Chicago Studio by Alex Cheng

AN D

EN G

CHICAGO STUDIO

01 02 03 04

Introduction Studio Project Professional Practice Urban Environments

Introduction

1.0 - Program Introduction Virginia Tech Chicago Studio

Chicago Studio creates a neutral platform for the discussion of architecture and urbanism in Chicago, and the curriculum is guided by the collaboration with Chicago’s visionaries in an effort to generate innovative ideas for the city. This powerful mechanism directly integrates education and practice by embedding students within some of Chicago’s top architecture and urban design firms. Real voices, real problems, and real stakeholders inspire the curriculum to create real opportunity by using Chicago as the design laboratory where students test ideas. The program is structured in a virtual campus — the design lab and lecture halls are located within a network of shared spaces in design firms, civic institutions and other private companies. The program has active partnerships in the public and private sector, ranging from global leaders in practice to the city government to the local community. The process intentionally takes the university, the profession and the city out of a familiar setting to drive true creativity and broad community-focused architectural solutions that are relevant to the contemporary city. Chicago Studio has established an amazing network in Chicago — directly engaging some 500 professionals, more than half of them local architects and urban designers (many VT alumni) that are enriching the students experience. Together, we are making Chicago a better place through the collaboration of these passionate students and established leaders. This collaboration engages the city — from the Mayor to local Chicagoans — to confront real issues that architecture and design can help solve. As part of the program, students receive multiple benefits. A furnished, shared apartment in downtown Chicago. Weekly events with local design firms, as well as daily engagement with people in those firms. Monthly overnight / day trips, including transportation, room & board. Several architectural tours, events in and around Chicago, as well as a Membership to the the Art Institute of Chicago are supplied. An unlimited subway / bus pass for the semester is provided, in addition to several group studio lunches & dinners. The 15-week program is broken down into two primary components: a 10-week studio project and a 5-week internship / applied research position in the host firm. A Professional Practice class, as well as an Urban Environments class are taught within the 15 weeks.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 6

Alexander Cheng 7

1.1 - The Students Friends + Colleagues

14 students from Virginia Techâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s School of Architecture + Design attend the Spring 2015 Chicago Studio. A diverse group of people with various ethnicities, backgrounds and interests, we are all passionate about our work, and hope to learn as much as possible through the Chicago Studio program. The 14 of us are broken down into 4 students are hosted by SOM, CannonDesign, and GREC Architects. 2 students are hosted by von Weise Associates.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 8

Joanna Brindise

Chanel Carter-Harris

Alexander Cheng

Palmer Ferguson

Kirsten Hull

Andres Jimenez

Janice Jones

Barbara Kane

Michael Mekonen

Ryan Myers

Connor Walker

Mo Wang

Landon Williams

Zachary Wolk

Alexander Cheng 9

1.2 - The Firms Professional Host Environments

The 14 of us are broken down into 4 groups that go to separate firms across the city of Chicago. 4 students each are hosted by SOM, CannonDesign, and GREC Architects. 2 students are hosted by von Weise Associates. The placement of students in the host firms are determined by expression of individual preference, as well as a portfolio submission and review. Once we are placed, we decide amongst ourselves who we want to work with for the studio project. As a result, 7 teams are formed within the 4 firms.

Skidmore, Owings, + Merrill

CannonDesign

GREC Architects

von Weise Associates

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 10

Joanna Brindise

Alexander Cheng

Janice Jones

Connor Walker

Andres Jimenez

Ryan Myers

Kirsten Hull

Michael Mekonen

Landon Williams

Barbara Kane

Chanel Carter-Harris

Mo Wang

Palmer Ferguson

Zachary Wolk

Alexander Cheng 11

1.3 - Organization Hyper-Communication

The program moves at a rapid pace, and communication between 14 students in 4 different locations requires a systematic method. 4 team leaders relay incoming information from Andrew to the rest of the group in each host firm. So whether a conference room needs to be booked, a desk crit needs to be scheduled, or if someone is going to be late, a hierarchy of communication exists to facilitate the flow of information efficiently and effectively.

Skidmore, Owings, + Merrill

CannonDesign

Andrew Balster

GREC Architects

von Weise Associates

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 12

Alexander Cheng

Joanna Brindise

Janice Jones

Connor Walker

Kirsten Hull

Andres Jimenez

Ryan Myers

Michael Mekonen

Landon Williams

Barbara Kane

Chanel Carter-Harris

Mo Wang

Zachary Wolk

Palmer Ferguson

Alexander Cheng 13

01 02

Introduction Studio Project

Studio Project

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections Organization Density + Massing Circulation + Space Material + Space

Transit Analysis

1.0 - Transit Center Analysis Typical Analysis Prompt

As an introduction to an unknown project, the work involves the analysis and documentation of the workings and aesthetics of two successful multi-modal transit centers. The goal of the analysis is to get a grasp of the functionality of a high-traffic area. How do people use it? How do they move through it? Does the path of travel ever involve going outside? How does it connect its immediate surroundings to the rest of the city? The country? The world?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 22

CHICAGO STUDIO S2015 DESIGN STUDIO PROMPT 1 : TYPICAL ANALYSIS

https://www.tumblr.com/search/ARCHITECTURAL+DIAGRAMS

Prompt: Individually, research national and international mixed-use transit stations, and after analysis: identify (2) that are successful and interesting based upon criteria that each student defines, ex. spatial connections, clarity, beauty, simplicity, complexity….. or historical importance, contemporary adaptation, impact on adjacent areas, programmatic manipulation, etc). Be critical and don’t simply show the obvious, search for the interesting and present the material in a cohesive and constructive way. And please talk with one another to minimize overlapping projects - if there is precedent overlap then adjust the content and lense of analysis... Make: diagram the design concept the each station, including things such as the circulation flows, programmatic adjacency, contextual response, etc. Req’d: 1-DIAGRAM OF EACH STATION (print each drawing at 10” x 10”, black/white/ gray - no color) 1-PRESENTATION: digital, (1)-Pecha Kucha - 20 slides, 20 seconds per slide of your analysis - 16:9 ratio Readings: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin. Representation to Expression by Gombrich. Due: Friday, Jan 30 - send presentation to abalster@vt.edu by 9am on Friday, labeled “CSS15-Analysis-FirstnameLastname.pdf”

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN STUDIES VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY

Alexander Cheng 23

1.1 - Transit Center Analysis 1 Rosa Parks Transit Center

The diagram for Rosa Parks Transit Center illustrates it as a beacon of light in downtown Detroit. The area is becoming desolate and unpopulated - the vestige of its former automotive industry left behind. The transit center is the object of hope amidst the economic and demographic blight. Rosa Parks seeks to bring more people and more activity from across the rest of Michicagn and the United States to Detroit by bus, bike, light rail, car, and foot.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 24

ROSA PARKS TRANSIT CENTER Rosa Parks Transit Center contains the program of a passenger termianal and a roof canopy covering an outdoor waiting area. The idea is to construct a permanent roof structure which can withstand the elements, is simple to maintain, is inexpensive, and is unique. Rainwater is collected for local irrigation at the bottom at each bay of the canopy. The angled steel frame provides structure for the tensile curves of the low-energy embodied fabric, and was made from a local fabricator. Though under cover, pedestrians waiting for transportation beneath receive filtered white light. The site of the transit center shares a squeezed geometry similar to our wedged site in Jefferson Park, yet the design does not feel spatially limited. The canopies reach out beyond the footprint, grabbing space around it.

CANOPY

WATER

BUS

Alexander Cheng 25

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 26

Alexander Cheng 27

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 28

Alexander Cheng 29

KING'S CROSS

1.2 - Transit Center Analysis 2 Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross is understood through the diagram as a clash of the old with the new. The renovation offers a hyper-contemporary concourse that butts up against the old structure, but does not touch it. The station today is viewed through the various filters of history that came to compose what it is today - a hub of multi-modal transit that connects London to the rest of the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom, to all across the world. The pedestrian trip from a plane, to an underground train, to a commuter train through careful planning of transit infrastructure, is entirely enclosed.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 30

HEATHROW AIRPORT

Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Train Station

PICCADILLY LINE

KINGS CROSS TRAIN STATION

Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross Station by John McAslan + Partners is an excellent example of a new infrastructrual intervention within old bones. Located in London, England, Kingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cross is a major train hub for commuter trains and is a primary stop on the Underground. McAslan designs an enormous fan-shaped canopy of triangulated steel that springs off of the old station on one side. The diagrad superstructure houses restaurants, retail shopping, and provides shelter to wait for trains to come.The original station still contains its historical extant residue of the old brick exterior and cast iron frame interior. The new work is integral to the function and performance of the station, but is aesthetically separated from it.

OLD

NEW

Alexander Cheng 31

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 32

Alexander Cheng 33

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 34

Alexander Cheng 35

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 36

Alexander Cheng 37

01 02

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis

2.0 - Typical Analysis Jefferson Park Transit Center

Conventional research is conducted to gain rudimentary knowledge about the transit center in Jefferson Park. Photography documents the spatial sequence of events as a user moves through the station. Diagrams and line drawings break down the idea and function of the station down into individual components.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 40

CHICAGO STUDIO S2015 DESIGN STUDIO PROMPT 3 : TYPICAL / ATYPICAL ANALYSIS

Prompt: In groups of 2, research the Jefferson Park Terminal and after analysis present your findings of the current situation, ex. spatial connections, clarity, beauty, simplicity, complexity….. or historical importance, contemporary adaptation, impact on adjacent areas, programmatic manipulation, etc). Be critical and don’t simply show the obvious, search for the interesting and present the material in a cohesive and constructive way. Make: diagram the design concept of the station, including things such as the circulation flows, programmatic adjacency, contextual response, etc. Req’d: TYPICAL: 1-DIAGRAM OF JEFFERSON STATION (print drawing at 10” x 10”, black/white/ gray - no color) 1-ISOMETRIC / 3-DIMENSIONAL DRAWING OF JEFFERSON STATION (print drawing at 10” x 10”, black/white/ gray - no color) 1-PRESENTATION: digital, (1)-Pecha Kucha - 20 slides, 20 seconds per slide of your analysis - 16:9 ratio … and then, using the criteria of Prompt 2 (analysis using only one sense) ATYPICAL: 1-MAP: Create a map of the recordings. 1-PRESENTATION: Digital presentation, 5-minute slide show or film - 16:9 ratio Due: Tue, Feb 10 - desk crits send materials to abalster@vt.edu by Monday, Feb 9 by 5pm, labeled “CSS15-FileName-LastnameLastname.pdf”

typical having the distinctive qualities of a particular type of person or thing: informal showing the characteristics expected of or popularly associated with a particular person, situation, or thing: representative, classic, quintessential, archetypal, model, prototypical, stereotypical; normal, average, ordinary, standard, regular, routine, run-of-the-mill, stock, orthodox, conventional, predictable, unsurprising, unremarkable, unexceptional. early 17th century: from medieval Latin typicalis, via Latin from Greek tupikos, from tupos (see type) atypical not representative of a type, group, or class: unusual, untypical, non-typical, uncommon, unconventional, unorthodox, off-centre, anomalous, irregular, abnormal, aberrant, deviant, divergent; strange, odd, peculiar, curious, bizarre, weird, freakish, freak, eccentric, quirky, alien; exceptional, singular, rare, unique, isolated, unrepresentative, out of the way, out of the ordinary, extraordinary;

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN STUDIES VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY

Alexander Cheng 41

2.1 - Location + Access Community Of Jefferson Park, Chicago, IL

Jefferson Park is defined as a community. It is 1 of the 77 communities within the city of Chicago. It is located approximately 10 miles Northwest of the Loop in downtown Chicago. It is accessed via the Jefferson Park Transit Center. The station is connected to the rest of Chicago by bus, by the Blue Line on the CTA train, and is a stop on the Union Pacific / Northwest Metra line. The community is also accessible by car and by bike. Milwaukee Avenue is the most prominent street that defines the area immediately around the station.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 42

STREETS

Alexander Cheng 43

2.2 - CTA Community Of Jefferson Park, Chicago, IL

The CTA train connects local Chicago denizen that use mass transit to Jefferson Park via the Blue Line to Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Hare International Airport. The rail runs along the Kennedy Expressway to the Jefferson Park Transit Center, and allows access to Jefferson Park. The CTA infrastructure carries riders from within a 15 mile radius.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 44

CTA STREETS

Alexander Cheng 45

2.3 - Metra Community Of Jefferson Park, Chicago, IL

The regional Metra rail connects Jefferson Park to the rest of Illinois within a 60 mile radius. The Jefferson Park Transit Center is the point of access for the Metra line as well as the CTA. The community can be accessible to suburban visitors, not only city-dwelling Chicagoans.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 46

METRA CTA STREETS

Alexander Cheng 47

2.4 - Bike Community Of Jefferson Park, Chicago, IL

Dedicated bike paths that run along the streets and paths of Chicago also run through Jefferson Park. A work commute from downtown to Jefferson Park is within reason to use a personal bicycle, or bicycle rental program if desired, such as Divvy.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 48

BIKES METRA CTA STREETS

Alexander Cheng 49

2.5 - Multi-Modality Community Of Jefferson Park, Chicago, IL

Overlaying the various layers of multi-modal transit infrastructure that Jefferson Park hosts, the community is identifiable as a place of high-transit activity. A knotting of transit occurs as a result of the multiple intersections of transport.

MET

Y WA AD RO

CTA

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 50

Alexander Cheng 51

2.5 - Functionality Transit Center Concept + Workings

Jefferson Park Station is a renovated station connected to the local, inter-city, + regional train infrastructure. The primary train station used to be above ground, but is now converted into the metra regional train line. As a result, CTA trains are now below in-between the inbound and outbound lanes of the Kennedy Expressway.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 52

1. Isolated Floating Box

ISOMETRIC OVERVIEW

SECTION THROUGH THE TRANSIT CENTER

SECTION THROUGH THE METRO

2. Linear Longitudinal Pedestrian Access

ISOMETRIC OVERVIEW

SECTION THROUGH THE TRANSIT CENTER

SECTION THROUGH THE METRO

3. Transverse Transit Platforms

ISOMETRIC OVERVIEW

Alexander Cheng 53

2.6 - Sequence Of Spaces Transit Center User Path Of Travel

The renovation of 1970 by Skidmore, Owings, + Merrill involved the addition of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;floatingâ&#x20AC;? box at the back of the station. Its location in the median of the Kennedy Expressway requires a method of connection to the street, to navigate underground beneath old tracks + span over half of a highway. Walking the line of travel from one end to the other, the experience is un-inviting throughout, with the exception of the bridge over the highway. The station has grown tired over time, and what once was a gleaming white box, has become a poorly aged space with a lackadaisical pedestrian experience.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 54

SECTION THROUGH THE TRANSIT CENTER

DOWN TO BLUE LINE

METRA TERMINAL BEYOND

HIGHWAY

OLD RAIL

BUS TERMINAL

ISOMETRIC OVERVIEW

SECTION THROUGH THE METRO

Alexander Cheng 55

2.7 - Fantasy Of The Transit Center Ideal Qualities Of Jefferson Park

After analyzing successful multi-modal transit centers, functional and desirable qualities of the idealistic transit center are gathered verbally and given hierarchy by size. In a perfect world, the Jefferson Park Transit Center would be characteristic of all of the described traits.

INFRASTRUCTURE PHYSICAL SOCIAL

DENSITY

NODES POINTS

PUBLIC CENTERS LOCAL POLICY

PLANNING LANDSCAPE

TRANSPORTATION SHAPING

URBAN-ENVIRONMENTS BUILT

NATURAL

SUSTAINABLE

STRATEGIES

CONDENSED

WALKABLE MULTI-MODAL

CIRCULATION CONTEXT RENOVATION

CONSTRUCTION

INTERACTION

IMPACT HEALTH

LIFESTYLE

LINKING

FUTURE

HYPER-CONNECTION Chicago Studio Spring 2015 56

2.8 - Reality Of The Transit Center Actual Qualities Of Jefferson Park

Since reality is not an idealistic world, Jefferson Park falls short of being a perfect transit center. Several qualities, some more important than others, are omitted from the list of transit desire. What does Jefferson Park Transit Center need to make it more successful than it is today?

INFRASTRUCTURE PHYSICAL SOCIAL

DENSITY

NODES POINTS

PUBLIC CENTERS LOCAL POLICY

PLANNING LANDSCAPE

TRANSPORTATION SHAPING

URBAN-ENVIRONMENTS BUILT

NATURAL

SUSTAINABLE

STRATEGIES

CONDENSED

WALKABLE MULTI-MODAL

CIRCULATION CONTEXT RENOVATION

CONSTRUCTION

INTERACTION

IMPACT HEALTH

LIFESTYLE

LINKING

FUTURE

HYPER-CONNECTION Alexander Cheng 57

01 02 03

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis

3.0 - Atypical Analysis Jefferson Park Transit Center

The atypical analysis negates all but one sense in understanding the Jefferson Park Transit Center area. Rendering all but one sense inaccessible provides the framework to interact with the environment through a different perceptive lense from the norm.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 60

CHICAGO STUDIO S2015 DESIGN STUDIO PROMPT 3 : TYPICAL / ATYPICAL ANALYSIS

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN STUDIES VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY

Alexander Cheng 61

3.1 - Expectations Versus Reality The Sense Of Touch And The Built Environment

Snow becomes a variable to our expectations, which creates the reality that we feel beneath our feet as we crunch through the terrain. These variables impact the built environment and affect our ability to physically interact with it as it was originally intended.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 62

EXPECTATIONS

BUILT ENVIRONMENT

REALITY

Alexander Cheng 63

GROUND TEXTURE

3.2 - Sensorial Mapping Linear Progression

COVER

The Jefferson Park site is comprehended through the sense of touch. The elimination of the other four senses allows the perception of the site to be purely tactile - heightening the uncertainty of solid surfaces beneath the snow. Amidst the snowstorm, the diagram shows the relationship between the presence and absence of architecture, in correlation with the presence and absence of snow on the surfaces we come in contact with.

EXPERIENTIAL PROGRESSION

LINEAR PROGRESSION

FULL EXPOSURE TO ELEMENTS EXPOSED

FULL EXPOSURE TO ELEMENTS

MIS-STEP WITHIN EXISTING FOOTPRINT

EDGE OF COVER THRESHOLD

EDGE OF COVER

MISC. PATCH OF ICE

UNDER COVER - SUN EXPOSURE MELTS SNOW

UNDER COVER - SHADE PRESERVES SNOW

SNOW RESIDUE INSIDE TUNNEL

COVER

DRY SURFACES INSIDE

GROUND TEXTURE

WALKING TURBULENCE

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 64

MISC. PATCH OF ICE

WAITING FOR BUS

UNDER COVER - SUN EXPOSURE MELTS SNOW

UNDER COVER - SHADE PRESERVES SNOW

EXIT TO PAVILION

SNOW RESIDUE INSIDE TUNNEL

DRY SURFACES INSIDE

INSIDE STATION

MIS-STEP WITHIN EXISTING FOOTPRINT

WALKING TURBULENCE

Alexander Cheng

RETAIL SIDEWALK

CROSS TIRE TRACKS

TURN CORNER

INTENSE + PROLONGED GUST - WALK BACKWARD

LULL

INTENSE + PROLONGED GUST - WALK BACKWARD

CURBSIDE SNOWBANK

WALKING OUTSIDE TIRE TRACKS

WALKING WITHIN TIRE TRACKS

BENEATH UNDERPASS - WALKING OUTSIDE TIRE TRACKS

BENEATH UNDERPASS - WALKING WITHIN TIRE TRACKS

BENEATH UNDERPASS - WALKING OUTSIDE TIRE TRACKS

CURBSIDE SNOWBANK

BENEATH UNDERPASS (SIDEWALK)

GUST OF WIND - WALK BACKWARDS

GUST OF WIND - COVER FACE

GUST OF WIND - WALK BACKWARDS

GUST OF WIND - COVER FACE

SHOVELING PARTIALLY REVEALS SIDEWALK

GUST OF WIND - WALK SIDEWAYS

CONE OBSTACLE

3.3 - Touch Documentation Walking Through The Snowstorm

Haptic perception is difficult to capture and present to others without visual information. The textures, surfaces, feelings, and lack thereof, are captured by photography. Together the pictures document the somatosensory observation of the place.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 66

Alexander Cheng 67

3.4 - Expectations Jefferson Park Transit Center

Touch allows us physical access to information that we come in contact with.This sense validates expectations set by the other four.

EXPECTATION

WHAT I SEE IS WHAT I SHOULD FEEL BENEATH MY FEET.

THE SIDEWALK FEELS ROUGH AND DRY, SO I PROBABLY WON’T SLIP ON IT.

THE CURB IS 6 INCHES ABOVE THE STREET, SO I SHOULD PLAN TO STEP DOWN 6 INCHES

OH, SUDDENLY I FEEL SOMETHING DIFFERENT...I SHOULDN’T STEP THERE.

CONCRETE IS SOLID...IT SHOULD NOT MOVE WHEN I WALK ON IT.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 68

Alexander Cheng 69

3.5 - Reality Jefferson Park Transit Center

Touch allows us physical access to information that we come in contact with. When the other senses are taken away...touch is all we have to rely on, and reality becomes only what you feel.

REALITY

WHAT IS SEEN IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE FELT BENEATH.

THINK THIS IS THE SIDEWALK...CAN’T SEE EXACTLY WHERE IT IS...

WHERE IS THE CURB? HOW FAR DOWN SHOULD IS THE STEP?

ALL OF THE SURFACES FEEL THE SAME... IT’S ALL COVERED IN SNOW.

SNOW IS DEEP...HARD TO KNOW HOW FAR DOWN THE BOOT WILL SINK...

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 70

Alexander Cheng 71

01 02 03 04

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition

4.0 - Project Introduction Jefferson Park Mixed-Use Project

The project is introduced as a mixed-use building adjacent to the Jefferson Park Transit Center. The program consists of a market + several hundred micro-unit apartments. The site occupies an irregular wedge-shaped geometry that borders the Metra train line, the Transit Center, and a street intersection.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 74

CHICAGO STUDIO S2015 DESIGN STUDIO PROMPT 4 : Programmatic Conjecture 1.0

This project is a community catalyst, a specialized kind of development that will prove to be an amenity for the neighborhood now and deep into the future. The building will provide a variety of residences and amenities that work together to create a vibrant and exciting ecosystem that is both self regenerating internally and stimulating to the neighborhood and the city. Mixed markets have existed for all of recorded history and there are emerging trends to create spaces that capture the unique opportunities of the local context and culture (non-generic, non-suburban). This project is hyperlocal, yet regionally connected.

PROJECT : MIXED-USE RETAIL / RESIDENTIAL BUILDING Mixed Market 75,000 - 80,000 sq ft Market Prepared Foods Coffee Bar Restaurant / Bar (seating for up to 50 ppl) Cooking Classrooms (2 @ 1000 sq ft each) Restrooms (6 fixtures per m/f) Mechanical Space min 18’ ceiling ht vertical circulation no parking req’d Residential 250-300 apartments 200-250 sq ft Each unit includes: Living area Bedroom Kitchen Bathroom Closet Storage vertical circulation no parking req’d Research: Visit Whole Foods (1550 N Kingsbury), Eataly (43 E Ohio) and Plum Market (1233 N Wells). Study the spatial organization, layout and overall atmosphere of each market. Then research each business: the mission, business model and identity. Visit all sites and study the basic structure for each business. (do this Tuesday pm / Wednesday am) Prompt: Then, in groups of 2, create a preliminary scheme that addresses: the site, hor./vert. circulation, parti and massing. (limit this to a 1.5-day effort - do this Wednesday pm / Thursday, and prepare presentation Friday am) Req’d: 1- ISOMETRIC DRAWING OF THE PROJECT (print drawing at 20” x 20”, black/white/ gray - no color) 1-PRESENTATION: digital, (1)-Pecha Kucha - 20 slides, 20 seconds per slide for the project - 16:9 ratio Due: Fri Feb 13, 3pm The presentation on Fri Feb 13 will include the following from each group of 2: 1. typical / atypical analysis (1)-Pecha Kucha 2. programmatic conjecture (1)-Pecha Kucha All previous analysis, studies and research should be pinned up for discussion.

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN STUDIES VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY

Alexander Cheng 75

4.1 - Site Location Of Project

This flat site is located in the community of Jefferson Park within the city of Chicago, 10 miles northwest of downtown. The 100 foot tall Veteranâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Building, the Jefferson Park Transit Center, and the Metra Line tracks border the site. It is an odd, triangular shape in plan that has a rotation that skews it from the grid axes that dominate Chicagoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s residential streets. Its proximity to transit makes it a desirable place to develop, and has the potential to make the community a place of hyper-connection + high energy.

STREETS

SITE 0' 0'

5' 10' 5' 10'

20' 20'

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 76

50' 50'

100' 100'

200' 200'

Alexander Cheng 77

4.2 - Programmatic Definition Mixed-Use

What kind of semantics do the words â&#x20AC;&#x153;mixeduseâ&#x20AC;? carry? As a baseline to begin the work, semantics are crucial to understanding the meaning of the project.

MIXED

Mixed-use development is a blend of combining residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial program

blend_programs_inte

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 78

D-USE

ms, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections.

egrated_connections

Alexander Cheng 79

4.3 - Programmatic Re-Definition Market

Half of the programmatic intent of the project is a market. What are the typical definitions for â&#x20AC;&#x153;market?â&#x20AC;? How can unique, atypical qualities for a market be juiced from the typical semantics?

marÂˇket

noun noun: market; plural noun: markets 1. A regular gathering of people for the purchase and sale of provisions, livestock, and other commodities. An open space or covered building where vendors convene to sell their goods. synonyms: marketplace, mart, flea market, bazaar, fair; archaicemporium 2. An area or arena in which commercial dealings are conducted. synonyms: demand, call, want, desire, need, requirement The state of trade at a particular time or in a particular context. synonyms: stock market, trading, trade, business, commerce, buying and selling, dealing

DEFINE Chicago Studio Spring 2015 80

mar路ket

[re]

DEFINE

specialized goods information relationships energy sheltered interaction common

Alexander Cheng 81

01 02 03 04 05

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents

5.0 - Plum Market Chicago Local Market Research

Located in Old Town, on Wells Street, Plum Market is a small grocery store with an emphasis on local and specific international brands. It resides at the base of a residential tower. The apartment units + market relationship is largely credited for the success of Plum Market. The primary customers for the market are the tenants above that quickly pass through the market for daily items as they need them. The small size of the market is actually beneficial for the typical users, because it can be rapidly and easily navigated.

PLUM MARKET Quick Circuit

4 1

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 84

1 - Entry

2 - Produce

3 - Deli

4 - Wine

5 - Coffee

Alexander Cheng 85

5.1 - Eataly

HEAR

Chicago Local Market Research

Eataly is an integration of recreational dining and market shopping. It caters to a specialized genre of food (Italian). Because of this, people that visit the market / restaurants come with a pre-meditation of eating or purchasing Italian cuisine. Charts, maps, and other graphics about different elements of Italian food are scattered throughout the store. Cooking classes + tastings are also offered by Eataly, allowing the experience to become pedagogic.

GO TRY BUY RETURN

EATALY

Centralized Piazza

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 86

1 - Piazza

2 - Standing Tables

3 - Sitting Tables

4 - Kiosks

5 - Grocery

Alexander Cheng 87

5.2 - Whole Foods Chicago Local Market Research

Whole Foods on Kingsbury Street is the largest of the three precedented markets. Despite its vast size, it attempts to bring local, craft qualities of food and other products to the Lincoln Park area. Within, genres of food are broken up into both aisles and small tables or stations, to invoke intimacy and reduce the perceived enormity. Whole Foods distinguishes itself from other grocery stores in its mission statement to sell the most quality organics, such as produce, spices, etc...

WHOLE FOODS Large Circuit

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 88

1 - Local Tables

2 - Grocery Aisles

3 - Self-Serve Stations

4 - Sampling + Tasting

5 - Restaurants + Balcony

Alexander Cheng 89

5.3 - Athenian Agora Market As Information Center

In addition to being a place where people gathered to buy and sell all kinds of commodities, the Agora was also a place where people assembled to discuss all kinds of topics: business, politics, current events, or the nature of the universe and the divine. Porosity of the architecture allowed Greeks to move fluidly in and out of buildings, through porticos and across the agora to exchange goods and information.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 90

5.4 - Mercat St. Josep Energetic Market

In Barcelona, Mercat St. Josep exudes an enormous amount of energy from sheer human traffic. A-frame trusses span across a metal roof packed between two buildings, opening up the floor area of the interior for circulation and kiosks. The noise output form the market is tremendous - people on the adjacent La Rambla street are forced to observe it. The goods sold within are beautiful in color and texture, and transactions are fast, exciting, and can be manipulated in price by haggling.

Alexander Cheng 91

5.5 - The Grand Bazaar Market As Urban Promenade

Though it sells much more than just food, the Grand Bazaar in Istanbul offers a more urban plan to circulate through a market. The bazaar organizes its shops through 67 covered streets that intersect each other at various locations. The experience of the market changes from being one open space to a series of promenades.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 92

5.6 - Markthal Housing Forms Market

Winy Maas and MVRDV developed a way to allow the form of housing to become the enclosure for a market. 228 apartments arch around and over the marketplace, which allows for a dialogue between people in the market and people living above it. It engages people from the street, and urges residents to get involved with the market activity. A stimulating graphic of produce defines the surface above. Its visibility from inside and outside the building evokes an intense energy in the space.

Alexander Cheng 93

01 02 03 04 05 06

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections

6.0 - The Individual An Architecture For People

The meaning of the project is drawn from the necessity of people in architecture. Without people, architecture cannot be created. Without people, architecture cannot be used. An object cannot be appreciated without presence. The concept for the project must intimately engage the human condition alongside with the program.

S S CLA R

VERTIC A L A C CIR I U A R T A S N E N R T A C U H C O O D F L O C C D O O E KIN F R F A D MAR E E G P E XE UBLIC K I P

N O TI

R A

P MR

ACE P S L

A B T E

BME

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 96

IN TH E

A GE S T I R S E L ORA E T CH I E V K N ST A B T A T OM O T H D A I R E N E O O R A R E N T IN O NG I D A I A L G S PR I V TE

LIV R I

IVIDUAL

CL B O

ED S

Alexander Cheng

6.1 - The House Re-definition Of Project

The mixed-use program of market + micro-unit housing can be understood as an analogy to a family household. The family lives in the House. Others use the House in different ways, depending on their relationship to the House. All of the different people and their respective interactions with the House are the generators for the design of the House.

HOUSE defined as a PROJECT. KITCHEN defined as a MARKET. BEDROOM defined as a MICRO-UNIT.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 98

and others use the House in eir relationship to the House. All of eractions with the House are the House.

MICRO-UNIT

ent in the project. He is an immedia child in the House, he has his and familiar relationship to the

e Jefferson Park locality. As a good House often for company, and is s the House pretty well.

reater Chicago Area. He is a family es or for a fun time. He knows the

MARKET

r city, another state â&#x20AC;&#x201C; out of nnection, and visits on occasion. but understands how it works.

ENT: Is a resident of another through the human condition, and s completely unfamiliar with the

PROJECT

Alexander Cheng 99

6.2 - Narrative Development Of Working Process

Who are the users of the House? Who are we designing for? The process of the work must be influenced by the people that use it. The project is engaged by a wide range of individuals that will all see and use the site differently, so its design must recognize that variety. The members of the House metaphorize users and visitors to the project, from locals to international travelers.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 100

MARKET RETAILER

MICRO-UNIT RESIDENT

JEFFERSON PARK RESIDENT

CHICAGO RESIDENT

OUT-OF-STATE RESIDENT

INTERNATIONAL RESIDENT

MOM / DAD

CHILD

NEIGHBOR

FRIEND

IN-LAW

FOREIGN

Mom and Dad are integral to the functioning of the family within the House. They provide advice and knowledge about living well.

The Child is an immediate member of the family. The Child belongs to a room in the House. The Child has an intimate and familiar relationship to the House.

The Neighbor comes over to the House often for company and is invested in the family. The Neighbor is familiar with the house.

