Design Manifestos: Elizabeth Whittaker of MERGE Architects

Elizabeth Whittaker is the founder of MERGE Architects in Boston, Massachusetts. She has served on the Boston Society of Architects (BSA) and AIA Board of Directors, the BSA/AIA Rotch Traveling Fellowship Committee and the BSA/AIA Nominating Committee. She was a recipient of the 2015 AIA Young Architects Award and MERGE Architects was honored with the 2014 Design Vanguard Award from Architectural Record (recognizing the top ten emerging firms in the world). Elizabeth approaches architecture as a discipline embedded in both practice and academia, and currently holds a faculty position as Assistant Professor in Practice of Architecture at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design. Modelo spent some time learning about Elizabeth’s journey of starting the firm and her ambitions for the future.

On becoming an architect
I was definitely not a student or lover of architecture at an early age. I certainly didn’t know at age 15 that I wanted to be an architect. I was actually a painter, so I came to architecture accidentally. Painting was my obsession, but I was also very interested in journalism at the time. At the impressionable age of 17, I decided I wanted to study graphic design and start my own publication. However, on a whim, the day before my sophomore year I decided to take an architecture studio. It was super impulsive. I had never experienced anything so terrifying and uncertain. I failed miserably right out of the gate — and then I was completely hooked.

It was quite the discovery. A discipline that incorporated all the things I was interested in at the time: 2D graphics, painting and sculpture — overlayed into something that we could actually inhabit. I was enthralled. There was never one right answer. I’ve been at it since I was 19 so it’s been a while. I entered into the design school within my undergraduate program at North Carolina State University. It was this amazing place of young, raw talent. The Design School had many disciplines within their program: architectural design, graphic design, industrial design, landscape architecture and even textile design. Many of the initial studios were general design studios. We were all together. It was a real mashup of various talents and interests. This dynamic impressed a love of building, fabrication and all things making for me.

On discovering her voice as a designer
The discovery began within my undergraduate program where I was in constant dialogue with my classmates that weren’t necessarily studying architecture, but rather one of the various other design disciplines within the program. For me, architecture was always and is always a blend of many different interests. It was about making small-scale, real-scale, full-scale and true-scale objects, as well as understanding the social implications of space. We were dabbling in all areas of design throughout my undergrad, and we were making many artifacts and testing, testing, testing. This was back in the day before we had laser cutters or CNC routers. It was a real can-do mentality and it taught me to be incredibly resourceful and creative with very modest means and materials. I firmly believe we still utilize this way of thinking and sensibility in my practice today.

After undergrad, I worked in an office for several years in order to gain some practical experience before I entered graduate school. I received my M.Arch at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design, where I was faced confronting all of my previous intuitions. In grad school I had to describe it, explain it and really wrestle with these intuitions that I had developed throughout my undergrad experience. It was a great contrast to my earlier education, and somehow this process helped me find my particular voice, which is still very much about the maker-culture and often a handmade/high-touch sensibility. My work is focused on how to incorporate a low tech/high tech process to produce a sense of efficiency in fabrication, whether it is digitally or hand crafted. I’m always interested in this idea of craft in the project. We make a lot of models in my office. We are often constructing elements of our projects ourselves (mock-ups) before getting on the jobsite and then actually building certain components of the project on-site. The contractors that we often work with are either not up to the task of executing some of our more custom details and ambitions, whether it be physically, mentally or financially. Therefore we (MERGE) end up taking over certain scopes while under construction.

On starting Merge Architects
I started Merge back in 2003, probably five or eight years earlier than I thought I would start my practice. For a long time I knew I wanted to have my own office, but I was of the opinion that I should wait until I had more experience. At the time I had seven to eight years in different offices including Frank Gehry’s in Los Angeles, Elwardt & Lattermann Architekten in Berlin and a few more offices in New York City. Just before I started my firm I was working for a great architect in Boston and was extremely busy with projects within that practice. I loved the office and the work, but as it turned out a couple of side projects came my way and I just didn’t have time to do them because I had a very intense day job. I was simply going to pass them along.

Just as I was about to send them on to some of my friends with their own startup practices, I realized people wait years to ‘get work’ so I decided it was a good time to jump. It wasn’t planned — at all. The decision happened over a two-week period and I just dove in. It’s been full of plenty of highs and lows ever since, as I’m pretty sure any architect would describe their practice. I started pre-recession, so that was good thing. We were lucky to get a lot of work fairly early. For the most part they were fast track, small projects. I affectionately referred to them as non-projects. They often didn’t seem like much of a project at all, yet I had to build a body of work out of these various opportunities and create a way of working that would translate later into larger-scale built projects as we began to scale up.

I continuously strive to incorporate the same sensibilities that we’ve had on the smaller projects in the early years of MERGE. It was a relatively small practice for the first eight years out, however, over the past two or three years we’ve doubled in size. We’re extremely busy right now, which is as much as sign of the times as it is the fact that we’re finally ready to do the bigger projects that are coming our way.

On specific principles that she strives to adhere to
In each of my projects I bring the ambition of combining my interests in craft with my curiosity for how people actually use space and are affected by a particular architecture. I’m interested in how very subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, details and dimensions of a project can dictate how a space is occupied and perceived. We talk a lot about social choreography of place in my practice. For example, the dimensions of a piece of furniture can actually dictate the social dynamic of a collective space. We worked on a restaurant a few years ago where we designed a series of benches that were built a couple of inches lower than typical seat height and 8” deeper than a typical seat. We also provided casters for these benches that allowed for people to rearrange the seating configuration at will each evening. Because of the specific dimensions and flexibility of each piece, the users, often strangers, would sit back-to-back, creating a certain social energy that would not have happened otherwise. That was a very early project for us, maybe the second year into my practice. At first glance it’s very modest details, but the reality is that space offers a very different experience than any other restaurant I’ve ever been in because of these simple dimensions and the flexibility of the seating components.

As addressed earlier, I am also equally obsessed with craft and how we approach making in our work. We approach detailing as a very loose yet precise exercise. We are often rethinking, remaking and re-detailing some of the aspects of a project on-site during construction. I call it real-time resolution. We often collaborate with special fabricators, artisans and of course general contractors to allow for a blend of standard construction practices with highly custom components and details. Since we always seem to work within tight budget constraints, we are always looking for a clever conceptual and material economy of means.

This demand for efficiency in construction costs forces us to concentrate our design energy into very strategic locations on each project. Within each project we have what we call the Core Project — the project within the project. For example, 90% of a project may be built very simply in terms of construction and detailing, but the remaining 10% may be where to spend a larger price per foot. This could be a specific wall, object or a series of details, such as the facade of the building or a certain surface that will set the overall design intent of the full work. If executed successfully, the entire project can be perceived as highly customized and unique. We’ve had to be very sneaky with how to pull off well-considered design on very low budgets that will be perceived as high-design in the end. It’s shaped the way that we think about the work and how we can actually produce the kinds of projects that we’re interested in. We’ve had to be extremely resourceful because of our small budget restraints over the years.

Admittedly, most all architects I know at one time or another are dealing with challenging constraints, and often financial. This isn’t always a negative. It keeps us nimble. For the first eight or nine years of my practice, we had incredibly challenging budgets to work with. As a result we had to work with very challenging construction crews that were hired on the cheap. Since we’ve always been interested in a higher level of craft and custom detailing, and our contractors often could not deliver on some of our more particular details. We decided to step in and construct many of the project components over the years.

On the relationship between teaching and practicing
There are many of us who practice and teach. I’m sure I’m not alone when I acknowledge that this weekly overlap is incredibly rewarding, yet unbelievably challenging. To spend the morning deep into the reality of construction and then the afternoon discussing possibilities with a very different freedom, provides an invaluable feedback loop that is critical to the way we work. It is difficult to switch gears in a matter of hours. But after teaching for over ten years, now I can see that it has simply become one long conversation.

In my practice and in my studio at Harvard GSD, I push learning through the act of making. And to be clear, making for me is very much about the construction of something physical, not just digital. It’s through this process of actually constructing, testing and critiquing what’s been constructed, then re-constructing, re-testing, and iterating over and over again, that we form a methodology for working. This method of discovering and discussing the work permeates both in my office and in my studio. My studios are heavy on model making, fabrication and exploring various means of construction.

With many of our smaller, earlier projects in the office we had the luxury of seeing the work built very quickly. Nothing felt too precious. One project led to the next in terms of research, and more iterations of a similar idea would evolve through the subsequent different scale projects. For example, we would transform an idea we executed as a wall of an interior space into an exterior facade. It’s important to think of surfaces as both 2 and 3 dimensions, and to consider surface as an occupiable layer within a space or wrapping a building. To imagine it as a spatial condition that can possibly negotiate between the street and an interior.

On recent projects that represent her unique approach
With each project I try to craft a particular social experience. I’m obsessed with balconies, and any outdoor space really that allows for interaction with the street or neighboring property. I try to incorporate as many exterior spaces as possible within our residential projects, whether it is multi-family or private single family.

We just completed a house in Lexington, Massachusetts, where we incorporated five recessed gardens on the second floor of the house embedded between bedrooms and bathrooms. These recessed outdoor pockets of space allow it to rain and snow between the private rooms and bring exterior gardens into the interior. These visual thresholds allow for a new social connection between the rooms within the home that ironically provide a strong sense of privacy while allowing cross views and a sense of layered space. This is actually a very small house. It’s approximately 2000 sf, so the spaces are quite compressed yet porous.

We also just completed a multi-family loft building about a year ago that had a green screen. It was a stainless steel screen front façade that was ‘sewn’ onto steel gusset plates that became a vertical garden for this concrete and asphalt corner of the city. This screen wraps over a series of balconies that create a buffer between the street, the balcony and the living spaces within each unit. Through its transparence, the screen allows for a social exchange and dialogue with the streetscape while remaining somewhat private. This detail has become the signature component of the architecture and has created an entirely new identity for this area abutting the Shipyard.

We’re also about to begin construction on over 100 housing units in Detroit, Michigan, where we are weaving in similar ideas about social pockets of space within a series of two and three story carriage homes and four story duplexes. We’ve incorporated interior and exterior courtyards, passages through building massing and roofscapes over carports to address multiple ways to weave the private space with the public deep within the urban block.

As we scale up in our work, we are essentially multiplying this condition within both the private and public urban realm.

On her design toolkit
There are a lot of young, contemporary practices today that are utilizing high digital processes in their work. I wouldn’t describe my practice quite like that. We use digital as a resource. We use it in a much more modest capacity, where digital tools help us to achieve a particular fabrication method, certain shape-making and so on. It doesn’t dictate the kind of work we do.

We are constantly looking for new materials to test and explore within our projects as we work on many interiors as well as ground up construction. In the beginning of my practice we actually worked on mainly interiors. I developed an understanding of working with new and familiar materials in very unique and economical ways. We continue to strive to learn something new on each and every project. We are constantly searching for ways to game the construction industry in terms of how they price projects. The framer is a lot less expensive per hour than the millworker. We often try to find ways to utilize the trades on the site for aspects of the project that they wouldn’t normally be involved with on a typical project. It’s about leveraging the labor on site so that we’re not paying four times what we need to for the project. That’s not really a design tool. It’s more of a practical way of thinking through how to get the project built on the budget we’re given. That’s definitely in our toolkit.

I would describe my ‘toolkit’ as less of a toolkit and more of a strategy of process as we push to build more work in Boston and throughout the country. We have projects currently in Massachusetts, Michigan, Iowa, Panama and Southeast China. What I’ve learned is that I need a strong narrative to persuade the approval parties to build the type of work that we do, regardless of where we’re building. Being able to communicate a clear understanding of concept to context has helped me push a contemporary architecture in many conservative and traditional environments.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
There have been extensive discussions on how to best educate the public on our value as architects as we expand our cities. How do we communicate the necessity of our involvement earlier in the overall process? We’ll often get approached late in the game once certain aspects of the project have been locked in. Architects are often marginalized by the enormity of a full project team. This includes clients, sometimes developers, engineers, consultants, city agencies, and often the public because (depending on the jurisdiction) they ultimately have to approve it. Or at least the majority does. We work on multi-family housing in Boston where there’s a very robust neighborhood approval process set in place by the city. It is surprising how emotional the abutters can get about simply any development in their community. Our work is very contemporary, so we have to navigate these groups very carefully. The future of contemporary architecture in a city such as Boston depends on the success of communicating the relevance and necessity of innovative work.

