Gestures: Opacity Series 05

O P A C I T Y S E R I E S 05

O P A C I T Y S E R I E S 05

INTRODUCTION

Letter from the Editor

4

Opacity Initiative

5

Jurors

8

Deliberations

20

Data

43

PROJECTS

Selected Works

47

Mentioned Works

97

Cited Works

117

NEXT

Afterword

134

Credits

136

© 2022, HDR. All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher.

ISBN: 978-1-7358025-1-0 We practice increased use of sustainable materials and reduction of material use.

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Over the past year and a half, many of us have become more attuned to the word gesture. We have witnessed gestures of kindness from neighbors when they deliver groceries or Thanksgiving plates; gestures of solidarity with a right fist in the air; gestures of compassion with monetary donations to causes we care about. Wearing a mask at the grocery store has become a gesture of community care, and more recently, so has getting a COVID-19 vaccination. In a world separated during a pandemic and civil unrest, for most of us, all we have been able to provide are gestures, big or small.

When we cannot physically be there for one another, all we have are our signifiers.

During the 2021 Opacity jury, I found that jurors remarked not only on the design elements of each project but also on what each of those elements signified. Certainly, a well-articulated stair could stand beautifully on its own—but how that stair generated social spaces and thus greater metaphorical connection between users, was discussed as a gesture.

Similarly, context played a crucial role in conversations: Careful consideration given to a project’s surrounding community served as a strength in many of the projects you’ll read about in the following pages. These elements include grand entryways or outdoor social stairs, two planning strategies that connect these new projects to nearby residential or commercial areas. Even something small—like material choices or the addition of a singular window—were gestures of care toward communities that may not use the building, but who are subjected to its presence.

As a professor who teaches writing to my students, I call this practice a ‘tonal observation.’ I invite my students to revisit even small interactions with friends or colleagues with an analytical lens to better understand how their words, punctuation, or body language communicate bigger ideas or emotions. Understanding that much of their communication takes place in rapid exchanges—text messages, emails, emojis— just how much are they communicating with so few words? As designers, we need to ask what we are saying to our buildings’ users, clients, or even passers-by with our design decisions.

In this edition of the Opacity journal, I invite you, the readers, to also consider the ways that we indirectly communicate our intentions or ideologies to others. We might meditate upon the built environment as a gesture to our communities both locally and globally with an exercise in radical empathy. How others interpret our gestures is of critical importance as we encounter those of other backgrounds or cultures, who speak other languages or move through the world with different levels of ability. When we encounter sustainability or accessibility we ask ourselves, “Is this a statement I am making, or is this a gift?”

We all have our signifiers that we use each day, waving hello to our neighbors or sending a lackluster “ok” in a text message. But when your job is to build the world we inhabit—an enormous responsibility—we learn the power of gestures; their ability to bring us together, to invite us in, to share with one another, to care for the planet, to pay homage to the past, and to connect communities.

Anjulie Rao, Editor Opacity Journal 05

5

L etter f rom the editor

O PA C I T Y I N I T I AT I V E

The Opacity Initiative is the “measure of our design conscience,” a way for HDR to revisit and understand our work from outside perspectives. It is a yearly design review in which outside experts from varied disciplines are invited to evaluate the firm’s work and offer their feedback.

Jurors gathered this year at the James Stirling building at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Shown here, left to right, are Aaron Betsky, Edward Keegan, Allison Grace Williams, Paul Makovsky and Scott Cohen.

7

O pacit y I nitiative

ALLISON GRACE WILLIAMS CHAIRWOMAN

FAIA, NCARB, LEED AP, NOMA Founder, AGWms_studio San Francisco, California, USA

Architect Allison Grace Williams has amassed an international portfolio of large-scale civic, cultural, and research works in 40 years of practice as a design leader with SOM, Perkins & Will, and AECOM. Notably, her work includes the August Wilson Center, the Health and Sciences Campus for Princess Abdulrahman University for Women, the U.S. Port of Entry at Calexico, and research laboratories for NASA Langley and NASA Ames. ​In 2017, Williams founded AGWms_studio‚ where design consulting for clients, frequent lectures, occasional studio teaching, design competition and awards juries, pro bono activities, and making (art, building, and inventing) are the mainstay. She is an adjunct lecturer at Stanford University and two-term Visiting Committee chair at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design (GSD).

Williams holds an M.Arch from UC Berkeley’s College of Environmental Design (CED), a BA in the Practice of Art, also from UC Berkeley, and was a Loeb Fellow at Harvard GSD. In 2015, she was named Berkeley CED’s Distinguished Alumni in Architecture. In 2018, Williams was awarded the Norma Sklarek Award by the AIA California Council and recently joined the board of directors for Designing Justice + Designing Spaces.

What does it mean to you to be the chair of a jury, and what are your role and responsibilities?

My responsibility as chair, I think, is to make sure that we don’t float above the real issues, but engage not only in critiquing the work but in understanding and demanding a high level of review of what the real issues are in designing holistically. It’s not just about how it looks. It’s not just about the program. It’s about all these things, but layered onto that it’s about many of the issues that are fundamental in the world today—climate change, social issues, interdisciplinary design process— and trying to make sure that they become part of the dialogue.

Each jury is different. But I think that the mix of individuals on the jury had their own relationship to the profession whether they are practicing in a firm or are writers or critics or teachers. I think it brought this particular mixture of awareness of what’s going on across the profession, not just within the frame of their own practice.

Tell me about what the jury looked for in winning projects. What did they gravitate to?

Last year the jury was held virtually and this year we were in person. Can you reflect on how the group dynamics changed or were different this year?

The experience of a jury happens in ‘in-between’ moments: The spontaneous interaction that jurors have as they get to know one another, as they throw some ideas around that may not be specific to a particular project, but more about where the profession is today, what’s important today, and the way that a building problem is solved. So, when it was remote, we didn’t have as much of that in-between spontaneity. In person, we understood everyone’s background, point of view, hot buttons for discussions. It was a return to the full experience of being on a jury and the things that enrich the jury’s ability to evaluate the work.

Some of the winning projects were smaller-scale projects. What can a large firm like HDR bring to small projects?

In the range of things that we were looking at, I think the smaller projects were the stronger projects. They dealt with a level of precision about place, relevance, and materiality. And maybe they presented perhaps in a way that allowed the unfamiliar person who doesn’t know the project to quickly digest with purpose what made this project uniquely itself. With a lot of the big projects, that’s the difficulty. HDR produces some really wonderful large-scale projects, and I do remember that there were a number of projects that we awarded, that were of larger scale. They were notable because of the way they engage the urban context, their urban design contribution, their attitude about public space, their attitude about enclosure, and formal or informal ways of kind of creating some kind of dialogue with their surroundings.

9 J urors

We were looking for projects that weren’t just solving the problems that are right in front of them. We appreciated those projects that not only solved those problems inventively but also with an awareness of issues that are tangential to the building itself. Its location, its users, its budget, and design excellence—which is the subject of Opacity that things need to be seamless, that the layers are there, but they’re working in a seamless way. So that you don’t look at a project and say, “Boy, that’s really sustainable,” or, “Boy, that really uses the site.” In terms of a thorough analysis of excellence, it’s all of those things working together seamlessly.

AARON BETSKY

Director, School of Architecture and Design, Virginia Tech Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

Aaron Betsky is director of the School of Architecture and Design at Virginia Tech. Previously, he was president of the School of Architecture at Taliesin.

A critic of art, architecture, and design, Betsky is the author of over a dozen books on those subjects, including forthcoming volumes on Frank Lloyd Wright, and the landscape architecture firm Turenscape. He writes a twiceweekly blog for architectmagazine.com, Beyond Buildings.

Trained as an architect and in the humanities at Yale University, Betsky has served as the director of the Cincinnati Art Museum (2006 – 2014) and the Netherlands Architecture Institute (2001 – 2006), as well as curator of Architecture and Design at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (1995 – 2001). In 2008, he also directed the 11th Venice International Biennale of Architecture. His latest books, Making It Modern and Architecture Matters, were published in 2016 and 2017 respectively.

Reflecting on the jury experience, what types of themes or ideas emerged from the projects that you reviewed that you are particularly interested in or attracted to?

It was heartening to see a large firm such as HDR make room within its practice for some very good designs that serve the various communities in which it operates. The ability to apply its skills in creating good spaces with a great sensitivity to light, scale, and to their surroundings.

In projects that might not have the same budgets as some of its corporate or lab work, this was especially nice to see. I was interested in some of the experimentation it’s doing in the field of healthcare design and was especially excited to see the hospital in Shenzhen and the attempt to rethink the floor plan of a big hospital.

