UG2 ARCHITECTURE 2420: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II The Ohio State University, Austin E. Knowlton School of Architecture Spring 2013_ Balliet (c) Bongiorno, Kimbrell, Snyder, Twelmeyer, Wilke Field / Threshold / Poché / Chamber spatial sequences Curved Negative Positive, Bruno Munari,1951 Imagineering Gateway, Dumëne Comploi, 2010 Monument to Victims of Holocaust, Hans Hollein, 1963 A justifiable exaggeration carries ideas to the level of extraordinary things, where the forms of ordinary language could not elevate our imagination. ‐Quatremere de quincy This semester we will develop projects that will examine two critical aspects within the discipline of architecture: the creation of borders (edges, transitions, threshold, corners) and the creation of space (enclosure, volume, interiority). The semester will be organized to isolate, interrogate and exaggerate the potential of these aspects. Building on last semester’s development of aggregated elements in a specific context in service of domesticity, this semester we will use assembly, relief and surface variation to design spatial sequences that will range from very abstract to radically specific. As a mode of operation, precision will be valued over vagueness in regards to representation and you will be asked to prioritize speculation over certainty in terms of design concept. The tasks will ask that you both exaggerate and edit initial concepts to develop innovative design solutions. While expanding your ability to negotiate with convention you will continue to build your arsenal of modeling and drawing techniques that you will increasingly be asked to deploy in support of your design intent. Representational clarity will be valued equal to design concepts. As a means to wrestle convention and challenge assumptions, the tasks intentionally offer ratios and extents in lieu of specific programs and typologies. The first half of the semester will be an individual design project that relies heavily on conventional modes of representation (orthogonal drawings and physical models) of nontraditional concepts. We will design a field and an architecture for viewing with maximum exterior with minimal interior. The second half of the semester you will work in groups, focusing on the creation of space, while prioritizing poché and volume. The project will be represented by a large‐
scale volumetric model. The two main design projects, lasting 4‐5 weeks each, will be introduced by a 2‐3 week exercise. To help expand and develop innovative concepts we will gather inspiration from canonical built and unbuilt pieces of architecture as well as look to fields adjacent to architecture, such as painting, design, and fashion. The spring semester project completes technique’s cycle of abstraction and engagement and provides a bridge to the third year’s emphasis on material issues. This term we will study architecture in relation to:  Thickness  Figure/Profile  Corners  Hierarchy  Relationship to Ground  Distinct Circulation  Aperture  Poché  Volume Elbe Philharmonic, Herzog de Meuron,2012 UG2 ARCHITECTURE 2420: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II The Ohio State University, Austin E. Knowlton School of Architecture Spring 2013_ Balliet (c) Bongiorno, Kimbrell, Snyder, Twelmeyer, Wilke Execise 01: Field Transformation (2d, 2 ½ d,3d) Alice, Florencia Pita, 2007 Podfield, Thom Mayne, 2010 Toy Fountain, Greg Lynn, 2011 #492, David Reed, 2001 The first exercise starts with the analysis of two distinct objects. You will extract the visual structure and spatial hierarchy inherent in each object and utilize abstraction and transformation to design a third object, a bas relief. To begin, select a 2D and a 3D precedent from the list below or an alternative under the guidance of your studio instructor and work to oscillate between 2D and 3D to generate new spatial interpretations/concepts. You should employ various tactics to overlap patterns, graft textures, vary density and amplify figuration to manipulate geometry and create form. The goal is to transform these qualities into a fictional field that emphasizes and exaggerates difference. The final output will require the precise representation of a single design object. You can think of this as an architectural prototype, the manifestation of an idea embodied with a broader notion of aesthetic organization. Task *review: Monday, January 28th  Analyze the selected precedents using a series of diagrams (3‐6) for each  Draw the 3D object(s). Collapse the three dimensional information into a single image, including multiple views.  Develop the 2D image into a three dimensional surface. Expand the implied three dimensional qualites of the image or painting. Digitally model the result.  Transform, assemble and design a new 2.5D relief model by sampling and compiling the results of your analysis. The focus of this design task is to highlight the relationship of different levels, edges and transitions. The model has no scale. Final presentation requirements will be discussed with studio instructor. Precedent 2D: Precedent 3D: Bridget Riley, Movement in Squares, 1961 Lorenzo Bernini, Triton Fountain, 1643 Bridget Riley, Pause, 1964 Greg Lynn, Toy Furniture Fountain, 2011 David Flores, Bad and Evil Dunny, 2006 David Reed, #492, 2001‐03 Ruth Asawa, Aurora Fountain, 1986 Kwang‐Young Chan, Aggregation 07‐F005, 2007 Olafur , La situazione antispettiva, 2003 Thomas Bayrle, Mr. Big, 1971 Red Balloon Flower, Jeff Koons 2011 Gabriel Orozco, Moon Axel, 2005 Takashi Murakami, Kansei Gold, 2008 Dominic Wilcox, War Bowl, 2002 Julie Mehretu, Stadia Mehretu Series, 2004 Tony Cragg, Versus, 2010 Agnes Martin, Untitled, 1960 Tony Cragg, Secretions, 1998 Arcimboldo, Rudolf II of Habsburg as Vertumnus, 1590 Yayoi Kusama, Dots Obsessions, 1999 Alexander Ross, Untitled 2004 Richard Hutten, Cloud Chair, 2009 Manfred Mohr,P1011‐L, 2004 Antoine Pevsner, Torso, 1924‐26 Matthew Ritchie, Line Shot Matthew Ritchie/ Aranda‐Lasch, Morning Line, 2007 James Rosenquist, Females and Flowers, 1984 Marc Fornes, NONLIN/LIN Pavilion, 2012 Micromegas Project, Daniel Libeskind, 1979 Alligator Chair, Campana Brothers, 2004 Reading List: Allen, Stan, “From Object to Field” in Points + Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City. Princeton Architectural Press, 1999 Lynn, Greg, “Intricacy”. ICA Philadelphia, 2003 Wood, Lebbeus, “Thom Mayne’s Mind”. http://lebbeuswoods.wordpress.com/2010/11/25/thom‐maynes‐mind/ UG2 ARCHITECTURE 2420: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II The Ohio State University, Austin E. Knowlton School of Architecture Spring 2013_ Balliet (c) Bongiorno, Kimbrell, Snyder, Twelmeyer, Wilke Project 01: Gateway threshold/ Corners / Apertures / Horizon Porte Pia, Michelangelo, Rome 1565 Porte Saint‐Denis, Blondel, Paris 1669 Officina del Bottaio, Claude Ledoux,1773 Wolkenbügel, El Lissitzky, Moscow, 1925 Amherst Art Museum, Kevin Roche, 1974 Historically, gateways have been used to mark entry, commemorate achievement or conversely limit passage and create borders. Gateways are situated just beyond sculpture and at the edge of architecture and often resemble an arch. An arch by definition spans space and supports structure above. In many ways the gateway is an exaggerated, grandiose, and concentrated version of an architectural proposal. At its best, it glorifies entry, has an intimate and deliberate connection to the ground, horizon and the sky, minimizes apertures and maximizes corners. The development of the interior and exterior are often provocatively incongruent. In reconsidering the contemporary gateway, we will focus on the architectural issues of sequence, entry, development of spatially descriptive vertical spaces, interlocking volumes, curated views, and creation of atmosphere and effect. Additionally, we will study the innate challenges of the gateway, including innovative circulation, issues of symmetry, structural methods, and contemporary forms of rustication, color and material use. The scale of the project is small, allowing for exploration through large sections and models. The Gateway is explicitly not a building but rather a glorified arch with amplified connections and distinct voids. We will embrace the verticality and exploit the contrast of the compressive space and expansive views. Our focus on the gateway is twofold, to explore the productive tension between verticality and a decisive connection to the ground while exploiting circulation and movement. The project also acknowledges the important relationship between the ground and the architecture, this relationship has contributed significantly to the discourse of architecture. Precedent: Precedent:
