved it, was crowned twice as Armadillo catch-and-count champion, building his lifelong love of humor and Inviting everyone home for dinner (does this sound familiar?). Volkerjoined a group of graduates and faculty including Wolf Hilberts and Pliny In proving that the making of creative places happen with appropriate, regional, inventive materials and engaging everyone in collective creativity. They tried accreting structures with sea creatures, inflating structures to be covered with thin sheets of ice, reinventing adobe for self­ help school building in Peru, re-engineering bamboo for flood survival in Bangladesh — each effort focused on the materials of specific places and people. These pursuits have flourished! I met Pliny whenIwas working for John Eberhard who launched the AIA Research Corporation. John was actively convincing federal agencies that they must engage Architects in their research endeavors - for appropriate and advanced technology, energy, climate, and the future of building performance. I led a HUD project challenged to write and illustrate Regional Guidelines for Passive, Energy Efficient Buildings. Working with 30 year data from the National Climate Center and Olgyay’s BioclimatIc Zones, we outlined the design priorities of 13 US climates, of course with subsets, deeply illustrated with regional precedents. Pliny was the Texas guru, straddling 3 climate zones alone. These pursuits have flourished! And then there were marriages. Seemingly mismatched husband and wife personalities that somehow made 1+1 =3! The wild and the serious, the driven and the calm, might define Pliny+Gail, Volker+Vivian. Amazingly these partnerships have created both completely meshed and independent lives for each of us. Gail andIhave been active In the pursuit of improving buildings for health and productivity, setting goals across national standards and guidelines. We served on the Board of the USGBC together and celebrated each other’s awards and honors on the national scene. Thanks to partners who celebrate each other’s successes, these pursuits have flourished too! From those early days, our pursuits have built into a woven fabric of shared environmental commitment, which leads to the irreplaceable and catalytic creation of Living Laboratories like Max Pot and the Intelligent Workplace that houses Carnegie Mellon’s Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics. These two educational playgrounds are shockingly rare even today, although THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 173

Page 176

EVERY STUDENT OF ARCHITECTURE SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AND TEST AND ITERATE, WORKING ALONGSIDE STUDENTS AND PROFESSIONALS OF MANY DISCIPLINES. the Rural Studio and the generations of Solar Decathlons come to mind. Both Centers would argue that creatively addressing regional and societal challenges, fostering invention, testing the interfaces of the low and the high tech, the passive and the active - can only be explored, advanced and demonstrated in Living Laboratories. “Living” means that they are indeed lived in by faculty and students, industries and inventors, and “Lab” means that they are continuously evolving, losing and gaining ground as environmental design challenges and opportunities for solutions emerge. Every student of architecture should have the opportunity to build and test and Iterate, working alongside students and professionals of many disciplines — If we hope to make the built environment resilient and regenerative. Exploring design for energy, water, materials, waste, human and environmental health, and more, takes a community of knowledge and skills that only emerge when you have a Living Lab with open doors. Max Pot, like the Intelligent Workplace, are living labs that have engaged hundreds of students in hands- on learning and exploration. They have spawned a new generation of designers and place makers that are teaching and practicing around the world. Under their leadership, these living labs have flourished for 50 years! And yet, what will be the future for these and a handful of other Living Labs around the world? Living Labs need to become a mainstay in every university that has disciplines working on the built environment - architecture, building engineering, civil engineering, landscape architecture, interior design, and more. They need to be endowed financially with resources to support continuous iteration and innovation, fully integrated with university curriculum, and led by generations of visionary makers, educators and researchers. Our creativity, resiliency and regeneration depends on it. 174 | CMPBS

Page 177

us. Department of Housing and Urtan Development Office of Policy Development and Research In Cooperation with the US. Department of Energy Regional Guidelines for Building Passive Energy Conserving Homes

Page 178

3 1 Ir

Page 179

‘Jo ---- ‘TESTIMONIALS OFLOVE AND RAND FROM I^MPBS imUNITY-

Page 180

PAULA CANO SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL AUSTIN, TX The CMPBS was my very first address in Austin. I lived in a pod designed as a prototype for homeless housing. Com­ pact and self-sufficient, it included everything I needed: a dry-flush toilet, a solar-powered shower, and access to a communal kitchen. It embodied dig­ nity through simplicity—architecture as a tool for survival, connection, and care. The pod wasn’t perfect. Winters were cold, and ventilation was a challenge. But as someone arriving in Austin with a nomadic spirit and the hope of enter­ ing graduate school at UTSOA, it offered a radical sense of stability. More than shelter, It was a statement: that thoughtful design, even in Its most mod­ est form, can respond to complex social needs. CMPBS reoriented my under­ standing of architecture—notjust as a profession, but as a means to cultivate safety, belonging, and wonder. It inspired me to think critically about alternative typologies and to explore design as a form of advocacy. That pod and my first home in Austin remains a personal symbol of possibility—how small-scale interventions can seed large-scale change. Transitioning from the CMPBS to a glob­ al firm like SOM has been both energizing and humbling. The Center instilled in me a mindset of purposeful, often radical design grounded in preci­ sion. It taught me to navigate the intersection of global Impact and local intention, and to remember that scale is never an excuse to lose sight of the human experience. Whether designing hospitals, airports, or civic spaces,Iask: Who inhabits this space, and how will it feel? The Center sharpened a way of thinking that even within complex sys­ tems, there’S always room for human-scale and environmental solu- tlons-it just takes clarity and commitment to carry that responsibil­ ity forward. I believe the future is better than we think. Over the next 50 years, sustain­ ability will be shaped by a blend of optimism, data, and deep cultural shifts. The challenge lies in learning to inhabit the Earth In resilient, low-carbon ways, anchored in local values that resist both unchecked globalization and growing isolationism. As communities question the promises of modernity, there’s a return to regenerative practices rooted in equity, place, and resilience. MICHAEL GATTO ELEVATE ENERGY CHICAGO, IL My experiences at CMPBS helped me to see how things ‘could be different’ as far as designing and constructing the built environment. Since there Is a cer­ tain design aesthetic at CMPBS that is unique and often contrasting with the rest of the developed world, this helped me to see the power of design - and the value in starting from some fundamen­ tal or basic first principles. The amount of networking that I was able to do at CMPBS through my years there as a vol­ unteer, employee, community member, or friend attending various open hous­ es and events also helped me to expand my view of how many pieces there are to the puzzle of creating the built envi­ ronment. My experiences at The Center helped to open doors for me that I didn’t even know existed. I started as a volunteer at CMPBS work­ ing on developing the concrete mix design for the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration home in 1992, which was instrumental in my career transition from microelectronics process engineer­ ing to green building and architecture. After graduating UT with my masters In architecture I went to work for Gall Vittori as a LEED consultant before becoming a Rose Architectural Fellow at Foundation Communities. Needless to say my experiences at CMPBS were critical to my career change and ulti­ mately specializing in green affordable housing development. Iam hoping that regenerative develop­ ment replaces the sustainability movement in the near future. In this case regenerative development is the har­ monization of human and natural systems for their mutual benefit and co-evolution. Humans have a vital role to play in planetary evolution and can develop the capability and the will to do so into the future. 178 | CMPBS

Page 181

THE PEOPLE MICHELE L. VAN HYFTE ARCHITECT, CMPBS BOARD MEMBER AUSTIN, TX The Center is a place where strong bonds are built, innovative Ideas are cultivated, and enduring relationships are celebrat­ ed. It showed me a vision of a maximum potential future where balance, vitality, and resilience are foundational values. My experiences at CMPBS challenged my beliefs about what is possible and manifested into knowledge, inspiration, and hope that I leverage in every aspect of my life. Over 20+ years,Ihave had the honor of engaging The Center in various ways. Gail served as my mentor as I developed my expertise and founded my architecture firm. I served as The Center’s client, board member, board President, and now Past-President. In each role, I received much more than I gave. Pliny and Gall possess a magne­ tism that draws talented, passionate people into their orbit. My interactions with The Center have given me powerful “aha” moments. They inspire me to push boundaries, question paradigms, and insist upon healthier outcomes in my work as an Architect, sustainability consultant, and public policy advocate. Pliny’s innovative pro­ totypes have expanded my knowledge of modularity, biomimetic materials, and multi-functional systems. Harness­ ing The Center’s innovative thought leadership has helped me make signif­ icant impact in architecture and planning projects, and market transfor­ mation. To quote Gail, “health thrives amongst health.” I see this as an undeniable truth and a call for design that promotes thriving, not just surviving. In the next 50 years, it will be critical to fortify the natural and built environments so they successfully respond, regenerate, and adapt to a multitude of shocks and stressors. Climate change, natural resource depletion, and continued cli­ mate migration will challenge where we build and live. An ever-expanding under­ standing of human health and the planet’s health will provide new insight into why we build and how the act of building can strengthen our relationship with the planet. SIMON COUCHMAN ARCHITECT ERICEIRA, PORTUGAL In 1996, I had the privilege of interning at the CMPBS, where I worked on straw- bale construction techniques, welding and metalwork, and the development of brise-soleil shading systems^ That hands-on experience, combined with The Center’s visionary approach to eco­ logical design, shifted my understanding of what architecture could be. It was there that I first encountered the pow­ er of systems thinking and saw how buildings could respond holistically to climate, material life cycles, and com­ munity needs. That continues to influence my practice and values as an architect to this day. The Center’s emphasis on integrated, context-sensitive design has had a last­ ing influence on my professional work. At Simon Couchman Architects, an important part of our focus In environ­ mentally sustainable design lies in achieving passive climate-controlled performance in buildings—something that was deeply impressed upon me during my time at The Center. The hands-on, systems-based approach I encountered there encouraged a design philosophy rooted In material efficiency, improved thermal performance, and environmental responsiveness. That early CMPBS experience continues to shape how I approach architecture: as a collaborative, iterative process with the potential to create resilient, ener­ gy-efficient spaces that respond to place. Over the next 50 years, I see the sustain­ ability movement being reshaped by the growing urgency of climate adaptation, the pressure on finite resources, and a stronger call for equity in the built envi­ ronment. Designers will need to prioritize buildings that perform passively, con­ sume less, and give more back to their surroundings — socially and environmen­ tally. While technology will offer new tools, the greater challenge will be rethinking our relationship to place, permanence, and consumption. A deeper Integration of design with climate, community, and ecol­ ogy will become not just ideal, but essential—and I believe that mindset is what will truly define the next era. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 179

Page 182

LESLIE SAUER SENIOR FELLOW, PINCHOT INSTITUTE SERGEANTSVILLE, NJ I met Pliny in the 1960’s in college. Sus­ tainability wasn’t a word used yet, but we were completely committed to the new goals that Ian McHarg brought. Everybody was young. We spent all our time together. Almost all of the faculty ended up marrying students. While they were professors and we came to school to be taught what they knew, in fact, all of us were learning something new together. We worked as collaborators. We learned to think quite differently from our chosen professions. Nothing we proposed had been done before. Pliny was way too much for UT, so he started The Center, a dramatic extension of the way we learned at Penn. Except he achieved it fully and reached a level none of us quite imagined possible. I have watched doings at The Center since it began, visiting often over the years. The Center’s early work occurred when regulations and BMPs were just getting going. Over time, they’ve become a ceiling above which nothing can arise. But The Center is still devel­ oping Innovative ways of solving problems. The Center has stayed true to their original vision. What was most remarkable to me over time was what Gail brought to The Center. Looking at completely different but related issues — green building and health care — she showed that this kind of thinking is applicable throughout the design world and demonstrated how positive the results can be.Ithink the impact of The Center’s disciples all around the globe must be quite incredible. What we have learned is that we have many really good answers to the prob­ lems ahead. What we lack is political will. The battle Is now. My greatest con­ cern going forward Is the natural world. Once, we were quick to acknowledge that we depended on it. Protection of the world’s forests and other living landscapes was seen crucial to the cri­ ses of climate and biodiversity. I fear for all of nature. We’ve done a terrible job and have killed off 90% of birds and reptiles and marine mammals. Some­ how we have to learn to go back to looking at the real landscape, realizing our connections to it, and how much we actually depend upon it. ALEX STADNER HEALTHY BUILDING SCIENCE, INC. SAN RAFAEL, CA As an Office Manager and Project Man­ ager at The Center in 2004-2005,I had a unique opportunity to befriend Pliny, Gail, Melanie, Randal, and myriad con­ sultants and interns. We worked on innovative systems and planning mod­ els, high-level hospital and governmental contracts. CMPBS helped me understand MargaretMead’s quote, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” I learned that a small and scrappy organization - with the right balance of creativity, energy, integrity, drive and grit - can accomplish great feats. Everyone knows Pliny and Gail, and countless doors were opened on my pro­ fessional journey after my tour at MAXPOTS. Lessons in both practical project management,juggling relation­ ships and challenging situations, as well as familiarity with cutting-edge tech­ nologies and materials, helped form a strong base from which I would launch into the design-build industry. As a “sci­ entist” it had been difficult to understand my place, but Pliny and Gall utilized my skills well, and taught me much along the way. It’s been 20 years now and it is hard to imagine a life without those two influential years at The Center. I’m trying to better understand how Al can be used as a force for good in com­ ing decades. Fake news, nationalism/ isolationism, and culture wars pitting entire blocs of our electorate against anything that is “environmental” will undoubtedly shape our future. Between climate change (e.g., fires, sea level rise, droughts, food scarcity, climate refu­ gees) and growing social unrest, it’s hard not to see a more turbulent 50 years ahead. As always, there are bright spots on the horizon too, and between creative and caring minds, increasingly sophis­ ticated technology, and better decision making frameworks, we just might be able to improve in 5 decades. 180 | CMPBS

Page 183

THE PEOPLE FABIEN PROUVOST ARCHITECT SAINT OMER, FRANCE To complete my architecture studies in Paris,Iwas required to do a mandatory Internship. That’s howIended up in Aus­ tin in July 1999, for a one-year Internship at The Center. At the time, I had only a vague idea of what sustainable building might entail. At CMPBS,Iwas introduced to concepts like Life Cycle Design, Envi­ ronmental Footprint Design, Carbon Balancing, and the Air-Water-Food-En­ ergy-Material matrix. I was absolutely fascinated. Through a commission to create a kind of “ecological user manual” for a client whose land was located in Palo Duro Canyon, near Amarillo, I proposed a “green classroom” project (which later became the subject of my architecture thesis). It allowed me to apply all these concepts and demonstrate how to design and evolve a truly ecological architecture on that site — one that carefully manages Its environmental impact over time and space. The expe­ rience at CMPBS profoundly changed my worldview. I discovered tools that were both playful and scientific, capable of supporting any creative process of a project to “gently integrate it into the world,” at any scale, whether it would be a chair, a building, or an entire city. Iconcluded my intensive and mind-blow­ ing year with Pliny and Gail by saying: “WhatI know comes from whatIthinkI know, that grows up into whatIdid not even know I wanted to know.” Today, I’ve been working Independently since 2009. I offer my clients projects that are as environmentally responsible as possible. To better demonstrate the benefits of greener buildings—drawing inspiration from CMPBS—Ibuilt my own office in 2023-24, using wood, straw, raw earth, and reclaimed materials. It’s passive, and soon to be self-sufficient in water and energy. I managed to cut the carbon footprint in half compared to actual French regulatory standards. We now know howto design a “zero-car­ bon” project—self-sufficient in water, energy, and more.I believe the next step is to focus our efforts on three key areas:

1. Taxation Officially, all my clients are “eco-con- scious.” In practice, their wallets often disagree. I’m currently looking for a legal framework to monetize the carbon sav­ ings Ican generate for my clients. In the future, the more they decarbonize their projects, the more they should be able to deduct taxes. Additionally, French banks are beginning to offer more favorable loan rates for “sustainable” investments, which should also help make environmentally respon­ sible projects more accessible. I hope it will make it easier to convince them to go green!
2. Biodiversity In France, 70% of biodiversity has dis­ appeared in the past 40 years. I believe architecture must become a tool for bio­ diversity regeneration. In the summer of 2025, I’m restoring a large pond on our office’s site to bring back native wetland plants from the Saint Omer marshes, along with birds, insects, amphibians, and more—show­ ing my clients that “life is better with Nature than without.”
3. Resilience The majortechnical challenge of the 21st century Is to design cities and buildings that are more resilient—able to adapt to the effects of climate change: heat- waves, floods, landslides, megafires, hurricanes, and so on. Even though I had anticipated the risk of flooding in the design of the office project in Saint Omer, I modified the con­ struction mid-project to make it even more flood-resistant. Without compro­ mising the commitments mentioned earlier, I made the building “submersible” and resilient to a flood 60 cm higher than the one we experienced in 2023- 24-which Is a significant volume of water at the regional scale. Restoring the pond and reintroducing endemic plants and lives was part of that strat­ egy (to absorb more water and maintain an open land naturally). RODOLPHO RAMINA U&A ENGENHARIA E PLANEJAMENTO CURITIBA, BRAZIL I connected with Pliny and Gall the first 10 seconds I met them. Immediately,I was captured by their love, passion, engagement, commitment, generosity and vision. Through them I have met a THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 181

Page 184

brotherhood of researchers, professors, residents, artists, scientists, designers, practitioners, and shopworkers that gravitate around The Center. But it was not only the sustainability conceptual framework, construction methods and systems theory they were working at that time that shocked me — I was amazed how well they could integrate all those concepts and operate In a real design-and-construction environment that was actually DOING SOMETHING! After a few encounters and working at The Center my perception (or realization) on the whole complexity of sustainabil­ ity was changed forever. For the last 25 years all the interactions and discussions at The Center helped me to get a sound perception on how complexity permeates everything and how impredictable.ls the behaviour of complex systems, leaving no illusion of deterministic design, canons and ready- made solutions. Working with many brains in Austin I helped to put togeth­ er methodologies and tools to assess and, hopefully, perceive whole complex systems, challenging traditional meth­ ods of breaking them into smaller and dysfunctional pieces. Those methods and tools were put to use in water sys­ tems as big as the Amazon river and the Sao Francisco river watersheds In Brazil. And they worked! The major force at play is becoming POL­ ITICS (with all caps!). Technology is not the limiting factor anymore. Answers to fundamental questions like “sustain what?” and “for who?” are critical, as the whole world becomes more aware of the complex connections implications In the “transformation matrix”. At the same time more and more people, from even the remotest areas and likely the ones that were left out of the discussion, are being Included and their voices are getting increasingly louder. JOEL ANN TODD RETIRED TROUBLEMAKER CABIN JOHN, MD I met Pliny and Gail in the mid-1990s, whenIwas working to develop the AIA Environmental Resource Guide reports on materials. These reports used a life-cycle approach to identify poten­ tially harmful ingredients or processes to inform product specifiers. Pliny was doing a much larger version of life-cycle whole-systems thinking that brought together large data sets to look for pat­ terns, synergies, and place-based solutions to problems. The adage “waste is food” became real — the waste from one process In a region could become the fuel for another process. Abundant materials could substitute for loss-avail­ able ones. This exploded the concept of LCA to create practical solutions. Pliny and Gail are both visionaries and inspiration to me and so many others. Gail saw beyond initial views of “green buildings,” expanding the concepts to healthcare and inspiring others to think more broadly. And although Pliny’s work with data sets seemed esoteric, he always brought it to apply to practical problems (often testing ideas at The Center), he looks for interactions within and among systems, where the solution to one problem became a solution to other problems, rarely looking narrow­ ly at one issue, problem or impact. Solutions needed to add good, not just be “less bad.” This is the future, I hope. As we learn more about “sustainability” and “green buildings”, thinking seems to narrow to more exact metrics. We need “big thinkers” to help us get to the next levels. They are so creative, it’s easy for us mere mortals to get lost. Working with Pliny always made my head explode, in a good way. The world needs the wild Ideasand practical implementation that The Center champions. We need more Plinys and Gails to challenge us, turn our assumptions upside down, and show us new approaches. Thank you for many years of good trouble — and more to come. W. LAURENCE DOXSEY RETIRED, PREVIOUS DIRECTOR OF OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY FOR CITY OF SAN ANTONIO MEDINA, TX We worked with The Center to jointly initiate the creation of the Austin Green Building Program starting in late 1990. Developing that program in Austin became my main work for the next 7 plus years while employed by that city. With my previous background in oper­ 182 | CMPBS

Page 185

THE PEOPLE ating a business in passive solar/energy efficient design,I built strong expertise through working at The Center to Include a fuller picture of the environ­ mental considerations and Impacts associated with the built environment. Icontinued In this vein by becoming Sus­ tainability Officer for Austin, then an Environmental Officer for US Depart­ ment of HUD. I completed my professional career at the City of San Antonio as director of the Office of Sus- tainabillty. My professional career operated with a fuller sense of the conditions associated with sustainability. I ended up traveling to multiple countries and cities plus working with many different agencies Including the United Nations and US fed­ eral agencies to share this perspective. My final professionaljob at the city San Antonio entailed a very large number of different projects and programs. Proj­ ects such as a City comprehensive plan (Mission Verde Plan), large bike share program, several renewable energy applications, creation of revolving fund for energy efficient retrofits of City facil­ ities, small business lighting retrofits, low income weatherization program, energy efficient City fleet policy. Work­ ing with the municipal utility (CPS) to generate a strong renewable energy portfolio along with generating econom­ ic activity with renewable sector jobs was a special effort. San Antonio is now ranked number 1 in renewables in Texas and number 5 in the nation. Looking to the future, it is hard not to feel pessimistic at this time when the US government is implementing an opposite agenda to sustainability. It is imperative to have Federal (not to men­ tion international) government facilitation and efforts to advance soci­ ety toward a sustainable future. The Immediate term calls for strong political opposition to the malignant forces guid- ing the nation. As Individuals and within research and education opera­ tions, even large businesses, we can advance only minimally toward effec­ tively dealing with the huge challenges. Our personal dedication and relentless commitment to continue with the devel­ opment and vision of sustainability needs to stay strong and not just act politically but also within our lifestyles. JOHN HART, PHD EMERITUS PROF., BOSTON UNIVERSITY HELENA, MT In the early 1980s,Iwas Director of the Live Oak Fund for Change, which funded grassroots organizations; The Center was a recipient of this support. I met Pliny, and we connected well. After my foundation work ended, I began fund- raising for The Center, developing a booklet describing The Center’s projects, and obtained permission from Chicano artist Amado Pena to use one of his drawings for the front cover. Pliny and I traveled to New York, where we met with Cora Weiss and received addition­ al support, and with my friend, Lakota activist William Means, who headed the Delegation of the International Indian Treaty Council to the UN International Human Rights Commission. The Center continues to affirm my worldview, and I have remained in contact for 42 years. Center projects informed my work, which in turn provided ideas for Center outreach.I have lectured about The Cen­ ter in my classes at Carroll College and Boston University, and in presentations at Oxford University, and have present­ ed written information about and affirmation of The Center In my pub­ lished books and articles. Iforesee negative forces of greedy, con­ trolling groups striving to Impede Center activities and personnel, and pos­ itive forces for justice and hope conflicting with them In order to cata­ lyze individuals and organizations to promote social wellbeing and the sur­ vival of Mother Earth. I hope that, ultimately, the forces for good prevail. SARAH TALKINGTON AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION AUSTIN, TX As an Architectural Engineering Student, attending the UT, my cousin, Roy Miles, was a carpenter working with natural building techniques. He invited me to The Center to experience the Advanced Green Builder Demonstration Building. I was wowed especially by the mobile kitchen and suspended table. After graduation,I worked as an acoustician on several of the first LEED projects in THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 183

Page 186

Austin, including Dell Children’s, the first LEED Platinum Hospital. After serving out my internship at The Center, I never wanted to work on a project using non­ green building practices again. I have consistently worked as a design engineer, owner’s representative, and policy maker in green buildings through­ out my career. My job path would not have been available were it not for the leadership at The Center. I have essen­ tially dedicated the last 25+ years of my life to becoming a sustainability subject matter expert. WhatI love most is that working to put better, more sustainable building methods into practice is end­ less. It is an innovative and rewarding field with Infinite opportunities to explore. The work is also in service to all that I value most: the environment, cul­ tural diversity, and human health and wellbeing. Ithink that the sustainability movement must reconcile with its privilege. We must lower barriers to participating in the conversations about and benefits of sustainability. We must focus on the frontlines of the movement, where peo­ ple have been Impacted first and worst by standard development practices. We must value each other’s lived experience and become inclusive of the wisdom there. We must work together to face the challenges the next 50 years will bring and not allow ourselves to be divided. WENDY VITTORI HPD COLLABORATIVE PHOENIX, AZ The work of The Center had a major impact on how I understand and think about the importance of place in how we develop the built environment. The models for EcoBalance in particular struck me as such a powerful method that should be fundamental to all plan­ ning for how we build. I have been engaged with The Center primarily In a strategic advisory role, and also have had the honor of having an inside perspective from my family relationship. As my own career moved from the information technology indus­ try to a focus on sustainability In the built environment, what I have learned in my work with Gail, Pliny and The Cen­ ter’s Board have helped me shape the programs we have developed to help reduce the use of hazardous substanc­ es in buildings. There Is a real tension today - and It’s not clear how it is going to be resolved

• between the forces pushing and pulling technology Into our every day human experience, arid the forces resisting these changes. Is it inevitable that Al will replace and displace people from many jobs? Is it inevitable that the vir­ tual world will replace and displace physical human Interaction? These forc­ es will dramatically shape how we continue to think about the built envi­ ronment - what are the needs, and what are “good” solutions. The Center has the approach and methods that are needed to help balance these trends to the ben­ efit of the natural environment — of which people are a fundamental part. The Center - Itself a physical place - can and should continue to evolve itself as a place that demonstrates how we can best use these new capabilities to enhance the natural and human envi­ ronment for the decades to come. JIM ADAMS MCCANN ADAMS STUDIO AUSTIN, TX I first met Pliny and Gail around 2002. As an architect based in San Francisco, I was crafting the plan for the redevel­ opment of Robert Mueller Municipal Airport. CMPBS was engaged as a sus­ tainability advisor. Up until then my primary focus was in transforming urban districts into more humanistic and sociable places that allowed people to interact more meaningfully with one another. They were the ones who expanded my horizons to think more about how we were treating the land and by extension the planet. The Center introduced things that were completely new to me: Innovative ways to save energy, solar orientation, green­ house gas reduction, cutting-edge materials, and ideas about sustainabil­ ity that no one else was exploring. That experience dramatically changed my perspective on planning. 184 | CMPBS

Page 187

THE PEOPLE The Single most important thing to do in the next SO years is to reduce and eliminate greenhouse gas emissions, through dramatic changes in energy production, transportation technology, and construction, three things that The Center has focused on this topic for the last 50 years! We need to accelerate electrification and the replacement of fossil fuels, new technologies for moving us around, and material innovation that accelerate our ability to achieve carbon neutrality. BILL WALSH SAFE CHEMISTRY IMPACT FUND LOS ANGELES, CA I first encountered CMPBS sometime In early 2000. At the time,Ihadjust start­ ed a new non-profit called the Healthy Building Network, which worked with architects, designers, and building own­ ers to reduce the use of carcinogens and other toxic chemicals in building prod­ ucts. I didn’t know much about building products or anyone In the construction industry, having spent the previous 15 years fighting chemical pollution par­ ticularly incinerators with Greenpeace. A colleague suggested I call a friend of a friend in Austin, Texas, to help me get started. She was an environmental activist who had stopped a proposed municipal solid waste incineratorthere. “I think she has something to do with ‘green buildings,”’ my friend said. I had nothing to lose when I made that cold call, and Gail Vittorl picked up the phone. Over the course of the next decade, Gail rapidly became a highly influential figure in the national green building movement. The Center’s name became synonymous with health-based initiatives, ranging from negotiating the minutiae of LEED materials credits to her signature achievement of conceptualizing and implementing the Green Guide for Health Care (GGHC). Gall became a great friend and mentor to me and many of my colleagues at HBN. She volunteered many hours helping to shape HBN’s nascent mission and pro­ grams and worked tirelessly to advance health-based criteria for green buildings. Our Initiatives sometimes caused some serious commotion, as when we tried to eliminate vinyl from LEED-certIfied commercial interiors. Throughout my experience, I saw the best that CMPBS has to offer: accessibility, partnership, exceptional work quality, and the high­ est integrity. SAMANTHA POWER BIOFI PROJECT EARTH My first time going to MaxPot I felt like I had passed through a special portal! They are bringing appropriate technol­ ogy to life In a way that is palpable and Inspiring for all who visit. The systems maps cover the walls and the detailed descriptions of them made me feel like I had found my people. I could feel the teachings of Buckminster Fuller, Dana Meadows, and so many other brilliant thinkers alive In that place. And of course the people passing through that I’ve met there are equally as inspiring. MaxPot was the perfect place to share about the BioFi Project and the emerg­ ing field of bioregional finance that my colleagues and I are stewarding with a Texas audience who is thinking about economic transformation and regener­ ation. It was a joy to get to share and learn about work happening in MaxPot’s bioregion. The connections made at MaxPot clearly ripple far and wide! In the future,I believe that an economic transformation which understands the economy as a living system is going to be critical. We have to change how we invest and how economic and financial structures direct our life force. We need to move from an economy so rooted in extraction and often incremental sus­ tainability improvements to a step change to an economy that drives regeneration - rooted in living systems patterns and principles. ARTHUR SCHALLER ARCHITECT & ARTIST LATITUDE 44.12 N, LONGITUDE -72.73 I first met Pliny when we both taught beginning design at the Collage of Archi­ tecture at Ball State University, 1971-2. This was a newly founded program and we had freedom to develop an experi­ mental course focused on experiential learning and problem solving as opposed THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 185

