First year Design Build by Penn State Stuckeman School

FIRST YEAR 2014

DESIGN BUILD

SPRING 2014

FIRST YEAR STUDIO DESIGN BUILD Peter Aeschbacher Cathy Braasch James Kalsbeek Jodi LaCoe Nida Rehman Aaron Wertman (TA)

Penn State Department of Architecture

BUILDING, LEARNING, REMEMBERING This summer I plan on attending the thirty year reunion of my graduating class from architecture school at the University of Cincinnati. In anticipation, I’ve been wandering through my memories of that unique time in my life and the very familiar building where I began my career as an architect. In my mind I’ve visited all the studios, classrooms, jury spaces and the library. I’ve spent time on the student-made basketball court and the lawn where volleyball and kegs of beer appeared every Friday afternoon. The faces, voices and and distinct. In great detail I can describe the many models, the many drawings, and the many sunrises. As with most students, the exact words of faculty during particular reviews are carved deep and permanent. I remember late night conversations with janitors, who leaned on their brooms and shared memories of Viet Nam for hours with a mesmerized audience of 18 year olds, easily distracted from their models and drawings. The images are clear, the stories come quickly and the spaces are easily visualized. But there is one place that appears unclear, fuzzy and ill 3

In contrast—and with great pride—I can safely say this is not the case for any Penn State student who has studied here over the past 25 years. Whether in the old Engineering Units or the new Stuckeman Building, our shop and building yard are an intimate part of every student’s experience, beginning immediately in First Year. The sights, sounds and the daily experience of architectural education at Penn State.

whatever. Each spring, there is so much building activity that the work often spreads beyond the shop and migrates into studio and beyond, much to the consternation of administrators and janitorial. Allan Sutley, Steve White and basement, near the loading dock. I remember it had one are familiar mentors, advisors and chaperones as students learn to make, to build, to design. As a result, Penn State supervised the shop, yet I can’t remember his name and I

students acquire a familiarity with the shop that leads to their

can’t conjure an image of him, none whatsoever. Only one image survives—a tall, elderly faculty member, with two-inch eyebrows, sitting cross-legged on a stool, chain-smoking

I’m proud and privileged to have been a part of this creative learning-by-making activity for the past 25 years. Obviously,

deadwood faculty, ostracized from the department, who

my own education provided little opportunity for handson learning, material exploration or design-build projects.

room with smoke. Otherwise, the shop was an unfamiliar,

Subsequently, as I entered professional practice, I was

mysterious, rarely used space where none of us ventured

handicapped by my lack of understanding measurement,

and the faculty didn’t appear to mind or care.

tools, materials and methods of assembly. My ethic of

craftsmanship was limited to an expertise with bass, balsa,

stage for performing artists. We’ve tackled a tennis court

chipboard, corrugated and foam-core.

pavilion, a medieval windmill, a puppet theater, a wetland observation platform, a camera obscura and a number of

When I arrived at Penn State in 1990, I was determined to

sheltered benches, garden sheds, and even a water tower.

challenge beginning students with an experience that I never

In 2003, we traveled well beyond Penn State and served

had. Today, Campus Constructions, our annual design-build

a neighborhood in West Philadelphia by building pavilions

exercise has become a rich and wonderful tradition. In that

on two empty lots for after-school gardening and craft programs. Recently we created a reception terrace for Penn

built over 150 unique structures for the campus community.

State’s Recycling Center, built entirely of reclaimed material

Some have been temporary, experimental installations,

that included a table that seats 40 made of concrete and

while others remain today as useful and valued structures.

thousands of broken beer bottles.

The range of project types has been broad and diverse. We’ve designed and built everything from a doghouse to a

Over 25 years, the projects have been widely varied in scope, scale, budget, function and site; however, the fundamental objectives of the program have always remained the same: • To have students experience the entire architectural process from concept to realization; • To experience the implications of their designs at full scale; • To develop skills of craftsmanship, construction and detailing; • To learn to collaborate and cooperate within a design team; and • To confront the challenges of very real constraints such as budget, schedule, codes, clients, users, and the approval of governing municipalities and the 5

But the most important objective is to simply provide the opportunity for young students to feel the profound joy and pride of seeing their designs realized in the world. At the very beginning of their education, they experience the thrill concludes with the celebration of group accomplishment, in the students have proven that a wonderful way to begin learning about architecture is to make architecture. This booklet presents the Campus Constructions of 2014.

