chicago studio fall 2014

PORTADA

CHICAGO STUDIOFALL 2014

AIMÉ CRUZ

2 AIME CRUZ

PREFACEChicago Studio has been one of the most enriching experiences I’ve ever had in my life. I learned more about architecture that what I’ve learned in school or any other practice. And the people I got to meet were a huge impact in my life. Thanks to Andrew Balster and all of the people involved for making this studio possible.

3CSF2014

4 AIME CRUZ

5CSF2014

ABOUTCHICAGO STUDIO creates a platform for the discussion of architecture and urbanism in Chi-cago and the curriculum is guided by the collaboration with Chicago’s visionaries in an ef-fort to generate innovative ideas for the city. This powerful mechanism directly integrates ed-ucation and practice by embedding students within some of Chicago’s top architecture and urban design firms. Real voices, real problems, and real stakeholders inspire the curriculum to create real opportunity by using Chicago as the design laboratory where students test ideas.

The program is structured in a virtual campus – the design lab and lecture halls are locat-ed within a network of shared spaces in design firms, civic instructions and other private compa-nies. The program has active partnerships in the public and private sector, ranging from glob-al leaders in practice to the city government to the local community. The process intentionally takes the university, the profession and the city out of a familiar setting to drive true creativity and broad community-focused architectural solutions that are relevant to the contemporary city.

CHICAGO STUDIO has established an amazing network in Chicago – directly engaging some 500 professionals, more than half of them local architects and urban designers (many VT alumni) that are enriching the student’s experience. Together, we are making Chicago a better place through the collaboration of these passionate students and established leaders. This collaboration engages the city – from the Mayor to local Chicagoans – to confront real issues that architecture can help solve.

6 AIME CRUZ

7CSF2014

INTRODUCTION08 | FIRMS 10 | MEMBERS12 | HOST FIRM

8 AIME CRUZ

Skidmore, Owings & Merril

FIRMS

Skidmore, Owings & Merril

9CSF2014

von Weise Associates

10 AIME CRUZ

Claire ButterfieldTEAMS Design

Industrial DesignVirginia Tech

Aime Cruz GonzálezGREC Architects Architecture Tecnológico de Monterrey

Roger AlmaguerSkidmore, Owings and Merrill

ArchitectureTecnológico de Monterrey

Lois HanSkidmore, Owings and MerrillInterior DesignVirginia Tech

Chelsea BryantCannon DesignArchitectureVirginia Tech

Email Address:

Mobile Number: #(860)808-4563

[email protected]

Morgan MattIndustrial Design Virginia Tech

[email protected](860)808-4563

Morgan MattIndustrial Design Virginia Tech

Morgan MattTEAMS DesignIndustrial DesignVirginia Tech

José Luis Linares GarcíaCannon Design

ArchitectureTecnológico de Monterrey

David MasonSkidmore, Owings and MerrillUrban Affairs and PlanningVirginia Tech

Chris KitchenTEAMS Design


CHICAGO STUDIOFALL 2014

MEMBERS

11CSF2014

Amanda PhungTEAMS Design


Natalie RiosCannon DesignInterior Design

Virginia Tech

David ScurrySkidmore, Owings and Merrill

ArchitectureVirginia Tech

Liz RussoCannon DesignInterior DesignVirginia Tech

Thomas PowersVon Weise AssociatesArchitectureVirginia tech

Nancy RedeniusVon Weise Associates

ArchitectureVirginia Tech

Caleb RancourtTEAMS DesignIndustrial DesignVirginia Tech

Stevan RomoGREC ArchitectsArchitectureTecnológico de Monterrey

Andrew BalsterDirector

Stephanie PekalaTEAMS Design


12 AIME CRUZ

Don CopperRaised in Baltimore and graduated from the architecture school at Virginia Tech, with one year of study at the Architectural Association in London. Don has lived and practiced architecture in Chicago since 1981, and received his Illinois professional license in 1986. Following design and project management roles in offices such as Murphy/Jahn and Destefano+Partners, Don became a Principal with GREC in 1999, with the goal of delivering large-scale projects within a boutique studio environment.

David ErvinBorn and raised in utopian Reston, Virginia, and holds a profes-sional degree from the architecture school at Virginia Tech. Prior to moving to Chicago in 1989, David designed suburban office buildings in Northern Virginia. In Chicago, David was a charter staff member of DeStefano+Partners, where he designed large commercial projects locally and in Barcelona, before becoming a Principal with GREC in 1999. David has led projects for some of GREC’s most prestigious clients, including United Airlines and McDonald’s Corporation.

Greg RandallBorn and raised in Milwaukee, and earned his professional degree at University of Wisconsin, with a certificate from Ricardo Bofill’s Taller de Arquitectura in Barcelona. Greg moved to Chicago in 1984 and received his Illinois professional license in 1987. In Chicago, Greg has designed and managed projects for Nagle Hartray, Himmel Bonner, Valerio DeWalt Train, and was a Principal with DeStefano+Partners before joining GREC in 2004.

GREC architects is located in 645 North Michigan Avenue in Chicago, IL. This is the firm that will host me for the entire expe-rience in Chicago Studio. GREC is a group of architects, de-signers and planners who lead collaborative efforts with its team and clients to provide creative and efficient projects solutions.

The firm is integrated by three Principal Associate Partners: Don Copper, David Ervin and Greg Randall. In it there are 12 ar-chitects among the crew: Dennis Decapri, Janet Olson, Eliza-beth Fragoso, Amy Graves, Jessica Hogue, Raymond Dwyer, Paola Gomez, Aaron Kalfen, Nate Casteel, Charles Chambers, Terri Crockett, John Knuteson, Savannah as a business man-ager and Tom Reagan as business manager and controller.

When I arrived they were in the middle of the process of moving the office to a new building. Before they were lo-cated right next to the Chicago River, but since the building was going to be restored as a residential one, they need-ed to find a new space for the office. So my first week, I arrived to a temporary office which was located already in the same building where the new office is, but it was still under the last details of construction. Savannah welcomed me, introduced me to all the crew of the firm and gave me a little tour around the temporary office and around the new one. Everyone were really welcoming and nice. I spoke first to Paola who is from El Salvador, so she speaks Spanish too, and also to Amy, who I seated next to that first week.

The next week Stevan arrived and we moved into the new office, so we helped moving boxes and placing a lot of things where they belonged. The new office has a big open area where all the work stations are, two closed meeting rooms, a model space, two library material rooms, a meet-ing space, a lounge and a kitchen. It’s very illuminated and the best thing is that is right in the Michigan Avenue also known as the Magnificent Mile. This is the best part be-cause it’s the heart of downtown so it’s full of life, and there are a lot of places to go for lunch pretty close. It’s also the closest firm from where we live out of the five hosting firms.

13CSF2014

Meeting Room

Work Space

Common Area

14 AIME CRUZ

15CSF2014

CONTENTS 17 | EXPERIENCE JOURNAL 45 | URBAN MAPPING 97 | DESIGN STUDIO131 | PRO-PRACTICE

AIME CRUZ16

CSF2014 17

JOURNALEXPERIEnCE

AIME CRUZ18

WEEK 101/09-05/09

MONDAY 01I arrived to Chicago Thursday 28th of August, by the middle of the first week of the program, it was a long weekend because of labor day, so I started by settling around in my new apartment and walking around the city.

TUESDAY 02This was my first day at the firm. We started the day at SOM with an introduction Lecture of Robert Braken. He talked about some of the projects in which SOM has been working for us to know the way they design and the scale in which they work. Then we continued with another introduction lecture at TEAMS Design with Paul Hatch, who also talked about the type of proj-ects in which the firm works. Followed by the kickoff dinner at Pizzano’s restaurant with all of the students of the program plus the hosts of every firm.

WEDNESDAY 03We assisted to the introduction lecture at Cannon Design with Randy Guillot, who talked about the work of Cannon Design and about his path in architecture.

THURSDAY 04Stevan arrived to the city so Roger and me welcomed him and gave him a little tour around, we also went to SOM and GREC for him to know the firms and we organized so he could catch up with the work we had been doing.

FRIDAY 05This was the first day that we assisted the firm together. We talked with Don, one of the three associate partners of the firm and our mentor. Since the firm was changing of office, we helped a little with the moving. Then we assisted to the weekly review, this week’s assignment was the first radical conjecture, in which the studio worked the whole week, but we submitted by Mon-day because of our delayed arrival.

REFLECTIONI’m very excited about starting to work in the Chicago Studio, I’m sure this is going to be one of the best experiences of my life, not only for the city but for the opportunity of getting to know so close all of the five hosting firms and the people I’m going to meet and learn from during this three months.

CSF2014 19

JOURNAL

AIME CRUZ20

JOURNAL

Pilsen + Radical Conjecture 1 + Pin up at Cannon Design

CSF2014 21

WEEK 208/09-12/09

MONDAY 08Time to work in radical conjecture 2, Stevan and me visited the neighborhood in which our site is located, walked around taking pictures, recording and put-ting close attention to the principal elements that integrate the neighborhood.

TUESDAY 09We continued with the radical conjecture 2, collecting all the pictures and brainstorming what we had seen in the sight. We first picked which senses had been more intense for us during the tour, agreeing in sight and sound. Then we analyzed which was the best way to remap using elements that would relate to each sense and that would tell the story of the site.

WEDNESDAY 10There was an introduction lecture in GREC given by Don. He showed us some of the projects in which the firm works and we talked about why they are not as big as other firms. Also, every single one of the students in the studio presented their own Pecha Kucha, which consist in a 20 slide per 20 second presentation. After that, Stevan and I continued working on the radical conjecture, we started putting two videos together for Friday’s presentation, one for sight and another one for hearing.

THURSDAY 11We went to the VWA introduction lecture with Chip von Weise, he showed us some of their projects and the way they work in the office. Then Stevan and me returned to GREC to work on the radical conjecture, this was the first night we stayed late at the firm.

FRIDAY 12Every Friday we have the presentation of the work we did over the week, this Fri-day we presented at Cannon Design both of the maps we did. We exposed both of the videos we made, and discussed about our perspective of the neighborhood.

REFLECTIONI learned with this radical conjecture that there is more to the site than we usually see. Back at TEC, when ever we analyze a site we take in consideration always the same elements: sun path, wind orientation, surroundings and traffic. But I never questioned my self to analyze the site in a different way, a not conventional, to see what is the neighborhood, the people and the surroundings saying to me that can improve the quality of my project.

AIME CRUZ22

WEEK 315/09-19/09

MONDAY 15This week instead of working in a radical conjecture we worked in teams to research about ur-ban planning in our site. We worked with Tom and Nancy, two Virginia Tech students that are hosted in VWA. We all went to the library for research, we found some useful books and maps of the city from 1920 and 1977. We had a desk critic review with Andrew and Don, to talk about the previews presentations we had and the work we were doing with the investigation.

TUESDAY 16We joined with our team in GREC to collect all the information we found in the library and see which would help and which we had to discard. We putted everything in order and started as-sembling the presentation. We also went to AIA to a pro-practice lecture with Vicky Matran-ga, a design programs coordinator from the international housewares association. She talked about her work, her investigation and the interviews she has been doing throughout the years to different architects. Later that day I assisted to an urban planning meeting for the renova-tion of a community named Logan Square, it was really interesting seeing how the community is taken in consideration for the new developments and changes that is going to be created.

WEDNESDAY 17We joined with our team again in GREC to fix up the last details of the presentation and print our work. Then we transfer to VWA for the presentation of the work. We ex-posed the maps of the industrial corridor in Pilsen of 1920, 1977 and now a days and pointing out how it has changed and why, also pointing out population in those same years and maps that described the immigration from the zone to the suburbs of the city.

THURSDAY 18A trip to Minneapolis was organized for the weekend, so this day we traveled eight hours by bus to get to the city, since we arrived after six we had the afternoon free to walk around the city and settle.

FRIDAY 19We started a walking tour at eight in the morning. We visited the MSR firm and met one of the senior associates who gave us a tour around the office and explained us a little about their work. Then we made a tour inside and backstage of the Gurthrie Theater where we saw the main theaters, the re-hearsal rooms, fitting rooms and where they create all the stage scenery. We also walked around the Minneapolis University where we visited the art gallery, a building designed by Frank Gehry. Ending the day with a dinner at a nice restaurant with of all of the students of the studio and a special guest.

REFLECTIONThis week we learned a lot about Pilsen thanks to the investigation we did. It’s really important to ana-lyze the neighborhood, not only in its actual condition, but also through out the years, so we can un-derstand what has happened and the things that occur not only in the site but also in the surroundings.

CSF2014 23

JOURNAL

Pilsen 1923

GREC+VWA

Pilsen 1983

AIME CRUZ24

JOURNAL

Pilsen + Radical Conjecture 1

CSF2014 25

WEEK 422/09-26/09

MONDAY 22We just returned from our trip to Minneapolis so we worked on an assignment of the

trip. We also had a desk critic review, but this time with John and Terry, two architects that work in the firm and who are also our mentors. They gave us feedback about our

work and continued to work based on that.