The Friend visits for a few parties or for a fun time. He knows the House in a basic manner.

The In-Law is family through connection, and visits on occasion. He is unfamiliar with the House but understands how it works.

The Foreigner is family through the human condition and is visiting for the first time. He is completely unfamiliar with the House and needs direction.

LOCAL

IN-HOUSE

LOCAL

CITY

NATIONAL

GLOBAL

PROJECT

Alexander Cheng 101

6.3 - Biographies Understanding Who To Design For

What is important about who are we designing for? How can we figure out what they want in a market and housing mixed-use project? By asking certain questions, we can gain a more personal understanding about what would be both necessary and exciting to people in mixing market and housing together.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 102

CHILD JEREMY DIRECTOR

Who are they?

MARKETING GRAPHICS Skidmore Owings + Merrill AGE:

ETHNICITY:

POLISH / AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION:

BUS + TRAIN RESIDENCE:

THE HOUSE

DISTANCE TO THE HOUSE:

O mi.

What do they do?

ABOUT: I am a young and ambitious graphic professional that will be a microunit resident in the new mixed-use project by the Jefferson Park Transit Center. I was taken with graphic design from an early age growing up in uptown Chicago. I remember all of the graffiti on the three-story brick flats that I passed when I rode my bike to the nearby park on the weekends. I wanted to express my artistic passion through digital graphics and advertisting. I enjoy the challenge of producing graphics that are clear, concise, and compelling to convey a message. As such, I am excited to begin living in a neighborhood that desperately needs advertising to re-energize itself.

Mapped location of individual’s residence in reference to the project.

Where do they live?

Diagrams of individual’s typical transportation modes.

How do they travel?

FAVORITE FOODS: Demographics here.

What do they like to eat?

Favorite foods here.

What is their demography?

Needs go here.

Diagram of Individual’s Age vs. Jefferson Park Demographics

What is home?

WHAT MAKES HOME? Qualities of home go here.

What do they need?

Fantastical images and moments that evoke memory and vision of home.

What do they want?

Alexander Cheng 103

6.4 - Community Meeting Talking To Locals

A meeting with active community members offers valuable information about Jefferson Park. What do people currently think about their community? What would they like to see change? What do they think of a market + housing project right off of their transit center?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 104

Kate Wertime

Ryan Richter

Brian Nadig

“We are so pleased to have the Virginia Tech School of Architecture students looking at the design issues facing downtown Jefferson Park. Thank you for taking the time to visit the area personally, and to speak with local residents. I believe that the proposed site is currently being used as parking, right? It is right behind Veteran’s Square, across from its underground parking entrance. I live at North Linder Avenue and Balmoral. I walk to the station every day. A really important part of this project is how the community will feel about it. Is it simply an exercise, or will it become a proposal? There is a lot of transition going on. See the JPNA Facebook page to learn more about the neighborhood. You could have it be the most modern building facing the highway and train, but the sides that face the neighborhood have to be contextually sensitive.”

“A lot of people around here will have a lot of issues with a shiny, new, iconic building right off of the transit station. A lot of the people would argue against it, because it does not reflect the heritage and identity of the neighborhood. If you could design the project with stone and brick…modest aesthetics that pays homage to the soul of the local architecture, Jefferson Park residents would be much more accepting and satisfied with the project. Is this a safe place to live? Yes. Are there young people that live here? It’s actually a lot of older people that are convinced they live in a classic suburbia, and are content with it. But it’s starting to change. Younger people are starting to move in because it is one of the few places in the city that you can bu¬y or rent a place at a reasonable price.”

“Jefferson Park is one of the safest places to live in Chicago. It’s one of the rare, quiet places within the city to live. We want to have a successful and There are three big uncompromising issues that the community will not tolerate. One- the height of buildings cannot exceed 3 or 4 stories. Two – the intervention cannot cause excess traffic due to lack of availability of parking. Three – the projects cannot target people that won’t bring in families. Why? Because the current residents believe that newcomers to the neighborhood will ruin the community if they aren’t family oriented. We want activity, for example, a shopping district, but we are unwilling to compromise our current aesthetic makeup for the aesthetics of the typical contemporary, shining, glitzy shopping mall.” Alexander Cheng 105

6.5 - Embedded Meaning Addressing The Individual With The Site

The site inherently carries information that makes its way into the project. A project must interact with the information embedded in the site in a way that also responds to the programmatic parameters. When the project exists for people, the identity of the person must also be embedded into the site, and therefore into the project.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 106

Alexander Cheng 107

6.6 - Part To Whole The Individual As Component Of Project

The whole is equal to the sum of its parts, and people are an integral part of the equation. Without the person, the project lacks a crucial piece of its composition. There are many components that contribute to the project, so the graphic also suggests thinking about the project as multiple pieces that contribute to a cohesive whole in the end of the process rather than a single object.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 108

Alexander Cheng 109

6.7 - Initial Concepts Sketches

How do we begin to think about people interacting with the project? How can we organize moments of movement and moments of gathering around the programmatic stipulations? How do we use the proximity of transit to the benefit of the project? How public is the market? How private are the micro-units?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 110

Alexander Cheng 111

01 02 03 04 05 06 07

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections Organization

7.0 - The Grid Organization Of The City

Chicago, like many other cities, employs the grid. Highways and train lines were initially constructed as rapid routes of transit, that run in diagonals in and out of downtown. The rest of the city consists of an enormous infill of residential, retail, and other program along an ever so slightly rotated Cartesian grid. Jefferson Park is not exempt from this rule.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 114

7.1 - The Exception Cutting Through The Grid

Milwaukee Avenue is a primary artery that runs through Jefferson Park, connecting Highway 21 to the northwest to W. Kinzie Street near downtown to the southeast. It exists as an exception to the grid. As a major road, it traffics cars at a faster pace through Chicago than the grid can provide. Other roads and rail lines exist around Milwaukee in the Jefferson Park community as well to serve the same purpose.

lwa

Els

ton

ct /

istri

ins

A W.

eet

tr ie S

ee D

Aven u

auk

gins

Milw

e Av

W. H ig

Av e

etra

th M

Nor Line Alexander Cheng 115

7.2 - Urban Infill Programmatic Dialogue

The grid, in-conjunction with streets off of the grid, create parcels - a framework upon which the city can be constructed, building by buiding. The infilled grid in combat against the diagonal exceptions offer a dialogue in program. Retail shops and commercial program are organized along the primary diagonal arteries. Residential construction typically sticks to the grid. The site exists at the chaotic intersection of 4 different exceptions: the highway, the transit center, Milwaukee Avenue, and W. Ainslie Street.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 116

7.3 - Organizational Mutation Epidemic Of Diagonals

Milwaukee Avenue, W. Higgins Street, W. Ainslie Street, and the Kennedy Expressway create a mutational diagonal condition that converge on the site. The rotational alteration to these streets spread to the adjacent parcels. Those rotated parcels in turn, sometimes affect the next neighboring street, which then can affect the following parcel. This â&#x20AC;&#x153;epidemicâ&#x20AC;? of diagonal orientation speads until there is an opportunity for the grid to reconcile the mutation. Is the mutation beautiful or undesirable for the organization of the project?

Alexander Cheng 117

7.4 - Mutational Resistance Organizational Combat

In rare cases, the urban infill and parcel geometry does not yield to the snowplowing diagonal street. The residential urban plan instead engages the diagonal street by staggering at right angles along its length, staying true to the grid. Deletion of architecture is the only gesture made to make way for the diagonal. The principle of organization remains.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 118

7.5 - Epidemic Of Resistance Contagion Of The Fighting Grid

Can the endeavor of the grid against the diagonal be spread across the highway to the site? The grid as rigid, organizational framework can begin to bring order to a chaotic site.

Alexander Cheng 119

7.6 - Ordering The Site Grid Fights The Wedge

The logic of the grid is brought to the site. The residential urban organization is carried over as well to bring familiarity to the rhythm of masses exhibited in the locality. The square footage of the required program necessitates that the project must accommodate a much higher density of floor / area ratio than its surrounding neighbors.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 120

625 feet average

420 feet total

280 feet average

375 t

fee

145

fee

1 HOUSE = 5 MICROUNITS 54 HOUSES = 270 MICROUNITS

Alexander Cheng 121

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections Organization Density + Massing

8.0 - The Height Of Chicago Building Height Geographic Study

To gain an understanding about the massing of the project, it is important to be conscious of the buildings that surround the project. In general, the mapping exhibits a direct relationship between the height of the building and the distance from the Loop. As the buildings move further from the Loop, they tend to get shorter in height. The study also makes the enormous quantity of 3 story buildings across the city very apparent. Jefferson Park is one of the more distant communities from the Loop, and is also evidenced as one of the shortest communities. How does the project acknowledge height?

19+ STORIES

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 124

19-12 STORIES

CITY OF CHICAGO - BUILDI

ING HEIGHT DISTRIBUTION

12-7 STORIES

7-3 STORIES

Alexander Cheng 125

8.1 - Density Study Precedent Comparisons

225’

375’

Relating the needs of the project to other known programmatic precedents starts to get a sense for necessary square area. The footprints of the visited markets are compared to the site to understand how many floors are necessary to accommodate the program on the irregular wedge. In thinking about housing, 15’ x 15’ squares are overlaid on the site to quantify the number of micro-units possible in a maxedout floorplate.

145’

115 MICRO UNITS

SITE

15’X15’ | 225 SQ FT EACH

27,187.5 SQ FT

MAXED OUT FOOTPRINT

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 126

46,125 S

05’

SQ FT

475’ 215’

75’

16,125 SQ FT

185’

87,875 SQ FT Alexander Cheng 127

8.2 - Programmatic Projections Individually Evaluating Space Allocations

Individual projections of required space for various components of the market and housing program reveals significant differences in thinking. What is the balance between public and private spaces? How private is housing? How public is the market? How do we develop space and relationships between spaces after quantifying square footages?

Joanna

PUBLIC (Consumer Access) (No Consumer Access) PRIVATE

15,200 Market 1

15,200 Market 2

50’

Alex

7,500 Market 2

50’

128

100’

15,200 Market 4

150’

800 Coffee Bar

200’

5000 Restaurant

250’

600 Bar

1,2000 700 Prep. Foods Vert. Circula

80,000 Market TOTAL

PUBLIC (Consumer Access) (No Consumer Access) PRIVATE

7,500 Market 1

Chicago Studio Spring 2015

15,200 Market 3

7,500 Market 3

100’

7,500 Market 4

150’

6,000 Coffee Bar

200’

12,000 Restaurant

250’

6,000 Bar

80,000 Market TOTAL

12,000 5,000 Prep. Foods Vert. Circula

2,000 ation Cook. Classes

Market

PUBLIC (Free Circulation + Perception) (Restricted Circulation + Perception) PRIVATE

300 Structure

600 Bathrooms

8,000 Mechanical

1000 Vert. Circulation

500 Structure

8,000 Mechanical

10,000 Living + Dining

8000 Kitchen

7,500 Bedroom

10,000 Bathroom

7,000 Work Area

15,000 Storage

8,000 Closet

75,000 Market TOTAL

Residence

Market

PUBLIC (Free Circulation + Perception) (Restricted Circulation + Perception) PRIVATE

2,000 Structure

2,000 Bathrooms

2,000 5,000 Mechanical Vert. Circulation

2,000 Structure

2,000 Mechanical

15,000 Living + Dining

15,000 Kitchen

12,500 Bedroom

7,500 Bathroom

5,000 Work Area

5,000 Storage

2,500 Closet

Residence

Alexander Cheng 129

8.3 - Proportion + Scale

Exterior: General Proportions

Exterior:

Proportions

.75 1

.5 .5

1.25

Typology 2: A-Frame Bungalow

How do we begin to make space from numerical programmatic information? To establish familiarity with local architecture that surrounds the site, case studies are broken down into constituent proportions and dimensions. These ratios can be taken and applied to the project to set up a framework for spatial relationships and making good spaces that share a similar scale to the neighborhood. The study reveals that 25â&#x20AC;&#x2122; is the typical width of most residential buildings in the urban plan of Chicago. This crucial dimension sets in motion the architectural rhythm of the residential block.

Typology 1: Dormer Bungalow

Analysis Of Local Housing Typologies

.75 1 1

1.25

Typology 3: 3-Flat Apartment Building

.75

1.25

.75

1 1

25â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 130

Section: General Proportions

Section:

Proportions

.375 .375 .75

.75 1 .5 1.5

.75 1 .5 1

1.5

1.5 2

1.5

Alexander Cheng 131

8.4 - Residential Plan Analysis Breakdown Of Residential Layers

The house is the most essential component in the residential block. Without it, none of the other layers of the residential urban condition appear. To get a grasp on the elements of design that engage the residential urban condition, the plan of the typical Jefferson Park home is divided into all of its layers between the street and the alley. Each layer performs a specific function that adds to the experiential totality of the Chicagoan feeling of home.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 132

Street

Car traffic and sometimes bicycle traffic moves along the street. In a residential area, usually the street is 2 lanes wide, with space for people to park their cars against the curbside. The street needs to accommodate for private and public transportation, as well as provide safe opportunities for pedestrians to cross it.

30’

Street

10’

Verge

6’

Sidewalk

16’

Verge

Front Lawn

A narrow strip of grass, plants, and trees located between the curb of the road and sidewalk. It’s an aesthetic buffer from the street. It is safer and more comfortable for sidewalk pedestrians. It protects from spray an ddebris kicked up from passing vehicles. It provides a threshold for benches, bus stops / shelters, street lights, and other public objects of use. In the future, a verge may be taken away to allow an additional lane for busy streets.

Sidewalk

The sidewalk provides an area for pedestrians to move along the length of a street, and provides access both to the street, and the properties on the other side of the pavement. A curb typically elevates from street level, to protect the walkway and everything behind it from various dangers. Other forms of protection from the street include bollards, a verge, or trees.

60’

Front Lawn The front lawn has been conceived in many different House

ways across the world, but in Chicago, it is a buffer between the private home and the public street. Most of the front yards are fenceless to encourage good neighborly relations and discourage anti-socialism. However, sometimes a fence or semi-pervious wall exists to create a more private and intimate threshold between the sidewalk and home.

House The house is the fundamental building block of the neigh-

16’

25’

35’

borhood. Without the house, there would be no need for the rest of the residential components that create the communal urban form. The bungalow in Chicago is a long, thin bar placed very close to its neighbors. It resides between the front lawn and back yard. It divides the residential property into public and private realms.

Back Yard

Garage

Alley

Back Yard Behind the house, the backyard is an intimate open

space for the resident to use as he or she chooses. As it does not front the street, the space is less public, so the user has more freedom to decide what happens in this area. The back yard can be just a yard, or host a garden, patio, deck, or other activity. In Chicago, since properties are close together, the backyard can be a relatively communal space depending on the physical method of property division. The back yard leads into the garage.

Garage

The garage is accessed from a side door off of the sidehouse pathway. It is a place of storage for cars and other objects that do not fit within the bungalow. The garage is a serving space that fronts the serving street: the alley.

Alley

The alley is a consolidation of all of the ugly activities that has to occur in the neighborhood for it to function properly and beautifully in public. It exists to serve the houses so that the street may be free of any garbage or trash that is picked up by the municipality. It also provides a throughway for cars to get to garages, keeping the main street true to the pedestrian, front yard, and the home.

Alexander Cheng 133

8.5 - Project Plan Comparison Re-Definition + Application Of Residential Layers

The urban layers of the Jefferson Park home all hold a degree of public and / or private space. The mixed-use project has to reconcile the boundaries of a very public market to the privacy of micro-unit apartments. Just like the home, the project has to address how an individual moves from the street, to the sidewalk, to the entrance, and then into the space. Can the project can take these layers and use them to its specific functions and spaces?

House of Jefferson Park

10’ 6’ 16’ 6’ 60’

Semi-Public

73’ 204’

street. In a residential area, usually the street is 2 lanes wide, with space for people to park their cars against the curbside. The street needs to accommodate for private and public transportation, as well as provide safe opportunities for pedestrians to cross it.

Verge A narrow strip of grass, plants, and trees located between

Public

46’

30’

Street Car traffic and sometimes bicycle traffic moves along the

the curb of the road and sidewalk. It’s an aesthetic buffer from the street. It is safer and more comfortable for sidewalk pedestrians. It protects from spray and debris kicked up from passing vehicles. It provides a threshold for benches, bus stops / shelters, street lights, and other public objects of use. In the future, a verge may be taken away to allow an additional lane for busy streets.

Sidewalk

Front Yard

The front yard has been conceived in many different ways across the world, but in Chicago, it is a buffer between the private home and the public street. Most of the front yards are fenceless to encourage good neighborly relations and discourage anti-socialism. However, sometimes a fence or semi-pervious wall exists to create a more private and intimate threshold between the sidewalk and home.

Entry Porch A threshold of passage from the exterior to the in-

terior, the porch is a prelude to the enclosed spaces of the house. It belongs to the house, but is visually accessible from the street and front yard.

House The house is the fundamental building block of the

Private

Back Yard Behind the house, the backyard is an intimate open

25’

Garage

16’

85’

35’

neighborhood. Without the house, there would be no need for the rest of the residential components that create the communal urban form. The bungalow in Chicago is a long, thin bar placed very close to its neighbors. It resides between the front lawn and back yard. It divides the residential property into public and private realms.

Alley

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 134

Project - Street Level Market Condition

40’

Thoroughfare

The road that leads into the Jefferson Park Transit Center. It must be broad for frequent car, bus, and bike traffic that comes and goes from the station. Unlike the traditional suburban neighborhood model, it is not the primary method of transportation for the immediate area.

Active Edge

10’

231’

25’

20’

Public

120’

The transition between street and sidewalk is more than a verge to serve the pedestrian for the various needs they have. Bollards, street lights, trash cans, benches, trees, and gardens occupy the strip to engage and serve the sidewalk and protect it from the street.

Avenue Encouraging public transportation and walking in an area

of hyper-connection is important. So to accommodate for high foot traffic of public commuters and locals, the sidewalk becomes an avenue. It is widened more than triple the width of the typical residential model. Paved with durable, piecewise materials, the avenue is a beautiful walkway broken down in module and scale.

Front Bays

The front yard becomes atypical to Chicago in the project, in the sense that it no longer serves solely as an open lawn. The individual yard is broken down into yard “bays” that provide a place for outdoor seating, gardens, open space, and intimate points of entry into specific moments of the project.

Market Casual The first spaces to the market reserve

themselves for convenience shops and casual seating for conversation. It is a non-committal space of transition, like the front porch.

Market Retail Places of pause off of the core. Retail spaces 25’

Semi-Public

95’

50’

Circulation Core

The center of the building houses the greatest amount of activity. The core is the most essential component to the project, much like the house is the most fundamental component to the neighborhood. Space to circulate allows access to the various program surrounding the core, and carries users in and out of the building..

vary in their use, and is formed in different ways to cater to the type of shop inhabiting the space.The active core unites them all. This section of the project can host various programmatic functions. Retail shops are more intimate and engaging than convenience shops, and promote a greater lingering and sense of community.

of the market. These spaces are located to the rear of the building. It is a place for goods to move from the back of house to the rest of the store. It also serves as a waypoint for monetary exchange. Like the garage, retail service spaces are a place of storage and object exchange.

Back Of House A purely serving space, the back of house is 16’

Private

16’

25’

Retail Service Retail services assist in the holistic functioning

secluded from public view, but is easily accessed by staff. Like the alley, it exists to allow the building to perform effectively, and consolidates the “ugly” program in a low-visibility location. It is a throughway to move goods from outside-in, and waste from the inside-out.

Alexander Cheng 135

25’

TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCK

The 25’ rhythm revealed the housing typological study is applied to the plan of the project. The grid resists the diagonal of the wedge. The project is understood as 10 “bars” of various lengths that are dimensioned according to the 25’ increment. The residential alley condition that Chicago is known for is also brought to the project in the spacing of the bars. This lessens the perception of the project as a single building, and has it read as a series of “houses” as it would on a typical residential block.

1 HOUSE = 5 MICROUNITS

Ordering Framework For Building

54 HOUSES = 270 MICROUNITS

8.6 - Dimensional Grid Organization

25’

Chicago Studio Spring 2015

136

25’

0' 5' 10'

25'

50'

100'

200'

Alexander Cheng 137

8.7 - Massing Iteration Arrival At Built Form

The combination of prior analysis and iteration of masses provided the conditions for the project to arrive at a gridded, bar massing that is broken-down horizontally to the scale of the residential block. As a result of high programmatic density and filling the site footprint, the height of the project is minimized, to reduce its vertical imposition on the community.

EXISTING

GIVENS

SITE ODD GEOMETRY. RESPONSE TO SURROUNDINGS? HOW TO FILL WITH PROGRAM?

ANALYSIS

SPLIT EXPRESSION

RESIDENTIAL THIN PLANS = MORE LIGHT. MORE FLOORS. MUCH TALLER.

MARKET FAT PLANS = LESS LIGHT. FEWER FLOORS. SHORTER HEIGHT.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 138

EFFECTS OF SCALE

TOO TALL HOUSING 20 FLOORS = OMINOUS + IMPOSING. AGGRESSIVE + UNFRIENDLY. OVERPOWERS MARKET.

TOO SHORT MARKET 3 FLOORS = RELATABLE SCALE. RELATABLE SCALE = FRIENDLIER. DWARFED BY TOWER.

MONO

RESPONSE

OLITHIC EXPRESSION

EFFECTS OF SCALE

LOCAL EXPRESSION

EFFECTS OF SCALE

EFFICIENT MASS

MONOLITHIC FACES

SEPARATION

BROKEN MASSES

SINGLE MASS. PROGRAM DENSITY FILLS SITE. DISSOLVES PROGRAMMATIC SPLIT.

8 FLOORS = VERTICALLY SENSIBLE. LARGE FACES. HORIZONTALLY IMPOSING.

MULTIPLE MASSES. DIVIDED, BUT UNITED. PROGRAM DENSITY FILLS SITE. PLAY BETWEEN PROGRAMS.

8 FLOORS = VERTICALLY CONTROLLED. 9 MASSES = HORIZONTALLY RELATABLE. SUBTRACTIONS FOR PUBLIC SPACE. PROPORTIONALLY SENSIBLE. CONTEXTUALLY RELEVANT.

Alexander Cheng 139

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections Organization Density + Massing Circulation

9.0 - Site Plan Relationships Of Proximal Site Conditions

Zooming out to visually site the project within its surrounding context offers insight into critical points of entrance and exit. The tip of the wedge by the transit center and the street intersection lend themselves to be pedestrian-heavy areas of traffic. How can the plan of the project be filled with the program that also recognizes these key points of access?

0’

100’ 200’

400’

0’ Chicago Studio Spring 2015 142

800’

100’ 200’

400’

1600’

800’

1600’

3200’

3200’ Alexander Cheng 143

9.1 - Transit Circulation sit n Ce ter

Primary nodes of access are recognized in the ground plan. The mapping of human activity reveals the broadest paths of circulation within the building, and connect the transit center to the intersection of W. Ainslie Street and N. Lipps Avenue. Individual retail components of the market flank the circulatory artery of the project. Despite the staggered geometry of the plan, the pattern of human circulation remains diagonal - moving through space in the most efficient way possible.

an Tr

Mapping The Activity Of People

1 1

STAIR

ENTRY

1 1

SEATING

CONVENIENCE

COFFEE SH

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 144

PREP. FOODS

HOP

BOOKSTORE

B.O.H.

PLAZA BELOW

B.O.H. (BELOW)

PHARMACY B.O.H.

1 1 1

ps Lip

W .A

ins

lie

ENTRY

STAIR

CLINIC

e Av

FLOOR 1

Alexander Cheng 145

9.2 - Narrative Mapping Serial Progression

Can the process of designing for the individual be revealed through representation? The spaces are revealed as a serial progression of spatial encounters. The resident arrives at the Jefferson Park Transit Center, and proceeds to unravel the project by his exclusive perception. Different users would map different spaces, however, so it is difficult to understand and work through a project solely through progressive mapping.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 146

Alexander Cheng 147

9.3 - Project Circulation Plan + Circulatory Axonometrics

The circulation of the project in full is a stacking of slabs that gradually fill more and more with housing as the plan moves up. The gradient of public to private occurs in conjunction with the increase of housing on each consecutive floor. The circulatory patterns on the residential floors alter with each level change. Each floor has its own character, with different organizations of units and amenities.

Open To Below

Circulation

Micro-Unit Housing

Market + Retail Chicago Studio Spring 2015 148

0’ 0U G NI SE ROC 25’ TS CO ER ND Y FL 50 OO 0’ 5’ R 10 ’ 0U NI 25 TS ’

G SE ROC CO ER ND Y FL OO 0’ 5’ R

G SE ROC CO ER ND Y FL OO 0’ 5’ R GR 10’ 0U SE OC 2 NI TS CO ER 5’ ND Y FL OO 0’ 50 5’ GR R 10 ’ OC 0U CO ER NI 25 TS ’ ND Y FL OO 0’ 5’ R 50 GR 10’ 0U O NI TS CO CER 25’ ND Y FL OO 0’ 50 5’ R 10 ’ 0U NI 25 TS ’

0’

TR Y

LO W ER

AZ A

BAB.O CK .H OF.

HO US E

AL C

HE C

0’

5’

P PRSTRO OADIRDU UC CE E EN TR Y PR OD S DURCPROTAI YE DUR GO C R OD E FO ESID S UR EN P TH TI PR RO OD DDU FL AL C OO 0’ DURCREYE 5’ R Y GO RE 10’ GO O 4 B FO SID 2 9 UN AT OD DS 5 H U E IT S . RT NT ’ S P H I DR RO FL AL Y DUE O 0’ 50 GOD NCT OR 5’ R R R E O DR DY Y 10 ’ FO ESID 49 Y S GO B GO O S UN AT UR EN 25 ’ H. TH TI OD DS TAI IT R S S FL AL D OO 0’ 10 D0’ R RY E 5’ R 50 Y GO NT RE 10’ GOD O P RY 4 BA FO SID 2 9 UN ORDYDSROD T UR EN 5’ IT DAS GO UC ST CHH. S TH TI IR OD E AIR EC A Y S KO 0 FLO L 50 10 UT ’ 5’ OR D0’ DR RY 10 ’ G 4 Y O P PR 9U BA GO O RO O 25 TH NI ’ ODDDS DUDUC TS CH. MES AIR CE E EC AT Y KO S 50 UT DR HO Y ME D P DA GO RY RO R CH IR OD GODU FOGOESOID EC Y M S O CE UR DEN KO EA D TH S TI UT TS S A

FR O

ST AI

AL CO

ST AI AL R CO

AT S

ST AI R

EAAIR TS Y

BA B.

S B.

)

O. H

)

O. H

)

BE LO

B. O

HO BAME KE GO RY O D

KO U HOT ME

M ’ 49 DRDR D OH C BA E GRE UN Y YG H M A KFEO OSOID 25’ FREA IRY GO OO OL EC B IT RUYR DEN KO AT S OD D OZTS TH S TI UT H. SS EN FBL AL HO 50 .OOO 0’ ME .HR 5’ ST A 10 .( A L ’ GO B4E9 DRDR IR COH B ODAK LUON M Y YG 25 OL ’ WIT FREA S ER GO O BA )S Y OZTS TH ODOD E1 N . SS 00 B. HO 50 A’ L O. ME COST H .( BA G A BE KE OO DR HOILR LO RY D DAY G W S CH ) IR OO EC Y D B. KO S O. 1 UT ST 00A’ H. AI LC ( B R OH BA EL OW KE OL RY ) C MD

FR O

S SE EAT AT IN IN G G TR Y SE CO A COTIN S NV NVG EA . . TIN M SE G TH ARK AT IR ET IN D G S FL + R CO OO ES SE ECAT 0’ N AT O IN R IDE PR V. 5’ INNVG N 10 EP G. ’ M 2 TIA .F SE TH ARK 2 8 UN L O OD AT IR ET 5’ IT D S CIONG + FL R CO N CO S E O FFV. OR SID 5 NV EA 0’ EE P . TIN EN EN 0 5’ M RE 10 ’ SE G TRY P. TH ARK 28 TIAL AT FO IR E UN 25 IN OD D F T + ’ IT G S LO RE C COON OR SID CO 0’ PRFFV. EN 5’ 10N 50 0’ V 10 EN BOEPEE T . ’ MA 28 IAL OK. FO SE STRY R T U HI KE 25’ NI STO AT EA RD T TS ORD IN TI FL + R E CO G NG OO ES FF 0’ R IDE 50 EE P 5’ 10 NT 0’ 10 BROEP ’ 28 IAL OK. FO UN 25 STO SESEA ’ IT ORD AT TI S E CO ILNGNG FF OW 10 50 0’ BO EE ER OK PL C AZON ST CO A V. OR NV SE M E . AT TH ARK SEILNG IR ET AOT W D 10 IN E B. FL + R 0’ BO GR O. OO ES OK H0.’ PL C R IDE AO ST 5’ CO N 10 OR PZRAENV. ’ NV 28 TIAL M P E .F UN LO . TH ARK 25’ O S I W E TS OD IR ET ER AT D B FL + R PL COING BA .O. OO ES AZ FF 5 CK H0.’ R IDE 0 A EE B.O EN N PR .H OF 5’ 10’ TR 28 TIAL EP . H Y OU 2 .F UN LO OO IT SE 5’ W B. S D ER O. H. B PL CO AC AZ FF 50 10 0’ BAO E B.O EN K E .H OF OK TR . ST HO Y FR OR US OZ E E B EN BA .O. B. CK H. EN 100 O OF BO .H TR ’ . OK HO Y ST US FR OR E OZ E LO EN W BA BE.R P CK EN O. L OF H.AZ TR A HO Y US E

5’

R 10’ 5 FI ESID 2 1 UN FT E 5’ IT H NT S FL IA OO L 0’ R 50

R FI ESID FT E H NT FL IA OO L 0’ R

ST AI

CO O

EC .

