Over the years, working on the stone architecture at the University of Denver has taught some valuable lessons

Months after graduation in 1991, I was lucky to be offered an intern position with a venerable, maniacal, but benevolent architect out in the wilds of Colorado named Guion Cabell Childress, IV, FAIA (aka “Cab”). His first instruction to me — as my fiancé Val and I left Philadelphia for Denver — was as follows: “Visit the Woolery Stone Company of Bloomington, IN, on your way out here.”

Jack Rogers (no relation) greeted us late on a chilly November evening at the entry to a dust-covered limestone mill, and so I began my career with stone. Hours later, as we navigated somewhere around St. Louis on our way to Denver, I really wasn’t sure if I had learned much. It was not because Jack didn’t answer our questions. With reverence he showed us the mill’s machinery — much of it dating to the early 1900s — along with pallets of carved and cut stone ready to be shipped as well as great walls of quarry blocks. But it was very quiet. It was too cold for the mill to be running, and too late on a Friday to even find a carver working on “winter’s work.”

Mostly, however, I had no perspective. Maybe the following article shows I have developed a little. Hopefully, it will shorten the journey for a few young architects as well as help a few folks in the building stone industry to better guide architects on more effective use of natural stone in their designs. In this article, I will try to highlight three aspects of the journey and my thoughts on how the communication between mill/quarry and architect might be improved.

VISITS TO STONE PRODUCERS

Early the next year, Cab sent me further west to visit Wilford Hanson (aka “Wes”) out in Utah. Wes’s mill was alive, and the dust was in billowing clouds as his crew moved about. A few years went by, and I was climbing about Cold Spring Granite’s “bone yard,” and then a four-day trip to China and a frenetic race to visit a half dozen mills near Xiamen — in between trips to quarries and mills across Colorado, Toronto, Ireland and Italy as Well as many trips back to Indiana. Cab was not known for his patience, and he barely tolerated how long it was taking. However, he loved to see people learn, and so as each step unfolded, he was willing to wait as long as I proved to be a better architect after each trip. While each company certainly wanted me to prize their stone above all others for our next project, what I was learning was that in every case, a particular stone and mill had certain sizes, finishes and inherent characteristics that matched certain conditions of the design. Just as important is if the design of the stonework can be sized and detailed in a way that allows the mill to be efficient and therefore more competitive.

A couple of questions I asked Jack back in 1991:

• What is the biggest piece you can handle?

• What types of pieces can you mill?

If I could go back, I should have added:

• What is the size of block you usually work with, and what are the best dimensions to try to design to? When do you consider a design to be special order?

• While you can make just about any stone shape, are there certain conditions that another stone might be better suited for? Where is limestone at its best?

• Are there certain shapes/finishes that your mill is particularly well set up for? (panels, split-face ashlar, carved balustrades, running trim — such as water tables and copings, lug-sills, carving, etc.)?

• What should an architect draw and detail, and what should he leave to the mill?

Over the course of multiple trips, I learned how the type of stone and its inherent characteristics (hardness, block size, cutting planes) helped us decide what was best for a design — and therefore helped create a compelling design for the client. Moreover, though, I learned to evaluate such things as the machinery available, and hence, what was cost-effective that Allowed the client to be able to afford it.

When I first visited Bybee Stone Company in Indiana, the graceful swinging of their rack saws across blocks 18 feet long was mesmerizing, and the yard was full of blocks ranging up to almost 20 feet long. Years later, diamond wire saws had changed the typical block to something less than 10 feet long. The industry is not static, so don’t think that one visit is ever enough; it is a career-long endeavor.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Architects want to use stone; at least I think the best ones do. It is the building material that has proven to last for millennia when used well and usually lasts centuries even when it isn’t detailed right. Bill Colehower, now at MIT, commented that the most sustainable building is the one that isn’t torn down. They are also the “cheapest” when considering the years they serve. During a long discussion about masonry construction And copper roofs, then-Chancellor Daniel L. Ritchie observed that while the materials we were discussing helped to make a building last for centuries, in the end what truly ensures a building’s longevity is if folks smile when they see it. The buildings that do that are the ones folks tend to relate to. It may be that because each block of stone has something unique about it; that might remind us of our own individuality.

Over this journey, one of my convictions has become that the pattern of joints is critical to a design. Natural stone and its variations can accentuate the patterns of those joints, and their pattern reveals much about how a building is constructed. Other materials which strive to be identical in color, texture and shape every time demand mindful patterns — or maybe I should say relentless and maybe mindless patterns. These often expose such manmade intrusions as control joints, hose bibs, security cameras, etc.

In a discordant manner. Even the most precisely controlled construction will not overcome uneven weathering. In a perfect world, every element would be placed exactly where an architect composes it to be, but the truth is that almost always, the fellow cutting the hole for the fire strobe is on scaffolding that places him 10 feet off the ground and a few feet from the wall. He is installing the newer one that replaced the model the architect designed to — often years previously. The mason is struggling with a deadline and the discovery that the “sparky” was off by a few inches in laying out the conduit behind the wall.

In the subsequent weeks or months, the architect is looking at the wall after the scaffolding has been removed, and all the careful precision of layout now has a few random “birthmarks” strewn across the elevation. The architect knows that if he orders the offending eyesores moved, the patch will likely look worse that the flaw at hand.

On the scale of a building facade, seeking flawless perfection is very elusive, and so it is important be very thoughtful about the risks in designing in a manner that is only at its best when it is actually achieved.

DRAFTING

I have drawn stone shop tickets for our projects, though more often I draw stone layout drawings. It takes some time, and hence has a cost. Back in 1995, when we were working on the Ritchie Center, we were using so much stone that it was decided that the University should begin direct purchasing the sandstone from Wes early in order to assure that his mill would be able to “fuel” the project consistently. As I was meeting with our very talented Architect of Record (The Davis Partnership) and reviewing the piece drawings that I was drafting, one of the oth- Er partners joined the meeting, and after listening for five minutes, he asked “What are you doing? No owner pays for this type of drawing to be done.” I replied: “Actually, the owner does every time.”

In a fair project, it is the owner who pays. At some point in the process of getting the building built, someone will draw the shop drawings. The only question really is whether the owner pays a general contractor (with their mark-ups) to pay a mason (with their mark-ups) to pay a mill after bid and further paying for that whole sequence to add in some sort of contingency each time in case they missed something.

Plenty of our projects have bid where the stone portion of the bid is seen as a prime culprit for the project being over budget. In too many cases, I have drawn the layout drawings and seen the price of the stone package drop by as much as a third, and always the savings is at least three times what it has cost to have them drawn.

Just as great architecture is rarely “easy,” having the opportunity of working with great materials requires care and effort both for those who design and those who quarry and mill it. These include taking the time to visit producers and guide the process; considering how to design with natural stone to its best advantages; educating your client in what steps there are and how to best think about the process of design; and considering how the stone is detailed; among many other factors. Each step is critical.

Of course, there are many more lessons, and I certainly hope I am given a bit more time to learn them well.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Mark Rodgers, AIA, AUA is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania who journeyed to Colorado to pursue his career in architecture. Since 1999, Rodgers has been the university architect for the University of Denver (DU). For Rodgers and the DU design team, a great building is one designed and constructed to last, which is why stone is such an important part of DU’s design legacy. Rodgers has an extensive understanding of masonry architecture, has been honored by the Rocky Mountain Masonry Institute, and has authored articles published by the Indiana Limestone Institute and Colorado Construction Magazine. Rodgers is also the appointed chairman of the Joint Committee of the ANSI Dimensional Natural Stone Standard and Certification program being funded by the Natural Stone Council.