“We find beauty not in the thing itself but in the patterns of shadows, the light and the darkness, that one thing against another creates.” Jun’ichiro Tanizaki, from In Praise of Shadows
Umbra = latin for Shade / Shadow. Also a phantom or shadowy apparition. 82 = Light modulating boxes. A project that explores the modulation of light, shadow, and pattern. A mosaic tapestry of shadow. A light modulator. A space that captures the ephemeral, fleeting, poetic characteristics of daylight.
Architecture 2840: Arch Design + Build Studio Summer 2016 College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, IL Studio Professor: Mark A. Pearson Construction funding provided by the College of DuPage Foundation Resources for Excellence Grant Program.
UMBRA 82
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am truly fortunate to be able to make architecture with my students! The Arch Design + Build Studio began as a simple desire to teach a studio that explored the intersections of design and making, giving students a hands-on experience of constructing a designed structure. Now with this second design build project complete, I have an even deeper appreciation for the power of teaching Architecture through experiential building projects. I cannot thank the College of DuPage Foundation enough for funding this project. Your generous support of both design + build projects has enabled us to provide a transformative learning experience for our students. Without the ‘Resources for Excellence’ grant program, we simply could not have provided this experience for our students. THANK YOU! Thank you to my Architecture colleagues, Jane Ostergaard and Ted Kulinski, who have supported and encouraged this endeavor. Thank you to my wife and family for their continued support and enthusiasim. I would also like to thank the College of DuPage Administration for continued support, and for allowing us to create and experiment on COD’s main campus. Special thank you to Donna Stewart, Dean of Business and Technology for your strong advocacy for our program. Thank you to Dr. Ann Rondeau, Dr. Joe Collins, Dr. Jean Kartje, and many others who have helped champion this project. We hope that we have created a structure that will be enjoyed by the entire campus community. Special recognition to Bruce Schmiedl, Director of Facilities Planning and Development, for your ongoing support and enthusiasm. Your help establishing a strong relationship with the DuPage County Building Department was an invaluable asset to our success. Thanks also to Mark Rose, our talented shop supervisor. Your expertise helped to keep the students safe and the construction process moving smoothly. You helped “save” the architects numerous times when our drawings didn’t quite work like we thought, and demonstrated the valuable skill of problem solving to our students! Most importantly, I would like to thank the seven dedicated students who signed up for this challenge. You approached this project with hard work, dedication, and enthusiasm. Your teamwork and attitude made this class the most enjoyable experience that an instructor could ask for. Thank you for all of your extremely hard work. I am exceptionally proud of what we have accomplished together! Mark A. Pearson, AIA, LEED AP Professor of Architecture September 2016
This project challenged students to design and build a summer pavilion / student gathering space on the COD campus. The design solution was to be site responsive and create a social (architectural) space intended to foster student interaction. This temporary structure required seating areas and gathering spaces for students to socialize, converse, and interact with each other. Intended as a summer space, the pavilion required shade devices and responsiveness to the specifics of the site as a part of the design criteria. Students were asked to consider the following criteria as part of their design process: Site: This project should be a site specific architectural response. Concept: Design solutions should be based on clearly articulated, thoughtful, and developed design concepts. Spatial Development: The project should create a defined architectural space. Tectonics: Detail and tectonic considerations should be explored as an integral part of the design process. Constructability: Constructability and material concerns should also be a fundamental factor in the design. Code: The structure must meet all applicable DuPage County building codes. Budget: A material construction budget has been established at $8,000 for this structure.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SITE ANALYSIS
Architecture begins with the site. At its best, good design is a poetic response to place and circumstance. With this in mind, the 2016 Design + Build Studio began by analyzing the site. The purpose of this activity was to measure, draw, and observe the physical (and dimensional) site conditions. We were also interested in trying to understanding the more transient aspects of the place. Where is the sun, and how does it move? How do people move through and occupy the site? Where are the view corridors and potential relationship? What else makes this place unique? What are the latent aspects of the site, and how can they be revealed? These questions became a starting point for the design process, encouraging students to think deeper about place, and eventually lead to design solutions that are responsive to the specificities of this site. How can our design exist here, and nowhere else? How can it engage? Create place? Reveal?
