UVA School of Architecture - 2020 Studio - Elements of Housing.

ELEMENTS OF HOUSING Radical Domesticities for 21st Century Urban Life Anthony Averbeck (Coordinator) Jaime Sanz (Coordinator) Gonzalo Alonso María González Aranguren Jorge Pizarro UVA SoA | ARCH 2020 | Spring 2019

CONTENTS 1

Note from the Chair

2 Abstract 3

Faculty Overview

7

Guest Lectures

8 Calendar 12

Studio Assignments

14

Studio Overview

17

Pedagogic Objectives

18

Studio Process

20

Policy + Procedure

22

Exercise 1 - Draw Your Own Home

30

Exercise 2 - Case Study Analysis: Collective Housing Inventory

42

Exercise 3 - Typological Inventory of Domestic Units

52

Exercise 4 - Collective Housing Block in the City

58

Final Review

Review Schedule

Guest Reviewers 76 Bibliography

N OT E F RO M T H E C H A I R The conceptualization and design of domestic space is an essential component of urban life. The gradual collection of dwellings in multiple forms of existence —from individual to collective and from provisional to permanent— makes up the basic building blocks of a city. The space of the dwelling, as a mediator between conditions of exterior and interior, between the public and private realm, is an essential component in the construction of urban life, and has been throughout its extended history a pivotal component of the modern American city. With projects that range from extreme vertical urban growth (the Ansonia in New York City) to others that endorse ideas of decentralization (Radburn, New Jersey), the design of housing and the diverse models of domestic life it engenders, have played a pivotal role in the physical and experiential identity of the post war metropolis, shaping many of the models of domesticity that are quotidian today.

This studio brief asks of students to think about housing and its organization at multiple scales, and understand it as a primary organizational element that can help mediate between the public and private realms. The examination of canonical housing projects —through a careful reading of architectural drawings, primarily plans, sections, and elevations of the selected case studies— paired with an inquisitive attitude towards what should the future of housing entail for a small American city sets the stage for a challenging and productive design studio. The outcome of the studio will show the responsibility afforded to architecture in shaping the many notions of home.

Felipe Correa Vincent and Eleanor Shea Professor Chair of the Department of Architecture

1

ABSTRACT Elements of Housing is a foundation studio that introduces fundamental concepts, strategies, and disciplines associated with the design of domestic space, from the dwelling unit to the aggregation of domestic spaces into coherent urban blocks. Applied case studies, lectures, and workshops will build a foundation for a series of interrelated design exercises that construct hypotheses about new spatial, formal, and experiential typologies of domesticity that reshape and respond to changing conventions of life in the midsized city.

Housing is one of the most representative elements of a city’s history and cultural evolution. The aggregation of dwellings in multiple forms of existence over time —from individual to collective and from provisional to permanent— makes up the basic elements of a city. The space of the dwelling, as a mediator between the exterior and interior, between the public and private domains, is an essential component in the construction of urban life.

2

F A C U LT Y O V E R V I E W Anthony Averbeck (Coordinator) is a designer and academic who teaches design studio and visualization seminars in both the undergraduate and graduate programs at the University of Virginia, where he is currently a Lecturer in Architecture. He is also co-founder of a design and research collaborative investigating the American Midwest at both the territorial and tactical scales.

Averbeck has practiced professionally in Minnesota, Virginia, and New York, in both traditional architectural practice, and in the design and fabrication of architectural elements and landscape furniture. He holds a Master of Architecture from the University of Virginia, where he received the Lori Ann Pristo Award upon graduation, and a Bachelor of Science in Architecture, with High Distinction from the College of Design (CDes) at the University of Minnesota.

Jaime Sanz (Coordinator) focuses his professional activity as part of the team of JosĂŠ Manuel Sanz Arquitectos, based in Madrid where he has developed several projects, including his work focused in housing developments. His research interests focus on Postwar Domestic Spaces, and the role of the objects, furniture, appliances and new devices within the contemporary domestic space. He is Ph.D candidate with a dissertation entitled “Liquid Homes, processes of substitution on the domestic space for systems of objectsâ€?.

His work has been laid out in different national and international exhibitions including the last Venezia Biennalle 2018, within the Spanish Pavillion. He has been menthor teacher in The Superior Technical School of Architecture of Madrid from 2014 to 2017, as well as guest lecturer in the INDA-Chulalongkorn University of Bangkok.

3

María González Aranguren is architect and urban planner who graduated in Master degree in The Technical University of Architecture of Madrid (NAAB Substantial Equivalency Accreditation), with Honorable Mention in 2014.

She obtained ERASMUS Scholarship in TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN for one year and she studied an extra Master in Advanced Architectural Projects to complement her knowledge in Architectural Theory. She spent a year teaching at Technical University of Madrid as mentor professor to graduate students in their Master Thesis Projects. In January 2018, she joined the faculty at University of Virginia.During this time, she has combined teaching with professional practice in the renowned office A&G (Aranguren & Gallegos architects), where she began working in 2010 in national and international projects, including the ICA New Contemporary Art Museum in Miami, the “Oak House” or the new Housing Towers of Valdebebas. She has been very interested in the field of cooperation, traveling and studying possible solutions for cities in countries including India, Mexico, an Morocco.

Jorge Pizarro is an architect and urban planner graduated at the Technical University of Madrid, Spain, where he completed his Master’s degree in 2015 with honors. His final thesis project worked around the topic of urban and social sustainability under the title “Ahmedabad: Urban Fabrics in Conflict”.

In 2016 he established Ensalada Works, his own architecture office where, among other colleagues, he tries to explore new architectural fields, with a special interest in new ways of approaching our environments and contexts, based on the interconnection of professionals and fields. He has also been involved in the creation of Fragments Of: an international network of architectural academic workshops held in cities that are interesting for their cultural, social and economic distance.

4

Gonzalo Alonso is is an architect with an M.Arch from the School of Architecture of the University of Navarra. He set up Abalo Alonso Arquitectos, with Elizabeth Abalo, twenty years ago. Since then they have carried out several constructions and have obtained several awards and distinctions; among them, in the last years, the first Prize in the BakĂş International Awards for the RomaĂąo Civic Centre, Azerbaijan 2017; the A Prize of the Triennale di Milano for the Monterroso Health Center, Milano 2015; the International Prize Ischia di Architettura 2014 for the Moure Hotel; the Riuso, Regenerazione Urbana Sostenibile prize, for the Ribadeo redevelopment, Bologna 2013; Highly Commended at AR Emerging Architecture, London 2013, for the Rubido Romero Foundation; the Spanish Aplus Award 2013 for the University Kinder Garden in Ourense and in 2011 for the Oleiros Health Center; and the Spanish National Heritage Cities Award for the San Clemente Square.

5

Teaching Assistants

Sherry Ng MARCH ‘19 Coordinating TA

Colin Gilliland MARCH ‘19

Phillip Goodbread MARCH ‘19

Samantha Kokenge MARCH ‘19

Audrey Liu MARCH ‘20

Alek De Mott MARCH ‘20

6

GUEST LECTURES Felipe Correa is the Vincent and Eleanor Shea Professor and Chair of Architecture at UVA School of Architecture. He is an internationally renowned architect and urbanist.

Working at the confluence of architecture, urbanism, and infrastructure, he has, through his design practice Somatic Collaborative, developed design projects with the public and private sector in multiple cities and regions across the globe. Designing across multiple scales and varied contexts, Correa is known for using architectural commissions, design competitions, and diverse forms of applied research to facilitate design’s role as a critical mediator between society and space. Prior to joining UVA, he was an Associate Professor and Director of the Master of Architecture in Urban Design program at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design.

