Kansas City Project for the Arts

KANSAS CITY PROJECT FOR THE ARTS MASTERS THESIS DESIGN BY RYAN NORTHCUTT

KANSAS CITY PROJECT FOR THE ARTS

by Ryan Northcutt B.S.A., Southern Illinois University, 2014

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Masters of Architecture.

Department of Architecture in the Graduate School Southern Illinois University Carbondale August 2015

Copyright by RYAN NORTHCUTT, 2015 All Rights Reserved

  THESIS/DISSERTATION APPROVAL KANSAS CITY PROJECT FOR THE ARTS

By Ryan Northcutt

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters in the field of Architecture

Approved by: Shannon McDonald, Assistant Professor, Chair Stewart Wessel, Professor Jerry Monteith, Professor Graduate School Southern Illinois University Carbondale August 2015

AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF RYAN NORTHCUTT, for the Masters of Architecture degree in ARCHITECTURE, presented on AUGUST 2015, at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

TITLE: KANSAS CITY PROJECT FOR THE ARTS MAJOR PROFESSOR: Shannon McDonald, Assistant Professor

The expression of art is a powerful trigger to emotion. The intention of any artist

is to capture sensory motions through form, texture, composition, color, and beauty.

This experience breaks a person into a daydream. This daydream of emotions provoked by art is only one piece to the trigger. Like an artist, an architect sets out to capture the day dream experience with a three dimensional form. The importance of detail and sometimes complexity in simple architectural expressions are the driving forces behind these triggered emotions, sometimes in tune with art. Beyond the completed form is the process of where the art or architecture came from. It is the action of creativity that allows the final product to be glorified. In Kansas City art has flourished as a part of its community and culture since the 1930’s. KC’s community supports the arts and architecture, but lacking in the support of the process. The importance of a place for process to occur is precedence in other cities that appreciate art. This project is a proposal for a place of action for creativity and community fully supporting the arts of Kansas City.

i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Upon completion of the Kansas City Project for the Arts design project I would

like to acknowledge those who put forward their time to making this project successful.

I would first like to thank my committee, Shannon McDonald, Stewart Wessel, and Jerry Monteith for taking time to advise and guide my progress. I would like to gives special thanks to Jerry for taking part in an architecture project and sharing his experience as an artist. I would like to thank the studio professors for all their help and knowledge that pushed the project towards a realistic understanding of architecture. Lastly thanks to all who helped and motivated me along the way.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................

i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..........................................................................................

ii

LIST OF TABLES .....................................................................................................

v

LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................

vi

CHAPTERS

CHAPTER 1 – What is an Artist? ..................................................................

1

CHAPTER 2 – Defining Context ...................................................................

3

2.1 Brief History of Kansas City .........................................................

3

2.2 Artist Organizations ......................................................................

6

2.3 Artists Live Work Facilities ...........................................................

7

CHAPTER 3 – Site Review and Analysis ......................................................

10

3.1 Kansas City Site Review ..............................................................

10

3.2 Kansas City Weather Data ...........................................................

16

3.3 Kansas City Census Data ............................................................

20

CHAPTER 4 – Function ................................................................................

21

CHAPTER 5 – Community Orientation .........................................................

26

5.1 Introduction to a Community ........................................................

26

5.2 Internal and External Space .........................................................

27

5.3 Proxemic Spaces .........................................................................

30

5.4 The Architectural Expression .......................................................

34

CHAPTER 6 – Order of Design Development ..............................................

41

6.1 Initial Programmatic Volumes ......................................................

41

6.2 Final Programmatic Volumes .......................................................

44

6.3 Principle Design Statements ........................................................

48

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

CHAPTER

PAGE

6.4 Initial Design Development ..........................................................

48

CHAPTER 7 – Order of the Architectural Expression ...................................

60

7.1 Final Design Development ...........................................................

60

7.2 The Final Expression ...................................................................

73

7.3 Gallery and Atrium .......................................................................

89

7.4 Residential Units ..........................................................................

93

7.5 Workshops and Work Studios ......................................................

96

7.6 Structure, Systems, Materials ......................................................

98

7.7 Final Thoughts .............................................................................

101

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................

102

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Final Defense Boards .............................................................

104

Appendix B – Final Defense Floor Plans ......................................................

105

VITA .........................................................................................................................

106

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

PAGE

Table 3.1 Average Temperature ...............................................................................

16

Table 3.2 Precipitation .............................................................................................

16

Table 3.3 Snowfall ...................................................................................................

17

Table 3.4 Humidity ...................................................................................................

17

Table 3.5 Sunshine ..................................................................................................

18

Table 3.6 Wind Speed .............................................................................................

18

Table 3.7 Wind Frequency .......................................................................................

19

Table 4.1 KCPA Art Gallery Program .......................................................................

23

Table 4.2 KCPA Work shops and Studios Program .................................................

23

Table 4.3 KCPA Residential Units Program .............................................................

24

Table 4.4 KCPA Sublevel Parking Program .............................................................

25

Table 4.5 KCPA Program Totals ..............................................................................

25

v

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

PAGE

Figure 2.1 First Fridays at the Crossroads ..............................................................

5

Figure 2.2 City Arts Building ....................................................................................

8

Figure 2.3 Russel Industrial Center .........................................................................

8

Figure 3.1 KC Skyline ..............................................................................................

10

Figure 3.2 View South from W 21st st. ....................................................................

11

Figure 3.3 View South from Wyandotte ...................................................................

11

Figure 3.4 View North from Union Station ...............................................................

11

Figure 3.5 Kansas City Missouri Map ......................................................................

12

Figure 3.6 Crossroads Map .....................................................................................

13

Figure 3.7 KCPA Site Map .......................................................................................

14

Figure 3.8 Building Heights and Studies .................................................................

15

Figure 5.1 Cultural Spatial Orders ...........................................................................

27

Figure 5.2 Order of Interiors and Exteriors ..............................................................

29

Figure 5.3 Town Square ..........................................................................................

29

Figure 5.4 Proxemic Basics .....................................................................................

32

Figure 5.5 Proxemic Volumes ..................................................................................

33

Figure 5.6 Proxemic Relationships ..........................................................................

33

Figure 5.7 KCPA Qualities .......................................................................................

34

Figure 5.8 Community Rooms and Spatial Boundaries ...........................................

35

Figure 5.9 Order of Programed Space and Vertical Boundaries .............................

36

Figure 5.10 Town Square Scheme Development ....................................................

37

Figure 5.11 Relationships of Solid and Void ............................................................

37

Figure 5.12 Internal Conversation ...........................................................................

38

Figure 6.1 Concept Collage .....................................................................................

41

vi

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

FIGURE

PAGE

Figure 6.2 Program Volumes 1 ................................................................................

42

Figure 6.3 Program Volumes 2 ................................................................................

43

Figure 6.4 Program Volumes 3 ................................................................................

43

Figure 6.5 Program Volumes 4 ................................................................................

44

Figure 6.6 KCPA Movement ....................................................................................

44

Figure 6.7 Program Volumes 5 ................................................................................

45

Figure 6.8 Program Volumes 6 ................................................................................

45

Figure 6.9 Art Discipline Affinity Matrix ....................................................................

46

Figure 6.10 Program Volumes 7 ..............................................................................

46

Figure 6.11 Vehicle Loading Dock ...........................................................................

47

Figure 6.12 Development Sketch 1 .........................................................................

49

Figure 6.13 Development Sketch 2 .........................................................................

49

Figure 6.14 Public Sub Level Parking ......................................................................

50

Figure 6.15 Gallery and Workshop Floor .................................................................

51

Figure 6.16 Residential Floors Above Gallery .........................................................

52

Figure 6.17 Residential Floors Continued ...............................................................

53

Figure 6.18 KCPA SD Section .................................................................................

54

Figure 6.19 Initial Programed Spaces .....................................................................

55

Figure 6.20 Initial Gallery and Workshop Plan ........................................................

56

Figure 6.21 Initial Residential Units Plans ...............................................................

57

Figure 6.22 Initial Internal Conversation ..................................................................

58

Figure 6.23 Initial Gallery and Atrium Section .........................................................

58

Figure 6.24 Initial East Building Section ..................................................................

58

Figure 6.25 Initial North Facade ..............................................................................

59

vii

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

FIGURE

PAGE

Figure 6.26 Initial South Facade ..............................................................................

59

Figure 7.1 Gallery Program Function Diagram ........................................................

61

Figure 7.2 Wood Shop Program Function Diagram ................................................

62

Figure 7.3 Metals Shop Program Function Diagram ...............................................

62

Figure 7.4 Glass Studio Program Function Diagram ...............................................

62

Figure 7.5 Ceramics Program Function Diagram ....................................................

62

Figure 7.6 Ground Floor Plan Sketch ......................................................................

63

Figure 7.7 Residential Floor Sketch 1 .....................................................................

63

Figure 7.8 Residential Floor Sketch 2 .....................................................................

63

Figure 7.9 Residential Floor Sketch 3 .....................................................................

63

Figure 7.10 Town Square Diagram 1 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.11 Town Square Diagram 2 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.12 Town Square Diagram 3 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.13 Town Square Diagram 4 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.14 Town Square Diagram 5 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.15 Town Square Diagram 6 .......................................................................

64

Figure 7.16 Dynamic Overlap 1 ...............................................................................

65

Figure 7.17 Dynamic Overlap 2 ...............................................................................

65

Figure 7.18 Residential Unit Model .........................................................................

66

Figure 7.19 Dynamic Overlap Model .......................................................................

66

Figure 7.20 The Dynamic Town Square ..................................................................

67

Figure 7.21 Pre Final Approach ...............................................................................

68

Figure 7.22 Pre Final Site Plan ................................................................................

69

Figure 7.23 Pre Final Floor Plans ............................................................................

70

viii

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

FIGURE

PAGE

Figure 7.24 Pre Final Floor Plate Complexity ..........................................................

71

Figure 7.25 Pre Final Section ..................................................................................

71

Figure 7.26 Pre Final Facade ..................................................................................

72

Figure 7.27 Pre Final South Facade and Workshop ................................................

72

Figure 7.28 Pre Final Facade Study ........................................................................

73

Figure 7.29 Final Program Diagram ........................................................................

74

Figure 7.30 KCPA Site Plan .....................................................................................

75

Figure 7.31 Sub Level Parking (NTS) ......................................................................

76

Figure 7.32 Gallery and Workshop (NTS) ...............................................................

77

Figure 7.33 Administration and Upper Gallery (NTS) ..............................................

78

Figure 7.34 1st Floor Residential (NTS) ..................................................................

79

Figure 7.35 2nd Floor Residential (NTS) .................................................................

80

Figure 7.36 3rd Floor Residential (NTS) ..................................................................

81

Figure 7.37 4th Floor Residential (NTS) ..................................................................

82

Figure 7.38 5th Floor Residential (NTS) ..................................................................

83

Figure 7.39 Section A-A (NTS) ................................................................................

84

Figure 7.40 North Elevation (NTS) ..........................................................................

85

Figure 7.41 East Elevation (NTS) ............................................................................

86

Figure 7.42 South Elevation (NTS) ..........................................................................

87

Figure 7.43 West Elevation (NTS) ...........................................................................

88

Figure 7.44 Atrium Internal Conversation ................................................................

89

Figure 7.45 Gallery Space 1 ....................................................................................

90

Figure 7.46 Gallery Space 2 ....................................................................................

91

Figure 7.47 Gallery Space 3 ....................................................................................

