Uo bio med final publication small by lloyd lindley II

OMSI - Bio-Med Research Lab Ȉ Ȉ ͜͝͠ Ǧ ͘͡ Ȉ Ȉ

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Bill Kirkwood

OMSI - An Urban Science Park That Inspires Wonder University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Josh Kolberg

OMSI - Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Elizabeth Delorme

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Mark Schmidt

Looking from second ﬂoor into the library

Second Floor

OMSI - Biomedical Research Building Ȉ Ȉ ͜͝͠ Ǧ ͘͡ Ȉ Ȉ

OMSI - Biomedical Research Center University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Chitra Prabhakar

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Todd Palmer

OMSI Campus + Biomed Lab Design

View from OMSI Square

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Kevin Montgomery

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Ȉ Ȉ ͜͝͠ Ǧ ͘͡ Ȉ Ȉ

OMSI -Biomedical Research Laboratory Design Studio A section looking into the main entrance atrium space

Third Floor

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Instructor Lloyd D. Lindley, FASLA

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY DESIGN STUDIO TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Course Introduction/ Description Collaboration Course Objectives Urban Design Research Laboratory 2. Case Studies 3. Urban Design Workshops 4. Design Development APPENDICES A. Schematic Design B. Environmental Control Systems C. Course Photos D. Acknowledgments Guests Students Reviewers E. Bibliography

Introduction Collaboration Course Objectives Urban Design Research Laboratory 1

COURSE DESCRIPTION AND SYLLABUS ARCH 584 - Instructor Lloyd Lindley - Biomedical Research Laboratory Design COURSE DESCRIPTION This studio is designed to provide students an opportunity to explore and develop innovative urban design and architectural solutions for a specialized research laboratory. The Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) completed a master plan in early 2008. Research and development, laboratory and educational uses are envisioned within the plan to complement and expand the museum’s science and educational programs. The campus is at the transportation nexus of Light Rail Transit, Streetcar, bus and regional highway systems, and occupies a prominent yet underdeveloped 21.4 acre location on the east bank of the Willamette River. Oregon Health Sciences University’s (OHSU) hill top and emerging river front campus on the river’s west shore will be minutes away upon completion of the Willamette River transit crossing. The studio will feature a lecture series of Portland’s top professionals of research laboratory design. Leading local laboratory design architects will make presentations and students will tour OHSU laboratories. Nancy Stueber, President - Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI), will kick-off the studio at the OMSI campus, discussing OMSI’s vision for the future and the bridge between research science and education. Pat LaCrosse, Past OMSI President will lecture on the Master Plan, Politics, Neighborhood and Portland Streetcar. John Thompson ZGF who Mr. Lindley worked with on the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle will present the OMSI master plan and program and conduct a site tour. Thomas Fortier - ZGF, currently designing the Lorry I. Lokey Stem Cell Research Building at Stanford University, will conduct a tour of the OHSU Biomedical Research Building. Mark Williams, Vice President of OHSU Campus Development will lecture on the campus community of the new “South Waterfront Campus.” A complete list of guest lecturers and schedule is attached. Students will prepare case studies to investigate and answer questions about integration, interaction and collaboration, academic and research bridges between education and bioscience, “off the grid” green laboratory buildings, integration with transit facilities and, form, function and identity. 2

Studio deliverables follow the course of architectural design from schematics to design development. They are structured to provide students with project design process experience and a framework to explore innovations in urban design, common area and green building design in a campus context. It is also created to provide structure for exploration and creative investigation of theories, concepts and technology. Illustrations, models, computer design and written support materials for each phase of the design process are sequenced to help students develop progressive storylines and solutions that will inform OMSI of potential development possibilities as they build their bridges between research science and education. COLLABORATION Students are expected to collaborate by sharing ideas and discoveries while working individually on assignments and course deliverables. Students assigned to teams for base model, case study presentations, and publication are expected to share equally in production and presentations of work. COURSE OBJECTIVES Four objectives of the studio are to: • Envision and create an integrated and interconnected contextual urban form through urban design and comparative building typology to provide insight into relationships between modes of transportation, shared facility usage and public spaces. • Research and apply internal common area design that integrates and supports advances in research environment design, incorporates mechanical functions and informs building architecture to expand knowledge and creative thought around a highly specialized architecture. • Identify research laboratory comparative architectural typologies to create a building that complements the OMSI master plan and program while advancing innovations in building design through green materials and systems, environmentally responsive orientation, the exploration of expressive forms and integrated bioscience and education programs, • Strive for an “off the grid” and holistic architecture that incorporates this transit oriented site, climate-sensitive design, day-lighting, passive heating and cooling, photovoltaic cells, wind energy, waste water recycling and geothermal systems.

URBAN DESIGN Working within a diverse urban context that includes OMSI, the Eastside Streetcar Loop, Milwaukie LRT, Willamette River Transit Crossing, MLK Viaduct, Willamette River, Springwater Trail, Willamette River Greenway systems, and the South Waterfront OHSU campus, students will study implementation strategies for the OMSI Master Plan. Urban design will focus on creating an interconnected urban form including public spaces, linkages, architectural continuity and cohesiveness, building height and massing and riverfront site design. RESEARCH LABORATORY Through case studies, students will investigate and envision architectural typologies that provide models and patterns to shape future innovative interior and exterior laboratory design. Program and adjacency diagrams are provided to enable students to move directly into urban design and architectural plan and massing studies that incorporate environmental attributes of the site. Exploring distinct and identifiable building forms and materials should differentiate and provide balance between bioscience building identity and campus context of OMSI, the Portland Opera and the Streetcar/LRT station. Architectural typologies should also exhibit integrated and highly functional green building practices. The integration of a Streetcar/LRT/Bus station within the laboratory program will provide an opportunity to create a non-automobile oriented solution. Integrating public transportation with an exclusive research environment presents opportunities to explore architectural transitions between uses, and the scale and affects of public activities and spaces on scientific research.

Case Studies Urban Design Collaboration Sustainability Typologies 5

URBAN DESIGN CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION, CLEVELAND, OHIO Architect: Cesar Pelli & Associates Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1999 Size: 480,000 sq.ft. The building is oriented to maximize indirect sunlight, important for maximizing daylight in laboratory spaces, yet avoiding any solar gains. The campus is located on a highly urban site, which can become dangerous for the students commuting to and from class. The new research building fronts the street with an arcade, bringing pedestrians and students alike into the courtyard, providing communal collaboration spaces safe guarded from the physical hazards and noise accompanied by traffic and major streets, but still addressing the Intercontinental Hotel and MBNA Conference Center across the street. These issues can be overlooked as basic design qualities, but improper use of form can endanger the users of a space. OMSI will become neighbor to a major transit hub due to development already in the planning stage. With the massive increase of pedestrian activity in the area, the design of each new building must reflect and anticipate such changes. Much of the day to day use of OMSI is by students, both today, and in future projections. There is already collaboration with local elementary schools to educate Portland’s youth in the sciences, and OMSI has provided facilities and experiences public schools simply cannot afford to offer. Future hopes of OMSI include collaboration efforts with nearby OHSU, PSU and PCC, adding to the number of students flocking to and from OMSI on a regular basis. The Cleveland Clinic Foundation works to provide a promenade with distinct thresholds as one approaches and enters the site. From the highly public street, an arcade brings pedestrians into a semipublic courtyard. The building envelope provides a second threshold, distinguishing a semiprivate space. Finally individual floors and rooms become completely private spaces, and completing the promenade.

Sources: 1. Crosbie, Michael J. Architecture for Science. The Images Publishing Group Pty Ltd. 2004. 112 2. <http://www.barberhoﬀman.com/CCF_Lerner.html> 6

Summary: â&#x20AC;˘

The promenade from the public street takes the pedestrian through the arcade and courtyard and finally into the private interior spaces of the building.

â&#x20AC;˘

Design oriented to maximize indirect sunlight, important for providing and controlling daylight without solar gains in laboratory spaces.

Arch 584 - Bill Kirkwood

URBAN DESIGN GEORGIA TECH LIFE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY COMPLEX & TECHNOLOGY SQUARE Architect: HOK Environment: Atlanta, Georgia Date Completed: on-going Size: 600,000 s.f. and growing The Life Sciences and Technology Complex at Georgia Institute of Technology is a four building complex that includes the U.A. Whitaker Building, Ford Environmental Science and Technology, the Molecular Science and Engineering Building, and the Coulter School of Biomedical Engineering. Technology Square is an extension of the Life Sciences and Technology Complex. Georgia Tech is pushing to redefine the technological campus of the 21st century. The aesthic of the new buildings are respectful of the historical buildings on campus while incorporating innovation to enhance education. Technology Square is renovating a once dilapidated portion of Atlanta by turning it into a mixed-use and transit-oriented neighborhood that combines mixed use retail, office space, academic, and research facilities. Incorporating the public spaces into Technology Square provides an outlet for the faculty and students to escape from the rigors of academics. The campus was planned to promote interaction between various disciplines by breaking away from traditional campus design. Instead of the buildings housing individual disciplines, they are combined into one space. Researchers from chemical, electrical, mechanical, and biomedical engineering are clustered in office space. URBAN DESIGN â&#x20AC;˘ Connected to Technology Square, which is revitalizing the connection to midtown Atlanta. â&#x20AC;˘ Designed to be pedestrian friendly and desegregates the general public from students and faculty. Sources: 1. http://www.gatech.edu/newsroom/release.html?id=1504 2. http://gtalumni.org/map/ 3. http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-1416 8

• The Coulter School of Biomedical Engineering strengthens its ties to the community by having the first public-private joint academic program with its neighbor Emory University. This relationship also strengthens the complex by adding a medical program. • Georgia Tech-Savannah campus houses satellite locations of two Atlanta based economic development programs that help local entrepreneurs launch and build successful companies. • A few other projects that are being built or designed include: family apartments, innovative learning resource center, the Klaus Advanced Computing Building, and food processing technology building. • The map on this page highlights the Technology Complex in blue, which is .5 miles from Technology Square, highlighted in red. These areas are 1.5 miles north of Atlanta.

Summary: • Incorporates adjacent campuses and satellite campuses. • Promotes collaboration. • Strong connection to midtown Atlanta. • Improves student life. • Connected with professional offices. • Relates to historical context while being inventive.

ARCH 584 - Stephanie Rinehart 9

URBAN DESIGN AND URBAN FORM SKIRKANICH HALL, UNIV. OF PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA, PA Architect: Tod Williams Billie Tsien Environment: Urban Date Completed: March 2007 Size: 58,425 sq. ft. new + 6,000 courtyard The University encouraged a bold design by architects Tod Williams and Billie Tsien for this infill campus building. Sandwiched between two historic buildings in a slim 100- by 80-ft. site, Skirkanich Hall contrasts with the campus’s signature red brick façades to create a dramatic entry into a newly formed engineering complex. Williams and Tsien’s materials and details further set the bioengineering building apart. Street • The building needed to serve both as laboratory and entrance to a new engineering quadrangle. To perform both functions, Skirkanich Hall cantilevers over 33rd St. and pops up above the two adjacent School of Engineering structures, Towne and Moore. The Phildelphia Inquirer’s architecture critic said, “it magically pulls the ensemble together. The prominent overhang serves as a clearly marked entrance to the School of Engineering’s sector of Penn’s campus, a high-profile portal that functions like a castle tower and gates.” • Skirkanich faces east, away from campus, and its height affords views towards the city center. The main lobby off the street, which has automobile traffic, acts as a transition to the engineering complex and offers entries to the neighboring buildings and a pedestrian path inside the larger campus block. Courtyard • By creating an engineering quad, Skirkanich closes off a courtyard, a “secret garden” of Sources: 1. Inga Saffron, “One Fab Lab,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, Sept. 29, 2006. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/multimedia/20060929_saffron.html 2. Bruce Buckley, “Campus Crusade,” Mid-Atlantic Construction, Feb. 2005. 3. Suzanne Stephens, Building Type Study, Architectural Record, Dec. 2007. 4. John Prendergast, “Engineering’s Rough-Hewn, High-Tech Castle,” The Pennsylvania Gazetteer, Jan. 2007. 10

Skirkanich Hall creates a conspicuous street façade and entry into the engineering quad and its position near the edge of campus helps serve as a transition from automobile to pedestrian traffic.

630

bamboo and concrete, which will be open to the public. Included are a reflecting pool and Zen garden, screened from view and noise, with generous benches for seating. A glasswalled lounge on the ground floor looks onto the courtyard. • Ramps and stairways link the hall to the other three buildings. Skirkanich is aligned to the Towne building’s floorplate and a corridor connects the two. On the opposite side, there is a 6-ft. elevation change between Skirkanich and Moore, so the architects annexed a portion of Moore and built a set of stairs that ascends into Skirkanich. 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Towne Building North lobby Bridge South lobby Lounge Main communications Courtyard Levine Hall Ramp

Summary: P

• The laboratory building serves a University of Pennsylvan secondary function as entry and suture between older buildings

Office of the University Architect: 08/ © Trustees of the University of Pennsy

• Skirkanich creates a new engineering quad with interior, “donut hole” courtyard • The new quad helps define the campus edge and transition between automobiles and pedestrians • • Please delete unused bullets.

Skirkanich Hall, first floor

ARCH 584 - Ted Mitchner

URBAN DESIGN AND URBAN FORM UNIVERSITY OF OREGON SCIENCE COMPLEX, EUGENE, OR Architect: Ratcliff Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1989 Size: N/A In 1914, Ellis F. Lawrence developed a master plan for the University of Oregon campus.  The  plan imposed two major axes that would divide the campus; a North‐South axes and a East‐ West axes.  Lawrence envisioned several quads with buildings and departments grouped  around them.  With several revised plans and a lot of expansion, the University of Oregon  adopted “The Oregon Experiment” plan by Christopher Alexander in 1974, which would  continue to uphold some of the idea’s from Lawrence’s earlier work.  Alexander’s influence on  the new University of Oregon science complex can easily be seen.  His ideas of “Site Repair”,  “Piecemeal Growth”, “Coordination”, and “User Participation” are clearly apparent in the new  complex. The University of Oregon Science Complex is located on the north end of the University  of Oregon Campus in Eugene.  The complex consists of 4 new buildings; Willamette Hall,  Cascade Hall, Streisinger Hall, and Deschutes Hall, which were completed in 1989.  These  4 buildings were designed by Ratcliff Architects and focus on integration with the existing  science buildings.  The existing buildings were old and not well liked by its numerous users.  The  Architect tried to incorporate the new buildings with the old to accomplish Alexander’s concept  of Site Repair.  To do this, numerous committee’s and workshops were used to fully understand  the values of the users.   By developing 4 smaller building rather than one encompassing building several things were  accomplished.  This “piecemealed” development allowed for buildings to be constructed

Sources: 1. Harby, Stephen. “Using New Buildings to Solve Old Problems.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 8‐15. 2. Mosely, John. “From Participation to Ownership: How Users Shape the Science Complex.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental  Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 16‐21. 3. Rowe, J. David. “The Roots of Oregon’s Planning Tradition.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 8‐15. 12

individually as funding allowed.  More importantly, the “piecemeal” strategy allowed for the  new buildings to stitch together the existing buildings, creating one newly revamped science  complex rather than a single monolithic science building.  While the new buildings were  designed to ﬁt in with the old buildings by using similar material, scales, and styles, it was still  important that the buildings were distinguishable.  The Architect uses courts, linked arcades,  bridges, and porches to unify the older science buildings with the new, but provides variation  so that the new buildings act as “cousins or friends” to the old buildings rather than “identical  twins”.  The Science Walk also connects all the buildings as it allows all users to enter each  building through one engaging path.

Arch 584 ‐ Cyrus Dorosti

Summary: •

The development of several  smaller buildings to be used to  stitch together older unattractive  buildings. (Piecemeal Growth)

•

Using the integration of the new  and old buildings to improve on  the existing. (Site Repair)

•

Creating connections between  buildings (physical and  metaphoric) to tie together the  buildings programs. (Cousins vs.  Twins)

URBAN DESIGN & URBAN FORM TERRENCE DONNELLY CENTRE FOR CELLULAR & BIOMOLECULAR RESEARCH Architect: Behnisch Architekten with architectsAlliance Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2006 Size: 250,000 sf The University of Toronto St. George Campus resides downtown Toronto, Canada providing a dense historic fabric for this sleek building. The design of TDCCBR does not try to compete with existing structures, but respectfully addresses the character of the campus while providing a modern presence to this innovative research facility. To relate to the scale of the campus, the building is broken into two stacked volumes separated by one of two mechanical floors. The building symbolically serves as a bridge between the academic community and the city. TDCCBR is sited on College Street, providing a new entrance to the campus. The building physically connects to the Medical Sciences Building to the north and to the Rosebrugh building to the west. The modern tower of TDCCBR also addresses the city of Toronto as a visual connection contributing to the blend of historic and contemporary architecture of the campus and the city. The twelve-story-high tower sits atop a common thoroughfare through campus and the building’s main floor is designed to maintain this accessibility. The building acts a gateway to the campus to the north and the hospital and residential community to the south, but it also has become a landmark building as a public space for researchers and students to gather. The large granite-paved court welcomes the visitor to the building and the public space continues on the main floor inside with a winter garden that reaches to the fifth level. The winter garden is shared between the TDCCBR and the 1919 Rosebrugh Building through a skylight connection. This atrium is a daylight space lined with trees bringing the outside in and forming both a contiguous transportation path and a wonderful public gathering space. Sources: 1. www.archnewsnow.com 2. www.behnisch.com 3. Weathersby Jr., William. “Collaborative Labs Spark Discovery.” Architectural Record July 2006: 127-133. 4. Behnisch, Gunter, and Stefan Behnisch and Gunther Schaller. Behnisch, Behnisch & Partner: Buildings and Designs. Switzerland: 14 Birkhauser, 2003.

Summary: • Addresses both historic and contemporary context and scale • Gateway to campus and city by maintaining existing thoroughfares and by creating new entry court • Balances architecture and landscape design on tight site restrictions • Capitalizes on existing buildings to create a gathering space that acts as a destination for students and researchers

URBAN DESIGN AND URBAN FORM SKIRKANICH HALL, PHILADELPHIA, PA Architect: Tod Williams Billie Tsien Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: September 2006 Size: 58, 425 sq. ft.

east facade rendering

The University of Pennsylvania has always put signicant importance on the architecture of its laboratory buildings. They feel that research buildings should be landmarks for the advaned proccess and thinking that goes on inside them. Louis Kahn, in 1960, designed Richards Medical Center, and this along with several historic buildings made up the engineering campus at Penn. The new Skirkanich Hall held tradition of being a landmark building and adding to the urban fabric of campus. Both its bold look and well designed circulation add to the university’s campus. The new bioengineering building sits on a narrow site between the Moore School (electrical engineering) to the north and the Towne Building (mechanical engineering) on the south. This is why the front building face on 33rd street was pushed out over the building line. This major wall floats above the main entry and displays one of the building’s most unique materials, green brick. The varied colors of green resemble moss when seen from a distance, and although this sounds strange, the brick relates to a green serpintine stone used in the 1870s on campus buildings and the brick on its neighboring buildings. this heavy wall meets a shingled glass wall at angle which reflects the bend in 33rd street infront. This small site was also a cross roads on the entire campus as well as a connection space within the engineering quad. Skirkanich Hall used interior courtyards and creative circulation solutions to retain and actually improve these circulation paths. Most of the core functions are housed either in the upper floors or are sunken into the ground. A main circulation corridor cuts through from east to west allowing the David Rittenhouse Laboratory building to remain connected to the rest of the campus. A series of connections to its neighboring buildings occurrs on several floors increasing multi-department collaboration. Overall, Skirkanich Hall refreshed the engineering department’s image and improves the quality of campus circulation. Sources: 1. Architecture Record Online. http://archrecord.construction.com/projects/bts/archives/labs/07_SkirkanichHall/default.asp 2. Architecture Record. December 2007. Skirkanich Hall. Suzanne Stephans. pgs 128-133 3. University of Pennsylvania. http://www.pennconnects.upenn.edu/find_a_project/completed/completed_2006/skirkanich_hall_overview.php 4. Penn Engineering. http://www.seas.upenn.edu/skirkanich/what_to_see.html 16

courtyard

Summary: • The University of Pennsylvania believes lab buildings should be landmarks of innovation. • Green brick relates to campus history and is iconic. • The front facade extends past the building line to gain space and bends to reflect 33rd street bend. • Outdoor courtyards and first floor circulation continues major campus connections through the site. • Inside connections to neighboring buildings are made on several floors bringing the engineering department closer together.

1st floor

URBAN DESIGN AND URBAN FORM GENZYME CENTER, CAMBRIDGE, MA Architect: Behnisch  Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: November 2003 Size: 350,000 sq. ft. The Genzyme Headquarters is located in the midst of many dynamic research institutions in  an urban renewal area now known as Kendall Square. At the beginning of the 20th century  Kendall Square was home to many industries including a coal gasification plant.  As a  result, many neighboring buildings have turned their back on the site, which posed a major  challenge in the overall master plan. In present day,  the square has become populated with  biotechnology and information technology firms.  Additionally, the square has developed  into a focus for pedestrian life due to its adjacent location to the MIT campus and downtown  Boston.  The Genzyme Center serves as a cornerstone to a ten‐acre development that will  include performing arts center, residences, a hotel, office and laboratory space, retail shops,  and a park.    Many major streets adjacent to the site offer great opportunities to connect with the  surrounding neighborhood. Additionally, a subway transit stop is only a five minute walk from  the building.   The Charles River,  located just east of the site, has become an active recreation  area over the past 20 years.2        One of the main goals for Genzyme was to create a building that became a symbol for progress  and identity, for the company, its employees, and its visitors.  Through the use of glass and  form “the new building stands as a reflection of Genzyme’s commitment to innovation,  transparency, collaboration, and the entrepreneurial spirit.” 1

Sources: 1. Behnisch Architects. www.behnisch.com 2. Genzyme Center, Land Use & Community. http://www.aiatopten.org/hpb/landuse.cfm?ProjectID=274 3. Genzyme Corporation. http://www.genzyme.com/genzctr/tour/genzyme.html 4. Kendall Square. http://www.kendallsquare.org 18

Summary: •

Located in urban renewal area  known as Kendall Square.

•

Located adjacent to the MIT  campus, downtown Boston, and  Charles River.

