social renovations

1Social Renovations Tyler Hopf

SOCIAL RENOVATIONS

Tyler Hopf


This proposal is a renovation of social interactions. Physical, decorative, historical and aesthetic renovations exist in various forms and industries. They involve replacing the old physical aspects of a space with new ones, whether they are decorative, structural or functional components.

Social renovation replaces existing social structures of a space including program, events, perceptions and impressions with new ones. The intention is to improve social interaction, collaboration, productivity and subjective well-being. These renovations are far more effective then any physical reconstruction or aesthetic renovation. Instead of revising the aesthetic with a given function, the function is revised with a given aesthetic.

SOCIAL RENOVATIONS

Tyler Hopf

4

Tyler HopfB. Arch 2013B.S. Psych 2013Ralph Noble, Advisor


.......7

.......15

.......21

.......27

.......35

.......43

.......49

.......79

.......82

REACTIVATING THE DEACTIVATEDMaking the Unsocial Social

UNSOCIAL ON CAMPUSRPI Public Spaces that Don’t Quite Work

SOCIAL ON CAMPUSRPI Public Spaces that Work

CAFEEvelyn’s Cafe, EMPAC

UNPROGRAMMEDDCC Hallway

EXTERIOR’86 Field

PERSPECTIVESStudent Conversations

DESIGNING FUNCTIONAssuming Aesthetic

SOURCES

SOCIAL RENOVATIONS


WHY

The practical question presented is why do we need social space? What advantages does it provide over unsocial space? Why encourage students to collaborate when they could be working independently?

The answers to these questions have to do with happiness, cooperation, team work and student experience. Happiness, or more specifically subjective well-being, has an extremely strong correlation with social interaction. Positive social interactions can dramatically increase the subjective well-being of an individual or population. Social interactions have been shown to drastically decrease recovery time after a traumatic or devastating event in someone’s life. They can be very helpful in giving people positive impressions of a space or institution. In Louis Hellman’s essay “The Happiness In Between,” he states that social interaction is the primary determinant in our subjective well being. David Halpern uses evidence based design to prove that physical environments have a clear and

proven effect on social interactions and thus on an individual’s well being.

Social interactions can also have a dramatically negative effect on an individual when they are unwanted. Negative social interactions can convince people that they disliked an event or space. These negative interactions can be caused or strongly influenced by aspects of the space itself: if there is no where to sit down for people that are tired; if there is no where to sit and talk when people want to have a long conversation; if there the space is empty and awkward; if the space is closing and they didn’t realize it; if the space makes them feel insecure or unsure; if the space forces unwanted interactions; or if the space is uncomfortable because of temperature, air flow, noise or other external factors. Max Fordham says that happiness comes from removing unnecessary physical stresses from our bodies in “The Role of Comfort in Happiness.” Just as positive interactions can have a great positive influence on subjective well-being, negative

REACTIVATING THE DEACTIVATED

Making the Unsocial Social

8

interactions can make people very unhappy and discontent with their situation.

The subjective well-being of students and faculty is extremely important at any college campus. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute can used as a case study, a model and a design test. The students and their families are paying a substantial amount for tuition and investing a lot in the school. To keep students around and paying tuition, the institute has to keep them happy. Also, in order to attract new students, happy students are the best advertisements for new students. Current students talk to prospective students that are visiting, talk prospective students that are friends from high school, express their happiness to parents who talk to other parents and so on. The word of mouth advertisement is the most coveted and valued because it is far more convincing than any impersonal pamphlet of information could be.

Beyond the recruitment of new students and maintenance of happy students, increased social interaction allows for new and increased instances of collaboration, teamwork and idea sharing or generating. The collision between people of slightly different fields with slightly different projects and the discussion that can result from a spontaneous interaction can be extraordinarily helpful to both parties. New ways of working, new solutions, new problems and new teams can be developed from a simple chance meeting or a social gathering that can happen in a space that allows for it or encourages it. These valuable interactions can spur new team collaborations or connect people with other individuals that may know more about a topic. Sometimes these conversations may not lead to any new solutions or teams, but the increased strength of the network at RPI means a tighter and stronger alumni network, something that every University aims for. It can mean greater donations, greater job opportunities for students and a better reputation.

STRATEGIES

There are several ways to design a space to be ‘social.’ Primarily these strategies can require little physical intervention, minimal cost, very little time and resources and can be extremely effective. The design of productive social spaces can be done in subtle and simple ways. The design of social events, social interactions and social collaborations is not guaranteed, but it can be encouraged. Basic characteristics of a socially successful space include: simple additions of furniture, programmed events, signage and advertising, increased accessibility, niche spaces, encouraging social control, security and comfort.

Furniture

The furniture has the most direct and quantifiable effect on social interaction, positive or negative. The arrangement, type, density, comfort, and condition of the furniture can have a huge effect. Simply putting furniture in a space will not make it social. The furniture can also be used to make space unsocial by encouraging isolated spaces or by discouraging hanging out in the space.

The furniture in a social space has certain intentions and specific characteristics. It must be appropriate for the setting. Lounge chairs are not appropriate for a space where people eat lunch and have informal meetings. Folding chairs are not appropriate for a cozy study space or formal space. Mobility of the chairs can be a huge advantage in many spaces. It allows the chairs to adapt to whatever size group that wants to meet and interact. It also allows anyone to ‘pull up a chair’ and join the group spontaneously and feel comfortable doing that. It is also easier for a small group to break away from the large group and create their own little niche. The mobility of the chairs allows for extreme accommodation and is the most dynamic kind of furniture.


If the chairs are not moveable, the arrangement is extremely important because it is permanent. Chairs should be facing each other in small groups or benches should allow for people to sit next to each other, across from each other or sit alone and still feel comfortable. Bleacher style sitting can be extremely social if it is appropriate in a space. It allows for everyone to face the same direct and work individually or easily work with people next to them, behind them and in front of them.

Program & Event

Programming the space is done without any physical intervention to the space. Providing a program therefore usually has a very low cost and can be done in a very short time frame. The program simply gives the space a purpose and gives people a reason to be there. The program can have influence far beyond the specific time it is taking place and can influence people who were not there for a specific program or event.

By creating an event or program for a space people that may not have otherwise passed through the space or been familiar with it now have reason to experience it. They may bring friends and they may talk about it outside of the event afterwards. They can talk about the people they met at the event or about the space itself. The event and the program that occurred in the space can bring a large amount of people to the space for a short period of time and the interaction that occurs would not have occurred otherwise. Also, they may come back to the space in small groups, they may realize that it is available for use outside of the event and can only become aware of this through the use of program and event.

If the program is more of a long term event like turning a lounge into a cafe or turning a study space into a lounge or something where the actual function and name of the space is different, this is a way to re-familiarize people with a space they

may have thought that they knew and already dismissed. The design of event and program can be as thorough and intentional as the design of any physical construction and can be far more effective in directly influencing human behavior, specifically in designing an increase in social interaction.

Signage

Signage is typically very low cost as well but does require a physical manifestation in the form of advertisements, posters, signs, images or other material that can be used to describe a space in some way and encourage people to use it. Simple signs that show the hours of a space can be very helpful in informing people about the space and getting them thinking about it. If people know when the space is open, they are less likely to use the excuse that it might be closed. Also the hours act as a small advertisement for use.

Advertisements for the space can be valuable as well in getting people to go there and encouraging social interaction. Telling people a space is free and open for people to study and hang out can be effective in increasing discussion about the space. This can also be a way of labeling the space and giving it a name. Naming have a huge effect on how people view it and how they think it should be used. If people perceive a space as a study room or quiet space then they are probably not going to go there and have big group gatherings. If the space is given another name like lounge or hang out area then people will perceive it as a space that they can use for social interactions.

Accessibility

The ability of people to access the space and the convenience is extremely important. The accessibility can be a physical proximity or a perceived availability.


10

Making social spaces close to other popular spaces on campus is one easy way to make them accessible. This includes locating lounges near classrooms, cafes near dining halls, etc. But when the space has to be located out of the way more effort is required to make it appear on the way. Using other tools like signage, program, event and other enticements can encourage people to visit the space once or twice and hopefully give them an impression that it should be revisited again.

Word of mouth and demonstration of accessibility can be the most convincing methods of accessibility. If there is an empty cafe no one will go there because they assume it is either closed, there is no reason to stop there or it is an uncomfortable space. If the cafe or lounge is crowded or has a few people, then it is a clear demonstration that the space is accessible, comfortable and useful. If a friend tells someone they studied at a place or met a friend somewhere, it is even more convincing that it is accessible and desirable.

Niche

This may be the most physical intervention next to adding furniture. Creating small niches or nooks in a space is extremely valuable in making a space more comfortable and social. People visiting the space can territorialize their niche and use it by themselves or allow others to join them in it. But because the niche is a designated space within a larger area, the territorialization does not extend beyond that into the whole space. It makes the person in the niche extremely comfortable, secure and in charge of their own domain. They are not unsure of who will join them or who will sit with them. Those outside this territory can stop by easily and talk to the inhabitant but their interruption doesn’t have to be permanent. This strategy is used in some study spaces to encourage small groups in a common class to study and work together. This can be extremely

valuable in gaining knowledge and understanding of subjects with the help of friends. It allows people to come from outside and see the small group and ask to join and it allows other nearby groups to have an idea of what is going on.

Control & Security

For people to use a space and be happy in it they must feel secure in the space and they must feel in control. These two things are usually a matter of perception. To feel secure in a space it must have a clean reputation with few incidents of anything negative happening in the past. There must be some way to make visitors confident that they would be able to get out in a fire using an extra exit or could get help easily if there was an individual there trying to harm them. Public spaces can feel very secure if the right number of people are around. This means that there are enough people to notice if there is something wrong and there aren’t too many people that it would be lost in the crowd.

It is also important to be able to control social interactions. Unexpected interactions that are forced or unavoidable can be awkward, annoying and disruptive. If someone feels that they have no control over who they will see or have to talk to and feel they may be forced into unwanted interactions, their impression of the space will be negative and their social interactions will be discouraged. The ability to control when an individual wants to have a long conversation with a passerby or politely continue working can have huge advantages in individual productivity and interactive productivity.

Comfort

Comfort in a space has to do with temperature, air flow, smells, lighting, noise control and other external factors that can have dramatic effects on how long someone wants to stay in a space. If there is too much external noise or if there is



a lot of echo from people in the space, no one is going to want to hang out there and interact. When holding a conversation is difficult, it won’t happen. Controlling the sound level can be done through closing off the space appropriately from other areas of activity and using sound absorptive material. Temperature and ventilation comfort comes from a combination of well designed mechanical systems and proper use of these systems. Temperatures should be slightly adjusted for the seasons depending on what people are wearing. In the winter, everyone is wearing coats and sweaters. They come inside to get warm but they won’t stay in a space that is too heated for long periods of time. And likewise, they will not stay in a cold space because they can get plenty of that outside.

Overall, these strategies can all be done quickly and easily, with little negative impact but huge benefits for the social interaction on campus. The small physical cost of these strategies allow for implementation by any level of participant whether it is a user, owner, administrator, visitor, or someone in between. Many of the strategies are probably in place, but using this as a checklist can help some of the strategies be updated and revisited so that they are more appropriate and effective.

WHO

These strategies are easy to implement and can be done quickly, as described. However, who’s responsibility is it to utilize them and who will deploy them? The students themselves can and have taken certain steps to increase the sociability of certain spaces on campus. They must take it upon themselves to make their own territory and move chairs or demand changes. The Union, the most successful social space on campus is run by students. They have control over a large amount of aspects of the space and because they feel a part of its organization, it is always filled with

people working in seemingly random groups. The main space is filled with groups of all sizes gathered around odd arrangements of tables and chairs most nights. This is what more spaces on campus should strive for and get students out of their rooms, working with others.

In addition to a push by the students, the administration is also responsible for making changes. They have more control in terms of budget. The administration can indirectly benefit from the advantages to increased social spaces and should be motivated by these benefits. However, they have not stepped up to make campus more socially productive yet and the primary efforts have been done by the students. For a more efficient implementation of these strategies the administration must be on board too and give its support to increase positive social interaction on campus.