91

ix

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.)

FIGURE

PAGE

Figure 7.48 Gallery Space 6 ....................................................................................

91

Figure 7.49 Gallery Space 5 ....................................................................................

92

Figure 7.50 Gallery Entrance ...................................................................................

92

Figure 7.51 Gallery Front Entrance .........................................................................

92

Figure 7.52 Art Studio Gallery .................................................................................

93

Figure 7.53 Art Studio Unit Plan (NTS) ....................................................................

94

Figure 7.54 Typical Unit Plans (NTS) ......................................................................

95

Figure 7.55 Work Studio Section (NTS) ..................................................................

96

Figure 7.56 Light Diffusion System (NTS) ...............................................................

97

Figure 7.57 Structure and Systems (NTS) ..............................................................

99

Figure 7.58 Unit Privacy Glass System ...................................................................

100

Figure 7.59 Dynamic Facade and Materials ............................................................

100

Figure 7.60 Final Defense Exhibit ...........................................................................

101

x

CHAPTER 1 WHAT IS AN ARTIST?

What is an artist? While this question has been answered by many, it is always

questioned again. Without actually answering the question though, it can be used as a principle idea behind an architectural expression that dedicates space to ideas, conversation, social interactions, and the arts. To lead to an understanding of what an artist is, it might be helpful to understand art for what it is. Music producer and artist Brian Eno stated, “Stop thinking about artworks as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences.� The works of Brian Eno are evident of a trigger for experiences with each piece, whether a production of ambient music or an abstract visual of light, expressing emotion directed by the artist himself, leaving for people to experience the works all in a similar way. While it may be the intention for an artist to provoke certain emotions in the viewer, each person is likely to view artwork as a singular unique experience. Bachelard (1964) describes experiences, in the Poetics of Space, to be actions of daydreaming, all deriving from past experiences during youth.

Spaces themselves provoke personal experiences that only one individual can uniquely experience. While these spaces bring forward memories and allow for a heightened experience, an artist attempts to capture these moments through a sensory form. Henri (1961) explains that an artist is not to recreate a scene, but to express that scene through a visual style that is seen through the eyes of the artist. This visual style when done in spirit is truly expressive and captures the full range of emotion of a space or object resulting in art. So to revisit this proposed principle, what is an artist? While Brian Eno describes what art might be, it could be understood that in order to provoke thought and experiences, a contextual reference to space is involved, in both the art as the object and the artist.

1

A contextual reference in painting remains two dimensional in space, and with

an experience attached the viewer daydreams of that space. Architecture creates a three dimensional context. Like the references to many scales of spaces Bachelard describes in the Poetics of Space, an architecture that allows for these experiences in two dimensional spaces to actually happen. It is possible that the viewer is visiting the space for the first time, having no memories formed to create another dimension.

Bachelard (1964) speaks of sensory experience that refers to past contexts. These experiences that are of fond memories are comforting to the mind. It is then that these sensory experiences that allow for a space to become an experience with the art. With the original proposed principal a design proposal can be established. The design proposal is to become an architectural expression that is a place for artists and enthusiasts served by a few art/architectural concepts. This space becomes a facility of function, community orientation, and design order. It is to serve the artist as well as the art enthusiasts. With integration into a community, the facility gains support from local activists within the community. The internal community function is important in order for the space to serve as an artist’s living and working community. The function and community orientation will render the form and create the design order. As a facility of its own kind, it will stand out with a form and expression that is both iconic and contextual to its place. The final product of this proposal becomes a place of living, a place of working, and a place of conversation.

2

CHAPTER 2 DEFINING CONTEXT

The scope of the project requires a place of historic precedence to art. Kansas

City, from its rich history, has been a place with well-designed urban landscapes and a strong appreciate for the arts. The choice to select KC as the project site allows for innovation in design, seen in their history of architecture and urban design, and extends the existing art community upwards into a new standard of artist living. The current art community in Kansas City is supported by local organizations and thrives from its precedence of the Nelson Atkins museum, which also acts as a model for a strong architectural expression in KC’s unique physical environment. With a lack of precedence in community artist living in KC, a design proposal to initiate precedence while also initiating a contemporary model for artist living is an opportunity worth taking.

2.1 Brief History of Kansas City

Kansas City, Missouri, once said by J.C. Nichols, “a good place to live in”, is

a true model of an American city. The growth of this American city was brought from the east, where an established culture expanded ideas and built the foundation for the United States to eventually expand. At the heart of trade, KC was developed from fur and other goods traded in 1850, using rivers and railroad transportation (Haskell, 1950). Westport and the town of Kansas thrived as a port for the east and west trade routes, growing rapidly over a short period of time. The town of Kansas soon became Kansas City, and while the Civil War in the east ceased trade on the river, railroad trade routes began to expand and multiply. The late 1800’s boomed with expansion of trades with livestock from Texas and New Mexico, while many other large companies formed a base in the city to take advantage of its location. By the 1900’s Kansas City featured eight tall buildings of steel and masonry and many parks, boulevards, and 3

some of the first large span bridges. Robert Gillham, John C Henry, and J.C. Nichols, advocates for the city pushed to bring in modernized technology, parks and other city planning methods that would transform Kansas City from an industrial trade city to a pleasant place to live that would thrive in the entertainment and economy (Haskell, 1950). In April 1900 the face of Kansas City would change due to a mass fire. While destruction impacted the city’s physical fabric, the Kansas City spirit continued on.

With the improvements of the city uninterrupted, KC introduced lights and power to its patrons, which was a major improvement. In 1907, J.C. Nichols became an important figure in the Kansas City history. Advocating KC “a good place to live in” was the start of the innovative future for the urban fabric (Haskell, 1950). Before the Great Depression, Kansas City grew to a respectable size, adding some iconic features such as sign board hill, Liberty Memorial, and Grand Central Station which resides at the foot of Wyandotte Street. In 1923 J.C. Nichols designed and opened Country Club Plaza. This shopping center was the first of its kind due to its accommodation of the automobile. This important feature was a modern revolution that resonated throughout the United States thereafter. Providing an shopping center that included entertainment, restaurants, and shopping establishments, all in the being open air. Haskell (1905), mentions the birth of what is to become an expansive community of art. In 1933, the Nelson Atkins Museum opened the “Cow Town” to the world of art. Years later KC advocate J.C. Nichols sent the city through and industrial boom with movement of large companies and urban designs that would revolutionize future development of American cities and suburbs.

J.C. Nichols developed what is known as the subdivision of the modern day while still linked to the historic fabric of the city. His idea to preserve the natural contours and trees brought subdivision living into a natural landscape. This change to near city living changed the way property management was managed as a business (Haskell, 1905).

By the 1940’s Kansas City’s urban fabric has been established. The KC Power and Light founded earlier in the 1900’s developed a street light plan after WWII. With the 4

rising needs of suburban living due to crowding in cities, expressways introduced quick travel to and around the surrounding areas of the Downtown core. Throughout the city’s history, it has remained spirited and always pushing for new and improving qualities of community in order to make Kansas City truly “a good place to live in�.

Kansas City Crossroads District

Appreciation of the arts is something that grows in a city. It is established by

small groups and grows to become a community, expanding from a city block, to the entire city, and to other towns in the local region. It is no doubt that KC holds one of these artist communities, but in reference to others, it is still expanding. The Kansas City Crossroads district allows for artist to live and display their works. The district is full of rich history of the industrial trade market. Its city blocks are lined with masonry buildings that once served Kansas City and the United States with consumer goods. The current district preserves these masonry lined streets and brings in attractions of art and entertainment to the KC people. In support of the artist an event named First Fridays is held every first Friday of the month to celebrate the community support of its local artists and galleries in the streets of the Crossroads District. This event closes the streets

Figure 2.1 First Fridays at the Crossroads

to allow community members to enjoy local art, music and food. This established community of artists and art enthusiasts only begins to describe the Crossroads as the 5

art district of KC.

2.2 Artist Organizations

In order to define a space that supports artists some precedence must be set so

that an understanding of purpose can be made. In communities where art is recognized there exist organizations that help support artists with necessary resources in order to keep artists from living on the streets and becoming a failure. It is these organizations that create the fabric of the art community. The Washington Project for the Arts, located in Washington D.C., is a non for profit organization that supports local artist in finding work and giving them a place to live and work. Art and Design professor Jerry Monteith was one of the artists who supported this very organization from its start. Jerry describes times of struggle, but these times were grand in many ways. This organization had to define its own environment, finding space in old warehouse buildings and retrofitting them to their own needs. For an artist, time was not the question, as much of it went into working on the next art piece and the space they provided for themselves.

This organization exists still today and continues to help striving artist along their path to success. As an important part of the community, it serves as a model for community support to the proposed Kansas City artist living/working facility.

Kansas City has organizations and establishments that support artists. The

one that is best served to the proposed living/working facility is the Kansas City Artist Coalition. It is similar to the Washington Project for the Arts and in fact was established around the same time. In order to design a facility that supports artists, an organizational background should be established. The KCAC acts as a perfect candidate to support a facility such as this and with the help of the KCAC a smaller project could be established. The Kansas City Artist Coalition is currently located in north downtown KC. The function is much like the WPA with its support of artist giving them a place to stay, work, and show their pieces. The KCAC reaches out further than 6

the Kansas City area with a program that allows foreign exchange artist to live in KC and establish themselves. Expanding outwards allows for the worldwide artist culture to become a community with connecting international points. With the KCAC proposed to be the logistical backing of the proposed artist living/working facility, it can become possible for this facility to become a built place. With such a facility to become a place of action giving it the name Kansas City Project for the Arts is fitting and describes the logistical support it needs to become a successful facility that allows artists to become great.

2.3 Artist Live Work Faculties

A facility designed towards the needs of an artist is unique to housing facilities.

Many of these spaces that exist are sometimes defined by the artist themselves; giving them freedom to facilitate their own needs according to their discipline. In Kansas City there are very few places for artist to live as a community and have facilities that support their work. One new housing building is being renovated to fit artist and is said to accommodate a younger crowd and be affordable. The issue lies within the affordability of living in the Crossroads, the art district, of KC. With proposal of a living and working facility in the Crossroads, affordability is in question, but a larger question becomes about the facilities and ways of living for artist. While Kansas City does not currently imagine any artist living/working facilities on such a grand scale, many other art communities have established spaces for artists to work, live, and display their works to the community.

In Baltimore, Maryland the City Arts apartments are a fine example of such

a facility. Described as a vibrant, energy efficient residence, the building surrounds itself with local restaurants and entertainment, giving it a context of community. The facility itself is newly built on a lot within an existing brick manufacturing structures an industrial district. With 69 units, artists are supported through gallery and work 7

Figure 2.2 City Arts Building

spaces. The apartment options available are a 715 square foot studio or 1 bedroom and a 1,000 square foot 2 bedroom apartment. The City Arts apartments also act as an agent for artist for engagement to outside institutions and community organizations.

This precedent is a leading example of a working artist facility that functions towards the artist needs. There is much support from both internal and external community organizations for the City Arts apartments, making it successful.

On the other end of the spectrum of artist facilities is Russel Industrial Center, a

large complex of industrial buildings retrofitted by the artist themselves. It is said to be a

Figure 2.3 Russel Industrial Center

canvas for many artist and offers many other facility options such as film locations and large galleries for community events. In 2008 the facility took in a large quantity of artist and small business, making it one of the largest facilities of its kind in the Midwest. This ever expanding facility is utilizing its several buildings on the complex and it allows the artist freedom to define their own space as for its boundaries and uses.

