when does a logo become a brand?

Stop me if you have heard these terms in the last 10 years: brand identity, branding, or brand strategy.

What is all the discussion about?  For starters it has nothing to do with cattle or ranching (thankfully).  It is about connecting -- connecting people to products, people to people, products to organizations, habits to businesses -- virtually every cognitive association you can imagine.  Most often it is in terms of capturing the elusive "market share" and how to captivate the audience that you seek for your business or organization.  Nonetheless, what makes a brand and why does the logo matter?

In many ways a logo is a brand, or the line between the two is evanescent.  The logos below illustrate three different companies with three different focuses (utility service, consumer electronics, food/beverage consumption) each with very strong brand connections.

What these examples further demonstrate is that each brand is more subjective than its logo.  What are the kinds of things that you think about Apple when you see its logo?  Expensive products?  High design?  Mock turtlenecks?  What are the kinds of things you think about AT&T?  Terrible cellular coverage?  Out of date phone company?

In the last 10 years, with the acceleration of communication media and the globalization of information (also called "flattening") there are exponentially more bits, bytes, and blogs (shameless plug) vying for your attention.  Therefore organizations are attempting to more easily differentiate themselves from the white noise and be identifiable.  Branding is about identity; how do I become recognizable?  All of the logos below are circles, yet many are immediately distinguishable as to their company and brand.

"Enough already," you say, "so when does a logo become a brand?" 

Well that is not quite the point.  A logo needs to reinforce a brand and be a part of a comprehensive brand strategy that makes it as clear as possible what the brand is.  This is extremely difficult because of how many variables exist in the equation.  For instance, if you are CBS, you have an interest in creating a brand identity to both senior citizens and 30-something adults (think "Murder She Wrote" and "How I Met Your Mother").  How can you appeal to one demographic without alienating the other?  The answer would be to create a brand that is identifiable because of its interesting programming that appeals to many different demographics.  Even so, there is no assurance that your message will be received correctly.  If Charter Communications is having issues transmitting TV signals, and the elderly woman in Pennsylvania cannot watch her show that she has been waiting all week for, will she be upset at Charter or CBS?   

While you cannot control everything, there are several key aspects to branding and ensuring that your message is coming across as intended:

1. Design Matters: our world today is highly visual and attention paid to design will matter for the uniqueness of a brand.
2. Consistency is Key: consistency in logo, trademark, message, slogan, etc.  All work together to reinforce the brand.
3. Simplicity: this may be difficult to achieve, but many of the most successful brands are simple and understated while their business may be diverse and global (e.g. Nike, Target)

Of course this only applies if you want to stand out from the crowd.  However, judging from the narcissism of our Millenial Generation this should be nothing out of the ordinary.  Happy branding!

(re)Designing Education

In the most recent campaign cycle, many politicians remarked about the need to reform education.  Beyond the rhetoric, this is a large and complex task; probably not appropriate for politicians to meddle in.  This video explains some of the issues that have developed with our education system and the education paradigm.  The need for redesign is clear, but how...and by whom?

HOT or NOT: Second Street SW Downtown Bus Shelters

Planning and design work has abounded lately in the bustling metropolis of Rochester, Minnesota.

• In 2008, the Rochester Area Foundation and City of Rochester led the Second Street Corridor planning project to create a strategy for future growth and development through the corridor as a principle gateway to downtown.
• This year the City of Rochester, in conjunction with Mayo Clinic, University of Minnesota Rochester, Rochester Area Foundation and Rochester Downtown Alliance, recently finished work on the Rochester Downtown Master Plan (RDMP).
• Soon to be forthcoming will be the Downtown Master Plan and Mobility Study which takes a comprehensive view of mobility in, and accessibility to, the downtown core.

With these planning documents, the stage is set for a significant amount of redevelopment and change throughout our urban center.  While planning is a great first step, success ultimately hinges on implementation. 

The seminal project--out ahead of the aforementioned planning documents--is the first phase of the Second Street SW reconstruction undertaken by the City of Rochester Public Works Department.  This initial segment runs directly in front of Mayo Clinic's front door and is arguably the first thing that patients and visitors see when they arrive in Rochester.  The project was complex and involved mass transit considerations, pedestrian crossings, greenscape improvements, lighting and other urban design elements, but today's HOT or NOT focus is on the four brand new bus shelters that anchor the First Avenue SW terminus. 

The verdict is...HOT*

Finally an urban design project in Rochester worth embracing and celebrating!  The main statement that this project makes is "design matters, and this is the kind of quality design we can expect from our City."  In my opinion, what influenced the design process the most was the multi-disciplinary team that developed a scheme that incorporates functionality, aesthetics, public art, safety, traffic calming, and landscaping.  

The shelters are monumental and iconic.  They stand apart from the buildings that line Second Street SW and yet are indicative of an homogenous design aesthetic that runs through the corridor.  The shelters provide bench seating with on-demand heat lamps, and exterior knee walls that surround landscaping.  Each shelter is differentiated from its neighbor by organic super-graphic vegetation artwork that is incorporated into the frosted glass panels.  These panels are also illuminated by LEDs that rifle through the color spectrum, thereby reinforcing their landmark appearance at night. 

An additional functional design element (that I can appreciate from experience) is the secondary overhang opposite the street facade.  As I mentioned, these shelters are four of the most trafficked bus stops during rush hour and can have a line that far exceeds standing room capacity.  With this secondary overhang, those individuals not fortunate enough to land a seat or space inside the weather protected canopy, can avoid the elements below a beautifully detailed glass canopy on the rear of the shelter.



