During the academic year 2008—2009, the College of Design at the University of Kentucky conducted a year-long research and design study of the Shippingport area in Louisville. The Shippingport area, located just west of downtown Louisville, has significant waterfront and extensive infrastructure and enormous potential for future development. Development has been limited, however, because the entire area is cut off from the rest of the city by the freeway. In fall 2008, students analyzed and made strategic design proposals for the Shippingport area intended to stimulate economic development and bring much-needed jobs. Proposals included a complex of business incubators and needed vocational schools, including a culinary school with a restaurant; a centralized hospitality complex; a network of pocket parks that connect to the existing Olmstead Park system; and a new Green Ford Motor Company Campus where a new line of hybrid and electric products would be designed, developed and built. In spring 2009, students developed some or all of these strategic proposals into infrastructural and building proposals.
On May 27, the day of the final review and exhibition opening, Archinect's Paul Petrunia discussed the project with JDS' Julien De Smedt...
How do you think the field trips to Oslo and Brussels contributed to the project?
I think that it allowed the students to see universes that are extremely different than the ones they experience every day in Kentucky, and even at the College of Design… in the case of Brussels, I had set up our office with a large joined table and laptops for the students as well as full access to our facilities…
we also gave them a series of classes in practical tools such as photoshop, model making etc… the idea being that we would later on asked them to function on their project in the same that we do at the office.
Besides that they had much better beers in Brussels than they can in Lexington and I they went up a couple of days to Holland for even better ‘architecture’…
Was the project mostly developed at the master-plan scale?
Not really… mostly because the site, even though rather large, is concentrated on one neighborhood… or a chunk of the city of Louisville. We had more planning concerns in terms of the research prior to actual design…
I led the design project on the second semester and had to catch up massively in terms of time available to do such a large project to the level of ambitions that was set up during the first semester… we even put more pressure on ourselves by continuing the research into a design-implemented research so that the mechanics of designs would be fully glued to the specifics of the site…
In the end the project is a hybrid in between a masterplan and large scale architectural interventions… which is often the way we work in our projects… if an assignement is to small to be interesting we boost it by englobing concerns that immediately relate to the task, if it’s too big we design in a way that the future of it is somewhat not left undefined, as it can sometimes happen in too generic planning projects…
we’d like to be able to bring in an enthusiastic take to everything we do and at least manage to maintain that through the tedious process of masterplanning… so we drop a lot of exciting elements in to generate further enthusiasm and ambitions…
How did the students work together on this project? Was it purely collaborative or did the students take on individual or group roles?
It depended on the students and on the timing… after the first semester we had a review with Michael Speaks and composed what we thought were the strongest few projects and the teams that could achieve them… mostly according to who was already doing what, but in some cases we took ‘exec’ decisions change a chemistry that didn’t seem to work out… it was proposed rather than imposed and everything worked out well…
Further on while we sharpened our knives on each projects and even re-organised the divisions of projects the students formed new groups and some went solo… this was initiated mostly by myself but of course shared and proposed rahter than imposed... things worked out once more… along the course of the studio I also decided to appoint, within the group of students, the role of an editor and the one of a coordinator…
At the beginning it created some frictions among the students that felt these roles were disturbing their freedoms… which was absolutely not the intention: it’s important in groups to find who has leadership, editorial, organisational power… this can make or break a project. I wanted the students to understand that, beyond their own project concerns… this project could only succeed if the overall masterplan/design set was fulfilled…
Describe the roles of three studio instructors (Julien, Gary and Jason)
Gary and I shared the year lead of the whole studio. Jason, followed both semester as the ‘on site’ supervisor, keeping up with the joined decisions taken during our monthly visits…
Gary took on the first semester with a more background and analytical agenda… it allowed the students to understand a set of values, methods of organising an agenda, a point of view, a strategy… and to research precedences and the city itself… this turned out both useful and difficult during the second semester… which we expected: it was useful since knowledge was there and methods of acquiring and articulating knowledge were well in place…
What were lacking or at least weakened were the mechanisms of how you turn an intention, a value, a contextual understanding into a design/product/project… each of my trips were moments for taking decisions, sometimes harsh ones, but always necessary ones, to manage the project up to the finish line… we also established an email update system that would first give me full updates of the projects every Monday and then as it got more dramatic timewise, every day… this was of course very demanding but my experience with groups is that when the overall base is well reflected, the more short exchange there is, the more efficiency and speed of action you reach…
More images of the final project, and photos from the final review and exhibition opening, continue below...