12

Evelyn’s Cafe


‘86 Field

DCC Hallway


ALMOST

The Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute campus is full of areas and zones that are ‘almost’ successful in their attempt at creating a positive social space for interaction. These ‘almost’ spaces are scattered around academic buildings, residential spaces, unprogrammed space, exterior spaces, cafe spaces and more.

These spaces are close to becoming socially active but are being limited by one or several factors. The location of that space may mean that people are not often passing through or it is not easy to access for casual use. The space itself may be missing certain material things like chairs, tables, benches that would allow people to slow down and talk. There may be something extremely unattractive about the space that may make people uncomfortable and encourage them to keep moving rather than slow down and talk. The space may be too big for small interactions or too small for groups of people to separate. There may be no daylight or the building may be in poor condition. Anything unattractive can discourage

people from hanging out. But all of these things are easily fixed or counteracted.

There can sometimes be less material problems, but more social or psychological issues with the space. Something negative may have occurred in that space making it awkward for people to hang about in. This negative event could have been a major accident or incident. Also, if there is too much authority around people typically will not be happy and relaxed. Hanging out in public safety is not a common practice and either is hanging out right outside a tough professor’s office. The space may be territorialized where certain groups have claimed it and made other people uncomfortable through intimidation.

These various characteristics can discourage the social use of space but are also easily fixed or reset with subtle but precise alterations. The problems are specific to each of the categories of space on campus.

UNSOCIAL ON CAMPUS

RPI Public Spaces that Don’t Quite Work

16

Exterior

The exterior spaces have some specific factors that make them unsocial. They are typically too large and open without any space to feel intimate or separate with one or two other people. Without the ability to control social interactions, people become extremely unhappy and uncomfortable. Individuals want to be able to move away from people they don’t want to talk to and move closer to people they do want to talk to. Anything that forces them to interact with people they don’t want to interact with or presents unexpected social interactions that they have no control over leads to extreme discomfort. Without any smaller nooks there are few places for the smaller groups to control this interaction.

Also, many of these spaces lack any sufficient places to sit. Along with the idea of smaller intimate spaces or ‘nooks’ to gather in, benches provide a place for two people to feel like they are allowed to be there. Also, it is much more comfortable than standing for a long period of time and talking. Benches or sitting are a gesture from administration and from the Institute saying that people are welcome and encouraged to sit. A lack of benches is saying that sitting is not encouraged or welcome, making students feeling like they may be doing something wrong. And if there are just two or three benches, that is not enough. Students feel like they shouldn’t sit in them because there are not enough and someone else might want them. If they do sit down, they fill up way too quickly.

Cafe

The cafe spaces are also lacking in excitement and social interactions. The library cafe is almost always empty. Jazzman’s cafe has space for only a few people in a hallway. The Sage cafe has three stools that face a wall. The ECAV and EMPAC cafes are far away from anyone’s classes and students never know when/if they are open.

It is clear that there is not an intention by the administration or the campus hospitality company to encourage interaction at the cafes. The library cafe is usually empty because it is hard to get into. It’s entrance is bottlenecked and it is hard to look to the seating without squeezing all the way in. There is no way to spontaneously or casually enter the cafe or even to glance in to see if someone’s friends are there. In this case there is no way to control who you run into because if you enter the cafe and see someone you don’t feel like interacting with, you cannot escape easily and are forced to interact. This is intimidating to a lot of people. If you think your friend may be in there but aren’t sure, you are more likely to text them from outside then go in and check.

Jazzman’s cafe has three tiny tables that are all on the side of a hallway. Definitely not an ideal place to sit and chat or relax. If you do sit, there are people running and walking by nonstop. These people are a distraction and may interrupt the conversation. Also the people walking by see the tables as a hindrance and they are in the way of the hallway. The tables don’t work well as study spaces because of the people walking by and there is so few of them they are always crowded and unavailable. If someone wanted to stop by a table because they saw someone they knew, it is very awkward to stand on the end of the table with people walking by and running into them. It encourages spontaneous exposure, but not spontaneous interaction or conversation.

Other cafes like the ones at ECAV and EMPAC are considered inaccessible. They are not near any classes or residence halls or on the way. They are also relatively new on campus and not established as hangout places or spots to go to. Their hours are almost completely unknown and its impossible to know if its totally full, totally empty or if it is open at all without actually going there and checking.


Entrance Ways

Entrance spaces into some of the buildings on the RPI campus have large open spaces that have hundreds of people pass through every day and could be excellent places for spontaneous interactions. However these spaces are usually just used as hallways and people walk through them without even thinking of stopping.

The spaces do have huge potential because of the people that pass by on the way to or from similar classes or on their way out to lunch. There are certain characteristics shared by a lot of these entrance spaces that are detrimental to their hang out potential. These spaces typically don’t have any kind of furniture, whether it is benches or tables or chairs, for people so sit in.

Spaces like the Sage Building lobby have a few benches, but none of them are near each other or encourage interaction in any way. The Sage lobby has huge potential as a space for people to hang out because of its location as a central spot for student traffic intersections of all majors and because it is a relatively open space with several entrances. The space is well lit with large windows, the noise is not a problem and the space has high ceilings that help it feel larger and more open.

However, if you were to stop by at any part of the day almost no one is ever interacting in that space. It may be full of people walking through, people sitting on the benches not talking to each other or someone standing there on their phone waiting for class. But no one ever talks in that space, no one ever has a study group in that space and no one casually meets someone else there for a few minutes.

This could be dramatically improved by a few simple moves and basic interventions. First, it is also important to not that the space is not the most modern or recently updated. The floors are

old and academic, the walls are plaster and dull and the molding is not in style. The benches that are there look like thrones and don’t lend a lot of softness or repeatability to the space. In fact, nothing in the space is soft except the dirty mat used to collect the first of the dirt that people track in the building.

Removing these benches would be a great option and replacing them with tables and chairs would provide incredible improvement over what exists. Moveable chairs would allow people to rearrange them into any size group they would like. It would also send the message that sitting and using the space was not only allowed but encouraged. This makes a huge difference. Students aren’t sure right now if the space is meant to be a study area, a hangout area, a meeting place or if it is not supposed to be used. So it is assumed that it shouldn’t be used. More than the one table that is there now means people that do want to sit and chat don’t feel awkward that they are using the only table that other people could be using.

Changing the type of doors that separate this lobby space from the lecture hall is important as well. Currently they are swing doors and that is a disaster in a lot of ways. The swing doors provide little acoustic separation because there are wide gaps between them even when they are closed. And when someone walks through them, it is impossible for them to just close, they have to swing back and forth and call attention to themselves. They are noisy, they move too much and they don’t provide any noticeable advantages over regular doors. They distract the classroom within and the people in the lobby. The acoustic and physical separation provided by regular doors would make both spaces more comfortable and usable.

The space could be made to be an extension of the Sage cafe that needs a lot of work. There is very little space to eat lunch in there or have coffee with a friend, so the lobby could be a great



space to do that. It could also be more similar to the open study space on the fifth floor that is nice to work in because it is quiet.

Greene has no furniture to speak of yet students try to meet and stop and talk in the lobby space all the time. These conversations have end quickly though because there is no where to sit and they have to stand in the middle of the hallway with people walking by. The DCC entrance has no furniture either and so people end up sitting on the floor. This is actually anti-social even though they are sitting down because it does not encourage positive interaction, only awkward encounters.

The Mueller Center and the VCC have furniture but the chairs and couches are very seldom used. In the VCC the space is too large and overwhelming, similar to the problem with some of the exterior spaces. Also, the chairs are all separated by tables and are spaced awkwardly. They are arranged as if everyone sitting in them was going to watch TV or work independently and they don’t face each other or seem to be close enough for a comfortable interaction. The Mueller Center doesn’t work for different reasons. The seating is very space and there is a bench that lines the wall of windows closest to the door. Again, there is no space for niches or small interactions, it is just one row of cushioned benches and once in a while there is a stray table or chair there that can be used.

The space has a lot of potential with the amount of people that go in and out of the Mueller Center and the Armory. It also has a large TV that could be used for gatherings. A few small tables with ten moveable chairs would make a dramatic difference in the space and interaction in that space would be vastly improved. This would help the space seem less empty, more used and usable. It would also motivate students to territorialize it so it becomes theirs rather than strictly the Mueller Center’s.

UNSOCIAL

Each type of area has a set of problems that are similar across the sites. Using one from each category and solving the unsocial problems associated with it to make it more productively social can be used as a model and tool for the improvement of other spaces in the same category. This proposal will look at the ‘86 Field as an exterior space model, Evelyn’s as a cafe space model and the DCC hall was as an entrance way model. Changing these three spaces in subtle ways would have a big impact on campus and would take a small amount of effort or work.



SOCIAL ON CAMPUS

RPI Public Spaces that Work

SUCCESS

There are certain spaces on campus that work. They are successful at getting people to come there often, come for different reasons and meet new people each time. They encourage different types of interactions and because of this they are used over and over again be the students. The spaces work, but they also still have a huge potential for more success. With a little more intention and more furniture, the spaces that are almost always full now could allow for even more people to enjoy and utilize them.

Exterior

The exterior space outside of the Sage Building, outside of the Union and outside of Folsom Library are three of the most successful exterior spaces on campus. On a nice day, each space has all of the benches and picnic tables full and there are usually several groups of people mulling around talking. These places are successful because they are extremely accessible: they are right outside of the most used buildings on campus. It would be

quite concerning if these spaces were not socially successful. They each have several places to sit in different arrangements, allowing for a variety of groups to use the spaces. They also have some shaded spots and some open. The spaces do not feel overly large or overwhelming because they are right up against a building and have trees or columns to help create territory. These spaces do not need signage or program because they are located immediately adjacent highly programmed spaces. There is an ease in the ability to control social interactions because no one can sneak up on anyone. If someone doesn’t want to interact with someone that is walking over, there is plenty of time to move, look away, look deep in conversation or develop an excuse to shorten any potential conversation. If someone sees another person across the area that they want to talk to, movement is easy and casual, encouraging more interactions.

These spaces may work for these various reasons, but they can still be improved. The space outside


of the Union is rather beat up and could use a quick clean up. The picnic tables are often very dirty and sometimes splintery. More benches could be added as well, to take advantage of the huge success of the interior of the union and expand that outside. The outside of the Sage Building and the Library would both benefit from a lot more seating. Outside of sage people end up sitting on the little monumental circle or eating lunch on it. If there were several other benches close by or a few more tables then they would be quickly used and improve the social capacities of the space.

Cafe

There are very few cafe spaces on campus that work and the one that works the best fits in both the social and unsocial categories. Jazzman’s in the DCC is unsocial because it is too small and in a hallway. Yet at the same time is clearly social because the tables are almost always full with people at all hours of the day and night. There are only a few tables, with about a dozen seats. They have people sitting there drinking coffee and studying, people waiting for their next class in the DCC and people looking for somewhere quiet in the nights and evening to sit and work or chat. This space is highly social because almost everyone has classes right there and the traffic flow is constant. It is in the middle of campus and between everything. The success of the cafes on campus rely on the proximity to popular program (classroom building, library, and union). However, they could all be dramatically improved with a greater amount of seating and an opening up to the program around them. All of them except Jazzman’s have a small entrance and are isolated from the building and program around them.

Entrance

There are several entrance spaces that work and they are located within the Union and the

Library. The VCC lobby begins to work in certain ways and has a huge potential to improve. The spaces in the Union and the Library are popular not only because the buildings themselves are used the most often but also because of their flexible arrangement, open floor plan, security and comfort. These spaces have been the most successful in implementing almost all of the appropriate strategies for social space. There is ample seating and they are full and busy very often.

SOCIAL

These spaces are successful in allowing social interaction to occur and encouraging students to collaborate, discuss and debate. These spaces are extremely valuable to the school because of that and deserve to be looked at as models for other spaces on campus. Imagine having several spaces on campus that are just as popular and social as the Union. That would be extremely helpful in getting people to work together and to interact in new ways. At RPI, the student population has a reputation among other schools for being anti-social sometimes and awkward. This social renovation would help fight that negative reputation while also having huge internal benefits.