Page 188

to the abstract formalism so prevalent at the time. A memorable event was when Buckminster Fuller visited the stu­ dio, talked with the students surrounded by the living systems for plants, birds, fish and mice that they designed, installed, and monitored in the windows of the studio. Pliny left and landed at UT Austin; a few years later, at his urging,Icame to UT to teach and continue to refine some of the concepts and approaches we earlier explored. Pliny started The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, and I enthu­ siastically produced some early graphics. We left Austin, seeking a back to the land homestead, returning to Ball State. My family worked on converting a small acreage dilapidated farmstead and wood lot into a sustainable environ­ ment, raising two children and continuing our art making. The systems thinking, hands on experimentation, nature reverence, the ethical and empathic stance, and the willingness to “jump in” has stayed with me from the early days of Max’s Pot. I have transmitted those lessons throughout my 50+ years of teaching design, at Ball State University, UT Austin, the Archi­ tectural Association of London, the Yestermorrow DesIgn/Bulld School in Vermont and Norwich University, as well as continuous art making activity. The future? Presently a major blockage exists in the development of a sustain­ able future: greed, a classified political system, special interest, fear monger­ ing, the clawing back of human rights. the suppressing of diversity, terracide, genocide, scientific denial, all dance around the sleeping giant. When enough is enough the giant, wakes up, cleaning house, replacing industrial agriculture, reforesting much of the planet, developing systems of zero waste, and reviving work as a 4H dance of hand, head, heart In a holy manner. Unplug the drug and wake up the sleep­ ing giant. Certainly, there are visionary and pilot bright spots, such as Max’s Pot, and these centers grow forming a constellation of bright spots blanketing the planet each operating in their region but connected to the dynamic planetary pulse. CHRIS ZELOV FILM MAKER PHILADELPHIA, PA Voyaging back to the year 1992. The lead came from Penn Professor Ian McHarg, after interviewing him for a film project. When I asked about his influence on stu­ dents over the years he mentioned Pliny Fisk. Saying with a smile, that although he is a bit unorthodox, he Is brilliant, and would make a good interview. That was enough of an enticementfor wanting to know more. Soon afterI encountered an unexpected eco-design infused world in Austin, Tex­ as. They were seeking new horizons beyond the uneasy feeling of living through an exhaustion of cultural forms shaping the built environment in the late 20th Century. From Suburbia to McMan- sions, it seemed like a marshmallow syrup had been poured on to the land­ scape. We called it “Generica” back then. Given our youth and desire for alterna­ tives, It triggered a seeking of new paradigms that formed the basis of the award winning film: Ecological Design. I saw people inventing the future and evolving the mix, creating options in a world that has atrophied from the thirsting in the deserts of the imagina­ tion. The initially Buckminster Fuller-Inspired film, went off in a myriad of directions, thanks to characters like Pliny. The odyssey of discovery deep­ ened. The film continues on into the Global Dream Lab. Here lived an exper­ imental design seed planter for the next phase of the eco-design revolution.I saw The Center advancing the frontiers of what architecture can be all about. As Matthew Arnold wrote: “We wonder between two worlds, one dead, one waiting to be born.” To move forward, we are developing a radical pedagogy for creating alternative futures. French Philosopher Henri Bergson wrote about the significance of creative evolution. Hedonistic engineering is a key related skill. Life is full of surprises — may It con­ tinue to unfold and accelerate into regenerative futures, so that the tragic structures we are currently being thrown Into, do not dominate. The cre­ ative work of CMPBS is a splendid tonic to celebrate for breaking through the dross of the late 20th Century America. As the great German poet once said: “Boldness has genius, power and magic in it.” Thank-you Pliny for being a 186 | CMPBS

Page 189

THE PEOPLE light-worker, along with being a walking, breathing, inventor of what is possible in our built environment. PETER STRUBLE DESIGN BUILDER BOIS BLANC ISLAND, Ml In the Summer of 1993Iheard the phone ring and my Mother shouting out, “There’s some guy named Pliny wants to talk to you.” I had no idea why Pliny was calling me or how he had tracked me down at this remote location. “Peter, we need you!” Pliny explained that The Cen­ ter for Maximum Potential Building Systems, the organization that he ran with his Wife and co-director Gall Vltto- rl, had a project that needed someone with the kind of expertise that he appar­ ently thought I possessed. Pliny went on to describe the project which was being called the “Advanced Green Building Demonstration Home.” I once again declined his offer but thought to myself that the project did in fact sound interesting. The project would utilize locally sourced Caliche and other materials I was drawn to as well as pro­ viding the opportunity to work with appropriate technologies, i.e.. Solar arrays, water collection and greywater systems. When the last call cameI had pretty much decided thatIwould accept. I returned to Texas that Fall and began working on the project at The Center. The team consisted of myself, Greg Jack- son and Jesus Bendezu. Greg and Jesus had only recently received their Masters of Architecture degrees from UNC and the University of Iowa respectively. Greg was originally from North Carolina and Jesus was from Peru. Overthe next two years we worked as a team to develop Caliche block. Stucco and slab mixes, build a production facility to weld up the rebar framework and put it all together. In 1996Ifound myself frequently work­ ing with another staff member, Sally Lewis. A musical groupIwas with played a benefit on New Year’s Eve and Iasked Ms Lewis if she would like to go as my guest. She asked me If I would come and find her at Midnight, presumably because she didn’t know anyone else there. When 12:00 came I strolled through the crowd, found her at the back of the room and kissed her. We were married on Bols Blanc Island In 1997 and have been together for 28 years now. I have met some Incredible people at The Center over the years and maintain close friendships with many ofthem to this day. JULIA ALMARAZ DESIGNER DALLAS, TX During my year and a half as an intern at the CMPBS, I learned from Pliny Fisk the power of systems thinking and sus­ tainable technologies. That experience inspired me to pursue a Master’s In Bio- digital Architecture at the International University of Catalonia, where I designed the Terra Tower as my capstone project. The tower Is envisioned as a fully self-sustaining habitat that fully inte­ grates innovations I first encountered at CMPBS, including mineral accretion, anthroponics, and desalination. SHIVANI LANGER PERKINS&WILL AUSTIN, TX I have lived and practiced in Austin ever since graduating from UT Austin over 22 years ago. In sustainability circles, when you mention you’re from Austin, the conversation, much to my pride, almost inevitably turns to the pioneering work of Gail, Pliny, and The Center. They sparked my passion for sustainability, one that has stayed with me throughout my career. Even after serving as Director of Sustainability in various firms, every timeIsee the work happening at The Center or hear about their latest innovations. I’m reminded of what’S possible and inspired to push further. I also feel incredibly fortunate to have their ongoing support here locally, with our paths crossing often through projects, industry initiatives, volunteer events, awards, or simply moments that rekindle the sense of purpose they helped Instill In me from the very beginning. A major force shaping the future will be the influence we can exert at the policy level. Leaders like Gail have shown us that an Initiative with clear. THE FIRST so YEARS | 187

Page 190

actionable goals—even at a small city scale—can spark a powerful green building movement. The challenge now is to ensure those goals gain the support of decision-makers at the state and federal levels. In today’s shifting political climate, strong collaboration among innovative thinkers like Pliny and like-minded organizations is more important than ever. By demonstrating the proven benefits of climate solutions at larger scales—and backing them with research, innovation, and data- driven results—we can accelerate the sustainability movement and create lasting change. MARY EMENY TROUBLEMAKER BUSHLAND, TX Iforget how[first met Pliny, but it was shortly before Max’s Pot was formed. He and Daria were stfl teaching m the Architecture Dept, at UT, but deriritely frustrated wZLn the cc-L^u =-n-S Empc^eo bythiat work-E d’las seen drifted to serce =:Zcw=gJ=:€Z976.SCTr=ra] efusjCTed the Max’s Pct de-egatfen to the UNspen- soreo con—erence on nomen habitation (Habhat}- held In Vancco-ver. While UN delegate met dewTtown an old Navy base on the edge of town was filled with exhibits that promoted alternative ways of building and design. Max’s Pot had an exhibit there. That trip was transforma­ tive for me and 1thank Pliny daily for his invitation to join the team. Then came the adventure in Crystal City, the town In South Texas with a statue of Popeye In the central square because Del Monte spinach ran the town. The Hispanic workers In the plant struck, so the elec­ tric company turned off residential power. Pliny went down to teach those workers how to make solar hot water heaters out of old trash cans…Good Good Trouble! In 1978 Hunter and I moved to the Texas panhandle onto land that had b een in my family for over a century. V/e moved into a tiny, aban­ doned house on our family’s ranch and after making it livable decided to add an adobe entrance off the west side. David Lake was in and out of Amarillo that summer, working on another project. He served as our advisor, building what we think was the first free-standing adobe dome in this country. That kept the connection going with Max’s Pot. Several years later, we had the oppor­ tunity to retrofit an old barn and decided on straw bales as the way to go. Pliny came up and oversaw the con­ struction, memorialized in Adobe News as Tne Great Texas Retrofit. I amjealous of the young people who have the epportunit-y to work with them. They grve me ho pe for our future. JOSEF FARRlARZ STRUCTURAL ENGINEER BOCA RATOn, FL My experience as a structural engineer at The Ce nter waS transformative. immersing me in groundbreaking research that pushed the boundaries of sustainable construction. Working on cellular concrete research, we developed lightweight mixes through foam injec­ tion techniques, creating structural solutions with varying densities for diverse applications. The 100% fly ash concrete project was particularly rewarding—1led calculations and par­ ticipated in constructing an experimental prototype floor, demon­ strating how waste materials can become high-performance building components. The ferrocement structural elements project challenged me to design thin, foldable elements that maximized strength while minimizing material use. However, the Laredo Demonstration Farm project truly exemplified The Cen­ ter’s vision.I helped design agricultural structures using repurposed oil industry drilling pipes, creating an innovative shade and greenhouse system that embodied resource efficiency. The Center’s commitmentto sustainable innovation, combined with its collabo­ rative research environment, made it an ideal place to develop cutting-edge solu­ tions. May CMPBS influence sustainable construction for years to come. BARBARA HENDRICKS ARCHITECT GETTYSBURG, PA 188 1 CMPBS

Page 191

THE PEOPLE Iwas a Student : in the architecture pro­ gram at UT Austin between 1974 and 1978 after 2 years, off and on, at UT in fine art. I was young, i loved being in nature. I wanted to make things with purpose and was searching for a mean­ ingful focus. I found focus in the ideas that Pliny espoused as a professor about understanding our environment and how to build in concert with It. He was able to reveal specific concepts about identifying and using resources unique to every place in the world, and about systems of building not only buildings, but also whole communities, with the environment and community in balance as a goal. And this was not just a class- room experience. He had us go outdoors and build a solar heated hydroponic greenhouse and make bricks to build with at Max’s Pot. For me, the physical effort of building anchored my intellec­ tual understanding. I became an architect and was eventu­ ally able to be the project manager of a large project, the Biodesign Institute, buildings A and B at ASU, that, through the work of a team of extraordinary peo- ple, brought building science, community and the environment together. Iam so grateful for the UT and ASU education that carried me there, and for Pliny’s inspiration at my start In architecture. I believe that the educa­ tional work and outreach by people like Pliny and those at CMPBS is vital in spreading the truth about what we need to do to achieve sustainability to citizens, architects, politicians and leaders. This work, to me, is a core driver in creating the societal and political will required to push sustainability forward. To Pliny and Gail and all at CMPBS: Keep up the serious commotion! NICHOLAS KOCH CONTRACTOR SPRINGDALE, AR After fifteen years of friendship and mentorship with Gail and Pliny at CMPBS, I’ve witnessed something extraordinary. Beyond their immense impact on green building, they possess a remarkable ability to connect people across continents—Pliny will casually mention “that guy in Guatemala doing similar work,” and Gail Instantly pro­ vides the contact. These connections have transformed the world as much as their direct sustainable interventions. CMPBS embodies Austin’s original cre­ ative spirit—the weird energy that made the city special long before “Keep Austin Weird” became official. Pliny’s mind operates with complete openness to maximum potential, generating Ideas that seem impossible until they become reality decades later. He sees the future because he dreams it first, staying ten steps ahead of conventional thinking. While Pliny creates visionary sparks, Gail brilliantly translates those ideas into policies and standards that bureaucrats can understand and Implement. Togeth­ er, they’re like lions on the horizon—their mere presence moves entire herds for­ ward. CMPBS hasn’t just built structures; they’ve changed minds, hearts, and atti­ tudes of thousands who carry these revolutionary ideas into their own lives and organizations. They represent Aus­ tin’s soul—embracing the future while nurturing the creative, unconventional thinking that pushes boundaries and makes impossibilities possible. DARIA BOLTON FISK GO-FOUNDER, CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS What has CMPBS meant for me? Just do it. Don’t wait for permission or assurance, orjust the right time or place. But do honor and try to discern what time, place, people and circumstances you’re in. Work to demonstrate what’s possible and what designing and building in response to local climate, material base, knowledge and skill base could mean. Offer a glimpse of a new/old way. Isalute that spirit and impulse in us all and in The Center over all these years. From Austin Urban Alternatives to the Texas Appropriate Technology Network to the Texas Solar Action Coalition, may one thing continue to lead to another and may we remember to tread lightly, but boldly, as we. In Paulo Freire’s and Mlles Horton’s words, “make this road by walking.” THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 189

Page 192

v! v K^‘K

Page 193

D LAKE

Page 194

Fig. 25. Circular column and wind driven generators. HUOY / /ft // tv ‘k If CONTROL Mr.s:1 200 w WINDDRIV EN GENERATORS /: 1 Vk 1 4/ 192 | CMPBS Wolf Hilbertz, Wolf’s Lab At The Annex, Accretion / Biorock Process

Page 195

PHILOSOPHY HOW CAN ARCHITECTURE CHANGE THE WAY WE INTERACT WITH NATURE? CMPBS: Can you take us back to the beginning? What was the architecture scene In Austin like in the 1970s? David Lake:Iwas at the UT School of Architec­ ture, starting in 1972. That time was very eclectic. This was before anyone even used the word “sustainability.” There was a group of professors who were really seeking to create places that had the least possible impact on nature and to use least energy, water, et cetera. This was right after the big oil and gas crisis, where people were waiting in line for gas and all that crazy stuff. The school had rented this building they call The Annex, which was an old church,Ithink. As a student,Iwas focused on the question, “How can architecture change the way we interact with nature?” I was less interested in what the building looked like. I was more Interested in how the building could change behaviors and change our relationship with nature. I was inter­ ested in hanging out at the annex. There were characters like Pliny and Daria Fisk, Wolf Hil- bertz, people like that. Paco Arumi was there, who was developing software to do energy Interfaces on the performance of a building. One of my courses was to physically punch out those cards to run through a computer that would then do energy analysis of a design. It was absurd what we were doing. CMPBS: Could you talk a little more about Wolf Hllbertz? Lake: Wolf Hllbertz was a remarkable person. He was originally from Germany and he was intrigued with reef construction. He had this Idea where you would put metal mesh into salt- water, connect it to diodes, and basically make manmade reefs. What he finally achieved in the Caribbean — probably In the late ’80s,I guess — by hooking up a wind generator on a tiny little island, where he put this mesh Into the salt water, then ran a current through the whole shape. After something like six months or a year, the entire armature had been coated, basi­ cally Ithink It was limestone and other elements attracted from the ocean. He pulls it out of the ocean, sets it on the ground, dries it out and becomes a house! He had all these people, me Included, playing with this idea of how to make natural structures from the ocean. So that was Wolf. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 193

Page 196

‘1^n5*l^^C^-Df^^ F .<Ki^’ 194 | CMPBS Caliche Block Manufacturing by CMPBS if -±>—±^77<-^

Page 197

PHILOSOPHY CMPBS: Wow! If you take a step back for a sec­ ond and you contrast your experience to current ways of teaching design, what’s different? What were you guys tapping into? Lake: It was at the height of alternative think­ ing, and just throwing off the yoke of classic ways architecture was taught. We were all hip­ pies. We didn’t buy anything. We assumed nothing was a given. When you went to the School of Architecture, they had all these, frank­ ly, anal professors who were teaching Modernism and worrying about fenestration. It had nothing to do with building performance, or the quality of experience In the building, any of that. CMPBS: When you think about the question you asked a second ago — “How can architec- ture change the way we Interact with nature?”— Modernism seems devoid of a thoughtful relationship with nature. Lake: Well, we were revolting against that. The people who went to the Annex were seeking a different path. We were explorers. The profes­ sors out there shared the same basic philosophy: we are starting from ground zero and we’re crafting places that have the least Impact on the environment and have the most impact on the occupants. We honored the idea that nature Is finite, ecologies are finite, and resourc­ es are finite. None of the professors really cared about what the buildings looked like. That wasn’t the goal. It was completely, “How does the experience, the systems, the construction come together to evolve into places that have the least possi­ ble impact on nature, engage ecological systems, and create community?” So it was very radical. CMPBS: What about the early days of CMPBS? Lake: I was one of the first board members. I helped The Center raise some money to go to Oklahoma and get an old bicycle spoke wind turbine. I remember sitting down with Pliny and this kit of parts, the spokes. The Center wheel, and I think It had something like 200 blades. We hooked it up and created energy. Pliny had this remarkable mason, Howard. He was a part geologist, part mason, part medi­ cine. We built the first net-zero-water house. We did caliche block. Howard was 60, I think. He was very crusty, but he really knew soil chemistry. Anyway, we took caliche, crush it up, added water, and we’re making low-Impact cement block. So we did a little house out of caliche block and took all the water off the roof Into a cistern. I don’t know If there are even photographs of that thing. It was tiny, like a 12’ x12’ room. It was fun.Iwas intrigued with soil, the soil’s dynamics, and the use of soil. It actu­ ally goes back to the very earliest shelters of mankind, right? CMPBS: Why is work like this important? Lake: At the time we were all drinking the Kool- Aid about Mother Earth and alternative ways of living on Earth with nature. It was an explo­ ration; We were Earth explorers and we were going to fix how mankind occupies the Earth. That was exciting to all of us. We didn’t know what the outcome would be. We were just seek­ ing out-of-the-box solutions on how to be connected to nature, how to respect, not dam­ age nature, and create shelters that were In balance with all systems. CMPBS: When you look around, what do you see? The same crisis is still in our face. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 195

Page 198

50 years of Dreaming and Doing at The Center ; Pliny Fisk…: Pliny , Clearly is the exemplar of.„idea-phoria…-…the constant flow of ideas .„in volume and breadth of topics. Rapid fire -always seeking solutions ..unafraid to tackle the thorniest of challenges …Pliny ‘s asset is his curious mind ..never stopping …always going going going … A blend of the innovator /ingenious engineer extraordinaire ;Bucky Fuller …mixed with a hint of ecologist and expert of the mapping of all resources..; Ian McHarg-and the perception and poetry of;Louis Kahn … It’s no wonder Pliny still continues to dream up yet another “kit of parts.”and to invent __ ! Luckily „.. Gail Vittori is so present and precise in fishing through all of Pliny’s ever evolving ideas _______Gail steadily wades through the breadth of Pliny’s ideaphoria to “land” his strong and best ideas … Gail is steady. Gail is quietly effective-. Gail is laser focused on results ..and building consensus ..collaborating …she knows when to stop -dreaming up ideas -and consolidate -:::::::::::::::::::::: : …projecting confidence and steadfast in the pursuit and the value -.that just one good idea can make the differ­ ence . And so this remarkable pair ..have explored and led so many of us on successful journeys …and have made The Center known as the -.CEnTER for charting paths to resilience in all fields …all endeavors … across the globe -there are no borders in seeking a resilient future … I have been lucky to be a student of Pliny .. From 1973 to 1976..and a member of The Center ever since , the UTexas School of Architecture had a band of renegade professors ..seeking resil­ ience and sustainable solutions ..net zero water and energy -least possible impact upon our nat­ ural realm ..my lucky inclusion as a student in the annex and as a member of The Center forever changed my trajectory as an architect. (David Lake’s “joyous toast” digital transmission)

Page 199

Lake Flato’s greatest collaboration and the project that transformed how we as a firm explore sustain­ able design„.evolved from a simple call I made to Pliny and Gail regarding the U of Texas School of Nursing ..pursuit … We needed a collaborator …someone who gets The Center -and its core beliefs-in short …who is the leader in sustainable architecture 25 years ago ..? Gail and Pliny said without hesitation ; Call Bob Berkebile and Steve McDowell at BNIM.„ I did call ..and Bob and Steve AGREED ..and together with The Center .. we crafted a building for the UT /Houston Health Science School of Nursing and Community Center …the first LEED GOLD certified building for UT systems ..first Leed Gold in Texas (confirm) Lake Flato’s first AIA COTE Top Ten project But more importantly we learned to LISTEN and to learn from BNIm and The Center ‘s collaborative process …the pursuit of high performance buildings which emerge from the culture climate and craft of each place …together we sought the best ideas -from users , owners, consultants, contractors .. Networking. Dreaming with a purpose. Committed to a low impact and high performance design process without apriori design ideas .„ Lake Flato has enjoyed our collaborations with The Center ; Austin central Library , LEED Platinum, Cote Top Ten Georgia Tech EBB , LEED Platinum , Cote Top Ten Doseum Children’s Museum San Antonio ,LEED Gold World Birding Center , South Texas LEED Gold ,Cote top Ten To name just a few ..and all we had to do as a team was to ; “Bring an open mind !” I can’t believe it has been a half century for The Center .. Pliny is still his exuberant and playful self .. Gail equally ebullient and seeking answers . „Both always on a journey to craft a balance between the built environment and our natural realm.. Compromise has never been a worthwhile option at The Center-. Inspiration and the pursuit of the seemingly impossible has always been the path. No FEAR Love Nature Seek the best ideas Collaborate Repeat and Repeat and Repeat Congratulations to The Center Happy birthday… Dream on ! DO MORE WITH LESS ! ONWARD !- David Lake FAIA

Page 200

198 | CMPBS Felix Candela In Texas (Photo by Willis Albarado) SIX FLAGS I _ ____ fi’erem ___

Page 201

PHILOSOPHY Lake:Iwould actually argue the crisis Is so much worse. We are in denial of science. We’re in deni- al of technology. We’re in denial of applying rigorous engineering innovations to build plac­ es with the least possible impact on the environment. It was a crisis long before this current administration appeared. Let me just backtrack a bit. Did you read the text I submitted to Pliny and Gail? CMPBS: Yes — you sent something that felt to me like a joyous toast. Lake: That is exactly what it is! It’s ajoyous toast honoring two people who have lived it.I mean, they have lived the dream of a future where mankind has the least possible impact on the Earth. They’ve been true to that. CMPBS: Can you talk about your time with O’Nell Ford? Lake: I needed to get a real salary, so I inter­ viewed with O’Neil Ford, whoImet at UT Austin, then worked for him for five years. He pounded into us this notion of responsiveness to the climate, craft, and culture of each place. It was a very pared down version of what The Center was doing, but much more pragmatic. But still sharing some of the aspirations. CMPBS: A happy medium between ecological design and high design. O’Neil Ford buildings are typically beautiful. Lake: Absolutely. They were very rooted in, in classic, passive solar response, local materials, craft, and detail. Making spaces between the buildings and focusing on the experience of being in the building. What it feels like from the Inside is equally important as.what it looks like from the outside. I think that the obsession with the building as a sculpture is the biggest failing of modernism. CMPBS: A building as an object? Lake: An object and not about occupant expe­ rience. And it certainly didn’t look at the surrounding buildings and how it was relating to the buildings next door and the streetscape or any of that. We could go on forever. But back to toasting The Center. It is remarkable that you have this group of individuals who are striving to rethink how we Interact with nature. How do we, as humans, land on this Earth and make a stronger connection to nature? And no idea is not worthy of chasing. This is a case of reinventing who we are, how we live, and how we are sheltered? How are we sheltering all species? In the early days it was open season. You could have any idea and Pliny or Wolf would go, “Hmm,that’s interesting. Where are you going to take this? O.K, Go! See where this leads you.” There was just an openness to dream about how you solve problems of all types. Isaid in my toast — andImean It — that Ithink Pliny’S challenge Is that he has TOO MANY ideas. He has an Incredible quantity of Ideas that spring from his curious mind on an every-sec- ond basis. He’s the purest designer I know. And by that,Imean, he has more ideas In a day than some of us will have in a lifetime. Ido attribute it to him being with Ian McHarg. Seeing what Louis Kahn was doing. Knowing what Bucky Fuller was upto. All of those things. Ithink he too has a completely open mind about the future. But at the same time, Ithink from THE FIRST so YEARS | 199

Page 202

Ian McHarg, he’s very much rooted in resource mapping, overlaying information, trying to come up with a kit of parts that grows from what we are given in each particular place, whether It’s materials, culture, climate, or craft. They all emerge from understanding each par­ ticular region without any a-priori notions about what things should be. CMPBS: I’d love to justjump over to starting a firm of your own. Lake: Ted Flato andImet in O’Neil Ford’s office. Ted was from Texas, but went to school in Cal­ ifornia and was working with Bill Turnbull, who was teaching at Stanford. Around that time they had been doing Sea Ranch. So Ted was intrigued by that approach to solving things. And Turnbull and O’Nell Ford liked each other. Small world. Sometimes you get lucky in life and work hard to pursue connections with great teachers. If you’re open-minded, you can be shaped and you can find yourself. And that’s how Ithink The Center very much shaped me. Again, each and every project begins from zero. You never go into a project thinking about what it should look like or how it feels. That Center experience got combined with working for O’Neil and absorbing his Texas regionalism. O’Neil also loved engineering.I don’t know if you know this, but he brought Candela in to do the first Texas Instruments factory. That project featured the first intersti­ tial floor, where they were running oxygen, electrical, everything, in alO-foottall intersti­ tial floor under the semiconductor floor. It had no columns because Candela had done a folded concrete roof. CMPBS: Louis Kahn got a lot of credit for a sim­ ilar approach at the Salk Institute. Lake: You don’t bring that up with O’Neil Ford! [laughs] He was three or four years ahead of Kahn. His project for Texas Instruments was done for a working factory and It set the tone for future semiconductor facilities and factories of all sorts. The interstitial floor was made from precast concrete trusses so construction was really fast. They did the folded concrete roof without columns. So that was less expensive. Ithink It was 100 feet free span. CMPBS: Can you talk a little bit about how, at Lake | Flato, your team was able to transition from the dreams and aspirations that grew out of the 1970s to really significant commissions, like the UT School of Nursing, for example? Lake: In 1984, we founded Lake | Flato. At the time, Texas was in an economic crisis. We were just trying to get anyjob we could. That usual­ ly meant we were doing ranch houses. And the beauty of doing ranch houses is that they have to be built way out in the middle of nowhere, and so you immediately have to use local mate­ rials and local craft. You’ve got to do more with less. We used to call It “Ranch Tech,” which is this idea of using whatever’s available and tru­ ly being ingenious about pushing the limits of what you can get your hands on. Whether it’s welding pipe as a steel structure for barn-mak­ ing or using corrugated steel in interesting ways because it’s inexpensive and spans pretty far. Just trying to be as pragmatic and poetic as possible. And be connected to the environment and open. We used to have this saying, in fact we used to have T-shirts that said, “Indoor, Outdoor, blah, blah, blah,” [laughs] because we’d get tired of describing our process. Basically It was how do you make the out-of-doors part of the interior experience? That was something O’Neil Ford 200 | CMPBS

Page 203

PHILOSOPHY Hill Country Jacal, Pipe Creek, TX (Photo © Leigh Christian) THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 201

Page 204

0 %&4 01 *^.Ji F’^tarfU Id 5^4 utiu3 202 | CMPBS University of Texas Health Science Center School of Nursing (Photo © Lake Flato) 74

Page 205

PHILOSOPHY banged into us and merged easily with Pliny’s open-minded systems, where you tried to be as light on the Earth as possible. Our first truly process-driven collaboration was with The Center and BNIM at the School of Nurs­ ing In Houston. I remember Bob Berkebile and I were in the regents antechamber, and we’re getting ready to explain to the regents why a building should be resource efficient, and the architect of the university systems at the time said to us, “Do not mention anything about sustainability or resilience.” And Bob looked at me and had this little smile. And I said, “Well, this is gonna be interesting.” [laughs] At the time, the School of Nursing was on track to be a LEED Gold building.Idon’t believe there’d been a LEED Gold project built in Texas yet. I know that the university system had never even had a LEED certified building — they didn’t even know what LEED was. So Bob went into the regents and by the time he finished talking about systems integration, resource efficiency, all the things we were striving for, one of the regents turned to the rest of them and said, “Why aren’t we doing this on all our buildings?” CMPBS: What was The Center’s role in that project? Lake: Gail was critical in that collaboration. She is such a good listener and consensus-builder. I love Pliny and his energy when it comes to chasing the next great idea. Gail’s always focused on, “Wait a minute, let’s get this one idea down now and see where that leads us.” And that’s the beauty of the two of them. They balance one another. So that one project led to many more collabo­ rations between The Center and Lake | Flato. The School of Nursing got certified LEED Gold. It did get a Committee on the Environment (COTE) Top 10 Award. Since then Ithink we’ve since won maybe 16 COTE awards, the most by any firm in the United States. CMPBS: How do you think achieving success at that level helped build the culture at the firm? Lake: We’ve always said that the culture of the firm Is actually an ongoing evolution of our effort to create places that are intrinsically light on the Earth. Making the most with the least. These are all principles that we really started honing when we were doing ranch houses. At the same time, all of us at Lake | Flato love get­ ting out and going camping. There Is a camaraderie in the out-of-doors. In valuing nature. We’ve attracted people who share these values and care about this process. Ithink you just build momentum. Each project has to build the next project and lead to the next project. Ithink the most significant challenge for us was to take on bigger and bigger projects and apply the same principles. Certainly the School of Nursing was one of those moments. The Burl­ ington Northern Santa Fe corporate headquarters north of Fort Worth was anoth­ er one where we actually designed and built a whole campus where they control all the trains In North America from a central command cen­ ter. No one would have ever dreamt that these ranch house guys could take our philosophy and apply It to a corporate campus or to a nurs­ ing school. CMPBS: I love this question you started with, “How can architecture change the way that we interact with nature?” How has your answer to that question changed over time? THE FIRST so YEARS | 203

