christopher gebhardt architecture portfolio 2014 - august update
Post on 02-Apr-2016
218 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
-
Christopher GebhardtUniversity of OregonB.Arch Candidate 2014
cwgebhardt@gmail.com(720)-224-5412
1750 Alder St. #7Eugene, OR 97401
2589 Lake Meadow Dr.Lafayette, CO 80026
-
I am a fifth year B.Arch student at the University of Oregon, from Boulder, Colorado. I got in to architecture because of the positive effect I saw it could have on peoples lives and that is always my highest priority while designing. With that in mind I often focus on issues of human context, responsiveness to local conditions, evidence based design, and sustainability while also trying to design buildings that are beautiful and spaces that enrich the lives of those who occupy them.
Professional Experience
-PEH Architects
Studio Projects
-Adaptable Housing in San Francisco
-Skinner Butte Visitors Center
-Portland Culinary Institute
-Commercial-Broadway SkyTrain Station
-West Campus Academic Village
-Takasegawa Master Plan
-Building 55, Granville Island
Other Coursework
-Building Enclosures
- Eugene Depot Post-Occupancy Evaluation
-HEDCO Education Post-Occupancy Evaluation
-Passive Heating and Cooling
Extra-curricular
-Graphic Design
-Photography
-
I spent the summer of 2013 working for PEH Architects in Boulder, CO. During the summer I was the lead drafter from conceptual design through permit application for a small medical ofce renovation: turning a plastic surgery ofce into an
orthopedic ofce.
I also worked on several other projects during the summer, including the core and shell permit application for a 50,000sf grocery store and several historic rehabilitations for the city of Blackhawk, CO.
Media use: AutoCAD, SketchUp, pen, pencil
-
Design Development
This summer job was fantastic experience for me because I got experience with the phases of the design process that are not covered in school. Through the rst four years of my schools curriculum our buildings never go past schematic design, yet in the professional world most of the time gets spent on design development.
During this job I got a lot of experience with the work that goes into the design development phase including drawing enclosure details, designing interior elevations, drawing up material and hardware schedules, putting together specications, and drawing detailed wall sections and casework shop drawings.
-
ADAPTABILITYIN HOUSING
Media use: Revit, AutoCAD Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, pens, pencils, physical models.
9 9RAUSCH
9 9RAUSCH
Housing Terminal StudioProf. Michael Fifield Winter-Spring 2014
Rear Courtyard
Folsom and Rausch
This two term final studio project allowed me to bring together everything I had learned in school in one comprehensive project.
During the course of this project we got the chance to meet with many practicing architects to discuss housing issues while, in our own projects, exploring in depth everything from programming and site design to code compliance, zoning, and environmental control systems.
-
Why People Move
1/8" = 1'-0"
One Bedroom Pair
1/8" = 1'-0"
Two Bedroom and Studio632sf each 817sf and 475sf
0 5 10 20
1/16 = 10 10 20 40
1/8 = 1
0 5 101/4 = 1
1/2 = 10 51 3
One Bedroom Adaptability
1/8" = 1'-0"
Two Bedroom
1/8" = 1'-0"
One Bedroom w/ Expanded Living Space967sf 967sf12 O
pen
ing = 3 Sheets of Dry
wall
1/8" = 1'-0"
Two Bedroom
1/8" = 1'-0"
One Bedroom w/ Expanded Living Space967sf 967sf
12 O
pen
ing = 3 Sheets of Dry
wall
Two Bedroom Adaptability
Unit Adaptability
The available data on residential mobility within the U.S. shows that people move for a wide variety of reasons, but analysis of those reasons shows that there are general trends and commonalities that can allow a designer to address issues that will be relevant for a large number of people. For example, 62% of local moves are made for housing related reasons, 26% are made for family related issues.
Housing-Related Reasons
Family-Related Reasons
Work-Related Reasons
Other
Local Moves
Internal Migration Immigration
New/Better House
Cheaper Housing
Better Neighborhood
Wanted to Own Home
Other housing reason
Change in Marital Status
Establish Own Household
Other Family Reason
New Job/Job Transfer - 0%
Retired
Closer to Work/Commute
Look for Work/Lost Job
Other Job Related Reason
Housing-Related Reasons Family-Related ReasonsWork-Related Reasons
Attend College
Health Reasons
Change of Climate
Other Reasons
Other Reasons
Quality Issues 30.6%
Quantity Issues 25.9%
Other Issues 41.4%
This study divides the reasons for moving into three catagories: issues involving the quality of the housing situation, the quantity or square footage of the housing situation, and other issues such as those having to do with location or ownership type.
New/Better HouseBetter NeighborhoodHealth Reasons (Accessibility)
Change in Marital StatusEstablish Own HouseholdLook for Work/Lost JobRetiredCheaper Housing
Closer to Work/CommuteWanted to Own HomeAttend CollegeChange of ClimateOther Family ReasonOther Job Related ReasonOther Housing ReasonOther Reasons
24.4%4.8%1.4%
7.0%9.5%0.5%0.2%8.7%
3.4%12.2%1.8%0.2%9.8%0.4%11.7%1.9%
41.4%
30.6%
25.9%
Type Analysis: Local Moves
All data from: Donald J. Bogue, Why Americans Move, in Immigration, Internal Migration, and Local Mobility in the U.S., ed. Donald J. Bogue, Gregory Leigel, and Michael Kozloski (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2009), 3058.
Total does not equal 100 due to rounding in each catagory
Design Responses
Quality Issues - Addressed through good design in this project and the possibility for units facade interfaces to be upgraded
Quantity Issues - Addressed through the ability of the units to be reconfigured, expanded, or shrunk by either the developer or the occupant.
Other IssuesThe scope of this project is limited to issues that can be addressed in a single housing development. The designer recognizes that there are many reasons for residential mobility that cannot be addressed in this project.