SOCIAL ON CAMPUSRPI Public Spaces that Work


CAFEEvelyn’s, EMPAC


The Cafe

The cafe is a brightly lit, very open space that is oriented as a long space with benches along one side and a food bar on the opposing side. The space acts extremely well as a restaurant and serving area. The counter is easily accessible, there is a full kitchen and the tables are set up with plenty of space between them. The area receives a large amount of day light and feels very large and open. Since the mezzanines above step back from the concert hall, the full height of the building is experienced in the cafe space and the light from the northern glass wall and the ETFE roof make it a very pleasant space to be in.

Lunch was served every Tuesday and Thursday during the cafe’s “Eat Local” program where sustainable and local food is brought in and prepared for diners. This is open to students, faculty, staff and the community. Recently, in the past few weeks this has been expanded to a Monday through Friday event and is a huge improvement for the campus community. That means that enough people were interested and

it will get more people to the space more often. It would be great to have Evelyn’s be considered as one of the best dining options on campus, and even in Troy.

Meals are also served sometimes during the evenings of performances, major events, lectures or talks with various visitors. These are also great events to get more people to visit the space and lend some program to it. Outside of the time the space is used as a cafe, it largely lays empty. It could be used for studying, for group projects, for hanging out and for club meetings. Walking through the space with a tour or with a friend, it is almost always empty and the echo of the building can be intimidating if it stays void.

The Building

EMPAC is a cultural center of campus and meant to bring a new music and art scene to the community. With venues of several scales and geared toward multiple methods of performance, Evelyn’s cafe is located in the center of a constantly changing program.


28

DN

DN DN

UP

OTB

OTB

OPEN TO ABOVE

OTB

OTB OTB

5STASTAIRNONA313sf

5EP6ELEVATORNONA179sf

5EF1ELEVATORNONA408sf

5600CORRIDORNONA188sf

5600ACORRIDORNONA279sf

5607LAVATORYNONA115sf

5609ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC138sf

5611ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC214sfSTAGE CREW

5615LAB OPEN SVEMPAC357sf

5614LAB OPEN SVEMPAC336sfINSTRU STOR

5612LAB OPEN SVEMPAC209sfSOUND EQUIP

5608ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC210sfLIGHT EQUIP

5300ACORRIDORNONA1315sf 5300

CORRIDORNONA1358sf

5000LOBBYNONA3422sf

5STJSTAIRNONA289sf




5000AVESTIBULENONA165sf

5000BCORRIDORNONA208sf

5STBSTAIRNONA193sf

5454VESTIBULENONA89sf


5411ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC319sfPROJ/MACH ROOM

5409ASSEMBLYEMPAC364sfBALCONY 54 SEATS

5413ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC377sfBALCONY/SEATING

5403ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC298sfBALCONY/SEATING



5344ELEC RMNONA26sf

5348TEL DATANET & TEL113sf

5401ELEV EQUIPNONA26sf

5STLSTAIRNONA71sf

5330LAB OPEN SVEMPAC186sfMACHINE ROOM

5324AVESTIBULENONA89sfS/L LOCK





5217TEL DATANET & TEL12sf

5218ELEC RMNONA34sf

5200ACORRIDORNONA253sfS/L LOCK

5202ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC200sfEVENT STOR

5208LAB OPEN SVEMPAC1019sfSHARED STOR

5212LAB OPEN SVEMPAC32sfDIMMER ACCESS

5318LAB OPENEMPAC2686sfSTUDIO 2

5002LAVATORYNONA51sfHC LAV

5004MENS LAVNONA420sf

5006WOMENS LAVNONA595sf

5008STORAGE SEREMPAC270sfSTORAGE


5STKSTAIRNONA92sf

5012FOOD FACIL SEMPAC91sfSTORAGE

5014OFFICE ADMINEMPAC84sf

5018FOOD FACILEMPAC951sfCAFE PREP KIT

5024FOOD FACIL SEMPAC138sfCAFE/BAR STOR

5021ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC209sfSTORAGE

5010MECH EQUIPNONA2513sf


5STDSTAIRNONA188sf

5324LAB OPENEMPAC3726sfSTUDIO 1

5860ASSEMBLYEMPAC1939sfAUD STAGE

5800RASSEMBLYEMPAC988sfAUD 74 SEATS

5800CASSEMBLYEMPAC1728sfAUD 274 SEATS

5800LASSEMBLYEMPAC988sfAUD 74 SEATS

5STHSTAIRNONA807sf

5832MECH EQUIPNONA527sfSOUND RACK MACH RM

5STESTAIRNONA241sf

5712ELEC RMNONA35sf

5708OFFICE ACADEMPAC89sf

5719LAVATORYNONA204sfMENS LAV

5867ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC297sfKEYBOARD STOR

5713LAB OPEN SVEMPAC665sfMALE CHANGING RM

5707LAB OPEN SVEMPAC675sfFEMALE CHANGING RM

5705LAVATORYNONA213sfWOMENS LAV

5700ACORRIDORNONA422sf

5856ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC424sfASSEMBLY RIGHT

5855ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC406sfASSEMBLY LEFT

5866LAB OPEN SVEMPAC846sfBACKSTAGE

5220ALAB OPEN SVEMPAC83sfCHANGING ROOM

5220CLAB OPEN SVEMPAC70sfCHANGING ROOM

5220DLAVATORYNONA68sf

OPEN TO ABOVE

OPEN TO ABOVE

ROOM 6800R

ROOM 6800C

ROOM 6800L

5318BLAB OPEN SVEMPAC242sfMACHINE ROOM

EMPAC 5000 LEVEL

ShaftShaft

Shaft Shaft

ShaftShaft

Shaft

Shaft Shaft

OTB

Shaft

5220BLAVATORYNONA66sf

Shaft

OTB

Shaft

Shaft

5STCSTAIRNONA75sf

Shaft

Shaft

Shaft

5710TEL DATAITI8sf

5001FOOD FACILEMPAC2538sfEMPAC CAFE

5844ASSEMBLY SEREMPAC92sfSOUND/LIGHT LOCK






RM 3366 BELOW

ACCESS HATCH

ACCESS HATCH

ACCESS HATCH

5826MECH EQUIPNONA547sf MACH RM

5354JANITORSNONA62sf Shaft

5214LAB OPEN SVEMPAC220sf

CAGE WALL

OTB

INSITE Visual-FM 5.3.0

DRAWING: A150 DB.vfm SCALE: 1.0" = 30.0' PLOTTED: 8/7/2008

Evelyn’s Cafe

PerformanceVenues


Performances occur most often in the evening, but there are usually exhibitions up all day and lectures throughout the week as well. However, despite the constant series of events, it is still almost empty the majority of the time.

The building has an entrance right behind the library on campus and another one on Eighth Street in Troy. This entrance is usually locked so pedestrians from Troy are required to walk all the way to the top of the hill to enter.

The building can be seen from the highway on the way in to Troy and acts as a showpiece for the campus to prospective students, parents, visitors, alumni, donors, sponsors and the community. The main concert hall is the most memorable part of it as the wooden ‘hull’ in the glass box of the building. The main entrance to the building on campus is two levels above the cafe. The main entrance in the building to the concert hall is right next to the cafe, linking them close together.

When It Works

The cafe is packed with people consistently during the “Eat Local” lunches on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Almost all the tables are usually filled with a mix of students, faculty, staff and community members. It is a great time and place for any of these individuals to wave to a friend in another department or to go over and talk to a faculty member about something related or unrelated to school. The opportunity for casual interaction is huge and can be hugely beneficial in building connections between different groups within the student body, the school, and the community. It works well for this because the people have a good reason to be there, they are relaxed, taking a break from work or school and because the space is excellent for encouraging this interaction.

The Eat Local lunch is a positive reason for people to come to the cafe. It supports local farmers,

provides healthy food and is one of the better dining options on campus for lunch. Anyone going to lunch there is probably in a good mood and feeling relatively positive already just based on the event. And it is a great place to tell friends to meet for lunch or to walk over with some people that are working together.

Lunch during the week is one of the best times for people to interact and develop new relationships. If someone is taking the time out of their day to walk over to EMPAC for lunch, they understand the value of taking a break and aren’t too stressed, or know that they need the break. In this case, they are also more likely to be open to new social interactions and happy to talk to anyone they run into at lunch.

Finally, the space itself works incredibly well for this. Because it is so open and light, everyone is typically comfortable and they don’t feel oppressed or awkward in the space. It is informal enough to allow people to feel comfortable just walking over to another table, waving across the room, wandering through, or talking from one table to another. But at the same time, people have enough control and privacy if they are in the middle of an intimate conversation. The acoustic qualities are comfortable to allow for conversations of multiple levels. The tables and chairs are mobile but are laid out in a very organized way. Since they are moveable, it adds to the informality of the space. Someone could easily put two tables together for a large group of eight or even just pull up a chair for a group of five.

The event also works very well for receptions before or after major events. With all kinds of shows going on within the facility, there are quite a few receptions that occur throughout the year. Receptions include refreshments after lectures, dinner’s with speakers, desserts after evening movies, wine and drinks before a concert or snacks with a exhibition opening. These all



work because the space has the elegance and formality of the performance venue, wooden hull, and great lighting. At the same time, the space is comfortable and informal with moveable tables and chairs, at different heights for approaching, standing and sitting, and a bench along one edge for casual sitting. There are no defined edges of the cafe space so it is easy to hang out on the outskirts and not feel isolated or removed.

When It Doesn’t Work

The cafe doesn’t work whenever there isn’t organized event. It’s ability to encourage social interactions is completely lost when there is no lunch event or special performance. The rest of the time it sits totally empty and is devoid of any casual or spontaneous interactions. Groups don’t study there and people don’t relax there.

It doesn’t work because it is perceived as inaccessible in terms of location and in terms of openness to students. The chairs are comfortable and moveable, but no one thinks they should be moved because they might get yelled at. The security, control and comfort levels are all great from the open plan and great light, but its awfully boring if there is no one else around.

How To Make It Work Better

The space has been improving each year in its programming and access to students but still has a long way to go. It recently started serving lunch every week day. Previously it was twice a week and before that only for special events. This is a great way to start to demonstrate that it is easily accessible and open to students. However, program beyond the cafe is needed to show that it can be used for other things.

It could be a great space that is similar to the union. A space that fills up towards finals with different groups of students and individuals moving the tables and chairs around to adapt it

to their needs. It appears inaccessible and far away from everything, but really it is close to everything. It is right next to the library which is hugely popular. It is no farther from the rest of the academic buildings than the union, yet that is far more used because it has become student territory.

Evelyn’s might start off by creating some programs like a free coffee and snack night for studying. Or it could even offer late night study nights and charge for food. Even if few people buy anything it designates hours when the space is open and encourages people to come to EMPAC not just for performances, but for interaction.

Compared to the union there are more outlets, it is much better lit, the space is newer, probably a similar amount of seating, closer to the library and has a couple other advantages. It just needs to be perceived as accessible and made accessible.

With tours going through the building, it is awkward to explain why the newest building is left empty. It’s energy costs are enormous each month and it has to run whether it is empty or not. So filling it up uses the energy that it has to expend anyway and it will impress tour groups a lot more to see such a new buildings popularity, accessibility and usability by students.



ENTRANCEDCC Hallway


The Hallway

The space outside the classrooms in the DCC is hard to describe as any typology specifically. It isn’t exactly a hallway per se, but it isn’t a lobby, an entrance way, a lounge, a waiting area or any traditionally defined space.

The space has a generic rug on the floor and the CMU walls that close off the classrooms that are on the left when walking down from the main entrance. On the right, there are a stairs down and a series of windows that look out onto a driveway for the most part, and some greenery. There is a slight ramp near the entrance of the space.

This leads to problems in how to treat it. Students aren’t sure if they should go there to wait before classes, if they can tell their friends to meet them there or what they would even tell their friends if they wanted to meet there. The school administration and various on campus events will use it as a kind of convention center for kiosks and presentation tables. It functions well enough

for these conference events of limited size, but when nothing is planned there, the awkwardness is obvious.

On a typical weekday, the hallway space is filled with students standing off to the sides and sprawled on the floor against the walls. Since there are no chairs or tables the students have impressively adapted as much as possible and are willing to sit on the floor every day.

Sitting on the floor in a public place is not always pleasant for the people sitting or those walking by.

Students should not have to sit on the floor. Sitting on the floor can be demoralizing and is a sign that the administration does not think that the students need to be able to sit on chairs. It is a clear statement, intentional or not, that the floor is perfectly appropriate for the students. More practically, it is uncomfortable and unhealthy. Sitting on a chair is much more ergonomic and promotes better posture for the body. The ground is hard, not meant for sitting and dirty.

ENTRANCEDCC Hallway

36



3ST2STAIRNONA198sf

305MENS LAVNONA133sf


315JANITORSNONA20sf




308ACLASS SVREGISTRAR351sf

311CLASS SVMULTIMED SVS446sfAV BOOTH 308



316LOBBYNONA2113sf




325CLASS SVMULTIMED SVS71sfCLOSET


3ST1STAIRNONA605sf






331ACLASS SVMULTIMED SVS53sfCATWALKACCESS330


336MEDIA SERVMULTIMED SVS181sfROUTING SWITCHER

3ST8STAIRNONA23sf

341LOUNGEGEN USE809sf


338MEDIA SERVMULTIMED SVS187sfCONTROL ROOM

337CLASS LECREGISTRAR2103sf116 SEATS

3ST3STAIRNONA171sf


345OFF SERCDC181sf

3-EELEVATORNONA135sf


3ST4STAIRNONA107sf

342MEDIA SERVMULTIMED SVS186sfTAPE ROOM

344OFF SERCDC132sfLOUNGE

314CLASS SVMULTIMED SVS1064sfAUDIO & STORAGE

323MEDIA SERVMULTIMED SVS972sfTRANSMITTER ROOM



308BCLASS SVREGISTRAR294sf


319ACLASS SVMULTIMED SVS85sfCATWALK ACCESS 3


3ST10STAIRNONA39sf



3ST12STAIRNONA14sf 335OFF CIRC

CDC246sf

329OFF CIRCCDC219sf

3ST9STAIRNONA119sf



3ST13STAIRNONA51sf

3ST11STAIRNONA17sf

329.20MEETING ROOMCDC51sfINTERVIEW AREA





329.10MEETING ROOMCDC49sfINTERVIEW AREA335.08

MEETING ROOMCDC56sfINTERVIEW AREA







329.17MEETING ROOMCDC58sfINTERVIEW AREA329.15

MEETING ROOMCDC58sfINTERVIEW AREA 329.13

MEETING ROOMCDC58sfINTERVIEW AREA329.11

MEETING ROOMCDC49sfINTERVIEW AREA






302AMERCH FACILSODEXHO619sfJAZZMAN

DARRIN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER 300 LEVEL

344AMEETING ROOMCDC87sfINTERVIEW AREA

INSITE Visual-FM 3.1

DRAWING: Darrin-3.ins SCALE: 1.0" = 30.0' PLOTTED: 8/8/2006

Hallway

Classrooms


Sitting where people walk is another statement that the students don’t quite deserve better. The arrangement of the space also promotes sitting individually and discourages interaction while seated. Students can sit on the floor and face across the hallway if they lean against the wall, but it is difficult and uncomfortable to sit facing another person or group. Thus, people end up facing across the hall, to people they cannot easily talk to or to blank walls. In the worst case, they are forced to stare at the people that walk by.

To the students walking by, this space can’t even act as a typical hallway. Instead they have people sitting on the floor on both sides of the hallway facing them and staring as they walk through. This is extraordinarily uncomfortable to a student who is walking down this for the first time and doesn’t know anyone in the hallway. Even the most popular student feels uncomfortable because the distance between the seated and the standing is not appropriate for easy conversation or interaction. People are the most uncomfortable when they are confronted with uncontrolled social conditions. The people walking to class this way have no control over the interactions, the people, or the awkwardness.

The Building

Within the Darrin Communications Center, the classrooms are some of the largest lecture halls on campus and are shared by all of the disciplines in the school. The building also has rooms in the basement for some clubs and offices. It has a tunnel that connects to the JEC underground. The Career Development Center is located inside as well as the Institute radio station. Jazzman’s cafe is located right near the entrance and it is also connected to the Low Building on the main floor. Every undergraduate student has been in the building for classes, orientation, tours, meetings, movies or any number of activities that go on inside. It has four entrances but two main ones on the upper floor.

When It Works

As mentioned previously, the DCC Hallway does have successful moments throughout the year. It has been successful in accommodating smaller conferences, open house type events, and certain fairs.

For example, for the past few years the Genericon Conference has been held in this area. Genericon, according to its website, is

“...a weekend-long, general convention run by the students of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY. We feature a wide variety of attractions that run the gamut of geeky hobbies, including science fiction, gaming of all forms, and anime. Our events include panels by guest speakers, video gaming tournaments, role-playing games of both the pen-and-paper and live-action variety, and twenty-four hour showings of both science fiction classics and modern anime fresh from Japan. The convention runs for an uninterrupted 48 hours...”

This kind of conference needs a flexible space with access to larger lecture halls, a good location for easy access and a hall that can accommodate vendor tables and artist tables. This is where the hallways specifically comes in handy for this conference and for others. When the tables line both walls of the hallway, no one can sit on the floor and chairs are provided for people. The middle area that acts as the ‘hallway’ is no longer too large to feel comfortable and is big enough so that interaction is not forced, but easier if desired. The density is much more appropriate like this for a conference and everyone is expected to walk through and feels comfortable stopping at tables or completely ignoring them because of the appropriate amount of space.

One of the obvious but usually forgotten advantages that the space holds for conferences like this is its complete lack of popularity when there are no classes going on. There is no reason for anyone



to be in this space when they do not have a class in the next hour in one of the rooms. Therefore, there is barely any need for an organization to sign out the space or even consider other people in the space when organizing their event.

Not only are there certain times when this space works, there are certain areas that are more successful in terms of interaction and functioning for the students benefit.

Towards the entrance and closer to Jazzman’s cafe, the space is clearly more successful and active. This comes from a combination of factors, but primarily because its is has the highest traffic and gets the most attention from people walking by or through.

This is where a lot of school organizations will put tables and chairs so that they can advertise or sell something. Many times there is food for sale or tickets for events here. Other times, it is simply to spread awareness and generate interest in a club. Also, administration or certain administrations will put a table that is relevant to the students. Because of the high traffic and openness of the space, these tables work fairly well near the entrance. Lots of people walk by, many are coming early to a class or are leaving one so have a few minutes to look around and the space near the door is bright and well lit.

But if you buy a waffle, bubble tea or even a ticket to the next drag show there, what do you do next? There is no where to take it and sit down, no where to talk to your friends about meeting up before the drag show or where you are going out after. How can you eat a waffle on a plate standing up with no table? It’s a balancing act, that’s for sure, and you shouldn’t have to know how to juggle to enjoy it. This is just the beginning of when this space doesn’t work.


The hallway doesn’t work as a space for positive social interactions whenever there is no organized event, which is the vast majority of the time. It does not work during classes because people end up sitting on the floor. It does not work when classes aren’t going on because people feel no reason to be there and leave the space completely empty and unused. There is huge potential because it is such a large and open space but there needs to be support from the Institute itself to make the space more usable.


There are several strategies to make this space work a lot better. First, some form of seating is needed so people don’t have to sit on the floor. The seating has to be able to be moved, folded up or adapted to the conferences and conventions in the space that will still occur. Benches that line each side would be a great start because they would also be seating for the tables they set up for the conferences, or the tables could just be set up over them. This would start to pick students up off the floor and create nice spots for people to interact and relax in between classes. Tables could be added if people wanted to use this as a study space after class hours too. Moveable chairs and tables would be too messy and have to be rearranged every time a tour came by so that they looked neat. Larger permanent furniture with tables and chairs would take up too much space and the hallway would lose its flexibility.

Another good strategy that could be done in addition is to extend the territory of Jazzman’s out into the other direction. It could easily be extended down the hallway a little bit with some more tables. This would not encroach too much on the open space and would provide a lot more seating that would be used around the clock throughout the year.



EXTERIOR‘86 Field


The Field

The field itself used to be used for the Institute’s football team and other sports. It is now used for unofficial recreational sports, sporadic festivals, as a pathway from one side of campus to another and as an empty field. In 2009 there was a design competition in the architecture school to generate new ideas for the field after the football was moved up to ECAV. The ideas proposed mostly large architectural interventions that would act to bring more people to the field and to create a new heart to campus. The problem with these proposals was that they included too much and cost more than the administration was willing to spend. Instead, the administration dismissed all of the proposals and instead planted several trees, paved three new paths and created a line of benches.

While the intentions may have been good, the renovations to the field are not nearly as effective as they could be. The trees are a great addition, but the row of less than a dozen of them does little more than create a barrier between the field

and the nearby academic buildings. The row of benches were also a great idea to give people a place to sit and watch people in the field or just sit along the path. However there are only about ten of them and non of them are near enough to each other to allow for any kind of interactions. The paths were also helpful in creating cleaner and more clear ways for students to cross the field. They don’t have to walk through the grass or snow or walk around the entire field to cross it. They also don’t have to walk in the road that goes east-west, but have a dedicated pedestrian path that is uninterrupted and has the trees and benches along it. This path is quite nice and probably one of the nicest on campus. However, the paths are clearly paths and while there are benches along the way, there is absolutely nothing that suggests anyone should slow down and talk or stop and interact.

It’s Place on Campus

Located in the center of campus, the ‘86 field is a part of every campus community member’s mental map. It is the heart of the academic side

EXTERIOR‘86 Field

44

‘86 Field


of campus and walking to almost every building requires seeing it, walking by it or walking through it.

Immediately surrounding it are several building that have the opportunity to interact or relate to it, but for the most part fail to have a strong connection with it. The Johnson Engineering Center is on the south size and is the largest building that touches the field. It has no entry ways or exits on the ground level that enter to the field. So if someone was inside the building and just wanted to get onto the field, there is no easy way and the person has to go around something or down stairs to get to the field. This may not be intentional but completely eliminates any ease of flow between the inside of this building and the field. The JEC does however provide a very strong visual connection with the field on its second floor exterior walkway. This is the main walkway through campus and provides a great view of the entirety of the field. This provides a great observation deck and area for students to take a minute and look at the field, point at people on it and wave if they know them. However, just like if they were inside the building, there is no direct way to just walk onto the field, just several stair cases down.

Across the field, the Troy building and the Ricketts building are immediately on the field as well. These buildings have entrances on the ground floor and feel much more connected to the field. The Troy building feels especially connected after the recent renovations to the field. There is a promenade of trees that intersects right outside the front door of the Troy building and creates a little plaza. This connection is well done and since the Troy building contains President Jackson’s office, it is fairly understandable why this area go the most attention. Ricketts is not used very often by a large portion of the school, but it does have a reasonable connection with the promenade.

The ‘87 Gym

Other buildings that are close but not directly on the field are the Greene Building, the Low building, the DCC, the Sage Builidng and the Quad Resident Halls. None of these buildings have direct entrance ways to the field. They do have parts of the building visible from the field and the field is visible from parts of the interiors of the buildings. Therefore, the connection is mostly visual, but it means that the students understand the buildings in relation to the location of the field and they are aware if there is something going on in the field at any time. Sometimes in Greene students can hear loud music from the field and have to close the windows or sometimes in Sage students can see people playing in the field and they stop paying attention to class to watch. In this way, these connections cannot be ignored and should be taken advantage of in any design.

When It Works

The ‘86 field has several times of the year and of the day that it is successful in certain ways. During the summer and warmer months is obviously the most useful time for an outside space in upstate New York so that is when we will judge its success.

During the summer, there is obviously not a lot of students or faculty on campus without normal classes in session. However, there is a significant amount of time in the early fall and late spring where the field can be used. From August to mid November in the fall and from March to May the weather is appropriate.

Several different sports and informal recreational activities occur on the field. There are quidditch games and ultimate frisbee matches next to soccer games and students playing catch. There is enough space for several groups of students to use it at once if they want, but rarely does more than one group at a time take advantage of this.

EXTERIOR‘86 Field


Throughout the year the administration or certain student organization will also have events on the field that can be extremely successful if organized well. In the winter there are sometimes Winter Festivals that have smaller vendors on the field with ice skating and other fun activities. Also, Relay for Life uses the field every year as a staging area for the fundraising event. Both of these events are extremely popular with students and faculty and draw a large part of the RPI community to the field.


However, the field is empty for the vast majority of the time. Let’s face it, there is not an endless supply of frisbee players and if anyone wants to play soccer or another sport, the fields up at ECAV are better for that. But when you go to other campuses every green space is filled with people outside studying on blankets in the quads or sitting at picnic tables and enjoying every minute of nice weather.

The field does not work for social interaction outside of organized festivals or the occasional frisbee game because there is no established tradition of enjoying it and because it is unclear whether the administration wants people to mingle there. The benches are all along one edge and there is no where to sit anywhere else on the entire field if the grass is wet or people don’t want to sit on the ground. The field is also relatively newly renovated, so established quads in other university’s have generations of people that have created traditions of enjoying the space. This space at the heart of campus still seems uncertain of its own intention and needs an enthusiastic and confident student body to take it over.


Looking at other successful exterior quad spaces on other campuses, hey all have great traditions

of casual use. They also have traditions of organized events of all types. Movie nights projected on buildings lining the space are a great way to get people there in the evening and show them that it is safe and fun. Other events like a quad study period where there are free snacks outside and other incentives for people to study outside will bring them there and show that studying outside can be as productive or more productive than studying in a room alone. Free field blankets or blankets sold at the bookstore that are specifically for the field are a creative incentive. Every time someone sees the blanket they have they will think about using it on the field and it would be a clear sign of the administration’s support for using the field as a social space. Professors can help encourage the use of the space by turning it into an outside classroom. If its nice out and there is somewhere to sit, why not take advantage of that and take the students outside to learn. Discussions outside may keep the students awake, interested and happier than inside old academic buildings. Permanent picnic tables and more seating throughout would be a huge help for people to stop and relax before and after class and on the weekends. It would be another sign of support from the administration as well.

These are also great ways to increase the feeling of community on campus. Students will go with their friends, but they may meet friends of friends and become closer to them. They may sit next to a group of people they don’t know but end up striking a valuable conversation about school or otherwise. The more active the students are with each other the stronger their collaboration in school and also the stronger the network of alumni out of school. There are immediate benefits in the productive advantages on school work and projects and future advantages in the alumni network, job prospects, donor prospects and reputation of the school.

EXTERIOR‘86 Field


Discussions

The most productive source for these design proposals, strategic interventions and behavioral understandings was not from the psychology books or from design classes. Instead, it was from conversations with users. A broad survey of the school population would not be helpful to this specific project because it is not just looking at the past, but relying on people with a lot to say about the spaces and people that have been using them for years to talk about what changes would be helpful. Personal discussions and conversations with individual students is far more productive in hearing descriptions in their own words and understanding their perspectives.

Some of the students suggested spaces I had never been to. By talking with students from several majors it was possible to get a better understanding of the variety of spatial needs and study habits. Also, talking to seniors was important to discuss spaces that had been well used and to talk to people that had spent the most time on campus.

The students interviewed with were:

Kristi Nelson, Nick Vigilante, Stephen Nock, Dan Powell, Sarah Murray, Brian Nock, Sarah Goldfarb, Zoe Demple, Shawn Nelson, Jamie Lee, Rosa Tung, Michelle Lahnemann, Kyleen Hoover, Maranda Wong, Kateri Knapp, Julia Grabazs, Briana Earle, Mairead Lyons

Their addition to the conversation is extremely helpful in the creation of this concept and document.

Not only that, but by asking these questions to them they will bring this conversation to other people and begin to question their perceptions about the spaces and what can be done and what should be done to them.


50

GENERALName: Kristi NelsonExpected Graduation: December 2012Expected Degree: Information Technology & Web Science

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 4.5Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 4.5Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 4.5Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 4.5Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 4

SPACESWhat spaces on campus do you use most often for group projects, hanging out and talking to people? (Excluding residence halls)Of these spaces, which was your favorite and least favorite and why?

I use Sage Building, Union, Library, and the JEC. My favorite space is the Union especially the McNeil room even though it gets really crowded towards the end of the semester. My least favorite is the JEC because there’s a limited number of rooms to do group work.

What spaces on campus do you think have potential to be other hang-out spaces but that you never/rarely used and why?Do you have any suggestions on how these or other spaces on campus could be improved?

The DCC could become a hang out for a longer period of time than 30 minutes. Most people are waiting between classes in the DCC if there were couches or chairs lining the DCC great hall then more people could use that space to meet.

Looking at the hallway in the DCC, what is your impression and experience of it as a space for social interaction?What do you think could be done to improve it?

See above.

Looking at Evelyn’s Cafe in EMPAC, what is your impression and experience of it as a space for social interaction?What do you think could be done to improve it?

I have never really spent time there. I have been in EMPAC a total of five times for events so I have only seen social interaction of mingling.

Looking at the ‘86 Field, what is your impression and experience of it as a space for social interaction?What do you think could be done to improve it?

The space has been improved with the added benches along the Troy and Ricketts building. There could be a gazebo or picnic tables to encourage group work and utilizing the space for academic studies.


GENERALName: Nick VigilanteExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: Mathematics of Operations Research

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 4Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 3Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 2Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 3Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5) 4


I worked mostly in the union in the third floor. I don’t remember the name of the room I was in that I liked, but it had a bunch of comfortable chairs and a white board. That was my favorite. My least favorite one was probably the rooms on the first floor of Carnegie building. I had to

do group work for classes there and the desks were a pain to move around and they were really uncomfortable.


I suppose the roofs of buildings are a sweet place to hang out, but they aren’t “accessible” to the common folk, and they have no seating/power outlets. There are some nice lounges in some of the classroom buildings, like Ricketts has a nice lounge, but I rarely go in there. Wherever there are spots for students to hang out include more power outlets since RPI students are inherently tethered to their laptops, as well as more seating.


Definitely not enough power outlets. And it’s crowded but that doesn’t bother me. However more tables and chairs would be good.


I only passed by once, so I don’t have much of an opinion.


I love the ’86 Field. It’s a great place to hang out when the weather is nice.


52

GENERALName: Stephen NockExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.S. Mechanical Engineering + M.S. Technical Communication

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 4Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 4Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 3Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 3Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 3


As I’d expect to hear from most students, I’ve done most of my group project work in the McNeil Room of the Student Union. I’ve done other, non-academic, group projects in the various meeting rooms in the Union. I also like to work in the fifth floor lounge of the Sage building, the lounge on

the third floor of the JEC, and the library. These three spaces are typically quieter than the Union, making them not as optimal for group work.

On campus, I’d prefer to hang out or talk to friends somewhere that I can sit but not in extremely close proximity to others (ie: not a dining hall). Spaces such as the Union’s north (fish tank) lobby and the alcove seating in the Rathskellar come to mind.

I think it’s valuable to mention that I see many student groups “working together” while individually working on their computers. I have not found any spaces on campus that truly foster an environment for groups to work together, while individually engaging with their computers. The VAST lab, Sage second floor, is a strong example of a poor space for collaboration, as demonstrated when the student groups attempt to work together on design projects. The primary space is the individual work station and there is no secondary space for the group to operate together.


The first non-utilized space I see for social interaction is the DCC Great Hall. Although I suggested seating to the Class of 2013 as a class gift, the suggestion was not the first choice. I suggested fold down benches for each side of the hallway, which would alleviate students’ discomfort when sitting against the walls to wait for access to a lecture room. The seating would be available when preferred but stored inconspicuously otherwise. I enjoy people watching in this area, but do not enjoy interacting with people here. The extent of interaction is a cordial greeting and smile.



As aforementioned, seating is a necessity to make the environment comfortable. People consistently feel rushed in this area, whether ignoring solicitations from fundraising groups, waiting in line at Jazzman’s, or waiting for a class lecture/exam to begin. I’d like to see the space more flexible for guiding people to each meeting space, for fostering interaction, and for supporting the events that are sometimes hosted in this space (fundraising, recruiter fairs, BFTAD, middle/high school pipeline fairs, etc). This would include seating, better lighting, more colorful flooring, better signage, and easily installable but non-permanent work surfaces.


From my experiences with EMPAC performances, talks, and shows, in addition to two full student orientation programs in the venue, the café space presents itself as a corral, or a holding space. Patrons are eager to enter the studios, theater, and concert hall, creating a strained environment for social interaction. I’ve seen the space used empty, used with varying levels of square and round tables, or converted to a full-dining area with long banquet tables. The most successful and comfortable uses of the space are for after-event receptions, when a handful of food and beverage stations are installed with significant space for crowds to move and gather.

The curved bench creates some difficulties when creating a floor-plan or when navigating the space. It almost creates a hallway against the edge of the concert hall, but guests must climb over the bench or enter from an end and must

crouch to walk. I think the single long bench should be re-considered.


Interactions on the ’86 Field include people passing one another in transit, informal recreational games, formal events, individuals and small groups relaxing to pass time, and student project groups testing or installing projects. As with most outdoor spaces, the usefulness of the ’86 Field depends entirely on weather. It would be nice to have a structure that makes the space useful for interacting or simply being sheltered during rain. Some variation in elevation might also be beneficial, so that the space is more comfortable for people who want to relax or explore.

Any other comments about the RPI campus, social spaces, or any related topic:The zen garden between Sage and West Hall is often unknown or forgotten. It also feels neglected, but should perhaps be considered in this project. I also know that administrators and program organizers are expending energy and resources to make ECAV a more central space for student interaction and productivity. Consider the various seating spaces, the meeting rooms, and the café, none of which I’ve personally made an effort to use.


54

GENERALName: Dan PowellExpected Graduation: Dec 2013Expected Degree: BS Design Innovation and Society + BS Mechanical Engineering

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 3.5Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 3Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 3Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 2.5Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 4

SPACESWhat spaces on campus do you use most often for group projects, hanging out and talking to people? (Excluding residence halls) Of these spaces, which was your favorite and least favorite and why?

I tend to work on group projects at my house or in the PDI Studio (Sage 2211) because there is enough table space and it’s a bit calmer than the Union. The Library carpets are really loud and I just don’t like the vibe there. The VCC is nice but it’s kind of dark in there.. maybe if I brought

a desk lamp. I do like those low tables near the computer rooms though, they’re awesome.


I’ve been let in to some of the spaces the video games majors get to use down on the second floor of Sage, and they’re sick. If you look at current trends in office furniture, they’re all based of of what attracts people like us who are coming out of college; workspaces are now designed to be more open and collaborative, and to keep people motivated to come to work. Perhaps RPI should pay more attention to this. I guess the Union does a pretty good job, but I hate how people are so clustered there and the acoustics kind of suck.I’ve thought for a little while now that the coolest place to work would be set up similar to booths at a restaurant, because it’s efficient space-wise, but each workspace has some feeling of separation/exclusivity that makes it easier to focus. Table space, sound-dampening and good/adjustable lighting are important factors that influence my ability to work well.


Let people put temporary artwork up on the walls..? I don’t do anything there except avoid people trying to sell me cookies.


I think there’s definitely a nice vibe there, especially in the warmer months. The food is kind


of expensive and fancy compared to anywhere else on campus but I guess that’s how EMPAC distinguishes itself and attracts the hipster/artist people. I kind of like how quiet and open it is there. If it got really crowded I’m not sure how I’d feel about it.


Maybe more between-class activities could happen there, or maybe things could happen on the weekends? I wouldn’t over-book it for things though, people probably like it being open for impromptu sports/activities.

Any other comments about the RPI campus, social spaces, or any related topic:

My roommates like to play basketball and the gym closes at like 7PM on Fridays, along with everything else. They should really hire people to keep it open so that people have something to do on Friday nights besides make bad life choices.


56

GENERALName: Sarah MurrayExpected Graduation: 2014Expected Degree: B. Arch & M. Eng

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 4Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 4Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 4Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 3Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5) 2


The Greene Building is usually where I meet most often for group projects, either using studio space if it is an architectural project or meeting with groups outside architecture in the architecture library. I rarely get together with people to socialize on campus, although a lot of socialization usually occurs in studio spaces.

I probably prefer the architecture library over studio space because it much quieter as well as a much cleaner and more pleasant environment.


RPI does have a pretty good amount of green space but it doesn’t seem to be used very often as hang-out spaces. This could partially have to do with the weather but I think it doesn’t offer enough intimacy. The ’86 field is often used for recreation but you rarely see people just hanging out and chatting on campus. I think if there were smaller nooks throughout campus which were more conducive to small get-togethers and which offered a little more privacy, exterior spaces might be great for hanging out.


