Jean Barr is living history. Every day.

She may make a trip to the grocery store to pick up some fresh milk but returns to her house built in 1748, originally owned by a guy named Shippen who was an in-law of Benedict Arnold, infamous traitor of the American Revolution. What is it like to live in a house with such an unusual connection to history?

We met at a neighborhood historic preservation group years ago. I had always assumed Jean was a long time Philadelphia resident which is true, since 1950. But that ain’t the half of it, as I was to discover this drizzly, foggy morning.

Jean welcomed me inside, took my umbrella, and we began an informal tour of her historic house facing the Delaware River. When she and her husband Russ first arrived it appeared they had bought “a pile of bricks with a view,” as she likes to say, harkening back to when 50-gallon drums collected rain in the attic. It was so bad she refused to live there for two years during construction.

Jean Barr’s house (left side), upon acquisition in the 1950’s,
front porch since removed Read more…

The weeks leading up to the installation near the Mall in Washington DC were some of the longest work weeks of my life (this is coming from some one who has been in the construction industry professionally for a number of years prior to enrolling at the Southern California Institute of Architecture, SCI-Arc). This being an unprecedented experience, I was unsure of what to expect, especially after the grueling past weeks. Seven days to fully assemble a house containing a number of elements that had yet to be completely realized is a daunting task, especially with a crew of students. Though seasoned by six months of intense construction experience (our team built the house with almost no subcontracting) it was unclear how things would unfold in West Potomac Park. As the four trucks carrying the modules traveled across the country our team filtered into the capital eager and anxious to begin assembly.

In design school a student spends so much time designing and redesigning each project that the scope of work involved in actual construction is well beyond his or her comprehension. Though the Solar Decathlon (through October 2) project lacks much of the organizational and bureaucratic complexity of a “real” architectural project, it remains filled with many of its own unique challenges.

Internally, organizing 40 students from two separate schools on a single project is no small task. Externally, handling the sponsors, donors, consultants, media, and all the logistics involved with transporting a home across the country can get complex quickly and if not organized will lead to failure. Every team faces these challenges, of course, and their respective solutions are woven into the project early on. Being from SCI-Arc, I can only comment on our experience, which I suspect is unique, due to the small size of the SCI-Arc / Caltech facilities. The challenge, then, must be handled by the students in tandem with the design and construction of the project. The ability of our team to self-organize and to adapt is something we’re immensely proud of.

Read more…

During this year’s NeoCon, the largest contract furniture trade show held in Chicago’s Merchandise Mart, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) introduced Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Pilot Credit 43, which applies to all Building Design and Construction, Interior Design and Construction LEED rating systems.

The pilot credit supports LEED’s objective of encouraging building owners and facility managers to implement measurable green building goals as these relate to maintenance and furnishings, specifically. LEED Pilot Credit 43 promotes the use of non-structural products, with known life cycles in LEED buildings, in order to set the foundation for continuous improvement. Also, for the first time, the USGBC recognized several third-party certifiers, which validate the sustainable attributes proclaimed by manufacturers about their products. Many of the methods of earning LEED Pilot Credit 43 revolve around the use of third-party certification.

Read more…

Barnraising, image courtesy brockhistoricalsocieties.ca

The best thing about architects is not simply that they use cool software or design buildings or even that they can help create interesting spaces. The best thing about architects is that they solve problems. In school, as students, they are challenged to address social, cultural, racial, environmental, and not least, spatial, issues. Given the opportunity, they use their critical thinking skills to solve many different problems.

Based on this premise, architecture critic Guy Horton and I discussed the possibility of starting a round table or colloquium to brainstorm solving some pressing problems with architects and academics. Our efforts went nowhere. Then we read a column in the Economist suggesting that academics and corporations can do a lot when they combine their minds in “frugal innovation”. This includes things like the $300 house which, significantly, was a challenge put forth in a Harvard Business School blog, not aimed at architects.

Admirable as such projects are, they neglect poverty and homelessness in developed nations. This is a gross oversight. And it needs to be corrected. Pour populations in the U.S. haven’t received as much attention because, frankly, it’s less “sexy” to talk about urban poverty here than is in some exotic, far-flung place. Read more…

To get a behind-the-scenes view of how the Metropolis Booth came together for this year’s International Contemporary Furniture Fair, I went to the people in charge of making it happen. The interdisciplinary group in David Stark’s class at Parsons was a handful of students, both grad and undergrad. As a group they took on the assignment of conceiving, designing, making, installing, and recycling our booth—working on it from the beginning to the end of the spring semester, on a very tight budget!

