Issuu on Google+




hitecture c r A f o l o o ate Sch u d a r G y it s er mson Univ

Branch is an annual, student-produced publication from Clemson University Graduate School of Architecture. The intent of this document is to graphically archive the year’s endeavors by highlighting the most provocative works designed and produced by the school’s current students and faculty. This publication was conceived by (GASP)... the Graduate Architecture Student Partnership. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication can be reproduced in any manner whatsoever unless permission is granted in writing by Clemson University. Branch 1.0 Copyright © 2011 Clemson University School of Architecture

Modular 2 C-4 Commuter Parking Lot Clemson University Clemson, SC 29634 USA Typeset in FF Din Pro and ITC Conduit. The almighty union between the timeless Din and the renegade Conduit set a precedent that will reign over all those who follow and forever triumph in branch history. Epic win. Branch 1.0 Editors Kristin Kolowich, EIC Kyle Miller Jeffrey Pauling Faculty Editor Armando Montilla




n i a st

t i l i ab

.. . s i y  


] : E [R







closin g tho ughts

ackn + conotrwibleudgements tions



s ote ’s n itor


n tio c du o r int

e13 m the





ion t c du o r int





Architecture has been taught at Clemson for almost a century. Today, the School of Architecture is meeting new challenges through pedagogical and technological advances to provide transformational architectural leadership, shaping the environment of the 21st century for a better future. Clemsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s School of Architecture is an interconnected, geographically distributed community of teachers and learners, dedicated to: < Educating future architects, through rigorous and expansive design education, with local and global understandings of firmness, commodity and delight; < Generating knowledge to address the great challenges of the time, like health care, ecology, and an increasingly digital society, through innovative, interdisciplinary research, practice and scholarship; < Advocating for the improvement of built, natural and social environments, through design activism, public service and public education.


Kate Schwennsen, FAIA, Professor, is the new (2010) Chair of the School of Architecture. Her teaching and research focus on issues of diversity, leadership and evolving education and practice models in architecture. Recent publications/presentations include: “You Can’t Just Add Women and Stir”, “Sustainable Education Sustainable Profession”, and “The Architect at Mid- (21st) Century”. She has held many leadership positions in professional organizations, and is currently a Co-Vice-President for Region III, (the Americas), on the Education Commission of the International Union of Architects (UIA). Schwennsen was 2006 President of the American Institute of Architects, the second woman to serve as the elected leader of this then149-year-old, 80,000-member organization. She is licensed to practice architecture in Iowa and South Carolina. Professor Schwennsen was formerly (20012010) Associate Dean for Academic Programs of the College of Design, Iowa State University.

Architecture is part of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities along with the departments of Planning and Landscape Architecture, Art, Performing Arts, Construction Science, Philosophy and Religion, Languages, English, Communication Studies, and History. As the sole architecture program in South Carolina, and part of a land grant university, the School has built a program of study with an attentive and engaged view to its regional context while seeking a perspective of national and global dimension. The university values the School of Architecture’s programs, based on their quality, demand, and potential to contribute to the university’s mission. < The BA in Architecture, is a pre-professional degree in which practical knowledge is blended with a liberal education, attracting the highest-achieving undergraduates on campus. < The NAAB accredited M.Arch. has been ranked in the top 20 programs in the U.S. by Design Intelligence magazine 4 years in a row. < The NAAB accredited M.Arch. in Architecture + Health is one of only two such degrees in the country, and is a distinctive model of combining teaching, learning, research, and service. < The M.S. in Architecture is a research-based postprofessional degree. < The PhD in Planning, Design and the Built Environment, (PDBE), is one of a half-dozen similar programs in the country, powerfully interdisciplinary, and critical to the development of new knowledge. The School’s Fluid Campus offers a uniquely seamless global education, in which students and faculty work in a diversity of physical, political and cultural settings. The Daniel Center for Urban Studies in Genoa, Italy was established in 1973 as the first foreign studies program in Architecture. The Charleston Architecture Program was initiated in 1987, and is

8 now a comprehensive center for undergraduate and graduate architectural education. The Barcelona Architecture Program is in its eighth year of operation in collaboration with the Barcelona Architecture Center and the Polytechnic University of Catalunya. At home in Clemson, a new 55,000 s.f. zeroenergy-ready building designed by Thomas Phifer and Partners and McMillan Pazden Smith, will be the home of graduate architecture studios beginning in Spring semester 2012. The scholarship, research and practice engaged in by Architectureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s students and faculty is exemplary, central to the advancement of our discipline and to Clemson Universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s areas of emphasis. Faculty and students are recipients of regional and national design awards, and significant sponsored funding in 21st century issues. The institutional setting of a top-20 public land-grant research university, in the upstate of South Carolina, shapes and supports the innovative, evolving scholarship of this School, a school with energetic and dedicated faculty and students, a vigorous connection with the professional community, and a solid foundation upon which to build its future. This publication has been made possible only through the leadership, creativity and hard work of a key group of graduate students, who deserve full credit for this wonderful record of the Fall 2010 work of the M.Arch. program. Thank you especially to the GASP (Graduate Architecture Student Partnership), Kristin Kolowich and Kyle Miller, and Assistant Professor Armando Montilla. Enjoy!

Kate Schwennsen, FAIA, Hon. FKIA, Hon. RAIC, Hon. RAIA, Hon. JIA, SFDFC Professor & Chair

H C N RA otes n s â&#x20AC;&#x2122; r edito




The idea for this publication was far-fetched. The newly formed Graduate Architecture Student Partnership (or as we like to refer to it with the alluring acronym GASP) was in one of our usual Sunday evening meetings, thinking of ways that we could actually DO something for the school to justify our existence as the voice of the grad students or more commonly known this year as “those kids out in the trailers.” A publication of student work seemed simple. Include selected projects from the past year, a couple of articles from faculty and call it good. Our GASP faculty advisor, Lynn Craig, mentioned that Clemson architecture hadn’t had anything like this since Line, a student-produced publication from years ago, so this was a great way to bring back a student publication. We immediately decided that this was how we were going to make our big statement and let everyone know that GASP was more than just a resume booster. That first conversation was in October 2010. As studio progressed and Christmas break approached, the publication idea faded into the background. Once we all returned in January, revitalized and well-rested, it came up again in our first meeting. We had to do this, somehow. Even in January, the publication seemed like a relatively easy task, but we all secretly knew that it was going to be a serious time commitment. One of the GASP members was going to be the editor in chief and gather a group of volunteers to compile the document. The release date was April 1st: the graduate open house for the newly accepted


students who would be visiting campus. In January, this all seemed totally feasible. A month later, I was standing outside the trailers (which I like to optimistically refer to as my second home), taking a break from what was going to surely be a long, sleepless night of studio work, when I saw one of my GASP partners, Shannon, walking up to me with a smug grin on his face. I had missed last night’s GASP meeting so I could only assume he was about to fill me in on the juicy details. “So you heard what happened at the meeting last night, right?” “No…” I replied. “Our EIC for the publication is too busy. They can’t do it. We all agreed that it was in your hands. That’s okay with you, right?” Silence. Not the juiciness I was expecting. My thoughts were racing. Could I really commit to this? Better yet, could I actually pull something like this off? (As an aside, you should know that the GASP team consists of five men, all graduating in May, all two-year track students… and me, a 3-year track student, not graduating until next year. The situation is probably similar to being the youngest and only girl amongst your older, rambunctious brothers where you must bravely endure the frequent guy-talk and are constantly try to prove yourself as ‘one of the boys.’ This was probably one of those moments where I was expected to man-up and take on for the team. That being said, those five men are the best ‘big brothers’ ever.) “Yeah. Okay. I can do that,” I said with my newly mustered up confidence. The publication was now going to be my ‘baby’ and I was determined to prove that as the lone-female, I could pull this one out for my boys.

“We are continuously growing towards new trends and technologies which shape our current state, but no matter how far we get from our starting point, we always have our roots, our education, that forever ground us.”

Kristin Kolowich is currently a graduate student in architecture at Clemson University. She is the Editor in Chief of Branch 1.0, the annual graduate student-produced publication. Kolowich earned a B.A. from Wake Forest University in 2008 and in 2010 she was one of the founding partners of the Graduate Architecture Student Partnership.