83 Comments
Oh...one more thing...the city of Vienna was recently rated as being the best place on earth to live. Such a scandalous celebration of the philistinism you all must think those backwards locals guilty of! Haha!
First a Zaha project in Vienne...
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/31/99409729_e42aeb7eee.jpg
Then a photo designed by a series of unknown yet competent architects building upon the moves of one another to make a beautiful street...
http://goeurope.about.com/library/graphics/gal/vienna_2.jpg
That pesky mayor listening to those knucklehead citizens of Vienna!
Orhan, Instead of actually addressing any point, or actually showing us how your type of architecture theory (not what you grew up in, but rather what you support and what you do for a living) could in any way be beneficial to the built environment, to the natural environment, to cities, or to people – you have done nothing but take things personally and attack those who disagree with you. I once again restate that I would love to see ONE example of this type of urban design – “good new boy” urban design that is successful in these regards.
Please check your personal attacks and insecurities at the door, and lets please have a real conversation about what good urban design really is. Please do not deflect the conversation from the real issues or distract the audience with comments like “they are programmed” - instead, I ask that you show us, teach us – all of us – your ways – and truly explain how they are better than traditional ideas and theories of “good ol’ boy” tried and tested urbanism, that people all over the world thrive in and love.
I would like to point out- Orhan and others - that have said that these critics have been very "mean to students" and "predator like" - that the one student to respond on this site actually said that they were glad that their project stimulated these discussions - and in fact said that they were not hurt or angered, but encouraged.
In the end, it is my hope that all those who read these entries will learn something about themselves, their own work, and what really needs to be done to revitalize our cities.
Out of anyone, it seems that the student has the best attitude presented on this page, even though I may not agree with the scheme. The student understands that there is much to learn.
I have written what I think about the project in my first post.
You have tirelessly rejected anything different than your grid based renewal projects, love for historicism, row housing and so on.
What is zeitgeisty? What are your views on the current ‘zeit’ in the light of social, economical and political changes taking place in the world? Do you think 18-19 century urban design developments of colonialist European cities you seem to love, are still viable models for quadrupled world population, depleting resources, mass immigration?
We know you dislike modern architecture, Rem Koolhaas and others, why do you think we (I) worship them? Did you see in my numerous articles that I do that?
You summary judge everything that does not fit into your picture. I don’t say I dislike vernacular architecture, old buildings, old urban spaces. I was born into them and grew up in a noisy bustling old city. I love that and chaos it offers ring after ring surrounding the square. I love its modern suburbs, surrounding shanty towns. I find them like priceless lessons and rich cultural incubators. I value things that don't work hundred percent.
This is different...
Do you think we ought not developing new models and ideas for fast changing demographics, culture, technology, generations? Do you know there are seven deep 'previous' cities under the foundation walls of last Troy?
Who are you? What are your credentials? How do you think, so as a matter of factly, that this project is ‘wrong?'
You repeatedly talk about livable cities but don’t accept aa example of, basically, a nicely and humanly proportioned waterfront park and sustainable community schemes the class has designed/proposed on what seems to be an industrial wasteland. Why so?
Tell us more about scale. Vegetation, urban life, you say this proposal lacks of.
Why are you so adamantly opposed to this raw and preliminary proposal?
What is eating you? The particular teachers? The particular university? The forms?
Do you think it is possible to re-construct Champ de Elysse? Piazzas of Rome? Mosque of Suleiman? Old Vienna? In Louisville? If I was from there, I'd be insulted for your unloading of Rome on me... What, Kitch-ville? Why? Hell no!
Who are you kidding gentelmen?
What are you bringing on the table in terms of re configuring cities, thinking about new ideas to counter unprecedented needs for infrastructure, housing, education, new communities with previously unseen demographics, need for developing new organizational methodologies and systems?
What?
Who cares if you hate modern architecture? Go ahead buy a row house and die in it. See if I care...
Orhan fails once again to answer the simple questions, and instead takes things personally and distracts the audience. What a great way to learn about architecture!
Your diatribe questions have been answered by me and others, both explicitly and implicitly few times over. You are still insisting because that is all you think you have got.
Now, how about my questions? How about the real joochill stand up and say, this is who I am, this is what I have done as an urban designer and as an urban theorist, and this is why I have such an authority to call everything about this project 'wrong?'
Your buddy is welcome too.
And while at it, please touch base with some of other questions I brought up about in my prior post. Thank you in advance.
Orhan - you seem to have some anger issues. Perhaps you should try to be civil to one another and then maybe you will get the response you are looking for?
civil what? to people calling others apes, shame, ignorant, etc etc, where did you come from? did you read? i am more civil than both of them combined. i am sick of all this passive agressive mingle wording.
anger issues? kindly mind your own business!
this is your second post so far and you already b lined on me!
talk about the project, not me.
