INTRODUCTION Sanjive Vaidya, RA, Department chair
“Midnight on Feb. 5, 1952, a cross was burned in front of Stoughton Hall, where the 11 black members of the Harvard Class of 1955 lived… One of the 11 black students was the late J. Max Bond ’55, who became one the nation’s leading black architects, stressing socially progressive themes and public service.” -Hartman, Chester. “Cross burning in Harvard Yard?” The Harvard Crimson, 17 Sept 2014.
Symbolizing structural and social barriers for minorities and people of color accessing higher education, this violent scene is heightened by its setting. The venerated campus represents a pinnacle of logic and reason. Faculty openly discouraged Max Bond from pursuing architecture because of the color of his skin. His experience at Harvard is alarming, but familiar. The barriers are now less overt, but remain economically polarizing and dispiriting.
By completing his degree, Max Bond demonstrated the steel resolve and calm demeanor that propelled him to prominence while using his power to help others do the same. He advanced ideas on the intersection between architecture, public service and the pivotal role of public education. Access to higher education is fundamental to the discourse on equity and advancement.
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) 2016 report on Diversity in the Profession of Architecture enumerates barriers to the pursuit of an architectural education. Beyond the high cost of architectural programs is the lack of role models of color. First and secondgeneration students choose more lucrative careers. Architect’s salaries are notoriously low. Underscoring this is a lack of awareness about the scope of architecture. The New York Building Congress forecast $56.4 billion of construction spending on the city in 2020. This is spread over many components of development and reconstruction. It points to the expanding use of digital design technologies, advanced materials and performance analytics to manage the increasing complexity of building in the city. Efforts to ensure that design and planning are aligned with resource conservation and energy management increase construction costs.
Graduates from the Department of Architectural Technology often engage non-traditional design practices such as: digital fabrication and representation, preservation technologies, building performance analytics and project management. The newly reconfigured fouryear BTech curriculum harnesses their interests and talents. It is a strategy to bring students closer to the drivers of construction spending, accessing employment opportunities with sustainable compensation.
Capitalizing on this robust technical curriculum, the new five-year BArch program provides a high quality, affordable professional degree pathway for students pursuing a role in the practice of building design and construction. While both degrees offer students an opportunity to pursue licensure, the BArch degree accelerates the timeline. It promises to be an industry disrupter, offering agency to a demographic frequently underserved and unrecognized for their leadership potential. The courage and tenacity of these students to overcome significant economic and social barriers is evidence of their ability to succeed.
Educating the quantity and diversity of architectural students, City Tech is situated to play an important role in the revitalization and public well-being of New York City. It remains a reliable ally and positive catalyst for the disadvantaged and underrepresented. The process of design thinking coupled with personal experience of the city’s deficiencies, make these students important contributors to discussions on infrastructure, disaster preparation and climate change. They can become effective advocates for their communities with firsthand experience of inadequate public accommodations for the aging and dying, support for the mentally ill and disabled, housing for the homeless and the formerly incarcerated. Their education is an act of self-defense. It is a defiant assertion of belonging, and pride in diversity. An effective design education links aesthetics with science, policy and human need. Vitruvian principles for the twenty-first century.
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION EDITORS 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR SANJIVE VAIDYA 7
FACULTY WORK 8
EXPLORATION OF LIGHT THROUGH VIRTUAL REALITY ESTEBAN BEITA 11
FROM TANGIBILITY TO COMPLEXITY JIHUN KIM 19
COLLECTIVE COMPLEXION JIHUN KIM 27
INTERVIEW FREDERIC LEVRAT 39
COMMERCIAL TOWER AND FACADE DESIGN KATHERINE BUCHELLI 42
EDUCATION, DESIGN AND PRACTICE JASON A. MONTGOMERY 45
DESIGN 8 NET ZERO COMMERCIAL TOWER FACADE STUDIO JOHN NEARY / VICTORIA ERESKINA 55
MIXED REALITY IN FACADE EDUCATION PHILLIP ANZALONE 65
STRUCTURE FOR ARCHITECTS RAMSEY DABBY / ASHWANI BEDI 74
EXPRESSING ENERGY ROB ROTHBLATT 79
STUDENT WORK 87
BROOKLYN HEIGHTS PUBLIC LIBRARY ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 3 ABRIL RODRIGUEZ 89
BROOKLYN STACK HOUSES ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 5 ALBERT W. VARGAS 91
BROOKLYN URBAN VILLAGE PARK ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 5 FARAI MATANGIRA 93
SKYWALK ESPLANADE ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 7 JOSHUA CANDO 95
THE ANELIDA ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 6 JULIA PROKOP 97
NEW GOWANUS HOSTEL + FISH % OYSTER FARM ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 5 OLIVER HADI 99
COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 6 OLOLADE T. OWOLABI 101
NYC HOUSING AUTHORITY: AVENUE ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 6 PAMELA LOPEZ 103
HOUSING PROJECT ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 6 RAFIA AMIN 105
NYCHA HOUSING PROJECT ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 6 TASFIA AMIR 107
GOWANUS CANAL HOSTEL ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 5 TIFFANY ZHANG 109 STUDENT WRITING: PRINCIPLES & THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE 111
ARCHITECTURE CLUB 133