Now of course the publication did happen, otherwise you wouldn’t be reading this. That’s not to necessarily say that the rest was history. The existence of this document is the culmination of a month of rigorous work and sleepless nights by three motivated and unrelenting students and by no means came about effortlessly. Further, it’s one thing to compile a

12 bunch of student and faculty work into one cohesive narrative but it’s quite another to give that narrative purpose, worth and a name. Which brings me to the word “branch.” The name of this publication is an evolution: a result some substantial brainstorming and evaluation, much like the very thing it stands for. The word “evolution” is frequently heard in our daily architectural discourse. The evolution of architecture. The evolution of materiality. The evolution of sustainability. The evolution of architectural education. Lecture after lecture we are reminded that the built world is evolving and that we must adapt and respond to the changing environment. But where does that change happen and when do we make it happen? As students in architecture, we must follow a curriculum and our role is to be reverent sponges that absorb the wisdom, expertise and brilliance of our professors only to one day take all of that digested knowledge and turn it into practice. This word “evolution” applies to us somehow, but is it even the right word? An evolution implies change. It is the gradual development of something from a simple to a more complex form. It also implies that the original state of the thing that is evolving is lost to the newly evolved result. I liked the concept of the publication reflecting this idea of evolution. I began thinking that as architecture students we go undergo our own evolution throughout our education but unlike the definition of the word, we do not necessarily lose our original state to the process. The education we receive is forever our foundation... our roots. We all endure standardized curriculum and it is our job to take these roots and develop our own path based on individual interests and strengths in an effort to become the professional we want to be. In that sense, it’s not so much an evolution that we experience, it’s more of a lateral extension we make from these roots that causes us to subdivide our basic skill set into more complex realms of expertise. While this branching process may begin at the educational level, it continues far beyond into our professional practice. As manifested branches of our educational discourse we are continuously growing and bifurcating towards new trends and technologies which shape our current state, but no matter how far we get from our starting point, we always have

our roots, our education, that forever ground us. Therefore, this publication is a documentation of the branching that occurred in Clemson during the year as a whole- as well as that of its individual students and faculty members. Branching?…Branch?…Branch! I like it. Provocative, insightful, has a nice ring to it… I love it. Hello, publication name! It was a great idea, but now how on earth do we convey that message graphically so people will get it? I will quickly swallow my pride and admit that I had not even considered how we were going to illustrate my new philosophy. Fortunately, Kyle, one of the editors, was on the same wavelength. After an evening charrette produced what were proving to be boring, cliché ideas, we were tired and discouraged. And then… Kyle folded a piece of paper. At 4 A.M., it was the most beautiful thing we had ever seen. That simple, folded piece of paper turned out to be the element that inspired the materiality of the graphics in Branch. Every image in this publication is photograph of that paper: folding and branching in all of its glory. The background of the photos is an old table top we found in the hallway, underneath a site model. The table is the symbolic reflection of the roots: a vintage, weathered studio table whose scars, cuts and color are the result of generations of Clemson students’ design ideas, projects and models. In the words of our other editor Jeff, “It screams studio.’” From that point on, Branch had a life and it developed into something greater than we ever originally envisioned it to be. So there you have it; the story of how this publication came to be. We have laid the roots for this document and it is up our future classes of students to keep it alive. The finished product gives us an overwhelming sense of accomplishment, pride and triumph; and it still brings the biggest smile to my face when I hold it in my hands. And now, without further adieu, Branch 1.0.


e m e th



ARMANDO MONTILLA Assistant Professor

When Marc-Antoine Laugier pointed out to the primitive hut as the origin of Architecture on his An Essay on Architecture (1), he unveiled the fundamental question of re-using in architecture, not only as the seminal transformation of material, but rather on prolonging the life of the object found in nature, by changing its role and it position in space; and by making it become part of an assemblage gainfully enhanced with a purpose, a new raison d’être. Industrialization and modernity brought a deeper transformation of materiality and components, which were bound to become part of the built environment, by adding the them the technological paradigm (and the subsequent chain of energy consumption); to a process that transformed the act of re-using, into the transformation of prime matter by means of the assembly-line productivity brought by 20th Century Fordism. Re-using has now returned back to Laugier’s principles: Re-purposing without the tax of extra energy toll, is bound to become the new paradigm at the architectural thought of ecological consciousness. Industrial, so-called ‘eco’ designers do that already, outsourcing the natural and implicit transformations of mass induced by biological and environmental conditions, into resulting entire new products. No, it is not utopia coming back to haunt us from the 60s, it is real, and it is coming our way.



But new and ‘novel’ cater to different meanings: How ‘new’ can ‘new’ be? The paradigm of re-using speaks not only of the locality of matter substance, (with a minimal degree of energyconsuming transformation, plus the maximum exploiting of re-arrangement and order); but also speaks of the notion of creating and of an implicit re-definition of the notion of authorship. The architect thus becomes more a mediator than a creator, envisioning entire new systems derived from previous, outdated and in disuse pre-existing assemblages and spatial conditions. The final result takes the place of the next stage in the transformation of building matter, which ideally might not be at the last stage, or at the life span end of the composite.

“How crucial is it to preserve former uses, and what are the possible consequences and effects in the collective realm?” Armando Montilla is the faculty advisor for Branch and an Assistant Professor of Architecture, History & Theory and Criticism at Clemson University appointed 2009. He has worked in Miami and Los Angeles, with firms such as Arquitectonica, RTKL and The Jon Jerde Partnership, and with Ricardo Bofill Taller de Arquitectura in Barcelona. His essays and writings have been quoted by authors such as Roberto Segre in Culture, urbanism and planning Heritage, culture, and identity (Ashgate Publisher, 2006), and have been published in a multitude of academic journals and university publications. He is presently a PhD Candidate at Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, on the multicultural city and a comparative study on urbanity and ethnicity between Miami and Barcelona.

Re-defining authorship by re-using matter celebrates the triumph of 19th Century Laugier’s thinking, combined with industrialized 20th Century Fordism: As different materials behave differently and possess diverse inherent properties, technology is geared to find the best bonding agent between them, and to highlight the assemblage conditions, which will better perform in terms of thermal efficiency, energy saving and atmospheric/ambience qualities. We can now name this, as a new ‘performative materiality’, made possible by new advanced techniques in material science, which can anticipate material behavior and resistance properties. The architect can take authorship of a new composition, but the performance of the ensemble will remain in the realm of collaborative trans-discipline. Re-using and re-defining also act together within the envisioned dwelling of the near future: The net-zero home is bound not only to produce its own energy by harvesting it, but also to re-incorporate its own waste, as part of a naturally-


logic process of transformation, which will outsource resulting detritus into the production of bio-mass and the fertilizing of its own greenery, including its own occupants supplying, comestible produce: Here Fordism is taken to an introverted extreme, where chain production becomes a localized and domestic process of self-supplying and self-consumption, eliminating chains of energy-consuming distribution lines, and costly displacements to reach edible goods.

but also of the collective idea of public space: When a square in Cairo acquires significant historical meaning by the act of ‘bio-power’ - strictly according to its definition by Foucault (3), the meaning of re-appropriation escalates in the collective consciousness to another level in relevance. Architecture has also lost spatial collective meaning to the influence of the media and economics. Is it time to re-appropriate the realm of presence architecture deserves?

The aggressive erosion of land by human use plus the growing occupancy of that land, calls for new means of occupation in terms of re-appropriating former uses, being those part of unused built infrastructure, existing assemblages with long gone usefulness and potential re-purposing. The idea of preserving versus destroying serves here as a perverse metaphor: When a turn of the 20th Century Church in Buffalo NY, falls into disuse and faces either its destruction by demolition, or the prospect of a new life as suburban Church in the outskirts of Atlanta (2), the idea of re-purposing takes another romantic turn on the attachment to tradition and the salvaging of old patrimony, versus the environmental consciousness of energy consumption. Re-appropriating arrives here as the paradox faced by the new architectural mediator: How crucial is it to preserve former uses, and what are the possible consequences and effects in the collective realm?

The notions of re-using, re-defining and re-appropriating come together as a festive Leitmotiv for a much-needed architectural consciousness, one that does not celebrate plain disengaged novelty, but rather a creativity of techno-ethics (4) and ecological value.

The High-Line in New York by Diller & Scofidio + Renfro and Field Operations is notably the best current example of reappropriating spatial components into an inedited goal, where old industrial infrastructure having a strong presence in the city is re-purposed as a public space of unlimited consequences. Here is not only about buildings, but also about the built environment and its consequential presence in space. The idea of re-appropriation goes also beyond the actual use of material,

(1) LAUGIER Marc-Antoine: An Essay on Architecture. Santa Monica CA: Hennessey & Ingalls, 2009. (2) MAHER, Dennis: “On the Battle for the Afterlives of Post-Mortem Architecture” (ACSA National 99th Annual Meeting: Where do you stand? Conference Proceedings, 2011. ( (3) For Michael Foucault, biopower, is a technology of power, which is a way of managing people as a group. Antonio Negri in his book Empire (2001), defines ‘bio-power’ as the power of the people. (4) Technoethics (TE), is an interdisciplinary research area concerned with all moral and ethical aspects of technology in society. It draws on theories and methods from multiple knowledge domains to provide insights on ethical dimensions of technological systems and practices for advancing a technological society (





Southern Experience Complex

a n d e rs o n , s o ut h ca ro l i n a

ADIE HAILAT Clemson Studio | Criss Mills | F 09

bringing back a healthier lifestyle and greener surroundings

Strip Culture: Defeating the Spread In the developing city of Anderson, South Carolina, a commercial strip is evolving. Horizontal spreading and massive concrete parking lots have replaced the existing green forests. The HO[rise]ON FOLD, aims to bring back a healthier lifestyle, greener surroundings and defeat this spread. The concept of the design explores the possibilities of back tracking the problem. The program is first laid out horizontally, the way current development takes place. Then a series of folds allow for the maximization of space while minimizing the square footage. This folding of various programmatic elements allows for unprecedented adjacencies, creating an interesting relationship between the different activities taking place in, on, and near the building. The series of folds are then sunk into the ground to take advantage of the river that runs next to the sight allowing citizens to experience it. Both the HO[rise]ON FOLD and the contours of the site define a natural trail that runs within the site and through the building. Various other activities start developing due to the form, like white water kayaking, rock climbing over the folding plates of the building, skating, a flea market and many other spontaneous activities. Programmatic elements start to draw lines of varying speeds due to the nature of the program. These lines create nodes of interest where they meet. Cars, pedestrians, skaters, climbers, hikers, and even people sitting down, all define the space in particular moments.