Orhan,
I'll explain again. A verb is an action word. A noun is a person, place or thing. I said the students "ape" the architecture of those they are told to worship. It is a verb. Not a noun. I never called anyone an ape. Drop that nonsense immediately.
Who am I? I am an architect in Washington, DC, and an adjunct professor. I am an intellect who thinks about the world, and our drift to ugliness and oblivion and wants to change things for the better. I am a secular humanist who believes in human dignity. I am a liberal, and radical architect who has the stones to stand up to the Historicist- Modernist establishment. I want to create places of enduring beauty and timeless worth. Who are you?
Alan12, whoever you are, thank you for the call for civility.
Orhan, I hope some to fulfill your wish and die in an old piece of architecture, I thank you for the kindness. Your frightening conservatism when it comes to strict adherence to the failed urbanist planning theories is truly depressing, because so many will listen to you, their architect and professor.
You asked if traditional urban design methods will adapt to a burgeoning population. I say indeed they are they only way. Modernist philosophies have given us both the single use zone of office towers and the sprawling suburb. No farms = no food. We need and must break down the scale to create walkable places to live in and work, supported as much as possible by local food sources. We need to get away from mid 20th century outdated modernist ideas about industrialization and mass production. We need to incorporate new technologies into an architectural language that relates to human scale, history, and culture. That you need to ask this is stunning to me.
So, again, your wishes for my death I hope to some day peacefully make come true. As an atheist, I know I have but one chance at this life, and I better make it as good and as beautiful as I can.
Orhan:
Still distracting and deflecting.
Still taking things personally.
Still not answering questions I asked 5 DAYS AGO!
Glad to see that nothing has changed here.
Frankly, your actions and words are frightening me.
Congratulations on your stunning achievements.
Perhaps I will see you in a cafe in Paris one day, or possibly on a soulless floating disc hovering high above the now useless traditional ground plane in some decaying city somewhere.
Cheers!
Looks like The Orhan has been at this irrational writing thing for some time. I found this with a simple Google search:
http://edificial.com/2009/02/is-orhan-ayyuce-bull-goose-loo.php
yes there are a lot of stuff on me in the internet. thousands. people know what i write. are you now obsessed with me? look who is more personal. it was always you guys who got personal. you didn't need to go that deep to google search about me. just click on my name, that's who i am, and save yourself some agony.
how about you? names? where exactly do you teach so we can direct students to you.
obviously you are more interested in anonymously bragging about me. cowards... you got nothing!
Orhan,
Simply puy, you don't seem very trustworthy to me. I could brag to you about my accomplishments, what I've built, and the like, but I really don't need to. Honestly, I really don't want to. Think whatever you like, it doesn't matter. As for my obsession, it surely isn't about you. but, your ego is showing a little bit. You might want to zip up.
all you stand for above are addressed in the shippingport project and then some more... so, you and your buddy hate this project for some other reasons that you are not coming clear or hiding. why?
on personal attacks:
zip yourself. you are a second hand passive agressive post nazi! i knew you would decline to identify yourself!
Orhan, when people flail as you are and accuse people of being nazis, they are either unstable and therefor not to be opened up to, or worse, they are in control of their faculties and are choosing to say the things you say. If you were rational, I would identify myself. In this case, caution is the better part of valor. Sorry my man, you aren't going to find out who I am. You frighten me. Bullies are not to be taken seriously, and now your words are in public for all to see. You called me a Nazi because I like good urbanism and disagree with you. There is no more efficient way to make yourself look foolish than you have here demonstrated. I really hope all your students read this, I really do.
You bring shame upon yourself with your behavior, you bring shame upon architects with your behavior, and your tactics of insult and intimidate have no effect on me, and so you have proven yourself a childish brat.
what's new dodgeball?
you start with 'shame' and end with 'shame.' i am honored to join the other shamed (teachers and students you previously 'did')
are you sure you are not a devout shame giver, the perfect man, the second hand superior almighty, hiding under secular username?
did you try other search engines on me? maybe you'll find more dirt. that is all i have to say to you...
goodby and good riddance from my radar...
