Architecture without Content II
atelier office kersten geers david van severen carola daldoss andrea zanderigo autumn winter 2011 arch.usi.ch
1
This is the second in a series of investigations on architectural strategies for banal buildings of a significant scale. Today, a great number of buildings do not require an intricate development of the plan in order to be either socially viable or economically interesting. If the plan and its potential complexity could be an inspiration (or an alibi even) for a great number of architectural projects -and in most cases its failure, it seems that as soon as the plan and the complexity of its use turns irrelevant, the lever to argue for Architecture is most certainly gone. The battle for architecture and its necessity is fought on the fields of housing and public building: there where the plan matters. Contrarily, a great part of the contemporary building production happens in the fringes of this universe. A great number of buildings are pragmatic clothing for a not too specifically defined content. In many cases any attempt to make architecture, starting from the sheer pragmatism of this content becomes wishful thinking. Still, when the scale of the building appears significant in relation to its context, the stakes are too high to let go. Architecture in these instances cannot be too ambitious, but has to be smart. It cannot be too sophisticated, but it has to be intelligent. It should not ever attempt to be a complete architecture, but it should position itself on the one hand servant to the content it does not grasp, still it should be fundamental enough not to be overlooked, to make sense on its own right. More important however, is the question of what should be its frame of reference, what should be its ambition. What are the defining principles of the big box? In the early nineteen seventies, and in the better part of the second phase of his architectural production, Robert Venturi experimented with a set of graphical principles disguised as the pragmatic answer to the phenomenology of being seen (and recognized). Despite the (pop art inspired) pseudo irony, and games of representation, many of the strategies and implicit principles still seem valuable. This is no surprise, as in the continuation of architecture of complexity and contradiction, the notion of continuation, or (to a certain extent) architecture detached from its function, is the key. Architecture without content uses the function or content of a certain building as the alibi for its existence. Function/content is the catalyst but not its quintessence. Venturi’s categorization of ‘boxes’ in ducks and decorated sheds appears old-fashioned in our over wired society where context and address is defined by GPS and webspace. More disturbingly, it makes an unnecessary connection between the container and the contained. Fascinatingly, in parts of his own production (eg Lewis Thomas laboratories) we get a glimpse of what is possible when this all too forced argument is put aside: we see a building in search of principles that do not have to communicate - an exercise in the architecture of the perimeter. Architecture without content starts here and wants to investigate the possible architectural strategies left to us when we accept the limits of our field of operation. This pragmatic architecture is not a new architecture and probably finds its roots both in European architecture before orthodox functionalism, (sheds, halls and palaces) and in the pragmatic architecture of the big scale container buildings as developed in the realm of North American Corporate buildings in the sixties and seventies. In this second installment, the focus is on both traditions. In an attempt to distill possible strategies for architecture of the box, we look briefly at the architecture of corporate envelopes, without forgetting the European pre-Enlightment heritage. The studio investigated the possibility for a vocabulary to be used for big boxes in the city. The projects are proposals for specific machines for the even covered field. They are presented as portraits of possible buildings. Incomplete as it is, it shows a catalogue of potential tools, possible strategies, to deal with the indifference, scale, economy and pragmatism of the big box. Even though we attempt to accumulate formal knowledge through trial and error only, this series cannot hide behind indifference. Each of the projects needs to be an exercise in economy of means, but more importantly a search for a valid set of principles. If the success of the project cannot be evaluated in a mastered complexity, economy of the plan or a promenade of any kind, how can we judge its relevance? Then again, how do we judge the pyramids, or the success of a palazzo? Scale cannot be the only criterium.
2
Preamble
During the studio our investigation will tackle the topic of “architecture without content” through different yet complementary angles. In the first two weeks we will look at ideological predecessors of the big box in Paris. Trés Grande Bibliothéque by OMA, Centre Pompidou by Piano & Rogers and L’Espaces d’Abraxas by Taller de Arquitectura, seem to suggest a possibility of an architecture of a certain scale where its appearance is completely mediated through the composition of the facade. If one takes abstraction of any program they seem to be able to house anything. Their architecture is skin deep. Each of them, due to its size and particular architectonical solution, might in the end offer a possible strategy to organize the urban territory.
