Given at Our 2010
Convention on Architecture in Chicago: When I was first
contacted about addressing the GCEA [Global Convention and
Exposition on Architecture], I have to confess that I was a
little disappointed that my seminar was titled Preservation
OR Progress, as if there should ever be a question. I
would have hoped that it would have been called something
like: Preservation IS Progress or perhaps: Preservation –
Duh?
What is particularly vexing to
us is that historic preservation seems to be one of the only
social movements in the last century that constantly has to
be reaffirmed with each new generation. You would be hard
pressed to find a seminar today called Women’s Suffrage:
Friend or Foe or Banning Child Labor: Has it hurt US
competitiveness?
So, Preservation or Progress?
I guess the question comes down to what one’s definition of
progress is. For those of us in the Chicago preservation
movement, we do not view the goal of preserving our
architectural past as being mutually exclusive with
nurturing our architectural future. The preservation of an
historic building does not deny the opportunity for
something better to be built, nor does it stifle our ability
as architects to realize our own vision. Rather, it is the
totality of a city’s architecture that defines it and sets
it apart from all others in the United States. It is that
very juxtaposition of the old and the new that creates a
dynamic architectural tension that strengthens and enhances
a cityscape, allowing individual works of steel and glass
modernism to stand apart from their often soot-stained
forefathers.
Unlike Manhattan, Chicago is
not by any means starved for developable land. Outside the
central city, acres of land sit vacant, while downtown a
multitude of surface parking lots, multi-story concrete
parking garages and mediocre post-war office buildings are
crying out to be replaced by something better. The same can
be said for the vast majority of other American cities.
Imagine what our cities would look like if we preserved and
rehabilitated all of the good buildings, tore down all the
bad buildings and then replaced them with great buildings?
As professional
preservationists, we understand that every historically
important building cannot, nor should not be saved. Unlike
other art forms, architecture cannot be hung on a wall or
stowed neatly in a drawer. Rather, it not only must be
maintained but it also must be economically viable; a
daunting challenge in any environment but particularly in
this economic downturn. Every historic structure cannot be
turned into a publicly funded history museum; in fact most
properties that currently are used as museums are
perennially strapped for operating, maintenance and
programming resources.
However, our beef with the
prevailing American view of historic structures, or any
structure for that matter, is that they are considered
guilty until proven innocent. In Europe, adaptive reuse is
always the first consideration. In the US, demolition
always seems to be the first option, with communities and
preservationist forever scrambling to play catch up, with
often disastrous and, ironically, architecturally inferior
results.
Another important element of
preservation that is only now being accepted is the marriage
between the green movement and the preservation movement.
It only stands to reason that a continuous cycle of
demolition and reconstruction is inherently wasteful and
ultimately unsustainable. LEED certification for new
construction does not factor in the lost embodied energy
from the building that was leveled to take its place, nor
does it account for the wasted construction debris that must
be dumped into a landfill before new construction can
begin. If this were taken into account, and if proper
incentives were in place to reward preservation rather to
incent demolition, there would be far fewer demolitions and
far more adaptive reuses taking place.
But how do we as a society
decide what is worthy of preservation; what should stay and
what should go; what gets a generous helping hand from Uncle
Sam and what gets left to twist in the wind, literally.
When confronted with that question, I often paraphrase the
Supreme Court’s view of pornography, which is: I can’t
define it, but I know it when I see it. In other words,
they left it up to individual communities to decide for
themselves what regulation, if any, they wanted to impose
with regards to that particular art form.
And that is the argument that
we make at Preservation Chicago on a daily basis. We could
not exist as a functioning organization if we did not
partner with and engage community residents to assist then
in their individual preservation efforts. We were founded
to be a clearing house of information and a neighborhood
resource to block clubs, community groups and religious
congregations fighting to preserve the structures that they
value and cherish.
I love my city and that is why
I co-founded Preservation Chicago and fight every day of my
life for it. It is a city worth fighting for. For me, the
best part of living in Chicago is leaving Chicago. I don’t
mean a permanent departure, of course. However, being away
for a week or two can be most beneficial, for it is only
when you leave for a time and visit other American cities
that you truly appreciate the uniqueness of Chicago.
