2017-UBC_APR

Page intentionally left blank
2017 Architecture Program Report

University of British Columbia
School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
submitted to the
Canadian Architectural Certification Board
15 September 2017
Revised 29 January 2018

6333 Memorial Rd
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z2
Page intentionally left blank
Contents
1.0 Introduction to the Program......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Program Identity and Mission........................................................................................................ 1

1.1.1 SALA Strategic Plan Update: Director’s Message................................................................... 2
1.1.2 Architecture Program Vision Statement................................................................................ 3
1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives.............................................................................................. 5
1.2.1 Program Action Plan and Objectives..................................................................................... 6
2.0 Progress Since the Previous Site Visit......................................................................................... 12
2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations.................................................. 12

2.2 Responses to Unmet Compliance with the Conditions for Accreditation
in the 2012 VTR and FE................................................................................................................ 15
3.0 Compliance With the Conditions for Accreditation..................................................................... 20
3.1 Program Response to CACB Perspectives...................................................................................... 20

3.1.1 Architecture Education and the Academic Context............................................................. 20
3.1.2 Architecture Education and the Students............................................................................ 21
3.1.3 Architecture Education and Registration............................................................................. 22
3.1.4 Architecture Education and the Profession......................................................................... 23
3.1.5 Architecture Education and Society..................................................................................... 24
3.2 Program Self-Assessment............................................................................................................. 26
3.2.1 Detailed Self-assessment of 2011 Strategic Plan................................................................. 26
3.2.2 Assessment by the Faculty and Students............................................................................. 45
3.2.3 Assessment by the MArch Alumni....................................................................................... 51
3.3 Public Information....................................................................................................................... 63
3.3.1 University Calendar............................................................................................................. 63
3.3.2 Admissions and Recruitment Materials............................................................................... 67
3.3.3 School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Website.............................................. 67
3.3.4 Memo to Students and Faculty Outlining CACB Accreditation Criteria and Processes........ 70
3.4 Social Equity................................................................................................................................ 74
3.4.1 Faculty................................................................................................................................. 75
3.4.2 Staff...................................................................................................................................... 76
3.4.3 Students............................................................................................................................... 76
3.4.4 Admissions Process.............................................................................................................. 76
3.4.5 Advancement, Retention, Graduation................................................................................. 77
3.4.6 Equity, Health and Wellbeing Services................................................................................. 77
3.4.7 Access to Formulation of Policies and Procedures.............................................................. 77
3.5 Human Resources........................................................................................................................ 79
3.5.1 Students............................................................................................................................... 79
3.5.2 Faculty Members’ Teaching, Learning, and Service............................................................. 82
3.5.3 Adjunct and Sessional Faculty Members............................................................................. 85
3.5.4 Student Course and Instructor Evaluation........................................................................... 86
3.5.5 School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA) Administration........................ 86
3.5.6 Staff Members..................................................................................................................... 87
3.6 Human Resource Development.................................................................................................... 89
3.6.1 Students............................................................................................................................... 90
3.6.2 Full-Time Faculty.................................................................................................................. 96
3.6.3 Public Lectures, Competition Awards, Major Publications, Exhibitions, and Events......... 101
3.6.4 Out-of-Town and Local Visiting Critics............................................................................... 114
3.7 Physical Resources..................................................................................................................... 118
3.7.1 General Description of Physical Resources........................................................................ 118
3.7.1.a Classroom, Studio, Office and Administrative Resources.................................. 118
3.7.1.b Architecture Reading Room, Audio-Visual Store and Materials Library............ 119
3.7.1.c Workshop and Digital Fabrication...................................................................... 119
3.7.1.d Building Plans.................................................................................................... 121
3.7.2 Chronology of Work on New SALA Building, 2011-2017................................................... 127
3.8 Information Resources and Information Technology.................................................................. 130
3.8.1 Library Self-assessment..................................................................................................... 132
3.8.2 Reading Room Collection................................................................................................... 144
3.8.3 Information Technology Resources.................................................................................... 143
3.8.4 Current IT Infrastructure Action Plan................................................................................. 146
3.8.5 Demonstration of Sufficient Funding to Execute the Action Plan...................................... 147
3.9 Financial Resources.................................................................................................................... 148
3.9.1 Budget............................................................................................................................... 148
3.9.2 Tuition Revenue................................................................................................................. 149
3.9.3 Finance-Impacting Academic Initiatives............................................................................ 150
3.9.4 Other Income Sources....................................................................................................... 150
3.10 Administrative Structure.......................................................................................................... 151
3.10.1 UBC Accreditation............................................................................................................ 151
3.10.2 UBC Organizational Structure.......................................................................................... 152
3.10.3 The Faculty of Applied Science Administrative Structure................................................ 153
3.10.4 SALA Academic Structure................................................................................................ 155
3.10.5 SALA Staff Structure......................................................................................................... 156
3.10.6 SALA Council.................................................................................................................... 157
3.10.7 SALA Committee Governance Structure.......................................................................... 158
3.10.8 Comparison with Other Professional Programs at UBC................................................... 158
3.11 Professional Degrees and Curriculum....................................................................................... 159
3.11.1 Master of Architecture Program Curriculum................................................................... 161
3.11.2 Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture Program Curriculum
(Dual Degree).................................................................................................................. 162
3.11.3 Distribution of General Studies, Professional Studies including Prerequisites
and Electives.................................................................................................................... 164
3.11.4 Student Progress and Graduation.................................................................................... 168
3.11.5 Minors or Concentrations Students May Elect to Pursue................................................ 168
3.12 Student Performance Criteria................................................................................................... 169
3.12.1 Curriculum Overview....................................................................................................... 169
3.12.2 Summary of Student Performance Criteria..................................................................... 176
4.0 Supplemental Information....................................................................................................... 188
4.1 Introduction to the Institution and Program History................................................................... 188

4.1.1 History, Description, and Mission of the Institution.......................................................... 188
4.1.1.a UBC Strategic Plan............................................................................................. 188
4.1.1.b Faculty of Applied Science Mission and Vision.................................................. 190
4.1.1.c SALA Mission and Vision.................................................................................... 190
4.1.2 Program History................................................................................................................. 191
4.2 Student Progress Evaluation...................................................................................................... 194
4.2.1 Procedures for Evaluating Student Transfer Credit and Advanced Placement.................. 194
4.2.2 Procedures for Evaluating Student Progress...................................................................... 194
4.3 Current Course Descriptions....................................................................................................... 197
4.3.1 Core Courses...................................................................................................................... 197
4.3.2 Elective Courses................................................................................................................. 232
4.4 Current Faculty Resumes............................................................................................................ 258
4.5 Visiting Team Report from the Previous Visit............................................................................. 310
4.6 Annual Reports.......................................................................................................................... 351
4.6.1 Annual Report 2011 - 2012................................................................................................ 352
4.6.2 Annual Report 2012 - 2013................................................................................................ 353
4.6.3 Annual Report 2013 - 2014................................................................................................ 355
4.6.4 Annual Report 2014 - 2015................................................................................................ 372
4.6.5 Annual Report 2015 - 2016................................................................................................ 390
4.6.6 Annual Report 2016 - 2017................................................................................................ 405
4.6.7 Committee Reports from 2016 - 2017............................................................................... 407
4.6.7.a Academic Infrastructure Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017...................... 407
4.6.7.b Outreach Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017............................................. 412
4.6.7.c Reseach Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017............................................... 414
4.6.7.d Student Affairs Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017.................................... 416
4.6.7.e Academic Affairs Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017................................. 418
4.7 Focused Evaluation (2015)......................................................................................................... 420
4.8 Evaluation Documentation......................................................................................................... 438
4.8.1 MArch Studio Written Evaluation...................................................................................... 438
4.8.2 SALAStudio Course Evaluation........................................................................................... 439
4.8.3 SALA Non-Studio Course Evaluation.................................................................................. 440
4.8.4 SALA TA Evaluation............................................................................................................ 441
4.9 Self-assessment Documentation................................................................................................ 442
4.9.1 Faculty Self-assessment Survey......................................................................................... 442
4.9.2 Student Self-assessment Survey........................................................................................ 444
4.9.3 Alumni Self-assessment Survey......................................................................................... 446
Glossary of Acronyms
AAPS Association of Administrative

ACSA Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture
AIAS American Institute of Architecture Students
AIBC Architectural Institute of British Columbia
AMS Alma Mater Society
AP Advanced Placement
APR Architecture Program Report
APSC Faculty of Applied Science
ARCH Architecture Course designation
ARCHUS Architecture Student Society
ARPT Appointments, Reappointments, Promotions and Tenure
AUCC Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada
BA Bachelor of Arts
BArch Bachelor of Architecture
BASc Bachelor of Applied Science
BCLSA BC Society of Landscape Architects
BDES Bachelor of Design in Architecture and Urbanism
BES Bachelor of Environmental Studies
BFA Bachelor of Fine Arts
BLA Bachelor of Landscape Architecture
BSAS Bachelor of Science in Architectural Studies
BSc Bachelor of Science
CACB Canadian Architectural Certification Board
CALA Canadian Architectural Licensing Authorities
CASA.ACEA Canadian Architecture Students Association
CAUT Canadian Association of University Teachers
CCUSA Canadian Council of University Schools of Architecture
CIRS Centre for Interactive Research in Sustainability
CNC Computer Numeric Control
CUPE Canadian Union of Public Employees
ENDS Bachelor of Environmental Design program
ESL English as Second Language
FE Focused Evaluation
FRAIC Fellow of Royal Architectural Institute of Canada
FTE Full Time Employment
GAA Graduate Academic Assistant
GP Graduation Project
GPRC Graduation Project Review Committee
GSS Graduate Student Society
HPB High Performance Buildings
IDP New SALA Building
ISS International Student Services
IT Information Technology
LARC Landscape Architecture Course designation
MAIBC Member of Architectural Institute of British Columbia
MArch Master of Architecture
MARCLA Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture Dual Degree
MASA Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture
MASLA Master of Advanced Studies in Landscape Architecture
MED Master of Environmental Design
MLA Master of Landscape Architecture
MScA Master of Science Applied
MSc Master of Science
MUD Master of Urban Design
NGO Non-governmental organization
NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
PhD Doctor of Philosophy
RAIC Royal Architectural Institute of Canada
RFQ Request for Qualifications
SALA School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
SA Study Abroad
SCARP School of Community and Regional Planning
SPC Student Performance Criteria
SSHRC Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
TA Teaching Assistant
TBA To Be Announced
TLEF UBC Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund
TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada
UBC University of British Columbia
VTR Visiting Team Report
1.0 Introduction to the Program
1.1 Program Identity and Mission

Accreditation requires an understanding of the program’s specific scholastic identity and mission.
The APR must include:

- A summary of the program’s identity, uniqueness, strengths and challenges.
- The program’s current mission statement, the date of its adoption or revision, and the date of its endorsement by
the institution.
Structurally, the Architecture Program is within the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA) in
the University of British Columbia’s Faculty of Applied Science (APSC).
The professional Master of Architecture (MArch) program accounts for approximately half of student enrollment
and faculty appointments within SALA, and is delivered alongside the Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture
(MASA), a two-year research degree. Other degree programs offered within SALA include the professional
(MLA) and research degrees (MASLA) in Landscape Architecture, the Bachelor of Environmental Studies (ENDS),
an undergraduate design program, and the post-professional Master of Urban Design (MUD) degree. The UBC
Program is the only professional architectural program in British Columbia.
The School is justly proud of maintaining a collegial environment well suited to self-motivated, intellectually
curious graduate students. A student enrollment of approximately 180 together with generous faculty-student
class ratios encourages a high degree of direct contact and the kind of critical support so crucial to mature
enquiry. Augmented by a substantial proportion of international students, students in the School come from a
broad array of educational and cultural backgrounds, representative of the diverse social fabric of Canada.
A growing strength of the School and the MArch program is the opportunities it provides students for
interdisciplinary learning. MArch and MLA (Landscape Architecture) students have greater ability to study with
and across their respective professional core and elective areas of study and peer groups.
With the inauguration of the Master of Urban Design (MUD) program in 2015, we anticipate that the new Urban
Design Student Performance Criteria will integrate into the MArch program new cross-disciplinary opportunities,
and that the inherent ability of the school to deliver this will complement our necessity to do so.
Studies abroad programs have expanded, and the School now offers two summer programs every year. We also
now run the distinctive full-term studies abroad program -- a part of the architecture program since the 1960’s
-- every year. This provides more of our students the chance and options about where to study abroad in an
immersive experience.
Reflecting the interests of several faculty as well as stable partnership entities outside UBC, the past several years
have seen a significant expansion in the design-build areas of the program. We anticipate that fabrication and
making aspects of the MArch pedagogy will continue to expand.
1.1 Program Identity and Mission -- 1

The creation of several large university-wide lecture-based service courses has expanded the teaching assistant
opportunities for MArch students. This trend will continue as the Bachelor of Environmental Design gives way
to its replacement, the new undergraduate Bachelor of Design in Architecture, Landscape Architecture and
Urbanism degree, anticipated to begin in fall 2018.
The biggest challenge that the MArch program and indeed SALA continues to face are with its facilities, both
their increasing obsolescence and the distance between them. Other areas of this Report (see Section 3.7.2)
will go into some detail to describe the significant efforts of Directors Van Duzer and Kellett to develop a new
SALA facility.
Another challenge SALA and the MArch program faces are the increasing budget pressures of Provincially
capped tuition increases mapped to cost of living increases but that do not account for merit and performance
increases for staff and faculty. SALA and the MArch program have financially benefitted from being part of the
large Applied Science faculty, and have made many incremental and sincere efforts to creatively control expenses
and increases sources of revenue. See Section 2.9.3 and elsewhere in this Report for more detail regarding
these efforts.
Applications for admissions to the MArch program continue to grow, especially strongly among the Advanced
Placement applicant cohort. This led in 2015 to the expansion of the AP cohort to two full studio sections,
from approximately 12 to 24 incoming students per year. This has led to some changes to advanced placement
admissions review procedures, which had been previously tailored to each specific student, requiring substantial
review time by individual faculty. Additionally, this recent shift has led to some changes in the needs and
desires of the student body that will likely lead to changes in the culture and shifts in the curricular pedagogy of
the school.
More detailed information regarding the strengths and challenges of the MArch program can be found elsewhere
in this Report. See Section 1.2.1 Program Action Plan and Objectives and Section 3.2.1 Detailed Self-assessment
of 2011 Strategic Plan.
1.1.1 SALA Strategic Plan Update: Director’s Message
SALA is a distinct academic unit within a very large global research University and a large Faculty of Applied
Science (8,000 students). As a consequence, strategic plans and priorities within SALA are necessarily as
informed by the more broadly framed strategic initiatives of the University and the Faculty of Applied Science as
they are by the more narrowly framed needs and initiatives of SALA’s individual academic programs. The themes
and aspirations articulated in these documents offer context as well as opportunity for the values, goals and
priorities articulated by SALA’s Master of Architecture program.
Since 2009, the University has been guided by Place and Promise: The UBC Plan, a vision of UBC in 2020
developed under President Stephen Toope. This strategic plan developed through extensive engagement
with the full campus community over 18 months sets out an institutional vision, six core values and nine
commitments to goals and actions. These include institutional commitments to: Student Learning; Research
Excellence, Community Engagement, Aboriginal Engagement, Alumni Engagement, Intercultural Understanding;
International Engagement, Outstanding Work Environment, and Sustainability.
2 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

Within that institutional context, in 2015, the Faculty of Applied Science under the direction of Dean Marc
Parlange developed Engage 2020: The UBC Applied Science Strategic Plan, which distilled and refocused many
of the Place and Promise themes around a distinctive vision of an integrated and interconnected constellation
of “applied sciences”. Engage 2020 set out to establish an “unparalleled research and learning environment in
which creative minds work together to address today’s greatest challenges in service to society” through three
core values — connection, leadership and impact; and four key commitments — a culture of valuing people, a
focused research enterprise, a distinctive learning environment, and an engaged community.
As release of the Faculty of Applied Science strategic plan coincided with a change of leadership in SALA, the
School has not yet undertaken renewal of its now eleven-year old 2006 “Strategic Plan: School of Architecture
and Landscape Architecture.” However, Place and Promise and the 2006 SALA Strategic Plan informed the
Architecture Program’s most recent strategic plan, which was approved by program faculty in 2011, and is
included in Section 1.1.2 below.
While this important task remains to be formally constituted and delivered as a strategic plan, since the last
CACB visit in 2012 the School has nonetheless pursued or adapted coherent strategic direction from the themes
and aspirations set out in Place and Promise and Engage 2020 and applied them to guide many new initiatives
of the School. These include new academic programs such as a Master of Urban Design (2013), dual degree
pathways in the Master of Architecture and Landscape Architecture programs (2016), a Master of Engineering
Leadership in High Performance Buildings (2017) with Mechanical and Civil Engineering, and a Bachelor of Design
in Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Urbanism (forthcoming 2018).
Germane to these themes are the core values and concepts embedded programming and feasibility studies for
a SALA building (2011 – 2014), in the undertaking of a School branding study (2016), to successful recruitment
of top faculty candidates (2014 and 2017) and students, and most recently, to definition of the core research,
scholarship and creative practice strengths of the School (2017 and continuing). Proposals for a forthcoming
renewal of the Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture / Landscape Architecture post-professional research
degrees that will be based upon them is anticipated in 2018.
1.1.2 Architecture Program Vision Statement
Adopted in December 2011, the MArch Strategic Plan has been a constructive touchstone for many initiatives
undertaken by the Program since the 2012 accreditation visit. A detailed review of the program’s undertakings
vis-à-vis the 2011 Strategic Plan in the period since the last accreditation visit the Program’s 2011 Strategic Plan
can be found in Section 3.2.1.
The 2011 plan remains a vital document, and has led to a renewed set of Action Plan Goals that are set out in
Section 1.2 of this report. These Action Plan Goals will be developed in fall 2017 as a renewed Mission Statement
by a Mission Statement Subcommittee that will report to the Program Faculty and the SALA Director.
1.1 Program Identity and Mission -- 3

Adopted December 9, 2011
Strategic Plan: Professional Master of Architecture Program,

The Architecture Program Strategic Plan is coordinated with the encompassing School of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture Strategic Plan and supports Place and Promise: The UBC Plan, sharing in its commitment
to student learning, community engagement and research excellence, and its engagement with Aboriginal,
intercultural and international engagement and sustainability.
Vision
The Architecture Program of the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture’s core responsibility is design
education.
Through teaching, professional endeavours, research and scholarly activities, the Program is committed to the
production of outstanding graduates equipped to provide the necessary design and intellectual capabilities that
will contribute to a built environment that supports civil and sustainable patterns of living.
The Architecture Program has three overarching commitments: enhanced student learning, productive
community involvement, and research excellence. The actions taken to achieve the goals set by these
commitments can often serve to further several goals and more than one commitment: curricular and
pedagogical practices may also involve community engagement and /or faculty research. This interrelatedness
contributes to the robustness of the Program.
To further this end, our goal is to make interdisciplinary learning common practice. Engagement with
environmental issues, for instance, is distributed across all facets of the program, including dedicated course
work, classes and studios, faculty research and publications and community initiatives.
The Strategic Plan is implemented through the Program Chair in consultation with the SALA Director and is
revisited as an agenda item at the annual Architecture Program retreat held at the end of the Academic Year in
May and revised as needed.

1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives
Accreditation follows an action plan that guides the program in achieving the objectives of its mission. This plan,
which should be used to structure the program’s self-assessment process, helps the visiting team understand the
program’s role within the institution and the parameters of its future development.

- The program’s action plan and objectives developed in accordance with institutional norms.
- Its measures of success, and a time line for executing the plan.
The Program Action Plan was developed during and after a self-assessment of the program’s evolution in the
period since the 2012 accreditation. The self-assessment developed data via surveys and focus groups of faculty,
students and alumni organized around the CACB Five Perspectives: Architectural Education and 1/ The Academic
Context; 2/ The Students; 3/ Registration; 4/ The Profession; 5/ Society. Self-Assessment data derived from
faculty, student, and alumni surveys are included in Section 3.2 of this report.
Faculty, students and alumni interact with each other in a variety of formal and informal contexts.
MArch students provide ongoing input through their representatives in ARCHUS, the architecture student
society. The SALA Director and the SALA Student Affairs Committee hold meetings with ARCHUS and other SALA
student representatives on a monthly basis. The program chair holds a general student meeting in the fall and
spring terms. Two student focus groups and the student survey were conducted in spring 2017. Information
gleaned from student surveys and focus groups are integrated into the 2017 Action Plan.
Program faculty provide ongoing self-assessment of the program’s curriculum, administrative procedures,
admissions policies, and governance structures through regular faculty meetings at the (MArch) program and
(SALA) school level. The many developments in the MArch curriculum since 2012 are detailed in the Annual
Reports and the 2015 Focused Evaluation, included here in Section 4.6 and Section 4.7, respectively.
Program alumni’s interactions with faculty and students are less formal than are the former group’s interactions.
This is something that needed to be addressed, and so in spring 2017, as part of the self-assessment process,
the program chair constituted an MArch Alumni Council of 2007-2017 MArch alumni who were familiar with
the program’s recent history and had recent experiences of internship, mentorship, and licensure in their
professional lives.
The MArch Alumni Council has held several meetings over the spring and summer that, along with the alumni
survey to assess the program via-a-vis the Five Perspectives, have proven very useful in terms of developing goals
to strengthen the social, curricular and extracurricular ties between alumni and the program. Many of the ideas
that arose through Alumni Council meetings are evident as goals in the 2017 Action Plan.
1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives -- 5

1.2.1 Program Action Plan and Objectives
The following Program Action Plan responds to the input of faculty, students, and alumni, as well as to self-
assessment of the program’s work, since 2012, toward meeting the goals of its 2011 Strategic Plan. Action Plan
Objectives reflect the Self-Assessment of the architecture program’s strengths and weaknesses, opportunities
and threats.
The Program Action Plan and Objectives is structured to extend the 2011 Strategic Plan into the next two years
so that it may align with SALA’s strategic plan objectives. The 2011 Strategic Plan is organized around three
overarching Commitments that contain several Goals, each of which contains several Action Plan Items.
Adopted September __, 2017
2017 Action Plan Objectives
Architecture Program
Commitment #1: Teaching
Provide an outstanding and distinctive professional education directed toward the breadth and complexity of
issues germane to contemporary built and natural environments.
Commitment 1, Goal 1 Action Plan Items:

Address unmet Student Performance Criteria through continued review and refinement of the disciplinary core
of architectural education by:
1. Establishing a working group including indigenous alumni and members of the indigenous community
to research and develop core curricular and extracurricular content related to the national Truth and
Reconciliation process. (2017-18 academic year)
2. Further developing the shared learning objectives for ARCH 501 Second Term Vertical Studio with its focus
on the basic understanding of universal access, building-to-site design, and material and technical design
integration. (Fall 2017)
3. Developing verifiable evidence of the ability to design for universal access in all ARCH 521 Comprehensive
Building Studio student work. (Spring Term 2018)
4. Using the 2017 Teaching/Learning Enhancement Fund (TLEF) grant to explore areas where digital skills
and issues can be integrated into the Program curriculum but also develop opportunities for faculty
development in the areas of digital tools and culture. (2017-18 academic year)
5. Integrating a core Urban Design studio requirement for all MArch students into Fall Term vertical studio
offerings. (2017-18 academic year)

Continue to build the Program’s national and international profile by:
1. Continuing to provide financial support to students and faculty who have opportunities to participate in
international conferences or other peer-reviewed events. (Ongoing)
2. Building stronger ties to the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada and the Canadian Architectural
Licensing Authority with regard to the documentation, analysis and design of regenerative environments
and addressing the implications of the national Truth and Reconciliation process in architectural practice
and education. (2017-18 academic year)
3. Developing program contributions to the research and engagement initiatives of the CALA/CCUSA Joint Task
Force and the Architectural Institute of British Columbia (AIBC) with regard to advocacy and public outreach
efforts for the profession of architecture and exploring the future of architectural practice. (dependent on
CACB/CCUSA timeline)
4. Identifying and supporting faculty members who wish to offer semester-long and summer studies abroad
programs so that the SA program can be run annually. (Ongoing)
5. Identifying and supporting adjunct faculty members who may wish to offer semester-long and summer
studies abroad programs so that the SA program can be run annually. (Ongoing)

Enhancing the educational opportunities that foster inter-disciplinary collaboration and cross-cultural
learning by:
1. Collaborating with the professional community in retooling and delivering ARCH 543 Contemporary
Practice, focusing on CACB Leadership and Advocacy Student Performance Criteria, including the role of the
Architect as an advocate for client and public interests, and as a collaborator who aids in capacity building
processes with disadvantaged communities. (Fall 2017)
2. Developing a repeatable, sustainable model of engagement with topics of concern for British Columbia’s
First Nations communities as an integral part of ARCH 521 Comprehensive Building Studio. (2017-18
academic year)
3. Developing a key area of the Architecture Program’s historic identity by exploring and developing
core Urban Design Performance Criteria in studio curricular areas focused on regenerative design and
environments that will be a part of future CACB program evaluations. (2017-18 academic year)

Enhance the quality of student life in the Program by:
1. Organizing an ad hoc committee of students and faculty to review the impacts of the increased size of
the Advanced Placement cohort in the MArch program, and implement curricular and extra-curricular
adjustments to address this new reality of the MArch program’s culture. (Fall 2017)
2. Addressing the concerns expressed by Advanced Placement students in the student self-assessment
process with regard to the current practice of pairing Advanced and Non-Advanced Placement students in
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Building Studio. (Fall 2017)

3. Working with the SALA Director, reestablish the end-of-year SALA Projects exhibition. Exploring Alumni
Council recommendation that local architectural practices provide support for reinstating the annual SALA
Projects exhibition of student work. (2017-18 academic year)
4. Rescheduling the Praxis Mixer Pecha Kucha earlier in the year in order to make the interaction between
members of the professional community and MArch students in their last year more aligned with the
intention of pairing future interns with local architectural practices. (Fall 2017)
5. Continue to support and explore opportunities to expand the ARCHUS student society’s health and wellness
initiatives. (2017-18 academic year)
6. Expanding on Alumni Council recommendation that the August 2017 Introductory Workshop and the
MArch mentorship program. (2017-18 academic year)

Support the Program’s faculty by:
1. Working with Program Chairs in consultation with the SALA Director, develop a plan to organize and
communicate to faculty a three-year schedule of teaching assignments. (Fall 2017)
2. Expanding SALA’s website and social media presence and staffing in order to more actively disseminate the
creative and scholarly work of faculty. (2017-18 academic year)

Improve the Program’s physical resources by:
1. Continue to work with the Dean of Applied Science and other governance, development, and academic
units at UBC to identify opportunities to unify SALA’s programs in one or more locations.

Enhance the Program’s Administration by:
1. Requesting that the SALA Director provide regular updates on Advisory Council’s activities and
contributions to SALA, the Architecture Program’s activities and future development. (Ongoing)
2. Requesting that the SALA Director review and ensure that current staffing levels and duties are adequate to
administer a growing set of degree programs and student population. (Fall 2017)
3. Requesting that the SALA Director do a review of existing staff roles, fields of expertise, and qualifications
and make any adjustments necessary to maintain relevance as SALA’s and the Architecture Program’s needs
evolve with respect to social media, outreach, recruitment, and public programming. (Fall 2017)

Commitment #2: Community
Engage with a wide range of constituencies in the larger community – academic, professional practice and public
- and bring these associations directly to bear on its educational and administrative priorities.

Strengthen academic ties by:
1. Maintaining the policy of invited participation by out-of-town visiting critics for all advanced studio and
thesis reviews. (Ongoing)
2. Strengthening the coordination of opportunities for out-of-town and local guest lecturers to conduct
seminars for Architecture Program students during their visits to UBC. (Fall 2017)
3. Developing collaborative research projects between Architecture Program faculty and students and local
architectural practices and regional city governments. (2017-18 academic year)
4. Strengthening existing and develop new collaborative research projects between UBC’s Office of Vice
President for Research and its academic units including Forestry, the Sauder School of Business, APSC, the
Architecture Program faculty and students, and indigenous communities in British Columbia. (Ongoing)

Strengthen professional ties by:
1. Working with the Alumni Council, the AIBC and RAIC toward the goal of clarifying policies on academic
and professional responsibilities for architectural education and internship, and the right to title of
MArch degree-holding individuals working in the profession and currently referred to as Interns. (CALA/
CCUSA timeline)
2. Working with the AIBC, explore the development of a UBC post-professional degree program that provides
AIBC Interns with mandatory and elective professional development courses. (2017-2019)
3. Providing assistance in the form of research and study partnerships to the AIBC and RAIC in their outreach
and advocacy efforts for the architectural profession across the province of British Columbia. (CALA/
CCUSA timeline)
4. Building on the Comprehensive Design Studio’s success in doing so, develop roles for members of the
professional architectural community to contribute in focused areas of the curriculum that address (current
or future) unmet Student Performance Criteria, especially in Second Term Vertical Core Studio ARCH 501.
(Fall 2017)
5. Formalizing the establishment of an Alumni Council in order to develop curricular and non-curricular goals
that alumni have expressed interest in becoming more involved. In addition to the issue of professional
curriculum development, internship, and licensure, these include: on-campus alumni events; Introductory
workshop; student mentoring; development of regenerative environments research and curriculum;
development of curricular content related to the Truth and Reconciliation process. (Ongoing)

Strengthen community ties by:
1. Developing the SALA website and social media outlets as sources of information about faculty community
engagements. (2017-18 academic year)
2. Defining and publishing a set of research clusters that organize SALA Faculty expertise. (2017-18
academic year)
3. With the AIBC, co-sponsor a series of public panel discussions by local practitioners and members of the
Architecture Faculty on the future of architectural practice. (Spring term 2018)

Strengthen international ties by:
1. Identifying and supporting Program Faculty who wish to develop new term-long Studies Abroad Program
venues to ensure the sustainability of offering the Program annually. (Ongoing)
2. Working with the SALA Director to continue the teaching fellowship component of the Program Faculty by
identifying upcoming sabbaticals, retirements, and new faculty searches. (Ongoing)
3. Continuing to develop new international university exchange partnerships. (Ongoing)
Commitment #3: Research
Engages in leading edge design research and scholarship activities that contribute constructively to the theory
and practice of architecture.

Nurture and support leading edge design research and scholarship by:
1. Develop and embed in media platforms and recruitment content recommended in the report done by the
SALA branding consultant.
2. Following through on efforts led by the SALA Research Committee, identify the key areas of Program faculty
research expertise and publish these as research clusters on the SALA website. Actively pursue partnerships
with other UBC academic units, industry, and communities.

Support faculty research by:
1. Following through on efforts led by the SALA Research Committee, identify the key areas of program faculty
research expertise and publish these as research clusters on the SALA website. Actively pursue partnerships
with other UBC academic units, industry, and communities.

Support graduate student research by:
1. Working with the chair of the Bachelor of Environmental Design program, expand the opportunities for
MArch student teaching assistants as the recently-approved expansion of the undergraduate BDES program
is phased in. (2017-18 academic year)
2. Developing pathways for and encourage the authors of MArch thesis projects to re-format selected aspects
of their work for peer-reviewed research papers and design research projects. (2017-18 academic year)
3. Developing a single or series of annual student research prize(s) that correspond to the SALA research
clusters. (2018-19 academic year)

Remain current in design theory, practice and advocacy by:
1. Maintaining the newly created adjunct faculty fellowship positions intended to attract promising academics
or practitioners who seek to build up their teaching credentials. (Ongoing)
2. Developing curricular content that integrates the architectural implications of the national Truth and
Reconciliation process. Evidence of this should be seen in many of the core curriculum as well as in studio
and seminar elective offerings. (2017-18 academic year)
3. Developing curricular content that integrates the educational implications the arise out of the findings of
the joint CALA/CCUSA Future of Architectural Practice committee and process. With the AIBC, co-sponsor
a series of Future of Architectural Practice panel discussions by local practices and academics engaged
in innovative aspects of practice including digital prototyping and design/build, capacity-building and
community engagement, regenerative environments, and other topics. (CALA/CCUSA timeline)

2.0 Progress Since the Previous Site Visit
Accreditation is contingent on the assurance that deficiencies, both minor and serious, are being systematically
addressed.

- The program’s summary of its responses to the previous team findings (VTR) as documented in the Annual
Reports (AR). This summary must address the conditions identified as “not met”, as well as the “causes of concern”.
It may also address the conditions identified as “met” or it may address “team comments”.
The following addresses concerns within the Team’s General Comments in the 2012 VTR, followed by an update
on the program’s progress since 2012 in meeting these four remaining unmet conditions and criteria.
2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations

An update on the several general comments of concern made in the 2012 Visiting Team Report:
Concern 1 / Loss of a downtown presence: “The downtown studio was an important facility for the School.
Because of the isolation of the UBC campus it is critical that the school maintains its presence in downtown
Vancouver. This has allowed for students to be exposed to the social and urban design issues related to the
rapidly evolving inner city environment and public discourse within the city. This has also facilitated the schools
involvement with both the architectural and wider community. It was also serving as a gallery as there is no
space available on campus for this type of activity and was an ideal location for the thesis students to meet
with their mentors from private practice, to have studio space, and exhibition space for their final work. The
closure of the downtown studio is a significant loss to the School and the community, both professional and
public.“– 2012 VTR
Response: Budget pressures have continued to force SALA to make difficult decisions regarding how to direct its
limited resources. However, the decision to no longer maintain a physical space downtown has been balanced
by a significant increase in downtown public programming, most notably in the robust lecture and debate events
sponsored or co-sponsored by SALA and public and private partners. A detailed schedule of these events is in
Section 3.6.3 of this report. Additional events, including an annual exhibition held at the AIBC gallery and a Pecha
Kucha held in at a downtown firm’s office and sponsored by the RAIC, are also new to the MArch program, and
we believe have helped build stronger ties between the MArch program and the professional community.
Concern 2 / Lack of clarity around a new facility: “There is a clear need for either a new building or renovated/
expanded Lasserre building. In the meantime, optimization of the Lasserre building could be explored.”
– 2012 VTR
Response: The concern over progress toward consolidating SALA programs in a new facility is addressed in
detail elsewhere in this report, most directly in SALA Director Kellett’s response to unmet Condition 7. Physical
Resources (below). In the meantime, the architecture program continues to develop ways to balance the
optimization of its existing spaces and the maintenance of the quality of studio spaces available to its students.

Concern 3/ Lack of contiguous space for Architecture and Landscape Architecture studios: “Available studio
space is inadequate, and is less per student than at the time of the previous VTR as the Downtown studio was
closed. General environmental conditions within the Lasserre building are less than optimal.”
Response: SALA’s goal of being housed in a unified, single or proximate facility remains unfulfilled, and the
adequacy of its facilities has not appreciably changed since the 2012 VTR. Details of incremental improvements
to facilities or tools are covered elsewhere in this report. Being responsive to budget pressures, optimizing
space, and maintaining studio space for individual, graduate-level student education remains a major challenge.
One example of how the program has addressed this challenge was the decision in 2015 to offer annually the
Fall Studies Abroad program. An average of 14 students has participated in the two years since this change
was adopted.
The architecture program was able to increase its fall term intake of students because of this change. This change
did not overpopulated the studio because the program has a larger population of students enrolled in the fall
term, at the end of which graduate approximately 16 students. This simultaneously increases a tuition revenue
stream, and optimizes the population of students in its third-floor studios.
Concern 4 / Administrative Staff: “The incomplete amalgamation of SALA is affecting staff, particularly in the area
of job descriptions and responsibilities. The School is encouraged to complete this process as soon as possible, to
ensure that functionality and proper service to students is maintained.”
Response: Staffing changes to support the amalgamation SALA continued after the 2012 visit. In 2013 three
existing roles all with some student support tasks were realigned to create 2 distinct Student Services Co-
coordinator roles, one to service students in the Architecture programs and one to service students in the
Landscape Architecture, Environmental Design and Master of Urban design programs, and a third role dedicated
to SALA wide academic coordination (curriculum/scheduling etc.). In early 2014 a new Student Services and
Recruitment Manager position was created to oversee these areas and to address increase staffing to support
the area of student recruitment.
The addition of new SALA programs, changes to some University wide administrative procedures and increased
work load volume are again taxing current staffing levels and distribution and a subsequent review and
realignment of staff roles and responsibilities is now underway.
Section 3.5.6 details SALA’s current staffing roles and organization. The concerns expressed in the 2012 VTR were
made as the first, relatively modest, reorganization of staff roles and responsibilities was occurring SALA-wide.
New and expanded degree and non-degree programs have put pressure on that earlier staff reorganization, and
has led to a realignment of staff roles and responsibilities that is now underway.
Once complete, this process will lead to an increase of two staff positions — up to eleven positions in total.
It is a complex process involving labour rules, and meeting union and management requirements for existing
and new jobs. The job descriptions and responsibilities for all positions is being reviewed by faculty and staff,
and it is anticipated that realignment will augment and streamline abilities in financial management, academic
coordination, reading room and archiving, student support, and website, media and development. Hiring is
expected to take place through the 2017-18 academic year.
2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations -- 13

Concern 5 / Budget. “Due to the current changes in UBC’s budget model, the SALA budget allocation from the
University is unknown. The School is encouraged to work with the University to clarify its budget allocation as
soon as possible.”
Response: The School’s annual funding allocation comes from a combination of graduate and undergraduate
enrolment based tuition (approximately 33% of total) and a baseline budget allocation (set in 2011 when UBC
introduced a new University wide funding model) that carries forward each year with adjustments based on the
net change against the previous year. It should be noted that since the baseline was set in 2011/12 SALA has not
experienced a negative change and therefore experienced growth in its funding allocation. SALA has also made
a set of incremental but crucial expansions to its degree and non-degree programs, doing its part to augment its
revenue streams. As such, has enjoyed a relatively stable budget situation. Section 3.9 of this report addresses
many of the budget concerns raised by the 2012 VTR.
14 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017 2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations -- 14
2.2 Responses to Unmet Compliance with the Conditions
for Accreditation in the 2012 VTR and FE
The previous CACB accreditation visit in 2012 granted the Architecture Program a full six-year accreditation
period, with a Focused Evaluation Report after three years. The 2015 Focused Evaluation Team Report (FE)
indicated that one Condition and three Student Performance Criteria remained unmet. These are: Physical
Resources, Accessibility (which we wish to note was deemed “met” by the 2012 VTR, but “unmet” during the
Focused Evaluation review), Technical Documentation, and Comprehensive Design.
Condition 7. Physical Resources
The program must provide physical resources that are appropriate for a professional degree program in
architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full-time student; lecture and seminar
spaces that accommodate both didactic and interactive learning; office space for the exclusive use of each full-time
faculty member; and related instructional support space.
FE Team Comments:
“Despite all efforts deployed by outgoing director Van Duzer and by UBC Authorities towards funding the new
facility, which seems almost secured, the project encountered a major setback at the beginning of 2015 with
the concerned raised about the site selected for construction. At the time the Focused Evaluation Report was
prepared (April 30) no timeline had been confirmed for exploring new sites. Therefore, the status of the new
building is uncertain at this time.
“The program reports that maintenance and minor upgrades of the existing buildings have been done in 2014 in
regards to signage, painting, printer upgrading and furniture. Considering that the Physical Resources are mostly
the same as they were when the 2012 visit occurred, this condition is still Not Met.”
Program Response, by Director Ron Kellett:

Subsequent to the 2011 feasibility study, program and site combinations that accommodated the SALA and
SCARP programs on different sites were considered. These alternatives, no longer constrained by existing
building footprints and floor plates, and informed by better understanding of the space needs, priorities and
growth opportunities of the School acquired in the six years since the merger, suggested a thorough review and
update of the SALA program. Two years later, a new ‘Program Study for the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture’ was commissioned with Architecture Research Office (New York) in anticipation of a design study
for new building on a different, West Mall site (2013). This program defined SALA space and expansion needs at
approximately 45,700 NSF (73,100 GSF) of new construction. A subsequent revision (2014) proposed directing
approximately 9,250 NSF of that space to a downtown annex in a contemplated new tower.
In parallel with these studies, SALA and UBC worked to secure sufficient funding such that design of the
proposed project could begin while a wider fundraising effort would be initiated to secure the balance.
When the ARO program was written, construction costs of $28M - $33M were anticipated and by late 2014,
approximately $22M in funding had been identified from donors and sources within UBC. With sufficient
confidence that the $5-10M gap could be closed, in late 2013 the University authorized a Request for
Qualifications competition to provide design services to accommodate the SALA program on the West Mall site.
2.2 Responses to Unmet Compliance with the Conditions for Accreditation in the 2012 VTR and FE -- 15
However, the principal private donor declined to support building on the proposed site and this competition was
withdrawn while alternate sites were identified and considered.
By late 2015, a prominent site at an entrance to campus acceptable to the principal donor had been identified
and studies were initiated to test the SALA program on it. In the intervening two years, a campus construction
boom in combination the greater prominence and construction complexities of the new site, the cost of the
proposed SALA project had increased by more than a third to approximately $44M, roughly double the funding
available. SALA and the University have been unable to close this gap while changes in leadership at the
University (2016), the Faculty of Applied Science (2017 and 2018) and the provincial government (2017) have
complicated appeals for additional support.
In addition, as the most recently proposed site is prominent within a rapidly growing area of campus, other
academic competitors have come forward and will likely gain authorization to proceed before SALA. As a
consequence, at this writing, SALA is working closely with the University to develop an incremental approach
to develop alternative approaches to the project. Among the options under consideration are alternative sites
developed in collaboration with other academic partners and incremental phased approaches that would
consolidate graduate programs, academic and administrative infrastructure in a new or remodeled building while
accommodating an expanded undergraduate program in existing studio and teaching spaces in Lasserre. While
these remain under active consideration, no conclusions have been drawn or decisions made at this time.
Since the 2012 accreditation visit, incremental facility improvements to the Lasserre Building have continued
every year. Apart from replacing power and hand tools in the shop, the improvements have largely developed
the program’s digital fabrication tools, including four plastic filament 3D printers, located in or near the three
studio locations, two in Lasserre; one Die Cutter, located in Lasserre; and one Larger format laser cutter (2017),
located in Lasserre.
Digital Projectors have been installed in the three principal seminar rooms, but other physical improvements
to Lasserre’s rooms and spaces have been relatively minor in scope. The exception will be the reorganization of
the SALA staff area on the 4th floor of the Lasserre Building, which is imminent as of the writing of this report.
A seminar room (309) was renovated in 2016 to provide improved pin up surface. Other improvements to the
physical facilities are noted in the program’s Annual Reports in Section 4.6.
B5. Accessibility
Understanding to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and cognitive
abilities.
FE Team Comments:
“Reference to the Building Access Handbook is now part of a Building Code module incorporated in ARCH 511
(Architectural Technology 1), but still appears as a very general consideration.
“No evidence of a systematic development of accessible design was observed in the design work. There is
still limited evidence that students have the ability to design the site of a building with barrier free paths or
to address different range of issues encountered with various physical handicaps. The use of stairs and other
universal access barriers in projects, without alternate paths, was still noticeable in the work submitted from the

Comprehensive Studio, as much in site planning as well as inside the building. Based on these observations, the
Team considers that this criterion is still Not Met.”
Progress Since Last Visit:

First introduced in 2014 at a basic interior circulation and exterior urban design scale as part of a student
assignment in the First Term Core Studio (500) and in the design of an accessible washroom in Communicating
Construction (551), accessibility issues are then addressed in some depth in the Second Term Core (501) studio,
and specifically as a building system within the Comprehensive Studio (521).
Adopted in 2017, the learning objectives for the Second Term Vertical Studio (501) explicitly require design
work to incorporate fundamental principles of accessibility. This studio is taken by all students, and introduces
accessible site and building design elements. The fourth-term Comprehensive Design Studio further integrates
accessible site and building design elements into the development of student design work.
Demonstration: Communicating Construction 551, Second Term Vertical Studio 501 and Comprehensive Design
Studio 521
C3. Technical Documentation
Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for purposes of review and
construction.
FE Team Comments:
“This criterion is Not Met. There is a lack of evidence that would support a demonstration of ability to conduct
appropriate site planning. There is no clear reference of structural axis and levels in the comprehensive studio
drawings.”

ARCH 501 Second Term Vertical Studio explicitly requires a constrained scale of focus around site-to-building
design issues. Site design is among other building-scale related constraints in ARCH 501 learning objectives that
also include tectonic and material investigation. The objective is to better prepare students later in the studio
sequence, in particular in ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio, to meet this criterion.
Specifically developed to address this criterion, Communicating Construction (551) was converted from an
elective to a core course in 2016. The course provides students an opportunity to apply the organizational
logic and graphic conventions used to develop a set of construction documents. Through lectures and redlining
sessions, students learn how to interrelate the several scales from site to building, the technical description
of code-related specification, building systems, and assemblies necessary to communicate both general and
detailed relationships of a design for the purposes of construction.
Students are introduced to material and building systems, construction documentation, and the regulatory
environment in the Architectural Technology stream (511, 531).
Demonstration: ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio, Architectural Technology I and II (511, 531),
Communicating Construction 551
C4. Comprehensive Design
Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and a site. The design
of designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building envelopes, building assemblies, life-
safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
FE Team Comments:
“The CACB SPCs listed in the studio documentation indicate a good strategy for informing students about
expectations for the assignments.
“There are various assignments that cover program analysis, spatial experience, site, structure, light and
ventilation, building code. However, there is a lack of evidence for site analysis and planning. The detailed
drawings (1:20) are not convincing (structural components not illustrated) or missing.
“Doubts were raised by the FE Team regarding students working in collaborative teams of two, as this
arrangement could affect the ability for each student to respond to all of the SPCs. In this arrangement of team
work, it is not possible to track the individual progress of each student so as to ensure that they are meeting all
the SPCs related to the Comprehensive Studio.”

Students incrementally and iteratively gain a foundational understanding of site-to-building design, accessibility,
program analysis and testing, environmental stewardship, life safety, and integrating the various building systems
in a single design. This occurs in various technical stream courses and studios especially in the second, third, and
fourth terms, and in particular, the Second Term Vertical Studio 501. Communicating Construction 551 also gives
students the opportunity to experience the complexity of developing from initial concept a set of construction
documents of a building.
This foundation precedes the fourth term Comprehensive Design Studio term. Since 2013, students work in pairs
from site analysis and design, structural and environmental systems analysis and integration, to program testing
and schematic design, through life safety and building code analysis and integration. Studio work since 2013 is
supported by work assigned in the parallel technical classes Structures II 532 and Environmental Systems and
Controls II 533.
Since 2013, several one-on-one pin up style meetings with structural and mechanical engineers, code consultants
and architects review the in-progress work of the students and provide technical guidance on the refinement of
their design development. The role of these important interchanges between technical specialists and students
has expanded in the subsequent years.
One of the challenges of this criterion is the sheer amount of work necessary to meeting this standard. We
have emphasized to the students the value of collaborative experience, and collaborative nature of practice,
and believe that this is an important part of the Comprehensive Design Studio. Instructors provide guidance to
student teams, helping them efficiently organize their time to meet the comprehensive standard.
We acknowledge the Focused Evaluation Team’s concerns regarding students working in pairs, and that it is
necessary within this model for individual students to demonstrate their Comprehensive Design ability. To this

end, since 2016, and the FE report, students are given individual assignments to produce detailed wall section
development that integrates the various elements of an exterior wall section.
Demonstration: Second Term Vertical Studio 501, followed by Comprehensive Studio 521.
3.0 Compliance With the Conditions for Accreditation
3.1 Program Response to CABC Perspectives

Programs must respond to the relevant interests of the constituencies that make up the CACB: educators and
regulators, as well as members of the practicing profession, students and interns, and the general public. Together,
each of these stakeholders brings specific concerns to the accreditation process, comprising the broad range of
perspectives that frame a professional education in architecture. The CACB encourages each program to address
these perspectives in a manner consistent with its identity and mission.

- The program’s discussion as to how it addresses each of the following Five Perspectives:
Architecture Education and the Academic Context
Architecture Education and the Students
Architecture Education and Registration
Architecture Educataion and the Profession
Architecture Education and Society
3.1.1 Architecture Education and the Academic Context
“The program must demonstrate that it both benefits from and contributes to its institutional context.”
During the 2006-2011 accreditation period, the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA)
worked to consolidate UBC’s two professional design programs: the Masters of Architecture and the Masters of
Landscape Architecture into one entity. In the past six years, while some aspects of that consolidation remained
to be addressed, SALA took on new challenges, including expansion of its undergraduate, professional and post-
professional degree programs, helped to develop post-professional degrees in the Faculty of Applied Science
(APSC) Master of Engineering Leadership degree programs, creation of new summer term non-degree programs
within UBC’s Vancouver Summer Program framework. Each of these has deepened SALA’s contributions to UBC,
and strengthened its connections to other UBC academic units.
In 2015, SALA established a new graduate-level degree program -- the post-professional Master of Urban Design
degree, now in its third year. SALA’s two professional degree faculty have also created a new path to completion
of their respective MArch and L.Arch degrees, a rigorous “dual degree” (MARCLA) path that culminates in
professional degrees in the two professionally-accredited disciplines after a four-year course of study. In 2017,
Provincial approval was received for expanding the undergraduate Bachelor of Environmental Design program
from the current two-year to a full four-year course of study. SALA has also worked with APSCI to develop and
deliver post-professional Master of Engineering Leadership degree in High Performance Buildings, courses of
which MArch students may take for elective credit. Since its initial contributions in 2012, SALA faculty have now
developed curriculum for 10 Vancouver Summer Program courses, non-degree classes that are taken by BC
residents as well as students internationally.
Architecture program faculty have made significant progress in establishing connections to other distinct UBC
academic units, including with the Faculty of Forestry, its Pulp and Paper Centre and Centre for Advanced Wood
Construction, and the Sauder School of Business’s Centre for Social Innovation and Impact Investing. Faculty

member Ray Cole served as Director of the UBC Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability for three years
from 2012-2015. Joseph Dahmen is a faculty associate of the Peter Wall Institute of Advanced Studies. Program
faculty also have worked with UBC’s SEEDS program on on-campus design/build projects, established key roles in
APSCI work indigenous engagement and with the Verna Kirkness Science and Engineering Program.
Program faculty are well-represented in a variety of UBC initiatives, having served on UBC search committees,
campus planning and design review committees, architect and planning consultant selection committees, as well
as other, academic committees related to appointments and promotion.
Since 2012, the architecture program faculty has been renewed with two tenure-track hires, had three junior
faculty promoted with tenure, and a fourth being reviewed for tenure this academic year. Many of these younger
faculty have been especially active in cross-disciplinary collaborations with other units at UBC as listed above.
3.1.2 Architecture Education and the Students
“The program must demonstrate that it provides support and encouragement for students to achieve their full
potential during their school years and later in the profession, and that it provides an interpersonal milieu that
embraces cultural differences.”
The MArch program enrolls about 150 full time students each semester. While the program has expanded
as a part of its incremental policy of increasing its revenue streams, it continues to maintain its objective of
average enrollment in design studio at twelve students. This low faculty/student ratio results in small classes and
encourages a high degree of dialogue between faculty and students. Required core design studios meet three
afternoons a week for a total of 12 hours weekly. Vertical studios meet two afternoons a week for a total of 10
hours weekly.
Since 2012, the architecture program has sought to strengthen its professional curriculum while at the same
time expand its students’ cross-disciplinary opportunities in partnership with the SALA Landscape Architecture
program. The program has also expanded its studies abroad programs, increasing the number of the shorter,
summer schedule of studies abroad courses and, in 2015, moving to offering annually the full-term, fall studies
abroad program that has been a hallmark of the architecture program since the 1960s.
The MArch program has also been able to nearly double the amount of money it offers annually to its students
in scholarship aid. With the creation of several large UBC-wide lecture courses and the definition of increased
teaching roles in the undergraduate ENDs studios, the program has significantly expanded teaching assistant
opportunities for its students.
ARCHUS, the student organization, provides a significant venue for student leadership, and the breadth of its
engagement in the life of the school is testimony to the enthusiasm and abilities of our students. ARCHUS,
with support from the Director and program faculty, have expanded its health and wellness programs and its
partnerships with the AIBC and RAIC, with exhibits, pecha kucha-style mixers, and co-sponsored Friday evening
Good Times events. ARCHUS routinely organizes Graduation Project presentations each semester, manages
common student space in the 3rd floor studios, and organizes social events. Students regularly participate in
Faculty Meetings at the Departmental and SALA level. The program chair will aid in development of new lines
of communication between ARCHUS and MArch alumni society in areas that thus far will include mentoring
processes and portfolio development.
3.1 Program Response to CABC Perspectives -- 21

In the area of SALA governance, previous Director Van Duzer established, and current Director Kellett has
continued, a Student Executive Committee that brought together the leadership of SALA’s student organizations,
faculty, and staff to regularly discuss issues and initiatives. This was key to the process of consolidation of SALA’s
various institutional elements, and has strengthened communication, and revealed new challenges, among the
various student groups, faculty, leadership, and staff.
3.1.3 Architecture Education and Registration
“The program must demonstrate that it provides students with a sound preparation for the transition to
professional life, including internship and licensure
Within The Architect’s Act of British Columbia, the School Director serves or nominates a faculty colleague
to serve on the governing Council of the Institute, and also in a similar manner, nominates a member of the
Registration Board. Since 2012, program chair John Bass and before him Professor Christopher Macdonald have
served on AIBC Council.
Since January 2016, Bass has served on Council, and since February 2017, on the joint CALA/CCUSA Future of the
Profession Task Force. The task force is intended to be a national undertaking, and is organized in two tracks; one
addressing outreach and advocacy in the architectural profession, with the ultimate objective of developing a
national architecture policy; the other will develop the next iteration of student performance criteria in advance
of the next CALA/CCUSA Validation Conference, and how these might impact curricula and learning objectives.
It is anticipated that UBC architecture students will be directly engaged in some aspects of the future of
architecture task force work, including being data-gatherers and interpreters as part of faculty research efforts
and/or seminars, and facilitation experts and participants at public events.
Program representation and presentation of white papers at the previous Validation Conference by faculty
members Christopher Macdonald, then member of AIBC Council, and Greg Johnson, member of the AIBC
Registration Committee, places the UBC architecture program in good standing in its commitment to
participating in the processes of defining the roles of the academy and the profession with respect to the
education and training of architects.
AIBC staff representatives visit with the architecture student body annually to inform students of the intern
program, and have instituted a program through which interested students are able to become student members
at no cost.
In the MArch curriculum the most deliberate effort to ensure that students are wholly familiar with the
procedures of internship and licensure exists within the required courses, ARCH 541: Process and Practice of
Architecture, taught by Cynthia Girling and Nick Paczkowski.

3.1.4 Architecture Education and the Profession
“The program must demonstrate how it prepares students to practice and assume new roles within a context of
increasing cultural diversity, changing client and regulatory demands, and an expanding knowledge base.”
Although it is an optional course of study for MArch students, the Co-op option has helped to amplify an
understanding of registration issues and -contingent upon timing -co-op students may be eligible to use their
work experience to initiate their position as interns. Particularly during the current buoyant local economy, this
program has an opportunity to expand and consolidate its already positive reputation within the community and
we look forward to this prospect.
Since its inauguration by then-Director Van Duzer in 2011, the architecture program has developed a robust
mentorship program that connects individual students with individual members of the architectural professional
community. It is expected that one benefit of new Mentorship program will continue to be to familiarize the
students with the registration process. While oblique with respect to this particular item, it should be noted that
the AIBC continues in its longstanding annual support for student scholarships. Notwithstanding our unusual
geographic isolation from our professional community, the School enjoys an increasingly constructive and
interconnected relationship.
The RAIC, in its capacity of national advocate for the profession, interacts with the student body a number of
times each year to discuss portfolio preparation for job searches, more general conversations about what to
expect in the experience of architectural practice, and sponsors a round table pecha kucha-style event that bring
together recent graduates and members of the local architectural community in a mixer.
Within the curriculum, the most focused and deliberate effort to ensure that students are wholly familiar with
the variety of modes of professional practice exist within the curriculum of required courses, specifically ARCH
543: Applied Topics in Professional Practice. ARCH 543 regularly visits a variety of offices in Vancouver, and
engages their employees and principals in discussions about practice organization, the ethical, advocacy, and
leadership aspects of the profession. Additionally, ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio invites an array
of building engineers and consultants to work directly with students in workshop settings that address the
technical, regulatory, and economic aspects of architectural practice.
The Co-op Program offers the unique opportunity of professional experience in a structured setting. Students
engage in an eight-month (two continuous terms) work-term in an architectural firm or in related fields of design
or construction. The program is offered to students who have completed their second-year courses and must
be followed by two terms of academic study. The student receives market value remuneration for the work
performed and six elective credits.
Each placement is expected to cover a variety of professional situations. The student, employer, and co-op
supervisor work together to develop this comprehensive experience, which is documented in a Co-op workbook.
Contemporary Practice (ARCH 543) may also be waived with submission of a Contemporary Co-op Workbook
Practice Workbook. Students working in an architectural office may be able to obtain credit towards registration
in the discretionary category.
Local professionals routinely serve on interim and final design studio juries as well as on final Graduation Project
reviews. In the second semester of the Graduation Project, students form a committee, chaired by a member
of the faculty, and comprised of several local professionals who then follow the project through a series of five
committee meetings to the final formal presentation.

3.1.5 Architecture Education and Society
“The program must demonstrate that it equips students with an informed understanding of social and
environmental problems and that it also develops their capacity to help address these problems with sound
architecture and urban design decisions.“
Students have benefitted from the work of many individual faculty members who often provide the focus and
point of contact with other initiatives both within the University, the city, and various communities as well as
government and industry. In recent years, faculty have undertaken and/or coordinated a variety of on-campus
events and public programs, community-based design build installations, and other types of engagement.
Since 2009, SALA has presented its lecture series at Robson Square in downtown Vancouver. In recent years,
that program has expanded with thematically-specific sub-series in recent years that focus on issues related to
sustainability (from 2012 to 2017 Joseph Dahmen’s work on the BC Hydro-sponsored Form and Energy Series)
and urban design, in large part led by Leslie Van Duzer’s work to establish the 2016-17 Urbanarium City Debates
and, starting in fall 2017, the VanPlay Smart City Talks.
Other thematically-specific public lecture programs initiated by SALA include the 2012-13 SALA Speaks program
co-sponsored by the Museum of Vancouver, and the 2017 View Corridors: Five Takes on Vancouver series. These
lecture series are described in greater detail and in relation to the larger public lecture programs sponsored by
SALA elsewhere in this report.
Students have been involved in many community-based design/build events directed by program faculty,
including most recently SALA student work on Macro Maki, installed at the 2017 Powell Street Festival that was
co-organized by Mari Fujita, and, with Bill Pechet, the Upcycled Urbanism event co-sponsored by the Museum of
Vancouver. In Arctic Adaptations, a 2013 seminar run by John Bass, two participating architecture students, Geoff
Cox and Neil Aspinall, were selected to contribute to the Canadian pavilion exhibit at the 2014 Venice Biennale.
The Arctic Adaptations proposal, which addressed the future of Canada’s North, received special mention by
the biennale’s organizers. Working with several students, in 2017 Blair Satterfield designed and built Pollinator,
a series of bee and bat homes and pollination stations installed on the UBC campus and at a pop up city park at
5th Avenue and Pine in Vancouver.
Since 2014, under the leadership of Greg Johnson, the program has developed a collaboration with a non-profit
organization able to provide a site and accommodation for students, who have designed, developed construction
documents for, and built several cabins and pavilions. Johnson also co-curated and oversaw the design of an
exhibition and publication of the work of Daniel Evan White, done in partnership with the Museum of Vancouver.
Students contributed model-making and drawing development for the exhibit and book.
Over the past six years, faculty-led labs and research initiatives have brought together the research interests
of faculty with student activity both in the classroom and as research assistants. AnnaLisa Meyboom’s TIPS
(Transportation Infrastructure Public Space) Lab has provided students opportunities to conduct sustainable
infrastructure- and urban-scaled research opportunities. John Bass’s ongoing work with several BC First Nations
communities has engaged students in vertical design studios and cross-disciplinary research opportunities
involving building design, historical data-gathering, and education programs. In 2016, Inge Roecker’s activity
in urban housing led to her being a mentor to two students working with the City of Vancouver Planning
Department and UBC Faculty of Law on an affordable housing study. In 2016, Professor Ray Cole oversaw a group
of students in a research seminar-based live research project on regenerative design that brought together
students with staff in the Vancouver office of Busby Perkins Will. Working with student research assistants,

Joseph Dahmen designed, built and installed Mycobenches, mycelium biocomposite benches, at a number of
venues, including the Museum of Vancouver, Craft Ontario (Toronto), the AIBC Gallery, and on the UBC campus.

3.2 Program Self-Assessment
The program must provide an assessment of the degree to which it is fulfilling its mission and achieving its
strategic plan. The CABC encourages absolute candor in conducting and reporting the self-assessment so that, if
well done, it will largely anticipate the VTR.

- A description of the program’s self-assessment process;
- Faculty, student, and alumni assessments of the program’s overall curriculum and learning context, as outlined in
the CACB Perspectives.
The self-assessment undertaken for this report took two primary forms. The first is a detailed evaluation by the
Program Chair of how well we have met the goals of the program’s 2011 Strategic Plan (see Section 3.2.1).
Individual course and faculty evaluations that are completed by students near the end of each term were not a
part of the self-assessment process, but are a significant tool used by individual instructors, the Program Chair,
and the SALA Director, to evaluate the effectiveness of instructors and courses (see Section 4.8.1).
The Program Chair developed surveys for three constituencies: Faculty, Students, and Alumni. The surveys were
organized around the CACB Five Perspectives: Architectural Education and 1/ The Academic Context; 2/ The
Students; 3/ Registration; 4/ The Profession; 5/ Society. This provided a mechanism for individuals to offer their
personal assessments. Each generated data that has provided a glimpse into the impressions – but also divergent
impressions -- within those groups about the strengths and weaknesses of the architecture program. Copies of
the self-assessment surveys are compiled in Section 4.8.2.
Faculty and students completed the same survey in hard copy, with the results collected and correlated by staff
into an .xls format. Their responses are correlated below.
In order to gain a more retrospective insight into the program’s engagement with the CACB Five Perspectives,
the alumni survey development process began with a draft presented at the first meeting of the Alumni Council
in May 2017. In response to council members’ recommendations, revisions were made to the structure of the
survey and questions were added. The alumni survey was conducted online for four weeks in June and July 2017.
The self-assessment process, its comparison of program performance against goals set out by our 2011 Strategic
Plan, its surveys and focus groups, and the input of the newly established Alumni Council, have all contributed to
the development of the Program Action Plan in Section 1.2.
3.2.1 Detailed Self-Assessment of 2011 Strategic Plan
This detailed Self-Assessment is formatted in two columns. In the left column is the text of the 2011 Strategic
Plan document, organized around its three Commitments to Teaching, Community, and Research; on the right is
a detailed (retropective) Self-Assessment of the Program’s progress in addressing those Commitments since the
2012 accreditation visit.

Commitment #1 (Teaching). Provide an
outstanding and distinctive professional
education directed toward the breadth and
complexity of issues germane to contemporary
built and natural environments.
Goal 1: Maintain and build on the Goal 1 Retrospective Self-Assessment

strength of the disciplinary core by:
A/ Ensuring quality of courses and all studios. A/ All core courses and studios are either taught or
coordinated by full time faculty. We have identified
ොො All core courses and studios are taught by full and mentored a single, teaching-committed adjunct
time faculty. design instructor to help deliver instruction in ARCH
500: Introductory Design Studio 1 and ARCH 521:
ොො Faculty peer review of all studios at the end of
Comprehensive Building Studio. With the exception
term exhibit.
of the need to cover for full-time faculty during
ොො Regular faculty review of teaching of core courses sabbaticals or leaves of absence, all other courses
and studios. in the core curriculum have been taught by full
time faculty.
Since 2012, faculty peer review of studios occurs in an

end-of-term “walk-around” in which the work of each
studio is presented by its students to students and
faculty. The format allows for debate and discussion,
and gives faculty the opportunity to see the work done
in all studios.
Faculty review of teaching and core courses occurs

especially for junior tenure-track faculty through
annual peer reviews that are required as part of the
tenure case documentation process. Faculty also
regularly discuss core courses and curriculum during
program meetings. Additional review of teaching
performance and course syllabi is done by the SALA
Director and Program Chair, who review student
evaluations of courses on an ongoing basis.
B/ Reviewing and revising the curriculum on an B/ Since 2012, the work of the curriculum committee
ongoing basis. (now Academic Affairs) has led to the implementation
of several changes in the curriculum that addressed
ොො Maintain a curriculum committee to assess the unmet Student Performance Criteria. These changes
curriculum and its pedagogical effectiveness were in studio, history/theory, design media, and
and to identify any issues arising from current technical areas of the curriculum. The most recent
practices and changes in the profession or round of changes include:
accreditation demands.
ොො In fall 2016, implemented ARCH 551
ොො Refer to Student assessments of Teaching
Communicating Construction, in which students
3.2 Program Self-Assessment -- 27

and Coursework as it contributes to curricular develop a set of construction documents, as a
discussions. core course
ොො Compare the program to other programs to ොො In spring 2017, implemented ARCH 501 as a
assess its relative merits and currency. vertical core studio that focuses on the site and
material aspects of building design
ොො In fall 2017, implementation in ARCH 504/505
Architectural History 1 and 2 with a new thematic
content structure
ොො In fall 2017, implementation in ARCH 515 Design
Media 1 with a modular structure that will allow
students to engage skill-based content at the
level appropriate to their entry-level skills.
Student course evaluations have led to changes in

some curricular areas, notably in the ARCH 515 Design
Media 1 syllabus. The 2015 decision to increase the
Advanced Placement cohort from 12 to 24 has led to
new challenges that are only now beginning to appear
and that need to be addressed.
There is near consensus among visioning and branding

processes and focus groups that distinctiveness in
the Architecture Program resides in four areas: our
location in Vancouver, British Columbia, on the Pacific
Rim; sustainable design expertise, the uniqueness
of the term-long Studies Abroad Program, and the
individual attention by faculty and staff to students to
customize their courses of study.
Our faculty are also regular participants in studio

reviews and give lectures at architecture schools both
nationally and internationally, providing the Program
with context to assess its position relative to other
programs. The Program has identified a weakness in
the specific area of digital design culture that has in
part emerged as part of this engagement with other
institutions.
C/ Operating exemplary standards of design theory, C/ The Program continues to develop its curriculum
practice and advocacy. with respect to all three areas.
ොො Familiarize students with and adopt technologies ොො In 2016, SALA received a UBC Teaching and
that provide graduates with broad and pertinent Learning Enhancement Fund (TLEF) grant to
experience. explore how to integrate digital tools and media
into its various degree programs. This initiative
ොො Ensure faculty maintain currency in their
was led by Architecture Program faculty member
knowledge base and pedagogy.

ොො Seek new faculty capable of augmenting and Blair Satterfield and supported by SALA
enriching existing resources in order to expand Director Kellett.
dialogue and enhance program capacity.
ොො In March 2017, the Architecture Program hired
Dr. Adam Rysanek, PhD, who is a leading expert
in simulation modeling in building- related
fluid dynamics
ොො In March 2015, the Architecture Program hired
Dr. Sara Stevens, PhD, an architectural and urban
historian with a focus on the economics of urban
development.
ොො In fall 2016, Senior Instructor Greg Johnson’s
teaching responsibilities in the Civil Engineering
Department ended, allowing the expansion of his
core and elective courses within the Architecture
Program, with content related to technical
documentation, detailing, and construction
documentation.
ොො Over the past several years, the second term
ARCH 517 Design Media 2 has been offered
with an expanded field of content that includes
intermediate 3D modeling, digital fabrication,
and animation.
Goal 2: Build the Program’s national Goal 2 Retrospective Self-Assessment

and international profile by:
A/ Attracting and admitting exceptional applicants and A/ Over the past six years, the number of domestic
continuing to graduate exceptional students who are and international applicants to the MArch program
equipped to be future leaders in practice and research. has steadily increased, and in 2017 approached 600
in number. During the application review process
ොො Maintain an open and accessible application exceptional applicants are identified and the Program
process that recognizes past experience and Chair personally contacts these applicants by phone or
accomplishment of applicants. Skype, answering questions, describing the Program,
and offering an entry scholarship.
ොො Promptly identify top students and entrance
scholarships candidates and recruit accordingly.
The SALA website lists many financial support
ොො Continue to augment and enhance available opportunities, including internal and external
scholarships and track new and relevant scholarships and awards, grants for travel, community
scholarships registered with the Faculty of projects, and UBC projects.
Graduate Studies.
ොො Provide a structured program of graduate Program Staff have put in place a well-organized
teaching assistantships and graduate research process describing the requirements for all Teaching
assistantships distributed across ENDS and MArch Assistant positions. These are advertised to all
studio and course offerings, including incoming and already-enrolled students many months

a clear communication of requirements and in advance of the employment period. Interested
opportunities. students submit their qualifications, and faculty review
them and make their hiring decisions.
ොො Maintain an informative website that effectively
communicates information about the
The SALA website has been reconstructed twice since
Architecture programs and current activities and
2012, and is currently being redeveloped. It is the
that celebrates achievements of faculty, students
objective of faculty and staff to more aggressively
and alumni.
populate the new website and other social media
with content that includes the achievements of
faculty and students as well as events including
lectures, prizes including the Margolese Prize, and
other significant public information. The website also
provides diverse materials and information including
student handbooks, funding opportunities, and other
resources.
B/ Involving the program and students with the B/ The Program’s co-operative program is managed by
professional community. faculty member Greg Johnson, AIBC. Greg monitors
the co-op students’ experiences, meets with them
ොො Maintain an effective co-operative program. on a regular basis, evaluates the results of the co-op
at its conclusion, and where necessary consults with
ොො Maintain an effective mentoring program
the architectural practices in which co-op students
involving students and practitioners.
are placed.
ොො Explore the possibility of profession-initiated
directed studies opportunities. Since 2011 incoming MArch students have been paired
ොො Continue to integrate contemporary architectural with a mentor from the professional community.
offices / practitioners across the curriculum. Students have availed themselves of this opportunity
to varying degrees, and many speak to its value. SALA
ොො Offer regular Student tours of exemplary faculty have recently been reviewing the mentoring
contemporary work. program, and expect to make some adjustments to its
ොො Enhance design-build opportunities. mechanisms in the next year. The Program Chair,
as part of the self- assessment process has been in
ොො Institutionalize and expand international
discussion with alumni and gained valuable insights
exchange and studies abroad programs.
from them about ways to improve it.
ොො Maintain the SALA public lecture series and
continue to afford student involvement with Practitioners continue to offer professionally-initiated
speakers in related seminars and tours. study in the form of vertical studios, on the order of
3-5 per year. Each year, the Program Chair provides
guidance toward the development of studio proposals
by interested practitioners for the following year.
These are submitted for review by Program Faculty,
who select from the pool the best proposals. This
process has become increasingly competitive, and this
past year four out of sixteen proposals were selected
for fall and spring term studios.

In collaboration with Vancouver architectural practices
Urban Arts Architecture and HCMA the Program has
begun to reconstruct its ARCH 543 Contemporary
Practice course. The course will continue to focus on
practice-related Student Performance Criteria, and
continue to integrate visits to a variety of architectural
offices. We are exploring a greater focus on the
future of architectural practice (a joint initiative of
the Canadian Architectural Licensing Authorities
[CALA] and Canadian Council of University Schools
of Architecture [CCUSA] ) and the implications of
the national Truth and Reconciliation process for
architectural education and practice.
Many core courses offer opportunities for students

to tour exemplary local buildings, including ARCH
521 Comprehensive Building Studio, ARCH 533
Environmental Systems and Controls II, ARCH 511
Architectural Technology 1, ARCH 531 Architectural
Technology 2, and ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice.
The Program has significantly expanded opportunities

for students to engage in design-build projects;
three consecutive years of students designing,
developing construction documents, and completing
construction of three cabins, an archery range, and an
amphitheatre. This now stabilized program is among
the Program’s most popular course offerings.
In 2015 the Program began offering its semester-long

fall studies abroad program annually. In addition, each
year students have two SALA-wide summer studies
abroad opportunities. In recent years several students
per year have participated in exchange programs,
primarily in Europe and Australia.
SALA continues to offer a robust public lecture

program of local, national, and international architects,
landscape architects, and urban designers, artists,
and activists. The lecture series venue is at UBC’s
downtown Robson Square auditorium, and since 2012
has featured speakers from Spain, India, Japan,
Denmark, Thailand, England, France, China,

Switzerland, Germany, Italy, South Africa, Norway, the
United States, and Canada.

C/ Advocacy on behalf of design excellence in the C/ Students are encouraged to participate in
constructed environment, responsibly expressed contemporary design debates through local
across a rich variety of constituencies. forums such as the Urbanarium City Debates on
architecture, urban design and housing, and the
ොො Encourage students to become involved in design Turncoats Vancouver debaes on architecture, design,
debates across the campus and within the city. and urbanism.
ොො Studios focused on pertinent contemporary
Students are encouraged to participate in competitions
issues, exemplified by the Core Comprehensive
and exhibition/installation competitions. Several have
Building studio.
had their proposals selected via local, national, and
ොො Encourage student involvement with social issues international competitive juries.
via exhibitions and competitions.
Goal 3: Enhancing the educational Goal 3 Retrospective Self-Assessment

opportunities that foster interdisciplinary
collaboration and cross cultural learning by:
A/ Providing opportunities for cross-disciplinary A/ Program staff regularly updates and publishes
education. course offerings in other UBC academic units.
ොො Maintain opportunities for students to take Students work in pairs for much of the ARCH 521
classes in other fields. Comprehensive Building Studio, and are encouraged to
identify and work on aspects of project development
ොො Afford interdisciplinary teamwork in required
that play to the strengths and interests of each student
assignments in core coursework.
in the pair. Students in ARCH 500 Architectural Design
ොො Regularly offer interdisciplinary studios (with Studio 1 collaborate on the planning of shared site
landscape architecture and/or engineering), models, and the development of base drawings for
design-build projects, seminars and cross or their assignments.
multi-disciplinary thesis committees.
Students are able to take a Landscape Architecture
studio offering as one of their three vertical studio
options. The Design/Build course sequence from
design, to construction documents, to construciotn
joins students from the MArch and MLA programs.
The Faculty of Applied Science will in January 2018
initiate its post-professional Master of Engineering
Leadership High Performance Buildings program, in
which MArch students will have the opportunity to
take courses in a multi-disciplinary environment with
practicing professionals in engineering, architecture,
and development.

B/ Providing opportunities for cross-cultural learning. B/ The Architecture Program and SALA more broadly
have expanded the opportunities for both the full-term
ොො Institutionalize and expand international and Studies Abroad Program and four- to six-week Summer
exchange and Studies Abroad Program options, Studies Abroad Program. The cost recovery model has
ensuring their sustainability via a cost recovery been fully implemented.
program and enhancing access to all students.
ARCH 501, ARCH 520, and ARCH 540 Vertical Studios
ොො Regularly offer studios with a focus on
regularly offer community-engaged studios on a range
community involvement that may be both local
of topics including housing and public building design.
and international.
Goal 4: Enhance the quality of Goal 4 Retrospective Self-Assessment

student life in the Program by:
A/ Actively encouraging and supporting student A/ With the support of past and current SALA Directors
initiatives that allow them to develop their own Van Duzer and Kellett, ARCHUS has implemented a
collegial relationships and projects beyond the domain robust wellness program that take place in-studio and
of program curricula. that include healthy breakfasts, yoga, and pet days.
ොො Support student initiatives, the student led In fall 2016 SALA initiated a new five-committee
ARCHUS and student representation in larger structure that includes a Student Affairs Committee.
student organizations. This Committee established regular meetings with
Professional Degree and Undergraduate student
ොො Continue to liaise with UBC support staff to
groups including ARCHUS. Prior to this, previous
provide information and guidance on issues
Director Van Duzer established and current Director
pertaining to topics such as stress and equity.
Kellett continued a Student Executive Committee
ොො Offer extra-curricular directed studies with cross meeting policy that also met regularly with student
disciplinary collaborators. associations.
While there have been some attempts to link ARCHUS

to the other Canadian architecture programs’ student
associations, this remains a work in progress, as is
the linkage of ARCHUS to the American architecture
programs’ American Institute of Architecture
Students (AIAS).
Program Staff maintain an important line of

communication with UBC’s Access and Diversity Office,
and seek its guidance and refer students to it on an
as-needed basis.
Students occasionally take advantage of opportunities

to undertake cross-disciplinary extra-curricular
directed studies, especially in collaboration with their
student colleagues in the Landscape Architecture
Program. Many of these are undertaken in design and
design/build competitions.

Student and Alumni self-assessment input has
identified a strong desire to reestablish the end-of-year
exhibition of student work, which occurred from 2012-
2015 and entitled SALA Projects. This was suspended
in 2016 due to budget priorities.
Goal 5: Support the Program’s faculty by: Goal 5 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Ensuring that explicit and equitable expectations of A/ SALA Director Kellett has continued the policy of
teaching, research and scholarly activity and service annual meetings with faculty. The discussion includes
are enacted across all faculty members of the program each individual’s teaching interests, research, and
and School, consistent with current expectations of service objectives for the next year.
SALA Faculty and University policies.
Teaching assignments are coordinated across several
ොො Annual review of faculty teaching, committee and programs, primarily by Program Chairs in consultation
community work to ensure equitably distributed with the Director, including the MArch, MLA, ENDS
loads and recognition. and MUD degrees. While most assignments are settled
early on, there can be unanticipatable faculty leaves
ොො A Faculty Development Program.
and other circumstances do on occasion present
ොො Maintain public lectures and events, community challenges to the timely informing of faculty teaching
interactions and publications. assignments.
ොො Fund faculty participation in conferences,
lectures, fellowships, and publications. Support funding is available through SALA for travel
expenses associated with peer-reviewed presentations.
ොො ARPT mentoring parallel with Program Chair and The Director make available additional support for
SALA Director. faculty, including reduced teaching responsibilities
if time is needed by faculty to develop research or
new courses.
Several new events have been developed beyond the

maintenance of SALA’s public lecture program. These
include an annual exhibition and opening reception
at the AIBC gallery of Comprehensive Building Studio
projects; in 2016, ARCHUS and the RAIC initiated the
Praxis Mixer, a Pecha Kucha, in which architectural
offices and thesis students present their work; in
2014, the AIBC and RAIC sponsored a Good Times
event in the fall term to talk about their respective
roles vis-a-vis the licensure, internship, and advocacy
for the profession.
Co-edited by Program Faculty Chris Macdonald and

Leslie Van Duzer, the first five West Coast Modern
House Series books have been published under ORO’s
label. The series documents several of the iconic
examples of built works from the mid-twentieth

century, many of which are in disrepair, face the threat
of demolition and are in danger of being forgotten.
The SALA Director, Program Chair provide mentoring

to junior faculty as they progress toward the
tenuring process.
Goal 6: Improve the Program’s Goal 6 Retrospective Self-Assessment

physical resources by:
A/ Acquiring a new building to house all programs and A/ Since the 2010 Feasibility Report several efforts
permit open design reviews, installations, exhibitions have occurred toward the end of unifying SALA’s
and public programs. programs in one place. These include:
ොො Maintain the momentum gathered by the 2010 ොො Procurement of a $10 million-dollar pledge in
feasibility study. writing from a major donor.
ොො Completion of the SALA programming document,
with full SALA faculty buy-in, produced by
Architecture Research Office of New York.
ොො Several site selection and testing endeavours.
B/ Devising a self-sustaining digital media resource B/ In 2016, SALA received a UBC Teaching and Learning
capability including multiple forms of output devices Enhancement Fund (TLEF) grant to develop proposals
and appropriate support capacity. for how and where to integrate digital resources and
digital fabrication into its curriculum.
ොො Improve the current capability of IT resources
and support. The Architecture Program has made some progress
regarding digital media resource capability, including
the purchase of several 3D printers, upgrades to
its plotters, and operation and maintenance of its
laser cutters.
The University and/or SALA maintain software licensing

agreements with many commonly used applications,
including Microsoft Word, Autodesk, Adobe Creative
Cloud, Rhinoceros 3D, etc. etc. These applications
are available to students (and faculty) at significantly
reduced rates, nominal fees or free of charge.
IT resources and support have also expanded since

2012. On-site support from UBC IT Services is available
daily in the Lasserre Building.

C/ Maintaining a presence in the city center to increase C/ Maintaining the downtown presence of the
the activities (teaching, thesis reviews, events and Architecture Program has been challenging due to
exhibitions) and visibility of the Program, School and our budget limitations, competition for dwindling
UBC in the downtown core. resources, and the scarcity of venues. The Program
and SALA have continued to deliver a public lecture
ොො Continue delivery of a public lecture and program in a downtown venue. SALA did from 2013-
exhibition programs and events held at 2015 organize a popular annual exhibition of student
downtown locations. work at downtown venue.
ොො Re-establish a program presence in downtown in
In April 2017, SALA held its first annual public open
the form of a studio/exhibit space.
house exhibition of student work and reception at
UBC. This event was attended by more than two
hundred and fifty people and brought together
students, alumni and members of the professional
community.
Smaller events, including an AIBC Gallery exhibition

of Comprehensive Building Studio projects has been
held annually since 2013. The Praxis Mixer, since
2016, has brought together graduating students and
representatives from Vancouver’s architectural offices.
If the goal of increasing our downtown presence has
been achieved, it has done so by creating new small,
and temporary oppoiurtunities, and not through the
establishment of a relatively permanent presence in
the form of a storefront or other space.
Goal 7: Enhance the Program’s Administration by: Goal 7 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Establishing an external advisory group to provide A/ Begun under Director Van Duzer in 2011 and
regular and ongoing advice on regarding the Program’s continued under Director Kellett, a SALA Advisory
activities and development. Council provides SALA and its various Programs
with advice about its ongoing activities and future
development.
B/ Liaise with SALA Director to ensure periodic review B/ The Architecture Program Chair meets with SALA
of administrative structures, confirm a hiring plan to Director Kellett on a regular basis in both the formal
optimize its human and physical resources and develop setting of the SALA Council (previously SALA Executive
a review structure for monitoring the success of its Committee) and more informally as needed to discuss
implementation. and coordinate student, faculty and staff issues.
In fall 2016, after an efficiency analysis of Program and

School Committee efforts, Director Kellett proposed
and gained faculty approval for the organization of a
SALA-wide committee structure.

The new structure organization combines faculty
and staff members in committees responsible for
addressing issues related to five areas, described
elsewhere in this Report. Despite some minor
refinements, the committee’s end-of-year reports
(Section 4.6.7) seem to indicate that the new
committee structure is operating effectively.
Commitment #2 (Community). Engage

with a wide range of constituencies
in the larger community – academic,
professional practice and public - and bring
these associations directly to bear on its
educational and administrative priorities.
Goal 1: Strengthen academic ties by: Goal 1 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Enhancing existing and forging new connections A/ The Architecture Program has out-of-town critics
between the work by students, design research and participate in all panels for final advanced studios and
scholarship locally and internationally. thesis reviews. These critics come from across Canada
and the United States.
ොො Expand opportunities for visiting critics at final
design reviews. When possible, seminars with visiting out-of-town
lecturers occur during the day or following the lecture.
ොො Institute a seminar event with visiting lecturers
Because it has been difficult for guest speakers
for students.
to extend their stays, this goal has not developed
into a consistent program. Still, it does contribute
to a program of such events that includes local
practitioners a venue for students to experience
informal exchanges with professionals and academics.
B/ Engaging with other academic units at UBC B/ Program students and faculty have contributed to
and beyond. efforts with two B.C. First Nations communities related
to locally sustainable models of housing development,
ොො With other UBC academic units and private most recently with the Heiltsuk First Nation of Bella
NGO’s, work with British Columbia’s First Bella and previously with the Nuxalk Nation of
Nations communities to develop a socially and Bella Coola.
economically sustainable model for locally
produced architecture, land use visions, and Several other initiatives have been undertaken with
other collaborative endeavours. other communities (the Mowachaht-Muchalaht and
the Nisga’a Nation) related to architectural and urban
design, historical analysis and youth education, and
other project-based research. These projects have
been done in collaboration with UBC’s Schools of
Forestry and Business, with the Architectural

Association in London. Some work has been supported
by Mitacs grants and funding from SALA.
C/ Promoting flexibility within the accredited C/ The Architecture Program has strengthened
professional curricula, and actively seeking curricular connections within SALA, especially with
partnerships with other academic programs within its professional Landscape Architecture degree
the School and UBC to provide specialist emphasis counterpart. Core curriculum in Design Media (ARCH
and focus. 515 and ARCH 517), Research Methods (ARCH 568),
and Process and Practice (ARCH 541) are now offered
ොො Strengthen curricular connections within SALA as joint MArch and MLA courses with discipline-
and with the Faculty of Applied Sciences and specific content taught as break out modules.
other academic units at UBC.
MArch students are able to take one landscape
ොො Participate in the development of new programs,
architecture studio for full credit toward fulfilling
including current proposals for a graduate urban
their advanced design studio (ARCH 520 or ARCH 540)
design degree, and a program in energy systems
requirements.
within Applied Science.
There is little to report on advancements of
strengthened curricular connections between the
Architecture Program and academic units in the
Faculty of Applied Sciences (APSC). However, having
been approved by the Provincial Ministry of Advanced
education, the graduate urban design degree (MUD)
graduated its first cohort of students in summer 2015,
and the new APSC Master of Engineering Leadership
programs will begin its new High Performance
Buildings (HPB) post-professional degree in January
2018. Architecture Program students may take courses
in the HPB program for credit toward their degree
requirements.
Finally, the MArch and MLA programs have developed

a Dual Degree Option (MARCLA) degree, a four year
course of study that allows students accepted into
both professional degree programs to opportunity to
pursue both degrees at the same time. The MARCLA
degree’’s first cohort of students was admitted in
fall 2016.
Goal 2: Strengthen professional ties by: Goal 2 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Continuing to be productively engaged with A/ Since January 2016, the Program Chair has sat
the Architectural Institute of British Columbia, The on the AIBC Council, and on its Public Outreach
Royal Architectural Institute of Canada and the local Committee. Since winter 2017 the Chair has also
community of practitioners. participated in the joint CALA/CCUSA ad hoc Future of
Practice Committee, which was established in late
ොො Clarify role and strengthen participation of the

Program Chair and or designate in the AIBC. 2016 to develop recommendations on several topics
Explore issues related to licensure examination related to education, internship, and right to title.
and streamlining, right to title and continuing
education. The 2015 CACB Focused Evaluation Report determined
that the Program was in compliance with four of the
ොො With the Architectural Institute of British
seven Student Performance Criteria found to be unmet
Columbia, organize exhibitions of student
in the 2012 CACB Visiting Team Report.
research and design.
ොො Maintain the practice of having the AIBC host an Since 2014 the AIBC has hosted an exhibition of
annual Good Times event at Lasserre. Develop student work from the Comprehensive Building
new annual dinner meeting with AIBC members. Studio, and continues to host a Good Times event at
ොො Develop new continuing education opportunities Lasserre, now in conjunction with representatives
for AIBC members who participate in activities in of the RAIC and BCSLA. In spring 2016, architecture
the Architecture Program. student organization ARCHUS partnered with the BC
RAIC chapter in the Praxis Mixer event, an evening of
pecha kucha-style presentations by students who have
just completed their thesis and representatives of local
architectural practices.
B/ Maintaining its fulfillment of Canadian Architectural B/ ARCH 521 Comprehensive Building Studio was
Certification Board (CACB) accreditation standards and inaugurated in 2013 and is integrated with ARCH 533
actively contributing to ongoing dialogue concerning Environmental Systems and Controls II and ARCH 532
the definition of the governing Conditions and Structures II. A series of structured interactions is
Procedures that underpin the accreditation process. integrated into the studio involving lighting, energy,
mechanical, structural and code consultants from local
ොො Development of an Integrated Studio that architectural and engineering practices, who offer
will establish significant links with areas of technical and design guidance to students as they
contemporary practice in Architecture. develop their projects.
C/ Establishing events to complement and expand C/ An alumni event is held at the annual AIBC Annual
upon current alumni the alumni relationships to General Meeting. In general, the Architecture
the Program. Program’s relationship with its alumni is an area with
many opportunities. However, it is also an area of
ොො Continue in partnership with AIBC’s Annual outreach that needs to be strengthened.
General Meeting to organize an annual reception
for all Program alumni. Growing out of the CACB self-assessment process,
the newly formed Alumni Council will provide a
ොො Include alumni in the new IDP Building project
forum to develop the Architecture Program’s alumni
feasibility study process.
outreach efforts.
ොො Continue to pursue grandfathering a MArch
degree for to the approximately 900 alumni with Events that seek to strengthen the Program’s ties to
the three-year BArch degree. its alumni occurs primarily on an ad hoc basis, and is
an area that needs to be developed. The June 2017
retirement celebration of Professor Ray Cole brought
together 420 Program alumni from the 1970s to the
present, and provided a glimpse into the potential of

a more robust relationship between the Architecture
Program and its alumni.
The dormant status of the IDP (the new SALA

building) has put alumni-inclusive events related to its
development on hold.
Since 2012, staff did a comparative analysis of MArch

and BArch credits, and determined that nine additional
credits would need to be taken by alumni holding the
BArch degree in order to meet MArch requirements.
This process is ongoing.
Goal 3: Strengthen community ties by: Goal 3 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Exploring potential venues from which to actively A/ Having to make difficult choices within the means of
disseminate the design research and scholarly the SALA budget, the Downtown Studio lease was
activities of the School Community including web- not renewed in 2011. This has led to a greater focus on
based publishing and forging partnerships with allied event-based public programming, both in downtown
institutions to effect exhibitions, publications, etc. Vancouver and at UBC.
An end-of-year exhibition of student work, entitled

SALA Projects, was held from 2012-2015 in downtown
venues, and was a popular, well-attended event.
Despite its popularity, it was suspended in 2016 due to
budget priorities.
At the completion of her appointment as SALA

Director, a $100,000 alumni gift honoring Leslie Van
Duzer was given to SALA. The gift has funded SALA
outreach and lecture programming.
In April 2017, SALA and the Architecture Program

initiated a new on-campus public event called Studio
Sessions and Design Night, in which studio work from
the 2016-2017 academic year was exhibited. The event
was attended by approximately 200 people.
In 2014 the first of five West Coast Modern House

Series books, House Schumiatcher, by Leslie Van Duzer,
was published. Each book launch was hosted with an
event downtown at Inform.
In 2015-16, SALA was an Academic Partner of Places

Journal, an online resource for public scholarship on
the future of architecture, landscape, and urbanism.
Due in part to a lack of faculty uptake of

the opportunity to publish in Places, difficult decisions
related to budget concerns and priorities, led to the
decision not to continue this partnership.
In 2012, SALA began offering not-for-credit summer

courses as part of the UBC Vancouver Summer
Program. SALA courses now include Design in the
public realm, Landscapes and parks of the Vancouver
region, Fabrication techniques for design, Integrating
design and fabrication, Design thinking and strategic
design, Design thinking as a practice, Wood as a
Building Material, Case studies in building with
wood, Sustainability by design, and Perspectives on
city making.
SALA and the Architecture Program co-sponsored

an exhibit at the Museum of Vancouver titled “Play
House: The architecture of Daniel Evan White,” which
was curated by Senior Instructor Greg Johnson was.
The exhibit ran from October 2013 to March 2014.
B/ Establishing public programs focused on vital B/ Then-SALA Director Van Duzer and current Director
architecture and landscape issues that affect policy, Kellett contribute to UBC’s physical development by
planning and vision within the University Community, participating in the Campus Design Review Committee.
in the City of Vancouver and throughout the
Lower Mainland. Program Faculty member Matthew Soules contributes
to Vancouver’s physical development through
ොො Re-establish a downtown space for the membership in Vancouver’s Design Review Panel.
Architecture Program for studio, thesis
reviews and meetings, exhibitions, and other The SALA Advisory Council, established in 2011 by
community events. Director Van Duzer, have typically met in a downtown
venue. The Council is comprised of prominent
members of Vancouver’s design professions, the
development industry, museum administrators and
community activists.
It was through conversations at Advisory Council

meetings that the Urbanarium was established. The
Urbanarium has quickly become a key organizer within
the city of discussions and debates about urban design
and policy, with ten public debates thus far in its
first six months. The Urbanarium also sponsors
competitions and organizes city tours.

Goal 4: Strengthen international ties by: Goal 4 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Maintaining a vital architectural Studies A/ Since the late 1960s, the term-long, fifteen-credit
Abroad Program. Studies Abroad Program has been a vital part of the
Architecture Program’s identity, and continues to be.
B/ Encouraging and supporting additional study B/ In 2015, the term-long SA Program began to be
abroad programs that, while providing emphasis to offered annually instead of bi-annually, and to students
the program core are accessible to students in both of in the MArch and MLA professional degree programs.
SALA’s professional programs. Tokyo, Japan and Chandigarh, India have been the
most recent locations of the Program.
ොො Develop exchange and studies abroad programs
with other universities. Typically, two six-credit Summer Studies Abroad
programs are offered each year to SALA students. In
ොො Establish visiting Adjunct positions that attract
recent years these have travelled to Spain, Portugal,
national or internationally known figures.
the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Italy.
ොො Actively explore opportunities for the Program’s
co-operative students to work abroad. The new Master of Urban Design Program’s 2016
Mexico Studies Abroad program was attended by
several MArch students.
SALA has exchange partnerships with 12 universities

internationally.
Each year between three and six of our MArch

students participate in exchange programs in Europe,
Australia, and Hong Kong, and approximately the
same number come to UBC on exchanges. Some
of our exchange students remain abroad to work,
occasionally for co-op credit.
Commitment #3 (Research). Engages in

leading edge design research and scholarship
activities that contribute constructively to
the theory and practice of architecture.
Goal 1: Nurture and support leading edge Goal 1 Retrospective Self-Assessment

design research and scholarship by:
A/ Actively promoting faculty’s research interests A/ The research interests of faculty are often
within the architecture program and establish the integrated into elective studios and research seminars
means to focus these efforts on collaborative and of the MArch Program. Among these have been
distinct enterprises. studios and seminars on a diverse range of topics from
Urban Design to Material Research that have been led
ොො Consult with faculty on research interests, by AnnaLisa Meyboom, Joe Dahmen, Matthew

activities, and plans; provide guidance for faculty Soules, Inge Roecker, John Bass, Blair Satterfield, and
on research and funding opportunities and Mari Fujita.
publication venues.
Directors Van Duzer and Kellett have conducted
ොො Promote opportunities for collaboration with
end-of-the-year interviews with all SALA faculty that
industry and research institutions.
address research interests and activities, funding
opportunities, teaching interests, and guidance on
publishing opportunities. Faculty have been successful
in many of their applications for funding support from
industry and research institutions, including from
Mitacs, SSHRC, NSERC, UBC’s TLEF fund, and the City of
Vancouver.
B/ Encourage the dissemination of faculty and B/ Self-assessment surveys of students and alumni
student research work in both academic and public and identity research done by a branding consultant
communities and provide support for faculty indicates that SALA should develop greater awareness
participation. of the faculty’s research within both academic and
public communities.
Goal 2: Support faculty research by: Goal 2 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Providing funding support for faculty research A/ Annual funding support for travel to conferences
by Program Faculty continues. Development staff
ොො Maintain annual funding support for faculty in the Faculty of Applied Science grant writing and
conference participation. development support have aided faculty on a range of
interests from relatively modest support for design/
ොො Establish effective research support within
build projects to donors for the new SALA building.
the Department of Applied Science such as
appropriate grant writing support.
B/ Recognizing and supporting junior faculty research B/ Course relief, study leaves, or scheduling
through course relief and scheduling. accommodation for junior faculty is given
upon request.
C/ Maintaining and augmenting spaces for faculty C/ All full-time faculty have dedicated office space,
duties and research including individual offices for full- which for many is also their research space. Several
time faculty and dedicated research space. faculty maintain offices for their practices, and during
the summer months the Lasserre Building is able to
accommodate faculty needs for additional research
space for student research assistants.
The program for the new SALA building includes

dedicated research space.

Goal 3: Support graduate student research by: Goal 3 Retrospective Self-Assessment
A/ Establishing pathways for successful research by A/ During the course of the academic year and
MArch students and MArch thesis students. summer, many MArch students work as program
faculty research assistants, which is the primary
pathway for most students.
B/ Integrating students in the MArch and MASA B/ Especially active and ambitious students also
programs into the intellectual, design and research independently develop their research, and SALA
culture of the architecture program. provides funding support for travel to conferences and
exhibitions for student research papers or exhibition/
ොො Support for dissemination and presentation of installation projects that are accepted via peer review.
student research.
Many students also use their two-term Graduation
Project (thesis) to develop research guided by their
faculty mentor.
C/ Establishing a clear pathway for students in the C/ Many MArch students are TAs for MArch and ENDS
MArch and MASA programs to gain meaningful courses. The number of TA opportunities has expanded
teaching experience; promote continuation of MArch in the past several years with the development of the
and MASA research in Doctorial/PhD programs to three service courses now delivered by SALA faculty in
meet the increasing demand for higher-level terminal large undergraduate class formats.
degrees in Architecture and related interdisciplinary
explorations. Alumni of the MArch program are regularly invited
to participate in studio reviews and as members of
ොො TA opportunities in MArch and ENDS courses. thesis committees, providing them with experience in
mentoring and critiquing students’ work.
Goal 4: Remain current in design Goal 4 Retrospective Self-Assessment

theory, practice and advocacy by:
A/ Faculty hiring. A/ Since 2012, two new junior faculty tenure-track

hires have been made, and three junior faculty have
ොො Continue to fill vacated positions with new hires; been promoted to tenure. These hires and promotions
initiate process for new hire in design and course span across most of the curricular areas of the
faculty with contemporary history/theory focus. architecture program, including design, technology,
history/theory, and media.
B/ Establishing a series of publications to actively B/ Apart from the West Coast Modern House book
disseminate the design research and scholarship series, there has been little coordinated activity to
activities. advance the goal of facilitating publication by faculty
and students.
ොො Explore publication venues to facilitate faculty
and student publications.

