"In need?" "Only available site?" "Happened to be...?"

Who is kidding whom?

Fukuoka, Japan, was in need of a new government office building and the only available site was a large two-block park that also happened to be the last remaining green space in the city center.

Emilio Ambasz and Associates, Inc. was awarded the commission for successfully achieving reconciliation between these two opposing aims: maintaining the green space of the existing park while providing the city of Fukuoka with a multi-use, symbolically decisive building. Under the building's fourteen one-story terraces lie more than one million square feet of space, containing an exhibition hall, museum, 2000-seat proscenium theater, conference facilities, 600,000 square feet of government and private offices, as well as large underground parking and retail spaces.

***

Thanks to disjointed.org.

Comments

[Ian]

I don't see how this can ever be a real replacement, but it seems like a good idea anyway.

[Zach]

If I lived in Fukoka, I might be irked, but that building looks pretty damn cool.

[Brian Miller]

I think its pretty cool, actually, if the public has access to the terraces.

[David Sucher]

Public access? That's a good question. I would doubt that it has but who knows. I guess if I were really energetic I'd write to the architect and/or owner.

[Talking Dog]

More close up photos, ignore the Japanese text:

http://www.archi-map.net/~ats/fuku/04acr.html

Commentator says that the garden is completely open, but it "feels somewhat dark and is somehow a little difficult to enter for the first time."

[JRoth]

The website of the architect (your link, David) makes clear that terrace access is, indeed, public (you can see the walkways snaking up), and that the top level features a "belvedere", presumably some sort of trellised lookout.

I didn't understand the tone of your comments until I realized that you though the public had lost access. I think the building looks great , and I also think it meets the Three Rules pretty well (although the modernist streetface may be a bit generic).

In that photo, I see acres of death and barreness, and one plot of life and fecundity - a portion of which climbs to the sky. Wonderful.

[David Sucher]

I stand corrected; there is public access. And maybe it's truly usable. But I would like to hear a first-hand account from someone I trusted before I would be convinced. In short, I am skeptical that they have created public space which is particularly marvfelous and which compensates for the loss of the park thay had.

And clearly, the excuses to destroy a park sound like makeweights. Parkland is "free" and there is always some good reasons -- "In need..." "Only available site..." "Happened to be..." to compel the use of a park space for a building.

There appear to be nearby low-rise sites which could have been acquired for a public building. But park land is an easy target.

That's my take and the reason for my skepticism. Also, I am curious how from a security standpoint you can have a multi-story building which permits the public to go up one side and down the other. Maybe it's possible. Maybe I am dead wrong and it's a great solution in every possible way. It's such an unusual building that it might be worth further detailed investigation.

[Andrew Spicer]

I entirely agree with David that the excuses used are far too weak to justify using park land, and the innovative building design isn't a good enough substitute.

However, this design might be a good thing to consider for a project being built on developed land adjacent to a park.

[David Sucher]

Talking Dog: I looked at that link you offered, thanks. But I could not make out too much from the photos and regrettably, I do not speak or even write Japanese.

Andrew: I agree entirely. As a design for a private site it actually looks pretty good...it appears as if it could have 3 good urban faces and the ziggurat side is visually quite attractive and would provide wonderful decks for the adjacent interior spaces. But the security issues would seem to limit access to those decks from the immediate interior spaces to their occupants. That doesn't mean that it might not be a particularly effective design overall but simply that the exterior spaces might not plausibly be "public" space.

[clew]

Well, remember that most of Japan is much less crime-ridden than most of the US; or was until recently, anyway. (Which I found very pleasantly unsettling, on my one visit. Transit, at midnight, through Tokyo and suburbs, *absolutely respectable*.)

It might therefore be easy to allow access to the terraces.

The whole does remind me of the ambush-ready convention center "park" in Seattle, though.

[David Sucher]

Possibly so, Clew. Japan is not Seattle.

But again, my main point is that parks are considered free land. Where do freeway builders always seek to place their roads? Parks. No people to displace and lower condemnation costs. It's the language of the web page which I found laughable and sad at the same time.

And your point about the Freeway Park in Seattle is a good one. The central idea -- build over a freeway airspace -- was sound but the designer chose the wrong metaphor at the outset; she chose to create a "bit of wilderness" in a city. That was a mistake.

[John Massengale]

Geez Louise, does ANYONE think that if you were standing in the park looking at the building you would think to yourself, "Oh, look, that looks like a nice park, let's go over there and play some ball"?

Two, have we lost the ability to make beautiful buildings, so that we think we have to hide them under pseudo-nature?