•

The square has developed into  a focus for pedestrian life with  retail, residential, research, oﬃce  and plaza space.

•

In proximity of subway transit  stops and major streets.

KENDALL SQ

BOSTON

MIT

ARCH 584 ‐ Todd Palmer

19 Kendall Square Aerial Rendering

URBAN DESIGN AND URBAN FORM JANELIA FARM RESEARCDH CAMPUS, ASHBURN, VA Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Rural Date Completed: 2006 Size: 581,008 Square Feet (281 acre site) The Janelia Farm Research Campus is focused on biological and biomedical technology development that promotes collaboration within department and with different disciplines. This campus is a research, training and educational force of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Located on the banks of the Potomac River characterized by the surrounding forests and historical structures. The buildings were designed to fit within the contours of the landscape, becoming apart of the bluffs. Over the first few years after the campus completion, the hope is that the surrounding landscape will grow to further conceal the structures. The campus consists of two main facility buildings (research facility and conference center) and surrounding housing. The housing cluster is to provide temporary residences for researchers who will be visiting the campus for a year or more or for visitors for conferences and other campus functions. The campus was designed as a pedestrian campus with one main vehicle entrance dividing the main functions of the campus. All circulation within the campus is by foot, with separate service and visitor circulation. The length of the building provides flexibility in organizing researchers, while providing lab space, lab support, and offices in close proximity to each other. Conference spaces are provided on the main level of the building along with other public and shared functions that are all accessed through the lobby. The most unique features of the Janelia Farm Research Campus is its rural location and its sensitivity to the existing land form. Itsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; rural location has allowed this campus to become a small research village. The other unique feature of this campus is the challenge to integrate with a natural landscape instead of an urban campus. The goal was to have the structures of the campus become apart of the existing landscape form. The design of the structures also allows for many views back into the landscape from most of the interior spaces. Sources: 1. Rafael Vinoly Architects. 2009. 16 Jan. 2009 <http://www.rvapc.com/>.

Living

Divided by Entrance

Research

Summary: •

Buildings fin into contours, becoming apart of the bluffs

•

Circulation within campus is primarily pedestrian

•

Length of structure provides flexibility to organize researchers in close proximity to each other and their needed amenities

•

Rural location creates a research village

Arch 584: Elizabeth Delorme

COLLABORATION WATER POLLUTION CONTROL LABORATORY, PORTLAND, OR Architect: Miller Hull & SERA Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1997 Size: 40,000 sf The design firm, Miller Hull, places a large importance on collaboration within their workplace which in turn, carried over into their work with the City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services on the Water Pollution Control Laboratory. At Miller Hull, “The process of collaboration has been twofold: interactive investigations into the nature and the potentials of a project, and evaluations and criticisms of the correctness of directions proposed.” (Source 3) The importance of sharing an idea through collaboration helps develop a focus, clarifing and expanding that idea. The Portland Water Control Laboratory is an example of a design with the focus of creating a collaborative space amongst the scientists, administration and public. The building is organized in seven linear bays, running parallel to the Willamette River, consisting of 15,000 sf of laboratories and 25,000 sf of administrative and support spaces. The bay closest to the river contains offices, group work areas, conference rooms, and social spaces intended to “foster interaction between scientists, technicians, and managerial staff who are normally segregated according to task” (Source 5). This two-level section brings daylight into the other bays. In addition, the adjacent water pond is used as a grounds for experimental analysis and as a public learning tool. Labs cater to the science fields of general chemistry, microbiology, nutrients, organic analysis, metals and organic preparation. The lab is set up in branched out bays for the scientists to work. Usually two scientists will share the same bay. A central spine between the work stations brings these bays together. The open corridor in the middle of the bays acts as a spine, Sources: 1. Galison, Peter & Thompson, Emily. “Architecture for Science.” MIT Press. 1999. 2. Hinshaw, Mark. “ Water pollution control industry.” Architecture; Jul97, Vol. 86 Issue 7. 3. Miller Hull website. http://www.millerhull.com/htm/nonresidential/WaterP-Lab.htm 4. Thompson, William. “The Poetics of Stormwater.” Landscape Architecture. January 1999. 5. Olson, Sheri. “Miller Hull: Architects of the Pacific Northwest.” Princeton Architectural Press. 2001. 22

Private

Public Public

Private

connecting all the lab bays together, which serves as a visual and physical connection. This layout is collaborative because it is so open and scientists from differening fields are sharing supplies, support spaces and visual paths. A porch off the lab bays serves as a collaborative outdoors space for the scientists and admin workers. The admin work space is also very open, with lots of light and low workstations.The pond is also considered a lab space as scientists are constantly collecting data from this source in regards to water pollution control and its affects.

Summary:

Wedged between the office block and the labs is a bar of support spaces that includes a highceilinged lobby and a broad interior corridor, which is open to the public. Lined with large windows looking into the labs, the corridor pushes through the north face of the building extruding out to bridge over the demonstration filtration pond. Visitors are able to look into the lab spaces and see what the scientists are working on as well as they are able to walk on the bridge, which bings them directly over the filtration pond. At the pond they can absorb the view and learn about the impacts of stormwater on an urban site and river through general observation and teaching sessions by scientists.

• Different science disciplines share the lab, administrative and common spaces

Public involvement in the space is very important. Typically a water sewage treatment plant is not a place where the public would want to gander and walk. In reslut, a nature walk and public art have invited the public in, creating a more public friendly space. The public already pass close to the building as they walk along the St. John’s bridge and park (Source 5). Not only does the space serve to educate the public on water pollution control, but it is designed as a multi-purpose space. In the evening, the building is secured allowing the large multi-purpose rooms, which are close to the entrance, to be available for community meetings. ARCH 548 - Danielle Meyers

• Building set up in a series of seven bays to adapt to each program’s spatial needs for width, depth and height.

• Public use and education is incroporated into the site and buildings. Paths allow pedestrians to pass by and observe the space. A stormwater pond serves as an education and learning tool for scientists and the public. The interior space has a corridor with large windows looking into the spaces allowing the public to observe the innerworkings of the scientists.

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION NANOSYSTEMS INSTITUTE, LA, CA & NEUROSCIENCES CENTER, BETHESDA, MD Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2006 Size: 189,005 Square Feet

Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2006 Size: 530,880 Square Feet

Rafael Vinoly Architects (RVA) have several research buildings they have designed in the past few years that are mainly focused on increasing collaborative research by providing flexible spaces throughout the facilities. Two of these designs are the California Nanosystems Institute and the John Edward Porter Neurosciences Research Center. The California Nanosystems Institute at the University of California was designed to encourage partnerships between the faculty, university students, and the national science community. The space needed to be flexible for the changes in emerging science disciplines, allowing for interdisciplinary work and for the continuing changes in research methods. Maximum efficiency of the buildings mass had to be accomplished because of the limited space in this dense area of the city. Even with a limiting site, RVA wanted to maximize the horizontal footprint to allow for better user interaction. The interior/open-air courtyard is filled with stairs, bridges, walkways, and terraces to provide a lively space for researchers to interact both planned and serendipitously. Many of these spaces have integrated furniture and working surfaces into their design. The John Edward Porter Neurosciences Research Center, part of the National Institutes of Health, was commissioned because the National Institutes of Health wanted to consolidate its several buildings around the country for neurosciences into one facility. The structure is composed of six square lab modules arranged around a glass atrium. The atrium is designed as a collaborative â&#x20AC;&#x153;nexus.â&#x20AC;? Centrally located the atrium includes the main entrance lobby, cafe, meeting facilities and serves as the main circulation for the building. The labs within each module square are designed to be as flexible as possible for the current lab uses and for any changes that may need to be made in the future. Sources: 1. Rafael Vinoly Architects. 2009. 16 Jan. 2009 <http://www.rvapc.com/>.

Summary: •

Unique gathering spaces with innovative work surfaces

•

Maximize horizontal footprint for easier interaction between scientists

•

Active circulation spaces

•

Accessible public functions, outreach to neighborhood, campus, and other disciplines.

Arch 582: Elizabeth Delorme

COLLABORATION INTERDISCIPLINARY UNDERGRADUATE SCIENCE LABORATORIES, PITTSBURG, PENNSYLVANIA Architect: Burt Hill Kosar Rittlemann Associates Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2003 Size: 100,000 sq. ft.

Carnegie Mellon University takes pride in the quality and overall experience their students are offered by their laboratory classes. The new project includes an interdisciplinary freshman lab, physics and physical chemistry laboratories, a lecture hall to house scientific demonstrations, a computer classroom and a dedicated K-12 educational outreach lab. Chemistry labs are highly dependent on the fume hood systems which control the air within the lab itself and ensure the safety and health of those inside labs. Rittlemann Associates worked to design a space which would allow for a more collaborative, and flexible space than most lab designs. The students are assigned to desks which are attached to a fume hood pod. The desks however are easily movable and can be thus rearranged. This freedom to move provides opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration as students move from group to group relatively effortlessly. The K-12 educational outreach lab is similar to the programs OMSI offers for the elementary schools in the Metro area. By learning from Carnegie Mellon’s collaborative lab layouts, OMSI can hope for similar results improving their programs and expanding their target populations. Bringing multiple disciplines and age groups into a single building armed with flexible labs will provide more opportunities for collaboration between fields.

Sources: 1. Crosbie, Michael J. Architecture for Science. The Images Publishing Group Pty Ltd. 2004. 108 2. Carnegie Mellon’s University Advancement Division. <http://www.cmu.edu/mcs/uglabs/pdf/uglabs-brochure.pdf> 3. Carnegie Mellon. <http://www.cmu.edu/mcs/uglabs/> 26

Perminant fume hood work stations

Summary: â&#x20AC;˘

Labs are laid out in changeable pods, giving students the opportunity to easily move desks around the lab based on who they will be working with.

â&#x20AC;˘

Provides labs for students of all ages, ranging from Kindergarteners to undergraduates.

Moveable Desks

Arch 584 - Bill Kirkwood

COMMON AREA DESIGN & RESEARCH COLLABORATION TERRENCE DONNELLY CENTRE FOR CELLULAR & BIOMOLECULAR RESEARCH Architect: Behnisch Architekten with architectsAlliance Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2006 Size: 250,000 sf TDCCBR is designed for a highly collaborative research and educational environment. This institution is the Canadian leader for the study of the human genome. The building houses four hundred specialists on the cutting-edge of research for genetics and disease. This center was programmed to be a collaborative and interdisciplinary research center, which required innovative technology and flexible space. The lab floors are designed repetitively to maximize space efficiency, flexibility and natural light. Suspended ceilings are eliminated and the floor to floor height is increased to create an open and airy environment. The floor plates are kept shallow and the designed glazing system also contribute to a high level of transparency. The work zones are differentiated by color, lighting and millwork, which can be seen from the exterior creating a colorful pattern in the night sky. A circulation corridor is located on the western side of the building connecting labs and research stations. Connected by staircases, the corridors on levels 2-5 offer break-out spaces or smaller gardens for interaction. The winter garden atrium on the ground floor ties all of the public and private spaces together as it extends to the fifth floor; it does this both visually and formally to create the main gathering space. On levels 7-12, the bay windows have interconnecting stairways, lounges and cafes. A total of three double and triple height gardens are located at the perimeter of the building to foster informal collaboration or offer a space for relaxation. Sources: 1. www.archnewsnow.com 2. www.behnisch.com 3. Weathersby Jr., William. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Collaborative Labs Spark Discovery.â&#x20AC;? Architectural Record July 2006: 127-133. 4. Behnisch, Gunter, and Stefan Behnisch and Gunther Schaller. Behnisch, Behnisch & Partner: Buildings and Designs. Switzerland: 28 Birkhauser, 2003.

Summary: • Open, airy lab space for flexibility • Materials and colors used to differentiate work groups • Circulation corridor connects labs and stations and to adjacent buildings • Small gathering spaces are placed off of central corridor for collaboration or relaxation • Winter garden atrium and smaller multi-story gardens keep building open and provide for serendipitous interaction

COMMON AREA DESIGN & RESEARCH COLLABORATION Georgia Tech Molecular Science & Engineering Building (MS&E) Architect: HOK Environment: Atlanta, Georgia Date Completed: 2006 Size: 275,000 sq.ft. The Molecular Science & Engineering Building at Georgia Technical Institute is part of a 4-building campus that houses both engineering and science. The research that is performed here includes: material and polymer characterization, bio-nanotechnology, chemistry and biomolecular engineering, bio-manufacturing, membrane fabrication, nanochemistry, molecular biology and computational chemistry. Five schools from the College of Science and College of Engineering are also represented. MS&E accommodates 41 principal investigators, 50 support staff, and more than 400 research staff and graduate students. The interdisciplinary labs are highly flexible and can contain a cell culture room, traditional ceramic engineering furnaces, an electronic test station, and a biochemistry lab. Common Areas • Easy collaborating across disciplines and departments happens in hallways for face-to-face interaction. • A variety of open meeting spaces are placed throughout the hallways to promote interaction when faculty from different disciplines “bump into” each other in the halls. • Featured in the building is a two-story 8,000 sq. ft. restaurant and coffee shop that is between the lab and office areas, to promote the interdisciplinary collaboration and is also accessible to adjacent research buildings. Collaboration: “Research Neighborhoods” • Does away with the traditional layout of having the faculty with their labratories and graduate students, though are still in close proximity. Sources: 1. http://www.gatech.edu/newsroom/release.html?id=1504

Molecular Science & Engineering

• Offices are clustered to encourage casual conversation across multiple disciplines. An example would be having an engineer next to a chemist. • Students benefit from this by having exposure to faculty member that has a different perspective. • The neighborhood arrangement is highly conducive to multidiscipline interaction and has proved beneficial by the already leading developments in fields like molecular imaging.

Petitute Institute for Bioengineering & Bioscience

Ford Environment Science & Technology

Summary: • Meeting places in hallways and throughout the facility. • Nontraditional office arrangement. • Multiple disciplines sharing the building to promote collaboration.

ARCH 584 - Stephanie Rinehart 31

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION SKIRKANICH HALL, PHILADELPHIA, PA Architect: Tod Williams Billie Tsien Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: September 2006 Size: 58, 425 sq. ft. north connection / west facade

3rd floor common space

The new bioengineering building, Skirkanich Hall, for the University of Pennsylvania is a combination of research and learning spaces that weave together as the spaces stack up within the building contained on a narrow site. It is nestled between Moore School (electrical engineering) to the north and the Towne Building (mechanical engineering) on the south, both of which had to be connected to Skirkanich Hall. These connections, along with a main entry and courtyard spaces created a number of paths within the building which had to be addressed. Tod Williams and Billie Tsien Architects saw this as an opportunity to create several different common spaces throughout the building. Within the main entry from 33rd Street a multilevel space opens many views within guiding users toward their separate activities. Also, on several occasions the point at which the vertical and horizontal circulation meets there are lounge spaces open to floors below or skylights above giving users a place to pause when traveling within the building. These spaces are made possible by pushing the lab spaces to the east and west ends, leaving circulation and multiuse spaces in the center. Skirkanich Hallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s common spaces not only have dynamic form and nice views, but they are also detailed with a unique material pallet. Most unusual is the green brick found inside and out. The varied colors of green create a pattern that looks similar to moss. An acid yellow tile is also used to give surfaces a scaled texture, and contrasts well against the granite floors or concrete walls and floors. The concrete contains a blue aggregate which is shown off in both the polished floors and bush-hammered walls. Overall, Skirkanich Hall was able to connect multiple engineering departments through a series of well details interior and exterior spaces that also support the very functional laboratory spaces. Sources: 1. Architecture Record Online. http://archrecord.construction.com/projects/bts/archives/labs/07_SkirkanichHall/default.asp 2. Architecture Record. December 2007. Skirkanich Hall. Suzanne Stephans. pgs 128-133 3. University of Pennsylvania. http://www.pennconnects.upenn.edu/find_a_project/completed/completed_2006/skirkanich_hall_overview.php 4. Penn Engineering. http://www.seas.upenn.edu/skirkanich/what_to_see.html 32

east entry

Summary:

east/west section

• Skirkanich Hall had to marry a combination of different circulation paths with a functional lab building.

west entry

• Common spaces appear at the intersections of verticle and horizontal circulation. • Common spaces are highlighted by light, views, multi-floor spaces, and materials. • Unique materials such as green brick, hammerd concrete, and black granite excite interior and exterior spaces.

1st floor

3rd floor

interior common space

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION UNIVERSITY OF OREGON SCIENCE COMPLEX, EUGENE, OR Architect: Ratcliff Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1989 Size: N/A The University of Oregon Science Complex is a great example of how collaboration can be used  to design and also how it can result from design.  “The Oregon Experiment” which is used as a  guideline for new development on the University of Oregon campus, calls for early collaboration  prior to development.  In the case of the Science Complex, this collaboration was broken into  three key groups.  The first group is the “direct users” which consists of all those who would use  the building such as students, faculty, and department heads.  The second group is the planning  committee, which consists of the campus planners and representatives for the administration and  faculty.  Finally there is the Administration itself that must be involved in approving each stage  of the planning and design process.  By creating these groups and providing numerous means for  them to collaborate with each other, it was the hope of the University of Oregon that the different  groups could establish common values and desires.  These common values would then help  designers create common spaces which different user groups would like to gather and likely share  ideas.  Essentially, when designing actually begins, there is already a good idea of what different  departments want and need.  Thus spaces can be created which different departments would likely  gather together and hopefully collaborate with each other.   In the case of the Science Complex, it became apparent that there were more than just individual  departments such as physics, biology, and chemistry but interdisciplinary institutes such as  molecular biology, chemical physics, and materials science.  From this, the idea of Horizontal  and Vertical Integration was developed to help organize places of interaction.  The idea was that  different departments can be connected vertically within individual buildings, and institutes can be  connected horizontally by floor levels.  The idea was that similar departments and institutes would  Sources: 1. Harby, Stephen. “Using New Buildings to Solve Old Problems.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 8‐15. 2. Pally, Marc. “Finding a Place for Collaboration.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 8‐15. 3. Mosely, John. “From Participation to Ownership: How Users Shape the Science Complex.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental  Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 16‐21. 4. Coffin, Christie Johnson. “Making Places for Scientists.” Places; A Quarterly Journal of Environmental Design 7 no. 4 (1992): 8‐15. 5. Linn, Charles. “Science Fair.”  Architectural Record no.12 (11/1991): 86‐95. 34

be easily connected so that they are more likely to collaborate with one another.   The University of Oregon Science Complex achieved this integration by creating places of  gathering at points where departments and institutes connected.  Bridges, Porches, and Walkways  provided horizontal connections, where as Stairs, Light Wells, and Fountains provided vertical  connections.  To further emphasize these key areas many stairways and bridges were lined with  large skylights and windows to flood the nodes with daylight.  The idea here was to create nodes at  the crossroads between departments and institutes.  These nodes would provide pleasant places  for people from different departments and institutes to gather, and hopefully collaborate with  each other.  In addition to these smaller nodes, larger gathering spaces such as the Willamette Hall  Atrium were created so people from multiple disciplines could gather at one grand space which is  highlighted by a large open encompassing staircase, a café, fire pit and a hearth.   In addition, special gathering spaces that encourage random interdisciplinary interactions, there  is also several other features that provide collaboration outside of the buildings.  A large and  very popular fountain was created adjacent to one of the many courtyards along the Science  Walk.  The fountain can be heard throughout the complex and encourages people to gather by  it.  The Science Walk connects all the buildings of the complex and the numerous courtyard nodes  together, and also gives passers by a glimpse of the numerous bridges, porches, and stairwells that  metaphorically and literally connect the numerous buildings together.  From outside, the Science  Complex becomes a warm place that feels nothing like the dingy and claustrophobic spaces that  many other lab spaces create.  It instead is open, with high ceilings, daylight, and natural materials  which make every day in the complex feel like a Saturday. Arch 584 ‐ Cyrus

Summary: •

Early collaboration between  diﬀerent user groups to establish  common values and desires  amongst users.  These common  values then helped designers to  create common spaces which  diﬀerent user groups would all  like to gather and thus be likely to  share ideas.

•

Horizontal and Vertical  Integration creates crossroads  where people from diﬀerent  disciplines are likely to bump  into each other and hopefully  collaborate.

•

The creation of pleasant  gathering places and nodes at  these crossroads promotes people  to stop and interact.  Examples  of these types of spaces are the  Social Stairs and Departmental  Hearth.

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION JAMES H. CLARK CENTER, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, CA Architect: Foster and Partners Environment: Campus Date Completed: September 2003 Size: 245,000 sq.ft. The James H. Clark Center at the Stanford’s University houses the biomedical research lab. Interaction is encouraged with regionally shared facilities, a café, seminar rooms, and an auditorium. Fifteen percent of the building is dedicated to public functions such as conference rooms and classrooms, while nine percent consists of facilities that are shared by people within the Center. The shared facilities include small animal imaging, biocomputation co-laboratories, central glass wash, and media prep. Collaboration is unavoidable by way of the building’s unique design which features open labs, plenty of social spaces, and shared instrumentation. There are no interior corridors in the building and the inner courtyards are completely glass. Researchers on the second floor can look across the courtyard into other laboratories. Bridges connect the wings of the building. The Clarke Centre is strategically located at the heart of the campus, between the core science and engineering buildings and the medical centre. It acts as a social magnet for the University, encouraging students, lecturers and researchers from diverse disciplines to mix. The building frames an open courtyard overlooked by balconies. A forum at the heart of the courtyard is used for exhibitions, concerts and other events, while a restaurant on the ground floor of the south wing offers a new social focus for the entire campus with tables spilling out into the courtyard. A coffee bar on the third floor is located to encourage people to pass by the laboratory spaces, further distinguishing the building as a place in which social encounters and impromptu conversations are regarded as integral to scientific endeavor.