Architects are masters at analyzing a problem, regardless of the type or scale work they produce. It is our responsibility to set up the problem strategically. Unfortunately we are often hired just as they need to solve it.

On advice she would give her younger self
It would be to remind myself every week that nothing happens overnight. It is a cumulative process of thinking, learning, discussing and building. And rethinking, relearning and re-discussing. The feedback loop needs to be rich and long. As with anything in life, we’re all in a hurry to get there. The path of an architect typically takes a very long time. It can take years, even decades, to find yourself where you think you want(ed) to be. It’s important to not rush it and be strategic about the projects that you do and don’t do.

The relationships you form along the way are also important because the majority of this industry is based on relationships. It continues to surprise me that relationships are valued almost more than the final product. I’ve enjoyed immensely making these new relationships along the way, which feed the practice, feed goodwill, and frankly make the process of building a more humanized endeavor.

I will admit that it is terrifying in the beginning to operate financially month-to-month with the uncertainty of the next project always looming. Even when you’re well-established you never know how the next year will play out given the volatility of the market. Architects need by definition a sense of control. This is very difficult to wrestle with when you’re forming a practice and you have very little control, at least in the beginning, for the initial projects that come your way. That can be very frustrating but also immensely exciting. It’s better to embrace it than try to fight it. Leave your mind open for finding projects within the non-projects.

Design Manifestos: Don Kranbuehl of Clark Nexsen

Don Kranbuehl is a Senior Architect and Associate Principal at Clark Nexsen’s Raleigh, North Carolina office. Don has more than 16 years of experience in the design, management, and construction spanning the academic, science + technology, and civic sectors. He has led the architectural design for a variety of projects that have been honored with state, regional, and national AIA design awards. Most recently, Don led the design for the UNC Coastal Studies Institute Research Building which received a Chicago Athenaeum International Design Award. Modelo spent some time learning about Don’s award-winning designs and unique approach.

On becoming an architect
My decision to become an architect was based on many factors, but grew primarily from my interests in art and music as well as science. Growing up, my two main hobbies were painting and playing the drums. My parents helped me develop these interests through painting classes and music lessons. These helped create a foundation for thinking visually and learning to design through art and music.

When I was twelve, we moved into a modern house that my stepfather, an architect, had designed and built. This gave me the opportunity to experience the power of architecture and begin to understand and appreciate the importance of site, form, material and light. Working with my stepfather at his home office on school projects, I fell in love with a profession where I could combine my interests in art, music and science.

On finding his voice as an architectural designer
A number of influences have been important, including my architectural education at Virginia Tech. During my years in the architectural and engineering graduate programs, I gained an appreciation for a pedagogy focused on discovery, process over product and learning through travel. The Virginia Tech faculty also encouraged utilizing personal experiences to influence and help guide the creative process. Here I once again drew upon the experience of playing drums in rock and jazz bands in high school and college to see how I could apply the notion of improvising in music to improvising in design studio.

My musical knowledge and practice inspired me to explore in an architectural setting rhythm, order, restraint and improvisation while appreciating the importance of listening to the voices of others playing music with you. I could appreciate the value of this in architecture where, in a sense, I was listening to the voices of the site.

Another important influence has been teaching in the architectural graduate school at North Carolina State University for the past nine years. This has helped me focus on the importance of designing public space as well and responding to site forces, both urban and natural. I continue to learn and grow from each studio I teach.

On how his role has evolved since joining Clark Nexsen 
I joined Clark Nexsen (formerly PBC+L) eleven years ago when my wife and I moved back home to the Mid-Atlantic after working in Chicago for a number of years. I searched for a firm with a strong connection to an academic setting. Clark Nexsen was integrally related to North Carolina State, as several of the architects were adjunct faculty and many participated in studio reviews. I had worked for Skidmore Owings & Merrill (SOM) for several years where I obtained licenses as both an architect and engineer, so joining the AE firm Clark Nexsen was a natural and exciting progression. The approach to design here is collaborative with a focus on idea-driven architecture. The team-oriented approach ultimately leads to the best design as the AE design team is in the same office and can listen and work closely together. I continue to focus on learning how to make our team-oriented approach a more healthy discourse that encourages collaboration around ideas, site, program and tectonics.

On principles he strives to adhere to
There are many important factors that are key including program, geometry, daylight and circulation. Environmental forces are examined as well to create an energy efficient and sustainable response. But I think at the heart of our design process is that we strive to understand the relationship of the form to the site and how it can create a unique reinterpretation of the site. That understanding drives the idea and design of the project.

We also always work on developing a clear tectonic and material expression that further reinforce the idea. The materials and craft of the architecture are important to us and trying to elevate how one experiences and engages the tactile dimension of the architecture.

I think this is an important question and one that I am always revisiting. Fortunately, as a teacher, it helps me to constantly review what I believe the important principles are to stress to students and consequently it informs for my own design process at Clark Nexsen.

On his role as a designer at Clark Nexsen
As a Senior Architect at Clark Nexsen, my primary focus is to help lead the design of a project from the initial kickoff with a client all the way through construction. At Clark Nexsen, we believe it is important for the architects to help shepherd a project from conceptual design through construction. This helps to ensure that the key elements of the architecture that are critical to the project and the client are kept intact and that there is an attention to the craft and the details in the construction process.

Another important aspect of my role is to listen to the client to develop a clear understanding of the mission and challenges that the client wants to achieve. Other important roles are to lead the design team’s analysis of the site and conceptual design process and to help guide the discourse between all members of the design team throughout the design and construction process. A large part of my role is ensuring that all members of the design team are heard and involved to make sure the best ideas are brought forward.

On recent projects that represent his unique approach
In terms of how we approach projects, we feel that it is important to treat our clients as partners in the design and make it a truly collaborative process. We believe in the power of ideas and use an investigative process to learn about the client’s objectives as well as the challenges and opportunities with their specific project and site.

One project we recently finished is the Wake Tech Regional Plant. It was primarily meant to be a building to house heating and cooling equipment. But the Wake Tech faculty and staff also hoped to make it a place to teach students about building systems. We designed a simple rectilinear glass and steel box with a perforated metal screen layer which screens and highlights the technology. A public path was located behind the screen to lead the students and public along an educational path featuring views of the mechanical equipment as well as the natural setting. The facility presented a unique opportunity to transform the standard “typology” of a utilitarian regional plant into more of “a museum for mechanical equipment” where the equipment is on display to the students and public.

Another recent project is the UNC Coastal Studies Institute. It’s located on Roanoke Island in North Carolina and is surrounded by wetlands and sweeping views of the Croatan Sound. The harsh and severe coastal environment provided inspiration for the building’s design. It is elevated on piloti that touch the ground lightly yet it engages and interacts with the landscape through its site walls and natural lawns. An existing canal governs the building’s simple bent form. This form aligns the building with the canal and captures views of the water and sky.

On the state of design software
In terms of the state of software today, it’s changing so rapidly it’s hard to keep up with it. There are constantly new programs coming out that our Tech studio evaluates for their usefulness in our design process. One of the best results of the new software is it allows for more overlap and blurring between disciplines. We continue to use a wide range of tools from hand sketching and physical model making to digital software such as SketchUp, Rhino and Revit. We supplement these basic modeling tools with plugins such as V-Ray for visualization, Grasshopper for modeling, and Sefaira for daylighting and energy modeling.

On the future of architecture in next 5–10 years
It is an exciting time to be in the field, as there will continue to be an emphasis on making buildings more sustainable and responsive to the changing environment. The global warming crisis demands that the architectural industry respond with responsible solutions that help reduce emissions and help improve the environmental challenges. At the same time, in order for architecture to be sustainable, architects will need to create uplifting buildings that clients want to keep for a long time.

On the future of the firm in the next 5–10 years
Clark Nexsen continues to develop into a strong design firm that creates thoughtful and sophisticated architecture. We want to keep building a culture that encourages discovery and collaboration. Our goal is to create inspiring architecture that responds to the challenges that lie ahead.

On advice he would give his younger self
There’s lots of advice I would give myself regarding school or my first years in architecture but that’s part of the joy of learning — struggling and learning from others. The great thing about architecture is that it is such a complicated field crossing so many disciplines that there is always more to learn. I continue to feel like a student of architecture today. I think if I gave myself some overall advice it would be to slow down — to find more opportunities to slow the process of architecture down as good design takes time.

Design Manifestos: Bob Little of L2Partridge

Bob Little, Co-Founder of L2Partridge in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania is an award-winning designer focused on corporate commercial and higher education projects. His work on the E.J.DeSeta Building in Wilmington, Delaware was awarded an AIA Gold Medal, PSA Silver Medal and was published in Architectural Record. Bob is NCARB-Certified and is a registered architect in five states. He is a member of AIA, PSA, the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Concord Township Historical Society. Bob received his BArch and MArch from Cornell University, and has a BS in Environmental Design from University of the Arts. Modelo spent some time learning about Bob’s progressive designs and unique approach.

On becoming an architect
One half of my family is builders. My mother could draw, I could draw, and so for some reason I always wanted to get involved with building and design. Having access to some blueprints early in my life, I would find myself fascinated with how things were drawn, but I truly didn’t understand what architecture was. I went to art school where I decided to pursue printmaking. I was very interested in mezzotint in particular. I found that everything I was doing in my print making was very architectural in nature. After discovering an Environmental Design program, I received a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Design. But this only wet my palate. By chance, I met a recent Cornell grad named Burt Miller who was teaching a studio on urban design. He was the one who encouraged me to formally pursue architecture and apply to Cornell University. Once I was there I excelled through the design studios receiving a Bachelor of Architecture, followed soon after by my Master of Architecture.

On discovering his voice as a designer
Coming out of school you are, in a way, slightly confused. In a lot of ways you don’t know who you are as a designer. Early in my career, I found myself getting hung-up on aesthetics, particularly in the facade. As a result, my process over the years has been one of distillation, trying to simplify projects and their expression. For me simplifying means clarification, or purifying. I think an example of this is my design for EJ DeSeta in Wilmington, Delaware. The built form is very simple and the fenestration is very precise. The beauty is in its austerity. The same can be said for the United States Postal Service (USPS) project I designed in Philadelphia. Although it’s ten times the size of the DeSeta building, on a diagrammatic level it’s quite simple. It’s a box, a wall that acts as a circulation spine, and an office bar to the front that conforms to the site. If you look more closely there are layers of complexity, but the idea itself is very simple. I think this notion of simplicity is partially a result of my education at Cornell in the early 80’s.

While I was at student I got lucky. At the time, the program had just been taken over by Werner Goehner. But he was on sabbatical, so they had Hans Kolhoff fill in, a disciple of Mathias Ungers. There was an intense rigor to the creation of architecture — a kind of obsession with the plan and a renaissance attitude toward facade. There was, what we called, ‘plan fixation.’ Professionally, I have always gravitated to the work of Alvar Aalto and Richard Meier. I am fascinated with the clarity achieved in their plans; specifically their practical nature. Something I have always struggled with is the balance of the practical and the artistic sides of design. I would say that most importantly, my education provided the necessary skills to learn on my own; to ask questions, seek answers and draw conclusions.

On starting L2Partridge 
My business partner and I met and worked together at Kling. While we enjoyed the work, we didn’t feel that the company was serving the clients very well. We felt that we were selling ourselves to ‘feed the machine’ but fell short on the delivery and commitment to the work. So we thought that we could be successful in a smaller model than the big mega firm, and eliminate the red-tape and bureaucracy that you get at a big firm. L2Partridge began as two companies. L2 Architecture started as an architecture and engineering company. During the recession, we dropped the engineering and joined Partridge Architects whose primary focus was Interior Design, combining the two companies to expand our services and clients.

My role has shifted significantly since becoming a leader of a company. Being in a position of ownership, I have to wear multiple hats. I find my time is less dedicated to the actual act of designing and is spread over various necessities like marketing.

