Historic or Sustainable?

A wise friend, historic landscape architect and preservationist, once pointed out that sustainable and historic are often one and the same. This was rather an epiphany for me at the time, though it is kind of obvious when you think about it.

Earlier, more vernacular architecture was built with local materials (no carbon intensive trips around the world for your granite counter tops) and located in the more comfortable locations for living.  This often meant close to water, with shelter from wind and exposure to sun in cooler climates, and protection from sun and exposure to breezes in hotter climates.

Towerbooks

Hence the early settlement of North Beach and Mission Dolores. In Marin you find similar early development near water in the sheltered Ross Valley, in the "banana belt" in Sausalito etc. Old ranches are usually in the lee of hills near creeks, and of course the Ohlone chose choice spots to move to on a seasonal basis.  I sometimes long to emulate them this foggy summer.

SC Museum of Natural History

The more a homes location and orientation is adapted to the climate and topography, the less energy is required to keep its occupants comfortable. Things as simple as double hung windows for control of circulation of air, and deep eves for protection from sun and rain also mitigate energy costs significantly.

Marin County Library

As the more desirable spots were taken, with the rapid growth of SF and surrounding areas prompted by the  gold rush, homes were built across the landscape, heedless of slope and orientation, and that's a subject for another post.