Www.point32.Com Downloads Patkau

8/16/2019 Www.point32.Com Downloads Patkau

1/351Bullitt Foundation Living Building Statement of Qualifications Patkau Architects Inc

Patkau Architect

The Bullitt Foundation Living BuildiStatement of Qualificat


2/35


3/35

Contents

Firm History 2

Design Approach, Site/ Program Analysis,

Design Process 4

Proposed Team 13

Selected Projects 19

References 28

La Petite Maison


4/35

Firm Histo



Firm History

Patkau Architects

Patkau Architects is an internationally recognized

architectural design studio based in Vancouver, British

Columbia, Canada. There are currently three principals:

John Patkau, Patricia Patkau and Michael Cunningham,

and three associates: David Shone, Peter Suter and

Greg Boothroyd.

Experience

In over 25 years of practice, both in Canada and in theUnited States, Patkau Architects has been responsible

for the design of a wide variety of building types for a

diverse range of clients.

Projects vary in scale from gallery installations to master

planning, from modest houses to major urban libraries.

Many projects have involved functional programming,

management of detailed public processes, and design

of complex buildings and sites. Comprehensive involve-

ment throughout all phases of the design and construc-

tion process has consistently resulted in award-winning

projects.

Patkau Architects has also been involved in research

projects, including an extensive investigation intoissues of sustainable building and a detailed study of

emerging educational technologies for the University of

Texas, Houston Health Science Center.

Current work includes a Natural History Museum and

Biodiversity Research Laboratory at the University of

British Columbia, the Marcel A Desautel Faculty of

Music and School of Art at the University of Manitoba, a

350-room student residence at the University of Penn-

sylvania, as well as a variety of residential projects in

diverse locations ranging from a northern island off the

coast of British Columbia to a farm in Ad’Diriyyah, Saudi

Arabia.

As the circumstances of the work change, our inter-ests expand. We seek to explore the full richness and

diversity of architectural practice, understanding it as a

critical cultural act that engages our most fundamental

desires and aspirations. We refuse singular definitions

of architecture: as art, as technology, as social service,

as environmental agent, as political statement. We

embrace all these definitions, together, as part of the

rich, complex and vital discipline that we believe archi-

tecture to be.

In addition to practice, the firm is also active in architec-

tural education. John and Patricia have taught, lectured

and been guest critics at numerous universities in Can-

ada, the United States and Europe. Patricia is a Profes-

sor of Architecture at the University of British Colum-

bia. In 1995, Patricia and John were jointly Eliot Noyes

Professors of Architecture at the Graduate School of

Design, Harvard University. John is currently teaching

at Yale University.

Recognition

Patkau Architects has been recognized widely for

design excellence. Significant national and international

awards have been received for a great variety of build-

ing types, including twelve Governor General’s Awards

(Canada’s highest honor), four Progressive Architec-

ture Awards, seventeen Canadian Architect Awards of

Excellence, an RAIC Innovation in Architecture Award

of Excellence, and three AIA Honor Awards including a

joint AIA/ALA Honor Award for la Grande Bibliothèque

du Québec. John Patkau and Patricia Patkau have been

recognized as Fellows of the Royal Architectural Insti-

tute of Canada, Honorary Fellows of both the AmericanInstitute of Architects and the Royal Institute of British

Architects and Members of the Order of Canada.

The office has also won a number of international

design competitions, including the Nursing and Bio-

medical Sciences Facility for the University of Texas

Houston Health Science Center, a master plan and two

College Houses for Hamilton Village at the University

of Pennsylvania, la Grande Bibliothèque du Québec, a

new central library for the province of Québec, and the

Winnipeg Centennial Library in Manitoba.

The work of the office has been published and exhib-

ited widely. Over 200 articles in books and professional

journals and three books dedicated exclusively to thefirm’s work have been published. The work has also

been shown in numerous exhibitions, including 20 solo

exhibitions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

In 1996, Patkau Architects was selected to represent

Canada at the Venice Biennale.

Patkau Architects Awards

2008Governor General’s Medal forArchitectureGleneagles Community Centre

Governor General’s Medal for

ArchitectureWinnipeg Centennial LibraryAddition

2007Honor AwardAmerican Institute of ArchitectsAmerican Library AssociationGrande Bibliothèque du Québec

Lieutenant-Governor of BC MedalWinnipeg Centenial Library

Canadian Architect award ofExcellencePeterson / Munck House

Seattle AIA CommendationCentre for Music Art and Design

2006

Lieutenant Governor’s Medal forArchitectureGrande Bibliothèque du Québec

Lieutenant Governor’s Certificateof MeritGleneagles Community Center

Prairie Design AwardWinnipeg Centenial Library

Award of ExcellenceConsulting Engineers of ManitobaWinnipeg Centenial Library

Keystone AwardConsulting Engineers of ManitobaWinnipeg Centenial Library

2005Canadian Architect Award ofExcellenceLittle House

Canadian Architect Award ofExcellenceCentre for Music Art and Design

Honor AwardAmerican Institute of ArchitectsAgosta House

Honor AwardAmerican Institute of ArchitectsShaw House

2004Canadian Architect Award ofExcellenceNew College HouseUniversity of Pennsylvania

Canadian Architect Award ofExcellenceWinnipeg Centennial Library

Governor General’s Medal forArchitectureShaw House

Governor General’s Medal forArchitectureAgosta House

BC Vision AwardGleneagles Community Centre



Firm History

Recollective

Recollective is a values-based, multi-disciplinary green

building and sustainable community consulting firm

comprised of some of the top green building experts

in Canada.

All principals and staff are Leadership in Energy and

Environmental Design Accredited Professionals (LEED®

AP) and can provide complementary, full-service exper-

tise, drawing from a range of backgrounds including

architecture, mechanical engineering, academics, tech-

nology and product research, and project management.

They offer the following core group of services:

Green building strategies

Building simulations including energy, thermal

comfort, daylight and CFD modeling

Green building incentives and funding research

Integrated Design Process (IDP) facilitation and

training

Facilitation, mentoring and management of LEED

projects in New Construction, Commercial

Interiors, Existing Buildings and

Neighborhood Development

Facilitation and management of BuiltGreen and LivingBuilding Challenge projects

Sustainable community building

They have successfully completed ten LEED certified

projects and are currently consulting on over 50 active

LEED projects amounting to over 12 million square

feet, including South East False Creek’s Athlete’s Vil-

lage (1.5 million square feet of high-rise and low-rise

mixed-use) and the Montessori Project, targeting LEED

Platinum and Living Building Challenge certification.

Beyond buildings, Recollective also provides consulting

services to municipalities and large developers in areas

such as sustainable land-use strategies and green build-

ing guidelines and policies.Recollective is a member of both the Canada and US

Green Building Councils (CaGBC, USGBC) and is a

practitioner as well as educator and advocate of green

building. Through volunteer engagement on local,

national and transnational green building committees

and boards of directors, including the Canada, US and

Cascadia Region Green Buildings Councils, Recollective

is committed to help grow and strengthen the green

building movement.

As past LEED project application reviewers for the

CaGBC, and as current faculty members with both the

CaGBC and the Cascadia Region Green Building Coun-

cil, Recollective has an in-depth knowledge of what is

required for a successful LEED application. At the very

local level, the company’s commitment to sustainability

is reflected in their 3-R (reduce, reuse, recycle) purchas-

ing policies and their universal transport subsidy.

As board members of the Cascadia Region Green Build-

ing Councils, Recollective members were involved in

the development of the Living Building Challenge. They

actively advocate the Living Building Challenge through

educational seminars at local firms.

Also, Recollective is utilizing the Living Building Chal-

lenge and LEED Platinum framework to define the sus-

tainability objectives of the Montessori Project, a 25,000

square foot pre-school centre in Richmond, B.C.. This

project incorporates a generous edible organic land-

scape, rainwater harvesting, onsite black water treat-

ment, mixed mode displacement and natural ventilation

and on site renewable energy including solar thermal,

photovoltaics and wind energy. Recollective’s role inthe project includes Integrated Design Process Facilita-

tion, developing Green Building Strategies, performing

Building Simulations, LEED Project Management and

Funding Research. As a means to build on the educa-

tional mandate of the funding charities, Recollective is

helping to direct a documentary film about the chal-

lenges and lessons learned in achieving the ambitious

objectives identified in the Living Building Challenge.