Reasons for Moving by Type of Mobility, 2005
Reason For Moving Total Mobile Local Mobility Internal Migration Immigration
All Movers 100 100 100 100
Family-Related Reasons 27.1 26.3 29.3 19.6Change in Marital Status 7.1 7 7.8 3.4Establish Own Household 7.8 9.5 5.7 3.5Other Family Reason 12.2 9.8 15.8 12.7
Work-Related Reasons 17.6 4.4 29.3 55.1New Job/Job Transfer 10.4 0 20 30.5Look for Work/Lost Job 1.9 0.5 2.4 15Closer to Work/Commute 3.4 3.3 3.9 1.3Retired 0.5 0.2 1 0.4Other Job Related Reason 1.4 0.4 2 7.9
Housing-Related Reasons 47.1 61.8 29.9 9.9Wanted to Own Home 9.3 12.2 5.9 1.4New/Better House 17.8 24.4 9.7 3.4Better Neighborhood 4 4.8 3.3 0.4Cheaper Housing 6.6 8.7 4.2 1.2Other housing reason 9.4 11.7 6.8 3.5
Other Reasons 8 5.3 11.3 15.4Attend College 3.2 1.8 4.9 6.5Change of Climate 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.1Health Reasons 1.6 1.4 2 1Other Reasons 2.6 1.9 3.1 7.8
Why Americans Move
Shiftable Units Subdividable Units Reconfigurable Units
Pedestrian Friendly Street Edge Accessible UnitsGood Neighborhood
Housing-Related Reasons
Family-Related Reasons
Work-Related Reasons
Other
Local Moves
Internal Migration Immigration
New/Better House
Cheaper Housing
Better Neighborhood
Wanted to Own Home
Other housing reason
Change in Marital Status
Establish Own Household
Other Family Reason
New Job/Job Transfer - 0%
Retired
Closer to Work/Commute
Look for Work/Lost Job
Other Job Related Reason
Housing-Related Reasons Family-Related ReasonsWork-Related Reasons
Attend College
Health Reasons
Change of Climate
Other Reasons
Other Reasons
Quality Issues 30.6%
Quantity Issues 25.9%
Other Issues 41.4%
This study divides the reasons for moving into three catagories: issues involving the quality of the housing situation, the quantity or square footage of the housing situation, and other issues such as those having to do with location or ownership type.
New/Better HouseBetter NeighborhoodHealth Reasons (Accessibility)
Change in Marital StatusEstablish Own HouseholdLook for Work/Lost JobRetiredCheaper Housing
Closer to Work/CommuteWanted to Own HomeAttend CollegeChange of ClimateOther Family ReasonOther Job Related ReasonOther Housing ReasonOther Reasons
24.4%4.8%1.4%
7.0%9.5%0.5%0.2%8.7%
3.4%12.2%1.8%0.2%9.8%0.4%11.7%1.9%
41.4%
30.6%
25.9%
Type Analysis: Local Moves
All data from: Donald J. Bogue, Why Americans Move, in Immigration, Internal Migration, and Local Mobility in the U.S., ed. Donald J. Bogue, Gregory Leigel, and Michael Kozloski (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2009), 3058.
Total does not equal 100 due to rounding in each catagory
Design Responses
Quality Issues - Addressed through good design in this project and the possibility for units facade interfaces to be upgraded
Quantity Issues - Addressed through the ability of the units to be reconfigured, expanded, or shrunk by either the developer or the occupant.
Other IssuesThe scope of this project is limited to issues that can be addressed in a single housing development. The designer recognizes that there are many reasons for residential mobility that cannot be addressed in this project.
Reasons for Moving by Type of Mobility, 2005
Reason For Moving Total Mobile Local Mobility Internal Migration Immigration
All Movers 100 100 100 100
Family-Related Reasons 27.1 26.3 29.3 19.6Change in Marital Status 7.1 7 7.8 3.4Establish Own Household 7.8 9.5 5.7 3.5Other Family Reason 12.2 9.8 15.8 12.7
Work-Related Reasons 17.6 4.4 29.3 55.1New Job/Job Transfer 10.4 0 20 30.5Look for Work/Lost Job 1.9 0.5 2.4 15Closer to Work/Commute 3.4 3.3 3.9 1.3Retired 0.5 0.2 1 0.4Other Job Related Reason 1.4 0.4 2 7.9
Housing-Related Reasons 47.1 61.8 29.9 9.9Wanted to Own Home 9.3 12.2 5.9 1.4New/Better House 17.8 24.4 9.7 3.4Better Neighborhood 4 4.8 3.3 0.4Cheaper Housing 6.6 8.7 4.2 1.2Other housing reason 9.4 11.7 6.8 3.5
Other Reasons 8 5.3 11.3 15.4Attend College 3.2 1.8 4.9 6.5Change of Climate 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.1Health Reasons 1.6 1.4 2 1Other Reasons 2.6 1.9 3.1 7.8
Why Americans Move
Shiftable Units Subdividable Units Reconfigurable Units
Pedestrian Friendly Street Edge Accessible UnitsGood Neighborhood
Housing-Related Reasons
Family-Related Reasons
Work-Related Reasons
Other
Local Moves
Internal Migration Immigration
New/Better House
Cheaper Housing
Better Neighborhood
Wanted to Own Home
Other housing reason
Change in Marital Status
Establish Own Household
Other Family Reason
New Job/Job Transfer - 0%
Retired
Closer to Work/Commute
Look for Work/Lost Job
Other Job Related Reason
Housing-Related Reasons Family-Related ReasonsWork-Related Reasons
Attend College
Health Reasons
Change of Climate
Other Reasons
Other Reasons
Quality Issues 30.6%
Quantity Issues 25.9%
Other Issues 41.4%
This study divides the reasons for moving into three catagories: issues involving the quality of the housing situation, the quantity or square footage of the housing situation, and other issues such as those having to do with location or ownership type.
New/Better HouseBetter NeighborhoodHealth Reasons (Accessibility)
Change in Marital StatusEstablish Own HouseholdLook for Work/Lost JobRetiredCheaper Housing
Closer to Work/CommuteWanted to Own HomeAttend CollegeChange of ClimateOther Family ReasonOther Job Related ReasonOther Housing ReasonOther Reasons
24.4%4.8%1.4%
7.0%9.5%0.5%0.2%8.7%
3.4%12.2%1.8%0.2%9.8%0.4%11.7%1.9%
41.4%
30.6%
25.9%
Type Analysis: Local Moves
All data from: Donald J. Bogue, Why Americans Move, in Immigration, Internal Migration, and Local Mobility in the U.S., ed. Donald J. Bogue, Gregory Leigel, and Michael Kozloski (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2009), 3058.
Total does not equal 100 due to rounding in each catagory
Design Responses
Quality Issues - Addressed through good design in this project and the possibility for units facade interfaces to be upgraded
Quantity Issues - Addressed through the ability of the units to be reconfigured, expanded, or shrunk by either the developer or the occupant.
Other IssuesThe scope of this project is limited to issues that can be addressed in a single housing development. The designer recognizes that there are many reasons for residential mobility that cannot be addressed in this project.
