Precedent Presentations and Dialogues

Precedent Presentations are tomorrow afternoon, and as we have discussed, we will be splitting up by projects/precedents into four groups.  Each group will have two professors who will act as moderators for the discussion, but generally, you are presenting to each other to solicit thoughtful dialogue and hopefully, debate.

The groups, professors and presentation locations are as follows:

Group A (Crown Hall, Lower Core, room 4)
Profs: Chadha, Parente
Projects:Baths at Caracalla, Miami Beach Parking Garage, Waste Treatmet/Ski Run
Group B (3410, Room 216)
Profs: Tinucci, Williams
Projects: Centre Pompidou, Seattle Public Library, Market Hall
Group C (Crown Hall, Room 14)
Profs: Danly, Klaeschen
Projects: Fiat Factory, Eames House, Maritime Youth House, Bryhus Project
Group D (3410, North Studio)
Profs: Glynn, Park
Projects: A8erna, Highline
The presentations will be digital slideshows (PDF’s preferred, Powerpoint is acceptable).  There is no limit to the number of slides, but you will be strictly held to a 5 minute presentation time.  Please edit your presentations to include only the most essential slides necessary to make your strongest points and arguments.  Quality is valued over quantity (remember that you have to maintain the attention of 30 of yourselves).  If you are the first group to present a project, please introduce the project fully (extra time will be granted). If you present after the first group, understand that it is not necessary to repeat the information that has already been given.  Adapt to what has been said before you (this is a good lesson for any presentation), and continue from where others have left off.   Again, the Hybrid nature of your projects should establish the framework for your presentations.  Your research, analysis and contextual investigations have led you to conclusions about the project that you should state clearly and with authority.  You have become the experts.
Also, models have played a significant role in your research of this project.  Please bring those models to the presentations and use them in your presentation.
All presentations must be uploaded to the group Dropbox in your specific group (per the above) and in your specific project folder by 1:45pm tomorrow.  The link to the shared Dropbox folder follows: Click here to view IIT_B3_F13_A305_Precedent Deconstruction Review. Please double check that this works, and if it does not, please contact your studio professor who will email you the link directly.  The naming convention for your presentation should be as follows.  PROJECTNAME_PROFESSORNAME_STUDENTLASTNAMES.PDF OR PPT.  For example, “Baths at Caracalla_Tinucci_Tinucci.pdf”.

Assignment 2: Hybrid (De)construction

IPhone-002-863x1024“Hybrid Precedent Deconstruction”

“A great building must begin with the immeasurable, must go through measurable means when it is being designed, and in the end must be unmeasurable..”  Louis Kahn


 Analysis, originating from the Greek roots ana-(up) and luein or lyein (loosen), meaning to break up, unloosen or untie, can be defined as follows:

a·nal·y·sis (noun)


– A detailed examination of the elements or structure of something, typically as a basis for discussion or interpretation.

– The process of separating something into its constituent elements.

To begin our design project this semester, we will start with an analytical and representational study of an existing HYBRID buildings and/or space precedents – their program, place, context and experience. We will take apart their complexity into their components so that that their meaning and impact on our life becomes apparent. This dissection is an approach that  is essential to the design process.  In order to create the immeasurable, we must train ourselves to understand and employ measurable means.


– perform thorough research on various unknown and unconventional building typologies

– analyze the program, place, context, function, and architecture of precedent Hybrids

– construct situations (context and history) that warrant hybrid solutions

– critically evaluate and critique hybridization in precedent projects

– explore strategies for dissecting and analysing existing building concepts

– explore graphic representations of program and concept

– develop representational strategies for context, use, material, sequence, and experience

– communicate programmatic complexity and specificity in the context of an annotated drawing set and/or, concept model

–  produce quality through refinement.


With a partner, you are to research the content, context, culture and space of a precedent Hybrid (chosen from the following, and negotiated in your sections with each other and your professor):