formed a community of structures that celebrated the

The year was unique in that all the projects were sited on

contrasting and diverse intentions, materials and methods

the lawn of the Stuckeman Building, where together they

of each groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s project. All nine structures were united by the theme of Aedicula, or small buildings; but as expected, the students took that concept in a rich variety of directions. We built a rammed earth kiln, a tensegrity treehouse, and a playful perch high above a dramatic landscape of tubular steps. We had a large cube enclosing two benches, a playful collection of interactive cubes, a trio of slatted lounge chairs and two small tool sheds made entirely from reclaimed materials. In addition, this booklet also includes the design-build exercise that preceded Campus Constructions, in which each student individually creates a small scale piece as a warm-up to the larger, group projects. This year

every student built a wall segment in studio. The format

requirement of 3 feet x 8 feet x 6 inches was strictly shared by all, yet the wonderful variations of concept, character and construction are compelling. Together, the projects assembled to create a provocative corridor that led from one end of studio to the other. This portfolio of projects demonstrates that a Penn State architecture student is no stranger to the art and craft of building. Our goal is that these lessons will not be forgotten and will form a lasting impression throughout our studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; careers. It is my hope that when Penn State Students attend their 30 year reunion, unlike my experience, the activity of working together to build something beautiful, something provocative, something real, will be a crystal clear image in their memories of Penn State.

James Kalsbeek Summer 2014

ASSIGNMENT 1:

WALLS

D. Ackerman

A. Cacchio

S. Ahmed

A. Cavazos

J. Chen

A. Ahr

L. Alali

B. Almeida Barra

K. Andrews

A. Chesakis

T. Corbley

A. Aveta

S. Cranford

S. Daugherty

A. Barnett

H. Breidenbaugh

H. Denardo

M. Dickson

S. Buchan

C. Difazio

M. Esposito

S. Oztan

A. Pugliese

A. Rabold

P. Geldrich

J. Gutt

S. Rakiec

M. Ross

I. Hsu

E. Rothrock

N. Sauter

S. Li

K. McCormick

L. McCullough

R. Newburg

A. Novak

B. Novielli

S. Osorio

C. Scalzo

M. Sharp

J. Shinogle

M. Shrout

K. Stuewe

J. Swartz

M. Yeakey

LEAVE YOUR MARK design is intended to motivate. In addition to the impression pegs, the wall features three prompts on a speaking graphic, a thinking bubble, and an action sign. A person can leave their physical mark on the wall with the pegs, initiate and respond to the prompts, and potentially motivate others to reciprocate.

Bridget Novielli

Section 1 Jodi LaCoe

CONTRAPTION No one truly knows what’s happening on the ‘other side.’ Inspired by Rube Goldberg’s devices, a person initiates a series of interactive contraptions, some of which are not visible to the other side, to transport a ball in duplicitous and extraneous ways. The wall is meant to inspire curiosity and wonderment.

Megan Shrout

Section 1 Jodi LaCoe

CURVES, CRISCO & CARDBOARD Based on close observation of public behavior, this project comprises a modular wall seating system that mediates socio-spatial relationships. A rich and iterative design nesting people on both sides

Alexia Cavazos

Section 2 Peter Aeschbacher

CONNECTED HEXAGONS The project explores the possibilities of a permeable boundary in a modular wall system that can be used as both a partition and as storage. It also acts as seating and can be as a stage for performances.

Nathan Sauter

Section 3 Nida Rehman

ANONYMOUS INTERACTIONS This wall fragment originates from the idea of invading space considered safe, restful or comfortable. Approaching the the body, to lounge, and to be at rest: a seat, back rest, containing storage compartments, revealed only through minimal access openings. As the storage compartments are accessed, the comfort on the other side is ripped away. From the side of rest, the hidden storage areas are concealed with no point of access and the contents of the volumes are unknown. Meaningful interaction occurs without awareness of the interaction itself.

Katelyn Stuewe

Section 3 Nida Rehman

A WALL FOR “THE KISS” Intended to provide the backdrop for a print of Klimt’s “The Kiss,” this project is inspired by the dense weaving of color,

entire painting is like a rich textile of pattern and texture. Using ‘weaving’ as a point of departure, the wall surface is a tapestry and the wall is the loom that created it. Rather than being a wall made by tools, the wall is the tool that makes itself.