7

CALENDAR

January

M 14 First day of class / Course Introduction / Introduce Ex. 1

CAM 158, 1:00-3:30p

W 16 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 01

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 18

Desk crits

M 21 MLK Holiday, No Class W 23 Ex. 1 Review / Visualization Workshop 02

Tech Bridge, 1:00-3:00p, CAM 158, 3:00-4:45p

F 25

Introduce Ex. 2 / Desk crits

CAM 158, 1:00-2:00p

M 28 Lecture by Felipe Correa / Desk crits

CAM 158, 1:00-2:00p

W 30 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 03

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

February

F 01

Desk crits

M 04 Ex. 2 Review

8

Tech Bridge, 1:00-4:45p

W 06 Introduce Ex. 3.1, 3.2 / Lecture by Maria Gonzalez / Visualization

Workshop 04

CAM 158, 1:00-4:45p

F 08

Desk crits

M 11 Film: Mon Oncle by Jacques Tati / Desk crits

CAM 158, 1:00-2:00p

W 13 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 05

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 15

Desk crits

M 18 Desk crits W 20 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 06

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 22

Ex. 3.1/3.2 Progress Pin-Up

Tech Bridge, 1:00-4:45p

M 25 Introduce Ex. 3.3 / Lecture by Anthony Averbeck and Jaime Sanz

CAM 158, 1:00-3:30p

W 27 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 07

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

March

F 01

Desk crits

9

M 04 Desk crits W 06 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 08

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 08

Ex. 3 Review

M 11 Spring Recess, No Class W 13 Spring Recess, No Class F 15

Spring Recess, No Class

M 18 Introduce Ex. 4 / Lecture by Jorge Pizarro / Desk crits

CAM 158, 1:00-3:00p

W 20 Site Visit / Studio Walkthrough / Visualization Workshop 09

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 22

Desk crits

M 25 Lecture by Gonzolo Alonso / Desk crits

CAM 158, 1:00-2:00p

W 27 Desk crits / Visualization Workshop 10

CAM 158, 3:30-4:45p

F 29

Desk crits

April

M 01 Desk crits W 03 Desk crits

10

F 05 Desk crits M 08 Desk crits W 10 Desk crits F 12 Ex. 4 Progress Pin-Up

Tech Bridge, 1:00-4:45p

M 15 Desk crits W 17 Desk crits F 19 Penultimate Review

Tech Bridge & Naug, 1:00-4:45p

M 22 Desk crits W 24 Desk crits F 26 Desk crits

M 29 Desk crits

May

Th 02 Final Review

11

STUDIO SECTIONS Anthony Averbeck Samantha Kokenge, TA Auer, Jessica Clark, William Davis, Mira Liberatore, Elizabeth Lin, Amelia Lowden, Connor MacPherson, Ian

Penny, Patrick Reid, Heather Travers, Eric Trepp, Devon Xia, Chenyang Zekany, Emily

Jaime Sanz Phillip Goodbread, TA Brown, Lauren Diaz, Angel Dong, Yudi Gianakopoulos, Marina Gorashi, Omer Hickman, Anna Lapointe, Colby

Koury, Kyle Norton, Nicholas Ruff, Jack Saunders, Evelyn Sharpe, Jayden Thompson, Taylor Wang, Nancy

María González Aranguren Audrey Liu, TA Bowles, Reagan Harding, Summer Hicks, Zoe Hu, Bihong Huntsinger, Kenton Master, Alexander Morinigo-Spalding, Esteban

12

Padilla, Isabella Ragano, Gabriella Riley, Ellie Schiavone, Luciano Sparks, Madison Suid, Yahya Wright, Alexander

Jorge Pizarro Alek De Mott, TA Andrade, Gabriel Gibbs, Dylan Hendi, Matias Hunger, Julia Kilgore, Katherine Legare, Daniel Magenheimer, Jolie

Maguire, Samuel Proano, Maria-Emilia Rhodes, Trenton Rodas, Ana Rodgers, Genesis Tao, ChenCheng Yamada, Cheyenne

Gonzalo Alonso Colin Gilliland, TA Cheetham, Lauren Di Napoli-Castaneda, Alejandro Duncan, Hayden Fay, James Hurst, Christopher Key, Mary Kirssin, Leah

Knights, Lindsay Miller, Elizabeth Milone, William Shen, Chenan Thornberry, Bridget Zavala, Fernando

13

STUDIO OVERVIEW Elements of Housing | Radical Domesticities for 21st Century Urban Life ARCH 2020 Foundation Studio III Spring 2019 Monday, Wednesday, Friday 13:00 – 17:45 Introduction Elements of Housing is the third foundation studio in the undergraduate program in architecture. The studio introduces fundamental concepts, strategies, and disciplines associated with the design of domestic space, from the dwelling unit to the aggregation of domestic spaces into coherent urban blocks. The studio speculates on the designer’s role in analyzing and shaping the future city and how we will inhabit it. Applied case studies, lectures, readings and workshops will build a foundation for a series of interrelated design exercises that construct hypotheses about new spatial, formal, and experiential typologies of domesticity that reshape and respond to changing conventions of urban life.

Housing is one of the most representative elements of a city’s history and cultural evolution. The aggregation of dwellings in multiple forms of existence over time —from individual to collective and from provisional to permanent— makes up the basic building blocks of a city. As American models of urban development continue to depart from the traditional and time-honored model of the compact city, the studio acknowledges the agency of designers to operate in novel capacities. The design of domestic space begins with the recognition that homes have grown in scale recent decades in The United States, which is sustaining a greater standard area per occupant than in the past, and larger than other developed countries. As such, projects will

14

be sited in the downtown core of Charlottesville, Virginia, USA, experimenting with new typologies in collective housing that respond to the place and reshape conventions of life in the midsized city. Contemporary ways of living, including our evolving relationship with technology, and new conceptions of home as ephemeral place to reside within a nomadic society, will be engaged as design drivers. Speculations will operate within such research themes as density, dispersion, multifunctionality, and vertical suburbia, as explored through comparative case studies.

The studio methodology progresses from cell to city, approaching housing first with investigations at the human scale and the individual dwelling unit, and then broadening the exploration to strategies for aggregation at the scale of the urban block. Logistically, the studio is organized into three parts.

The first component is comprised of two exercises in case study analysis and drawing, the second the development of a typological inventory of domestic units, and the final a collective housing project that will synthesize the content of the studio. Three primary components establish a foundation for speculation: the first being a competency in visualization and representation, the second being a foundational understanding of the principles of architecture (space, form, program, scale, architectural language), and the third being the capacity to research, interrogate, and explore through the design process.

15

Image Credits: Anthony Averbeck and Maria Gonzalez Aranguren, ARCH 2020, Spring 2018, University of Virginia, SoA

16

PEDAGOGIC OBJECTIVES The succesful completion of this core studio will demand the students skillfully demonstrate knowledge of and engagement with the following primary pedagogic emphases of the course: 1. To establish an understanding of the discipline of architecture, its rules and logic, through specific foundational methodologies in drawing and analysis.

2. To rethink the role of housing at three scales: the dwelling unit, the collective aggregation, and the urban block, in the creation of new systems and the reconfiguration of existing systems.

3. To develop an understanding of fundamental components informing the design of domestic space, including programming the house (interior and exterior spaces),considering relationships between each part and the whole.

4. To consider the various factors informing the design of collective housing in the city; including socio-cultural factors, principles of construction and tectonics, and urban and environmental systems.

5. To foster a dialogue between design motivations and actions, and how they might be tested and explored through specific design projections.

6. To explore the range of scenarios at play informing how we dwell collectively in the contemporary world, and the diverse design procedures that can inform their transformation.

7. Development of team work capacities, active participation in discussion, and the ability to productively work both individually and in collaboration with others.

17

STUDIO PROCESS Studio Methodology The work of the studio will be framed by a rigorous and iterative process of analysis, drawing, and modeling to synthesize information regarding site, program, and other parameters to generate multiscalar design strategies, hypotheses, and ideas. The work will be directed toward developing an architecture that engages the program of housing within the specific physical and social context of the site, including its geography, urban fabric, and infrastructure. Visual documentation and analysis, including drawings, diagrams, and models will be critical tools for testing and communicating ideas clearly. The studio emphasizes the iterative design process, deploying both physical model making, sketching, and 3D software tools effectively to do so. This intensive design process will require full and active participation by all members of the studio. Assignments will be conducted both individually and in teams.

