Download Gallery Guide PDF with all winners + jury commentary.

Professional Winners:

FIRST PLACE:
CARMEN C. CHAM, JAMES BLACK & TYLER GOSS
Footprint, Los Angeles, CA
Click here for project description & images.

SECOND PLACE:
GARY PAIGE, NICK AHO, RICHARD LUCERO, PING PING TAN
GP/S [Gary Paige/Studio], Los Angeles, CA
Click here for project description & images.

THIRD PLACE [Shared]:
LIZ FALLETTA
Los Angeles, CA
Click here for project description & images.

THIRD PLACE [Shared]:
CAROLINE FILICE SMITH
Neceth, Spotsylvania, VA
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
JOHN FERRI AIA, CAROLYN MATSUMOTO,
WILSON RODAS, TAKAKO TAJIMA
Los Angeles, CA
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
BENJAMIN LUDDY & MAKOTO MIZUTANI
Scout Regalia, Los Angeles, CA
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
Ric. Abramson AIA, Daniel Ruiz, Van Pham, Chasen Rainey
Workplays studio*architecture, West Hollywood, CA
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
Jeeyong An, Sang Hwa Lee, Ji Yoon Oh
Ginseng Chicken Architecture P.C.,  New York, NY
Click here for project description & images.

Student Winners:

FIRST PLACE:
The Choripans: Ignacio Barrios, Ariel Gualtruzzi, Delfina Prause, Mauro Aparo
Universidad Nacional del litoral, Santa Fe, Argentina
Click here for project description & images.

SECOND PLACE:
Tim Norris
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
Click here for project description & images.

THIRD PLACE:
Ryan Lovett
Columbia University, New York, NY
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
Margaret M. Fain
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Click here for project description & images.

HONORABLE MENTION:
Tommy Pniewski
Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK
Click here for project description & images.

*Woodbury Hollywood
6518 Hollywood Boulevard
Hollywood, CA 90028

Dingbat 2.0 Exhibition-related Events:

In addition to the exhibition, two panel discussions bringing together Dingbat 2.0 competition jury members, city officials, and other members of the design community to discuss the design proposals will be held at the gallery space during the run of the exhibition.

Dates for Dingbat 2.0 Exhibition-Related Events:

Saturday, June 26, 1:30 pm:
- Dwell on Design Dingbat 2.0 Competition Presentation
Saturday, June 26, 3pm:
- Panel Discussion – Dingbat as Urban Typology
Saturday, July 17, 3pm:
- Panel Discussion – Dingbat as Cultural Icon

The Dingbat 2.0 Competition & Exhibition are sponsored by the National Endowment for the Arts, the City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs, Enterprise Holdings Foundation, the Woodbury University School of Architecture, and the Los Angeles Forum for Architecture and Urban Design. Archinect is the media sponsor for the competition, and printing for the Dingbat 2.0 Exhibition has been generously provided by Ford Graphics.

“Microparcelization”

Entry P-109

Click here for complete competition boards.

The “Microparcelization” project advocates replacing Dingbats with small single-family homes on small lots, to be made possible by new mechanism for subdividing parcels, and to be promoted by an updated version of the Case Study House program. Dingbats were perfect for the zoning, economies, and construction practices of their time, but today they approach the end of their useful lifespan. Aging Dingbats are structurally and environmentally deficient. The Dingbat is the city’s least desirable multifamily housing typology; their nostalgic appeal tugs most strongly at architects themselves. Thousands can be replaced before we should get soft and start to miss them.

The goal of Dingbat 2.0 is the increased quality of housing stock in the Dingbat neighborhood, not by covering it with new Stucco Beasts, but rather with diverse and desirable new architecture; and the way to catalyze this change, as the Dingbat taught us 50 years ago, is by amending the Zoning Code. The obsolescent Dingbat will become the fallow ground from which a new housing form may emerge. Dingbat, make way – the city needs room for Small Homes on Small Lots.

Los Angeles’s enormous 7500-square-foot lots made sense for single-family homes a century ago, but by the 1950s, the marketplace dictated that they were ripe for redevelopment with six to eight units. The greater value and scarcity of urban real estate today should be acknowledged, and the barriers preventing smaller houses on less land should be demolished.