Having read your article about category errors in Architect magazine, could you explain category errors and describe how they manifested in some of the work that you saw?

Could you speculate on why this happens, why do these glitches occur?

They occur when designers are trying to do too much or when they don’t fully control all the different elements that need to go into the building. They can control them in terms of perhaps budget or space allocation, but then putting the whole thing together doesn’t quite work.

Because you’re in the academic environment, and you work as a critic, and you have professional training, how do architects benefit from this type of exercise; one that pulls them back into this academic experience of having outsiders come and review their work?

The best architects are always open to critiques and discussions among their colleagues and know that they can be a very fruitful way of developing your own work. Way back when, when I was in Los Angeles, we organized a series called Out There Doing It, in which young designers showed their work to each other. And sometimes they were pretty intense. But people came back for more because they felt as if it was helping their work develop. And similarly, I think some architects will invite their friends or colleagues to look at their work.

In more recent years, there have been quite a few larger firms in the United States that have invited these kinds of groups of outsiders to look at the work, which I think it’s a very smart thing to do. Because when you develop a corporate culture that is as thorough as HDR’s, you sometimes miss the opportunities to test what you’re doing in front of trained and objective outsiders. I really laud HDR for doing that and for continuing to do so.

11 J urors

We found a few projects where there was confusion between what was the front of the building, what was the back, and what the main elements were.

We also found some places where the designers were trying to do too much with a façade and trying to bring together many different compositions.

In the end, you weren’t sure whether something was meant to look like a solid wall, a line of columns, a set of panels placed next to each other, or a transparent façade with screens in front of it. There was this problem in some of the projects with understanding the orders and hierarchies that go into making a building. And I think that those category errors also reflect, in some cases, a larger confusion about the nature of the building and its place within its context. And again, not all of the work, but we found some.

PRESTON SCOTT COHEN

Professor, Harvard University Graduate School of Design Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

Preston Scott Cohen is the chair and Gerald M. McCue Professor of Architecture at Harvard University Graduate School of Design (GSD) and is the principal designer at Preston Scott Cohen, Inc. His buildings aim to exemplify an expanding repertoire of architectural form, a goal directly related to his core curriculum at the GSD. The firm’s work exemplifies a new, highly disciplined alliance between architectural typology, geometry and digital modeling.

Cohen’s projects, commissioned by private owners, institutions, government agencies and corporations, involve diverse scales and programs including houses, educational facilities, cultural institutions, office and retail buildings, and urban designs.

Cohen’s work has been widely published and exhibited internationally in numerous collections, as well as been the subject of numerous theoretical assessments by renowned critics and historians. Cohen has held faculty positions at Princeton University, Rhode Island School of Design, Ohio State University, University of Toronto, and the University of California, Los Angeles.

In 2014, Cohen was inducted into the National Academy for his exceptional creative work and contribution to the arts. Other honors and awards include first prizes in seven international architectural competitions. He is the author of Contested Symmetries and numerous theoretical and historical essays on architecture and he lectures regularly around the world.

What were some of the highlights of the jury process?

It was a wonderful opportunity to hear about a practice that has such a diversity of projects that deal with so many issues that architects are focused on. The reason I was so excited to have HDR at Harvard, to be able to discuss with them what we’re doing and hear what they’re doing, was to understand the interrelation between practice and the academy today. It was an exceptional occasion, illuminating a lot of important issues that are significantly informing what’s happening in practice today—the innovations, initiatives, and strategies for dealing with the city and the environment.

As an architect and as an educator, what type of projects or project qualities are you most drawn to?

What qualities make for an excellent submission, particularly when you’re thinking of it being evaluated by an outside jury?

It is useful to see a very thorough documentation of the plans and the section, which helps us read the project. Of course, the photography is crucial: I think there were a few photographs of very specific points in the building, or particularly experiences of inhabitants in the building, that zeroed in on something important. As far as the design process, I do think it is also helpful to see analysis, the drawing precedent references that were important, or even sketches and variations that were considered at the initial stage of design that shows the irreducible form of the idea. It can help the jury focus their attention the way you would like them to.

Do you think that there’s any value in expressing or representing messier parts of the design process, particularly in community projects where we know the process can be filled with friction?

That would be interesting. In some of these cases, when something happened— the way the building is sited, or some element was introduced— that gives back to the community in a unique way, it becomes catalytic, creating turning points in the process. It might be an interesting idea to identify the timeline of the events that occurred along the way; to track the point during the design process wherein the intervention of other voices might have impacted the results. And what you’re talking about is the participation of others, not just the architects, clients, or developers making important decisions, but including the participants that helped shape the outcome and representing that as a collective effort.

13 J urors

One of the standout ideas that seems to be coursing through the HDR practice is to highlight what would seem to be something internal to the program or the site that could be given unusual emphasis, and to elevate it to a very high quality—even while many other aspects of the project would proceed to be governed by issues like economy of means, and other standards that, relatively speaking, dictate how buildings have to be today like material and environmental issues. Some projects would, for example, just focus on harvesting natural light in a very beautiful way; some would have a very particular way of handling access by introducing a promenade ramping—an approach to circulation that’s really exceptional, while the rest of the domain remains relatively conventional. Some projects would make one exceptional element in the site that drew attention to a lot of conditions in the site, even though most of the building remained straightforward. This is a way to deal with what so many of us are struggling with: how to meet all of the demands of codes and efficiency and environmental regulations that we ourselves want to affirm and still offer people an experience that is remarkable.

EDWARD KEEGAN

Architect, Author and Educator Chicago, Illinois, USA

Edward Keegan is an architect, writer, curator, broadcaster, and educator who has used these diverse platforms as an outspoken critic and strong advocate for the profession for more than three decades.

The author of two books, Keegan is a contributing editor for ARCHITECT magazine and writes regularly for Builder and Crain’s Chicago Business.

He has written for Architecture, Architectural Record, Architectural Lighting, Azure, Contract, Custom Home, Residential Architect, Metropolis, Interior Design, Chicago, Chicago Architect, the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times, and Inland Architect.

He has curated numerous exhibitions and, as a journalist and broadcaster, has interviewed some of the most noted architects and museum directors of our time. On a more popular note, Keegan has interviewed documentary filmmaker Ken Burns and baseball broadcaster Bob Uecker about architecture.

Keegan has taught architecture at the University of Notre Dame, Archeworks, Andrews University, and the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

You’re trained as an architect, but you’re also a critic. How do the skills and expertise you have in each field inform or speak to one another while you evaluate projects as a juror.

When I was an undergraduate at the University of Virginia, we had a core class called Concepts in Architecture. We had a notebook where, on one side of the page, you would write your lecture notes.

The facing page was split into two columns: the first column was for commentary on what the lecture was about—teaching us how to think critically about what we were told. Several times during the semester, the notebook was given to our TA and professor, who would make comments on our commentary in the second column. I’ve used this structured feedback loop throughout my entire career, the idea being that to be an architect is to critically evaluate environments. There needs to be a feedback loop with clients, contractors, building officials, users, and community groups. It’s a large ecosystem that architects operate in at any given time.

Since you're a writer, I want to hear your thoughts on written project statements for submissions.

What tends to make for compelling statements? When are statements helpful and useful to jurors?

Could you say the same about unbuilt projects?

I think most people will look a little bit more at the text there because there’s less to go on. And one of the problems is photographs are not the best way to see a building. In some ways, we’re always reading shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave. There’s a suspicion of what the photograph is telling us—and a rendering is going to be less real.

What project qualities were you drawn to?

There were certain elements or methods of composition that I’ve always been drawn to. For example, the Brescia University project uses some interesting collage approaches to façades, taking elements that are on the campus but abstracting them in interesting ways. These are things that were very popular in the ‘70s and early ‘80s. To see a big firm looking at stuff from back in my early career, those interesting formal concepts, definitely drew me in. The Nebraska bank used some of those things that have been familiar ways of operating, and that I’ve seen throughout my entire career, but more subtly. So did the Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts. It wasn’t a topic that we talked a lot about among ourselves, but I feel that these are shorthands shared among the jury. Sometimes people aren’t even necessarily thinking about those things, but they actually guided us in some of the directions we went in.