Reasons for Moving by Type of Mobility, 2005
Reason For Moving Total Mobile Local Mobility Internal Migration Immigration
All Movers 100 100 100 100
Family-Related Reasons 27.1 26.3 29.3 19.6Change in Marital Status 7.1 7 7.8 3.4Establish Own Household 7.8 9.5 5.7 3.5Other Family Reason 12.2 9.8 15.8 12.7
Work-Related Reasons 17.6 4.4 29.3 55.1New Job/Job Transfer 10.4 0 20 30.5Look for Work/Lost Job 1.9 0.5 2.4 15Closer to Work/Commute 3.4 3.3 3.9 1.3Retired 0.5 0.2 1 0.4Other Job Related Reason 1.4 0.4 2 7.9
Housing-Related Reasons 47.1 61.8 29.9 9.9Wanted to Own Home 9.3 12.2 5.9 1.4New/Better House 17.8 24.4 9.7 3.4Better Neighborhood 4 4.8 3.3 0.4Cheaper Housing 6.6 8.7 4.2 1.2Other housing reason 9.4 11.7 6.8 3.5
Other Reasons 8 5.3 11.3 15.4Attend College 3.2 1.8 4.9 6.5Change of Climate 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.1Health Reasons 1.6 1.4 2 1Other Reasons 2.6 1.9 3.1 7.8
Why Americans Move
Shiftable Units Subdividable Units Reconfigurable Units
Pedestrian Friendly Street Edge Accessible UnitsGood Neighborhood
Housing-Related Reasons
Family-Related Reasons
Work-Related Reasons
Other
Local Moves
Internal Migration Immigration
New/Better House
Cheaper Housing
Better Neighborhood
Wanted to Own Home
Other housing reason
Change in Marital Status
Establish Own Household
Other Family Reason
New Job/Job Transfer - 0%
Retired
Closer to Work/Commute
Look for Work/Lost Job
Other Job Related Reason
Housing-Related Reasons Family-Related ReasonsWork-Related Reasons
Attend College
Health Reasons
Change of Climate
Other Reasons
Other Reasons
Quality Issues 30.6%
Quantity Issues 25.9%
Other Issues 41.4%
This study divides the reasons for moving into three catagories: issues involving the quality of the housing situation, the quantity or square footage of the housing situation, and other issues such as those having to do with location or ownership type.
New/Better HouseBetter NeighborhoodHealth Reasons (Accessibility)
Change in Marital StatusEstablish Own HouseholdLook for Work/Lost JobRetiredCheaper Housing
Closer to Work/CommuteWanted to Own HomeAttend CollegeChange of ClimateOther Family ReasonOther Job Related ReasonOther Housing ReasonOther Reasons
24.4%4.8%1.4%
7.0%9.5%0.5%0.2%8.7%
3.4%12.2%1.8%0.2%9.8%0.4%11.7%1.9%
41.4%
30.6%
25.9%
Type Analysis: Local Moves
All data from: Donald J. Bogue, Why Americans Move, in Immigration, Internal Migration, and Local Mobility in the U.S., ed. Donald J. Bogue, Gregory Leigel, and Michael Kozloski (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2009), 3058.
Total does not equal 100 due to rounding in each catagory
Design Responses
Quality Issues - Addressed through good design in this project and the possibility for units facade interfaces to be upgraded
Quantity Issues - Addressed through the ability of the units to be reconfigured, expanded, or shrunk by either the developer or the occupant.
Other IssuesThe scope of this project is limited to issues that can be addressed in a single housing development. The designer recognizes that there are many reasons for residential mobility that cannot be addressed in this project.
Reasons for Moving by Type of Mobility, 2005
Reason For Moving Total Mobile Local Mobility Internal Migration Immigration
All Movers 100 100 100 100
Family-Related Reasons 27.1 26.3 29.3 19.6Change in Marital Status 7.1 7 7.8 3.4Establish Own Household 7.8 9.5 5.7 3.5Other Family Reason 12.2 9.8 15.8 12.7
Work-Related Reasons 17.6 4.4 29.3 55.1New Job/Job Transfer 10.4 0 20 30.5Look for Work/Lost Job 1.9 0.5 2.4 15Closer to Work/Commute 3.4 3.3 3.9 1.3Retired 0.5 0.2 1 0.4Other Job Related Reason 1.4 0.4 2 7.9
Housing-Related Reasons 47.1 61.8 29.9 9.9Wanted to Own Home 9.3 12.2 5.9 1.4New/Better House 17.8 24.4 9.7 3.4Better Neighborhood 4 4.8 3.3 0.4Cheaper Housing 6.6 8.7 4.2 1.2Other housing reason 9.4 11.7 6.8 3.5
Other Reasons 8 5.3 11.3 15.4Attend College 3.2 1.8 4.9 6.5Change of Climate 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.1Health Reasons 1.6 1.4 2 1Other Reasons 2.6 1.9 3.1 7.8
Why Americans Move
Shiftable Units Subdividable Units Reconfigurable Units
Pedestrian Friendly Street Edge Accessible UnitsGood Neighborhood
-
Back Yard Social Node
1/8" = 1'-0"
Section - Back Yard Social Node
1/8" = 1'-0"
Back Yard Social Node
1/8" = 1'-0"
Section - Back Yard Social Node
1/8" = 1'-0"
Plan
Section0 5 10 20
1/16 = 10 10 20 40
1/8 = 1
0 5 101/4 = 1
1/2 = 10 51 3
Courtyard Social Node
DN
Scale
Project number
Date
Drawn by
Checked by 1/8" = 1'-0"
5/22/2014 7:08:55 PM
A304
Outdoor Spaces 2
W14
3 March 2014
Author
Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"
1
Roof Deck
2
Roof Deck Iso
Scale
Project number
Date
Drawn by
Checked by 1/8" = 1'-0"
5/29/2014 3:41:25 PM
A305
Outdoor Spaces 3W14
3 March 2014
Author
Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"Roof Deck Section
Plan
Section
0 5 10 20
1/16 = 10 10 20 40
1/8 = 1
0 5 101/4 = 1
1/2 = 10 51 3
Roof Deck
Outdoor Space Adaptability
Regardless of the specific reason, the decision to move is about the need for change. Since buildings are generally considered static and permanent, change in a life situation usually means moving to a different building. The fundamental premise of this project is that when people need change, instead of them needing to move to different housing, their current housing should be able to change, or adapt, to meet their new needs.
This project is an exploration of the ability of a building to adapt to meet the changing needs of its inhabitants. It will explore the issues surrounding residential mobility in America. What is it that makes so many of us pick up our roots and set them down in a new location? How many of the needs that drive people to do this can be met by thoughtful and innovative housing design? Can we enjoy the benefits of a community we have invested ourselves in while also having housing that works for our current life circumstances?
-
Fully Shaded
Partially Shaded
Vertically Shaded
Open Position
Shading Position
Full Balcony
Juliet Balcony
Double Facade
Solid Panels
Window Adaptations
Ideal World Real World
Panels that easily clip onto the mullion system allow users to adapt to seasonal changes in desired solar access while also customizing their units interaction with the outdoors through visual access or upgrades such as larger balconies.
Shades slide on simple tracks concealed in joints between wall panels, allowing the users to cutomize solar access without requiring any installation or uninstallation.