Sources: 1. Foster and partners: www.fosterandpartners.com/Partners/1076/Default.aspx 2. Tradeline: www.tradelineinc.com/content/CC14B80A-2B3B-B525-808A6BAFC1011C9F 36

Summary: •Location of common spaces adjacent to the laboratory areas foster collaboration. •Inner open courtyard can be used for exhibitions, concerts and other events. •Balconies allow for people to walk alongside labs and see the inner workings. Balconies also overlook the central courtyard. •Transparent skin of the building allows researchers an opportunity to look into different departments from their work stations. •Interaction is encouraged with shared facilities like cafes, courtyards, coffee bars and balconies. ARCH 584 - Chitra Prabhakar

Common Area Research and Collaboration Howard Hughes Medical Institute: Janelia Farm Research Campus Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Rural Date Completed: October 5, 2006 Size: 740,411 square feet Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Just outside Washington D.C. is one of the nations leading privately funded medical research organizations. In 2000 they expanded their research to a nearby site 30 miles upstream from Washington D.C. on the Potomac in Virginia. Of the 689acre site, 60 would be developed into the Janelia Farm Research Campus. Three firms were invited to compete, but ultimately Rafael Vinoly Architects of New York would be chosen. The design process was extremely rigorous, working with well-funded industry professionals, but Vinolyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s geometric vision was never compromised, which was decided as a way of encouraging people to interact. The form takes the shape of a wide serpentine curve around a pond, and is divided in thirds by two large glass stairwells. The curve recedes as it climbs up from the pond, creating one of the largest green roofs in America, allowing every floor to exit on to a green space, every lab space and oďŹ&#x192;ce to have natural light, and creating a transparent and open layout free of directional dark corridors allowing mixing and interaction of the scientists on a day to day basis. Looking at the previous precedents they knew that the greatest architectural labs were not always the greatest research labs, looking at Bell Labs as successful, and the Salk Institute as architectural, they knew they would be challenged to rethink the concept. The intention of the facility was not to create the next Salk Institute, rather it was to challenge what the Salk failed to do, and create a research facility that was in touch with nature, while allowing research groups room to collaborate, adding in conference facilities, as well as a residential hotel and

housing for temporary or visiting scientists, and design a space where work and relaxation could co-exist and discourage isolation. They achieved this by placing the oﬃces in clusters outside the labs, sharing lab spaces without making them irregular, creating meeting spaces with the glazed stairways, using glass walls on much of the interior and exterior walls, and designing the stairways, green spaces, cafeteria and the pub to be the hubs of interaction, not the oﬃces.

Summary:

In looking at Bell Labs and the Laboratory for Medical Biology in Cambridge, they were able to take notice of how good labs were designed and operated. They started by designing the public relaxing spaces become the center for interaction and business making, giving the assignment of “interview room” to the pub, and leaving the office for office work. Additionally, they wanted to push the idea of the P.I.’s being “bench scientists” and not just grant writers and office clerks, so being a private institution, they assign money to research, not salary. Lastly they designed the labs to be small, in hopes that the lab teams would remain around 6 people. Ins studying the social interactions of people in general they found that people who interact with 20 or more people rarely seek interaction with people outside their circle, so as a designed criteria, the lab groups were to not exceed 6. They wanted the campus to set the new standard, not be clustered in with its predecessors as a newer version. They pushed the envelope and set the lab not as “the next Salk” but rather rethought every aspect in hopes to not be compared to any existing building.

•

Vision that forced interaction

•

Clustered oﬃces around lab spaces

•

Created a Shared Lab Space

•

Used glass walls inside and out to promote interaction and visibility

•

Provide housing for visiting scientists

•

create a culture and infrastructure that promotes action and interaction

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION AMANO RESEARCH LABORATORIES Architect: Richard Rogers Partnership Japan, Kisho Kurokawa Environment: Rural Date Completed: 1999 Size: 72,118 sq. ft. Form and structure combine in this enzyme laboratory in the Gifu Prefecture to create a sense of transparency and openness that encourages interaction among employees. The bulk of the simple design serves nearly as one continuous space. Form • The long S-shaped structure conforms to the hilly site and reflects the central placement of the labs as the “spine.” Along the south façade, attached to the labs, are three longitudinal study rooms furnished with small conference tables and desks, areas which serve as flexible, open work space and invite interaction. • At top level, facing north, a restaurant and administrative spaces open towards the hill. Adjacent to the main lobby are a foyer and large conference room which can be reached from inside or outside without disrupting work. • By partially sinking the building into the hillside, the building “buries” many of the lab support and mechanical spaces, and the resultant thermal mass reduces energy consumption. Transparency • A continuous gallery walkway on the top level orients users and offers visual access down to the labs. Frequent stair connections between the gallery and ground floor prevent

Sources: 1. Hardo Braun and Dieter Gromling, Research and Technology Buildings - A Design Manual. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser, 2005. 2. Richard Rogers Web site, http://www.richardrogers.co.uk/work/all_projects/amano_research_laboratories 3. Japan architect, 2001 Winter, n.40, p.38-[41] 40

circulation between lab desks.

Summary:

• Rooflight slits aligned with each structural bay allow natural daylight to penetrate laboratory space.

• Labs and study areas are nearly continuous spaces under longspan exterior structure. • Upper-level walkway and deep study areas provide visual access amongst lab workers and move circulation away from labs.

1 Laboratories 2 Analysis/study areas 3 Conference room 4 Lobby

1 2

3 4 1 2

ARCH 584 - Ted Mitchner

• Larger social spaces such as restaurant, lobby and conference rooms are daylit and glazed to offer views and an inviting setting.

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION GENZYME CENTER, CAMBRIDGE, MA Architect: Behnisch Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: November 2003 Size: 350,000 sq. ft. In all aspects of the Genzyme Center design, the architects, owners and consultants focused on designing an environment to promote collaboration, interaction and teamwork. Instead of designing the building from the outside in, the designers focused on designing from the inside out. They focused “on the individual working environment, as the key to the overall complex structure of the building.” 1 One of the primary moves to promote these characteristics was the development of the large central atrium, which creates a dynamic atmosphere and a variety of spatial experiences. Linking the building both vertically and horizontally, the atrium space pushes into the programed space as well as pulling the programed space into the atrium. As the heart of the building, the atrium contains numerous small areas for casual meetings and interaction. “Bifurcating like a tree over its twelve story height, its branches and twigs reach from the center of the building to the facade, creating a variety of distinct spatial experiences.” 1 A main concern with a large atrium space is providing enough program elements in order to keep the space adequately active. In order to achieve this, the designers positioned all the circulation around and through the atrium. The intricate network of stairs becomes “part of a boulevard, which starts amid the trees and water on the ground floor and proceeds upward creating a meandering path of social interaction throughout the building.” 1 Furthermore, the placement of conference rooms, a library, and a cafe along the perimeter of the atrium increase the overall activity.

Sources: 1. Behnisch Architects. www.behnisch.com 2. Genzyme Center, Land Use & Community. http://www.aiatopten.org/hpb/landuse.cfm?ProjectID=274 3. Genzyme Corporation. http://www.genzyme.com/genzctr/tour/genzyme.html 42

Diagrams illustrating the volume of programed space (green) vs. the volume of common space (yellow).

One of the main benefits of an open atrium is the potential for eye contact. This simple gesture allows a necessary connection between departments and employees who normally would have no interaction throughout the day. With a simple hand wave or smile, individuals can begin to establish important relationships. One of the main goals of the architect and space planner was to design a working environment that was not only efficient but also encouraged collaboration. The primary method to achieve this goal was through flexible furniture, that could easily be reconfigured and put under multiple uses in different conditions. “One does not feel like they are in an artificial environment. That is healthier for people and they perform better, both physically and mentally, in that environment.” 3 In addition to the indoor atrium, the developer also concentrated on creating outdoor space where the public and employees could congregate and socialize. Adjacent to the Genzyme Center is the north plaza. Located in the vicinity of many businesses and research institutions, this space becomes a focal point for the area. A place where one can eat, rest, attend live concerts, and shop a local farmer’s market. This plaza continues to encourage the interaction and collaboration atmosphere so evident in the Genzyme Center.

ARCH 584 - Todd Palmer

Summary: •

The designers focused on designing the building from the inside out.

•

The large atrium space is the heart of the building and links the building both horizontally and vertically.

•

The atrium contains numerous small areas for casual meetings and interaction

•

Flexible furniture was used to encourage collaboration and teamwork.

•

The adjacent North Plaza also encourages interaction and collaboration among the local businesses and research institutions.

COMMON AREA DESIGN AND RESEARCH COLLABORATION SALK INSTITUTE - La Jolla California Architect: Louis Kahn Environment: Rural Date Completed: 1960 The Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, is an independent, non-profit, scientific research institute. It was founded by Jonas Salk, the inventor of the polio vaccine. The salk institute is a laboratory design is which collaboration was a major design element. Part of this was influenced by Kahn’s earlier work on the Richards medical research building at the University of Pennsylvania. Although the layout is completely different in the Richards building, each laboratory space was designed free of walls and capable of morphing as the building changed uses. This was most informed by the “served and servant” spaces in which Kahn became so influential. In the Richards building the ventilation stacks stayed permanent while the laboratory spaces flowed clean and free. The affect of collaboration at the Salk institute is partly due to a conversation between Kahn and Salk in which Salk explained that his idea was more successful because multiple labs were laid out on one floor and not separated by any walls. Instead of having three or four lab spaces on one floor there was just one large space. Thus collaboration is a natural affect caused by the bleed over of space and acoustics. The Design and site of this project was to attract the worlds best scientists to the institute. The setting waves back and forth between personal exposure and experience with a gorgeous environment. The more private study rooms are slightly detatched but toward the center of the building and slant their windows toward the ocean so they cannot see any other view. this almost forces a introspective space and thus freeing the rest of the space for extroversion. Collaboration is also encouraged throughout the rest of the building via blackboards stratigically placed in circulation space to attract serendipitous passerby.

Summary: • . •

•

Large floor plans without any seperating walls to encourage collaboration Opposite spaces designed with the intent of contemplation such as offices only facing the water. Heirarchy of collaboration spaces including smaller corridor interactions to the large patio (pictured below) overlooking the view.

SUSTAINABILITY INSTITUTE FOR FORESTRY AND NATURE REASEARCH, WAGENINGEN, THE NETHERLANDS Architect: Behnisch, Behnisch and Partner Environment: Rural Date Completed: 1998 Size: 127,014 sq. ft.

The institute is laid out into 3 double loaded oďŹ&#x192;ce wings oriented alongside semi-interior gardens, library, cafeteria, and conference center. Materials were chosen based on their embodied energy, recyclable potential (for demolition), and toxicity. The architects limited the use of steel in the structure, keeping the building at a height which lifts are not required, other than for accessibility. Floors are all made from woods harvested from near the building site, and the majority of concrete used in the project is functioning solely as thermal massing. The design incorporates an operable roof system over the interior gardens in order to eďŹ&#x20AC;ectively cool the building at anytime. As a result, air conditioning was not necessary, and excluded from the design altogether. Chlorine free, plastic pipes were used instead of conventional PVC for electrical conduits, though this caused issues when fishing the wires due to the lack of lubrication which is a property of common PVC. One of the main focuses of the overall design was to keep the project in a closed water system. The grey water system retains collected rain water in a system of ponds which are home to heliophites, natural water treatment plants. With the amount of rainfall in Portland, a similar grey water system may be utilized. However, the value of the OMSI waterfront property may suggest retention ponds too costly in relation to other grey water systems available.

Sources: 1. Crosbie, Michael J. Architecture for Science. The Images Publishing Group Pty Ltd. 2004. 48 2. Blundell, Peter Jones. Architectural Review, The. 2001. <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3575/is_1247_209/ai_70912258> 3. http://www.behnisch.com/site_files/pdf/22.pdf 46

Summary: •

Louvered ceiling over interior gardens provide enough natural ventilation to negate ducting in all spaces other than the lab areas.

•

Grey water system allows for a closed water system by capturing all rain from building and uses heliophites (natural water treatment plants) to purify before recirculation.

•

Energy modeling allowed the architect to use only as much concrete as was necessary for thermal massing.

Arch 584 - Bill Kirkwood

IFNR 47

GREEN DESIGN WATER POLLUTION CONTROL LABORATORY, PORTLAND, OR Architect: Miller Hull & SERA Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1997 Size:40,000sf Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services’ mission is the “stewardship of natural resources and service to the community.” On this project the Bureau worked to restore a once polluted site. Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services selected the site “to demonstrate that the collection, cleaning, and discharge of storm water from the city’s neighborhoods can comfortably coexist with nature” (Source 2). The project shows a commitment to improving its property. After choosing the site, they stabilized 900 feet of the riverbank using soilbioengineering methods and replaced a collapsed stormwater line that crossed the property with a stormwater garden.

Daylighting Public & Science Education Innovative Stormwater Integration

Fifty acres of water run-off from St. John’s neighborhood is treated onsite in the water demonstration retention pond. It is a learning and improvement tool for the scientists and public. When it rains, water flows down hills and into a system of stormwater pipes and drains. A sculptural form was designed to lead into the retaining pond. The linear piece of it consists of a twelve-inch diameter outfall pipe surrounded by stones (Source 4). The stormwater runs through the pipe and stones dissapate the energy and allow solids to settle out and then the remaining water seeps into the upper portion through weepholes in the side of the pipe. The linear stone wall rises and falls to show the water level. Pollutants that remain in the pond sink to the the bottom two feet of the pond and remain there (Source 1). Examples of pollutants are oil, grease, heavy metals, animal waster, fertilizers, pesticides, etc. When the water from the pond infiltrates into the soil, microorganisms break down the pollutants before the water drains into the Willamette. The pond, bioswales and scuppers are tools (Source 5) for studying Sources: 1. Galison, Peter & Thompson, Emily. “Architecture for Science.” MIT Press. 1999. 2. Hinshaw, Mark. “ Water pollution control industry.” Architecture; Jul97, Vol. 86 Issue 7. 3. Miller Hull website. http://www.millerhull.com/htm/nonresidential/WaterP-Lab.htm 4. Thompson, William. “The Poetics of Stormwater.” Landscape Architecture. January 1999. 5. Olson, Sheri. “Miller Hull: Architects of the Pacific Northwest.” Princeton Architectural Press. 2001. 48

how contaminants affect water quality, how stormwater control measures affect the landscape and how water may be treated in an urban environment. When it rains the “roof is a dramatic demonstration of urban runoff as oversized scuppers pour rainwater into a landscaped treatment pond on the waterside site.” (source one). The building does not have gutters, but instead uses scuppers, in which they overflow into the pond or into one of the six biofiltration swales in the garden and parking lot. The bioswales are similar to those used at Oregon Museum of Science and Industry.

Summary:

• Two story spaces allow light to reach farther into the building, decreasing needs for articifial lighting.

The building is designed around energy effiency in regards to daylighting. Interior computerized window shades and energy-efficient lighting system minimize internal heat load and help reduce overall energy use (Source 4). Self-dimming fluorescent lights, motion sensitive light switches, and operable windows are in the offices and common spaces. Core spaces are glass-walled to bring light through the space. Skylights are placed along the double- heighted space on the north side by the labs. The glazed western elevation looks to the river and is protected by a repetitive pattern of brise soleil which reduce glare to offices and shade higher summer suns and allow lower winter sunlight into the space .

• Different science disciplines share the lab, administrative and common spaces

Since labs require careful controls, natural systems are impossible. The non-laboratory spaces are naturally ventilated with aluminum operable windows: a green light signals when the chiller is off and the windows can be opened. The laboratory systems provides 100 percent outside air for ventilation, conditioned by a single two-stage, direct/indirect evaporative cooling system.

• Office and administrative spaces are naturally ventilated. This is possible because of the zoning layout of the space by using different bays.

ARCH 548 - Danielle Meyers

• Interior spaces are sheltered from the sun via sun shades, large overhangs and computerized shades.

mechanical 1

mechanical 2

SUSTAINABILITY TERRENCE DONNELLY CENTRE FOR CELLULAR & BIOMOLECULAR RESEARCH Architect: Behnisch Architekten with architectsAlliance Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2006 Size: 250,000 sf TDCCBR is a high performance building utilizing both passive and mechanical systems to maximize energy efficiency. The gardens, lounges and corridors are mechanically-assisted natural ventilation and the laboratories and offices use a separate energy efficient mechanical system. By dividing the building into two different energy zones utilizing different sources, the building is able to provide maximum efficiency. The two mechanical spaces break up the mass of the building and also allow the laboratories to be open and free of mechanical rooms. Traditional ventilation standards were challenged and the design team was able to reduce the number of air changes per hour from 20 down to 10-12. The south elevation features a double facade with 2.5 feet of air space between the exterior single-glazed system and the interior double-glazed skin. Louvers are located between the skins reducing heat gain and redirecting daylight into the building. These also assist the stack ventilation system to heat or vent the interstitial space. Interior shades are also used to help with heat control. Operable windows are provided in the principal investigator’s offices and connected to the central system so when the windows open, the mechanical units turn off. The multiple-story gardens filter the air and provide oxygen throughout the atrium space. The irrigation and drainage for the plants connect to the storm-water reclamation system. The plant selection varies in each garden, but all adapt seasonally. In the summer, the foliage provides shade and in the winter, with the absence of leaves, sunlight infiltrates deeper into the building to provide warmth and comfort.

Sources: 1. www.archnewsnow.com 2. www.behnisch.com 3. Weathersby Jr., William. “Collaborative Labs Spark Discovery.” Architectural Record July 2006: 127-133. 4. Behnisch, Gunter, and Stefan Behnisch and Gunther Schaller. Behnisch, Behnisch & Partner: Buildings and Designs. Switzerland: 50 Birkhauser, 2003.

Summary: • Both passive and mechanical systems are used to maximize energy efficiency • Double facade controls heat gain and daylighting • Tall garden spaces enhance indoor air quality and contribute to water efficiency • Mechanical systems are broken up vertically to better accommodate energy needs, keeping lab floors free of mechanical rooms

GREEN BUILDINGS GEORGIA TECH WHITAKER BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING BUILDING, ATLANTA, GEORArchitect: HOK Environment: (Rural or Urban) Date Completed: 2003 Size: 90,000 sq.ft. The Whitaker Building was a design-build project under a tight 18 month deadline. While Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) was not a project requirement, sustainable aspects were incorporated into the design. The building contains 45,000 sq. ft. of labratory space and 45,000 sq. ft. of classrooms, lecture space, and administrative area. EXTERIOR • The exterior skin is glass on the north, south, and southwest facades. • The glazing is designed to allow maximum visible light admittance, while minimizing cooling loads, and sun glare. • The glazing is a combination of 25 percent fritted, 25 percent translucent, and 50 percent high performance vision glass. • Exterior sunshades were incorporated to reduce direct sunlight and glare. Since the office area and labratory area are distinctly divided, the offices were able to have operable windows for natural ventilation without impacting the performance in the labs. HVAC • The HVAC system was designed to minimize energy loads while maintaining the interior environment to be comfortable for the occupants. • The exhaust system allows uncontaminated room air to be combined with fume hood exhaust. Sources: 1. http://www.edcmag.com/CDA/Archives/62ac40a1e2d98010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____

• The HVAC system was selected according to the highest airflow demand due to ventilation requirements, fume hood make-up air requirements, and cooling load requirements. Air handling units use variable frequency drives to control fan speeds to allow minimum air necessary according to code. • Sophisticated labratory airflow controls system maintains space pressurization relationships, space temperature control, minimum ventilation rates, and fume hood face velocities simultaneously. This control system was designed to keep energy consumption down, and ventilation rates at a minimum. • The office area has its own air handling system. A variable-volume recirculating air handling unit was used. It is also equipped with an airside economizer cycle to utilize outdoor air for “free” cooling when the ambient temperature is less than the indoor temperature. ELECTRICAL • They typical energy load from lighting is 25%. This was minimized by the type of light fixtures used. “All laboratory spaces were provided with 1 by 4-foot lay in prismatic fixtures with high frequency electronic ballasts and two T-8 fluorescent lamps. They were arranged in rows 5 feet apart, and for each laboratory the lamps are alternately switched to allow users to select between having none, half, or all of the lamps on (website).” • “Lighting fixtures in offices and classrooms are 2 by 4-foot lay-in parabolic type with three T-8 fluorescent lamps. These spaces are provided with inboard/outboard switching to allow users to select between none, 1/3, 2/3, or all lamps on (website).” • Lighting in the public spaces is controlled by an automation system, and the exterior lighting is controlled by a photocell. ARCH 584 - Stephanie Rinehart 53

Summary: • Well designed exterior glazing system that is aesthically pleasing and designed to control sun glare and heat gain. • Sophisticated HVAC system that minimizes energy loads. • Office and administrative spaces have their own air handling system seperate from the laboratory space. • Efficient and adjustable light fixtures. • A commissioning authority was hired by Georgia Tech to confirm that the systems in the building were performing according to requirements. This process resolved several unanticipated operational issues. No complaints about temperature have been reported by the building occupants.

GREEN BUILDINGS BAHRAIN WORLD TREADE CENTER, PORTLAND 1-5 BRIDGE, & WIND TURBINE ADVACEMENT Architect: Atkins architects (Trade Center) Environment: Urban Date Completed: Fall 2007 (Trade Center)

Bahrain World Trade Center

Like many sustainable ideas, wind turbines have recieved large critisism for not being a realistic solution. However, large steps are quickly being made and the idea of clean wind energy is being realized by serious people. A good example of a large commitment is the Bahrain World Trade Center. The design is structured around three 29 meter wide wind turbines. The turbines sit on bridges stretching between the two towers of the mixed use building. Small attempts have been made to adapt wind turbines to buildings, but this building made it part of the design to ensure the most success from their investment. The turbines are expected to produce 11-15 percent of the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s energy. This may not sound signicant, but along with other energy saving stratagies this will greatly reduce energy needs. The Bahrain project can only be seen as a prototype, more advances are being made everyday. One of these advances is the Mag-Wind design. These new turbines use magnets to eliminate nearly all friction, leading to much greater energy outputs. Many Mag-Wind trubines are being designed to be a part of buildings, since taller buildings already experience strong wind forces. (A new Mag-wind super turbine is being constructed that will produce one gigawatt, more than a 1000 mills on a standard wind farm can produce, it will be able to power 750,000 homes.)

Super Mag-Wind (in construction)

Portland I-5 design idea

Most wind turbines are placed in vast, wide open plains or the ocean, however experts say that vallies and gorges are also well suited for the clean energy producing turbines. This is why a city like Portland, OR, known for their environmentally friendliness, is playing with the idea of designing wind turbins into the new I-5 bridge. The massive structure could use the energy to power its lights and tolls, as well as be an icon to Portland and surrounding gorge area. Sources: 1. World architecture news. http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=2133 2. Tree Hugger. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/03/bahrain_install.php 3. Got 2 be Green. http://got2begreen.com/green-infrastructure/alternative-energy/maglevs-wind-turbine-is-real-2/ 4. Oregon Live.com http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/01/i5_wind_turbines.html 54 5. AeroVironment. http://www.avinc.com/Energy_Lab_Details.asp?Prodid=52

Summary: • Bahrain World trade Center uses three 29 meter wide turbines that can produce up to 15% of the buildings energy and only cost 3% of the project.