CL S

IN CO G O CL K. AS S

ST AI

EN S ITTA YI

R Y 10 ’ FI ESID 51 FT E UN 25 ST ST S H NT ’ IT AI AI SP PEC FLO IAL S AM R R OR EC 0. EN ’ . 5’ IT 10 50 0’ Y R 10’ 10 5 0 FI ESID 2 1 UN AM’ FT E 5’ SP IT EN H N S EC ST ST FL TIA IT AI AI . SP Y AM OO L R R EC 0 EN R 50 . ’ 5’ IT 1 10 Y AM 00’ ’ 10 51 0 EN U SP AM’ IT 2 NI SP Y EC 5’ T EN S S AM IT AM . PE EC. ENY C. EN IT IT 10 50 SP 0’ Y Y 10 EC 0 AM AM’ . EN S EN IT PE Y IT C SP R . Y AM AM EC FI ESID EN E FT E NI . IT 10 H CNT TY SP 0’ Y FL O IA 10 EC 0 OO O L SP. AM’ 0’ R K. 5’ EC EN 10 AM . ’ IT 5 R 1U Y EN SP FCI ESID 25’ NI IT SP EC TS Y OFTOH EN . EC KFI L COTIA . NOG O L OR K. CO S 50 0’ CL ST OK PEC 5’ AS AI 10 ST AM . . ’ S5E1 R AI EN SUN R 25 SPSPE IT ’ AM IT SP CCOO Y EC C S EN EC OOKK . . IT IN 10 . . Y 0’ 1 00 G CO 50 ’ CL S O AM TA AS K. ST EN IR SE AI IT C S R Y A SP OO ME EC KI CO NI C . NG OK TY O 10 . C 0’ 10 ST 0’ LA OK S A S S . PE AMIR TA SE AM C. IR EN S EN IT CO IT Y Y OK SP IN EC G CO . C ST LA OK SP AI ST SS . R AM EC AI ES R

ST AI R

’

5’

’

10 ’

0’ 55 R UN SI ESID 25’ IT XT E S H NT FL IA OO L 50 0’ R

5’

’

R SI ESID XT E H NT FL IA OO L 0’ R

5’

R 10’ 5 SI ESID 2 5 UN XT E 5’ IT H NT S FL IA OO L 0’ 50 R

5’

R 10 ’ SI ESID XT E H NT FL IA OO L 0’ R 5’

5’

R 10’ 5 SI ESID 2 5 UN XT E 5’ IT H NT S FL IA OO L 0’ 50 R

R SI ESID XT E H NT FL IA OO L 0’ R

ST AI

AAMM EENN IITTY Y

0’

ST AI R

AM Y

ST AI

IT Y

ST AI

ST AI R

IT Y

A0’M

0’

R SE ESID VE EN NT TI H AL FL 0’ OO 5’ R RE 10’ 5 ASME SID 2 3 UN EVNE EN 5’ IT S NITT TI YH AL FL 0’ 50 OO 5’ R R 10 ’ SE ESID 53 VE AEMN UN 25 NT TEI ’ IT S H NAILT FL Y 0’ OO 5’ 50 R 10 R ’ 5 ASME ESID 2 3 UN EVNE EN 5’ IT S INTT TI YH AL FL 0’ 50 OO 5’ R 10 ’ 53 AM UN 25 ’ EN IT S IT Y

R SE ESID VE EN NT TI H AL FL 0’ OO 5’ R 10 ’ 53 RE AM UN S S EV IDE 25’ EN IT S EN N IT Y TH TIA L FL 50 0’ O 5’ OR 10 ’ 53 AM UN 25 ’ EN IT S IT Y

ST AI

N STITY AI R

BA R GH + R TH ES FL TAU OO R 0’ R A 5

IT Y

BA EI R + GH R TH ES FL TAU OO R 0’ R AN 5’ T 10 ’ 0U BA NI EI R + 25’ TS GH R TH ES FL TAU OO R 50 0’ R AN 5’ T 10 ’ 0U NI 25 TS ’

NT ’ B A 10’ 0U EI R + 2 NI G 5 TS AMHT RE ’ EHN F STA ITLO UR YO 0’ 5 A R 5’ NT 0 BA 10 ’ R EI 0U GH + R NI 25 TH ES TS ’ A T FL MAEU OO NR 0’ R ITAYN 5’ 50 T B A 10’ 0U EI R + 2 NI GH R 5’ TS AM T E EHN F STA ITLO UR YO 0’ 5 R AN 0 5’ T 10 ’ 0U NI 25 T ’ S AM EN IT Y 50

0’

10 0’

ST AI R

0’

ST AI

IT Y

AM EN

ST AI

ST AI R

AM EN Y

AM EN STA IT IR Y

ST AI

IT Y

AM EN

BA TH

R BA R

ST AI R

R BRAE RST SBT AARI R

ST AI

ST AI R B AR

ST BRASEATU RSATIRRAN AU T RA

BA TH B R . RAERES ST TA SATU UR AIRA ABN R N AT T R BA TH B . RAER

ST REAUR RE ST ABNAST AU T R AU RA R BNAT AN R T

TA UN REIR G ST E AU BA RA TH NT LO . UN S GE TA REIR ST AU RE R ST AN LO AU T U RA RE NG NT ST E AU RA NTRE RE S T ST AU A U RA RE RA NT ST NT BA A TH RE UR . ST AN T ST AURE RAST AI R NTAU RE RA S T NT BA AU T RA LOH. R RE NT UN E STA GE STSTA U AI U RA R R N AN RT T ES TA UR LO R AN REUNG ES T ST E TA AU R UR RABES AN NAT RTA T UR AN T

8 8

7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

Alexander Cheng

149

ER V.

OB S

ER V.

OB S

RV .

9.4 - Unit Organization Iteration Of Unit Location + Orientation

Within the organizational hierarchy of the 25’ gridded squares, the micro-unit can begin to be manipulated within the dimensional parameters. A 25’ x 10’ unit provides 250 square feet of space, and is an appropriate depth for daylighting. Within each “bar”, the units can be arrayed in various combinations and quantities, creating communal amenity spaces for tenants on each floor. The shifting of units also opens the plan for circulatory space. The units have to be able to accommodate their individual locations and orientations. Ergo, the glazed wall and the entrance location can flexibly shift in plan.

15 Units

14 Units

13 Units

12 Units

11 Units

9 Units

10 Units

10'-0"

11 Units

5'-0" 10'-0"

5'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0" 5'-0"

25'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

25'-0" 175'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0"

25'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

150

25'-0"

10'-0"

Chicago Studio Spring 2015

25'-0"

10'-0"

5'-0"

175'-0" 175'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0" 25'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0" 25'-0"

25'-0"

10'-0" 10'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 25'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 25'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0"25'-0"

10'-0" 10'-0"

25'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

5'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 25'-0"

10'-0"

5'-0"

25'-0"

175'-0"

25'-0"

12 Units

10'

25' 25'

25'

10'

25' 10'

10'

10' 12'

25' 25'

25'

10'

Alexander Cheng

25' 10'

10'

151

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Transit Analysis Typical Site Analysis Atypical Site Analysis Program Definition Research + Precedents Conceptual Projections Organization Density + Massing Circulation + Space Material + Space

10.0 - Layering Material Material + Meaning

A tripartite system sets up the material aesthetic for the project. To the exterior, a glass veil reflects the sky and surroundings of the community. It also acts as a protective layer for the precious reclaimed brick layer behind it, as if the brick were on exhibition in a museum. The micro-units and market program are housed behind the brick layer, and composes the â&#x20AC;&#x153;massâ&#x20AC;? that is seen behind the glazing. Reclaimed brick physically exhibits its history. It is a familiar tone and texture to the community and the city. Finally, wood brings warmth and a feeling of comfort to the spaces within.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 154

Alexander Cheng 155

10.1 - Elevations Exterior + Relationship to Surroundings

In elevation, the reclaimed brick work behind the glass facade dominates the aesthetic. The play of the facade becomes the absence of mass behind the glass veil, which results in a void that is filled with an amenity or circulation space behind. Next to the Veteranâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Building across the street, the project sits humbly next to it, without desire to exert dominance over its surroundings.

5' 10'

20'

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 156

50'

100'

200'

Alexander Cheng 157

10.2 - Sections Critical Sections

The warmth of the wood material layer is found through the section of the project. The market opens up to the highway and Metra rail. Light is brought deep into the market as a product of micro-unit deletion on the upper levels of the project that face the tracks. The core of the project is open to the sky at every floor by the same move of localized programmatic deletion. This creates a vast space at the center of the project for activity to radiate around it.

2 Open Space Towards Train

Core Open To The Sky

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 158

Alexander Cheng 159

10.3 - Narrative Qualities Materials + Spatial Progression

The benefit of working serially and progressively is the ability to think about the project spaceby-space. As a character in the narrative walks through it, the architect is able to see through the eyes of the user and begin to think about material application as a series of events. The experience of the connected spaces in the path of travel is better understood as a result of the process of working.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 160

Alexander Cheng 161

10.4 - Micro-Unit Micro-Unit Development

At the scale of the micro-unit, what does a resident see? What are the materials? The proportions? A 10’ x 10’ square offers decent height within the unit without feeling overly vertical. It allows the 25’ length of the unit to be the dominating dimension. Chicago’s 3-flat buildings offer a proportional system of one-third serving, and two-thirds served. These proportions are applied to the entrance of the micro-unit. Onethird of the facade hosts the door, serving the coming and going of the user, freeing the other8' two-thirds from functional responsibility. 10'

10'

1/3

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 162

10'

2/3

13'

12'

11'

10'

25'

10'

20'

19'

18'

17'

16'

15'

14'

10'

20'

25'

Alexander Cheng 163

01 02 03

Introduction Studio Project Professional Practice

Professional Practice

01 02 03 04

Lectures + Discussions Interviews Hypothetical Firm Project Timeline

Lectures + Discussions

1.0 - GREC Introduction 01-26-15 Intro Presentation

Notes

GREC is a small to mid-sized office with an unusual pull of work from corporate and commercial genres. The idea for the office is for it to be set up as much as possible like Cowgill Hall studio at Virginia Tech. All communication between colleagues is verbal and in-person. The hierarchy of the studio is broken down such that everyone is of equal design merit.

Presenter’s name is Don Copper. He is a principal of the firm. Studied in London. Worked for Murphy / Jahn. Worked for DeStefano + Partners. Is a VT School of A+D alumnus. GREC Architects is a small to mid-sized firm, about 20 employees. G________ Randall Ervin Copper are principals...Who is the “G” in GREC Architects? Greg Randall is a University of Wisconsin graduate. Worked for Ricardo Bofill in Barcelona…cool! David Ervin is a VT School of A+D alumnus. Donald Copper is a VT School of A+D alumnus. GREC Architects Projects: Urban “Infill” Tower. Metal panels on a big wall…a pixilation of water’s reflection. -Adaptive Re-use. -Mixed-Use. -Residential. Warehouse Hotel. Like the Bauhaus design meeting red brick. Public Sector Work. Work in Middle-East for some time. Don talks about the principals’ desire to set up the studio culture like Cowgill Hall. He encourages verbal communication in person, and if not then over email between everyone in the office…people should always be talking to each other. The idea behind collaboration and the design process in the office is a breaking down of hierarchy in the studio. Don states that everyone that works here is of equal design merit and are equal participants in the design process. The culture of the office is the most important thing. The office philosophy is a question that they are constantly asking themselves…it’s difficult to encompass design as one statement…the reasons for design are constantly changing. Serving the client is the primary goal of the work. They try to bring the client into the design process as much as possible. If Don had to pick 1 word for the design philosophy, it would be for the design to be EXPERIENTIAL. Architecture is for the client…so it’s the client’s building, not GREC’s. If there is no authorship of the idea, then collaboration on the project is freer and lets the idea be the most paramount thing in the work. In cities, it will happen a lot where on section of the urban infrastructure will be neglected and outdated… so architects can spawn instigation projects to spur movement and money into city improvement.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 172

1.1 - CannonDesign Introduction 01-27-15 Intro Presentation

Notes

Winn Chen, Kelley Folts, Tim Swanson, and Randy Guillot present the Chicago office of CannonDesign as a heathcare and educationally focused firm. They talk about the firm’s principles and core beliefs, and make those evident in describing a few sample projects around the world.

Traits of the office environment at CannonDesign: -Humility -Honesty People representing CannonDesign today: Kelley Folts – Architect 1 VT School of A+D graduate. Did Chicago Studio a few years ago. Worked at Pittsburgh History + Landmarks Foundation (PHLF) Winn Chen – Architect 1 Worked at Metter/Morris Collaboration. Washington University in St. Louis graduate. Randy Guillot, AIA, LEED AP: Design Principal + Regional Design Director Worked at OWP/P (merged with CD), Perkins + Will, Gensler. Rhode Island School of Design graduate. Tim Swanson – Associate Vice-President: Urban Strategy Graduated high school many years early… Graduated college many years early… Other people at CannonDesign: Matt Vibberts – Architect 1 VT graduate last year. Chicago Studio participant 1 year before. CannonDesign evaluates you as a client and what you want now…and then the office thinks about what you could want in the years to come as well, whether or not you know that as the client. Understanding + learning about how the world lives + works in different places is important to be a good designer. It’s not about what you know, but is about what you DON’T KNOW. Cannon gives you access to people + places around the world, and they want you to TAKE THINGS FROM THEM! -Values. -Networks. -Learning. Work typologies of CannonDesign: -Healthcare. -Educational. -Urban Planning.

Alexander Cheng 173

1.2 - SOM Introduction 01-28-15 Intro Presentation

Notes

Dawveed Scully and Casey Renner offer a brief overview of Skidmore Owings + Merrill and what the office is. They describe a few of their past and ongoing projects to give a sense of what the firm is all about. They provide discourse about working on projects outside of the United States, which is a large source of SOM’s client base.

SOM works on projects around the world. They have a huge client base. Major projects of note: -Willis Tower, Chicago, IL, USA -Hancock Tower, Chicago, IL, USA -Burj Khalifa, United Arab Emirates -1 World Trade Center, New York City, New York -Broadgate House, London, England -Lakeside Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA Converting Lakeside to a neighborhood as a model for the rest of Chicago. Lots of future investment in a particular area. International thinking for living differently in the United States. Positioning of project… necessitates drawings that show linkage, distance, connection. Lots of benefits of being a large, powerful firm. The office can make a huge impact - imparting significant, meaningful change that can rejuvenate a poor area. Can provide built place for a society with no infrastructure or direction to develop. Can have the opportunity to change the world! Questions about SOM: In working on huge projects, how often is money an issue, and how often does the firm run into problems of halting or even cancellation of the project? Why would someone work for SOM? Is it for the opportunity of being part of making a bigger impact? Do you feel like you learn as much about architecture as a practitioner in a smaller firm? Do you feel lacking in diverse activity? SOM gets the chance to design a “green” community or development from scratch. How do they consider all external factors to create a grounded community that will be technologically and intellectually prepared for the future of the world? Thinking about Chicago… Re-use of water and return to ecological system naturally. 0% waste…possible? Connection to the world through architectural paradigm? Advanced infrastructure as a catalyst for an ideological change in future way of life. Return storm water to Lake Michigan? How to keep the lakes clean…major resource of fresh water. The project becomes a learning center… an urban laboratory. Ideas at SOM are BIGGER than the rest of the offices in the world…why? Because they have bigger projects and opportunities through power + far-reaching connections that forcibly ask bigger questions than that of the work of a boutique firm. Why are people here to work? You can move between professions here…work isn’t set, you have different tasks, not just drawing details forever. People who work here can move between offices nationally and internationally. Partners here are a group that run the firm, not just 1 omnipotent god that controls the office…the strength of the leadership is manifest through a collaborative.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 174

When you have an office that revolves around 1 important architect, then when that architect dies, his or her style goes away with the death. But since SOM is a collaborative, the work continues as people come and go. There is no 1 style that will go extinct when

leadership goes. The layers of history of the firm will continue to be layered upon, building upon the identity of the work of the firm from its origins to the forever advancing present.

1.3 - VWA Introduction 01-29-15 Intro Presentation

Notes

Chip von Weise introduces his office as a place of great intelligence and diversity. A small, primarily residential firm, von Weise Associates is situated in an old brick building, beautifully renovated for the office’s needs. He mentions that the beauty of the smaller firm is in the details, and the ability to carry through the design process from beginning to end with an intimate relationship to the client.

Chip Von Weise’s educational background: Amherst College – Bachelor of Fine Arts. Lots of extracurriculars: -Varsity Football -Varsity Ski Team -Varsity Crew -Glee Club Harvard University Graduate School of Design. The diagram of cognitive meaning connects: -Understanding. -Appreciation. -Experience. In conjunction with: -The General. -The Specific. Chip says that because the firm is so small, you can manage a project within a few years out of school. (1-2 years) Project managers don’t really do the drawings or design work, the end up just talking to people and makes sure things run smoothly. The small firm intrinsically implies a diverse way to engage the work. We are all better people through intimacy with the client and developing architecture that they want. Chip thinks that the idea can be expressed beautifully in the computer…However, there is something “sexy” about a sketch that clients will respond to emotionally. It is not a rational reaction. Sketches are less concrete…They let clients deal with little amounts of information to make quick, fast decisions on plan layout, options, elementary formal decisions, etc… Clients will always want to focus on the highest resolution thing in the drawing that you give them…so to talk about broad stuff, give them a broad and loose drawing. Von Weise Associates does provide project precedents to give clients something juicy to sink their teeth into. Don’t be afraid to put words on drawings, models, etc…if it conveys the intent better than not having words on it. Then what’s the point of the model or drawing if it’s less successful?

Alexander Cheng 175

1.4 - Pro Practice Introduction 02-09-15 Introductory Lecture

Notes

Response

Casey Renner outlines the intent of the professional practice class. He describes what he hopes for us to get out of the class. What are the important questions to ask about the profession so that we understand it better as young architects and designers?

Split between the architect as a “creative genius” and the architect as a “business professional.” Large scale projects always have a ripple effect. Thinking about urban planning, 10, 20, even 30+ year studies. Architecture is not just about the details…have to think about larger scale repercussions.

I found that it was eye-opening to hear about all of the other career possibilities that an architecture major could take getting out of school. It’s an interesting question to ask. Where is the work in the profession? Is it all re-use projects? What will be considered “new” in the future? Where should I go to work, because I know work is there? What places need work, even though they might not need it? I am excited for Pro-Practice class to learn about how people advance in their careers. How does one work to become a partner from an intern designer?

Embodied energy in materials…how does their creation, and then the energy needed to put those materials together to make the building, eventually impact the overall energy footprint of the project? How do those decisions impact the world? What about other careers in architecture? -Urban Planning. -Sustainability Specialist. -High-Performance Design Analyst. -Etc…Where are the opportunities for work that the profession needs? All of the projects these days are REHABILITATION + RE-USE. How do we modify the existing urban condition to accommodate for urbanization across the world? Pro-Practice class will consist of lectures + interviews from business professionals. What are the important questions about architectural firms? -How are firms structured? -How do people get to leadership positions in firms? -How does the structuring affect how the firm operates? What are the important questiosn about the profession as a whole? -Will 70% of people live in cities by 2050? -Should all of the focus in architecture be on the urban condition? -How does a project manager in a large firm keep people on task? -Versus a small firm principal managing his few employees + his 1 on 1 interactions with clients? You can be in the same firm, and have a totally different experience from someone else in the same office. Different position, different projects, the reasons can vary. Pro-Practice is supposed to give you an idea of what it is like to be a practitioner.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 176

I think that Pro-Practice will also reveal a few truths about what is important in the profession. It can be difficult sometimes to think about what is important in what we are working on, and what is not. How about considering the long-term impacts of a project? What about how the building will be repaired and maintained over the years? How will it change its surroundings over the course of several decades? Does the proximal region develop successfully as a result of the work? The meaning behind what it is to be a practitioner in the profession of architecture is complex. I think that receiving individual answers from multiple practicing professionals with years of experience, and then filtering pieces of each of those answers will bring clarity to the identity of the architect in the profession. Asking students to set up their own imaginary firm sounds challenging. We cannot draw upon the many experiences that practitioners have. We will have to glean information from these practitioners, and make conjectures based on current events and our current knowledge. Again, we have to figure out where the work is, where the work will be, what kind of work we think we should contribute to the world, and why we are doing it. Do we build buildings to get noticed? Do we design to make nice drawings? No. I think design is for people. Architecture cannot exist without people. Without people, there is also no need for architecture. Can a firm be built simply off of this foundation?

1.5 - Role Of The Architect 02-11-15 Discussion

Notes

Response

A discussion with Casey Renner and colleagues about our assumptions about the role of the architect, as well as our expectations as a professional 10-15 years from the present. Discussion over several articles of reading: RIBA vs. Bieber vs. Barbie - the battle for architecture’s future, Dear Other Architects by David Basulto on Archdaily, and The Future For Architects by Claire Jamieson in Building Futures - RIBA.

RIBA – Royal Institute of British Architects. RIBA is more balanced than the AIA. They influence government that makes urban developmental decisions. Makes the city a better place. Licensure in the U.K is required by doctors, lawyers, and architects. Currently there is a lot of foreign development:

It was surprising to hear about how many firms have work abroad. Not just large firms, but smaller ones too. How are architects getting work so far away? How is the client base being established across seas? Does a firm in the United States do work for someone geographically local to them that has an international business? Then, does that businessman do business with the architect just because they are familiar and have experience with the architect’s prior work with them?

-Russia -India -Brazil -China All of this work is great for U.S. architects. Lately, a lot of work is being held up abroad…why? Governments block projects…clients suffer financial setbacks, external factors are variables to availability of work. You don’t want to put all your eggs in 1 basket. You still want work if one region starts to fall through. Not every city needs a brand-spanking new skyscraper or icon…so where do you direct your work? 10 years ago, there was a huge boom in the Chinese economy, but now it’s slowing down, and so are projects as a result. 95% of all of the built environment is not designed by architects…SHOCKING. Look at Pentagram or DBOX.com or Brooklyn Digital Foundry or Frog Design. Do labels matter? Does “AIA” after your name make you more credible? More trustworthy? More approachable for work? OPTIMA firm…look at this. David Hovey. Can you be the designer (architect) + the client (profiteer) at the same time? How cool would that be?! Fund and design your own project. Wow! Look at SHoP Architects.They have a stake in the project. Partial ownership – they are willing to put their money on their own work. Convinces clients of value of design.

The rapidness and rigorous amount of work in China had to eventually slow down. The world can only fit so many new things. Eventually, the work has to become about how to densify space, rather than constantly create new ones. The other issue with all of the work in China is that the vast majority of architecture was being designed by architects foreign to the country. How can China be perceived as itself when its architectural identity is being defined by people not of the same land? How many brand new icons of wealth can the cities of China have until it they are no longer iconic? The fact that political leadership is stopping a lot of work there is no surprise after thinking about it. When nothing being built has an identity rooted to the place that it resides, what does the identity of the place become? Eventually the city becomes unrecognizable - a place that doesn’t belong to the place. It’s upsetting to people when the feeling of belonging disappears, and that feeling can stem from the lack of identity of place.

Alexander Cheng 177

1.6 - Laura Fisher + Gracia Shiffrin 02-18-15 Lecture + Discussion

Notes

An introduction to two successful women that are involved in the profession of architecture, but are not necessarily practicing themselves. They speak about their professional career and personal background and how it developed the career and life that they have today. We discuss various topics in architecture that are not brought up in the academic setting.

Laura Fisher Career Background: Currently Managing Director at IPM Consulting. Senior Director, Real Estate for McDonald’s. Vice President of Real Estate for Deutsche Bank. Manager of Leasing + Administration for Salomon Brothers. Vice President Managerial Facilities for Wells Fargo. Assistant Vice President of Properties for JP Morgan Chase. Laura Fisher Education: Attended VT School of A+D – B.ARCH. MBA in Finance at University of Chicago Graduate School of Business. Like anything else, architecture is also a BUSINESS. You are convincing people to spend their money, in essence. Laura talks about for McDonald’s + most other companies, REAL ESTATE IS A COMPANY’S 2ND BIGGEST EXPENSE. (Second only to salaries.) She worked on Hyatt hotel on Wacker. INDEMNIFICATION – Releases you from liability when something goes wrong with the project. When you have a good contractual document, you can re-use it for work again + again + again! Copy – Paste. Know the value of your services. Don’t overestimate or underestimate what you can offer to someone else. If they don’t believe your cost, convince them of your value. People involved in making a building: Developer. Financier. Legal. Title Company. Marketing. Architects. Engineers. Design Consultants. Tenants. General Contractors. Subcontractors. Accountants. Project Management. Building Service Providers. Real Estate Brokers. How do you find work? In getting 99.9 % of jobs, people get to know you, and someone you had previously worked with will give someone else your name. REFERRALS. Be involved in GROUPS. Volunteer in something you believe in, and get to meet people. The more people you know, the more people know you! Get some experience in other fields…you never know how your skills will be used later on. Look at your leaders in your firm to look how to dress. If you dress like a leader, people will hopefully start look at you like a leader. Don’t dress like your peers. Dress like your leaders. What will the clients think of the firm? Develop good habits. Develop good dress codes. Impressions of your work environment will translate to the kind of quality and results that the client will start to expect from your work. Start thinking about getting your practicing license NOW. You can get LEED Certified NOW. Start a career folder. Little things that you’ve done…SAVE THEM. You never know when you’ll need to list what you’ve accomplished (ex: FAIA). Joining groups are about meeting people. MEETING PEOPLE. People appreciate WRITTEN THANK YOU NOTES. People remember these things.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 178

Gracia Maria Shiffrin. Gracia Maria Shiffrin Career Background: Development Consultant – Shiffrin Consulting. Director, Vice President – Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago. Deputy Chief of Staff – Office of Mayor Richard M. Daley. Assistant Commissioner – Landmarks Division. Assistant Corporation Counsel – Finance + Economic Development Division.

Project Architect – VBN Architects. Project Architect – HTI Architects. Staff Architect – Parsons Brinckerhoff. Gracia Maria Shiffrin Education: Juris Doctor - DePaul University – College of Law B.ARCH. – Louisiana State University College of Design. Gracia is from El Salvador. She is both an attorney and an architect! Wow! Gracia says you need to press, press, press. Get in peoples’ faces if you really want to go do something or work for someone. She got in the face of the school she wanted to go to, and asked, “What do I have to do to get a scholarship? I really want to come here!” City of Chicago decides to retain all of the old towers, promoted the re-use and rehabilitation of them. Lower taxes + fees of people that can provide money to fund these projects. Then more projects happen! She makes incentives of millions of dollars to developers and the city. Ask yourself these questions: Do you still want to do the exciting thing? Even when you’re older? What’s your long term plan? Do you have one? Does it constantly change? How do you get the money to fund projects? Be open to possibilities…you think you know what you want to do, but anything could come along and change your mind! Life can be circumstantial, no matter how much you plan things out. It is always a good idea to have a life plan, but at the same time, be open to new things too! Ultimately, is it about contribution to society? U.S Department of Housing + urban development… She gave money and provided oversight to projects. Membership in the AIA is JUST A CLUB. But, other people see AIA + they say “Oh! You’re an architect!” You should get a book on how projects are funded + what happens as it develops, beginning to end. How do you convince someone that architecture is of value? How do you take care of it? You should join boards, foundations, groups, etc...get to know people.

Response Both of these women have had tremendous careers. What was most surprising to me was how circumstantial a lot of the career moves were in their lives. It seems that no matter how hard we try to plan out our lives, there is always an element of surprise – some kind of unpredictability that finds its way in. In that respect, I think that it’s important for architects and designers to be open to change, no matter how anticipated that change is or not. Whatever events or situations are thrown in front of us, we have to respond in the best way that we can with the current knowledge and information that we have access to at the moment. Another unexpected discovery revealed from Gracia in particular was how much she did at times to make her visions and aspirations become a reality. She mentioned that, in attempting to be admitted into DePaul, she put herself in front of the admissions leadership and demanded to know what she had to do in order to get a scholarship from the school so she could afford to get the education she wanted. Through this hubris, DePaul ended up giving her a scholarship. It’s incredible to me that putting yourself in front of the people that make the decisions can yield results in certain situations. Sometimes the option that seems the most unorthodox or most unexpected, can produce an outcome that can have a significant impact on your life. Imagine, that Gracia did not get that scholarship. So many consequences would follow that would redefine her life. Without the scholarship, she probably would not get the chance to attend DePaul. If she didn’t attend DePaul, then maybe she wouldn’t have attended law school. Without law school, she would never have gotten her Juris Doctor. Without that degree, who knows how that would have affected the kind of work she involved herself with? So in my opinion, Gracia’s act of setting up the best conditions possible for her to get what she wanted was incredibly critical to her future. Laura makes a very good point involving the narration and portrayal of an individual’s accomplishments. She argues that you should always keep a folder of all of the things you’ve done. Little things, big things, they should all make it into this folder, just in case you ever have to ask the question, “what have I done with my life?” In addition, she makes a case for editing the phrasing for the activities and involvements that you have done when compiling them in a resume or curriculum vitae. Does your future employer need to know about your delinquency punishment of having to pick up trash off of the street for several hours each week of your sophomore year summer? No, but maybe there is a way that you can positively express your time spent. Maybe it’s how you “kept the streets trash-free for the community” for a few months. That being said, a positive spin is ok, but lying on the resume is not ethical by any means.

Alexander Cheng 179

1.7 - Chip von Weise - VWA 02-23-15 Lecture + Discussion

Notes

Chip, the founder and principal of von Weise Associates gives a talk about his experience with clients. What do clients expect from the architect? How do they come to find your work and ask you to do work for them? He discusses payment options between the two parties. He also describes the differences in practice between a large firm and a small firm, and what an individual designer can get out of both work experiences.

Von Weise Associates was founded in 1996. Started in a basement. If you hang out with other architects, you won’t make friends that will give you work later on. Friends with non-architects = client base and future work! Lots of work comes from REFERENCES and good friends. Friend references a friend to your work…then what? Goes to your website. Sees your firm’s work. Sees your firm’s philosophy, awards, etc…Then they call your firm to inquire about your services. Cross-fertilization of people talking about Von Weise Associates gets them work. VWA works back and forth between hand sketching and CAD. Clients don’t like computers! Clients actually expect you to be an ARTIST. If you don’t hand sketch, they actually are disappointed. Bidding at Schematic Design...sometimes clients realize that they can’t pay when they get a bid number early on…and architects can alter the design to prevent disaster. A lot of EMOTIONAL CONTENT in working with the client. The client’s decisions don’t always follow the numbers on a sheet, or what is the most rational. 12%-15% of the construction cost is the ARCHITECT’S FEE. Typically is 15%-18% for smaller projects to make it worthwhile. Payment options: -FIXED FEE (budget up front) – Clients prefer this typically, that way they know exactly how much they are paying from the get go. -HOURLY – Draw until client is happy. Good for clients that are good decision makers, because then the design can be time and work energy efficient. -% OF CONSTRUCTION COST Difficult for client to constrain their desires…so there is an increased fee. This can lead to an unhappy client. So, it can be said that without the client having some aesthetic control, their own desires can make them unhappy. VWA likes to do Schematic Design phase as hourly. So they can have clients align what they want in design with what they want to pay. Then, they can tell you EXACTLY how much it will cost to produce drawings in future phases. Big firms move as much responsibility as possible to the builder…VWA does not do that. VWA exposes themselves to making full 3-D models, articulating every last detail to please the client, which puts them under a great deal of responsibility when it comes to the build finish. A house project can take 8 months to 2 years. Depends on the builder and any potential problems. VWA – gets their current fee rate by trial and error with past projects. What works and what doesn’t.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 180

AIA used to have a fixed fee for projects. No longer a rule. Firms set their own fees. Now, firms compete with each other in setting their fees. Very few firms have such a good fee rate as VWA…15% is really good actually. Most offices will get very petty percentages to be competitive. 5%, 8%, maybe 10%.

These rates give clients a false representation of what architects can provide for the money. At low rates, the quality of work will suffer. If you explain the process to the client, they will be more likely to understand and be willing to work with you. Relationship between the work product + the fee… There are a few BOTTOM LINES: -You gotta eat. -You gotta sleep. -You’ve got to balance billed time with quality + efficiency. Having an expert on your team helps to establish your design credibility for a project proposal in competing with other firms. Bidding process used to be a sealed bid where whoever’s bid inside an envelope was automatically the winner. PROJECT DELIVERY. Bring contractors in early. At Schematic Design. So the cost of construction is better known early on so there are fewer surprises and unpleasant moments later on. VWA tries as much as possible to use the builders that VWA knows well…they know what results they can expect. Back up builders are ethnic (“Polish Brigade”, Latino, etc…) and don’t do as great a job when it comes down to smaller details and finishes. Cheaper contractors aren’t as organized. More expensive contractors have a laid out schedule. They know when to do what, and encounter fewer problems in construction, both physically and in project schedule. If you need something done fast, having good relationships with these people can pay off when you’re in a pinch and need to deliver. If you are willing to do things for people, people will hopefully be willing to do things for you because they appreciate your hard work and respect. LARGE FIRM. Extremely talented and bright staff members that are extremely motivated. Lots of specialty knowledge… people know their stuff in one category. Have tremendous amount of information within the firm. Lots of experience, clients are more comfortable with a firm that has more experience. Work process can make work look a lot like a competitor’s work…how? A lot of HANDING OFF. Only person that takes the project from beginning to end is the project manager. So are all 50 of the project managers in that office good? Not always. So the design won’t always live up to the firm’s portfolio that is advertised. Highly specialized positions is efficient, but the work range is less diverse for an individual architect or designer in the firm. SMALL FIRM. Lots of creative thinking + dialogue. Project manager does every part of the project. Broader slice of architectural practice. Client gets more design experience.