In addition, Recollective’s experience as consultants

on the Net Zero multi-residential building in South East

False Creek’s 2010 Olympic Athlete’s Village gives them

first-hand experience with the complexities of devel-

oping and integrating a net-zero energy mandate, on aproject with a large number of complex stakeholders.


7/35

Patkau Architect


Design Approach, Site/Program AnalysDesign Proce



Design Approach, Site/ Program Analysis, Design Process

“To draw a carp, Chinese masters warn, it is not enough to know the animal’s morphology, study its

anatomy or understand the physiological functions vital to its existence. They tell us that it is also necessary to

consider the reed against which the carp brushes each morning while seeking its nourishment, the oblong stone

behind which it conceals itself, or the rippling of water when it springs toward the surface. These elements should

in no way be treated as the fish’s environment, the milieu in which it evolves or the natural background against

which it can be drawn. They belong to the carp itself, insofar as it is not defined as a distinct form capable of a set

of movements or as a particular organism performing a series of functions. Instead, the carp must be apprehended

as a certain power to affect and be affected by the world. In other words, rather than a formed and organized

individual, the brush should sketch a life, since a life is constituted simply by traces left behind and imprints silently

born.”

Zone 1, Kwinter and Feher

Design Approach

To Affect and Be Affected By

Investigations into the Particular

The work of Patkau Architects is characterized by an

interest in the particular. Each architectural opportunity

presents a myriad of unique constraints and opportuni-

ties; in the form of site characteristics, climatic condi-

tions, programmatic ambitions, budget realities, owner

convictions etc. Design directions emerge from an

attempt to respond and synthesize these into a poetic

whole, in contrast to the practice of imposing a phi-

losophy or formal vocabulary on a situation. This princi-

ple makes it possible to respond in a sensitive way to

each situation. Numerous concepts emerge during the

design process. Some of the more impelling qualities

of this project are discussed below.

Problem Solving/ Creative Thinking

The Bullitt Foundation has identified a broad spectrum

of objectives which include ambitions of sustainabilty,

functionality and cost effectiveness. The desire for

design excellence, ‘human delight and the celebra-tion of culture, spirit and place’ is also identified; the

reasons why we desire sustenance. The magnitude of

the challenge to achieve objectives such as net zero

energy and water can at times create a problem solving

mindset within the team, in which the ultimate objec-

tive to create beautiful and enriching places to live

and work is lost. Our approach will be a creative one,

which will ensure that the problem solving activities are

guided and informed by the desire to reach beyond the

pragmatics which define the project. One example of

how this might be achieved is the concept of ‘binding’.

Binding

Design itself is a synergistic act, binding the realiza-tions of the project ‘problem’ through form. The ability

to bind through form is what allows any project to

move beyond problem solving into the realm of an ex-

perienced and compelling reality. As the artist Lynda

Barry suggests, there’s something about working with

form that can unclench something that we have no

other way of getting at.

Constructing Permanence, Agility and Cultural

Sustainability

Durable, well-built buildings tend to age well and in

doing so attract the care and engagement of their in-

habitants over time. Duration requires that designers

consider how buildings continue to affect the envi-

ronment and inhabitants over the years. However, as

different aspects of a building have different life ex-

pectancies and, as programmatic needs are likely to

change over time, buildings also need to be agile, able

to absorb intelligent change. Thinking of a building as a

diagram that maps the relative permanence of its parts

suggests an attitude to both material and cultural sus-

tainability. A tree is just such a diagram: sustainable

and resilient over time with processes of permanence,

growth, change, decay, exchange and renewal all inter-

related.

Living System

Thinking of the building as a living system is a strategythat we would like to suggest to the project team

as a whole, one way of framing discussions for this

project. Living systems have the capacity for continu-

ous learning and adjustment. If they don’t they won’t

survive. This would mean exploring directions that

use nature as mentor and model, searching for solu-

tions that are well-adapted to context, endowed with a

maximum of self-sufficiency and benefit to community,

smart and robust over time, economical of energy and

materials and, ultimately, beautiful; beautiful partially

because of the care and consideration given to the

physical manifestation of a sustainable place for sus-

tainable lives.

Constructing Synergies/Scaling

Constructing synergistic relationships at multiple scales

is key, a powerful mechanism for achieving sustainable,

affordable solutions.

Synergies exist between things and design becomes

the act of negotiating this space.

Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec



Solutions which address many issues and opportuni-

ties simultaneously also produce integrated, productive

‘density’ in a design - along with the attendant feeling

that nothing is being wasted, that everything is doing

as much as it can or needs to. This recognition in turn

produces a kind of embedded spirit in the work. Syner-

gies often help to create this sense of a dense, layered

experience of place, a kind of beauty in itself.

Resilience

If the true measure of this project’s success will be

determined during its operation and inhabitation over

time, it is important that sufficient resilience be built

into the design at different scales. The project needs

to be able to be ‘tuned’, if required, when the perform-

ance of the building is measured after occupancy.

While tuning can perform adjustment, flexibility at

multiple scales needs to be inscribed in the design to

deal with more significant changes over time. Retrofit-

ting of building systems over time requires agility at yet

another scale. The idea that a building/project can learn

and adapt over time is a worthy challenge. The design

for this project needs to anticipate unknown situations

of change, exchange and renewal while maintaining

certain important characteristics of durability and per-manence that characterize it and make it memorable.

As one architect suggested

last century, we need to startwith a sense of realization ofthe problems and insert designas its natural extension.

Louis I. Kahn:Writings, Lectures, Interviews



Site/ Program Analysis

It is admirable that the Bullitt Foundation performed a

significant amount of investigation prior to the acquisi-

tion of a site. Often the site selection has a profound

impact on the ability of the design team to achieve the

project objectives, and achieve them in a cost effective

manner.

As suggested this site will offer many benefits, how-

ever some challenges exist. For example, given the

desire to achieve a net zero energy project it will lik-

ley be essential that all solar energy which is available

on the site during the heating season be captured and

transformed into usable energy. It is also critical that

solar energy be excluded from the building interior dur-

ing the cooling season, but captured and turned into

some form of useable energy, such as domestic hot

water and electricity. Detailed quantitative analysis is

required, however these principle objectives imply that

glazing for the project may need to be located princi-

pally on the east and southern facades, as this is when

and where solar gain is desired for most of the year. It

also implies that south facing glazing would need to be

shaded in a manner which does not prevent solar gain

during the heating season, while capturing the energy

in some form. Similarly, west facing glass would need

to be protected much of the year with a vertical sun-

shade which prevents late afternoon and evening sun

from over heating the building late in the day.

If the aspiration for a net zero energy project is con-

sidered in relationship to the functional program and

the desire to create and market desirable places to live

and work, the following issues and synergies begin to

emerge. First, the implied location of the glazing noted

above suggests that the building would be turning its

back on the city, on East Madison Street. This might

be particularly problematic for the retail occupancies.

Second, the implied location of the glazing also sug-

gests that it would be difficult to provide view glass on

the west façade to help capture the desired and poten-

tially marketable views to downtown Seattle. However

these two issues may act as a catalyst to inform an

interesting and effective design response.

Temperate/ Seasonal Climate

The performance of glass depends very much on the

environmental conditions within which it exists. The

temperate climate which Seattle enjoys is in some

ways the ideal climate to achieve a net zero energy

building in that for much of the year the temperature

outside is reasonably close to the desired temperature

inside. As such, from the point of view of heat transfer,

for much of the year glass might be located anywhere

on the facade. The difficulty is created during the more

extreme times of the year, such as during the winter

and summer months.

Pattern of Occupancy

From the point of view of creating desirable and mar-

ketable places to live and work, it may be important

to have display glass on Madison Street, facing north-

west, and more view glass in the residential units than

is ideal from an energy conservation standpoint. It is

interesting to note that the likely pattern of occupancy

associated with retail, commercial and residential oc-

cupancies may help address this issue. For example,

many residences may not be occupied very much dur-

ing weekdays and connection to the outside is most

useful during daylight hours. In contrast commercial

occupancies tend not to be occupied during the eve-

nings.