ොො Identify funding sources and a faculty
publication coordinator to supervise and support
architecture program publications.
Section 3.2.2 Assessment by the Faculty and Students
Program faculty provide ongoing self-assessment of the program’s curriculum, administrative procedures,
admissions policies, and governance structures through monthly faculty meetings alternating between the
(MArch) program and (SALA) school level.
The Program Chair holds a general student meeting in the fall and spring terms. The SALA Director and the SALA
Student Affairs Committee hold monthly meetings with ARCHUS and other SALA student representatives on a
monthly basis. At the request of ARCHUS (the Architecture Student Society) representatives, the Program Chair
is available to meet to receive student questions and concerns as well as to update representatives on actions
taken in response to them.
The following charts and responses present a diverse range of student insights and opinions. Survey questions
organized along a spectrum from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). Except for corrections to spelling and
grammar, written comments are taken verbatim from the surveys.
Chart 3.2.a. Aggregated Faculty Responses

Faculty Survey Analysis
Faculty responses indicate that on aggregate Faculty disagree most strongly with the following two statements:
17/ “The program should develop a compulsory co-op term of 8 or 12 months.” (2.00)
Several faculty responded “don’t know” to this statement, and the remainder mostly disagreed or
strongly disagreed with this statement. The program oversees a voluntary co-op program, which
is undertaken by two or three students per year. Discussions around a compulsory co-op program
occur from time to time, but at this point it does not appear that developing such a program has any
real momentum.
4/ “Students are able to contribute to my research in the classroom context.” (2.71)

Statement 4 received the second lowest agreement rate, and is worth noting that Statement 5,
“Students are able to contribute to my research outside the classroom context” received an aggregate
faculty score of 3.42, or an approximately average aggregate score. This distinction between teaching
and research is perhaps an expression of the legacy and value of teaching in the program. Nevertheless,
whether the integration of teaching and research should be more fully realized within the curriculum is
part of an active discussion among faculty.
Especially high rates of agreement (strongly agree, or >3.5) with the survey statements were found for 11
statements, in descending order:
1/ “I maintain high professional standards with regard to research and publication.” (4.00)
30/ “The program provides students with opportunities to generate their own knowledge regarding
social, environmental and ethical issues.” (3.875)
2/ “I make clear to my students the academic standards expected in their work.” (3.75)
8/ “I am responsive to how students wish to shape their personal learning agendas.” (3.75)
10/ “I am respectful of students who are different from me.” (3.75)
29/ “The program provides students with a learning context that allows them to explore
how social and environmental issues are addressed in architectural and urban design.” (3.75)
22/ “The program provides students the opportunity to use tools and think about questions
related to their future in architectural practice.” (3.71)
3/ “I have opportunities for interaction with other academic programs at UBC.” (3.625)
9/ “I structure my coursework so that students are able to work with other students in
ways that contribute to their education.” (3.625)
23/ “The program provides students with opportunities to explore the collaborative nature
of architectural practice.” (3.625)
31/ “The program provides opportunities for students to directly engage in civic activity and
public service.” (3.571)

In all, the Faculty perceive the architecture program to provide students a learning context that supports the
independent growth of designers, collaborative work, social engagement, and ethical and environmental
consciousness.
Faculty narrative responses to survey statements:

Below is a collection of the Faculty’s written responses to the survey:
“My response to question six is impacted by a lack of shop space and research space provided by UBC.
SALA does its best to develop these hard infrastructure assets, but our ability to do so is somewhat limited.
The University because of limits of funding at the Provincial level, has pushed responsibility for raising
funds to the faculty. Teaching, service, and research are the areas of focus of a professor.”
(Rank not indicated)
“I have been impressed by the time and energy devoted to issues of student career trajectory, engagement,
and school culture. The interest in these issues is much greater than in my prior institutions or in practice
(in my experience).”
(Rank not indicated)
“The line between academic learning and internship learning moves according to topic & individual. C17
[re: co-op]: Probably agree, though need to extend program, which is [a] significant change.”
(Senior Instructor, tenured)
“All of these [referring to Perspective Four: Architecture Education and the Profession] are theoretically
touched on in the program, but not in great depth.”
(Senior Instructor, tenured)

Chart 3.2.b. Aggregated Student Responses
Student Survey Analysis

Student responses indicate that on aggregate students tend to have less extreme opinions about the architecture
program. Analysis of student responses to survey statements find that on aggregate students disagree most
strongly with the following three statements, with only one falling within the “strongly disagree” (<2.5) range:
3/ “Architecture students have opportunities for interaction with other academic programs at
UBC.” (2.45)
27/ “The program provides opportunities to engage in civic activity and public service.” (2.67)
11/ “I am exposed to the national and international context of practice and the work of the allied design
disciplines.” (2.77)
Student responses to statements 3 and 27 contrast to Faculty responses, and indicate areas where more effective
communication and/or development of interaction opportunities for students are in order.
In clear contrast to the Faculty, the Students “strongly agreed” (>3.5) with statements about the program on only
one occasion:
24/ “I am aware of the social and environmental issues associated with architecture.” (3.58)

Students also scored another six statements at or near a “strongly agree” (>3.4):
25/ “I have had the ability to explore how social and environmental issues are resolved through sound
architecture and urban design principles.” (3.5)
10/ “I have access to mentoring from members of the professional design community.” (3.5)
8/ “I am able to work with other students in ways that contribute to my education. (3.45)
9/ “I am respectful of students who are different from myself.” (3.45)
14/ “I am aware of the role of the Architectural Institute of British Columbia in the internship and
licensure processes.” (3.42)
7/ “Faculty are responsive to how I wish to shape my personal learning agenda.” (3.41)
These latter responses correlate to much of the Faculty’s perception of the program, and suggest that the
development of individual learning agendas, the inculcation of social and environmental principles, and learning
through collaboration are experienced by students as part of their time in the architecture program.
Below is a collection of Students’ written responses to each of the survey’s five sections:
Question Set #1 - “In what ways would you like to see the Architecture Program augment its engagement with
CACB Perspective 1: Architectural Education and the Academic Context?”
“There’s a big school out there I only see 2 rooms of it. Faculty has high highs and low lows. This will
always be true. The same is true with students.”
(MArch student)
“We should have more elective credits available to take classes outside of SALA.”
(MArch student)
“The program MArch at UBC is more flexible and open to pluri-disciplinary education than other Canadian
MArch. But that is also because I am advanced placement student.”
(MArch student)
“There is no interaction between other academic programs, the students (myself included) have to
produce these relationships. Whether this is a role of a student is unknown.”
(MArch student)

CACB Perspective 2: Architectural Education and the Students?”
“Printing, CNC is ridiculously expensive. Hurts my poor student wallet.”

(MArch student)
“We are all under pressure.”

(MArch student)
“Comprehensive studio should maybe be split into two semesters. One with partner, one without.”
(MArch student)
CACB Perspective 3: Architectural Education and Registration?”
“There seems to be a huge discrepancy between school (studio in particular) + professional practice. Not
necessarily a bad thing.”
(MArch student)
“Education is only about the AIBC, and not other provincial associations despite that many students are
not from British Columbia and likely will work elsewhere.”
(MArch student)
“Due to my own aloofness…unsure where I’ll practice in the future.”

(MArch student)
“SALA (some faculty) favour the route of not getting registered. Certainly, no right or wrong position on
this. Just interesting.”
(MArch student)
CACB Perspective 4: Architectural Education and the Profession?”
“Greg Johnson’s class is essential if a bit dull.”

(MArch student)
“Awareness or opportunity.”
(MArch student)

“Ray will be dearly missed.”

(MArch student)
“I answered “strongly agree” to 24 and 25 because I worked on social issues for my thesis. I think architecture
education fails to explore the social involvement of architecture and engage deeply with issues of class,
gender, race, sexuality. Architecture doesn’t like to talk about these uncomfortable issues.”
(MArch student)
“No public service is required or encouraged.”

(MArch student)
Section 3.2.3 Assessment by the MArch Alumni
Program alumni’s interactions with faculty are less developed than they should be, and this is something that
needs to be addressed in the long term. In spring 2017, as part of the self-assessment process, the program
chair constituted an MArch Alumni Council of 2007-2017 MArch alumni who were familiar with the program’s
recent history and had recent, often ongoing experiences of internship, mentorship, and licensure in their
professional lives.
The MArch Alumni Council has held several meetings over the spring and summer. The Council reviewed student
and faculty surveys, and then consulted on the development of unique survey statements from the perspective
of alumni experience as part of the program self-assessment process.
Beyond the self-assessment process, the Council has proven to be a very productive forum in terms of
developing goals to strengthen the social, curricular and extracurricular ties between alumni and the program,
and will continue to consult with the program chair and faculty on a schedule and with an agenda that is being
formulated during the early fall 2017. It is worth noting that ideas that arose through Alumni Council meetings
are evident as goals in the 2017 Action Plan.
The following charts and responses have been selected to present a diverse range of alumni insights and
opinions. Except for corrections to spelling and grammar, they are taken verbatim from the surveys.

Chart 3.2.c. Aggregated Alumni Responses
Alumni Survey Analysis

The survey was conducted online for three weeks in June 2017. Among the 109 alumni respondents, 59% were
registered interns, and 38% were licensed architects. This number is significant in part because the vast majority
(>85%) of respondents had graduated since 2008.
The chart above can be read multiple ways. According to alumni, the program most consistently provided a
solid foundation for CACB Perspective C: “Architectural Education and Registration” -- although it also suggests
that CACB Perspective E: “Architectural Education and Society,” is considered by alumni to be a strength of the
UBC MArch education. Less strongly perceived was the program’s engagement with Perspective A: Architectural
Education and the Academic Context.”
Analysis shows that on aggregate, the alumni respondents disagree strongly (<2.00) with the following six
statements:
16/ “After graduation I have continued to produce peer-reviewed research.” (0.81)
15/ “As a student I was able to produce research that was presented or published in peer-reviewed
contexts.” (1.45)
47/ “The program provided me with opportunities to explore the obligations the architect has to the
client.” (1.69)

12/ “I was able to productively interact with other UBC academic programs.” (1.70)
59/ “The Program provided me with opportunities to directly engage in public service.” (1.77)
60/ “The Program provided me with opportunities to interact with community groups or other advocacy
interests.” (1.92)
Survey analysis shows that on aggregate, the alumni respondents agree strongly (>3.00) with the following eight
statements:
55/ “The Program provided me with a learning context that allowed me to explore how environmental
issues are addressed in architectural and urban design.” (3.19)
54/ “The Program provided me with a learning context that allowed me to explore how social issues are
addressed in architectural and urban design.” (3.18)
57/ “The Program provided me with opportunities to generate my own knowledge regarding
environmental issues.” (3.18)
35/ “Becoming a licensed architect is/was a very important step in my career goals.” (3.17)
56/ “The Program provided me with opportunities to generate my own knowledge regarding social
issues.” (3.16)
49/ “The program provided me with opportunities to explore the obligations the architect has to produce
well-designed buildings and spaces.” (3.08)
24/ “The program exposed me to the national and international context of architectural theory and
practice.” (3.08)
42/ “The Program provided me with the opportunity to use tools and think about questions related to the
future of architectural practice.” (3.00)
85% of respondents would recommend the program to potential future students, and ranked the reasons
as follows:
69% School Culture

61% Location
52% Tuition
51% Study Abroad
50% Studio Offerings
40% Program Flexibility
37% Sustainability Training
4% Other
Following is a collection of Alumni written responses to each of the survey’s five sections:

CACB Perspective 1: Architectural Education and the Academic Context?”
“A lot of the faculty research seemed to me to be remote from the concerns of the public, the knowledge
and interests of most students, and the types of practice in which 90% of graduates will take part... The
school could benefit by shifting its research in a more pragmatic and grounded direction.”
(2014 graduate)
“When looking explicitly at the final theses subject matter, there is a wide range and not all may be truly
relevant to the architectural profession. Perhaps the research methods course or another alongside
the research semester could aid students in finding a relevant and current research topic that actually
contributes to contemporary discourse i.e. current issues and trends. I believe this will help students to
better isolate their future direction in the field of architecture after graduating.”
(2017 graduate)
“Would like to see more cross-over with the business school, in contexts like development projects - to steer
conversations / demonstrate value of good design. Also engage in product / business related questions
architects would be well poised to address - how is a product (Architectural or otherwise) bringing value
to a business?”
(2016 graduate)
“We seemed to have very little interaction with other departments (except maybe landscape architecture).
This has changed in the intervening years. More engagement with engineering or business disciplines
would make sense. These are the people we interact with on a regular basis.”
(2008 graduate)
“SALA does very poorly to embrace its own institutional context. There is little to no engagement with art
and philosophy. Being ‘interdisciplinary’ is either not on most professors’ agendas or it is exclusive limited
in the realm of applied arts.”
(2015 graduate)
“The creation of ‘labs’ around core thematic topics to further augment capacity building (i.e. via
collaborations with Government/NGO’s/community of practice/civil society to help address critical, local/
regional real-world issues).”
(2010 graduate)
“Landscape, Urban Design, and Architecture are already working together more so than when I was a
student. Bridging courses with geographies and sciences would have been nice. I had written for a magazine
(not peer reviewed) while in school and have since taken over as editor of that magazine. The way I see
it students in Vancouver do not have a global outlook, they don’t seek out conferences or publications or
opportunities to contribute to a broader field or context.”
(2013 graduate)

“A stronger sense of program/departmental focus. The school could benefit from adopting a coherent
position on the discipline, and finding ways to a) implement / publicize research and work in this area b)
collaborate or interact with other disciplines or members of the academic community to demonstrate/
explore the role that the school can play (or that architectural inquiry can play) in solving problems,
exploring ideas, etc.”
(2012 graduate)
“I believe that the program could benefit from greater engagement with disciplines with stricter traditional
academic standards (eg. theory, methods) and with applied programs (e.g. engineering).”
(2011 graduate)
“I generally do not recall any knowing engagement with any of my professor’s research, nor do I feel that
my own pursuit of research was promoted or encouraged to any degree, let alone the typical standard for
post graduate studies in other faculties. Frankly, I am (I guess pleasantly) shocked that this is currently a
priority based on my experience.”
(2012 graduate)
“The architecture school should resist the tendency to overthink and reinvent itself, and focus on the
fundamentals of training people to be good architects. That will always be relevant and useful to Society,
and will always be approved by governing accreditation authorities.”
(2010 graduate)
“Only that it seems to me a shame that while the school’s position on broad issues like cultural inclusivity
and climate change are obvious in a kind of de rigueur way, that the region would benefit from the school
engaging in specificity and regional issues - even at the risk of making a bit of trouble.
I think the geography of UBC is a challenge, after working up the west coast in the US I wondered why
these schools didn’t collaborate more.”
(2006 MArch graduate)
“The curriculum I went through was successful in facilitating a very open-minded learning environment.
Students were constantly encouraged to explore and design discourse from other context, cultures and
disciplines.”
“I would like to see the school take a strong stance in addressing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s
Calls to Action and be a leader in the conversation of how to deal with reconciliation in design.”
“I think the school, for me, did an excellent job in this regard.”

“I would say that SALA does not embrace cultural differences. It is still very much an old boys club. We are
taught the western male history and engage very little with other vernaculars or other ways of knowing/
designing. Perhaps the school should be more open to other perspectives and create a healthier more
inclusive environment where women and minorities are recognized. The school should recognize that
work/life balance and professional success can go hand in hand.”
“The program successfully engaged many international students. And I think it is important that not all
studios focus on the Canadian context - as it successfully does. I think it is important for an architect to
be capable of culturally unbiased design work and to be able to address the local context as well as think
globally.”
“Architecture, as a discipline, has the potential to positively contribute to solving large complex problems
beyond the conventional ‘built’ realm. This should be stressed, in my opinion. Ideas, thinking, process and
communication over technical knowledge that will be learnt regardless.”
“More support in terms of physical and mental well-being, a lot of which is a matter of linking SALA more
closely with existing UBC health resources.”
“The mentorship program is a good step to achieving this goal. A physical presence in the heart of the city
will make it easier to engage the profession and the general public. There are significant changes being
considered in the urban design and built characteristic of Vancouver, and having a physical presence in
the city may allow the school engaging these topics in a meaningful way and help project a voice on these
sorts of matters in the future.”
“SALA could do a better job providing need-based and merit-based financial support. Students from
lower socioeconomic backgrounds provide different cultural experiences and views, and have increased
challenges completing higher education programs.”
“Continuation of the existing studies abroad options. Further studies abroad options (short courses over
winter break, or summer courses) would offer more opportunities in interpersonal milieus and cultural
differences. Studies ‘abroad’ also do not necessarily be outside of BC or Canada. Many contexts do exist
for professional and personal development in the province and elsewhere in Canada.”
“Courses or work study programs directly linked to professor research in this domain was greatly valuable
and eye opening in my experience. This also clearly exposes students to forms of practice.”

“I understand (and greatly appreciate & respect) that work is going / has already gone into addressing
many of the above since I left, including strengthening mentorship and design-build, reducing barriers to
engaging learnings beyond SALA, and integration of indigenous (and other non-western) perspectives. (I
was unfortunately not in a position to be able to take advantage of studies abroad during my time at SALA
- so international exposure ratings lower than would have been otherwise).”
“The scholarship process at SALA was incredibly opaque (from the student perspective) and seemed to
reward students who played politics well instead of supporting students with greater need. That being
said, there were some professors who were sympathetic to this issue by providing research opportunities.
But it often wasn’t enough, necessitating multiple jobs and side hustles. The energy I had to expend just
to make ends meet was definitely detrimental to my educational output.”
CACB Perspective 3: Architectural Education and Registration?”
“It could be argued that students don’t have a great “real world” reality of office culture nor does it
prepare them for office life as an intern. My opinion is that there is a lot to learn about the profession and
I’d rather have that time spent teaching me about design than practicalities of office life which I will learn
in the seven years it takes me to get registered.”
“I sense that though I was fortunately exposed professors with well received recommendations, the school
still merely provides students the minimum exposure to discourse of professional practice. There appear
to be a gap between what students perceive to be the expectation, and what they’re encouraged or
supported to do through their education. For example, the school provides minimal support for co-op
placement.”
“A better integration of CHOP with the curriculum so that when we are in practice, we better understand
the responsibilities of an architect at different stages of work.”
“Maybe this has improved in recent years but there was little to no relationship between academic and
professional worlds. I’m personally on the fence about how close this relationship should be. I felt we were
being prepared to run an office not just be an employee and I appreciated that.”
“I’m of the belief that the institution should engage with professional life only in an auxiliary capacity.
Maybe that’s a co-op situation. Maybe have more site visits to in-progress buildings in the area with
visits to that architect’s office to see the process. In no way should the institution veer from an academic
first focus.”

“Although the theoretical, research and design side of architecture should be the focus of architectural
education, construction education, working drawings and technical skills are very important in a
professional program. I think most programs lack this and graduates are un-prepared for the professional
setting.”
“Let’s celebrate paths OTHER than internship/registration. What else can architects do? How do they do
it? What other ways can we contribute?”
“Co-op is a valuable option. However, I think there is value in the school as being apart somewhat from
the concerns of practice. School, in my view, is about making better citizens, and in this case better citizens
whose worldview is through the practice of architecture. Every time firms complain that the school doesn’t
train students well enough, they are a) forgetting that they didn’t know much when they graduated, b)
that architecture is more complex than when they graduated, and c) they are really only trying to execute
cost savings by shirking their traditional professional role as mentor.”
“Exposure to alternative/emergent models of (real-world) practice. More (reciprocal) support/engagement/

capacity-building with AIBC, RAIC and community of practice re: Internship/alternative pathways. This is a
larger nut to crack, necessitating commitments from each of the other named parties.”
“Have an architectural practice seminar early on and introduce the students to possible career paths,
including license procedure and timeline.”
“Program can provide more information, direction in the process, highlight connecting points and even
help in choosing appropriate firms. There are a multitude of scales, types of work, cultures, personalities,
and facets to every firm. The path to license is more complicated than what is taught at school.”
“All the skills that may not seem to be related to critical thinking are so important in the profession, from
technical writing to making good contract documents to the soft skills of managing people, time and
budgets.”
“The school does a good job in this regard. I can’t recall what the law class was called but it was excellent,
with a very engaging and knowledgeable lawyer with a background in architecture. I waived the other
professional practice class so can’t comment on that one. I wouldn’t want to see the school to expand
much beyond these courses, because I’d rather spend the time I have at university learning about things
and doing things you *can’t* do while you’re practicing. “
“I would love to see a more integrated registration process like that in the UK, where there seems to be a
smoother transition between school and work life.”

“I think co-ops are hugely beneficial, but I don’t believe a mandatory co-op term should be added to the
program. There should be support and encouragement of the benefits of a co-op term, though.”
“Overall, the program was good preparation for internship. However, I would have been better prepared
had if I been informed in more detail about the business models of architecture, what type of work is
standard for a graduate beginning their internship, and with more experience in detailing (perhaps as an
added component in vertical studios?).”
“Part of the problem is the attitude of firms locally in Vancouver. Most senior designers treat students
like they know nothing. This is not the case in Europe for example where young people are catalysts for
new ideas. Licensure in Canada is a problem generally though. The school could focus more on preparing
students for the AIBC but they would sacrifice academic rigour.”
“Exposure to other career paths beyond traditional architectural practice. Recognition of the limited
demographics represented in the architecture professional and honest discussion/advocacy/support to
diversify.”
“While I greatly valued my time doing co-op and I think the program should be further supported through
direct relationships between the school and firms, I do not think it reflects everyone’s path and should not
be required.”
CACB Perspective 4: Architectural Education and the Profession?”
“The process one must undergo to become a registered architect is absurd and opposed to the profession’s
stated goals of increasing diversity and engagement with the public. To what end are we forcing students
through multiple degrees, an excruciating experience logging process, overly long and arduous licensure
exams, and the remaining litany of requirements (interview, professional practice courses, etc.)? The
answer surely can’t be public safety, for if it was the bridges and skyscrapers designed by engineers
who have but a mere bachelor’s degree would be crumbling around us. The answer, of course, is the
profession’s peculiar superiority complex, and it’s a big problem the universities and regulators should be
working together to address.”
“Perhaps if architects need to assume new roles, students need to assume a variety of roles throughout
their education. I’m not sure how this could be achieved, but perhaps adding more kinds of players to
every project could be beneficial - client, co-client, owner, builder, non-for profit group, BIA, etc.”
(2017 MArch graduate )

“Even if these topics are taught, as I’m sure some were when I was there, but it’s all pretty abstract until
you’re out there in practice. Also, practice and regulations will force the issue, but no one in the profession
will teach you how to think or even how to design. It’s like how buildings have to be built to code but any
technician can do that, understanding consultant coordination and municipal bylaws won’t help people
become better architects.”
“Gaining AIBC credible hours while in school would take the sting out of it later. Also, the AIBC has required
courses for interns - why are these not mentioned or engaged with earlier? That and perhaps the school
could examine the content of the exams to better understand what the since deems as crucial knowledge
for architects.”
“Client and regulatory demands are difficult to address outside of practice and I think this is something
that can more or less stay there. Collaboration on the other hand is interesting for me personally and
seems to be lacking somewhat. More collaborative work in the studios would not only help students to
work together, but ensure that the studio environment stays alive and active. Each year fewer students
work in studio - this may have adverse effects not only on practice but also personal development for
students. My undergrad involved an open work environment with lots of idea sharing. This is how we
grew and learnt - not only from our professors and ourselves. It would also be great if the comprehensive
studio demanded AP students not to work together. In practice we work with other disciplines - the range
of backgrounds in the school is a great introduction to that aspect of practice.”
“Some broad-based business courses could be extremely helpful here: why would an architect be valuable
to a project even if regulation A, B, C were to change tomorrow is a common business proposition, but
not one that gets asked a lot in the discipline. I would like to see the conversation to move towards one
of value (how architects can remain valuable as consultants in a changing ecosystem) than one (strictly-
speaking) of design quality.”
“There could be a stronger engagement between the teaching of architectural history and the teaching
of environmental science. Somewhere in between those topics is where the stories of changing client
and regulatory demands are hidden. Imagine a history class on Sterling’s Staatsgalerie that teases out
the design and construction process, client meetings and regulatory challenges, while also discussing it’s
architectural impact on theory and practice.”
“The program should not be burdened with developing an internship structure. The best schools in Europe
ETH for example combine academics and technical rigour. The internship program should be dissolved.
Students should automatically be architects like in Europe. The market will determine who can deliver.”
“I would love to see more constraint studios that reflects the work environment in terms of structure, cost
and regulation limitations. And the adoption of objected/data oriented tools like Revit could be taught in
school to formulate the tangled complexity exist in real projects.”

“Architecture is design school, it is not about realizing building projects. There is ample time in the
professional practice of architecture to learn how to realize building projects, or engage culture, etc.”
CACB Perspective 5: Architectural Education and Society?”
“The school excels in exposing students to social and environmental issues. I was given multiple
opportunities through SALA to interact with stakeholders and advocacy groups, and area which greatly
influenced my education and seems to distinguish me from architecture graduates from other schools.”
“I would like to see SALA develop a strong program focus in social response/outreach, as well as be leaders
in “sustainable” design. Our graduates should be sought after by architecture firms across North America
as the ones to hire because of their knowledge, skill sets and innovative design capabilities in regenerative/
sustainable design.”
“Bring back the downtown studio! Being in the heart of downtown gentrification was eye-opening to a
young independent person.”
“This topic was very clearly on the agenda when I was in school. Then and now it skews more toward
Urban Design and big Landscape Urbanism issues but, in professional practice, we often have a more
narrowly defined slice of the pie. Is important to understand the big issues but needs to be balanced with
understanding what constitutes an architectural idea (i.e. What’s our scope vs what’s our responsibility?)”
“Understanding of social and environmental problems should be stressed even more than they already
are. Problem solving through design should absolutely focus on what threatens the environment and
humanity. The discipline needs to shift even more from the past virtues that are less relevant to those
that are.”
“It would be beneficial to develop a more structured and sustained manner of interaction with local
communities that is directly understood as a form of contribution of the school towards social justice in
the city (for example, through a core studio focusing on a certain social issue, or a design-build course
situated in a contested urban context).”
“Felt this area was the strength of my education. Social engagement and ethics are what drew me to
the program.”

“It wasn’t until moving to Europe that I appreciated the systemic thinking that I had been exposed to at
UBC. Unfortunately, this is rarely required in a conventional developer driven project at a firm in Vancouver.
Nevertheless, I think the school is doing this well.”
“Municipalities across Canada are looking for ways to address the TRC’s Calls to Action. Our students
should be (but are not yet) in a position to assist finding culturally appropriate responses.”
“Per environmental issues, I again see this as primarily a technical issue not an issue of design per se. The
leading green building standards require detailed technical understanding of building envelope science
and building systems.”
“I don’t feel like social/ethical topics were a focus of the program while I was there. The environmental
offerings were good + diverse. It was only in my GP1/2 where I was really able to engage meaningfully with
social/ethical/environmental concerns in any depth.”

3.3 Public Information
The program must provide clear, complete, and accurate information to the public by including in its academic
calendar and promotional literature the exact language found in Appendix A-1, which explains the parameters of
an accredited professional degree program. Candidate programs must include, as well, the exact language found
in this appendix on the parameters of candidacy status.

- The program description as it appears in university academic calendar or any other institutionally authorized
printed or digital materials.
- Evidence that all faculty and incoming students have been provided with a printed or digital copy of the Guide to
Student Performance Criteria.
3.3.1 University Calendar
The following section is excerpted from the UBC Vancouver Academic Calendar 2017/18. Much of this content is
also available online at the UBC SALA website.
Introduction
The Master of Architecture (MArch) program is an accredited professional graduate program for those with an
undergraduate degree who wish to pursue professional studies in architecture, as a prerequisite to becoming a
registered architect.
The full program is 119 credits. Students entering the program with an undergraduate degree normally take
three and one-half years of full-time study to complete the requirements. Students holding a pre-professional
architecture degree will be considered for advanced placement. An undergraduate degree in a field related to
architecture may be advantageous in reducing the length of the program, but it is not a required prerequisite.
Demonstration of interest and aptitude in the field occurs as part of the application process. At the time of
application, the School’s Admissions Committee will determine the extent of advanced placement on the basis of
the applicant’s undergraduate transcript and portfolio.
Academic Advising
Students entering the program are assigned an advisor for their first year of study. In addition, during the first
year, and in subsequent years, students may seek advice from their studio or thesis mentor, administrative
faculty (specifically the chair of Standings and Promotion and the chair of the Master of Architecture program),
as well as the administrative staff.
Admission
The selection of university courses anticipating graduate studies in architecture should emphasize a breadth
and mix of academic experience, including exposure to some aspect of visual communication. Irrespective of
specific degree requirements within various faculties or universities, university-level course work in mathematics,
physics, English literature, and composition is desirable. Beyond specific academic experiences, students
entering the Master of Architecture program should demonstrate interest and potential in the creative arts and
architecture.
Please visit the School for information and guidance in preparation for entry.
3.3 Public Information -- 63

Candidates for admission to the Master of Architecture program are generally required to hold the academic
equivalent of a four-year baccalaureate degree from UBC. In at least four years of study, candidates should have
obtained a B+ average in third- and fourth-year coursework. Applicants must in addition demonstrate creative
potential and aptitude for the study of architecture.
Applicants must submit all of the following by January 4:
ොො Application Form and fee information.

ොො Biographical statement. A brief summary (in resumé form) including work experience, travel, or other
relevant experience.
ොො Statement of interest. A brief statement of the reasons for desiring to study architecture as well as reasons
for selecting Architecture at UBC.
ොො Portfolio. A portfolio of work demonstrating aptitude and experience in creative endeavours and evidence
of graphic skills. Additional information and instructions pertaining to the presentation of the portfolio are
available by email.
ොො Transcripts. Two official transcripts of all post-secondary study completed to date (up to, and including,
December grades) received in sealed, endorsed envelopes. If an applicant is currently completing a degree,
an evaluation will be made on the transcripts to date. Acceptance will be conditional on the successful
completion of the bachelor’s degree according to the academic requirements, and receipt of a final, official
transcript confirming the degree awarded.
ොො Letters of reference. A minimum of three letters of reference from persons who can best assess the
applicant’s initiative and academic, analytical, and creative abilities. These must be received through the
online application system (see the School’s website) or in sealed, endorsed envelopes.
Places are awarded on a competitive basis as interest in the program far exceeds available resources and
facilities. The Admissions Committee reserves the right to not admit applicants who nominally meet the entrance
requirements. All admissions must be approved by the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies.
A week-long workshop course in late August is mandatory for entering students. Details about the workshop
course are provided with the letter of offer. Students who are unable to attend must re-apply for admission at a
later date.
Readmission and Reinstatement

For regulations concerning readmission and reinstatement, see Withdrawal, Reinstatement and Readmission.
Academic Regulations
See Section 4.2.2 for detailed information.
Portfolio
All students are required to keep a portfolio of their work in each design studio for review by faculty members at
the end of each term in which the studio is held. The portfolio must contain, at a minimum, all the presentation
drawings from each project in a studio, but these may be digital files or reproductions of originals and
photographs of other presentation materials such as models, etc. The portfolio is to be kept available for review
in case of an appeal of grade in a studio or other dispute regarding the student’s standing.

Advanced Placement
As noted under Admission, advanced placement is normally established at the time of admission, subject to
confirmation of previous experience by appropriate faculty.
Supplementary Work
No supplementary work is available in design studios.
For courses other than design studios, the normal University regulations apply. Only in exceptional circumstances
will a student be allowed to undertake supplementary work in those other Architecture courses, which are
assessed on a continuing basis throughout the term.
Appeal Procedures
Degree Requirements
Study Abroad Program

A student who enrolls in the full-term Study Abroad Program may substitute ARCH 538 (Study of Architecture
Abroad) for elective credits and ARCH 539 (Architectural Design Abroad) for ARCH 520 or 540, so as to make up a
full term’s work abroad.
Co-op Education Program

The added Co-op component to the Master of Architecture program provides motivated, qualified students with
paid employment experience directly relevant to their academic program under the supervision of practicing
professionals.
The optional program consists of two consecutive terms; placement begins in September, January, or May. The
Co-op experience must be followed by two terms of academic study.
Students will be selected on the basis of academic performance, written and oral communication skills, and
general suitability for the work environment. Students may apply during their fourth term of studio. Specific
deadlines are available at Architecture’s administrative offices.
Faculty advisors or coordinators visit students at their places of work and provide advice on the work term
reports that is a requirement of the program.
Students are responsible for finding their own work placements, although the Architecture office keeps a file of
interested firms. Students participating in the program will be registered in ARCH 555 and ARCH 556 for a total of
6 credits and pay the usual graduate fees. These 6 credits are considered elective credits. In addition, the elective
ARCH 543 will be waived if a Professional Practice Workbook is completed.
Program Specific Expenses

Apart from the cost of living and tuition, certain additional expenses must be anticipated to include books,
equipment, the Introductory Workshop (ARCH 502) and support technology and equipment.
Students electing to participate in a Study Abroad Program must be prepared to meet further expenses.
Graduation Project

The Graduation Project, consisting of ARCH 548 and ARCH 549, provides an opportunity for students in the
professional MArch program to identify, delineate, and explore a topic of their choice leading to a proposal for a
specific architectural project clearly situated in a fully articulated context. Students are required to demonstrate
their ability to define an architectural project, to acknowledge the varied scales of resolution appropriate to the
task, and to take responsibility for the management of the process to complete the project on schedule.
The Graduation Project is overseen by the Graduation Project Review Committee (GPRC), a subcommittee of
the faculty.
Complete details on the criteria for and completion of the Graduation Project can be found within the
Graduation Project Guidelines at Architecture.
Graduation Project Part I: ARCH 548

The purpose of Part I of the Graduation Project is to explore a chosen topic, to discover and define the
architectural project that is inherent or implicit within it, and to develop an outline program through which the
project may be explored in terms of its design ramifications. ARCH 548 is a one-term, 3-credit course. In order to
be eligible to enrol in ARCH 548, a student must have successfully completed all requirements for second year.
Graduation Project Part II: ARCH 549

The purpose of Part II of the Graduation Project is to explore in deliberate design terms the material of Part
I. ARCH 549 is a one-term, 9-credit course. In order to enrol in ARCH 549, in addition to passing ARCH 548, a
student must have reduced any outstanding course requirements beyond ARCH 549 to a maximum of 18 credits.
The final grade will be determined by the supervising committee in consultation with guests and other faculty
in attendance at the final presentation. A minimum of 68% is required in order to obtain credit for the course. It
should be noted that in cases where the time taken to complete the Graduation Project has been extended, the
final grade will fully reflect the period of time taken to complete the project.
Should a grade of less than 68% be attained for ARCH 549, the student would then be required to take a leave
from the program for a period of twelve months. The student would then be required to submit a new Part II
proposal and, with the approval of the GPRC, begin again with a new topic and a new supervisory committee.
It would be necessary for the student to undertake any needed preparatory work acceptable to the new
committee chair without credit, prior to re-registering.
Should a student receive a grade of less than 68% after a second attempt, the student would be required to
withdraw from the program and would not be permitted to re-register.
Graduation Project Final Report

The Graduation Project Final Report consists of an amalgam of the work of Part I and Part II, submitted with
the purpose of, in part, providing a bound copy of the project to be held in the Architecture Reading Room.
Adherence to specified format requirements is expected.
Time Limit for Completion of Degree Requirements

University regulations establish a five-year time limit for the completion of a master’s program. For provisions
regarding on-leave status, see On Leave Status.

3.3.2 Admissions and Recruitment Materials
In 2016 SALA published a new admissions and recruitment package for its professional MArch and MLA degree
programs as well as its post-professional Master of Urban Design and undergraduate Bachelor of Environmental
Design programs. Also included in this package was a 2016 Fall Lecture Series poster. The SALA website (see
Section 3.3.3 below) contains many sources of information, including FAQs, Feature Stories, detailed admissions
requirements, post-admissions tasks, and many other issues of interest to prospective students.
A package of information including the CACB Terms and Conditions of Accreditation and Student Performance
Criteria is mailed to incoming students after they accept the program’s offer of admission.
3.3.3 School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture Website
The outline below describes the nested structure of the SALA website. Hyperlinks to key areas related to the
architecture program are provided for convenience.
About
History
Accreditation
Margolese National Design for Living Prize
Recipients
FAQs
Career Opportunities
Contact
People
Leadership
Advisory council
Faculty
Emeriti and honorary professors
Staff
Events + news
Lecture series
Feature stories
News
Events
Admissions
Bachelor of Design in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Urbanism
Master of Architecture
Master of Landscape Architecture
Dual Degree option
Master of Urban Design
Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture
Master of Advanced Studies in Landscape Architecture
International applicants

I’ve applied. Now what?
I’ve been accepted. Now what?
Academics
Non-Degree Programs
Vancouver Summer Program
Design Discovery
Undergraduate Degree
Bachelor of Environmental Design
Why Study Environmental Design Here?
What Can I Do With My Degree?
Curriculum
Bachelor of Design in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Urbanism
Graduate Degrees
Master of Architecture
Why Study Architecture Here?
Curriculum
Master of Landscape Architecture
Why Study Landscape Architecture Here?
Curriculum
Dual Degree Option
Why Pursue Both Degrees Here?
What Can I Do With My Degrees?
Curriculum
Post-Graduate Degrees
Master of Urban Design
Why Study Urban Design Here?
Curriculum
Annual Theme and Forum
Community Partnerships
Affiliates
Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture
Why Pursue a Second Architecture Degree Here?
Curriculum
Master of Advanced Studies in Landscape Architecture
Why Pursue a Second Landscape Architecture Degree Here?
Curriculum

Enriched Educational Experiences
Co-Op
Design Build
Directed Studies
Study Abroad
Exchanges
Academic Calendar
Courses
Student Life
Student Government
Student Organizations
Advising
Mentorship
Health and Wellbeing
Employment
Scholarships, Grants and Awards
Policies and Procedures
Resources
Buildings
Computing
Accounts
Computers
Network and internet access
Print, plot, and scan
Security
Software
Technical support
Media and AV
Library and Resource Collections
Workshop and Fabrication
CNC router
Die cutter
Laser cutters
3D printers
Material sales
Room and Fabrication Reservations
Make a payment
Book a room or fabrication device
Get help
Handbooks and Forms
Work

3.3.4 Memo to Students and Faculty outlining CACB Accreditation Criteria and Processes
The following message was emailed to all incoming and currently enrolled students in the professional
architecture program:
To all incoming and enrolled MArch students,
Please view the document at the following link, CACB Conditions and Terms for Accreditation, from the
Canadian Architectural Certification Board.
This document contains the following statement from the CACB: “This guide is written expressly for the
faculty and students of professional degree programs in architecture. It begins with a brief overview of
the parameters for accrediting professional degree programs, including a list of the twelve conditions
that your program must address to maintain its accreditation. However, the guide’s primary purpose is to
inform you about one of these conditions, namely the Student Performance Criteria.”
Student Performance Criteria are areas where every student who graduates from an accredited
architecture program must demonstrate the required level of accomplishment measured either
“understanding,” or the higher degree of “ability.” The criteria define the minimum requirements for
your professional education in architecture.
As some of you may already be aware, the School is gathering student work throughout the 2017 year as
part of our preparations for the CACB’s accreditation visit in early 2018. Graduating from an accredited
program enables your architectural education to be certified automatically. This is a major step toward
professional architectural registration.
Sincerely,
John Bass
Chair, Architecture Program

The following e-mail message was sent to all faculty members in the School of Architecture:
Architecture faculty,
One of the requirements for accreditation is that the School distribute the CACB’s most recent
Conditions and Terms for Accreditation, which includes Student Performance Criteria to all faculty. Here
is your copy.
This document describes the accreditation process, including the set of 31 student performance criteria
(formerly 37), the delivery of which is our most important responsibility. This document describes the
accreditation process in detail, including the ongoing preparation of the Architecture Program Report.
Another document, CACB Procedures for Accreditation, describes in detail the various aspects of the
full accreditation reporting, review, and assessment process. As you prepare for a new year, please
take some time to review these important documents, and carefully consider how your courses will
unambiguously contribute to meeting our responsibilities to provide our students with the highest
standard of professional education.
Sincerely,
John Bass

3.4 Social Equity
The accredited degree program must provide a summary of provincial and institutional policies that augment and
clarify the provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as they apply to social equity. Where policies in place
are specific to the School or professional program, these should be clearly stated, as well as the means by which
they are communicated to current and prospective faculty, students and staff.

- Procedures in place used to achieve equity and diversity in School operations and activities.
Broadly, a number of authoritative bodies have established policies directly focused on social equity, including
the Federal government, the Provincial government, and the collective agreements between the University of
British Columbia and faculty, administration and staff.
In the UBC Mission document Valuing Difference: A Strategy for Developing Equity and Diversity at UBC, Dr.
Stephen Toope, former President of UBC states,
“Fresh perspectives are as integral to academic enterprise as blood is to life. Accordingly, The University
of British Columbia recognizes that diversity amongst its students, staff and faculty is essential to ensure
a lively learning environment where ideas and perspectives are given voice. Being a diverse community is
not enough, however; UBC must ensure that those voices perceived to be ‘different’ are recognized and
appreciated.
The values of mutual respect and equity are therefore central to the University’s strategic planning
document, Place and Promise: The UBC Plan, in which UBC articulates its commitment to building
intercultural aptitudes and creating a strong sense of inclusion. Valuing Difference: A Strategy for
Advancing Equity and Diversity at UBC is central to realizing that commitment. It is intended to ensure
that equity and diversity are embedded not only in UBC’s values but also in its operations. Valuing
Difference also recognizes that there is still much work to be done to achieve these goals …. and that
action is required to address these concerns.”
UBC’s Equity Office is specifically responsible for promoting institutional practices and individual behaviours
that enhance the pursuit of educational and employment opportunity. They work to prevent discrimination and
harassment on campus, to provide procedures for handling complaints and to coordinate UBC’s employment
and educational equity program. They help educate members of the UBC community about their rights and
responsibilities. Workshops and training sessions for students, staff and faculty on issues such as discrimination
and harassment, equity and diversity are offered regularly and are available on request. They also regularly
provide detailed reports on UBC’s progress towards achieving employment equity.
The UBC website provides public information on many policies directly related to issues of social equality.
These include Employment Equity, Discrimination and Harassment, and Advertising of Position Vacancies, #73
Academic Accommodation for Students with Disabilities.

3.4.1 Faculty
Specifically pertaining to all School of Architecture faculty, including sessional faculty, the Faculty Association
delineates these guidelines under the Framework Agreement for Collective Bargaining. The Collective Agreement
between the Faculty Association and the University of British Columbia is the governing document on major
issues such as faculty rights, discipline, appointments, promotion and tenure.
Article 4. No Discrimination
4.01. There shall be no discrimination regarding any term or condition of employment by reason of
sex, sexual orientation, age, race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, political belief, religion, marital
status, family status, physical or mental disability (provided that such condition does not interfere with
the ability to carry out the essential duties of the position), or membership or nonmembership in, or
activities on behalf of, the Association. The University, the Association, Faculty Members, Librarians and
Program Directors are committed to fostering a positive working climate of mutual respect in which all
members of the University Community - students, faculty, staff and visitors - are able to study and work
free from harassment and discrimination.
4.02. In keeping with the requirements of the Federal Contractors Program, to which the University is
committed, the University and the Association agree to the principle of employment equity for all groups
as may be designated in Federal and Provincial legislation, or as agreed to by the Parties. This principle
ensures opportunities in hiring, promotion and tenure for members in designated groups and ensures no
systematic barriers exist to the full participation of these groups in the workplace.
When hiring new tenure-track faculty, the procedures are conducted according to the University policies which
at the initial round are limited to Canadian citizens. (Should a qualified candidate not emerge from this round,
applications will be sought from non-Canadian.) In order to achieve the greatest diversity, all faculty and senior
academic administrative openings are advertised in the AUCC publication University Affairs and the CAUT Bulletin
prior to selection of a candidate for appointment. To this list of publications, the School of Architecture also
adds the ACSA newsletter and/or other selected academic publications. All advertising for positions contains the
wording “UBC hires on the basis of merit and is committed to employment equity. We encourage all qualified
persons to apply.”
For sessional appointments, postings are advertised in accordance with the Agreement on Conditions of
Appointments for Sessional and Part-time Faculty Members. Every attempt is made to encourage the highest
qualified candidates possible from the professional community to apply for these positions. Accommodations
are made to the teaching format in order that highly qualified professional instructors may integrate their
teaching and professional responsibilities.
Criteria and procedures for achieving equity and diversity in faculty appointments, re-appointments, and
promotions are clearly set out in the Collective Agreement between the University of British Columbia Faculty
Association and the University of British Columbia (Section 4). Faculty members applying for promotion are
counseled by the Director with respect to assembling relevant information. Special consideration is given in
establishing the weighting of teaching, service and research to ensure that these weightings fairly reflect the
applicant’s role and responsibilities within the Faculty.
Full time faculty members in the Architecture program reflect this diversity. Of the full-time faculty members,
40% are women.
3.4 Social Equity -- 75

3.4.2 Staff
Policies with respect to hiring procedures for support staff are covered in the collective agreement between
the University of British Columbia and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) 2950, as well as the
Agreement on Conditions and Terms of Employment between the University of British Columbia and the
Association of Administrative and Professional Staff (AAPS).
3.4.3. Students
Broadly, the UBC Calendar states “The University of British Columbia is committed to ensuring that all members
of the University community – students, faculty, staff and visitors – are able to study and work in an environment
of tolerance and mutual respect that is free from harassment and discrimination.”.
For students, UBC offices which reflect the University’s commitment to social equity “irrespective of race,
ethnicity, creed, national origin, gender, age, physical ability, or sexual orientation” include the Equity Office, the
Access and Diversity Office, the Disability Resource Centre, Counselling Services, the International House, the
Women Students’ Office and the First Nations House of Learning.
Student representatives are voting members at all levels of university committees from the Board of Governors
to the standing and ad hoc committees of the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, including the
Student Executive Committee, which has regular meetings with the SALA Director and the SALA Student Affairs
Committee, comprised of faculty from SALA’s degree programs.
Over the course of the last several years, ARCHUS has developed a series of health and wellness programs that
are available to students in the architecture program. These include a weekly healthy breakfast each Friday, in
which students prepare waffles, crepes and other meals. Every term, ARCHUS sponsors a Health and Wellness
Day, which includes recreational activities and the presence of Wellness Peers from UBC’s Health and Wellness
Centre, and BYDTSD: Bring Your Dog to School Day.
3.4.4 Admissions Process
While there is no formal avenue to identify many characteristics, such as religious and sexual preferences and
ethnic background, during the admissions process care is taken to eliminate bias against these characteristics
as best as possible by virtue of the size and structure of the Admissions Committee. In the last admissions
committee, all available faculty and ten students who volunteer through ARCHUS, individually assess the
applications [four per applicant file] based on the submitted pieces. Then at a combined meeting, each
member’s results are evaluated and reviewed then a consensus reached for each of the applicants.
The Professional MArch program accepts between 25-35 students into its first year and between approximately
10-15 additional students are given advanced standing into second year. Table 3.5.a. shows the number of
applicants over the past six years to illustrate the changes from one year before the last accreditation visit to
the present.
Since the last Accreditation Visit, the statistics for admissions has remained fairly constant. The percentage of
women admitted to the program is approximately equal to the percentage of men admitted. Approximately 30%
of successful applicants are visible minorities, primarily of Asian and Iranian origin.

3.4.5 Advancement, Retention, Graduation
Within the requirements of the architecture program, students are given a fair degree of latitude and autonomy
in making decisions in their course selections that reflect their academic objectives within the constraints of the
program. A couple of examples where student autonomy is intertwined with intervention are listed below.
The three nine-credit vertical options studios give students opportunity to choose design studios which reflect
their interests and academic objectives while at the same time meeting the necessary educational requirements
for architectural design. In order to enroll in a vertical options studio, students participate in a lottery process
whereby students rank their interest in each options studio offered that term. With results compiled, the vertical
options studios are balanced with respect to verticality, gender, academic strengths and preference to senior-
level students all the while respecting each student’s highest-ranked studio choices where at all possible. To
explore an alternate placement in an options studio, a student may discuss the placement with the Chair or a
designated member of the design faculty.
Study abroad opportunities are offered by Architecture faculty in both full term study as well as short four to
six week summer study. A full term study abroad program is now offered every year while a short study abroad
offering is typically offered each summer. Students have equal opportunity to apply to participate in these
offerings. The study abroad programs are balanced with respect to gender and year level as enrollment permits
with some weight to academic standing and seniority in the program.
Beyond that, with respect to advancement, retention and graduation, academic accomplishment becomes the
only criteria.
3.4.6 Equity, Health and Wellbeing Services
UBC’s Equity and Inclusion Office provides students with many services and resources. The SALA website section
on Health and Wellbeing has a link to the Equity Office, along with links to several related university services,
including Access and Diversity, Counselling Services, and Health Services.
3.4.7. Access to Formulation of Policies and Procedures
Faculty, students and staff are given access to the formulation of policies and procedures including curriculum
review and program development.
For Architecture faculty, all major program decisions have been instituted after review in a faculty meeting and
voted on by all faculty members. An annual all-day architecture faculty retreat as well as monthly meetings
provide ample opportunity for review, discussion, and voting. SALA has five standing committees: Academic
Affairs, Student Affairs, IT Infrastructure, Research, and Outreach. These committee’s end-of-year reports are
in Section 4.6.7. Each program’s subcommittees report to the SALA committees in such areas as curriculum,
graduation project, awards, admissions, Web/IT, lectures and events. Senior faculty have standing and
promotions meetings that address appointments, reappointments, promotions and tenure. In addition, SALA
faculty meetings occur monthly with one all-day faculty retreat and one half day retreat per year.
3.4 Social Equity -- 77

For students, a student representative is a member of the Faculty Meeting and takes information and decisions
to the students through their student ARCHUS society. The SALA Director and Chair of the Student Affairs
Committee has monthly meetings with representatives from the five student bodies within SALA – Architecture,
Landscape Architecture, [undergraduate] Environmental Design, Urban Design, and (Architecture and Landscape
Architecture) Advanced Studies.
78 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017 3.4 Social Equity -- 78

3.5 Human Resources
The program must demonstrate that it provides adequate human resources for a professional degree program
in architecture, including a sufficient faculty complement, an administrative head devoting not less than fifty
percent of his/her time to program administration, administrative and technical support staff, and faculty support
staff. Student enrolment in and scheduling of design studios must assure adequate time for an effective tutorial
exchange between the faculty member and the student. A maximum student/faculty ratio between 12:1 and 15:1
is considered acceptable. The total teaching load should be such that faculty members have adequate time to
pursue research, scholarship, and practice to enhance their professional development.

- Students: Description of the students’ educational backgrounds and the program’s selectivity, retention, and time-
to-graduation rates since the last accreditation sequence.
- Faculty: Description of the distribution of effort between teaching and other responsibilities of each faculty
member and evidence that students evaluate individual courses and faculty.
- Administration: Description of the distribution of effort between administration and other responsibilities for
each position.
- Staff: Description of the responsibilities for each position.
3.5.1 Students
Applications and Admissions to the MArch Program

It is the goal of the Professional MArch program to enroll 60 students -- or five studio sections of twelve per
section – every year. The number increased from approximately 48 to 60 in 2016, when the decision to run the
full-term Studies Abroad Program annually (which creates space in Vancouver as up to 16 students participate in
the SA) instead of biannually, opened up the opportunity to augment tuition intake.
Between 33 and 39 students holding a wide variety of undergraduate diplomas enter into the first-year non-
advanced placement stream. Approximately 24 additional students are given advanced standing with either
18/21 or 36/39 credits and enter directly into an advanced placement stream. These numbers translate into an
annual student body renewal of three studio sections entering the curriculum at its beginning and two studio
sections placing into an advanced course of study.
Table 3.5.a. shows the number of applicants over the past six years to illustrate the changes from one year before
the last accreditation visit to the present.
3.5 Human Resources -- 79

Table 3.5.a. Admissions Data for MArch Program
Category 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total # of Applicants 367 338 355 429 489 510
% of AP Applicants No Info 42% 53% 55% 54% 61%
Canadian 226 211 241 273 305 280
US 36 33 23 23 52 54
International [non US] 105 94 91 133 132 176
Admitted to Year 1 30 34 35 32 35 33
Advanced Standing 12 18 12 16 17 22
Total Enrolled 42 52 47 48 52 55
Applied/Enrolled 367/42 338/52 355/47 429/48 489/52 510/55

% Canadian Enrolled 85% 71% 87% 83% 84% 80%
Male:Female 0.91:1 1.08:1 0.88:1 0.66:1 1.36:1 0.90:1

Graduated 43 44 42 45 41 39
Application numbers have risen significantly, and the applicant geographical distribution are disproportionately
toward international applicants. In the 2011 Architecture Program Report the program reported:
“That of the accepted applicants, approximately 40 – 50% are from BC, 30 – 40% were from other parts
of Canada, and about 20% from the US and abroad.”
In the 2017 applicant data, the percentage of international students from the US and elsewhere is now
approximately 45%. However, the Canadian cohort continues to be approximately 80% of those enrolled.
Several key observations can be derived from this table:
ොො The proportion of advanced placement (AP) applicants has significantly increased. Coupled with ongoing
pressure to find new sources of revenue for the program, this shift led to the program decision to expand
the AP cohort by one studio section of 12 students.
ොො The demand for places in the professional MArch program remains exceptionally high. The number of
applicants has increased by 42% since 2012.
ොො Over the past six years, while the number of Canadian applicants has risen relatively steadily, the number of
US applicants slowed in 2014-15, but has spiked since 2016. Non-US international students have seen the
biggest increases, with the number of applicants from China and India increasing most dramatically.
ොො The ratio of applicants to admitted is approximately 5:1, and the ratio of applicants to enrolled is currently
approximately 9:1. Space and resource limitations prevent the School from accommodating a larger
number of qualified applicants.
ොො The gender mix in the MArch program varies from year to year but is close to gender equity.

The preferred applicant academic distribution encompasses a full range of academic four-year degrees, from
a Bachelor of Fine Arts to a Bachelor of Applied Science. A very small number of students enter with graduate
level work or more than one degree at an undergraduate level. From 2005-2011, the breakdown of degree
specializations for incoming students fell along these approximate parameters:
Bachelor of Arts (including BFA) 35%

Bachelor of Science 15%
Pre-Architecture degrees 40%
Bachelor of Applied Science 5%
Other degrees 5%
Selectivity
Last year, 510 applications were received for the Master of Architecture program. Each application is reviewed
individually for admissibility, then those that meet minimum requirements are reviewed by at least two
faculty members. Staff then correlates results to identify the successful candidates. Approximately 110 offers
of admission are sent out, with an acceptance return of about 50 - 55%. Since 2015, we now target to admit
60 students.
Retention and Time to Graduation

Table 3.5.b. describes retention, time to graduation rates and reasons for leaving the program for students in the
Master of Architecture admitted 2009 through 2013. The data includes students who were required to complete
the full program at 119 credits as well as those who were admitted with a range of advanced placement.
Unless a hardship or other form of exception is applied for and granted, the time limit for completion of degree
requirements is five years.
Table 3.5.b. Completion Data for MArch Program
Entry # # Retention Avg. Time Min/Max # Leaving Program, Reason

Year Enrolled Graduated Rate to Complete to Complete
2009 52 45 86% 3.37 2.3 / 6 years 5 withdrew (4 vol, 1 req), 1

changed program (LARC), 1 time
limit lapsed
2010 42 39 85% 3.41 2 / 5.3 years 7 withdrew (6 vol, 1 req)
2011 46 40 87% 3.32 1.6 / 4.6 years 6 withdrew (5 vol, 1 req)
2012 46 35 83% 3.12 2.3 / 4.6 years 5 withdrew (4 vol, 1 req), 2
changed prog (1 ENG, 1 LARC)
2013* 52 43 83% 3.01 2.3 / 3.6 years 4 in-progress, 4 vol withdrew, 1
changed program (LARC)
* Does not include in-progress students. 2013 entry year is still in progress, with 4 still in program. Retention rate would increase to 90% if
4 remaining 2013 entry students graduate.
A student’s discontinuance from the program is most often a result of the student’s interests and abilities being
at cross-purposes with the demands and focus of the program.

Over this time period, students’ time to graduation averaged three years and three months, four months less
than reported in the 2012 APR. This number will likely continue to decrease as the larger cohort of Advanced
Placement students make their way to graduation.
Minimum / maximum times to graduation ranged from one year six months to six years - in one exceptional case
– and more typically approximately four and a half years. The shorter end of the range reflects those who enter
the program with significant advanced credit and are able to complete course work over the summer terms.
The longer end of the range reflects those who have extended their academic career for a number of reasons
including a co-op opportunity, taking studies abroad programs, which can disrupt students from moving through
the course of study along the most time-efficient path, taking time to work for financial or career opportunities,
academic difficulties or personal difficulties.
Student/Faculty Ratios
Student to faculty ratios range as follows:
Table 3.5.c. Student/Faculty Ratios
Year Studio Lecture Seminar

2012/13 10.5 30.6 13
2013/14 10.3 40 13.4
2014/15 12.6 37.9 10.6
2015/16 12.3 35 13.4
2016/17 11.9 36 14.9
2017W TERM 1 12.7 36.5 14
3.5.2 Faculty Members’ Teaching, Research, and Service
Neither UBC nor the Faculty of Applied Science has a stated policy with regard to expectations of the balance
between teaching, research and service roles. However, UBC maintains a web portal for faculty and department
heads with information about university promotion and tenure review policies.
At present, The SALA Appointments, Reappointments, Promotions and Tenure (ARPT) Review Norms is the
internal document that outlines faculty load expectations. The Review Norms were most recently updated in
2015. This broad characterization is unlikely to accurately measure any individual faculty’s deployment at a given
time, but over the course of an academic career provides a useful working measure. Teaching, research and
service comprise about 40%, 40%, and 20% respectively of a typical tenure-track faculty activity, with tenure-
track lecturer positions increased toward teaching and decreased research expectations.
Service roles occur within the governance structure of SALA, in liaison with the Faculty and University and
other appropriate roles in the broader community. SALA governance is described in Section 3.10.7. Committee
assignments are organized by the SALA Director in consultation with the program chairs and with individual
faculty members. The Director attempts to balance service responsibilities across the faculty, taking into account
the fact that faculty service obligations are widespread, and often involve significant time commitments to
panels, councils, etc. outside of program, school, or UBC.

Full-time faculty serve on a variety of committees at higher levels within the university. All full-time Design and
Specialist faculty serve on the committees within SALA committee governance structure. All MArch full-time
faculty participate in the admissions review process. As with the other SALA program chairs, the MArch program
chair receives teaching relief of one course and a stipend to support research activity.
A typical yearly teaching load for SALA faculty would be:
ොො Architecture Design faculty: One design studio each term, one core or seminar course per year and the
supervision of between (4-6) Graduation Project [GP]-1 and GP-2 student projects each term (one hour per
week per student). They may also sit as members of other GP-2 committees.
ොො Architecture Specialist faculty: Three core courses/seminars each academic year, participation in studio
critiques on an as-needed basis, (1-3) thesis research (GP1) students, and serving as chair or committee
member on (1-3) design thesis (GP2) committees.
Creative practice, scholarly and research efforts are similarly broad in their application across the School’s faculty,
making strict parity difficult to describe accordingly. In advance of an annual meeting with the SALA Director,
faculty submit an updates of their teaching, service, and research activities. This update is also a key part of
merit-based salary increases, which are determined by a SALA faculty committee.
Faculty Knowledge with regard to Changing Conditions of Practice and Licensure

The program chair serves as a voting member of the Architectural Institute of British Columbia (AIBC) Council,
and provides regular updates to program faculty about the discussions taking place at Council, including changes
to licensure, internship requirements, membership, and other agendas of the Council.
The program chair and SALA Director have also participated in national discussions among the schools,
regulators, CACB and CALA regarding the future of architectural practice, and the impacts that these changes
might have on architectural education and CACB conditions and terms of accreditation. These future of
architecture conversations are ongoing and will have impacts on the core curriculum in the next few years.
Recent years have seen the development of better lines of communication between the AIBC and the
architecture program, with social events sponsored by the AIBC and RAIC each term that inform students of the
path to licensure. These events are attended by many faculty, and take place at UBC and at architectural offices
in Vancouver.
Design and technical curriculum faculty actively engage members of the Vancouver architectural and related
consulting professional communities through invitations to student reviews, guest seminars in class and in-
progress technical consultation in the development especially of the students’ comprehensive design projects.

Table 3.5.d. Full-time Faculty Teaching and SALA Administrative Duties for 2017/2018 School Year
Name 2017/2018 2017/2018

Courses/Studios Taught ARCH / SALA Committees
John Bass ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F] Architecture Program Chair
Academic Affairs
Admissions
Accreditation Liaison
Joe Dahmen LARC Technology I [F] Admissions
SALA Survey Course [W] Academic Infrastructure
Mari Fujita On sabbatical ENDS Admissions
Academic Affairs
Cynthia Girling ARCH 541 Process and Pract. [W]
Greg Johnson ARCH 531 Technology II [F] Co-op Program Advisor

ARCH 551 Communic. Const. [F] Admissions
ARCGH 544X Design/Build [F] Academic Infrastructure
ARCH 511 Arch Tech I [W]
ARCH 551 Communic. Const. [S]
ARCH 544Y Design/Build
Chris Macdonald ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F] On Leave
ARCH 561 Adv. History Theory [F]
ARCH 521 Comp. Des. Studio [W]
Sherry McKay Sabbatical [F] Admissions
Student Affairs
ARCH 504/505 History [W]
ARCH 523 Cont. Theories [W]
AnnaLisa Meyboom ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F] On Leave
ARCH 512 Structures I [F]
ARCH 532 Structures II [W]
Oliver Neumann On leave
Bill Pechet ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F] Admissions
ENDS 411 Technology [F]
ARCH 501 Vert. Core Studio [W]
Inge Roecker ARCH 500 First year studio [f] Admissions
ARCH 543 Contemp. Practice [W] Student Affairs
Adam Rysanek ARCH 513 ESAC I [F] New Faculty
ARCH 533 ESAC II [W]
ARCH 573 Env. Sys. Elective [W]
Blair Satterfield ENDS 401 Studio [F] Admissions
Academic Infrastructure
Matthew Soules ARCH 500 Elements Studio [F] Admissions
ARCH 568 Research Methods [F] Outreach
ARCH 523 Cont. Theories [W] Thesis Coordinator
Sara Stevens MUD Core History MUD Program Chair
ARCH 504/505 History [F] Outreach

Leslie Van Duzer ENDS 231 Design by Thinking [W] Admissions
ENDS 403 Themes [S] Outreach
George Wagner ARCH 500 Elements Studio [F] Admissions
3.5.3 Adjunct and Sessional Faculty Members
Teaching in all streams of the curriculum from design (Condon, Gates, Grady Huemoeller), to media (Barton,
Vass, Cloutier), history/theory, technology (Labrie) and practice (Paczkowski), adjunct faculty contribute a great
deal to the delivery of the Program’s professional education. Typically, adjunct and sessional positions are hired
on a part-time, per-term basis, and do not include service or research components.
Many of the adjunct faculty cohort are drawn from Vancouver’s professional architectural community. Others
connect to it through the Program’s longstanding Studies Abroad Program, in which local knowledge and
expertise (Duggal, Singh) complement Vancouver-based adjunct faculty who will this year coordinate the
Chandigarh, India-based Program on the ground.
In 2017, SALA established two “fellowship” positions, one in media and design (Tak), the other in history
(Watson), that will bring people and expertise from outside the Lower Mainland to invigorate the culture of
the school. Ms. Tak’s two-year appointment is is modeled after UBC Instructor position, with an emphasis on
teaching, and includes a service component. Mr. Watson’s is for one year, although it is likely that there will be an
ongoing role for an adjunct history instructor.
Table 3.5.e. Adjunct Faculty Teaching for 2017/2018 School Year
Name 2017/2018 Notes

Courses/Studios Taught
Michael Barton ARCH 517 Design Media II [W]
Roy Cloutier ARCH 539 Stud. Abr. Studio [F] Chandigarh Studies Abroad Co-coordinator
ARCH 538A Stud. Abr. Elect. [F] with N. Sylvia
ARCH 538B Stud. Abr. H/T [F]
ARCH 577 Revit [S]
Darryl Condon ARCH 501 Vert. Core Studio [W]
Bindu Duggal ARCH 538B Stud. Abr. H/T [F] 1/3 course, Chandigarh Studies Abroad
Joanne Gates ARCH 500 First Year Studio [F]
ARCH 521 Comp. Des. Studio [W]
Matthew Grady ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F]
James Huemoeller ARCH 521 Comp. Des. Studio [W]
Michel Labrie ARCH 574 Adv. Tech. Elective [W]
Nick Paczkowski ARCH 541 Process and Pract. [W] 1/3 course
Nicole Sylvia ARCH 539 Stud. Abr. Studio [F] Chandigarh Studies Abroad Co-coordinator
ARCH 538A Stud. Abr. Elect. [F] with R. Cloutier
ARCH 538B Stud. Abr. H/T [F]
JP Singh ARCH 538B Stud. Abr. H/T [F] 1/3 course, Chandigarh Studies Abroad

Thena Tak ARCH 568 Research Methods [F] Design Teaching Fellow
ARCH 520/540 Vertical Studio [F]
ARCH 517 Design Media II [W]
ARCH 573 Elective [S]
Lőrinc Vass ARCH 515 Design Media I [F]
Joseph Watson ARCH 504/505 History [F] History Teaching Fellow
ARCH 504/505 History [W]
ENDS 402 Studio [W]
3.5.4 Student Course and Instructor Evaluation
Each term, students complete a confidential on-line evaluation of course and teaching for every lecture, seminar
and design studio in which a student is enrolled. Students are given a two week window prior to the final exam
or final review in order to complete each evaluation. Results are available once final grades have been entered
on-line as follows: The Provost’s office receives results for the UBC-Wide Questions for all courses evaluated.
The Director of SALA and the Chair of Architecture have access to results for the UBC-Wide Questions, Course
Evaluations and Teaching Evaluations for all courses evaluated. Each instructor has access to review the UBC-
Wide Questions, the Course Evaluations and the Teaching Evaluations for each class taught by that instructor.
Where a class is taught by more than one instructor, each instructor would have access to review the university-
wide questions, the course evaluations and his/her individual teaching evaluations.
Student feedback is taken into consideration in evaluating curriculum, faculty teaching, consideration for merit
and in tenure and promotion. In addition, a peer-review process is in effect in which junior (tenure-track) faculty
are reviewed annually through the time of their re-appointment upon conclusion of the third year of their
contract. If reappointed, peer-review occurs again in the three-year period leading up to their case for promotion
and tenure.
3.5.5 School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA) Administration
The designation of School at UBC, in general, recognizes that the program trains professionals, conducts research
related to the education program, maintains a relationship with professional certification bodies and provides
continuing education for practitioners. See Section 3.10 of this report for details regarding University / SALA /
Architecture Program governance.
SALA is related administratively to the Faculty of Applied Science (APSC) but functions relatively autonomously
in academic matters. As a School under the Faculty of Applied Sciences, Architecture enjoys the generous
support of the APSC Dean and many of the administrative benefits of a large faculty, such as the Alumni and the
Development infrastructures, while maintaining considerable autonomy regarding program development and
budget expenditures.
The Faculty of Graduate Studies is responsible for ensuring the academic quality and integrity of graduate
programs and providing a supportive and equitable environment for faculty and students alike. These services
include admissions, student records, awards, PhD orals, and graduation for 6500 graduate students.

3.5.6 Staff Members
Staff as of June 27, 2017 (Proposed changes to be instituted before accreditation review not included):
Administration
Hanne Bartlett (Administration Manager)

Responsible for the management of SALA’s financial and human resources. Reports to the Director and provides
advice and guidance to faculty on administrative and financial matters. Recruits and supervises support
staff. Administers and controls departmental finances including the operating budget of approximately $6.1
million. Forecasts budgets and prepares statements of financial status. Oversees management of all staff and
faculty records.
Tracy Satterfield (Accounts Payable + Payroll Coordinator)

Responsible for coordinating, maintaining and processing accounts payable, clerical financial functions
and the student employment process. Coordinates student hires, reconciles research and specific purpose
accounts and establishes and maintains school-wide processing procedures in these areas. Reports to the
Administration Manager.
Theresa Juba (Academic Coordinator)

Responsible for coordinating new curriculum initiatives and curricular revisions, course scheduling, exam
scheduling, and student evaluation of course and teaching. Supervises and coordinates academic, end of term
events including end of term studio reviews. Advises on academic policies and procedures through the role
of staff lead on the Academic Affairs committee. Orients adjunct faculty to academic systems and hires and
supervises students or volunteers for academic events. Reports to the Administration Manager.
Vacant (Receptionist/Secretary to the Director) (as of July 15)

Responsible for reception and administrative support to Director, architecture program Chair, faculty and staff.
Acts as the first line of contact for the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA) Office and
provides information and advice to students and prospective students of the ARCH program. Reports to the
Administration Manager.
Emma Fennell (SALA Outreach and Communications Manager)

Responsible for the outreach and communications initiatives for the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture (SALA). Establishes and maintains strong connections to the design professions, alumni and wider
community and advises the Director and/or designate committee(s) on best practices for the development
and execution of communications and marketing strategies. Coordinates external events. Prepares and
communicates public information on behalf of the School. Reports to the SALA Director. Manages work study
students and temporary employees.

Student Services
Tara Deans (Student Services and Recruitment Manager)

Responsible for the management of student recruitment, admissions and student advising for SALA and oversees
the day-to-day operations of the SALA Student Services unit. Reports to the Director and provides advice and
guidance to SALA administration in these areas through her roles as a SALA Council member and staff lead on the
Student Affairs committee. Recruits and manages SALA student service staff and oversees student awards, the
SALA graduation event and non-credit programs offered by SALA.
Jaynus O’Donnell (Student Services - Architecture)

Responsible for student support, academic advising and student records management for Graduate Programs in
Architecture. Advises and provides complex information to students in the Master of Architecture (MArch) and
Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture (MASA). Reports to the Student Services and Recruitment Manager.
Works with faculty administration on student related projects and issues.
Amy Villablanca (Student Services – Landscape Architecture, Environmental Design and Urban Design)
Responsible for student support, academic advising and student records management for Graduate Programs in
Landscape Architecture (LARC) and Urban Design (MUD) and the Environmental Design Undergraduate program
(ENDS). Advises and provides complex information to students in the Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA),
Master of Advanced Studies in Landscape Architecture (MASLA) and Master of Urban Design (MUD) graduate
programs as well as the Bachelor of Environmental Design Program (BED). Reports to the Student Services and
Recruitment Manager. Works with faculty administration on student related projects and issues.
Physical & Learning Resource Support
Nick Scott (Workshop Technician)

Responsible for managing and maintaining the SALA workshops and digital output facilities. Performs on-
going inspection, maintenance, and repair equipment throughout the School. Makes recommendations for
new equipment acquisitions and coordinates the acquisition process. Provides technical instruction to faculty
and students. Reports to the SALA Manager of Administration and SALA Director. Hires and manages student
employees.
Graham Entwistle (Workshop Assistant)

Assists workshop and digital fabrication equipment users, ensures a safe and orderly workshop environment, and
helps to monitor student employees. Reports to and provides backup support to the SALA Workshop Technician.
Vacant (Library Assistant)

Responsible for coordination of activities and collections of the SALA Reading Room, including books, periodicals,
technical literature, slides, working drawings and models. Assists in establishing the policies and procedures of
the Reading Room, and the scope, organization and emphases of the collection. Responsible for managing the
School’s Audio-Visual collection, including AV and photographic equipment. Supports facilities management.

3.6 Human Resource Development
Programs must have a clear policy outlining both individual and collective opportunities for faculty and student
growth within and outside the program.

- The program’s policy regarding human resource development opportunities.
- A description of the policies, procedures and criteria for faculty appointment, promotion and tenure.
- A description of faculty development opportunities.
- Evidence of how faculty activities encourage currency in the knowledge of changing demands of practice and
licensure.
- Evidence of the program’s facilitation of student opportunities to participate in field trips and other off-campus
activities.
- Evidence of opportunities to participate in student professional societies, honors societies, and other campus-wide
student activities.
- Description of student support services, including academic and personal advising, career guidance, evaluation of
progress, and internship placement (if applicable).
- A list of guest lectures and visiting critics brought to the program since the previous site visit.
- A list of public exhibitions brought to the program since the previous visit.
As stated on the SALA website:
“Deeply committed to the quality of the built and natural environment, we are a close-knit school
of architecture and landscape architecture at one of the world’s top 20 public universities. We rank
20th in the 2015 and 27th in the 2016 QS World University Rankings, the highest of all Canadian
architecture schools.
“We are located in Vancouver, an ideal laboratory to prepare the next generations of architects,
landscape architects, designers, and planners to respond to the urgent human and environmental
issues of our times. Through our undergraduate and graduate programs, we teach students to become
intellectual and creative leaders, articulate spokespersons, and progressive agents of change for society.
“In addition to contributing significantly to the dialogue, education, research, and innovation within the
architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design professions, we award a major national design
prize each year to individuals who have shown extraordinary talent and dedication to make Canada a
better place to live.”
In this spirit, the Architecture program strives to provide diverse opportunities for faculty, staff and students to
gain the most from limited financial resources but expanding opportunities.
3.6 Human Resource Development -- 89

3.6.1 Students
Student Support Services - UBC Wide
The University of British Columbia has developed a wide range of student support services including the office
of Awards and Financial Aid, Career Services, Counseling Services, the Disability Resource Centre, International
Student Services, Student Health Services, the Wellness Centre and the Women Students’ Office. Each of these
offices is well publicized through the SALA website, the University calendar, the University’s website, through
bulletin boards and through a centralized location in the Student Services building, Brock Hall. These offices
have proved to be a valuable aid in supporting student progress with students being referred to these offices as
appropriate.
Graduate Student Society

The Graduate Student Society (GSS) is an organization that; advocates for and protects the interests of graduate
students at UBC; and supports graduate students in their studies or as they face academic problems. The GSS
advocates on issues such as communication between departments and administration at UBC, and improved
relations between supervisors and students. The GSS also hosts social, recreational and career-oriented events.
Alma Mater Society

A portion of student fees go toward the Alma Mater Society (AMS) which provides student services such as
an extended health & dental plan; U-Pass bus pass, advocacy on such issues as student discipline cases and
appeals, academic appeals, residential tenancy or housing issues, and information on peer counseling, and crisis
support. They also oversee many recreational activities and clubs including ARCHUS, the architecture student
organization.
International Student Services

International Student Services provides support to international students at UBC, through services and programs
such as one-to-one advising, educational and social programs, ESL classes, the Peer Program and information
about their visa status and adjustment to Canada. ISS also coordinates the UBC Student Exchange Programs and
provides social and cultural space to the International Community at International House.
Student Support Services - Architecture Wide
Academic Advising
Architecture advising occurs in a number of different ways and contexts. Each student receives a Student
Handbook which outlines their academic career, identifies policies and procedures for the different programs
and gives general information about the School. All first-year students are assigned a faculty member to go to
for assistance. All architecture faculty are available to assist students in issues related to their program of study.
SALA tech fee

In September 2008, the SALA students put together a SALA IT Fee Referendum which responded to the need
for funds to support the ongoing development and maintenance of requisite design media infrastructure. They
identified this infrastructure as essential to maintaining professional and academic credibility, accreditation and
remaining competitive with other professional programs offered across Canada. It is also necessary for students
to remain competitive in entering professional practice. This referendum passed by a 72% majority. The dispersal
of this fee is done by the IT Committee which has student representatives. The annual fee remains at $300, with
an additional $50 Student Association fee.

Field Trips and other Off-Campus Activities
Field trips form an integral part of the delivery of the MArch curriculum. Notable are the various site visits
arranged in the introductory technology courses and visits enriching design studio instruction, including recent
trips to Vancouver Island, Alberta and northern B.C., , etc. Most often, the local trips are free, but trips away
from Vancouver are paid for by the student with attempts to keep costs as low as possible.
Mentor Program
Beginning the Fall of 2011, a new initiative was launched to pair each incoming professional Architecture
and Landscape Architecture student with a local, professional mentor. The goal is that the mentor will serve
throughout the student’s academic career, and ideally on through licensure. The mentors, some of whom are
UBC alumni, represent some of the best firms in town and will no doubt offer their mentees invaluable early
exposure into the professions. The mentors include a wide range of design practices [S, M, L, XL] and other public
offices such as the City of Vancouver Planning Department. Students are given a profile of the possible mentors
and rank their choices depending on their particular interests. Of course, the students will return with stories,
information and ideas to tell other students which will broaden the experience for all. They in turn, will be
representatives of the School to the professional community.
Table 3.6.a. Mentors participating in Mentor Program
Name (Last, First) Firm

Amanat, Hossein Amanat Architect
Coady, Teresa B+H BuntingCoady
Vasto, James B+H BuntingCoady
Apostolides, Michael B+H BuntingCoady
Smyth, Dwayne B+H BuntingCoady
Lambur, Peter B+H BuntingCoady
Javidan, Amirali Bing Thom Architects
Merk, Harald Bing Thom Architects
McDonald, Ian Ross Bruce Carscadden Architect
Bristol, Graeme Centre for Archtitecture & Human Rights
Chester, Robert Robert Chester Architect
McCauley, Brian Concert Properties Ltd
Haden, Bruce Dialog
Webster, Lyn Dialog
Gerson, Kate Dialog
Arthur, Holly Dialog
Cutbill, Jennifer Dialog
Harris, Vance Dialog
Cheung, Michael Dialog
Scott, Our Dialog
Ellison, Simon Dialog
Larigakis, Andrew Dialog
Boldt, Chris Henriquez Partners Architects
Schimert, Christian Henriquez Partners Architects

Cheadle, Brock Henriquez Partners Architects
Sheaffer, Patrick Henriquez Partners Architects
Lee, Thomas Henriquez Partners Architects
Cheng, James K.M. James K. M. Cheng Architects
Wai, Joseph Joe Y. Wai Architect Inc.
McDonald, Michael Kasian Architecture Interior Design & Planning
Gardner, Milton Kasian Architecture Interior Design & Planning
Wojciech, Brus Kasian Architecture Interior Design & Planning
Nakaska, Alan Kasian Architecture Interior Design & Planning
Werker, Lynne Lynne Werker Architect
Green, Michael MGB Architecture + Design
McFarlane, Steve MGB Architecture + Design
Woodford, Chris MGB Architecture + Design
Delage, Jean Phillipe MGB Architecture + Design
Maxwell, Heather MGB Architecture + Design
Minard, Alex Perkins & Will
Richter, Max Perkins & Will
Gushe, Susan Perkins & Will
Lampard, Mason Perkins & Will
Miu, George Perkins & Will
Mani, Sanaz Perkins & Will
Greig, Bob Perkins & Will
Gomes, Catarina Perkins & Will
Madkour, Yehia Perkins & Will
Scott, David Peter Cardew
Rositch, Bryce Rositch Hemphill Architects
Guenter, David Shape Architecture
Smith, Alec Shape Architecture
Funk, Nathaniel Shape Architecture
Lit, Kelvin Stantec
Wolfe, Ray Stantec
Knapp, Bruce Stantec
Wong, Terrance Stantec
Wreglesworth, Peter Stantec
North, Brent Stantec
Howat, Heather BattersbyHowat
Liu, Fang BattersbyHowat
Kwan, Tillie BattersbyHowat
Balcaen, Bettina BattersbyHowat
Lee, Cindy BattersbyHowat

Cuk, Mary BattersbyHowat
Schroeder, Thomas Patkau Architects
McGeough, Gerry UBC Campus and Community Planning
Yustin, David David Zacharko Architect
Higgs, Melissa HCMA Architecture + Design
May, Tobi Measured Architecture
Hein, Scot City of Vancouver
Bailey, Jim City of Vancouver
Boddy, Trevor
Word of mouth has circulated amongst the professional community and many professionals have contacted
SALA in order to participate in the program. In fact, so many have done so that, having successfully matched all
incoming students, the program will be opened now to all professional students on a first-come, first-serve basis.
Developing opportunities to strengthen alumni-to-student mentoring has recently been raised during meetings
with the Alumni Council. Council members believe that there are many opportunities for MArch alumni to
become more active in mentoring events and activities, and wish to explore this in the 2017-18 academic
year. An early example of this being implemented is in the expanded role that alumni will play in the 2017
Introductory Workshop.
Networking Opportunities with the Local Professional Community

Since 2015 program faculty have conducted a portfolio workshop for current and prospective students. Twice
a year, several members of the AIBC and RAIC sponsor a “Good Times” event at which both organizations make
brief orientations and do a Q&A with students. In 2015, the RAIC began hosting an evening Pecha Kucha at which
local firms and graduating MArch students network and present their work. The Pecha Kucha is an opportunity
to meet SALA’s brightest talent, and in turn, give the students exposure to a wide range of practices and potential
employers. It has been well-attended, and has now become an annual event.
Introductory Workshop [ARCH 502]

This workshop, which takes place the week before the September school opening, is a required course for
all first-year students entering the program. Many field trips are incorporated within the framework of this
workshop. The Workshop supports many objectives, including orientation, a Pecha Kucha-style introduction to
SALA faculty, introduction to senior students, and formation of a framework for subsequent design problems.
Recently an orientation to a variety of administrative topics takes morning, such as introduction to the Reading
Room, Workshop, IT Services, and the office administration including student opportunities and responsibilities.

Summer Studies Abroad
Summer study abroad opportunities organized by faculty of the UBC School of Architecture reflect faculty
interest and generally range from four to six weeks in length faculty. These opportunities are open to all
students, and should demand exceed the course capacity, the criteria of gender balance and academic standing
define the list and wait list. Students pay their own expenses for these courses, while faculty seek to keep costs
as low as possible. Recent Summer Study Abroad offerings were as follows:
2012 The Netherlands with Cynthia Girling

2013 Sweden with Christopher Macdonald
2014 Berlin with Daniel Roehr and Doug Patterson
Portugal with Christopher Macdonald
2015 Switzerland: Modernity Now, with Christopher Macdonald
2016 Mexico City with Kees Lokman and Daniel Roehr
2017 The Netherlands with Bill Pechet and Collette Parras
Scandinavia with Leslie Van Duzer and Michael Perlmutter
Studies Abroad
In addition, on a biennial basis, a full term of study is possible that includes vertical studio credit and an
allowance of three three-credit electives. Operating continuously since 1968, these Studies Abroad programs
have provided an extraordinarily rich context for approximately 16 students to develop and measure their
emerging sensibilities.
Since 2012, the Study Abroad programs were as follows:
2012 Tokyo
2015 Chandigarh
2016 Tokyo
2017 Chandigarh
Past programs have been held in Egypt, Barcelona [Spain], Hong Kong, Amedebad [India], Kyoto [Japan], Paris
[France], Venice [Italy], Jerusalem [Israel] and other urban centres of architectural significance. Students pay
their own expenses for these courses, while faculty members seek to keep costs as low as possible.
Exchange Programs
Opportunities are available for students to participate in exchange programs coordinated through the UBC’s Go
Global Student Mobility Programs office as well as the Faculty of Graduate Studies through the Western Deans
Agreement or the University Exchange Agreement. These exchange programs are available across Canada as
well as in 150 partner universities internationally. Students continue to pay UBC’s highly affordable tuition fees
while taking advantage of excellent opportunities elsewhere.
In its own right, SALA also has developed 12 exchange partnerships with universities around the world. Partner
institutions are located in diverse locations around the world, allowing students to pursue courses of interest
abroad that can be transferred back as UBC degree requirements. In turn, our program is enriched by students
entering as visiting or on exchange from within Canada or internationally. These students most often come for
one term of study and generally enroll in a vertical studio and some additional coursework.

Students’ Participation in Other Activities
The intense and collegial environment of the MArch design studio quite naturally encourages a culture of shared
interests and events organized by students. Formally, the architecture student society, known as ARCHUS,
elects representatives of the various constituencies within the School and holds regular Good Times social
events on Friday evenings. ARCHUS generally organizes health and well-being events, social events and end-
of-thesis receptions during the school year, and liaises with its counterparts in other SALA programs and at the
university level.
Students initiate publications that receive support from SALA. The title of an upcoming publication is Room,
and is planned as a series. Each issue of the annual will explore a different distinguishable room and challenge
its boundaries and demarcations, both material and immaterial. The inaugural issue of Room will explore the
Bathroom. The publication has received partial grant funding, along with original submissions from artists,
writers, and designers including Peter Greenaway and Leonard Koren. The students developing the book are
currently collaborating with the Vancouver-based design agency Post Projects, and the book launch date will be
October or November 2017.
Students have also been involved in the development Sixty-Three Drawings from Chandigarh (2017) and Tokyo
from Vancouver 3 (spring 2018). These provide students a significant opportunity to become immersed in
aspects of graphic design and desktop publishing. Students also form an integral part of other facets of the
School’s activities, including mounting the annual AIBC Comprehensive Design Studio Exhibition (2013-present)
and SALA Projects exhibition (2013-2016).
Student Advisory Committee

The ARCHUS executive also serves as liaison with School administration and ensures that student voices are
represented on diverse issues. The Student Executive Committee is comprised of the Presidents of the student
organizations, a student representing each year of each program, the SALA Director, the chair of Student Affairs
Committee, and the Manager of Student Services and Recruitment.
This Committee is intended as a dialogue to hear student concerns in a focused way, to give information to all
students and to bridge the five SALA programs through student-centered proposals.
Co-Op [Internship] Placement

Though a small facet of our program, the Co-Op option affords an opportunity for students to gain professional
experience. It is enthusiastically received for those who participate. Each of those interested is encouraged to
seek their own opportunities either locally or abroad. Since 2014, students have or are working for such firms
as ipli Architects, Singapore; Lekker Architects, Singapore; STUDIO V Architecture, New York; Amanat Architects,
Vancouver; HCMA Architecture + Design, Vancouver; LWPAC, Vancouver; Plant Architect Inc., Toronto; Francl
Architecture, Vancouver; Battersby Howat Architects, Vancouver; B+H Architects, Vancouver; Arrow Architects,
Copenhagen; BIG Architecture, New York; Dialog, Vancouver; Jodoin Lamarre Pratte Architectes Inc., Montreal;
Guy Architects, Yellowknife; Stuart Howard Architects, Vancouver.
Before taking the Co-Op option, students must complete two years of study. The Co-Op program itself requires
participants to have at least a continuous eight-month work experience.

3.6.2 Full-Time Faculty
With respect to Policies, Procedures and criteria for appointment, promotion and tenure, neither UBC nor the
Faculty of Applied Science has a stated policy with regard to expectations of the balance between teaching,
research and service roles. However, UBC maintains a web portal for faculty and department heads with
information about university promotion and tenure review policies.
At present, The SALA Appointments, Reappointments, Promotions and Tenure (ARPT) Review Norms is the
internal document that outlines faculty load expectations. The Review Norms were most recently updated in
2015. This broad characterization is unlikely to accurately measure any individual faculty’s deployment at a given
time, but over the course of an academic career provides a useful working measure.
Professional Development Reimbursement Expenses

Beginning July 1, 1999 the University of British Columbia instituted a university-wide program to provide financial
assistance of $500 per year for full time professors, associate professors, assistant professors, instructors and
lecturers. As of July 1, 2011 these funds for Regular Faculty and Sessional Lecturers with continuing status, was
increased by $600 per year, bringing the total amount available to $1,100 per year. The Carry Forward (also
called the “accrued” or “banked”) period was increased from three to five years.
The assistance is to be used for professional development expenses that relate to activities that “enhance the
performance, ability, or effectiveness of a member’s work at the University.” Detailed information about this
program can be found here.
In addition to the University-wide program, SALA has established a program to budget additional professional
development funds for all faculty members. Starting in 2011 the faculty began receiving $1400 for professional
development expenses. Within the University, various funding sources exist to promote faculty researches,
including the Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund, from which most recently faculty members received
$46,150 to develop proposals for the integration of contemporary “making practices” into the SALA curriculum,
Hampton Research Grants and Study Leave Research Grants.
Teaching and Academic Growth

UBC’s Centre for Teaching and Academic Growth works with UBC faculty to foster quality teaching and
learning across the University. In doing so, they take a leadership role in addressing professional development
needs for current and future practitioners of teaching in higher education. In all of their activities, they aim
to create supportive learning environments in which to explore teaching practice and reflect upon a range of
contemporary instructional issues.
Leaves
Conditions governing Leaves of Absence are set out in the Collective Agreement between the University of
British Columbia and the Faculty Association. In addition, under special circumstances, Faculty are granted
reduced workloads or leave of absence without pay to pursue individual research work.

Faculty members on approved Research/Study Leaves include:
Blair Satterfield Jan 1/18 to Dec 31/18

Mari Fujita Sep 1/17 to Aug 31/18
Sherry McKay Jul 1/17 to Dec 31/17
AnnaLisa Meyboom Sep 1/16 to Aug 31/17
Christopher Macdonald Jul 1/16 to Jun 30/17
George Wagner Jul 1/14 to Jun 30/15
Inge Roecker Jul 1/12 to Dec 31/12
Administrative Leaves:
Leslie Van Duzer Jul 1/15 to Jun 30/16
Leave of absence without pay, or reduced workload, were given to the following faculty:
Matthew Soules Sep 1/15 to Feb 29/16

Matthew Soules Jan 1/18 to Jun 30/18
Oliver Neumann Sep 01/12 to Mar 1/13
Sep 1/15 to Ongoing
Christopher Macdonald Jan 1/12 to Jun 30/12
Equipment Renewal Initiative

A new initiative for all SALA faculty and staff is the anticipation of rotational computer renewal every three
years. This renewal initiative arose out of the extensive budget evaluation and renewal which occurred
2010/2011 in SALA.
Summary of Faculty Research
John Bass, Associate Professor

BArch, Rhode Island School of Design 1985
BFA, Rhode Island School of Design 1984
Associate’s Degree, Wentworth Institute of Technology, 1979
Bass works in contested territories, including three coastal British Columbian First Nations partner communities
including the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation, the Heiltsuk First Nation, and the Nisga’a Nation on housing
design, education, and interdisciplinary projects. He is also working in India, studying the slum rehabilitation
colonies of Chandigarh’s periphery, and collaboration in the public space and engineering design for low-tech
infrastructure improvements in several rural villages.
Ray Cole, Professor (ret. July 2017)

PhD (University of Wales, 1973)
BSc (Civil Eng. City University, London, 1969)
Ray Cole has been teaching environmental issues in building design in the Architecture program for the
past thirty years. He was co-founder of the Green Building Challenge - an international collaborative effort
to benchmark progress in green building performance and environmental assessment - and has served on
numerous national and international committees related to buildings and the environment.

Joseph Dahmen, Assistant Professor
MArch, School of Architecture & Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2006
BA, Wesleyan University, 1997
Dahmen, with his partner Amber Frid-Jimenez, Canada Research Chair in design, runs AFJD Studio, and is co-
founder and Director of Sustainability at Watershed Materials LLC. His research and design projects investigate
the technical methods and cultural effects of resource use at the scales of architecture and territory. He is a
frequent conference speaker on these topics and has consulted on projects in North America, Europe, Asia, and
Africa. He is a faculty associate of the Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies.
Mari Anna Fujita, Associate Professor

MArch, School of Architecture, Princeton University, 2003
BA, Columbia College, Columbia University 1998
Fujita’s research focuses on the spatial and cultural effects of globalism. She maintains a design practice,
Fubalabo, which has pursued diverse projects including material studies, wearables, gallery installations,
interiors, building designs, and urban proposals. She received the ACSA/JAE 2010/11 Best Scholarship of Design
Article Award for the article Foray into building identity: Kampung to Kampong in the Kuala Lumpur metropolitan
area. She has worked as an architectural designer in both New York and Berlin.
Cynthia Girling, Professor

MLA, University of Oregon
BLA, University of Oregon
BES, University of Manitoba
Girling’s work focuses on sustainable urban design, the public realm, and tools for urban design. With Ronald
Kellett, she co-directs the elementslab, a SALA research group housed in the Centre for Interactive Research
on Sustainability. The lab develops methods and tools of measured visualizations for public engagement in
community planning and design. Girling and Kellett are co-authors of elementsdb, a database and decision-
support tool for students, professionals, and researchers in the quest to design more sustainable urban regions.
Greg Johnson, Senior Instructor

MScA, Université de Montréal, 1980
BArch, Université de Montréal, 1977
BASc Mechanical Engineering (Honors), University of British Columbia, 1974
With a background in architecture and engineering, Johnson has integrated the two disciplines throughout his
30-year architectural practice, now as a partner in the firm Principle Architecture. He was part of early passive
solar design and energy conservation initiatives, and recently larger issues of sustainability and high-performance
buildings. With the Museum of Vancouver, Greg co-curated the first retrospective exhibition on the work of local
architect Daniel Evan White in 2013-14.
Christopher Macdonald, Professor, Architecture

AA Diploma (Honors), 1979
BES University of Manitoba, 1975
Macdonald’s current research activities include assisting in a definitive historical survey of early modern houses
in the Vancouver region and preparing a study of contemporary urban housing practices across Canada. He is
the author of A Guide to Contemporary Architecture in Vancouver, and Downs House II (2016), part of SALA’s
Modern House Series. Since 2012 he has contributed essays to several books and monographs and had work
exhibited in Canada and the US.

Sherry McKay, Associate Professor
PhD, University of British Columbia, 1995
McKay is book review editor for Building Research & Information (UK) and an editor in SALA’s Modern House
Series. She was co-applicant in a SSHRC Connection Grant (Principal Penny Gurstein, SCARP) for The Future of
Public Housing and presenter in its international workshop at UBC (January 2015). Research includes “West Coast
Land Claims,” a chapter in Northern Building: Canadian Architecture, 1967-2017 (Princeton University Press,
2018); Beyond Functionality: The Design Capital of Bridges with AnnaLisa Meyboom; and an exhibition proposal,
“Housing Equity: Vancouver Public Housing”
AnnaLisa Meyboom, Associate Professor

MArch, University of British Columbia
BASc, University of Waterloo
Meyboom directs research into future transportation and its catalytic relationship to urban form in her in
interdisciplinary research group, Transportation Infrastructure and Public Space. She also studies the use of
structural behaviour algorithms in the generation of architectural form. She maintains a blog on her research and
teaching. She is a practicing engineer and has a background in bridge design.
Oliver Neumann, Associate Professor

Associate Chair of Wood Building Design and Construction, UBC Faculty of Forestry
Associate Faculty, UBC Pulp and Paper Centre
MSc Advanced Architectural Design, Columbia, 1996
Dipl. Ing. Architect, Technical University Berlin, 1995
Neumann is an Associate Chair of Wood Building Design and Construction and an Associate Faculty member
at the Pulp and Paper Centre. He is a licensed architect in Berlin, Germany. His research projects build on
collaborations with wood scientists, engineers, fabricators, and material suppliers, and focuses on the role of
digital technology in the building process and in broader speculations of emerging material culture.
Bill Pechet, Lecturer in Practice

BArch, University of British Columbia
BFA, University of Victoria
BA, University of Victoria
Pechet maintains a private practice engaged in an array of projects from strategic urban planning studies, to
residential and retail design, cemeteries, set design, and public art installations. His accomplishments include
large artworks for many Canadian cities, and urban infrastructures, public spaces, and cemeteries in Western
Canada, the US, Europe and Asia.
Inge Roecker, Associate Professor

MArch, University of Manitoba
Roecker’s research focuses on sustainable forms of urban habitation and its relationship with evolving social and
cultural entities. She is the co-founder of the interdisciplinary research collective, living lab, which centers its
inquiry and work on her interests in urban living and urban communities. She is a registered architect in British
Columbia and Germany and principal of ASIR architekten, that has been recognized internationally through
awards, publications, and exhibitions.

Adam Rysanek, Assistant Professor
PhD, University of Cambridge, 2013
MSc Mechanical Engineering, Queen’s
BSc Mechanical Engineering, Queen’s
Rysanek’s research specializes in integrated design of low-carbon, or low-exergy buildings and communities;
alternative construction approaches and operational modes for sustainable, comfortable buildings; and new
visualization and human-building interaction tools for evaluating building performance. His current research
project – ‘3for2 Beyond Efficiency’ – studies integrated structural, mechanical, and electrical systems and the
development of design concepts with significant material, space, and energy lifecycle savings.
Blair Satterfield, Assistant Professor

MArch, School of Architecture, Rice University, 1995
BSAS, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 1991
Satterfield began his collaboration with Marc Swackhamer in Houston in 1998. HouMinn Practice, whose work
has been featured in Dwell and Fast Company, and has garnered prestigious awards from Architect and ID
Magazines. Blair’s ongoing research focuses on the impact of digital production and fabrication techniques on
housing and the urban landscape.
Matthew Soules, Associate Professor

MArch, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, 2003
BA (double major), University of British Columbia, 1999
Soules is a licensed architect and the director of Matthew Soules Architecture. His research investigates the
relationship between contemporary capitalism and the built environment, and has received research funding
from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canada Council for the Arts and the British
Columbia Arts Council. His built work and research has received widespread recognition and awards, notably
from the ACSA and AIBC, and has been published internationally.
Sara Stevens, Assistant Professor

PhD, Princeton University
MED, Yale University
BArch, Rice University
BA, Rice University
Stevens is an architectural and urban historian. Her research focuses on the relationship between architecture
and capital, looking at American real estate developers of the twentieth century and exploring the cultural
economy of architectural practice, risk, and expertise. Her book, “Developing expertise: Architecture and real
estate in metropolitan America” (Yale University Press, 2016), studies real estate development in twentieth-
century American cities, and how developers, investors, and architects worked together to build subdivisions and
superblocks, cul-de-sacs, and towers.
Leslie Van Duzer, Professor

MArch, University of California Berkeley
BA Architecture, University of California Berkeley
An expert in early-modern European architecture, Van Duzer is co-author of four books. Most recently, Leslie
sole-authored House Shumiatcher (2014), the first in a series she initiated of building monographs documenting
endangered West Coast Modern houses in British Columbia. She is currently working on two new books: The Art
of Deception, based on her longstanding interest in the relationship between architecture and magic, and Atelier
Nishikata, a monograph on a remarkable but little-known practice in Tokyo.

