Suburbia as Landform by Haneen S

Haneen Abu-Sherbi

Suburbia As

Landform

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Thesis Development to Re-Imagined Suburbia

Fall 2021 | ARCH 817 | Grant Alford Kansas State University | College of Architecture, Planning, and Design

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Contents Introduction Diagrammatic Relationships Landform + Mat Building Exploration of Forms Suburbia Moving Forward

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

Introduction

Suburbia influences how we socialize, commute, access opportunities, and informs a lifestyle. Suburbia is examined demographically, environmentally, and critiqued on its existing conditions and characteristics. These critiques allow for an argument for change to achieve a reimagined suburban life.

Introduction to Suburbia Characteristics, history, and qualities of suburbia. Fall 2021 ADS 7/Alford

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

Suburbia Today The House Suburbia has existed for centuries, but it wasn’t until after the 1920s that suburbia started to boom. It was suburbia in the 1950s in the United States which conceived a generic house construction type that allowed for the fast and cheap production of suburban homes, continuing today. With the rapid growth of infrastructure, such as highways, to the increase of population (baby boomers), the suburbs were subjected to uniformity and homogamous change. This generic characteristic that forms the average suburban house stems from many factors; however, the central fact comes from who and how the places developed. Due to the high demand, homes were produced quickly and economically with only a small number of builders,

giving them their uniformity. For example, in 1949, 70% of homes were built by only 10% of builders.1 This generic style results from builders constructing limited model types to afford construction and purchase similar products. This standard model aims to a one-size-fits-all house and misses the opportunity to cultivate the growing family demographic in one-third of the suburbs.2 The average house layout includes: A few rooms, a designated “game room”, living and dining room connecting to the kitchen, and utility/storage space. Introducing an architectural language is one solution to approach the conventional qualities of the suburban home. “New Homes in Bridgeview: Haslet, TX: D.R. Horton,” DR Horton: America’s Largest Homebuilder

1 Ellen Dunham-Jones and June Williamson, Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban Design Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2011). 17 The New Suburban History

Kim Parker et al., “Demographic and Economic Trends in Urban, Suburban and Rural Communities,” Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project (Pew Research Center, May 30, 2020), https://www.pewresearch.org/ social-trends/2018/05/22/demographicand-economic-trends-in-urban-suburbanand-rural-communities/.

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

“Suburbia…is a manifestation of such fundamental characteristics of American society as conspicuous consumption, a reliance upon the private automobile, upward mobility, the separation of the family nuclear units, the widening division between work and leisure, and the tendency toward racial and economic exclusiveness.” - Kenneth T. Jackson Crabgrass Frontier4

The Block As suburbia transformed into a new type of manufacturing, it began to produce more significant homogeneous communities. The suburbs were marketed as a place away from the overcrowded, loud, busy city life. One example

Levittown marketed the suburbs as peace and stability, away from the chaos of the city.

stems from one of the very first suburban community developments known as Levittown. Levittown produced homes along a curved road to remove the attachment to the grided city, highly regulated yards, and uniform houses equipped for the middle-class family.3 Builders like

3 Crystal Galyean et al., “Levittown,” US History Scene, December 21, 2019, https://ushistoryscene.com/article/levittown/.

Kenneth T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

Growth and Change in Suburbia

Population before 2000

Popul

From the beginning of the half of the American populaPopulation before 2000 suburban boom in the early tion lived in the suburbs.6 1900s until today, suburbia has transformed. DemoHalf of households had children 53% of total American Population lived in Suburbs graphics refer to the charac*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data teristics of a population, inHalf of households had children cluding household size, type, 53% of total American Population lived in Suburbs age, race, ethnicity, class Population currently *Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data of income, renters vs. buyers, and other measurable Population currently characteristics. Growth and change of suburbia aim to Third of households have children define the driving factors to Singles and Elderly double how suburbia is developing 16% increase in Population size living in Suburbs with total or 55% of over time and why. Studying Third of households children American Populationhave in Suburbs Singles and ElderlyChp. double these changes impacts how *Retrofitting Suburbia, 2. 16% increase in Population size living in Suburbs with total or 55% of we build and plan for creating American Population in Suburbs our future socially, economi*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. cally, and environmentally.5 The outward expansion away from before cities2000 gave way to afPopulation fordable housing; implementation of new policies rose as more efficient home production became evident. Policy change gave Half of households had more childrenaccess to vulnerable Americans 53%more of total American Population lived in Suburbs to achieve the suburban *Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data dream, meaning growth for the suburbs. Population currently By the 1990s,

