draft
SDSU DoArch 2010-2011
1
draft
SDSU DoArch 2010-2011
KOCH+HAZARD
DRAFT 2010-2011
ARCH INC.
Designed and Produced by Dustin Jones Editorial Advisors - Brian Rex, Charles MacBride & Sushmita Shresta Publisher Department of Architecture South Dakota State University Box 2203 Intramural Building (The Barn) 108 Brookings, SD 57007 Phone: (605) 688-4841
PERSPECTIVE
DRAFT, is a student publication of the Department of Architecture at South Dakota State University. Copyright 2011 the Department of Architecture, South Dakota State University. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording without permission in writing from the publisher.
TSP
Main Avenue Analysis 6
“Work Like, Not Look Like” - Rick Wessling
13
Bounding Space 14 “A Look Back” - Sushmita Shresta 29 The Precedent 30 Events 38 Species of Space 40 Accreditation Report 51 Boxing Space 52
“Cheap, Crafty, & Mobile” - Alex Krug
64
Situating Space 66
“The Unique Opportunity of Integrated Design” - Charles MacBride
75
Future Expansion Project 76 Index 80
CONTENTS
Foreword - Brian Rex 5
FOREWORD FOREWORD: DRAFT is a clear snapshot of how we look straddling our first and second year of teaching architecture at SDSU. Dustin Jones has done an amazing job in taking the initiative to document all the models, develop a coherent graphical layout, and spend hours polishing DRAFT into a respectable first publication for the department. We must carry on with this initiative and make DRAFT a successful sustainable student retrospective publication of a years work. Reflection is an important part of growing and practicing. We dedicate this document to all the people who have contributed their time during the first year of Architecture at South Dakota State University: Sushmita Shrestha Amber Janousek David Hilderbrand Dustin Jones Janice Hanson Rick Wessling Jordan Standing Soldier Tiffany Peterson Chevelle Waege T.J. Olson Dan Landes Joe Foarde Karen Bravek Kathleen Donovan Garrett Walter Louise Loban Jerry Jorgensen Rachel Speiser Arlene Madsen Teresa Hall Alex Krug and all the first year’s students whose patience and enthusiasm has made the biggest impact on who we are and how we are seen. FORWARD!
Brian Rex 4|5
10th Street
college green
9th Street
7th Street
6th Street
bandshell
5th Street
4th Street
courthouse square
3rd Street
2nd Street
1st Street
11th Avenue
Medary Avenue
9th Avenue
8th Avenue
7th Avenue
6th Avenue
8th Street
5th Avenue
Main Avenue
3rd Avenue
2nd Avenue
1st Avenue
Henry Avenue
church
MAIN AVENUE ANALYSIS Arch 101 is an introduction to architecture, its culture, its practice, & its allied design arts. This course studies design as an independent discipline, and an integrated part of a much larger & complex world.
MAIN AVENUE BROOKINGS : PHOTOMOSAIC BY DAY
8
9
MAIN AVENUE BROOKINGS : PHOTOMOSAIC BY NIGHT
10
11
the journey... can mark the beginning of a lifelong exploration of the craft and of the
WORK LIKE, NOT LOOK LIKE The journey of the first year architecture student can mark the beginning of a lifelong exploration of the craft of representation and of the creation. With first developing an understanding of the different experiences and relationships we have with our natural and built environment. Then learning how to be articulate about what these experiences and relationships are, and finally going on to develop the skills to purposefully create new experiences and relationships. Beginning with a spacial study of their most common day to day activities and then representing them through drawings and models, the students developed a direct understanding of how the drawings and models were a representation of how the activity took place in space, but not what the activity looked like. The students used the tools of drawing and modeling to represent and articulate how something actually works versus its appearance. Applying these skills to the study of houses by significant architects, the students created drawings and models of the buildings that represented how they were built, how they worked, but not how they looked. This exploration of the visual and physical palette the architects used to create the buildings provided the basic tools for the students to explore on their own. Like the beginning musician, the students continued to practice the manipulation and representation of space with these very basic tools. The cube provided the basic frame work for the score. They explored many variations on the theme, with each exploration offering another lesson in the craft of representing how the solution worked, but not what it looked like. This craft of representation develops the direct connection of the hand to the mind. It is the craft of understanding how something is made and how it works. Constructing a drawing in the same manner as you would build the building is to understanding what organizes the building and what encloses or directs the space. This constructing develops an understanding of scale and the nature of the materials used. It begins to establish an understanding of the physical and visual palette of architecture. This craft of representation and this hand to mind connection is in fact thinking. Developing this sense of craft is an integral part of thinking. The act of making is thinking. 12|13