15 J urors

For most jurors, and certainly this is true of my own deliberation, the first thing we do is look at pictures. If we were walking down the street and seeing these buildings, we would see them first before there would be any written material to go with it. And ultimately the building rises and falls there. If it doesn’t work visually, it’s probably not going to work at all—you don’t have docents describing what you’re seeing. I suspect other jurors may be on the same end of the spectrum. But when we got into our discussions after the first elimination round, the descriptions were helpful in understanding how the design was realized. One reason we had a lack of agreement on a project was that we were seeing different things. And in reality, the designers were, at least in their descriptions, telling us they were working in directions that we weren’t particularly interested in. It really is about how articulate architects can be as to what they’re doing and what issues they’re tackling.

PAUL MAKOVSKY

Editor-in-Chief, ARCHITECT Magazine Washington, DC, USA

An experienced editor, brand strategist and content producer, Paul Makovsky leverages his deep expertise in the architecture and design industry and his extensive network of contacts in the field to create content for diverse media platforms. He has investigated architecture and design at all scales, which gives him a unique perspective on the way architecture affects every aspect of our lives.

Makovsky was recently named editor-in-chief of ARCHITECT magazine.

Previously, he served as consultant of product development and strategic content for multiple architectural firms and product manufacturers. Prior to that, Makovsky spent two years as the editor-in-chief of Contract Magazine and 18 years at Metropolis magazine, progressing through multiple positions including as vice president of design, and editorial and brand director.

Makovsky started his career as the managing editor of 2wice Magazine, generating design, writing and research.

To begin, I’d love to hear a brief reflection on the jury experience, particularly the mixed professional experiences of the jury as a whole. What effect did this diversity of expertise have on your discussions?

It’s always great to have a diversity of expertise and experiences on a jury. That way you’ll always have someone on the jury who brings up an issue or point that everyone else has overlooked. Did you think about this? What about this detail here? It starts a conversation— and sometimes it ends one when someone points out where exactly a project misses a point.

Thinking about your expertise as an editor, what do you look for in a winning project submission?

What criteria about images or storytelling matter most to you?

General things to think about: Is it beautiful? Is it functional? Is it sustainable?

How would the user feel in the space? These are frequent questions I would ask myself when looking at a project.

The jury seemed drawn to projects that consider not just the building clients, but also the larger context or public interaction with the project. Could you speak about some of your favorite public gestures that acknowledge the public or the local context?

The types of projects that a firm chooses to work on will become more important to how we value that firm. The judges really loved the modest projects that had a deep impact on a community. Modest projects like the Gretna Branch or the Siena Francis Emergency Shelter show how architecture can have a deeper impact on the wider community.

As we measure what makes a ‘winning’ project, the idea of sustainability continues to evolve. We’re going beyond the material breakdown of a product or building: ‘It’s 95% recyclable!. It’s CLT!’ How do the materials we choose to use impact the communities where the material originated and as well as where they are ultimately being used? Increasingly, sustainability means it also has to consider equity in the wider equation, and what the deeper impact is on the communities the architect and designers are designing with and for.

As firms take on projects, they also have to ask themselves whether the project is bringing better value to the communities. Firms should ask themselves: “Is the process of designing and building a project making their practice a better place to work? Are we constantly mentoring younger firm employees?” When firm leaders are interviewed about a project for a story, are they including junior employees as well? Firms can use their projects as opportunities to continually mentor, promote, and elevate employees.

17 J urors

Architects and designers work in a visual language, so the image plays a crucial role in conveying the nature of a space. Some design magazine editors don’t like to have people in the spaces they show, I think it’s important to show people in projects. A few years ago, at an architect’s retrospective, the exhibition included videos of people using the spaces that the firm designed. I think we’re really in our infancy on how to better communicate spaces through video. Some lifestyle photographers do a great job of capturing the atmosphere of a space by showing how a space is used through interesting details. Many firms are still using a style of photography from decades ago. Architecture is always evolving, the way we use images to communicate architecture should evolve too.

D A Y 1

The first day of jury deliberations began with a process to review the 75 submissions.

All projects were displayed throughout the main deliberation room and selected the shortlist of projects they felt were worthy to proceed to the second round of conversation.

19

D eliberations

C I V I C

1 2 3

& C U L T U R E

4

5

6

1

Children’s Exploratorium, Richmond, British Columbia, Canada

2

Gretna Branch, Gretna, NE

3

District Wine Village, Oliver, British Columbia, Canada

4

Kingston Tennis Clubhouse, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

5

Confidential Museum, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

6

Judy Varner Adoption and Education Center, Omaha, NE

7

8

9

21 D eliberations D ay 1

7

University of Nebraska Omaha Ballpark, Omaha, NE

8

Second Chapter Winery, Oliver, British Columbia, Canada

9

McDonald Theater Renovation, Lincoln, NE

1 3 2 5 4 6

C O R P O R A T E

W O R K P L A C E

1

1917, Omaha, NE

5

2

NAE Urban Village, Erfurt, Thuringia, Germany

River’s Edge Office Building, Council Bluffs, IA

6

3

Kiewit Corporate Headquarters, Omaha, NE

4

JUMP Business Center, Bothell, WA

Orange County Sanitation District Administrative Headquarters, Fountain Valley, CA

D E F E N S E

1D 1E 2

3

Cyber Center of Excellence Headquarters, Ft. Gordon, Augusta, GA

1 E1

Bellevue Sustainability Learning Lab, Bellevue, NE

2

Brescia University Food School & Academic Pavilion, London, Ontario, Canada

3

Brendan Iribe Center for Computer Science and Engineering, College Park, MD

4

Chesebro Academic Center Renovations and Additions, Princeton, NJ

E D U C A T I O N

23 D eliberations D ay 1

1 D1

4

E D U C A T I O N

5

6 9

7 8

9

5

Elmor Stout School, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands

7

Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts, Lincoln, NE

6

Concordia University Music Center, Seward, NE

8

MaReCuM Hub, Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

9

NorthStar Expansions, Omaha, NE

10

12

11

11

13

14

25 D eliberations D ay 1

10

York University Neuroscience Facility, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

11

Wittson Hall McGoogan Library Renovation, Omaha, NE

12

Strauss Performing Arts Center, Omaha, NE

13

Wall of Hands, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

14

School of Public Health, Austin, TX

1

H E A L T H C A R E

1

Craig H. Neilson Rehablitation Hospital, Salt Lake City, UT

2

Gangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea

3

Grand Island Regional Medical Center, Grand Island, NE

2 4

3

5 7 6 7

4

Guilin Medical University Affiliated Hospital, Guilin, China

6

Moffitt Cancer Center, Hospital Expansion, Tampa, FL

5

Marina del Rey Replacement Hospital Project, Marina del Rey, CA

7

New Dunedin Hospital, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand

8

Orleans Heath Hub, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

10

Patient Care Pavilion, Lebanon, NH

9

Prince Edward County Memorial Hospital, Prince Edward, Ontario, Canada

11

One Flight Away, Conceptual Design Competition

12

13

Rhine Ordinance Barracks Medical Center, Kaiserslautern, RhinelandPalatinate, Germany Sheltering Arms Institute, Richmond, VA

8 9 10 12

11 13

27 D eliberations D ay 1

H E A L T H C A R E

14 16

15 17

18

19 1 2

14

Shenzhen Beijing Genomics Institute Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China

15

Siena Francis Miracles Treatment Facility, Omaha, NE

16

Sunac Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, Qingdao, China

17

The First Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China

18

Kathy & Joe Sanderson Children’s Tower, Jackson, MI

19

William Beaumont Army Medical Center, Fort Bliss, TX

1

Lakehouse, Summerland, British Columbia, Canada

2

Dunham House: Combat Wounded Care Residence, Omaha, NE

3

Siena Francis Emergency Shelter, Omaha, NE

R E S I D E N T I A L

S O C I A L

H O U S I & N G

3

1 3

2 4 6

5

7

S C I E N C E

29 D eliberations D ay 1

1

Anna-Marie and Stephen Kellen Research Building, Rochester, MN

2

Building 14 Systems Integration 3, Laurel, MD

3

Cambridge Semiconductor Research Centre, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom

4

Cedars-Sinai Biomanufacturing Center, West Hollywood, CA

5

Cedars-Sinai Innovation Center, West Hollywood, CA

6

Merlot 3 (M3), Maribyrnong, Melbourne, Australia

7

Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Welcome Center, Berkeley, CA

S C I E N C E

8 8 9 10

11

12

8

MPI Cloudspace, Heidelberg, BadenWürttemberg, Germany

9

National Institutes of Health Visitor’s Center, Research Triangle, NC

10

NASA Instrument Development Facility, Greenbelt, MD

11

Shanghai Pharma Research and Development Campus, Shanghai, China

12

Shanghai Pharma Ethiopia Pharmaceutical Factory, Addis Ababa, Oromia, Ethiopia

1 2

3

4 5

4 U R B A N & C O M M U N I T Y

D E V E L O P M E N T

6

8 7 9

31 D eliberations D ay 1

1

Community Tartan, New Waterford, Nova Scotia, Canada

2

Edgescape Tower, Council Bluffs, IA

3

Blockchains Innovation Park, NV

4

Makkah Gate, Makkah, Saudi Arabia

5

Mural, Lincoln, NE

6

Park 10, El Paso, TX

7

Platte River Prairies Revitalization, Wood River, NE

8

Power District Mixed-Use Redevelopment, Salt Lake City, UT

9

West Wing Lakeside Penticton, British Columbia, Canada

D A Y 2

Throughout the entirety of Day 2, jurors deliberated over the 36 shortlisted projects.

