Project Introduction  New high-tech classroom and lab facility  Area : 30,000sq.ft.  Function –To provide a home for innovative courses that take a team based approach to problem solving and design. –Inhabitants of building should feel a part of surrounding environ. –Create a work environment that stresses collaborative achievement.

Project Constraints  Constrained site- limited by palm grove, existing buildings and sea  Budget million  Completed by 9/30/12  Hurricane zone  Hot, humid climatic conditions; high heat loads  Structural system must withstand high winds and possible flooding  Floor height restrictions

Site Context - Seaside, Florida Seaside Florida provides a rich and colorful oceanfront community with a unique architectural sophistication. Hybrid Building, Steven Holl City/ Campus Plan

Existing Site Plan

Design Concept 1  Special architectural features  High heat load on east side  Solid auditorium structure  Inefficient floor plans

Design Concept 2  Meets height requirements  Limited cranage space  Compact but awkward floor plans

Design Concept 3  Light steel structure over flood protected “Core” Business  Inflexible architecture layout  Excessive use of concrete

Architecture View of Building from road

Site Plan

First Floor Plan South Elevation South-east Axon

Second Floor Plan West Elevation

Third Floor Plan North Elevation

Section Through Auditorium East Elevation

Area Analysis Entry Perspective

Interior Space Model First Floor View from Sea

Interior Space Model Second Floor

Interior Space Model Third Floor

Iterative Processes Wayfinding problems caused by numerous corridors Quality of space corrupted by low ceiling heights Problem: Design for 3rd floor office wing, elevated slab Elevated slab raises several constructability issues Prohibitive complexity for architectural and structural design

Iterative Processes Simplified architectural design Organized architectural design, faculty offices with exterior view Solution: Swap second and third floors entirely Auditorium Offices Large Classrooms Walls to hide main Beams in Large classrooms placed under large open steel truss roofing

Iterative Processes Architect prefers tighter spacing of structural elements to improve asymmetric balance Glazed corner important to design concept Leveraging Aesthetic and Functional Concerns Large shear walls block a great deal of window wall on North elevation

Structural System  Gravity loads –DL = 150 psf –LL = psf  Wind load 120 psf –ASCE 7-95  Preliminary system

Office Wing  Shear wall system  Foundation  9 ‘ Flat slab perimeter beam

Flat Plate in SAP 2000

Structural Model

Gravity System  Beams –Cast in place 9”x12” (2.0%)  Columns –Custom precast 18”x18” (3%) / 20”x20” (3.5%) –Auditorium precast 26”x16” (1.5%) –Interior cast in Place 18”x18” (2%)

Auditorium  Retaining wall / slab  Precast columns  Glass corners  Roof ?

Lateral System Auditorium  Higher wind pressure  Shear wall connection  Ringbeam

Integrated Solution  Hidden steel beams W24x450 (90%)  Larger shear walls  Reduced cantilever

Structural Model

Wind Deflection

Cost Breakdown - $ 5,600,000

Schedule - Start Date 1 May 2011 Finish Date 25 Apr 2012

Crane - Link Belt Hydraulic Truck Crane - HTC Backhoe Loader - Caterpillar 426CEquipment

Comparison: Fenestration System

PrecastCast-in- place Comparison: Column Construction

1 Aug 2011

12 Oct 2011

3 Nov 2011

Opportunities for Off-site Fabrication Copper roof Auditorium Roof Truss Precast concrete columns Curtain wall and cladding frame

Design Analysis Location a factor in team dynamics Tight design process between engineer and architect Design process monitored by construction management

Group Assessment  Collaborative Successes –Strong integration of structure and architecture –Friendly relationship, friendly struggles –Programmatic goals achieved through iterative design process  Collaborative Inadequacies –Lack of shared product model –Creation of numerous design models, several for each discipline –Difficulties with communicating key structural concerns

Using Technology Collaborative Means Heavy use of web based technologies –NetMeeting – –Discussion Forums –Group web space  Technology cannot offset lack of communication  Learning new technologies requires time overhead and may not produce desired results

Lessons learned  Everyone should use compatible technology  Shared product model saves time and increases efficiency across disciplines  Team should follow protocols for developing and sharing information  Greater understanding of other disciplines needs  If technology is used properly, time and effort are saved for the entire team