Page 206

Lake: That’s a good question. I’d say we’ve evolved to be less systems-driven and more climatic response-driven.I would also say we’re looking at conventional approaches learned over many, many centuries of people living out in the wilderness and making the most of the least. The Sodbusters have been an inspiration. Barns are an inspiration. A barn is one of the great form-follows-function structures ever built. Now we’re having to really look at high perfor­ mance buildings engaging a much, much broader group. We’ve gotta bring in the right consultants. A good example would be the Aus­ tin Central Library, which we did with Gail. Ever since we did the School of Nursing, we’ve estab­ lished a meeting at the very beginning of every job. We engage the users, the owner, the con­ tractor, the design team, interested citizens, and we dream about, what is it about this build­ ing that you’re striving to accomplish? How can we make this building really fit the place, solve the problem, be welcoming, and engage every­ one who comes to the building? We now call.them “integrated high-perfor­ mance design charrettes.” They’re led by our partner Heather Holdridge, who is an engineer. She’s not an architect. She’s always had an eye towards performance. And so we gather every­ body in a room and we list all these things, and at the end of a full day we will have, as we did in the Austin Public Library, two core goals. For the library, one goal was to be the best day lit library in the United States. The second goal was to be Austin’s living room. Those two simple ideas drove a chart about LEED certification and building performance. We actually list — using the LEED process — where we’re going to focus on innovation. Our goal was to seek a LEED Platinum building. The City of Austin had hired us to do a LEED Certified building. By the end of that integrated design charrette, we had many more aspirational goals, that we would always revisit at the end of each phase with the owner and the contrac­ tor. That led to the Austin Central Library becoming the most dayllt library In the United States. It was shaped completely by daylight­ ing. The building Is 74% day lit by area. We found every way to bounce, harvest, and reflect light throughout a six-story building. Gail was amazing at being part of that process and building consensus. Gail’s really good at asking questions, not because she knows the answer, but because she’s trying to understand where the challenge Is going to come from and how we can build consensus to solve It. CMPBS: Last question. Let’s imagine that you were a young person today, and interested in working on the same big challenges that animated the people around you in the 1970s. What advice do you have for someone just starting out? Lake:Ithink the most important thing In solv­ ing problems is being able to listen to a variety of perspectives. Ithink now more than ever we have to really mine the future of technology and innovation, systems integration, and break- throughs in construction. I’d still assume nothing is a given. Always be willing to turn over a new leaf. Listen. A good example of our firm holding onto this beginners mindset was Confluence Park. We engaged a University of Houston professor Andrew Kudless for a park at thejunction where San Pedro Creek meets the San Antonio River. We did these folded shells, pre-cast con- 204 | CMPBS

Page 207

PHILOSOPHY frH^ a B^ TO, / .f i^‘V?,/ ’ ’/ ‘v%Xy,4 ^ifc^a Confluence Park, San Antonio (© Casey Dunn) THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 205

Page 208

1000 LUXO LUX RORC ATRIUM DAYLIGHT ANALYSIS ILLUMINANCE (LUX) SEP 21, 3PM PERIODICALS PORC TEENS CAFE 2ND ST. EVENTS CESAR CHAVEZ;St!^J

• SOUTH | NORTH CO-Wl TOWI ri. NON FICTION FICTION KIDS ATRIUM NON FICTION NON FICTION TOP SKYLIGHT SOUTH SKYLIGHT NORTH SKYLIGHT EAST WINDOWS A daylight model of each aperture that contributes to an evenly-lit atrium. PHYSICAL MODELING SKYLIGHT UNDER CONSTRUCTIONON-SITE LIGHT MEASUREMENTSLUMINANCE MAPPINGDAYLIGHT PROCESS 206 | CMPBS Austin Public Library Daylighting Study (© Lake Flato)

Page 209

PHILOSOPHY Crete petals, that all hinged together and they served to funnel rainwater into the cistern underneath. The shade structure then irrigates the entire park. We didn’t really know what we were doing. We didn’t enter Into that effort with an idea about what it was going to look like. It was totally evolutionary. It was by collaborating with an artist who talked about petals and the geom­ etry of nature and we applied that to constructibility — how we were going to build this quickly and with the least possible use of resources. Ithink our future is really about dreaming, but dreaming with some sense about the practi­ cality of getting something built. I mean, you have to balance those two things. I think the future is about escalating these ideas Into city building in countries where they’re wildly expanding. How do we make these places resource efficient?Ithink a lot of that has to do with broadening our definitions. What Is archi­ tecture? What Is landscape architecture? What is urban design? What is ecology? I think back on Pliny being immersed with Ian McHarg and early resource mapping. It’sjust a simple Idea of taking what’s there on Earth and deciding what’s pivotal in saving. Where’s the least fragile place to occupy the Earth with the least impact? I think Stanford’s taking an interesting approach. Their sustainability department is engaging and has all these different depart­ ments, coming together to think about a future that’s driven by resilience, not consumption. That’S inspiring. CMPBS: That insight into Stanford circles all the way back to education, where we started this conversation. It sounds like what was hap­ pening at the Annex, but on a University-wide scale at one of the top institutions In the world. We’ve made a lot of progress, but there is still a long way to go. This has been an inspiring conversation. Thank you. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 207

Page 210

r? v; ‘^zq

Page 211

ERIES OF ;h-impact bPOSALS ^PONDING FARING JS/RY GAPS I^LATED JTIONS

Page 212

AGRIHOOD AN AFFORDABLE, SOLAR-POWERED, 3D-PRINTED COMMUNITY THAT INTEGRATES FOOD PRODUCTION WITH RESILIENT BUILDING SYSTEMS —I10^ ►70 ‘WiX The Agrihood is a prototypical solar-powered, 3D-printed neighbor­ hood that Integrates food production into an affordable twelve-unit residen­ tial community with sustainability at Its core. Achieving zero-energy build­ ing in Texas is a challenge, given the extremes of heat and cold, a fragile electrical grid vulnerable to peak demands, and the state’s location in tornado alley, subject to floods, fires, and other hazards. Together, these conditions shaped an approach to housing that is self-reliant, resilient, and affordable. Hollow ZD-printed concrete walls pro­ vide both structure and thermal mass, absorbing and releasing heat and cool energy to regulate interior conditions. A Quonset-style roof, proven to perform exceptionally well under severe Texas winds, reinforces resilience, while also Incorporating flexible photovoltaic pan- Project Team: Pliny Fisk III, Gail Vittori, Lauren Rochell, Diana Valdes Year: 2024 210 | CMPBS

Page 213

GLOBAL DREAM LAB els and radiant sky cooling technology. The 3D-printed mass walls and Quon­ set-style dwelling units are designed to incorporate large inbuilt ducts, partic­ ularly when the top and bottom sides of the Quonset are covered with flat mate­ rial. The combination of these attributes enables the complex to rely almost entirely on solar heating and cooling, delivering zero-energy, disaster-resilient homes at an affordable cost of $120- $224 per square foot. The same building system is also used for a vertical “grow barn,” where duck­ weed (Lemna minor) is cultivated as a sustainable substitute for red meat, dairy, and grains. The solar-powered 3D printer’s gantry is repurposed after con­ struction and transformed Into a utility corridor that doubles as a shaded pedes- trian sidewalk. Through these Innovations, the Agrihood building sys­ tem reduces greenhouse gas emissions, eases pressure on prime farmland and rangeland, and provides oxygen and food for Inhabitants in a healthy, bio­ philic environment. AGRIHOOD FARM BUILDINGS — AGRICULTURE{ xACCESS ROAD ’ - AGRIHOOD RESIDENTS : FUTURE OUTLET SHOP VISITOR PARKING SITE P^AN FARM / KITCHEN/ CLASSROOM EXISTING BUILDINGS POND LENTIL STACKEDTRAYS USE SAME BUILDING SYSTEM AS SECOND STORY RESIDENTIAL INTERNAL GROWTH (AU. NUMBERS ARE APPROXIMATIONS) HEATING / COOUNGZ SOLAR ELECTRICTTY QUONSET ROOF ON BOTH HOMES ANO FARM BUILDINGS 24/ 7 LED FULL SPECTRUM DUCKWEED FARM

1. MEAT REPLACEMENT
2. DAIRY REPLACEMENT
3. GRAIN REPLACEMENT (FOR APP. 40 PEOPLE) TOTAL POND LENTIL AREA OF ONE “AGRI” BLOCK- 8,800 sq ft • PROVIDES ENOUGH OXYGEN FOR 80 PEOPLE • SEQUESTERS 2,668 POUNDS OF CARBON • PRODUCES 25,580 GRAMS OF PROTEIN, ENOUGH PROTEIN FOR 464 MEN OR 568 WOMEN • PRODUCES 0.064 MEGAWATTS 12-16 AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL — OFF GRID HOMES SINGLE OCCUPANCY, EXTENDED FAMILY AND DUPLEX MULTI USE VIA VERDE
4. SOLAR OPERATED 3D PRINTER
5. CONSTRUCTION GANTRY
6. UTILmES MOUNTING AND PEDESTRIAN PROTECnON
7. SECURE ENTRANCE THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 211

Page 214

RADIANT SKY COOLING MEMBRANE + THIN-FILM PV + INGENUITY = AIR CONDITIONING AND HEATING WITH NO COMPRESSOR OR FURNACE 45 Outdoor Air 40 Indoor Air35 30 10 5 U 25 ° 20 45 40 Outdoor Air ’■■■ Indoor Air 0 O co m co O ra co O m O O’ m co O O m co O O m co O 0 -5 .10 -15 CM -20 . ^25 ^-30 35 30 9 25 20 15 10 5 70 —Rsc Surface . Heat Flux 60 50 —■■■■ Indoor Relative 40 Humidity 30 20 10 0 m to O co rv ^ O CT M CO O O m “to O 35 -40 -45 -50 ~ O co O 8 7 6 5 -X 4 3 2 1 0 PV EIec Production COOLING MODE Radiant sky cooling (RSC) is a commercially-available technology that radiates heat directly to outer space through the “atmospheric window” of wavelengths to which earth’s atmosphere is largely transparent. Our positive net-energy system employs an RSC membrane over alternating channels in the quonset hut shell to form heat exchange ducts. During the cooling season, fans circulate air through these ducts and the 3d printed wall cavities to store “cooith” in the cistern and concrete hypocaust floor. Living spaces are conditioned as-needed using this pre-cooled mass. HEATING MODE Thin-film photovoltaic membrane covers alternating channels of the quonset hut to form heat exchange ducts to capture heat from the back of the PVs. In combination with solar gain, internal loads and reduced heat loss from a very tight envelope, this heat satisfies heating loads. Fans circulate air to store heat and condition the living spaces using the same scheme described above. ENERGY STAR The ENERGY STAR/HERS rating is not designed to consider housing with no conventional heating/cooling equipment. We used EnergyGauge to create the rating shown, entering the maximum performance values for a heat pump system.The actual rating would be better if our proposed scheme could be properly modeled in that system. HERS RATING CERTIFICATE $534 ENERGY SIMULATION The proposed system was simulated using Energyplus. For the average heat flux from the RSC film, we conservatively selected ~35 W/ m2 after reviewing multiple peer-reviewed SMALL UNIT- 2 LEVEL Site Energy Consumption PV Energy Production academic papers and one meta study presenting (house only) values ranging from 20-100 W/m2, depending Net Energy on the spedfic situation. Consumption Photovoltaic Array Size 2,150 kWh 2,250 kWh -100 kWh 1.45 kW 212 | CMPBS

Page 215

GLOBAL DREAM LAB FLEXIBLE PV NEOPRENE INSULATING MOUNTING GASKET EXTERIOR (61’102; WARM AIRCOLD AIR DUCT INSULATION AIRKRETE R 3.91/inch — RADIANT BARRIER: REFLECTIX INSULATION DOUBLE LAYER OF S’ INTERIOR INSULATION ROCKWOOL R42 TOTAL DOME UGHTTUBE RADIATIVE SKY COOLING (RSC) ROOF SECTION DETAIL WARM OR COOL AIR RECIRCULATING UP OR DOWN 3D PRINTED WALLS CLEAR PANEL 11 -4 B’-4 El’ — 9’ 3D PRINTED CISTERN AND ------ FOUNDATION 3000 GAL/HOUSE BIOCLIMATIC SECTION 12* <07) WARM AIR INTERIOR CLEAR PANEL GUTTERS FOR WATER COLLECTION 3D PRINTED PLANTERS THE FIRST so YEARS | 213

Page 216

lu^i 3D PRINTING ON APRON CONSTRUCTION GANTRY MOVES PRINTED CISTERNS 3D PRINTING OF WALLS MATERIALS BEING DELIVERED ON APRON SECOND FLOOR IN SELECTED UNITS ROOFS AND GLAZING 1-3D SOLAR PRINTING 214 | CMPBS 3 -COMPLETEDj2-CONSTRUCTION GANTRY

Page 217

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Pl h i THE FIRST SO YEARS | 215

Page 218

] ffixEak4 taxx^rl S7KX:tiX?| NW.,* 216 | CMPBS

Page 219

GLOBAL DREAM LAB SMALL UNIT - 1 LEVEL -1 BED 345 SO FT GROWTH GROWTH LARGE UNTT- 1 LEVEL- 1 BED 6B6 SQ FT SMALL UNIT — 2 LEVELS — 1 BED F1-408 SQ Fr v F2-325 SQ FT LARGE UNTT- 2 LEVELS -1BH) F1-686 SQ FT F2.403 SQ FT SMALL UNFT - DUPLEX F1-408 SQ FT PER UNIT F2-325 SQ FT PER UNIT LARGE UNrr-2 LEVELS -2-3 BH) F1.6U SQFT F2.643 5Q FT SITE PREP Base Material Excavation/Topsoil Storage _______ AFFORDABLE 1 LEVEL- 350sf 3,000 AFFORD 2 LEVEL- 600 sf 3.000 DUPLEX Ext fam 2000 Construction Slab Apron 1,000 1.000 900 suD total MULTI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR/ unit share _________ 4,UUU 4.000 2900 Power Third Rail ___________________________ 2800 2800 2800 Battery Storage 3D Gantry Setup ___________________________ 2200 3000 2200 3000 2200 3000 Construction Gantry Setup ___________________ 2000 2000 2000 __________ sub total _______________________ 10,000 10,000 10.000 3D PRINTER MANUFACTURING ________________________ Foundation Modules & Covers ________________ 9.500 9.500 16.500 U-shaped Wails ____________________________ 10.500 10.500 Z1,5UU ____________ Subtotal ___________________________ 19.500 19.500 38.000 OFFSITE APRON DELIVERED COMPONENTS___________ Quonset Roof Component ___________________ 3.000 3.000 5.000 Insulation _________________________________ 1.500 1.500 2,500 Giazing/Doors _____________________________ 17.000 17.000 16.000 Flexible PVs / waste heat and Rad-Sky Cooling 12,750 12,750 20.750 Kitchen/Bath/Bed Inserts_____________________ 10.000 10,000 11.000 Second Floor Kit (Post & Beam& floor)_________ 14000 25000 Spiral Stair Kit _____________________________ 1000 1000 subtotal 44.250 59J50 80.250 LANDSCAPE PLANTS & FURNITURE ____________________ 950 950 1200 ____ __________________________________TOTAL $76,200 S224 /sr S93.200 S155/sf at 600sf 143.130S120/sf 1 THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 217

Page 220

SCHOOL FOR FELD STUDIES (SALTWATER FLUSH) A CONSTRUCTED SALTWATER WETLAND AS AN INTERACTIVE LIVING LAB AND MODEL FOR COASTAL RESILIENCE CM I’L? a;—— era=,’—— aim =- i—&: T Project Team: Project Team: Pliny Fisk III and Rich MacMath (design); Dan Schellenberg (on-site wastewater treatment system); Sally Struble (landscape) Year: 1996 218 | CMPBS

Page 221

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Located on Magdalena Bay, bordering Puerto San Carlos on the west coast of the Baja Peninsula, the School for Field Studies’ Center for Coastal Studies rep­ resents a deep investigation of self-reliance in coastal conditions. This experiential residential campus was designed to immerse students in the ecology of saltwater marshes and their connection to the fishing industry. Initial master planning oriented the cabins for faculty and staff to take advantage of cooling breezes; sourced bio-based materials such as seashell stucco from the region; and, significant­ ly, installed a saltwater-based artificial wetland wastewater treatment system to offset the use of scarce freshwater for flushing toilets—otherwise requir­ ing piping from 54 miles away. Master planning, design, and construction oversight spanned six months. As a prototype, the saltwater wetland highlighted a new possibility for coast­ al regions worldwide: using plentiful saltwater for sewage conveyance rath­ er than depleting precious potable freshwater. The global reality that salt- water Is abundant while freshwater is scarce should Inform water-use pat­ terns, though replicable examples remain all too rare even today. With up to 90% of coastal wetlands—essential breeding, spawning, and nursery habi­ tats for marine species—at risk of disappearing by 2100 due to climate change, pollution, and development, projects like this suggest another path: integrating wetlands Into the landscape as wastewater purification systems while also supporting the species nec­ essary for their survival. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 219

Page 222

STUDENT DWELLING UNCTS _________ AREA: 9 UNTTS (F> 192 SF (TZ^ SM) / UNTT TWO UNTT TYPES. X yANO B- OCCUPANerr. 4 STOOENTS , UNTT SOL-AR PHOTOVOLTAICS. 95 SF / UNTT WORKROOM AREA 512 SF (46.1 SM) TOWER #2 / STUDENT BATHHOUSE ____________ A=A. 448 SF (403 STI.) WATER TANK 1760 GAU PLUMBING FDCTURES. 8 LAVS. 6 TOILETS. 4 SHWRS. SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS 95 SF WETLAND M3 _______________________ TRC4TMENT NON-SAUNE GREYWATER FROM BATHHOUSE TREATMENT TANK AREA 320 SF (233 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH LENGTH. TOO LF (30 M) X 2 FT. WIDE WETLAND #1 TREATMENT: SALINE BLACKWATER FROM STUDENT BATHHOUSE AND AC BATHROOMS TREATMENT TANK AREA: 320 SF (288 SM) VEGETATON TRENCH: 1OO LFC3OM)X2FT X2EE1CES INTERNS AREA 1008 SF (92 SM) OCCUPANCY:! MGR. 3 NTERNS WATER TANK: 1.760 GAL- •. WETLAND #2- PLUMBING FPenreS1 LAV. 1 TIT. I BATH/SHWR. 320 SF (233 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH: TOWER #3_____________ NATIR TANK:w GAL BATHROOMS AND LAUNDRY WETLAND #4_____________ TREATMENT. SALNE AND NON-SALINE GREY AND BLACKWATER FROM FACULTY UNITS TREATMPCT TANK AREA 32OSF(2a3 SM) VEGETATION TRENCH. 1OO LF C3O M)X2Fr. Ur CLASSROOMS COURTYARD EACULTY DWELLING UNriS. AREA 5 UNfTS © 640 SF (57.6 SM) / UNTT< LIBRARY AND ADMINISTRATTON OFFICE AREA: 768 SF (09.1 SM) 1- 2 PERSONS , UNTT DINING HALL /KrrCHEN AREA:1440SF 029.6^ PLUMBING FDCTURES:1§1* PER UNTT »7U^^TJJNX______________ -REA 400 SF (360 SM) OCCUPANCY- 1 — 2 PERSONS SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS 475 SF u:i:’ DINING TERRACE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICB DIRECTORS RESIDENCE/ AREA 1J3O SF 0153 SM) OCCUPANCY. 2-4 PERSONS SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS 23 75 SF ,^-UMBNG RKTURES 1 LAV. 1 TlT. 1 BATH/SHWR ALL TREES SHOWN ARE EXISTING PARKING EXISTING PALAPA TOTAL BUILDING AREA (NOT INCLUDING TOWERS) 11.052 SF (995 SM) 220 | CMPBS

Page 223

GLOBAL DREAM LAB GENTRALfRESHWATER GARDEN SAfi. / INTERN UNIT LAUNPAX FACULTY UNrrs <2) SKW Knorai DIRECTORS RESIDENCE FACULTY UNrrS CTl .SKW Sav’ ^^T VNir.&lP FACULTY UNfT CENTRAL HALOPHTYE PLANT GARDEN GARDEN AT sruoesi- OWELUNG L~T5 WETLAND #4_____________________
TREATMENT: SAUNE .AND NON-SAUNE GREY AND BLACKWATER FROM FACU-TY UNTS AMD SAM/NTERN UNrr G^TXTURES iW 7 LAVS. 7 BATH/ShOWERS. ANO 7 TOL-E=S SEPTC TANK: 1.000 GAL TREATMENT TANK AREA. 300 SF (27.0 SM) INSIDE WTH 2-3 FT. WOE RETANNG WALLS OSPOSAL TR^slCH._ KX) LF (30 Mj X 2 FT. Wrrn PERFORATED aPE AT| CENTRAL HALOPHYTE| PLANT GARDENf or unGairL” R/A&d “ll^J’U?^nfr!&*ra :£^^^l!y<TCd \fr72i|-lr=<frP?r W^IUANQJ!2 TREATMENT NON-SA-NE GREYWATCT FROM KTrCHEN, L-MJNORY. AND AC. BAT-ROOMS RXTVTCS:1SNK 4 LAVS. ANO 2 WASHNG MACHNES SEPTIC TANK 1.000 GAl TREATMENT TANK AREA: 300 SFC27O SM) NSOE WITH 1 FT, WCE RETANKG WALLS DSPOSAL TRENCH •CO LF (30 M) X 2 FT WTH PERFORATED APE AT CENTRAL FRESHWATER GARDEN ANO COURTYARD PERMETER LANDSCAPING TREATMENT\ NON-SALTsE GREYWATER FROM BATHHOUSE’ EKTURES 6 LAVS. 4 SrCAKERS SE=TC TANK \COO GAL TREATMENT TANK AREA 300 SF {27.0 SM) Nsoe wm-i 2-3 ft. wide RETAIS6G WALLS DSPOSAL TRENCH LENGTH too LF{3O 1X 2 FT. WIDE WITH PERFORATED Pft AT CENTRAL FRESHWATER GARDEN AND PALM TREE GIGATON SALT WATER SUPPLY SHALLOW WEx-L AND PUMP EXISTING STORAGE OS-ERN WETLAND #1 TREATMENT- SALNE BLACKWATER FROM STUDENT BATHHOUSE AND AC BATHROOMS RXTURES ‘O TOLETS SEPTIC TANK 1000 GAL TREATMENT TANC AREA 300 SF (770 SI) NSDE WITH FT WOE RETANNG WALLS DISPOSAL TRENCH. 100 UF (30 M) X 2rt WTTH PERFORATED PPE AT SALT WATER SETTLING TANK SALT WATER WETLAND BACKISH WATER SETTLING TANK BACKISH WATER WETLAND FRESH WATER Vy TREATMENT Ll_ FRESH WATER WETLAND A SALT WATER J^^WELL THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 221 BATHHOUSE

Page 224

FERROCEMENT BOTTOM LINER 4° DA. PERFORATED PIPE TRENCH MEDIA TOP ELEV.= — r-O- CLEAN OUT ACCESS CELL B OUTFLOW PIPE INVERT ELEV.= 0-0° CONC. BLOCK RETAINING WALL CELL B (SEE DETAIL) CONC. BLOCK __
RETAINING WALL CELL A (SEE DETAIL) WATER LEVEL ELEV.= 0-0” SEPTIC TANK OUTLET PIPE INVERT ELEV. = + TO” SEPTIC TANK Wrri-I BAFFLE i.OOO GALLONS EFFLUENT FILTER EPTIC TANK INFLOW PIPE SECTION .DISPOSAL TRENCH (SEE DETAIL) 0- q^ dTR.farWETLAHO S1UOIE9 N^OArENA BAY &6-% Mexico VVEflANPS peiAII-0 5Mar’,7 32’.O ^^o’w 0 CUEANOur INLET NV^FOTa Ej-j?4c:L^- O 74’-2&” PEEP MtoiA ALUM/ MEDIA COVER- CN’ER WATep- LEVEl- MEDIA I’-o’ Ik---------‘I’ CATT>|LGi dK^MEHlTlLS KEbe9 evruGr iNv^rcr Euev = o’-o C^UU X? O^UL- ‘0’ PLAN arid S^riON \h 0

• 1-0” &m&. +O-^ feiuoa 0-0^ w^fE -1-0 WEAPCP flfS INvn2.r=-i-o (J\ 111 is < .i,ax>&&L- WttW PAPFL^, Top &L.ev.=+2-o’ ^,T-|N<^ GR>OB) H <^^rric,i;sNKT2?werL4NPs p^ils C^PTO TANk^ INFLOW MOUNDFP +2W -E!!^
• Z’-C -INK CONC. PLooK. |2.eTA INIHG WILL 1, E*(91-HG (SKAD^ O’IN O§ M^PLA NOTES: •^EVAJ-IONS —CTvIfN WITH— wetlanps WAltaZ L^EU ^6^0° BENCHMARK •M’N. SLogEgtIz, —C>urF3/2yY-Cf— |Co”MlM LB/^IN weruANos 222 | CMPBS

Page 225

GLOBAL DREAM LAB THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 223

Page 226

PLENITUDE A COMPACT DESERT ECO-CITY REVIVING MINING LANDSCAPES AS ABUNDANT COMMUNITIES ^d Ite

Project Team: Pliny Fisk ill, Adam Pyrek — lead designers; Lovleen Gill Aulakh; Evan Brooks; Cassidy Ellis; Shruti Gupta; Robert Murray; Sophia Razzaque; Blake Smith; Sam Vonderau Year: 2011 224 | CMPBS

Page 227

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Plenitude is a visionary design for a compact, resource-conscious city that seeks to repair the environmental and social harms of surface mining. Locat­ ed on one of Morocco’s many phosphate surface mines In need of remediation, between three ancient desert towns, the city is designed to absorb future regional growth while serving as a model for mine restoration and regen­ eration. The design balances food, water, energy, and material flows by employing game-changing clean technologies such as carbon-balanced, non-freshwa­ ter-based brine-derived concretes reinforced with abundant regional fibrous minerals; an on-demand hydro­ gen energy system with no storage requirement; a pedestrian-friendly rall- to-road pod transportation network powered by both gravity and hydrogen propulsion; and a solar heliostat and hybrid wind system that generates ener­ gy for export, ensuring the settlement remains fiscally responsible. THE FIRST so YEARS | 225

Page 228

CITY PLANNING PROCESS REGIONAL: NEAR KHOURIBGA. MOROCCO SUB-REGIONAL: PHOSPHATE MINE SCARS ZONE 1: PHASE 1 OF MAKING THESmE LIVABLE EXISTING HWY N-11 SOLAR MIRROR TREE ARRAYREGIONAL TRANSPORT OASIS GREENBELT URBAN CORE AGRICULTURE PLATEAU SERVICE/TRANSPORT RING 3? EXISTING SITE CONTOURS FROM MINING DESTRUCTION
6 an ?0, EXISTING CONOmONS 226 | CMPBS SUB-REGIONAL SITE PLAN

Page 229

GLOBAL DREAM LAB

---

THERMAL CHIMNEY —”/
PEDESTRIAN -------------— --------^^^ I~ WALKWAY I ZONE 1 PLAN URBAN ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS RESPONSE ^•.VrvX%Y >1. {.^- !U>^^^ZN 1 - >‘7’•/W SUMMER: GOOD SUN )• l• ¥ >>U SUMMERS FOGGY /,¥ /.<>.-A;::i<<4AV» N V. ,-’

;<.’ Jj; rW SUMMER: COOL BREEZE ^^^^■iM^; \ T^^v RAINSTORM HIGH WINDS OASIS Community under­ ground dsterns SOLAR MIRROR COVERED FARM Residential cluster Upgraded existing farmland TENT VALLEYTHERMAL CHIMNEY TOWER • Multifunctional updraft thermal engine lifts