For those of us in the
preservation movement, it is Chicago’s architecture that
defines the city and sets it apart from all others in the
United States. However, world-class architecture alone does
not make a city great. It is the energy and the innovative
ideas generated by its citizens that determine whether or
not a city is going to be world class. Fortunately, Chicago
has never longed for either. And even absent our collection
of Sullivan’s and Wright’s, D. H. Burnham’s and Mies Van der
Rohe’s, Chicago would still be a dynamic place.
Our architecture simply
creates the “stage-set” on which this grand drama of
American urbanism plays out. The primary mission of
Preservation Chicago is to see that this stage-set is
preserved. But our architectural legacy should not be saved
merely because it is beautiful. More importantly, it should
be saved because the physical form and context of Chicago’s
existing architecture already reflects the very philosophy
that so-called urbanists are advocating in the first place.
I would venture a guess that
most Chicagoan’s, if stopped on the street, would not be
able to offer a definition of what, exactly, urbanism is.
However, the fact that they would even be on the street to
be asked shows that, for the most part, we are living the
principles of the back to the city movement without
consciously knowing it. For inner-city Chicagoans, new
urbanism is simply old urbanism. The pleasure of sitting on
your front steps in the summertime and watching the
neighborhood children play on the sidewalk, the convenience
of being able to walk to the corner to buy a bottle of pop
or a newspaper, or the variety of transportation options
available to us within a short walk, are generally taken for
granted as our right as city-dwellers.
As a not-for-profit
preservation advocacy organization, preserving historic
buildings is, of course, our primary mission. But
Preservation Chicago has also committed to a more
idealistic, and perhaps less quantifiable, mission: We aim
to preserve our historic urban environment. Urban
preservation frequently fails when a historic structure is
preserved, and yet, as part of that preservation effort, it
becomes divorced from its original historic context.
Facadism has done a great deal to erode the value of
historic buildings by attaching them to parking garages or
hiding them behind enclosed shopping malls. Our
organization seeks to make historic preservation relevant by
allowing buildings to continue their useful lives as
buildings, in context – not as figurative headstones or
museum installations.
Therefore, in order for
Preservation Chicago to accomplish its mission successfully,
we evaluated what would be the best approach to implementing
our ideals. We acknowledged early in our existence that our
energy would be best spent advocating for broad policy
changes that reinforce the process of preservation, rather
than dissipating it by running from street corner to street
corner protesting the demolition of individual buildings.
And while we have spent considerable time doing just that,
we have also expended a great deal of our energy working on
policy issues ranging from zoning reform and strengthening
our current landmarks ordinance, as well as educational
outreach to inform the general public about the benefits of
preservation.
We have discovered that it is
through grass roots community organizing that we have had
our greatest success. We learned that once a threat to a
community is exposed, neighborhood residents are much more
inclined to support historic preservation. And with this
protracted economic down turn which has led to countless
foreclosures and abandoned buildings, neighborhood
preservation is now more critical than ever.
Several years ago we have
embarked on an ambitious campaign called the Landmark
District Initiative. This initiative calls for the creation
of new landmark districts throughout the city, as well as
the expansion of existing districts to include protection of
adjacent historic buildings and spaces that were not
included when our original districts were drawn. This
initiative has led to a serious disagreement with regards to
individual property rights, for which the city is currently
engaged in a high-profile lawsuit.
That other cities throughout
the United States are beginning to emulate the things that
Chicagoans have always taken for granted speaks volumes
about the validity of such planning concepts as tightly
spaced traffic grids, efficient mass transportation,
mixed-use zoning and pedestrian-oriented development,
concepts first embraced by Chicago out of simple necessity
over 100 years ago.
We hope that our efforts will
inspire other communities to consider the preservation of
their historic architecture, as well as their often-fragile
urban environments.
Our mantra is that historic
preservation is not about the past, but rather, it is about
the future. So, I hope I have been able to demonstrate
today that Historic Preservation is definitely Progress.
*
* *
On site with McHugh Construction
This summer
Chicago Architecture Today
enjoyed an opportunity to sit down with the management of
one the nation's most prolific construction firms McHugh
Construction, Inc. based right here in Chicago.
Since its founding in 1897,
James McHugh Construction Co. has earned its reputation as a
builder of landmark, one-of-a-kind structures.