Delivery of Content The exercises and studio content will be in introduced through lectures, discussions, and workshops to communicate critical content. Lectures will cover content from methods of case study analysis, design processes, the lineage of domesticity, collective housing strategies, and visual representation. During the semester, we will organize a series of round table discussions to support the application of lectures and readings to studio projects. Additionally, a series of weekly visualization workshops will facilitate an understanding of critical representational methods.

Studio Field Trip to Downtown Site The studio will take a field trip to the site in downtown Charlottesville in early March to explore, document, and analyze the site preconditions.

This will take place during studio time, and will require students to arrange transportation to and from downtown.

UVACollab and Classes Folder The studio will use UVACollab for the sharing and dissemination of critical information and resources, and for the submission of digital work. Moreover, students will be expected to use and maintain a personal folder on Classes using the provided structure. An explanation will be given at the studio intro.

18

Studio Exercises The studio will be divided into four phases, and each phase is accompanied by an exercise, consisting of drawing and analysis at the beginning of the term (exercises 1/2), followed by the design of domestic units based on specific parameters (exercise 3), and concluding with an exercise in aggregation to develop a resolved collective housing strategy at the scale of the urban block.

Ex. 1 - Draw Your Own Home Jan 14 - 23 will establish foundational skills with a focus on accurately observing, recording, and drawing one’s own domestic space(s), introducing fundamentals of measurement, precision drafting, and working between analog and digital tools for architectural representation.

Ex. 2 - Case Study: Collective Housing Inventory Jan 23 - Feb 1 will focus on reading, re-drawing and comparing case studies in collective housing through hand-drawn diagrams and digital drawings. The resultant will be a catalog of precedents to be shared and exhibited across the studio.

Ex. 3 - Typological Inventory of Units Feb 6 - Mar 8 will focus on developing an inventory of domestic units based on a series of parameters and constraints. The first exercise is the development of a horizontal home, the second a sectional home, and the final a home based on a common research theme.

Ex. 3.1 Horizontal Home Ex. 3.2 Sectional Home Ex. 3.3 A Home for Someone Ex. 4 - Collective Housing Block in the City Mar 8 - May 2 This final component synthesizes the ideas, concepts, and techniques from the first three exercises into the development of coherent collective housing blocks for the assigned site. Emphasis is placed on developing strategies with clear strategies for aggregation of domestic units.

19

POLICY + PROCEDURE Participation The studio meets every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 1:00pm to 4:45pm. Attendance is mandatory. You are expected to participate in all pin ups and reviews, and during desk-crits you are expected to be working at your individual workstations. Participation at visualization workshops is also mandatory. In addition to completing assignments on time, you are expected to engage in discussions and dialogue in class.

Lecture Series The SARC lecture series is an invaluable learning experience, and your participation in studio extends to attending lectures by the department of architecture. We will structure Monday and Friday sessions to end before the beginning of school lectures and allow all to attend.

Reviews Reviews are not evaluations, but rather an opportunity for open dialogue about your work. Evaluation will be conducted in confidential sessions by the studio faculty, in which all critical aspects of a project will be considered. It is important and expected that each student not only present their work in reviews, but also attend the presentation of fellow students. Participation in class reviews and seminars is absolutely mandatory.

UVA Honor Code This architectural studio is built on a foundation of analysis, transformation, and reuse of precedents and is, therefore, intended to be an open community of shared research, process, and ideas. However, the University of Virginia Honor Code applies with respect to the building and preservation of a community of trust across the University and prohibits lying, cheating, or stealing. You may find more information at http:// www.virginia.edu/honor/, and if you have questions about special cases in the context of the School of Architecture’s curriculum, please contact the School of Architecture’s elected representatives.

20

SoA Rules, Regulations, Guidelines Undergraduate students of the School of Architecture can review the Academic Rules, Regulations, and Information provided at the following link for specifics on Incomplete Grades and Ownership of Work, among other issues relevant to studio. http://records.ureg.virginia.edu/content. php?catoid=33&navoid=1275.

All students with special needs requiring accommodations should present the appropriate paperwork from the Student Disability Access Center. It is the student’s responsibility to present this paperwork in a timely fashion and follow up with the instructor about the accommodations being offered. Students are urged to fulfill this responsibility within the first two weeks of the class. The SDAC is located in the Department of Student Health at Elson Student Health Center and can be contacted at 243-5180 or http://www.virginia.edu/studenthealth/sdac.html.

Grading The studio adheres to the School of Architecture’s guidelines for evaluating student work. A summary of this criteria can be found below.

A+ | A- Extraordinary Work. Addressing and expanding upon the issues presented in the assignments and discovering/ proposing issues which are reciprocal and similar to the specific assignment. Demonstrating the ability to achieve and excel independently in the development of class work.

B+ | B Notable Work. Addressing and expanding upon the issues presented in the assignments, and demonstrating understanding and achievement in directing the investigations and development in class work.

B- Competent Work. Addressing all of the issues presented in the assignments and demonstrating an understanding of them.

C | D | F Marginal Work. Exhibiting difficulty in demonstrating an understanding of the issues and concepts presented in the assignments.

Assignments not completed.

21

E 1 . D R AW YO U R O W N H O M E An Exercise in Observing, Recording, and Drawing Domestic Space Assigned: Jan 14 Review: Jan 23 Reference: Atelier Bow Wow, Graphic Anatomy 2 As an introductory exercise, you are tasked with analyzing and drawing familiar spaces of inhabitation. To begin, you will observe and measure your own domestic space (apartment, house, or dormitory.) Then, you will construct precise measured drawings using AutoCAD/Rhino in plan, section, and axonometric projection. Finally, you will draw yourself as a participatory scale figure. This will form a collective catalog across the studio that can be inserted into drawings to give a sense of the human scale. The project will be evaluated on accuracy and precision, legibility and clarity of the drawings, and your success in capturing a sense of scale and spatial quality.

Process 1. Record the Space Using your sketchbook, a measuring tape, and camera, begin by recording information needed to construct the drawings. Construct freehand sketches with dimensions of walls, doors, windows, furniture. Record both vertical and horizontal dimensions. Photograph the space thoroughly for reference in constructing the drawings offsite in studio.

2. Draw the Space From your recordings, use AutoCAD/Rhino to construct three line drawings of your living space, in plan, section, and axonometric projection. Scale all drawings to 1/4” = 1’-0”. Draw walls with appropriate thickness, apertures, static and kinetic furniture. Use appropriate line weights to denote hierarchy.

Use hatching to convey materiality, change in ground condition, etc.

3. Draw Yourself: A Catalog of Scale Figures In Rhino, accurately draw yourself in plan and elevation to be inserted into

22

your space to scale. Begin by sketching and recording measurements, and then translate into the digital. Edit the drawing to to show important characteristics and features of your figure. Consider composing yourself performing an activity so that you can occupy the space in interesting ways (cooking at countertop height, sitting, lying down, etc.)

Deliverables 1. One 30� x 30� poster for each student featuring a curation of process sketches and photographs, along with the three final orthographic drawings at the specified scale. Students must use the template provided on UVA Collab.

2. One collective poster by the studio featuring the catalog of scale figures for propagation throughout the semester. Students will format, export, and save the drawings to UVA Collab as dirtected. Teaching Assistants will assemble and plot the collective poster based on the template provided.

Andre Grospe, ARCH 2020 Spring 2018

23

Individual Board Plan, Section, Axonometric Drawings (see InDesign template on Classes)

Collective Board Scale Figures (see InDesign template on Classes)

24

25

26

Review Format This exercise will be reviewed in gallery format, with students, instructors, and teaching assistants viewing and discussing the collective work.

This will be followed by a general discussion on drawing technique and representational effectiveness.