Rebecca Newburg

Section 4 James Kalsbeek

A WALL FOR â&#x20AC;&#x153;THE BURIAL OF THE COUNT OF ORGAZâ&#x20AC;? In this painting, El Greco breaks from traditional notions Instead, there is no space, there is no sky, no ground, no entwines together in a dense assemblage of expressive, curvilinear forms. Similarly, this wall is a dense assemblage sizes and shapes. One side of the wall is a dramatic basketlike tapestry of gently curved pieces, each one made of thin delicate strips laminated together and shaped in a variety of jigs. The other side is also tapestry-like, but more akin to a not only the framed reproduction of the El Greco but also the jigs used to build the opposite side.

Elizabeth Rothrock

Section 4 James Kalsbeek

GRID WALL modes of operability: subtraction, the removal of blocks creates any pattern or degree of opening for increased visual access, natural light, or collaboration, and addition, when the

and elegantly minimalistic wall system.

Andrew Chesakis

Section 5 Cathy Braasch

SPIRAL WALL The compression and aggregation of wire spirals create a grid, a datum that dissolves when the spirals reach their most open condition. The concave wall section reinforces the cocoon-like feeling of the densest units and the buoyancy of the expanded units.

Marlene Sharp

Section 5 Cathy Braasch

ASSIGNMENT 2:

LITTLE BUILDINGS

Section 1a Framed Interactions

Section 2 Hort Lounge

Section 1b Inbox / Outbox

Section 3a Treesegrity

Section 3b E.A.R.T.H.

Section 5 Two Sheds

Section 4 Figure and Field

INBOX/OUTBOX Inbox/Outbox explores how people use a space given a study, eat, and perform. The space is delineated by a black and exterior zones and provides storage for the furniture â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cubes.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; Visual access through the frame varies based stacked, rotated, and combined with wedge elements to form chairs, tables, benches, and loungers. They are light and have comfortable hand grips for ease of movement design encourages programmatic experimentation and user engagement in the landscape.

David Ackerman Lojean Alali Paige Geldrich Adelynn Rabold Megan Shrout

Section 1a Cathy Braasch

Section 1a Inbox / Outbox

FRAMED INTERACTIONS Cradled in a jog in the sidewalk, Framed Interactions allows path separates two zones—a collective ‘extroverted’ space and an ‘introverted’ island. These areas for sitting, lounging, and socializing are formed by extrusions structured by a

Each elevation uniquely frames a view of the landscape. The painted end grain of the 2x4s reinforce the link, such as the pale patina color when facing the Stuckeman Family Building. The patterning of the 2x4s for each constructed of visual access through the structure from the ground to top. These shifting masses and interlocking views create a new perspective on the surroundings and a variety social interactions.

Tyler Corbley Shannon Daugherty Bridget Novielli Samuel Oztan

Section 1b Cathy Braasch

Section 1b Framed Interactions

HORT LOUNGE inspired a modular chair design for this lounge area in order and back cradles the body in way that is comfortable for reading, writing, drawing, or just relaxing. The chairs may be

Skyler Ahmed Kristen Andrews Alexia Cavazos Haley Denardo Katelyn McCormick Stephanie Rakiec

Section 2 Jodi LaCoe

Section 3 Hort Lounge

TREESEGRITY Treesegrity provides a tectonic interpretation of the experience of tree climbing in order to reconnect people with nature and encourage sustainable thinking. Each part the tree; being within the canopy; and gazing out above the treetops. The six-legged tensegrity tower base provides a gentle sway while the canopyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s arabesques recall branches and leaves. An access ladder brings the visitor to just above horizon.

Aurelie Aveta Andrew Cacchio Lilith McCullough Megan Ross John Shinogle

Section 3a Peter Aeschbacher

Section 3a Treesegrity

E.A.R.T.H. In order to design buildings with a connection to the Earth, one must think beyond the borders of form and

of non-renewable resources located in the Centre County place within the structure.