Viewing each project on the ‘big screen,’ jurors critiqued and debated vigorously, focusing often on details and design intentions.

33

D eliberations D ay 2

Anna-Marie and Stephen Kellen Research Building

Community Tartan

JUMP Business Center

NorthStar Expansions

School of Public Health

Behavioral Health Institute

Bellevue Sustainability Learning Lab

Confidential Museum

Kingston Tennis Clubhouse

One Flight Away

Second Chapter Winery

Brescia University Food School & Academic Pavilion

Dunham House: Combat Wounded Care Residence

Lakehouse

MaReCuM Hub

Orange County Sanitation District Administrative Headquarters

Shenzhen Beijing Genomics Institute Hospital

Siena Francis Emergency Shelter

Cambridge Semiconductor Research Centre

Chesebro Academic Center Renovations and Additions

Edgescape Tower

Children’s Exploratorium

Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts

Cobalt Credit Union Gretna Branch

Judy Varner Adoption and Education Center

35

Orleans Health Hub

Strauss Performing Arts Center

Merlot 3 (M3)

MPI Cloudspace

Park 10

University of Nebraska Omaha Ballpark

NAE Urban Village

Platte River Prairies Revitalization

Wall of Hands

Wittson Hall McGoogan Library Renovation

D eliberations D ay 2

McDonald Theater Renovation

D A Y 3

Day 3 was spent confirming final decisions and organizing projects into award categories: Selected, Mentioned, and Cited. Afterward, jury members participated in a Reveal of winners, sharing vital insight into their decision-making process. The Reveal, which also included commentary from HDR design leadership, was broadcasted virtually to attendees at offices around the globe.

37

D eliberations D ay 3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

39 D eliberations D ay 3

Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts

5

2

Cobalt Credit Union Gretna Branch

6

3

MaReCuM Hub

4

NorthStar Expansion

1

Siena Francis Emergency Shelter Brescia University Food School & Academic Pavilion

7

NAE Urban Village

8

Shenzhen Beijing Genomics Institute Hospital

9

Edgescape Tower

10

McDonald Theater Renovation

11

Merlot 3 (M3)

12

University of Nebraska Omaha Ballpark

PROJECT TYPOLOGY

1

4

1

3

C I V I C

E D U C A T I O N

14 H E A L T H C A R E

21

S C I E N C E

13

& C U L T U R E

9

1

1

1

RECOGNIZED

U R B A N &

6

D E F E N S E

1

2

41 D ata

C O M M U N I T Y

D E V E L O P M E N T

C W O O R R P K O P R L A A T C E E

S O C I A L H O U S I & N G

R E S I D E N T I A L

9

Of the 75 project submissions, the 12 recognized projects range in typology; the largest group consisted of four education projects, followed by three civic/ culture projects.

URBAN SUBURBAN RURAL

39 U R B A N

N/A

S

R

U

U

B

R

U

A

R

L

B

13

A N

22

An overview of all 75 submissions in context of project site.

PROJECT SIZE

10–50K SF

< 10K SF

51–100K SF Education (4) Corporate Workplace (2) Healthcare (1) Science (1) Urban & Community Development (1)

Education (5) Science (3) Civic & Culture (2) Healthcare (1) Urban & Community Development (2) Corporate Workplace (1) Residential & Social Housing (2) Civic & Culture (6) Residential & Social Housing (2) Education (1) Science (1)

510K–1.0 MILLION SF

110–250K SF

Healthcare (3) Science (2) Urban & Community Development (1) Education (1)

260–500K SF

Healthcare (3) Urban & Community Development (2) Civic & Culture (1) Corporate Workplace (1)

Healthcare (6) Science (1)

A distribution of all 75 submissions organized by area size and project typology.

D ata

1.5–5.0 MILLION SF

43

Healthcare (5) Science (4) Corporate Workplace (3) Defense (1) Education (1) Urban & Community Development (1)

PROJECT SIZE A proportional comparison of the final 12 projects by area size.

3,800

7,360

5,700

17,060 Edgescape Tower

University of Nebraska Omaha Ballpark

McDonald Theater Renovation

Cobalt Credit Union Gretna Branch

18,000

28,062

43,850

50,000 Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts

Siena Francis Emergency Shelter

Brescia University Food School & Academic Pavilion

NorthStar Expansions

We appreciated those projects that not only solved problems inventively, but also with an awareness of issues that are tangential to the building itself. Its location, its users, its budget, and design excellence—which is the subject of Opacity—those things need to be seamless; the layers are there, working in a seamless way.

Allison Grace Williams

2,025,702 Shenzhen Beijing Genomics Institute Hospital

45 667,147

MaReCuM Hub

D ata

495,140

NAE Urban Village

559,723

Merlot 3 (M3)

S E L E C T E

JOHNNY CARSON CENTER FOR EMERGING MEDIA ARTS

CO B A LT C R E D I T U N I O N GRETNA BRANCH

D

MARECUM HUB

N O R T H S TA R E X PA N S I O N S

SIENA FRANCIS E M E R G E N C Y S H E LT E R

49 SELECTED

COBALT CREDIT UNION GRETNA BRANCH

E L E VAT I O N

0

10 15 20

0

Cobalt Credit Union is the largest credit union in Nebraska and serves clients in 16 counties in Nebraska and Iowa. This new branch for the community of Gretna, just outside of metropolitan Omaha, is part of its effort to better serve rural communities.

High contrasting materials juxtapose an austere exterior with a warm and inviting interior. The exterior is clad with blackened zinc metal panels that provide durability while expressing high character through the natural inconsistencies and patina of material. Jurors appreciated that the cladding contradicts the rural setting, noting that the minimalist, long-and-low, striking exterior seems very much a part of the surrounding landscape while still standing out from it.

The interior uses glulam white oak for its heavy timber structure; micro-perforations in the wood wall and ceiling panels enhance acoustic performance. The jury considered some minor detailing issues where the oak paneling met the stark white walls, noting imperfections and awkwardness of certain interior volumes. But overall they found the space to be light and inviting.

10

15

20

L O C AT I O N

Gretna, Nebraska, USA CLIENT

Cobalt Credit Union STUDIO

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Interiors Engineering Planning + Consulting Lighting Design Landscape Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Matthew DeBoer Corie Dechant Joel Fairfax Tyson Fiscus Mitch Hain Ryan Hawley Alison Ingunza Kelsey Pierce Andrew R. Wilson Chandra Wondercheck

The entire south façade houses all employee offices. This façade is rotated a highly intentional five degrees to provide a clear line of sight from each employee workstation to the front entry vestibule. This assures that employees have clear visible sight lines to people coming in and from the facility and gives the customers peace of mind that they can see a team of familiar faces the moment they enter the building.

The clerestory form distinguishes the character for the project. From the exterior, the observer gets a glimpse of the warm wood interior glowing from inside. From the interior, ample daylight floods the public space from the clerestory windows and the raised ceiling provides a lofty sense of space.

SITE PLAN

0

25

50

100

51

SELECTED

Black Zinc Shell

White Oak Core

White Oak Structure

M AT E R I A L PA L E T T E I S O M E T R I C

JURY FEEDBACK

53

4

1

2

SELECTED

The project recalls the idioms of suburban buildings, but by using that zinc face and the hint of columns around the entrance and the formalized clerestory box—pieces that go into a normal suburban building— here they are subverted and abstracted and moved around to evoke something that goes beyond the suburban reality.