27

PLAN PERSPECTIVE 1/4” = 1-0”

porch swing cherry lumber core t=.75" oil paint

24"

galvanized steel sheet t=0.1" standing-seam roofing structural plywood t-.5" rafter 1"x1" @ 10" rigid insulation foam t=.5" steel plate t=.6" steel pipe 2 X 4 X .15

108"

attic

does not bite friendly

1.5 ton 12 seer air handler dual heat pump

cross beam

174.5"

12"

gas burning fireplace single face traditional fireplace natural draft ventilation powder coat finish t=.0125" mosaic masonry ivory stacked

108"

8" rise 10" tread cedar

foyer

outer whythe 3.5" air space 2" inner whythe 3.5" strapping 1.5" lath plaster balsam bark paint

living room

office

bedroom

8"

wooden joists 2"X10" sub flooring on diagonal 1"X8" wooden beam 10"x10" sycamore flooring 5"x0.75"

108"

57.5"

foyer

living room

outer whythe 3.5" air space 2" inner whythe 3.5" strapping 1.5" lath plaster balsam bark paint

8"

12"

vinyl record player cardboard LP sleeve cover vinyl @ 33 1/3 RPM 12"

8" rise 10" tread

washroom

dining room

kitchen

178.5"

12"

outer whythe 3.5" air space 2" inner whythe 3.5" strapping 1.5" lath plaster balsam bark paint

96"

basement

sadie beagle-hound mix

SECTION PERSPECTIVE LOOKING NORTH

PLAN PERSPECTIVE

1/3” = 1-0”

1/3” = 1-0”

13"

129"

8"

80"

DRAW YOUR OWN LIVING SPACE

42.5" 123"

4

13"

GIBBS, DYLAN

2

1

4'-3"

9'

3

11'-4"

Section Looking North

Plan Perspective

Section Looking West

1/2”=1’

1/2”=1’

1/2”=1’

1.6576

6'-5"

9'

11'-4"

4'-3"

9'

5" 3'-516

1

11'-4" 11.4663

8'-8"

8'-8"

Bathroom

Common Room

Kitchen

1/4”=1’

1/4”=1’

1/4”=1’

17'-8"

21'-4"

3

4

16'

10'-434"

6'-5"

14'

13'-4"

9'

3'-458"

2

7'-211 16"

17'-4"

8'-8"

Draw Your Own Living Space

28

Dylan Gibbs (top), Gabriel Andrade (bottom)

Andrade, Gabriel:Pizarro

FLOOR PLAN

SECTION LOOKING EAST

1/2” = 1-0”

1/2” = 1-0”

A

G

F

E

D

DRAW YOUR OWN LIVING SPACE

FLOOR PLAN

C

B

Munford 3rd Floor A: Depicted Room B: Bathroom N C: Sairs N D: Kitchen E: Common Room F: Stairs S G: Bthroom S

LIN, AMELIA

NORTH EAST AXON 1/8” = 1’

NORTH SECTION

LOWDEN, CONNOR

Amelia Lin (top), Connor Lowden (bottom)

29

E 2 . C A S E S T U D Y A N A LY S I S An Inventory of Collective Housing Precedents Assigned: Jan. 25 Review: Feb. 4 As a second warm up exercise before we begin the semester’s design component, you will be asked as a class to construct a catalog of collective housing stratagies. Working in teams of two, each pair will be assigned a discrete project, and will be asked to both analyze/diagram the conceptual frameworks and logic of the two projects, and produce measured drawings.

Deliverables First, each team will research and attempt to addresses through a 300 word write-up and diagrams, the following questions regarding the project: - What is the primary design intent/strategy for the projects?

- Is there a common thread between the two of them?

- At what scales are the projects operating?

- How many typologies of domestic units does the project contain?

- How do the individual domestic units function?

- How does the domstic unit interface with the public domain?

- What is the circulation strategy for each project?

Next, each team will construct a 30” x 30” boards with both plan and two sections of each case study at a scale appropriate to the project, in consultation with the instructor. Drawings are to be B/W. Finally, the team will construct a 30” x 30” boards with a bird’s eye axonometric drawing of the project in its context, showing how the project integrates with the urban fabric, infrastructure, flows, etc. It might be exploded to reveal components and systems.

30

Board 1 Plan, Sections, Diagrams (see InDesign template on Collab)

Board 2 Urban Axonometric, Urban Diagrams (see InDesign template on Collab)

31

Review Format On February 4, we will review the boards on the Tech Bridge in the format of team presentations and feedback/discussion. Groups will pinup and present next to other groups analyzing the same case study, beginning with a short presentation of each group’s analysis, followed by a discussion between students and instructors.

32

One Santa Fe by Robert Clark and Heather Reid

33

The City and the Lake

Circulation

The Corner Condition

A. Structural Column

B. Mullion Room Orientation

PLAN

1/16”=1’-0”

C. Glass

D. Exterior-Decorative Beams

A

B

C

D 315’

SPINE-BONES-SKIN LAYERS

12’

12’ 12’

15’

15’ 15’

SECTION LOOKING EAST 1/16”=1’-0”

860-880 LAKE SHORE DRIVE

34

315’315’

EMILY ZEKANY AND AMELIA LIN

Lake Shore Drive by Emily Zekany and Amelia Lin

Kangchanjunga Apartments by Mira Davis and Bay Penny

35

36

Nakagin Capsule Tower by Omer Gorashi and Colby Lapointe

The Mountain by Christopher Hurst and Leah Kirssin

37

CASE STUDIES 1. Lake Shore Drive Mies Van der Rohe, Chicago, Illinois, USA (1951) 2. UnitÊ d’habitation Le Corbusier, Marseille, France (1952) 3. Complejo Residencial San Felipe Enrique Ciriani, Lima, Peru (1966) 4. Nakagin Capsules Kurokawa, Tokyo, Japan (1970) 5. Bouca Housing Alvaro Siza, Porto, Portugal (1978) 6. Kanchanjunga Charles Correa, Bombay, India (1983) 7. Edificio Residencial Jaragua Paulo Mendes da Rocha, Sao Paolo, Brazil (1984) 8. Kitagata Housing Complex SANAA, Gifu, Japan (1994-2000) 9. Rue des Suisses Herzog & deMeuron, Paris, France (2000) 10. Housing in Maia Eduardo Souto de Moura, Maia, Portugal (2001)

38

11. Housing in Carabanchel Aranguren & Gallegos, Madrid, Spain (2003) 12. Elemental Alejandro Aravena, Constitucion, Chile (2004) 13. The Mountain Bjarke Ingels Group, Copenhagen, Denmark (2008) 14. Alcรกcer do Sal Residences Aires Mateus, Alcรกcer do Sal, Portugal (2010) 15. One Santa Fe Michael Maltzan, Los Angeles, California, USA (2015)

39

40

41

E3. INVENTORY OF UNITS A Typological Inventory of Domestic Units Assigned: Feb. 4 Interim Pinup: Feb. 22 Review: Mar. 8 This third exercise is dedicated to the design of domestic units with a series of spatial and formal constraints. Students will work individually to develop three domestic units: the horizontal home, the sectional home, and a home for someone considering the adaptation of the domestic unit to issues affecting contemporary urban life. Collective housing has historically comprised the largest total built surface area in the city. External conditions that determine the construction of housing, and its cultural and technical configurations, is increasingly defined by outmoded cultural clichĂŠs and economic drivers. Too often, the design of domestic space responds uncritically to established norms in construction techniques, financial motivations, durability, speed of construction, social status, square footage, etc. Despite this, in the relatively short time from the pre-industrial age to today, many aspects of urban life have undergone rapid change and diversification. As a result, architecture should respond by innovating in the design of new dwellings and the transformation of existing ones.

The broad pedagogical objective of this series of projects is to train in capacities to draw and think spatially about domestic space. More specifically, the architectural objective is to explore the plasticity of domestic spaces through the careful attention to given constraints. Economic considerations and legal restrictions are the traditional constraints for the design of collective housing. In order to facilitate innovation, this project also offers a series of spatial and formal constraints for the design of spaces of inhabitation.

42

3.1 Horizontal Home is a spatial exploration of horizontality and opportunities for interior/exterior relationships. Think formally, spatially, and logistically as you configure your spaces. The objective is to recreate an atmosphere.

Design Guidelines: 1. Design a habitat of 1200 S.F. on one floor.

2. Provide 25% of this given area as an exterior space.

3. The minimum diameter to be inscribed in a courtyard is 9 ft.

4. The maximum free height inside is 12 ft, the minimum 8 ft.

5. Ceilings and floors can incorporate texture, slopes, and small changes in heights. The operative floor thickness is 18”

3.2 Sectional Home is a spatial exploration of sectional relationships in compact domestic spaces. Think formally, spatially, and logistically as you configure your spaces.