Operable Skin/ Living System

The design concept which might emerge from this site/

program analysis is an operable skin. For example, if

the façade consisted of an array of operable photovolta-

ic/ solar energy panels which provide insulation and so-

lar protection when closed while retaining the ability to

capture solar energy in some form, it may be relatively

easy to organize the program on the site in a way which

addresses the two aforementioned issues. For a South

facing residence, this might imply that when the oc-

cupants are not at home or are sleeping , the operable

panels might be closed, as the desired daylight and

views which the glazing offer is not required. During

sunny summer days when the occupants are at home,

the operable panels might fold up to allow views and

capture daylight, but also open in a way which protects

the view glass from solar gain. If these panels consist

of photovoltaic cells, the facade would also have the

ability to make use of the solar energy falling on the

sunshade during all seasons. For a northwest facing

retail occupancy, the panels may be closed after hours

to avoid heat loss and gain. These panels might also act

as security shutters.

�

�

�

�

Sunpath December 21

Sunpath March 21

Sunpath June 21

Possible patterns of occupancyfor residential (red), commercial(green) and retail (blue).



Heat Transfer/ Pattern of Occupancy

It may also be possible to benefit from the fact that

the defined. It may also be possible to benefit from

the fact that the patterns of occupancy associated with

the three different programmed occupancies will likely

be different and somewhat reversed. For example, the

residences will likely be occupied when the commer-

cial and retail are not. This might allow the excess en-

ergy which is created in the commercial occupanciesto be transferred and stored until it can be used by the

residences.

Roof Garden/ Human Delight

The site analysis also suggests the delightful opportu-

nity for a roof garden which could provide the building

community with a place to gather and enjoy views of

the city and landscape. These gardens are most suc-

cessful when the space on the roof is defined or semi

enclosed, to create a place. This might suggest that a

photovoltaic arbour be developed to provide solar pro-

tection, generate electricity, or hot water while collect-

ing rain water for building usage. The storage of rainwa-

ter might be achieved in a reflecting pond to help add

experiential richness, such as was developed for the

Nursing and Biomedical Science building at the Univer-

sity of Texas, Houston.

Community Synergies/ Scaling

It is desirable in the first instance to achieve the net

zero energy and net zero water objectives without af-

fecting surrounding properties, such that they are not

compromised in terms of also achieving these objec-

tives. However, in some instances it may be mutually

beneficial to develop partnership strategies with the

neighbours for systems which are more efficient and

affordable at a scale which is larger than a single build-

ing. ‘Scaling’ could be a key tool in addressing issues

of sustainability in this project. One example to explore

would be a neighborhood energy utility that maximizes

the synergistic potential of sharing heat and/or electric-

ity production, distribution, use and recovery. Among

other things, this might include sharing roof top space

for solar collectors or space underground for develop-

ing geo-exchange heating and cooling. Other synergies

at multiple scales will be pursued. Some have already

been identified by the Bullitt Foundation.

It is our experience that the challenges presented by a

project often create the greatest opportunities.

Design Process

This project is a special opportunity with unique con-

straints, opportunities and team members. Given this

and the complex nature of the project, it is recom-

mended that ultimately the design process needs to

be informed by the team as a whole; to this end the fol-

lowing process structure and principles are suggested.

This structure and the associated principles are based

on both the positive and negative experiences we have

accumulated in attempting to address similar objectiveson past projects, all of which have been educational.

In general we propose a collaborative, integrated design

process which is iterative and flexible, with informed

leadership, and defined by a creative rather than prob-

lem solving mindset. Many of the principles outlined

in ‘The Integrated Design Process’ produced by the

BC Green Building Roundtable have been incorporated

into the suggested process; however these have been

augmented to help ensure that all of the Bullitt Founda-

tions objectives are achieved.

“The Integrated Design Process (IDP) is a method for

realizing high performance buildings that contribute to

sustainable communities. It is a collaborative process

that focuses on the design, construction, operation and

occupancy of a building over its complete life-cycle. The

IDP is designed to allow the client and the other stake-

holders to develop and realize clearly defined and chal-

lenging functional, environmental and economic goals

and objectives” (Larsson, 2002)

By definition this process focuses on realizing ‘high per-

formance buildings that contribute to sustainable com-

munities’. While it is understood that this is only one

defining objective of the Bullitt Foundation, the Founda-

tion has also identified the desire to reach beyond the

creation of a sustainable environment, to create places

which offer ‘Design Excellence, Human Delight and the

Celebration of Culture, Spirit and Place’, the reasons

why we desire sustenance.

As such, the IDP has been augmented to ensure that

the creative process of developing beautiful and enrich-

ing places to live and work is not overwhelmed by a

problem solving state of mind.

Nursing and Biomedical SciencesBuilding Competition

University of Texas, Houston

The photovoltaic arbor developedfor the Houston Nursing and Bio- medical Sciences Building wasdesigned to provide shade for rooftop activities, heat for domestichot water, generate electricity and

collect rainwater; all in a transpar- ent manner that explained thesefunctions. The collected water wasretained partially in the form of aquiet, reflective, roof top watergarden, used gravity to power itsdistribution and served as a form ofdampening for a high rise building.



Phase One

Informed Leadership/ Establish Management Team

Confirm Process Structure/ Green Process

Informed Leadership:

It is important that the correct balance between leader-

ship and collaboration be established. The assemblage

of talented team members with admirable objectives is

not in i tself enough. They must also be empowered to

participate in an effective manner. This requires leader-ship and management.

Establish Management Team:

Due to the broadly based objectives of the Bullitt Foun-

dation, it is recommended that a Management Team

be assembled which consists of Point 32, Patkau Ar-

chitects/ Recollective and an unnamed local Associ-

ate Architect to ensure that all project objectives are

achieved; Design Excellence/ Human Delight, Environ-

mental/ Sustainable, Functional, Cost Effective/ Mar-

ketable.

Confirm Process Structure/ Green Process:

The first task of the Management Team will be to in-

form the design of the proposed process. Part of this

responsibility will be to design a Green Process which

minimizes the environmental impact of the process

itself. For example, we have utilized vehicles such as

teleconferencing, video conferencing and ‘Go To Meet-

ings’ to help avoid the costs of travel when appropriate.

Also, it will be desirable to orchestrate a process which

minimizes the associated printing of paper etc.

Phase Two

Clarify/ Document Project Objectives

see Project Objective Diagram on Page 12

The aspirations of the Bullitt Foundation are ambitious

and complex in nature. Addressing these aspirations

will require that a relatively large team be assembled.

Empowering this team to participate effectively requires

in the first instance that the Project Goals be clearly de-

fined, such that all participants have a collective under-

standing and can engage in tasks in a meaningful man-

ner. While the description of these goals, provided in

the RFQ, represents a comprehensive introduction, it

is important to clarify and priorize the various objectives

identified, prior to the work itself proceeding. For ex-

ample, at least four different ‘green’ measurement sys-

tems have been identified to describe the objectives of

the project; Living Building Challenge, LEED Platinum,

BREEAM and the Green Building Matrix as part of the

Seattle Priority Green Permitting Program. While these

programs tend to be mutually supportive, it is impor-

tant to identify where potential conflicts and contradic-

tions exist. Also, LEED attaches predetermined values

to various design responses. These values need to beapplied in terms of the ultimate desire to certify the

project ‘Platinum’, however the ranking system may

not accurately reflect the values of the Bullitt Founda-

tion. If they do not, we propose that a sister set of val-

ues be established to properly reflect the values of the

Foundation, to help guide the design process. Also, the

Project Objectives need to be documented in a man-

ner which can be translated into definable tasks for the

team members.

Phase Three

Assemblage of Team/ Definition of Roles/ Initiate

Partnerships

Assemblage of Team:

Based on the clearly stated objectives identified above

and in consultation with the Bullitt Foundation and Point

32, the appropriate team will be assembled to address

the needs of the project. See also Project Team Section

of Document.