Rick Wessling, AIA
BOUNDING SPACE Consider your room (your single most private living space). This unit uses surveying, analyzing, and synthesizing your living space as its vehicle for exploration. #1) Surveying the Room: Formal Space and Event Space #2) Analyzing the Room: Bona Fide and Fiat Space #3) Synthesizing Between Form and Event: the Interstitial
PHOTOMOSAIC
16
17
CATALOGS
18
19
CHRONOPHOTOGRAPHS
Changing Clothes
Getting Into Bed
Getting Out of Bed
Studying
Making Food
Cleaning
Getting Back From Class
Doing Homework
20
Check Email
Turn Fan on/off
Watch TV
Watch Movies/Tv
Get Out of Bed
Clean
Put Food In Microwave
Change Clothes
Getting Dressed
Browse Internet
Get in Bed
Study/Homework
Turn on Fan
Go to Bed/Sleep
Eat Meal
21
Eat/Drink
WIRE MODELS
22
23
CATSCANS
24|25
INTERSTITIAL MODELS
26
27
the gradual passage of time gave them strength and knowledge to speak
A LOOK BACK Coming from a completely different society, culture and geography, it was challenging for me to be a part of this department as everything I know is somewhat different. With an educational background, which is more British, a religion balancing between Hinduism and Buddhism, and a society with more joint families, it was to say the least a big leap for me. But, I definitely had some new opportunities to work in a congenial environment. My one year work as a volunteer in the department gave me ample opportunity to understand the American way of teaching and learning as well as the chance to get in touch with the architectural fraternity within the state. The batch of students in the first class were silent and introvert, but the gradual passage of time gave them strength and knowledge to speak their mind as architectural studies promote explanations, presentations and discussions. The first year students did projects that were new to me, but I found them to be stimulating. In the bounding space project students were taking pictures of their room, making collages, wire models, foam models, and cataloging the functions. In fact, I believe that for the first time they sensed how different they were from the engineering students. Architecture takes dedication and die heart interest to get through it. When the students were making their final foam model of their room, they had to stay awake the whole night to work on the project. They were learning the reality of the architecture educational pattern. Every day in class there was a new and challenging project to complete. It was as new to me as it was for the students, so there was a learning phase for all of us. I helped the students with their projects with ideas from similar projects that I had in my architectural studies. Architecture needs all head, heart and hand to do better. They need to think, love and work accordingly. The passion that the students expressed when they faced challenges was my favorite part of this program; they were eager to learn and tempted to work. I know that this hunger will keep them alive in the field of architecture. Sushmita Shresta 28|29
THE PRECEDENT Lovell Beach House by R.M. Schindler, Newport Beach CA, 1926 Villa Stein by LeCorbusier, Garches FR, 1927 Eames House by Charles and Ray Eames, Pacific Palisades CA, 1949 Villa Curutchet by LeCorbusier, LaPlata Argentina, 1955 Maisons Jaoul by LeCorbusier, Neuilly-sur-Seine, Paris FR, 1956 Margaret Esherick House by Louis Kahn, Chestnut Hill PA, 1961 Mother’s House by Robert Venturi, Chestnut Hill PA, 1964 Norman Fisher House by Louis Kahn, Hatboro PA, 1967
NORMAN FISHER HOUSE BY LOUIS KAHN
32
33
MOTHER’S HOUSE BY ROBERT VENTURI
34
VILLA CURUTCHET BY LECORBUSIER
35
VILLA STEIN BY LECORBUSIER
36
LOVELL BEACH HOUSE BY R.M. SCHINDLER
37
SPECIES OF SPACE Garden Space Villa Medici Renaissance @ Fiesole by Michelozzi in 1460 Villa d’Este Renaissance @ Tivoli, Rome by Ligorio in 1550 Villa Lante Mannerist @ Bagnaia, Tuscany by Vignola in 1550 Villa Papa Guilia Mannerist @ Rome by Vignola in 1553 Villa Gamberaia Mannerist @ Settignano, Florence in 1610 Villa Torlonia Baroque @Frascati by Maderno in 1623 Villa Valmarana Baroque @ Ai Nani, Vicenza by Mutoni in 1668 Villa Dona Dalle Rose Baroque @ Valzanzibio, Padua by Barbarigio in 1690 What is the FORM of the SPACES in the garden? What is the FIGURE of the WHOLE in the garden? What are the SPATIAL PARTS of the garden? What is the PART to WHOLE relationship in the garden?
CATALOG
42
43
STRING MODELS
44
45
PAPER MODELS
46
47
SPACIAL MODELS
48
49
enthusiasm and the support it brings is a critical indicator of what I believe will become an incredibly successful program...