TUESDAY 23For this week’s assignment, besides the radical conjecture, we needed to deliver

some panoramic photographs from the site so we went to Pilsen to take them. We walked around the neighborhood analyzing which of the streets were the most critical

and wood self-explain the site. After this, we went to Jahn firm to a pro-practice lec-ture with Carl D’Silva, who talked about the renovation of the Louvre and all the investi-

gation of the site behind that particular project.

WEDNESDAY 24We started working on the radical conjecture of the week, trying to come up with

some concepts that would help us star with our project. We generated two concepts and worked on two drawings that would represent the idea, complemented by two

models.

THURSDAY 25We worked all day in the development of our concepts, drawings and models.

FRIDAY 26We went first to GREC to print our work for the presentation and with all set we made our ways to SOM. The presentation was really interesting, after everybody exposed, we had a round-robin where people approached to our table, made questions and

gave us feedback.

REFLECTIONThis week I learned about concept and its definition. The definition differs by each

person and I had the idea that the concept is only something architects use to create a more artsy architecture, but it doesn’t mean that a concept should be only a sen-

tence that describes your project but the actual essence of it. It should empower your first ideas, thoughts and proposals but is not something that needs to be litteral in the

project, however it should be perceived and generate an experience in the user.

AIME CRUZ26

WEEK 529/09-03/10

MONDAY 29We started with a desk critic review with Andrew and Don, in which the Cannon Design team joined so we discussed about the last Friday review and of our work for the week. Stevan and I started working on our adjacency diagrams for our project.

TUESDAY 30We continued working in the adjacency diagrams as well as in the distribution of the program in the site, making research of the elements that it integrated and trying to understand as much as possible how the recycling process on a factory works.

WEDNESDAY 01We started the day with a pro-practice lecture with Drew in SCB architecture, on the topic of the business of architecture. He talked about how architecture is not only a profession but also a business and the elements we needed to know in order to understand the whole. How architects need not only to design but to get work and manage it. Then we went to another pro-practice at Beyond Design with Patick Nally who talked about his work, the way of how industrial design works and some projects of the company.

THURSDAY 02This day we had a review of our work at VWA, discussed about the weakness and strengths of our concept and project and listened to the other reviews. Then we all went to a James Corner conference in which he talked about his firm, his work and mostly about his most recent suc-cessful project, the High Line.

FRIDAY 03We worked in our pro-practice summaries and research of our project.

REFLECTIONThis week we worked in a lot of research on the recycling process, it’s interesting to learn how it works and the different opportunities and challenges come from designing this type of proj-ect. We also worked in many different itterations for the distribution of our program, trying to fit everything in the most compact possible way, so we could create the most efficient machine possible, in order to create an economical sustainability and leave enough space so we can leave a considerable amount of green space that will engage the neighborhood and will bal-ance the noise and sight polution that comes with the building.

CSF2014 27

JOURNAL

AIME CRUZ28

JOURNAL

Organic Structure

GREC Pin-up

CSF2014 29

WEEK 606/10-10/10

MONDAY 06 We started the week with our desk critic review with Andrew and Don. We talked

about how our project has been developing, and they told us that our work was to technical and that we needed to go for a more conceptual approach, have more fun

with it and deliver a more literal architecture of our concept. We worked on the chang-es all day. Leaving work I went to an external conference of Radical Cities by Justin McGuirk, who talked about his exploration across Latin America in search for new

architecture and his study cases.

TUESDAY 07We went to a pro-practice lecture in AIA with Laura Fisher a talented architect with

a master in finance. She told us about her path in architecture and how she got to where she is and some of the projects and places is where she has worked. Then

we returned to GREC to continue with our project and we had a review with Charles Chambers, another architect of the firm, also our mentor. Then after work I went to

another conference with Molly Weight Steenson about the architectures of information.

WEDNESDAY 08

THURSDAY 09

FRIDAY 10

We spend the day developing a Pecha Kucha for our Friday presentation, in which we explained our concept, process and main characteristics of our project.

We continued with the Pecha Kucha presentation and started generating the 24”x24” drawings that would represent the main idea of the concept. As well as a model that

would explain how our project integrates with the site, the levels and spaces.

Presentation day. We exposed our Pecha Kucha, followed by a round robin where all the mentors that assisted gave us feedback. We received very good ones and also some that made us think about some elements that we proposed. We had a good

conversation with every one of the guests and made notes of every comment in order to make the necessary changes in the project.

REFLECTION

With every weekly presentation I learn more and more, it’s a great advantage having not only one but several judges that review our work and gives us feedback of what

we are doing correctly and what this that we are missing or not noticing. It’s incredibly interesting listening to all the opinions of our judges and mentors, seeing the differ-

ence of opinions that each one of them has about the same elements in the project.

AIME CRUZ30

WEEK 713/10-17/10

MONDAY 13

TUESDAY 14

WEDNESDAY 15

THURSDAY 16

FRIDAY 17

Stevan and I commented about the feedback we had on Friday’s review, analyzing which changes should be made in the project. We did some sketches of the changes we agreed on and started working on the hard lines.

We continued with the changes and reorganized our adjacency diagrams as well as one of the drawings, since some of the feedback was that they were not explaining completely the concept. Then we went to SOM for a pro-practice lecture with Mike Lingertat, a Project Manager of SOM. His lecture was really interesting, he talked about his role in the firm and his chores.

We organized our work and printed every necessary thing to go to SOM to a review with An-drew. After the short review, we received some students of Delft Architecture School from th Netherlands who are studying a master in Complex Projects. The professors of Delft gave an introduction of their school and work and so did SOM about the firm and projects. After that we made teams with the Delft students to work the next day in a workshop. After we all had our teams organized we took them to dinner to get to know them better.

I took my team to the GREC office, gave them a tour around the office and presented them to the associate partners of the firm, Don, David and Greg. After we organized in a confer-ence room, we started working. The assignment consisted in reinventing the neighborhood of Pilsen in a radical way, in order to reimagine it and visualize how it could transform and the potentiality that it could have.

We all went to SOM to present our proposals. It was interesting seeing the different points of view of every team and how each one had a different perspective of what the future of the site could be. The professors and mentors gave us some feedback and made a closure of the workshop. After that, we had a conversation with Luis Monterrubio, urban planner of the Chicago, of the issues and potentiality of the different neighborhoods that integrates Chicago.

REFLECTIONIt was very refreshing working in a new project with students from a different place. I noticed the potential and talent that the Delft students have and learned a little bit more about their master. They tend to work in big scale projects and lean more in to urban design. It was a fantastic weekend in where we all learned from each other and make really good friendships.

CSF2014 31

JOURNAL

AIME CRUZ32

JOURNAL

CSF2014 33

WEEK 820/10-24/10

MONDAY 20We started the week working on our journals. One of the students of Delft came to the

office, and we worked with her in some proposals for our project.

TUESDAY 21We worked in our project at GREC, analyzing which would be the best way to go in

the architecture of the building, mostly in the roof, since we want it to be a green roof where people can go up and enjoy not only the experience of the green space but the

views around Pilsen.

WEDNESDAY 22

THURSDAY 23

FRIDAY 24

This was a really exciting day, not only did we hosted a lecture of Jaime Lerner but we got to talk to him. We told him a little about Pilsen, the characteristics of the neighbor-hood and discussed about what different opportunities it could evolve to. He also told us that he has been in México before and that he loves Chiapas, the city, the culture, the people and the mezcal. In his lecture he talked about his previews projects and in

what he is working at the moment. I find his job not only interesting but inspiring.

I started working mostly in the sections of our project, trying to describe the process inside of the building and the main access to the green roof. I spend most of the day

editing the sections in Photoshop.

I worked in the model of the site, so it could help us create diagrams to explain more graphically our project. While Stevan worked in the Revit model of our proposal. We

both complement each other’s work and work hand in hand figuring out where the project is going to.

REFLECTION

I learned that the project need to be described as a whole. You need to present not only the site but the relationship that the project has with it and how is affecting the

community.

AIME CRUZ34

WEEK 927/10-31/10

MONDAY 27

TUESDAY 28

WEDNESDAY 29

THURSDAY 30

FRIDAY 31

This day was the mid-term presentation at Cannon Design. All of the teams presented their projects, the advances and the things in which they would keep on working for the final presentation. We all presented a Pecha Kucha, along with the amount of 24”x24” drawings that would best explain the project. After the presentations we had a round robin where we received feedback and suggestions of what was missing, in what we could work on and what could be better for our project.

Since the pin-up was on Monday, instead of Friday as it usually is, we had Tuesday free.

We went to work to the office and focused on analyzing the feedback that people gave us on Monday. We decided we needed to work more in the experience and the path that peo-ple would have in the green roof, as well as the interaction between the architecture and the green space. After lunch we went to a lecture of a new SOM research for a timber tower. Then after that I interviewed Michael Lingertat for one of my Pro-Practice interviews. We talked about his work at SOM and his day to day tasks. He told me a little bit of what the roll of a project manager is and how to make it work.

We continued working in our project, making sketches of the proposals of the paths of the people in our project, and redistributing the program in a way that would make more sense to the building in relationship to the new changes.

We made progress in the adjustments of the project. Potluck in the office, we brought Mexi-can candy to share with everyone, as well as little candy skulls for “Día de muertos”, so they could know also about our traditions.

REFLECTIONIt is important to make cleat diagrams to describe what is really happening in the project. So not only you but everyone can understand how the plan works and what is going on in each space.

CSF2014 35

JOURNAL

Site

Longitudinal Section

Ground Floor Plan

AIME CRUZ36

JOURNAL

CSF2014 37

WEEK 1003/11-07/11

MONDAY 03I worked in transcribing my pro-practice interview with Michael Lingertat from SOM. At

the afternoon we had our weekly meeting with Andrew, where we discussed about sev-eral topics, but mainly the project and our deliverables for the final presentation, as well a

bit about curriculums and the different ways in which you can present yourself in it.

TUESDAY 04Based on the feedback we had with Andrew in the meeting of the day before, we start-ed sketching a different proposal for a better distribution for our project, something that

would make better sense and that would help the architecture of our building. Afterwards we went to SOM for a pro-practice with Neil Kanz an associate designer of the firm. His

roll is being in part of the design team, specializing in competitions and geometry. His work is completely amazing, he has been studying complex geometry since graduate school, so his achievements in the field are amazing, and impressive, mostly because he works in Autocad by script. After, we had another meeting with Andrew, discussing

about the future approach for Chicago Studio with Tec de Monterrey.

WEDNESDAY 05

THURSDAY 06

FRIDAY 07

I started the day at SOM, so I could meet with Bridget Hapner and Megan Glaves, two graphic designers from the design studio of the firm. This was one of the most interest-ing interviews I had, since I have a big interest in this filed in particular and also because I had the opportunity to have a conversation from two very similar but different points of

view since Bridget is a graphic designer and Megan is an architect with master in graph-ic design. We talked about their roll in the firm and some other similar topics but most of all, we talked about how graphic design involves in architecture and the importance of it. Then I went to GREC and started working in this pro-practice and also worked for sever-

al hours in InDesign applying some tips Bridget and Megan gave me.

Started working in the layout of my final book for Chicago Studio, also looking at some of the books from past semesters. That afternoon I interviewed John Knutson, one of the architects from GREC, he just graduate last year and also formed part of the Chicago

Studio in spring 2013.

We had a portfolio resume workshop at Cannon Design. We all took our resumes and discussed about what was right and wrong about each one, and how we could improve

it to make it look even more professional and that it would be attractive for the people in the future that would see it. It is all about the layout and the way you describe your

work. In the afternoon I met with Luis Monterrubio, and architect with a master in urban planning that works in the department of the City of Chicago. He is Mexican and a great

person, he was kind enough to talk to me about his path in his career and how his expe-riences had helped him move forward in his career.

REFLECTIONIt was incredible to get to know people, not only their work but more about their passion

and their own perspective of architecture.

AIME CRUZ38

WEEK 1110/11-14/11

MONDAY 10

TUESDAY 11

WEDNESDAY 12

THURSDAY 13

FRIDAY 14

We arrived early to the office so we could finish with some final details of our project in order to go to a desk critic at VWA with Chip Von Weise. We discussed about the strengths and weaknesses of our project and what we could change in order to improve it. So we went back to the office and work all day in the changes and improvements that needed to be done.

There was a lunch and learn in the office. According to the architecture foundation, licensed architects must have a determined amount of lectures per year in order to be updated, so GREC hires people any other day so they can give a lecture at the lunch break in the office. The firm orders food and we all sit in a conference room to hear the lecture while eating. The lecture was about materials but particularly about tiles. After that we sat with Don Copper, one of the associate partners of GREC, to make one of our pro practice interview to him. We had a great conversation about his work, and the path in his career. Next we went to SOM.to interview Neil Kanz, who talk to us a little bit more about his work but mostly about his passion for geometry.

We worked all day in the project. By the afternoon I interviewed Charles Chambers, and architect that is part of the crew of GREC. We talked about how he started as an architect in several small firms and the different work he did in each one of them. He likes working in dif-ferent fields and not focusing in just one, like residential or hospitality or even just construction because in that way you do keep learning but only about one topic, and that doesn’t gives you flexibility in the long run.