Now you may have noticed an asterisk next to the verdict.  That is because there are a couple 'glitches' in the design that I take umbrage with.  The first has to do with the metal canopy.  I subscribe to the design theory that materials contain visual weight and that physics and gravity should influence material choices.  An example of this would be using heavy stone as a foundation to appear permanent and massive, while lightweight metal is used for sun shades that float out from a building.  In this design, the principle overhang is a metal clad canopy that is proportionally much too thick.  The steel beams that are within are very deep, but then the canopy is clad on all sides with metal panels and recessed lights as opposed to exposing the structure to lighten the visual weight (the secondary overhang, on the sidewalk is a much better example with lightweight metal struts and point-supported glass forming its canopy).  The solution to this issue is that the overhang should be much less massive or should be clad in an alternate material that doesn't connote levity.

The second design detail that detracts from the overall concept is with the quickness with which the LEDs make their way through the spectrum.  I may be in the minority, but I do like the LEDs both from a traffic calming and attention grabbing standpoint as well as a way to appreciate the artwork at night.  However, the frequent shifting of colors is almost too busy and distracting and ends up looking cheesy.  If the rate at which they changed was slowed, or if each of the four shelters remained on a distinct color, the effect would be much better. 

All in all, I am very pleased with this first effort in upgrading the appearance and expectations of our downtown.  I feel that it is an optimistic sign of things to come.  Our design community is increasingly aware of the decisions that need to be made and the City Leadership has realized that making sound design judgements will reap rewards with each successive project.  Even though the street light timing has changed on Second Street making it increasingly inconvenient to pass through this downtown stretch with its staccato rhythm of reds and greens, I still find myself desiring to take a stop and go drive to admire the beauty of Rochester's latest design installment.

Ignorance is Bliss (and funny!)

Not only is this an extremely honest and brutal portrayal of the Architect naivete, but it is an amazing website that I plan on using immediately to create movies of my own!



HOT or NOT: Fourth Street SE Bridge Reconstruction

Attention class, it is time for the first lesson of Urban Design 101.  There are two principle means of transportation along public streets: vehicles and pedestrians.  Alright, let's review:

1)  Which of the following are primary methods of travelling in a street right-of-way?
        A - riding a monkey
        B - riding a unicycle
        C - walking on a sidewalk
        D - driving an automobile

These two means of transportation represent the source of 90% of the design decisions that factor into a street section.  Therefore, if you cannot successfully design these two modes, you might as well give up factoring in the other secondary modes of transportation that may also need consideration.  These days it is difficult to get the relationship of these pieces wrong.  In fact, with all of the literature and education available on new urbanism, and downtown revitalization, I think you would be hard-pressed to screw this up.  Which brings us to our latest installment of HOT or NOT, the Fourth Street SE Bridge Reconstruction.

The verdict is...NOT

South side of 4th Street SE bridge

Do you see the problem?  Ignore for a moment the seasonal daylighting and lack of vegetation and imagine this in full summertime bloom.  Now do you see the design flaw?  I am going to break this down and explain why the most fundamental of design considerations was ignored for this project and, as a result, the overall success is compromised. 

[As a disclaimer, I need to mention a few things.  This is a vast improvement upon its predecessor.  The new bridge incorporates planters, quality materials, lookout niches, a narrowed curb-to-curb dimension, it includes planning for bike lanes in the future, and connects adjacent bike and walking trails in a much more safe and efficient manner.  There is a lot that is HOT about this bridge reconstruction project, and without knowing the true cause of this major design flaw, I cannot pin the NOT blame squarely on the designers.  As with anything in government and the "design by committee" atmosphere, this project had the potential to be screwed up at various points along the way.]

A frequent complaint of people who live in and around urban environments is that the street can feel unsafe.  This can be due to a myriad of factors, but often it is the result of pedestrian-vehicular conflict (i.e. pedestrians, when walking along a street, are intimidated by vehicles).  This feeling can be exacerbated by increased speeds of vehicles, and by bringing the pedestrian closer to moving vehicles.  Complete streets--or streets that are designed for multiple modes of transportation--tend to make for a safer pedestrian environment because they are ultimately reducing vehicle speeds and putting barriers between pedestrians and vehicles.  Creating a buffer between pedestrians and vehicles is the easiest way to increase the perception of safety on public streets.

This can be accomplished through several different singular strategies or combinations of more than one.

• Grade Separation: placing the vehicle and the pedestrian at different elevations
• Boulevard Plantings: placing vegetation or trees between the sidewalk and the roadway
• On-Street Parking: Dedicating a lane to parking to create more distance between pedestrian and vehicle

So here is the fatal flaw in the Fourth Street SE Bridge Reconstruction, they did not place the planters between the pedestrian and the vehicle.  This not only puts the traffic closer to the people, but it also pushes the people away from the edge of the bridge where they can take advantage of the views.  This is a huge error in design and has no cost implications to reverse (in design).  I am struggling to think of a single advantage to the current arrangement, but alas I cannot.

street section comparison

There will be more bridge reconstruction projects in Rochester's future, and I hope we can raise the level of thinking about these basic urban design decisions.  Frankly, this one has no excuse.



Anything you can do, I can do Modulor

When French architect Le Corbusier conceived of the Modulor Man, his intention was to bridge two disparate systems of measurement.  The anthropomorphic juxtaposition of mathematics and anatomy was a classical idea, yet his modern mind required a new interpretation.  This refusal to accept the most basic foundation of design thinking typifies the life and struggles of Corbu.