George Wagner, Associate Professor
MArch, University of Washington, 1981
BA, Bard College, 1975
Wagner’s research interests include architecture and modernism, the North American City, urban form and its
ideological implications, contemporary Japanese architecture, and urbanism. His writing has been published
in journals such as Harvard Architecture, Perspecta, Bauwelt, AA Files, Canadian Architect, and Harvard Design
Magazine and books including Architecture and Feminism, Free University Berlin, Stan Douglas, and Hitoshi Abe:
on-the-spot.
3.6.3 Public Lectures, Competition Awards, Major Publications, Exhibitions, and Events
Public Lectures
Throughout the academic year, SALA sponsors or co-sponsors several lecture series and public forums. As part of
a commitment to outreach to the public and to Vancouver’s professionals, all lectures listed below occur in more
accessible downtown Vancouver venues. Organized by SALA faculty member Joe Dahmen (with support from BC
Hydro) the Form and Energy Series lectures are marked with an *.
Table 3.6.b. Public Lectures in 2012
2012 Speaker(s) Affliation Notes

*January 25th Charles Bloszies Office of Charles Bloszies, Panel Discussion - Trevor
San Francisco Boddy, Robert Fung,
Marco D’Agostini, and
Michael Green, panelists
*February 28th Trevor Butler Archineers, Kelowna, BC
*March 7th Michelle Addington Yale University
March 13th Winy Maas MVRDV, Rotterdam
*March 14th Mark West University of Manitoba
*March 19th David Gissen California College of the Arts,
San Francisco
*March 27th Phillippe Rahm Philippe Rahm architects /
Princeton University
September 27th Kim Nielsen + Kasper 3XN, Copenhagen
Guldager Jorgensen
September 28th Blair Satterfield + Marc HouMinn
Swackhamer
*October 4th Sean Lally University of Illinois
October 15th Paul Fast Fast + Epp
October 18th Achim Menges University of Stuttgart
October 26th Henri Bava Agence Ter, Paris
October 30th Adam Yarinsky Architecture Research Office, NYC
November 5th Dominique Alba APUR, Paris
*November 15th David Easton Rammed Earth Works, California
November 19th Peter Osler College of Architecture Illinois
Institute of Technology

Table 3.6.c. Public Lectures in 2013

*January 14th Francois Roche R&Sie(n), Paris + Bangkok
January 18th Aranzazu Rangel muf architecture/art, London
January 21st Marlon Blackwell University of Arkansas
January 23rd Cornelia Oberlander
February 5th Yung Ho Chang Atelier FCJZ, China
February 13th Bernadette Blanchon ENSP Versailles, France
February 25th Peter Cardew Peter Cardew
Architects, Vancouver
March 4th Carol Mayer-Reed Mayer/Reed, Portland
March 11th Marc Treib University of California
March 18th Eric Miller University of Toronto Margolese National
Design for Living Prize
*March 20th Rania Ghosn University of Michigan
March 25th Harry Gugger Harry Gugger Studio, Switzerland
April 3rd Peter Busby Perkins + Will, Vancouver
April 8th Julie Bargmann DIRT Studio, NYC
September 9th Thomas Woltz Nelson Byrd Woltz, NYC
September 23rd Annette Gigon Gigon/Guyer, Switzerland
October 7th Lola Sheppard Lateral Office, Toronto
October 21st Phyllis Lambert Canadian Centre for
Architecture, Montreal
November 4th Greg Smallenberg, Kelty PFS Studio
McKinnon + Alla Johnson
November 18th Gregg Pasquarelli SHoP Architects, NYC

Table 3.6.d. Public Lectures in 2014

January 27th Julie Campoli Terra Firma Urban Design,
Burlington, VT
February 3rd Andreu Arriola + Arriola + Fiol, Barcelona
Carmen Fiol
February 6th Cornelia Oberlander + Susan Vancouver
Herrington
March 10th Rahul Mehrotra Harvard Graduate School of
Design, Cambridge and Mumbai
March 17th Bing Thom Bing Thom Architects, Vancouver Margolese National
March 24th Cristina Moreno + AMID (Cero9) Architects, Madrid
Efren Grinda
March 31st Benedetta Tagliabue Miralles / Tagliabue
Architects, Barcelona
September 22nd Rainer Schmidt Rainer Schmidt
Landschaftsarchitekten, Germany
October 6th Harrison Fraker University of California
at Berkeley
October 20th Aaron Naperstek Streetsblog, NYC
November 1st Olivo Barbieri (Milan), Greg Photography in the City
Girard (Vancouver), Leo panel discussion
Rubinfien (NYC), Guy Tillim
(Capetown)

Table 3.6.e. Public Lectures in 2015

January 12th Amale Andraos Work Architecture Company, NYC
January 19th Vikram Bhatt McGill University Margolese National
February 2nd Mikyoung Kim Mikyoung Kim Design, Boston
February 23rd Jenny Sabin Jenny Sabin Studio, Philadelphia
*March 2nd Christoph Reinhardt MIT
March 9th Ron Williams University of Montreal
*March 16th Philippe Block ETH, Zurich
September 14th Hillary Brown Spitzer School of
Architecture, NYC
September 21st Keller Easterling Yale University
September 28th George Baird University of Toronto
October 5th Luis Callejas LCLA, Norway
October 26th Susannah Drake dlandstudio, NYC
November 2nd Pierre Belanger Harvard University
November 6th Louisa Jones Provence, France
November 16th Piet Oudolf Hummelo, Netherlands

Table 3.6.f. Public Lectures in 2016

January 11th Georgeen Theodore Interboro and NJIT, New York
January 20th Joyce Drohan, Brent Perkins + Will, TODERIAN Urbanarium City Debate
Toderian, Michael A. UrbanWORKS, UBC Sauder, MLA
Goldberg, Sam Sullivan Vancouver False Creek
*February 1st Janette Kim + Erik Carver Columbia University
February 3rd Lance Berelowitz, Oliver URBAN FORUM ASSOCIATES, Urbanarium City Debate
Lang, Dave Ramslie, LWPAC, Integral Group LLC, Rize
Christopher Vollan
February 22nd Chris Cornelius Studio:Indigenous and
UWM, Wisconsin
February 29th Frank Barkow Barkow Leibinger, Germany
March 7th Cornelia Oberlander Vancouver Margolese National
March 9th David Eby, DJ Larkin, Tom MLA Vancouver-Point Grey, Urbanarium City Debate
Davidoff, Andrey Pavlov Pivot Legal Society, UBC Sauder,
SFU Beedie
March 21st Studio Obuchi University of Tokyo, Japan
April 13th Adriane Carr, Patrick Vancouver City Council, UBC Urbanarium City Debate
Condon, Geoff Meggs, SALA, Vancouver City Council, SFU
Gordon Price City Program
May 11th Michael Geller, Judy THE GELLER GROUP, J Rudin Urbanarium City Debate
Rudin, Charles Campbell, Communications, The Tyee,
Michael Kluckner Vancouver Historical Society
October 6th Ole Scheeran Buro Ole Scheeren, Germany
November 6th Louis Benech Neuilly-sur-Seine, France
November 16th Kate Orff SCAPE and Columbia
University. NYC

Table 3.6.g. Public Lectures in Spring 2017
Spring 2017 Speaker(s) Affliation Notes

January 16th Leila Araghian Diba Tensile Architecture,
Tehran, Iran
January 18th Sandy Garossino, Caitlin National Observer, Western Urbanarium City Debate
Jones, Mark Busse, Jane Cox Front Society in Vancouver,
HCMA Architecture + Design,
Cause + Affect
January 23rd Anthony Acciavatti Columbia University, New York
January 30th Gunther Vogt Vogt Landscape Architects, Zurich
February 6th Zita Cobb Shorefast Foundation, Fogo Island,
Newfoundland
February 15th Christine Duhaime, Jens von Duhaime Law, MountainMath, Urbanarium City Debate
Bergmann, Kirk LaPointe, Business in Vancouver, UBC Sauder
Tsur Somerville
February 27th Aneerudha Paul KRVI, Mumbai
March 6th Sara Stevens UBC SALA, Vancouver
March 8th Caroline Adderson, Michael SFU, Vancouver Historical Urbanarium City Debate
Kluckner, Javier Campos, Society, Campos Studio, Lanefab
Bryn Davidson Design/Build
March 24th Sylvia McAdam Idle No More Margolese National
*March 30th John Ochsendorf MIT
April 26th David Eby, Sam Sullivan, NDP, BC Liberals, Greens Urbanarium City Debate
David Wong
May 17th Thom Armstrong, Gabu Co-operative Housing Federation Urbanarium City Debate
Heindl, Antonio Gómez- of BC, GABU Heindl Architektur,
Palacio, Tom Davidoff DIALOG, UBC Sauder

Table 3.6.h. Public Lectures in Fall 2017
Fall 2017 Speaker(s) Affiliation Notes

September 11th FIRE 1: Jack Self and Leigh London, New York FIRE Series #1
Claire La Berge
September 14th Oliver Krieg and ICD Stuttgart
David Correa
September 18th FIRE 2: Daniel M. Abramson Boston, Ann Arbor FIRE Series #2
(Boston) and Andrew
Herscher (Ann Arbor)
September 20th VANPLAY Smart City Talk I
September 25th Susanne Schindler and ETH Zurich, Pratt, NYC FIRE Series #3
Catherine Ingraham
September 27th Ron Kellett SALA View Corridors Series #1
October 3rd VANPLAY Smart City Talk II
October 11th Bill Pechet SALA View Corridors Series #2
October 17th VANPLAY Smart City Talk III
October 25th Leslie Van Duzer SALA View Corridors Series #3
October 26th Adele Weder Book Launch --
Copp House
October 27th Kathryn Gustafson Seattle and London
November 1st VANPLAY Smart City Talk IV
November 6th James Cheng Vancouver
November 8th Greg Girard SALA View Corridors Series #4
November 15th VANPLAY Smart City Talk V
November 22nd Michael Perlmutter SALA View Corridors Series #5

Brown Bag Lectures (lunchtime lectures in Lasserre 202)
Lunchtime lectures have a long but informal history in the program, allowing spur of the moment events of
interest to students. In fall 2016, an effort was made to organize these events in conjunction with other public
programming as part of an events poster.
Table 3.6.i. Lunchtime Lecture Series Spring 2017

January 11th Shelley Long Hapa Collaborative
January 18th Michael Leckie Leckie Studio Architecture
and Design
February 1st Susan Scott Scott & Scott Architecture
March 1st Bill Pechet UBC SALA and Pechet Studio
March 8th Marianne Amodio MAA Studio
March 17th Meg Graham Superkül
The fall 2017 Brown Bag Series expanded to include both lecture/discussions with local practitioners and to
leverage the availability of out-of-town lecturers to conduct seminars with students and faculty.
Table 3.6.j. Lunchtime Lecture Series Fall 2017

September 11th Jack Self and Claire La Barge London, New York
September 18th Daniel M. Abramson and Boston, Ann Arbor
Andrew Herscher
September 25th Susanne Schindler and ETH Zurich, Pratt, NYC
Catherine Ingraham
September 27th Ian Macdonald Carscadden Stokes Macdonald
October 11th Shelley Craig and Urban Arts Architecture
Jennifer Marshall
November 1st John Wall Public Architecture
November 6th James Cheng James KM Cheng Architects
November 22nd Marie-Odile Marceau McFarland Marceau Architects
SALA Lectures done in Collaboration with Industry or Government

SALA also wishes to recognize that public programming is often done in collaboration of partners from industry
and government, often due to the grant-writing and outreach work of faculty and the Director to develop those
ties. The following is a description of programming done in partnership with groups outside of SALA since 2012:
SALA / BC Hydro Powersmart

ොො Form and Energy: Interdisciplinary lectures open to the public featuring architects and designers whose
work engages energy in new ways. Spring 2012 - 2017, grant recipient: Joe Dahmen

SALA / French Consulate
ොො Henri Bava (Paris), October 2012
ොො Dominique Alba (Paris), November 2012
ොො Bernadette Blanchon (Versailles), February 2013
SALA / Dutch Consulate

ොො Piet Oudolf (Netherlands), November 2015
SALA / UBC Chair of Wood Building Design and Construction / Architecture Program at University of
Oregon, Portland
ොො Achim Menges (Stuttgart), October 2012
SALA / Credit Suisse

ොො Harry Gugger (Basel), March 2013
SALA / IDSWest
ොො HouMinn (Vancouver-Minneapolis), Spring 2015
SALA / Vancouver Public Library

ොො View Corridors: Five Takes on Vancouver -- A series of five lectures by SALA faculty and adjuncts for the
general public at the Vancouver Public Library, Fall 2017
SALA / Museum of Vancouver

ොො SALA Speaks – Two Sunday afternoon lecture series featuring SALA faculty at the Museum, Spring
2012, Fall 2012
ොො Migrating Landscapes, British Columbian contribution to Venice Biennale (organized by Biennale winners:
5468796, Winnipeg), 2012
ොො Play House: The Architecture of Daniel Evan White – Exhibition designed and curated by SALA Lecturer Greg
Johnson with Adjunct Martin Lewis
SALA / Vancouver Board of Parks + Recreation / Urbanarium

ොො VanPlay Smart City Talks: The Future of Vancouver Parks and Recreation - A five-part lecture series imaging
the future of Vancouver’s parks. Curator: Cynthia Girling (representing SALA), Fall 2017
SALA / Urbanarium
ොො City Debates: Ten Oxford-style debates on urban design and policy featuring a wide range of topics and
experts, Spring 2016, Spring 2017, curator: Leslie Van Duzer

SALA / Inform (Book Launches)
ොො Building Seagram, Phyllis Lambert October 2012
ොො Cornelia Hahn Oberlander: Making the Modern Landscape, Susan Herrington in conversation with Cornelia
Hahn Oberlander, 2013-2014
ොො House Shumiatcher, Leslie Van Duzer in conversation with Judah Shumiatcher
ොො Downs House II, Chris Macdonald in conversation with Barry Downs
ොො Merrick House, Tony Robins in conversation with Paul Merrick
ොො Binning House, Matthew Soules
ොො Friedman House, Richard Cavell
ොො Copp House, Adele Weder
ොො Smith House II, Michael Prokopow
SALA / Westbank (developer)

ොො Bjarke Ingels, Spring 2012
ොො Kengo Kuma, Spring 2015
SALA / Stantec
ොො Marlon Blackwell, January 2013
SALA / UBC
Since 2012, SALA faculty have served on a variety of UBC committees in which the design of on-campus
buildings, landscapes, or spaces have been the primary focus. These committees include:
ොො SEEDS – on-campus installations

ොො Public Realm Steering Committee
ොො New Architect Selection Committee
ොො Advisory Urban Design Panel
ොො Green Buildings Plan Steering Committee
ොො UBC Campus Planning Consultant Review Committee
SALA / PuSH Festival

ොො Aranzazu Rangel, muf architecture/art (London), January 2013
SALA / West Vancouver Museum

ොො Assisted with fundraisers for the Museum’s Barry Downs and Ron Thom exhibitions.

Competitions sponsored by professionals
ොො Checkwitch Poiron Best Section Competition (2013)
ොො James Cheng Best Project Competition (2014)
ොො Fast & Epp Best Structure Competition (2013-ongoing)
Annual Funded Lectures

ොො Paul Sangha Lecture (2011-five-year pledge, recently renewed)
ොො Webb Lecture (endowment)
ොො Cornelia Hahn Oberlander Lecture (endowment)
ොො Arthur Erickson Lecture (endowment)
ොො SALA Friends and Alumni Lecture (ongoing fund)
Leslie Van Duzer Legacy Outreach Fund

Upon the completion of her five-year term as SALA Director, an anonymous donor awarded SALA $100,000 over
four years for continued outreach. Given a tightening budget, the fund has allowed SALA to continue a robust
series of events.
Margolese National Design for Living Prize

The Margolese National Design for Living Prize celebrates and inspires exceptional impact on living environments
benefitting all Canadians. Created by a generous estate gift made to the University of British Columbia by
Leonard Herbert Margolese, it awards annually an unrestricted $50,000 prize to a Canadian who has shown
extraordinary talent and dedication to make Canada a better place to live.
ොො 2012 – Eric Miller

ොො 2013 - Bing Thom
ොො 2014 - Vikram Bhatt
ොො 2015 – Cornelia Hahn Oberlander
ොො 2016 – Sylvia McAdam
ොො 2017 – TBA
Honorary Professors
These are appointments made in recognition of services rendered to a Faculty, Department or School and are
not normally held by individuals holding a faculty appointment at the University or another academic institution.
ොො 3-year terms (July 2012 - June 2015), Peter Busby + Cornelia Hahn Oberlander

Major Book Publications (see faculty bios in Section 4.4 for complete publication record)
Girling, Cynthia, Anezka Gocova, Vanessa Goldgrub, Nicole Sylvia. Wesbrook Place, University of British Columbia,
Canada, A Case Study in Sustainable Neighborhood Design, April, 2015.
Murakami, S., Iwamura, K., & Cole, R.J. CASBEE: A Decade of Development & Application of an Environmental
Assessment Method for the Built Environment, Institute for Building Environment & Energy Conservation, Tokyo,
2014, 296p.
Stevens, Sara. Developing Expertise: Architecture and Real Estate in Metropolitan America, Yale University
Press, 2016.
West Coast Modern House Series Book Launches

This series was co-edited by Leslie Van Duzer and Sherry MacKay.
Table 3.6.k. West Coast Modern House Series Book Launches
Date Book Host

May 4th, 2014 Leslie Van Duzer: House Shumiatcher Inform Interiors
May 4th, 2016 Christopher Macdonald: Downs House II Inform Interiors
April 20th, 2017 Anthony Robins: Merrick House Inform Interiors
May 4th, 2017 Matthew Soules: Binning House Inform Interiors
May 18th, 2017 Richard Cavell: Friedman House Inform Interiors
September 15th, 2017 Adele Weder: Copp House Inform Interiors
Awards at Competitions
Joe Dahmen:
ොො Architizer A+ Award Popular Choice Winner: Watershed Block. Products +Technology.
Cynthia Girling:
ොො Mahyar, Narges, Kelly J. Burke, Xiang (Ernest) Jialing, Siyi (Cathy) Ming, Kellogg S. Booth, Cynthia L. Girling,
and Ronald W. Kellett (2016). “UD Co-Space: A Table-Centred Multi-Display Environment for Public
Engagement in Urban Design Charrettes,” ISS ‘16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Interactive Surfaces and
Spaces, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 10 pages. Honorable Mention award, ISS ’16 Conference
Bill Pechet:
ොො The Otherside - Shortlisted. 2017
ොො Heaven Between – Competition 1st place. 2016
ොො Closer Than – Competition 1st place. 2016
ොො Dichroic Vancouver – Competition 1st place. 2014
ොො The Gathering – Competition finalist. 2013

Inge Roecker:
ොො Competition Entry, Multigenerational Housing (81 units) Invited Competition for Infill Site, Stuttgart,
Germany (December 2011) Shortlisted
Blair Satterfield:
ොො First Place for Mississippi River Bridge Plaza Design Competition. 2012
Matthew Soules
ොො Materials Category, Architizer A+ Awards. Note: Awards included publication: “Vermilion Sands,” A+ Awards
2015, ed. Marc Kushner (London: Phaidon Press, 2015): 104 – 05. 2015
Exhibitions
Joe Dahmen:
ොො “Mycobenches,” Architectural installation of mycelium biocomposite benches at Living Well exhibition at
Craft Ontario, as part of Toronto Offsite Design Festival. January 16- March 18, 2017
ොො Architectural Installation of mycelium biocomposite blocks at Why I Design at Museum of Vancouver in
Vancouver, BC November 9, 2016
ොො “They grow without us,” architectural installation in Primary Research Lab exhibition curated by Lee Plested
at Western Gallery, University of Washington (Bellingham) Sept., 2016
ොො “They Insulate,” temporary installation of mycelium biocomposite materials at Architecture Institute of
British Columbia in Vancouver, BC. October 31- November 25, 2016
ොො “They grow without us,” temporary architectural installation composed of functional seating made of
mycelium biocomposites exhibited at Lee Square on UBC Campus April 12-July 1, 2016
ොො “Mycelium Mockup,” architectural installation Catalyze
ොො “I Hear You Say,” architectural installation at Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies. September 23, 2013-
October September 1, 2014
ොො “Pop Rocks,” public art installation commissioned by the City of Vancouver. Aug. 15–Oct. 1, 2012
Mari Fujita:
ොො “The Rate of Uselessness / Bubble City,” (with Michael Barton) 2’x2’ model Exhibited at Your Future Home:
Creating the New Vancouver. Museum of Vancouver. January 21-May 15, 2016.
ොො “Line 13: Civic Space Under Development,” (with Jason Anderson) Exhibited in Section Perspective, Diana
Center Gallery, Barnard College, NY, May 30 - June 14, 2013. Invited and selected for exhibition. Work is
an annotated map of a transit line in Beijing, China. The drawing and text, in English and Chinese, describe
the transit line as a section cut through the concentric rings of Beijing that offer sequential, lateral views of
adjacent zones. 2013
Greg Johnson:
ොො Oversaw design and co-curated exhibition and publication on the architectural work of Daniel Evan White
Architect, in partnership with the Museum of Vancouver. 2013-2014

Sherry McKay:
ොො “The Measure of Dan White,” Playhouse: The Architecture of Daniel Evan White, exhibition catalogue
curated by Greg Johnson and Martin Lewis, Museum of Vancouver Oct. 2013-Mar 2014
Blair Satterfield:
ොො “Hypernatural: Architecture’s New Relationship with Nature,” University of Milwaukee Wisconsin School of
Architecture and Urban Planning Gallery & The Goldstein Museum of Design. 2015
ොො “HouMinn Evolution,” University of Hawaii. 2015
Leslie van Duzer:

ොො “On Drifting Sand” in Exhibition: Drawing by Drawing / Svein Tønsager & Friends. Danish Architecture
Center, Copenhagen. Opening 1.2012
3.6.4 Out-of-Town and Local Visiting Critics
Table 3.6.k. Out-of-Town Final Studio and Thesis Review Visiting Critics 2012-2017
Year Guest Critic Affiliation

2012 Mark Swackhamer University of Minnesota, HouMinn Practice, Minneapolis
Roger Sherman UCLA, Roger Sherman Architecture and Urban Design, Los Angeles
John Comazzi University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
Jennifer Schab Rios Clementi Hale Studios, Los Angeles
Andrew King Cannon Design
John Patkau Patkau Architects
Patricia Patkau Patkau Architects
Lola Sheppard University of Waterloo
Gundula Proksch University of Washington
Craig Scott California College of the Arts, San Francisco
2013 Nathan Bishop SCI-ARC, Koenig Eizenberg, Los Angeles
Jae-Sung Chon University of Manitoba
Jorge Colon University of New Mexico
Jim Siemens SKArc, Saskatoon
Kiel Moe Harvard Graduate School of Design
Peter Osler Illinois Institute of Technology
Ken Oshima University of Washington
Richard Sommer University of Toronto
Daniel Winterbotton University of Washington
Julie Bargmann University of Virginia
Michael Piper University of Toronto
2014 George Baird University of Toronto, Baird Sampson Neuert, Toronto
Neeraj Bhatia California College of the Arts, San Francisco

Tom Buresh UC Berkeley
Rob Corser University of Washington
Roddy Creedon UC Berkeley, Allied Architecture and Design, San Francisco
Mona El Khalif University of Waterloo
Giovanni Fantappie No Art Just Sign; Architect, Florence, Italy
Barry Sampson University of Toronto, Baird Sampson Neuert, Toronto
Takako Tajima University of Southern California, Bureau EAST, Los Angeles
2015 Gail Peter Borden University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Rocco Ceo University of Miami, Florida
Julie Eizenberg Koenig Eizenberg Architecture, Santa Monica
Adam Frampton Columbia University, Only If, New York
Andrew Levitt University of Waterloo
Jim Nicholls University of Washington, Seattle
Peter Osler Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago
Annette Rudolf-Cleff TU Darmstadt, Germany
Kim Wiese University of Manitoba, Winnipeg
William Williams University of Cincinnati
2016 Kevin Alter University of Texas, AlterSTUDIO Architecture, Austin, TX
Irene Cheng California College of the Arts, Cheng + Snyder, San Francisco, CA
Debbie Choe ZGF, Portland
Neyran Turan UC Berkeley, NEMESTUDIO, San Francisco, CA
Niel Minuk University of Manitoba, DIN Projects
Jeffrey Hou University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Curt Gambetta Princeton University
David Ruy SCI-ARC, RuyKlein, Los Angeles, CA
Adam Marcus California College of the Arts, Variable Projects, San Francisco, CA
2017* Thena Tak University of Minnesota, Office of Vincent James, Minneapolis, MN
Wendy Gilmartin Cal Poly Pomona, FAR frohn&rojas, Los Angeles, CA
Jim Nicholls University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Deirdre Harris DNCA Architects, Albuquerque, NM
*Spring Term only

Local Visiting Critic and Service Contributors
Whether visiting for a studio review, serving on a thesis committee, providing technical expertise to and
mentoring students, or doing a Q&A at a Friday Good Times, members of the Vancouver professional community
make an immense contribution to the life of the Architecture program.
Russell Acton MAIBC, FRAIC Dianna Foldi MAIBC Sara Maia

Larry Adams MAIBC, BArch 1981 Daniel Gasser Armen Mamourian MArch 2009
Hanako Amaya MLA 2004 Joanne Gates MAIBC Chad Manley MArch 2011
Marianne Amodio MAIBC Katherine Gerson MAIBC, BArch 1974 Jennifer Marshall MAIBC
Jill Anholt M. Arch 1996 Rob Grant MArch 2000 Esteban Matheus MArch 2012
Javier Arbona Andrew Gruft emeritus professor Jaymie Matthews
Joost Bakker MAIBC, FRAIC David Guenter IA.AIBC, MArch 2010 Ian Ross McDonald MAIBC, MArch 2005
Rebecca Bayer MArch 2008 Matt Grady MAIBC Steve McFarlane MAIBC Mary McMains
Matt Beall MArch 2011 Bruce Haden MAIBC, MRAIC, BArch 1991 MArch 2006
Bryan Beca MArch 2010 Matt Halverson MAIBC Heather McNeill
Milos Begovic MArch 2009 Doug Hamming MAIBC Alex Minard MAIBC MArch 2006
Noel Best MAIBC, BArch 1967 Jim Hancock MAIBC, FRAIC Barbara Miszkiel
Mahbod Biazi Fernanda Hannah-Suarez Jeanie Morton
Brian Billingsley MAIBC, MRAIC, MArch 1998 David Harding MAIBC, BArch 1992 Nathanial Nacionales IA.AIBC
Sailen Black MAIBC Courtney Healey IA.AIBC, MArch 2009 Kurt Neiswender
James Bligh Michael Heeney MAIBC, MRAIC, BArch 1984 Martin Nielsen MAIBC, MRAIC, MArch 1996
Aaron Boley Scot Hein Donal O’Donoghue
Greg Boothroyd, MAIBC John Hemsworth MAIBC, MArch 2002 Rodrigo Cepeda Oettinger
Alicia Breck Richard Henriquez MAIBC, FRAIC Tony Osborn MAIBC
Kyle Bruce Gregory Henriquez MAIBC, FRAIC Mark Ostry MAIBC FRAIC
James Burton Garnet Hertz Nic Paczkowski MAIBC, MRAIC
Peter Busby MAIBC, FRAIC Melissa Higgs MAIBC Duane Palibroda
Mark Busse Eitaro Hirota IA.AIBC, MArch 2008 Angelique Pilon MArch 2010
Javier Campos MAIBC Darren Huebert MArch 2016 Ryan Panos MArch 2013
Peter Cardew MAIBC Roger Hughes MAIBC, FRAIC Andrew Pask
Teresa Coady MAIBC, FRAIC, BArch 1983 Richard Iredale MAIBC Patricia Patkau MAIBC, FRAIC
Barbara Cole Daniel Irvine MArch 2015 John Patkau, MAIBC, FRAIC
Darryl Condon MAIBC, FRAIC Dane Jansen Sean Pearson
Emily Cooperman Caitlin Jones Angelique Pilon IA.AIBC, MArch 2010
Shelley Craig MAIBC Tewanee Joseph Adrian Politano
Clinton Cuddington MAIBC, MArch 1998 Ron Kato MAIBC Kelly Porth
Taylor Culler Scott Kemp MAIBC, MRAIC Ray Pradinuk MAIBC, BArch 1979
Piers Cunnington Robert Kleyn MAIBC, BArch 1988 Kevin Redmond
Gabe Daly Aaron Knorr MArch 2007 Simon Richards MAIBC, BArch 1974
Steve DiPasquale MArch 2010 Michel Labrie MAIBC, MRAIC, MASA 2000 Gordon Richards MAIBC
Tyler Dixon Oliver Lang Stephanie Robb MAIBC
Craig Duffield Maria Lantin Anthony Robins MAIBC
Alexander Earl Michael Leaf Bryce Rositch MAIBC B Arch
James Eidse MArch 2007 Michael Leckie MAIBC, MArch 2000 Scott Romses MAIBC
Michelle Fenton MAIBC Elizabeth Lee Robert Saliken MAIBC, MRAIC
Jana Foit MAIBC, MArch 2002 Michael Lis Ana Sandrin IA.AIBC

Eesmyal Santos-Brault Craig Stanghetta Brian Wakelin MAIBC, MRAIC, MArch 1998
Thomas Schroeder Steve Suchy John Wall MAIBC, BArch 1994
Ouri Scott MAIBC, MArch 2008 Nick Sully MAIBC. MArch 1998 Patrick Warren
Gabriela Aceves Sepulveda Zhenzhen Tan Gair Williamson MAIBC
Marko Simcic MAIBC, BArch 1990 Peeroj Thakre MAIBC, 1999 Cindy Wilson MAIBC
Craig Simms MAIBC Bill Uhlrich MAIBC Ray Wolfe
Hazen Sise MAIBC Annabel Vaughan IA.AIBC, MArch 1999 Terrance Wong
Chris Sklar IA.AIBC, 2009 Erick Villagomez MArch 2003 Taizo Yamamoto
Alec Smith MAIBC Jane Vorbrodt MAIBC, MArch 2002 Innes Yates MAIBC
Carla Smith MAIBC Nicholas Waissbluth MAIBC Katy Young, MAIBC, MArch 2011

3.7 Physical Resources
architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full-time student; lecture and seminar
spaces that accomodate both didactic and interactive learning; office space for the exclusive use of each full-time
faculty member; and related instructional support space.

- A general description, together with labeled plans, indicating seminar rooms, lecture halls, studios, offices, project
review and exhibition areas, libraries, computer facilities, workshops, and research areas.
- A description of any changes under construction, funded, or proposed.
3.7.1 General Description of Physical Resources
3.7.1.a Classroom, Studio, Office and Administrative Resources
The Architecture program presently is distributed across three locations, nearly all of which resides in the
Lasserre Building. A secondary location accommodates in one space both graduate and PhD research student
offices in Ponderosa B, and a third accommodates a faculty office in the Centre for Interactive Research in
Sustainability (CIRS).
Administrative Offices and Reception Area

Located on the fourth floor of the Lasserre Building, School staff members oversee admissions, student records
and the administrative life of the School. The Director’s office is also included in the administrative area, which
in physical and electronic manifestations provides a front-line location for inquiries and making contact with
the School.
Faculty Offices
Faculty offices, with the exception of one faculty member, are dispersed throughout three floors of the Lasserre
building. The other faculty member is located in the Centre for Interactive Sustainability with two Landscape
Architecture faculty, which optimally locates her amongst an multidisciplinary cohort of colleagues, some at a
very senior level, from many disciplines at UBC all working on sustainability. Each full-time faculty member has
individual office space.
Design Studios
Each student in the MArch program is assigned a studio work-space, allocated in groups according to their design
studio placements. The entire third floor of the Lasserre Building encompasses the majority of space, with
additional studio space in the basement of Lasserre. A joint Architecture / Landscape Architecture studio is on
occasion located at the MacMillan Building where Landscape Architecture, Urban Design, and the undergraduate
Environmental Design programs are located. The various studios’ provisions include drawing and layout tables,
and provide a secure, 24-hour-accessible environment with wi-fi capability and readily accessible clusters of
computer workstations. Printers, plotters, laser cutters, 3D printers and other tools are available here.

Lecture Rooms
Primary lecture halls are located on the ground level of the Lasserre Building (Lasserre 102, 104, 105, 107), with
smaller classes and seminars [Lasserre 202, 211, 301 and 309] distributed across the various facilities of the
School. While some of these are controlled by the School, others are accessed through the Classroom Services
and are in high demand from many departments. Most have been fitted with digital media capability.
3.7.1.b Architecture Reading Room, Audio-visual Store and Materials Library
The Architecture Reading Room and Audio-visual store are located in the lower floor of the Lasserre Building.
While primary research materials are located in the Art + Architecture + Planning Library nearby, the Reading
Room offers a selection of current periodicals, Reserve course materials and a collection of recent School Thesis
projects. These resources are supplemented by a store of audio-visual equipment available to students on a loan
basis. Online access to the University library system and databases, desktop and slide scanners, a CD burner and
copy machines are also available for students’ use. Perhaps more importantly, the Reading Room offers a quiet,
central location outside of the studios where students regularly meet.
In summer 2017, the Materials Library was relocated from the lower floor of Lasserre to the second floor,
conveniently adjacent to Room 202, where many of the materials-related courses are taught.
The audio-visual store provides students and faculty access to laptops, digital and slide projectors, TVs and VCRs,
digital cameras and camcorders, wireless microphones, 35mm cameras and other photography accessories,
photography lights, and a light table.
3.7.1.c Workshop and Digital Fabrication
The School’s model and furniture making workshops are located on the basement level of Lasserre Building in
Rooms 2 and 4.
Room 2 contains a comprehensive joinery shop with stationary and portable power tools as well as hand tools
available for students use, (see inventory below). This resource is open 5 days a week during office hours with
evening and weekend hours supervised by student monitors, for a total of about 60 hours a week. Any of the
portable tools can be signed out overnight for use at home or in the studio.
Room 4, which is open to students at all times, compliments Room 2 as an assembly shop. It has workbenches
with electrical and compressed air outlets as well as a drill press, disc sander and sandblaster.
SALA has 3 types of digital fabrication devices: a CNC machine, 2 laser cutters and a 3D printer. These are
available to students via a web based sign-up application, and are run mostly by work/study monitors who
become very familiar with the machines and the best strategies for running different types of projects. The use
of the machines is charged to the students at a low rate to partially recoup the costs of running them. This is
done by a swipe card system using their UBC student cards.
3.7 Physical Resources -- 119

The CNC machine is in a separate room accessed from within Room 4. It is a Precix Model 9000, 3 axis machine
with a 4’ x 8’ bed. It is available during shop hours plus 24 hours on evenings and weekends. It is used by
students engaged in a wide variety of work including studio projects, Digital Media courses, and directed studies
as well as their own extra-curricular explorations. The School also accepts occasional outside work, typically
machining site models for design firms.
The two laser cutters are Trotec Speedy 300 units @ 60 watts. They can cut paper, wood and acrylic up to ¼”
thick. One is located on the 3rd floor adjacent to the studio area and the other is located at the Landscape
Architecture studio. Both machines are available to all SALA students, (72 hours per week in total), and are very
popular for cutting parts for architectural models.
The 3D printer is a ZCorp 310+ model; it is located in an alcove of Room 4. It is available for 4 builds a week –
the machine is started in the evening and unloaded the following morning. Although it gets its greatest use
toward the end of term when students need final models, it is also used for Digital Media exercises. Like the CNC
machine we occasionally do work for outside design projects for payment.
The Workshop is staffed by one full time technician with extra help being provided by 3 work/study or Graduate
Academic Assistants [GAA]. The digital fabrication devices are staffed by 16 students each working 6 – 8
hours per week.
Use
All incoming students are required to attend an orientation session and sign a waiver before being permitted
to use the workshop. The School purchases basic accident insurance on behalf of all the students. Training
is provided on a one-to-one basis as the need arises. Students, especially those in First Year are encouraged
to speak with the technician or monitor in charge to discuss their project and to come up with a plan for
accomplishing it. The student is then instructed on the machinery involved and assisted as necessary throughout
the process of working from raw materials to finished product.
A selection of materials is available for purchase in the workshop for prices close to our cost. Included are
Baltic birch plywood, basswood, MDF, and acrylic in a range of thicknesses. When other materials are required
students can consult a list of local suppliers or consult with the technician. The workshop also sells at cost basic
safety equipment.
The last 10 years have seen the workshop extensively renovated to create a safe and up-to-date resource. The
electrical supply has been upgraded, a powerful dust extraction/make up air system installed, and worn-out or
inadequate machinery and tools have been replaced or overhauled. At this point the shop is developed to the
maximum possible given the space available. Limitations include the lack of metal working and plastics tools. The
facilities capacity is under pressure as a result of increased use by architecture students. With the merger of the
Architecture and Landscape Architecture programs this pressure can be expected to increase as both Landscape
Architecture and ENDS students take advantage of the facilities.

Inventory
The stationary machinery includes:
ොො 2 @ 10” table saws

ොො 1 @ 24” and 1 @ 14” band saw
ොො 1 @ 6” jointer
ොො 1 @ 14” planer
ොො 2 drill presses
ොො 1 compound mitre saw
ොො 1 @ 24” scroll saw
ොො 1 @ 16” thickness sander
ොො 1 edge sander
ොො 1 combination disk/belt sander
ොො 1 disk sander
ොො 1 router table
ොො 1 spindle sander
ොො 1 metal cutting band saw
ොො 1 polystyrene cutter
ොො 1 sandblaster
As mentioned above there is a comprehensive collection of portable power and hand tools as well as measuring,
clamping (including a vacuum clamp for laminating) and finishing tools.
3.7.1.d Building Plans
The following pages contain floor plans of the Lasserre building, the primary building for the Master of
Architecture Program.

Woodworking
Shop
Lasserre Woodworking
Basement Studio
Shop
Space
Studio Space
5
Classroom
Classrooms
5C
Reading
Room/AV Reading Room/AV
9/9A
Woodworking Shop
2/2A/4/4A/4B
Laser Cutter
5B
Storage
1A
Dedicated ARCH
Space
Shared Space

Lasserre
First
Floor
Lecture Hall
Classroom
Exhibition Space
Classrooms
Classroom 105
107
Lecture Halls
Lecture Hall 102
104
Exhibition Space
100
Dedicated ARCH
Space
Shared Space

Lasserre
Second
Floor Faculty Offices
Classroom
Faculty
Lounge
205
205B
205D
205C
Faculty Offices
Classrooms
202
211
Faculty Offices
201A
201C
201D
202A
205A
205B
205C
205D
Faculty Lounges
201B
205
Classroom
Dedicated ARCH
Space
Shared Space

Lasserre
Classroom
Third
Floor
Student
Lounge
Studio
303A
Space
Studio Space
300
303
Classrooms
301
309
Faculty Offices
301A
Studio 309A
Space
Laser Cutter
302
Studio Spray Booth

Space 302A
Student Lounge
303A
Student Kitchen
303E
Classroom
Dedicated ARCH
Space
Shared Space

Lasserre
Fourth
Floor
Director Office
408
Faculty Offices
408
412
414
420
424
Admin Offices
402
402A
404
Dedicated ARCH
Space
Shared Space

3.7.2 Chronology of Work on New SALA Building, 2011-2017
For many years, the School of Architecture, then subsequently the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture, has suffered for a lack of space as detailed extensively in many Accreditation Reports, feasibility
studies and Faculty Reports. Over many years, some of the difficulties have been somewhat alleviated by
renovations, space rental and new furniture.
What follows is a chronology of the past six years of efforts to consolidate SALA at a single location.
2011-2012: Expanding Lasserre

When SALA was initially formed in the mid-2000’s, the Director’s key objectives have been to bring the identity
and budget of the Architecture and Landscape Architecture (and now, Urban Design and Environmental Design)
programs together, but also to bring them into closer physical proximity [currently they are separated by about
one kilometer]. Under Christopher Macdonald and Ray Cole, the first major attempt to consolidate SALA at the
Lasserre site progressed through University review, and was in 2010 approved for a feasibility study. In 2011,
under Director Van Duzer, SALA conducted the feasibility study. In 2012, after the last accreditation review, the
university concluded that the originally approved site was too small for SALA’s aspirations, so the project was
reconceived as a mixed-use tower (SALA academic space plus graduate student housing) on the newly assigned
West Mall Annex site nearby.
2013: The West Mall Annex Site

In 2013, Director Van Duzer secured the promise of a $10 million donation from a private donor. With newfound
optimism, New York-based Architecture Research Office (ARO) was hired in summer 2013 to do the programming
for a new mixed-use academic and residential building on a new site: the West Mall Annex. ARO’s work was
based on the many strategic planning discussions the faculty had the previous year and a summer workshop
with faculty, staff, student representatives and UBC administrators. With the ARO program in hand and a $31
million budget established, Brent Sauder, Director of the UBC Strategic Partnerships Office, tried diligently
without success to secure enough funding from the wood industry and the government to create an 18-story, tall
wood tower. With no further prospects for major donors in sight, the project appeared doomed, until UBC Vice-
President Resources and Operations Pierre Ouillet promised $10 million dollars for the project. Including other
small donations, SALA was within $8.8 million of its goal, a smaller but still significant funding gap.
2014: Downtown Alternatives

Director Van Duzer and the Vice-President Ouillet approached the private donor, a major developer in Vancouver,
with the possibility of moving the school downtown as one possible way to close the remaining funding gap. This
would also fulfill a longstanding desire of SALA to have a presence downtown. At our May 2014 SALA retreat the
SALA faculty and staff voted unanimously in support of exploring two off-campus options: a new development
proposition the donor was negotiating with city planners, and the soon-to-be vacated Emily Carr facilities on
Granville Island. Subsequently, UBC administrators expressed hesitation about working with CHMC, owners of
the island, and the donor made it clear he would withdraw his $10 million donation if that was the option we
chose. His donation was intact for both the on-campus or off-campus in his new development options.
Following a Board of Governors meeting where the possibility of SALA moving downtown was discussed, then-
UBC President Stephen Toope contributed $2 million from his own discretionary funds as a sign of his support
for the project, no matter the siting. SALA was then $6.8 million short if the school was built on campus, with a
smaller shortfall if built off-campus.

2014: Split Campus Option
The SALA Advisory Board, comprised of 40 leading figures from the community, met to discuss the options and
clearly felt it was important for SALA to maintain some presence on-campus. After more discussion, a proposal
for developing the school both on and off-campus was raised for the first time. This idea very quickly picked up
momentum and the faculty voted unanimously to pursue the split school option. Fully supportive of the idea of
a school that bridges the city and the remote UBC campus, the donor offered an additional $2-$3 million for this
option, reducing our shortfall to $3.8-4.8 million. UBC has offered to find a few million more as needed to help
close the gap.
2015: SALA Only at West Mall Annex

As we were studying the broader SALA Building options, UBC was studying our West Mall Annex site. Concerned
about massing and the associated shadows cast, it was determined by Community and Campus Planning that our
project would no longer be in a mixed-use tower with student housing, but would instead be a dedicated SALA
facility. The SALA faculty was happy with this decision, feeling it would give the school more control over the
design of the building.
In 2015, we reported that a Request for Qualifications had been let in 2014 based on program and site approved
in 2013. Due to our lead donor’s concerns about the selected site, this RFQ was subsequently suspended. In
2015, the University, in consultation with the lead donor, identified another site, tested program feasibility and
recalculated the project cost estimate. Currently the committed funding is short of the threshold necessary to
approve consultant selection. However, a new SALA building remains the top building priority of the Faculty of
Applied Science and among the highest of the University of British Columbia.
2016: UBC Gateway Site

By late 2015, a prominent site at an entrance to campus acceptable to the principal donor had been identified
and studies were initiated to test the SALA program on it. In the intervening two years, a campus construction
boom in combination the greater prominence and construction complexities of the new site, the cost of the
proposed SALA project had increased by more than a third to approximately $44M, roughly double the funding
available. SALA and the University have been unable to close this gap while changes in leadership at the
University (2016), the Faculty of Applied Science (2017 and 2018) and the provincial government (2017) have
complicated appeals for additional support. As a consequence, this most recently proposed UBC site has been
claimed by other academic competitors who have gained authorization to proceed, displacing SALA’s claims to
the site.
2017: Incrementalism
As a consequence, at this writing, SALA Director Ron Kellett is working closely with the University to develop an
incremental approach to develop alternative approaches to the project. Among the options under consideration
are alternative sites developed in collaboration with other academic partners and incremental phased
approaches that would consolidate graduate programs, academic and administrative infrastructure in a new or
remodeled building while accommodating an expanded undergraduate program in existing studio and teaching
spaces in Lasserre. While these remain under active consideration, no conclusions have been drawn or decisions
made at this time.
Nonetheless, despite these setbacks, we continue to shape, expand, and integrate our academic programs and
curricula in anticipation of future growth and co-location. Since our last accreditation visit, for example, we have
fully integrated design media, research methods and professional context coursework and increased joint vertical
studio options for all Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture students, and developed

streamlined dual degree pathways for students pursuing coincident Master of Architecture and Master of
Landscape Architecture degrees. We have redesigned and expanded our undergraduate program as a Bachelor
of Design in Architecture and Urbanism (anticipated launch in 2018) and initiated two new interdisciplinary post-
professional Masters degrees in Urban Design (2013) and High Performance Buildings (2018).

3.8 Information Resources and Information Technology
The architecture librarian and, if appropriate, the staff member in charge of visual resource or other non-book
collections must prepare a self-assessment demonstrating the adequacy of the architecture library. The library
collection must contain a wide variety of print, visual, and electronic media, and be adequate in size, scope,
content (both current, and retrospective), and availability for a professional degree program in architecture. The
collection must include at least 5,000 different Library of Congress NA or Dewey 720-729 titles along with technical
and support volumes to provide a balanced architecture collection as described by the Art Libraries Society of
North America and the Association of Architecture School Librarians. Its staff and services should be adequate and
appropriate to support the goals, objectives, and curriculum of the architecture program. Visual resources and
other non-book materials are considered an integral part of an architecture education, and students must have
ready access to these materials. Access to other architecture libraries in the region is not a substitute for an on-
site library.

- The type of architecture library serving the program.
- A self-assessment of the library, including library collections, visual resources and other non-book collections,
services, staff, facilities, and budget/administration/operations.
- Library statistics report.
For Information Technology Resources, the program must also provide the information technology infrastructure
and corresponding staff support in order to effectively contribute to the delivery of the curriculum, as well as
supporting activities of staff and faculty.

- A description of the hardware, software, networks and other computer resources available to students, faculty
and staff.
- A current action plan outlining recurring levels of staff support, renewal of hardware and infrastructure and
student software access, as well as anticipated modifications to current installation.
- Demonstrate sufficient funding to execute the action plan.
Note: In the absence of a Reading Room resource staff person at SALA to coordinate this self-assessment, the
self-assessment of UBC’s Music, Art, and Architecture (MAA) Library was completed by Paula Farrar, UBC’s
Architecture and Planning Librarian. SALA Administrative Manager Bartlett completed the self-assessment of the
Reading Room Collection with some support from the architecture program chair.
Library Resources Overview

The architecture library collection is located in two places on the UBC campus. The Reading Room collection is
on the lower floor of the Lasserre Building, home to the architecture program. The collection contains a small
(approximately 4,000 titles) collection of periodicals, monographs, history and theory and other sections of
often-accessed architecture, landscape architecture, urban design and planning books, its materials widely
indexed online. Shelving for books in the Reading Room is at its limit, and new acquisitions require that room be
made for them.
The Reading Room acts as a circulating/reference library, course reserve materials, study space, audio visual
equipment bookings, materials library access for the architecture, landscape, urban design, and ENDS Programs

while the MAA Library houses the primary architecture collection. The Reading Room functions very well with a
manual circulation system and is a personal, comfortable place for the students and faculty to study, research or
communicate with one another.
The Reading Room holds two computer workstations, and also provides faculty and students easy access to
basic A/V equipment including digital projectors and cameras. The Reading Room collection is funded out of the
SALA general operating resources, with a $4,000 annual budget to cover journal subscriptions, binding costs,
and faculty-initiated book orders. In lieu of new staffing for the Reading Room collection, it is currently staffed by
work study students, and open approximately 24 hours per week.
Housed a five-minute walk from the Lasserre Building in the full-service university library I.K. Barber Learning
Centre is the main architecture collection. Contained within the MAA, the main collection contains over 35,000
volumes with the Library of Congress NA subject designation, a total that has increased by approximately 2,500
since 2010. The MAA Library journal collection holds 48 of 55 titles associated as “core” by the Association of
Architecture School Libraries (AASL). The MMA provides a range of digital subscription services covering a broad
range of resources, from over 100,000 slides in digital databases to online journals and indexes, to software and
hardware tools.
Access to e-books and other online resources have increased since 2012, and as their quality and
comprehensiveness have improved, so has this gradually changed the way that students and faculty use the
Reading Room collection and library resources more generally. These changes in resource accessibility and
the retirement of the Reading Room Librarian in fall 2016 presented SALA with an opportunity to significantly
redefine the tasks that were once overseen by that staff person.
Reading Room Staffing

The SALA Director and Human Resources Administrator are at an advanced stage of defining the new job
description. Some tasks that were previously the responsibility of the Reading Room Librarian would shift
to others’ staff persons’ portfolios. Others would be expanded, including archiving and collection of student
and faculty research and work, involvement in the curation of digital and online collection, and other fields
of expertise that extend beyond managing the Reading Room collection. This is a complex portfolio. Given
the limited number of staff positions, it is important to define that portfolio in a way that is resilient. This is
challenging in the face of dynamic, changing, difficult to precisely define, world of information tools and the
human expertise to manage them.
Funds
The funding is provided by the School budget, TLEF grants, and gifts from donors and book sales. The library
coordinator has input and authority for budget expenditures and acts as a liaison with the AArP Librarians.
Evidence of Planning
Meetings with the Director and administrator are scheduled to discuss plans, budgets and goals. Staff meetings
are typically set for every 2 weeks to discuss future and present events.
Participation of Faculty and Students

ARCHUS (student association), faculty and staff all participate in the development and evaluation of library
policies, services, resources and programs.
3.8 Information Resources and Information Technology -- 131

3.8.1 Library Self-assessment
In the absence of a Reading Room resource person at SALA, the following self-assessment was completed by
Paula Farrar, Architecture and Planning Librarian at UBC’s Music, Art, and Architecture Library.

Architecture Accreditation Report
UBC Library
September 11, 2017
BACKGROUND
UBC Library is the second largest research library in Canada with multiple branches on the Vancouver Point Grey Campus,
as well as the UBC Okanagan Library in Kelowna. The Library ranks thirty first among members of the Association of
Research Libraries (ARL), an organization comprised of 114 research libraries in North America. UBC Library‘s collections
are large and diverse. As of July 2016, they include over 7.9 million volumes, 2.3 million of which are ebooks, and more
than 291,000 journal subscriptions.
UBC’s Music, Art & Architecture (MAA) Library in the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre (IKBLC) houses the core architecture
collection and provides reference and instructional support via the Architecture & Planning Liaison Librarian. Due to the
interdisciplinary nature of architecture, collections and expertise in the Koerner Library (UBC’s humanities and social
sciences library, including government publications, GIS, data and statistics), and the Woodward Library (UBC’s Science
library, including engineering) are partners in supporting the teaching and research of the School of Architecture +
Landscape Architecture (SALA).
UBC Library: library.ubc.ca

MAA Library: barber.library.ubc.ca
IKBLC: ikblc.ubc.ca
STAFF
The Music, Art & Architecture (MAA) Library is administered by the Acting Head Librarian, Kevin Madill, in consultation
with an Associate University Librarian. In addition to the Head Librarian, the MAA Library employs two full-time
professional librarians, one of which is the Architecture & Planning Liaison Librarian, Paula Farrar. Paula joined UBC
Library in 2005 after completing her MLIS at UBC’s School of Library & Information Studies. In 2014 she took on the role
of Architecture liaison. Currently Paula is responsible for the development of UBC Library’s architecture, landscape
architecture, and planning collections, as well as reference, instruction and liaison to the School of Architecture +
Landscape Architecture and the School of Community & Regional Planning. The MAA Library also employs a manager,
three full-time reference assistants, 7 full-time circulation assistants, two graduate academic assistants (graduate
students in the School of Library, Archival and Information Studies) and student shelving assistants.
All Library staff members are encouraged to participate in professional development. Library employees in MAA can apply
for workshops and/or conferences using their professional development funding to support attendance at local, national,
and international conferences. Conferences recently attended by Paula Farrar include: the Association of Architecture
School Librarians (AASL) in Detroit (Mar 2017), the Northwest Chapter of the Art Libraries Society of North America
(ARLIS/NA) in Portland (Nov 2016), and the UK Architecture Librarians Group (ARCLIB) in Glasgow (Jul 2016).
FACILITIES
The North Wing of the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre (IKBLC) opened in August 2005 and housed two separate library
units: the Art + Architecture + Planning Division and the Science & Engineering Division. In June 2013, the Science &
Engineering Division moved out of the IKBLC and the Music Library moved in, merging with the Art + Architecture +

Planning Division to form the Music, Art & Architecture (MAA) Library. With this new configuration, the Library undertook
a renovation project to create a new entrance and single service counter on the third floor, as well as the creation of four
Digital Media Rooms.
The IKBLC has been a clear destination for many in the campus community since the opening of its south wing in April
2008. During the busy fall and winter terms, the IKBLC attracts just over a quarter of a million visitors per month. The
building provides expanded access to computer and word processing workstations, multimedia Mac workstations,
printers, scanners, improved study spaces for individuals and groups, including nine bookable Group Study Rooms and
three bookable Digital Media Rooms, and much more.
The MAA Library provides two Graduate Research Rooms. These are secure spaces for graduate students to conduct
advanced research for theses and dissertations. The space provides a dedicated, comfortable, quiet work environment
and includes secure storage space for library materials. Access is limited to graduate students whose primary research
requires extensive use of IKBLC collections.
The IKBLC is also home to the Library‘s Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS). The ASRS is an onsite storage
facility for library collections with a capacity of 1.8 million volumes. Materials housed in the ASRS are made available
within fifteen minutes of an online request being made. In 2016 the Library opened PARC, a second storage facility at the
south end of the Vancouver Campus. PARC provides 2,280 square metres of high-density collection storage and can house
approximately 1.6 million volumes. The facility also houses a campus-wide records management service, a small
digitization area, a staff work area and a publicly accessible reading room. Materials in PARC are provided via the
Library’s Document Delivery service, with a 1 day delivery time.
The Chapman Learning Commons, located in the heritage core of the IKBLC, is a collaborative and innovative learning
space that brings together learners of all types— students, faculty, staff, and community members—making the most of
technology to support and enhance learning and teaching at UBC. The Commons offers learning support services and
programs, including tutoring, writing and research support, study skills workshops, academic peers, and access to a
variety of technologies including multimedia software and hardware. learningcommons.ubc.ca
The Research Commons, located in the Koerner Library, provides workshops and 1 on 1 consultations to support graduate
students with thesis formatting, citation management, GIS software, data analysis software and more. Services are
provided by graduate student peer instructors, subject specialist librarians and campus collaborators. Koerner Library is
also the home of the Library’s Maps, GIS & Data Services unit, which includes a specialized GIS/Data lab for students.
researchcommons.library.ubc.ca
COLLECTIONS
The origins of the Music, Art & Architecture (MAA) Library at UBC can be traced back to the 1940s with the establishment
of the Fine Arts Room in the old Main Library. The opening of the School of Architecture in 1949 was a catalyst for the
Library to begin collecting intensively in the area of architecture. Over the years the architecture collection has grown
and transitioned from the Fine Arts Room, the Fine Arts Library, the Art + Architecture + Planning Division, to the current
MAA Library. The MAA Library’s primary goal is to create and cultivate a strong and vital collection that supports the
research needs of faculty and students in the Department of Art History, Visual Art and Theory, the School of Community
and Regional Planning, and, most relevantly, the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture.
The Architecture Liaison Librarian is responsible for the acquisition of all architecture materials and is guided by a written
collection development policy (see appendix A). The policy aims for a collection that is broad while also providing deep,

comprehensive coverage of Canadian materials—especially British Columbian—and relevant North American, UK,
European and Pacific Rim publications with selective coverage of Central and South American publications. Materials are
selected for the collection via firm orders and approval plans with UBC Library‘s book vendor YBP Library Services, a
vendor that specializes in providing scholarly content for academic libraries across North America. Additionally, the
Architecture Liaison Librarian actively surveys national and international publisher‘s catalogues and websites to ensure
that the most up-to-date materials are being purchased including those not offered through formal arrangements with
the Library‘s book vendor. Faculty and students are encouraged to suggest relevant books, periodicals and databases for
purchase or subscription and can do so via an online form or email to the Architecture Liaison Librarian.
The MAA Library estimates its physical collection to be approximately 476,876 items as of June 2017. This number
includes monographs, serials, vertical files, reference materials, CDs, DVDs, etc. The number of titles with the Library of
Congress subject heading designation assigned to architecture (NA) is approximately 35,8851. The number of NA classed
titles with imprints 2010-2016 is approximately 2,500. Please note this number excludes the Library’s extensive ebook
collection.
Collections Expenditures FY 2016 – 2017
UBC Library Vancouver: $16,631,712 (CAD)

Music, Art & Architecture Library: $371,929 (CAD)
Monographs
The principal print collection of architecture monographs is housed in the MAA Library; however, as previously
mentioned, due to the interdisciplinary nature of the subject area, relevant print collections are also housed in the
Koerner Library (humanities and social sciences, GIS, government publications, data and statistics) and Woodward Library
(engineering). Additionally, the print collection at the Okanagan Library is available to architecture students and faculty
via document delivery. An area of constant growth is UBC Library‘s ebook collection which now exceeds 2.3 million titles.
UBC Library purchases individual ebook titles and subscribes to numerous ebook collections, many of which are
purchased through provincial and national consortial agreements. For a list of recent NA acquisitions visit the Library’s
New Books search at: bit.ly/2gQVPZo
Monographs Budget FY 2016 – 2017

Music, Art & Architecture Library: $157,467 (CAD)
Serials/Periodicals
The Library purchases electronic journal subscriptions where a reliable, stable, and up-to-date online version exists.
Although a number of architecture titles are now available online, UBC Library retains a number of ‘print only’ journals
due to instability of provider and poor quality of online images (in pdf or html formats), and where the online version of a
journal excludes images published in the print version.
1Architecture topics are also covered in the MAA Library under a large array of different Library of Congress subject classifications,
given the multidisciplinary nature of architecture and its intersections with visual art, art history, sustainability, urban design and
planning, and engineering.

The MAA Library journal collection has both current and historic materials in both print and electronic formats. The MAA
Library currently subscribes to 48 of the 55 titles identified as “Core” by the Association of Architecture School Librarians
(AASL). www.architecturelibrarians.org/coreperiodicalslist
CORE LIST – UBC Library current subscriptions (and open access)
1. 306090 (print)
2. A + U (Architecture and Urbanism) = Kenchiku to toshi (print)
3. AA Files (print)
4. Abitare (print)
5. Architect (print + online)
6. Architects' Journal (AJ) (online)
7. Architectural Design (AD) (print + online)
8. Architectural History: the Journal of the Society of (online)
9. Architectural Record (print + online)
10. Architectural Review (print + online)
11. ARQ: Architectural Research Quarterly (online)
12. AV Monografias (print)
13. Baumeister (online)
14. Canadian Architect (print + online)
15. Casabella (print)
16. Crit, the Journal of the American Institute of Architecture Students (print)
17. El Croquis (print)
18. Detail (Munich) (print)
19. Domus (print)
20. Environment and Behavior (online)
21. GA Document (print)
22. GA Houses (print)
23. GreenSource (print – publication ceased in 2013)
24. Grey Room (online)
25. Harvard Design Magazine (print)
26. ID (International Design) (print – publication ceased in 2010)
27. Japan Architect (print)
28. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research (print)
29. Journal of Architectural Education (JAE) (online)
30. Journal of Architecture (online)
31. Journal of Green Building (online)
32. Journal of the American Planning Association (JAPA) (online)
33. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (JSAH) (online)
34. Journal of Urban Design (online)
35. Landscape Architecture (print)
36. Landscape Journal (online)
37. Log (print)
38. Lotus International (print)
39. Metropolis (online)
40. Perspecta (print)

41. Places (online)
42. Planning (print)
43. Praxis: Journal of Writing + Building (print)
44. Quaderns d'arquitectura i urbanisme (online – current year embargoed)
45. RIBA Journal (Royal Institute of British Architects) (print)
46. Thresholds (online – current year embargoed)
47. Urban Land (print + online)
48. Werk Bauen und Wohnen (print)
Access to serials is enhanced by the UBC eLink–software that supplies a direct link from online index search results (Avery,
Geobase, Google Scholar) to either the Library‘s full text online subscription or the print holdings in the Library catalogue.
Users can access UBC Library‘s electronic resources on campus or remotely; in the latter case, they will be asked to
authenticate with a campus-wide login through UBC Library‘s EZproxy service.
Serials & Database Subscription Budget FY 2016 – 2017

Music, Art & Architecture Library: $ 212,096 (CAD)
Electronic Materials
As mentioned in the previous sections on Monographs and Serials, UBC Library has significant ebook and ejournal
collections. In addition to these e-resources, UBC Library subscribes to many electronic databases. Examples of core
databases in architecture to which UBC Library subscribes include: the Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, Art Full
Text, Building Types Online (Birkhauser), Detail Inspiration and the Design & Applied Arts Index. Secondary databases
include: ARTbibliographies Modern, Art Index Retrospective, Bibliography of the History of Art, Compendex, GreenFile,
International Bibliography of Art, and Urban Studies Abstracts. UBC also subscribes to large multidisciplinary databases
like the Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, Canadian Business & Current Affairs, GeoBase, JSTOR, and ProQuest
Theses Dissertations Global. For a comprehensive list of UBC’s electronic databases visit: resources.library.ubc.ca
The MAA Library subscribes to two image databases: ARTstor and the Archivision Digital Research Library. ARTstor is a
digital library of more than two million images, information about the images, and software tools designed to enhance
teaching, learning, and scholarship. The images in ARTstor come from a wide range of cultures with initial strengths in
European, American, and Asian cultures and come from many notable collections including the recent collaboration
between Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation (GSAPP) and the Avery
Architectural & Fine Arts Library that makes available 20,000 images of architectural plans and sections and related
materials. Archivision is a database of 80,000 plus high quality, professionally photographed images of landscape
architecture, architecture, urban planning, archaeology, and design. It includes images of contemporary structures from
the United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia. The MAA Library has also purchased ongoing access to OnArchitecture, an
audiovisual online streaming resource for architecture. Criterion On Demand and Kanopy, are UBC Library’s general
online streaming resources.
Funding for Collections in the Current Economic Climate

As noted in the previous accreditation report, the Library has continued to face challenges with maintaining a healthy
collections budget. The 2015/2016 fiscal year brought unprecedented challenges. The purchasing power of the Library’s
collections budget continued to decline following the combined effects of inflation, skyrocketing e-resources costs, and

the falling Canadian dollar. Of the 14.8 million dollars allocated to the Library’s collections that year, 13.2 million (89%)
was required just to maintain existing levels of access to the Library’s current collection of research journals and
databases. The dramatic increase in the cost of these resources left limited funds to expand journal and e-resource
subscriptions, or support information resources across other formats such as monographs.
The graph below makes visible the decline from 2010 to 2015 in the Library’s collection purchasing power and the
Library’s ability to sustain existing resources.
Since 2015 the University provides a standardized 2% yearly increase to the Library’s collections budget to help offset the
cost of inflation. UBC Library is grateful to the University for this yearly increase as well as various one-time supplements
to the collection budget; however, regrettably, these much-needed and welcomed funds are not sufficient to off-set
typical inflationary increases for the information resources we provide. UBC Library continues to explore new funding
models that will meet the approval of the Provost and Deans, with the goal of increasing UBC Library‘s base budget
(including collections) and making it sustainable over time.
ACCESS TO SERVICES
Reference & Instruction

In person reference assistance is available to Architecture students and faculty during regularly scheduled times at the
Research Help counter of the Music, Art & Architecture Library’s Information Desk on the third floor of the IKBLC. Faculty
and students can also phone or email questions to the Architecture liaison librarian or schedule one-on-one research
appointments. Generally, these appointments are generally scheduled for an hour. UBC Library participates also
participates in the province-wide, post-secondary, virtual chat reference service AskAway.
MAA Library Reference Hours (Winter Session 2016/2017)

Monday - Friday: 11 am – 5 pm
AskAway Hours (Winter Session 2016/2017)

Sunday – Thursday: 10 am – 9 pm
Friday & Saturday: 11 am – 5 pm

In the past all incoming Architecture students have received an introductory hour long Library Research Skills workshop
from the Architecture liaison librarian as part of SALA’s orientation program. A more comprehensive session is also
provided to students taking SALA’s Research Methods course. To supplement in person reference and instruction an
online subject specific research guides is also available to students:
guides.library.ubc.ca/architecture
UBC Library also provides many general workshops throughout the year that architecture students and faculty can
register for via the online Instructional Calendar. Sample sessions from the Graduate Workshop Series include:
- Citation Management
- Best Practices in Research Data Management
- Copy Right for Authors & Creators
- Publishing a Journal Article
- And various software programs such as NVivo and SPSS
For a list of upcoming sessions in the Graduate Workshop Series visit: events.library.ubc.ca/series/7
Interlibrary Loan (ILL)

UBC Library’s Interlibrary Loans (ILL) service allows UBC faculty, staff, and students to borrow material from other libraries
free of charge when items are not part of UBC Library‘s collection, such as hard-to-find resources including non-English
language publications, obscure conference proceedings, or non-UBC dissertations. Requests for materials are submitted
online and desktop delivery is provided for journal articles, book chapters and conference papers usually within 1-2
business days. Physical books are usually available for pickup within 7 business days.
UBC Library also participates in reciprocal borrowing agreements that allow UBC students and faculty to borrow material
while visiting other Canadian institutions. Faculty members have additional privileges at some American universities. For
more information visit: services.library.ubc.ca/borrowing/reciprocal-borrowing
Course Reserves
In 2013 the UBC Library began offering electronic course reserves. Through the Library Online Course Reserves system
(LOCR), instructors request material to be put on course reserve for their classes. LOCR staff create permanent urls to the
Library’s purchased/subscribed electronic content, or for print journal articles, book chapters and conference papers,
scan, upload and clear copyright, including paying any required transactional license fees. In some cases, print books are
placed on course reserve with a restricted loan period of 2 hours, 1 day, or 3 days. If faculty require assistance using the
LOCR system, the Architecture liaison librarian is available to help by email, phone or in person. For more information on
LOCR visit: services.library.ubc.ca/borrowing-services/using-course-reserves
Copyright & Scholarly Communication Services

The UBC Library’s Scholarly Communications & Copyright Office supports scholarly communications and copyright
services for the UBC community. The office advises faculty and staff on the application of UBC's copyright requirements
and guidelines in a higher education setting and provides a range of services to support faculty, staff and students in the
preparation of their course materials, assignments, presentations and publications. UBC Library continues to play a major
role institutionally regarding copyright in the development and maintenance of the UBC copyright website, developing
and running copyright compliance workshops for faculty and students, and organizing and running an Open Access
Event—a week-long series of seminars and workshops designed to incite discussion regarding the implications of
copyright legislation on research and study in an academic setting. For more information visit: copyright.ubc.ca

Technology
The following list provides an overview of the types of technology (hardware and software) and technology lending
available to UBC architecture students and faculty.
1. Wireless Network available in all Library branches (UBC IT)

2. 123 workstations throughout IKBLC
a. 111 PC workstations running Windows with MS Office (2010)
b. 8 iMac workstations with:
i. Microsoft Office for Mac 2016
ii. Apple Pages, Numbers and Keynote
iii. LibreOffice 5
iv. Apple Photos, iMovie, and Garage Band
v. Google Earth
vi. Google SketchUp
vii. CyberDuck (for FTP)
viii. Safari, Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox
ix. Xcode 7 (in Applications)
c. 14 iMac multimedia workstations with the above plus:
i. Adobe Creative Suite
ii. Final Cut Pro X
3. 43 GIS workstation in the Koerner Library with:
a. ArcGIS Desktop & ArcGIS Pro (including ArcMap, ArcGIS Pro, ArcCatalog, ArcGlobe, ArcScene)
b. AutoCAD
c. ESRI City Engine
d. FME Desktop
e. Google Earth Pro
f. Grass GIS
g. IrfanView Image Viewer
h. Matlab
i. NVivo
j. R
k. QGIS
l. SPSS
m. Stat Transfer
n. Trimble SketchUp Pro

4. Printers and copiers with black & white, colour and double-sided printing capabilities located near all
computer workstation areas.
5. 1 Engineering copier (available in Koerner Library)
6. 11 Microfilm/fiche/card readers, some with the ability to create digital documents (available in Koerner
Library)
7. Flatbed scanners in all branches, with 1 large format scanner in the MAA Library
8. 36 Laptops (available from 4 UBC Point Grey Library branches)
9. 8 Sony Digital HD Video Camera (available from the IKBLC)
10. 8 LCD projectors (available from the IKBLC)
11. 6 Digital cameras (available from the IKBLC)
a. 2 Cannon DSLR
b. 2 GoPro Hero 4
c. 2 Cannon Power Shot
d. 9 tripods
12. Various phone chargers & adapters (available from the IKBLC)
Prepared by: Paula Farrar, MLIS, BA

Architecture & Planning Librarian
UBC Library | Music, Art & Architecture Library
The University of British Columbia | Vancouver Campus
414 - 1961 East Mall | Vancouver BC | V6T 1Z1 Canada
Phone: 604-822-4474
Email: [email protected]
Date: September 11, 2017

Appendix A
Architecture
Collection Development Policy
Music, Art & Architecture Library
Clientele
The architecture collection serves the needs of the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA),
which offers courses at both undergraduate (Bachelor of Environmental Design) and Master’s of Arts levels.
Other departments may also use this collection, including the Department of Art History, Visual Art and Theory.
Overview of the strengths of the existing collection

The architecture collection is housed in the Music, Art & Architecture Library in the Irving K. Barber Learning
Centre. The library’s collection, numbering over 400,000 items (including over 400 current journal subscriptions)
is rich in Canadian, Pre-Columbian, Asian, Italian Renaissance, and Baroque art as well as the history of
architecture.
Current areas of collecting

The architecture selector covers architectural history, theory, criticism, and design for special populations,
sustainability, housing and urban design, and environmental studies. Canadian architecture and in particular,
the architecture of British Columbia, is of special emphasis.
Research and publishing characteristics

Books on architecture fall into the following general categories: theory, historical, engineering/technical, and
design. Theory, history, and design books overlap with art, and technical books overlap with
science/engineering. Books on architectural projects, housing, urban design, sustainability, and environmental
and social aspects of architecture overlap with community and regional planning. These overlaps are reflected
in courses offered in other departments. Books with scholarly content on architecture published in the United
States or Canada are supplied by an approval plan. All other materials on architectural history are so closely
related to art history that many of the art books contain as much information on architecture as on art.
Form
The collection includes books, journals, article indexes, image databases and more. In addition, there are
cabinets of files with an emphasis on architecture.
Coverage
There are no exclusions.
Publication date
The majority of acquisitions will be for current publications, with retrospective purchasing to fill collection gaps
and to meet research needs of users, in particular faculty.

Languages
Predominantly English language, but we collect in all western European languages. We buy books in the Asian
languages, as long as there is some text in the western languages.
Geographic origin
We collect from all areas worldwide, emphasizing Canada, the United States, the Pacific Rim, and Europe. More
selective collecting is done for Central and South America.
Exclusions
Books without critical text, textbooks, blueprints, manufacturers catalogues, 3-D models, slides, computer-aided
design programs (CADD), “how to” renovation books, text books, revised editions which do not have significant
text changes, dissertations (unless published as a monograph), or popular biographies on architects.
We buy limited numbers of stand-alone CD-ROMs; most of the CD-ROMs we collect are incorporated into
published monographs.
Collections in other UBC Libraries/ Areas of overlap
 Asian Library
Material with text in Chinese, Korean, Japanese, and Indic languages.
 Koerner Library
Humanities & Social Sciences materials
 Woodward Library
Engineering materials.

3.8.2 Reading Room Collection
The Reading Room collection is composed of monographs, journals, course reserve material, graduation projects,
unique, school archives, audio visual equipment and a digital image database that support the School’s teaching
and research needs. Additional teaching and learning resources include a selection of AV Equipment for loan
and a Materials Library. The reading room and A/V equipment are located in Room 9 on the lower floor of the
Lasserre Building and the the Materials Library, which houses samples of building material products is located on
the second floor of the Lasserre Building.
While the central Music, Art + Architecture Library (MAAL) houses the primary architecture & landscape
collections on campus, the School’s Reading Room, a small circulating library and study space provides
convenient access to resources for SALA faculty and students. SALA’s reading room catalogue is accessible online
through the UBC Library cataloguing module called Voyager, making materials widely accessible. Reading room
hours are currently reduced to a staff vacancy, however every effort is made to schedule open hours 5 days
per week.
The Reading Room augments the MAAL collection with materials relating to practice, history, theory and
criticism that support the curriculum of the School. There are approx. 4000 titles relating to architecture,
planning and landscape architecture. Some duplicates with the MAAL exist. All the appropriate periodical
indexes are available on-line. The extent of the collection remains stable with regular purchases and discards.
New material is catalogued upon receipt and displayed on the new book shelf. The book collection is mended
and bound as needed. In addition to new volumes, the collection receives book donations from the community
on a regular basis.
The Reading Room maintains a selection of key architecture and design journals. The monograph collection
reflects the School’s courses of instruction, student interests, faculty research and studies abroad. Effort is made
to avoid duplication with the MAAL.
The Reading Room developed a digital Image database collection of 5241 images from Studies Abroad and
Canadian Architecture. SALA’s digital image database uses software called MDID developed through The James
Madison University. Funding to set up the database was provided by UBC’s Teaching and Learning Enhancement
Fund grants. There is also a collection of approximately 20,000 slides, a variety of models, building material
samples, and a small collection of CD’s and DVD’s.
School archives and theses dating back to 1950 have been catalogued and filed in storage lockers by the Reading
Room and are available for library use only. Archival material is catalogued, placed in acid free envelopes or
boxes before filing.
The Materials Library is situated in the Lasserre Building room 202A and consists of holdings of product
literature, samples of building materials, CDs, and technical literature.
The Reading Room has two computer workstations available for students to connect to the campus library
system, providing access to extensive online resources for users. A printer with scanning and copying capabilities
is also available.

Funding for the Reading Room is provided through SALA’s general operating resources. Four thousand dollars
per year is allocated to covers journal subscriptions, binding costs and SALA faculty initiated book orders. Other
sources of funding include project based grants through the UBC Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund and
the sale of surplus books.
The full-time reading room reference assistant position is currently vacant. The School is reviewing the positon
to consider modernization of the role and expanding the role to include digitization and archiving. To date,
the reference assistant has educated patrons on how to use the library system, catalogued collections and
coordinated reading room purchases and discards. The MAAL library is the main source for library training and
orientation for students and provides a series of training sessions through the year.
Two to three students staff the reading room and provide circulation and reading room support during fall and
winter terms. Each student assistant works a maximum of 10 hours per week. The reading room is open 20 to
24 hours per week.
3.8.3 Information Technology Resources
In the summer of 2011, the SALA IT department was centralized to the UBC IT department, part of a University-
wide strategy. Given SALA’s limited resources it cannot support its own IT staff, helpdesk, etc. and this solution
has worked reasonably well as an alternative. Along with access to the university’s IT staff support and resources,
a UBC IT staff person is available Monday-Friday at the Lasserre Building for several hours each day to support
and troubleshoot faculty and administration hardware and software problems and upgrades, and to monitor the
Lasserre Building’s IT infrastructure.
From the perspective of the students, day-to-day operations of the IT resources of the school are overseen by
SALA staff, who maintain equipment and operate some digital fabrication hardware. SALA staff also train and
oversee a large cohort of student technicians, who operate, maintain, and top up necessary supplies for digital
fabrication and printing hardware.
Digital fabrication tools have also expanded and been upgraded in recent years. From page 16 of this
report (Program Response, by Director Ron Kellett): “Since the 2012 accreditation visit, incremental facility
improvements to the Lasserre Building have continued every year. The improvements have largely developed the
program’s digital fabrication tools, including four plastic filament 3D printers, located in or near the three studio
locations, two in Lasserre; one Die Cutter, located in Lasserre; and one Larger format laser cutter (2017), located
in Lasserre. Digital Projectors have been installed in Lasserre’s three principal seminar rooms.”

Table 3.8.a. Computer and Hardware Inventory
Location Item Quantity Details

Lasserre 3rd Floor Mac Pro 4 APPLE MACPRO C2D 3.2GHZ/2GB/320GB
Dell Precision 3 T3400 2.66GHZ /4GB/ 80GB
Dell Precision 1 T7400 2.00GHZ/4GB/160GB
Dell Precision 1 390
Dell Studio 1 XPS
Color LaserJet printer 1 HP 6015
Color LaserJet printer 1 HP 5550dtn
Color LaserJet printer 1 HP 9500
B&W LaserJet printer 1 HP5000N
B&W LaserJet printer 1 HP5100
Plotter 1 HP DesignJet 500
Plotter 2 HP DesignJet 800
Plotter 1 HP DesignJet T1120
Plotter 1 HP DesignJet T1200
Scanner 4 Epson Perfection V200 Photo Pro
Scanner 1 HP DesignJet T1120 42” HD
Reading Room PC Computer 2 Dell
PC Computer (L/T) 2 Dell Latitude D800 PentiumM
Mac (L/T) 1 Macbook Pro
3.8.4 Current IT Infrastructure Action Plan
Recurring Levels of Staff Support

In 2017-18, SALA will realign two technical staff positions to better support operation and renewal of the School’s
infrastructure. One staff position focuses on the School’s physical infrastructure (classrooms and IT). A second
position focuses on the School fabrication infrastructure (shop and fabrication devices).
Renewal of Hardware Infrastructure / Anticipated Modifications to Current Installations

Renewal and modifications to the physical and hardware infrastructure of the SALA are defined and managed
through a SALA-level Academic Infrastructure committee co-chaired by faculty and staff. Students are also
represented. This committee develops and recommends policies and priorities for the assessment, renewal and
expansion of SALA’s infrastructure including IT infrastructure. This committee consults broadly with faculty, staff
and students. Its outputs include annual reports of needs and recommendations for infrastructure renewal and
expansion. This committee, for example, defined and recommended the aforementioned infrastructure staff
realignments.
SALA maintains a service agreement with UBC IT to monitor and maintain the School’s IT infrastructure. This
agreement includes dedicated IT staff assignments to SALA. SALA funds the service agreement with UBC
IT at $45k.

A three-year Teaching Learning and Enhancement Fund curriculum development initiative ‘Integrated Design
Learning through Making and Building @SALA’ includes task areas linking academic goals and planning to
infrastructure needs. The principal goal of this project is to develop curricula and infrastructure to enable every
student in the School access to integrated design, fabrication and building curricula and experiences at every
level of every program. In 2016-17, the first year of this initiative, SALA completed a School- and campus-wide
inventory and mapping of fabrication related tools and equipment accessible to students and, researched case
studies and models of best and innovative global practice. Work currently underway develops instructional
materials related to safe and effective operation of this equipment and pilots first iteration course refinements.
Work soon to begin will engage broader issues of curriculum development and the technology investments
necessary to support this curricular redesign initiative.
3.8.5 Demonstration of Sufficient Funding to Execute the Action Plan
Recurring levels of staff support

All staff support and student support to staff is funded in the recurring base budget. Funding allocated to support
infrastructure staff positions represented approximately $120k in salary and benefits. In 2018-19 the salaries
associated with these recently reclassified positions will elevate to match increased their responsibilities and
scopes of work. These positions are supplemented with student employees at $35k.
Renewal of Hardware Infrastructure / Anticipated Modifications to Current Installations

SALA allocates an annual hardware renewal and acquisitions budget of $100k.
SALA allocates an annual physical infrastructure repair and modification budget. In 2017-18 SALA allocated $37k
to regular upgrade of hardware and an additional $63k to a significant upgrade to laser cutting equipment and
infrastructure in Lasserre. An additional $12k was allocated to physical infrastructure (teaching space) repairs
and upgrades.
Student Software Access

Student technology fees and output device revenue contributes $91k and $115k respectively to technology
hardware, infrastructure and materials. SALA supplements this funding with $134k from the recurring budget.
SALA provides the most current hardware and software solutions to facilitate the pedagogical mission of the
school. This is accomplished by supporting Mac and PC platforms with a wide array of up-to-date software
including Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Suite, AutoCAD and its related Building Information Modelling (REVIT)
software, advanced digital modelling and scripting, animation software, and beginning in fall 2017, a workstation
with VR capability.
SALA provides access to peripheral hardware (itemized elsewhere in this Report), wireless connectivity, and
academically discounted software packages to promote the student’s achievement. Its computer facilities are
governed by UBC’s ‘Appropriate Use of Information Technology’ policy.

3.9 Financial Resources
Programs must have access to sufficient institutional support and financial resources.

- Program budget, endowments, scholarships, and development activities.
3.9.1 Budget
Architecture revenue and expenses are included in the overall SALA budget. Table 3.9.a. is a five year summary
of SALA’s financial position, included as a foldout at the end of this section.
An estimate of Architecture specific costs in relation to the overall costs of the School is presented in Table
3.9.a. Salaries for Architecture faculty, sessional instructors teaching Architecture courses and student teaching
assistants supporting Architecture courses are based on actual salary costs. All other amounts are estimated
based on the percentage of students in the Architecture program compared to other programs offered at SALA.
These percentages are used to breakout both revenue and costs where the actual breakdown is not available.
A comparison of the reported surplus/deficit across the Faculty of Applied Science (APSC) for year ending March
31, 2017 and year ending March 31, 2016 is included below (Table 3.9.b.). Note that Nursing and the School of
Community and Regional Planning (SCARP) are Schools and the others listed are engineering departments.
Table 3.9.b. Comparative Surplus/Deficit Data of Annual Expenditures 2016/2017 (thousands of $)
Program March 2017 March 2016

ChemBio 201 (194)
Civil 940 192
Electrical (121) 657
Mechanical (2) 468
Materials 248 186
Mining (163) 26
Nursing (54) (237)
SALA 179 (21)
SCARP (192) (172)

3.9.2 Tuition Revenue
The School’s annual funding allocation comes from a combination of graduate and undergraduate enrolment
based tuition (approximately 33% of total) and a baseline budget allocation (set in 2011 when UBC introduced a
new University wide funding model) that carries forward each year with adjustments based on the net change
again the previous year. If enrollments and tuition rates increase the funding will increase. If enrollments
decrease to an extent that is greater than the net tuition increase for the year the net change will be negative.
As shown in the table below the school’s graduate tuition increased by $17,708 in 2016/17 over 2015/16. It
should be noted that since the baseline was set in 2011/12 SALA has not experienced a negative change and
therefore experienced growth in its funding allocation. The change is variable when compared to other schools
and departments in APSC – see below (Table 3.9.c.).
Table 3.9.c. Tuition Allocation for Graduate Programs across APSC
Program MASc MEng MSc PhD FY16/17 FY15/16 Change

ChemBio 99,369 93,808 7,866 258,746 459,789 475,402 (15,612)
Civil 273,799 478,129 189,540 941,468 771,181 170,287
Electrical 301,295 358,000 529,090 1,189,386 1,188,694 692
Mechanical 196,352 87,971 215,238 499,561 671,657 (172,096)
Materials 93,765 2,210 195,958 291,933 285,215 6,718
Mining 118,238 287,535 84,209 489,982 517,395 (27,413)
Nursing 430,412 426,403 4,009
SALA 1,384,259 1,366,551 17,708
SCARP 523,960 421,172 102,789
ICICS 3,880 315,285 (311,405)
While tuition is typically capped at a rate of 2% per year, SALA is part of a University wide initiative that is
approved for accelerated tuition increases for non-thesis based international graduate students. Over the next 3
years new international graduate students will see a tuition increase of 37.2%.
International students make up approximately 25% of the student body across SALA and the direct funding from
tuition makes up about 33% of the School’s budget. As such tuition increases alone will not address the ongoing
structural deficit and rising costs. The school continues to work on new initiatives in an effort to increase
revenues and/or control costs
3.9 Financial Resources -- 149

3.9.3 Finance-Impacting Academic Initiatives
Since 2011, several other financial initiatives which affect architecture courses include:
ොො The development of several Vancouver Summer Programs courses.

ොො The development of university-wide service courses that provide funding to SALA through
undergraduate tuition.
ොො In 2017, the approval of a UBC Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund grant to explore the integration
of digital and manual making tool and spaces throughout the SALA programs.
ොො In 2015, the expansion of the full-term studies abroad program, allowing an increased intake of
approximately 12 incoming MArch students.
ොො In 2015, the increase of the MArch Advanced Placement cohort, who typically move through their course of
study in approximately one year less time than do non-Advanced Placement stream students.
ොො In 2014, the inauguration of the Master of Urban Design Program.
Future finance-impacting initiatives include:
ොො Master of Engineering Leadership – High Performance Buildings starts in January 2018.

ොො Bachelor of Design proposed and pending Ministry approval for 2018/19 start date.
3.9.4 Other Income Sources
Donations
In addition to the annual budgets SALA receives funds from alumni donations for both specific and general
purposes. On March 31, 2017 the Architecture Program had an accumulated balance of approximately
$120,000.00 in outside donations to be used for purposes such as public lectures, student scholarships and
bursaries and support for studies abroad.
Research
As of March 31, 2017 the various faculty members in the Architecture program collectively held $354,193.09 in
research funds.
Scholarships
One of the key initiatives since the Accreditation Report 2011 has been the development of new scholarship
opportunities for architecture students. In 2017, the Architecture program distributed $163,050 in scholarships
to both incoming and continuing students an increase of $74,550, or nearly 100%, since the 2011 APR.

Table 3.9.a. SALA Five-Year Financial Report
SALA Financial Report FYE March 31, 2018 FYE March 31, 2017 FYE March 31, 2016 FYE March 31, 2015 FYE March 31, 2014
Prepared 23-Jan-18 Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted Forecasted
SALA ARCH OTHER SALA ARCH OTHER SALA ARCH OTHER SALA ARCH OTHER SALA ARCH OTHER
Funding/Revenue
Recurring
GPO Funding Allocation 5,432,425 2,987,834 2,444,591 5,227,653 2,770,656 2,456,997 4,989,706 2,644,544 2,345,162 5,032,040 2,666,981 2,365,059 4,862,924 2,577,350 2,285,574
Printing Lab and Materials Revenue 137,004 75,352 61,652 142,265 75,400 66,865 114,739 60,812 53,927 102,000 54,060 47,940 100,000 53,000 47,000
Student Tech Fees 91,240 50,182 41,058 90,369 47,896 42,474 86,742 45,973 40,769 84,930 45,013 39,917 85,000 45,050 39,950
Student Fees - Cost Recovery Workshops 66,050 36,328 29,723 149,978 79,488 70,489 97,614 51,735 45,879 86,400 45,792 40,608 44,066 23,355 20,711
Student Fees - Vancouver Summer Program 412,506 226,878 185,628 366,148 194,059 172,090 177,845 94,258 83,587 92,016 48,768 43,248 - - -
Student Fees - Design Discovery Summer Program 28,500 15,675 12,825 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Student Fees - Application Fees 31,620 17,391 14,229 34,406 18,235 16,171 32,183 17,057 15,126 27,000 14,310 12,690 25,000 13,250 11,750
Faculty teaching resourse support - - - 60,000 31,800 28,200 97,500 51,675 45,825 37,500 19,875 17,625 37,500 19,875 17,625
Non-Recurring
Donations for Specific Purpose/GPO accounts 29,447 - 29,447 8,940 - 8,940 584 - 584 - - - - - -
Research Overhead 2,489 - 2,489 4,054 - 4,054 - - - - - - - - -
Other Non-Operarional Projects 76,150 - 76,150 45,067 - 45,067 81,517 - 81,517 122,750 - 122,750 - - -
Total Funding/Revenue 6,307,432 3,409,640 2,897,792 6,128,879 3,217,534 2,911,345 5,678,430 2,966,054 2,712,376 5,584,636 2,894,800 2,689,836 5,154,490 2,731,880 2,422,610
Expenses
Salaries
Faculty (actual allocation) *ARCH Faculty 14 FTE 3,341,093 1,849,705 1,491,388 3,242,833 1,942,419 1,300,413 3,036,080 1,914,777 1,121,303 2,922,790 1,772,375 1,150,415 2,872,157 1,757,264 1,114,893
Sessional 664,953 320,527 344,425 540,850 254,731 286,119 330,770 171,670 159,100 315,571 192,054 123,517 366,839 170,958 195,881
Students - Academic 252,483 75,192 177,291 228,366 60,353 168,013 217,957 56,268 161,689 219,593 39,206 180,387 158,334 27,788 130,546
Students - Non-Academic 124,887 68,688 56,199 69,039 25,759 43,280 34,125 18,086 16,039 56,009 29,685 26,324 41,326 21,903 19,423
Staff 531,696 292,433 239,263 558,527 296,019 262,508 528,956 280,347 248,609 552,119 292,623 259,496 542,463 287,505 254,958
Payroll Costs/Benefits 621,084 341,596 279,488 616,065 326,515 289,551 588,480 311,894 276,586 569,559 301,866 267,693 547,461 290,154 257,307
Non-Salaried Expenses (Operational Expenses) 747,993 411,396 336,597 627,669 332,665 295,004 860,410 456,017 404,393 699,502 370,736 328,766 592,713 314,138 278,575
Capital Expenditure (Furniture / Equipment) 181,625 - 181,625 66,681 - 66,681 102,730 - 102,730 339,132 - 339,132 52,399 - 52,399
Total Expenses 6,465,814 3,359,538 3,106,276 5,950,031 3,238,462 2,711,570 5,699,508 3,209,059 2,490,449 5,674,275 2,998,545 2,675,730 5,173,692 2,869,710 2,303,982
Surplus/Deficit (158,382) 50,102 (208,485) 178,849 (20,928) 199,776 (21,078) (243,005) 221,927 (89,639) (103,746) 14,107 (19,202) (137,831) 118,629
carry forward (opening) 578,660 399,810 420,888 510,527 529,729
carry forward (closing) 420,278 578,659 399,810 420,888 510,527
*ARCH @ 55% (based on ratio of *ARCH @ 53% (based on ratio of *ARCH @ 53% (based on ratio of *ARCH @ 53% (based on ratio of *ARCH @ 53% (based on ratio of
student FTE) student FTE) student FTE) student FTE) student FTE)
3.10 Administrative Structure
The program must be part of, or be, an institution accredited by a recognized accrediting agency for higher
education. The program must have a degree of autonomy that is both comparable to that afforded to the other
relevant professional programs in the institution and sufficient to assure conformance with all the conditions for
accreditation.

- A description of the program’s administrative structure, a comparison of this structure with those of other
professional programs in the institution, and a list of any other programs offered in a multi-discipline unit.
3.10.1 UBC Accreditation
Institution’s Accreditation by a Recognized Agency:

The University of British Columbia currently operates under the authority of the University Act of the Province
of British Columbia (R.S.B.C. 1996, c468). It is also a member of the Association of Universities and Colleges
of Canada.
3.10 Administrative Structure -- 151

3.10.2 UBC Organizational Structure
From the webpage of UBC’s governance and organizational structure:
“Governance of The University of British Columbia is balanced between the Board of Governors and
the Senates, and flows through the President’s Office to the portfolios of the Vice-Presidents.
“The Chancellor serves as the titular head of the University, presides over all major ceremonies, and is
an ex officio member of the Board of Governors, the Senates, and the Council of Senates.
“The role of the President is to provide oversight and direction for the operation of the University,
in accordance with the strategic framework and directions of UBC’s governing bodies, the Board of
Governors and the Senates.”
A diagram of the UBC governance structure:
The University of British Columbia

www.ubc.ca
CHANCELLOR
Sarah Morgan-Silvester
CHAIR COUNCIL OF
BOARD OF GOVERNORS SENATE
CHAIR Senate UBCV
Bill Levine THE UNIVERSITY OF Senate UBCO
BRITISH COLUMBIA Stephen J. Toope
SENIOR ADVISOR TO
INTERNAL AUDIT
THE PRESIDENT
Michael Hartwick
BOARD PLANNING & Richard Price
SECRETARY OF
LIAISON MANAGER PRESIDENT & SENATE
SECRETARY TO THE BOARD VICE-CHANCELLOR James Ridge
Reny Kahlon Stephen J. Toope
EXECUTIVE
OMBUDSPERSON
DIRECTOR
Shirley Nakata
Patricia Stevens
DEPUTY VICE-CHANCELLOR
VP DEVELOPMENT & VP EXTERNAL, LEGAL & PROVOST & VP FINANCE, RESOURCES VP RESEARCH & VP STUDENTS AVP
& PRINCIPAL
ALUMNI ENGAGEMENT COMMUNITY RELATIONS VP ACADEMIC & OPERATIONS INTERNATIONAL (Pro-Tem) HUMAN RESOURCES
UBC OKANAGAN
Barbara Miles Stephen Owen David Farrar Pierre Ouillet John Hepburn Louise Nasmith Lisa Castle
Doug Owram
Provost & Vice Principal Vice Provost & AVP Vice Provost & AVP Senior Director
Academic & Research AVP Alumni AVP Campus & AVP Research &
University Counsel Academic Affairs Academic Facilities Comptroller Student Development
(Okanagan) Jeff Todd Community Planning International Human Resources
Hubert Lai and Resources and Enrolment (pro-tem) Ian Burgess & Services
Wes Pue Nancy Knight Don Brooks
Anna Kindler Paul Smith Janet Teasdale
AVP Administration Managing Director

AVP Development Executive Director Chief Information Vice Provost Director Director
& Finance Treasurer Infrastructure
Heather McCaw Government Relations Officer Health Research Services Athletics & Recreation UBC Okanagan HR*
Jackie Podger* Peter Smailes Development
Adriaan de Jager Oliver Grüter-Andrew* Gavin Stuart Martin Kirk Bob Philip
John Metras
Chief Administration Managing Director Managing Director Managing Director

AVP Students Acting Director Executive Director Managing Director
Officer AVP Equity University Community University-Industry Student Housing &
Ian Cull Public Affairs Continuing Studies Building Operations
Drew Collier Tom Patch Services Liaison Hospitality Services
Randy Schmidt Judith Plessis Dave Woodson
Debbie Harvie Angus Livingstone Andrew Parr*
Chief Communications Director Chief Risk Officer

Executive Director
Officer Planning & Institutional Deans / Principals / Risk Management Community Service
International
Richard Fisher Research Librarian Services Learning
Helen Pennant
Walter Sudmant Ron Holton
AVP Enrolment &

Registrar
James Ridge * Dual Reports
Updated: July 2011
Chart 3.10.a. UBC Governance Structure

3.10.3 The Faculty of Applied Science Administrative Structure
The Faculty of Applied Science, one of twenty-six faculties and schools at UBC, offers undergraduate and
graduate programs in Engineering, Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Regional Planning, and Nursing. The
Faculty offers these engineering programs:
ොො Biomedical Engineering
ොො Chemical & Biological Engineering
ොො Civil Engineering
ොො Electrical & Computer Engineering
ොො Engineering Physics
ොො Environmental Engineering
ොො Geological Engineering
ොො Integrated Engineering
ොො Materials Engineering
ොො Mechanical Engineering
ොො Mining Engineering
ොො UBC Okanagan Engineering
Under the leadership of former Dean Marc Parlange and in partnership with the UBC Sauder School of Business,
Applied Science has developed nine Master of Engineering Leadership post-professional degrees. These
intensive, one-year degree programs include:
ොො Advanced Materials Manufacturing

ොො Clean Energy Engineering
ොො Dependable Software Systems
ොො Green Bio-Products
ොො High Performance Buildings
ොො Integrated Water Management
ොො Architecture and Marine Engineering
ොො Resource Engineering Management
ොො Urban Systems
Architecture program faculty made significant contributions to the development of the High Performance
Buildings program, including its emphasis on regenerative design, and will help deliver its course of study. Its
courses will also be available to be taken by MArch students as an elective.

Applied Science participates in a number of research centres and laboratories at UBC, some of which are
inter-faculty collaborations and others of which are within Applied Science and involve inter-departmental
collaborations.
ොො Advanced Materials & Process Engineering Laboratory (AMPEL)

ොො Clean Energy Research Centre (CERC)
ොො Institute for Computing, Information & Cognitive Systems (ICICS)
ොො Michael Smith Laboratories
ොො Pulp & Paper Centre (PPC)
Networks of Centres of Excellence

Applied Science faculty members also participate in several distinguished Networks of Centres of Excellence,
including:
ොො AUTO 21 - The Automobile of the 21st Century

ොො Canadian Water Network
ොො Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Systems
ොො Intelligent Sensing for Innovative Structures
ොො Micronet-Microelectronic Devices, Circuits and Systems
ොො Sustainable Forest Management
NSERC Strategic Research Networks

UBC Applied Science faculty members are the primary investigators responsible for three NSERC Strategic
Network Grants which provide $15m over five years. These include:
ොො Canadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology (CANRIMT)

ොො RES’EAU-WaterNet
ොො Magnesium Network (MagNet)
Applied Research Consortiums
ොො Composites Research Network

ොො Energy Reduction in Mechanical Pulping
The two schools in the Faculty – the School of Nursing and the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture - offer programs in their respective disciplines.

3.10.4 SALA Academic Structure
A School within the Faculty of Applied Science, the School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture is
comprised of four programs:
ොො The Architecture Program, which offers a professional graduate Master of Architecture (MArch) degree and
a post-professional Master of Advanced Studies in Architecture (MASA) degree
ොො The Landscape Architecture Program, which offers a professional graduate Master of Landscape
Architecture (MLA) degree and a post-professional Master of Advanced Studies in Landscape
Architecture (MASLA)
ොො The Urban Design Program, which offers a post-professional Master of Urban Design (MUD) degree
ොො The Environmental Design Program, which offers an undergraduate non-professional environmental design
(ENDS) degree.
The SALA academic structure is as below:
President
Dr. Santa J. Ono
Vice-President, Academic and Provost

Dr. Andrew Szeri
Dean of Applied Science

James Olson (acting)
SALA Director
Ron Kellett
ARCH Chair LARCH Chair ENDS Chair MUD Chair Admin Mgr
John Bass Susan Herrington Mari Fujita Sara Stevens Hanne Bartlett
Chart 3.10.b. SALA Academic Structure

3.10.5 SALA Staff Structure
A staff reorganization and expansion project is currently underway, led by the SALA Director and Administration
Manager, with consultation from the SALA Council.
The current SALA staff structure is as below:
Director
Ron Kellett
Outreach & Student Services &

Communications Recruitment Manager
Manager
Emma Fennell Tara Deans
Administration
Manager
Hanne Bartlett
Student Services: Student Services:
Architecture LARC, ENDS, MUD
Jaynus O’Donnell Amy Villablanca
Receptionist / Reading Room Accounts Payable Workshop Academic IT Support

Secretary to the Archivist & Payroll Coordinator Technician Coordinator (Part time)
Director
(Vacent) (Vacent) Tracy Satterfield Nick Scott Theresa Juba Trask Nattrass
Workshop
Assistant
Graham Entwistle
Chart 3.10.c. SALA Staff Structure

3.10.6 SALA Council
The SALA Council meets biweekly, with membership is as below:
Chair
Ron Kellet
Staff Lead
Hanne Bartle�
Members
John Bass
Susan Herrington
Mari Fujita
Sara Stevens
Joe Dahmen
Ad hoc Members
(per agenda)
Academic Affairs Chair
Academic Infrastructure Chair
Student Affairs Chair
Research & Faculty Development Chair
Outreach Chair
Table 3.10.d. SALA Council Membership

3.10.7 SALA Committee Governance Structure
The Architecture Program meets monthly to review, discuss issues related to the internal workings of its
programs, including matters related to curriculum, admissions, advanced placement policies, awards, faculty
searches. The Program Chair also shares progress report updates and seeks counsel from program faculty
regarding SALA Council and SALA committee work issues.
SALA committees meet biweekly or monthly, and review and discuss ongoing work of the committee and any
work being done by ad hoc subcommittees, leading to presentation at SALA Faculty meetings. SALA Faculty
meetings are where issues are presented for discussion and where appropriate, voting. The SALA committee
governance structure is as below:
SALA Governance
Chair
Ron Kellett
Committee Chairs
Staff Leads
Student Rep
TBA
Governance Committees
Research &
Academic Academic Student Faculty
Affairs Infrastructure Affairs Development Outreach Coordination
Chair Chair Chair Chair Chair Chair
Susan Herrington Joe Dahmen Cynthia Girling Patrick Mooney Leslie Van Duzer Ron Kellett
Staff Lead Staff Lead Staff Lead Staff Lead Staff Lead Staff Lead
Theresa Jub Nick Scott Tara Deans Tracy Satterfield Emma Fennell Hanne Bartlett
Jaynus O”Donnell Graham Entwhistle
Amy Villablanca Members Members Members Members
Members Sherry McKay Kees Lokman Matthew Soules Leslie van Duzer
Members Greg Johnson Daniel Roehr Adam Rysanek Fionne Byrne Joe Dahmen
John Bass AnnaLisa Meyboom Thena Tak Cynthia Girling
Blair Satterfield David Zielnicki Student Rep Patrick Mooney
Sara Stevens TBA Student Rep Susan Herrington
Bill Pechet Student Rep TBA
TBA Student Rep
Ad Hoc Member TBA
Ron Kellett
Chart 3.10.e. SALA Committee Governance Structure
3.10.8 Comparison with other Professional Programs at UBC
The School of Community and Regional Planning (SCARP) shares the same building as the Architecture program,
and in 2012 moved its administrative home to the Faculty of Applied Science from the College of Interdisciplinary
Studies. SCARP‘s administrative structure is similar to Architecture’s.

3.11 Professional Degrees and Curriculum
The CACB awards accreditation only to first-professional degree programs in architecture. These include: Master
of Architecture degree with a related pre-professional bachelor’s degree requirement, typically amounting to
five or six years of study; Master of Architecture degree without a pre-professional requirement, consisting of an
undergraduate degree plus a minimum of three years of professional studies; Bachelor of Architecture degree
requiring a minimum of five years of study.
The curricular requirements for awarding these degrees must include three components: general studies,
professional studies, and electives that respond to the needs of the institution, the architecture profession, and the
students respectively. Together these three components comprise a liberal education in architecture and ensure
that graduates will be technically competent and critical thinkers who are capable of defining multiple career paths
within a changing societal context.

- Specification of the degree(s) offered.
- For each degree offered, an outline of the curriculum showing the distribution of general studies, professional
studies (including their prerequisites), and electives.
- A summary description of how the stated CACB curricular requirements are reflected in student admission
assessments concerning advanced placement within the program.
The Architecture Program offers three streams leading toward a professional Master of Architecture degree.
These are:
ොො Master of Architecture [professional degree]

ොො Master of Architecture with advanced placement [professional degree]
ොො Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture (MARCLA) Dual Degree Option [dual
professional degrees]
The following criteria apply to all admissions assessments for students entering into any of the above
degree streams:
All students admitted to the MArch program must have completed the equivalent of a UBC undergraduate
degree. On “previous degree” tab on the SALA website, the MArch program specifies the following requirements
regarding undergraduate study:
“You must hold a degree that is academically equivalent to a four-year bachelor’s degree at UBC. There
is no requirement for the discipline of your previous degree. We accept students from a wide variety of
academic fields.”
3.11 Professional Degrees and Curriculum -- 159

On the University Calendar, applicants are notified that:
“The selection of university courses anticipating graduate studies in architecture should emphasize a
breadth and mix of academic experience, including exposure to some aspect of visual communication.
Irrespective of specific degree requirements within various faculties or universities, university-level
course work in mathematics, physics, English literature, and composition is desirable. Beyond specific
academic experiences, students entering the Master of Architecture program should demonstrate
interest and potential in the creative arts and architecture.”
The following criteria applies to all admissions assessments for students applying to the two advanced
placement streams:
Unlike several of the Canadian professional graduate degree programs in architecture, there is no UBC
undergraduate degree in architectural studies to which the UBC MArch degree is directly linked (the so-called
4+2 structure is perhaps the best example). This makes our faculty and staff examination of undergraduate
architectural studies transcripts something that cannot be mapped directly onto our own undergraduate
architectural studies degree.
The number of applicants for admission with advanced placement into the MArch program has increased
significantly every year for the past several years, and advanced placement applicants now significantly
outnumber applicants to the non-advanced placement degree stream. Students who apply, and indeed, are
admitted with advanced placement standing come to the program from many programs across Canada and
internationally. The program’s past practice of providing a highly customized process of reviewing individual
transcripts and offering individually-tailored terms of advanced placement transfer credit became onerous to
staff and faculty to administer, and difficult to prospective and accepted students to explain.
To address this, in 2017 the MArch program reviewed its “in-practice” advanced placement course waiver
policies for the past five years, and based on that analysis -- including confirmation of the fulfillment of General
Studies requirements during an advanced placement applicant’s undergraduate study -- adopted policies to
simplify and streamline its advanced placement structure.
Since 2017, students entering from a four-year Bachelor of Science in Architecture or a five-year professional
undergraduate Bachelor of Architecture (with more courses of equivalent professional studies curricular content)
receive 36 to 39 credits toward their degree. These are students who typically waive out of the entire first year of
study in the MArch program.
Advanced placement applicants from four-year undergraduate Bachelor of Arts (or similar degree titles with
some but less professional studies curricular content) are given 18 to 21 credits. For example, a student may
be waived from ARCH 515 Design Media I, but required to take ARCH 517 Design Media II, a common term of
acceptance for many students admitted with some but not the full suite of advanced placement credits.
This structure offers quality-control advantages to faculty who can make fine-grained distinctions about standard
of quality regarding advanced placement applicant work. It translates to two tiers of advanced placement
measured in semesters, not in years: a maximum amount of transfer credit of two terms plus one three-credit
course, and a minimum amount of one term plus one three-credit course.