On specific principles that L2Partridge adheres to
Simplicity, but also a thread of consistency. It’s not about repeating elements or attributes, but rather about taking an attribute and transforming it to its next logical development. It’s like the design of a car, you see a car from the 1920’s and one from today and realize that there has been this amazing transformation over time. That’s how I like to think about the work, it evolves as we evolve. Intrinsic to this notion is the diagram. As a product of a rigorous education, I have always conformed to a simple truth in design. “If you can’t diagram it, you don’t have an idea.” The diagram enables one to clarify, in a conceptual manner, the essence of an idea.

On his role at L2Partridge
My responsibilities, besides oversight of design, encompass marketing, business development, social media, and technology, i.e., computer software to aid in design and production. L2Partridge is not a large firm so we all have multiple roles. I try to stay close to the latest software applications by supporting the efforts of those individuals using the programs, and pushing them to try new things.

On recent projects that represent the firm’s unique approach
I’m not sure we have a unique approach, but I do believe that we are made up of unique personalities. Those personalities in turn make our process unique because of how we engage with the client. I think in some ways that our approach is very old school, in terms of sitting down with a pen and piece of trace paper.

Our strategy is to partner with our clients. We don’t look for single projects; we focus on establishing long-term client relationships that will yield assignments for many years. We endeavor to understand the client’s business model so we can make design decisions that support their goals and objectives. We did this successfully with Endo Pharmaceuticals WWHQ (300 KSF), the University of the Sciences new Physician Assistant Education Buildings (57,500 SF) and currently with The Henderson Group where we are designing a 75,000 SF office building. We are only successful if our clients are successful.

On his design toolkit
What is my process? Pen on paper. Coming up with a diagram. There is something about the look of the ink on the paper that evokes meaning. The time delay between ideas in my head and the movement of the pen on paper allows me to think, patiently and quietly. I don’t stay in the sketch book long as I begin to block out ideas in CAD, print them and then sketch over them with trace paper and then back to CAD again. It goes around and around until I am happy with the form or composition. Parallel to this CAD and sketching effort are the explorations using 3D modeling software. I love to draw over a 3D model. There is a back and forth between perspective drawing and 3D modeling.

On the state of design software today
I think the software is super cool, you can do a lot of great things. Sometimes you just have to experiment with the software to achieve the design you want. There is a lot of investment and time involved with developing cells, families, and blocks. But ultimately it produces an image with which you need to make decisions about the design, and continue to develop it. For me, it’s not enough to see it on the screen, it’s printing it, sketching over it, followed by going back to the model to make some adjustments. 3D models will never replace a physical model, but unfortunately fee structures in our industry today don’t support the creation and study of physical models. As a result, we rely heavily on visualization software to determine the outcome of a design. I’ve been told that I am “old school” for relying on my sketch book diagrams. Maybe this is true, but I am open to trying new tools as long as the interface feels intuitive. If I can easily smudge a line or make a line thicker or thinner by how much pressure I excerpt on the stylus, great, I would love to try it. When I was a younger architect, I did all of my own computer visualization using Integraph’s Modelview program. It was exciting helping to pioneer visualization efforts in the office. In regard to the software used in the office, there are amazing things going on that aid in visualization and production.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
I think it’s going to be harder for medium-size firms to survive. There will be two types of firms. There will continue to be the mom-and-pop shop and the big mega firms. The medium-sized firms like ours will find it difficult to survive. The issue comes down to portfolio breadth. Huge firms that can setup offices in cities across the US and the World have a larger pool of project experience that can be used as a selling point. At the design studio level, innovations in technology have greatly increased productivity throughout the profession. It has enabled us to be more efficient and get more done with fewer people. We are able to produce large scale buildings with half the people we used to need. The answer to this question has always rested on the merits of technology making our lives easier.

On the future of L2Partridge in the next 5–10 years
We are in a growth mode. We realize that we need to increase in size. While we would like that to be organically, we might be faced with an opportunity to merge to increase our market sector diversity. Currently, for example, we don’t have any exposure in the healthcare industry, which will continue to be very strong and has proven hard to break into. Getting these projects often means teaming with another firm.

I see the profession changing to a field of specialists. As expertise requirements of market sectors evolve, it is becoming increasingly difficult to have a generalist practice. If you don’t have ten project examples of exactly what an RFP is requiring, it can be challenging to compete for new commissions. L2Partridge has been on both sides of this trend and I believe it will only continue to become a specialty profession in regard to market sector focus or building type.

On advice he would give his younger self
Get more involved with the architecture community. Get involved. Go to the various networking events and participate more with the AIA. If you are ever going to do your own thing, you need to have a comfort level with networking and generating relationships. I would say it’s hard for me to look back at my work and determine something I would change — I believe that I am still, and will forever, be searching for my architectural voice.

Design Manifestos: Ania Leeson of OTJ Architects

Ania Leeson is a Partner and Studio Director at OTJ Architects in Washington, D.C. She is a licensed architect who has previously worked in New York City and Chicago, Illinois. Ania holds a Master’s degree in Architecture from Harvard University and Bachelor’s degree from Cornell University.Modelo spent some time learning about Ania’s journey with architecture and forward-thinking design approach.

On becoming an architect
I spent the first seven years of my life in Communist Eastern Europe, where at the time, architecture and the built environment was grey, static, and depressing. At age six I took my first trip abroad, where I was exposed for the first time to colorful and energetic design. What I saw on that trip hooked me and it was not long after that I decided I wanted to become an architect. I was lucky enough to have spent the rest of my childhood and teenage years living in Holland — in my opinion the most creative nation in Europe. The Dutch were never afraid to take risks with design — nothing about their architecture, art or design is ever dull or uninteresting. Living and being surrounded by that was inspiring and further pushed me to pursue architecture as a major, and eventually as a career.

On discovering her voice as a designer 
I arrived in design school believing that less is more when it comes to design but it was definitely something that was further reinforced by my professors. The impact of something understated can be far more meaningful than something that triggers sensory overload. However it was while reading John Berger’s Ways of Seeing in college that I started to additionally develop an appreciation and importance of designing spaces that can successfully tell a story without words. I approach design with that voice telling me to think about the story the space will tell in the most effortless and lucid manner possible.

I’ve had the privilege to work for a range of firms since my first design job in college, each of which has influenced the way I think about and approach design. I’ve always had, and continue to have, mentors who I admire and who I can learn from. However a very strong professional influence are my clients, the new challenges they bring, the stories they need their spaces to tell and the new lessons I learn from them.

As designers we never cease to learn from each other, which I feel is an educational constant in my life. The educational influences from my past that have had the biggest impact on me as a designer were design studios at the Harvard Graduate School of Design that involved project immersion through travel. One memorable example was a studio led by Peter Rose, a great architect and professor who took us on a Donald Judd pilgrimage to Marfa, Texas. Art and social context had a tremendous impact on me back then and continue to influence me in my professional life today.

Traveling has been an influence for me. I’m always inspired by seeing new landscapes, art, color, architecture, materials, and experiencing what other people consider their norm. I try to take as many trips a year as my schedule allows. Although I am fine returning to places I love, I try to see new places each year and I don’t try to cram too much in. I’ve been on a Scandinavian kick recently as part of this discovery.

On joining OTJ Architects
I had just relocated to Washington, D.C. from Chicago, Illinois and was searching for something new and out of my comfort zone. I had started out my career at RTKL working on mixed-use urban design projects as well as sustainability-focused commercial architecture. I then transitioned to a smaller firm in Chicago where I primarily poured myself into an addition to a Stanley Tigerman building in the south side of Chicago. Returning to the DC area I now call home was a great new opportunity that presented itself to me to join and help build a growing design studio at OTJ.

On how her approach has evolved since joining
I’ve learned a great deal from my team, from consultants and other industry leaders over the years. But I believe the biggest change in approach for me professionally has been coming up with ways to be more creative about my job as a whole, as opposed to just being creative about design.

On specific principles she strives to adhere to 
Listening to our clients is our key principle. We are very much a people-focused firm and we love to collaborate with our clients. Listening and being in tune with their goals is key to a project’s success.

On her role at OTJ Architects 
My role is to challenge myself and others to produce better design while being forward thinking in workplace strategy, design and our creative process. It is pretty simple when you boil it down.

On OTJ’s unique approach to design
We are a boutique firm and have a youthful energy that I am very excited to be a part of. We approach design collaboratively and I believe what truly sets us apart is the fact that none of our projects look alike.

On projects that represent her unique approach
National Trust for Historic Preservation: The challenge for the National Trust for Historic preservation Headquarters (NTHP) was designing a home for an organization that focuses on preservation. NTHP chose the historically significant Watergate complex in Washington, D.C. which was designed by Italian Architect Luigi Moretti over five decades ago. The space we had to work with was a cold shell with some spectacular views of D.C., the river and the rest of the concrete complex. The story we were telling within the space was one that was at the core of NTHP’s mission. We focused on staying true to the Watergate. We researched Moretti’s work, his attention to detail and the materiality that he had mastered. We found a great deal of inspiration from his work and from the rest of the complex that translated effortlessly into the interiors of his building. We were able to respect the context while giving NTHP an open, collaborative workspace to further their mission.

Confidential Client: The focus of the Confidential Client project was creating a great space for the employees to work in. With a four story office space, the biggest challenges tend to be floor silos that are created if not enough attention is paid to encouraging staff to traverse all of their floors. We worked with the firm to create a series of magnet spaces, flanking the four story stair to encourage and allow staff to have casual conversations in spaces that felt connected yet unique to each floor. Although many of these spaces were focused on encouraging interaction, we also designed focus spaces. One example of that was a quiet reading room, reminiscent of a library with soft seating, book shelves and great views of D.C. The design intentionally balanced the softer, warmer design features with an edgy feel to create a unique environment reflective of the firm.

National Restaurant Association: We were tasked to create an office environment and space that captured the National Restaurant Association’s Spirit of Hospitality. They needed a space they could host industry events while also having a functional office space. The event space was a large spaceplan driver for the two floors they occupy. The event space begins with a very warm welcoming elevator lobby, a reception area with very comfortable seating areas, soft lighting and a gas fireplace. The space has an interconnecting stair that is open yet intimate. It leads staff and visitors alike to an open commercial grade studio kitchen (equipped with a goPro camera hidden inside of an exhaust hood to film the food being cooked), a reception bar area and an indoor/ outdoor entertaining space. Our goal, besides weaving the spirit of hospitality into the design, was making the event space feel like it was accessible to the staff 95% of the time when an event was not taking place. We really enjoyed working closely with the National Restaurant Association to make sure their space was thoughtful and represented their membership while being a very clear nod to the industry.

On her design toolkit 
Our process starts with research and visioning, so that we can develop an understanding of what we need to highlight or who we need to connect with in order to design the right space for our clients. We work in teams and we use charrettes and in-house critiques to push our design and make our projects stronger and better through collaboration.

Our team charrettes are paralleled with sketching to distill a concept. We then take the concept and use a range of digital visualization tools to develop it. 3D modeling plays a major role in how we develop and communicate design. Clients simply get it when you show them their future space in 3D.

On the state of design software today
Design software is an incredible design tool, it is forever improving but it’s only that: a tool. It can’t replace thoughtfulness of the plan and design concept.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
I think the design industry will become more integrated from conception of design through the completed built space. I believe we will see more efficiencies in production, coordination and construction all of which I’m very excited about. But at the end of the day the core of what we do as designers will likely remain the same. We will research our clients, listen to them and design spaces that make a difference and help tell a story.

On the future of OTJ Architects in the next 5–10 years
I see OTJ being very creatively adaptive in the way we approach industry changes. As I mentioned, I don’t see the core of what we do changing, but I do see the methods of execution changing particular to when a design is born. OTJ has a great, young energy and we are not afraid to think outside of the box as a firm.

On advice she would give her younger self 
Be creative in the way you think, not just the way you design.

Design Manifestos: May Poon of Wilson Associates

May Poon is an Associate Principal and Design Director at Wilson Associates. Her 13 years with Wilson Associates at the Dallas, Texas and Los Angeles, California offices have yielded a portfolio of highly awarded and successful properties across the globe. Clients and colleagues revere May’s natural ability to close her eyes and place herself in a space as she designs. From the back of the house to guest reception, May knows what the operator needs on every level. Fluent in English and Cantonese, her unique cultural ties to multiple countries and cultures give her a broad understanding and empathy toward a vast international client base and humanity as a whole. Modelo recently spent some time learning about May’s progressive designs and her unique approach.

