PROJECT HEC Montréal Hélène-Desmarais Building, Montreal, Quebec

ARCHITECT Provencher_Roy

TEXT Olivier Vallerand

PHOTOS Ema Peter

Montreal-based Provencher_Roy has long demonstrated its aptitude for creating dynamic education facilities and university buildings, dating back to one of their breakthrough projects, UQAM’s J.-A.-De Sève building (1998). The lessons learned from this wealth of work are brightly visible in the Hélène-Desmarais Building, the new centre for Montreal’s post-secondary business school, HEC, in the heart of the city’s commercial core. 

Led by then-partner Alain Compéra, Anne Rouaud, and Gerardo Pérez, the architect team transformed an odd-shaped downtown site into a building that feels at once intimate and on-brand with HEC’s executive-oriented profile. The design takes inspiration from HEC’s role as an early-twentieth-century institution of the primarily French-speaking side of downtown: in 2000, its original building on Square Viger was transformed in the Bibliothèque Nationale du Québec’s Archives Centre, by Dan Hanganu and Provencher_Roy. Since that time, the institution has operated from two buildings at the Université de Montréal campus, on the other side of the mountain—a Brutalist one designed by Roland Dumais and recently renovated by Provencher_Roy, the other a new-build by Dan Hanganu and Jodoin Lamarre Pratte architectes. The new space repositions the school closer to the economic centre of the city, in a historic setting neighbouring Saint Patrick’s Basilica.

The design process built on models of collaborative learning and experimentation developed by the business school itself, which HEC had iteratively explored in its previous buildings. Working in collaboration with HEC research group Mosaic, Provencher_Roy undertook a co-design process that included a full-day workshop with HEC faculty and students, neighbours (including church members), heritage experts and creative professionals, followed by regular discussions with these groups. This process allowed the team to understand neighbours’ fears about the occupation of an empty space owned by the basilica. They worked closely with stakeholders, as well as with engineers, city staff, and government representatives, to develop a shared framework and vision for a contemporary addition to the city that would be integrated in the urban fabric. 

The building occupies a comb-shaped site created by the combination of land ceded by the church and two privately owned lots. Throughout the design process, the team had to adjust their design, as HEC didn’t know which private owners would accept to sell their lots. Reacting to the building’s siting—anchored in the heart of a city block—the team imagined it as forming a campus with the basilica to the north, at the top of the comb. The teeth of the comb, popping out onto Beaver Hall, mask the service sides of adjacent buildings. A planned next phase of the lot redevelopment will redesign the basilica’s forecourt, resulting in better connections to both the new HEC building and De la Gauchetière Street. 

To further complicate the design, the site sits on a steep slope, with nearly nine metres (two full floors) of height difference between De
la Gauchetière to the east of the building and René-Lévesque Boulevard to the west. This is negotiated by introducing a main circulation axis that steps up from De la Gauchetière, dividing the overall massing of the building into two sections. These volumes were further refined by thinking of the roof as a fifth façade, visible from the tall buildings surrounding it. Mechanical elements are carefully screened, and the top of the facility treated as a landscape of green roofs and terraces accessible from different floors. More shaping occurred in response to the Church’s requests that views be protected, and neighbours’ access across the site preserved. The resulting sculptural form creates a diversity of viewpoints and experiences both inside and outside. This renders it impossible to fully comprehend the building at a glance—and yet, easily understandable as one circulates through it. 

The interior clarity is achieved by two horizontal circulation axes. These visually connect the interior to the city, and provide for clear views of the vertically stacked program elements: a restaurant on the lower floor, conference and lecture rooms above, followed by classrooms, floors dedicated to continuing education, and foundation and administration offices at the top. Throughout the building, circulation areas and informal collaborative working spaces are positioned along the façades. The composition is anchored by a monumental stair on the first floors, connecting to a more contained sculptural stair on the upper floors. Contrasting black and white walls on each side of the feature stair subtly divide the space. This constellation of events and nodes, all consistently linked to views of the city, make wayfinding easy, despite the building’s unusual shape.

Walking through all the informal working spaces is enough to make anyone jealous of HEC students—even before going into the classrooms. These are carefully planned, based on many years of experimentation in HEC’s other buildings, and informed by lessons learned during the Covid disruptions. The classrooms and formal meeting spaces integrate hybrid teaching and collaborative tools, including webcams and screens on every wall of many rooms. U-shaped fixed configurations and modular tables allow for close interaction between teachers and students. In addition to a traditional 300-seat main auditorium with glazed walls to the circulation spaces, the building includes a “deconstructed” auditorium designed to teach entrepreneurial communication skills, mimicking situations in which students might be asked to work during their professional careers. 

Throughout the building, shiny stretched ceilings and mirrored walls provide a visual sense of expansiveness. Fritted glass similarly creates continuity between walls and façades on the white side of the building. The fritted glass doubles as passive shading, playing a role in the building’s energy efficiency strategy—an important requirement from HEC even before the adoption of the most recent building code, with its more stringent energy-savings measures. Instead of curtain walls, highly insulated composite walls were designed and prototyped; the resulting modular system helped with the rationalization and constructability of the building’s sculptural form. A geothermal system results in smaller mechanical equipment needs, increasing the accessible areas of the building’s roofscape.

Subtle gestures are integrated throughout, connecting with both the history of the site and of the institution. For instance, maple links the new building to HEC’s other facilities in Montreal. Trees from the site, which had to be removed during construction, were reused in furniture for the facility. Outdoor furnishings were designed using stones from the former St. Bridget shelter, a building demolished in the late 1970s, whose foundations are inscribed on the ground floor of the new building. 

Provencher_Roy’s site-responsive design promises to become, with time, a central meeting point for the Montreal business community, and an important chapter in the school’s proud architectural history. Once again, HEC teaches here the importance of investing in architecture: both for fostering the collaborations that are at the heart of business, and for expressing the institution’s longstanding role as a civic leader.

Olivier Vallerand is an Associate Professor at the École de design, Université de Montréal.

CLIENT HEC Montréal | ARCHITECT TEAM Alain Compéra (FIRAC), Anne Rouaud, Gerardo Pérez, Claude Provencher (FIRAC), Henry Cho, Jonathan Bélisle, Olivier Chabot, Guillaume Martel-Trudel | STRUCTURAL/CIVIL Consortium SDK/MHA | MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL Pageau Morel/Bouthillette Parizeau in Consortium | LANDSCAPE Provencher_Roy | INTERIORS Provencher_Roy | WAYFINDING Arium Design | PROJECT MANAGER WSP Canada | CONTRACTOR Magil Construction | AREA 24,000 m2 | BUDGET $160 M | COMPLETION September 2023

ENERGY USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 105.5 kWh/m2/year | WATER USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 0.46 m3/m2/year 

The post Lessons learned: HEC Montréal Hélène-Desmarais Building, Montreal, Quebec appeared first on Canadian Architect.

PROJECT Canadian Centre for Climate Change and Adaptation, Saint Peters Bay, PEI

ARCHITECTS Baird Sampson Neuert architects, part of the WF Group with SableARC Studio 

TEXT David Sisam

PHOTOS Brad McCloskey

Building on a reputation for delivering environmentally progressive institutional buildings, Toronto-based Baird Sampson Neuert (BSN) has once again designed a notable academic building with ambitious sustainability goals. This time, the project, completed with SableARC Studio, is situated on Prince Edward Island, a small province with a remarkable history of initiatives to combat the threatening consequences of climate change.

The Canadian Centre for Climate Change and Adaptation (CCCCA) is a 30-minute drive across the eastern tip of the Island from Spry Point, the site for the 1976 Ark, an experimental built demonstration of a self-sustaining house and ecological research centre by architects David Bergmark and Ole Hammarlund. That landmark project from 50 years back—officially opened by no less than Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau—was built under the auspices of the US-based New Alchemy Institute, with funding from the federal government and land from the province. The Ark was the first in a long series of environmental initiatives on PEI: in 1981, the Wind Energy Institute of Canada was established in North Cape, where there is a Research and Development Park testing a great variety of experimental wind turbines. By 2018, 23 percent of the electrical energy on PEI was supplied by wind turbines. In 1999, the Island Waste Management Corporation was created. Its Waste Watch program has converted 65 percent of the Island’s waste to compost or recycling. From 2019 to 2023, the Green Party formed the Official Opposition in the PEI legislature—for the first time in the history of any Green Party in Canada. 

These bursts of environmental consciousness are not surprising on a small island with no oil and gas reserves, a fast-eroding shoreline, limited space for landfill, and other vulnerabilities to climate change, including the effects of sea level rise. These vulnerabilities became clearly evident in 2022, with the widespread damage of post-tropical storm Fiona. The storm destroyed 40 percent of the island’s forests, and coastline erosion was in many cases measured in metres.

In 2019, the province’s track record of environmental initiatives continued when the federal government, along with the province and the University of Prince Edward Island (UPEI), announced combined funding for the new Canadian Centre for Climate Change and Adaptation (CCCCA) at UPEI. The CCCCA is located remotely from the main UPEI campus in Charlottetown and overlooks the Village
of Saint Peter’s Bay (pop. 231).