ACCREDITATION The National Architectural Accrediting Board or NAAB gives full accreditation to new programs once they’ve run a gauntlet of extensive reporting and careful scrutiny that the institution is dedicated to the education of professionally qualified students. This past May we entered that process by submitting an 80 page report on the development of the Department of Architecture. On 22 June Miguel Rodriguez, FAIA, a practicing architect in Miami, visited us to determine whether we are ready for Initial Candidacy for accreditation. He spent two days with us touring, interviewing, and studying how we’re doing. Here are his closing evaluation remarks as submitted to the accrediting board: Its difficult to express in written form the enthusiasm, excitement and anticipation that is evident from all involved in the development of this program, starting with University leadership, the Dean and Heads of existing departments both within and outside the College of Arts and Sciences, current students, and the Foundation itself. In fact, as if to fit neatly within a larger ‘plan,’ even my seat-mate on the flight leaving Sioux Falls, an SDSU alum, former employee and current Grad student in an unrelated field was not only aware of the new program but exhibited the same level of enthusiasm. This enthusiasm and the support it brings to this endeavor is a critical indicator of what I believe will become an incredibly successful program serving not just the people of South Dakota but those of the broader region of which it is a part. Our initial candidacy visit is scheduled for Fall of 2012 with ensuing meetings coming in Fall 2014, and the final accreditation approval visit in Fall 2016, a semester after the first class has graduated with their Master of Architecture. Once final, everyone’s degrees, including the already graduated class, are accredited degrees. Accreditation is not a goal. It is a validation of our effort to build a strong, unique, and focused professional program here in South Dakota. What we are doing here is to a standard. That standard is professional. In time, with proof of consistency and foresight, we’ll earn this credential just by doing what we do professionally and making what we’re doing obvious, public, thoughtful, and sustainable. 50|51
BOXING SPACE Site the garden’s narrative, a story free of its Italian sources, into a variety of boxes: boxes of space, boxes of form, and everything we can imagine in between. To box the narrative we’ll work through some operative techniques of formal and spatial design such as: folding compressing, sectioning, and scaling. At the end of all this pushing and shoving we’ll have a graphical and modeled description of way that the garden’s narrative is structured within generic form/space modulations of the box.
3 x 3 x 3 CUBE DRAWINGS
54
3 x 3 x 3 CUBE MODELS
55
DRAWING CUBE SECTIONS Template
56|57
COMPOSITE CUBE MODELS
58
59
SECTION DRAWINGS Assignment: Drawing to Wire/Chipboard Model 1) Take your 9 inch Large Cube Model and Draw 9 sections evenly spaced on one piece of 24’ by 24’ vellum. 2) Use a cross hatching technique (or color) to fill in the positive space. 3) Cut 9 pieces of chipboard to match the 9 section drawings. Cutting out the negative space of the drawing. 4) Tape together your 9 chipboard sections and drill holes evenly spaced through all 9 sections. 5) Weave wire through the holes to space out the sections.
60
61
WIRE/CHIPBOARD MODELS
62
63
CHEAP, CRAFTY, & MOBILE DoArch is cheap, crafty, and mobile. We’ll see at least three different facilities before we find a real home. We started poor with no money, so we began making place in the surplus barns of the university. When 1/3rd of the students in the program can weld and we have one of the best metal shops of any architecture program in the U.S.A, we figure we can make all of our tables and other fixtures. Alex Krug has provided the craft throughout this project. So, here’s a sample of a simple design for a table Alex concocted for the studios and a few of the salvaged cabinets and flat files set into a frame and raised up on casters to get us from one office to the next over our first years at SDSU. DoArch is in every sense a design problem to be analyzed, resourced, and constructed.
64|65
SITUATING SPACE In this phase we’ll move the work back towards a specificity by putting it somewhere, giving it context, situation, and surroundings as well as returning the work to a particular scalar and enveloping relationship to the human body.
Assignment: Part One 1) Make a Dummy Site from blue foam where the total possible build area is left as a void. 2) Make five Box Sitings according to the following: a) Make a 2 x 2 x 2 condensed project box b) Site the 2 x 2 x 2 box in the site, filling in the appropriate amount of foam to complete the volume of the sloped ground missing. You can extend chipboard planes and piano wire out of the box (not brass, copper, or wood) to mediate between the site and the box but you can’t make new parts to do this. These five box sitings should each fit into your “dummy site” so we can switch them out and look at them. Part Two 1) Increase the scale of the Dummy Site 3x 2) Take an existing Large Cube Model and modify it based on feedback to exemplify part to whole. 3) Examine the relationship of your cube to the site to find the best suited location. 4) Place Cube on, in, over, or of the site.
