November AIA-SWO Chapter Meeting Recap

AIA-SWO chapter meeting, 11/15/17 at Sam Bond's Brewing

The AIA-Southwestern Oregon Committee on Local Affairs (CoLA) enjoyed the privilege of sharing the story of its genesis, history, efforts, and aspirations during this past Wednesday’s cozy AIA-SWO chapter meeting at Sam Bond’s Brewing. The presentation and ensuing discussion was an opportunity for CoLA to inform the chapter members in attendance about the committee’s mission, who its members are, how it chooses to do what it does, and enumerate the issues it has engaged since its inception in 2015.

I’ve been a member of CoLA from the start. The other current members are Scott Clarke (chair), Austin Bailey, Eric Gunderson, Stan Honn, and Travis Sheridan. The AIA-SWO Board of Directors appointed each of us for two-year terms that are staggered for the sake of continuity. One CoLA seat is always occupied by the immediate SWO past-president; Stan fills this role, serving as a direct liaison between CoLA and the board). Going forward, the SWO board will strive to nominate members to reflect as much diversity as possible; presently, CoLA conspicuously lacks a female member, but this will be rectified next year when Katie Hall steps into the SWO past-president role and joins the committee.

Historically, our chapter has regularly sought to provide valuable public commentary about matters of local importance related to the built environment. Whether it was the GDA (“God-Damned Architects”), the “Dead Presidents,” or other previous incarnations of a local affairs committee, the goal always has been to raise awareness about what our profession brings to the table by directly and publicly engaging in locally relevant topics.

Today, CoLA’s stated mission is to take positions on issues that affect the practice of architecture and the design and planning of the Eugene-Springfield community.(1) CoLA communicates the substance of these concerns to the AIA-SWO chapter membership and strives to represent its most commonly held views. CoLA promotes policies and positions that inform positive actions on or around the issues it becomes involved with.

Our committee carefully selects topics of interest, only choosing a limited number to maximize our effectiveness. The AIA-SWO board does recommend issues for us to consider; however, all that we do consider must be relevant to our profession, of community-wide importance, and carry implications beyond a single project. We study each and decide whether or not to adopt a public position.

Our mission includes providing a platform for AIA-SWO members to share their views with CoLA. We do this by informing the chapter about our intent to take on a topic and then soliciting input. Ultimately, when we publicly announce a position, we take care to identify ourselves as CoLA, a committee of the American Institute of Architects Southwestern Oregon Chapter. Notably, when the chapter sanctioned CoLA in its present form, the SWO board empowered our committee to take positions without necessarily securing its approval in advance.

Any position statement we do generate is the result of consensus between all CoLA members. Given how varied and divergent the opinions of AIA-SWO’s entire membership can be, this is one reason why the number of CoLA members is deliberately kept to a small number. We purposefully do not endorse political candidates. We do organize and encourage chapter members to advocate on behalf of CoLA’s positions in public settings, such as at city council meetings or by writing letters to the editors of the Register-Guard or Eugene Weekly.

During the chapter meeting, Scott, Eric, Stan, Travis, and I discussed this history, our committee’s mission, and enumerated CoLA’s accomplishments (due to another engagement, Austin wasn’t able to be with us). We’ve been active on numerous fronts, perhaps more so than most SWO members realize. Looking back, the list of what we’ve taken on is impressive:

2015

• Discussed possible contribution to ASLA visioning forum for a revitalized Kesey Square.
• Attended South Willamette Special Area Zone neighborhood group meetings.
• Attended Envision Eugene open house to review progress on the city’s Community Design Handbook.