These existing artist living facilities serve as models to design a new artist facility 8

that could change the way artist live. Certain qualities of these existing facilities already allow for an artist to feel at home such as high ceilings, concrete floors and open plan.

These attributes allow for freedom and less worry for damage to the apartment itself.

Understanding the program from each example of artist housing gives precedence to what program should facilitate the KCPA building. In general these facilities break down into three separate programs. As an artist a place to live, work, and exhibit works is enough to support the artist. In order to make this design proposal successful these three programs must be included, but the research then becomes of how these spaces are arranged and what design features should be included to then change the way of life of an artist to better improve the final product of art thus creating those experiences for the community. 

9

CHAPTER 3 SITE REVIEW AND ANALYSIS 3.1 Kansas City Site Review KCPA Lot Location 39° 5’16.67”N 94°35’11.67”W 2100 Wyandotte St. Crossroads District Kansas City, MO 64106

Figure 3.1 Kansas City Skyline

KCPA site resides in the Crossroads freight house district. The 32,000 square

foot empty lot sits in the center of renovated industrial buildings. Majority of the renovations have been as apartment lofts. The aesthetic of the context is primarily brick with concrete or stone trim. General surrounding building heights vary from 20 feet to about 120 feet. Topography is low grade comparatively to the north of the site which is hilly. The current site is used for local residence to take their dogs outside. Local residences also are able to park on street parking in the area. Just south of the site are the railroads that run through Kansas City, with Kansas City Union Station and Amtrak service in the local region. The city is walkable within a 2 mile radius. From the site a 20 minute walk will put you into downtown and its entertainment center.

10

Figure 3.2 View South from W 21st.

Figure 3.3 View South from Wyandotte

Figure 3.4 View North from Union Station

11

0.6 mi

1.0 mi

KCPA

0.2 mi

0.4 mi

0.2 mi

0.4 mi

0.6 mi

0.8 mi

Q U A L I T Y H I L L

D O W N T O W N

0.8 mi

C O N V E N T I O N C E N T E R

P O W E R A N D L I G H T

0.6 mi

S P R I N T C E N T E R

0.4 mi

0.2 mi

M AIN ST.

WYANED OT TE ST.

K A U F F M A N C E N T E R

C R O S S R O A D S KANSAS CITY PROJE CT FOR THE ARTS

I- 3 5

KCPA

U SO

0.2 mi

W

ES

T

BL

VD

.

U N I O N S T A T I O N

0.4 mi

L I B E R T Y M E M O R I A L K C PA

0.6 mi

TH

E. 20th ST.

C R O W N C E N T E R

K A N S A S C I T Y , M I S S O U R I

KEY

0.8 mi

Figure 3.5 Kansas City Missouri Map

12

KCPA Site Brick Concrete Framed Street Car Railroad Infrastructure

City Hall Police HQ Fire Station Hospital Library School Park

KCPA

0.1 mi

0.2 mi

0.1 mi

0.2 mi

W. 18th ST.

WALNU T ST.

W. BALTIM ORE AVE.

WYANE DOT TE ST.

CENTR AL ST.

WASHI NGTON ST.

BROAD WAY BLVD.

E. 18th ST.

W. 19th ST.

10°

350°

340°

20°

320°

.

W. 21st ST.

250°

240°

.

30° 40°

MCLEOD LAW

80°

73.5° FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS

SOCIETY FOR CONTEMPORY ARTS

70°

LEEDY VOULKOS ART CENTER

MID AMERICA ARTS ALLIANCE

INGRAMS

E. 20th ST.

SCHOOL FOR BARTENDING

TWENTY 20

80°

90° IAS

LID HT EIG E FR OUS H

100°

S

CK TA KS Q JAC BB

110° W.

n 22

T. dS

120° 26.5°

230°

130° 140°

220° 150°

210° 200°

BRO

0.2 mi

ADW

190°

180°

T. AY S

160°

170°

M AIN ST.

BR

OA

DW

AY

B LV

D.

0.1 mi

FORT SCOT T ST.

W

VD

NORTH WESTE RN AVE.

H UT

BL

VD

W. BALTIM ORE AVE.

70°

W. 21st ST.

PIPER GARAGE

K A N S A S C I T YFREIGHT HOUSE LOFTS PROJECT FOR THE ARTS T

BL

SHERRY LEEDY CONTEMPORY ARTS

WYANE DOT TE ST.

CENTR AL ST.

BROAD WAY BLVD.

WASHI NGTON ST.

SO

PIPER LOFTS

60° ART SUPPLY

270°

ES

T

60° 50°

PABST LOFTS

260°

ES

50°

MANNY’S RESTAURANT

280°

W

E. 19th ST.

40°

W. 20th ST.

300°

KCPA

SO

H UT

30°

310°

290°

20°

W. 19th TERRA CE 10°

330°

0.1 mi

M AIN ST.

C R O S S R O A D S

0.2 mi

U N I O N S T A T I O N

KCPA PIPER LOFTS - 110 ft.

KEY

0.3 mi

KCPA Site Brick Concrete Framed Hist. Reserve Hist. Reserve Street Car Railroad

Pub Cafe Restaurant Store Apart.

Gallery Park Bus Stop

PABST LOFTS - 58 ft.

FRIEGHT HOUSE LOFTS - 56 ft.

STUART HALL LOFTS - 100 ft.

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS - 44 ft.

FREIGHT HOUSE - 30 ft.

VIE W TO NORTH

Figure 3.6 Crossroads Map

13

PIPER LOFTS

UNDER REDEVELOPMENT ft

2

ft

1 1 0f t ft

79

0

79

PA R KING LOT

78

8

786

W YAN DOT TE ST.

44ft

PIPER LOFTS PARKING GARAGE

ft

ARTIST & CRAFTSMAN SUPPLY PARKIN G LOT

McLEOD LAW FIRM

16ft

784

UNDER UREDEVELOPMENT 30ft

17ft

ft 38ft

17ft 783.4 ft

W. 21s t ST.

W. 21st ST.

PARKIN G LOT McLEOD LAW FIRM

151ft

54ft

782 ft 35ft

115 f t

FREIGHT HOUSE LOFTS

1 03 f t

FORT SCOT T S T.

215ft

780 ft 84ft

99ft

56ft

PARKIN G LOT 58ft

24f t

778

40ft 36ft STUART LOFTS

18 f t

F ORT SC OT T ST.

ft

W YA ND OT T E ST.

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS PARKING GARAGE

INGRAMS 2 0f t

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS

776.1 ft JACK STACK BBQ 3 0f t

44 f t 776

Kansas City Project for the Arts 2100 Wyandotte St. Kansas City, MO 64106 100ft 1:30

15ft PARKIN G LOT

Figure 3.7 KCPA Site Map

14

ft

Figure 3.8 Building Heights and Studies

15 UNDER CONSTRUCTION (44ft)

SITE ELEMENTS

BOULEVARD YOGA & HEALING ARTS (16ft)

MCLEOD LAW (17ft)

CONTEXT & HEIGHTS

ARTIST & CRAFTSMAN SUPPLY (16ft)

PABST LOFTS (58ft)

STUART HALL LOFTS (100ft)

REGERISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS (44ft)

UNDER CONSTRUCTION (30ft)

INGRAMS (20ft)

FREIGHT HOUSE LOFTS (56ft)

FREIGHT HOUSE RESTAURANTS (30ft)

PIPER GARAGE (38ft)

MANNYS RESTAURARNT (30ft)

BLUE URBAN LOFTS (110ft)

FIGURE GROUND

3.2 Kansas City Weather Data (from City-data.com)

Table 3.1 Average Temperatures

Table 3.2 Precipitation

16

Table 3.3 Snowfall

Table 3.4 Humidity

17

Table 3.5 Sunshine

Table 3.6 Wind Speed

18

Table 3.7 Wind Frequency

Tornado Activity:

5/20/1957: F5

5/22/1952: F4

Earthquake Activity in Kansas City, Missouri Area

18/2008 at 09:36:59, a magnitude 5.4

9/26/1990 at 13:18:51, a magnitude 5.0

5/4/1991 at 01:18:54, a magnitude 5.0

3/25/1976 at 00:41:20, a magnitude 5.0

6/10/1987 at 23:48:54, a magnitude 5.1

5/4/2001 at 06:42:12, a magnitude 4.7

19

3.3 Kansas City Census Data (from City-data.com) Kansas City Zoning:

Kansas City Zoning Ordinance

Kansas City Code:

IBC 2012

Geographical Data:

39° 5’16.67”N 94°35’11.67”W

Elevation: 882 ft

Land Area: 313.5 square miles

Population Data:

Population in 2013: 467,000

Density: 1,489 people per square mile

Males: 231,437

Females: 235,570

Median Resident Age: 35 years of age

Household income: $45,551 Mean commute time: 20 minutes

Unemployment: 7.3%

Racial Demographics:

White alone: 55.5%

Black alone: 27.8%

Hispanic: 10.4 %

Asian: 2.6%

Two or more Races: 2.6%

Ancestries:

German 15%

Irish 10%

United States 8.2%

English 6.6 %

Italian 3%

French 1.9%

20

CHAPTER 4 FUNCTION

A facility designed towards the needs of an artist is unique to housing facilities.

Most of these existing spaces are defined by the artists themselves; giving them freedom to shape their own space according to the needs of their discipline. Kansas City does not currently have any artist living and working facility on a grand scale.

The precedence set elsewhere allows for a better understand of how an artist live/ work building can and should function. Beyond what already is as an artist facility, the question becomes of how far the boundaries of conceptual architectural expression can be developed. The original thesis principle is to create a place for experiences. This statement becomes its main function, but this function is not physical in nature until acted upon by an architectural expression of space. So what are the boundaries of this function and how do they communicate with functional needs of an artist at work?

The first step in the process is to define the functional needs of an artist at work. In a broad view, the facility needs to have three types of spaces, exhibition, working, and living space. These spaces can be seen in the program of the existing precedence in artist housing. What is important is how these spaces begin to communicate with each other as they exist in space. With this communication boundaries begin to form, but at the same time they are broken with communication. The definition of the three program spaces begins here:

Serving as the connection to the outside community to the inner community of

the building is the exhibition space. The Kansas City Project for the Arts gallery includes gallery spaces for different exhibits and creates volumes for artist to display many different shapes of work and ideas. The following program is:

(see table 4.1) 21

As an artist live/work facility an importance to work space becomes a factor in

finding a place to live. With large workshops and studio space this allows the artist to utilize different disciplines of craft in order to become creative and create better art. In order to allow for exterior communication between the work space and exterior galleries a loading dock allows for transportation of art and materials to become possible. The following program is:

(see table 4.2)

The last space to be included in the KCPA building is the residential apartments

for artists. The function of these spaces becomes unique in that they are modified to house artist’s needs. Each of these needs become individual to the artist due to differences in art disciplines. Sizes of spaces differ and different types of apartment units allow for the artist to feel at home and comfortable with defining their own spaces as needed. The following program is:

(see table 4.3)

Each of these larger program spaces includes smaller supporting spaces. It is

these supporting spaces that become the boundaries between the physical programs.

As each space is placed it defines the form of the building and ultimately defining a conversation between spaces. This conversation becomes the architectural expression that then creates formal and informal interactions between its users. While the main program spaces act as the determining form for the building there exist supports spaces between that allow a final conversation to exist. Two architectural forms that are unique to the KCPA building are the atrium space and car elevator to the residential floors. These spaces will be examined later in this writing, but the importance of these two features gives the KCPA building unique boundaries in the program spaces. The following graphic displays the remaining program space and the final totals of square footage. The following program is:

(see table 4.4) 22

Architectural Program Kasnas City Missouri, Crossroads Dist.