Ultimately it will be necessary to involve User and

Owner Representatives for the Commercial, Retail and

Residential components of the project.

Definition of Roles and Responsibilities:

It is important to establish Agreements and the associ-

ated scopes of work with the team members which are

compatible with the Project Objectives. These Agree-

ments need to define the Roles and Responsibilities

of the team members in a clear manner, but may also

need to be flexible in nature, such that the contracts

do not limit their involvement in desirable and unique

tasks.

Initiate Partnerships:

It is desirable to begin partnering with other organiza-

tions, such as the City of Seattle Permitting Program/



Neighborhood Organizations/ Utility Companies/ Man-

ufacturers/ Funding Organizations/ etc. as soon as pos-

sible in the process. This may be critical in terms of

achieving certain objectives which may be costly, such

as photovoltaic panels, or not permitted by the ‘authori-

ties’.

We have been successful in the past on many projects

working with the local authorities to achieve ‘equivalen-cies’ which were instrumental in achieving a successful

project. For example, the atrium space in the Aquat-

ics Ecosystems Research Laboratory is not allowed by

the Building Code, however working with the Authori-

ties Having Jurisdiction from the outset helped us to

achieve an equivalency which made this valued inter-

connected space possible.

Phase Four

Confirm/ Document Project Goals with Input from

Design Team

It is desirable to utilize the collective expertise of the

team which is assembled to inform the Project Objec-

tives established for the project.

Phase Five

Information Gathering/ Search for Synergistic

Relationships

In general Patkau Architects resists pursuing a design

direction for as long as possible, such that a depth of

understanding can be acquired, to help ensure that

the direction pursued is an informed one. It is pro-

posed that a combination of subgroup and full team

meetings will be utilized to collectively establish a list

of the investigations and information which needs to

be gathered to achieve the identified objectives. It is

understood that some of this information may already

have been gathered. For example the site feasibility

work which has been performed will be examined to

determine what additional information is required. The

following types of analysis, investigations and research

will be performed during this phase.

Environment/ SustainabilityLiving Building Challenge Site Module: ‘Habitat Exchange’ Identification Energy Module:

‘Net Zero Energy’ Analysis of

Program and Site Anticipated Energy Usage/

Conservation Analysis

Energy Harvesting AnalysisPassive Solar Analysis

Photovoltaic Solar Analysis

Geothermal Analysis Wind Analysis Other?

Compare Available Energy on Sitewith Anticipated Energy Usage.This will require an analysis of the

Zoning of this part of the CityMaterials Module:

‘Materials Redlist’ Analysis to deter

mine the impact which this mighthave on potential Design Directions;

‘Carbon Footprint’ Analysis to deter

mine which ‘General ConstructionType’ will minimize the Footprint;

‘Responsible Industry’ Analysis todetermine accessibility of FSC Certi-

fied Wood or Salvaged Sources;‘Appropriate Materials/ ServicesRadius’ Analysis to determine the

impact on potential Design Directionsfor primary building systems

Water Module:

‘Net Zero Water’/ ‘Sustainable WaterDischarge’ Analysis of Programand Site;

Water Usage/ Conservation Analysis; Water Harvesting Analysis; Water Recycling/ Reuse Analysis;

Compare Available Water on Site withAnticipated Water Usage

Indoor Air Quality Module:

Test Air Quality at Strategic Locationson Site such as Street Level;

Study Relationship between Natural

Ventilation and Energy Conservation/Usage during Spring, Fall and WinterSeasons

Beauty and Inspiration Module:

Explore potential opportunities for

Introducing ‘Human Delight and theCelebration of Culture, Spirit andPlace’;

Explore potential opportunities for theproject to ‘Inspire and Educate’

��

�

�

�

�

��

�

�

�

�

�

Estimated regional rainfall



Green Building Matrix/City of Seattle Permitting Process

Similar to the analysis work identified above for the LivingBuilding Challenge, the requirements of the Green Build-ing Matrix will be used to identify specific research tasksduring this phase.

LEED PlatinumSimilar to the analysis work identified above, the require-

ments for LEED Platinum will be used to identify specificresearch tasks during this phase.

Functional Program Program Evaluation/ Development

Program/ Zoning AnalysisExamine how the Program can be accommodated on the

Site based on the current Zoning Regulations

Net to Gross AnalysisPattern of Occupancy Study for Residential/Retail and Commercial Occupancies

What Periods of the Day/ Week do people Occupy the Dif-

ferent Parts of the Building? This investigation is intended

to help inform when tempered environments, views, ven-

tilation etc. is required for occupants.

Cost/ Budget/ Market Analysis

Review/ Refine Cost of ConstructionReview/ Refine BudgetReview/ Refine Market Analysis

A portion of this analysis may involve an analysis of the

Views which can be achieved from various portions of the

site.

Phase Six

Schematic Design

Through the process of gathering information, design

directions emerge. Patkau Architects will utilize a

combination of isolated study, subgroup and full team

meetings to identify and develop potential design di-

rections. It is during this phase that the project begins

to be transformed into tangible form. It may be that

one strong, clear direction emerges at this time or

that multiple directions appear. Each of these design

directions will need to be developed and tested in an

iterative manner in terms of their ability to address the

previously established goals, including Environment/

Sustainability Goals, Programmatic Objectives, Cost/

Life Cycle Costs/ Marketability Objectives, as well as

the ultimate goal to create a place which offers ‘Design

Excellence/ Human Delight and the Celebration of Cul-

ture Spirit and Place’. Normally it is not possible to fully

evaluate a direction in a holistic and therefore meaning-

ful manner until a relatively complete Schematic De-

sign is generated.

If none of the proposed Schematic Designs achieve the

project objectives, then either the project objectives

will need to be modified or other approaches gener-

ated and tested in an iterative manner.

It is suggested that the project budget be established

at the end of this phase.

Phase Seven

Design Development

Most often one Schematic Design emerges from the

Schematic Design process as being superior. During

this phase the Schematic Design is developed to ad-

dress outstanding issues and refine the approach, such

that the Developed Design can be tested in terms of

its ability to address the previously established goals;

including Environment/ Sustainability Goals, Program-

matic Objectives, Cost/ Life Cycle Costs/ Marketability

Objectives as well as the ultimate goal to create a place

which offers ‘Design Excellence/ Human Delight and

the Celebration of Culture Spirit and Place’.

It is suggested that the project budget be confirmed at

the end of this phase.

Phase Eight

Method of Project Delivery

Different Methods of Project Delivery are appropriate

for different projects and different reasons. Given the

ambitious and complex nature of this project it will

be desirable to design a method of delivery which is

compatible with the project objectives. For example, a

Stipulated Sum Process may result in the best price for

a project, but it may not provide the necessary flexibil-

ity. A Cost Plus process may help accomplish the best

quality, however it would likely result in the most costly

product as well.

It is desirable that this method be chosen during this

phase as it can have an impact on the way in which the

Construction Documents are produced.

Design study models

Nursing and Biomedical SciencesBuilding Competition




Phase Nine

Construction Documents/ Bidding

During these phases the challenge will be to ensure

that the detailed execution of the documents does not

compromise the ability of the design to achieve the

project objectives, but rather brings rigour to earlier de-

cisions. For example, it is often during the bidding of a

project that many sustainable qualities are lost, due to

cost, durability or other logistical issues.

At the end of this phase the CD’s will need to be tested

in terms of their ability to address the previously estab-

lished objectives; including Environment/ Sustainabil-

ity Goals, Programmatic Objectives, Cost/ Life Cycle

Costs/ Marketability Objectives as well as the ultimate

goal to create a place which offers ‘Design Excellence/

Human Delight and the Celebration of Culture Spirit

and Place’.

It is suggested that the project budget be confirmed at

the end of this phase.

Phase Ten

Construction Phase

Similar to the previous phases, this phase is concerned

with protecting the aspirations of the project and re-

quires that the design process continue to ensure that

the desired project is realized.

This phase is also by definition an opportunity to expand

the team and build partnerships with the Contractors,

Subcontractors and Manufacturers assembled to de-

liver the project. In particular these groups will need to

be organized to participate in the relevant parts of the

Living Building Challenge, LEED Platinum and Green

Building Matrix to help ensure that the project is con-

structed in a non-wasteful, and sustainable manner.