On becoming a designer
I’ve been interested in art and design since a very early age. When I began discerning my major in college, I chose architecture and followed that path through five years of college, two degrees and my licensure. After school, I followed my calling to a firm in London, England and worked there until an opportunity to move to Dallas, Texas arose. For the last 15 years I have called Dallas home. Initially, I continued my profession as an architect until an amazing opportunity at Wilson Associates came my way. As an architect, moving to Wilson was a shift in my career, from pure architecture to interior architecture. It was an exciting challenge and I am now celebrating my thirteenth year at Wilson.

On discovering her voice as a designer
During my career as an architect, I studied the “masters” of architecture as they inspired me in ways that affected my voice as an architect and now as an interior architect. The first “master” is Japanese architect Tadao Ando, a very conceptual, self-taught minimalist who designs with light to create space in a Modernist way. Another one who inspires me is Paul Rudolph. His architecture is created from forms and shape, and still influences how I create spaces today. This inspiration translates into my design through geometry and patterns that define space. Finally, the third one who inspires me, and contrasts the other two, is Santiago Calatrava. I had the chance to work with this Spanish icon when I was in London, who combines the study of nature, architecture and engineering disciplines into his aesthetic. His architecture and art inspire me to listen, observe and incorporate the natural world into my designs.

On how her role has evolved since joining Wilson
I came from an architecture background. This means I focused on the spatial form of buildings and how they created communities, cities, and urban and suburban environments. I took the same approach when I started practicing interior architecture. Everything has a meaning to it. It begins with the story, the concept, spaces, and finally the interior architecture. The aesthetics and feeling fall into place when you have a strong story.

On specific principles she strives to adhere to
In everything we do, we try to make sure that we understand where the client is coming from, what his or her desire is and then we build a script around it, before we even put the pencil to paper. Everything must have a meaning behind it.

On her role as a designer at Wilson Associates
My truly functional role is the story-teller and creator of design. I believe in building a strong and solid foundation with every client in order to understand them deeply. A project is a journey with our client, and we must come together as a team to develop a strong concept and ultimately a successful project. Together we ensure the story is good on day one of the project, prior to assembling the team who will do the work. This is the most important role I have in the context of Wilson Associates and the Dallas office. I lead the team through all stages of the project until the day the property is opened.

On recent projects that represent the firm’s unique approach
Right now, I am working on the Sofitel in Mexico City. The client is Grupo Eco from Mexico City and the operator is Sofitel. I love working with Sofitel because they always have a very strong design brief, which helps to kick-start the concept.

The Sofitel Mexico City concept is centered on two iconic architects from the twentieth century: Le Corbusier, a Swiss-French architect and Luis Barragan, arguably the most famous Mexican architect. Working closely with Grupo Eco, the architect for this project, we are designing the interiors by taking inspiration from the two icons and Grupo Eco’s architecture of the building. The inspiration plays out by architectural forms, spaces, colors and patterns. Art has been a strong driver for this project with architectural sculptures, lighting sculptures and contemporary Mexican art. We view art as an integral piece to the project, not an accessory. This project is an excellent example of that approach. Everything is designed together to compliment each other.

An interesting challenge on the Sofitel Mexico City is its location. It’s immediately adjacent to the American Embassy, making it prime real estate, but also making it challenging in terms of access. The street lobby of the hotel is placed on a long interior driveway through the entire length of the building.

The street lobby is the first impression of the hotel for most guests when they arrive. We worked hard to find solutions that impress the visitor and transform the drive into an experience. The design includes 3D mapping, architectural art and light projection to bring light and interest to what could be a long dark tunnel.

On her design toolkit
I’m very old school. I always start with a pencil. I work with the client to understand their vision and come back to the studio to brainstorm with the team using images and ideas. We use Pinterest to curate images of space, feeling or color. Once we have a concept, we sketch, and use AutoCAD, SketchUp or 3ds Max. The tools vary upon the project or the concept.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
Architecture and design are moving in a direction that we have never been before. There are so many new technologies that affect our industry, such as new computer programs, 3D printing, or innovative construction techniques. We are truly pushing the boundaries and making shapes, forms and spaces that we’ve never seen before. Technology, design, art, architecture and interior design are all coming together. It’s very exciting right now.

On the future of Wilson Associates in the next 5–10 years
We have a group of extremely passionate designers in our organization in eight offices worldwide. I have just started working with our Los Angeles office, which is interesting because every office has their own culture, but the passion we have for design is the same. It’s good to work for a company that has a vision to understand that interior design is not limited to interior design. Interior design should encompass everything from architecture, art, interior design, graphic design, etc. All these components should always be considered, and having the support of the company for us to explore these different ideas is a huge plus.

On advice she would give her younger self
I would say to myself, ‘do not be afraid to try new things.’ I did pure architecture for more than a decade. When I was younger I never thought I would be anything other than a pure architect. But here I am, an interior architect! It allows me to see and understand architecture holistically. Before my vision was limited. I wish I had taken the plunge a little earlier but I’m here now.

Design Manifestos: Peter Pennoyer of Peter Pennoyer Architects

Peter Pennoyer established Peter Pennoyer Architects in 1990 and it has since grown to include four partners, fifty associates, and four interior designers. The firm is an award-winning practice in traditional architecture recognized as a leader in classicism and historic preservation. Based in Manhattan, New York and with an office in Miami, Florida, the firm has built a substantial and varied body of work across the country and abroad for residential, commercial, and institutional commissions often involving historic buildings. For the past twenty-five years, Peter Pennoyer and his partners have grounded the firm’s projects in a forward-looking interpretation of history. They believe that architectural practices in the past leave us potent lessons that are relevant to contemporary architectural challenges. Modelo spent some time learning about Peter’s unique historical approach and the inspirations behind his modern and classical designs.

On becoming an architect
Growing up, New York City was a natural place to think about architecture. In the ’60s, New York was in trouble. People had moved out; thousands of buildings that were empty — repossessed by the city in tax lien proceedings. Many people and companies ran to the suburbs. Real estate was almost worthless, not significantly appreciating from 1932 until basically the 1980s. There was very little being built, but people were thinking about how to fix the city. My parents were involved with New York, with politics and with social issues. And they felt that they had an interest in trying to help people who were impoverished. Growing up in a house where social activism and mindfulness about what makes a good city brought idealism as opposed to pure aesthetics. Aesthetics came later.

I also happened to have neighbors and friends of my family who were architects. I admired our next-door-neighbor, an architect who was working at Skidmore Owings & Merrill when I was very young. He was full of passionate fire-in-the-belly of Modernist zeal. And he was working with Gordon Bunshaft designing the Chase Manhattan Tower near Wall Street. He raved about an architect named Le Corbusier. At that point I was interested in Modernism because Modernism looked very different in the 60s then it does today in New York because there were only a few International Style buildings. You could walk down Park Avenue and it was all masonry, all of these buildings that actually fit into the vision for Terminal City around Grand Central. Then there was the Seagram building and Lever House. A stark, invigorating contrast. I knew then that I wanted to be an architect.

On discovering his voice as a designer
When I went to Columbia College, I was interested in older buildings. I wanted to study architectural history and I found that the architecture school courses weren’t really referencing history much, so I began taking courses in the preservation school. The preservationists were studying older buildings. Then I enrolled in an undergraduate studio with Robert A. M. Stern. He was and is a great teacher, a very thoughtful architect and a champion of New York City. He led us to look at the sense of place and the importance of studying precedent. He wasn’t doctrinaire about it — if a student was interested in Modernism, he’d say ‘fine, but go look at the source, read the books, go see the buildings and measure them.’ But in my case, it led me to a real fascination with historical architecture. Because of my interest in the city, I began to realize that the buildings that most appealed to me were buildings that connected to other buildings, that became part of a streetscape, or part of a neighborhood, or established an identity that was greater than just one building. This became an important part of my approach to design.

In my senior year I went to work at Bob Stern’s office. I started out organizing his slide library. This is a man who carried a camera around everywhere he went for decades, taking pictures of every building that interested him — in each one the architect, the location, the building would have to be identified. Those slides gave me a window into the power of a visual library. After I graduated from college I moved from slides to designing interior architectural renovations — and began to design in earnest.

Within Stern’s office there was always an opportunity to explore architecture. There was a high level of ambition about design in that office and that gave me a great boost and confidence. Now mind you, it was this odd moment when Modernism was trying to squeak into Post-Modernism and we produced some bizarre things. Everyone was having to learn again — it was like all the books had been thrown out. Many had been taught that history was destructive to creativity and beauty. Actually, that’s not right because the word beauty itself was taboo in architecture school along with proportion and harmony. If you mentioned these qualities you were thought of as being just eccentric or bourgeois. I worked for Stern for almost two years before I went to Columbia graduate school where there were some faculty who were moving past modernism The brick wall of orthodoxy was crumbling; people were sensing that there other ways to look at architecture.

Working and studying under Bob Stern I met Gregory Gilmartin, a fellow employee and student. He was working with Bob writing New York 1900 and New York 1930. the great books on New York City architecture and history. Gregory has been a friend and colleague in my firm ever since. My work in graduate school was continually informed by history. Every time I understood a great building — by traveling, by reading — it seemed to enrich my designs. Some friends who were doing very cold Modernism seemed to have a bottomless well of intuitive impulses about design. My mind doesn’t work that way. I don’t think that it’s a bad thing to design that way but there are very few people who are good at it. You actually have to be a kind of genius. I don’t think I am. Very, very few architects are.

On starting the firm
I started sooner than I should have because a classmate in second year proposed that we partner on designing a loft for a famous model (movie star). This was an opportunity presented to me on a platter. I said ‘of course I’ll be your partner and I’ll help design Isabella Rossellini’s loft, I’ll do Keith Haring’s Pop shop and meet you at the Warhol Factory.’ His name was Peter Moore and he was brilliant at connecting with the fashion and art worlds in New York; and convincing people that what they really needed was an energetic, architecture student as designer.

So we started off really fast with absolutely no professional credentials. New York was a great place to make this happen because it was full of people who were actually interested in new ideas and willing to take risks. We had some fascinating projects and even a client who brought us in as their in-house architects. They rented us offices in their hotel (now known as The Mark), which we renovated, learning about construction, learning about design, and we also built an art warehouse for them. We built a store in London. This one patron, who is still a friend today, had the confidence to let us do all his projects. This was very rash. But it worked out well for him and for me.

In the meantime, my friends — people who care about architecture like Gregory Gilmartin, who is the Director of Design here — helped me continue to learn and act as though in some sense I was still in school. After Moore moved on we grew and quickly learned that we had to be professional. It’s been almost 30 years and I now have four partners: Tom Nugent, Liz Graziolo, Jim Taylor and Jennifer Gerakaris. Together we have built up a practice based on mostly residential design but some commercial and institutional work.

On principles that he strives to adhere to across projects
The first principle is may seem like the least interesting one — making the building work for the client. In residential work this means actually getting to know people at a deep level. Not only people but in some cases what they own — what paintings or books or furniture they have. This isn’t the sexy part of the architectural profession. But making the building work really well is important to us and I enjoy the process.

Making the building feel right to people is essential — anyone coming to a house we design should feel welcomed. It sounds trite but anyone walking into that living room should feel comfortable and anyone sitting at that table having a conversation at dinner should feel that the space is a good place to do that. And our clients feel a sense of joy in the architecture; delight in the details and the spaces and the proportions. Underlying that is knowing how to achieve the best design. We don’t design in an off-the-cuff way. If we’re going to do paneling we have looked and thought about how the masters have done that particular kind of paneling. We would never do exactly what an architect has done before but we’re aware of the best examples. That’s the knowledge part and that is exhausting because it’s easier to put blinders on and think that you have all the answers in your head. But we think we can always do better. We’re constantly learning and that’s a lot of work.