Another first activity for the studio was to complete a precedent study. The class researched numerous examples of pavilions, follies, small structures, and design build projects at other institutions. Students researched projects with similar complexity, scale, and scope to our project. Their research analzed formal characteristics, spatial characteristics, modulation of light, materiality, tectonics and detail. This research allowed the class to have a conversation about design potential. The goal of the precedent study is to understand what has come before, and what has already been done, as a way to learn and envision the possibilities for this project. The intent is not to copy these projects, rather to learn from them and then move beyond. Perhaps in one of these examples is a spark that could ignite a design idea for our project. Maybe a clear and compelling concept in one of the researched projects changes the way we might approach our line of inquiry. Perhaps there is an intriguing material to explore, or a beautiful detail to study, learn from, and emulate. Precedent research is a way to study and think about design potential. Precedent research is a process of simultaneously learning and seeking inspiration.
PRECEDENT RESEARCH
STUDY 01: MULTIPLES
The intent of the first design study ‘MULTIPLES’ was to encourage students to work in teams, and produce a large variety of ideas, concepts, and approaches. Multiple ideas, multiple approaches, multiple tests and explorations were the themes of this study. These are first studies, and as such they are not quite ready for the world to see yet. Their value, however, is in the ideas that are being explored. These are first ideas, tests, and explorations. They are points of departure, beginning concepts that still need to be rigorously developed, questioned, and refined. Somewhere in these initial sketches, however, is a thread of what the eventual project will become. At the conclusion of this first study, a group voting technique using sticky dots was utilized to identify which schemes were to be developed further. Some schemes were combined, some concepts were to be developed as is, and some very good ideas were eliminated, as is always necessary in the design process.
STUDY 02: SYNTHESIS
SYNTHESIS The combining of elements into a single or unified entity. A complex whole formed by combining. The process of combining objects or ideas. To put together or combine. From the previous study and critique discussions, the three following schemes emerged and were developed with greater focus and depth. SCHEME A: Light and Shadow This scheme is an exploration of light and shadow. The design concept is to create a gathering space that is a mosaic of shadow and pattern, which will move throughout the day to enrich the space. Undulating boxes create a rhythmic roof and wall pattern that gives the space a dynamic presence. This scheme was ultimately selected for construction, but the design was further developed to include a staggering of the form, opening it up to the south side which was determined to be too enclosed in this initial version.
STUDY 02: SYNTHESIS
SCHEME B: Folded Roof This scheme is an exploration of a folded roof form with a sculptural presence. The scheme is long and linear, creating a space with a simple, staggered bench below a dynamic roof form. The design concept explores engaging the artistic context of the MAC with a sculptural object that marks the site. Views from many vantage points, coupled with the movement of the form, will enhance the presence of the pavilion. This scheme also included several variations, all exploring the dynamic roof form concept. These variations tested alternate orientations on the site and experimented with repetition.
STUDY 02: SYNTHESIS
SCHEME C: Trapezoidal Curve This scheme is conceived of as a series of furniture pieces; twelve trapezoidal benches that can be arranged to create a sinuous form. Each bench varies in seat height and roof height, creating a rhythmic formal presence for the structure. This scheme has strong potential for the way in which it can be infinitely reconfigured on the site, although the intent is to pick one configuration and bolt the pieces together. A herringbone wood trellis creates a shadow pattern with an organic character that compliments the curvilinear form of the plan.