Phase Eleven

Commissioning/ Operation

During this phase the knowledge developed by the de-

sign team regarding building performance, operation,

and maintenance is transferred to a new group of

building stewards which include the Owner, Occupants,

Maintenance and Operations groups. This is particularly

important for a project intending to achieve zero energy

and zero water usage, as most building systems areonly effective if operated as intended.

It is suggested that Credits EA3 Additional Commis-

sioning and EA5 Measurement and Verification be

adopted to help achieve a LEED Platinum certification.

Phase Twelve

Post Occupancy

Given that the ultimate measure of the project’s per-

formance will be determined after it is completed, it

is important that the design be robust in nature, such

that if initial measurements suggest that the objectives

have not been achieved, adjustments can be made with

relative ease to address this. If early design decisions

require perfect execution in order to perform success-

fully, it is likely that the project objectives will not be

achieved. In the construction industry this is referred to

as design and or construction tolerance.

It is also important that the project budget adequately

be apportioned to address these atypical post occupan-

cy ambitions via the establishment of an appropriate

contingency.



Bullitt Foundation Building Project Objectives Design Excellence - Human Delight and the Celebration of Culture Spirit and Place

Environment/SustainabilityLiving Building Challenge "The Green Building Matrix" Leed Project Checklist

Summary of Prerequisites City of Seattle Priority Green Permitting Program

Petal Prerequisite 1. Energy and Climate Protection Bullitt Foundation Checklist

1. Site Responsible Site Selection EC-1-Minimum 2% o total energy use rom 14 Points Sustainable Sites

2. Site Limits to Growth on-site renewables Required Prerequisite 1: Erosion & Sedimentation Control

3. Site Habitat Exchange EC-2-On-site power generation ? 1 1: Site Selection

4. Energy Net Zero Energy EC-3-Passive cooling/climate responsive design ? 1 2: Urban Redevelopment

5. Materials Material Red List EC-4-Comply with 2030 Challenge EC4 ? 1 3: Brownfield Redevelopment

6. Materials Construction Carbon Footprint is a mandatory requirement* ? 1 4. 1: Al te rnati ve Tra nspo rt ati on, Publ ic Tra nsp ort at io n Ac ce ss

7. Materials Responsible Industry EC-0-Other innovative Energy and ? 1 4.2: Alternative Transportat ion, Bicycle Storage, Changing Room

8. Ma te ria ls Ap pro pria te M at eria ls /Se rv ic es Ra dius C lim ate Pro tec tio n des ig n el em ents ? 1 4. 3: Al te rnati ve Tra nspo rt ati on, Al te rnati ve Fuel Ve hic le9. Materials Leadership in Construction Waste 2. Healthy People and Communities ? 1 4.4: Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacitiy

10. Water Net Zero Water HP-1-Historic Landmark+Green Redevelopment ? 1 5. 1: Re duc ed Si te Di st urb ance , Pro te ct or Res tore Op en Sp ac e

11. Water Sustainable Water Discharge HP-2-Brownfield Redevelopment ? 1 5. 2: Re duc ed Si te Di st urb ance , Dev el op me nt Fo ot pri nt

12. Indoor Quality A Civilized Environment HP-3-Advanced Workforce Housing ? 1 6.1: Stormwater Management, Rate and Quantity

13. Indoor Quality Healthy Air: Source Control HP-4-Food Security Site or urban agriculture ? 1 6.2: Stormwater Management, Treatment

14. Indoor Quality Healthy Air: Ventilation HP-5-Dedicated program that integrates ? 1 7. 1: La ndsc ap e & Ex teri or De sig n t o Re duce Hea t I sla nds, NonRo

15. Beauty & Inspiration Beauty and Spirit green collar job creation ? 1 7. 2: La ndsc ap e & Ex teri or De sig n t o Re duce Hea t I sla nds, Ro of

16. Beauty & Inspiration Inspiration and Education HP-6-Innovative transportation ? 1 8: Light Pollution Reduction

HP-O-Other innovative Healthy People and ? 5 Points Water Efficiency

Communities design elements ? 1 1.1: Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50%

3. Restore our Waters ? 1 1. 2: Wat er Ef fic ient L ands ca pi ng , No Pot abl e Us e or No Irrig ati on

W-1-50% or more of rain or stormwater ? 1 2: Innovative Wastewater Technologies

re-used on site ? 1 3.1: Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction

W-2-50% or more reduction of gray water/black ? 1 3.2: Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction

water entering storm and/or sanitary sewers ? 17 Points Energy & Atmosphere

W-3-Natural Drainage System ? Required Prerequisite 1: Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning

W-O-Other innovative Restore Our Waters ? Required Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance

design elements ? Required Prerequisite 3: CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment4. Green Seattle Initiative ? 1-10 1: Optimize Energy Performance

GS-1-Green Roof ? 1 2.1: Renewable Energy, 5%

GS-2-Urban Forest ? 1 2.2: Renewable Energy, 10%

GS-3-Seattle Green Factor ? 1 2.3: Renewable Energy, 20%

GS-O-Other innovative design elements ? 1 3: Additional Commissioning

5. Waste Reduction and Recycling ? 1 4: Ozone Depletion

WR-1-Building re-use and or recycling of ? 1 5: Measurement & Verification

building materials on site ? 1 6: Green Power

WR-2-Innovative recycling ? 13 Points Material & Resources

WR-O-Other innovative Waste Reduction and ? Required Prerequisite 1: Storage & Collection of Recyclables

Recycling design elements ? 1 1.1: Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Shell

? 1 1.2: Building Reuse, Maintain 100% of Shell

? 1 1. 3: Buil ding Reuse, Ma intai n 100% She ll & 50% Non-S hel l

? 1 2.1: Construction Waste Management, Divert 50%

? 1 2.2: Construction Waste Management, Divert 50%

Funct ona Program ? 1 3.1: Resource Reuse, Specify 5%? 1 3.2: Resource Reuse, Specify 10%

? 1 4.1: Recycled Content, Specify 5% (p.c. + 1/2 p.i.)

? 1 4.2: Recycled Content, Specify 10% (p.c.+ 1/2 p.i.)

More specifically, this program considered reaching ? 1 5. 1: Lo cal /Reg io na l M at eria ls , 20 % Ma nuf act ure d Lo cal ly

the maximum buildable area of 47,500 square feet ? 1 5.2: Local/Regional Mater ia ls , of 20% in MRc5.1, 50% Harvested

through the following allocation of space. ? 1 6: Rapidly Renewable Materials

? 1 7: Certified Wood

Level A (below grade): ? 15 Points Indoor Environmental Quality

Up to 10,000 sq.ft for rainwater storage, wastewater ? Required Prerequisite 1: Minimum IAQ Performance

treatment, mechanical equipment, and parking ? Required Prerequisite 2: Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

? 1 1: Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Monitoring

Level 1 (15th Ave. access): ? 1 2: Ventilation Effectiveness

Up to 4500 square feet for retail and ? 1 3. 1: Co nst ructi on IA Q Ma nag eme nt Pla n, Duri ng Co ns truct io n

5500 square feet of partially below grade parking. ? 1 3. 2: Co nst ructi on IA Q Ma nag eme nt P la n, Befo re Occupa ncy

? 1 4.1: Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives & Sealants

Level 2 (Madison St. access): ? 1 4.2: Low-Emitting Materials, Paints

Up to 9000 square feet of commercial/retail use and ? 1 4.3: Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet

approximately 1000 square feet for circulation/core ? 1 4.4: Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood

? 1 5: Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source ControlLevel 3-6: ? 1 6.1: Controllability of Systems, Perimeter

Approximately 27,500 square feet distributed ? 1 6.2: Controllability of Systems, Non-Perimeter

between office and residential use. ? 1 7.1: Thermal Comfort, Comply with ASHRAE 55-1992

? 1 7.2: Thermal Comfort, Permanent Monitoring Systems

? 1 8.1: Daylight & Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces

? 1 8.2: Daylight & Views, Views for 90% of Spaces

? 5 Points Innovation & Design Process

? 1 1.1: Innovation in Design



Cost/Marketing ? 1 1.4: Innovation in Design? 1 2: LEED Accredited Professional

69 Points Project Totals

52-69 points Platinum

Capital Cost 39-51 points Gold

Life Cycle Costing 33- 38 p oi nts S il ve r

Marketing 26-32 points Certified


17/35

Patkau Architect


Proposed Tea



Project Team

Patkau Architects has aligned itself with Recollective, a

Vancouver-based multi-disciplinary green building and

sustainable community consulting firm with direct ex-

perience in delivering LEED Platinum Buildings and a

working knowledge of the Living Building Challenge.