• Rail to Road pods for gravity release •Transportation hub • Regional dirigible • Rail to road gravity transportation LARGE DESERT LIVING MACHINES Dye sensitized solar PV greenhouses Controlled heat gain and wavelength change CONTINUOUS SHADED NEIGHBORHOOD Connects neighborhood centers Dye-sensitized colored PV and wind generator tent- supported towers Funnel water collection Cistern water storage ZONE 1 SECTION MULTIPURPOSE CONTINUOUS GREENWAY Vegetative cooling Cistern water storage Bird sanctuary Living machine fertilizer - pigeon & bats INTEGRATED VERTICAL INDUSTRY SUPPORT TOWER Brine electrolysis Solar kiln Concrete mixer and pump MULTIPURPOSE CONTINUOUS GREENWAY Vegetative cooling Cistern water storage Bird sanctuary Living machine fertilizer-pigeon & bats HISTORIC DESERT TOWNS Preserved as museums WINTER: FOGGY DENSE MIXED USE COMMUNITY Civic, commercial and housing WINTER: GOOD SUN THE FIRST so YEARS | 227

Page 230

ANNOTATED SYSTEM DIAGRAM OF MATERIALS FLOW SOURCE PROCESS USE RESOURCE BUILDING SCALECITY SCALE 10 10 S P U R Ik -f—[} U SOURCE 1 Waste phosphate & MgO carbon-balanced cement 2 Caliche from high calcium carbonate soils 3 Sillcone sand 4 Brine minerals for ceramic cements 5 Brine metals (iron/aluminlum/magnesiumj 6 Basalt from mineral extraction 7 Hemp (fibers and oils) B Oily planls-cactus. Yuahubi. Salicornia. Creosote Bush 9 Bioremedlated land to build on SO-PRINTED NEIGHBORHOOD Uses central towers as gantry bast, with last-selling MgO cement for walls and roots inspired b, arcrent Nubian archatclurv PROCESS 1 High temperature kiln, basalt fiber 2 Medium temperature kin. MgO cement 3 Low temperature kiln - bio-based material drying 4 Elactrolysis 5 Plant oU extraction 6 Monomer spin weaving 7 High temperature fusing (basalt) using solar 8 Foamed MgO/phosphate cement 9 Hemp fiber/MgO block 10 Hydrogen firing for traditional day crafts USE 1 Structural monocoque support mirrors 2 Vertical industry support tower 3 Thermal chimney tower 4 Greenhouse support systems 5 Control walls and pond bottoms for enzyme and bacterial processes 6 Pond and cistern linings 7 Encapsulation of heavy metals using MgO/phosphate concrete 8 Cables (or tents and thermal chimney 9 Greenway ring road 10 Fine and coarse aggregate for aU ceroentatious processes 11 Cable rails for transportation 12 Bio-based plastics for greenhouses and tent membranes 13 Hemp trio-based resins for monocoque R-R pods 14 Electrolysis ptatesZaluminium and magnesium 15 Water harvesting 16 Caliche block rcpiocemenl of adobe RE-SOURCE 1 Open building systems/reuse of elements 2 MgO ls nutrient fertilizer 3 Hemp as renewable resource 4 Oily plants as renewable resource 5 Rehabilitation of land using waste organics 6 Improved earth technologies like caliche 7 Improved reinforcing of old structures using fast setting cements B Iron replacement for reinforcing old structures with basalt rebar. 9 Repair of old roofs with more permanent materials 10 Reusable carbon-balanced cement using MgO phosNiate 11 Reduced use of fresh water with brine based cements 10 16, MATERIAL FLOW ‘J to Plenitude uses brine from treated saline groundwater to produce low-energy, fast-setting saltwater MgO concrete for large-scale 3D printing. All materials are screened to ensure they are non-toxic and support local eco-industrial byproduct use. Basalt fiber, though carbon-intensive, replaces steel as a stronger, more durable reinforce­ ment in magnesium oxide cement, and its UV and weather resistance also make it ideal for tent and shade surfaces. Overall, the material palette is regionally sourced, low-carbon, and designed to reinforce local eco-industrial systems. 228 | CMPBS

Page 231

GLOBAL DREAM LAB ANNOTATED SYSTEM DIAGRAM OF WATER FLOW SOURCE PROCESS USE RE-SOURCE BUILDING SCALECITY SCALE 10 10 3 P U R SOURCE 1 Precipitation, Tent Roofs 2 Precipitation Mirrors 3 Precipitation Mirror Roradlatlon Moisture and Greenhouse Condensation 4 Path and Slreot Water 5 Major Thoroughfare Water Collection 6 Large Thermal Chimney Greenhouse Water , Greenhouse Surface Roofs I Underground Brine 9 Brine water from Mineral processing 10 Brine water from Urine processing 11 Green roof Collection on Farm Buildings PROCESS 1 Processlng/Storago under Greenway 2 Oasis Direct Storage 3 Cisterns around Oasis-indirect storage 4 Greenway aroound Large tents at ground connection 5 Electrolyls, RO Brine processing 6 Water Harvesting Treatment at Home Scale USE 1 Residential 2 Commercial 3 Industry 4 Fresh water Irrigation Idrip irrigation) 5 Bioremediation enzyme bacteria and fungi phase 6 District Chiller and Evaporathre Cooling 7 Verticalvegetable and Herb Garden Community and Home Scale 8 Halophyte Agriculture 9 Brine water for MgO Phosphate Cement 10 Washing of Heliostat Mlrrrors 11 WasNog Greenhouse/tent dye-sentisized PV 12 Salt water irrigation RE-SOURCE 1 Flipped Mirror Reradiatlon Evaporative Retention 2 Fresh water Food Aquaponics, Fish Waste Water used by plants 3 Wetlands using Reed plant species for treatment 4 Tree Species for human Waste treatment (grey and black water) 5 Green roofs for Human Wasta Treatment 6 Waste Water Greenhouse condensate 7 Brine Waste Water from Halophyte plants Into Brine Shrimp Farm 8 Food AquaponIcs-grey water for Tilapia 9 Select animals use non-fresh Water Sources 10 Urine resourced as Fertilizer 11 Ground Water Saved for Historic Towns 12 Toilet/Urine Separation CITY SCALE CYCLES BUILDING SCALE CYCLES U lO 6 The city approaches water in arid conditions through an integrated system that combines traditional methods with advanced ecotech- nologies. Saline groundwater is used in multiple ways—such as hydrogen production, construction materials, and agriculture—so that the byproduct of one process becomes the feedstock for another. Freshwater is prioritized for drinking and essential needs, while saltwater supports halo­ phyte crops, greenbelts, aquaculture, and animal feed. This closed-loop approach not only balances scarce desert water resources but also offers a model for coastal regions increasingly threatened by water scarcity. THE FIRST so YEARS | 229

Page 232

ANNOTATED SYSTEM DIAGRAM OF ENERGY FLOW SOURCE PROCESS USE RESOURCE CITY SCALE 10 S p U K SOURCE 1 CommimIty shade vent $mem 2 Integrated dye-sensitized solar PV 3 Greenhouse tent dye-sensitized solar PV 4 Fiber optic daylight tracker 5 Mullifimctional updraft thermal chimney raises hydrogen pods for gravity release 6 Combined solar high temperature absorber with vertical axis wind system 8 Green roofs for constant temperature 8 ThermaUy designed calicho/bemp walls 9 Ground based cooling tunnels for core neighborhoods 10 Night time flattening of mirrors to hold ground temperature 11 Heliostat mirrors till on poor direct solar days for heating community buildings and agriculture 12 Solar greenhouse drying for earthem construction 13 Solar greenhouse drying for crops 14 Long lasting shade system made from basalt for courtyards 15 Multifunctional muUlangular solar heliostats PROCESS 1 Phase Change magnesium oxide IHgOl piaster 2 On demand alumlnium-magneslum battery 3 Greenway cooling for tent and thermal chtinney 4 Oasis heat sink 5 Wet sand heal sink 6 Cistern heat sink 7 Auto /truck hydrogen conversion USE 1 Passive heating / cooling of buildings 2 Passive lighting 3 Fiber optic full spectrum task lighting 4 Colored light for plant growth 5 Courtyard cooling using shade 6 Courtyard cooling using mist 7 LED lighting 8 Microwave RE-SOURCE 1 Waste C02 for greenhouses 2 Light from dye-sensitized PV Increases plant growth 3 Water from hydrogen battery 4 WaU/floor retease/absorb constant temperature 5 Ground cooling aided by waste moisture from hydrogen absorption chillers 6 Exported energy from Plenitude used by historic desert towns 7 Improved living standards for permanent renovation 8 Non-polluting firing methods for traditional brick firing CITY SCALE ENERGY LIFE CYCLE Plenitude draws its renewable energy mix from the desert’s natural conditions—shade, breeze, night cooling, and thermal mass—supplemented by solar heliostats, wind, photovoltaic fabrics, thermal chimneys, and on-demand hydrogen. Unlike most zero-energy models, its energy equation also integrates transpor­ tation, prioritizing human power, walkability, and pedestrian systems. Innovative Rail-to-Road Pods, powered by gravity and supported by hydrogen and thermal chimneys, form an efficient, low-carbon mobility network while doubling as multi-use infrastructure. 230 | CMPBS BUILDING SCALE

Page 233

GLOBAL DREAM LAB ANNOTATED SYSTEM DIAGRAM OF FOOD FLOW BUILDING SCALE SOURCE PROCESS lO USE S 0 U Q 7124#5 4 10 ••nRE-SOURCE SOURCE 1 Dye-sensitized greenhouse vegetables 2 Greenhouse aquaculture 3 Greenhouse orchards 4 BrIno water saUcomla (cattle feed) 5 Brine water shrimp 6 Brine fish species , Roof top container garden I Integration kitchen gardens , Courtyard herb vegetables 10 Home chicken, pigeons, and fish farms 11 Pulse fed animal husbandry 12 Adaptive traditional animal husbandry 13 Enhanced traditional gardening methods PROCESS 1 Vegetable preparation for markets 2 Food preparation for markets 3 Meat butcher 4 Medicinal plant preparation 5 Home meat/flsh preparation 6 Poultry preparation -pigeon/chicken 7 Animal slaughtering 8 Large-scale solar dryers 9 Adaptive reuse of traditional cooking methods USE 1 Personal nutrition: fiber, protein, carbohydrates, vitamins & minerals 2 Restaurants 3 Store front sales 4 Street vendors 5 Open air market vendors 6 Bulk sales outside communities 7 Traditional market sales 8 Oasis Market stalls RE-SOURCE 1 Toilet waste separation 2 Kitchen compost 3 Kitchen recydlng center for organic separation 4 Biopod organic treatment- protein concentration for fish and smaU animals 5 Yermiculiure 6 Street recycling system 7 High yield In-vessel composters 8 High yield vertical composters 9 Integrated landscape-window composting 10 Whole tent neighborhood vermiculture farm system 11 Lifecycle design organic food restaurants Ikeyed food sources In Plenitude) CRY SCALE BUILDING SCALE •ly l to 10 FOOD LIFE CYCLE THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 231

Page 234

232 | CMPBS te’-j P= rt ‘i

Page 235

global DREAM LAB P V ^k Plenitude extends beyond technology and infrastructure by incorporating social and economic systems that sup­ port sustainable resource use. It imagines a new ecology of commerce shaped as much by natural systems as by human activity, rather than profit motives alone. Sustain-a-Bills, a region­ al currency, ties monetary value to resource cycles, rewarding ecological health and cultural preservation instead of extraction. As a whole, the city nur­ tures a culture of resource consciousness, aligning economic prosperity with the regeneration of land and community, and balancing abundance with respon­ sibility. THE FIRST 50 YEARS I 233

Page 236

LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM AN INTEGRATED REGIONAL MODEL FOR BUILDING, INFRASTRUCTURE, MATERIALS, AND AGRICULTURE AS A FOUNDATION FOR LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Credit: R. Greg Hursley 0 J 4 1 Coordinated with the Texas Department of Agriculture’s Texas-Israel Exchange under the leadership of Agriculture Com­ missioner Jim Hightower, Laredo Farm challenged agricultural convention In Texas, where, as in many U.S. states, the economic viability of farming is threat­ ened. The Farm was designed as a prototypical bioreglonal building system and Incorporated water-efficient farm­ ing practices introduced by visiting Israeli agriculturalists. A low-cost, regional material palette maximized efficiency, flexibility, resource utilization, and replicability. Buffelgrass, an invasive species, was baled into blocks, set within a wooden ladder-block frame, wrapped in chicken-wire lath, and sprayed with fly ash-based cement. Repurposed oil drilling stems, ubiqui­ tous in south Texas, were introduced to support a continuous shade and wind-deflection system, light-gauge roof structures, water catchment sys­ tems for irrigation, solar space and water heating systems, and wind gen­ erators. Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Josef Farbiarz; Steve Year: 1988 Gerdes; Tom Glassford; Alberto Luera; Tom Morris; Tony Ramirez; Laredo Junior College Construction Department, W. Laurence Doxsey, Rich MacMath, Rey Zamora; Howdy Reichmuth 234 | CMPBS

Page 237

GLOBAL DREAM LAB AGRO-FORESTRY AREA NORTHERN VARIETY AVACAOO TREES srrE PLAN RIO GRANDE RIVER ORGANK: SOLID WASTE STOCKPILE SLUDGE THICKENING CISTERNS CONTINUOUS SHADE DIRECT GAIN MAIN OFFCE SOLAR DRYER SOLAR ZEOLITE REFRIGERATION DOWN DRAFT COOLING TOWERS STRAW BALE PACKING SHED RECYCLED OIL RIG DRILLING STEM 40 KW WIND WATER PUMPING WATER TREATMENT WETUIND MARSH SEDIMENTATION POND BATCH SOLAR WATER l FARM INSEOTUARK K^WIND-GROW COMPOSTING SPATIAL IMPACT GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP frycy*ycycyf¥c>mr^ BUILDING FORM ICON REPRESENTATION IRON ORE HYACINTH STRAW LIME DOWNDRAFT TOWER SOLAR RADIATTON BAMBOO SHADE GOTTERS CISTERN feoUNDATK^n DRILLING STEM POLf FLYASH METAL­ ROOF THERMAL MASS VAPOR BARRIER I FLYABH I STUCCO 11 UPDRAFT |’ HOT . STRAW MIRALES h VAPOR . BARRIER 1 | __LATH THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 235

Page 238

Credit: R. Greg Hursley PROTECTIVE COVER SYSTEM AND BUILDING SUPERSTRUCTURE PROTECTS FROM WIND STRUCTURES FOR VINES AND BIRD HABITATS PROTECTS YOUNG PLANTS FROM EXCESSIVE SUN DURING SUMMER REDUCES WATER CONSUMPTION UP TO 50% SEPARATES IRRIGATION LINES FROM CULTIVATION STRUCTURES FOR OVERHEAD VINES ENCLOSURES FOR BENEFICIAL INSECTS ANO BIROS PROTECTS FROM HAIL REDUCES TEMPERATURE STRESS FROM lO-IS’F USE OF COLOR SHADING CAN ENHANCE PLANT GROWTH UP TO 20% PROTECTS PLANTS FROM FREEZING BY BLOCKING NIGHT SKY RERADIATION POLES USED AS STURCTURAL BASE FOR SCREEN HOUSE PROTECTIVE STRUCTURE CAN BE EFFECTIVELY USED FOR INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE SUCH AS BID-INTENSIVE GARDENING AND PERMACULTURE CAGES POLE CABLE SYSTEM USED AS SUPPORT FOR LOW COST FABRIC STRUCTURES TO HOUSE: PLANTS -GREENHOUSES -SOLAR DRYER POLE SYSTEM USED AS BUILDING ROOF SUPPORT FOR: -PACKING SHEDS -BARNS -MAINTENANCE OFFICES ANIMALS -CHICKENS -DUCKS -TURKEYS -GEESE -RABsrrs -PIGS -LAMBS -GOATS -CATTLE Credit: R. Greg Hursley The Farm’s extensive shade system, a principal design element, is built over a series of 30’x 30’x 24’ units within which a variety of farming activities take place. The three-dimensional environment allows many plant and animal species to thrive at all elevations. For example, beneficial insects are enclosed within a protective envelope and birds are kept in an aviary surrounding the plant environment. This envelope—com­ prising light filters, plant trellises, variable shade cloth, and bird netting—functions both as part of an integrated pest management system and as a microclimatic environment suitable for plant growth in this semi-arid region. 236 | CMPBS

Page 239

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Credit: R. Greg Hursley III THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 237

Page 240

238 | CMPBS

Page 241

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Credit: R. Greg Hursley THE FIRST SO YEARS | 239

Page 242

THE FARMTHE OTY SOME PRODUCE USED BY LAREDO JUNIOR COLLEGE ASH FOOD NITROGEN FOODMIER JARRED HONEY IMGISV ruc’iNKsqnf REFRIGERATED ORGANIC VEGETABLES & FRUITS PURE WATER PtCKLED PRODUCTS HOT WATER CARBON FIBER TRACE BJEI,.ENTS DRIED FISH. FRUrrS & VEGETABLES Pt11,3(0 ATK>N uouro WASTE nniniNc (ANSiNC LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM AS FLEXIBLE BUILDING SYSTEM RAN VENTED EYAP COL SUN ADDITIONAL CLIMATE PARTS HEATING T r’ rrrr rrrr rrrr RAOIANT barRIBA GOLARAm COLLECTOR HEAT STORAGE COOLING RAOIA NIrrier AIR VENTS ADDITION BUILDING COMPONENTS LOW TUNMEL, SOLAR VERTSHAD&WmO SURFACE MYOR. ENERGY mw«um«nmirn SOLAR OICTRCG REFRIGERATOW DRYING WATER, SANTT. ATON COOLING TOW ERSA THERUAL CHIMNEYS VEGETA 4 ILS RGAT M FILTEI £TLC^rox>^ LE^T nilto EXTRA I OUSE COMPOS’ PLANT PACI 0 GSM US The farm’s grid design gives farmers the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions—from shifting markets to seasonal needs. As demands evolve, the grid can be modified; for example, roofs can be added to sections when additional warehouse storage is required. 240 | CMPBS

Page 243

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Credit: R. Greg Hursley Due to the Farm’s grid layout, elements were built on the ground and hoisted Into place on the drilling stem poles. The structure became a prototype demon­ strating how Texan farmers can overcome operations and maintenance challenges, lessen reliance on water and fossil-fuel energy, passively cool crop­ lands and buildings, and extend the growing season through continuous shade. Other building system demonstrations included 40-kW wind generators that pumped water from the Rio Grande Riv­ er through a constructed wetland for purification before use on the Farm; updraft and downdraft cooling towers; a zeolite solar refrigerator; ferro-cement cisterns; a large solar crop dryer; helix anchor foundations; and extensive use of electric and telephone pole hardware and cable fasteners. When the Farm lost support following a change in administration at the Texas Department of Agriculture in 1990, Lar­ edo Junior College and the local community revived it as the Lamar Bruni Vergara Environmental Science Center. Today, the College’s website describes the site as a “regional destination for elementary, middle and high school stu­ dents to receive experiential science Instruction, mainly in life, biological, aquatic and environmental sciences.” THE FIRST so YEARS | 241

Page 244

FLOATING REEF TOWN oe© A MOBILE FLOATING COMMUNITY AND CONSTRUCTED REEF BUILT ON A REPURPOSED OIL RIG Coral reef ecosystems support roughly 25% of all marine species and provide food security and livelihoods for millions of people, yet they are increasingly threatened by the petroleum industry along reef-heavy coasts. Because reefs are ancient, slow-growing, and fixed to the seabed, relocating them from pol­ luted waters can be as difficult as creating entirely new reef systems. Prompted by the University of Texas at Austin’s IC2 Institute, The Center has pro­ posed the Floating Reef Town—a concept to rebuild reefs and establish a floating community using a combination of decommissioned semi-submersible oil rigs and an Innovative process called mineral accretion. Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Caroline Dunn; Charlie Correales Year: 2017 242 | CMPBS

Page 245

GLOBAL DREAM LAB BASALTFIBER WIND SCREEN/ HURRICANE LOUNGE PALLETjourr PVPANELS riprui ation HUMAN POWERED ELEVATOR SATELLTTE FOR GEO LOCATION DIRIGIBLE LANDING PAD ACCRETION (CATHODE /HULL) WIND POWER FOR MICRO GRID ENDANGERED SPECIES ICONS SIUCATED WOOD STRU CTU RAL GRIO PALLET OFF-GRID SAFE HOMES CONSTRUCTION CRANE SUBMERSIBLE OIL RIG ACCRETION (ANNODE / ANCHOR) HURRICANE VIEWING LOUNGE PROTECTED BY BASALT FABRIC WIND BREAK TYPICAL PALLET LIVING MODULE WITH BATHROOM / KITCHEN UNITS SURFACE OF WATER SUBMERSIBLE PLATFORM IN HURRICANE SEASON The Global Coral Reef Alliance has devel­ oped Biorock™ a mineral accretion process that uses low-voltage electrical currents to encourage minerals to crys­ tallize on metallic structures. This process forms a limestone material sim­ ilar to the natural foundation of coral reefs and can be used to create artificial reef structures that support coral growth at accelerated rates. Building on the petroleum industry’s semi-submersible oil rigs, or “floaters”— large steel barge-like structures, designed to be navigated to various off- shore oil fields and capable of carrying immense weight—the Floating Reef Town proposes attaching metallic nets shaped like reefs beneath these rigs, using mineral accretion to foster coral growth. Above, a dense configuration of pallet-based housing modules would provide living spaces for reef divers and fishers. Guided by satellites, these float­ ing reef-towns could continually reposition themselves in cleaner waters, protecting marine ecosystems and sus­ taining human livelihoods. THE FIRST so YEARS | 243

Page 246

URBAN AZOLLA OOO0 A FUNCTIONAL URBAN FOCAL POINT AND CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION HUB ^4^ U/z %^ Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Lauren Rochell; Julia Almaraz Year: 2023 244 | CMPBS

Page 247

GLOBAL DREAM LAB HTC WASTEWATER TREATMENT RUNNING TRACK COMMERCIAL EDUCATIONAL AUDITORIUM INDUSTRIAL 1^ 3D PRINTED DOUBLE HELIX TENSION RING EXTERIOR PROTECTIVE SCREEN TRANSPARENT PV GIAZING TENSION RING PHYTOREMEDIATION PLANT GREEN ROOFS STRUCTURAL DUCT UP OR DOWN DRAFT 86 DWELLING UNITS 25Lx20Wx25H COMPRESSION RING WITH WINDOWS INTERIOR BASALT CABLE TENSION WRAPPING COLOR CHANGING SPHERE FOR BOTH RERADIATION TO NIGHT SKY FOR COOLING OR ABSORPTION OF SUN FOR HEATING MgO CEMENT DOUBLE HEUX COMPRESSIVE COLUMN CORE AZOLLA/DUCKWEED AGRICULTURE The Urban AzoIla is an infrastructure solution combining wastewater treat­ ment, carbon balancing, local food production, housing, and air purification Into a functional icon for Austin’s green efforts and history. It offers the oppor­ tunity to serve as a provocative cultural symbol of our time—an iconic combination of forward-thinking eco-technologles where public and pri­ vate sectors meet. Imagine a mixed-use facility with a com­ mercial base beneath a large, glowing AzoIla greenhouse, a central shaft cre­ ating high-rise access to residences, an entertainment venue on top reminiscent of the Eiffel Tower or the Seattle Needle, RELATIVE SIZE COMPARISON EIFFEL TOWER URBAN AZOILA URBAN SEARLE SPACE SEQUOIA NEEDLE GUsrAvt&ra outs sqm A<NCWUMaco THE FIRST so YEARS | 245

Page 248

SECTION URBAN AZOLLA PLAN and educational platforms to study a world in the midst of profound change, and to discuss our chances as humans of turning these challenges around. In Austin, the Urban AzoIla could become the next Moonlight Tower-type icon, showcasing to the world the city’s suc­ cesses as a green, carbon-neutral leader. The Urban Azolla system transforms wastewater into essential services such as energy generation, air purification. water treatment, toxic and heavy-met­ al removal, and valuable soil amendments. Wastewater is used as feedstock to grow the tiny aquatic fern Azolla filiculoides, capable of rapid bio- mass reproduction and carbon sequestration. Through hydrothermal carbonization, also known as wet pyrol­ ysis, the biomass can be transformed Into biofuel for energy production. The byproduct, BioCoal (hydrochar), is a ben­ eficial soil amendment. Azolla can also phytoremediate wastewater, removing toxins and heavy metals, which are then separated and recycled through a pro­ cess called Pulse Wave. Beyond Austin, the Urban Azolla system could be adapted to a wide range of urban, regional, or environmental needs depending on local industry, pollution levels, desired outputs, energy demands, or soil nutrient requirements. 246 | CMPBS

Page 249

GLOBAL DREAM LAB O AZOUA GROWTH MODULE 0 POWER GENERATION UNIT (BOILER/ENGINE/ GENERATOR) 0. AZOUA GROWTH SURFACE 0. AZOUA SCRAPER 0. AZOUA SHOOT 0. AZOUA BELT SEEDER 0. DENSITY SENSOR 0. SPEED CONTROL 0. SPONGY CONVEYOR BELT 0. TREATED WASTEV,ATER FEED G • STEAM GENERATOR G • FILTERED WATER INPUT G • STEAM TO HTC G • STEAM TO STEAM ENGINE G • HYDROCHAR FUEL COMPRESSOR G • AC/DC GENERATOR G • BECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION (UGHTS/AF?UANCES/CONTROUERS/SENSOR5) Q. ELECTRICAL DISreBUTION (MOTORS/PUMPS/RESlSTANCE HEATERS) G • IGNinON BOX G• COAL GAS © HYDROTHERMAL CARBONIZATION (HTC) ENERGY/FERTILIZER MODULE 34 @) • TREATED AZOLLA INPUT @) • STIRRING MOTOR © • HEATING COIL @) • PRESSURIZED STEAM ®. PRESSURE TANK WFTH INSULATED JACKET @) • DEWATERING ..SEPARATOR © • HYDROCHAR FOR FUEL @) • HYDROCHAR FOR FERTILIZER PULSEWAVE MICRONIZATION SEPARATOR ©• AZOLLA INPUT ©• HIGH RPM MOTOR ©• SHEAR PLATES ©• SONIC PULSEWAVE ©• CYCLONE SEPARATORS ©• HEAVY AND RARE EARTH METALS ©• PHARMACEUnCALS & PFAS ©• STIRRING PROPEUER ©• MICRON SEPARATOR The Urban AzoIla’s eponymous concept is based on the plant’s pro­ found carbon-balancing potential. Fifty million years ago, azoIla is said to have begun shifting the oxygen-to-carbon ratio to where it is today (a process that took 800,000 years), enabling oxygen-dependent life to survive. According to multiple studies. azoIla doubles in mass every three days, and one acre sequesters six tons of carbon per year—approxi­ mately equal to ten acres of healthy temperate forest. If propagated In dense trays within an urban high-rise, azoIla could be more effective at carbon seques­ tration than hundreds of acres of forest. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 247

Page 250

RIVER TREATING BRIDGE A LOW-IMPACT BRIDGE THAT RESTORES RIVER HEALTH The River Treating Bridge, first concep­ tualized at CMPBS in 2011 as part of a green mobility challenge, was revived following the Baltimore bridge collapse In 2024. Thousands of U.S. bridges are aging and in need of repair, while more than half of the nation’s rivers remain unsafe for swimming due to pollution. Yet no bridges today are designed to actively improve the water flowing beneath them.The River Treating Bridge redefines bridges as infrastructure that not only carries traffic but also restores ecological health. Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Suchita Toshniwal; Nicolette Beguerlsse Year: 2024 248 1 CMPBS

Page 251

GLOBAL DREAM LAB The design employs Arundo donax, or carrizo—a tall, invasive reed widespread across the U.S.—which research has shown to effectively filter heavy metals from water. Incorporated into bridge supports, these reeds transform the bases into natural filtration systems, providing ecological remediation while simultaneously cushioning the supports from erosion and impact. Structurally, the bridge uses tensegrity: balancing tension and compression to minimize vertical supports and enable lighter, more material-efficient con­ struction. Instead of conventional invasive building methods, prefabricat­ ed tubular sections are floated into position from upstream ports, anchored to pilings, then raised and rotated using buoyancy-assisted, low-impact tech­ niques. Stabilized with compression rings and cables, the sections connect into a continuous structure that stream- lines assembly, reduces material use, and minimizes ecological disturbance in rivers and estuaries—pointing toward a future where bridges facilitate both transportation and ecological resto­ ration. ^7- .C 4. O. > THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 249

Page 252

CARRIZO SPRINGS (CALICHE BUILDING) A DEMONSTRATION OF REGIONAL BUILDING METHODS AND PASSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN The Carrizo Springs Girl Scout Headquar­ ters in south Texas was built in 1981 with support from the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Center for Appropriate Technology. Its design focused on using on-site and regionally available materials, water, and energy resources. Construction methods were limited to a few simple, low-energy tech­ niques that local, non-speclalized labor could easily learn and apply. The building is constructed primarily from locally produced caliche bricks—an abundant calcium carbonate material that can be harvested without displac­ ing farmland, since caliche-rich soils are generally unsuitable for agriculture. Other locally sourced elements include bamboo, used both for roof trusses and as a substitute for rebar in the founda- Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Steve Musick Year: 1980 250 | CMPBS