We started the day with a lecture of Geof Walters, one of the partners in Cannon Design. He talked about the elements of architecture, the ones that conform the process of a project like the design process, delivery, documentation, detailing and performance. He talked about ev-ery single one of those and tried to really make us understand the process behind them and the importance and relevance that each one have. After that we went back to the office and worked all day in our project.

We arrived early to the office to arrange the last details of our project and print all the neces-sary plans for a presentation at 5pm to our coworkers in GREC. Almost all of the people in the office attended, we made a Pecha Kucha of ourselves and the project, so the people that didn’t know the whole processes would be updated. By the end everyone gave us feedback about it, and showed us how we could improve it. They liked our concept and our work, af-terwards we just had conversations related to architecture and the applications that would suit us.

REFLECTIONArchitecture not only depends on the work you do, but of the integration of the work of all the people in the office. Is amazing getting to know how everything works inside a firm and how they have their own way to achieve their projects.

CSF2014 39

JOURNAL

AIME CRUZ40

JOURNAL

Organic Structure

GREC Pin-up

Process Diagram

CSF2014 41

WEEK 1217/11-21/11

MONDAY 17This is the beginning of the end of the program since is the last week in GREC and in Chicago. We had a lunch Pro-practice lecture in Cannon Design, this time John

Syversen Principal of the firm. He talked about his experience in the firm, about some of his work and how architecture can literally change the surroundings. Had meeting

with Andrew and one of the teams form Cannon Design in GREC, we talked about our project, and what we want to do for our end result.

TUESDAY 18We worked in a calendar for what’s next. By December 9 we have to upload our final

works about the project. We Monterrey Tec students will not be at the presentation physically but our project will be there. We also had a meeting at VWA with Andrew,

we connected via Skype with Juan Carlos, to talk about our proposals for the future of Chicago Studio with Tec de Monterrey. There are several approaches but the best fit

is still to be determined. We talked to Andrew and we are all excited about the way the program will proceed.

WEDNESDAY 19

THURSDAY 20

FRIDAY 21

I worked all morning in my final personal Pecha Kucha. We had a final presentation with all the people involved with Chicago Studio, each one of us presented our ex-

perience in the program and our takeaways. Which for me the most remarkable ones would be seeing everything in a different way, more radical and creative, the city of

Chicago and all of the people I met and the strong friendships I made.

We worked in polishing the project, creating what we want to present and also talked with mentors to discuss what we plan to deliver for our final presentation. In the after-noon Andrew presented to the Chicago Studio a lecture he recently presented in the

Netherlands to the Delft students. Finalizing with a closed pinup between our group so we could all discuss about the work we have and give feedback.

Last day of the program in Chicago. We moved out of the office, thanked every single one of the people in the office for having us there and for the support, feedback and

leadership they gave us. We had a last lunch at a restaurant with all of the crew of GREC, and said our goodbyes. At night we had a closing dinner with Andrew, the

director of the program and all of the 18 students that integrates it.

REFLECTIONThis has been one of the best experience of my life, not only because I got to work

with top architecture firms, but because I learned a lot from each one of them. Also I’m thankful for the people I met not only in the group but in the different firms.

FRIDAY 22We were invited by Don Copper, to a special event that would be celebrated in the

office, the Magnificent Mile Lights Festival, since the firm is located right in Michigan Avenue they invited all of the architects and clients of the office to see it from there. It

was the perfect way to say goodbye to Chicago.

AIME CRUZ42

WEEK 13-15

24/11-30/11Traveled to Washington DC to spend Thanksgiving break. Then traveled to Blacksburg to know Virginia Tech cam-pus and work in our project. This was an amazing experience, getting to know one of the biggest traditions of the American culture. And happy to meet the campus and the studio in which the design program takes place.

01/12-07/12We leave Blacksburg and send our project to one of our friends from the Chicago Studio group, so it would get printed and pined up at the final presentation in Virginia Tech

CSF2014 43

JOURNAL

01/12-07/12 09-12-14We leave Blacksburg and send our project to one of our friends from the Chicago Studio group, so it would get printed and pined up at the final presentation in Virginia Tech

Day of the Final Presentation in Blacksburg, VA. It will take place in Virginia Tech’s architecture building “Cow-gill”. I will not be present, but my work will be there.

44 AIME CRUZ

AIME CRUZ46

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 47

URBAN MAPPING

historyNANCY REDENIUS STEVAN ROMOTOM POWERSAIME CRUZ

AIME CRUZ48

URBAN MAPPING

total area 137, 361 acres

UTLIZATION OF LAND IN CHICAGO

CSF2014 49

history

21.4% 12%

8.8%

4.6%

6.9%

7.6%

4.8%3.3%

24.6%

2.7%

3.3%

AIME CRUZ50

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 51

History

Chiefly Heavy Industry

Chiefly Light Industry

Light & Heavy Industry

pREPARED BY: CHICAGO pLAN cOMISSION rESEARCH dIVISION

AIME CRUZ52

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 53

HISTORY

physical development

GROWTH IN AREA AND ASSESED VALUATION , CITY OF CHICAGO

YEAR

(1) City of Chicago, Bureau of Maps and Plats (2) City of Chicago, Comptroller’s Office

*One half of full valuation by statutory amendment. **Full evaluation.

19001910 19201930194019501960

185.52 189.23 199.92207.20212.86212.92225.10

276,565,880 838,994,536

1,654814,838*3,188,915,049**1,995,827539**

8,109,151,01710,429,524,480

AREA IN S QUARE MILES (1)

TOTAL ASSESED VALUATION

AIME CRUZ54

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 55

history

AIME CRUZ56

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 57

URBAN MAPPING

site mapping

AIME CRUZ58

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 59

SITE MAPPING

CHICAGO

AIME CRUZ60

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 61

SITE MAPPING

pilsen

AIME CRUZ62

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 63

SITE MAPPING

industrial corridor

AIME CRUZ64

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 65

SITE MAPPING

site

AIME CRUZ66

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 67

URBAN MAPPING

site analysisROGER ALMAGUERDAVID SCURRYDAVID MASONlOIS HAN

AIME CRUZ68

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 69

site analysis

AIME CRUZ70

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 71

site analysis

AIME CRUZ72

URBAN MAPPING

Automobile

Public Transit

CSF2014 73

site analysis

Easements + River Access

Infrastructure rails + Canals

AIME CRUZ74

URBAN MAPPING

Bicycle Routes + Divvy Station

Automobile | Highway + Main Arteries

CSF2014 75

site analysis

Public Transit | Bus Routes

Public Transit | Train Routes

AIME CRUZ76

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 77

URBAN MAPPING

typologyJOSE LUIS LINARESCHELSIE BRYANTNATALIE RIOS LIZ RUSSO

AIME CRUZ78

URBAN MAPPING

Origins

CSF2014 79

typology

AIME CRUZ80

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 81

typology

AIME CRUZ82

URBAN MAPPING

heavy

light

high-tech

Footloose:

- Capital intensive - Heavy machiery - Heavy processing- Highly regulated

Limited capital invesment

Not as environmentally impactingraw materials less restrictive to locationlocated within rural/urban settingeasily transportedlow raw material demandssmaller factories / smaller scaleconsumer drivenconsumer driven

High capital invesment

cost remains relatively same regardless of location

- Specific siting- Usually rural- Environmentally taxing - Industry or business oriented

Computer andElectronic Products 7%

Miscelaneous Manufacturing 6%

Other Manufacturing

13%

CSF2014 83

typology

Paper 4%Food 12%

Printing and related Support Acivities 6%

Non-pharmaceutical Chemicals 5%

Plastics and RubberProducts 7%

Primary Metals 7%

Fabricated Metal Products 16%Machinery 9%

Computer andElectronic Products 7%

Miscelaneous Manufacturing 6%

Other Manufacturing

13%

Electrical Equipment and Appliances 5%

Transportation Equipment 4%

Figure 1. Industry Composition of Metropolitan Chcago Manufacturing Jobs, 2011

Chicago Industry Composition

AIME CRUZ84

URBAN MAPPING

heavy

LIGHT

CSF2014 85

TYPOLOGY

LIGHT

HIGH-TECH

AIME CRUZ86

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 87

typology

AIME CRUZ88

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 89

typology

AIME CRUZ90

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 91

URBAN MAPPING

ATYPICALMAPPING

AIME CRUZ92

URBAN MAPPING

CERMAK

EAST LOOMIS ST

WEST LOOMIS ST

CSF2014 93

ATYPICAL MAPPING

SITE

AIME CRUZ94

URBAN MAPPING

CSF2014 95

atypical MAPPING

MINEAPOLIS

96 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

CSF2014 97

DESIGN STUDIO 99 | RADICAL CONJECTURES107 | TU DELF WORKSHOP115 | PROJECT

98 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

CSF2014 99

RADICALconjectures

design studio

RADICAL CONJECTURE 1 RADICAL CONJECTURE 2RADICAL CONJECTURE 3

100 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

conjecture 1PILSEN POST ENGINE

“We can only add to the world, where we believe it ends, more parts similar to those we already know (an expanse made again and al-ways of water and land, stars and skies).” - Umberto Eco, The Island of the Day Before “All perceiving is also thinking, all reasoning is also intuition, al observation is also invention, these activities are not without effect; they have great force in shaping the world.” - Rudolf Arnheim “Mapping I returned to its origins as a process of exploration, discovery and enablement. This is less a case of mapping to assert authority, stability and control, and more one of searching, disclosing and engendering new sets of possibility. Like a nomadic grazer, the exploratory mapper detours around the obvious so as to engage what remains hidden.” - James Corner, The Agency of Mapping

Intro: As Peter Pero noted in Images of America, the plan of Chicago is largely a grid set upon the prairie, but the area of Pilsen is shaped by geographic confluence and mechanical engineering. A canal, a river bend, a plank road, an interstate highway, a railroad viaduct - THESE TRANSIT ARTERIES BOTH ENRICHED AND DEFORMED PILSEN.

Prompt: Reform and reimagine Pilsen as a complete neighborhood constructed on the Stevenson Expressway. The order and composition should be determined and selected based upon one’s reading of the area, research and intuition. What is Pilsen as a unified composite, artery or mass?

Make: Axonometric, Isometric, or Perspective (24” x 24” sheet) of the conceptual proposition and a mapping of the new Pilsen proposition. Tell the story as one vision, not in a series of meaningless drawings and diagrams.

Req’d: The drawing and map(ping) should clearly convey a new physical order, atmosphere and culture, and clearly be intellectually stimulated by Gombrich’ s text. Include 1-2 succinct sentences on the analysis and design concept.

Due: Fri 9/5 at 3pm

Readings: Representation to Expression, Gombrich. Methods of Representation A Clarification of Critical Terminology, James Heard.

CSF2014 101

RADICAL CONJECTURES

102 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

conjecture 2cartographic Limitations“Draw upon the strange imagined half-lives of obsolescent and anachronistic things that are charged with the future. Set aside all familiar hierachies, and recognize that dust, a discarded piece of paper or a scratch on the floor is as important as a window, cornice, column or door. We are in a situation in which everything counts—or at least in which we can discount nothing. Overlooked minor objects, apparently without use, and peripheral spaces of the city, apparently without residents, [demand] architectural intentions. Abandoned objects, locations, and spaces have a particular kind of architectural potential energy, a lack of precise definition that allows them to hover somewhere between promise and realization; however misleading it might actually be, then, dereliction implies a unique capacity for transformation—an ability to assume radically new spatial characteristics in the future—whilst simultaneously presenting what we could describe as fossils of an earlier world, one that has long since disappeared or ceased to operate.“ Pamphlet Architecture 32: Resilience Prof. Mark Dorrian, Edinburgh University, ESALA

Act I : Recording & Mapping Prompt:In groups of 2-4 students…. * Following the route Chicago Studio walked in Pilsen on Wed 8/27, record the path using only ONE ofthe five senses: sight (ophthalmoception), hearing (audioception), taste (gustaoception), smell (olfacoception or olfacception), ortouch (tactioception). How do the senses, or the limitation of senses, remap the perception of space and place? How much can a singlesense record? Make: catalog / record your findings.

Then: repeat the exercise using a DIFFERENT sense, and catalog / record your findings.

Make: Create representations in the form of maps, making ONE map for EACH sensory recording. In addition, create a 5-minutedigital presentation (slide show, animation, or film) on the process of information gathering for the exercise.

Req’d: ➔ MAPS: TWO maps of the path, each map created from the recording of ONE sense. ➔ PRESENTATION: Digital presentation, 5-minute slide show, animation, or film to be shown in the review.

Reading: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin.