Recollective will participate in the process as Sustain-

ability Consultants.

Ultimately, it is our intention to work with an AssociateArchitect located in the Seattle area, however this firm

has yet to be selected. As suggested by Point 32, this

Associate will be selected during the next phase of the

selection process, in consultation with Point 32 and the

Bullitt Foundation.

The project team will consist of the following key par-

ticipants:

Architect

Patkau Architects

Principals in Charge of Design

John and Patricia Patkau

In this capacity John and Patricia will provide informed

design leadership.

Design Principal

Michael Cunningham

In this capacity Michael will work with John and Patricia

Patkau to design the project. In addition Michael will

work with John Patkau to help lead the design process

in terms of working with the Owner, Point 32, Associ-

ate Architect and the Specialty Design Consultants.

Project Manager/ Designer

Michael Thorpe

Michael Thorpe will participate in the design process

and act as Project Manager for Patkau Architects.

Michael lived and worked in Seattle from 1999 to 2005

and so is familiar with local development and construc-

tion practices. Michael will act as the principle liason

with the Associate Architect, Point 32 and the Specialty

Design Consultants during the post design phases of

the project.

Sustainability Consultant

Recollective: Buildings, Community, Ecology

Brenda Martens

In this capacity Brenda will work with Patkau Architects

to lead and manage the process as it relates to the Bul-

litt Foundations sustainability objectives, through all

phases of the project. Brenda is experienced with both

the LEED Certification and Living Building Challenge

processes.Recollective: Building Simulation Consultant

Jack Cui

Jack will work closely with Brenda and perform all the

required building simulations.

Associate Architect

Principal in Charge of Management/

Project Architect

This individual and the associated firm has yet to be

named. It is our intention to work with an architect

located in Seattle. As suggested by Point 32, this As-

sociate will be selected during the next phase of the

selection process, in consultation with Point 32 and the

Bullitt Foundation.

The Associate Architect will work closely with Patkau

Architects during all phases of the project. In general

Patkau Architects will lead during the Design phases

of the project, with management support from the As-

sociate Architect. The Associate Architect and Patkau

Architects will share the lead during the Construction

Documents phase. The Associate Architect will lead

with design support from Patkau Architects during the

Construction, Commissioning and Post Occupancy

phases of the project.

Management Team

It is suggested that a Management Team be assembled

to manage the process as a whole. This team would

consist of Point 32, Patkau Architects, Recollective and

the Associate Architect. This team in consultation with

the Bullitt Foundation would select the remaining Spe-

cialty Consultants.

In general the management team will work together

to organize the activities of the team using a process

which is characterized by collaboration, integration,

iteration and flexibility with informed leadership. See

also Design Process Section of Document.

Specialty ConsultantsThese needs may change over

time, however initially it is ex-

pected that the following special-

ty consultants will be required.

Structural Engineer

Mechanical Engineer

Electrical Engineer

Lighting/ Daylighting

Photovoltaics

Landscape Architect/ Ecologist

Civil Engineer

Geotechnical Engineer

Water Management Acoustical Engineer

Materials Consultant

Capital Cost/ Life Cycle Costing

Construction Contractor Cost/

Constructability

Marketing?

Code/s



John Patkau

Principal

John Patkau founded Patkau Architects with Patricia

Patkau in 1978.

John is responsible for providing leadership for the

activities of the firm generally, and responsible, jointly

with Patricia, for providing design leadership through-

out each project from inception to completion.

Member, Order of Canada

Professional Affiliations

Registered Architect in British Columbia, New York,

Pennsylvania and Washington

NCARB Certification

LEED Accredited Professional

Honorary Fellow, Royal Institute of British Architects

Honorary Fellow, American Institute of Architects

Member, Royal Canadian Academy of Arts

Fellow, Royal Architectural Institute of Canada

Academic

Master of Architecture, University of Manitoba, 1972

Bachelor of Environmental Studies

University of Manitoba, 1969

Bachelor of Arts, University of Manitoba, 1969

Professional

(see also project portfolio, project list, awards, exhibi-

tions and selected publications)

Symposia

Plenary Speaker, Sustenta America, Chilean Associa-

tion of Architectural Offices, Santiago, Chile.

Plenary Speaker, Capital Modern: Edmonton Architec-

ture & Urban Design 1940-1969, Edmonton, Alberta

Plenary Speaker, 7th International Alvar Aalto Sympo-

sium, Jyvaskla, Finland

Plenary Speaker, New Zealand Institute of Architects

National Conference, Auckland, New Zealand

Plenary Speaker, Royal Architectural Institute of Scot-

land National Conference, Edinburgh, Scotland

Plenary Speaker, Schwer Punkt Holz, Murau, Austria

Fabrications Exhibit, Wexner Center for the Arts,

Columbus, Ohio

Lectures

Guest lecturer at over 50 institutions including Harvard

University, Yale University, University College Dublin,

Manchester

Master Series, University of California at Los Angeles,

Architecture League of New York, Colegio de Arquitec-tos de Catalunya, Architectural Association, London,

and Royal Institute of British Architects.

Teaching

Eero Saarinen Visiting Professor, Yale University, 2009

Raymond E. Moritz Distinguished Visiting Professor

Washington University (St. Louis), 1998

Visiting Professor

Eliot Noyes Professor of Architecture

Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 1995

William Lyon Somerville Visiting Lectureship

University of Calgary, 1994

Thesis and studio critic at the University of BritishColumbia intermittently from 1985 to the present

Public Service

Member, Vancouver League for Studies in Architec-

ture, 1998 to 2004

Member, Vancouver Urban Design Panel, 1990-1992

Juror, American Institute of Architects Educational

Facilities Awards

Juror, American Wood Council Awards

Juror, Canada Council Awards

Juror, Canadian Architect Awards

Juror, Canadian Wood Council Awards

Juror, Houston Chapter, AIA Awards

Juror, Portland Small Lot Housing Competition

Juror, San Francisco Chapter, AIA Awards

Juror, Vancouver League for Studies in Architecture

Cliffhanger Competition

Juror, World Architecture Awards



Patricia Patkau

Principal

Patricia Patkau founded Patkau Architects with John in

1978. She is currently a Professor in the School of Ar-

chitecture at the University of British Columbia.

As principal, Patricia is responsible for providing design

leadership throughout each project from inception to

completion. At the University of British Columbia she

teaches senior design studios and thesis.

Member, Order of Canada


Registered Architect in British Columbia

Honorary Fellow, Royal Institute of British Architects

Honorary Fellow, American Institute of Architects

Member, Royal Canadian Academy of Arts

Fellow, Royal Architectural Institute of Canada

Professional

Professor School of Architecture

University of British Columbia, 2002 to present

Juror, International Competition

NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium, 2001-2002

Raymond E Maritz Distinguished Visiting Professor

Washington University (St. Louis), 1998

Invited Participant

Stanford Learning Lab Programming Charrette 1998

Visiting Professor

Eliot Noyes Professor of Architecture

Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 1998

William Lyon Somerville Visiting Lectureship


Visiting Professor, Harvard University Graduate School

of Design, 1993

Academic

Master of Architecture, Yale University, 1978

Bachelor of Interior Design

University of Manitoba, 1973

Public Service

Commissioner, University of Washington Architectural

Commission, 1999 to present

Acted as juror or visiting critic for numerous institutions

including NATO, New York State AIA, San Diego AIA,

Canada Council, Canadian Wood Council, Governor

General’s Medals for Architecture, Progressive Archi-

tecture Awards, Yale University, Massachusetts Insti-

tute of Technology, , University of California Los Ange-

les, and University of Toronto.