7

6

4

8

3 4 7 5 4

FLOO R PL AN

0

5

10

1

Entry

5

Vault

2

Conference Room

6

Employee Workroom

3

Teller Line

7

Building Utility

4

Office

8

Drive-through Lanes

20

55

SELECTED

57

SELECTED

JOHNNY CARSON CENTER FOR EMERGING MEDIA ARTS

Lincoln, Nebraska, USA CLIENT

University of Nebraska-Lincoln STUDIO

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Interiors Engineering Planning + Consulting Lighting Design Research TEAM MEMBERS

Mike Brotherson Tyson Fiscus Donald Foster Wade Goehring Robert J. Guinn Michael Hamilton Nicholas R. Hoesing Jim Hubbell Gina Jarta Garrett Johnson Randy Niehaus

The program focuses on students and faculty who will spark new ideas for the future of new media, technology, art, and culture.

The jury was attracted to this adaptive reuse project as a measure for sustainability and as a necessary opportunity to promote interdisciplinary collaboration. “They took an unattractive building and made it into something reasonable, using modest clarity and straightforwardness,” said one juror.

The building is located at the confluence of two urban delineations: 13th Street, on the south edge of the site, known as the “zipper zone,” forms the southern edge of the university and knits the campus into the downtown edge of Lincoln. Q Street, on the eastern edge of the site, is known as the “urban canyon” and provides a cultural corridor that connects downtown Lincoln with the heart of the campus. Responding to its location, the architects created an urban gesture by modifying the building’s corner condition with the addition of a second-story view over the corner canopy. “It has a new civic gesture that it didn’t have before. The use of solid and transparent, particularly at night, is conceptually strong,” said one juror.

The experimental and speculative nature of the program was inspiring to the design team. The existing building was considered a non-precious shell that simply provided an open playground for radical and chaotic ideas to be generated and explored by the users.

Conceptually, the building is thought of as a “black box”—in the traditional theater sense it is an unadorned space. In science and computing, a “black box” is a device, system, or object that is viewed in terms of its inputs and outputs being unknown, opaque, or black—in this sense, almost anything might be referred to as a black box. Staining the brick black expresses the austere or unknown nature of emerging media.

59 SELECTED

L O C AT I O N

This renovation project transformed the former University of Nebraska-Lincoln Bookstore into a new home for the Johnny Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts, a new pilot program for the university that is conceptually regarded as a central nervous system of interdisciplinary learning.

SECTION

0

10

25

1

4 2

6 3

5

7

ADAP TIVE R EUSE ISOM E T R IC 61

0 50

200

1984 Retail

2

New Opening

3

Entry Signage + Canopy

4

Re-orient Clerestory

5

New Views

6

New Identity

7

2019 Learning

SELECTED

SITE PLAN

1

63

SELECTED

JURY FEEDBACK

Though I wish they had included more images of the building’s interior, what we are awarding is a facelift for a building that is modest and that gives light and views. The intervention dissipates the original heaviness and creates a conceptually strong program that connects different disciplines in one facility. It is inviting and open; the repositioning of the building is carefully done.

65 SELECTED

7

13

8

1

9

3

6

Dance Studio

2 3

11

2

14

4

9

LEVEL 1

1

10

13

LEVEL 2

6

Dance Office Suite

Emerging Media Lab

7

Creative Mixing Chamber

8

4

Faculty Suite

9

5

Sound Studio

10

Computer Lab

Equipment Checkout

12

Student Suite

Loading Dock

13

Team Room

Lounge

14

Open to Below

5

12

13 0

11

Mechanical

2

20

40

67

SELECTED

MaReCuM Hub

Mannheim, BadenWürttemberg, Germany CLIENT

Mannheim Medical Faculty of the Ruprecht-Karls-University of Heidelberg STUDIOS

Munich, Berlin, New York SERVICES

Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Thomas Grabner Christopher Nielsen Michael Reischl Gabriel Stern Elizabeth Von Lehe

The campus site with its unique location and landscape offers the opportunity to create an inspiring series of squares, staircases, and alleys that connect with the interior of the building and open up to the users on all floors of the faculty buildings. Though jurors had hoped for more interconnection between each of the structures, they enjoyed how each module came together to form outdoor community spaces.

The landscape design is the connecting element between the new contemporary representation of the MaReCuM campus and the historical identity of the site. New surface materials show the historical site transformation and point to the area’s future.

Contrarily, rhombic, large-format clinker bricks that resemble the previous building materials in their appearance, but as a timeless material, they take on a new meaning in order to turn the site into a lively campus center. Jurors appreciated the screens, though were uncertain about how designers might modulate them based on exposure. On the campus plateau, the new surface covering creates an interplay between the historical orthogonal stone grid and the orientations of the existing building context.

69 SELECTED

L O C AT I O N

The Mannheim Medical Facility of the Ruprecht-Karls-University of Heidelberg offers one of the most modern medical study programs in Germany and is a world-class international research and working environment.

The new building modules for the Mannheim Reformed Curriculum for Medicine and Medically Related Professions (MaReCuM) create a lively urban infrastructure for students, lecturers, and researchers and form an integral and central part of the new campus area, northeast of Mannheim city center. This future area will develop into a central public meeting place for campus visitors and residents around the Kesselhaus of the University Hospital, the historical jewel of the complex.

CONCEPT ACCE SSIBILIT Y

SITE PLAN

71 SELECTED

CONCEPT PROGR AMMING

GRO U N D FLOOR

73

SELECTED

CONCEPT DIAGR AM

The former historic steam power plant as incubator and key stone for the new university.

JURY FEEDBACK

We liked the central public space and the enclosure created by the new cubes, which becomes part of the environment.

We also enjoyed the scale of the boxes; they possess a layer of sophistication.

75

SELECTED

77

SELECTED

NORTHSTAR EXPANSIONS

79

SELECTED

1

Existing

2

3

5

6

New

S E C T I O N T H R O U G H L A N D S C A P E S TA I R 0

4

5

10

0 5 10 20

20

The NorthStar Foundation, a non-profit after-school program and summer camp for underprivileged boys in North Omaha, had a building that was originally designed for only middle school grades. Because of the immense community need and the successful growth of the organization, the design team programmed and designed building expansions to the existing facility to include grades three to eight and high school students.

The south building expansion uses and extends the existing building’s iron spot brick to clad the simple architectural forms, which anchor the building onto the site. The new high school entrance extends the existing building’s clerestory daylighting strategy, guiding the new interior space into the existing building’s main circulation spine.

The north expansion was tightly bound by an existing circular drop-off to the east and an abrupt property line and rising topography to the west. Six large classrooms at the north were stacked into a slender, two-story form that stretches to the north between these two constraints.

The east-facing curtainwall helps to guide visitors to the new entrance while an interior “landscape stair” gradually slopes— driving a glass façade up off the ground.

Though the jury found the sweeping gesture appealing, they were disappointed that the design team didn’t take advantage of this gesture to create a ramp for accessibility and instead opted for elevator placement.

The stacked classrooms are wrapped by a circulation platform that cascades down into a wood-clad “learning stair” at its core, connecting to the landscape stair along the east, giving students an unconventional route to and from the classrooms.

SITE PLAN

1

Learning Stair/ Mindfulness (below)

2

Grades 3–5, Level 1

3

Grades 6–8, Level 2

4

Landscape Stair

5

Masonry Base

6

Boardroom

L O C AT I O N

Omaha, Nebraska, USA CLIENT

NorthStar Foundation STUDIOS

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Interiors Engineering Lighting Design Landscape Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Joshua Christensen Michael Hamilton Richard McKinley Kama Pfister John Savage Kristopher Tourek Andrew R. Wilson

81

SELECTED

83

SELECTED

8 8 8

1 2 4

5

9

12

6

7 8

LEVEL 1

10 8

1

85 30

60

90

SELECTED

0

3

1

Entry

7

Dining Area

2

Workroom

8

Activity Room

3

Board Room

9

Gallery

4

Mindfulness Room

5 6

10

Study Rooms

Learning Stair

11

Roof

Innovation Hub

12

Existing

8 8 8 2

5

JURY FEEDBACK

It’s a simple project—an addition with six rooms in front and a few more in back.

The swooping gestures are a nice way to invite people in, and the movement it sets into motion with the ascent is captivating. The photography presented is also incredible.

12

6

LEVEL 2

7

11

87

SELECTED

SIENA FRANCIS EMERGENCY SHELTER

As Siena Francis improves and expands its services to Omaha’s homeless population, the first step was to construct a new low barrier emergency shelter. This new 43,000 SF facility lodges roughly 350 single men and 100 single women with dignity in a durable and safe space. Several other facilities on the site include permanent supportive housing, a community services building, and an addiction recovery building. The site is in close proximity to all city services and public transportation networks.

The architectural parti is a single-level, simple geometry organized into zones according to use. The new entry is defined by a large courtyard with an interstitial space between the public street and the building. This courtyard is a fundamental component of the design as it provides a semi-private exterior gathering and queuing space.

