Portfolio Spring 2022 by mapellet

THE BOOK Studio ARK

Rashmi Pradhan + Kenzie Pelletier ARCH 353 Studio White Winter 2021 - Spring 2022

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Studio Financial Sponsors

Studio Collective

Lake | Flato

Anjali Beekam

Mode Associates

Caswell Espinoza

Design Collaborators Lake | Flato

Christian Gibson Gabriela Guevara

Adam Martin

Holly Dufek

Adie Hailat

Izzy Hoffman

Allison Peitz

Jasmine Lin

Ryan Yaden

Juliette Fournier

Sam Rusek

Katherine Neuner

LPA Design

Kelly Ferris

Ellie O’ Connor

Lydia Rosenthal

Jamie Intervalo

Mason Bechtold

Krista Scheib

Maya Rosen

Matthew Porreca

Nancy Padilla

Matthew Winter

Nick Goldschmidt

Silke Frank

Noelani Maylad

Other Reviewers

Rashmi Pradhan

Cal Poly Faculty Alex Hirsig

Van Viet Doan Cal Poly Peers

Andrew Goodwin

Alex Dominé

Brent Freeby

Benjamin Vargas

Carmen Trudell

Will Fry

Jeff Ponitz Jessica Napier Stacey White

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Problem Description Site Understanding Campus Master Plan The Project The Reflection Appendices

04 07 14 18 24 40 42

01 INTRODUCTION The primary objective of the two-quarter project was to provide a proposal for the relocation of the existing California Western School of Law’s campus. The existing campus is located in Downtown San Diego just south of interstate five. Included in the campus relocation proposal was the request for a campus that would serve approximately one-thousand law students accompanied by the supporting faculty and staff. This narrative follows the project development and final proposal of one building option for the new campus master plan. This building will serve as a one-hundred square foot academic building within Cal Westerns relocated campus. The project includes individual and group work completed over the two-quarter integrated design studio facilitated by Professor Stacey White as a part of Cal Poly’s Third Year Bachelor of Architecture program.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed site relocation for Cal Western’s campus is located in Logan Heights, California, sandwiched between Barrio Logan and Downtown San Diego. As a studio collective, this site was selected due to its proximity to the population being served by the pro bono clinics offered through Cal Western. These clinics support and assist asylum seekers, falsely incarcerated individuals, and the needs of the surrounding communities. The integration of these clinics into the larger campus master plan played a key role in the final master plan iteration proposed by the design studio. For Studio ARK, supporting the quality of life within the existing and planned communities became a driving factor within the groups individual building proposal. The proposed building emphasized the value of collaboration within communities and aims to facilitate interaction among the populations being served. i.

This book describes the process of design development and is broken down into the following chapters:

Chapter 2: Problem Description This section of the text explores the background of California Western School of Law and investigates what factors contribute to a successful legal education. It details the university’s curriculum as well as the process of earning a degree. The chapter describes the goals of the institution and discusses the various clinics integrated into the campus facilities. Since this school serves as a site for those seeking asylum from Central and South American countries, the chapter begins to review the causes of immigration as it relates to poverty and economic opportunity, impunity and elite indifference, crime and violence, and environmental degradation. This research was used by the studio collective to better understand the clients and population being served, resulting in a more thoughtful design. The chapter concludes with research of several sites suggested within San Diego, resulting in the selection of Logan Heights as the proposed relocation site. Chapter 3 Site Understanding This chapter dives deep into the selected site of Logan Heights and includes research in both historical and environmental fields. The section outlines climactic data, demographics, population information, and economic trends in the area. Additionally, a brief history of Logan Heights is provided, accompanied by the city’s past and recent transitions from a more commercialized seaport to a now primarily residential and mercantile zone. This research was used to formally drive decisions regarding the layout and programming of the campus mater plan. Chapter 4 Campus Master Plan Combined with research from Chapter 3, this section explores the key elements of both successful and “ideal” campus master plans. Within this chapter, collective goals are set and ideals converged. The section begins to detail studio ethos; such as a desire for human scale, circulation hierarchy, biophilic design, access to transportation, transitional zones, and implementation of environmental response. Precedents are researched and used as a way to determine and refine a master plan base, resulting in the formation of central courtyards, buffer zones, and an increased focus on landscaping both the private and public realm. This chapter outlines strategies for campus resiliency, touching on topics related to climate crisis such as increasing temperatures, rising sea levels, and designing for future campus and community evolution.

Chapter 5 The Project This chapter of the text centers itself around Studio ARK’s proposed building situated on the campus master plan. It covers the initial design phase, project inspiration, schematic development, performance goals and strategies, and final proposal. The section illustrates diagrams supporting the team’s proposal, including site and floor plans, detailed wall sections, structural diagrams, and experiential renders. The chapter concludes followed by brief reflection by team members. Chapter 6 The Reflection Within this chapter each student was asked to reflect on their experiences and learnings throughout the two-quarter design studio. Since the Third-Year studio acts as the first integrated design studio for many, each student was faced with new challenges and asked to detail their take aways. Chapter 7 Appendices This chapter concludes the text by outlining work from the design studio and integrated tech section each student was enrolled in over the course of their Third Year. ii.

These chapters are followed by a reflection on the design development process and individual experiences during the double-quarter integrated studio. In addition, the book concludes with a collection of previous work that developed over the course of the design studio and appendices cataloging work completed during Third Year.

Design Process and Project Phases The development of both the campus plan as well as the final individual building took place over the course of two quarters and can be divided into the following phases: Winter Quarter 2021: Phase I | Research The phase seeks to understand the needs of the clients and those that they serve. As a law school that provides outreach clinics for asylum seekers from Central and South America, it was essential to understand reasons and causes behind immigration. Research was also conducted to determine the ideal campus location between Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, Logan Heights and Chula Vista. It was through this research that the studio collective was able to design from a place of empathy to better serve the clients needs. Phase II | Master Planning During this phase, the studio was divided into groups, each given the common goal of developing a campus master plan based on the research gathered in Phase I. These plans were then combined to create a cohesive campus master plan that would later be shared among the studio for the remainder of the course. Phase III | Schematic Building Design This phase gave individuals a chance to explore and design a proposal of a single building within the campus context. Additionally, each student was given the opportunity to select the programming that would accompany their building proposal. Various programs were compiled onto a studio list for each individual to place within their building, including twenty thousand square feet that was allocated to a program of the student’s own creation. This twenty thousand square foot program became known as the moonshot, an opportunity to address a need in the surrounding campus or community. A combination of precedents and climactic studies were applied during this phase along with the previous research compiled as a studio collective. Phase IV | Partner Schematic Building Design After working individually and receiving both firm and faculty feedback, students were given the opportunity to form a partnership. These joint ventures were tasked with combining their proposals to develop programming for a refined one hundred thousand square foot building. Over the course of two weeks, each partnership selected a specific site within the campus master plan and began to develop an initial iteration to conclude the first half of the two-quarter experience. Spring Quarter 2022: Phase I | Schematic Design Refinement After a formal review, students used the first four weeks of spring quarter to refine their design for a schematic proposal. During this phase, the basis of design was set, requiring each group to take a stance and compile a well-rounded proposal to present to faculty and firms for review. This proposal was meant to serve as the basis for project development for the remainder of the school year. Phase II | Project Develop The phase allowed groups to dive deep into each aspect of their design. From section details to systems integration, this final phase pushed each team to collaborate on a fully realized conceptual design. The project development phase concluded the two-quarter experience and left students to reflect on their learnings over the year.

02 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION CAL WESTERN SCHOOL OF LAW (CWSL) Cal Western School of Law (CWSL) California Western School of Law is currently located in downtown San Diego and is the City’s oldest law school. It was founded in 1924. They currently occupy three buildings on Cedar Street on the northern end of downtown near the I5 freeway. They currently have approximately 670 law students with planned expansion to up to 1,000. They are an independent, not for profit, that offer four degree pathways. The school is committed to provide a rigorous educated to a diverse study body through an emphasis experiential learning through simulations and community clinics that serve undeserved clients in the areas of criminal, immigration, trademark, legal aid, and Internet law.

In their new location, the California Western School of Law are hoping to reflect their school motto through the campus experience. Rethinking the physical presence of the overall campus location can act as a catalyst in better serving the immigrants justice, protection, and inspire the aim towards a brighter future. The approach to better serving the at-risk communities requires interventions integrating legal education practices and a sense of empathy towards human immigration and civil rights. The Cal Western School of Law is playing a crucial role in serving the evolving communities of San Diego and providing high quality education to shape future lawyers.

Aiming to represent the state’s diverse society, California Western Law School is training ethical, compassionate, and competent future lawyers and hopes to aid the undeserved populations. With 41% of the 2021 student being ethnic minorities and 59% women, Cal Western encourages those who face larger battles and aim to better the world around them. Cal Western offers scholarships and grants to students ranging in socioeconomic status opening the doors to lower income applicants. To foster and encourage diversity the site is in Barrio Logan San Diego, a neighborhood whose community facing challenges that students could offer legal advice. Cal Western prepares its students to focus on immigration law and criminal justice by placing them in clinics located near the school to obtain practical work experience while working towards their degrees. Locating the campus in a community of those who lack legal aid gives students a greater opportunity for creating change. Cal Western offers its students many class courses, clinical programs and community law interventions which encourages students to give back to the community in which they are located.

LEGAL EDUCATION The educational requirements to practice law in the State of California consists of several processes and requirements with varying academic standards to be met. While the California Bar Examination is the ultimate milestone to obtaining licensure to be an attorney, the traditional educational requirement entails obtaining a JD (Juris Doctor) degree from law schools registered by the State Bar (California-accredited) or approved by the American Bar Association (ABA). The JD takes three years to complete which follows the pre-legal education of College Level Equivalency Programs Examinations or at least two years of college in any given major. The most typical undergraduate majors choosing this path in California obtain a four-year bachelor’s degree in English, Business, or Political Science. This does not limit other majors to take up the JD program as an academic path to achieving licensure as an attorney. The state bar of California summarizes the following legal education options for eligibility to obtaining licensure

    

Three or four years of study at a law school accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) Four years of study at a State Bar-registered, fixed-facility law school Four years of study with a minimum of 864 hours of preparation at a registered unaccredited distance-learning or correspondence law school Four years of study under the supervision of a state judge or attorney A combination of these programs

The academic process requires a guided approach with mentor-ship; from graduate school all the way to becoming a practicing attorney. CWSL offers a variety of courses to cover ground on theoretical knowledge and practical application. Some of the traditional courses are offered based on the year’s curriculum. These are split into three years First Year curriculum: Foundational year with special emphasis on legal analysis, research, and writing to explore opportunities. The academic year is split into trimesters, some of the courses include    

Civil Procedure Contracts Legal procedures Torts

Second and Third Year Curriculum: The upperclassman curriculum includes two important milestones which are the STEPPS program and the Clinical Externship Program. STEPPS includes a client-attorney simulation set up to practice law earlier in the educational years. Some other courses include      

Constitutional Law I Criminal Procedure I Evidence Legal Scholarship Training Seminar STEPPS Torts II

CSWL also focuses on clinics and assistance programs to provide opportunities for externships, and simulation-based learning. The pro-bono programs excel in bridging the gap between the academic world and real time problems. Trial law is another essential part of the program to practice communication and real time delivery of arguments.

Some of the Clinical Programs include    

Access to Law Initiative Competitive Advocacy Program California Innocence Project Pro Bono and Public Service Honors Program

The ethos of legal practice can be found in academic initiatives that are taken up by the law school to shape lawyers that are rigorous workers, empathetic citizens, through the experience of obtaining a law degree at Cal Western School of Law. Experiential Learning programs such as law clinics, paralegal services, advocacy programs, community law projects etc. Aid in enhancing the legal education aspects that mostly pertain to minimum formal education requirements.

MASS MIGRATION AND UNDERLAYING CAUSES

Environmental Disasters Country Environmental Disaster- .. Earthquake

1800

Flood

10M

Storm

1600

Wildﬁre

1200

1000

800

4M 600

Population Displacement 2015-2020

Data from "Refugee Data Finder." The UN Refugee Agency, (2020). Environmental Disasters Data from "Climate Knowledge Portal." The World Bank, (2021).

3M 400 2M 200

Chile

Paraguay

Argentina

Bolivia

Panama

Uruguay

Peru

Brazil

Costa Rica

Dominican Republic

Belize

Colombia

Mexico

Guyana

Ecuador

Nicaragua

Honduras

Venezuela

0M El Salvador

0 Guatemala

One of the primary areas that students dedicate time to on this campus are the experiential learning clinics that deal with issues of social justice and give the students an opportunity to interact with real clients. Given the schools focus on immigration related issues, the following research was completed to gain an understanding of the San Diego community and those clients the students would ultimately be working with. Research focused on five primary immigration related issues: crime and violence, environmental degradation, poverty and economic opportunity and immunity and elite indifference. Each gave us a basic understanding of why large populations are moving into the US and what needs to be done to create a desirable, welcoming environment.

Rate Of Asylum Seekers Per 100,000

1400

Asylum Seeking Population

Crime and Violence

Poverty and Economic Opportunity

Rate Of Asylum Seek..

0.8

0.7

Data from "Refugee Data Finder." The UN Refugee Agency, (2020).

1200

Poverty Rate

0.5

800

Poverty Rate

0.6

1000

0.3

Chile

Argentina

United States

Bolivia

Uruguay

Paraguay

Brazil

Peru

Costa Rica

Colombia

Belize

0.0 Guyana

0 Mexico

0.1

Nicaragua

0.2

200

Ecuador

400

Asylum Seekers vs. Infant Mortality Rate Country Measure Names

1800

Infant Mortality Rate

18 1200

12 800 10 600

Infant Mortality Rate

1000

Data from "Infant Mortality Rate from 2009 to 2019 (in deaths per 1,000 live births)" Statista, (2021).

8 6

400

4 200 2

Chile

Argentina

United States

Bolivia

Uruguay

Paraguay

Brazil

Peru

Costa Rica

Dominican Republic

Colombia

Belize

Guyana

Mexico

Nicaragua

Ecuador

Venezuela

Honduras

0 Guatemala

Asylum Seekers vs. Homicide Rates Country Measure Names

Homicide Rates Per 1.. Rate Of Asylum Seek..

1600

Asylum Seeking Population

Data from "Refugee Data Finder." The UN Refugee Agency, (2020).

1400

30 800 25 600

Homicide Rates Per 100,000

1000

Homicide Rate Data from "Citizen Security in Latin America." Igarape Institute, (2018).

400

10 200 5

Chile

United States

Paraguay

Argentina

Panama

Uruguay

Brazil

Bolivia

Peru

Dominican Republic

Colombia

Costa Rica

Belize

Guyana

Mexico

Nicaragua

Ecuador

Honduras

0 Venezuela

0 El Salvador

Rate Of Asylum Seekers Per 100,000

45 1200

Guatemala

The identified causes do an excellent job of describing some of the reasons people are seeking asylum in the US, however there is one outlier that sticks out in multiple databases. Brazil features similar numbers to the countries with the most asylum seekers but sends very few people to the US. With a GDP ($1,434.08 Billion) nearly 33% higher than the next closest country in Central and South America, (Mexico, $1,076.16 Billion), Brazil remains appealing to people despite the ongoing issues.

Infant Mortality Rate

1800



Data from "Refugee Data Finder." The UN Refugee Agency, (2020).

1400

We studied the rates of infant mortality to see if that too was an underlying cause There is a slight trend between infant mortality rate and # of asylum seekers, however some countries with few asylum seekers still see exceedingly high infant mortality rates.

Comprehensive Findings

Asylum Seeking Population

Impunity and Elite Indifference  

Rate Of Asylum Seek..

El Salvador



Poverty rates have been shown to be extremely high among the countries studied. Some correlation between Poverty/the lack of economic opportunity among countries and asylum seekers can be seen with some countries but not all. Poverty rates are even among the countries studied, but countries with the highest rates of asylum seekers also tend to have higher poverty rates.

1600

Rate Of Asylum Seekers Per 100,000



Data from "Poverty Headcount Ration at National Poverty Lines." The World Bank, (2020).

0.4

600

Dominican Republic



Poverty Rate

Asylum Seeking Population

1400

Venezuela



Attention to the mass effects of natural disasters on populations, and the # of people displaced by environmental disasters; categorized by the worst natural disaster in the country Natural disasters have played an influential role in the displacement of large populations There is evidence that many of the countries with the most asylum seekers in the US have also experienced high population displacement from natural disasters

Measure Names 0.9

1600

Honduras



Country 1800

El Salvador

Environmental Degradation

Asylum Seekers vs. Poverty Rate

Rate Of Asylum Seekers Per 100,000



Comparisons between crime, specifically homicide rate, and rate of asylum seekers (per 100,000) in the countries listed While not definitive, in general countries with higher homicide rates also see more asylum seekers moving to the US

Guatemala



HIGHER EDUCATION Every place of higher education has multiple physical and environmental characteristics which make it successful. Finding those common trends in campuses across the country was the first step towards designing a new campus for Cal Western School of Law. We looked at schools ranging from three hundred to three thousand students in total enrollment, each accompanied by a variety of disciplines but primarily focused on universities with their own program for law. This data was then consolidated creating a starting framework to be applied as precedent for the master planning process. We were able to narrow down the characteristics of an ideal campus to the following: Community & Safety    

Immerse the campus within the cultural and historical context of the site location through vernacular architecture and respective facilities. Provide transparency at the ground floors to keep focus on the ground condition. By creating access to emergency response stations that alert authorities of criminal activity along the campus circulation routes to provide security. Supply adequate even lighting throughout campus, including those to academic functions and campus housing.

Organization    

Increase building density (while maintaining a human scale to provide spaces for students as well as the community. Provide clear and consistent indicators of where important programs are located and how to access them. Supply clear pedestrian circulation routes using a consistent visual language and scale to provide a connection between all spaces. Provide universal access to make areas easy to traverse for people of all physical types.

Accessibility & Transportation  

Easy access for walkways to create a safe space away from traffic or clear spatial integration of pedestrian walkways within traffic routes. Integrate bike routes throughout campus that tie into the community bike circulation system.

Resources    

Campus should include spaces for informal learning such as spaces to study or for student support services in a single location. Provide spaces that can be shared / accessed by the broader community. should act as multipurpose spaces for students and community members to both enjoy and be able to use as recreational spaces as well. Education should include financial aid, career advisors, access to studying with professionals, and disability resources. Resources should provide functions that help support student success even in the non-academic side, for example such as a childcare center.

SITE SELECTION

The studio researched four potential sites: Chula Vista, Mission Valley, Downtown San Diego, and Logan Heights. Each site was researched in terms of their relevant community boundaries, natural resources, social attributes, people, built environment, and heritage, in order to determine which location seemed most fitting for a future campus community. This information was aggregated into a single exhibit and presented to the studio partners with voting taking place to determine which location would best serve the institutional needs. Some of the assets and disadvantages of each location are as follows: Chula Vista 

Chula Vista was an attractive location because of its proximity to the US-Mexico border, making this location convenient for immigrants served by the Latin American Institute of Law and Justice. However, it was ultimately not selected because of its lack of public transportation, which isolated it from other law resources in downtown San Diego.

Mission Valley 

The Mission Valley proposal incorporated the law school campus into SDSU’s Mission Valley campus expansion. Some advantages to this proposal included that it was well connected to downtown San Diego by public transportation and that it would have access to SDSU student culture. However, it was not selected because it was the furthest away from the US-Mexico border, potentially making it inconvenient for law clients living in Mexico, and because it lacked the existing infrastructure and vibrancy of an existing more downtown site.