2100 Wyandote Street Architectural Program Kasnas City Missouri, Crossroads Dist.

Art Gallery 2100 KCPA Wyandote Street Gallery Exhibition Space 1 KCPA ArtGallery Gallery1 2 Gallery ExhibitioGallery n Space2 31 Gallery 13 Gallery 42 Gallery Gallery 42 53 Gallery 5 Gallery (Atrium)3 64 Gallery 6 (2nd Floor)4 Gallery Circulation Space 5 Gallery 5 (Atrium) GaGallery llery Se6rv(2nd ant SFloor) pace 6 Gallery Entrance Space Lobby 7 Circulation 8 GallerCustodial y Servant Space Space Restroom 97 Gallery Mens Entrance Lobby Womens Restroom 10 Custodial Space 8 Floor) 11 MensMid Restroom 9 Mens Restroom (Gallery 12Womens Restroom Womens (Gallery Mid Floor) Restroom 10 Gallery Storage 13 (Gallery Mid Space Floor) 11Mens Restroom Circulation 12Womens Restroom (Gallery Mid Space Floor) GGallery allery AStorage dministSpace ration 13 Gallery Administration Lobby 14 Circulation Space KCPA 15 GallerHousing y AdminiSupport stration KCPA Admin ReceptionLobby Desk 16 Gallery Administration 14 Supply Storage Room 17 KCPA Housing Support 15 KCPA Admin GalleryReception Admin Support 18 KCPA Desk 16 CuratorRoom Offic 19 Supply Storage 17 Circulation Space KCPA Gallery Admin Support 18 KCPCurator A Art GaOffic llery 19 KCPA Work Shops and Studios Circulation Space Work Shop KCServant PA Art GSpace allery 20 KCPA Work ShopsLoading Dock and Studios 21 Trash Bay Work Shop Servant Space 22 Custodial 20 LoadingCloset Dock 23 Mens Trash Restroom 21 Bay 24 Womens Restroom 22 Custodial Closet 25 Outdoor Balcony 23 Mens Restroom Circulation Space 24 Womens Restroom Wood Shop 26 25 Outdoor Balcony MachinerySpace Floor Circulation Finishing WoodRoom Shop 26 ToolMachinery Storage Room Floor Dust CollectionFinishing System Space Room Wood Product Storage Tool Storage Room Ceramics 27 Dust Collection System Studio Space Studio Floor Wood Product Storage CermamicsCeramics Storage Studio Space 27 Finish Ceramics Storage Studio Floor Kiln Space Room Cermamics Storage Metals Shop 28 Finish Ceramics Storage Machinery Floor Kiln Room HotShop Wall Metals 28 Metals Product Storage Machinery Floor Tool Storage HotRoom Wall GlassStorage Studio 29 Metals Product Studio Room FLoor Tool Storage Hot Wall Glass Studio 29 Glass Storage Studio Space FLoor Work StudioHot Spaces 30 Wall StudioSpace Floor Glass Storage Custodial Closet Work Studio Spaces 30 Mens Restroom Studio Floor Womens Restroom Custodial Closet Circulation Space Mens Restroom KCPA Work Womens Shops and Studios Restroom KCPACirculation ApartmentSpace Units 1 Bedroom Unit A KCPA Work Shops and Studios KCPA Apartment Foyer Units Kitchen A 1 Bedroom Unit Living Space Foyer Bedroom Kitchen Living Closet Space Bathroom Bedroom Laundry Closet Room 2 Bedroom Unit B Bathroom Foyer Laundry Room Kitchen B 2 Bedroom Unit

Sq. Feet

Quantity

Total Sq. Feet

Efficiency Rating

Parking Spaces

32,407 Sq. Feet

Quantity1

32,407 Total Sq. Feet

30% Efficiency Rating

Parking Spaces

Sq. Feet 32,407

Quantity1

Total Sq. Feet 32,407 10145

30%

Sq.1190 Feet 1500 1920 1190 560 1500 2510 1920 1100 560 1365 2510

Quantity1 1 11 11 11 11

Total Sq. Feet 10145

1100 1085 1365 130 360 1085 475 130 301 360 243 475 1170 301 532 243 1170 813 532 402 708 813 68 402 879 708 144 68 703 879

1 1 1 1 11 11 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 11

4296 4296

3717 3717

1 18158 144 1 Sq. Feet Total Sq. Feet 703 TableQuantity 4.1 KCPA Art Gallery Program 12023 1 112023 8158 Sq.1488 Feet Quantity1 Total Sq. Feet 439 12023 11 12023 25 1488 11 151 439 11 146 25 11 330 151 11 9444 146 1 1985 1985 330 11 1211 1 9444 185 1985 11 1985 66 1211 11 45 185 11 478 66 11 904 904 45 11 546 478 11 170 904 11 904 94 546 11 94 170 11 1867 1867 94 11 1112 11 94 250 11 1867 1867 360 1112 11 145 250 11 1186 1186 360 11 833 11 145 200 11 1186 1186 153 833 11 2328 11640 200 15 1920 153 11 37 2328 51 11640 92 1920 11 92 11 37 187 92 1 29605 92 19 Sq. Feet Quantity Total Sq. Feet 187 683 5464 98 29605 30 1 Sq. Feet Quantity Total Sq. Feet and Studios Program Table 110 4.2 KCPA 1Work Shops 683 8 5464 260 30 11 160 110 11 20 260 11 50 160 11 53 20 11 894 11 894 50 72 53 11 170 894 11 894

23

Glass Storage Space Work Studio Spaces Studio Floor Custodial Closet Mens Restroom Womens Restroom Circulation Space KCPA Work Shops and Studios KCPA Apartment Units A 1 Bedroom Unit Foyer Kitchen Living Space Bedroom Closet Bathroom Laundry Room B 2 Bedroom Unit Foyer Kitchen Living Space Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Closet 1 Closet 2 Bathroom Laundry Room Studio Unit C Foyer Living Space Kitchen Bathroom Laundry Room Studio Unit (Small) D Foyer Laundry Room Closet Living Space Kicthen Bathroom 1 Bedroom Unit (Handicap Accessible) Foyer Laundry Room Bathroom Bedroom Closet Living Space Kitchen Art Studio Units F Foyer Laundry Room Bathroom Unique Living Space Avergae Apartment Servant Spaces Residential Lobby 31 Mail Room 32 Car Elevator Shaft 33 Car Loading Dock 34 Elevator Lobby 35 Vertical Circulation 36 Balcony Space 37 Interactive Floors Space 38 Roof Terrace 39 Circulation Space KCPA Apartment Units Sub Parking Level 40 Parking Area 41 Elevator Lobby 42 Mechanical Room 43 Car Elevator Shaft Vertical Circulation Sub Parking Level Parking Requirements Residential Museum Space Bicycle Building Totals

30

E

153 2328 1920 37 92 92 187 Sq. Feet 683 30 110 260 160 20 50 53 894 72 170 204 150 150 20 20 55 53 779 30 536 110 50 53 516 53 23 13 330 55 42 731 35 55 76 150 20 300 95 1638 35 53 50 1500 27084 2533 160 310 350 1080 688 156 645 5021 2200 Sq. Feet Table 19912 390 1070 310 746

Sq. Feet

1 5 1 1 1 1

11640

9 29605 Quantity Total Sq. Feet 8 5464 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 894 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 5453 1 1 1 1 1 2 1032 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2193 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 22932 14 490 14 742 14 700 14 21000 1 27084 1 1 6 1860 6 2100 6 6480 7 4816 4 624 2 1290 1 1 35 65052 Quantity Total Sq. Feet 4.3 KCPA Apartment Units Program 1 1 1 2 620 1 22738 Total Quanity Parking Spaces 18 1 per 1 Unit ( 13ft height min.)

19 2.5 per 1,000 sq. ft space 26 1 per 3 Dwelling Units Quantity Total Sq. Feet EfďŹ ciency Rating Parking Spaces 135553 15% 37 Vehicle (plus street parking) 20332.95 26 Bicycle 155885.95

24

34 31 35 32 36 33 37 34 38 35 39 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 40 41 42 43

Apartment Servant Spaces Car Loading Dock Residential Elevator Lobby Mail Room Vertical Circulation CarBalcony ElevatorSpace Shaft Car Loading Dock Interactive Floors Space Elevator Lobby Roof Terrace Vertical Circulation Circulation Space Balcony Space KCPA Apartment Units Interactive Floors Space Sub Parking Level Roof Terrace Parking Area Circulation Elevator Space Lobby KCPAMechanical ApartmentRoom Units Sub Parking Shaft Level Car Elevator Parking Area Vertical Circulation SubElevator ParkingLobby Level Room ParkMechanical ing Requirem ents Car Elevator ResideShaft ntial Vertical MuseCirculation um Space Sub ParkinB g iLceyvcelel ParkingBuilding RequireTotals ments Residential Museum Space Bicycle Building Totals

27084 350 2533 1080 160 688 310 156 350 645 1080 5021 688 2200 156 645 Sq. Feet 5021 19912 2200 390 1070 Sq. Feet 310 19912 746 390 1070 310 Table 746

16 27084 2100 16 6480 17 4816 1860 46 624 62 2100 1290 6480 16 71 4816 624 354 65052 Quantity2 Total Sq.1290 Feet 1 1 351 65052 Quantity2 Total Sq. Feet 620 1 1 22738 1 Total Quanity Parking Spaces 2 620 4.4 KCPA Sub Level Parking Program 18 1 per 1 Unit ( 13ft height min.)

1 19 2.5 per 1,000 sq. ft space 2273268 1 per 3 Dwelling Units TotalSq. QuaFeet nity Parking Spaces Spaces Sq. Feet Quantity Total Efficiency Rating Parking 18 137peVehicle r 1 Unit(plus ( 13ftstreet heighparking) t min.)

135553 15% 19 226 .5Bicycle per 1,000 sq. ft space 20332.95 26 1 per 3 Dwelling Units 155885.95 Sq. Feet Quantity Total Sq. Feet Efficiency Rating Parking Spaces 135553 15% 37 Vehicle (plus street parking) 20332.95 26 Bicycle 155885.95

Table 4.5 KCPA Program Totals The final program revealed a total square footage of about 155,000 square feet. With respect of the program the building reaches a height of 110’ and 6 stories.

25

CHAPTER 5 COMMUNITY ORIENTATION

5.1 Introduction to a Community

Space is a common link between our existences as humans. Time has allowed

space to exist in such a way that architects can allow built forms to manipulate time and space to alter the human perception. Like an artist it is an architect’s job to capture an expression with form giving the user a unique experience. Unlike an artist’s moment to capture the emotions of a single viewer, an architect looks to the masses and plans for a group of people to experience emotions as a whole. This notion to an expression of form becomes an orientation to a community experience. To formally understand what the word community means, the following are two definitions defining community:

com·mu·ni·ty kəˈmyo͞onədē/ noun 1. a group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common.

2. a feeling of fellowship with others, as a result of sharing common attitudes, interests, and goals.

These definitions describe the action of a community, but they do not define the space required for a community. So the question arises, what is the shape of this physical community? The answer does not lie within a single space, such that could be expressed by an artist, but it might be multiple spaces, that are expressed by the work of an architect. This definition of community requires a sense of physical scale, something beyond human scale to inspire.