Response Chip offers a valuable perspective on the profession as a business. Being the leader of a smaller firm has intricacies that a leader of a larger firm wouldn’t necessarily deal with. An intimate, one-on-one relationship with the client is something that Chip regards as being essential to a successful design process and to the satisfaction of the client. When the client knows that the person in charge is also the person that they are most intimately tied to for the design process, it is very reassuring that every word, every gesture that the client makes to Chip, he will make sure that those comments and desires make it into the design. The beauty of the smaller firm is that the control of the exactness of information is more simple and harder to lose than it would be with a larger firm. The words are carried from the client’s mouth to the principal’s ear, which are then translated to the designers on the project. In a larger firm, sometimes there is a language barrier because the project is abroad. So then maybe that comment by the client has a slight misinterpretation in translation. Then that translation goes to the partner, which is paraphrased to the project manager, which is in turned shared with the architects and designers on the project, who then finally make the changes and additions per the client’s comments. The lineage of information is just simpler in a small firm. Chip also discusses the benefits of working in a small firm as far as an individual’s development as a well-rounded architect. A smaller office means that all of the tasks expected from the architectural services has to be distributed across a smaller group of designers. Therefore, each individual has to be more diverse in their capabilities in order to move the project forward for the office. In this respect, it can be said that it would be beneficial to work for a smaller firm when you are younger, so that you can get more hands-on experience across a broader spectrum of the practice. This will lay a solid foundation for you to develop as an architect and leader later on down the road, familiarizing you with the many layers of the work process. Chip also qualifies a few struggles of the smaller firm. He mentions that sometimes work can get slow in poor economic situations. In this case, it is important to have reliable sources of work to keep money coming in to the office to keep it running as a business. I wonder if there is a reserve that the office keeps in case of financial emergency to keep the firm on its feet when the economy wobbles and falls to its knees? Chip also talks about how he gets a leg up on his competition when getting a job. It helps Von Weise Associates, as a small firm, to bring on specialists and consultants early on in a project when discussing work with a client. This reassures the client that the architecture will stem from a deep and rich knowledge from people that know the desired building program typology well. This, in tandem with an intimate client / firm relationship, gives Von Weise as a small firm a competitive edge against larger, multi-disciplinarian, integrative firms.

Alexander Cheng 181

1.8 - Drew Ranieri - SCB 02-25-15 Lecture + Discussion

Notes

Drew is an Associate Principal at Solomon Cordwell Buenz, and gives a lecture on contracts. What is a contract, and how does it allow cooperation and understand between the various parties that contribute to the project? What are the legal obligations of each party? What is the cost of a building in terms of a fee? Who is responsible for what? These are a few topics that Drew brings to light.

Drew Ranieri Career Background: Currently Associate Vice President of Solomon Cordwell Buenz. Worked for Mario Botta in Switzerland for 1 year. Ran a small studio with himself as leadership with just a few individuals. Worked many other places…rapidly changing in younger career. Drew Ranieri Educational Background: M.ARCH. - Virginia Tech School of A+D. He lived in Ellen Braaten’s place for a year! Got to meet all of the guest lecturers and visiting professionals that the school faculty had over. (That’s how he got his job with Botta!) B.S. ARCH. – Catholic University of America Drew has 2 kids. One is in architecture…works for Olson Kundig in Seattle, WA. THE CLIENT PAYS. So it’s all about THE CLIENT’S DECISIONS. Project – Contract. Things to think about in a contract: Scope. Schedule. Work Product. Risk + Responsibility. Compensation. Drawings and the manual have to go hand-in-hand. There is a chain of command established. Client might have a contract that filters information to them through a 3rd party. The primary relationships in architecture: -Client. -Architect. -Contractor. -Developer. (extra 4th party depending on project) Who’s responsible for what? Time of construction – need to be extremely precise + careful with time…otherwise cost will get out of hand, and will be a big issue with client. SOMEONE ALWAYS HAS TO PAY. When it’s your project, what if you are paying? What if you’re the client + architect? How does the design change when it’s coming from your wallet? Empathetic design. Other people on a project. -Legal consultants. -Project manager on client’s side. -Marketing consultants. -Engineering consultants. -Sustainability. -Mechanical. -Structural. -Civil. -Electrical. -Plumbing. -Acoustic. -Other – depends on the project! Different projects need different specialists!

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 182

Various relationships between the parties in the contract: To the Architect. To the Owner. To the Builder. Who are you responsible to? Who are others responsible to? What are you responsible of? What are others responsible of?

COMPENSATION. Conceptual - 5%. Schematic Design – 15%. Design Development – 20%. Construction Documents – 20%. Bid – 5%. Construction – 35%. Alternative 1 breakdown for compensation. THIRDS. Conceptual + Schematic Design + Design Development – 33%. Construction Documents + Bid – 33%. Construction – 33%. Alternative 2 breakdown for compensation. HALVES. Conceptual + Schematic Design + Design Development + Construction Documents – 50%. Bid + Construction – 50%. First-time clients can be way more naïve and unknowledgeable than experienced, second-time clients. Construction administration. Very hard to deal with. Need to outline stringent, governmental procedure. CONTRACT MEANS - “I’m going to deliver this, you’re going to pay for that.” What does the Client ask the Architect? How much? How long? Can I have _____ if _____? Expectations versus reality. Will the client be satisfied? How to make the client see what is going to happen as clearly as possible? What am I being asked to provide? How am I providing it? TOOLS OF THE ARCHITECT. Precedents. Experience. 2-D Representation. 3-D Representation. Physical Models. Mock-Ups. Specifications. Model of Architecture. Architecture is a Practice, subdivided into it being both a: Business + Profession. LIABILITY + INDEMNIFICATION. If the architect does not tell the contractor what to do, then the architect is not liable if the contractor does something wrong. Architect has to be careful how they talk to the various parties involved with the project. DO NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY IF NOT NECESSARY OR SPECIFIED. Drawing – QUANTITY. Manual – QUALITY. We don’t tell the contractor how to do things. If you do, then you become responsible. If something goes wrong, then you are brought into the picture of blame. Don’t barter services unless the intent and specifications of the agreement are clear. Don’t do business with a friend, unless you have a contract. As an architect, you have to be critical of everything. You can have a clause where the architect can get paid before they start work. So if finances go bad, or the project falls through, then the firm can cut its losses and still have money to walk away with to continue to support itself as a business. 3 MAIN COMPONENTS OF RUNNING A FIRM. Manage. Market. Production.

Response Drew makes it a point to outline the goals and intents of a contract between the various parties to make a building happen. Typically the three parties that are involved in contractual agreement are the client, the architect, and the contractor. It is striking how Drew delineates and separates the role of the architect from the role of the contractor. It was to my knowledge that whenever an issue came about involving the design of the building, whether it was a discrepancy with a drawing, or a detail being constructed on site, or the quality of a material as it is shipped – that the responsibility fell on the architect to make everything right. After this lecture, it is clear that there is obviously a division in roles between the architect and contractor that is outlined and detailed in the contract. For example, when an architect draws a detail, it is typical for the architect to relinquish the responsibility for the physical creation and implementation of that detail by the contractor and construction crew. In this case, it is only the architect’s job to, to the best of their knowledge, to draw and describe the detail in its function and aesthetic. The architect does not tell the contractor or the people involved in construction how to build that detail. If he does, then he can be held liable. The question is, if an architect does give advice or direction to build something on the construction site, and in the contract specifies that advice or direction given by the architect is not to be considered as a comment to be held liable, then is the architect still liable if he accidentally gives advice? It is also interesting to think about the cost of a building from the architect’s fee standpoint. Where does the money go involving the design and production of the building? Drew breaks the allocation of funding down to its individual phases. He says that it can vary. But in general, it is worthy to think about the notion that the phase of construction in the architects’ fee can be approximately half of the total fee, and that the other half can be the design and representation of the building. Maybe this is why a lot of people and developers don’t want to pay architects to design their houses or properties. Is it asking too much for 50% of a fee to design the project? Should there be a reallocation of the time spent on phases to make the fee more reasonable for clients? Or should architects be better about communicating the value of their services to design and deliver a satisfying project of quality and longevity to clients? Regarding the “tools of the architect,” there is something to be said about the expectation of clients and the workflow and method of the architect. Clients certainly have pre-meditated ambitions about what they should see from what they pay the architect. At the same time, each architecture firm has different ways of working through a project, and work differently to proceed through the various phases of design. Sometimes, it could be argued that the expectations of the client and the process of the architect may not always match. Perhaps the architect has to produce an image or drawing for the client that does not always play into the typical workflow for the project. So is it a good thing or a bad thing for a drawing to be made just for the needs of the client, at the expense of interrupting the process of the work on the project? Should clients be less needy for productive updates and meetings about the design progress, or should architects be more willing to adapt their process for the desires of the client to be involved in the design?

Alexander Cheng 183

1.9 - Donald (Don) Copper - GREC 03-02-15 Lecture + Discussion

Notes

Don Copper is the “C” in GREC Architects. As a partner, he is in charge of bringing in projects for the office, which ultimately allows it to work as a business. He discusses how GREC runs as a studio, and how he breaks down the phases of a project by percentages and fees. He talks about where the money goes to once the firm receives the fee paid by the client.

GREC sells themselves as a boutique firm that offers corporate services. This is an odd niche…1 design principal will always be on a project the whole way through. Partners are responsible for bringing work into the firm. Hard to not be involved as a partner. Partners are financially responsible to the client. TYPES OF CLIENTS. Some want a type, genre, or style of architecture. There are 2 types of clients: 1. Experienced clients. 2. Inexperienced clients. Others just want the most, for the least. Example in Dubai – a project is fully financed up front by client. The building is marketed only after it’s completed…very odd. Marketing occurs during the process typically in the U.S, so when it is finally finished people are excited and ready to use it right away…no waste of time or money. They try to reduce hierarchy in the studio at GREC. No design specialization here. Have junior architects on Schematics all the way through CD’s. How do you get your clients? Your work? Being friends with rich people + non-architects? THE PHASES OF A PROJECT. Programming – How do I take this program, and put it on the site? Schematic Design – Big formal moves. Design Development – Resolving design aesthetics. Construction Documents – Resolving small details + how to build. How do you “end” a phase? It’s kind of arbitrary. PROJECT STAFFING. Amount of effort per type of staff per phase. Include overhead costs (rent, utilities, etc…) Include profits (need money to run a business.) These combined are called O+P. Hours x Cost = Monthly Fee. Monthly Fee + # of Months = Cost Per Phase. Phases are divided into percentages, totaling up to 100%. You can’t just slash the fee. What about the people of the firm? The financial well-being of the firm is important too! You can’t just be walked all over when it comes to money. KNOW THE VALUE OF YOUR SERVICES. “You get what you pay for.” –Don Copper. If a client just looks at the fee only, and is only concerned with money, then they will not consider the architect’s work and their project will not be well done. As the architect, you have to CONVINCE THE CLIENT OF YOUR VALUE. The truth is that there will ALWAYS be someone cheaper than you, so it’s your job to articulate why someone would pick your work and services over someone else.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 184

GROWTH. Studio Gang was a small boutique firm of about 20 people. Then they got the Aqua Tower project, and now they have 80+ people on their team as a result. Growth is good, but it can change the dynamic of the office, and therefore can change the work of the firm overall. Whether or not that is a good thing is another question. Many ways to structure payment. Depends on the agreement between you and client.

GREC currently has 12 active projects, and are seeking 4. Clients love that they can talk about their issues with anyone in the office. Familiarity of all projects is easier in a smaller firm. Easy for clients to get answers to their questions. Architecture in general, is a geographically locked business. The first few projects you do tend to follow you and the public profile of the firm. So think about the kind of work you want to do first, because it will define your initial public identity. As a principal, you have to be pro-active rather than re-active. Predict trends – where’s the work? Don’t get caught asking yourself, “now what?” Know what to do next ahead of time! MARKET, MARKET, MARKET YOUR WORK. Questions for Don. How do you get your work? Is it mostly through referral from satisfied clients? Is it through personal connections you’ve built over the years? Or do you have to market + seek out + compete for work? Do you think that’s a trend for larger firms to get their work? Know your boundaries. Don’t tell other people how to do their job. Speak passively when it comes to legal issues. SOMEBODY PAYS FOR EVERY MISTAKE.

Response Don talks a lot about the where the money goes when the client pays a fee to the architect. What is the money for? The allocation of funds goes to a plethora of locations once received. In thinking about the architecture firm as a business, one has to think about the individual architects that contribute to the work of the firm. Architects are people too! They have to financially care for themselves at least, if not for their spouses and/or children as well! As a partner, one has to also think about these people as colleagues that spend 40 hours a week together at least. The office depends on them for punctual and quality work on a day to day basis. Therefore, the fee becomes very important. The leadership has to care a lot about the fee. The fee has to be reasonable in quantity to provide for these people. The fee also has to support the office itself, not just its employers. Don describes how the fee has to expand to cover the costs of overhead financial matters. The space that the firm uses to work in likely has a cost. If the office is in the city, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s likely that the office has to pay for their lease. Utilities become a cost as well. How about maintenance? Does the office have a cleaning crew hired to keep the place up? That can be another expense. Is there any ambition to renovate the office to make it a better space to impress clients? Is the office in need in upgrading computer hardware or software? All of these improvements to the office environment and work capabilities all cost money that have to be ultimately sustained by the fee. Don brings up another point of how the office gets its work. This is an even more premature question. Without any work opportunities, then thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s no chance of even thinking about the fee. So how does a firm get work? Don provides a few methods. The most memorable of which is to market the work. Marketing is very significant to the public profile of the firm and the work, and can get projects noticed by a broad range of people. The more outlets available to get the work out means more exposure, which in turn means more eyes on the design. This can be good and bad. If the work is mediocre or even poor, then lots of exposure will likely hurt the reputation and in turn, the business of the office. If the work is high quality, then the publicity will likely bring distinguishing clients with good work opportunities. Another way to get work is through referrals. Much like Von Weise Associates, even though GREC is a mid-sized firm with larger projects, they depend on their current and past clients giving them positive references to others looking to instigate projects. Referrals can be just as good as other marketing outlets. One person talking about the work of a firm to another can be even more effective than just having someone look at a website or graphic provided by the firm, because a conversation about the firmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work becomes more personal and individually tailored. How then, are firms to know how to get the word out about their work? What means and methods are the most effective for the type of work, and location of work that the office engages in? Should we just use as many avenues as possible for others to notice us? Or should we be selective in how others view our work, choosing a selective cropping of mediums to cater our services to those people that use those mediums to seek work?

Alexander Cheng 185

1.10 - Carl D’Silva - JAHN 03-04-15 Lecture + Discussion

Notes

Response

Carl is a Vice-President, Principal Architect at JAHN. He presents the Louvre renovation in Paris that I.M. Pei designs to demonstrate meaning of the architectural idea. He attempts to clarify what a design concept is, and its role throughout the length of a project.

JAHN history. Murphy / Jahn came from Burnham’s firm. Murphy was Burnham’s assistant. Jahn comes later, and buys out Murphy.

Carl discusses the renovation of the Louvre museum in Paris, France, to demonstrate the meaning of an architectural idea. The pyramid that is so iconic and indicative of I.M. Pei’s intervention to the Louvre complex, is actually very un-indicative of the holistic design concept of the renovation. The entire purpose of the renovation was to provide linkages to the various wings of the museum without having to navigate from one end of one wing, to the other end of the opposing wing through the U-shaped plan of the Louvre. The renovation was one of subterranean connection and infrastructure, not of iconism.

If there is no program, what is your project? What is your architectural design concept? -Not re-vitalizing. -Not re-use. -Not re-energizing. -THESE ARE NOT IDEAS! Le Louvre – “The Fortress.” Renovation + addition by I.M. Pei. The pyramid is the signature icon for his work on the Louvre. But, the pyramid is not indicative of the design concept. The pyramid is just a marker for the fact that the Louvre was renovated. The Louvre had been adaptively reused for many things: -Fortress. -Palace. -Additions. -Museum. President Mideron – Big proejcts in Paris to progress the city architecturally. The Richelieu wing was just an office building before it was annexed. Previously in the Louvre, it was difficult to move from point to point. You had to go a long way to get from one side to another. I.M. Pei puts in underground axis and connection as the major portion of his work. Puts the pyramid in the middle of the courtyard to appropriately end the axis of Paris. -La Defense. -L’Arc D’Triomphe. -Champs Elysees. -Le Louvre. Pyramid in glass doesn’t compete with the historicity of the building. Pyramid defines the entrance into the museum. It provides daylight to the subterranean connections down below. Acknowledges the axis of Paris’s historic urban planning. It is the least important part of the project as far as the design concept. Pyramid is the entrance hub center to access all of the wings of the museum. Huge improvement in faster circulation and museum access. Pyramid is a place of pause. It is a local center. A point of transfer. Former parking lot is converted into a public plaza with the pyramid. It becomes a place for people to meet. It becomes an enlargement of the public realm of the city. Check out factories on 112th-115th streets in Chicago…re-use. You won’t get a design concept form programmatic analysis. Give them the idea from the beginning. Frame the presentation to be what you want to talk about. Not what you have. MEANING + APPROACH. Something is this size because a person uses that thing in this way. How to approach a project – knowledge for the rest of your working career. Guide the conversation – strong focus, then other people will want to talk about that focus.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 186

One could say that the architectural design concept of the project was to provide more program for the museum, while at the same time, shortening circulation through the museum through increased means of connection and intersection, without changing the formal identity of the museum to the public eye. So, even though Pei places a huge glass pyramid in the middle of the plaza in front of the Louvre, it is not crucial to the idea of the project. It is simply an icon that tells that the renovation took place, and acknowledges the Louvre as the point of terminus along the axis of Paris with the Champs Elysees, Arc D’Triomphe, and La Defense. What is the significance of this example to Carl? He talks about the importance of the architecture design concept, and how that can differ from other thoughts of design about the project. For example, mentioning that, as the architect, you wanted to, “provide more light in the gathering space, increase interaction between people in the circulatory areas, and re-energize the area around the project” is not providing an architectural design concept. A truer concept would entail thinking in a broader sense, not just describing what you wanted to do in certain spaces in your project. The idea should encompass the project as an entirety, and from it can stem all of the consecutive decisions made. Without the architectural idea, what does architecture become? It becomes a meaningless act of production. When one makes a house, just to make a house, then the meaning of making the house in the first place is lost. Without meaning, architecture fails to appeal to the human condition. As human beings, we are rooted in history. Our progress is shaped by everything that we have done in the past. Without the past, there is no present. Without the present, there is no future. So transitively, it can be argued that without the past, there is no future. Meaning is derived from what has been done. So without meaning, there is no future for architecture. The architectural idea is richly intertwined with layer upon layer of meaning, which forms a continuum of semantic guidance as we work through a project and deal with light, scale, material, form, orientation, and space. Without the idea, there is no architecture. Just mechanized production.

Alexander Cheng 187

BRIAN LEE

CASEY RENNER

CHELSEA KILBURN

PHILIP ENQUIST

WILLIAM BAKER

STEPHEN PACK

01 02

Lectures + Discussions Interviews

2.0 - Brian Lee Partner, Design - SOM

INTERVIEW

Brian Lee, FAIA, LEED AP, believes that architecture starts with solving our client’s genuine needs, but also must strive to achieve inspirational results that transcend expectations. A fundamental question that guides his work is how a building’s aesthetics, program, and tectonics can provide meaning to those who live and work in its spaces. His hands-on design approach is focused on achieving full integration of the natural and built environment through the most innovative design forms, materials, and construction technologies.

What made you choose architecture? What’s your background? Where did you grow up? I don’t want to contradict myself and make up stories…haha. I grew up in the central valley of Sacramento, California. My father was an architect. I’m second generation Chinese, so my grandmother and grandfather immigrated from China. They were farmers. There were lots of farmers during the Depression. Worked in a meat market grocery store downtown. My father was the first one to go to college. Really quite admirable in that generation – they were really the ones that made significant advances in terms of education and quality of life. I actually quite admired his experience, as well as my grandfather’s experience. Actually, I was surprised by this question by somebody else at another school. And I wrote to her, it was about being in that environment. It was a sort of advantage. I saw the drafting tables in the basement, because he was moonlighting at the time. So people would be coming over later at night and I would see them as a kid. He later had his own office, so I would go there because my mom was also the secretary office manager. And she also did drafting. She did geological surveying for the federal government. The hand drawn, topographic, beautiful maps you see. I would be washing cars, trimming the hedges, gardening in front of the office, sweeping the front steps of the office. Then I’d come in and run the print machine. The earlier ones were wet. You had to hang them up to dry off. It feels like Henry Ford Model T period, to even just coloring drawings. It was even before a product you might not even know – Zipatone. It used to be big sheets you would cut out to lay down patterns, textures, and tones. It’s like plastic that you had to put down. Before that you had to hand color. Like if you wanted to shade or tone for a parking lot or a landscape feature, you would draw on the back of the drawing with a blue pencil. So it take forever! Just errrrchhhh* So those kinds of things in being in the environment. But the most interesting thing for me was just hanging around people that were connected to building – connected to architecture and engineering. I wouldn’t just go there, then get in the car and go to baseball or something. It didn’t seem like “work” quote, unquote – these aspects of architecture, engineering, and design. Most notable was when we went out to San Francisco, and he’d visit old professors and old classmates. When you crossed the bridge, it was like going to this magical city. Then going to have lunch with old classmates from these firms on top of this old time, century restaurant. It was this whole kind of thing where you’d see big scale drawings. Full scale drawings of a wall section, big models, and then you would see the buildings. That was inspiring. When I did apply to college, actually, I applied and put down “Math” for a major. It still has an undergraduate major in architecture. It’s accredited, but it’s not a professional degree. And then those lecture halls! Sitting with 500 other kids for math and physics classes, it’s like, “Uggghhhh, this isn’t too fun.” So I switched into architecture. That was the biggest influence personally. Did you work through college with your father?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 190

No I didn’t, because you know, it’s hard to work for your dad. But I did pick up a number of odd jobs. Worked for structural engineering department in Berkeley. Did a lot of diagrams and drawings for them. Interestingly enough my first jobs were with TY

Lin, very famous engineer. I was just doing drafting. Rebars and ties. They didn’t have me calculating anything, because I don’t know about that kind of thing at the time. But just as a draftsman, supporting architects and engineers. That was for 2 summers. Where did you go after college? I went to Berkeley for undergraduate, and right after Berkeley I went to Harvard GSD for graduate school. I did two years there. It was a 2.5 or 3 year program, but they gave me advanced standing. So it was a 4 year, plus a 2 year. From there, how did you find yourself at SOM? Well 2 summers at TY Lin, and then I spent 2 summers at SOM. You have a network of guys and gals you know. And someone couldn’t do one summer, and they knew of a job, they’d say, “Hey you might wanna check these guys out.” I got a part time during the year, helping out with some drawings at SOM in San Francisco. And you develop relationships so – I worked there one summer, while I was at grad school. And when I finished grad school, I was intent on going to New York. And at that time you know, there’s different architects you admire and you’d go work for them. So I applied to I.M. Pei’s office, Richard Meier’s office, there was a guy named Charles Gwathmy. Gwathmy-Segull. That was kind of interesting. I had done some drawings for him when I was at Harvard. Measuring up a building and documenting, they were going to do some renovations. Then a firm called Richard Jurgula. That was an interesting firm for me. It was less stylistically set than Richard Meier’s practice and I.M. Pei’s practice. It was a little bit more about humanism in architecture that I appreciated. It was more of a Venturi and Louis Kahn school. So I was accepted at I.M. Pei’s office and Richard Jurgula’s office. I told them that I could go to start work in December, because I was going to go to Sacramento for the summer. So Gwathmy says, “Once you go back, you never go back to New York, so forget it.” I was going to take a position at I.M. Pei’s office, but I ended up going back to Sacramento because of a girlfriend, and a project. My dad had a small housing project. And he said that it would be good experience. I ended up doing it for a year. So I didn’t go back to New York. Things could have been different, but it was one of those things – a project that I could do by myself. He was just a one-man office at that time. It was fun. It was 50 units of student housing in a law school in Sacramento. And you get to do everything. Meet the clients, go down and get the permits, bid the thing out, the whole kit and kaboodle. I got licensed, because it’s good experience to get licensed that way. I developed an ulcer. You know it’s stressful. You’ve got to do everything. You say, “I want to do this. I want to do this.” You have people saying, “No, you can’t do that.” Either it costs too much, or you can’t build it, or we don’t like it. So it’s an interesting experience to learn about the hard-knocks of the real world. So at the end of that year, it was under construction. I got a call from SOM, again, because they knew I was back on the west coast and wanted to know if I would come out to the San Francisco office. So at that time I was in CA phase, out on jobsites, wondering if I would go back to New York. Meanwhile girlfriend is still in the area. So it worked out to say, “Ok, let’s try out this SOM thing in San Francisco.” Oh and by the way, prior SOM experience was with the

urban design group. Planning work, large scale projects. But they said to come back to the architecture department. And the rest is history! I started in 1979 so, 36 years later. Haha. You mentioned that you liked working on a project because of the humanistic aspect of it. And I saw something that you mentioned before in regards to Churchill’s quote, “We shape our buildings, therefore they shape us.” Do you remember that? Your TED-X? You were talking about the human scale, and large buildings versus small buildings. So I was wondering if you have more experiences or thoughts about that? Interesting question. I haven’t put this in words or writing. But it’s interesting how architects can mature. They’re usually filled with vigor early on. You go out and there’s a certain ambition. You’re very intent on trying to accomplish things. I was lucky because I had some interesting professors at school. They were all very strong architects. The strongest was Kallmann – Kallmann McKinnell. They were architects that did the Boston City Hall. Very much about the tectonics of architecture. But at that time also, there were people coming into the school that were very strong. Richard Meier was teaching there, Gwathmy was there, Maki came, Michael Graves was there when he was doing late-modernism, cubist architecture. They were all architects that had a definite point of view. Eisenmann came in to talk. I felt that from a point of view of having skills at form making, understanding volume, surface, the formal aspects of architecture, that I had certain abilities in that. I had remembered that from my background at Berkeley, there were people teaching there at that time were like Christopher Alexander, and a whole group of people that believed in the social and behavioral aspects of architecture and how it related to people. So there’s a little bit of that dichotomy. So me coming from Berkeley, which was more of a populist culture, then going to Harvard, where they would tell you how to express a column, or how to cut a window in a wall, how to make a joint. I said, “Ok, this is kind of fun.” I was learning something that I thought was really interested in, that I didn’t necessarily get at Berkeley. Then when I started to work at SOM, I had somebody named Chuck Bassett, who took me under his wing. He was an architect who I thought was very skilled. And his dad was an architect in the Midwest, did very sensitive work. He grew up with the ability to draw, think about how to craft things, and went to go see Eero Saarinen. Eero Saarinen’s work was much less dogmatic in approaching the problem, and finding an architectural solution to address that problem. So when you look at his work it’s very, very different, whether it’s TWA Terminal or Dulles Airport. Chuck had worked with him on the chapel at MIT – little brick building. To the GM Center. All of these different buildings. So that same philosophy in thinking about appropriateness, and not being so uptight about your own ideology, that allowed you to be a lot more free about thinking about architecture. Also art, history, how people use space and social influences. I thought that was interesting because it didn’t mean you were without a philosophy, but to me it meant that you are more whole as a person. And when you’re more whole as a person, you’re better as an architect. And you have to look at a lot of other architects that are so tied up in their stylistic issues, that it’s hard for them to do other things. You could name them now. You know a building by somebody. If a building looks like that, you know who that person

is. I think that in the end, and this is not going to be postmodernist, I’m not just trying to say we just want architecture that is accessible and appeals to people, like what Michael Graves did. But it’s trying to take the histories of what architecture meant to people, and how does it fit into our human condition. That to me is kind of interesting. It means that it’s thinking about, from the very beginning, how do people relate to spaces, what do they feel. What are the emotions? Inspirational, depressing, contemplative, activating, stimulating. How do you get these qualities in architecture? To me, that kind of was a worthy pursuit, to say I am confident as a form maker. Let’s see if we can’t make architecture that provides meaning and feeling. I was lucky to visit some of the things that Peter Zumthor is doing. It’s quite beautiful. There’s a similar rigor to the work, and he’s after certain qualities of space, light, and sound. We had to go to Basel. We went a weekend early before a client meeting. We traveled around Zurich and went to Basel. Luckily there was the Art Basel that weekend and that was incredible. We saw the church (St. Benedict Chapel), we saw the baths at Vals, we saw an interesting little senior housing project that I saw was quite clever. It was a linear building, big piece of glass, and balcony. It was quite simple. Collective senior housing. It was single loaded, and had a very wide quarter to those units. In that quarter, people starting to populate it with stuff inside the unit that they brought outside. So there was a grandfather clock, chairs with doilies on them, pots and plants. So it was a way to think about how collective housing and family housing could be highly personalized and less institutionalized. Especially for seniors that want to have that ability to relate to each other in later years of life, that they’re not isolated but they feel like part of the larger community. So to me, those kind of qualities were quite interesting, like when you go to visit the little church (St. Benedict Chapel). Have you been? I thought it was a little disappointing. The inside, from point of view with just the painted surface of the plywood. I thought that was much more naturalistic. But everything else was incredible. The vestibule that leads you in and the kind of qualities of that stuff. And it very much reminded me of a sensitivity that I wish we could practice, that Scarpa does. You know his work? That thing works so well in the landscape. And the materials and how the light comes in. It didn’t start with a stylistic issue, but it started with an idea how to develop a place in a broad sense that is inspirational. It has meaning, it speaks to people. And when you talk about Scarpa stuff, have you seen the cemetary? Incredible. I was lucky to go there with my life. She’s very tolerant. She likes architecture and design. But she’s like, “Really? A cemetery?” We spent like 3 hours there. A whole afternoon because it was so beautiful. So I think to me, how do you find a way to develop an architecture? Yes you have to solve problems, it’s about performance, it’s about a certain urbanism. But getting back to your thing, an architecture of scale, even in large jobs, how do you find ways to continue to think about people? They’re normally 6 feet tall. How do they move through the space and what do they feel like? We talked about this the other day about the issue of panoramic windows. Can you still get this quality of experience of being in the sky without panoramic windows? Because you know, energy issues are such that you want more solids. You can get it, if you’ve got a gigantic piece of glass that’s people sized. So a 10 by 10 piece of glass with solids on either of it, you would still have that quality of expan-

siveness, of the sky and of the light, without it being 60 feet of glass. You’re talking a little bit about the material, the scale, the form, and the tectonics of it. You said before that the material finish cost and the craft of the construction can make or break the project. So how does that factor in to working with this, and how do you work with other countries where you don’t know the craftsmanship of things? With projects you can control the form and the shape of it, but the craftsmanship you put in someone else’s hands. How do you deal with that? It’s a constant struggle for us. Especially when we don’t get to do the full documentation of the project, or take the project all the way to the final results. You mentioned abroad. Where we have that problem. Although we have some fairly good buildings, compared to the rest of the best buildings in the world, have been built in China. But I can’t even get a little library here, to detail to the same extent that we’d like to do it China. Because, these guys don’t get it, something costs too much money, and now they’re not gonna do it, and why aren’t you gonna do it? Oh we do it for them, oh maybe we could do that, and then a week later decided we can’t. Haha. You know it’s just constant small battles to win the war. So I do that that, if you tried to describe the best buildings in the world, it does have to do with how things go together in the end. Ours is a visual and experiential profession. So when you look at a corner, at an intersection, at a surface of a wall, even at a low end material – stucco. What’s the quality of that surface? Does it have ugly, stupid, mundane expansion joints that look like they are the least common denominator or are they carefully hidden? I think that you can do buildings out of very ordinary materials. If done properly, cleanly, then it’s quality that you think you’ve experienced great architecture. There’s an architect in the Bay area that my dad studied under. He’s kind of famous. His name is William Wurster. The school at Berkeley was named after him – Wurster Hall. And he was an architect that came from the east coast, but adopted a Bay area regionalism. And he did a lot of houses. His whole thing was how to simplify details. Yet, when you looked at them, they were probably the most complicated details imaginable, but it was all about reduction. So that it didn’t have a big lap trim over a window and the siding, but it was all carefully seamless and crafted like cabinet work. So sometimes the things that look the most simple, are the hardest to do. But you can do it! It’s just a matter of sitting down and sweating the details. Could you speak about your view about the social and environmental and economic responsibility of architecture in sustainable design? Or to narrow down the question, what does sustainable design mean to you? Well maybe they are all related, so backing up and relating sustainable design to social responsibility, and it does affect the economy in terms of what you do and what you will save later on. I think it gets back to the issues of not only what your feelings about your responsibilities as an architect, in terms of whether you’re doing the right thing. But also how do you more importantly, not just let it be sloganeering, or buzzwords. Not empty, sort of goals. But how do you really get it done? And because we’re a service

