I w w w w W Iw w. w w - - p. .. @6 Wedesay "7,00 -Th Mchga Dil An EDUCATED GUESS about the future of campus architecture nated culture as"an alternate union for women, or the rumor that says the quirky Fletcher Administration Build- ing was built as a 1960s anti-riot struc- ture. Just as Neo-Gothic was the style when the Law Quad was built and 45- degree angles were fashionable when the Duderstadt Center was designed, today's campus buildings will eventu- ally become cultural relics. Therefore, to predict what the next 10 years of Michigan architecture will hold, it's important to investigate the trends now In many ways, new construction is shaped by what's popular, not just in the field of architecture but in urban planning as a whole, and consequently, by prevailing social movements. Con- temporary architecture is no longer defined by style as much as it is by pro- cess. Though it's debatable, many claim that the post-modernist style was dead after 1994 and that nothing substan- tial is risen to take its place. Take the neo-traditional Weill Hall, the sculp- tural Biomedical Research Building and the airy and linear Museum of Art expansion - aesthetically, they're radically different, but in a way, they capture the spirit of the times. With no predominant architectural style, the less artsy, more social mantras of using technology, maintaining sustainability and fostering globalism have become the guiding forces in most new con- struction. Infusing technology into architec- ture no longer just means having more Ethernet outlets or automated drop- down projection screens. Interactive media and its corresponding connec- tive tissue of complex communication technology are transforming the way space is perceived, especially on a uni- versity campus. As new technology further imbeds itself into our culture, campus architecture will respond. Gott said the Residential Life Initia- tive has played a major role in defining the importance of technology in aiding social interaction. "The social needs of our students combine with the extraordinary advances in technology have a tremen- dous role in shaping facility needs. But there are other contributing factors, too," she said. "We also see interdisci- plinary opportunities for new collabo- rations influencing faculty and student requirements for space as another example of a dynamic that influences siting and planning of current pro- Ten years ago, then-Uni- versity President Lee Bollinger encouraged campus architects to think ahead. Far ahead. "We need to take a long view," he said in a 1998 press release. "To consider what our Uni- versity Campus might be like, what its character should be, one hundred years from now." Bollinger chartered the acclaimed architecture and planning firm Ventu- ri, Scott Brown and Associates to con- ceive a fresh campus master plan that would unite the University's buildings into a recognizable whole. Michigan's physical campus was to herald a new vision. Today, that new vision has gotten old. So how will campus be remem- bered? And more important, what will the class of 2027 see when they look around it? Amid the ebb and flow of social tides, throughout the ups and downs of the economy and within the hearts and minds of generations, one thing remains: the buildings. So when archi- tects and planners gaze into their crys- When you return from campus 20 years from now, what will you see? By Austin Dingwall I Daily Staff Writer ter how well the team does, they will always be part of the largest crowd in America watching football on that particular Saturday. Recent criticism of the stadium's upcoming renovation is most likely fueled by nostalgia and pride rather than architectural woes. So takea moment to anticipate what the next decades will hold in store for Michigan's campus. Large projects like North Quad will become fresh pil- lars for Michigan's campus, yet most change will occur on a smaller scale. Gott pictures a campus shaped by the interstitial space between build- ings and the . overall campus fabric. She stresses the need for informal areas like walkways, plazas and green space. It's these places, she says, that "contribute to the vitality, energy and invigorating social realm of campus that typically contribute to some of the most memorable experiences for students." While charging toward the future, though, it's important to con- currently re-examine the present and engage the past. In the 10 years prior to Bollinger's late-90s address, campus buildings mirrored growth throughout most of the country. During the 80s, America glamorized indoor shopping malls and thrived off cheap gas. Suburban sprawl was not yet a buzzword, and commu- nities continued to radiate outward where land was cheap and untainted by historical reverence. "The last ten years have witnessed an unprecedented period of construc- tion," Bollinger wrote in 1997, regard- ing Michigan's own growing campus. "We are, however, at risk of centrifugal sprawl, of diluting our essential coher- ence and sense of community." His comments were remarkably pre- scient considering that at the time not only were the coming trends of archi- tecture unknown, but most people contemplating the future still thought Y2K was an apocalyptic threat and prophecies of global warming seemed far-fetched to many. Observing the modern world is an easier task. As important as it is to heed Bollinger's words of advice and look toward the future when creating Michigan's architecture, buildings are inherently products of