Program and Built Form

The rather heroic presence of the CCCCA takes its position on a ridge above the picturesque village, on land donated by three families. It is a location that in previous generations might have been occupied by a grand mansion or a church. In effect, it symbolizes the necessary effort that will be required to counter the real threats posed by climate change.

Innovation is also evident in the Centre’s program, which accommodates the internationally recognized UPEI Climate Research Laboratory, as well as other teaching and living spaces. Its unique 24-hour live/learn/research programme includes teaching, research, maker and social spaces that extend across the ground level, and compact accommodation for twenty-one residents on the upper levels. 

The entrance to the Centre is a double-height space with a view through to a grass forecourt, which hosts a drone launching pad and a solar array. At the east and west ends, a drone port/workshop, art gallery, and resource room/kitchen break free of the bar to further define the forecourt. The drone port/workshop takes advantage of the site’s topography to allow a greater volume for the space. The teaching and research spaces all have abundant natural light, and faculty offices border a 57-car parking lot on the north side.

As a living laboratory and educational destination, the building enables world-class sustainability-focused research, as well as immersive experiential learning for graduate and undergraduate students. The Centre specializes in coastal climate science, precision agriculture, and climate adaptation research. Its location gives researchers and students access to nearby wetlands, forests, and coastal habitats, as well as facilitating the monitoring of PEI’s shoreline by drone.

The CCCCA doubles as a community hub, hosting workshops and public meetings with local residents, including the neighbouring Abegweit First Nation, and engaging the local community with significant global climate change research.

Headwinds

When the project was awarded to BSN in association with SableARC Studio, immediate headwinds were encountered. Essentially, there was that all-too-familiar problem of too much program for too little money, and too little time. Within a fast-track 21-month design and construction schedule, the architects had to reprogram the facility from its initial 4,180 square metres to 3,530 square metres to meet budget limitations. Even then, the building and its ground source geothermal system were realized for $295 per square foot—a remarkable feat given the sustainability achieve­ment of the project. Significant site costs were required to service the lot and to provide onsite capacity for firefighting, including water storage, booster pumps and back-up emergency power systems. In an additional set of challenges, the project was designed and built during the peak of Covid pandemic lockdowns, a period of significant material price escalation.

Sustainability

Because of the Centre’s research mandate, for the architects it was a given that the CCCCA building would need to showcase the best in sustainability practices. Implementing a carbon sequestering design approach, the structure primarily consists of conventional wood stick construction with occasional use of glulam beams and steel columns. The exterior walls are made up of prefabricated, thermally broken wall panels and locally harvested wood cladding. Triple-glazed and operable Passive House certified windows provide daylighting, views and natural ventilation for all regularly occupied spaces within the building. The Centre is sited to address the grass forecourt, maximizing views, access to daylight and microclimate conditions. The Centre achieves the CaGBC Zero Carbon Performance Standard, based on an all-electric design approach which includes a ground-source geothermal heating and cooling system, coupled with 100 KW of onsite solar panels, and a low-voltage power distribution system for lighting and electric vehicle charging.

The Achilles heel in the sustainability profile of the CCCCA doesn’t have anything to do with its architecture, but rather with its location and car dependency. While its live/learn program is intended to help address this, the Centre is located 51 kilometres from the main UPEI campus and over 10 kilometres from the nearest grocery store. Recognizing the problem of distance, UPEI has made arrangements with the provincial bus service to allow opportunities for daily trips between the Centre and the main campus on its regular route, and provides subsidies for students to use the service. Resident students typically carpool for grocery store outings.

What if?

There were several sustainability initiatives proposed by the design team that were not possible to implement due to the budget constraints. These included green roofs, permeable paving for the entry drive and parking lot, as well as brise-soleils for the art gallery/multi-use gathering space and drone port/workshop. A proposed second-floor rooftop terrace was a casualty of value engineering during the construction management delivery process.

When asked what would have been different if the project had a larger budget and a more forgiving timeline, principal Jon Neuert of BSN allowed that the community space would have been more developed, and that the built form would have been more granular in nature, as is typical in BSN’s portfolio of university academic and residence projects. This finer grain would also allow the built form to be more attuned to the village of Saint Peter’s Bay, with its array of small buildings and church spires, while at the same time maintaining its strong presence atop the ridge.

Notwithstanding these ‘what ifs’ and other built form options, the CCCCA as constructed is a remarkable achievement, and provides UPEI and its students a fertile setting for teaching, research, community activities and living accommodation. The client and the architects have done more with less—economy of means, generosity of ends—reflecting the Island’s tradition of punching above its weight in its efforts to tackle the threatening consequences of climate change.

David Sisam is Principal Emeritus of Montgomery Sisam Architects. He and his family have a summer place near Malpeque on the north shore of PEI.

CLIENT University of Prince Edward Island | ARCHITECT TEAM BSN—Jon Neuert (FRAIC), Luke Cho, Dat Pham, Mehdi Latifian, Clare Commins, Jesse Dormody. SableARC—Bill Saul, Jodi Crompton, Robert Haggis | STRUCTURAL SCL Engineering | MECHANICAL MCA Consultants | ELECTRICAL Richardson | LANDSCAPE Vollick McKee Petersmann | INTERIORS SableARC  Studio | CONTRACTOR Bird Construction | CAGBC NZB SHADOW REVIEW LMMW Group Ltd. | AREA 3,600 m2 | BUDGET $11.4M building / $12.4M with site servicing & improvements | COMPLETION May 2022

ENERGY USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 109.6 kWh/m2/year | EMBODIED CARBON 60-YEAR LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS (PROJECTED) 204.7 kgCO2e/m2 (59% below CaGBC NZB v3 threshold) 

The post Economy 
of Means, Generosity of Ends: Canadian Centre for Climate Change and Adaptation, Saint Peter’s Bay, PEI appeared first on Canadian Architect.

PROJECT MacKimmie Block & Tower Redevelopment, University of Calgary, Alberta

ARCHITECT DIALOG

PHOTOS Tom Arban, unless otherwise noted

Glass has fascinated medieval cathedral builders, German Expressionists, and modernists such as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. As German art critic Adolf Behne wrote, commenting on Bruno Taut’s Glass Pavilion for the 2014 Cologne Werkbund exhibition: “The longing for purity and clarity—the glowing lightness, crystalline exactness—for immaterial lightness, and for infinite liveliness found in glass a means of its fulfillment—in this most bodiless, most elementary, most flexible material, richest in meaning and inspiration, which like no other fuses with the world.” 

And yet the extensive use of glass cladding has been often challenging—or plain irresponsible in terms of environmental sustainability—in the Canadian context. More recent technologies, however, including the use of double-skin façades, allow for designs that are both fully glazed and well-insulated. While double-skin systems are intricate, expensive, and time-consuming to install, this technology has been deployed with impressive results in the recently completed deep-energy retrofit of the MacKimmie Tower and newly built adjoining Hunter Student Commons at the University of Calgary. The project supports the university’s aggressive sustainability policy: by 2023, the institution will have 16 LEED-certified buildings on its main and peripheral campuses; the university is striving to be net-zero by 2050. 

Achieving a highly performative deep-energy retrofit and accompanying new-build was a learning experience for the client, the design team led by DIALOG, and the construction companies involved. Early in the process, the MacKimmie Complex was selected as one of sixteen projects to participate in the Canada Green Building Council (CaGBC)’s Zero Carbon Building pilot program, allowing access to additional technical expertise and to the sharing of experiences with other teams in the pilot program. Boris Dragicevic, Associate Vice-President of Facilities Development at the University of Calgary, speaks highly of the process, as do Rob Claiborne and John Souleles, the DIALOG partners-in-charge of the project. 

The retrofit involved the reimagining of one of the campus’s earliest structures. The 1972 MacKimmie Tower had its cladding removed, interiors gutted, and two floors added atop it. The concrete structure’s out-boarded perimeter columns made it well-suited for the application of a double-skin glass façade as part of the retrofit. This approach was also supported by expertise from Munich’s Transsolar Klimaengineering. The detailed design of the glass cladding was carefully studied by the DIALOG team, using both physical and parametric models. The final design features a system of diagonal mullions that turn the corners with a faceted geometry. Due in part to its relatively compact floor plate, the Tower is not used for lecture rooms, but rather houses various administrative units, meeting rooms, and the Faculty of Social Work.

Adjoining the MacKimmie Tower, the Hunter Student Commons is a case-study in how a similar double-skin system can be deployed in a new-build. Replacing an older steel-framed building that was structurally inadequate, the Student Commons contains a variety of classrooms, study spaces, the Registrar’s office, and the Hunter Hub for Entrepreneurial Thinking. The centre of the building is occupied by three sculptural shafts that provide solar-assisted stack effect. (In the MacKimmie Tower, a former elevator shaft performs a similar function.) Interiors are minimalist, with exposed concrete structure and simple detailing. What is also noticeable is the lack of exposed HVAC equipment and the generally quiet environment—features enabled by the under-floor displacement ventilation system that harnesses supplementary ventilation from the double-skin façade and works with the stack effect (the same approach used in the tower). 