There often seem to be people hanging out in the hallway between classes, but the lack of seating/lounge spaces leaves everyone lining the edges of the hall and doesn’t allow them to necessarily sit and speak to one another. If seating were added which enabled people more comfort and more opportunities for socialization people might be more apt to stick around longer.


Evelyn’s Café is set up in order to act as dining space and therefore it doesn’t seem to attract any activity outside of that. The benches lining the concert hall offer some additional seating but


once again aren’t great for holding conversations with other people. Although the space itself is very nice, I’m not sure it will ever function as a social space due to its location on campus.


I already kind of talked about this.


EMPAC Hill is probably my favorite space on campus. It would be great if there were seating or something which allowed people to enjoy the views.


58

GENERALName: Brian NockExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.S. in Civil Engineering, M.S. in Civil Engineering



I use the Union quite a bit, because of convenience for everyone. It’s a good go to place with the central location, lots of space (though not always functional – lack of plugs, sometimes not enough tables… ugly tables), and food/snacks available in the building. Other than that, the only other place

I use regularly is the Alumni House. I actually prefer to meet there, if the group is willing. It’s much more private and productive, but the con is that it’s further from campus. Also, this is a location not regularly available to most students – I have 24/7 access as an employee of the Office of Alumni Relations. Favorite would be alumni house, for reasons above. Least favorite would be… I don’t know?


A lot of the lounges could be greatly improved. It seems like the thought is “Oh, we could make a lounge space for students to work…” Then, they get some couches/tables/chairs, maybe good lighting and call it good. Really a productive work space requires a lot more. It needs to be inviting, especially with young people today. It would be great to have flexible space with modular furniture. I would love to see them go as far as having snacks, office supplies, even brain exercising games and toys in the spaces. Just things to make people think. As always, we can discuss the lack of outlets on campus. We know it stems from the time of construction of most of the buildings, but something’s got to give – MOAR OUTLETS!

As far as specific spaces that I have in mind… the Sage lounge (5th floor, Sage Lab) is one that I pass frequently, but use infrequently. It’s just not inviting, though there are often many people who spend time in the space during the day since the location is convenient. Also the engineering lounge in the JEC… it’s been improved (a lot, actually) with new furniture, but still could see some of the extras added in.

Also, lighting. Sometimes it really sucks for things like writing.



Interesting topic of discussion here. The Class of 2013 may still be toying with the idea of installing benches in this area, the “Great Hall.” The space sucks right now. Long hallway with some nice window etchings. Students sitting on the nasty floor (I’m guilty too). There are limited outlets and it’s just not comfortable (or impressive to prospective students). The space has to be flexible, which I understand, for some of the health, community, etc. fairs that take place there, or some of the open houses and registrations, where tables run the length of both sides. Usually, when I run into someone who I know there, the conversation is really short. There is no space to hang out… aside from sitting on the floor. Plus, tabling on the ramp is a little odd. Really, modular furniture would do well here, perhaps with integrated outlets.


I’ve only used the space once for productivity. Other times, I’ve been at a few receptions in the space, had lunch there once, and passed through the space a number of times. It’s probably the best designed, but most underused space on campus. I don’t have a lot to say about improvements, as I haven’t spent much time in there, but it could certainly be better marketed to students as a social space IF the goal is to use the space more. It may be that they want to minimize noise/traffic in the environment, for the most part.


It’s definitely been improved over the years that I’ve been here. For the most part, we know that the weather in Troy sucks, so most of the year, no one wants to be out there. I would love to see better access from the Quad and Hassan Quad via the south parts (there are staircases for each on the north side, but no access from in front of Greene or by Church VI). I don’t have a lot of recommendations for improvements outside of that. Some sculptures would be interesting and fun, maybe nearest the JEC so as not to interrupt the space. It would also be interesting to have sculptures at the west and east ends that were insprired by field goal posts, bringing in the historical nature of the space. From what I’ve heard though, Dr. Jackson does not like statues, which may include sculptures. The added pathways and benches have made a difference, in a positive way.


We know that RPI has a reputation for being a “cold” place, which means that the spaces are color-less and uninviting. Splashes of life and color in the existing spaces could make a big difference. And probably a lot more than splashes of color, when I think about it. Let’s get buckets and buckets of color/life. The architecture (externally) is beautiful (for the most part). Inside the buildings (where the community spends MOST of the time) it is awful. Better lighting would make a big difference, I think.


60

GENERALName: Sarah GoldfarbExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.Arch



Group projects most often occur within the Greene Building, with a rare meeting in the McNeil Room. As for hanging out/talking typically studio spaces within the Greene Building, and sitting by the sculpture in front of Greene when it’s nice out. The space between the Greene Building and the VCC, and EMPAC hill are also nice in good

weather. Of those, my favorite is probably the area surrounding the sculpture because it’s not highly trafficked like the Greene-VCC space, and it’s more relaxing on a nice day than being inside. EMPAC hill also has a nice view of Troy but can be fairly busy.


It works as an impromptu space for social interaction since the space is wide enough that students can sit in the hallway and relax or do work while they wait for their classes to begin, and they often encounter people they know walking by. Having Jazzman’s there is also nice, and helps draw people into and through the space. The space could be improved by making it more vibrant and comfortable; it works as a social space now but feels a bit dreary.


Evelyn’s Café is nicely done, however it doesn’t offer much space for large social interaction. The table are arranged in such a way that they facilitate smaller gatherings, which is nice, however the space may benefit from having arrangements available for larger groups.


The ’86 Field is an interesting space. It had a lot of potential, but the walkways have cut it up in an unsuccessful way (spatially speaking; in terms of short cuts they work well) and they make the green spaces feel a bit disconnected.


GENERALName: Zoe DempleExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.Arch



Union, VCC, Library – least favorite=Union, usually too crowded or loud.


EMPAC has an extremely large front space which is really only used during events and when the café is open. This area definitely has the potential for being a great area for people to meet/hangout/do work.


Its width makes it feel as though you can walk down the entire thing without having to interact with people. The wideness is emphasized by the fact that there are no seating areas or smaller enclosed areas for people to hangout/ wait in while they are waiting for class.


Hey! I talked about this before! – anyway, more comfortable and intimate seating near the café might make it a more inviting space to hangout.


I never knew I could hate pathways as much as I hate the ones on the ’86 field. Let’s make it a pond/ice skating rink.


62

GENERALName: Shawn NelsonExpected Graduation: May 25, 2013Expected Degree: BS Chemistry

RATINGS (1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 5Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 5Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 4Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 4Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 3


Excluding the residence halls, I generally use the Student Union and the Biotechnology Building. My favorite venue is the Biotechnology Building because there are comfortable seats, large tables with plenty of room for group projects, and it is relatively quiet. I dislike working in the Student Union because I feel it is too full and noisy most

of the time. Occasionally, I will work in the Union if it is a less-busy day or night.


I think the lounges in each of the respective “major buildings” would be great places for students to utilize. For example, the lounges in J-ROWL, Cogswell, and the JEC, could be put to much better use. Other spaces such as the 200-level of the DCC could be remodeled and have a more inviting atmosphere for students; i.e. the study ‘cubicles’ on the opposite side of the classrooms.


The DCC, in and of itself, is in need of a complete remodel. The Great Hall is a space that so many students and faculty utilize and it doesn’t have much to offer. Outside of the occasional chair and railings, there is very little seating space. Permanent tables and chairs, similar to those found near Jazzman’s could run the length of the railing, or, in the very least, some form of seating without tables. The countless cohorts of students sitting, kneeling, and standing outside of lecture halls studying prior to exams is somewhat overwhelming.


Evelyn’s Café in EMPAC is a hideaway; it’s a best kept secret, in my opinion. I enjoy the space – the chairs are nice, and the tables are rarely occupied. If it were improved with more seating,


it could be further advertised as a public space. My concern is that EMPAC is distant from many venues on campus and the majority of students may be discouraged from using it, as is the current situation. The use of EMPAC has always been a heated debate on our campus and since the student body and administration cannot seem to agree on its use as a concert venue, perhaps it could be improved as a space for social interaction, outside of the concert scene.


Considering the variable weather of Troy, the ’86 Field would be a tough bargain to improve as a social space. I enjoy the recently constructed benches and the space has improved astronomically since my first year at RPI when it was still utilized as a football field. I’m not sure there is much of a campaign needed to further improve it, because it is most heavily utilized during the warmer days, which are limited during the traditional academic year. If anything, more seating and perhaps a permanent covered space, such as a gazebo could be added to one ‘corner’ of the field.


There are many underutilized spaces on our campus, including the lower levels of the DCC, EMPAC, the Pittsburgh building, the upper levels of the Sage building, and many building lounges.

The student population has outgrown available social spaces; the Union is usually crowded on typically ‘busy’ nights and students have to compete for project space. I am lucky enough to have 24-hour access to the Biotechnology building, but many students are out of luck in this regard.


64

GENERALName: Jamie LeeExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B. Arch



The union is a good space for group projects although it does get crowded and loud. There aren’t many spaces on campus to just hang out and talk to people.

What spaces on campus do you think have potential to be other hang-out spaces but that

you never/rarely used and why?Do you have any suggestions on how these or other spaces on campus could be improved?

If there were spaces that mimicked studio spaces then people could get work done and also hang out which is what archies do most of the time anyways. But smaller spaces that are conducive to working as well as just hanging out (like the study rooms in the residence halls) work well.


You can walk down that hallway and expect to see atleast one person you know sitting on the floor waiting for class to start. You can’t really do much to it without making it look crowded. People do their homework on the floors and sit on the floors, but i don’t think adding chairs and tables is the answer to that.


It’s a good space, but a very public one so the minute you set 5 people talking in that area it would probably resonate up to all the floors, i think everyone gets the impression that you have to be very quiet in that building. Also, no one really knows it’s there.


It’s cold and rainy at RPI so using the field isn’t that feasible, but on nicer days it’s pretty good at being utilized for playing sports or just laying out. The benches on the north(?) side of the field are a good start i guess.


GENERALName: Rosa TungExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: Games, Simulation Arts, and Sciences

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 5Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 3.5Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 3.5Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 5Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 5


Games Lounge and VAST Lab. VAST lab: favorite because it has so many computers and is underused. Games Lounge: because it has so few computers and is overused.


EMPAC: great atmosphere but not very accessible to students, and when it is half of it is still not accessible. Its only purpose seems to be to impress whatever visitor comes along rpi, I see plenty of rpi staff with snooty old people there.


Tables and chairs.


Snooty old people, and wannabe artsy people. Maybe have more events be advertised better? Shirley Jacksons winter concert was not advertised to students at all I didn’t see anyone I knew there, only families and…old snooty people.


Not any better than how it was before. I would personally add a water system in which people could dip their feet and read in the summer but I know that’s not realistic.

66

GENERALName: Michelle LahnemannExpected Graduation: 2014Expected Degree: B. Arch



1. Green Building studios/library – well known spaces, easy to meet up with people, lots of rooms to choose from2. VCC – nice that it is open 24 hrs, very quiet, but bad lighting/blah décor inside3. Union – lots of tables to work at but very loud


EMPAC – make it more clear when the building is actually open for student use. I’m never sure if I am going to be able to actually get inside the building when I walk over there aside from evening events or lunch time. DCC – more tables/benches/chairs to work at, mainly in big hallway space outside of the classrooms. This seems like unused space that can easily be utilized


I think it’s a great opportunity to add more things that would make it easier to interact with people, such as more seating and tables for people to sit at and talk, study, hang out, or eat. There are a few over by Jazzmans but they always seem to be occupied when I walk past them that I never have a chance to sit there.


I think there is a good amount of seating and space for people to interact at Evelyn’s Café, the problem I think is actually getting people to go there. I think many people, myself included, find that we aren’t sure if we are actually ‘allowed’ to go to EMPAC just to hang out. Its usually thought of as a place to go for events or lectures and that’s it.



I think a lot has been done to improve the ’86 Field in recent years. A lot of benches, sidewalks, and trees have been added while still keeping enough grass space for people to play games and hang out on. I think there is a good balance of both right now. Not too overdone, but not too bare.