Alexander Cheng 191

organization, people pay us to do work for them. And automatically, in that trade, you tend to feel that you lose the ability to drive the agenda. But I think that what you have to do, and this is where the best designers in the world are able to turn that agenda around, and listen to what someone’s asking you to do. And find ways that it first addresses the greater societal concerns, right? Because that’s what we really want to do. That’s what most designers what they believe they can do in life. How it then intersects with the client’s concerns. Actually I think Saarinen did a Venn diagram of society intersecting with clients’ concerns with architectural concerns, or art. That is the way you have to go about it. That you’re constantly being tugged and pulled. Yeah you’re paying me to do this, but I am presenting to you a better way to do it, or supporting your desires that is adding more value in the end or makes you feel good as a person or as a company, or it’s going to be a benefit to your users, tenants, students, or whoever. It’s a tough question, because we’re all going to say, “Yes, absolutely we have to be responsive.” To not only society, but be conscious of social issues of our time. You have to look at the news and see what’s happening today. Would you do a prison if you had your choice? Why? They don’t get good space. Those spaces are not nice spaces. You know, the AIA is having its own debate right now, of whether or not the profession will or will not support societies’ views on incarceration and punishment. And because it’s so tied into specific ideas about isolation and punishment, that we shouldn’t be a part of that. Yet other people in the AIA, believe yes, maybe we could actually help. Maybe we can come up with different models in terms of how to deal with the penal system that are more human and actually improve the human condition. So where do you fall? My ideology says either, I will not do that, or do you fall in the camp as a pragmatist where you say, “Well I can make a better place.” These are significant issues that designers address. Like this new Apple watch that just came out. Does that improve the human condition? We don’t know yet, right? Maybe, because it’s all about this incremental interface between technology and people. That’s what they’re talking about. It’s not a watch, it’s really the constant development of technology where you control the technology, not let the technology control you. But where’s the fit in the grand scheme of things in terms of, you know, a cure for cancer? I think that there’s kinds of questions every day that you have to ask about what you’re doing. Is it the right thing to do? Can you make it better? I ask it every day myself – “Are we providing any innovation?” Just straight off. Is there something about this project where I’d be able to tell a story? Something that solved a problem? Something that provided a benefit to society? And that benefit to society could be physical, psychological, it could be about sustainability, about the environment, conservation. So when you ask that question, they kind of all fit together. But you have to do that, because otherwise, as a designer, you’re kinda out there as a hired tool. Sometimes you get trapped because the way expectations and the way things work in the world, especially the business world. So that’s why I say you have to be constantly questioning and remind yourself to do the right thing. We had a professor over fall travel. He asked us all, “What is the role of the architect?” Some answered, the rest were blank faces. But he said, “The role of the architect, is to enrich human lives.” You were talking

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 192

about your answer to the question about the responsibility that we have. How far does that extend? To all human lives? In what ways can we do that? I think that’s true. It applies at all scales too. I think that one of the most interesting advantages in this office that we have is that we have people that are multi-disciplinary. So I am constantly reminded by some of the work that Phil Enquist does in terms of larger scale issues how it relates to cities and the environment. And how sometimes it’s not a building problem, but it’s actually a city problem or a district problem, or a neighborhood problem, or a country problem. On the other hand, we have people very skilled in interior environments. When you’re designing a building, and then thinking about those interior spaces, how do they really relate to, not just how people feel and how they move through the space, but creating a better workplace. And that’s a huge topic today. It’s about how the tech world is trying to find its “magic answer.” Is it all fun playhouse spaces about collaboration and throwing everybody together? I’ve been watching these tech companies. This guy owns the 1871, which is this start up tech-company. He is the owner of it that allows startups to get that space. He’s watched how people works in the space for a couple years now, and he says, “Nobody ever gets any work done in these open office plans. If they really wanted to get work done, they slink off and find a place they can be by themselves in the office, or a cubby hole or a corner. And so it’s kind of interesting to hear that. Because it counters the collaborative open plans, which we have here. I think that getting back to this issue of thinking about responsibilities, it is ultimately about making things better for the human condition. And there’s a broad range of issues that relate to it. If you can argue that a beautiful church was talking about the human condition, and no matter how elaborate the tectonics and the issues of form and surface and light, they were really about inspiring people. And hopefully you can take those same aspects to schools, educational facilities, workplaces, places of healing, and government, in terms of interaction and services for people. I talked to Phil last week, and I think it’s really good that you and he talk, maybe it is a city issue, maybe it’s a building issue, but it is that back and forth. So I talked to him about I guess how we represent our projects, drawing things and modeling, and other things like this. He says, “Too often, architects look at the buildings as the building alone on a piece of paper. Here it is, in isolation. Here it is, you can go around to all these people at SOM, and say to some of them and ask, “Hey do you know what this building is?” And they won’t know. “Yeah, that’s the Parcel E building.” Like ok, what street is that on? What’s on that intersection? What’s on that corner? They say, “I don’t know”. You know what I mean? He made the argument that when we draw and represent, we make the mistake of not including everything that is around the building, a lot of the time we just look at the elevation and there’s nothing around it. Yeah we throw in a few trees and a few cars for people - great for scale. But we don’t really address that as much as we should. So do you think that we should keep drawing in isolation because we can’t handle all of the information that is given to us at once, so we can get at it a little more clearly, or do you think we should always keep it in its surroundings as he suggests?

I think that, are we talking generally or specifically? No, I think that, I mean the very best designers, you guys know the rule right? The rule is that you always look up at one scale, maybe two scales. So you design a building, you look at the block scale and the neighborhood scale. To see how it fits inside the neighborhood, then you look at the city scale. So I think that designers are always trying to find some context for their work so I know that Phil tries to set out an idea for people to react to, I think, or at least hope not, that people aren’t thinking about the context. Now, what happens though is that often times, the way that we produce architecture and design cities is so fast, and frankly, it’s pretty amazing that we used to have a dedicated amount of time allocated to a project per person, now it’s kind of like half the time, because now in architectural production, you can get drawings out so quickly and just produce 3- dimensional massing and even 3-D printing. And so sometimes, frankly, younger, less experienced designers come in, and they are given a task and they do that, and we have to remind them to think at all scales, up, down in order for these things to work. So I totally agree with him, of course. You kind of addressed a little bit - what questions do we ask ourselves when we’re making buildings. But I wanted to ask what do you think are the most difficult questions of architecture are? About the profession in general? Well, I think part of the profession is always about lots of different things. Ok. I think that the power of design is not always fully recognized by clients. Sometimes authorities are part of the approvals. And so people get in the way in terms of setting goals and briefs and programs that are not as much as they could be, so that’s one thing. You guys may have heard this before - the idea of the master architect. So someone who is very capable of doing design to detail, is something that doesn’t happen, it’s pretty rare, because there are a lot of firms that do the design and they hand their working drawings for others to do the detailing. So splitting up that kind of conception of what the architect does is, kind of wide spread. We associate with architect probably when we’re abroad, we can’t get there on time, but we will very rarely do it in our own count unless we’re in some kind of special circumstances. So there’s that part. And the other part is, we believe in a multidisciplinary concept, where an engineer is working very closely with you rather than as an adversary, that is something that happens a lot. Different developers believe that engineers should be adversaries. They should say, “Hey watch out, they are going to make some crazy shape, so don’t let them do that because if it costs me more money because of that form, I’m going to lose money, etc…” So they’ll separate out the engineers and have the engineers report directly to the client, rather than working directly with the architect, so you lose that opportunity to integrate a few things that fully holistic. So that’s one of things of practice that is a little difficult. I think the way the fascination of star architects are branding things, is maybe to be expected but it’s unfortunate for a lot of firms, because there are talented people that don’t get a chance to do work, so you may get the flavor of the month because, “Oh, they have an interiors and a building by this star-architect, because that’s what sells.” I’ve heard that from clients here. They didn’t really like the building, but a developer here will say, “Well we don’t really like

the style.” But then we notice that there are too many glass and modern buildings and so go the pendulum swings and we go back a little, and maybe we like this old kind of aspect to traditional architecture. So they look for these brands that I think denies architects the ability to problem solve and really sticks the architects in a spot, so it becomes a commodity. I think that the profession is not great for the way it trains architects. From the schools and also when you get out of school, part of it, I was on the advisory board for GSD, for a short time you are in school, you’re lucky to have 5 years. Some people only have 3 years, to become an architect, and part of it is doing core, and also they might do collaborative studios, and travel to another place, so the amount of time that you actually have in a studio is actually not that much. The amount of time that you have to take interesting seminars that deal with design, and also the technical aspects of architecture isn’t that much. So I don’t know how much you guys have taken structures, or doing systems, or building performance, then you take that, and if they have even taught you professional practice, management issues, so is it appropriate that you learn those things in school? Or do you wait to then have the profession teach you that. Then you get students, hire the best design students, and they usually don’t have the best technical background and so you see how they kind of track up and they kind of veer over to be a technical architects but then you, a lot of firms try to split them, we try not to split them early, we see how people kind of work, but where does that leave room for management? You’re not going to hire a guy from the B-group to be a manager of office because he has no idea really about the practice, but then a firm like us has even tried looking at a CFO or CEO from a business practice and it’s a total disaster because they don’t really understand the culture, at least for us design that drives the practice. People come to us because they want to have a well-designed building, it’s not that they come to us because we have lower fees or we have good ol’ boys that will be your buddies to take you golfing or baseball games. So I think that, that person doesn’t really do a good job of training something that is an intensive experience over a long period of time and maybe it’s fine that people learn through IDP and internship programs and they find their own way, but there is probably a better way to do that, probably a more efficient way to do that. It’s always the question of, getting the experience, needing the experience for the job, but then leaving the job for the experience at the same time. They don’t pay you enough. We came in prepared for that. Did you think about it? We were thinking about majors. You see what majors pay you out of school, architecture majors are up there with literature or something like that. I’m going to ask you a question a little more about context, I know Joanna would ask this if she were here, probably. I think that as we’ve been here, we’ve learned that you all do a lot of projects in China, so I think there’s always that struggle with identity so I think that a lot of the time as architects we try to have sensitivity and identity to a place and locality to this point where we take pretty rigorous site analysis and try to find relationships between certain bits of information, and try to pull it all together and incorporate it into the project. So I wanted to ask you your thoughts on identity and architecture and whether you thought

that identity is crucial in a world where we can get from here to China in one day. The world is getting smaller and smaller so I feel like identity is getting more and more precious because every place is getting more and more accessible.

kind of endless. So what are the kind of surfaces that define it? So I say that’s kind of an easy answer but it’s kind of true, you can take it beyond its literal aspect, it doesn’t have to be just literally floors, walls and ceilings.

I kind of have two minds about that, I think that you’re right, it’s much more global today, people travel and are connected and probably most importantly they have similar aspirations. So who are we to deny people who aspire to a certain kind of life and lifestyle and standards of living around the world? If they were looking for the things that we value, why would we deny those things? On the other hand, what we definitely have found is when we try to get into a place, and really try to understand what we are, because we believe we are, trying to developing a unique architecture. And ultimately we try to be different and define our differentiator, to understand that place and context. I really am a firm believer that somebody has to go to the site and just be at the site, just experience the place. Because it’s very different, like we were commissioned to do a hotel in Arizona, so I went camping on the site with another designer. I spent two days out there to see the sun rise and sun set, sound, animals, temperature, the experience of the big sky. It was actually easy to then describe to then client those qualities that you felt were of that place that you wanted to communicate your body and your architecture. The harder places are you know, in China, or the Middle East, or anywhere else that is trying to develop another kind of architectural model that might be more transportable, so what do you do to try to bring a character that relates to the potential of that place without it seeming to be pandering to a caricature of that location. And can you actually bring something that is kind of abstract and kind of easy, but can you bring something that is a different way to think about their own things that they tell you that you brought it back and interpreted it. I think that there’s things about that are quite interesting, so like the Jin Mao project. I really didn’t like that project. Do you know it? It looks like a pagoda? A tower that looks like a pagoda in Shanghai. But you know it was adopted by the city as being very Chinese, and had these qualities that people really liked. The lowest common denominator, or common person really liked that, maybe to the intelligentsia it may seem a little corny. So I kind of believe with the latter. But then do you then do something instead that abstracts the notion of what a tall structure might be, how do you find those qualities? There is something about that, I believe that the best architects are trying to be different, and they are trying to re-interpret something that might be a certain prevailing mood, certain kind of context or condition that then you are trying to make a statement about. I think that’s very important, because otherwise you’re only transporting your style or brand to these certain places, and part of a larger spreading of commodity around. A little bit is ok, but if you see 30 buildings that could be from anywhere all kind of in one place, and also in 7 other cities, that really seems to be a lost opportunity.

I interviewed someone else. She did Chicago Studio 2 years ago. Her name is Chelsea. She works now at von Weise Associates now. She asked a similar question. “What are the fundamentals of architecture?” She said, “I think today, we’re struggling with the fundamentals because we have all of these digital programs to make these amoebic forms.” So she’s worried that you would get rid of things that you clearly define as a space, celling, floor, and wall. Eventually, it can become this thing that blurs the floor to the ceiling to the wall. It’s getting easy to blur those things.

We won’t tell Xuan that you don’t like the Jin Mao tower. Haha. Now, maybe this is a hard question… How do you develop space? Usually with floors, walls and ceiling. Because space is - my professor told me, space by itself, you have to define space before you have space otherwise it’s

I think that we do architecture all the time where floors and walls are all one surface, so I don’t literally mean you have to have floor, wall and surface, but you have to have something that defines, I mean Sol LeWitt was famous trying to define space with the least amount of edges. He would do a whole series of things that were the edges of pieces, but taking one away and you get the sense of space there. So I think that it is a complex thing but you have to have something to define it. It’s something that can’t go away. Some of the traditional responses, would be is a play of light, the quality of light, that is being held by surfaces, There was an architect Edward Lutyens who was an English architect, in a sense he had some series of buildings, was made out of quartz, at the edge there was a condition where the wall came out, and they had this slight eave that was very thin edge around the space, so it was interesting to see that image of it that he was able to use the sky as really, because of the edging as a way to bring the sky to define that space. Famously James Turrell, that’s the whole thing. He talked about how a sky dome, how you can flatten out the sky in perception by defining the very thin edge so it almost appears as if it you could touch that surface. So thinking how do you define space…think about those kind of qualities, these are things people think about, it’s part of architecture to be able to add on to those discoveries and exploration. Any advice? What do you think we have to be capable of in architecture and urban planning? I’m asked this very often - do you read newspaper? Keep up with current affairs? Follow politics? Yes, I follow some, but probably less then I should. I guess my answer to you guys is that design leadership comes from being as smart as you can. You need to be aware of all the humanities, art, literature, history so you can speak intelligently and with and creative authority that is based on information acts experiences because that’s how you develop a way for people to believe you. In that way you become thought leaders that isn’t specifically about architecture, architecture, architecture, architecture. You know? Details and surfaces and materials and light, there will be people who listen to that stuff, but then in the end, they’ll pat you on the head and say, “Nice architect, nice architect, nice architect.” And go away when they figure out how it can be built and what the

Alexander Cheng 193

cost of the thing is. And how are we going to work on the alderman and the mayor? So I think that a simple answer is to be super well rounded, does in fact make a difference. When you think about people who are creative designers, they are all over the place, sometimes there’s a lot of marketing, so take all of the marketing and cynical aspects out. Thomas Heatherwick you know him? He did the pavilion at Shanghai. He won this joint venture project with us on a project. And at first I was interested in doing it with him, but then he got feisty and wanted to take control and I said, “I don’t think so.” So I recommended Foster and in the end, Foster ran over him, the small architect. I don’t think all of his work is brilliant, some of it is kind of dopey and goofy, but Heatherwick is constantly trying to say, “What is it that’s different, how can I bring other experiences to the problem?” So I think that that mindset is interesting because you can bring other mindsets, art, biology, science, natural world, craftsmanship, and manufacturing. And combine that with an understanding of economics and politics, processes and psychology and sociology. How do you do those things, you will be much more well versed to talk about ideas, provide compelling arguments for those ideas and basically win people over, based on the strength of your content. I think that it only comes, frankly, from being smarter - reading and talking. But to also collaborate, it really means to be able to be an expert in a few things you are capable of. It doesn’t mean to get a lot of dumb people into a room and come out with some ideas, you get kind of crap. But really getting experts together who are open and willing to bounce ideas off each other, and selfish in a way to have new ideas, and that’s how you get true collaboration of being inspired and poked led in direction that you may not have thought about before. I want to know how you balance life and work. Do you see a separation between the two? Some people define it differently, but it seems like in most cases you have work and then you have other things. Phil said he will go home, and will constantly be thinking about something. He can’t stop, even though he’s at home. It’s always going in his mind. I wondered if you have the same kind of thing? Would you wake up in the morning at 5:30 AM and say, “Oh my god I’ve got it!” I get emails from Phil early in the morning, but he gets emails at 2:00 in the morning so…haha. You have to - and I’m trying to avoid clichés, so I apologize, but you find a passion for what you do. And if you have that passion for what you do, it never seems like work. I’ll pull an all-nighter every once in a while, because I’m on something, and sometimes it’s about the fear of failing, but I don’t mind doing it because it’s not work, it’s something I’m really interested in doing. It is work but it feels like...I don’t think that for me, personally, that there is a separation. Not everybody has the chance to think that the things that you do are so interesting, and it can occupy your time and not worry about it, because it doesn’t feel like work. A lot of people have a lot more mundane tasks and other issues. So we need to be sensitive about that - find a balance for you not to burn out, for you not to become strange people that don’t have relationships. Maybe families, children, loved ones. And that is an important aspect, because the profession can’t take all of the time you’re willing to give it, and you have to make sure that as a person you’re whole and you realize that there are some priorities and make sure that they don’t sacrifice for your selfish desires.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 194

There’s lots of stories of architects I know that their kids turn out to be a little crappy because their kids don’t get any attention or grow up with them, so you that’s something you have to figure out. That’s a design problem! The first studio I took at Berkley, was very interesting. It was with a guy named James Prestini. A famous sculptor. Very famous in the Bay area. I took a class with a sculpture, of taking a little section of I-beams and stacking tubes on top of each other and chroming. It may not be a big deal today but that’s it. He was an artist, sculpture and did architecture but teaching at the time, the first 2 quarters was about systems, wanting you to be methodical and develop a surge and criteria of what a thing is supposed to do. So you have to design a system that does this, this, this, and this. It had to be modular, it had to connect 10 different ways. this high, low cost, all that kind of stuff, so everyone came up with different things, and this is again before the computer, so there was a lot to do with understanding processes. So setting up a script to materials, construction and details. So people came up with really interesting things. The last quarter was about, taking the same things you did here, and design your life. And people were like, “oh my god this is so corny and stupid.” But it was this interesting thing. You had to decide what the things are that you want to accomplish, how you want to go about it, and what are the things you want to do to get to those goals. How do you fit in a personal life with that? In a sense, it’s not a corny exercise, but you have to be aware to get from A to B there are certain things you probably need to do, don’t leave things to chance. Think about it, and there is a way to find a balance that suits you for the kinds of things you are doing.

Alexander Cheng 195

2.1 - Casey Renner Senior Associate - HOK

INTERVIEW

Casey Renner, AIA has recently become a senior associate at HOK. A former SOM associate, Casey has a diverse work background, with work experience in both small and large firms. He teaches professional practice to the Chicago Studio, and has described the profession of architecture as a broad and multi-disciplinary cosm of people and specialities.

If it’s ok that we can ask this, maybe you saw it coming, maybe you didn’t, but why did you feel that a switch in career was right for you at this time? What does HOK offer you that drew you to them? Well for one, a promotion, more autonomy, and the kind of learning opportunity to sort of be in more of a leadership role. It was a hard decision, because it’s hard to get over firstly, six and a half years of inertia. But I was also in a good position there and I think they were seeing me as somebody who was on their way up in the firm, kind of thing, and that’s fine, and I appreciated that. But that wasn’t everything to me. I didn’t become an architect because I wanted to work at SOM. I became an architect so I could learn about doing good architecture. No matter where that is. So, they gave me a lot of tools and opportunities to climb that ladder, but there was also a lot of political structures in place. When you’ve got a 75 year old company, you can’t help but carry around 75 years’ worth of baggage to some degree. There were a lot of people in my way, I’ll say. And they weren’t trying to keep me down, but it was like, between me and Brian, there were still 2 more levels. I was an associate, there’s still an associate director, then there’s a director, and then a partner. And yes, I was having daily conversations with partners and directors, but in order for me to be promoted and be given this sort of autonomy, it’s not a matter of them not trusting me to have that, but it was a matter of the other people around looking over my shoulder and asking, “Hey, why did he get that?!” And now they’re complaining about my promotion and all of the politics involved and all of that. It was easy to just say, “You know what? These guys are giving me trust from day one, they’re handing it over to me.” And it’s challenged me to move my career in another direction. When you switched firms, are there any problems in transferring creative property? Are there any tools and processes that you can’t bring from SOM to HOK without there being problems?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 196

If you asked a lawyer, or H.R, then yes, probably. In fact, I had a few things on my computer at SOM that I forgot to save on my own before leaving, and they had a whole policy of you can’t use your own personal hard drives and non-SOM approved flash drives, etc…I forgot to save those things, and I had to call H.R and get I.T to get it off my machine, give it to HR to review the contents of that folder that I’m asking for, to see whether or not they can release it to me. So stuff like that. There’s a lot of corporate sort of, restrictions on it. But in terms of the intellectual property, obviously I don’t have access now to all of the old projects, and references, and hotel design guidelines, plans of Burj Dubai if I wanted to refer to lease depths, etc…But you can’t stop somebody from retaining a certain amount of knowledge they have. You can’t help but absorb all that stuff. So the projects I did, yeah – I’ve got all the presentations for that, and it’s in my portfolio. And the AIA says that for the things you worked on, you have every right to retain some of that, and of course I’m retaining that. And in fact when I came here, the marketing group wanted to make a cut sheet for me saying, “Here’s his experience.” And obviously I have no experience at HOK yet, so they’re putting on my resume that I’ve done this project and this project and this project, in this market, in this geographic location. And oh look, there’s an asterisk there, this was before he came

to HOK. That’s it. You know, so as long as you’re up front and honest, I don’t see why you can’t talk about your previous experience. Before school, how did you choose to become an architect, or be in the design field for that matter? I feel like I could have a better answer every time. But I blame my dad, because he always wanted to design his own house, and would always keep those little and maybe they don’t have them anymore – those little magazines that you could buy of house plans. In magazine stands or bookstores. They were these cheap newsprint pages, and it was crap developer spec projects. They all look the same, they all had brick fascias and horrible hip roofs and things like that. But he was constantly buying those and keeping them out. So I would flip through and I would like, try to sort of re-imagine those plans and redraw them myself and look at the relationships of rooms, entry sequences, and all of that stuff. And my mom, she was also a landscape designer, so she would always have graph paper around. So I would steal her graph paper and look at his house plans and draw my own, and that was it. I would do this with friends, and they would start drawing waterslides, giant towers and things like that. And I’m like, “You can’t do that! That doesn’t even work!” Something like that. That was when I was like 10, so well before college. You always wanted to go into architecture. Did you have any doubts about what field you wanted to go in? No. It was pretty much always architecture. I focused on art, sculpture, hand-drawing, etc…It was one of those things where everyone was saying that you have to be good at math. And I kind of ignored that because I wasn’t that great at math. I would nod and say, “Yeah, ok well whatever we’ll cross that bridge when we get there.” And it turns out you don’t have to worry about it that much. I think that’s how a lot of people confusing architecture and engineering. I got that a lot too. It was kind of awkward. I wasn’t that good at calculus. Yeah exactly! I remember taking the physics for architects class as an undergrad, and everyone was like, “Oh, that must be hard.” And I was like, “No, that’s like the remedial physics class.” Planetary movement? I don’t know, let’s talk about Newton’s Laws. I talked with Phil a few weeks ago, and he was talking about things that he’s done. His accomplishments. I asked him if there was a way you keep track of that, what you want to have done in your life. He says, “Yeah, I keep a personal timeline, you should keep one too.” All of the things that you want to accomplish, you should keep yourself a personal timeline of what you have done, and when you want to accomplish it by. I wondered, that at your current career trajectory, how that fits into your personal timeline, if you keep it. Maybe it’s in your head. Are you doing everything that you want to be doing? And what’s still on the list? Well how long do you have here? That’s a good question, because I kind of had one running in the background I think but I never plotted it out. Let’s see…I just turned 35, just as a point of reference. I knew that

I was going to be in grad school until I was 28, which I was. I think I told myself I wanted to be licensed by the time I was 35. Which I did. In fact, I had by the time I was 33 or 34, I can’t remember. So I hit that goal. But, quite honestly, when it comes to these other things, I didn’t know that I was going to be spending six and a half years at SOM. I thought it would be 3 or 4 years tops. And I didn’t really even have SOM on my radar. I kind of was looking at MVRDV, and Herzog and DeMeuron when I first graduated, and then the recession hit, and everyone held on for dear life. That put me off course, but I still got licensed in that timeframe. The next 5, 10, 15 years, I don’t know. I’ve been talking continuously with friends of mine about registering a company name. Just getting something in the books so that if a project were to ever come up, we would be prepared to do some sort of independent practice. But it’s truly hard to have a timeline for something like that. You never know if this developer friend of yours in Mexico or something will suddenly call you up and say, “Hey, I need a new condo tower.” Or it could be 3 years from now, or 8 years from now. So, maybe if I had a generic timeline, maybe by the time I’m 40, I’ll have a project of my own that isn’t necessarily under the umbrella of a different company. Or hopefully on the boards or moving toward that. I’m glad there are no other recording devices other than your phone in this room, because I didn’t take this job necessarily thinking that I would ride out my career here. It was more to say, “I want that challenge of more leadership, and trying to build a practice at that level to see what that means for myself.” But I know a lot of people like Phil, if you had asked him if he was going to spend his entire career at SOM, he probably would’ve said “no” too. Yet, he’s in a great spot and has a lot of opportunity there because of it. Beyond 40…I don’t know. Haha. I think that, my models have always been vague. People like, Nader Tehrani who was my thesis advisor. He’s running an office NADAAA, with 3 “A’s”, don’t forget that. And Vincent James, who’s practice has sadly been up and down, and is fairly small despite winning the national AIA firm award in 2013. They’re like, 8 people now. They were both one hand in the academic world. For example, Vince taught some option studios at the GSD, and is teaching at MIT now, runs a practice in Minneapolis. Nader was department head at MIT, and runs a practice of 20 people in Boston. They’re getting a lot more publicity these days. They are academics, but they didn’t get into academia by working their way up the ladder and kissing somebody’s ass. No disrespect to Preston Scott Cohen, but at the GSD, he started as adjunct and worked his way up to that role, but never had a practice where you can say, “He’s an architect first, and a teacher second.” For me it’s always architect first, and teacher second, that is more interesting. Somebody like Vince was asked to teach an option studio at the GSD because they tapped him based on the interest of the work he was doing. He had to be a practitioner and have his own firm and do that work in order for something to think he was worthy of teaching. So that’s sort of the idea I have in mind. I want to build a practice, and let that generate ideas still elsewhere. When it comes to that vague timeline, where you’re intending on going, do you have a specific mantra or philosophy or something that’s pushing you to seek those positions?

Hmm. This is becoming a therapy session. “Tell me more about your father.” Haha. I don’t know that’s a good question. Mantra…or what’s driving it? No. It’s maybe what drew me to a place like SOM and Herzog and DeMeuron. Being interested in both at the same time is what drew me to that rather than someplace a little more abstract or creative, for lack of a better term. Both practices are grounded on the project. Like that project has to come from a client or a specific need, or a grounded kind of origin. Not something that I dreamed up as a creative professor, but I needed something to make it look like I was doing work. It wasn’t like a pavilion that was going to get torn down in 6 months, it wasn’t a thing I just dreamed up and exists only on paper. These were real projects with a capital “P.” So I think that was the goal, or mantra for lack of a better term. Talking a little more about transition out of school into working, what was that like for you? What were the hardest parts of being put into the work environment? The hardest transition to make was not from school to my first job. All of my jobs have been feathered in with school a little bit. So when I went as an undergrad, as a sophomore I started working summers with Ralph Rapson, so that summer job became a full time job after I graduated. I did the same thing with Vincent James for a couple months before I went to grad school. Then I came back for competitions in between, things like that. Same thing after school, I worked for Howler and Yoon, after having Meejin as a professor. That was for 8 months. Then that big split happened when I went from there to SOM. I had worked in firms no bigger than 20 people, and suddenly went to 600 when I first started. So that was just like…crazy. Yes SOM Chicago was 600. We had 10, 9, 8, and a little bit of 5, and all of the studios were densified. So anyway that was such a big transition to make, and it was hard to kind of keep that focus on the idea, because you felt like you got thrown in. It’s funny, because I was just talking about the project, where you’re thrown into something and you’re just one element of it. And you’re just studying the crown of the building, or the façade treatment, or something like that, and you lose sight of the whole picture. So I think that was the biggest shock. To still somehow find the kernel of the project in that. Eventually you realize that you work in a studio, and the studio breaks things down in scale, and then that studio has several projects and there’s a small team of maybe 3-4 people, and that suddenly becomes the core that you’re talking about. And when you get to work on something from the very beginning, then you can retain that sort of idea, and it all becomes the same. You’re starting from the same origins, the same kind of techniques, whatever. I would like to think that – and it was funny because I was asked to present some of my work at Blacksburg yesterday – I’d like to think that it’s not tied to the office. That I’m the same architect regardless of where I’m working. So I’ve presented stuff at Vincent James’s office as well as SOM. So I’ve presented like, a little pavilion that’s 30 feet tall to an expo center that’s 2 kilometers long. But I’m still the same architect. There’s still that driving force I guess. I had a question about information and how you filter it. I had a good conversation with Don the day before, and we were talking about how cell phones, for example, how do you set it aside? There’s a lot of

information coming in, and you’ve got to find a way to filter it out. Because in the end, it’s too much! You’ve got to get things done. And there’s something to be said about having a deep concentration on your work where you’d be able to get into it and push everything else aside. So I wondered if you have some sort of mechanism or procedure that you’ve established for yourself, where you start to filter out distractions from all of this incoming information, and have a way to ingest what you need to know, what you need to work on, in manageable, bite-size pieces? Day to day, I’m not exactly sure. It’s one of those things where I always have to deal with questions from the team, make sure everyone is moving in the right direction, despite any detours that come up. But it’s funny, you know, in sort of a backwards way, in having the need to go back and forth and present to a client, is sort of weirdly one of those things that keeps it grounded in this basic idea. Because you have to take all these things, technical or esoteric things that you’re talking about on a daily basis in the studio, and hand it over to somebody who doesn’t have any idea of what you’re talking about, and you have to sort of distill it to its essence. Or you have to give it a sales pitch or something like that. You have to take all the things you’ve been working on for the last two weeks, and talk to somebody about it, in the most general terms. And maybe they have an understanding because “A” – they’re the client, and “B” – they’ve been on a few previous presentations, or whatever. So there’s this process to it. But the need to have to talk about it to the outside, whether it’s a client or even a consultant, still reminds me, or forces me to remind someone else, what the origin of the project was, or what the kernel of that idea is, or how it’s mutated or something. Because otherwise it’s hard to reflect. I can’t just close the door and take an hour and just think about projects. But I do find that since my role has become a little more leadership oriented, rather than day to day things, I find that I’m sketching a lot more, diagramming a lot more, trying to keep big ideas or big gestures in mind, rather than getting hung up on details. I think that’s more a function of my role and the team rather than my strategy as a designer to filter out background noise. So I don’t know, I don’t have a great answer. My next question has to do with the future of architecture. Kind of what we talked about in the beginning of the semester in professional practice. As technology and understanding of building systems and components, and how it all evolves, do you think designers will become more specialized individually? And will they be forced to collaborate more just because they know more about one thing and less about others? And where do people who call themselves “architects” fall into that? I’ve been grappling with that. The thing I told you about 10 minutes ago about my personal goal and where I’d like to be is almost being killed by that article I gave you guys. That RIBA study. I’m well aware of that risk. But it’s funny – short answer, I have no clue, and I’m still trying to work that out. Long answer is – at SOM, there was a technical archvitect that was constantly hammering me to figure out the detail. Draw it exactly as it is put together. And my response often was, “I’d like to hear back from the curtain wall contractor, so I know what their limitations are, what their fabrication is, what type, etc...” He would say,

Alexander Cheng 197

“No! You’re the architect. You have to draw it. You have to tell them what to do.” I can understand that. It’s the classic model of the architect. We refine everything. We design the doorknob, we design the chair, we design the cabinetry. But I think frankly, that’s not where the profession is going. As much as we want to control these things, we’re just not. So, the flipside of that, and is what I subscribe to a little bit more, is one of my professors was saying, you know, if you want to look maybe before the definition of classic architect that he’s talking about, let’s talking about the definition of the word architect, and that’s “master builder.” It’s not mason, it’s not wood worker, it’s not the guy who does that craft. It’s the one who is the sort of umbrella that collects all of these things. So yeah, you need to have knowledge of all those fields, but only insofar as how it affects your design, or lets you design according to a parameter. So no, I’m not going to be a mason, or you know, a curtain wall contractor, but I just need to know enough about that discipline to design to that parameter. So when it comes to specializations, I don’t know. I think that’s where the field can very easily fragmented and become BIM oriented, or sustainability oriented, or fabrication oriented. And that’s what they’re doing. You’re getting sub-consultants from different companies working for architects rather than outside clients. And I’m interested in architectural acoustics. I’m working for an acoustics consulting firm over the summer and talking to a lot of people in that specialty, in that dynamic between architects and consultants. And there seems to be a divide right now. And personally, what I want to do is to challenge that, and that’s where I’m trying to go. And here’s where that article I gave you comes in. I don’t think they’re encouraging big firms necessarily and that’s what should happen, but they’re saying that this is the tendency, that all big firms will try to do all of this “in-house.” Because everyone finds it easier to work between teams when they’re on the same floor and on the same payroll. Sure, we can do architecture, engineering, acoustics, whatever. So companies are going to continue to try and bundle that in. And maybe you’ll find yourself in a position where you can get a job as easily with Gensler because they’re dealing with office environments and acoustics as you would with a consultant. That’s where I understand that corporate versus specialty divide happening. But in my mind, it’s part of the same problem. It’s all like, increasing complexity and fragmentation. It’s whether or not a company can put all of that under one roof, or if the pieces of the project have to be chopped up into consultants. That’ll be interesting to see. So that’s kind of the root of the question. So you don’t have a particular prediction for it? No I’m trying to navigate it myself. Haha. But I think it’s interesting. I think the challenge is that the size of the firm, in the past, has correlated to the size of the project. Chip’s doing small, single family houses, and SOM is doing skyscrapers. There’s got to be something in between to do schools, and low-rise condo developments. And hospitals, that’s a totally different thing. So that’s where I sort of take issues with that article or study. Yeah the field is getting increasingly complex, but there’s got to be a 30 person firm doing a 300,000 square foot building somewhere. Those

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 198

buildings are not just going to cease to exist. Right? So maybe there’s a market still to do that. I don’t know.