2016

• Participated in Project for Public Places stakeholder workshop, fall 2016.
• Sent two separate letters to the mayor, council, and city manager regarding planning of the stillborn South Willamette Special Area Zone (one regarding how to move forward in the wake of SW-SAZ being halted by the city council, and another regarding the Oregon Consensus Assessment process).
• Met with COE staff members regarding the draft Community Design Handbook and provided significant feedback.
• Met with individuals representing a variety of perspective on topics of civic interest; these included representatives from WECAN, new mayor Lucy Vinis, and neighborhood-advocate Paul Conte.
• Attended multiple public meetings on a variety of topics of interest to CoLA, most notably several related to the South Willamette Special Area Zone.
• Wrote an opinion piece for the Register-Guard endorsing extension of the Eugene downtown urban renewal district. 
• Attended Chamber of Commerce meeting, attended by Claire Syrett, in support of continuing the Urban Renewal District.
• Established standing monthly meetings (noon on the last Thursday of each month) open to all AIA-SWO members.
• Participated in Project for Public Places stakeholder workshop. 

2017

• Contributed to a Eugene Weekly article regarding the future of the EWEB Riverfront redevelopment. 
• Endorsed application by Dave Guadagni, AIA to represent AIA-SWO interests as one of the City of Eugene’s “Riverfront Renewal Guides” (citizens’ advisory committee).
• Reviewed/discussed ADU workshop developments with David Wade. 
• Entered letter to the public record in support of the Amazon Corner mixed-use development. 
• Wrote an opinion piece for Eugene Weekly commending the City of Eugene and Lane County for their collaborative efforts to reshape Eugene’s civic center.
• Discussed the City of Eugene’s management of its public art.
• Developed a strong tie with the editorial leadership at the Eugene Weekly (Camilla Mortensen, Bob Keefer). 
• Attended Missing Middle workshop. 
• Wrote letter to city council, mayor, and city manager supporting study of River Road and Hwy 99 corridors with the goal of implementing values and objectives established by Envision Eugene. 
• Continued to track Eugene City Council decision-making on and subsequent abandonment of the SW-SAZ planning effort. 

Our most recent project is the piece we wrote for the upcoming AIA-SWO Design Annual insert in the Register-Guard, to be published on November 30.

One way chapter members can track some of what our committee does is to subscribe to my blog. I’ve tagged all the posts regarding our work under the label “CoLA.” I do try to report regularly about our activities in an effort to keep everyone informed. We also encourage AIA-SWO members to attend our committee meetings, which regularly occur on the fourth Thursday of each month, at noon in The Octagon (92 East Broadway in downtown Eugene). The meetings are definitely an opportunity for anyone to weigh in and voice concerns and express opinions on the topics du jour.

The chapter members who attended Wednesday’s chapter meeting did affirm the general principles and operational structure of CoLA. They offered many thoughtful ideas for leveraging and expanding CoLA’s efforts. Here are some highlights:

• Consider focusing CoLA efforts on one specific issue, for example housing, and allow that topic to prioritize efforts for the year.
• Connect with the efforts of chapter members already engaged in important community issues. Track the efforts of those members, including their participation in committees, boards, etc. Allow their efforts to become an extension of CoLA’s work.
• Continue to work towards establishing credibility. Contact local leaders and let them know about CoLA’s mission and find ways to seek common ground. Partner with groups holding shared values (such as ASLA and APA) but also groups (such as the Home Builders Association) that we may not immediately think of as natural partners. Ideally, the entire community will recognize CoLA as a resource regarding issues concerning the built environment of Eugene/Springfield, and a sounding board for those seeking the perspective of our profession.

Overall, the November chapter meeting was very positive and affirming. That said, I left thinking those who attended our presentation have high expectations for CoLA, and the burdens of those expectations suddenly felt weighty. I hope we can continue to take them on without becoming overwhelmed in the process. The coming year will be one of transition for our committee as we continue to mature from a “start-up” to a sustainable operation. Be sure to let us know your thoughts. We welcome your input and encouragement!

(1)  Unfortunately, for reasons of practicality, CoLA cannot address concerns specific to the other AIA-SWO communities, such as Bend, Corvallis, or Roseburg. Regardless, our hope is that the issues we do tackle provide insights and offer lessons of value for our far-flung chapter members.

Fire and Ice – Landscapes of a Changing Planet

Eric Gunderson, former principal and owner with PIVOT Architecture, most definitely hasn’t been short of things to keep himself busy with during his retirement. Besides being an avid traveler, Eric is and has always been a prolific and keenly talented artist. Painting and drawing are his powerful and joyous means for describing and understanding the physical world. Eric studied art at both the University of Oregon and the Sutton School of Art in London, honing skills his peers in architecture have long admired and appreciated.