26

5.2 Internal and External Space

The scale of community can be broken down into a few different sizes, ranging

from human scale to well beyond human scale. Before these scales are defined into spaces, it is important to understand that culture is a large part of the thoughts of an artist or designer. Each culture has their unique ideas about space and community which defines a unique experience. The Aesthetic Townscape, a document of research on spatial arrangement based on culture, is a guide to understanding these different scales of spaces that orient towards a community. Ashihara (1983) begins his research with understanding the orientation of two architectural elements, the floor and the wall.

These two elements present a smaller personal scale of architecture that can be seen to separate two spaces in a vertical or horizontal plane. Along each axial orientation is a difference of cultures giving an understanding to communal spaces. For example Ashihara (1983) refers to the thickness of walls defining a culture. It is evident in Japanese architecture that walls are thin and arranged in a way for natural ventilation.

Western architecture presents thicker walls for natural insulation. The geographical location plays a roll on construction methods, but these variances have created meaning behind the architectural expression given within the walls structure. The basic teachings of Buddhism define two perceptions, muga, referring to space and mujo, representing time. This conceptual framework is distinctive to Japanese architecture and gives ideas to their perception of space (Ashihara, 1983, p.10). These axial orientations also create a sense of interior and exterior spaces. With an arrangements and physical

Figure 5.1 Cultural Spatial Orders

27

anatomy of these horizontal and vertical planes a reference to culture can be made and this creates two unique understandings of community. Japanese architecture is said to be oriented to the floor. For environmental reasons Japanese structures take form to allow for passive energy solutions, but aside from passive energy solutions is to meet physical comfort, a metaphysical idea of developing space towards external and internal functions.

Around the world the boundaries between inside and outside are different

culturally, and this architectural expression of inside and outside are what define physical community spaces. Discussed in the Aesthetic Townscape, Ashihara (1983) uses a reference to where people where their shoes as to define inside spaces and outside spaces. Although this becomes a discussion of cultures the important note of this action can be exemplified by comfort in hotels around the world. The external aesthetic of a hotel may vary from place to place but there is a general construction that defines a hotel. The internal order of space is what defines the community orientation, culture, and boundaries of internal and external space. Where Japanese people remove their shoes is seen as internal space. Upon entering the lobby of the hotel the people customarily remove their shoes, feeling comfort of an interior space. At night the front doors of the Japanese hotel are locked and personal activities such as bathing take place in communal rooms (Ashihara, 1893, p. 18). The action of removing the shoes in a Japanese hotel or inn makes the space an internal space, much like a communal house for guest to enjoy themselves along with the company of others. Western hotels are quit opposite in reference to the internal order of space. Not like the customs of Japan, western people tend to remove their shoes in the privacy of their room. Ashihara (1983) refers to the western style hotel to keeping its doors open 24 hours a day and where shoes are worn in the lobby and corridors. This openness is what defines the space as external even if it is still enclosed by walls and floors. The orientation of boundaries lies within the privacy of one’s personal room to the public lobby and 28

corridors. These boundaries of external and internal space define cultural architectural expressions, but when contemplated it is a difference in community spaces that define boundaries of human interaction. This same notion of Japanese and Western spatial

Figure 5.2 Order of Interiors and Exteriors

boundaries can be seen in university campuses, where Japanese universities are interior spaces although being open to air (Ashihara, 1983, p. 19). So as these spatial references are beginning to become defined the architecture begins to place itself into a communal orientation.

A reference to the scale of architecture defines communal spaces. References

to the interiors and exteriors of a house or hotel are small scale. With an understanding though of the boundaries of these spaces, difference scales can be viewed to model how a building will engage with itself, its surroundings, its neighborhood, and its city. Viewing a university as an exterior space with interior spaces within leads to an orientation that is unique to the urban fabric of towns and cities. Ashihara (1983) discusses the arrangement of public spaces in cities in Japan to be similar to the principle of garden design. With a similar order just as a university or hotel, these types of spaces are enclosed by walls and more interior than they are exterior, but remain

Figure 5.3 Town Square

29

open air. This public space is more known as a town square and it is said that the Italians have the largest living rooms in the world, with the most exquisite town squares (Ashihara, 1983, p.33). A town square’s community engagement is seen to be a place of social interaction. It is a living space for the people of the town as they may visit the square many times a day to chat with friends, relax and socialize. Ashihara (1983) refers to this internal order to be a worldwide expression in the urban fabrics of smaller cities where 1 to 2 story houses face inwards from a circumscribing boundary. These different scales of spaces with orders towards internal and external expression shape the way community space is defined.

5.3 Proxemic Spaces

The Kansas City Project for the Arts building is one that will display different

levels of community orientation through ordered spaces of interior and exterior values.

The design of a community space can be diagrammatically simple, but these spaces are complex in the nature of human interaction needs to responding to the space created.

It is said that conversation happens in passing. This action is simple and we can remember a time when this is true, but it is not the space we were in that we think of, only the conversation. These spaces are communal and not all of them are intentional public spaces. Through careful design these spaces can become designed and provoke conversation in passing. There is a sociological study that defines human interactions base on distances known as proxemic relationships. It is within these distanced spaces that informal conversations occur between humans and the architecture. Sociologist Edward T. Hall studied proxemics and defined its science, and given some of his research we can understand the spaces where informal actions occur. The science itself is quite complex and difficult to understand as it is describing person to person interactions. Understanding a few basics though will help define spaces to form architectural expressions that ultimately provoke user experiences mentioned before.

The point of this research begins here, 30

“The measured proxemic interval is somewhat comparable to temperature (only more complex). For example, attempting to get meaningful measures of density using criteria such as people per acre is a poor approximation at best. To assess density, the investigator needs to know sensory involvement over time. The problem of the planner is confounded by the fact that ethnic groups vary as to the degree to which they are sensory involved with each other and therefore dependent on walls and sensory screens of various types� (Hall, 1974, p16).

This passage referring to sensory involvement is a direct involvement with architecture itself. With Halls statement we can correlate the research of Ashihara on cultural aspects of walls and floors as well as internal and external spaces. This information is valuable to a designer in their attempt to create a space that triggers a daydream experience. Hall (1974) has stated that it is not the best way to measure the proxemic interactions by using measurable distance units, but in a different scale based on sensory involvement. These points describe how an individual reacts spatially: 1. Context 2. Emotions 3.

Personality Differences

and these points broken down further are: 1. Setting a.

Material component

b.

Spatial component

c.

Temporal component

2. Activity a. Work b. Play c.

Defensive activities

d. Language 31

3.

Relationship in social systems

a.

Relative status

b. Age c. Sex These details of how setting, activity, and relationship are defined are culturally determined (Hall, 1974, p.16). This is also true with architecture. The ways Hall’s and Ashihara’s research intersect describe spatial qualities architecturally using only words.

As mentioned before these proxemic studies become complex and begin to describe the nature of human interactions with a cultural bias. The intention of this research is only to give framework to space, volume, frame, and function within.

While this research remains a guiding factor to understanding human interaction

within spaces, architecture is defined from physical members requiring numbers to define its true spatial expression. Edward Hall determined distances based on these proxemic relationships, although he believes numbers don’t adequately describe these relationships. The social interactions are different scales ranging from distances that are intimate at 18”, personal at 4’, social at 12’, and public at 25’ plus. These distances can

Figure 5.4 Proxemic Basics

help an architect size spaces base on their intention of use. These distances are only represented in a single axis, so by creating a second and third axis, these distances 32

become volumes, better representing space. These volumes then become the framework in designing the space in order to satisfy its function. The difference in these

Figure 5.5 Proxemic Volumes

specified program spaces is often discussed as the servant spaces to the served space.

Louis Kahn uses these servant spaces to allow served spaces to be uninterrupted with intention that the servant spaces become places of conversation between the user and the architecture. It leads us to think that these servant spaces become places of informal conversation as conversation does happen in passing. So can these spaces be designed? Edward Hall also presents a study of proxemic relationships as types of interactions. These interactions between two people are seen as competitive

Figure 5.6 Proxemic Relationships

33

direct, cooperative semi-indirect, cooperative semi-direct and coactive indirect. These relationships too become framework for designed servant space.

5.4 The Architectural Expression

The importance of the experience for the user of the building shows how

successful the building is. Like an artist the painting is to capture a unique experience seen through the eyes of the artist and past down to its viewers. In a three dimensional world the experience happens through space and it is the architect who guides the user to have those experiences. The KCPA building is one with a unique program unlike many other residential buildings. This alone defines a unique experience for its residence and visitors. Like much of the research, this design proposal is much more complex and requires the research to logically define the spaces in order to achieve its goal as an architectural expression. The KCPA building represents community, and given its function as an artist live/work facility its conceptual boundaries are broadened and creative. The following sketches are conceptual ideas that begin to form spaces based on boundaries, proxemic relationships, and the internal and external value of

Figure 5.7 KCPA Qualities

34

spaces all in efforts to strengthen the community of the KCPA. The first set of sketches describe qualities of the KCPA that allow it to function and be attentive to the artist’s needs. By allowing wall space, open plan, flexibility of wall space, accessibility, and ease of movement and material transport the facility becomes a place of options and sense of openness. This becomes an important value to the artist for their sense of freedom. While these qualities might be in reference to the KCPA gallery, they can also be applied to the residential program and work program. The complexity of this

Figure 5.8 Community Rooms and Spatial Boundaries

design proposal comes from the spatial boundaries and order of the program to design places of community. Given the research of internal and external spaces, and proxemic relationships we can define spaces for conversation between humans, and humans and architecture. Louis Kahn (Kahn, 1972) believed that streets of a city are intended as community rooms. He described these spaces to not be dominated by vehicles but by people. This sort of community room refers to a town square mentioned in the Aesthetic Townscape. His example to explain these community rooms refers to a performance theater with the seating becoming a public community space, the backstage as the actor’s private house, and the curtains as the boundary between the two. The boundary between becomes the complex architectural expression, in that it may exist in one instance but not in another, which loosens the boundary between public and private spaces much like a Japanese hotel. In reference to the street becoming a community space, the boundary between the KCPA building and the street is permeable, allowing 35

for the artists house to become a public space when allowed, much like the curtain in a theater. For this relationship of spaces to work an order of the program must be present.

This means that spaces must be placed precisely to ensure that private spaces can become public, which creates a dynamic conversation between the building and its environment.

As mentioned before many of these architectural expressions and relationships

exist on different scales. With the environment and the Kansas City Project for the Arts building in conversation the interior conversation is left to be determined with a spatial quality. These spatial boundaries discussed by Kahn refer to smaller spaces as well.

Kahn (Kahn, 1972) believed that spaces are divided into servant and served spaces.

In the KCPA building these spaces have a quality of being either internal or external depending on the boundary that is set. As seen in many of Louis Kahn’s work there is a permeable boundary between servant and served spaces. This conversation within the architecture is an order of programmed spaces. Louis Kahn (Kahn, 1972) refers to

Figure 5.9 Order of Programed Space and Vertical Boundaries

servant spaces becoming community rooms, with the example of a stair landing as a place of conversation, social interaction, or private lounging space. This spatial quality is a precedent to show the relationship between internal and external spaces, proxemic relationships, and community orientation, only to prove that conversation can happen in passing in a designed space. The intention of this precedence is to use Kahn’s thoughts and work to define servant spaces and small scale spaces as places of conversation.