His inability to mesh this type of analytical genius with fundamental human comfort in his stark and high-modernist buildings remains his greatest failure.  While his imprint on the canon of architecture is unmistakable and his buildings are seminal, they lack to endurance of the classical works that he was attempting to supplant.  Pity, though.  The Modulor Man is so much easier to draw... 

Modulor Man superimposed onto Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man

Name That Penetration

The standard contract for a commercial construction project is between the Owner and the Architect.  Nowhere in that contract is there a relationship between the Owner and Mechanical Engineer.  What this does, in a sense, is make the Architect the face for everything design.  When the Owner sees how gigantic his roof-top unit is after it is installed, he doesn't call up the Mechanical Engineer, he calls the Architect. 

Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Architect to know enough about Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing systems to identify those items that have impact visually and architecturally on the design...in a perfect world.  In reality, this rarely occurs and the design is tweaked up until the last minute and often into the construction phase and pretty soon the Architect is clueless.  We are not without weapons in this fight.  The wonderful specifications and general notes contain language such as, "submit shop drawings showing exact locations..." and, "notify Architect of discrepancies..." and my favorite, "contractor to coordinate." 

Principle on my list of pet peeves, are penetrations through the exterior envelope.  These are not only spots for moisture and air infiltration, but they have a direct impact on the aesthetics.  Without a solid understanding of MEP systems and what elements need to penetrate the envelope and where they occur and which code they follow; you end up with a swiss cheese facade. 

So to illustrate the difficulties in coordinating all of the various mechanical trades responsible for affecting the design, it is time to play:

NAME THAT PENETRATION!

Fill in the blank (you have to you use more than one)

A  ____________________            Furnace Fresh Air Intake

B  ____________________            Range Hood Exhaust

C  ____________________            Dryer Vent

D  ____________________            Furnace Exhaust

E  ____________________            Toilet Exhaust

F  ____________________          

G  ____________________

H  ____________________

I   ____________________

J   ____________________

K  ____________________ 

Carpet is Evil

There I said it, and the sooner you can realize and accept the ills that carpet brings to our built environment, the sooner you can reiterate this sentiment to others.  Proselytize, my brethren!

Now many of you may be saying, "wait one second, I thought carpet was an amazing, functional, inexpensive interior floor finish that is desirable for anyone with young children or the elderly?"  I am going to explain to you why carpet isn't all it's cracked up to be, and in fact, you would be better served to rip it all out and start over. 

The case against carpet goes like this:

If someone walked up to you on a street and exclaimed, "hey! I have this fantastic coat I think you should buy.  It is soft against your skin and will protect you if you bump into things on the street or if you fall down.  Plus it has some insulating qualities so it feels warmer in the winter time.  It is much cheaper than Gortex or those other long lasting, high durability coats, and it comes in any color or pattern you desire!  Now, the only thing is if you have pets, or you smoke, or you encounter any moisture anywhere in the entire world, you will have to be diligent about dry cleaning it and keeping it exposed to fresh air.  You can never put it in a closet because then mold will grow all over it.  Oh, and I should mention that when you clean it, it will most likely spew all of the dirt, mold spores, and pet dander back into the air so you may want to be sure to be in a well ventilated space...and I should mention that when it wears out (and it will wear out) it will be significantly heavier due to all of the moisture and debris it has absorbed over its lifetime.  So, can I put you down for this coat, maybe one for each season?!"

Lynn Hauldren: Friendly carpet salesman? or viscious enabler?

That is the problem with carpet, for a long time the focus has been on the positive with relatively little emphasis on the negative.  However, recently with the sustainable movement, the perils of plush have made their way into the parlance of our times.  Specifically, many green rating organizations (Green Communities, MN Green Star, LEED, Green Globes, etc.) have virtually outlawed the stuff.  This has not been well received by manufacturers of carpet.  So their response is to discredit these claims to ensure carpet remains a healthy flooring alternative.  I am here to set the record straight. 

Facts: 

• Carpet was originally (and still is) a petroleum based product, meaning it required oil to make it.  Without digressing into the oil debate, we can agree that was not the best course of action.  So recently more "green" manufacturers have used other products including corn and recycled synthetics to create their carpets, which is a step forward unless the farmers are using chemicals or pesticides in their fields. 
• New carpet emits noxious chemicals from the fibers themselves and from the adhesives used to install them.  If you gots to have it, make sure you specify low VOC and formaldehyde emission adhesives and Green Label Plus (Carpet and Rug Institute) carpets and pads.
• Carpet is by nature absorptive.  They can absorb the following: new paint on your walls, pet dander, dust mites, fleas, dirt, pollen, smoke, mold spores, soot and ash, and odors.  "BUT WAIT!," the carpet purveyors exclaim. "All you have to do is regularly vacuum."  This sounds like a solution, but what is a vacuum? 
• The vacuum principle is simple, brushes and air currents kick up dust and debris from the carpet so that it can be sucked into the machine.  As with any suction, their needs to be a release or exhaust, which means that all of the air you are sucking into the vacuum has to come back out.  The vacuum attempts to let the clean air go through the filter or bag while the debris is collected.  The problem is that to maintain a solid vacuum, you need to have the filter and bag porous enough to not choke off the air movements.  As a result, particulates that you are removing from the carpet are redistributed via a high powered fan back into the air.  This is also referred to as 'robbing Peter to pay Paul.'
• Basements are the absolute worst location for carpet.  Basements are by definition below grade, which means they are surrounded by soil and ground moisture.  Concrete is a porous material and therefore with temperature and pressure differences will perfuse water over time.  Carpet is also porous...except when it gets clogged with dust, dirt, and debris.  When this happens, then moisture moving from below basement slabs is trapped above the concrete and below the carpet creating a fantastic atmosphere for mold and mildew growth. 