Dividing the land promotes economic equality and neighborhood stability. The old American dream of homeownership persists. Increasing the number of homeowners augments the numbers of neighborhood stakeholders and their sense of community. People are learning to do more with less space, encouraged by both economic necessity and a backlash against the phony sustainability of gigantic custom “green” homes that are actually energy and resource hogs.

Smaller parcels invite urbanistic diversity. Parcel subdivision creates smaller, cheaper parcels, and further lowers the price of land by relieving excess demand. Cheaper land and smaller, cheaper houses beget a larger client base for custom or semi-custom homes (and more projects for our hungry architects). Smaller homes on smaller parcels provide a means of injecting new vitality into the moribund design culture of residential Los Angeles. The goal is to achieve a more informal architecture of novelty and delight. In support of the goal of a revitalized culture of architectural experimentation, we propose a new series of “Case Study MicroHomes” as a successor to the famed Case Study House program, promoting a participatory, populist design culture.

The implementation of Tokyo-style small homes on small lots has been unfeasible primarily due to limitations on lot subdivisions. We propose modifying the Los Angeles Planning and Zoning Code to create a new tool for the urban designer’s toolbox: Microparcelization. With more freedom than under the Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance, landowners within designated districts would be permitted by right to subdivide their parcels into separate legal parcels as small as the marketplace will support.

VARIEGATED MAT-SCAPE™

Dense-Mix Prototype for Palms, Los Angeles

Entry P-197

Click here for complete competition boards.

Variegation
In an age where the contemporary domestic landscape is defined by different lifestyles and living arrangements, and where the nuclear-family is being supplanted by the post-nuclear or extended family, conventional forms of housing such as the dingbat and suburban tract house are rapidly becoming outmoded, raising critical questions about new models of urban housing. Specifically, several questions emerge: How can contemporary and emerging forms of domesticity lead to strategies for producing programmatic identity and variation? What are ways of theorizing difference for a building type that’s often plagued by spatial uniformity and morphological sameness? And, how can we increase density yet at the same time amplify the resonance of spatial affect and experience.

Given this context as a background for research, our project for Dingbat 2.0 proposes a Variegated Mat-scape™ as a prototype for generating spatial, programmatic, and material variation. Not only is the idea of variegation intended to reflect and index the diverse cultural mosaic that comprises Los Angeles (and more particularly the Palms neighborhood), but is also seen as a new typology—a building-landscape—that celebrates (and materializes) multiplicity and difference by re-envisioning the relationship between interior and exterior space. Instead of the usual hierarchical building-object to ground relationship, we’re proposing a dense and diverse patchwork of volumes and surfaces that provides exterior green space for each resident as well as two larger “greens” for the community.

Density: Constant or Variable?
With a population of 45,475 people within an area of 1.9 square miles, the Palms district is not only one of the most demographically diverse but also has one of the highest densities (21,983 people per square mile) in the city. And, with the eventual arrival of the Metro Expo Line to the region these statistics will undoubtedly only increase. In spite of this the existing building fabric suffers from morphological sameness with a density coefficient that’s constant rather than variable. Therefore, in order to address the projected growth the Variegated Matscape™ employs a variable density gradient that ranges from one- and two-story units to fourstory clusters, resulting in a higher density per block as well as greater differentiation in the scale of the neighborhood.

Nine Square Mat-scape
Instead of the typical 50 x 150 foot R-2 parcel and setbacks, we’re adopting a composite organizational strategy of grids and ladders: a nine square grid measuring 48 x 48 feet with minimal setbacks and zero lot lines in places, and, a “ladder” or fish-spine of 15 walk streets that traverse the block and provide access to the units. Parking is situated below grade and accessed by a series of air and light portals that are sprinkled across the site. Morphologically, the new grid operates in the z-axis as well as the horizontal; individual units are made up of two to five 16 x 16 x 10 foot spatial modules plus a 225 square foot patio and/or roof terrace. Ranging in size from 450 to 1125 square feet, these units are interlocked and arranged in various ways based on orientation and local adjacencies to configure ten different unit types. Similar to Sol LeWitt’s 46 Variations on Three Different Types of Cubes or Steven Reich’s serial composition of looped and layered sounds for guitar, Electric Counterpoint, the endeavor is to produce a supple system that is a prototype and catalog of different spatial types, yet pliant enough to be recombined to adapt to local differences as well as the contemporary domestic landscape.