36

This definition of spatial quality for the KCPA relies on the research for the

function of the building as a place of community to be successful. There is one last quality of the building that remains. Two scales of conversation have been addressed and there exists a third scale, most similar to a town square. Already within the KCPA

Figure 5.10 Town Square Scheme Development

building is a small scale of interior conversation, but to allow this small conversation to interact with the large conversation an intermediate spatial quality must be defined.

Alejandro Aravenda discusses the qualities of a community through architecture with a multitude of scales, much like the proposed KCPA building. His works have defined an intermediate interior conversation by using an open core, or an atrium space. Aravenda (Aravenda 2014) explains the disadvantages of a servant core within a building to be detrimental to the buildings internal community. By opening the core an interior conversation occurs between each side of the building. In this he has found that the users of the building are less likely to feel isolated. This open core concept reveals a relationship between the solids and voids of the building. While the central core remains a void physically, its potential to become solid occurs metaphysically when conversation exist between humans and the architecture. On the many levels of the building there is

Figure 5.11 Relationships of Solid and Void

37

a network of conversation, creativity, and sense of community strengthened within the building. Referring back to the curtain of the theater the boundary between public and private spaces from the exterior surroundings to the KCPA’s center core becomes the main program of the gallery, the residential units, and the workshops and studios.

The last quality that serves the Kansas City Project for the Arts building is the

program itself. As these programs become internal and external spaces, places of community, and boundaries, they act as a place for experiences to take place. This reference to the artists painting provoking daydreaming to its viewer comes alive in a three dimensional volume. The program itself its complex spatial, but it also holds an architectural expression that provokes experiences and triggers the internal conversation. The architectural program calls itself living space, working space, and exhibition space, but these names do not describe the actions of the internal conversation. More suitable names are coexistence space, place of action, and public domain, respectfully corresponding to living space, working space and exhibit space.

These spaces describe their function towards spatial qualities. The diagram describes

The diagram represents an internal conversation within the KCPA building.

The conceptual program spaces are diagramed as the following: Blue: coexistence space Red: place of action Yellow: public domain The black lines represent the boundaries of spaces that overlap and converse architectural between a central core space.

Figure 5.12 Internal Conversation

38

these actions existing in space. As an artist defines their space, their living spaces might overlap with work space, and perhaps overlap with exhibit space as well. It is these overlaps that define a unique architectural expression and creates an internal conversation with the architecture as it is dynamic. Visionary architect Sou Fujimoto is a leader in these types of spaces that are unique to form and define traditional program spaces differently. These few quotes from his book Futurospective Architecture discuss the relationships between the architecture and human interactions as to create conversation and community.

“Function is the relationship of man and space.” (Fujimoto, 2013, p.89) “A nest for people is a hospitably arranged “functional” place. On the other hand a cave is irrespective to one’s need; it is heuristic domain where infinite possibility is born out of interaction with one. Rich complexity inherent in the cave must behold the possibility to the future of architecture.” (Fujimoto, 2013, p.56) Many of Sou’s works are evident of proxemic relationships and loosening the boundaries of internal and external spatial quality. Similar to his thoughts of the nest and cave, Bachelard (1964) refers to the experience of a nest in the Poetics of Space.

In his description he narrates the life of a nest and its value to the life of the bird. The importance of the nest is that it is a static living situation for a period of time, consisting of a single space of pure function. This space is also constructed for only one function and time period. Sou Fujimoto’s comment on the cave though brings a new respect into the nature of future architecture. When we think of a cave we see it as not as a single space but a multitude of spaces of all different sizes. Applying this to an architectural program is difficult, but we can assume that these spaces will occupy a function arranged in no particular order. So when describing the function of the KCPA building as a place of coexistence, place of action, and public domain, we can better understand how these spaces begin to act upon each other within a large volume.

To discuss some final thoughts of the community orientation of the KCPA 39

building, it is important to understand that the spaces all serve a similar function. While the larger program calls for living, work, and exhibit space, each space within these spaces calls for similar actions, that are named coexistence space, place of action, and public domain. As these spaces are structured, an overlap of these actions defines the physical structure of the architecture, creating an architecture expression. Within its scales of public versus private spaces include solids and voids that provoke an internal conversation between its users and the user and the architecture.

40

CHAPTER 6 ORDER OF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

Throughout this process the design of the building has arranged its functionality

in many different ways in order to rule out inefficient means of living in artist housing.

While the functions changed so did the initial forms of the building. The process began with a collage image created from existing structures that exemplify some aesthetic, material, and functional orders that the facility should have given its location and context in a former industrial setting.

Figure 6.1 Concept Collage

6.1 Initial Programmatic Volumes

The image above (figure 6.1) was the first conceptual idea of what a facility such

as an artist living and working facility should look like with its program in mind in a city urban environment. With heavy contextual ties to the surrounding industrial masonry buildings the lower space would act as the workshop. Sprouting up would be living spaces arranged in such a way that a unique form and aesthetic would deem the facility an iconic structure in the Kansas City skyline. Lastly the idea of movement as a function of the building became a strong design aspect. Vehicular traffic became involved on a 41

three dimensional plane with respect of the structure and would allow for a reinvented dynamic of human to vehicle relationship. This initial concept was a deciding factor in much of the function of the facility due to the needs of the artist to move their materials and art from place to place. With an established program, some initial massing’s for the building was examined in order to start determining spatial relationships and form, along with how the building should be oriented on the site according to solar orientation, building approach, and functionality purposes of service vehicles, gallery attendants, and residences related to the existing urban fabric. As all of these are required to work together, many iterations of the facility’s program analysis were required to create a unique narrative of how the facility would engage within its environment. The program design analysis is as following: (White = parking structure, Blue = Residencies, Red = Work Spaces, Yellow = Gallery Space, Green = CafÊ/Restaurant, Purple = Lobby) 1. (Figure 6.2) The first design iteration was formed from the typical podium scheme and

Figure 6.2 Program Volumes 1

allowing east and west light to fill in the residential units. With residential space on top maximum amounts of light is filtered into the spaces. With parking adjacent to the works paces, an ease of movement between the vehicle and work space become a dominate feature.

42

Figure 6.3 Program Volumes 2

2. (Figure 6.3) The second iteration of program massing addressed the need of a central vertical circulation, while work spaces were combined with residential units and parking as well. This gives the residence an ease of access to their vehicle for easy transport.

Figure 6.4 Program Volumes 3

3. (Figure 6.4) The third program massing scheme allows spaces to merge together to create a dynamic community’s pace within the center. The parking structure attaches to the work spaces allowing for an ease of transport between the car and personal space.

4. (Figure 6.5) The forth iteration involves arrangement of spaces for direct or indirect lighting. The northern side would house the work spaces giving them maximum indirect lighting for art disciplinary needs. Parking spaces run along the south façade taking in much of the direct light. With parking at full height, access to the vehicle becomes a 43

priority of ease of function.

6.2 Final Programmatic Volumes

Figure 6.5 Program Volumes 4

The first initial program analysis developments reveals some functionality

benefits that drove the next design iterations to resolve all the complex factors. The most important space that became consistent was the gallery, placed on ground level and on the primary streets allowing for an inviting entry and approach to the KCPA building. From the initial concept collage, the parking situated with the full height of the facility was a unique scheme, and allowed for residence to move from their unit to their vehicle in less time and effort. This idea was developed from the artist’s place of work.

The work space could not be determined due to differences in artist disciplines and

Figure 6.6 KCPA Movement

44

personalities. By expanding square footage in the residential units, residents are given the option to set up studio in their own privacy. Public workshops and studios adjacent to the residential units give a mental separation and an acoustical separation. The next few design schemes were developed from these ideas determined from the initial program volume forms. By this point the form of the building started to be determined by its programmatic needs. The importance of community orientation then began to detail the building as it was developed.

Figure 6.7 Program Volumes 5

5. (Figure 6.7) The next design iteration involved gallery space on the ground level on the northern portion of the site where the most traffic occurs. With residential units arranged on the east, west, and north in the structure lighting can be controlled and indirect lighting becomes a primary need to working on art. The parking structure

Figure 6.8 Program Volumes 6

45

became a system of accessibility for the artist, as well as taking in the direct light.

6. (Figure 6.8) Through the development of the center core, the next step was to form spaces based on the research of proxemic interactions, an internal conversation and spatial needs for different disciplines of artist. Spatially the arrangement becomes a puzzle in order to fit spaces efficiently. By using an affinity matrix ranges for different volumes of units determined their volume and function. The dynamic nature of the units

Figure 6.9 Art Discipline Affinity Matrix

developed from Sou Fujimoto’s comment on nest architecture and cave architecture, and the dynamic nature of design space for an internal conversation between humans and architecture.

Figure 6.10 Program Volumes 7

7. (Figure 6.10) The final program analysis development keeps the center atrium allowing for the puzzle of residential units to communicate internally. The program of residential units provides adequate personal work space for artists. As the gallery becomes the entry of the facility it becomes projected into the street and becomes 46

a “sign� for the building. Spatial requirements for the residential program increased leaving less space for a parking structure within the height of the building. To accommodate this change, a loading dock and car elevator that is accessible to each

The diagram represents vehicular traffic on a vertical axis that runs the height of the building.

The KCPA features residential loading docks that allow material and artwork transport to be easier, using a vehicle elevator and loading zones.

Figure 6.11 Vehicle Loading Dock

floor allows for the user to still connect the vehicle to the unit. The last adaptation of the facility was to separate specific work spaces from the residential units. Disciplines that require machinery and large spaces moved to the ground level and are separated by air space, allowing for a natural acoustical, but still adjacent to the gallery and residential units for ease of movement.

47

6.3 Principle Design Statements

With each of these program design iterations written statements were formed to

allow the building to conceptually come to life. The statements separate function, form, economy, and time into individual categories.

Function- The function is to serve the artist in the creative thought process and art work assembly. Provide community atmosphere on an internal scale with the building and an external scale with the buildings surrounding environment. Provide space for artist to live, work, and exhibit art. Allow ease of transportation for materials and projects.

Form- Defined by principles of community and cultural framework. Allows solid and void spaces to become similar in nature creating an overlap. Defines loose spatial relationships between private and public spaces with a complex boundary. Exercises loose spatial relationships of exterior and interior spaces. Takes form of artist’s thoughts, works, and disciplines.

Economy- The KCPA building should become a public hot spot, affordable housing and sustainable living, passive and active systems to supplement needs of art preservation.

Time- The building becomes a timeless piece of architecture. It allows for future discussion of dwelling typologies related to communities and cultures. It shall be accessible 24/7 by those who are admitted.

6.4 Initial Design Development

The design progression of the KCPA building began from the final iterations of

the programmatic volume studies. Using the volume models as guidance to determine spatial relationships a few preliminary floor plans were developed using the basic program and conceptual ideas discussed. One important note is that the community orientation of the building was not fully developed during these studies. This phase was merely to understand the spaces and the site limits with codes and zoning requirements. The following images are sketches of floor plans and ideas related to the final programmatic volumes.

48

The development of this sketch begins with a sky parking garage and its relationship to residential units. The scheme shoes double loaded corridors with parking and vertical circulation adjacent to the residential portion.

Figure 6.12 Development Sketch 1

Similar to Figure 6.12 this scheme features a double loaded corridor but with central vertical egress.