Andrew Ahr Nate Sauter Meghan Dickson Stephanie Osario Katelyn Stuewe

Section 3 Peter Aeschbacher

Section 3 E.A.R.T.H

Floor Plan Scale: = 1’ Floor 1” Plan

Reflected Ceiling Plan Scale: 1” = 1’Ceiling Plan Reflected

Front Elevation Scale: = 1’ Front 1” Elevation

Side Elevations Scale: Elevations 1” = 1’ Side

Floor Plan Scale: = 1’ Floor 1” Plan

Reflected Ceiling Plan Scale: 1” = 1’Ceiling Plan Reflected

Front Elevation Scale: = 1’ Front 1” Elevation

Side Elevations Scale: Elevations 1” = 1’ Side

Section Scale: 1” = 1’ Section

Rebar Section Scale: = 1’ Rebar1”Section

Rebar Axon Scale: NTS Rebar Axon

Section Scale: 1” = 1’ Section

Rebar Section Scale: = 1’ Rebar1”Section

Rebar Axon Scale: NTS Rebar Axon

Scale: 1” = 1’

0 of Burn 1 Hour 0º F 1 Hour 0 of Burn

Goal:0º F Prepare structure and Goal: fuel for firing Prepare0 structure and FSI: Hour of Burn fuel Burning 0ºNothing F for firing FSI: SDI:Hour 0 of Burn Goal:0ºNothing Burning F Nothing Burning SDI: Prepare structure and Fuel: Goal: Nothing fuel for firing Burning Nothing Burning FSI: Prepare structure and Fuel: fuel for firing Nothing Burning FSI: SDI: Nothing Burning Burning Nothing SDI: Fuel: Nothing Burning Burning Nothing Fuel: Nothing Burning

1 1

Scale: 1” = 1’

5 of Burn 2 Hour 500º F 2 Hour 5 of Burn

2 2

15 of Burn 3 Hour 500º F 3 Hour 15 of Burn

Goal:500º F Smoulder sawdust to dry out Goal: earth and greenwood willows Smoulder sawdust to dry out FSI: Hour 15 of Burn earth and greenwood willowsC Smoulder, Rating 85, Class 500º F FSI: Hour 15 of Burn SDI: Goal:500º Smoulder, Class C F 122,Rating Rating Within85, Requirements Smoulder sawdust to dry out SDI: Fuel: Goal: Rating earth and greenwood willows 122, Within Requirements Majority Pine Sawdust Class A FSI: Fuel: Smoulder sawdust to dry out earth and greenwood willows Smoulder, Rating 85, Class Majority Pine Sawdust ClassCA FSI: SDI: Smoulder, Class C Rating 122,Rating Within85, Requirements SDI: Fuel: Rating 122, Requirements Majority PineWithin Sawdust Class A Fuel: Majority Pine Sawdust Class A

3 3

Scale: NTS

Scale: 1” = 1’

Goal:500º F Smoulder sawdust to dry out Goal: earth and greenwood willows Smoulder to dry out FSI: Hour 5 sawdust of Burn earth willowsC Smoulder, Rating 85, Class 500º F and greenwood FSI: SDI:Hour 5 of Burn Goal:500º Smoulder, Rating 85, Class C F Rating 122, Within Requirements Smoulder sawdust to dry out SDI: Fuel: Goal: Rating earth and greenwood willows 122, Within Requirements Majority Pine Sawdust Class A FSI: Smoulder sawdust to dry out Fuel: earth andPine greenwood willows Smoulder, Rating 85, Class Majority Sawdust ClassCA FSI: SDI: Smoulder, Class C Rating 122,Rating Within85, Requirements SDI: Fuel: Rating 122, Requirements Majority PineWithin Sawdust Class A Fuel: Majority Pine Sawdust Class A

Scale: 1” = 1’

20 of Burn 4 Hour 1830º F 4 Hour 20 of Burn

Goal:1830º F Burn willows to increase Goal: temperature and fire Burn willows earth structure Hour 20 toofincrease Burn temperature and fire FSI: 1830º F earth structure Burn, Rating C Hour 20 115, of Class Burn Goal:1830º F FSI: SDI: Burn willows to increase Burn, Rating 115, Class C Rating unavailable Goal: temperature and fire SDI: Fuel: Burn willows to increase earth Ratingstructure unavailable Branches Class A FSI: temperature and fire Fuel: earth Burn, structure Rating 115,A Class C Branches Class FSI: SDI: Burn, Rating 115, Class C Rating unavailable SDI: Fuel: Rating unavailable Branches Class A Fuel: Branches Class A