Lectured at over 30 institutions including University ofMinnesota, Yale School of Architecture, Illinois Institute

of Technology, Museum of Modern Art in New York, Je-

rusalem Seminar for Architecture, University of Texas,

Association of Architectural Historians, Queen’s Univer-

sity in Belfast, New Zealand Association of Architects,

and Oslo Association of Architects.



Michael Cunningham

Principal

An architect with 25 years of experience, Michael has

been with Patkau Architects for 20 years. He became

a principal in 1995.

In 1997, Michael was awarded the Ronald J. Thom

Award for Early Design Achievement. This National

prize is awarded every two years to a candidate in the

early stages of his or her career who demonstrates

outstanding creative talent and potential in architecturaldesign.


Registered Architect in British Columbia


Professional

Ronald J. Thom Award for Early Design Achievement

1997

Academic

Lighting Certificate

Harvard Graduate School of Design, 1983

Master of Environmental Design (Architecture)


Bachelor of Arts, University of Calgary, 1977

Academic Awards

Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Medal

Head of the Graduating Class

Cecil Scott Burgess Scholarship

Clark James Coupland Scholarship

Faculty of Environmental Design Scholarship

Faculty of Environmental Design Fellowship

Public Service

Acted as a visiting critic or lecturer at McGill University,

Dalhousie University, University of British Columbia,

and University of Calgary.

Jury Member, Canadian Wood Council

2007 BC Wood Design Awards

Jury Member, San Antonio Chapter AIA Awards, 2002

Selected Professional Experience

Beaty Biodivsersity Centre and Museum

University of British Columbia

Designer, Project Architect

New College House

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Designer

Aquatic Ecosystems Research Laboratory



Grande Bibliothèque du Québec

Montreal, Québec


Hamilton Village Student Housing Competition

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Designer

Nursing and Biomedical Sciences Building

Environmental Issues Study

Educational Technologies Study

University of Texas, HoustonDesigner, Project Architect

Oakdale Community Centre

Toronto, Ontario


Shaw House

Vancouver, British Columbia


Strawberry Vale Elementary School

Victoria, British Columbia


Emily Carr College of Art and Design

Vancouver, British Columbia Designer

Newton Library and Seniors’ Centre

Surrey, British Columbia


Canadian Clay and Glass Gallery

Waterloo, Ontario




Michael Thorpe

Project Manager

Michael is a project manager with extensive experi-

ence in leading large multidisciplinary and joint venture

teams from conception through to occupancy. He has

been with Patkau Architects since 2005, and is pres-

ently overseeing delivery of the Beaty Biodiversity Cen-

ter at the University of British Columbia.

Prior to joining Patkau Architects, Michael spent six

years working with one of Seattle’s leading architecturalpractices, where he was the primary contact on several

high-profile federal and civic projects. Michael has both

Bachelor of Architecture and Bachelor of Environmental

Studies degrees from the University of Waterloo.

Academic History

Certified Document Technologist Certificate, 2001

Construction Specifications Institute, Seattle

AutoCAD Level Two Certificate, 1994

Camosun College, Victoria

Bachelor of Architecture, 1992

University of Waterloo, Waterloo

Bachelor of Environmental Studies, 1984

University of Waterloo, Waterloo.


Beaty Biodiversity Centre

Project Manager

With other firms

Seattle City Hall

Project Architect, construction documents and con-

struction administration phases, for a $72M, 19 500

sq m civic complex.

Seattle Civic Center Plazas

Project Architect, construction documents and

construction administration phases for a $13M civic

complex.

Oroville-Osoyoos Joint Port of Entry

Project Architect, construction documents phase, for a

$31M high-security building.

Sequoyah Middle School, Federal Way, WA

Project Architect, construction administration phase,

for a $13M, 7 000 sq m school.

Environmental Science Center, Burien, WA

Project Architect, design and construction documentsphases, for a 150 sq m building.

Maplewood K-8 School, Edmonds, WA

Project Architect, construction documents phase, for a

$14M, 4 600 sq m school.

Oaklands Elementary School, Victoria BC

Construction documents team for a 4 500 sq m

school.

Municipal Office, Victoria BC

Design development and construction documents

team for a 170 sq m office.

Steudle Residence, Whistler BC

Construction documents team for a 510 sq m home.

Rocky Point Condominims, Nanaimo BC

Design development and construction documents

team for a 33-unit condominium.

Wang Residence

Design development team for a $18M home.

Office Building, Victoria BC

Design development and rezoning team for a 3 900 sq

m office building.



Brenda Martens

Principal, Recollective

Brenda has over 17 years experience in the building in-

dustry working on residential, institutional, commercial

and industrial projects throughout British Columbia.

Her experience includes office, medical and rehabilita-

tion renovations, recreation facilities, and libraries, vary-

ing in scope from design, construction administration,

and project management to facilities management and

LEED Coordination.As a board member of the Cascadia Region Green Build-

ing Council, Brenda reviewed and provided feedback on

the Living Building Challenge prior to its release.

As a member of the Canada Green Building Council’s

Technical Advisory Committee, Brenda reviewed the

original LEED Canada documentation, and now re-

views Credit Interpretation Rulings and proposed up-

dates. This advisory role provides the opportunity for

involvement in the evolution of the LEED products as

well as awareness of any developments that may affect

current projects.


Board of Directors, Cascadia Region Green BuildingCouncil

Faculty, Canada Green Building Council

Faculty, Cascadia Region Green Building Council

Technical Advisory Group (TAG) member


Member, Cascadia Region Green Building Council

Chapter Committee of the CaGBC

NAIOP Development Issues Committee

City of Vancouver Green Building Strategy Committee

Academic HistoryBachelor of Science, 1989



Southeast False Creek Athlete’s Village, Vancouver BC

LEED Project Manager for 1.5 M SF of mixed-use

development

Whistler Athlete’s Village, Whistler BC

LEED Consultant for 75 acre LEED-ND application

BC Housing 12 Sites, Vancouver BC

Sustainability Coordinator for 12 carbon-neutral and

LEED Gold social housing projects

UniverCity Review, Burnaby BC

Green building reviewer for all new developments at

UniverCity

Vancouver Island Conference Centre, Nanaimo BC

Green Building Consultant

City of North Vancouver Library, North Vancouver BC

LEED Project Manager

Edmonds Town Centre Library, Burnaby BC

LEED Project Manager

Yukon Healing Centre, Yellowknife YK LEED Project Manager


24/35

Patkau Architect


Selected Proje



Selected Project Description Patkau Architects

Nursing and Biomedical Sciences Building Competition


The Nursing and BiomedicalSciences Building is located

in Houston, within the TexasMedical Center. The functionalprogram includes 250,000 squarefeet of classroom, seminar,office, continuing education,and student support facilities.

The area of the site necessarilyimplies a high-rise building. Tocounteract the tendency of high- rise buildings to isolate people,the floors are interconnectedby multi-story spaces. Socialareas such as the bookstore,food services, auditorium, andvarious lounges are located withinor adjacent to these spaces toreinforce their role in support- ing academic community. The

remaining areas between thesemultistory spaces are designedto be easily changed. This is fa- cilitated by a clear span structure,a modular partition system, andan accessible floor plenum.

Because of the orientation of thesite, the primary facades of thebuilding face directly east andwest, resulting in extreme solarconditions. To prevent solar heatgain, the east and west sides ofthe building are shaded by louvers.These louvers also act as reflectivelight shelves, directing natural lightinto the centre of the building. Theroof of the building is protectedfrom the sun by a large parasol.Constructed of photovoltaic cells,

this parasol produces electricityto operate the fans associatedwith the mechanical systems. Inaddition, the rooftop system isalso designed to collect rainwater,which is stored in a large cistern.

Awards Progressive ArchitectureCitation 1999

Canadian Architect Award 1998

Winning Submission, InternationalDesign Competition 1996

“This research building in Texas is arguably one of the finest pieces of

current design by Canadians, and it is the most sophisticated environmental

design solution submitted to the Canadian Architect Awards this year.”

