The event, titled Northport Artwalk, was organized through the cooperation of the local business community and the organization of local artists, with the aim to support both the local business and the local artist community.

My exhibit included 8 paintings that together presented a short story about a village and its struggle to revive local economy. Each painting had a storyboard text associated with it, that was placed on a mobile site. Each painting has a QR code embedded into the painting itself, integrated with the scene depicted. Thus, a visitor could interact with the painting not only in a usual way, by enjoying the art, but also by using a mobile phone to scan the code and read the associated text of the story. To further underscore this business and art coalition, the mobile pages also included offers from local businesses, encouraging the “buy local” message promoted by the local Chamber of Commerce.

To explain all this and offer the text to users without mobile phones and scanners, the story is also captured in the brochure.

THE INTERACTIVE ART EXPERIMENT

This project is an exploration of the connection between art and technology. Art is defined as a physical manifestation of human reason – a vessel through which we convey truth to each other, which has the added benefit of permanence in a changing world. We honor and respect artists for what they do, because they are able to overcome the constant fluctuations of life. Art is therefore an important component of human culture and exchange, a method through which we build community and relationships with each other. Art in communities is always the most important gathering place, and the way in which we honor places of importance. We put statues in important parks, paintings in churches, decoration and ornament on buildings. This is how we say to one another, “this place matters”.

In today’s world, this ability to communicate the distinction of place has become increasingly difficult – there is so much information, and so many things which scream for attention, that we have trouble communicating clearly. Technology has revolutionized our lives in so many ways; it has made life more efficient and much wider than our small towns. But art is still a vehicle for truth, and though we must accept the changes that technology has brought, we cannot forget the importance of communicating real Truth to each other, and not just the facts of our daily life.

This project examines the way in which art today can intersect with both technology and community. We increasingly rely on our near constant connection to the internet which implies a connection to each other. The Experiment integrates mobile codes with artwork that was specifically made for Northport Artwalk. The viewer interacts with the art not only by viewing, but also by scanning the code with a mobile phone, which when scanned will send the user to a website with a storyboard behind each painting. To engage the viewer further, the website is also connected to a local business or merchant offer. Each illustration is unique and the codes are fully integrated. To appreciate the experiment, the viewer must fully engage the illustration and find the code in order to scan it. At the close of Northport Artwalk, the websites will all revert to displaying the portion of the story which they illustrate. In this way, the illustrations are forever connected to their text and to each other, but are also individual pieces that stand alone. Much like we are.

The project illustrates the story of a town by a harbor, not necessarily this one (Northport), but close enough for us to feel its truths as our own. It tells of businesses which flourish, decay and are reborn and how a community comes together to recreate its relationships and save its identity. It is an experiment in human dynamics and community building and a continuation of the endless human struggle to communicate.

The Design Guidelines documents provide an opportunity to visually illustrate the desired way of development. Although the zoning provisions provide a legislative intent to regulate the development,  it is not easy for users to understand these large and complicated documents or easily visualize the desired outcome.  The Design Guidelines are not a substitute for zoning regulations; rather, they present a framework for site development, building form, streetscape, and architectural and landscape character to further the legislative intent and to ensure that community character and identity are not undermined by inconsistent development.

The guidelines are advisory in nature and are usually provided as additional detail, context and direction on recommended development practices. Compliance with design guidelines is usually encouraged; as it clarifies the desired outcome, it can dramatically improve the speed of the application process. The document may contain some mandatory parameters and requirements that must be met, usually when directly illustrating zoning requirements. Well-developed documents clearly specify the difference between the “guidelines” and the “standards”. The interpretation of design guidelines and standards is usually responsibility of the municipal appointed design review committee, commission, or board (usually Planning Board). Since it is important to recognize that each parcel, site plan and proposed development is unique, the review boards exercise discretion in applying guidelines to achieve the stated intent of the zoning legislation.

Form-Based Zoning is the most effective way to regulate the development and its physical form. FBC is a zoning code,  requires rather than guides, has the power to define a complete public realm and it doesn’t use land use as the prevailing regulation. However, not very many municipalities are inclined to switch their working documents. The process is costly and it takes time and resources to gather community input, define, develop, refine and adopt a document. However, it is a process that at the end provides a documents with clear and predictable development standards.

I find that there is a way to still provide a decent tool and take a step forward while testing the ground and the process,  by creating a good design guideline document. which provides a working framework similar to FBC.

Such  well developed design guideline document will address the lot configuration and circulation, access management, streetscape, building massing and sustainability measures, while also including the desired architectural strategies.

The art of creating places requires the sensibility to recognize emotional effects of existing places. What is it that excites or comforts, attracts, and what is it that makes us walk  away; what exactly creates these bookmarks in our memories?