The objective is to recreate an atmosphere.

Design Guidelines: 1. Design a habitat of 1200 S.F. with only a 20% of the total surface touching the ‘ground’. This is 240 SF of footprint, and the rest is aerial.

2. The height of spaces can be designed between the minimum legal of 8 ft and a maximum of 12 ft.

43

3.3 Micro Unit: A Minimal Home for Someone This final typology asks students to conceive of a minimal home of no more than 2500 ft ³ in volume, considering how the minimal domestic unit can adapt to the needs of contemporary urban life. For this final typology, students are asked to design for a specific occupant.

Deliverables For each of the three schemes, students will develop the following representations, presented on 30” x 30” boards in accordance with the template files available on the Classes folder.

1. Ground Floor Plan at 1/4”= 1’-0” scale 2. Typical Upper Floor Plan (if applicable) at 1/4”= 1’-0” scale 3. Section or Section Perspective at 1/4”= 1’-0” scale 4. 3D printed model of a scheme of student’s choice at 1/16” = 1-0” scale Review Format An interim pinup will take place on February 22 to review progress on Ex. 3.1 and 3.2 at the Tech Bridge.

A final review of all three components will take place on March 8 in CAM 205/405.

44

(1) 3D print model

(3) 30” x 30” boards

Board 1 (Ex. 3.1) Horizontal Home Plans + Section (see InDesign template on Classes)

Board 2 (Ex. 3.2) Sectional Home Plans + Section (see InDesign template on Classes)

Board 3 (Ex. 3.3) Students select either template

45

SECTION AA 1/4” = 1-0”

AXONOMETRIC NTS

FLOOR PLAN N

1/4” = 1-0”

TYPOLOGY Horizontal House, 1200 S.F. OCCUPANTS 3 Recent Environmental Science Graduates DESCRIPTION The Prairie House is a one story dwelling designed around the basic need of three recent college graduates. The Living spaces of the house are sunken down into the ground so as to maximize on geothermal climatization and to bring the inhabitants closer to nature within thir own living quarters by mplacing all of the work surfaces at Ground level. The main common area includes a large open space for gathering, connecting the kitchen, dining, and living areas. The bathroom is just off of this space, with a raised tub to continue the theme of living at ground level. The individual living spaces have private outdoor areas, so that th inhabitants may become more connected with nature, without the disturbances of activity in the common spaces. The desks and beds are all at ground level, and rotating glass windows surround the living spaces to give substantial airflow and views to all of the spaces within the house

SECTION BB 1/4” = 1-0”

HORIZON HOUSE

46

CLARK, WR

Robert Clark (top), Angel Diaz (bottom)

Omer Gorashi (top), Tommy Xia (bottom)

47

48

Alexander Master (top), Robert Clark (bottom)

Amelia Lin (top), Matias Hendi (bottom)

49

50

51

E4. COLLECTIVE HOUSING BLOCK An Aggregation of Domestic Units on the Urban Block Assigned: Mar. 18 Penultimate Review: Apr. 19 Final Review: May 2 For the final project, students are asked to design an aggregation of housing units, and their public and collective spaces, as a cohesive urban block.

Students will work individually to test and iterate strategies, working toward a resolved and coherent scheme to present at the final review in May. The Site The site is located in the downtown core of Charlottesville, VA, USA. It is presently utilized for surface parking, and is the site of the weekly Charlottesville City Market, a farmer’s market that takes place each Saturday morning. The site is approximately 240’ x 460’ and includes a 20’ wide street (1st Street S.) that bisects it in the N/S orientation. The site is bounded by Water Street to the north, South Street to the south, 2nd St. NW to the west, and 2nd St. NE to the east.

Designing an Urban Block The pedagogical objective of this project is to apply the lessons of the case study analysis, lectures, and readings to design solutions that address the essentials of collective housing. The project focuses on the following fundamental aspects of collective housing: typology of aggregation, morphology, programmatic hybridity, densification of existing conditions, sequencing of public, collective, and private spaces, scale, materiality and spatiality linked to project’s strategy and urban integration.

52

Site in Charlottesville, VA, USA

Site Downtown Mall

20’

8’

210’

35’

street

8’

sidewalk

240’

block

8’

20’

8’

210’

8’

36’

block

8’ 20’

53

54

55

Process 1. Students will begin the process by exploring through diagrams and models, formal possibilities for aggregating the units they have designed: horizontal home, sectional home, micro units. In the process, they will test multiple possibilities through iteration.

2. Next, students will depart from the previously designed units, rigorously applying case study research and knowledge from both lectures and readings to develop a strategic catalog of clear and deliberate strategies for aggregation on the site. Strategies can be formal (morphological), related to atmosphere, or related to spatial conditions (enclosed, opened, etc).

3. Finally, with a catalog of both exploratory and strategic aggregation typologies, students will select a scheme to develop a coherent urban housing block with minimal programmatic hybridity and a clear integration of public space.

Considerations Typologies of Aggregation Students will gain an understanding of the role of access and circulation to arrive to the domestic unit. Corridors, stairs and elevators are the essential elements of dwellings. These elements define basic typologies of aggregation, and by extension, ways of living. We can design housing aggregated with a single loaded corridor, or a vertical core with two dwellings per floor, 5 dwellings per floor, etc. A thorough understanding of typologies for aggregation is the first important part to learn in order to be able to start designing collective housing.

Urban Morphologies In addition to typology of aggregation, collective housing can also be defined

56

by its morphology, such as towers, linear bars, courtyards, closed blocks, mat-buildings, terraced buildings, etc. The form and scale of a group of collective housing, as well as its repetition, defines the urban context. Similar morphologies can have different modes of aggregation.

Programmatic Hybridity Students should seek to increase the programmatic hybridity of the existing urban fabric. Although the main component of this project is housing, students will explore the incorporation of offices, shops, markets, parking below grade, sport courts, etc. Rather than designing this program, students will configure it spatially in relation to the domestic program, projecting possible scenarios for activating the public realm.

Spatial Sequencing: Public, Collective, Private Transcending the classical public/private dichotomy, and the spatial distribution of enclosed versus open, the challenge is to consider the relationships between realms and achieve a more dynamic spectrum; degrees of collective space between public and private and degrees of openness in the sequence.

The collection of buildings forming the urban block will look for the sequence of collective spaces linked to the circulation infrastructure of lobbies, corridors, stairs and elevators (collective=open to the residents only), and public spaces (open to the city at large).

Urban Integration In addition to the project’s internal strategy, the collective housing block shouldt respond to fundamental site-specific systems, such as topography, solar orientation, views, and environmental and cultural preconditions.

57

FINAL REVIEW Exercise 4. Collective Housing in the City Synthesizing the content of the semester, students will present the results of Exercise 4 at the final review as a comprehensive design project for the urban block in Charlottesville. Under the direction of your instructor, each project should address many of the questions that have been raised throughout the preliminary exercises and issues introduced during the previous semester’s study of urban architecture.

Submission Requirements The final collective urban aggregation, along with the material from all preliminary exercises will be the basis for the final review gallery. Each student will have a space allotted for large format boards for the final exercise, and space in the Corner Gallery for the display of select previous exercises.

While the drawings presented in the final review will be open and developed based on the requirements of each project, there are a few comparative deliverables each student must comply with. These are: 1. Site Plan at 1/32” = 1’-0” scale showing the project within the context of the site (extents provided) 2. Aerial Axonometric using the view angle and context provided 3. Urban Section at 1/32” = 1’-0” scale showing the project within the context of the site (extents provided) 4. Section at 1/16” = 1’-0” scale 5. Ground Floor Plan at 1/16” = 1’-0” scale 6. Typical Upper Floor Plan at 1/16” = 1’-0” scale 7. Catalog of Unit Plans at 1/4” = 1’-0” scale 8. Final Building Model at 1/16” = 1’-0” scale * These are required deliverables across all sections of the studio, and as such this list should not be considered exhaustive. Additional deliverables will be addressed by studio instructors.

58

Review Format Each student will present one 36” x 72” board along with a final 1/16” = 1’-0” scale building model and iterative process models as directed by the studio instructor.