THE EVOLUTION OF AN IDEA At the conclusion of the previous study, the class selected a project to pursue. We debated, discussed, and ultimately voted on our next course of action. We then spent the next week developing the design as a group. During this time, many important design and detailing decisions were made that contributed to the ultimate success of the project. One constant teaching challenge in a design studio is the process of design development. Taking an idea from an initial sketch into a refined work of Architecture is a skill that takes students time to master. As an educator, I am interested not only in the final product, but how the design studio arrives at that solution. How a design project develops is critical for design excellence. It is important to understand how a design concept evolves, and what is explored and tested along the way. Often, the first study has a fragment of something that will eventually become important, but in this early beginning it is often just a hint at something greater. Great design requires a rigorous design process to move a project from that initial spark into something of value. Taking a closer look at the process of development for this project, a certain logic begins to appear. The initial studies, even in their diagrammatic state, are exploring something important, namely the idea of a repetitive geometric roof pattern with shadows. In these studies the idea is born, but the process doesn’t end here. It takes a great deal of design development work to move the project from an unrefined idea into a build work of art. Looking backwards, you can easily trace the thread of the idea all the way through. The challenge for the designer, of course, is that the creative process often only makes sense in reverse. Or as the author E.L. Doctorow says about the writing process “Writing is like driving at night in the fog. You can only see as far as your headlights, but you can make the whole trip that way.� The Architectural design process is like that too. In real time, it is impossible to see the end of the journey. But looking back at the process reveals the embedded logic that is often present, the strands of thought that link the studies together. For a designer, an awareness of how we work creatively is crucial for producing work that is authentic and meaningful.
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
What this illustration fails to address is that simultaneously in the studio, other unique schemes were also being pursued in the same manner. Some of these included roof forms and shadow patterns. As these other ideas evolved, they of course began to influence this scheme. A good studio is a fertile ground for ideas, students all influencing each other, allowing for cross pollination to occur.
This final design scheme is a gathering space that is intended to be enjoyed by the entire campus community. The pavilion is an exploration of light, shade and shadow, defined by a mosaic of shadow and pattern which moves throughout the day to enrich the space. Eighty-two undulating light boxes create a rhythmic roof and wall pattern that gives the space a dynamic presence, and captures the ephemeral, poetic characteristics of natural daylight.
FINAL DESIGN
FINAL DESIGN
FINAL DESIGN
June 21 10:00am
March / September 21 10:00am
June 21 12:00pm
March / September 21 12:00pm
June 21 2:00pm
March / September 21 2:00pm
June 21 4:00pm
March / September 21 4:00pm
FINAL DESIGN
FINAL DESIGN
FINAL DESIGN
FINAL DESIGN
BUILD, JUST BUILD This studio is based on the simple idea of design and making. The premise is that connecting students with building enhances the learning experience, and fundamentally changes the design process. In this class we learn by doing. We think while building. We design knowing that we must build. We solve problems with our hands. We solve problems in the shop. We consider the poetic and the tectonic simultaneously. We think about materials and connections. We work as a team. We work as a design office. We draw details, and build mockups. We learn about the limitations of our drawings. We pay attention to details. We understand scale through full size prototypes. We have deep conversations about real world issues. We have conversations that would not normally occur in a design studio. We have a client, and consultants, and a budget, and codes, and regulations‌‌.. and we make real things. All of this allows for an unparalleled and engaging learning experience for our students, our future Architects. Through this process we hope that we have created a beautiful space that will be enjoyed by the entire campus community.
CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION TIMELAPSE
CONSTRUCTION
INSTALLATION DAY
INSTALLATION DAY
INSTALLATION DAY
INSTALLATION DAY
INSTALLATION DAY
UMBRA 82
UMBRA 82
UMBRA 82
UMBRA 82
UMBRA 82
UMBRA 82
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
Andrew Dunlop III Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? Compared to other classes, the design build class was a more hands on experience. You get to experience the feeling of working in a design firm during the design development phase, and then in the end get to build the vision that you have been working towards. I hope I have this kind of opportunity to take another design build course again in the future. Q. What was the most meaningful aspect of this course to you as a student of architecture (and future architect)? I thought this class really gave me an opportunty to experience working collaboratively with other students. Working as a team to build and finalize the design was a positive learning experience. I also appreciated the opportunity to work with officials from the DuPage County Building Department and learning about the approval process required to get a project built. I want to thank the COD Foundation for supporting this design build experience this summer. This class is a great opportunity for students that want to have a more hands on learning expereince, which will prepare us well for the future working in teams within an architectural firm on real projects.