Personally, I will take a cold ceramic tile basement that may mean I need to wear slippers versus choking on the myriad hazards supported by that evil carpet.  And now you know as well.  (and as they say, knowing is half the battle)

HOT or NOT: Think Mutual Bank

A man's handshake tells a lot about the person.  Firm = strength, confidence, determination.  Limp = weak, timid, wishy-washy.  Rough = unrefined, simple, honest.  Smooth = sneaky, sophisticated, moisturized.

A building's design tells a lot about the establishment.  It reflects the values of an organization and their resolve and dedication to core principles.  It may meet purely functional and utilitarian needs, or it may try to awe and inspire, or it may attempt to grab attention in the hopes of bringing patrons through the doors.  In any case, many things can be read off the facade of a building and I think it is important to evaluate them.

In Rochester, Think Mutual Bank has been making waves by building new locations all over town as it grows into a premier financial institution.  Their success is not solely due to their mortgage products or interest checking accounts, but because of the emphasis they place on design.  This edition of HOT or NOT is discussing Think Mutual Bank's body of work in Rochester with a focus on three particular locations. 

The verdict is...HOT

Green Meadows

The three banks profiled here are selected for their dissimilar aesthetic but commonality of purpose.  All three vary widely in materiality (metal; stone; terracotta and glass), formal expression (lines and arc; butterfly roof; box and plane), and interior experiences (verticality; structural expression; transparency).  However, as different as each may appear, the importance placed on design is clearly demonstrated.  Think Mutual Bank has decided to construct buildings that are unique, iconic and emblematic of their organization.  Their brand announces triumphantly, "design matters."

West Circle Drive

If you ever had your father advise you that "you never get a second chance to make a first impression," or had your mother straighten your collar before you head out because "when you meet someone, your appearance speaks first," then you understand this tactic by Think.  If you want people to think you are a safe, secure, and professional company, then you need to project those qualities in your brand.  Banks have often been confined to the stereotype of classical architecture because of the connotation of permanence.  But the paradigm has shifted and now banks are about their services and convenience.  Can you name a bank that you have been to in the last 10 years that didn't have a drive-thru?  This freedom allows banks to make a different sort of first impression.

Shoppes on Maine

The HOT design goes well beyond first impressions.  I would recommend walking inside each of these three banks; not because I am advocating you change financial institutions, but because I was not allowed to take photographs of the inside of these banks and their interior spaces are equally as exciting as their exterior.  I cannot think of another exposed timber truss, butterfly roof that I have seen in person, not to mention in Rochester (West Circle Drive location).  All three of these locations feature abundant natural light, intuitive wayfinding, open floor plans and accessible offices.  I imagine it is as functional of a place for staff as it is for customers. 

Clarify of structure, simplicity of function...all around quality design.  Think Mutual Bank is tough to beat when it comes to memorable architecture in Rochester.

$1,113/sf

One of my absolute favorite designers is Italian Architect Renzo Piano.  Piano's work has spanned more than four decades and includes many of the most iconic architectural examples of the last 25 years.  His work oversees and in the United States has many attributes of modern architecture that I appreciate and attempt to emulate; structural expressionism, large scale geometric moves, lightweight materiality, sustainability, and awe-inspiring interior spaces.  My admiration for his work and practice make it all the more difficult to write this type of post that is not all praise and adulation. 

I recently was reading a critical review of his most famous recent completed works, the Modern Wing expansion to the Art Institute of Chicago.  This article in one of the major architectural publications lauded his beautiful and striking urban intervention grafted onto the classical structure.  The imagery was overwhelming even in print and having seen it personally during construction I could confirm its impressive stature up close.  My favorite component of Piano's presentation graphics is his frequent use of a large scale building section that illustrates the vibrancy of the layers and scale of the structure.  In this magazine, the page with the sultry black and white line drawings is often also utilized for some details about the project (architect, builder, material suppliers, etc.).  Such was the case with this project, and included in the description was the total square footage and total cost.  I have never claimed to be a math whiz, but I can do some simple division to calculate the cost/sf which is often used in architecture as a ballpark estimate of costs and a rule of thumb for complexity of design or degree of finishes. 

The number that I calculated made me wonder if I missed a decimal point.  $1,113/sf (1,113.63636 to be exact).

Now in full disclosure, I have worked on a few complex lab science buildings and a few high design buildings that garnered a higher level of interior and exterior finish...but I have NEVER worked on a building that cost more than $300/sf.  In fact, I had heard that upwards of $500 was the limit set for many of the most famous "starchitects" in the US.  This is more than TWICE that much!!  How could this be?