Each project will be allotted 20 minutes total (presentation and discussion).

Students and critics will be distributed between three review spaces, as indicated on the final review schedule on pages 60-62.

36”

72”

model

other student work

18”

59

REVIEW SCHEDULE SPACE 01 / CAM 220B Carlos Jimenez, Konstantina Tzemou Mona El Khafif (a), Anselmo Canfora (a), Ehsan Baharlou (a) Katie Stranix (p), Katie Kasabalis (p)

9:00-9:20

INTRODUCTION

9:20-9:40

Amelia Lin (AA)

9:40-10:00

William Milone (GA)

10:00-10:20

Robert Clark (AA)

10:20-10:40

Leah Kirssin (GA)

10:40-11:00

Bay Penny (AA)

11:00-11:20

Fernando Zavala (GA)

11:20-11:40

Heather Reid (AA)

11:40-12:00

Lauren Cheetman (GA)

12:00-12:20

Elizabeth Liberatore (AA)

12:20-12:40

Bridget Thornberry (GA)

12:40-13:00

Alejandro Di Napoli-Castaneda (GA)

13:00-14:00

LUNCH

14:00-14:20

Elizabeth Miller (GA)

14:20-14:40

Chenan Shen (GA)

14:40-15:00

Angel Diaz (JS)

15:00-15:20

Lindsay Knights (GA)

15:20-15:40

Christopher Hurst (GA)

15:40-16:00

Colby Lapointe (JS)

16:00-16:20

James Fay (GA)

16:20-16:40

Kyle Koury (JS)

16:40-17:00

Mary Key (GA)

17:00-17:20

Hayden Duncan (GA)

17:20-17:40

Marina Gianokopoulos (JS) FINAL DISCUSSION

60

SPACE 02 / CAM 220C Ajay Manthripragada, Marshall Prado Elgin Cleckley (a), Betsy Roettger (a), Ines Martin Robles (a), Peter Waldman (p), JT Bachman (p)

9:00-9:20

INTRODUCTION

9:20-9:40

Ellie Riley (MG)

9:40-10:00

Summer Harding (MG)

10:00-10:20

Gabbie Ragano (MG)

10:20-10:40

Yahya Suid (MG)

10:40-11:00

Isabella Padilla (MG)

11:00-11:20

Kent Huntsinger (MG)

11:20-11:40

Alexander Wright (MG)

11:40-12:00

Mady Sparks (MG)

12:00-12:20

Bihong Hu (MG)

12:20-12:40

Zoe Hicks (MG)

12:40-13:00

Esteban Moringo (MG)

13:00-14:00

LUNCH

14:00-14:20

Emily Zekany (AA)

14:20-14:40

Alexander Master (MG)

14:40-15:00

Devon Trepp (AA)

15:00-15:20

Ian MacPherson (AA)

15:20-15:40

Eric Travers (AA)

15:40-16:00

Reagan Bowles (MG)

16:00-16:20

Mira Davis (AA)

16:20-16:40

Tommy Xia (AA)

16:40-17:00

Jessica Auer (AA)

17:00-17:20

Luciano Schiavone (MG)

17:20-17:40

Connor Lowden (AA) FINAL DISCUSSION

61

SPACE 03 / CAM 205 Pablo Perez Ramos, Almudena Ribot John Comazzi (a), Esther Lorenz (a), Luis Pancorbo (a), Lucia Phinney (p), Belen González (p)

9:00-9:20

INTRODUCTION

9:20-9:40

Katherine Kilgore (JP)

9:40-10:00

Nick Norton (JS)

10:00-10:20

Lauren Brown (JS)

10:20-10:40

Taylor Thomson (JS)

10:40-11:00

Chencheng Tao (JP)

11:00-11:20

Evelyn Saunders (JS)

11:20-11:40

Anna Hickman (JS)

11:40-12:00

Omer Gorashi (JS)

12:00-12:20

Yudi Dong (JS)

12:20-12:40

Matias Hendi (JP)

12:40-13:00

Nancy Wang (JS)

13:00-14:00

LUNCH

14:00-14:20

Trenton Rhodes (JP)

14:20-14:40

Daniel Legare (JP)

14:40-15:00

Genesis Rodgers (JP)

15:00-15:20

Sam Maguire (JP)

15:20-15:40

Gabriela Rodas (JP)

15:40-16:00

María-Emilia Proano (JP)

16:00-16:20

Cheyenne Yamada (JP)

16:20-16:40

Jole Magenheimer (JP)

16:40-17:00

Dylan Gibbs (JP)

17:00-17:20

Julia Hunger (JP)

17:20-17:40

Grabriel Andrade (JP) FINAL DISCUSSION

62

63

GUEST REVIEWERS Carlos Jiménez [Rice Architecture] Carlos Jiménez is an architect, educator and author. After graduating from the University of Houston College of Architecture, he established Carlos Jiménez Studio in 1983. As a tenured Professor at Rice University School of Architecture, Jiménez is a frequent lecturer and critic, and from 2001– 2011, he was a jury member of the Pritzker Architecture Prize. His many built works include the Central Administration and Junior School for the Museum of Fine Arts Houston and the Tyler School of Art at Temple University.

Konstantina Tzemou [AECOM] Konstantina is an urban designer and architect based in New York City. She currently collaborates with AECOM Technology Corporation, Design and Consulting Services in the Northeast Region. Konstantina holds a Master’s degree in Urban Design from Harvard University and a 5-year professional Diploma in Architecture from University of Patras – School of Engineering, Greece. Konstantina has served as Research Associate at Harvard University and has collaborated with multidisciplinary teams on architecture, urban design and planning projects in Greece, UK, France, USA, UAE and China.

Pablo Pérez-Ramos [Harvard GSD] Pablo Pérez-Ramos is Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. He holds Doctor of Design and Master in Landscape Architecture degrees from the GSD, and is a licensed architect from the Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura de Madrid (ETSAM). He has been a member of the editorial board of the New Geographies journal between 2013 and 2018, and co-editor-in-chief of New Geographies 08: Island (Harvard GSD, 2016). His writing has also been published in A Line in the Andes (Harvard GSD, 2012), MONU (2014), Urban Landscape: Critical Concepts in Built Environment (Routledge, 2015) and Architecture is All Over (Columbia University Press, 2017).

64

Marshall Prado [University of Tennesee, School of Architecture] Marshall Prado is an Assistant Professor of Design and Structural Technology at the University of Tennessee and doctoral candidate at the Insititute of Computational Design at the University of Stuttgart. He holds a Bachelor of Architecture from North Carolina State University and advanced degrees as a Master of Architecture and a Master of Design Studies in Technology from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design. Marshall has previously taught at the University of Stuttgart and University of Hawaii and has been an invited studio critic at the University of Pennsylvania, Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Michigan and the Wentworth Institute of Technology. He has led several workshops on computational design and fabrication techniques. His current research interests include the integration of computation and fabrication techniques into lightweight material systems and spatial design strategies.

Ajay Manthripragada [Rice Architecture] Prior to coming to Rice, Ajay Manthripragada taught core and advanced design studios at UC Berkeley, where he also directed InArch, the post-baccalaureate program in architecture, from 2014-2016. He has been an invited guest critic at Cornell, RISD, Harvard, and The Cooper Union. Manthripragada holds a Bachelor of Arts from UC Berkeley and a Master of Architecture from Princeton. He worked in various architecture firms in Paris, New York and San Francisco before founding his own studio in 2014. The office has completed several small projects since its inception, including a new house and art gallery in Berkeley. Manthripragada’s work has been exhibited at the Graduate School of Design at Harvard and the School of Architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology. In 2018, Manthripragada was nominated for the Mies Crown Hall Amercias Prize as an emerging practictioner. Manthripragada’s Wortham Fellowship research takes up questions of the use of architectural precedent apart from its signifying capacities. The project seeks to devise and situate a new model for the presence of historical references in design studio pedagogy.