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
Arlinda Haxhiu Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? This class is more practical that other courses because you design and then actually build something. In a studio course you get exposure to structure and materiality through building study models, but it’s not even close to what you learn from actually building the structure. Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? The class was absolutely amazing in every way. It was such an amazing experience that words cannot describe. From the design process to the build process it was all a positive learning experience. Working in groups and brainstorming ideas as a team. Presenting our work to the county felt like we were a real architecture firm. Even the little things such as using a drill or figuring out how pieces come together was a learning experience that you do not get in a normal studio class. Q. How did the necessity to build change the design process during the studio portion of the course? We wanted to build a sculptural pavilion that was also comfortable and pleasant for the COD students. We didn’t have many restrictions, but as a small group of seven we had to design something feasible, easy to construct, within budget, and manageable for a three week build time. During the process we built a mock-up of the roof for the presentation to the county, and we realized that the individual boxes had to be cut smaller than what we had shown in the drawings. Q. What was the most meaningful aspect of this course to you as a student of architecture (and future architect)? It is a wonderful experience, and everyone should be given this opportunity. It is such a rewarding feeling when you see your own design taking life. We learned how to respect everyone’s ideas and get to work accomplished with different personalities. I feel enriched and have a better understanding of the building process. A big THANK YOU to the COD foundation for making this possible. Because of your generosity I feel very proud, and have accomplished my first structure, and my heart is filled with joy and appreciation. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to express ourselves and give something back to the college community.
Michael Keslinke Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? From the start of the class we needed to think much more realistically. Our initial schemes needed to consider the viability of actually building our design, as well as the cost and time it would take to accomplish the goal. This created a much more connected experience than other classes because if you neglected to research, develop and understand your design idea it would negatively impact the class’ ability to build later in the semester. Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? Compromises. Having a class with only seven students meant that a team effort was essential. Learning to come together was critical because if everyone involved in the class didn’t give 100% effort then we would be significantly undermanned to finish the project. Learning to step away from your own ideas and accept someone else’s sugestion was a challenge, but being able to do this was key for our group to collaborate and work as a team to finish this design. Q. How did incorporating a “build” component into a design studio course change the learning environment (or learning outcomes) of the course? A significant amount of time went into building an understanding of our project, but even more time went into strategies, building methods, techniques, and division of labor. Unlike traditional studio classes we had a limited time frame of eight weeks. Initial planning was essential before starting construction, giving us the best chance for a smooth process. Building is a challenge and there were several unseen setbacks, but being prepared meant that we could foresee some issues and adapt quickly when others arose.
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
Jose A. Maldonado Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? This class was different from other COD courses because it challenged us with problems that the class had to solve as a team. In an architectural studio you only get a fraction of the experiences that we had in the Design + Build class. This class is more serious, and knowing that the final scheme is going to be built is both overwhelming and exciting. Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? I learned that great architectural design comes from many individuals working together. It is not just one person, but a group collaborating together to accomplish a project. I learned that by collaborating, many things can be accomplished. Q. How did incorporating a “build” component into a design studio course change the learning environment (or learning outcomes) of the course? The most meaningful aspect of this class was the sense of teamwork and working with my friends to create a bond. It was not easy at first, but gradually we all understood that each of us had a responsibility to accomplish something great. A class of seven students was daunting, but eventally I understood that as long as we worked together anything is possible. I would like to thank the COD foundation for providing us with this great experience. Without your contribution, the class would have lacked the key building experience that’s going to help us significantly in our future. I am hoping that this class runs forever so that future students get to experience what I experienced in this class. Thank You!
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
Drew Peterson Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? The class was very hands-on and team oriented. I think the task phases made the class comprehensive and easy to follow. Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? I learned how to properly put together a successful drawing set. I also learned about project phasing and time management. Q. How did incorporating a “build� component into a design studio course change the learning environment (or learning outcomes) of the course? Incorporating a build component into the class joined the theoretical aspects of design from the classroom with approaches to how things actually get done and built in the real world. The necessity to build set a finish date that kept us on pace for each phase in the design and building process. Q. What was the most meaningful aspect of this course to you as a student of architecture (and future architect)? Learning how to put together a proper display board and drawing set was the most beneficial part of the class for me. Thank you to the COD Foundation for supporting this learning experience. Your funding has helped to motivate and inspire.
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
Malak Saadeh Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? The design build class is a good class and I learned something new all the time. It is such a great opportunity to learn how to work together as a team and meet critical deadlines. This class allowed me to experience the construction process, and for the first time I understand how to work with different materials. Q. What was the most meaningful aspect of this course to you as a student of architecture (and future architect)? What I liked best about this class was getting to build a project we designed ourselves. I honestly really enjoyed everything about the course. The professor is organized, very clear, and is always willing to help. Professor Pearson made this class enjoyable and fun to be in. I would like to thank the COD Foundation for their support in helping to make this valuable learning experience possible. I would like to add my “thanks” to the other students for their participation, making this class possible. I am pleased to report a very positive learning experience from the design build class. I think it’s a very valuable experience, and I’m glad I took it.
Scott Sallmann Q. How was this class different or unique from other more traditional COD courses? I think that this class was unique from other COD courses that I have taken in that it allowed me to work in an environment that was close to a real world architectural studio. I also got the experience of building a life sized structure, not just a scale model. Q. What did you learn in this class? In particular what did you learn because of the design build experience? I learned that when working in a group there needs to be compromise and that ideas need to be shared. I also learned that when you think you have your design set, the construction process may reveal changes that may be necessary to be made. Q. How did incorporating a “build” component into a design studio course change the learning environment (or learning outcomes) of the course? I think the construction aspect of the course enhances the learning process by allowing us to see how a structure is actually assembled. In a normal studio class, we only make small scale models using glue, and don’t really understand the actual connections that hold the structure together. The necessity to build forced us to develop a structure that we could complete within an eight week course. With other studio classes, the focus is soley on the design, but in this class we had to consider all aspect of design and construction. Q. What was the most meaningful aspect of this course to you as a student of architecture (and future architect)? The most meaningful aspect of this course was the group effort and teamwork involved in completion of the structure. I would like to thank the COD Foundation for supporting this design build class. This course gave me the chance to have a unique experience that might not be offered at other institutions.
STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
OUTTAKES
PROJECT LINKS: PROJECT VIDEO: https://youtu.be/hxbFLAx_R8s CONSTRUCTION TIMELAPSE: https://vimeo.com/176524037 DESIGN + BUILD STUDIO BLOG: http://codarch-designbuild.blogspot.com/ FLICKR PHOTOSETS: Design: https://www.flickr.com/photos/maparch/albums/721576717877467 Construction: https://www.flickr.com/photos/maparch/albums/7215767289990981 Final Photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/maparch/albums/72157669838470343 THANKS TO: College of DuPage Foundation, RFE Grant Program Karen M. Kuhn, Executive Director, COD Foundation Barbara Abromitis, Director of Grants, COD Foundation Kristen Kepnick, COD Foundation Dr. Ann Rondeau, College of DuPage President Dr. Joseph Collins, Vice President of Accademic Affaris, COD Dr. Jean Kartje, Special Assistant, Accademic Affairs, COD Dr. Donna Stewart, Dean, Business and Technology Division Kris Fay, Associate Dean, Business and Technology Division Bruce Schmiedl, COD Director of Planning and Development Jim Stran, DuPage County Building Department Steve Cyrier, DuPage County Building Department Jane Ostergaard, COD Architecture Ted Kulinski, COD Architecture Mark Rose, Construction Shop Supervisor, COD Architecture Heller Lumber Company All images © College of DuPage Architecture, 2016
SPECIAL THANKS
College of DuPage Architecture Design + Build Summer Studio 2016