Downtown San Diego 

Downtown San Diego was attractive because it is the current location of the Law School, and students would have access to its social scene, law firms and the San Diego County Superior Court. However, it was narrowly decided against as the density of the buildings required was not considered viable for all uses.

Logan Heights 

Ultimately, Logan Heights was selected. This is a predominantly Hispanic community, which could make the campus more convenient and approachable to Hispanic individuals served by the Latin American Institute of Law and Justice. Additionally, it is the closest location to downtown San Diego and has access to public transportation. Moving forwards, our studio deemed this area’s relatively high crime rate and large unhoused population as matters that required careful attention.

03 SITE UNDERSTANDING CONTEXTUAL UNDERSTANDING

During the initial research phase, the studio focused primarily on the contextual understanding of Logan Heights and its surrounding communities. A fundamental part of the campus master plan design stemmed from an understanding of community, demographic, climatic, and accessibility within the site. It was this contextual understanding that allowed the studio to thoughtfully select materials and site layout within the greater campus master plan.

The analysis of the following areas of study supported the continuity of design between the Cal Western Campus and local circumstances: Population 

The total population of Logan Heights, also known as Barrio Logan, is 58,408, with around a 5% population increase annually. The community makes up about 4% of San Diego’s total population of 1.4 million people.

Community Context 

The initial neighborhood of Barrio Logan grew due to the development of a US Naval Base in 1898 in San Diego. Later, the creation of a major commercial seaport and the railroads also provided a housing boom in the area. This brought many diverse groups to the area, including African Americans, Japanese Americans, Filipino-Americans, and Italian Americans. However, the spirit of the community today, known as the “Logan Heights Experience” (aka The Heights, Logan, La Logan, Barrio Logan, etc.) is due to the migration of the Mexican families which began around 1900. They came from all parts of Mexico, including Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Sinaloa, Durango, Michoacan, Zacatecas, etc. The population growth of Mexican families would continue up to the 1950s. In 1956, the placement of Interstate 5, the Coronado Bridge, and the deliberate changes in zoning patterns (from primarily residential to mixed-use industrial) devastated Logan Heights by removing economic viability and decreasing property values. In both aspects, Logan Heights residents felt uninformed and unable to voice objections or opinions on the expansion of San Diego, and to this day, families still feel a deep sense of loss. However, in the late 1960s, the residents of Logan Heights came together to oppose the construction of a sub-station under the San-Diego-Coronado Bay Bridge by the California Highway Patrol. Through incredible will and commitment, the land was turned over to the community and later became Chicano Park. The community’s tenacity, spirit, and determination to preserve Barrio Logan as a vibrant, culturally rich, and united community continues on and can be seen today in their Barrio Logan Community Plan.

Demographic Distribution 

San Diego has a distinctive cultural identity from Hispanic populations from over sixty years. Historically, the area became prominent from industrial jobs, and there was a significant increase in San Diego’s Mexican population due to the 1910 Mexican Revolution. Alongside the prevalent Hispanic and Latino population, 42% of San Diego’s residents are white, 16% are Asian residents, and Black or African American residents make up 5% of the population. The median age is around 26.8 years. Overall, the culturally vibrant community consists mostly of local families that need a catalyst to revitalize the sense of physical connection that drives socio-economic and employment growth.

Poverty 

In Logan Heights, the annual median income varies with an average income of $52,944. The total median income lies below the average at $40,310, primarily belonging to demographics under 25 and over 65. The total working population of Logan Heights consists of 51,093 people, 73.9% of which are above the poverty level with an additional 22.9% below the poverty level. The average Barrio Logan household lives on an annual income 45% less than the rest of San Diego.

Air Quality 

San Diego is currently ranked as having the seventh worst ozone pollution in the country. With a median AQI, or Air Quality Index, of 64, this city reports only 73 days of good air quality throughout the year while the remaining 292 days record air quality that is moderate or unhealthy for sensitive groups.

Water Availability 

The availability of water in Logan Heights is limited due to its lack of precipitation and large population. Annually, it receives approximately 12 inches of rain per year, mostly seeing clear and sunny days. Logan Heights also experiences an average humidity of 69% per year with the most humid month being July and the driest being January. Given its context in southern California, Logan Heights and the rest of San Diego rely on imported water from northern California or the Colorado River through the 242-mile-long Colorado River Aqueduct. Still, Logan Heights and San Diego produce 10% of their own drinking water through the desalination of ocean water.

Climatic Desirability 

San Diego is known for its temperate climate, resulting in a city constantly welcoming new resident. The area is lined with public and private beaches as well as plenty of park and recreation-based facilities accessible to the public. With a long list of historical and attraction-based sites, San Diego has no shortage of visitors during every month of the year. The cool maritime breezes keep the city at a comfortable temperature during the summer months, while the almost constant sun warms up the region in the winter. With a relatively low humidity and a marine layer that is quick to burn off, San Diego has some of the most desirable climactic attributes in the country.

Land Use 

Barrio Logan is organized in a manner that prioritizes its residential and commercial communities. In the Barrio Logan Community Plan, the commercial and residential zones are the heart of the community and are framed by major streets and key sight lines. The development of these zones is driven by multi-family development, but are restricted by the large, industrialized zones. Near the waterfront, land is reserved for heavy industrial and military development, primarily the San Diego Naval Base. The industrial and military development of the land has forced awkward circumstances on the existing community as some residents find themselves living next door to a boat building yard. This shows a relative disregard for the existing community present before the industrial development. Additionally, the proximity of the Naval Base has sparked development that further imposes on the Barrio Logan Community such as a need for naval lodging. Barrio Logan has been forced to adapt and integrate these waterfront industrial conditions.

Transportation 

The site is located adjacent to the I-5 and the Coronado Bridge, making it a hub for vehicle transportation. Through the site, there are two modes of public transportation that circulate. Trolleys and buses run alongside bicyclist lanes. There are anticipated road improvements to enhance mobility and connectivity in the community such as the Draft Mobility Element that is meant to make walking, biking, and public transit more attractive in the city, including Barrio Logan. The Draft Mobility Element will work alongside the developing land use of the community to create a more vibrant and accessible neighborhood through the growth of the community’s interconnections.

Resource Availability 

Logan Heights benefits from coastal air and its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. The coastal winds can easily be utilized in passive design strategies for individual buildings as well as energy generation for the city as a whole. Offshore wind and hydroelectric farms have immense potential in powering the city but have received push back from the city power suppliers like San Diego Gas & Electric Company. Gas and electricity are provided by the San Diego Gas & Electric Company. SDG&E has substantial investment in the Barrio Logan community. One of the utility’s major power stations in the San Diego region is in Barrio Logan. This station is identified as the Silvergate substation, located west of Harbor Drive at Sampson Street.

ECOSYSTEM UNDERSTANDING The ecological understanding of a site is crucial to a building’s success. An understanding of the surrounding climate conditions and topography act as formal drivers when it comes to systems integration, architectural experience, and inhabitant comfort levels. A well-researched understanding of the ecological environment gives the designer and building a chance to better show the relation between inhabitants and the surrounding ecology. The ecosystem encompassing Logan Heights: including soil conditions, vegetation, wildlife, topography, and climate, was researched by the studio to develop a collective understanding of how the master plan might best serve the surrounding environment. Soil  

Soil is primarily composed of marine and non-marine, poorly consolidated, fine and medium grained, pale brown sandstone which lends to the creation of weak soil conditions. The site is located in close proximity to Rose Canyon which is a fault earthquake and liquefaction prone area but remains occupied.

Vegetation      

Intense urbanization means no native plants are present and little landscaping Coastal proximity means future plans to preserve vegetation in waters (algae and marine grasses) to preserve small sea creatures in the area Despite the lack of rainwater, the coastal climate can support many types of succulents, such as the artichoke agave or the Mexican fence post cactus. Various wildflowers can also strive here such as the Arroyo Lupine, the Goodding’s Verbena, the Bush Anemone, as well as Texas Sundrops. Several types of trees can successfully live in this climate such as the Chaste Tree and Pheonix Mesquite. In the right conditions, San Diego can be quite lush as we can see in Fern Canyon in the San Diego Zoo and Balboa Park.

Wildlife      

Bird life is the most prominent, almost non-existent wildlife beyond this Nearest wildlife is 3.5 miles away in a canyon: coyotes, deer, and other mammals Six miles south of the community is a habitat for rare/endangered birds 430 bird species in the area, half are seasonal (in San Diego County) Infrastructure and dumping waste have contributed to decreased biodiversity especially in north and central bay of San Diego (location of Barrio Logan is central bay)  Oil spills, ship waste, etc. Ocean life includes dolphins, otters, and sea lions, as well as fish and crustaceans but much less diverse

Topography 

The site is effectively flat and continues this way to the bay to the west and south, elevation increases well beyond the site boundary to the north and east. Balboa Park is built on top of a hill while it spreads out into the many canyons that stretch from it.

Climate   

San Diego has a diurnal swing of about thirty-five degrees Fahrenheit with a mean temperature of about sixty-five to seventy degrees. This puts San Diego in the comfort zone for much of the year: June to November, but August and September can often be warm in comparison. Design Strategies that are effective in the climate are internal heat gain and solar direct gain. Sun shading is important as well for higher sun angles. San Diego’s wind is marine influenced when it comes to temperature and primarily originates from the northwest.

110

120

130

140

90 60

100

110

100

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY

04 CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

CAMPUS DESCRIPTION AND SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONS The Students and Faculty 

The planned campus is first and foremost a place for the students of Cal Western to pursue their education. While the master plan centers itself around providing a welcoming space for students to live, work, and learn; it is also a place for collective gathering. The campus itself features buildings including a recreational facility, central library, performing arts center, educational building, university union, and housing for visiting scholars; all of which are individually catered to best support the students and faculty of Cal Western.

The Visiting Scholars 

As a way to encourage visiting lecturers and esteemed faculty to visit Cal Western, residential units were integrated into the greater campus plan. Located at the north most entrance to campus, these units sit in close proximity to a major thoroughfare connecting Downtown San Diego and Barrio Logan. With private rooms, shared dining spaces, and accessibility to the campus and its resources, the scholars are able to comfortably visit at Cal Western for extended periods of time.

The Community 

The resources residing on the Cal Western campus are not intended to be exclusively used by students and faculty, but rather extended to the surrounding communities of Downtown San Diego, Logan Heights, and Barrio Logan. Each building on the master plan features programming tailored to the greater population. From community halls to daycare facilities, the campus offers a variety of services and outreach programs intended to assist campus and community members alike.

HOW MIGHT WE GOALS Community   

How might we reflect global context within local design? Globally, how might we respond to humanitarian issues such as immigration and mass incarceration through quantitative research and qualitative application? Locally, how might we design as “apart” of the community rather than “a part” from it, both visually and spatially? Additionally, how might we create a strong campus environment and identity while still welcoming those in need?

Clients 

How might we design to promote student physical and mental well-being through the organization and development of spaces for both student and community interaction?

Service 

How might we emphasize the architect’s and law student’s responsibility to serve through building design?



Utilize unique site conditions as well as environmental factors to create a safe and accessible place for learning?

Site

CAMPUS PLANNING: BEST PRACTICES Upon analysis and review of other universities, it was concluded that important qualities that exist for a campus plan to be successful must be reflected. Our project looks to prioritize the experiences of the Law students and Latin American immigrants who will predominantly be experiencing these campus spaces. On the other hand, we also wish to create a transitional experience from the public to private through landscaping features that introduces biophilic design. Furthermore, the qualities and characteristics of a campus plan that are of greatest interest to our project include: responding to environmental and cultural context, implementing transitional spaces, introducing biophilic design, and continuity of design that encourages sense of community.

The best practices we have outlined for our site and project include:

Transitional Spaces   

Creating transitions within the campus in order to encourage interaction between the interior programming and existing exterior infrastructure. Important to create distinctions between spaces. These transitional spaces look to create dynamic buffers within a space to elevate the user’s experience.

Biophilic Design   

Implementation of vegetation – including deciduous trees and shrubs with an emphasis on those that provide food Landscape design that seeks to engage communities Landscape and vegetation that encourages health and wellbeing of project’s users

Environment and Cultural Context   

Understanding the environmental abilities of a site while implementing design strategies to highlight site potential Understanding the cultural context of where a project resides and how to contribute in a respectful way Encouraging community engagement with local communities

Sense of Community   

Creating central nodes or quads that allow for various student or regional communities to cross paths and engage with one another Supply buffer zones for students to study or rest between classes Provide landscape features whilst implementing seating that enables people to sit and engage in conversations

CAMPUS COMPARATIVES A Nolli map is a figure ground drawing that aided us in developing our campus plan. These plan drawings help to distinguish private, semi-private, and public places from each other and clearly differentiate space from mass using black and white to represent the area being studied. We used several Nolli maps to help inform us of the flow of spaces on our campus and identify the ideal qualities of a law school campus. Some of the specific campus functional elements we would like to emulate were determined to be on these nine campuses: Georgetown Law School 

This school was chosen for its centralization and walkability in the Washington D.C. area. The campus provides its students with living facilities (such as childcare, a fitness center, and housing for 300 students) to support students’ educational excellence. This is in addition to the classrooms, clinic spaces, and an expensive library. The proximity to national buildings and public transportation also encourages immersion into the extracurricular activities that D.C. has to offer.

Harvard Law School 

The campus is comprised of mostly historic buildings with lots of green open space between buildings. The WWC is the hub for all student life which holds common spaces, classrooms, clinics, and dining facilities.

Fordham Law School 

The school’s closeness to the urban setting, along with its inclusion of greenery and proximity to Central Park provides easy access to city activities and nearby law firms. While located in a large, bustling context, the silver LEED certified campus itself contains a smaller plaza within to create a threshold between the campus and the city.

Duke University School of Law 

Students are expected to live off-campus, while the law school features many sheltered outdoor spaces for students to relax and study. Its clinic wing is designed as a separate law office that fosters trust between law students and clients because it offers a space to meet confidentially.

Notre Dame Law School 

This campus creates community through large library reading areas as well as “living rooms” for student and teacher interaction. It utilizes large grassy lawns for social spaces and provides housing for graduate students and their families on campus.

New York University Law School 

The school is a unique campus as it is a series of buildings nestled in the city itself and centered around Washington Square Park. It is very well integrated into the city and fosters experiences in which school and city life intertwine.

Stanford Law School 

The central location of the university primarily gives students access to the mental health services. There are several green spaces available in the form of courtyards for studying and gathering. Its circulation system is also robust as the campus is broken up into four buildings with separate educational functions linked together with shared courtyards.

Lewis and Clark Law 

The ample green spaces on the 20-acre campus function as “living rooms” to encourage community and gathering and are used as outdoor classrooms on occasion. The school is further surrounded by the forests of the state park, giving students access to nature as they make their way through the intensive law curriculum.

University of Oregon Law School 

The buildings on this campus create pockets of public space that are more sheltered than the general public realm and are oriented towards a shared courtyard with other buildings.

COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY While the term community most frequently refers to a group of people or a tangible location, the abstract definition spans beyond physical reach. When compiling the campus master plan, reflecting the conceptual community surrounding our site was imperative to the proposal’s success. With a site located in Logan Heights, our master plan was faced with the challenge of being a point of transition to the more urbanized Gaslamp district as well as the lower density community of Barrio Logan. The campus serves as a major threshold between Downtown and the future developments planned for Barrio Logan. The project is based on a series of transition zones that required attention; by focusing on scale, density, and circulation we were able to propose a seamless shift that melds two communities into one. The Scale 

With the Barrio and Downtown in mind, buildings were designed following the idea that the campus alludes to the infrastructure around it. The master plan gradually shifts from five story structures in the southwest corner of the site to a larger scale of up to nine story structures on the northeastern side of the site.

The Density 

Similar to the transition in scale, density played a significant role in designing the campus master plan. The lack of accessible public realm was a primary concern in the initial design phase. The proposed campus plan allows for the street condition to adhere to its surrounding context while the site itself remains inviting for members of the surrounding communities to experience and inhabit.

The Circulation 

The selected campus site provides a bridge between varying existing hardscapes (Downtown San Diego infrastructure, proposed Barrio Logan Plan), with a goal of supporting and enhancing the overall ground plane moving forward. Following the requirements defined in the Barrio Logan Plan, all major thoroughfares will consist of sidewalks ranging between ten and fourteen feet accompanied by planting strips and class I and class II bike lanes.

CAMPUS RESILIENCY Resiliency refers to a site’s ability to weather adverse conditions (both immediate disasters and long-term stresses) while supporting a prominent level of functionality and safety for all its residents. A primary test of resiliency is a site’s response to the challenges posed by climate change. As a coastal site in a drought and fire-stricken state, our campus will be particularly at-risk. The central concerns include sea-level rise and flooding, increasing temperatures, and decreasing precipitation. Although in the most catastrophic climate scenarios our site may simply become uninhabitable, we have pursued resiliency strategies that will ensure its functionality under many circumstances.

Some primary strategies are outlined as follows: Addressing Sea-Level Rise and Flooding  Our buildings avoid placing primary or essential functions in below-grade spaces, so that flooding events do not damage or inhibit campus activity in the long-run. Addressing Increasing Temperatures  

Reducing urban heat island effect with extensive site vegetation, cool roofs, and rooftop gardens. Increasing tree canopy on street edge and internal campus quad to give community greater access to shade in extreme heat.

Addressing Decreasing Precipitation  

Use of building-level water capture and reuse of gray water to reduce strain on municipal water systems. Extensive native-plant landscaping to reduce campus irrigation needs.

Addressing unreliability of Energy Access through    

Integration of on-site energy generation with battery backup Reducing energy needs (and thus reliance on potentially spotty energy grids) by taking advantage of appropriate building-scale and site-specific passive strategies. Site design with awareness of solar access to increase natural daylighting in each building. Extensive on-site solar generation to reduce loads on city grid and provide an independent energy source.

Many of the measures described here are very physical and architectural. While these may help preserve life and increase physical comfort, the campus also takes measures to address social and communal resiliency. By providing spaces for justice-oriented law education and pro-bono practice, as well as non-academic programs (such as markets, greenhouses, daycares, and more), the campus works towards lifting up the community and putting the neighbors in a better situation to recover following a disaster. The conjunction of architectural and social interventions embodied in our campus to support making Barrio Logan more resilient in the face of the challenges to come.

05 PARTNERS PROJECT PURPOSE

The Sobre/mesa Center improves the quality of life of Cal Western School of Law Students and the surrounding communities through biophilic design and food-centered spaces. The aspirational intent of Sobre/mesa is to facilitate community within the presence of the pre-established neighborhoods; ultimately creating a hub for collective gathering and the cultivation of engagement through agriculturally rooted spaces. Utilizing the idea of food as an informal facilitator of expression and connection, this mixed-use building aims to serve as the community center of Cal Western Law School’s newly proposed campus.

