Geological Considerations in Architecture* RICHARD E. KUMMER ‘A discussion of the relationship between architecture and geology may seem to all of us an incogruity at first thought. We might well ask what an area of pure science has to do with what is normally considered a form of applied art. First, I would like to redefine architecture as “the creation of environmental shelter for men's activities, using natural and man-made elements in their most functional and esthetic manner”. Per- haps it is in our definition of geology that I must make some concession. It is not the entire field of geology with which an architect is concerned; rather it is in that narrow band of geology loosely referred to as “topog- raphy”, To the geologist, the crust of our earth must seem a relatively minor chapter in his book of knowledge, but to the architect, the first few yards, or tens of yards into our earth are the most significant. ‘As catly as the reign of Augustus, a Roman architect, Vitruvius, in his famous “Ten Books on Architecture” (1) cautioned his colleagues and fellow architects to site their buildings and cities with care and understanding of the natural environment. While much of what he said had to do with problems of geographical and political nature, a certain degree of emphasis was placed on the suitability of the earth itself as adequate and satisfactory support. The builders of those times were handicapped by their lack of knowledge of geology as we know it now, but they were blessed with the almost limitless selection of building sites. Today, our problems are much different. We know a great deal about our world and, indeed, much more about our human needs. Unfortunately, we are rapidly losing that great gift of ancient times— that limitless selection of where we choose to build and live. Until fairly modern times, people founded cities and villages, con- structed dwellings and public buildings where they answered specific needs. Our society, until the twentieth century, was basically rural and the communities that sprang up were generally sprinkled around to serve as trade centers for the surrounding countryside. Communities tended to flourish around trails, along rivers and canals, near mountain passes, etc. Generally speaking, however, poor sites were avoided. Our problem then today is this: in these United States and in other highly industrialized, urbanized countries, space for our cities and build- Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, Vol. 67, No. 2 1964. Published September 18, 1964. + Syaaposum paper, resented before the grology section ofthe Kansas Academy of Science fmporia, on Meeting En ay 1, 1964 (307)308 Transactions Kansas Academy of Science ings comes less by selection than circumstance. Space for building evolves ‘or becomes usable because of ever present pressure from our great metro- politan areas. Studies in ecology would indicate, and our own good powers of observation would verify, that our cities grow and extend them- selves along our automotive routes, Both developers of commercial prop- erties and home buyers favor locating where access by automobile is convenient. Obviously, factors other than geology determine where the next housing development, the next shopping center or the next public building will be built. Our present developer asks first, “What will be the most profitable and acceptable locale for my next venture?” If it happens that that site has topographical problems, he expects them to be resolved. Certainly with our command of equipment and techniques, many things can be accomplished. The real question is whether or not they should be. Our castern seaboard illustrates clearly the pattern of urban growth From Massachusetts to Virginia extends an almost unbroken string of cities, villages, shopping centers and housing developments. New York City and Washington, D. C. were for the most part sited or located be- cause their natural geographical placement answered specific human and social needs. Now those cities are joined by a great highway system which is, in turn, bracketed by increasingly congested business and resi- dential areas. To fly over this area at night would reveal a constant string of glowing lights, brightly tying vast metropolitan areas into an uninterrupted chain of human activity. A few more years or decades will find this area no longer a chain of loosely connected activity centers, bat indeed, a city itself. This is not an isolated example. This type of urban growth is happening all over the nation near every metropolitan center. It reflects our times and the intangible things that shape our lives, It seems obvious that there is little we can do to change the social and economic patterns that shape the growth of our cities. At the moment there are untold acres of lind admirably suited for human use, The problem facing us today, and in the immediate future, is that we simply face certain limi- tations of selection, and we must have the intelligence and basic good judgement to successfully utilize what is available. It is here that there must be a closer coordination of geologist, engincer and architect. Traditionally, geologists have provided certain consulting services for architects and engineers. We depend heavily on them for substructure analysis for major buildings, and for those smaller buildings requiring special considerations. Certainly, if availability of suitable land does become an increasing problem, these services will by necessity beGeological Considerations in Architecture 309 expanded and intensified. At the present time, very few consulting geologists arc available for this type of professional scrvice. Many are deeply involved in studies of mineral resources, but few are available for consultation in matters concerning construction. I would suggest this to be a relatively untapped field in geology. ‘Water has been another area of interest for the geologist in the supplying of data for construction. We have always found the various State Geological Surveys, and in particular the Ground Water divisions of those organizations particularly helpful in this specific area. It's very sobering to realize just how critical the water situation can become, and that problem cannot help but influence our every plan in the future. We all know the problems involved in supplying potable water for human consumption, but I'd like to point out the problems that arise in building construction, particularly concerning the foundations and footings. We find one of the greatest factors in failure of foundations and footings is not from underdesign or overload of soil capacity as you would suspect, but is more often the result of the soil drying out from around the foot- ings. During the extremely dry summer of 1955, many fine homes in Kansas City developed foundation failures because of the serious drop in water table. Experiences such as this have caused us to revise some of our construction techniques. For example, in many instances we pro- vide gravel strips at the ground under eaves to catch roof runoff, instead of building gutters at the eave line and evacuating water to storm sewers. We fecl that this will tend to keep the subsoil more consistently moist. It’s a little deflating though, to find that the Japanese have used this method of water conservation for centuries. Of course, we look increasingly to the geologist to keep us informed of physical changes in ground water and water table levels. I know this information is avail- able to those who seek it, but I would suggest a more concise reporting and dissemination of this type of material to all those who are involved in any way. Perhaps these few thoughts will point out the relationship of the architect and the science of geology and some idea of what that relation- ship will become, I think the geologist in his understanding of our catth offers us valuable basic information we need to ctate and build intelligently. The understanding of our carth is the foundation on which we must all ultimately build. In retrospect, I feel [ may have painted a rather terse picture of site problems today and in the future. These problems do exist, how- ‘ever, and they must be faced and solved. ‘The point is that given certain apparent troublesome site features plus an understanding of how to work310 Transactions Kansas Academy of Science Fig. 1. with those problems, the resulting structure can be not only satisfactory, but actually reinforced by the existing envionment. In many instances, architects tend to favor building sites that present somewhat of a challenge—in particular for residences. A site which possesses dramatic natural features such as rock outcroppings, brooks and streams and slop- ing topography can often engender an imaginative and fresh approach to the problems of individual shelter. Indeed, nothing is quite so univer- sally appealing as a beautiful home, capitalizing on and well adapted to 4 rugged and visually exciting site. Frank Lloyd Wright would call thi design approach “organic” or “of and out of the natural environment’ His architectural masterpiece, Fallingwater (Fig. 1), built for Mr. Edgar Kaufmann at Bear Run, Pennsylvania, has become a classic example of integration of structure to site. I have visited this home a number of times and I am continually struck by the beauty of it. To produce successfully such a structure as this requires a profound study and under- standing of all natural elements peculiar to that site, and a sersitiveness of man to nature. May we all be so wise and sensitive, Reference The Ten Books of Architecture, 1914, Harvard University Press. 1. Vitew —Deparimens of Archisecture, College of Arts & Architecture, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa.