From: 	Patrick Costin <pcostin@canal5studio.com>
To:	Helen Donaldson <HCD@portlandmaine.gov>
CC:	Timothy Hart <thart@canal5studio.com>, "Greg Day(gregdaylight@gmail.com)" <gregdaylight@gmail.com>, Greg Shinberg <gls@shinbergconsulting.com>, "TimSoley (tsoley@eastbrowncow.com)" <tsoley@eastbrowncow.com>
Date: 	8/26/2013 12:30 PM
Subject: 	RE: follow up questions

Hi Nell:
Creative interpretation is part of my business so it feels natural to try it on regulations!
The goal of the lighting is to graze the glass and aluminum curtain wall framing to make the geometry visible even when curtains are closed for privacy (and backlighting isn’t happening).
Our original design mounted lights on the building on each side of the window wall. There were two problems with it – first the light would shine directly into the rooms and second the reflective effect on the glazing would be undermined by light going through the glass rather than grazing along its surface. The serrated profile of the curtain wall design reduces the distribution of light horizontally on the surface of the glazing. So we believe the vertical (up/down) approach is a superior strategy.
If we don’t light the corner we risk losing some of the intentional drama of the corner -  the idea is to contrast the rectilinear volume of the building mass with the fractal  character of the Crinkle Wall. If the glass on the corner isn’t consistently illuminated externally, its appearance will vary depending on internal illumination, which we think makes it contribute less to the urban environment.
Best regards.

CANAL5STUDIO

Patrick S. Costin, AIA, LEED AP
One Canal Plaza, Suite 888
Portland, Maine 04101
207.553.2115

canal5studio.com

Architecture / Planning / Interior Design