A variety of devices effectively transform the pair of buildings into smart machines to achieve net-zero. The active ventilated façades, manufactured in Germany by Hueck Aluminum Systems and assembled and installed in Calgary by Ferguson Glass, are compartmentalized into one-storey zones on the tower, and a multi-storey zone on the Hunter Student Commons. Within these zones, operable windows are controlled by highly reliable motors, which respond to sensors that track the sun, wind, and temperature. Automated blinds between the two façade layers are used for sun-shading. Users can override the automated controls, by means including opening or closing the blinds according to personal preference for up to two hours at a time. Heating for the buildings is provided by the university’s central heating plant, a carbon-efficient co-generation facility. The MacKimmie Complex’s electricity is in part generated by PV arrays on the roof of the tower and embedded in the Hunter Student Commons facade. (Arrays will eventually be added as well to the Student Commons’ roof.)

There is a premium to using double-skin systems. However, as Boris Dragicevic of the University of Calgary points out, this was offset by retaining the existing concrete structure of the tower, as well as by a reduction in the cost of mechanical systems. The per-square-metre construction costs for the project was not extraordinary, and Dragicevic claims the additional costs of achieving LEED Platinum and net-zero will be recouped in just over twenty years. The maintenance of the façade will involve cleaning twice a year, something the University has accepted. The scheme has received several awards and certifications already, including a 2020 CaGBC Excellence in Green Building: Zero Carbon – National Award and 2020 CaGBC Zero Carbon Design Certification. 

All of this effort was put towards an impressive result. The properties of glass—reflectivity, transparency, and durability—allowed the designers to achieve an overall crystalline effect, enhanced by the overall shaping of the scheme. The two new buildings at the University of Calgary are highly precise, but also transform according to the time of day, the weather, and the angle from which they are viewed. The result is a compelling piece of design that has dramatically enhanced the intensity of activity on the campus.

Graham Livesey is a professor in the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape at the University of Calgary.

CLIENT University of Calgary | ARCHITECT TEAM Douglas Cinnamon (RAIC), Robert Claiborne (RAIC), John Souleles (RAIC), Steve Veres, Tracy Liu, Matt Parks, Jodi James, Matthew Parker, Neal Philipsen, Matt Stewart, Leanne Junnilla, Caleb Hildenbrandt, Kristen Forward, Hayden Pattullo, Michelle Brecht, Joel Penner, Ryan Van Marle, Stephanie Fargas | STRUCTURAL Entuitive | MECHANICAL DIALOG—Tim McGinn, Mike Bauer, Amisha Pope , Mike Torjan, Michael Mochulski, Alex Tansowny | ELECTRICAL SMP Engineering | CIVIL | LANDSCAPE DIALOG—Doug Carlyle, Nathan Grimson, Stacie Harker | INTERIORS DIALOG—Louise Aroche, Maria Zhang, Cara Oakley, Larissa Moore | CONTRACTOR Stuart Olson | CLIMATE ENGINEERING Transsolar Klimaengineering | ENERGY MODELLING, COMPLIANCE AND TECHNICAL MODELLING DIALOG | CIVIL Urban Systems  | COMMISSIONING WSP | CODE Jensen Hughes | ACOUSTICS Patching and Associates | ACCESSIBILITY Level Playing Field  | WIND Gradient Wind | ELEVATOR Vinspec | AREA 35,300 m2 | BUDGET $257 M | COMPLETION  Tower—Nov 2019; Block and Link—Sept 2022

ENERGY USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 75 kWh/m2/year | WATER USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 0.31 m3/m2/year |

The post Crystal Boxes: MacKimmie Block & Tower Redevelopment, University of Calgary, Alberta appeared first on Canadian Architect.

PROJECT University College Revitalization, Toronto, Ontario

ARCHITECTS Kohn Shnier and ERA Architects in Association

TEXT Pamela Young

PHOTOS Doublespace Photography

A good cover song generates renewed appreciation for the original while establishing the validity of the reinterpretation. The main building of University College, the University of Toronto’s founding college, was designed by Cumberland and Storm and completed in 1859. After an 1890 fire gutted most of the interior, the college was grandly rebuilt. More recently this magnificent repository of gargoyles, stained glass and ornamental stonework was a golden oldie ripe for a remix: in addition to falling far short of 21st-century accessibility standards, “UC” needed a radical space usage rethink and extensive systems upgrades.

Kohn Shnier Architects and heritage specialists ERA Architects aptly characterize their UC revitalization as “strategic and surgical.” It encompasses comprehensive accessibility upgrades, the transformation of Canada’s first purpose-built chemistry lab into a conference centre’s main space, the renovation of the West Hall reading room and various classrooms and offices, a new café, and the return of UC’s library to its pre-fire home in the East Hall. 

When John Shnier and ERA’s Graeme Stewart conducted a July 2022 Toronto Society of Architects tour, they stressed that although UC may look to 21st-century eyes like quaint Victorian medievalizing, it was radical in its day. Stewart describes it as Canada’s first example of “progressive eclecticism”: a mash-up combining historic Norman, Gothic, and Italianate elements with contemporary influences such as the Second Empire style. To Shnier, it was important for new revitalization elements to avoid the heritage renovation “trope” of minimalist steel-and-glass neutrality: “We were trying to solve oxymorons—to create interventions that are clearly of this moment, but at the same time look as though they’ve always been there.”

The University College Revitalization is a series of Big Moments, linked by changes that, without calling attention to themselves, do much of the heavy lifting required for modernization. The integration of accessibility ramps exemplifies the latter. Shnier recalls sneaking off after the RFP-stage mandatory site visit to do some measuring. Initially the university had thought mini-lifts would be needed to address UC’s frequent partial-flight level changes. Kohn Shnier and ERA argued, in their proposal, that a carefully conceived ramps system would be a viable and more gracious alternative. Mission accomplished: the revitalization’s chevron-patterned grey stone ramps, accented with landing-delineating black-and-white borders, mesh beautifully with the heritage interior palette. Similarly, automatic door openers, fire and life safety hardware and other mechanical and electrical control panels were consolidated into freestanding blackened steel consoles that made it possible to integrate a lot of new tech without having to run conduits up the walls.

The Big Moments, for their part, are woven into the heritage fabric with equal thoughtfulness. West of the elevated 19th-century main entrance, a new accessible entrance leads into the Paul M. Cadario Conference Centre. Circular in plan, the centre’s Croft Chapter House was originally UC’s chemistry lab. Pulled away from the rest of the building to contain explosions, the domed chapter house was one of few UC interiors not destroyed in the 1890 fire. This striking but long-underused room has been transformed into versatile, technology-enabled space. Its massive new ‘chandelier’, fabricated by Eventscape, improves acoustics and provides adjustable lighting, without closing off views to the dome. A perimeter bar rail tucked into the wainscoting—made of stained oak pickets infilled with fabric-wrapped acoustic material—supports the conversion of space that hosts presentations by day into an after-hours venue for drinks and socializing. 

On the second floor, the soaring West and East Halls flanking UC’s main stairwell originally housed a museum and library respectively, but both were repurposed as examination rooms/study hall space after the 1890 fire. In the West Hall, now called the Clark Reading Room, new cylindrical pendants provide even, ambient light that shows off the freshly restored wall and ceiling woodwork, while downlights in the same fixtures provide illumination levels suitable for reading a book or newspaper. (Shnier notes that the university originally envisioned traditional chandelier-style lighting for this space. To demonstrate that the functionally superior but more contemporary-looking pendants would complement the interior, the design team gathered images of Oxford University’s Christ Church dining hall, which has pendant fixtures when it’s used as a Hogwarts set in the Harry Potter movies.)

The most complex of the UC Revitalization’s Big Moments is the return of the library to the East Hall. A mezzanine framed the original 1850s library, creating study nooks on two levels around the open centre. The new library reinstates this type of spatial arrangement. Shnier likens the new mezzanine to an oversized “piece of furniture” that houses an array of infrastructure and provides access for future systems modifications, while meeting heritage requirements for minimal contact with the 19th-century walls. Its construction was no easy feat: steel supports had to be embedded in the ground and threaded through first-floor classrooms. To reduce the mezzanine’s bulk, the main-floor stacks taper inward as they rise. Adding to the effort to dematerialize the volume, mirrored stringcourses were inset up the full height of the main-level stacks. (These mirror strips also let students approaching a study alcove know whether it’s occupied and give those sitting in these nooks a head’s-up when someone
approaches.) But these mitigation measures are not enough to counteract the impression of a lot of “furniture” squeezed into a smallish box—and the mirroring adds a dollop of cruise-ship glitz to an otherwise urbane heritage renewal.