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan


PICKUP yourpersonalkayakorborrowonefromus.

EXPERIENCE thewhitewatershootoffformaximum adrenalinerush,ortherelaxationslopeforan enjoyableadventure

HANDIN yourkayakafteryournewexperienceand wewilltakecareofitfromthereandyoucanrush upstairsforanotherride

ENJOY theviewofyourkayakslidingontheroofina displayofacontinuoslychanging“art” installation




AIAS-Kawneer School for Tomorrow Design Competition

cl e ms o n , s o ut h ca ro l i n a


Research Studio | Ulrike Heine + Jose Caban | S 10

sustaining education through design

Clemson Zero Energy House “The larger scope of this research is to design, plan, build and evaluate the Clemson Zero Energy House, an affordable low-energy house, which can be adapted to the climatic conditions of South Carolina using passive energy strategies and natural materials. The House will meet the highest standards of contemporary design. The planned building should be a prototype of sustainable architecture - a show-house for students, faculty, researchers and clients - making sustainable, ecological, energy efficient and climate sensitive architecture experiential, touchable and measurable.” -Ulrike Heine Design Considerations

How can we design a house that is climate specific, spatially optimized, energy efficient, accomodates active sustainable technologies and is economical? Through research and design iterations climate specific passive design strategies are identified and complimented by appropriate active sustainable technologies. Incorporating the institutional knowledge contained in housing archetypes of the upstate affords the Zero Energy House a sense of place and context. The Zero Energy House features an optimized core containing mechanical, plumbing, and vertical circulation spaces organized around a vertical service shaft. By centralizing these required functions, the size of the north and south wings is easily modified. A simplified floorplan based on a 2’-0” grid maximizes material use and accomodates modular assembly for pre-fabrication. Beyond providing a major contribution to the dialogue of contemporary sustainable architecture, the Clemson Zero Energy House seeks to foster Inter-Departmental Collaboration and forge partnerships with Industry leaders which will define the next era of research Clemson University.

Key Plumbing Areas Mechanical Vertical Circulation

Lower Level: 1,504 hsf


Final Model Perspective Images

Envelope Energy Efficiency Analysis

Upper Level: 641 hsf

Roof Overhang Energy Efficiency Analysis

Front Porch Perspective




Greenville-Spartanburg International Airport Addition and Renovation for the Greenville-Spartanburg Airport

gre e n v i l l e , s o ut h ca ro l i n a

JILL RODGERS ALLISON CHANG Synthesis Studio | Ulrike Heine路Dan Harding路Bernhard Sill | F 10

repetition of frame creates elegance and flow in airport redesign

Conceptual Diagram

Sectioning Space Due to a recent partnership with Southwest Airlines and expanding markets, the Greenville-Spartanburg Airport needs to renovate its core, expand its existing facility, and add eight new gates. The redesign was inspired by the existing precast concrete t-beams repeating at the roof condition.  The repetition of the simple frame created an elegance and flow in the structure that the rest of the existing airport was lacking.  The concept seeks to expand upon the existing form by transforming the frames based on the occupant movement to create an iconic, functional airport. Along with the structural rhythm, the objective was to simplify passenger flow and enable a more enjoyable passenger experience. The points of arrival and departure by ground were realigned and program spaces were diagrammed to create a series of ribs containing three programmatic spaces separated by two areas of movement. Eleven key frames were designed in detail as points of reference to the program and as a result of passenger movement at that moment. The result was a sectional study of over 250 concrete frames.

Second Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Ground Floor Plan

Section Perspective Through Arrival


Interior View of Boarding Gates

Exterior View of Entry




D esign | B u i l d

c h a rl e s t o n , s o ut h ca ro l i n a

STUDIO V CAC.C | David Pastre | F 10

one client. one city. one semester. one professor.

information kiosk + movie screen The studio focused on architecture and tectonics, particularly the relationship between design and building through a hybrid academic/professional studio where students designed and built an actual project in collaboration with clients, professionals and craftspersons. Bluesphere: Earth Art Expo aims to reach out to middle and high school children, college students and young adults as well as the general public in our area; any person that is served by a participating organization is affected by this citywide exposition. The studio was devoted to the execution of two projects aiding the cause of bluesphere in Charleston. The first project was an information kiosk. 95% of the materials use in this project were salvaged locally, and established a unique palette from which to design. The design was a collaborative process between the students, the client, the city, and professional architects and engineers incorporating models, full scale mock ups and joinery tests. The project was constructed within three days on the most prominent green space in Charleston, SC. Once the project was deconstructed, 100% of the materials were transported back to the main campus to be used for future design build studios. The project established a model for sustainability in construction to be repeated in future studios.

STUDIO V: Elissa Bostain, Rebecca Cook, Jim Graham, Xiaokang He, John Lindenmu, Lauren Martinez, Ryan Massengill, Joe McNeill, Ben Miskelly, Michael Niezer, Caitlin Ranson






information kiosk + movie screen For the second phase, 85% of the materials used were also salvaged locally. The design was a collaborative process between the students, the client, the city, and professional architects and engineers incorporating models, full scale mock ups and joinery tests to solve the complex mechanics of this system. The project was constructed with a focus on portability and ease of assembly. This screen structure was the center piece for bluesphereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s closing event. The screen will be transported on the custom made trailer to be repeatedly used in the future. -David Pastre








Air Force Village Chapel Design Competition Second Prize Winner

s a n a n t o n i o , t e xa s


Synthesis Studio | Ulrike Heine + Dan Harding | F 09

center for fellowship

From Clarity to Revelation The chapel is characterized by a clearly ordered plan with a revelation of light within, through strong concrete forms and moments of reveal. The program is divided into three main bars: the sanctuary, the side chapels and sacristies, and the restrooms and administration. The fourth bar of the narthex unites the three bars, in which the three main volumes are easily discernible and accessible. Three gardens result from the placement of the three bars. The larger Fellowship Garden is accessed from the narthex and sanctuary and serves as a social gathering space. It is bound by a series of rammed earth walls, reminiscent of the mission style architecture found in San Antonio. Off of this space, a smaller Amy Leong and Natalie Shovlin won second prize in Contemplation Garden overlooks the 2009 nation-wide Air Force Village Chapel Design the large reflection pond, which Competition held under the sponsorship of the American surrounds the sanctuary. The Institute of Architects. The competition had a total of 92 third garden is located between professionals and 33 student entries. This competition challenged entrants to design an inter-faith spiritual the administration wing and the center for Air Force Village, located in San Antonio, Texas. healthcare facility. The new chapel was supposed to inspire parishioners The interior of the sanctuary and create a significant architectural landmark. employs sunlight to mark the transition into the sacred. Windows expressed on the exterior of the chapel are concealed within by wooden and white plaster panels suspended from the ceiling and walls. Light emanates mysteriously from behind and through these panels, encompassing the space, and evoking the sacred. Light is brought into the side chapels and sacristies through conical light wells that are only perceived upon entering the space. In addition to day lighting, the chapel incorporates several other green strategies as well. The roof of the three main bars are green roofs to eliminate heat islands in a very hot climate. Operable windows allow natural ventilation to condition both the sanctuary and administration wing, reducing the load on mechanical systems. The rammed earth garden walls, being made of dirt, are a highly sustainable building material. Floor Plan



Concrete Walls

Plaster Panels

Primary Entrance

Wood Panels

Courtyard Looking South


Sanctuary Looking South

Exploded Axonometric

Transverse Section




Second Prize Winner AIAS-Kawneer School for Tomorrow Design Competition

n o r t h c h a rl e s t o n , s o ut h ca r ol i n a

NATE BOYKIN Clemson Studio | Peter Laurence | F 10

education through structural logic

Noisette Elementary School Sustainability is about the future. What will our future look like if the resources needed for tomorrow are used up and discarded today? The children in our schools are often treated as such- a commodity in abundance. We cannot let the future of our culture rest in the hands of a neglected generation. Our schools have to change in order to adapt to the variety of students they house, or we will continue to sink into illiteracy, unemployment, and general lack of concern with the community at large. In order to reestablish the school as the center of the community it once was, its built environment has to serve a variety of functions and stimulate on many levels. The design intent of Noisette Elementary- situated in an up and coming pedestrian neighborhood- is to teach the child and community with its structure. Large primary shapes are joined with oversized exposed structural elements- educating its inhabitants about the structural logic. Large cisterns situated along the front entrance collect and store rain water for irrigation purposessilently instilling the children and community with responsible and