Due: Friday, Sept 12th 2014

References/Precedent: ➔ Maison Bourdeaux➔ The work of Michel Gondry, http://www. nytimes. com/2006/09/17/magazine/17gondry. html?pagewanted=all&_r=0➔ Allegory of the Five Senses, Pietro Paolini, Gerard de Lairesse ➔ Dans Le Noir, Blinde Kuh, Blind-Liecht➔ Spatial Information Design Lab (Projects/Publications reference)

CSF2014 103

RADICAL CONJECTURES

104 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

conjecture 3Assembled intentions

Left: Shipwrecking, Bangl adesh Center: The Los Angel es Arts Park Proposal , MorphosisRight: Sir John Soane’s Museum

Prompt: Using the Pilsen Material Recovery Facility building program, explore the physical manifestation of building concepts. Working in teams of 2-4: Create: a base-map / site-plan that defines the atmosphere and organization of the PMRF (qualitative and quantitative) at the scale of ?

then, Create: (2)-physical models, using the PMRF building program, at the scale of ?

then, Create: an axonometric, isometric, or perspective (24” x 24” sheet) for each conceptual PMFP proposition. Show the idea of the building concept as one vision, not in a series of meaningless drawings and diagrams. Req’d: ➔ BASE-MAP / SITE-PLAN➔ PHYSICAL MODELS - (2) schemes per student➔ CONCEPT STATEMENT - (1) per model➔ AXON/ISO/PERSPECTIVE DRAWING - (1) per model

Note: Each of the physical models must be highly crafted, rich in definition and layered with meaning, but they must also show a clear order and parti. The 24”x24” drawings may use the models - first as a source of 2-dimensional documentation (photographing, scanning, exposing, tracing, rubbing…) - and second as a form of a detailed exploration into the organization and atmosphere using any media or mixed media. The drawings should articulate the building concept and be drawn to a scale. Regardless of the team size, each architect and interior designer should create (2) schemes, each with a concept, model and drawing. These concepts should be thought about collectively to explore as many options as possible. If desired, teams can produce one base-map / site-plan. See defi ni ti ons on concept on the fol l owi ng page.

Due: Friday, Sept 26th 2014

CSF2014 105

RADICAL CONJECTURES

AIME CRUZ106

tu DELFT workshop

CSF2014 107

design studio

delft WORKSHOPreinventing pilsen

AIME CRUZ108

tu DELFT workshop

CSF2014 109

design studio

AIME CRUZ110

tu DELFT workshop

2014

CSF2014 111

design studio

2014

201?

AIME CRUZ112

tu DELFT workshop

CSF2014 113

design studio

114 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

CSF2014 115

DESIGN STUDIO

PROJECTpilsen material recovery facility

116 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

PUBLIC ZONES

Educational Lobby/Exhibition Gallery - 200 sq m (2,000 sq ft)Cafeteria - 250 sq m (2,500 sq ft)4-Offices @ 10 sq m (100 sq ft) eachOpen Office - 100 sqm (1,000 sq ft)2-Classrooms @ 50 sq m (1000 sq ft) eachConference Room - 25 sq m (250 sq ft)Security Office - 10 sq m (100 sq ft)Reuse/Collection Center - 200 sq m (2,000 sq ft)Public Recycling Drop-off/Loadi ng Dock - 100 sq m (1,000 sq ft)Restroom/Locker-rooms (2 @ 50 sq m) 100 sq m (1,000 sq ft)

OPERATIONAL FACTORS Assume approx 15% allowance in building GFA for Circulation, Viewing Platforms, Mechanical - 2,000 sq m (20,000 sq ft)Assume approx 10% of site GFA for rail/barge loading/unloading - 6,000 sq m (60,000 sq ft)Assume a future railway, at grade or raised, that bisect the Industrial Corridor running E/W.

SITE REQUIREMENTS Total site area - 15 acres = 653,400 sq ft30% Open space on site (approx. 5 acres)No freight or truck access on CermakNo parking required

building programpilsen material recovery facility

CSF2014 117

PROJECT

NON-PUBLIC ZONES

Ti pping Area Inbound Materials 6,000 sq m (60,000 sq ft)Incoming materials will be brought by rail onto a tipping floor, which also serves as a pre-processing storage area.

Processing Area 4,000 sq m (40,000 sq ft)15m clear-height w/Shredder. This area will be the heart of the recycling center where most goods will be sorted, cleaned, and categorized for re-use. Materials are first sorted manually along conveyors to remove bulky items and plastic bags before feeding into a mechanical sorter.

Bale Storage Area 2,000 sq m (20,000 sq ft)10m clear-height. Once recyclables are sorted they are stored in large containers until enough material is accumulated to bale. Materials are then fed into balers. Bales are compacted and bound cubes of recycled materials that reduce the volume of recycled goods and facilitate transportation. After materials have been received, processed and baled, they will leave by either rail or barge.

Loading Areas 6,000 sq m (60,000 sq ft) - not calculated in the GFA aboveRail Loading/Unloading (90m long min)Barge Loading/Unloading (15m x 60m min) w/Mooring Pier

118 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROCESS OF NATURE AND RECYCLING PROCESSCONCEPT

CSF2014 119

PROJECT

120 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

ADJACENCIES

CSF2014 121

PROJECT

122 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

FIRST PROPOSALSORGANIC FORM AS A STRUCTURE

CSF2014 123

PROJECT

124 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

LOADING/UNLOADING TIPPING

BALING PROCESSING


BALINGPROCESSING

CERMAK

LOOMIS ST

CSF2014 125


BALING PROCESSING


BALINGPROCESSING

PROJECT

CERMAK

LOOMIS ST

126 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

SECTIONS

CSF2014 127

PROJECT

128 AIME CRUZ

DESIGN STUDIO

INTEGRATION

CSF2014 129

PROJECT

130 AIME CRUZAIME CRUZ130

iNTERVIEW

CSF2014 131131CSF2014

PROFESsIONALPRACTICELECTURESINTERVIEWS


iNTERVIEW


lecture

Cannon Design

word of advice

1. Build strong relationships through hard work2. Communication is everything3. Have broad influences and mentors4. There is never enough time, ever. 5. Your client is your design partner6. Listen and explore7. Don’t expect the outcome, set yourself for discovery 8. Promote your strengths 9. Be generous and courageous. Don’t be an ass 10. There is always more than one right answer

This lecture was focused in some words of advice that Randy Guillot considered most mean-ingfull to share for us students as a guidance through our career after graduating from school. Because we all know that going out into the real world might be scary and might feel like we don’t know a thing, but as few as we know as much as we can gain by learning and working.

randy guillot

CSF2014 135135CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

“knowing what you don’t know is as important as knowing”

Randy’s rules come from experience in a long career, being the guidelines that have been funda-mental in his success. He makes emphasis in the relationships and contacts you make through out your career and as he does, I consider this one of the most important elements of the profession and there is no other way than to create this ties with hard work. Yes, it is important to work but it is knowing what you don’t know as important as knowing, so in that way you can keep on learn-ing. Always look for people that are willing to teach you, because not always working means learning. It’s important to be organized and not way to perfectionist, because there is never enough time to do the work as flawless as we want to live it done. Know your timing and your program in order to deliver a great work within your standards. As well as knowing since the beginning that your design partner is not only the person working next to you, but your client, because he is the one that knows specifically what he needs and desires. Communication is everything to be always in the same page and create not only what he expects but, listening close can let you deliver a great satisfaction in your client.

Don’t be afraid to explore and go beyond constrains and normal standards. Always think out of the box and further than you use to, it’s what the career is all about. Don’t ever expect the outcome, set yourself for discovery during the process. Be sure to know that there is always more than one right answer. Keep an open mind in possibilities and opportunities and most important of all be generous and courageous, don’t be an ass.


LECTURE

DREW RANEIRISOLOMON CORDWELL BUENZ

ARCH BUSSINESS

The lecture was about how architecture is not only a profession but also a business. A business in which you will only succeed based in three important elements: getting work, designing and managing it. It also addressed the importance of contracts and agreements in the practice.

Scheme that contracts work by is: 1. Scope The program, square meters, units, levels2. Schedule What, how and when are you delivering3. Risk + Resposibility What are you committed to deliver4. Work Product Mockups, Drawings, plans, models5. Compensation How much are you chargi ng, to who and when

Stages of program Design:1. Concept Design 5%2. Schematic Design 15%3. Design Development 20%4. Construction Documents 20%5. Bidding 5%6. Construction Administration 35%

Relationships:Between owner, architect, contractor and developer

1. Traditional

2. Design Build

3. Owner client

4. Built to suit

A

O

C

AO

C

A

OC

ADO

C

CSF2014 137137CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

1. Traditional

2. Design Build

3. Owner client

4. Built to suit

“it isn’t just the buildings, is the environment you live in”

Much of the discussion of the lecture involved contracts, why are they important, what elements inte-grates them, what a good contract consists of and how a poor contract can hurt designers. It is import-ant what elements need to be in a contract in order for all the people involved to be satisfied and pro-tected from any misunderstanding. Contracts should be fundamentally understood as a legal agreement between all parties involved within a project.

He discussed about the relationships between owners, architects, contractors and developers, the different possibilities of work and the pros and cons of each one. Being a surprise since is a completely different way of working from México. For starters architects make their own work and the part of the contractor, there is no division formal division, while in this case an architect providing skills of a con-tractor might cause drastic concerns and vice versa. That is why there is an interconnected relationship stablished.

Also scheduling is a key factor within contracts. Each category has its own time and place within the design process and involves numerous parties. The client must be upheld throughout, while consultants enter at various phases. Consultants may include contractors, developers, financers, structural engi-neers, electricians, etc.

Drew got us to understand the realistic part of the design process and pointed numerous facts that we might never thought about before that are really important to consider when making the business of architecture.


lecture

laura fisherreal state expert, aia

alternate careers

Laura Fisher is an incredible prepared woman, her extensive CV is impressive which includes: - B Arch in Virginia Tech - LEED- MBA in University of Chicago - AIA Fellow- Licensed Interior Designer - Coop President- Licensed Realtor - Church Board- Licensed Architect - Etc. She shared with us her work experience and how she started making her path in architecture. But most of all, she gave us words of advice in which steps we need to follow in order to succeed. The thing that might be the most important by the time we graduate is getting licensed. This is a basic step every architect needs to make and the sooner you do it, the better, it would be easier because you have all the knowledge fresh in your mind and also the studying mind set rather than if you try on presenting it 2 or 5 years after being working.

Also she made a big focus on first of all thinking in what is it that we want to do with our lives. Just because we are in architecture doesn’t mean we have to know what we want to do. Since architecture has a wide field of opportunites, you can always star master in whatever it is that you like. But once you know what is it that you want to do, focus on that and always work hard to be the best. Don’t conform with the minimum, always look for new opportunities and engage in them. There is always something more in which you can develop yourself.

CSF2014 139139CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Laura shared a numerous valuable facts and tips that we always need to have in mind. But the best one for me is to know that not because I’m studying architectre means that I need to stick with it. There a million other things related to architecture that I can focus on and pursue a career in. But always asking the question, where do I want to go? What do I want to do with my life? Because doing what you like and what you love will always get you to where you want to be.

Knowing your skillset is fundamental, you need to know what you are capable of and what you are not. Not only to know what your performance is, but to identify what things you need to work on. This for you to know the value of your services. You need to be fair to your client and mostly to yourself with the work that you do. Don’t sell your work for a cheaper price than is worth.

Always take care of how you present yourself. This involves your dress code, your profession-alism but also the way you connect with people. Participate, get involved and engage with your community. But most of all, don’t lose touch with the relationships you’ve already established. Keep all of your relationships alive. It never hurt’s meeting with people or even just sending e-mails letting them know what you are up to.

Listening to Laura was very enriching, because architecture is always about the design and how beautiful and functional things are, but sometimes we forget about many other aspects that also come within the architecture, like business or others. Her advices were not only useful but inspir-ing for me to look for what I really want to do in life and pursue it.

“it is easier to smile than it is tu frown”


Lecture

michael lingertatskidmore, owings & merrill

PROJECT MANAGMENT

Project management is integrating all of the people who are involved in the design process to be in the same page in order for the project to work. The project is always integrated by the de-sign team, engineering team and the project manager. It consists in trying to balance as best as possible the cost, time and quality of the project in order for it to be as fast, good and cheap as possible.

Management isn’t control, is not about saying do this or do that, is about making everyone move in the right direction. So multiple meetings with all the people involved in the project are scheduled through the entire process of the project in order to have knowledge about what is happening with every piece of the puzzle. Schedules need to be followed and there also needs to be flexi-bility, everyone is important, everyone’s voice needs to be heard, so if someone needs more time or similar, arrangements are needed to be done within the possibilities of the program.

Essential Responsibilities 1. Setting up a project 4. Meetings 2. Contracts and insurance 5. Financial Records 3. Team member contacts 6. Communication and record keeping

COST TIME

QUALITY

FAST

GOODCHEAP

CSF2014 141141CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

“it’s all about being in the same page along the way”

Every building has a lot of work behind it, and behind that work there is a lot of people that is involved in the process. How do we manage to keep all the people in constant notice, knowing what their roll is and organizing the results? This is where a project manager comes in. Michael Lingertat is the Director of Project managing in Skidmore, Merrill and Owings, not only I learned a lot from his lecture but I had the opportunity to interview him.

It is impressive to see how many people is involved in the process of the development of a building. As we know architects are involved as well as engineers, but I never really thought about the consultants such as cost estimators, master planners, infrastructure and utilities designers, interior designers, land-scape architetecs, lightning experts, acoustic experts, and the list con go on and on. All of this people need to be completely organized in order for the project to succeed.

Within the essential resposibilities of a project manager come the six previously mentioned. But it is also about the relationship you have with your team, communication and trust is crucial in order for everything to go right. By the end of the day is always a team effort.