I actually really like how RPI is laid out as a campus. At my previous school most of the building were far away from each other and things were very separated, which is weird because it was a small campus. For the most part, the buildings at RPI are close together that it creates a greater sense of a more tight-knit community on campus.


68

GENERALName: Kyleen HooverExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.Arch

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 5Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 4 Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 3Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 4Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 3


I use the Greene Building and the Student Union for group projects. The Greene Building is preferred for convenience and a more silent and less crowded atmosphere than the Union.


The outdoor space of the 86 Field could incorporate more seating for students/ electric outlets for electronics to be used while the weather is nice.


The carpet should be changed to a hard surface and the walls redone to hide the cinderblocks. I think there is potential for it to become a social space with a few tweaks aesthetically.


To advertise and draw students down to Evelyn’s Café would help improve its use on campus. Perhaps more comfortable, lounge-like seating and lighting.


The outdoor space of the 86 Field could incorporate more seating for students/ electric outlets for electronics to be used while the weather is nice.



GENERALName: Maranda WongExpected Graduation: December 2013Expected Degree: BS and ME Materials Engineering



The spaces on campus I use most often are the MRC Lounge, Union, Pool, VCC, Library, ECAV.My favorite is the Union because it is easy to meet in groups and schedule back to back group meetings because there is usually space. There is also easy access to food, the shuttle, and

my apartment. My least favorite is the library. Sometimes it is extremely difficult to find a study room, the café closes so you can’t get anything to eat if you are studying late, I also don’t like the bright orange and red coloring of the floors. There is also very little parking close to the library.


Sometimes I go to ECAV and it’s nice to do work there because it can be really quiet upstairs, however it gets pretty cold. It would probably be easier for more people to get up there if shuttles came more often. Also, only athletes have access to ECAV at certain times.


It is so crowded and loud most of the time. It’s good to have a quick conversation with someone but it gets too crowded.Seating could be added to make it more comfortable.


It is used a little bit, it could be used more with pick up games of Frisbee or soccer when it is warmer.


70

GENERALName: Kateri KnappExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.Arch

RATINGS(1 = Very Negative, 3 = Neutral, 5 = Positive; N/A)Overall Happiness at RPI (1-5): 3Social Interaction on Campus (1-5): 2 (outside of Greene) 5 (if you include Greene)Feeling of Community on Campus (1-5): 4Productive Group Collaboration on Campus (1-5): 3Influence of Campus Spaces on Social Interactions (1-5): 3


Within Architecture, I most often use the Greene Library and whichever studio most of the members of the group are in (fairly typical to archies). Of these two, I prefer the Library because it has nice bright and evenly distributed lighting, it’s usually the most temperature controlled space, and it has

seating for group work. Outside of Architecture courses, I have used the fifth floor of Sage and the first floor of Folsom. In Folsom, I usually have a feeling of unease or guilt when working in a group because of the need to speak out loud (even if quietly).


N/A.


I seem to see hints of potential for social interaction and “hanging out” in the DCC hallway, evidenced by the fairly steady number of people sitting on their laptops along the length of the corridor. Also, whenever there is a table near the doorway, there is almost always someone huddled over it’s crooked surface with a laptop. I think by adding seating and small tables (perhaps along the West side of the hallway so as not to interfere too much with the flow between classes) the space would see a great increase in use. Also, there is no reason that the tables and chairs on the slanted portion of the floor couldn’t have adjustable legs so that the surface of the table could be level.


Now that the café is open for lunch every day, I have seen a marked increase in the amount of people spending time there. As a space to do work or for social interaction outside of lunch, I


think that the space is underutilized. I think the hightop seating is ideal for after lectures and events (it allows more people to gather around a table than just the seated ones), but isn’t optimal for daytime and regular use. In addition, the seats themselves, especially at the regular height tables are not particularly comfortable or welcoming.


While it is nice that they maintained a “field” for quidditch and frisbee, outside of those activities, the field seems generally neglected. I think the open field portion could be reduced to almost half it’s size and remain functional. The other portion could benefit from more trees (not a forest, but enough that people would feel comfortable sitting beneath them), different seating options (including benches with backs), a water feature (could be used for cool breezes in summer and ice skating in winter).

72

GENERALName: Julia Grabazs Expected Graduation: May 2014Expected Degree: BARCH



-Greene building for architecture only projects, especially the library. -For other group projects, the second floor of the Union or group study room in Folsom-I like the group study rooms in Folsom that overlook Troy because they permit a quiet place to work, yet allow views towards the outside

so it is not as suffocating as working in other spaces. There is often too much commotion and distraction in the Union.


-EMPAC, there are breakout spaces that seem to be only utilized during events/ performances and during lunchtime-I would like to see EMPAC open at night and be more casually used by students-Also, I think there are many outdoor spaces which are underutilized. I’m not sure if there is not enough seating but students seem to only gravitate towards a few spaces while much of our campus has natural, open spaces.


-There are always students congregated there before and after class. However, I dislike how the only seating is on the floor. It makes the space very unprofessional with students and backpacks everywhere on the floor. I think adding small benches or tables could maintain the popularity of the space while improving the quality. If there were more outlets and tables, the space could be used for studying and not just to wait between classes.


-As mentioned above, I think promoting and opening EMPAC during non-event, lunchtime hours would improve the accessibility for social


interaction. Also, maybe the small, high tables could be replaced with larger, lower tables that would promote studying in groups. Also, electricity is essential to extended periods of studying.


I think the small improvements in planting and sidewalks helped to break up the large expansive field, however, I think they were far too timid in creating an interactive space for social gatherings. There are new places to sit; however, the field is still only primarily used for a few activities: frisbee, quidditch, and to make giant snow balls/ snowmen. I would like to see architectural interventions of larger scale to add some smaller zones to the field that would promote outdoor group work. An outdoor amphitheater would be great for screening movies, having small concerts, and holding class outdoors when the weather permits.


In general, the common rooms in the older dorms are very small and sparse which limits the amount of social interaction between upperclassmen students that are not in the newer dorms.


74

GENERALName: Briana EarleExpected Graduation: May 2013Expected Degree: B.S. Civil Engineering, M.E. Transportation Engineering



Spaces Most Often Use – Union, Library I like the union because there are always other students there I know and is a great place to meet for group projects. The one thing I don’t like about the union is it does get very loud so it is sometimes hard to focus on work.

I like the library because it is a quiet place to get work done is a good place to study during classes during the week. I like the study rooms to meet in groups or get homework done in a quiet room where you can talk with your group. I don’t like the library because sometimes I can’t find a good table or study room to work at.


I think that the alumni house could be a great place to hang out at and get work done. Especially for students that live off campus. It is very close to the off campus houses and is a quiet place to get work done. Study Days is great and if there were more of those to get work done at the alumni house during the year I think it would be very helpful.


I think that the DCC great hall is a place where students do socialize at the beginning and end of class. Also I do see students doing work against the walls while waiting for class. I don’t think students go there for the reason to socialize. It is just when classes are in session. I think to improve the DCC great hall more tables and chairs along the hallway would bring more students to use the DCC as a place to study, socialize, and meet with groups.



I have only been to the café once for one event. From what I have seen and heard about the café it is a nice place to get a snack and work. I don’t have any classes near EMPAC so I never go there. I do think that not a lot of students know about the café in EMPAC so if it was advertised more that would be very helpful.


The 86’ Field from what I have seen is a great place for students to hang out and play outside. I see it is used a lot more during the fall and spring when it is nice outside. I have seen students laying in the grass or sitting on the benches doing work which I think is great. From all the work that has been done to the field I think is looks very nice and many students use the space to socialize. I think to improve 86’ Field is to have more events on the field to show what a great space it is to use.


76

GENERALName: Mairead LyonsExpected Graduation: May 2013 Expected Degree: B.S. Biomedical Engineering Minor in Psychology



The Student Union is the building I most utilize on campus for doing group projects whether it is for Senior Design courses or just working on homework together. I also go there for the majority of just hanging out when there is not a lot of work to do but just needs to be gradually be done. Also

go to the Jonsson Engineering Center Third Floor Lounge to do quick impromptu meetings for group work. Another building on campus is the library. Second floor library is a common place to go between classes and catch up with friends or do some quick work. The Jonsson Engineering Center Third Floor Lounge is my least favorite to meet up just because of the lack of outlets, as well as how quiet it is. It is sometimes too quiet to have a discussion without feeling as though you are disturbing someone else. The Student Union is my favorite place to meet up and either do group work in the McNeil Room or hang out at the tables on the Third Floor and hang out with friends.


Some areas in the Russell Sage Labs has potential for being a bit more conducive to group work or just hanging out between classes. On the Fourth Floor there is a large open space for work to be done but not many desks just chairs.


I think it might be beneficial to people who are either waiting for class or just hanging out if there were more chairs and tables to sit down at. People just sit on the floor which is uncomfortable. There are more than enough people in that hallway standing around to add some benches possibly on one side of the hallway.



The only problem I foresee with Evelyn’s Café is the fact that it is a bit farther away from campus than ideal. The food is great but there are not many people who are willing to go there and hangout. The space itself with the chairs and tables available is a good place for social interaction. The benches near the concert hall are not ideal but are useful for using that area other than Evelyn’s Café.

Looking at the ‘86 Field, what is your impression and experience of it as a space for social interaction? What do you think could be done to improve it?

I like that the ’86 is now a green space and the walkways around it and through it. Relay for Life is perfect for using the ’86 field because of how much space is available for tent set up as well as area for a stage. During the warm weather it is nice to hang out on the green to just relax and spend some time in the sun. There definitely could be more benches available to sit down around the green. I know that there are some near the Ricketts building but even on the other side it would be nice.


The RPI campus is interesting. It does have some very beautiful areas to walk through but in the building themselves there are not many study rooms available to students other than the Library, Student Union, and VCC. Of course the classrooms themselves could be used for group projects but only when there is no class taking place.


78

Conversations

These conversations have revealed important points on student relationships with the spaces they are using (or not using) while they attend RPI. The diversity of spaces used and the criticisms and comments they provided points out the varied social possibilities of the campus and physical areas to go. There are actually quite a few opportunities for social interaction. However, the consistent types of criticisms and problems with certain spaces revealed a deep understanding of the spaces by the students.

Some of the students seemed more than happy to talk about what they thought could be fixed at RPI. They were very engaged with my project immediately and questioned why I was interviewing them about these spaces. They were generally interested in providing me with ideas to improve spaces and telling me what was wrong with the spaces. It was as if no one had ever asked them what they thought about the spaces or they had never thought to tell anyone. I doubt many opportunities have come up where anyone would ask their opinion on the spaces they use.

However, the school administration should consider doing what I did since the students that use the space the most and have the most to say about the spaces are willing to say what everyone else is thinking. Their first person experiences and ideas can provide great suggestions for improvements for the future. While the students know they will be leaving soon and aren’t extremely invested in the space, it may take an adminstration or more permanent individual in the campus community to step up and realize that RPI as a whole has an incredible amount to gain through the growth of positive social interactions.

Furniture

Consistently across the conversations with everyone, furniture was a main cause for

complaint, comment or criticism. Whether it was because the furniture was lacking, nonexistent, falling apart, awkward or just uncomfortable, it continued to be an issue across several spaces and experiences.

Many times the spaces simply lacked enough chairs and tables to be used by more people. The DCC was called out several times for not having any chairs or benches or anything at all. For such a large space where so many people are obligated to hang out in it makes sense to add furniture and to create the opportunity for people to rest and interact positively.

In other locations there was not enough seating because what was there either filled up too quickly or didn’t allow for people to sit and have a conversation with more than two people. The benches on the ‘86 Field are a great example of some benches that aren’t quite enough. Several students pointed this out and mentioned it would be great if there was more places to sit. After changing from a football field that held hundreds of people to a recreational field, the number of benches there and the amount of people sitting there is quite embarrassing. Twenty people could fill up the seating.

Several spaces in the Sage Building have furniture and have the potential for interaction but the seating is awkward. The low couches in the top floor study area are so low it is hard to sit up straight and impossible to do work on a computer in any position comfortably. The few tables and chairs that are there clearly are left overs and chairs put next to each other don’t even match. The benches on the ground floor have a similar problem and are also uncomfortable. They face the door and it is awkward to have a conversation with the person next to you or more than one other person.