The Dingbat Demographic

Entry  P-184

Click here for complete competition boards.

Current market fundamentals indicate that real estate developers will not be rebuilding the Dingbat apartment en masse any time soon. While it may be feasible to build a new “stucco box” typology in wealthier neighborhoods during the next cycle, most Dingbats will have to make do with rehabilitation, substantial or otherwise, for the foreseeable future.  Alternate solutions that allow Dingbats to more actively and sustainably serve their residents, their communities and the public realm will be required if Los Angeles is to meet the demands of its residential future.

The Speculative Stucco Box
The Dingbat is the crystallization of pure real estate development rationale. In the late 1950’s the fundamentals for multi-family property development were good and investors were optimistic about the future.  Americans’ personal savings had increased steadily since WW II and financial institutions had money to lend.[i]  A dip in the population of home buying age increased demand for rentals.[ii]  Multi-family development was treated favorably by the IRS.  [iii] And building and zoning codes were less onerous and public participation in development approvals virtually unheard of.  Given such an auspicious environment, it is not hard to understand how the Dingbat came to populate vast swaths of Los Angeles in neighborhoods as disparate as Venice Beach and Highland Park, all tarted up just “enough to get [tenants] in, not more.”[iv]

New Economic Realities
Today, these same measures reveal a vastly different economic landscape.  Americans’ savings rates have plummeted since the ‘50s and ‘60s and as a nation we are largely in debt. [v]  The credit crunch reduced banks’ ability to lend and dramatically tightened underwriting standards. The 1984 revisions to the tax code eliminated most of the tax benefits for multi-family investors.  And citizen participation requirements have protracted the government approvals process and building and zoning codes are increasingly stringent. The social mobility to which the dingbat apartment originally aspired, both for its small entrepreneurial developer and its tenants, is not currently tenable and may never be again.

Emerging Demographic Futures
The Dingbat has the potential to support alternate aspirations, however, especially in light of coming demographic changes which promise to shift both housing needs and expectations.  Nationally, babyboomers are rapidly aging and reshaping our attitudes about retirement.  Non-traditional families are on the rise, with divorced single parents, grandparents raising grandchildren and single, never-marrieds forming an increasing number of new households.[v] In California, growth of the foreign born population is slowing and that of the second generation is accelerating.[vii]  The homegrown population, those born and raised in California whatever their roots, are choosing to stay rather than migrate to other parts of the US.[viii] In Los Angeles, the housing affordability crisis continues, most acutely for those who are homeless or who have special needs.[ix]  These are groups for which the American Dream of single-family homeownership, either for real or by approximation, may not be available, appropriate or even attractive.

The Dream of Multi-Family Homeownership
Coupling these coming demographic changes with new economic realities reveals a real opportunity for LA’s stucco box typology.  The Dingbat Demographic proposes five possible dingbat futures, exploring how existing examples of the typology might be cheaply reshaped to accommodate emerging demographic demand and greater expectations regarding sustainability, identity and the cultivation of community. The Dingbat basics, large setbacks, side access, tuck under parking, flat surfaces, etc. are all reimagined to support new lifestyles, allowing new types of tenants to define themselves relative to a changing “American Dream.”