It begs the question, is it right to spend that much money on an art museum?  I can maybe rationalize that type of spending on a structure of higher significance but for simply a civic function it seems (dare I say) wasteful.  What message does this send to the public about what Architects do?  How must our non-profits and small business of the world feel when they scrape together $100/sf and design a building that they consider the Taj Mahal?  The biggest error in this whole thing is the tacit acceptance of this practice.  The glossy magazines believe this to be commonplace.  In the latter stages of a great recession, we should all understand the fundamental problem that this sort of excessive spending is having on our profession.  Who will stand up and say, "enough is enough?"

dollars per square foot of building as compared to automobile costs

This is precisely the kind of inattentiveness that has caused the public perception of Architects to wane.  The moment that people think that this sort of practice is common, is the moment we have reinforced the sentiment that hiring an Architect is a luxury and ultimately, "not worth it because they will design something that I cannot afford."  Many would argue that these world renowned architects cannot be limited by banal budgets or cost overruns because it compromises the design.  I am sorry, but cost, budget and fees are inextricably linked to design.  You can't sweep costs under the rug for the sake of an outstanding design.   

For the sake of design, and for its ability to transform people's lives, this blatant disregard for financial considerations is hurtful and unsustainable.  Hopefully, the next big project that is produced from Piano's studio makes up for the lack of realism of this project. 

Et tu, Renzo?

What is Architecture?

Good question.  Literal Definition:

1. The art and science of designing and erecting buildings.
2. A style and method of design and construction.

For me, it is the embodiment of more.  Yes, architecture has to satisfy certain criteria (i.e. keep the water out, not fall down, etc.), but what else can it do?  Can it inspire?  Can it awe?  Can it calm our psyche?  If it is true that less is more, then I have to contend that more is more.  The more energy, the more thought, the more symbolism, the more creativity, the more beautiful a structure or building can become, the more it becomes architecture.

Here is what some others think.  What do you think?

Architecture from MAYAnMAYA on Vimeo.

HOT or NOT: Knutson Construction Services

From the moment that the Architect jettisoned the "builder" portion of master builder, Builders and trades people have had it out for us.  Builders are focused on the simple and practical matters: how two materials are connected, what height cabinets are to be installed, where the bathrooms are located, when their check is supposed to arrive, etc.  Architects are concerned with the intangible and experiential: how are the two materials in dialogue with each other, what height cabinet is the most comfortable for a human, where are the bathrooms in relation to the bedrooms, when am I ever going to get paid, etc.  I believe the animosity is bred from each thinking they can do the other's job better.  White collar vs blue collar.  Sweating under the sun vs eye strain from a computer screen.  In reality, the best architect is one who admits what he knows and what he does not know.  I often defer to the man/woman in the field to see how they would do a task to help me understand the limitations and constraints.  From there, a design solution can be reached.

In the case of the Knutson Construction Services building in Rochester, the Builder is on display...and the Architect apparently fell asleep at the keyboard.  Remember, this is from the design standpoint, as their is plenty of construction expertise on display and I can find little fault in the implementation of the vision.  It is just that the vision is apparently clouded with other visions of bad buildings.

The verdict is...NOT



The theme is apparent: display the construction abilities of this full service general contractor and use the Knutson name and logo as an element of design.  I appreciate the prowess of the contractor both in the cast-in-place structural elements and in the consistency of masonry work.  My issue is with the decision to abstract the "K" to the point where it no longer is a recognizable allegory.  I am huge fan of abstraction, but there is a fine line between abstraction and a different idea all together.  In this case, the angles of the concrete and roof lines and even the retaining wall on the backside of the building are all different and unrelated.  I even tried to look at the front entry from a bunch of different angles to see if the concrete or shadows would all of a sudden reveal themselves in a DaVinci Code moment of recognition.  I got nothing.  Either this is a colossal oversight or there is an unbelievably masterful concept hidden that is beyond my (or anyone else's) comprehension.

I detest design moves for design moves' sake.  I believe that there should be more meaning behind each line on the page, or each material in a composition, especially when it comes to modern architecture.  For me, this design is largely unresolved.  It is a spec office building that is slightly askew on the site and uses great materials in an incongruous fashion.  Key details that make my skin crawl are apparent in the dominating blue rooftop louver screens that were an attempt at integrating with the architecture of the roof line, as well as the southwest elevation which apparently wasn't understood would be the face that most people would see driving north on Highway 52.   

Southwest Elevation, a.k.a. The Most Interesting Facade in the World

I guess when it comes right down to it, the means justify the end.  By that I mean the craftsmanship and skill of the Builder gives this building its design.  The Builder wins this round for showcasing their skill and making the Architect look foolish.  I consider this a good example of why we need a more critical lens for evaluating the built environment.  Just because something is different, doesn't necessarily mean it is good.  When you pass this building on Highway 52 do you automatically think, "wow, that is cool" or do you think, "hmm, that is different." 

There were elements and details that I did actually enjoy.  The monumentality of the cast-in-place concrete was fantastic.  As an entrance element it works really well, I just wish there was some more meaning there.  Also the detail at the top of the front curtain wall is difficult to achieve (such as small cap at the roof line) and shows some creativity in the assembly of the system.  But as I drove away I felt relieved that this building was tucked away on the northwest side of town and not in my neighborhood.  The next time you drive by, be sure to look for the elusive "K," I know it has to be in there somewhere!!

The Design Vacuum (excerpt from Architectural Record)

The following is an excerpt from this past July's lead editorial from Architectural Record.  It happens to include an excerpt from a writer named David Dillon, who recently passed away, but was a well known architectural critic for the Dallas Morning News.  This brief narrative exemplifies the struggles in our profession today and what I view as the design imperative that is necessary to reconnect with the public and make architecture relevant once again.