Chicago’s history is McHugh’s
own: many of the area’s top landmarks bear McHugh’s imprint,
including Marina City with its striking corncob shape and
the world-class Arlington Park racetrack, completed in a
record 21 months. More recent contributions to Chicago’s
distinct milieu include the new Goodman Theatre, the
striking angles of the Notebaert Nature Museum, the swank
Hotel Monaco and Hotel Allegro, and the new high-rise
neighborhood of Lakeshore East. Little Village and York
Community high schools demonstrate equal commitment to
innovation and tradition in education.
In this interview, we were
treated to not only a bit more of the firm's history,
current projects and procedures, and perspective on the
economy as it pertains to the construction industry. This is
part one of two on-site interviews.
*
* *
Spotlight
on Friends
An Exclusive with Roger G. Hill II CEO /
Chairman
Gettys Hospitality & Design
Development
By Erik Munck
On assignment for Chicago Architecture
Today
Erik: I understand
you were a hotel administration major at Cornell University.
How did you become interested in hotel design?
Roger: I went to the
hotel school to get a good understanding of how hotel
operations worked. I had an internship at Bear Sterns and
wanted to eventually work for them performing research on
which hotel stock to buy. However, I soon realized that
there were a lot of hotels that had been built in the 80's
for the wrong reasons. In 1986, tax laws were changed
dramatically where prior to that you could use the lost
money invested in real estate as a tax shelter. That made
owning a hotel that much more difficult in that it had to
make complete economic sense [from the onset of any
project]. When Andrew, Ari, Julius, [the three other Cornell
students who helped found Gettys] and I met, we came to the
consensus that there could be an interesting opportunity to
utilize our interest in finance and the way that hotels run,
and couple that with a strong understanding of how to help
an owner make the right decisions for renovations or new
construction. There was also a faculty member at school
named Keith Halbert who taught in the Properties Department.
He understood our thinking about how to potentially create a
design business that could be business-focused, and we ran
with that idea. In short, it was coming across an
[influential] professor that really got us interested in
design in addition to possessing an understanding that there
was a need in the marketplace for people who understood good
design and good hotel business.
Erik: I am also
aware that you attended the prairie school in Racine
Wisconsin which was built by Frank Lloyd Wright’s firm. Did
this help influence your interest in design?
Roger: I would say
without question that it did. Architecturally it was a
really stimulating environment to work in, and I feel that
helped me at a young age subliminally to begin to understand
the importance of good design. The Prairie School shows that
you don’t have to spend a lot of money to make a place look
good, a belief which we pride ourselves on here at Gettys.
The school has some great details in relationship to being
environmentally sensitive, like overhangs which keep the
summer sun from coming in a building. It can get pretty cold
in the Midwest, and there are some terrific ways to let
natural light inside. One thing that came through was that
it was a place that you really felt good coming to.
Erik: Why start
Gettys in Chicago?
Roger: We started
Gettys here in Chicago because when we started the business
in 1988 there were already a number of really
well-recognized hotel interiors firms in LA and New York,
and not many here. Also this is a central location, which we
knew from a travel perspective would help us be competitive,
and certainly as time has gone on it’s been a wonderful
location for us to be in relationship to international
travel. Not that we had that vision back then, but it’s
proven to reinforce that it was a good decision. Hyatt was
also here and has always been a good customer of ours. Other
than the weather it’s been a fantastic place to be.
Erik: How has the
current economic status affected the types of projects that
Gettys has taken on now?
Roger: One of the
things that is unique about us is that we have always been
excited to work on projects at many different price points,
whereas some of our competition will only do resorts,
luxury, or upper up scale projects. Having done a range of
projects, we are in a better position than some other firms
which are only focused on the high-end or new construction
markets. It is helping us tremendously that we are currently
working on both renovations and new construction, and not
many clients would feel good about a firm being able to work
in a multitude of different environments, but our philosophy
is spend a dollar and make it look like two, no matter the
project. This current economic environment has been very
challenging, but luckily for us it has been less challenging
because of the fact that we can work in this broad design
platform.
Erik: Would you
like to continue with foreign projects?
Roger: Absolutely.