Bahrain World Trade Center

• Portland, OR plays with the idea of incorporating wind turdines on the new I-5 bridge. • New Mag-Wind turbines nearly eliminate friction making them much more efficant. • A new Super Mag-Wind turbine will be able to power 750,000 homes.

Wind turbine prototypes

Portland I-5 design concept

GREEN BUILDINGS - LEED “OFF THE GRID” COR - MIAMI, FLORIDA Architect: Oppenheim Environment: Urban Date Completed: Est. 2012 Size: 480,000 sf mixed-use condominium complex COR, the first sustainable, mixed-use condominium in Miami, Florida represents a dynamic combination of architecture, structural engineering and ecology. Rising 380’ above the Design District, Cor extracts power from its environment utilizing the latest advancements in wind turbines, photovoltaic’s, and solar hot water generation – while integrating them into its architectural identity. A hyper-efficient exoskeleton shell simultaneously provides building structure, thermal mass for insulation, shading for natural cooling, enclosure for terraces, armatures for turbines, and loggias for congregating on the ground. Essentially a box within a box this tower has generated some criticism. One of which is the apparent “cheese grater” exoskeleton that many view can only have occured an environment like Miami. Aesthetics aside, the exoskeleton, since it is not used as the primary curtain wall, is allowed to take the brunt of the solar gains while the interior box stays cool. This idea works similar to a cooler, having layers separated by an air gap to insure a balanced tempature inside. The “cheese grater” also has a use in that it houses the wind turbines. Instead of having turbines mounted atop the structure like a flag pole, the system actually incorporates it into the design of the facade. The exoskeleton also stores the solar gains for the hot water generation. Weather or not an observer is attracted to the appearence of COR, they at least have to admit that it is quite a creative use of green technology. Bridging the gap between a mixed use condo tower and a laboratory focused tower, elements such as the seperation of the wamer exoskeleton from the interior tower can provide an opportunity for heating and cooling assistance.

HVAC designs in a laboratory tower can ver very rigorous and demanding. By aiding this systen in any way, precious floor space is opened up. COR offeres a great example of how this can be done. Exhaust will still be a high priority for a laboratory tower and by freeing up some of that space, the exhaust system can dominate the portion that the heating and cooling elements once overcrowded.

Summary: •

Mixed use condominium tower

•

Multiple exterior walls to make efficient use of solar heat gains

•

Wind turbines incorporated into the design of facade

•

10 inch thick exoskeleton provides shading for interior cube

•

Use of photocoltaics and solar hot water generation

•

Provides a great opportunity to free up heating and cooling elements from interior floor space

Green Building Howard Hughes Medical Institute: Janelia Farm Research Campus Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Rural Date Completed: October 5, 2006 Size: 740,411 square feet When designing a scientific research campus just oﬀ the banks of the Potomac River, Rafael Vinoly Architects knew they would have to make a strong connection to the landscape. Building on a 281-acre parcel of land with a historically registered 1936 Normandy-style farmhouse being the centerpiece of the site, the design team was pushed to bring only their most creative solutions. What they came up with was a design that carved itself into the landscape creating a stepped down section, the largest intensive green roof in America harvesting 95% of the storm water, and a connection with nature focusing its attention on the designed pond which divides the campus. The pond is a designed feature that allows for systems cooling and is immediately visible from the main entry; a secondary pond exists on the opposite side of the housing. On the opposite side of the pond, they designed a housing complex called the “hotel” available to post doctorate fellows or visiting scientists, and some units could even accommodate scientists’ families, creating a live-work environment. Creating a stepped down building allows the grade to hide the unoccupied spaces, but still allows natural light into every occupied space and also helps in creating a massive green roof. The terraced green roof allows for every floor to exit onto green space, making every floor to feel like the ground floor. When looking from the water up to the building its glass façade presents itself with a graceful, but strong, presence. In its approach from above the building looking towards the pond, its presence is almost unnoticed due to its concentric floor plan, terraced section, and its vast green roof. The intention was to attempt to own the landscape without anyone even noticing it was there.

The site protection and utilization was a constant consideration for construction management as well. The concrete plant was brought onsite, allowing excavated rubble to become the aggregate, and also saved in shipping and transportation costs. The rubble was also crushed and used as backfill on the road system. Every tree (100%) was either mulched and used on site or sawn into floorboards that would be used in the housing projects. The construction was mindful and respectful to its surroundings both historically and naturally, and did what they could to lessen the impact of putting such a facility on a riverside property without destroying the integrity of the surrounding areas.

Summary: • • • • • • • •

Building uses nature as an integral part of lab experience Building is one with the site 180,000 square foot intensive green roof making it the largest in America roof harvests 95% of storm water Did not apply for LEED certification Concrete made from excavated rubble. trees 100% recycled into mulch, flooring, and other building materials All occupied spaces naturally lit

GREEN BUILDING CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, SAN FRANCISCO, CA Architect: Renzo Piano Building Workshop Environment: Urban Date Completed: 2008 Size: N/A The renovation of the California Academy of Sciences by Renzo Piano, located in the San  Francisco’s Golden Gate Park, provides many great examples of how green friendly systems  can be incorporated within a large scale building.  The newly opened building was awarded  LEED Platinum status several months ago.  The numerous sustainable design elements include: •

An undulating green roof which allows for cool air to ﬂow into the museum and warm air  to be released.  The green roof also provides great insulation and is estimated to keep the  museum 10 degrees cooler on hot days. In addition, the green roof absorbs 3.6 million  gallons of rainwater, preventing it from becoming storm water; the rest of the water is  harvested and re‐used.

•

Skylights which operate on heat censors have been strategically placed to give light to light  hungry coral and tropical rainforest exhibits.  In addition, 90% of all oﬃces in the building  have natural light and ventilation with operable windows, cutting energy costs signiﬁcantly.

•

Radiant heating provides a heat source from hot pipes in the ﬂoor, and also as a cooling  source using cold water being pumped from the nearby ocean.

•

60,000 Photovoltaic cells produce up to 10% of the buildings electricity use.

Sources: 1. Gregory, Rob, “Renzo Piano: California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, USA”, Architectural Review, 2005 Apr., v.217, n.1298, p.67 2. Anonymous, “Renzo Piano: renovation and expansion of the California Academy of Sciences, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, U.S.A.”, GA  Document, 2005 May, n.85, p.[28]‐33 3. greenbuildingelements.com/2008/09/26/academy‐of‐sciences‐museum‐ﬁnally‐opens‐in‐san‐francisco/ 4. www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek06/0609/0609academy.cfm 5. www.calacademy.org/ 60

•

Recycling materials was key to the buildings construction.  95% of all steel used is recycled  steel. Fly ash (a recycled coal by‐product) was mixed into the concrete. 50% of the lumber  used was harvested from sustainable forests. 68% of insulation comes from recycled blue  jeans. 90% of all demolition materials were recycled. 32,000 tons of sand from foundation  excavation was used in dune restorations in San Francisco.  In addition, in the past year the  Academy recycled 80% of its garbage. Bathrooms ﬂush with reclaimed water from the city  of San Francisco, and there are no paper towels in the bathrooms.

•

Food served in the café is harvested locally.

•

The building used between 30 and 50 percent less energy than the federal code requires.

Arch 584 ‐Cyrus Dorosti

Summary: •

Passive Ventilation using  undulating roof and heat  censored skylights

•

Living Roof for water reclamation  and storm water capture

•

Solar Panels to provide electricity

•

Recycled materials used, and  demolished materials recycled

•

Café of only locally grown food

GREEN BUILDING JANELIA FARM RESEARCH CAMPUS, ASHBURN, VA Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Rural Date Completed: 2006 Size: 581,008 Square Feet The overall phylosophy of the Howard Hughes Medical Institutes’ Janelia Farm Research Campus site is to integrate sustainable approches into everything from the smalles details to future programming needs. The main structure of the campus is referred to as the “Landscape Building,” because of its integration with the landscape. But this research facility is not only blending with the landscape but taking the steps to create a more sustainable campus design. Along the length of the structure, square glass atriums provide natural daylighting. Daylighting is accomplished in all occupied spaces, including labs and offices. All spaces use an occupancy sensory lighting system with sensors to turn of artificial lighting when natural light is providing the correct level of light. Many of the materials used throughout the project were excavated from the site. The trees cut down were 100% recycled and the stumps and softwood was ground into mulch. This facility has a 180,000 square foot green roof planted with indigenous vegetation and is now the second largest green roof in the U.S. The total thickness of the roof is two feet. This roof retains 95% of rain water, dramatically reducing the amount drained into storm sewers. Storm water retention is provided by the two man-made ponds, which are fed by roof drainage systems. The site run off is used for irrigation and wildlife. The green roof and environmental ponds also affect the heating and cooling efficiency of the site along with the added insulation provided by the buildings being embedded into the landscape. Another innovative design solution was an uniquely designed low energy LED street light used throughout the campus.

Sources: 1. Rafael Vinoly Architects. 2009. 16 Jan. 2009 <http://www.rvapc.com/>.

Summary: •

All occupied spaces have natural daylighting

•

Used site excavated materials and recycled 100% of the trees used or removed during construction

•

Second largest green roof in U.S. at 180,000 sq ft and two feet thick

•

Site retains 95% of rain water in two man-mad ponds on site

Arch 584: Elizabeth Delorme

GREEN BUILDINGS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING BUILDING, UC, MERCED Architect: EHDD Architecture Environment: Campus Date Completed: February 2006 Size: 174,00 sq. ft. The University of California’s science and engineering building at Merced accommodates all laboratory based activities for the university’s Natural Science and Engineering divisions. The building is 3-storeys high and designed to achieve a LEED silver. The project houses modular laboratory spaces, 23 classroom labs, open academic computing center, 60 seater seminar room with primary student- related spaces. The spaces are designed to foster inter-disciplinary collaboration among faculty and students. The open lab spaces accommodate up to 4 PI’s. The sustainable infrastructure includes a large central plant with heating and cooling systems connected to all the different blocks on the campus through a tunnel. The laboratories in the Science and Engineering building are clustered together in one part of the structure to connect to the tunnel node of the central plant. The central plant also serves as a living laboratory for environmental science students. It has thermal energy storage tank for chilled water to be produced at night when the demand for electrical energy is low. This chilled water is sent to air handlers in the lab spaces for cooling both the building and the equipment. Use of filters and generous duct sizes save energy. Fume hoods use variable air volume to reduce exhaust rates. Offices and conference rooms are separated from labs so they can have openable windows and natural ventilation. The building also features a three storey arcade with glass sunshades on the SE and SW façade.

Sources: 1. EHDD Architecture: www.ehdd.com/ 2. News: www.archnews.com/features/Feature117.htm 3. Document: www.scup.org/downloads/annualconf/42/scup-42-20070709-CC-19.pdf 64

Summary: •Use of Sunshade devices for the reduction in heat absorption. •A central plant for heating and cooling system can also provide for detailed study for interested students. •Accurately estimating the internal heat loads from the lab equipment avoids installation of excess air conditioning capacity. •Separation of lab spaces from offices and common areas reduces cooling needs. •Covering 80% of parking spaces with PV will generate more energy (future development plan for project) ARCH 584 - Chitra Prabhakar

GREEN BUILDING MOLECULAR FOUNDRY, BERKELEY, CA Architect: SmithGroup Environment: Urban Date Completed: March 2006 Size: 95,690 sq. ft. SmithGroup designed this nanotechnology building for the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), a division of the U.S. Department of Energy. LBNL’s campus is situated in the hills above the UC-Berkeley campus and the Molecular Foundry labs cantilever 45 feet from the foundation, offering a dramatic entry to the LBNL campus and views to the Bay Area. The project was certified LEED Gold by the U.S. Green Building Council, the first LBNL building to earn a LEED rating. The building’s design reduced energy consumption by more than 27% relative to California Title 24 energy requirements. Materials • Specifications included low-emission carpet, paint, and adhesives, as well as renewable bamboo flooring and cabinetry in the interaction spaces. • Polished concrete flooring was used in some public spaces, including the primary entry, but porosity and the risk of biocontamination precluded the use of concrete floors in laboratory areas. The H-8 laboratory occupancy standard (specific to California) requires spill containment with a floor covering. Form • Floor plans were organized with office suites in isolated mechanical zones, allowing energysaving recirculating air systems for the offices, while still delivering 100 per cent outside air to the laboratories. • Natural light is maximized throughout laboratory spaces, which are arranged across a double-loaded corridor that spans the length of the east-west axis of the building. Sources: 1. Architectural Record Web site, http://archrecord.construction.com/projects/bts/archives/labs/07_MolecularFoundry/default.asp 2. SmithGroup Web site, http://www.smithgroup.com/index.aspx?id=392&section=34 3. Lab Business, Spring 2008, http://www.smithgroup.com/repository/documents/1557.pdf 4. Tradeline, Oct. 17, 2007, http://www.tradelineinc.com/content/28765/display/n7%3Avjd 5. GreenSource, April 2007, http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/rms/grns-1-20736428/ 66

Equipment • Sizing of new electrified systems was based on an in-house survey to quantify electrical usage in several similar facilities across the research group’s campus. The collected data allowed the project team to reduce the size of every electrical component. This led to a chain of HVAC equipment reductions as well, including chillers, ductwork and diffusers. • “Green” plumbing equipment includes half-gallon-per-minute hand-washing faucets, waterless urinals and an electromagnetic water treatment system in the cooling towers that reduces water consumption and harmful chemicals. • Fume hoods are variable-air-volume with a combination of horizontal and vertical sashes. Fans and pumps use variable-frequency drives controlled with reset schedules to minimize energy use. 1 Offices 2 Interaction 3 Imaging laboratories 4 Utility plant 5 Loading zone

Summary: • Certified LEED Gold • Environmentally sensitive materials where code allowed • Layout dictated by natural light and air circulation • Electrical equipment sizing and selection based on a review of usage by neighboring buildings • Lab equipment power and resource requirements flexible enough to vary with usage

Plan, Level 1

ARCH 584 - Ted Mitchner

GREEN BUILDING GENZYME CENTER, CAMBRIDGE, MA Architect: Behnisch Architects Environment: Urban Date Completed: November 2003 Size: 350,000 sq. ft. The Genzyme Corporation and architects worked carefully to ensure that the building was designed to be environmentally responsible and achieve the highest standards for green buildings. That being the case, the project was registered with the GBC under its LEED System, and following the completion of the project, the Genzyme Center received a platinum certification. Sustainable Site Development • The center was built on a “brownfield” site, where a coal gasification plant was located. • Eco-roofs help mitigate storm water runoff as well as the urban heat island effect. Additionally, the eco-roof creates a necessary wildlife habitat in the urban environment. • The building is located in proximity to multiple modes of public transportation. • The Center provides bike storage and showers in basement, electric vehicle charging, and Energy • Photo voltaic cells are mounted on the roof to help reduce the operation energy. • Concrete slab construction provides a passive heating/ cooling benefit that helps moderate temperature fluctuation in the building and reduce energy costs. • The atrium produces a stack effect which helps to naturally ventilate the building. • High performance glass and a double glass curtain wall that covers 32% of the building help provide insulation. • Heliostats on the roof reflect natural light down into the atrium space throughout the day, allowing 75% of employees to work using natural light alone. Sources: 1. Behnisch Architects. www.behnisch.com 2. Genzyme Center, Land Use & Community. http://www.aiatopten.org/hpb/landuse.cfm?ProjectID=274 3. Genzyme Corporation. http://www.genzyme.com/genzctr/tour/genzyme.html 68

• •

Louvers on the roof of the atrium automatically regulate the amount of daylight that enters the space. Operable windows allow employees to physically alter their surroundings without turning on an artificial system.

Water Savings • The center instituted dual flush toilets and waterless urinals. • Moisture sensors were installed in the surrounding landscape to reduce unnecessary irrigation. Materials • Designers chose materials that were low in Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), sustainable and recyclable, and made from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) harvested wood. • 50% of materials came from local sources within 500 miles of the site. • 90% of all waster material from the project was either recycled or reused. Indoor Air Quality • The center employs a sophisticated air monitoring system to ensure that the air quality in the building is optimal. • Atrium gardens, operable windows, and views to the outdoors help to create a positive, healthy, and exciting workplace for employees. ARCH 584- Todd Palmer

Summary: •

LEED Platinum Project

•

Heliostats located on the roof reflect light down into the atrium onto glass chandeliers

• •

Eco-roofs on the roof help mitigate storm water runoff.

•

“Brownfield” site development

•

Materials are low in VOC’s, sustainable and recyclable, and FSC wood.

LABORATORY TYPOLOGIES WATER POLLUTION CONTROL LABORATORY, PORTLAND, OR Architect: Miller Hull & SERA Environment: Urban Date Completed: 1997 Size:40,000sf The Portland Water Control Laboratory building has a flexible design, adapting to the needs of scientists in fields of general chemistry, microbiology, nutrients, organic analysis, metals and organic preparation. The state of the art laboratory is organized in seven long bays, with alternating sloped roof planes and strips of mechanical equipment. It is unique in that the building houses several types of science research as well as serves to educate the public. Lab experimentation also takes place out into the stormwater infiltration garden pond and its supporting spaces. It is a testing ground for stormwater runoff, native animal and plantlife development in the urban context. The building is 37,000 sf, with 15,000sf of lab space and 25,000sf of administrative and support spaces. The seven bays vary in width, program, and transparency. The first bay parallels the river on the west and is the most articulated. It includes open administrative office space, cafeteria, and multi-purpose rooms. The space in this bay is fairly transparent to extend daylight and views into the other bays. The second bay is an enclosed-two story service core containing stairs, restrooms, and private conference rooms. It is a vertical volume and flat roof that conceals the mechanical equipment and provides a visual break between the large north south sloping roof, sloping up toward the bridge on the North. The following four adjoining bays contain the laboratory spaces. The roof slopes south and up Sources: 1. Galison, Peter & Thompson, Emily. “Architecture for Science.” MIT Press. 1999. 2. Hinshaw, Mark. “ Water pollution control industry.” Architecture; Jul97, Vol. 86 Issue 7. 3. Miller Hull website. http://www.millerhull.com/htm/nonresidential/WaterP-Lab.htm 4. Thompson, William. “The Poetics of Stormwater.” Landscape Architecture. January 1999. 5. Olson, Sheri. “Miller Hull: Architects of the Pacific Northwest.” Princeton Architectural Press. 2001. 70

to north reaching a double height porch for scientists to relax and collaborate. The interior lab spaces require careful controls, which make natural systems impossible. As a result, the natural ventilation is in the open office space, which has a secondary system of aluminum operable windows. The lab spaces have lofted ceilings with six individual work areas in large nooks off a wide circulation spine. The scientists share the support spaces. Large windows look into the labs for light to seep through the space as well as to allow public viewing along the corridor. Private lab offices and meeting rooms are placed along the core, but maintain glass walls to allow light to penetrate into the space. This lab building is set up very simply and works effectively because of the small knit footprint. This project is successful in regards to its laboratory uses because both inside in the labs and outside in and around the pond, different types of scientists share and use the same spaces, piggybacking off of one another’s research. The seven bays are a result of both the orientation of the sight with the river and the need to organize different programs and their different ceiling heights and mechanical needs in an orderly fashion. The lab and lab equipment bays do not have natural ventilation whereas the offices, conference rooms and cafeterias do, so they are need to be zoned differently, which is a common method unique to lab buildings.

ARCH 548 - Danielle Meyers

Summary: • The seven lab and support bays are connected by a few wide corridors and smaller supplementary corridors that allow for easy transition for the scientist from lab to equipment to office • The lab space is set up in branches where two scientists share all of the immediate spaces and all of the scientists share the general spaces along a spine connecting the series of branches • Scientists conducts research both inside in the labs and outside in the pond.

Lab Typologies Howard Hughes Medical Institute: Janelia Farm Research Campus Architect: Rafael Vinoly Architects Environment: Rural Date Completed: October 5, 2006 Size: 740,411 square feet In designing the laboratories at Janelia Farm the architect had a single vision and that was to create a space that forced interaction. In laying out the design, a serpentine building was created in the landscape along the Potomac River stacking receding levels above and creating a stepped down building that responded to the site, placing a pond in the center of the campus. In this building two large glass stair cores divide the building into thirds, and their arrangement was intended to create meeting places for all of the different labs to meet and mingle. Additionally they placed more conference space than usual, and created some unique social spaces to allow for relaxation and work to meld into the culture of the facility. The offices were arranged in clusters and placed just outside the lab spaces to allow a neighborhood scenario for the labs, offices, and meeting spaces. The labs were placed into the serpentine shape with minimal change to the standard lab layout, and placed on the inside of the all glass corridor that faced the pond and landscape, allowing for the exchange of borrowed light. The layout of the labs is arranged around floor-mounted bollards, which allow for a number of different arrangements without the need for electricians or plumbers, and frees the ceiling plane of clutter. In looking into sociological studies, the architect found that once a maximum number of 20 or so is reached in a group, people tend to rarely reach out to other circles, or look to meet new people. In knowing this the labs design hinged on small lab groups, no larger than 6 to encourage others to collaborate and interact on a daily basis.

Glass walls, inside and outside create an open and connected environment inside the lab. In using glass, the facility allows a stronger connection with nature and the river with its exterior elements, but also creates an open, connected feeling among the scientists, while still providing the security and air quality necessary for the labs to run. It helps with way finding, promotes interaction, creates a professional transparency, and allows for the river to be a constant attraction, be it for inspirational thinking, or for meditative distraction. The floor-to-floor heights are somewhat standard on the upper floors (16’-20’) but on the first floor the floor to floor is 36’. In realizing the time taken from inception to having a built, functioning building, is anywhere from 2-6 years (maybe more) and lab equipment and technology can greatly change over that period of time. So in making the floor-to-floor 36’ (and large enough to fit a tractor trailer) it allowed the facility to be always growing, and always ready for the next line of large lab equipment. Also with the design intent of being expandable, the facility was designed with unprogrammed, unfinished space for labs and scientists to fill. The building is a compliment to its surroundings without disturbing the natural beauty of the landscape. The scientists of Howard Hughes Medical Institute are allowed, “to probe the genius of life itself” as was the intended goal of Howard Hughes. Being so gracefully placed into a natural setting reminds the scientists of their duty, while providing them with cutting edge technology.