The jury’s heated debate about this project centered squarely on the issue of ‘sterility’ for these types of facilities, noting a balance of durable and warm, inviting materiality is needed. Ultimately, the jury found that the project successfully carved out spaces for beauty, noting the ceiling and building height as excellent details, specifically the height of the building that extends past the ceiling, which provides small ‘reveals.’

They also enjoyed the approach to civic life hinted throughout the structure, expressed particularly through the portico.

“Providing ample daylight indoors as well as the courtyard adds dignity and a sense of civicness,” said one juror.

Overall, the durable facility provides a safe and dignified place of shelter for those often finding themselves in the most difficult time of their life. Combined with counseling, rehousing, and social integration services, the Siena Francis Emergency Shelter houses more than just people—it houses a sense of hope.

89 SELECTED

L O C AT I O N

SERVICES

TEAM MEMBERS

Omaha, Nebraska, USA

Architecture

Rebecca Cherney

Taylor Nielsen

Interiors

Nicholas Decker

Kylie Wilmes

Engineering

John Dineen

Andrew R. Wilson

Lighting Design

Alison Ingunza

Landscape Architecture

David Lempke

CLIENT

Siena Francis House STUDIO

Omaha

1

Warmth: Maple veneer plywood ceiling with routed reveals minimize panel joint visibility

2

Daylighting: Elevating glazing frame views of sky while maintaining privacy for occupants

1

2

3

JURY FEEDBACK

The fact that they were able to eke beauty into common spaces, even into the windows, is important. We can talk about sterility, but it’s a larger social problem; until we are willing to dedicate resources into these projects, we’re going to end up with more sterile environments. They’ve gotten quite a lot out of it. It’s an institutional building, but it aspires to the civic. It’s interesting to be as dedicated as it is; I’m surprised at this character of it. By rediscovering industrial spaces, we are discovering the capacity to domesticate undomestic things.

3

No Paint Zone: Burnished concrete masonry unit, polished concrete flooring, stainless steel doors

91 SELECTED M AT E R I A L S D I A G R A M

1

T Y P I C A L S H E LT E R SLEEPING DORM

2

1

Beds tightly packed together

2

Natural light is introduced while maintaining privacy from exterior

3

Partial-height walls break down scale and provide added privacy while still allowing for air circulation

3

M O D I F I E D S H E LT E R SLEEPING DORM

93 SELECTED

FLOO R PL AN

95

SELECTED

M E N T I O N BRESCIA UNIVERSITY FOOD SCHOOL & AC A D E M I C PAV I L I O N

E D

NAE URBAN VILLAGE

SHENZHEN BEIJING GENOMICS INSTITUTE H O S P I TA L

BRESCIA UNIVERSITY, FOOD SCHOOL & ACADEMIC PAVILION

This new two-story, 28,000-square-foot pavilion at Brescia University College delivered a high design building on a modest budget. Large parabolic precast concrete panels are used across the building façades—a nod to the modernist Mother St. James building, to which the new building connects. The remainder of the exterior material palette is comprised of reclaimed stone from the site’s previous building and two different expressions of prefinished metal siding.

The connection to the Mother St. James building helped establish the pavilion’s circulation parti, which extends into the new building to create a ‘street’ that puts science on display before leading students or visitors out the south entrance and into the green space that buffers the campus on three sides. Indoors, one can observe a lesson in progress in one or both of the lab spaces; or food being prepared in the commercial test kitchen, which will be served in the adjacent testing room. Visitors are welcomed into a double-height community learning space, which also acts as a study area.

The second floor shares natural light from a large central skylight with the ground floor below through a pair of openings that also highlight reclaimed stone walls. This floor showcases the science lab and adjacent research lab as well as a 150-seat classroom that can be subdivided into two classrooms.

Generous curtainwall apertures in both the lab and student lounge bring nature indoors, while the classroom provides a view to the campus. The student lounge, which shares the double-height space with the community learning room, reminds students that their research and efforts will ultimately benefit their communities.

L O C AT I O N

TEAM MEMBERS

London, Ontario, Canada

Donald Chong

CLIENT

Brescia University College

Susan Croswell David Flett Jennifer Hoggard

STUDIO

Min Hoo Kim

Toronto, London (Canada)

Somayeh Mousazadeh

SERVICES

Architecture

Chris Routley Jeffrey Salmon Debby Sparks

99

MENTIONED

A key driver for the new pavilion was the redistribution of public routes from the existng Mother St. James building. The goal was to annex off this main building and to introduce a new entrance at the interstitial link into the new Academic Pavilion.

The existing Mother St. James building has ‘squares’ at major junctures which the pavilion employs at its link and its market. This was addressed by ‘shifting’ the circulatory spine, thus creating a street that swells at its middle with the market square. The main core structurally maintains its central bay, allowing a break in the middle for new frontages, gatherings, and an opportunity for daylighting.

Preliminary layout plans showing ‘Nolli map’ public routes network.

GRO U N D FLOOR 0

10

20 m

EDGE

PA S S A G E

COURT

Precast Panels

Skylight Blades Daylight Apertures

‘Street’ Ceiling Trays

Link to Existing

1

Entry Link

8

Support Spaces

2

Active Learning Classroom

9

‘The Market’

3

Building Services

10

Food Science Lab

4

Classrooms

11

Food Preparation

5

Food Processing Lab

12

Student Lounge

6

Commercial Kitchen Lab

1133

Community Learning Space

7

Central Street

1 2 4 3 8

7 10 12

101

5

MENTIONED

1 3 6 8

9 11 13

LINK

Switchback ramps, fanned glass volume

SHIFT

Kitty-corner lab fronts, bridge/wedges, skylit blades

PERCH

Nested volumes, windowboxes, projecting student lounge SECO N D FLOO R

JURY FEEDBACK

The project demonstrates high quality, sophisticated thinking and an edited palette in the texture of the panels and belief in daylight.

I like the presence that it has; it takes pieces that can be found elsewhere. But there’s a collage that is a popular architect tool.

It reminds me of what Michael Graves was doing in the ‘70s, and this takes those elements and repurposes them. Playing with simple forms, textures, and colors, this is sophisticated response.

103 MENTIONED

NAE URBAN VILLAGE

A modern and flexible office building has been designed that will serve as a vital heart of the new ICE-City Ost urban district.

The building establishes forward-thinking standards and, because of its hybrid woodconcrete construction method, progressively and sustainably integrates the tradition of the region’s timber construction history with modern architectural requirements.

Characteristics of the surrounding urban landscape are deliberately incorporated: clear building lines connect to the neighborhood’s perimeter block arrangement while a critical ‘opening gesture’ establishes a southerly connection. Although the building sits on a complete “Erfurt block,” its subordinate tectonics are kept to a human scale.

Innovative space planning strategies enable the new development to be constructed in three phases, offering advanced flexibility to respond to future conditions. Additionally, modular space components allow building areas to flex and morph in size throughout the construction schedule; over the structure’s lifetime, floor areas and building volumes can be adapted with minimal effort. The building’s foundation and lower level floors are a solid reinforced recycled concrete structure, with floors above composed of a local timber skeleton structure. Jurors called this scheme “expressive.” Structural components can be separated by type and are, therefore, recyclable. This applies both to material recycling and to the direct reuse of individual components.

L O C AT I O N

SERVICES

Erfurt, Thuringia, Germany

Architecture

CLIENT

TEAM MEMBERS

Deutsche Bahn

Christopher Nielsen

STUDIO

Berlin, Munich

Michael Reischl Gabriel Stern Laurent Thill

105 MENTIONED

SECTION THROUGH THE MARKET PL AZA

0 1

3

5m

Massing the Erfurt Block as starting point

Developing a link to the local identity

Connecting landscape and the urban fabric

Establishing a clear entrance as a market place

JURY FEEDBACK

The designers are exploring reductive skins and horizontal datum that neutralizes the building. The timber on top of concrete is expressive and structural, and there is a continuity, a sense of publicness, throughout the offices. If there could have been a different resolution with the base, with articulated boxes and a spine, I’d be much happier.

The columns, while somewhat mismatched with the base, are strong and simple.