[i]  Smith, Wallace F.. The Low-Rise Speculative Apartment Building. Berkeley, CA: The Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 1964.
[ii]  Smith, Wallace F.. The Low-Rise Speculative Apartment Building. Berkeley, CA: The Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 1964.
[iii]  Smith, Wallace F.. The Low-Rise Speculative Apartment Building. Berkeley, CA: The Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 1964.
[iv]  Beach, John & Chase, John.  “The Stucco Box,” p. 13. (Dingbat Field Guide)
[v]  US Department of Commerce: Bureau of Economic Analysis.
[vi]  The State of the Nation’s Housing 2005, The Joint Center of Housing Studies of Harvard University.
[vii]  Myers, Dowell; Pitkin, John & Ramirez, Ricardo, “The New Homegrown Majority in California,” USC Population Dynamics Research Group, April 2009.
[viii]  Myers, Dowell; Pitkin, John & Ramirez, Ricardo, “The New Homegrown Majority in California,” USC Population Dynamics Research Group, April 2009.
[ix]  City of Los Angeles Housing Element 2006 – 2014.

The Flip

Entry  P-196

Click here for first competition board – Urban Scale
Click here for second competition board – Architectural Scale

Click here for larger view of this drawing.

Pleasantville

Featuring Dingbat 2.0

Entry  P-179

Click here for first competition board – Urban Scale
Click here for second competition board – Architectural Scale

The Dingbat, which has long been a residential icon of the Los Angeles area, is direly in need of an update. Transportation and congestion are some of the greatest obstacles that Los Angeles faces today and the traditional Dingbat fails to respond to these problems in many ways. Not only has the limited capacity (6-8 households per building) proven insufficient in accommodating the rapidly increasing population and thus exacerbating already problematic sprawl, but the back-out parking spaces traversing the sidewalks create unfriendly and hazardous walking conditions for pedestrians making the already difficult journey to public transit even more of a challenge.

The new Dingbat 2.0 is an evolved prototype of its predecessor and at the same time the centerpiece to a new urban planning typology named “Pleasantville.” Dingbat 2.0 responds to the rising population of the Los Angeles area by accommodating almost triple the numbers of units and thus helping to reduce further sprawl. The buildings are shifted toward the street, which are turned into vehicle-only streets, to maximize the width of the previous back alley which is landscaped into a lush pedestrian passageway. From an urban perspective, dedicated passageways for pedestrians will ensure safer and more attractive conditions for them to access public transit nodes, which in turn will help reduce dependence on private vehicle usage.

Architecturally, what set dingbats apart from other housing typologies were the dedicated parking space allocated to each unit and the individuality given to each building through unique decorative elements adorning each facade. As the successor to this cultural and architectural icon, Dingbat 2.0 continues to provide an architecture that is unique and reflective of the lifestyle of the residents. Only, instead of the arbitrary decorative elements and names typical of traditional dingbats, each unit is equipped with an automated parking space attached to the vehicle side of the building, creating a real-time matrix of vehicles that can be used to easily identify the building. After all, the city of Los Angeles has evolved to become car-dependant. What began as a necessity has developed into a culture in itself. With so many hours of the day spent in traffic, the car is as much a dwelling as the home and furthermore a defining element of one’s lifestyle. Thus, while the dependence may be reduced in Pleasantville, the culture of the car is not only maintained but proudly displayed as a symbol of individuality.

Between the higher density, pedestrian friendliness and easy access to public transit, Pleasantville features the perfect condition for development of public transit infrastructure and a sustainable urbanism, all while maintaining the unique, regional character of the dingbat.

en marSh

Entry  P-126

Click here for the fist competition board – Urban Scale.
Click here for the second competition board – Architectural Scale.

A neighborhood infill strategy for a 21st century pattern of living.

Background:
Built for a car-centric society, the Dingbat no longer speaks to a 21st century Los Angeles in which the current expansion of mass transit and interest in a cleaner environment continue to push away from a car-based culture. Yet as a prototype for development, it does retain a specific legacy – the dingbat housing type enables a denser form of infill whose variants and multiplication result in a hyper-specific urban patterning.

Premise:
New urban visions for existing neighborhoods need not necessarily begin with post-apocalyptic scenarios that generate an urban tabula rasa. In fact, viable urban strategies can include more incremental strategies that introduce effective change one lot at a time.

