FilmAnimation

NovemberDecember

JuneJuly AugustSeptemberOctober

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMay

TypographyFine ArtInterior DesignTextilesSurface Pattern

Graphic DesignPhotographyFashionArchitectureFurniture Design

www.howdesign.com

£6.00

Gre

en A

rchi

tect

ure:

An

over

view

Inte

rvie

w: P

erte

r P

enno

yer

The

Des

igne

r’s h

and

Dav

id C

hip

per

field

Arc

hite

cts:

Anc

hora

ge A

rt M

useu

m

Sof

twar

e U

pd

ate

Wha

t A

rchi

tect

s ha

ve b

een

wai

ting

for

Rur

al S

tud

io:

Lion

s P

ark

Kim

Wilk

ieLo

ngw

ood

Gar

den

s Li

ving

Wal

l

Exh

ibit:

“The

Art

of S

truc

ture

”

Han

cock

Lof

tsK

onin

g E

izen

ber

g

Wat

er R

esou

rces

Cen

ter

Wat

sonv

ille

Gos

dor

fR

epea

ting

Str

uctu

ral N

ode

Lego

Fac

ade

Hill

ingd

on, G

reat

er L

ond

onA

rchi

tect

: Wha

t_A

rchi

tect

ure

Est

o G

alle

ries:

Gw

athm

ey

Sie

gel &

Ass

ocia

tes

Arc

hite

cts

Day

light

ing:

Tam

ing

the

Sun

2-3

4-5

6-9

10-1

1

12-1

3

14-1

7

18-1

9

20-2

1

22-2

3

24-2

5

26-2

7

28-3

1

32-3

3

1

Con

tent

s

Ad

vanc

ed G

lazi

ngS

oler

a+N

anog

el

Cira

light

: Sun

trac

ker

Two

day

ligh

ting

syst

em

3D F

lour

esce

nt

Dim

min

g B

alla

stLu

ton

Ele

ctro

nics

Pro

ject

Run

away

Am

and

a H

urle

y

The

Hig

h C

ost

ofN

OT

Goi

ng G

reen

Ber

nard

Tsc

hum

i’s

New

Acr

opol

is M

useu

m

Cas

e S

tud

y:

AN

SI-

Em

eral

d R

emod

el T

rans

-fo

rms

70-Y

ear-

Old

Pho

enix

H

ome

Wei

ll G

reen

ber

g C

ente

rW

eill

Cor

nell

Med

ical

Col

lege

, N

ew Y

ork

34-3

5

36-3

7

38-4

1

42-4

3

44-4

7

48-4

9

50-5

3

54-5

5

Gre

en A

rchi

tect

ure:

An

over

view

Inte

rvie

w: P

erte

r P

enno

yer

The

Des

igne

r’s h

and

Dav

id C

hip

per

field

Arc

hite

cts:

Anc

hora

ge A

rt M

useu

m

Sof

twar

e U

pd

ate

Wha

t A

rchi

tect

s ha

ve b

een

wai

ting

for

Rur

al S

tud

io:

Lion

s P

ark

Kim

Wilk

ieLo

ngw

ood

Gar

den

s Li

ving

Wal

l

Exh

ibit:

“The

Art

of S

truc

ture

”

Han

cock

Lof

tsK

onin

g E

izen

ber

g

Wat

er R

esou

rces

Cen

ter

Wat

sonv

ille

Gos

dor

fR

epea

ting

Str

uctu

ral N

ode

Lego

Fac

ade

Hill

ingd

on, G

reat

er L

ond

onA

rchi

tect

: Wha

t_A

rchi

tect

ure

Est

o G

alle

ries:

Gw

athm

ey

Sie

gel &

Ass

ocia

tes

Arc

hite

cts

Day

light

ing:

Tam

ing

the

Sun

2-3

4-5

6-9

10-1

1

12-1

3

14-1

7

18-1

9

20-2

1

22-2

3

24-2

5

26-2

7

28-3

1

32-3

3

1

Con

tent

s

Ad

vanc

ed G

lazi

ngS

oler

a+N

anog

el

Cira

light

: Sun

trac

ker

Two

day

ligh

ting

syst

em

3D F

lour

esce

nt

Dim

min

g B

alla

stLu

ton

Ele

ctro

nics

Pro

ject

Run

away

Am

and

a H

urle

y

The

Hig

h C

ost

ofN

OT

Goi

ng G

reen

Ber

nard

Tsc

hum

i’s

New

Acr

opol

is M

useu

m

Cas

e S

tud

y:

AN

SI-

Em

eral

d R

emod

el T

rans

-fo

rms

70-Y

ear-

Old

Pho

enix

H

ome

Wei

ll G

reen

ber

g C

ente

rW

eill

Cor

nell

Med

ical

Col

lege

, N

ew Y

ork

34-3

5

36-3

7

38-4

1

42-4

3

44-4

7

48-4

9

50-5

3

54-5

5

sustainability, materials, energy efficiency,

land use, and waste reduction.

SustainabilityGreen buildings are not only be designed

for a present use, but consideration is

also be given to future uses as well. An

adaptable structure can be “recycled”

many times over the course of its useful

life. If specific technical issues prevent use

of the building for a new function, then

the materials used in its construction are

designed to facilitate ease of recycling and

reprocessing of materials.

MaterialsBuildings consume a variety of materials in

their construction. Green design reduces

the dependence on resource intensive

products and materials. Today, there

are an increasing number of products

available made from efficient, earth-

friendly, or recycled materials. In a green

building, consideration is also given to the

construction process itself.

Materials that minimize waste or can be

recycled, help contribute to an efficient

and environmentally sensitive construction

process.

Energy Efficiency Another important aspect of green design

What exactly is green architecture?Green architecture is an approach to

building which has become more prevalent

in the last 25 to 30 years. Also known as

sustainable design, green architecture is

simply a method of design that minimizes

the impact of building on the environment.

Once thought of as unconventional and

nonstandard, green architecture is quickly

becoming accepted by both regulatory

agencies and the public alike as a

socially responsible and logical means of

construction.

The beginnings of today’s green

revolution can be traced back to the

social awareness of the 1960s and

European design such as is found in

Scandinavia. From these origins, new

construction techniques have lead to the

development of innovative materials and

design concepts. Indeed, successfully

designed green projects can involve an

extensive array of factors, ranging from

the resourceful use of materials, to careful

consideration of function, climate, and

location.

So what makes something “green”?The concepts about green architecture

can generally be organized into several

areas of application. These areas include

is the integration of energy efficient

mechanical systems and conservation

methods.

Green buildings are designed to reduce or

eliminate the dependence on fossil fuels.

Additionally, green designs further help to

minimize waste through the use of gray

water recycling and other sustainable

energy strategies.

Land Use Site selection and building orientation

also play a critical role in green design. A

green building is located to take advantage

of its climate and surroundings. These

conditions not only affect the efficiency

of a building, but of the community

and society as a whole. Planning for

responsible land use addresses these

issues through the consideration of

climate, transportation, and the natural

environment.

Waste Reduction An amazing amount of waste is generated

by the construction of a typical building.

Green buildings are designed to eliminate

waste by using modular systems of

construction, recycled products, and

efficient use of materials. The ideal green

building would create no waste either

during construction or use, so the impact

on the environment and resources is

minimized.

Summary Today, sustainable design is becoming a

natural part of an increasing number of

buildings. As natural resources dwindle,

green design will take a critical role in

our built environment. In future articles,

we will look at the specific components

of green architecture, such as the variety

of innovative products and materials

now available. If you would like more

information about sustainable design,

please visit some of the valuable resources

listed below.

By: Patrick Larum

2-3

G

reen

Arc

hite

ctur

e

Feat

ured

: SC

IC A

tlant

a sh

owro

om

4-5

In

terv

iew

everybody else.

What techniques are used?

Gilmartin sketches in pencil, in felt-tip pen,

and he drafts his designs using 2H lead on

tracing paper with a Mayline parallel rule.

Anton Glikin draws freehand first and then

does pen-and-ink drawings. He also does

watercolors and washes.

Why rely exclusively on hand drawing at

the design phase?

We believe the kind of design we do is

best expressed in a direct connection from

your mind to your arm to your hand to

the paper. It’s more fluid. We try to make

each project different, so we like to have

the freedom of the pencil. We work very

closely with others in the office to put this

into the computer.

What computer drawing programs do

you use?