44 sustainable practices. Local salvaged wood from an abundance of demolitions is repurposed for concrete formwork- leaving a signature of regional history. The central administration coreelevated and transparent- speaks to a communal appreciation for integrity in our leaders.  However, more important than what a facade can hint- the schools of tomorrow Nate Boykin won second place in the international must change the way we educate. This project AIAS-Kawneer School of Tomorrow Student Design weaves multi-functional and multi-scaled Competition for this entry. “Submissions were evaluated spaces throughout the circulation, so that based on their originality and appropriate use of learning can be spontaneous and engaging. Kawneer architectural aluminum building products, and implementation of sustainable and universal Spaces flow from large to small, from sunny accessibility design principles for development of both to shaded, and as a child finds his way he can building and site,” according to Yuriy Napelenok of the be as playful or introverted as he chooses AIAS. All award-winning designs will be displayed at to be. A typical class room is surrounded the AIAS Forum 2011 in Phoenix, Arizona in December and featured at the 2011 AIA Convention and Design by seating, gathering zones and ample Exposition in New Orleans in May. Winning entries circulation. This allows teachers to  break off will also be published in the spring 2011 issue of Crit: into smaller groups or gather multiple age Journal of the AIAS. groups in a comfortable setting where more dynamic learning can take place. The daily routine of a child will now find variety and a sense of the unpredictable to keep them interested. While the daily operations of a school often go unnoticed, it is imperative to understand that a building of this scale significantly impacts its surrounding site. In order to limit these adverse affects- day lighting through thoughtful sectional design, solar collection through industry-leading Kawneer products, storm-water management through roof collection, and passive cooling through integrated green roofs have all been implemented.  Noisette Elementary carefully considers how a child interacts with his surroundings and how those interactions contribute to his development. When a school can better fulfill this purpose, it can reestablish itself as a viable center of community with a more hopeful future.




a s h evi l l e , n or th ca r ol i n a

ELISE LITTLE LAURA MELTON G1 Studio | Armando Montilla | F 10

creating renewable energy from brewery waste

Biodigesting Efficient Energy Our concept for Lexington Avenue was inspired by the words of Henri Lefebvre: â&#x20AC;&#x153;[N]etworks of exchange and flows of raw materials and energy fashion space and are determined by it.â&#x20AC;?[1] From this quote, we began considering the way energy determines space. We strove to produce a cyclical effect where waste materials create energy, which in turn, creates dynamic social spaces. With this idea in mind, we researched renewable energy sources and decided on an underground Biphase Orbicular Biodigester. It uses waste from Asheville breweries to create carbon neutral, renewable energy for an urban dining room in the middle of the street. The Biphase Orbicular Biodigester, a PurposeEnergy digester designed specifically for the brewing industry, transforms high solids content brewery waste and other organic materials into biogas. The remaining content after the digester process is primarily salt and organic fertilizer. The biogas, a mixture of carbon dioxide and methane (the principal component of natural gas), is then used to generate heat and electricity. The process produces enough energy to power the waste treatment process and meet our streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s power needs. Unlike burning fossil fuels, the use of waste represents a closed carbon cycle and thus does not contribute to increases in atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide. Furthermore, because anaerobic systems are air tight, the chance for odor and other gaseous pollutant emissions are negligible. This also holds true for liquid emissions that are often a problem with composting technologies. To provide organic materials for this Biodigester, the ten existing Asheville breweries as well as restaurants and residents contribute their waste grain and food waste. These organic materials are thus diverted from entering the landfill and/or municipal wastewater treatment facility. It also reduces cost of byproduct remediation. Breweries are currently hauling their waste grain to farms, as a source of feedstock. Our program will save them this cost. Additionally, the renewable energy introduced by the PurposeEnergy digester can be monetized in the form of carbon-offset credits as well as marketed to environmentally conscious beer drinkers. Thus, this process enables the brewery to reduce its opAshville Streetscape Perspective

48 erating costs in a highly competitive marketplace, encourages the entrepreneurial spirit, and produces green renewable energy. The Biphase Orbicular Biodigester’s energy powers our new urban dining room. Recycled stainless steel modules – adjustable to bar, table, or stool height – pull up from the street and click into place. Biogas is piped up the support for the center modules, creating cooking stations atop the tables and outdoor space heaters radiating on the center module supports. Additionally, the modules can form rows of benches that, with the slope of the street, produce an impromptu amphitheatre for outdoor performances. During the day, the tables sit flush with the road to permit normal traffic. At night when the street closes, the modules are cleaned and ready for use. The Biodigester also powers streetlights and outdoor chandeliers, providing soft light for nighttime socializing. The curbs are sloped, so that once closed to cars, the street becomes an outdoor room. Both sidewalks and roads are resurfaced with Flexi-Pave, a pour-in-place paving surface pervious to storm water. The rubber material comes from recycled tire as well as has the advantage of a flexible surface that doesn’t crack or develop potholes. Trashcans, placed along the street, allow pedestrians to contribute their organic waste to the Biodigester. In sets of three, they offer disposal for organic waste, recycling, and garbage. The trim lights up when disposal occurs to encourage participation. The green line painted on the street playfully connects the trashcans to the Biodigester. The dumpster, placed at the back of the parking lot, allows trucks from breweries and restaurants to contribute their high solids content to the Biodigester below. Powered by the Biodigester, our new outdoor dining space allows for a communal urban moment devoid of consumerism as well as challenges the gap between public and private space. Thus, “the concept of social space becomes broader”[2] when the pedestrian takes over the street and creates social space where there once was none. [1] Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1974), 85. [2] Ibid, 85






Urban Planning + Design/Build

c h ar l e s t o n , s o ut h ca ro l i n a


CAC.C | Robert Miller | F 09 - S 10

increasing bicycle use in charleston

BIKE LINKS Charleston’s Bike Plan In the fall of 2009 students in Studio V at the Clemson Architecture Center in Charleston developed a visionary cycling master plan for the Metro-Charleston area. Guided by Professor Rob Miller the student team worked with officials from the City of Charleston and surrounding municipalities as well with cycling advocacy groups to develop a cycling master plan focused on redeveloping Charleston, South Carolina into a world class cycling community. The master plan itself connects the peninsula of Charleston to the outlying municipalities of Mount Pleasant, Sullivan’s Island, West Ashley, North Charleston, James Island, and Folly Beach. Further, the master plan identifies an iconic point of interest as a destination within each of the municipalities and connects it via a separated bike path that features distinctive planting and paving materials to develop a unique character for each municipal connector to significantly improve the quality of experience for cyclist, pedestrians and motorist alike. A comprehensive goal of the master plan is to respect the rights of all cyclists, considering their wide ranging skill and experience levels. While roads and streets are part of the public domain it is not always appropriate to mix cyclists with automobiles. The implementation of physical barriers such as landscaping and hard-scaping, which varies based on road conditions, is the most appropriate response in the interest of increasing ridership. Seams in the urban fabric adjacent to major automobile thoroughfares were targeted during route selection to maximize existing land opportunities. If these were unavailable, roads that offered the safest, highest quality environment and most direct route were selected. At the conclusion of the semester students and the Clemson Architecture Center in Charleston turned over all research, documents, and information to the City of Charleston for further refinement before the city adopts and implements the master plan. During the research phase students discovered numerous existing cycling master plans for the metro-Charleston area but these plans were often incomplete and lapses in services and

facilities occurred near boundaries between municipalities. In addition to the process of design, soliciting public input brought together various agencies, advocacy groups and community members with a vested interest in cycling, which built consensus and a cohesive inspiring vision for the future of cycling in Charleston, which perhaps was the most profound result of the master plan effort. -Shannon Calloway (‘11) + Jeffrey Pauling (‘11) FALL 2009 STUDIO V: Jake Bachman, Max Bendert, Shannon Calloway, Sean MacManus, Kyle Miller, Carson Nolan, Jeffrey Pauling, Tyler Whitehead






Framing the CCDC A vertical, collaborative, and iterative studio, consisted of four graduate and six undergraduate architecture students serving the Charleston Civic Design Center (CCDC). The center’s focus to increase bicycle use within the Charleston was the catalyst of this project. As a display of “practicing what you preach” the center requested that the studio design and build a permanent bicycle storage facility adjacent to their historic building. The CCDC building in the larger context of the block seems out of place amongst its larger and newer neighbors. Historic documentation reveals it was once apart of an urban environment that has been diluted through the years. The project sought to create a dialogue between history and the bicycle. The bicycle boxes are positioned perpendicular to the street and away from the building to place the bicycle on display to the community. At the same time this movement accentuates the odd trapezoidal shape of the building. Placed in a constant row elevated above the ground, to further celebrate the bicycle, the boxes separate only in recognition of a preexisting building. The CCDC wall became a graphic representation of the intensity of physical alterations that the building has incurred. The activation of the wall creates an alley way that allows for people to interact with history and further understand the area through detailed graphics on the back of the bicycle boxes. -Jonathan Jones (‘11)

SPRING 2010 STUDIO V: Joel Babcock, Alex DeFee, Daniel Hutcherson, Jonathan Jones, Charles Kane, Andrew Pardue, Kathryn Sedor, Lindsay Shelton, Joel Travis, Barak Yaryan





The project is the result of a design / build studio experience for the 2nd year graduate students and was designed and built in the courtyard space of the architecture building (Lee Hall) over the course of 7 weeks using standard wood production framing materials and techniques.