Photo: Magda Biernat

Early on, three design proposals were presented. One was chosen to go forward. Amy Johnson, who just received her MArch, was on the team whose proposal was picked. As she explains, she “started out with an understanding that we had a strong idea, and pushed my group to represent our thoughts as clearly as possible. After the Metropolis meeting, I led the effort to successfully integrate parts of all three schemes, as requested. Throughout the second half of the semester, I found myself co-managing a number of different tasks with Lauren Zailyk—millwork, lighting, signage, electrical, transportation of materials, and the breakdown – as well as picking up loose ends. I also saw myself in a leadership role with the undergrads and, having real world experience, I hoped to push them to think about this is a ‘real’ project; i.e., to see through tasks from beginning to end.”

Lauren Zailyk, second year Master of Architecture student who just graduated, speaking for the group, recalls:  “During the schematic design and design development phases we worked closely together to develop the overall design, construction details, explore materiality, put together a comprehensive presentation of materials, and insured that all programmatic requirements were met in the design brief.”  Typically, she added, “I fielded questions from undergraduates in terms of representation methods and interior construction issues like ADA requirements. In addition to our detailed design and construction duties, Amy Johnson and I organized the final breakdown at Javits.”

While working with the group, Patrick McNaughton [MFA Interior Design and among the first to graduate from that new program this spring], acted as project manager. “This mostly meant maintaining communication with Metropolis and Javits, and ensuring that all project deadlines were met,” he said. Metropolis was the client, with me giving the overall charge to the class; Dungjai Pungauthaikan and Ashley Stevens of our Art Department providing the design critique; Carri Winters of our Marketing Department worked with the team on a daily basis. Here the students talk about their hands-on experiences of designing and building a booth that needed to represent the magazine—and celebrate our 30th anniversary—at the trade show.

Susan S. Szenasy: When you signed up for the course, what did you think you were about to get into?

Lauren Zailyk: After attending several ICFF shows, my admiration for the Metropolis booth design—its ability to interact with my aesthetic sense year after year—has continued to grow. When I saw the opportunity to participate in this group design-build I jumped at it. I expected to have the opportunity to take something graphic [the magazine] and make it experiential as well as gain hands-on experience with crafting functional furniture.

Amy Johnson: I was seeing this as a design-build opportunity. I feel that you cannot discount what you learn from physically making what you have designed, drawn, specified, etc.  What’s amazing about this project is that young designers usually do not have the budget to build what they are dreaming up.

Patrick McNaughton: I was really excited about the opportunity to work with David Stark and explore the more decorative side of design. I had previously worked on a couple of design-build projects through Parsons (Aftertaste 2010 Dinner and Parsons 2010 Fashion Benefit), so I was generally familiar with the process, which requires a lot of teamwork and, therefore, an extremely competent team. I was hopeful that we would have a fun experience, but also that the rest of the students would actively engage themselves enough to keep the workload evenly distributed.

Read more…

Photo: Morley Von Sternberg.

It’s ironic to think that some of the most pleasant and appealing structures in the U.S. have had some of the most painful births. Take Yale’s Kroon Hall. This $33.5 million LEED Platinum flagship building of the University’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies (FES), opened last spring, has the comforting exterior of a classic Connecticut barn set amongst Yale Gothic. Bordered by inviting courtyards and a water garden, its sun-filled 58,200 sq. ft. interior features red oak paneling from sustainably managed forests, healthy low-VOC workspaces and cheerful gathering areas for students and faculty. A 100 KW photovoltaic rooftop supplies 25% of the building’s electricity, its water is heated by photovoltaic panels embedded in the southern façade, its air is heated and cooled by deep-well heat pumps, low-velocity basement fans and cooling water spray, and circulated by natural convection. Rainwater is captured for grey water toilet flushing and irrigation. Windows can be opened and closed at will (optimally by heeding sensor-activated red and green light signals during the day).

Kroon Hall is indeed one of sustainable design’s pioneers, having had its genesis from the 1990s through the first decade of the 21st century. At its heart is a concept called biophilia, advanced for the past 20 years by Stephen Kellert, Yale professor emeritus of social ecology, and famed entomologist Edward O. Wilson. Biophilia acknowledges the human need of a fulfilling connection with nature. Its structural expression in Kroon Hall was driven to fruition by James Gustave Speth, the then dean of FES and a world-recognized leader in environmental studies.

Photo: Morley Von Sternberg.

Yet Kroon Hall came about only after the near resignation of dean Speth and repeated frustrations experienced by professor Kellert and others. Read more…

Last Spring I enrolled in a sustainable construction development class thinking it would be nice to know a thing or two about healthy building material alternatives. Despite the section of my bookcase now dedicated to green manuals and alternative materials catalogs, I have learned an important lesson that most building professionals, concerned with health and sustainability, have learned before me: there is no such thing as “a thing or two.” It’s more like a few thousand things, most of them with crazy scientific names ending with “-ene” or “-ide.” You can spend hours just figuring out what type of paint to invest in (or, should that be wallpaper instead?) to minimize the VOCs used, and that’s even before the dreaded “egg shell white, or linen white?” debate.