AutoCAD and 3ds Max.

How up-to-date are you with software?

We keep up with the latest versions of the

software and have certain people in the of-

fice who know the latest techniques. Most

of us in the office have a particular set of

talents. We don’t all try and learn the latest

things. Somebody here knows them.

Do you have people move between hand

drawing and the computer?

Yes, but the people who are the principal

designers constitutionally express them-

selves with pencil and pen.

What’s the role of beauty in drawing?

It depends on who’s doing it. Gilmartin’s

drawings are exceptionally accurate and

detailed. They’re visions of what he’s look-

ing for, and he’ll build up layers and layers

of trace as he refines his designs. All the

drawings that are done here for design

look beautiful to me because they show a

great passion. You can see the gesture and

the physical act, as opposed to computer

drawings that always look a little bit ossi-

fied.

Does the computer have a role beyond

construction documents?

We totally invite the computer. The 3ds

Max stuff we do is extremely elaborate.

We’re pushing very hard to make it more

realistic, warmer. We try to vary our pre-

sentations. We try to get the client to face

a complete presentation—nothing tenta-

tive—so they can fully commit.

What other rendering techniques do you

use?

It’s important to make a distinction be-

tween drawings and renderings. Rendering

is a different step. We do paintings of our

houses that are accurate in represent-

ing the building and that show shade and

shadow and give a sense of materiality.

When we’ve had a separate easel with

a painting, the design is much easier for

people to read.

Do you hire specifically based on draw-

ing ability?

I look at the range of skills. Great drawing

skills aren’t common these days. If some-

one brings a new kind of drawing style or

media, we welcome that. The drawings are

of different character, depending on who

might have done them.

So there’s no office drawing style?

We try to make the designs personal to the

designer. If you look at the work, you can

see which partner or associate has worked

on it. The work depends on the context,

the style of the building, and the client. So

there’s a diversity of work, and that is also

reflected in the diversity of drawing style.

By: Edward Keegan

Feat

ured

: Top

- S

tair

hall

des

ign

Bot

tom

Lef

t -

Legs

for

lond

ond

erry

pie

tra

dur

a m

arb

le t

ops

Bot

tom

Rig

ht -

Nep

tune

, des

ign

for

a b

ay w

ind

ow

Even in the age of computer-aided

design, pencils, pens, and paintbrushes

can be essential architectural tools.

Is there a place in the modern architecture

practice for handmade design drawings?

Peter Pennoyer—who leads an epony-

mously named New York firm that produc-

es classically inspired designs for houses

and apartments, as well as institutional

and commercial projects—believes so.

Pennoyer and members of his firm are ac-

tive in the Institute of Classical Architecture

& Classical America, for which Pennoyer

serves as chairman; one colleague, senior

associate Anton Glikin, taught drawing

there. Pennoyer keeps a collection of

hundreds of drawing instruments from the

18th to the 20th centuries at the office,

and some still get daily use. “We still have

Maylines,” Pennoyer says. “We still have

charcoal.” These tools help produce the

firm’s distinctive work.

How much of your design work begins

with sketches?

Design in this office is done by drawing,

period. We don’t design things directly on

the computer. I sketch some, as much as

I’m able, but I’m really managing the firm.

Gregory Gilmartin, our director of design,

only draws. He never uses CAD, although

he’s very familiar with it and works with

4-5

In

terv

iew

everybody else.

What techniques are used?

Gilmartin sketches in pencil, in felt-tip pen,

and he drafts his designs using 2H lead on

tracing paper with a Mayline parallel rule.

Anton Glikin draws freehand first and then

does pen-and-ink drawings. He also does

watercolors and washes.

Why rely exclusively on hand drawing at

the design phase?

We believe the kind of design we do is

best expressed in a direct connection from

your mind to your arm to your hand to

the paper. It’s more fluid. We try to make

each project different, so we like to have

the freedom of the pencil. We work very

closely with others in the office to put this

into the computer.

What computer drawing programs do

you use?

AutoCAD and 3ds Max.

How up-to-date are you with software?

We keep up with the latest versions of the

software and have certain people in the of-

fice who know the latest techniques. Most

of us in the office have a particular set of

talents. We don’t all try and learn the latest

things. Somebody here knows them.