PROJECT PROGRAM “Sobremesa” is a Spanish word used to describe the flow of conversation around a meal, a savoring of food and company. A stark contrast to the fast-paced workday in America, where dining can consist of quick takeout or a microwave meal; Sobremesa asks for time to be invested in sharing, digesting, and connecting. Centered around the idea of using food as an informal facilitator, The Sobre/mesa Center begins to investigate relationships between the populations served. The programming of the building politely asks its visitors to take time to interact, whether by shopping, dining, working, or living; spaces such as the market, café, touchdown floors, and residential units support occupants shared experiences. The key word here being experience; when programming initially started it became clear that to successfully integrate engagement between the surrounding communities, spaces would need to directly facilitate interaction. To support collaboration, programs such as communal kitchens and central dining locations were designed on the residential floors. In spaces that are typically labeled as public, the buildings goal is to construct an intimate feeling of community while also avoiding the projection of exclusivity. A principal goal of Sobre/mesa is to ensure that it does not privatize the public realm; while there are areas of the building that require more privacy, such as the residential units, the remainder of the building is meant to support the community rather than detach itself from it. In order to achieve this, spaces in the building were designed to show a sense of transparency from the exterior. By using the building envelope as a means of communication, fully public spaces are straightforward, showing their contents and intentions to the public realm while private spaces are given a sense of opaqueness, to protect the privacy of their more permanent inhabitants. This goal of avoiding privatization is directly reflected in the programmatic spaces and architectural design of the building, both of which are tailored to support members of Barrio Logan, Downtown San Diego, Visiting Scholars, and the population of Cal Western School of Law.

PERFORMANCE GOALS Energy



Photovoltaic panels help to offset Sobre/mesa’s substantial energy load. Larger crystalline panels located on the rooftop make up the majority of the building’s solar energy but are supplemented by amorphous translucent panels on the exterior curtain wall of the greenhouses. Additionally, most of Sobre/mesa’s circulation was deliberately pushed outdoors to reduce air conditioning requirements while immersing building occupants in the surrounding environment.

Water



Water catchment is concentrated in the landscaping of the project. The permeable pavers allow rain to collect underground and be recycled into the greenhouses after a filtration process. The higher nitrogen concentration in rainwater makes this more advantageous to Sobre/mesa’s food production capacity. Use of native plants and grasses around the building also reduces the site’s water requirements.

Light



The project’s location at the Northmost section of the proposed campus lends itself well to mitigating Southern solar gain. Most large expanses of façade transparency are located at the North elevation to take advantage of the indirect daylight. Additionally, the split building shape creates a central thoroughfare, where façade transparency could be implemented with the guarantee of shading. The exception to this rule is the swathes of South-facing glazing for Sobre/mesa’s greenhouses. A sun path chart was carefully studied to ensure that it would not receive excess solar gain, and the glass was frosted to provide an additional layer of light diffusion. As the building climbs higher, glazing becomes more controlled. Residential windows are oriented to maximize views of the surrounding city, with operable shading that allows occupants to control their environment.

Production



Sobre/mesa’s extensive food production spaces are integral to the project’s ethos but create a challenge for achieving energy-saving goals. The greenhouses require the capacity to strictly regulate thermal and ventilation conditions, all of which generate heavy energy consumption. To reduce that load, Sobremesa’s greenhouses aim to capitalize on the pleasant San Diego climate. Strategic use of glazing and thermal mass combined with BMS-controlled operable windows are just some of the solutions towards reaching performance goals. Food production is facilitated through aeroponic, and hydroponic systems as opposed to traditional soil-based planting. The high potential for water recycling (supplemented by added nutrients), reduced energy consumption, and high efficiency of these systems, high potential for water recycling supplemented by added nutrients, were the driving factors in this decision.

FORMAL INFLUENCES - STREET CONDITIONS

PROGRAMMATIC DRIVERS Sobre/mesa aims to be a multi-faceted organism on Cal Western’s campus that improves the quality of life of its many communities through biophilic design and food-centered spaces. These are especially important when considering the law school population of students, faculty, and visiting scholars; all of whom devote their careers to serving others and tending to isolate themselves along the way. Sobre/mesa asks them and the community of Downtown San Diego, Logan Heights, and Barrio Logan to consciously engage in sustainable processes and care for themselves through holistic immersion in farm-to-table practices. Using food as a facilitator of social connection, the project cultivates community engagement in the long term while providing natural support to its occupants. Sobre/mesa serves the law school as the law school serves the people.

The farm-to-table process is embodied through every inch of the building. Greenhouses climb up the building, growing fruits and vegetables that are cared for by volunteers. In addition to productive biophilia, living walls and plant spaces provide mental health benefits and purified air to occupants. Food travels out of the greenhouses into community spaces of various privacies. More private areas like the community kitchens in upper-level visitor apartments encourage the sharing of conversations amongst visiting scholars over a common dinner table. Public spaces like the ground-floor market serve the larger campus community as well as the residential community of Logan Heights and Barrio Logan. The market and adjacent pantry fill address the issue of food insecurity by creating proximity to fresh produce to communities located within a food desert. The food produced in the building makes its way to users at multiple points, allowing the building to directly contribute to the health of its occupants.

By providing on-campus access and visibility to food and agricultural programs, Sobre/mesa intends to create community connections in Cal Western Law’s newly proposed campus and support equal quality of life in Logan Heights.

SITE PLAN

SITE SECTION

FLOOR PLANS

5 32

6 (RESIDENTIAL TYPE A)

7 (RESIDENTIAL TYPE B) 33

STRUCTURE Being a building centered around biophilia, Sobre/mesa had a goal of incorporating natural materials within the building’s main structural configuration. The structure is centered around the use of materials including mass timber and steel. The building plans to utilize a mass timber frame for the main structural component, coupled with the integration of steel framing in greenhouse spaces and a concrete split core between the two building masses. When it comes to gravity and lateral systems, the implementation of moment framing methods will act to support the longer structural spans. Following structural consultations with Cal Poly faculty members, we discovered a few spaces that may require additional framing depending on load calculations.

When deciding on a structural system, program played a crucial role. The building is comprised of spaces that will have large span requirements such as a theater, touchdown spaces, and market. One of the biggest challenges was the integration of structure in a thoughtful way that was able to complement the building experience but remain functional. Within the building, Sobre/mesa remains true to the structural materials selected by reflecting them internally to provide an aesthetically welcoming center for the community. A key decision was made early in the design process to prioritize the collaboration between architectural experience and strucutre, refraining one from taking priority over the other, leading to a unified space for students and visitors.

CIRCULATION

EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR RENDER VIGNETTES

SOCRATIC MARKET

DOG TROT

TOUCHDOWN SPACE

PICK ‘N GRAB GREENHOUSE

DETAILED WALL SECTION AND AXON

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

1 A3

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

---

8 8

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE MASS TIMBER SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM SPRINKLER SYSTEM SPACED @ 10' O.C. SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

1' - 0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

DUCT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW SILL CASING

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE DUCT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM SPRINKLER SYSTEM @ 5' O.C. SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE

2 x 3 DOUBLE TOP PLATE SPRINKLER SYSTEM @ 5' O.C.

2 x 12 TYP. HEADER ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW HEAD CASING

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

3' - 4"

3o x 9o FIXED WINDOW

1" CONCRETE TOPPING BROOM FINISH

OPERABLE 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS

5" NON-COMPOSITE METAL DECKING

4' - 2"

GREENHOUSE: FRUITS & BERRIES

5" NON-COMPOSITE METAL DECKING 8.75" x 30" GLB JOIST SPACED @ 30' O.C.

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

6.75" x 30" GLB GIRDER SPACED @ 10' O.C. 12" x 12" GLB COLUMN SPACED @ 10' O.C.

8.75" x 30" GLB JOIST SPACED @ 30' O.C.

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

12" x 12" GLB COLUMN SPACED @ 10' O.C.

2' - 6"

4' - 0"

OPERABLE LOW-E PANEL 5/8" THREE-PLY PVIGU GLASS SPANDREL FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS 1/4" WHITE GLAZED TEMPERED GLASS 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM SOLAR CELLS 0% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE 2.5" x 9" ALUMINIUM MULLION INTERIOR LOW-E IGU PANEL OPERABLE LOW-E IGU PANEL FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL 1/4" RED-TINTED TEMPERED GLASS 2.5"SOLAR x 9" ALUMINIUM MULLION 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM CELLS 30% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE INTERIOR LOW-E IGU PANEL 2.5" x 5" ALUMINIUM MULLION 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL 1/4" RED-TINTED TEMPERED GLASS 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM SOLAR CELLS 30% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE

7' - 0"

2' - 6"

4' - 0"

5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS SPANDREL 1/4" WHITE GLAZED TEMPERED GLASS 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM SOLAR CELLS OPERABLE 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL 0% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS

1" CONCRETE TOPPING BROOM FINISH 6.75" x 30" GLB GIRDER SPACED @ 10' O.C.

4' - 2"

GREENHOUSE: ROOT & BULB

2.5" x 5" ALUMINIUM MULLION 1" CONCRETE TOPPING W BROOM FINISH

7' - 0"

4" CONCRETE SLAB ON NONCOMPOSITE METAL DECKING W12x26 STEEL GIRDER @ 30' O.C. 1" CONCRETE TOPPING W W12x26 STEEL BEAM @ 20' O.C. FINISH BROOM

GREENHOUSE: ROOT & BULB

1' - 0"

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

4" CONCRETE SLAB ON NONCOMPOSITE METAL DECKING HSS6x6x.5 STEEL COLUMN (NOT SHOWN)

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

W12x26 STEEL GIRDER @ 30' O.C.

2' - 0"

W12x26 STEEL GIRDER @ 30' O.C.

1' - 0"

W12x26 STEEL BEAM @ 20' O.C.

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

HSS6x6x.5 STEEL COLUMN (NOT SHOWN)

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

PV PINK TINTED CURTAIN WALL PANELS **SEE DETAIL D1 FIBER CEMENT WALL PANELS (SEE DETAIL 2)

FIBER CEMENT WALL PANELS (SEE DETAIL 2)

GREENHOUSE: LEAFY GREENS

PV PINK TINTED CURTAIN WALL PANELS **SEE DETAIL D1 FIBER CEMENT WALL PANELS (SEE DETAIL 2)

FIBER CEMENT WALL PANELS (SEE DETAIL 2)

GREENHOUSE: LEAFY GREENS

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB 12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

31/2" 1/2"THERMAL CFS FRAMING AIR BARRIER

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW SILL CASING

D3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

E3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

D2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

1" CONCRETE TOPPING BROOM FINISH 6.75" x 30" GLB GIRDER SPACED @ 10' O.C. 5" NON-COMPOSITE METAL DECKING 8.75" x 30" GLB JOIST SPACED @ 30' O.C.

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

6.75" x 30" GLB GIRDER SPACED @ 10' O.C. 12" x 12" GLB COLUMN SPACED @ 10' O.C.

8.75" x 30" GLB JOIST SPACED @ 30' O.C.

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

#3 BENT REBAR A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

#3 BENT REBAR

E2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

D3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

E3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

D2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

10' - 0"

12 12

F F

9 9 12

10' - 0"

STUDENT TOUCHDOWN 2100 SF

A1 --10' - 0"

10' - 0"

A1 ---

STUDENT TOUCHDOWN 2100 SF

A1 ---

8 8 13

10' - 0"

8 8

LAB 2: Integrated Wall Focus Area + 3d Axon RASHMI PRADHAN STUDIO WHITE // ARCH 342 SPRING 2022 LAB 2: Integrated Wall Focus Area + 3d Axon RASHMI PRADHAN STUDIO WHITE // ARCH 342 A3_Floor 03 - Kenzie 342 3 SPRING 2022 1/2" = 1'-0" 10' - 0"

1 A3

14 14

1' - 0" 2' - 0" 1' - 0" 2' - 0"

7' - 0"

4' - 0"

A3_Floor 03 - Kenzie 342 1/2" = 1'-0"

E2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB 20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

PV PINK TINTED CURTAIN WALL PANELS **SEE DETAIL D1

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

PV PINK TINTED CURTAIN WALL PANELS **SEE DETAIL D1

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

12" x 12" GLB COLUMN SPACED @ 10' O.C.

E2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

D3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

5" NON-COMPOSITE METAL DECKING

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

1" CONCRETE TOPPING BROOM FINISH

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

#3 BENT REBAR

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

2 x 12 TYP. HEADER

3o x 9o FIXED WINDOW

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

D2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

2 x 3 SILL PLATE 2 x 3 DOUBLE TOP PLATE

3o x 9o FIXED WINDOW

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW HEAD CASING

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

D3_Greenhouse Glazing 1/2" 1'-0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

2 x 12 TYP. HEADER ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW HEAD CASING

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

#3 BENT REBAR 20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

2 x 3 SILL PLATE 2 x 3 DOUBLE TOP PLATE

Suspended Wood T-Ceiling Sys- TYP. IRMA ROOF Semi-exposed Sprinkler System tem Semi-exposed Sprinkler System Herringbone TYP. IRMAPavers ROOF atop Pedestals UHPC FACADE 3” Rigid Batt Insulation GREENHOUSE: ROOT & BULB Herringbone Pavers atop(WRB) Pedestals A|UHPC Panels EPDM Roofing Membrane UHPC FACADE 3” RigidSheathing Batt Insulation Steel Girt System Plywood GREENHOUSE: ROOT & BULB A|UHPC Panels EPDM Roofing Membrane (WRB) Steel Girt System Rigid Batt Insulation 2” Plywood ConcreteSheathing Topper with Welded Water Resistant Barrier Wire Fabric Rigid Batt Insulation 2” Concrete Topper with Welded Shear Connector Water Resistant WireBarrier Fabric Plywood SheathingBarrier Vapor ShearCLT Connector Interior Steel-Framed 3 Layer Deck Plywood Vapor Barrier Backup WallSheathing GREENHOUSE: LEAFY GREENS InteriorWall Steel-Framed 3 Layer CLT Deck Gypsum Board Glulam Structural System Backup Wall GREENHOUSE: LEAFY GREENS Gypsum Wall Board Glulam Structural System

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

#3 BENT REBAR

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

VAPOR BARRIER

TYPICAL MULLION

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW SILL CASING

20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

VAPOR BARRIER 3" RIDGID INSULATION

TYPICAL MULLION 3 1/2" CFS FRAMING

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION #3 BENT REBAR SLAB

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

1/4" GYPSUM WALL BOARD

#3 BENT REBAR 12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB 20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

1/4" GYPSUM WALL BOARD 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION #3 BENT REBAR SLAB

3" RIDGID INSULATION

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

3o x 9o FIXED WINDOW

3' - 4"

GREENHOUSE: FRUITS & BERRIES

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

2 x 12 TYP. HEADER ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW HEAD CASING

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

1/2" THERMAL AIR BARRIER

1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING FIBER CEMENT CURTAIN WALL PANEL

4' - 0"

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

2 x 3 SILL PLATE

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE SPRINKLER SYSTEM @ 5' O.C.

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

FIBER CEMENT CURTAIN WALL PANEL

4' - 0"

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW SILL CASING

SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

7' - 0"

2 x 3 SILL PLATE 2 x 3 DOUBLE TOP PLATE

SPRINKLER SYSTEM @ 5' O.C. SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE

Ground Floor 0' - 0" Ground Floor 0' - 0"

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

7' - 0"

GREENHOUSE: HERBS & SPICES

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT 6" - 8" CAN LIGHT FIXTURE

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

VAPOR BARRIER

TYPICAL MULLION

GREENHOUSE: HERBS & SPICES

2' - 0"

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT 6" - 8" CAN LIGHT FIXTURE

2' - 0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

TYPICAL MULLION 3 1/2" CFS FRAMING

1/4" GYPSUM WALL BOARD

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

6" - 8" RECESSED INCANDECENT 120V LIGHT

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

VAPOR BARRIER 3" RIDGID INSULATION 1/4" GYPSUM WALL BOARD 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

6" - 8" RECESSED INCANDECENT 120V LIGHT

1' - 0"

31/2" 1/2"THERMAL CFS FRAMING AIR BARRIER

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

2' - 0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

1' - 0"

3" RIDGID INSULATION 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING FIBER CEMENT CURTAIN WALL PANEL

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

1' - 0"

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

1/2" THERMAL AIR BARRIER

HSS6x6x.5 STEEL COLUMN (NOT SHOWN)

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE SPRINKLER SYSTEM SPACED @ 10' O.C.

5 1/8" x 24" GLB GIRDER @ 10' O.C.

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

FIBER CEMENT CURTAIN WALL PANEL

W12x26 STEEL BEAM @ 20' O.C.

SPRINKLER SYSTEM SPACED @ 10' O.C. SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

1' - 0"

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

5 1/8" x 24" GLB GIRDER @ 10' O.C.

4" CONCRETE SLAB ON NONCOMPOSITE METAL DECKING HSS6x6x.5 STEEL COLUMN (NOT SHOWN)

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE MASS TIMBER SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

8' - 0"

5 1/8" x 24" GLB GIRDER @ 10' O.C.

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE 8" VENT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

8' - 0"

1' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT 6" - 8" CAN LIGHT FIXTURE

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

MASS TIMBER SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

1' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT 6" - 8" CAN LIGHT FIXTURE

6" - 8" RECESSED INCANDECENT 120V LIGHT

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

8" VENT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

6" - 8" RECESSED INCANDECENT 120V LIGHT

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

SPRINKLER SYSTEM SPACED @ 10' O.C.

4" CONCRETE SLAB ON NONCOMPOSITE METAL DECKING

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

TYP. FOUNDATION 12” Concrete Foundation Slab TYP. Pile CapFOUNDATION Concrete #312” Bent Rebar Foundation Slab GREENHOUSE FLOOR SYSTEM 20”Pile Dia.Cap Pile-Steel Pipe 2” Concrete Topper with Welded #3 Bent Rebar GREENHOUSE FLOOR SYSTEM Wire Fabric 20” Dia. Pile-Steel Pipe 2” Concrete Topper with Welded TYP. FLOOR SYSTEM Shear Connector WireBarrier Fabric Vapor 2” Concrete Topper with Welded ShearCLT Connector TYP. FLOOR SYSTEM 3 Layer Deck Wire Fabric Vapor Barrier 2” Concrete Topper with Welded Shear Connector 3 Layer CLT Deck Steel Structural System WireBarrier Fabric Vapor ShearCLT Connector 3 Layer Deck Steel Structural System High Efficiency VAV Vapor Barrier Electrical Conduit (Grow Lights) 3 Layer CLT Deck Glulam Structural System Efficiency PVHigh Junction Box VAV Electrical Conduit (Grow Lights) High Exposed Sprinkler System Glulam Structural Efficiency VAV System PV Junction Box Electrical Conduit Exposed Sprinkler System High Efficiency Suspended Wood VAV T-Ceiling SysElectrical Conduit tem FIBER CEMENT RAINSCREEN Suspended Wood T-Ceiling SysSemi-exposed Sprinkler System Exterior Cement Curtain tem FIBERFiber CEMENT RAINSCREEN Wall Panels Semi-exposed Sprinkler System Exterior Fiber Steel Cement Black-Anodized GirtCurtain System Wall Panels TYP. INTERIOR WALL Black-Anodized Steel Girt System Cold-Form Steel Framing Rigid Batt Insulation TYP. INTERIOR WALL Water Resistant Barrier Gypsum Board Rigid Batt Insulation Cold-Form Steel Framing Accoya Wall Panels Water Resistant Gypsum Board Plywood SheathingBarrier Accoya Wall Panels Interior Steel-Framed Backup Wall Plywood Sheathing Gypsum Wall Board DOUBLE-SKIN GLAZING Interior Steel-Framed Backup Wall Gypsum Wall Board GREENHOUSE: HERBS & SPICESExterior: Triple-Laminated PV DOUBLE-SKIN GLAZING PUNCHED WINDOW OPENING Glass Panels with 1/8” a-Si Thin GREENHOUSE: HERBS & SPICES Exterior: Triple-Laminated PV Film Solar Cells 2” Concrete Topper with Welded PUNCHED WINDOW OPENING Glass Panels with 1/8” a-Si Thin Wire Fabric Film Solar Cells Girt Framing anchored 2” Concrete Topper with Welded Aluminum Shear Connector to Steel Structure, with intermediWireBarrier Fabric Vapor Girt Framing anchored ateAluminum channels multifunctioning as ShearCLT Connector 3 Layer Deck to Steel Structure, with intermedishading devices Vapor Barrier ate channels multifunctioning as 3 Layer CLT Deck Glulam Structural System GREENHOUSE: FRUITS & BERRIES shading devices Interior: Low-E IGU Wall System with Operable Panels controlled Glulam Structural System High Efficiency VAV and electrical GREENHOUSE: FRUITS & BERRIES byInterior: BMS Low-E IGU Wall System Electrical Conduit with Operable Panels controlled High Efficiency and electrical Suspended Wood VAV T-Ceiling Sysby BMS Electrical Conduit tem A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE

W12x26 STEEL GIRDER @ 30' O.C. 1" CONCRETE TOPPING W W12x26 STEEL BEAM @ 20' O.C. FINISH BROOM

6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

KEYNOTES KEYNOTES

8" VENT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

2.5" x 5" ALUMINIUM MULLION 1" CONCRETE TOPPING W BROOM FINISH

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

MASS TIMBER SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

5 1/8" x 24" GLB GIRDER @ 10' O.C.