1. Baths at Caracalla, Rome, Italy, (AD 216)

2. Fiat Lingotto Factory, Turin, Italy (Giacomo Matte-Trucco, 1923, Renzo Piano)

3. Eames House, Los Angeles, California (Charles and Ray Eames, 1949)

4. Centre Pompidou, Paris, France, (Renzo Piano, Richard Rogers, 1979)

5.  A8erna, Amsterdam, Netherlands (NL Architects, 2003)

6. Maritime Youth House, Copenhagen, Denmark (PLOT, 2003)

7.  Seattle Public Library, OMA, 2004

8. Highline, New York, New York, (Field Operations, 2011)

9. Miami Beach Parking Garage,  1111 Lincoln Road,Miami, Florida (Herzog & De Meuron, 2011)

10. Market Hall, Amsterdam, Netherlands (MVRDV, 2014)

11.  Amagerforbraending (waste treatment plant and ski run), Copenhagen, Denmark (BIG architects, 2016)

12. Bryhus Project, Copenhagen, Denmark (OMA, 2018)


1. Read excerpt from ‘Delirious New York – Downtown Athletic Club’.  Select your partner and precedent Hybrid.   Compile and analyze drawings, readings, and historical and contemporary written accounts of the precedent Hybrid.  You will need both orthographic drawings (plans and sections) as well documents that inform your understanding of the social/political/spatial context that surround the project.  The goal here is to understand both the use and context thoroughly.

2.     Deconstruct the concept(s) and uses in the building, and analyze the project as a Hybrid.  Uncover the what components of this project create an the understanding of this building as a hybrid, what are the thresholds of this hybrid, and question the quality of this precedent as a hybrid.  Analyze the use and hybridization of the precedent project and critique its virtue, success, failure.

3.   Draw critical plans/sections/axons/sketches to demonstrate the precedents performance as a Hybrid and its specific use across time and space.  Be creative in your choice of drawing types and styles as the presentation of these drawings must be responsible for communicating the complexity of the Hybrid.

4. Craft a modeling strategy and model to communicate the hybridity of the selected precedent.  This model should express the qualities of the hybrid that drawings can not or do not communicate.

5. Deliver a 5 minute powerpoint presentation of the analysis of the precedent that explains the project as a hybrid (or not).  Use your research, crafted drawings and models to clarify the hybridization and concept, and argue how the project’s context, situation, concept, use and/or performance contributes to it’s hybrid stature.


a.   What are the components that contribute to the hybridity of this project?  Context, environment, concept, use, performance, time, process, material, details, construction, etc.?

b. How did (or does) the cultural context of the precedent project influence the program/use of the Hybrid?

c.    What are the primary, secondary, tertiary (etc) uses, spaces and sequences of the Hybrid?

d. Is this project a hybrid.  Is it more or less successful a hybrid?  Why?

e.   Does it’s understanding as a hybrid come with any limitations or thresholds?

f.   How does the project as a hybrid change or influence it’s context?  Does it change our understanding of space?  Does it change how people act?  Does it make life more efficient?  Does it make our society more thoughtful?


W 11 Sep              Project assigned – select precedent and project partner

F 13 Sep               Lecture: Precedent Research

                                First research compiled_Initial template for analysis developed

M 16 Sep               First draft of an annotated conceptual section/plan/axon

W 18 Sep               Workshop: Conceptual Modeling

                                 First draft of precedent model due

F 20 Sep                Final drawings and models in progress – printed at delivery size for pre-final review

M 23 Sep               Final presentations and review


1 – 11×17 comparative analysis document (template to be created per studio)

1 – scaled annotated section, plan, axon or other drawing indicating program/use1 – conceptual model representing the specific Hybridization

1 – 5 min. presentation to be delivered as a projected presentation that poignantly explains the hybrid qualifications of the project

Note: the HYBRIDIZED use should be the primary organizing factor for each drawing and model.

additional resources:

-Pamphlet Architecture Hybrid Building (1985), Joseph Fenton, Princeton Architectural Press [pdf excerpt from instructors]

– Delirious New York, Definitive Instability: The Downtown Athletic Club [pdf excerpt from instructors]  (

– “This Is Hybrid (English and Spanish Edition): Aurora Fernández Per, Javier Mozas, Javier Arpa: a+t ediciones (January 1, 2011

Precedent, Program and Experience of Space REVIEW

S13_A306 PRECEDENT REVIEW DRAWING LOCATIONS+The Assignment 2 review will take place tomorrow over the entire lower level of Crown Hall.  There is another studio lecture scheduled in the lower level of Crown Hall at 2pm, but promptly following that lecture, and beginning +/- at 3pm, we will pin up our Illuminated and Annotated drawings, grouped by precedent project, in the west corridor, Lower Core and the East Corridor as indicated on the above plan (or download S13_A306_PRECEDENT REVIEW DRAWING LOCATIONS).