There is, however, a lot to like in the library. The new stairway that swirls between the main and mezzanine levels is confident, modern, and purposefully playful: the ‘spikes’ incised through its white-painted steel balustrade enable even shorter students to take in the axial view enroute between levels. Seeing the restored stained glass and ornamental carvings at eye height adds to the pleasure of exploring the mezzanine. Here again, accessibility-improving interventions enliven everyone’s experience of moving through this building. At the mezzanine’s west end, the floor ramps up slightly around enclosed volumes containing study rooms and administrative space to provide access to an attic-level café and the new elevator.

Normally, an elevator addition barely rates a mention in a project review, but this one is a Big Moment. Unable to find a suitable interior location for an elevator shaft, the design team repurposed the quadrangle-facing ground-floor purser’s office and designed a new tower above it. Clad in overlapping copper tiles that are several decades away from acquiring an old-timey patina, the new elevator shaft nonetheless evokes heraldic associations, ranging from armour to dragon scales. It is of its own time—especially at night, when a soft red LED glow seeps out between the tiles—but also true to the spirit of University College’s historically allusive architecture. It belongs. And it’s arguably the signature riff in a revitalization that compellingly reinterprets University College for the 21st century.

Pamela Young is a Toronto-based writer and communications manager.

CLIENT University of Toronto | ARCHITECT TEAM Kohn Shnier—John Shnier, Maggie Bennedsen, Amin Ebrahim, Tristan van Leur, Roxana Lilova, Kiana Mozayyan Esfahani. ERA—Graeme Stewart, Max Berg, Leag Gibling | STRUCTURAL Blackwell Engineering | MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL HIDI | CONTRACTOR MJ Dixon | CROFT CHAPTER HOUSE ACOUSTIC CANOPY FABRICATOR/CONTRACTOR Eventscape | LIGHTING Alula Lighting | AREA 2,230 m2 | BUDGET Withheld | COMPLETION 2021  | OFFICIAL OPENING October 2022

The post Strategic Interventions: University College Revitalization, Toronto, Ontario appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Brock University’s newly expanded athletic centre has won the NIRSA Outstanding Facilities Award for the Canadian Region.

Completed late in 2020, The Zone is a $7.39 million project that involved the renovation and addition of 16,250 square feet for the fitness centre, home to both elite training and everyday programs.

The design team was led by architecture firm mcCallumSather, and included consultants WSP and landscape architects TerraPlan. Aquicon Construction served as Construction Manager.

“We have had so much fun working on The Zone, especially because we know how meaningful the project is to this campus. What’s really exciting is that it reflects the University’s strong athletics culture and vision of its Student Union, who were very involved,” said Drew Hauser, Director of Design & Business Development at mcCallumSather.
The students’ vision for their expanded fitness centre included a transformed courtyard experience, replacing the heavy awning and closed-off space with a light-filled and vibrant space.

The double-height interior features a series of active mezzanines that boldly feature the campus colours and its mascot. A long turf section creates an area for walking, runs or sprints, and gives workout options with different training surfaces.

The centre also includes a multi-purpose space for TRX, heavy bags, plyo boxes and hurdles; cardio areas in the mezzanine that can be easily accessed without passing through the weight-training areas; a free weight area; and Olympic Lift, strength, and conditioning areas. Group fitness areas are more private, with a specialized spin studio and yoga studio. In the spin studio, the design incorporates a wood louvered wall system that allows light and connection into the space when open, and sound seclusion during spin class.

“The Zone expansion has quickly made the fitness facility an integral component of the student experience at Brock University, providing opportunity for physical, mental and personal growth,” says Asad Bilal, Brock University Student Union President.

The awards, part of a larger program that rewards all aspects of Collegiate Recreation Leadership and Promotion, recognizes excellence in the innovative designs of new, renovated, and/or expanded collegiate recreation and wellness facilities at NIRSA member institutions.

Officially announced at the beginning of March, the awards will be presented at a ceremony on March 29 in Portland, Oregon.

The post Brock University’s athletic centre wins award for design excellence appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Connecting students to the vibrancy of Toronto’s downtown core while bringing together educational and residential functions, Ryerson University’s  28-storey Daphne Cockwell Health Sciences Complex is a new hub of academic excellence and student life.

The nearly 300,000-square-foot tower is located on the eastern edge of Ryerson’s campus, just around the corner from Yonge and Dundas. The Perkins&Will-designed building was opened in August 2019, and is part of a campus master plan developed in 2008 to guide Ryerson’s expansion through new development and renovations.

“Daphne Cockwell Health Sciences Complex demonstrates Ryerson University’s position as active city-builders. We found a wonderful fit with Ryerson, where our teams were both incredibly motivated to work alongside communities and stakeholder groups to create a state-of-the-art living and learning space. It was critical that we introduce a building that not only connects to, but also enhances, the fabric of the surrounding downtown neighbourhood,” says Andrew Frontini, design director of Perkins&Will’s Toronto and Ottawa studios. “This type of consolidated yet integrated design is a vibrant and viable solution for urban campuses of the future.”

Recognizing the need for an integrated approach that celebrates density, student life, community, and learning, Perkins&Will’s Toronto and Vancouver studios conceived a vertical campus typology—the first of its kind for Ryerson University. The Complex has become a new gateway into the campus from the east side. 

Clad in white aluminum panels and accented with vibrant orange, the striking façade is a bold addition to Toronto’s dynamic skyline. Adapting Toronto’s prevalent podium-tower model, the building’s volumes have been lifted to create an active streetscape and continuous public spaces from the ground level to the roof, encouraging students to engage and collaborate with one another.

The façade’s orange threads visually represent the public spaces that are woven throughout the building, putting its activities on display.

“The DCHS Complex uniquely expresses public space throughout the building, creating new connections to the adjacent campus at the ground floor and illustrating student life in a vertical axis. This expression reinforces the concept of a vertical campus, successfully integrating the academic and social lives of Ryerson students,” says Ryan Bragg, principal of Perkins&Will’s Vancouver studio.

The first eight storeys of the building Integrate four academic departments: the Schools of Nursing, Midwifery, Nutrition, and Occupational and Public Health. The programs are supported by a variety of new classrooms, teaching kitchens, and labs to enhance students’ learning experience. 

The building also features a state-of-the-art Digital Fabrication lab, visible from the public realm, along with flexible research facilities and university administration offices. Rising above 18 storeys, residence dorms house up to 330 students, further enriching campus life.   

At pedestrian level, the public atrium becomes an important contribution to the city. With a café and spaces to socialize and study, the atrium animates Church Street and creates new porosity with connections that link the city to the heart of the campus. Large windows invite natural light into the atrium, creating seamless indoor-outdoor connections. 

Beyond traditional pedagogies, the Complex is a place for students to learn, collaborate and innovate in new ways. It is outfitted with machine-learning systems and sustainable technologies, such as a green roof that acts as an urban farm to provide fresh produce to the ground-floor cafe, and a greywater system for faucets, toilets, and showers.

When designing the Complex, Perkins&Will referenced its Precautionary List, an extensive database of hazardous and harmful materials, ensuring the Complex was created with materials known for being safe and having a low environmental impact. Designed to achieve LEED Gold Certification, it is expected to use 32 percent less energy and consume 35 percent less potable water than traditional construction.

Another feature is a metering and monitoring system that allows students in residences to view their energy and water consumption online. The program also assists the University’s Living Laboratory research program, aimed at developing smart and ongoing solutions for operations based on user-driven research. 

“The DCHS Complex is the most ambitious example of sustainable design at Ryerson and it is intended to be a catalyst for continually improving performance. We designed this project to be a great project not just at the opening, but to be an on-going resource for Ryerson’s researchers to study. The lessons learned from this building will make the next generation of buildings better,” says Max Richter, senior associate of Perkins&Will’s Vancouver studio. 

The post Daphne Cockwell Health Sciences Complex, Ryerson University, Toronto appeared first on Canadian Architect.

In October, the University of Bath released the final version of a National Design Studio Survey examining the impact of the spring transition to online learning in UK architecture schools.

Soon after UK universities shifted to online learning this spring, the University of Bath undertook a survey of the impact of Covid-19 on studio teaching in architectural education. 798 students and 120 teaching staff at 29 schools of architecture responded to the questionnaire.  This resulted in the largest design studio survey produced to-date on the challenges and opportunities faced by schools of architecture in a Covid-19 world.

“Across all items surveyed, satisfaction among students had decreased following the move to remote teaching. Most significantly affected was the ability for students to learn from each other, to feel part of a community and to access the emotional and motivational support of their peers,” write the report’s authors.

“This was echoed in responses from tutors. While in many cases universities were commended for adapting to online teaching, the absence of a physical workplace resulted in an overall detrimental impact on student learning. There was a 58% fall in student satisfaction after the move to online learning and only 7% of students preferred online delivery over its face-to-face equivalent.”

The study finds a similar result for teaching staff: while 39% of tutors were satisfied with their online teaching experience, this fell from 95% satisfaction with in-person delivery. Only 4% of tutors preferred online delivery to its face-to face equivalent.

As social distancing measures continue into 2021, these findings provide information that may help schools of architecture develop appropriate responses in the Covid-19 environment.