4 4

Scale: NTS

25 of Burn 5 Hour 1830º F 5 Hour 25 of Burn

Goal:1830º F Burn willows to increase Goal: temperature and fire Burn willows to earth structure Hour 25 and ofincrease Burn temperature fire FSI: 1830º F earth Hour 25 115, of Class Burn Burn, structure Rating C Goal: FSI: 1830º F SDI: Burn to increase Burn,willows Rating 115, Class C Rating unavailable Goal: temperature and fire SDI: Fuel: Burn willows to increase earth structure Rating unavailable Branches Class A FSI: temperature and fire Fuel: earth structure Burn, Rating 115,A Class C Branches Class FSI: SDI: Burn, Rating 115, Class C Rating unavailable SDI: Fuel: Rating unavailable Branches Class A Fuel: Branches Class A

5 5

30 of Burn 6 Hour 0º F 6 Hour 30 of Burn

Goal: 0º F Extinguish flame with water Goal: to put out flames and slake Extinguish with water the quicklime flooring Hour 30flame of Burn FSI:0º to F put out flames and slake the quicklime flooring Hour 30 of Burn Nothing Burning Goal: FSI: SDI:0º F Extinguish flame with water Nothing Nothing Burning Burning Goal: to put out flames and slake SDI: Fuel: Extinguish flame with water the quicklime flooring Nothing Burning Nothing Burning FSI: to put out flames and slake Fuel: the quicklime flooring Nothing Burning FSI: SDI: Nothing Burning Burning Nothing SDI: Fuel: Nothing Burning Burning Nothing Fuel: Nothing Burning

6 6

Floor Plan Plan Floor

Reflected Ceiling Ceiling Plan Plan Reflected

Front Elevation Elevation Front

Side Elevations Elevations Side

Section Section

Rebar Rebar Section Section

Rebar Rebar Axon Axon

Scale: 1” 1” = = 1’ 1’ Scale:

Hour 0 0 of of Burn Burn 11 Hour

0º F 0º F Goal: Goal: Prepare structure and Prepare structure and fuel for firing fuel for firing FSI: FSI: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning SDI: SDI: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning Fuel: Fuel: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning

Scale: 1” 1” = = 1’ 1’ Scale:

Hour 5 5 of of Burn Burn 22 Hour

500º F 500º F Goal: Goal: Smoulder sawdust to dry out Smoulder sawdust to dry out earth and greenwood willows earth and greenwood willows FSI: FSI: Smoulder, Rating 85, Class C Smoulder, Rating 85, Class C SDI: SDI: Rating 122, Within Requirements Rating 122, Within Requirements Fuel: Fuel: Majority Pine Sawdust Class A Majority Pine Sawdust Class A

Hour 15 15 of of Burn Burn 33 Hour

Scale: 1” 1” = = 1’ 1’ Scale:

Hour 20 20 of of Burn Burn 44 Hour

1830º F 1830º F Goal: Goal: Burn willows to increase Burn willows to increase temperature and fire temperature and fire earth structure earth structure FSI: FSI: Burn, Rating 115, Class C Burn, Rating 115, Class C SDI: SDI: Rating unavailable Rating unavailable Fuel: Fuel: Branches Class A Branches Class A

Scale: NTS NTS Scale:

Hour 25 25 of of Burn Burn 55 Hour

Hour 30 30 of of Burn Burn 66 Hour

0º F 0º F Goal: Goal: Extinguish flame with water Extinguish flame with water to put out flames and slake to put out flames and slake the quicklime flooring the quicklime flooring FSI: FSI: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning SDI: SDI: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning Fuel: Fuel: Nothing Burning Nothing Burning

FIGURE AND FIELD Figure and Field comprises two complementary projects that create a stimulating, fun and safe space of play. The Landscape is a grid of cylindrical modules of varying heights rising from the ground to form a playful ground plane for climbing, resting and exploring. It comprises 15" diameter tubes, structured with plywood frames, and a top layer of mulch, wood chip, and stones, to form a variegated climbing surface. The Perch rises above, anchored down with concrete footings in the tubes below. It is a four-square plan, and one square cantilevers above as a second level. The structure comprises a wood frame and plywood cladding with openings providing a variety of views and interactions.

Together the two create a spatial experience emphasizing playful exploration through ascent and descent.

Hannah Breidenbaugh Justin Chen Savannah Crawford Rebecca Newburg Christopher Scalzo

Bernado Almeida Barra Christina Difazio Elizabeth Rothrock Jordan Swartz Mark Yeakey

Section 4 Nida Rehman

Section 4 Figure and Field

SONOTUBE TYP. SONOTUBE TYP.