contemporary ideology. Consider that the Michigan League was born out of a male-domi- grams." Consider the aspirations of North Quad to integrate academic space, media cafes and student housing. Programs that may have never been thought of as amiable partners are now being interwoven into single proj- ects. Striving to be cutting edge, the Ross School of Business is also tackling technology head-on to create spaces that don't look futuristic but function futuristically. While it's hard to pre- dict future innovations now, whatever they are, they're sure to be valuable fixtures of each new building erected on campus. on the other hand, building tech- nology is rapidly changing industry, so staying on the cutting edge means accruing considerable risk. New archi- tectural features often adorn modern structures as aesthetic highlights, and often they're soon dated as new inno- vations outpace them. The Biomedical Science Research Building is a prime example of pioneering building tech- nology with its undulating double-glass fagade sweeping across the site. Like many fashions, this building technique blossomed in Europe before landing in the Americas. Sure, it looks cool today, but who knows how it will fare in decades to come. It's easy to imagine a time in the near future when people eye the building's reflective skin and are slated to become certified by the United States Green Building Council for Leadership in Energy and Environ- mental Design, and more projects of every scale are feeling the push to go green. Like technology, sustainable build- ing practice is a less visual aspect of architecture. Reducing toxic chemi- cals in buildings, increasing indoor air quality and lessening pollution related to construction and building mainte- nance are issues often overlooked due to factors like cost. All the school's building projects should be 100 per- cent environmentally friendly, and so far all signs seem to indicate that the University is heading in that direction. If the University wants to remain architecturally progressive, trends like technology and sustainability should be accepted and articulated in campus development far into the future. Trends ofcreatinggloballyrecognizable archi- tecture should not. Global thinking is a not an inherently bad movement, but so-called global architects could be and should be avoided if the Univer- sity wants to maintain its individual character. This globalist trend entails hiring starchitects - world-renowned architects - to make a signature piece for a location. Worldwide, architects like Frank Gehry are being called on by cities to create memorable archi- tecture. Though these architects are awe-inspiring designers, the architec- ture produced is often designer-based as opposed to place-based.When every location has a unique Gehry building, it ceases to seem unique, and the nov- elty soon wears thin. So far, Michigan has only dabbled in such techniques - Venturi's Halo around Michigan Sta- dium and Renzo Piano's design for a new building on the Law Quad are two examples. So far, though, the campus has kept its local character by welcom- ing architects specific to each job. Reacting against sprawl and the growing ubiquity of generic places where franchises and strip malls define a community, urban planners are searching for ways to bring back personality to urbanized areas. Unlike much of Michigan, Ann Arbor has essentially been spared this challenge, but that doesn't mean the fight is over. A look at the University's current mas- ter plan shows that it is trying to main- tain the unity and character of campus as Ann Arbor grows up around it. See ARCHITECTURE, Page 12B tal balls, they must do so with vigor, optimism and, because ultra-futuristic buildings usually look dated within a few months, a sense of caution and the realistic notion that we probably won't be wearing jet packs anytime soon. Their propensity for foresight is cru- cial because the stakes are so high. Although much of the VSBA work still provides the foundation for the University's planning principles, it has been constantly updated and refined. University planner Sue Gott said it's important to realize the difficulties of planning a campus with ever-chang- ing needs. "Campus planning will continue to be influenced by many unpredictable dynamics," she said in an e-mail inter- view. "But the need for social interac- tion and a physical environment that is inspiring will likely remain timeless." University structures are steeped in tradition, whether they're glorified icons, like Burton Memorial Tower, or just backdrops for memorable events. Take the Big House, where football fans find solace in the fact that no mat- AND CONSTRUCTION The classically ornate entrance of Angell Hall CHANEL VON HABSBURG-LOTHRINGEN/Daily, The Biomedical Science Research Building CHANEL VON HABSBURG-LOTH RING EN/Daily exclaim, "That look is so early 2000s!" As the campus considers its next fleet of architectural projects, hopefully who will consider technology as a process- driven aspect of design, rather than an architectural exclamation point. Sustainability is another concern that is becoming increasingly impor- tant in construction. With the world's increasing awareness of its environ- mental woes, this trend is likely to pick up steam in the next few decades. The Mott Children's and Women's Hos- pital and the Ross School of Business ro ~ _ :. £ s t a ; k v-. _. Ilk , 4 4, , . , x=' ± } ypm _... .. _ . _. j _ ,., . ., ,.r. ., . ,_ 4. %nw....o-n m . 1~ j , ,; .