Details of advanced placement offers of admission are communicated to accepted students in their offer of
admission letter. Within this two-tier framework, this method of administering advanced placement remains
highly customizable, but requires less time on the part of faculty and staff to review and administer.
3.11.1 Master of Architecture Program Curriculum
Completion of any of the three Master of Architecture degree streams leads to the accredited professional
degree with the Canadian Architectural Certification Board. Breakdown of general studies, professional studies,
and elective requirements toward completion of the degree requirements is described in Section 3.11.3 below.
In order to satisfy the requirements for the Master of Architecture, students must successfully complete 119
credits of study, including the following: two credits introductory workshop, six credits design media, six credits
architectural technology, six credits architectural structures, six credits environmental systems and controls,
twelve credits architectural history, theory and research, three credits advanced history and theory elective,
forty-five credits architectural design, six credits professional practice, three credits technical documentation,
twelve credits elective course work and twelve credits graduation project parts one and two.
Within the above requirements students are given a fair degree of latitude and autonomy in making decisions in
their course selections that reflect their academic objectives as noted below.
Studio Requirements
The requirement for forty-five credits in architectural design is met through two nine-credit core design studios,
one nine-credit core option studio, and two nine-credit vertical options studios. The core design studios –
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design and ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio – are comprised of
specific programmatic requirements for which each student must enroll and complete or alternately be granted
exemption should it be demonstrated that equivalent content was successfully completed within previous
education. The one nine-credit ARCH 501 core option studio is the required second term studio for all non-
advanced placement students, chosen from a suite of studio offerings with a consistent set of learning objectives
that focus on building and site design. The two nine-credit vertical options studios give students opportunity to
choose design studios which reflect their interests and academic objectives – including the opportunity to take
a landscape architecture or urban design studio - while at the same time meeting the necessary educational
requirements for architectural design.
Elective Requirements
In meeting the elective requirements, students may select course offerings within architecture however students
are also encouraged to investigate course offerings outside the discipline of architecture to a maximum of six
credits. Outside electives are frequently drawn from the disciplines of landscape architecture and planning
as well as from the disciplines of geography, resource management and environmental studies, sociology,
anthropology, urban studies, history, literature and film studies. In order for an outside course be counted for
elective credit, students are required to submit to the Chair for approval the course description and rationale for
its inclusion. Students may also make application to undertake a directed study for elective credit – an individual
independent exploration of a selected topic – supervised by a member of the full-time faculty. All proposals for
directed study require two signatures – that of the supervising faculty member and that of the Chair.

Graduation Project Requirements
Within the criteria set out for the graduation project, the individually directed graduation project allows students
a fair degree of latitude in developing a graduation project that reflects each student’s academic interests within
a set of specific committee-established criteria. Students may also be approved by their thesis supervisor(s) to
work as a pair on topics of ambitious interrelated scales or complexity. In part one of the graduation project,
each student (or pair of students) works with a member of the full-time faculty to explore a chosen topic,
to discover and define an architectural project inherent or implicit within that topic and to define an outline
program through which the project may be explored in terms of its design ramifications. In part two of the
graduation project, each works with a supervisory committee that is chaired by a member of the full-time faculty
to explore in deliberate design terms the field of inquiry established in part one of the graduation project. Both
components of the project are directed by the student(s) with the mentor and committee in place to provide
guidance and expertise as required, but generally on a weekly basis. The work of the graduation project is
culminated in a public defense of the project and followed by submission of the full documentation of the
project that then becomes a part of the collection of the Reading Room and hence a resource for other students.
3.11.2 Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape

Architecture Program Curriculum – Dual Degree
The dual degree (MARCLA) program option permits qualified students the opportunity to earn a Master of
Architecture and a Master of Landscape Architecture concurrently.
The MARCLA option is a four-year program to pursue the Master of Architecture (MArch) and the Master of
Landscape Architecture (MLA) at the same time. Each degree is accredited: the MArch degree by the Canadian
Architectural Certification Board and MLA degree by the Landscape Architecture Accreditation Council.
The MARCLA program is a very rigorous course of study leading to graduate professional degrees in both
disciplines. Entry to the dual degree program is highly competitive and applications are selectively evaluated.
Applicants should demonstrate an interest in and some knowledge of architecture and landscape architecture.
Admission Requirements
Students wishing to pursue the MARCLA option must be admitted separately to the Master of Architecture
and the Master of Landscape Architecture programs. Those seeking admission to the dual degree program
must provide notice of this intention in writing in their applications to both programs. Students holding a pre-
professional degree in one of the two disciplines (a Bachelor of Environmental Design, Bachelor of Science with
a major in Architecture, a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture, for example) will typically be given advanced
standing at the discretion of each program’s Admissions Committee.
Program Requirements
The MARCLA option for the Master of Architecture (MArch)/Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA) degrees
is designed for candidates seeking admission to both professions. Full-time students normally complete this
program in four years. The dual master’s degrees are awarded upon the completion of 149 credits of work,
including an interdisciplinary major graduating project supervised jointly by a full-time faculty from architecture
and landscape architecture.

Core Curriculum Requirements
The MARCLA core curriculum includes 45 core required credits in MArch; 39 core required credits in MLA and
53 interdisciplinary (joint) core required credits. The combined total of 84 core required credits across both
programs account for all technical, history, theory and research, media, and professional practice courses. All
students are additionally required to take 12 elective credits.

3.11.3 Distribution of General Studies, Professional Studies including prerequisites and electives
General Studies
Students entering the program have completed degrees in a wide range of disciplines and courses generally
considered to be ‘general studies’ and are part of that required undergraduate degree. Recommended courses
include first year Math and Physics as well as a broad range from humanities, social sciences, applied sciences,
sciences and fine arts. This particular academic background largely fulfills the requirement of ‘general studies.’
Professional Studies
Professional studies in the MArch program are organized in many curricular streams, including history/theory
(including research methods), design, media (including technical documentation), technology, and practice.
Since 2012, the MArch program has made two significant adjustments to the core professional studies
curriculum. These are intended to address concerns of the 2012 Visiting Team Report (and subsequent Focused
Evaluation), in particular deficiencies regarding technical documentation, and the pedagogical evolution of the
faculty. Program faculty also sought to keep in place the total number credits (119) needed to complete the
degree, and of the balance between required core and electives courses.
The professional studies curricular changes include the replacement of ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice (still
a requirement for several students as the new curriculum is transitioned in) with ARCH 551 Communicating
Construction (a core requirement for incoming students since fall 2016), and the replacement of ARCH 503
Themes in Architecture with ARCH 568 Research Methods, which is intended to enhance our students’
research skills.
Regarding the above changes, program faculty believes that the student performance criteria currently
addressed by ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice are also addressed by other courses (see Section 3.12 Student
Performance Criteria: Core Courses Content Matrix). This led to the opportunity to create a core course related
to technical documentation. However, the program is exploring a new version of a Contemporary Practice course
that will focus on Leadership and Practice aspects of professional studies, including the future of practice, and
models of contemporary practice, as described in Section 1.2, Goal 2, Article B and elsewhere in the Action Plan.
The following table outlines the core and elective courses of the program ordered by course content.
Electives in any stream are typically taken by students without advanced placement after completion of two
years of core professional study curriculum. In general, the first core course listed in the table in any stram is a
prerequisite to the subsequent course.

Table 3.11.a. MArch Core Courses and Advanced Elective
Stream Core Elective

History and Theory 504 Architectural History I 504/505 Advanced Architectural History
505 Architectural History II 522 Current Issues in Architecture
523 Contemporary Theories in 524 History of Urban Form
Architecture 538 Studies Abroad Seminars
568 Research Methods 544 Architectural Seminar
548 Graduation Design Project Part I 561 Topics in Arch History & Theory
561J Green Cities – Capitalism, Urbanism and
Environmentalism
Design Studio 502 Introductory Workshop 539 Studies Abroad studio
500 First Year Studio
501 Core Option Studio
520 Vertical Studio
521 Comprehensive Design Studio
540 Vertical Studio
549 Graduation Design Project Part II
Media 515 Design Media I 577A Design Media III
517 Design Media II 577B Revit
Building Technology 511 Architectural Technology I 573D Regenerative Development & Design
531 Architectural Technology II
Building Structures 512 Structures I 572 Advanced Structures
532 Structures II
Building Systems 513 Environmental Systems and 573 Advanced Topics in Environmental Studies
Controls I [4 courses]
533 Environmental Systems and
Controls II
Technical 551 Communicating Construction 544X Design Build I
Documentation 544Y Design Build II
541 Art and Science of Detailing
Professional Practice 541 Process and Practice of ARCH 555, 556 Co-Op
Architecture
543 Contemporary Practice
For course descriptions of all MArch core and many MArch electives, please refer to supplemental pages
(Section 4.3).
Electives
To fulfill the requirements of the MArch program, students complete 5 elective courses, and one advanced
history/theory requirement. These elective courses are offered through the School, through allied disciplines
such as Community and Regional Planning and Landscape Architecture, or through the university at large.
Providing the opportunity to broaden their education beyond the general studies and professional curriculum,
students can choose elective courses that apply to their present interests and future careers. All electives taken
outside of SALA must be approved by the MArch program chair.

Outline of the Non-Advanced Placement Curriculum (see also Section 3.12 Student Performance Criteria: Core
Courses Content Matrix)
The program sequence for an incoming student requiring the full 119 credits of study (non-Advanced Placement)
will resemble the following:
First Year | August

ARCH 502 | Introductory Workshop
First Year | Fall Term

ARCH 500 | Elements of Architectural Design Studio
ARCH 504 | Architectural History I
ARCH 512 | Architectural Structures I
ARCH 515 | Design Media I
First Year | Spring Term

ARCH 501 | Second Term Vertical Studio
ARCH 505 | Architectural History II
ARCH 511 | Architectural Technology I
ARCH 517 | Design Media II
Second Year | Fall Term

ARCH 520 | Advanced Vertical Design Studio
ARCH 568 | Research Methods
ARCH 513 | Environmental Systems and Controls I
ARCH 531 | Architectural Technology II
Second Year | Spring Term

ARCH 521 | Comprehensive Building Studio
ARCH 523 | Contemporary Theories in Architecture
ARCH 532 | Architectural Structures II
ARCH 533 | Environmental Systems and Controls II
Third Year +
The remaining requirements are noted below. The trajectory for completing these requirements can vary greatly
and thus students need to set their own trajectory.
ARCH 540 | Vertical Design Studio 3a

ARCH 541 | Process and Practice of Architecture
ARCH 543 | Contemporary Practice*
ARCH 551 | Communicating Construction*
Electives | 6 electives including one Advanced History/Theory requirement
ARCH 548 | Graduation Design Project Part I: Directed Study
ARCH 549 | Graduation Design Project Part II: Design Thesis

Outline of the Advanced Placement Curriculum (see also Section 3.12 Student Performance Criteria: Core
Courses Content Matrix)
Please note that this outline describes the course of study for a student who receives the maximum (two terms
plus one three credit class) amount of transfer credits.
The program sequence for an incoming student requiring the minimal 80 credits of study (Advanced Placement)
will resemble the following:
First Year | August

ARCH 502 | Introductory Workshop
First Year | Fall Term

ARCH 520 | Advanced Vertical Design Studio
ARCH 568 | Research Methods
ARCH 513 | Environmental Systems & Controls I
ARCH 531 | Architectural Technology II
First Year | Spring Term

ARCH 521 | Comprehensive Building Studio
ARCH 523 | Contemporary Theories in Architecture
ARCH 532 | Architectural Structures II
ARCH 533 | Environmental Systems and Controls II
Second Year +
The remaining requirements are noted below. The trajectory for completing these requirements can vary greatly
and thus students need to set their own trajectory.
ARCH 540 | Vertical Design Studio 3a

ARCH 541 | Process and Practice of Architecture
ARCH 543 | Contemporary Practice*
ARCH 551 | Communicating Construction*
Electives | 6 electives including one Advanced History/Theory requirement
ARCH 548 | Graduation Design Project Part I: Directed Study
ARCH 549 | Graduation Design Project Part II: Design Thesis
*As described above, ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice is being phased out as a core course, as its content is
covered elsewhere in the professional studies curriculum. It is being replaced within the professional studies
curriculum by ARCH 551 Communicating Construction.

3.11.4 Student Progress and Graduation
As noted in Student Progress Evaluation, student progress is evaluated individually by each course instructor and
overall at the conclusion of each academic term. Any concerns are addressed to the student in writing and often
followed up in an individual meeting.
Each student is eligible to graduate once he/she has successfully met all requirements as stated on the letter
of offer of admission from the Faculty of Graduates Studies and has submitted an application for graduation.
Once verified by a member of staff within Architecture, the name of each student who has successfully met the
requirements for the Master of Architecture is put forward to a member of staff within the Faculty of Graduate
Studies who then confirms all requirements have been met. Once confirmed, that member of staff in Graduate
Studies then puts each student’s name forward for approval to Graduate Council within the Faculty of Graduate
Studies, which then proceeds to Senate and finally the Board of Governors.
3.11.5 Minors or Concentrations Students May Elect to Pursue
Minors or concentrations are not specified in the curriculum literature, however through careful choice
of electives and Graduation Project (and, to a lesser extent, the studio choice), students can develop a
concentration in a particular area, e.g. urban design, environmental issues, digital applications, etc.

3.12 Student Performance Criteria
The CACB intends to maintain the performance criteria that assist programs in preparing students for the broad
requirements of the profession, while also encouraging educational practices suited to the circumstances of
particular programs. While the CACB stipulates the student performance criteria that must be satisfied, it specifies
neither the educational programs nor the forms of student work that may serve as evidence of having satisfied
these criteria. Programs are therefore encouraged to develop unique learning and teaching strategies, methods,
and materials to satisfy these criteria.
Each architecture program must ensure that all its graduates possess the skills and knowledge defined by the
performance criteria set out below, which constitute the minimum requirements for meeting the demands of an
internship leading to registration for practice. The program must provide evidence that all its graduates have
satisfied each criterion through required course work.

- An overview of the program’s curricular goals and content.
- A thematic summary of how the 31 Student Performance Criteria (SPC) are acknowledged in the structure and
deployment of the curriculum.
- A graphic matrix that cross-references each required course with the performance criterion it fulfills.
3.12.1 Curriculum Overview
The Masters of Architecture (MArch) program at UBC is constructed to allow students with undergraduate
degrees in unrelated subject areas to fulfill the expectations of a professional degree program in three years.
Those admitted with significant accomplishment in related design disciplines are granted advanced standing in
the program up to one year of credit. The program is exercised with the intent of allowing a degree of flexibility,
but the high proportion of ‘core’ required coursework provides the essential structure and sequence of the
curriculum.
Apart from a degree of flexibility afforded students in selecting two of their four studio options, the first two
years of the curriculum are entirely core history, media, and technical areas of study.
The third year includes the advanced history/theory seminar and practice-related core areas of study as well as
the two-part thesis sequence. The final year’s four-to-six elective courses allow students to shape their more
advanced educational experiences according to individual interests (students may also choose to distribute their
electives more evenly over their course of study by taking them during the summer, including summer studies
abroad opportunities).
3.12 Student Performance Criteria -- 169

Year One First Term
ARCH 502 Introductory Workshop (2 credit hours)
ARCH 500 Elements of Architectural Design Studio (9)
ARCH 504 Architectural History I (3)
ARCH 512 Structures I (3)
ARCH 515 Design Media I (3)
Second Term
ARCH 501 Second Term Vertical Studio (9)
ARCH 505 Architectural History II (3)
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology I (3)
ARCH 517 Design Media II (3)
Year Two First Term

ARCH 520 Adcanced Vertical Design Studio (9)
ARCH 568 Research Methods (3)
ARCH 513 Environmental Systems and Controls I (3)
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II (3)
Second Term
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio (9)
ARCH 523 Contemporary Theories in Architecture (3)
ARCH 532 Structures II (3)
ARCH 533 Environmental Systems and Controls II (3)
Year Three First Term

ARCH 540 Advanced Vertical Design Studio (9)
ARCH 541 Process and Practice (3)
ARCH 548 Graduation Project Part I (3)
Second Term
ARCH 504/505 Advanced History/Theory Seminar (3)
ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice (3)
ARCH 549 Graduation Project Part II (9)
The remaining 15 of the total required credit hours consist of five 3-credit hour approved electives, some of
which are taken inside of the MArch program itself.
Please see the foldout at the end of this section (Chart 3.12.a. Course of Study) for a diagrammatic version of this
information.
The following notes provide brief introduction to the logic of the core course sequences.

History/Theory/Research
The History/Theory/Research stream includes a sequence of required courses: Architectural History I (504),
Architectural History II (505), Research Methods (568), and Contemporary Theories in Architecture (523), as well
as a required Advanced History/Theory Seminar (504/505). The culmination of the stream occurs in Graduation
Project Part I (548) in which individual research is undertaken with individual faculty mentor.
Research Methods, Contemporary Theories, and the Advanced History/Theory Seminar emphasize issue
based or building-specific analysis venues for developing research, critical thinking, verbal and writing skills.
Architectural History I and II develop knowledge and research methodologies through a thematically organized
topics on architectural history to 1900, and from 1900 to the present, respectively. The Graduation Project
provides the opportunity for students to declare their own topic of interest, pursued with the aim of preparing a
full and compelling context for further design exploration.
The Advanced History/Theory Seminar (ARCH 504/505) requirement is fulfilled from an approved array of topic
seminars delivered by Architecture faculty, varying from term to term.
Design Media Core

The Design Media sequence of required courses include Design Media I (515) and Design Media II (517). Using
both manual and digital tools, these courses introduce theories and techniques fundamental to architectural
representation and the principles of spatial organization. In Design Media I, students are expected to develop
critical sensibilities through recursive, studio-based exercises that examine several subjects at different scales,
including scale and the body, the analytic sketch, measure and proportion, and orthographic, axonometric and
perspective projection. Given that design practitioners today and into the foreseeable future must adapt to
understand new software quickly and repeatedly, Design Media II focuses on developing a degree of fluency in
digital modeling [Rhinoceros], animation [Bongo], and parametric modeling [Grasshopper] and the translation of
digital models to digital output machines.
Professional Practice
Professional topics are engaged in the courses Process and Practice (541) and Contemporary Practice (543). Both
courses occur near the end of the MArch curriculum, serving as somewhat of a bridge to anticipated professional
life while building upon the likelihood that a majority of the students will have obtained some office experience
at this point in their studies.
In their areas of focus, Process and Practice is largely concerned with the legal and administrative context
surrounding professional practice, including elements of contract law, local authority jurisdiction and aspects of
practice formation, liability, etc. The focus of Contemporary Practice will be framing, clarifying, and questioning
the “evolving professional identity” of architecture. Through lectures, case examples, discussions, guest lectures,
and a series of short projects, students will be introduced to and discuss many of the conventions of, and
connections between design, practice, advocacy, ethics, and the building production industry. Materials covered
will include programming, design, construction documentation, sequencing, coordination, and communication.
Financial and legal responsibilities, ethical and contractual forces, and how such concerns impact the design and
delivery of architecture will also be included in the course.

Studio Design Sequence
The design sequence within MArch curriculum is structured alongside Technology courses - both independent
and interconnected - and parallel History and Theory coursework. The sequence culminates with the Graduation
Project (548/549).
An introductory Elements of Architectural Design Studio (500) in the first term of First Year, a Second Term
Vertical Studio (501), and a Comprehensive Studio concluding the Second Year (521) are required of all students,
typically being run as a series of 3-4 distinct studio groups each responding to a common thematic topic. Within
the vertical structure, the second term – spring term - Vertical Studios are constrained by building-scale focus on
site-to-building design-related content including basic material and assembly, program testing and organization,
and introductory issues related to accessibility. The remaining two Design Studios (520, 540) are selected from
an array of topics offered each fall term – and are fully Vertical Design Studios.
The intent of the vertical format - in which students at different levels of progress within the program work
together - is to invite peer-to-peer learning of a high order and provide preparation for the challenge of
constructing the complex context and direction of enquiry required in the Graduation Project (548/549). To that
end, within the topical framework established by the course instructor, students are given a degree of latitude in
establishing their own individual scale and scope of enquiry.
Spring 2017 MArch Second Term Vertical Studios (501/540) included:
ොො Powell Street (Roecker)

ොො The New Normal (Satterfield)
ොො Our Aging Network (Huemoeller)
ොො Grafting Social Space (Condon)
Fall 2017 MArch Vertical Studios (520) include:
ොො Naming and Claiming: The Yuquot Whalers’ Shrine (Bass)

ොො Towards a More Responsive Tower (Grady)
ොො Housing Builds the City (Macdonald)
ොො Timber Tech (Meyboom)
ොො Retail Therapy (Pechet)
ොො Wallflower Architecture (Tak)
ොො Convivial City Chandigarh: Dwelling In/On The Periphery [Cloutier/Sylvia]

Technology Coursework
Six courses constitute the required education in technology. These are taken in the following sequence:
First year: Structures I (512) and Architectural Technology I (511); second year: Architectural Technology II
(531), Environmental Systems and Controls I and II (513 and 533), and Structures II (532). In the first year the
structures course as well as the architectural technology course provides the background for the required Second
Term Vertical Studio. In the second term of the second year the Environmental Systems and Controls II and
Structures II courses are coordinated with the concurrently-run Comprehensive Studio (521), and require some
coursework developed out of the students’ design as it develops. Nearly all of the courses are responsive to
environmental issues.
In addition, many of the students take elective seminars on technical topics ranging from detailing, to the
learning the building information management tool Revit, to advanced seminars in high-performance buildings.
Architecture Electives
In addition to the Advanced History/Theory Seminars, which contribute to required core coursework, seminars in
other topics expand upon core content in each of the Technology streams.
These include an Advanced Structures seminar (572) in which parametric modeling is used in modeling complex
large-span structures; Advanced Building Technology seminar (571) in which students explore more complex
envelope assemblies, material investigations, construction typologies, and design development. Advanced
Sustainability courses (573) address the central issue of integration of green performance requirements and
technologies into a work of architecture in an effective, economic and elegant manner.
A sampling of recently delivered electives includes:
ARCH 538a – Architecture Studies Abroad – Fieldwork [George Wagner]

ARCH 538b – Architecture Studies Abroad – Contemporary Architecture: Tokyo [George Wagner]
ARCH 538c – Architecture Studies Abroad – Directed Study [George Wagner]
ARCH 538a – Architecture Studies Abroad – Fieldwork [John Bass]
ARCH 538a – Architecture Studies Abroad - Grid, Zone, and Field Studies [Roy Cloutier and Nicole Sylvia]
ARCH 538 – Summer Studies Abroad

2017 – Stockholm S,M,L,XL [Leslie Van Duzer]
2017 – Stockholm Through the Lens [Michael Perlmutter]
2017 – Netherlands [Bill Pechet and Collette Parras]
2016 – Portugal [Chris Macdonald]
2015 – Switzerland: Modernity Now [Christopher Macdonald]
2014 – Siza and Souta de Moura: Modernity and the Traditions of Building [Christopher
Macdonald]
2014 – Analysis through the Designer’s Lens: Berlin [Daniel Roehr and Doug Paterson]
2013 – Sweden [Christopher Macdonald]
2012 – The Netherlands [Cynthia Girling]

ARCH 544 – Seminars
2014 - present – Design Build 1 & 2 [Greg Johnson]
2016 – On Writing [George Wagner]
2016 – Looking at the Region: Urban Design Case Studies in Metro Vancouver [Neil LaMontagne]
2015 – Future Transportation and Urban Form [AnnaLisa Meyboom]
2015 – UBC Student Union Building Intervention [Oliver Neumann]
2015 – Building Images: A Two Week Course in Architectural Photography [Michael Perlmutter]
2015 – Photographing the Hidden City [Greg Girard]
2015 – City Studio: Outdoor Classroom Design/Build Project [AnnaLisa Meyboom]
2014 – Multi-Levels of Conflict [Alicia Breck]
2014 – Adaption, Cooptation, and Exaptation [Blair Satterfield]
2014 – Urban Traditions and Prospects [Christopher Macdonald]
2014 – Assemblages [AnnaLisa Meyboom]
2014 – The Body Acoustic [Leslie Van Duzer and Dana Reitz]
2013 – Creativity: Codes and Bylaws [Inge Roecker]
2013 – Arctic Adaptations [John Bass]
2012 – Type-Prototype [Christopher Macdonald]
ARCH 545: Directed Studies
ARCH 555 – Co-Op 1

ARCH 556 – Co-Op 2
ARCH 561 – Advanced Architectural History/Theory

2017 – Arrival City 2.0 [Christopher Macdonald]
2017 – Green Cities: Capitalism, Urbanism, and Environmentalism [Sara Stevens]
2016 – Housing Equity [Sherry McKay]
2016 – Capitalism and the Modern City [Sara Stevens]
2015 – On Density [George Wagner]
2015 – Design Build [Oliver Neumann]
2014 – Territory, Atoll, Edge, Enclave [Mari Fujita]
2013 – Asset Urbanism [Matthew Soules]
2013 – Current Debates in the Built Environment [Sherry McKay, Abidan Kusno]
2013 – Pax Metropolitan A / Martial Metropolis [Matthew Soules]
ARCH 571 – Advanced Architectural Technology

2013-present – The Art and Science of Detailing [Greg Johnson]

ARCH 573 – Advanced Environmental Technology
2018 – Green Building Contemporary Practice
2017 – Sustainability in Practice [Adam Rysanek]
2014-2017 – Regenerative Development and Design [Ray Cole]
2016 – Green Design and Regenerative Development - Live Project [Ray Cole]
2014-2015 – Sustainable Design in Practice [Michel Labrie]
2014 – Social Sustainability in Practice [Darryl Condon]
2013 – Topics in Sustainable Building Science [Ray Cole]
2013 – Light, Colour, Space [Ray Cole]
2012 – Green Building [Ray Cole]
2012 – Regenerative Design [Ray Cole]
ARCH 577 – Advanced Media

2016-present – Design Media III [Blair Satterfield]
2015-present – Building / Information: Design and Production with Autodesk Revit [Roy Cloutier]
Although as electives this array of coursework falls outside the purview of accreditation requirements, student
involvement is considerable with at least 50% of students taking at least 2 to 3 advanced level courses in the
completion of their MArch program. Together with the more modest special interests served in the selection of
vertical Design Studios, these electives encourage students to articulate individual interests within the discipline
and graduate with deeper knowledge of one or more aspects of the professional curriculum.

Chart 3.12.a. Course of Study
Three-year (119 credit) course of study
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Summer Fall Winter Summer Fall Winter Summer Fall Winter Summer
ARCH 500: ARCH 549:

ARCH 501: ARCH 521
Elements of ARCH 520: ARCH 540: Graduate Project 2:
Second Term Comprehensive
Architectural Vertical Studio Vertical Studio Design Thesis
Vertical Studio** Design Studio
Design
ARCH 504/505:
ARCH 504/505: ARCH 504/505: ARCH 523:
ARCH 568: Advanced
Architectural Architectural Contemporary Elective Elective
Research Methods Architectural
ARCH 502: History 1A History 1B Theories
History
Intro
Workshop ARCH 511: ARCH 513:
ARCH 512: Architectural Environmental ARCH 532: ARCH 541:
Elective Elective
Structures 1 Technology 1 Systems and Structures 2 Professional Practice
Controls 1
ARCH 551: ARCH 531: ARCH 533:

ARCH 548:
ARCH 515: ARCH 517: Environmental
Communicating Architectural Graduate Project 1: Elective
Design Media 1 Design Media 2 Systems and
Construction*** Technology 2 Directed Study
Controls 2
Two-year (83 credit, Advanced Placement) course of study* Notes on Course of Study
*Advanced Placement stream illustrated here for compari-

son purposes only. Advanced Placement courses of study
Year 1 Year 2 vary widely and thus cannot be fully illustrated. UBC
requires that 60% of the M.Arch degree’s typical 119
Summer Fall Winter Summer Fall Winter Summer credits, or 72 credits, must be completed at UBC.
ARCH 521: ARCH 549: **ARCH 501 is the second term vertical studio required for
ARCH 520: ARCH 540: Graduate Project 2:
Comprehensive all non-advanced placement students.
Vertical Studio Vertical Studio Design Thesis
Design Studio
*** ARCH 551 Communicating Construction is offered in
ARCH 504/505:
the fall and summer semester.
ARCH 568: ARCH 523:
Elective Advanced
Contemporary Elective In order to meet their core and advanced history curricu-
Research Methods Architectural
ARCH 502: Theories
History lum requirements (an elective), students must take nine
Intro
credits of Architectural History (ARCH 504 and 505). These
Workshop ARCH 551:
ARCH 532: ARCH 541: credits cannot be all the same course number. For exam-
Communicating Elective Elective ple, a student may not take nine credits of either ARCH 504
Structures 2 Professional Practice
Construction*** or 505. Students may take six credits of 504 and three
credits of 505 or six credits of 505 and three credits of 504.
ARCH 533:
ARCH 531: ARCH 548:
Environmental
Architectural Graduate Project 1: Elective ARCH 538B (a course taken as part of a full term study
Systems and
Technology 2 Directed Study abroad) can also be used to fulfill three credits of a
Controls 2
student’s Architectural History requirement.
3.12.2 Summary of Student Performance Criteria
Narrative Summaries
This document provides overview and summary of the relationship between CACB Student Performance Criteria
and the UBC MArch core curriculum. As such it serves as a reference to Course Syllabus material and should be
read with reference to the accompanying Matrix (foldout, Table 3.12.b.) - which provides graphic summary - and
the Curriculum Overview (Section 3.12.1). With the majority of performance criteria, conditions are met through
a curriculum structure that is iterative and cumulative: Coursework that introduces, raises and culminates with
demonstration of the particular criterion is noted accordingly.
A Critical Thinking and Communication
The History/Theory stream in the professional MArch Program contributes most directly to fulfillment
of CACB Critical Thinking and Communication student performance criteria (A1, A4-A9) while
complementing and overlapping with Design/Media coursework (A2-3).
A1 Critical Thinking Skills

Ability to raise clear and precise questions, use abstract ideas to interpret information, consider diverse
points of view, reach well-reasoned conclusions, and test them against relevant criteria and standards.
The ability to precisely formulate questions, based on the use of abstract ideas to interpret information
and the consideration of diverse points of view is developed in lectures (ARCH 504, 505, 523, 568)
and seminars (ARCH 504, 505, 504/505, 523, 568) as is evidenced in the syllabi for those courses. It is
demonstrated in the related exams (504, 505) and essays (523, 568).
Also demonstrated in the assignments are basic methods of data collection and analysis, a skill set which
prepares for the Graduation Project (548/549).
Demonstration: Student work 504/505, 523, 568 and 548/549.
A2 Research Skills
Ability to employ basic methods of data collection and analysis to inform all aspects of the programming
and design process.
Research skills and case study examination of architectural research methods are presented and
considered in lectures (ARCH 568) and in the History/Theory seminars (ARCH 504, 505, 504/505, 523).
Basic data gathering, analysis and visualizing skills are introduced and developed in Design Media I and
II (515, 517). Research and analysis provide the underpinning of all Design Studios (500, 501, 520, 521,
540) culminating in the Graduation Project Part I (548) and Part II (549).
Demonstration: Research Methods 568, Vertical Studios 501, 520, 521, 540 and Graduation
Project 548/549

A3 Graphic Skills
Ability to employ appropriate representational media to convey essential formal elements at each stage
of the programming and design process.
Representation and technical documentation conventions, skills and media are introduced in the Media
Stream (515, 517, 551) and instrumental to all aspects of the Design Studios (500, 501, 520, 521, 540).
The skills culminate in the completion of the Graduation Project (548/549).
Demonstration: Design Media I (515) and II (517); Communicating Construction (551); Core and Vertical
Studios 500, 501, 520, 540; Comprehensive Studio 521 and Graduation Project 548/549
A4 Verbal and Writing Skills

Ability to speak and write effectively on subject matter contained in the professional curriculum.
Verbal and writing skills are developed throughout the History/Theory stream in the requirement of
essay writing. These essays take different forms: literature reviews, short expositions and long essays.
Writing skills are demonstrated in essay assignments in 504, 505, 568 and 523.
These writing skills are augmented in seminar/lecture formats courses 504, 505, 568 and 523 where
verbal skills are demonstrated in formal student presentations of their research, similar to the formal
and informal presentation of progress in Design Studios (500, 501, 520, 521, 540). These skills are a
basis for the Graduation Project 548/549 where verbal skills are tested in the presentation of work to
committee members and faculty-wide reviews and writing skills demonstrated in the text of 548 and its
later augmentation with the design work of 549.
Demonstration of Writing skills: Student work 504, 505, 568, 523, 548.
Demonstration of Verbal skills: Assignment descriptions 568, 523 and graduation instructions
for 548, 549.
Note: Students having evident difficulties with writing are directed to the writing workshops offered
by UBC student services: similarly to Graduate Studies seminars on effective verbal presentation
techniques.
A5 Collaborative Skills
Ability to identify and assume divergent roles that maximize individual talents, and to cooperate with
others when working as members of a design team and in other settings.
Collaborative work occurs in various settings across the curriculum. All Design Studios (500, 501, 520,
521, 540) contain aspects of group projects, especially in base model and drawing development and
preparatory research.
Students in Comprehensive Design Studio 521 work in pairs, albeit with individual Detailed Design
Development (C1) and Building Systems Integration (C2) assignments to assure all students meet SPC
thresholds for those areas of their development. In the Technology stream, students work collaboratively
in Architectural Technology I and II (511, 531) and Environmental Systems and Controls I and II (513,

533). Within the History/Theory stream, collaborative assignments are set in Contemporary Theories
523. Collaborative work is also undertaken by students in Contemporary Practice 543.
Demonstration: Representative Design Studio work 501 and 521
A6 Human Behavior
Understanding of the relationship between human behavior, the natural environment and the design of
the built environment.
Students develop their understanding of the relationship between human behavior, the natural
environment and the design of the built environment across the entire studio sequence, with a focus in
the core research methods, technology and contemporary practice courses.
Lectures and seminars in Research Methods (568) results in presentations and essays on contemporary
local and global research papers. The technical implications of how human behavior impact reconciling
the environment, environmental control, and design are studied in the Environmental Systems sequence
(513, 533).
Contemporary Practice (543) introduces some of the public engagement, advocacy, and programming
aspects of human behavior from an ethical and professional perspective. Cumulatively, these
are synthesized in the Graduation Project (548/549) where historical, or existing, traces of this
interrelationship must be understood in relationship to the proposed project and its future
consequences.
Demonstration: Student assignments and essays in Research Methods 568, Contemporary Practice 543,
and Graduation Project Part I 548.
A7 Cultural Diversity
Understanding of the diverse needs, values, behavioral norms, and social/spatial patterns that
characterize different cultures and individuals, as well as the implications of this diversity on the societal
roles and responsibilities of architects.
The criteria for cultural diversity are met across the History/Theory sequence as well as in Contemporary
Practice 543.
Demonstration: Architectural History I 504 and II 505, Advanced Architectural History 504/505, Research
Methods 568, Contemporary Theories 523, Graduation Project 548
A8 History and Theory

Understanding of diverse global and local traditions in architecture, landscape, and urban design, as well
as the factors that have shaped them.
This understanding is accomplished across core History/Theory courses (504, 505), Research Methods
(568) and Contemporary Theory in Architecture (523). The specific manner in which the contextual
factors are related to global and local traditions is described in the course syllabi and readings.
Demonstration: Student assignments, exams, essays in 504, 505, 504/505, 523, and 568

A9 Precedents
Ability to make a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of a building, building complex, or urban space.
Demonstration of this ability begins with building analyses that form part of the research for the History
courses (504, 505), is reiterated through Contemporary Theories (523) and culminates in the preparatory
work for the Graduation Project (548). In addition, precedent analysis forms a widespread component if
Design Studios (501, 520, 521, 540), in particular in the Introductory Design Studio (500).
Demonstration: Student assignments, essays in 523 and Graduation Project Part 1 548.
B Design and Technical Skills
The six-studio sequence includes three core studios, two vertical studios, and the Graduation Project
Part 2 (thesis) and through the sequence encourages students to work on increasingly self-defined
professional, social and technical objectives. The Introductory Core Studio (500) introduces foundational
aspects of architectural design. The second term (Second Term Vertical) studios (501) develop basic site-
to-building, material and technical, and accessibility aspects of design. The third and fifth term studios
(520, 540) provide students with an opportunity to explore issues, scales, and methods of design that are
of personal interest, including landscape architecture or urban design. The fourth-term Comprehensive
Design Studio (521) is highly integrative, and is taught in conjunction with the contemporaneous
Structures II (532) and Environmental Systems and Controls II (533).
B1 Design Skills
Ability to apply organizational, spatial, structural, and constructional principles to the conception and
development of spaces, building elements, and tectonic components.
These aspects of the design process are introduced and given emphasis to varying degrees throughout
the Design Studio sequence (500, 501, 520, 521, 540).
Demonstration: Introductory Core Studio 500, Second Term Vertical Studio 501, Vertical Studios 520 and
540, and Comprehensive Studio 521
B2 Program Preparation
Ability to assemble a comprehensive program for an architecture project that accounts for client and user
needs, appropriate precedents, space and equipment requirements, the relevant laws and standards, and
site selection and design assessment criteria.
The vertical Design Studios (520, 540) require the establishment of a comprehensive program for the
student projects, sometimes developed within a collaborative group. The development and testing
of a given program vis-à-vis regulatory constraints and site conditions is a specific requirement for the
students within the Second Term Vertical and Comprehensive Design Studios (501, 521). All students
must assemble a comprehensive program in order to fulfill the requirements of their individual
Graduation Project I (548).
Demonstration: Second Term Vertical Studio 501, Comprehensive Studio 521, Graduation Project Part I
548 and Part II 549

B3 Site Design
Ability to analyze and respond to context and site conditions in the development of a program and in the
design of a project.
This aspect of the design process is emphasized throughout the Design Studio sequence (500, 501, 520,
521, 540) and is given special emphasis in the Second Term Vertical Studio (501) and Graduation Project I
and II (548/549).
Demonstration: Vertical Studios 501, Comprehensive Studio 521, and Graduation Project Part II 549
B4 Sustainable Design
Ability to apply the principles of sustainable design to produce projects that conserve natural and
built resources, provide healthy environments for occupants/users, and reduce the impacts of building
construction and operations on future generations.
Concepts of sustainable design are introduced in the majority of technical courses and the Technical
Documentation course (551) as an essential component of the course syllabus. The contemporaneous
linkage of Environmental Systems and Controls II (533) to Comprehensive Design Studio (521) provides
students with the opportunity to apply this knowledge explicitly on a given project.
Demonstration: Environmental Systems and Controls I 513 and II 533, Comprehensive Studio 521
B5 Accessibility
Understanding to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and
cognitive abilities.
Introduced at an urban design scale as part of a student assignment in the First Term Core Studio (500)
and in the design of an accessible washroom in Communicating Construction (551), accessibility issues
are then addressed in some depth in the Second Term Vertical (501) studio, and specifically as a building
system within the Comprehensive Studio (521).
Demonstration: Communicating Construction 551, Design Studios 501 and 521
B6 Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards

Understanding the principles that inform the design and selection of life safety systems in buildings and
their subsystems; the codes, regulations, and standards applicable to a given site and building design
project, including occupancy classifications, allowable building heights and areas, allowable construction
types, separation requirements, occupancy requirements, means of egress, fire protection, and structure.
Introduced in the Structures (512, 532) and Architectural Technology (511, 531) sequences, this criterion
is addressed specifically in the syllabus of Professional Practice (541) and Communicating Construction
(551). Students have the opportunity to apply the elements of this criteria explicitly as a component of
the Comprehensive Studio (521).
Demonstration: Student work in Communicating Construction 551, Contemporary Practice 541 and
Comprehensive Studio 521.

B7 Structural Systems
Understanding of the principles of structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces, and the
evolution, range and appropriate applications of structural systems.
Structures I (512) introduces these criteria in basic principle, with greater focus and applied
demonstration of technical integration in Structures II (532) and its concurrent delivery with
Comprehensive Design Studio (521).
Demonstration: Structures I and II (512, 532) and Comprehensive Design Studio (521)
B8 Environmental Systems
Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of environmental systems, including
acoustics, illumination and climate modification systems, building envelopes, and energy use with
awareness of the appropriate performance assessment tools.
This criterion is introduced in Architectural Technology I and II (511, 531) with particular reference to
building enclosures, then addressed as the key syllabus component of the Environmental Systems and
Controls sequence (513, 533). Students have the opportunity to apply their knowledge of environmental
systems within most vertical studios (501, 520, 540), but to a more extensive and explicit degree within
the Comprehensive Design Studio (521).
Demonstration: Coursework in Environmental Systems and Controls I, II 513, 533
B9 Building Envelopes
Understanding of the basic principles involved in the appropriate application of building envelope
systems and associated assemblies relative to fundamental performance, aesthetics, moisture transfer,
durability, and energy and material resources.
This requirement is addressed as major component of the syllabus in Architectural Technology I (511)
for smaller buildings, and furthered as a syllabus component in Architectural Technology II (531). The
criterion is addressed as a syllabus component in Environmental Systems & Control I (513) and in
Communicating Construction (551). Students have the opportunity to apply their knowledge of building
envelopes to an extensive degree within the requirements of the Comprehensive Design Studio (521).
Demonstration: Coursework in Architectural Technology I, II 511, 531, and Environmental Systems and
Controls I 513

B10 Building Service Systems
Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of building service systems, including
plumbing, electrical, vertical transportation, communication, security, and fire protection systems.
Introduced as major syllabus components in both Architectural Technology I and II (511, 531) and
Environmental Systems and Controls I and II (513, 533), students undertake assignments dealing
with developing an understanding of the various building systems. They are subsequently required
to demonstrate their ability to apply this knowledge explicitly in their Comprehensive Design Studio
(521) project.
Demonstration: Architectural Technology I and II (511, 531), Environmental Systems and Controls I 513
and II 533
B11 Building Materials and Assemblies

Understanding of the basic principles utilized in the appropriate selection of construction materials,
products, and assemblies, based on their inherent characteristics and performance.
An understanding of assemblies and materials is a focus of the Second Term Vertical Studio (501)
and given special emphasis in the Comprehensive Studio (521). More explicitly particular materials,
products, and assemblies are described in the required Structures (512, 532) and Environmental Controls
I (513) courses. Most specifically, the criterion is addressed as major component of the syllabus in
Architectural Technology I (511) for smaller building construction types, and furthered as a syllabus
component in Architectural Technology II (531) for larger buildings. Communicating Construction (551)
requires students to graphically describe this criterion.
Demonstration: Technology sequence coursework 511, 531, and Communicating Construction 551
B12 Building Economics and Cost Control

Understanding of the fundamentals of development financing, building economics, construction cost
control, and life-cycle cost accounting.
Structures I and II (512, 532) introduce issues related to structural systems and life cycle cost accounting.
Research Methods (568) and Contemporary Practice (543) explore respectively aspects of development
financing, and the economic implications of emerging and conventional methods of architectural design
and building production.
Demonstration: Coursework in Structures I 512 and II 532, Research Methods 568 and Contemporary
Practice 543

C Comprehensive Design
The interrelated criteria for Comprehensive Design (C1-C4) have been consolidated within the second
year, second term of the MArch program. However, information at preceding terms of the program
provide a foundation for the Comprehensive Design term, including the introductory courses in
Structures (512), Environmental Systems (513), and the Architectural Technology I and II sequence
(511, 531). The Introductory Core Studio (500) and Second Term Vertical Studios (501) are purposely
constrained to the scale of building design to ensure adequate iterative experience in advance of the
Comprehensive Design Studio.
Comprehensive Studio (521) is coordinated with the delivery of Structures II (532) and Environmental
Systems and Controls II (533).
C1 Detailed Design Development

Ability to assess and detail as an integral part of the design, appropriate combinations of building
materials, components, and assemblies.
The Second Term Vertical Studio (501) focuses on bringing a design from concept to some depth of
detailed, integrative design thinking at the scale of building systems. 501 is followed by Architectural
Technology II (531), with its depth of focus on the detailed technical development of a single building
throughout the course of the term. Both courses precede and anticipate the more specific requirement
toward this end within the fourth term Comprehensive Design Studio (521).
Demonstration: Second Term Vertical Design Studio 501 and Comprehensive Studio 521, supported by
Structures II 532 and Environmental Systems and Controls II 533
C2 Building Systems Integration

Ability to assess, select, and integrate structural systems, environmental systems, life safety systems,
building envelope systems, building envelopes, and building service systems into building design.
Running concurrent to Second Term Vertical Studio (501) and its focus on basic integration of building
systems is Architectural Technology I (513), which introduces and explores in a technical class context
the integration of structures and environmental systems. The cumulative and iterative base of these and
other courses lead to the fourth term Comprehensive Design Studio (521) and the concurrent Structures
II (532) and Environmental Systems and Controls II (533).
Demonstration: Student work in Second Term Vertical Studio 501, Architectural Technology I 513 and II
531, Comprehensive Studio 521, Structures II 532 and Environmental Systems and Controls II 533

C3 Technical Documentation
Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for purposes of
review and construction.
Communicating Construction (551) was introduced as a core course in 2016. Though considered a
part of the media stream, the course provides students an opportunity to learn the organizational
logic and graphic conventions used to develop a set of construction documents. Through lectures and
redlining sessions, students learn how to interrelate the several scales from site to building of technical
description of code-related specification, building systems, and assemblies necessary to communicate
general and detailed relationships of a design. Comprehensive Design Studio (521) requires students to
demonstrate a depth of integrative design documentation.
Demonstration: Comprehensive Design Studio 521 and Communicating Construction 551
C4 Comprehensive Design
Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and a
site. The design of designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building envelopes,
building assemblies, life-safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
As noted in (C1, C2, C3) above and in previous sections, a foundational understanding of site-to-building
design, accessibility, program analysis and testing, environmental stewardship, life safety, and integrating
the various building systems in a single design is gained incrementally and iteratively within various
courses and studios especially in the second, third, and fourth terms. Communicating Construction 551
also gives students the opportunity to experience the complexity of describing a resolved, integrated
technical artifact that begins as an idea.
This foundation precedes the fourth term Comprehensive Design Studio term. Students work in pairs
from site analysis and design, structural and environmental systems analysis and integration, to program
testing and schematic design, through life safety and building code analysis and integration. A series
of one-on-one pin up style meetings with structural and mechanical engineers, code consultants and
architects help review the in-progress work of the students and provide technical guidance on the
refinement of their design development. Toward the end of the design phase of the term, students are
given individual assignments so that they may demonstrate their individual ability to produce detailed
wall section development that integrates the various elements of an exterior wall section.
Demonstration: Second Term Vertical Studio 501, followed by Comprehensive Studio 521, and

D Leadership and Practice
The role of the architect as advocate have long been a tradition of the program. That the architect draws
his or her leadership authority by acting wisely and in the public interest, whether in the context of
environmental, ethical and/or political contexts or judgments, is a principle woven into all or nearly all
courses in the curriculum.
D1 Leadership and Advocacy

Understanding of the techniques and skills for architects to work collaboratively with allied disciplines,
clients, consultants, builders, and the public in the building design and construction process, and to
advocate on environmental, social, and aesthetic issues in their communities.
The collaborative nature of architecture is introduced and discussed in the Architectural Technology (511,
531), Structures II (532) and Environmental Systems and Controls II (533) as well as in Comprehensive
Design Studio (521). The focus on accessible design in the Second Term Vertical Studio (501) is an
emerging area of advocacy that is now being introduced to the MArch students. Research Methods (568)
gives an overview of architectural research in leading-edge issues of the built environment. Graduate
Project Part I (548) provides students a voice to establish a position regarding advocacy and principle.
How architects and architectural practices lead and advocate on these specific areas is discussed and
explored in some depth Process and Practice (541) and especially in Contemporary Practice (543)
lectures, field visits, and coursework.
Demonstration: Coursework in Process and Practice 541, Contemporary Practice 543
D2 Ethics and Professional Judgment

Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgment regarding social,
political and cultural issues in architectural design and practice.
Discussions of ethical issues are implicitly part of the curriculum at all levels. They are discussed
alongside the delivery of technical information in the Environmental Controls streams (513, 533). A
fuller, more explicit exploration of such issues occurs in Contemporary Theories (523) and in the
context of professional practice occurs in Process and Practice (541) and Contemporary Practice (543)
coursework.
Demonstration: Coursework in Contemporary Theories 523, Process and Practice 541, Contemporary
Practice 543

D3 Legal Responsibilities
Understanding the architect’s responsibility to the client and the public under the laws, codes, regulations
and contracts common to the practice of architecture in a given jurisdiction.
Legal responsibilities as they relate to building code analysis and technical documentation are discussed
in Architectural Technology I (511) and Communicating Construction (551). The full understanding
of the laws, codes, regulations, and contracts occurs during the Process and Practice (541). In in-
depth workshop in building code analysis with professional code specialists is integrated into the
Comprehensive Design Studio 521.
Demonstration: Coursework in Process and Practice 541, Comprehensive Design Studio 521
D4 Project Delivery
Understanding of the different methods of project delivery, the corresponding forms of service contracts,
and the types of documentation required to render competent and responsible professional service.
Understanding the methods of project delivery occurs in the Process and Practice course (541) during
the final year of the program. Communicating Construction (551) provides students with an in-depth
exploration and development of aspects of project delivery related to technical documentation.
Demonstration: Coursework in Process and Practice 541, Contemporary Practice 543, and
D5 Practice Organization
Understanding of the basic principles of practice organization, including financial management, business
planning, marketing, negotiation, project management, risk mitigation, as well as an understanding of
trends that affect practice.
Aspects of this criterion are discussed in Research Methods, in particular with regard to the role
of research in business development, development economics and marketing. More specific
comprehension of practice organization occurs in the Contemporary Practice (543) course, in which
students do case study research in diverse practice organizations and models of contemporary practice.
The criterion is further discussed in Process and Practice (541), especially with regard to financial and
risk management, insurance, and includes visits to a local firm by students. Communicating Construction
(551) uses construction documents as a means to understand the aspects of practice related to
construction.
Demonstration: Coursework in Process and Practice 541, Contemporary Practice 543, and

D6 Professional Internship
Understanding of the role of internship in professional development, and the reciprocal rights and
responsibilities of interns and employers.
The route to registration is thoroughly discussed in the Process and Practice (541) course. The RAIC and
AIBC make an annual presentation to the MArch students discussing the requirements for interns and
pathways to eventual registration.
Demonstration: Coursework in Process and Practice 541

Table 3.12.b. SPC Matrix
Student Performance Criteria: A: Critical Thinking and

Communication
B: Design and Technical Skills
C: Comprehensive
Design
D: Leadership and Practice
Core Courses Content Matrix
Life Safety, Building Codes & Standards
Building Economics & Cost Control

This diagram focuses solely on how Student Performance
Building Materials & Assemblies
Ethics & Professional Judgment

Criteria are delivered by the core curriculum, either by
Detailed Design Development
Building Systems Integration

individual core courses or cumulatively.
Technical Documentation
Building Service Systems
Environmental Systems
Leadership & Advocacy
Professional Internship
Comprehensive Design
Verbal & Writing Skills
This material is delivered in two degrees of competency:
Critical Thinking Skills
Practice Organization
Legal Responsibilities
Program Preparation
Building Envelopes
Sustainable Design
Collaborative Skills
Structural Systems
Cultural Diversity
History & Theory

Human Behavior
= Course introduces basic CACB SPC principles, which are often
Project Delivery
Research Skills
Graphic Skills
cumulatively explored and examined by students, as
Design Skills
Accessibility
Precedents
Site Design
documented in course materials and student work.
= Course documents CACB SPC principles in student work,

meeting threshold of “understanding” or “ability.”
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 C1 C2 C3 C4 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6
ARCH 502 Introductory Workshop
ARCH 500 Elements of Architectural Design
ARCH 501 Second Term Vertical Design Studio

Studio
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio
ARCH 548 Graduate Project 1: Directed Study
ARCH 549 Graduate Project 2: Design Thesis
ARCH 504 Architectural History 1A

History/Theory
ARCH 505 Architectural History 1B
ARCH 568 Research Methods
ARCH 523 Contemporary Theories
ARCH 504/505 Advanced Architectural History
ARCH 512 Structures I
ARCH 532 Structures II

Technical
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology I
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II
ARCH 513 Environmental Systems & Controls I
ARCH 533 Environmental Systems & Controls II
ARCH 515 Design Media I

Media
ARCH 517 Design Media II
ARCH 551 Communicating Construction

Practice
ARCH 541 Professional Practice
ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice

4.0 Supplemental Information
4.1 Introduction to the Institution and Program History

4.1.1 History, Description, and Mission of the Institution
The appendix of the APR must provide a brief history and description of the institution, in which the program exists,
as well as the institution’s current mission statement and the date of its adoption of last revision. This could be
provided as a web link.
The University of British Columbia is a publicly supported, comprehensive university comprising twelve Faculties,
fourteen Schools, almost 70 centers and institutes and four affiliated teaching hospitals. UBC is the third largest
university in Canada and the oldest in the province. It is consistently ranked as one of the top three Canadian
universities, and ranks thirty-sixth -- and among the top twenty public institutions -- in the world in the 2016-
2017 Times Higher Education World University Rankings.
Incorporated by the provincial government in 1908, UBC admitted its first students in 1915. It moved to its
present Point Grey location in 1925 following the “Great Trek” which had convinced the Provincial Government
to resume the construction that had been halted by the First World War. Today almost 500 buildings occupy
a 400-hectare campus, with downtown facilities in Robson Square and a separate Okanagan campus. The
Vancouver campus educates more than 63,000 undergraduate and graduate students each year, representing
140 different countries.
The University Calendar is a comprehensive guide to all programs, courses, services, and policies at the
University of British Columbia. The Calendar also serves as a record of many University academic policies and
procedures. The online Calendar is the official Calendar as UBC no longer supports a print version. Changes are
incorporated online at intervals throughout the year.
4.1.1.a UBC Strategic Plan
The UBC Strategic Plan is constructed as a statement of Vision, Value and Commitments to quite particular
arenas in which University interest and resources will be focused. It serves as an overarching document within
which more local strategic planning occurs. In summary:
The UBC Plan Vision

As one of the world’s leading universities, The University of British Columbia creates an exceptional learning
environment that fosters global citizenship, advances a civil and sustainable society, and supports outstanding
research to serve the people of British Columbia, Canada and the world.
The UBC Plan Values

Academic Freedom: The University is independent and cherishes and defends free inquiry and scholarly
responsibility.
Advancing and Sharing Knowledge: The University supports scholarly pursuits that contribute to knowledge and
understanding within and across disciplines, and seeks every opportunity to share them broadly.

Excellence: The University, through its students, faculty, staff, and alumni, strives for excellence and educates
students to the highest standards.
Integrity: The University acts with integrity, fulfilling promises and ensuring open, respectful relationships.
Mutual Respect and Equity: The University values and respects all members of its communities, each of whom
individually and collaboratively makes a contribution to create, strengthen and enrich our learning environment.
Public Interest: The University embodies the highest standards of service and stewardship of resources and
works within the wider community to enhance societal good.
The UBC Plan Strategic Priorities

Student Learning: The University provides the opportunity for transformative student learning through
outstanding teaching and research, enriched educational experiences and rewarding campus life.
Research Excellence: The University creates and advances knowledge and understanding, and improves the
quality of life through the discovery, dissemination and application of research within and across disciplines.
Community Engagement: The University serves and engages society to enhance economic, social and cultural
well-being.
Aboriginal Engagement: The University engages Aboriginal people in mutually supportive and productive
relationships, and works to integrate understandings of Indigenous cultures and histories into its curriculum and
operations.
Alumni Engagement: The University engages its alumni fully in the life of the institution as valued supporters,
advocates and lifelong learners who contribute to and benefit from connections to each other and to the
University.
Intercultural Understanding: The University engages in reflection and action to build intercultural aptitudes,
create a strong sense of inclusion and enrich our intellectual and social life.
International Engagement: The University creates rich opportunities for international engagement for students,
faculty, staff, and alumni, and collaborates and communicates globally.
Outstanding Work Environment: The University provides a fulfilling environment in which to work, learn and
live, reflecting our values and encouraging the open exchange of ideas and opinions.
Sustainability: The University explores and exemplifies all aspects of economic, environmental and social
sustainability.
4.1 Introduction to the Institution and Program History -- 189

4.1.1.b Faculty of Applied Science Mission and Vision
Within that institutional context, in 2015, the Faculty of Applied Science under the direction of Dean Marc
Parlange developed Engage 2020: The UBC Applied Science Strategic Plan, which distilled and refocused many
of the Place and Promise themes around a distinctive vision of an integrated and interconnected constellation
of “applied sciences —architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, nursing and planning” able to respond
to “the greatest challenges of our time” because it is able to “cross cultural and disciplinary boundaries . . . [and]
see the world through . . . bigger pictures and longer terms.” Engage 2020 set out to establish an “unparalleled
research and learning environment in which creative minds work together to address today’s greatest challenges
in service to society” through three core values — connection, leadership and impact; and four key commitments
— a culture of valuing people, a focused research enterprise, a distinctive learning environment, and an engaged
community.
4.1.1.c SALA Mission and Vision
Situated with the Faculty of Applied Science, SALA exists as a relatively independent administrative entity within
the larger Faculty, which also includes the School of Nursing.
As described by SALA Director Kellett in Section 1.1.1 of this report, SALA’s strategic objectives are guided by
University and Faculty strategic planning mission and value statements. In part guided by the 2009 UBC Strategic
Plan, these are the current SALA Mission and Vision statements:
The School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture’s core responsibility is design education.
Through its teaching, professional endeavours, research and scholarly activities, the School is committed
to producing outstanding graduates equipped to provide the necessary design and intellectual leadership
that will contribute to a built environment that supports civil and sustainable patterns of living.
Guided by this vision, the individual and collective teaching, research and scholarship within the School is
directed at building an internationally recognized school that:
1. Provides an outstanding and distinctive professional education directed toward the breadth and complexity
of issues germane to contemporary built and natural environments.
2. Engages with a wide range of constituencies in the larger community – academic, professional and public –
and brings these associations directly to bear on its educational and administrative priorities.
3. Anticipates evolving realities within the realm of contemporary practice and stimulates effective innovation
that supports cross-scale and interdisciplinary approaches and solutions.
4. Engages in leading edge design research and scholarship activities that contribute constructively to the
theory and practice of architecture and landscape architecture.
Since 2012, SALA has implemented several school-level (SALA) objectives, including:
ොො Twice redeveloped the SALA website, the most recent iteration launched in 2016.
ොො Developed a post-professional Master of Urban Design degree program (2013).

ොො Implemented cross-disciplinary (for the professional Master of Architecture and Master of Landscape
Architecture cohorts) core coursework in areas where it was appropriate, including Professional Practice,
Design Media, Research Methods, and Advanced Design Studios.
ොො Developed dual degree pathways in the Master of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
programs (2016).
ොො Undertook a School branding study (2016), that will lead to the creation of new recruitment messaging and
materials.
ොො Successfully recruited five top faculty candidates to the MArch and MLA programs.
ොො Collaborated with Mechanical and Civil Engineering on the development of a Master of Engineering
Leadership in High Performance Buildings (2017).
ොො Developed a four-year Bachelor of Design in Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Urbanism
(forthcoming 2018).
ොො Defined the core research, scholarship and creative practice strengths of the School (2017 and continuing).
ොො Developed and initiated a fund-raising effort to create a new facility adjacent to the Lasserre building – the
traditional home of Architecture - to house SALA under one roof.
The Master of Architecture Mission and Vision statements are included in Section 1.1 of this report.
4.1.2 Program History
The appendix of the APR must provide a brief program history.
The establishment of the School of Architecture at UBC in 1946 was shaped by circumstances of geographic
isolation and historical immediacy. After more than 60 years of producing professional graduates, it is fair to
observe that the condition of metropolitan Vancouver itself may serve as the most direct testimony to the
work of the School over time. Indeed, the origins of a distinctive ‘West Coast’ design idiom and its continuing
development are directly linked to the work of students, faculty and graduates of the UBC School.
The School’s early identity was deliberately modernist, largely defined by the first School Director Frederic
Lasserre whose vision of the modern project in architecture was set in a program that advocated, in his own
words “breaking away from studying the earlier practice of applying old architectural designs to modern needs.”
By the mid-1950s, the School had grown to a student population of 150. Lasserre’s ambition for a modern
and functional design sensibility was given pointedly didactic presence in the completion of the purpose-built
Lasserre Building for the School of Architecture in 1962. Designed by the Vancouver firm of Thompson Berwick
and Pratt, the Lasserre Building also included the Department of Art History and Fine Arts and the School
of Community and Regional Planning, a conjunction of concerns that continues to the present day. Among
significant faculty during these formative years, Peter Oberlander, Arthur Erickson and Abraham Rogatnick were
crucial in establishing enduring standards of intensity and spirit in the School’s pedagogy.

Appropriate to the shifting social circumstances which characterized the 1960s, the philosophical position
of the School found expression in deliberate community activism undertaken by faculty and students alike.
Guided by its Director, Henry Elder, the School was actively engaged in significant local planning issues, most
famously in the repudiation of the plan to destroy Vancouver’s historic Chinatown and Gastown in the process
of constructing a freeway. The School was also instrumental in the initiatives which preserved the Roundhouse
as an active community centre and fostered the development of Granville Island: significant moments in
Vancouver’s efforts to define alternative models and discover its own urban potential.
During the 1980’s, Doug Shadbolt introduced “core” courses to the curriculum. From 1990 to 1998, under the
directorship of Sandy Hirshen, the program shifted the existing Bachelor of Architecture to a graduate Master of
Architecture [MArch] program; developed key outreaches in the community, particularly securing and renovating
a permanent downtown location and establishing a regular design-build elective. Several new faculty were hired
which gave excellent direction and fresh energy to the program. Serious budget cuts and frozen tuition fees
however, negatively impacted discretionary monies.
Christopher Macdonald was the Director of the School of Architecture from 1999 to 2005 and under his
leadership, extensive physical renovations were made to the Lasserre building, together with developing an
elective co-op option and extending community interaction. Most significantly, he oversaw the introduction
of the undergraduate Bachelor of Environmental Design (ENDS) program and the amalgamation of the School
of Architecture and the Landscape Architecture Program into the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture (SALA).
In 2006, Ray Cole was appointed as SALA’s inaugural Director, with Sherry McKay assuming the newly formed
role of Chair of the Architectural Programs. In the new SALA governance model, the Program Chair continued to
direct the academic mission of the professional MArch, including overview of budget and assignment of teaching
roles to faculty. Meanwhile, the Director’s responsibilities included orchestrating a new institutional identity,
developing of its vision and mission and initiating the planning of new facility to bring all of SALA to one location.
George Wagner assumed the role of Program Chair for Architecture in 2009 and oversaw considerable renewal in
full-time faculty as well as the hiring of a new SALA Director, Leslie van Duzer, in 2010.
Under Director Van Duzer, many governance elements of the Architecture Program were consolidated under the
SALA umbrella. SALA faculty and staff worked with design consultants on two feasibility studies for a new SALA
facility on the UBC campus. The $50,000 Margolese National Design for Living annual prize was first awarded in
2013. New not-for-credit Vancouver Summer Program offerings began and have expanded since. A new post-
professional Master of Urban Design (MUD) degree program began in September 2014. and Canada’s first dual
professional degree Architecture and Master of Landscape Architecture (MARCLA) began, its first cohort of
students beginning in September 2016.
John Bass became Program Chair for Architecture in 2012, at a time when SALA was prepared to develop
cross-disciplinary curricular integration where it served well the purposes of both of its professional degree
programs. During this period, the Program refined its discipline-specific core curriculum. Introduced were a
consistent body of learning objectives for ARCH 501, the second term vertical studio (2017) and integration of
the Comprehensive Design Studio with Environmental Systems and Controls II and Structures II (2013). A core
course in technical documentation was established in 2016. Introduced in fall 2017 was a new curriculum for
architectural history (ARCH 504/505) organized around pre-twentieth-century and modern history.

The period from 2014 to 2017 saw the development of the cross-disciplinary (for MArch and MLA students)
core curriculum. Cross-disciplinary courses implemented include joint core instruction in design media (2014),
research methods (2014), and professional practice (2014) areas of the curriculum. Additionally, under the
initiative of Greg Johnson, the design/build offerings expanded, and the Architecture Program’s biannual Studies
Abroad program began to be offered annually in 2015 to both MArch and the MLA students.
In spring 2015, Professor Ron Kellett was appointed SALA Director. Academic developments since include
an expansion to the undergraduate ENDS program, which was approved by the Province in fall 2016; SALA
contributions to new post-professional Master of Engineering Leadership programs, including most significantly
the new High-Performance Buildings degree, offered by the Applied Science faculty. Director Kellett has
continued to pursue the goals of uniting the SALA programs in a new facility, and refining the governance model
of an expanding SALA. Begun in fall 2016, a branding consultant has led SALA faculty constituencies in an exercise
that will provide the principles for these challenges, and inform new SALA strategic planning, research and
outreach activities.

4.2 Student Progress Evaluation
The appendix of the APR must include:
- The procedures for evaluating student transfer credit and advanced placement.
- The procedures for evaluating student progress, including the institutional and program policies and standards
for evaluation, advancement, graduation, appeal and remedial measures.
4.2.1 Procedures for Evaluating Student Transfer Credit and Advanced Placement
Student Transfer Credit and Advanced Placement

The full program is 119 credits, and the University requires that in the case of students with Advanced Placement
(AP), 60% of that 119 credits, or 72 credits, must be completed while a UBC student. Students entering the
program with an undergraduate degree normally take three to three and one-half years of full-time study to
complete the requirements.
The broad outlines of transfer credits for student who are admitted with advanced placement are normally
established at the time of admission, subject to confirmation of previous experience by transcript and syllabus
review by appropriate faculty within their specific areas of the curriculum. With transfer credits from their
undergraduate B.A. or B.S. degrees in architecture, AP students may take as little as two years to complete the
requirements of the UBC MArch degree. See Chart 3.12.a. for the non-AP and AP course of study diagrams.
Students holding a pre-professional architecture degree (either BA or BS) will be considered for advanced
placement. An undergraduate degree in a field related to architecture may be advantageous in reducing the
length of the program, but it is not a required prerequisite. Demonstration of interest and aptitude in the field
occurs as part of the application process, and letters of interest by applicants, their portfolio, and references all
play important roles in the admission evaluation process.
At the time of application, the School’s Admissions Committee will determine the extent of advanced placement
on the basis of the applicant’s undergraduate transcript and portfolio. Beginning in the 2017 admissions process,
the Admissions Committee awarded advanced placement in blocks of one-term or a full two-term transfer
credit (18/21 or 36/39 credits). These AP credits are usually given for first term or first year courses taken at the
undergraduate level across the curriculum, including Studio, Media, Technology, and History.
4.2.2 Procedures for Evaluating Student Progress
Students in the Master of Architecture program fall under academic regulations in place for master’s programs
as set out by the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. The following apply specifically to the Master of
Architecture program:
A grade of at least 60% is required in any course taken in the program with no more than 15 credits of Pass-level
standing (60-67%) being counted towards degree requirements. In addition, a grade of at least 65% is required
in ARCH 500 and at least 68% in ARCH 540 and 549. Failure to obtain credit for a total of three design studios
will require the student to withdraw from the program and the student will not be permitted to re-register in
the program.

Should a student not attain 65% or above in ARCH 500, the following conditions would apply:
ොො If the mark is less than 60% the student would be required to withdraw from the program for eight months
and retake ARCH 500 in the subsequent Winter Session Term 1;
ොො If the mark is between 60% and 65% the student will not be granted credit for ARCH 500. The student will
be required to re-register for ARCH 500 the following term.
A minimum mark of 74% must be obtained when repeating a failed course.
Appeal Procedures
Students may protest decisions relating to their academic studies. In this event, it is recommended that the
student first consult the faculty member directly involved in the decision. At any point in seeking resolution, a
student should feel free to seek the advice of the chair of the program’s Standings and Promotion Committee. If
satisfactory resolution is not forthcoming at this point, the appeal process should continue with a written request
of appeal to the chair of the program.
When the protest relates to a decision in a design studio, the program chair would establish an appeal
committee to hear the case. The appeal committee would consist of three full-time design faculty plus the
program head, ex-officio, and has the authority to interview all persons involved and to recommend to the
program chair that the grade be affirmed or changed. The appeal would only be heard if it is initiated within
thirty days from the time the decision has been communicated to the student, whether it be by letter or by
posting on the Student Service Centre.
If the matter has not reached satisfactory resolution, the student would then contact the following sequence of
individuals as necessary: the Director of SALA, the Dean of Applied Science, and finally the Dean of the Faculty
of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. Any change of grade must be approved by the Dean of the Faculty of
Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. Normally resolution can be achieved through the above processes, however
the following additional procedures are in place. In matters of academic judgment, students may request a
Review of Assigned Standing through Enrolment Services. For details, see Review of Academic Standing. With
respect to matters of procedure, resolution may be sought through the Registrar to the Senate Committee on
Appeals on Academic Standing. For details, see Senate Appeals on Academic Standing.
Degree Requirements
Instruction in the School is offered through several types of courses:
ොො The Introductory Workshop, mandatory for all incoming students for a period of one week prior to Labour
Day, involves the engagement of environmental and architectural concerns of the West Coast through field
trips, design exercises, and seminars.
ොො Lecture courses and seminars
ොො Design studios (required core studios and vertical options) explore selected topics in architectural design.
Students are expected to present and defend their proposals in the course of critical dialogue with faculty
members, visiting professionals, and their peers during reviews.
4.2 Student Progress Evaluation -- 195

To qualify for the Master of Architecture, students must satisfactorily complete a minimum of 119 credits
including a sequence of structured core coursework, 15 credits of electives, and a major Graduation Project
as follows:
ොො Workshop Course: ARCH 502

ොො Lecture/Seminar Courses: ARCH 5041, 5051, 5111, 5121, 5131, 515, 517, 523, 531, 532, 533, 541, 551, 568,
and an advanced history/theory requirement from one of ARCH 504, 505 or 5382
ොො Design Studio Courses: ARCH 500, 501, 520, 521, 540
ොො 15 credits of electives which may be selected from: ARCH 504, 505, 522, 537, 538, 543, 544, 545, 561, 571,
572, 573, 577
ොො Graduation Project: ARCH 548, 549
1
These courses are prerequisite to more advanced-level courses and should therefore be
completed in the first and second year of the program.
2
Winter Session study abroad advanced history/theory offering.
Students holding a pre-professional architecture degree, as noted in the Admissions section, above, will in
general be eligible to qualify for the Master of Architecture by completing fewer credits than 119; the minimum
(university) requirement being 72 credits. The exact number of credits to be completed and the program of study
will be established at the time of admission, and will vary according to the applicant’s previous education and
level of achievement.
A student may be waived from a required course if he/she has completed a similar course at a prior date. For
this to take place, a student must validate the equivalence with the faculty member responsible for the course. A
waived course is to be replaced by another of the same credit value so that there is no change to the number of
credits required for completion of the degree.
Students may undertake courses outside Architecture for elective credit toward their degree. Such courses
must be demonstrated to be relevant to the student’s program of study. Students must submit a request for
permission to enroll in the course for credit towards the Master of Architecture, in writing, to the Chair of
Architecture.
Complete university course information can be found here. Detailed and current information regarding
Architecture courses is available at the SALA website.

4.3 Current Course Descriptions
The appendix of the APR must include a one or two-page description with an overview, learning objectives, course
requirements, prerequisites, date(s) offered, and faculty for each required and elective course in the program.
4.3.1 Core Courses
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design......................................................................................................... 198

ARCH 501/540: Vertical Design Studios
Grafting Social Space.................................................................................................................... 200
Our Aging Network....................................................................................................................... 202
Powell Street................................................................................................................................ 204
The New Normal.......................................................................................................................... 206
ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop........................................................................................................................ 208
ARCH 504: Architectural History I........................................................................................................................... 209
ARCH 505: Architectural History II
Spring 2017................................................................................................................................... 211
Fall 2017....................................................................................................................................... 212
ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I.................................................................................................................... 213
ARCH 512: Structures I........................................................................................................................................... 214
ARCH 513: Environmental Systems and Controls I................................................................................................. 215
ARCH 515: Design Media I...................................................................................................................................... 216
ARCH 517: Design Media II..................................................................................................................................... 218
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio.............................................................................................................. 220
ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories in Architecture............................................................................................... 222
ARCH 531: Architectural Technology II................................................................................................................... 223
ARCH 532: Structures II.......................................................................................................................................... 225
ARCH 533: Environmental Systems and Controls II................................................................................................ 226
ARCH 541: Professional Practice............................................................................................................................ 227
ARCH 543: Contemporary Practice......................................................................................................................... 228
ARCH 551: Communicating Construction............................................................................................................... 229
ARCH 568: Research Methods................................................................................................................................ 231
4.3 Current Course Descriptions -- 197

ARCH 500: Elements of
4. The body is the invariable presence in architecture. Its dimension
Architectural Design
________________________________ is the constant of architectural composition, the material fact
of architectural space, and the mobile increment by which
Credits: 9
architecture is perceived.
Type: Core
Faculty: Joanne Gates, Matthew Soules,
George Wagner The curricula of the semester will be comprised of four design
Prerequisites: projects. Methods and media of exploration will vary both among
Term: Fall. 2017
the projects, and within the design process of individual problems.
It is intended that a range of approaches, increasing in complexity
Year 1
throughout the semester, will acquaint the student with the
ARCH 500 Elements Studio fundamental conventions of architectural design, and the extent to
ARCH 504 Architectural History I which those conventions themselves hold the keys to meaningful
Fall
ARCH 512 Structures I invention.
Student Performance Criteria Learning Objectives

A1, A3, A5, A6, A9, B1, B3, B5, B6, B7
_________________________________________
Over the course of this introduction to architectural design,
students are expected to develop a set of research, technical,
formal, graphic, conceptual, and time management skills.
Course Description
_________________________________________
Research
The first semester design studio enrolls students with diverse Students are expected to become aware of and demonstrate the
academic backgrounds; this is understood to be one of the great proper application of basic dimensional and functional aspects of
strengths of graduate level architectural education. It is this buildings, including how these relate to the human body and other
diversity that allows us to believe that the responsibility of the functional factors that inform the design of buildings. This basic
semester, and the Masters of Architecture program, is to offer demonstration of research skills will include referring to manuals
more than a simple professional degree, but an introduction to a such as Architectural Graphic Standards, but also through a critical
discipline that is both extremely specific in its practical application examination and application of lessons learned from building
and material resolution, and quite broad in its inevitable design precedents.
engagement with the borders of other political and cultural
discourses. Technical
Students are expected to become aware of and demonstrate the
The first term core studio is predicated on several principles: proper application of basic technical aspects of building design,
including the common-sense principles of structure and gravity,
1. Architecture, as both a discipline and a practice, uses two- and orientation to environmental factors including site, topography,
three-dimensional media as tools to explore and represent ideas. sun, wind, light, etc.
These media are used in the most speculative stages of design as
well as a design’s most precise and specific descriptions. Formal
Students are expected to become aware of some of the formal
2. Design is organization, often dependent on the synthesis and conventions of building design, including techniques for organizing
conceptualization of deliberate structural and syntactic logic. served and service program, establishing the front/back – public/
private orientations of ground plane and elsewhere, testing
3. Site, context and position are not simplistic or preexisting and developing basic relationships of structure and space,
conditions to which the architect reacts, but essential conditions to choreographing circulation and public and private sequences of
be constituted and developed by the designer. spaces and movement.

Graphic
Students are expected to demonstrate the ability to graphically
communicate ideas, space and form at several scales and using
basic sketching, diagramming, architectural drawing, and study and
presentation model conventions. Using digital and manual drawing
media, students are required to understand and correctly execute
such basic drawing types as site and floor plans, building and street
sections, axonometric and isometric 3D views, concept diagrams,
and perspective views.
Conceptual
Students are expected to demonstrate the ability to observe and
analyze the context provided to them in any given exercise about
the physical, social, ecological, and political world. Students are
also expected to abstract from this observation and analysis
specific questions about space, form and program, and show the
ability to critically test and develop these abstractions into the
physical and spatial material of building design.
Time Management
Students are expected to demonstrate the understanding that
deadlines affect design processes. This understanding includes
showing the ability to be responsive to instructor’s guidance
from one class to the next, to move work forward at each interval
between studio meetings, and to prepare all new or required
printing and model materials in time for the start of all desk crits,
reviews and pinups.
Requirements
_________________________________________
Contribution to overall evaluation is distributed as follows:
10% Exercise one

20% Exercise two
30% Exercise three
30% Exercise four
10% Effort and arc of improvement

ARCH 501/540: Grafting Social boundaries of public thought. Public buildings focused on the
production and display of community art are surprisingly rare.
Space Studio
________________________________ This studio will examine the opportunities within the program of a
contemporary community art centre to contribute to social impact
Credits: 9
while responding to the diverse ambitions for Granville Island.
Type: Core
Faculty: Darryl Condon & Melissa Higgs The studio will be led by the Managing Principal of HCMA
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design Architecture + Design, Darryl Condon, with support from HCMA
Term: Spring. 2017 Principal Melissa Higgs and other staff. The investigations will
be taught from a practice-based perspective and part of the
Year 1 exploration will be to test the potential for integration and cross-
pollination between educational and professional studios.
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio
ARCH 505 Architectural History II
Spring Program
The program will focus on an evolving public building typology, the
community art centre. Students will be responsible for considering
the changing nature of the delivery of community services and
Year 3
to investigate the potential for this building type of have positive
social impact.
Spring
*Elective
Site(s)
*Elective
The studio will explore a series of progressively complex sites on
Granville Island. As the complexity of the program increases, so too
Student Performance Criteria with the complexity of the sites.
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, B1, B2, B3, B5
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Course Description
_________________________________________
- To encourage design innovation through iteration and layering of
The importance of truly public social space in supporting the complexity
goals of resilience and social sustainability are increasingly well - To encourage a range of analysis and representations of
understood. What is more problematic is the lack architectural concepts.
of metrics or frameworks for guiding the discussion and ultimately - To investigate the impact of differing context on
measuring the potential social impact of architecture. This studio architectural form.
will explore the creation of meaningful social space across a variety - To examine the social impact potential of inserting social space
of scales. within a mature context.
Granville Island occupies a unique place within the City of

Vancouver. While surrounded by, connected to and dependent on
Requirements
the City of Vancouver it is federal territory that operates within _________________________________________
its own set of rules and context. Granville Island is a constructed
You will be marked for both scope and rigor in studio projects
place, created within the waters of False Creek in the location of a
as well as for the depth of participation in studio meetings and
sandbar that was part of the traditional First Nations community
discussions. The relative weighting of the studio assignments will
called Snauq. This ambiguous place will be the territory of
be as follows:
exploration for this studio.
PHASE 1 10%
Art, and especially community based art, in its many forms, plays
PHASE 2 15%
an important role in challenging preconceptions and pushing the

PHASE 3 25%
PHASE 4 40%
Scholarship 10%

ARCH 501/540: Our Aging will look at the categories that define the aged, what they want
and need, and finally their networks, both social and familial,
Network Studio
________________________________ either to we make sure they remain connected to those networks
or to question if that is even a good idea. Is aging in place a
Credits: 9
solution, or just a feel-good design trope?
Type: Core
Faculty: James Huemoeller
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design Within this topic, the studio will focus on two important issues
Term: Spring. 2017 within the architecture profession. First, students will be asked
to ensure their design projects address accessibility. Not just
as a series of turning radiuses and sloping walkways, but as an
Year 1
experience within the city. How does one move through the
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio city, and from the city to the building? How, when needed, is
ARCH 505 Architectural History II that movement made legible, and for whom do we define those
Spring
ARCH 515 Architectural Technology I experiences. A second, tangentially related issue will ask the
ARCH 517 Design Media II student to move beyond research and embrace the speculation
of architectural form within the context laid out for both projects.
Year 3 All the students in this class have begun to learn the language of
ARCH 540 Vertical Studio design, with various levels of experience and have thought about
ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice research, either within the context of architecture or perhaps
Spring
*Elective another discipline. This studio will take those skills and translate
*Elective them into clear formal ideas that address the social context of an
aging population’s experience within the city.
Student Performance Criteria

A1, A6, A7, A8, A9, B1, B2, B3, B5 Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
The challenge of this studio is to learn to maintain a clear
Course Description communicable line of analytical and design thought between
_________________________________________ different scales and phases throughout the design project.
It is no secret that, for lack of a better term “developed” nations Students will explore the boundaries of the architectural design
are aging at a potentially unsustainable rate. Canada, while not process through a series of directed, but open-ended studies
necessarily leading the way, is still expected to see its over 65 that will allow students to both engage and question traditional
population constitute over half the population. The equates to practice. Finally, students will learn to define a specific design
a potentially $65 billion-dollar shortfall as the ratio of retirees problem, research its context, and develop architectural responses,
to workers continues to change. Of course, these are stats that and then articulate those ideas through a variety of traditional and
sell newspapers (when those existed), so what does this mean non-traditional presentations mediums.
for architecture? If nothing else, it means that the able-bodied
individual you see in most renderings constitutes only half the The design research will be supported by a body of readings
potential user group. That likely that person you have been and investigations into precedents that will place the design
envisioning as you work through your designs is the wrong one. objectives into the context of broader conversations within the
design communities. The objective here is primarily one of
This studio will explore the idea of aging within Vancouver and exposure, ensuring any design proposals sees the immense body of
the role the built environment should play on this evolving issue. knowledge within our profession as a stepping stone for developing
Rather than focus though on housing, the traditional territory in new ideas. Given the theme of the studio, it is also expected that
architecture for addressing aging, this studio is going to look at the students will gain a better understanding of accessibility in the
the city. It will look at aging, not in isolation, but within a context. built environment. Visits with aging Vancouverites, and a trip to
We will confront the stereotypes and assumptions our society and Seattle, the students will hopefully see accessibility as something
architecture as a profession makes about this demographic. We more than just turning radiuses and clearances.

Requirements
_________________________________________
Your ability to develop and communicate a critical, research-driven

project within a given set of criteria as outlined in the relevant
schedule descriptions will form the basis of evaluation. Assignment
of letter grades will be as per the “UBC General Grading Practices.”
As always, attendance to classes is the first step and absence will
adversely affect a student’s grade on the relevant project. The
breading breaks down as follows:
Project 1: 35%
Project 2: 65%

ARCH 501/540: Powell Street Studio of Hastings Street was a major cultural and entertainment district.
________________________________ Prior to the Second World War, there was also a vibrant Japantown
along Powell Street centered around Oppenhiemer Park. This
unique historical precinct has been and remains home to unique
Credits: 9
civic culture that is intensely connected and committed to the
Type: Core
Faculty: Inge Roecker place and its stories.
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design
Term: Spring. 2017
Learning Objectives
Year 1
_________________________________________
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio The impetus for this studio is to gain a greater understanding
ARCH 505 Architectural History II of the stories that the place has to tell and suggest spaces and
Spring
ARCH 515 Architectural Technology I buildings required to tell them. Our goal is to generate and explore
ARCH 517 Design Media II fresh ideas for the neighborhood with new architechtonic and
programmatic visions for a culturally, socially and economically
Year 3 inclusive community. To explore new layers for future realities
ARCH 540 Vertical Studio of urban existence with the Japantown context. What programs
ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice will support the community and celebrate its diverse roots and
Spring cultures? Would it be places for production, service, exhibition,
*Elective
*Elective education, entertainment, community, nature or living? Theoretical
basis to prepare for the studio will be drawn from Subdivided:
City-Building in an Age of Hyper-Diversity, a compilation by Jay
Pitter and John Lorinc. “Hyperdiversity, intense diversification of
A1, A6, A7, A8, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B8, B9, B11,
population in socio-economic, social and ethnic terms, but also in
B12, C1, C2
respect of lifestyles, attitudes and activities. How do we build cities
where we aren’t just living within the same urban space, but living
together, and what makes a truly connected city?” Jay Pitter
Course Description
_________________________________________
Poweru-Gai K’EMK’EMELA’Y’ Connecting Narrative Through Requirements
Placemaking _________________________________________
This studio will proceed through a series of exercises that form
Connecting Narratives Through Placemaking will explore the
synthetic whole. As an advanced design studio it is expected that
processes to understand and the many layers, voices and
each student will develop a unique and conceptually rich position
narratives that shape a space into a place. How can we respect,
leading to inventive spatial propositions. The exercises are meant
commemorate and celebrate the life of the past in places we
to function as a constructive framework to aid design evolution and
plan for the present? There is an increasingly complex range of
are not exclusive to the generation of diverse individual positions.
challenges for realizing thriving and socially inclusive cities. Large
The following outline provides the term structure, each loop
scale issues such as environmental resilience, economic prosperity
follows a feedback loop in class and community.
and social equity need to be addresses to reverse a growing urban
Theory Workshop
development pattern of segregation by economic values. The
DTES was the center of the city at the turn of the 20th century,
Loop 1a: Historic Building Mapping
with City Hall, the courthouse and the Carnegie Library all located
there. The headquarters of the BC Electric Railway Company was
Loop 1b: Historic Building Drawing
also in the area, making it also the region’s transportation hub.
It was also the main shopping area for the city, which centered
Loop 2: Site Analysis
around Woodward’s Department Store. The surrounding stretch

Loop 3a: Community Process
Loop 3b: Program Conceptual Development Loop
3c: Program Schematic Development
Loop 4: Comprehensive Design

ARCH 501/540: The New Normal Studio as their Olympic counterparts, yet often struggle for equivalent
________________________________ recognition and are considered by many to be inadequate, despite
their accomplishments. What if we altered our perspective?
What if the experiences of those labeled as disabled were seen
Credits: 9
Type: Core as normal? What if the accommodation of all bodies was seen as
Faculty: Blair Satterfield an opportunity to generate better form, assembly, and flow? This
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design studio begins with the premise that global “normalcy” is a fiction,
Term: Spring. 2017
that the concept of “normal” is more a personal construct than a
static measure or metric, and that those who aren’t considered
Year 1
typical might offer something incredible to designers. In The
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio Normal Studio we reject preconceptions about limited types of so-
ARCH 505 Architectural History II called normative bodies. Instead we embrace a position that seeks
Spring
ARCH 515 Architectural Technology I to find and celebrate the exceptional qualities and experiences of
ARCH 517 Design Media II alternative “normal” humans.
Year 3
Learning Objectives
Spring
ARCH 543 Contemporary Practice _________________________________________
*Elective
*Elective Develop a set of drawings, diagrams, and models that investigate
and communicate the idea, effect and approach of your building
and it’s unique circulation and structural system. During the
course of the semester, students will pay special attention to
issues of access and accessibility. Architectural sequences that
A1, A3, A5, A6, A9, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7 seem mundane can be some of the most challenging for many
of our friends and neighbors. Egress stairs, bathrooms, and entry
sequences will all be considered central to our proposals. We will
work to make something exceptional from these experiences.
Course Description
_________________________________________ Students are asked to review and understand the rules and
regulations that surround ADA. Students will also visit Dark Table (a
Normal (From Wikipedia): “Definitions of normality vary by person,
restaurant with blind servers), Seattle landmark projects known for
time, place, and situation
their innovative yet accessible circulation sequences, and two firms
– It changes along with changing societal standards and
(ARCH and LARC) to discuss and understand accessibility in design.
norms. Normal behavior is often only recognized in contrast to
The New Normal Studio strives to build ability to design both site
abnormality. In its simplest form, normality is seen as good while
and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and
abnormality is seen as bad. Someone being seen as “normal” or
cognitive abilities. Further, the studio wants to find exceptional
“not normal” can have social ramifications, such as being included,
normal experiences in those we erroneously categorize as limited.
excluded, or stigmatized by larger society.”
What is normal? What is abnormal? What is exceptional?

Howard Schatz’s composite image of Olympic and professional Requirements
_________________________________________
athletes shows bodies that are perfected, but not perfect. Each
body in his famous photograph is in fact atypical due to genetics Each assignment will carry a grade. The breakdown is listed
and hyper-optimization. Each was selected and developed to below and is based on a one hundred point system. Points will be
excel at very specific activities, and each falls neatly outside what determined by how well the objectives of the exercise are met and
is considered “normal” for the human form. These athletes are by the quality of the execution of those objectives by students.
universally celebrated, yet many equally accomplished individuals It is extremely important that you ask questions to clarify the
are not. Paralympic athletes (for example) are as physically gifted intentions and ground rules for each assignment. Late submissions

are accepted at the discretion of the instructor and are subject
to a 20% grade reduction per week. Team projects (if applicable)
will be given one grade, so it is important that work is coordinated
between individuals and that each team member participates fully.
Attendance and participation - 5%

Sectional Exceptional 1 - 10%
Midterm Pinup - 10%
A Centre for New Normal Experiences - 55%

ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop
________________________________
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
This assignment introduces critical thinking about our lived
Credits: 2 environment. We will be looking at neighbourhoods as designers

Type: Core rather than tourists. We will explore the neighbourhood’s
Faculty: Inge Roecker history, for example the era in which it was built, its evolution
Prerequisites:
in the context of its surroundings, and how it is perceived
Term: Fall. 2017
today. Through researching, sketching, measuring and filming,
we can then begin to understand the decisions made by the
architect, landscape architect or urban planner. Through means
of documentation, we will then critically analyze our findings and
A5
present them as a group installation.
The overall goal is to work efficiently, and effectively with limited

Course Description time and material in order to produce work that expresses ideas of
_________________________________________ context, scale and space.
As part of a long lasting school tradition, on Monday, August
28 – Friday, September 1, 2017 you’ll be attending the 2017
Introductory Workshop. This is a one week interdisciplinary
Requirements
orientation to the School of Architecture and Landscape _________________________________________
Architecture, and will include introductions to the faculty, staff,
Each neighbourhood group will be responsible for producing four
students, facilities, programs and design culture of the school.
1-minute videos, to be presented together as a cohesive 4-minute
presentation, expressing different aspects of their neighbourhood.
In addition to these introductions, in this workshop, you will
These will be produced with camera-phones (or other camera
engage in a collaborative design assignment that will start out
you have access to), edited in-studio and presented together for
by exploring some of Vancouver’s neighbourhoods. By the end
a final installation. The final installation, including a 1.5m square
of the week, your work will be showcased and exhibited in the
projection screen will be produced by each group. Storyboards
the Lassere courtyard, where we’ll celebrate together in typical
showing process work will also be displayed as part of the
SALA style.
presentation.
Over the course of the week, we will work in groups of 10 students,

Each sub-group (2-3 students) will pick one of the following
with sub-groups of 2 students, where we will be sketching,
focuses: 1m, 10m, 100m, 1000m, and Installation. The four
documenting (through various mediums) and talking through ideas.
sub-groups exploring scale will film their neighbourhoods in that
This assignment is ultimately geared towards shedding light on the
context, producing their own 1-minute video. These videos will
architectural culture of Vancouver, grounding you with a contextual
be compiled into a looped, installation ready video. Final video
understanding of the city, and steering you to think critically about
file format should be exported as an mp4. The fifth group will be
the design around you.
responsible for the title cards, cohesion of the four videos, and the
production and installation of the projection screen.
We will also be exploring various levels of scale. This is done
through the simple context of Charles and Ray Eames’s short
Each student will be required to use their sketchbooks, cameras,
documentary, Powers of Ten. It is a means of relating ourselves to
and phones to document their findings, and to produce
design, architecture, and the urban environment.
storyboards and process drawings.

ARCH 504: Architectural History I parts of architectural design.
________________________________
The course is open to students from all disciplines. The format for
the course will be two lectures each week, with discussion time
Credits: 3
integrated into each course period. Discussions will center around
Type: Core
Faculty: Sara Stevens the readings and writing assignments.
Prerequisites:
Term: Fall. 2017
Year 1 Learning Objectives

_________________________________________
ARCH 500 Elements Studio
ARCH 504(5) Architectural History I(II) - To learn to read buildings: using drawings, sketches, perspectives,
Fall
ARCH 512 Structures I renderings, paintings, and any number of visual sources, students
ARCH 515 Design Media I will read and interpret architectural and cultural meaning.
- To learn to interpret documents: primary and secondary sources
(i.e. this is not a grab bag of ideas for thesis projects).
- To interrogate the changing relationship between architecture
A1, A2, A4, A7, A8, A9
and society, the impact of the industrial revolution, international
trade ways, and cultural contact on defining architectural design.
- To interrogate architecture’s changing obsessions with memory,
Course Description eclecticism, style, technologies, commerce, and nation.
_________________________________________ - To understand what studying buildings can reveal about their
Empire Building: cultural contexts (political, economic, social, technological,
The Cultural Economy of Architectural Production, pre-1900 environmental, aesthetic) and to see how the production of
buildings and designs negotiates those contexts.
This course will introduce students to a global history of
architecture focused on the 18th and 19th centuries. The course
argues that cultural exchanges produced not just style, nationalism,
Requirements
memory, and eclecticism, but architectural knowledge itself. By _________________________________________
using empire as a rubric for studying architecture, the course will
In addition to active weekly participation, students will be expected
situate design within a system of economic and cultural exchanges.
to master the concepts presented in the class (in other words, this
In tracing architectural interactions across continents, the political
will be neither slide memorization nor advanced independent re-
economy of globalization appears in a much longer history, amidst
search) through three types of assignments. For students enrolled
a diverse set of actors, including both colonizers and colonized.
in ARCH 504, the paper will be longer and will require greater
Students will learn to read buildings and interpret their cultural
development of the research topic and analysis.
meaning and to interrogate the changing relationship between
architecture and society.
1. Fast, frequent visual analysis exercises (that combine writing and
drawing) will structure architectural interpretations of historical
Our readings of projects will highlight the cultural economy
projects. These will be in-class assignments. [At least once every 2
of architectural production, by which I mean the ways that a
weeks, students will turn in 1 hand-drawn sketch or 1 short para-
design is embedded in political economies through cultural
graph analyzing a project shown in lecture. The paragraph will be
output and exchanges. Through thematic investigations arranged
an informal, writing-to-learn exercise that aims for historiographic
in an overlapping chronology, the lectures, while far from
commentary (i.e. students develop an argument about the work,
comprehensive, will offer synthesis and narrative (without denying
rather than merely mining projects for studio techniques).] These
disjunctures) and will offer examples of the analytic work expected
exercises will count toward the participation grade.
of the students in their assignments. With close readings of
2-3 projects each week, the course will examine infrastructure,
2. A timeline will be a visual analysis of a single project presented
landscape, technology, representation, and politics as constituent

in class, researched and graphically presented on an 11x17” page.
One in-class pin-up/crit during the week of October 25 will provide
feedback for revisions before the assignment is graded. The topic
for this timeline can continue into the long research paper. The
final timeline will be due November 8.
3. One long research paper will develop research and analysis skills
to build students’ abilities to undertake independent research proj-
ects in subsequent architecture courses. These will be outlined in
detail as the course progresses. [Understanding primary/secondary
sources; finding and integrating sources and illustrations; analyzing
others’ arguments; making your own arguments.]
1. DUE November 3: Topic selection for research paper, identifica-

tion of possible sources, and statement of research question (250
words)
2. DUE December 9: Final paper on a topic related to the timeline

(2,500-3,000 words for ARCH404, 3,000-3,500 words for ARCH504)
4. Two short-answer exams (a midterm and a final) will cover con-

tent, and point toward the questions that motivate architectural
history. Midterm exam: October 20
FINAL EXAM: December 12 or 13

15% Midterm exam
15% Final exam
15% Participation / visual analysis exercises
15% Timeline
40% Research paper (in two parts: topic and research ques-
tion, 10%; final paper, 30%)

ARCH 505: Architectural History II Requirements
_________________________________________
________________________________
Evaluation will be based on the following:
Credits: 3
Type: Core Mid-term exam 15%
Faculty: Sherry McKay Research Project 10%
Prerequisites: ARCH 504: Architectural History I
Ideas Map 15%
Term: Spring. 2017
Final Research Paper 30%
Year 1 Final Exam 15%
Participation 15%
Spring
A1, A2, A4, A7, A8, A9
Course Description
_________________________________________
This course traces the debates in modern and contemporary
architectural thought, including critical analysis of the contribution
of the 20th century and early 21st century producers of
architecture and their social and political contexts.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
- Understanding of the multiple and parallel developments of
architectural modernism of the 20th and early 21st century
- Understanding of the social, technical, material and political
issues influencing the production and development of architecture
during this time
- Awareness of the literature produced by significant figures of
the period
- Ability to identify issues in specific projects
- Ability to identify global developments and local variations
(Western and alternative geographies)
- Ability to reflect critically on the architecture of the various
modernisms of the period
- Ability to research and write about significant architectural
phenomena (buildings or issues) in a cogent manner

ARCH 505: Architectural History II - Understanding of the social, technical, material and political
________________________________ issues influencing the production and development of architecture
during this time
- Awareness of the literature produced by significant figures of
Credits: 3
the period
Type: Core
Faculty: Joseph Watson - Ability to identify issues in specific projects
Prerequisites: - Ability to identify global developments and local variations
Term: Fall. 2017 (Western and alternative geographies)
- Ability to reflect critically on the architecture of the various
Year 1
modernisms of the period
ARCH 500 Elements Studio
- Ability to research and write about significant architectural
ARCH 504(5) Architectural History I(II)
Fall phenomena (buildings or issues) in a cogent manner
Requirements
Student Performance Criteria _________________________________________
A1, A2, A4, A7, A8, A9
Evaluation will be based on the following:
Attendance and participation 25%

Course Description Discussion section leadership 15%
_________________________________________ Reading response 10%
Final paper outline 20%
The Skyscraper and the Modern City
Final paper 30%
The skyscraper is one of the most defining, and divisive, features

of modern architectural and urban histories. While tall buildings
visually dominate the skylines of cities across the globe, this course
argues that their histories are more complex than a succession of
novel architectural objects. Lectures, readings, and discussions will
explore how skyscrapers have both shaped and been shaped by
aesthetic debates, financial markets, infrastructural developments,
technological revolutions, environmental conditions, cultural
aspirations, class stratifications, and gender politics, among other
factors. By tracing these diverse threads from the late-nineteenth
century to the present, students will develop a multifaceted, cross-
disciplinary understanding of theskyscraper’s role in the history of
modern architecture and the shaping of contemporary cities.
This course traces the debates in modern and contemporary

architectural thought, including critical analysis of the contribution
of the 20th century and early 21st century producers of
architecture and their social and political contexts.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
- Understanding of the multiple and parallel developments of
architectural modernism of the 20th and early 21st century

ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I environments. Requirements of exterior cladding: visual & water
________________________________ management requirements, open/closed cladding, rainscreen &
pressure-equalized systems, durability.
Credits: 3
Construction Documentation
Type: Core
Faculty: Greg Johnson Drawing Specifications. Relationship between construction
Prerequisites: drawings & technical specifications and their role in communicating
Term: Spring. 2017 design information. Project delivery methods and construction
Year 1 contracts.
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio I

Regulatory Environment
Spring Zoning & Development Bylaws, Building Codes & Bylaws
Control of built form. Building safety, building size and height,
control of fire spread, occupancy loads, egress routes.
Student Preformance Criteria
A3, A5, B1, B4, B6, B8, B9, B10 B11, C1, C2, C3, D3
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Upon completing the course, students should have familiarity with
Course Description the materials used in contemporary construction, their history
_________________________________________ and their properties. In addition they should understand the
Architectural Technology 1 (ARCH 511) and 2 (ARCH 531) integration of building systems, the process of creating building
investigate building materials and systems – including properties, assemblies, and be able to analyze in particular the various roles
application and performance – in the context of architectural materials play in the performance of the building enclosure. Skills
design, environmental conditions, historical context, regulatory at drawing typical construction assemblies should be reasonably
controls, sustainability, and economic constraints. well developed, with an emphasis on light wood framing.
In ARCH 511, the principles of building science, construction

materials/systems and the technical issues of design will be Requirements
introduced primarily through the understanding of how a building _________________________________________
is layered. Light wood frame construction will be the primary
Exercises typical of the type of those found on the examinations
vehicle used to explore these relationships, though reference will
will be undertaken together during class time in order to
also be made to other construction systems – heavy/mass timber,
understand concepts. These exercises will not be graded, but
steel, masonry and concrete – throughout the term.
answers will be posted on Connect.
Building Systems
Individual and group assignments will be assigned on a regular
Structural, Electrical & Lighting, Mechanical & HVAC, Plumbing,
basis, and are to be submitted by class time on the date indicated.
Enclosure, Site.
Submissions should be in hard copy format, clear and well
Characteristics & design of integrated building systems: site,
organized, and accompanied by an electronic pdf version. Any
structural, enclosure, finishes/furnishings & service systems.
photographs, drawings or referenced material used must have
Evaluation of building performance, durability & sustainability.
their sources clearly identified.
Materials in Architecture Assignments (individual & group) 70%

Metals, Concrete, Wood, Masonry. Concept of the building Final exam (laptop + open book) 30%
enclosure: definition & evolution. Building science principles:
control of air, moisture, heat, sound, fire propagation.
Characterization of environmental forces: exterior & interior

ARCH 512: Structures I Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
________________________________
- To develop an understanding of the flow of force through a
Credits: 3 structure, to understand where structure is necessary and to lay

Type: Core out a basic structural system.
Faculty: AnnaLisa Meyboom - To understand how to roughly size structural members in steel,
Prerequisites:
timber and concrete structures.
Term: Fall. 2017
- To understand the impact of architects’ decisions on the economy
and sustainability of the structural system.
Year 1
- To develop an understanding of engineering terminology in order
ARCH 500 Elements Studio to better communicate with their engineering collaborators.
ARCH 504 Architectural History I
Fall
Requirements
_________________________________________
A final grade of at least 60% is required on the final exam in order
B6, B7, B11, C1, C2, C4
to pass the course. The grading will take place as follows:
Final Exam: 50%

Exercises: 50%
Course Description
_________________________________________
Structure is an intrinsic part of making and as such is important
to the architect as part of his/her repertoire of media with which
they will create. This course helps students attain, through both
quantitative and qualitative means, a basic understanding of
statics, structural materials and flow of force through a structure.
Students will learn to use rules of thumb for sizing of structural

elements of structure in concrete, steel and wood and form an
understanding of the basic elements required for stability in a
structure. Students will develop a fundamental understanding of
structural design following current engineering practices and will
be introduced to engineering terminology in order to effectively
communicate with their structural engineers when they enter
practice.
Overall topics in the course include the following: configuration

of basic structural systems, light wood frame construction, loads,
properties of materials, equilibrium, column behavior, lateral
stability, shear and moment diagrams, and bending stresses in
beam elements.