I think. So I definitely look to them for a model. Like, yeah you can go from corporate to creative individual firms rather than the other way around.

How do you break the routine of work? How do you separate work from personal life? And does it separate for you at all?

And I ask you about your mentors because I’m curious about what questions you’re asking yourself now, that you would seek advice from them about. Because I feel like we all have our own individual agenda, and we reach similar realizations. In whatever we’re studying we’re going to have similar questions that we’re going to answer, and I think it changes with age. So I wonder what the questions are, at 35, in your position now, that you’re trying to answer and grapple with?

I think my fiancée would like to ask the same question. And it’s funny because she’s also an architect, and we met at Skidmore. She’s at Cannon now. Anyway I think it doesn’t. When I’m here, I’m not always working, and don’t always tell my bosses that. I’m looking online at something. And I think it’s funny because the things that I do, that I’m interested in, in my free time, I’ll look at a car blog, or a design blog, or something like that. There’s things that I’m looking at, and I’m like, “That’s really cool.” And that percolates into my work. When I go on a trip, I’m looking at buildings. And no, it’s not a study tour, or field trip or anything like that. But of course I’m going to see buildings. I made a specific trip to Brazil to see the architecture. In fact that’s where I got engaged – in a Niemayer building (with the hyperbolic surface). That’s cool! I mean, no it doesn’t separate at all, and I don’t think it needs to. And we’re going to get married at the Saarinen chapel at MIT. So no there’s no division, but I think it enriches everything. When it comes to the work-life division, yeah you need a break and maintain your sanity. But it’s one of those things where you can appreciate the details of something else. For example John Pawson wrote a cookbook. It’s that sort of thing, if you can appreciate the purity of materials, maybe you can appreciate the purity of food, and the way it’s prepared or presented. So it’s all of those things combined. And I think it’s one of those things where the idea of work-life balance, is only valid if you accept that you’re going to work a 40 hour workweek and you need to go home, and your kids get out of school, and need to live in a very structured way. But if you see it as your life consists of these things, even when you’re out of work, then maybe that concept is more about, when do you need a release valve? When do you need to stop being stressed out and relax? I don’t know. Maybe I’m thinking too casually about this in a corporate environment. You mentioned a little about your mentors. Rapson? Vincent James? Yeah Vincent James. And Rapson was one of them, but he was way beyond his prime. I mean he was 87 when I started working for him I think. And you’re still in touch with them? Well Rapson is deceased. His son Toby – we’re actually going to try and meet up with him this week. Vincent James, I haven’t been in touch with him in a while. I would consider him a model or mentor of mine. Nader, yeah definitely. When the convention was here last year we met up for lunch, and he had a bunch of advice for me, etc…Those would be the main ones. Meejin Yoon and Eric Howler too. And Eric is an interesting one too, because I secretly model myself after him. In the sense that he went to work for KPF for 11 years, before he split off and went to go work for Diller Scofidio when they were doing the ICA in Boston. And from them he started his own practice and started teaching. And their practice is taking off

I had this discussion with Nader a year ago. I was in talks with Jeanne Gang for about 7 months before I get an offer. I then interview them 3 times. I was going to make my move over there, and I had these big career questions about where should I go? What should I do next? And all those things. And I wanted to ask people like Eric Howler before coming here. “Am I crazy? Is this a good move for me? What does this look like from the outside?” But “A”, they weren’t going to give me all the right answers. And “B”, I needed to make the decision quickly and leap into the void in a way. Nader was great in saying, “Go for it.” And I think that was talking about Studio Gang. And I didn’t go there because I think I would have been kind of merged in with the rest of the group, rather than be given a new challenge in a leadership role. But I think the advice to be bolder about something, and maybe take a bit of a risk was a good one. I guess it would be question along those lines. “Am I at the right point to uproot myself? Does it seem like I’m being too comfortable in my current position?” All of these questions in a way, it’s like if you’re asking them in the first place, you probably know the answer. So I don’t know. I didn’t consult them too much, maybe I should have. We’re going into our last year in an educational institution – speaking broadly, I know some people are going to grad school. But do you have advice for opportunities? Any questions we should ask? Or things we should seek out that we would not have access in a firm or anywhere else? I mean, maybe having a timeline or having some sort of end goal in that regard in saying that – know that you’re not just going to a firm in terms of how you can help them. They’re definitely helping you somehow. Know what you’re trying to gain from that experience. What you can get out of that job. I went to SOM thinking, “This isn’t exactly what I want to do, but if I want to be an architect, I need that grounding, I need that reality, and there’s definitely something to gain from a firm like that whether it’s their history or their knowledge. No, I don’t want it to define me, but I knew I could pull something from that for my own good. I guess it would be along those lines. I mean something within the school…access to resources we might not have outside of the school. It’s a huge school with opportunities and resources, and we don’t have a lot of time. Don’t think about school as necessarily setting you up for your next job. Because you do need to finish your work. And seeing the stuff pinned up over the last two days – the fifth year work – it’s all about

how you define your own project, and complete that. I would say follow your own interest as it relates to your own project. If you are interested in acoustics – great, fine. But define your project in a way that lets you study that or design to that rather than the other way around. Rather than saying, “Ok, this is what I want to do when I get out, here’s how I need to equip myself before graduation.” I wouldn’t think that way. On that same page, any other advice for thesis or pre-thesis? Anything to do in the summer? Keep it very grounded and simple, because it will get complex very easily. I’m not saying small, but keep it simple. If it’s a site, keep it to your site. If it’s a program, keep it to your program. Define that, and set it aside. If you give yourself the chance to keep re-defining it, it’s not going to become about the resolution of the project, but more about you grappling with this question. I fell in this trap, and I didn’t quite know the location, the size, the program. And it’s not necessarily about that in the end, but I kept on going back and forth and started questioning my underlying motives. In the end I never really had a building out of it. I never got a great project. It is an architectural thesis. You should be having a commentary about architecture, or the approach of architecture, or the function of it, or the representation of it, or whatever. I almost took the role of a confused client rather than an architect that was trying to resolve a project, or answer a question about, you know, the interaction of structure in architecture. Try to define something early on. Don’t let that control the project. Matt Vibberts at Cannon, have you ever seen his boat thesis? He started small with a boat, and would have decisions that are made by building the boat, like the size of the building. So the building was a boathouse, but it was more about the actual boat. So that seems like that’s along the same page.

refer to. So that takes that little bit of pressure off. When it comes down to it, it’s more like, I was just continuing to do what I feel I do best, or want to do. And a lot of times, I found people getting in my way, or undermining it out of sheer hierarchy. I realize that a lot of times, things I was doing, there were a number of projects that I did, and I didn’t confer with my leader, and it got presented to the client, and the client loved it. And the project continues to move forward. And the technical architects that I was working with said, “Yes, that’s totally feasible.” You start to realize that, the minute you put it in front of somebody, and the only thing they do is critique it only on a subjective basis, not really for a lack of understanding of it or lack of experience, but more like, “I don’t like what you’re doing, and I’m in charge, so we’re going to do it my way.” That’s when it really started to rub me the wrong way. I would say, “Look, I understand this through and through, more than you do. I’m designing it, and I’m a perfectly capable designer. And the client likes my design, and in fact have chosen my design. So if I were to put this in front of you before that, it would have been only an aesthetic change.” So I think it was moments like that which made me think that I can lead something. I don’t need somebody to change that course. Why would I subject myself to that additional criticism, when I’ll I’m doing is adhering to the political structure of something. So I don’t think there was a moment like, “Ok good. Finally, I passed that test, now I can lead a team.” I just did what I do best. And it’s always going to be that way. Even if I’m at the top of the totem pole, that’s not going to be only my decision. I’m always going to serve. And have questions of whether or not that’s the right thing, and maybe someone will be like me and have a better idea, and hopefully I can realize that, and not let my ego get in the way of it.

In my mind, that’s still interesting because it’s all about – in the end, the final product, the process of getting there, the assumptions you make that you sort of, have to negotiate or question along the way. It wasn’t like, “Should I make a boat? Or should I swim? Well if I’m going to swim, what are the advantages and disadvantages of swimming? And would I need a pontoon to rest?” I hate to even say this. I don’t want to say keep it reductive, because that’s not it at all. It’s supposed to be an evolving process. But don’t make it a reverse funnel, where you start from one point, and have 20 answers at the end, none of which have any resolution. How do you know when you’re ready to lead? You said you wanted to come here (HOK) for a little more autonomy and a little more freedom. So at what point were you like, “You know, I’m at the capacity to make my own decisions, and I want to do that.” At some point, I think I want to be in a leadership position, but I don’t think I know nearly enough to be there. So I feel like there’s some sort of obligation for me to reach a certain level and feel comfortable, and have others recognize that I am capable. So how do you know? You’re never going to be the single author of a building. So you can let that conception go. It’s not like you need to know every single thing about it. You’re always going to have a team supporting it, or consultants, or people that did it before you that you can

Alexander Cheng 199

2.2 - Chelsea Kilburn Architectural Intern - von Weise Associates

INTERVIEW

Chelsea Kilburn is a recent graduate of Virginia Tech’s School of Architecture + Design. She is an intern at von Weise Associates in Chicago, and is currently learning a lot about the professional world and how it differs from the academic practice. She brings a youthful, energetic perspective in understanding the profession.

What is your position title here at Von Weise Associates? Oh gosh, I don’t even know if I know that. Haha. I think I’m an intern architect. I think that’s what it is, before you become a project manager. How did you get to be a part of the office? Did you inquire for a summer internship after Chicago Studio? Do you think being hosted in VWA was crucial in your decision to work here out of school? Yes and yes! I was here in the spring, and Chip was looking for interns, and I was looking for an internship in Chicago in general. Obviously I love everybody here so it just sort of fit that I could stay on. And when I was looking for actual, real life, grown up employment, it was super simple. I just called and said, “you know, if you guys need anything, I love you! I ‘d be happy to intern with you again.” It was easy, Chip was like, “Ok yeah, can you come tomorrow?” Yeah I think it’s about keeping up a relationship and having a good experience. Why are you practicing here? Is your time here more to gain a greater variety of experience? Or is it more because you have a desire to work on smaller projects? A combination of the two? Yeah I really particularly like the range of work that we have because it’s smaller and more manageable for an individual to work on. It’s not just houses, it’s not just commercial build outs, it’s a little bit of both. You get experience on both ends in Chicago, out of Chicago, out of the state. Because they are smaller, we get to do everything. We work really closely with the client, so you get to observe that relationship form at a really intimate level, and it’s awesome. If they want a custom cabinet for their spoons below where their coffee maker would be, you know about it. You know how they operate in that space, sort of? As someone who has virtually no experience in an actual, for real grown up setting, it’s really nice to see the narrative form, but also be able to see all the details. I do RCP’s, I do routing of ducts – not really, but I have done that! Massing models, all kinds of stuff. It’s zooming in and out of scales, every day. It’s nice. And for gaining my hours, for registration, that’s super helpful. One of my concerns in going into the office world is that things can get mundane. How do you “keep things fresh” within the office environment? How do you keep the curiosity going with the day to day rigor of the professional world?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 200

That’s a totally valid question. I think a lot of people coming from school struggle with that I think. I’ve seen a lot of my friends go through that 3-4 month dip in mood. You realize how much more the schedule is strict in your life, and some days you have to deal with days that are much more mundane. But honestly, I don’t know if I’ve ever really felt that way, because this office lets me do so many different things. There are some times I will have a SketchUp model day after day after day. But, it’s fast paced enough, that you’re always like, “oh man, I’ve gotta finish that.” And I mean the people too – the people in the office are wonderful. Everybody is excited to talk to everybody else all the time. It’s fun to sit at lunch and talk to your co-workers. And then, I think

that our office is pretty involved in, or we are trying to become more involved in, more events across the city. We will have an outing in the summer where we go somewhere. We go to different lectures together. There is an outside pull – we’re not always in just the “bubble” of VWA. What do you hope to accomplish here at VWA? How does that differ from what do you hope to accomplish as an architect in your lifetime? I want to manage a project eventually…haha. I need to learn like, how to draw a building section first. But, what I would love to gain out of this place is the ability to work with everybody along the lines of interaction with maybe the structural engineer, all the subs, all the different people that will come into the process. I think that’s really important, being able to handle a stream of email, as well as managing a project from the client’s perspective, and from Chip’s perspective, is a real talent. Especially if you’re the only person on the project. You’re the only person building that entire house, pretty much. I think that’s amazing. Short term, that’s what I want to do. Versus, what I want to do with my career as a whole? *Sigh.* I’m still trying to figure that out. I think that all the Tech grads I’m here with, we talk about it a lot. What are our overarching visions, trajectories, you know? I just wanna make good buildings. I wanna make good space. I wanna help people have an interest. I wanna educate people about that. I think that’s something that is frustrated from what I’ve seen in the past six months is that some people don’t have an idea what we do, and that strengthening that relationship can get that thing built better. Not necessarily more quickly, and that’s not the point. But I think there’s an understanding that could be a bit better. Yeah I don’t know. I just keep learning. You kind of already answered it, but where do you see your career going in the years to come? You said you weren’t sure? I’d like to go to grad school. I have an interest in landscape architecture and design actually. One of my co-workers here – I just want to grow up to be her. I don’t think she’s here today, but Tiffany – wow she’s amazing. She studied landscape architecture and architecture. And she’s like a catalogue of plants! She’s able to make these two worlds mesh, and its just so interesting to me. So grad school maybe at some point, haha. I don’t know. I’m not afraid to jump around to different areas either. I think for me, it’s a matter of what I can do best, and where I fit best. Just gaining experience. I don’t know if I see myself owning my own office. I could see it being collaborative with someone. Being a design principal in some way. I don’t think it’s an ego thing to say, “I want to own my own office.” But I don’t think it needs to be, “my name – Associates.” You know? I don’t know if that answered your question, but there it is. What are the big problems that you see in architecture as it stands now? That can be within an office, with a client, with buildings in general, the construction, whatever. This is what we talk about every night, when I go home. Haha. This is why living with other architects is difficult. I think there’s obviously some day to day petty things that you deal with like, “oh, the GC didn’t get

back to me fast enough,” or something like that. As a bigger picture, it’s sort of what I mentioned before – like a mutual understanding. Helping people understand that just having a granite countertop doesn’t mean it’s nicer. Or having something look like wood is nicer. Not that it’s a question of finish or material, but helping them understand more like, design principals, I guess. And then understanding, what we can do as architects to help them experience that. I don’t know if this is off topic in any way, but when we use SketchUp to walk around a space and show people a space, it’s more about the massing of things, and helping them see, “Oh, we have to do all these different types of drawings or this kind of detailing to get this kind of effect.” Not that it’s an effect necessarily but as a spatial condition that ultimately you will want to be in. I think that’s an issue that I see. People are wanting things cheaper and faster and it’s expected in some ways I guess. But I think we should slow down and ask, “what do you do?” I think that with some other professionals, like a lawyer, you wouldn’t say, “Oh I don’t trust your opinion on this.” Or a doctor. It’s not like you have to get it in the technical sense but there is an understanding between the two parties. It’s basic but you build on it. And for us especially we have to build on it! No pun intended! Haha. But yeah, that’s frustrating. Where do you see the profession of architecture going in the decades down the road? What will become important in the design of buildings? These are tough questions. Haha. But no they’re great questions! Well, what I see happening has a lot to do with the influence of technology. Not just in an office setting but in a building’s setting. So, software leading to how space is shaped. One of my co-workers, Aya – she was talking about this. We’ve destroyed the uses for the column. We don’t need the column anymore. So now we have solid surfaces, or fluid surfaces coming in out of a floor or a wall. So now I think we are at the risk of destroying the wall. So you know, what happens after that? Which is exciting in some ways, to see these blob forms, and other varieties of spaces emerge. But what I would like to see happen is a re-considering of classic ideas. And it doesn’t have to be like we go back to medieval times – that’s not what I’m saying in any way. Nothing fad based. Everything’s just happening so quickly. There’s things that are essential in architecture. You need a floor. You need a wall. That can evolve, but you can’t get rid of those. Technology I see is going to be a way for things to get very blurry. That’s how I see it changing, and it’s super interesting. A lot of this virtual reality stuff, like I think it’s kind of silly and fad and trend right now – modeling spaces in your eyes – nothing physical. But that “third space” is super interesting and I’d like to see what that can do. What advice do you have for my generation of architects? Well, I’d like to consider myself the same generation. Haha. Yeah I mean, I think you should make good space. Be conscious of the impact we have not only environmentally, but socially as well. I think a lot of people approach architecture now like – we’re 90 percent socially minded and 10 percent architecturally minded. Or it could be the same with anything. “Oh, we’re philosophers and then architects.” Or, “Oh, we’re cultural anthropologists and then architects.”

And I think it’s important to be an architect. Not that you can’t let other things influence you and inform your decisions, but it’s important to be an architect and not a sociologist. You can help make the world better in many ways as an architect, and you can make intellectually rigorous. You can make it cleaner, greener, however you want to phrase it. But you need to let architecture do that, and not necessarily all of these different things that you try to connect to it. And I know that’s kind of big…but it’s important to keep the mindset that we are here to be architects. I think it’s important to know how things go together, and how to make that smarter, and more, clever in a way. So pushing that boundary is important to us. Keep history in mind, keep basic design principles in mind, keep your Virginia Tech education in mind. But be current, and aware of what’s happening around you. Be a smart designer. Make good spaces. You were saying to regard history. So I was doing applications in New York, and it seemed like everyone was trying to be so edgy. All of these “avant garde” places that think they’re so great. They would say, “We design spaces, that have never been done before. We design in methods and ways that are unprecedented, and have never been done before.” Now, I think that’s ridiculous. You don’t acknowledge history at all? I don’t think you can do that. Yeah and it’s not like you have to be citing Vitruvius or whatever, but architecture is cyclical and recyclable and iterative, so grow on it you know? Build on it. It’s likely that you have long hours on a regular basis, so how do you manage the dialogue between living + working? On a scale of 1-10, how much do you work? (Where 1 is a 30 hour workweek and you don’t care about your work, and 10 is don’t eat, don’t sleep, and work until you go unconscious.) So this is an issue I think is really important to talk about. So maybe this ties back to a little bit of the previous question. As someone who’s new to the field – when you graduate and go to the real, working world, it’s really important to foster an environment of mutual respect between your co-workers and employers. Some offices have the notion that it’s competitive in some ways. And that you will put in that time to gain momentum for your project or your team or whatever it is. And that’s just a different setup. But in my case in this office, everybody has an investment in their personal life, whether it’s their family, their friends, their own projects, their own home, whatever it is – you have to respect your co-worker’s time. Like, I have to respect Chip’s time and he has to respect my time, you know? So there’s never been a night where I’ve been here until 3 AM. I don’t think that will ever happen. I’ve been here late, but that will never occur regularly on a weekly basis. If something needs to happen, I’m more than happy to do it because that’s my job! That is my role, to help things happen and get done. But if I’m not feeling well, and I try to come in, people will say, “Hey, you know, you need to take time to be a person.” That helps you with your work. What was the second part of the question? Right, the scale from one to ten. I love to work. I love to learn about architecture. I’m still in that state from school, like I still have a lot of momentum. I don’t know if that will ever really go away. So I think I’m an eight. I’ve been really conscious of trying to separate work from personal life. In the city, there’s so many things to

do that you have to go out and do those things, and not necessarily have to tie them back to your work in some way. Like, “Oh, I went to the Art Museum and it influences my work ethic in some way or my design work.” No, you should go because you want to go and do that. Or similarly with architecture lectures. I’m not trying to go because I want “brownie points,” you know? Haha. I’m going because I want to go and learn! I think it’s important if you want to continue growing creatively. I’m in the stage here where I help people execute things. So I like to go home and work on my own projects. I’ll design things with James, with my friends, by myself, and it’s not necessarily a building sometimes. But it’s difficult because when you get home, you’re really tired! Haha. Even though you sit all day, you get really tired. Maybe you go to the library and read a book on some building that you admire, or you go somewhere in the city. You shouldn’t go home and keep working on drawing CD’s. It’s important to keep yourself engaged. But I don’t think people from Tech have that issue. I think it’s engrained. So yeah, maybe like an eight. What should I not miss while I’m in Chicago? Two things. Where is your favorite place to go? Where is your favorite place to eat? Oh, okay. Favorite place to go…I have so many places. I feel like I’m just talking and talking. Haha. Um, I’ve decided my new favorite building in Chicago, like iconic building, is the Thompson Center. I LOVE the Thompson Center. I thought it was really strange for a while. But I was in there sending off some mail the other day. But when you come in at midday, and the light comes in, it’s like AMAZING. It’s so weird and crazy and just nice. It’s so awesome! It’s this meeting of transportation – like the train is there, there’s a weird food court, a post office, a DMV. It’s like a mall almost. All these weird things that come together. It’s pink and blue now – it’s supposed to be red. But it’s got these pink and blue panels on it. It’s a Helmut Jahn project. It has this weird shape. It has elevators whizzing up and down, and stairs everywhere! I don’t know. I just LOVE that place. It’s just a weird public place in the city. You know? It’s not like any other official building in the city. It’s so weird and chaotic and fun and busy all the time. And a place to eat…I love Polish food. So there’s a place called Pod Lankah I think? It’s off Division on the blue line. That place is great, but you’ve gotta have an appetite. It’s like my grandma’s house. Like if her dining room was eight times bigger. Or Chinatown, I like Chinatown too. There’s just good food everywhere it’s a problem. Haha.

Alexander Cheng 201

2.3 - Philip Enquist Partner, Urban Design + Planning

INTERVIEW

Philip Enquist, FAIA is the partner in charge of Urban Planning in SOM’s City Design Practice. He offers insight into the value of a greater vision. He is looking at cities and beyond - broadening the scope of work and collaboration between people to solve some of the biggest problems that face the earth today.

What does it mean to be an Urban Designer? Why are you one?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 202

I think that my mission has changed actually through my career, because I’ve always been in urban design. I went to school in architecture, but even in architecture school I knew I wanted to be involved in the larger urban context. I don’t know where that came from. I grew up in the Los Angeles region in a very small town. But when I got to L.A., I loved the city, especially the historic core of the city. At that time it was pretty much abandoned, there were a lot of vacant buildings. Everyone was investing in places like Irvine, Valencia, the West Side, Century City – no one was investing in downtown. No one was building walkable environments. No one was talking about how one building should relate to another building, and how buildings add value to the street. And in architecture school, we were getting projects like, design a house sitting in an orchard. Or, design a museum on a green field site. No one ever gave us context. So when I got to graduate school I said, “I’m really going to take on downtown L.A. because it’s so full of problems. No one’s living there, no one’s walking, and it’s hot in the summer. It’s like, really hot in the summer, hotter than the rest of Los Angeles. It doesn’t relate to the river. But there was no urban design school back then. The only guy was Colin Rowe, back at Cornell, was teaching about collage city and urbanism. And you had guys like Jonathan Barnett writing about urbanism. But that for some reason seemed like the bigger design problem. It wasn’t about a building so much as it was about the urban community. But as I’ve progressed in this career, I realize how much more critical this is than just the interest of a design student. Cities are really such a critical part of the solution for our planet – living in higher density, accommodating for population growth, being able to be flexible to accommodate evolving workplace, evolving housing, evolving educational and cultural amenities. That we, as a design community, need to know much more about cities. How cities grow, how they contract, how they stay competitive, how they add value. And I think the architectural community has just not grabbed that. Especially the schools for the most part. There are exceptions. I’ve been reading a lot about Mark Rothko, and I just got this thing in the mail from Richard Serra’s new show, and it’s called “Reversals.” Ok. So I’m looking at this (Richard Serra brochure) and it kind of reminds me of the modern architectural design challenge. And Mark Rothko as a modern painter, he never wanted his paintings in the same room as other artists. He never wanted his paintings hit by natural light. He wanted to control the amount of light that hit his paintings. And he wanted his paintings in complete isolation. You viewed those in isolation. And there is something about modernism, and modern architecture, that created this priority to view your design in isolation, and its embedded in modern art as well. Look at that (gestures to brochure). This is my statement, my piece. But it’s not really meant to cluster with other things. Cities on the other hand, and in the reality of our daily world, they’re messy. They’re messy and full of visual chaos. That doesn’t necessarily fit the modern aesthetic. So when I was a young architect at Skidmore, I used to hear that retail at the base of your buildings was a really bad thing. Because you could not control the image of the retail. So they would do something like put up neon signs, or like Cheesecake Factory at the bottom of the John Hancock center. Putting up

those copper awnings. So a modern architect hates that, but maybe somebody that likes to walk around a city, benefits from that. And I think that modern architecture, and the way that modern architecture is taught, has not shifted into a more urban reality. It’s still very isolated you have your design on an isolated piece of paper. It doesn’t matter, even. I mean you see it here too. You’ll see buildings, and you’ll talk to somebody designing buildings and you’ll ask, “Hey, what street is that on?” And they’ll say, “I don’t know, it’s E9.” “What’s E9?” “Oh you know, E9 is the parcel. It’s the E9 Parcel project.” “Well what street is it on? What neighborhood is it in?” “I don’t know.” There’s this disconnect. For some reason, in my DNA I was interested in the bigger context. Now an architect will call me a planner, because I’m not designing buildings. But if I go to a real policy planner – a member of the American Planning Institute, they will think of me as an architect, because I’m involved with projects. Mixed use projects. So they see me as an architect – I’m not a planner in their eyes. And an architect will see me as a planner, because I’m not an architect in their eyes. So an urban designer, if you take that road of urban design, you’re kind of out there on your own. And I mean it in a positive way, and a negative way. The positive way is that you can set your own course, you can set your own priorities, you can identify your own problems. So that’s how we got involved in that Great Lakes project. I don’t know if you know about it. But we just decided that we were not thinking holistically with political boundaries. But at the scale of the city, in Chicago we get involved with a street context or Millennium Park planning, or the museum campus, or the ripple effects of an Obama library on a neighborhood. And that’s the stuff that really gets me interested. So now we have this capital city project in Egypt that we’re trying to understand. The downside is that you’re out there on your own. It’s hard to get the design community pulled along with you. Or the design community will expect that out of your planning study, there will be some cool new architectural object created. And it’s always good when that can happen because it gets other community groups involved and excited. But I think we have to spend more time thinking about the city as this solution. I mean, yes – we need smarter buildings. But we really need to apply design, in a better way, to cities. Your TED talk, Imagine There Are No Borders, was emphatic of larger scale visionary thinking about addressing the design of humanity’s interaction with the Great Lakes in order to preserve its ecological health and beauty. You talked about how cities can improve themselves ecologically in a variety of ways as well. How would you (or did you) set such a huge plan like this in motion? Does it involve talking to political leadership first? Other architects + planners? Locals? Explain. We aligned with a few people that we found wonderful to work with. We aligned with Dave Ulrich, from the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence City Initiative. He organizes an organization of mayors on the Great Lakes. So he was huge in helping us get organized. We also teamed up with a man out of Quebec and Montreal called Raymond Jost. And Raymond runs the International Secretary of Water which is funded by the EU. And they’re headquartered in Paris. But his office is actually in Montreal but he also has an office in Quebec City. He has helped us bridge the gap to the other side. We teamed also with the

National Parks Conservation Association. A woman there – Lynn McClure helped us to fit this idea into the national parks world. So we’ve had help. We’ve had people helping us. Because it’s so big, if we spent more time with it we’d align with many others too. So now we’ve got the exhibits going to Cleveland. It was in Quebec. It was here in Chicago. There are forms associated with this. But it’s still very small time. It’s not clicked into anything big. It stayed small time. I need to align with more people your age to help think about how we move this into the next world. We’ve talked about another phase being, “50 Million Great.” So it’s about the Great Lakes, there’s 50 million people that live here. So we said, what if we call phase 2 of this, “50 Million Great?” We stopped talking about the physical issues, and we started talking about the 50 million people that live here, and what they need out of the Great Lakes. What they want to see. How they’re committed and connected to it. What’s the technology we can use to reach 50 million people? And what’s the conversation we want to have with them? We’re kind of at a crossroads right now in how we want to move it forward, but we have to move it forward in a different way. Did you plan on being where you are today in the profession - leading teams of talented architects and planners to make the world a better place? Is this where you will continue to dedicate your time and effort until -? Until I die? There’s job security in urban design. I have to say that because, there’s few people in it, and more and more people recognize the value in it. We had one client in Panama, who really understood what we did, and he said, “My god, this is job security.” I said, “What do you mean?” He said, “This group is building out over wetlands. This group is trying to expand the airport. This group is trying to figure out how to take over the American base associated with the Panama Canal. There’s urban problems everywhere! You have job security.” And there are problems everywhere. Whereas architects in general, suffer from a lot of work during a strong economy, but then zero work in a weak economy. Planning I think is almost the reverse of that, and I never really studied that. But it always seems to me that when the economy is slow, we get very busy. And then when the economy gets really strong, we get a little light. I think partly, it’s because the building community, when they don’t have projects going, they start planning. So in the slow economy they start planning. What’s their next thing going to be? And then when things get busy they get out there building and they don’t have the time to plan. But I don’t really know. But for a young person in the design field I think it’s a huge direction. I don’t know, do people tell you this? Most architects tell you there aren’t enough jobs for all the students. I think that’s completely not true. There’s always room for innovative thinking. There’s always room for a good idea. There’s always a demand for a good idea. If you could pick one, if it is possible to isolate one commonality among the global urbanity - what is the single most critical issue with contemporary cities today in the world? One? Ok. I would say…the one key issue overarching, is really understanding the incredible cost of living the way we live. And by that I mean, the way we

live is pretty artificially based. Propped up by a lot of resources that help us live this way. And it’s not just first world countries, it’s also how third world countries are propped up too. And the long range cost of living this way – the cost on the environment, the cost in relation to climate change, the cost related to illnesses, the cost related to restoring the stuff we’ve screwed up, the cost of habitat extinction. We don’t measure these costs, really. And it’s because of the way we’re living. So if there’s one thing, I would say it’s that – what’s the real cost of living the way we’re living. I just talked with Paul last week and he said that, and I quote: “…that it’s really up to your generation of architects, urban planners, and designers to make cities work. Otherwise, humanity is toast. Seriously.” Would you agree with this statement, and why? What advice would you give my generation so that humanity isn’t toast? What do I have to do as a designer to keep us living in a civilized way on the Earth? I would say it a little differently. I wouldn’t say you’re toast. I think there’s power in optimism. Especially in this role of urban design and planning. There’s great power in optimism. In being an optimistic problem solver. See yourself not as a designer, but as a problem solver. That design is really leading to problem solving. It is a component of problem solving, it is not an end all. I think that if you’re optimistic, if you’re open minded, if you’re enthusiastic, then I think you’ve got a great career ahead of you. Don’t get jaded, don’t get cynical, don’t get beaten up. But I mean, you will. You will have moments of being cynical, and you’ll have moments of being beat up and frustrated. But, don’t let that guide your everyday, because it’s the optimism that the designer feeds off of. It’s the optimism that a problem solver is using as their fuel to keep moving. So you have to be optimistic. And students are totally optimistic. It’s like, “Hey this is all cool! It’s new, it’s interesting, it’s challenging.” Everybody’s cool. Everybody’s young and fun. It’s great! Keep that as you move through life. Then, you’re good. I know your schedule is incredibly busy - long hours on a regular basis, traveling all over the world to meet with others and to talk about urban design. So, how do you manage the dialogue between living + working? Are they separate in your case, or is there an integration of the two? On a scale of 1-10, how much do you work? (Where 1 is a 30 hour workweek and you don’t care about your work, and 10 is don’t eat, don’t sleep, and work until you go unconscious.) You need a very tolerant wife, or spouse, or significant other. You need somebody very tolerant. It is very time consuming. I think the whole creative process in any field, where you’re creating something from nothing, is time consuming. Teamwork is better because you can help share the loads. But in the design world, quite often, you’ll find yourself with very demanding jobs, very demanding clients, that don’t give a shit about the impact to your life. So we used to have all these public sector clients in China. And because Chinese New Year is in January or February, they would start demanding stuff in early December, and schedule meetings at the end of December, because they want everything put together by Chinese New Year. So, they would demand meetings on Christmas Day, or New Year’s Day. And they’d do it on purpose.