Très Grande Bibliothèque OMA, Paris 1989
In the summer of 1989 the French Government organized a competition to build a new national library in France. The site, a rectangle of 250m x 300m isolated between the river and the railway, was in the eastern part of Paris near the Périphérique, facing the Seine. Along with conference centers, restaurants, offices, etc., it would consolidate five separate and autonomous institutions in which the complete production of words and images since 1945 would be contained: a sound and moving image library/cinematheque, a library for recent acquisitions (books, films, videos), a reference library, a catalogue library and a scientific research library. The total area of the building program was 250’000m2, 75% of it was storage.
Level +3, plan (the Cross)
Centre Georges Pompidou
Renzo Piano & Richard Rogers, Paris 1971-78
Following the competition in 1971, the building was designed and built in six years, in the Beaubourg area of the 4th arrondissement of Paris within one kilometer of Notre Dame and the Louvre and on the edge of the densely populated medieval quarter. The cultural centre consist of four major specialist activities: museum and centre for the visual arts of the 20th century, public library, centre for industrial design, film museum, centre for musical and acoustical research (Ircam). Areas for office administration, bookshops, restaurants, cinemas, children’s activities and car parking were also to be included. Building specifications: height 42 m (Rue Beaubourg side), 45.5 m (Square side), length 166 m, width 60 m. Floor area: 103,305 m2.
Longitudinal section (competition drawing)
Les Espaces d’Abraxas
Taller de Arquitectura R. Bofill, Marne-la-Vallèe (Paris) 1978-1983
The apartment complex is located in Marne-la-Vallée, one of several new towns created in the mid1960’s as a way of dealing with urban congestion. The complex is made up of three main parts: the Palacio, a 19-story high apartment building, the Théâtre, a curved section of apartments demarcating a plaza in the center and the Arc modeled on a triumphal arch containing 20 apartments. The three buildings are laid out in a baroque space, more French in some areas, more Mediterranean in others, to constitute a public space which have become the symbol and reference point for a large part of the Marne valley. Building specifications: 591 dwellings, floor area: 47’000 m2.
Le Théâtre, interior facade
3
Machines
In week 3 we will investigate what the big box might or might not house. Ultimately the big box is a machine; a device without people. Here you will find a first selection of possible machines-like buildings. These buildings are hardly populated like storages, data centers, factories, recycling plants, car parks, malls, etc. Typically these building host one simple function which could even vary with the passing of time and which is not shaping its architectural appearance. In a way these machines provide a shelter to human (or computers) activities, thus recreating an unexpected link with the pseudo-mythical origins of the architectural culture. Having been freed from the need to convey semantic contents, the big box might be able to read and interpret the specificity of the contexts, even without renouncing to its intrinsic genericity. A pragmatic approach towards technology, a certain tolerance towards the program and the expectations of the design are the key.
Recycling Plant
Typical program of a urban waste recycling plant: 1. access area (controlled) 2. waste unloading area 3. mechanical waste separation 4. final selection 5. storage area for recycled material 6. transfer area to landfill (non-recyclable waste) 7. reception and environmental room 8. locker rooms for personnel 9. parking for heavy vehicles
10. offices 11. cafeteria 12. parking for personnel/visitors
Recycling Plant, Ca単ada Real, Madrid, Spain, I. Abalos & J. Herreros, 2000.
Self Storage
Typical self storage program: 1. access 2. reception 3. administration (offices and facilities) 4. control room (security cameras, alarm...) 5. security guardians office (& facilities) 6. services area (copys, faxes,...) & small shop (packing material) 7. packing area 8. main storage space for private/business customers (separated units from 2m² to 350m²)
9. container storage space (transportable containers on track system) 10. outdoor storage space (for vehicles, boats...) 11. parking for heavy vehicles 12. covered loading area 13. rentable meeting rooms & furnished offices 14. parking for visitors
Self storage, typical plan of the units.
Data Center
Typical data center program: 1. hall/circulation 2. room for data archives/magnetic tape 3. room for servers 4. service platform/coolth recovery equipment 5. ventilation plant, fire extinguishing system 6. electricity/emergency power 7. services, ventilation, argon fire-suppression system 8. transformer 9. main entrance/reception
10. administration offices 11. control room 12. services & facilities area for personnel 13. covered loading area 14. parking Remarks: the power supply can’t go off, the communications lines can’t break down, the space must be kept under high security, the data rooms need to be kept cool
Leibniz Data center, Garching, M端nich, Germany, T. Herzog, 2006.
Paper Mill
Typical paper mill program: 1. main entrance 2. administration offices 3. services & facilities area for personnel 4. paper maschines room 5. storages (feedstocks, mechanicals, chemicals,...) 5. paper storage 6. covered loading area 7. technical rooms (ventilation, electricity,...) 8. parking
Remarks: the paper machines are very large (up to 250 m in length, > 6 m height) and operate at very high speed (100km/h).