ARCH 513: Environmental Systems Nor are acoustic theories and concepts directly examined. However
in the exploration of solar control, passive solar, daylighting and
and Controls I
________________________________ natural ventilation strategies, explicit reference will be made to
their potential energy and acoustic consequences.
Credits: 3
Type: Core
Faculty: Adam Rysanek Learning Objectives
Prerequisites: _________________________________________
Term: Fall. 2017
- To develop an understanding of key environmental issues in the
Year 2 context of building design.
- To examine and explore the factors which collectively lead to
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio the design of relevant and appropriate thermal, atmospheric and
ARCH 513 ESAC I luminous environments for different building types.
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II - To understand the impact of climate on the design of buildings
ARCH 568 Research Methods and understand how buildings provide environmental control.
- To develop an understanding of how to critique the
Student Performance Criteria environmental control systems of buildings, and to be able to
A5, A6, B4, B8, B9, B10, B11, C2, D2 formulate an appropriate environmental strategy for a building and
integrate it within the broader context of architectural design.
- To be conversant with the various specific techniques available to
Course Description architects which enable control of the environment in and around
_________________________________________
buildings and understand the potential of environmental factors to
This introductory course examines the role of the architect act as generators of architectural form.
and other design consultants in assuring appropriate thermal,
atmospheric and luminous conditions within and around buildings.
It will identify key environmental issues across a range of building Requirements
_________________________________________
types, with a strong emphasis placed on those related to green
design. The course provides a conceptual and theoretical basis Throughout the term there will be three assignments, two
for the subsequent environmental control course, ARCH 533: undertaken in groups and a third individually. Each assignment
Environmental Systems and Controls II. broadly tests students comprehension of one of the the three main
tranches of the course’s curriculum: principles of heat transfer
The following specific issues will be addressed throughout and site climate analysis, fundamentals of passive environmental
the course: systems and control, and case study analysis. The “principles”
assignment involves a climate analysis of a North American
- The key issues related to the environmental controls in buildings location. The “fundamentals” assignment extends the case study
-The key climatic factors affecting building environmental and asks students to propose passive environmental systems and
performance controls for a program’s thermal and daylight requirements. The
- The performance and architectural opportunities of various solar “case studies” assignment asks students to propose, science-
control strategies informed passive design alterations to an existing space(s) on UBC
- Traditional and reflective daylighting strategies campus. These course assignments will be supplemented by a
- Thermal mass and passive solar heating final exam.
- Natural ventilation strategies – wind-driven, stack and solar-
enhanced stack ventilation. The course will be marked based on the following distribution:
Course
“Principles” assignment 15%
Issues directly related to the derivation of R-Values/U-Values of “Fundamentals” assignment 20%
building elements and the energy analysis of buildings not covered “Case studies” assignment 30%
in this course since these are covered in ARCH 511: Technology 1 Final exam 30%
and ARCH 533: Environmental Systems and Controls II respectively. Participation 5%

ARCH 515: Design Media I
________________________________
DM1 is an introductory course, one that emphasizes breadth
rather than depth of exposure to the various conceptual
and technical skills covered, with a focus on producing two-
Credits: 3
Type: Core dimensional representations of three- and four-dimensional
Faculty: Lőrinc Vass objects and processes. The key focus of the course lies in the
Prerequisites: problematics of how scale affects representations of the built
Term: Fall. 2017
environment (understood here as encompassing both landscape
and architecture, softscape and hardscape, indoor and outdoor
Year 1
space, living and inert material, etc.); the ways our increasingly
ARCH 500 Elements Studio digital tools exacerbate this problem; and the ways such tools
ARCH 504 Architectural History I might be harnessed as catalysts towards accurate, critical, and
Fall
ARCH 512 Structures I inventive spatial production. Through lectures, skills tutorials, and
ARCH 515 Design Media I exercises, students will learn about communicating idea through
choice of media and technique, concerning questions such as what
Student Performance Criteria to draw and what to edit out, what an appropriate drawing type or
A1, A3, B1 point of view might be, the signifying function of line weights and
types, how a page is composed, etc. This emphasis on a range of
fundamental concepts, skills, and techniques is intended to
allow students to acquire the necessary foundation for pursuing
Course Description more specialized interests in their subsequent study,
_________________________________________
research, and practice.
Designers of the built environment including architects, landscape
architects, urban and environmental designers, draw on a range
of tools, techniques, and media to observe, describe, analyze,
Learning Objectives
and synthesize knowledge about our natural and anthropogenic _________________________________________
environments, and in turn to speculate on, intervene in, and
To develop:
generate new environments. Such media include analog and digital
—sketching and freehand drawing abilities;
representations, such as drawings and models, as well as time-
—the ability to effectively communicate ideas and intentions
based media, material and computational simulations, etc. As
through non-verbal, graphic media;
forms of visual and graphic communication, the use of these media
—the ability to effectively communicate three-dimensional form
are guided by rules, conventions, and best practices. On the one
and space in two dimensions;
hand, they are contingent on subject matter, context, audience,
—the ability to use basic projection types (orthographic,
and intent. On the other hand, the choice and application of media
axonometric, oblique and perspective) and an understanding of
influences the nature and outcome of the process of design itself.
their geometric logic;
—the ability to integrate manual and digital media, including
Design Media 1 (DM1) is the first course in the SALA media
raster- and vector-based content;
sequence that introduces the basic manual and digital tools,
—the ability to deploy descriptive, analytic, and speculative
techniques and graphic conventions that are an essential part of
content through the appropriate graphic means;
the design process used by architects and landscape architects.
—an understanding of the basic historical problems, concepts
Taught jointly by faculty representing both graduate degree
and principles of architectural and landscape architectural
programs at SALA, DM1 provides students with the opportunity to
representation.
gain an understanding basic practical knowledge of architecture
and landscape architecture’s shared and distinct practices with
DESIGN MEDIA TECHNIQUES
respect to using design media. This cross-disciplinary approach
- Concept and Idea Sketching (Hand Sketching, Montage, and
aims to equip students with the ability to operate and collaborate
Sketch Modeling)
within today’s expanded field of spatial design practices, across
- Plane Projections (Plan, Section, and Elevation)
subject matter, scale, media, and technique.
- Central and Parallel Projections (Perspective, Axonometric and

Isometric)
- Diagrams (Analytical, Organizational, Relational) Students are expected to be consistently productive, self-directed,
- Presentation (Composition and Layout, Typography, Graphics, inventive and precise. Each of the six exercise modules will account
Labeling) for 12% of the final grade. At the end of each exercise, your work
will be collected and provisionally evaluated using a five-point
DESIGN DRAWING CONVENTIONS grading system: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Needs to Improve,
- Two Dimensional Drawing Poor. The evaluation will keep you informed of your standing, and
- Basic Computer Graphics and Rendering the work will be returned to you at the completion of the next ex-
- Graphic Communications ercise. You will have the opportunity at the end of the term to up-
- Basic Laser Cutting date/revise/complete past exercises and integrate them into your
final portfolio, which will be worth 12%. Class participation and
DESIGN MEDIA CONCEPTS attendance, effort and arc of improvement will account for the
- Understanding of drawing conventions remaining 16% of final grade.
- Ability to use media operatively
- Ability to use media appropriately Your final grade will be determined at the end of the term by
- Understanding the difference between synthetic and review of your final portfolio submission. If you have questions or
analytic drawing problems that cannot be discussed during regular class meeting
- Ability to clearly represent and present form and content times, you are encouraged to make an appointment with
graphically the instructors or one of your TAs. At any point in the term, stu-
dents with unsatisfactory progress will receive a letter of concern
with recommendations for improved performance.
Requirements
_________________________________________ Attendance during class times is mandatory. Accumulation of more
than three unexcused absences from class will constitute grounds
The organization of DM1 is intended to sponsor a lively culture of for failing the course.
inquiry and engagement with the history, theories, and material
of design media. The rhythm of lectures, labs and pinups provides
several complementary ways to learn: the more passive lecture/
tutorial; the interactive desk crits; and the necessity of being a
sponge in the “learn from your peers” experience of the group pin-
up. The labs, along with the optional evening and weekend TA
labs should foster an atmosphere of consistent production, peer
and instructor engagement, and cross-fertilization between
students. Please learn to be an active listener and questioner, and
don’t be afraid to imitate successes of others through appropria-
tion of technique, styles, organizational strategies, etc.
You are required to keep a sketchbook as a way to develop the es-

sential habit of quickly studying certain possibilities and problems
of design, composition. You are also required to integrate the key
sketches from your process into each exercise presentation. Your
sketchbook, and perhaps a software/app counterpart like Paper
should be your constant companion, and should be used at desk
crits to provide evidence of consistent exploration of your work
You are also encouraged to develop a habit of browsing and study-
ing examples of architectural and landscape architectural drawings
in print and online (see the Bibilography), as well as the work of
your colleagues at SALA.

ARCH 517: Design Media II
________________________________
instructional work sessions.
Block 1
Credits: 3
Type: Core (Jan 4-Jan 27)
Faculty: Blair Satterfield - Rhino 1 (Stuart Lodge)
Instructors: Mike Barton, Dave Flanders, Jessyca Fan, - Rhino 1 (Lőrinc Vass )
Stuart Lodge, Lőrinc Vass
Prerequisites: Design Media I - Animation (Mike Barton)
Term: Spring. 2017 - G.I.S. (Dave Flanders)
Year 1 Block 2
ARCH 501 Vertical Studio 1 (Jan 30 - March 1)
ARCH 505 Architectural History II - Actuated Media (Mike Barton)
Spring - Rhino 1 (Lőrinc Vass)
ARCH 517 Design Media II - Rhino 2 (Jessyca Fan)
- Grasshopper 1 (Stuart Lodge)

Block 3
A1, A3, A5, A6, A9, B1, B2 (March 6-April 3)
- Immersive Media
- Diagram/Adv. Illustrator (Lőrinc Vass)
- Rhino 2 (Jessyca Fan)
Course Description
_________________________________________ - Grasshopper 2 (Stuart Lodge)
Design Media II (DM2) is the second course in the SALA media

Each student chooses 1 module to undertake for each block.
sequence.
Curating their own way though Design Media II.
The focus of DM2 centers on specific software and media used

for generating and representing design content. Emphasis will be
placed on industry standard software suites (Rhino, Grasshopper, Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
G.I.S., Adobe CS Flash, AutoCAD, etc.) and select 3D digital output
devices. Specifically, the course will explore how and when to best In 2013 the SALA Faculty asked for a substantial redesign of
utilize these programs and tools in the generation of design work. the second course in the Design Media sequence. The decision
was made to deliver course content through a series of focused
The mastery of any software suite takes time, rigor and repetition. modules and to expand the class to include Landscape Architecture
This class is designed to help students better understand the (MLA) and Environmental Design (ENDS) Students. The course is
logics, potentials and limitations of each software package and evolving and has grown to address the following objectives.
hardware package. The goal is to build enough familiarity with
production software (and some output equipment) to allow - Provide training in the means, methods and use of select design
student to use them in their own design work, and in doing, to software.
further develop their own skills and methods. The instructors and - Provide training in the means, methods and use of select
teaching assistants will work to communicate the basic structure digital tools.
and organization of each program and tool set. Issues ranging - Provide training in the means, methods and use of select analog
from input and workflow to output will be discussed. Efforts will media techniques.
also be made to situate this work in a broader discourse of digital - Establish a shared baseline understanding of techniques and
production in design. strategies for the use of digital tools and design media for all
SALA students.
The course is divided into 4 blocks and 4 modules. Each module - Foster a shared media culture at SALA.
will be taught as short exercises supported with lectures and - Offer a more choice and targeted media exposure.

- Where possible, allow students to tailor their own media
experience within the DM sequence.
- Provide enough long-term flexibility within the course to adjust to
shifting trends in media use.
- Provide enough capacity within the course to accommodate
MArch, MLA, and ENDS students.
- Give students more strategies for success in the future.
Media is changing at a rapid pace. It is no longer possible to gain

life-long “expertise” in a given tool set. Successful professionals
will intend to provide a foundational understanding of some of
the media designers use in practice. It is also structured to give
students techniques and strategies for engaging new software and
hardware throughout their professional careers.
Requirements
_________________________________________
Students will be evaluated and graded on four criteria (listed
below). More specific requirements will be provided in each
individual module:
1. Complexity of ideas, depth of analysis, quality of production

2. Attendance, participation
3. Work habits, progress
4. Projects
A grade will be provided for each module. The final grade

will be determined by averaging grades from each of three
selected modules.

ARCH 521: Conceptualizing the ecology in which automobiles, planes, trains, and helicopters
connect Vancouver to sites within the immediate region and
Technical: Local Air Transport Centre
________________________________ locations across the globe. The site is intense with local specificity
but is a portal to other locations. The river and its banks are also
Credits: 9
increasingly the site of recreational leisure activities, from cycling
Type: Core
Faculty: Joanne Gates, Bill Pechet, Matthew Soules and jogging to rowing and boating. Together, these characteristics
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design render the site a location that is in constant flux: water flows, birds
ARCH 501: Vertical Studio glide and floatplanes buzz. At the same time, it is also a place of
Term: Spring. 2017
stasis: people sleep, passengers wait, and places get serviced.
Year 2
In considering the program for the Local Air Transport Centre,
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Studio the variety of constituencies served by the facility provides an
ARCH 523 Contemporary Theories important point of departure in establishing a sense of cultural
Spring
ARCH 532 Structures II priority for the project. While an array of specific necessities and
ARCH 533 ESAC II associated dimensions will be provided as a kind of forensic carcass
of a programmed, teams will need to bring to this document a
Student Performance Criteria emerging sense of character and spirit of the proposed facility.
How can such a facility not only acknowledge but also actively
A5, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, C1, C2, C3, C4, D3
participate in changing ideas about dynamic systems? What kinds
of experiences can be forged to produce a lively and engaging
location? And – of course – what is the role of architecture in
Course Description both facilitating this experience while inevitably providing its
_________________________________________ form of expression? As well, the variegated program suggests
The studio will focus on conceptualizing technical material in the development of a lexicon of environmental control and
the design process. You will be asked to think, quite directly, visual exposure.
about how ideas are embodied in or conveyed by the technical
systems and materials used to accommodate necessity. The
program is a new facility centered around floatplane travel on
Learning Objectives
Sea Island in Richmond, BC. The building is made up of a wide _________________________________________
range of programmatic elements that serve the logistics of plane
The main objective of the studio is to explore integrated design
transportation – from ticketing and check-in to fueling and repair.
thinking as applied to architecture. The studio will expect you to:
In addition – ancillary or not – is an array of administrative and
- Identify, explore and transform specific formal and programmatic
support functions as well as a restaurant and hotel.
precedents that help to situate your proposal within an argument
about a contemporary transportation facility in general and the
If the aggregate of these spaces establishes the expressive
new building on Sea Island in particular
character of the building, the specific inflection of structure,
- Identify and explore technical systems and develop their
tempered environment and spatial logic describe the specific
relationships with spatial, organizational and experiential agendas
geography and culture of the facility.
- Understand the relationships between an architectural agenda
and its development through building materials and systems
Both site and program for this studio have the capacity to carry
- Demonstrate the ability to imbue ideas of the above along a
a significant formal and conceptual agenda. Situated on Sea
continuum of scales from landscape setting to building to material
Island, on the banks of the Fraser River, the site is at the nexus of
assembly and furnishing.
a complex series of dynamic systems. The river, with its seasonal
changes, fluctuating hydrology, and estuary ecology support a
From a practical point of view, this studio will focus on a single
range of avian and marine life that offers a powerful opportunity to
building design, recursively explored and carefully developed for
examine architectures relationship with non-human life-forms and
the duration of the term. You will be working in collaborative teams
systems. At the same time, Sea Island sits within a complex human
of two. The opportunities that this partnership provides include

new ways to communicate and compromise, sharpen and clarify, Development of the architecture of integrated technical and
brainstorm and bounce ideas off, meet deadlines and coordinate cultural ideas. 50%
work. You will also have the opportunity to develop your interim
project in some detail individually. Collaborative engagement and timely fulfillment of studio
obligations. 20%
The course is also coordinated with assignments in ARCH 533:
Environmental Systems and Controls II (ESAC 2) and ARCH 532: Depth and clarity of participation in studio discussions
Structures II. You will be calculating the energy supply and demand and work. 10%
loading for your projects through assignments in ESAC 2 and
developing and refining your structural system through work in
Structures II. This work will begin soon after the start of the studio,
and develop as an inherent part of each team’s project. Professors
Joe Dahmen (ESAC 2) and Monplaisir (Structures II) will contribute
to ongoing project development, with their expertise amplified by
a varied set of presentations by specialist professionals through the
course of the term.
Requirements
_________________________________________
From a practical point of view, this studio will focus on a single
building design, recursively explored and carefully developed for
the duration of the term. You will be working in collaborative teams
of two. The opportunities that this partnership provides include
new ways to communicate and compromise, sharpen and clarify,
brainstorm and bounce ideas off, meet deadlines and coordinate
work. You will also have the opportunity to develop your interim
project in some detail individually following Spring Break.
The course is also coordinated with assignments in Environmental
Controls and Structures. You will be calculating the energy supply
and demand loading for your projects through assignments in
EC and developing and refining your structural system through
work in Structures. This work will begin soon after the start of the
studio, and develop as an inherent part of each team’s project.
Professors Dahmen and Monplaisir will contribute to ongoing
project development, with their expertise amplified by a varied
set of presentations by specialist professionals through the course
of the term.
Your work will be graded for both scope and rigor in studio
projects, and for your ability to successfully collaborate and
participate in class meetings. Your work should show initiative in
self-directed research to support and extend your inquiries. Grades
will be assigned as follows:
Quality of the spatial idea that organizes site and program. 20%

ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories in Requirements
_________________________________________
Architecture
________________________________
Students will be graded according to the following breakdown:
Credits: 3
Type: Core
Faculty: Sherry McKay Class presentation and example 10%
Prerequisites: ARCH 505: Architectural History II A 1000 word reflective essay 20%
Term: Spring. 2017 A 1000 word observed and theorized essay 20%
A 2000 word synthetic theoretical essay 40%
Year 2 Class Participation 10%
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Studio
Spring
ARCH 532 Structures II
ARCH 533 ESAC II
A1, A2, A4, A5, A7, A8, A9, D2
Course Description
_________________________________________
This lecture-and-seminar course looks at a specific set of
contemporary theoretical and historical propositions. It seeks to
foster a dialogue between theory and practice. The course also
aims to develop analytical and critical skills via focused discussion
and varied writing venues. Discussion will be facilitated by small
break out group and commentary sessions. The intention of the
course is to afford the intellectual context and framework by which
you might begin to position your architectural ambitions.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Writing venues include: two short trenchant papers, and a
lengthier, more developed and synthetic research essay. The
objective is not only to explore a relevant body of writing and work
but to also develop skills in relating theoretical investigation to its
embodiment in built form and space.

ARCH 531: Architectural Technology II durability & weatherproofing, moisture dimensional changes.
________________________________
Masonry Construction
History & development, fired & unfired clay units, concrete unit
Credits: 3
masonry elements, loadbearing & veneer masonry systems, design
Type: Core
Faculty: Greg Johnson of highly modular construction systems, reinforcing, building
Prerequisites: ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I enclosure issues of masonry buildings
Term: Fall. 2017
Concrete Construction
Year 2
History & development, reinforcement, concrete forming, cast-in-
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio place, pre-cast systems, tilt-up, pre- and post-tensioned systems,
ARCH 513 ESAC I exposed concrete weatherproofing, finishing & detailing.
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II
ARCH 568 Research Methods Building Foundation Systems
Shallow & deep foundations, spread footings, piles & caissons,
foundation drainage.
A3, A5, B1, B4, B6, B8, B10 B11, C1, C2, C3 Facade & Cladding Systems
Metal panels, terra cotta, stone, concrete, plastics,
attachment methods.
Course Description
_________________________________________ Glazing Systems
Glazing characteristics, punched windows, curtain, storefront &
Architectural Technology 1 (ARCH 511) and 2 (ARCH 531)
window wall systems, structural glazing
investigate principles and methods of construction, building
materials, and construction systems – including properties,
Interior Finish Systems
application and performance – in the context of architectural
Suspended ceiling systems, wet & dry gypsum systems, paneling.
design, environmental conditions, historical context, regulatory
controls, sustainability, and economic constraints.
Acoustics
In ARCH 531, the principles of building science, construction
Acoustic principles, sound control & spatial acoustics
materials/systems and the technical issues of design will be applied
to the major construction types – solid/mass wood, steel, masonry
and concrete – throughout the term. A module on architectural
acoustics is also included. Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Construction Tolerances & Building Movement Upon completing the course, students should have familiarity
Manufacturing variations, movement due to thermal, moisture, with the major construction types: mass wood, steel, concrete,
seismic issues, settlement, wind & snow loads, construction masonry. They should be able to design (and draw in 2D and 3D)
tolerances. full enclosures using a variety of interior and exterior cladding
systems, ensuring a high level of technical performance.
Steel Construction Students should be able to demonstrate an understanding of
History & development of steel construction, steel frame, steel basic acoustic principles, and apply them to issues of sound
properties & profiles, connection methods, architectural exposed control within buildings. They should also be able to recognize the
structural steel (AESS), light steel framing. importance of room size, shape, and interior surface materials to
controlling the acoustic qualities of a space.
Mass/Solid/Tall Wood Construction
History & development of tall (mass) wood construction using
engineered wood products, fastening techniques, fire protection,

Requirements
_________________________________________
Exercises typical of the type of those found on the examinations
will be undertaken together during class time in order to
understand concepts. These exercises will not be graded, but
answers will be posted on Connect.
Individual and group assignments will be assigned on a regular

basis, and are to be submitted by class time on the date indicated.
Submissions should be in hard copy format, clear and well
organized, and accompanied by an electronic pdf version. Any
photographs, drawings or referenced material used must have
their sources clearly identified.
Assignments (individual & group) 70%

Final exam (laptop + open book) 30%

ARCH 532: Structures II
________________________________
satisfactory seismic behavior.
- Understand structural strategies and rules of thumb for the
Credits: 3 design of high-rises.

Type: Core - Become familiar with engineering terminology in order to
Faculty: Jean Dières-Monplaisir efficiently communicate with structural consultants.
Prerequisites: ARCH 512: Structures I
Term: Spring. 2017
Year 2 Requirements
_________________________________________
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Studio
ARCH 521 Contemporary Theories A final grade of at least 60% is required on the final exam in order to
Spring
ARCH 532 Structures II pass the course. The grading will take place as follows:
ARCH 533 ESAC II
Final Exam: 45%
Exercises: 30%
Fast+Epp competition: 15%
A5, B1, B6, B7, B11, C1, C2, C4
Comprehensive Design studio assignment: 10%
Course Description
_________________________________________
Using the basic principles established in Architectural Structures I,
this course expands the agenda from simple statically determined
single-span structures into more complex multi-span and
continuous systems. Advantages of continuous systems and
effective material configuration are discussed and compared
quantitatively. Simplified methods of analysis are used for steel and
concrete systems sizing. Selection of appropriate structural systems
as well as understanding the implications of building configuration
on earthquake performance are emphasized. Structural
consideration for the design of high-rises are introduced.
Fundamental concepts of design following current engineering
practices will be taught with engineering terminology in order that
the students can effectively communicate with their structural
engineers when they enter practice.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
- To develop an understanding of conventional structural systems
and how their selection is impacted by architectural constraints
- To become familiar with both steel and concrete structural system
layout strategies.
- Understand how structural analysis considerations, such as
continuity and fixity, can help architects in strategically deploying
of a structural system to minimize material use.
- Understand how basic design steps can be taken to insure

ARCH 533: Environmental Systems design assignments. Readings and student presentations will
supplement course lectures. ARCH 533, Environmental Controls II is
and Controls II
________________________________ a companion course to ARCH 513, Environmental Controls I, which
is a prerequisite. A collaborative design project in which teams of
Credits: 3
students will research and propose environmental control systems
Type: Core
Faculty: Joe Dahmen for studio projects will be integrated with the Comprehensive
Prerequisites: ARCH 513: Environmental Systems and Design Studio offered concurrently. However, enrollment in the
Controls I Comprehensive Design Studio is not a prerequisite for the course.
Term: Spring. 2017
Year 2
Learning Objectives
ARCH 521 Comprehensive Studio _________________________________________
Spring
ARCH 532 Structures II By the end of this course, students will be able to
ARCH 533 ESAC II - Identify and estimate the major sources of energy flows
in buildings
- Explain the modes of thermodynamic transfer in buildings
- Display a holistic understanding of the major functions of passive
A6, B1, B4, B8, B10, C2, C4, D2 and active environmental control systems
- Evaluate the performance of different environmental control
system strategies from the perspectives of inhabitant experience,
architectural form, functionality, and energy use
Course Description
_________________________________________ - Provide direction to specialized consultants collaborating on the
design of environmental systems
Architects direct the flow of a substantial amount of energy.
The residential sector accounts for one quarter of global energy
demand, while the built fabric is responsible for close to half of the
total energy consumed annually in Canada. Energy consumption by Requirements
_________________________________________
buildings causes major impacts on the natural environment, and
the performance of environmental control systems is intricately Final grades will be based on the following:
tied to the ecological and haptic performance of buildings.
Environmental Systems and Controls II will prepare architects for Assignments 20%
21st century practice by considering the functions and design Design Project A 20%
implications of the strategies and technologies that control interior Midterm Exam 20%
environments. From a design perspective, energy and interior Design Project B 20%
environments offer opportunities at the intersection of form and Participation and attendance 10%
energy. This course will seek to understand the physical processes
underlying the flow of energy in and through buildings, and
the passive and active technologies available to contemporary
architects.
Environmental Systems and Controls II will investigate state of the

art of building systems to control interior environments as well
as the technologies likely to become available to architects in the
future. The course will also consider the history of contemporary
techniques to better understand their function and evolution. The
course is modeled on the current mode of architectural practice,
with lectures from expert consultants, site visits, and collaborative

ARCH 541: Professional Practice Requirements
________________________________ _________________________________________
- Attendance 20%
Credits: 3 - Mid-term take-home test: The mid-term test focuses on
Type: Core
understanding and interpretation of the CCDC2 standard form of
Faculty: Cynthia Girling, Nicholas Paczkowski
Prerequisites: Construction Contract. This will be an open book test conducted
Term: Fall. 2017 during Reading Week. 40%
- Field Review Report: Students will arrange to attend a Field
Year 3 Review with their Mentor or another registered professional. The
ARCH 540 Vertical Studio intent is to gain experience with conducting a Field Review and
ARCH 541 Professional Practice writing a mock report of that review. 20%
Fall
ARCH 551 Communicating Construction - The Debates (group project): Teams of students will debates
Elective* opposing positions relative to ethical dilemmas posed as
scenarios. 20%
B6, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6
Course Description
_________________________________________
This professional practice course will introduce the ethical,
regulatory and administrative issues encountered in practice. In the
course we will discuss the meaning and responsibilities of being
a professional and will overview the regulation of Architecture
& Landscape Architecture in British Columbia. We will cover the
importance and critical role of contracts and contract documents
in the design/construction process, liability issues associated with
practice, and aspects of the business of architecture/landscape
architecture.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
- Know what it means to be a licensed professional, the mandates,
responsibilities and liabilities.
- Understand the regulatory context of practice relative to health
safety welfare.
- Understand professional ethics in architecture and landscape
architecture.
- Understand professional registration in British Columbia.
- Understand professional liability and how to manage risk.
- Learn about contract law as it relates to the practice of the
professions.
- Learn the scope and responsibilities of prime and sub-consultants
in contract administration.

ARCH 543: Contemporary Practice Requirements
_________________________________________
________________________________
1. Architectural practice research presentation (40%): interrogation
Credits: 9 of a current architectural practice, analyzing and critiquing its field

Type: Core of operation, methodology and organization.
Faculty: Inge Roecker
Prerequisites: ARCH 541: Professional Practice
A list of practices will be provided to choose from, work will be
Term: Spring. 2017
done in groups of two.
Year 3
2. Reading responses (20%) 200 word summary and response to
ARCH 548 Graduate Project Part I
assigned readings to be completed individually, and inn advance of
Spring class as preparation for discussion.
*Elective
*Elective
3. Tour Responses(20%) 200 word summery and response to
architectural practice tours to be completed individually, as
Student Performance Criteria preparation for class discussion.
A1, A2, A6, A7, A9, B12, D1, D2. D5
4. Attendance and Participation (20%)
Course Description
_________________________________________
The architectural profession opportunistically defines itself in
ways that are both supportive and contradictory to its agenda(s).
Despite generations of practice and discourse, the definition
of architectural practice remains in flux. Architects are eagerly
defining opportunities for new kinds of design outcomes-
expanding engagement with the built environment, the territory
of architecture and the role of the architect. The course delivery
will be in form of lectures and guest presenters, students
presentations, office visits and class discussions.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
The focus of the seminar will be to frame, clarify and question
the evolving identity of the architectural profession. The course
objective is to introduce students to the possibility and diversity
of architectural practice at present in traditional but also non-
traditional fields. The focus is on exploring emerging modes and
processes of architectural production. Students will explore both
local and international practices to learn about pertinent issues in
the contemporary practice of architecture. Topics include finding
/generating work, working(studio/office) structures, expertise/
collaboration, methods of production, and branding.

ARCH 551: Communicating 2. Early summer term meeting 3 times per week for 3 hours over 4
weeks during the month of May.
Construction
________________________________
Course will include the following activities:
Credits: 3
- Instructor-led presentations and discussions
Type: Core
Faculty: Greg Johnson - Review of precedent example projects
Prerequisites: ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I, ARCH - Completion of exercises
512: Structures I - Development & presentation of individual design projects
Term: Fall. 2017
Year 3
Learning Objectives
ARCH 540 Vertical Studio _________________________________________
ARCH 541 Professional Practice
Fall This course will strive to fulfill the following learning objectives:
ARCH 551 Communicating Construction
Elective*
1. To understand the requirements and organization of the
documentation necessary for construction communication,
Student Performance Criteria through review of precedent examples and exercises, including:
A3, B1, B4, B5, B6, B8, B9, B10, B11, C1, C2, C3, C4, D3, D4, D5 - Relationship of technical specifications, working drawings and
contracts
- Understanding the various graphic projections and drawing
conventions typically used for construction drawings
Course Description - Developing an understanding of how construction drawings are
_________________________________________
developed (“building the drawings”)
One of the critical roles of the architect is to communicate to those - Developing familiarity with the use of 2D CAD applications
involved in the construction of a building the information necessary and their relationship to 3D models, including the structure and
to fulfill the intent of the conceptual design. This requires a good organization of electronic file systems
understanding of materials, the trades involved, and the processes
which lead to the complex assemblies of today’s buildings. 2. To understand the process of refining and elaborating a
preliminary design (traditionally known as the design development
Communication of such information has traditionally been phase) in preparation for construction, including:
undertaken through the means of construction documents, the - Understanding the integration of the major systems in a building:
large majority of them prepared by the architect. Although this site, structure, enclosure, finishes & furnishings, services
communication vehicle may ultimately be replaced by a more - Understanding the role of the architect in the coordination of
intelligent electronic one, presently it comprises electronically- disciplines during design and construction: site development,
produced working drawings and technical specifications, each structural, enclosure, plumbing, heating/ventilation, fire
of which possess unique characteristics and conventions which protection, electrical power, lighting, data, security, interior
have been developed over a long period of time to aid in the finishes, furnishings
transmission of such specialized information. - Understanding the role of building codes, bylaws and standards in
the design of a building (occupant safety, community development,
This required course will familiarize the student with essentials building form, quality control)
of construction documentation through reviewing precedents, - Establishment of 2D and 3D reference systems for spatial
discussing the various components, and producing documents for a organization and coordination of building systems
student-designed term project. - Integration and performance of construction materials
Offered in two terms in different course formats: (performance, cost-efficiency, durability, weathering, building
movement, etc.)
1. Fall term, meeting once a week for 3 hours, and

Requirements
_________________________________________
A number of short exercises will be undertaken early in the course
to familiarize students with the aspects of drawing clarity.
Students will undertake an individual design project based on

given criteria. Through regular assignments, the construction
documentation (drawings & technical specifications) for the project
will be progressively developed. Refer to Design Project document
for more details.
Course evaluation will be based approximately on the following:
Course attendance & participation 20%

Floor plan exercise 20%
Design project 60%

ARCH 568: Research Methods course concerns as stated in the learning objectives above and
________________________________ summarized as follows:
- Questions pertaining to the research paradigm the article

Credits: 3
falls under.
Type: Core
Faculty: Matthew Soules - Questions pertaining to specific methodological choices made by
Prerequisites: the author.
Term: Fall. 2017 - Questions about how this particular approach can help you make
decisions about design decisions.
Year 2
- Questions about how the methodology and the information can
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio be understood in relation to formal outcomes or design strategies.
ARCH 513 ESAC I
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II Questions need only be one or two sentences long. No more
ARCH 568 Research Methods than 150 words. One question per reading. They must be brought
to class printed. Questions will be handed in to the instructor
at the end of the seminar and will form part of the ‘class
participation grade.’
A1, A2, A4, A6, A7, A8, B12
Requirements
Course Description _________________________________________
_________________________________________
Class Participation 15%
The general objective of the course is to make us effective Assignment 1: Commentary and Thesis Statement 10%
researchers. It seeks to introduce the basic components of good Assignment 2: Bibliography and Article Review 10%
research design: a sound methodology, secured by cogent research Assignment 3: Research Proposal – Short 10%
strategies and pertinent tactics based upon an appropriate Assignment 4: Case Study 10%
literature review and clear assessment of the available data. It Assignment 5: Presentation of Research 15%
is the underlying premise of this course that research involves Assignment 6: Research Booklet 30%
imagination and creativity as well as logical argumentation and a
careful understanding of the multiple information sources available
and their framing by pertinent disciplines. The more specific
objective of the course is to produce a body of clearly conceived
research with its attendant strategies, tactics and literature review.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Readings are to be read before each class. Each week, students will
prepare one question for each one of the readings. The question
should be designed to foster discussion around the course topic
(e.g. by questioning fundamental assumptions of the author or
clarifications.) These questions will form the basis of the seminar
discussion. These questions are not “test” questions, designed
to test if you read the reading. They are “seminar” questions,
designed to provoke discussion, and in particular, to stimulate
an understanding of how the reading is relevant to the core

4.3.2 Elective Courses
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studios

Housing Builds the City................................................................................................................. 233
Naming and Claiming................................................................................................................... 234
Retail Therapy 225
Timber Tech.................................................................................................................................. 238
Towards a More Responsive Tower........................................................................................................... 240
Wallflower Architectures.............................................................................................................. 242
ARCH 538A: [Grid, Zone, and] Field Studies........................................................................................................... 244
ARCH 538B: Infrastructures of Incrementality....................................................................................................... 245
ARCH 538D: Cityspace, Livingspace, Waterspace................................................................................................... 246
ARCH 538E: Stockholm S, M, L, XL.......................................................................................................................... 247
ARCH 538F: Stockholm Through the Lens.............................................................................................................. 248
ARCH 539: Convivial City Chandigarh..................................................................................................................... 249
ARCH 544X: Design Build I...................................................................................................................................... 250
ARCH 544Y: Design Build II..................................................................................................................................... 251
ARCH 561J: Green Cities - Capitalism, Urbanism and Environmentalism............................................................... 252
ARCH 573D: Regenerative Development & Design................................................................................................ 253
ARCH 577A: Design Media III.................................................................................................................................. 255
ARCH 577B: Architectural Production and Autodesk Revit.................................................................................... 257

ARCH 520: Housing Builds the of four – groups to be self selected. The intent of including
collaborative group work is to acknowledge this as the paradigm
City Studio
________________________________ of current practice and also to accelerate the capacity to
describe projects at both urban and very detailed local scales: ie.
Credits: 9
detailed façade and furnishing designs alongside massing and
Type: Elective
Faculty: Chris Macdonald logistical diagrams.
Term: Fall. 2017
Learning Objectives
Year 2 _________________________________________
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio While the studio deliberately embraces the sometimes perplexing
ARCH 513 ESAC I realities of architectural practice in Vancouver, the intent is to
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II at all times probe, question and challenge the status quo. As in
ARCH 568 Research Methods past collaborative studios that have been run alongside practice,
we believe that the important wisdom and advice coming from
Student Performance Criteria that arena may be constructively mirrored with inspirational and
A5, A6, A7, A9, B2, B3, C1, C2, D1, D5 alternative initiatives from within the academic milieu.
Course Description Requirements

_________________________________________ _________________________________________
While the quest for ‘affordability’ in many contemporary settings - Grading will be accounted for as follows:
including Vancouver - may be tossed by the forces of land values,
foreign capital movement and government policy, it is surely Unit Study 10%
necessary to cultivate the ability to create meaningful expressions Granville Street 30%
of domestic life and understand their important contribution to our Case Studies 10%
collective urban identity. West Hastings 50%
This vertical design studio will take up this challenge, working Written notes will accompany each stage of the project and we will
collaboratively with Gair Williamson Architects - http://www. conclude with exit interviews.
gwarchitects.ca/ -and absorbing the practice’s well established
excellence in this realm. We will be working at a full range of
scales from individual unit design through to urban design and
‘shadowing’ two current projects in the GWA portfolio.
Following a visit to two contemporary projects in Chinatown - one

nearing completion by Gair Williamson Architects and one recently
completed by SALA faculty Inge Roecker - we will undertake a one
week charrette exploring the realities of current standards for
modest rental units in Vancouver. This will be followed by a four
week project for a constricted site at 1182 Granville Street, to be
undertaken in teams of two – assigned by the instructor. Having
discovered something of the problematics of urban housing, we
will take a moment to prepare Case Studies – individually. Finally,
there will be a ten week long project for a more substantial and
complex site at 95 West Hastings Street, undertaken by groups

ARCH 520: Naming and Claiming Studio
________________________________
despite the desire of the museum to see it repatriated. For our
purposes, we will assume that a successful outcome to repatriation
negotiations will be reached in the future -- that the shrine will
return to the Yuquot National Historic Site – and to Nuu-Chah-
Credits: 9
Nulth traditional territory – where it will need a home.
Type: Elective
Faculty: John Bass
Term: Fall. 2017
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Year 2
As is the case of many studios, it is expected that you will be able
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio to successfully synthesize a project well-developed at several scales
ARCH 513 ESAC I from the many spatial and non-spatical, physical and non-physical,
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II 3D and 4D factors informing design.
ARCH 568 Research Methods
You are expected to demonstrate an high degree of knowledge and

Student Performance Criteria control of the following Performance Criteria that are part of the
A5, A6, A7, B2, B3, B4, B5, B8, B9, B11, D1, D2 education of an architect:
Cultural Diversity. Understanding of the diverse needs, values,

behavioral norms, and social/spatial patterns that characterize
Course Description different cultures and individuals, as well as the implications of this
_________________________________________
diversity on the societal roles and responsibilities of architects.
Amongst the contentious legacies of British Columbia’s colonial
era are the thousands of artifacts and remains taken or purchased Program Preparation. Ability to assemble a comprehensive
from coastal First Nations in the 19th and 20th centuries, and program for an architecture project that accounts for client
demands that these be repatriated as part of the process of and user needs, appropriate precedents, space and equipment
national reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous people the requirements, the relevant laws and standards, and site selection
Federal government has claimed it is committed to. and design assessment criteria.
In British Columbia, perhaps the most rarified of these artifacts is Site Design. Ability to analyze and respond to context and site
the Yuquot whalers’ shrine, taken from Nuu-Chah-Nulth territory conditions in the development of a program and in the design of
by ethnologist George Hunt at the behest of Franz Boas, who was a project.
chief ethnologist for the American Museum of Natural History.
This description of the shrine from Aldona Jonaitis: Sustainable Design. Ability to apply the principles of sustainable
design to produce projects that conserve natural and built
“An assemblage of 92 carved wooden figures and whales, 16 resources, provide healthy environments for occupants/users, and
human skulls, and the small building that housed them – variously reduce the impacts of building construction and operations on
identified as a burial place for great chiefs and a shrine used for future generations.
rituals associated with whale hunting – the shrine had for centuries
stood in Yuquot, or Friendly Cove, on the remote west coast of Accessibility. Understanding to design both site and building to
Vancouver Island, to be visited only by chiefs and their wives. accommodate individuals with varying physical and cognitive
Since its removal to New York, it has captured the imagination abilities.
of individuals who have represented it in anthropological and
historical writings, film, television, video, and newspapers.” Environmental Systems. Understanding of the basic principles that
inform the design of environmental systems, including acoustics,
Since it was taken in 1904, the shrine has been in storage in the illumination and climate modification systems, building envelopes,
basement of the AMNH, where for many reasons it is today, and energy use with awareness of the appropriate performance

assessment tools. for funding.
- Each of you will also identify within the work of artists Marcel
Building Envelopes. Understanding of the basic principles involved Duchamp and Robert Smithson a critical point of entry into your
in the appropriate application of building envelope systems and own work. I wish to emphasize that you are to understand the
associated assemblies relative to fundamental performance, work of both artists as historical figures, whose methods and
aesthetics, moisture transfer, durability, and energy and material arguments are in need to recasting in the context of the politics
resources. and ethical consciousness of the 21st century.
- A three-day weekend site (Sept. 22-24) visit.Though we will
Building Materials and Assemblies. Understanding of the basic visit the site, it is not yet confirmed whether we will be able to
principles utilized in the appropriate selection of construction stay overnight at the site, but the trip will involve meetings with
materials, products, and assemblies, based on their inferent community members.
characteristics and performance. - After returning from the site visit, individuals will refine their
functional programs and phasing diagrams. On Sept. 29 we
Leadership and Advocacy. Understanding of the techniques and will pinup to discuss your specific and detailed proposal for
skills for architects to work collaboratively with allied disciplines, an economic/institutional scenario complete with temporal,
clients, consultants, builders, and the public in the building design functional and technical programs.
and construction process, and to advocate on environmental,
social, and aesthetic issues in their communities. Phase Two (three weeks, 25% of grade):
The first review of site and building design work will occur on
Ethics and Professional Judgment. Understanding of the ethical October 20th. Required at the review will be a site plans and
issues involved in the formation of professional judgment sections at 1:500, schematic designs in plan and section at 1:100
regarding social, political and cultural issues in architectural design illustrating programmatic organization and key subjective and
and practice. haptic representations of individual proposals.
Development of this project will continue until the end of the term.
So it is at this stage that basic commitments will be set with regard
Requirements
_________________________________________ to conceptual and spatial strategies, materials, energy systems,
and pre- and post-fabrication logic. All of these will be evident in
The studio will be organized in three basic parts: An initial site and building schematic design organization linking the (private)
programming, inventorying, fabrication methods and technology given and (public) discretionary elements of the project.
research phase that will include a site visit and programming
exercise followed by a two-part, nine-week design phase that will Phase Three (four weeks, 25% of grade)
result in well-developed building and site designs spanning scales The second and final interim review, one focused on refinement
from 1:500 to 1:20. and development, will be on November 17th. As the scope of the
projects is modest, it is expected that projects will develop a high
Phase One (three weeks, 20% of grade): degree of resolution, including geometry and formal elaboration,
- A two-week collective research project that will inventory off- key pieces of furniture, openings, and interfaces (more on what an
grid energy options, and compile design research on digitai and “interface” is later).
material prefabrication systems.
- You will collectively inventory the artifacts of the Whalers’ Shrine, At this review you should demonstrate significant resolution
developing a graphic strategy to identify its many pieces and the of site and building vis-à-vis the design of integrated technical,
functional requirements for their storage. programmatic, spatial, material fabrication and conceptual systems
- Concurrently, individuals will begin to develop a phased functional at scales that approach 1;
and temporal program for their projects. The project scope will be Final Presentions (Dec. 4 or 5, 20% of grade)
very limited, and functional constraints that each of you will have Requirements, including drawings and models, TBD.
to work within will be set.
- Each individual’s programming will address capacity-building as The final 10% of your grade will be a measure of your arc of
well as staged development of the project and high-level scenarios improvement, conceptual ambition, effort, and colleagiality.

ARCH 520: Retail Therapy Studio
________________________________
so, walking up and down its sidewalks, one is struck by the large
amount of for lease signs and also the relatively low-density of the
buildings. The struggle of the street is under constant analysis by
the local business association, marketing agencies and city planning
Credits: 9
think-tanks. Whereas the daily pedestrian counts are very high,
Type: Elective
Faculty: Bill Pechet competition from a nearby shopping centre and a host of other
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design local and international market issues are affecting the performance
Term: Fall. 2017 of the area, rendering it melancholic. Even so, Robson is a prime
connector between the cultural/business district of downtown and
Year 2
the dense residential area of the West End and so holds immense
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio potential to capitalize on this position and serve both communities.
ARCH 513 ESAC I
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II It is common knowledge that marketing agencies, local business
ARCH 568 Research Methods associations, land-owners and city planning think tanks play
significant roles in shaping consumer environments and they use all
kinds of tactics in order to distinguish them from precincts in other
neigbourhoods or cities. Under constant review via pedestrian
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B11,
counts, postal code analysis and countless other research methods
B12, D1, D2
shopping precincts are scrutinized in order to help reinforce and/
or change them. This chicken and egg analysis is often reflective
of natural trends and is reinforced through the tools of economic
Course Description forecasting on the part of the business community and influenced
_________________________________________ by the enforcement of zoning and by-laws. This forms the very
From the beginning of urban history, spaces of commercial nature of the environmental experience of those places. Things
exchange have served not only merchantry roles within cities but like street furnishings, festival décor, signage and other such
have also been prime activators in the construction of public life. light-touch elements become adornments to communicate these
The souks, agorae, stoae, streets, arcades, malls and markets distinctiveness’s and are relatively quick-fix strategies. However, the
of both historic and contemporary provenance all carry with larger bones of space such as building scale, architectural response,
them parallel universes of activities that complement the act of landscape, pedestrian and vehicle circulation and infrastructure
shopping. These form complex social and economic ecosystems of deeply influence the persona of these precincts, and take longer
interdependency, where buying things or looking at things to buy, to change. From this and more ‘organic’ systems of evolution
becomes part of a larger act of civic engagement. these shopping environments accrue reputations as local, regional,
national, international and have their archetypal shopping avatars
This studio will look at those interdependencies by focusing on who become the ideal target demographics.
3 blocks of Vancouver’s Robson Street, from Burrard to Jervis
streets. A few decades ago, this shopping district shifted from Along with some participation from the RBA and COV planning,
providing a local/civic service role serving a more local clientele we will examine the role that urban design and densification can
with a mix of grocery stores, cafes, restaurants and clothing into play in repositioning Robson as a vital economic and public engine
being a primarily clothes-oriented strip with a retail mix similar to for the city, where both locals and visitors can find a relevant
a middle-range shopping centre. It was famously a street where set of spaces to shop and not-shop. This will involve looking at
2 Starbucks were kitty corner from each other and this fact was a precedents from around the world, forensic dissection of the
kind of symbol that it reached the status of generic….’the street economic, regulatory and circulatory systems that govern the
that was malled’, some said. current street, and then finally rethinking Robson with ambitious
and visionary designs that fold in greater density, diverse
Interestingly, today, rental rates on Robson are among the most programming, public space, revised circulation, landscape, other
expensive in North America, effectively excluding the possibility vital infrastructures and, yes, of course, shopping.
that anything but global brands can afford locate there. Even
Our class will investigate the powerful role that analysis and

visionary thinking can play in forming urban space and experience. technical studio. Integrated thinking is paramount to success on
Using a methodology focusing on experimentation and research, the projects, particularly on the clarity of understanding how
the studio will work with an iterative process of thinking/making ideas can be manifest inventively, technically, experientially and
in a way both systematic and inventive. The goal is to trigger ideas culturally. Thinking has consequences at all layers of experience;
by exploring ideas with intent, and then projecting those into form urbanistically, locally, environmentally, and socially. The projects
and space on real sites, mindful of economic models, climate and will be assessed by the design that results from this multi-leveled
cultural practice. The studio will be structured to take an urban understanding.
idea and test it at a closer-up scale in order to see how the larger
context and the immediate design response are very contingent on At midterm interviews you will receive a personal interview and
one another. verbal evaluation of your work to date. This evaluation is intended
to help you understand both what appears positive in the work
you are producing and what remains problematic. It should
Learning Objectives identify any critical issues or skills that you need to address in the
_________________________________________ remaining half of the term. The purpose of this review is not to
The main objective of the studio is to recognize how urban judge but to help you in your work at a time when you can still
form embodies larger ideas of cultural purpose as influenced address any outstanding concerns.
by economies, notions of public and private space and that

those systems are regulated through by-laws that reflect those If there are serious concerns at this juncture, the oral review will
conditions. be supplemented with a written review and submitted to both

yourself and the school administration.
Students are exepcted to develop a traceable methodologies which

integrate ways of thinking with appropriate means of testing. Of After final reviews, an exit interview will be arranged to discuss the
primary importance is interpreting and creatively responding to the work of the term.
requirements of the studio assignments, with encouragement to

move beyond into deep and imaginative speculation. The studio will meet Tuesday and Friday afternoons. Attendance in
studio during scheduled meeting times is mandatory.
Students will be encouraged to formulate their own mini-thesis

for each project within the larger discourses of the studio and to
demonstrate the ability to imbue ideas at the several scales of
operation, from the large to the detailed.
Requirements
_________________________________________
You will be marked for both scope and rigor in studio projects, and
for your ability to successfully collaborate and participate in class
meetings and discourse. Your work should show initiative in self-
directed research to support and extend its own inquiries. Grades
10% Project 1 weeks 1-3

60% Project 3 weeks 7-13.5
10% Depth and clarity of participation in studio discussions
and contributory research
Students should understand that this is a design studio, not a

ARCH 520: Timber Tech Studio
________________________________
and across cultures. Each timber typology reflects the technology,
environment and cultural values of their times. Timber structures
play a large role in the architecture to which they belong - they
simultaneously reflect light and provide mood, express the
Credits: 9
technology of the time, and provide supporting structure. Use
Type: Elective
Faculty: AnnaLisa Meyboom of timber is thus compelling in architecture but the basic form of
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design the structure has not changed significantly over time: many of
Term: Fall. 2017 the timber structures take the form of a post and beam of some
description in a hierarchical manner. This studio challenges not
Year 2
only the heirarchy of post and beam but the singularity of its use.
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio Wood can perform as structure, finish, insulation and furniture
ARCH 513 ESAC I but a hierarchical use of wood limits its use to only structural
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II and requires other elements to take on other roles. Perhaps new
ARCH 568 Research Methods conceptions of wood may take on other roles simultaneously
rather than in isolation.

The physical form of trees is different in the new growth and the
A1, A2, A5, A9, B1, B3, B4, B7, B11
fast growth we have in today’s forests. The wood sources which
are sustainable are second and third growth forests. These forests
have characteristics which differ from timber used in previous
Course Description generations. The timber of today is fast growing and planted
_________________________________________
closely spaced to grow tall and thin. This commodity timber is
While we see many industries around the world reeling from the smaller in diameter and thus may be suited to a different type
disruptive effect of technology, the construction industry remains of design.
intransigent both in materials and methods. While change for
change’s sake is a fool’s errand, in construction there may be One of the innovations in material recently involves engineered
a clear benefit to innovation - namely the environment. The wood products. These products are made of smaller pieces,
building sector is responsible for the use of 47.6% of the energy particularly suitable for use in engineered wood products. The
produced in the US (48% in Canada) and 44.6 % of the total CO2 combining of smaller pieces into a larger whole piece leads to
emissions1 . Building construction is 5.9% of this total. Innovation different and potentially more flexible forms while increasing
in design and construction could therefore provide a significant sustainability of the material by its reduced impact on old
contribution to reducing GHG emissions both within Canada but growth forests as well as its ability to use rapidly renewing forest
also internationally. resources.
Wood is a renewable resource and absorbs carbon as it is grown. The joint is where the action is in wood structures. Beautiful wood
As such it is one of the most sustainable building materials that joints have been celebrated in Japanese and Chinese architecture
can be used. It is also light to transport, can be used as both for centuries. Wood joinery is a highly celebrated craft appreciated
structure and finish, and is easily machinable, lending itself to for its combination of beauty and function.
energy efficient construction as well as facilitating a large variety
of architectural forms and expressions. This studio will focus on Innovations in joints include a resurgence of wood to wood
where material, structure and processes of building come together connections after many years of metal connection pieces
with a focus on the use of wood. With new technology comes Innovations in glued connections including developments of wood
new opportunities and the question for this studio is how new based glues are also of interest. Finger joints which use larger
technologies in digital design and robotic fabrication of wood can surface areas are already in widespread use to splice smaller
contribute to make building less environmentally costly. dimensional lumber. What possibilities are there for innovation in
connections?
Timber structures have taken many forms throughout the ages
Digital fabrication methodologies allow us mass customization as

well as permitting us infinite variations on a theme. As such, each of presentation, participation in studio culture and responsiveness
piece can be cut differently and precisely placed in relation to the to criticism are significant factors by which the instructor will
next piece. Ideally the assembly instructions will be included in the evaluate each exercise.
pieces so assembly is easier, quicker and more accurate.
At midterm you will receive a personal review of your work to
Many of our construction processes are wasteful and result in date. This evaluation is intended to help you understand both what
much material going to landfill. One of the arguments used for appears positive in the work you are producing and what remains
prefab is often that the material use is more efficient since things problematic. It should identify any critical issues or skills that you
can be planned to minimize material waste and waste from need to address in the remaining half of the term. The purpose of
the production stream can be reused or disposed of in a more this review is not to judge but to help you in your work at a time
sustainable way. The challenge is to develop a design process when you can still address any outstanding concerns. At the end of
which acknowledges and addresses this issue. term, you will receive a written evaluative paragraph of your studio
work as well as have an exit interview with the instructor.
Learning Objectives The weight and criteria of course work [per project and overall] will
_________________________________________ be evaluated as follows:
- Identifya nda ssumedivergentrolesthatmaximizeindividual

talents,andtoc ooperatewithotherswhen workingasmembersof WS Workshop 5%
ad
esignteamandinothersettings. PP1 Prelude 10%
- Applyo
rganizational,spatial,structural,andconstructional PS1 Design Build Exercise 25%
principlestot heconceptionanddevelopment ofspaces,building PS2 Competition Exercise 40%
elements,andtectoniccomponents.
- Applyt hep
rinciplesofsustainabledesigntoproduceprojects Research & scholarship 10%
thatconservenaturalandbuiltresources, providehealthy Effort and arc of improvement 10%
environmentsforoccupants/users,andreducetheimpactsof
buildingconstructionand operationsonfuturegenerations.
- Understandt heprinciplesofstructuralbehaviorinwithstanding
gravityandlateralforces,andtheevolution, rangeandappropriate
applicationsofstructuralsystems.
- Understandingofthebasicprinciplesutilizedintheappropriate
selectionofc onstructionmaterials,products, components,
andassemblies,basedontheirinherentcharacteristicsand
performance.
Requirements
_________________________________________
Successful completion of each exercise is required to complete
this course. Attendance at all studio meetings, pinups and
presentations is mandatory. You will be marked for both scope and
rigour in studio projects. Your work should show initiative in self
directed research to support and extend its own inquiries.
Students will be evaluated according to the following three

categories: design process and content, design media and
conventions, and scholarship. Consistency of effort, ability to
conceptualize from within the context of the given exercise, quality

ARCH 520: Towards a More Responsive little generosity is given to the city and the public further than
the first floors at grade, reserving the benefits of height, view,
Tower Studio
________________________________ air and prospect for those who have access and who can afford
it. Those tall buildings that do depart from the standards of the
Credits: 9
typical tower do so with gestural expression as their goal, their
Type: Elective
Faculty: Matthieu Grady sculptural formalism and gimmickry abetted by the increasing ease
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design of advanced computer modelling in order to justify their value
Term: Fall. 2017 to a city. Alongside a growing appetite of clients to differentiate
their product from their competitors by defining and promoting
Year 2
themselves with increasingly “iconic” architecture, tower design
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio has swung violently from the traditional extruded tower toward
ARCH 513 ESAC I evermore sculpturally expressive and daring forms into which the
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II life of the building and its inhabitants must fit, at times uneasily,
ARCH 568 Research Methods and with unfortunate consequences for cities and citizens alike.

A1, A2, A6, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B8, B9, D2 Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
This studio aims to expose students to the very specific set of
parameters, constraints and opportunities inherent in the tower
Course Description typology, in order to critically explore ways in which these factors
_________________________________________
can be manipulated, modified and mutated toward towers that
From the Tower of Babel, through to the first towers of Chicago are more responsive, reactive and adapted to their surrounding
at the turn of the century, to the current supertall skyscrapers, context, radically reshaping the typical tower typology through
building higher has been a persistent pursuit throughout time; for a deep and careful consideration of the unique conditions each
reasons pragmatic (economics, proximity, productivity, etc.) and specific site affords. Of specific concern will be the influence of
aspirational (symbols of progress, definers of city skylines, markers environmental factors in how the tower typology can respond
of wealth and status, etc.), towers have acted as lighting rods for responsibly to its energy-intensive nature, given the inherent
the ambitions of a culture, as stakes in the ground in the progress challenges this typology embodies – i.e. large exterior envelope
of technical prowess, as signposts marking, in time and place, surfaces exposed to the elements (sun, wind, rain, etc.);
the evolution of cities. Yet, in response to growing importance of imbalances between the desire for expansive views and the
densifying intelligently in response to the persistent population concurrent loss of thermal performance; gluttonous use of
increases in cities (more than 50% of the world’s population is energy in vertical transportation as well as mechanical servicing
now urban, and that number is set to balloon exponentially) systems, etc. Students will be encouraged to explore ways in
coupled with the very real need to design and build sustainably which environmental factors inherent in building high can not
and energy-consciously, many towers have seldomly departed only be controlled for and defended against, but be harnessed
significantly from a uniformly similar core design in the past and channelled towards positively benefit the building and its
decades. Despite several emblematic examples, and despite inhabitants, turning constraints into advantages. In parallel,
significant progress in the science around building technologies, attention will be paid to the ways in which the tower, as opposed
systems and strategies, towers continue to be designed and to being a solipsistic and solitary entity, can become a more
built to prescribed and conventional norms, using standard intimately connected, richly programmed vertical extension of the
strategies, systems and products applied similarly to sites around city, and can intelligently respond to the evolving nature of the use
the world without consideration of the site’s unique contextual patterns of its citizens.
conditions; a site’s maximized allowable floor plate is repeated
vertically and undifferentiated limited only by zoning restrictions;
hermetically sealed exterior envelopes wrap all orientations
uniformly regardless of solar exposure, view, or urban context;

Requirements
_________________________________________
During the first 2 weeks, the first phase of the studio will pursue
comprehensive studies of notable precedent tower projects that
will expose students to the specific characteristics of the tower
typology, as well as the ways in which towers might reflect the
concepts of responsiveness. This phase will be punctuated by
critically-minded visits of specific and emblematic towers in
Vancouver, as well as by talks by practitioners and specialists in the
field of tower design.
During the following 3 weeks, the second phase of the studio

will involve a series of preliminary and open-ended speculative
exercises on discrete and specific characteristics of the tower
typology (vertical circulation, structure, exterior envelope,
technical servicing, etc.) creating a lexicon of potential and
innovative responses to the “inevitables” of tower design.
Acknowledging that the most successful towers are more often
the fruit of the efforts of and interactions between many people
and increasingly less a result of the individual gesture of a solitary
“genius”, the second phase will conclude with a collective exercise
whereby the studio as a whole will engage in the collaborative
design of a tower together based on the previous study of essential
characteristics of the tower typology.
For the final 7 weeks, the third phase of the studio will involve an
in-depth design development of a mixed-use tower in Vancouver’s
downtown core, where students will develop a design that
specifically responds to essential qualities of the site and context.
The final project will be preceded by a collective gathering and/or
creation of all essential background information of the site by each
member of the studio to create a comprehensive information set
of shareable and accessible data (i.e. digital 2D and 3D of existing,
drone photography, climate and site information, physical site
context model, etc.) as well as an individual analysis of the critical
contextual conditions of site to which each tower’s typological
adaptations will respond.

ARCH 520: Wallflower architecture can be more inclusive, cyclical, and even preemptive?
Can we rethink the grocery store, which is typically a landscape of
Architectures Studio
________________________________ consumption, as also a landscape of production, pleasure, culture,
and/or even waste? Is there a more cyclical approach to food
Credits: 9
flows that can be integrated and at the same time generative? If
Type: Elective
Faculty: Thena Tak food is one of the last outposts of sociability, are there notions of
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design collectivity that can actively reform the grocery store typology?
Term: Fall. 2017
Students will be asked to question and test the relevance of

Year 2
program, material, language, organizations, and spatial conditions
ARCH 520 Vertical Studio in order to reimagine a grocery store typology that subverts
ARCH 513 ESAC I the ordinary and expected. In doing so, familiar qualities of the
Fall
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology II grocery store, from name to function to aesthetics, will be open to
ARCH 568 Research Methods reinterpretation, contamination, and reinvention. The studio will
begin with the particulars through an in-depth analysis of specific
plant foods and will then transition into the general by researching
larger food networks and grocery typologies. As a whole, the
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B11,
course will engage an array of tools for critical thinking that will
B12, D1, D2
include: historical and precedent analysis, physical model-making,
iterative and experimental representation, and in-field site visits to
local grocery stores, agricultural centers, and waste facilities. Each
Course Description student is expected to develop a set of curiosities and that will act
_________________________________________
as both friction and driver in the evolution of each project.
Architectural accolades are often relegated to glamour programs
- think museums, libraries, embassies - and to be sure, in an age
where image reigns king, there is no shortage of demand for the Learning Objectives
stylized or the fashionable. Yet for most us, glamour spaces are _________________________________________
the exception and instead, our everyday spaces are experiences
- Reconsider even the most everyday spaces as rich opportunities
of drugstores, gas stations, bus stops, and that small convenient
for thoughtful and provocative design.
store on the corner that sells Poprocks. In large part, everyday
- Develop an iterative understanding to design and apply methods
architectures are candidly generic and forgettable.
which integrate both thinking and making.
- Question and adapt established program typologies, the grocery
Wallflower Architectures champions the ordinary by exploring the
store in this case, to respond to our changing environments
dormant possibility of the most unheroic spaces that diffidently
and contexts.
substantiate their existence through grounded necessity and
- Develop a critical position based on individual research,
function. As one of the most ordinary spaces and arguably one
exploration, and testing of ideas and intuitions.
of the most public spaces in our current milieu, the grocery store
- Develop representation as an integral part of the design process.
will define this studio’s programmatic charge and appropriately,
- Understand and demonstrate how drawing, images, and modeling
its unhero.
(digital and physical) impact design thinking.
Evolving from a history of trading posts and over-the-counter

grocers, the contemporary grocery store is one of the touchstone
participants in a global food market that is estimated to be an $8 Requirements
_________________________________________
trillion dollar industry. Sustenance, that is food, is a universal need
that transcends cultural, social, and temporal boundaries leading You will be marked for both scope and rigor in studio projects, and
to an incredibly diverse industry that engages multiple scales and for your ability to successfully collaborate and participate in class
networks. The familiar grocery store provides a point of entry meetings and discourse. Your work should show initiative in self-
into this complex industry and offers the opportunity to ask if directed research to support and extend its own inquiries. Grades


50% Project 3 weeks 7-13.5
10% Depth and clarity of participation in studio discussions
and contributory research
Students should understand that this is a design studio, not a

technical studio. Integrated thinking is paramount to success on
the projects, particularly on the clarity of understanding how
ideas can be manifest inventively, technically, experientially and
culturally. Thinking has consequences at all layers of experience;
urbanistically, locally and environmentally and the projects will be
assessed by the design that results from this understanding.

ARCH 538A: [Grid, Zone, and] Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
Field Studies
________________________________ - Develop a command over graphic, analytical, and synthetic skills
Credits: 3 required to communicate effectively on-site.

Type: Elective - An understanding of the social/political/spatial/behavioral
Faculty: Roy Cloutier and Nicole Sylvia conditions unique to this region of the world.
Prerequisites: ARCH 515: Design Media I, ARCH 517:
- Ability to engage complex and unfamiliar subject matter and
Design Media II
Term: Fall. 2017 graphically translate it in a clear and provocative way.
- A broader and deeper awareness of the conventions and
techniques of visual communication from around the world.
- Ability to self-critique and that each student may objectively read
A2, A3, A6, A7, A8
the drawings he/she has produced.
Course Description Requirements

_________________________________________ _________________________________________
This course is a fieldwork-based research seminar that operates - Background research on historical drawing conventions and
in documentary and scenario modes, using annotated drawing techniques from around the world (individual)
as the primary means of communicating ideas. The course is - In-the-field sketching, emphasis on analytical and synthetic
structured around a series of explorations of conceptually- techniques as well as graphical creativity (individual)
significant conditions within Chandigarh and its peri-urban and - Development of a folio of highly-crafted drawings that each
rural landscapes. These explorations are situated in the locally communicate a narrative about a condition of the region. The final
conceptually-loaded typological spatial conditions of the grid, zone, drawings will demand that several draft iterations be developed
and field. A series of ‘field walks’ — loose, experimental drawing (individual)
exercises in the field — will provide the foundation for individual
research and the development of a folio of three, highly-crafted
narrative drawings.
Part ethnography, part experimentation, the aim of this course

is to capture the quotidian circumstances of Chandigarh and
its surrounds through the medium of the line drawing. Initially
conceived in a top-down manner as a rational and relatively fixed
entity, the city has instead evolved as a vibrant platform for the
complexities of the everyday. In this seminar students will address
questions like: What are the conditions endemic to this particular
intersection between High Modernism and the tactics of everyday
life? Who and what are the actors and agents that inhabit this city/
region and how do they interface with the spaces, networks, and
forces around them? What sorts of lived, social spaces do they
occupy, and how do they tactically carve them out of the strategies
of the city?

ARCH 538B: Infrastructures of Dhanas, for in-depth fieldwork (building upon research conducted
in a previous version of this course in 2015). Dhanas is a settlement
Incrementality
________________________________ of 8,448 units housing roughly 40,000 people. Its architecture is
repetitive and imposing—yet its ostensibly rigid logic has proven
Credits: 3
unexpectedly resilient and adaptable over time (much like that of
Type: Elective
Faculty: Roy Cloutier and Nicole Sylvia Chandigarh itself). Its simple, ‘single-celled’ urbanism has proven
Prerequisites: ARCH 504: Architectural History I, ARCH 505: remarkably capable of rapid evolution, becoming overtaken,
Architectural History II appropriated, transformed, and diversified by its inhabitants. The
Term: Fall. 2017
course is based around field analysis and reconceptualization of
the transformations observed—framing them first in the form of a
Student Performance Criteria policy-proposal document to a Chandigarh-based audience, then
A2, A4, A6, A7, A8, D1 second in the form of an academic research paper that places them
in a broader historical and theoretical context.
Course Description
_________________________________________ Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
In recent years, architecture has begun to resdiscover its long-
standing interest in incremental forms of housing—that is, - A deeper understanding of the interaction of the built
development in which the architect consciously, selectively, environment and its inhabitants over time—particularly the ways
and tactically leaves space for the will of other agents and their in which design can influence that relationship in challenging
changing desires over time. Yet while promising in its pedigree social contexts.
and ambitions, the contemporary enthusiasm for varieties of - An awareness and understanding of sociological methods
incremental housing too often deteriorates into a contextually- and their potential applications within architectural practice,
oblivious form of intervention that places far too much onus particularly the role of direct fieldwork and occupancy analysis.
on those who are able to provide the least—an abdication of - An ability to work between direct fieldwork and historical/
collective responsibility masquerading as ‘openness’ or ‘self- theoretical writing, placing found examples and patterns in a
determination’, or a miserly blankness created in the name of larger context.
‘flexibility’. In response, this course argues that architecture (and - Greater command over writing, particularly the ability to reframe
in particular, incremental forms of social housing) is in need of a complex information for radically different audiences.
new understanding of generosity—eschewing the blankness of
‘flexibility’ and the precarity of ‘openness’ in favor of new, specific,
generative relationships between the architect and the inhabitant.
Requirements
_________________________________________
This advanced history-theory course probes alternate histories of
- Dhanas questionnaire creation and fieldwork (teams of 3-4)
incremental housing, specifically seeking out sources and voices
- Dhanas policy presentation and research document (teams of 3-4)
beyond the Western canon. Likewise, the course places at its core
- 500-word manifesto (individual)
an interdisciplinary, social-science and historically-based method
- Final research paper (individual)
that emphasizes the lives of projects over time and the agency and
desires of their inhabitants. To this end, the course is co-taught
with two Chandigarh-based researchers: Dr. Bindu Duggal, a
sociologist, and J.P. Singh, an architect and professor.
In its slum-clearance efforts, the Chandigarh administration has

forcibly relocated tens of thousands of settlement-dwellers to
various iterations of ‘rehabilitation colonies’ with varying forms of
land tenure and resource provision. The course will visit several
of these examples before focusing in on one particular colony,

ARCH 538D: Cityspace, Livingspace, and to be cognizant of the fact that, as a group, punctuality and
respect for each other is paramount. 3 days are allotted to allow
Waterspace
________________________________ the students to do individual research on their own, under the
advisement of both teachers.
Credits: 6
While the simple joy of visiting places is a core experience of the
Type: Elective
Faculty: Bill Pechet, Colette Parras trip, students are reminded that they must treat these excursions
Prerequisites: as serious research sojourns; that means that it is not enough to
Term: Summer. Amsterdam May 28th - June 8th. just photograph something, but rather to think analytically through
Rotterdam June 8th - June 13th. 2017
recording, sketching, and diagramming the sites we visit.
A1, A2, A3, A4, A7, A8, A9, B1, D2

Requirements
_________________________________________
Pre-trip Seminar
Course Description
_________________________________________ This 5-day seminar will serve to give our class the basic foundations
of historic and cultural information to understand contemporary
Join Bill and Colette for a tour of the Netherlands; a country
Dutch infrastructures, landscapes, architecture, and public space.
where density is supported by exceptional design invention in
The course themes of Cityspace, Livingspace and Waterspace will
public space, architecture, landscape architecture, planning and
serve as a basic armature to connect these 3 topics to one another.
infrastructure. The 2.5 week tour will examine both contemporary
The final seminar day will review some of the canonical works
and historic examples of Dutch design at a number of scales and
we will be visiting and profiles of the major design firms that are
media. Primarily based out of Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the tour
shaping the contemporary built environment of the country. The
will include daytrips to Hilversum, Otterlo, Almere, Utrecht, Delft,
seminars will run from 4-7:00 pm (3 hours x 5 =15 hours) with
Arnhem and the Western Water Barriers. Schedule permitting.
7-8 presentations per session. Each student will present 2 of the
the tour will also include office visits and lectures from specialists.
seminars in an expanded pecha kucha format and provide a one-
There will also be time for individualized wandering.
page (double sided) hand-out.
At over 17 million people, and a land area 1/22nd the size of BC,
Research Project
the Netherlands has established a culture of innovation in design
This may be an individual or a 2-person project that targets a
to ameliorate this density. Prior to the trip, we will conduct a
specific topic within the 3 major themes of the course (CITYSPACE,
series of teacher and student-led seminars to provide background
LIVINGSPACE AND WATERSPACE). The research project must seek
on the historic, geographic, and societal influences that formed
to integrate 2 of these terms together in order to represent their
the design culture of the country. The course will focus on the
confluences and contingencies. The goal is to discover situations
systems and mechanisms that engender inventive and affordable
and conditions that are specific to the Netherlands; that reveal
housing, innovations in architecture, a vibrant public realm,
themselves through observed, designed environments.
and infrastructures for transport and water management. Upon
returning home, students will produce a research project based on
During the tour, individual meetings will be set up with each
these themes, with latitude to allow each student to reflect their
student to discuss their chosen direction to determine the mode of
own particular interests and disciplines.
analysis and methods of representation.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
The tour itself is 17 days in duration with an expected 10-12
hours per day schedule. Some days may extend into the evenings,
particularly when the group is on a field-trip outside the two core
cities. Students are expected to participate in all organized tours

ARCH 538E: Stockholm S,M,L,XL Requirements
_________________________________________
________________________________
Students should bring their SLR camera and notebook on all
Credits: 3 excursions. All class meetings are mandatory and students must be
Type: Elective at meeting points on time.
Faculty: Leslie Van Duzer
Prequisites:
There is one running project for this course. Students are required
Term: Summer. 2017
to individually design a blog (using a starter template is fine) and
Student Performance Criteria to update it daily. This blog should demonstrate the student’s
A1, A3, A4, A7, A8, A9 curiosity, presenting independent research and thoughtful
reflections on the sites/sights encountered daily. The research
might include information about: other buildings the architect
has designed with reflections on how the building is situated in
Course Description the architect’s oeuvre; similar international movements that may
_________________________________________
have inspired the local example with reflections on similarities and
This course, taught in tandem with Michael Perlmutter’s Stockholm differences; context, such as the economic climate or planning
Through the Lens (ARCH 538F), unfolds over three weeks in the policy at the time and reflections on how that impacted the
beautiful Scandinavian city of Stockholm. Long known for its project; etc. (Note: The blog is not intended for friends and family
sustainable urban design, extensive park system, progressive and must not contain selfies.)
housing policies, refined architecture and exquisite product design,
Stockholm is an ideal city for studying the interrelationship of The evaluation of students will be based on the design (20%) and
social values and planning policies, the harmonious relationship substance (70%) of their blogs and their active participation in class
between landscape and architecture, the use of landscape as (10%). Students are required to design the blog framework prior
infrastructure, the design of intimately scaled architecture, and to the first day of class and to send their url to the instructor. The
innovative fabrication technologies. This course is well suited for instructor will provide students with individual feedback on their
students from any SALA discipline interested in gaining a broader progress each week. The blog will be graded following the last day
understanding of how a society’s values and design inform each of class (and the last post.)
other across multiple scales.
Stockholm S, M, L, XL includes ten full or half days of intensive

touring and discussion; two of those are combined with on-site
photography lessons in Stockholm through the Lens.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
The objectives of this course are to explicitly reveal the multitude
of form generators, including those that are not readily apparent,
such as social and economic policies; to situate the Swedish design
discourse within a broader, international context; and to inspire
students to see beyond the surface of models to find types or
essences that are transferable.

ARCH 538F: Stockholm Through communicating the qualities and importance of notable buildings,
in promoting specific architectural viewpoints.
the Lens
________________________________
Photography is the art of seeing, and through the photography
Credits: 3
assignments students will not only refine their own photographic
Type: Elective
Faculty: Michael Perlmutter eye, they will also acquire a heightened visual awareness of the
Prerequisites: built environment, and develop a sharper visual sensibility that can
Term: Summer. 2017 be of value in their design work.

A1, A3, A4, A7, A8
Requirements
_________________________________________
Course Description To participate effectively in the course, each student will need
_________________________________________ a DSLR or mirrorless camera that takes interchangeable lenses.
Additional required equipment includes at least one wide-angle
This course, taught in tandem with Leslie Van Duzer’s Stockholm
lens (or zoom with wide-angle), a sturdy tripod, and a laptop with
S, M, L, XL (ARCH 538E), will focus on the craft of architectural
the latest versions of Photoshop and Lightroom installed.
photography, where students shall have the opportunity to
photograph buildings and interiors under the guidance and critique
Students should preferably have some previous experience
of the instructor, a professional architectural photographer.
with photography, including a basic knowledge of working with
Photography sessions in the field will be combined with lectures,
aperture, shutter speed, depth of field, ISO, etc.
readings and discussions exploring issues of technique, the
history of architectural photography, contemporary practices and
All class meetings are mandatory and students must be at meeting
approaches, and the impact of architectural photography on the
points on time.
culture of architecture.
There will be two group photography sessions, where the

instructor will take the class to specific locations of architectural
Learning Objectives interest and provide guidance and assistance for each student on
_________________________________________ a one-on-one basis. In-class reviews of student work will follow
Without photography, a building, regardless of its qualities, is (30%). There will also be reading assignments which coordinate
destined for obscurity. Buildings of exceptional merit, if they with the lectures and photography. Short written summaries of
are to receive recognition as works of architecture, must be the readings will be required (20%). For the final presentation on
photographed and published. Photography, in this respect, is the last day of the course, each student will present a series of
intrinsic to the culture of architecture. photographs from a project individually chosen (50%).
The intention of this course is to expose students to fundamental Student Evaluation Criteria:
issues regarding the representation of architecture through Quality of the student’s photography work, ability to zero in on the
photography. Lectures, readings and discussions will heighten main themes or ideas in the text summaries, level of participation
the student’s awareness of how the photographic image affects in class discussions, progress and development over the course of
our view and understanding of architecture in general. Hands-on the class.
photography assignments will help ensure that the knowledge
gained is well grounded in first-hand experience.
The purpose of the course is not about educating future

architectural photographers. Instead the focus will be on the
importance of architectural photography for architecture:
in representing the architect’s intentions and ideals, in

ARCH 539: Convivial City Chandigarh
________________________________
The studio takes a sympathetic yet critical lens to these tendencies,
interrogating them against the harsh realities of mass urbanization,
migration, and precarity in contemporary India. Engaging the
periphery of Chandigarh’s Corbusian plan as a found context,
Credits: 9
the studio questions and selectively extrapolates the logics of
Type: Elective
Faculty: Roy Cloutier and Nicole Sylvia the city to an urban-scale site currently targeted for Smart Cities
Prerequisites: ARCH 500: Elements Studio development. Interventions work both upward from the scale of
Term: Fall. 2017 a unit (of dwelling, of material assembly, of mutualistic exchange,
of social collectivity, etc.) and downward from the scale of an
urban arrangement, converging toward interventions that are both
A1, A2, A3, A7, A8, B1, B3, D2
systematic and deeply architectural
Course Description Learning Objectives

_________________________________________ _________________________________________
Based in Chandigarh, India, Convivial City Chandigarh is a study - A critical understanding of contemporary patterns of urbanization
abroad studio rooted in two forms of research: one academic, (particularly in India) and the sociopolitical and economic
examining contemporary scholarship on urbanization; and one implications thereof.
deeply rooted in the histories and cultures of a particular place— - An understanding of the roles of the architect and (particularly
in this case, the historically-charged and urbanistically-fraught Western) architectural expertise in the production of the built
context of Chandigarh. The studio examines contemporary environment in developing (and often postcolonial) countries
urban dynamics in India, particularly as precipitated by the Modi like India.
government’s Smart Cities program. It questions the dominant - Ability to analyze a complex, unfamiliar urban context and
urban and architectural models adopted by Smart Cities advocates, identify within it patterns, systems, and sites for intervention on an
examining them through dual lenses: on one hand, critical urban scale.
geography, on the other, architectural process, representation, and - An understanding of the relationship between architecture,
speculation. In turn, the studio proposes to study these emerging landscape architecture, urban design, and planning; development
forms of urbanism from the inside out—accepting the concerns of an ability to operate fluidly between them.
of the Smart City while questioning, pluralizing, and radically - Cultivation of a critical yet inventive attitude toward
remaking the processes by which it takes form and evolves over representation—broadening and reconceptualizing it for the
time. As such, the studio is ultimately both analytic and synthetic, new subjects, new audiences, and new modes of intervention
working toward speculative proposals of alternative forms for the encountered in the study abroad course.
Smart City.
At the core of the studio’s interests are the conceptual and

disciplinary shifts that are happening as architects increasingly Requirements
_________________________________________
take systems as the object of design—a shift from conceiving
of architects as authors of discrete built objects to instead - Research and analysis on contemporary dynamics of urbanization,
conceptualizing design in terms of the management of increasingly particularly in India (groups of 2-3).
complex processes and organizations of matter. The course grounds - Analysis of a selected architectural/conceptual precedent
this interest in current discourse on infrastructure—not merely (individual).
in terms of literal infrastructure and its implications, but more - Intervention at a system-scale via urban design (individual)
importantly in the emerging discourse around understanding - Development of the proposal at an architectural scale (individual)
architecture as an open-ended, generative platform to be - Development of a graphical and written argument; submission to
appropriated and transformed by its users—a neostructuralism a conference (individual).
of sorts that harkens back to the city’s Corbusian plan in curiously
resonant ways.

ARCH 544X: Design Build I Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
________________________________
The design-build project will strive to fulfill the following learning
Credits: 3 objectives:
Type: Elective
Faculty: Greg Johnson - To engage students in the design of an actual small scale structure
Prerequisites: ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I, ARCH
based on a program provided by a client.
512: Structures I, ARCH 551: Communicating
Construction - To understand the sequence of design stages and the appropriate
Term: Spring. 2017 presentation and communication techniques to interact with the
client and accept critical review from professionals
- To ensure conformance to the relevant Zoning & Development
A1, A2, A3, A5, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B8, B9, B10, B11, Bylaws and the appropriate Building Code.
B12, C1, C2, C3, C4, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 - To undertake the production of the construction documentation
for such a building to fully describe how it is to be built, and
to coordinate the necessary documents for a building permit
application.
Course Description - To undertake material take-offs, investigate and source materials,
_________________________________________
determine costing, develop a project budget, and eventually place
One of the elements recognized to be important in the training the order for all materials, including coordination and arrangement
of an architect is the exposure of the student to actual full scale for delivery of materials.
construction activities. A common method of addressing this - To organize team(s) to undertake the construction itself in an
requirement is through the technique of a design-build project, efficient manner.
which involves the students undertaking the design – followed by - To plan and provide ongoing monitoring of the
the actual construction of a project. It permits not only hands-on construction schedule.
building using tools and real construction materials, but more - To fully document in text and photos the construction process.
importantly enables the students to see directly the implications of
their design decisions. Usually due to time and budget constraints,
these projects are relatively modest in scale.
Requirements
_________________________________________
This pair of two courses form the framework for the design-
build project: Course evaluation will be based on participation and engagement
in both courses, as well as the success of the finished projects in
- ARCH 544X is offered in the Spring term, and involves the design meeting the criteria.
phase of the project(s). Although the work of this term will take
place primarily at UBC, there will likely be one or more visits made
to the site.
- ARCH 544Y is offered during approximately 6 weeks in the

month of May-June in the early part of the summer, and will
involve continual attendance at the jobsite for approximately 200
hours of work.

ARCH 544Y: Design Build II Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
________________________________
The design-build project will strive to fulfill the following learning
Credits: 3 objectives:
Type: Elective
Faculty: Greg Johnson - To engage students in the design of an actual small scale structure
Prerequisites: ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I, ARCH
based on a program provided by a client.
512: Structures I, ARCH 551: Communicating
Construction, ARCH 544X: Design Build I - To understand the sequence of design stages and the appropriate
Term: Summer. 2017 presentation and communication techniques to interact with the
client and accept critical review from professionals
- To ensure conformance to the relevant Zoning & Development
Student Preformance Criteria
Bylaws and the appropriate Building Code.
A1, A2, A3, A5, A9, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7, B8, B9, B10, B11, - To undertake the production of the construction documentation
B12, C1, C2, C3, C4, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 for such a building to fully describe how it is to be built, and
to coordinate the necessary documents for a building permit
application.
- To undertake material take-offs, investigate and source materials,
Course Description
_________________________________________ determine costing, develop a project budget, and eventually place
the order for all materials, including coordination and arrangement
One of the elements recognized to be important in the training for delivery of materials.
of an architect is the exposure of the student to actual full scale - To organize team(s) to undertake the construction itself in an
construction activities. A common method of addressing this efficient manner.
requirement is through the technique of a design-build project, - To plan and provide ongoing monitoring of the
which involves the students undertaking the design – followed by construction schedule.
the actual construction of a project. It permits not only hands-on - To fully document in text and photos the construction process.
building using tools and real construction materials, but more
importantly enables the students to see directly the implications of
their design decisions. Usually due to time and budget constraints,
these projects are relatively modest in scale. Requirements
_________________________________________
This pair of two courses form the framework for the design- Course evaluation will be based on participation and engagement
build project: in both courses, as well as the success of the finished projects in
meeting the criteria.
- ARCH 544X is offered in the Spring term, and involves the design
phase of the project(s). Although the work of this term will take
place primarily at UBC, there will likely be one or more visits made
to the site.
- ARCH 544Y is offered during approximately 6 weeks in the

month of May-June in the early part of the summer, and will
involve continual attendance at the jobsite for approximately 200
hours of work.

ARCH 561J: Green Cities - Capitalism, netic, etc.) that investigates a theme in the course. Sketches or
rough drafts will be produced for discussion/pin-up in Week 3, then
Urbanism and Environmentalism revised and finished for final submission in Week 4. The major proj-
________________________________ ect for the course is a research paper. This project will be broken
into three parts. Initially you will submit an abstract and annotated
Credits:3 bibliography, due at Week 6. Then you will present to the class an
Type: Elective op-ed piece or manifesto with slides. Here you will take a first stab
Faculty: Sara Stevens
Prerequisites:ARCH 504: Architectural History I, ARCH 505: at the research and develop your argument. The presentations will
Architectural History II, be in class during Week 11 & 12. Finally, you will build from that
ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories opinion-driven piece to create a full-length research paper that
ARCH 568: Research Methods
will situate buildings in an aesthetic and economic context to read
Term: Spring. 2017
architecture and urban form as documents of social, political, and
Student Performance Criteria cultural forces.
A1, A2, A4, A8, A9
Requirements
Course Description _________________________________________
_________________________________________
Class participation, weekly reading responses and attendance: 20%
This course aims to look critically at different conceptions of
environmentalism and sustainability in architecture and allied Urbanism drawing: 20%
fields to understand their relationship to capitalism. What kind
of cover does greenwashing offer? What does it mean to look at Abstract + Annotated bibliography for research paper: 10%
environmentalism next to capitalism, in a way that goes beyond
Natural Capitalism, Eco-commerce, LEED platinum, etc.? What Op-ed / manifesto (500 words + images + bibliography) + illustrated
does it mean to think about cities as expressions of capitalism next presentation: 20%
to a rising concern about sustainability? How can we frame the
terms ‘environmentalism’ and ‘sustainability’ historically? What Research paper (3,000 - 4,000 words + images + bibliography): 30%
models for urban development are based on environmental ideas
(Malthusian economics and Limits to Growth)? How do architects,
landscape architects, and planners participate in, contribute to,
and critique green cities? Students will research historical examples
of architectural or urban environmental radicalism to situate a
concern for nature aside a self-interest in capital accumulation.
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________
This is a graduate-level seminar. Attendance and participation
in the discussion is mandatory; it’s also what will make the class
interesting and successful. Each week you are responsible for the
readings on the syllabus and for posting a response and question
(2-4 thoughtful sentences) on Connect’s discussion board. The
point here is intellectual priming-the-pump—a warm-up for what
you can bring to the table in discussion. For the initial assignment,
students will create an original conceptual representation of an
urbanism (metabolic, cartographic, systematic, ecological, cyber-

ARCH 573D: Regenerative performance issues.
Development & Design

________________________________ This course will examine a range of approaches regarding the
relationship between human and natural systems within the
Credits: 3
context of the emerging theory and practice of regenerative
Type: Elective
Faculty: Ray Cole development and design. It will provide an understanding of how
Prerequisites: ARCH 513: ESAC I, ARCH 533: ESAC II regenerative approaches differ from green design and how they
Term: Spring. 2017 can offer new insights and directions for architectural design so
that constructed projects can add positively to the places in which
they are located and increase, rather than diminish, social and
Student Performance Criteria natural capital.
A2, A6, B3, B4, B8
Regenerative development and design are equally concerned with
rethinking the processes necessary to create projects and the
continuing role that they play within the larger community rather
Course Description
_________________________________________ than seeing them as ‘finished’ isolated architectural works. Given
this process emphasis of regenerative developments and design,
Green building practices have become increasingly commonplace
a central ambition of the course will be to examine and draw from
in North America over the past decade, largely due to the
a host of architectural and landscape architectural practices to
introduction and widespread use of the Leadership in Energy and
understand their ethos, the principles that represent this ethos,
Environmental Design (LEED®) green building rating system. Green
the tactics they deploy and how they see the broader consequence
strategies, performance goals and associated assessment methods
of their work.
currently emphasize the ways and extent that buildings should
mitigate global and local resource depletion and environmental
degradation. While an important Initial step, simply producing Learning Objectives
buildings which “do less harm” and that are incrementally
_________________________________________
better than current practice will prove insufficient to meet the The primary learning objectives of this course are two-fold:
requirements of a built environment that can support sustainable
patterns of living. 1. To understand the emerging notions of regenerative
development and design and their differences with current green
Within the context of climate change and rapid urban and sustainable approaches to building design.
development, greater performance leaps will be necessary and 2. To gain a critical understanding of the potential lessons for
at a faster rate. This will challenge many existing norms and architectural design that can be legitimately drawn from natural
expectations and, in particular, redefine how we conceive the systems and processes.
design, construction and operation of buildings. Whereas the
current focus is on “green” design - strategies will also increasingly Specific objectives of the course are:
centre on adapting to the direct and indirect consequences of
climate change and restoring previous adversely impacted human - To develop an understanding of the key characteristics and
and natural systems. principles of regenerative development and design.
- To gain experience in the ways and extent that regenerative
The emerging notion of “regenerative” development and design principles can guide and inform project planning and design.
emphasizes a co-evolutionary, partnered relationship between - To gain an understanding of the features of emerging regenerative
humans and nature rather than a managerial one. It is the first design support frameworks and ways to evaluate the regenerative
approach to bridge human development with the physical and capability invested in a project.
functional, emotional and spiritual attributes of nature. Moreover, - To identify and explore ideas, models and strategies evidenced
while green building design remains largely a set of fragmented in natural systems that can help reframe design issues and
technological strategies, regenerative design is a whole, living prompt new ways of exploring, testing and communicating design
systems approach that emphasizes an interconnected web of strategies.

- To assist in formulating/refining a clear position/attitude
regarding the relationship between architecture and nature.
Requirements
_________________________________________
Two short exercises will be directed at asking you to identify
your own ethos, associated principles and larger ambitions with
particular reference to engaging nature. Each of these exercises is
weighted at 10% of the course.
Assignment
One major assignment will be undertaken during the term that
can hopefully relate to your current studio project, GP1 or GP2,
or current research interests. Given that each studio/graduation
project will have a unique focus, site and program, some degree
of latitude in the interpretation of the assignment is necessary to
maximize its value.

ARCH 577A: Design Media III independently and/or in teams to build expertise in the materials
________________________________ and methods of architectural production. Students will be asked
to speculate on and prototype new possibilities in the media of
choice. The course will be taught as combination working lab and
Credits:3
research seminar.
Type: Elective
Faculty: Blair Satterfield
Prerequisites:ARCH 515: Design Media I, ARCH 517: This seminar aims to explore the concepts of adaptation,
Design Media II cooperation and exaptation as they relate to the use of tools in the
Term: Fall. 2017
manipulation of materials, media, form and assembly.
A1, A2, A5, A9, B1, B11

Requirements
_________________________________________
The course will be broken into a series of small research exercises
Course Description and design explorations. These will map over a given assignment
_________________________________________
that will have its own time requirements and logics. This course is
Is design about representation or generation? Is the latter in about emerging processes techniques as well as product, so the
service of the former? What if they were one in the same? course will be follow two interrelated trajectories.
Students spend countless hours immersing themselves in the
learning of software and hardware useful for the generation Trajectory 1
of drawings, models, and other presentation materials. Some
tools reinforce inherited techniques of representation (AutoCAD Phase 1 - DM3 Topics
generates drawings that share basic traits with hand generated Form teams and select a media topic that interests you. Pick a
predecessors). Others tools abandon the tried and true fir new material. Pick a tool. Pick a strategy that illustrates your idea.
approaches to delivering work (Revit). Three-dimensional modeling This will be an exhaustive investigation of a selected subject and its
and scripting programs allow us to generate form with increasing properties, strength and weaknesses. Consideration will be given
complexity (Rhino, Grasshopper, etc.). Software can talk to to use, function, and processing. Sourcing and preparation of the
hardware so we can make material solids from those we generate material will also be researched. Your findings will be formatted
virtually (digital fabrication). Other software monitor or model and presented to the class.
performance (scan and solve). What aren’t they considered tools
for design? All of these tools and techniques that we collectively Phase 2 - Tooling
label “design media” are unavoidable. They are givens for this Once topics are selected by student teams, work will begin
generation’s designer and we invest in them heavily. Despite this on the design of both solutions for the problem at hand, and
investment, we rarely have opportunity to examine the potential strategies for how the use of media tools and techniques can help
of the tools we use to represent our work, and we rarely privilege generate them.
media as a locus of our research.
Phase 3 - Adapt, Coopt, Exapt
This phase will include a speculative proposal for tool modification
or invention. This will include the manipulation of a material and a
Learning Objectives
_________________________________________ potential application for that manipulated material. Testing of the
limits of both tool and material will be essential.
Design Media 3 centers on the ideas of tool hacking, applied
Phase 4 - Natural Selection:
material research, and advanced topics in media use and
One or more of the projects developed in A,C,E will be selected for
representation as a means of production. It is designed to allow
further exploration and possible fabrication.
and encourage students to apply their more developed skills
(and interests) in DM to explore advanced avenues of design,
Trajectory 2
representation, prototyping and fabrication. Students will work
- First students will familiarize themselves with terms, precedents,

and materials.
- Then individuals will select a method of tooling, forming, or
working as a precedent to analyze. Focus will be placed on research
precedents, analogous processes, and tool behavior.
- Next, students will speculate on the potential of that process to
be expanded or modified. This will lead to a proposal for a new
method of material manipulation.
- Finally, teams of students will develop and test select ideas
through their own proposals or a series of pollinator houses.
Resources and equipment permitting, prototypes will be
developed.
Attendance and participation 5%

DM3 Topics 15%
Tool-Time 15%
Adapt, Coopt, Exapt 20%
Natural Selection 30%
Documentation 15%

ARCH 577B: Architectural Production product is a comprehensive set of documents ranging from
visualization to analysis to construction documentation.
and Autodesk Revit
________________________________
Credits: 3 Learning Objectives

_________________________________________
Type: Elective
Faculty: Blair Satterfield - A critical understanding of the role of BIM in contemporary
Instructor: Roy Cloutier
Prerequisites: ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I, architectural production and the changes it precipitates
ARCH 515: Design Media I, ARCH 517: - An understanding of the differences between BIM and
Design Media II conventional 3d modeling
Term: Summer. 2017
- Command over modeling, drawing and visualization in Revit
Student Performance Criteria - Command over the software’s automation capabilities and ability
to remake graphic standards
A3, A8, A9, B11, C3
- Ability to identify the design intent behind the technical decisions
that arise in works of architecture, and a corresponding ability to
extract general principles from specific cases
Course Description - Ability to identify and document the construction of various
_________________________________________ envelope and structural assemblies, in three dimensions, arranged
to define a complete building
Building/Information is an in-depth investigation of a key emerging
design media: building information modeling. The course pairs
pragmatic training with a critical perspective, placing BIM in
the context of the broader historical and sociotechnical shifts Requirements
in architectural production that it is precipitating. It couples the _________________________________________
technical learning of an increasingly-widespread architectural - Background research on a selected precedent building (individual)
design and representation tool, Autodesk Revit, with reflection on - Thorough and proper modeling of that building in Revit
the use of Revit as a design medium, the analytic opportunities (individual)
its use can provide, and the design approaches to which it is - Clear, effective, and comprehensive drawn communication of that
conducive. Fundamental techniques are introduced through building using Revit (individual)
in-class exercises and workshops. These techniques are applied
through an ongoing, semester-long study of an exemplary
precedent, culminating in a comprehensive set of drawn
documentation.
This design media elective blends equal parts design media

instruction, historical/theoretical investigation, and building
construction training. Students learn the use of a paradigmatic BIM
program to an advanced level, gain an awareness of its place in
larger discussions of architectural production, and have the chance
to examine a specific architectural precedent to a significant
depth and rigor. In the process, students gain experience putting
together a drawing set—with a particular focus on how to set up
and deploy drawing conventions, both for presentation and for
construction documentation. Likewise, they have the opportunity
to examine and analyze a precedent project—reverse-engineering,
representing, then communicating its design intent via in-class
pinups at several key points throughout the semester. The end

4.4 Current Faculty Resumes
The appendix of the APR must include a condensed resume (not more than two pages) for each faculty member
currently teaching in the program. The resume must list: the courses currently taught; educational background
and registration data; recent honors and awards; recent research, scholarship, and creative activity; recent
publications; current academic, professional, and public service; and professional memberships. The term “recent”
refers to accomplishments since the last accreditation visit.
Michael Barton....................................................................................................................................................... 259

John Bass................................................................................................................................................................ 261
Roy Cloutier............................................................................................................................................................ 263
Ray Cole.................................................................................................................................................................. 265
Darryl Condon........................................................................................................................................................ 267
Joe Dahmen............................................................................................................................................................ 269
Jean Dieres-Monplaisir........................................................................................................................................... 271
Mari Fujita.............................................................................................................................................................. 272
Joanne Gates.......................................................................................................................................................... 274
Cynthia Girling........................................................................................................................................................ 275
Matthieu Grady...................................................................................................................................................... 277
James Huemoeller.................................................................................................................................................. 278
Greg Johnson.......................................................................................................................................................... 279
Chris Macdonald.................................................................................................................................................... 281
Sherry McKay......................................................................................................................................................... 283
AnnaLisa Meyboom................................................................................................................................................ 285
Oliver Neumann..................................................................................................................................................... 287
Collette Parras........................................................................................................................................................ 288
Bill Pechet............................................................................................................................................................... 289
Michael Perlmutter................................................................................................................................................ 291
Inge Roecker........................................................................................................................................................... 292
Adam Rysanek........................................................................................................................................................ 294
Blair Satterfield....................................................................................................................................................... 296
Matthew Soules...................................................................................................................................................... 298
Sara Stevens........................................................................................................................................................... 300
Nicole Sylvia........................................................................................................................................................... 302
Thena Tak............................................................................................................................................................... 303
Leslie Van Duzer..................................................................................................................................................... 304
Lőrinc Vass.............................................................................................................................................................. 306
George Wagner...................................................................................................................................................... 307
Joseph Watson....................................................................................................................................................... 308

Michael Barton
________________________________
Vision Critical HQ, Vancouver (Corporate, Office):
Planning. 2016
Adjunct Professor, 2015
Hootsuite, Singapore (Corporate, Office): Planning and Design
Consultation. 2016
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Hootsuite 2, Vancouver (Corporate, Office):
ARCH 517: Design Media II (Instructor). 2016-2017 Planning and Interior Design. 2015
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2016 Santa Fe House, New Mexico (Private,
Residential): Addition, Renovation. 2015
Education Hootsuite, London (Corporate, Office): Planning and Interior

_________________________________________ Design. 2015
MArch, University of British Columbia. 2008 Hootsuite 1, Vancouver (Corporate, Office):

Interior Design. 2015
MSc, University of East London. 2008
Warcraft: The Beginning (Feature
BA (Honors), University of London. 1995 Film): VFX Set Designer. 2015
Once Upon a Time (TV Series): Set Designer. 2014

Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity
_________________________________________
High Moon (TV Movie): Set Designer. 2014
Research / Scholarship
RoboCop (Feature Film): Set Designer. 2013
Researcher on Mixed Reality Wood Fabrication Research Project.
Witches of East End (TV Series): Set Designer. 2013

Co-funded project investigating potential applications of AR/Mixed
Reality in wood fabrication and construction. With support from
Man of Steel (Feature Film): Set Designer. 2013
Microsoft, the Province of British Columbia, Forestry Innovation
Inc., and industry partners.
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters (Feature Film): Set Designer. 2012
Creative Activity
Midnight Sun (Pilot): Set Designer. 2012
FUBALABO Design Corp, Principal.
Stanley Park Apartment, Vancouver (Private,

Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
Residential): Interior Renovation. 2017 _________________________________________
Bubble City: The Rate of Uselessness presented at Museum of Academic

Vancouver. Urbanarium: Your Future Home. 2016 SALA: IDLMB (Integrated Design Learning Through Making and
Building) Working Group
Hollyburn Properties HQ, Vancouver (Corporate,
Office): Planning, Interior Design and Furniture Design. 2016 Member of UBC Emergent Media Lab
BBTV HQ, Vancouver (Corporate, Office): Planning and Preliminary Member of UBC VR/AR Working Group
Design. 2016
4.4 Current Faculty Resumes -- 259

Professional
Member of IATSE Local 891 - The union of professional artists and
technicians working in film and television production in BC.