Getting back to our cornerstone of creating value and
reducing risk for the people that we serve, that mantra
applies extremely well globally. Now that we have offices in
Hong Kong and Dubai, it’s much easier for our team to be
there to support them [international clients], and thanks to
technology we can very efficiently work as one global
organization. It’s stimulating from an entrepreneur’s
perspective, as you want to continue to grow and learn, and
it is exciting to learn about new cultures. Fortunately for
us we’ve also had the opportunity to do business in these
new places, as much of our competition which only does work
in the U.S. has had a more challenging time. We [ the U.S.]
are at the epicenter of this financial calamity, and are
probably going to be in it for the longest period of time.
Erik: Do you have
a favorite type of project? For example: Local, new
construction, renovation, international?
Roger: I would say
projects where we can add the most value for a client from
inception to completion, no matter which project type you
just mentioned. If we can sit down with someone and really
understand what their objectives are from a design and
business perspective and help them come up with a plan and
then help execute it, that by far is the project type that
is the most exciting and rewarding, and which we can be the
most invested in. Providing the start-to-end value is the
easiest for us, and the most stimulating.
Erik: Do you have
any favorite projects which Gettys has completed?
Roger: Some of our
most meaningful projects were the smallest ones we had when
we were starting out, and I still have great affection for
them because people had enough confidence in us to give us a
chance to do them. I’ll never forget us renovating the Hyatt
Regency Chicago or the Radisson in Indianapolis. It is
really rewarding taking on those early projects and not
letting our clients down, and now twenty years later still
working with those same clients.
Erik: What was one
of the hardest projects you have been involved in?
Roger: Always the
most challenging but rewarding projects are those with
extremely aggressive timelines. We once did a model room in
two weeks for the Radisson Lexington hotel in New York City,
which would normally take a month to design and at least
another month to build out. You try to control three things
in a project: The time it takes, the budget and the scope.
If you don’t have control of at least two, it can be tricky,
but those projects with tight budgets and a need for speed
are also the most exciting.
Erik: What makes
Gettys stand out from the rest?
Roger: I’d like to
think it’s the culture we’ve tried to create. We treat each
other fairly, and have an open door policy for those who
want to learn and be involved in as many presentations as
they’d like. We also encourage people to take risks, and
want everyone at Gettys to feel the entrepreneurial
environment themselves. We couple that with trying to
attract the best people in each of the areas we are trying
to work in. Here we are a team, and consequently work within
the pronoun nomenclature of ‘We’ and ‘Our.’ I think that’s
unusual in the creative industry, which is so driven by ego.
We all share the successes and the failures; fortunately
over the last 20 years we’ve had a lot more successes than
failures. Furthermore, the majority of our clients are
people who also respect what we bring, and don’t look at us
as a commodity but can understand us and help us get the
most value out of a project.
Erik: What do you
think is the biggest difference in the hotel industry now
and when you started this company in 1988?
Roger: The biggest
difference, which we could not be more proud of because we’d
like to feel like we were an influence, is that now people
really recognize the power of great design. Twenty years ago
people’s expectations for good design both residentially and
in the hotel industry were much lower. If a guest wanted to
really experience terrific design he or she had to go to a
luxury or upper/ upscale hotels, whereas now terrific design
solutions can be found in the select service market as well.
Moreover, hotel rooms were homogenized within brands; even
two of the same brand hotels in different countries would be
the same. It has always been our understanding that there
should be a sense of place within a hotel. The brand will
ensure that guests will have the kind of experience that he
or she is expecting at that type of hotel, and there is no
reason that we should not be able to think locally to
develop a design solution. Technology is also playing a more
important roles, and with good design becoming more
affordable, I think design will get better and better.
For more information on the
Gettys Group, contact them at
Gettys.com
*
* *
Spotlight
on Friends
Chicago Architecture Foundation
Bookshop & Tour Center
Our Spotlight
on Friends series highlights organizations and businesses
within the Chicagoland community which contribute to the
city's unique architectural legacy.
The CAF Bookshop & Tour Center located at 224 South Michigan
Avenue is one of Chicago's most treasured resources. At a
recent interview, we explored the multi-faceted offerings
found there from architecturally-related merchandise to the
newly-constructed much lauded model city.
Ross Renjilian - Interview
Contributing reporters: Alex Tsparis,
Kyle Thomas
*
* *
Spotlight
on Friends
The Prairie Avenue Bookshop
Our Spotlight
on Friends series highlights organizations and businesses
within the Chicagoland community which contribute to the
city's unique architectural legacy. The Prairie Avenue
Bookshop located on the edge of the Loop on Wabash Ave is
one those special places many may not be aware of. In this
video segment, we hope to whet your appetite to take an
opportunity to sample the excellent selections of
architecturally-related material you'll find there.