Even for design professionals with some experience in building healthy, the challenge can seem like a time consuming labyrinth of dictionary definitions and a frustrating exercise in weighing lesser evils.

For most of us, including those just beginning our professional lives, lessons on sustainability thinking can culminate in a confusing upward climb towards a healthy environment. But, thanks to Perkins + Will’s “Precautionary List”, understanding chemical compositions in the design world has become easier. The list was created by the architecture firm, with the understanding that it is up to every individual to apply the precautionary principle when it comes to the health of humans, other living beings, and the environment. Even if there’s only a chance of a material containing something harmful, why use it? Read more…

Last December, Katherine Grove of William McDonough + Partners and Richard Maimon, of Kieran Timberlake, shared the stage at Ecobuild in Washington, DC. They were invited to discuss their work at the Make It Right project in New Orleans, where Cradle to Cradle provides a framework for the design of the community and of individual homes by several firms.

Make It Right is a pro bono effort to rebuild a community of safe and healthy homes. The emphasis is on affordability, high-quality, design, and sustainable construction. To date, 80 LEED Platinum homes have been built making the neighborhood a living laboratory of construction and material processes. Grove’s and Maimon’s presentations focused on the collaborative approach of the Make It Right interdisciplinary team, which has achieved remarkable effectiveness and efficiencies. They lowered the cost of building eco-friendly homes by managing the economics of the home designs, the costs of materials and labor, the education of staff and labor on site, contractor profit margins, insurance, legal and governmental fees, staff education, and the speed of construction.

Grove gave an overview of the Make It Right project and talked about how Cradle to Cradle was applied here: specifically with respect to materials assessment, target diagrams, and key performance goals for homes. Maimon presented an in-depth analysis of the Kieran Timberlake prototype house, including a look at how the design has evolved over multiple construction iterations, continually improving its effectiveness with regard to affordability, materials, and other factors. Grove followed this with a look at some lessons learned and initiatives under way, which include multiple modes of construction, workforce training, cross-training of builders, and more. After their presentation, I talked with them about the goals, lessons, and promise of Make It Right. Read more…

Several weeks ago the residents of Tingo built what is known locally as a chosa, a circular straw house of a type native to the high sierra, where long, resilient paramo grass grows abundantly. This particular chosa — framed in wood and tied with hand woven, straw rope —is enormous by local standards. While such vernacular architecture tends to be used in the service of tool sheds or detached kitchens, the Tingo building is intended as a community kitchen and dining hall. Its centerpiece, both in the sense of engineering and aesthetic drama, is a massive wooden pole, cut from a magnificent pine, harvested in the next town over. To bring it back to the village, 14 people labored for seven hours, using rope and muscle to drag the tree uphill to the closest road. Read more…

Deep in suburban southern California, the future of architecture has already arrived. This future is not just about more complex forms and compound geometries. It is not simply about software but how to make what is generated with software a reality. It is about processes, ways of working, and materials. It is also about more control for the architect. This is what Guy Martin had in mind when he started his own firm.

Guy Martin Design is quite possibly the most famous firm you have never heard of. He’s the guy who figures out how to make some of Philippe Starck’s more complicated creations, translating the digital into the physical.

He works behind the scenes in a non-descript warehouse with no windows. Thankfully, he has a huge ventilation system. He spends most of his time here with Marie, his robot accomplice. He’s moved up in the world. He used to operate out of a shipping container (also without windows) in the parking lot of SCI-ARC—until he graduated and was asked to leave and take his container with him.

Photo courtesy Guy Martin

Guy Horton: What was your motivation for starting a design firm based on robot technology and in-house fabrication? You were trained in architecture. Didn’t you hear that architects are supposed to draw stuff?

Guy Martin: Yeah I did not get that memo. In fact I find a lot of richness and potential in being very close to the means of production and the materials. It is a dialogue that the profession has shied away from. There was a time when a sociological need was met by distancing the profession from these two issues, but I believe that this no longer serves the profession. With these technologies and methods we can remove that barrier and regain some of the control and craft that the architect used to have when he was master mason. It is an emphasis on demonstrating concepts and having to wrestle with the resistance materials and methods expose to us in the process. Removed from having a hand in the craft and being somatically distant from the materials and methods we are not witness to the expressive potential inherent in these steps of design. I am more interested in working at reintegrating these concepts back into the architectural process. There is also the desire to push the automation of building so that the built work can economically allow for material expressiveness. Then there is also the concern of re-integrating more craft into building through digital means.

Read more…