This project poses a sustainable reconsideration of subdivision patterns, land use policies, occupancy, and infrastructural integration methods whose roots were originally set by the town of Sherman and later fully realized via infill of the “dingbat” type. This proposal examines five key issues (STREET, SITE, CAR, HOUSING TYPOLOGY, AND RESIDENTIAL OCCUPATION) that when addressed together form the basis for a 21st century infill neighborhood. Conventional residential solutions attempt to balance the car, pedestrian and urban image aspirations of a community. Unfortunately, continuous curb cuts are no longer viable and the West Hollywood site precludes known alley-based alternatives. However, rear yard utility easements already in place do provide an opportunity for reconfiguring familiar relationships. Therefore, this proposal inverts existing street usage patterns and suggests that, even in an existing urban context, pedestrian activity can be isolated and imbedded within the housing context itself. en marSh proposes the following:
• A new internally, embedded WALK STREET that combines with a reconceived STREET LOT and zone change recommendations to create a new landscape-buffered residential environment.

• Front and rear GREEN ZONES that replace conventional front yard and rear yard setbacks. Pass-thru PROMENADES on each lot connect the pedestrian walk street to the street lot and provide access to each dwelling’s front door between the green zones.

• Combined on site and off site PARKING options. At the scale of the neighborhood, a new landscaped “street lot” increases the number of spaces on the current “dingbat-resultant” street by at least 400%. At the scale of the lot itself, mechanically assisted car parking concepts further minimize the usual driveway paving and turning requirements for urban infill.

• Row house, townhouse and urban villa typologies introduce COLLECTIVE LIVING and SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE options not present in current zoning practice.
• A NEW SUBDIVISION STRATEGY expands the traditional SFD or MFD neighborhood density- based zoning by adding new RMS and CPN occupancy-based designations. Flexible ownership and rental structures (i.e. small lot subdivisions, courtyard cluster housing, naturally occurring retirement communities (NORC’s), co-housing concepts, etc.) can be integrated into housing types blurring distinctions between the individual and the collective and thus providing a wider spectrum for a lively neighborhood.

The en marsh proposal portends a residential future for a city that started as a marsh land. It moves away from the car-centered, Dingbat fabric of Los Angeles and envisions a bookended landscape condition for the housing that places a primacy on light, air and the re-appropriated potential of the ground plane.

Dingbat Terrarium

Entry  P-108

Click here for complete competition boards.

As a reinvention of the distinctively regional dingbat typology, our proposal seeks to maximize the quality
of life for residents within the increasingly dense future of the City. “Dingbat Terrarium” is a new vision for
multifamily housing in Los Angeles that embraces the utilitarian features of classic dingbats, while
proposing creative solutions for a more livable model of rental housing in the City.

AT THE URBAN SCALE
We propose a complete redevelopment of the Palms site at the single lot scale, with the principle that
combined lots are grossly outsized within the context of the surrounding area. Our proposal provides three
housing models to better meet the growing housing needs of Los Angeles: family, workforce, and student
housing. The site has an even mixture of housing types that have been planned to encourage community
interaction (family housing is clustered, with workforce housing serving as a buer between family and
student housing).

The existing alleyway has been redesigned as a greenway and community garden, providing a space for
congregation and respite. Trash collection has been moved to the streetfront, while parking is enclosed in
an at-grade garage with various options to encourage the use of transportation alternatives.
Taking into account the vast network of transportation alternatives within half a mile of the site, the Palms
site oers an ideal opportunity to re-examine how residents use their cars relative to other modes of
transportation. Parking for each building was designed starting from existing regulations, and modified to
meet the needs of each user group. Car shares, bike parking, and electric vehicle stations are included to
various extents in all three of the housing schemes. The family housing model follows existing parking
regulations and provides parking spaces to code, while the student housing proposal provides communal
car shares and ample bike parking.

AT THE RESIDENTIAL SCALE
“Dingbat Terrarium” challenges the idea of favoring outward views regardless of the setting. Each unit in
our proposal has a “terrarium” in the living room- a vertical garden in a floor to ceiling glass enclosure.
These light wells provide residents with a curated garden view while bringing light through the units and
into the garage. Wood framed windows and doors are utilized more for diuse light and air rather than
outward views.
Each building has a greywater recycling system where non-potable water is reused to irrigate the new
greenway and streetfront landscaping. Solar water heating and photovoltaic panels provide an ecient
and sustainable power solution for the building.
Taking a queue from the unique facades of classic dingbats, our proposal introduces a highly customizable
wire mesh lattice at the front and rear facades. A wire mesh lattice at the front and rear facades allows for
the application of various materials and designs, providing a new take on one of the most distinguishing
features of the classic dingbat.