Arch of Septimius Severus, Rome 203 AD Arch of Constantine, Rome Italy, 312 AD Arch of Maximilian I, Albrecht Dürer, 1517 (woodcut) Porte Pia, Michelangelo, Rome 1565 Porte Saint‐Denis, François Blondel, Paris 1669 Blenheim Palace Gateway, Sir John Vanbrugh, England 1720 Officina del Bottaio, Claude Ledoux, 1773 (unbuilt) Royal Salt Works, Claude Ledoux, Chaux France 1775 Hôtel de Thélusson, Claude Ledoux, Paris 1778 Arc de Triomphe, Étienne‐Louis Boullée (unbuilt) Gate of a Hunting‐Ground, Jean‐Jacques Lequeu (unbuilt) Arc de Triomphe, Jean Chalgrin, Paris, 1808 Ames Gate Lodge, Henry Richardson, North Easton MA, 1880 Columbus Arch, Daniel Burnham, Columbus 1899 Wolkenbügel, El Lissitzky, Moscow, 1923‐25 (unbuilt) Cranbrook Art Museum, Eliel /Eero Saarinen, Michigan, 1925 Thiepval Memorial, Edwin Lutyens, Triepval France, 1932 Gateway Arch, Eero Saarinen, St. Louis, 1965 Fine Arts Center, Amherst, Kevin Roche, 1974 La Grande Arche, Spreckelsen/Andrea, Paris 1989 Wall House, John Hedjuk, Groningen 1970(designed) / 2001 (built) Nanjing Museum of Art, Steven Holl, Nanjing 2009 Program: The program will expand upon the traditional typology of a gateway/arch. The design should emphasize circulation, views and curated movement through a sequence of vertical and horizontal volumes. The minimal program requires gradient conditions from open to enclosed and careful consideration of apertures. The overall massing should fit within a 100’ x 100’ x 100’ bounding box and include a minimum of 20% void. To what extent you incorporate your field study into this project will be under the guidance of your studio instructor. The core design issues:  Design of a Fictional Ground  Integrated Ground Connection (minimum of two distinct ground connections)  Differential Circulation; including vertical/horizontal/diagonal (entry and exit in different locations)  Observation Area: 1600 SF/ Outdoor Viewing Platform: 800 SF / Gatekeepers Quarters: 240 SF UG2 ARCHITECTURE 2420: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II The Ohio State University, Austin E. Knowlton School of Architecture Spring 2013_ Balliet (c) Bongiorno, Kimbrell, Snyder, Twelmeyer, Wilke Schedule January 01.07.13 01.09.13 01.11.13 mo we fr Kick Off / Exercise 01 Introduced Studio Crit Studio Crit 01.14.13 01.16.13 01.18.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit Klaus Bollinger Lecture 01.21.13 01.23.13 01.25.13 mo we fr NO CLASS Studio Crit Studio Crit 01.28.13 01.30.13 02.01.13 mo we fr Exercise 01 DUE / Project 01 Introduced Studio Crit Merrill Elam / Mack Scogin Merrill Elam Architects Studio Crit Archizines Banvard Gallery Opening w/ panel discussion February 02.04.13 02.06.13 02.08.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit Kevin Desouza / Arizona State University th
th
Possible Mediums Conference (7 ‐10 ) 02.11.13 02.13.13 02.15.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit Eyal Weizman / Centre for Research Architecture 02.18.13 02.20.13 02.22.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit George Galster / Wayne State University March 02.25.13 02.27.13 03.01.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit 03.04.13 03.06.13 03.08.13 mo we fr Project 01 Due //MIDterm Exercise 02 Charrette Adrianne Gueze / West 8 Exercise 02 Pin‐Up/ Project 02 Introduced 03.10‐03.17.13 Spring Break 03.18.13 03.20.13 03.22.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit Curtis Roth / KSA Trott Visiting Professor April 03.25.13 03.27.13 03.29.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit 04.01.13 04.03.13 04.05.13 mo we fr Studio Crit Studio Crit Studio Crit Justin Diles / KSA LeFevre Fellow 04.08.13 04.10.13 mo we Studio Crit Studio Crit Beatriz Colomina / Princeton (tbd) 04.12.13 04.15.13 fr Studio Crit mo Project 02 Due / FINAL REVIEW *Baumer Lecture Series 5:30pm unless otherwise indicated *Intermittent lectures/workshops TBD UG2 ARCHITECTURE 2420: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II The Ohio State University, Austin E. Knowlton School of Architecture Spring 2013_ Balliet (c) Bongiorno, Kimbrell, Snyder, Twelmeyer, Wilke General Course Information Instructors/ Policies Instructors Kristy Balliet, balliet.5@osu.edu Sarah Bongiorno, scbongiorno@gmail.com Dow Kimbrell, dow.kimbrell@gmail.com Zach Snyder, zedsnyder@gmail.com Joe Twelmeyer, twelmeyer.1@osu.edu Benjamin Wilke, wilkebenjamin@gmail.com Introduction Architecture 2420 is the second studio of the second year of the undergraduate architecture curriculum at the Knowlton School of Architecture. Following the preparatory first year of general education requirements, the second year begins the architecture curriculum in earnest. The curriculum can be summarized as follows: second year studios focus on