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 3" RIGID INSULATION

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

8" VENT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

INTERIOR LOW-E IGU PANEL 2.5" x 5" ALUMINIUM MULLION

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL 1/4" RED-TINTED TEMPERED GLASS 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM SOLAR CELLS 30% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

3" RIGID INSULATION A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

INTERIOR LOW-E IGU PANEL OPERABLE LOW-E IGU PANEL FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL 1/4" RED-TINTED TEMPERED GLASS 2.5"SOLAR x 9" ALUMINIUM MULLION 1/8" a-Si THIN FILM CELLS 30% LIGHT TRANSMITTANCE

6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

6" LW CONCRETE METAL DECKPAVERS 3/4"ON HARRINGBONE

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 3" RIGID INSULATION

3" RIGID INSULATION EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 3" RIGID INSULATION

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE 6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

OPERABLE 5/8" THREE-PLY PV GLASS PANEL FOR NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROLLED BY BMS

1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE 6" LW CONCRETE METAL DECKPAVERS 3/4"ON HARRINGBONE

SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM

3" RIGID INSULATION

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 3" RIGID INSULATION

3" RIGID INSULATION

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE DUCT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

---

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER

DUCT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

8 8

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

1 A3

9 12

---

1 A3

A3_Floor 03 - Kenzie 342 1/2" = 1'-0"

E2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

06 IN REFLECTION As a cohort, we have not had the most traditional experience when it comes to an architectural education. With that being said, when starting out double-quarter I was not sure what to expect. There was a combination of a nerves and anticipation to jump into third year after being online for most of my college career, but I’m grateful to say that two-quarter has been the highlight of my time at Cal Poly. I believe that the environment created in a studio has a direct impact on the work produced by the students enrolled in each section, and in wrapping up my double-quarter I have to say I could not have asked for a more inclusive and holistic studio culture. I felt encouraged to take risks, challenge myself, explore new design strategies, and most importantly never hesitated to ask for help. The studio focused on a proposal for a single building (developed individually and as a group) situated on a greater campus master plan (developed as a studio collective) as a relocation suggestion for the existing California Western School of Law. This was the first educational based prompt I had worked on in a studio which was eye opening. The programming of the building was relatively open ended but required collaboration with the studio to create a proposal for a campus master plan. The first half of double quarter started out as an individual project with group collaboration to develop several options for a studio master plan. Following mid-review, the class refined each groups master plan to create a cohesive option that would be used for the remainder of the year. This gave me the opportunity to experience working in both small and large groups on a unified design proposal. Near the end of Winter quarter we were asked to partner up with another member of studio to begin our joint venture. We spent the second half of double quarter as a team, working to plan, design, and refine a proposal to present to our firm partners and Cal Poly faculty members. I would say my greatest take away from the two-quarter experience was the chance to work in a nick firm environment. Our professor encouraged collaboration and taught us how to work on a single proposal that pulled from a collection of design influences. Together we were able to learn new techniques, software, design strategies, and apply technical integration into our designs. The integrated aspect of the studio exposed me to a more comprehensive understanding of systems thinking within design. I was able to explore detailed section views of elements proposed in our teams building. Topics in lighting, wall composition, and facade expression were covered in detail throughout each quarter. With a highlighted focus on the detailed wall section, each student spent several weeks developing and refining their wall assemblies. Cohort pin-ups and collective markups were distributed during the spring quarter to allow for students to receive feedback on their sections in preparation for review. Concluding with a final submission that was featured during presentations at the end of the two-quarter experience. It’s safe to say that the two-quarter experience was like no other studio I have completed. The opportunity to work on the development of a project for twenty weeks allowed for new levels of detail to be reached. While a building is never truly completed, it was a unique experience to see a more comprehensive design proposal at the end of the two-quarters. I am looking forward to what the next two years hold and am grateful to have experienced my first integrated design studio at Cal Poly.

THE STUDENT McKenzie Pelletier California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Bachelor’s of Architecture Student - Third Year Studio Toker - Fall 2021 Studio White - Winter 2021 + Spring 2022

BIBLIOGRAPHY  

(https://en-us.topographic-map.com/maps/n0u/San-Diego/) (https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/planning/community/profiles/pdf/cp/cpblfull.pdf)

RUBY CITY CONTEMPORARY ARTS CENTER | ELOISE HIDES | KENZIE PELLETIER | TEJU KSHATRIYA | TORI MCLAUGHLIN

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

ARCHITECTS FIRM PROFILE The Ruby City Contemporary Arts Center was designed by Adjaye Associates. This firm focuses on mainly community centered design, but also designs some residential projects as well. Looking at their portfolio, the work seems to vary in program, function, and form, but all have something in common: unique and warm-colored materials. The Ruby City Museum is pre-cast concrete that is colored red. Like the Ruby City Contemporary Arts Center, many of the buildings featured on their website are pre-cast concrete and have large, geometric massings. However, there are some exceptions to this general pattern. The UK Holocaust Museum and the Abrahamic Family House Projects seem almost parametric, with lighter facades.

PROJECT DESIGN TEAM

A BIT OF BACKGROUND Linda Pace was inspired to embark on the creation of the Ruby City Contemporary Arts Center following a dream which she notes within her memoir. This dream was titled "Dreaming Red: Creating Artpace." This center was intended to house Linda's extensive art collection she had acquired throughout the years. The Ruby finally had a chance to display this artwork following Lindas passing in 2007. Inspired by the surrounding Spanish missions 16th century architecture in San Antonio, Adjaye set out to create a space that could honor Linda's work and her vision. The space was coordinated to integrate seamlessly into the greater architectural community of the area without blending in too much. The amber-hued concrete walls draw attention to the center and invite visitors to take a closer look. With over 900 works to display, the Ruby City Contemporary Arts Center has become a major landmark.

Architect: Adjaye Associates Client: Linda Pace Foundation Structural Engineer: Guy Nordenson and Associates Lighting Consultant: Tillotson Design Associates Mechanical Engineer: WSP Landscape: Madrone Landscape Facade Consultant: WJE-Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc Project Manager: Norton Company Cost Consultant: Whiting Turner

CLIMATE San Antonio has a subtropical climate, meaning this location has very hot and humid summers and moderate winters. In the summer, temperatures can reach above a hundred degrees. In the winter, temperatures average about 50-60 degrees. Precipitation levels are about 32 inches a year, which is also very moderate. Snow is very uncommon in this climate. Ruby City Contemporary Arts Center is largely a mass without windows. Strategically placed “lanterns” break up the roof line and provide views to the surrounding city of San Antonio. Additionally, skylights bring more light into the gallery spaces. These angled and strategically placed windows were influenced by the hot climate of this location. In the summer months, a building with a facade with many windows would be unbearable.

FORM As a whole, the contemporary art center was designed to resemble an angular polished rock within the broader landscape. To address the transition into the building, the solid form is sheared at human level to allow for human scale interaction. In terms of materiality and facade, the Ruby City Contemporary Art Center was built in extension of an existing park, Chris Park, and open exhibition space, Studio. It's large green plaza space resembles closely with the green landscape of the existing Chris Park. Besides the art center, there are also condos in the Camp Street Residences building. The red-finished precast concrete facade of the art center resembles closely to the brick facade of the condominium tower.

CONTEXT This project is located in San Antonio, Texas, less than two miles from the downtown area. With a population of around 1.5 million, it is a pretty urban area with a lot to do within walking distance. Located just 1.5 miles away is The Alamo, a historical mission and cultural icon. With downtown so close, Ruby City does face some traffic during peak hours, especially on the S Panam Expressway which is located directly west of the site.

SPACE The Ruby City building is a realtively small museum, with the grond floor serving primarily as admin space, and the second floor as the gallery space. When you enter on the ground floor there is the lobby and stairs that lead up to the art loop of the second floor.

SECOND FLOOR

GALLERY SPACE

GROUND FLOOR

LOBBY ADMIN MECHANICAL

SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0” 5

SKIN The exterior skin of the Ruby Contemporary Arts Center is pre-cast concrete that was fabricated in Mexico City. This concrete was then colored red to match the surrounding San Antonio Architecture. For the first ten feet, the concrete was polishes as to make it more approachable for the human scale. Above this initial ten feet, the concrete is rough and sharp. Various hues of red glass were encrusted into the wall to add even more texture to this building skin. The overall goal was to create an angular, rough, almost rock like structure that was altered only at the level where human interaction is possible. The contrast between textures is one of the many iconic mentions of Ruby City.

STRUCTURE The Ruby City building is based on a relatively regular grid system. With a few deviation from the grid occurring at each cantilevered end as well as near the atrium. Aside from these minor detours, the grid itself remains regular throughout the rest of the structure, aiding in the support of the massive concrete exterior.

BEAMS COLUMNS FOUNDATION

CIRCULATION • What is the experience of arriving, entering and moving through the building? When arriving at Ruby City guests are welcomed by polished concrete and extruded cantilevers. The entrance sequence on either side of the gallery includes massive overhangs that serve as both a shading device and a tunnel that pulls visitors into the building. On the northern side of the structure the entry sequence is public whereas the opposing entrance seems to be a more private staff entrance. • Where is the entrance / lobby and does it serve its intended purpose? The entrance is along a street corner and seems to serve its purpose well. With the lobby located directly inside, the sequence itself appears to flow nice and work well with the surrounding area. In plan the lobby seems a bit on the smaller side, but for the size of the building it seems to work well. • How do vertical circulation (ramps, escalators, open communicating stairs, elevators) connect to horizontal circulation (corridors, aisles in open plans) to create a circulation network? The stairs seemed to be an afterthought within Ruby City. With two staircases located in an almost identical space, it looks as though they were only placed there as a means of egress. The more interior staircase leads from the lobby straight into the second-floor gallery whereas the more exterior based stair is located along the atrium on the northeastern side of the building. The elevator however was placed right in the center of the structure with direct access to the reception area and upper floor galleries.

FOUNDATION Not much information about the foundation of the Ruby City Contemporary Art Center can be found; however, the building is made up of precast concrete. Based off of that, and the available information, it can be inferred that the foundation is mostly likely also a concrete base.

CIRCULATION & SYSTEMS The Ruby Center contains a central elevator that acts as a second mode of transport. In addition to the elevator, two stairs that double as a means of egress are located on the outer rim of the structure.

STAIR BATHROOM

BEAMS

PLUMING

COLUMNS

ELEVATOR

FOUNDATION

EGRESS How do the three elements of egress (exit access, exit, and exit discharge) work together to allow people to safely move from a remote space to the public way (such as the sidewalk). Does this system overlap with the more experiential version of the circulation system or is separate entirely? This building has one main entrance/exit with a lobby space. The entryway has a large overhang that creates a sheltered, yet open entryway that is inviting to the passing public. This overhangs makes the building feel safe and approachable for visitors. We were surprised to see there are only two sets of stairs, both on the same corner of the building. These stairs do create a sculptural mass on the outside. This egress is integrated into the mass. STRUCTURE The Ruby City Contemporary Center utilizes a concrete structural system. A series of concrete columns are used for vertical support and provide the majority of resistance from gravity loads. A couple of load-bearing walls are also utilized to provide support from gravity loads. To resist lateral loads, few shear walls are implemented. The primary sturctural system is a reinforced concrete structural system with a secondary system composed of precast concrete panels with a red hue.

REFLECTION In completing the BAP we learned how to analyze a building structure in a thoughtful and critical way. Within this project we were able to explore how a precedent was conceptualized, assembled, and utilized. We began the project by digging into the background of the structure, including the design inspiration, architect, and firm that was responsible for its development. We then looked outside the box, literally, by examining the skin and surrounding site. We learned that our particular project was enveloped in a manner that took the human scale into consideration. We then moved inside the structure and began to pull apart mechanical, structural, and plumbing systems. We discovered how the project was assembled and how it would be experienced. When we looked at the experience of the building, we focused on circulation, egress, and program layout. Overall, we were able to gather a good bit of information that helped us to fully understand the outer and inner workings of the project. The biggest takeaway for our group was the method of analysis we learned and used during this project. We know that this is something we can carry with us in our education and professional careers to better understand buildings and design.

SOURCES https://houston.culturemap.com/news/travel/10-03-19-ruby-cityopening-date -october-13-information-new-exhibition-sebastianmexican-artist-san-antonio/ https://www.rubycity.org/about/ https://www.adjaye.com/who-we-are/firm-profile/

Emotion Above Design Architecture is the art or practice of designing and constructing buildings, or is it? Shouldn’t architecture be more about the people and communities we are designing for rather than the buildings themselves? Isn’t the informal definition of architecture to build for the people? It often feels as though we no longer design with the intention of making inhabitants feel something, but rather to make ourselves feel something. Accomplishment. Pride. Arrogance. Prestige. Relief. Whatever feeling we are desperately searching for is directly reflected in our work. We have become so chained to our digital renderings and schematic works that we have forgotten the why behind designing in the first place. We began designing for the sake of breaking world records or ending up as the latest feature on an accredited blog. This pandemic within the architectural community has caused the scale between innovative architecture and designing to improve human life to drastically tip. Resulting in a complete disregard directed at the people we are designing for. As a whole, our intentions are easily lost in the world of design. Covered by literal facades that are meant to please the eye of the public, however, it is more than the eye of the public we are meant to please. Sure, we can design for aesthetics, structure, comfort, and use, but we must remember to design for the impact as well. This impact often comes in the form of an experience, memory, or feeling that is cultivated within the built environment. At least in the beginning, when inhabitants occupy a space that is all it is. A space. I believe that architects often forget that they do not produce a finished design, but rather a space in which the user can inhabit and personalize. This space is shaped by its occupants over time. Sometimes all at once in a frenzy of moving boxes and specially placed furniture. Other times the personalization of a space happens over time, such as the measure of height on a doorframe or the slow collection of frames adorning walls. The responsibility to create a space in which users can successfully modify and individualize their surroundings is crucial to the success of an architect. Often times we leave clients in the dark about the design decisions that are being made and instead choose to only involve them when we come to critical crossroads. Why do we as the designer, get to decide the limits of a client’s involvement? Who are we to say what decisions fall under which level of urgency? Whether the client is a single person or a whole community, who gave us the right as the employee to control the involvement of the employer? It is imperative to the future success of the design community that we facilitate an atmosphere of open communication between client and architect. We must be able to design alongside the client. After all the built environment is not created as an artifact to be displayed upon a pedestal, but rather it is meant to be inhabited by tens, hundreds, if not thousands of community members. We are designing for the client, with the client. It is this sense of figurative community that leads to the proper design, development, and distribution of physical communities. We must find our sense of community if we ever wish to design a successful one. The architectural field is stuck in an identity crisis. We have forgotten why we design. We have settled for creating these cookie cutter structures that follow the rules of architecture. Rules that are created to keep us focused on the logistics of creativity. Rules that keep us obsessing over the feasibility of design. This is not to say that we should throw all rules away and jump into creative anarchy. But who’s to say we have to follow each and every rule in the design community. Why build something empty and barren when we have the power to evoke emotion through design? Is it fear of criticism that has left us spiraling the same drain? Or perhaps we have accepted that if something is not broken, no attempt should be made to fix it. Again, this is not to say that the industry is broken. It has proven quite the opposite. I only wonder, when did we stop designing to enhance the human experience, when did feeling and designing become disconnected?

I think, for many reasons, I am drawn to more “dated” spaces. Before modern technology it seemed as though people, designers in specific, were so driven by the desire to express emption within their creations. Every space was a passion project, filled with emotion and constructed with determination. This determination to create something that would draw people in, welcome them, perhaps even become a part of their routine. Cathedrals and monuments were constructed to display a feeling. Spiritual. Powerful. Holy. Loving. All feelings that designers knew they could evoke through something as simple as stone. We know that by using light, materials, color, sounds, and even texture, spaces have the ability to emit emotions. So why do we not focus on this? Why do we spend our time building these grand structures without considering how they truly make occupants feel? I believe one of the most important questions to ask ourselves as we design is, what emotions are we evoking within occupants who experience our design? We know we can design spaces that convey a feeling, this is not some hidden secret. So why don’t we? I guess with all this being said, my concern lies with the occupant. These spaces may stay in our sketchbooks for months, on our minds for years, but they stay with the inhabitants for life. Our designs integrate themselves into communities, create new tourist attractions, become homes for generations to come. It is imperative that we design as such. We design knowing that the occupants of these spaces have feelings. They have lives that are to be lived in these very structures we create. Without space, there is no structure to a community. Without the inhabitant our communities remain barren. Through design we can strengthen a community, but we cannot do this without a community itself. These two forces work hand in hand. One cannot exist independent of the other. After all, the built environment provides context for experience.

SEATTLE SPHERES s e a t t l e

s p h e r e s

DESIGN TEAM | NBBJ ARCHITECTS LOCATION | 211 7TH AVE, SEATTLE, WA 98121 YEAR BUILT | 2018 SCOPE | 721,182 FT2

The building aims to foster engagement in an urban setting. The domes create a formation of buildings, plazas and open public spaces that intertwine within the existing metropolitan landscape. With green walls, waterfalls, and tranquil workspaces; the structure acts as a central hub for gatherings within the community. The plants that inhabit the space spur from over 400 different species and come out to a count of around 40,000 full time green residents within the spheres. The domes are a welcome sight in the overly urbanized landscape.