"...[There is] a huge vacuum in serious design commentary, in which architecture, the most public of the arts, is losing touch with its public -- its customer base, if you like -- and has less and less influence on how our communities are planned and designed.
...[in a recent poll of] six national critics about what was most important to residents in their part of the country...almost without exception the key issues were public and civic -- affordable housing, regional planning, access to transit, neighborhood preservation, congestion, sprawl, open space.  Architecture with a capital A, as in what are Rem Koolhaas or Frank Gehry up to now, barely made the list.  Which is to say that there is a big disconnect these days between what architects are doing and what the magazines are publishing, and what the public is doing and interested in.
Correctly or not, the public perceives the profession to be largely indifferent to its concerns.  They think architects are interested mainly in architecture as art, in architecture as business, or in defending the autonomy of the profession, which has been largely squandered, whereas they see themselves as custodians of the public realm and the social and communal elements of architecture and design.
...The great critic Ada Louise Huxtable once said that the public knows its right when it comes to the law, or Social Security, or Medicare; it's up on all the entitlement programs.  But it does not know what  it is entitled to in terms of architecture, urban design, or environmental policy.  One job of a good design magazine [OR BLOG!] it to help educate the public about its rights in these matters, because in the end its biggest ally is a concerned public, and its most powerful weapon the ability to arouse public opinion in the service of good design."

Eff Gehry

Since becoming an architect, answering the question, "what do you do?" in polite conversation has patterned a routine response.  I am frequently told, "Oh, I always wanted to be an architect," and "I could never do architecture because I am terrible at math," and the always classic, "Oh really?  Do you like Frank Gehry?"

At some point in the last decade, Frank Gehry supplanted Frank Lloyd Wright as the one name of an architect that people with limited knowledge of architecture seemed to know.  The fact that Frank Gehry has become the dictionary definition for 'architect' is not only disturbing it is revolting.  It is the equivalent of saying, "Oh you are a doctor?  Do you enjoy Dr. Kevorkian's work?  It is ground breaking, don't you think?"  Often having just met this person, I clearly do not want to offend them and I am graced with some tact, albeit a minute amount, so I have developed a clever answer that insinuates my disdain while acknowledging their right to enjoy his so-called work.  My response is:

"Gehry?  Well he certainly is a talented sculptor, but I am not sure he knows anything about architecture."

It is quite simple.  Frank Gehry appears to have no working knowledge of how architecture is created yet has successfully developed a brand all his own that brainwashes the unsuspecting masses.  Hats off to him for that.  Now giving credit where it is due, the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain was a seminal building of the last 25 years.  The ability of this building to attract visitors and transform a tiny port town into a vital and thriving tourist destination is truly spectacular.  But is it architecture?

From the dawn of civilization, the most primitive structure that man erected was the lean-to shed, one post and one plane.  Soon after, man used the post and beam to frame larger expanses of space.  Further down the road, the arch was utilized and its inherent structural strength allowed some of the mots awe-inspiring ancient architecture.  After the industrial revolution and the widespread adoption of concrete, more advanced structures were developed from the hyperbolic paraboloid to free form architecture like Ronchamp.  At each of these critical junctures in architectural history, the architect/designer knew that vocabulary of design and made buildings that served their function with an inherent understanding of how it was to be supported and remain static. 

Enter Frank Gehry and his method of multiple iteration model making.  Working at different scales and in different mediums, he creates model after model until the perfect form is produced.  A work of art...not architecture.  This perfect model is handed to a team of people who's job it is to figure out how to build it.  Take for example the Pritzker Bandshell in Millennium Park (Chicago).

 soft ribbons of metal emanating from the stagefront

Now in real life, the bandshell appears exactly like the model in scale, proportion and vibrancy.  But if you have a chance to visit the next time you are in Chicago, take a walk around to the backside. The view from back there is much less inspiring.

complex web of struts, beams, and supports achieve the desired effect

It is precisely this lack of integrity of structure that is the most appalling to me.  It is deliberately deceptive.  All of his architecture follow this same premise: "Look at the ribbons, aren't they beautiful:?  Pay not attention to the structure behind the curtains."  Anyone can do this.  In fact, there are probably professional artists who could achieve even greater success if they had the access to Frank Gehry's engineers and drafters. 

I prefer my architecture pure, simple, and coherent.  A wall that is true to its materiality and structure.  A facade that is composed and artful, but not fake.  To me, those have greater significance and are a greater addition to the built environment.  Frank Gehry's work belongs INSIDE the museums that he most often designs.  So the next time you view or experience a Frank Gehry building, make sure to look beyond the flashy exterior skin and formulate your own opinion of the 'architecture.'  Then the next time you bump into an architect at a party be sure to say, "Oh you are an architect?  What is with that Frank Gehry guy?  I just don't see what all the fuss is about."

HOT or NOT: B'Nai Israel Synagogue

For an inspiring example of "how to" for simple modern design, visit the B'Nai Israel Synagogue on the corner of 2nd Street SW and 7th Avenue SW.  In my opinion it is easily one of the top three examples of modern architecture in Rochester, MN, with understated elegance of its pure form and gently gestures combining to produce an iconic sculptural exterior. 

For the inaugural HOT or NOT post, the verdict is...HOT!

The reason this new house of worship has such appeal is due in large part to its approach and entrances as well as its material juxtaposition.  As you near the building, the walks lead you through an intentional experience of views in and around the composed facade.  While at the same time the materials soften at each entrance point to highlight the transition from exterior to interior. 