Summary: • • • • • •

•

More meeting, conference, and social spaces Neighborhoods consisted of Oﬃces, labs and meeting spaces Lab equipment fed from bollards to free ceiling Lab groups intended to be no more than 6 to encourage interaction Glass walls to promote interaction First floor designed to be 36’ and can accommodate a tractor trailer for any cutting edge equipment Designed with unfinished, unprogrammed space to accommodate future endeavors

RESEARCH LABORATORY TYPOLOGIES JAMES H. CLARK CENTER, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, CA Architect: Foster and Partners Environment: Campus Date Completed: September 2003 Size: 245,000 sq. ft. The James H. Clark center for biomedical engineering and studies features a design very different from the traditional research facilities. This uniquely designed building houses Stanford University’s Bio-X program. The Center for Clinical Sciences and Research (CSSR) building also in the campus designed by Foster and Partners was designed to facilitate interdisciplinary approach and promote interaction between scientists. The Clark Center takes this idea a step further. This 3 storey project has 146,000 sq.ft of lab space that is comfortable and flexible and accommodates 600-700 people. Its design shows support spaces on the outside with labs and offices on the inside. Innovative flexible, 10’-high work spaces include accessible utilities, mobile casework, and adaptable infrastructure. Sealed epoxy floors allow work areas to be utilized as wet or dry labs. Laboratory layouts can be reconfigured at will. A Unistrut ceiling and racks provide drop-down access to standard utility services, such as gas, air, vacuum, electricity, and water. The Unistrut drops are mobile and can be moved easily and inexpensively by unscrewing a few bolts, so that lab spaces can be converted to wet or dry areas to accommodate each researcher’s work. Sinks are the only items that are not mobile. The result is a layout that meets the unique user needs and desires of a modular, flexible organization of laboratories and offices. All benches and desks are on wheels and can be moved to allow ad hoc team formation that can respond easily to fast-evolving research needs.

Sources: 1. Foster and partners: www.fosterandpartners.com/Partners/1076/Default.aspx 2. Tradeline: www.tradelineinc.com/content/CC14B80A-2B3B-B525-808A6BAFC1011C9F 74

Summary: • Flexible Lab layout allows for future research accommodation • Sealed Epoxy floors in lab spaces allow for the labs to be used as dry or wet labs. • The mobile unistrut ceiling provides access to all utility services and further enforces flexible manipulation of space. • Benches and desks are on wheels which can be arranged according to the necessity of the research team using the space. • Entire structure and the column spacing is dictated by the lab module 21’ and 36’. • 38” beams are designed to satisfy vibration requirement.

ARCH 584 - Chitra Prabhakar

RESEARCH LABORATORY TYPOLOGIES RICHARDS MEDICAL RESEARCH BUILDING - University of Pensylvania SALK INSTITUTE- La Jolla California Architect: Louis Kahn Environment: Rural and Urban Date Completed: 1960 These two buildings designed by Louis Kahn represent two different styles of laboratory design. The Richards Building was the first multi-story, rigid-frame structure to employ pre-cast, pre-stressed, and post-tensioned concrete construction in the United States. Kahn had built neither a medical laboratory or a high rise structure before. The Richards medical research building, had many different program requirements that were needed. Kahn developed a way of incorporating a designation of space for specific departments but allowed further growth and shift to occur by leaving the floor plan of the space free of obstruction. The building is concieved as a collection of discreet funcional components. The origional design called for one core tower housing circulation, mechanical systems, bathrooms and animal quarters. This core tower served three towers of laboratory space that extend from it in a pinwheel array. Later three other towers were added to incorporate more program. These lab towers are flanked by a series of vertical masses housing fire stairs, plumbing and secondary ductwork. Kahn moved to a different design with the Salk institute. No longer did he discretely assign space by enclosing departments in one tower or another. In this design he used a semitrical design with only one large lab area per side. This led to a larger floor plate and a lower height. instead of the seven floors at the Richards Medical Research building, there were only three here at the Salk Institute. Both of these facilities incorporate an open lab design that encourages collaboration but the major difference is relative distance. Researchers can easily communicate with each other in a larger single floor because there are not multiple floors or buildings to weave in and out of. The Richards building represents a maze for interdepartment collaboration yet Salk embraces this openess and celebrates it in its design.

The real distinction of theses buildings come with the design of the open floor plan. Later office building would incorporate this into their design but what really seperates Salk and the Richards Building is the arrangement of support space. Labratory buildings need such a heavy amount of ventilation that typically a large ratio is required for floor space to mechanical space. An office or housing building can be seperated by different clients or tennants thus the mechanical would be placed into the dividing walls. At Salk and the Richards building, there is only one objective being laboratory space and in turn by placing the mechanical space outside the floor space, large open floors opened up for the laboratory spaces. Summary: •

Richards Medical Research Building (top right) designates program through tower and floor components.

•

Structure of Richards Building is kept clear of columns to create an open lab space

•

Complimentary components such as circulation, restrooms, and MEP flank the building in seperate towers creating the famous “Served and Service” spaces.

•

Salk incorporates two large lab spaces per floor creating an incredibly large multi-use space. 77

Urban Design Workshops Session 1 Session 2 79

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE CONTEXTUAL INFLUENCES, IDENTITY, AND CONSTRAINTS

Disection of Site: •

Identifying Districts.

•

Transportation Influences include pedestrian, vehicle, and public transportation.

•

Constaints include MLK Viaduct, River, Railway, Lightrail, Marquam and Hawthorne Bridges.

•

Science and Art Identities are seperated by the river, OMSI can play a role in connecting the two.

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE OPPORTUNITIES

Site Potential:

Arch 584 - Andrew Suljak, Mark Schmidt, Cyrus Dorosti.

•

Visual Opportunites to site from OHSU, Bridges, and MLK. Visual Gateway from the south (HWY 99)

•

Visual Opportunites from OMSI to Mt. Hood, River, Downtown, and OHSU.

•

Connection to Academic Influences of PCC, OHSU, and PSU.

•

Educational opportunites at Ross Island.

•

Potential development using river as means of transportation.

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE OPPORTUNITIES

Node Development: •

The new transit stop helps develop a strong node that has the potential to bring a lot of activity to the east side of the river.

•

The transit bridge links the South Waterfront and OHSU.

•

The site provides unique views to downtown Portland and the South Waterfront.

•

The site has ample southern exposure.

•

The OMSI campus already sits in established bike and pedestrian corridors. 82

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE IDENTITY

PCC

PSU

EDUCATIONAL/ SCIENCE DISTRICT

Creation of a District: •

In conjunction with OHSU, PSU, and PCC, the completion of the OMSI campus will create a new educational and science district in Southeast Portland.

•

The massing of the OMSI buildings can have a drastic influence on the identity of the campus.

•

Views from the Marquam Bridge, the river and each of the existing educational sites will become important.

OMSI

OHSU

Arch 584 - Group A - Todd Palmer, Josh Kolberg, Ted Mitchner, Kevin Montgomery 83

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE CONTEXTUAL INFLUENCES

Portland Crescent: •

Completion of the Portland Crescent.

•

The completion of the crescent geographically connects The Convention Center, Downtown Portland, and OMSI. 84

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE CONSTRAINTS

OMSI CAMPUS OPPORTUNITY INDUSTRIAL/ POSSIBLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

OMSI CAMPUS

COMMERCIAL/ MIXED USE

OPPORTUNITY INDUSTRIAL/ POSSIBLE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

COMMERCIAL/ MIXED USE

Constraints:

Arch 584 - Group A - Todd Palmer, Josh Kolberg, Ted Mitchner, Kevin Montgomery 85

•

Visibilty is limited at the current location of OMSI. The campus is now in a place that could be considered the backyard of the East side. Much of the surrounding development turns it’s back on the site and large edges exist with I-5 and the railroad.

•

Edges will develop with the addition of the new light rail line and the new street car.

•

Development adjacent to OMSI is limited and unknown

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE OPPORTUNITIES From Downtown Portland

Portland Community College

Hosford - Abernethy Neighborhood

Power Plant

Description of Diagram: • •

•

OMSI

OMSI is in an central and growing area of Portland Connection opportunities for OMSI to engage with transit, Ross Island, Portland Community College and the surrounding neighborhoods

To South Waterfront and OHSU

Transit Hub

From OHSU

Visual connections to and from the site; including OHSU, South Waterfront, and Downtown Portland

From South Waterfront

Ross Island

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE INFLUENCES 2 3 9 4 Description of Diagram: 1 8

•

The site has a number of influences, mainly being different communities in the immediate area. This project is attempting to combine all of these communities into an education district.

•

Influences include (1) PSU, (2) Industrial/Commercial, (3) Residential Neighborhood, (4) Existing OMSI, (5) Industrial Area, (6) OHSU, (7) River, (8) Transit Bridge, and (9) PCC.

7 5

Arch 584 - Kathryn Martenson, Danielle Meyers, Elizabeth Delorme, Chitra Prabhakar

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE IDENTITY

Description of Diagram: • Interactive partnerships with community to foster alternative learning • Leader in science and education • Non-profit / volunteer spirit • Local / state / regional education • Willamette River • Mixture of culture, people, accessibility and sustainability

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE CONSTRAINTS

Description of Diagram: • Willamette River • Transportation (train, streetcar, automobile, pedestrian, bike) • Existing massing and zoning • Bridges and noise

Arch 584 - Liz Delorme, Danielle Meyers, Chitra Prabhakar

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE CONTEXTUAL INFLUENCE

Description of Diagram: • Connection to Willamette River • Adjacent organizations: OHSU, PSU, PCC, Portland Opera • Hub for transit • Promotes collaboration

Arch 584 - Bill Kirkwood and Stephanie Rinehart

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION TWO Key Concepts •

This option explored the  opportunity to create an  OMSI campus. Creating  multiple biuldings helps to  establish the campus feel.

•

There is open space left along  the river’s edge, creating a  public park.

•

The trimet station is  celebrated in order to create a  destination.The buildings step  up away from the river and  steps down toward the trimet  stop to maximze southern  exposure.

•

Buildings push up to the  street maintaining the 20’  setback, helps to begin the  urban fabric on the east side  of the river.

•

High builings surround the  street car tracks, creating  a “urban canyon” and a  gateway for those entering  into the OMSI campus.

SITE RESPONSE OPTION 1

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION TWO SITE RESPONSE OPTION 2

Key Concepts

Arch 584 ‐ Group A ‐ Todd Palmer, Josh Kolberg, Ted Mitchner

•

This option explored creating  an iconic massing for OMSI.  The massing of the building  optimizes solar orientation,  creating a large southern  facade

•

There is open space left along  the river’s edge, creating a  public park.

•

The trimet station is cel‐ ebrated in order to create a  destination.

•

Remaining buildings push up  against the 20’ setback on the  street.

•

The street car passes through  the large building mass creat‐ ing  an extravagant gateway  for those entering into the  OMSI campus.

•

Massing volume establishes  views from Willamette River  and Marquam Bridge.

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION TWO ZONING HEIGHT STUDY

Height Study

LEGEND 60’ max

120’ max

150’ min 250’ max

Description of Diagram: •

Taller buildings in the NE portion of the site allowing 3-5 stories along street and light rail for a more pedestrian scale

•

Increased amount of building surface facing ZONING the south for natural HEIGHT STUDY daylighting opportunities

existing 25’ setback proposed 40’ setback

LEGEND 60’ max

120’ max

150’ min 250’ max

Liz Delorme, Stephanie Rinehart, Kathryn Martenson

existing 25’ setback proposed 40’ setback 93

ANALYSIS:

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION TWO Axes, Entrances and Massing

high-rise buildings

low-rise buildings

entries into site

MAX line

pedestrian

Description of Diagram:

nodes

â&#x20AC;˘

Connecting to river and neighborhood on the E/W and the Opera and industrial opportunities to theANALYSIS: N/S through axes and SITE entrances

legend: high-rise buildings low-rise buildings entries into site MAX line pedestrian

Arch 584 - Elizabeth Delorme, Stephanie Rinehart, Kathryn Martenson

nodes 94

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE DESIGN OPTIONS

Description of Diagram: â&#x20AC;˘ A) This diagram shows the existing waterfront boundary with respects to the OMSI buildings. New construction will address the projected Metro plans Portland has begun. In the next 15 years the City plans on converging the MAX, street car and bus routes on the OMSI site. The surplus of public transit in the area will serve to engage the growing pedestrian activity in the area. Orienting the design to address the transit, we can create a highly dynamic area combining local commuters, researchers and students.

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION ONE DESIGN OPTIONS

Description of Diagram: • B) A waterfront park connects pedestrian paths to the water. The design should respect that of the existing OMSI , city and opera building

Arch 584 - Kevin Montgomery, Drew Suljak, Bill Kirkwood, Danielle Meyers

• C)Shared space for OMSI and the research facilities are integral to the project’s success. The MAX would empty into a green space that would serve as a pause space/ park in the new science quad. The new research building would be an icon on a new campus for math and science. • D) Connection to city and water, looking at appling a pedestrian core and transit core

URBAN DESIGN WORK SESSION TWO MASSING

Key Concepts • HIGHER DENSITY TOWARDS MLK AND STEPPED DOWN TOWARDS RIVER AND LIGHT RAIL STATION. • VISUAL CUES FROM ROADS COMING IN ON THE EAST SIDE • BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO MLK DESIGNED TO BE ABOVE ROAD LEVEL. • CENTER SPACES/ NODES/ CONNECTING CORES FOR PEOPLE TO GATHER • LIGHT RAIL STATION SHALL BE A LANDMARK • CABLE CARS AND LIGHT RAIL TO HAVE VISUAL CUES TO SITE.

Design Development Elizabeth Delorme Cyrus Dorosti Bill Kirkwood Josh Kolberg Kathryn Martenson Danielle Meyers Ted Mitchner Kevin Montgomery Todd Palmer Chitra Probhakar Stephanie Rinehart Mark Schmidt Drew Suljak 99

100

OMSI - Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Elizabeth Delorme 101

From Downtown Portland

Portland Community College

Hosford - Abernethy Neighborhood

Power Plant

OMSI

To South Waterfront and OHSU

Transit Hub

OMSI - Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center Portland, OR

From OHSU

From South Waterfront

Ross Island

Storyline For the OMSI Campus, the primary focus is to create a community destination through physical and visual connection to surrounding areas, such as the Portland Community College, the Willamette River, South Waterfront, Downtown Portland, and the surrounding neighborhoods. To create these connections the campus plan will emphasize axis’ that cut through the site, giving hierarchy to the main east/west walk connecting the river and neighborhood. The placement of these axis’ were informed by the existing grid of the city. This new campus is an urban campus and should express that through its layout and density. By taking cues from the surrounding city the OMSI campus will be able to better integrate into the fabric of the city and limit the feeling that this area is an island, separated from the city. The expansion of the OMSI building should include a new main entrance oriented toward the center of the campus. This will allow OMSI to better communicate with the campus and the transportation hub being created on the campus’ southern edge. Science, research, and education should be integrated into many of the campus’ features, including paths, art, transportation and sustainability practices. These features can be integrated into the campus as wayfinding and create a cohesive image for the OMSI Campus. The design of the Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center (BLEC) is intended to strengthen the ideas of the campus design and to act as a gateway into the campus from the new public transportation bridge (construction to be completed in 2015). The form is designed to express the functions of the garden, entry and exhibition with the facade expressing laboratory and common spaces. Programing is separated by floors and their proximity to the ground plane. Programing oriented toward public or educational functions are located on the first three levels leaving the floors above for laboratory functions. The top floor, looking out to the Willamette River and Downtown Portland is dedicated to be a restaurant/event space in order to take advantage of the magnificent view. This large event space could be used not only for BLEC activities but also for OMSI and other campus uses. The buildings exterior material pallet consists of concrete, metal paneling, and a curtain wall system blending Northwest design with industrial design. The interior will be a balanced tension between the smooth, cold concrete and a textured, warm wood. Sustainable practices will also be integrated into the design of the center by addressing energy usage, water runoff, and opportunities for passive cooling. 102

Parking

Water Ave

OMSI

Streetcar

OMSI Expansion

Willamette River

Light Rail Portland Opera Portland Opera Expansion

Scale 1” = 100’ 103

PROGRAMING AND FACADES

Cafe

Auditorium

Entrance/Security

Exhibition

First Level Scale 1” = 100’

Public Uses - Exhibition, Auditorium, Library Educational Laboratory Common Area and Circulation

East/West Section Scale 1” = 100’ 104

East Elevation Scale 1” = 80’

North Elevation Scale 1” = 80’

South Elevation Scale 1” = 80’

West Elevation Scale 1” = 80’

105

LABORATORY AND SUSTAINABILITY Laboratory Support Space Office Conference Room Common Area and Circulation

Laboratory Level Scale 1” = 100’

Common Area - View toward North

106

The Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center could be collecting up to 693,841 gallons of rain water per year. It is important to incorporated an approach to stormwater management for the laboratory building but also to set a strategy for the entire OMSI campus. The benefits to integrating a stormwater management system into a design is to cleanse stormwater collected on site before returning it back into the local ecosystem. Large vegetated channels (bioswales) designed for the campus will be able to collect and treat stormwater on-site, while also providing the campus with a park area that can also be used as an educational tool for the museum. Other strategies for the OMSI Campus green roofs dense vegetation areas throughout the campus

Vent

Lab Separation Lab Separation Fresh Air Intake

Fresh Air Intake Stack Ventilation

6â&#x20AC;? Concrete Slab Lab Separation Fresh Air Intake Laboratory Floor - Night Flushing

North/South Section - Night Flushing

107

There is an opportunity to use a night flushing system to cool the mass of the building if an adequate amount of airflow can be achieved naturally or with a fan system. Because the Biomedical Laboratory and Education Center is a cooling dominated building it is important to focus passive systems toward cooling the structure. It is also important to be sensitive to the amount of glazing and to incorporate shading into the design.

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Bill Kirkwood 117

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR Storyline OMSI will become the neighbor to a major transit hub because of the master plan already in place for the east side of the Willamette River. I will preserve this strong connection between the existing campus and new transit hub by creating a clear view corridor from the transit stops toward the existing OMSI building. The building site is located between the existing OMSI building, and the new mass transit stop. The new transit stop, along with new facilities, will bring a substantial increase of pedestrian activity in the area. This design anticipates such changes by providing a restaurant and a large open plaza leading pedestrians from the transit stop through campus and to the river. The plaza, connected through my buildings will give a clear sense of expansion and contraction, showing pedestrians where the points of arrival are, and where the remaining campus lies. Programming of the biomedical research building includes public plazas which bleed into the interiors, becoming a restaurant, cafĂŠ, library, exhibition space and lecture hall all on the ground floor. As one moves through the professional building, spaces become more private; offices, labs and lab support rooms are all located on the upper levels of the design. Sunlight will be a factor in this project as well. Labs are placed on north and east facing facades, creating spaces resistant to solar gains. As a leader in science, the OMSI site should reflect the principles and goals of the people who work there. This site will incorporate the sciences with sustainable technologies to reduce the impact the project will have on the environment as best as possible. The entire plaza will function as a water treatment retention pond where heliophytes, plants using sunlight to cleanse the water, will purify the rainwater collected onsite before releasing it to the ground and Willamette River. Fortunately, there are no obstructing buildings on site, existing or in planning, which would allow for a large system of photovoltaic panels to be placed on the existing OMSI rooftop, which is flat and barren. My project will work to not disrupt this new PV field, while utilizing a PV system of its own on horizontal light shelves placed on the south faĂ§ade. 118

119

FLOOR PLANS Total Square Footage = 240,000 Biomedical Building Core Lab Lab Support Research Exhibition Prefunction Lecture Theater Café

40,000 sf 40,000 sf 20,000 sf 5,000 sf 3,600 sf 4,200 sf (252 seats) 800 sf

Director’s Oﬃce Director’s Admin Manager’s Facilities Oﬃces Admin Director Admin Assistants Conference Rooms

540 sf 240 sf 1,400 sf 200 sf 260 sf 1,120 sf 2,340 sf

Tech Kitchen

650 sf (ea. floor) 380 sf (ea. floor)

Educational Building Class Rooms Conference Rooms Library Teaching Lab Staﬀ Oﬃces Restaurant

2,640 sf 2,000 sf 10,700 sf 1,040 sf 540 sf 4,110 sf

120

121

122

123

124

OMSI - An Urban Science Park That Inspires Wonder University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Josh Kolberg 125

OMSI - An Urban Science Park That Inspires Wonder Portland, OR Storyline URBAN - Of the city. This campus should have an urban feel that brings the urban sensibility of Portland (the Central East district) to the campus. There should be variety, human scale and richness, quality of edges (or quality of transitions), and connectivity. SCIENCE - Ultimately, this development is about science and research. The underlying metaphor here is a striving for or a reach for the top. Solving the mysteries of life. PARK - Ecological sensitivity. Understanding this developments impact to the site and environment and developing ways in which that impact is lessened. Incorporating the natural into the campus/development. INSPIRES WONDER - One of OMSIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s main goals. Develop a project that is rich in material, technology, and intent that will provide meaning to the city. 1) My design plan provides a reception point and edge to the transit node. First, the parking garage is placed on the east side of the Street Car track. That way, the entry point to the campus for not only mass transit users but also auto commuters is the same. My site abuts the Street Car tracks on the west and the light rail tracks/bridge to the north. It will provide the urban face to the development for those arriving. Thus immediately ushering visitors and users of the site into an urban place. The site will be split into two buildings. A shorter building to the left (6 stories, ~90 ft) and a taller tower to the right (12 stories, ~200 ft). To use a metaphor, the smaller building is the Cascade foothills and the tower is Mt Hood (also seen from elevation on the site). The foothills (smaller building) is the gathering place, the social space. Containing classrooms, libraries, and auditoriums. The mountain (taller tower) embodies the quest for knowledge and wisdom through research (journey to the mountaintop). It houses the laboratories and research offices. This metaphor also played a role in materiality for the two buildings. Both buildings have an east-west axis for maximized solar orientation and minimum impact on easterly views. 2) These two buildings, at the nexus of the transit hub will take forms which create a gateway to the OMSI campus. From car, street car, light rail, or bike to the transit node, you are immediately received into a gathering space framed by the two buildings. These two buildings create the Gateway to the campus. The Gateway frames the view to OMSI, the river, and the city beyond. It is a wayfinding device with OMSI as the target. The Gateway itself will be an active place with sky bridges above connecting the two buildings and indoor and outdoor circulation and common areas elements providing a dynamic to the â&#x20AC;&#x153;outdoor atriumâ&#x20AC;?. 3) Because the buildings abut the transportation node, an expansive public area faces the river. It is the funnel from the transit node to OMSI and to the east bank walk and it will also be a highly active public place. Storm water filtration features, stepped tiers to create an auditorium, fountains, and other features which will draw nature into the site and create a dynamic place for the public to be and to pass through. 126

EXISTING OMSI ENTRANCE

WATER AVENUE

SERVICE BAY

FUTURE OMSI DEVELOPMENT

CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT

OMSI LEARNING CENTER ENTRANCE

STREETCAR LINE

PARKING STRUCTURE

K AL W

SITE PLAN SCALE: 1” = 100’

T BR

NSI

TRA

U O SO GE T

NTO

DOW

127 PORTLAND OPERA

LIGHT RAIL PLATFORM

BUILDING SECTIONS

EAST-WEST SECTION THROUGH MEETING HOUSE SCALE: 1” = 50’ 128

129

NORTH-SOUTH SECTION THROUGH TOWER SCALE: 1” = 40’

FLOOR PLANS 6TH FLOOR

FLOORS 4 THRU 12

LAB

5TH FLOOR

LAB SUPPORT

LIBRARY

3RD FLOOR 4TH FLOOR

212,750 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 3RD FLOOR

63,300 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE

EVENT SPACE

PUBLIC EXHIBIT AND AUDITORIUM SPACE | 15,500 SF

2ND FLOOR

LAB SUPPORT SPACE | 36,500 TOTAL SF (3,650 PER LAB FLOOR)

AUDITORIUM

LAB OFFICE SPACE | 37,600 TOTAL SF (3,760 PER LAB FLOOR)

2ND FLOOR

GENERAL OFFICE, CLASSROOM, AND MEETING SPACE | 13,330 SF

DINING

SECURITY / ADMIN

ENTRY LOBBY

PUBLIC EXHIBITION

RESEARCH LIBRARY | 15,300 SF AUDITORIUM

SECURITY / ADMIN

N GROUND FLOOR PLAN | MEETING HOUSE | 1”=80’ 130

LAB SPACE | 40,000 TOTAL SF (4,000 PER LAB FLOOR)

GROUND FLOOR PLAN | TOWER | 1”=80’

GENERAL OFFICE, CLASSROOM, AND MEETING SPACE | 15,500 SF PUBLIC SPACE MECH

EAST ELEVATION | SCALE: 1” = 65’

WEST ELEVATION | SCALE: 1” = 65’

131 SOUTH ELEVATION | SCALE: 1” = 65’

NORTH ELEVATION | SCALE: 1” = 65’

132

TWO GEOMETRIES JOINING. TWO ENVIRONMENTS MERGING. ONE STORY OF HOW THEY CAME TOGETHER TO FORM A NEW CAMPUS FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH.