S O U T H E L E VAT I O N

LO N GIT U DINAL SEC TIO N

0 2 6

10 m

Massing within a clear network

Creating a pattern of sngle houses

Introducing vertical accessibility

Making it modular and hackable

107 MENTIONED

109 MENTIONED

SHENZHEN BEIJING GENOMICS INSTITUTE HOSPITAL This two-phased, 290,625-square-foot project creates an ecological system that establishes a new hospital as a connection and transport hub between the nearby nature park and the city. An open ‘healing green valley’ between each of the two development phases penetrates the natural parks and urban spaces to form a brand-new ecological ‘healing park.’ “Shenzhen is such a green city, and bringing that into the hospital is wonderful,” said a juror.

In consideration of the topography, the design creates a multi-layer landscape composed of terraces and building podium to form a multistory, pedestrian-friendly building entrance system connected to the city. Phase I and Phase II buildings are distributed on both sides of the green valley. Arranged in sequence along the circular connection bridge are a rare disease center, comprehensive medical center, Phase II hospital, and future college.

The design constructs a lifecycle genetics medical experience systems in the center of the site, and includes a genetic medical exhibition hall and a precision health center to provide international cutting-edge personalized medical services.

The inpatient towers are designed like ‘life trees’ growing from the mountain park.

Each tree is composed of multiple basic modules of ‘life cabins’ to form a ‘life capsule’ that can be flexibly adapted to diverse programs. Based on the trend of precision medicine, the medical planning reconstructs the relationship between rare disease research and clinical practice. Through horizontal and vertical integration, interdisciplinary units are seamlessly connected.

L O C AT I O N

Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China CLIENT

Beijing Genomics Institute STUDIO

San Francisco SERVICES

Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Annette Himelick Sinae Jung Brian Kowalchuk Sangmin Lee Wei Wang Yuxuan Wang Jenny Zhao Dongqi Zhu

111

MENTIONED

1 2 3

Phase I General Hospital (18F)

4

Secondary Entrance

5

Emergency Room Entrance

10

9

Healing Park

Phase I Rare Disease Center (21F)

6

Infectious Disease Clinic Entrance

11

Phase II General Hospital

Main Entrance/Outpatient Entrance

12

7

Garage Entrance/Exit

Phase II Future Academy (25F)

8

Diagnostics & Treatment

1133

Phase II Future Academy Entrance

Waste Management Exit

7 5

4

7

1

2

8 Diagnostics & Treatment

4

6 Rare Disease Center (21F) General Hospital 9

Phase I 6

Phase I 10

8

3

6 11

12 13 Future Academy

General Hospital

Phase II

7 7

MASTER PLAN

Phase II

113 MENTIONED

1

Main Entrance Square

2

Main Entrance Lobby

3

Coffee and Retail

4

Healing Park

5

Ecological Hall

6

View Elevator

7

Public Waiting Area

8

Phase I Courtyard

9

Phase II Courtyard

10

Phase II Entrance

G E N E L O O P S PA C E S Y S T E M

115 MENTIONED

GENE MEDICINE EXPERIENCE CENTER

1

Gene Medicine Exhibition

5

Reception Canteen

2

Precision Screening Center

6

Staff Canteen

3

Food Square

7

Retail

4

Drop-off

JURY FEEDBACK

What I like is the tension of the landscape coming out under the buildings and into the middle. The buildings remain tight. I thought there was a brightness about it and openness.

It’s nice having a landscape in the center.

I like the monumentality of the nearlybrutalist building shape; one thing we’re losing in hospitals is grandeur, but this project brings back that optimism and futurism, but combines it with a lot of open space.

C I T E D

EDGESCAPE TOWER

MERLOT 3 (M3)

M C D O N A L D T H E AT E R R E N OVAT I O N

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA BALLPARK

EDGESCAPE TOWER 1

2

3

4

MO R PHO LOGY

“Edgescape” at River's Edge, is a zone that identifes the transition between river, cities, and states: constantly changing, water rising and falling, sculpting the landscape. The Edgescape Tower is an intervention that activates a previously unusable portion of the Missouri River riverbank. The vision is to activate this urban wilderness with recreational use, allowing citizens of Council Bluffs, Iowa and Omaha, Nebraska to enjoy its beauty in ways not previously possible due to increasingly common flood events.

L O C AT I O N

1

Council Bluffs, Iowa, USA CLIENT

Southwest Iowa Nonprofit for Collective Impact (SINC) STUDIO

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Engineering

Once complete, visitors will access the tower via a network of elevated walks connecting to the tower. Upon arrival, visitors find moments of quiet respite among the trees at the elevated base level. The platforms above contain access points to a 100-foot-tall climbing wall, simulated caving environments, a tree-top roll-glide course, and multiple observation decks.

Sustainability + Resiliency

The tower and walkways are designed using resilient materials assembled in simple, repeating forms. Users navigate up and down between platforms that are suspended between two simple core structures. The result is a stoic structure that strives to complement its natural surroundings through the use of wood as a screening element throughout and wood board formed over the concrete structure.

Paige Haskett

Lighting Design Urban Design + Planning Landscape Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Rebecca Cherney Jen Cross John Dineen Tyson Fiscus Randy Niehaus Jacob Pulfer Beth Redding Tom Trenolone Timothy Williams James J. Wingert Cole Wycoff

Situate climbing wall on vertical core

2

Split core, maximizing climbing area

3

Elevate program above flood plain

4

Integrate adventure program elements

Art Installation

Roll-Glide Course River Observation

Adventure Park

Climbing Wall

Elevated Walk

Visitor Pavilion

Observation Tower MASTER PLAN 119 CITED

Phase 1 Minor 0.54 miles

Phase 1 Major 0.69 miles

Phase 2 0.87 miles

Phase 3 1.03 miles

RAISED WALKWAY CONSTRUCTION

JURY FEEDBACK

It’s lively and I like the joy of composition.

I find this to look more interesting than zipline.

We’re seeing these walls everywhere, but this is playing with the (idea of) industrial silos.

If you’re going to get this opportunity, have some fun with it.

It’s convincing, and though it should be lighter, it has other functions. It’s both specific and abstract at the same time and works in the landscape. I think it’s actually a pretty compelling composition. I can imagine how great it must be to walk up at the catwalk.

I’m excited that the project might be realized.

Observation Tower

Art Installation

Climbing Wall

Roll Glide Course Caving

Elevated Walk

121 CITED

PROGRAM

TYPICAL RIVER LEVEL

FLOODED RIVER LE VEL

S O U T H E L E VAT I O N

E A S T E L E VAT I O N

MCDONALD THEATER RENOVATION FLOOR PL AN

10%

The Elder Memorial Theater Center serves as the home for performing arts at Nebraska Wesleyan University. The complex consists of two houses, including the 250-seat proscenium McDonald Theater. Constructed circa 1980 and, while designed with the best technology and practices of the day, the McDonald Theater was due for several upgrades. The renovation and addition project has been organized into three phases, the first of which consisted of a new interior expression, seating, and stage floor as well as mechanical upgrades.

The existing main house was reconceived with a simple bold enclosure of light at the human scale. This ‘light fixture’ consists of custom perforated aluminum sheets that are back-laminated with a translucent scrim to create a cavity that is lit with linear, dimmable, and color-changing LED elements. Enveloping patrons with light, the pattern of perforations is the conversion of theatrical performance audio recordings into a physical artifact, creating a unique and immersive experience. Jurors debated this project heavily: advocates were drawn to the perforated panels as art objects; critics found the screens lacked nuance and were too harsh as lighting tools. Ultimately, the groups settled on its merit as a small intervention that has a big impact on the quality of experience.

0 5 10 20

>50%

L O C AT I O N

Lincoln, Nebraska, USA CLIENT

Nebraska Wesleyan University STUDIO

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Interiors Engineering Lighting Design TEAM MEMBERS

Robert J. Guinn Mitch Hain Matthew W. Kuhn David Lempke Randy Niehaus Taylor Nielsen Timothy Williams Chandra Wondercheck

Required perforation openness percentage for acoustic absorption behind panel

VOLUME

VOLUM E

20,000 Hz

20,000 Hz Pitch

Pitch Time 20 Hz

Time 20 Hz

123 CITED

JURY FEEDBACK

For me, it’s the intersection of data graphics, light, and industrial design. It’s a single element that is engineered, and has an engineering foundation. Though I’m less fascinated with the coloration as I am by the source for the creation of the patterning of openings, the ability to bring light and transform the color of the space is excellent. The simple perimeter brings scale, and there’s a story behind what it’s doing.

125 CITED

MERLOT 3 (M3)

Merlot 3 is a data center that responds to its local environment through sensitive design moves. Located in Victoria, a suburb of Melbourne, at the junction between large industrial developments and low-scale residential dwellings, the form and scale of the building has been designed with the wellbeing of local residents in mind. The project is comprised predominantly of data halls, offices, breakout space, and areas for public use with an accompanying café.