Contributing reporters: Alex
Tsparis - Editing, Video
Kyle Thomas - Interview
*
* *
An Exclusive with Mike
Maurer, AIA Principal Gettys Group, Inc.
Green Hotel Design: Chicago's
Felix Hotel
by Erik Munck, Project
Assist., Chicago Architecture Today
Going green is easier than
people think, even in the hospitality industry. At least it
is when you take an innovative hospitality design firm and
have them renovate a historic hotel in one of the greenest
cities in the U.S. The Hotel Felix is the $27 million newly
developed boutique hotel that once was the Hotel Wacker,
located in downtown Chicago and expected to be the city’s
first LEED Silver hotel. Gettys Group, Inc. supplied the
interior and architectural design, procurement, and project
management services. I was fortunate enough to talk to Mike
Maurer, AIA and Principal with Gettys, about the steps they
took to secure LEED Silver status, and the unique way in
which hotels are affected by, and in turn affect,
sustainable building practices.
A hotel functions very
differently than other buildings and operates on its own
standards. Therefore, hotels need their own rating system,
explains Mr. Maurer. The amount of use and quick turnaround,
as well as need for high visibility are just some issues
designers must face. Furthermore, hotels are broadening
their functions, incorporating more conference centers,
spas, and newer technologies. Luckily, one of Mr. Maurer’s
associates is one of 16 architects working with the USGBC to
develop a much needed LEED Hotel category.
Sustainability is becoming
more important in the hospitality industry and is used to
attract clientele; a case in point when numerous people
checked out of the Lakeshore hotel to stay in the nearby
Felix. Some companies even require their employees to stay
in green hotels. Gettys helped their client, OBG Hotel
Felix, secure LEED status, without compromising their high
standards. Maintaining brand image is one of the hardest
parts of making a hotel sustainable, recalls Mr. Maurer.
Using less water can sacrifice the powerful showers adored
by guests, and the need for high indoor air quality means a
lot of duct work, which one does not want exposed in a
high-end hotel. However, in typical Gettys fashion, they
made it simple, and gave the clients the information
required to evaluate each LEED point. Allowing the client to
make informed decisions is the key part of the job; a
position held by Mr. Maurer and Gettys.
So what are the areas that
gained the Felix major LEED points? According to Mr. Maurer,
some are no-brainers. The re-use of an existing facility, an
urban environment close to public transport, and reduced
demand for electricity and plumbing, to name a few. In fact,
just by complying with Chicago’s building codes
automatically earns many points, specifically in the energy
use category. As Gettys has their own procurement, they were
able to maintain control over their specifications, and
gained many points in carpeting, certified woods and
recycled products. These of course, were selected with
design as the main priority. “The guests don’t notice what’s
not there,” says Mr. Maurer, revealing the importance of not
constantly reminding guests that they are in a LEED
building. Guests don’t want to feel like they are
sacrificing anything to stay at a hotel. Mr. Maurer
thankfully jokes that green does not mean tons of solar
panels or granola anymore. A high-end hotel can be green and
still have the amenities, comforts, and image one would
expect in a high-end hotel.
So what is the Felix’s
image? Nature provides the inspiration, but does not
dominate. A wide array of earth tones, champagnes, and
bronzes, both rich and neutral make up the palette.
According to Mr. Maurer, color comes from the guests and the
streetscape. Windows on the north show trees and let in the
northern light, the light favored by artists. The elaborate
artwork is the pop.
It is only natural that
hotels are following the green trend. With the popularity of
the Felix and the increasing interest towards sustainable
practices in the hotel industry, it should be easier to live
a green lifestyle, even while traveling.
*
* *
An Exclusive with
Stephen Yas
President, YAS Architecture
LLC
Q. Can you give us a
brief history of YAS Architecture in the Chicagoland area?
R.
We were founded in 1990 from two partners in Evanston, IL
after an 18-year history of working in and with some of
Chicago areas largest firms such as SOM and Lohan
Associates. We have been at our current Chicago location on
south Michigan Avenue since August of 2007.