Do you have people move between hand

drawing and the computer?

Yes, but the people who are the principal

designers constitutionally express them-

selves with pencil and pen.

What’s the role of beauty in drawing?

It depends on who’s doing it. Gilmartin’s

drawings are exceptionally accurate and

detailed. They’re visions of what he’s look-

ing for, and he’ll build up layers and layers

of trace as he refines his designs. All the

drawings that are done here for design

look beautiful to me because they show a

great passion. You can see the gesture and

the physical act, as opposed to computer

drawings that always look a little bit ossi-

fied.

Does the computer have a role beyond

construction documents?

We totally invite the computer. The 3ds

Max stuff we do is extremely elaborate.

We’re pushing very hard to make it more

realistic, warmer. We try to vary our pre-

sentations. We try to get the client to face

a complete presentation—nothing tenta-

tive—so they can fully commit.

What other rendering techniques do you

use?

It’s important to make a distinction be-

tween drawings and renderings. Rendering

is a different step. We do paintings of our

houses that are accurate in represent-

ing the building and that show shade and

shadow and give a sense of materiality.

When we’ve had a separate easel with

a painting, the design is much easier for

people to read.

Do you hire specifically based on draw-

ing ability?

I look at the range of skills. Great drawing

skills aren’t common these days. If some-

one brings a new kind of drawing style or

media, we welcome that. The drawings are

of different character, depending on who

might have done them.

So there’s no office drawing style?

We try to make the designs personal to the

designer. If you look at the work, you can

see which partner or associate has worked

on it. The work depends on the context,

the style of the building, and the client. So

there’s a diversity of work, and that is also

reflected in the diversity of drawing style.

By: Edward Keegan

Feat

ured

: Top

- S

tair

hall

des

ign

Bot

tom

Lef

t -

Legs

for

lond

ond

erry

pie

tra

dur

a m

arb

le t

ops

Bot

tom

Rig

ht -

Nep

tune

, des

ign

for

a b

ay w

ind

ow

Even in the age of computer-aided

design, pencils, pens, and paintbrushes

can be essential architectural tools.

Is there a place in the modern architecture

practice for handmade design drawings?

Peter Pennoyer—who leads an epony-

mously named New York firm that produc-

es classically inspired designs for houses

and apartments, as well as institutional

and commercial projects—believes so.

Pennoyer and members of his firm are ac-

tive in the Institute of Classical Architecture

& Classical America, for which Pennoyer

serves as chairman; one colleague, senior

associate Anton Glikin, taught drawing

there. Pennoyer keeps a collection of

hundreds of drawing instruments from the

18th to the 20th centuries at the office,

and some still get daily use. “We still have

Maylines,” Pennoyer says. “We still have

charcoal.” These tools help produce the

firm’s distinctive work.

How much of your design work begins

with sketches?

Design in this office is done by drawing,

period. We don’t design things directly on

the computer. I sketch some, as much as

I’m able, but I’m really managing the firm.

Gregory Gilmartin, our director of design,

only draws. He never uses CAD, although

he’s very familiar with it and works with

6-7

An

chor

age

Art M

useu

m R

evie

w

orama, and window walls on the ground

and second floors open public spaces to

view from the outside. The building, then,

is visually porous, but ambiguously so

because the mirror-fritting reflects images

of the sky at the same as it admits views

into the galleries, creating an intriguingly

gauzy surface that plays off the crisp cubic

forms.

The building is complex despite its appar-

ent simplicity. Though it has a cool beauty,

the surface itself feels soft, and though

the language is universal, the massing is

particular. The aesthetic may be industrial,

but the composition is picturesque.

The payoff of the complexity and variety is

that by the time the building delivers view-

ers to the object at hand in serene and fo-

cused galleries, their senses and sensibili-

ties have been primed by an extraordinary

building that helps them see extraordinary

things.

By: Joseph Giovannini

Feat

ured

: Top

- W

est

sid

e of

the

bui

ldin

g

Bot

tom

Lef

t -

Gla

zed

win

dow

s on

the

ext

erio

r w

alls

Bot

tom

Rig

ht -

The

line

ar m

otif

stai

rcas

e

Chipperfield Architects had ambitions for a

more extroverted museum that would still

respect the art while also responding to the

larger context. The architects spent square

footage strategically, positioning the addi-

tion on the downtown side of the existing

structure to give the building a completely

new entrance façade and an enhanced

civic presence. The program was stacked

to rise above the surrounding buildings,

creating a height that allows upper floors

unobstructed mountain views. A circulation

atrium was centered at the back of the ad-

dition, allowing the staircase to function as

a new core, and fusing the addition to the

existing building.