Popul

Popula

*Retrofitti

Popula

Marri

*Retrofitti

Marri

half of

*PEW r

half of

Elderly *PEW r

Net Gained International and Domestic Migration

Elderly

Net Gained International and Domestic Migration Population 2050

12% of

*PEW re

11% of total gained migration in Suburbs

12% of

Elderly *PEW re

*PEW research Center

11% of total gained migration in Suburbs

Diversity 2012-2016 *PEW research Center

Elderly

Diversity Doubles 2012-2016 Population

15% of

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data

*PEW res

68% White, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other

Married Population currently

15% of

*PEW research Center

Third of households have children Singles and Elderly double 5+7 Ellen in Dunham-Jones and June Wil- 6 Baldassare, “Suburban Commu16% increase Population size living in Suburbs with total orMark. 55% of liamson, Retrofitting Suburbia: Urban De- nities.” Annual Review of Sociology 18 American Population in Suburbs sign Solutions for Redesigning Suburbs (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2011). 18 Demographic Changes

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2.

(1992): 475–94. stable/2083463.

http://www.jstor.org/

*PEW res

68% White, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other *PEW research Center 8

half of Suburban Population is Married *PEW research Center

Elderly Population before 2000

Net Gained International and Domestic Migration

12% of total Elderly American Population lived in Suburbs Ages 65+ *PEW research Center

11% of total gained migration in Suburbs *PEW research Center

Half of households had children Population currently 53% of total American Population lived in Suburbs *Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Population currently

Third of households have children Singles and Elderly double 16% increase in Population size living in Suburbs with total or 55% of American Population in Suburbs

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2.

Third of households have children Singles and Elderly double 16% increase in Population size living in Suburbs with total or 55% of American Population in Suburbs

Net Gained International and Domestic Migration

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2.

Population Doubles

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2

Married Population Population Doubles

*Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2.

Married Population c

half of Suburban Pop

*PEW research Center

Elderly Population be

half of Suburban Popu *PEW research Center

Elderly Population bef

12% of total Elderly Am

Net Gained International and Domestic Migration

*PEW research Center

11% of total gained migration in Suburbs

Demographic growth also changed along with the development of suburbia. By 2050, the population will double that in 2000, a sizable amount accounting for immigration numbers while before 2000 also seeing a shift in diversification in the majority-white neighborhoods7.

n before 2000 Americans are also having

seholds had children fewer children, while married al American Population lived remain in Suburbsto account couples

the population. The elderly are also accounting seholds had children currently for large numbers, as many al American Population lived inthe Suburbs are from baby boomer uburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data generation8. Overall, the suburban demographic is evolving, and this should also nuseholds currentlyhave children d Elderly doublecorrespond to how suburbia forms andin Suburbs functions.9 ase in Population size living with total or 55% of

*PEW research Center

Elderly Population 20

12% of total Elderly Am

Diversity 2012-2016

*PEW research Center

11% of total gained migration in Suburbs *PEW research Center

Diversity 2012-2016

Elderly Population 201

15% of total Elderly Am *PEW research Center

68% White, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other

Population 2050

*PEW research Center

15% of total Elderly Am *PEW research Center

68% White, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other

Population 2050

*PEW research Center

uburbia, Chp. 2. Census for Data half

Population Doubles *Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data

Married Population currently Population Doubles *Retrofitting Suburbia, Chp. 2. Census Data

Married Population currently

Population in Suburbs

half of Suburban Population is Married

uburbia, Chp. 2.

*PEW research Center

useholds have children d Elderly double ase in Population size living in Suburbs with total or 55% of Population in Suburbs

Chp. 2. duburbia, International and Domestic Migration

Elderly Population before 2000 half of Suburban Population is Married *PEW research Center

Elderly Population before 2000

12% of total Elderly American Population lived in Suburbs Ages 65+

d gained International andinDomestic al migration Suburbs Migration

*PEW research Center

ch Center

Elderly Population 2012-2016

12% of total Elderly American Population lived in Suburbs Ages 65+

2012-2016

Graphics and research are derived from al gained migration in Suburbs

ch Center

Eduardo Granillo and Haneen Sherbi in Socio-Political Critique.

*PEW research Center

Elderly Population 2012-2016

15% of total Elderly American Population lived in Suburbs Ages 65+

2012-2016

*PEW research Center

e, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other

rch Center

e, 14% Hispanic, 11% Black, 7% other

rch Center

15% of total Elderly American Population lived in Suburbs Ages 65+ *PEW research Center

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

Diagrammatic Relationships

This architectural critique of suburbia explores the ground vs. building relationships. This is based on the premise that most generic aspect in suburbia is developed on flat land. The generic diagrams give relationships between the block and ground. The block follows four primitive conditions, hovers, inserts, sits, and buried into the ground plane.

The Ground and Building The architecture critique of suburbia concerning the conditions of the ground and house.