The decline of what could have been a good debate into issues of personality is unfortunate. Too look back at the project at hand - the proposed automotive plant intended to revitalize or bring stability to a portion of Louisville, the large scale ring with its roof-top test track (fiat plant, Turin as precedent one presumes); given the current state of the automotive industry, the choice seems ill-informed on the part of those responsible for the project definition. Indeed, hanging the fate of a region on a single entity has proven to be disastrous; one need look no further than Detroit, Flint, or Gary, Indiana to see this in action. The vast scale of this element, intended to act as a regional icon a la the Guggenheim Bilbao, is unwieldy on the landscape and judging by its scale as represented in the model, could not support or be converted into other uses. As the interest in green building grows, and the economy continues to slump, especially in the industrial sector, it would seem that this would be of vital importance. The ability to adapt to change is what has allowed cities that are hundreds and thousands of years old continue to remain on the world stage as vital and important places. As a regional icon, should we forget that the Ohio River is a regional icon? A replay of the 1937 flood would surely act as a reminder. At the bird's eye view, the image of the project is unfortunately reminiscent of the highway and urban renewal projects that brought us the network of roadways which cut cities like Louisville off from its important natural resources, like the Ohio River. The circular land bridges are also oddly reminiscent of the plastic can rings that have had an unfortunate environmental impact. I applaud the attempt to integrate vocational and culinary schools, as well as small business incubators, into the surrounding neighborhoods. Too bad these don't show up well in the model.
I do not blame Cbone for not wanting to share who he is. After what I have seen on this page I do not want to share either, for fear that Orhan would come after me.
Orhan you now have not only responded with more rage, but you have taken the arguments that were made about you and are now accusing others of the same.
My posts will end here. I have had enough of all of this – but especially the behavior of one.
So how about the project, ladies & gentlemen? Any other thoughts?
Alexander Walter, for thoughts on the project, you have to go back to the beginning!
To summarize, joochill and I do not care for it because of its deliberately anti-urban disposition, it's scalelessness, its promise of grim architecture destined to last but a short time because of it's inability to age gracefully, and it's lack of anything that will make for a good urban experience. Others think us rubes, knuckleheads, and Orhan, who henceforth will be called Napolean, wishes for my death, and has called me a Nazi because of my thoughts. Napolean doesn't like being proven wrong in front of others in his little fiefdom of this website, and has thus responded with an aggression disproportionate to the reality of what is being discussed - a poorly conceived student project directed by professors with a lust for destroying our cities through expressions of arrogant machismo.
A Real Person makes a Real Good Point. It will no doubt be ignored by Napolean or denigrated, but what can you do? I am interested to find out more.
Since I am off Napolean's radar now, I will heartily recommend to any architecture student the book "The Architecture of Community" by Leon Krier without fear of being called the Anti Christ.
It's been an interesting discussion, I have truly enjoyed it! No hard feelings to the students, best of luck in the future.
Napolean, Au Revoir, see you at Waterloo.
I don't think anything's been proven in this thread except that different people have different opinions about architecture and urbanism - what works and what doesn't. 'Grim', 'anti-urban', and 'urban experience' are individual judgments, not universal.
The conflation of this particular set of projects with single-use zoning, sprawl, and suburbs, as well as the positioning of it against farming, local food, pedestrian scale, work/live areas, history, and culture is groundless and, in fact, inconsistent with stated intentions of the studio.
If your (and Krier's) way works for you, good on ya. If you feel you can also learn from West 8, good too. If a different take on contemporary urbanism can work and be learned from, no reason not to explore that as well. Cities like Rotterdam are examples of both traditional and non-traditional approaches to urbanism co-existing in the same vicinity.
Most of this conversation has been addressed as if there were singular right answers to design. Wouldn't that be depressing.
Congratulations to the students involved in this studio. Good work!
both/and, not either/or, nor right/wrong. that's what Orhan and Steven seem to be saying. if i'm understanding correctly, then i most definitely agree.
Yes and Yes!
Bravo UK students and faculty. I look forward to learning more about this studio and project via the forthcoming publication.
This "round bridge", is the most poetic urban invention I have ever seen. Let's celebrate that a group of deep thinker actualy invented the future meeting space for those people, who like to enjoy life, not just run through the CITY on every single bridge, keep forgeting the aincient meaning of connections and relationships.
With the exception of Joochill's boringly backward and conservative rubbish, the arguement was quiet entertaining.
in turkish. last part of the article is on shippingport, louisville in izmir...
http://www.arkitera.com/k276-guncel-meseleler.html
Hey, I know I said I was done with arguing with the willfully ignorant Orhan and his pathetic band of yesmen, but I thought he and everyone else might find this interview with Rem interesting. I'll give you a little highlight...my favorite part of the interview:
SPIEGEL: Some people say that if architects had to live in their own buildings, cities would be more attractive today.
Koolhaas: Oh, come on now, that's really trivial.