We also love building technology, we like to know how things are made, and we love knowing about materials. We don’t specify windows unless someone here has visited the factory where they make the windows. We like to work with craftsmen, we like to talk to contractors and we like to think about best practices. We even love the forensic part of it — understanding old buildings that have problems and figuring out why. We also embrace new materials and methods but we’re very careful to understand anything new before we use it in our buildings.
Symphonic is a word that I think is most important in our work. Because I use traditional sources, precedents and ideas, I could risk having a building feel like a collection of quotations, of styles. Instead I harmonize these inspirations into one complete, coherent work of architecture.

On recent projects that represent his unique approach
We are working on a house now that’s under construction that is influenced by Czech Cubism. There are very few examples of this style, yet there we were with the client in and around Prague tracking down every single one. This was practically like learning a new language because it’s all about angles and facets. The design is symphonic because it’s pulling unusual influences together into one work of architecture. We are also furnishing the house and very involved in building the collections.

We recently built a house in Dutchess County, north of New York for a collector of 19th century American art. That was fascinating because she had such a great vision for her interest in the period of American history, furnishings and fine arts. She allowed us to make a building that was very traditional in its outward guise, but had quite an open plan — it’s a very special project that addresses the landscape, the collections sing in that house and our collaboration with the interior designer Thomas Jayne, made it ideal. .

A recent commission in Maine is extraordinarily interesting because it’s trying to evoke some of the peace and serenity of summer cottages that people would build 140 years ago. It does not include a lot of the amenities. It has no built in lighting — there’s just minimal surface lighting. It is dark, it’s very sculptural as shingle-style should be. It doesn’t have one built in sound speaker. It doesn’t have a television. It has a telephone down the hall. The architecture is evocative because it’s a shingle-style house built with the idea in mind of a client who went on the grand tour and came back and said ‘I love a vaulted hall that I saw in this monastery’ or ‘I love the Diamante pattern of these vases on the side of the stair.’ Those influences make the house textured and suggest a rich history.

A new headquarters for Historic Hudson Valley was a very special challenge. This group is in charge of great house museums near New York — so in way they are the curators of a collection of architecture. Our design relates to the history of the area without competing or directly referencing the houses. We were able to make grand public rooms for programs and meetings that also display collections. The building also has offices and archival storage spaces. Yet it all holds together in one unified design.

On his design toolkit
The most important tool is the creative spirit of the designer. This is not an office where I say that the name on the door is not the only designer. There are several designers here — I’m just one of them. To make that tool effective, we explain to our clients that we don’t come up with five alternative schematic designs. We believe in drawing our best scheme first. Even if we have to regroup and revise.

Hand-drawing is also important. We always start with pencil and paper. We think that physical connection between your brain and hand doesn’t quite happen for our kind of architecture if you’re typing commands into your keyboard. There’s a physicality to architectural design that demands hand drawing. And for inspiration we have a 10,000 volume library.

The technical part is important. We have a full-time spec-writer who keeps up with technology and we have a full-time 3D person. The 3D stuff is great because we can show the clients, walkthroughs and we can print models in-house. Having someone here who can do beautiful watercolors is another kind of tool. I do not think that there’s one right method for each person who works here. We do not impose a standard graphic formula. If they have a particular talent for drawing or painting in a certain way, I encourage them to do that. I’m not worried about someone looking at our work and being able to identify the different people who contribute. I’m not trying to make our work homogeneous.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
I do think that there are great opportunities for younger architects because of the division of the profession into specialties. This is amazing because a young firm can win a commission to do a high-rise. I look back to SOM and I think of the people who designed the Chase Manhattan building. They studied for years and practiced for decades before they had the opportunity to do that. Everything that had to do with the design of that building was within the walls of that one firm — literally within their office. At that point, there were only 6 engineers alive who were capable and competent to design the structural system for that skyscraper. Everyone had to work really hard and was on a slow track. Then I look at firms today that I hadn’t heard of 5 years ago and they are doing a major building. This is an opportunity for some. But it’s a bad thing for our profession because it means that the marketplace, the developers, the clients and the institutions have been able to chop up what was under one firm’s control into separate commodities where you get a design architect who gets paid very little. Their name is on the door — on the building. Then you get an architect of record who is churning out thousands of construction drawings and documents, and then you have all these other consultant specialists. A lot of it is necessary because the world is getting more complicated. But, it’s a far cry from the days when an architect like Ely Jacques Kahn who did the building across the street here (Two Park Avenue), was considered the master of the setback. Here was an architect who learned how to interpret the 1916 zoning-code to create ziggurat-like compositions. His firm designed and drew everything- from the massing to the ornament — design drawings and construction drawings. It was an entirely different enterprise than the trend today when architects are handed an envelope diagram by a consultant and many have working drawings done by other firms.

On advice he would give his younger self
I wouldn’t have given up as quickly something I tried early on, which is to do what’s now called affordable housing. I believe that all housing should be beautiful and I believe that there isn’t a large incremental cost for excellent design. I tried pursuing this when I first graduated from architecture school and it didn’t work out because we didn’t have our act together and we didn’t understand the financial part of it. We only pulled off a renovation of one building, which came out really well. Then when we tried to step it up, we ran into bureaucracy and red tape. I would’ve loved to have been able to find a way to prove that you can actually build beautiful, detailed low-income housing. This shouldn’t be impossible, but you can’t do everything.

Design Manifestos: Shawn Keller of CW Keller and Associates

Shawn’s work embodies the shared vision of CW Keller and Associates. From modest beginnings, literally the basement of Charlie and Shawn Keller’s family home, CW Keller has continued to grow and evolve into one of the most technologically advanced fabrication shops in the US. The shop’s cornerstone is embracing the process, not just being experts in a material. According to Shawn, “the process unlocks the potentials of the materials.” To this end, the company has never been about responding to current trends, but instead innovates within its own expertise. From opening a custom furniture retail store in 1980, to purchasing its first CNC in 1995, to branching out into custom concrete formwork in 2011, Shawn has never been about staying put and settling into a niche. He loves challenges.

Prior to CW Keller, Shawn Keller spent ten years as a senior project manager for a Boston architectural firm, where he worked on the design and implementation of programs for a broad spectrum. He continually draws on that experience in his interaction with current clients and their architects, collaborating to find the best way to achieve each project’s design and budgetary goals. Shawn is a graduate of Syracuse University. Modelo spent some time learning about some of the challenges that Shawn takes on and the shared vision of CW Keller and Associates.

On becoming a fabricator 
My father started CW Keller. Our firm started as a custom woodworking company and my dad started it in the basement of our house where my brother and I were growing up. It was coffee tables and dining room tables. He was the industrial arts teacher at Wilmington High School in Wilmington, Massachusetts and was doing this on the side. It got to a point where he could transition to making it a full-time job for himself, and moved it out of the house into a small shop in North Andover, Massachusetts. Over the course of the past 45 years he grew the business up as a commercial woodworking firm that grew up through doing residential and then some commercial. Then we got into retail in the 1980s and 1990s. Estée Lauder was our main client through that period. We were building Origins cosmetic stores for Estée Lauder on a national basis, which was a great run. Estée Lauder was interested in doing a much higher-end retail environment so we went through multiple iterations of their stores, building them out nationally every 4–5 years. Then they would renovate and do them all over again. What that did is essentially allowed us to grow the infrastructure of the firm to support that client.

Ultimately what happened is the retail market started to slow down pretty dramatically in the late 1990s. It put us in a position to re-evaluate where we were going to be as a company and get back into more commercial work in the Greater Boston area. The challenge that we faced as a fabricator is there were a lot of people in that space. Here to New York City, there are hundreds of woodworking companies that can do reception desks and wall panels and the things that we’d be bidding against. Margins get driven down and competition is pretty fierce. We saw the growth of our company as enjoying doing things that were the heart of harder projects. Contractors would start to come to us and say ‘we’ve got this project, but we’ve got this one piece that everyone else keeps saying no we’re not interested in doing that.’ That was the part that we loved doing. From 2000 through to today we have aggressively gone after the hardest stuff out there. What’s the most complex thing that people are doing? We had some lucky relationships that were created with firms here in Boston and Cambridge. Nader Tehrani, Mark Goulthorpe — designers who are really pushing the envelope of what could be done and forcing us to step up our game to be able to do those projects. It’s blossomed from there.

On discovering his voice as a fabricator
It started with the early relationships that we started to build. My background is in architecture and I went to Syracuse for undergrad. Then I came back to the Boston area and worked as an architect in Boston for about ten years. What that helped me do was sit on that side of the table: design team with client with general contractor. What are the issues that they face in getting a project designed and budgeted and under construction? I was able to take the knowledge that I had living in the architecture-side of the business and start to apply it to how we approached our relationships with architects and general contractors. I knew what meeting they had just come out of before they came to meet with us and the issues that they had. Where we started to be more successful was in our ability to go to contractors and architects and say ‘we understand what you’re trying to do here, we see the drawings, we understand the goal and we’re going to bring a design-sensibility to helping you figure out how to build it.’

That was helpful in building relationships with a lot of architecture firms. We became a go-to team for them to be able to say, ‘before we go to our client, we’ve designed this thing, can you give us feedback? We’re thinking the budget for should be x, but we don’t want to design it, put it into a set of drawings and have the budget come back twice that.’ We developed a very collaborative relationship with the firms up here and then extended into New York by being a collaborator in feedback of concept. That allowed us to grow what are now the fastest growing parts of our business: our engineering team and our design team. We’ve gone from being a fabricator that was 80% production (guys on the shop floor building and using machinery, a handful of engineers and project managers) to essentially 50/50. We’re 20 engineers, design engineers and project managers and 22 fabricators on the shop floor. We’re trying to straddle that world between design and fabrication by building our engineering team to support the design side.

On specific principles he strives to adhere to
Profitability as a starting point. We believe strongly in transparency. We’re often asked to get involved with projects where the general contractor will say ‘we’ve talked to all these other people and no one can do this. Who’s your competition? Who else can do this?’ Our feeling in many cases is there isn’t a lot of others doing the things that we’re doing. The challenge we face is that the industry in many cases is still stuck in a mindset of ‘as a client I need to see 3 competitive bids for me to feel comfortable picking CW Keller as the fabricator.’ Often there is no one else who’s going to bid it. Or, bids may come in but they’re so apples to oranges that it’s hard for people to make decisions. One of the things that we’ve really tried to strive for is transparency of cost. We are open and willing to provide our clients with full documentation of the cost to build something. Here are our hourly rates, here are the profit margins that we’re trying to achieve and here are our engineering hours that we’re estimating. We’ve found that we’re able to start really changing the dynamic of how we work with our clients. We have architects that we’ve worked with, STUDIOS is a great example. They have offices in D.C., New York and San Francisco and we’ve been working with them for ten years. They have a track record now of working with us in this model, where they’ll specify us for a part of a project, knowing that we’re willing to provide them and their client with that level of transparency. And there’s a level of trust that’s been built up over a history of ten years of projects. It’s the only way we’ve been able to figure out how to work more successfully in projects that are so complex that there’s tons of risk associated with them.

On the evolution of his role 
The evolution began with retail starting to go away and being an organization very geared towards: copy, paste, repeat. When we started to move back into the commercial and residential markets, everything is a one-off. You have to be a bit more flexible in building something once and you’ve got to get it right the first time. Then you’re going to go on and do something completely different. Where with retail, you’re going to build the same store fixture 40 times. Project management comes pretty simply, you just click a button and the drawings are there.

Now, we’re a custom woodworking company but we’re starting to get involved in the world of concrete. How do we get involved in pre-cast-in-place concrete projects? We’re starting to take things that we know how to do and figuring out how to step into an industry where we have no idea what to do. We’re figuring out ways to collaborate with people in those other industries to educate ourselves and go through steep learning curves. This evolution has been possible by changing the structure of our company and growing that engineering and project management component allowing us to be a lot more agile in how we approached the variety of projects that we do.

