Syracuse SOA Spring 2017 Arc208


Prof. Ivan Bernal

The second year studio sequence positions formal, spatial, technological and material design inquiry in critical relationship with context – social, cultural, physical, and environmental. External and internal logics of site, city, program, and tectonics are the topics of research and production. The studios introduce students to the subject of architecture (its varied approaches, cultural addresses, political profiles, etc.) in relation to the object of architecture (i.e., the built artifact) introduced in first year.

ARC 207 places explicit emphasis on synthesis of performance and appearance in architecture within urban or para-urban sites/situations. Projects require interpretation and resolution of moderately complex programs and spatial narratives. Design response emerges, in part, out of an understanding of networks, systems, and formations of the city. ARC208 explores factors and forces influencing the generation of architectural form and tectonic resolution through the lens of site, system, surface, and section in a “landscape” context. The conventional program is modest in scope with the expectation that design projects have a high level of resolution. Site is positioned as a complex landscape of artifacts, organizations, and processes that operate at diverse spatial and temporal scales.

Landscape + Architecture: Expanded Frameworks of Form and Relevance-For architecture site certainly matters; but why, and how? The discipline of architecture is encompassed by, and in-turn encompasses, urban forms and urban questions. Architecture brings together politics to culture in form and space.  From Vitruvius to Alberti, and through to Rossi and Rowe, for as long as there has been a discipline of architecture, there has been an urban basis for its relevance. Urban locations provide rich and demanding sites for architectural design.  As presented in ARC 207, the expanding concentrations of systems, spaces, and people that constitute cities are political, cultural, and literal contexts for architecture. Thus, Fall of Second Year explored and engaged questions of spatial form, tectonics, and program in relation to the complexities of urban sites and contexts. How, then, has the discipline of landscape architecture further expanded questions and conceptions of site?  Over the past several decades, landscape discourse has opened up to absorb a range of associated topics: environmentalism (Rachel Carson), cultural studies (J.B. Jackson), ecology and planning (Ian McHarg), among other more traditional concerns.  More recently, critic/designers such as James Corner have worked to articulate a rigorous synthesis of this breadth, re-forging Landscape Architecture as Landscape Urbanism. Just as remarkable has been the expansion of landscape architecture’s methodologies and related form-solution proposals, which are site specific, yet encompass multiple complexities across scales and issue-sets. As architecture and landscape architecture confirm their connections and interdependencies to urbanism and environment, the demands for design engagement likewise expand.  Our design disciplines recognize obligations of performance, experience, and appearance, in the production of form. These are broad considerations and daunting questions of discipline-wide significance. What will we do in this semester of ARC 208?  We will work on sites in landscape contexts, focusing on: systems, surfaces, spaces, and strategies. System 207 introduced the term “system” to promote design understanding of tectonics, program organization, building circulation, and multiple aspects of urban form. To these 208 will add landscape systems of infrastructure (local and regional), hydrology, and climate as fundamental aspects of context.  Systems, as such, are characterized by logics.  Throughout, systems span from the natural to the constructed, and are multi-scalar, embedded, and inter-related. Surface 207’s urban-surface interests of ground and building face, with associated concerns of publicness, activity, and city-space will be augmented by additional attention to terrain: its morphology and its material and phenomenal properties. Surface as a mediating tissue is studied for its ecological, performative, aesthetic, tectonic and spatial attributes and effects. Surfaces are examined as geometric forms, patterns, and envelopes in relation to technical and spatial systems.Space- Certainly we can understand space as integral to architectonic form – this is already second nature.  Furthering these potentialities, 208 will explore space and form at the scale of landscape. Overlaps common to building-scale and landscape-scale spatial form will be recognized, expanding questions of vocabulary and organization.  Additionally, the subtleties and multivalence of landscape space will also be introduced. Strategy – Requiring construal of urban site and building program, 207 introduced building-form strategy as project genesis – synthetic diagrams answering external considerations with internal form and logic. 208 will project strategy more broadly, engaging necessarily larger readings of context.  Particular focus will be directed at establishing and developing building’s role within more extensive and engaged landscape-scaled form strategies.

Students: Sukhmann Kaur Aneja , RazanBairagdar, AmandaBrunner, Isabella Calidonio,  AlejandroCollantes, Rachel Davis, Prerit Gupta, Baxter Hankin, Daniel Hogan, Yuanqi Hua, Jessica Huang, Ema Scheifele, Yunhao Yang.