68
PART ONE: DUMMY SITE
69
PART TWO: SITUATION
70
71
PART TWO: SITUATION
72
73
...the slow success of the simple, repetitive acts of making and
THE UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY OF INTEGRATED DESIGN The acknowledgement and shift towards sustainability and “green thinking” over the past ten years has forced a change in both architectural practice and education. This has been an important, if belated, advance that the profession has (quickly) embraced, while the schools, always slower to change, have tried to rework these new ideas into the traditional studio-based system. Integrated design has been introduced into what is now known as “comprehensive studio,” but the delivery of required technical and professional coursework generally remains on the periphery of the most effective, hands-on means of design education. Sustainable building emerges as the most visible of the many systems and forces within integrated design, but ultimately must remain as flexible as any of the other physical or conceptual requirements of thoughtful building design. The acknowledgement and active response to the environmental impact and energy usage by buildings and infrastructure is regarded now as the most significant shift in architecture since the critique and ultimate rejection of modernism in the 1960s. That shift, largely due to cultural, political and societal changes, brought with it an approach to architectural education based less upon the formal and constructive, and more upon the humanistic, stylized and process driven narratives best embodied by postmodernism. Concerns of tectonics, materiality, and building mechanics were left out of the design studio and practice both for generations. The lessons of learning through basic acts of assembly and the exploration of various material qualities was substituted for poetic, detached meanderings, and has left the standard or accepted studio teaching methodology that much further behind the comprehensive design model. Integrated building concepts now influence design thinking as much as traditional concepts of space, light and formal composition, and while both are crucial, the former requires more accountability to the professional and technical training and education of architects. The new Department of Architecture at SDSU has a unique opportunity to set up a curriculum unburdened by the conventional separation of design studio and the “lesser” supporting technical and professional coursework. The program will be based on applying ideas of craft, assembly and material, and on the slow success of the simple, repetitive acts of making and building. This is the new potential of architectural education for our new era. The program doesn’t reject the importance or place of theory, form, or history, but rather claims that learning architecture by using your hands supports all of these integrated principals in combination. 74|75
Charles MacBride
WAGNER HALL
COMM
ADMINISTRATION
ROTUNDA
ART MUSEUM
OLD HORT
EXPANSION
AME BUILDING
PATIO
ENGINEERING QUAD
HARDING HALL CROTHERS
LOHR LAB
12th AVENUE AXIS
LINCOLN
SOLBERG
LAYOUT YARD
ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
STUDY AREA
FACULTY OFFICES GALLERY & CRIT SPACE
03/150sf
04/150sf
05/150sf
06/150sf
07/150sf
08/150sf
09/150sf
10/150sf
CRIT SPACE
MEDIA RM 300sf
CRIT SPACE
CRIT SPACE
MATL'S & TECH RESOURCE CTR AND ARCH READING ROOM 1100sf
RECRUITMENT, ADVISING, SCHOLARSHIP, & PLACEMENT 500sf
LOCKERS
ENTRY ARCH LANDING
LOCKERS
OPEN
02/150sf
LOCKERS
GALLERY & NORTH LANDING
01/150sf
ARCH WORK RM & ACCREDITATION ROOM 650sf
DEPT HEAD 220sf ATRIUM BELOW