GREENHOUSE AS A HOME g r e e n h o u s e

DESIGN TEAM | BIAS ARCHITECTS LOCATION | XINWU DISTRICT, TAIWAN YEAR BUILT | 2018 SCOPE | 3,616 FT2

a s

h o m e

Using artificial control of the climate, the Greenhouse as a Home structure can produce products that can then be severed directly to community members. BIAS challenged themselves to engage the climate directly and shape the building in such a way that the environment was reflected on the interior while remaining sustainable. Human living space is then threaded through this greenhouse in a way to create harmonious eco-based living.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION - ROOTS

aspirational intent | to facilitate a place of community within the presence of many; ultimately creating a space for collective gathering, self-nourishment, and the cultivation of engagement

EXPERIENTIAL NARRATIVE

food insecurity has been plaguing our communities since before the Great Depression, affecting the lives of over 38.3 million people. college students account for a hearty percentage of these millions, around 39% of college students say they are food insecure with this number becoming 1.7 times more likely among those who have COVID. the increase in food insecurity is partially due to the growing prevalence of food deserts, but factors such as social determinates, poor access to transportation, and low-income areas only add to the strain on food related resources. social determinants including access to transportation, markets, produce, and healthcare all play into the development of food deserts. furthermore, communities that are located within food deserts are experiencing increasing cases of chronic diseases. these chronic diseases are directly tied to low consumption rates of vegetables and fruits and include patients experiencing Alzheimer’s, arthritis, asthma, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and impacts on mental health. there is no lack of evidence pointing towards the ever-growing presence of food insecurity, leading us to ask a very important question. how might we begin to address the underlying causes of food deserts so that we might move towards a sense of

security

within our communities?

PRECEDENT GREENHOUSE AS A HOME INSTALLATION

DESIGN TEAM | BIAS ARCHITECTS LOCATION | XINWU DISTRICT, TAIWAN YEAR BUILT | 2018 SCOPE | 3,616 FT2

SITE PLAN EXISTING BUILDINGS EXISTING STREETS PROPOSED CAMPUS BUILDINGS PROPOSED LANDSCAPING OPEN LAWNS / COURTYARDS PROPOSED BIKE PATHS PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PATHS

located in the urban environment of Logan Heights, the proposed site plants itself among an ever developing city landscape. the primary goal when conceptually developing site plan is to create an easement within the increasingly urban surroundings of San Diego. with a large courtyard located at the center of the building structure, community members and occupants of the school are encouraged to interact. the addition of a semi-natural landscape is much needed in the built environment that overtakes each parcel. the ground floor is meant to serve the community; featuring a communal kitchen, lounge space, and garden space for public use.

LOUNGE 5

ELEVATOR TOWER 2 4' - 0"

EGRESS

TOWER

EGRESS

TOWER

CAFE 6

LAVATORY 4

SECONDARY PROPOSED SITE

PERFORMANCE METRICS $

RESULTS Target EUI is 27 based on a 80% reduction

& * BASELINE 132 EUI 100 Zero Score

& *

TARGET 27 EUI 20 Zero Score 100

BUILDING SUMMARY

LOCATION

San Diego, CA

92113

USES

College / University

100,000 sq.ft (100.0%)

BASELINE

TARGET

YOUR BUILDING

EUI % Reduction from Baseline

80%

N/A

Zero Score

100

N/A

Site EUI (kBtu/ft²/yr)

132

N/A

Source EUI (kBtu/ft²/yr)

263

N/A

Total GHG Emissions (metric tons CO₂e/yr)

870

174

N/A

RESULTS &

imperial

GOALS

metric

print %

ACTUAL

CONCEPTUAL MASSING massing concept for initial master plan the master plan was developed using typical building typologies that were further varied to compliment the existing site. within each parcel a smaller portion of the site was selected as a potential location for the development of group members individual buildings

MASS GLASS + FORM ITERATION

SITE CONTEXT

BUILDING PROGRAM PROGRAM SUMMARY INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE

FACULTY OFFICE

STUDENT COLLABORATION

VISITING SCHOLARS

MOONSHOT SHARED RESOURCES

SCHOLARS HOUSING EDUCATION

COLLABORATION

INITIAL

MOONSHOT

ADMIN

EDUCA TION IN

RS H

OUS

ING

D SPAC

E MOONSHOT

MOONSHOT

OLA

EDUCATION

SCH

RESOURCES

REWORKED

CONCEPTUAL FLOOR PLANS ELEVATOR TOWER 2

EGRESS TOWER 1

LOUNGE 5

FACULTY OFFICES + LOUNGE 35

ROOFTOP GARDEN 4' - 0"

KITCHEN SPACE 37

LAVTORY 36

EGRESS TOWER 3 -

CAFE 6

FLOOR 00

FLOOR 04

KITCHEN 33

ROOFTOP CAFE + GARDEN 34

LAVATORY 4

DIDACTIC CLASSROOM

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM

43 SCHOLARS HOUSING + LOUNGE 9

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM 14

LAVATORY 42

DIDACTIC CLASSROOM

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM 7

GARDEN SPACE 10

FLOOR 01

FLOOR 05

ROOFTOP GARDEN 40

GARDEN SPACE 11

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM 31

STUDY LOUNGE 39

SCHOLARS HOUSING + LOUNGE 32

Room 23

LAVATORY 30

DIDACTIC CLASSROOM 25

FLEXIBLE CLASSROOM 22

KITCHEN 19

FLOOR 02 + 03

GREENROOM 21

FLOOR 06

GREENROOM 18

KITCHEN 20

INTERIOR VIGNETTES

EXTERIOR VIGNETTES

LIGHT

PENTAGON COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON ARCHITECTS

1676 INTERNATIONAL BLVD PERKINS + WILL

WATER VILLA FRAMEWORK ARCHITECTS

METAL

WOOD

GLASS

SYSTEM

DENSITY

SECTION

JOINT VENTURE STACEY WHITE DOUBLE QUARTER 2022

RASHMI PRADHAN KENZIE PELLETIER

https://printclublondon.com/shop/greenhouse-cacti/

PROJECT PRECEDENTS PROJECT NAME: PASONA OFFICES ARCHITECT: KONO DESIGN LOCATION: TOKYO YEAR: 2005

PROJECT NAME: THE NEW CHILDREN’S MUSEUM LOCATION: SAN DIEGO ARCHITECT: ROB QUIGLEY ARCHITECTS YEAR: 2007

(PROJECT PROGRAM)

PROJECT NAME: ROY AND DIANA VAGELOS EDUCATION CENTER ARCHITECT: DILLER SCOFIDIO + RENFRO LOCATION: NEW YORK YEAR: 2016

PROJECT NAME: GROWING PAVILLION ARCHITECT: BIO BASED CREATIONS LOCATION: AMSTERDAM YEAR: 2019

(EXTERIOR AESTHETIC)

BASIS OF DESIGN Studio ARK

Rashmi Pradhan + Kenzie Pelletier ARCH 353 / Studio White Spring 2022

PROJECT + PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS Project + Program Code Analysis Thermal and Ventilation Systems Sizing Plumbing Systems Sizing Energy Consumption

00 00 00 00 00

Sobremesa

The aspirational intent of is to facilitate community within the presence of many; ultimately creating a hub for collective gathering and the cultivation of engagement through living spaces. Utilizing the idea of food as an informal facilitator of expression and connection, this multi-use building aims to serve as the community center of Cal Western Law School’s newly proposed campus.

PROJECT + PROGRAM CONT. POPULATION SERVED

The Sobremesa Center aims to serve the network of communities it intersects; including but not limited to: the law students attending Cal Western, residents of Logan Heights and Barrio Logan, scholars visiting the university, and members of the community experiencing housing uncertainty. A common theme linking these groups together is found in the populations relationship with food. Food insecurity has been plaguing our communities since before the Great Depression, affecting the lives of over 38.3 million people. Within those millions, about 39% of college students say they are food insecure with this number becoming 1.7 times more likely among those who have COVID. The increase in food insecurity is partially due to the growing prevalence of food deserts, but factors such as social determinates, poor access to transportation, and low-income areas only add to the strain on food related resources. Social determinants including access to transportation, markets, produce, and healthcare all play into the development of food deserts. furthermore, communities that are located within food deserts are experiencing increasing cases of chronic diseases. These chronic diseases are directly tied to low consumption rates of vegetables and fruits and include patients experiencing Alzheimer’s, arthritis, asthma, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and impacts on mental health. There is no lack of evidence pointing towards the ever-growing presence of food insecurity, leading us to ask a very important question:

How might we begin to address the underlying causes of food insecurity through functionally designed spaces meant to better serve the surrounding populations?

PROJECT + PROGRAM CONT. PROJECT GOALS

How might we

bridge the gap between Cal Western students and local residents?

How might we

encourage the building of a common community?

How might we

create a unique living experience for building users?

How might we

plan and create spaces centered around functional biophilic design?

PROJECT PURPOSE Sobremesa attempts to be a multi-faceted organism on Cal Western’s campus that improves the quality of life of its many communities through biophilic design and food-centered spaces. These are especially important when considering the law school population of students, faculty, and visiting scholars, all of whom devote their careers to serving others, tending to isolate themselves along the way. Sobremesa asks them to consciously engage in sustainable processes and care for themselves through hollistic immersion in farmto-table practices. Using food as a facilitator of social connection, the project cultivates community engagement in the long term while providing immediate health to its occupants. Sobremesa serves the law school as the law school serves the people. The farm-to-table process is embodied through every inch of the building. Greenhouses climb up the building, growing fruits and vegetables that are cared for by volunteers. In addition to productive biophilia, living walls and plant spaces provide mental health benefits and purified air to occupants. Food travels out of the greenhouses into community spaces of various privacies. More private areas include the Community Kitchens in upperlevel visitor apartments encourage the sharing of conversations amongst visiting scholars over a common dinner table. Public spaces like the ground-floor Market serve the larger campus community as well as the residential community of Logan Heights and Barrio Logan. The Market and adjacent Pantry Fill address the issue of food insecurity by creating proximity to fresh produce within the food desert. The food produced in the building makes its way to users at multiple points, allowing the building to directly contribute to the health of its occupants. By providing on-campus access and visibility to food and health programs, Sobremesa intends to create community connections in Cal Western Law’s newly proposed campus and encourage greater quality of life in Logan Heights.

ROOM LIST SPACE

OCCUPANCY TYPE

TOTAL SF

PUBLIC SERVED ZONE MUSHROOM THEATER THEATER LOBBY MECHANICAL SUPPORT SHARED RESOURCES CONFERENCE ROOMS WORKROOM LOUNGE CAFÉ SEATING CAFÉ KITCHEN PRINT N COPY CIRCULATION LOBBIES

A2 AND B A2 A2 S

EDUCATIONAL ZONE ADMINISTRATIVE SUBZONE RECEPTION DEANS OFFICE ASSOCIATE DEANS OFFICES STAFF OFFICES FACULTY WORK SUBZONE FLEX OFFICES TOUCHDOWN WORK AREA CAREER CENTER RECEPTION JOB ADVISING STUDENT SUCCESS ZONE TOUCHDOWN WORK AREA ACADEMIC SUPPORT NETWORK

12,015

B B B B

1,050 300 480 405

B B B B B

3,480 1,400 520 160 320

B B

2,100 1,800

VISITING SCHOLARS ZONE HOUSING ZONE SINGLE BEDROOM DOUBLE BEDROOM TRIPLE BEDROOM COMMUNITY ZONE LOUNGE AND WORKROOM COMMUNITY KITCHEN ATRIUM

A2 AND R2

MOONSHOT GREENHOUSE ZONE AQUAPONICS HYDROPONICS / AEROPONICS COMMUNITY ZONE COMMUNITY KITCHEN FARM TO TABLE DINING FARM TO TABLE KITCHEN ENTRY LOBBY MARKET SPACE PANTRY FILL GRAB N GO FOOD STORAGE

A2 AND B

SUBTOTAL (ASF) TOTAL (GSF)

B B (IF O.L. IS < 50) B B B B

13,370 2,080 1,260 830 2,100 900 1,490 1,200 540 2,970

30,850

R2 R2 R2

5,880 2,040 4,400

A2 A2 A2

9,700 8,400 430 12,525

B B

270 5,250

A2 A2 A2 A2 B B B S-2

670 1,500 550 420 1,400 1,500 350 615 68,760 114,600

PROJECT + PROGRAM CONT. TEST FITS

ADJACENCY

LIVING SPACES (MOONSHOT) RESIDENTIAL (VISITING SCHOLARS) STUDENT SUPPORT FACULTY / ADMINISTRATION EGRESS CORE (SHAFTS, RESTROOMS)

CODE ANALYSIS NATIONAL BUILDING

OCCUPANCY TYPE B MIXED USE: A-2 25,010 ASF B 29,985 ASF R-2 24,640 ASF S-2 615 ASF DOMINANT OCCUPANCY: B

OCCUPANT LOAD TOTAL: 1485 persons (REFERENCE ADJACENT TABLE FOR BREAKDOWN BY FLOOR AND SPACE)

GROUNDFLOOR PICK N' GRAB GREENHOUSE MARKET GRAB N GO COMMUNITY KITCHEN FOOD STORE ROOM ACADEMIC SUPPORT NETWORK SUPPORT SPACE

OCCUPANCY TYPE A2 AND B A2 A2 A2 B S2 B

OLF 60 60 60 200 300 200

TOTAL FLOOR 01 PANTRY FILL CAFE SEATING CAREER CENTER + RECEPTION JOB ADVISING CONFERENCE ROOM LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

A2 AND B A2 A2 B B B A2

FLOOR 02 CAFE OUTDOOR SEATING CAFE KITCHEN STUDENT TOUCHDOWN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

A2 AND B A2 B B A2

FLOOR 03 GREENHOUSE SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (2) MEDIUM CONFERENCE ROOM (1) LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

A2 AND B A2 B B B

FLOOR 04 STUDENT TOUCHDOWN PRINT N' COPY LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE

B B B B

60 20 150 150 150 5

20 200 150 5

60 150 150 5

200 200 5

TOTAL

EGRESS 2 PATHS OF EGRESS PER BUILDING STAIRWAY WIDTH: 48” min. EXIT ACCESS WIDTH: 48” min.

FLOOR 05 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2

FLOOR 06 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 07 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 08 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 09 TOTAL ROOF AREA

ROOF

SQUARE FOOTAGE NATIONAL (ASF) SQUARE FOOTAGE NATIONAL (GSF) OCCUPANCY NATIONAL (GROSS) CALCULATED EGRESS (INCHES) ACTUAL EGRESS (INCHES) TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE (ASF) TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE (GSF) TOTAL OCCUPANCY (GROSS)

NOT INCLUDING ROOF

200 200 200 5

200 200 200 200 5

8,260

NATIONAL TOTAL ASF

NATIONAL O.L.

270 1,400 350 670 615 1,800

5 23 6 3 2 9

5,105

1,500 745 680 320 400 200

25 37 5 2 3 40

3,845

112

745 1,200 1,050 200

37 6 7 40

3,195

800 480 400 200

13 3 3 40

1,880

1,050 540 200

5 3 40

1,790

1,000 1,100 840 200

5 6 4 40

3,140

1,000 1,100 840 1,200 200

5 6 4 6 40

4,340

1,000 1,100 840 1,200 200

5 6 4 6 40

4,340

1,000 1,100 840 1,200 200

5 6 4 6 40

4,340

MINIMUM EGRESS MINIMUM EGRESS MAX PATH OF EGRESS # OF EXITS WIDTH (in) STAIRWAY WIDTH (in) TRAVEL DISTANCE (ft) 75 75 75 100 75 100

100 100 100 100 100 100 22

67,860 113,100

594

1485

125 125 125 125 11

22 48

33 / 3 = 11 48

FLOOR 02 GREENHOUSE (TRADITIONAL) GREENHOUSE (ROOT AND BULB) FACULTY TOUCHDOWN SUPPORT SPACE

A2 AND B A2 A2 B

FLOOR 03 FACULTY LOUNGE FACULTY OFFICES (12) SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (1) SUPPORT SPACE

B B B B

FLOOR 04 GREENHOUSE (CONTROLLED) FACULTY LOUNGE LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM (1) DEANS OFFICES ADMIN OFFICES (4) SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

A2 AND B A2 B B B B

FLOOR 05 FACULTY LOUNGE FACULTY OFFICES (12) SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (1) SUPPORT SPACE

B B B B

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 06 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL FLOOR 07 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 08 VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

R2 AND A2 R2 R2 R2 A2 A2

FLOOR 09

ROOF

SQUARE FOOTAGE NEWTON (ASF) SQUARE FOOTAGE NEWTON (GSF) OCCUPANCY NEWTON (GROSS) CALCULATED EGRESS (INCHES) ACTUAL EGRESS (INCHES)

NOT INCLUDING ROOF

125 125 125 75 75 12

A2 AND B A2 S2 A2

TOTAL

125 125 125 125 125 12

FLOOR 01 GREENHOUSE (TRADITIONAL) FOOD STORE ROOM FARM TO TABLE SEATING SUPPORT SPACE

125 125 125 125 125 12

A2 AND B A2 A2 A2 A2 S2 A2 A2

NEWTON TOTAL ASF

NEWTON O.L.

60 60 5 200 300 5 15 300

270 800 420 550 500 1,260 2,080 830 6,710

5 13 84 3 2 252 139 3 500

60 300 20

1,200 500 1,500

20 2 75

3,200

750 1,000 1,400

13 17 9

3,150

900 1,740 720

6 12 5

3,360

700 900 510 1,830 405

12 6 3 12 3

4,345

900 1,740 720

6 12 5

3,360

1,000 680 840 1,200 200

5 3 4 6 40

3,920

1,000 680 840 1,200 200

5 3 4 6 40

3,920

1,000 680 840 1,200 200

5 3 4 6 40

3,920

60 60 150

150 150 150

TOTAL

100 100 100

GROUNDFLOOR AQUAPONICS GREENHOUSE (SERVES DINING) RESTURANT LOBBY KITCHEN (PRIVATE) FOOD STORE ROOM ENTRY LOBBY MUSHROOM THEATER SUPPORT SPACE TOTAL

OLF

TOTAL

100 100 100 100 12

OCCUPANCY TYPE

TOTAL

100 100 100 100

4,340

31,975 53,292

NEWTON BUILDING

60 150 150 150 150

150 150 150

200 200 200 200 5

MINIMUM EGRESS MINIMUM MAX PATH OF EGRESS # OF EXITS WIDTH (in) EGRESS WIDTH TRAVEL DISTANCE (ft) 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 100

150

1 1 2

3,920

35,885 59,808

891

100 / 3 = 34 48

125 125 125 125 125

1 1 1 1 1 12

125 125 125 125 125

1 1 1 1 1 12

100 100 100

1 1 1 1 1 12

100 100 100 100 100

1 1 1

100 100 100

1 1 1 1 1 7

75 75 100

1 1 1

75 75 75

1 1 1

75 75 75 75 75 75 75

150 (first floor, N/A) 48

125 125 125 75 75

CODE ANALYSIS CONT. SITE BOUNDARY

58 '-

27 /3 2"

COMMERCIAL ST.

-0

99' - 8"

90' - 0"

-0

48' - 9 7/16"

18' - 4 31/32"

-0

15 1

-6

-0

32 "

" 5

31 '-

-1

9/ 32

CODE ANALYSIS CONT. SPACE

CONSTRUCTION TYPE 1B CONCRETE & STEEL The primary structural system for the building will be steel, with core elements (shafts, restrooms, egress) comprised of concrete bearing walls that extend to the upper floors. The emphasis on non-combustible materials is important to mitigate risks caused by the increased amount of machinery present in our building. This construction also allows us maximum flexibility with facade decisions and connects with the steel-glass greenhouse typology.

ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA: UNLIMITED MAX HEIGHT: 180’ MAX NUMBER OF STORIES: 12

OCCUPANCY TYPE

PUBLIC SERVED ZONE MUSHROOM THEATER THEATER LOBBY MECHANICAL SUPPORT SHARED RESOURCES CONFERENCE ROOMS WORKROOM LOUNGE CAFÉ SEATING CAFÉ KITCHEN PRINT N COPY CIRCULATION LOBBIES

A2 AND B A2 A2 S

VISITING SCHOLARS ZONE HOUSING ZONE SINGLE BEDROOM DOUBLE BEDROOM TRIPLE BEDROOM COMMUNITY ZONE LOUNGE AND WORKROOM COMMUNITY KITCHEN ATRIUM

A2 AND R2

MOONSHOT GREENHOUSE ZONE AQUAPONICS HYDROPONICS / AEROPONICS COMMUNITY ZONE COMMUNITY KITCHEN FARM TO TABLE DINING FARM TO TABLE KITCHEN ENTRY LOBBY MARKET SPACE PANTRY FILL GRAB N GO FOOD STORAGE

A2 AND B

SUBTOTAL (ASF) TOTAL (GSF)

B B (IF O.L. IS < 50) B B B B

TOTAL ASF

CONSTRUCTION TYPES ALLOWED

13,370 TYPE IB, TYPE IVA, TYPE IVB 2,080 IB - CONCRETE AND STEEL 1,260 IVA - HEAVY TIMBER 830 IVB - HEAVY TIMBER

CON. TYPE SELECTED IB - CONCRETE AND STEEL

ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA

ALLOWABLE HEIGHT

ALLOWABLE STORIES

UL A2 - UL B - UL

180' A2 - 180' ABV.GRADE B - 180' ABV.GRADE

12 A2 - 12 ABV.GRADE B - 12 ABV.GRADE

UL B - UL

180' B - 180' ABV.GRADE

12 B - 12 ABV.GRADE

UL A2 - UL R2 - UL

180' A2 - 180' ABV.GRADE R2 - 180' ABV.GRADE

12 A2 - 12 ABV.GRADE R2 - 12 ABV.GRADE

UL A2 - UL B - UL

180' A2 - 180' ABV.GRADE B - 180' ABV.GRADE

12 A2 - 12 ABV.GRADE B - 12 ABV.GRADE

2,100 900 1,490 1,200 540 2,970 12,015 TYPE IB, TYPE IVA, TYPE IVB

B B B B

1,050 300 480 405

B B B B B

3,480 1,400 520 160 320

B B

2,100 1,800 30,850 TYPE IB, TYPE IVA, TYPE IVB

R2 R2 R2

5,880 2,040 4,400

A2 A2 A2

9,700 8,400 430 12,525 TYPE IB, TYPE IVA, TYPE IVB

B B

270 5,250

A2 A2 A2 A2 B B B S-2

670 1,500 550 420 1,400 1,500 350 615 68,760 114,600

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS NATIONAL BUILDING SF ALLOCATION

HYBRID AIR-HYDRONIC SYSTEM

AIR

AIR: HIGH EFFICIENCY VAV HYDRONIC: CHILLED BEAMS + RADIANT HEATING (OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL/GREENHOUSE)

CENTRAL PLANT EQUIPMENT: BOILER / CHILLER ROOM COOLING TOWER

15,000 SF 2,000 SF TOTAL ASF BOILER / CHILLER ROOM* COOLING TOWER* AIR HANDLING UNIT (AHU) MAIN SUPPLY + RETURN FRSH AIR LOUVER INTAKE EXHAUST AIR LOUVER EQUIPMENT TYPE

DISTRIBUTION SIZING: (REFERENCE ADJACENT TABLE FOR SIZING OF OTHER MECHANICAL COMPONENTS)

NEWTO

SYSTEM: HYBRID FLOOR G G G G G 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 8

OCCUPANCY A2 A2 A2 B B A2 A2 B A2 A2 B A2 A2 B B A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2

HIGH EFFICIENCY VAV

SPACE PICK N' GRAB GREENHOUSE MARKET GRAB N GO COMMUNITY KITCHEN FOOD STORE ROOM PANTRY FILL CAFE SEATING CONFERENCE ROOM LOBBY CAFE OUTDOOR SEATING CAFE KITCHEN LOBBY GREENHOUSE SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (2) MEDIUM CONFERENCE ROOM (1) LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY COMMUNITY KITCHEN LOBBY COMMUNITY KITCHEN

ASF

HYDRONIC 270 1400 350 670 615 1500 745 400 200 745 1,200 200 800 480 400 200 200 200 1200 200 1200 200 1200 14,575 750 16 65 52

FLOOR G

1 1 2 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 8

OCCUPANCY B B B B B B R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2

SPACE ACADEMIC SUPPORT NETWORK CAREER CENTER + RECEPTION JOB ADVISING STUDENT TOUCHDOWN STUDENT TOUCHDOWN PRINT N' COPY VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2) VISITING SCHOLARS COMMON ROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT (1) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2)

ASF

SF ALLOCAT 1,800 680 320 1,050 1,050 540 1,000 1,100 840 1,000 1,100 840 1,000 1,100 840 1,000 1,100 840

17,200 15,000 2,000 -

BOILER / CH COOLING T AIR HANDL MAIN SUPP FRSH AIR LO EXHAUST A EQUIPMEN

*PLANT SIZING BASED ON TOTAL CAMPUS SF (785,000)

DUCT SIZE (AIR) BETWEEN: 48” x 48” (ESTIMATE FOR A 20,000 SF BUILDING) 114” x 120” (ESTIMATE FOR A 1,000,000 NATIONALNATIONAL BUILDING BUILDING SYSTEM: HYBRID SYSTEM: HYBRID SF BUILDING) PIPE SIZE (WATER)

SF ALLOCATION SF ALLOCATION

AIR

AIR FLOOR G G G G G 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 8

NATIONAL NATIONAL NATIONAL NEWTON BUILDING BUILDING NEWTON BUILDING BUILDINGBUILDING SYSTEM: SYSTEM: SYSTEM: SYSTEM: HYBRID HYBRID HYBRID SYSTEM: HYBRID HYBRID

HYDRONICHYDRONIC OCCUPANCY FLOOR OCCUPANCY SPACE SPACE ASF ASF FLOOR A2 G A2 PICK N' GRAB PICKGREENHOUSE N' GRAB GREENHOUSE 270 270 G A2 G A2 MARKET MARKET 1400 1400 1 A2 G A2 GRAB N GO GRAB N GO 350 350 1 B G B COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN 670 670 2 B G B FOOD STORE FOOD ROOM STORE ROOM 615 615 4 A2 1 A2 PANTRY FILL PANTRY FILL 1500 1500 4 A2 1 A2 CAFE SEATING CAFE SEATING 745 745 5 B 1 B CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ROOM ROOM 400 400 5 A2 2 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 5 A2 2 A2 CAFE OUTDOOR CAFE OUTDOOR SEATING SEATING 745 745 6 B 2 B CAFE KITCHEN CAFE KITCHEN 1,200 1,200 6 A2 3 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 6 A2 3 A2 GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE 800 800 7 B 3 B SMALL CONFERENCE SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (2)ROOM (2) 480 480 7 B 3 B MEDIUM CONFERENCE MEDIUM CONFERENCE ROOM (1)ROOM (1) 400 400 7 A2 4 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 8 A2 5 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 8 A2 6 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 8 A2 6 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN 1200 1200 A2 7 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 A2 7 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN 1200 1200 A2 8 A2 LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 A2 8 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN 1200 1200 14,575 14,575

2” (ESTIMATE FOR A 20,000 SF BUILDING) 6” (ESTIMATE FOR A 1,000,000 SF BUILDING)

NOTE: ADD VENT SHAFTS AT PERIMETER AND CORE TO DECREASE DUCT SIZES

TOTAL ASFTOTAL ASF

BOILER / CHILLER BOILER /ROOM* CHILLER ROOM* COOLING COOLING TOWER* TOWER* AIR HANDLING AIR HANDLING UNIT (AHU) UNIT (AHU) MAIN SUPPLY MAIN+ SUPPLY RETURN+ RETURN FRSH AIR LOUVER FRSH AIRINTAKE LOUVER INTAKE EXHAUST EXHAUST AIR LOUVER AIR LOUVER EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT TYPE TYPE HIGH EFFICIENCY HIGH EFFICIENCY VAV VAV *PLANT SIZING *PLANT BASED SIZING ONBASED TOTALON CAMPUS TOTAL SF CAMPUS (785,000) SF (785,000)

750 16 65 52

NEWTON NEWTON NEWTO

SF SFALLOCATION SF ALLOCATION SF ALLOCATION ALLOCATION SF ALLOCATION AIR AIR AIR AIR OCCUPANCY FLOOR OCCUPANCY SPACE SPACE ASF ASF BG B ACADEMICACADEMIC SUPPORT SUPPORT NETWORKNETWORK 1,800 1,800 B 1 B CAREER CENTER CAREER+ CENTER RECEPTION + RECEPTION 680 680 B 1 B JOB ADVISING JOB ADVISING 320 320 B 2 B STUDENT STUDENT TOUCHDOWN TOUCHDOWN 1,050 1,050 B 4 B STUDENT STUDENT TOUCHDOWN TOUCHDOWN 1,050 1,050 B 4 B PRINT N' COPY PRINT N' COPY 540 540 R2 5 R2 VISITING SCHOLARS VISITING SCHOLARS COMMONCOMMON ROOM ROOM 1,000 1,000 R2 5 R2 THREE BEDROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (1) (1) 1,100 1,100 R2 5 R2 ONE BEDROOM ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (2) 840 840 R2 6 R2 VISITING SCHOLARS VISITING SCHOLARS COMMONCOMMON ROOM ROOM 1,000 1,000 R2 6 R2 THREE BEDROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (1) (1) 1,100 1,100 R2 6 R2 ONE BEDROOM ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (2) 840 840 R2 7 R2 VISITING SCHOLARS VISITING SCHOLARS COMMONCOMMON ROOM ROOM 1,000 1,000 R2 7 R2 THREE BEDROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (1) (1) 1,100 1,100 R2 7 R2 ONE BEDROOM ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (2) 840 840 R2 8 R2 VISITING SCHOLARS VISITING SCHOLARS COMMONCOMMON ROOM ROOM 1,000 1,000 R2 8 R2 THREE BEDROOM THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (1) (1) 1,100 1,100 R2 8 R2 ONE BEDROOM ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (2) 840 840

AIR HYDRONIC HYDRONIC HYDRONIC HYDRONIC HYDRONIC SF SFALLOCATIO SF ALLOCATIO ALLOCAT FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOROCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY FLOOR OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY SPACE SPACE SPACE SPACE SPACE ASFASF ASF ASFASF FLOORFLOOR FLOOR FLOOR OCCUPANCY FLOOROCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY SPACE SPACE SPACE SPACE SPACE ASF ASF ASF ASF ASF GGGA2 G A2A2 A2 G A2 PICK PICK AQUAPONICS PICK N' N' GRAB N' GRAB AQUAPONICS GRAB GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE 270 270 270270 270 GG 2 G B BB2 BB FACULTY ACADEMIC ACADEMIC TOUCHDOWN ACADEMIC FACULTYSUPPORT SUPPORT TOUCHDOWN SUPPORT NETWORK NETWORK NETWORK 14001,800 1,800 1,800 1400 GGGA2 G A2A2 A2 G A2 MARKET MARKET GREENHOUSE MARKETGREENHOUSE (SERVES DINING) (SERVES DINING)800 1400 1400 1400 800 3 B 11 BB 13 BB FACULTY CAREER CAREER LOUNGE CAREER FACULTY CENTER CENTER CENTER LOUNGE ++ RECEPTION RECEPTION + RECEPTION 900 680 680680 900 GGGA2 G A2A2 A2 G A2 GRAB GRAB RESTURANT GRAB NN GO GO NRESTURANT GOLOBBY LOBBY 420 350 350350 420 3 B 11 BB 13 BB FACULTY JOB JOB OFFICES JOB FACULTY ADVISING ADVISING ADVISING (12) OFFICES (12) 1740 320 320320 1740 GGGBG B A2 B G A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN COMMUNITY (PRIVATE) KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN (PRIVATE) 550 670 670670 550 4 B 22 BB 24 BB FACULTY STUDENT STUDENT LOUNGE STUDENT FACULTY TOUCHDOWN TOUCHDOWN LOUNGE TOUCHDOWN 9001,050 1,050 1,050 900 GGGBG B A2 B G A2 FOOD FOOD ENTRY FOOD STORE STORE LOBBY STORE ENTRY ROOM ROOM ROOM LOBBY 1260 615 615 1260 615 4 B 44 BB 44 BB DEANSSTUDENT STUDENT OFFICES STUDENT DEANSTOUCHDOWN TOUCHDOWN OFFICES TOUCHDOWN 18301,050 1,050 1,050 1830 11GA2 A2 1 A2 A2 G A2 PANTRY PANTRY MUSHROOM PANTRY FILL FILL MUSHROOM FILLTHEATER THEATER 2080 1500 1500 1500 2080 4 B 44 BB 44 BB ADMINPRINT PRINT OFFICES PRINT ADMIN N' N' COPY N' COPY (4) OFFICES COPY (4) 405 540 540540 405 11GA2 A2 1 BA2 G B CAFE CAFE FOOD CAFE SEATING SEATING STORE SEATING FOOD ROOM STORE ROOM 500 745 745745 500 5 B 55 R2 R2 55 R2 B FACULTY VISITING VISITING LOUNGE VISITING FACULTY SCHOLARS SCHOLARS SCHOLARS LOUNGECOMMON COMMON COMMON ROOM ROOM ROOM 9001,000 1,000 1,000 900 11 1BB 1 A2 B 1 A2 CONFERENCE CONFERENCE GREENHOUSE CONFERENCE GREENHOUSE ROOM ROOM (TRADITIONAL) ROOM (TRADITIONAL)1200 400 400 1200 400 5 B 55 R2 R2 55 R2 B FACULTY THREE THREE OFFICES THREE FACULTY BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM (12) OFFICES APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT (12) (1) (1)(1) 17401,100 1,100 1,100 1740 22 1A2 A2 2 A2 A2 1 A2 LOBBY LOBBY FARM LOBBY TO FARM TABLE TO SEATING TABLE SEATING 1500 200 200 1500 200 6 R2 55 R2 R2 56 R2 R2 VISITING ONE ONE SCHOLARS ONE VISITING BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM SCHOLARS COMMON APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT COMMON ROOM (2) (2)(2)ROOM1,000 840 840 1,000 840 22 1A2 A2 2 BA2 1 B CAFE CAFE FOOD CAFE OUTDOOR OUTDOOR STORE OUTDOOR FOOD ROOM SEATING STORE SEATING SEATING ROOM 500 745 745745 500 6 R2 66 R2 R2 66 R2 R2 TWO BEDROOM VISITING VISITING VISITING TWO BEDROOM SCHOLARS SCHOLARS APARTMENT SCHOLARS APARTMENT COMMON COMMON COMMON (1) ROOM ROOM (1) ROOM 6801,000 1,000 1,000 680 22 2BB 2 A2 B 2 A2 CAFE CAFE GREENHOUSE CAFE KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN GREENHOUSE (TRADITIONAL) (TRADITIONAL) 750 1,200 1,200 1,200 750 6 R2 66 R2 R2 66 R2 R2 ONE BEDROOM THREE THREE THREE ONEBEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM APARTMENT BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (1) (1) (2)(1) 8401,100 1,100 1,100 840 33 2A2 A2 3 A2 A2 2 A2 LOBBY LOBBY GREENHOUSE LOBBY GREENHOUSE (ROOT AND (ROOT BULB) AND BULB) 1000 200 200 1000 200 7 R2 66 R2 R2 67 R2 R2 VISITING ONE ONE SCHOLARS ONE VISITING BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM SCHOLARS COMMON APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT COMMON ROOM (2) (2)(2)ROOM1,000 840 840 1,000 840 33 3A2 A2 3 BA2 3 B GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE SMALL GREENHOUSE CONFERENCE SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (1)ROOM (1)720 800 800800 720 7 R2 77 R2 R2 77 R2 R2 TWO BEDROOM VISITING VISITING VISITING TWO BEDROOM SCHOLARS SCHOLARS APARTMENT SCHOLARS APARTMENT COMMON COMMON COMMON (1) ROOM ROOM (1) ROOM 6801,000 1,000 1,000 680 33 4BB 3 A2 B 4 A2 SMALL SMALL GREENHOUSE SMALL CONFERENCE CONFERENCE CONFERENCE GREENHOUSE (CONTROLLED) ROOM ROOM ROOM (CONTROLLED) (2) (2)(2) 700 480 480480 700 7 R2 77 R2 R2 77 R2 R2 ONE BEDROOM THREE THREE THREE ONEBEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM APARTMENT BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (1) (1) (2)(1) 8401,100 1,100 1,100 840 33 4BB 3 BB 4 B MEDIUM MEDIUM LARGE MEDIUM CONFERENCE CONFERENCE CONFERENCE LARGE CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ROOM ROOM ROOM ROOM (1)(1) (1) ROOM (1) (1)510 400 400400 510 8 R2 77 R2 R2 78 R2 R2 VISITING ONE ONE SCHOLARS ONE VISITING BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM SCHOLARS COMMON APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT COMMON ROOM (2) (2)(2)ROOM1,000 840 840 1,000 840 44 5A2 A2 4 BA2 5 B LOBBY LOBBY SMALL LOBBY CONFERENCE SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM (1)ROOM (1)720 200 200200 720 8 R2 88 R2 R2 88 R2 R2 TWO BEDROOM VISITING VISITING VISITING TWO BEDROOM SCHOLARS SCHOLARS APARTMENT SCHOLARS APARTMENT COMMON COMMON COMMON (1) ROOM ROOM (1) ROOM 6801,000 1,000 1,000 680 55 6A2 A2 5 A2 A2 6 A2 LOBBY LOBBY COMMUNITY LOBBY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN 1200 200 200 1200 200 8 R2 88 R2 R2 88 R2 R2 ONE BEDROOM THREE THREE THREE ONEBEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM APARTMENT BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (1) (1) (2)(1) 8401,100 1,100 1,100 840 66 6A2 A2 6 A2 A2 6 A2 LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 200200 200 88 R2 R2 8 R2 ONE ONE ONE BEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM APARTMENT APARTMENT APARTMENT (2) (2)(2) 840 840840 66 7A2 A2 6 A2 A2 7 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHENKITCHEN 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 77 7A2 A2 7 A2 A2 7 A2 LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 200200 200 77 8A2 A2 7 A2 A2 8 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHENKITCHEN 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 88 8A2 A2 8 A2 A2 8 A2 LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY 200 200 200200 200 88 A2 A2 8 A2 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMUNITY KITCHEN KITCHEN KITCHEN 1200 1200 1200 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL ASF ASF ASF ASF TOTAL ASF 17,68014,575 14,575 14,575 17,680 17,375 17,200 17,200 17,200 17,375

