This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Architecture | NEW ORLEANS


About Make it Right Architects GRAFT COMPANY:


GRAFT was established in 1998 in Los Angeles, California by Lars Kruckeberg and Wolfram Putz. Thomas Willemeit joined the firm in 2001 and opened an office in Berlin, Germany the same year. In 2005, Gregor Hoheisel, who had been partner in Los Angeles in 2000 to 2001, became Partner of GRAFT Beijing, founded in 2001. In 2007, Alejandra Lillo became partner for GRAFT LA.


GRAFT was conceived as a Label for Architecture, Urban Planning, Exhibition Design, Music and the “Pursuit of Happiness.” Since the firm was established, it has been commissioned to design and manage a wide range of projects in multiple disciplines and locations. With the core of the firm’s enterprises gravitating around the field of architecture and the built environment, GRAFT has always maintained an interest in crossing the boundaries between disciplines and “grafting” the creative potentials and methodologies of different realities. This is reflected in the firm’s expansion into the fields of music, car design, art installations, academic projects and “eventings” as well as in the variety of locations throughout the globe.


Graft Team


* Lars Kruckeberg, Founding Partner * Wolfram Putz, Founding Partner * Thomas Willemeit, Founding Partner * Gregor Hoheisel, Founding Partner Beijing * Alejandra Lillo, Partner Los Angeles


Pugh + Scarpa Architecture Santa Monica, CA


Pugh + Scarpa, has redefined the role of the architect and results in some of the most remarkable and exploratory design today. They do so by looking, questioning and reworking the very process of design and building. Each project appears as an opportunity to rethink the way things normally get done; to redefine and cull-out latent potentials that exist in materials, form, construction and even financing- to, as Scarpa says, make the “ordinary extraordinary.” This produces entirely inventive work that is quite difficult to categorize because it is driven by exploration rather than an initial intent. It is environmentally sustainable, but not about ‘sustainable design.’ It employs new materials, digital practices and technologies, but is not defined by nor molded


by technologies. It is socially and community conscious, but it is not created as a politically correct statement. Rather, it is deeply rooted in conditions of the everyday, and works with our perception and preconceptions to allow us to see things in new ways.


Over the last eight years, PUGH + SCARPA has received 36 major design awards, notably 11 National AIA Awards, including 2006 and 2003 AIA Committee on the Environment “Top Ten Green Project” awards, 2005 Record Houses, 2003 Record Interiors, and the 2003 Rudy Bruner Prize. Pugh + Scarpa was a finalist for the 2002 United Nation’s World Habitat Award and the Architectural League of New York named the firm an “Emerging Voice” in 2004. Their work was recently on exhibit at the National Building Museum in Washington, DC and has been featured in Newsweek. Lawrence Scarpa has also appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show.


PUGH + SCARPA is an architecture, engineering, interior design, and planning firm founded in Santa Monica in 1991. Principals Gwynne Pugh, AIA, ASCE, LEED AP, Lawrence Scarpa, AIA, and Angela Brooks, AIA, LEED AP, have garnered international acclaim for their success in marrying an innovative modern aesthetic with leadership in sustainable and socially progressive design. Their exploratory, inventive approach has led to seminal work such as the Colorado Court affordable housing project and the Solar Umbrella home, both recognized for their achievements in design and sustainability. With offices in Santa Monica, California and Charlotte, North Carolina, Pugh + Scarpa is currently working on a wide variety of commissions for public, private, and institutional clients.


Gehry Partners / Los Angeles, CA


Our design for the MIR two-family home began with the initial community feedback meeting and a study of the local typologies and proposed program. Of the components of local vernacular, the majority of the community expressed a desire for quality outdoor space, especially the garden.


Starting with this initial desire, two story solutions were explored to reduce the overall footprint of the built structure, which would maximize available garden area, and potentially reduce foundation costs. Several basic diagrams for program organization were studied falling into two basic categories – side by side and front to back. The front to back organization allowed for better flow of the interior spaces, and a better proportioned single garden for each house. The front to back organization maximizes privacy for each house, as the area/length of common wall is reduced.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136