The Lobby Gallery at the Broadway Commerce Center in downtown Eugene will soon feature a collection of Eric’s paintings and drawings on the theme of Fire and Ice – Landscapes of a Changing Planet. Among the pieces will be a smoky watercolor depicting a fire raging through the Strawberry Mountain Wilderness. Others include a study in oil paint and colored pencil portraying a forest killed by fire and insects on the slopes of Davis Lake Basin, and images of ice on the retreat across the planet. Without having asked Eric directly, I suspect this compilation of his paintings and drawings is tinged with some sadness about our planet’s present trajectory.

Art may be a window into the artist’s soul, but it also reveals much about what he or she is seeing and attempting to comment upon. I’m looking forward to visiting Eric’s exhibit to not only appreciate his art but also to view the world through his eyes. Make a point to do the same and visit the display anytime during its month-long run in December.

What:  An exhibit of painting and drawings on the theme of Fire and Ice – Landscapes of a Changing Planet

Where:  Broadway Commerce Center Lobby, 44 W. Broadway, Eugene, OR

When:  December 1 through December 31, 2017

Opening:  First Friday Artwalk, December 1, 2017 – 5:30 PM to 8:00 PM 

Experience Mapping

The four steps to making an experience map (from Adaptive Path's Guide to Experience Mapping). 

My colleagues and I like to think our firm (Robertson/Sherwood/Architects) is particularly good at helping the clients we serve develop a clear vision for their projects. In our minds this has always meant guiding the course of discovery and design, along which we very much expect our clients to be dedicated participants. Since our firm’s inception, we’ve unquestionably believed in the value of design processes aimed at engaging as many stakeholders as possible, particularly during the earliest stage of each project. We regard our aptitude for architectural programming and attention to the needs of building owners, occupants, and operation & maintenance personnel as a strong suit.

William Pena’s classic programming guide Problem Seeking defined the simple, yet comprehensive, process for developing an effective architectural program. Almost a half-century since it was first published, Problem Seeking remains a touchstone for our firm. Its underlying principles are timeless. Fundamentally, they distinguish between programming—which is problem seeking—and design, which is problem solving. The process outlined by Pena involves an organized method of inquiry consisting of a five-step process (establish goals, collect and analyze facts, uncover and test concepts, determine needs, and state the problem) interacting with four considerations (function, form, economy, and time). This process has served countless architects and their clients very, very well.

As relevant as the methodology propounded by Problem Seeking remains, there’s no doubt a set of emerging issues impacting the discipline of architectural programming. Chief among these is the acceleration of broad cultural and technological changes changing how we work, learn, play, and live. It’s difficult to predict with any certainty what the coming years will bring, and consequently defining the design problem with precision is increasingly difficult. The proliferation and perpetuation of standards and guidelines that may quickly become obsolete work at cross-purposes with the challenge of identifying future needs. The increasing complexity of our world is pushing us toward a threshold whereupon it may become impossible to adequately state in easily understood terms the nature of the problems to be solved.

Is there a “magic bullet” providing an effective solution to the challenges posed by the emerging issues? Probably not; however, learning and borrowing from other disciplines is an essential means for coping with rapid change. One relevant specialty that immediately comes to mind is the marketing industry and particularly consultancies focusing on the development of user experiences (UX). The work of these specialists often parallels what we do as architects in the process of defining design problems related to enhancing user satisfaction with products and services. These professionals are adept at identifying emergent trends in highly competitive markets, generating insights into how their clients operate, supporting new initiatives, and building stronger futures for the organizations they partner with. They understand the necessity of managing a myriad of touchpoints to differentiate customer experiences, in much the same way architects differentiate and particularize the experiences of users in all sorts of physical environments.

Of course, a huge segment of the architectural profession (especially that involved in the design of retail facilities) already understands how the quality of experiences influences peoples’ choices of products and services; however, my guess is many other architects may not be fully aware of the sophisticated tools available for capturing and presenting key insights about the complex interactions that occur across any ecosystem. One such tool developed by UX designers is the experience map.

Adaptive Path is a San Francisco-based design and user experience consultancy that pioneered user experience design strategies during the early years of this century (the firm was acquired in 2014 by the financial firm Capital One but continues to publicly share ideas through its adaptivepath.org site, pro bono engagements, and annual UX events). The firm prepared a useful guide to experience mapping, which I’ll draw from extensively to validate the applicability of the technique as an architectural programming tool. Many of the concepts have direct parallels in the programming and design of buildings. I certainly see experience mapping as a useful adjunct to the process defined by William Pena in Problem Seeking but by no means a replacement.

Experience mapping is a collaborative, iterative process for synthesizing and visualizing the holistic user experience. Experience mapping builds knowledge and consensus. The activity results in an artifact—an experience map. The experience map presents, with richness and depth, key insights into the complete experience of users. Once developed, it becomes a tool that supports charting new courses of action. The quality of an experience map is directly tied to the quality of insights it communicates. That said, as with problem seeking, it is the process that is most important. Experiencing mapping brings teams together, builds empathy for the users (customers), clarifies the big picture, and identifies areas of opportunity. No two maps will be alike because the needs of each client and each project are unique.

The key building blocks of experience mapping are Doing (what actions are users taking to meet their needs), Thinking (how do people frame and evaluate their experiences), and Feeling (what emotions do people have along their journey). Additionally, Place, Time, Devices, Relationships, Touchpoints(1) , and Channels(2) provide a framework for the experience map. The methodology used involves conversations with user groups to gain insights, as well as individual interviews and observations. It often employs a directed story-telling technique to guide conversations and paint vivid pictures.

The anatomy of an experience map includes the following:

The Lens
The lens is an overriding filter through which you view the journey, such as a persona, more general experience principles, or a value proposition.

The User Journey Model
The journey model depicts the range of interactions customers have across channels, touchpoints, time, and space in pursuit of satisfying one or more needs.

The Takeaways
The takeaways summarize key findings from the experience mapping process. Takeaways could include strategic insights, recommendations, and design principles. They’re typically added to the map late in the process, once you have begun to pivot from understanding the current state of needs to envisioning a future state. 

An example of an experience map: An excerpt from the Rail Europe customer journey.

At its core, an experience map is a visual narrative of the users’ “journey.” The goal is to bring the collected data to life through a visually engaging infographic that is easy to comprehend. It should include the key building blocks—Doing, Thinking, and Feeling—but should also emphasize the guiding design principles that emerge upon understanding the journey. The map is organized on the fly over the course of several iterations. Visually, it should convey the essence of a story immediately. The experience map should present a compelling point of view, work on multiple levels (organizing hierarchically is important), and be designed for maximum impact. If it is done well, the map helps stakeholders break free of the nearsightedness of their individual roles to look at the organizational capabilities needed to achieve their goals.

Ultimately, like problem seeking, the experience map is a catalyst, not a conclusion. An experience map is a means to something actionable—ideally something to design around—and not an end in and of itself. It may not be a magic bullet but is a tool architects can master to improve the likelihood their designs for buildings will be as well-adapted, flexible, and responsive to future needs as possible. Because architects are visually oriented, preparing graphically effective experience maps should come naturally.

The applicability of experience mapping to architecture does come as a personal “aha” moment. While Robertson/Sherwood/Architects hasn’t yet developed a true experience map with one of our clients, we intend to do so soon. We’re already employing other elements characteristic of UX design, including mood boards, personas, and user narratives to supplement more conventional architectural programming means. Clearly, there’s much we can learn from other disciplines to help us cope with the increasingly complex and rapidly changing challenge of defining the problems we’re tasked to solve. As user-centered designers, we’re enthusiastic about the potential inherent in broadening our approach to architectural programming.

(1) A touchpoint is a point of interaction between a person and any agent or artifact of an organization. These interactions take place at a certain point in time, in a certain context, and with the intention of meeting specific needs.

(2) A channel is a medium of interaction with users. A channel defines the opportunities or constraints of a touchpoint.