Facade Options
Hopper Window
Sliding ExteriorSun-shades
Awning Window
Inward OpeningCasement Windows
Spandrel Panel
Track Concealedin Panel Seam
Juliet BalconyRailing
Floor Level
Window Operability
Possible Removable Panelfor Full Door
Window Adaptability
0 5 10 20
1/16 = 10 10 20 40
1/8 = 1
0 5 101/4 = 1
1/2 = 10 51 3
Facade Adaptability
STATISTICSSITE SIZE:
BUILDING TYPE:
NUMBER OF UNITS:
UNIT DENSITY:
UNIT TYPES:
COMMERCIAL SPACE:
99 Rausch St. San Francisco, CA (SOMA District)
.75 ACRES
MID-RISE
RESIDENTIAL/
MIXED-USE
66 UNITS
88 D.U./A.
STUDIOS, 1 AND
2 BEDROOM
FLATS, 3 BED-
ROOM UNITS
2600ft2
-
50 10 20
WORKSPACE
RECEPTION AREA
CAFE
SPECIAL EXHIBITIONHALL
RESTROOM
RESTROOM
MECH.ROOM
STORAGE JANITORS CLOSET
LIBRARY
MAIN EXHIBITION HALL
MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM
BIKESHELTER
BIKESHELTER
A A
B
B
N
DOWNDOWN
DOWN
DOWN
Skinner Butte Park
Visitors Center Eugene, OR
and Historical Museum
Fall 2010 The Skinner Butte Visitor Center is located in Eugene, Oregon, near the site of the original cabin built by the towns founder, Eugene Skinner. It houses exhibition space, a caf, and a library for the local historical society.
Media use: SketchUp, Illus-trator, Photoshop, InDesign, pastels, markers, pens, pen-cils, physical models.
-
MAIN EXHIBITION HALLWORKSPACE LIBRARY 50 10 20
NORTH FACING SECTION (A)
Designing in Section
For me, this project was about learning to design in section. It was about realizing that you can make interesting and beautiful spaces without complex oor plans.
As architects we spend a lot of time looking at oor plans, which are good for organizing program elements, but the users who will inhabit the space do not directly experience what we see in the plan. Section drawings are more evocative of what a user in a space will see and feel.
In this building I separated incompatible program elements with walls that reached to the level of the bottom of the trusses, but connected them through the visually continuous roof volume inhabited and shaped by the trusses.
Social Space During this project I began to
take a real interest in the design of informal social spaces. The Lawrence Halprin-inspired concrete forms in front of the center were the beginnings of my explorations into shaping and creating sociopetal spaces.
-
OF PO RT L A
ND
CUL
INAR
Y INSTITUTE
UP
UP
UP
DN
W.C.
W.C.
MAIN KITCHEN
DRY STORAGE
W
A
L
K
-
I
N
R
E
F
R
I
G
E
R
A
T
O
R
WAREWASHING
W
A
L
K
-
I
N
R
E
F
R
I
G
E
R
A
T
O
R
W
A
L
K
-
I
N
R
E
F
R
I
G
E
R
A
T
O
R
W
A
L
K
-
I
N
F
R
E
E
Z
E
R
SERVER STATION
RESTAURANT
LOBBY
PROVISIONERS OFFICE
STAFF LOCKERS AND TOILETS
CAF
LAUNDRY
DELIVERY STAGING
AREA
STREET SEATING(CULTURAL CONNECTION)
HOT PREPARATION
PRE-PREPARATION
COLD PREPARATION
A
B
A
B
DN
S
W
1
1
t
h
A
SW WASHINGTON St.
Spring 2011
The program for this studio was to design a culinary institute for a site in Portland that would incorporate a public restaurant, classrooms, and teaching kitchens.
It was my rst opportunity to develop a complex program in an urban setting. I wanted to design a building that would participate in and add interest to the urban fabric while contributing to the neighborhood at the street level and celebrating the horizon for both those inside and out.
STUDENT LOCKERS
FACULTY OFFICE
FACULTY OFFICE
LECTURE CLASSROOM
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
STAFF WORK SPACE
LOUNGE
UPDN
DN
UP
DN UP MEETING ROOM
W.C.
W.C.
A
B
B
MEETING ROOM
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
LOBBYMAIN
KITCHEN
CULINARY TEACHING KITCHEN
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
STAFF WORK ROOM
LOUNGE
FACULTY OFFICE
WALK-IN REFRIGERATOR
ATRIUM
BASEMENT MECHANICAL ROOM
SECTION B: FACING NORTH-WEST 5 100 20
Media use: AutoCAD, Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, pens, pencils, physical models
-
DN
DN
DN
W.C.W.C.FACULTY OFFICE
FACULTY OFFICE
OPEN TO BELOW
FACULTY OFFICES
LIBRARY
FACULTY OFFICE
FACULTY OFFICE
COMPUTER LAB
ROOF GARDENS
ROOF GARDENS
ROOF SEATING
ROOF SEATING
A
B
A
B
CULINARY TEACHING KITCHEN
CULINARY TEACHING KITCHEN
PASTRY TEACHING KITCHEN
LECTURE CLASSROOM
UP
DN
UP
UP
W.C.W.C.
OPEN TO BELOW
A
B
A
B
DN
DN
LECTURE CLASSROOM
THIRD FLOOR PLAN FOURTH FLOOR PLAN
5 100 20
5 100 20NORTH-EAST ELEVATION
STREET SEATING ROOF GARDEN Public Interface
In such a walkable city as Portland, close to the park blocks and one of the citys famous food cart locations, this buildings interface with the public realm was very important. I wanted it to enhance the lives of people who just walk by, or see it, not just the lives of those who inhabit it. To this end I took care to integrate the buildings facade into the context in a pleasing but modern way, and I included public seating areas on the east side of the building.
It was also a big issue with the program. Part of the culinary school is a public restaurant and the school wanted to be welcoming to members of the public coming for weekend or evening classes, but at the same time the students and faculty of the school needed some measure of security in the city.
I designed the transition from the public rst oor to the school oors above to provide both a grand sense of entry and a secure point of controlled access.
-
VancouverBurnaby
Coquit lam
NewWestminster
Surrey
Richmond
Burrard
Granville
Waterfront
StadiumChinatownVancouver City Centre
YaletownRoundhouse
Olympic Village
BroadwayCity Hall
King Edward
Oakridge41st Avenue
Langara49th Avenue
Marine Drive
Bridgeport
Sea IslandCentre
Templeton
Nanaimo
29th Avenue
GilmoreRupertRenfrew
Production WayUniversity
Lake CityWay
SperlingBurnaby Lake
Holdom
BrentwoodTown
Centre
Edmonds22ndStreet
New Westminster
Patterson
Metrotown
RoyalOak
Sapperton
Braid
Scott Road
Gateway
Surrey Central
Main StreetScience World
Aberdeen
Lansdowne
CommercialBroadway
VCCClark
YVRAirport
JoyceCollingwood
King George
RichmondBrighouse
Lougheed Town Centre
Columbia
Millennium Line
Expo Line
C
a
n
a
d
a
L
i
n
e
Fare Zone Boundaries
COMMERCIAL-BROADWAY
Start your commute off right at...