Page 253

GLOBAL DREAM LAB 7Fr-^;;i7 .I^ rfT. CISTERN SIZING 48 ^^4^2-40 percent drought. EB El^ rainfall”-^/ COOLING USING RERADIATING . ROOF Btu’s/sq.ft CORRUG ATED IRON ROOF CALICHE MESQUITE SOLAR GREEN HOUSE FOR ____ DIRECT SOLAR GAIN IN WINTER WHITE MET AL NOCTURN ALLY RE-RADIATING ROOF FOR COOLING CISTERN CALICHE MASS BEARING 20% crowncover BAMBOO TRUSS MESQUITE FLOOR TILE LOW ENERGY POZZOLAN CEMENT NON ROTTING CEDAR POSTS BAMBOO RE-BAR REINFORCING CEDAR. POZZOLAN CEMENT IRON ORE BAMBOO FOR CULTIVATION THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 251

Page 254

k^
Z? -6 ri’ < li ’.!,: :p rh X’ -^^i<1 .»4’^ ^1 WHITE CORRUGATED METAL COLLECTS DEW BAMBOO REINFORCED CALICHE LINTEL GUTTER TO CATCH EARLY MORNING DEW BAMBOO TRELLIS FOR SHADING VINES PLANTER BOX FOR VINES COLLECTS WATER FROM . CUTTER ROT-RESISTANT MESQUITE PLANKS FOR PLANTER CEDAR CROSSPIECE TO HOLD BAMBOO CALICHE BLOCK FOR STRUCTURE AND MASS MESQUITE SAWDUST BLOCK FOR EXTERIOR INSULATION SHADING TRELLIS STABILIZED LIME PAINT CORRIGATED IRON IRON REINFORCED CONCRETE LINTEL GALVANIZED IRON FLASHING GALVANIZED IRON CUTTER CEDAR CROSS LINTEL POST OAK DOWEL JOINT MESQUITE PLATE POST OAK DOWEL JOINT BAMBOO TRELLIS (CUADUA ANCUSTIFOLIA) SHADING VINE (IPOMOEA PURPUREA) The window-wall shading design employs a dew catchment system over vines, channeling condensed moisture to water plants while also providing shade. This strategy is particularly effective in coastal or near-coastal regions, where high early-morning humidity allows night-cooled surfaces to collect condensation—especially on east- end west-facing facades that experience greater heat gain. 252 | CMPBS

Page 255

GLOBAL DREAM LAB WATER OUTLETS FOR TRICKLE ROOF REFILL LINE ROOF SURFACE PAINTED WITH WHITE ACRYLIC PAINT T 1/2 INCH PVC DOWNSPOUT WATER LEVEL ESTABLISHED BY TANK FLOAT NIGHT SKY RADIATION COOLING SYSTEM „^ 3 INCH HEADERS PUMP FLOAT SWITCH 3/4 INCH GARDEN HOSE FILLED BEFORE SLAB POURING ,CALCRET^ MESQUITE
/ WATER MAliq 1/RADIANT H0S,E tian; mesquite hardwood flooring and insulation blocks made from mesquite sawdust; and caliche-block permeable paving for parking areas and walkways. For the paving, the block-making machine was reused: blocks were cast directly on the ground and left in place as pavers. Heating and cooling are provided entire­ ly by passive systems. In winter, an attached solar greenhouse supplies warmth, while in summer the building relies on natural ventilation and a roof­ top night-sky reradiation system. At night, water circulates onto the roof, where it releases heat to the cool night sky as the water trickles down, then recirculates through the radiant floorto regulate indoor temperatures. Together, these strategies demonstrate how regionally based design and con­ struction deliver not only efficient, low-impact buildings but also econom­ ic growth. By tracking energy use, material sourcing, and employment, the project showed that such practices gen­ erated 1.5 to 6 times more local jobs than conventional construction. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 253

Page 256

1 Ml 254 | CMPBS

Page 257

GLOBAL DREAM LAB r ^’^ THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 255

Page 258

MOSQUITO ORB OQ0 A RAPIDLY DEPLOYABLE SOLUTION FOR MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASE PREVENTION AND FOOD SECURITY Mosquitoes are the world’s deadliest animal, transmitting diseases that kill over one million people each year—most from malaria, which disproportionately affects children under five. Nearly half of the global population Is at risk of malaria or dengue fever. With climate change driving mosquito populations and with no cure for most mosqui­ to-borne diseases, prevention remains the most effective strategy. Yet current defenses—into which billions of dollars are invested, including insecticide-treat­ ed nets, chemical repellents, and emerging genetic approaches—are lim­ ited in effectiveness, costly, and can cause environmental harm. Mapping has revealed a striking overlap between regions most affected by mos­ quito-borne disease and those suffering from hunger. The mosquito ORB addresses both challenges simultane­ ously. Designed as a globally scalable Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Ford Martin; Robert Ellis; Marynes Cabrera Year: 2016 256 | CMPBS

Page 259

GLOBAL DREAM LAB system, the ORB traps disease-carrying mosquitos, which then lay their eggs inside the structure. The eggs hatch into larvae that attract fish, creating a nat­ ural food source communities can harvest. In this way, the ORB reduces disease risk while also improving food security. The ORB works by replicating the con­ ditions mosquitos Instinctively seek: still water, humidity, carbon dioxide, and light at night. Floating on ponds or lakes. the ring surrounding its base calms the water inside. Modules made from waxed cardboard or bio-based plastic infused with mycelium spores release carbon dioxide through respiration as the fungi grow, mimicking human presence. Phos­ phorescent paint on the ORB’S oculus openings charges during the day and glows softly at night, drawing mosqui­ tos in. For cost-effective distribution, ORBS are flat-packed with fold lines and simple instructions, making them light- weight, inexpensive to ship, and easy to assemble locally. The design also enables rapid manufacturing across regions worldwide. By reducing mosquito populations at the source, the ORB curbs the spread of deadly diseases, restores a sense of safety outdoors, and improves access to food. At the same time. Its sculptural, glowing forms create an evolving art-sci­ ence installation that transforms ecological Intervention into a visible, inspiring presence in the landscape. INCIDENCE OF MALARIAGLOBAL HUNGER *7’ No data low moderate serious alarming extremely alarming No data 0 10 30 5^^„10^^^^30^^^^^0^^^±000 Dau source: Concern Worldwide and Wclthungcrhille OurWorldinData orc/hunger.and.undemounshmcnt |CC 6V Data source: Wcrid Health Orranluncn wo World Sank dZ025l OurWadj nUalxorj u’-‘a-c !CCb, MARSH PLANTS STRONTIUM ALUMINATE BIODEGRAD. HEMP CARDBOARD MUSHROOMS INTEGRATED SURFACE FLOTATION EDGE ROUGH WATER CALM WATER MOSQUITO LARVAE GRUB TYPE FISH ORB DOME OVER POT FISH POND THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 257

Page 260

4’ liiiniiiiim 1’ 10” 1’ 10” 2’ 258 | CMPBS

Page 261

GLOBAL DREAM LAB SECTIONPLANPERSPECTIVE ORB SINGLE ORB 3 ORB 7 ORB 15 ORB 10 BASE THE FIRST SO YEARS | 259

Page 262

sPOD A REDESIGNED SHIPPING PALLET FOR MODULAR CONSTRUCTION OF SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 1 There is an urgent global need for build­ ing systems that are fast to distribute, simple to construct, affordable, and sus­ tainable. More than 100 million people worldwide, forcibly displaced by conflict, environmental crises, or political insta­ bility, urgently need shelter and infrastructure. What If we tapped into an existing global logistics network—the pallet shipping industry—to deliver these critical building materials? And with an estimated 2 to 3 billion pallets in circula­ tion in the U.S. alone, what if the pallets themselves became the building blocks for sustainable development? The sPOD (short for “seed pod”) is a redesigned shipping pallet created to do Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Clayborne Stocker; Jeremy Harrienger; Dana Rauseo; Henry Rice; Max Jack; Nicholas Koch Year: 2018 260 | CMPBS

Page 263

GLOBAL DREAM LAB BASIC MODULE ATTRIBUTES

1. FOUR WAY HINGE JOINT
2. STANDARD PIPE SIZE AND MATERIALS
3. THREE LEVELS STORAGE
4. EMBEDDED WHEELS
5. EXTENSIONS HINGE INSERT
6. ALL BID-BASED OPTION
7. CARBONIZED BIOFOAM CORE
8. FURNITURE FIRE, WATER, INSECT-PROOF
9. HUMAN-SCALE SIZE, WEIGHT, TOOLS
10. RE-SOURCE BIOCHAR
11. NET CARBON SINK PALLET MODULES PALLET TYPES REGULAR PALLET STRAPPING PALLET PLATFORM PALLET MOBILE PALLET PALLET WHEELS TURNING PALLET TRANSPORTER BULK CONTAINER PALLET CONTAINER PALLET TALL CONTAINER CONTAINER PALLET ENCLOSED MOBILE BULK BALLET GPS MOBILE PALLET exactly that. Replacing conventional wood pallets—which account for rough­ ly 15% of U.S. softwood and about 40% of hardwood lumber usage, and are often chemically treated—sPODs are built from net-negative carbon materi­ als such as Plantd’s OSB panels, made from fast-growing perennial grasses that capture more carbon with less land. sPODs are designed for interoperability. The pallets can be attached to each oth­ er and configured, through simple connectors, into a wide range of struc- tures—from housing to green infrastructure to transportation devic­ es and furniture. A single pod can scale Into an entire community assembly. In this way, the sPOD serves as a Swiss Army Knife for sustainable community building, combining principles of green chemistry, design for disassembly and reuse, and standardized connections. Structural components, for example. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 261

Page 264

are designed to work with established ASTM international pipe frame stan­ dards, ensuring compatibility with existing manufacturing and supply chains. Other significant environmental and performance benefits include the potential for high thermal resistance, resistance to mold and bacteria, and full recyclability. At the end of their life, sPODs can also be transformed into bio- char through pyrolysis, generating renewable energy while producing a valuable soil amendment. To make building with sPODs even easier and expand their potential, the system Is paired with an AI-AR-DIY platform that guides users in design and construction. This open-source archive of building solu­ tions uses augmented reality to assist with assembly in real time, while also enabling communities to share designs with one another. Overtime, with the help of AI, the platform evolves into a global, continually learning library of sustainable sPOD designs that generates regionally appropriate solutions. The sPOD system offers a tool for disas­ ter recovery, affordable housing, and sustainable development, while trans­ forming the shipping and pallet manufacturing industries Into critical suppliers of sustainable building solu­ tions worldwide. SPOD EXPLODED VIEW 262 | CMPBS

Page 265

GLOBAL DREAM LAB R14-18 walls - R28 roof roll-down awning• protected windows - high impact walls• strap down to anchors• beamsand columns using hollow cowlings as concrete formwork utility pedestals. (can use sPOD for concrete formwork) non-overhang roofs• SPOD GREEN SUPERSTRUCTURE wind generator towers wastewater wetland ; (sewage treatment) ”x up/down draft towers organic waste to food wastewater (vector insects to fish) wastewater (organic waste to fish and vegetables) porous paving roof cistern raised bed garden SPOD GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE THE FIRST so YEARS | 263

Page 266

7te, ^I. ‘i- 1 264 | CMPBS

Page 267

GLOBAL DREAM LAB SHELTER / INTERIOR / FURNITURE KITS

1. BUILDING LEVELER /WHEELS AS FEET
2. PIPE CLUSTER COLUMN- CREATE
3. TIRE TREAD AS BUILDING SEAL
4. JOINT CAPS/ WHEEL CAP/ STORAGE COVERS
5. FLEX CLEAN WINDOW / INSECT SCREEN
6. PLUMBING / ELECTRIC WIRE / FLEX PIPE
7. PLUMBING / ELECTRIC CONNECTORS, SWITCHES, VALVES
8. ASPIRATION AND MECHANICAL VENTS
9. PROTECTIVE DOORS AND WINDOWS AWNINGS
10. STAIR AND SPIRAL STAIR NIC J^i 1 n TINY TWO STORYTINY TINY COURTYARDTINY AS DOGTROT TINY Wmi GREENHOUSE TINY RAISED WITH GROUNDIHG CABLES THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 265

Page 268

SPACE FRAME TRUSS MANSARD ROOF PYRAMID ROOF TABLE DOUBLE TABLE TABLE WITH CHAIRS DOUBLE TABLE WITH CHAIRS AND BENCHES CHAIR BENCH RAISED FLOOR BUNK BED WINDOW AWNING FOLDABLE DOOR STAIRS TUBE INSERTS on FAffiC STIWRaO mu WTO &ATTCIC3 TOOLS onWOT 266 | CMPBS

Page 269

GLOBAL DREAM LAB FENCE FLOOD BARRIER OR POND RETENTION TRELLIS POROUS PAVING TREE WELL RAISED GARDEN BED SPOD GASIFICATION SPOD BIOGAS PRODUCTION SPOD SOLDIER FLY TO FISH PRODUCTION SPOD SOLDIER FLY TO CHICKEN PRODUCTION 0 1 SPOD WASTEWATER TREATMENT THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 267

Page 270

CART DOUBLE CART RAFT WITH MOTOR AND GPS DOCK STEERING GROUND TRANSPORT WATER TRANSPORT ‘A _____rwO UATl FOADANU I_______TUIUCT0AM>VU0 LvF TURMNOArouXtD —7= CONTROL CONTROL FrcLF^----------PZADUGHTfi -------------- HUOUCKT y—roar RUT MOTOR \tTURINO UMT hTtCRPOVOT,/ DRONE HUMAN CARRIER DRONE WHEEL CONNECTION DETAILS WHEEL ROTATION FOR BUILDING LEVELING GPS / WIFI / BLUETOOTH STEERING UNIT CUBE CONNECTION - WHEEL - POWER HUB AXLE CONNECTION FOR - WHEEL ROTATION INTO PLATFORM PALLET 268 | CMPBS

Page 271

GLOBAL DREAM LAB % $ Flora-based living systems utilize land, air, and water transport through a variety of seed pod adaptations. Once they arrive, these pods draw on additional key ingredients to support their growth. Our sPODs function in a similar way, designed to bring sustainable development practices to sites anywhere in the world. Like nature, we piggyback on existing transport systems—in our case, air, water, and land shipping channels already used for billions of palletized goods. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 269

Page 272

THE HIGHER LINE A HYBRID AIR-TO-RAIL-TO-ROAD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 11^ 11 Most transport systems are limited to either land, elevated, or air; none that we know of are designed to transition seamlessly between them. The Higher Line changes this by integrating all three into a single, fluid network. In dense urban areas, our ‘vans’ attach to sleek overhead tensegrity rails, glid­ ing above streets, trees, and rivers. These rails connect to air transport ter­ minals in The Center of towns and cities, where the same van can be picked up by a blimp-Style airship and carried to oth­ er cities equipped with Higher Line infrastructure. In less dense areas, vans can be lowered onto roads and autono­ mously driven to their destinations. Seamless transitions between land, rail, and air are made possible by four self-motorized wheels that convert from Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; MengShin Lin Year: 2025 270 | CMPBS

Page 273

GLOBAL DREAM LAB MAGNUS DIRIGIBLE TRANSPORTS 50 VANS VAN AS GONDOLA POWERED PROPELLER FOR STEERING ROTATING SPHERE OBSERVATION DECK VAN CARRIER TENSEGRITY RAIL STRUCTURE RAIL TO GROUND WHEELS WfTH PV-POWERED HUB MOTOR — STRUCTURAL RING FOR RAIL TO GROUND WHEEL ROTATION — DROPSTITCH FABRIC SAFETY BODY VAN AS VAN PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL RAIL TO GROUND WHEELS WITH PV-POWERED HUB MOTOR rail to road via an integrated hub system. A hook suspension system holds the van in place while the wheels rotate beneath, then lowers it to the ground. Today’s transit systems are resource-in­ tensive, spatially intrusive, and slowed by congestion. While most cars sit idle 90 percent of the time, the Higher Line is designed for near-constant use, free­ ing ground-level space for people, landscapes, and vibrant streetscapes. Safety and affordability are also built In: Higher Line vans are constructed from drop-stitch air-cushioned fabric, first pioneered by DuPont for inflatable air­ craft in the 1950s, which proved remarkably safe under crash tests. The result Is a lightweight, resilient ‘bumper car’ that protects passengers as if they were inside an airbag. The Higher Line builds on existing mobil­ ity trends. Autonomous fleets like Waymo, car-sharing, and city-owned e-bikes have already accustomed people to shared, electrified, and flexible trans­ port. These systems set the stage for a more advanced system where elevated and ground-connected travel merge seamlessly. More than transportation, the Higher Line is conceived as part of the city’s fabric—an aesthetic and life­ style addition to the urban experience. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 271

Page 274

6’ 3’5/8’ 5’3’3’ 3’3’3’ 272 | CMPBS

Page 275

GLOBAL DREAM LAB GEARS PULLEYS BEARING CLUTCH HOOK UFTS VAN MOTOR JOINT CONNECTS MOTOR, CLIP, AND BEAM CUP THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 273 RAIL-TO-ROAD

Page 276

CIDUS AN INTEGRATED WATER + ENERGY SYSTEM FOR RESILIENT BUILDINGS AND COMMUNITIES 1 -C^ Project Team: Pliny Fisk III; Rich MacMath; Gail Vittori; Kai Pang-Whitsett Year: 2013 274 | CMPBS

Page 277

GLOBAL DREAM LAB (1) Solar absorbing/re-rodiating slructuial monocoquc roof (2) Integrated rainwater catchment system (3) Structural monocoque building envelope (4) Structural monocoque partition walls (5) Building-integrated structural monocoque insulated double-wall cistern/foundation (6) Vortical/hoiizonal trellis for ballasted photovoltaic panel mounting (7) Integrated above-ground utility runs (8) Integration of secondary sliadiiig and rainwater catchment (9) Computer-controlled climatic conditions switch (10) Heat/Cool Pump to convert energy from heat sink to indoor thermal comfort (11) Electrical heat load monitor/regulator (12) MgO fiber-reinforced cement (13) Control integration v,ith building vrater system/wetland treatment (14) Wastewater wetland evaporative heat tranfer (1) (2) household water ta (13) household water out (drainage) (3) (12) I The Community-Integrated District Util­ itysystem (CIDUS) is a design framework for resilient neighborhoods operating at two scales: the building and the com­ munity. At the building scale, CIDUS integrates two critical aspects of urban develop­ ment-water and energy—into a single system. Each building includes a solar heating, cooling, and water-collecting roof; an energy-efficient envelope; and a combined cistern and thermal-storage foundation. This water-filled foundation stabilizes expansive soils by applying constant weight, while also storing ther- mal energy and capturing water, eliminating the need for above-ground cisterns. Aggregated across the neigh­ borhood, the network of roofs and cisterns functions as a district-wide heat sink. At the community scale, a continuous trellis corridor links buildings and covers sidewalks, alleys, and streets. The trellis structure forms the backbone of the THE FIRST so YEARS | 275

Page 278

(1) Retaining wall (2) Pea gravel (3) 3/4” gravel bed (4) Insulated foam inner wall with weep holes to collect stored pre-tempered water in heat sink (5) Waterproof liner (6) Gutter downspout and first flush tank for rainwater collection and debris removal tinufituinitt Wetland heat sink ;a Night Gravel Bed Foundation Heat/Cool Sink with Wetland Thermal Loop Performance 276 | CMPBS Gravel Bed Foundation Heat/Cool Sink Pyramid Shed Half Vault Solar absorbing/ re-radiating Roof Solar hot water Roof using glazing Solar thermal roof solar still (UV) using glazing Thermal Loop Options Roof Typologies Roof Surface Options

Page 279

GLOBAL DREAM LAB Elevated Utility (pergola) Elevated Utility (trellis) Elevated Utility (pergola)

• photovoltaic array Elevated Utility (trellis)
• photovoltaic array Sub-grade Utility (trench) Sub-grade Utility (standard buried) urban infrastructure—in a single inte­ grated system, it supports photo­ voltaic panels and solar equipment, dis­ tributes renewable energy through a local smart circular grid, carries utilities, and provides shaded circulation routes and public spaces. By elevating solar panels on the trellis rather than rooftops, the system pre­ serves roofs for heating and cooling while avoiding common rooftop PV issues such as leaks, insurance compli­ cations, and orientation constraints. The trellis also integrates utility conveyance: lightweight lines such as fiber optics run through elevated protected channels, while sub-grade trenches and pipes beneath sidewalk panels carry sewage, water, and drainage lines. This arrange­ ment allows immediate access for repairs and maintenance without dis­ ruptive excavation, unlike conventional systems with long burled utility runs. Additional corridor features include recycling stations connected to pneu­ matic conveyance systems, EV charging for cars, bikes, and scooters, and spac­ es for local businesses and vendors. Beyond infrastructure, the trellis corri­ dors enrich daily life with shaded walkways, tree wells, benches, and gathering areas that promote interac­ tion and create a unified neighborhood identity. CIDUS’s localized energy and water sys­ tems free communities from dependence on centralized utilities, strengthening their resilience. As an adaptable frame- work, it can be tailored to local conditions and serve as a blueprint for ecologically balanced, socially connected, cli­ mate-safe neighborhoods. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 277

Page 280

0 0 0 0 0^ Efficiency One-bedroom Multi-bedroom Multi-family Efficiency with Pergola One-bedroom with Carport & Pergola Multi-bedroom with Carports & Pergola Multi-bedroom with Carports & Community Utility Trellis Rec Center Park Town Center 278 | CMPBS

Page 281

GLOBAL DREAM LAB 400 sf400 st400 sf tttt ttttt ttttt District Utility District Heat Sink intHitti ititniti tttttttit ^nJ THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 279

Page 282

Page 283

Page 284

HENSLEY FIELD SUSTAINABILITY CONSULTING FOR THE MASTER PLAN OF A 738-ACRE FORMER MILITARY BASE IN DALLAS Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio CMPBS Team: Pliny Fisk III; Gall Vlttori Master Planners: McCann Adams Studio / SWA Year: 2022 282 | CMPBS

Page 285

PROJECTS ‘7 1 I’M Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio 1^A ^ta:=,G^^f;.LUu THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 283

Page 286

$ 5 &4^ Hensley Field is a 738-acre property located in southwest Dallas, owned by the City of Dallas. McCann Adams Studio, working with SWA and a robust consul­ tant team, led the master planning effort, with The Center serving as sus­ tainability lead. The resulting Master Plan highlights six Guiding Principles developed over the course of an 18-month process engaging communi­ ty members, stakeholders and technical advisors: Environmental Health, Eco­ nomic Opportunity & Investment, Affordability & Diversity, Healthy Com­ munities, Mobility & Access, History & Culture, with the overall development designed to be a “living laboratory of resilience.” Among the strategies includ- 284 | CMPBS

Page 287

PROJECTS ed in the plan are a 40-acre “Innovation Village” as a showcase of state-of-the- art fossil-free energy at scale, a multi-modal transportation infrastruc­ ture, and a ‘proof of concept’ of the City of Dallas’ Comprehensive Environmental and Climate Action Plan, Including net zero energy requirements for all new construction. In addition, acknowledging the fragility of water supply, buildings will be designed to be ‘reclaimed water ready, and a distrlct/municipal-scale reclaimed water loop will be distributed throughout Hensley Field, supplied with reclaimed water from a nearby water treatment plant. THE FIRST so YEARS | 285 ££^^1

Page 288

AN ECODISTRICTS PILOT PROGRAM ESTABLISHING BENCHMARKS AND GOALS FOR THE 65-ACRE MIXED-USE SUSTAINABLE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE FORMER SEAHOLM POWER PLANT gt In 2012,the Seaholm District was select­ ed as one of ten projects in North America to participate in EcoDistricts’ Pilot Program, established by the non- profit organization EcoDistricts (now Partnership for Southern Equity). To further advance this work, the City of Austin’s Office of Sustainability con­ tracted The Center to engage with diverse public, private, and non-profit sector stakeholders with an objective to identify quantitative and qualitative opportunities and benefits, articulate the project’s sustainability vision, goals, and process, develop an action agenda. CMPBS Team: Pliny Fisk III; Gail Vittori; Brendan Wittstruck Year: 2013 286 | CMPBS

Page 289

PROJECTS cn>-< O rc m ^ Q 0 0 ENERGY • use • generation • pollution • portfolio • brownout alerts • special events AIR • air quality • improvements • smog levels • transportation • street trees • oxone alerts • special events FOOD • use • local production • restaurant waste • healthy eating • fitness • special events WATER • use • catchment • lake levels • water quality • habitat • flood alerts • special events MATERIALS • construction waste • recycling • waste reduction • waste water • building materials • special events and explore how emerging tools such as ecoBalance and Visible Green can add value to the EcoDistrlct Protocol. Under­ scoring the assessment was the congruence between EcoDistricts’ eight key performance areas and the action areas of the Imagine Austin Vision Plan and the Office of Sustainability’s Rethink/Austin Plan. Sustainability emerged as a central organizing principle of the Seaholm Development District. The 65-acre Dis­ trict is anchored by three distinct parcels: to the west, the Southwest Strategies/Seaholm Power LLC mixed- use redevelopment on the former Seaholm Power Plant site; In the middle, the new Austin Central Library; and to the east, the Trammell Crow mixed-used redevelopment of the former Green Water Treatment Plant site. The Center’s report included recom­ mended action areas acknowledging the Seaholm EcoDistrict’s unique opportu­ nity to emerge as an exemplar of cohesive, healthy green building and urban design, ecological and social mind­ fulness, resilient infrastructure, and extraordinary innovation. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 287

Page 290

RESOURCE USE TRADE-OFFS BUILDING-INTEGRATED PHOTOVOLTAIC GLAZINGPOINT-OF-USE GREYWATER.. RAINWATER CATC’-Jv COMDEMSVE nVt IRRIGATION FOR FOOD °?0DJU RAINWATER .CATCHMEN1 IRRIGATION FOR FOOD PRODUCTION SHOA’EPS RAINWATER/ USE IN TOILETS : WATER COLLECTION SHARING BUILDING GREYWATER FOR PUBLIC LANDS IRRIGATION EFFLUENT REUSE 1N TOILETS HVA Q Open space + street swales jmanage stormwater and treat j runoff O Integrated street swale system improves District-wide storm infrastructure resilience EXAMPLES OF CYCLE THINKING WITHIN DISTRICT Q Building greywater + condensate reclaim provide water for irrigation 288 | CMPBS

Page 291

PROJECTS ^D E3ENERGY TRANSFER GREYWATER FOR GREEN ROOF IRRIGATION QIntegrated Agriculture for local food production PEAK LOAD ENERGY TRANSFER ) Local restaurants support economy of local food production and enable healthy eating choices VEHICLE2GRID ENERGY TRANSFER SINK-IN-TOILET FIXTURES BUILDING-II/JTEGRATED PHOTOVOLTAIC GLAZING PRODUCTIVE GREEN ROOF LOCAliV-SOUiKED RESTAURANT FOOD TO LOCAL RESTAURANTS Green roofs + rain gardens 0 manage stormwater runoff to improve lake and creek water quality THE FIRST so YEARS | 289

Page 292

dashboard performance display COMMUNOTY IDENTITY rainwatershade trees HABITAT+ ECOSYSTEM water quality treatment HABITAT+ ECOSYSTEM r^ stormwater green lattice A/ayfinding I roof mount photovoltaics MOBILITY indoor grid-to-veh vehicle-^-; ^energy tran ‘ACCESS+. MOBILITY’.’ r use uiomdss fuel cell energy bioswale network^ treat +/etain outdoor use & water quality treatment biochar soil COMMUNITY regeneration IDENTITY HABITAT+ ECOSYSTEM grow walls green roof ENERGY v\Nler mining h|at transit I FNERGl LADY BIRD LAKE 290 | CMPBS

Page 293

PROJECTS waater storage sharing shade trees grow screens bioswale lattice COMMUNITY . IDENTITY water quality treatment HABITAT+ =EC0SYSTEM building-integrated photovoltaics rgy sharing water storage sharing integrated fixtures unwater “green lattice” wayfinding COMMUNITY IDENTITY condensate stormwater ^row walls '''^reei\roof 1IABITAT+ EcdsYSMi- indoor use : fixture efficiency PV-gravitv indoorroof mount photovoltaics ‘Grid 2 Vehicle Energy Transfer ACCESS+ ITY indoor use use (“purple pipe”) d. 6 U »a’ty aw ra’a .1^ .«^< effluent re-use loop 1\ bioswale’network [treat + detain or ujse’ bioswale network Ioutdoor THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 291

Page 294

INTEGRATED DESIGN CHARRETTE LEAD FOR THIS LEED PLATINUM LIBRARY IN DOWNTOWN AUSTIN Credit: Nic Lehoux 4 I I ^1 in: A HI!” in”-! Li-: CMPBS Team: Dylan Siegler; Gail Vittori Project Architect: Lake Flato Architects and Shepley Bulfinch Joint Venture Year: 2019 292 | CMPBS

Page 295

PROJECTS Credit: NIc Lehoux 1 In envisioning a new central library for Austin, the Lake | Flato/Shepley Bulfinch Joint Venture established three guiding principles:

• A Community Building: a building that draws people in and serves the community
• A Smart, Sustainable Building: flexible, resource efficient
• A Landmark Building: civic, timeless, expressive/reflective With these principles in mind. The Cen­ ter was brought on to the team to collaborate on an Integrative Sustain­ able Design Charrette, held November 2-3,2009 with a diverse array of team members and City of Austin represen­ tatives participating. Affirming the project’s original direction, the charrette offered greater depth of guiding princi­ ples, clarity of metrics, acknowledge­ ment of challenges, and commitment to follow through on Immediate next steps. Among the enriched principles coming out of the charrette are: THE FIRST50 YEARS | 293