The bulk of the building form, containing the data centers, has been set back from residential streets. The façade has been agitated and folded, informed by the rhythm of the adjacent residential grid. Lower forms have been positioned between the residential streets and the data centers.

As a result, the overall building mass has been broken up and the building scale decreases as it reaches residential streets, providing visual relief.

‘Pocket Parks’ have been designed along the façade at the termination of perpendicular streets, providing visual screening and bookending views. A smaller scale café has been designed along the street edge.

The materiality and form is similar to that of nearby dwellings, and provides a gentle transition from residential to industrial.

The color red, a strong element of corporate branding for the client, has been applied between the agitations in the façade.

L O C AT I O N

Maribyrnong, Victoria, Australia CLIENT

NEXTDC STUDIO

North Sydney SERVICES

Architecture Urban Design + Planning TEAM MEMBERS

Alan Boswell Rosemary Chung Stefano Cottini Samuel Faigen Amir Fakhrduzduzani Sangbeom Han Christania Herman Phat Huynh Sonni Jeong Fiona Macdonald Amy Papas Graeme Spencer

127 CITED

27 m

5.2 m

13 m

M3

Site Boundary

Green screen

Setback

25 m

Carla Street

Residential

4 m 6.5 m

Setback

1

Site Boundary

10 m

M3

Café

Street width

Indwe Street

Residential

Brand THE REVEAL

Rhythm & Light C R Y S TA L L I N E C U T S

THE REVEAL

Relief The brand is revealed through

THE GREENS

red folds in the façade

3

1 2

MASSING

1

Green Spaces for Respite

2

Break-out Office Space

3

Data Center

129 CITED

E L E VAT I O N

PLAN

Evolution of form: residential to industrial saw tooth

JURY FEEDBACK

Trying to make a transition between industrial and residential isn’t easy.

I applaud this notion that there is a community function. People can gravitate to the outside of the building and there is generosity to make sure they have outdoor access.

The nighttime character with the pixelated brick is also probably quite pleasing from the residential side.

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA BALLPARK The University of Nebraska Omaha continued the development of its Center Street campus with the addition of a new baseball and softball stadium complex. The requirements for different geometries prevented the use of the same field for both sports.

The site rises sharply away from the street to the west climbing 45 feet with a continued rise beyond. The north/south topography remains constant allowing for each field to occupy one of the two orientations. Jurors did notice that, in the placement of the baseball and softball fields, the sun’s movement into the eyes of a right fielder was preferred to left field; thus the baseball fields received the ‘preferred’ treatment.

The new complex’s sequence of arrival guides fans along an ascending path to the open concourse and pavilion, which establishes a plinth 17 feet above the first point of entry.

The concourse and pavilion overlook both fields, softball to the south and baseball to the north. From the concourse, patrons descend into either seating bowl carved into the hillside. The Y-shaped pavilion rests on the concourse, containing amenities like concessions, restrooms, a covered social deck, and access to seating at field level.

L O C AT I O N

Omaha, Nebraska, USA CLIENT

University of Nebraska Omaha STUDIO

Omaha SERVICES

Architecture Interiors Engineering Lighting Design Landscape Architecture TEAM MEMBERS

Joshua Christensen Laura Franzluebbers Alison Ingunza David Lempke Kevin Moody Randy Niehaus Taylor Nielsen John Savage Matthew J. Stoffel

131 CITED

Entrance Procession

LO N GIT U DINAL SEC TIO N

JURY FEEDBACK

This is probably the strongest landscape we’ve seen among the submissions.

I love the topography of the slope and how the designers worked within the existing topography. It would also be very easy to extend the stands for growing crowds—the designers created seating infrastructure that can be added to later on. The site planning is also great: from how they cut the parking, the low profile of the building, and the way they depressed the fields.

Shared Pavilion

Open Concourse

Tunnel Access

133

SECTION PERSPECTIVE

CITED

ROOF PLANE

PAV I L I O N L E V E L

CONCOURSE LEVEL

Building form shaped by movement

E XPLO D ED A XO N OM E T R IC

AFTERWORD

The Architecture studios at the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD) are primarily housed in Gund Hall, where the Opacity jury deliberations took place this year. Designed by GSD alumnus John Andrews in 1972, the large, tiered, flexible open space is cantilevered below a sloping skylight. It was designed so that disciplines within the building could see one another to promote a free transaction of ideas, to be “open for open-ended intellectual growth.”

Opacity is similarly about an open discourse where we share our work, open ourselves to critique, and foster growth as a firm. It is also an opportunity for pause and reflection, to look at who we are as a practice, to examine how far we have come, and to gauge where we are headed.

Some interesting comparisions between this year and previous years: we saw roughly half the number of submissions, and while last year’s selected works were mostly unbuilt, this year most were built. The portfolio remained consistently broad and diverse, affording an interesting mix of scales and typologies to review. This year, finalists included more smaller projects than in years past. As we were able to hold Opacity in person for the first time in two years, though to a smaller group, there was a renewed sense of optimism.

We celebrate how Opacity changes over time. At this point in time, given what we are living through, this year’s Opacity was even more meaningful, as everyone has faced existential questions, pausing and reflecting on recurring themes of restraint and doing less with more, the legacy of our work, and considering community and social purpose.

Restraint— Doing less with more.

Projects that exercised restraint, modesty, and clarity were overwhelmingly appreciated. Innovation was viewed in terms of trying to push beyond their constraints. Many of the selected works rewarded modesty, finding relationships between the inside and outside with modest means and attention to detail.

Discussion and review considered the technical challenges of a project typology, budget, program, and other constraints. Legacy— Building must live beyond the text.

Legacy— B uilding must live beyond the text.

The ‘legacy’ of our design decisions was emphasized, as was the idea that buildings need to stand alone over time. Written text is important to storytelling, but not as important as the visuals. Sometimes, the narrative and accompanying visuals were disconnected. The important lesson learned: viewers interpret not the architect’s words, but understand intent through the actual design: “A building that is good lives beyond the text.”

In a presentation on March 8, 2021, to the Chicago chapter of the Virginia Tech Alumni Association, Opacity juror Aaron Betsky suggested this path forward: “…If there is going to be a revolution in architecture, if architecture is going to make the world better, if design is going to help us rethink and redesign our reality to be more sustainable, open and just, and more beautiful, then it will have to come from gathering together what is already around us, collaging it and finding a way of producing beauty out of the amalgamation of what already exists.”

In a company like ours, with the breadth and scale of projects we work on, designers can make an important difference by challenging the norm. We can truly impact the entire profession by becoming more purpose-driven in all our work, and by prioritizing social equity, diversity, and sustainability.

Brooke Horan, IIDA, ASID, Design Director

135 AF TERWORD

Purpose— Designing for equity, social purpose, and hope for a more just and sustainable world.

We are experiencing a convergence of thought around a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of climate, health, and equity. Harvard GSD News recently addressed “Practice in a Time of Economic Uncertainty: Advice for Emerging Architects” in a series of interviews with architects that asked them to consider how design will engage the climate crisis for a more equitable and inclusive society. The AIA Climate Action Plan urges an immediate transformation of architects’ day-to-day practice to achieve a zero carbon, equitable, resilient, and healthy world. The theme for the 2021 Venice Biennale, “How Will We Live Together?,” proposes a new spatial contract where architects are called on to imagine spaces in which we can generously live together…as emerging communities that demand equity, inclusion and spatial identity; together as a planet facing crises that require global action for all of us to continue living at all.”

CREDITS GUEST EDITOR

O PAC I T Y 2 0 2 2

Anjulie Rao

Anjulie Rao is a Chicago-based journalist and editor who focuses on livable built environments, equitable design, architecture criticism, and public spaces. She also teaches various writing courses at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC) in the Architecture+Interior Architecture and New Arts Journalism departments.

Rao completed her Masters in New Arts Journalism from the SAIC in 2014 and her bylines can be found in The Architects Newspaper, Curbed, Metropolis, American Craft, Chicago Magazine, and Artsy, among others.

Paula Brammier Olivia Epstein Ashley Glesinger Kristen Hartman Paige Haskett Brooke Horan Danette Hunter Brian Kowalchuk Michael McPhail Shea Oliver Rebecca Ohnoutka Anjulie Rao Encarnita Rivera Dan Schwalm Katie Sosnowchik Thomas Trenolone Greg Wells Mary Zgoda

F E AT U R E D PHOTOGR APHERS

Kevin Belanger Tom Kessler Dan Schwalm

ITN 5437