OMSI ‐ INTERSECTION OF PLACES

EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE LOOKING FROM NEW OMSI EXPANSION ENTRY

University of Oregon   •   Architecture Department   •   ARCH 584 ‐ Winter 09   •   Professor Lindley   •    Kathryn Martenson 133

OMSI ‐ Intersection of Places PARTI SKETCH

PROCESS DIAGRAMS

ACCESSIBILITY STUDY

Portland, OR Storyline

CENTRAL EASTSIDE DISTRICT

WILLAMETTE RIVER

A duality exists on the site of our project, the intersection of the Willamette River and existing greenway with the  “industrial sanctuary” of the Central East Side Neighborhood.  Industry continues to thrive in the neighborhood,  but this emphasis has decreased on the river.  Now, there is a strong common desire to connect Portland with its  main river by activating the green space along it.     This duality is connected physically by OMSI, but most strongly connected by the museum’s values of creativity,  integrity, community partnerships, and sustainability.  Rooted in volunteer start‐up spirit, OMSI relates to the East  Side.  As a long time industrial area, this neighborhood is about start‐up businesses and hard‐working entrepre‐ neurs.  Similar to OMSI, the Central East Side Neighborhood is focused on staying true to what they know best,  while acknowledging the needs for diversity, growth and improvement.   The merging of these environments led me to the idea of weaving the natural topography of the river with the  structure of the city grid.  In bringing these together, I added a third component that would integrate the new  Biomedical Laboratory building.  In order to take advantage of the site opportunities, I created a new grid to align  with the river.  By bringing these three together,  the site becomes a campus with a central plaza. The new transit bridge and OMSI expansion act as the two main arteries along the traditional Portland grid.  The  Biomedical Lab building sits on its own grid oriented towards the river.   This direction is made clear by the water  feature that runs the axis throughout the entire site.  Rain water is collected from the roofs of all the buildings on  campus and is used to run the water feature by gravity. The lab building sits at the crux of the campus; the orientation opens up the space and is symbolic of opening the way for new research, while contributing to the larger community of the campus.

LANDSCAPE STUDY

GRID SHIFT STUDY

The building plays oﬀ this main idea, as well.  The two main bars act as lab and education space, while the con‐ nector form is programmed as the common space.  The two bars act as the topography coming from the river and  the connector as the city grid that cuts right through it.  The bars are kept simple in form, but represent this idea  through the cutting away of the traditional box, as land is cut and formed by the river.  The connector is kept a  simple rectangle to represent the structured city block. Materials are used to emphasize the story.  Brick is used at the base to tie into the campus feel of OMSI.  Used in  an updated way, it is formed into a panel system.  The curtainwall and metal panel are meant to evoke a lighter,  airy and more open feel to the building.  Symbolically, these materials represent the direction of research; open to  new ideas and exploration.  Channel glass is used for the connector piece.  It is a diﬀerent material all‐together, to  illustrate the importance of collaboration that happens in these common spaces.  It is at the heart of the campus  and is also the tallest point on the campus.  The channel glass glows at night to emphasize the values of science,  research and collaboration.   134

SITE PLAN

WATER AVE OMSI EXPANSION OMSI

OMSI EXPANSION

NEW STREETCAR LINE

BIOMED LAB

RAINWATER  COLLECTION /  WATER FEATURE

WILLAMETTE  RIVER

FUTURE LAB  DEVELOPMENT

RESTAURANT / LOOK‐OUT TRANSIT CENTER

NEW TRANSIT BRIDGE

OPERA

135

BIOMEDICAL LABORATORY PROGRAM: TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE ‐  220,000 sf AUDITORIUM  CAFE    EXHIBIT SPACE  LIBRARY

6,000 sf 3,000 sf 5,000 sf 10,000 sf

LABORATORY  EDUCATION  OFFICE    OTHER

110,000 sf 50,00 sf 15,000 sf 20,000 sf

ELEVATIONS

FLOOR PLANS LAB

COMMON CORE

NINTH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN

LAB

TEACHING  LAB

COMMON

WEST ELEVATION SCALE 1:80

NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 1:80

CORE

LIBRARY

THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN

AUDITORIUM

ENTRY

CORE

EXHIBIT

FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN CAFE

EAST ELEVATION SCALE 1:80

SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1:80 136

EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE LOOKING FROM THE CENTRAL PLAZA TOWARDS THE BIOMEDICAL LABORATORY 137

SECTIONS LAB

EDUCATION AUDITORIUM

NORTH / SOUTH SITE SECTION MECH

MECH COMMON LAB

LAB CORE

CORE EDUCATION

EDUCATION EXHIBIT / CAFE

AUDITORIUM

EAST / WEST SITE SECTION

PRECEDENT STUDIES

THE GETTY RICHARD MEIER

THE ALHAMBRA GRANADA, SPAIN 138

TERRENCE DONNELLY CENTER FOR  CELLULAR & BIOMOLECULAR RESEARCH BEHNISCH & BEHNISCH

IRCAM RENZO PIANO

PERSPECTIVES

EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE LOOKING FROM WATER AVENUE

INTERIOR PERSPECTIVE LOOKING FROM CAFE

139

140

OMSI Biomedical Research Laboratory and Master Plan Site Aerial

North Elevation

University of Oregon

Architecture Masters Program Winter 2009

141

Professor Lindley

Danielle Meyers

Composition Studies

OMSI is looking towards expanding their footprint to twenty-five acres and designing a science campus in the upcoming future. They have established a vision for their future science campus, which encompasses four main goals: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Creating a center for excellence Create a community destination Increase revenue generation Create a center for sustainability.

OMSI is in a diverse neighborhood of industrial, commercial and residential along the Willamette River. In the next few years, the site will increase in its diversity through the addition of streetcar lines and the transit bridge. As a result, OMSI will have the opportunity to extend their educational services to a greater population. This opportunity can be reached with a construction of a science campus, creating an identity for OMSI and southeast Portland. The science campus will include an education piece added onto OMSI, a science laboratory and supporting buildings and landscape. Many large developments in Portland are islands as a result of their design and or their placement. OMSI and its future twenty-five acres is in the same situation, only they can draw the public into their space with the result of a responsive design.Upon entering the island-like site, the proposed landscape, built form, and flowing topical forms frame the cone of imagination toward OMSI and the river. The site is sloped to allow for views from the top of the site down to the water as well as for storm water runoff to the river. Whether entering by mass transit, automobile or on foot, upon approaching the site, the individual will be greeted with this view. A large canopy funnels the site inward before the view expels further. The idea behind the landscape and gathered importance toward the river is to create an identity for this campus and develop a groundscape and roofscape that is exposed on the exterior, but leads the imagination to its inside body as the eye circulates the site. As an example, many romantic European towns are composed of a series of buildings molded together over time, leading along a path and slowly the eye is focused on an arched entry in a building with a hint of relief at the other end. As the person walks closer toward the arch, the view of a plaza on the other side is revealed and upon arrival of the plaza, the sky opens up and relief is accomplished, resulting in a deep breath of satisfaction and accomplishment by the person experiencing this change. Likewise, the OMSI plan serves to appropriately replicate this series of feelings. The groundscape and roofscape draw the eye and foot in with a visual point of focus as they arrive from either bridge (West) or the transit stops, parking lot and streets (North, East, South). While the eye is lured in with curiosity, the form will seem strangely familiar as it responds to environmental issues such as the angle of the sun, wind pattern, sensitivity to water runoff and protection from the elements. The site plan for the new OMSI campus integrates this greater contextual population, which will include scientists, faculty, students, families and other public members all reaching the site via the plethora of transit options. The plan attempts to make the approach to the campus simple by integrating spaces for automobiles, streetcar, bus, light rail, bikes and pedestrians and even water craft. The site celebrates arrival through this rich integration and welcomes all in through a series of landscaped and built forms. Visitors easily navigate the space through a series of axes ultimately leading to OMSI and the river. The landscaped pieces include grassy and paved walkways, covered canopies, bioswales, a boardwalk and water deck. The planned builds a dialogue between different programs, arrival forms, and focusing on views such as the river, downtown and Mount Hood. The plan will support OMSIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s four goals. 142

The site selection for the specific science laboratory design was chosen animate four personal goals I identified that would assist in OMSIâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s goals: creating an identity for OMSI, innovation, public education and connection with the community. A new state of the art science laboratory that is responsive to OMSI and Portland/Oregon values will establish an identity for the new campus as well as for the east side. The building is nestled between the new bridge, streetcar line, river and existing OMSI and as a result of its location, height and form; it will create a strong and welcoming identity for OMSI. The heightened location will serve as a focal point to show off how buildings can be designed innovatively, and especially that laboratory buildings can be as innovative as the work going on inside the building. Elements such as sun, rain and materials will be considered in the design of this building. Public education will be achieved through its innovative and sustainable design features, such as solar collection, through its location having an obvious presence. In addition, the program will include spaces such as classrooms, teaching laboratories and a cafĂŠ/bar to hold public lectures. Lastly, the building will serve to connect to the community as its location will create ease of access to the integrated sequence of indoor and outdoor spaces. The public spaces, mostly on the ground floor will serve to create a constant livelihood to the campus.

Site Plan with First Floor 143

Case Study of Trusses: Portland Airport

The building is laid out according to at 25â&#x20AC;&#x2122; x 30â&#x20AC;&#x2122; grid in order to accommodate the lab layout. As a result, the building structure is internally load dominated, allowing for the skin to become more playful. The building placement takes advantage of a large amount of southern exposure. Consequently, the form of the building curves back to allow for optimal solar gain. The southern facade is covered with a pattern of pv fuel cells that vary in density. They serve to collect sun for energy support of the building and to shade the spaces inside. The highest concentration of the fuel cells will be at most horizonatl portion of the facade, most likely in the area of the June 21st sun angle. The lower levels will have more vision glass to serve the view of the public spaces and because its location is not as optimal for solar gain.

Section displaying the auditorium and office layout

Section showing different programatic spaces, the entrance atrium and truss system to support skin and the set back floor plates to allow for maximum solar penetration 144

Studies of potential solar gain using PV fuel cells as solar collectors 145

Looking from second floor into the library

Second Floor

A section looking into the main entrance atrium space

Third Floor 146

Case Study of Storm Water Treatment: Water Pollution Control Laboratory, Portland West Elevation

Case Study of Canopies: Gehryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Serpentine Canopy East Elevation

Case Study of PV Window System: Lillis Builidng, Eugene

Case Study of Water Wall: Expo 2008, Spain

South Elevation 147

148

OMSI - Biomedical Research Building University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Ted Mitchner 149

OMSI - Biomedical Research Building Portland, OR OMSI’s new research building stands at the front door of a new nexus of transportation in Portland. The building’s form combines OMSI’s mission to enliven science and industry with the curvilinearity of nearby elevated freeways and the industrial character of the central eastside. The floors curve and connect like the building’s other prominent neighbor, the Marquam Bridge, but these interior corridors are reserved for pedestrian traffic and encourage chance encounters of people on the move. The tower form announces OMSI’s expansion to the city and also serves environmental goals by providing for daylighting and energy efficiencies of vertical stacking of labs.The premium views and facilities serve to entice top researchers and generate revenue for OMSI, a non-profit institution.

Process drawings

Site photos showing Marquam Bridge

150

Parking structure

Figure-ground

OMSI expansion and new entrance

Water retention pond

Low-rise office

Solar panel array Restaurant and retail pavilion Fountain and bicycle ramp

Overall site plan 1â&#x20AC;? = 100â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

1:2000

151

Key to sections and plans

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cross section 1/64” = 1’0”

Library 6,000 sq. ft. Auditorium 277 seats Backstage/storage 1,000 Reception 6,700 Lobby 1,400 Café 1,300 Exhibition 3,275 Loading dock 800 Restrooms Mezzanine walkway Skybridge to parking Classrooms 3,400 Executive offices 1,100 Open office 1,600 Administrative offices 1,251 Conference rooms 2,270 Lounge 1,600 Rooftop terrace 1,800 Research labs 4,000/floor Lab support 1,200/floor Linear equipment room 2,300/floor Break room 500/floor Large conference 500-800 each

12 2

19 Exterior perspectives

Longitudinal section

10 3 152

8 3

2 2 12 1 4 11 9

Ground floor plan 1/64” = 1’0”

Mezzanine 1/64” = 1’0”

14 15

21 20

17 Third floor 1/64” = 1’0”

Lab floor A 1/64” = 1’0”

153

Lab floor B 1/64” = 1’0”

Interior perspectives of skybridge entrance, mezzanine walkway and exhibit space

West elevation 1” = 40’ 0”

East elevation 1” = 40’ 0”

154

Model photos

North elevation 1” = 40’ 0”

West elevation 1” = 40’ 0”

155

156

OMSI Campus + Biomed Lab Design

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Kevin Montgomery 157

View from OMSI Square

OMSI Campus + Biomed Lab Design Portland, OR Storyline

Analysis

Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (OMSI) is one of the top ten science museums in the nation and is continually seeking to grow and expand the opportunities for everyone to learn about math and science. OMSI has had several different locations here in Portland, but has settled well into its current location on the east side of the Willamette River off of Water Avenue, an area that has long been an industrial neighborhood. Existing buildings have been renovated and added to, to reach OMSI’s current facility, but OMSI is once again looking to expand. Recently having acquired several acres to the south of their site, OMSI wishes to both expand its museum facilities by adding exhibit space and learning classrooms as well as develop the rest of the land into a math and science campus with buildings supporting a variety of science programs. An exciting part of this campus is the two new forms of trimet planned for future development running adjacent to the OMSI property. A new streetcar and lightrail lines will put the area in the spotlight of the east side of Portland.

Site Lines

Site Section Concept

Building Section Concept

In developing a master plan for OMSI there is a necessary attention to how OMSI will strengthen its identity while developing a fun and very sustainable campus. A key to the plan shown starts at the point where streetcar and lightrail meet. Combined the two could deliver as many as 400 visitors every 15 minutes. Although this would be rare, there are hopes that public transportation becomes a main form of transit for visitors, and so there must be a strong connection from the stop location to OMSI. This connection path would become the front yard or mall of the campus, a large linear green space that gradually slopes to OMSI and the river. This space would be identified in three segments, the machine (west end), the body (middle lawn), and the environment (east end) each landmarked by a sculpture piece that represents different aspects of Science. Here visitors could not only learn from the outdoor exhibits and relax but also filter into the other new buildings that may hold shops, restaurants, offices, and even housing. At the bottom of the mall would be OMSI’s new addition, this new piece expands from the southern half all the way to the river where underwater learning labs and exhibits could be held. As it stretches to the river it would lift off the ground forming a gateway underneath to lead one to the waterfront entrance of the museum. Just before the passage there would be a public square that balances the public avenue with the transit square that would exist at the eastern end of the mall where the trains unload. The square near OMSI would be a place for presentations, concerts, and where the field trip students eat lunch. To the south of the square would sit a sunken auditorium sitting within a reflecting pool that acts as a water retention space for the campus. The sloped green roof of the auditorium would also act as seating for large events held at the square. This OMSI square would be the focal point of the view onto campus from the eastbound max as it turns and riders are able to see north. From the square visitors can either continue under the OMSI addition onto the outstretching mall which forms a new pier, or relax in a park that will continue the green spaces of campus down to the water. One building in this master plan is a bioresearch laboratory. The facility would have not only labs but also classrooms, a library, dining facilities, and several other public spaces. This building is placed just to the north of the new Max line, with the new mall to its south. These paths squeeze the building into its linear form, which is also ideal for sustainable strategies. Allowing for clear sight lines from the transit square to OMSI, the primary tower is shaped into a wedge. A smaller piece is added to the east, this piece floats above the buildings “patio” space which is an extension of the Transit square. This would tie to the green space of the mall and transit square connected pedestrian paths to building nodes. This raised portion of building would be held by tension members and be an example of modern engineering and icon to the campus. On the lower few levels the public spaces would open to each other through multistory spaces, views and circulation paths. After passing from open space and into the heavier core from the entry visitors emerge into the first floor commons that is open to the second and third floor. Above, researchers will work in the most advanced lab spaces available that are organized to promote collaboration and take advantage of daylighting. The lower half of lab floors have balconies off of central lounges while the upper floors share a multistory patio on the west end overlooking the river. The unique skin on the building was designed to protect upper balcony spaces while still allowing daylighting and views, and interact with the mall space as users pass by. To accomplish these goals the system is divided on an angled grid reflecting the tensile structure into three parts. There would be a mix of PV panels, metal screen panels and void spaces, as the PV cells charge the system the panels would across the grid to protect different spaces or frame different views, this movement and the use of lighting would engage the surrounding outdoor spaces. All of the interior spaces are designed to use daylighiting, passive heating and cooling whenever possible, and use a minimal amount of energy which some of can hopefully be provided by the buildings on-site energy production, south facing PV cells. Lastly, with a large footprint the building will be designed to capture and use its own rainwater and treat much of its own waste on campus. Overall, the building hopes to push the envelope on green building design and at the same time strengthen the identity of the newly formed OMSI campus, making it an exciting destination for people all over the country. 158

Site Plan 1â&#x20AC;? = 100â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Campus Design - New Identity of a Math + Science Campus - Set Example for Sustainable Campus Design - Connect OMSI to new Transit - Expand OMSI to River - Create Strong Site Lines to Guide Visitors - Use Outdoor Space to Merge Visitors and Researchers 159

Offices

Support Lab

Green Building Strategies

Classrooms Conferences

Library Exhibition

Energy Conservation through Sealed Program HVAC Energy Production on Site w/ PV cells Water Collection and Reuse Site Water Treatment Daylighting and Natural Ventilation

Skin - Protect Upper Balconies - Frame Views - Interact w/ Campus Mall The Innovative Moving Skin that wraps much of the building is a pattern that is rotated to reflect the tension structure behind the east wing and is filled in with either PV cell panels, a Perforated metal screen, or is left open. The openings and Solar Power allow the system to move and adapt to needs of the building.

Program

Circulation

Patio

View From Transit Stop

Lounges

Circulation + Collaboration Spaces

Structure 160

View from MAX

161

4-7 Lab Floors 1” = 80’

2nd Floor 1” = 80’

Program

N / S Building Section

The main entry is to the east facing the transit square with a cafe just inside. The first 3 floors hold civic and educational spaces with a more formal restaurant on the lower level. The 4 floor is the first lab floor but also holds the Administrative spaces to the east. Floors 5-10 are purely lab, support, and offices with lounges and patios mixed in.