Page 296

Credit: Lara Swimmer FAIN tatK ft»F| TW&nor TOK

• P^taM rere*, +ra*«i pdu fyrcwra«»3ro; .^OT^ Rrour Courtesy of Lake Flato Architects
• Set the benchmark for City of Austin environmental initiatives
• Establish library as an educational experience about local flora, fauna, ener­ gy, climate, water
• Design the best daylit library and sub­ terranean garage ever
• Provide a view for all regularly occupied spaces
• Design for resiliency and uncertainty
• Design for passive systems first to achieve as high a level of energy perfor- mance and comfort and rely on mechanical systems as a secondary mode
• Establish water balance as the basis to gauge water performance Opened In October 2017, the LEED Plat­ inum-certified Austin Central Library operates with many of the original design principles and ambitions fulfilled. In 2018, TIME Magazine recognized the building as one of the 100 World’s Great­ est Places. 294 1 CMPBS 0

Page 297

PROJECTS THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 295 I ’ 4 Credit: NIc Lehoux

Page 298

■: 296 | CMPBS Credit: NIc Lehoux ivr

Page 299

PROJECTS THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 297Credriit:

Page 300

COLONY PARK SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY SUPPORT FOR THIS PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP TO DEVELOP A 208- ACRE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY IN NORTHEAST AUSTIN

.V;’ Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio CMPBS Team: Lauren Rochell; Gail Vittori Master Planners: Farr Associates / Urban Design Group; McCann Adams Studio Year: 2014 and current 298 | CMPBS

Page 301

PROJECTS TV COMMUNITY INNOVATION DISTRICT I. VEHICLE TO GRID (HANGING 2. FEMA TRAILER REDO 1 RESILIENT HOXE 4. MANUFACTURED HOME 5. FOAM HOME EXTENDED 6. FOAM HOME 7. TWO-STORY MANUFACTURED HOME 8. GRO-HOME 9. MOBILE HOME EVOLUTION 10. MANUFACTURED HOME REHAB 11. COMMUNITY PLAYGROUND 12. COMMUNITY GARDENS 13. BUS STOP 14. ELECTRIC BIKE SHARE 15. UTILITY/SHADE TREIUS Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio ±t Ml 1 fy THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 299

Page 302

STARTER INCREMENTAL HOME with CARPORT 400 sf 2-STORY PORCH ADDrnON with ADU/GARAGE 2500 sf 2-STORY HOME with GARAGE/PERGOLA 1200 sf ’^ LARGER ADDITION with ADU/GARAGE 1600 sf /pl 2-STORY PORCH HOME with GARAGE and DOGTROT 1700 sf /^ 2-STORY PORCH HOME \q„/ with ADU/GARAGE and PORCH 1700 sf The Colony Park Sustainable Communi­ ty, a 208-acre City-owned property located In northeast Austin, is a City and community-led effort initiated in 2012 with $3 million funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Sustainable Communities Challenge Grant awarded in 2012, with Farr Associates and Urban Design Group leading the effort. The Colony Park Core Team, comprised of community leaders, developed a community-focused vision, and highlighted these Eight Pillars of Community Need: Healthcare, Food Access, Workforce Housing, Education, Connectivity & Safety, Economic Vitali­ ty, Government Resources, and Open Space & Parks. For this first phase of work. The Center provided sustainabil­ ity guidance including concepts spanning from incremental housing to alignment with LEED and AEGB frameworks. The next phase of work continues with Arterra Development as the Master Developer and McCann Adams Studio as the Master Planner, with The Center again supporting sustainability efforts highlighting four signature themes: Pro­ tecting Air Quality, Mitigating Urban Heat Island, Creating Green, Healthy and Resilient Building and Infrastructure, and Protecting the Nlght Sky, and over- seeing the LEED for Communities - Plan & Design certification process. Colony Park Is projected to have up to 3,000 single- and multi-family residen­ tial units. Including 20% workforce affordable housing, about 230,000 square feet of mixed-use office and institutional space, 130,000 square feet of mixed-use retail, and 42 acres of parks, trails and open space. 300 | CMPBS

Page 303

PROJECTS Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio IN” THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 301 Courtesy of McCann Adams Studio

Page 304

SUSTAINABILITY CONSULTING FOR THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF AUSTIN’S VOTER- APPROVED LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM Thermal Safety & Comfort

• Summary of Strategies and Related Data

1. Highly reflective white metal with one inch (1”) insulation vs. exposed metal: Reduces surface temp of roof by 24’F 2 Radiative sky cooling film on roof Reduces surface temp by 20-30’F
2. Platform pavers high solar reflectance + neutral thermal mass Reduces surface temp by 10’F
3. Trees at center of platform Reduces surface temp by 30’F
4. Vegetative fence & trees at center of platform Reduces surface temp by 20’F
5. Ecotracks Reduces surface temp of tracks by 18’F
6. High speed low volume fan Reduces perceived temp by WF
7. Benches cooled by district chilled water Cools site elements with 45”F water
8. Misters Reduces immediate air temp by 20’F (between 40-80% humidity) temp by 20-30+F \i; immediate air temp by 20F: |/surface —temp by aioF ^Psurface । temp by |—16F----- 4,surface temp by 3o:f— |/surface ‘teinp by |/surface temp (TBD) Context 96Fis the average ambient high temp forJuly I, perceived air ‘temp by 10*F Approximated temperature reductions based on thermal safety and comfort strategies. This diagram summarizes the thermal safety and comfort strategies and provides approximated temperature reductions based on in-situ temperature readings, informed online research, and a Harvey Bryan study for the Central Phoenix / East Valley Light Rail Transit Studies are suggestive and may not reflect Austin-specific temperature and humidity conditions. Several of these strategies can be done in combination to maximize thermal performance. frnogc/Sourcc CURBS Austin Transit Partnership’s Austin Light Rail project kicked off in 2020, with 58% of Austin voters approving the light rail system. Designed with a fleet of electric trains, the approximately 9.8 mile route will include 15 stations. With an initial aim for the project to set a national standard for green transit system operations, Aus­ tin Transit Partnership engaged the HUG team for Pro-Concept Design, led by HKS — UN Studio — Gehl, with The Center serv­ ing as sustainability lead. Developed between 2022-2024, the pre-design phase presented integrated strategies highlighting responsiveness and resil­ ience to Austin’s unique environmental context and climatic trends. Additional­ ly, the work underscored the opportunity for this generational under­ taking to be a prominent, public-facing ‘proof of concept’ of Austin’s most ambi­ tious environmental policy initiatives, including the Climate Equity Plan, Water Forward, and Zero Waste. To gain an understanding of Austin’s thermal challenges particularly with an interest in the passenger experience. The Center took temperature measure­ ments of bus stops around Austin. The study revealed shaded metal benches with temperatures exceeding 105°F, and mid-afternoon ambient temperatures of shaded areas exceeding 100°F. Cre­ ating inviting, thermally comfortable transit stations emerged as a priority to attract new and retain existing tran­ sit users, and to mitigate beat-related health risks. CMPBS Team: Pliny Fisk III; Gail Vittori; Lauren Rochell Key Designers: HUG (HKS-UN Studio-Gehl) Year: 2024 302 | CMPBS

Page 305

PROJECTS ElECT?ONi(r . MECHANICAL DESIGN ADAPTATIONS qRIENTa,, PASSNE OPERATIONS C STRUCTURAL CONOmONS FOR HUMAN COMFORT C CARBON BALANCE O 0 INFILL OltSHAD/zVi ID PASSIVE SOLAR HEATING EliCULTURE AND CRAFT MASS COOLING ADAPTIVE DESIGN STRATEGIES O Flexible, Open Building Systems El Carbon Intensity of Materials LowImpact Foundations III Healthy. Sustainable, and Ethical Materials ra Clrcularlty/Waste Management Auxiliary Water Sources Green Infrastructure IE AirQuality IE Lighting a Aroustics El Aibllc Education @1 Community Connectivity and Resilience ^ Additional Innovations ACTIVE COOUNGBuilding Orientation Enhanced Ventilation Shading and Heat Island Radiant Mass Ground Coupling Net Zero Carbon Buildings On-site/Renewable Energy Production LANDSCAPE FOREST BOG REGIONAL BUSINESSES LOCAL BUSINESSES <jL&ERATUR6 ECONOMICS CHIMNEj, xjARlAB/% ^X MASS GOUPUA/g STRUCTURALLY SAFE USER EXPERIENCE !£> 6 1 O O - IB COMFORT ZONE NATURAL VENTILATION a ill MASS COOLING S NIGHT VENTILATION THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 303

Page 306

ANIMAL design with nature PROTECTION (SAFE ZONE) SENSORY CONNECTIONS & CONTROL DWN2 INSECT PLANT MINERAL FROTECTTVE SHIELD HIGH PERFORMANCE TENSION DUAL PROTECTION (COCOON) FIBER REINFORCEMENT DKW STUCCO BINDER DVUN7 GEOMETRIC STRUCTURE OWNS esilJlP^O^irs it connections evidence based design design with climate building system typologies embodied carbon balance 304 | CMPBS TORNADO TEMP INCREASE EcOS Eire DISASTER OVERLAY £8011 DROUGHT EEDI WIU)FIRE [£D2 FLASH FLOOD £603 HURRICANE £1134 TEAAP DECREASE EBO, SOIL DEGRADATION £209 EXPANSNE SOILS £309 SOIL SALINIZATION EBDIO 7^ ruNOwa Kcrou PSYCHROMETRICS -COOLTEMPS DAC, CATENARY COMPRESSION BSTI TENSEGRITY SniUCTURE E5T2 PSYCHROMETRICS -WARM TEMPS, HIGH HUMIDITY DAC2 GEO,METRIC SPACE FRAME BSO DROP STITCH FORIAING aST/ REOAIMED/REPURPOSED/ REUSED ECBI YEHOW PINE, MESQUITE. PECAN. OSAGE ORANGE, OAK 6^7 WOOD-CHIP CONCRETE (FASWAll) cej UMESTONE/CAUCHE/ GRANHE C24 i>XiCOO AUSTIN DISASTER + GROWTH TRENDS D,/C4 ^.~: ov rx, bJULCiij 4’.VOX, GoOliO ?X”XrO 34,^ <3 ‘ntti 4c Item 1-71 UM t!L-r, FLEXIBLE. OPEN BUILDING asro CASTELLATED BEAMS asTd 3D PRINTED STRUCTURE 8577 CROSS-LAMINAIED TIMBER 6573 HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION 85re ADAPTIVE DESIGN STRATEGIES TERRA COTTA BRICK BASALT FIBER PRODUCTS teas MAGNESIUM OXIDE CEMENT KE, CONCRETE: SULPHUR BASED. FLY ASH, HIGH SURFACE AREA AERATED, MgO ECOB RECYCLED STEEL (SEGUIN) ECS9

Page 307

PROJECTS CONCEPT TRANSIT STATION LOCAL CRAFT LOCAL FOOD MOONLIGHT TOWER CLOCK TOWER NAMES NATIVE VEGETATION NATIVE PEOPLES AUSTIN MUSICIANS CALICHE TILE CISTERN DRAINAGE ROOF TO PROTECT PEOPLE POTTED PLANTS CELLS DOWNSPOUT PIPE TO CISTERN 20’ 30’ RECIRCULATING AIR 12’ MAINTENANCE SHED OR BATHROOMS STRAIGHT ROOF WITH VENDOR VAULTED ROOF WITH VENDOR MOONUGHT TOWER CLOCK TOWER NATIVE PEOPLES NATURE LANDSCAPE JUST GEARS Prompted by our engagement with the Austin Light Rail project, The Center developed a theoretical modular design that reflects an integrated, climatic approach, acknowledging local cultural heritage, resources and industries THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 305

Page 308

•

Page 309

ND

Page 310

VMOJ <\ON d\°^6’ o 06
;.z* rn 0 FE% \O S’Ojo’dd gREE^Z

Page 311

igpv COMMUI 200: GE

Page 312

VIABLE
g re e n (L) 00 00 -O O o 0, U Q- U (D C 0,

O U U, TO O 0 TO ^ ru E L. CD CD CD ^ 0, +” ru E OJ ro ^ 0, U, (U ^ (D +” ru B U 11 dm, ^ ECD

Page 313

OVANCED GREEN BUILDER DEMONSTRATION HOME ECOSPORTS COMPLEX PLENfTUDE ECOCTTY THE GREAT TEXAS RETROFT FORMULA GREEN ID GREEN SYSTEMS BRIDGE CARRIZO SPRINGS CRYSTAL CITY

Page 314

ecosystem hydrosystem climosystem geosystem ^Rojo partner

Page 315

vyarer Reso ir Resource Partners e Partners 0 1^ oirzNtcro ^OTOOTY: CARRIZO SPRINGS PtENnUtt ECOCITY Material Resource Partners ^ner^y Resource Partrfers

Page 316

space scale | boundary |footprint! overlayconserve-integrate-cycle replenish | balance | partner | regenerate outsidesource Ire-source |6 S|P -5O( R f R 0) PRESERVE C©N5!RVil ENERGY source | re-source overlap V’ outside ^^Mi^^ATia REPAIR RESTORE ^EGI^NEi^AI^ province

Page 317

a fauna person C O 0) K te C U 0) 1?’ o’? 1^ =1 tou\di°9 7^.o U O Z Z TIXAS AXM@mragTT fiOW OeffiupN 2007 UUUDO DEMONSTUnON FARM

Page 318

SUPP0RT^& conneanons design for manufacturing open building building systems typologies embodied carbon balance design with climate evidence based / economics ;W design with nature design with reuse

Page 319

0 -^1 L g^JODG^i G\j5ir.g aidiw o-ifzec (OfUOR) g@iv?@Ere§nara^ gssE: £uire.!)@i?CiroZ5n&E0j :7W fyv^G0^J4®^niK9-a7z 03:^i?@^.£@aroj @ijm.raf(ev£[3

Page 320

11 ^^ A/ ^E —■e— “B v” a Q 0) 0

Page 321

a: LLI Z Z < LLI UT -) LLJ U V L. 3 0 m

Page 322

Q < h— CO CO I— Z a< UJ —I CK o. LL. P< CK LLI co I— Z O< ^3- uO’

• LLJ U o- LLJ < CL ^ I— CO O’ LU c^ ^< Z co O < CK LLJ !< Z 0 !< :^ CK 0 U- Z rfk resources o I (0 1

a LLJ NO

• O & LU

I- Om LU ^

Page 323

O ro to U, V, 0) U 0 0) co O < UI < 0) U < ULI ad < co LU :^ DANCED GREIN BUKO lONSTRATlON HOME fr ire< LAREimmroNSTR ATION FARM

Page 324

CADMIUM LEAD PHTHALATE MERCURY cycle of life health promotion

• disease prevention precautionary principle transparency + disclosure MATERIALS asthma e.co4~Q<™} “o A^ofij^s ”^ malaria fluen.

Page 325

O 15 3 1-: ;-1 L- access’to (b ^(D
0) n!

Page 326

u@@j6 3NniSV0 LLJ

yD|Dq Ni^nd

Page 327

O0) carbon balance CO2 EMISSION-/ JCO2 SEQUESTRATION industrial brine ground brine sea water brine (^ MgO brine 2> I 5 8 MgO extraction MgO firing cement grinding jw®Gi^ ij /lb”. C^ phosphate industrial ecology planning

Page 328

-O O 0 O 0 (D E 6 E “o O/ oc u
0) E 0 O° O O 0^ LLI LLJ LL.

Page 329

PUBLIC PRIVATE ENVIRONMENT ORGANISM SECTOR SECTOR ,9- (D ^x 0) TO 0) — »> ,0 (D C G) E 0 ©0)

Page 330

CI!i 0161 6P OSSI U7 CL O UJ a O to J- O Z O V IO Ob ZU C U O Z ^ O z Z i O rf z O 0 ^> WU Z 6 Z. I; o’,

Page 331

0 0) C to CD CD O © E C U E 3 0) 0 to OE vq I 0) -o= *5= CT^ J111=til XO) = O ©b 0 0) COMMUNmr SUPPORTED ARCHHECTURE ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE: VILLAGE IN A BOX CARRIZO SPRINGS THE GREAT TEXAS RETROFTT UTAUSTIN SOLAR ^DECATHLON, 2002 FORMULA GREEN LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM EAST TEXAS PROJECT TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SOLAR DECATHLON 2007 CARPENTER HOUSE 1

Page 332

7^ . global wetlandsglobal coal deposits ^ C C C c C 0 0 °O, 0 <% 7co /e?0(; — -/(Aeaq — ^/JeiuAzudAeV i@>U3’ O tn O ujnq O Z 0

Page 333

global salt water sources land to sea PLENITUDE ECOCmr LAREDO DEMONSTRATION FARM ) LONGJU SUSTAINABLE VILLAGE BAJA SCHOOL FOR FIELD STUDIES ADVANCED GREEN BUILDER DEMONSTRATION HOME \PROTOCITY: /GALVESTON REDEVELOPMENT ISLAND NATIONS INmATIVE: VILLAGE IN A BOX LIVING BRIDGE

Page 334

4,500 1,100 280 RATION millions time-space “feb design LIVING SYSTEMS COLLARS! 70 Space POTENTIAL GLOBAL COMMUNICATION!

Page 335

UIU Uto Ulf) PROTOerrV: GALVESTON REDEVELOPMENT ISLAND NATIONS INITIATIVE: VILLAGE IN A BOX FORMULA GREEN TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SOLAR DECATHLON 2007 PLENITUDE ECOCrTY

Page 336

d^,ff^ x. O © 2 9 1 © c2?) 0 <^^ ra

Page 337

GREEN FORMS svodSO33 uo6eiiQd rcroore Q TEXAS AIM UMraSTTY SOAAOeCAIHQIXa? 1 O C e 1 U 0 X O O © CL WASCHOOL FORFHDSnJOB 5U1@$KS OMMUtfTY SUPKMTH) AAOfTKnjRE -o OT 12 Cj .eN VV, -•A. A 3 CD ’“°°X<j;u^ a’ O 4 1 eue;u% % ,9’0

t-l 4 K^^

Page 338

11

Page 339

THE PEOPLE BOARD OF DIROTORS, ,AND

/ IN MEMORIAM

Page 340

BOARD OF DIRECTORS STAFF, INTERNS, VOLUNTEERS Bob Anderson 1975 Pliny Fisk III Brian O’Brien Donna Burrow Lyova Anderson” Daria Bolton Fisk Clarke Snell Rachel Carson Stephen P. Anderson” Ken Smith Wendy Price Todd Bill Cassis Garv Ashford 1977 Beth Caldwell 1997 James Campbell Dawn Danby Lansing Pugh Simon Couchman Janel Dobkins ^mUCId r,Llieil^ Elizabeth Richards Helen Mary Daley Jessica Kleiss David Armistead Howard Scoggins James Denney Laura Lagrossa Pamela Mayo Clark 1978 Barbara Hofrenning Joanna Dewald Michelle LaRose Harley Clark Hernando Merino Tess Floyd Alison McMillin Juan Cotera John Motloch Eric Frost Eric Oden Gloria DeLeon 1979 John Hand Jerry Garcia Geoffrey Peek Susan DeMarco Gail Vittori Ken Haggard Dirk Raffegerst Mary Emeny Ray Wilson Jennifer Howard Karl Schwingel Daria Fisk” Jeff Lanza Tara Keairnes Joachim Serazio Dlinv ^ick ill” Tom Teasdale Kristian Kicinski Amy Siddon 1980 Richard Johns Paul Kouri Patricia Tristan Carlos Guerra Paolo Minissi Jeff Kruse Ron Wilcox Guy Herman Michele Seghers Cheryl Maglosky 2000 Bryce Alt Dan Komer Steve Musick Anthony McKenzie Richard Baker David Lake 1981 Eri Weinstein J.R. Meliker Mimi Bardagjy Karen Langley 1982 Scott Campbell Roy Miles Jeff Hunt Cynthia Leigh 1984 John Hart Suzi Mitchell Sharon Joyce Alberto Luera 1985 Stephen Gerdes Garrett Mosiman Brian Luis James Nations David Madden Greg Norris Fabien Prouvost Michael Osborne Richard Pruiksma Michael Nyarko Rodolpho Ramina Ray Reece 1986 Josef Farbiarz Dick Richardson Janet Seibert Philip Russell Ray Zamora Kevin John Richardson Erik Tveite 1987 Art Myer Harrison Saunders 2001 Will Bradshaw Howard Scoggins 1988 W. Laurence Doxsey Dan Schellenberg Kenneth Davis Dee Simpson Tom Glassford Austin Swinney Chris Driver Emily Vargas Tom Miller Petrik Watson Aria Finkelstein Gail Vittori Howard Reichmuth 1998 Lee Barrett Carson Fisk-Vittori Gail Watkins 1990 Milosav Cekic Skye Bender-deMoll Michael Kross David Dewane 1991 Michael Gimbrere Nathan Engstrom Amy Marino Ariel Fisk-Vittori Richard MacMath Dickson Fogleman Ian Pendleton Robin Griggs Lawrence Randall Notgrass David Hsu Chris Rowe 1992 Jim Walker Martha Kennan Pablo Serna Lance nubey 1993 Michael Gatto Peter Lohmann Benjamin Spencer Amanda Masino Chris Perry Eric Parks Katie Sternberg Edie Muehlberger Jim Robertson Paul Robbins Paul Waggoner Carol Thompson Josef Farbiarz Melinda Robillard 2002 Michael Albanes Jorge Vanegas Ramon Carrasquillo John Russell Lucas Brown Michele Van Hyfte 1994 Adam Fisk Michael Sledd-Benoit Gerardo Carrillos Wendy Vittori Noah Fisk Kirby Smith Tara Chesson Ben Obregon Lucia Athens Amaranta Craig Casey Rothschild Chad McKinney Heidi Dues

• Founding Board Members Sally Struble 1999 Jacques Abelman Jeremy Ellers 1995 Bill Bavinger Eric Anderson Nichole Elmer Cordula Oel Richard Baker Brian Faitt Peter Struble Nikolas Bertulis Frances Hernandez 1996 Jesus Bendezu Laura Boutelle Karia Keeton-Page Greg Jackson Vahid Brignoni Spence Kellum 338 1 CMPBS

Page 341

Ellen Kolsto Meagan Leleux Kenneth Loshelder Eli Mosley Mary Voorhees Adele Houghton Mimi Kwan Laura Mast Aspen Price Justin Short Kylie Palzer Ramya Prakash Justin Short Himadri Sinha Brendan Wittstruck Jeremy Harrienger Ben Howell Sarah Knenlein Lauren Rochell Suchita Toshniwal 2003 Peter Arathoon Blake Smith 2013 Rusell Beaumont 2019 Cole Leslie Monica Brown Rachel Stone Dana Crawford Brittany Faulkner Amy Holte 2008 Ashley Blackmon Jordan Frazin 2020 Simon Butler Carla Hyman Jakob Bueche 2014 Charlotte Barrows Paula Cano Ingrid Karklins Cassidy Ellis Thomas Hill Jaime Hutton Eric Parks Janis Fowler Cody Snellenberger Kai Pang-Whitsett Melanie Schopper Nick Hentschel 2015 Erin Allen Kirsten Toole Paula Suda Sarah Hill K Alexander 2021 Henry Rice Sean Van Delist Jesse Miller Barrett Bertrand 2022 Julia Almaraz Wendy Vittori Brooke Morton Jane Broumley Gina Jamison James Wilson Jody Naderi-Rosenblatt Laura Bustillos 2023 Nava Koral 2004 Jason Axelrod Amy Rivera Katy Chrisler Christina Morales Elizabeth Baird Svea Tulberg Julie Cleveland Ana Davila Charlotte Barrow Brady Zaitoon Emil Cliggott-Perlt AerIn Goldman Steven Bauman Greg Mast Aaron Cloninger Atithi Shrestha Kurt Brethauer 2009 Sam Brunswick Kimberly Cohen Diana Valdes John William Byrd Charlie Candler Kadi Dartez Grace Huang Xu Jeff Chapman Youngjae Chung Luke Escobar 2024 Nicolette Beguerisse
Ariel Fisk-Vittori Sebastijan Jemec Zach Hollandsworth Julia Bennett Andy Karvonen Lauren Jones Monty Jacobs Cristiano Monsalves Michael Mallow Aaron Smith Lauren Jones Mark Thaler Tim McGee 2010 Patrick Bresnan Adams Kirkpatrick 2025 Aylin CibIk Dan Overbey Evan Brooks Aria Kumar Sarah Grubisich Hollie Scott Margaret Chandler Jimmy Magliozzi Mie Hoefer Peter Stair Bess Hester Daniel Mobley Hazel Kent Jesse Turck Nick Hester Russell Moorman Cameron Klepac Aide Uzgiris Eli Martin Paige Hill Oliverio Sean Power 2005 Jason Avent Melissa Pineda Paul Oveisi Susana Pulido Michael Camacho Johnathon Perisho Aaron Parker Kiran Topiwala David Dewane Adam Pyrek Laura Perez Hasen Zimmerman Rachel Dewane Armando Salinas Samantha Rusek Courtney Garvin Aaron Gilliam Marshall Swearingen Rio Salazar Scott Johnson Sam Vonderau Parker Tinsley Andy Karvonen Evan Brooks Alexandra Weidanz Lula Marcondes Margaret Chandler Brady Zaitoon Mary Petrovich Sam Vonderau Max Jack Ben Phillips Janet Maykus Nicholas Koch Sarah Talkington 2011 Dane Carlson 2016 Robert Ellis 2006 John Algood Nels Long Santiago Lopez Andrew Blaisdell Sheb Mirando Ford Martin Andy Mattern Aiyou Zhu Ken McKenzie-Grant Dylan Slegler 2012 Rob Erni Tess Pedeprat Amanda Thompson Elena Carey Conley Giles 2007 Aaron Cloninger Robert Crites 2017 Charlie Correales Brian Crawford Ned Fischer Caroline Dunn we regret Inadvertently omlttlng any- Alice Embree Neil Griffin Jane Pulaski one who has been part of The Center’s Lovleen Gill-Aulakh Kathleen Hetrick 2018 Lacey Ellis Serious Commotion since 1975. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 339

Page 342

RAY REECE TRAY by RAY REECE 340 | CMPBS

Page 343

Ray Reece was a journalist, author and activist whose keen intellect and strategic vision helped illuminate the deeper significance of The Cen­ ter’s work. What distinguished Ray was his ability to see beyond the surface—to recognize the profound methodology underlying what others might dismiss as mere tinkering. When Ray first encountered The Center’s proj­ ects soon after its founding in the late 1970s, he was most interested not just by the solar water heaters and other innovative technolo­ gies, but by the systematic thinking that drove them. He understood that behind every prac­ tical application lay a comprehensive philosophy—the area point network resource concept that organized natural resources, people, and their economic relationships into a coherent framework for change. Ray’s greatest contribution was his role as chroniclerand interpreter. Through meticulous documentation, he spent many hours with Cen­ ter staff asking probing questions and recording the stories that would be included In “The Sun Betrayed.” This book represented his conviction that there was Indeed a movement taking place—one with deep strategic under­ pinnings that connected The Center’s work to broader thinkers that comprised a global net­ work of change-makers. His legacy lies in his ability to see patterns where others saw chaos, and to document the wisdom that might otherwise have been lost to time. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 341

Page 344

CYNTHIA LEIGH 342 | CMPBS

Page 345

THE PEOPLE Cynthia Leigh was a remarkable woman whose dedication, wisdom, and grace left an indelible mark on everyone who knew her. An activist at heart, she was Immediately drawn to The Cen­ ter’s mission as a leader in the green building movement, recognizing its potential to create meaningful change at every level. What set Cynthia apart was her extraordinary preparation and commitment. She approached every board meeting with the thoroughness of a lawyer preparing for trial, serving as presi­ dent, treasurer, and In whatever capacity was needed. Her meticulous attention to detail was legendary—she could navigate complex bud­ gets, understand intricate spreadsheets, and provide invaluable counsel on matters ranging from immigration issues for interns to grant applications and legal complexities. Beyond her professional excellence, Cynthia was a stabilizing force during turbulent times. When challenges arose, she was there with calm reassurance and practical solutions, ensuring The Center could navigate any difficulty. Her partnership with colleagues like Gail was marked by mutual respect and shared dedica­ tion to The Center’s core mission. Cynthia’S personal life bloomed alongside her professional contributions. Her meeting with noted ceramicist and sculptor Ishmael Soto at The Center sparked an Immediate connection that grew into love, marriage, and family—a beautiful testament to The Center’s role as a place where lives intersected and transformed. Perhaps most remarkable was the grace with which Cynthia faced her final chapter. Even in her last days, she maintained the same thought­ ful elegance and strength that had defined her life with characteristic dignity. Her legacy lives on In the lives she touched and the institution she helped nurture. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 343