The thing is, like in cooking, there is no one magical component. The success of a memorable meal lies in the mix and synergy of all ingredients, and the meal’s ability to excite our senses and emotions.  Surprises are as important as the harmony, and the art is in making them sing together.

The proposal presents an infill project within walkable distance from the vibrant downtown of Huntington, with multimodal improvements to mass-transit connections. The idea of densification of the Town core is one of the principle strategies for Smart Growth and New Urbanism.

The 80 unit anchor prototype buildings are situ­ated on 1.06 sewered acres in southern Hun­tington Village on Rt110. The apartments will be compact, modular factory constructed units specifically designed with ultra space and utility efficiency as central design features eliminating central HVAC needs, requiring only a minimal additional monthly utility cost to ten-ants. This will also serve to reduce construction time and cost while allowing enough density to target starting rents at +/-$1,000 PM. These units would be constructed in the Calverton Industrial Complex, thereby creating jobs and a new local industry supplying modular units for projects through­out Long Island and the North-eastern U.S. Transport of these units can be facilitated by rail or ship with minimal carbon creation. Special architectural attention will be given to the resi­dential nature of the area and an adjacent his­torical site.

An existing hybrid bus stops within 50 feet and routes from the north at Hunting­ton Harbor, through Huntington Village, south to the Huntington LIRR station (1.25 Miles), Melville business district, SUNY Farmingdale, Republic airport and terminating at the Ami­tyville LIRR station and Amityville village.

The site’s unique topography provides significant interior space for 50 electric Zip-cars to service this site and nearby sister buildings with a total of 150 units. The Zip-car franchise provides a new lifestyle possibility to the village popula­tion of using cars only when public transpor­tation is problematic while generating mixed use revenue thereby lowering apartment rents.

The team: E. Dokonal, I. Dokonal, Latham, Kave

The sustainable development of harbor cities was investigated during an International Workshop of design professionals organized by a French non-for profit organization. The focus was on examining the synergies of Dunkirk, a strategically positioned Harbor-City in terms of:  international business relationships, cultural exchanges, migratory phenomena, synergy with the hinterland (territory of mining passageways located in the metropolis of Lille),  maritime imaginary etc.

Dunkirk is one of the crossroads of Europe, a meeting point of Latin and north European cultures. Its position, northernmost in France, makes it the gate to Northern Europe with proximity to one of the busiest shipping straits in the world. Historical conquests show the strategic role of the city for the region.

The proposal provided recommendations for achieving sustainability goals and balanced development of the city.  Aspects of study included economic recommendations, mobility proposals, and the investigation of impacts on harbor evolution in its region.

The introduction to this workshop provided a lot of scientific data, revealing a complicated relationship between the city and the port. In order to gain more understanding of local issues, we decided to utilized a “bottom-up” method by getting input from inhabitants of the agglomeration through a series of interviews, performed separately from the workshop organization. The questions asked were about the relationship between working and living areas, the role of Dunkirk as the center of the Agglomeration (that provides specialized commerce, services and cultural activities); descriptions of the positive and negative urban aspects of the municipalities; expectations on new projects; etc. We also emphasized reactions and comments about the sense of identity within the Agglomeration, and the points with which people have an emotional connection. These interviews gave us a clearer picture of community issues and identity, which were not completely understood during the series of introductory and scientific presentations.

The final proposal approach was based on the following

• Accentuate  the history and tradition, to capitalize on the potential of:
  • the Dunkirk city center and other historic cities within the Agglomeration (CUD);
  • the existing port infrastructure;
  • traditional events, such as Dunkirk’s carnival…
• Reinforce the good aspects of the port and minimize the environmental and social impacts of such activity
• Develop economic strategies and potential beyond the sea and the port that would add value to the region and bring together the north (urban) and south (agricultural) parts of the Agglomeration: (eco) tourism, (organic) agriculture, (‘nautical’ and rural) sports, arts and culture, entertainment, education…
• Address issues of sustainability and climate change.  Provide models for sustainable development in terms of morphology, water preservation, storm water drainage, research and production of renewable energy, etc ,
• Improve the Agglomeration’s multimodal transportation system, in order to respond to the contemporary needs and to support the current and future investments
• City Branding:  To develop the image of the Agglomeration through an integrated sequence of projects and policy changes that clearly communicate concepts of “Dunkirk as a gateway to Europe”, “Northern France as a desirable destination for live-work-play and vacation”, “Port as a sustainable activity, something to be proud of”…

The final presentations were made to International “jury” members and local government officials.

The participation process is influenced by many forces and trends, such as: economic impacts and the speed of social change, diminishing resources and the overall effects of suburbanization, shift in values, impacts of information technology.