MULCH SURFACE

DRAINAGE HOLE 3 "DIAM. TYP. 8 DRAINAGE HOLE 3 "DIAM. TYP. 8

MULCH SURFACE COMPACTED EARTH COMPACTED EARTH MESH LINING

MESH LINING 3

PLY. PLATE PLY. PLATE

PLY. PLATE

3 " PLY. PLATE 4 WOODEN BLOCKING

WOODEN BLOCKING 1 " 2

PLY. X-FRAME

1 " 2

PLY. X-FRAME

2 C401 2 C401

2 2 C401 C401

4 4 C401 C401

DRAINAGE PLATE 1 "=1'-0" DRAINAGE PLATE SCALE : 2 SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

3 C401 3 C401

SONOTUBE SONOTUBE PLY. X-FRAME PLY. X-FRAME WOODEN BLOCKING WOODEN BLOCKING 112 " LENGTH SCREW 112 " LENGTH SCREW

4 C401 4 C401

1 1 C401 C401

3 3 C401 C401

SONOTUBE SECTION 1 "=1'-0" SONOTUBE SECTION SCALE : 2 1 2

SCALE :

"=1'-0"

WOODENT BLOCKING SUPPORT 1 "=1'-0" WOODENT BLOCKING SUPPORT SCALE : 2 SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

1 " 2

SONOTUBE TYP. MULCH SURFACE

MESH LINING 4"

PLY. X-FRAME

DRAINAGE HOLE 3 "DIAM. TYP. 8

COMPACTED EARTH

5 5 C401 C401

PLY. PLATE

WOODEN BLOCKING

1 " 2

PLY. X-FRAME

2 C401

4 C401

DRAINAGE PLATE SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

X - FRAME STRUCTURE 1 2

SCALE :

"=1'-0"

3 C401 SONOTUBE PLY. X-FRAME

WOODEN BLOCKING 112 " LENGTH SCREW

4 C401 E.L. 1'-0"

1 C401

SONOTUBE SECTION SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

3 C401

WOODENT BLOCKING SUPPORT SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

5 C401

BOLT JUNCTURE SCALE :

1 2

"=1'-0"

16 "BOLT TYP.

SONOTUBE TYP.

TWO SHEDS Architecture historian Nicolas Pevsner famously wrote that not. This project attempts to prove Pevsner wrong. This project is an experiment to create structures made out of scrap pieces of wood. Conventional building elements such as studs, sheathing, doors and windows are hand crafted from repurposed materials, rather than purchased at a store or lumberyard. While the form resembles a conventional backyard shed, close examination reveals a rich and complex world of material, color, texture, craft. The transportation and assembly/disassembly. Shed #1 is a tool shed for conventional yard and garden tools. Shed #2 is a greenhouse shed made of reclaimed window sashes that might preserve sensitive plants through the winter months. Together, like fraternal twins, that share similar qualities yet in a dialogue about material reuse and design.

Sierra Buchan Andrew Chesakis Ali Pugliese Suheng Li

Andrew Barnett Miranda Esposito Chin Hsu Arielle Novak Marlene Sharp

Section 5 James Kalsbeek

Section 5 Two Sheds

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Spring 2013 First year instructors and students would like to thank the following individuals and departments for providing tremendous material and intellectual support. Dean Barbara Korner / College of Arts and Architecture Kelleann Foster / Stuckeman School Mehrdad Hadighi / Department of Architecture Dave Will / College of Arts and Architecture

Allan Sutley / Stuckeman School Steve White / Stuckeman School Jamie Hielman / Stuckeman School Scott Tucker / Stuckeman School Stephanie Swindle / College of Arts and Architecture Reviewers: Juan Ruescas, Eric Sutherland, Ron Henderson, Shadi Nazarian, Laura Foxman, James Wines, Veronica Patrick, Scott Wing, Chris Counts, Karen Lutsky, Jawaid Haider, Barry Kew, Scott Wing, Denise Costanzo, Daniel Cardoso Llach, Darla Lindberg, Ana Abalos, Tom Lauerman, Robin Thomas, Scarlett Miller, Will Bruder, Mike Leakey Book Design: Nathan Sauter, Dustin Julius, Scott Tucker