I also learned that the work is not just doing the work but keeping record of it. This is an important part, not only for documentation but to keep track of every aspect of the conversations, deals and commit-ments that each and every person involved agreed to, so there is no range for misunderstandings.


lecture

neil katzSKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRIL

parametric modeling

Neil katz studied his bachelor in architecture in the university of Minnesota and as soon as he graduated he joined with SOM. He started working in the office of NY and later he was transferred to the office in Chicago. He is part of the black box studio, which is a team of architects and design professionals who are the program experts, being the computational innovators of SOM.

Since he was a little kid he had an interest for geometry, so since high school he started focusing in developing this skills in this area. At the same time he was always interested in technology, specially computers, so he spent most of his time working in both. By the time he joined SOM in the mid 80’s, the office just acquired computers, there weren’t many people using them. There were 20 to 30 computers for an office of 300 people. He worked with a team developing a new program for script modeling named Architecture & Engineering Series (AES) which later ended as a collaborative development with IBM.

His work is always done by script, using the simple tool of Autocad. He recently worked in the team of design for the new WTC. He collaborate in proposing different ways of parametric mod-els, complex geometry shapes. He describes his work as simple, rather than complex. He always starts by simple geometric shapes, then taking them to the next level by analyzing how the forms relate to each other, from smooth transitions to extreme ones.

Parameters is the most important factor in his design. He bases in the parameters that the project will have, from the site, the light, the views and many others. Since the parameters always drive the design, he needs to know exactly which ones they are so he can start scripting a code for the model.

CSF2014 143143CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

“geometry is the language of architecture”

Having the opportunity to interact with Neil Katz was a great experience. I admire his work entirely, not only because of its greatness but because I have an interest in geometry to. Seeing the way he experi-ments with shapes and he takes them to the next level is inspiring. And the best part is that the complex geometry is not random but driven from different parameters that make the form not only attractive but functional. He refers to geometry as the language of architecture and I’ve always heard that but I’ve never seen before such a clear definition of it, and his work really explains it in the most explicit way.

One of my favorite of his projects is the Cathedral of Christ the Light in San Francisco. Where he took the name of the cathedral literal and created the image of Christ in the altar with light. He started by choosing the image that was going to be projected, then he changed it to gray scale, then made it an algorithm and finally a pattern. Not only had he needed the pattern of the image but he studied the lighting of the building. How and when it would be lighted by the sun in order for the image to appear. My mind was blown by the cre-ativity and complexity of his mind, the way he figured out the way to deliver what he had in mind, exactly as he had it. We architects, or at least most of us, complain about technology being a constrain rather than a tool, but after seeing the work of Neil and the way he approaches problems, I’ve been inspired to always give a harder thought and take things to the next level. He says that whenever there is something he can’t do, the problem is not the tool but himself, because it is in his mind that he needs to find a solution and a way to tell the tool what is it that he wants to do. His lecture and the conversation we had was extremely enriching and inspirational for me, because he made me understand things in a different way.


LECTURE

geofFREY walterscannon design

arch balance

Geoffrey talks about the balance of the profession of architecture. This should be composed by design, technical and management. This three “legs” should be in perfect balance in order for a great outcome to be delivered. The architecture should follow a structure integrated by:

PROCESSCollaborative work makes work more efficient, not a single person can know everything and be able to solve the issue without others opinions. The more collaborative the process is the better the results are. DELIVERYMost projects use to follow the Design-Bid-Build process, now there is a broad options of pro-grams that can improve and compress and make faster this whole process what makes it easier to have a great quality of delivery in the final product. DOCUMENTATIONAll documentation should always be clear and understandable for construction. Even the hardest project’s documentation should be able to be read by someone who is not architect, so there is less range of mistakes in construction. DETAILING This has to do entirely with how the building performs, how does it go together with the field? How does it affects it? Building and structure systems have to do with this as well. PERFORMANCESustainability goes in hand with performance, measures of energy use, core issues, gas emis-sions and many others. The 2030 challenge is the goal for today’s architecture.

CSF2014 145145CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

“Sustainability shouldn’t be the design but it should be the outcome”

Geoff talked to us about his view of design, our preparation for the technical side, standard terms, facts and codes we must know as well as building performance and sustainability concerns. The practice and profession of architecture is always changing, even as we are being taught architecture, so it’s important to keep up to date and be aware of the changes of the practice.

Continued education and research is the most important aspect of the architecture profession. It is the designer’s duty to stay informed, have the appropriate knowledge to apply innovative methods, and ex-ecute this information into the built environment. Sustainability shouldn’t be the design but it should be the outcome.

Standards such as Architecture 2030 acts as a manifesto to achieve net zero energy by 2030. The standard will drastically impact the industry at the same level affects as codes. Roughly 40% of the en-ergy consumed in the United States is through the building sector. As a result, by achieving net zero, the negative effects on the environment become positive.

In conclusion, this lecture was merely informative and made me realize that I need to be prepared, be-cause nobody else will prepare me to have this knowlegde of trends and changes in design processes and codes that are constantly in upgrade.


lecture

JOHN SYVERSTENCANNON DESIGN

ARCH IMPACT

Architects resposIbility is to make architecture that will make a social impact. John Syversten shared with us his vision and phIlosophy about how the work we do can improve people’s lives. There three big elements of impact are social, environmental and economic. This three not only should be considered in the design but implemented in every decision of the project.

Communities, cities and even countries can change exponentially just by the way it is built. He talked about a particular project that he worked in Brownsville recently and described it as an example of success. The project was to construct a science building for research. A intensive site analysis was done, but instead of just focusing in the common elements architecture demands, such as dimensions, sun path, flows and others, they searched for the obesity, crime and poverty rates in the area as well as the boarder issues.

All of this helped the team rethink about the program and propose what the city really needed instead of what they were asked for. They looked for opportunities to maximize the impact that the building would make in the community. So in result instead of creating a science building they came up with an incredible outcome of a global health building in which people would also be educated about the issues previously mentioned that the community was troubling with.

CSF2014 147147CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

“the more you become involve, the more you will realize how little you are doing”

As the conclusion of the semester John Syversten talked to us about his work and his passion of helping the community. The thing that I most clearly take out is to increase our knowledge in the context and the only way that it can be done is by getting out and engaging, this way you can look for the opportunities to help the community. It’s not about the little pieces along the way that will make the change but to be focused in the good end.

His enthusiasm is contagious, it was inspiring to get to know someone so committed in using his knowl-edge and skills in order to help others and to make not only good architecture but an impact with his projects. He pointed out that Pro Bono projects doesn’t mean free, it means for good. And the more you become involve, the more you will realize how little you are doing, not that you are doing nothing but you realize how much there is to do.

You always need to start thinking with big questions, like institutional, social or cultural questions. In this way you can start making a change, it might be locally urgent but it will end up being globally significantly. That’s why people need to work collaboratively in order to solve a problems, Every time someone can do something different and it’s a group thing.

All the work that you do, you have to do it with passion, with your heart and it needs to be something in which you believe in, that’s how your work will always be authentic and authenticity can’t be hidden.


iNTERVIEW


iNTERVIEW

associate partnerdon copperg|r|e|c

CSF2014 151151CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Why did you decided to study architecture?

What is your favorite thing about architecture?

What is your roll in the firm?

What do you think is the most difficult thing of the profession?

Why was the decision to have a small firm?

When I was a kid I showed a lot of aptitude for both creativity and math and science, so that was usually a combina-tion that suggested architecture or engineering, so I knew it was about designing buildings but I didn’t know anything more than that. Studying in Virginia Tech definitely changed my perspective, because the philosophy of the school was based on the philosophy of the Bauhaus, so the emphasis was more in the creativity part than the science and math part, it really brought out my creativity to great degree, more than I even knew I had, it changed my life.

Solving problems. To me is really satisfying, whether is design or technical issues, finding the right solution for the problems is why I enjoy it so much. The most challenging one would be the current one, because they are all unique, and this is another thing that I find satisfying of what we do, and is that every project is unique, it has its own client, it has its own program, its own site, its own opportunities. There are a lot of things that you do the same from building to building but we get to do new things all the time, which not a lot of professions get that opportunity.

As an owner you do a lot of business, a lot of responsibility. But when it comes to actually work-ing on a project I kind of still do a little bit of everything, from schematic design to construction detailing.

It’s a lot of work for the amount of compensation, there are much more lucrative professions. So in a sense that’s probably the only frustrating thing. People don’t see architects the same way that they use to, we used to be considered the honors representative, the honors advocate, we protect the interest of the owners but it has happened over the last twenty or so years where we’ve lost, part-ly through our own behavior, we’ve lost that position. And I blame it a little on the contractors, be-cause the contractors try to convince the owners that the architect is spending more of their mon-ey that they need to spend, and that the contractor should be the expert of how you spend your money.

All three of us, the associate partners, have worked before in big firms and we are more comfort-able working in a studio environment rather than a corporate environment, but what we are capa-ble of is providing the same level of service as a big corporation except in a much more human way.

Before starting GREC, did you picture yourself working in Chicago?

When you graduated, did you envision having your own firm?

I moved here after I graduated and the original plan was to check it out for a couple of years and then maybe move to another city. But I fell in love with the city, is just an awesome city.

Yes and no. Yes because that’s kind of what you think about coming out of school, but no because I didn’t re-ally know anything about what I was thinking about. To be perfectly honest, this happened sort of accidentally, it wasn’t my plan to be an owner of what this firm was, that was sort of a temporary situation but David and I found out that we could work well together, so we started growing the firm and then we became partners.


iNTERVIEW

What gives you satisfaction in your job?

How do you picture yourself in five years?

What advice would you give to our generation of architecture students?

Well there is a couple of answers, one is the problem solving, is very satisfying. Also being a business owner it’s also really satisfying to create a good environment for people to work in, so that something that I didn’t even anticipate, it feels really good to walk in here every day and see people who are happy to be here.

Right now we have really good projects with really good clients and a lot of times the quality of the clients is more important than the quality of the project so I rather have an average project with a great project, than a great project with a difficult client. And that’s my perspective now, when I was younger I wanted the great project, so I would say looking at the five year mark, to continue to do project with the level of client that we are currently working with would be good. Because they are really good clients and they have a lot of respect for what we do and they like working with us, we like working with them, because ultimately it comes down to how do you want to spend all of the time that you spend working. If it were about money I would be probably would be doing something else, so it has to be about how your time is spent and that’s why I’m in business with my friends and we work with our friends and we try to have a healthy social environment in the office, because we work really hard and if you are going to spend that much time doing something, you should try to set it up as much as you can to enjoy it.

I’m going to answer with the same answer I just gave, this work is more rewarding when you are doing it in an environment that is healthy and productive, so from my own perspective, my advice would be to find a place where you want to work based on the people and the environment rather than the work they do. Because I know coming out of school you want to work with people who do the most creative, advanced design, everybody does or most people do, but usually, and this is unfair generalization perhaps but, does aren’t always the most healthy environments by their nature. You don’t become famous by being a nice guy.

Do you have a favorite type or scale of project?All of what we do is fun, there a couple of things that we don’t do that I don’t think I would enjoy like custom houses, as much as I would like to design a custom house, it’s really challenging to work with clients who don’t speak the language, and it’s hard for them to visualize this. Sometimes even if you show it to them they are still looking at a drawing. And the few houses that I have done, it’s strange when you know exactly how something is going to turn out but the client has no idea, so everything is a surprise, and they are spending their own money, which is different than developers who are spending somebody else’s money. So the in-vestment, financial and emotional investment is very high, so if something is unexpected, which must things are, it’s often very intense, it’s being my experience. And there are other things that I would love to do that we don’t do, like civic buildings, and I don’t mean like fire stations and schools because we’ve done those, but cultural buildings like museums or theaters, those kinds of buildings would be very interesting to work on.

How do you develop the projects between the three of you?What we usually do is, all three of us will meet initially, or even work on the project for a little while and then one of us will go forward as the principal in charge in that project but we are always talking every day, that’s why we sit right next to each other, so we know about what’s happening with all the projects.

CSF2014 153153CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE


iNTERVIEW

managing directormichael lingertat skidmore, owings & merrill

CSF2014 155155CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Why did you become an engineer?Michael: I always kind of new I wanted to be in tall buildings somehow, in the city somehow. As a kid we all fall in love with cities, or you did Legos and I think you fall in love with that side of it. I ended up going down as masters or architecture program, then the hardest graduate option was constructural engineering and I picked that one cause it give me the right to do engineering and architecture, get both licenses, so I picked the structural one. Just for that reason, I was good for it, I knew it, it was going to be either that or practice and sort of fell into that. When I came out of school I knew I wanted to work in an AE firm in the city. I waited, I didn’t take my first jobs, my first offers, I waited for the summer for an opportunity to open up in Chicago in a big firm and SOM came up.