This is something a lot of students can comment on and criticize because spaces won’t be used if


they aren’t comfortable, its as simple as that. No one is going to stand around and no one is going to sit in terrible chairs when they can go to their room and lay on their bed or chill on their couch.

Community

While the ratings of the interviews failed to reveal any dramatic outliers or extreme ratings, there were some constancies through them. The strongest pattern throughout the rankings was in the ‘Feeling of Community on Campus’ category. It was almost always rated in the 2-3 range, sometimes up to 4 but it was clear that there was a lack of feeling connected to the fellow students, the student organizations, faculty, alumni and the RPI community.

This lack of community feeling comes from a lot of factors and is not an immediate problem that can be blamed on one person, policy or action. It is a tradition that is built into the school, its reputation and the habits of the student body and administration.

Based on the conversations with the individual students it seemed they believed the physical spaces on campus were not having a positive influence on their interactions. While this is only one piece of the problem and solving it will only lead to some improvement, it is a strong part of building community from the bottom up. If the physical spaces were changed and improved to have a greater and more positive influence on the social interaction that would have a slow but strong domino effect on the social atmosphere of the campus. With people feeling more comfortable interacting in public spaces, talking with more strangers and increasing their confidence, comfort and happiness, more positive community related feelings and activities would be generated.

Investment

Along with the lacking of community on campus is the always present feeling of temporariness. College is only a few years and everyone knows that they (hopefully) won’t be spending more than four or five years in the city they go to school in. This is especially true in Troy. I know very few people who are planning to stay in the immediate area and maybe only one or two people who will be staying on campus longer to pursue a Masters or PhD.

This means that very few people care about the space after they leave. They think about the campus once in a while now and what is wrong with it, but there is no real reason to complain or make any suggestions for serious changes because they wouldn’t happen before they leave anyway. For now, it doesn’t hurt to just get by and leave the spaces as they are, the students are surviving so why bother doing the work to fix anything that they won’t get to enjoy?

This lack of investment is deeply related with the lacking sense of community. With a sense of community comes a intention about the future of the community. Right now students don’t care about the students of the school in 10 years, their biggest worry is getting out of here with a degree and as little debt as possible. With a sense of community will come a concern for others at the school - peers, alumni, underclassmen and future students. It brings a sense of pride, a sense of investment and a sense that the physical condition and the social condition of the school matter.



The architect’s role in society is traditionally restricted to building design and construction, specifically the design of visual and physical objects. The architect is ultimately in charge of aesthetic value and while the client must approve of the project and may guide it in certain directions, it remains the responsibility of the architect to make the vast majority of design decisions. “Aesthetic” includes general form, façade, visual impact, layout, circulation and anything that is supposed to add to the visual perception of the building.

While some architects claim not to follow a certain aesthetic and/or make their architecture authorless, there is an undeniable connection between the architect and the project because of individual subjective design decisions. Architecture cannot be a purely functionalist or rational process by nature. First, not every aspect of a project has one rational choice, but sometimes many or sometimes none. Second, this would provide an extraordinarily boring and mechanical design that lacks comfort for the human being. Therefore, aesthetic and the

personal choices of the architect are integral to every project and its success or failure.

As mentioned, aesthetic is something that is the architect’s responsibility within a project. The client may pick the architect for their style and have something in mind, but it is ultimately the architects ‘expertise’ and area of influence. The client typically determines the function. The client states whether they want an office building, a theater, a school, a house or a museum.

This provides a clear sequence of events. The function and program of the space is determined. The architecture comes in and designs, using their own aesthetic values and proposes a project.‘Reversing Function and Aesthetic

However, reversing this role of aesthetic and function is necessary to look at given built environments. Instead of using the function as a limiting and guiding factor in the aesthetic, what if the aesthetic was a limiting and guiding factor in the function? Architects are not necessarily


82

trained for this, but a similar design method can be used to use existing constraints and create something new. The idea of renovation comes from this flipping of roles, but typically involves changing the aesthetic (or at least updating it) as well.

So given a used space, like any of the ones mentioned on campus, or any space that is not performing as it could or should, how do you design the function? First, analysis of the aesthetic is necessary. Whatever kind of intervention occurs in the space it must align with the aesthetic. If the space is clearly an older space with outdated style, putting in completely new and modern furniture or advertising it for active and events for young people would not be appropriate. So the aesthetic must be taken into account and understood to move forward in re-designing the function of a space and its use. Outlining the specific functional strategies and categories that are possible to use in the space allows for a catalog of tools to be used in changing the use of the space. These were discussed previously. As they are implemented they must also be evaluated and understood for future projects.

This kind of process needs to be formalized and taught to architecture students, psychology students, designers and others. This process is not limited to architects, but can be utilized by engineers, managers, administrators and anyone who is in the position to alter a space. These strategies are incredibly valuable to architects as an extension of already existing design tools. The limits of the physical can be extended to the social and psychological. If architects are able to use tools that don’t cost as much, that don’t have as long of a construction period and that can be implemented instantly.

Social Renovations

The idea proposed here is social renovations. Physical, decorative, historical and aesthetic

renovations exist in various forms and involve replacing the old physical aspects of a space with new ones, whether they are decorative, structural or functional components.

The idea of a social renovation replaces existing social structures of a space including program, events, perceptions and impressions with new ones. The intention is to improve social interaction, collaboration, productivity and subjective well-being. These renovations are far more effective then any physical reconstruction or aesthetic renovation. Instead of revising the aesthetic with a given function, the function is revised with a given aesthetic.

Who is trained to design the social space? The architect is educated in designing the physical and the psychologist is educated in analyzing the cognitive and behavioral. A combination of both is required to understand and alter existing social spaces. The architectural knowledge helps in understanding what kind of physical interventions can be used as tools and how spaces are interpreted by people, understanding the limits of budgets and existing political structure. The psychological knowledge helps in understanding the behavioral and cognitive effects of the interventions with a greater analysis of the motivations and effects of certain characteristics of spaces.

In the end, this proposal is a model for future social constructions and can be used to illustrate the effectiveness and necessity for such interventions. The benefits are clear, the costs are low and the implementation is relatively easy.

So it is time for architects to switch things up. Design of physical and visual aspects without designing the social and political has definite limitations

Form vs. Function

This argument alters generations of architects



who have discussed the problem of Form vs. Function as a black vs. white scenario. Some state that the form of a building should be the driving aspect of the project and the function can follow. Others state that the function of a building should drive the form and the design of the building. This process is not one or the other, but instead looks at it as Form and Function. Form is given because we are looking at a space that already exists. Function is also already given because we are looking at spaces that are already used. The issue is performance. The Form (or aesthetic) is not performing adequately to allow for the Function to be successful. The function is not following the form and the form is not following the function. They are both taken into account and adjusted according to the intentions of a new function. This strategy generally focuses on changing the function and leaving the form so that cost and efforts can be as efficient as possible and the implementation is fast.

Can this kind of strategy be applied to larger scale projects? The answer is definitely. Large public spaces can gain from trying to understand the benefits of social renovations to their spaces. Public parks that are not as active as they could be, public plazas and squares that fail to generate the feeling of community and activity that they were meant to, etc.

The idea of socially renovating public parks is starting to happen to a lot of urban parks right now. In cities like New York, the value of green space was ignored for many years and recently the importance of the parks is starting to regain popularity. Money is being spent to clean up and restore parks, to maintain them and to provide additional programming and activities for the parks. The parks are reaching out to people of all economic statuses, from those who have limited resources and are looking for inexpensive places to take kids to those who might donate money to the park’s funds.

There are several benefits to improving these kind of spaces that are influencing more than just a group of students. The people that work, live, and play near the parks can come to the park and interact with people they may not have met before, they may see people they haven’t seen in a while and it allows for an incredible opportunity to relax. In fast paced city life the value of slowing down and thinking is incredible and sometimes trips to the park can be far more productive in generating ideas or work than any day in the office can. The sense of community increases happiness for people and it has huge economic advantages for the surrounding area.

To Practice

In taking this strategy to practice, I hope to use it on my own projects and projects I am working on within architectural firms. Proposals for dramatically improving spaces that exist or will exist without adding significant cost are extremely valuable to supervising architects and can be even more attractive to clients. If a client sees that this is possible to do and can be convinced to the benefit, it can give the project I am working on significant advantages over others that simply provide blank slate architecture that fails to extend into the social realm.

Eventually, to have all architects, designers, and space makers include this kind of thinking in their projects means that design is no longer restricted to the physical. It means that all new projects, all renovations and all design can consider the social as equally or more important than the form. As people habituate to the style of a space and to the physical decorations and organizations, the ability of the space to accommodate spontaneous social interaction, programmed social activities and promote casual collaborations and conversations become increasing valuable and essential to the success of a space.

84

REFERENCES

Baucells, Manel and Rakesh Sarin. 2012 Engineering Happiness : A New Approach for Building a Joyful Life. Berkeley, CA, USA University of California Press

Botton, Alain de. The Architecture of Happiness. New York, US: Random House, 2006.

Burnett, Simon. “The Happiness Agenda: A Modern Obsession.” London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

Desai, Pooran and Ed Blake. “Is Happiness the Key to Unlocking Sustainability.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 44-51. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Diamond, Ros and Simon Henley. “The Good Life.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 30-39. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Diener, Ed and Eunkook M. Suh. “Culture and Subjective Well-Being.” Cambridge Mass.: MIT, 2000.

Eid, Michael and Randy J. Larsen. “The Science of Subjecting Well-Being.” New York: Guildford Press, 2008.

Fordham, Max. “The Role of Comfort in Happiness.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 56-65. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Franklin, Samuel S. “The Psychology of Happiness: A Good Human Life.” Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Friedman, Myles. “Improving the Quality of Life: A Holistic Scientific Strategy.” Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1997.

Friedman, Yona. “Toward a Scientific Architecture.” Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1975.

Guite, Hilary and Sarah Toy. “Social and Physical Factors for Building Happiness.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 102-111. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Halpern, David. “An Evidence-Based Approach to building Happiness.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 70-81. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Hellman, Louis. “The Happiness In-Between.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 18-29. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

King, Matthew. 2009. Heidegger and Happiness : Dwelling on Fitting and Being. London, GBR Continuum International Publishing.

Layard, Richard. “Happiness: Has Social Science a Clue.” Lionel Robbins Memorial Lectures. Performed March 03 2003. London School of Economics. March 03 2003. Lecture.

Makinen, Anna and Paul Hajek. “Psychology of Happiness.” New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2010.

Mikellides, Byron. “The Love Affair Between Psychology and Architecture.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 86-97. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Offer, Avner. “In Pursuit of the Quality of Life.” Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Ruck, Nancy C. “Building Design and Human Performance.” New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1989.


Schwarz, Martha. “Happiness In the Landscape.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 134-139. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Thomson, Tamsie. “Can Urban Topologies Promote Happiness?” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 156-165. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Till, Jeremy. “A Happy Age (Before the Days of Architects).” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 122-129. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Walker, Lorna. “Building For Cloud 9.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 116-121. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

Wernick, Jane. “Introduction.” In Building Happiness: Architecture to Make You Smile, edited by Jane Wernick. 6-15. London, UK: Riba Building Futures, Black Dog Publishing, 2008.

INTERVIEWEES

Kristi NelsonShawn Nelson

IMAGES SOURCES

Pg. 28http://empac.rpi.edu/http://valleyvlog.blogspot.com/2010/09/hvexas-empac-evelyns-cafe-opening-soon.htmlhttp://informedinfrastructure.com/239/transgranular-perspiration-is-not-sandy-sweat-new-discoveries-in-ceramic-tiles-at-smartgeometry-2012/

Pg. 36http://mercenarytales.blogspot.com/2010/02/genericon-xxiii-mission.html

Pg. 44http://life.rpi.edu/2010/04/29/relay-success/

All other imagesTyler Hopf or Facebook.com

SOURCES

86

Tyler HopfB. Arch 2013

B.S. Psych 2013Ralph Noble, Advisor

social renovations

Documents

negative social interactions

positive social interactions

unsocial space

negative interactions

existing social structures

aesthetic renovations

subjective wellbeing

given aesthetic