The architects decided to glaze the build-

ing, making the museum visually interact

with the environment: the mountains can

be seen from within, and the galleries and

public spaces from outside. “We wanted

an open and transparent aesthetic to cre-

ate a relationship to the city and the land-

scape,” says Billy Prendergast, associate

director of the project. He adds, “Anchor-

age is neither a brick nor a stone city, like

London or Berlin, and stone in any event

couldn’t compete with the natural stone of

the mountains.”

Chipperfield wrapped each element of the

program in an appropriately dimensioned

glass cube. Each cube is juxtaposed or

stacked in a progressive sequence that

forms a promenade up and into the build-

ing. As in the Hepworth Wakefield art

gallery near Leeds, England—composed

of a series of clearly defined rooms that

drive the external forms of the building—

in Anchorage, Chipperfield particularized

spaces per program and sequence. The

particular is expressed within a universal-

ized language; bars of program are slipped

and stacked, achieving a cubic silhouette

in a pyramid four stories tall that achieves

a striking, crisp monumentality. Other glass

structures in the city are merely generic

office buildings. “We rendered the volumes

with a continuous surface as pure as pos-

sible, to have them read very clearly, with-

out being broken up by big windows,” says

Prendergast. “There wasn’t high demand

for big spaces, so with the gallery experts,

we worked for optimum spaces about 22

feet wide.”

The architects left about 25 percent of the

curtain wall transparent. They skinned the

building in double-glazed, mirror-fritted

glass, with a third interior wall of glass

enclosing a heated space 1 foot deep

on the transparent areas of the façade to

prevent condensation in Alaska’s extreme

climate. A long wall on the top floor allows

a sweeping view of the mountainous pan-

It’s an ocean, a continent, and a far cry

from Berlin to Anchorage, Alaska, but Lon-

don-based David Chipperfield Architects

was working on the renovation of Friedrich

August Stüler’s Neues Museum and the

expansion of the Anchorage Museum at

about the same time. If the architects were

responding to the grandeur of history in

urbanistically dense, culturally loaded

Berlin, they responded to a different form

of grandeur in Anchorage—the Cugach

Mountains—and to another urbanism: a

sprawling frontier city with wood-frame

houses sprinkled among commercial mid-

rises.

The commission called for a nearly 90,000-

square-foot expansion to the existing mu-

seum, a composite building with a single-

story original volume transformed by a

1984 Mitchell Giurgola Architects addition.

This new expansion had to accommodate

galleries and the Smithsonian Arctic Stud-

ies Center.

Museums are normally a closed build-

ing type, subject to all the issues of art

conservation and architectural deference

to art, and the existing building followed

all the rules: introverted and protective of

the treasures inside, it was mute to the city

itself and blind to the magnificent nature

beyond.

6-7

An

chor

age

Art M

useu

m R

evie

w

orama, and window walls on the ground

and second floors open public spaces to

view from the outside. The building, then,

is visually porous, but ambiguously so

because the mirror-fritting reflects images

of the sky at the same as it admits views

into the galleries, creating an intriguingly

gauzy surface that plays off the crisp cubic

forms.

The building is complex despite its appar-

ent simplicity. Though it has a cool beauty,

the surface itself feels soft, and though

the language is universal, the massing is

particular. The aesthetic may be industrial,

but the composition is picturesque.

The payoff of the complexity and variety is

that by the time the building delivers view-

ers to the object at hand in serene and fo-

cused galleries, their senses and sensibili-

ties have been primed by an extraordinary

building that helps them see extraordinary

things.