issues of technique with support courses in graphics and architectural history, third year studios focus on issues of materiality with support courses in construction and structures, and fourth year studios focus on issues of organization with support seminars in technology and history / theory. Policies Format: Studio meetings will generally be of two types: collective pin‐ups, smaller group discussions, individual desk critiques. Students should be prepared to be in studio for the entirety of class time and must be ready to present at the beginning of class. Studios are based upon ongoing research. Successful completion of assignments and requirements are subject to the discoveries of previous work. All communication with the studio instructor should be carefully considered, as it will be critical to evolving directions and assignments. Students must check their university email daily. Deadlines: Students who miss deadlines due to valid extenuating circumstances may submit the required work at a date agreed upon with the instructor. University regulations limit such circumstances to serious personal illness and death in the immediate family, and both cases require written documentation: a doctor’s note or a newspaper obituary. Unexcused late projects are not accepted, incomplete projects are evaluated in relation to their degree of completion, and a student is present only if he or she presents sufficient work to the instructor. A student’s grade will drop one letter grade after the second unexcused absence; and a student with three unexcused absences will be immediately dismissed and given an “F.” Documentation: Students must provide digital reproductions of all final projects and submit to the school archive is requested to do so. Digital reproductions of both models (as jpegs) and drawings (as PDFs) will be stored on CD’s, one CD per student. Students must place documentation in their instructor’s KSA office mailboxes prior to a grading. Failure to meet deadlines will result in a grade of "incomplete." Evaluation: Studio work is both individual and collective. Criteria of evaluation include not only individual design excellence, but also a student’s contributions to the studio through collective research, documentation and discussions. Grading is based on a comparison with other students in the course, with students who have taken the course previously, and with the instructors' expectations relative to the objectives of the course. Projects are reviewed by a jury including instructors from other courses, other academic institutions, and architectural firms. For an "A", the student must satisfy the course objectives excellently; for a "B", in an above average manner; for a "C" in an average manner; for a "D" in the lowest acceptable manner; and an "F" denotes that the student has not satisfied the course objectives. Sexual Harassment: O.S.U.'s Sexual Harassment policy, which applies to all faculty, staff, and students, includes lewd remarks and inappropriate comments made in the studio environment, classroom, and computer labs as well as the "display of inappropriate sexually oriented materials in a location where others can see it." Students can file a complaint by contacting Student Judicial Affairs at 292‐0748. Sanctions include reprimand, suspension, and dismissal from the University. Students with Disabilities: If a student requires accommodation for a disability, he or she should immediately arrange an appointment with the professors and the Office for Disability Services. At the appointment, the professors, disability counselors, and student can discuss the course format, anticipate needs and decide upon accommodations. Professors rely on the Office for Disability Services for assistance in verifying the need for accommodations and developing accommodation strategies. Student Safety: University escort service provides safe transportation 7:30AM‐3AM. Call 614 292‐3322. Studio Behavior: Students must work in the studio, because of the collaborative nature of research and the shared development of techniques. Students are responsible for keeping their areas clean, their floors free from obstructions, and all studio furniture in good condition and original location. All presentation materials must be removed from review spaces following reviews and all studio materials must be removed from the building at the close of every semester. Students may, however, store material in their credenzas over winter and spring breaks.