Preliminary results from the University of Bath’s survey were released in the spring. Since then, architecture schools across Canada have been exploring ways to deliver their curricula virtually and adapt studios to online learning.  Most Canadian universities have been closed to in-person learning for the fall 2020 and winter 2021 semesters to limit the spread of Covid-19.

The full University of Bath report is available here.

The post UK study reports 58% decline in student satisfaction with spring move to online architectural studios appeared first on Canadian Architect.

We are saddened to mark the passing of Geoffrey Massey, age 96, on December 1, 2020.

Massey worked in partnership with architect Arthur Erickson from 1963 to 1972. The duo created projects including the Simon Fraser University campus, the MacMillan Bloedel Building, and the University of Lethbridge’s University Hall, along with an initial plan for Robson Square.

Geoffrey Massey’s father, Raymond, was an academy award-nominated actor. His uncle, Vincent, was Governor General of Canada, and headed a royal commission on the arts that resulted in the influential Massey Report. Geoffrey was a fourth-generation member of the family that founded farm equipment manufacturing company Massey-Harris, later Massey-Ferguson.

Geoffrey Massey was born on October 29, 1924 in London, England, to Raymond Massey and Peggy Freemantle. His parents divorced in 1929, and Geoffrey was raised by his father and second wife, Adrienne Allen. The family moved to the United States in 1939, and Geoffrey joined the Canadian army in 1942, becoming a paratrooper. He subsequently studied architecture at Harvard, while Walter Gropius was director of the school. After graduation in 1952, Massey worked briefly in Montreal before moving to Vancouver.

In Vancouver, he worked with Sharp & Thompson, Berwick and Pratt, and became friends with Arthur Erickson, who had also worked there. They were housemates in a small place on Chilco Street, where they lived rent-free in exchange for designing a six-storey apartment that would eventually replace the house. They were known for throwing parties whose guests included young artists and architects such as Jack Shadbolt, Ron Thom, Barry Downs, and Takao Tanabe. They later rented a house together on Bachelor Bay in West Vancouver.

Eager to work on their own, Massey and Erickson worked on a series of houses for acquaintances, including a house for artists Gordon and Marion Smith. In 1955, it won the first Massey Medal in the category of residential houses under $15,000.  (A decade later, Erickson would design another, much larger, house for the Smiths .)

Erickson and Massey also designed a house for artist Ruth Killam, a childhood friend of Erickson’s. Massey and Killam fell in love during the project, and later married, living together at the house, which overlooked Howe Sound. Over the years, Massey created a number of additions to the Whytecliffe property, including a studio that, tragically, was lost in a fire, along with many of Massey’s original drawings.

“I always felt their pavilion-like West Vancouver home designed originally for Ruth Killam was the coolest house anywhere, perfectly integrated into the most spectacular waterfront site in Canada, and adorned with Ruth’s wonderful artistic creations inside and out. It was always a treat to visit—by land or sea,” recalls Geoffrey Erickson, Arthur Erickson’s nephew, who visited often with the Masseys as he was growing up.

Killam-Massey House. Photo courtesy the Erickson Estate Collection.

In 1963, Massey and Erickson’s business partnership formally started when they teamed up to bid on the design for the new Simon Fraser University, atop Burnaby Mountain on the outskirts of Vancouver. Their bold masterplan won the design competition, and they worked with associate architects Zoltan Kiss, Rhone & Iredale, Robert Harrison and McNab Lee & Logan towards completing and opening the university two years later.  Erickson and Massey held complementary roles: Erickson led the design, while Geoffrey provided the administrative oversight essential to realizing a project of this breadth and complexity.

Massey received an honorary Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, from Simon Fraser University in 2016. SFU President Joy Johnson says: “Among the giants of West Coast modernism, Massey and Arthur Erickson’s visionary design for Burnaby campus shaped SFU’s educational philosophy by tearing down walls between faculties, removing silos and creating common areas where disciplines merge and ideas flourish.”

Lethbridge University, designed in 1968 and opened in 1972, displayed a continuation of architectural thinking inspired by ideas of “megastructure,” or buildings constructed at the scale of their natural landscape settings. The plan conceived of a university complex that interwove instructional spaces and informal living areas.

“Geoff was the anchor,” says Bo Helliwell, who worked with Erickson and Massey from 1968 to 1972, a period when Erickson was frequently traveling. Helliwell says that Massey also had a role as a “rainmaker for the firm”—due to his family connections, as well as his physical presence. “He was tall, ridiculously good looking, had a radio announcer’s voice—he had a big presence and hearty laugh.”

The partnership ended amicably in 1972. Massey told a reporter that their interests over the years had changed, and that he and Erickson thought that “it might be more satisfactory to go separate ways.”

Massey was elected a Vancouver City Councillor later in 1972, a position he held for two years. During that period, he played a part in the selection of the winning design for the rehabilitation of Granville Island, by Norm Hotson and Joost Bakker, who entered with the support of their employer, partner Richard Rabnett of Thompson, Berwick and Pratt.

Massey also was a supporter of Art Phillips, who was mayor of Vancouver from 1973 to 1977. Mayor Phillips championed livability and inclusivity, and under his leadership, Vancouver’s city planning came to address environmental and quality-of-life concerns.

Massey continued his own architectural practice over the following decades, working mostly on private homes. His work included a number of projects in Whistler, an area in which he was an early owner and developer.

“Geoff was a really decent person, a really nice guy,” recalls architect Paul Merrick, who worked with Thompson, Berwick and Pratt in the 1970s. “He was kind and gentle, and very easy to like—a big man with a strong presence.”

Throughout his career, Massey was a behind-the-scenes advocate for architectural culture in Canada. He convinced his uncle, Vincent Massey, to hold an invited competition for the design of Massey College at the University of Toronto. He advised on the selection of Arthur Erickson, Carmen Corneil, John B. Parkin and Ron Thom as the invited competitors.  Thom’s design won, resulting in one of the country’s finest works of architecture.

“I came to know [Geoffrey Massey] late in his life through book and advocacy projects that we worked on together,” recalls critic Adele Weder. “He was like a taciturn elder full of memories of an amazing period in Canadian architectural history, stories that he would mete out on rare and treasured occasions. I am so grateful for what he has shared with me and others.”

Geoffrey Erickson says that while Massey was “not a self-promoter,” both he and his wife Ruth were impressive in their abilities. “Ruth was part of the Yellow Door Studio painting group with my grandmother Myrtle Erickson, and became an accomplished painter. Fortunately, the Massey children—Raymond, Vincent, Nathaniel, and Eliza—all inherited their parents’ artistic sensibilities, which they now express in film, photography, and ceramics.”

Massey retired from architecture in 1991. His wife, Ruth Killam, died in 2011. He is survived by children Eliza, Raymond, Vincent and Nathaniel.

The post In Memoriam: Geoffrey Massey appeared first on Canadian Architect.

TEXT Bruce Kuwabara, Partner; Geoff Turnbull; Director of Innovation; Kael Opie, Senior Associate; Mitchell Hall, Principal, KPMB Architects

Post-secondary education has been shaken by the COVID-19 pandemic, with teaching moving online midway through the spring semester—and, for many colleges and universities, remaining at least partly online through the fall. Some have speculated that the shift to online learning will become permanent, and that some post-secondary facilities will close entirely. But our academic clients remain focused on the long-term development of their campuses, albeit with a greater emphasis on designing facilities that ensure the safety of students and staff.

Designing for health and wellness is good design for COVID

Beyond the physical distancing measures that will, at least temporarily, need to be implemented within classrooms and campuses, we strongly believe that air quality is critical to the health and well-being of people who inhabit academic buildings. We know from work by immunologists like Erin Bromage at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth that the formula for spread of infection is:

Successful Infection = Exposure to Virus x Time

This indicates we need to be especially concerned about spaces that are occupied for extended periods of time, including offices, lecture halls, and labs. Long durations of occupancy in these confined spaces can alter the distancing calculus if ventilation systems move viral particles through the space, effectively connecting the occupants.

We believe that the best approach is using 100 percent fresh air in a true displacement ventilation strategy. This allows for the minimum amount of cross-contamination in occupied spaces and eliminates concerns around recycling virus-laden air.

Manitoba Hydro Place in Winnipeg—while a workplace, rather than an academic facility—is an example of this kind of system. The impetus behind the design, over a decade ago now, was to create the highest quality interior environment. Post-occupancy studies showed an increase in worker productivity and satisfaction, with a corresponding decrease in annual sick leave. Having a fresh-air displacement ventilation system, along with operable windows for additional natural ventilation, has dramatically simplified our client’s post-COVID back-to-work planning.

Vertical campus concepts

As universities and colleges in major cities have limited room for expansion, the concept of creating vertical campuses has gained currency in recent years. Vertical campuses organize teaching, research, and residential facilities in a connected stack. The idea of interconnected academic neighbourhoods fosters identity and community; creates a hierarchy of spaces for engagement; and allows for larger communal spaces for events—all functions that retain relevance, even in the midst of a pandemic.

Pinch points and confined spaces, such as elevators and corridors, are areas of particular concern for controlling transmission of a virus. To reduce dependency on elevators, it is important to emphasize walkability, especially within large, multi-floor buildings. The key is to create choices of movement so that directional flow can be organized to minimize intersections of people.