John Bass
_______________________
Presentation of work at Indigenous Housing Research Day, March
28, 2017, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Associate Professor, 2010 / Program Chair, 2012-present Village improvements for Dhakrani, Uttarakhand, India, public
space design for a gravity-fed fountain and public space. Design
completed September 2016
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Chandigarh’s Rehabilitation Colonies. Ongoing research into
the history, present, administrative and urban design future
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2014, 2016
of Chandigarh’s slum resettlement colonies, begun winter
2016, ongoing.
ARCH 515: Design Media I. 2013, 2014. 2016
Culturally specific housing for the Heiltsuk Nation, ongoing

ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2017
community-based design collaboration, began fall 2016, ongoing.
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2012 - 2014

Naming and Claiming: Nootka Sound. Completed July 2016.
ARCH 538A: History/Theory Abroad in Chandigarh. 2015

Village improvements for Dhakrani, Uttarakhand, India, public
space design for a gravity-fed fountain and public space. Design
ARCH 538B: Field Lab Abroad in Chandigarh. 2015
completed September 2016
ARCH 539: Studio Abroad in Chandigarh. 2015

Memory Marker prototype, presented to Chief Mike Maquinna,
Mowachaht-Muchalaht Band, at Yuquot, July 20, 2015.
ARCH 544M: Arctic Adaptionations. 2013
Is Chandigarh Still an Idea? Lecture given at Sushant School

of Art and Architecture, Ansal University, October 29, 2015,
Education
_________________________________________ Gurgaon, India
BArch, Rhode Island School of Design. 1985 Chandigarh’s contested geographies. Presentation given
at Chandigarh College of Architecture, January 19, 2015,
BFA, Rhode Island School of Design. 1984 Chandigarh, India
Associate Degree, Wentworth Institute of Technology. 1979 Village improvements for Manko, Punjab, India, engineering for a
low-tech sanitation infrastructure, Manko, Punjab, India. Design
and fund-raising materials work completed December 2015.
_________________________________________
Design in the Anthropocene: The opportunities of scaling
and scoping. Presentation given at TU Graz, June 30, 2014,
Graz, Austria.
GoGlobal: Chandigarh Studies Abroad Program. $9,600. 2017
Feasibility Study for the Cultural Village and Cultural Village

GoGlobal: Chandigarh Studies Abroad MUD seminar and SALA
Longhouse, Laxgalts’ap, BC. Design work completed Fall 2014.
studies abroad program. $19,800. 2015
Feasibility Study for the Mill Bay Camp, Gingol’x, BC. Completed
Mitacs. Nuxalk Sustainable Development of Forest Resources.
February, 2014.
$10,000. 2013.
Tableau Vivants, paper given at Architecture at the Ragged Edge of

Creative Activity
Empire: Race, Place, Taste and the colonial context. University of
Works With Kwakwaka’wakw and Nootka, Nuxalk and Nisga’a.
Queensland, June 27-28, 2013, Brisbane, Australia.

Chair, Architecture Program, Fall 2012-present
The Agency of Analytic Drawing: Fort Rupert, British Columbia, Chair, MArch faculty search committee
1849-1930, presentation at the University of Auckland School of
Architecture, June 2013. Chair, SALA Academic Affairs Committee
Feasibility Study for the Welcome House Café, Gitwinksihlkw, BC. Storytelling in Picture and Plans, presentation at UBC SALA Truth
Design work completed December 2013. and Reconciliation Day Forum, September 2013
Member, SALA Council, Fall 2012-present

Selected Publications
_________________________________________ Standing member, Admissions Committee
Bass, John. 63 Drawings of Chandigarh, University of British

Mentor, Verna J. Kirkness Science and Engineering Education
Columbia School of Architecture, 2017.
Program, 2016-2017
Bass, John. Naming and Claiming: Nootka Sound, University of

Public Service
British Columbia School of Architecture, 2016. Transmitted to the
Organizer, UBC SALA event at First Nations House of Learning,
Mowachaht-Muchalaht First Nation, July 2016
March 2014
Times of Chandigarh, “Canadians foresee future shock,: article on

Member, ASPC Aboriginal Engagement working group, January
Chandigarh Studies Abroad program, December 15, 2015.
2016-present
Times of India, Chandigarh edition, “Moving beyond ‘modernism,’

article on Chandigarh Studies Abroad program, September
14, 2015.
Bass, John. (online) “Watermark: Along the California Aqueduct,”

Published August 2015. <https://placesjournal.org/article/
watermark-along-the-california-aqueduct/>
Bass, John. “Drawing conclusions: Fort Rupert, British Columbia

in 1863,” in Architecture and Justice, Nick Temple and Renee Tobe
(eds.), UK, Ashgate Press, 2013; pp 189-202.
Bass, John. Peak Water studio: The California Delta, University

of British Columbia School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture. ISBN: 978-0-88865-670-4

_________________________________________
Academic
Council Member, Architectural Institute of British Columbia, 2017
Member, AIBC Public Outreach Committee, 2016-present
CALA/CCUSA Future of Practice Ad Hoc Committee, ongoing.

Roy Cloutier
________________________________
Undergraduate Research Fellow. University of Minnesota 2012
Adjunct Professor, 2014 Creative Activity

Contingent Design. Co-founder, research lead. 2017
Courses Taught Patkau Architects. Intern Architect. 2017

_________________________________________
ARCH 538A: Theory Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017 PUBLIC Architecture + Communication Design. 2016
ARCH 538B: Field Lab Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017 Lamoureux Architect. Project Designer. 2015
ARCH 539: Studio Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017 Silicon Sage Builders. Project Designer. 2013
ARCH 577: Design & Production with Autodesk Revit. 2014-2017

_________________________________________
Education “Four Grids for the Great Plains.” Uncertain Futures, OCAD
_________________________________________
University, Toronto, ON, forthcoming October 27-29. With Nicole
MArch, University of British Columbia. 2016 Sylvia. 2017
BScA, University of Minnesota. 2012 “Architecture After Cultivation.” 105th Annual Meeting of the
Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture: Detroit, MI,
March 23-25. With Nicole Sylvia. 2017
Licenses / Registrations
_________________________________________ “Marking Land, Bordering Systems,” -SITE Magazine, vol. 35:
“Borders”. 2016
AIBC, Intern Architect
“Atomizing the Smart City: Toward a Flexible Infrastructural
Urbanism” Infrastructure Space: 5th International Forum for
Recent Honors / Awards Sustainable Construction, LafargeHolcim Foundation: Detroit, MI,
_________________________________________
April 7-9. 2016
Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Student Medal. 2016

“Marking Land,” CLOG Journal 5, Landmark: 126-7. 2016
SALA Projects, 2015; Masters of Architecture Awards. 2015

“Atomizing the Smart City” 104th Annual Meeting of the
Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture: Seattle, WA,
Terry J. Gower Memorial Scholarship. 2015
March 17-19. 2016
Werner Forster Memorial Scholarship,.2014

“Atomized Urbanism: Design in the Networked City”. Urban Design
Forum, University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, March 10-12.
2016

_________________________________________ “Urbanisms of Difference: Toward a Theory of Enclave Tactics,”
15th International Cultural Studies Symposium, Ege University:
Research / Scholarship İzmir, Turkey, May 6-8.
Research Fellow. TimberSkin Labs. 2015
“Enclave: A Typological Atlas,” 103rd Annual Meeting of the

Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture: Toronto, ON,
March 19-21.

_________________________________________
Academic
Teaching Assistant. Environmental Design Studio II:
Constructions. 2016
ARCHUS President. 2014-15
SALA Alumni Advisory Committee. 2014-15
Teaching Assistant. Design Media I. 2014
Lead Teaching Assistant. Introductory Workshop. 2014

Ray Cole
________________________________
_________________________________________
Professor, 1977
Cole, R.J., Robinson, J., & Westerhoff, L. M., Regenerative
Sustainability: Rethinking Neighborhood Sustainability, IN:
Courses Taught Pragmatic Sustainability: Dispositions for Critical Adaptation, Ed.
_________________________________________ Steven A. Moore, Routledge (New York). 2016
ARCH 513: Environmental Systems and Controls I. 2012-2017

Cole, R.J., and A. Oliver, Chapter 11: Shifting Agendas, IN: Low
Carbon Low Energy Architecture, Ed: Khaled A. Al-Sallal, Taylor &
ARCH 573D: Regenerative Development & Design. 2017
Francis. 2016
ARCH 573G: Regenerative Design (Live Project). 2016

Fedoruk, L.E., Cole, R.J., Robinson, J.B., & Cayuela, A., Learning
from failure: understanding the anticipated-achieved building
ARCH 573: Topics in Sustainable Building Science. 2013
energy performance gap, Journal of Building Research &
Information, 43(6), p750–763. 2015
ARCH 573: Light, Colour, Space. 2013
Robinson, J., and Cole, R.J., Theoretical Underpinnings of

ARCH 573: Green Building. 2012
Regenerative Sustainability, Journal of Building Research &
Information, 43(2), p133–143. 2015
ARCH 573: Regenerative Design. 2012
Cole, R.J., and Fedoruk, L.E., Shifting from Net Zero to Net Positive,
Buildings Journal of Building Research & Information, 43 (1),
Education
_________________________________________ p111-120. 2015
Phd, University of Wales. 1973 Cole, R.J., Net Zero and Net Positive Design: A Question of Value,
Journal of Building Research & Information, 43 (1), p1-6. 2015
BSc Civil Engineering, City University, London. 1969
Murakami, S., Iwamura, K., & Cole, R.J., CASBEE: A Decade of
Development & Application of an Environmental Assessment
Licenses / Registrations Method for the Built Environment, Institute for Building
_________________________________________ Environment & Energy Conservation, Tokyo, 296p. 2014
AIBC, Honorary Member Cole, R.J., Situating CASBEE within a Broader Context, IN:
Murakami, S., Iwamura, K., & Cole, R.J., (Eds) CASBEE for enhancing
RAIC, Fellow Quality of Life & reducing Environmental Loads, Commemorative
publication at the 10th anniversary of CASBEE, Japan Sustainable
Building Consortium (JSBC), Tokyo. 2014
Recent Honors / Awards
_________________________________________
Cole, R.J., Situating CASBEE, A Japanese-made unique building
World Green Building Council Chairman’s Award, for “individuals rating and certification system, within a Broader Context, Territorio,
who have made an outstanding contribution to the global Italia, 01/14, p9-22. 2014
sustainability movement.”
Cole, R.J., Oliver, A., & Blaviesciunaite, A., The Changing Nature of
Workplace Culture, Facilities, 32 (13/14), p786-800. 2014
Cole, R.J., and Valdebenito, M.J., The importation of building

environmental certification systems: international usages of

BREEAM and LEED, Journal of Building Research & Information, Professional
41(6), p662-676. 2013 Member: Scientific Committee, World Sustainable Built
Environment 2017, Hong Kong, June 5-7th, 2017
Cole, R.J., Oliver, A., and Robinson, J., Regenerative design, socio-
ecological systems and coevolution, Journal of Building Research & Member: AIBC Volunteer Recognition Committee, 2011-17
Information, 41(2), p237-247. 2013
Member: Scientific Committee, Central Europe towards Sustainable
Blaviesciunaite, A., and Cole, R.J., The Cultural Values Embedded Building 2016, Prague, Czech Republic, June 22-24th, 2016
in Building Environmental Assessment Tools: A Comparison of
LEED®- Canada and CASBEE, International Journal of Sustainable
Construction, 1(1), p7-16. 2012
Member: Scientific Committee, Sustainable Building 14-Barcelona,
Robertson, A.B., Lam, F.C.F, and Cole, R.J., A Comparative Cradle-to- Barcelona, Spain, October 26-28th, 2014
gate Life Cycle Assessment of Mid-rise Office Building Construction
Alternatives: Laminated Timber or Reinforced Concrete, Buildings, Member: International Scientific Committee – SB13 Portugal –
2(3), p245-270. 2012 Sustainable Building Contribution to Achieve the EU 20-20-20
Targets, Guimarães, Portugal, 30th Oct – 1st Nov 2013
Cole, R.J., Bild, A., and Oliver, A., The Changing Context of
Knowledge-based Work: Consequences for Comfort, Satisfaction & Jury Member: University of Manitoba Visionary (re)Generation
Productivity, Intelligent Buildings International, 4 (3) 182-196. 2012 Design Competition Phase 1 & 2, UoM, Winnipeg, January 1st –
September 20th 2013
Cole, R.J., Bild, A., and Matheus, E., Direct & Indirect Consequences
of Automated & Human Activated Controls, Intelligent Buildings Member: International Scientific Committee – SB13 Singapore,
International, 4(1), 4-14. 2012 Realising Sustainability in the Tropics 9 -10th September 2013
Cole, R.J., Rating Systems for Sustainability, IN: Encyclopedia of Member: International Scientific Committee – CESB13 Prague –
Sustainable Science & Technology, Meyers, Robert A. (Ed.) Springer Central Europe towards Sustainable Building 2013 – Sustainable
Press, 1st Edition. 2012 Building and Refurbishment for Next Generations, Prague, 26-
28th June 2013
Cole, R.J., Regenerative Design and Development: Current Theory
and Practice, Journal of Building Research & Information – Organisor & Chair: SB13 Vancouver: Pushing the Boundary –
Editorial, 40(1), 1-6. 2012 Net Positive Design, CaGBC 2012 National Conference & Expo,
Vancouver, BC June 4-6th 2013
Cole, R.J., Busby, P., Guenther, R., Briney, L., Blaviesciunaite, A., &
Alencar, T., Developing Regenerative Design Framework, Journal of Jury Member: FuturArc Sustainable Design Awards, Singapore –
Building Research & Information, 40(1) 95-111. 2012 Feb 31st - Apr 15th 2013
Cole, R.J., Transitioning from Green to Regenerative Design, Journal Jury Member: FuturArc Sustainable Design Awards, Singapore –
of Building Research & Information, 40(1) 39-53. 2012 Feb 1st – Mar. 15th 2013
Jury Member: RAIC/Canada Green Building Council – Green

Current Academic, Professional & Public Service Building Design Awards, Ottawa – January 15th 2013
_________________________________________
Public Service
Academic
Member: Advisory Committee: Pathways Toward Carbon Neutral
Instructor: SENV 7400 – Building Environmental Assessment, MSc
and Net Zero Energy for Residential Buildings in BC Roadmap
Course, Chinese University of Hong Kong, April 9-17th 2016; April
project, Lighthouse, Vancouver
11-19th 2015; April 12-20th 2014; April 7-15th, 2012

Darryl Condon
________________________________
American Architecture Prize. CESM Soccer Centre (silver). 2016
Adjunct Professor, 2014 North American Wood Design Award. CESM Soccer Centre. 2016
Institution of Structural Engineers – iStructe. Grandview Heights

Courses Taught Aquatic Centre – Supreme Award winner. 2016
_________________________________________
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2017 IIDA/ALA Library Award. Mill Woods Library, Seniors and Multi-
cultural facility. 2016
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2016
Athletic Business Facility of Merit Award. Grandview Heights
ARCH 573F: Social Sustainability in Practice. 2014 Aquatic Centre. 2016
Wood Design and Building Award. Grandview Heights Aquatic

Education Centre. 2016
_________________________________________
SAB Canadian Green Building Design Award. Jasper Place
BArch, McGill University. 1990 Library. 2016
BScA, McGill University. 1988 ACEC – Schreyer Award. Grandview Heights Aquatic Centre. 2016
ACECBC Structural Engineering Awards. Grandview Heights Aquatic

Licenses / Registrations Centre. 2016
_________________________________________
Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia Awards for Architecture.
Architectural Institute of British Colombia
Steveston Fire Hall. 2015
The Alberta Association of Architects

City of Edmonton Urban Design Awards. Mill Woods Library,
Seniors and Multi-cultural facility. 2015
The Saskatchewan Association of Architects
Alberta Construction Magazine. Mill Woods Library, Seniors and

Fellow, Royal Architectural Institute of Canada
Multi-cultural facility. 2015
LEED
PA Awards. CESM Soccer Centre. 2014
International Olympic Committee / IAKS Award. Hillcrest

_________________________________________ Centre. 2013
BC Woodworks Wood Design Awards. Architect Category. 2017 International Paralympic Committee / IAKS Award. West Vancouver
Community Centre. 2013
Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia Awards for Architecture.
Grandview Heights Aquatic Centre. 2016 City of Edmonton Urban Design Awards. Jasper Place Library. 2013
Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia Awards for Architecture. Athletic Business Facility of Merit Award. Hillcrest Centre. 2012
Jasper Place Branch Library. 2016
BC Woodworks Wood Design Awards. Steveston Fire Hall. 2012
World Architecture Festival. Grandview Heights Aquatic Centre -
Category Winner. 2016

Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity Board. 2015-2017
_________________________________________
Director, Kids Up Front Foundation. 2013-2014
Creative Activity
HCMA Architecture + Design, Partner. 2000-2017
_________________________________________
Places: Public Architecture. 2015
Pools: Aquatic Architecture. 2013

_________________________________________
Professional
President / Councilor, Architectural Institute of British
Columbia. 2013-2017
President / Director, BC Recreation and Parks

Association. 2012-2017
Chair, CPRA Infrastructure Task Group. 2014-2017
Juror, ACEC-BC Awards. 2017
Juror, ACEC-BC Awards. 2016
Juror, RAIC Sustainable Design Awards. 2015
Juror, SAB Magazine Sustainable Design Awards. 2015
Member, FII Wood First Advisory Committee. 2013-2014
Member, City of Vancouver Urban Design Panel. 2012-2014
Juror, Athletic Business Facilities of Merit Awards. 2014
Juror, Prairie Wood Awards. 2012
Juror, Canstruction Vancouver. 2012
Public Service
Technical Advisor, Rick Hanson Foundation. 2016-2017
Member, Canadian Infrastructure Report Card Advisory

Joseph Dahmen
________________________________
_________________________________________
Assistant Professor, 2011
Wall Scholar, Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies, UBC. Sept.
Courses Taught 2016-Sept. 2017
_________________________________________
UBC SEEDs (Social, Economic, Environmental Development) grant,
They Grow Without Us

UBC Campus and Community Planning grant, They Grow
Without Us
National Science Foundation SBIR Grant Technology

Commercialization & Innovation Grant, Watershed Materials
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2012

National Science Foundation SBIR Phase II Grant,
Watershed Materials
ARCH 533: Environmental Systems and Controls II. 2012-present
Early Career Scholar, Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies

LARC 504: Landscapes for Energy Interpretation. 2014
Sept. 2012- Sept. 2013
LARC 582B: Emergent Topics in Environment and

Creative Activity
Sustainability. 2015
“Mycobenches” Architectural installation of mycelium
biocomposite benches at Living Well exhibition at Craft Ontario, as
part of Toronto Offsite Design Festival. January 16- March 18, 2017
Education
_________________________________________
Architectural Installation of mycelium biocomposite blocks
MArch, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2006 at Why I Design at Museum of Vancouver in Vancouver, BC
November 9, 2016
BA, Wesleyan University. 1997
“They grow without us” architectural installation in Primary
Research Lab exhibition curated by Lee Plested at Western Gallery,
Recent Honors / Awards University of Washington (Bellingham) Sept., 2016
_________________________________________
“They Insulate” temporary installation of mycelium biocomposite
SXSW Eco Finalist, Greentech category: Watershed Materials. 2014 materials at Architecture Institute of British Columbia in Vancouver,
BC. October 31- November 25, 2016
Architizer A+ Award Popular Choice Winner: Watershed Block.
Products +Technology. “They grow without us” temporary architectural installation
composed of functional seating made of mycelium biocomposites
Architizer A+ Awards, Architecture + Materials Finalist, Pop Rocks: exhibited at Lee Square on UBC Campus April 12-July 1, 2016
March 8, 2013
“Mycelium Mockup” architectural installation Catalyze, Museum
of Vancouver as part of ISEA 2015 annual conference of the
International Society of Electronic Art. August 16, 2015
“I Hear You Say,” architectural installation at Peter Wall

Institute for Advanced Studies. September 23, 2013- October Dahmen, J., Soules, M, and Frid-Jimenez, A. “Pop Rocks”
September 1, 2014 Proceedings of the ACSA Conference Toronto, Canada, March
19-21, 2015
“Pop Rocks” public art installation commissioned by the City of
Vancouver. Aug. 15–Oct. 1, 2012 Frid-Jimenez, A. and Dahmen, J. “Data Visualization,” in
Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, Ed: Michael Kelly, Oxford University
“Energy Systems,” in SALA Works at Orr Gallery, Vancouver. Press, 2014
February 27th- March 12, 2012
Dahmen, J, Muñoz, J, “Modular Rammed Earth Masonry Block,”
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Rammed
Selected Publications Earth Construction, Perth, Australia, Feb. 10-13, 2014 pp 79-84
_________________________________________
Dahmen, J. “Who’s Afraid of Raw Earth? Experimental wall in New
Dahmen, J. “Soft Matter” in: Reflections of Canada: Illuminating
England and the Environmental Cost of Stabilization” Proceedings
our Biggest Opportunities and Challenges at 150 Years Ed: Philippe
of the International Conference on Rammed Earth Construction,
Tortell. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2017 (in press)
Perth, Australia, Feb. 10-13, 2014 pp 85-88
Dahmen, J., Kim, J, and Ouellet-Plamondon, C. “Life cycle

Dahmen, J., Muñoz, J., “Earth Masonry Unit: Sustainable CMU
assessment of emergent masonry blocks,” Journal of Cleaner
Alternative,” International Journal of GEOMATE, December, 2013,
Production, February, 2017 (in revision)
Vol. 05, No. 02 (Sl. No. 10) pp 903-909
Dahmen, J., and Frid-Jimenez, A. “They Grow Without Us”

Dahmen, J., Muñoz, J., “Earth Masonry Unit: Sustainable CMU
Proceedings of the ACSA Conference, Detroit, MI, US, March
Alternative,” GEOMATE Third International Conference on
23-25, 2017
Geotechnique, Construction Materials and Environment, Nagoya,
Japan November 13-15, 2013
Dahmen, J., Dalton, B, and Frid-Jimenez, A. “New Cloud Atlas”
Proceedings of the ACSA Conference, Detroit, MI, US, March
Dahmen, J., Frid-Jimenez, A, and Soules, M., “Pop Rocks: soft urban
23-25, 2017
boulder field,” ACSA 101st Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, US,
March 21-24, 2013 pp20-21
Dahmen, J. “Soft Futures: Mushrooms and regenerative design,”
Journal of Architectural Education, February, 2017, Vol. 71, No.
Dahmen, J and Ochsendorf, J. “Earth masonry structures: arches
1 pp 57-64
vaults, and domes,” chapter in Modern earth buildings; materials,
engineering, construction and applications, Matthew R Hall, Rick
Dahmen, J., “Soft Matters: Responsive Architectural Operations,”
Lindsay, and Meror Krayenhoff, eds. Cambridge UK: Woodhead
Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research, Vol14, Numbers
Publishing, 2012, pp425-458
1-2, June 2016, pp. 113-125
Dahmen, J., “Architecture beyond borders: provisional lessons

Dahmen, J. “Raw Earth Architecture: opportunities and barriers to
learned from the developing world,” Proceedings of ACSA
adoption,” in Raw Earth Architecture Ed: Mehdi Mahmoud Dellagi,
International Conference, June 20-23, 2012 pp401-406
Tunis: Beit al Hikma Editions, 2016
Dahmen, J,. and Roehr, D. “Collaborative Design Methods for

Dahmen, J., and Frid-Jimenez, A. “Mycelium Mockup” Proceedings
the Open University of West Africa,” Proceedings of Sustainable
of the ACSA Conference, Seattle, WA, US, March 17-19, 2016
Futures Conference: Architecture and Urbanism in the Global
South, Kampala, Uganda, June 27-29, 2012 pp255-261
Muñoz, J.F., Easton, T., Dahmen, J. “Evaluation of Alkaline Activated
Fly Ash Geopolymer Binders on Stabilized Soils,” Construction and
Building Materials, July 2015, Vol 95, pp 86–95

Jean Dières-Monplaisir
________________________________
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
ARCH 512: Structures I. 2016
ARCH 532: Structures II. 2017
Education
_________________________________________
MArch, University of British Columbia. 2015
M Civil and Structural Engineering, National Institute of Applied

Sciences. 2010
BE Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering, Trinity College

Dublin. 2009
_________________________________________
Intern Architect, AIBC. 2015

_________________________________________
RAIC Student Medal. 2015
Stantec Scholarship in Architecture. 2013
MArch Award, UBC International Student Initiative. 2012

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Principle Architecture, Intern Architect. 2015-present

Mari Fujita
________________________________
- Moderator. A symposium occasioned by the Tom Burrows
exhibition at the Morris and Belkin Art Gallery. 4 speakers
Associate Professor, 2013 were invited to talk about squatting and the contested city.
March 27, 2015
Courses Taught “Copy. Paste. Build” for Five Crucial Decades of Citybuilding:
_________________________________________
MUD Urban Design Forum, UBC, Presenter. One of 15 presenters
Undergraduate invited to participate in day-long forum on the next five decades of
ENDS 110: Studio. 2017 urbanism. Speakers were academics and policy makers from across
North America. November 05, 2014
ENDS 302: Studio. 2014-2016
“Adventures at the intersection of neuroscience and architecture
Graduate with Colin Ellard and Ian Ross McDonald” - Moderator, Built City @
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2013 MOV: Synapse Event, Museum of Vancouver. November 2013
ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop. 2014 Creative Activity

“The Rate of Uselessness / Bubble City” (with Michael Barton)
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2016 2’x2’ model Exhibited at Your Future Home: Creating the New
Vancouver. Museum of Vancouver. January 21-May 15, 2016.
“Line 13: Civic Space Under Development” (with Jason Anderson)
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2014 Exhibited in Section Perspective, Diana Center Gallery, Barnard
College, NY, May 30 - June 14, 2013. Invited and selected for
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2013 exhibition. Work is an annotated map of a transit line in Beijing,
China. The drawing and text, in English and Chinese, describe the
ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories. 2013 transit line as a section cut through the concentric rings of Beijing
that offer sequential, lateral views of adjacent zones. 2013
ARCH 544E: Elective Course. 2015
Museum of Vancouver Upcycled Urbanism Event, Project Partner.
ARCH 561: Adv. History Theory Seminar. 2015 2013. Invited to be 1 of 6 Project Partners for a public event
that celebrates urbanism and public space. Responsible for the
organization and the leadership of a design workshop on March 17,
Education 2013. My role is specifically to help the workshop participants form
_________________________________________ their ideas around ones that are buildable and implementable.
Also responsible for the coordination and execution of the
MArch, Princeton University. 2003 event. July 2013
BA, Columbia University. 1998

_________________________________________
_________________________________________ Mari Fujita, “Chinatowns as Territorial Trope: A Case Study of
Vancouver, San Francisco and Los Angeles,” in Global Perspectives
Research / Scholarship in Heritage Conservation, Expansive Scopes, Plural Boundaries &
Research on Shrinking Cities in Japan, working towards scholarly Empathetic Approaches, Vinayak Bharne, ed. (London: Routledge,
articles and a book proposal. 2016-present forthcoming Fall 2016)
Morris and Belkin Gallery, Spatial Politics and the City Symposium Mari Fujita, “Projecting Urban Villages in Shenzhen” Shaping

New Knowledges: ACSA Annual Meeting. Seattle, WA, 2016,
591-597. 2016
Mari Fujita, “City Limits” Journal of Architectural Education, 70:1

(Winter 2016): 78-80
Mari Fujita, “Enclave Urbanism in Flux,” SALA/SCARP Urban Forum,

UBC. Paper presentation. March 2016
Mari Fujita, “Expanding Notions of Home, Conceptualizing and

Representing Global Consciousness in Vancouver” The Expanding
Periphery and the Migrating Center: ACSA Annual Meeting.
Toronto, ON, 2015, 415-420. 2015
Mari Fujita and Jason Anderson, “Building Urban Narrative,

Themed New Towns in China,” Globalizing Architecture: Flows and
Disruptions: ACSA Annual Meeting. Miami Beach, FL, USA, 2014,
55-63. 2014

_________________________________________
Academic
Chair of Environmental Design Program, UBC School of Architecture
and Landscape Architecture
Professional
Journal of Architectural Education (JAE) Editorial Board
Sustainable Cities and Society, Paper Reviewer
Public Service
Powell Street Festival Design Build Competition, Co-organizer.
Co-wrote brief for design competition, handled communications to
SALA students, organized jury, participated in media press release
and communications strategy

Joanne Gates
________________________________
Red Tree Wellness, Vancouver, B.C. 2016
Attendease Rooftop Patio, Sun Tower, Vancouver, B.C. 2015
Les Petits Artistes Daycare, Vancouver, B.C. 2014
Courses Taught Vancouver Osteopathy Centre, B.C. 2014

_________________________________________
Undergraduate Artspace l Children’s Art Centre, Burnaby, B.C. 2012

ENDS 402: Settlements. 2013
Graduate Selected Publications

_________________________________________
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Studio. 2014-present
Bathroom Renovation, North Vancouver. Azure. March/April 2018

ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2014-present
The Home Front/ Numbers building for female architects

Vancouver Sun. August 2015
Let in the Light. Canadian Interiors Magazine. December 2012

Education
_________________________________________
MArch, University of Manitoba. 1994 Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
_________________________________________
BES, University of Manitoba. 1989
Professional
Mentor for the Intern Architect Program at the AIBC
_________________________________________
Registered Architect, AIBC

_________________________________________
Finalist - Arthur Erickson Memorial Award, Western Living 2013

Designer’s of the Year Competition. 2013

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Gates - Suter Architects Inc. Principal.
B-C House, Vancouver 2017
acoustics + hygiene: Bathroom Renovation, North

Vancouver, B.C. 2017

Cynthia Girling
________________________________
for Advanced Landscape Planning, UBC, October 14, 2016
“Can We Create Home? Evaluating livability and sense of place in
Professor, 2007 a new community,” 2016 CSLA Congress Home: Locally Inspired,
Winnipeg, MB, presentation with Margot Long, FCSLA, BCSLA,
ASLA, LEED Associate, Principal, PWL Partnership, Dr. Kejia Zheng,
Courses Taught Assistant Professor, College of Architecture and Urban Planning,
_________________________________________
Tongji University
Undergraduate
ENDS 301: Design Studio 1. 2017 “Fast Early Often: Measured visualizations to inform planning
practice,” 2014 BC Land Summit, Vancouver, BC, 15 May, 2014
Graduate
ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop. 2015 “Three Applications of a Prototype Interactive Engagement Tool for
Urban Design,” with Maged Senbel, Ron Kellett, Mike van der Laan,
ARCH 541: Professional Practice. 2014-2017 2014 Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture, Baltimore
MD, March 26-29, 2014. (juried abstract)
LARC 510D: Netherlands Urban Design Studio. 2014
“Town & Gown: Creating complete communities on campus,” 2014
Great Places Lecture, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, October 9, 2014
Education
_________________________________________ Creative Activity
ElementsLAB, Co-Director. 1995-present
MLA, University of Oregon. 1980
BLA, University of Oregon. 1978 Selected Publications

_________________________________________
Girling, C., Senbel, M., Kellett, R., Lay, E., “Effects of visualizations
and information rich public engagement on resident acceptance
Licenses / Registrations of smart growth for emissions reductions,” Journal of Architecture
_________________________________________ and Planning Research, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 140-158. Summer, 2016.
RLA, British Columbia Society of Landscape Architects. Mahyar, Narges, Kelly J. Burke, Xiang (Ernest) Jialing, Siyi (Cathy)
1983-present Ming, Kellogg S. Booth, Cynthia L. Girling, and Ronald W. Kellett
(2016). “UD Co-Space: A Table-Centred Multi-Display Environment
Registered Landscape Architect in Oregon. 1996-2013 for Public Engagement in Urban Design Charrettes,” ISS ‘16:
Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces,
Fellow, Canadian Society of Landscape Architects ACM, New York, NY, USA, 10 pages. Honorable Mention award, ISS
’16 Conference
Fellow, Council of Educators in Landscape Architecture
Maged Senbel, Mike van der Laan, Ron Kellett, Cynthia Girling,
Fellow, American Society of Landscape Architects Jessica Stuart, “Can form based codes help reduce municipal
GHG emissions in small towns? The case of Revelstoke, British
Columbia”, Canadian Journal of Urban Research. Vol. 22, No. 1
Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity supplement pages 72-91. 2013.
_________________________________________
Maged Senbel, Cynthia Girling, James T. White, Ron Kellett, Patrick
Research/Scholarship
F. Chan, “Precedents reconceived: Urban design learning catalysed
“Tools for Engaging in Urban Design and Emissions Reductions,”
through data rich 3-D digital models.” Design Studies. Vol. 34, No.
Cool Tools: Climate change, digital tools and schools, Collaborative

1, January 2013. Shortlisted for 2013 Design Studies Award. Member - MECH Head Reappointment Committee
Michael van der Laan, Ron Kellet, Cynthia Girling, Maged Senbel,
Kellogg Booth, Tao Su, “A Collaborative Multi-touch, Multi-Display, Professional
Urban Futures Tool,” Proceedings, 2013 Simulation for Architecture BCSLA Board of Directors, Ex-officio 2012-2016
and Urban Design (SimAUD) Symposium, April 7-10, San Diego, CA.
(http://www.simaud.org/proceedings/) Oregon ASLA Fellows Nomination Committee
Mahyar, Narges, Kellogg Booth, Cynthia Girling, Ronald Kellett, Washington ASLA Design Awards Jury
“Just Scratching the Surface, the Long Road to Effective Cross-
Display Interaction,” Cross-Surface 2016 Workshop, 2016 ACM ISS Editorial Board, Landscapes/Paysages
Conference, Niagara Falls, Canada, November 2016.
Girling, Cynthia, Anezka Gocova, Vanessa Goldgrub, Nicole Sylvia,

Wesbrook Place, University of British Columbia, Canada, A Case
Study in Sustainable Neighborhood Design, April, 2015
Kellett, Ronald, Cynthia Girling, Michael van der Laan, Stephanie

Mauer, Maysa Phares and Maged Senbel, Urban Design Metrics
and Visualizations for Marpole and Grandview Woodland, Report
to the City of Vancouver 2013

_________________________________________
Academic
Member - Applied Science Appointment Reappointment Promotion
and Tenure Committee
Member - Landscape Architecture Faculty Search Committee
Member - SALA Student Affairs Committee
Member - SALA Student Executive Committee
Member - SALA Faculty Executive Committee
Member - ENDS, MLA Admissions Committees
Member - Urban Forestry Program Advisory Committee
Member - SEEDS Biodiversity TLEF Steering Committee
CGS / Affiliated Fellowships - Master’s Adjudication Committee
Member - Urban Forestry Program Faculty Search Committee
Member - UBC Okangan Design Guidelines Advisory Committee

Matthieu Grady
________________________________
- Cumberland Terrace (Competition), Toronto, ON. 2013
Adjunct Professor, 2017 Paul Andreu / Richez&Associés, Design director. 2012-2013
Kilo Architectures, design director. 2011-2012

Courses Taught - Grand Stadium (Competition), Casablanca, Morocco. 2011
_________________________________________
- Mediathèque (Competition), Khouribga, Morocco. 2011
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2017 - Baccarat Hotel and Residences (Competition), Rabat,
Morocco. 2011
- Sporting Complex (Competition), Ben Guerir, Morocco. 2011
Education
_________________________________________
MArch, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. 2000 _________________________________________
BA, McGill University, Montreal, QC. 1996 Academic

Thesis committee member, University of British
Columbia. 2013-2015
_________________________________________
Guest critic - University of British Columbia. 2013-2015
Architect, Architectural Institute of British Columbia

_________________________________________
1st Place - Grand Paris, 2 Metro Stations for New Ligne 15

(Competition), Paris, France. 2013
2nd Place - Congress Centre and Symphony Hall (Competition),

Angers, France. 2012

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Load Design, principal & creative director. 1999-present
Diamond Schmitt Architects, Vancouver office lead/design lead.

2017-present
HOK Architects, design director/senior associate. 2015-2016
B+H Architects, design director/senior associate. 2013 -present

- CETC Tower, Shanghai, China. 2015
- Emily Carr University of Art and Design, Vancouver, BC. 2014
- Winnipeg True North Square (Competition), Winnipeg, MN. 2014

James Huemoeller
________________________________
Carport. Ongoing
Adjunct Professor, 2016 Row House Remodel II. Ongoing
Georgetown Conservation Project. Ongoing

Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Ellis Residence. 2016
Wood Residence. 2015
Row House Remodel. 2013-2015
Education New School of Engineering, Brown University, with Kieran

_________________________________________ Timberlake. 2014 - 2015
MArch, University of Virginia. 2008 DVBC Concession Stand, with Kieran Timberlake. 2015
BA, Lehigh University. 2002 McKinlock House Renewal, with Kieran Timberlake. 2012 - 2014
Dunster House Renewal, with Kieran Timberlake. 2012 - 2015

_________________________________________
Architect, Architectural Institute of British Columbia _________________________________________
Registered Architect, Pennsylvania Walthall, D., R. Souza, J. Benton and J.F. Huemoeller. “Preliminary
Report on the 2013 Field Season of the American Excavations
LEED BC+D at Morgantina: Contrada Agnese Project (CAP).” Fasti On Line
Documents & Research. 2015. No. 222:1–15. 2014
Construction Document Technologist
Benton, J., R. Gorham, J.F. Huemoeller, L.A. Lieberman, D.
Massey, A. Smalling, R. Souza, A. Truetzel, and D.A. Walthall.
Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity “Relazione sul recente lavoro a Morgantina: Il progetto Contrada
_________________________________________
Agnese(2013-2014),” in G. Bruno and L. Maniscalco (eds.), La
geoarcheologia come chiave di lettura per uno sviluppo sostenibile
Creative Activity
del territorio sala congressi del museo archeologico di Aidone (EN),
Acheiropoiēton (Not Made by [Human] Hands) - Exhibition, The
04 - 05 luglio. 2014
American Academy, Cinque Mostre, Rome, Italy. 2016.
BOOMtowns - Exhibition, The American Academy in Rome, Text

and Image Series. February 2016 _________________________________________
Vaguely Familiar Histories - Invited speaker, SALA University of Professional

British Columbia, Brown Bag Series. November 2016 JIM, Principal. 2015-present
Philadelphia School Reuse Charrete, Community Design Volubilis Excavations, Project Architect. 2016-present
Collaborative, w/ Kieran Timberlake. 2015
Morgantina Excavations, Geospatial Director. 2008-present
Morgantina Archaeological Park Conversation. Ongoing

Greg Johnson
________________________________
_________________________________________
Senior Instructor, 2011
Royal Architectural Institute of Canada
Courses Taught Association of Professional Engineers & Geoscientists of

_________________________________________ British Columbia
Undergraduate
Architectural Institute of British Columbia
ARCH 411: Architectural Technology I. 2012-2013
Building Envelope Professional Designation

CIVL 201: Civil Engineering 1. 2012-2015
LEED Accredited Professional Designation

CIVL 478: Building Science & the Building Enclosure. 2012-2015
Graduate
ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I. 2012-present _________________________________________
ARCH 531: Architectural Technology II. 2014-present Research / Scholarship

Collaborator in the Sustainable Building Science Program, funded
ARCH 513: Environmental Systems and Controls I. 2012 through an NSERC CREATE grant totaling $1.6 million over 6 years.
Participated in the delivery of the teaching components of the
ARCH 544X: Design Build I. 2015-present program. 2010-2017
ARCH 544Y: Design Build II. 2015-present Creative Activity

Oversaw design and co-curated exhibition and publication on the
ARCH 551 (formerly ARCH 544N): Communicating Construction. architectural work of Daniel Evan White Architect, in partnership
2013-present with the Museum of Vancouver. 2013-2014
ARCH 571B: Architectural Detailing. 2012-present

_________________________________________
ARCH 597A: Sustainable Building Science Program
Topics. 2012-2015
Academic
Development of new course for MArch program (ARCH 551) on
CIVL 598G: Sustainable Building Science Program Projects. 2012
Construction Documentation to better address accreditation
requirements. Elective course 2013-15, converted to required
course in 2016.
Education
_________________________________________
Integration of communication/language skills component of APSC
MScA, Université de Montréal. 1980 201 into CIVL 201.
BArch, Université de Montréal. 1977 Development of Design-Build course and project, undertaken
in two terms: first term of design (ARCH 544X), second term
BASc, University of British Columbia. 1974 of construction (ARCH 544Y). Relationship is now established
with non-profit partner organization, able to provide a site and
accommodation for the students. The intent is to create an
opportunity for an annual project to provide practical construction
experience for the students.

Association of Professional Engineers & Geoscientists of BC Board Organizing committee member, 12th Canadian Masonry
of Examiners. 2017 Symposium. 2011-2013
Department of Engineering, Carleton University Accreditation Wood Design Awards, Jury Member. 2012
Review Committee. 2017
Masonry Institute of British Columbia Masonry Design Awards, Jury
SALA Faculty Merit & PSA Review committee. 2017 Member. 2012
SALA Academic Infrastructure sub-committee. 2016-present Public Service

School Noise Action Group. 2006-present
Architectural Institute of BC Registration Committee Member, SALA
representative. 2014-present
Architecture Co-op program coordinator. 2013-present
SALA Safety Committee. 2012-present
SALA Landscape Architecture Instructor position search

committee. 2016-2017
SALA Faculty Merit & PSA Review Committee. 2014-2016
External examiner for MSc candidate, BC Institute of

Technology. 2016
Civil Engineering Department Teaching & Learning Sub-

Committee. 2015
UBC Climate Action 2020 Workshop. 2015
Civil Engineering Department Merit & PSA Review

Committee. 2014
Civil Department Head Search Committee. 2014
Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB) Validation

Conference. 2014
SALA Review of Teaching. 2013
Applied Science Killam Teaching Prize Committee, co-

chair. 2011-2014
Professional
Committee member, Chair in Wood Building Design &
Construction. 2011-present
Review of “Architectural Tectonics” for publisher Routledge. 2014

Christopher Macdonald
________________________________
May 2016 RAIC Festival of Architecture, Presentation with Andrew
King, Ottawa.
Professor, 2005
‘Downs House II: A Conversation’, Presentation with Barry Downs,
November 2016, Inform Interiors, Vancouver.
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
‘The Vancouver Modern House: A Fragile Legacy’, Presentation
September 2016, Vancouver Heritage Foundation, Museum of
Undergraduate
Vancouver, Vancouver
ARCH 403: Themes in Architecture and Design.
‘Drawing Ambience’, contributor to group exhibition at Washington

Graduate
University, RISD and Cooper Union, 2016
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2015, 2017
‘Hank Schubart’, Bool Launch and Presentation, May 2012 Harbour

ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2014, 2015
Art Gallery, Ganges.
ARCH 538: Portugal. 2016

‘Migrating Landscapes’, Panel Discussion, November 2011
Museum of Vancouver, Vancouver.
ARCH 538: Switzerland: Modernity Now. 2015
‘Vancouver Present Tense’, Invited presentation and field trip,

ARCH 538: Siza and Souta de Moura: Modernity and the Traditions
with Matthew Soules May 2011, RAIC Festival of Architecture,
of Building. 2014
Vancouver.
ARCH 538: Sweden. 2013
ARCH 544: Urban Traditions and Prospects. 2014

_________________________________________
ARCH 544: Type-Prototype. 2012 Downs House II, photography by Michael Perlmutter. UBC
SALA West Coast Modern House Series with Oro Editions,
ARCH 561: Arrival City 2.0. 2017 Vancouver 2016.
‘Perfect Seven’, in Border Crossings Art + Architecture, volume 35,

Education number 2 Summer 2016.
_________________________________________
‘Christopher Macdonald’ and ‘Christopher Macdonald and Peter
AA Diploma (Honors), Architectural Association School of
Salter, contributors to Drawing Abience, Washington University and
Architecture. 1979
RISD, distributed by University of Chicago Press, 2015, pp,92-95

‘The Next Modern House’, Chapter in The West Coast Modern
House, Figure.1 Publishing, Vancouver 2014.

_________________________________________ ‘Domestic Topography: An Introduction’, Essay in monograph
BattersbyHowat, TUNS Press, Halifax 2013.
The Canada Council for the Arts, 2015 - $20,000 for production of ‘Foreword’ in, Houses Made of Wood and Light, Michele
Downs House II monograph Dunkerley, University of Texas Press, Austin, 2012.
‘Design Research as a Convergence of Practice and Academia’, ‘Collected Wisdom’. In Canadian Architect RAIC Gold Medal,

Volume 57, June 2012, pp. 28-29.

_________________________________________
Academic
Member, UBC Campus Planning Consultant Review Committee,
MoA Renewal Project. 2017
Member, President’s Advisory Committee for the Selection

of a New Dean for the Faculty of Applied Science. March -
December 2012
Member, SALA Building Committee. 2011- present
Professional
Member, APSC ARPT Committee. 2012, 2017
Member, Council of the Architectural Institute of British

Columbia. 2013-2016
Participant, CACB educating Future Architects Conference, St-

Sauveur, Quebec. September 2014

Sherry McKay
________________________________
_________________________________________
Associate Professor, 1992
“The Measure of Dan White,” Playhouse: The Architecture of
Daniel Evan White, exhibition catalogue curated by Greg Johnson
Courses Taught and Martin Lewis, Museum of Vancouver Oct. 2013-Mar 2014
_________________________________________
Undergraduate
ENDS 281: Architecture in Context + Across Time. 2014-2015 _________________________________________
Graduate Academic
ARCH 504: Architectural History I. 2012-2014 Chair - Student Affairs Committee, SALA. 2017
ARCH 505: Architectural History II. 2012-2017 Chair - Architecture History + Urban Design Faculty Position
Committee. 2014
ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories. 2012-present
Chair - Urban Design Faculty Position Search Committee. 2013
ARCH 561H: Housing Equity. 2016
Member - ISGP Advisory Committee, and Admissions
ARCH 561C: Current Debates in the Study of the Built Environment. Committee 2012-2017
2012 - 2013
Member - UBC SSHRC Faculty of Graduate and Post Graduate
Studies. 2015, 2016
Education
_________________________________________ Member - UBC, Department of Geography, Urban Studies
Specialization Committee. 2012-2017
PhD, University of British Columbia. 1995
UBC Faculty of Graduate Studies PhD, University Examiner 2014,

MA, University of British Columbia.
2015, Chair. 2013
BA, University of British Columbia.

University Examiner, Curtin University Australia, PhD.
September 2014
_________________________________________ Public Service
Co-editor: West Coast Modern House Series, Oro Publications +
Society of Architectural Historians 2012-2017 SALA. 2014
Book Editor: Building Research & Information, UK. 2012-2017

_________________________________________ Review of the Manuscript Palimpsest: Strategies and Tactics for
Intervening in Urban Landscapes, Routledge. January 2015
“West Coast Land Claims,” Northern Building: Canadian Reviewer - Manuscript for Francis and Taylor. February 2013
Architecture, 1967-2017 (Princeton University Press, Spring 2019)
Reviewer - Manuscript for Francis and Taylor. December 2012
Co-applicant, SSHRC Connections grant for “Future of Public
Housing” Workshop, January 2015 granted ($49, 934) Principle
Investigator: P. Gurstein

Publication referee for Racar: Henri Labrouste et l’architecture
comme experience totale. February 2012

AnnaLisa Meyboom
________________________________
Invited presenter - Autonomous Vehicles and the Future of Driving
in the Region at Tranlink Regional Roundtable on the Future of
Associate Professor, 2016 Driving, New Westminster, BC, Feb 2, 2017
Invited presenter - Designing the Future of Autonomous Vehicles

Courses Taught and Urban Form at the Automated Vehicles: Planning the Next
_________________________________________
Disruptive Technology. Conference Board of Canada Conference,
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2013, 2014 Toronto, Canada, April 19-20, 2016.
ARCH 512: Structures I: 2012-2015, 2017 Invited presenter - TimberSkin Research: Large Scale Wood
Membrane Structures. Centre of Advanced Wood Processing Open
ARCH 532: Structures II. 2012-2016 House 2015. Vancouver, January 29, 2015
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2015, 2017 Invited presenter - Disruptive Technologies and the Future of
the City. Five Crucial Decades of City Building. UBC Urban Design
ARCH 544O: Studio with students from Southeast University in Forum. November 5, 2014
Nanjing, China. 2014

Invited presenter - Digital Design and Fabrication from the
ARCH 544U: Future Transportation & Urban Form. 2016 Architect’s Perspective. Digital Design and Construction of Timber
Structures Workshop 2014. Vancouver, June 12-13, 2014
Education UBC Hampton Grant. Intelligent Mobility & Urban Design: Impact
_________________________________________ on the City & Society. $18,260. 2014-2015
MArch, University of British Columbia. 2007 Grant - Forest Innovation Investment (Wood First Investment Plan).
Shell Structures in Wood. $64,000. 2014
BASc, University of Waterloo. 1993
Grant - UBC Living Lab. Parkades of the Future. $13,725. 2014
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
Member, Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists BC Maia, Sara Costa, and Annalisa Meyboom. “Understanding the
Effects of Autonomous Vehicles on Urban Form.” Road Vehicle
Member, Royal Architecture Institute of Canada Automation 4 (2017): 201.
Sara Costa Maia & AnnaLisa Meyboom. ‘Researching Agency in

Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity Interactive Architecture.’ ACADIA 2016, Posthuman Frontiers: Data,
_________________________________________
Designers and Cognitive Machines. Michigan, USA. Oct 27-29 2016.
Sara Costa Maia*, Hannah Teicher and AnnaLisa Meyboom.
“Infrastructure as Social Catalyst: Electric Vehicle Station Planning
Invited presenter - ‘Autonomous Vehicles : Designing the Urban
and Deployment”. Journal of Technological Innovation and Social
Future’ to Hatch Engineering Board of Directors, Wosk Centre for
Change. Elsevier. Volume 100. November 2015. 53–65
Dialogue, Vancouver, Canada. June 23, 2017
Invited presenter - ‘Autonomous Vehicles and their Impact
AnnaLisa Meyboom, Oliver Neumann & Thomas Tannert. Extending
on Urban Form and Society’ to Vancouver Board of Trade,
the Vocabulary of Wood: Research in Large Scale Shell Structures
April 21, 2017
in Wood. Real Time - Extending the Reach of Computation. The

Association for Education and Research in Computer Aided Canada. February 2014.
Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe). Vienna, Austria.
September 16-18, 2015. Meyboom, AnnaLisa, Hannah Teicher. Strategic Siting of Early Fast
Charging Stations to Accelerate Growth. EVVE: Accelerating EV
Meyboom, AnnaLisa, Annette Bögle & Jose Romo Martin. Growth. Gatineau, Canada, Oct 21-23, 2013. (Accepted on abstract)
Geometry and Parametric Modeling in the Conceptual Design Meyboom, AnnaLisa, Hannah Teicher. Level 2 Siting Methodology
of Bridges. International Association of Bridge and Structural for Municipalities. EVVE: Accelerating EV Growth. Gatineau,
Engineers. Geneva, Switzerland. September 23-25, 2015. Canada, Oct 21-23, 2013. (Accepted on abstract)
Ata Sina, Shannon Pitt, AnnaLisa Meyboom, Mark Martinez, James Reeves, David, Meyboom, AnnaLisa. Stigmergic Space. ACADIA
Olson. Thermocatalytic Metafolds: Experiments in the Fabrication 2013 Adaptive Architecture Conference. Cambridge, Canada, Oct
of a Composite Paper Polymer Shape Changing Material. ACADIA, 24-26, 2013.
Computational Ecologies: Design in the Anthropocene, Cincinnati,
USA: October 19-25, 2015. Design Guidelines and Standards, BC Public Electric Vehicle
Charging Stations. Prepared by TIPSlab for BC Hydro and the
Sara Costa Maia, AnnaLisa Meyboom. “Interrogating Interactive Province of BC. August 2013. 140 pages, illustrated.
and Responsive Architecture” in Computer-Aided Architectural
Design Futures. The Next City - New Technologies and the Future UBC Electric Vehicle Charging Network Plan: A Campus Approach.
of the Built Environment. 16th International Conference, CAAD Prepared by TIPSlab for University of British Columbia and the
Futures 2015, São Paulo, Brazil, July 8-10, 2015. University Neighbourhoods Association. February 2013. 62 pages,
illustrated.
Alexandra Cheng*, Thomas Gaudin, AnnaLisa Meyboom, Oliver
Neumann and Thomas Tannert. Large Scale Wood Surface
Structures. 3rd Annual International Conference on Architecture Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
_________________________________________
and Civil Engineering (ACE 2015) Singapore, 13-14 April, 2015.
Academic
“A Graphical Analysis of British Columbia’s Energy Grid in Relation
Member, Working Commission on Design, International Association
to Electric Vehicle Fleet Loads”. Prepared by TIPSlab for research
of Bridge and Structural Engineers, Zurich, Sept 2009-present
collaborators, BC Hydro, BC Hydro, Province of BC and National
Resources Canada. March 15, 2015. 27 pages.
Professional
Transportation Research Board
‘Parkades of the Future.’ Prepared by TIPSlab for UBC Living Lab,
December 22, 2014. 82 pages, illustrated.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
Persuasive User Interfaces to match Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV)

Public Service
charging to renewable availability and off-peak power demand.
Plug in BC Advisory Committee 2013-14. Advised in the preparation
Prepared by TIPSlab for research collaborators, BC Hydro, BC
of the EV Communications Strategy, Province of British Columbia.
Hydro, Province of BC and National Resources Canada. December
2, 2014. 37 pages.
Plug in BC Advisory Committee 2015. Advising on Electric Vehicle
Strategy, Province of British Columbia
Evaluation of Fast Charging Station Locations: Assessment of
Conformance to the Station Location Process Guide. Prepared
Advisory Council to the Federal Government on Autonomous
by TIPSlab for BC Hydro, Province of BC and National Resources
Vehicles, 2017
Canada. April 2014.
EV Infrastructure Strategy Working Group of the City of

Evaluation of Level 2 Charging Station Locations: Assessment of
Vancouver, 2017
Conformance to the Station Location Process Guide. Prepared
by TIPSlab for BC Hydro, Province of BC and National Resources

Oliver Neumann
________________________________
and Civil Engineering (ACE 2015) Singapore, China. 2015
Associate Professor, 2009 Oliver Neumann and Rodrigo Cepeda Oettinger. Wood Fibre-based
Building: Innovative Architectural Applications of 3-D Printing for
Prefabricated Housing Production. The International Journal of the
Courses Taught Constructed Environment, Vol. 3. 2013
_________________________________________
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2013, 2014

_________________________________________
ARCH 544: UBC Student Union Building Intervention. 2015
Academic
ARCH 561: Design Build. 2015 UBC Pulp and Paper Centre, Associate Faculty. 2011-present
Associate Chair of Wood Building Design and Construction, UBC

Education Faculty of Forestry. 2010-present
_________________________________________
MAAD, Columbia University. 1996
MArch, Technical University. 1995

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Chrysalis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC,
Canada. 2015
Lightbox, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 2013
_________________________________________
O. Neumann, J. Hunter, A. Meyboom, A. Cheng, Th. Tannert.

TimberShell: Wood in Building. Journal of Engineering and
Architecture, Vol. 3, Issue 2. 2015
AnnaLisa Meyboom, Oliver Neumann and Thomas Tannert.

Extending the Vocabulary of Wood: Research in Large Scale
Shell Structures in Wood. Real Time - Extending the Reach of
Computation. The Association for Education and Research in
Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe). Vienna,
Austria. 2015
Alexandra Cheng, Thomas Gaudin, AnnaLisa Meyboom, Oliver

Neumann and Thomas Tannert. Large Scale Wood Surface
Structures. 3rd Annual International Conference on Architecture

Colette Parras
________________________________
_________________________________________
Public Service
Guest Critic, SALA Thesis Reviews. 2014
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Undergraduate
ENDS 420: Technology and Techniques. 2016
Graduate
ARCH 538D: Cityspace, Livingspace, Waterspace. Abroad in
Netherlands. 2017
Education
_________________________________________
B.Visual Arts, University of Victoria. 1996
_________________________________________
Registered Architect in the Netherlands. 2010

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Bing Thom Architects. Associate Business Development, Vancouver.
BC. 2016-present
Patkau Architects Inc. Vancouver, BC. 2013-2014
Exhibition and Conference at Adedes Gallery. Berlin,

Germany. 2013
‘Scales’ UNStudio at THINK Amsterdam. Amsterdam,

Netherlands. 2012
UNStudio. Associate Architect, Amsterdam, the

Netherlands. 2001-2013

Bill Pechet
________________________________
The Gathering – Competition finalist. 2013
Lecturer in Practice, 2000 Granville Street – National merit Award from Canadian Society of
Landscape Architects. 2010
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
Undergraduate
ENDS 402: Studio. 2012, 2016 Creative Activity
Alton Millpond – Gathering Pavilion and Rehabilitation project,
ENDS 411: Materials and Methods. 2012-2017 Caledon, ON. 2018
Graduate Keynote Speaker – K’vod V’Nichum Conference (North American

ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2012 Chevra Kadisha), San Rafael, CA. June 2017
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2012 Keynote Speaker – JCANA (Jewish Cemetery Association of North
America) Convention, Vancouver, BC. May 2017
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2014-present
The Federation Table, A Moving Monument, Calgary, AB. Fall 2017
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2013, 2017
Jewish Cemetery of Reno Master Plan, Reno, NV. 2017-2018
ARCH 538D: Cityspace, Livingspace, Waterspace. Abroad in
Netherlands. 2017 Necessaria at Mountain View Cemetery, Vancouver, BC. 2017
Restoration of Jewish Cemetery at Mountain View,

Education Vancouver, BC. 2017
_________________________________________
Presentation - Work of Pechet Studio, BC Association of Garden
BArch, University of British Columbia. 1987
Designers. February 2017
BFA, University of Victoria. 1982

OA Laneway House, Vancouver, BC. On hold.
BA Geography, University of Victoria. 1979

Presentation - Work of Pechet Studio, Emily Carr University, Dept.
of Industrial Design. November 2016

_________________________________________ Dichroic Vancouver, Vancouver. 2016
The Otherside - Competition shortlist, City of Toronto Public Art Schara Tzedeck Cemetery Addition & Memorial Plaza,
competition, Toronto, ON. 2017 Vancouver, BC. 2016
Bute Street Plaza, Vancouver, BC. 2016
Heaven Between – Competition 1st place, City of Winnipeg Public
Art competition, Winnipeg, MB. 2016 Rings on Alberni - lighting project for Alberni Street, Vancouver,
BC. 2015-2018
Closer Than – Competition 1st place, Brighouse Station Public Art
Competition (Canada Line), Richmond, BC. 2016 Roger That, Public Art lighting installation, Calgary, AB. 2015
Dichroic Vancouver – Competition 1st place. 2014 Ambleside Precinct Street Design Guidelines, Vancouver, BC. 2015

Decorative Lighting and Demonstration Projects for the West End.
Vancouver, BC. 2014
Garden City Lands Visioning Report & Master Plan.

Richmond, BC. 2014
Public Realm Master Plan for Mount Pleasant and Broadway East,
Vancouver, BC. 2014
Woods Columbaria, Phase 2, Capilano View Cemetery, West

Vancouver, BC. 2014
Little Spirits Garden and Ossuary. Saanich, BC. 2013
Emptyful, Millennium Plaza. Winnipeg, MB. 2012

_________________________________________
Academic
SALA Alumni Committee Member. 2014-present
SALA rep to MOV for Upcycled Urbanism events and exhibitions.

2014-present
SALA rep to BCSLA Board of Examiners. 2014-present
SALA ENDS committee member. 2013-present
Public Service
Jury Member. Public Art Competition for Fraser Heights Community
Centre, Surrey, BC. 2017
Jury Member. Public Art Competition for Kildonan Park Pond,

Winnipeg, MB. 2017
Vancouver Urban Design Awards. Submission Juror. 2016

Michael Perlmutter
________________________________
work. 2015
Adjunct Professor, 2013 Main Gallery, Stockholm. Solo exhibition of photography

work. 2014
Courses Taught St. Petersburg Design Week, Russia. Solo exhibition of photography
_________________________________________
work. 2012
ARCH 538F: Stockholm Through the Lens. 2017
ARCH 544F: Building Images. 2012, 2015

_________________________________________
AAHN15: Creative Tools - Architectural Photography. (Lund UBC SALA West Coast Modern House Series: Friedman House
University, Sweden). 2013 with text by Richard Cavell, Copp House with text by Adele Weder,
Binning House with text by Matthew Soules, Merrick House with
text by Anthony Robins. 2017
Education
_________________________________________
UBC SALA West Coast Modern House Series: Downs House II with
text by Christopher MacDonald. 2016
MArch, University of California Berkeley. 1988
UBC SALA West Coast Modern House Series: House Shumiatcher

BA, University of California Berkeley. 1977
with text by Leslie Van Duzer. 2014
_________________________________________
Licensed to practice architecture in the state of California.

1985-present
Member of the Swedish Association of Professional Photographers.

1996-present

_________________________________________
Two photographs were made into Swedish postage stamps. 2013

_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Commissioned Photography. Photography of architecture, interiors,
and works of art in Europe and North America. Commissioned by
architects, engineers, publishers, government agencies, product
manufacturers, museums, etc. 1994-present
Edsviks Konsthall, Stockholm. Group Exhibition of photography

Inge Roecker
________________________________
zoning documents for Chinatown. I am also an appointed member
of CHAPC advising City Council on issues pertaining Chinatown
Associate Professor, 2010 development.
Creative Activity
Courses Taught Design Project, Turner Dairy, Heritage Conversion of Vancouver’s
_________________________________________
first Dairy distribution center /1920 (14 family units), Vancouver,
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2014-2016 BC. 2015-present
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2014-2017 Rezoning Stage (prototype study for a courtyard typology within
single family typology in Vancouver)
ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop. 2016-present
Design and Feasibility Study, Testing new Zoning requirements
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2012 along the Hastings Corridor. Vancouver. 2016
ARCH 543: Contemporary Practice. 2013-present Competition Entry, Shortlisted, Multigenerational Housing (81
units) Invited Competition for Infill Site, Stuttgart, Germany.
December 2011
Education
_________________________________________ Design Building Project, Energy +, Collective Housing development
producing / storing solar energy (28 units), Weinsberg, Germany.
MArch, University of Manitoba. 1999 2011- 2015
BES, University of Manitoba. 1991 Design Project, Energy+, Urban Infill Housing (8 Units), Heilbronn,
Germany. 2012-2015
Licenses / Registrations Design Project, 217 East Georgia/Chinatown, Urban Infill on 25

_________________________________________
feet lot (28 units/ prototype development), Chinatown, Vancouver,
BC. 2012-2015
Registered Architect. AIBC. 2016
Registered Passive Haus trained Professional. CAN PHI, Vancouver,

BC. 2012-2015 _________________________________________
Registered Architect. Architektenkammer Baden-Württemberg, Kerry Gold, Vancouverites aim to create Co-housing space within a
Germany. 1999 tower, Globe and Mail. April 2016
Member. RAIC. 2007 Dr Thomas Haag, Wohnen der Zukunft, erlebt in der Gegenwart,
BWGZ, Oekologisches BAuen. June 2015
Ulrike Bauer-Doer, A perfect environment to grow old, Heilbronner

Stimme. February 2015
_________________________________________
Herrgott, Barbara S.”Wohn-und Geschaeftshaus in Bad Rappenau”.
Handbuch und Planungshilfe Altengerechtes Wohnen. Berlin: DOM
publishers, pp. 145-149. ISBN 978-3-86922-149-6. 2012
I have conducted extensive research that is focused on the
historical and cultural fabric of Vancouver’s Chinatown. These
Loeffelhardt, Markus. “Altenwohnen”. Neue Architektur: Heilbronn
studies are instrumental in directing planning guidelines and

in Stadt und Landkreis. Sutttgart: Edition Panorama Publishing, pp Appointed Vice President, Vancouver Women’s Health Collective
210-211. ISBN 978-3-941001-09-1. 2012 (VWHC). 2011-2013
Van Uffelen, Chris. “Lu’s Pharmacy”. UBC SALA Outreach by design,

Pharmacies. ASIR Studio, Organelle, Basel: Braun Publishing,
pp.217-219. ISBN 978-3-037668-096-4. 2012

_________________________________________
Academic
Member, SALA Arch. Faculty Search Committee. 2017
Member, SALA MLA Faculty Search Committee. 2016
Member, SALA MArch Admissions Committee. 2016
Chair, SALA MArch Admissions Committee. 2014
Chair, SALA MArch Graduation. 2013
Chair, SALA MArch Admissions Committee. 2012
Member, SALA Directed Study Options. 2012
Member, SALA AIBC Internship/Co-op. 2012
Professional
Appointed Board Member, Chinatown Historic Area Planning
Committee, City of Vancouver -CHAPC. 2016-present
Appointed Board Member, Creative Advisory –Innovative Housing

and Design, City of Vancouver. 2016-present
Appointed Board Member, Advisory Board- Re:address Summit –

International Housing Conference, Vancouver. October 2016
Board Member, Chinatown Society Buildings Revitalization

Committee (CSBRC). 2012-present
Board Member, Vancouver Chinatown Revitalization Committee

(VCRC), Planning and Development Committee. 2015-
Appointed Board Member, Seattle Chinatown Design Center,

Seattle, USA. 2009-2013
Public Service

Adam Rysanek
________________________________
Engineering, Princeton University. 2015
Assistant Professor in Environmental Systems, 2017 Guest lecturer - Judge Business School, University of
Cambridge. 2011-2012
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
_________________________________________
ARCH 513: Environmental Systems and Controls I. 2017
Rysanek, A., Fonseca, J., Schlueter, A. (in preparation). Bayesian

calibration of dynamic building energy models Target publication:
Education Applied Energy.
_________________________________________
PhD in Engineering (Civil, Structural, and Environmental), University Peng, Y., Rysanek, A., Nagy, Z., Schlueter, A. (in review). Using
of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 2013 Machine Learning Techniques for Demand-Driven Cooling Control
in Office Buildings Applied Energy.
MSc in Engineering (Mechanical), Queen’s University,
Kingston, ON. 2009 Lienhart, L., Rysanek, A., Schlueter, A., (in review). Evaluation of the
net economic costs andbenefits of a ’3for2’ commercial building in
BASc (Mech. Eng.), Queen’s University, Kingston, ON. 2006 Singapore Journal of Building Construction and Planning Research.
Peng, Y., Rysanek A., Nagy, Z., Schlueter, A. (accepted). Learning-

Recent Honors / Awards based attribution of building occupant services demand Energy &
_________________________________________ Buildings.
ERASMUS/MUNDUS Transatlantic Partnership for Excellence Rysanek, A., Miller, C., Schlueter, A. (2017). A workflow for
in Engineering (TEE) Research Mobility Scholarship; undertook managing building information and performance data using virtual
a 3-month visiting research post at the University of British reality: an alternative to BIM for existing buildings? Proceedings of
Columbia, Vancouver, BC. 2013-2014 Building Simulation 2017 San Francisco, California
UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Science and Schlueter, A., Rysanek, A., Meggers, F., Mast, M., Bruelisauer,
Innovation Award scholarship. 2009-2013 M., Chen, K. W., Miller, C., Pantelic, J. (2016). 3-for-2: Realizing
spatial, material, and energy savings through integrated design.
Journal of the Council for Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH)
Recent Research, Scholarship & Creative Activity 2016 Issue II.
_________________________________________
Ward, A., Heo, Y., Choudhary, R., Rysanek, A. (2016). Exploring
the impact of different parameterisations of occupant-related
Principal Investigator: approx. US$ 600k research and development
internal loads in building energy simulation. Energy & Buildings
award under the Singapore Building Construction Authority (BCA)
123(1), 92-105
Green Building Innovation Cluster (GBIC) Demonstration scheme
for the ’3for2@UWCSEA’ project. 2016-2018
Peng, Y., Rysanek, A., Nagy, Z., Schlueter, A. (2016). Case Study
Review: Prediction Techniques in Intelligent HVAC Control Systems
Investigator and co-author: approx. US$ 650k research award
Proceedings of IAQVEC 2016 Songdo, Republic of Korea
under the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
to develop the Bayesian Building Energy Management (Bbem)
Rysanek, A., Choudhary, R. (2015). DELORES - a tool for stochastic
Portal, a software platform for integration of Bayesian approaches
prediction of occupant services demand. Journal of Building
to uncertainty analysis into building energy simulation. 2014-2017
Performance Simulation. 8(2), 97-118.
Invited guest lecturer - Department of Civil and Environmental

Rysanek, A., Murray, P., Miller, C., Pantelic, M., Mast, M., Schlueter, portfolio. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of
A. (2015). Simulation analysis of a low-exergy decentralized air- the International Building Performance Simulation Association.
conditioning system for hot and humid climates. Proceedings of Chambery, France.
the 14th International Conference of the International Building
Performance Simulation Association (IBPSA) Hyderabad, India Rysanek, A., Choudhary, R. (2012). A decoupled whole-building
simulation engine for rapid exhaustive search of low-carbon
Omu, A., Rysanek, A., Stettler, M., Choudhary, R. (2015). Economic, and low-energy building refurbishment options. Building and
climate change, and air quality analysis of distributed energy Environment 50(0), 21-33.
resource systems. Procedia Computer Science 51, 2147-
2156. Rysanek, A., Booth, A., Tian, W., Choudhary, R. (2012).
Incorporating future climate models into building retrofit analysis
Rysanek., A, Murray, P., Pantelic, J., Miller, C., Meggers, F., Mast, to assess the economic impacts and likely adaptation to climate
M., Schlueter, A. (2015). The design of a decentralized ventilation change. Proceedings of the 5th International Building Physics
system for an office in Singapore: Key findings for future research. Conference. Kyoto, Japan.
Proceedings of CISBAT 2015; International Conference on Future
Buildings and Districts. Lausanne, Switzerland
_________________________________________
Murray, P., Rysanek, A., Pantelic, J., Mast, M., Schlueter, A. (2015).
On decentralized airconditioning for hot and humid climates:
Academic
Performance characterization of a small capacity dedicated
Chair of Architecture and Building Systems, Institute of Technology
outdoor air system with built-in sensible and latent energy
in Architecture, ETH Zurich, Switzerland. 2014-2017
recovery wheels. Proceedings of the 6th International Building
Physics Conference. Torino, Italy
Course project reviewer - Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Princeton University. 2015
Tian, W., Rysanek, A., Choudhary, R., Heo, Y. (2015). High resolution
energy simulations at the city scale. Proceedings of the 14th
Professional
International Conference of the International Building Performance
Association of Scientific Staff Singapore-ETH (AsETH), Governing
Simulation Association (IBPSA) Hyderabad, India
Board Member and Treasurer. 2014-present
Ward, R. M., Choudhary, R., Heo, Y., Rysanek, A. (2015).

Member of International Building Performance Simulation
Parameterisation of internal loads in assessment of building energy
Association (IBPSA) British Columbia Chapter. 2014-
performance. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference of
the International Building Performance Simulation Association
Member of Electricity Policy Research Group (EPRG), University of
(IBPSA) Hyderabad, India
Cambridge. 2009-2014
Rysanek, A., Choudhary, R. (2013). Optimum building energy

Task coordinator, IEA-ECES Annex 31: Energy storage with Net Zero
retrofits under technical and economic uncertainty. Energy &
Energy Buildings and Districts: Optimization and Automation. 2013
Buildings. 57, 324-337.
Member of British Research and Policy Contact Group (RPCG) on

Rysanek, A., Choudhary, R. (2013). Using building simulation to
decarbonizing commercial and public buildings. 2011-2013
create marginal abatement cost curves for individual buildings.
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of the
International Building Performance Simulation Association.
Chambery, France.
Ward, R., Mortada, A., Omu, A., Rysanek, A., Rainsford, C.,
Choudhary, R. (2013). Analysis and optimisation of retrofit
and energy supply strategy across a diverse urban building

Blair Satterfield
________________________________
_________________________________________
American Collegiate Schools of Architecture Member. 2008-present
Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture

Courses Taught (ACADIA). 2013-2017
_________________________________________
Undergraduate
ENDS 401: Studio. 2017 _________________________________________
ARCH 437: Design Media II. 2014- First Place for Mississippi River Bridge Plaza Design
Competition. 2012
Graduate
ARCH 544: Design/Build Seminar. Canada Wood Council. 2014-2017
ARCH 577: Revit. 2015-2016
_________________________________________
ARCH 515: Design Media I. 2015
CREATE. Human in the loop Interactive Computational Tech.
$150,000 grant. 2017
ARCH 517: Design Media II. 2014-
F.I.I. Grant. $103,000. 2017

ARCH 501/540: Vertical Design Studio. 2012, 2017
SEEDS Grant. $8,000. 2017

ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2015
Large TLEF Grant. $46,150. 2017

ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2012, 2013, 2014
P.O.P House Grant. $4,800. 2017.

ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2013
P.O.P House Grant. $10,800. 2016

ARCH 543: Contemporary Practice. 2012-2013
Hampton Fund Research Grant. $25,000. 2015

ARCH 544: Design/Build Seminar. Canada Wood Council. 2014-2017
Canada Wood, China Wood Design/Build. $9,250 each. 2014, 2015

ARCH 577: Revit. 2015-2016
UofM Imagine Fund, Goodtimes/T-Wall. $5,000. 2014/2015

ARCH 577A: Design Media III. 2016-present
Creative Activity
HouMinn Practice, founding partner 1998-
Education
_________________________________________
Hypernatural: Architecture’s New Relationship with Nature.
MArch, Rice University. 1995 University of Milwaukee Wisconsin School of Architecture and
Urban Planning Gallery & The Goldstein Museum of Design. 2015
BSAS, University of Illinois. 1991
HouMinn Evolution. University of Hawaii. 2015
VarVac Wall. 2012-2014

The Kinetic Commons. 2012
_________________________________________
iijournal, associate editor. 2014-2017
“Becoming Finders of Form | Variable Vacuum Forming”

International Journal of Interior Architecture + Spatial Design 03.
With Marc Swackhamer. 2015
Primary Illustrator: “Hypernatural: Architecture’s New Relationship

with Nature” by Brownell, Blaine and Marc Swackhamer (New York,
USA: Princeton Architectural Press). 2014

_________________________________________
Academic
SALA Academic Infrastructure Committee. 2016-2017
ENDS New Curriculum Committee. 2016-2017
Established HiLo Lab at UBC SALA. 2016
SALA Interim Chair. 2015
SALA New Building. 2012-2016
Design Media II Course Redesign. 2014-2015
Public Service
American Collegiate Schools of Architecture (ACSA) SALA
Representative. 2013-2017

Matthew Soules
________________________________
Honorable Mention - Vermilion Sands. Faculty Design Award,
Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture. March 2015
Wheelwright Prize – Nomination, Graduate School of Design,
Harvard University. January 2015
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Finalist – Pop Rocks. Materials Category, Architizer A+ Awards.
ARCH 500: Elements of Architectural Design. 2011-2012, 2017 Note: Award given jointly to collaborators – AFJD Studio.
April 2013
ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio. 2011, 2013-2015, 2017
Housing Design Education Award, Association of Collegiate Schools
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2014, 2016 of Architecture/American Institute of Architects, March 02, 2012
ARCH 523: Contemporary Theories. 2011

_________________________________________
ARCH 568: Research Methods. 2013-2014, 2016-2017
ARCH 561: Adv. History/Theory Elective. 2012-2013
SSHRC - Insight Development Grant, Asset Urbanism. 2012-2014
Creative Activity
Education Founder and Director - Matthew Soules Architecture Inc.,
_________________________________________
Vancouver, Canada. 2008-
MArch, Harvard University. 2003
Vancouver Art Gallery North Plaza - Design of Vancouver’s
BA, University of British Columbia. 1999 new primary outdoor civic space, Vancouver, Canada. Note:
Collaboration with Nick Milkovich Architects, Hapa Collaborative,
and Urban Futures Associates. Ongoing
_________________________________________ Centennial Square Public Washrooms - New public washroom
building on the grounds of Victoria City Hall, Victoria, BC.
AIBC, Registered & Licensed Architect. 2008-present December 2016
Social Shapes - Plaza seating installation, Burnaby, BC. January 2016

_________________________________________
Intense the Heat - Temporary installation for an arts festival, West
Vancouver, BC. August 2015
AIBC Special Jury Award - Vermilion Sands. Architectural Institute
of British Columbia. October 2015
City Fabric - Temporary installation on the Burrard Bridge,
Vancouver, BC. Note: An equal collaboration with Rebecca Bayer.
Built Environment Professional Notable - Vermilion Sands. Core 77
August 2015
2015 Annual Design Awards. June 2015
EcoSoMo (Ecological Social Modules) - Permanent public art

People’s Choice Award – Cultural Pavilions Category, Special
installation, Burnaby, BC. April 2015
Mention – Commercial Pop-Up/Temporary Category, Finalist
– Materials Category - Vermilion Sands. Architizer A+ Awards.
Vermilion Sands - Temporary installation for an arts festival, West
Note: Awards included publication: “Vermilion Sands,” A+ Awards
Vancouver, BC. August 2014
2015, ed. Marc Kushner (London: Phaidon Press, 2015): 104 – 05.
April 2015

‘V’ Bicycle Parking Racks - New bicycle racks throughout downtown Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
Victoria, Victoria, BC. 2012 _________________________________________
Pop Rocks - Temporary public space installation in downtown Academic

Vancouver, Vancouver, BC. Note: Equal collaboration with AFJD Chair - End-of-Year Exhibition, UBC SALA. 2013-2015
Studio. AFJD Studio is the design practice of Amber Frid-Jimenez
and Joe Dahmen. 2012 Professional
Selection Committee Member - Skyway Public Art Commission,
Durante Kruek, Vancouver. June - August 2015
_________________________________________ Selection Committee Member - Robson Redux International Design
Competition, Vancouver. March 2015
Matthew Soules, “Vermilion Sands” in Transmaterial Next:
Materials That Will Redefine Our Future Physical Environment, Associate Editor - The International Journal of the Constructed
Blaine Brownell (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2017), Environment. 2013-14
128-130. In press.
Award Juror - Annual Architecture Awards, American Institute of
Matthew Soules, “Constant Object,” Log 40 (New York: Anyone Architects – New England Chapter. August 22, 2012
Corporation, Spring/Summer 2017): 101 - 106.
Public Service
Matthew Soules, Binning House: West Coast Modern House Series Member - Vancouver Urban Design Panel, City of Vancouver. Note:
(San Francisco: ORO Editions, 2017). Panel advises City Council on all major re-zonings and development
permit applications. 2014-2015
Matthew Soules, “Financial Formations,” in Industries of
Architecture, eds. Katie Lloyd Thomas, Nick Beech and Tilo Amhoff
(London: Routledge, 2016), 199-209.
Matthew Soules, “Leisure, Nature & Views: Notes of Spatial

Financialization #2,” in Asset Architecture No. 2, ed. Ali Rahim
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania School of Design,
2016), 35-38.
Matthew Soules, “What Was Once Called Architecture: Notes

on Spatial Financialization,” in Asset Architecture No. 1, ed. Ali
Rahim (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania School of Design,
2015), 13-15.
Matthew Soules, “Deconstructing Livability. Perspectives from

Central Vancouver,” in Post-War Middle-Class Housing: Models,
Construction and Change, eds. Gaia Caramellino and Federico Zanfi
(Bern: Peter Lang, 2015), 329-349.
Matthew Soules, “From Sci-Fi to Fi-Fi: Fictions and The Socio-

Technologies of Architectural Production,” JAE Journal of
Architectural Education 69, no. 2 (August, 2015): 220-227.
Matthew Soules, “Pax-Metropolitana: Urbanism and Its
Relationship to Violence and Peace,” The International Journal of
the Constructed Environment 3, no. 4 (2013): 25-33.

Sara Stevens
________________________________
Course Development Fund, Rice School of Architecture, Summer
2013 and 2014
Assistant Professor, 2015
Fellowship of Woodrow Wilson Scholars, Princeton
University, 2011-2012
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Social Science Research Council, Dissertation Development
Undergraduate Fellowship, 2008
ARCH 404: Architectural History I. 2015-present
Yale School of Architecture Merit Scholarship, 2004-2006
Graduate Alpha Rho Chi Medal, Rice University, 2000
ARCH 504: Architectural History I. 2015-present
Chillman Prize for Most Outstanding Portfolio, Rice University, 2000
ARCH 561J: Green Cities - Capitalism, Urbanism and
Environmentalism. 2017
_________________________________________
ARCH 561H: Capitalism and the Modern City. 2016
UDES 504: Urbanism by Design. 2015-2017 “REITs: The Financialization of Architectural Production,” Society of
Architectural Historians Annual Conference, St. Paul, Minnesota,
USA, April 2018
Education
_________________________________________
“Designing Development: The Architectural Division of Webb &
PhD, History & Theory of Architecture and Urbanism, Princeton Knapp,” Rethinking Pei: A Centenary Symposium, jointly hosted by
University. 2012 Hong Kong University and Harvard University Graduate School of
Design, Hong Kong, December 2017
MED, Yale University. 2006
Presenter on urban design pedagogy, Administrators’ Conference
BArch, Rice University. 2002 for Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Albuquerque,
New Mexico, USA, November 2017
BAArch. Rice University. 2000
“REITs and the Financialization of Space,” Society for American City
and Regional Planning History, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. October 2017
_________________________________________ “Developing Expertise,” invited evening lecture in school series,
University of British Columbia School of Architecture and
Member, Society of Architectural Historians; Member, Society of Landscape Architecture, March 2017
American City and Regional Planning Historians, 2008-present
“The Real Estate Developer Running for President,” invited seminar
speaker, University of Kansas Urban Studies Seminar, October 2016
_________________________________________
“J. C. Nichols Suburban Infrastructure: The Aesthetic, Moral,
and Legal Foundations of American Suburbia,” Wide Open Town
Publication Grant - Developing Expertise (2016), Graham
Symposium, Kansas City Public Library, April 2016
Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, 2015-2016
Invited panel chair and respondent, “Reconceptualizing Real Estate

Publication Grant - Developing Expertise (2016), Barr Ferree Fund
Development,” Society of American City and Regional Planning
for Publications, Princeton University, 2015-2016

History Conference, Los Angeles, California, USA. November 2015 “Big Money, Little Stories,” Journal of Architectural Education 69,
no. 2, October 2015, 200-202.
“From Swindlers to Experts: Professionalization in Real Estate
Development,” Histories of American Capitalism Conference, Dictionary entries for “Retail Architecture” and “Gensler”
Cornell University, Ithaca, November 2014 (architecture firm) in Oxford University Press’s Grove, Dictionary of
Art Online, “Retail Architecture,” and “Gensler.” 2014
“Hines in Houston: The Urbanism of Architectural Exceptionalism,”
Society of Architectural Historians Annual Conference, Austin, “(Modern) Design by (Real Estate) Committee,” Pidgin 16, April
Texas, April 2014 2013, 41-52.
“Just So Stories in Real Estate History, or, How the Apartment Tower Book reviews in Buildings + Landscapes, Journal of Architectural
Got Its Glass Skin,” Aggregate Architectural History Collaborative, Education, and Enterprise and Society.
Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, New York. March 2014
“The Architecture of Real Estate,” invited all-school lecture at Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
_________________________________________
University of Houston College of Architecture, Houston, Texas.
January 2014
Academic
Master of Urban Design Chair. 2017-present
“The Aesthetics of Property Values: Investing in Suburban
Landscape Design,” Planning History Conference (SACRPH),
FIRE Lecture Series Organizer. 2017
Toronto, October 2013
SALA Outreach Committee Chair. 2016-2017

“Pursuing Profit: How Zeckendorf Followed Urban Renewal to
Denver,” Society of Architectural Historians, Detroit, Michigan.
Lecture Series Organizer, School of Architecture and Landscape
April 2012
Architecture, University of British Columbia. Fall 2016, Spring 2017
“Professionalization Meets Public Policy: How the Urban Land

Green College Leading Scholar, University of British
Institute Shaped Urban Renewal,” Business History Conference,
Columbia. 2016-2018
Philadelphia, March 2012
Workshop participant, “Kansas City’s Golden Age,” University of

Missouri at Kansas City. November 2015
_________________________________________
Professional
Developing Expertise: Architecture and Real Estate in Metropolitan Journal of Architectural Education, Editorial Board Member. July
America, Yale University Press, 2016. Reviewed in: Metropolis 2017-June 2020
Magazine, September 2016 (preview); Urban Omnibus, January
2017; and Casabella, July 2017. Student Travel Award Committee Chair, Society of American City
and Regional Planning History. 2017
“Speculative: Design and Capital in the Work of Gerald Hines,”
ARPA Journal 05: Conflict of Interest (Applied Research Practices Jury Member, Phillip Tattersfield Essay Competition, British
in Architecture, arpajournal.net) (submitted February 2017, Columbia Society of Landscape Architects. 2016-2017
under review)
Chair and commenter, “Re-conceptualizing Real Estate
“Field Notes: 1893 World’s Fair Panorama,” Manifest Journal #3: Development,” Society of American City and Regional Planning
Bigger Than Big, (submitted October 2017, under review) Historians, Los Angeles. November 2015
“Just So Stories of Real Estate History,” The Aggregate website
(transparent peer review), http://we-aggregate.org (under revision)

Nicole Sylvia
________________________________
_________________________________________
Sustainable Infrastructure in Punjabi Villages, Research Assistant.
Courses Taught 2015
_________________________________________
NSERC Engage Project - Exploring Better Integration of Building-
Undergraduate
Scale and Geospatial Tools to Inform Urban Design and Planning,
ENDS 202: Constructions Studio. 2016 (as TA)
Research Assistant. 2015
ENDS 220: Architecture in Context. 2014, 2016 (as TA)
Frameworks for Regenerative Design, Researcher. 2014
Graduate
ARCH 538A: Theory Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017 Wesbrook Village Post Occupancy Study, Research Assistant. 2014
ARCH 538B: Field Lab Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017 Creative Activity

Bing Thom Architects, Intern Architect. 2017-
ARCH 539: Studio Abroad in Chandigarh. 2017
Contingent Design, Co-Founder/Researcher. 2017-
ARCH 541: Professional Practice. 2016 (as TA)
Silicon Sage Builders, Project Designer. 2013
ARCH 577: Design & Production in Autodesk Revit. 2014-
2016 (as TA) City of Martinez, California, Planning Department Intern. 2013
Education Selected Publications

_________________________________________ _________________________________________
MArch, University of British Columbia. 2016 “The Modernisms of Vancouver.” The Modernist, issue 24,
forthcoming fall 2017.
Summer Institutes: [IN]CITY, University of California, Berkeley. 2012
“Four Grids for the Great Plains.” Uncertain Futures Conference,
BDA, University of Minnesota. 2012 OCAD University, Toronto, ON, forthcoming October 27-29. With
Roy Cloutier.
Recent Honors / Awards “Architecture After Cultivation.” 105th Annual Meeting of the
_________________________________________ Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture: Detroit, MI,
March 23-25. With Roy Cloutier.
AIA Henry Adams Medal, 2017
“Aloha Evolution.” Illustrations and storyboard design for an

RAIC Honor Roll, 2017
animated short. Presented at HouMinn Evolution, University of
Hawaii. With Prof. Blair Satterfield, HouMinn, and team.
Thompson, Berwick, Pratt & Partners Scholarship, 2015
“Suspended Sphere.” First Place, Fast + Epp Architectural

Concord Erickson Energy and Architecture Fellowship, 2014
Engineering Design Competition. With Kate Mathers.
Master of Architecture Award, 2014
Faculty of Applied Science Graduate Award, 2013

Thena Jean-hee Tak
________________________________
Pinckney Street Residence - Private residence, Boston, MA. 2013
Adjunct Professor, 2017 Hanely Wood - Office Interior Renovation, Washington, D.C. 2013
Aviary - Public interactive art, Dubai, UAE. 2013

Courses Taught
_________________________________________
Boston Society of Architects Headquarters - Office-exhibition,
ARCH 520: Vertical Design Studio. 2017 interior renovation, Boston, MA. 2012
Project Architect - Höweler + Yoon Architecture, Boston,

Education MA. 2010-2013
_________________________________________
MArch II, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Selected Publications

Cambridge, MA. 2015 _________________________________________
BArch, Cornell University, College of Architecture, Art and Planning, “The Violent Picturesque” - PIDGIN Magazine 22: Flora and Fauna,
Ithaca, NY. 2009 Princeton School of Architecture Press. 2017
“Soft Efficiency” - GSD Platform 8. Actar, Harvard University GSD,

Recent Honors / Awards 2015. 2016
_________________________________________
“Surface Tectonics” - GSD Platform 7. Actar, Harvard University
Recipient of 2011-2012 Robert James Eidlitz Travel GSD, 2014. 2015
Fellowship. 2012
“Babylonian Slowness” - GSD Platform 7. Actar, Harvard University
GSD, 2014. 2015
_________________________________________
“Amphibious Territories” - Association, Vol. 5. Cornell University
AAP, 2013. 2013
“Soft Efficieny” - Presenter, GSD Open House: Option Studio
Presentation, Harvard University GSD. 2015
_________________________________________
Creative Activity
Goose Creek Safety Rest Area - Safety Rest Area for MN Academic
Department of Transportation, Minneapolis, MN. Ongoing Review Critic, University of Minnesota College of
Design. 2015-2017
Environmental Learning Center - Public nature center, St. Paul,
MN. Ongoing Review Critic, University of Milwaukee School of
Architecture. 2015-2016
Designer - Vincent James Associates Architects, Minneapolis, MN.
2015-present Review Critic, Northeastern University. 2013-2014
Thicket Installation - Public installation for the exhibition ‘How

Soon is Now,’ Judin Gallery, Berlin, Germany. 2015
Intern - Barkow Leibinger, Berlin, Germany. 2014

Leslie Van Duzer
________________________________
lecturer, University of Tokyo, Tokyo. June 2016
Professor, 2010 U40 Lunch / Panel: “Legends of Architecture” - Panel moderator,

Urban Development Institute. February 2016
Courses Taught “Building the Zeitgeist” - Invited lecturer, Vancouver

_________________________________________
Heritage Foundation, B.C. Mid-Century Modern House Tour.
Undergraduate September 2015
ARCH 403: Themes. 2017, 2018
Panel: “Curse of the Livable City” - Panel moderator, Richmond
ENDS 231: Thinking by Design. 2012, 2013 (x2), 2016, 2017 Art Gallery, Richmond, B.C. Exhibition: Greg Girard: Richmond /
Kowloon. April 2015
Graduate
ARCH 502: Introductory Workshop. 2014 Panel: “Integrated Infrastructure and Urban Systems” - Panel
moderator, Urban Development Institute / Asia Society, Beijing.
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2018 Pacific Cities Sustainability Initiative – Healthy City/Resilient City
Conference. April 2015
ARCH 538E: Stockholm S,M,L,XL. 2017
“In Praise of Ambiguity” - Invited lecturer, Peking University,
ARCH 544P: The Body Acoustic. 2014 Beijing. December 2014
LARC 525: Research Methods. 2012, 2013 Q+A with Herzog and deMeuron team - Moderator, Vancouver Art
Gallery. Orpheum Theatre, Vancouver. October 2014
Education “Gesamtkunstwerk” - Invited lecturer, Westbank Salon Series,

_________________________________________ Vancouver. April 2014
MArch, University of California, Berkeley. 1986 “The Village Model” - Invited lecturer, Evergreen CityWorks,
Toronto. February 2014
BAArch, University of California, Berkeley. 1981
“Ambiguity and Imagination” - Invited lecturer, BC Society of
Landscape Architects Annual Conference. April 2013
_________________________________________
“Thinking by Design” - Invited lecturer, University of Saskatchewan
- School of Architecture Initiative. Symposium 3: Design Thinking
and Teaching. March 2013
“The Infinity of Identity” - Invited lecturer, CONFERENCE EUPRO
2017: Identity of Contemporary Architecture in Global World
“In Praise of Ambiguity” - Invited lecturer, Museum of Vancouver.
Environment, Liberec, Czech Republic. September 2017
SALA Speaks. November 2012
“Design Thinking: What Architects and Magicians Have in

Creative Activity
Common” – Invited lecturer, Healthcare Infrastructure Summit,
“In the Thick of Loos” – Invited exhibition at Adolf Loos Study
Muskoka, Ontario. April 2017
Centre, City of Prague Museum, Prague, 2019. In progress
“Adolf Loos Readymade” - Invited lecturer, Waseda University,

“Janice Swings” - Commissioned by Campus Planning and Design.
Tokyo. June 2016
Collaborators: students Peter Fortune, Darren Hubert, Anthony
Roach. 2014
“The Art of Deception: Adolf Loos and Mies van der Rohe” - Invited

“Container Contained” - Commissioned by UBC Infrastructure Director of UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture.
Development/Project Services and Campus and Community 2010 - 2015
Planning. Collaborators: students Peter Fortune, Dylan Korba, Jean Established the Master of Urban Design Program
Dières Monplaisir, Devan Burr. 2014
Established the professional mentor program for all
“On Drifting Sand” in Exhibition: Drawing by Drawing / Svein incoming students
Tønsager & Friends. Danish Architecture Center, Copenhagen.
January 2012 Established SALA’s participation n the Vancouver Summer Program
Design juror - Portland State University, USA (thesis reviews). 2015

_________________________________________ Design juror - University of California, Berkeley, USA (thesis
reviews). 2013
Leslie Van Duzer. Atelier Nishikata: When This Becomes That. Book
in progress
Professional
Juror, Berkeley Prize Essay Competition. 2012 – 2016
Leslie Van Duzer. The Art of Deception. Book in progress
Alghurair University, Dubai (accreditation review for proposed new

Chris Macdonald, Sherry McKay, Leslie Van Duzer, eds., West Coast
school) Team member: Amir Ameri. 2014
Modern House Series, San Francisco: ORO (7 books)
- Michael Prokopow and Douglas Coupland, Smith House II. 2018
Lambda Alpha International, Vancouver Chapter. Executive Board
- Adele Weder, Copp House. 2017
member, Treasurer. 2013 – 2015
- Tony Robins, Merrick House. 2017
- Matthew Soules, Binning House. 2017
External Advisor to Ecuadorian Government on the founding of a
- Richard Cavell, Friedman House. 2017
new university in the Amazon. 2013
- Chris Macdonald, Downs House. 2016
- Leslie Van Duzer, House Shumiatcher. 2014
Technical Review Committee, first round of architect selection
process for a new Vancouver Art Gallery. 2013
Leslie Van Duzer, “Mies and the Remix,” arq 19 n. 3
(2015): 197. 2015
Jury Member, Western Living Magazine’s 2013 Designers of the
Year competition. 2013
Leslie Van Duzer, “Letter to a Magician,” Pidgin Magazine 19 (Spring
2015): 1-7. 2015
Expert reviewer for Fulbright Commission, Prague. 2013
Leslie Van Duzer, “The Alchemy of Dance and Architecture” in

Arthur Erickson Foundation. Board member, Vice
Dance Aesthetics: The Significance of Space (Vancouver: The Dance
President. 2011-2013
Centre, 2013), 15-16.
Public Service
Leslie Van Duzer, “Preface: Architecture of Eloquence” in Building
SALA and Urbanarium: City Debates. Curated ten public Oxford-
Artistry, (Vancouver, Westbank, 2012), 4-7.
style debates on urban design issues. 2016-2017
Established the non-profit Vancouver Urbanarium Society thorough

_________________________________________ SALA Advisory Board. Founding and ongoing Board Director. 2013-
Academic Mayor’s Task Force on Affordable Housing, Vancouver. Academic

Formalized SALA-wide ongoing “in-reach” student lunchtime Working Group. 2012
lecture series. 2017

Lőrinc Vass
________________________________
“Metabolic Infrastructure” (in collaboration with Justin
Neenan). 2014
Sessional Instructor, 2016
Fast+Epp Architectural Engineering Design Competition (second
prize). 2014
Courses Taught
_________________________________________
“Urban Forest Bridge” (in collaboration with Mamoud
Bakayoko). 2014
Undergraduate
ENDS 401: Environmental Design Studio III. 2017
International Student Initiative Award, University of
British Columbia. 2012-2013
Graduate
ARCH 517: Design Media II. 2017
Affiliated Fellowship, University of British Columbia. 2012-2013
ARCH 538A: On Density. 2016
ARCH538B: Post-War Japanese Architecture & Urbanism. 2016

_________________________________________
ARCH 539: Study Abroad Studio Tokyo. 2016 Lőrinc Vass, “Constellations of the In-between: Topological
Diagrams of Urban Interstices,” Association of Collegiate Schools of
Architecture 2015 Fall Conference: Between the Autonomous and
Education Contingent Object, Syracuse, NY: October 8-10.
_________________________________________
Lőrinc Vass, “Francisco Kripacz: Interior Design,” BC Studies 192,
Winter 2016/17.
BFA (Honors), Simon Fraser University. 2011

_________________________________________
Canadian Architect Student Award of Excellence. 2016
American Institute of Architects Henry Adam Medal. 2016
Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Honor Roll. 2016
Think Public Space Architectural and Urbanistic Competition

(second prize). 2015
“Full Void Park“ (in collaboration with Pengfei Du, Yan Luo, Neal
Qiongyu Li, Daichi Yamashita). 2015
Architectural Institute of British Columbia Scholarship. 2015
Fentress Global Challenge 2013: Upcycled Architecture (shortlist of

16). 2014

George Wagner
________________________________
Academic, Professional, and Public Service
_________________________________________
Academic
Architecture Chair, UBC SALA, 2009-2012
Courses Taught
_________________________________________ Public Service
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cornell, University of
Undergraduate
Toronto, University of California at Los Angeles and Berkeley,
ARCH 503: Themes. 2011, 2013
University of Michigan, University of Washington, Carnegie-Mellon,
Arizona State University, University of Manitoba, Architectural
Graduate
Association. Temple University Japan, Tokyo University of the Arts,
ARCH 500: Elements Studio. 2013, 2017
Meijii University
ARCH 501/540: Second Term Vertical Studio. 2012, 2013, 2015

Final Studio Reviews, Thesis Reviews, Daniels Faculty, University of
Toronto. 2013
ARCH 538A: On Density. 2016
Final Reviews, Daniels Faculty, University of Toronto. 2011-2012
ARCH538B: Post-War Japanese Architecture & Urbanism. 2016
ARCH 539: Study Abroad Studio Tokyo. 2012, 2016
ARCH 544: On Writing. 2016
ARCH 561: On Density. 2015
Education
_________________________________________
MArch, University of Washington. 1981
BA, Bard College. 1975

_________________________________________
Symposium: HIGH LIFE: The Residential High Rise as Urban Habitat:
Contemporary Perspectives, International Assessments, Viennese
Contexts. Lecture: Vancouver: Tall and dense. AzW Vienna. 2013
_________________________________________
Tokyo from Vancouver 3. Collection of student works from Study

Abroad in Tokyo. 2014

Joseph Watson
________________________________
City,” Living in America: Frank Lloyd Wright, Harlem, and Modern
Housing, Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of American
Sessional Lecturer in History and Design, 2017 Architecture, Columbia University, September 28-29, 2017
“Reclaiming the Borderlands: Commerce and Culture in The

Courses Taught Disappearing City,” invited panelist, Living in America: Frank Lloyd
_________________________________________
Wright, Harlem, and Modern Housing, Temple Hoyne Buell Center
ARCH 505: Architectural History II. 2017 for the Study of American Architecture, Columbia University,
September 28-29, 2017
Education Presenter, “The Suburbanity of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Broadacre

_________________________________________ City,” Buell Dissertation Colloquium, Temple Hoyne Buell Center
for the Study of American Architecture, Columbia University, New
PhD Candidate in the History and Theory of Architecture, School of York, March 31-April 1, 2017
Design, University of Pennsylvania. 2018 (anticipated)
Presenter, “Redlining Usonia: The Social Politics of Frank Lloyd
MA Theology (concentration: Social Ethics), Union Theological Wright’s Cloverleafs,” Urban History Association 8th Biennial
Seminary in the City of New York. 2012 Conference, Chicago, October 13-16, 2016
BArch (magna cum laude), College of Architecture and Design, Panel organizer and presenter, “Scaling Up: Spatial Practices and
University of Tennessee at Knoxville. 2008 Urban Systems in the 20th and 21st Centuries,” Urban History
Association Eighth Biennial Conference, Chicago, October 13-16,
2016; fellow presenters were Daniel Richter and Jesse Smith,
Recent Honors / Awards commentator Bryant Simon
_________________________________________
Presenter, “Utopia and the City: Edward Bellamy and the
President Gutmann Leadership Award, Carnegie President’s Fund
Topographies of the Future,” Architecture Ph.D. Colloquium,
and the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly, University of
University of Pennsylvania, April 8, 2016
Pennsylvania. 2015
Presenter, “Structuring Utopia: Edward Bellamy’s City and

Will M. Mehlhorn Scholarship, School of Design, University of
Regional Planning,” The Society for American City and Regional
Pennsylvania. 2013
Planning History 16th National Conference, Los Angeles,
November 5-8, 2015

_________________________________________ Presenter, “Bureaucracy and Architecture: Rockefeller Center and
the Case for a New Historiography,” 12th Annual Architectural
Research/Scholarship Humanities Research Association Research Student Symposium:
Presenter, “Beyond Radio City: Rockefeller Center’s Regional Syncretic Architectures, Plymouth University (UK), June
Context,” The Society for American City and Regional Planning 11-13, 2015
History 17th National Conference, Cleveland, October 26-29, 2017
Presenter, “Architecture’s Territorial Ambitions, ca. 1929,”
Panel organizer and presenter, “Transatlantic Movements of Architecture Ph.D. Colloquium, University of Pennsylvania,
Interwar Modernist Planning,” The Society for American City and April 10, 2015
Regional Planning History 17th National Conference, Cleveland,
October 26-29, 2017; fellow presenters were Avigail Sachs and Presenter, “John Portman versus the Janitors,” Short Circuit
Gideon Fink Shapiro, commentator Elihu Rubin Lightning Talks, School of Design, University of Pennsylvania,
March 30, 2015
Symposium panelist, “Commerce and Culture in The Disappearing

“Outside Looking In: Race, Class, and Space in Atlanta, ca. 1964,” Edward Bellamy’s Utopian Fiction,” published online in Planning
invited lecturer, Spring Lecture Series, Graduate Program in Perspectives, July 2017, forthcoming in print
Architecture, Morgan State University, March 12, 2015
“Aid, Capital, and the Humanitarian Trap,” Thresholds 40
Presenter, “Revaluing the Land: Broadacre City and Frank Lloyd (2012): 238-244
Wright’s Theory of Capital,” 9th Savannah Symposium: The
Architecture of Trade, Savannah College of Art and Design,
February 5-7, 2015 Current Academic, Professional & Public Service
_________________________________________
Graduate Research Grant, Mellon Humanities, Urbanism and
Academic
Design Project, University of Pennsylvania. 2015
Ph.D. Representative, School of Design Student Council, University
of Pennsylvania. 2014-2015
Penny White Project Fund, for Wild Interfaces (www.wildinterfaces.
com), in collaboration with Mary Miller, Graduate School of Design,
School of Design Research Representative, University
Harvard University. 2015
of Pennsylvania Graduate and Professional Student
Assembly. 2014-2015
Guest lecturer, “Outside Looking In: Race, Class, and Space in
Atlanta, ca. 1964,” Spring Lecture Series, Graduate Program in
Originator and Co-Organizer, Short Circuit, an ongoing series of
Architecture, Morgan State University, March 12, 2015
interdisciplinary lightning talks, School of Design, University of
Pennsylvania. 2014-present
Symposium Co-Organizer and Panel Chair, City Futures, University
of Pennsylvania, November 12-13, 2015; organized with Winka
Convener, Architecture Ph.D. Colloquium, University of
Dubbeldam and Daniela Fabricius; participants included Daniel
Pennsylvania, 2013-2015; participants included Francesca Ammon,
D’Oca, Reinier de Graaf, Andrew Herscher, Thom Mayne, Paul
Daniel Barber, Etienne Benson, Charles Davis, John Dixon Hunt,
Preissner, Vyjayanthi Rao, Marilyn Jordan Taylor, Liam Young
Sandy Isenstadt, Joan Ockman, Liliane Weissberg
Presenter, “Outside Looking In: Atlanta’s Peachtree Center and the

Professional
Politics of Space,” Annual Conference of the Southeast Chapter
Member - Society for American City and Regional Planning History
of the Society of Architectural Historians, University of Arkansas,
Fayetteville, October 29-November 1, 2014
Member - Society of Architectural Historians
Presenter, “The Politics of the Atrium: Atlanta’s Peachtree Center

Member - Southeastern Society of Architectural Historians
and the Re-invention of Space,” Bankrupt: Economic Crisis
and the Built Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Member - Urban History Association
April 4-5, 2014
Symposium Co-Organizer and Panel Chair, Architecture Education

Goes Outside Itself: Crossing Borders, Breaking Barriers, University
of Pennsylvania, February 8-9, 2013; organized with Daniel Barber,
David Leatherbarrow, and Joan Ockman; panel participants
included Michael Carriere, Andrew Chin, Andrea Merrett,
Albert Narath
_________________________________________
“Topographies of the Future: Urban and Suburban Visions in

4.5 Visiting Team Report from the Previous Visit
The appendix of the APR must include a copy of the report from the previous site visit in its entirety.