I know you started working at SOM as an engineer and that you made your way up to project manager, how was that transition like? I think at some point what happens, you sort of see a group and see what’s going on and what I liked about en-gineering was the big picture, in Skidmore we do big jobs, we do a lot of high rises, structure drives the shop in all of it, and I got to see enough of the architecture as a structural engineer, I got to drive the ship in a lot of things, figure out the spaces first. What we know you need an auditorium there but what is it really? To go for the structural you need to draw the auditorium to figure it out. But I didn’t like doing the calculations in the structure, I loved envisioning what the structure was, figuring it out, drawing it, making sure it worked but calculating the differences between a quarter of inch a sixteen inch metal plate bored me, it didn’t interest me, its absolutely important and crucial but it didn’t interest me. It naturally became a time when they were looking for project man-agers and someone said “Mike is good at this kind of things, he has a duel degree, etc.” So they hired me as project manager, I was doing a lot of work in a different office, so I came back to the SOM offices, I still had little things to finish up structurally, but I was doing management jobs on architecture to, and I had never done it be-fore. But in the end of the day I knew how to build and I knew generally what was going on with the phases. And I fell in love with it, I personally said “I’ll give it six months and if I don’t like it I’ll leave”, well that was 10 years ago.

What is thing you like the most and the least about your job? It’s interesting when you have done a job once or twice and you can see how things are coming, you feel this things coming, because we are doing innovating stuff, we are doing new stuff but we are also building buildings. Building buildings really hasn’t change, using wood or concrete, steel, glass, stone or precast in the outside, I mean, you still have to build it by hand, so some of the construction is very advanced or some of the ideas are very advanced but some of it is very straight forward so you know, things happen fast, but nothing happens that fast in the world. And is interesting when you plan something out or you think it through, but what is really cool about it is when it actually works and you see it happen. You know you design a process, a schedule and it works, and it works well. A schedule that works well brings all this really talented people, who has expertise in whatever they have it, you bring all this pieces, they all talk and things come out of it. Sometimes just normal buildings, sometimes really interesting things but is that discussion. So you create a process that allows for them, interact and let everyone get their work done and deliver to go price it, get paid and build. You have to be flexible, every job and every person is different. So to me, to know what is coming and that moment when it works, to me that’s the most interesting thing about my job. The other side is that I love knowing almost everything about a job, that’s a positive and a negative, I know everything about a job but I really don’t know anything. It’s a funny way to say it but you are never intimate with anything, any part of the design or structure, not anymore as a project manager, but you know generally about everything. If you really want to get into the details and get your finger nails dirty, you don’t do that as a manager anymore.


iNTERVIEW

How do you prepare yourself for a new type of project? You do your homework, you ask questions. Even if you think you are right, you always have to talk to peo-ple to agree on stuff. So part of it is doing your homework but other part is having the discussion with them to make sure that that’s the right date. Is that working back and forth to hit the date. That is doing your homework. You’d be surprised about how many new things there are and every building is new, every site is new, so a lot of times I’m still surprised of how you can ask a lot of questions and the answers you get are “I don’t know”. And you go like OK, so we need to go and find that out. Not that you are supposed to know, that’s not necessarily the thing, maybe you get ten people around the table and maybe no one knows, ok so how do we find out, how do we go get that answer because you have to get the answer, so we have to go do the research, ask lawyers, ask clients, ask whoever. That’s how you prepare, and it’s not that hard, you just have to go do it, and you have to do it efficiently and you have to make sure you go forward. Sometimes you have to wing it by asking the right questions, but a lot of the fun of it is when we don’t know the answer, and the answer comes when you draw it and you figure out the problems.

As a project manager you need to interact with people of different fields, designers, engineers, etc. How was it for you at the beginning, learning how to communicate with each one of them? Because I know that not every person work with the same words, engineers approach things in a different way as a designer would. Did you have any trouble with that? The response that pops in my head is team work. You have to show people you are on their team, you have to show people that they have value and that you are willing to work with them as a team to get to the end. So a lot of that is listening, a lot of people are not good listeners, and specially a lot of designers and people are different, sometimes you’ll have to listen at them, and get to the core of that they are try-ing to say, let them teach you or say what they need to say until you get what they are trying to say. Other times, some people aren’t talkers, some engineers just like to sit there and draw, do their work and you got to pull that information out of them, because you want their input. To me, going back to your ques-tion, of how do you deal with different people, you do have to listen to figure them out, at times you have to judge the situation, because at times you have to come in to the meeting and say look this is what we are doing, here is the schedule, I’ve talked to you all, or we don’t have time, you have to do this, trust me and you have to build that trust with your team and they’ll get there. I think that’s what it is, sometimes is listening to them, and then using that to move something forward and that just comes with the experience.

You’ve talked about learning in every project, but from which project you think you’ve learned the most? Which was the most significant for you? It’s 18 years, you know that? But if I had to choose, maybe one from my structural time, if you’ve ever flown through Newark airport, in the continental hub, which is the big glass wall that looks out, as well as the concord C which is the one with the skylights, I worked on that. For three years I was out there every single week, from the first baggage handling facility, as a structural engineer I learned all about baggage handling, we were fast tracking it, I had to make sure that the baggage rout in this big conveyor belts and that they didn’t hit the structure, so I did a lot of work with it. I learned all about the system, I looked at their drawings, I read their drawings, we coordinat-ed, this is before Revit so you had to think in 3D on how to do it, but it was fascinating, because everyone flies a lot now a days, but you aren’t looking in what really happens, so now whenever I’m in an airport I look and see it everywhere. That was that one, I have a bunch of them. I’ve got lots of big projects from where I’ve learned a lot.

CSF2014 157157CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Can you describe your day to day tasks?See this is interesting, I never quite know what I’m going to be doing every day, you nev-er do, not in my roll. I know that I’m booked up, I know that I have meetings probably sched-uled half to two thirds of the day. So a lot of my days go on having conversations with all the mem-bers of the project to coordinate them and also strategizing. It’s working with people to get their ideas together, to create the best idea. Also keeping yourself straight and understanding what is a priority.

Do you work in several projects at the same time? Yes, now I’m starting to have younger PMs underneath me doing some of that day to day work. Which is rela-tively a new thing for me, but I like it. But yes, it really depends on the scale and the size of the projects. Right now I have five to six active projects which is too much, three heavily active projects with a lot of little stuff. But never a full time every week for six months out of the year, is like that for a month and then the tailor is down.

How do you manage your time? You have to find your own way to do it and prioritize everything, cause remember, you can’t really do a week per project because then the other people are a week behind. And even when you are in a project meetings, you are checking your emails, taking phone calls, knowing what is going on in general with the other projects. I write a lot of lists, I rarely look back at my lists, but the technique of writing makes you think about it more. And once you think about it more then all of a sudden, for me, it gets stuck in my brain. But what I actually do the list for is figuring out what is top or what is mandatory now, and that what’ll go first, the other is going to wait and it’s always a judg-ment call. If everything is a priority you ask for help, we have another PMs in the firm that can do a certain firms.

How do you manage a life/work balance? Do you work in a regular schedule, like from 8-5 daily or similar? Not well enough. No one allows me or disallows me to take a day off. We have working hours, formal hours, all those things but the jobs have to get done. You have to have a balance and you have to be able to show it off, so when you look at that list, that I talked about just a minute ago, and if you do the two and three things you have to also be able to say well the other ten on there can wait until tomorrow and put it down. Is tough to plan for that kind of things but you have to because nothing is ever going to fall down tomorrow. Construction doesn’t work that fast. You need to answer your client, you need to be proactive, but nothing is really going to ever fall down tomorrow. So if you plan ahead and do your homework, it’s important to be off, and that’s the balance that you need to have.


iNTERVIEW

designercharles chambersG|R|E|C

CSF2014 159159CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE


Do you have a master?

During your first years of work, what kind of work where you doing?

How did you know when it was time to move on, change job?

I was in high school and we had to take and art class as mandatory and I had my freshman year had already taken a drafting class and I hated it because I was terrible at, and in junior year I had to take an art class and I was deciding, at the time I think at the back of my head, I was sort of thinking about college but not really. I took an art class and randomly one day my art teacher came up to me and he is like your style is very ar-chitectural, I had no idea what that meant. So I kind of latched on to that and I was deciding between being a pilot or architecture. I didn’t know anything about flying and I didn’t know anything about architecture but I latched on to the architecture thing and I think, like subconsciously, I think it was because I have such a strong interest in problem solving in general so that’s kind of what led me to it and why I started. It was a complete accident and the fact that I enjoy it and that I land in it, I think that it was a big happy accident.

So I did a five year program as a professional degree, see in the US you only need a professional degree to be able to get you license, you don’t need a masters so in my generation the kids would go to a masters most times because the needed to get their professional degree not so much because they wanted to study something. So for me, I didn’t really understand the benefit of going to get my masters, to go study another two years of architecture after I just done five years. And there is always conversation about the thesis and having a very independent investigation, but at the time and even still today I felt like if I felt that passion towards a subject or an idea of research I would do it on my own. So I had my professional degree, I graduated and even to this day I feel like if I want to go back and really focus at something or go study something that maybe I feel like I need academia supplement then I’ll go back, but I wouldn’t do architecture because is kind of redundant.

I worked in two offices at school. I worked in a small office with one boss and that was it, just him and me in a 4x5 office. We had three projects in two and a half years which for any office is like no work but we were busy. One was a religious education center, and then we did my bosses house and we started to do an office built down when I left. Then in total I worked in six offices after school.

You know when a relationship is done? Is the same emotion. For me a lot of what I do or what I design, its being a lot of work to not make it an emotional experience, so I’ve always had a perspective for the user, how it’s going to be use, I think that the client is one thing but then the user is another they are two different parties. I’ve always felt like I’ve been very compassionate towards that, so I feel like after I understood the office’s design process or knowing that their business model was a certain direction that was not beneficial to me, sometimes is just economic for you. So there is always different factors and I think you are ultimately going to find it, I said the relationship thing sort of as a joke but sometimes in relationships you need to grow, like you0ve been with this person and then you know you can’t grow further with them, it just doesn’t work, is the same thing in a firm. Regards the size of the firm, you are going to develop a relationship with it, you are going to develop understanding and how things work and when things doesn’t work, you are going to know.


iNTERVIEW

Working in all those different projects, is there any particular scale you like to work on?

And talking about middle size, how can we get architecture to the middle class?


I like medium, so like a school is a good size, like 20,000 sqft. That is very medium so you can get your head around details, you can get very intimately involved with the exterior and the interior. I think that is one of my frustrations right now, is that a lot of what I’m working on is exterior and we don’t do a lot of interior design and I feel like is part of the architecture. So I love being involved in all aspects of the process, not just doing the curtain wall, or not just doing a launch but I like thinking about the building as a whole. And I think doing small to medium size projects allows that.

Well I still need an answer to that. Undercutting ourselves in terms of contracts and our own economy, we archi-tects have our own value, like there is an incestual architectural value, like I care about what you think of me, I’m saying architects in general, but I don’t care what the user thinks. So if you go to any of this fancier, big, Gehry or any of those people, if you took like a huge poll about how people feel, interact or are comfortable about using that architecture, that we put on a pedestal, I’m pretty sure that that pedestal would get pretty small. So that’s one kind of comment in that. I think the second is that the middle class doesn’t understand the value of consid-ered design, so they don’t want to pay for it. I think anybody that we know within the middle class structure that has never worked with an architect or understands what an architect does, they think we put things together and maybe there is another ration in there of people that think that we try to make things look good but exactly what you are talking about in terms of understanding an urban component or a context or so, those very im-portant things that help realize strong design outside or even inside the building. We architects are not educat-ing other people or telling them what it is. And somewhere along line there needs to be an education process.

I guess that it would be not be so narrow minded and approach. To constantly be open when you do receive criti-cism, listen to your client, listen to your consultant, listen to your boss, listen and eventually you will have interns and people underneath you that you that you are going to help mentor and bring along, like I love listening to the guys I work with, I want to know what they are thinking. Getting all of those perspective pulls all the time as you mature, as an architect, I think is critical. Remind yourself about that open mind, there is always going to be people under you, there is always going to be people above you, next you, so absorb all of that and make that your constant guidance.

CSF2014 161161CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE


iNTERVIEW

graphics specialist

graphics specialist

megan glaves

bridget hapner

skidmore, owings & merrill

skidmore, owings & merrill

CSF2014 163163CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Why did you become an architect/graphic designer? M: I chose architecture because I feel like I am a very visual person, I was the editor in chief of my year book and I really liked designing it and I really liked seeing my classmates holding the book, so my mom pushed architecture just because it’s a good design career, so I did. And then towards the end of my architecture education I realized I didn’t want to be an architect just because there are a lot of things that are in the way of actual architectural design, so I explored graphic design, really liked it, so I went in that direction, but stayed in the architecture field. B: I like the communication aspect of it, like helping peo-ple understanding and create better experiences through making things visual.

What would you say has been the most difficult part of adapting architecture to graphic design AND VICE VERSA?M: Remembering that the architecture is the design, so when you are perching it as graphic designer, you are communicating architecture or the planning, you need to remember that that’s the main focus, not some super fancy graphic design that is really cool and trending, because you really need to keep things simple and clean enough for the architecture and the planning, because that is the main focus. Because some-times I think that could be a battle with graphic designers who maybe don’t know a lot about architecture or planning, because they want to make it all look really fancy, sometimes that can excuse the message B: I would say, working closely with the studios and trying to understand what they are trying to communicate, because there is sometimes where we can strip away, understand what they are doing so you can really help them drive that point home, more than just formatting. Megan and I do a lot of diagrams, we see how many color do we need, how many line weights, basically get this point across so the message can be understood clearly as possible.