Page 346

RANDALL NOTGRASS .4^ 344 | CMPBS

Page 347

THE PEOPLE ¥?<;: ^M^^ Randall’s Custom Machines: Pond and Swale Maker (Left), Raised Bed/Berm Maker (Center Top), Folding Form Maker (Center Bottom), Helix Anchor Installer (Right) Randall’s journey to The Center began with a simple act of kindness—helping a stranded woman named Gail with her broken-down Peu­ geot on North Lamar in Austin. What started as roadside assistance blossomed into a lifelong connection when Gail invited him to visit The Center. From that first visit, Randall fell In love with the mission and became an Indispensable part of the community. Randall possessed an extraordinary mechan­ ical genius that knew no bounds. When The Center needed a massive mortar mixer fortheir fly ash factory, Randall ingeniously repurposed an old Subaru engine, then figured out how to mount It to the mixer. He designed and built complete manufacturing systems from rough sketches. HIs ability to transform ideas into working reality became legendary—give him a concept, and within a week, he’d have a func­ tioning prototype. Beyond his technical brilliance, Randall brought music and joy to daily life at The Center. HIs beautiful singing voice harmonized perfectly with Dawn Danby’s operatic talents during impromptu lunchtime concerts. He was a reg­ ular at Friday communal lunches, contributing to the rich discussions that made these gath­ erings special. During open houses, he could explain his complex projects with the same enthusiasm he brought to casual conversations. And he didn’t hesitate to do everyone’s horo­ scope reading, or to teach them to weld. The Center has a unique ability to recognize and nurture each person’s strengths. In Randall, it found someone whose mechanical genius was matched by his generous spirit and musical soul. HIs legacy lives on in every Innovation he created and every life he touched with his kind­ ness and creativity. THE FIRST so YEARS | 345

Page 348

DEE SIMPSON

Page 349

THE PEOPLE For twenty years, Dee served on The Center board of directors, becoming an unwavering advocate and trusted friend to those doing challenging work on the ground. His loyalty was legendary—he would bail friends (e.g., Pliny) out of jail, defend their unconventional meth­ ods, and use his considerable influence to ensure important projects received the funding they desperately needed. Without Dee’s inter­ vention, the Crystal City project might never have gotten off the ground. Dee Simpson was a force of nature—a Texan through and through who embodied the spirit of getting things done. Educated at TCU, Dee became a politically astute powerhouse who could navigate the complex corridors of power with remarkable skill. His Influence stretched far beyond party lines; he was the kind of person who could raise the funding for Ann Richards’ gubernatorial campaign while maintaining connections across labor, environ­ mental, and political circles throughout Texas and beyond. What set Dee apart was his rare combination of political savvy and genuine commitment to appropriate technology and community solutions. Inspired by thinkers like E.F. Schum­ acher, he understood that meaningful change happened at the grassroots level. When the National Center for Appropriate Technology needed regional leadership. Dee didn’t hesitate to step up, bringing his extensive network and fundraising abilities to advance sustainable solutions across multiple states. Beyond his professional accomplishments. Dee was remembered as “funnier than hell”—a man who could find humor even In the most chaot­ ic situations. He was someone who understood that real change required not just good inten­ tions, but also the courage to act. His legacy lives on in every community project he helped bring to life. THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 347

Page 350

Page 351

1 ZORKS,

Page 352

Page 353

CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS A Systems View to Save the World: The Built Environment and Beyond Pliny Fisk III, Joel Ann Todd, Lauren Rochell, Gail Vittori Everything is a system; if not, there would be no feedback, no evolution, no life. Living Systems — biotic and abiotic — maximize potential futures; if not, there would be :no change. Potential Systems become life at the next step. It’s been 30+ years since our work on green building rating systems was introduced to the architecture, landscape architecture, interiors, and urban planning professions at a city and national scale. Our effort at the city scale, the Austin Green Building Program developed in coordination with the City of Austin, was awarded at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Soon after, with federal funding we developed a scientifically vetted input-output, life cycle assessment, geographic information systems procedure, BaselineGreen. This national-scale model overiaid economic monetary flow data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis with pollution data from the Environmental Protection Agency (greenhouse gases, criteria air pollutants, toxic releases) into an input/output LCA model enabling an assessment of the built environment in a GIS format. This allowed us to identify priority problems and patterns by location, but not necessarily identify potential solutions. This paper argues that we need to combine both directions into a significantly updated industrial planning methodology with a feedback monitoring system at city, national, and global scales to both determine success and assess failure in the context of our future industrial ecosystem. Two examples illustrate the power and capability of the original BaselineGreen model that has been applied to a wide variety of projects. We found surprising patterns or hierarchies of importance, and gaps at each life cycle phase of air, water, food, energy, and material industries. • In one example, under the NAICS code single family residential buildings, we found that foundations represented die single largest environmental impact per $M worth of economic activity in the building sector, reflecting the intensive use of Portland cement-based concrete mixes. Portland cement is estimated to contribute about 8% of global C02 emissions. Without robust data analysis at large scales this discovery was not obvious. As we hunted for potential solutions, we realized some were outside the construction industry. For example, we found that the desalination of saltwater used for industrial processes resulted in the byproduct magnesium oxide (MgO) — well known as a cementitious material before the advent of Portland cement. MgO is 10% more abundant than the total amount of Portland cement used in Texas each year, and is reported to be carbon balanced. Similarly, we found that cross laminated timber (CLT), conventionally used to suspend heavy oil refinery equipment over marsh areas using cross laminated southern yellow pine timber, was also a possible net carbon sink. If properly administered, both these material substitution strategies have the potential to balance much of the greenhouse gas burdens associated with single family foundations. • In a second example, when we looked at complex buildings like the US Pentagon, an often-overlooked building product — electrical wiring — prompted a similar discovery. This time, the problem was due to a polymer (PVC) used in jacketing (again, not an obvious finding). An alternative PVC-free low- 8604 FM 969 Austin TX 78724 Ph 512/928-4786 www.cmpbs.org [email protected]

Page 354

smoke zero-halogenated (LSZH) product was specified and, because of the enormous quantity’ of wiring installed in the Pentagon, helped accelerate a robust manufacturing sector of LSZH wiring. With these examples, we started to realize we were redesigning the life cycle — not simply analyzing and understanding but planning it to implement change. In certain instances, we could help create whole new industrial platforms (i.e., building foundations and wiring) that could become ubiquitous players in the industrial ecosystem (what building has no foundation or wiring?). Due to their significance, we refer to tliese new discoveries using the language of ecosystem ecologists and ancient construction archeologists, adopting the concept of the “keystone”: without them the ecosystem, structure, building or industry would fail or, worse yet, send a whole part of the human-based industrial ecosystem into decline. Presentations of these types of results from the BaselineGreen analyses as applied to significant buildings including tlie Pentagon, Seattle Justice Center, University of Texas Health Science Center, a proposal for a research lab in Montana for the National Institute of Standards and Testing (NIST), and at workshops witliin our own city, prompted great interest and the expressed need for more; but tlie right political, economic and environmentally combined mindsets were needed to advance the work beyond the original NAICS construction-related codes, i.e., to include the other industrial codes such as agriculture, forestry, transportation, wastewater, health care, just to name a few. With some additional work, we could extend the original effort into an equally robust feedback system whose parameters would enable us to consider feedback mechanisms including employment and issues of equity, health, and environmental quality. To carry out this vision, we started to develop an industrial toolkit (a “Global Dream Lab of Industries”) to represent possible keystone industries emanating from our almost five decades of experience. Innovations include hydrothermal carbonization of wastewater; sonic micronization; wood silication; soldier fly processing of organic waste; magnesium oxide cement from processed sea water; sewage-treating saltwater wetlands; duckweed and azoIla plants as keys to a food revolution and oxygenating and decarbonating the planet; outer space as an urban heat sink using specially formulated coatings — the list goes on and extends well beyond the building industry. True success is to understand what success means and, just as important, what failure means and tlie reasons behind both. As we proposed at the 1992 U.N. Earth Summit, there needs to be a built-in feedback loop. This goes beyond city commissions to the global scale, such as witli subcommittees overseeing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, where global feedback happens with satellite, land, soil, water, air and ocean monitoring. It is encouraging that this work is happening with data collection of many kinds. See, for example, Planet.org, EDF methane sensing satellite, and EDF’s toxic release monitoring work and the White House’s collaboration with ESRI and Climate Mapping for Resilience and Adaptation (CRMA) wliich integrates information from across the federal government. Assuming the above feedback systems are in place, where do we go next in a world that is rapidly becoming more complex and more at risk? We’ve considered two possibilities: One, tapping into the vast industrial databases that exist on a global scale, including patented technologies across more than 1,000 categories, and correlating these with key biometric and other geographic specific indicators; in effect, creating a taxonomy of industry. And two, recognizing the recent advancements in AI, in particular as invention tools that could combine attributes of the above taxonomy into the need realms that cross over environment, equity, health and economics. The opportunity to shape the future industrial ecosystem is upon us. 8604 FM 969 Austin TX 78724 Ph 512/928-4786 www.cmpbs.org [email protected] 352 | CMPBS A Systems View To Save the World

Page 355

Caliche vs. Adobe—Shelter or Food: A Choice That Defines Our Future Pliny Fisk III and Brittany Faulkner Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems Austin, Texas Earth USA National Conference October 2019 Introduction Building with earth, like everything else in today’s complex world, must consider a wide range of what ifs; not simple what ifs, but big what ifs that could define our immediate and not so distant future. Civilizations before us have collapsed due to food and water scarcity. Utilizing sandy loam soils to make low-carbon earthen adobe block can result in similar consequential outcomes, while using other abundant low-carbon earthen materials does not pose a similar outcome. II. Definition of adobe and caliche soils Adobe is currently the most widely-used locally sourced building material in arid and semi-arid regions of the world, and is gaining credibility as a suitable natural building material globally. As a basic premise, adobe blocks are constructed from soil that is mostly sandy particles with similar parts of clay and silt [1], and are comprised of soil categorized as sandy loam. Sandy loam is among the most valued agricultural soils due to its ratio of different sized particles which allow for good drainage, nutrient retention, and root growth [2,3]. Figure 1 illustrates the presence of sandy loam worldwide, especially in developing countries, with the implication that its widespread use as a construction material could adversely affect global resiliency to food scarcity issues. In contrast, caliche soils are very different than the sandy loam used for adobe: they have no clay and are defined as predominately carbonate soil deposits of exceedingly variable chemical and textural compounds and are often considered pre-limestone formations (4]. Documented evidence of clay and adobe-type brick use conflicting with food supply in the most basic sense exists. Utilizing sandy loam as a building material instead of as an agricultural asset has proven to be problematic. In 2007, the Chinese government placed a safeguard over 295 million acres of farmland to protect the population’s food supply from the 197,600 acres of farmland that are converted to adobe blocks each year (5]. A similar situation occurred in Bangladesh, where the country’s food security was threatened as a result of farmers selling their soil for brickmaking [6]. With over 30 years of research into the subject, we propose using caliche as an earth-based, low carbon alternative to adobe: it exists as a local resource throughout similar geographies as adobe, yet does not threaten the regions’ agricultural integrity. The state of Texas serves as a baseline case study, with some of the methods learned in this context suitable for application at a global scale. 1

Page 356

III. Comparing availability in spatial areas—globally Fig. 1 Loam Adobe Soils Worldwide [4] When Egyptian architect Hassan Fathy visited the U.S. and oversaw the building of the Dar al Islam Mosque near Abiquiu, New Mexico in 1980 which he had designed, Simone Swan, a friend and mentor to many in the earth building movement, invited us to partake in the building process. Steve Musick, who co-authored The Caliche Report, published by The Center, and Vista volunteer Jeff Lanza, joined the many people from all over the southwest and the world to build this beautiful building (see Figure 2). Ever since that experience, we have aspired to bring caliche into the same skill set and almost mystical architecture position that this corbelling approach to building gave us. Fig. 2 Dar al Islam Mosque Constructed under Hasson Fathy, global crew along with CMPBS’s Steve Musick and Jeff Lanza, Abiquiu, NM [7] IV. The availability of caliche On a global basis, calcareous soils make up 7% of the world’s land surface, with some estimates as high as 13% [8,9]. The obvious connection between this material and arid lands Is shown on the maps below. 2 ------A-,„hA—choltpr or Food

Page 357

Fig. 3 Global caliche deposits [7] DiytadtyUirc __ : Hyper^ra ____AM Somteta __! Dry uihra, Fig. 4 Global Dryland Systems [10]. Calcareous soils are present in arid and semi-arid regions of the world. V. CMPBS experience building with caliche Our experience has included buildings for the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Center for Appropriate Technology, The Meadows Foundation, The Educational Foundation of America, and the Texas State Energy Conservation Office (SECO). Unfired caliche block have been used to construct a dormitory, classrooms and a community center, and the State of Texas Advanced Green Building Demonstration in Austin. In particular, we have constructed walls, floors, structural lintels, porous paving, a cistern for water storage and planter boxes (Fig. 4). Below are two CMPBS buildings constructed with a high calcium carbonate caliche mix we have developed and tested under Uniform Building Code criteria. Compression strengths often reach 1200 - 1500 psi with as little as 4-5% cement stabilizer. (The Caliche Report is available from www.cmpbs.org) 3

Page 358

Fig. 5 Hill Country Youth Ranch; Ingram, Texas [7] Fig. 6 Girl Scout Headquarters; Carrizo Spring, Texas [7] Fig. 5 shows the Hill Country Youth Ranch in Ingram, Texas—a dormitory building whose unfired stabilized caliche block were manufactured on-site almost entirely by the young residents, using locally sourced caliche. Designed as a passive solar building, design features include a water storage cistern built all along the bottom ventilation windows to both store water and cool the air within the building taking advantage of high ceilings and a thermal chimney effect at the roof peak. Fig. 6 shows the Girl Scout Headquarters in Carrizo Springs, Texas. In addition to the unfired stabilized caliche block manufactured on-site with locally sourced caliche, the building utilized bamboo as reinforcement for the foundation and lintels, based on studies developed by Clemson University for World War II as a substitute for steel, that was in scarce supply at the time. In addition, insulating block manufactured from sawdust collected from a mesquite firewood yard in Carrizo Springs were manufactured locally and installed on the building’s exterior thus improving energy performance by exposing humans to the radiative effect from the interior Caliche block’s mass. Over more than four decades. The Center’s work has included stabilizing caliche with flyash cement from a coal fired power plant, with standard Portland cement and with white Portland cement; current work is exploring the use of magnesia-based cements including magnesium oxychloride, magnesium oxysulfete, and magnesium phosphate as stabilizers. Below Is a diagram of the process used by CMPBS to manufacture and construct with caliche. 4

Page 359

The coincidence of other resources available wherever we find caliche has influenced our past and future work. One of these is the presence of saline water, which cannot be used in Portland cement-based caliche mixes due to the destructive tendency of the salt; however, as we discovered years later magnesia-based concrete stabilization used as a replacement for Portland cement is not affected by this salinity. As shown in Fig. 8-Fig. 18, the prevalence of saline water Is evident, from Travis County, Texas, to the State of Texas, to the global scale. This realization has led us to consider how other available resources, some considered equally troublesome as saline water including mesquite, municipal wastewater and others, can be woven into a way of thinking about a potentially new or evolving ecosystem that is inclusive of humans within these gigantic areas of the earth’s surface. We will describe one of many of these possible ecosystems as being triggered by the presence of Caliche. Other bio-systemic partners that are low water-intensive materials that could complement work with caliche include hemp, kenaf, and certain bamboos, though none of these others is elaborated on in this paper. 5 Fig. 7 Diagram of the Process used by CMPBS to Manufacture Caliche based construction [4] Fig. 8 Saline Soils Present Globally [7]

Page 360

CW U. H, IHOCX (rC<C’4in IVK [] Fig. 9 Caliche presence and extraction sites in the state of Texas [4] Fig. 10 Adobe presence and extraction sites in the state of Texas [4] Otartonon til Nttgramd btaraam for lira rcM&Utrets at tent I Into ta fewtota ?„„< ,3 •re JUn tJr,»d 0=1.1 Or: 01.4 0.4 lOTtNJru Tew (A&B foCoA&r ton) shan tam Fig. 11 Presence of saline water in the state of Texas [7] Fig. 12 Distribution of aboveground biomass for live mesquite trees at least 1 inch in diameter in Texas [11] 6

Page 361

Fig. 13 Calcareous soils in Travis County, Texas [7] m ^‘3^ mi GOT rcm ITO Fig. 15 Depth to saline water In Travis County, Texas [7] Legend PercLearo Sob I 3 ICTTO Sob Fig. 14 Loamy soils in Travis County, Texas [7] Fig. 16 Land suitable for agave in Travis County, Texas (7] Legend Fartiand SuO&oter A^rnre Fig. 17 Urbanization in Travis County, Texas [7] mUrban Core ^Regional Centers [^ Austin City UmIts Waterways Dry tons per acre OJ-QS ■ 05-1 ■ 1-2 Fig. 18 Dry mass of mesquite in Travis County, Texas [7] 7

Page 362

VI. The eco-systemics of using caliche, native plants, renewable fuels and magnesia- based cements Variations of calcareous soils are located in most arid / semi-arid regions around the world and require testing to determine calcium carbonate content as well as any other minerals that in some cases might be found unsuitable for earth block making (see The Caliche Report previously referenced). Highly calcareous soils in Travis County happen to include those with magnesium oxide content already present in a natural state at approximately 2- 10%. Whether this phenomenon only exists in our region is unknown. See Tables 1, 2 below for specifications from a pit in Central Texas, which shows the contents of surfaced mined materials. Our specific ecosystem includes in addition to caliche and sandy loam, plant species such as agave, mesquite and cacti of varying types. As previously stated, sandy loam soils are laced throughout this ecosystem. (The previous maps show resources in Travis County including these and other materials that could serve as a source of low-carbon building based partially on magnesia stabilizing cements, caliche and natural fiber reinforcement using sisal from processing the agave.) Table 1 Texas Crushed Stone Company MAGUME Specifications PREMIUM MAGLIME (TCS #462) Specifications Sieve Size % Retained TCS Avg. Sample TCS Low TCS High 4m 0-2 T T T 8m 0-10 4.0 3.0 5.0 100m 0-71.5 68.0 65.0 71.0 16,189,089 tons of this product has been sold since 1947 Table 2 Texas Crushed Stone Company SUPER FINE AGLINE Specifications SUPER FINE AGLIME (TCS #465) Specifications Sieve Size % Retained TCS Avg. Sample TCS Low TCS High 4m 0-2 1.0 T 2.0 8m 0-10 6.0 T 15.0 lOOm 0-71.5 25.0 10.0 61.0 200M 0-95.0 32.0 15.0 80.0 4,869,313 tons of this product has been sold since 1947 Low % High % CaC03 85 96 MgC03 2 10 8 360 | CMPBS Caliche vs. Adobe — Shelter or Food

Page 363

In our analysis of this context, saline ground water can be considered a resource, recognizing the value of the waste brine that results from the purification process. Due to the use of fresh water in these highly evaporative environments, circumstances have forced humans to go deeper to find fresh water only to have the saline water become even more saline due to the higher mineral content in deeper geological formations. The latter has forced many populations in and around arid zones to treat this water so that it can be used for potable and industrial purposes. The resulting by-product, brine, has emerged as a considerable concern as to how to dispose of it. Brine is also associated with hydraulic fracking as the go-to basis for injecting this highly mineralized water into oil-bearing strata to force the petroleum to the surface. In the context of concrete work, saline water cannot be safely used with Portland cement-based concrete mixes as it compromises structural integrity. In some instances, countries such as Qatar incorporate desalination as part of their construction practice to create potable water to enable use of Portland cement-based concrete mixes. The serendipity occurs when one realizes that beneath the surface and as a by-product of desalination there is not only an alternative cement present but one that does not require fresh water in the mixing process but can be mixed with saline water with very minor structural diminishment. This is a win-win situation due to the fact that worldwide use of Portland cement incorporates a fresh water quantity equivalent to the entire potable water needs of some entire countries. While we have not tested out magnesium stabilized caliche with saline water, previous work with MgO has shown that the saline water has little adverse effect. This effort will be updated and presented at the conference. The potential for use of the immense salt water deposits surrounding such countries as a source of cement itself is waiting for exploitation. However, of all the work being done on magnesia cements a non-conflicting cement solution called magnesia oxysulfate cements is a prime candidate for a multitude of reasons. Table 3 below shows the availability of sulfate and MgO. In Texas we find there is enough of these materials that are present in waste brackish water from combining municipal and industrial processing to supply 110% of the Portland cement equivalent now used in the State, which in turn is the largest producer and user of Portland cement of any state in the US. (See Table 3 for a breakdown of magnesium, sulfate and other high value minerals) Table 3 Mineral Composition of Salt Water [7] 9

Page 364

VII. Potential new ecosystem for arid lands The modern ecosystem that might evolve is one in which technology becomes part of the ecology. The term eco-industrial, in its broadest sense, begins to place caliche in the crossroads of how arid lands might evolve in the future industrial ecosystem of such regions. As In any ecosystem, an eco-industrial ecosystem is essentially a large mass balance of a region’s energy, water, and material flow. The creation of calcareous soils in construction becomes one part within multiple processes that together create a kind of “plus-ultra solution” in which the synergies of the processes working together enables higher returns verses more simplified linear systems of production. The avoidance of using sandy loam soils for construction enables those soils to be even more productive when injected with biochar waste derived from the use of high BTU mesquite wood within a gasifier energy unit. Gasification is not only the renewable energy unit needed for processing caliche (mine, sift and manufacture) but creates the low temperature fired, low water magnesium cement. But the most valuable component of this human created ecosystem may well be the waste biochar resulting and its value as both a carbon sink in the loamy soil and as nutrient enhancer. Cements, particularly magnesia cements (other than magnesium phosphate cement due to its conflicting characteristics with the need for agricultural phosphate) used as the stabilized element for the caliche together become a kind of systemic trigger when all processes are considered. The use of this kind of stabilized caliche as construction material especially for residences, small industrial and agricultural buildings, secondary roads, sidewalks, and other flat work such as small foundations and paths may even become a net carbon sink due to the cement used and the overall C02 curing of the calcareous material within the mix. In essence we are speeding up the geological cycle in making the soft caliche, similar to limestone thus sequestering some C02 in the process that, together with the curing of the MgO, enables this carbon sink to be measured. This paper outlines in systemic terms how these potential eco-industrial arid lands might function with details of these hypothetical scenarios to be developed as an addendum to be accessed through www.cmpbs.orR under Earth USA Conference addendum. In conclusion, there is much work to be done with more testing and confirmation of the main assumptions presented, for example, the Uniform Building Code testing of Magnesium oxysulfate/caliche block, the longevity of natural fibers in MgO stabilized caliche, the chemical efficacy of sulfate and MgO from saline water made Into cement. We are actively pursuing the magnesium oxysulfide stabilized caliche in our earth lab, so far with good results. Samples will be shown at our presentation with some verification that caliche materials can indeed take the place of sandy loam-based adobe with measurable environmental and ecosystem improvements. 10 362 | CMPBS Caliche vs. Adobe — Shelter or Food

Page 365

“An Eco-lndustrial System for Resettlement within Arid and Semi-arid Lands” Pliny Fisk III, Co-Director Brittany M. Faulkner, Research Assistant The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems Austin, Texas In the wake of climate change, Texas is the #1 state, according to FEMA, in several natural disaster categories, and experiencing greater frequency and magnitude of these calamitous events. Such events impose limits on life support systems from habitat to infrastructure and are rapidly threatening all life forms without an effective, systems-scale adaptation protocol. The combination of disasters and shifting supply of resources requires consideration of a wide range of strategies, including the gradual shifting of whole populations when planning for the future. Arid and semi-arid lands in Texas, and in other areas worldwide, may provide a basis for a viable, long-term relocation strategy. Coastal Texas is challenged by a broad spectrum of issues including an increase in floods, hurricanes, infrastructure disnuption due to high shrink- swell soils, and an increase in vector disease due to humid conditions. Seventy-five to 88 percent of land in Texas is characterized as arid and semi-arid, with that number subject to increase as climate change shapes the future of this region. This trend requires a substantial re-evaluation of both resource assumptions and their use, as well as how to consider some disaster conditions as opportunities when planning for the future. This presentation describes a set of unusual opportunities, not only in how we view disaster, but how a new set of planning and technology strategies could help to reverse some trends, while offering new areas for greater population holding capacity in the future. We offer seven examples of a combined strategy for what we refer to as “eco-industrial technologies,” reflecting their ability to literally create a new ecosystem for people and land. Examples include a range of life support strategies from construction materials to new water resources, mitigation and management of invasive species to new agricultural practices and passive cooling technologies. The integration of these approaches enables a re-evaluation of resource limitations in arid and semi-arid regions, such as the lack of freshwater. Technologies within the eco-lndustrial system can process saline groundwater—common to most arid and semi-arid hydrology—to produce fresh water. The same technology also generates a high-grade carbon balanced cement and hydrogen energy. Similarly, the mesquite tree that is common in many parts of Texas holds a higher BTU value per pound than lignite coal; when incorporated into certain gasification technologies mesquite has been proven to generate energy and also biochar as a by-product. This waste product of

Page 366

gasification has the capability to hold nutrients in notoriously poor soils and also improves its water holding capacity. Our presentation includes mapping of disaster zones and resource availability, and overlays these conditions to show potential integration of resource uses and disaster resiliency. The presentation is accompanied by samples of eco-technologies, including biochar, a caliche mix for construction; humic fertilizer from lignite coal, and magnesium oxide cement, which the audience will have the opportunity to engage with. In addition, we will provide examples of buildings and structures that utilize such technologies, such as the Advanced Green Building Demonstration for the State of Texas. Table 1. Relation between resources found in arid & semiarid regions and the natural disasters that they mitigate. These resources are coordinated with EcoBalance technologies and links that define how each resource can be processed and used to combat such disasters. Resource Disaster EcoBalancing Technology EcoBalancing Technical Link Comment mesquite soil degradation; wildfire biomass gasifier bioremediated lignite humic fertilizer; biochar invasive, groundwater-using species & high BTU/lb value solar energy temperature extremes colored / translucent photovoltaics use of colored shade to grow crops photovoltaic panels over ground area provides shade for crops and people sky reradiation temperature extremes nano radiant cooling; interior space cooling desert skies have high cooling potential saline water soil salinization MgO cement MgO cement stabilizing caliche processing saline water provides cement, hydrogen fuel, and freshwater caliche non-arable soil construction of buildings & roads preservation of sandy loam soils not used for construction calcareous soils substituted for loam-based construction

Page 367

Figure 1. RESOURCE INTENSITY LOW HIGH Figure 2. DISASTER INTENSITY HIGHLOW

Page 368

AI-AR and DIY Combining advanced communications technology into a training program for sustainable development using sPOD building system Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) ‘19 Conference ‘Technology Mangement in the World of Intelligent Systems” August 25-29, 2019 Portland, Oregon, USA Pliny Fisk in’, William Claybome Stocker, Brittany M. FaulkneP Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems. Austin, Texas, USA Abstract— Combining human intelligence with Artificial Intelligence and Augmented Reality in the pursuit of sustainable practices could represent a profound planetary resource. An example of this hybrid development platform is sPOD: a simple, user- and eco-friendly construction Idt that can be configured to address a breadth of sustainable development practices related to shelter, food, water, waste and renewable energy using a crowd- learning and -sharing procedure to enable proper construction and performance in diverse regional contexts. Through image sharing algorithms that recognize each building system component along with optional combinations for given purposes, patterns of possible outcomes are created that are ultimately augmented by the crowd indexed embedded icons, with visual language enabling the pictorial construction of buildings and supporting infrastructure. Users learn, share and propose alternative solutions on an AI content editing platform similar to ImageNet that complements people’s skills to create verifiable technical outputs. Human and machine learning can evolve to establish regional performance benchmarks benefiting the crowd and individual user while supporting cultural variations. Al and crowd sourcing has gained rapid success in the global marketplace with positive economic returns. AI/DIY’s value in the sustainability arena balances resource use, with potential to measurably improve universal health and welfare for planet and people. I. INTRODUCTION Combining human intelligence with a global self-help labor force a rapidly deployable intelligent building system is made more accessible through embedded artificial intelligence and augmented reality, creating a sustainable development tool kit that could represent badly needed planetary resources. The core of this hybrid development platform is sPOD: a simple, user- and eco-friendly construction kit that is globally distributable through piggy backing onto the technology behind the vast existing shipping network. This newly conceived adaptable smart shipping pallet addresses a breadth of sustainable development practices related to shelter, food, water, waste and renewable energy. The combined procedure of being user communications smart and engineered for a range of adaptable uses enables construction and performance in diverse regional contexts. Through image sharing algorithms that recognize eacli pallet component ; optional combinations for tlirec key re-development needs arc enabled bringing shelter, interior furniture and sustainable landscape to users . The resulting wind, flood, and fire wortliy system lielps create resilient redevelopment procedures for generations to come. Our AI- AR- driven visual language enables tlie pictorial construction of tliese buildings and supporting infrastructure. Users learn, share and propose alternative solutions on an AI content editing image based worknet type platform similar to ImageNet but limited to complement people’s skills to create verifiable technical outputs specifically for sPOD construction. Human and machine learning can evolve to establisliregional performance benchmarks benefiting tlie crowd and individual user wliile supporting cultural variations tlirougli crowd sourced trial and error feedback approacli. AI as the regional context supplier keys actions taken in four areas of global concern ; climate cliange, disaster zones, regions of water and food scarcity ,and the need to improve soils due to a liistoi y of degradation enabling the user to understand the importance of seemingly minor actions taken. Botli AI and AR have gained rapid success in the global marketplace and instructional learning with positive economic returns. AI- AR/DIY’s value in the sustainability arena balances resource use, witli potential to measurably improve universal health and welfare for planet and people. By serving and enabling the underserved (refugees both political and environmental, disaster relief victims of fire and flood, as well as the low income, and the homeless) we propose a strategic partnership of coiporale sponsors, philanthropic organizations, disaster relief agencies and the military in a quest to better the world and to better people’s lives. Together this “clientele”, if it can be tapped, comprises some 220Mi people and climbing. n. BACKGROUND AND ASSUNIPTIONS We use as our core background, the following conditions j Includes 554,000 homeless in the U.S. (2017), 100 million homeless globally (2005), 60 million political refugees (2016), 50 million environmental refugees (anticipated 2020), and 9 million incarcerated globally

Page 369

and resources: • The world wide web called the shipping pallet indusby tliat lias a proven track record of global capacity including inventoiy, delivery, stocking and access into almost every comer of the globe. These attributes started out as a strategic procedure within the U. S. military to coordinate supplies during world war H when the first 2 million pallets were ordered • A total redesign and re-engineering of this packaging system in all its various fonns to both improve shipping but to also create a community building block for tiie future • Humans as a resource including a desire to do good work and a capacity to leam as wed as a unique physical capacity to make and create is unbounded and is perliaps the most valuable resource we have. • The new direction in bio-based plastics emanating from rapidly renewable plant-based resources (particularly hemp and bamboo) each having the capacity to be processed into strong insulating materials yet biodegradable in a maimer that enhances the soils tlirough what is called biochar. Some scientists arc referring to this as the final frontier for turning our present state of global wanning around. III. The sPOD Building Blocks The physical components of tlie system fill four reeds starting with being able to function as a comprehensive slipping pallet module and subsequently being ^le to fill tliree actual development needs of slielter, interior furniture and green infrastructure including water collection and treatment, food production and waste treatment and as an envelope for a variety of energy systems including PV’s, methane biogas generation and organic gengas gasification The pallet component of the system is able to be adapted in a plug and play manor to four different pallet configurations one a light stripping pallet for items such as fibers, cotton, or straw bales; a medium duty pallet for items like sacks of flour or grain; a heavy duty pallet for items such as 55 gal drums and concrete masonry blocks and finally a container type pallet that varies from being a hollow pallet with container pockets to a large box pallet with four p^let size walls and a lid, the latter can also be configured to being a small shipping container The shelter component is also reconfigurable into a variety of shelter types from simple, what we refer to as folded plate tents, to very robust useful tent configurations under high winds and flood, a larger hexagon sliaped tent eitlier dome or elongated, a module box system that starts out small but can be added as whole modules enabling shared walls to become strong shear walls and, finally, the same modular system raised on robust columns also constructed from tlie pallet system to counter flood conditions. Many attributes of the system such as anti-bacterial, fire proofing, high impact from flying objects, no overhangs to avoid wind damage, are embedded within all design options. Likewise, DfD (Design for Disassembly) and DfOB (Design for Open Building) where utilities of all types are never locked within, enables system upgrade and maintenance throughout its life. Finally, once the shelter or any other use of sPOD finds an end to its useful life, its core being carbonized biofoam, it becomes a soil building mineralizer called biochar. The interior furniture application includes a set of basic furniture types including tables, chairs, benches, beds, desks, book shelves, counters, etc. The landscape component of sPOD fits into a categoiy in international development circles referred to as green infrastmeturc or a living landscape. The components of this landscape range from water harvesting and storage to porous paving, intensive food production using waste water and organic waste, and renewable energy in the form of organics used for biogas, gengas and photovoltaic mounting. IV. CREATING ACOMXRJNICATION LANGUAGE FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF SPODS The four applications of sPOD described above require an organizational structure that enables the user to understand how things go together whether you are a pallet shipment compaiy or a disaster relief user in the field. This language is made up of four phased steps: 1) the preparation pliase; 2) the construction pliase; 3) the use pliase; and 4) tlie reuse phase roughly following what tlie manufacturing and building industry refers to as the life cycle but placed in more user friendly terms. These phases are abbreviated as P = prcparc (set up, coUect your p^) C = construct (includes the phases of construction in a pictorial format) U = how the final configuration is used and R= how to reuse the components through a disassembly or repurposing process. These four phases summarized and diagrammed below are correlated to all four uses of the sPOD family of pallets — shipping, shelter, furniture and landscape — shown in the pictorial diagram, and then subsequently witliin each of these sectors of use as the following diagrams relate.