The work offers a multi-layered space for public displays of behavior and was designed as a response to the play â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Man Who Was Thursday, â&#x20AC;? a play that was used for the Russian Constructivists stage sets. While it is not intended as a direct analog of the play, the work draws metaphorical lines between itself and the interwoven, shifting ground of the play.

The language of the work is related to constructivist assemblages, the De Stijl movement and the ridged geometry of its siting.


As a three dimensional construct, its is not dependent on a clearly defined set of bounded spaces. Rather, it is made up of a porous collection of surfaces and planes that describe neither object nor container, and resists attempts to understand the space through these polarities of interpretation. As a pedagogical tool, the design/ build experience offers a model in strong contrast to the traditional desk based project. With this model not only is the opportunity for collaborative efforts multiplied but in shifting the paradigm towards “making,” a number of new connections are invoked.

“Of course there is also the satisfaction of seeing a design realized”

Criss Mills is a registered architect and holds masters degrees in Architecture and Fine Arts. For the past nine years he has been teaching here at Clemson University. His interest in the design process, informed by physical models, drives the evolving content of his book “Designing With Models.” He has worked as a sculptor and architect for twenty-five years. He is the founder of Criss Mills Architects, an Atlanta-based firm, where he currently practices. The firm focuses on modern and contemporary design fueled by the idea that architecture should be an explorative event, played out in the context of the client’s interest and the pragmatic demands of the developmental envelope.

One of the primary connections is that of erasing the artificial division between design and execution. With it, process or becoming, a pervasive but possibly invisible condition, comes into play as a central force. While it is ostensibly the goal of completion that drives the project, the evolutionary state of process is far more important, forcing the on going ingestion of lessons large and small. Of course there is also the satisfaction of seeing a design realized, but the real value here lies in the ability of experiential space to be engaged by users in the time / space network. This opportunity is unparalleled in understanding how the built artifact actually operates when taken over by those who consume and interpret it. …And while there is a design component not unlike other


experiences, it is uniquely charged with the anticipation of actualization and responsibility for a set of constraints usually placed in suspension in the studio. The full array of these constraints ranges from environmental, fiscal, structural and temporal, to the imperative for accurate information in the unforgiving world of building. This pragmatic class of constraints may be more obvious in terms of how they flow from the built work, but another important layer is brought forth in the move between the design and the building of it. This layer is usually not addressed in the academic studio as well. It would be simple to label it as details, but what in reality is forced out is the idea of a complete and pervasive design. If it is not present, at least the fact that this level of consideration may be absent becomes obvious. Finally, it is tempting to see the event of assembly as a form of training as the studio participants make alliances with new tools such as power saws and drills. However, the real importance here lies in the engagement of the material and the convention within which it resides. This is to say that it is not simply a one way imposition of will over the material through mastery of its rules, but that there is another round of negotiation, with the material adding its voice to the project.

Studio Participants: Aaron Swiger, Adie Hailat, Carson Nolan, Kaitlyn Mooney, Kyle Miller, Lauren Culp, Lori Sons, Mililian Scott, Patrick Lee, Shannon Calloway, Blake Hoffman





2009 Air Force Village Chapel Design Competition First Prize Winner

s a n a n t o n i o, tex a s

JONATHAN EDENS KYLE KEAFFEBER Synthesis Studio | Ulrike Heine, Dan Harding, Jose Caban | F 09

reconnecting congregations through arteries of greenspace

Community Connection Through Gardens This design intends to provide the Air Force Village with a chapel that serves as a model for the fulfillment of the charge set forth in the genesis. Currently, the Village is separated into two polarized settlements to the north and south, each possessing its own version of a “park” (accented with small ponds). The “Community Center,” with its large swaths of parking does little to connect the two halves. With the given site resting in the void between, a prime opportunity for “connection” presents itself. The site design of this scheme implements a gently sloping “plateau” that connects the existing parks into a single, continuous artery of greenspace. The chapel becomes the heart as it is placed atop the plateau, along the seam of the once divided Village. The plateau collects the approaching community members Jonathan Edens and Kyle Keaffeber won and, through the provision of northern first prize in the 2009 nation-wide Air Force Village Chapel Design Competition held and southern path, funnels them toward under the sponsorship of the American the chapel. The iconic form of the building Institute of Architects. The competition had rises slowly into view above the shade of the a total of 92 professionals and 33 student trees lining the path and evokes that once entries. This competition challenged entrants to design an inter-faith spiritual forgotten sense of reverence for the House center for Air Force Village, located in of God. From either direction, the three San Antonio, Texas. The new chapel was concrete towers that anchor the building to supposed to insire parishoners and create the ground and simultaneously connect it a significant architectural landmark. with the heaves, provide a firm foundation for the contemporary chapel form. The narthex, as it intersects the garden path, can be opened almost entirely to the open air of the surrounding garden; subtly offering the opportunity for a meaningful encounter within, as it allows for passage from one park to another. On days of worship, the narthex fulfills many roles: covered passage from the existing health facility, shade from the summer sun, shelter from inclement weather, and most importantly, a place for gathering and fellowship. Eventually, the narthex will direct the congregation from the garden, between the two Eastern towers, and through the tall, wooden doors at its terminus… and into the nave. Unlike, its religious

First Floor Plan

64 predecessors, who found themselves bound to the mantra of “light penetrates where the structure is not,” this chapel declares that “light penetrates where the structure is.” It is discovered that the seemingly solid and structural concrete western tower has been hollowed out by the chancel. During worship, sunlight pours through the three symbolic openings along the tower’s rim, providing a potent reminder of the beauty, power, and presence of the Holy Trinity. In concert with the chancel, the sophisticated wooden “skin” covering the nave (and narthex) houses and conceals all of the necessary functions of the space while preserving a clean and warm aesthetic. At the end of the service, the narthex invites the congregation to circulate and spill out into the surrounding garden before they begin the reflective descent from the mountain top.





Squarescape in Placa de la Gardunya

ba rc e l o n a , s pa i n

JOSHUA ATRIA JEFF TREITZ G1 Studio | Doug Hecker | F 10

atmosphere surrounded and defined by water

What if there was an urban oasis located in the Placa de la Gardunya, a square behind one of the busiest markets in the world, The Boqueria Mercet, in the middle of Barcelona, Spain (a city facing an extreme water shortage)... Aquasphere is a complete redevelopment of the Place de la Gardunya, a square located directly behind the thriving Boqueria Mercet in Barcelona, Spain. Beneath the busy surface of market life lies a complex system of produce delivery and water distribution. Every year, the market uses milllions of gallons of fresh water in the form of water and ice. The basice aim of Aquasphere is to create a sustainable water system that supplies fresh water in its three physical states to the market and to the plaza. Not only does Aquasphere provide water and a simplified system for food delivery but also a gathering place for locals and tourists to celebrate and relish in the creation and conservation of water. Rainwater is collected from the large roof covering the Boqueria and in the three water collection towers located in the plaza. The water is filtered and stored in large clear-resin reservoirs underneath the towers. During times of little or no rainwater, water extraction machines located in the water collection towers and atop the market tower extract water from the air using a process of reverse osmosis and desalinization. Every morning, water is frozen in the large ice tower located on the front of the marketâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s office tower. The ice is carved and deposited in a large ice room below the market for use by the many market vendors. As the ice melts throughout the day the water is put back into the Aquasphere system.

Flow of merket processes

Current pedestrian flow

Plaza groundscape plan

Desired pedestrian flow

Plaza elevations

Resin covered swimming platform

Elevated rainwater wading pool

Public space perspective Resin surface attached to substructure by thin steel pipes that double as misting apparati Aqua sciences water producing technology

Steel columns anchored into 1.25 meters of concrete





AIAS-Kawneer School for Tomorrow Design Competition

c h a rl e s t o n , s o ut h ca rol i n a


Clemson Studio | Peter Laurence | F 10

sustaining education through design


Individualizing the Learning Environment One might ask, “What does the School of Tomorrow do?” or “What will the School of Tomorrow do for the education system?” When designing the Charleston Harbor Elementary School a strong emphasis was placed on what the school could accomplish for students and teachers, the surrounding community, and for the education system as a whole. The classrooms designed for Charleston Harbor Elementary accordingly focused on how different types of learning can be accomplished in one room, accommodating individual learning styles, while accomplishing the goals of the group. The design of this multivalent learning environment therefore focused on four major types of learning: social, outdoors, traditional (although increasingly digital), and “in-between” spaces that focus on nature and the surrounding environment, remove the barrier between interior and exterior, and provide a space for students to engage the exterior environment while still being in the classroom. Charleston Harbor Elementary is a school that is environmentally-conscious, provides a highly individualized learning environment for every student, and strives to broaden the horizon of the educational system as a whole.