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
N
SUPPORT SPACES
ATTENDANT
ATTENDANT
UPUP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
LEASABLE COMMERCIAL SPACE
A
00A3US 10002500 0022800 2800 05050100 150 150 CGC 500 800 125 2800 2500 30503080900 2100 092216080305030600 300 300 700 130 175 1400 1500 1000A3US 10002500 0022800 2800 05050100 150 150 CGC 500 800 125 2800 2500
N
URBAN CONTEXT
CONCOURSE PLAN
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
The Skytrain station at the intersection of Commercial and Broadway in Vancouver, B.C., is the busiest in the city. It is the main link between intercity mass transit and the Skytrain routes outbound to the suburbs. This is a proposal for the expansion of this station. This studio placed an emphasis on designing a distinctive, functional, and structurally sound roof for the expanded concourse.Media use: AutoCAD, SketchUp, Rhino, Grasshopper, Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, pen, pencil, physical models..
-
SKYTRAIN
VANCOUVER is best experienced by ...
Adult Faresstarting at
$2.50Student DiscountsKids under 5 ride FREEInquire at station about DAILY PASSES
MAST CAP SECTION
LIGHTING
BANNER ATTACHMENT
CORNER PLAZA
TRANSVERSE SECTION
MAST DETAILS
MODEL
One of the challenges in this project was designing within Translinks strict design guidelines for station accessibility and design, especially regarding placement of elements on the platforms and surge zones around stairs and escalators.
-
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UPUP
UP
UP
DNDN
UP
UP
DN
UP
EVENT ROOM
PARKING RAMP
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
D
O
C
K
KITCHEN DINING HALL
200 SEAT LECTURE HALL
14th Street
K
i
n
c
a
i
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
l
d
e
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
600 SEAT LECTURE HALL
FOOD COURT
RESTROOM RESTROOM
B
A
B
A
GROUND FLOOR0 10 25
THE JOHNSON AXIS
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON
WEST CAMPUS ACADEMIC VILLAGE
Fall 2011
The University of Oregon Campus Planning Department is currently considering developing a parking lot next to campus into an academic village with residence halls, dining facilities, classrooms and lecture halls.
This studio was intended to explore the feasibility of tting the desired program onto the site; this was the main challenge of the studio. Other challenges included developing good circulation on this crowded site, organizing the adjacencies between the different program elements, and relating to the main campus in a modern, but cohesive fashion.
Media use: AutoCAD, Revit, Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, pen, pencil, physical models..
-
DN
DN
DN
DN
UP UP UP
UP
UP
CROSS CULTURAL CENTERHOUSING ADMIN
AND STUDENT LOUNGE
ROOF DECK
100 SEAT LECTURE CLASSROOM
100 SEAT LECTURE CLASSROOM
STUDENT HOUSING
HUMANITIESDEPARTMENT
RESTROOMRESTROOM
FACULTY APARTMENTS
B
B
A A
SECOND FLOOR0 10 5025
DN
UP
DN
UP UP
DN
UP
UP
A
B
B
AHEARTH
HEARTH
HEARTHSTUDY
LAUNDRY
STUDYSTUDY
LAUNDRY
L
A
U
N
D
R
Y
TYPICAL HOUSINGFLOOR0 10 5025
Design Guidelines
The University of Oregons Campus Plan uses pattern language style guidelines to articulate the values of the university relating to the campus environment and architecture in a language that is accessible to designers and lay-people.
These patterns must be considered for all construction projects on campus. This project was my rst experience designing a building based on a framework of guidelines. The patterns were useful as sources of initial inspiration and as metrics to judge the success of different schemes. In the sidebars of the following spread I have diagrammed my response to several of the patterns from the campus plan.
This studio was done with the support and input of the campus planning department. They wanted to see if the program they envisioned for this site was viable. Our projects were attempts to make it work. In the end they decided that this was too much program to t on the site, but they said they would use our schemes to discuss these issues with the campus user groups as they started fund-raising to have the actual building designed and built.
Experimental Design
-
SOUTH ELEVATION0 10 5025
EAST ELEVATION0 5025
ROOF DECK
VIEW FROM JOHNSON AXIS
GROUND FLOOR CIRCULATION CENTER
SECOND FLOOR CIRCULATION CENTER
Activity Nodes
When locating buildings, place them in conjunction with other buildings to form small nodes of public life. Create a series of these nodes throughout the university, in contrast to the quiet, private outdoor spaces between them, and knit these nodes together with a network of pedestrian paths. -UO Campus Plan Policy 11
Building Complex and Connected Buildings
Isolated buildings can be symptoms of a disconnected campus community.
The buildings should be conceived as a collection connected by arcades or bridges defining and embracing outdoor spaces. -UO Campus Plan Policy 11
Building Hearth
Create a social hearth for every building. Place the hearth at the buildings per-ceived center of gravity and beside a path that everyone uses. -UO Campus Plan Policy 11
-
SECTION B
SECTION A0 10 5025
Future Expansion
Consider the possibility of future expansion and change when designing a new building or addition.
13th
Johnson Axis
Downtown
South and West UniversityNeighborhoods
Wings of Light
Shape buildings in ways that allow natural light to penetrate far into their centers. Use ideas like light shelves to bounce daylight even further into the buildings spaces. Usually this will mean buildings that have wings less than about 50 feet in width. -UO Campus Plan Policy 11
Placing the main entrance(s) is perhaps the single most important step taken during the evolution of a building plan.THEREFORE: Place the main entrance(s) of the build-ing at a point immediately visible from the main av-enues of approach, and give it a bold shape in the front of the building. -UO Campus Plan Policy 11
Main Building Entrance
-
Takasegawa Master Plan
Kyoto Summer 2012with Will Green and Joel Grogan
This studio took place in the summer of 2012, in Kyoto, Japan. City ofcials were interested in student proposals for a new master plan for the Takasegawa canal neighborhood in downtown Kyoto.
I teamed up with two landscape architecture students to develop a plan for the canal that was designed to attract users and distribute business more evenly through the day, instead of the seedy nightlife that currently dominates the area. The centerpiece of our design was the conversion of a parking lot into a grand plaza that would serve as a hub for this part of downtown and connect the Takasegawa canal to the commercial hub of downtown, Kawaramachi-dori, and to the Kamo River.
At the end of our visit these proposals were presented to several ofcials from the City of Kyoto and locals from the neighborhood of the Takasegawa.
This project took second place in the Student/Emerging Professional category of the 2013 AIA Southwest Oregon-ASLA People's Choice Awards.
Media use: Watercolors, pens, pencils. Revit modeling from later competition entry.
-
Collaboration The Kyoto 2012 Summer Studio gave Oregon students an opportunity to visit Japan and design a project in a new and unfamiliar cultural setting, and was benecial for the City of Kyoto because they were looking for proposals for this downtown areas redevelopment that would bring up ideas that would never occur to someone who has lived here his whole life as one ofcial put it.