Do you think a master in graphic design was enough for your knowledge in the field?M: Yes, I chose to do that because my undergraduate was not in graphic design and I wanted to actually get education in graphic design in order to get the freedom to explore and just kind of play around, so I could really learn and grow. So for me the graduate education was very important, so what I have noticed in comparison from the graduate education vs the undergraduate education is that undergraduate is very focused on learning how to do things, and how to be a good designer, towards the graduate program was really focused on why you are designing so therefore when you think about why you are doing something that really helps you decide, ok, what I’m I going to do, what media am I going to use, can I use a computer, what kind of programs are appropriate, should this be done by hand, you know, things like that. So learning the why was absolutely beneficial because then that helps with my career as well, like why should we use this diagram, what it is supposed to be saying, is supposed to be saying this, ok well then lets adjust it this way, so in that way it will really say what it needs to say.

Which do you think is the main difference regarding point of view between both?M: I think that is when I was learning design, I was learning it in architectural practice, and so a lot of things are very structured and lined up, you have to work with the space, the usability of it and how people are experiencing that, so I kind of think like that when it comes to design. And also having that background in architecture, I understand the language of what architects are trying to say, so then I can work with that as when Bridget comes in, her not having that background, she comes with a fresh mind looking at this, so I may see something and be like yes it’s really obvious but her looking at it might be like it’s not obvious to me and that is actually a really good thing because now we can work together to come to a good solution. B: I think architecture and planning is different, because in planning is more about telling the story of why you did what you proposed, and in architecture is more about the content so I feel like more graphic support is need-ed to tell the story, so often times we’ll work in icons and diagrams, so I’m back at just doing graphic design.


iNTERVIEW

How did you enroll with SOM and which is your current position?M: I found a job online for a graphic specialist and I liked it because it was working with graphic studio within an architecture firm and I applied for it because I was graduating soon and I needed a job and I wanted to be in a big city so I applied, got interviews and got the job. So I was looking for jobs that were graphic design in architecture, I just knew about SOM because of my architecture background.B: I’ve never heard about SOM before this job. I was working as a freelancer, so I worked in a lot of small places before and SOM needed some help temporarily, so I start-ed as a freelancer and ended up being a good fit, so now I’ve been here for year and a half.

In which part of the design process do you come in? B: Hopefully really early, that would be ideal, because then I think that would really help, as well as im-plement the color palette that would go through out the document, and make sure that everything is only made once instead of having to do I multiple times. Sometimes we get in at the end, especial-ly on deadlines or competitions. But we get a lot of success coming in the projects at the beginning. M: The earlier you come in, the more you know about the planning design or the architectural design and that really influences the graphic design and the story telling and that’s what we can help early on.

What is your role and responsibility?M: Is usually kind of putting all together. Usually we work with design teams a lot because they are do-ing the actual design work and then a lot of times, they are not really good laying out pages or mak-ing things look nice, so we do a lot of that. Making their work look nice. If we come in early in, would be developing color palettes, working with the team making sure they are using it correctly, and that they are telling their story in a good way, but sometimes it is just taking stuff that they’ve already put to-gether and making sure that things are consistent and lined up, using a grid and stuff like that.

Who evaluates your performance? M: We have a boss, Janine. Usually we go to her just to say do you think this is ok? She’s been here for fif-teen years so she is very familiar with certain styles that the partners really like so she can really help with that. We go to each other too, there is plenty of times when I say like “Hey Bridget, I’ve been staring at this since forever, does this look good? What do you think?” And also working with the team and seeing how they react to what we are doing, and we also tell them our reactions to what they are doing, so it’s a lot of collaboration.

Could you describe your day-to-day tasks?B: It depends on what we are working on, we also work with marketing, so sometimes our project more about how to coordinate the files are being put together, bring in something throughout the weeks before the final submis-sion. Sometimes we get a call from marketing saying that they need an infographic illustrating why the way we are proposing is best and then maybe we’ll spend a day or two or even just a few hours creating the infographic, a set of icons or something like that for the proposal, so it really depends on what people need. We’ve done a little bit of exhibition graphics as well, we always try to let everyone know that we are here so they can use us as resource.

What do you like most about your job? B: I like that it is about thinking about what people need and thinking about how people would live in a space, how big the design supporting material should be like to present the design. I think for graphic design, you personally as a designer you feel strongly about working in advertising or selling something to someone, so I really like the idea of working in a place where designers are working on helping peo-ple, that is really important to me, do a work in which I believe in and I feel like here we are doing that.M: I wanted to stay within architecture because of the reason that Bridget just de-scribed and I also enjoy working with other designers on figuring out how to best describe how we want this people to interact in the space and how that works, it makes it really fun.

CSF2014 165165CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

What would you like to change about your job?M: It would be nice to have a little bit more freedom and trust, because sometimes architects feel like they are the superior designers, so therefore they try to tell you what to do, so you have you have to say, you don’t know anything about graphic design, let me do it, which you can say to some people, but other times with partners who run the company, you have to respect the fact that they are senior of you and this is what they want, and if they want it red and they want it certain way, you just do it. So it would be nice to have more freedom and people trusting that we are good graphic designers and it is why we are here, so let us do it and you guys focus on your architecture or planning.

What gives you job satisfaction?M: Winning competitions gives me a lot of satisfaction. If we work on competitions for a very long time or big projects, it makes me really happy to win those. One of the competitions I did recently, I was involved from the very begging, so I was really able to control the graphics throughout the entire book, which ended up being of three hundred pages and it made me really proud to turn in the book to the client, and then ending up winning. Now we probably won because the planning was really great, the architecture and all of the re-quirements were really great, but the information was presented very well and it made me proud to do that. B: There have been a few times when I‘ve create something and people look at it in a different way, once is visual-ized, but not published, so I really like having people come to me asking for a PDF of that work to show it to this person, spread information around, use what we have in the best way possible, I’m glad we can help do that too.

B: This weeks when you know there is a competition, you know that is going to be a little crazy so that week I won’t make any plans, assuming you are going to be here working until late, submitting everything together and getting that all exported, making sure it’s good to go. You just want to focus on that. There are times when I can leave at 5:30, because your work has been done or it can wait until tomorrow. I think is just making sure that when you really need to buckle down, focus on a deadline and really give it complete focus, doing that and then a break after. M: A lot of what I do is really consider ok is this something that I need to stay late for, and if it is some-thing that can be done tomorrow then I go home, but f it’s something like no I need to stay, I need to do this, it needs to get done, then I want it to be done right, I want it to be done on time., then you stay. Is just kind of knowing, in competitions you usually know about in advanced so you kind of know that that week is just going to be crazy. Stuff sometimes comes up at 4pm, 4:30, 5:00pm so it’s eval-uating what is actually really important and needs to be done, whether it is immediately or if it can wait.

How do you manage a life/work balance?

M: It’s kind of, what I said earlier, other designers telling you what to do and you just have to do it, so it can be difficult. Sometimes it’s other designers taking your work and then doing something that they think is really cool graphic design and it’s not, so then you have to spend time fixing it. It’s difficult to get the architects focusing in architecture and planners in planning, so then in that way we can be the ones who focus on the graphics. B: Here we work with architects, structural engineers, marketing, planning and I think that is really valuable be-cause I think that’s when the whole design field is moving towards, you can’t just make pretty pictures, you have to understand a lot more about the user and what is going on and we have to do that, that is a big part of the job

What is particularly difficult, about this profession?

B: Well everything we do is print, so we do deliverables or proposals or power points and PDFs, we have done a little bit of iPad stuff, but not much. So we are in our computers all day, sometimes we do pin ups and meetings, which are really helpful but I’m pretty much in my computer all day. So yes, technology has a 100% of our process. M: I do sketching when the project demands it. Once they asked me for a logo, so that’s something where I actu-ally sketched out ideas, 50 different kind of logos, then narrow it down to 5 that I liked and then I go into Illustrator. So I started out with sketches but finalize in the computer. Is nice to sometimes take a break from the computer.

What role does technology play in your position?


iNTERVIEW

architectural internjohn knutesong|r|e|c

CSF2014 167167CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Why did you become an architect?

What would you say is the most significant thing Chicago Studio left you?

Why did you come back to GREC?

I think, like most people, I wanted to do architecture kind on naively. I was interested in things like art and sciences, so a lot of people guided me towards architecture and I always had the sense that I was interested in space and environment. Just growing up always interested in buildings and I didn’t really know what that meant, so actually going into architecture, kind of learning what it is that you are studying. I think that is all part of the excitement of the architectural education, but initially I think it was something really ingrained that I somehow knew. I also feel like most people kind of doubted it when I started, especially because of the program that I was trained I, a kind of free educational environment, you kind of build your own education, you focus on what you want to focus on and you have a lot of freedom. I didn’t respond very well to that at first, but I kind of had this mentality of let’s get this first year through and we’ll see, and I think that is really the key to any profession, you kind of need to just find what you are good at. I think you kind of learn to embrace the struggle, which is another thing that really attracted me to the profession in general, the creative struggle.

I think it was definitely a different way of working. When I finished Chicago Studio I kind of was like this is the way of working, one that can really enrich your experience. And I think you need a variety of those, to really sort of have a rich education. And I think that was its main contribution, providing a different environment, a different pace of working, where I was having to do interviews once a week, so there’s that constant output, constantly making, which I really think it was a valuable lesson. In the program you don’t have time to just kind of sit on your hands and think about what it is that you want to do. You know, day one, making and producing and that really enforces you to constantly make and also be critical about what you are making which was a huge help to me, going into my fifth year of architecture school, doing a thesis. So that was a huge take away, and I think another huge take away, which often is taken for granted is being exposed to the city. Because as an architect you also have the responsibility to explore, and I think that Chicago Studio is a great program because it enables that.

To GREC specifically, I like the working environment there and I like my bosses. But coming back to Chicago was more of the drive for me, I knew I wanted to start practicing architecture in a city and like I said before, Chi-cago provide us great platform to do that, where I’m not just in the office. I’m working in the office, but then I’m also doing other things that really enrich me as a professional and not just me as a professional, but also me as an architect, and as a designer. So knowing that I wanted that environment, and knowing that I had connections in Chicago, that I had form through Chicago Studio, that’s kind of where I started looking and having the con-nection with GREC, then they wanted me to have a job there afterwards, so I think that’s a big part of it. I think it’s easy coming out of school and have a list of hype dream list firms that you would go work for, which I think is great, but you learn pretty quickly that is less to do with the actual work and more to do with sort of the structure and the mentorship that you are getting, which is what GREC is doing for me. I think you really have to look at where you are going to get the best mentorship, so that what attracted me back to the city and back to GREC.


iNTERVIEW

What is your roll and responsibility at your job?

Who evaluates your performance?

What would you say is the most rewarding and difficult thing about this profession?

I’m an intern technically, and I’m kind of the Willis at the totem pole at work and I have the least experience, so I think my roll and responsibility is to learn as much as possible and be a sponge so I don’t have a really specific job. I’m in a position to continue to grow, so is kind of taking on whatever and doing it to the best of my ability. GREC is really helpful because I have been put in one project that I’m staying consistently, so it’s giving the ability to see the timeline, kind of play out before the sequence of the project, but yes, I don’t have a specific job and I don’t know what my job tittle is but I’m steel very much a student, and I think is just learning the other side, the flip side of the coin, is like you spend five years in architecture school, know you are outside of it, what does it mean, what is the profession, how does the profession operates, for better or for worse learning it.

I think on a very broad level, the three partners do, nut is less personal, less individual is more of how the project is going, is it keeping its schedule, that sort of things. More often than not is my direct super-visor, which is a project manager of the project that I’m working on now, because this is a person who is giving me specific tasks to perform, and evaluate them how well I do them, if I carry them out, so on a very sort of technical, pragmatic level, that is the person who evaluates my performance. But I think you always have bear in mind, number one you are always evaluating your own performance and I think that’s a great thing about the profession, is relatively simple to do, knowing that you are doing it correct-ly, you are a designer so you have an intuition about this things. And number two, as I said, I’m still a student, so my performance is based less on correctness and based more on the willingness to learn.

In a way the most rewarding thing about the profession is the profession and the most difficult part of the profession is the profession. I think the rewarding thing is being in a community of designers and having a conversation that kind of transcends view because as much as we all like to design individually, the real value of having a profession is that you are constantly being pushed and challenged. So I really like that community, is not saying that I like to do group work all the time, obviously to have anything built requires a team, but I think that it has to be sot of an individual stand or approach to certain things. So that’s kind of in a micro environment in the office and not a macro scale in the profession. You have this individual designers putting things out there for the world and other designers and critics pushing against it, and people pushing back, I think that makes a really rich conversation. I think one of the most difficult things about the profession is that architects are business people, which is ok but the problem is having a profession that isn’t set up well for any business model. You are not selling a product really, you are kind of selling a service, but really what you are trying to do is really more aligned, I would think, with an artist, where you are trying to make an impact, you are not building this building for one person, you are building it to leave a mark in the earth, and that’s why we are architects. So that causes some issues, communication issues and people who don’t understand that sort of mentality and architects less willing to take a stand of that they believe, in which is ultimately good space. So that’s one of the most difficult things right now, in my stage of life I’m dealing with, realizing that about the profession and how do you approach that, like how do you accomplish what you want to accomplish. So, it’s an interesting idea about profession, it’s interesting to me for that reason, that established frame work that sets up this expectations of business which I don’t think is necessarily true.