65

Almudena Ribot [Penn State, Stuckeman School of Architecture] Almudena Ribot joined the faculty of the Department of Architecture in the fall of 2018. Prior to that she was a professor of design at the School of Architecture ETSAM, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid. Her academic interests focus on three interrelated fields: industrialization, customization and environmental, social and economic sustainability. She lead the Design Studio Group UD.RIBOT, also called CoLaboratorio, which included three additional instructors at the graduate and undergraduate levels. Almudena also co-directs her own architecture studio since 1990. Her practice focuses on the priority of systems and construction as project languages, in particular the use of industrial systems and customizable solutions. One important project to this regard is, among 44 works executed, CUATRO 50 Industrialized Housing System, co-directed since 2007. In academic education, Almudena is interested in collaborative processes. In 2009, she co-founded the CoLaboratorio Group: Manufacturing, Prototyping and Collaboration, in which she has developed projects, teaching, and research with this focus.

66

Internal Reviewers JT Bachman JT Bachman is a registered architect, co-founder and principal of Office of Things, an architecture collaborative that explores the multiplicities of a constructed environment that is at once playful and rigorous, clean and dirty, high and low. Based out of New York City, San Francisco, and Charlottesville, OO-T’s work spans a wide range of project types, including immersive architectural installations, interactive environments, retail projects, and strategic planning and design for contemporary offices. Prior to joining UVA, JT received his Master of Architecture degree from Yale University, where he was awarded the AIA Henry Adams Certificate upon graduation. He completed his Bachelor of Design in Architecture at the University of Florida, and spent a semester abroad studying at the Vicenza Institute of Architecture. Prior to founding Office of Things, he worked at Studio Gang Architects in Chicago and the LAB at Rockwell Group in New York City.

Ehsan Baharlou Ehsan Baharlou is an Assistant Professor of Architecture, Advanced Technologies, in the School of Architecture at UVA. His work focuses on integrating design computation and the process of materialization. His research aims to bridge the gap and mediate the cyber-physical interactions between complex forms and advanced manufacturing tools, shifting from a paradigm of abstracted computational design toward an integration of both physical (fabrication and production) and digital investigations. He completed his post-doctoral associate ‘18 at MIT in the Department of Architecture, in Prof. Mark Goulthorpe’s group (Composite Architectures). His post-doctoral research concentrated on the automated production of composite housing and the development of the CAD/CAM software customization in composite architectures. He earned his PhD ‘17 under the supervision of Prof. Achim Menges at Institute for Computational Design and Construction (ICD), University of Stuttgart. His doctoral research focused on the integration of

67

fabrication and construction constraints into a computational model for the realization of informed form generation.

Ila Berman Ila Berman, DDes, Dean of the School of Architecture, and Edward E. Elson Professor at the University of Virginia is an architect, theorist, and curator of architecture and urbanism whose research investigates the relationship between culture and the evolution of contemporary material, technological and spatial practices. She is a featured alumna of Harvard University’s Grounded Visionaries series and the recipient of numerous awards and fellowships including the Lieutenant Governor’s Medal for Design, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada Fellowships, a Special Achievement Award from the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching from Tulane University, where she was a Favrot Professor, founding director of the URBANbuild program, and the Associate Dean of the School of Architecture until 2007. She has also held academic administrative appointments as the O’Donovan Director of the University of Waterloo School of Architecture, and the Director of the School of Architecture at CCA in San Francisco.

Anselmo Canfora Anselmo Canfora founded Initiative reCOVER at the University of Virginia in 2007. Initiative reCOVER is a research project established to assist underserved populations through partnerships with humanitarian, community-based organizations, professional firms, and manufacturers. In the classroom and in the field reCOVER promotes a collaborative entrepreneurial interdisciplinary spirit in service of hands-on, design-build learning experiences, and the advancement of building technologies, methods, and materials. Based on a fundamental philosophy that design and building processes are dialectically interdependent, a building is not simply considered a result, outcome, or even a product of design, but instead it is promoted as a collaborative effort well informed by thoughtful research, substantive interdisciplin-

68

ary exchanges, and direct community involvement. Canfora’s research and teaching center on two recurring themes in the architecture discipline: The tools and craft of building, and the people for whom buildings are made.

John Comazzi Professor Comazzi’s teaching, research, and scholarship focus on the following areas: mid-century Modern architecture and design; design theory and criticism; architecture photography; the design of active learning environments for PK-12 education; design for healthcare environments; and design-build practices for community development. He is the author a monograph on Balthazar Korab, one of the most prolific and celebrated architecture photographers of the Modern era (Balthazar Korab: Architect of Photography, Princeton Architectural Press, 2012), and is currently writing a monograph on the Miller House and Gardens in Columbus, IN (forthcoming from Princeton Architectural Press, 2019). He joined the faculty in the School of Architecture at the University of Virginia in the Fall of 2017 as the Director of the Design Thinking Concentration. Prior to joining the faculty at the University of Virginia, he held teaching positions at the University of Michigan (Lecturer 1999-2006), and the University of Minnesota (Assistant Professor 2006-2012, Associate Professor with Tenure 2012-2017) where he was the Director of the Undergraduate B.S. Degree Program (Major in Architecture) from 2012-2015.

Elgin Cleckley Elgin Cleckley is a designer, educator, and creative director of _mpathic design, a Design Thinking initiative and practice focusing on strategies for empathic, human valued design. After studying architecture at the University of Virginia and Princeton University, he collaborated with DLR Group (Seattle), MRSA Architects (Chicago), and Baird Sampson Neuert Architects (Toronto) on award-winning civic projects. He was a Muschenheim Fellow at the University of Michigan (1998), also teaching undergraduate studios at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Before joining UVa’s Design Thinking program

69

in 2016, he was the 3D Group Leader and Design Coordinator at the Ontario Science Centre (Toronto), Science Content and Design Department, and Agents of Change Initiative, since 2001. This work produced award-winning exhibitions and public art with international artists David Rokeby, Michael Awad, Steve Mann, and Stacy Levy. Elgin teaches Design Thinking studios and seminars at the University of Virginia, also directing the School’s Design Thinking program in Ghana.

Mona El Khafif Mona El Khafif [Dr. techn. Dipl. Ing.], is an Associate Professor at UVA School of Architecture and Principal of SCALESHIFT. She received her professional degree in Architecture from the RWTH Aachen and her doctoral degree in Urban Design from the TU Vienna. El Khafif taught at the TU Vienna at the Institute for Urban Design [2000-2006], Tulane University [2006-2008], California College of the Arts [2008-2013], and the University of Waterloo [2013-12016], where she co-directed the school’s DATAlab. She is co-author of ‘URBANbuild: Local/Global’ and author of ‘Staged Urbanism”. Her research operates at multiple scales, examining the interdisciplinary aspects of urban design, creative place making, urban prototyping, and strategies for the smart city. At UVA El Khafif is the RCN director of the NSF Grant MainStreet21 and co-directs the Smart Environments project.

Belen González Aranguren Belen González Aranguren is architect and urban planner who graduated with a Master of Architecture degree from The Technical University of Architecture of Madrid (NAAB Substantial Equivalency Accreditation), with Honorable Mention in 2016. She obtained the ERASMUS Scholarship in FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CHILE (Santiago de Chile) for one year. She has been invited to carry out teaching activities at the European University and IED School, as well as at her alma mater, The Superior Technical School of Architecture of Madrid.She is inscribed in the International Doctoral Program in Cross-sectional Studies of Architecture and Urbanism (PHD) by the UPM and The ETSAM. Belen’s research exam-

70

ines the radical impact on the form and conception of architecture and the city of technology derived from data networks, the smartphone and social networks. In August 2018, she joined the architecture faculty at UVA School of Architecture. She currently teaches two different studios. Belen González Aranguren’s international work has focused on development cooperation, developed from when she was awarded the Bilateral Agreement Scholarship for a year of study in Chile. There she carried out development cooperation work with two large organizations: “A roof for Chile” and “Children and City”, two cooperation initiatives where she worked collaboratively to design and build housing for people with limited resources.