Q. What is the current
size of your design team, and is this your primary office of
operation? Can you currently foresee growth that would
precipitate future expansion?
R.
We currently have 10 people on staff with a couple of
graduate level interns as well. We are projecting to a staff
level of about 21 team members [to comfortably handle future
growth].
Q. What are the
specific design programs which define YAS Architecture?
R.
We began with the idea of doing commercial projects [and
have since received a number of residential commissions],
but the scope of work breaks down to 50% public work and 50%
private work for developers. So our focus is Architecture,
Interior Design and Urban Design projects.
Q. Talk about your
firm’s philosophy which shapes each project endeavor from
start to finish.
R.
The predominant focus of our design philosophy is
"humanizing" modern architecture. Just because a facility is
modern doesn't mean it has to be cold, unlivable and
uncomfortable. There needs to be a tactile element to a
modern building. We want the people of a particular culture
[or locale] to be able to identify with a building-to
experience sort of a psychological connection. Before
there's a concept there must a spirit. Our goal is find the
spirit of place. When you find that, then you're home,
so-to-speak. What I mean by "spirit" involves the essence of
that culture and humanistic value of a [particular] place.
We must ask, "What is the symbolism of a [certain] local
that people can relate to? For example, we didn't want to
design a Prairie-style public facility in the west suburban
community of Montgomery, IL according to the desires of most
of their city officials because there was no history of that
style in that area.
Basically, a building shouldn't look like it was dropped in
from the United States if you're in another country.
Therefore, consulting with the community can play a large
role in getting project "right." We do expect that a
prospective client will view our portfolio and understand that
we design within the theme of a modern [context].
[Realistically], although we believe that we should design
for "our time" and technology, we know that modern design
can be a tough sell, especially in many suburban
communities.
Q. Tell us a few of the
projects past and/or present in which you have experienced
the greatest sense of accomplishment as you reflect upon its
outcome and client satisfaction.
R.
I gage success
by client satisfaction, especially as it relates to the
realm of functionality. For example, many of our public
projects have attained the status of a becoming a
"prototype" for similar projects by other firms.
Case-in-point was Firestation #3 in Evanston, IL. We
instituted several atypical, yet innovative design concepts
for this facility including a new color scheme, a symbolic
house drying tower, 3 80-foot glass apparatus bays, a
workout room, a great room, study and watch rooms and
private dorm rooms for male and female personnel. Humbly,
the station has become the envy of area fire houses and
we've attained a bit of cult status among the fire house
patrons themselves. This outcome illustrates the need to
talk to the client not just about style but function. Yet,
we never put our value judgments [on what's needed for a
project ahead of our clients. This is accomplished by not
just talking to the decision-makers who are the visionaries,
but we also go to the rank-n-file who'll be living and
working from day-to-day in that facility.
Q. In
light of the present economic downturn, how does that affect
YAS Architecture going forward?
R.
Global Economics. If say the condo market here in the U.S.
is stagnant, we'll go where its thriving. In a broader
sense, we propose a design process and methodology which
functions like an equation to draw out from a client what
the best [solution] would be in a particular context.
[Versatility works to our advantage] as we have the ability
to design almost any kind of project. [Yet], in this down
market, high-end modern is selling [which of course is the
core of our design philosophy]. And we are proud to say that
all of our projects have come in under budget [which speak
positively to our program].
Q.
What is your personal
feeling on the great deal of emphasis being placed upon
green technology today, and what do you think the outlook of
urban architecture will have in store for sustainable
design?
R.
Good architects were doing green design before it became a
buzz word. We work together with our clients to reach a
level of sustainability they're satisfied with and use a
LEED checklist as the client and project calls for it. On a
philosophical but yet functional level, I believe that every
high-rise building should produce more energy than it uses.
For example, our high-rise project in Columbia will provide
more energy than it consumes and in fact, will produce
enough energy to satisfy the needs of the community around
it.
Q. How would you
complete the following sentence: “Architecture design
schools need to better prepare students in…?”
R.
Freehand drawing is becoming a lost art. Students need to
learn how to design without the aid of a computer. CAD
should be used as a tool, but not dictate design, theory or
creativity. Student though processes should be more lateral
than logical. In other words, thinking needs to occur more
out-of-the-box.