SPIEGEL: Where do you live?
Koolhaas: That's unimportant. It's less a question of architecture than of finances.
SPIEGEL: You're avoiding the question. Where do you live?
Koolhaas: OK, I live in a Victorian apartment building in London.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,408748,00.html
He's quick on his feet and good with impenetrable phrases that sound meaningful but aren't, I'll give him that. And he knows good architecture and urbanism when he sees it! Hard to imagine him living in some of the destructive garbage he designs, really. He even says that it is an issue of finances! So, I guess good urbanism is only for the affluent...a strange point.
I know you'll fire back with your pre-written talking points disguised as polemical brilliance that you convince yourself you thought of, and I look forward to it. Until then, happy reading!
Hey, I know I said I was done with arguing with the willfully ignorant Orhan and his pathetic band of yesmen, but I thought he and everyone else might find this interview with Rem interesting. I'll give you a little highlight...my favorite part of the interview:
SPIEGEL: Some people say that if architects had to live in their own buildings, cities would be more attractive today.
Koolhaas: Oh, come on now, that's really trivial.
SPIEGEL: Where do you live?
Koolhaas: That's unimportant. It's less a question of architecture than of finances.
SPIEGEL: You're avoiding the question. Where do you live?
Koolhaas: OK, I live in a Victorian apartment building in London.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,408748,00.html
He's quick on his feet and good with impenetrable phrases that sound meaningful but aren't, I'll give him that. And he knows good architecture and urbanism when he sees it! Hard to imagine him living in some of the destructive garbage he designs, really. He even says that it is an issue of finances! So, I guess good urbanism is only for the affluent...a strange point.
I know you'll fire back with your pre-written talking points disguised as polemical brilliance that you convince yourself you thought of, and I look forward to it. Until then, happy reading!
talk to me three years from now, you Cilly goose.;.)
http://www.archinect.com/news/article.php?id=36331_0_24_0_C
keep looking, i see some improvement!
Nice deflection. Silly goose?! I must say, I was hoping for something more pithy.
i can't afford to live in my own designer home. would love to. in meantime live in modernist box a la corbusier from the 60's on the inner edge of tokyo's suburbs. 30 million + population in tokyo. parisian plans don't work here. they can't. neither does new urbanism. it can't. we need new ideas not old. seriously, times have changed and while there are some things that could work form the old, there are many that wil not. ditto for modernism. my belief is we are only now coming to terms with the city in our time and so any exploration is valid, including this project and including leon krier's work (although he does seem to have missed the boat a bit in retrospect, just as much as jeanneret did). the danger is in believing we have found a solution that will work everywhere, and worse one that works forever. all solutions in planning are temporary. that is planning fundamental.
do credentials matter? if so...> licensed and practicing architect, with own office in toyko. planner. phd in planning. did phd under guidance of one of the fellows currently advising sarkozy on masterplan of paris. my advisor is a modernist but not adamant about it. he sees future of urbanism as something we are yet to discover. that seems best way to move forward.
i am not a fan of the project, but only because i am unable to hear or see the ENTIRE process to completion. i am however a huge fan of students taking chances, walking out on limbs and exploring the edges of architecture and new ideas about spaces, objects and urbanism. what seems to get lost by these sentimental urbanists is that this is an opportunity for pushing boundaries; no one is even remotely suggesting that the model does or should represent a real/built condition, but ideas no matter how "outside" the realm should be considered, why? because they crack the stale underwhelming present state of things, and allow for other thoughts, new thoughts and their potentialities.
i can't get beyond the fact it reminds me too much of aranda/lasch in vegas...
Well this was fun to read until it devolved into a playground scene from primary school. Although I disagree with their delivery, their tone, and most certainly their tactics, I think that CBone and joochill make some interesting points, which are possibly rooted in the changing attitude towards how we encourage our young designers to learn in this challenging time. I can't begin to speculate, however; being of a more genteel nature, and obviously not having seen any of their other studio or course work, I don't think it's fair to come charging in and call such a beautifully-executed project "disgusting". What I like most about it is that as the "student" and Steven Ward said, it IS a though experiment, although I do think it is probably economically inappropriate and unsustainable; also that it has caused such a fervent discussion about urbanism here, so far removed from the classroom. If you can wade through some of the muck in reading the above comments, you might actually learn something!
Truly, it's been so long since I designed something cool. Isn't that what school is for? Riding that hot-air balloon of design fantasy until graduation and student loans weigh your basket back down to earth? I don't know, I'm just asking. I think the above project is a wonderful teachable moment though, in many respects, for past, present and future.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.