Is this a park or a building? What benefit comes from being unable to decide?

[Talking Dog]

I know a couple of people in Fukuoka, will have to ask them for a reaction. I have mixed feelings about this building, but it is certainly better than equivalent projects like Nikken Sekkei's Osaka City Hall, which is a similar hulk built in the middle of scarce public parkland. In this Fukuoka case, I doubt that it was absolutely necessary to build this building, other than the need for pork, which is usually the case with such buildings in Japan. Typically they turn out to be white elephants.

I think this building is probably popular with joggers by day and lovers at night. It is also probable that they have landscaped it for some spectacular seasonal displays with things like cherry trees, azaleas, hydrangeas and red maples. It could possibly be thronged at such times.

This building is part of a recent trend in Japanese urbanism towards "greening." Japanese cities have very little green space to begin with, and this lack is credited with contributing to the "heat island" phenomenon that has become a current keyword.

As a result, some municipalities have put greening ordinances in place that mandate a certain percentage of rooftop space be given over to landscaping when new devolopment is made. Tokyo is the forerunner in this area, with the "Green Tokyo" 20% plan (I suspect this Fukuoka project predates that, however).

The greening trend is expanding on the home front, too, with a rooftop gardens and terraces being popular options for new residential construction. This is not generally a Venetian-style rooftop platform, but rather an garden that is integrated into a flat roof on light gauge steel buildings. Here is a typical high concept residential design that integrates greening, although not on the rooftop. It's not uncommon for decks to be replaced with grass in such buildings.

http://www.misawa.co.jp/machiya/keyword.html

Of course Japanese urban buildings have always incorporated gardens, famously. But these days residential garden space, at least, which is typically 200 or 300 sq. ft., is being taken over by expanding parking needs. Hence the garden space is migrating upward.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the need for cheap municipal parking was the real driver behind this project.

[JRoth]

Well, Mr. Massengale, benefits from "being unable to decide" include:

Cleaner air
Cleaner water
Less storm runoff
Reduction in urban heat island effects
Reduced energy costs paired with increased thermal comfort
Accessible, lovely outdoor space on every level
Wildlife habitat (obviously, mostly birds here).

Designed properly, roof gardens are no more "pseudo-nature" than any other garden - and much less pseudo than the despicable grass lawn.

I'd be curious to see how many roofscapes you think are more lovely than this one.

[John Massengale]

>I'd be curious to see how many roofscapes you think
>are more lovely than this one.

Does anyone have a photo of the Manhattan skyline?

Then, let's see, there's the Houses of Parliament, Chartres Cathedral, St. Peter's, the Pantheon . . . just about any building built between 1600 and 1850 . . .

Last but not least, a roofscape is on the roof. This is one side of the building. I don't find it lovely at all, and doubt it is more green than a simple green roof.

[JRoth]

Ah yes, how sadly predictiable. The Pantheon provides an outstanding practical model for a roof on a modern commercial building. Thanks for your well-considered input!

I might add that 95% of the buildings in Manhattan have flat, tar-covered roofs. The fact that a select few are pointy, sloped, or rounded in no way defends or mitigates the ugly deadness of the rest. Surely you don't propose putting the Chrysler spire atop every tenement? Or maybe a 12:12 slate roof on the Pan Am Building? Put soil and life on every flat roof in Manhattan, and you get the same skyline, just 10 degrees cooler in summer and with about 10% more ambient oxygen.

I don't know what photo you're looking at, but I see trees on this roof in Japan, as well as clear signs of intensive landscaping. What evidence do you have that it is "a simple green roof?" [as if these are so commonplace as to be dismissable]

You're right that this is "one side of the building." It is also, inarguably, the most interesting side of this building, and somehow it is the one to which you object. And actually, in this building the roofscape massively modifies and informs the adjoining side, making a building that would normally have 4 sides dull and one side dead into one that has 2 vibrant sides. Fault the designers, if you must, for the ordinariness of the remaining three, but to complain about the vibrant two is nonsensical.

[Sam]

Does anybody know where i can find any more pictures of buildings like this except for the Emilio website? Please. Its for an exam.

[barry]

I lived in Fukuoka a few years back and you can indeed walk up the terraces to the top. And if you really want a surreal experience, try and get onto the top bit aswell. The only time i ever did it, some rather authoritarian voice came over the tannoy telling me to get off and shortly after 2 policeman came pegging up the stairs telling me to get down. Off course, being wonderfully Japanese they were not angry just keen to help me understand the rules. Very warm and friendly coppers.

Barry