Reading

A round-up of articles from several editions of the PlaNetizen weekly news:

- Hidden costs in wood burning. Fairly straight-forward idea, that burning wood is awfully polluting. Some interesting exerpts:

Some pellet stoves, which burn nuggets of dried wood, are back-ordered 90 days, says John Crouch of the Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association.

In some communities, mostly in the West, 30% to 80% of the wintertime particle pollution is attributed to wood burning in the home, regional and federal agencies say.

Kapahee and other environmental officials don't worry much about new stoves, which boast either catalytic converters or combustion chambers designed to minimize soot. But a wood stove sold before stiffer regulations took effect in 1992 can emit as much pollution as seven diesel buses, says Guillermo Cole of the Allegheny County, Pa., Health Department.

Which makes me wonder: how much pollution comes from a coal plant for the amount of electricity we'd use in a space heater? and how does that compare with a natural gas furnace in terms of pollution? unfortunately, these deeper issues wouldn't be covered in a little Yahoo article like this.

- Materials Guy: the Architecture of Shigeru Ban. This quote says everything about his approach:

The idea of building with paper seems riddled with problems - it is flammable, vulnerable to water, weak and temporary, but Ban turns all these arguments upside down: "How long do you think concrete lasts? It has many problems and it's very difficult to replace or fix. If a paper tube is damaged it can be replaced by a new one. The lifespan of a building has nothing to do with the materials. It depends on what people do with it. If a building is loved, then it becomes permanent. When it is not loved, even a concrete building can be temporary. And the strength of the material has nothing to do with the strength of the building. It depends on the structural design. Buildings made of concrete are easily destroyed by earthquakes, but paper-tube buildings can survive without damage." They are easily fireproofed and waterproofed, he continues, and they have significant advantages over other building materials in that they are cheap, environmentally friendly and easy to manufacture anywhere in the world.

'If a building is loved, it becomes permanent.' Very true. A well-made or historic building, if unloved, is often torn down. A cheap building like a Taco Bell isn't loved either, so it is torn down. It is the rare building that has been well-loved during its whole life, or has been brought back from the brink through copious amounts of money and hard work, that can go on with a life far longer than its materials might dictate.

- Tastemakers: Forbes picks for the Top Ten Influential Architects. No real surprises here, other than Rick Harlan Schneider. I've heard of him vaguely, but surely there are others more influential than he - if you want green architecture, look to William McDonough, who has built and written far more than Schneider. The thing that most amused me about this article though was that they used the icon of a man holding a T-square, and virtually none of the architects could design their buildings using a T-square - it's computers all the way now. The equivalent is like using an icon of a doctor with leeches to symbolize modern medicine. It just doesn't apply any more!

- Prefab Homes Get Fabulous: featuring a new trend of modern prefab houses, including ones sponsored by Dwell magazine and Ikea. Not terribly keen on the designs presented here generally, but prefab modern is an alluring idea.

- Speaking of Ikea... Portland gets an Ikea Wah! no fair. Not only does Portland get an Ikea before metro Detroit does, but the store is even near light rail and in a downtown location. Can you imagine the activity if there were an Ikea in Detroit proper, even on the relatively lame People Mover??

-  Want to save $3,150 in taxes? Buy a hybrid car. Beginning in January 2006, the federal gov't will offer up to $3,150 in taxes, depending on the emissions of the car. Plus with some cities offering free parking at meters, and other states offering unlimited access to HOV lanes, the reasons to not buy a hybrid are quickly running out. Now if only Michigan would offer a tax break for hybrids.... fat chance!

Comments

[Murph]

Hmmm....

If the Ikea were to be located in Detroit proper, I suppose I would back down from "withering" to merely "disdainful".

Except, oh wait, Detroit would probably waive the property taxes on it in order to lure them in, and allow them to build a massive parking lot, such that 95% of Ikea shoppers won't venture off Ikea's lot (the article says even the Portland store's site plan includes 1200 parking spaces, and Detroit wouldn't see any benefit from it at all. Ikea's still the worst plan for urban revitalization since casinos.

(Sorry. Ikea is my insta-cranky button topic...)

[Architectress]

True, Detroit would probably waive taxes but if they were smart, they would only do it for a couple of years. Ikeas, much as you may disdain them, are big economic generators beyond their property lines. They attract people on a *regional* basis, not just locally. I know plenty of people, myself included, who have driven to Toronto or Chicago, visited friends and tourist attractions, stayed overnight at hotels - all to shop at the Ikea for a day. Heck, some people rent whole trucks in order to fill them up and return home.

And FYI, an average Ikea is 100,000 square feet. If the Portland store is about that, then they have 1 spot for every 83 sq. ft. It's a lot more than we allow for retail, sure, but I bet they use every single one too.

[Murph]

"a lot more than we allow for retail, sure"

Is there any place in Michigan that has a maximum on the amount of parking provided? Even Ann Arbor, which claims to be so concerned, only has minimums...No, wait. I'm wrong. For "Retail Stores and Retail Centers between 300,000--600,000 square feet of floor area" (the proposed Canton Twp. IKEA is 300k s.f.), Ann Arbor's zoning requires a minimum of one parking space per 285 s.f. and a maximum of one parking space per 250 s.f.

We have a few small pieces of furniture from IKEA (near Philly, from when we lived in Princeton), but they just sort of exist; they aren't in any way nice or likeable. (Contrast: the table we scavenged from a dumpster and Cara refinished.) Ikea just rubs me the wrong way, as encouraging a disposable lifestyle (Target furniture runs a close second here).

And, yes, they're regional attractions. Just like casinos and stadia. In general (because I've not seen analyses that focus on Ikea specifically), single monolithic activity generators have been shown to be poor economic development strategies, usually not even providing enough in taxes to cover the costs of the municipal services they demand.

[aka Archipunk]

I was going to chime in on the woodburning article. (And not to be petty, but it's from USA Today which is to facts as McDonalds is to nutritious, in my book.)

I think conflating pellet stoves with woodburning is misleading. From what I have read (and I don't have any sources handy to cite), pellet stoves are pretty efficient and don't pollute nearly as much as compared to a stack of sticks in a stone ring in the backyard. Just the amount of material burned is much less with a pellet stove versus log burning in a traditional fireplace, but, because they also burn hotter, much less soot is produced.

On the Ikea front, I understand the "cheap and disposable" bias is most prevalent on the east coast, where Ikea had their first stores. I don't know if the quality has improved over time, but to me, Ikea is definitely something where there are wide swings in quality. I have a bed frame that is much nicer than most wood futon frames I've seen but isn't needlessly ornate or fussy (or expensive). Many things Ikea sells I would want to see in person before deciding whether or not to buy. But I have a number of things I've had for 6-7 years that I got from Ikea that I consider useful and durable.

(Anyhow, I think that's enough Ikea defense.)