While working on this project we met extensively with city ofcials from various departments as well as a local historical society and many community members.
-
FOOD, DRINKS, THEATRE, CINEMA, SHOPPING, BOWLING, ICE CREAM
CHRISTOPHER GEBHARDT | SPRING 2013 | ARCH 484 | PROF. STEPHEN DUFF
FOOD, DRINKS, THEATRE, CINEMA, SHOPPIN
CHRISTOPHER GEBHARDT | SPRING 2013 | ARCH
Anderson Street
Old Bridge Street
54 55
95
57
5 59
33
Railspur Alle
RAILSPUR ALLEY & ANDERSON STREET
DN
UP
UP
UP
UP
A
B
THEATRE
ICE CREAM SHOP /SODA FOUNTAIN
BOWLING ENTRANCE
RAILSPUR ALLEY
A
N
D
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
KITCHEN
LOBBY
RETAIL
BACKSTAGE
BACKSTAGERETAIL
RETAILRETAILRETAILPUB
PATIOBAR
LEASABLE SPACE
RESTAURANT
CINEMAA
B
KITCHEN
TERRACE
LOBBY
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
BACKSTAGE ACCESS
OPEN TO BELOW
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
GROUND FLOOR
SECOND FLOOR
RAILSPUR ALLEY & OLD BRIDGE ST.
During Spring 2013 study abroad in Vancouver, we lived in downtown Vancouver and attended classes on urban design and kinetic architecture on Granville Island.
The studio project was to develop a program and design a building for an empty lot on Granville Island that would contribute to the goals of Granville Islands master plan.
We had to deal with a pier from the Granville St. bridge that landed in the middle of our site as well as the strict form-based zoning of the island.
Media use: Revit, Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, pen, pencil, physical models..
-
Level 10.00 m
Level 23.50 m
Basement
A
THEATRERETAIL
RESTAURANT CINEMA
BOWLING
Level 10.00 m
Level 23.50 m
B
SECTION B FACING SOUTHEAST
NORTHEAST ELEVATION
ISOMETRIC VIEW
RESTAURANT GRANVILLE ISLANDProgramming A big part of this studio was programming the building that would go on this site. We knew from the city planning guide that they were trying to add night-life to Granville Island, but they wanted uses that would also contribute to the day life of the island.
It was up to us to develop a program that would work well with the carefully managed mix of uses on the island, as well as t in with the islands industrial style.
My building is anchored by two theaters which would be the main contributions to the local nightlife. Surrounding the theaters are a couple types of restaurants that could be active throughout the day and night, and some small scale commercial that would add day interest and maintain the smaller human scale of Railspur Alley. Family attractions like the underground bowling and the soda fountain would increase the attraction for families and be busy during the day and night.
GRANVILLE STREET BRIDGE
-
Enclosures
FLASHING
TURN UP PANEL END 45
PLYWOOD SHEATHING
Z - CLIP
STANDING SEAM ROOF SEAM
30lb ASTM RATED BUILDING FELT
FASCIA3 ROOF DECKING
15 GLULAM BEAM
DRIP NOTCH
RAINSCREEN SIDING MOUNTED ON 1X4 FURRING STRIPS
RIGID INSULATION
PLYWOOD SHEATHING FIBERGLASS BATT INSULATION
GYPSUM BOARD
2x6 FURRING STRIPS
ROOF OVERHANG6
VAPOR BARRIER
WINDOW GLASS
CASING
FLASHING
SILL
RAINSCREEN SIDING MOUNTED ON 1X4 FURRING STRIPS
PLYWOOD SHEATHING FIBERGLASS BATT INSULATION
VAPOR BARRIER
SCREENROUGH FRAMING SILL
30lb BUILDING FELT MOISTURE BARRIER
PRESSURE-TREATED MUDSILL
SOLE PLATEBASEBOARD
CEMENTBOARD RIGID INSULATION
FLASHING
ANCHOR-BOLTCONCRETE SLAB
CONCRETE-RATED MOISTURE BARRIER4 OF COMPACTED GRAVEL
S
SEALANT
WINDOW DETAILS7
GYPSUM BOARD
WINDOW GLASS
CASING
FLASHING
SILL
CORNER BOARD
PLYWOOD SHEATHING FIBERGLASS BATT INSULATION
30lb BUILDING FELT MOISTURE BARRIER
NAIL FIN
FURRING STRIPS
2x8 STUDS
SCREEN
GYPSUM BOARDWINDOW CORNER DETAIL8 WINDOW TO WALL JUNCTION 9
VAPOR BARRIER
Building Enclosures is a course that covers the theory and practice of thermal envelope design. The bulk of the course is a thorough survey of the most common cladding materials covering the advantages and disadvantages of each, as well as their unique challenges in terms of detail design and how the detail design can affect the overall aesthetic of a building.
The projects for this class were about designing details for buildings with various cladding systems. The rst project was an entrance for a community center remodel that had wood stud walls and a roof supported by heavy glu-lam beams. The second was a wing of a campus building that had some window walls, and some sections of walls with a terra-cotta rainscreen mounted on a CMU backup wall.
-
KAWNEER VENTROW ISOLOCK VENTILATOR
THERMALLY BROKEN STEEL ANGLES TO SUPPORT LINTEL
CASTELLATED BEAM
SLAB
INSULATION
DRAINAGE LAYER
ROOT REINFORCEMENTLAYER
GROWTH MEDIUMVEGETATION
STEEL CURB
PAVER
MODIFIED BITUMEN
COUNTER FLASHINGBOSTON VALLEY TERRACLAD COPING
WOOD BLOCKING
BOSTON VALLEY TERRACLAD PANELVERTICAL TRACK FASTENER
VERTICAL TRACKINSULATION
VAPOR and MOISTURE BARRIERS
FLASHING
DENSGLASS
B
G
STEEL ANGLE
WINDOW HEAD at TERRA COTTA WALL5
PPG SOLARBAN 60STARPHIRE GLASS
KAWNEER 5525 ISOWEBWINDOW
METAL TRIM
DENSGLASS
CMUBOSTON VALLEY TERRACLAD PANEL
VERTICAL TRACK FASTENER
VERTICAL TRACK
VISUAL QUALITYSTEEL SILL
INSULATION
KAWNEER VERSOLEIL SUNSHADE
VAPOR AND MOISTURE BARRIERS
WINDOW SILL at TERRA COTTA WALL6
OPERABLE
TERRA COTTA WALLSHADING
WINDOW WALLSHADING
KAWNEER VENTROW ISOLOCK VENTILATOR
CASTELLATED BEAM
SLAB
INSULATION
MODIFIED BITUMEN
COUNTER FLASHING
BOSTON VALLEY TERRACLAD COPINGWOOD BLOCKING
BOSTON VALLEY TERRACLAD PANELVERTICAL TRACK FASTENER
VERTICAL TRACK
FLASHING
G
L
K
G
STEEL ANGLE
CMU
EXTERNAL SHADE MECHANISMKAWNEER VERSOLEIL SUNSHADE
KAWNEER INLIGHTEN LIGHT SHELF
KAWNEER 1600 SYSTEM 3 CURTAIN WALL SYSTEMPPG SOLARBAN 70XL GLASS
WINDOW WALL AND ROOF7
TERRA COTTA WALL
Area of Glass / Wall Unit: 48sf
PPG Solarban 60 on Starphire Glass U-Value (From PPG): .28
Area of Terra Cotta: 92sf
Terra Cotta R Value (from MEEB):
Outside Air Film: .17 Terra Cotta: .8 15 Barriers: .06 CMU: 1.11 Gypsum Board: .45 Inner Air Film: .68 Total: 18.27
Terra Cotta U-Value:
Wall Type
U-Value
Area T
Window .28 48sf 1 13.4 Terra Cotta
.054 92sf 1 4.96
18.4 Total Wall U-Factor:
Total Wall R-Value:
Calculating R-values
-
Passive Heating and Cooling
27
Direct gain
Direct gain
27
Solar hot water or PV
Direct gain
Direct gain
Vertical Insolation: 1465 Btu/day ft
Passive Heating: Direct Gain
Original Roof Section
Revised Roof Section
Passive Heating and Cooling was a seminar taught in fall 2013 by John Reynolds on designing passive systems for thermal control in buildings.
