Douglas Steidl

The 2005 AIA President is a principal of Braun & Steidl Architects, Inc., a mid-size firm with offices in Akron and Columbus, Ohio. Doug is based in the Akron office, which provides architectural planning and interior design services for university, medical, religious, corporate, hospitality, and recreational projects. Major firm projects include the Memorial Arena and Convocation Center at Kent State University, the veterinary school at Ohio State University, the corporate headquarters for GoJo Industries, First United Methodist Church (Akron), the Geneva State Park lodge and conference center, and the Athletic Complex for Western Reserve Academy. In 1998 Braun & Steidl was the recipient of AIA Ohio’s Gold Medal Firm Award.

Question. How would you describe the projects submitted by the students in terms of quality and scope?
Answer. I think they were wonderful, the presentations were indepth, the mix of projects was from research, to analysis, to observation, to design, to cities, to communities, to specific architectural projects, to materials, it was really broad.

Q. How have the students chosen to address the main themes of the award such as natural or artificial light and urban context?
A. I think all of those themes showed up, but especially, the utilisation of natural light and the utilisation of natural materials that hold or give off light. I think they made you think about lighting in a different way, things like using minerals to hold phosphorescent light that releases at night or ideas about diffusion of light, clouds, the idea of light as a trail or as a way sign. It was really stimulating in that we think of light as light, shade or shadow, but it was so much more, there were so many subtle variations.

Q. Would you say that they were realistic perspectives about the use of light or somewhat more on the technological side?
A. I think they covered the gamut. Some projected light, some were artificial light, some had to do with natural light, some had to do with light in nature, some were about how to transmit light. It was really a complex set of documents, and when we selected the winners I think we came up with a pretty diverse approach to how light can be thought about, how it can be perceived, how it can be used and what it does to an individual. It is not just the brightness, but the quality of it, and the colour and how it integrates with nature.

Q. Was there a special emphasis on how to control light?
A. There was a lot about how to control light, a lot about how to stimulate energy with light, a great deal about how to conserve energy with light. Sustainability was a major theme. And I think there were quite a few projects that had to do with community, and a great deal of discussion by the jury on how these presentations affect the life of more people, how can they make communities more understood. And a higher quality of life is the way that light is brought into the public space.

Q. Were they mostly site-specific projects, or rather prototypes?
A. Some were site-specific projects, some were actually the development of what I would call the materials or tools that could be used on almost any architectural project, some of them had to do with analysis and study of light and how it affects people and projects, some of them were pretty typical of architectural light, shade and shadow and some of them were about economy of energy.

Q. What process did the jury follow to select the award winners?
A. Per Olaf Fjeld led a great jury. We made first impressions, then we went into depth, then we narrowed, then we discussed in an open forum and the jury was very open, free to express themselves in any way and felt free to express themselves in any way, and then we came to consensus, which was difficult because of the quality of the submittals.

Q. Was there agreement among the jurors on the projects chosen?
A. In the end there was total agreement. There was great discussion, and at times disagreement, but in the end the projects that we chose were chosen by consensus.