The impacts of technology are a particularly interesting means of participation and fairly untested ground with many surprises.

The traditional newspaper used to be the public’s main source of information and a forum for discussion. Letters sent in from individual readers and a variety of columnists and editors who held forth on various public topics of interest were ardently followed by the general population. Our process of interaction with each other has not changed in its essentials, merely in the medium and its drastically improved efficiency.

As we are all experiencing information overload, are we turning into data addicts? Watching the news is not enough these days; we are frantically reading the bottom of the screen with not one but two or three information-spitting lines. We are tied to our mobile devices wherever we go and we are checking the facts on the internet while having a casual conversation with our peers. The era of the newspaper is coming to an end, not just because it’s production is costly and has increasingly serious environmental consequences, but mostly because it’s providing us with a restricted amount of news at a time, it is not driven by our preferences, it gives us sections we don’t want to know about, doesn’t allow for interactive chat with 10 of our friends, doesn’t play the music we like in the background and it is definitely not as sexy as an ipad…

The new technology platforms seam obviously beneficial for the participation process: it allows for information to reach more people more quickly, allows for more people to provide feedback, allows for routinely uploaded relevant content, etc. Although many web users still remain passive, social networking presents us with an opportunity to communicate the types of relevant opinions that can shape public view and impact political decision making. Its quick and powerful transmission to a mass, global audience  should not be underestimated. This ease of information exchange is appealing for many reasons. But can this platform be used to successfully fully engage the public in the way comparable to face-to-face contact? This debate raises the question: where are the planners in this process?

The planning process is a flow of topics and action steps, where the results from one step initiate study and action in the next step.   The flow can circulate, alternate or go in one direction, depending on the particular needs of the planning process.  The implementation- a very important step, can be the end of the process, or can be just a step (community development does not stop), and the results of one analysis can influence additional steps.  It is also important  to review the plans regularly to check for their relevance, since the proposals for development or needs change with time or market needs, and the growth may vary from the general direction described by the master plan.
The decision making process is a complicated one, and the practice of community participation is an important part of it.  It is shaped to promote democracy, justice and sustainability, and can be described as an inclusionary process in which all community members have an opportunity to voice their opinion and influence decisions affecting their community. It is  considered as a fair, bottom-up, transparent decision making process, which collects input from all stakeholders and builds a consensus on important issues.

However, what is meant to be a bottom-up and knowledge supported democratic process, sometimes results with no implementation, as a result of a fear driven, NIMBY (“Not In My Backyard”) reaction to anything and everything that represents a change. There is skepticism towards the process and the players, mixed with general anxiety or hostility, driven by economic downturn, diminished resources or just plain uncertainty of the future. But, it is important to understand the fear as there is a lot at stake: vested interest tied with the changes in the community, starting with the  financial value of the home to overall quality of life.

The ability to voice an opinion and have a free debate that brings different points of view is a strength of democracy. But is the immobility of the process brought by the strong conflicting points of view its weakness?

There is no question whether it is ethical and pragmatic to hear out all groups  who will be impacted by the decision making process.  If it is true that the open debate supported by arguments should be the means of a decision making process, and that the rules are framed to minimize the abuse of power and to improve the outcome of most rather than everybody, the process needs both educated and responsive community members and decision makers who are able to recognize that in order for meaningful change to happen, the process is intended as a tool helpful to reach a goal, not as an end in itself.

In puzzle solving, one is intended to put together the  pieces in a logical way in order to come up with the desired solution. In solving today’s environmental problems, we don’t seem to be puzzle enthusiasts.

The global environmental crisis calls for a restructuring of the way we live and organize our cities, towns, and villages worldwide. Most people nod at “we cannot go on with business as usual”, but are we collectively and individually ready to make changes? What can one do, can it make a difference, and in which direction should we as a society go? The facts show that we are jeopardizing our life supporting systems, and experiencing weakening and the endangerment of the entire ecosystem.

The problem is, we have yet to come up with tangible solutions that begin to take action. Not only is the puzzle still unsovled, but we have thus far put together maybe two pieces out of ten million.