One possible approach is to design required exit stairs as primary vertical circulation. At George Brown College on the Toronto Waterfront as well as at the School of Design at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, the exit stairs are wide and gently sloped, and are located on the exterior of the floor plate to allow natural daylighting and views. This makes them a desirable choice for moving between floors. Designating some stairs up-only and others down-only could minimize contact in stairwells.

Virtual engagement and review

Only days before COVID forced all to shelter in place, our office was awarded a large, complex university project that brings together diverse disciplines in one building. Building on past successes with the Integrated Design Process, we were able to pivot quickly and organize a series of virtual Town Hall sessions involving the entire design and client teams. Moving forward, twice-weekly sessions are allowing us to maintain momentum and build a quick rapport—albeit entirely virtual.

For academic projects currently in construction, minimizing the delay caused by work site shut-downs is a primary concern.

While wrapping up renovations to Robertson Hall at Princeton University, we worked closely with the construction manager to develop a virtual project review and closeout process. Using a checklist prepared by each consultant, the construction manager was able to broadcast a walk-through video review of each space in the building. Drawings and specifications were shared on the screen for reference and discussion as required, and participants asked questions, made comments and directed the camera to see specific items.

This process allowed the project closeout review to be completed on schedule, despite the pandemic.

From virtual to reality

Overall, the pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of people in interior environments. As institutions increase their dependence on virtual learning and working environments, we expect to see an increase in the perceived—and real—value of physical gathering spaces that can provide safe and healthy environments for living, working and learning.

The post Pandemic effect: Academic facilities appeared first on Canadian Architect.

York University has broken ground on the School of Continuing Studies’ signature new 97,000-square-foot building, with the start of construction marked by a virtual ceremony.

Designed by Perkins and Will, the new building, located at the university’s Keele campus, will help meet the increasing demand for York’s professional certificate programs and the York University English Language Institute (YUELI).

“This new, standalone home for our School of Continuing Studies demonstrates York’s commitment to serving the current and future needs of learners and employers, here at home and around the world, as they rise to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and the demands of a dynamic global knowledge economy,” said President and Vice-Chancellor Rhonda L. Lenton.

Currently, students attend classes at various locations throughout the campus and staff are spread across four buildings. The building will also accommodate the school’s rapidly growing student and staff population.

Due to COVID-19 physical distancing measures, the school took a non-traditional approach to the construction groundbreaking by inviting the extended York community to visit its virtual groundbreaking webpage.

“Our students are bold, they’re confident, they’re ambitious. The building is an embodiment of who we are as a school,” said Tracey Taylor-O’Reilly, Assistant Vice-President, Continuing Studies. “The building will be a twisted, iconic gateway site and showcase York’s long commitment to providing high-quality education to non-traditional students.”

Scheduled to open for students in fall 2021, the building will allow for expanded access to the English-language university pathways that support international students and new Canadians, and programming to support professionals looking to pursue careers in emerging and in-demand fields.

“Our language programs are the top programs in North America. Our professional programs are among the most innovative in Canada and among the top programs in North America,” said Taylor-O’Reilly. “Our physical environment needs to be an extension of the quality of the education we’re providing to our students. This building will allow us to bring innovation using the cutting-edge twisted design to create a world-class education experience in North America.”

The post York University breaks ground on new School of Continuing Studies appeared first on Canadian Architect.

From halting classes to delaying new construction projects, the pandemic has had a measurable impact on post-secondary institutions.

Quick adaptation to remote learning has kept schools afloat, but as we emerge from lockdown, the threat of COVID-19 calls into question how academic facilities will accommodate our return. Will classes resume in-person, or online? Will social distancing measures impact class sizes? Will international students be able to come back to campus?

Post-secondary institutions may choose to gradually resume classes and campus activities using careful planning. Certain hands-on academic activities, such as labs, can’t be conducted virtually. In response, some Ontario universities have established a two-pronged approach to re-opening this autumn: announcing a mix of small, in-person classes and labs, combined with larger online classes and lectures.

Now more than ever, we need excellence in post-secondary education design. Navigating academic facility design in a pandemic world involves creating safe learning environments that are not only hygienic, well-ventilated, and bright, but now have flexibility to implement physical distancing, and technology to accommodate remote learning.

While much remains uncertain, as of June 2020, key design solutions can be prescribed at gradual stages of reopening to help colleges and universities enhance health and safety while fulfilling their role as centres for learning and teaching.

Retrofit Solutions

1. Place handwashing stations or hand sanitizer at entrances and exits so that students can conveniently disinfect their hands. We have designed numerous laboratory and culinary spaces where hygiene is paramount and handwashing is required multiple times throughout each class. It is now essential that we integrate handwashing facilities into traditional classroom settings to decrease the spread of germs.
2. Use integrated graphics and wayfinding, such as patterned window films and clear door numbering, to create easily navigable environments that optimize social distancing. While post-secondary facilities should be logical and well-connected, integrated graphics and wayfinding can enhance architectural solutions, making the movement of people more efficient. For example, clear wayfinding in high traffic areas, such as hallways and entryways, helps occupants navigate through spaces, reducing overcrowding.
3. Incorporate sensor and touchless technologies to prevent the spread of germs through contact with switches on doors, lighting, and Audio-Visual equipment. It is imperative that we take advantage of sensor and touchless technologies that already exist, by emphasizing their visibility and ease of use.
4. Reconfigure classrooms to provide adequate space between occupants. A square classroom is an ideal shape for accommodating different layouts, as opposed to a classroom that is long and narrow. Wall dividers can be used to reconfigure a classroom that is not an ideal shape or size. Dividers can be opened to double the size of a classroom, or closed to create multiple smaller classrooms. Recessed floor outlets ensure that the layout of furniture and equipment are not constrained by access to wall outlets. As social distancing rules relax, flexible classrooms can return to reconfigurations with less emphasis on physical distancing.
5. Resist the trend to over-populate workspaces. In recent years, open offices have been preferred for their ability to accommodate a maximum number of occupants. However, increasing the density of workspaces is undesirable in a pandemic world. Now is the time to prioritize private space, and reduce overcrowding in classrooms, offices and lecture halls. Adequate space for staff and students to practice social distancing is of paramount importance. Private or semi-private workspaces also prevent people from disturbing each other with sound.
6. Incorporate Audio-Visual technology into classrooms to facilitate remote learning. We have designed a number of electronic learning environments where lectures can be recorded and streamed to students. These include classrooms and recording studios that are equipped with power, Audio-Visual equipment, green screens, and sound-proofing so that faculty can record or stream lectures in a quiet and focused environment.

New Build Solutions

1. Select surfaces that can easily be cleaned without looking institutional. Our designs for culinary schools – highly sanitary environments – have leveraged colour, texture and light without sacrificing health and safety requirements. Beneficial learning environments require bold and colourful surfaces that are both stimulating and sanitary.
2. Specify interior systems that prevent the build-up of moisture and germs. Seamlessly connected interior finishes such as stainless steel, sealed floors, and integrated coves with built-in drains prevent bacteria from collecting and can be easily washed without water seeping into cracks.
3. Create common areas that inform people to sit apart. Built-in furniture in cafeterias, office receptions, and hallways should be designed to discourage gathering in close proximity. For example, while one long bench is excellent for corralling large groups of students, we should now create multiple, shorter benches that can hold the same number of students at an appropriate distance apart.
4. Ensure that social distancing in classrooms does not stifle collaboration and connection. We design learning spaces that promote the cross-pollination of ideas. This often requires physical gathering – where students and staff pull their chairs or push their tables together. In a pandemic world, cross-pollination takes on a new connotation, and our goal is to prevent the spread of germs. While we do not want to reduce connection, the design of the classroom should remind students that they should be distanced while communicating and collaborating. This means using fixed tables and avoiding seating arrangements that promote gathering in large groups. Integrated technology that facilitates remote communication can also help students feel inspired by each other, despite being isolated from each other.

Gow Hastings Architects is a Toronto-based architecture and interior design studio specializing in higher education.

The post Designing for Higher Education in a Pandemic World appeared first on Canadian Architect.

University of Toronto: An Architectural Tour (The Campus Guide), 2nd Edition
By Larry Wayne Richards (Princeton Architectural Press, 2019)

Part of a series covering campuses across North America, this book is far more than a simple guidebook. It recounts the intertwined history of the university’s development and the architectural styles and strategies it has chosen to represent itself, as it has grown and densified within its downtown and two satellite campuses.

Since the first edition of the guide was issued in 2009, the University of Toronto has invested over a billion dollars in the construction of new buildings and the renovation of existing ones. The updated guide covers structures including the newly opened John H. Daniels Building at One Spadina Crescent (NADAAA with Adamson Associates and ERA), the Goldring Centre for High Performance Sport (Patkau with MJMA), and the addition to the Innovation Complex at University of Toronto Mississauga (Moriyama & Teshima Architects). It also describes the upcoming Landmark Project (KPMB, Michael Van Valkenburgh, Urban Strategies, and ERA) that will further pedestrianize the main campus’s open spaces, primarily by sinking a grass-roofed parking garage underneath King’s College Circle.