S端ddeutscher Zeitung Typography, M端nich, Germany, P. Von Seidlein, 1988.
4
Grand Paris
During week 4 we will go to Paris. Our first conception of the big box, will be confronted with the context of Grand Paris. A set of sites chosen from the ones shown here will make our working terrain/field for experiment. By confronting the big box with the urban territory of Paris we want to investigate how these mute buildings can have an impact in structuring the city. The concept of Grand Paris (developed in 2007) is aimed at reinventing the city at a bigger scale, in the climate of the post-Kyoto agreements. The transportation system will be implemented with the construction of a new 140 km figure-eight subway track, connecting those parts of Paris, which have been sprawled outside the PĂŠriphĂŠrique mainly during the 50s and the 60s. Seventy thousand new houses per year are planned till 2030. In this challenging context, the big box is asked to play a major role in addressing certain basic infrastructural needs of the contemporary city. We think the big box might become even a powerful tool to define those places through the means of architecture.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1. Le Port de Gennevilliers 2. Le Triangle de Gonnesse 3. Valenton 4. Le Marche Ă Rungis 5. Quartier Pleyel Ă Saint Denis
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
6. Les EMGP à Saint Denis 7. Molette à Blanc Mesnil 8. Sevrean 9. Carriéres sous Poissy 10. Confluence Ivry sur Seine
5
Samples
From week five onwards we will develop precise portraits of possible big boxes in Paris. Here one finds a set of portraits of possible big boxes, possible machines. Each of the buildings presented here, is exemplary, in type and in aberration. Some samples won’t be immediately related with the topic of the big box, only a closer observation will reveal their value for the research. Types and programs rarely couple themselves in monogamy. Within the formal tradition of reproduction and copy, we want you to contemplate on that what is essential to make any given architecture into your architecture, any given solution a tailored solution, a proposal for a specific site. The main aim of the studio is to enhance the basic skills of the students, while simultaneously improve their understanding of architecture mainly as a critical practice.
Basilica di Massenzio, Rome, Italy, 4th century A.C. _the generic big unitarian space _perfect coincidence of structure and space _big scale
Pacific Design Center, West Hollywood, California, Cesar Pelli, 1975 _half mirroring blue glass curtain wall _complete disconnection between the interior and the exterior _semi-public inner distribution as the only carefully designed piece of the building (apart from the skin) _outer shape as a pure extrusion of a given profile, as an out-of-scale moulding (not completely true...) _the “blue whale� completely outsizes its context
Freiraum Wielandstrasse, Berlin, Germany, Hans Kollhoff, 1984 _the Crystal Palace over a stone, street-related pedestal with a portico _the dinosaur-bones-like roof is openable
Uffici per la Camera dei Deputati, Rome, Italy, Gianugo Polesello, 1966 _triangular plan (the box fits in the context but retains a platonic shape) _monumental entrance (columns) _bridge-like connection with the old building _elaborated roofscape (the box as a pedestal) _promenade from the street level to the top
Beinecke Rare Books Library, New Haven, Connecticut, Gordon Bunshaft for S.O.M., 1960-1963 _an utterly precious raised-from-the-soil box _alabaster and stone cladding (the stone is covering, and mimicking, the concrete underneath) _a box within a box (glass and metal, alabaster and stone) _the basement and the square as a fundamental part of the project _the sunken court as the negative of the raised box _a dialogue in between different eras at its best
Ringroad (Houston), Bas Princen, 2005 _golden solitary with glamorous appereance _curtain wall facade _perfect ordinariness
Centro Torri, Parma, Italy, Aldo Rossi, 1984 _the idea that a mall might look as a walled city, thus providing the suburbs a context _too much ironical?