The opportunity for us is taking what we know how to do as a custom fabricator doing very complex wood-related projects. How do we apply that to steel fabrication? We’re not a steel fabricator but we have an incredibly robust engineering team, some come from a steel background. We’re strong at 3D modeling and we are speeding up the modeling process by hiring people who just write code or just write scripts to automate processes. If you tell them what the steel fabricator’s going to need, they can start to automate modeling processes to make it very robust to provide a metal fabricator (who might be weak on engineering, but strong on machinery and equipment capabilities) where we can step in and be their engineering team. The same thing applies for concrete form systems. Now that we understand how concrete forms work, we can apply those same strategies to build a concrete form system to cast the canopies that we’ve done here in Boston, the Miami Science Museum and Gulf Stream Tank. We are working for the lead engineer for the Sixth Street Trestle, which is a ¾ of a mile long bridge in Los Angeles that’s been designed and the team’s now trying to figure out how to build a form system for this very complex bridge structure. Our team has been engaged to help them figure that out and the robustness of our modeling and engineering team allows us to step into those different markets. It’s been taking a company that was based around millwork fabrication and seeing how we can expand it into these other markets.

On recent projects that represent the firm’s unique approach 
There are 2 concrete canopies in front of the aquarium in Boston, called the Harbor Park Pavilion. That was our first large scale cast-in-place concrete project. We were doing a lot of work for Turner Construction and Utile Inc. was the design architect. The canopies had been designed. They’re double-curved concrete as cast-in-place. There’s no form system that exists in the marketplace to do double-curved cast-in-place concrete. Turner owned the project and a couple Project Managers reached out to us and said ‘we know you don’t do this, but can you come to a meeting with us, the architect, the structural engineer and the concrete team? Just listen to what we’re trying to do. Right now the plan is the concrete team is just going to ship hundreds of sheets of plywood to the job site, the architect is going to plot on paper sections through the canopy that’s 40-feet-wide. They’re going to tape them to the plywood and cut them out by hand and try to build a form-system on the job site. We just don’t think that’s the right way to do it.’

The strength of our company is CNC, we have large-scale CNC machines that are very good at cutting out very complex shapes that come out of the fabrication models of plywood or other materials. Having that infrastructure and equipment that we use to build other things was pretty simple once we realized what the team needed. It was pretty straightforward for us to build a form-system for them, send it to the job site as a kit of parts and have them assemble it on what they’re traditionally using for cast-in-place concrete. We used the analogy of you’re making a cupcake and you have your cupcake pan, which is a metal pan. You have a little piece of paper that has all the ridges on it. You fill that piece of paper with cupcake batter and you put it in this metal pan. You pull the cupcake out and it has the little ridges on the edge. We’re the paper in the system.

There are international companies that build form systems for concrete and they’ve figured out 98% of what you need to do in cast-in-place concrete. But what they don’t do is deal with double curvature or complex geometry. They like to do straight walls, flat floors, facets, maybe a single curve but as soon as you try to do a twisted surface, there’s no product available to do that. We just become that very thin interstitial layer between standard form systems and that complex surface that an architect’s trying to achieve. Harbor Park became a great opportunity for us because it was immediately published as ‘look at this project and what people were able to do. This is how they did it.’

The phone just started ringing. Within a year we had the contract to do the engineering and form system for the main aquarium tank for the Miami Science Museum. The best way to describe it as is the aquarium that we have in Boston. Six of those will fit in this one tank in Miami. From a scale-standpoint it was giant. The design was done by Grimshaw in New York and it’s essentially a martini glass shape that’s rotated. It’s three-stories in the air and supported on 6 cast-in-place concrete legs. You actually walk underneath it. There’s a 32-foot-diameter clear acrylic oculus that you look up through to see the underside of the tank. Then it’s open air above. The general contractor on that project is the same general contractor on the Sixth Street Trestle out in Los Angeles. They’ve said ‘great job here, can you come look at this project out in LA?’ It’s allowed us to apply a lot of the same methodology in other projects as we’re using in concrete form systems.

On his design toolkit 
Another influence for us has been how people like Mark Goulthorpe and Nader Tehrani have been using 3D modeling. That’s the direction they were going in their practices. Everyone was AutoCAD-based and everything was planned in elevation and section. They were some of the early adopters of 3D modeling software and we were doing a lot of work with them. We realized pretty quickly that we’d better be using the same software as they’re using or we’re going to get left behind. We can’t take a complex 3D surface and draw it in the software that we have because it’s like cutting a slice through an egg. Every slice is different. We had some projects that were great because they were very collaborative. In the C-Change project, Mark had a very robust team of engineers and modelers who were developing the 3D model of that project that our engineering team essentially got to shadow for about a year. We got educated from that team on how to do what they were doing and what software they were using.

We are exclusively Rhino-based as far as 3D modeling. We are on a trajectory to eliminate paper shop drawings within our facility probably in the next 18 months. Everyone on the shop floor will be interacting with Rhino models through laptops, instead of getting a 50 page pile of paper for whatever crazy thing they need to build. They’re going to open the Rhino model and just start interacting directly with it. We’re on a crusade to get our clients to not get shop drawings and we have companies, like STUDIOS, that have accepted that we will only submit to them a 3D model of the project. The other interesting part of 3D modeling is that it’s interesting to see architects designing spaces with the same 3D modeling software that we’re using. They’ll design an element using the software and give us the model and we’ll always ask if we can use the model for fabrication. 99/100 times they say no and we have to remodel it because they can’t assume the liability of us building off of what they drew. That’s something that we see architects and engineers starting to grapple with. If they’re going to put all this energy into creating a model of something that they want built, at some point we have to start to get them to accept the risk of ‘you drew it, we can build from it, your client’s going to pay us to model it all over again.’ Either engage us from the get-go to model it for you (which is what we’re doing in a lot of cases), or let us help you model it the first time with enough confidence that we can use it as a tool and not have to duplicate those efforts.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years and the firm’s evolution
We have been adopting a lot of fabrication techniques that were developed for the automotive industry and the boat industry. If I start on the construction-side of things, the concrete industry from a global scale is ripe for a huge disruption in how things are done. The industry is still based on the premise that you’re going to flood a job site with a tremendous amount of manpower and fabricate form systems, hand-bend rebar, place it all by hand and cast-concrete for structures. The ability to prefabricate concrete form systems, the same way the furniture industry has gone from shops like us building custom-wood desks to companies like office environments and these other larger companies building systems furniture. The systems furniture has the acoustic panels in it, it has the electrical in it and it shows up as a kit of parts. You have to put it together and you have a work station.

When we did the Miami project, we called our form system the ‘IKEA version’ of concrete forms because we didn’t assemble any of it in our facility. We manufacture very complex forms as kits of parts, each kit was probably 10–15 pieces that were all machined to only go together a certain way. There was a one-page document with no dimensions, no instructions, just an exploded view of how that piece went together. The premise of it was ‘I need to be able to give a semi-skilled workforce on a jobsite the information that they need to put together a very complex, double-curved structure together.’ They can’t cut it, they can’t modify it, they just have to put it together and trust that when they put the model together it’s going to create this very complex shape. In the concrete industry, we see it continuing to adopt means and methods for prefabrication of form systems. The other big side of that is that we have to get to a point where we can do localized manufacturing of components. We’re in New Hampshire. Working regionally it’s fine, flat-packing systems and putting them on trucks and shipping them to Miami is ok but it’s not the ideal situation. You have a lot of shipping costs associated with sending that much material to Miami. Building the form system for a ¾ of a mile long bridge in New Hampshire and sending it to Los Angeles is just not feasible.

The approach that we’re starting to take is partly us looking at localized temporary fabrication facilities. The technology and machinery has evolved enough. For the project in Los Angeles, we go in, rent a facility for 18 months, put two CNCs in the facility, hire local labor to operate those machines under our direction and do all the engineering in New Hampshire. We output information to the CNCs in Los Angeles and it’s not different than us sending the information to the CNC that is 50 ft away in our shop. We do all the fabrication at the job site or within a mile of it. This eliminates or reduces trucking dramatically. You’ve leased the equipment, you give it back and you move it to the next job site.

The other side as far as how our company’s going to evolve is going to be around strategies that accelerate the process of doing analysis of concept for clients. They’ve designed the inside of an auditorium in Atlanta as a project that we’re working on for the Alliance Theater. It’s a very sculptural interior for a 650-seat theater. They’ve designed it — it’s a beautiful rendering. The client loves it. We have to quickly be able to analyze that and give them feedback on cost so that they can very quickly iterate design to get that cost to align with the client’s budget. We’re building sophisticated tools around the Rhino platform and working with architects who are working in Rhino. These tools allow us to quickly analyze what they’ve modeled and give them robust feedback on cost, so that they can make the right decisions to move forward. Internally for us it’s growing those capabilities. Instead of it taking us four to six weeks to put a bid together of something that’s that complex, we can do it in 3–5 days.

On advice he would give his younger self 
One of the things that we have recognized over the past few years is that we need to build the best team possible. We’re working on projects that are pushing the envelope of what can be done. In the past, we had a team and they were a great group of talented people, who were good at what we had been doing for 20 years. They were excellent at building retail store fixtures. What we tried to do was take those same people and get them to be good at modeling concrete form systems. Some of them got it and some of them just didn’t want to get on that bus and go in that direction. We struggled with how to evolve the company and try to keep everybody that we had on board, instead of making strategic decisions around the right team. The challenge is twofold: getting the right people and the right talent to be able to do that and being ok with having some people get off the bus.

The other is the analogy we use: combining craft. We’ve got men and women on the shop floor who are incredible craftsmen and craftswomen. They know how to build and put things together and they take a lot of pride in the quality and workmanship of things that we put out the door. They’ve been doing it for their careers. Now we also have mixed into that a younger, more diverse engineering team. The best way to describe the culture-clash that we have right now is we have 4 people who drive Priuses to the shop, and a parking lot full of pick-up trucks with camouflage on them and the John Deere logo. You’ve got this very diverse talent-base interacting with each other. If I had to go back and say something to me 10 years ago, it would be ‘you’ve got to get out in front of this. You’ve got to be figuring out ways to build a culture and a team that is going to collectively embrace this challenge because that’s been a fairly rocky path for the organization.’ Going too long with people who were disgruntled with the direction that the company was going and trying to convince them that they should come along as opposed to saying it’s ok, you would be better off somewhere else.

Design Manifestos: Bill Baxley of Leo A Daly

Bill Baxley is a designer of exceptional creativity and vision, especially notable for his client-centered approach at Leo A Daly in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He emphasizes dialogue, transparency, and accessibility in his practice, resulting in designs that serve the public by creating meaningful spaces. His work in the corporate, public, and educational realm has been awarded locally and nationally. He emphasizes the message of sustainability not only through the selection of materials and methods, but by creating work that will meet the evolving needs of clients and the community for generations. Modelo spent some time learning about what inspires the designs behind Bill’s award-winning projects.

On becoming an architect
My father was a civil engineer in the Coast Guard so we moved around a lot. I started thinking about architecture by chance. I was coming to the end of high school and was expected to go to college. I realized I needed to focus on something. Architecture looked interesting to me but the high school I attended didn’t have classes that gave me much exposure to anything relatable.

This was a leap not really of faith, but of interest. So I jumped. Most architecture schools required a portfolio to get in. I had to manufacture one in between football practices. I laugh when I think about that. I can’t believe I got in anywhere.

On discovering his voice as a designer
That’s something that’s ongoing. I feel like I am learning to speak, but the tone of that voice seems to change with regularity. I realized I had something to say, when I could offer perspective which was based on experience. Because we moved around so much, by the time I was 15 I think I had lived in or travelled to all 50 states. I was constantly having to meet new friends and discover each place that we lived rather quickly. This has translated into a, robust and expansive discovery process about where it is we’re doing the work and who it is we’re doing the work for. Our designs are formed by what we learn initially and how that learning is transformed and built upon throughout the design process.

On joining LEO A DALY
I’m in my sixth year at LEO A DALY. I was interested in joining LAD because they were primarily an engineering-focused office and did not have a recognized design voice here in Minneapolis. The idea of helping to create that culture, to hire people that were interested in developing that -forming it out of this amazing legacy that LEO A DALY has cultivated over the past 100 years was exciting. We are making great headway in terms of building that group and expanding the types and range of projects that we get involved with. We do a lot of different things in a lot of different places. Our ability to be dexterous about programs, different clients, different locales has been formative for our process.

On principles he strives to adhere to
The process of inquiry is really important for us. Not to over-simplify but we do a lot of listening and a lot of asking of questions when we start work. That takes the form of research, of visiting places, and of meeting lots of people, before we start really thinking about the work itself. That’s true for different scales of projects and different typologies. It’s gearing ourselves, and our clients, to get rid of our preconceptions and being able to re-see each problem in a new way.