In comparison to the other buildings on 2nd Street, this one boldly states its purpose and wears its function as a skin for the world to see.  In contrast to a context of mimesis, the B'Nai Israel is purposefully unique; eye-catching and intriguing.  Passing along the building in the evening, the glowing clerestories and sidelites transmit light in direct vertical and horizontal beams while the name and figural menorah on the south facade is illuminated from below.

While the overall interior and exterior details are superb, the B'Nai Israel is not without imperfection.  However, the minor elements that detract from the design are extremely small and easily overlooked.  For me the two most apparent mistakes (if you could call them such) are the difference in thickness of the vertical brick as it turns and becomes the horizontal brick and the discoloration of the Ipe.  The brick "bookend" look is marvelously detailed and does have a distinct Perkins + Will shape (often and easier accomplished in concrete) but is just different enough to be noticeable.  My guess is that the horizontal is as thin as it can be, and the designer did not want to widen the verticals to match because it might be too bulky or take away floor area. 

The other issue, the discoloration of the Ipe on the facade is for me a lesson learned.  Ipe is a rich and durable wood, but on the south facade, with direct sun exposure, its color fades quickly.  What made the discoloration worse, was the overhang.  It created two tones of Ipe color thus highlighting the faded portion.  The B'Nai Israel has since re-stained the Ipe to recreate the original look, while the north and west facades have retained their rich color. 

Beyond these two minor details, the strength of detailing, material transition, and thoughtfully designed facades (including even the "back side" which faces an adjacent building to the east) are unrivaled.  For me, this building still grabs my attention every time I pass by and reveals new elements previously undiscovered that add to the magnificent design.

LEED for People

USGBC Unveils LEED for People, Granola Supplier ConAgra’s Stock Soars.

The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) took another step toward complete monopolization of the green building rating system with the August release of the LEED for People pilot program. Building on the tremendous success of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) brand and identity, the USGBC hopes to take a quantum leap forward in the certification and evaluation of the green lifestyle.

“This is exciting, I’ve long wanted to know just how ‘green’ I was being but I had no subjective criteria to benchmark myself against,” exalts San Francisco resident John Edmundson. With the release of LEED for People, average citizens can “certify” their ability to live with a light imprint on the Earth. Craig Somersby from the USGBC describes, “It is one thing to say that you are living a sustainable lifestyle. It is quite another to create a prescriptive, quantification rubric to certify that it is so. THAT is the true basis for sustainability by generating increased revenue for our organization.”

The LEED for People pilot uses the same well known system to label the levels of completion: Platinum, Gold, Silver and Certified. The level of completion is determined by a point scale with a total of 60 points available in 5 categories. The broad categories that cover the everyday lifestyle include Food and Waste, Energy Consumption, Hygiene, Clothing Materials, and Proselytizing.

Verification, a central tenant of the LEED system, is integral to the certification process. Once registering with the USGBC to begin the LEED for People program, one needs to hire a personal consultant known as a Provider. The Provider’s job is to explain how to live more green. This can be in the form of personal anecdotes or charming stories, as well as websites that they found and thought were “interesting.” The Provider will be involved from registration through certification at a typical cost of their annual salary based on their education (recent quote received at $25,000). The Provider works hand in hand with a Rater who will actually be following the registered individual around on a daily basis to confirm the compliance with the requirements. They keep with them a large tally sheet to check off the categories and the total number of points. The Rater will be involved once a preliminary checklist has been created and work with the individual until certification, if they approve. This cost can range anywhere from $20,000 to $50,000 depending on the level of certification.

Critics of the LEED for People pilot point to the excessive fees and the reliance on two separate consultants for the purposes of verification. This process requires the individuals expend money up front with the hope of receiving credit upon completion. Jack Wilson of Boulder, Colorado complains, “I was pursuing LEED Platinum and in the process of gathering my fecal waste, but my Rater left in his SUV to drive-thru McDonald’s. Then, after I had buried the waste in recycled cedar mulch and spit, he told me that I shouldn’t have used a plastic bag because it would not biodegrade and therefore I could not receive any points!”

While the new program will work through a study period of two years, the final program will be sure to incite anger, verbal abuse, and a new charge amongst the Liberal Left to prove the need for comprehensive sustainable lifestyle mandates from the government.

HOT or NOT

Some of you may remember an early website back in the days of Friendster and the illegal-Napster that offered an simple outlet for our gross narcissism called http://www.hotornot.com/.  The sole purpose of the website was to upload a picture of yourself and have others vote on scale of 1 to 10 for whether or not you were "hot" (I did look it up and it is still in operation although it appears to be more of a dating service now).  The premise was catchy for the early adopters, but the gimmick soon wore off. 

Well, I am not above such gimmicks and have decided to introduce a section of the blog called HOT or NOT.  Each week I will select a design project in and around Rochester, MN that is either HOT or NOT (in the design sense).  I plan to qualitatively review these projects and explain my reasoning, but in the wonderful world of Web 2.0, feel free to leave your comments of your own perception of the project.  In the end, the votes will most likely tell the story of how HOT our local designs are and where the gap exists between design and reality.

I also welcome suggestions for buildings, structures, districts, intersections, or other designs that you think should be the subject of a HOT or NOT posting.  Leave a comment on this post with your thoughts. 

Bruegger's Boogie

If you haven't been to the subway in the U.S. Bank Building, then you have never been to Bruegger's Bagels at the base of the escalators, on the opposite side as Daube's.  I happen to be a big fan of their bagels, and in the fall they have a seasonal coffee that is very tasty.  Their space layout, however, may be one of the most poorly planned in the entire subway.  I am sure there is a worse way to lay it out, but it would take some work. 