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

The first column is the generic relationship finding between simply the ground and block. The second adds depth to the ground line, and the last explores the entirety of the block.

denying it to be a building as a whole? Then, what form and place does suburbia become, is it still defined as suburbia and why.

Through the study of varies relationships, the blue model, seen in the next page, gives formal architectural strategies to accomplish variety between the ground and block relationship. These aspects happen while maintaining the definite characteristic of suburbia, the detached home and open yard. The yards and homes are maintained, while introducing terraces, slopes, stairs, and by carving into the landscape. This begins to invite the idea of density within suburbia, and how that can be achieved through the design of a landform building. If the blue blocks are removed and lifted from the site, what is

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Landform + Mat Building

SANAA’s Rolex Learning Center, Lausanne, Switzerland

Steven Holl Vanke Center. Shenzhen, China,

Steven Holl Vanke Center, Shenzhen, China,

Stan Allen Landform Building| Architectures New Terrain 10

Allen, Stan, and Marc McQuade. Landform Building: Architecture’s New Terrain. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller, 2011.

Nico Saieh, “Rolex Learning Center / SANAA,” ArchDaily (ArchDaily, March 22, 2010), https://www.archdaily. com/53536/rolex-learning-center-sanaaby-iwan-baan.

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Landform Buildings

“Landform Building affirms the efficacy of architecture as a discipline at the same time as it asks new questions of architectural expertise.” - Stan Allen Landfrom Architectures New Terrain

Dominique Perrault Architecture EWHA Women’s University

Stan Allen introduces Land- urbanism and ecology and However, landscape building rault Architecture EWHA form building discussed recuperates the architecture seeks to re-think the archi- Women’s University in Seoul, expertise. tecture’s relationship to the Korea13. through four main ideas. ground, no longer occupying Some common characteris- a given site but constructing Form – Artificial Mountains tics include commonplace the site itself with new forScale – Mega Form Atmosphere – Vast Interiors architecture such as green mal strategies and technical Process – Fabricating Terrain roofs, geological forms, problems within architecture buildings you walk over, a itself.9 Landscape Building utiliz- network of ramps + wrapped es the advantages of new surfaces, and landscapes Examples of landform buildtechnologies in emerging lifted high or carved into the ing include SANAA’s Rolex fabrication and material- ground. Designs only made Learning Center in Lausanne, ity to construct new artificial possible because of new Switzerland11, Steven Holl environments. It learns from technology and construction Vanke Center Shenzhen12, China, and Dominique Perexperiments of Landscape techniques.

12 “Horizontal Skyscraper - Vanke Center,” STEVEN HOLL ARCHITECTS, November 1, 2021, https://www.stevenholl. com/project/vanke-center/.

13 Dominique Perrault Architecture, “Dominique Perrault Architecture,” Dominique Perrault Architecture - Ewha Womans University, http://www.perraultarchitecture.com/en/projects/2459ewha_womans_university.html.

Le Corbusier Venice Hospital

Kevin Roche and John Dinkeloo, Oakland, California, Museum of art

Sarkis, Hashim, Pablo Allard, and Timothy Hyde. Case: Le Corbusier’s Venice Hospital and the Mat Building Revival. Munich: Prestel, 2001.

“Hôpital, Venice, Italy, 1964,” Foundation Le Corbusier, http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/corbuweb/morpheus.aspx? sysId=13&IrisObjectId=5784&sysLangua ge=en-en.

“Kevin Roche John Dinkeloo and Associates Oakland Museum, Oakland, CA, Exterior View,” CMOA collection ( Carnegie Museum of Art, Carnegie Institute), https://collection.cmoa.org/ objects/7ed09faa-17b6-491c-b884-fefca72fa8b6.

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Mat Buildings

A Mat building is characterized as low rise and high density, embodies a homogenous layout, and consists of a systematic repetition of a simple element (column, skylight, modular room); repetition provides the framework. Alison Smithson “how to recognize and read Mat building” CIAM and team 10 sought to define mat building through the work of Le Corbusier Venice Hospital in the 1960s. They proposed that it is the idea of a cluster, a grouping of parts and functions that are different (but sited close together), the elements cease to be defined. The determined qualities of Mat buildings represent:

Kevin Roche and John Dinkeloo, Oakland, California, Museum of art

▸ Greater adaptability in the use of space ▸ Use land efficiently ▸ Reduce the overall need for transportation. ▸ Inherently energy-conserving. ▸ Create their own microclimates. One critique stem from Archigram 5 Editorial: Archigram asks the question concerning the city: Do we still need cities? Or can it be contained in one building? If we accept the idea of single multi-level buildings, it is only logical also to accept multilevel cities. However, instead of only connecting through the street and subway, a true

multi-city demands a connection (an environment-pedestrian) not just vertical and horizontal, but also diagonal. This same argument can be made for suburbia today. However, if we are re-imaging suburbia (in the future), it should accept and embody the changes in density, environment, and transportation. Why not then adapt these ideas through form and new architectural strategies.