2012 Visiting Team Report

Master of Architecture Program

The Canadian Architectural Certification Board
1 Nicholas Street, Suite 710
Ottawa (Ontario) Canada K1N 7B7
Voice: (613) 241-8399
Fax: (613) 241-7991
E-mail: [email protected]
Web Site: www.cacb-ccca.ca
4.5 Visiting Team Report from the Previous Visit -- 311

Visiting Team Report
February 25-29, 2012
Table of Contents

I. 2863(9'8-32?''6)(-8%8-32 ........................................................................................... 3

II. Summary of Team Findings (Conditions 3.1 A 3.12) ................................................................ 4
1. !)%1E7)2)6%0311)287 ................................................................................................. 4
2. 32(-8-327*36''6)(-8%8-32B1)8C%2(B2381)8C%7911%6= ............................................. 4
3. 63+6%1E763+6)777-2')8,)46):-3977-8):-7-8*63146):-397#! ................................ 5
4. Program Strengths .............................................................................................................. 7
5. %97)73*32')62%2(!)%1E76)'311)2(%8-327 ............................................................. 8

III. Compliance with the Conditions for Accreditation .................................................................... 9

IV. Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix A: Program Information .......................................................................................... 26
1. Brief History of the University of British Columbia @ .................................... 26
2. Institutional Mission ....................................................................................... 26
3. Program History ............................................................................................ 26
4. Program Mission ........................................................................................... 27
5. Program Action Plan ..................................................................................... 29

Appendix B: The Visiting Team (names & contact information) .............................................. 36

Appendix C: The Visit Agenda ............................................................................................... 38

V. Report Signatures .................................................................................................................. 40

VI. Confidential recommendation to the CACB ........................................................................... 41

Page 2 of 40

I. ! $
The CACB is a national independent non-profit corporation, whose Directors represent the Canadian
Architectural Licensing Authorities (CALA), the Canadian Council of University Schools of Architecture
(CCUSA) and the Canadian Architectural Students Association (CASA). The CACB is both a decision-
making and policy-generating body. It is the sole organization recognized by the architectural profession
in Canada to assess the educational qualifications of architecture graduates (Certification program) and
to accredit professional degree programs in architecture offered by Canadian Universities (Accreditation
program).

By agreement of the Registration Authorities and Councils of nine Provincial Institutes and Associations,
the CACB was established in 1976 to assess and certify the academic qualifications of individuals
holding a professional degree or diploma in architecture who intend to apply for registration. The Ordre
des Architectes du Québec joined the CACB in 1991. In 1991, the CACB mandate to certify degree
credentials was reaffirmed and its membership was revised to reflect its additional responsibility for
accrediting professional degree programs in Canadian University Schools of Architecture.

The CACB awards accreditation only to professional degree programs in architecture. These are
normally:
? Master of Architecture degree with a related pre-professional bachelor's degree;; requirement,
typically amounting to five or six years of study;;
? Master of Architecture degree without a pre-professional requirement, consisting of an
undergraduate degree plus a minimum of three years of professional studies;;
? Bachelor of Architecture degree requiring a minimum of five years of study, except in Quebec,
where four years of professional studies follows two years of CEGEP studies.

The process of accreditation begins at the school with the preparation of the Architecture Program
Report (APR). The APR identifies and defines the program and its various contexts, responding to the
CACB Conditions and Procedures for Accreditation. The APR is expected to be useful to the planning
process of the school, as well as documentation for the purposes of accreditation.

Upon acceptance of the APR by the CACB Board, an accreditation visit is scheduled. The CACB's
decision on accreditation is based upon the capability of the program to satisfy the Conditions and
Procedures for Accreditation, including the ability of its graduating students to meet the requirements for
learning as defined in the Student Performance Criteria. During the visit, the team reviews student work
and evaluates it against these requirements. The team also assesses the effectiveness and degree of
support available to the architectural program through meetings with the institution's administrators at
various levels, architecture and other faculty, students, alumni, and local practitioners.

At the conclusion of the visit, the Visiting Team makes observations and expresses compliments and
concerns about the program and its components. It also offers suggestions for program enrichment and
1%/)7 6)'311)2(%8-327 ;,-', -2 8,) .9(+1)28 3* 8,) 8)%1 %6) 2)')77%6= *36 8,) 463+6%1E7
improvement and continuing re-accreditation. Following the visit, the team writes the following VTR,
which is forwarded with a confidential recommendation to the CACB. The CACB then makes a final
decision regarding the term of accreditation.
Page 3 of 40

II. Summary of Team Findings
1. (

The Team was impressed with the vibrancy of the ',330E7*%'908=789()287%2(78%**%7;)00%7;-8,8,)
pedagogical context for the MArch degree program. The learning environment created by the School
encourages and nurtures creativity and exploration, grounded within the context of Vancouver and its
environs: culturally, socially, and environmentally. The School has historically played an important role
;-8,-28,)-8=3*#%2'39:)6%7;)00%7328,)2%8-32%078%+)%2(;-8,8,)%443-281)283* E72);
Director, there is promise of even greater influence and impact on the City, as well as the institution of UBC
itself. It is hoped that there will be the possibility for the return of the School to the context of the downtown,
as the role that this presence has had in the past has been immeasurably beneficial to the School, to UBC,
the downtown community, and the City at large.

Although the School has experienced success and reputation in its current physical context of the Lasserre
Building, the time has clearly come for either renewed facilities within the existing building, or within a new
building altogether. In addition to requiring larger space for studios, workshop and offices, the physical state
of the Lasserre building is inadequate for the functioning of the School. In particular, it is noted that the
building does not meet the structural seismic requirements for the area, a fact of concern to both the staff of
%7;)00%7"E7%(1-2-786%8367

The timing of this Visit coincides with the recent creation of the new Strategic Plan, the amalgamation with
Landscape Architecture into SALA, curriculum changes, and the pivotal appointment of a new and energetic
2);-6)'836!,)!)%1-7348-1-78-'8,%8"E7 ',3303*6',-8)'896)-7)28)6-2+%2);4,%7)3*
resurgence and innovation within the landscape of architectural education in Canada.

2. & '& '!#

Met Not Met
1. Program Response to the CACB Perspectives
A. Architecture Education and the Academic Context [ X ] [ ]
B. Architecture Education and the Students [ X ] [ ]
C. Architecture Education and Registration [ X ] [ ]
D. Architecture Education and the Profession [ X ] [ ]
E. Architecture Education and Society [ X ] [ ]
2. Program Self-Assessment [ X ] [ ]
3. Public Information [ X ] [ ]
4. Social Equity [ X ] [ ]
5. Human Resources [ X ] [ ]
6. Human Resource Development [ X ] [ ]
7. Physical Resources [ ] [ X ]
8. Information Resources and Information Technology [ X ] [ ]
9. Financial Resources [ X ] [ ]
10. Administrative Structure [ X ] [ ]
11. Professional Degrees and Curriculum [ X ] [ ]
12. Student Performance Criteria (SPC)
A1. Critical Thinking Skills [ X ] [ ]
Page 4 of 40

A2. Research Skills [ X ] [ ]

A3. Graphic Skills [ X ] [ ]
A4. Verbal and Writing Skills [ X ] [ ]
A5. Collaborative Skills [ X ] [ ]
A6. Human Behavior [ X ] [ ]
A7. Cultural Diversity [ X ] [ ]
A8. History and Theory [ X ] [ ]
A9. Precedents [ X ] [ ]
B1. Design Skills [ X ] [ ]
B2. Program Preparation [ X ] [ ]
B3. Site Design [ X ] [ ]
B4. Sustainable Design [ X ] [ ]
B5. Accessibility [ X ] [ ]
B6. Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards [ X ] [ ]
B7. Structural Systems [ X ] [ ]
B8. Environmental Systems [ X ] [ ]
B9. Building Envelopes [ X ] [ ]
B10. Building Service Systems [ ] [ X ]
B11. Building Materials and Assemblies [ X ] [ ]
B12. Building Economics and Cost Control [ X ] [ ]
C1. Detailed Design Development [ ] [ X ]
C2. Building Systems Integration [ ] [ X ]
C3. Technical Documentation [ ] [ X ]
C4. Comprehensive Design [ ] [ X ]
D1. Leadership and Advocacy [ X ] [ ]
D2. Ethics and Professional Judgment [ X ] [ ]
D3. Legal Responsibilities [ X ] [ ]
D4. Project Delivery [ X ] [ ]
D5. Practice Organization [ X ] [ ]
D6. Professional Internship [ X ] [ ]

3. ( "! " "!

The Visiting Team applauds SALA for the evident and substantial improvements to the program, in
response to the concerns expressed in the last Visiting Team Report. Most of the causes for concern have
been addressed as noted below:

Absence of a Strategic Plan
A Strategic Plan has been developed, which would benefit from an implementation/action plan including
timeframe and action items. It is understood that this additional planning is already in progress by the
Director.

IT
The current IT model, being that of incorporating the Architecture School into the central UBC campus wide
IT infrastructure, has recently replaced the previous model, consisting of two onsite IT staff, which had been
implemented subsequent to the last VTR. The consensus from both faculty and students is that the IT
support has become more reliable and professional in its delivery.

Page 5 of 40

The incorporation of this model has freed up staff budget time;; faculty is now on a rotational schedule for
upgraded hardware on 3-year basis.

Faculty is in the process of acquiring multiple software licensees of AutoDesk AutoCAD Suite. This will allow
the faculty and students on campus access to required CAD software. As well, students have access to free
downloads of the student version of this software. This will resolve two issues: students will be exposed to
current software most generally in use in professional offices;; and students will have access to required
software at little or no cost.

Accessibility
Introduction of accessibility notions in the Architectural technology course is a good initiative, but is not
sufficient yet to give the ability to the student to design a building or a site as required to accessibility
standards.

Program preparation
The Team observed program preparation components within the E-Studios, and to a more complete extent,
within the thesis work.

Research Support
The limitation of the studio scheduling to three afternoons a week for required studios and two afternoons a
week for all other studios, to has free up dedicated faculty research.

Financial Aid
There has been no change since the previous VTR.

Financial Equity
Access to the Study Abroad programs remains limited to those students who find the funding for these
programs.
Some software has been provided since the previous VTR, and a change to some packages of open
student source software is providing more open access. However, there is still the expectation that students
pay for other software packages.

Campus Development Planning at UBC
SALA faculty are still not involved in the standing committee that oversees new construction on campus,
and architect selection committees.

Perceived Loss of a Teaching Position
With the appointment of the Director, this has not occurred. In fact, three new, junior faculty members have
been hired since the previous VTR, in addition to two Chairs.

Fundraising
Director Van Duzer has made fundraising a priority for the SALA, and is actively engaged with the
community and the University to increase revenues for the School.

Page 6 of 40

4. Program Strengths

Faculty
The faculty at SALA are a knowledgeable, dedicated and highly collegial group with a broad variety of
professional interests and expertise. The faculty has been renewed and complemented by energetic new
hires. Their broad range of educational backgrounds and experience has brought a robust complement to
faculty research. The collegiality of the faculty cohort has positively influenced the students who are
similarly respectful, collegial and passionate.

Students
The students form a dynamic and concerned group who are actively involved in enhancing their education,
while being very interested in social and environmental issues. They are involved in organizing exhibitions,
competitions and social activities that significantly enrich the educational experience.

Administrative staff
Administrative staff continues to be hard working and dedicated to SALA. The amalgamation of the School
of Architecture and the Landscape Architecture Programs is requiring many changes, additional work load
and adaptation to new situations. Despite these expectations and changes, the staff exude enthusiasm and
dedication to working for the betterment of the students and the School.

Educational Environment
The School of Architecture should be lauded for its positive environment where much is accomplished within
a framework of limited resources.

Sustainability
8-7-14368%2883238)8,) ',330E7*3'97)(-28)6)78-27978%-2%&-0-8=3*8,))2:-6321)28%2(-87438)28-%083
capitalize on this strength. The efforts to explore innovative approaches to environmental stewardship and
leadership are taking the School to the leading edge of sustainable design and practice.

Studies abroad
Studies Abroad programs add an additional opportunity for enrichment.

Co-op Program
This program for the School shows promise of contributing to the educational experience. Students fully
appreciated the insight into the profession they gained while working in practice before graduation.

Interdisciplinary Collaboration
Initiatives to increase collaboration with SCARP and Landscape Architecture are positive moves towards
consolidating SALA as a coherent academic unit. The consolidation strengthens the case for a facility that
houses all of SALA.

Mentorship Program
This new program for the School is unique and the students appreciate the effort of the school in pairing
them with local professionals for regular informal meetings to share perspectives and opportunities.

Support for the School of Architecture and SALA
The Vice Provost was well informed of the current transformations occurring in SALA, and expressed strong
support for the School.

Page 7 of 40


New director of SALA
The visiting team recognizes the new Director of SALA for bringing active and positive leadership and vision
to the School. There is much support and respect for Director Van Duzer by faculty, students, University
administration, and the community, and expectations are high for the School.

5. !(

Loss of a downtown presence
The downtown studio was an important facility for the School. Because of the isolation of the UBC campus it
is critical that the school maintains its presence in downtown Vancouver. This has allowed for students to
be exposed to the social and urban design issues related to the rapidly evolving inner city environment and
public discourse within the city. This has also facilitated the schools involvement with both the architectural
and wider community. It was also serving as a gallery as there is no space available on campus for this
type of activity and was an ideal location for the thesis students to meet with their mentors from private
practice, to have studio space, and exhibition space for their final work. The closure of the downtown studio
is a significant loss to the School and the community, both professional and public.

Lack of clarity around a new facility
There is a clear need for either a new building or renovated/expanded Lasserre building. In the meantime,
optimization of the Lasserre building could be explored.

Lack of contiguous space for Architecture and Landscape Architecture studios
Available studio space is inadequate, and is less per student than at the time of the previous VTR as the
Downtown studio was closed. General environmental conditions within the Lasserre building are less than
optimal.

Administrative Staff
The incomplete amalgamation of SALA is affecting staff, particularly in the area of job descriptions and
responsibilities. The School is encouraged to complete this process as soon as possible, to ensure that
functionality and proper service to students is maintained.

Budget
9)838,)'966)28',%2+)783"E7&9(+)813()08,) &9(+)8%003'%8-32*6318,)"2-:)67-8=-7
unknown. The School is encouraged to work with the University to clarify its budget allocation as soon as
possible.

Page 8 of 40

III. Compliance with the Conditions for Accreditation

Programs must respond to the relevant interests of the constituencies that make up the CACB:
educators (CCUSA) and regulators (CALA), as well as members of the practicing profession,
students and interns, and the general public.
A. Architecture Education and the Academic Context

The program must demonstrate that it both benefits from and contributes to its institutional
context.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
!,) ',330E7%'%()1-'4)(%+3+=-7+6392(;-8,-2-87'328)<873*#%2'39:)6"%2(8,)
local region. Coursework and studio projects utilize these contexts for exploration and
elucidation in architectural terms, but also in terms of cultural, social and environmental
concerns. Students in the School are taught clearly that design is a contextual exercise, to
the benefit of both students and the School. Some of the initiatives that address this
requirment include:
Collaboration with SCARP students and amalgamation of Landscape Architecture
SALA participation and studios at the MacMillan and CIRS buildings
Successful collaboration with campus and community planning initiatives
Continued engagement with and direct support for ENDS program

B. Architecture Education and the Students
The program must demonstrate that it provides support and encouragement for students to
achieve their full potential during their school years and later in the profession, and that it
provides an interpersonal milieu that embraces cultural differences.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Although some measures could be taken to organise the support of the student projects and
opinions brought through the voice of ARCHUS, some really good initiatives have been taken
to maintain a good level of communication between the direction and the student body (open
door policy from director and Student Executive Committee). It should also be noted that the
unofficial communication between the faculty, the direction and the student appeared really
open and collegial.

C. Architecture Education and Registration
The program must demonstrate that it provides students with a sound preparation for the
transition to professional life, including internship and licensure.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
ARCH 543 covers this topic with plenty of reference cases and topics as it relates to practice
organization, roles and responsibilities of the profession, internship. The new initiative of the
Mentor program has been received positive by the students. It should be applauded that
SALA has initiated this program that may give students an opportunity to create relationships
Page 9 of 40

and connect to the local profession easing into internship and licensure. As part of this
transition and immersing students into the local professional life increasing the connection to
VancouverE7(3;283;2463*)77-32%0()7-+2'31192-8=1%=&)&)2)*-'-%0*36789()287 One
of the great opportunities are being presented with the opportunity through by Associate
Professor Inge RoeckerE7,-2%83;2'9492'896)463.)'87. However it should be noted that
the lack of downtown space for SALA impedes on the opportunities for students connecting
with the local design community during thesis reviews.

D. Architecture Education and the Profession
The program must demonstrate how it prepares students to practice and assume new roles
within a context of increasing cultural diversity, changing client and regulatory demands, and
an expanding knowledge base.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Many topics concerning the practice of architecture are covered in the required courses
ARCH 541 Process and Practice and ARCH543 Contemporary Practice. The positive
attributes of these courses, as well as other practice related initiatives in the School include:
Engineers and consultants are invite to work directly with students in some workshops
Students are in contact with teachers who also have a practice
The school has a Co-op program that offers professional experience
SALA has instituted a Mentor program that pairs students with local professionals for
informal meetings with a practitioner
Local professionals routinely serve on studio juries
Representatives of the AIBC visit annually to inform students of the intern program

E. Architecture Education and Society
The program must demonstrate that it equips students with an informed understanding of
social and environmental problems and that it also develops their capacity to help address
these problems with sound architecture and urban design decisions.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Courses such as ARCH 520, 521, 540, Vertical Design Studio, for example, studios
%((6)77-2+D"6&%2'9492'896)E%2(-27)68-327-28379',2)-+,&396,33(7%7,-2%83;236
with a retrofit of the building exterior and interior at 29 East Hastings Street, led by Associate
Professor Inge Roecker in collaboration with the UBC School of Architecture and Landscape
6',-8)'896)E7'31192-8=3986)%',()7-+2789(-37-2-8-%8)(&=8,)#%2'39:)6$31)2E7
)%08,300)'8-:)#$;-8,8,)0%88)6E7+3%08334)2%4,%61%'=*36;31)2-28,)
Downtown Eastside, a safe place to discuss health and receive peer support, provide
excellent examples of fulfillment of these criteria.

2. Program Self-assessment
The program must provide an assessment of the degree to which it is fulfilling its mission and
achieving its action plan.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Page 10 of 40

Team comments:
The accreditation process encourages program self-assessment to achieve pedagogic goals and
the aims of the strategic plan. The SALA program has hired a new Director (externally sourced)
who is well supported by the Dean, the alumni / development staff and the UBC president. An
annual retreat is a forum for budget, human resources, facilities, curricular and student
performance issues, with a move to the integration with the university and professional
communities at large. A committee has been struck to formulate a Program Strategic Plan, to
establish terms of reference, with an emphasis for how Architecture should be visualized as distinct
within SALA and beyond. With some of the issues surrounding IT support, there has been a move
to centralize the service, with a saving of a portion of a staff position. Peer review, highlighting the
early performance of new hires is conducted at the conclusion of all coursework, in addition to
student reviews of all instructors and courses. Graduate satisfaction surveys are now completed,
with the results informing the recent strategic planning sessions.

3. Public Information
The program must provide clear, complete, and accurate information to the public by including in
its academic calendar and promotional literature the exact language found in the CACB 2010
Conditions (Appendix A-1), which explains the parameters of an accredited professional degree
program.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This information is included on SALA website under the MArch program, and is clearly laid out and
easily accessible.

4. Social Equity
The accredited degree program must provide a summary of provincial and institutional policies that
augment and clarify the provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as they apply to social
equity.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
UBC operates following criteria set by the Federal government, the Provincial government and the
collective agreement. The University has an Equity Office, an employment Equity Plan (2010), and
an Equity and diversity strategic Plan(2010). In addition, UBC has establish a number of policies
directly related to the issues of social equality in its Policy Website. As demonstrated by School
statistics, there is a good balance of women and men among the faculty and students

5. Human Resources
The program must demonstrate that it provides adequate human resources for a professional
degree program in architecture, including a sufficient faculty complement, an administrative head
devoting not less than fifty percent of his/her time to program administration, administrative and
technical support staff, and faculty support staff.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Page 11 of 40

Administrative
Since the last Accreditation Visit, a new Director of SALA has been appointed, bringing stability,
energy and vision to the School. Leslie Van Duzer began as Director in 2010-11, and began the
process of the amalgamation of the programs within SALA, including rationalization of staffing and
budgets. In addition, Director Van Duzer has established SALA wide: budgeting, policies &
procedures, staffing, course schedules, and an Executive Committee comprised of program chairs,
as well as faculty and student representatives. Senior Administration, faculty, students, and the
external community, very positively view Director Van Duzer, and the changes that she has
implemented to date. In addition to her administrative duties, Director Van Duzer also contributes
8)%',-2+-28,)*3613*8;3B7)6:-')7'3967)7C92()6+6%(9%8)4%2-university), which brings some
university wide attention to SALA.
Faculty
Three new, junior faculty members have been hired in the Architecture program since the last
Accreditation Visit as replacements for retired faculty. In addition, two new tenureable positions
have been created: a position in Building Science/Technology (75% Architecture, 25% Civil
Engineering), and a position in Sustainable Design (100% SALA). These hires are welcomed
additions to the faculty cohort, bringing energy and passion to their new roles. These new faculty
are well received and appreciated by students and faculty alike.

Faculty workloads appear to have been rationalized, with equivalency in teaching workloads
established.

Staff
The Staffing of SALA is presently undergoing a rationalization as the process of amalgamation of
programs is not yet completed. This has two areas of implication for staff that may affect the
functionality of the Architecture Program, in administrative terms. Firstly, discussions with staff
indicate that portfolios of responsibility for some staff have not yet been finalized. Discussions with
students indicate that they are experiencing a lack of student advising, which may be as a result of
this incomplete process of staffing responsibilities. Faculty advisors are not necessarily known to
students, and have been noted to be unresponsive to student queries. The School is encouraged
to complete this process in a timely fashion, and ensure that student advising is consistently
available.

Secondly, staff are presently located in different buildings, which presents difficulties for some. In
addition to presenting challenges, there is some duplication of staff, such as receptionist positions.
Two positions are currently being recruited to cover the areas of Outreach & Recruitment, and
Clerical Financial/Reception.

The Workshop operates under the staffing of one individual, who works with and supervises
student monitors, who assist with the operation of the digital fabrication equipment. These student
monitors also supervise students in the Workshop after hours. All students receive one session of
safety training, and equipment training occurs on a one-on-one, as needed basis. The workload for
one full-time staff member is therefore onerous, and workable only due to the dedication of this
staff member. Although the accident rate is relatively low in the Workshop, as compared to other
institutions with similar equipment, there is no back-up for this position which is vitally important in
a program in which a workshop plays a vital role in the pedagogy, and one in which demand for
digital output is increasing. Students have noted that the Workshop is closed when the technician
Page 12 of 40

needs to perform other duties outside the shop, which can be challenging in times of deadlines.
The addition of a second workshop technician, either full-time or part-time, would be beneficial to
the operation of this important component of the Architecture Program.

Since the last Accreditation Visit, IT staff support has been operating on a centralized model, as
described in Section 8. The responsibilities and requirement for IT support appears to have been
resolved, with improvements to this arrangement continuing to be developed and fine-tuned.

6. Human Resource Development
Programs must have a clear policy outlining both individual and collective opportunities for faculty
and student growth within and outside the program.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Faculty
The SALA amalgamation has included the establishment of a separate SALA APRT Review Norms
for the assessment and promotion of faculty. Previously assessed within the norms of the Faculty,
SALA faculty are now assessed within a framework that is more appropriate for design faculty.

UBC funding for faculty professional development of $1,100 per year has been supplemented by
SALA by $1,400 to a total of $2,500 each year that can be used for expenses that relate to
professional development.

Faculty computer equipment is now being replaced on a three-year rotational basis, a new initiative
under the leadership of Director Van Duzer.

Students
There are various Study Abroad opportunities for Architecture students within the Architecture
program, and these are much valued by the student body. However, these programs operate on a
cost recovery basis, with the costs covered by students as additional to the other costs of the
Program. Feedback from students indicates that these additional costs act as an impediment to
some students, thereby creating an environment in which not all can enjoy the benefits of these
highly beneficial programs. The Program is therefore encouraged to seek additional funding for the
study abroad programs, in order to equalize these opportunities across the student body.

There are additional opportunities for students to study abroad through the UBC Go Global
program, but the Program could benefit from coordination, as students currently navigate the
program without guidance or assistance. In addition, the Program is encouraged to explore
opportunity for students participating in Go Global to receive academic credit for coursework taken
through this program, as students currently must extend their time to completion if they take
advantage of Go Global.

Student leadership occurs in the Architecture Program under the aegis of ARCHUS, an elected
body of student volunteers. ARCHUS %'8-:-8-)7-2'09()B33(!-1)7C%;))/0=73'-%0):)288,%8-7
much appreciated by the student body. In addition, ARCHUS has representation on The Executive
Committee established by Director Van Duzer, organizes other events, and assists the Program
regularly with gallery and exhibition design and set-up. ARCHUS plays a valuable role in the
Page 13 of 40

student life of the Program, providing peer support and continuity across the years of the Program,
in addition to Program support in a variety of ways.

7. Physical Resources
The program must provide physical resources that are appropriate for a professional degree
program in architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full-time
student;; lecture and seminar spaces that accommodate both didactic and interactive learning;;
office space for the exclusive use of each full-time faculty member;; and related instructional
support space.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
As previously identified in the last Accreditation Visit, the facilities continue to be of concern for a
program dedicated to design and matters related to the spatial efficacies.
The elimination of the downtown studio lease for financial considerations by the University has
exacerbated the crowding of the Lasserre studio spaces and other spaces on the UBC campus.
Additionally, the removal of this studio from the urban setting has drawn universal criticism from
students and staff alike, who considered this invaluable for the course of study which concentrates
heavily on urban design issues, some of which are located in the immediate area. The ability for
this location to facilitate outreach to the architectural community is now compromised, from a
perspective of exhibition exposure to the attraction of visiting critics from the community.
The Lasserre Building, while a fine example of a building of the period, is challenging the faculty to
deliver instruction optimally. The separation of program delivery to five buidlings on campus is
obviously straining cohesion, most notably with the landscape architecture program. A closer
physical proximity A even if located in a neighbouring arts precinct - would help to strengthen both
programs. The condition and distribution of programming amount the various facilities has a
potential impact on the ability of the program to attract new staff.
The space utilized by the architecture program within Lasserre is stretched;; addressing this critical
consideration has been initiatied with the commissioning and receipt in June 2011of the UB
Planning and Design feasibility report. Unfortunately, the timing indicated in the feasibility study no
longer appears current and a budget or a funding model was not articulated. While the co-location
of architecture with music and planning in Lasserre may acomplish overarching institutional
objectives, these are clearly at the expense of the effective operation of the architecture program.
This has stressed many of the functions, from over crowding in studios to scheduled classroom
useage. Student gathering space is very limited. The workshop, while clearly well organized and
managed, suffers to the point where students using the facility frequently determine the methods
employed for project implementation by the availability of some of the equipment. Wisely there has
been no attempt to integrate any metal fabrication into a workshop setting, as this would further
challenge the already limited space, while impacting safety considerations.

In addition to crowding in the Lasserre building, the physical state of the building itself is of
concern. Work areas in the building are not always heated, thereby discouraging student use of
the studio spaces in evenings and weekends. Also, and of greater concern, the building does not
meet the seismic requirements for the area, which is known to be seismically active. This concern
was expressed to the Team by both staff within SALA, as well as by a senior administrator within
the University. At the very minimum, the Lasserre building should be upgraded seismically.
Page 14 of 40


8. Information Resources and information technology

The architecture librarian and, if appropriate, the staff member in charge of visual resource or other
non-book collections must prepare a self-assessment demonstrating the adequacy of the
architecture library. For Information Technology Resources, the program must also provide the
information technology infrastructure and corresponding staff support in order to effectively
contribute to the delivery of the curriculum, as well as supporting activities of staff and faculty.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The Architectural collection, housed within the Fine Arts, Architecture and Planning division of the
central campus library, consists of some 29,000 publications;; the capital expenditure for new
publications and periodicals is approximately $35,000.00;; the adequacy of the central library to
service the Architectural program is more than adequate.

The School also houses a Reading Room in the Lasserre Building, which is very well used by the
School. Its resources for the School include quiet study space, the materials library, AV equipment,
archival space, access to online image database. The holdings of the Reading Room complement
the Fine Arts, Architecture and Planning Library, and together comprise a history of the intellectual
life of the School over the past 50 years, including bound copies of student thesis projects.

The current IT model, being that of incorporating the Architecture School into the central UBC
campus wide IT infrastructure, has recently replaced the previous model, consisting of two onsite
IT staff. The incorporation of this model has freed up staff budget time;; as well the consensus from
both faculty and students is that the IT support has become more reliable and professional in its
delivery. The only issue would seem to be that of response time, however strategies have been put
-240%')831-8-+%8)8,-779',%D4)2'-07(3;2E46)-deadline to allow adequate plot time.

9. Financial Resources
Programs must have access to sufficient institutional support and financial resources.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
In 2010-11, the budget for the Architecture program was merged into one consolidated SALA
budget. Section 3.9, Financial Resources Supplementary Material reads, in part:
B!,)*92(-2+%003'%8-327,%:)&))2'31&-2)(%2('%2238&))%7-0=7)4%6%8)(!,-7=)%6731)
information was available to split the expenses for the school between the Architecture Program
and the Landscape Architecture Program. Where r)59-6)(8,)740-8&)8;))28,)8;3463+6%17E
expenses will be assumed to be 2/3 Architecture and 1/3 Landscape Architecture based on the
6)0%8-:)'314%6-73273*&38,%'908=!%2( 89()28!32%:)6%+)C

In addition the 2011-12 budget allocation has not, as of this writing, been released to SALA by the
University, as a new pan-university funding model is presently being implemented.

Therefore, making an accurate comparison between the budgets in this accreditation cycle and the
previous is challenging. However, based upon observation of facilities, delivery of the program,
Page 15 of 40

discussions with faculty, students and administration, it is concluded that funding at this time is
determined to be adequate.

10. Administrative Structure (Academic Unit & Institution)
The program must be part of, or be, an institution accredited by a recognized accrediting agency
for higher education. The program must have a degree of autonomy that is both comparable to
that afforded to the other relevant professional programs in the institution and sufficient to assure
conformance with all the conditions for accreditation.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
In meetings with Director van Duzer, and with Vice Provost and Associate Vice President for
Academic Affairs and Resources Dr. Anna Kindler, it was clear that the program enjoys levels of
autonomy and support from the administration.

11. Professional Degrees and Curriculum
The CACB awards accreditation only to first-professional degree programs in architecture. These
include:
Master of Architecture degree with a related pre-professional bachelor's degree;; requirement,
typically amounting to five or six years of study;;
Master of Architecture degree without a pre-professional requirement, consisting of an
undergraduate degree plus a minimum of three years of professional studies.
Bachelor of Architecture degree requiring a minimum of five years of study, except in Quebec,
where four years of professional studies follows two years of CEGEP studies;;

The curricular requirements for awarding these degrees must include three components: general
studies, professional studies, and electives that respond to the needs of the institution, the
architecture profession, and the students respectively.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The SALA M.Arch. program is organized as a 3 year (+) professional degree in Architecture,
without a pre-professional requirement. However, the introduction of the ENDS, pre-professional
program, has provided the opportunity for progression, within SALA, from undergrad through to
Masters.

As not all students accepted into the M.Arch. program come from backgrounds incorporating
fundamental architectural skills, it has been found that some students are at a disadvantage at
the start of the program, in terms of specific software and drawing skills. Faculty are investigating
8,)34436892-8=83()0-:)6%D&6-(+-2+'3967)E-28,)7911)646-3683463+6%1'311)2')1)2883
address these deficiencies. This endeavor should be pursued vigorously, as current student
feedback would strongly support the need for course.

Each architecture program must ensure that all its graduates possess the skills and knowledge
defined by the performance criteria set out below, which constitute the minimum requirements for
Page 16 of 40

meeting the demands of an internship leading to registration for practice. (See CACB 2010
Conditions for further detail regarding the SPC categories and criteria).

A1. Critical Thinking Skills
Ability to raise clear and precise questions, use abstract ideas to interpret information, consider
diverse points of view, reach well reasoned conclusions, and test them against relevant criteria
and standards.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This criterion was well met throughout all the theory courses, though these skills did not appear
as strongly in the Graduation Project 2.

A2. Research Skills
Ability to employ basic methods of data collection and analysis to inform all aspects of the
programming and design process.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Throughout the student exhibits the team has observed the general ability of students collecting
data and analyzing specific parts of the program. It should be noted that some of the data
collection and analysis could be more thorough and consistently displayed in the student work
exhibits.

A3. Graphic Skills
Ability to employ appropriate representational media to convey essential formal elements at each
stage of the programming and design process.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
A good diversity in the use of media was observed, the digital fabrication achievements being
particularly remarkable even though mainly aimed at the final representation stage of the design
process.

A4. Verbal and Writing Skills
Ability to speak and write effectively on subject matter contained in the professional curriculum.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The written work in ARCH 504 and 505 (Architectural History 1A and 1B) demonstrate the ability
to critically and effectively reflect and write about architectural ideas and developments. Written
work that accompanies ARCH 549 capably communicates the architectural ideas explored in
these design projects.

A5. Collaborative Skills
Page 17 of 40

Ability to identify and assume divergent roles that maximize individual talents, and to cooperate
with others when working as members of a design team and in other settings.

Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The vertical studios integrate varying terms together in single project teams whereby students
are exposed to overlapping abilities, and learn in a group setting from their peers. This fosters
students to identify strengths and weakness in their abilities and to assist and assume in roles as
required and appropriate. As well, with the integration of the School of Architecture and the
Landscape Architecture Program, there has been an opportunity to provide joint studios and
foster interdisciplinary learning and collaboration. The student feedback on these two strategies
has been positive.

A6. Human Behavior
Understanding of the relationship between human behaviour, the natural environment and the
design of the built environment.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This topic is well covered in the required Architectural History courses (ARCH 504 &505) as well
as in some of the vertical studios.

A7. Cultural Diversity
Understanding of the diverse needs, values, behavioral norms, and social/spatial patterns that
characterize different cultures and individuals, as well as the implications of this diversity on the
societal roles and responsibilities of architects.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This topic is covered mainly in the Contemporary Theories in Architecture (ARCH 523), but also
in the required Architectural History courses, and notions of the topic were also noticeable in
some of the vertical studios.

A8. History and Theory
Understanding of diverse global and local traditions in architecture, landscape, and urban
design, as well as the factors that have shaped them.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Courses that support this criteria are dispersed throughout the program curriculum. The courses
start with a more observational review of traditional architecture, landscape, and urban design
motifs and developments;; and develop into a critical analysis of contemporary architecture,
landscape, and urban design.

Page 18 of 40

A9. Precedents
Ability to make a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of a building, building complex, or
urban space.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
As well as relying on the courses that support criteria A8, this criteria is also supported by the
design studios. The Thesis Studios provide the most comprehensive evidence.

B1. Design Skills
Ability to apply organizational, spatial, structural, and constructional principles to the conception
and development of spaces, building elements, and tectonic components.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Development of architectural design skills are evident in most course and project work, as should
be expected as a core competence in any architectural program. The issues of some concern
include the proportion of group work compared to independently generated in the various design
studios and to what extent students will be evaluated independently. Additionally, many projects
are not developed beyond what would traditionally be considered a schematic level of resolution.
The standard of acceptance takes many of the project graphics only to a point where the
construction of models is well informed. While some projects are notable exceptions, this does
appear to be the normative level of completion presented.

B2. Program Preparation
Ability to prepare a comprehensive program for an architectural project that accounts for client
and user needs, appropriate precedents, space and equipment requirements, the relevant laws
and standards, and site selection and design assessment criteria.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
ARCH 543 outlines methods for program preparation for student understanding. Throughout the
student exhibits the ability of preparing a comprehensive program can be observed, yet more
detailed information showing the basis of the analysis of user needs, space requirements and
design criteria could be more consistent (see also A2, research skills). Reviewing the student
work there seems less focus on relevant laws and standards as they pertain to a project.

B3. Site Design
Ability to analyze and respond to context and site conditions in the development of a program
and in the design of a project.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This criteria is supported by the design studios. The Thesis Studios provide the most
comprehensive evidence.

Page 19 of 40


B4. Sustainable Design
Ability to apply the principles of sustainable design to produce projects that conserve natural and
built resources, provide healthy environments for occupants/users, and reduce the impacts of
building construction and operations on future generations.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
!,)):-()2')8379443688,-7'6-8)6-%-7*392(-28,)D 89(-3E%2(136)63&9780=-28,)8)',2-'%0
courses: ARCH513 and ARCH533. Although this criteria is deemed to be met, there is a lack of
investigation and implementation of current rating systems, which are employed to analyze
Sustainable Design, within building projects.

B5. Accessibility
Ability to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
Design including barrier free washrooms were integrated in the Architectural Technology 1
course (ARCH511) and was noticeable in some of the vertical studio and thesis work. However,
there is still limited evidence that students have the ability to design a site or a building with the
inclusion of the full range of accessibility issues, which includes all types of handicaps. The use
of stairs and other universal access barriers in projects, without alternate paths was also
noticeable.

B6. Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards
Understanding the principles that inform the design and selection of life-safety systems in
buildings and their subsystems;; the codes, regulations, and standards applicable to a given site
and building design project, including occupancy classifications, allowable building heights and
areas, allowable construction types, separation requirements, occupancy requirements, means
of egress, fire protection, and structure.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
ARCH 511, 531, 541 and 543 have little information of specific design, selection and application
of Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards as part of the design process. The
information provided in the course outline covers topics such as general requirements of codes
and standards, yet no specific information about building code classifications, occupancy,
separation requirements or fire protection can be found. The vertical studio work and E -Studio
work do show inconsistent evidence of studentsE ability or understanding of these systems within
the design process.

B7. Structural Systems
Page 20 of 40

Understanding of the principles of structural behavior in withstanding gravity and lateral forces,
and the evolution, range and appropriate applications of structural systems.

Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Structural concepts and systems are to be found in the courses Structures I & II, as well as
throughout studio work. Integration of structural concepts and systems into design is amply and
well demonstrated across all years of the MArch program.

B8. Environmental Systems
Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of environmental systems, including
acoustics, illumination and climate modification systems, building envelopes, and energy use
with awareness of the appropriate performance assessment tools.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Environmental Systems & Controls I, ()7'6-&)(%7%((6)77-2+D%446346-%8)8,)61%0
atmospheric, luminous (visual) and acoustic conditions in and around buildings, identifying key
active and passive approaches to environmental controls across a range of building types and
wit,-2%:%6-)8=3*'0-1%8-'>32)740%'-2+%78632+)14,%7-740%')(32-779)73*7978%-2%&-0-8=E
ensures that this criteria is met with excellence.

B9. Building Envelopes
Understanding of the basic principles involved in the appropriate application of building envelope
systems and associated assemblies relative to fundamental performance, aesthetics, moisture
transfer, durability, and energy and material resources.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Building envelope methodologies and design are discussed in various courses, notably ARCH
531. Exercises are developed to illustrate plausible examples and address realistic conditions.
Application of these principles into various studio projects is evident, but some presented work
does not show a thorough understanding of the principles of building envelope design as they
are applied to these projects.

B10. Building Service Systems
Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of building service systems,
including plumbing, electrical, vertical transportation, communication, security, and fire protection
systems.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
ARCH 511, 513 and 533 cover partial areas of building service systems in various degrees: a
large focus is displayed on building envelope performance, heat loss and gain calculations,
vertical transportation, day lighting, energy and sustainability principles. There is little information
Page 21 of 40

or evidence of the integration of actual mechanical or electrical systems, communication,
security and fire protection systems or principles as to when and why certain systems will be
applied. Throughout the student exhibits there is a lack of evidence of integration of such
building service systems, especially basic systems such as HVAC, space requirements for
systems and fire protection and how this may affect design considerations.

B11. Building Materials and Assemblies
Understanding of the basic principles utilized in the appropriate selection of construction
materials, products, components, and assemblies, based on their inherent characteristics and
performance.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This criteria is generally supported by the Design Studios, with more in-depth review evidenced
within technical courses ARCH511 and ARCH531. There is also a materials library available to
the students, which has allocated staff to monitor and update the contents on a continuous basis.

B12. Building Economics and Cost Control
Understanding of the fundamentals of development financing, building economics, construction
cost control, and life-cycle cost accounting.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The basics of this topic are covered in the Contemporary Practice course ARCH 543. It would
be beneficial for the students to deepen the notion of the cost control.

C1. Detailed Design Development
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
There is no singular evidence in support of this criterion. Various technical courses, including
ARCH 511, 531, and 532, indicate intent of aspects of Detailed Design Development. However
this is not translated into a building design. Many design studio work shows no significant
evidence of progress beyond the conceptual design stage.

C2. Building Systems Integration
Ability to assess, select, and integrate structural systems, environmental systems, life safety
systems, building envelopes, and building service systems into building design.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
Page 22 of 40

These criteria are evidenced under ARCH 513. However, this course and design studios should
provide a more rigorous review of how systems, including conventional systems, are integrated
into typical architectural design solutions.

Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for
purposes of review and construction.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
The conceptual development of details and accomplishment in graphical documentation were
limited in scope. While some elective courses showed a good level of accomplishment or a
technical documentation that emerged from a personal design, the courses dedicated to meet
this criterion were lacking in consistency sufficient to meet the ability level.

Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and
a site. The design or designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building
envelopes, building assemblies, life-safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
Met Not Met
[ ] [ X ]
Team comments:
The Comprehensive Design has undergone two iterations since the last VTR, with a third
currently underway. The first iteration, as noted in the APR under the Program Self Assessment
of the 2007- 229%0)4368-()28-*-)78,%88,-7'6-8)6-%-77944368)(&=8,)B90896)3*%/-2+C
Studio. This has been revised in the second iteration, which is the presented evidence for this
#!;-8,8,)#)68-'%0 89(-3713(-*-)(&=%2BC()7-+2%8-32%2(79440)1)28)(&=:%6-397
technical courses, particularly ARCH513 and 531. Although it is understood that this criteria may
be satisfied by more than one studio and/or course, this approach can lead to inconsistencies
across student submissions and instructor requirements. This is the case in this instance. The
BC 89(-3elective addition to some of the studio work varies in depth and complexity, as
demonstrated in the work exhibited, depending upon the instructor.

The team has a concern with the course outline of the E studio. The studio expectation of this
studio summarizes that students elect and identify criteria to be incorporated into the design
process as they relate to ecology. For the period of consideration for this assessment, the
requirement for Comprehensive Design was included as a component called the E-Studio
stream within the Vertical Studio sequence. Students were required to take E-Studio in at least
32)3*8,)8,6))6)59-6)(#)68-'%0 89(-37 89()287B-()28-*=;,-','6-8)6-%8,)=;-00&)
addressing in their work, and pursue a design process so that results in a synthesis of those
'6-8)6-%C!,)-Studio required students to relate social and cultural issues to defined areas of
design and performance.

Environmental stewardship and sustainable design considerations are being incorporated and
integrated to a large degree in vertical design studios and E-Studio. Yet the review team notes
that analysis and application of basic building systems such as HVAC, plumbing and life safety
are lacking or being displayed inconsistently throughout the displayed work. The focus of the
Page 23 of 40

UBC on ecology including social, cultural and economic aspects of environmental issues should
be commended, yet should not replace a studentEs capability of evaluating and incorporating
basic building systems, as required by this SPC.

D1. Leadership and Advocacy
Understanding of the techniques and skills for architects to work collaboratively with allied
disciplines, clients, consultants, builders, and the public in the building design and construction
process, and to advocate on environmental, social, and aesthetic issues in their communities.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
The combination of the two practice courses presented a great and diverse sum of material
allowing a good understanding of the criterion.

D2. Ethics and Professional Judgment
Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgment regarding
social, political and cultural issues in architectural design and practice.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Such Courses with pertinent content as ARCH 531 and Arch 543 ensure the criteria are met with
excellence.

D3. Legal Responsibilities
Understanding 3*8,)%6',-8)'8E76)74327-&-0-8=838,)'0-)28%2(8,)49&0-'92()68,)0%;7'3()7
regulations and contracts common to the practice of architecture in a given jurisdiction.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Courses ARCH541 and ARCH543 provide coverage of the Legal Responsibilities of the
profession.

D4. Project Delivery
Understanding of the different methods of project delivery, the corresponding forms of service
contracts, and the types of documentation required to render competent and responsible
professional service.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
This topic is well covered in the required courses Process and Practice (ARCH 541) and
Contemporary Practice (ARCH 543).

Page 24 of 40


D5. Practice Organization
Understanding of the basic principles of practice organization, including financial management,
business planning, marketing, negotiation, project management, risk mitigation and as well as an
understanding of trends that affect practice.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
ARCH 543 covers the basic principles of practice organization through case studies, examples
and reference cases. The course material in general is modeled through interesting parallels and
examples. Students receive a well-balanced cross section through current Practice organization,
business planning and future trends.

D6. Professional Internship
Understanding of the role of internship in professional development, and the reciprocal rights and
responsibilities of interns and employers.
Met Not Met
[ X ] [ ]
Team comments:
Course ARCH543 provides specific content directed to the role of Internship in the profession.
In addition, a mentorship program has been established that links students with Vancouver
practitioners, which acts as a mirror to the mentorship requirements for professional Internship.

Page 25 of 40


IV. Appendices

Appendix A: Program Information

Architecture Program Report

1. Brief History of the University of British Columbia
The University of British Columbia is a publicly supported, comprehensive university comprising twelve
Faculties, fourteen Schools, almost 70 centers and institutes and four affiliated teaching hospitals. UBC
is the third largest university in Canada and the oldest in the province. It is consistently ranked as one
of the top three Canadian universities and ranks thirtieth in the world in the 2010 Times Higher
Education World University Rankings.

Incorporated by the provincial government in 1908, UBC admitted its first students in 1915. It moved to
-8746)7)283-286)=03'%8-32-2 *3003;-2+8,)B6)%8!6)/C;,-',,%('32:-2')(8,)63:-2'-%0
Government to resume the construction that had been halted by the First World War. Today almost 500
buildings occupy a 400-hectare campus, with downtown facilities in Robson Square and a separate
Okanogan campus. The Vancouver campus educates more than 47,000 undergraduate and graduate
students each year, representing 140 different countries.

The University Calendar is a comprehensive guide to all programs, courses, services, and policies at
the University of British Columbia. The Calendar also serves as a record of many University academic
policies and procedures. The online Calendar is the official Calendar as UBC no longer supports a print
version. Changes are incorporated online at intervals throughout the year.

2. Institutional Mission
The UBC Plan is constructed as a statement of Vision, Value and Commitments to quite particular
arenas in which University interest and resources will be focused. It serves as an overarching
document within which more local strategic planning occurs. In summary,

The UBC Plan Vision
rsities, The University of British Columbia creates an exceptional
learning environment that fosters global citizenship, advances a civil and sustainable society, and
supports outstanding research to serve the people of British Columbia, Canada and the world.

The UBC Plan Values:
academic freedom: The University is independent and cherishes and defends free inquiry and
scholarly responsibility.
advancing and sharing knowledge: The University supports scholarly pursuits that contribute to
knowledge and understanding within and across disciplines, and seeks every opportunity to share
them broadly.
excellence: The University, through its students, faculty, sta! , and alumni, strives for excellence and
educates students to the highest standards.
integrity: The University acts with integrity, fulfi lling promises and ensuring open, respectful
relationships.
Page 26 of 40

mutual respect and equity: The University values and respects all members of its communities, each
of whom individually and collaboratively makes a contribution to create, strengthen and enrich our
learning environment.
public interest: The University embodies the highest standards of service and stewardship of
resources and works within the wider community to enhance societal good.

The UBC Plan Commitments:
Student Learning: The University provides the opportunity for transformative student learning through
outstanding teaching and research, enriched educational experiences and rewarding campus life.
Research Excellence: The University creates and advances knowledge and understanding, and
improves the quality of life through the discovery, dissemination and application of research within and
across disciplines.
Community Engagement: The University serves and engages society to enhance economic, social
and cultural well-being.
Aboriginal Engagement: The University engages Aboriginal people in mutually supportive and
productive relationships, and works to integrate understandings of Indigenous cultures and histories
into its curriculum and operations.
Alumni Engagement: The University engages its alumni fully in the life of the institution as valued
supporters, advocates and lifelong learners who contribute to and benefit from connections to each
other and to the University.
Intercultural Understanding: The University engages in reflection and action to build intercultural
aptitudes, create a strong sense of inclusion and enrich our intellectual and social life.
International Engagement: The University creates rich opportunities for international engagement for
students, faculty, staff, and alumni, and collaborates and communicates globally.
Outstanding Work Environment: The University provides a fulfilling environment in which to work,
learn and live, reflecting our values and encouraging the open exchange of ideas and opinions.
Sustainability: The University explores and exemplifies all aspects of economic, environmental
and social sustainability.

3. Program History
The establishment of the School of Architecture at UBC in 1946 was shaped by circumstances of
geographic isolation and historical immediacy. After more than 60 years of producing professional
graduates, it is fair to observe that the condition of metropolitan Vancouver itself may serve as the
most direct testimony to the work of the School over time. Indeed the origins of a distinctive 'West
Coast' design idiom and its continuing development are directly linked to the work of students, faculty
and graduates of the UBC School.

!,) ',330E7)%60=-()28-8=;%7()0-&)6%8)0=13()62-780%rgely defined by the first School Director
Frederic Lasserre whose vision of the modern project in architecture was set in a programme that
%(:3'%8)(-2,-73;2;36(7B&6)%/-2+%;%=*631789(=-2+8,))%60-)646%'8-')3*%440=-2+30(
architectural designs 8313()622))(7C

By the mid- 78,) ',330,%(+63;283%789()2843490%8-323* %77)66)E7%1&-8-32*36%
modern and functional design sensibility was given pointedly didactic presence in the completion of the
purpose-built Lasserre Building for the School of Architecture in 1962. Designed by the Vancouver firm
of Thompson Berwick and Pratt, the Lasserre Building also included the Department of Art History and
Fine Arts and the School of Community and Regional Planning, a conjunction of concerns that
continues to the present day. Among significant faculty during these formative years, Peter
Page 27 of 40

Oberlander, Arthur Erickson and Abraham Rogatnick were crucial in establishing enduring standards
3*-28)27-8=%2(74-6-8-28,) ',330E74)(%+3+=

Appropriate to the shifting social circumstances which characterized the 1960s, the philosophical
position of the School found expression in deliberate community activism undertaken by faculty and
students alike. Guided by its Director, Henry Elder, the School was actively engaged in significant local
40%22-2+-779)71378*%13970=-28,)6)49(-%8-323*8,)40%283()7863=#%2'39:)6E7,-7836-'
Chinatown and Gastown in the process of constructing a freeway. The School was also instrumental in
the initiatives which preserved the Roundhouse as an active community centre and fostered the
():)0341)283*6%2:-00)70%2(7-+2-*-'%28131)287-2#%2'39:)6E7)**368783()*-2)%08)62%8-:)
models and discover its own urban potential.

96-2+8,) E739+ ,%(&308-2863(9')( B'36)C'3967)7838,)'966-'9091631 83
under the directorship of Sandy Hirshen, the program shifted the existing Bachelor of Architecture to a
graduate Master of Architecture [M.Arch.] program;; developed key outreaches in the community,
particularly securing and renovating a permanent downtown location and establishing a regular design-
build elective. Several new faculty were hired which gave excellent direction and fresh energy to the
programme. Serious budget cuts and frozen tuition fees however, negatively impacted discretionary
monies.

Christopher Macdonald was the Director of the School of Architecture from 1999 to 2005 and under his
leadership, extensive physical renovations were made to the Lasserre building, together with
developing an elective co-op option and extending community interaction. Most significantly, he
oversaw the introduction of the undergraduate Bachelor of Environmental Design (ENDS) program and
the amalgamation of the School of Architecture and the Landscape Architecture Program into the
School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (SALA).

2 %=30);%7%443-28)(%7 E7-2%9+96%0-6)'836;-8, ,)66='%=%7791-2+8,)
newly formed role of Chair of the Architectural Programs. In the new SALA governance model, the
Program Chair continued to direct the academic mission of the professional MArch, including overview
3*&9(+)8%2(%77-+21)283*8)%',-2+630)783*%'908=)%2;,-0)8,)-6)'836E76)74327-&-0-8-)7
included orchestrating a new institutional identity, developing of its vision and mission and initiating the
planning of new facility to bring all of SALA to one location.

George Wagner assumed the role of Program Chair for Architecture in 2009 and, significantly, has
overseen substantial renewal in full-time faculty as well as the hiring of a new SALA Director, Leslie
van Duzer, in 2010. Under Leslie Van Duzer, significant changes have been formulated for a single
budget for SALA, progress has been towards a new building and steps have been initiated for greater
SALA cohesion.
4. Program Mission
Situated with the Faculty of Applied Science, SALA exists as a relatively independent administrative
entity within the larger Faculty, which also includes the School of Nursing. At present the APSC
Faculty does not possess a distinct faculty-level strategic plan, although policy concerns are
coordinated among all pertinent Department Heads and School Directors at regular meetings with the
Dean.

More specifically pertinent to the MArch program are the current SALA Mission and Vision statements:
Page 28 of 40


Through its teaching, professional endeavours, research and scholarly activities, the School is
committed to producing outstanding graduates equipped to provide the necessary design and
intellectual leadership that will contribute to a built environment that supports civil and sustainable
patterns of living.

Guided by this vision, the individual and collective teaching, research and scholarship within the
School is directed at building an internationally recognized school that:
1. Provides an outstanding and distinctive professional education directed toward the breadth and
complexity of issues germane to contemporary built and natural environments
2. Engages with a wide range of constituencies in the larger community A academic, professional and
public A and brings these associations directly to bear on its educational and administrative priorities
3. Anticipates evolving realities within the realm of contemporary practice and stimulates effective
innovation that supports cross-scale and interdisciplinary approaches and solutions
4. Engages in leading edge design research and scholarship activities that contribute constructively to
the theory and practice of architecture and landscape architecture

The Scho
Since the appointment of its inaugural Director and Program Chairs, SALA has not only formulated a
mission and vision statement articulating its collective aspirations, but also:

1. Developed a new identity and a new website formally launched in November 2007
2. Formulated and begun to execute new Information & Technology capability
3. Developed and initiated a fund-raising effort to create a new facility adjacent to the Lasserre
building A the traditional home of Architecture - to house SALA under one roof

5. Program Strategic Plan

Strategic Plan: Professional Master of Architecture Program, School of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture

December 9, 2011
The Architecture Program Strategic Plan is coordinated with the encompassing School of
Architecture and Landscape Architecture Strategic Plan and supports Place and Promise: The UBC
Plan, sharing in its commitment to student learning, community engagement and research
excellence, and its engagement with Aboriginal, intercultural and international engagement and
sustainability.

Vision
The Architecture Program of the core
responsibility is design education.

Through teaching, professional endeavours, research and scholarly activities, the Program is
committed to the production of outstanding graduates equipped to provide the necessary design and
intellectual capabilities that will contribute to a built environment that supports civil and sustainable
patterns of living.

The Architecture Program has three overarching commitments: enhanced student learning,
Page 29 of 40

productive community involvement and research excellence. The actions taken to achieve the goals
set by these commitments can often serve to further several goals and more than one commitment:
curricular and pedagogical practices may also involve community engagement and /or faculty
research. This interrelatedness contributes to the robustness of the Program.

To further this end, our goal is to make interdisciplinarity common practice. Engagement with
environmental issues, for instance, is distributed across all facets of the program, including dedicated
course work, classes and studios, faculty research and publications and community initiatives.

The Strategic Plan is implemented through the Program Chair in consultation with the SALA Director
and is revisited as an agenda item at the annual Architecture Program retreat held at the end of the
Academic Year in May and revised as needed.

Commitment #1 (Teaching). Provide an outstanding and distinctive professional education
directed toward the breadth and complexity of issues germane to contemporary built and
natural environments.

Goal 1: Maintain and build on the strength of the disciplinary core by:
A/ Ensuring quality of courses and all studios
All core courses and studios are taught by full time faculty
Faculty peer review of studios at the end of term exhibit
Regular faculty review of teaching of core courses and studios.

B/ Reviewing and revising the curriculum on an ongoing basis.
Maintain a curriculum committee to assess the curriculum and its pedagogical effectiveness
and to identify any issues arising from current practices and changes in the profession or
accreditation demands.
Refer to Student assessments of Teaching and Coursework as it contributes to curricular
discussions.
Compare the program to other programs to assess its relative merits and currency

C/ Operating exemplary standards of design theory, practice and advocacy
Familiarize students with and adopt technologies that provide graduates with broad and
pertinent experience.
Ensure faculty maintain currency in their knowledge base and pedagogy.
Seek new faculty capable of augmenting and enriching existing resources in order to
expand dialogue and enhance program capacity.

Goal 2: ! ( #
A/ Attracting and admitting exceptional applicants and continuing to graduate exceptional
students who are equipped to be future leaders in practice and research.

Maintain an open and accessible application process that recognizes past experience and
accomplishment of applicants.
Promptly identify top students and entrance scholarships candidates and recruit accordingly
Continue to augment and enhance available scholarships and track new and relevant
scholarships registered with the Faculty of Graduate Studies.
Page 30 of 40

Provide a structured program of graduate teaching assistantships and graduate research
assistantships distributed across ENDS and MArch studio and course offerings, including a
clear communication of requirements and opportunities.
Maintain an informative website that effectively communicates information about the
Architecture programs and current activities and that celebrates achievements of faculty,
students and alumni.

B/ Involving the program and students with the professional community.
Maintain an effective co-operative program
Maintain an effective mentoring program involving students and practitioners
Explore the possibility of profession-initiated directed studies opportunities
Continue to integrate contemporary architectural offices / practitioners across the curriculum
Offer regular Student tours of exemplary contemporary work.
Enhance design-build opportunities
Institutionalize and expand international exchange and studies abroad programs.
Maintain the SALA public lecture series and continue to afford student involvement with
speakers in related seminars and tours.

C/ Advocacy on behalf of design excellence in the constructed environment, responsibly
expressed across a rich variety of constituencies
Encourage students to become involved in design debates across the campus and within
the city.
Studios focused on pertinent contemporary issues, exemplified by the Core Comprehensive
Building studio.
Encourage student involvement with social issues via exhibitions and competitions.
Goal 3: Enhancing the educational opportunities that foster inter-disciplinary collaboration

and cross cultural learning by:
A/ Providing opportunities for cross-disciplinary education
Maintain opportunities for students to take classes in other fields,
Afford interdisciplinary teamwork in required assignments in core coursework
Regularly offer interdisciplinary studios (with landscape architecture and/or engineering),
design-build projects, seminars and cross or multi-disciplinary thesis committees.

B/ Providing opportunities for cross-cultural learning
Institutionalize and expand international and exchange and Studies Abroad Program
options, ensuring their sustainability via a cost recovery program and enhancing access to
all students.
Regularly offer studios with a focus on community involvement that may be both local and
international.

Goal 4: Enhance the quality of student life in the Program by:
A/ Actively encouraging and supporting student initiatives that allow them to develop their
own collegial relationships and projects beyond the domain of program curricula.
Support student initiatives, the student led ARCHUS and student representation in larger
student organizations
Continue to liaise with UBC support staff to provide information and guidance on issues
pertaining to topics such as stress and equity.
Page 31 of 40

Offer extra-curricular directed studies with cross disciplinary collaborators
Goal 5 ! (! ##

A/ Ensuring that explicit and equitable expectations of teaching, research and scholarly
activity and service are enacted across all faculty members of the program and School, consistent
with current expectations of SALA Faculty and University policies.
Annual review of faculty teaching, committee and community work to ensure equitably
distributed loads and recognition
A Faculty Development Program
Maintain public lectures and events, community interactions and publications.
Fund faculty participation in conferences, lectures, fellowships, and publications
ARPT mentoring parallel with Program Chair and SALA Director

Goal 6: " (#!#
A/ Acquiring a new building to house all programs and permit open design reviews,
installations, exhibitions and public programs.
Maintain the momentum gathered by the 2010 feasibility study.
B/ Devising a self-sustaining digital media resource capability including multiple forms of
output devices and appropriate support capacity.
Improve the current capability of IT resources and support

C/ Maintaining a presence in the city center to increase the activities (teaching, thesis
reviews, events and exhibitions) and visibility of the Program, School and UBC in the downtown core.
Continue delivery of a public lecture and exhibition programs and events held at downtown
locations.
Re-establish a program presence in downtown in the form of a studio/exhibit space.

Goal 7: ( #
Establishing an external advisory group to provide regular and ongoing advice on regarding
8,)63+6%1E7%'8-:-8-)7%2(():)0341)28
Liaise with SALA Director to ensure periodic review of administrative structures, confirm a
hiring plan to optimize its human and physical resources and develop a review structure for
monitoring the success of its implementation.

Commitment #2 (Community). Engage with a wide range of constituencies in the larger
community % academic, professional practice and public - and bring these associations directly
to bear on its educational and administrative priorities.
Goal 1: Strengthen academic ties by:

A/ Enhancing existing and forging new connections between the work by students, design
research and scholarship locally and internationally.
Expand opportunities for visiting critics at final design reviews.
Institute a seminar event with visiting lecturers for students

B/ Engaging with other academic units at UBC and beyond.
Page 32 of 40

With o8,)6"%'%()1-'92-87%2(46-:%8)E7;36/;-8,6-8-7,3091&-%E7-678
Nations communities to develop a socially and economically sustainable model for locally
produced architecture, land use visions, and other collaborative endeavours.

C/ Promoting flexibility within the accredited professional curricula, and actively seeking
partnerships with other academic programs within the School and UBC to provide specialist
emphasis and focus.
Strengthen curricular connections within SALA and with the Faculty of Applied Sciences and
other academic units at UBC.
Participate in the development of new programs, including current proposals for a graduate
urban design degree, and a program in energy systems within Applied Science.

Goal 2: Strengthen professional ties by:
A/ Continuing to be productively engaged with the Architectural Institute of British Columbia,
The Royal Architectural Institute of Canada and the local community of practitioners.

Clarify role and strengthen participation of the Program Chair and or designate in the AIBC.
Explore issues related to licensure examination and streamlining, right to title and continuing
education.
With the Architectural Institute of British Columbia, organize exhibitions of student research
and design.
Maintain the practice of having the AIBC host an annual Good Times event at Lasserre.
Develop new annual dinner meeting with AIBC members.
Develop new continuing education opportunities for AIBC members who participate in
activities in the Architecture Program.

B/ Maintaining its fulfillment of Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB)
accreditation standards and actively contributing to ongoing dialogue concerning the definition of the
governing Conditions and Procedures that underpin the accreditation process.
Development of an Integrated Studio that will establish significant links with areas of
contemporary practice in Architecture

C/ Establishing events to complement and expand upon current alumni the alumni
relationships to the Program.
Continue in 4%682)67,-4;-8,E7229%0)2)6%0))8-2+8336+%2->)%2%229%0
reception for all Program alumni
Include alumni in the new IDP Building project feasibility study process.
Continue to pursue grandfathering a MArch degree for to the approximately 900 alumni with
the three-year BArch degree.

Goal 3: Strengthen community ties by:
A/ Exploring potential venues from which to actively disseminate the design research and
scholarly activities of the School Community including web-based publishing and forging
partnerships with allied institutions to effect exhibitions, publications, etc.

B/ Establishing public programs focused on vital architecture and landscape issues that
affect policy, planning and vision within the University Community, in the City of Vancouver and
throughout the Lower Mainland.
Page 33 of 40

Re-establish a downtown space for the Architecture Program for studio, thesis reviews and
meetings, exhibitions, and other community events.

Goal 4: Strengthen international ties by:
A/ Maintaining a vital architectural Studies Abroad Program

B/ Encouraging and supporting additional study abroad programs that, while providing
)14,%7-7838,)463+6%1'36)%6)%'')77-&0)83789()287-2&38,3* E7463*)77-32%0463+6%17
Develop exchange and studies abroad programs with other universities.
Establish visiting Adjunct positions that attract national or internationally known figures.
'8-:)0=)<4036)34436892-8-)7*368,)63+6%1E7'3-operative students to work abroad.

Commitment #3 (Research). Engages in leading edge design research and scholarship activities that
contribute constructively to the theory and practice of architecture.
Goal 1: Nurture and support leading edge design research and scholarship by:
A/ Actively promoting *%'908=E76)7)%6',-28)6)78s within the architecture program and establish the means to
focus these efforts on collaborative and distinct enterprises.
Consult with faculty on research interests, activities, and plans;; provide guidance for faculty on
research and funding opportunities and publication venues.
Promote opportunities for collaboration with industry and research institutions.

B/ Encourage the dissemination of faculty and student research work in both academic and public
communities and provide support for faculty participation.
Goal 2: Support faculty research by:

A/ Providing funding support for faculty research
Maintain annual funding support for faculty conference participation.
Establish effective research support within the Department of Applied Science such as
appropriate grant writing support.

B/ Recognizing and supporting junior faculty research through course relief and scheduling

C/ Maintaining and augmenting spaces for faculty duties and research including individual offices for
full-time faculty and dedicated research space..

Goal 3: Support graduate student research by:
A/ Establishing pathways for successful research by MArch students and MArch thesis students

B/ Integrating students in the MArch and MASA programs into the intellectual, design and research
culture of the architecture program.
Support for dissemination and presentation of student research

C/ Establishing a clear pathway for students in the MArch and MASA programs to gain meaningful
teaching experience;; promote continuation of MArch and MASA research in Doctorial/PhD programs
to meet the increasing demand for higher-level terminal degrees in Architecture and related
interdisciplinary explorations.
Page 34 of 40

TA opportunities in MArch and ENDS courses

Goal 4: Remain current in design theory, practice and advocacy by:
A/ Faculty hiring:
Continue to fill vacated positions with new hires;; initiate process for new hire in design and
course faculty with contemporary history/theory focus

B/ Establishing a series of publications to actively disseminate the design research and scholarship
activities.
Explore publication venues to facilitate faculty and student publications.
Identify funding sources and a faculty publication coordinator to supervise and support
architecture program publications

Page 35 of 40

Appendix B: The Visiting Team
CHAIR
Loraine D. Fowlow Educator
Associate Professor
Faculty of Environmental Design,
University of Calgary, Canada
2500 University Dr., N.W.
Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada
T. 403-220-7439
C. 403-819-6361
[email protected]

MEMBERS
Marie-Paule Macdonald Educator
School of Architecture
University of Waterloo
E-Mail: [email protected]

John Romanov Practitioner
Romanov Romanov Architects Inc
375 Parkside Drive,
Toronto, Ontario, M6R 2Z6
Tel.:(416).766-8750
Fax :(416) (416) 766-8760
E-mail : [email protected]

Ted Maciurzynski Practitioner
Design, Planning and Construction
C409 A 2055 Notre Dame Avenue
Winnipeg, MB R3N 0J9
Tel.: (204) 632.2525
Fax: (204).632.9661
E-mail : [email protected]

INTERN/STUDENT
Mathieu Boucher Côté Student
Coordonnateur des publications - CASA/ACEA
Auxiliaire d'enseignement/recherche de 2e cycle
Faculté d'aménagement, d'architecture et des arts visuels
Université Laval, Québec.
mathieu.boucher-[email protected]

OBSERVERS
Carole Caron Practitioner
Aedifex Architecture Inc.
281 St. George Street
Page 36 of 40

Bathurst, NB E2A 1B8

Tel: (506)-546-8429
Fax: (506)-546-8426
E mail: [email protected]

Claudia Nuwenhof Practitioner
85 Country Lane Drive
Calgary AB T3Z 1J6
Tel: (403) 470 0449
E mail: [email protected]
Page 37 of 40

Appendix C: The Visit Agenda
TIME EVENT LOCATION PARTICIPANTS

Saturday, February 25, 2012
AM Arrival of Team Chair
meet Hotel Vancouver Lobby;
lunch at Market; reservation
12:00 Meet/lunch with Chair under George Fowlow, Wagner
2:00 Team Room visit Team Room LASR 9 Fowlow, Wagner
PM Team arrival
17:30 Team Introductions Team Chair suite All team
CinCin Restaurant; 1154 Robson;
reservation under Loraine
19:00 Team dinner (casual) Fowlow All team

Sunday, February 26, 2012
Griffins in Vancouver Hotel; can
7:30 Breakfast charge to room All team
8:30 travel to SALA **
9:00 Facilities tour SALA All Team, Wagner
10:30 Team orientation, review of APR Team Room LASR 9 All team
11:00 Preliminary review of exhibits Team Room LASR 9 All team
12:00 Lunch with SALA academic staff LASR 205 All team, academic staff
13:00 Presentation of program by academic staff Team Room LASR 9 All team, academic staff
15:00 Review of exhibits Team Room LASR 9 All team
Coast Restaurant 1054 Alberni;
19:00 Dinner and de-‐briefing reservation under Loraine All team

Monday, February 27, 2012
7:30 Breakfast with Chair Hotel Vancouver All team, Wagner
8:30 travel to SALA **
ENTRY MEETINGS:
9:00 Leslie Van Duzer, Director SALA LASR 408
10:00 Dr. Paul Smith, Vice Provost & AVP Academic Koerner Library, 6th floor Team members, tbd
10:30 break
11:30 Administrative and Support Staff TBD Team members, staff
12:30 All Student Meeting LASR 104 All Team; students only
13:30 ARCHUS student executive for Lunch Team Room LASR 9 All Team, ARCHUS exec
14:30 Library tour TBD Team members, tbd
15:00 break
15:30 Work Session Team Room LASR 9 All team
15:30 IT meeting TBD Team members, tbd
17:00 travel to AIBC Gallery taxi vouchers in Team package All team
17:30 Viewing Faculty Exhibition Or Gallery, 555 Hamilton St. All team, Chair
Alumni, practitioners,
18:30 Gallery Reception Or Gallery staff,
faculty, students, Admin
Chambar, 562 Beatty Street;
20:00 Dinner All team
reservations under Loraine
VTR work Hotel Vancouver
Page 38 of 40


Tuesday, February 28, 2012
7:30 Breakfast Hotel Vancouver All team
8:30 travel to AIBC for Heavy Studio 440 Cambie Street
9:00 travel to UBC**
Class/Studio observation
Sage Restaurant; reservation All team; faculty list in
12:00 Lunch with faculty from other programs under Loraine team folder
Class/Studio observation
Potential interviews: staff, students, faculty
Dinner can be brought into Team
Room, Room service can be
ordered at the hotel or I can
18:00 Dinner arrange a restaurant. All team
VTR work Hotel Vancouver All team

Wednesday, February 29, 2012
7:30 Breakfast Hotel Vancouver All team
Luggage can be secured in Team
8:30 travel to SALA Room LASR 9
EXIT MEETINGS:
9:00 Chair Wagner LASR 420 All team
10:00 Leslie Van Duzer, Director LASR 408
10:30 Dr. Eric Hall, Dean of Applied Sciences # 5006 Kaiser Building
11:00 BREAK
11:30 Dr. Farrar, VP Academic & Provost 6th floor, Koerner Library
12:00 School exit meeting LASR 104
12:30 travel from SALA to airport
Page 39 of 40

V. Report Signatures
Page 40 of 40

4.6 Annual Reports
The appendix of the APR must include copies of all ARs (including the Annual Statistics Report) that have been
submitted to the CACB since the previous site visit. Only the most recent school academic calendar should be
submitted.
4.6.1 Annual Report 2011 - 2012.......................................................................................................................... 352

4.6.2 Annual Report 2012 - 2013.......................................................................................................................... 353
4.6.3 Annual Report 2013 - 2014.......................................................................................................................... 355
4.6.4 Annual Report 2014 - 2015.......................................................................................................................... 372
4.6.5 Annual Report 2015 - 2016.......................................................................................................................... 390
4.6.6 Annual Report 2016 - 2017.......................................................................................................................... 405
4.6.7 Committee Reports from 2016 - 2017......................................................................................................... 407
4.6.7.a Academic Infrastructure Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017............................................... 407
4.6.7.b Outreach Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017....................................................................... 412
4.6.7.c Reseach Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017......................................................................... 414
4.6.7.d Student Affairs Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017.............................................................. 416
4.6.7.e Academic Affairs Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017........................................................... 418
4.6 Annual Reports -- 351

4.6.1 Annual Report 2011 - 2012
CACB Human Resources Statistics Report

Annual Report: 2011-2012 (CACB 2005)
School: University of British Columbia School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
Compiled: George Wagner, Chair, Architecture Program
Student Data B.En.D. B.Arch M.Arch M.A.S.A. Ph.D.

Pre-prof Prof Prof Post-prof
Full-Time Students 49 136 15

- Men 26 75 6
- Women 33 61 9
FTE Students (total) 49 148 15
Architecture Design Studio Students
Outside Students Serv. by Department 4

(total FTE)
Foreign Students 8 31 11
Total Degrees Awarded 16 40 1

- Men 5 21 0
- Women 11 19 1
Number of Applicants 390 27
Number enrolled in the given year 48 6
Number of applicants admitted 11 0

with advanced standing
Resource Data
BUDGET
still being determined by UBC
Faculty Data No. Full-time (or Half-Time)

Faculty Credentials
Full (or Half)-Time Regular Faculty
- Head Count 18 Ph.D. 2
- Total FTE 14.38 D.Arch. 1
M.A. or M.S. 2
Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Faculty
(including Adjuncts, Sessional 22.37 Prof. M.Arch. 10
and Lecturers) B.Arch. 4
Post Prof. Masters 3
Licensed Registered Architects 8 Other 1
- Regular Faculty
- Others
Indicators Physical Resources
Student Ratio 10.29:1 Studio Area 11,756

(FTE Students / FTE Faculty) (net sq.ft.)
Studio Ratio Total Dedicated Area 23,669

(Arch. Design Students / Studio Faculty) (net sq.ft.)
Selection Margin 12%

(% of Enrolled Students / Applicants)
Retention 83%
(% of total Degrees Awarded/
No. of Enrolled Students at Initial Year)
(No. of weighted credits per year

including tutorial)

4.6.2 Annual Report 2012 - 2013
A-4• Human Resources Statistics Report • 2012– 2013

School or Program : University of British Columbia School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture

Professional Degree Accredited Total nb Total nb Nb of Nb of Total nb
of credits / of terms / credits / hours / of hours /
degree degree term credit degree
• Master of Architecture degree
with a related pre-professional bachelor's degree
• Master of Architecture degree 119 7 12-18 1 1549
without a pre-professional requirement, and
consisting of an undergraduate degree plus a
minimum of three years of professional studies
• Bachelor of Architecture degree
minimum of five years of study, except in Quebec,
where four years of professional studies follow two
years of CEGEP studies

Faculty Data Faculty Credentials (highest degree only)
Full-time (FT) + Part-Time (PT)
Ph.D or Post- Prof. B.Arch Other Licensed Studio
D.Arch Prof Ms M.Arch architect teaching
s
FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT P FT PT
T
Regular Faculty
Men 1 6 1 1 2 1 7 2
Women 1 4 2 1 3
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Regular 15.0
Faculty: Number of FT Regular Faculty +
a figure equating PT Regular Faculty
Typical FT teaching load / year 3 classes

Other Faculty
• Visiting
• Adjunct • Sessional • Lecturer 7 2 7 5
• Ph.D Candidate
Men
Women
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Other 4.0
Faculty: a figure equating other faculty
on the basis of a typical FT teaching load
Total FTE Regular + Other 19
Faculty
Total Regular and Other Faculty 11
who are licensed architects
teaching in studio
Nb of pre-professional studios 4
taught by all Faculty for the year
Nb of Masters studios taught by 14
all Faculty for the year
Page 1 of 2


Student Data Pre-professional degree Master of Architecture degree or
Bachelor of Architecture degree
Fall Winter Summer Mean/yr Fall Winter Summer Mean/yr
Full-Time Students 51 51 1 40 125 103 2 74
Men 14 14 0 9 63 52 1 38
Women 37 37 1 25 62 51 1 36
Part-Time Students 0 0 17 0 35 51 45 44
Men 0 0 6 2 18 22 22 21
Women 0 0 11 6 17 29 23 23
Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) 51 51 8 40 149 143 28 107
Students 1
FTE Foreign Students 2 6 6 2 5 35 35 6 27
Students in Design Studio 51 51 0 34 139 116 0 83
Studio Ratio (Students in Design 26 13

Studios / Nb studios taught for a year)
Fall Winter Summer Total/yr Fall Winter Summer Total/yr
Number of applicants for a given 124 0 0 124 367 0 0 367
term and total for a year
Number of entering students for a 24 0 0 24 55 0 0 55
given term and total for a year
With advanced standing 0 0 0 0 14 1 0 15
Total Degrees Awarded-Expected 3 26 0 29 7 41 0 48
for a given term and total for a year
Men 3 7 0 10 2 18 20
Women 0 19 0 10 5 23 28
Graduation Rate (%) 3 100% 117%

1 Full-Time Equivalent Students (FTE): Number of full-time students reported above + number of full-time equivalent for part-time
students calculated on the basis of a full course load required to complete the program in the normal number of terms.
2 FTE Foreign Students : Students included in Total FTE Students who are not Canadian citizens or landed immigrants.
3
No of degrees awarded or expected / No of entering students at the beginning of the degree.
Page 2 of 2


4.6.3 Annual Report 2013 - 2014
School of Architecture & Landscape Architecture

402 – 6333 Memorial Road
Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z2
Phone: 604 827 7252

Fax: 604 822 3808
www.sala.ubc.ca
June 26, 2014
Mourad Mohand-Said
Executive Director and Registrar
350-55 Murray Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 5M3
Regarding UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, MArch Program

Annual Report
Dear Mourad Mohand-Said:
Please find enclosed the Annual Report as required by CACB Conditions and Procedures
for Maintenance of Accreditation.
Documents include the response to conditions identified as not met and to causes of
concern listed in the last VTR and a current statistics report.
I hope that these are self-explanatory and acceptable to the Board.
Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.
Regards,
John Bass
Associate Professor and Chair

June 26, 2014
Mourad Mohand-Said
Regarding UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, MArch Program Annual Report
Dear Mourad Mohand-Said:
Please find enclosed the Annual Report as required by CACB Conditions and Procedures for Maintenance of
Accreditation.
Documents include the response to conditions identified as not met and to causes of concern listed in the last VTR
and a current statistics report.
I hope that these are self-explanatory and acceptable to the Board.
Regards,
John Bass

2013-2014 Annual Report:
School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, MArch Program
Submitted June 2014.
MArch Professional Program in Architecture
Attn: Mr. Mourad Mohand-Said
This report is organized in three sections:

1. Response to Team’s General Comments
2. Conditions for Accreditation “met” and “not met”: a summary
3. Responses to “Program’s progress since the previous site visit” (from 2006 VTR)
4. Causes of concern and team’s recommendations
5. Specific responses to “met” and “not met” criteria
General note:
Concerns and comments following from the CACB, February 25-29, 2012 visit are noted in italics, with notes
outlining the MArch Program’s response following. While certain issues remain “in progress,” the MArch Program
has in large measure been able to actively respond to the concerns and deficiencies identified during the 2012
CACB Team Visit.
1. Team’s General Comments
There were many positive impressions made by the team by its visit. However, those were tempered regarding the
Lasserre Building, which stood out as a major concern. Specific responses to the unmet conditions is addressed in
section 5 below.
2. Conditions for Accreditation “met” and “not met”: a summary
Met Not Met

A. Architecture Education and the Academic Context X
B. Architecture Education and the Students X
C. Architecture Education and Registration X
D. Architecture Education and the Profession X
E. Architecture Education and Society X
2. Program Self--Assessment X
3. Public Information X
4. Social Equity X
5. Human Resources X
6. Human Resource Development X

7. Physical Resources X
8. Information Resources and Information Technology X
9. Financial Resources X
10. Administrative Structure X
11. Professional Degrees and Curriculum X
A1. Critical Thinking Skills X
A2. Research Skills X
A3. Graphic Skills X
A4. Verbal and Writing Skills X
A5. Collaborative Skills X
A6. Human Behavior X
A7. Cultural Diversity X
A8. History and Theory X
A9. Precedents X
B1. Design Skills X
B2. Program Preparation X
B3. Site Design X
B4. Sustainable Design X
B5. Accessibility X
B6. Life Safety Systems, Building Codes & Standards X
B7. Structural Systems X
B8. Environmental Systems X
B9. Building Envelopes X
B10. Building Service Systems X
B11. Building Materials and Assemblies X
B12. Building Economics and Cost Control X
C1. Detailed Design Development X
C2. Building Systems Integration X
C3. Technical Documentation X
C4. Comprehensive Design X
D1. Leadership and Advocacy X
D2. Ethics and Professional Judgment X
D3. Legal Responsibilities X
D4. Project Delivery X
D5. Practice Organization X
D6. Professional Internship X
3. Program’s Progress since the previous site visit (Team assessment of responses to the 2006 VTR)

The Visiting team noted that many of the causes of concern from the 2006 VTR have been addressed and that
progress had been made in responding to the last visiting team’s concerns related to CACB criteria. Improvements
were noted regarding development of a strategic plan, IT infrastructure and support, program preparation,
research support, perceived loss of a teaching position, and fundraising. Continued concern was noted regarding
accessibility and design, financial aid and equity for students, and lack of involvement in campus development
planning processes. Responses to those concerns are below.
Accessibility
“Introduction of accessibility notions in the Architectural technology course is a good initiative, but is not sufficient
yet to give the ability to the student to design a building or a site as required to accessibility standards.” In both the
core Comprehensive Design Studio and core technical classes, significant progress has been made to address this
concern. Please refer to response to SPC B5 below.
Campus Development Planning at UBC

“SALA faculty are still not involved in the standing committee that oversees new construction on campus, and
architect selection committees.“
SALA architecture faculty are now members of several key UBC committees related to new construction on the
UBC Point Grey campus, including: the New Building Committee, the Public Realm Steering Committee, the Urban
Design Advisory Panel and the New Building Site Selection Committee. Faculty from the Landscape Architecture
program are also actively involved with planning on the Okanagan campus.
4. Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations

“The downtown studio was an important facility for the School. Because of the isolation of the UBC campus it is
critical that the school maintains its presence in downtown Vancouver. This has allowed for students to be exposed
to the social and urban design issues related to the rapidly evolving inner city environment and public discourse
within the city. This has also facilitated the schools involvement with both the architectural and wider community.
It was also serving as a gallery as there is no space available on campus for this type of activity and was an ideal
location for the thesis students to meet with their mentors from private practice, to have studio space, and
exhibition space for their final work. The closure of the downtown studio is a significant loss to the School and the
community, both professional and public.” Significant progress has been made toward funding for the construction
of new SALA facilities that would include an enhanced downtown presence. This facility would include space for
public programming as well as studio space. Please see response to “Lack of clarity about a new facility”
immediately below for more information on progress in this related matter of physical facilities.
Two new annual public events located downtown have to a degree mitigated the loss of the downtown studio. The
first of these is an annual end-of-year exhibition of SALA student work, held both years at a downtown venue. This
two-week event was held in May 2013 and 2014. The opening of each event was attended by perhaps 150 people.
This year’s exhibit was held at the Queen Elizabeth Theatre Pavilion, and over the course of the two-week exhibit
350 people visited, about 25 people a day, including many from the professional and broader community. For the
second consecutive year the architecture program has partnered with the Architectural Institute of British

Columbia to hold an exhibit at the AIBC gallery downtown. Last year’s event was an evening reception associated
with announcing the winners of the Arctic Adaptations competition on Nunavut Health that was run as a summer
course. This year’s event will be a six-week exhibit tentatively titled “To Name is to Know: Imagining a BC Truth
and Reconciliation Research Centre” – with work done by students in the spring 2014 Comprehensive Design
Studio.

“There is a clear need for either a new building or renovated/expanded Lasserre building. In the meantime,
optimization of the Lasserre building could be explored.”
For the Architecture program, and for SALA as a whole, currently our facilities remain much the same as reported
in the 2012 VTR. That said, we are able to report significant new developments toward meeting the goal of a new
state-of-the-art building.
To recap, in 2011 Shape Architects with Feilden Clegg Bradley of England, completed a feasibility study for the
renovation of, and addition to, the Lasserre Building. The university concluded that the originally approved site was
too small for SALA’s aspirations, so the project was reconceived as a mixed-use tower (SALA academic space plus
graduate student housing) on the newly assigned West Mall Annex site nearby.
In 2012, Director Van Duzer secured a $10 million donation; officially recorded in 2013, this was the largest gift
received by UBC that year. With newfound optimism, New York-based Architecture Research Office (ARO) was
hired in summer 2013 to do the programming for the new building. Their work was based on the many strategic
planning discussions the faculty had the previous year and a summer workshop with faculty, staff, student
representatives and UBC administrators. With the ARO program in hand and a $31 million budget established,
Brent Sauder, Director of the UBC Strategic Partnerships Office, tried diligently without success to secure enough
funding from the wood industry and the government to create an 18-story, tall wood tower. With no further
prospects for major donors in sight, the project appeared doomed. But then, after years of UBC not offering any
funding, quite suddenly the UBC Vice-President Resources and Operations Pierre Ouillet promised $10 million
dollars for the project. Including other small donations, we were then suddenly within $8.8 million of our goal.
Director Van Duzer and the Vice-President Resources and Operations Pierre Ouillet approached the donor, a major
developer in Vancouver, with the possibility of moving the school downtown as one possible way to close the
remaining funding gap. Downtown space could be had at a lower price per square foot and could fulfill a
longstanding desire of SALA to have a presence downtown. At our May 2014 SALA retreat, with the Dean of
Applied Science Marc Parlange and other UBC administrators in attendance, the SALA faculty and staff were fully
updated on the status of the fundraising and presented with the option of moving the school downtown. After a
discussion about the pros and cons of various options, the faculty and staff voted unanimously in support of
exploring two off-campus options: a new development by the donor and the soon-to-be-abandoned Emily Carr
facilities on Granville Island. Subsequently, UBC administrators expressed hesitation about working with CHMC,
owners of the island, and the donor made it clear he would withdraw his $10 million donation if that was the
option we chose. He donation was intact for both the on-campus or off-campus in his new development options.

Following a Board of Governors meeting where the possibility of SALA moving downtown was discussed, UBC
President Stephen Toope contributed $2 million from his own discretionary funds as a sign of his support for the
project, no matter the siting. We were then $6.8 million short if the school was built on campus, with a smaller
shortfall if built off-campus.
The SALA Advisory Board, comprised of 40 leading figures from the community, met to discuss the options and
clearly felt it was important for SALA to maintain some presence on-campus. After more discussion, a proposal for
developing the school both on and off-campus was raised for the first time. This idea very quickly picked up
momentum and the faculty voted unanimously to pursue the split school option. Currently, the faculty are working
on a more detailed analysis of the possibility of building a majority of the school on campus with a substantial
design hub downtown with a public outreach function. A survey for the students will go out at the end of June.
Fully supportive of the idea of a school that bridges the city and the remote UBC campus, the donor offered an
additional $2-$3 million for this option, reducing our shortfall to $3.8-4.8 million. UBC has offered to find a few
million more as needed to help close the gap. We finally have the funding we need to realize a new building.
As we were studying SALA’s options, UBC was studying our on-campus site, one of three forming the new Amoury
Hub. Concerned about massing and the associated shadows cast, it was determined by Community and Campus
Planning that our project would no longer be in a mixed-use tower with student housing. It would be a dedicated
SALA facility. The SALA faculty was happy with this decision, feeling it would give the school more control over the
design of the building.
Many of these developments have occurred extremely quickly since May 2014; discussions among the SALA
community and UBC administrators about the exciting potential of the split option are currently in progress. While
challenging with the summer break, efforts are being made to keep all faculty engaged in the conversation. Given a
major turnover in UBC leadership on July 1st, and given the advice of UBC administrators close to the project, SALA
will seek UBC Executive Committee approval for the split option on July 15th. While obviously somewhat
premature, the possibility to build the entire facility on campus will remain a strong fallback option.
Clearly, this is a moment of great optimism in the school as we are closer to realizing a new facility than ever
before. If all goes as currently envisioned, the on-campus facility could open as early as fall 2017 and the
downtown facility in 2018.

“Available studio space is inadequate, and is less per student than at the time of the previous VTR as the Downtown
studio was closed. General environmental conditions within the Lasserre building are less than optimal.” Among the
many issues that our far-flung physical facilities pose is the ability to offer greater interdisciplinary experiences for
students in different programs. Despite these constraints, progress toward interdisciplinary learning environments
has been achieved by identifying opportunities for creating them within the curriculum. The first of these began in
fall 2013, and integrates first term students in the architecture and landscape architecture program in the core
Design Media 1 course. Also begun in the fall 2013 term, students can take one of their three vertical studio
options in the complementary discipline.

In spring 2015, students from the professional degree architecture and landscape architecture programs and the
undergraduate Environmental Design program will be offered their intermediate and advance media courses as a
series of modules that allow students to customize to some degree their core media interests and abilities.
Beginning in fall 2015 and will integrate third term students in the architecture and landscape architecture
program in the core Research Methods course. Discussions are ongoing on whether it is possible to align the
learning objectives of the first term core studios in architecture and landscape architecture without reducing the
core disciplinary principles of the two professional programs. But this change would not be possible without a new
facility, and so discussions about it are very preliminary.
“The incomplete amalgamation of SALA is affecting staff, particularly in the area of job descriptions and
responsibilities. The School is encouraged to complete this process as soon as possible, to ensure that functionality
and proper service to students is maintained.”
With much staff input, their job descriptions were completely rewritten after the staff reorganization.
Subsequently, for nearly a year, the staff met and described the details of their responsibilities to one another. This
information was recorded in order to produce a chart with an overview of each staff member’s annual
responsibilities. This chart is currently being designed with the intention of further clarifying roles, streamlining
efforts and identifying when staff may require additional assistance.
SALA is blessed with a talented, dedicated and loyal staff. Complaints from students about service are rare to non-
existent but the staff are without a doubt too heavily loaded and stressed. In 2013-14, one key staff member quit
for another job, then returned; another was promoted from CUPE to M+P; another suddenly went on medical
leave; one was dismissed in the staff reorganization and two new positions (one fulltime and one part time) were
established. With every change, even helpful new hires, comes a lot of additional work, so getting the staffing to
the right level and stabilized continues to be our goal. We hope with the two new staff hires in place, we will enjoy
a period of relative stability.
Budget
“Due to the current changes to UBC’s budget model, the SALA budget allocation from the University is unknown.
The School is encouraged to work with the University to clarify its budget allocation as soon as possible.”
For the last two years, Director Van Duzer has effectively communicated with faculty about the effects of the
university’s new budget model on SALA. Where and how resources are distributed within SALA is presented
annually to the faculty at their end-of-year retreat.
Given the UBC budget model (in turn determined by the Province’s allocations to higher education), the school still
faces budgetary challenges not unlike many architecture programs across the country. The architecture program
has taken modest but important steps to manage stresses on the budget. Most important among these has been
to modestly increase the program’s admissions intake and to slightly increase the proportion of international
students. Other SALA-wide efforts to increase revenue include among others: starting a new Masters of Urban

Design program, participating in the Vancouver Summer International Program for foreign undergraduate
students, ramping up fundraising efforts, securing funded studios, adding a new service outreach course, and
increasing undergraduate enrolment.
5. Specific responses to “condition not met” criteria
7. Physical Resources (unmet condition)

architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full--time student; lecture and seminar
spaces that accommodate both didactic and interactive learning; office space for the exclusive use of each full-
-time faculty member; and related instructional support space.
Team comments:
“As previously identified in the last Accreditation Visit, the facilities continue to be of concern for a program
dedicated to design and matters related to the spatial efficacies. The elimination of the downtown studio lease for
financial considerations by the University has exacerbated the crowding of the Lasserre studio spaces and other
spaces on the UBC campus.
“Additionally, the removal of this studio from the urban setting has drawn universal criticism from students and
staff alike, who considered this invaluable for the course of study which concentrates heavily on urban design
issues, some of which are located in the immediate area. The ability for this location to facilitate outreach to the
architectural community is now compromised, from a perspective of exhibition exposure to the attraction of visiting
critics from the community.
“The Lasserre Building, while a fine example of a building of the period, is challenging the faculty to deliver
instruction optimally. The separation of program delivery to five buildings on campus is obviously straining
cohesion, most notably with the landscape architecture program. A closer physical proximity - even if located in a
neighbouring arts precinct -- would help to strengthen both programs. The condition and distribution of
programming amount the various facilities has a potential impact on the ability of the program to attract new
staff.
“The space utilized by the architecture program within Lasserre is stretched; addressing this critical consideration
has been initiated with the commissioning and receipt in June 2011of the UB Planning and Design feasibility report.
Unfortunately, the timing indicated in the feasibility study no longer appears current and a budget or a funding
model was not articulated. While the co--location of architecture with music and planning in Lasserre may
accomplish overarching institutional objectives, these are clearly at the expense of the effective operation of the
architecture program. This has stressed many of the functions, from overcrowding in studios to scheduled
classroom usage. Student gathering space is very limited. The workshop, while clearly well organized and managed,
suffers to the point where students using the facility frequently determine the methods employed for project
implementation by the availability of some of the equipment. Wisely there has been no attempt to integrate any

metal fabrication into a workshop setting, as this would further challenge the already limited space, while
impacting safety considerations.
“In addition to crowding in the Lasserre building, the physical state of the building itself is of concern. Work areas in
the building are not always heated, thereby discouraging student use of the studio spaces in evenings and
weekends. Also, and of greater concern, the building does not meet the seismic requirements for the area, which is
known to be seismically active. This concern was expressed to the Team by both staff within SALA, as well as by a
senior administrator within the University. At the very minimum, the Lasserre building should be upgraded
seismically.”
Concerns about Physical Resources are directly linked to the new building fundraising campaign that is being done
by Director Van Duzer. Being housed in an upgraded or new facility is obviously of the highest priority for all
members of the SALA community. There is good progress being made on that campaign. A description of this
progress is addressed elsewhere in this Report. In spring 2014 SALA’s student societies were asked to prepare a list
of furniture needs, maintenance issues and minor upgrades for their spaces. UBC facilities and SALA staff will work
on these during summer 2014, and will spend approximately $250,000 dollars on this work. Continued challenges
certainly exist, especially with respect to the inauguration of the Master’s of Urban Design program in September
2014, and fiscal pressures to grow the size of SALA’s programs. Pending the realization of the new SALA building,
and through analysis of carefully phased, three-year incremental increases in admissions intake to fiscal planning
to space planning, the architecture program faculty is very involved in the planning and anticipatory risk
assessment processes necessary to remain on top of these challenges.
B5. Accessibility (unmet condition)

Ability to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and cognitive abilities.
Team comments:
“Design including barrier free washrooms were integrated in the Architectural Technology 1 course (ARCH511) and
was noticeable in some of the vertical studio and thesis work. However, there is still limited evidence that students
have the ability to design a site or a building with the inclusion of the full range of accessibility issues, which
includes all types of handicaps. The use of stairs and other universal access barriers in projects, without alternate
paths was also noticeable.”
The Comprehensive Design Studio has been significantly revamped. It is structured around design at public scale
and with a functional program that allows for more detailed instruction on and student development of many
code-specific aspects of building design, including accessibility and barrier-free design. CDS learning objectives and
CACB Performance Criteria addressed now include site planning and design, accessibility, and code compliance
language. Instruction on accessibility extends from outside to inside, and relates site to building design. In spring
2014, architecture faculty concluded that spring term vertical studios should be defined around constraints that
link building to site planning and design. Studio instructors teaching spring term vertical studios will therefore be
provided with a set of learning objectives that require students to demonstrate an awareness of the principle of

accessibility in their designs. ARCH 541 also addresses the issue of health and safety and the ethical responsibility
of the profession to attend to this.
B6. Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards (unmet condition)
Understanding the principles that inform the design and selection of life--safety systems in buildings and their
subsystems; the codes, regulations, and standards applicable to a given site and building design project, including
occupancy classifications, allowable building heights and areas, allowable construction types, separation
requirements, occupancy requirements, means of egress, fire protection, and structure.
Team comments:
“ARCH 511, 531, 541 and 543 have little information of specific design, selection and application of Life Safety
Systems, Building Codes and Standards as part of the design process. The information provided in the course outline
covers topics such as general requirements of codes and standards, yet no specific information about building code
classifications, occupancy, separation requirements or fire protection can be found. The vertical studio work and E -
-Studio work do show inconsistent evidence of students’ ability or understanding of these systems within the design
process.”
As a responses to concerns over SPC B6, content has been developed and is covered within the curriculum as
follows:
Architectural Technology 1 (ARCH 511) and Structures 1 (ARCH 512) now use Edward Allen’s Architect’s Students
Companion as a text and cover those aspects of building code analysis that relate to structural systems, building
code classifications, occupancy, separation requirements and fire protection. In the next academic year, a module
on building code analysis will be delivered in ARCH 511.
Architectural Technology 2 (ARCH 531) has introduced a module on acoustics.
Environmental Controls 2 (ARCH 533) has added modules on fire protection and plumbing systems.
Process and Practice (ARCH 541) covers the following aspects of the list: Responsibilities, scope, and related
liability of the two professions as related to the Architect Act and the two major building codes, BC and Vancouver;
The legal landscape of the profession, plus the typical development permit/ building permit process in BC; The
larger issue of health and safety and the responsibility of the professions to attend to this.
The Comprehensive Building Studio (CDS) includes instruction on accessibility, egress and fire protection and,
beginning in spring 2015, will require a comprehensive building code analysis.
B10. Building Service Systems (unmet condition)

Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of building service systems, including plumbing,
electrical, vertical transportation, communication, security, and fire protection systems.