DIGWEHO

Entry  P-119

Click here for complete competition boards.

DIG has created a portfolio of exceptional properties that responds to the diversity of southern California lifestyles. DIGWEHO is our newest residential community offering in the highly desirable City of West Hollywood. We have nine distinctive designs for you to explore. With a range of canonical expressions, flexible spatial configurations, efficient construction, and a sophisticated solution to parking ordinance requirements, DIG has redefined the multi-family property experience for all stakeholders.

OUR DINGBAT IS GOOD FOR THE INVESTOR.

• Faster construction starts and completions
• Cheaper construction costs
• Better income yields
• Higher occupancy rates

OUR DINGBAT IS GOOD FOR THE RESIDENT.

• Improves level of comfort and functionality
• Enhances expressions of personal identity
• Offers a variety of units to suit lifestyle needs
• Creates affordable options

OUR DINGBAT IS GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY.

• Promotes diversity of residents
• Respects contextual building fabric
• Recycles lower use properties into appropriate higher use properties over time
• Optimizes residential density while conforming to current zoning
• Improves vehicular access and parking efficiency
• Reduces environmental impact

OUR DESIGN, INFUSED WITH A SUSTAINABLE VISION FOR THE FUTURE, IS WHAT SETS
US APART FROM CONVENTIONAL MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPERS. HAVE A LOOK AT
WHAT WE OFFER:
1. We provide a vertical automated parking machine in place of a subterranean parking garage. This allows us to maximize the ratio of dwelling units and satisfy dedicated parking requirements.
2. We can build a comfortable volume within current zoning requirements, whereas, conventional developers max-out building envelopes to achieve square footage pro formas.
3. We reduce construction costs by more than 15% because we eliminate basement excavation and podium construction. Conventional developer parking costs average $30-$35k per space. Our cost is $25K.
4. We reduce construction durations by 20% because we build slab-on-grade foundations and typical Type V wood framing. Conventional developers squander time excavating and building retaining walls.
5. Our front yard villa units and rear yard flats provide a variety of ownership opportunities.
6. We employ a simple yet flexible structural system that allows for variations on bed/bath unit combinations.

7. Because we provide rooftop communal space, we can dedicate prime open areas at grade-level to
ground floor residents.
8. Our projects are more cost effective than conventional developments and we pass the savings along
to encourage affordable rents. Investors can structure leases below market rates and remain
profitable.
9. Because we build the “WEHO Green Standard”, we meet all communal open space requirements
with our rooftop garden. Conventional developers neglect habitable open space.
10. We design our projects with integrated sustainable systems that reduce energy consumption.
11. We reduce the amount of embodied energy in our projects by incorporating regionally sourced
materials and by employing labor from local construction pools.
12. We have extra parking capacity that we lease to zipcar®. This means more profit for investors and
less cars in the neighborhood.
materials and by employing labor from local construction pools.

Entry  S-113

Click here for first competition board – Urban Scale
Click here for second competition board – Architectural Scale

To Preserve:

urban support: layout of the streets, blocks size, main street, corridor mediators.

Edification: “box” as a formal structure

To Transform:

Central Alley Street:

From an abnegated, backstreet site to a “central” space

From service street to public space

From a space for vehicles to a space for man

From gray to green

Edification:
Box decomposition to create a new spatiality, habitability, comfort, ventilation, lighting, preserving density.

Parking lots:
Relocation underneath the community street, to unify and reorder vehicular traffic within the block, avoiding its use as a vehicular access, restricting it to pedestrians-only. This way the street is provided with a new dynamic, encouraging community interaction. Its construction can be State funded, to later be maintained by a private company.

Sustainability:
Unified, community compromised, trash collection system.
Trash classification, using organic waste for gas production (contributing to a sustainable network service for the block). Increase green spaces.