Q. In what ways does
YAS Architecture participate in the Chicagoland community?
R. We're doing our best to try
to build a better world one building at a time through
preservation and re-development projects. The end result
being making the community a safer [and more inviting]
place. We also work with the academic community through
architectural educational initiatives and competitive
programs to assist students in taking greater steps to
become a desirable workplace commodity.
*
* *
An Exclusive with Ted Strand
Principal at Solomon
Cordwell Buenz
On
"Green Design" and 340 on The Park
340 on
the Park
Q: Why does SCB feel it was
important to strive for LEED certification in a residential
skyscraper?
A: One of the things I want
to make real clear is giving credit where credit is due, and
that the developer, Related Midwest, was ahead of the curve
(pushing for a green design). They decided in conjunction
with SCB to ring up the idea of sustainability. / This is a
project that was done far in advance of any of green design
incentive programs. SCB and the developer were way ahead of
the curve on this, and in the end they were anticipatory of
what the green market would be and benefited from it.
Q: What were some major
obstacles or design implications necessary to make 340 on
the Park a green building by design.
A: [First of all], LEED is a way of keeping
score through a design process.
Q: So does LEED drive design
decisions?
A: No, I don’t think it
drives design decisions. When it comes to doing a curtain
wall, we made decisions about that curtain wall; we made
decisions about the quality of the glass [and] about the amount
of glass that would be used in there. So, those are all
design decisions that led to achieving certain LEED points,
but it’s a balance that you are trying to strike between
achieving these points and making the building be on
budget. There is a whole range of decisions that you go
through to arrive at the final design, and LEED is one of
the components, so I would not say it is the driver behind
the design.
Q: After Completing 340 on
The Park and being awarded the silver LEED certification, do
you feel that many of your future projects will incorporate
green technologies?
A: Absolutely. Part of our
practice now, is that we ensure that discussion is held with
each and every one of our clients. The notion of achieving
some level of LEED certification is discussed, and that we
educate our clients on LEED and its implications.
Q: What is your personal
feeling on the great deal of emphasis on green technology
today, and what do you think the future of architecture will
have in store for green technology?
A: I think increasingly it
is becoming more mainstream, however what we as a practice
are more interested in is not necessarily ensuring that all
of our buildings are LEED certified. We are more interested
in seeing ways we can reduce energy consumption in a
building, and that is not just getting LEED points, that’s
thinking about a building holistically.
Q:
Having the opportunity to design next to Millennium Park
(one of Chicago’s most favored Green Spaces) is there any
specific elements you pulled from the iconic park, and
anything that you did differently in your later attempts.
A: Clearly, The Legacy is a
building that really capitalizes on those views. The
Heritage is a building that faces parallel to the park,
where as The Legacy turns its axis to be perpendicular to
the park, so the views look out towards the park. With the
Heritage we made every attempt to get units with views
looking over the park, but there are some units that only
have the city view. In the Legacy all the views go out
overlooking the park.
Q: Not just looking at
Millennium Park, SCB primarily operates in the Chicagoland
area, besides business & commerce variables, what do you
derive from the Chicago area’s built environment or its
history of architecture, which inspires or guides your
design principles?
A: Architecture went through
a phase where contextualizing was something that was very
important. The postmodern movement was where everything had
a hat on it, and everything tried to be related to its
context. Instead we focus more on Chicago being the home of
modern architecture with Mies and International School. As a
practice we tend to look at buildings from a reductionist
stand point rather than trying to add layers of fussiness,
we are trying to design buildings so they are pure
expressions of their function so that they are as clean and
as simple, and as modern, from an expression point, as they
can be.
Have any insights on a recent industry trend? Maybe you have an opinion on a current design or educational philosophy? Or perhaps there are subject areas pertaining to civic events and concerns, academic-related or professional issues where you see the benefit of bringing a
unique perspective to the public discourse. We invite you to send us your thoughts. Additionally, we will solicit your opinion on various topics under consideration at various times throughout the year. Your
experience and knowledge of the "whats", "whys" and "hows" in the realm of architecture, construction, development, design, design and even tourism we believe would be of great benefit to our readers.
Tell us the subject area of your piece along with your name,
title, and place of business or school. Photos are encouraged. Send your letter to
friends@chicagoarchitecturetoday.com. We look forward to hearing from you soon!