CSF2014 169169CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

What do you like the most about your job?

What other things do you like to do, do you have any hobbies?

What would you change about your work?

I like learning, in some ways it’s the most kind of banal things, because like I said, right now I’m not doing anything, I mean because I come to work and I do drawings, or now I’m doing bathrooms and this are things that aren’t really exciting. I think anything that is putting things in your tool box, enabling you to operate within the profession is exciting. So sometimes picking red lines in a drawing isn’t the most exciting thing, it’s like this is a skill that I need to have that I can put to use later on in my career. I think doing renderings are fun, a lot of times that feels one of the more superficial things, like I’m going to make the building look pretty and shiny. Anything from learning how to draw technically and clearly excites me, is something that I love doing. And also learning how to communicate with people in this profession is something that is exciting and very scary. I like my job because it enables me to work.

I always look for ways in which I can contribute, having independent projects is very important and I always look for ways in where I can have a voice. There are hobbies that you have for yourself and that you keep to yourself and I think there are things that you do outside of work that enrich you as a person but also have a contribution. So as an architect I enjoy looking for competitions or conferences that I can summit and write to. So usually my work is appointed to something like that, but I do a considerable amount of drawing, because my senior thesis was about drawing, so I’m always looking to continue that, sharpen it and learn from it. And I also do a lot of reading because I enjoy synthesizing observations and things that I find interesting, so I do a lot of reading outside of work.

In some ways I don’t think about it as my job, but there are many things that I would change about the profession and the professional environment that we are in, the idea that architecture is a business means that is always serving a client which I don’t think is bad, but I think we need to have some value in ourselves to know that we have expertise on understanding space and complex special issues that many other people don’t have exper-tise. So one thing that I would change about the profession in general is to have more the ability question things and challenge things so is not necessarily about getting it right, but is about expanding the discipline or under-standing of space. So that’s what thing, and about my job in particular there are a couple of specific things, I think that in the office we don’t work with our hands, which I think is really critical for architects to do, because what we are doing is very physical and what we are creating is very physical and I think it requires a physical means of production, and I think that has been over taken by the demand for speed and efficiency which speed and efficiency in architecture I don’t think go hand in hand or well together. So if it was up to me there would be a lot more exploration and experimentation, where we would have the luxury to make a model and study it and manipulated and really challenge things for that formally. Or do a lot more sketching and not sketching of a building but really without having an end concept in mind just drawing envisioning space. And I think that is one thing that architects in my generation are noticing and something that is becoming more prevalent in practice.


iNTERVIEW

What would you think would be your next step in your career?

What advice do you have for this generation of architecture students?

Where do you think its the balance between pushing yourself to do a creative project and an artistic one towards the functionality of it?

Well going back to school, I always feel like I have to, not out of an obligation but I feel pulled to that en-vironment, and it’s a matter of figuring out what my career is, and it’s not like I have a twenty year plan, but I’m inclining to think that I won’t be working in an architecture office for the rest of my career, I want to have the opportunities to really explore and do crazy things. I think going back to school kind of refines that a little bit, so I don’t know what would come after that, whether I would go back to work in an office or whether that would mean a career in academia, I’m not really sure, but I think the next step is going to school and kind of in the same level, not really simultaneous, but in the same level is obtaining a li-cense just because is a thing you need to have to operate in the profession whether you are the prin-cipal of an architecture firm or you are a professor, I don’t think it really matters, its having that under-standing of what it takes to make a building and make it work, so that then you can operate more freely.

I think I see a lot of constraint in the next generation of designers, I say next generation but I mean myself really, is a matter of not being restraint and specially because as young architects, I think our place is to challenge and learn, so you can’t really do that if you are always trying to be correct, you are always constrained by that, we should be exploring and we should be doing that prolifically and that’s another problem with the profession, is I don’t know how well it facilitates that just because is so hard to break into practice. I think it’s challenging, I’ve seen that in a lot of peers and students who don’t really feel the great end to work productively so I think it’s up to figure out how do you do that, how do you be productive, what does that mean and how do we challenge what is going on now to be productive. And especially because we are talking about architecture students, we are not talking about the next generation of architectural professionals, I think its finding that voice through our work and having diverse work. I think another kind of problem with architectural education is now is that people aren’t being crazy enough, people need to be crazy, but thinking about the work critically, is not you with a for-mula of x+x+x = building, and I do that every time and I end up with a good building but essentially they all are the same. Not saying that buildings that look similar is an issue, but there needs to be a more critical approach.

I don’t have a fairly controversial response to this because in some ways my own work pushes that boundary a little bit, whether is architecture, whether is art, but it is space. I view architects as space artists, is what we are doing, we are manipulating space as a medium, so I’m probably in an extreme where personally for me, I care less about comfort and function, I care more about interesting space that enriches our environment, the experience of it. I think architecture is a luxury, we don’t needed, we need shelter, that’s a function, but to ele-vate something into architecture is saying that it is having an impact in the way that we see the world, so to me that’s what it should be doing. I always hate conversations of what people like in architecture, because to me is not about what you like, is not a matter of taste, is a matter of what’s interesting and what’s challenging and what’s challenging the way you see the world, so that we can see differently, that’s essentially what the city is, it’s all of this merging so that we can have all of that on our fingertips. And I’m still kind of figuring that out, but I think, especially from the student’s perspective, your job isn’t to figure out necessarily how things function, your job is to provide a new perspective and I think all of those fall in to place, it somehow how you frame it for yourself, especially because hopefully youth pursue this education because you are going to express yourself and have a voice, so in a way it doesn’t really matter, I think we need all of those views to make inter-esting architecture, make space and have those conversations because if we narrow the answer down, what is good architecture, whether is functional, if we had an answer for that then we could stop, there wouldn’t be a point, so I think first and foremost it should be challenging and being creative because that is how we make progress and then kind of the back seat of that is how does it function, what are the pragmatics of that.

CSF2014 171171CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE


iNTERVIEW

associate designerneil katz skidmore, owings & merrill

CSF2014 173173CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE


Is it in your plans studying a master’s degree?

How did you get involved with technology?

Did it ever cross your mind studying something more related to programming instead of design?

Being from New York, how did you end up in Chicago?

What would you say that was your firs approach to geometry?

Where do you find inspiration, how do you relate topics with geometry like music?

I pretty much knew I wanted to be an architect, when I was in high school and my was high school program was very academic, so I studied chemistry and physics, mathematics and when I studied architecture at college I figured it would be a continuation of sort of that same type of academic and very rigorous and it wasn’t and it was probably the school. So I thought I knew what architecture was but I’m not disappointed.

When I graduated in 1985 it wasn’t as popular then as it is now to get a masters and I went right to SOM and we were very busy so I thought about getting my master but it just didn’t happen.

When I went to school, while I was there, like in my third year, so half way through, they got a computer in the school of architecture. I was always interested, you know I had a computer at home that I was programming and playing with, and I took computer science classes, programming classes, so when the school got theirs I spent a lot of time there.

Not really, no. I mean, I really enjoy programming but I thought it was a great tool to use to do things like architecture. I did consider switching to engineering because in school the architec-ture program wasn’t as academically vigorous as I thought it would be. I love chemistry and phys-ics and things like that and I thought that maybe engineering would let me apply some of those things.

About five years ago, architecture was very slow and things were much slower in New York than they were here in Chicago so the office asked me if I could move out here. I’m from Ney York, I was born there and grew up there but I guess my tight to SOM was stronger than my tight to New York.

I was going to say in high school but even before that. So in school I was always thinking about shapes and playing with shapes and things like that. When I was growing up, like in grade school, I just to love to draw and I used to love mathematics so people use to say you should be an architect.

So I love music as well, I play an instrument, I play the clarinet. When I was in high school I thought about playing the clarinet, then in college I stopped, now that was another thing I thought I would continue like phys-ics and chemistry, but there was no time. But then after college I started playing and also started taking a jazz class and it focuses more than I ever had on music theory because it needs to improvise and you really need to understand the system of music and it really is a system and I think there are so many relationships because of that to architecture. Even some of the words that we use are the same like rhythm, color. And one of the things I love are patterns and music is all about patterns too. So it has had some influence in my work but not in a formal way, just because I think about it so much, it has found its way into the work that I do here.


iNTERVIEW

What is your roll and responsibility?

What do you like most about designing with programming?

How much is the longest you’ve taken to solve a problem for a project?

How do you start designing the projects?

Do you think technology has changed a lot throughout the years?

I’m part of a design team, I’m part of a studio and I often get asked to do by my studio, but also from other studios, to work on things that use the skills that I have developed. I do a lot of geometric modeling, so if a building has some complex massing that the team is interested in exploring, they’ll often ask me to help with that. And not just modeling but at the same time how do we make it work as a building, so at the same time that I’m creating interesting forms, the team is interested in my geometric point of view on how it will work. I also do a lot of sustainability analysis, so not only looking at the buildings geometrically but also looking at them from energy and light points of views. So my roll I guess is as a designer with a particular focus.

People use to think and tell me, if you use computers to design you are going to give up a lot of con-trol, if you do things manually you have more freedom. And I think is just the opposite, which is what I like, I think using programming you can have so much control over what you are designing. Another thing that I love is playing with parameters, you build the parametric model, you play with the sliders and see what happens. What I found most exciting is when I’m surprised, sometimes you know what to expect, but sometimes you don’t or you think you do. That’s what I really enjoy about working the way that I do.

So sometimes when I get asked for help from a team, the time that I’m able to spend helping them var-ies, so sometimes they have a deadline in a week and they need to make a presentation, I’ll often spend as much time as I have helping the team. When I was in New York I worked in the WTC project and I was in the team for three or four years. And it wasn’t always the same building, the design changed so much, you look at it in the beginning the middle and the end and they are three different buildings.

That varies as well, sometimes the team will already have a shape of a building in mind and say let’s ex-plore some of the possibilities but starting from here. Maybe they have a shape that they are really tight to and say let’s try to optimize it in some way, we know the panels are going to be twisted, let’s try to make them flat or let’s try to optimize it for energy, what can we do to the building? Sometimes they all still be thinking about the geometry, what the building should look like, when they ask me for help and I usually like that much better. So I never start with a blank page, I think that is impossible to do, so when that happens we look at what constrains do we have, that can help me to come up with a design. What are the constrains? What are the site constrains, the zoning constrains, there are some rules that say your building can only be this tall or fit within this envelop, so we’ll use those kinds of things as a starting point.

So computers are faster and now we are starting to take advantage of massive computing or clouding com-puting, so to do energy analysis for example, if I want to test many iterations of something I just to have to tested one at a time but now we can test thousands of variations at the same time. So instead of tak-ing an hour with each one, maybe I’ll do twenty of them. Now in an hour we can get a thousand results.

CSF2014 175175CSF2014

PRO-PRACTICE

Watching the advance in technology, where do you think that will go in the future?One thing that I have seen change and I think will continue to change, when I started using computers in SOM in the mid 80’s there weren’t that many people using it, like when I was at school and they got their computer I spend a lot of time in the computer room and didn’t really much had competition, people generally weren’t in-terested, so we had about twenty work stations and we had about five hundred people in the office so now ev-eryone has a workstation and in the past few years people are using programs like Revit and Autocad and a few people are doing more sophisticated things like programming. But now it seems like grasshopper, thinking that way or thinking about creating models in sort of a parametric way and being able to program a model instead of just building it manually has becoming more and more common. So I think that will continue, people will be able to do more things like that themselves. People will be more self-sufficient not just in modeling but in analysis.

What would you like to do that you haven’t being able to do in architecture?

How do you see yourself in 10 years?

Do you think there is something missing in today’s programs?


I was talking about if I were focusing on analysis instead of design then I would like to do design or if I were doing design I would like to do analysis. So since I graduated I’ve always been in practice design-ing real projects, one thing that I miss because I’m not involved is academics, being able to do research.

I do teach, in a very limited way, this semester I’m not teaching but in the past I’ve thought one class each semester like one or two evenings and I really enjoy it. And I think I enjoy it so much because is not the only thing that I do. I think if I did that only I might not enjoy it as much. In five or ten years that might change because I do like to do research and maybe being in a university where I thought more might also give me some more time to focus on research.

If I’m not able to do something with a tool, I usually think that is not because there is something missing with the tool but because I’m not able to do it, so it’s me, it’s not the tool. So when that happens I usually try to figure out how I can learn something that I don’t know in order to be able to do what I need to do, like some aspects in mathematics. And the tools that I like to use the most are the simplest tools, like really basic programming language, or a simple modeling tool. For example, I like using Autocad because it’s so simple and I less like using Revit, because it has so many built in features and it also makes assumptions about how people work. So I like to use a simple tool and try to do the most with it, one in which I have the control and not the program.

Find your passion. I meet so many people that don’t like what they do, they keep looking at their watches and wanting to leave. But I think you get so much more out of life by really doing something that you like.

FALL2014