The facts are debated, questioned, neglected, “inconvenient”, but here are  some of them. These are the pieces we should focus on:

negative impacts of current urbanization policies and over-use of natural resources:

• loss of habitat
• loss of agricultural land
• loss of drinking water
• destruction of marine eco-systems
• extinction of plant/animal species
• threat to human population due to any of the above, reflected by
  • changes in weather patterns and the rising sea level
  • serious public health problems (extremes: obesity or lack of water/food; diseases caused by pollution or lifestyle, etc)
  • increased crime and war (often caused by the lack of resources, economic and social imbalance)

The global plan should be:

1.     re-structure the way we live, work and play

• centralized but balanced development
• utilizing science and technology achievements for restructuring of existing business models
• providing for diverse population and mixed income

2.     rethink the way we develop and shift towards

• efficient morphology
• mix of uses
• mix of development typologies for mixed income
• multi-modal transportation and mass-transit efficiency
• preserving open space and natural resources
• inclusion of biophilia and public spaces in urban areas

3.     achieving economic goals through investment and raising of the quality and/or quantity of

• environmental restoration programs
• historic and cultural preservation
• locally produced food, organic farming
• water conservation
• stormwater drainage programs locally produced energy (wind, solar, recycling)
• social equity

It’s not easy to develop a strategy on how to find all the crucial pieces to solve this puzzle collectively, when the most influential players have different agendas . However, as an individual player, ask yourself a simple question: what have I done today that if everybody else did around me, would make a difference?

Human civilization has historically flourished in areas with easy access to water. There are many regulations such as Riparian Water Rights or the Right to Water law, regulating water use as a human right, “right to equal and non-discriminatory access to a sufficient amount of safe drinking water, to sustain life and health”. The drinking water contamination is a prime concern for many nations, and represents a future threat for all of us. It’s one of the first problems brought by any natural disaster, as we have witnessed with recent tsunami disasters, hurricanes, earthquakes and fires.

One would think that since our lives depend on it, there would be more investment in research and more solutions for production of drinkable water.

Water has many distinct properties that are critical for the proliferation of life, and all known forms of life depend on it. Clean drinking water is essential for human existence, and some studies are suggesting that contaminated water accounts for the deaths of more than 14,000 people daily. The human body contains anywhere from 55% to 78% water depending on body size. To function properly, the body requires between one and seven liters of water per day to avoid dehydration; the precise amount depends on the level of activity, temperature, humidity, and other factors. Recent reports suggest that by 2030, in some developing regions of the world, water demand will exceed supply by 50%; by 2025 two-thirds of the world’s population might be living in countries with moderate or severe water shortages.

Clean water is a vital resource, but one sixth of the world population has to live without it today, because of lack of infrastructure, unequal distribution of reserves, or simply adverse geographic conditions that prevent access to clean water. Even in industrial countries such as Spain and Italy, water shortages are a serious issue. As revealed in the BBC story , some Villages in Africa are learning to utilize a very cheap technology of solar purification. By filling the clear plastic water bottles and leaving them in the sun for at least 8 hours, the water is ready for use. If the water reaches more then 50C, it is safe in just an hour. Solar radiation means a combination of ultra-violet rays and heat, which can effectively destroy the bacteria which cause common water-borne diseases like cholera, typhoid, dysentery and diarrhea. However, the solution is not universal and solar purification is effective way of treating water in the areas where there is no chemical contamination.

The questions have been raised by many asking if disposable water bottles cause cancer if frozen or exposed to heat. Canadian Cancer Society is saying that these rumors are not true, specifically explaining that there is no evidence that plastic water bottles contain dioxins, substances known to cause cancer. However, as Dr. Rolph Halden, PhD. PE. of John Hopkins University states that there is another group of chemicals, called phthalates that are sometimes added to plastics to make them flexible and less brittle, although they are not typically found in plastics used for water bottles sold in the United States. Phthalates are environmental contaminants that can exhibit hormone-like behavior by acting as endocrine disruptors in humans and animals. If you heat up plastics, you could increase the leaching of phthalates from the containers into water and food. He also ads that relatively speaking, the risk from exposure to microbial contaminants is much greater than that from chemicals.

Siemens is one of the companies heavily investing in water treatment systems, and their products range from water treatment plants, to smaller mobile versions that are built into track-trailer and deliverable within 48 hours. But their mobile versions, suitable for individual use is what is intrigues me as a true potential for disaster areas. One of their products emits short-wavelength UV radiation which penetrates the nuclei of any bacteria and destroys their genes, and it takes about 15 minutes to sterilize the water completely. I do wonder what it does for the user’s genes. But, there is also a version that’s powered by solar cells, which is harmless to users while it’s deadly for bacteria.The sterilizer kills only microorganisms; it isn’t able to eliminate environmental toxins such as pesticides. The company is working on Xeradex lamps that emit UV radiation of much shorter wavelengths, which can break up chemical compounds.

Similarly to Siemens’s ultraviolet lamps, there are other designs utilizing UV light, like Timothy Whitehead’s “Pure” bottle that eliminates the need for chlorine and iodine tablets to sterilize drinking water. They take up 30 minutes to work, using wind-up ultra violet bulb.