February 19, 2013 § Leave a comment
…and I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that we had our first real meeting on Sunday night as a local organizing committee for the 2015 Construction History Congress. I think we’re off to a flying start, with some initial decisions made and volunteer groups set up for everything ranging from facilities and tours to social events and fundraising. There are plenty of opportunities to volunteer left, though. We’re targeting a late May, 2015 date. Thanks to the group of eleven hearty souls who showed up and (admittedly after a glass or two of wine), volunteered their time and expertise. Watch this space, and note the hashtag #5icch, which we’ll use to put news about planning out there…
February 19, 2013 § Leave a comment
Just back from Chicago for a long weekend with sixteen design students in tow. It was cold, as my field trips seem to always be, but we got in a good couple of days of firm and site visits. The site itself is a tricky one–a long, skinny block between Wacker and the Chicago River, and students were productively baffled by how it works in the flow of the west Loop. Because of the weather we spent a fair amount of time walking the concourse of the Metra station to the west, and I suspect there will be a fair amount of internal circulation showing up after we froze ourselves walking around. (Just like all the outdoor fountains that cropped up in our Montreal project after early September field trips there…)
The highlight for me, though, was meeting alums and former colleagues for our firm visits. We had tours of SOM, IA, and Studio Gang, all of which were interesting, and all of which complemented one another really well. IA organized reps from Knoll and from the John Buck Company, and we got a couple hours of their time to talk about high rise design and economics, which was absolutely priceless–many, many thanks to those folks for taking their long Friday lunch hour to talk with us, and for buying us pizza.
Curious to see how all this inflects the designs. We heard very clearly that we’d over-provided for elevators (apparently we specified much speedier elevator service at my old firm than strictly necessary?) and that we’d maybe been under-ambitious in thinking of a million square feet as an appropriate scale for this site. So, discussions to be had. Mid-review in 2-1/2 weeks…
February 13, 2013 § Leave a comment
As mentioned here previously, the Fifth International Congress on Construction History will be held in Spring, 2015 in Chicago–the first time the Congress has been held outside of Europe. I’ve been asked to assemble the local organizing committee, and we’ll be meeting this Sunday evening and Monday morning to get the ball officially rolling. If you’re interested and haven’t been in touch yet, let me know and we’ll get you involved…
February 12, 2013 § 2 Comments
When I started teaching in 2000, I proposed doing a longspan and a high rise studio more or less back to back, to make a point about the role of technology in design. The idea was inspired by Myron Goldsmith’s dictum that the greater the structural challenge, the more nearly architectural form would assume purer structural shapes. Super long span? Something’s going to end up looking like a funicular, or a space frame. Super high rise? The building will eventually look like a giant wind-resisting cantilever (see Khalifa, Burj).
The longspan studio was a happy reminder that architects will still find a way to do some precocious formal innovation, even faced with a 300-foot span. And our department’s commitment to comprehensive design, coupled with new initiatives on competition studios, put the high rise studio off again and again.
So the first chance I’ve had in a couple of years to propose a pure option studio, we’re doing it. The program is for a million square feet, on the site of the old Morton Salt building on Wacker Drive between Washington and Randolph (I’ve stolen the site from Larry Booth, who did a similar project for his Northwestern architecture program in 2011). I’m holding students to the byzantine FAR rules for downtown–setback calculations, outdoor plazas, etc. But mostly I’m enjoying the process. We have a mixed studio of architects, interior designers, landscape architects, and a brave community and regional planner, so the ideas and discussions come from every conceivable direction. Yesterday’s pinup included one structural scheme getting hammered because the column grid wouldn’t jibe with a reasonable cubicle layout. Form follows Steelcase? Yes, absolutely in this environment.
And rightly so. Part of the whole point is that the commercial office building is basically the resultant of a dozen or so major economic, political, and technical vectors. The finances squeeze every square inch out of a floor plate (and core), the city’s civic desires mold the building’s form, especially at street level and near the top, and structural and environmental needs do most of the rest of the work. There’s a definite sense of enlightened problem solving going on, here, alongside the realization that ornament is what you do when the problem is more or less solved, and you’re not yet happy with the results.
Some loyal readers will be pleased to know that we’ve added a ground floor program that splits the footprint between a greengrocer (badly needed in this part of town) and new facilities for the Chicago Architecture Foundation. In addition to gallery space and a slightly larger lecture hall, the riverfront site suggests that the River Tour could have a new home, integrated with the rest of the Foundation’s activities.
We head east this week for a site visit, a hike around the Loop looking at precedents, and a handful of firm visits with ISU alums and former colleagues of mine to see some current skyscraper design work and to do some socio-cultural research…