By: Joseph Giovannini

Feat

ured

: Top

- W

est

sid

e of

the

bui

ldin

g

Bot

tom

Lef

t -

Gla

zed

win

dow

s on

the

ext

erio

r w

alls

Bot

tom

Rig

ht -

The

line

ar m

otif

stai

rcas

e

Chipperfield Architects had ambitions for a

more extroverted museum that would still

respect the art while also responding to the

larger context. The architects spent square

footage strategically, positioning the addi-

tion on the downtown side of the existing

structure to give the building a completely

new entrance façade and an enhanced

civic presence. The program was stacked

to rise above the surrounding buildings,

creating a height that allows upper floors

unobstructed mountain views. A circulation

atrium was centered at the back of the ad-

dition, allowing the staircase to function as

a new core, and fusing the addition to the

existing building.

The architects decided to glaze the build-

ing, making the museum visually interact

with the environment: the mountains can

be seen from within, and the galleries and

public spaces from outside. “We wanted

an open and transparent aesthetic to cre-

ate a relationship to the city and the land-

scape,” says Billy Prendergast, associate

director of the project. He adds, “Anchor-

age is neither a brick nor a stone city, like

London or Berlin, and stone in any event

couldn’t compete with the natural stone of

the mountains.”

Chipperfield wrapped each element of the

program in an appropriately dimensioned

glass cube. Each cube is juxtaposed or

stacked in a progressive sequence that

forms a promenade up and into the build-

ing. As in the Hepworth Wakefield art

gallery near Leeds, England—composed

of a series of clearly defined rooms that

drive the external forms of the building—

in Anchorage, Chipperfield particularized

spaces per program and sequence. The

particular is expressed within a universal-

ized language; bars of program are slipped

and stacked, achieving a cubic silhouette

in a pyramid four stories tall that achieves

a striking, crisp monumentality. Other glass

structures in the city are merely generic

office buildings. “We rendered the volumes

with a continuous surface as pure as pos-

sible, to have them read very clearly, with-

out being broken up by big windows,” says

Prendergast. “There wasn’t high demand

for big spaces, so with the gallery experts,

we worked for optimum spaces about 22

feet wide.”

The architects left about 25 percent of the

curtain wall transparent. They skinned the

building in double-glazed, mirror-fritted

glass, with a third interior wall of glass

enclosing a heated space 1 foot deep

on the transparent areas of the façade to

prevent condensation in Alaska’s extreme

climate. A long wall on the top floor allows

a sweeping view of the mountainous pan-

It’s an ocean, a continent, and a far cry

from Berlin to Anchorage, Alaska, but Lon-

don-based David Chipperfield Architects

was working on the renovation of Friedrich

August Stüler’s Neues Museum and the

expansion of the Anchorage Museum at

about the same time. If the architects were

responding to the grandeur of history in

urbanistically dense, culturally loaded

Berlin, they responded to a different form

of grandeur in Anchorage—the Cugach

Mountains—and to another urbanism: a

sprawling frontier city with wood-frame

houses sprinkled among commercial mid-

rises.

The commission called for a nearly 90,000-

square-foot expansion to the existing mu-

seum, a composite building with a single-

story original volume transformed by a

1984 Mitchell Giurgola Architects addition.

This new expansion had to accommodate

galleries and the Smithsonian Arctic Stud-

ies Center.

Museums are normally a closed build-

ing type, subject to all the issues of art

conservation and architectural deference

to art, and the existing building followed

all the rules: introverted and protective of

the treasures inside, it was mute to the city

itself and blind to the magnificent nature

beyond.

8-9

An

chor

age

Art M

useu

m R

evie

w

Feat

ured

: Lef

t -

Sid

e vi

ew o

f top

of b

uild

ing

Mid

dle

- E

ntra

nce

view

Rig

ht t

op -

Sid

e p

lan

of r

ecen

t ad

diti

on

Rig

ht b

otto

m -

Sid

e vi

ew

8-9

An

chor

age

Art M

useu

m R

evie

w

Feat

ured

: Lef

t -

Sid

e vi

ew o

f top

of b

uild

ing

Mid

dle

- E

ntra

nce

view

Rig

ht t

op -

Sid

e p

lan

of r

ecen

t ad

diti

on

Rig

ht b

otto

m -

Sid

e vi

ew

FilmAnimation

NovemberDecember

JuneJuly AugustSeptemberOctober

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMay

TypographyFine ArtInterior DesignTextilesSurface Pattern

Graphic DesignPhotographyFashionArchitectureFurniture Design

www.howdesign.com

£6.00