EXISTING SOLBERG HALL (CIM)
1ST & 2ND YR STUDIO HOT DESKS 1450sf
ARCH ADMIN 1150sf STAFF OFFICES, WAITING & WORK ROOM
ELEV
M
3RD YR STUDIO COLD DESKS 1300sf
4TH YR STUDIO COLD DESKS 1300sf
W
LINE OF CLERESTORY WINDOWS ABOVE
ARCH LANDING
CRIT SPACE
ENTRY
CONFERENCE AREA 570sf
ATRIUM BELOW
6TH YR STUDIO COLD DESKS 1450sf
GALLERY & CRIT SPACE 570sf
CRIT SPACE
CRIT SPACE
5TH YR STUDIO COLD DESKS 1450sf
LEVEL THREE PLAN
LOADING & YARD LAYOUT
DOCK
OUTDOOR LAYOUT & ASSEMBLY (COVERED)
NORTH ENTRY
ENTRY FROM DOCK
ME DESIGN TEAM WORKSPACES 1800sf
SOPHOMORE PROJECTS & LAYOUT
CIM PROJECT STORAGE
METAL SHOP MACHINE SHOP 1900sf
MACHINE AREA
1800sf
TOOL ROOM & STORAGE MECHL RM
M
WOOD SHOP
CONTROL RM 840sf
W
CLASSROOM
CAFE 600sf
AIAS 240sf
PRINT SHOP & DIGITAL FABRICATION 500sf
LAYOUT & ASSEMBLY
& TEACHING LAB
1500sf
MODEL SHOP 575sf
STAIR
CNC SHOP 300sf
VIEW INTO SHOPS
THE GALLERY LOUNGE, READING CARRELS & STUDENT ACTIVITIES DISPLAY (PLATFORMS, HANGING, CASES) CAFE TABLES
LEVEL ONE PLAN
THE PATIO
76|77
ENTRY
VIEW INTO MECHL
ARCH PROJECT STORAGE
CIM ADMIN
ENTRY
2400sf
1150sf
DISPLAY & VIEW INTO SHOP ELEV
750sf (EXISTING)
HIGH BAY WELDING
EXISTING SOLBERG HALL (CIM)
CIM LANDING
FOUNDRY
ME PROJECT STORAGE
THE ATRIUM
ENTRY
ME TESTING LAB ENGINES AREA 400sf
SERVICE CORRIDOR
MECHL RM
VIEW INTO MECHL
MASONRY STORAGE
2ND & 3RD FLOOR CONNECTION TO NORTH STAIR TOWER
N
EXISTING CONNECTION TO SOLBERG HALL DEMO DEMO SOLBERG SOLBERG ADDITIONS ADDITIONS
1) MASSING CONCEPT: FIRST PHASE
DEMO DEMO INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL ARTS ARTS BLD BLD
• UTILIZE SOLBERG HALL • CONNECTION WITH CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM • SYNERGY BETWEEN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND ARCHITECTURE CURRICULUM, FACILITIES, TEACHING • PHYSICAL CONNECTIONS AT EACH FLOOR LEVEL BETWEEN SOLBERG & AME
78
2) MASSING CONCEPT: SECOND PHASE • CREATE PUBLIC SPACES • CREATE STUDENT GATHERING AND STUDY AREAS • RESOLVE CIRCULATION BETWEEN SOLBERG & AME • PROVIDE VIEWING AND DISPLAY AREAS ON FIRST FLOOR FOR ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING SHOPS THE ATRIUM
OPEN STAIR FOR CIRCULATION AND CASUAL RELAXING
N
NEW ELEVATOR MAIN ENTRY TO AME BUILDING
THE PORCH
OPEN GALLERY FOR STUDY, CAFE, VIEWING OF SHOP SPACES AND OTHER STUDENT ACTIVITIES ENTRY ENTRY
THE PATIO
OUTDOOR SEATING, OPENS INTO THE PORCH
ENTRY ENTRY
CLERESTORY WINDOWS ABOVE ARCHITECTURE STUDIOS
N
THE THE ATRIUM ATRIUM
3) MASSING CONCEPT: THIRD PHASE
THE THE PORCH PORCH
ARCHITECTURE ARCHITECTURE MATHEMATICS MATHEMATICS SHOPS SHOPS
• FIRST FLOOR (RED): SHOP SPACES FOR ARCHITECTURE, MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT • SECOND FLOOR (GREEN): MATHEMATICS DEPT • THIRD FLOOR (BLUE): ARCHITECTURE DEPT
79
MacBride, Charles 74,75,76,77,78,79
Van De Rostyne, Brian 22,27,35,42,47,55,59,69
Dyk, Anthony 54,59,62
Mathiesen, Sienna 47,55,62
Wagner, Joshua 38,48,55,59
Farde, Joe 4
Nelson, Keeghan 8,9,10,11,52,58
Waldner, Christina 47
Foxley, Blake 21,54,55,62,74
Olafson, Nicholas 38,46
Walter, Garrett 30,34,38,63
Haley, Kelsey 45
Rex, Brian 4,5,6,38,39,57,76,77
Wessling, Rick 12,13,38
Hamer, Emily 40,49,54,55,62
Rolf, Neil 38
Wevik, Daniel 32,33,38,54
Hamilton, James 56,59,66
Shresta, Sushmita 4,6,28,29,38,57,76
Wiswall, Libby 38,44,47,63
Harrington, Katherine 59,62,71
Speiser, Rachel 38,57
Hawley, Rebecca 18
Schrempp, Jared 63,69
Jones, Dustin Sedlmajer, Bobbie 6,19,21,27,37,38,47,54,57,61,72,76 24,25,26,43,59,60 Krug, Alex 4,8,9,10,11,16,17,49,64,65,76
Standing Soldier, Jordan 45
Lyon, Rex 63
Urban, Jacob 47,49,59,61,70
INDEX
Bilka, Daniel 20,36,38,47