17,200

15,000 2,000 -

BOILER 15,000 BOILER BOILER BOILER // CHILLER CHILLER // CHILLER CHILLER BOILER ROOM* ROOM* /ROOM* ROOM* CHILLER ROOM* COOLING COOLING 2,000 COOLING COOLING TOWER* TOWER* TOWER* COOLING TOWER* TOWER* AIR AIRAIR AIR HANDLING HANDLING - HANDLING HANDLING AIRUNIT UNIT HANDLING UNIT UNIT (AHU) (AHU) (AHU) (AHU) UNIT (AHU) MAIN MAIN MAIN MAIN -SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPPLY MAIN ++ RETURN RETURN ++ RETURN SUPPLY RETURN+ RETURN FRSH FRSH FRSH FRSH AIR -AIRAIR AIR LOUVER LOUVER LOUVER LOUVER FRSH INTAKE AIR INTAKE INTAKE INTAKE LOUVER INTAKE EXHAUST EXHAUST EXHAUST EXHAUST - AIR AIRAIR EXHAUST AIR LOUVER LOUVER LOUVER LOUVER AIR LOUVER EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT TYPE EQUIPMENT TYPE TYPE TYPE TYPEHIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY HIGH EFFICIENCY VAV VAV VAV VAV VAV *PLANT *PLANT *PLANT SIZING SIZING SIZING BASED BASED BASED ON ONON TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL CAMPUS CAMPUS CAMPUS SF SF(785,000) SF (785,000) (785,000)

-- - -- - 900 750 750750 900 20 16 1616 20 80 65 6565 80 70 52 5252 70

15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 2,0002,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 -- - -- - -- - -- - -

BOILER BOILER BOILER // CHILL CHIL / CH COOLING COOLING COOLING TOW TOW T AIR AIRAIR HANDLING HANDLING HANDL MAIN MAIN MAIN SUPPLY SUPPLY SUPP FRSH FRSH FRSH AIR AIRAIR LOU LOU LO EXHAUST EXHAUST EXHAUST AIR AIRA EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT EQUIPMEN TT

PLUMBING SYSTEMS NATIONAL BUILDING*** GROUNDFLOOR FLOOR 01 FLOOR 02 FLOOR 03 FLOOR 04 FLOOR 05 FLOOR 06 FLOOR 07 FLOOR 08

NEWTON BUILDING*** GROUNDFLOOR FLOOR 01 FLOOR 02 FLOOR 03 FLOOR 04 FLOOR 05 FLOOR 06 FLOOR 07 FLOOR 08

TOTAL ASF 5,105 3,845 3,195 1,880 1,790 3,140 4,340 4,340 4,340

TOTAL ASF 6,710 3,200 3,150 3,360 4,345 3,360 3,920 3,920 3,920

OCCUPANCY (1)

ASF (1)

B A2 B B B R2 R2 R2 R2

OCCUPANCY (1)

2470 2445 2250 1080 1790 2940 2940 2940 2940

ASF (1)

A2 A2 A2 B B B R2 R2 R2

6210 2700 1750 3360 3645 3360 2520 2520 2520

OLF (1) 200 30 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

OLF (1) 30 30 30 200 200 200 200 200 200

O.L. (1) 13 82 12 6 9 15 15 15 15

O.L.(1) 207 90 59 17 19 17 13 13 13

OCCUPANCY (2)

ASF (2)

OLF (2)

O.L. (2)

A2 B A2 A2

2020 1400 945 800

30 200 30 30

68 7 32 27

A2 A2 A2 A2

200 1400 1400 1400

30 30 30 30

7 47 47 47

OCCUPANCY (2)

ASF (2)

OLF (2)

PRIMARY OCCUPANCY

TOTAL O.L.

O.L. (2)

81 89 44 33 9 22 62 62 62

TOTAL O.L.

1400

200

700

A2 A2 A2

1400 1400 1400

30 30 30

47 47 47

207 90 66 17 43 ` 17 60 60 60

B A2 B B B R2 R2 R2 R2

PRIMARY OCCUPANCY A2 A2 A2 B B B R2 R2 R2

GENDER SPLIT

# OF UNITS

41 45 22 17 5 11 31 31 31

GENDER SPLIT 104 45 33 9 22 9 30 30 30

WC (M)* URINAL (M)* LAV. (M)* WC (W)* LAV (W)* DRINKING FOUNTAINS SHOWERS

3 3 3 3

# OF UNITS

1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3

2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 3

1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3

1 1 1 1 1

WC (M)* URINAL (M)* LAV. (M)* WC (W)* LAV (W)* DRINKING FOUNTAINS SHOWERS

3 3 3

2 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3

* 1 FIXTURE PER UNIT ** 1 KITCHEN SINK PER UNIT, 1 LAUNDRY TRAY/AUTOMATIC CLOTHES WASHER CONNECTION PER UNIT/PER 12 UNITS *** OCCUPANCY TYPE S-2 EXCLUDED FROM CALCULATIONS due to minimal ASF and large OLF

TEST FIT: GENDER NEUTRAL

1 1 1 1 1

TEST FIT: GENDERED

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3

3 2 2 1 2 1 3 3 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3

1 1 1 1 1 1

OTHER 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY ** ** ** **

OTHER 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY 1 SERVICE SINK / LAUNDRY TRAY ** ** **

ENERGY CONSUMPTION EUI TYPE

EUI (kBtu/SF/YR)

TOTAL BUILDING SF

GROSS ENERGY CONSUMPTION (pEUI X TOTAL SF)

INSOLATION VALUE

REQ SOLAR ARRAY AVAILABLE SIZING (SF) ROOF AREA (SF) 9,160

BASELINE pEUI TARGET pEUI CODE COMPLIANT pEUI CURRENT ACTUAL pEUI

132 27 33.01 27

100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000

13,200,000 2,700,000 3,301,000 2,700,000

6.62 6.62 6.62 6.62

1,993,958 407,855 498,640 407,855

TARGET pEUI: 27

TOTAL ROOF AREA: 14,063 SF

TARGET PV SIZING AREA: 407,855 SF

AVAILABLE ROOF AREA : BETWEEN 7,030 - 10,550 SF

ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF EUI OFFSET PINK SOLAR PANELS TO POWER LIGHT IN GREENHOUSES AND ACT AS LOW-ENERGY GROWING LIGHTS SUPPLEMENTING HVAC SYSTEM WITH LIVE WALLS TO LOWER ENERGY USAGE SOLAR LIGHTS ON EXTERIOR TO POWER LIGHTING IN THE EVENING SUN TUNNELS IN LOWER-LIT AREAS OF BUILDING TO DECREASE ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING CONSUMPTION HYDROELECTRIC ENERGY WITHIN IRRIGATION SYSTEMS ? WIND ENERGY VIA TURBINES OR ALTERNATIVE METHODS UTILIZING THE NW PREVAILING WINDS KINETIC TILES (NICK AND CHRISTIAN) AS A WAY TO SUPPLEMENT REMAINING PV NEEDED

6,870 6,870 6,870 6,870

SOBREMESA

CENTER LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO

RASHMI PRADHAN + KENZIE PELLETIER

STUDIO WHITE | WINTER 2022

FOOD BECOMES AN INFORMAL FACILITATOR OF EXPRESSION, CONNECTION, AND COMMUNITY, AND THIS EXPERIENCE IS ONE THAT DEFINES “HOME” TO MANY IN LOGAN HEIGHTS. “SOBREMESA” IS A SPANISH WORD USED TO DESCRIBE THE FLOW OF CONVERSATION AROUND A MEAL, A SAVORING OF FOOD AND COMPANY. THERE MUST BE NO RUSH. WITH CAL WESTERN’S NEW CAMPUS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO HISPANIC CULTURE, THE SOBREMESA CENTER AIMS TO ENCOURAGE THE SHARING OF CONVERSATIONS THROUGH FOOD-CENTERED SPACES AND TO CONNECT THE MULTIPLE COMMUNITIES THAT SHARE THE AREA. THROUGH THE INTEGRATION OF FARM-TO-TABLE SOBREMESA INTENDS TO BRING THE COMMUNITY BACK TO ITS ROOTS.

ADJACENCY STUDY

the aspirational intent of Sobremesa is to facilitate a center for community within the presence of many; ultimately creating a hub for collective gathering and the cultivation of engagement through living spaces.

THE RESTAURANT

USE - CONTROLLED

THE MARKET

AN UNDERGROUND PACE IN AN OFFICE RS BUILDING. DURING ITS HE PROJECT HAS PROMOTED D NOT ONLY THE OFFICE UT ALSO THE PUBLIC PASONA 02 OFFERS SEMINARS, GRAMS, AND RELAXATION NG MEMBERS OF THE UNITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO HE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY.

DESIGNED AS AN UNDERGROUND FARMLAND SPACE IN AN OFFICE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING. DURING ITS OPERATION THE PROJECT HAS PROMOTED AND EDUCATED NOT ONLY THE OFFICE EMPLOYEES BUT ALSO THE PUBLIC COMMUNITY. PASONA 02 OFFERS SEMINARS, LECTURE PROGRAMS, AND RELAXATION SPACE TO BRING MEMBERS OF THE URBAN COMMUNITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPRECIATE THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY.

PASONA 02 - URBAN FARM FACILITY KONO DESIGNS TOKYO, JAPAN

GREENHOUSE - CONTROLLED

URBAN FARM FACILITY S

THE PLAZA THE FACADE

WOOD CLADDING + GLAZING FILTERED LIGHT PUBLIC PRIVATE SOLID VOID SOLAR SHADING CONTROLLED VIEWS

THE KITCHEN

SOBREMESA The aspirational intent of Sobremesa is to facilitate community within the presence of many; ulti-

mately creating a hub for collective gathering and the cultivation of engagement through living spaces. Utilizing the idea of food as an informal facilitator of expression and connection, this multi-use building aims to serve as the community center of Cal Western Law School’s newly proposed campus.

PROJECT + PROGRAM CONT. POPULATION SERVED

How might we begin to address the underlying causes of food insecurity through functionally designed spaces meant to better serve the surrounding populations?

PROJECT + PROGRAM CONT. TEST FITS

ADJACENCY

LIVING SPACES (MOONSHOT) RESIDENTIAL (VISITING SCHOLARS) STUDENT SUPPORT FACULTY / ADMINISTRATION EGRESS CORE (SHAFTS, RESTROOMS)

SDSU Mission Valley - Campus Expansion Plan kenzie pelletier | stacey white | january 12

studio design intention is to add on to the existing campus expansion occurring in the Mission Valley area of San Diego. The dry-bulb temperature chart demonstrates that the comfort levels in the San Diego area fall mostly within the months of July to September. It is important to note that in other months, the comfort levels are within reach by a few degrees.

In terms of EUI, the target is about half the value of the baseline test for a building of this typology and size. Thus resulting in a need to cut the EUI in half in order to reach an 80% reduction rate.

Using collected data, it can be concluded that prevailing winds most commonly air from the northwestern direction. In terms of solar geometry the peak time for solar exposure occurs during mid-day hours of the summer months.

TEAM MATRIX NICK GOLDSCHMIDT KENZIE PELLETIER ARCH 307 / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

SUMMARY From the matrix of iterations pictured above, we discovered factors that significantly affected the EUI values. A major factor to note is the floor to floor height; this not only changed the EUI but more obviously the overall building form. As the FF height increased the EUI value was also raised leading us to believe that the FF height must be carefully considered when we put together our buildings. With a lower floor to floor height OR lower number of floors, the EUI value can remain consistent. Another major finding was the impact of atrium/courtyard space on the overall EUI, leading us to question further investigate this concept. Moving into our personal iterations we kept these findings in mind and began to further explore the scope of impact that floor to floor height and atrium/courtyard space plays on the ending EUI value in each building form.

INDIVIDUAL MATRIX KENZIE PELLETIER

DISCUSSION / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

SUMMARY

Following the completion of all nine iterations, it was found that several factors had major impacts on the EUI values. In terms of the most noticeable change, the EUI seemed to change by the greatest ratio once floor to floor height was altered. The higher the FTF height, the higher the EUI value; it was easily determined that the two work proportionally to one another. The factor that was most intriguing was the alteration on EUI caused by the presence of a courtyard versus an atrium. As a courtyard was added, the overall EUI percentages increased dramatically. It would be interesting to see how to maximize courtyard space while maintaining EUI values.

INDIVIDUAL STUDY 1 KENZIE PELLETIER

ARCH 307-01 / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

STUDY SUMMARY

EUI: 26 KBTU/FT2/YR TOTAL S.F.: 99,235 S.F. (99.2% OF TARGET S.F.) # OF STORIES: 5 F.F. HEIGHT: 14 WWR: 0.709 S:V RATIO: 66:1000

Using a slightly altered U typology, the purpose of this iteration was to investigate the relationship between WWR and EUI values. As the window to wall ratio was increased, the EUI was affected in direct relation and slowly increased. The floor height, number of stories, and type of atrium was held constant through both iterations. The placement of the atrium was altered, but did not have an impact on the findings. This specific iteration raised questions regarding the extent to which WWR affects the EUI as there was only a minor increase in overall EUI between the two iterations, but the WWR value doubled.

INDIVIDUAL STUDY 2 KENZIE PELLETIER

ARCH 307-01 / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

STUDY SUMMARY

EUI: 25 KBTU/FT2/YR TOTAL S.F.: 96,946 S.F. (96.9% OF TARGET S.F.) # OF STORIES: 8 F.F. HEIGHT: 15.05 WWR: 0.566 S:V RATIO: 58:1000

In this iteration, the relationship between glazing - in terms of the atrium - and closed roof were being analyzed to see which had a greater impact on the EUI. It was deduced that the presence of glazing on the atrium contributed to a higher EUI value than a closed roof system. The glazing on the sunroof allowed for a higher amount of heat transfer and loss than the original building which had a closed roof system. While the EUI was not greatly increased, and still fell under the target value, it opens up a potential investigation into how shading may be able to minimize the EUI value shift in future design iterations.

INDIVIDUAL STUDY 3 KENZIE PELLETIER

ARCH 307-01 / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

STUDY SUMMARY

EUI: 25 KBTU/FT2/YR TOTAL S.F.: 97,805 S.F. (97.8% OF TARGET S.F.) # OF STORIES: 5 F.F. HEIGHT: 14.5 WWR: 0.542 S:V RATIO: 69:1000

This study was meant to explore the different values produced by the precense of an atrium versus a courtyard. It was found that the surface to volume ratio was impacted the most once the atrium was converted. The EUI had a minor increase that can likely be attributed to the addition of interior windows surrounding the newly placed courtyard. Overall, all values were kept as close to the original iteration as possible in order to see the direct effects of a courtyard versus atrium program on the building EUI value.

TEAM MATRIX NICK GOLDSCHMIDT KENZIE PELLETIER ARCH 307 / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

SUMMARY We chose to pursue new studies in lab 3 that more closely related to our studio project. WWR was still the most impactful change, as an increase leads to a much higher EUI, but this also greatly improved the sDA, so there are still benefits despite the increase in EUI. Floor to floor height also impacts the EUI, but we noticed that when increasing it while keeping the WWR the same, the impact was not as dramatic as changing the WWR. We also noticed that a lower S:V ratio seemed to help lower the EUI, but was not nearly as noticeable as varying WWR. In regards to daylighting, creating shallower plates greatly improved the sDA, while adding courtyards also helped to improve the percentage. The shallower plates also make the spans much more manageable for the structure, and allow more variety in choosing materials. We also attempted to keep a more standardized sizing throughout the buildings so that creating a grid is much easier to do.

INDIVIDUAL MATRIX KENZIE PELLETIER

DISCUSSION / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

SUMMARY

Following the completion of all twelve iterations, I found that the EUI was particularly difficult to decrease when the forms became more complicated. Using footprints from massing work in studio I was able to test how the EUI was altered with the varying FTF heights and WWR. I found that with high FTF heights, it was important to watch the WWR to counteract the increase in EUI caused by the taller FTF heights. On the other hand, when I began to lower FTF heights, I was able to maximize the WWR to allow for deeper light penetration and maintain my EUI value. Moving forward I knew I still needed to decrease the EUI value of my selected shape.

PREFERRED SCHEME KENZIE PELLETIER

DISCUSSION / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

STUDY SUMMARY The scheme selected allows for low window to wall ratios -which in truth will need to be increased to meet code minimum- that allow for controlled daylight to enter the structure. The building features a large courtyard that will allow for the integration of some exposed structure if needed. I think the structural grid might be a bit more difficult but can definitely be made regular along the form shown. From Lab 02 this form was added to my matrix as I wanted to test a few of the massing shapes we created in studio this week. I am looking forward to seeing what materials I can use with this grid setup and furthermore, see how I can prioritize day lighting and lower the EUI from the existing value of 34kBtu/ft2/yr to the target EUI of 27kBtu/ft2/yr. While my preferred scheme still needs a few alterations, I believe it will be a good challenge moving forward.

DAYLIGHT STUDY KENZIE PELLETIER

DISCUSSION / STACEY WHITE LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

The completion of the sDA study led to the discovery of relationships between EUI and sDA. I found that it was difficult to reach both target EUI and the desired sDA range for the given building footprint. When I began to change the WWR values, the EUI was improved, however, it became extremely difficult to reach the desired range of sDA values. My best performance (seen outlined in red) led to a slight increase in the desired EUI but a good middle value for the sDA percentage. Moving forward I would like to lower my EUI even further without losing the required percentages for sDA.

STRUCTURAL GRID

FTF HEIGHT OF 14’

5” SLAB W/ 1 1/2” DECKING

KENZIE PELLETIER

DISCUSSION / STACEY WHITE

16” STEEL BEAMS

LOGAN HEIGHTS, SAN DIEGO GROSS SQUARE FEET | 100,000 FT2 TARGET EUI | 27

28” STEEL GIRDERS

119” COLUMNS

TYPICAL BAY 5" SLAB W/ 1 1/2" DECKING

30.00

STUDY SUMMARY 40.00 40.00

When completing the structural grid, it was easy to see that the final grid would not be a regular one. With the application of a regular grid, there is a large amount of columns that fall within the spaces that are meant to be open. Moving forward it will be important to determine a pattern of column grid that allows for the most regularity but prioritizes spaces without the interference of columns. I think as far as FTF heights go, the 14’ height works well with the selected members but could be brought up.