View from West river bank

162

View in 1st Floor Commons

163

164

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Todd Palmer 165

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR Storyline Oregonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Museum of Science and Industry has a long history in the Portland area and continues to aspire to create a strong connection not only with OHSU, PCC and PSU but also the surrounding community. With the addition of the transit stop on the OMSI campus, there is a incredible opportunity to finally create this community node and an educational/ science district. As a result, the transit stop it celebrated with large glass canopies to established the transit stop as a destination. Upon arrival visitors will realize they have reached the OMSI campus and a special area of the city. Setting the building back from the southern edge of the campus, the connection between the transit stop and OMSI is framed by the new biomedical research laboratory and the line of trees that defines the plaza. The new public plaza complements OMSI, the new research laboratory, and the surrounding neighbors. The plaza creates a unique public space where people can gather, enjoy the east riverbank, and experience unique views of the new Trimet bridge, Portland and the South Waterfront. In addition to the creation of a public node, the plaza allows OMSI to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability through the use a extensive water catchment and treatment features that help with storm water management while also creating a necessary focal point for the plaza. The large waterfront terrace creates an essential anchor for the east esplanade as well as an opportunity to revitalize the existing riparian zone. The new biomedical research laboratory is a direct response to the site criteria and aims to improve the overall visual and physical connection with the new OMSI entrance. The ground floor directly relates to the site around it by creating a large interior public space adjacent to the plaza. The public program elements neighboring the lobby space extend through a series of planes into the large space. The result is a sequence of common spaces that relate to the larger public lobby. The lab floors are designed with a variety of common areas to encourage collaboration and a sense of community among the employees. Additionally, the crown of the lobby space is a large roof terrace that acts as a large common space for all the laboratory employees. The treatment of the skin is a reaction to create a campus feeling from working with existing OMSI materials. The OMSI brick anchors the corners of the building and the glass curtain wall expresses the modern and scientific research that occurs within the building. Overall, the the design aims to build a sense of community on all scales of the projects; beginning with the urban scale and filtering down to the campus scale and into the building plan. Process Drawings from Term 166

Overall Site Plan Scale 1”= 100’ 167

BUILDING SECTIONS

Aerial of Site

View toward OMSI entrance

View from Trimet Stop

West - EastWest Section - East Section Scale 1”= 40’-0” Scale 1”= 40’-0” 168 Final Physical Model

North - South Section Scale 1”= 40’-0” 169

Typical Lab Floor (Floors 5-12) Roof Terrace Scale : 1”= 80’-0”

FLOOR PLANS Total Square Footage: 260,000 sq.ft.

View from Lobby Space

Auditorium: 8,000 sq. ft. Eshibition: 3,000 sq. ft. Education: 12,000 sq.ft Library: 13,000 sq. ft. Common Space: 23,000 sq. ft.

Laboratory Office Suite: 10,000 sq.ft. Research Offices/ Laboratories: 156,000 sq.ft. Other: 35,000 sq.ft.

Fourth Floor Plan Scale : 1”= 80’-0”

Third Floor Plan Scale : 1”= 80’-0”

Second Floor Plan Scale : 1”= 80’-0”

Ground Floor Plan Scale : 1”= 80’-0”

View Looking onto Library Common Area

Diagram - Extension of Program into Lobby Space

170

South Elevation : Scale: 1”= 60’-0”

East Elevation : Scale: 1”= 60’-0”

171 North Elevation : Scale: 1”= 60’-0”

West Elevation : Scale: 1”= 60’-0”

172

OMSI - Biomedical Research Center University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Chitra Prabhakar 173

OMSI - Biomedical Research Center Portland, OR BACKGROUND: OMSI is proposing the development of 24 acres of land around the well known museum on the Waterfront, possibly relocating Water Avenue. A steep rise in the number of visitors is expected as the new streetcar and light rail stops will fall within walking distance to OMSI. The proposed changes to the site envision a “science quad” with PCC on the north and OHSU and PSU on the west. The new Bio-medical research center on the OMSI campus is intended to expand and bridge the museum’s science and educational programs. CONCEPT: Under the proposed design, the existing entrance to OMSI on Water Avenue will become a secondary entrance as new entry nodes are introduced on the waterfront. Paved campus routes for bicycle and pedestrians will connect various buildings within the campus. The proposed site plan incorporates a large open green space as a public spill out and hang-out space. The green path which connects the transportation hubs and directs people towards OMSI will be a pedestrian highway which finally meets the Greenway. An inner private green space connects and establishes movement within the campus and will also provide common space for researchers and staff of the various facilities. This space can be used for exhibitions and other outdoor activities. The proposed bio-medical research center will be a model in sustainability. The building will demonstrate various sustainable techniques such as roof gardens for water collection and water recycling, PV’s for generating energy, shading device to reduce the use of mechanical systems, use of sustainable building materials and proper zoning of different spaces. The building is designed as two separate blocks connected through an atrium. The lab floors are all stacked together in one block as they demand special floor to floor height, separate mechanical systems and extensive security. Other public and semi public spaces are staked together in a second block. Zoning of different spaces for the research center are based on public, semi public and secure zones. Library, Auditorium and exhibition space will be on the ground floor as these are more public oriented spaces. An informal café allows for the exhibition and auditorium users to spill-out into the green outdoor space. The next 2 floors are designed to be classrooms, offices and conference rooms. The offices are designed to face the waterfront so as to provide better view. The upper floors are designed to be lab floors which are more private and secure areas looking out to Mt. Hood. 174

Overall Site Plan Scale 1”= 100’ 175

Transverse Section

176

Longitudinal Section

South Elevation

North Elevation

East Elevation

177

West Elevation

FLOOR PLANS Total Square Footage: 315,000 sq. Auditorium: 10,000 sq. ft. Exhibition: 4,000 sq. ft. Education: 20,000 sq. ft. Library: 35,000 sq. ft Cafe: 10,000 sq. ft. Office Suites: 20,000 sq. ft. Common Spaces: 25,000 sq. ft. Lab/ Offices: 160,000 sq. ft. Other: 30,000 sq. ft. Fifth Floor Plan

Ground Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

178

Site Section 1

Site Section 2

179

180

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Stephanie Rinehart 181

OMSI -Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR The Oregon Museum of Science & Industry site has the potential of becoming of having a strong campus in conjunction with the growing Portland State campus, Oregon Health & Science University campus, and Portland Community College, completing the Science & Technology Quarter. OMSI has a strong vision, which is going to be carried through the biomedical building, and throughout the rest of the campus. This building will help to strengthen this area as a campus for learning, which will continue to educate the public about science, technology, industry, and stimulate the ideas for living sustainably. OMSI’s goal is to create a carbon-neutral campus and to pursue the latest ideas in energy conservation and clean power. OMSI plans to showcase their green science and technology in hopes to inspire people to practice their own “green” living. The synergy between the OMSI expansion and the proposed biomedical building is crucial. The OMSI site is located adjacent to the Portland Opera, an industrial area, and a residential neighborhood. The growth of the OMSI site is capable of reinvigorating the area and growing as an education and technology campus. Having a major transportation hub is important for the campus as well as the neighborhood. With the addition of the new transportation it will be the only campus out of the four that is readily accessible by public transportation from the other three campuses. The biomedical building has a prominent location on the sight of this campus. It has strong visual connections with PSU, OHSU, and as you enter the site from across the river. It is between the existing OMSI building, the proposed OMSI education expansion, and the Portland Opera. The entry-level of the lab building has a café, exhibition space, and a lecture room/auditorium that shall be easily accessible to OMSI, the Portland Opera and people visiting the campus. The building will also be designed sustainably and have some of these systems on display for the general public. One feature shall be the Living Machine. This will be the primary system for converting black-water to grey-water for the offices and administrative portion of the building.

182

Education Expansion

183

LIVING MACHINE 01 ANAEROBIC REACTOR

The underground Anaerobic tanks serve as receiving basins of waste from the building’s toilets.

02 CLOSED AEROBIC REACTOR

The underground Closed Aerobic tanks reside together but are seperated by a partition. Here, dissoled oxygen concentrations are being monitored.

03 OPEN AEROBIC REACTORS

The Open Aerobic tanks harbor a diverse array of tropical plants within the greenhouse.

04 CLARIFIER

The Clarifier pumps recycled sludge to the beginning of the flow pathway. Goldfish that inhabit the tank serve as biological indicators of ecosystem health.

05 CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS

Clear supernatant from the Clarifier spills into the Marsh Influent sump. A portion of the planted gravel floor flanked by raised walkways.

06 STORAGE, DISINFECTION, REUSE

Water from the gravel bed enters the Effluent sump where it is held in a storage tank. When needed for flush water, it is sent throught the UV filter.

Other sustainable features to be on display include: roof garden(s) and storm water retention, via bioswales, in the exterior common area. Water and green space are a major theme for the future of OMSI. Being located on the river gives opportunity for great views across the river. Also, the first floor opens up to the green space between the building and the river. This creates a more welcoming frontage for the lab building, and creates fluidity between the indoor and outdoor space. From this the first floor is public and very accessible, the second floor is semi-public and has the educational program, as well as the library that is situated to have a great view to the river, and the floors above are private and house the labs, support spaces, and offices. A Center of Excellence: Intends on expanding its current educational programs and act as a pipeline for highly motivated students from diverse backgrounds to move on to Oregon’s higher education institution or into careers in industry.  Strengthening the Science & Technology Quarter  Accessible by public transportation from adjacent campuses  Furthering lab education  Tours and education on sustainable design practices and ways to incorporate those values into everyday lives. A Community Destination: A place for the public engagement around today’s critical global issues, such as climate change and degradation of wildlife habitats, and local issues, such as storm water runoff and transportation.  Public transportation hub  Water and green space strongly incorporated throughout campus A Center for Sustainability: Designed to be a carbon-neutral campus and as a center for public education through demonstrations of alternative energy systems and techniques; use of innovative and appropriate technologies to solve problems; and opportunities for public dialog on science policy.  Classrooms and lecture/auditorium space for public education.  Displays of constructed wetlands, bioswales, the living machine, roof gardens, and solar energy A Revenue Generator: To support OMSI’s educational mission and build financial strength  Additional amenities such as a workout facility, bookstore, retail, coffee shop, restaurants, etc.  Furthering the idea of a destination spot for adjacent neighborhood  Reinvigorating the industrial area 184

185

FLOOR PLANS

First floor: Exhibition Space - 1.870 sf Auditorium - 3,795 sf Office - 1,619 sf Cafe - 1,200 sf Second floor: Office/Library - 5,040 sf Education Laboratory - 5,394 sf Typical floor (3-10): Laboratory - 70,095 sf Office/Administration - 7,068 sf

ROOF GARDEN LIVING MACHINE

CONFERENCE ROOMS

BACK OF HOUSE

EXHIBITION

OFFICES

ADMIN

COLLAB AREA OPEN

OPEN

COLLAB AREA COLLAB AREA

OFFICE

OFFICES

AUDITORIUM

OPEN LABORATORIES

Typical Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

OPEN TO BELOW

OFFICES

RAINWATER HARVESTING

OFFICES COLLAB AREA

OPEN LIBRARY

OPEN OPEN OFFICES OPEN EDUCATION LABORATORY

GREEN ROOF

Roof Plan

Second Floor Plan 186

Front Elevation

East Elevation

Back Elevation

West Elevation 187

188

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Mark Schmidt 189

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR Storyline Approaching the biomedical research facility for a new expanded OMSI campus, a few driving themes emerged. First, that the project will embody the spirit of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, drawing interesting correlations even in the name, science and industry. Portland is divided by the Willamette River developing into two very distinct sides. The west side has long been the home of OHSU and PSU. Science and education dominate the topography of this side of the river. The eastside is dominated by a blue collar industrial district and warehouses that line the rivers edge. It is interesting to notice how the industrial quality of the eastside can be dismisses and overlooked by the Westside evident by the bridges that cross the river touch land nearly 200 ft. east of the shoreline well beyond the industrial zone. A traveler passes over the area without really noticing it. This project embraces the industrial past, a heritage that created the foundations of OMSI. There will be an opportunity to celebrate the confluence of streetcar and light rail by creating a meeting place where the visitors access transit. This is very important to the eastside because by bringing the streetcar eastward it also brings permanence and reliability to the industrial district. So far the only streetcar lines have been developed along the western side. This is an opportunity to create a visual acknowledgement of this very important meeting point. A large glass covered arcaded archway that covers the light rail and streetcar stops sets this stop apart in that no other stops in the city have this station type or attention to detail. The OMSI transit station will provide an experience similar to entering Grand Central Station in New York for the first time but on a more modest and technological scale.

Process Drawings

190

Overall Site Plan Scale 1”= 100’

191

Visitors and employees will be greeted by a large central courtyard that opens up to the waterfront. The courtyard paving patterns are shaped by tangential curves that radiate from the new OMSI entrance. Additional landscaping and site water features are carved along the same pattern creating the illusion of being drawn into the entrance. OMSI, having an entrance on the northern side, would have a more elegant entrance on this side, one that greets the landscape and acknowledges sustainability in a conspicuous educational fashion as well as an image of beauty.

Concept Diagram

The new biomedical building would be somewhat of a contrast. In a celebration of the Industrial past certain materials would be prominent such as exposed cor-ten steel and concrete. These materials generate a sense of haptic relation to its past. The entrance to the building has a large glass atrium that floats above the ground and turned on its axis to gesture the OMSI entrance and the waterfront. The atrium is a main circulation connecter for the building where subsequent catwalks meander their way though the elevated portions of the space. In order to incorporate the sustainable quality of this building, hanging gardens float within the atrium space turning it into a virtual extruded greenhouse. Another significant space and destination is the library and reading space that is cantilevered above the courtyard. The simple rectangular form of the library reaches out to the courtyard displaying the far reaching goals of the research that is developing within the building. This space is a public and private place where visitors can occupy the cantilevered space but allow for private educational uses as well

View from Streetcar Stop

192 Stairway Collaboration S pace

Catwalk in Atrium

193 Main Entrance

Ground floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Second floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Third floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Building Plans and Sections

mechanical

Typical lab floor plan (floors 5-10) Scale 1”=80’

East - West Section Scale 1”=80’

194

mechanical

North - South Section Scale 1”=80’

West Elevation Scale 1”=60’

East Elevation Scale 1”=60’

South Elevation Scale 1”=60’

195

North Elevation Scale 1”=60’

196

OMSI - Bio-Med Research Lab University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 584 - Winter 09 • Professor Lindley • Drew Suljak 197

OMSI - Bio-Med Research Lab Portland, OR

SITE The site for the new OMSI campus sits on the east bank of the Willamette. It has views to Mt. Hood to the east, and OHSU as well as downtown Portland to the west. It is additionally the site of 2 new transit lines, one which will require the construction of a new bridge over the river. The buildup of the OMSI campus will hopefully build a strong relationship with the cross-river campuses of PSU and OHSU, as well as PCC on the east side. The surrounding site is mostly industrial, but with this addition, OMSI is given the opportunity to both engage and help develop the surrounding neighborhoods.

SECTION LABORATORY

GREEN In an effort to display OMSI as a frontrunner in scientific research, one of the priorities was to have as little impact on the environment as possible in building this lab, this is done by harvesting all the available natural resources. The green roof acts as a way of drawing natural light into the offices and the corridor as well as the long corridor of the lab itself. Oversized for air-flow, the space inside the atrium is designed to draw air through the offices in the summer and create natural ventilation. The south wall on the lab block has opportunities of both PV panels on the break room wall, and solar gain on the west side. Every roof is designed to capture rainfall and either use it inside the building or over it through the campus bioswale.

198

SECTION EAST

SECTION SOUTH

ELEVATION SOUTH

ELEVATION EAST 199

ELEVATION NORTH

ELEVATION WEST

DESIGN LEVEL 5-9

LEVEL 4

LEVEL 2

LEVEL 1

The design intent of the laboratory was not that of only function, but additionally that of drawing interest. The design was to draw the public in, encourage interaction, and allow the building not to be a fortress as much as a display case for science. This transparency was created in accenting the special places of the building; the atrium, the exhibit space, and the library, as well as allows the program on the more private floors to be expressed on the exterior. The break rooms for the labs tie in with the language of the buildings core, and that of the north facing conference rooms, and the 3rd floor reads as an uninterrupted mechanical floor to service the lab. Allowing the building to read from the exterior makes the building more accessible, maximizing its usage and utility. The form of the lab was inspired by the human eye. In all of scientific research, the purpose of a lab is to have space to observe nature, looking for changes in temperature, alteration, state changes, or any sort of abnormality. A laboratory is a space for watching, with rigorous testing, and highly cal brated instruments life and its many mysteries. Laboratories are society’s way of telling nature “we’re watching.” 200

LIBRARY

201

EXHIBIT SPACE

SPACES CIRCULATION

RESEARCHERS. The spaces created in between the labs are as important if not more so than the labs themselves. Across the industry, labs and lab designers are looking to increase collaboration among its scientists, because new directions are found in other fields and focuses. Making these interactions occur, however, is a difficult task. In trying to design with collaboration in mind, the circulation was funneled into one main path of travel, break rooms were placed on every other floor and small, intimate spaces were placed into the floor plan to allow for a few scientists to chat with one another. Spaces in the atrium, office core, and library were designed with the goal of creating a useable space for researchers to leave their benches and work and create with others, without having to go very far.

VERTICAL CIRCULATION

LABORATORY

PUBLIC. The spaces for public usage are kept to the first few floors. The library, exhibit space and auditorium are on the first and second floors, where the public offices are on the second and third, essentially drawing a public/private line above the third floor. This makes visits easier, and allows a level of privacy for the researchers while still being connected through the atrium. The intent is for the atrium to allow the visitors to observe the researchers without disruption.

MECHANICAL

202

OFFICE CORE

LABORATORY

203

BREAK ROOM STAIR

204

Schematic Design Elizabeth Delorme Cyrus Dorosti Bill Kirkwood Josh Kolberg Kathryn Martenson Danielle Meyers Ted Mitchner Kevin Montgomery Todd Palmer Chitra Probhakar Stephanie Rinehart Mark Schmidt Drew Suljak 205

Elizabeth Delorme Biomedical Laboratory Create a community destination through physical and visual connections to surrounding areas emphasize axes through site Education Path - design functional science/technology education paths as the campusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; way finding Use local materials and Northwest regional design - landscape, open, light filled, disciplined in pland and section, environmental needs and priorities

Form expresses Garden - Entry - Path

Create a new main entrance to OMSI to be able to communicate with the campus

Sun and water collection creates a unique walking space

East/West section 206

Site Design Scale 1’ = 200’ 207

208

209

Bill Kirkwood OMSI Biomedical Research Building Two buildings create a threshold entering the OMSI site from the new public transit stops. The courtyard doubles as a water treatment center, leading scientists, students, teachers and the general public through the new biomedical reasearch facilities. Photovoltaics will be utilized on the light shelf shading system utilized on the southern facade of the main laboratory building helping maintain an easily controlled environment on the interior of the laboratory building.

210

211

Josh Kolberg Schematic Design - OMSI Biomedical Research Design Studio - Winter 2009 Development of an Urban Science Park that Inspires Wonder. Urban in that it is of the city, Science in that the primary programatic goal is science research, Park that is pays attention to sustainability, and that the project helps to Inspire Wonder for OMSI guests and employees. Taking full advantage of the transit investment, providing a Gateway to OMSI, and enhancing the prime riverfront real estate.

212

WATER OMSI MAIN ENTRANCE

AV E

SERVICE

PARKING

STREET CAR STATION

CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT

PARKING

LIGHT RAIL STATION

OMSI SITE PLAN SCALE: 1” = 200’

PORTLAND OPERA

ARCH 584 - Josh Kolberg

213

OMSI EXPANSION & BIOMEDICAL LABORATORY SCHEMATIC DESIGN

PERSPECTIVE

“INTERSECTION OF PLACES” EARLY PROCESS DIAGRAMS

LABORATORY FLOOR PLAN

Arch 584 ‐ Kathryn Martenson 214

SECTION

215

DANIELLE MEYERS BIOMEDICAL LABORATORY PORTLAND, OREGON

OMSI, the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry is looking foward to the development of a new science campus as they are expanding into the 25 acres surrounding them in the near future. OMSI is developing a science campus, which will include a biomedical laboratory building that integrates public uses such as a cafe, learning classrroms and laboratories, exhibit spaces, library, conference rooms and an auditiorium. The private areas are laboratory spaces and living spaces for the scientists. OMSI has four main goals they aspire to accomplish with their future science campus: creating a center for excellence, creating a community destination, increased revenue generation and a center for sustainability. The remaining of the site will include the addition of an educational building, mixed use buildings, landscaping, parking, a public transit bridge coming in from across the Willamette, and a streetcar line. The site will become a mecca of transit and science education and laboraties. The biomedical building is approximately 250,000 square feet.

North

East

South

West

North/South Section East Portion

North/South Section West Portion

216

ARCH 548 - Danielle Meyers

Site Plan 1:200

217

OMSI BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH BUILDING TED MITCHNER

Site perspective Lab floor plan 1:100

Third floor plan 1:100

First floor plan 1:100

Mezzanine floor plan 1:100

218

Site plan 1:100 219

OMSI CAMPUS + BIOMEDICAL LAB KEVIN MONTGOMERY

Key concepts of the site design focus on creating an identity for a new math and science campus, while focusing on the existing museum and its connection to the new transit stops. This new connecting axis forms the campus mall and leaves a triangular site where the biomedical lab building sits. Interesting forms and materials support the idea of a math and science learning experience.

View from Max Square

Schematic Section

Site Plan Connection Axis

1st Floor Common Space 220

Site Plan 1” = 100” 221

OMSI BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY SCHEMATIC DESIGN

View from Trimet Stop

View from Lobby Space

Aerial of Site

View from New Trimet Bridge Site Plan ‐ 1”=100’

Arch 584 ‐ Todd Palmer

222

223

OMSI BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY SCHEMATIC DESIGN

Site Plan

Arch 584 - Chitra Prabhakar 224

225

OMSI BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY SCHEMATIC DESIGN Perspective facing west

Second Floor Plan

Third - Seventh Floor Plans

Entries along water

Campus connectivity

Fluid spaces

Building Section in Site Facing East

ARCH 584 - Stephanie Rinehart

226

SITE PLAN with First Floor NTS

227

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR

Mark Schmidt Schematic design progress Second floor plan

Site entrance perspective

North - South Section

Courtyard perspective

Lab floor plan

228 East - West Section

Overall site plan Scale: 1” = 100’ 229

Drew Suljak LAB

OMSI Campus Bio-Med Laboratory

1 A2.2

STOR

Using the metaphor of an eye, the building was to express science as a way of observing nature. The lab spaces themselves face east and west, capturing the mountains and the city skyline, respectively. It is placed on the eastern edge of the campus in hopes to anchor the campus, allowing its presence to be made from across the Willammette, and create a space for the inner campus to develop. The intent to build a greenspace along the view corridor towards the river has always been the design, but the masterplan has continued to developed.