Main Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan





Mixed-Use Space in Genoa

ge n o a , i t a l y


influencing the street atmosphere

06 Plan Roof Lounge

Concept Sketch

The Sound of Piazza Campetto There are few cars in the narrow streets of the Old City. People generally pass quickly around the site and through Piazza Campetto in a hurry to get somewhere else. The street atmosphere changes entirely when influenced by the right sounds. A guitarist busking near our site provided this with great affect. The way the music travels in the narrow streetscape inspires the design as the programmatic element. The crowded medieval site creates a closeness that desired to be addressed. How does one see out from the inside, without being on display to the outside? To reach this effect, a metal screen was used on the façade providing privacy, shading, and aesthetic invigoration. Programmatically, the residential area was lifted off the ground level and supported by thick “walls” which hold utilities and service space for the large cavernous music venue that takes its place. A roof bar takes advantage of the dense urban fabric that takes place above the busy street below.

05 Plan Residential 04 03 02

01 Plan Lobby

00 Plan Performance Interior perspectives



Floor Plates


Columns / Elevator


Construction diagram

Exterior Model perspective




Designing an iconic structure for a culture is a challenging process that most architects rarely experience. The architecture firm Snohetta, Craig Dykers and Kjetil Thorsen, has had this type of opportunity twice, and in both are charged with designing structures that reflect and almost symbolized each culture.


CAF Lecture Series

re f l e c t i o n b y

JARED MOORE M.Arch (â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;12)

For the majority of architects a design project usually consists of just a few client groups. These groups stem from high level executives to basic office staff, and even to the general public in the surrounding area of the project site. Though these groups may have different views on how the project should look and function they usually all tend to share some common ground on the overall goals for the project. I would argue that this common ground comes from the fact that the majority of the clients groups are all internal to the main client. For example, when designing the expansion for Lee hall the architects dealt with


many different client groups. The main group, or group with the most control of the projects, was high level leadership, President Barker, Trustees, Dean’s, and Chairs. The other client groups for the project included faculty, staff, students, and alumni. All of these other groups are internal members of the main client, and though they each have their own ideas and goals for the project they all share a common ground to build a new and innovative project. To most this would sound complex, and that’s because it is. Designing any project for any client will be a complex process involving many different people. So when Snohetta designed the Alexandria Library, and the National September 11 Memorial Museum Pavilion they had to deal with all of these groups, but also with the cultures of each nation.

“Snøhetta has responded with designs that reflect the cultures past and shed light on their future.”

Craig Dykers is - together with Kjetil Thorsen - founding Partner of the Norwegian Firm Snøhetta, which jumped into International Stardom with the building of the Alexandria Library in Egypt, project awarded in 1989 and finally completed in 2000. Later on, Snøhetta continued cultivating its interdisciplinary approach and sophisticated design image in projects such as the Peter Dass Museum and the Karmøy Fishing Museum in Norway; being more recently awarded the Mies Van der Rohe European Architecture Prize with their Project for the Oslo Opera, in 2009. With offices in Oslo and New York, Snøhetta is soon to complete in 2011 the September 911 Museum and Memorial in New York, has been recently awarded the Project for the extension of SF MOMA in San Francisco, and the reconstruction of public space in and around Times Square, in New York City.

When designing the Alexandria Library the client list for the project was long and complex. It included everyone from royalty and government officials to historians and the general public. Though Snohetta was designing a library, I would argue that the library also acted as a museum and serves as a icon of modern Egyptian architecture. Looking at the history of the Ancient library of Alexandria, or also known as The Royal Library of Alexandria, it was one the largest library in the world housing anywhere between 40,000 to 700,000 books. However, much of these books and scrolls were lost during the destruction of the ancient library, which is a major source of controversy today. Knowing all of this Snohetta had to design a building that would function not just as a library or museum, but as a symbol of Egyptian culture and its rich history. The library design comprises a simple circle inclined towards the sea and partly submerged in a pool of water. The inclined roof lets in daylight indirectly and allows for an uninterrupted view of the Mediterranean. The building is surrounded by a wall clad with granite engraved


with calligraphy and inscriptions representative of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s civilizations. The overall subtle form of the building fits perfectly within its surroundings. From the port the building is unobtrusive to the surrounding buildings, and even begins to connect the port to the rest of the city. The National September 11 Memorial Museum Pavilion is a project whose destruction is not controversial, and represents the main reason for the project. Though the project has a specific client/owner, the projects main client is that of the people that perished during the attacks and their families they left behind. The design for the building embodies a careful reaction to the horizontal character of the memorial design. The building will provide each visitor with the opportunity to engage in the act of remembering and to ponder the consequences of forgetting. The façade of the building uses a material that blurs the reflection, and almost has a ghost like effect on the reflecting image. Certain characteristics of the Museum Pavilion will seem reminiscent of the original towers, while at other times these notions are only alluded to. Inside the atrium stand two structural columns that were rescued from the original towers. Although they are removed from their former location and function, they mark the site with their own profound aesthetic gesture. Through these two different challenging projects Snohetta has responded with designs that reflect the cultures past and shed light on their future. Their subtle design forms and gestures represent a complex understanding of the culture and context in which they stand. In the end I feel that Snohetta accomplished the goals of each client group from both projects, and have designed modern icon or symbols representing the rich history of each projects culture.






generating structure from nature

gre e n v i l l e , s o ut h ca ro l i n a

ALEX DEFEE BARAK YARYAN Synthesis Studio | Ulrike Heine, Dan Harding, Bernhard Sill | F 10 Greenville-Spartanburg Airport


Blurring the Line Between Site and The GSP airport expansion capitalizes on the qualities of the surrounding landscape, transcribing the spatial and phenomenological character of the adjacent forest into the building. The project explores the blurring of site and building to create an extended threshold experience. The shifted beam grid of the roof allows for a forest-like haphazard placement of structural columns within a logical and buildable framework. This quality is further enhanced by an articulated roof treatment that is read as an extension of the forested landscape by air, and as an extension of forest canopy from within the building.

Core Building Form Derivation

Structural Grid Derivation


Floor 03 + Concourse

Wall Section

Floor 02 + Office

Floor 01

Interior View of Ticketing





I feel like Winka Dubbeldam has read Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake’s book, Refabricating Architecture. Either that, or the authors wrote it specifically based on her process of design. Whatever the case, her practice seems to be the epitome of their thought process, elaborated in Refabricating Architecture. The book argues that Architecture today is being designed and constructed in small pieces by different entities (the architect, materials researcher, contractor, etc.), and is thus fragmenting. Designing and putting up buildings still takes years to accomplish, and Architecture, as a profession, has fallen far behind the automobile and boating industries, which streamline their product’s manufacturing process to achieve maximum efficiency. Kieran and Timberlake state that architects need to learn from these two industries and create a new process of design that puts the building together digitally off site, and engages all the aspects of building construction throughout the process of design/completion. Thus, essentially fitting together

re f l e c t i o n by


CAF Lecture Series




large, preformed pieces to create the whole. It sounds a lot like prefabrication, but their argument of refabrication points out that customization is easily accomplished with today’s technology, and thus a refabricated building’s components don’t need to be the same to maintain efficiency. I believe Dubbeldam’s architecture accomplishes this refabrication, digitally manufacturing the building off site yet maintaining uniqueness in its components. She cuts out the tediousness of piecing small things together on site and instead goes straight to manufacturers to accomplish mass customization. Whereas other architects’ fragmentation of their design/construction process tediously complicates it, she redefines fragmentation as optimization. She looks to emulate nature, pointing out the optimized fragmentation of cells and antibodies that lead to beneficial mutations. In her lecture on Friday November, 21 2010 in Clemson University and an interview by Armando Montilla with her entitled “Pushing the Envelope”, two buildings stand out as examples of her mass customization: her Greenwich Street Project in New York, NY and her parents’ Dub House in Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

“[Dubbeldam] is paving a new road in architecture that leads to a streamlined building process where truly refabricated architecture can emerge as the norm.” Winka Dubbeldam is the principal of Archi-Tectonics NY, founded in 1994 and Archi-Tectonics NL, founded in 1997. Archi-Tectonics recently opened its offices in Shanghai [2008]. Dubbeldam is a graduate of the Academy of Architecture in Rotterdam [1990], and received a Degree in Master of Science in Advanced Architectural Design from Columbia University, NYC in 1992. She has lectured extensively and taught at the Masters Programs of Columbia University, NYC and Harvard University, Cambridge and currently holds the position of Director of the PP@PD, the Post-Professional Program at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. She has also served as juror in design competitions among which the AIA and the Architecture League, NY, as well as in a multiplicity of reviews at International Architecture Schools. Winka is also an external examiner at the Architectural Association, London