And we’d say, “No.” But quite often, I’d be in China on the 23rd, and I’d come back on the 23rd. So your Christmas Day is totally jet-lagged. And looking back on that I really regret it. Because they expect us to respect their holidays – so during their Chinese New Year, nothing happens. But they have absolutely no respect for our equivalent holidays. I think there’s just a quality of life issue where it’s ok to say, “No.” Where the job doesn’t always determine a “yes.” But that said, in general, and especially in this firm, the people that are in this firm have been used to living that kind of life, where they’re up at a 10. Ok maybe an 8, or sometimes 9. And rarely below 6. That points to a difficult life balance. At the same time, it helps to have your family engaged in design also so they understand what design is. They also understand the time it takes to develop something in a creative field. I think that if you love what you do, you think about it all the time anyway. Where I am in my life now, I’m not at the computer, drawing much anymore. At all, really. There’s a bunch of people working on the projects. But I am thinking about the projects all the time. All the time. So I go home, and I’ve got other ideas. I’m emailing people. I’m sketching and photographing and sending to people. It may not be 2 hours in the evening, but it’s 20 minutes in the evening that I’m thinking about something and sketching and sending it. Or this morning – I had some ideas at 5:30 in the morning that I was sending to London, you know? So I don’t know the answer to that either. You have to be balanced. I never had anyone coach me on how to live a balanced life. Probably would be a good idea to do that. I used to work with this one guy, and he was the worst! He and his wife were both urban designers in San Francisco. Boris Dramov and Bonnie Fisher. They worked 20 hours a day. But they also played really hard. So on the day they decided not to work, they’d call up all these people and do an urban hike. And you’d spend the whole day and walk 20 miles through San Francisco. You’d take the waterfront, or you’d walk certain streets or go through certain neighborhoods. And it was this really drive to do stuff. The urban hike was kind of a cool way to get exercise, and you had time to converse with people – socialize. And they’d invite people from different fields, not just the people they worked with, and they would do these urban hikes, and were religious about it. I watercolor so I paint a lot. I paint with a group in Chicago. We meet every other Sunday and paint. Things like that help. When your child is young, you’re trying to spend as much time as you can there. That’s super important. That’s like the most important thing, really, over anything, is that. So, you have to prioritize. Family first. Job second. But creative field works through everything. Creative passion works through everything. It’s a good question. It’s good to always think about that. Another question I had asked of me when I was young, was to try and lay out a strategy for yourself so you have milestones every so often. Whether it’s a certain number of years and what you want to accomplish. And they can be simple things like, “I want to be involved in a community non-profit around a project. And so 5 years from now I want to see something in the community that I had something to do with. I want to be on some kind of lecture circuit. Speaking on panels. Or I want to give a TED Talk. I want to write a magazine article. You know? Things like this. Put some deadlines out there for yourself early on and that really helps. Paul is a really good guy to talk about that with too. He’s always talking about that. He has done everything. And his father was also a

Alexander Cheng 203

really famous newscaster in Chicago. Really famous guy. Had his own news show. I think that Paul’s a very fluid thinker. He’s a very good guy. Anyway, this is fun. So you’re going around asking these questions to a lot of people? What are you doing with all this? Anyway, let’s stay in touch. What is valuable to you? I know when we design there’s a lot of different things. It has to be energy efficient, it has to make people happy, it has to be relatable in scale. There’s a lot of things we have to think about. But what is really valuable in the way you design? What is the most significant thing? Is it an amalgamation of all these different things that have to work together? Or is there some overarching thing? Is design supposed to be hedonistic? Is it for pleasure? I don’t know the answer…um. It varies by your user group, your problem, your client, you’re trying to define the problem in a way that can be solved. Once that happens, then you start to solve it. You’ll find that, many people dwell within the problems, but never define them to be solved. You can understand a problem, and define a way forward that brings people together in agreement. I think then you’re meeting your true aspirations. So for example, we just talked today about Ellis Avenue. We’re at the University of Chicago. We’re redesigning this street through the middle of the University of Chicago campus. And so we had like, six schemes. One scheme narrows the street, has more trees, better pedestrian environment. And the campus said, “Well my god, you’ve removed all the parking. We have to buy those parking stalls from the city at 380,000 dollars per space.” So cost of removing parking. It’s a 99 year lease, so once it’s bought, it’s gone for 99 years – that’s some crazy thing. So then there was another thing about one-way traffic versus two-way. It’s two way today. If we go one-way, we can go to one lane, because one wider lane is better than two narrow lanes in two different directions in this particular place. There was traffic flow, that’s another one. And then, we had another scheme with bikeways down one side. But it’s like, we don’t have a culture for bikeways, everybody will walk across this and get hit. So there was this bicycle thing. So everything that we were showing – people were jumping on us. So, we said ok – there’s parking impact, traffic flow, bicycles, curb alignments are expensive. So then we said, “Ok. All of this is your criteria. So we want to accommodate bicycles, yes. But not together. Ok. Do we we want to go one way? Yeah. Ok great. We don’t want to lose parking? Yeah. Ok/ And we don’t want to align curbs? Yeah. Ok. This is a simple example, but you help them articulate their criteria – what their problem really is. Once you get that set, and say, “Ok, these are the alternatives that meet those requirements.” Then you go from 20 alternatives down to 3 or 4. And you get the conversation to the next level. Then what we will do – now that we understand the problem, is we will now define a series of principles. And it’s very hard to get an agreement around a design. But it’s easier to get agreement around a principle. So you say, “Ok. We will not change grading profiles or curb lines.” That’s a principle. Yes. Ok. We have these solutions. So when you have a client or somebody that’s not creating the solution with you. They are the roadblock. So you come along with your design process. You hit this and you try something else, and you hit this, and you try something else, and you hit this, and you

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 204

try something else. That’s an example of defining a problem in a way that can’t be solved. So if you said instead - ok, These are the constraints, but I’m going to create these principles that are going to allow me to go through this. So I take you through my principles, and that leads me around these roadblocks. So you’re always finding a way around this stuff. I worked with this guy for many years – John Cricken, who really believed this. As a problem solver, you have to always find a way to always go around the obstacle. You don’t let it defeat you or stop you. You always find a way around. Anyway, we can talk more about design approaches, but there are other things you don’t learn in school. And one of them is problem solving, really. Unless you take specific classes in problem solving that usually design faculty do not teach problem solving. Actually Andrew Balster is good at this. You’re not working with Andrew, are you? He’s very good at this. Design studios are taught in the strangest way, where you’re given a problem, then working with blinders on. And then you present this, and say, “This is my thought.” And then you get shot down by this jury you don’t know. And usually the jury doesn’t even know your problem. They’re brought in for the day. It isn’t what I’d call “problem solving,” it’s more presenting designs and people are sitting back and, you know, critiquing your design. But it’s usually at the end, it’s done, you’re not going to take their advice and it’s not going to inform your product anymore. A real problem solving solution in my mind is spending enough time with the problem to understand it, it’s pieces, and developing the principles to guide it. And usually those principles can be broken down into segments. At the urban scale, there’s always something about movement. Circulation. How people move. How people get around. Whether it’s by car, transit, bicycle, walking – the whole system of movement. Then there’s something about the actual development or the development pattern. How it works, what the traditions are, what your program is, and what are the principles around development patterns? And then there’s something about open space that ties to the larger environment but also help people use public space. The whole world of public space. And then there’s something about sustainability, energy, waterways. And if you just keep thinking of these headings, because there’s not many of them. And you develop ideas, or a general principle around those, then those lead you to strategies. And those strategies have to be loose enough that you can design within them and keep adjusting. And that to me, is one approach to problem solving. There are other ways to do this too, but one approach is a principle based strategy. That is never taught at design school, that I have ever seen. Maybe it is, but I never see it. And when I try to teach this, when I’ve taught, it’s like you’ve got a lot of people with their eyes in the headlights. It’s like, “What are you talking about?” And I just think that it’s hard to teach modern architecture or design. I don’t know. Anyway I’m rambling. But Andrew is very good. Andrew knows how to get involved with groups – community groups, meeting with the city, or the Aldermen.

Alexander Cheng 205

2.4 - William (Bill) Baker Partner, Structural + Civil Engineering - SOM

INTERVIEW

Bill Baker, PE, SE, FASCE, FIStructE, NAE, FREng, is the head structural and civil engineering leader at SOM. He oversaw the structural system of the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the tallest building in the world to date. He seeks to provoke early conversation between engineering and architecture in the process of making a building.

What does it mean to be a structural engineer, and why did you become one in the first place? We get to solve interesting problems and build things that last for a while. We are a little different here in SOM, because we are engineers working inside an architectural practice. A lot of engineers spend their career, “making it work,” which is what we try not to do here. We try to work with the design from the beginning, so that it is integrated with the design process. It needs to be a piece of art. It needs to be considered together with the design. Have you ever worked in an environment where you are a separate consultant to the architecture? Or have you always been integral in conversation to the design of the building like I think it is here in SOM? Do you enjoy being included in the design earlier on? How does it help? Sometimes we work with artists. I worked with James Turell in Arizona. It was kind of a “make it work,” but he was also open to help. So what we tried to do is organize what he had done, and established a hierarchy. There were numerous objects that were crashing together. One of the things you have to do in architecture is to resolve conflicts, so establishing a hierarchy is important to architecture to know what can go from the design, and what can’t. When we would have a conflict with Turell, we would get rid of conflicts that dealt with the lower hierarchy issues. You were the chief structural engineer on the Burj Khalifa in Dubai that uses the bundled tube structural system. Did you develop that system yourself? Was it through talking with other engineers? Was it discovered through research? It kind of evolved. We did a tower in Korea called Tower Palace 3. It was similar. It become clear to me that with some modifications that it could go quite high. You have to have a big site to make it work. We had a competition for the Burj, and the final system emerged through a system of studies, coordinating with interior design, coordinating with the client, what was invariant, what could be changed. We asked, “what is this we have? Can we describe it? Can we give it a name?” You want things to be fluid for a while, so we ask what the essence of it is, and we came up with “buttressed core.” That gets at the essence, and the hierarchy of it really. These are the things that are most important. There are a lot of other things that are going on in the building, but that’s what it was. It came out of the rules that we put out up front. We knew it was going to be complicated, so we set ourselves some constraints to make sure it didn’t get out of hand. Some of the constraints that we set were an SOM stale module, and maintain that module, and the second restraint was no transfers. As soon as you have to have transfers within this system it just becomes a nightmare. We would have walls that wouldn’t hit the walls below, columns that wouldn’t hit columns below, you know. Basically, as this this thing went up, and the plan trims back, we had to have alignment of structural elements all the way through to the ground. That’s how the system really evolved. Isn’t it like the Willis Tower? The bundled tube system?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 206

Not at all. I read somewhere that it was somewhat similar… It’s not a bundled tube, it’s more about how you shape the tower. We did think of the Sears tower in working on the Burj. The one thing that the Sears does do, even though it’s not a bundled tube system, is that the shape at the base is this uber shape, and as it goes up, you just have to decide at what height to “stop” the building. When you do that, it’s not as clean as that statement, there’s load transfers and transitions. There’s actually massive multiple story deep trusses at the setbacks in the Sears tower – you can see it from the exterior when the light is right. The load is trying to jump to the different shape as the plan gets wider down below. What’s the most difficult thing as an engineer? The most difficult struggles? I can’t think of an answer in particular, but one of the things is I guess that sometimes you can’t get the right idea? You’ve got something that works, and its ok, but you know, that in your heart of hearts, that it’s not “singin’,” you know? Ok? And so, sometimes you have to walk away from it, and let it sit for a few days and not think about it directly. Stop working the problem, and let it simmer in the back of your head and see if something comes to you. Stop trying so hard, sit back and see if you get an idea. You know, it’ll just come on its own. For the future of architecture, do you think it will be an integration between engineers and architect? Or will it be a consultant relationship? It’s a complicated question. The people that really care about design, and want to really design in a holistic manner, tend to be integrated. Norman Foster now has engineers on staff. They decided that they want to progress. There will be other people that just want to make a living and survive, you know. When there’s more people in the room you get more ideas, but there’s less control. The more people, the more chaos – which isn’t always a bad thing, you know. But if you have a tight fee, and you just have to deliver something that works, a consultancy is hard to beat. You see this all the time in academia, in the difference between team design versus the individual only process in working. Each of the disciplines needs to have its own drive to be as good as it can be. Because if one of the disciplines becomes complacent, or not as good as the rest, then they run the risk of disappearing. It’s up to the leadership of the practice to be demanding of themselves, within each discipline, and towards all of the other disciplines. If you’re going to spend your career tied up with certain people, you want to make sure that those people that you’re working with are good. How about structural engineering to influence the larger scale? How about structural engineering to influence urban planning? Well it’s kind of interesting. I think it’s less so on the project side than it is on the philosophical side. I, and some of the other senior structural engineers interact all the time with the urban planning group. We’re both specializations within architecture, and some of the engineers are architects by degrees and some

of the planners are architects by degree, but we’re not in architecture. We’re not practicing architecture in the sense of building architecture. We actually interface quite a bit on the philosophical issues in an integrated practice. We also do work on urban planning projects with them often, particularly if there’s a technical issue. I was actually asked to join the urban planning group, we were working on an airport, and it was a planning project, and I was doing a lot of the planning work, as an engineer. And they actually asked me to join the urban planning studio. I said, “no thanks.” You know? I want to be a structural engineer. Haha. On another side of engineering, the urban planners coordinate a lot of other engineers, primarily civil engineers. When you have a lot of infrastructure, you know, you’ve got a transportation, water management, and other things, how do you organize the city so you minimize transit? It’s not like you’re living, working, and playing in one building, but you don’t want to use your car too often, so when you use mass transit – that’s engineering. One of the things that we help with, is how the engineers help the urban planners deal with the technology issues. Quite frankly, engineering is typically too siloed. There is this multi-variable design and optimization. Too often, a transportation engineer won’t know that much about water, or power. And urban planning is trying to integrate all of this stuff. So, I’m collaborating right now with them on some projects. What’s buildable? What’s reasonable? What’s the nature of the construction culture? So that they are drawing something that’s appropriate for the soil it’s sitting on. They could be building a Christ Church, but it’s not a good idea if its in a river valley with all this liquefaction and other problems that an engineer would recognize. Engineers that deal with urban planning, haha I’m surprised how much we work together. I’m dealing at the size of a bolted connection, and they’re dealing at the size of city blocks. Do you think that’s how good design comes about? By everyone talking to everyone all of the time? It’s fascinating because everyone is so specialized and have really detailed things to say about their discipline, and when you combine all of these disciplines together to make one thing, it seems super highly knowledgeable, and is understood really well, but the coordination between all of the groups can be a struggle at times. I just wonder if there is a fine line between working with others to make the project better, or are there problems in talking with so many people that ultimately, the work doesn’t get done fast enough? We’re in architecture, right? So we’ve got a deadline, we’ve got a budget. You blow the budget, you blow the deadline too many times, and you’re out of work. In some ways, a deadline is your friend. You organize the process. You start with broad brainstorming sessions, everything’s out on the table, and then you narrow it down – and at some point, you’re in production. You’re making the competition boards, you’re making the models, preparing presentations, and then you’re building a building at some point. You manage the process. This is what you’ve got to do. If you were an architect, how would you design your building? Would you start by designing the structure first? Then make everything else work around that ordering system?

I would say, geometry. Because geometry is the intersection of structure and architecture. Geometry is key to structure, and is key to architecture. You’re creating shapes, spaces, voids, lines, and nodes. You think of all the geometric terms you have, and a lot of them reference architecture. I would start with the geometry. What advice do you have for my generation of architects and urban planners? How can I, and others in the profession involved in creating and making the built world work better with engineers to make the world a better place, and to make the flow of work more engaging and less problematic? Don’t let the ego get in the way. I’ve seen a lot of great people not do a lot of great things because their ego got so big. Some of the best architects and designers that I’ve worked with are open to ideas. You know? They don’t have to own every idea. Don’t be afraid to not know something, but learn as much as you can about just the technology of the other trades. Why is the electrical engineer telling me that the switch gear room has to be so big? You know? What’s in that room? Why is it that way? Why is it arranged that way? Be confident enough to admit that you don’t have the answer. Have enough internal strength or security. Don’t be insecure – you don’t have to show that you know everything. Have enough belief in yourself that you’re open. It’s likely that you have long hours on a regular basis, so how do you manage the dialogue between living + working? What do you do for fun? On a scale of 1-10, how much do you work? (Where 1 is a 30 hour workweek and you don’t care about your work, and 10 is don’t eat, don’t sleep, and work until you go unconscious.) I’m pretty close to the high end there! I’ve spent a lot of hours here, I think a lot, I love it a lot. I have a family with children, and I enjoy my time with them a lot, so when I’m with them I try to have quality time. But also, when people are asleep, I work on things. It’s a very, very complicated business we’re in, and you can’t dabble in it and expect to have a lot of influence and impact. There are a lot of things that require a lot of time to study. I could do the business end of the business in a lot less time, but a lot of the time I spend on research – things that I don’t understand, or trying to create new design processes or new technologies. And that’s something that’s hard to rush. So you really just have to work at it all the time to make progress. And think about what I find interesting that has architectural ramifications, understand it, then make it available to others in design in general. A lot of the stuff we do is very sophisticated, and there’s only one or two people that can actually do it, and you’re not going to make the world better if only a few people can do it, so we’re trying to create new technology, and then make that technology available so others can use it. How do you educate yourself? Where do you get your sources? That’s one of the things I’ve struggled with here. I didn’t know that, for example, that you could get a plan of this building from the intranet here at SOM. I can find this piece of information that I want, but only if I go to this particular location. How do you always know the right places to look to find the information that you need to answer the questions

you have? Or to push your thinking about something? I talk to people. I had two calls today from professors from the University of Bath for an hour to an hour and a half. I’m collaborating on a book with John Oschendorf at MIT, Philippe Block from ETH Zurich, and Allan McRobie at Cambridge University. I had three emails from Cambridge professors last night. We’re working on this idea, this project, kind of concept that’s mathematical. A lot of it comes from wondering, “how do they do that?” Or, seeing something, or reading something, and because of someone’s background, you see something that someone else didn’t see, and you can get at it from a different point of view. I’m teaching myself projective geometry. It’s a simplistic geometry in that in most geometry, you have a metric – a length. You have angles. You have parallel lines, perpendicular lines. In projective geometry, you don’t have a metric, so lengths aren’t controlled. Angles aren’t preserved. Parallelisms aren’t preserved. The only things that are preserved, are lines. And that’s very, very pure geometry. But it also has important structural implications because it is what we call “structurally invariant.” So if I have a structure that’s in equilibrium, any projection of it, by principle, is in equilibrium as well. Perspective is part of projective, but it’s not the same. Perspective was started by Renaissance artists, but is not a projection. A perspective of a perspective of a perspective becomes a projection of something. You can have equivalence between what you know as a pencil, with a bunch of lines coming out of it – it can be projective as a pencil that has a bunch of dots coming out of it, because then you can map between one another in a consistent manner. There’s some amazing design implications from this. A flying buttress on a cathedral – you could say that it could be a simple arch – a 2-D arch, and work it out, then project it. If the projection holds, then it’s still in equilibrium. We’re studying Maxwell, who is a 19th century natural philosopher. He was the father of magnetic theory. He did some amazing work in all kinds of fields, one of which was early structural engineering. So we need to understand what they understood, then apply it because it didn’t get past people very well in the first place, and the few that took it well, forgot it. So we’re finding some of these old methodologies and old ideas that are very pure, because the industry wasn’t established back then with any standards, so these guys were inventive from nothingness, so their ideas are very clear. And so we’re looking at ways to adapt those things. I’m looking at ways to apply this to shells. The diagrams on the wall – it looks like a roof. It looks like a plan of a roof. Those are the forces! You can graphically draw the forces. It could turn out that it’s not just the forces, it is the structure. It is a reciprocal. It can go either way. And then you can project it into a third dimension and have a planar thing. We’re still figuring it out, and it’s not in the standard text. I talk to lots of people, I meet lots of people, I find out what they did, and how they did it. Picasso had a quote – he said that, “bad artists copy, great artists steal.” So what is the idea behind the design? Not what the design is. And then, the idea becomes really portable. Where is your favorite place to go, and your favorite place to eat in Chicago? Hmm. Let’s see. I love walking along the lakefront. Favorite place to eat? Well it’s not there anymore. It was was in the basement of the Greyhound bus

Alexander Cheng 207

station down in the loop. It was a chili bar. God what was it called?! The bus station isn’t even there anymore. Oh man. That was a great place. Don’t look to close to the hygiene or anything like that. There’s a great hot dog place in Evanston called Mustard’s Last Stand. It’s one of my favorite places to eat. But the chili place was a total dive. Sometimes they had some country music going.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 208

Alexander Cheng 209

2.5 - Stephen Pack Interiors Technical Coordinator - SOM

INTERVIEW

Stephen Pack, AIA is a TC in SOM’s Chicago office. He gets involved after the schematic design phase in architectural projects. As the TC, Stephen sees the project through design development, all the way through construction to ensure built quality of the project.

What is a Technical Coordinator? SOM is organized in a three-tiered, or three-legged stool system. Project manager, designer, and technical coordinator. Project manager handles contracts and financial. The design sets the design in motion and is most heavily involved in the front end of projects. And then starting sometimes in the SD phase, but more usually in the DD phase, technical coordinator gets involved and starts shaping the project. Looking at code issues, technical issues, and by the time the construction documents phases comes around, the technical coordinator really owns the project with minimal ongoing roles from the designer. And then during the CA phase, or the construction phase, the TC (Technical Coordinator) continues to make site visits, attend OAC meetings, interact with the contractor, and basically guarantee the success of the project and help everybody interpret the documents and specs. How did you decide to be involved in this position here? Did you decide? Of course I decided. Previously, I had taught for a while after graduate school and then I worked in a smaller firm after that, more in the role of a project architect, which handles all three of those former articulated tasks that are broken apart here. As a project architect, I handled everything together. I did the financials, the code stuff, the design, the client contact, and I oversaw construction. When I came here, I would say that the role of technical is still the closest thing to a project architect. Even on this recent project that I did in Toronto, I was involved even before the concept design phase. The client had made a selection of several buildings that they were interested in. So I went to Toronto and looked at the various buildings. I was involved at every phase. So my role has always been more expansive than a traditionally defined one. It is fundamentally my belief and my practice that, design occurs on a project until the owner takes occupancy. As long as we’re involved we are still designing. For me, the role of technical is the one that gives me the most exposure to the whole process, and it’s the one that I’m most familiar with and the one I like the best. I love being on the jobsite, seeing how things are really done, because it informs the design and production process of the next project, and the next one. So I just want a greater understanding of everything that’s going on. It says on the Intranet that you are part of the interiors department?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 210

Well I am trained as an architect. Right now on a project, I am working with the architectural team and interiors team, as I have done on numerous projects here. But at the time there was a need, a real need, for someone from an architectural background in interiors. And technicals are almost always architects. I don’t know of any technical in SOM, in any studio that’s not had an architectural background or credentials. It’s always just worked for me, in that studio. I was hired to, in a time of crisis, to work on a project in Los Angeles eleven years ago and it just worked out well ever since. In SOM, interiors definitely does not mean interior decoration. It’s much more interior architecture – fit outs. It’s quite continuous with what the architects do, and there is reciprocity with the architectural studios in terms of shaping buildings from

the inside out, and not just considerations of external form that aren’t inwardly functionally driven. What is it that you want to accomplish here as a technical coordinator of one of the largest architectural firms in the world? I don’t just focus on the interiors. I want to help the firm achieve the highest quality building as a whole. One of the beauties of SOM is that, for a big firm, it does still very much prioritize design. If we compare it to other big firms in Chicago and other parts of the U.S. I am aware of that tradition here, I came from a modernist background so I use my reason and my imagination and I have various people skills and try to ensure that the intent and integrity of the design actually gets executed and built and realized. Looking back, how well did McGill University Masters in Architecture in Canada prepare you for your current work? What do you wish they had taught you? No no no. I went to the University of Kentucky for my five year professional degree. I practiced some after that and taught some after that. I felt fully qualified for practice at that point. McGill studies and my masters was a bit of a different focus, because I might pursue a teaching path at that point. So it gave me everything and more that I could have ever wanted from it. But it’s not that it has a one to one correlation with what I do here. But that’s ok. I still do a lot of teaching here, just in terms of communicating and mentoring younger staff. Even older staff. Where do you see your career going in the years to come? Will you continue to work in interiors here? Is this where you want to be? No I’m pretty happy doing what I’m doing. I’ve been practicing for I think has been twenty six or twenty seven years now that the clock has turned over. The Toronto project from 2009 to 2013 was the best project of my career. And I think there are others out there. And if there are not, at least I enjoy my colleagues here, my position here, and Chicago. I’m learning new stuff every day. As long as that’s still happening and still get to participate in wonderful projects here at SOM, I’m happy to continue to develop my knowledge and skills and communicate those to others to help everybody achieve what their interests are, in light of the company’s history. What are the common issues in interiors technical coordination as it stands now? How do you think they should be resolved in the future? Architecture is a cyclical industry. The most recent incidence of this started in 2008 when the general economy dropped into recession. Architecture was hit very hard. Very little was being built in North America. We were doing a lot of work overseas, but a lot of it just got to design development, and then we would hand it off to local architects. They would do the CDs and everything beyond. The big, big problem with that, is that for better than half of a decade, and it’s starting to pick back up, half of the graduating classes of architectural students and graduates haven’t done CDs. Doing DDs is still very loose, and nothing really has to be worked out. The level of research and integration and coordination is 30-40% of what it needs to be for CDs. So there is this moral hazard

that we’ve all gotten. Including project managers. It doesn’t affect designers so much. But technical coordinators and managers for sure. The way managers write contracts, and the time that a TC and their staff need to do justice to high quality work, has been a little forgotten. So as the domestic economy picks back up, and as we do more full services, including CDs, full specifications, and CA services, we just have to get back into that deep knowledge of what it takes to document and understand the requirements for communicating the intent that we want for the built work. What design elements do clients typically look for in a quality interiors project? Good furniture? Beautiful materials? Etc…

me what you find!

It’s likely that you have long hours on a regular basis, so how do you manage the dialogue between living + working? What do you do for fun? On a scale of 1-10, how much do you work? (Where 1 is a 30 hour workweek and you don’t care about your work, and 10 is don’t eat, don’t sleep, and work until you go unconscious.) I mentioned that I have been in the field for twenty six or twenty seven years, and have been here for eleven. And when I started, I gave a lot more time to the office than I do today. Let’s just say my work / life balance has improved. I’m better at what I do maybe, and I feel that to really do justice to work you also have to have some time in life. So you know it’s part of the aging process, the experience process. There are times still where I have to work long hours to achieve something. Architecture always takes a tremendous amount of time. Good work takes a tremendous amount of time. You have to really love it and that’s really part of the work / life balance. But for your general well-being and long-term positive contribution to a place like this, you need to have a balance with the overall arc of your life. I try to work a 50 hour week and that’s that. When I’m here, I’m working hard. I have communications devices so I can communicate with team members overnight, but I try to unplug and have my evenings and as much of my weekends as I can. Maybe a 6 to 6.5. What should I not miss while I’m in Chicago? Where is your favorite place to go? Where is your favorite place to eat in Chicago? My favorite place to eat I think is in Logan Square, it’s a farm to table place. I think it’s called Lula’s. I love it. I like it a lot. I’m a vegetarian so it works out with my interests. What else? The lakeshore is not to miss. The Art Institute is not to miss. Walking the city and discovering for yourself is good. See different neighborhoods and their diversity. From Oak Park to Andersenville, Hyde Park to Evanston, to Lincoln Park, Garfield Park to the conservatory. And Pilsen’s a good one! There’s a nice publication that you probably know of. It’s called NFT (Not For Tourists). It breaks Chicago down into component neighborhoods and it gives you maps. It helps you navigate restaurants and galleries in each of those areas. So I pick up the reader. It’s not just architecture you can’t miss. You’re here for a time. On your weekends you have to go out and do something! I’m a photographer so I like to go out and photograph things. The bridges over the Chicago River are wonderful. There’s just so many things. Architecturally you can get a guidebook and do what you want to. But you should write a journal of the city and all your discoveries and tell

Alexander Cheng 211

2.6 - Alex Cheng Student, Virginia Tech School of A+D

REFLECTION Interviewing offers a wealth of knowledge and wisdom from experienced and established designers and practitioners, and puts forth that knowledge in the most meaningful, personal way, catered with precision to the questions given by the interviewer. It is an experiment with givens and variables when interviewing a professional. The givens – are the questions, and the way that the interviewer frames them to the professional. The variables – are the responses from the interviewee, and how those responses can change across different individuals when asked the same question. Sometimes, to answer a question, the interviewee will propose an alternative question to rectify certain issues with the question that is asked, because they are unsure how to answer it in the way it is presented. Phrasing and diction were critical in the interviews, because a lot of professionals hold certain personal meaning to words that some of us consider to be mono-definitive. In reality, a lot of overused words with more generic meaning by dictionary, are broken down and specified into personal definitions to bring meaning to the work of architects and other professionals associated with architecture. When asked questions involving these words, the response usually requests another question to clarify the intent of the original question. “What do you mean by architecture? What about place are you asking about? Identity of what?” These are typical examples of how architects and the like will react to questions asked without sufficient background, or when the question involves an unprecedented pretense. A few of the inquiries stayed constant across all interviews, to get a gauge for diversity of thought within the same set of questions. So, for all of the really important questions about the profession, the questions were kept in all of the interviews to gain multiple insights about the same topic. For example, when asked, “How do you balance life and work?” All of the interviewees provide a different outlook. As a result, there are a lot of different precedents to pull from so that it is easy to answer the same question for oneself. On the flip side of the coin, certain questions were put forth depending on the specialty or focus of the professional. When interviewing architects, the intent would focus more around the development of space, how they practice, and what is important to them in practicing. But when interviewing engineers, planners, and interior designers, the intent behind the questions would follow the kind of work that these professionals practice, but always in relationship to architecture and design as a commonality between all of these professions linked to it. To discuss similarities and differences across the range of interviews, it is easiest to ask the same question, regardless of the interviewee’s profession. It then provides the simple framework to compare and contrast responses to then form one’s own opinion and personal response to the very question asked in the first place. “How do you balance life and work? Is there a separation between the two?”

