aJournal

Hype and excitement for the new SUB is finally beginning to form.  It seems as if the project is finally going to become a reality.  The AMS is in the architectural selection stage of the design.  Over the past week, different local architectural firms have announced their interest in the project and have made their presentations to the UBC community over at the current SUB.  Display presentation boards, keynotes, and Youtube videos have all been complete, and now, it’s the students that get to vote for their top three architectural firms that they feel confident will create a new SUB that represents all of UBC.

While most of us will, unfortunately, not be able to use the new SUB to its full potential, I still believe it is essential for us to leave a lasting legacy.  The new SUB should not only reflect what we value today, but be a symbol that we are proud of in the years to come. 

The firms that have displayed interest in the SUB, namely Bunting Coady Architects, Busby Perkins+Will, Bing Thom, HBBH+BH, Cannon Design, Heriquez, and Stantec, are a collection of local firms, most of which have designed buildings for UBC or have experience in designing facilities for other post secondary institutions.  We have a great selection of architects and so it is really hard to narrow three firms down.  I hope to share my insight on the architectural selection process.

As in the name of the building, the driving force behind the SUB is obviously the students at the university.  But I believe the community of UBC, as a whole, need to factored into the equation.  The more input we receive from different stakeholders, the more ideas, and essentially, the better the building.  Quoting George Bernard Shaw, “if you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still have one apple.  But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.”  The question really becomes, how do we ensure that everyone participates in the designing of the SUB?  Well, for one, social media like Facebook and Twitter is important in order to stimulate discussion and feedback, but I think that only targets the students.  A central meeting space, idea forum workshops, and consultation periods should be an essential component to the design process of the new SUB, and choosing an architectural firm that has the capability of engaging members of the community must be considered when selecting a firm.

Choosing a firm that is able to integrate lasting green technologies is also an important component of the project.  According to Bunting Coady Architects, the average UBC building uses three times more energy than the average building in the province.  With UBC’s ambitious goals in reducing energy consumption, it is important that the new SUB reflects the goals of UBC and the values of its students.  LEED certification, now a hot selling feature in the real estate market, should really be considered as the basic fundamentals for this project.  This building should not only not harm the environment, but is a positive component that gives back to the environment.

Amidst the concrete and steel buildings, it’s not hard to forget the beauty of our university campus.  The architecture of the new SUB shouldn’t just be for building to impress, like a building with colorful glass walls, six plasmas, and have “modern” leather seating.  No.  The architecture of the new SUB should enhance the beauty of the campus and its surrounding lands. 

Disappointingly, few of the architectural firms have bridged the concepts above together.   How can the new SUB facilitate the interaction between people and our environment?  I don’t know about you, but I think everywhere in UBC, other than Starbucks oddly enough, keeps you inside their buildings, but does little to bring you outside, other than transporting between facilities.  Considering building with the grassy knoll, further expanding greenspace, and integrating features that allow students to get outside are other factors that need to be taken into consideration.  Vancouver weather sucks, I know.  But when it’s sunny and warm, we should be outside experiencing the fresh air.  When it’s cold and depressing, we should be able to sit inside, but still bring in the positive elements of being outside inside.

All these factors, and more, must be equally considered during the design process of the new SUB; one factor is more important than the other.  Hopefully, this post stimulates more thoughts and will make your job choosing architectural firms a little easier.  You have until April 15^th at 10:00 to vote for three architectural firms who you believe are candidates for developing our new SUB.  

Further Resources:

http://www2.ams.ubc.ca/index.php/ams/subpage/category/architect_selection/

Looking forward to the proposal by Buning Coady Architects.

Many innovative ideas were thrown around today at the UBC Ideas Forum for transportation solutions to UBC.  Some of them were out there… incredibly innovative, but not financially feasable, and some of them were just not solutions that solved anything.

My presentation focused on what I thought the Transportation Consultation was really about: solution for a more permanent bus loop in addition to simplifying transportation to and around campus.  I propose to develop a departure and unloading bus loop located at the centre heart of campus between Wesbrook Mall and East Mall on University Boulevard, then have a second bus departure bay and layover space at what is now “Lot B” behind Thunderbird Parkade.

The problem is, at least two other presenters had the same, or similar idea.  I then shifted my presentation to the features that should be found at the bus loop, like way finding, real time information displays, etc., and then quickly moved to bike sharing.  Instead of centralizing and capitalizing on one big idea, I decided to cover a lot of grounds and didn’t take into consideration of just focusing on one big concept and providing technical details about it.  When planning the bus loop proposal, I took into account all the technical details like layover space and bus turning radius, but I didn’t say anything, as if I was assuming that people would just understand the idea.  I think that’s a big problem and something I learned out of this. 

So what’s the lesson of the day?  When doing projects like this, it’s important that you provide one innovative idea and include supporting details that back up your proposal.  Covering a lot of ground makes your presentation less memorable for the audience.  This sounds obvious I know, but it’s not so easy when you implement it.

Aside from all the disappointment of my own presentation, especially knowing that I could have done a lot better, I’m glad I went to this as I learned a lot of new techniques and ideas that I would have never thought of.

A big shout out to Karen who let me know about the transportation ideas forum.  Also, I’d like to acknowledge Jon-Scott and Alisha for their awesome presentations and will use their presentation styles as a template for my projects.