In her lecture, Dubbeldam started her presentation with The Greenwich Street Project. This one is all about the glass, used in an irregular way. The glass curtain wall curves without uniformity as it moves up the building. Its diagonal shape is derived from points of mathematical inflection where the sloping plane of New York’s midrise setbacks intersects with the vertical plane of the building. Such a design would normally cost an exorbitant amount, but she managed to push the price down by fabricating the building components separately and ensuring


their cohesiveness based on digital models. She says that thanks to digital models, a fabricator can have complete access to each point in space of a finished building, and thus accurately manufacture its components without imperfections. In fact, she says she doesn’t like Architecture’s staple program: AutoCAD, with its reliance on 2 dimensional drawings. She prefers to take out the realm of misunderstanding and go straight to the realization of form. Her Dub House, a much less curving building, yet equally astounding in its accomplishment, also embodies the idea of refabricated architecture. In the article “Pushing the Envelope”, she explains that the house was designed as an assemblage of pieces, only made possible by the advantages of digital and mathematical fabricating processes. Once on site, its components were assembled very quickly—in only 3 days! Though this speed harks to traditional prefabrication, the house lacks the drab uniformity of many other prefabricated buildings, and instead displays a uniqueness that can only come from specified design. She reinforces that this is only made possible by going directly to the manufacturer, cutting out the middleman, and thus the miscommunication. Using the advantages of digital design, Winka Dubbeldam successfully demonstrates a new mutation of architecture, in which the fragmentation of building design/construction is optimized through the clarity of 3 dimensional models. She is paving a new road in architecture that leads to a streamlined building process where truly refabricated architecture can emerge as the norm. She is the avant-garde, and as she says in the closing statement of “Pushing the Envelope”, “I think there are very interesting times ahead for digital practices, and eventually it will just be the only way.”





digitally fabricating nature in downtown austin

a us t i n , t e xa s

KRISTIN KOLOWICH GREGORY SWINTON Grad 1 Studio | Douglas Hecker | S 10 Art Alliance Austin, 2010 TOGS3 Design Competition


From Nature to [ART]tifice The third annual Temporary Outdoor Gallery Space Ideas Competition (TOGS3) enhances the global dialogue between art and architecture. The goal is to generate a temporary outdoor structure that will function simultaneously as an exhibition space and as an architectural exhibition. The TOGS challenges the visual and conceptual boundaries of the outdoor gallery space, transforming the open-air art fair experience into one that features the synergy between art and architecture and brings both to the public realm. The site for the TOGS is located in downtown Austin, Texas along the edge of Lady Bird Lake. The lake’s perimeter is a public park with bike paths and a trail system that weaves through the heart of Austin creating an urban oasis that is very popular with its residents. This piece of green space nestled within a buzzing cityscape was inspirational to our design; particularly the large amount of lush trees that separate the park from the city. The trees in site photo #26 inspired the design of the building skin that will enclose the TOGS. The skin was laid out in a cross pattern so it could literally “wrap” around the space. The pattern is continuous around the cross shape with the branches thickest at the bottom and then tapering into a thin, delicate lace which creates a similar tree experience to being underneath a tree canopy. To enhance the “natural” experience, the TOGS will be composed of two layers of plexiglass and thin steel metal panels. The plexiglass will create the whole exhibition space in order to protect site

TOGS3 site analyzed and location chosen for context extraction


site context analyzed from photo

any displayed art from inclement weather while the steel panels become the tree pattern that is wrapped around the space. On the roof the plexiglass is varied between the translucent plastic and pieces of photoluminescent plastic. During the day, natural sunlight activates the plastic causing the pieces to glow a cool blue at night. Lumistone is a manufactured photoluminescent acrylic and due to its thermoforming properties, it can easily be fabricated and installed. The shape of the trees defines the contours of the building skin but the internal system of the trees defines the structural elements of each panel. Similar to a light steel frame, a tree has a complex interior cell structure that allows it to remain rigid. Using digital fabrication techniques, we can also use a cell pattern to make the panels rigid. The image of a tree’s cellular structure is converted into a vector pattern and that pattern is stamped into the panels. The process of stamping the metal panels alters the material strength in our favor. In order to highlight the stamped pattern, the raw steel sheets will be electroplated with chromium to increase material hardness and produce a high-reflectivity surface. This will allow the structure to mirror the the trees creating a dynamic visual play between the fabricated tree structure and the natural trees that surround it.


trees in site translated onto panels

d ig ita l


cellular pattern of tree analyzed to add rigidity to panels


cellular pattern digitally translated into vector pattern


cellular pattern added to panels. ready for fabrication.

94 lumis to ne

Site Plan | Downtown Austin

p le xig la ss

s te e l f ra me Photoluminescent Roof


sheets of 1/8â&#x20AC;? thick steel are prepped for fabrication process

plating + finish Steel sheets are electroplated with chromium


Sheets are processed through a metal laser cutter to apply pattern


Acrylic sheets are cut to size. Panels ready for construction.

g ro und

fo und a tio n fa b r i c a t i on





Throughout history the emergence of new technologies has reshaped our built environment and so, society. Roman arches afforded more freedom of movement – physically and socially – across thresholds. Flying buttresses allowed the magnificence of light to penetrate once-heavy walls. Reinforced concrete, structural steel, and free-plan organizational systems accommodated conventions of people, at work and at play, on a massive scale. Over the last two decades, Information Technology (IT) has served Architecture primarily as a drafting, modeling, and simulation tool in the process of designing buildings and other works for the built environment. There is, however, an emerging tendency to extend IT from the Architect’s computer display into the very physical fabric of the built environment, mostly with respect to: (1) building facades and other architectural surfaces acting as computer displays; and (2) smart control of heating, air conditioning and lighting for maintaining human comfort. But while IT can intelligently move digital bits across building surfaces or temperature-controlled air through building interiors,




embedded IT can intelligently move mass to create an adaptive, physical-digital built environment. The prospect of such an “Architectural Robotics” was anticipated by architect and MIT Media Lab founder Nicholas Negroponte thirty years ago in his vision of “…a man-made environment that responds to and is ‘meaningful’ for him or her.” Wired editor Kevin Kelly has since imagined a “world of mutating buildings” and “rooms stuffed with co-evolutionary furniture.” And while Bill Gates envisions “a robot in every home,” William J. Mitchell, former Dean of MIT’s School of Architecture and Planning, sees homes “as robots for living in.” Internet links to a sampling of recent activities in the emerging area of architectural robotics are offered at the close of this proposal.

“Architectural Robotics ...must instead explore ways for improving life, enhancing existing places, and supporting human interaction.” Keith Evan Green is Professor of Architecture and Electrical & Computer Engineering at Clemson University. He is founding Director of the Clemson University Institute for Intelligent Materials, Systems and Environments (iMSE) partnering Architecture, Materials Science & Engineering, and Electrical & Computing Engineering. Green earned a B.A. Psychology, M.S. Architecture and Ph.D. Architecture degrees at the University of Pennsylvania, and the Masters of Architecture degree at the University of Illinois at Chicago. His doctoral dissertation, later published as a monograph (in English and soon, Japanese) explores how architecture, an “Animated Architecture,” can behave more like living things in response to human needs and opportunities. Green is also a practicing, international award-winning architect.

Current research in robotics, including modular self-reconfigurable robots, heralds more significant changes in the built environment. Architectural Robotics raises questions such as: How will we program buildings? How will buildings recognize activities taking place inside (e.g., sensor fusion)?, and, How will designers, including end-users, associate activities with desired building configurations? In designing buildings, architects typically anticipate in the form and function of these buildings how people will inhabit them and how these buildings  will respond to a range of possible, local conditions. In designing Architectural Robotics, however, there is a fundamental difference: investigators are engineering a responsive system that actively engages and interacts with inhabitants and local conditions in real time. So, unlike a conventional building which has a very limited range


of responses to dynamic, changing conditions, an Architectural Robotics is bound together with its users and local conditions in a designed performance.  Architectural Robotics must go beyond simplistic formal achievements; it must instead explore ways for improving life, enhancing existing places, and supporting human interaction. This is no utopian dream in which technology or architecture transforms completely our everyday reality. Instead, architecture and technology – particularly, an Architecture-Robot hybrid – must support human activity, respond naturally, and perform according to our needs and wants. Architectural Robotics, when employed, must also complement and redefine our urban living patterns. Answers to life problems and opportunities will come not from computational or robotic solutions alone, but through the way these technologies, embedded in the built environment, help forward the interaction among people and their surroundings to create places of social and psychological significance. For philosopher Andrew Feenberg, “technology is not simply a means but has become an environment, a way of life.” An Architectural Robotics is more than an aesthetic search, a stylistic possibility, or a technological quest; it is, instead, a way to develop new spatial patterns in support of human activities.