The guide features 186 buildings on or immediately adjacent to the university’s campuses, and is extensively illustrated with photos by Eugen Sakhnenko. A companion map is included with the volume.

The post Book Review: University of Toronto, An Architectural Tour (The Campus Guide), 2nd Edition appeared first on Canadian Architect.

PROJECT University of Lethbridge—Science Commons, Lethbridge, Alberta

ARCHITECTS KPMB Architects / Stantec Architecture, Architects in Association

TEXT Matt Knapik

PHOTOS Adrien Williams

This fall, the Science Commons at the University of Lethbridge opened its doors to a new generation of researchers, students and staff. The result of an extensive six-year process with KPMB Architects and Stantec, the 38,400-square-metre, $219-million facility presents an ambitious new vision for cross-disciplinary university research in Canada, and a prominent new face for the University of Lethbridge.

The Science Commons is sited at the north end of Arthur Erickson’s iconic University Hall, which has kept pensive watch over Alberta’s Old Man River Valley for the past half century. The new building sets out its own formal agenda—there is little deference here to University Hall’s massing or materiality, and no trace of Erickson’s dogmatic fidelity to the prairie datum. Instead, the Commons carries bold lines across its prominent mass, drawing new relationships both to its neighbour and to the rolling coulees. Taken together, it’s tempting to see the two buildings not just as different ideas, but as altogether separate architectural species.

Drawing on Moriyama & Teshima Architects’ 2012 Master Plan for the University of Lethbridge, Science Commons is sited to create a defining edge and pedestrian link along the north line of the campus. It closes an important loop around the University’s lower Coulee Quad, reaffirming the long-term viability of University Hall. The building mass deviates somewhat from the Master Plan’s scheme, finding a more privileged position on an outcrop along the escarpment. The architecture takes good advantage of this position, delivering long views into the campus green and the river valley below.

In Erickson’s University Hall, the floor plates are sunk into the coulee topography, presenting an inherent challenge to campus expansion. Even in Erickson’s original master plan, the primary growth strategy simply saw another thousand-foot building placed in the adjacent coulee. Instead, in subsequent decades, buildings linking to University Hall’s southern end had to find ways of descending to Erickson’s elevation. In this regard, Science Commons has achieved a successful internal choreography that eluded the University’s previous expansions. Tall interior volumes, terraced floors, and well-articulated stairways invite the rolling landscape up into the building, providing a natural circulation logic.

Within this system, two key gestures complete the campus link. On the west end of the building, a slim and elegant bridge gathers pedestrians from the campus above. To the east, a low, Miesian mass provides a distinct and understated connection to University Hall, a mediating force between the two architectures. The building’s south edge has awakened the University’s Coulee Quad, which should instigate further review of the potentials of this remnant outdoor space. Proper attention from a landscape architect could unearth the space’s emerging presence and unique landscape character, inviting it more fully into the social life of the campus.

The Science Commons is wrapped in a double-skin facade, joining Manitoba Hydro Place in a lineage of sustainable building collaborations by KPMB and German sustainability consultant Transsolar. The exterior wall is populated exclusively by remotely actuated windows, while the interior includes user-operated windows, offering a balance of agency and performance. On the building’s south face, the two layers peel away from each other to produce a compelling winter garden that students can pass through and inhabit. This space alone has twelve modes of operation—and along with the rest of the complex building skin—will become “better tuned” and “better played” as an instrument over time, according to the designers.

There is a significant question posed by this lineage of work: does it pay off to build a building-around-a-building? From the perspective of energy performance and environmental comfort, the current case studies are looking positive for large-scale scenarios. Manitoba Hydro Place, for example, has performed beyond its stated targets. It will take time and careful study of each individual project to provide a better answer, but we likely will see more of this solution on institutional buildings in the coming years.

The Science Commons is flanked by two outdoor “porches”—a quaint term given the tremendous scale of the spaces. One is essentially the building’s forecourt, inviting visitors from the main parking lot. The other is a grand outdoor gathering space. Its carefully crafted microclimate creates a moment of refuge overlooking the valley—an improved take on the bare and windswept tunnel-effect present at University Hall’s outdoor plaza.

The aptly named Science Commons aims to build bridges between the sciences and the community by producing transparent spaces for collaboration and informal gathering. This agenda is a key driver of the plan, which is organized as a series of nested social units.

At the largest scale, four large blocks pinwheel around a full-height atrium. As described by project co-lead Bruce Kuwabara, this well-appointed space is “the piazza to Erickson’s thousand-foot street; a destination at the end of a long filmic procession through the prairie.” The atrium serves as building hub, event space, and anteroom to the main lecture theatre; it will undoubtedly become a campus-wide focal point.

The four surrounding blocks are divided into “neighbourhoods” with central places for gathering. These neighbourhoods are in turn home to smaller clusters, which provide lab, office and support spaces for groups of students and researchers. Evident care has gone into the scale, arrangement and appointment of these spaces, providing opportunities for collaboration at many scales.

Natural light streams through the building’s skylights and plentiful glass walls. “Science on display” is the repeated chorus, an idea that stemmed from the design team’s first engagement question to its clients: “Why did you choose to become a scientist?” The resulting interior is a celebration of science as a theatre of discovery. There are open views into nearly every laboratory and classroom, interactive displays, and a dedicated learning space for community and K-12 programming. Scientific research and its intriguing paraphernalia are the building’s core seduction, and an important ingredient in the facility’s broader economic agenda. As Alberta premier Jason Kenney noted in his remarks at the building’s grand opening, the facility plays a key role in attracting international talent and securing the province’s long-term prosperity. Walking through large, gleaming labs full of modern instruments, one can feel the weight of this promise. The Science Commons is a bold signal—both of Alberta’s pressing need to reimagine itself and of its enduring optimism and innovation.

KPMB and Stantec have produced a provocative architectural statement next to Lethbridge’s landmark University Hall. While Erickson’s most fervent devotees will likely never fully embrace the new presence, the students, faculty and community that call Science Commons home know full well that they are in possession of one of Canada’s premiere science facilities.

Matt Knapik is a designer and educator based in Calgary. He studied architecture and urban design at the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape at the University of Calgary, where he has taught as a sessional instructor since 2011. He is an Urban Designer at O2 Planning + Design.

CLIENT University of Lethbridge | ARCHITECT TEAM KPMB—Bruce Kuwabara (FRAIC), Mitch Hall (FRAIC), Kael Opie, Nic Green, Lucy Timbers, Amin Monsefi, Andrew Hill. Stantec— Michael Moxam (FRAIC), Stephen Phillips (FRAIC), Justin Saly (MRAIC), Rich Hlava, Trish Piwowar, Dale Bateman, James Strong, Chris Onyszchuk (MRAIC), Ruth Wigglesworth, Bo Kim, May Fung, Mahshid Matin, Wilfred Lach, Tim Lee, Michael Reagan, Matthew Emerson, John Higgins, Peter Eng, Renato Calanog, Dennis Flandez, Russell Flores, Floren Jose, Joan Diaz | STRUCTURAL Entuitive | MECHANICAL SNC-Lavalin | ELECTRICAL SMP Engineering | LANDSCAPE PFS Studio | INTERIORS KPMB Architects / Stantec Architecture, Architects in Association | CIVIL Stantec Consulting | ENERGY/CLIMATE Transsolar Inc. | WIND/MICROCLIMATE/ACOUSTICS RWDI | GREENHOUSE GHE/JGS | LEED Stantec Consulting | VIBRATION NOVUS Environmental | AV/IT The Sextant Group | VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION Soberman Engineering | QUANTITY SURVEYOR Altus Group | GEOTECHNICAL Tetra Tech EBA | VIVARIUM The ElmCos Group | VIVARIUM WALL COVERING Altro Whiterock | CONTRACTOR PCL | AREA 38,400 m² | BUDGET $219 M | COMPLETION August 2019

Energy Use

ENERGY USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 383.2 kWh/m²/year; 51% energy reduction (relative the MNECB) | BENCHMARK (NRCAN, hospitals built after 2010) 666.7 kWh/m²/year | WATER USE INTENSITY (PROJECTED) 35% water use reduction

The post Defining a New Datum: University of Lethbridge–Science Commons, Lethbridge, Alberta appeared first on Canadian Architect.

This fall, students at Fleming College’s Sutherland Campus in Peterborough, Ontario, are enjoying a facility that has been revitalized by Toronto-based architects Gow Hastings. The original 200-acre campus was established in 1973 with a collection of buildings designed by Ron Thom in collaboration with Thompson Berwick and Pratt and Partners within the terraced, park-like setting.

The 7,060-square-metre A-Wing Building serves as the campus gateway and as a classroom facility. A $13-million project aimed to transform the dark, heavy, and outdated building into a contemporary one that meets the standards of 21st century learning and sustainability. The renovations needed to take place while the A-Wing was fully occupied.