Figure 6.13 Development Sketch 2

49

Figure 6.14 Public Sub Level Parking

50

Figure 6.15 Gallery and Workshop Floor

51

Figure 6.16 Residential Floors Above Gallery

52

Figure 6.17 Residential Floors Continued

53

Figure 6.18 KCPA SD Section

54

These sketches (figures 6.14, 6.15, 6.16, 6.17, 6.18) of plans and sections began

from the concept of a central core allowing for an interior conversation within the KCPA building. These schemes also support a vehicle loading dock (figure 6.11) rather than sky parking garages on each residential floor. This design scheme for the building displayed features that gave the building a portal from the interior core to the exterior environment. This gave residence a place to interact with both interior and exterior of the KCPA building while bringing in ventilation and sun from the south. With introducing a central core to the building, attention to solar design became an issue of getting sunlight to reach the atrium floor. This issue alone determined that the height of the building should only be so tall in order to preserve effects the sun had on the interior of the building.

After review of this stage of development a few key aspects need to become

apparent in the design in order to further develop the design. With the principle of a community orientation, the architectural expressions needed to integrate into the form and allow an internal conversation to be amplified by the design. Seen in the section above (figure 6.18) are spaces that project from the exterior and interior facade. These projections are intended to create a conversation between the architecture itself. By allowing these projections to become a dominate feature space is defined differently at each level of the building. The final step of the initial design development led to a better understanding of the final form for the KCPA building. The following diagrams and drawings present forms that follow the community orientation principle.

Figure 6.19 Initial Programed Spaces

55

21st Street

DINING

LOBBY

GALLERY

DWN

PARKING

DOCK

Fort Scott

ATRIUM

STAGING

WORK STUDIO

Figure 6.20 Initial Gallery and Workshop Plan

56

Wyanedotte Street

GALLERY

The design demonstrates some development towards the community orientation

principle as the original principle idea behind an architectural expression that dedicates space to ideas, conversation, social interactions, and the arts.. With consideration of personal work spaces residential units feature open plan and large space to designate work space from living space within their personal apartment unit (figure 6.21). The internal qualities of the buildings expressed below (figures 6.22, 6.23, 6.24) are derived from the research in Chapter 5, with an idea expressed of an internal conversation as well as acting as a place for action to occur. Although this scheme is an initial approach to the final design, this form is not fully evident of the design research.

20’

20’

25’

REF

40’

REF

REF

U

W

30’

30’

W

U WD

DR

DR

35’ 35’

REF

17’

REF

30’ 17’

Figure 6.21 Initial Residential Units Plans

57

Figure 6.22 Initial Internal Conversation

Figure 6.23 Initial Gallery and Atrium Section

JUNE 21 = 73.5ยบ

DEC. 21 = 26.5ยบ

Figure 6.24 Initial East Building Section

58

Figure 6.25 Initial North Facade

Figure 6.26 Initial South Facade

The exterior architectural expression of the Kansas City Project for the Arts

building begins to create a dialogue of the residential units and their relationship to each other with the spatial requirements of each unique art discipline. Final thoughts of this design determined that the form and internal conversation were not fully expressive of a communal orientation. From this point in the design development the form had followed the programmatic volume of iteration 6 (Figure 6.8). Further development was best suited with iteration 7 that represents its final form and all of the principle concepts.

59

CHAPTER 7 ORDER OF THE ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION

The architectural expression of the KCPA building is a fundamental part in its

principle of community orientation. As mentioned in the introduction of this proposal for an artist live/work building, the building should provoke emotional and daydreaming experiences similar to the experience of viewing art. Unlike a two dimensional space that some art represents, a three dimensional space is the background to a heightened experience. The qualities of the architecture allow for different experiences to take place in space and time. After an initial design development review, the KCPA building almost provoked these experience through the architectural expression. With integration of a community orientation principle, the form and purpose of the building was determined.

With attention to details of lighting, materials, structure, and servant components, the buildings functionality became one with its purpose as a place for experience.

Continuing with concepts like proxemic relationships, designed conversation space, volumes of solids and voids, and finally an internal conversation relative to an internal and external orientation, the KCPA became a successful design proposal that demonstrates a place of function and community. The following diagrams, images, and commentary are the final pieces of process that represent the final design proposal for an artist live/work community building in the Kansas City Crossroads district.

7.1 Final Design Development

With an initial design development scheme already in place, the next step to the

process was to understand the building as a place rather than just a structure. Between the initial and final drawings, intermediate sketches were drawn in order to move the process forward. These drawings (figures 7.6, 7.7 ,7.8, 7.9) placed program spaces logically and began the final form of the KCPA building. While the residential units used 60

the community orientation principle, the gallery and workshops were determined by basic program function diagrams (figures 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5). Since the function of the KCPA is unique, sizes of spaces needed to be changed in order to maintain efficient function. The start of the final development for the residential units was taking the model of a town square (figures 7.10, 7.11, 7.12, 7.13, 7.14, 7.15) and using its spaces to understand the central core as a place for internal conversation. Using an atrium open to the ground floor, the residential levels program involved two egress shafts, a central corridor, and residential units arranged according to proxemic relationships, small scale internal conversation, and their sizes due to unique art disciplines.

Figure 7.1 Gallery Program Function Diagram

61

Figure 7.2 Wood Shop Program Function Diagram

Figure 7.3 Metals Shop Program Function Diagram

Figure 7.4 Glass Studio Program Function Diagram

Figure 7.5 Ceramics Program Function Diagram

62

Figure 7.6 Ground Floor Plan Sketch

Figure 7.7 Residential Floor Sketch 1

Figure 7.8 Residential Floor Sketch 2

Figure 7.9 Residential Floor Sketch 3

63

Figure 7.10 Town Square Diagram 1

Figure 7.11 Town Square Diagram 2

Figure 7.12 Town Square Diagram 3

Figure 7.13 Town Square Diagram 4

Figure 7.14 Town Square Diagram 5

Figure 7.15 Town Square Diagram 6

64

Studies of the town square space being applied to the form of the building led to

a few different ideas of volume spaces. Described in Chapter 5 was an idea of designing programed spaces for conversation. This idea came about from discussions by Louis Kahn and Sou Fujimoto. In exploration of this idea spaces began to define boundaries between overlaps with different areas and heights of spaces. In two dimensional space,

Figure 7.16 Dynamic Overlap 1

Figure 7.17 Dynamic Overlap 2

these volumes reveal an interesting dynamic of spaces within a singular larger volume.

What this relationship represents is an internal conversation between the architecture and the users of each space. This same conversation is seen on a larger scale within the center atrium space of the building. The sketches above (7.16, 7.17) demonstrate 65

this overlap in a two dimensional space. The models shown (figure 7.18, 7.19) begin to show the overlaps of spaces in three dimensional spaces using volumes of proxemic distances. These spaces are designed for conversation in passing. On the small scale they provoke that internal conversation where an internal space might become an external space based on its purpose. Another view is that they define different scales of solid and void space, both physically and metaphysically. So the question about

Figure 7.18 Residential Unit Model

Figure 7.19 Dynamic Overlap Model

66

these spaces is where can these be applied to and will the boundaries of the overlaps deem the space successful or a failure? The progress of the final development led to the exploration of these spaces being applied to the residential units and the art gallery.

Both of these programs are loose in nature as discussed before due to their cultural backgrounds. As an artist live/work facility that’s purpose is an international community, the idea of culture may become diluted needing for a broad idea of spatial boundaries.

This need for redesigned spaces allows for these dynamic spaces to become a potential new typology in residential. Also mentioned before was the notion for an artist to design their own space to their personal liking. This new typology of space could bring forward new opportunities for creativity, giving the artist larger volumes and different spaces for different purposes. Where this new typology of dynamic space occurs in the art gallery also defines space in a different way. By using different areas and volumes, these single spaces become galleries while their overlaps act as places for personal interactions between art gallery visitors. The overlaps also act as portals to the next space. So to

Figure 7.20 The Dynamic Town Square

revisit how these spaces my look, the sketch (figure 7.20) shows relationships of spaces as they move down in scale from the larger environment to smaller personal spaces.

With each overlap is a boundary that becomes a dynamic part of the internal form.

67

The pre-final KCPA building represented these dynamic overlaps in a complex

fashion both internally and externally. With importance to a community orientation in form and purpose, the pre-final form was much more successful and better represented the original principle of designing an architectural expression that dedicates space to ideas, conversation, social interactions, and the arts. The following drawings explain the architectural expression behind the KCPA building.

Figure 7.21 Pre Final Approach

68

W 21ST ST

2100 WYANEDOTTE ST

FORT SCOTT ST

T

DS

2N W2

SITE PLAN @ 1:20 0

Figure 7.22 Pre Final Site Plan

69

12

48ft

UP

DN

FORT SCOTT ST

Figure 7.23 Pre Final Floor Plans

70 309

310

311

ELE

RES LOBBY

LOADING ELE

DN

TRASH

LIFT

ELE

RES LOBBY

AUTO PARK

DN

ELE

308

DN

302

307

ATRIUM

RESTROOMS

301

306

303

205

305

304

BACL.

UP

GALLERY

ENTRY

WORK STUDIO

ART STORAGE

ATRIUM

GALLERY

W 21ST ST

WYANDOTTE ST 111

112

113

ELE

408

409

410

ELE

RES LOBBY

LOADING ELE

DN

UP

RES LOBBY

LOADING ELE 102

401

109

407

307

UP DN

406

ATRIUM

RESTROOMS

301

110

ATRIUM

RESTROOMS

101

404

305

UP

107

106

105

104

403

DN

405

402

108

UP

103

209

210

211

ELE

DN

DN

502

207

ATRIUM

503

206

202

ROOF TERRACE

ATRIUM

RESTROOMS

501

208

UP

102

RESTROOMS

201

0

18

54ft

FLOOR PLANS @ 1:30

504

505

410

ELE

RES LOBBY

LOADING ELE

UP

RES LOBBY

LOADING ELE

UP

ROOF TERRACE

DN

205

204

203

104

Figure 7.24 Pre Final Floor Plate Complexity

Figure 7.25 Pre Final Section

71

Figure 7.26 Pre Final Facade

Figure 7.27 Pre Final South Facade and Workshop

72

Figure 7.28 Pre Final Facade Study

Between the pre-final design and final design, the importance of the facades

aesthetic and function would play an important role in the breaking of boundaries which would open up the building and creating an external conversation between the building and its surrounding environment. This iteration of the facade used a moveable facade in order for the artist to define their privacy between the unit and city. The choice to use concrete as well tied to the context by contrasting with the red masonry buildings.

7.2 The Final Expression

The final design of the KCPA building is the successful model of the original

design principle. It is architectural expression that dedicates space to ideas, conversation, social interactions, and the arts. The purpose of the building is to provoke a narrative between the function of the building, the architecture, and the person using 73

it. As users begin to experience the architecture of the KCPA building, they will feel an understanding of the architecture as a space to provoke personal experiences referred to in the Poetics of Space. The last of this chapter will display the narrative of the KCPA building and show its success as a building unique of its purpose and function as an Artist live/work facility.

Figure 7.29 Final Program Diagram Program Colors: Yellow: Gallery Blue: Residential Red: Workshop and Studio

74

UNDER UREDEVELOPMENT 3 0f t

0 79 8 78

ft

40 ft

ft

99ft

84ft

10 3ft

1 5 1 ft

17ft

44ft

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS

18ft

PAR K ING LOT

54ft

W. 21st ST.

McLEOD LAW FIRM

PAR K ING LOT

FREIGHT HOUSE FLATS PARKING GARAGE

24ft

115ft

17ft

44ft

Kansas City Project for the Arts 2100 Wyandotte St. Kansas City, MO 64106 10 0f t 1:30

STUART LOFTS

36f t

58f t

35f t

McLEOD LAW FIRM

W. 21s t ST.

16f t

ARTIST & CRAFTSMAN SUPPLY

2 79

UNDER REDEVELOPMENT

ft 786

778

ft

780 ft

15f t

776

776.1 ft

ft

783.4 ft

ft

t 782 f

784

W YA ND OT TE ST.