As the drawings vary in size, and as it is unclear to us exactly how many drawings of each project there are, please work together to place the drawings in their respective groups.  If drawings need to move left or right, up or down, or spill across the halls or into the studios, please feel free to let them do so.

AND, of utmost importance, please pin your drawings OVER the top of the existing drawings on the tackboards in the halls.  Please do not move existing documents in the halls, just simply pin over the top of them.  Very few of the existing documents are sacred, so they can be pinned through, but please endeavor to not damage the existing material and take care when removing the drawings to return the walls to their prior state.

Once pinned up, the professors will review the drawings in the three respective areas – the west corridor, east corridor and lower core.

We are very much looking forward to seeing the final products.

And last but not least –

After the review, and after the drawings have been removed, we’ll meet back in our respective studios to launch the next project.

And prior to pinning up, if you haven’t yet removed your Vessel cast from outside of Crown, you will be asked to do so before pinning up your Precedent drawings.

2a | Monastery Research and Precedent

Our first step will be to investigate the building typology and program through an intensive research and precedent analysis phase.  

– perform thorough research on an unknown building typology
– research and document specific monastery precedents for comparison and analysis
– develop a detailed space program from your research and building planning exercises

general research:
Begin to familiarize yourself with the Monastery building typology by researching the history of Monasteries and the Monastic Orders using any and all available resources.  Document your findings in the form of notes, tables, timelines, etc and be sure to include bibliographic references.  Initial readings should include but are not limited to –

At a minimum, you must answer the following questions with your research:
What are the similarities and differences between the Benedictine, Cistercian and Mendicant Orders?
What is the general history of the Monastic Orders? Why, how, where and when did they exist
Key spatial/architectural differences between the architecture of the various orders?
Typical daily routines of the Cistercian Order?
What relationship do each of the orders have with the public/outside world?


  1. The Abbey Church of the St. John’s Benedictine Monastery by Marcel Breuer
  2. Baldegg Monastery, Hochdorf, Switzerland (1968-1972) by Marcel Breuer
  3. The Abbey at Vaals by Hans van der Hejden (Hans van der Laan)
  4. Monastery of Our Lady of Novy Dvur, Czech Republic by John Pawson.
  5. Tautra Monastery, Tautra, Norway, Jensen and Skodvin
  6. Knocktopher Friary, ODOS Architects
  7. Fountains Abbey:  Yorkshire,  1132ad
  8. Abbaye Notre-Dame de Sénanque, Provence, 1148ad
  9. Mont Saint Michel,  Normandy France, 6thc
  10. Rila Monastery, Bulgaria, 10thc
  11. Fontenay Abbey, Burgundy France, 12thc
  12. Santa Maria de Poblet – Catalonia Spain, 12thc
  13. Cluny Abbey, Burgundy France
  14. Batalha Monastery, Portugal Spain
  15. St. Germain-des-Prés, Paris, 6th century

precedent research (due Friday, February 3rd, or as decided by your studio instructor):
From the below list, select a precedent and research and document the project in an agreed upon and standardized format within your own studios.  At the minimum, you are to document the following for each project:
When was the monastery built and how long did it operate?
Where is it located?  Is there a reason behind the location?  Are there unique site conditions?
What are the programmatic components of each monastery? Label and similarly color code each of the typical spaces including Cloister, Church, Chapter House, Chapel, Refectory, Library, Sleeping Quarters.
What is the size, layout, scale and orientation of each project.  Provide labeled plans at equal scales.
Architectural materials and structural systems?
Key similarities and differences between precedent and conventional monastic order if any?
Entry points for public and private users?

precedent analysis (due Friday, February 3rd, or as decided by your studio instructor):
The precedent study must go beyond the simple copying of existing photography or documentation found on the web.  The investigation of the precedent requires a more critical method of analysis – by drawing the floor plan (even by tracing), you will inevitably develop a deeper understanding.
What are the component parts of the building?  Can you break it down by space, structure,   circulation, etc?  Can you explain why?

space program (due Monday, February 6th, 2pm or as decided by your studio instructor)-
On Friday, February 3rd, we will have an in studio workshop to develop the basic building planning ‘building blocks’ for each space in the program.  NOTE TO ALL: BRING YOUR LAPTOPS TO STUDIO.  In studio, we will each draw the basic ‘building blocks’ in both plan and section to house each specified functions of the program.  We will use what we have learned about each of the spaces through our research to construct the required space (size and scale, not design) and use these establish the square footages and volumes detailed within your own individual space program spreadsheet.