Gow Hastings began by stripping the building’s dark brown aluminum envelope back to its steel frame, and recladding it with alpolic aluminum panels – a lightweight material often found on gas stations. The overall effect is clean, uplifting and playful. White and yellow panels transform the facade while integrating it with the original brown campus buildings and a new Corten-clad neighbour. The similarly coloured panels were arranged at varying angles to capture natural light, while some panels were perforated overtop of windows, or treated with “accordion folds” to add visual variety.

A glass pavilion marks each entrance and its accompanying circulation space. Each of these nodes includes a skylight that invites in light over multiple storeys.

Solid classroom and office walls have been replaced with glazing, further inviting light and views through the building. Further performance upgrades included new roofing, energy efficient glazing, LED light fixtures with occupancy sensors, and building components made of recycled materials.

To create intuitive, accessible spaces inside the building, Gow Hastings adjusted external entrances to respond to the most commonly used pathways, and straightened corridors.

The building further includes a series of hands-on learning environments, including classrooms for the Health and Wellness program that simulate hospitals and ambulances, and classrooms for the Justice and Community Development program that simulate courtrooms.

The post Fleming College A-Wing, Sutherland Campus, Peterborough, Ontario appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Location Vancouver, British Columbia

Architect DIALOG

Photos Ema Peter

The Campus Energy Centre (CEC) is a state-of-the-art hot water facility that supports the University of British Columbia’s target of eliminating the use of fossil fuels on campus by 2050. At the same time, it redefines public interaction with district energy infrastructure.

Through its optimized spatial configuration and the predominant use of timber, the $24-million, LEED Gold facility uses almost 63 percent less energy and 31 percent less water than a baseline building of its type.

The 1,858-square-metre building houses all process equipment including three 15-megawatt natural-gas-fired high-efficiency boilers, with capacity for expansion to a total output of 80 megawatts. It serves 130 buildings through 14 kilometres of underground insulated pipe.

Sited on an active corner of campus, the building also serves to educate the university community about daily energy production. It incorporates glazed boiler bays on the ground floor that allow pedestrians to see the inner workings of the plant, and features interactive signage and displays.

The orientation and massing of the building worked with the rigid arrangement of the equipment to enable natural ventilation and cooling of the facility. Locating the boiler bay at the northwest corner takes advantage of the necessary height clearances to provide daylight to the main plant space, while dramatically displaying the three boilers.

To reduce the embodied energy of the building, the team advocated for a primarily wooden structure as a replacement to the concrete and steel usually used for infrastructure buildings. The primary structure is constructed of renewable, locally sourced cross-laminated timber (CLT) panels supported by glulam columns and 20-metre clear span beams. A lifecycle analysis indicated an 18 percent reduction in global warming potential by using engineered wood.

A zinc shroud wraps the building perimeter to unify the distinct elements and reconcile the need for intake and exhaust louvres, vents and other service penetrations. The zinc materially connects the CEC with both the Life Sciences Centre and Pharmaceutical Sciences Building.

:: Jury ::   Daniel Pearl (MRAIC), Lisa Bate (FRAIC), Michael Green (FRAIC)

This building redefines public interaction with utilities, exposes and educates about function, and is a both an operational and design contributor to the campus community. Beyond directly replacing carbon emissions at the campus scale, the inclusion of design elements that promote capturing carbon, such as the predominant use of mass timber and cross-laminated timber in lieu of more typically carbon-intensive structural components, reinforces how a project can be exemplary in responding to local challenges. The building section enables natural ventilation even within a mechanized infrastructural program, and its external facades skillfully integrate the rigorous requirements of low air inlets and high outlets that promote natural ventilation, while remaining compositionally lyrical. The site ecology massively limits stormwater runoff via the use of rain gardens and a detention facility.

Today, the most critical challenges and most dynamic responses are when a building design can demonstrate sustainable-thinking leadership at multiple scales and beyond just its pressing issues.

CLIENT University of British Columbia Project Services | STRUCTURAL Fast + Epp | MECHANICAL FVB Energy | ELECTRICAL Applied Engineering Solutions | LANDSCAPE Perry + Associates | CONTRACTOR Ledcor Construction | CIVIL / GEOTECHNICAL Kerr Wood Leidal Associates | code lmdg | ACOUSTICS bkl | AREA 1,974 m² | BUDGET $26 M | COMPLETION October 2016 (occupancy)

The post RAIC Green Building Award: University of British Columbia Campus Energy Centre appeared first on Canadian Architect.

As part of its plans to expand student housing on campus, Simon Fraser University (SFU) is planning to demolish Madge Hogarth House, one of the original buildings on the Burnaby Mountain campus masterplanned by Arthur Erickson and Geoffrey Massey.

Madge Hogarth House opened as a women’s residence in 1965, and later became a campus resource space. The university has said that renovating the building to meet current seismic, fire and life safety requirements is unfeasible. The planned demolition would make way for a new residence for 369 students.

The chair of the Arthur Erickson Foundation council, Phyllis Lambert, has written to SFU president Andrew Petter and campus planning and development director Ian Abercrombie, demanding the school halt demolition and assess Madge Hogarth House for heritage value.

The text of Phyllis Lambert’s letter to Ian Abercrombie follows:

Dear Mr. Abercrombie,

I write to you urgently about the  status of the  Madge Hogarth Building in the  West Precinct of the Erickson/Massey Simon Fraser campus. I have just  been informed that this outstanding work, one of the great original campus buildings of 1965, known then as the Women’s Residence, is slated for demolition.

It would be unthinkable for any of the original buildings of the  great authored North American campuses—Thomas Jefferson’s 1819 University of Virginia, or Mies van der Rohe’s 1940s and early 50s Illinois Institute of Technology, for example—to be touched, except to restore or even repurpose them, as  has been done.

Is Arthur Erickson not one of the  acknowledged major architects of the  20th century, equal to Jefferson and van der Rohe? And was not his  universally heralded Simon Fraser declared to work “perfectly as  an environment and a monumental piece of architecture” by Ada Louise Huxtable, the New York Times architectural critic, in a cover story of Time magazine? Must Canada continue to disregard its  great works?

Unfortunately, Huxtable’s perfect environment has not been maintained at SFU. Along with the other extraordinary architecture of Erickson/Massey, the  unheralded Madge  Hogarth Building has suffered neglect along with deferred maintenance. However, as one of the great buildings of the  campus, or anywhere, the  Madge Hogarth Building, the Women’s  Residence, MUST bear witness as  one of the high points of Canadian civilization. This building is a rare example of the architects’ thought about—and execution of—communal residential structures, both within the structure itself and in its  relationship to the  wider campus.

We have the  knowhow and tools to repair and renew the building. As a residence typology it can be repurposed in numerous ways. A 11SFU Site & Guidelines study made a few years ago proposed incorporating the  existing building with a new higher density building. The incorporation of new and old has become a leading architectural practice world-wide. No building today can replace the existing building—certainly not in the current climate of economic constraint and scarcity of architectural vision.

In addition to the very great quality of the building (Erickson’s rendering is attached), the Madge  Hogarth house is  a women-only student residence named in honour of Vancouver philanthropist and SFU convocation founder, Madge Hogarth Trumbull. She financed the building. How will the destruction of a structure dedicated to and honoring women play out for SFU’s reputation among the top 50 of the world’s universities? And how will deriding such a gift affect future donors to the University?

Mr. Abercrombie, thank you for considerately responding to my letter of 22 March 2018, in which I introduced you to the Arthur Erickson Foundation and offered our assistance to Simon Fraser University in relation to the recently launched Burnaby Campus Plaza Renewal project, by inviting Don Luxton, Donald Luxton & Associates, and Larry Beasley, Beasley & Associates Inc., to your Campus Design Review Panel: Meeting #1 Summary, September 17, 2018. Their reports to our Board were positive. However, the proposed destruction of the  Madge Hogarth House is  certainly not positive. In addition to  advocating for respectful stewardship of Arthur Erickson’s physical works, the mandate of the  Arthur Erickson Foundation (AEF)  is  to inspire future generations to seek, as Arthur Erickson did, the deep understanding and aesthetic that informs great design; and advancing education in and understanding of architecture and design and related history and philosophy.

In the name of the Arthur Erickson Foundation, I urge you, as Director of Campus Planning and Development, for the reasons stated above, to honor the  extraordinary donor Madge Hogarth, and your university, its  magnificent site and original vision. By doing so, you will simultaneously take a major step in perpetuation of the internationally renowned design of SFU  and show appropriate respect for Canadian creativity, integrity, and culture. I urge you to rethink the symbolic and architectural significance of the  Women’s Residence, and to undertake with the appropriate architect its  renovation and expansion. I urge you to change course.

Yours truly,

Phyllis Lambert CC, GOQ, CAL, M.S. Arch, LL D, FRAIC Chair, Arthur Erickson Foundation

Founding Director Emeritus, Canadian Centre for Architecture

The post Phyllis Lambert urges SFU to reconsider demolition of Erickson/Massey women’s residence appeared first on Canadian Architect.