PARKI NG LOT

ft

FORT SCOT T ST. FORT SCOT T ST.

Figure 7.30 KCPA Site Plan

WYAN DOT TE ST.

75

215f t

PIPER LOFTS

PAR K I N G LOT

PAR K I N G LOT

30f t

JACK STACK BBQ

20f t

INGRAMS

56f t

FREIGHT HOUSE LOFTS

38f t

PIPER LOFTS PARKING GARAGE

110f t

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

1

36

43

42

43

21’ - 10”

41

2

3 9’ - 2”

Sub Level Parking 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

76 Figure 7.31 Sub Level Parking (NTS)

18’ - 7”

4 24’

A

40 (Public)

A

5

40 (Private)

24’

6 24’

7 24’

8

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

Figure 7.32 Gallery and Workshop (NTS)

1

33

33

36

21’ - 10”

3

26

20

21

8

32

9’ - 2”

35

2

31

18’ - 7”

Gallery and Work Shop 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

77

4

7

24’

A

A

13

27

5

5

24’

10

9

1

6

4

23

24

24’

22

7

28

29

3

2

24’

8

Figure 7.33 Administration and Upper Gallery (NTS)

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

1

19

18

21’ - 10”

2

16

9’ - 2”

3

15

11

14

17

12

18’ - 7”

4 24’

Administration and Upper Gallery 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

78 A

A

5

6

24’

6 24’

7 24’

8

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

Figure 7.34 1st Floor Residential (NTS)

1

33

36

21’ - 10”

2

25

9’ - 2”

3

1st Floor Residential 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

79 F

A

A

35

34

18’ - 7”

4

A

24’

A

A

5 24’

A

30

6

D

24’

7 24’

37

B

C

F

F

8

Figure 7.35 2nd Floor Residential (NTS)

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

1

33

36

21’ - 10”

2 9’ - 2”

3 18’ - 7”

F

A

A

35

34

2nd Floor Residential 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

80

4

A

24’

5 24’

A

30

6

D

24’

7

E

F

F

24’

37

8

Figure 7.36 3rd Floor Residential (NTS)

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

1

33

36

21’ - 10”

2 9’ - 2”

3 18’ - 7”

F

F

C

35

34

F

3rd Floor Residential 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

81

4

C

24’

5

F

24’

6

F

24’

7

E

F

F

24’

37

8

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4”

33

36

21’ - 10”

2 9’ - 2”

3

34

F

F

4th Floor Residential 1/16" = 1'-0"

18’ - 7”

35

F

1

C

24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

Figure 7.37 4th Floor Residential (NTS) 24’

82

4

C

24’

5

F

24’

38

30

6

F

24’

7 24’

E

F

F

37

8

Figure 7.38 5th Floor Residential (NTS)

L

K

J

I

H

G

F

E

C

B

A 11’ - 8” 12’ - 4” 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’ 24’

1

33

36

21’ - 10”

2 9’ - 2”

3

F

F

F

C

35

34

18’ - 7”

4

C

24’

5

5th Floor Residential and Roof Terrace 1/16" = 1'-0"

24’

83 38

24’

F

6

39

24’

7

39

24’

8

84

Figure 7.39 Section A-A (NTS)

85

Figure 7.40 North Elevation (NTS)

86

Figure 7.41 East Elevation (NTS)

87

Figure 7.42 South Elevation (NTS)

88

Figure 7.43 South Elevation (NTS)

7.3 Gallery and Atrium

Figure 7.44 Atrium Internal Conversation

89

The atrium and gallery of the KCPA are the primary public spaces where art is

displayed by the artist of the building and outside local artists. The purpose of these spaces is to bring an interior conversation to the private program spaces to the public space. Using a central core that remains void allows for the architecture to come alive internally to the users of the building. Displayed in the image (figure 7.44) are the renamed program colors. As a place for internal conversation the atrium brings a place for coexistence between the artist’s private homes and gallery visitors, a public domain where everyone interacts and a place for action. As a building of purpose and function, the places for action exist in every space. The primary places for these actions are the gallery and atrium but there is a connection between the artists personal workspace as it could be displayed publicly. The atrium also serves the purpose to bring light into the interior of the building and into the gallery spaces on the ground floor. With natural light flooding in, the illusion of being in an exterior space brings visitors to experience a town square. The fact remains that the atrium is an internal space within the building, layering the boundary between private and public, internal and external, and solid and void space. The art gallery is an expansive space that allows each artist of the building to display their work to the public. The gallery’s overlapping space and large volumes allow the visitor to experience space in different ways as they experience and day dream with the displayed art.

Figure 7.45 Gallery Space 1

90

Figure 7.46 Gallery Space 2

Figure 7.47 Gallery Space 3

Figure 7.48 Gallery Space 6

91

Figure 7.49 Gallery Space 5

Figure 7.50 Gallery Entrance

Figure 7.51 Gallery Front Entrance

92

7.4 Residential Units

The residential units of the KCPA building are programed with typical apartment

units (figure 7.54) with a studio unit, 1 bedroom, 1 bedroom ADA accessible, and a 2 bedroom. This accounts for around half of the units to provide for an artist wanting a standard living situation. The remaining residential spaces in the program are art studio apartments (figure 7.52, 7.53). These spaces follow the principle of community orientation outlined in Chapter 5. These spaces are dynamic and allow the artist to define their own volume of spaces rather than defining just a space. This principle is an attempt to define a new typology of apartment living for the creative individual. These units also break the barrier between boundaries of public and private spaces. In each space an internal conversation between humans and architecture can be outlined just as it is within the atrium space of the KCPA building.

Figure 7.52 Art Studio Unit

93

Figure 7.53 Art Studio Unit Plan (NTS)

94

89 95

Figure 7.54 Typical Unit Plans (NTS)

7.5 Workshops and Work Studios

In the proposal to design an artist live/work facility, including plenty of workspace

is important for the artist’s needs. The KCPA building includes workshops and studios for artists to work with wood, metal, ceramic material, glass, and paper mediums.

Located on the south side of the building, the work spaces receive maximum direct lighting during the day. In consideration to light sensitive art, a light diffusion system is used to reflect all direct light into the space bringing in a constant ambient light. With plentiful space to work and store materials and artworks, the artists are allowed access to this part of the facility at all times of the day. Additionally a loading dock allows importing and exporting of artwork and materials.

Figure 7.55 Work Studio Section (NTS)

96

Figure 7.56 Light Diffusion System (NTS)

97

7.6 Structure, Systems, Materials

The structure, systems, and materials of the KCPA building are unique to many

standard systems of construction. The structure of the Kansas City Project for the Arts building is a heavy wood timber system. Using glulam beams and columns the structure becomes that of its context. A typical construction method of industrial buildings of the industrial age was to use load bearing masonry walls on the exterior and a heavy wood timber system on the interior. Heavy wood timber structures also allow for a faster construction time due to the ability to have pre-fabricated parts. Environmentally wood is a viable resource to use considering its renewability and its lessened impact on CO2 emissions. The structure grid spans 24’ in each direction and stands on a 15’ floor to floor height. With using glulam beams the girder beams can be placed every 6’ on center allowing for mechanical space between. With the structural spans, the systems for the spaces can be tucked between each beam and covered by a radiant heating and cooling panel. A radiant heating and cooling system give the spaces a constant temperature rather than a circulation of different temperatures of air a typical HVAC system would offer.

In the buildings materiality, a choice to contrast the context was made to make

the newly built KCPA building an icon. Although a contrast is made a careful choice in textures and geometries lets the building remain subtle in its context. With the use of board formed concrete, the grey color of concrete contrasts the red masonry buildings, but a texture remains similar to the coarse work of a masonry wall. The structure itself acts as a material of the building and is expressed with large glass facades. Attention to the choice in the type of glazing system was important to satisfy its context and design ideas. Using U channel glass gives the building a vertical appeal and is similar to the Nelson Atkins Museums addition by architect Steven Holl. The unique feature of the KCPA building is using technology to become a place of community orientation. By using a glazing system such as U channel glass, the facade has a frosted appearance 98

99 90

Figure 7.57 Structure and Systems (NTS)

giving privacy and diffusing light into the interior. Combining this existing aesthetic of U channel glass and a technology that allows glass to change from a privacy setting to a public setting allows for the artist to determine the aesthetic of the facade (figure 7.58).

While this technology is not currently available, it could become a new type of glass that changes the boundaries between internal and external spaces allowing for public and private spaces to merge on command. The appearance of the KCPA is formed by its community orientation principle, but the details of the building such as the structure, systems, and materials allow the building to fit into its context while remaining an iconic building in the Kansas City Crossroads skyline.

Figure 7.58 Unit Privacy Glass System

Figure 7.59 Dynamic Facade and Materials

100

7.7 Final Thoughts

The Kansas City Project for the Arts displays many new ideas and concepts that

could change the way artists and potentially in the future the way that other people live.

With the attention to a community orientation and designing spaces that could change communal living, this building acts as a precedence to new typologies of live/work facilities. To say some personal notes about the design proposal, I am proud to present this project to the Kansas City urban fabric and as a new model for construction, living, and art. The success of this project i feel is defined by a few points. The first is its reaction during final review. The most important quote to note about the project was from a Kansas City local. They were happy to say that this buildings attention to its context and community is very successful.

Overall I am please with the outcome of this project. It displays my efforts in

solving an architectural problem through technical, conceptual, and graphical means.

Thank you for reading the Kansas City Project for the Arts design proposal.

KCPA video Link: https://vimeo.com/135510952

Figure 7.60 Final Defense Exhibit

101

REFERENCES

Ashihara, Yoshinobu. (1983) The Aesthetic Townscape. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press,

Aravena, Alejandro. (2014, October). TED Talk. My architectural philosophy?

Bring the community into the process. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/

alejandro_aravena_my_architectural_philosophy_bring_the_community_into_

the_process#t-578020

Bachelard, Gaston. (1964) The Poetics of Space. New York, Orion Press

Fujimoto, Sﾅ行uke,, Meschede, Friedrich,, Gleiter, Jﾃｶrg H.,Kﾃｼppers, Gﾃｼnter. (2013) Sou

Fujimoto: futurospective architecture,

Hall, Edward T. (1974) Handbook for proxemic research. Washington: Society for the

Anthropology of Visual Communication,

Kahn, Louis. & SCI-Arc Media Archive. (June 06, 1972). Louis I Kahn. Southern

California Institute of Architecture.

Haskell, Henry C Fowler, Richard B. (1950) City of the future; a narrative history of

Kansas City, 1850-1950. Kansas City, Mo., F. Glenn Pub. Co.,

Henri, Robert,Ryerson, Margery. (1960, c1951) The art spirit. Philadelphia ; J. B.

Lippincott Company,

102

APPENDICES

104

105

VITA Graduate School Southern Illinois University Ryan Northcutt ryananorthcutt@yahoo.com Southern Illinois University Carbondale Bachelor of Science, Architectural Studies, May 2014 Thesis Paper Title:

Kansas City Project for the Arts

Major Professor: Shannon McDonald

106