LAB 04 KENZIE PELLETIER STACEY WHITE FEBRUARY 21, 2022

LOGAN HEIGHTS | SAN DIEGO 32.6986ºN | 117.1294ºW

MODEL IMAGE

DECEMBER 21

MARCH/SEPTEMBER 21

JUNE 21

9AM

12PM

3PM

INTROSPECTIVE

DECEMBER 21

MARCH/SEPTEMBER 21

JUNE 21

9AM

12PM

3PM

VIBRANT

DECEMBER 21

MARCH/SEPTEMBER 21

JUNE 21

9AM

12PM

3PM

SOOTHING

SECTIONS + AXONS

SOOTHING

MOOD MAPPING + REFLECTION

IN USING A COMBINATION OF APERTURE, ORIENTATION, AND MATERIAL; VARIOUS MOODS WERE CREATED THROUGH DAYLIGHTING. AS WAS EXPECTED, THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE APERTURE DIRECTLY ALTERED THE INFLUX OF LIGHTING; HOWEVER, WHAT WAS MORE UNEXPECTED WAS THE INTENSITY AT WHICH THE LIGHT SEEMED TO SHINE BASED ON THE LOCATION OF THE APERTURE. AN ALMOST SOFT LIGHT WAS ABLE TO BE CREATE WITH A CAREFULLY PLACED APERTURE, BUT NOT WITHOUT THE STRATEGIC PLACEMENT OF MATERIAL. WITH SEMI TRANSPARENT OR PERFORATED MATERIALS, THE LIGHT WAS DIFFUSED THROUGHOUT THE SPACE BUT IN MOST CASES STILL HAD A CENTER SPOTLIGHT DURING THE NOON HOUR AT EACH SOLSTICE. WITH MORE SOLID MATERIALS THE LIGHT WAS SIMPLY FEATHERED THROUGHOUT THE SPACE RATHER THAN FOCUSED IN A RAY. THE LIGHTING APPEARED ALMOST COLD DURING THE WINTER MONTHS WHICH WAS A LARGE CONTRAST TO THE WARMER LIGHT THAT DEVELOPED DURING THE SPRING AND SUMER SOLSTICES. WITH USING VARIOUS MATERIAL, IT WAS EASY TO DEMONSTRATE HOW EASILY LIGHT CAN BE MANIPULATED. THE HARSHNESS, INTENSITY, SPREAD, AND COLOR WAS ALL IMPACTED BASED ON THE SELECTED MATERIALS FOR THE TRIAL. CREATING MOOD WAS ALMOST INSTANTANEOUS AS SOON A MATERIAL WAS APPLIED. THE CHANGING OF COLOR OR TRANSPARENCY DIRECTLY ALTERED THE FEELING OF THE SPACE, MANAGING TO SHIFT THE MOOD IN A SECOND. WHEN CREATING THE INTROSPECTIVE MOOD, A PERFORATED MATERIAL LACKING ANY PIGMENT WAS USED TO DIFFUSE LIGHT IN THE SPACE. THE GOAL WAS TO CREATE A SOFT GLOW THAT WOULD ILLUMINATE THE ROOM THROUGHOUT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY. FOR THE VIVID MOOD, BRIGHT COLORS WERE MIXED AND OVERLAIN ON VARIOUS TRANSPARENT MATERIALS TO ALTER THE LEVELS OF VIVIDNESS IN THE SPACE. THE INTENTION FOR THE FINAL MOOD WAS TO CREATE A SOOTHING SPACE FOR VISITORS. WITH THE USE OF NATURAL MATERIALS AND COLORS TO COMPLIMENT THE LIGHTING, THE LIGHT WAS DEFUSED AND SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE ROOM AND AMONG THE VISITORS.

---

A11_Floor 11 114' - 0"

3/4" HARRINGBONE PAVERS 3" RIGID INSULATION 1/4" AIR INFILTRATION BARRIER EPDM ROOFING MEMBRANE 6" LW CONCRETE ON METAL DECK A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A10_Floor 10 104' - 0"

A9_Floor 09 94' - 0"

A8_Floor 08 84' - 0"

A7_Floor 07 74' - 0"

A6_Floor 06 64' - 0"

A5_Floor 05 54' - 0"

A4_Floor 04 42' - 0"

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

A2_Floor 02 14' - 0"

A0_Ground Floor 0' - 0"

8" VENT CONNECTED TO HIGH EFF. VAV SYSTEM MASS TIMBER SUSPENDED T-CEILING SYSTEM SUSPENSION CEILING WIRE

15/16" SUSPENSION TEE SPRINKLER SYSTEM SPACED @ 10' O.C.

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT 6" - 8" CAN LIGHT FIXTURE 6" - 8" RECESSED INCANDECENT 120V LIGHT

FIBER CEMENT CURTAIN WALL PANEL 1/2" THERMAL AIR BARRIER 3" RIDGID INSULATION 1/2" PLYWOOD SHEATHING 3 1/2" CFS FRAMING VAPOR BARRIER 1/4" GYPSUM WALL BOARD TYPICAL MULLION

ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW SILL CASING 2 x 3 SILL PLATE 2 x 3 DOUBLE TOP PLATE

2 x 12 TYP. HEADER ALUMINUM FIXED WINDOW HEAD CASING 3o x 9o FIXED WINDOW

1" CONCRETE TOPPING BROOM FINISH

5" NON-COMPOSITE METAL DECKING

6.75" x 30" GLB GIRDER SPACED @ 10' O.C.

8.75" x 30" GLB JOIST SPACED @ 30' O.C.

12" x 12" GLB COLUMN SPACED @ 10' O.C.

PV PINK TINTED CURTAIN WALL PANELS **SEE DETAIL D1

12" CONCRETE FOUNDATION SLAB

79" x 79" x 35" PILE CAP #3 BENT REBAR 20" DIA. PILE-STEEL PIPE

D2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

10' - 0"

STUDENT TOUCHDOWN 2100 SF

2A1 ---

10' - 0"

A3_Floor 03 - Kenzie 342 1/2" = 1'-0"

E2_Fiber Cement Paneling 1/2" = 1'-0"

LAB THREE

electric lighting design + section integration kenzie pelletier | studio white | spring 2022

PART ONE | methodology PART TWO | section integration PART THREE | summary

PROJECT ONE | methodology

ILLUMINANCE | 15 f.c. POWER DENSITY | 0.5 W/ft2 QUANTITY | 12 SENSOR | photo EFFECTIVENESS | successful lighting fixture: Gotham Architectural Lighting, 34 Watt, CFL 11 1/32 TRT 8RW T73 the recessed pattern worked well for the touchdown space. the selected lights fit with the programming goals by not distracting from the space and instead remaining embedded in the ceiling plane. when it comes to allowable density, this iteration does not exceed the given value for power density and at the same time meets the goal range for foot candles. the spacing of the lights also works well with the program and creates an evenly disbursed glow within the room during times lacking natural light.

PART 1 iterations through visual interior tool

PROJECT ONE | methodology

ILLUMINANCE | 16 f.c. POWER DENSITY | 0.5 W/ft2 QUANTITY | 12 SENSOR | photo EFFECTIVENESS | successful lighting fixture: 3’ suspended Gotham Architectural Lighting, 34 Watt, CFL 11 1/32 TRT 8RW T73 a suspended arrangement is successful within the space and creates a similar layout to the recessed iteration. the lighting would cause a busier ceiling plane but could also be used to architecturally enhance the space. in terms of effectiveness, the power density in this trial falls within the allowable range and the foot candles reach the required value. when it comes to programming, a suspended lighting system could cause more distraction in the touchdown space and would likely be avoided.

PART 1 iterations through visual interior tool

PROJECT ONE | methodology

ILLUMINANCE | 18 f.c. POWER DENSITY | 0.62 W/ft2 QUANTITY | 15 SENSOR | 12 EFFECTIVENESS | successful lighting fixture: Gotham Architectural Lighting, 24 Watt, CFL 11 1/32 TRT 8RW T73 following the power density values this iteration was also successful in creating an effective lighting arrangement for the space. more foot candles were added in this iteration but the value is still within the allowable range. in terms of power density value, it falls within what is acceptable regarding the space type. this iteration was successful but would likely not be used as it requires more lights to be placed on the ceiling plane.

PART 1 iterations through visual interior tool

PROJECT ONE | section integration

PART 2 detailed wall section + lighting application

A3_Floor 03 28' - 0"

SUMMER SOLSTICE 9 AM 51°

WINTER SOLSTICE 9 AM 21°

PROJECT ONE | summary

PART 3 performance reflection 111

APPENDIX TABLES FOOT CANDLE LIGHT

Guide

Table 140.6-C: Area Category Method — Lighting Power Density Values (W/ft2) Additional Lighting Power1 Allowed Lighting Power Density for General Lighting (W/ft2)

Primary Function Area Auditorium Area

0.7

Additional Allowance (W/ft2, unless noted otherwise)

Qualified Lighting Systems Ornamental

0.3

Accent, display and feature3

0.2

Detailed task work7

0.2

Ornamental

0.3

FOOTCANDLE LIGHT GUIDE Auto Repair or Maintenance Area

0.55

Audience Seating Area

0.6

Footcandles are the most common unit of measure used by lighting professionals to calculate light levels in businesses and outdoor 0.2 Detailed task work7 spaces. A footcandle square foot surface from a uniform source of light. The Illuminating Beauty Salon Areais defined as the illuminance on a one0.8 Engineering Society (IES) recommends the following footcandle levels toOrnamental ensure adequate illumination and safety for 0.3 occupants. Below is a guideline for common areas to assist in achieving appropriate light levels with the greatest energy-efficiency. Civic Meeting Place Area

1.0

Building Area Lecture, & Task Classroom, Training,Average Maintained Vocational Area Footcandles Warehouse Commercial (Horizontal) (FC) or Industrial WAREHOUSING & STORAGE Shipping and Handling Storage Bulky Items—Large Labels 10 Convention, Conference, Multipurpose Small Items—Small Labels 30 and Meeting Area Cold Storage 20 Copy Room Open Warehouse 20 Corridor Area Warehouse w/Aisles 20 COMMERCIAL OFFICE Bar or Lounge and Fine Dining Open Office 40 Dining Area Cafeteria or Fast Food Private Office 40 Family and Leisure Conference Room 30 Electrical, Mechanical, Telephone Rooms Exercise or Fitness Center and Restroom 18 Gymnasium Areas Lunch & Break Room 15 Hotel Function Area EDUCATIONAL (SCHOOLS) Exhibition or Display Classroom 40 Museum Area Gymnasium Restoration Room

Range of 0.7 Maintained Footcandles 0.45 (FC) (Horizontal) 0.6

10 - 30 0.5 10 - 30 0.6 10 - 30

0.4 30 - 50 0.5 0.4 0.5 7.5 - 30

— —

Ornamental 15 — —

0.3

5 - 15

Ornamental

— —

@30” Above Finished 0.3 Floor (AFF) @30” AFF

Detailed task work7

Matte surface reflectance for the table 40% 0.2 recommended

—

Ornamental

0.3

300.6 - 50

Accent, display and feature3

0.75

Detailed task work7

0.65

3 - 10 0.85

Corridor

10 - 40

Reading Area

4.5 W/ft

5 - 20 0.85

7.5

Library

Comments

—

0.55 30 - 50

125 50

0.3

Range of Average 1 White or chalkboard Maintained Maintained Footcandles Footcandles — (Vertical) (FC) (Vertical) (FC) 5

0.85

Class I (Pro or Div. 1 College) Financial Transaction Area Class II (Div. 2 or 3 College) General or School)Low Bay Class III (High Commercial ClassIndustrial IV (Elementary)High Bay and Work Areas Auditorium Precision

Ornamental

0.8 0.6

0.8

SUMMARY a photo sensor would be the most effective choice in the selected room. because of the primarily east facing windows, it would be ideal to have the lighting supplement the space when daylighting is not at a peak. a motion sensor could also be used since the space is programmed as a touchdown work area. while all the iterations were successful in varying ways, the recessed lighting configuration was the closet to matching technical and aesthetically based needs. it is for these reasons that the recessed lighting option would likely be selected for modeling purposes.

0.5

@30” AFF

SELECTED LIGHTING FIXTURE Gotham Architectural Lighting, 34 Watt, CFL 11 1/32 TRT 8RW T73 QUESTIONS + CONCERNS 1. how to best arrange fixtures on the ceiling? 2. with a CLT based ceiling, how can we avoid compromising the natural look of the wood while effectively implementing the lighting design?

0.2

30 Ornamental 20 Detailed task work7 150 7 Detailed 100task work

0.3 0.2 0.2

9 5 specialized 2.5 - 10 Precision work

0.7

Ornamental

0.3

This guide is a collaborative effort of Energy Trust of Oregon and Stacks Area 1.1the Lighting —Design Lab, Seattle, Washington.

—

target foot candle value Rev.07/2013

3. would other types of lights work better in the space, if so, should they be considered over the selected Gotham Architectural Lights?

PROJECT ONE

material specifications kenzie pelletier | studio white | spring 2022

PART ONE | material case study + graphic dimensional constraints PART TWO | detailed wall section + elevation PART THREE | csi specifications

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

PART 1 material case study + graphic dimensional constraints

“an opportunity to showcase Monash University’s outstanding research and demonstrate the motivation for transforming our grey urban areas into green, liveable and productive urban spaces that provide water treatment and reuse, food production, urban cooling functions and aesthetically pleasing surroundings. the inclusion of green infrastructure such as living roofs/ walls and a state of the art greenhouse that can be transferred into an open-air setting transforms the facility into a truly “living laboratory.” amongst the research and showcase elements provided are raingardens, bio-filtration showcase plots, tanks, permeable paving display, analytics laboratory, underground reservoir, living scaffolds and fabrication spaces.” - Monash EDU CASE STUDY | monash university - civil engineering hydraulics ‘living lab’ ARCHITECT | ASPECT Studios, DesignInc, + Irwinconsult MATERIALS | trellis scaffolding, existing building base + facade, drip irrigation

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

PART 1 material case study + graphic dimensional constraints

the main materials used in London’s Mint Hotel include what appears to be composed of concrete, bright yellow paint and tiles, and a trellis scaffolding system that creates the living wall adorning the building. with the use of trellis scaffolding, greenery climbs the structures that center themselves in the heart of London. the vibrant yellow orange tint of the structure can be seen from quite a distance as the towers rise above the ground plane. the colorful structure adds to London’s lively streets by complimenting the surrounding building typologies. the skylights above allow for sunlight to stream through the glass roof that covers the hotel and surrounding environment. CASE STUDY | london’s mint hotel ARCHITECT | Elmich VGM MATERIALS | trellis scaffolding, Elmich VGM versi wall product, irrigation system

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

the main materials used in the project are; wood, stainless steel, and the trellis scaffolding system. the mix of cladding allows for the building to house various vantage points and optimize particular views. the facade pulls passer-byers in without revealing too much of the buildings interior identity. the greenery is highlighted by the contrast of stainless steel but simultaneously complimented with the use of wood cladding panels. alternating between the solid living panels, semitransparent wood cladding, and transparent glass provides a playful look into the programs housed inside the structure.

CASE STUDY | vertical living gallery ARCHITECT | SDA, Sansiri PCL, + Shma MATERIALS | trellis scaffolding, stainless steel, + drip irrigation

PART 1 material case study + graphic dimensional constraints

wall hung application. Consult the Accessory Items

specific panel attachments.

_ 5" +

48" _ 5" +

_ 5" +

HORIZONTAL DIMENSION TO CENTER LINE OF ATTACHMENT CLIP (TYPICAL)

_ 6" + _ 6" +

_ 6" +

_ 5" +

36"

_ 6" + 36"

36" _ 6" +

_ 6" + EQ. EQ. _ 6" +

EQ. _ 6" +

_ 6" EQ. +

_ 6" EQ. + EQ.

EQ. _ 6" +

EQ.

_ 5" +

_ 6" +

EQ. EQ. _ 6" +

gre e n s c re e n ®

_ 5" +

EQ.

EQ. _ 6" +

_ 5" +

_ 6" EQ. +

_ 5" +

12’ - 0” — 14 - 0"

_ 6" +

_ 6" + _ 6" + EQ.

VERTICAL DIMENSION TO BOTTOM EDGE OF ATTACHMENT CLIP (TYPICAL)

_ 5" +

NOTE: TOTAL NUMBER OF ATTACHMENTS AND EXACT LOCATION MAY VARY BASED ON ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCATION OF STRUCTURE.

FALL ’15

4' - 0"

36" _ 5" +

_ 6" +

_ 5" +

_ 6" +

_ 5" +

6' - 0"

PANEL SIZES shown in attached chart COLOR OPTIONS matte texture black white matte texture green silver bronze terra

24"

W H

8’ - 0” — 10' - 0"

FABRICATION MATERIALS TRIM 20-gauge ASTM A879 galvanized steel CLIPS + STRAPS ASTM A879 galvanized steel 1/4” diameter 18-8 stainless steel bolt, washer, + nut PLASTIC SPACERS 1/2” thick black Ultra High Molecular Weight polyethylene washers FENCE POSTS 3” ASTM A500 square, Grade B steel tube FASTENERS FOR MOUNTING CLIPS self drilling, self tapping hex washer head screws Type 410 stainless steel strength Type 304 stainless steel corrosion resistance

attachment clips, trims, spacers, and straps for your PART 1 material case study + graphic dimensional constraints

Mounting Options

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

SUPPORT PLACEMENT

list for descriptions of available engineered

1743 S. La Cienega Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90035 T - 800.450.3494 725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1825, Los Angeles, CA 90017 T - 800.450.3494 www.greenscreen.com

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

PART 2 detailed wall section + elevation

PROJECT ONE | material specifications

PART 3 CSI specifications

OTHER MANUFACTURERS ambius upscapers livewall greenscreen slavonia ASSOCIATED MATERIALS “RELATED WORK” Section 03 30 00, CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE; Concrete footings. Section 32 93 00, PLANTS; Furnishing and installing related plants. QUESTIONS + CONCERNS what is the space allocation needed within the wall system for irrigation? how does the structure integrate with other systems such as a grey-water recycling system? what is the maintenance requirement for the wall? how can a marine climate affect the plants growing on the structure, or is there a specific classification of plant that must be used in such climates?

GUIDE SPECIFICATION PRODUCT GUIDE SPEC INTRODUCTION greenscreen® is a welded wire panel system used for trellising, fencing, architectural screening and vertical plant support applications. When the panel is combined with twining or climbing vines, greenscreen® forms a structural wire panel plant support system that defines or encloses space, provides privacy screening, and offers shading for more sustainable construction. DRAWING COORDINATION: Show location and size of panels and, if used, posts and planters. In most projects, greenscreen® can be installed in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions and it is not necessary to locate mounting hardware. If, however, location or configuration of mounting hardware is crucial to coordination with other work or to convey design concept, locations, type and details should be shown in construction documents. SPECIFICATION COORDINATION: Edit this guide specification to meet project requirements. Remove language that is not applicable and add additional language as required. Coordinate work of this section with other sections of specifications. MASTERFORMAT COORDINATION: The first three section titles and numbers listed below are recommended for data filing and for building mounted installations; those below are for optional usage. Titles and numbers comply with MasterFormat 2016. Edit footer as necessary to reflect applicable titles and numbers. SECTION 32 94 55 – EXTERIOR PLANTING SUPPORT STRUCTURE (Green Facade) SECTION 10 82 00 – GRILLES AND SCREENS/TREILLAGE SECTION 32 94 50 – WELDED WIRE PANEL PLANT SUPPORT SYSTEM SECTION 09 77 53 – VEGETATIVE WALL SYSTEMS SECTION 32 31 16 – WELDED WIRE FENCES AND GATES SECTION 32 31 19 – DECORATIVE METAL FENCES AND GATES SECTION 32 31 26 – WIRE FENCES AND GATES SECTION 32 31 26.13 – WIRE FENCES WITH STEEL POSTS SECTION 32 35 13 – SCREENS AND LOUVERS SECTION 32 33 33 – SITE MANUFACTURED PLANTERS PLANTING COORDINATION: Choosing appropriate plant material for greenscreen® requires consideration of climate, sun and wind exposure, soil, size of container, fertilization, plant spacing and desired visual effect. Twining, climbing, curling, and tendril vines are more suitable than vines that cling by aerial roots or suckers. Herbaceous vines with flexible stems are most appropriate for weaving into panels. DESIGN

ASSISTANCE:

Details

special

requirements,

please

the

greenscreen®

technical

manual

and

www.greenscreen.com describe design and installation requirements for most applications. For sales@greenscreen.com.

contact

greenscreen®

800-450-3494

END OF INTRODUCTION Guide Specification greenscreen®

32 94 50 – 1

[WELDED WIRE PANEL PLANT SUPPORT SYSTEM]

GUIDE SPECIFICATION

[SECTION 32 94 50 – WELDED WIRE PANEL PLANT SUPPORT SYSTEM]

PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1