Lucia Phinney A Lecturer at the University of Virginia since 1981, Lucia Phinney has been a Distinguished Lecturer since 1996. Lucia Phinney notes that while common sense reveals a vital biotic and meteorological milieu, representations of new construction nearly always portray buildings as sited in a context of blank surfaces. Seeking to remedy this lapse, her research and studio teaching are directed towards the rescue of the natural world through both representation and presentation. Her work explores the means to reveal rather than erase the incredible potential for natural systems to effectively engage and inform the places we make. Drawing on the history of painting, poetry, drama, and music, where hypotheses about the relationship between nature and the human condition are a constant thematic presence, she and her students propose interventions that change the definition of architecture to encompass natural process. Lucia Phinney has addressed these issues outside of the classroom through \”The Covesville Odyssey\”, a hypothetical reconstruction of the island landscape and home of Odysseus (a metaphorical tale of how humans dwell in the natural world); and through the research and design associated with the management of the gardens, fields, and forests of a farm in the Virginia Piedmont. Lucia Phinney’s recent work has been published in the following books and magazines: House Beautiful; Elle Décor; Storage, by Sally Clark; Architects House Themselves by Michael Webb; and Eighteen Houses, W. Jude LeBlanc, ed. A 2003 graduate in Landscape Architecture

71

at the University of Virginia, her master’s thesis examines the possibility that weather construction can instigate active urban life.

Inés Martín Robles Inés focuses her professional practice on the submission of international architectural competitions. Associated with Luis Pancorbo, she has won 17 awards in different competitions and 10 awards for their built work, including the recent AZ Awards in Canada, AR awards of AIA, and the ACSA Faculty Design Award. Their work has been published in numerous international magazines. Her research interests focus on Modern Spanish and Ibero-American architecture, on the survival of the past through tradition, and on the role of memory for architectural design methodology. She has widely published in peer review journals and achieved a Ph.D with a dissertation entitled “Tradition in Julio Cano Lasso”.

Luis Pancorbo Luis focuses his professional practice on the submission of international architectural competitions. Associated with Inés Martín Robles, he has won 17 awards in different competitions and 10 awards for their built work, including the recent AZ Awards in Canada, AR awards of AIA, and the ACSA Faculty Design Award. Their work has been published in numerous international magazines. His research interests focus on the technical dimension of architecture and its influence on the methodology of architectural design, American industrial architecture, and industrial ruins and derelict productive landscapes. He has widely published in peer review journals and achieved a Ph.D with a dissertation entitled “Albert Kahn Inc. Architecture as a Technical Object”. Luis Pancorbo has been for 8 years associate Professor in the School of Architecture of Madrid (ETSAM), and from 2011 to 2015 associate Professor in ESNE School of Design, Madrid.

72

Katie Stranix Katie Stranix is a registered architect, principal and co-founder of Office of Things, a design collaborative based in New York and Charlottesville that explores the multiplicities of the constructed environment that is at once playful and rigorous, clean and dirty, high and low. Founded in 2015, OO-T reexamines and reinterprets design issues, allowing the unexpected to arise through collaboration and nonlinear design. Stranix’s work and research with OO-T focuses on immersive architecture and environments that interrupt the ordinary and familiar through the manipulation of form, color, light and sound.

Prior to joining UVA, Stranix worked as a project architect at Studio Gang Architects on a number of community-centric cultural and public projects.

She is a graduate of the University of Virginia where she was awarded the Faculty Award for Design Excellence and of the Yale School of Architecture where she received the William Wirt Winchester Fellowship, the Lord Norman R. Foster Scholarship and the Wendy Elizabeth Blanning Prize.

Peter Waldman Peter Waldman is rumored to have quarried mica ever since his early childhood explorations of the wilderness of New York City more than half a century ago. He studied architecture from 1961-69, first at Princeton University, and later as a Peace Corps volunteer in Arequipa, Peru. He served his apprenticeship in the studios of Richard Meier briefly and more substantially with Michael Graves. Since the 1970s, he has been an architect and educator teaching first at Princeton, then at Rice University and currently at the University of Virginia, where he is now firmly grounded in the Piedmont condition. His extensive residential practice has been concerned with the Climatic House constructed according to Specifications for Construction executed by Nomads, Surveyors and Lunatics. His fables of the Gardener and the Engineer manifest his profound respect for the spirit and resources of the renewable American urban condition. Published internationally in Global Architecture, Area, Architecture and recently the Yale Perspecta, Waldman is winner of several Progressive Architecture design citations, Urban Design Competitions, and New Jersey AIA Design Awards.

73

74

75

BIBLIOGRAPHY On Housing Ábalos, Iñaki. The Good Life: A Guided Visit to the Houses of Modernity. (Park Books, 2000).

Alday, Iñaki. Aprendiendo de todas sus casas. Textos i Documents d Arquitectura. (Escola Tècnica Superior d ‘Arquitectura del Vallés, 1996).

Aravena, Alejandro. Elemental: Incremental Housing and Participatory Design Manual. (Hatje Cantz. 2016.)

Byrson, Bill. At Home: A Short Story of Private Life. Transworld Publishers, 2010).

Ebner, Peter. Typology + Innovative Residential Architecture. (Basel: Birkhauser, 2009).

French, Hillary. Key Urban Housing of the Twentieth Century. (W.W. Norton & Company, 2008).

Leupen, Bernard with Harald Mooij. Housing Design: A Manual. (NAi 010 Publishers. 2012).

Levitt, David. The Housing Design Handbook: A Guide to Good Practice.

(New York: Routledge, 2009).

McAlester, Virginia. A Field Guide to American Houses: The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America’s Domestic Architecture. (New York: Knopf, 2013).

Mozas, Javier with Fernandez Per, Densidad: nueva vivienda colectiva/ Density: New Collective Housing. (Alava: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2007).

76

Oliver, Paul. Dwellings: The House Across the World. (Austin: University of Texas Press. 1987).

Per, Fernandez. Ten Stories of Collective Housing: Graphical Analysis of Inspiring Masterpieces. (Alava: a+t Architecture Publishers, 2013).

Per, Fernandez. Density projects: 36 nuevos conceptos de vivienda colectiva / 36 New Concepts on Collective Housing. (a+t architecture Publishers, 2007).

Schneider, Friederike with Oliver Heckmann. Floor Plan Manual Housing.

(Birkhauser, 2011.)

Schoenauer, Norbert. 6,000 Years of Housing. (W. W. Norton & Company.

2003).

Rapoport, Amos. House, Form, and Culture. (Pearson, 1969.)

Rowe, Peter. Modernity and Housing. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995).

Rybczynski, Witold. Home: A Short History of an Idea. (Penguin Books, 1987).

On the Poetics of Architecture Zumthor, Peter. Atmospheres. Birkhäuser, 2006 On Architecture, Urbanism, and Culture Allen, Stan. Points and Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999).

77

Chermayeff, Serge; Alexander, Christopher. Community and Privacy: Toward a New Architecture of Humanism. (New York: Anchor Books, 1965).

Correa, Felipe. Sao Paolo: A Graphic Biography, (University of Texas Press, 2018).

Gandelsonas, Mario. X-Urbanism: Architecture and the American City. (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999).

Rapoport, Amos. Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man-Environment Approach to Urban Form and Design. (Franklin Book Co, 1977).

On Architectural Visualization Atelier Bow Wow, Graphic Anatomy 2 (Tokyo: Toto, 2014).

Ching, Francis. Architectural Graphics. (Wiley, 2015).

Lewis, Paul with Marc Tsurumaki and David J. Lewis, Manual of Section, (Princeton Architectural Press, 2016).

Tufte, Edward. Envisioning Information, (Cheshire: Graphics Press, 1990).

Uddin, Saleh. Hybrid Drawing: Techniques by Contemporary Architects and Designers (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999).

On Fundamentals of Building Construction Allen, Edward with Joseph Iano, The Architect’s Studio Companion: Rules of Thumb for Preliminary Design. (Wiley, 2017).

78

American Institute of Architects, Architectural Graphic Standards 12th Ed. (Wiley, 2016).

Ching, Francis. Building Construction Illustrated, 5th Ed. (Wiley, 2014).

Cover Image “Habitat and the City�: Competition Entry by W. Neutelings, A. Wall, X. De Geyter and F. Roodbeen (1990)

79

N OT E S

80

81

N OT E S

82

83

N OT E S

84