On his role as Vice President and Director of Design
I work with an amazingly talented group of architects, engineers, and designers at LEO A DALY. Sometimes my role is about the creation of things, but most of the time it’s about making sure that what we’re creating is the right thing, challenging the status quo and developing a culture here in the office. I’m the guy that’s asking all the questions that’s poking around the edges to make sure we’re looking at the right things.

On recent projects that represent the firm’s unique approach
We recently completed three projects that are quite divergent. The first was a memorial that we did in St. Paul on the grounds of the Capital. It’s a memorial for the fallen firefighters of Minnesota. LEO A DALY been involved with some significant memorials, the most recent being on the Mall in Washington D.C. with the World War II Memorial. This Fallen Firefighters Memorial project was pretty unique for our group here in Minneapolis. We spent a lot of time with firefighters, their families, and the Capital Planning Board in St. Paul to shape an amazingly unique and wonderful experience. It’s a simple expression but a poignant experience for everybody that visits. It is mostly constructed of weathering steel. Within the pattern of memorials on the mall, ours is the only structure that has a lid on it. It’s a very powerful experience in which we leveraged our questioning of materials and how they’re used, what a memorial experience should be like, and how it celebrates the sacrifice of these fallen firefighters.

On a different scale, we’re repositioning a campus for the National Intelligence Agency in Bethesda, Maryland. This was the old Geospatial Agency campus; it’s right along the Potomac River. It was built in the 40s and was a collection of mostly windowless old brick buildings. Director Clapper of the National Intelligence Agency wanted to build an embodiment of the post-9/11, more cooperative way of working for the 16 different agencies that have offices in this complex. In the architecture, we envisioned a continuous field of security climates and exterior spaces that could celebrate the place- the idea of a campus stitched into a neighborhood. It allowed us to explore the nature of a cyber facility, how it could be repositioned for the future, and how its engagement in the landscape could talk about a new way of working for this group.

We also just finished a headquarters building for The Toro Company here in Bloomington, Minnesota. It’s essentially an office building but it also engages the landscape in a way that’s really compelling. What was interesting for us about this project was to study the Toro products themselves. They follow a very definite methodology and tectonic of how these products go together. Our building, in a very simple way, reflects this understanding of the equipment itself and how the products shape the landscape. It is a very simple parti but it expanded their understanding of what their working environment could be and also tells a really great story about Toro itself.

On his design toolkit
I’m kind of an old-school guy. I do a lot of sketching but I actually do a lot of physical modeling. My favorite material is manila folder. I think it grew out of necessity because there were always piles of manila folders around and it was always easy for me to get some glue, some tape and some scissors or an Exacto knife and get some ideas going rather quickly. Sometimes we’ll take photographs of them, we’ll scan them and we’ll start to study the physical aspects of projects.

We’ve been on a full Revit platform for some time now, along with Rhino, Grasshopper, and Adobe suite as our main digital tools. Those are tools that our very talented designers use much better than I do. Our design ideas tend to be grounded in this very analog, haptic realm that we share with our clients. What’s fascinating is that we can take those into the digital realm and just study them in ways that we’re envisioning while we’re folding manila folders and doing sketches. We’ll kind of do this back and forth until we lock in and then the digital format takes over.

On the state of design software today
It’s amazing actually. What’s amazing is how quickly things are evolving and changing. There seems to always be a new way of looking at things- VR is coming onto the forefront here and I think in a few years that’s going to be amazingly transformative. Our workshop has many tools. One of the challenges we have is using the right tool, and using it at the right time. Maintaining our robust design environment is incumbent upon us being smart about the tools we use and know when to change them.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
There seems to always be this immense pressure on doing more for less and doing it quicker, and doing it more intelligently. I don’t think that’s going to change. It seems we’re in this discovery process about what these tools can do for us. Hopefully we can begin to leverage them in a way that isn’t simply reactionary or revelatory. I’m looking forward to a more congruous process when these tools become more integrated. Maybe it’s generational. The way we think is different than the way these subsequent generations will think about and use digital tools.

On the future of the firm in the next 5–10 years
For a firm that is 100 years old, in many ways we feel like a boutique group. I hope we maintain that sense of flexibility and nimbleness. We do a pretty robust job of building information modeling (BIM) but in terms of the leveraging of these digital tools from a design standpoint, I feel like we’re still in the crib. I believe this will also enable us to balance expertise and skill sets within our workplace. I’m looking forward to those two things coming together in a way that robustly increases our ability to leverage these digital tools from a design standpoint. I am certainly excited about the possibilities of that.

On advice he would give his younger self
This is so easy to say in hindsight- but I would tell myself not to be so timid. To be unafraid of messing up. What I mean by that is I have had a wonderful wealth of experience really early in my life, which gave me confidence in just about any situation, but sometimes it’s good to let the provocateur take over and create a little more imbalance. It will force to you to change your stance, and perspective and always re-see things in a new way.

Design Manifestos: Matt Baran of Baran Studio Architecture

Matt Baran founded Baran Studio Architecture in 2010 at the peak of the Great Recession. In his spare time, he worked on concepts for architectural robots that shifted their form and location to adapt to various contexts. This work won him an AIA award in 2006, and a full scholarship to UC Berkeley to complete a master’s thesis on adaptable robotic architecture. Upon graduation he began to teach at UC Berkeley and the Academy of Art. He also worked on the construction of a dwelling that employed the adaptive theories he had been exploring academically. These efforts were the beginning of Baran Studio. Currently, Matt continues his efforts, working closely with staff and clients to further explore architecture that is closely adapted to its context. Modelo recently spoke with Matt and learned more about his robotic approach to architecture and what inspires his designs.

On becoming an architect
When I was younger I was interested in fine arts, and I was doing a lot of sketching, drawing and painting. I realized that because I’d come from a very modest family background — a working-class background — to survive I needed to do something that was going to pay. Fine art didn’t seem like it was going to do that. I was looking through a course catalog and saw a drafting class at a community college. I thought I’d give it a shot. I thought that’s what architecture was — drafting up homes or something. I thought ‘well, it’s good enough, I’ll work on this for a while and see where it goes.’ I had some help from some family and they guided me towards university. I got into USC, and when I arrived they basically re-trained me and I started to understand at that point that architecture was art — not just drawing preconceived-looking houses. They started forcing me to think about things more abstractly. I was excited at that point and it took off from there.

On discovering his voice as a designer
For architects, it’s a combination of experiences. You can guide your voice on some level and it just sort of happens to you on some other level. When you’re younger you just try everything and you see what other people are doing and you see what’s in the magazines. When you’re being trained, you’re experimenting and trying to develop a voice.

Coming up into the late 80s and early 90s there was a lot of Deconstructivism theory that was going on, and that still factors into my work and my voice now. I’m not so interested in traditions of order. Earlier on I was influenced by my social class background, and for me there was a required resourcefulness and improvisation that went into who I was. There is part of me that was looking at more unconventional places and unconventional means of construction because I grew up around that.

I’m still very interested in places that have been erased, such as spaces under the freeway and places that were considered undesirable. I try to look at those places and say ‘what can I extract from them? How do you find beauty in places that are traditionally considered not beautiful? How do you take advantage of what’s there and try to bring it up? And not try to “fix it” but try to actually take what’s there and bring out the positive in it?’ A lot of Oakland and Detroit is like that, San Francisco has some of that as well. I’ve been working with developers and clients that are interested in those places. You have to work with them to find a way to take what you had, from context to budget. How can you take an inexpensive or common thing and make it into something uncommon and give it a voice — let it be beautiful as opposed to being considered an unfortunate necessity? That’s how a lot of the work we do evolves.

On starting his own firm
That was another thing that was out of necessity. Speaking to this idea of improvisation or resourcefulness- the economy had collapsed. I had gone back to school; I was tired of working for other people. It wasn’t exactly how I would do things, and I didn’t feel a lot of architects were willing to do the things I wanted to. I went back to school, retooled, and thought about some of these ideas I had. In the process I actually did a development project, where I was the developer, the designer, and the builder. I started being able to express some of these concepts in the work. But when I came out of school after getting the degree, there was nothing. There were no jobs. It was a desert for architecture. So I just taught because I had a Master’s. I started teaching at Berkeley and at the Academy of Arts. I continued some of these ideas in the courses that I was running and then started to express them in the built projects that I was doing. It just took off from there. The economy has rebounded and it seems to all be going very well. The work has evolved out of those initial ideas. I started the firm because there was nothing else.

On how his approach has evolved
Some architects choose to look at evolution as striving toward greater ‘consistency’ and some architects choose to see it as a process of change. I’m more interested in the latter. We’re always trying to adapt the design process and language to the given problem. The office is collaborative, and people are always bringing ideas to the table. I try to be as open to those ideas as possible. I think it’s inappropriate when the same design is used repeatedly. There are architects out there that are doing that — Gehry is the obvious one. They have a signature and they do it if they’re in Dubai, New York, or Minneapolis. Alternatively, it is possible to take a process and apply it. You have a process that looks to context and looks to function. It’s a time-worn thing but it’s gotten lost because people are looking at everything outside of architecture that they can find.You can look to elements that simply inform architecture and it suddenly becomes a very radical thing again. There are other architects who are more famous out there doing this now, like Big or OMA. They have a process that is very based in analysis and research and looking at program, looking at context and letting all those things come together to form the architecture. There’s this idea that it designs itself. That’s where we evolve constantly because every project- at least in its best state- is a new opportunity to develop a form, space and language that is unique. Every project is a new opportunity.

On recent projects that represent his unique approach
We have an apartment building in Oakland where we are taking an old warehouse and repurposing it into both parking for the building and loft space. We’re taking a piece of that building down and building up a new structure that’s interacting with the existing one. We’re taking an existing condition and using it to inform the new design, we’re finding a way to connect those things. It speaks to a lot of what we do, we adapt.

We also do a large number of mini-lot subdivisions in and around West Oakland. This often results in an increase in density, which is one of the more sustainable urban strategies you can implement. Oakland allows you to subdivide and make smaller than typical lots as long as your overall project conforms to code. While increasing density, we also maintain livability. We take the initial mass, and clean them and cut them, pushing and pulling the as a response to immediate contextual conditions. We deal with issues of privacy and light and air — it’s functionality of space. Each move is a response to all those aspects of the given project. That deals with the adaptability idea.

The office was founded on these little conceptual robotic projects that were basically not only about that response to the site, but they were about how the site changes over time. The architecture responds to those changes. In one case, I developed a machine that clips itself to the side of the highway and moves along, unfolding itself into various sites. Program would grow out of what was available in that existing space. In one case study, what emerged was a truck stop, because the mapping process showed there were a lot of trucks and truck traffic and we wanted to make incremental improvements with respect to emissions. We thought we’d put a biofuel station and a center where they could learn how to run their trucks more efficiently. Other programs emerged out of it as well — a library, a grocery a skatepark, all emerged from the site.

On his design toolkit
We are interested in building on various levels, and I am excited by theidea that design, documentation and construction be more tightly bound. We have used BIM from our inception. BIM is a great tool because you can use it as you design to understand the things 3-dimensionally and how it will be built and how it will be documented. There’s no gap between design work and your model. There are criticisms of that and there are some issues that often times it’s working with very conventional considerations of how to draw a window. In many ways that’s the stuff we have to work with in the field, so it gives us an opportunity to take those conventions and see if we can’t turn them on their head in some way. It forces us to do that.

We rely a lot on the software because it gives you the opportunity to visualize these things as you’re doing them- with interior spaces that you can get inside of, which is challenging to do with physical models. And you can move through them. We’re starting to use VR technologies now, so we’ve managed to transfer some of our computer knowledge into VR models, so they can download it to a headset and you can use that to basically be standing in the space. However, even with advances in technology, we still sketch by hand and work with physical models. There is no substitute for that.