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 212

There is a noticeable trend when receiving these responses. Assuming that all subjects interviewed truly enjoy their work, it is a correlation that the older, more experienced practitioners seem less inclined to think about life and work as separate entities. Whether or not it has to do with being in leadership positions

higher up in the professional hierarchy is another thing, but in isolating the discussion to experience and age, it seems that there is a life and work “marble cake” going on in the experienced professional’s mentality. There is no boundary. A common way of thinking in this school of thought is that the work you do is a way of living life. You see and frame things a certain way no matter what you’re doing or when you’re doing it because of the work you do. If your work is the axle of a bicycle, it is connected to various parts of the periphery by the spokes. Each spoke represents a different way of thinking as a result of things one learns in life. As more and more things are learned and experienced, more spokes are added to the wheel, which adds to the stability of connection to the axle at the core of the wheel, and increases points of connection to the rim. After many years of learning and practicing, one’s wheel has a diversity of connections from the core of their work out to many other branches of knowledge that forms, in entirety, an intelligent individual that is well connected and well rounded, who can draw information from various sources to inform decisions made in one particular profession. It was also a correlation that younger professionals tended to think of work and life more as distinct. It was easier for them to address the definition of a balance between time in the office, and time outside of the office. Perhaps this was the trend because younger individuals are still adjusting to the rigor of the professional world with expectations, consequences, and standard hours. Maybe they continue to seek solace from the regularity (is it a regularity?) of the real world, and have the urge to break from it from time to time to engage their youthful energy in miscellaneous activities and experiences. So then, is it to my benefit to try to move ahead faster than my younger colleagues, and take on more of the mindset of the older, and more experienced professional? Do I really feel that life and work are completely intertwined? Is there any separation whatsoever? Do I truly believe that? Right now, there are definitely times for breaks, and there are times for work. So I am not at a point myself where I can definitively state that work and life are completely integrated. Maybe I will realize it later, but I am at least cognizant as a result of the interviews, of how younger and older professionals involved in architecture think about their work and life relationship. “What advice do you have for my generation of architects and urban planners?” Asking for advice in general is a broad question, but put under the umbrella of the profession brings specificity to the question. The answer of course varies depending on who is being asked. Everyone realizes that different things are important in their lives, and they can only pass on what they have found to be important. Any other inference is not advice, but speculation. It was evident that there was no trend in response between all of the interviewees. Everyone has their own mentality and principles that they abide by that shape who they are. Some of the leaders highlighted the significance of one’s personality as a designer in order to be good at what you do. “Don’t let your ego get in the way.” “Be optimistic.” “You have to be as smart as you can.” They try to shape the mind of the interviewer by suggesting traits and qualities of a successful and fruitful professional engaged in design. Others give advice by suggesting what you should do rather than who you should become.

“You should make good space.” “You should follow politics.” Things like that. So it’s interesting to be the person that all of these people are imparting their knowledge and opinions upon. It is a process in itself to take all of the information thrown towards us, and filter out the little shreds that are important, and take those shreds to heart and move forward with them. If there were any similarities about giving advice, it was that it was all well intended, and unforceful. No matter who was in the conversation, the willingness to give information about how to make oneself better as not just a designer, or architect, or planner, but as an individual, seemed completely open, earnest, and uninhibited by ego. It is amazing how willing everyone is in this work environment to take the time to talk to a student about their anxieties, difficulties, and curiosities about the profession. Time is the most valuable thing someone can give to someone else, and that time with others has translated into a trove of knowledge to draw upon in the future.

Alexander Cheng 213

01 02 03

Lectures + Discussions Interviews Hypothetical Firm

P P

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 216

PLANNING PERIPHERIES ARCHITECTURE + URBAN PLANNING + SPECIALTY + CONSULTING

CONTACT: PHONE: (+44) 020 - PERIPLAN (+44 - 020 - 7374 - 7526) EMAIL: INQUIRY@PLANNINGPERIPHERIES.COM

LEADERSHIP: ALEX CHENG - PARTNER ARCHITECTURE + URBAN PLANNING

EXT: ARCH (2724) EMAIL: ALEX.CHENG@PLANNINGPERIPHERIES.COM

KIRSTEN HULL - PARTNER SPECIALTY + CONSULTING EXT: SPEC (7732)

EMAIL: KIRSTEN.HULL@PLANNINGPERIPHERIES.COM

MISSION: Planning Peripheries seeks projects of revitalization + regeneration. More specifically, on the peripheral urban boundaries of London - neighborhoods and communities, reinforcing the local diversity, as well as connection to central London. The work of the practice recognizes areas of potential, both developed and not developed immediately surrounding the dense core of London. Our offices locate themselves in conjunction with our projects to provide the framework for the most intimate working conditions between us and the client, as well as the community over the long-term periods of analysis, design, development, and construction.

Alexander Cheng 217

ENGINEERING

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 218

KIRSTEN

INTERN

The firm consists of approximately 100 employees. Their backgrounds are diverse, and consist of architects, planners, designers, engineers, consultants, and specialists. Together, this entity forms an intelligent and well-rounded team to solve some of the most significant urban issues of peripheral, transitionary, and neglected regions of London.

ASSOCIATE

PARTNER

Firm Structuring

PROJECT MANAGER

2.0 - Hierarchical Breakdown

SPECIALTY

CIVIL

ENERGY

STRUCTURAL

WATER

MECHANICAL

WASTE

ELECTRICAL

SOCIAL

GEOTECHNICAL

ACOUSTICAL

INTERNS

ARCHITECTURE

ALEX

PLANNING

TEAM 1

TEAM 2

TEAM 3

TEAM 4

TEAM 5

TEAM 6

INTERNS

TEAM 7

TEAM 8

TEAM 9

TEAM 10

INTERNS

Alexander Cheng 219

2.1 - Hypothetical Project Schedule Timeline Of Work Phases And Processes The breakdown of work for the hypothetical planning + architecture firm differs from the typical organization of the architectural office. Projects are larger, broader, and require greater quantities of both time and people to reach an appropriate quality of design.

Phase 1

Month

June

July

Aug

Weekly Coordination Calls Presentation Meeting

In-person Meetings

2. DISCOVERY: ANALYSIS & VISION

3. DEVELOP CONCEPTS FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF GROWTH 4. REFINE FINAL STRATEGIES, DESIGN GUIDELINES & DOCUMENTATION

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 220

X X

Kick-off Meeting

1. PROJECT START-UP

X X

hase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

April

May

X X

Issues + Opportunities Identification

X X

Alternative Scheme Collaboration

X X Alternatives Selection

X X

Drafting Of Preferred Scheme

X Final Master Plan Presentation

Alexander Cheng 221

2.2 - Potential Development Sites London, United Kingdom

Stratford

Dalston Shoreditch + High Street

Elephant + Castle Southwark

Vauxhall

Clapham Junction

Peripheral urban development and re-development in London bordering outside of Zone 1. These areas have potential to become places of vibrancy that are centered around the immediate community around it, and establish connection to historic London as well. Locations include: Clapham Junction, Elephant + Castle, Southwark, Stratford, Vauxhall, Dalston, and Shoreditch + High Street.

Central London

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 222

Dalston

Alexander Cheng 223

Stratford

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 224

Shoreditch + High Street

Alexander Cheng 225

Southwark

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 226

Elephant + Castle

Alexander Cheng 227

Vauxhall

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 228

Clapham Junction

Alexander Cheng 229

2.3 - Successful Relevant Projects Examples In Peripheral Urban Planning

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 230

Camden Town London, United Kingdom. Superkilen Copenhagen, Denmark

Brooklyn Bridge Park Brooklyn, NY

Olympic Sculpture Park Seattle, WA

Outlying sites of development around a major urban center have gone through planning schemes and implementation, and have proven to be successful. The Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle, Washington connects the edge of the city to the local body of water across a highway and train line. The Superkilen urban park on the periphery of Copenhagen unites the community around it, while recognizing its existing diversity. The Brooklyn Bridge Piers offer the immediate communities surrounding Manhattan to the east a place of gathering and entertainment. The streets of Camden Town in an outer ring of London have undergone urban editing to offer a more pedestrian oriented throughway.

Olympic Sculpture Park

Alexander Cheng 231

Brooklyn Bridge Park

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 232

Camden Town

Alexander Cheng 233

Superkilen

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 234

Alexander Cheng 235

2.4 - Representation Precedents Drawings, Renderings, + Other Output Methods and ways of projecting the intent of the project to clients and the people that the work will impact.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 236

Alexander Cheng 237

2.5 - Hypothetical Firm Calculations How The Firm Works As A Business Ultimately, the practice of architecture must work as a business in the world of finances. A certain number of people must be employed to perform the work of the firm, and they must be compensated appropriately for their time. The office must have a location, which costs rent. The space has utilities, rent, and other overhead costs associated with its existence. What do architects charge clients in order to keep the office running? What is the monetary value of our services?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 238

Alexander Cheng 239

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 240

Alexander Cheng 241

01 02 03 04

Lectures + Discussions Interviews Hypothetical Firm Project Timeline

4.0 - Project Schedule Timeline Of Work How does the project break down into phases? How much time is allocated to each phase? Who spends time on what phase? This is the intent of the project schedule. Though we might not think about it in school, the project schedule is revealing about how much time it takes to make a building come to fruition even after it is designed. 50% of the time dedicated to conceptual, schematic, and design development, with the other 50% allocated to construction documents + administration is not uncommon.

Project Phase Architect Selection Interviews Contract Drafting Architect + Owner Conceptual Design Design + Documentation Schematic Design Design + Documentation Schematic Design Cost Estimation + Review Design Development Design + Documentation Design Development Cost Estimation + Review Construction Documents Documentation Bid + Permit + Award Contract Negotiation Construction Phase (Variable) Occupancy End Project

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 244

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A

Alexander Cheng 245

01 02 03 04

Introduction Studio Project Professional Practice Urban Environments

Urban Environments

01 02

Studies Urban Observation

Studies

1.0 - Urban Environments Studies Intent Of Work Urban Environments class exists to provide rapid design exercises to practice making design decisions with various sets of existing information and criteria. The type of exercise ranges from the renovation of an apartment, to re-designing an entire Chicago skyscraperâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s facade. The studies are 3 days long, and force students to think critically about design within a tight time constraint.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 254

Alexander Cheng 255

1.1 - Study 1 Fixed Plan - Re-Design Of Apartment This week’s exercise consists of taking a given a plan of an apartment and developing that plan into a full three dimensional apartment. Consider the home you’ve grown up in. Think of what resonates with you, even the hierarchy of memory / re-telling. A home is an experience - what elements do you use to create the experience? What do you see in the plan and what story will you tell, what experience or series of experiences will you create? The plan is fixed, only the type of door can change. All walls, openings structure must remain. The three dimensional interpretation of the non-structural elements is up to you.

32’

16’

1 PERIPHERAL WALLS - CONCRETE Peripheral walls are concrete inside and out. Notion of security and solidity. Neutral tone is clean + simple. Thick concrete walls reduce sound transfer from neighbors.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 256

PRIMARY CIRCULATI

Entrance + access corridor along wit horizontal wood planks. Implies direct zone of the

8 4 21

th engaged living room finished with tion and movement in the most active apartment.

16â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

ION - WOOD PLANKS

32â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

3 SOCIAL SPACES - BRICK Brick walls only in spaces meant for stationary activity or pause. Warm tones + textural interest in places of sociality + entertaining. Brick also acts as a terminating wall at the end of the main corridor.

Alexander Cheng 257

1.2 - Study 2 Editable Plan - Re-Design Of Apartment Similar to last week’s exercise, this study consists of taking a given a plan of an apartment and developing that plan into a full three dimensional apartment. The perimeter of the unit needs to remain as is, as does the point of entry. The room sizes are flexible, although they should reflect their furnishing needs and relative hierarchy. The relationship of the kitchen, dining and living, as well as any related family or great room is up to you. The unit has a clear floor to ceiling dimension of 10’. Window sills start at 2’ AFF and the window heads are 9’ AFF.

ENTRANCE TO PRIVATE

COMPRESSION The given plan is very much a series of halways solely designed to serve that lead to the various spaces where the residents will perform the appropriate activities. Under the assumption that the apartment supports a vibrant and energetic family, the formality of walking through a narrow hallway to move from the entry to the living area is undesirable, and can be reworked to become something more for everyone.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 258

(NOT

NTRY

(OK FOR PRIVATE ACCESS)

COMPRESSION

PUBLIC TO PRIVATE

COMPRESSION

T OK...TOO MUCH TRAFFIC)

Alexander Cheng 259

YES...ENTRY NEEDS ACCESS TO A CLOSET

THRESHOLDS The apartment suffers from a lack of clarity in separating public versus private spaces to the north. The design intent involves the addition of physical thresholds in transverse hall off of the entry foyer.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 260

YES!

BEDROOM DOOR OPENS TO ENTRY... NO GOOD. NEED NEW LOCATION.

Alexander Cheng 261

DECOMPRESSION

2â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 262

BATH. ACCESS

The intervention converts a walk-in closet in the master bedroom into a library that makes the transition from the entry to the great room livable, while still retaining the functional capacity of a hallway. The master bathroom is made accessible to the great room, to add more proximal service to the programmatic core of the apartment. Doors are inserted to either side of the entry hall to separate private bedrooms and bathrooms from public circulation. The partition wall between the kitchen and great room is demolished to connect all of the public spaces where the family will spend the majority of their time.

DEC

NEW DOOR LOCATION OPEN TO LIBRARY AWAY FROM MAIN ENTRY.

NEW LIBRARY

SHIFT FRIDGE

DEMO PARTITION

COMPRESSION Alexander Cheng 263

ED RESS COMP

EXISTING PLAN The existing conditions provide an apartment that selfishly hoards private space, and demands a lot of servant space to access it.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 264

DECOMPR

ESSED

MODIFIED PLAN The new plan dictates slight translation in structural members and the donation of space from the master bedroom to allow the public to private connection to transcend the servant function. Demolition of partition walls near the kitchen connects all public activity.

Alexander Cheng 265

EXISTING PLAN

BREAK

BARRIERS

The demolition of the kitchen / breakfast room partition wall visually expands the space of the great room, fusing the living, dining, and kitchen into a singularity. This maximizes circulation and interaction between the three programs. The former pantry, walled off and shut behind a door, opens up to become horizontal lines of ingredients that lead into the kitchen. The shelves wrap around the opposite corner as well, bringing the great room to the library and the library to the great room.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 266

MODIFIED PLAN

Alexander Cheng 267

EXISTING PLAN

A HYBRID HALLWAY Converting the hallway into a hybridization of served and serving space gives the apartment a multi-functionality that is more efficient, useful, and beautiful. The gap between a column and wall becomes a bench that socializes the library with the great room. Shelves turn every corner from the entrance wall to the living room, providing immediate directional orientation to visitors. The hallway becoms a place to stay and read, and remains the route to travel from public to private activity.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 268

MODIFIED PLAN

Alexander Cheng 269

1.3 - Study 3 Fixed Plan - Re-Design Of Apartment Using the apartment from last weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s exercise, this study consists of taking a single room of the apartment and developing that room further. The shape, articulation and finish of each surface needs to be addressed. The space needs to be furnished and the type of lighting needs to be addressed. This includes the windows in the space. This should be depicted with and without window covering. Is this decoration or an extension of the architecture? Can it be both? What serves what?

DECOMPRESSION The intervention converts a walk-in closet in the master bedroom into a library that makes the transition from the entry to the great room livable, while still retaining the functional capacity of a hallway. The partition wall between the kitchen and great room is demolished to connect all of the public spaces where the family will spend the majority of their time.

DE Chicago Studio Spring 2015 270

NEW DOOR LOCATION OPEN TO LIBRARY AWAY FROM MAIN ENTRY.

NEW LIBRARY

ECOMPRESSION Alexander Cheng 271

LIBRARY + LIGHTING A concrete block confronts the entrance condition. Subtractions veneered in light maple carves place for common items. Book filled shelves in the same wood turn every corner from the entrance to the living room, providing immediate orientation to visitors. The density of literary information is proportional to the amount of privacy and acoustic absorption. The hall becoms a place to stay and read, and remains the route to travel from public to private activity. The window muntin pattern opens up at the height of the inhabitants to preseve views. Horzontal blinds offer an edgy diffusion of light to the interior., and quietly blends with the horizontal motif of the library / hall. Track spot lighting dynamically illuminates the walls and floor. As a result, the eye is drawn down the hall when transitioning from space to space, and focuses on the content of the shelves when looking to stay and read.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 272

Alexander Cheng 273

PLAY OF SURFACES A delineation is made between the area of travel and the area of leisure in the form of a subtractive channel. The ceiling is dropped one foot for intended intimacy and warmth when reading or talking. The column is re-imagined as a vertical series of wrapping incisions in wood that visually questions the structural capacity of the column. A thin, black carpet offers comfort, and mediates the transition from the master bedroom to the hallway.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 274

2 3

Alexander Cheng 275

1.4 - Study 4 Micro-Unit Design This exercise is the design of one module, a micro unit, which falls between 250 sf - 300 sf. The unit must contain all typical apartment functions. Kitchen ,bathroom living, dining, sleeping, storage, natural light, and ventilation. What serves what? Because of the nature of the unit, the three dimensional aspects of the design must be considered and presented.

MICRO SPLIT LEVEL The design for the microunit involves the splitting of floors into a private floor and a public floor. The spatial arrangement forms vast volumes in public areas and still provide separation for private areas. The bedroom and quiet study area is located on the top level. This is separated from the living, dining, and kitchen below. The bathroom is also located on the public floor, so it can be used by guests without venturing to the private floor. A light well runs the full height of the apartment, organizing the circulation around the unit, evenly distributing light. The issues with the design are numerous, however. Splitting the levels in the current format allocates a lot of space to circulation via the entrance landing and stairs, which is a horrible inefficiency of available space. Is there a way to make better use of these â&#x20AC;&#x153;servingâ&#x20AC;? spaces to work harder for the apartment? Is there a different way to make a stair so that it is multi-functional or is more compact? Is there another way to separate floors without having dedicated circulation space to get to them?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 276

2nd Floor (Private) 56 sq. ft.

Split Floor (Circulation) 48 sq. ft.

1st Floor (Public) 127 sq. ft. (usable) + 86 sq. ft. (storage)

TOTAL 317 sq. ft. (OVER CONSTRAINTS...)

Alexander Cheng 277

CONNECTION Even though the private level and public level are separated by height, they are connected through a void in the top floor that gives a portion of the lower level a great spatial volume, and provides a small moment of connection.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 278

SEPARATION A decision is made when the resident walks through the front door. Upstairs or downstairs? The private level and public level are separated by height. No wall partition is necessary to create privacy. And grander spaces can be formed as a result of this solution.

Alexander Cheng 279

When the plan is limited to a smaller footprint, whether the design is for a whole building or a microunit, the solution to achieve more space is to build up. The unit succeeds in giving a lot of visual space, which attempts to alleviate the extreme compression of the plan. The window opening follows the vertical circulation of the resident, so a view and access to light is never lost. However, the issues with a great amount of height means that the building must be taller to accommodate the same amount of units. If height isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t an issue, then the design is feasible. But in a place like Jefferson Park, where most buildings are 3 story flats, perhaps height has to be re-considered to relate to the scale of the neighborhood.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 280

PRIVATE

18’-0”

PUBLIC

12’-0” Alexander Cheng 281

1.5 - Study 5 Facade Re-Design - Three - Quarter View Chose a building in Chicago and capture 2 faces of the building in a three-quarter view photograph. Working in digital format, present at least one alternate exterior articulation of the building. This brings into question or study the vocabulary, scale and materiality, at the least, of the proposed alternative. Assume that the use of the interior spaces, known or unknown will stay the same, that the minimum size of the windows/apertures must be respected within reason, and that the exterior wall will remain in the same place, unless some intervention seems to have merit.

EXISTING CONDITION Currently, the tower at 200 S. Michigan Avenue is a sleek, rectangular extrusion of glass. Darker spandrel glass wraps around on all sides, giving the building a horizontality in visual reading. As a challenge, can the building read vertically with a simple change? The horizontal banding of the spandrel detracts from the thin vertical mullions running nearly the full height of the building, which are the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most primary vertical elements. As an additional design consideration, the east facade could also benefit from protection from the direct sun in the morning hours. Can sun screening also offer verticality?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 282

VERTICAL SHADING The resolution of the facade contrasts in directionality with the northern face of the building that runs parallel with W. Adams St. Vertical perforated metal screens appear to be seamless, making the east facade read as a sequence of vertical bays rather than horizontal floors. They offer diffusion protection from direct morning light rays. The screens have the opportunity to play with the bottom edge of the building where it meets the storefront. They can also blur the finishing line of the top of the tower. But is the intervention too playful for the city? A single, hard edge offers a quieter alteration.

Alexander Cheng 283

1.6 - Study 6 Defining The Block This study entails the documentation + dissection of Michigan Avenue. The chosen block is the East side of Michigan Avenue, between Ohio Street and Ontario Street. Document the chosen block working in elevation. You’ll need to patch/tile the images together to form a single image of the block. Some buildings may not fit entirely. How much is enough to define the block? What defines the block? Other images of the block are necessary to explain the block’s character. Diagrams and text explain what is seen and what it does.

EAST OHIO-ONTARIO

ONTARIO - OHIO: EAST

There are two buildings on the East block on North Michican Avenue, between Ontario and Ohio. Although both buildings share neutral material palattes, there is an enormous height discrepancy between them. The buildings both are separated from each other by an alley, and lend their street frontage to retail shops and corporate entry. These kinds of moves provide a relatability and accessibility to the human scale.

ALEXANDER CHENG 03-18-2015 0’

5’

1 in. = 20ft.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 284

20’

40’

ONTARIO - OHIO: EAST 625 N Michigan vertically articulates its facade with a higher frequency of vertical structure than horizontal slabs. The shorter building, 615 N Michigan, wants the eye to be drawn up to the tops of Corinthian column caps. However, horizontal window openings on the upper floors distract from the verticality, and makes it read horizontally.

ALEXANDER CHENG 03-18-2015 0’

5’

20’

40’

1 in. = 20ft.

ONTARIO - OHIO: EAST BLOCK DIAGRAMING ONTARIO - OHIO: EAST Street trees in the spring and sumStreet in the spring and summertimetrees offers shade to people on mertime offersPlanters shade towith people on the sidewalk. various the sidewalk. Planters withtovarious foliage lend themselves enlivfoliage lend themselves to enlivening the pedestrian zone. The ening theactpedestrian plantings as a visualzone. bufferThe to plantings as a visualthey buffer to the street.actAdditionally sepathe Additionally rate street. the sidewalk into a they broadsepaaverate the sidewalk into a and broad nue by shops (served) a avethinnue by shops (served) andstreet a thinner slice right next to the for ner slice nextpick to the street for bus drop right off and up (serving). bus drop off and pick up (serving).

625 North Michigan vertically articulates its facade with a higher frequency of vertical structure than horizontal slabs. The shorter building, 615 North Michigan, wants the eye to be drawn up to the tops of Corinthian column caps. However, horizontal window openings on the upper floors distract from the verticality, and makes it read horizontally. Street trees in the spring and summertime offers shade to people on the sidewalk. Planters with various foliage lend themselves to enlivening the pedestrian zone. The plantings act as a visual buffer to the street. Additionally they separate the sidewalk into a broad avenue by shops (served) and a thinner slice right next to the street for bus drop off and pick up (serving).

ALEXANDER CHENG ALEXANDER 03-18-2015 CHENG 03-18-2015 0’ 5’ 0’ 1 in. = 5’20ft. 1 in. = 20ft.

20’ 20’

40’ 40’

Alexander Cheng 285

1.7 - Study 7 Design Someone Else’s Studio Project The final study involves the manipulation of one of your colleagues’ studio projects. What haven’t they addressed yet that should be? How can you, as an outsider to the project, approach the design and offer the project new insight? Renderings of the project in its surrounding context are necessary to compare the original design to the proposed alternative.

THE NEW [DIS]ORDER Janice and Connor have developed a rigid ordering system for the exterior expression of solid and opening. The order consists of a grid of square openings that are broken down into smaller pieces that reflect the kind of activity housed behind each type of opening. Can a new order be introduced to the exterior expression of the project? Can the project take on chaos?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 286

CHAOS

Alexander Cheng 287

BREAK THE BIG WALL The most glaring portion of the project reveals itself on the Northern face of the building - a blank wall that abuts the Metra and CTA train lines. This facade is arguably one of the most advertised faces of the building. So how can it be more appealing as an advertisement to Jefferson Park? And how can this opportunity be used to introduce a bit of chaos to the rigidity of the project? The chaos that is introduced to the blank facade is a way to reveal the program within, just as the existing order does for the project. However, it does so within a new formal rule set. Spherical subtractive differences carve away at the massive wall, and influences the spaces within. It reveals the activity and the grand floor to floor heights of the project. The new chaos never interacts with the existing facade order that is prominent in other areas of the building, but solely in the blankness of the large North facade.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 288

ORDER

[DIS]ORDER Alexander Cheng 289

01 02

Studies Urban Observation

2.0 - Urban Observations Perception Of The City What are the things that are unseen in Chicago? The things that most people would walk right by, without giving it a second glance? The intent of urban observations is to unearth qualities and knowledge of the city that allows us to see it in a different way than before.

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 10

Week 11

Week 12

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 292

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 7

Week 8

Week 9

Week 13

Week 14

Week 15

Alexander Cheng 293

2.1 - Week 1 The Cloud - Object Of Vanity A city dwelling woman checks herself in The Cloud as if it were a bathroom mirror. Any reflective surface in the city can become a hotspot for individual vanity.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 294

2.2 - Week 2 Robie House - Kitchen Craft At the Robie House, Frank Lloyd Wright cuts sloped grooves into the kitchen countertop for excess water from drying dishes to drain into the sink. A basic drying rack would work, but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nice witnessing the extent of thought that Wright put into such small things of day-to-day activities.

Alexander Cheng 295

2.3 - Week 3 Graceland Cemetary The headstone for Louis Sullivan rests in Graceland Cemetary, which happens to be right down the street from our apartment. The metal work inlaid within the stone is done with meticulous care and detailing, much like the work of Sullivan himself. Another item of discovery - Mies Van Der Rohe is also buried in this cemetary.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 296

2.4 - Week 4 Reflections Of Color One wall of color can reach to-wards the eye through a series of reflections. OMAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s McCormick Tribune Student Center at the IIT campus focuses attention to the end of a hall of glass. The color appears through the openings in the frit patterns that form the many faces of Mies Van Der Rohe.

Alexander Cheng 297

2.5 - Week 5 Foreign Object The Bahaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;i House of Worship doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t seem to belong. Linden station, a friendly residential community, then a temple dedicated to a faith with a Persian origin? How did this thing get built here?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 298

2.6 - Week 6 Overhead Layers Of Light Light filters through the multi-layered roof system of the Renzo Piano addition to the Art Institute of Chicago. It seems like there is no clear line of protection of the elements. The ceiling appears as a fabric sheet that is open to the air. Partition walls never touch the ceiling, and the light is one continuous, un-interrupted layer across the space.

Alexander Cheng 299

2.7 - Week 7 St. Patrick’s Day In Chicago The St. Patrick’s Day celebration involves tens of pounds of vegetable dye that turns the river green. The intesity of green varies with the exclusion and admission of light between buildings.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 300

2.8 - Week 8 Brick Behind Stone Walking around North Michigan after class, a texture caught the corner of my eye. Looking up, I noticed dark brick infill within a multi-arched opening in a light and smooth masonry wall. The brick is turned at an angle to ruggedly contrast with the cleanliess of the window opening. I canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t decide if it appears more like a wall behind a wall, or if it reads more as an opening that is filled in.

Alexander Cheng 301

2.9 - Week 9 Order of Perceived Chaos MIesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s IBM Building, currently the Langham Hotel at 330 North Wabash, houses beautiful hanging glasswork in its lobby. The blobs of glass are each about 10 pounds, and seem to be scattered randomly. However upon looking up, it is revealed that they are organized in a grid. The randomness only exists in how the bubbles are fixed vertically within the grid.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 302

2.10 - Week 10 Worst Building In Chicago One of the ugliest buildings in Chicago is the Harold Washington Library on South State Street. What the exterior of the building seems to suggest is a massive space within. Upon entering, the expectation does not reflect the reality. The large, multi-story, vertical windows that are so definitive on the exterior are divided into disappointing 10 to 12 foot drywall spaces within. The building should have been built with the exterior relating a space that is truer to the interior, or vice-versa.

Alexander Cheng 303

2.11 - Week 11 Wonder Of Backlighting The Museum of Science and Industry, though seemingly old-fashioned on the exterior, reveals an interior of technology and excitement that is unexpected to visitors. The Omnimax Theater within the building is one example. Perforated alumninum panels are connected globally to form a bright, panoramic viewing surface for movies. Lit from behind, a seemingly solid and opaque surface becomes transparent, revealing the structure and serving systems that assist in the workings of the theater.

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 304

2.12 - Week 12 Peek-A-Boo A space for light also becomes place for social interaction between floors in the Harley Davidson Museum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Are moments like this intentional? Do architects ever design for a certain quality or event, then have it be used differently than they planned? Is that a good thing?

Alexander Cheng 305

2.13 - Week 13 Identity Of Impermanence An old brick atrium within a mall in Minneapolis, Minnesota floats umbrellas. Light is filtered from above through the stretched skins of the umbrellasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; fabric, creating a play between values depending on the color of the umbrella. Can these kinds of impermanent installations become the identity for a space, rather than permanent architectural design moves?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 306

2.14 - Week 14 Grid With Meaning The light of Chicago seen at night from the 96th floor of the Hancock Tower reveals itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ordering system. The long, straight streets of the city extend miles to the horizon of sight. Many other cities also utilize a grid, but once the grid is taken out of plan and seen in perspective, the unique qualities of the plan become obvious.

Alexander Cheng 307

2.15 - Week 15 Urban Improvements Scaffolding is erected to renovate and repair the Santa Fe Building on the corner of South Michigan Avenue and East Jackson Boulevard. Although the temporary structure is meant to allow improvements to the building, the pedestrian condition below becomes interesting. The scaffolding offers shade and establishes a regular rhythm to the walking experience. Can sidewalks use something like scaffolding as a permanent condition in the urban setting?

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 308

Alexander Cheng 309

Chicago Studio Spring 2015 310

Special Thanks: Andrew Balster Casey Renner Drew Ranieri Chip von Weise Thank you to the innumerable people that made the Chicago Studio the incredible program that it is today. I cannot imagine a group of people that are as kind, helpful, and willing as you all are. I had the most amazing time. You guys are simply the best. Thanks so much!

Alexander Cheng 311