Level 12 184' - 0" Level 11 168' - 0" Level 10 152' - 0" Level 9 136' - 0" Level 8 120' - 0" Level 7 104' - 0" Level 6 88' - 0" Level 5 72' - 0" Level 4 56' - 0" Level 3 40' - 0"

STOR

LOUNGE

OFFICE 1 A2.2

STOR

LAB LAB 1 A2.3

1 A2.1

Level 2 20' - 0" Level 1 0"

Upper Floors Section: North

CHANGING

Level 12 184' - 0" Level 11 168' - 0" Level 10 152' - 0" Level 9 136' - 0" Level 8 120' - 0" Level 7 104' - 0" Level 6 88' - 0" Level 5 72' - 0" Level 4 56' - 0" Level 3 40' - 0"

EXHIBIT

AUDITORIUM PREFUNCTION

1 A2.2

PARKING

ENTRY HALL

A2.1

1 A2.3

SEC.

EXT. COMMONS

ENTRY PLAZA CAFE

Level 2 20' - 0"

Level 1 0"

A2.3

Entry Level

Section: East

230

The idea of a water feature has been a constant element. with opportunities of storm water collection and geothermal usage, plus the opportunity to tie the campus to a central point, the idea of a lake or water feature has always had both an aesthetic purpose and utility. The opportunity is also available to make the systems into a living classroom, allowing patrons of the museum to experience exactly what the lake is doing, how it benefits the environment and the buildings, and how the pieces go together.

231

232

Environmental Control Systems Cyrus Dorosti Mark Schmidt 233

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory

University of Oregon • Architecture Department • ARCH 591 - Winter 09 • Professors Shwer and Bash • Mark Schmidt 234

OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory table of contents: Introduction .................................................................................................... 3 Climate Analysis -sun path .............................................................................. 6 Climate analysis -sun angle ............................................................................. 7 Climate analysis -wind rose ............................................................................. 8 Climate analysis- bioclimatic chart .................................................................. 9 Program analysis - internal of externally loaded ....................................... ......10 Program analysis - building plans and sections.......................................... ......11 Passive systems - cooling ......................................................................... ......12 Passive systems - daylighting and heating................................................ ......13 Natural budgets........................................................................................ ......14 Site water................................................................................................. ......15 Heating and Cooling - zones .................................................................... ......16 Heating and Cooling - calculations ........................................................... ......17 Mechanical systems - the visable past ...................................................... ......18 Mechanical systems - types of systems .................................................... ......19 Vertical transportation ............................................................................. ......20 Plumbing ................................................................................................. ......21 Electrical .................................................................................................. ......22 Crossing the line ...................................................................................... ......23 235

Introduction OMSI - Biomedical Research Laboratory Portland, OR

Square Footage: 266,880 Laboratory building Program: Laboratory suite, Education, Library and Public space

Storyline Approaching the biomedical research facility for a new expanded OMSI campus, a few driving themes emerged. First, that the project will embody the spirit of the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry, drawing interesting correlations even in the name, science and industry. Portland is divided by the Willamette River developing into two very distinct sides. The west side has long been the home of OHSU and PSU. Science and education dominate the topography of this side of the river. The eastside is dominated by a blue collar industrial district and warehouses that line the rivers edge. It is interesting to notice how the industrial quality of the eastside can be dismisses and overlooked by the Westside evident by the bridges that cross the river touch land nearly 200 ft. east of the shoreline well beyond the industrial zone. A traveler passes over the area without really noticing it. This project embraces the industrial past, a heritage that created the foundations of OMSI. There will be an opportunity to celebrate the confluence of streetcar and light rail by creating a meeting place where the visitors access transit. This is very important to the eastside because by bringing the streetcar eastward it also brings permanence and reliability to the industrial district. So far the only streetcar lines have been developed along the western side. This is an opportunity to create a visual acknowledgement of this very important meeting point. A large glass covered arcaded archway that covers the light rail and streetcar stops sets this stop apart in that no other stops in the city have this station type or attention to detail. The OMSI transit station will provide an experience similar to entering Grand Central Station in New York for the first time but on a more modest and technological scale.

Process Drawings

236

Concept Diagram

View from Streetcar Stop

237 Stairway Collaboration S pace

Catwalk in Atrium

238

Main Entrance

June 21

September/ March 21

December 21

Climate Analysis Sun Path Diagram

The image to the right is a sun path diagram overlaid on the proposed site showing the different paths taken by the sun during the solstices and the equinox. The image to the left is the same path overlaid on the buildings ground floor plan. As you can see this building takes a balanced approach to solar orientation due because of programmatic differences requiring different solar needs.

Also notable is that the summer sun path starts in the north east. it follows its way around the southern edge and finally sets in the northwest. In contrast, the low altitude winter sun path rises in the westsouthwest and take a much more gradual path along the sky and sets in the east-southeast. Therefore the southern facade is exposed to the highest amount of solar gain and encourages passive heating stratagies in winter. In the summer the intense sun needs to be diffused by use of shading or louvers so that overheating does not occur. 239

Summer sun angle

Sun angle at Equinox

Climate Analysis Sun Angle Diagram

Depending on the time of the year, the altitude of the sun in the sky changes. In the summer the sun is at it highest at an angle of 70 degrees. In the equinoxâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s it is lower at 45 degrees, and in the winter solstice the sun angle is at it lowest at 22 degrees. The changes in altitude from the seasons have a dramatic impact on daylighting a space. Winter angles penetrate deeper into a space but have high glare. Summer angles have a lower glare but reach less deep into a building. Central atrium spaces that incorporate light wells allow for summer angles to penetrate into the buildings core while in winter are balanced by the incoming low angle light.

240

Winter sun angle

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

Climate Analysis

Key to wind speeds

Wind Rose A wind rose gives detailed information about wind direction and frequency for a year or a portion of a year. The radial bars show the percentage of the time that the wind blows from each direction for various ranges of speeds. Wind direction varies with the time of the year and day. It is important that the wind be evaluated for the periods that natural ventilation is planned. These wind roses compare the wind patterns per month in Portland. The diagram to the right shows the wind pattern for the hottest 120 days from 9 am to 5 pm when the outside temperature is between 68 degrees and 82 degrees (562 hours). What this implies is that in order to incorporate natural ventilation openings in the facade must open out to the north-west. The best possible use would be to orient he entire building to the northwest and allow for the air to travel through it without any need for aid.

241

Bioclimatic chart January February March April May June July August September October November December

A Bioclimatic chart plots the temperature and humidity for a given month. The comfort zone implies an optimum balance of temperature and humidity where no heating or cooling is required for comfort. Excesses in any zone other than the comfort zone imply different stratgies for comfort. For instance this building plots nearly all its numbers below the comfot zone. This tells us that the building is in a consistant heating climate with only a few months out of the year that fall into the comfort zone. Yet as you will see later this building type differs in that it produces so much heat that it keeps itself balanced during the colder winter months

Climate Analysis 9

242

Internal

External

Program Analysis Internal or externally loaded?

Typically laboratory buildings are internally loaded. What that means is that the building is focused more on keeping the internal heating or cooling gains under check. Laboratory buildings create so much heat because of there equipment that much more attention is paid to controlling overheating than heat loss or gain through glazing. Externally loaded buildings are dominated by controlling heating losses gains through the buildings skin. Externally loaded buildings are usually thin buildings where most of the exterior is glazing.

This building is somewhat of a mixture of both. The laboratory zone of the building is clearly internally load dominated, yet there is substantial glazing on the east and west facades. This can be controlled by louvers angled so that higher summer sun angles can be shaded out. When the function of the building changes to the public and educational zones there is more variance when it comes to heating and cooling load. The all glass atrium is externally loaded because much of the attention will be on controlling the heat gains via the glazing. The auditorium and library zones will require less cooling and more heating than the atrium. 243

Ground floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Second floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Third floor plan Scale 1”=80’

Building Plans and Sections

mechanical

Typical lab floor plan (floors 5-10) Scale 1”=80’

East - West Section Scale 1”=80’

244

mechanical

North - South Section Scale 1”=80’

Passive Systems Passive Cooling

By separating the building into different zones passive cooling passive cooling becomes a possibility. The lab tower to the right demands such a strong cooling system that by incorporating a passive system to aid the rest of the building the overall building benefits. This system woks by utilizing the wind patterns in the summer. The strongest wind comes from the north-west and is sucked into the building via the stack affet. What this means is the air at the top of the central shaft is hotter than the air at the entrance. This creates

A natural suction because of the difference in altitude and temperature. This diagram shows how the main stem reaches into the atrium space and pulls the air to the exit hood in the penthouse. The are subsequent ducts that run into other education and library space but are not shown in this diagram.

245

Winter solstice diagram

Summer solstice diagram

Daylighting - passive heating Daylighting is an importand factor in passive designs because it not only cuts down on electrical costs, it also, when done properly, can aid in the natural heating of a space. The diagrams above show the the sun condidtion during the winter and summer solstice. The amount of space that can be lit changes depending upon the season. The winter angle penetrates deeper in to the space but the summer angle light the space more evenly.

Heating of the space occurs naturally because of the solar gains that are induced by letting in warm sunlight. In the winter the education space to the left in section show the sun hitting and important angle on the wall.

This wall is a concrete mass and throughout the day gains heat via the sun. early at night when the sun sets the wall will continue to radiate heat into the educational space. The laboratory sapce is not included in the section because the south wall is predominantly a mass wall. this allows for the same passive heating to occure that happens in the educational space. Because the Laboratory space does not need additional heating, heat pumps are placed within the space to transfer the warmth to the libray and atrium space 246

Required water budget:

1,935,000 gallons per year

Available water budget:

1,071,960 gallons per year

Required energy use:

1,847,436 kWh

Available solar budget:

7,218,849 kWh

Roof plan

Natural Budgets

What is meant by natural budgets? Natural budgets are areas of potential where incoming solar energy can be harvested and used for provided the building the energy it is needed. Also included are the water budgets. This shows the amount of water that falls on a roof per a given year and is able to be used in aiding heating and cooling of the building and grey water usage. According to the calculations nearly four times the expected energy use of the building can be provided by solar panels with a efficiency of 10%. Yet that would be completely covering every part of the building that was exposed to sunlight. I would expect the actual amount to be installed would be less than half of what was calculable. 247

Site Water Rainwater harvesting

Rainwater harvesting in urban areas can have diverse reasons. To provide supplemental water for the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s requirement,it increase soil moisture levels for urban greenery, to increase the ground water table through artificial recharge, to mitigate urban flooding and to improve the quality of groundwater are some of the reasons why rainwater harvesting can be adopted in cities. In urban areas of the developed world, at a household level, harvested rainwater can be used for flushing toilets and washing laundry. Indeed in hard water areas it is superior to mains water for this.

This site uses rainwater primarily for the laboratory HVAC system. A large retention pond located next to the building provides storage and visibility of this sustainable practice. A laboratory typically needs 9 gallons of water/sf roughly equal to over 2million gallons for this building. By harvesting the rainwater over half the amount of needed water is provided on site free of charge. Also included on the site is a water feature to the south side that doubles as a water aeration system. Once the unused roof water needs to be dispersed it travels down this feature and gets churned by the waterfalls. The dirt and debris settle on the bottom and the final clean water filters through the 248 ground into the Willamette River.

Zone 1 (Laboratory)

Zone 2 (Public)

Heating and Cooling 16

249

Laboratory (zone 1)

Public, Education, and Library (zone 2)

Heating Calculations

BALANCE PT 째F 52 = Inside Temp-(Q gains/Total UA&VI) ANNUAL HEATING ENERGY therms 83,522 = (Total UA&VI)(HDD)(24)/(AFUE)(V) ANNUAL ENERGY COST $ $100,226 = (annual therms)($/therm)

BALANCE PT 째F 61 = Inside Temp-(Q gains/Total UA&VI) ANNUAL HEATING ENERGY therms 104,766 = (Total UA&VI)(HDD)(24)/(AFUE)(V) ANNUAL ENERGY COST $ $125,719 = (annual therms)($/therm)

Cooling Calculations

TOTALS

18,188,511 1,516 6.56 152

BTU/H - 100% TONS Tons per 1000 SF FT2/ton

5,787,605 482 3.40 294

BTU/H - 100% TONS Tons per 1000 SF FT2/ton

Heating and Cooling Explaining the calculations

What these figures show is that there are a few factors that are dominant in this building. Internal gains within laboratory buildings are always a strong factor thus equipment loads within this building are ten times the amount of standard office buildings. the balance point is low because the building produces so much heat that a temperature of 52 degrees outside would mean there would be no need to heat or cool the building. Some of these numbers can be padded by the use of passive designs. Separating the HVAC into 2 zones helps dramatically. By isolating the Laboratory departments

from the education and public zones, the occupant density,ventilation per person, lighting density, and equipment gains can be greatly reduced. This takes load off the rest of the building where not as much demand is needed. As it stands, the building requires takes a total 1998 tons of cooling. The heating cost of Zone 2 can be reduced by the use of heat pumps to pump the excess heat from the laboratory zone into the public zone. Also aiding in Zone 2 are passive heating techniques. Winter sun warms the atrium along with the heat pumps from the lab. 250

Mechanical Systems

The visible past

Because this building sits within an evolving industrial area, I think it is important to visually represent the history of the site. OMSI is a museum of science and industry therefor it is only natural to celebrate the industrial heritage in a fashion that is educational as well as beneficial to the building. Take for instance the Pompidou Centre in Paris (left), this building exploits the guts of the machine in order to relieve the interior space of cluttering mechanical systems. What is interesting about using this approach

at the Biomedical Research is that it not only provides a clearing of square footage but it also directly reflect the industrial ghosts of the site in an educational fashion. The system itself would incorporate a larger air and water HVAC system for use in the more demanding lab and the smaller all water system for use in the educational and public spaces. The central core would be exposed first within the buildings atrium directly upon entrance, and continue up the western facade of the lab block where it finishes on an accessible green roof penthouse that celebrates the culmination of the event. 251

Mechanical Systems

Types of systems In the laboratory portion of the building, there will be a single-duct VAV system. This system is popular in large buildings. Its single duct requiresl less space for distribution, and the variation of air volume flow rate saves energy. This is beneficial to the laboratories because the hoods require a lot of air to provide â&#x20AC;&#x153;make upâ&#x20AC;? air to the fume hoods.

In the offices, administrative areas, public areas, and classrooms, the heating and cooling will be provided with an induction system. In the offices, occupants will be able to control the temperature of their space with a thermostat. Most of the heating and cooling is accomplished via the water distribution tree, which is much thinner then the all air system. Heat recovery is possible since the exhaust air is gathered in a return air duct.

252

Vertical Transportation

Fire stairs

Lab elevators

Lab elevators Stairs

Central core elevators

253

Flexibility and openness Plumbing is a key element in a laboratory driven building. Efficiency and flexibility are essential goals for these systems. Added appeal is done by locating the main plumbing trunks along side the HVAC core trunks thus relieving the lab block to be open an maneuverable.

Plumbing

Main plumbing trunks

Secondary plumbing and Rainwater harvesting trunks 254

Flexibility and openess The point of presence (pop) room is located to the bottom right corner of the building which frees the floor area for the lab and office space.

Electrical system

on elect.

255

Solar generation potential

Water harvesting potential

Crossings the line

Water harvesting storages

Site generation This is typically the most exciting possibility when dealing with a new site such as this. The possibilities of energy production on this site are great. Wind and solar are the two biggest possible generators for energy. This site unfortunately does not allow for a geothermal well because of the pollution levels in the soil. The soil cannot be disturbed otherwise the pollutants would find there way to the Willamette River, which we really donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want to happen.

Net zero is as well an unfortunate case. Laboratory buildings are notorious energy hogs and the best design is to reduce the energy needs as much as possible. Through wind turbines, solar panels, and passive heating and cooling designs this site can some within itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s closest reach of net zero. 256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

Course Photos Tours Lectures Reviews 275

Lecture Photos

276

Tours

277

Midterm Review

278

Midterm Review

279

Final Review

280

Final Review

281

282

Acknowledgments Guest Students Reviewers 283

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS GUESTS: Nancy Stueber - OMSI - President Pat LaCrosse - OMSI - Master Plan Contract Manager John Thompson - ZGF Principal Ron Huld - GBD Jim Cox - Estimeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Group Principal Phillip Wild - ZGF Associate Partner Thomas Fortier - ZGF Principal Dave Collins - Architectural Prototypes John Leahy - UO Model Shop Mgr. Chris Tung - KPFF Sean Batty - TriMet Mark Williams - OHSU Assoc. VP G.Z. Brown and Paul Schwer - PAE STUDENTS: Elizabeth Delorme Cyrus Dorosti Bill Kirkwood Josh Kolberg Kathryn Martenson Danielle Meyers Ted Mitchner Kevin Montgomery Todd Palmer Chitra Prabhakar Stephanie Rinehart Mark Schmidt Drew Suljak

284

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS REVIEWERS: Mike McCulloch - Mike McCulloch Architects Sera Kimura - ZGF Architects Dave Collins - architectural prototypes Dave Morey - SRG Tim Evans - SRG Denyse McGriff - PDC (Portland Development Commission) John Thompson - ZGF Marty Eichinger - Artist, Sculptor Andrew Pearson - ZGF (until 6:15) Suenn Ho - Mulvanny G2 Don Genasci - UO Hajo Neis - UO Jim Pettinari - UO Karl Sonnenberg - ZGF David Wark - Hennebery Eddy Jeff Joslin - AKA Architecture Kelly Scherr - OMSI Exhibit Design

285

286

E Bibliography 287

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, Christopher. A Pattern Language Towns - Buildings - Construction. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. pp 205-208, 940968. Attoe, Wayne and Logan, Don. “American Urban Architecture, Catalyst in the design of Cities.” Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. pp 1-43.** Bacon, Edmund N. Design of Cities, Simultaneous Movement Systems, pp. 240 – 281. Bierman, M. Lindsay. “Science Community Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.” Architecture (March 1994).pp. 68 -75. Braum, Hardo, and Gronling, Dieter. Research and Technology Buildings. 2005. City of Portland, Oregon. Central City Fundamental Design Guidelines. [Online] www.portlandonline.com/planning/index.cfm?c=31612 City of Portland, Oregon. Special Design Guidelines for the Central Eastside Industrial District. [Online] www.portlandonline.com/planning/ index.cfm?c=31612 City of Portland, Oregon. Portland Zoning Code, Title 33.510 and 33.140 [Online] www.portlandonline.com/planning/index.cfm?c=31612 City of Portland, Oregon. Central City Developers Handbook, “Central Eastside Urban Design Concepts and Policies Diagram for the Central Eastside Industrial District.” 1992. pp 7-25 (Online) www.portlandonline.com/planning/index.cfm?c=31612 Coffin, Christie Johnson. “Making Places for Scientists.” PLACES Brooklyn, NY V. 7. No. 11 Crease, Robert. Physicsworld.com “Lab Architecture, Laboratory design can be complex and risky.” April 1, 2008. [Online] http:// physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/33572 Crosibe, Michael J. Architecture for Science. 2004 Dizikes, Peter. “Outside the Box. Does innovative lab architecture lead to more innovative science?” Boston Globe.com May 9, 2004. www. boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/05/09/outside_the_box/ Fellman, Bruce, “The Science of Togetherness, The first new building on Science Hill since the 1960’s is all about linkages”, Yale Alumni 288

BIBLIOGRAPHY continued Magazine. October, 1993 [Online] http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/93_10/science.html GBD Architects. OHSU North Macadam Block 25 (Center for Health and Healing) Design Advice Review. December 2003 Gehl, Jan and Gemzoe, Lars. new city spaces, Copenhagen: Architektens Forlag, March 2006. pp. 10-20, 26-45, 72-77. Giedion, Sigfried, Walter Gropius. New York: Dover Publications, 1992. pp. 53-60. Green Guide for Healthcare. “Green Building Research” [Online] www.gghc.org/download/mgdocs.cfm?dir=GGHC%20Version%202.2 Harby, Stephen. “Using New Buildings to Solve Old Problems.” PLACES; Volume 7, No. 4. pp. 33-37. Kasprisin, Ron and Pettinari, James. Visual Thinking for Architects and Designers Visualizing Context in Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1990. Ch. 3 pp 87-110, Ch. 9 pp 262-268. Katz, J. Sylvan and Martin, Ben R. What is Research Collaboration? [Online] Korn, Peter. “To launch, city biotech needs labs.” Portland Tribune. November 13, 2008. [Online] http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/ story.php?story_id=122653035988654100 * Perkins & Will/Murase Associates. OHSU Patient Care Facility Land Use Review. Updated July 10, 2003 Schmertz, Mildred, FAIA. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca, Building Community. 1995. pp 80-89, 124-133, 164-175.* Sickinger, Ted. “In Knight’s gift, OHSU sees recruiting jackpot.” Oregonian. November 4, 2008. [Online] http://www.oregonlive.com/news/ index.ssf/2008/11/in_knights_gift_ohsu_sees_a_re.html * Slessor, Catherine. Sustainable Architecture and High Technology Eco-Tech. Singapore: Thames & Hudson, 1997. pp 92 – 97. Steele, James. Salk Institute Architecture in Detail. 1993. Turner, Paul Venable. Campus, An American Planning Tradition, Dynamism, Change and Renewal, pp. 249 - 305 Tyng, Alexandra. Beginning, Louis I. Khan’s Philsophy of Architecturel 1984. 289

Verzemnieks, Inara. “The life and architecture of Brad Cloepfil.” Oregonian. December 14, 2008. [Online] http://www.oregonlive.com/O/ index.ssf/2008/12/inara_verzemnieks_ponders_brad.html * Watch, Daniel. “Trend in Lab Design, WBDG Whole Building Design Guide, Research Facilities, Research Laboratory” [Online] www.wbdg. org/resources/labtrends.php?r=research Wiseman, Carter. I.M. Pei, A Profile in Ameircan Architecture. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1990: Chapter 4. The National Center for Atmospoheric Research (1961-67).pp72-91. Williams & Dame Development. OHSU River Campus-Building One (Center for Health and Healing) June 2003. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects LLP. OMSI Master Plan Phase One Site and Vision 2008. Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects LLP. Oregon Health & Sciences University, Biomedical Research Building, Land Use Review Application, January 2003

290