We covered many strategies for both heating and cooling, and went in-depth on how to access the necessary climate data for our sites and the mathematics required to accurately size and design the systems.
Our term project was to redesign a previous studio project to take advantage of a different climates potential for passive heating and cooling.
I redesigned my spring 2013 studio project, the theater complex from Vancouver, for Denvers arid climate.
-
CoolerWarmer
Air passing through wet pads at the top of the tower is cooled and drops down the tower and out the bottom, bringing a supply of fresh, cool air to the rst and second oors.
Passive Cooling: Cool TowersCalculations
Students at the University of Oregon are encouraged to incorporate passive heating, cooling, and day-lighting in all of our studio projects. Every student is taught the basics of techniques like night- ushed thermal mass cooling, or direct gain solar heating. This class, however, taught me the calculations required to accurately orient and con gure the building to optimize those strategies. My nal submission included 15 pages of calculations.
Human Agency and Comfort
This class also covered issues of thermal comfort. It included the standard ASHRAE de nitions of comfortable conditions for people, as well as other effects that in uence how people perceive comfort in their environment. For example, people who have some control over their environment, whether that means a thermostat or the ability to open windows and close shades, will feel comfortable in a wider range of temperatures .
-
DOOR C
DOOR B
DOOR ADOOR D
0 5 10 20
T
T
TT
T
TT
Eugene Depot: Post-Occupancy
Evaluationwith Alex Clohesey and Justin Hebels
Windows Glued ShutADAPTATION FOR USE : SEPARATION
HYPOTHESIS: The windows were sealed shut to prevent people from opening them and mess-ing the mechanical HVAC systems.
GLUE
REMOVEDWINDOW LATCH
Bench ScratchesBY-PRODUCT OF USE: EROSION
HYPOTHESIS: When people sit on the slippery benches, they slide a little before coming to a stop.
BT
- WOMAN
- MAN
- MOVING - READING
- LISTENING TO MUSIC
- TALKING ON THE PHONE
- TALKING (NOT ON PHONE)
- GOING TO BATHROOMS
- GOING TO TICKET OFFICE
- OBSERVER LOCATION
MAP KEY
DURATION OF USERS STAY
0-15 minutes 15-30 minutes 30-45 minutes
45-60 minutes observer and people who were in the station at 3:15, after everthing had left.
4 February 2011, 2:00-3:15PM As far as we can tell Friday afternoon is the busiest time of the week at the train station. The Express bus to Portland and the northbound Amtrak Coast Starlight both leave Eugene around 2:45 and they are popular routes with people who are going to spend the weekend in Portland, Seattle, or Vancouver B.C.. There were already almost ten people waiting when observation started at 2:00. This number increased steadily for the next 45 minutes, peaking at the 2:45 reading with about 35 people. A couple minutes after 2:45 the bus was announced and about ten people left on it. The Coast Starlight didnt pull in until a little after three, everyone else who had been waiting left on it. After the train had left there was a little residual traffic as disembarking passangers talked with the station agents or waited to get picked up, when observation ended at 3:15 there were only three people in the place.
Traces of Use
Behavior Mapping
My term project in Human Context of Design was to conduct a post-occupancy evaluation of Eugenes train station.
We analyzed the building using a variety of techniques including trace analysis, behavior mapping, interviews of employees and train riders, and historical research which included contacting the architects behind the stations renovation in the 1990s.
Finally we integrated all of the data we had collected and presented it along with an evaluation of how well the building was performing its function and how it could be improved. We also generated a set of general design guidelines based on our evidence that could be applied to future designs, transit oriented or not.
-
INTERVIEWER:_________________________
INTERVIEWEE:_________________________ M / F (CIRCLE ONE)
ROLE:________________________ AGE:________________
DATE:_____________________
TIME:_____________________
PLACE:____________________
Christopher Gebhardt
Jenny
Traveller 20s
2/5/11
2:45
Main waiting room
Shes taking the train to Portland, meeting a friend who lives there
Tries to use the train as much as possible, its cheaper and the experience is way better then airplanes, plus it it more environmentally friendly.
She likes how you can just walk in and take a seat with your bags, then get on the train, theres no hassle.
She usually gets to the station 20-25 minutes early; she forgot that you dont need to do any check in or other fuss when you get there.
She really likes the building, she thinks the yellow paint is nice and cheerful; the room is clean and nice.
It fits with that chill Northwest attitude
She said the station feels really safe, shes sure that there is crime on Amtrak, but its probably pretty rare and there are no big reminders of it.
She says the security at airports makes her feel less safe.
She really likes how when they re-did the architecture of the building they respected the old building, they didnt try to make it all modern looking.
She cant think of anything she would like to change, she really likes the old architecture and the cheerful wall colors and the old fashioned benches.
At first she thought she wouldnt have anything to contribute, she said she doesnt really think about archi-tecture all that much.
She had her stuff all spread out on her bench so it takes up the whole section.
I was sitting across from her and the benches were just far enough apart that I felt like I had to lean forward to talk to her and she was leaning forward as well. There might have been a noise issue there too as the station was pretty full and pretty noisy.
She kept going back to the experi-ence how nice it was compared to other forms of travel, whenever she talked about architectural features it was always how it contributed to the pleasant experience of train using.
InterviewsGuidelines for Future Design
Summary Maps
DOOR C
DOOR B DOOR A
DOOR D
0 5 10 20
People used their bags and coats to stake out a territory, usually one section of a bench
People tended to either sit as near to the ticket office as possible or as far as possible, the middle sections filled in last.