Page 370

Fig. 1. sPOD Pallet Uses Summary LANDSCAPE— ©O’ <>9

—.SHELTER INTERIOR Fig. 2. sPOD organization SHIPPING SHIPPING S M S H Fig. 3. Shipping SHELTER P:C IU IR S B Fig. 4. Shelter

Page 371

INTERIOR R S 1 _ L Fig. 5. Interior The pictorial line icons in the life cycle boxes depict the phases that produce the given use assembly. These would be contained within the AR image set associated with each sPOD individual component, and are stand-ins for the moment (i.e., replace the real image of the actual part and its particular use application). Within the final application each PCUR scries would also result in a photo of the actual resulting assembly in use. V. Supplying A Global PERSPEcmT Deploying sPOD globally as a building system has opportunities as weU as risks. Since the risks become greater every day due to the rapid pace of climate change, the AI component of the AI-AR — DIY system is the contextual framework that sets the stage for determining risk components within our overall design. For the purpose of this paper, there are 5 topic spatial maps presented as examples of this AI risk framework that arc embedded ^vith any informational sieve for sharing between users: Global soil degradation (Figure 7), Food Scarcity (Figure 8), Water scarcity (Figure 9), Global Refugee recons (Figure 10), and Global climate change regions (Figure 11). These together and separately help determine the responses that the sPOD system needs to fulfill as to placement as well as configuration if it were to become rj— O-» Fig. 7. Global Soil Degradation Conditions (S.D.) [9] LANDSCAPE P Fig. 6. Landscape Ko JJ thdu-tiu LItuQ Fig. 8. Global Food Scarcity Conditions (F.S.) [I2J

Page 372

Fig. 9. Global Water Scarcity Conditions (W.S.) [13] Total refugrcs’ ANWOUEO Number of registered refugees’ By counUy.Ju.it 2015 ■l~ O^H Fig. 10. Global Societal Refugee Conditions (S.R.) [14] operational, waste organics become tlie fuel, and the output can start to build intensive raised bed gardens encapsulated by tlie sPOD building blocks. The brain of tlx: system is not only the type of sequencing described above but also lire AI advisor tliat functions to set perspective and encourage llie need for action tlirougli a succinct rendition of conditions in the area of tlie world one is in, sucl i as whether it is drought prone or a food desert or tlie fact tliat the soils are too bad to plant and tlial one needs to create tlieir own soil and here is how to do it. Tliis aforementioned sequence is generated as advice from the AI cloud storage function of global conditions, and particularly tlie conditions in one’s region to receive relevant information As users start constructing and successes or failures occur, all is fed back to the cloud to sliare with other users. As the community is built from close and far, tlie system gradually improves and becomes more intelligent as the feedback goes back between users as well as back and fortli to home base so corrective measures, if needed, can occur. Fig. 11. Global Climate Change Impact Regions (C.C.) [11] VI. SPOD AI- AR- DIY AS A COMPLETE SYSTEM The diagram below depicts the sPOD components and how they interface with the user using a smart phone camera. Each user or group of users takes a photo of the intelligent icon depicted on every sPOD component. This action triggers the screen to show all four areas of possible uses. One of these use areas is then chosen with no hierarchy of need indicated meaning that in some situations furniture might be needed before shelter, if so, the sPOD system goes through the steps of constructing the needed furniture. In other cases there is enough shelter and furniture and no energy for cooking so that a rapid living landscape response might be a combination of a container pallet with rations, water, immediate cooking fuel and a longer term small prepackaged small organic waste processing unit to create methane which, although being able to be set up in an hour using the particular 3rd pa^y fold up kit with the sPOD system, would not produce the needed gas for several days pending the organic breakdown. Once CO,<STPUCTION SEQUENCE PATTERNS OF REGIONAL ANO GlOBAl CONOIUONS 0U!LT RESULT SNAP EO VOTH OTHERS Fig. 12. sPOD AI — AR — DEY System VII. MEETING THE U.N. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMET GOALS The capacity to serve a variety of interests relative to global climate change and socioeconomic status overlaps with the United Nation’s initiative for transforming the world. The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals [10] outline a framework for ending poverty and promoting the health of the planet by 2030. Both humanitarian and scientific needs are addressed by the goals, and sPOD serves as a medium to satisfy these goals and promote prosperity. 370 | CMPBS SPOD: AI-AR and DIY

Page 373

Multiple aspects of the Sustainable Development Goals are addressed through sPOD’s food, water, and infrastructure components. Socioeconomic issues, such as ending poverty and gender inequality, are addressed by the system as a whole by providing a life cycle system and through AI-AR capabilities to connect with others. One of the United Nation’s highlighted goals, climate action, is supported tlirough on-site reuse of waste in agriculture and poultiy/fisli cycles, and could potentially serve as a toxin treatment system for polluted waters and degraded soils. The sPOD structure is retrofit to resist a multitude of climate hazard types specific to a region, thus creating resiliency towards flooding from annual monsoons or wildfires caused by prolonged drought. Areas of the world where clean water and food security are of concern benefit from the sPOD system as well. In regard to water, green infrastructure components create a cycle where water is collected through the roof membrane, stored in a cistern, used by residents of the structure, and treated through a wastewater treatment wetland. Alternatively, the wastewater from the household is fed through a wetland filtration system, then serves as a component of the raised bed gardens. Vegetable waste from the gardens serves as a means of food for the fish/chicken systems, creating a self-sustaining food cycle that fulfills the needs of the household. The DIY aspect of creating a small-scale farm creates a close connection to the food system, and allows the crowd-sourced knowledge that is shared within the Cloud to reflect physical troubleshooting needs. Various other Sustainable Development Goals arc fulfilled through a combination of superstructure and infrastructure included in tlie sPOD system, including responsible construction and production, and industry, innovation, and infrastructure. Individual parts of the sPOD building itself can be rearranged and recycled to form multiple aspects of the system, or be utilized by the pallet industry if it no longer serves the needs of the sPOD community. Affordable and clean energy is another Sustainable Development Goal that is highlighted for its importance in securing global prosperity. The United Nations emphasizes the need for all people to have access to affordable and efficient energy sources, both of which are attainable through sPOD’s energy system. Photovoltaic mounts are placed on south-facing pallets, and double as awnings that provide shade and heat conservation on sunny days, and fold down during weather events to act as protection. In regions of the world where photovoltaics are not a feasible means to generate electricity, sPOD can be equipped with a gasifier and bio-gas generator, both of which use waste from food systems to power the home. Utilizing the multitude of systems comprising sPOD provides a means of addressing climate and socioeconomic issues acknowledged as global indicators of wellbeing. The interactive interface DIY and its connection to a global community via AI-AR capabilities engage users in the food, water, and energy systems of the structure, as well as region-specific climate. The information provided by the AI-AR interface opens up the possibilities for potential application of sPOD as a means of combating crisis and enhancing human livability. Fig. 13. Green Infrastructure Correlated to United Nations Sustainable Development Goals Fig. 14. Green Supcrslnjcturc Correlated to United Nations Sustainable Development Goals ACKNOWLEDGMENT Thank you to William Claybome Stocker, co-op architecture student at Mississippi State in Jackson, Mississippi, and Brittany M. Faulkner, applicant to the Masters in Community and Regional Planning program at the University of Texas at Austin, Texas. REFERENCES [1] P. Fisk III, “Environmental/econoiilic national baselining to create a new generation of fabricated buildings and developments”, 31^international Conference on Technology Policy and Innovarion, Aug/Sept 1999 in press [2] P. Fisk III and D. Armistead, “Shrinking Life Cycle Space Using Food Systems as Example,” IC2 international Conference, Monterrey, Mexico, June 2003.

Page 374

[3] P. Fisk and D. Armistead, “Life Cycle Space and the Life Cycle Ratio in Planning,” National Conference on Life Cycle Assessment, Seattle, Washington, September 2003. [4] P. Fisk III, “Life Cycle Design Principles for the Architecture and Planning Professions.” American Solar Energy Society National Conference, Asheville, NC, April 1996. [5] P. Fisk III and R. MacMath, “ABC Building System: An Industrialized Housing Research Proposal, Including Design of Flexible Building System with Participatory Model for Client Input and proposed ‘Building Mart,’”, for the Energy Efficient Industrialized Housing Researcli Program, Center for Housing Innovation, Contract #DE-FC03- 89SF17960, University of Oregon, March, 1991 [6] P. Fisk and R, MacMath, “Life Cycle Balancing: Building Shell, Interiors, & Furnishings Sub-Systems: Nursing and Biomedical Sciences Building,” the University of Texas at Houston Healtli Sciences Center System, 1999. [7] Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, “Sustainable Rating sytem: A Conceptual & Contextual Framework for the City of Austin,” Eartli Summit Award, Rio de Janero, July 1992 [8] Saunderson, Roy, “Can Learning Really Happen With Crowdsourcing?,” Training Magazine, vol. 54 no. 6, pg. 70-71, November/December 2017 [9] ISRIC, “World Soil Information Map,” 2018, Web.

15e-cb46-45e2-9126-lca38bd5cd22 http://data-isric.Org/geonetwork/srv/eng/calalog.search#/metadata/9e84c [10] United Nations, “Sustainable Development Goals”, 2018, Web. hltns:/.www.un.org/sustainablcdcvelonmcnt/sustainablc-devclonment- aoals/ [11] Medium Inc., “Likely places where climate refugees will be created,” 2016, Web. l34cd https://medium.coni/@timboucher/likely-places-where- climate-refugees-will-be-created-f8bdc2e [12] Maplccroft Inc., “Global Food Scarcity Conditions,” 2012, Web. https://www.lheguardian.com/global- development/graphic/2012/ocl/ 1O/food-security-risk-index-map [13] United Nations, “World Waler Assessment Programme (WWAP): World Water Development Report 4,” March 2012, Web. http^/www.unesco.org/new/en/natural- sciences/environment/waler/wwap/wwdr/wwdr4-2012/ [14] The Economist, “Looking for a home,” Special Report, May 2016, Web. ial-report/2016/05/28/‘looking-for-a- home https://www.economist-com/spec 372 | CMPBS sP0D: AI-ARand DIY

Page 375

Cultivating a Healthy City-Region MetaboUsm: A Key Step in Planetary Evolution Pliny Fisk III, Hasen Zimmerman, Sarah Grubisich The success or failure of civilizations has often depended on the fortunes of their cities. A city’s prosperity is deeply tied to its ability to transform surrounding resources and remain agile through continual reinvention. At times, I feel like Pliny the Elder in the Roman Empire—had he been able to warn decision- makers, perhaps Pompeii would not have continued its unchecked growth in the shadow of a volcano. Today, much like Rome, the United States stands ata precipice: our success or failure may hinge on how we conceive and shape our cities. I live near the edge of what is commonly called Tornado Alley, a region that includes several of the nation’s fastest-growing cities—among them my own, Austin, Texas. These cities face more than just tornado-level winds; they also contend with flooding, heat waves, cold snaps, wildfires, saline groundwater intrusion, farmland and forest loss, and air pollution drifting from Gulf Coast refineries. Yet humanity has adapted to large-scale environmental threats before. Tenochtitlan—now Mexico City—developed sophisticated flood-control systems (dikes, causeways, chinampas) that doubled as transportation routes and food infrastructure. Their ingenuity shows that resilience requires seeing problems as whole-system challenges, never in isolation. So what is the “whole system” for U.S. cities today? Despite polarized political narratives, economists point out that metropolitan regions account for the overwhelming majority of economic activity—around 90% of U.S. GDP’—underscoring the role of cities and their regions as the true engines of prosperity within nations. Every city is supported by a resource region, and its health depends on how wellwe understand and balance that system. In the early 1990s, my colleagues and I explored this systems-based view through the Austin Green Building Program. Although it appeared building-focused, we conceived it as a city-regional initiative, drawing on systems science—particularly cybernetics—to model the city as an organism constantly adjusting its relationship with the environment. This framing revealed the potential for continuous flows of resources between urban and rural areas. The program’s basic model was adopted by others, including the U.S. Green Building Council and more than 40 U.S. cities, eventually expanding to some 600 municipalities. While many implementations lacked the cybernetic and regional perspective, the scale was impactful enough to gain attention at the national level. At a meeting in Washington, D.C. with the AlA’s Committee on the Environment, the EPA asked whether we could create a national model that captured the environmental impacts of the built environment—greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants, and toxic releases—across all building typologies. This ensuing effort, built on input-output economic analysis from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, linked monetary flows with pollution flows across hundreds of industrial sectors, encompassing millions of businesses in total. For the first time, we could map building life cycles nationwide, tracing impacts from raw materials to finished products. With more data, we envisioned a true

Page 376

mass balance of energy, materials, and byproducts between industries and cities, identifying “problem industries” and exploring substitutes for polluting ones, such as Portland cement. In exploring these industrial substitutions, we found inspiration in ecology. Ecosystems rely on keystone species—organisms upon which the entire system depends. Similarly, cities depend on critical industries that serve as systemic keystones. Replacing Portland cement, for example, with magnesium oxide (MgO) cement could serve as one such keystone: it can cut emissions, reabsorb carbon during curing, and—crucially—be produced using saline water ratherthan fresh.’ In Texas, vast amounts of MgO could be harvested as a byproduct of saline water processing, potentially enough to replace all Portland cement used statewide. From there, we began identifying dozens of other potential “gap-filling” technologies—those that could replace harmful practices or supply missing links in the city’s resource cycles, and, like keystone species in ecosystems, stabilize and strengthen the whole system. These included reradiating roofs, biomass gasification, hydrothermal carbonization of wastewater, and caliche as a building material. As the list grew, we began to see these not as isolated fixes but as parts of a larger industrial ecosystem, where technologies and processes could work together to reinforce resilience. From that point, we began dreaming up a collection of visionary designs that brought these innovations into play—from low-carbon building systems to bridges that filter water and integrated mass-personal transit systems. We called this exploratory effort our “Global Dream Lab.” In this industrial ecosystem framework, surprising opportunities emerged. MIT researchers demonstrated cement-carbon-black “supercapacitor concrete,”’ suggesting that future structural elements such as foundations could store energy while bearing loads. Combined with MgO cement, this points to the possibility that foundations might one day both reduce soil disruption and provide on-site energy storage. Suddenly, buildings could rest on literal “battery foundations.” The more we identified weak links in the urban ecosystem and explored new combinations of keystone technologies, the more possibilities arose. Colleagues in Monterrey, Mexico, struggling with air pollution from skyscraper development, inspired us to consider tail buildings as “air cylinders.” Mines use elevators to circulate air—why not buildings? Retrofitted with elevator-driven air circulation as well as living plant trays (duckweed, azolla) along their facades, these towers could function as massive urban lungs—providing oxygen, filtering pollutants, and producing protein-rich biomass equivalent to acres of farmland. Duckweed’s protein yield per area is exceptionally high (several-fold above major crops),”-’ pointing to dramatic land-use savings. Livestock, by contrast, uses over a third of the world’s habitable land (via pasture and feed).®-? With such a vast footprint, urban food towers could radically reduce land demands, while simulated plant-based meats (already indistinguishable from animal products in taste tests) could help with public acceptance. Here too, urban and ecological resilience overlap and reinforce each other. These are only a handful of examples—unlikely applications of keystone industries that could inform new designs and help maintain the health of our cities’ resource cycles. But once we recognized how many opportunities there were to reimagine urban systems for sustainability and resilience, it became clear that we need a way to systematically generate, test, and connect design possibilities at scale. This pointed us toward the concept of an “invention machine,” something akin to TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving),’ the Soviet methodology later adopted by companies like Samsung. 374 | CMPBS Cultivating a Healthy City-Region Metabolism

Page 377

TRIZ showed that patterns of invention could be codified and reused. We began to imagine a comparable tool for cities: a planning engine with a taxonomy of millions of industries—biological sciences, materials research, energy systems, agriculture—capable of revealing ecologically balanced solutions for urban regions. In this imagined TRIZ-inspired world of regional industrial planning, the industrial ecosystem framework becomes a design method—one that could hybridize technologies, uncover keystones, and create truly cyclical relationships between the city and its rural partners, unlocking new levels of economic and ecological balance never before seen, and ensuring the sustained success of our cities. We stand today at the edge of forces that threaten the survival of our cities. But unlike Rome, we have the knowledge and tools to anticipate, adapt, and reinvent. ATRIZ-inspired invention machine could help us do just that—revealing keystone innovations that fill systemic gapsand strengthen the industrial ecosystem, while reconnecting each city to the resource region that sustains it. With such a tool, cities and their rural partners could function as balanced ecosystems, circulating energy, water, and materials in regenerative cycles. The choice before us is stark: continue unchecked growth in the shadow of mounting risks, or deliberately support an urban metabolism that ensures resilience for both our cities and their regions. Al assistance (ChatGPT) was used for developmental editing and content refinement. References

1. U.S. Conference of Mayors, and S&P Global Market Intelligence. U.S. Metro Economies:Annual Report and Forecast. June 2025. Accessed September 22, 2025. . https://www.usmayors.org/wp- content/uploads/2025/06/USCM-Metro-Economies-Annual-Report-and-Forecast June-2025.pdf
2. Badjatya, Palash, Abdullah H. Akca, Daniela V. Fraga Alvarez, Baoqi Chang, Siwei Ma, Xueqi Pang, Emily Wang, Quinten van Hinsberg, Daniel V. Esposito, and Shiho Kawashima. “Carbon-Negative Cement Manufacturing from Seawater-Derived Magnesium Feedstocks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, no. 34 (2022): e2114680119. .https://doi.Org/10.1073/pnas.2114680119
3. Chanut, Nicolas, Damian Stefaniuk, James C. Weaver, Yunguang Zhu, Yang Shao-Horn, Admir Masic, and Franz-Josef Ulm. “Carbon-Cement Supercapacitors as a Scalable Bulk Energy Storage Solution.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, no. 32 (2023): e2304318120. .https://doi.Org/10.1073/pnas.2304318120
4. Baek, GahYoung, Maham Saeed, and Hyung-Kyoon Choi. “Duckweeds: Their Utilization, Metabolites and Cultivation.” Applied Biological Chemistry 64 (2021): 73. . https://d0i.0rg/l0.1186/sl3765-021- 00644-z
5. Roman, B., R. A. Brennan, and J. D. Lambert. “Duckweed Protein Supports the Growth and Organ Development of Mice: A Feeding Study Comparison to Conventional Casein Protein.” Journal of Food Science 86, no. 7 (2021): 2774-89. .https://d0i.0rg/l0.1111/1750-3841.15635
6. Agudelo Higuita, Nelson 1., Regina LaRocque, and Alice McGushin. “Climate Change, Industrial Animal Agriculture, and the Role of Physicians—Time to Act.” Journal of Climate Change and Health 13 (2023):100260. httDs://doi.org/10.1016/i.ioclim.2023.100260.
7. Ritchie, Hannah, and Max Roser. “Global Land Use for Agriculture.” Our World in Data. Accessed September 22, 2025. /global-land-for-agriculture.https://oun/vorldindata.org
8. llevbare, Imoh M., David Probert, and Robert Phaal. “A Review of TRIZ, and Its Benefitsand Challenges in Practice.” Technovation 33, no. 12 (2013): 665-76. .https://doi.0rg/IO.IOI6/j.technovation.20i2.ll.OO3

Page 378

a

Page 379

CLOSING ?’. •-.-”«<+ -‘V.y TOWARDS A MAXIMUM, IPOTENTIAL’ FUTURE

Page 380

378 | CMPBS

Page 381

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WE THANK ALL WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 50 YEARS OF SERIOUS COMMOTION, AND WHO HAVE BROUGHT THIS BOOK TO FRUITION. WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT LIES AHEAD. Approaching The Center’s 50th year, ideas started to flow — let’s have a celebration, a symposium, an alumni event, and yes — let’s do a book to commemorate a half century of industry-shifting, interdisciplinary stretching inventions, prototypes, protocols and policies — collectively what we call serious commotion. While not all the activities will be realized by October, this book made it to the finish line. At The Center’s March ‘25 Board meeting, David Dewane — who, starting In 2005, has spanned sequential roles as Intern, staff, collaborator and now board member — raised his hand offering to ‘do the book.’ A mere six months later, the manuscript is being readied for the publisher; we couldn’t be more thrilled about what is in these pages. With the exceptional contributions of Hasen Zimmerman and Sarah Grubisich — interns who rolled up their sleeves and accomplished a herculean body of research, organizing, drafting and design — and Courtney Garvin, graphic designer extraordinaire with previous collaboration with David, the team took David up on his vision to make the experience of being at The Center come alive In the book. And all along, Pliny was shaping content, context, and tone. With an alm to acknowledge the broad community of collaborators who have provided inspiration, whose collective contributions to the ever-evolving ecosystems of the places we Inhabit bring Immense joy, we are thrilled to share these reflections, essays, sketches, and yes, dreams, of what we collectively know as possible. Thank you to all. The small team that keeps the wheels turning is ever evolving and, as we finalize this book, is comprised of Julia Almaraz, Sarah Grubisich, Ken McKenzie- Grant, Rich MacMath, Sean Power, Lauren Rochell, Kiran Topiwala, Suchita ToshnIwal. Our current Board Officers Jorge Vanegas, President, Michele Van Hyfte, Immediate Past President, Alberto Luera, Treasurer, and Board Members David Dewane, Amanda Masino, Edie Muehlberger, Mark Thaler, and Wendy Vlttorl provide unwavering support along with a healthy dose of pragmatic reality. We thank all who have contributed to 50 years of serious commotion, and who have brought this book to fruition. We can only Imagine what lies ahead. THE FIRST so YEARS | 379

Page 382

380 | CMPBS

Page 383

LAST WORD How do you describe the indescribable? That’s how I feel when asked to summarize the work and contributions of The Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems and Its leaders — Pliny Fisk and Gail Vittorl. I first met Pliny and Gail while working on a project called the Epicenter — the nation’s leading green demonstration project funded by the federal government in the late 1990’S. My mentor Bob Berkebile brought Pliny and Gail onto the team to help break new ground with materials — in particular new ways to lower the environmental impact of concrete by using replacements to Portland Cement- but the collaboration soon went much deeper — into discussions and analysis on how to completely rethink the entire supply chain and its impact not only on the environment but on people and the economy itself. How do you use material decisions to get the most good for the world? And this is a major theme at Max Pot that has persisted for fifty years — you can’t work on only a part of the problem with them — to make change you have to uncover the wider patterns, go deeper and think as broadly as humanly possible. And nobody thinks more broadly than Pliny — he Is the mad scientist of the green building movement, the innovator and linkage maker — one who sees decades ahead of others and finds connections between strands of research and data and possibility. Every timeItalk with him it expands the possible for me. What emerged from that work was a tool called Baseline Green, Co-developed with Dr. Greg Norris of Harvard — and a precursor to all the focus on embodied carbon now popular as a singular issue within the building industry. But Baseline Green went broader and deeper still than anything done today — it attempted to correlate supply chains to their economic and social footprints, to health outcomes and to a broader array of environmental impacts than merely carbon — don’t we care too about toxins In the environment and ozone depletion and habitat? Doing this work with Pliny and Greg greatly influenced my own thinking at a time when Iwas dreaming up the Living Building Challenge and helped me understand the complexities needed to reach for simplicity with meaning in design. And Pliny’S genius and innovation was matched by Gail’s clarity and wisdom. Working with her helped translate sometimes Incomprehensible concepts to others into direction and focus. Yin and Yang perhaps? I remember being an early reviewer of Gail and Robin Guenther’S groundbreaking book — The Green Guide to Healthcare and admiring her ability to bring coherence to complexity in the service of an Important building typology. And this Is another theme of The Center — simplicity and complexity held together with joyful equanimity. Simple solutions wherever possible, but without the fear of complexity whenever required. A straw panel, a helical screw pile — Simple… Entire carbon balanced regions and system approaches to seemingly unrelated supply chains — complex. The Center has focused on revealing the truth underlying how humans do things — what It does beautifully and what it does ugly. What work could be more Important and timely today? It is hard to describe the Impacts and influences on so many of us In the green building movement, but one thing is for sure- you never forget your interactions with Max’s Pot. You could point to the thousands of people who support green building rating systems and trace the lineage back to Austin of such programs — you could focus on the work of top architecture and engineering firms doing LCA analysis and trace that back in time as well. The Center doesn’t always get the credit, but they did cultivate the soil of change for so many of us. Max Pot Is 50… Yet still exploring the world with the fascination of a young child paired with the wisdom of a wise elder. Happy Birthday Dear Friends. Jason F. McLennan Creator - Living Building Challenge Winner of the Buckminster Fuller Prize Opposite: Shrine of Reverence #14 by Arthur Schaller THE FIRST 50 YEARS | 381

Page 384

MAX POT THE CENTER FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS 8604 FM 969, AUSTIN, TX 78724 https://CMPBS.ORG

Page 385

Page 386

Maximum Potential — a state that is never quite attainable — The Center strives to potentialize life support systems. Building —first, as a noun, so it becomes solid and tangible as in buildings; then, as a verb, so it becomes action as in building community. Systems— everything is a system; if — not, there would be nb feedback, no evolution, no life. Living systems — biotic and abiotic — maximize potentialfutures;if not,there would be no change. — Potential Systems become life at t^e next step. ■WWW.CMPBS.ORG ,j 7