On the future of the firm in the next 5–10 years
Our impact is increasing; we’re having a greater influence on the neighborhoods that we’re in now. And we are expanding to other places. We certainly have larger project in terms of footage and dollar amounts, but I would say that our interest is in valuing projects on multiple levels, not just in terms of size or dollars, but in terms of our own values. We want to analyze new solutions that are unique to each problem — doing even more analysis, looking at deeper structures. A lot of what people refer to and look for the context say, ‘we don’t want this thing in our neighborhood because it doesn’t look like the building next to it.’ They’re thinking on a very superficial level about what context means. Context is many things that you cannot see and a character that maybe you can see it takes a longer and more extensive look. You have to walk further down the block. You have to go to the library or go look at old maps and understand the history of that place. You have to look to infrastructural or organizational issues that exist. Where do transit lines run through? What’s the history of that transit line? We have tools that can measure pollution levels, light levels and noise levels — all these things that are essentially invisible. My hope would be that we have more and more opportunity to expand our research and do extended analysis that will let the architecture develop out of a comprehensive understanding of a place.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
In the last few decades architecture lost a lot of ground in the area of construction. You saw lawsuits happening in the 70s which caused architects to give up some of the ownership of the construction process because they wanted less liability. Construction management companies took scope from architects. We’re taking on more of the builder role and also taking on the responsibility but the control of that. That affects the design. More recently, you’ve seen architects regain some of that control through CNC manufacturing and design-build processes. We’re very engaged in that. We are actively involved in construction, even all the way to taking on the developer role.

On the other side, change is coming from technologies that are evolving — even your little app like Instagram or YouTube or an iPhone. It allows people to generate their own artistic content. There’s a certain degree of danger in that, there are assumptions that get made, preconceptions that are perpetuated. Also in that process, everybody has a voice. The trouble is that when one person thinks that they’ve got all the answers and that they’re basically trying to wipe out everything else. We work in so many neighborhoods and with many neighborhood groups. My feeling is that you should allow for diversity of ideas, varied thoughts on what that city should be or what architecture should be. We have a lot of people who are looking for homogeneity and what I hope we continue to see is diversity in cities. There isn’t one over-arching voice that says ‘the city has to be this way’ and tries to level it. We’ll continue to see a range of ideas about what that city should be like- a diversity of ideas.

On advice he would give his younger self
Invest in Microsoft. (laughs) Hang in there- the profession is very slow moving. It’s hard to recognize that when you’re younger and you’re always in a hurry. You have to have some patience both for yourself-to let yourself evolve- and for the profession- to let the profession evolve. Sit back and look for the opportunities. I would say you just have to sit back and wait for the opportunity and steer your course. Your time is so valuable. It’s the most valuable resource you have. When you see an opportunity that really fits with what you’re hoping to do, take it. When you see one that looks like an opportunity where you’re making too much sacrifice to your goals, then let it go. I still have trouble following this advice even now because your risk aversion instincts kick in or whatever it might be. In any case, you make a choice about where to go and eventually you’ll be there. Choose wisely.

Design Manifestos: Jason Steiner of Mithun

Blending artistic vision with analytic expertise, Jason Steiner leads Mithun’svisual design team at the Seattle, Washington office and integrates digital modeling, performance analysis and visualization into the design process. With advanced degrees in environmental design and architecture, Jason assists clients in visually understanding and articulating their goals through the medium of graphic communication and employing technology such as Building Information Modeling (BIM). Modelo recently connected with Jason and learned about his digital design process and his inspirations for past, present and future designs.

On becoming an architect
I do not recall the exact moment in time when I realized I wanted to be an architect. I don’t recall having an abundance of Legos as a child, so that’s likely not the reason. My parents were not architects. I did not know any architects. My earliest career aspirations, at least those that I remember, included being a truck driver, carpenter or lawyer. In that order.

However, for as long as long as I can remember, I have had a sustained interest in building construction, solving complex problems, making things and drawing. These combined interests ultimately led me towards architecture as my choice of profession.

On discovering his voice as a designer
During my second year of college I was part of the first cohort required to take a computer graphics course. This was an initial pilot program intended to eventually fully integrate design technology into the academic curriculum. I was hooked and perhaps even obsessed. I was absolutely energized by my new ability to model and realistically visualize any space or form I could imagine. I could explore design ideas without limitation. This free exploration provided me with the ultimate facility; the mouse became my pencil and the screen my canvas. I am a minimalist and in practice employ an elemental, modern approach to design. I believe that great design emerges from simple meaningful concepts. Every design element has purpose, is intentional and essential. I truly believe that the digital tools I was exposed to early in my academic career were the single most influential part of discovering my voice as a designer.

On the evolution of his role at Mithun
I joined Mithun initially for a six month internship while I was completing my last year of undergraduate studies. I became aware of Mithun after I had seen Bert Gregory, then Mithun’s CEO and the current Chairman, give a presentation on the recently (at the time) completed REI Seattle Flagship Store project. The firm’s deep commitment to sustainability, integrated design and beautiful architecture resonated with me. After my internship, I went back for graduate school, then upon completing school, took a week off and returned to Mithun. That was nearly 15 years and hundreds of projects ago!

My approach to architecture has certainly evolved since joining Mithun. I listen more (and talk less). I fully appreciate the responsibility of design with a purpose, for positive change. I have a more inclusive approach towards design and completely embrace the complex collaborative process.

On principles Mithun strives to adhere to
At Mithun, the overarching principle we strive to adhere to is, “Design for Positive Change.” We are a design firm, and our design has purpose — to create positive change in people’s lives. I find the simplicity and ambition of this principle to have a profound impact on our work and approach.

On his role at Mithun
At Mithun, as a Partner and the Director of Digital Design I lead the firm-wide integration of design technology into the design process, help guide Mithun R+D and also work as a designer mainly on conceptual design for a variety of projects and project types. I am also responsible for much of our recruiting efforts of recent graduates and summer interns. I am fortunate, as I am allowed to focus on two things I am passionate about; design and technology.

I work to provide designers across all disciplines with the best technology available to produce meaningful and beautiful work. I am particularly interested in crafting the design process to take full advantage of the opportunities created by emerging and existing technologies. I believe that design technology should be integrated in a manner that enables an intelligent process and fluid design EXPLORATION as opposed to design EXPLANATION. Providing designers and project teams with tools enabling rapid design exploration enables our teams to work efficiently, make better decisions and communicate with clients and stakeholders in a visually understandable way. Our project teams and clients also have fun incorporating new tools and methods of working!

On recent projects that represent Mithun’s unique approach
I do feel that Mithun has a unique approach to design. Every process begins with listening. We design experiences, not objects and we believe each design is different, because each client and each site is different. We are inspired by urban and natural systems and beauty grows from richly integrated solutions.

Our work is inspired and formed by; 1. an alert sense for the needs and experience of the user, 2. a culture of constant curiosity and discovery, 3. a spirit of optimism and promise, 4. an abiding responsibility to our clients, community and environment, and 5. the patterns of nature, the vision of an organization and the soul of a city.

We focus our efforts where we can make the greatest impact on people’s lives; where they live, work and learn.

A few recent projects that stand out as representatives to this approach are The Sustainability Treehouse and Weyerhaeuser Headquarters at 200 Occidental. For The Sustainability Treehouse, the building form emerges entirely from the experience. Dynamic educational spaces designed for exploration of the site and ecosystem at the ground, tree canopy and sky are elevated within the towering corten steel frame. The experience captures the wonder of childhood exploration, placing environmental education at the forefront of meaningful experiences for thousands of annual visitors to take home, positively changed. With Weyerhaeuser Headquarters at 200 Occidental, our design approach intentionally honors the neighborhood’s existing architecture while enhancing the contextual character with a modern, deep green interpretation. This design response would only be appropriate for this project, on this site, for this client. The Novelty Hill Januik Winery is another example of beauty growing from richly integrated solutions as landscape and interior space work in harmony to elevate the human experience.

On his design toolkit
3D modeling plays an important role in our process. We made an intentional, and at the time challenging, decision about eight years ago to transition all projects and disciplines to a BIM workflow, specifically Revit. We had done a few projects using Revit and understood the enormous potential for a more intelligent process. At the time, we were typically building 3D models for all projects in Sketchup, AutoCAD and / or 3ds Max concurrently with the production of 2D construction documents in AutoCAD. The parallel processes were highly inefficient and not aligned with a real-time decision making process. The use of BIM allowed for all designers to collaboratively share in the creation and exploration of a 3D model, and concurrently produce the construction documents. Today, we categorize and focus our 3D modeling software / processes into three primary categories; BIM, analysis and visualization.

For the development of the BIM, nearly all of our staff is highly proficient in the use of Revit as both a design and documentation tool. Architects, landscape architects and interior designers all work within Revit, collaborating on the BIM in real-time, beginning in the conceptual phase of design. Regarding initial form generation and massing we use a variety of tools, most notably Revit, Dynamo, Sketchup and 3ds Max. For example, The Sustainability Treehouse Revit model was started on day one of design, as we were participating in a two-week design charrette with the entire project team (client, consultants, contractor) in West Virginia. This allowed us to immediately visualize and begin to communicate and study a complex structure and site. As much as possible, everything we do is linked together in a dynamic way, regardless of the program it was constructed with. We also still use pens, trace and cardboard!

For analysis, we have implemented Sefaira into the conceptual and schematic design process to help us understand the relative effectiveness of our decisions and use as a comparative analysis tool. We use the data from Sefaira to help us understand the relative performance of our design options and make more informed decisions as we move towards a design solution. One primary benefit of Sefaira is the ability to dynamically link the Sefaira “model” to our Revit design model and see the updated analysis in real-time.

For visualization, we primarily use 3ds Max / VRay and Lumion. We began using Lumion upon the initial release and have since integrated it fully into our digital design process and trained almost all designers at Mithun. The WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) approach is an important part of our process as it allows the design team to focus their efforts almost exclusively on the development of design. This allows for a more efficient allocation of our resources towards the design effort, and ultimately we can do better work. We believe in the benefit of a real-time collaborative design process with our clients and project teams, and Lumion enables this in a significant way. We aim to present “live” in real-time whenever possible. For Weyerhaeuser Headquarters at 200 Occidental, real-time use of the Lumion model was used extensively and at times exclusively throughout the City review process. We also employ Virtual Reality (VR), currently using the Samsung GearVR combined with both 3ds Max / VRay and Lumion. Experiencing design from the human perspective is an invaluable tool in making more informed decisions. We are in the process of implementing full VR into our process.

On the state of design software today
I am optimistic about the state of design software today, as it is generally developing rapidly. We currently use a lot of different software, each with a specific purpose within our design process. The current challenge is interoperability and the relative inefficiency of distinct workflows and processes, especially when they lack connectedness. I am most encouraged by the rapid advancement of virtual and augmented reality platforms, positioned to radically disrupt the design process in the near future. The “holy grail”, of course, would be to dissolve our three categories into one where we would be able to simultaneously connect the BIM, analysis and visualization, in real-time.

On the future of architecture in the next 5–10 years
Projects will continue to increase in complexity and necessitate even greater levels of collaboration and intentional inter-connectedness across disciplines and expertise. We will continue to build upon our understanding and research into the connections between the built environment and human health. From a design technology perspective, augmented and virtual reality will transform not only how we share our work, but HOW we work. BIM will continue to evolve towards a fully integrated and coordinated design + construction + FM model. Also, BIM will be as much of a documentation platform as it is a social platform. Project teams will collaborate in a real-time virtual world. For the next generation of designers, the ability to write code and participate in a virtual process for extended periods of time may likely be equally as important as the ability to draw.

On the future of Mithun in the next 5–10 years
We are committed to design’s ability to anticipate and address the challenges of the future.

Mithun will continue to embrace the integration of technology into the design process, helping us effectively address these challenges. We will actively recruit a next generation of designers, eager to participate in a design process much different than what we would recognize today. We will need to remain nimble and continually willing to redefine our process, expectations and roles.

On advice he would give his younger self
Looking back, I have invested an enormous amount of my life and career into design technology and architecture. Working on projects like the Sustainability Treehouse, where I have seen the real positive change in people’s everyday lives, is extremely satisfying and humbling. The effectiveness of our real-time model during the conceptual design phase generated much of the momentum and excitement that was instrumental in the project being realized. Our ability to do that real-time work as a part of the design process was built upon years of development, passion and commitment to doing meaningful work. I would simply tell myself two things. It’s worth it. Because, it matters.