Indian Stupa, 1st c.B.C. _dome-like structure but unclear content _dominates the landscape
IBM Pilot Head Office, Cosham, England, Norman Foster, 1970-1971 _the low, wide box in the lawn _a very precise glazed skin, half reflective half transparent _organization of the plan as a filter from the entrance and parking side to the garden _Sir Norman Foster as Dan Graham
Kleefse Waard Industrial Compound, Arnhem, Nederlands, OFFICE Kersten Geers David Van Severen, 2011-2012 _super pragmatic box 4m to 12 m high _sloping roof providing energy _all the side facades are separately openable
Lewis Thomas Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey, Robert Venturi, 1986 _forced proportions incorporate air outlet grids and windows _simple box with complex content
Palazzo Ruccellai, Florence, Italy, Leon Battista Alberti (+ Bernardo Rossellino?), 1446-1452 _featuring a flat facade, graphically playing with the idea of the Greek-Roman ornament and orders _suggestion of being potentially endless
Storage Building for the Ricola Factory, Laufen, Switzerland, J. Herzog & P. de Meuron, 1986-1987 _extremely precise eternit cladding supported by an elaborated wooden sub-structure _semi-classical wooden cornice _in opposition to the roughness of the surrounding rocks (Robert Smithson anyone?)
Mosque of Abd ar-Rahman, Cordova, Spain, 792 _the outer perimeter of the box comprises a covered and an open-air space _almost completely closed exterior _regular, forest-like columns structure with a slight emphasis along the main axe _perimeter punctuated by buttresses
Casa della Memoria, Milan, Italy, baukuh, 2011 _the semi-monumental box _facades which tell stories about the city _the big hall plus a simple stack of floors plus two servant slab-like cores _the promenade to the roofscape
Yale Center for British Art, New Haven, Connecticut, Louis Kahn, 1969-1974 _humble but extremely precise exterior VS jewel-like wooden interior (schizophrenia) _clear distinction between structure and cladding _the structural rhythm is twice as wide at the ground floor _corner entrance trough a porch _street-facing shops
SESC PompĂŠia Factory, SĂŁo Paulo, Brasil, Lina Bo Bardi, 1977-1986 _rough concrete boxy tower _simple stack of floors _pushed-out vertical distribution (independent staircase + bridges) _organic openings
Illinois Regional Library for the Blind and the Physically Handicapped, Chicago, Illinois, Stanley Tigerman, 1975-1978 _triangular colourful metal box _column-like cylinder provides emphasis to the entrance _(cynically?) the volume is almost without any opening _the box organizes the parking lot _dialectic between the repetition of the storage space and the exceptionality of the spaces open to the public
Car Park in Wacker street, Chicago, USA, Shaw, Metz & Dolio, 1983 _a simple stack of floors _almost non-existent exterior walls revealing the inner content of the big box _the structure itself as the best “advertisement sign�
Fantoni Factories, Osoppo, Italy, Gino Valle, 1972-1996 _an entire complex of different industrial boxes, from the older prefab concrete temple-like buildings to the more recent chromium-like cladding boxes _perfect ordinariness
Incinerator Plant, Giubiasco, Switzerland, Livio Vacchini, 2010 _tectonic element (acustic panels) acting as a divise to abstract the facades _gigantic “bugnato� as reminiscence (or provocation?) of public function _functional compact shelter to host a complex process
Orsanmichele, Florence, Italy, Arnolfo di Cambio, Simone Talenti, Neri di Fioravante and Benci di Cione, 1290-1350 _the generic box (first loggia then church then museum...) _the precise rhythm of the structure VS the loose object (the altar) _integration of the vertical distribution within the structure _surfacing of the structure on the faรงade
Architecture without Content II. The big unconscious organizer.
The project is the core of any architectonic intervention. The project is consequent and consistent and is able in it self to lay bare both aspirations towards a given context as well as aspirations towards the context of architecture (its culture). Increasingly Architecture is produced in the fringes of the built environment, there where that ‘little extra’ is allowed. Architecture has become marginal. This studio aims to tackle the borders of this self proclaimed exile. By deliberately proposing to do architectural projects where it is not expected, or even not allowed, we seek to broaden the field in which we can operate to again make buildings that are currently done by mysterious entities, and commonly labeled commercial. Perhaps entering this field has its price. Perhaps we might have to give up complete control in order to be allowed to enter. A building of that kind might have other qualities, features that do not fit the common notion of good design. General appearance, size, the way it relates to the ground become crucial. A pragmatic approach towards technology and a certain tolerance towards the program and the expectations of the design are key. In the studio we will develop a set of big non-institutional buildings for the urban fabric of Paris. One should make a building that is big enough to be capable to organize a specific urban landscape through intelligent positioning. A building which is meticulously developed and detailed to perform on different scales of perception: blunt and big from afar; pragmatic and refined from close by.
Coverpage+page 7: pictures courtesy of Evita Fanou, Parina Vasilopoulou, Rem Luo, Jing Xie, Architecture without Content I, Columbia-Summer program, 2011.