Most dramatic hellos and good-byes happened here.
Families sit in the round part because its big and they can fit a lot of people.
DOOR C
DOOR B DOOR A
DOOR D
0 5 10 20
People enjoyed the large windows and the light that came through them.
People liked the yellow walls, they said it felt cheerful.
Most people liked the built in wooden benches. However, a couple people strongly didnt.
Train schedule signage was really confusing for users.
People liked looking at posters and historical pictures on the wall.
Private Seating for Public Waiting
Single people staking out territory
Facing benches as different spaces
Facing benches as parts of the same space
Group using the whole bench
In waiting spaces, design seating as multiple sub-sections based on expected group sizes.
Our observations indicate that a seating group designed for three or four people is small enough for one person to claim as their territory, and big enough for most groups waiting for public transit. If the distinctions between seating groups are ambigu-ous then single people can emphasize their distinction by claiming a terri-tory with their things, while groups can ignore the distinction and treat it as a larger single area.
-
Currently the Campus Planning Department at the University of Oregon requires that most new academic buildings built on campus include a certain variety of informal social spaces. This is based on a belief that good informal social spaces can contribute to the intellectual life of the university by creating opportunities for frequent interaction between faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate students, as well as foster interdisciplinary research and collaboration.
This post-occupancy evaluation, developed in cooperation with Campus Planning, investigates the social spaces in the HEDCO building and evaluates their effectiveness in terms of how many people use them, whether they like them, how well they create opportunities for interaction between user groups, and whether they are actually assisting or enabling interdisciplinary collaboration.
A Post-Occupancy Evaluation of Informal Social Spaces in the
HEDCO Education BuildingClark Honors College Thesis Project Completed March 2014
HEDCO as a Center of Community
0
5
10
15
20
Daily2-3 Tim
es per Week
Once per Week
2-3 Times per M
onth
Once per Month
Less Than Once per Month
Never
Ground Floor of HEDCO
Respondents whose primary workspace is NOT in HEDCO:
How often do you spend time in or use the following common spaces within the College of Education Buildings?n=59
Daily2-3 Tim
es per Week
Once per Week
2-3 Times per M
onth
Once per Month
Less Than Once per Month
Never
Education Station Caf
HYPOTHESIS: The social spaces in HEDCO provide a social center for the college and help foster a sense of community in by attracting members of the college who do not work primarily at HEDCO.
Survey respondents who did not work in HEDCO use the ground oor at least once a week, and over 50% use the cafe every week.
I love that I can come in to something visually pleasing, that feels more like home. I wish the space was a bit bigger, so that there were more spots to sit around the re...I can almost always walk by someone I know in this area... creating a nice community place to reach out to others and connect. - Grad Student
Behavior mapping showed that small groups frequently form and disperse in the atrium and main hall.
Research CollaborationHYPOTHESIS: The social spaces in HEDCO provide opportunities for researchers to interact with each other and facilitate interdisciplinary research and collaboration.
The informal nature of the caf area encourages me to talk with other researchers and share ideas there.n=25
0
3
6
9
12
15
Strongly Agree
AgreeNeither Agree nor Disagree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
56%
How often do you spend time in the ground oor of HEDCO Education Building?
How often do you spend time in the caf area of the HEDCO Education Building?
Are you collaborating, or have you recently collaborated on your project with other researchers?
Who are you collaborating with? Choose all that apply.
How did you begin your research collaborations?
p-value= 0.81
p-value= 1.00
p-value= 0.95
p-value= 0.86
p-value= 0.97
p-value= 1.00
The survey results for this hypothesis suggest that while the social spaces in HEDCO do provide opportunities for researchers to talk about their work, they have no signi cant effect on formal research collaboration.
The p-value is a measure of the likelihood that a result is the effect of random chance instead of a signi cant relationship. 1.00 is perfectly random, and .05 would be 95% certainty that it is not random.
We cross-referenced the answers to several questions about research collaboration with the frequency researchers claim to use the social spaces in HEDCO, and found no statistically signi cant relationship. It was, in fact, very close to perfectly random.
-
Research Goals and Methods
It identi es problems that can be xed in the short term, and indicates successes and shortcomings that can be used to improve campus planning projects in the future using a variety of evaluation methods including a quantitative and qualitative space analysis, formal observation and trace analysis, an online survey distributed to College of Education members, follow-up interviews after the survey, and person on the street interviews.
The results suggest that HEDCO is very effective as a community center. It attracts members of the college who work in other buildings on campus and provides spaces where members like to eat, study, work, and socialize. HEDCO also does appear to support student-faculty interaction very well for the departments based in the building but the results indicate that the common social spaces work better for faculty than students. There was no evidence found that the social spaces in HEDCO are contributing in a signi cant way to formal research collaborations. The thesis also identi ed way nding problems associated with users accessing the third oor and noted the replace as an exceptionally successful social place.
Results
Student-Faculty InteractionHYPOTHESIS: The social spaces in HEDCO provide opportunities for casual interaction between faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate students.
The results for this hypothesis are more ambiguous. HEDCO has a high percentage of people who think their department has an active hub for faculty and grad students but students rated HEDCOs opportunities for interaction with faculty at only 55 out of 100.
0
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
No
Yes
n=112, p=.10
Do you feel like your department has a "hub" where faculty and grad students frequently cross paths and interact informally?
Off campus
Lokey Education Complex
Clinical Services Building
HEDCO Education Building
Elsewhere on campus
Surprise Success: The Fireplace The replace in the HEDCO Atrium is one of the users favorite elements in the new building. It is successful as a cognitive mapping landmark, and as a focal point for social interaction.
f The literal hearth in HEDCOs metaphorical hearth space is easily the most successful social space in the college.
Please click on your favorite spot in HEDCOs rst oor
The replace
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
...NOT in HEDCO...in HEDCO
Please rate HEDCOs opportunities for interactionon a scale from 1-100 with 100 being excellent and 1 being poor:
Students whose primary workspaces are...
90
100
-
Graphic Design
Competition winning t-shirt design for the University of Oregon chapter of the AIAS
18
OLORADO
OLORADO
OLORADO
U
n
i
f
o
r
m
d
e
s
i
g
n
f
o
r
C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o
C
u
t
t
h
r
o
a
t
Y
o
u
t
h
U
l
t
i
m
a
t
e
C
h
a
m
p
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
T
e
a
m
w
i
t
h
T
h
o
m
a
s
G
e
b
h
a
r
d
t
Extracurricular graphic design projects I have done for fun and for organizations that I am involved with or people I know.
Kayak paint design based on Matisses cut paper art. With Stephen Duff
-
PhotographyPhotographs I have taken recently. Many of them are from my study abroads in Japan and Vancouver, some are from closer to home.
Photography is a fun way to record my experiences while also developing my eye for composition, color, and light.
top related