generation of investigators from these disciplines, I co-teach with Dr. Ian Walker [of Electrical & Computer Engineering] a novel cross-disciplinary course, ECE/ARCH 868 “Architectural Robotics” requiring student collaboration across the disciplines to promote knowledge exchange. Our collaborative research and educational activities cultivate in architects, scientists, engineers and human factors psychologists of this and future generations new vocabularies and new, complex realms of understanding which promise both novel design propositions and the flourishing of the individual disciplines. This research strategy is clearly warranted if the “future of design,” as Donald Norman describes, is “that of smart, intelligent devices, where almost everything will have a microprocessor built in, plus motors, actuators, and a rich assortment of sensors, transducers, and communication devices.” For more on “Architectural Robotics” – my team’s research and the 868 course I offer – please see the website, and investigate “Research” and “Academics.” For more about the course, you will find under “Academics” a link to the course syllabus and example videos of previous class work. If you are a graduate student in Architecture, consider taking the course (offered every Fall semester) as a tech elective; but please email or see me first to get permission to enroll (space

Realizing an Architectural Robotics presents new and difficult challenges to research and education in Architecture (and its allied arts), Computer Science and Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Human Factors Psychology. The development of new spatial patterns supporting human activities demands the attention of collaborative teams. Towards educating a new The Animated Work Environment as it appeared in Architectural Record, March 2010. unlike a conventional building which has a very limited range of responses to dynamic, changing conditions, an Architectural Robotics is bound together with its users and local conditions in a designed performance. 





hybrid design through digital and analog strategies

ge n o a , i t a l y

JESSICA JAEGER MITCH NEWBOLD Genoa Studio | Bernhard Sill | F 09


Vertical Tower Structure

Site Responsive Structure Drawing from the rich historical precedents of the city of Genoa, the project looks to create a new beautiful tower for the Casteletto region of the city. With a spectacular view and relatively large site, the project aims to create both a destination building and a local landmark while providing a meeting place for the locals. Precent research focused on hybrid design process that include both analog and digital strategies. Along with historical precedents by Antonio Gaudi and Frei Otto, the advanced design processes of Frank Gehry and the non-standard Dutch architecture of Lars Spruybroek influenced the overall design. Early conceptual sketches drive the design process to further examine both digital and physical possibilities. The program of the tower includes a park/sitting area, an observation/meditation area and a lookout tower. These elements satisfy the need to create a gathering place for upper Genoa and more specifically Casteletto. Nearly a century ago, the building site served as a camp for soldiers of the second world war. The structures erected have been torn down and have not been replaced in any permanent form. The site presently serves as an unofficial dog park and recycling facility for the inhabitants of a modern apartment complex. The site borders consist of the apartmentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; private access road to the North, a decrepit property fence on the South, a hill overlooking the historic center of Genova to the West, and the curve of a public Via on the East. This road is barely wide enough for two cars to pass, making it treacherous for pedestrians. To the North is a brick walkway that has a foot bridge over the road and a small access gate to the site. Multiple lookouts and views focused on various points and attractions throughout the city. These views are achieved through the layering of multiple skins to create solids and voids.

102 Vertical Forces

Horizontal Forces

Polygonal Cell

First Floor Plan

Rhomboid Cell

Ground Floor Plan

Triangular Cell

clo sin g th oug hts



As is the case with the majority of graduate students, one’s career with the Clemson University School of Architecture begins with a tour of the Lee Hall complex. While halflistening to the professor guiding the group of unfamiliar faces around the building, one becomes engulfed in the learning environment of hundreds of aspiring designers. No doubt blinded by the plethora of natural light bathing the undergraduate studios of Lee I, the retinas adjust to reveal an open workspace cluttered with thousands of process models. The studios are lined with a wallpaper of sketches, plans, and sections; the newest of which being added by few scrambling undergrads whom, judging by the array of cardboard coffee cups and dark eyes, have spent the last 20 hours doing the work they put off with a week of pitchers at TTTs. You realized the group has moved on and slowly shuffle down the stairwell and out the main doors. The group advances. Shuffling across a roundabout, around a campus building, down a flight of stairs behind a dumpster, and across a field of mulch paths the hum of construction equipment drowns out the professor’s discussion of Tom Phifer’s Lee III design. Topics such as the costly cladding of the previous grad tower and Phifer’s use of tree-columns to create an open plan seem to occupy the time it takes the group to filter down a steep make-


M.Arch (‘11)



shift stair and across a sea of cars. An SUV with 15 paw prints and a tail creeps behind the group at a speed of approximately 3 mph hoping someone will be abandoning their parking spot for the day. One recalls a memory of running from ghosts as Mario attempts to navigate Bowser’s castle. The professor/ guide reveals their final destination. The group splits as the more daring attempt to scale a 60° dirt hill, still muddy from showers earlier in the day. The less daring walk a few hundred more feet and up a paved path. The group reconvenes. They have finally reached the facilities for the M.Arch students, and a look of uncertainty washes across every potential candidate.

“The trailers will be memorable, for the best or for the worst, and will always be a reality of what it meant to be an M.Arch candidate in 2010.”

The trek is over, yet this can’t possibly be right….TRAILERS???

That’s right. BRANCH was conceptualized, designed, refined, discussed, and finalized in a windowless modular classroom. Ok, that’s not all true. Every classroom has windows, however not all of them let in much natural light due to the construction trailers 10’ away. Hey, at least there is plenty of parking right? Before 9AM, sure! After that, feel free to either:

Kyle Miller is a M.Arch student at Clemson University (class of 2011). He recieved his BS in Architecture from Kent State University in 2005. Having travelled across Europe and the United States, Kyle is constantly broadening his knowledge through new sights, sounds, food, and experiences.

1) Risk your luck in the faculty spots right outside the trailers 2) Become one of the 15 “ghosts” randomly circling the parking lot until someone leaves (see Mario reference above) 3) Or get your daily exercise walking from your car to Lee Hall for class, back to the trailers to get some work done, back to Lee Hall to pick up that laser lens from the library, back to the trailers to cut pieces for your model, back to Lee Hall to return the lens, back to the trailers to pick up your computer you forgot to bring with you, and then back to your car. Really, my calves


are rock solid after a year of trailer-architecture. Oh, and last but not least, keep in mind that jurys occur in Lee Hall 90% of the time, so be ready to transport site models, study models, final models, boards, and everything else across campus. I apologize, I have been rough on the trailers; In reality, being separated from campus has created a significant amount of learning opportunities that are unique to attending Clemson from 2010-2012. With the construction of Lee III in our backyard, we can witness the various stages of construction in first person. We literally have a structural case-study no more than 500 yards away from our studio. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a definite perk to being here. At all times you are no more than 30 seconds from going outside for a quick sun break or to spray paint your model. The laser cutter is here so you can watch the undergraduates randomly roam around until someone lets them in the the locked trailer. Regardless of the pros or cons, the reality of the situation is that the trailer becomes your workspace. As BRANCH has illustrated, creativity occurs no matter where you do your work. A good amount of work exhibited in this publication was created in the very same modulars described above. Whoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s to say that the work would be any better if it was done in the grad tower, or even in the new Lee III? Trailer-architecture will forever hold a different meaning to every graduate student that is forced to make the daily trek as described above. The trailers will be memorable, for the best or for the worst, and will always be a reality of what it meant to be an M.Arch candidate in 2010.

acknowledgements + contributions


CONTRIBUTIONS Each of the student works featured in this issue of Branch were selected by current faculty members. The featured articles were solicited for inclusion by the Branch editors. Faculty Contributors Jose Caban, Keith Green, Dan Harding, Douglas Hecker, Ulrike Heine, Peter Laurence, Robert Miller, Criss Mills, Armando Montilla, David Pastre, Kate Schwennsen, Bernhard Sill Student Contributors Joshua Artia, Jake Bachman†, Max Bendert, Elissa Bostain, Nate Boykin, Shannon Calloway, Allison Chang, Sara Cheicklard†, Rebecca Cook†, Alex Defee, Jake DeMint, Jonathan Edens, Jim Graham, Adie Hailat, Xaiokang He, Jessica Jaeger, Jonathan Jones, Kyle Keaffeber, Kristin Kolowich, Amy Leong, Evan Leinbach†, John Lindenmu†, Elise Little, Lauren Martinez†, Ryan Massengill†, Sean MacManus†, Joe McNeill, Laura Melton, Kyle Miller, Ben Miskelly†, Jared Moore, Mitch Newbold, Michael Niezer†, Carson Nolan, Kyungsun Orr, Jeffrey Pauling, Caitlin Ranson, Jill Rodgers, Natalie Shovlin, Greg Swinton, Jeff Treidz, Barak Yaryan, Joel Babcock†, Daniel Hutcherson†, Charles Kane†, Andrew Pardue†, Kathryn Sedor, Lindsay Shelton†, Joel Travis†, Tyler Whitehead †

Undergraduate Student

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Kate Schwennsen and Armando Montilla- who loved our crazy idea to do this in the first place, who supported our cause, and whose guidance and brilliance helped make this dream a reality... we express much gratitude. Amy Zimmerman and Shannon Calloway- whose assistance in the final hours was greatly appreciated. and of course to the founding partners of GASP- without whom the trailers would have no voice. Shannon Calloway Kristin Kolowich Kyle Miller Whitney Newman Jeffrey Pauling Tyler Whitehead May our legend live on.