Team comments:
“ARCH 511, 513 and 533 cover partial areas of building service systems in various degrees: a large focus is
displayed on building envelope performance, heat loss and gain calculations, vertical transportation, day lighting,
energy and sustainability principles. There is little information or evidence of the integration of actual mechanical
or electrical systems, communication, security and fire protection systems or principles as to when and why certain
systems will be applied. Throughout the student exhibits there is a lack of evidence of integration of such building
service systems, especially basic systems such as HVAC, space requirements for systems and fire protection and
how this may affect design considerations.”
Response:
Since there is a great deal of interrelationship in this concern, please also program response to SPC C1 through C4.
In response to the 2012, VTR, Environmental Control Systems 2 (ARCH 533) has introduced material regarding
selection of appropriate mechanical systems, their integration into building designs, and on the space these
systems require. This concern is also given much greater focus in the Comprehensive Design Studio, of which more
is described below.
C1. Detailed Design Development (unmet condition)

Ability to assess and detail as an integral part of the design, appropriate combinations of building materials,
components, and assemblies.
Team comments:
“There is no singular evidence in support of this criterion. Various technical courses, including ARCH 511, 531, and
532, indicate intent of aspects of Detailed Design Development. However this is not translated into a building
design. Many design studio work shows no significant evidence of progress beyond the conceptual design stage.”
Response:
The Comprehensive Design Studio has been significantly revamped. It is structured around design at public scale
and with a functional program that allows for more detailed design development teaching and investigation. CDS
learning objectives and CACB Performance Criteria addressed now include site planning and design, accessibility,
and code compliance language. CDS learning objectives and CACB Performance Criteria addressed now explicitly
refer to many aspects of technical integration and design. Clearest evidence of this is in the greater focus and time
spent on the development of wall sections in all student projects at a scale of at least 1:20.
For the past two years, the linkage between the concurrently-taught ARCH 531, ARCH 532, and CDS has allowed
students to more fully test and develop technical, graphic descriptions of their designs. Further use of drawing in
these advanced technical courses is expected in the coming academic year.
In spring 2014, architecture faculty concluded that spring term vertical studios should be defined around
constraints that link building to landscape design. Studio instructors teaching spring term vertical studios will

therefore be provided with a set of learning objectives that require students to demonstrate a basic understanding
of site design and technical and material integration into their designs.
The program now offers expanded elective course offerings focused on technical drawing and communication of
construction. This has helped us meet the demand for what is very popular subject matter among students.
C2. Building Systems Integration

Ability to assess, select, and integrate structural systems, environmental systems, life safety systems, building
envelopes, and building service systems into building design.
Met Not Met
[] [X]
Team comments:
“These criteria are evidenced under ARCH 513. However, this course and design studios should provide a more
rigorous review of how systems, including conventional systems, are integrated into typical architectural design
solutions.”
Response:
The fourth term now integrates modules that link teaching in Environmental Controls 2 (ARCH 533) and Structures
2 (ARCH 532) with the Comprehensive Design Studio (CDS). Assignments are given in the two technical courses
that allow students working on their CDS projects to do analysis and design of structures and environmental
control systems. Professors in ARCH 532 and ARCH 533 are actively involved in studio reviews, and seminars with
daylighting experts and CDS pinups with structural and mechanical engineers have greatly increased student
exposure to interdisciplinary technical experts. Lectures by studio instructors focus on the assembly of materials
and systems illustrated within the graphic conventions of the wall section are now integrated into the CDS.

Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for purposes of review
and construction.
Met Not Met
[] [X]
Team comments:
“The conceptual development of details and accomplishment in graphical documentation were limited in scope.
While some elective courses showed a good level of accomplishment or a technical documentation that emerged
from a personal design, the courses dedicated to meet this criterion were lacking in consistency sufficient to meet
the ability level.”
Response:
This concern has been a subject of several changes to the curriculum.
Over the past two years a technical curriculum committee has been analyzing the way that technical material is
delivered via the three-credit core technical courses and how they might be better delivered or integrated into the

design studio sequence. One question was whether the existing coursework could be delivered more efficiently so
as to free up a final, synthetic course that could directly address technical documentation. While the answer to this
question proved to be “no,” several productive outcomes have resulted that address this SPC concern.
The first is that the technical course faculty concluded that drawing will be a more significant part of course
assignments. Beginning in fall 2014, faculty teaching Structures 1 (ARCH 512) and Technology 1 (ARCH 511) will
redistribute some of their course content around linkages between structure and material. This will allow technical
drawing and documentation within those courses to more closely align with their expertise and drawing software
skill sets.
See elsewhere to updates on integration of the advanced structures and environmental controls courses with the
comprehensive design studio, especially as it is seen in the consistent development of detailed wall sections.

Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and a site. The design
or designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building envelopes, building assemblies, life-
-safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
Met Not Met
[] [X]
Team comments:
“The Comprehensive Design has undergone two iterations since the last VTR, with a third currently underway. The
first iteration, as noted in the APR under the Program Self Assessment of the 2007- 2008 Annual Report, identifies
that this criteria is supported by the “Culture of Making” Studio. This has been revised in the second iteration, which
is the presented evidence for this VTR, with the Vertical Studios modified by an “E” designation and supplemented
by various technical courses, particularly ARCH513 and 531. Although it is understood that this criteria may be
satisfied by more than one studio and/or course, this approach can lead to inconsistencies across student
submissions and instructor requirements. This is the case in this instance. The “E” Studio elective addition to some
of the studio work varies in depth and complexity, as demonstrated in the work exhibited, depending upon the
instructor.
“The team has a concern with the course outline of the E studio. The studio expectation of this studio summarizes
that students elect and identify criteria to be incorporated into the design process as they relate to ecology. For the
period of consideration for this assessment, the requirement for Comprehensive Design was included as a
component called the E--Studio stream within the Vertical Studio sequence. Students were required to take E-
-Studio in at least one of the three vertical studios. Students “identify which criteria they will be addressing in their
work, and pursue a design process so that results in a synthesis of those criteria.” The E-Studio required students to
relate social and cultural issues to defined areas of design and performance.
“Environmental stewardship and sustainable design considerations are being incorporated and integrated to a
large degree in vertical design studios and E--Studio. Yet the review team notes that analysis and application of
basic building systems such as HVAC, plumbing and life safety are lacking or being displayed inconsistently

throughout the displayed work. The focus of the UBC on ecology including social, cultural and economic aspects of
environmental issues should be commended, yet should not replace a student’s capability of evaluating and
incorporating basic building systems, as required by this SPC.”
Response:
The “Culture of Making” and “E-Studio” teaching model has been replaced with a fourth-term Comprehensive
Design Studio (CDS) that is taught across the entire class as a core studio. This had been tentatively implemented
during the 2012 Visit, but has since been more fully developed. The CDS is taught in parallel and with significant
integration with ARCH 532 and ARCH 533, the advanced structures and environmental controls courses,
respectively.
Since the last accreditation team visit, the revamped CDS, “Conceptualizing the Technical,” has been run twice. In
it, students are asked to consider how building systems and technology might be among the primary conceptual
drivers of their design work. Constraints including the scale of the functional program and site design ensure that
much greater development of and emphasis on building and life safety systems. We are confident that this new
model of delivering Comprehensive Design understanding and ability in our students is effectively addressing many
of the concerns expressed as part of the 2013 VTR.

School or Program : University of British Columbia

with a related pre-professional bachelor's degree variable variable
• Master of Architecture degree 119 7 12 - 18 1 1549

D.Arch Prof Ms M.Arch architects teaching
FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT FT PT
Regular Faculty 2 1 2 1 10 1
Men 1 2 0 5 1 3 6
Women 1 1 0 1 5 1 3
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Regular 14 + 1 = 15
Typical FT teaching load / year 2 studios + one course or 4 courses
Other Faculty
• Visiting
• Adjunct • Sessional • Lecturer 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 5 6
• Ph.D Candidate
Men 1 3 1 2 1 1 5 3
Women 1 1 1 3
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Other 4
Faculty: a figure equating other faculty where one course = 0.33 teaching load
Total FTE Regular + Other 15 + 4 = 19
Faculty
teaching in studio
Page 1 of 2

Full-Time Students 137 127 4 89.3
Men (optional) 74 70 2
Women (optional) 63 57 2
Part-Time Students 27 38 40 35
Total Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) 148 151 25 108
Students 1
FTE Foreign Students 2 (optional) 33 33 6 24
Students in Design Studio 127 103 0 77
Studio Ratio (Students in Design 12.5:1

Number of applicants for a given 356 n/a 356
Number of entering students for a 52 n/a 52
With advanced standing (optional) 18 n/a 18
Total Degrees Awarded-Expected 3 39 42
Graduation Rate (%) 3 81%
Report Period:
May 2013 – April 2014
3
Page 2 of 2

4.6.4 Annual Report 2014 - 2015
University: British Columbia

Faculty: Applied Science

ANNUAL REPORT TO

CACB-CCCA

Narrative Section

Program: MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (M. Arch)
Academic Year: 2014-15
Head of the Program (Name): John Bass
Signature:
Date: 26 June 2015

Annual Report/Narrative
1- INTRODUCTION
June 26, 2015

Mourad Mohand-‐Said
350-‐55 Murray Street

Regarding UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, MArch Program Annual Report
Dear Mourad Mohand-‐Said:
Please find enclosed the Annual Report on the MArch Program as required by CACB Conditions and Procedures
Documents include an update on academic and curricular changes to the Program, the response to the 2012
Visiting Team Report findings, a follow-‐up to the 2014 Annual Report, other relevant information about the
Program and faculty and a current statistics report.
I hope that these are self-‐explanatory and acceptable to the Board.
Regards,
John Bass
Page 1 of 11


2- STATEMENT OF CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM
Several changes were made and developments occurred over the last reporting period. These are organized
into four categories: Administrative changes, program developments, curricular changes, faculty changes.

Administrative changes: For the university calendar, the Architecture Program has made extensive language
changes in the way its individual courses are described there. This was done in order create consistent and
cohesive descriptions across the two disciplines. This is an intermediate step in a process that we anticipate
will eventually lead to an alignment of course numbering systems across the two disciplines.

Program developments: SALA has received Provincial approval for the creation of a new Dual Degree
option. This process took over a year and included extensive consultation. The Province approved the new
degree option in spring 2015. First intake of students will be for the fall 2016 term. It will be the first dual
degree offered by a Canadian school of architecture or landscape architecture.

From the Executive Summary SALA presented to the UBC Graduate Council:

"The Dual Degree Option in MArch and MLA will be the first of its kind in Canada. It will align the UBC
School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture with other renowned Universities such as Harvard GSD,
University of Pennsylvania, Cornell University and the University of Virginia all of whom offer a similar four-‐
year dual degree option. This dual degree option will allow students to integrate both the distinct
disciplinary knowledge of architecture and landscape architecture with interdisciplinary knowledge, or that
knowledge which is common to both.

“The stand-‐alone Master of Architecture degree is 119 credits and the Master of Landscape Architecture
degree is 110 credits. The proposed dual degree option is 149 credits. The Dual Degree Option an efficient
plan of study that enables students to complete all existing core and elective requirements in both degree
programs in a four-‐year time frame. This credit efficiency is possible because the two existing programs
have significant overlapping credits. Over several years, the School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture has been integrating these two degree programs by developing shared courses which students
from both programs are required to take and by cross-‐listing other courses. As well, students in these two
programs already may take some of their elective courses and one studio course in their sister discipline.
The proposed dual degree option program formalizes and structures what is already happening in the
school. As with all dual degree program options we have researched, students will complete one
interdisciplinary graduate project, which satisfies the requirements of both programs. (see attached
programs of study)."

Page 2 of 11


Attached as an appendix to this Report is the plan of study that we have developed for the Dual Degree
option. We would like to open a discussion with the CACB about any questions or concerns it may have
about the Dual Degree option, and we invite you to contact us for discussion and further clarification.

Curricular changes: The past year saw two core classes consolidated across the MArch and MLA curriculum,
joining the previously consolidated ARCH 515 Design Media 1 and ARCH 568 Research Methods, formerly
Research Methodology in Architecture. The new consolidated courses are ARCH 517 Design Media 2; ARCH
541 Professional Practice, formerly Process and Practice of Architecture.

ARCH 517 Design Media 2 offers students in the two professional degree programs the opportunity to
choose from a suite of intermediate-‐level 3-‐ and 4-‐D skills and applications from Revit and AutoCAD to GIS
and Rhinoceros. ARCH 541 Process and Practice of Architecture instructs students in the core aspects of
professional practice that are shared by jointly shared by architecture and landscape architecture, and
breaks out modules focused on the specific concerns of each. ARCH 568 Research Methods covers the
several methods of conducting research (scientific, social scientific, etc.) that are shared by architecture and
landscape architecture.

This past year also saw the completion of the first joint ARCH 549 Graduation Projects (thesis). Three pairs
of students chose this option, and all three achieved a very high level of development and enquiry in their
work. Evaluation of this option is ongoing, but the results of this year’s student work were promising. We
also instituted for ARCH 548 Graduation Project prep course a public Pecha Kucha “status report” event
that occurs about halfway through the prep term. This provides an opportunity for students to share their
ideas with their peers and faculty, and also sets a useful deadline for decision-‐making in the process of
exploring and framing an idea.

Faculty changes: This reporting period saw the retirement of Linda Brock, a core member of the technical
faculty since 1991. SALA and the Architecture Program is pleased to be joined by Dr. Sara Stevens, who was
hired after a search in winter 2015. Sara will teach core and elective history and theory courses in
architecture and urban design. Looking to the future and identified via a faculty succession and planning
process, the next hire will most probably be a core architectural technology faculty member. The Program
and Director will likely lobby with the Dean for this in the next two years.
Page 3 of 11


3- RESPONSE TO TEAM FINDINGS
3.1- CAUSES OF CONCERN

In the order listed in the 2012 Visiting Team Report (VTR) and the 16 December 2014 Review of 2014 Annual Report

“The downtown studio was an important facility for the School. Because of the isolation of the UBC campus
it is critical that the school maintains its presence in downtown Vancouver. This has allowed for students to
and wider community. It was also serving as a gallery as there is no space available on campus for this type
of activity and was an ideal location for the thesis students to meet with their mentors from private practice,
to have studio space, and exhibition space for their final work. The closure of the downtown studio is a
significant loss to the School and the community, both professional and public.”

SALA and the Architecture Program continue to sponsor a public lecture series downtown at UBC Robson
Square and other downtown or off-‐campus venues. This past year a dozen lectures were held at downtown
venues, with architecture, landscape architecture and urban design lecturers from Europe, Canada and the
United States. Several architecture faculty also participated in panel discussions during the Master of Urban
Design Urban Design Forum at Surrey City Hall.

The Program has also continued to host or co-‐host public events located downtown that help mitigate the
loss of the downtown studio. SALA Projects 3, a two-‐week exhibit of the year’s student work, was held in
May 2015. This year’s exhibit was held at the Pendulum Gallery in the HSBC Building Atrium downtown.
Approximately 200 people attended the opening, and over the course of the two-‐week exhibit some 500
people visited, including many from the professional and broader community.

For the second consecutive year the architecture program partnered with the Architectural Institute of
British Columbia to hold an event at the AIBC gallery downtown. Last year’s was a six-‐week exhibit titled
“To Name is to Know: Imagining a BC Truth and Reconciliation Research Centre” – with work done by
students in the spring 2014 Comprehensive Design Studio.


Concerns about clarity regarding a new facility remain. Being housed in an upgraded or new facility is
among the highest of priorities for all members of the SALA community. The university approved the site
Page 4 of 11


and program for a new building in 2014, and a Call for Proposals was announced in Fall 2014. That call was
abandoned, however, in early 2015 after the project’s major donor raised concerns about the site the
university approved for the new building. Since then, the donor, the Dean of Applied Science, incoming
Director Kellett and staff from the university have been exploring other sites, with no conclusions made at
the time of this writing. No timeline is yet confirmed but there remains a high degree of confidence about
the prospect for a unified SALA housed in a single facility.
Lack of contiguous space of Architecture and Landscape Architecture studios
“Available studio space is inadequate, and is less per student than at the time of the previous VTR as the
optimal.”

Increasing budget pressures combined with a finite amount of space continue to have an impact. The
budget-‐driven decision to make modest increases in enrollment to the MArch program combined with the
establishment of a new Master of Urban Design Program has reduced the amount of space for each student
in the Architecture Program. In order to house approximately 18 additional students on the third floor of
Lasserre, space allocated for most students is now a single large desk workstation rather than the ‘L’
configuration. This configuration ran for the past academic year, with no noticeable negative impact.

There are also ways that this lack of contiguity can be addressed from a pedagogical perspective. Over the
last several years it has been a goal of SALA faculty to offer greater cross-‐degree education for students in
its two professional degree programs. This has been described elsewhere in this Report. Architecture
students continue to be encouraged to take one of their three elective design studios in landscape
architecture. Summer Studies Abroad offerings remain a popular opportunity to have a cross-‐disciplinary
experience.

With regard to the general environmental conditions in Lasserre Building, here is an itemization of the
physical upgrades and maintenance on ARCH-‐specific facilities:

General Maintenance
-‐ Office signage in LSSR (2014)
-‐ LSSR 4th floor hallway upgrades (2014)
-‐ Painting in LSSR rooms 301, 309 (2014)

IT and Electrical
-‐ 3D Printer upgrade plus small 3D printers (six total) for the LSSR studios (2014)

Page 5 of 11


Furniture
-‐ New desks and chairs for ENDS, MUD, ARCH (2014)

Given the distance between their home buildings, there are limitations to the degree of interaction that
architecture and landscape architecture students can have and maintain their respective professional
obligations. This remains an ongoing topic of conversation among SALA faculty as a curricular and
pedagogical question, and of course is ultimately tied to the realization (or for now, the anticipation
thereof) of a new, shared facility.
functionality and proper service to students is maintained.”

The past year began with a staffing arrangement that included three temporary staff, and ended with a
staff that replaced these with three permanent staff, two of them student service coordinators, and an
enlarged position for a finance/hr clerk. Staff roles have been clarified in their specific functions, and
stabilized in their composition and sense of collegiality. The expanded position in h/r finance has allowed
other staff to be more focused on their core responsibilities. The year saw the retirement of a long-‐term
key staff member, and the return of another from a leave. The transition of a new full-‐time hire into the
role of the retired staff was orderly. All of the new hires seem to be very well defined and have fit in well.

The year also saw the end of Professor Leslie Van Duzer’s term as Director and following an in-‐house
search, the appointment of Ron Kellett, Professor of Landscape Architecture, as SALA’s new Director.
Budget
Budget
“Due to the current changes to UBC’s budget model, the SALA budget allocation from the University is
possible.”

Director Van Duzer has continued to effectively communicate with faculty the effects of the university’s
budget model on SALA. Where and how resources are distributed within SALA is presented annually to the
faculty at their end-‐of-‐year retreat.

The school still faces budgetary challenges. The architecture program has continued its modest but
Page 6 of 11


important steps to manage stresses on the budget. We have continued the practice of modestly increasing
the program’s admissions intake and to slightly increase the proportion of international students. The
Province approved the Dual Degree MArch/MLA option this spring at a modestly higher tuition rate than
either the MArch or MLA degrees. This will be another incremental but important part of the ongoing
challenge of remaining fiscally sound. We anticipate taking in our first DD students for the fall 2016.

The much higher tuition for the 16 graduate students in the inaugural Masters of Urban Design class has
made a modest but important contribution to SALA’s fiscal health. The success of last summer’s Vancouver
Summer International Program for foreign undergraduate students led to it being offered again in summer
2015.
3.2- CONDITIONS AND SPC ‘’NOT-MET’’

In the order listed in the Visiting Team Report (VTR) as well as in the Focused Evaluation Report if it applies

All identified conditions not-‐met were addressed in a focused evaluation report dated 30 April 2015.
4- OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION

5-
6-‐ As part of the five-‐year review of SALA Director Van Duzer, the Dean of the Faculty of Applied Science
conducted an External Review of SALA in September 2014. One of the key recommendations External
Review Committee was that new leadership was needed for SALA.
7-‐
8-‐ A series of health and wellness student initiatives including breakfasts, yoga, pet therapy – were instituted at
the request of students and supported by a grant from faculty
9-‐
10-‐ International Engagement
11-‐ Faculty believe in the importance of providing a range of study abroad options for students. Cultural
immersion and first hand exposure to great cities and masterworks are a critical part of any design
education. In addition to a term-‐long Study Abroad program, one or more 3-‐ to 4-‐week Study Abroad
courses are offered each summer. In the summer of 2014, two study abroad courses were offered, one to
Portugal and northern Switzerland, the other to Berlin. A preparatory seminar took place in the spring
2015 term for a study abroad in India in the Fall of 2015 where eighteen students will spend a term in
Chandigarh, India with Associate Professor John Bass. Students enrolled in the Chandigarh SA program are
supported with grants from UBC’s Go Global office.
12-‐
13-‐ Architecture has developed partnerships whereby students can independently spend a semester abroad
and have confidence in a successful exchange experience. Following on a trip to Denmark, Germany and
England in 2013, SALA Director Leslie Van Duzer made a recent trip to China and Japan with the VP
Page 7 of 11


Research and International, John Hepburn to investigate potential new exchange opportunities for
students. More work is required with UBC Go Global to establish more vetted partner schools.

China Wood, a 2014 summer studio program directed by Assistant Professors AnnaLisa Meyboom and Blair
Satterfield, integrates students from Chinese architecture schools with UBC students in a studio focused on
wood design and fabrication.
14-‐
15-‐ This year’s student-‐initiated study abroad included a student exchange at the University of Sydney in
Sydney, Australia.

16-‐ Co-‐op
17-‐ The optional co-‐op program allows students to take time away from their studies to work in their chosen
field. Senior Instructor Greg Johnson is taking over coordinating the program’s co-‐op program from Linda
Brock. Greg is a member of the AIBC Registration Board, and is strengthening practice-‐to-‐student
communications about openings, and is actively encouraging students to consider the co-‐op program
option. This past year two students participated in co-‐op -‐ one co-‐op opportunity with Studio V
Architecture in New York, the other with Amanat Architects in Vancouver
18-‐
19-‐ Selected Faculty Awards and Distinctions
20-‐ Blair Satterfield – VarVac Wall and Hex-‐Wall – Architect Magazine -‐ Annual Research and Development
Award – July 2014
21-‐ Blair Satterfield – VarVac Wall and Hex-‐Wall – Core77 Annual Design Awards -‐ Interiors and Exhibitions
Professional Runner Up – June 2014
22-‐ Matthew Soules – Vermilion Sands – ACSA -‐ honourable mention, March 2015
23-‐ Matthew Soules – Vermilion Sands – Architizer A+ Awards – Winner, Popular Choice Award, Pavilions
Category; Jury Selected Finalist, Pavilions Category; Jury Selected Finalist, Materials Category; Special
Mention, Commercial Pop-‐up / Temporary Category – March/April 2015
24-‐
25-‐ Selected Grants
26-‐ Ray Cole – Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions -‐ Increasing Energy Efficiency in BC Built Environment -‐ $1.5
million
27-‐ Ray Cole – Kresge Foundation, Bullitt Foundation, Real Estate Foundation of BC -‐ Regenerative
Neighbourhoods Project $274,400
28-‐ Joe Dahmen – BC Hydro – Collaborative Educational Initiative for Energy Efficiency and Conservation -‐
$39,500
29-‐ Joe Dahmen – UBC Centennial Initiatives Fund – Mycelium biocomposite architectural installation for UBC
campus -‐ $30,000
30-‐ Joe Dahmen – SEEDS – Mycelium biocomposite architectural installation for UBC campus -‐ $20,000
Page 8 of 11


31-‐ Joe Dahmen (co-‐investigator) – National Science Foundation (US) SBIR Phase II – Using Geopolymerisation of
Natural Aluminosilicate Minerals to Develop Sustainable Masonry Materials -‐ $740,000
32-‐ Sherry McKay (co-‐investigator) – Future of Public Housing -‐ $49,934
33-‐ AnnaLisa Meyboom (co-‐investigator) – National Research Council (ECO EII) with matching funds from BC
Hydro, BC Government (MEM,MOE) -‐ $179,00
34-‐ AnnaLisa Meyboom – UBC Hampton Grant – Intelligent Mobility and Urban Design: Impact on the City and
Society -‐ $9,130
35-‐ AnnaLisa Meyboom – Forest Innovation Investment – Shell Structures in Wood $64,000
36-‐ Oliver Neumann (co-‐investigator) – Forest Innovation Investment – Shell Structures in Wood $64,000
37-‐ Blair Satterfield – Canada Wood – Assemblages: China Wood Design-‐Build -‐ $9,250
38-‐ Blair Satterfield – Canada Wood – Wood as Process -‐ $10,000
39-‐ Blair Satterfield – Hampton Grant – Built to Change: 3D Printed Concrete Construction -‐ $25,000
40-‐ Matthew Soules – Burrard Arts Foundation and 221A -‐ Under the Bridges -‐ $50,000
41-‐
42-‐ Selected Competitions
43-‐ Bill Pechet – Roger Thas competition – first place. Calgary LRT North extension line to Tuscany and
Rockyridge, Public Art competition
44-‐ Bill Pechet – Closer Than – competition first place – for Brighouse Station Public Art competition
45-‐
46-‐ Selected Built Projects
Bill Pechet – Jewish Cemetery at Mountain View – Restoration and new Construction – Vancouver, BC,
Spring 2015
47-‐ Inge Roecker – The Flats on Georgia: Appartment House (28 Flats) in Chinatown, Vancouver – completed fall
2014
48-‐ Matthew Soules –EcoSoMo [Ecological Social Modules], Burnaby Mountain, Burnaby, BC – completed Spring
2015
49-‐
50-‐ Selected Exhibitions
51-‐ Blair Satterfield – HouMinn Practice – a Retrospective – University of Hawaii , April 2015
52-‐
53-‐ Selected Books
54-‐ Leslie Van Duzer – House Shumiatcher – the first book in the West Coast Modern House Series – Fall 2014.
55-‐ George Wagner – Tokyo from Vancouver 3 – Fall 2014.
56-‐
57-‐ Selected Student Achievements
58-‐ Neal Qiongyu Li and Daichi Yamashita, Master of Architecture students, received the Lamp Lighting Solutions
Award and a prize of 2000 euros for their entry Body Fabric Light in the student proposals division of the
Barcelona-‐based firm Lamp Lighting. Body Fabric Light was selected by the international jury for its use of
Page 9 of 11


building materials and ability to adapt and its interpretation of light and dark.
59-‐
60-‐ Geoff Cox and Neil Aspinall, Master of Architecture students, received Special Mention for their submission
Arctic Adaptations for the Canada Pavillon at the 2014 Venice Architecture Biennale. Their winning entry
strove to improve the psychiatric health of the Arctic by creating a series of mental health support centres.
Through the generation of a support network, the project addressed the dire need for accessible mental
health wellness in Nunavut.
61-‐
62-‐ Teaching Assistantships
63-‐ The number of teaching assistantships continues to increase with this year the offering of a third
undergraduate service class taught by Sherry McKay – Architecture in Context and Across Cultures. The
undergraduate service classes offer the opportunity to teach independently, an important educational
enrichment opportunity for graduate students. In addition, graduate teaching assistants teach alongside
faculty in the design media modules and the undergraduate design studios. For students interested in
pursuing academic careers, these experiences are invaluable.
64-‐
65-‐ Research Assistantships
66-‐ Research assistantships to assist with faculty research and design projects continue to be available through
faculty research funding.
Page 10 of 11


Dual degree

Core principles
1 Students work concurrently on two degrees

2 Non-advanced placement students choose
which of the two first-term studios to take
3 Students must be admitted
independently to both programs
4 Duration of study is planned for four years
5 Joint use of credits to satisfy degree requirements
6 Students complete one graduation project

Course of study
No advanced placement (149 credits)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4
Studio 1 or Vertical Studio 1 Vertical Studio 2 Vertical Studio 3
Plant Materials Structures and Materials Technology 2 Graduation Project 1
History Structures 1
Environmental Controls 1 Landscape Planning Mgmt
Design Media 1 History 1A Research Methods
Studio 2 Comprehensive Studio Comprehensive Studio Graduation Project 2
Site Analysis Theory Structures 2 Professional Practice
Site Engineering Technology 1 Environmental Controls 2

Elective
Design Media History 1B Contemporary Theories
Study Abroad or Elective Study Abroad or Elective Study Abroad or Elective
denotes Architecture course denotes Landscape Architecture course

Advanced placement
With a background in landscape architecture (108 credits)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
Vertical Studio 1 Vertical Studio 2 Vertical Studio 3
Structures 1
Technology 2 Graduation Project 1
History 1A Environmental Controls 1 Landscape Planning Mgmt

Structures and Materials Research Methods Elective
Comprehensive Studio Comprehensive Studio Graduation Project 2
Technology 1 Structures 2 Professional Practice
History 1B Environmental Controls 2

Site Engineering Contemporary Theories
Study Abroad or Elective Study Abroad or Elective

Advanced placement
With a background in architecture (108 credits)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
Vertical Studio 1
Vertical Studio 2 Vertical Studio 3
Plant Materials Structures and Materials Graduation Project 1
History Research Methods Landscape Planning Mgmt

Technology 2 Elective Elective
Comprehensive Studio Comprehensive Studio Graduation Project 2
Structures 2 Theory Professional Practice
Environmental Controls 2 Technology 1

Site Analysis Contemporary Theories
Study Abroad or Elective Study Abroad or Elective


with a related pre-professional bachelor's degree variable variable

Regular Faculty 2 - 2 1 9 - 1 - - 2 5 - 10 -
Men 1 ‐ 2 ‐ 5 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 4 ‐ 7 ‐
Women 1 ‐ ‐ 1 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2 1 ‐ 3 ‐
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Regular 15
Typical FT teaching load / year 2 studios + one course or 4 courses
Other Faculty ‐ 1 ‐ 1 ‐ 5 1 1 ‐ 2 ‐ 7 1 6
• Visiting ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1
• Adjunct • Sessional • Lecturer ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 5 1 1 ‐ 2 ‐ 7 ‐ 5
• Ph.D Candidate ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Men ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 4 1 1 ‐ 1 ‐ 6 1 4
Women ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 1 ‐ 2
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Other 4
Faculty: a figure equating other faculty where one course = 0.33 teaching load
Total FTE Regular + Other 19
Faculty
teaching in studio
Page 1 of 2

Full-Time Students 121 100 0 111
Men (optional) 63 47 0 55
Women (optional) 58 53 0 56
Students 1
FTE Foreign Students 2 (optional)
Studio Ratio (Students in Design 15:1

Number of applicants for a given 369 n/a n/a 369
Number of entering students for a 47 n/a n/a 47
With advanced standing (optional)
Total Degrees Awarded-Expected 3 43 n/a 46
Men (optional) 2 22 n/a 24
Women (optional) 1 21 n/a 22
Reporting Period:
May 2014 – April 2015
3
Page 2 of 2

4.6.5 Annual Report 2015 - 2016
University: British Columbia

Faculty: Applied Science
ANNUAL REPORT TO
CACB-CCCA
Narrative Section
Program: MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE (M. Arch.)
Academic Year: 2015-16
Head of the Program (Name): John Bass
Signature:
Date: 30 June 2016

Annual Report/Narrative Section
1- INTRODUCTION
June 30, 2016
Mourad Mohand‐Said
350‐55 Murray Street
Regarding UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Master of Architecture (M.Arch.) . Program
Annual Report
Dear Mourad Mohand‐Said:
Please find enclosed the Annual Report on the M.Arch. Program as required by CACB Conditions and Procedures
Documents include an update on academic and curricular changes to the Program, the response to the 2015
Focused Evaluation review of unmet conditions, a follow‐up to the 2015 Annual Report, other relevant
information about the Program and faculty and a current statistics report.
I hope that these are self‐explanatory and acceptable to the Board.
Regards,
John Bass
Page 1 of 12

2- STATEMENT OF CHANGES TO THE PROGRAM
Several changes were made and developments occurred over the last reporting period. These are organized into
three categories: Program developments, curricular changes, and faculty changes.
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS:
Dual Degree: The M.Arch. and .ML.A. programs have admitted their first cohort of five Dual Degree (DD)
students. A detailed description of the DD program was submitted with last year’s Annual Report. DD students
will begin their studies in Fall 2016.
CURRICULAR CHANGES
ARCH 551 ‐ Technical Documentation course: ARCH 551, Communicating Construction, a popular and
successful course taught as an elective for several years, will become a required course in Fall 2016, and will be
offered twice a year. All students entering the program beginning in Fall 2016 will be required to take this
course in order to graduate. This course will provide focused teaching and learning in the area of Technical
Documentation, a currently unmet Student Performance Criteria.
ARCH 521 ‐ Comprehensive Studio: Several adjustments were made to the 2016 iteration of the CDS. These
were intended to address deficiencies pointed out in the Focused Evaluation. The first significant adjustment
was a building code and accessibility analysis shared and discussed one‐on‐one with several practicing
architects who met with individual student design teams. The second adjustment added a series of
presentations and student Q/A with specialist engineers and designers regarding specific requirements
germane to the programme ‐ in this case lighting and mechanical systems specific to an art gallery. Finally, the
studio required all students ‐ who work in teams of two ‐ to work as individuals for several weeks developing a
key large‐scale wall section so that faculty could better evaluate individual technical and integrative thinking.
The program faculty continue to observe that the collaborative interaction between the teams of two presents
a profoundly meaningful learning experience.
ARCH 541 – Professional Practice: For the second year, this course has been offered as a cross‐listed course
with the professional practice course in Landscape Architecture. This past year saw the addition of a second
instructor who is an architect and lawyer practicing contract law to ensure the course captures content
necessary for the M.Arch. degree.
Page 2 of 12

ARCH 544X and Y ‐ Design‐Build I and II: This past year saw the second, and larger, offering of a two‐part
design‐build class. The Design‐Build classes provide exposure to the student of actual full‐scale construction
activities. The Design‐Build class will continue to be an offering within the curriculum.
Design Media 3: A new, advanced Media course addressing digital fabrication tools and modeling will begin in
Fall 2016.
Studies Abroad Program: The Architecture Program faculty approved offering its Studies Abroad Program
annually instead of bi‐annually.
FACULTY CHANGES:
Faculty search: Assistant Professor in Environmental Systems: Architecture Program will be advertised in Fall
2016, with a hire expected in Spring 2017.
3- RESPONSE TO TEAM FINDINGS
3.1- CAUSES OF CONCERN

In the order listed in the Visiting Team Report (VTR)

“The downtown studio was an important facility for the School. Because of the isolation of the UBC campus
it is critical that the school maintains its presence in downtown Vancouver. This has allowed for students to
and wider community. It was also serving as a gallery as there is no space available on campus for this type
of activity and was an ideal location for the thesis students to meet with their mentors from private practice,
to have studio space, and exhibition space for their final work. The closure of the downtown studio is a
significant loss to the School and the community, both professional and public.”
SALA Lecture Series ‐

SALA and the Architecture Program continue to sponsor a public lecture series downtown at UBC Robson
Square and other downtown or off‐campus venues. This past year more than a dozen lectures were held at
downtown venues, with architecture, landscape architecture and urban design lecturers from Europe,
Page 3 of 12

Canada and the United States. Several architecture faculty also participated in panel discussions during the
Master of Urban Design Urban Design Forum at UBC’s Chan Centre.
Fall web link: http://www.sala.ubc.ca/news‐and‐events/news/announcing‐fall‐2015‐lecture‐series;
Spring web link: http://sala.ubc.ca/news‐and‐events/news/announcing‐spring‐2016‐lecture‐series
AIBC Student Exhibition ‐

The architecture program partnered with the Architectural Institute of British Columbia and the
International Association of Lighting Designers to hold an event at the AIBC gallery downtown. Last year’s
was a two‐week exhibit of work done by students in the spring 2015 Comprehensive Design Studio, the
third consecutive year that SALA and the AIBC have jointly hosted this exhibit and reception.
RAIC Pecha Kucha Night ‐

The inaugural Thesis student pecha kucha presentations were held in May, and attended by 20 M.Arch.
students and 12 local practices. Each made a brief presentation of their projects/office. The event was
hosted by the RAIC, with VIA Architecture providing the venue.
SALA/Urbanarium ‐
A series of public debates organized by Leslie Van Duzer and the Urbanarium. Participants discussed topical
issues regarding the future of the Vancouver region.
Web link: City Debates
Other selected events/actions ‐

Inge Roecker hosted a reception in her studio in Chinatown where her students presented their vertical
design studio projects to a public audience.
SALA Director Ron Kellett reconstituted the SALA Advisory Council with representatives from the
professions, development, and the arts. Advisory Council meetings are scheduled three times per year.

2016 Program response:

A new SALA building, with capacity to accommodate all the School’s current programs and the expansion of
some, remains among the highest of priorities for all members of the University, the Faculty of Applied
Science and the SALA community. In 2015, we reported that a Request for Qualifications had been let in
2014 based on program and site approved in 2013. Due to our lead donor’s concerns about the selected
Page 4 of 12

site, this RFQ was subsequently suspended. In 2015, the University, in consultation with the lead donor,
identified another site, tested program feasibility and recalculated the project cost estimate. With a new
site and over two years of construction cost increases, the project had increased significantly (from $36M
to $50M). Currently the committed funding is now short of the threshold necessary to approve consultant
selection. However, a new SALA building remains the top building priority of the Faculty of Applied Science
and among the highest of the University of British Columbia. New public and private funding sources have
been identified and are currently being pursued. Additional initiatives will begin in fall 2016.

“Available studio space is inadequate, and is less per student than at the time of the previous VTR as the
optimal.”

Increasing budget pressures combined with a finite amount of space remains a cause of concern. The most
recent incremental response to addressing the increased budget pressures was the Spring 2016 decision by
Architecture faculty to run the Studies Abroad Program annually, and in the Fall term. This will allow the
program to admit an additional 12‐16 students every year.
With regard to the general environmental conditions in Lasserre Building, here is an itemization of the
physical upgrades and maintenance on ARCH‐specific facilities:
General Maintenance
Regular general maintenance is performed on the Lasserre building including: cleaning; plumbing, electrical,
and lighting repairs; garbage removal and recycling; and painting.
IT and Electrical
In 2015 a new plotter was purchased for the Architecture studio. As well, ongoing efforts were made to
increase the efficiency of the pay‐for‐print service for students.
Furniture
An additional 24 new desks and 24 new chairs were added to the third‐floor studio. New furniture for staff
was purchased including ergonomic chairs, stand‐up desks and shelving units. Room 211 was upgraded with
new furniture and a new projection system. One of our lecture halls, room 102, is currently being renovated
and upgraded.
Page 5 of 12

Given the distance between their home buildings, there are limitations to the degree of interaction that
architecture and landscape architecture students can have and maintain their respective professional
obligations. This remains an ongoing topic of conversation among SALA faculty as a social, curricular and
pedagogical question, and of course is ultimately tied to the realization (or for now, the anticipation
thereof) of a new, shared facility.
functionality and proper service to students is maintained.”

The past year was marked by little change and increased stability among the staff, and continued
refinement and clarity regarding roles and responsibilities. The Lasserre front desk position took on an
expanded role, and last year saw the addition of a second shop technician.
Budget
“Due to the current changes to UBC’s budget model, the SALA budget allocation from the University is
possible.”

Budget allocation and reporting processes and procedures within the University and Faculty of Applied
Science and SALA are much clearer, more transparent and timelier than they were at the time of the last
accreditation visit. Revenue, expenditures and carry forwards are now much easier to track, organize and
report to administrators and faculty in ways meaningful to academic and operational decision making.
These budget reports are now a part of every SALA meeting and both year beginning and year end retreats.
With better, more frequent access to more complete budget information and projections SALA has been
able to more effectively identify and test new revenue opportunities. In addition to the enrolment and
program expansion opportunities cited in last year’s report, SALA has successfully argued for and
implemented several revenue generating initiatives including: expansion of the undergraduate
Environmental Design program, increases to international tuition rates, new summer programs for non‐
SALA students and new fund raising initiatives in support of our lecture series and academic design build
programs.
Page 6 of 12

3.2- CONDITIONS AND SPC ‘’NOT-MET’’
The “Met” and “Not Met” evaluations and comments below are in the order listed in the 2015 Focused
Evaluation Report, which are taken to have superceded the 2012 VTR. Please note that Conditions and SPC
determined to have been “Met” in the 2015 FE Report are simply reported as such, with no additional
comment.
Condition 7: Physical Resources: Not Met

architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full‐time student; lecture and
seminar spaces that accommodate both didactic and interactive learning; office space for the exclusive use
of each full‐time faculty member; and related instructional support space.
Team Comments:
Despite all efforts deployed by outgoing director Van Duzer and by UBC Authorities towards funding the
new facility, which seems almost secured, the project encountered a major setback at the beginning of
2015 with the concerned raised about the site selected for construction. At the time the Focused
Evaluation Report was prepared (April 30) no timeline had been confirmed for exploring new sites.
Therefore, the status of the new building is uncertain at this time.
The program reports that maintenance and minor upgrades of the existing buildings have been done in
2014 in regards to signage, painting, printer upgrading and furniture. Considering that the Physical
Resources are mostly the same as they were when the 2012 visit occurred, this condition is still Not Met.

We expect that a similar “Not Met” evaluation will be assessed. While last year saw similar investments in
maintenance and upgrades of the Lasserre Building’s physical facilities (itemized elsewhere in this Report),
these remain remediative in anticipation of a new facility.
SPC B5. Accessibility: Not Met

Ability to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and cognitive
abilities.
Team Comments:
Reference to the Building Access Handbook is now part of a Building Code module incorporated in ARCH
511 (Architectural Technology 1), but still appears as a very general consideration.
Page 7 of 12

No evidence of a systematic development of accessible design was observed in the design work. There is
still limited evidence that students have the ability to design the site of a building with barrier free paths or
to address different range of issues encountered with various physical handicaps. The use of stairs and
other universal access barriers in projects, without alternate paths, was still noticeable in the work
submitted from the Comprehensive Studio, as much in site planning as well as inside the building. Based on
these observations, the Team considers that this criterion is still Not Met.

Refinement and further emphasis on the Building Code module incorporated last year (and mentioned in
our 2015 Focused Evaluation Report) led to the introduction of a focused analysis and design module on
Accessibility in the spring 2016 Comprehensive Design Studio. This module required students to develop a
code analysis of their projects, to identify the necessary accessibility responses and prepare graphic
diagrams of them, and to present and discuss these with practicing architects in one‐on‐one review
sessions.
SPC C3. Technical Documentation: Not Met

Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for purposes of
review and construction.
This criterion is Not Met. There is a lack of evidence that would support a demonstration of ability to
conduct appropriate site planning. There is no clear reference of structural axis and levels in the
comprehensive studio drawings.

As described in Section 2 above:
“ARCH 551 ‐ Technical Documentation course: ARCH 551, Communicating Construction, a popular and
successful course taught as an elective for several years, will become a required course in Fall 2016, and
will be offered twice a year. All students entering the program beginning in Fall 2016 will be required to
take this course in order to graduate. This course will provide focused teaching and learning in the area of
Technical Documentation, a currently unmet Student Performance Criteria.”
SPC C4. Comprehensive Design: Not Met

Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and a site. The
design or designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building envelopes, building
assemblies, life‐safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
Page 8 of 12

Team Comments:
The CACB SPCs listed in the studio documentation indicate a good strategy for informing students about
expectations for the assignments.
There are various assignments that cover program analysis, spatial experience, site, structure, light and
ventilation, building code. However, there is a lack of evidence for site analysis and planning. The detailed
drawings (1:20) are not convincing (structural components not illustrated) or missing.
Doubts were raised by the FE Team regarding students working in collaborative teams of two, as this
arrangement could affect the ability for each student to respond to all of the SPCs. In this arrangement of
team work, it is not possible to track the individual progress of each student so as to ensure that they are
meeting all the SPCs related to the Comprehensive Studio.

As described in Section 2 above:
“ARCH 521 ‐ Comprehensive Studio: Several adjustments were made to the 2016 iteration of the CDS.
These were intended to address deficiencies pointed out in the Focused Evaluation. The first significant
adjustment was a building code and accessibility analysis shared and discussed one‐on‐one with several
practicing architects who met with individual design teams. The second added a series of presentations and
student Q/A with specialist engineers and designers regarding specific requirements germane to the
program ‐ in this case lighting and mechanical systems specific to an art gallery. Finally, the studio required
all students ‐ who work in teams of two ‐ to work as individuals for several weeks developing a key large‐
scale wall section so that faculty could better evaluate individual technical and integrative thinking. The
program faculty continue to observe that the collaborative interaction between the teams of two presents
a profoundly meaningful learning experience.”
4- OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION
International Engagement –
Studies Abroad
Chandigarh, India, Fall 2015, 16 students (15 M.Arch.) coordinated by John Bass.
Tokyo, Japan, preparations for Study Abroad in September 2016
Master of Urban Design Study Abroad to Mexico – included several M.Arch. students
Page 9 of 12

Exchange
Ryan Arnold – University of Brussels
Hannah Brash – Lund University
Annie Hong – University of Melbourne
Nikolai Kuchin – ETH Zurich
Gourav Neogi – Lund University
Edwin Yip – University of Washington
Co‐op
Hannah Brash – Plant Architecture, Toronto
Christian Lam – Lekker Architects, Singapore
Katherine Mathers – HCMA Architecture and Design, Vancouver
Mingyue Zhang – LWPAC Architecture, Vancouver
Gourav Neogi – Arrow Architects ‐ Copenhagen, Denmark
Student Achievements – 2015‐16

‐ Neal Qiomgyu Li and Daichi Yamashita won 1st prize for ‘Body Fabric Light’ in the student design category of
the 2015 Lamp Lighting Solutions Awards, Barcelona.
‐ Maxim Pravosoudov (along with MLA Jaclyn Kaloczi) designed, built and exhibited ‘Dagdrommer
(daydream)’ at the Hardbakka Ruins Project in Bergen, Norway.
‐ Lorinc Vass, Daichi Yamashita, Neal Qiongyu Li, Pengfei Du (MLA) and Yan Luo won 2nd prize for ‘Full Void
Park’ in the Think Space competition.
‐ Lorinc Vass had his paper ‘Constellations of the In‐between’ accepted for presentation at the ACSA Fall
Conference in Syracuse, NY
‐ Jie Liu, Juchan Kim, Hewen Suo (ENDS) and Yiwen Ruan (MLA) won the 2015 Guming Rammed Earth Village
International Architecture Student Design Competition.
‐ Shannon Pitt was published alongside AnnaLisa Meyboom (faculty) in ACADIA 2015 for their publication
Thermocatalytic Metafolds.
‐ Roy Cloutier:
- Project selected as a competition finalist: “Atomizing the Smart City: Toward a Flexible Infrastructural
Urbanism” Infrastructure Space: 5th International Forum for Sustainable Construction, LafargeHolcim
Foundation: Detroit, MI, April 7‐9, 2016.
- Presented a version of a studio project (from the Chandigarh Study Abroad) at a peer‐reviewed
conference: “Atomizing the Smart City” 104th Annual Meeting of the Association of Collegiate
Schools of Architecture: Seattle, WA, March 17‐19, 2016.
- Presented a peer‐reviewed paper at a conference: “Atomized Urbanism: Design in the Networked
City”. Urban Design Forum, University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, March 10‐12, 2016.
Page 10 of 12

- Had two papers published in (non‐peer‐reviewed) journals: “Marking Land, Bordering Systems,” ‐SITE
Magazine (formerly OnSite Review), vol. 35: “Borders”, forthcoming summer 2016; “Marking Land,”
CLOG Journal, #14, "Landmark" (2015): 126‐7.
‐ Kaiyue Liao and Nicky Luk won 2nd place in the Fast + Epp Architectural Engineering Design Competition.
‐ Gabriel Lacombe won a jury‐reviewed competition to present an installation at the Festival des
Architectures Vives ‐ Montpellier, France.
‐ Jie Liu, Wen Sun and Hewen Suo (ENDS) received honourable mention in the 2016 eVolo Competition.
Selected Faculty Achievements – built works and projects, grants, exhibits – 2015‐16
Joe Dahmen
‐ BC Hydro Collaborative Educational Initiative for Energy Efficiency & Conservation $39,500
‐ UBC Centennial Initiatives Fund Mycelium biocomposite architectural installation for UBC campus $30,000
Mari Fujita
‐ “The Rate of Uselessness / Bubble City” (with Michael Barton)
2’x2’ model exhibited at Your Future Home: Creating the New Vancouver. Museum of Vancouver. January 21‐
May 15, 2016.
AnnaLisa Meyboom
‐ National Resources Canada (ECO EII) with matching funds from BC Hydro, BC Government – Powering Plug‐in
Vehicles with Renewable Energy Supply in BC ‐ $179, 700
‐ Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions – Transportation Futures for BC ‐ $343,000
‐ Collaboration with Thomas Tannert (Asst Professor Civil/Wood Sciences) and Iain MacDonald (Director of Centre
of Advanced Wood Processing) to successfully fund the Industrial Robot for CAWP. Total value of grants and gifts:
$250,000. To be installed Fall 2015 in the Centre of Advanced Wood Processing.
Inge Roecker
‐ Design Building Project, Energy+, Housing development producing and storing solar energy for (28 units),
Weinsberg, Germany. (2011‐ 2015) completed
‐ Design Building Project, Rehabilitation and conversion of an old Dairy factory and barn into a Co‐housing
complex (18 units) partly new Passiv Haus construction, 2014 – presently rezoning stage, Vancouver
‐ “Smart Grids‐Quartier‐Award Germany” Model housing project, Weinsberg, Germany 2015
Page 11 of 12

Blair Satterfield
‐ Exhibition ‐ Assemblage, Timber Structure Shanghai, China ‐ Shanghai Design Week ‐ September, 2015. Chosen
by the UNESCO Creative City Organization as the most important show project. Design‐Build collaboration
between Southeast University, Nanjing, Canada Wood, and UBC SALA. Co‐taught course and directed design
and rationalization of project with AnnaLisa Meyboom.
‐ Hampton Fund Research Grant $25,000
Matthew Soules
‐ Canada Council for the Arts: $20,000. For book publication on BC Binning House
‐ Core 77 2015 Annual Design Awards (USA) “Vermilion Sands” awarded Built Environment Professional Notable.
‐ Architectural Institute of British Columbia Awards “Vermilion Sands” awarded Special Jury Award.
Three Projects Completed Construction:
‐ Intense the Heat, West Vancouver
‐ City Fabric, Vancouver (equal collaboration with Rebecca Bayer)
‐ EcoSoMo, Burnaby
Leslie Van Duzer

‐ An anonymous donor established the “SALA Leslie Van Duzer Legacy Fund,” $100,000 over four years. With full
discretion over the funds, the first $25,000 was used to support the SALA‐Urbanarium City Debates, three of
which were staged during this review period.
• Leslie Van Duzer. “Mies and the Remix,” in arq: Architecture Research Quarterly, 19.3 (Cambridge University
Press, 2015), 196‐201.
• Leslie Van Duzer. “Letter to a Magician,” in Pidgin Magazine 19 (Princeton University, Spring 2015), 1‐ 7.
Page 12 of 12


• Master of Architecture degree variable variable

Regular Faculty 3 2 9 1 2 5 7
Men 1 2 5 1 2 4 5
Women 2 4 1 2
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Regular 15
Typical FT teaching load / year 3 courses
Other Faculty
• Visiting
• Adjunct • Sessional • Lecturer 2 7 1 1 1 7 1 7
• Ph.D Candidate
Men 1 4 1 1 1 4 1 3
Women 1 3 3 4
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Other 4.33
Faculty: a figure equating other faculty where one courses = 0.33 teaching load
Total FTE Regular + Other 19.33
Faculty
teaching in studio
Page 1 of 2


Students 1
Studio Ratio (Students in Design

Studios / Nb studios taught for a year) 13:1
Number of entering students for a 48 n/a n/a 48
Total Degrees Awarded-Expected 2 45 n/a 47
Men (optional) 0 26 n/a 16
Women (optional) 2 19 n/a 19
Reporting Period:
May 2015 – April 2016

3
Page 2 of 2


4.6.6 Annual Report 2016 - 2017

• Master of Architecture degree variable variable 12 - 18 1 variable


FT PT FT PT FT PT FT P FT PT FT PT FT PT
T
Regular Faculty 2 1 1 3 3 1 1 4 2 4
Men 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 3
Women 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Regular
Faculty: Number of FT Regular Faculty + 8.67
Typical FT teaching load / year 3 courses
Other Faculty
• Visiting
• Adjunct • Sessional • Lecturer 1 7 1 1 2 5 1 6
• Ph.D Candidate
Men 1 6 1 1 1 4 1 5
Women 1 1 1 1
Total FT Equivalent (FTE) Other
Faculty: a figure equating other faculty 5
Total FTE Regular + Other 13.67
Faculty
teaching in studio
Page 1 of 2

Students 1
Studio Ratio (Students in Design

Studios / Nb studios taught for a
year)
Number of entering students for a 0 51 0 51
Total Degrees Awarded-Expected 0 51 0 51
for a given term and total for a
year
Notes:
. Reporting period: May 2016 – April 2017
. Faculty data was calculated as follows:
. regular faculty were considered full-time teaching when he/she taught 3 or more courses
. regular faculty were considered part-time teaching when he/she taught less than 3 courses as
per the examples below
. held an administrative role as Chair and typically teaches 2 courses per academic year
. cross appointment within SALA with 2 courses in ARCH and 1 course in another program in SALA
. on leave or sabbatical for the year with teaching commitments covered by adjunct faculty
. research scholar appointment with the courses taught reduced and remaining courses taught by adjunct faculty
. Academic calendar is available at http://www.calendar.ubc.ca/vancouver/index.cfm?tree=12,196,278,0
3
Page 2 of 2

4.6.7 Committee Reports for 2016 - 2017
4.6.7.a Academic Infrastructure Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017

Satterfield – A.I. Summary – Director and Chairs | September 4, 2017
SELECT ITEMS FROM ACADEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE SUMMER WORK.
STUDENT SUPPORT
1) Design Media Techs Formerly Plotter Techs. Name change designed to help with Work Learn.
LSSR: Karem Obey (MArch) - [email protected]

MCML: Jim Dema-ala (ENDS) - [email protected]
Annex: Tory Michak (LArc) - [email protected]
Status: Offers have been made to plotter techs. They are in the system.
These positions will need to be renewed/rehired next summer. Tracy and I have worked to secure Work
Learn positions for them. We were successful.
Note: Should the drone be folded into one of these positions? Perhaps MCML or Annex, seeing as the load
in those two areas are arguably lighter?
INFRASTRUCTURE
2) LSSR 5 Removal of three power drops in column form (three aluminum columns that brought outlets
down to the floor). Replaced with outlets mounted to ceiling. SALA added six retractable extension cords
mounted to the ceiling to bring power to the open floor.
Status: Complete
3) LSSR 5B & Material Library (202A) Swap

Room 202A cleaned out and organized to receive Arch Material Library
Material Library moved from 5B to 202A
Status: Complete
4) 220 Power to LSSR 5B

UBC Facilities contacted to run 220 Power to Room 5B to support new Laser Cutter and associated filters
+ Other SALA and research tool sets.
Status: Complete
5) New Laser Cutter installed in LSSR 5B

New equipment purchased and installed in Room 5B
Status: Complete pending report from Nick & Graham

Note: Future lenses may be desirable for cutting thicker stock. See N&G.
Existing Laser Cutter installed in MUD Studio Space in MCML.

Status: Nick and Graham can update.
6) LSSR 309
Repair and resurfacing of west (interior) wall of 309 in Lasserre
Status: Pending.

• An initial estimate was secured for repairing the damaged wall in 309 and for re-skinning two
walls each in both 309 and 301 (the non-door/non-window walls that are used for pinups in both
rooms).
• Blair spoke with Ron K. and the decision was made to reduce the scope of the project (due in part
to spending necessary to get 220 power to Rm 5B).
• An email has been sent by Hanne asking Patrick Wong to provide a new estimate for only
repairing the single wall in Room 309.
• Where do we stand on this?
7) Adding pin-able surface to MCML hallway for accreditation

This project has been discussed and bandied about, but no action has been taken other than suggestions
about how to execute the job.
Note: Susan and Ron are the points of contact for this project.
8) LARC Shop
This is in the “discussion” phase. Nick can speak to the history of this idea. The mission would be a
satellite shop in the Annex. This could take a variety of forms, ranging from limited hand-tools and
workspace (think the 24-7 portion of the LSSR shop), to some digifab tools.
Pros:
• Improved access to shop space for SALA students.

• The Annex and MCML are far removed from the current shop in LSSR, so a satellite would
increase convenience.
• New faculty members could increase shop use by LARC students.
• Optics
Cons:
• Negative impact on staffing

• Duplication of equipment and maintaining two shops is a luxury cost
• Safety is a concern in unmonitored space or space with limited monitoring
• SALA Question whether SALA should invest in the Annex in any way. We should be working to
get people out of the Annex and into a better space.
EQUIPMENT
1) New Laser Cutter A new Laser Cutter was purchased for SALA, along with a new filtration system.
The Trotec machine and its filtration system have been placed in room 5B in the basement of Lasserre.
2) LSSR Laser Cutter The laser cutter that was located in Lasserre has been moved to one of the small
rooms off the MUD Studio in MCML. It will serve the ENDS, MUD, and LARC students.\

COMPUTERS
Two new computers have been acquired and installed over the summer.
• One is configured to support VR gear. This means a high render capacity (essentially a gaming
machine). This is located on the third floor of Lasserre.
• A second machine has been installed in the MUD studio in MCML. That is a replacement for the
Mac that failed last term.
• Both machines are P.C.s. There are, or should be no more Macs on the floor (verify). The decision
to move to PC platform was made with IT. It does a few things for us:
o Standardizes the build for SALA
o Reduces cost of entry for high powered machines
o Reduces cost of service for machines
o Increases speed and access to service for machines

4.6.7.b Outreach Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017

4.6.7.c Research Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017

4.6.7.d Student Affairs Committee Annual Report 2016 - 2017

4.6.7.e Academic Affairs Annual Report 2016 - 2017
ACADEMIC AFFAIRS ANNUAL REPORT: 2016-17

Committee members:
John Bass (ARCH, AAC chair)
Patrick Condon (MUD)
Mari Fujita (ENDS)
Susan Herrington (LARC)
Theresa Juba
Ron Kellett (ex-officio)
(Jaynus O’Donnell)
(Amy Villablanca)
SCOPE & ACTIVITIES

Over the course of the fall and spring terms, the committee worked on the following:
1. Design Media 1. Goal: To give ARCH and LARC students separate instruction (lectures and exercises) tailored
to the core learning objectives of their respective disciplines. Developed and SALA faculty approved a new
module-based course structure for Design Media 1 (ARCH 515). Separate instruction accounts for half of the
course curriculum. Students will be able to choose from a menu of skill-based software tutorials.
Development of the new curriculum will occur over the summer, led by Blair and new LARC faculty member
David Zielnicki. Next steps include a curriculum change and updating student handbook, website and
calendar.
2. Architectural History. Goal: To offer topic-driven architecture history courses and a greater student choice.
Reviewed and approved new architectural history curriculum (developed by Professors McKay and Stevens)
for Architectural History 1 (ARCH 4/504), Architectural History 2 (ARCH 4/505),. The new curriculum goes
into effect in 2017W (fall term). For their core history courses, students are now required to take one each
of ARCH 504 and 505, and for their required advanced history course, one of either ARCH 504 or 505. ARCH
561 will no longer fulfill the advanced history requirement. Next steps include a curriculum change and
updating student handbook, website and calendar.
3. Summer Studies Abroad. Goal: To establish consistent standards of academic expectations for all summer
studies abroad curricula. Reviewed and approved syllabi for two 2017 summer study abroad offerings.
Conveyed committee recommendations to those offering the SA programs. Proposals for summer studies
abroad should be presented to the students by late October, with syllabi for chosen offerings available for
AAC committee review by the beginning of the January term. We anticipate developing criteria for two
types of six-credit summer studies abroad: 1/ tour-based; 2/ project-based.
4. Advanced Placement Policies. Goals: 1/ to align ARCH and LARC policy regarding Advanced Placement,
Course Waiver and Credits-In-Program; and 2/ to streamline incoming ARCH students’ undergraduate
transcript review process. Spring 2017 ARCH admissions used the new policy. Staff and faculty will continue
to test the new model. Next steps are amendments to be reflected in the UBC Calendar, student handbooks
and SALA website
5. Teaching Assignments. Goal: To coordinate teaching assignments among the programs. Given the hire of
three new faculty and status of current faculty members, the teaching assignments were delayed; in the
future teaching assignments will need to be addressed earlier in the academic year to allow adequate time
for schedule coordination and securing the best timing and teaching space for each class. Achievements:
successfully integrated courses identified in the SALA / BUF Memorandum of Understanding into both the
SALA schedules and the BUF schedules. As of May 31, some assignments remain outstanding, and a search
for a History/Theory teaching fellowship and a potential multi-year adjunct appointment were ongoing.
Some concerns were expressed re: the lack of full time faculty currently proposed for ENDS for 2017/18.
6. Grading and Evaluation. Goal: To develop a consistent practice for communicating progress to students
enrolled in a design studio (and all other courses) at midterm and at the end of term, including grades for
each project. Note: ENDS and MUD students already receive this communication. The LARC program has a

long-established studio evaluation form that was shared with the committee. Work remains to develop
instructions for all faculty regarding consistent grading and evaluation practices.
7. Graduate Project Protocols and Reviews. Goal: To emphasize the focus of reviews as a discipline-specific
academic exam, and to reduce the costs of running the reviews, including staff time and catering costs.
Clarify and communicate to students the policy regarding GP1 and GP2 mentors: GP1 students may be
mentored by ARCH or LARC faculty, but GP2 mentoring must be done by faculty within the specific discipline
of the degree. The Dual Degree requires joint GP2 mentoring.
PROPOSAL FOR 2017-18 ACADEMIC YEAR

Several other tasks were in various stages of development and will continue over the summer and next
academic year. These include:
8. Elective offerings research and new policies. Goal: to review and amend electives past practices for
content, class size, scheduling, and type – including a so-called “research elective” differentiated from
electives that would have a larger enrolment. Research and analysis will continue over the summer and the
next academic year. Anticipate presenting a draft proposal in December 2017.
9. Graduate Thesis Protocol. Goal: To review and recommend changes, if any, to the GP1 and GP2 curriculum.
Anticipate presenting a draft proposal in December 2017.
We anticipate the following new tasks on the Academic Affairs Committee agenda for the next academic
year:
1. TLEF Digital Pedagogy. Goal: To explore how to effectively integrate digital skills, tools, and questions into
curriculum. Subcommittee, to be chaired by Blair (first term only, and then who takes over?)
2. ARCH Advanced Placement Cohort. Goal: To examine curricular (and program culture) effects of larger
cohort of Advanced Placement students in ARCH. See especially issues with Comprehensive Studio, but
extend work to include consideration of fundamental changes to AP course of study.
3. Future of Practice. Goal: Development (and placement) of course content (possibly within Inge’s
Contemporary Practice course) regarding the future of practice, in collaboration with members of the
professional communities.
4. The Pedagogical Implications of Truth and Reconciliation. Goal: To explore what, how, and where to
integrate content regarding the legacy of Residential Schools into the various degree programs SALA offers.
Identifying potential adjunct faculty associations with Aboriginal architects, landscape architects, and urban
designers.
ADVICE ABOUT COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

1. The AAC generally met bi-weekly, which seemed to work reasonably well, though the spring term saw fewer
meetings due to faculty searches and admissions. It’s possible that the full committee might meet less often
if specific tasks need more time to develop between meetings.
2. Committee size and membership is appropriate. Necessarily subcommittees chaired by a member of the
AAC were formed to address specific issues, but there is the concern that this will overwork people charged
with work in other governance areas.
3. The next committee chair should set up an online calendar to which members could subscribe.
4. Minuting quality and the timely accessibility to the minutes could also be improved.

4.7 Focused Evaluation (2015)
April 29, 2015
Mourad Mohand-Said
Re: Focused Evaluation, UBC School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, MArch
Program
Dear Mr. Mohand-Said:
Please find enclosed the Focused Evaluation as required by CACB Conditions and Procedures
We have organized these by Table of Contents, Executive Summary, 2012 VTR items of
concern and the Measures Taken in response to these, and by course, as specified by the CACB.
We hope that they are self-explanatory and acceptable to the Board.
Regards,
John Bass
UBC School of Architecture + Landscape Architecture

Focused Evaluation Submission Materials
Master’s of Architecture.Program, UBC SALA
30 April 2015
4.7 Focused Evaluation (2015) -- 421

Table of Contents
Focused Evaluation Report
UBC Architecture Program
I. Executive Summary
II. Measures taken to address Conditions Not Met

1. Physical Resources
2012 VTR comments and UBC response
2. SPC B5: Accessibility

3. SPC B6: Life Safety Systems, Building Codes & Standards

4. SPC B10 Building Service Systems

5. SPC C1: Detailed Design Development

6. SPC C2: Building Systems Integration

7. SPC C3: Technical Documentation

8. SPC C4: Comprehensive Design

III. Appendices
A. ARCH 511: Architectural Technology I
Course outline, assignments, student work examples
B. ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio

C. ARCH 531: Architectural Technology II

D. ARCH 532: Architectural Structures II

E. ARCH 533: Environmental Systems and Controls II


Executive Summary
Focused Evaluation Report
UBC Architecture Program
30 April 2015
In 2012 the University of British Columbia Architecture Program received from the Canadian Ar-
chitectural Certification Board a Six-year term with a Focused Evaluation at the end of Three years.
Specifically, the Visiting Team found the following Conditions and Student Performance Criteria
“not met.”
- Condition 7: Physical Resources

- SPC 85: Accessibility
- SPC 86: Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards
- SPC 810: Building Service Systems
- SPC Cl: Detailed Design Development
- SPC C2: Building Systems Integration
- SPC C3: Technical Documentation
- SPC C4: Comprehensive Design
This Report details the measures taken by the Program to address these eight items of concern.
Following this summary, the first section is organized item-by-item as listed above, beginning with
CACB language for each item and the full excerpt of the Visiting Team Report (VTR) concerns, fol-
lowed by a concise description of the specific changes to the curriculum that have been put in place
by the Program since then to address these concerns.
Appendices follow this itemization of the measures we have taken to address the VTR’s concerns.
Each of the four appendices include course descriptions and assignments as well as examples of
student work in the high, middle and low pass ranges.

UBC Architecture Program, Focused Evaluation, Executive Summary, cont’d.
The changes that we have made to our curriculum to address the above concerns have been made in
five (four core technical and one studio) courses, taken by students in their second, third and fourth
terms:
ARCH 511: Technology I (second term)

ARCH 521: Comprehensive Design Studio (fourth term)
ARCH 531: Technology II (third term)
ARCH 532: Architectural Structures II (fourth term)
ARCH 533: Environmental Systems and Controls II (fourth term)
As noted, ARCH 521, 532 and 533 are taken in the fourth term, and are closely coordinated with
each other in assignments regarding structural and environmental system development as well
as code compliance. Evidence of this coordination, along with other measures belonging just to
coursework, can be seen in the following sections of this Report.
In order to kept this report focused on the specific concerns raised during our last accreditation vis-
it, we have not included here an update on core technical courses other than Technology 1 (ARCH
511) and studio courses other than the Comprehensive Design Studio (ARCH 521), both of which
have been modified to respond to the 2012 VTR concerns.
We are pleased with the enrichments to our students’ education brought by these changes to the
curriculum, and to the welcome these changes have received from those students. We trust that
this Report will demonstrate our substantial commitment to addressing the concerns of the 2012
Visiting Team.
Don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or need additional information.
John Bass

Measures taken to address Conditions Not Met
The following section describes the measures UBC Architecture Program has taken to address
the concerns of the 2012 VTR. It is organized by “Condition Not Met” in the order that they are
organized by the CACB.
Condition 7: Physical Resources - Not Met

The program must provide physical resources that are appropriate for a professional degree pro-
gram in architecture, including design studio space for the exclusive use of each full-ˇtime stu-
dent;; lecture and seminar spaces that accommodate both didactic and interactive learning; office
space for the exclusive use of each full-ˇtime faculty member;; and related instructional support
space.
2012 Team comments:

As previously identified in the last Accreditation Visit, the facilities continue to be of concern for
a program dedicated to design and matters related to the spatial efficacies. The elimination of the
downtown studio lease for financial considerations by the University has exacerbated the crowd-
ing of the Lasserre studio spaces and other spaces on the UBC campus. Additionally, the removal
of this studio from the urban setting has drawn universal criticism from students and staff alike,
who considered this invaluable for the course of study which concentrates heavily on urban design
issues, some of which are located in the immediate area. The ability for this location to facilitate
outreach to the architectural community is now compromised, from a perspective of exhibition
exposure to the attraction of visiting critics from the community.
The Lasserre Building, while a fine example of a building of the period, is challenging the faculty
to deliver instruction optimally. The separation of program delivery to five buildings on campus
is obviously straining cohesion, most notably with the landscape architecture program. A closer
physical proximity – even if located in a neighbouring arts precinct - would help to strengthen
both programs. The condition and distribution of programming amount the various facilities has a
potential impact on the ability of the program to attract new staff.
The space utilized by the architecture program within Lasserre is stretched; addressing this critical

consideration has been initiated with the commissioning and receipt in June 2011of the UBC Plan-
ning and Design feasibility report. Unfortunately, the timing indicated in the feasibility study no
longer appears current and a budget or a funding model was not articulated. While the co-location
of architecture with music and planning in Lasserre may accomplish overarching institutional ob-
jectives, these are clearly at the expense of the effective operation of the architecture program. This
has stressed many of the functions, from over crowding in studios to scheduled classroom usage.
Student gathering space is very limited. The workshop, while clearly well organized and managed,
suffers to the point where students using the facility frequently determine the methods employed
for project implementation by the availability of some of the equipment. Wisely there has been no
attempt to integrate any metal fabrication into a workshop setting, as this would further challenge
the already limited space, while impacting safety considerations.
In addition to crowding in the Lasserre building, the physical state of the building itself is of
concern. Work areas in the building are not always heated, thereby discouraging student use of the
studio spaces in evenings and weekends. Also, and of greater concern, the building does not meet
the seismic requirements for the area, which is known to be seismically active. This concern was
expressed to the Team by both staff within SALA, as well as by a senior administrator within the
University. At the very minimum, the Lasserre building should be upgraded seismically.
Measures taken:
Concerns about Physical Resources are directly linked to the new building fundraising campaign
that has been led by outgoing Director Van Duzer and soon, by Professor Ron Kellett, who will
become Director in July 2015. Being housed in an upgraded or new facility remains of the highest
priority for all members of the SALA community. The site and program for a new building were
approved by the university in 2014, and a Call for Proposals was announced in Fall 2014. That call
was abandoned, however, in early 2015 after the project’s major donor raised concerns about the
approved site for the new building. Since early 2015, the donor, the Dean of Applied Science, and
staff from the university have been exploring other sites, with no conclusions made at the time of
this writing. No timeline is yet confirmed but there remains a high degree of optimism about the
prospect for a unified SALA housed in a single facility.

B5. Accessibility - Not Met
Ability to design both site and building to accommodate individuals with varying physical and
2012 Team comments:

Design including barrier free washrooms were integrated in the Architectural Technology 1 course
(ARCH511) and was noticeable in some of the vertical studio and thesis work. However, there is
still limited evidence that students have the ability to design a site or a building with the inclusion
of the full range of accessibility issues, which includes all types of handicaps. The use of stairs and
other universal access barriers in projects, without alternate paths was also noticeable.
Measures taken:
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 (Fall 2014)
The general concepts of providing universal accessibility has been introduced as a component of
the new Building Code module incorporated in ARCH 511. Refer to SPC B6 for a description of
this module. The barrier-free washroom assignment noted in the VTR response above continues to
be included in the course.
B6. Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards - Not Met
Understanding the principles that inform the design and selection of life-safety systems in build-
ings and their subsystems; the codes, regulations, and standards applicable to a given site and
building design project, including occupancy classifications, allowable building heights and areas,
allowable construction types, separation requirements, occupancy requirements, means of egress,
fire protection, and structure.
2012 Team comments:

ARCH 511, 531, 541 and 543 have little information of specific design, selection and application
of Life Safety Systems, Building Codes and Standards as part of the design process. The infor-
mation provided in the course outline covers topics such as general requirements of codes and
standards, yet no specific information about building code classifications, occupancy, separation
requirements or fire protection can be found. The vertical studio work and E-Studio work do show
inconsistent evidence of students’ ability or understanding of these systems within the design
process.

Measures taken:
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 (Spring 2015)
A new module has been introduced into the ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 course (also
presented within the Fall 2014 ARCH 531 Architectural Technology 2 class on a one-time basis
to ensure exposure to this cohort of students), providing an introduction to basic concepts of the
Building Code, with a focus particularly on those which impact most significantly the architectural
configuration of a building.
In general, the topics include:

- Occupancy classifications & determination of risk, occupancy loads
- Construction types (combustible vs. non-combustible, heavy timber)
- Building design parameters (building size, height, number of storeys, mezzanines, inter
connected floor spaces, etc.)
- Fire resistance ratings & fire separations, fire suppression systems, building combustible
content
- Egress system design (number, type, size, location, travel distances, dead-end corridors,
etc.)
- Spatial separation & exposed openings in building facades
- Accessibility requirements
- Washroom requirements
Following a presentation on the topic, an exercise is undertaken in class with student participation,
with the answers later posted. An assignment is also given requiring the students to undertake a
basic code analysis for an existing building.
The following items are included in Appendix B to demonstrate this module:

- ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 syllabus with this module highlighted
- Building Code slide presentation
- Building Code exercise undertaken in class with student participation
- Building Code assignment + sample student work

ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio (Spring 2015)
The specific effort in the syllabus of ARCH 521 includes an introduction to those aspects of the BC
Building Code that are especially pertinent to the topic at hand. Following this introduction, fo-
cused consultations with both SALA faculty and external building code experts are made available
to every student at an early, preliminary phase of design as well as at a point when more precise
decisions are being made regarding issues raised by regulatory requirements. The exercise of these
issues coming after their introduction in associated coursework encourages not only a more confi-
dent understanding and ability but is intended to declare that such erstwhile ‘technical’ topics have
indeed the capacity to sustain critical decisions regarding design strategy.
ARCH 532 Structures 2 (Spring 2015)

In coordination with the concurrent ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio, ARCH 532 has
added a module on selecting structural systems that includes the code requirements. The students
select their structural systems based on fire proofing code requirements as well as other consider-
ations such as spans, loading and construction and site limitations. Work is demonstrated in Com-
prehensive Studio as well as exam questions. Sample handouts and work is included in Appendix
D: ARCH 532.
ARCH 533 Environmental Systems and Controls II

In coordination with ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design Studio, ARCH 533 has a lecture devoted
to fire suppression systems and their relationship to life safety requirements in buildings. Students
are tested on these issues via several focused questions in the final examination for the course.
B10. Building Service Systems - Not Met

Understanding of the basic principles that inform the design of building service systems, including
plumbing, electrical, vertical transportation, communication, security, and fire protection systems.
2012 Team comments:

ARCH 511, 513 and 533 cover partial areas of building service systems in various degrees: a large
focus is displayed on building envelope performance, heat loss and gain calculations, vertical
transportation, day lighting, energy and sustainability principles. There is little information or
evidence of the integration of actual mechanical or electrical systems, communication, security and

fire protection systems or principles as to when and why certain systems will be applied. Through-
out the student exhibits there is a lack of evidence of integration of such building service systems,
especially basic systems such as HVAC, space requirements for systems and fire protection and
how this may affect design considerations.
Measures taken:
These SPCs have been addressed across a varied range of curricular adjustments.
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 (Spring 2015)

A new module was added two years ago into the course to provide a more explicit introduction to
building systems, in particular:
- Structural system (particulars addressed in detail within the 2 structures courses)
- Enclosure system (particulars addressed in much more detail later in this course)
- Electrical system, including power, lighting, communication, security
- Plumbing system, including hot & cold water supply, sanitary & storm waste systems
- HVAC system, including space heating/cooling, radiant surface heating/cooling, air quali
ty control
- Interior finish systems & furnishings
Following a presentation on each of these topics, an assignment is given requiring the students to
undertake an exhaustive analysis of an existing lecture hall space of their choice within a recent
UBC campus building, identifying all the elements of the building systems present.
ARCH 533 Environmental Systems and Controls II (Spring 2015)

A lecture devoted to plumbing and wastewater systems has been added to ARCH 533 two years
ago in response to concerns raised in this area. Topics addressed in the lecture include the follow-
ing:
- Global context and contemporary issues in water use
- Historic context of plumbing supply and wastewater systems
- Contemporary plumbing design considerations in supply for single, mid- and high-rise
residential buildings
- Contemporary design considerations for waste water in buildings, including the role of

plumbing vents
- Contemporary centralized and distributed methods of wastewater treatment
- Contemporary distributed approaches to dealing with stormwater
Students in the course are evaluated on their knowledge of the material via examination following
the lecture.
The following items are included in the appendix to demonstrate this module:
- ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 syllabus with this module highlighted
- Building Service Systems slide presentations
- Building Service Systems assignment + sample student work
C1. Detailed Design Development - Not Met

2012 Team comments:

There is no singular evidence in support of this criterion. Various technical courses, including
ARCH511, 531, and 532, indicate intent of aspects of Detailed Design Development. However this
is not translated into a building design. Many design studio work shows no significant evidence of
progress beyond the conceptual design stage.
Measures taken:
ARCH 531 Architectural Technology 2 (Fall 2014)
Although this topic has been addressed quite extensively for some time through in-class exercises,
several formal assignments are now included as a part of the course which require the students to
develop enclosure assembly details for several construction types.
The following items are included in the appendix to demonstrate the way this topic is now ad-
dressed:
- Enclosure detailing assignment for masonry wall + sample student work
- Enclosure detailing assignment for exposed and concealed concrete wall + sample student
work

ARCH 532 Architectural Structures II (Spring 2015)
Integrated with the Comprehensive Studio, the Architectural Structures II has added a focused as-
signment that isolates the structural system of their Comprehensive Design Studio and explains it.
Students must demonstrate that their structure has adequate gravity load carrying capacity as well
as the ability to resist significant seismic loads through a lateral load resisting system. Elements
must be sized approximately and the means to do this must be explained.
Detailed design development requires - above all else - the space for extended, iterative review
- amplified by specific technical analysis. The integration of concurrent technical coursework
together with a more structured and ‘front-end loaded’ Comprehensive Design Studio deliberately
addresses this need. Example assignments can be found in Appendix D: ARCH 532.

Issues concerning the assessment of building materials, components and assemblies are raised
throughout the design process in ARCH 521, with the pace and explicit assignments of task set out
to ensure that such concerns are given sufficient time through the course of the term to be reviewed
and critically reconsidered. These issues are explored through a combined effort in 2D representa-
tion, digital modeling, and physical modeling at a range of scales from 1:100 to 1:20.
C2. Building Systems Integration - Not Met

Ability to assess, select, and integrate structural systems, environmental systems, life safety sys-
tems, building envelopes, and building service systems into building design.
2012 Team comments:

These criteria are evidenced under ARCH 513. However, this course and design studios should
provide a more rigorous review of how systems, including conventional systems, are integrated
into typical architectural design solutions.
Measures taken:
The need to anticipate the integration of building systems into the design process has been most
deliberately addressed through the coordinated instruction that now exists each spring term

between ARCH 532 and ARCH 533 and the Comprehensive Design Studio, ARCH 521. This
coordination is described in the previous and following sections of this Report. We hope that the
effectiveness of these efforts is demonstrated in the assignments given and resulting student work
included in the Appendices.
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 (Spring 2015, discussed under SPC B10)
The Building Systems module includes an assignment that requires the students to identify the
various building systems present within an existing space. It enables them to assess the success
or failure of integration of building systems, with the hope that it would improve their ability to
integrate such systems into their own studio design projects.
ARCH 532 Architectural Structures II (Spring 2015)

ARCH 532 is now tracks with Comprehensive Studio progress closely. For example the ‘Selection
of Structural Systems’ and ‘Layout of Structural Systems’ as well as ‘Configurations of Buildings
for Seismic Design’ are the first three sections of the course - they aim to deliver larger configu-
ration issues. Later on the course moves into steel and concrete detailing when this comes to be
important at the latter part of the studio. In addition, the students are encouraged to discuss the
structural systems with the instructor and two structural ‘speed crits’ are held with external pro-
fessional engineers who critique and help with the structural configuration - first at the early and
then at the middle of the structural system design process. Concurrently there are also critiques
regarding building envelope, code consultants and environmental consultants in order to have the
students think synthetically about all the technical aspects of the building.
ARCH 533 Environmental Systems and Controls II (Spring 2015, discussed under SPC B6, B10,
C4)
ARCH 533 is now coordinated closely with the Comprehensive Design Studio. Students in ARCH
533 learn about a range of conventional, passive and hybrid approaches to maintaining interior
environments in buildings, as well as the spaces these different approaches require.
The major design assignment in the course is integrated with the Comprehensive Design Studio.
This assignment requires students to select an environmental control strategy for their Comprehen-
sive Design Studio project and develop a design for it taking into account the specific consider-

ations of their studio project. This exercise is documented through a printed poster and 3-5 page
report about the system chosen, its performance in summer and winter, quantitative projections
about energy use, and an overall justification for its design.

Critical review of the ongoing design work is executed through the lens of building code, struc-
tural and environmental engineering expertise and further allied with specific assignments in the
concurrent coursework. The demonstration of building systems informing design practice is made
evident in faculty presentations of important contemporary precedents and confirmed in the vari-
ous reviews by local practitioners.
C3. Technical Documentation - Not Met

Ability to make technically precise descriptions and documentation of a proposed design for pur-
poses of review and construction.
2012 Team comments:

The conceptual development of details and accomplishment in graphical documentation were lim-
ited in scope. While some elective courses showed a good level of accomplishment or a technical
documentation that emerged from a personal design, the courses dedicated to meet this criterion
were lacking in consistency sufficient to meet the ability level.
Measures taken:
Technical documentation occurs across and array of coursework in the curriculum, with special
effort being made to coordinate precise work in ARCH 532 and ARCH 533 with the Comprehen-
sive Design Studio, ARCH 521.
ARCH 511 Architectural Technology 1 (Fall 2014) and ARCH 531 Architectural Technology 2
(Spring 2015)
In both courses the students are exposed to some basic concepts of technical documentation
through assignment requiring the drawing of building details. Concepts such as the following are
introduced:
- Appropriate drawing scale

- Drawing projections
- Drawing conventions
- Drawing clarity (line weight, textures, hatches, etc.)
- Construction sequencing reflecting trade involvement
- Exploded assembly drawings
- Construction durability & ease of maintenance/repair

In particular, the requirement to construct 1:20 detailed analytical drawings at an early phase of
the studio should be noted, ensuring that appropriate time is given to an iterative and continuing
critical review of this material as the design projects progress.
C4. Comprehensive Design - Not Met

Ability to project a comprehensive design based on an architectural idea, a building program and a
site. The design or designs should integrate structural and environmental systems, building enve-
lopes, building assemblies, life-safety provisions, and environmental stewardship.
2012 Team comments:

The Comprehensive Design Studio has undergone two iterations since the last VTR, with a third
currently underway. The first iteration, as noted in the APR under the Program Self Assessment
of the 2007-08 Annual Report, identifies that this criteria is supported by the “Culture of Mak-
ing” Studio. This has been revised in the second iteration, which is the presented evidence for
this VTR, with the Vertical Studios modified by an “E” designation and supplemented by various
technical courses, particularly ARCH513 and 531. Although it is understood that this criteria may
be satisfied by more than one studio and/or course, this approach can lead to inconsistencies across
student submissions and instructor requirements. This is the case in this instance. The “E” Studio
elective addition to some of the studio work varies in depth and complexity, as demonstrated in the
work exhibited, depending upon the instructor.
The team has a concern with the course outline of the E studio. The studio expectation of this
studio summarizes that students elect and identify criteria to be incorporated into the design
process as they relate to ecology. For the period of consideration for this assessment, the require-

ment for Comprehensive Design was included as a component called the E-Studio stream within
the Vertical Studio sequence. Students were required to take E-Studio in at least one of the three
required Vertical Studios. Students “identify which criteria they will be addressing in their work,
and pursue a design process so that results in a synthesis of those criteria.” The E-Studio required
students to relate social and cultural issues to defined areas of design and performance.
Environmental stewardship and sustainable design considerations are being incorporated and
integrated to a large degree in vertical design studios and E-Studio. Yet the review team notes that
analysis and application of basic building systems such as HVAC, plumbing and life safety are
lacking or being displayed inconsistently throughout the displayed work. The focus of the UBC
on ecology including social, cultural and economic aspects of environmental issues should be
commended, yet should not replace a student’s capability of evaluating and incorporating basic
building systems, as required by this SPC.
Measures Taken:
For the past three academic years, revisions to the syllabus of ARCH 521 Comprehensive Design
Studio, ARCH 532 Architectural Structures II and ARCH 533 Environmental Systems and Con-
trols II have directly addressed concerns raised by the most recent CACB Visiting Team. Most
importantly, the delivery of these courses concurrently allows for significant integration of course
content and overlap of major assignments through the course of the term. A more detailed portray-
al of measures taken and current practices is set out in the respective Spring 2015 course syllabus
material and assignments, and evidenced by examples of student work.

A single, carefully defined building programme - the new School of Architecture and Landscape
Architecture Building in Spring 2015 - and attendant site condition is set, ensuring that sufficient
scale and complexity is available to exercise the requirements of this SPC. Programme elements
are varied in scale and specificity of use - including some aspect of public assembly - and delib-
erately require vertical circulation with attendant demands for providing means of egress. Siting
conditions are limited in order to allow rapid development of overall design strategies, in turn
promoting design development as an iterative, critical exploration integrating essential aspects of
structure, environmental systems, building envelopes and appropriate measures of building codes

and standards. Introductory seminars and a set of five introductory thematic studies are given by
faculty to further promote structured and rapid development of design strategies. Coursework in
ARCH 532 and 533 further refines technical discussion and allows for quantitative analysis as the
term proceeds through assignments linked to the Comprehensive Design Studio. As the working
title ‘Conceptualizing the Technical’ suggests, issues of programmatic analysis, an understanding
of building code requirements, of structural alternatives and environmental systems are all consid-
ered hold formative potential in the design process.
In addition to frequent and regular reviews by faculty, focused one-on-one consultations with
code, structures and environmental specialists occur at appropriate points of project development.
At both interim - effectively schematic design - stage and at the conclusion of the term, formal
presentations include an array of distinguished practitioners. Overall the project proceeds from the
urban / landscape scale through to the examination of building envelope and assembly concerns at
a scale of 1:20. A full array of media including physical models is deployed across the entire term.
Throughout, students work in pairs to encourage a collegial environment that stresses the collabo-
rative nature of design.

4.8 Evaluation Documentation
4.8.1 MArch Studio Written Student Evaluation
Student Final Evaluation

Term / Course / Instructor
Low Med High
DESIGN PROCESS
Scope and ambition of work
Exercises critical judgment to further work
Identifies appropriate tools to investigate ideas
Uses case studies and precedents in depth
Three-dimensional and spatial imagination
DESIGN MEDIA
Investigates through appropriate media
Fluent with basic architectural conventions
Craft of work
Clarity of representation
Power of representation to hold content
SCHOLARSHIP
Responds effectively to criticism
Communicates ideas and positions clearly
Level of completion of work
Studio attendance and time management
Knowledge of discipline, cultural awareness
COMMENTS

4.8.2 SALA Studio Course Evaluation
Studio Course SALA Course
Section Question Response Type

Studio Course SALA Overall, this studio was effective. 5-Point Likert Scale
Course Overall Overall, this studio was well organized and managed. 5-Point Likert Scale
Overall, the workload in this studio was appropriate. 5-Point Likert Scale
Overall, critiques and reviews in this studio were 5-Point Likert Scale
effective.
How was this studio effective? Long Answer
How could this studio have been more effective? Long Answer
Do you have additional comments to offer about Long Answer
this studio?
Studio Course SALA What was effective about this instructor’s Long Answer
Course Instructor design teaching?
How could this instructor’s design teaching be more Long Answer
effective?
Do you have additional comments to offer about this Long Answer
instructor’s teaching?
UBC-wide Questions The instructor made it clear what students were 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
expected to learn.
The instructor communicated the subject matter 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
effectively.
The instructor helped inspire interest in learning the 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
subject matter.
Overall, evaluation of student learning (through exams, 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
essays, presentations, etc.) was fair.
The instructor showed concern for student learning. 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
Overall, the instructor was an effective teacher. 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
4.8 Evaluation Documentation -- 439

4.8.3 SALA Non-Studio Course Evaluation
Non- Studio Course SALA Course

Non-Studio Course Overall, this course was effective. 5-Point Likert Scale
SALA Course Overall Overall, this course was well organized and managed. 5-Point Likert Scale
Overall, the workload in this course was appropriate. 5-Point Likert Scale
How was this course effective? Long Answer
How could this course have been more effective? Long Answer
Do you have additional comments to offer about Long Answer
this course?
Non-Studio Course What was effective about this instructor’s teaching? Long Answer
SALA Course How could this instructor’s teaching have been more Long Answer
Instructor effective?
instructor’s teaching?
UBC-wide Questions The instructor made it clear what students were 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
expected to learn.
The instructor communicated the subject matter 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
effectively.
The instructor helped inspire interest in learning the 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
subject matter.
Overall, evaluation of student learning (through exams, 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
essays, presentations, etc.) was fair.
The instructor showed concern for student learning. 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A
Overall, the instructor was an effective teacher. 5-Point Likert Scale with N/A

4.8.4 SALA TA Evaluation
Teaching Assistants SALA

Teaching Assistants Overall, this teaching assistant was effective. 5-Point Likert Scale
What was effective about this teaching assistant’s Long Answer
contribution to this course or studio?
How could this teaching assistant’s contribution to this Long Answer
course or studio have been more effective?
teaching assistant’s contribution?
4.8 Evaluation Documentation -- 441

4.9 Self-assessment Documentation
4.9.1 Faculty Self-assessment
UBC SALA - Architecture Program - Faculty Self-Assessment

What is this about?
Self-assessment by faculty, students and alumni is a required part of the process of preparing the Architecture Program Report (APR) for next year’s accreditation
visit. Opinion collection surveying and focus group conversations are useful in giving the program’s faculty and administrators a sense of how the program is
perceived by its constituencies – what it does well, what it needs to focus on in the coming years – as it prepares an Action Plan for the next several years. It is
important that you give your honest views, and that you are critical wherever you feel it is warranted.
How the survey and focus group conversations are organized:

From the Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB) Terms for Accreditation (2102): “The program must provide an assessment of the degree to which it is
fulfilling its mission and achieving its strategic plan.” To that end, the following survey is organized in five sections that correspond to the CACB Perspectives. You
will see that the five perspectives are heavily weighted toward our responsibility to prepare students for practice. The following questionnaire reflects this priority,
though the questionnaire for faculty is adjusted (from the student questionnaire) to reflect faculty perspective in both individual and program assessments.
Schedule
There are four events planned for this Self-Assessment:
April 27: Architecture program retreat. Orientation to and discussion about the self-assessment. Assessment subcommittee formed.
May 8: Deadline to send complete form to J Bass.
May 11: Self-assessment subcommittee meeting.
Mid- to late May: Date set at 27 April retreat. Program faculty meeting. Action plan agenda items discussion.
Tenure-
Tenured Instructor Adjunct Other
track
Please indicate whether (tenured, tenure-track, instructor, adjunct, etc.)

Strongly Strongly Don’t
Please rate each statement on a scale of 1 to 4 via a checkmark. Disagree Agree
Disagree Agree Know
1. I maintain high professional standards with regard to research and publication.
2. I make clear to my students the academic standards expected in their work.
3. I have opportunities for interaction with other academic programs at UBC.
4. Students are able to contribute to my research in the classroom context.
5. Students are able to contribute to my research outside the classroom context.
6. The university provides adequate support resources to my research efforts.
7. Additional comments:

“The program must demonstrate that it provides support and encouragement for students to achieve their full potential during their school years and later in the
profession, and that it provides an interpersonal milieu that embraces cultural differences.”
Disagree Agree Know
8. I am responsive to how students wish to shape their personal learning agendas.
I structure my coursework so that students are able to work with other students in
9.
ways that contribute to their education.
10. I am respectful of students who are different from me.
The program provides students with access to mentoring from the professional design
11.
community.
The program exposes students to the national and international context of practice and
12.
the work of the allied design disciplines.

“The program must demonstrate that it provides students with a sound preparation for the transition to professional life, including internship and licensure.”
Disagree Agree Know
The program makes students aware of internship and continuing education in relation
14.
to architectural licensure.
The program provides students with a learning context that makes students aware of
15.
the role of Provincial regulatory bodies in the internship and licensure process.
16. The program meets its responsibilities to prepare its students for licensure.
17. The program should develop a compulsory co-op term of 8 or 12 months.
The program makes students aware of the architect’s professional conduct

18.
responsibilities.

“The program must demonstrate how it prepares students to practice and assume new roles within a context of increasing cultural diversity, changing client and
regulatory demands, and an expanding knowledge base.”
Disagree Agree Know
20. The professional community is engaged in the life of school.
The program encourages students to think about the art and science of architecture
21.
through a lifetime of practice and research.
The program provides students the opportunity to use tools and think about questions
22.
related to their future in architectural practice.
The program provides students with opportunities to explore the collaborative nature
23.
of architectural practice.
The program provides students with opportunities to explore the specialized nature of
24.
architectural practice.
The program provides students with a learning context that makes them aware of the
25.
regulatory constraints architectural practice operates within.
The program provides students with a learning context that makes them aware of the
26.
technical disciplines associated with architectural practice.
The program provides a context for students to explore how to reconcile the
27.
obligations the architect has to clients, the public, and to creative enterprise.

“The program must demonstrate that it equips students with an informed understanding of social and environmental problems and that it also develops their capacity
to help address these problems with sound architecture and urban design decisions.“
Disagree Agree Know
The program provides students with a learning context that allows them to explore
29.
how social and environmental issues are addressed in architectural and urban design.
The program provides students with opportunities to generate their own knowledge
30.
regarding social, environmental and ethical issues.
The program provides opportunities for students to directly engage in civic activity and
31.
public service.
The program provides opportunities for students to interact with community groups or
32.
other advocacy interests.
4.9 Self-assessment Documentation -- 443

4.9.2 Student Self-assessment
UBC SALA - Architecture Program - Student Self-Assessment

What is this about?
Self-assessment by faculty, students and alumni is part of the process of preparing the Architecture Program Report (APR) for next year’s
accreditation visit. Opinion collection surveying and focus group conversations are useful in giving the program’s faculty and administrators a
sense of how the program is perceived by its constituencies – what it does well, what it needs to focus on in the coming years – as it prepares
an Action Plan for the next several years.
How the survey and focus group conversations are organized:

From the Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB) Terms for Accreditation (2102): “The program must provide an assessment of the
degree to which it is fulfilling its mission and achieving its strategic plan.” To that end, the following survey is organized in five sections that
correspond to the CACB Perspectives.
Schedule
There are three meetings planned for this Self-Assessment:
March 20, 1-2 PM: Orientation and discussion about the survey and focus group conversation
April 11, 12-1:30 PM: Discussion about each of the five CACB Perspectives (15 minutes per section)
Early May: Follow-up discussion about student survey and discussion
Please indicate your gender.
How many terms have you completed in the program?
Are you a non-advanced placement or advanced placement student?

Disagree Agree
Please rate each statement on a scale of 1 to 4 via a checkmark. Disagree Agree Know
1 2 3 4 0

1. Architecture program faculty maintain high professional standards.
2. Faculty make clear the academic standards applied to student work.
Architecture students have opportunities for interaction with other

3.
academic programs at UBC.
4. Students are able to contribute to the governance of the program.
5. The university provides intellectual and personal resources to students.

“The program must demonstrate that it provides support and encouragement for students to achieve their full potential during their school years
and later in the profession, and that it provides an interpersonal milieu that embraces cultural differences.”
7. Faculty are responsive to how I wish to shape my personal learning agenda.
I am able to work with other students in ways that contribute to my

8.
education.
9. I am respectful of students who are different from myself.
I have access to mentoring from members of the professional design

10.
community.
I am exposed to the national and international context of practice and the
11.
work of the allied design disciplines.


“The program must demonstrate that it provides students with a sound preparation for the transition to professional life, including internship
and licensure.”
I am aware of the internship and continuing education processes and their
13.
relationship with architectural licensure.
I am aware of the role of the Architectural Institute of British Columbia in
14.
the internship and licensure processes.
15. I understand what the architect’s professional conduct responsibilities are.

“The program must demonstrate how it prepares students to practice and assume new roles within a context of increasing cultural diversity,
changing client and regulatory demands, and an expanding knowledge base.”
17. The professional community is engaged in the life of school.
The program faculty encourages me to think about the art and science of
18.
architecture through a lifetime of practice and research.
I have opportunities to explore the collaborative nature of architectural
19.
practice.
I have opportunities to explore the specialized nature of architectural
20.
practice.
I am aware of the technical disciplines that are associated with architectural
21.
practice.
I have opportunities to explore how to reconcile the obligations the architect
22.
has to clients, the public, and to creative enterprise.

“The program must demonstrate that it equips students with an informed understanding of social and environmental problems and that it also
develops their capacity to help address these problems with sound architecture and urban design decisions.“
I am aware of the social and environmental issues associated with
24.
architecture.
I have had the ability to explore how social and environmental issues are
25.
resolved through sound architecture and urban design principles.
The program provides opportunities to generate knowledge regarding social,
26.
environmental and ethical issues.
The program provides opportunities to engage in civic activity and public
27.
service.

4.9.3 Alumni Self-assessment
9/14/2017 UBC Architecture: Alumni Self-Assessment (copy)
https://johnbass.typeform.com/to/Uucnw2/fallback 1/2















2017-UBC_APR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2017-UBC_APR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2017-UBC_APR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Page intentionally left blank

2017 Architecture Program Report

University of British Columbia

1.0 Introduction to the Program......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Program Identity and Mission........................................................................................................ 1

2.0 Progress Since the Previous Site Visit......................................................................................... 12

2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations.................................................. 12

3.0 Compliance With the Conditions for Accreditation..................................................................... 20

3.1 Program Response to CACB Perspectives...................................................................................... 20

4.1 Introduction to the Institution and Program History................................................................... 188

AAPS Association of Administrative

1.1 Program Identity and Mission

The APR must include:

1.1 Program Identity and Mission -- 1

1.1.1 SALA Strategic Plan Update: Director’s Message

2 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

1.1.2 Architecture Program Vision Statement

1.1 Program Identity and Mission -- 3

Strategic Plan: Professional Master of Architecture Program,

4 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

The APR must include:

1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives -- 5

Adopted September __, 2017

2017 Action Plan Objectives

Commitment #1: Teaching

Commitment 1, Goal 1 Action Plan Items:

6 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

Commitment 1, Goal 3 Action Plan Items:

Commitment 1, Goal 4 Action Plan Items:

1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives -- 7

Commitment 1, Goal 5 Action Plan Items:

Commitment 1, Goal 6 Action Plan Items:

Commitment 1, Goal 7 Action Plan Items:

8 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

Commitment 2, Goal 1 Action Plan Items:

Commitment 2, Goal 2 Action Plan Items:

1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives -- 9

Commitment 2, Goal 4 Action Plan Items:

Commitment #3: Research

Commitment 3, Goal 1 Action Plan Items:

Commitment 3, Goal 2 Action Plan Items:

10 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

Commitment 3, Goal 4 Action Plan Items:

1.2 Program Action Plan and Objectives -- 11

The APR must include:

2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations

12 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

2.1 Responses to Causes of Concern and Team’s Recommendations -- 13

Condition 7. Physical Resources

Program Response, by Director Ron Kellett:

16 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

Progress Since Last Visit:

C3. Technical Documentation

Progress Since Last Visit:

Progress Since Last Visit:

18 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017

3.1 Program Response to CABC Perspectives

The APR must include:

3.1.1 Architecture Education and the Academic Context

20 -- UBC SALA Architecture Report 2017