The design problem is nothing that can't be overcome, in fact, the movement through the space happens to be patterned after an old-fashioned ballroom dance.  I happen to be a dance aficionado and I took the liberty of transcribing the steps required to achieve success (ordering, paying for, and receiving food and beverage).  It may look complicated--in full disclosure it is a more advanced dance--but with a little practice, you too can be bouncing to the Bruegger's Boogie!  See the diagram below and the sequence description.

1. Start (at least I assume this is the starting place as it is nearest the elevators and escalators).
2. Proceed to the counter.  Bow to the server.  Look awkwardly for the menu before realizing that you are at the wrong station!
3. Circle to the right, swing those hips.
4. Watch out for the column! Sachet to the left.
5. Exchange glances at the patrons as you slide past their tables.  Don't knock any glasses!
6. Come to a stop, wait for the line to pass (turn to the side to slide past any larger patrons if necessary).  You're almost there!
7. Move along against the wall and turn to face the menu.  Now wait your turn.
8. Step forward at the call, place your order.  Then left over right, again left over right to answer any questions that they have about your order.
9. Come to a stop and left, right, left.  Wait your turn and pay for the meal!

This can be performed with a partner but it becomes increasingly difficult.  Only a seasoned veteran or a frequent Bruegger's patron should attempt. 

Now bow to your partner, you're done!

Modern in a Minute

One of the scariest things a client can say when being asked of their vision for a project is, "well, I want it to be kind of modern."  I guess the layman equivalent would be someone saying, "I want you to make me laugh."  To attempt to get inside a person's head and evaluate what THEY consider funny, is about as likely as guessing what one constitutes as "modern."  I think most often the confusion arises out of the literal definition of modern which is something that is new or in the present.  How can architecture built in the 30's and 50's be considered new?  The word I use when I want to connote something is new is "contemporary."  For me, "modern" imbues an entirely different meaning. 

So to try and dispel any misconceived notions of what modern architecture truly is, I have distilled the entire theory of modern architecture into a 1-minute snippet.  I suppose the next step for our attention-deficit generation is to try and pare it further to 142 characters.  But for now, 1-minute is what I am striving for.  [Note: while many of these principles apply to other disciplines (art, sculpture, politics, etc.) I am principally focused on the specific attributes of architecture]

What is modern?

At the end of the 19th Century, architecture was a formal language of classical expression founded on clear rules of order taken from the Greeks and Romans.  (e.g. the White House the Capitol Building)  Enter 1900 (roughly) and the modern movement.  A few people began to challenge the accepted aesthetic of design and viewed it as fanciful and superfluous.  For this new school, the root of architecture was the post, the beam, and the plane.  If you boiled it down to these component parts, the expression took on a much more clean, simple and organized language.  This stripped and raw aesthetic, along with the advent of industrialization of building materials and construction practices, made mass production and reproduction possible thereby eliminating elitist architecture.  Anyone and everyone was entitled to a building, produced by technologically innovative methods, expressing its function in its form, using materials to their limits (glass, steel, and concrete in particular), and devoid of any unnecessary detail.

This glory period was ultimately short lived.  As the theory took on larger and larger acceptance in practice, whole cities were conceived in the high modern style eliminating specific human characteristics such as scale, individualism, and personal space that were integral to comfort.  It was at this point, in the middle 20th Century that modern was rejected for its ironic lack of functionality and over commodification.  There was a resulting post-modern backlash which I will not get into, but today the principles of modern are back, yet in a more reserved and careful approach. 

In conclusion, when someone says "modern," it means an architecture of simple forms, innovative materials, clean lines, and functionality.  True modern examples in Rochester?  The Mayo Building, the IBM Complex, and the Hilton Building.  Contemporary modern examples in Rochester? The Rochester Art Center, the B'Nai Israel Synagogue, and the Dan Abraham Healthy Living Center. 

Modern is not all bad.  Like jokes, some are better than others.  Modern has significantly altered the face of architecture in only 100 years.  In many ways, it has contributed to our built environment in more long term ways than classical architecture ever did.  But like sweets, alcohol, and sex...all are best in moderation.

DMC...run!

Have you heard the word?  The Destination Medical Community (DMC) is an initiative of Mayo Clinic to bolster Rochester's world class health care environment and state-of-the-art community services.  However, the name feels like a Disney-esque theatrical sound stage where Doctors pop out of manholes singing, "top of the mornin' lassy, mind tellin' me what ails ya?"

Because the Downtown Master Plan is almost finished, it is important that we think seriously about how the DMC can be incorporated (why bother asking if this is even a good idea at this point).  So I have taken the liberty of offering a design for new lamp posts that can become a standard detail for all new streets and boulevards that may come under construction.  I feel it evokes the sense of excitement, medicine, and whimsy that is required to make the DMC a success. Cue music!!

starting at square one

Every day that we wake up, we are surrounded by design. From the car we drive to the key we turn in the ignition, we are continuously sensing design. The goal of this blog is to try and capture those items that may pass by unnoticed in the world, lost in the information, media, and bytes of life.

By highlighting the exceptional and mundane, the overlooked and celebrated, we can come to a greater understanding of what is contributing to our health, well being and environment. Design goes well beyond being "good" or "cool." We must ask the harder questions, probe deeper into the psychological and sociological reasons for our given reality.

Step one is identifying...step two is modifying. That is design in progress.