Peter Busby, Canadian Architect, 1998




Research and Design Investigations: Environmental Issues


Together with a multidisciplinaryteam, Patkau Architects

participated in an extensiveresearch project on environmentalissues, commissioned by theUniversity of Texas Houston.

The objective of the research wasto understand how environmentalissues directly influenced buildingdesign, and what techniquescould be effectively employedfor maximum impact.

The investigation was broadlydivided into three subject areas.The first studied the Architec- ture-Ecosystem Interface, andfocused on issues such as energyconsumption, conservation, andgeneration. A large part of theresearch involved studying and

comparing different configurationsof the building envelope and itseffects on daylighting, ventilation, and heat gain. Computermodeling was used to comparedifferent design solutions.

The second subject area focusedon the building as a PhysicalArtifact, and considered issuessuch as embodied energy,toxicity, durability, and maintenance, as well as the effectof the construction process.

The third subject area studiedEnvironmental Quality, andfocussed on issues such as air,light, and water quality, as well asthe importance of the connection

to outdoors. A large part of the research involved the comparison ofdifferent building systems, at largeand small scale. Computer modeling assisted in this comparison.

The research was carriedout in conjunction with OveArup and Partners, LawrenceBerkeley National Laboratories,and Center for MaximumPotential Building Systems.

“The design, construction and interiors of the building are part of a new era of

sustainability on the campus. We are making sure that it will meet the needs of the current

generation of students without having a negative impact on future generations.”

Brian Yeoman, assistant vice president for support services,

University of Texas Houston




Strawberry Vale School

Victoria, British Columbia

The Strawberry Vale School isa public school containing 16

classrooms and support areasfor students from kindergar- ten to grade seven.

All classrooms are oriented towardthe south to optimize naturalillumination and to maximize theconnection to an adjacent GarryOak woodland. The classroomsare located on-grade, groupedin pods of four, providing directaccess to the outdoors and thepossibility of an extended programof teaching. The arrangement ofclassroom pods creates a seriesof in-between spaces, bothinterior and exterior, suitable forindividuals or small groups.

A meandering circulation spine

provides access to each classroompod and to the remainingcomponents of the program.The irregular configuration of thespine creates small-scale commonspaces along it that support avariety of activities and interac- tions, both spontaneous andplanned, providing an architectural basis for a greater sense ofcommunity within the school.

The school was developed withinthe context of environmentalsustainability. Heating and lightingsystems were designed tooptimize the use of solar energyand daylight, materials were selected to maximize environmentalquality and minimize the amountof embodied energy, and thehydrology of the site was carefullydeveloped, integrating buildingsystems with natural ones.

Awards Governor General’s Medal 2002

Progressive Architec- ture Award 1995

Canadian Architect Award 1994

“Strawberry Vale School is a remarkable project that combines acute spatial intensity, a rich

tectonic concept spanning from a primary spatial order all the way through to mechanical systems,

and an unusually careful integration of the built form with a specific site. A virtuoso piece.”

George Baird, 2002 Governor General’s Awards for Architecture

“There are numerous reasons to believe in the impact of the Patkau's design. It's been a

magnet for people buying houses in the area … they've been attracted to the school. As well,

the children have responded. The building makes kids want to come to school.”

Liz Priestman, long-time teacher at Strawberry Vale School




La Petite Maison du Weekend

Various Locations

La Petite Maison du Weekend is aprototype self-sufficient minimal

dwelling. It can be relocated tovirtually any outdoor site, whereit will provide the basics foreveryday life: sleeping for two,kitchen, shower, and compost- ing toilet. Made of a variety ofmaterials and premanufacturedcomponents, it generates its ownelectricity, collects and distrib- utes rainwater, and compostshuman waste using only thenatural dynamics of the site.

The project was constructedin 1998 for the FabricationsExhibition at the Wexner Centerfor the Arts, in Columbus, Ohio.

Awards Royal Architectural Institute of

CanadaInnovation in ArchitectureAward of Excellence 2001

North American Wood DesignAwards Citation 2001

“An exhibit of ideas that pushes the imagination by investigating

ideas of self sufficiency, sustainability and minimalism, and by creating

a beautiful folly”

Jury, 2001 North American Wood Design Awards


29/35




Long Dock Beacon

Beacon, New York

Long Dock Beacon is locatedon a former industrial peninsula

on the Hudson River in NewYork. The site is adjacent to Dia: Beacon, a major new art museumsponsored by the Dia Foundation.

This project is the first development project to be sponsored bythe Scenic Hudson Land Trust, a40-year old conservation organiza- tion in New York. The project iscommitted to be a leader in sustainable design as the inevitableprecedent for all future ScenicHudson activities in the HudsonRiver Valley. Presently in the Sche- matic Design phase, the objectiveof this project is LEED Gold.

The program includes a 166guestrooms, a conference centre,

food and beverage services,and a wide variety of indoor andoutdoor public amenities The siteand building design balances theinterests of public use, development, natural habitat, environmental sustainability, and local identity.

Long Dock Beacon is beingrealized in association withGruzen Samton of New York.

“This first phase has been exciting and gratifying. We have been very satisfied with the

team’s responsiveness to the unique parameters of the project and to the issues raised by the

community and permitting agencies. … We believe that the masterplan beautifully expresses our

goals for the project and look forward to our discussions about its further development.”

The Scenic Hudson Land Trust

“You and the design team have developed an innovative, imaginative, and beautiful

masterplan. … We are extremely happy with the direction the project is taking and congratulate

you for your excellent work”

Foss Group




Aquatic Ecosystems Research Laboratory


The Aquatic EcosystemsResearch Laboratory is a 6

000 square meter interdisci- plinary research facility thatconsolidates research groupsfrom a variety of disciplines.

The building is organized aroundan atrium that spatially connectsthe four floors of the building toreinforce a sense of academiccommunity. Social spaces arelocated adjacent to this spaceto encourage serendipitousinteraction between the faculty,students, and the various researchunits. Faculty offices, loft spacesfor the student community, anda variety of meeting spaces arelocated on the upper floors,while the large public rooms

are located on the ground floorwhere they can participate inthe urban life of the campus.

The atrium also plays a key role inthe sustainable design strategiesemployed in the building. Theatrium acts as a natural ventilation stack that pulls air into thebuilding, eliminating the need fora traditional mechanical ventilationsystem. During summer, the building is naturally ventilated at nightto cool the concrete structure,which then acts as a radiantcooling surface during the day,eliminating the need for air condi- tioning for the three upper floors.

The atrium is glazed at the topto bring natural light deep intothe interior. This, combined withgenerous glazing on the north sideof the building and photo sensorcontrols technology, minimizesdependency on electric lighting.

The atrium is also understood tobe a kind of aquarium in whichthe skeletons of various formsof marine life will be suspended.In addition to the didactic valueof this display, the skeletonsoffer a spooky reminder of ourcollective mortality, and the needto understand the ecosystemswhich we are all a part of.

construction photograph

UBC’s Aquatic Ecosystems Laboratory is certified LEED Gold under the Leadership in Energy

and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System.




Beaty Biodiversity Research Centre and Museum


The Beaty Biodiversity Centreis dedicated to environmental

stewardship through research,strategy, and education. Withinthe centre are a natural historymuseum, a large natural historycollection, research laboratoriesand faculty, staff, and studentoffices with related meeting andsupport spaces. The building islocated on Main Mall, the centralnorth-south spine of the Universityof British Columbia campus.

In conjunction with the AquaticEcosystems Research Laboratory,a project we recently completed,the Beaty Biodiversity Centreforms a complex of relatedenvironmental science functionsorganized around a courtyard

space. This space exists on 2levels; on a lower level in theinterior of the complex as thenatural history collection, a centralarchival and exhibit componentin the complex, and on gradeas a garden. The garden andcourtyard space provides aunifying focus for the variouscomponents of both projects.

The Biodiversity Centre isorganized around 3 sides of thegarden and courtyard spacewith the Beaty Natural HistoryMuseum occupying the north sidealong Main Mall, and presenting apublic face for the whole complexto the campus. The principalexhibition space o