▸ A shallow but dense section ▸ Space activated by ramps and double-height voids ▸ The unifying capacity of a large, open roof ▸ Let’s the city or place flow through the project ▸ The delicate interplay of repetition and variation.14 Examples include Le Corbusier Venice Hospital15 and Kevin Roche and John Dinkeloo, Oakland, California, Museum of art 1961-68.16

Mat Building is also critiqued by Stan Allen, author of Landform Buildings. He breaks the building strategies portrayed through:

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

Exploration of Forms

Suburbia is unlike the grided urbanscape. It’s filled with cul-de-sacs, seemingly endless roads that curve and turn you into a mazelike experience. The streets and sidewalks are flat and horizontal, and the houses are all aligned. Homes are pitched, and the backyards are fenced. Food and necessitates of life remain almost always driving distance. Here the car dominates, and the pedestrian scale merely remains within the parameters of the individual house.

and subtracts like the uncertainty of the maze-like suburban landscape. “Houses” remain on top with multi-use below, and horizontal transportation is no longer the only navigation. The overall shape falls under the idea of landform building. Three different formal articulations are explored in the following pages: pixelization, shapey shape, and complex surfaces. Pixelization is one of the three types of formal strategy used in “form giving” that seeks part-to-whole relationships. Pixelization is the modulization of existing shapes. At a large enough scale, it can become a recognizable form. The series of blocks rearrange the possibilities of interactions, adaptive spaces, and the overall structure.

In the re imagined suburbia, the perplexity of the streets is maintained, reorganized within a guided or cube system. The pitched or slopped detached house and an exterior private space become the base module, extending the original suburbs’ unique characteristics. Amenities are no longer driving distance, now living underneath and Shapey is another type of forwithin the new form. It adds mal strategy that seeks part-

to-whole relationships. The various shapes and how they interact through intersection, voids, mass, openings, and collision, inform the body of the building. The experimentations explore how simple shapes begin to define architectural elements to transcend the program. Complex surfaces are the third type of formal strategy in this series of experimentation, continuing to seek partto-whole relationships. These are complex in how the form pulls, twists and turns, and folds as continuous surfaces. These are more parametric. These surfaces are informative in how they allow for function, program, and innovative building techniques.

“Form giving” Exploration of form in identifying formal strategies 19

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Grid Organization

Mixed Use

Suburban Attachment

Subtraction and Addition

Vertical + Horizontal Circulation

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

▸ ▸ ▸ ▸ ▸

Pixelization is the modulization of existing shapes. At a large enough scale, it can become a recognizable form. The unifying capacity of a large, open roof Let’s the city or place flow through the project The interplay of repetition and variation.

Shallow and Sloped

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

▸ ▸ ▸ ▸ ▸

Geological forms Buildings you walk over The unifying capacity of a large, open roof Landscapes lifted high or carved into the ground. Voids and masses

Terraced and Dense Form

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

▸ ▸ ▸ ▸ ▸

Pulls, twists and turns, and folds as continuous surfaces. Constructing the site itself The unifying capacity of a large, open roof Let’s the city or place flow through the project Network of ramps + wrapped surfaces

"Detached" House Unit

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

Suburbia Moving Forward

Suburbia is changing and evolving. As the demographics develop and the density increases, then the new identity of suburbia will live within a landform building. This will accommodate an increased population, an environmental solution, and enhance transportation between amenities and the central city.

Mountain Dwellings, PLOT = BIG + JDS, Copenhagen, Denmark

Mountain Dwellings Program Total = 355209sqft

Mountain Dwellings, PLOT = BIG + JDS, Copenhagen, Denmark

2/3 parking and 1/3 living 80 apartments Parking area contains 480 Parking spots Interior sloping elevator Slopes up Repetitive housing blocks Only accommodates housing and parking

Moving Forward Challenging the buildingground relationships and the definition of suburbia proposes solutions for establishing the new and sustainable suburbs.

Nico Saieh, “Mountain Dwellings / Plot = Big + JDS,” ArchDaily (ArchDaily, March 11, 2009), https://www.archdaily. com/15022/mountain-dwellings-big?ad_ medium=gallery.

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

The Program as Landfrom Form – Artificial Mountains Scale – Mega Form Atmosphere – Vast Interiors Process – Fabricating Terrain ▸ Buildings you walk over ▸ Geological forms ▸ The unifying capacity of a large, open roof ▸ Green roofs ▸ Lifted high or carved into the ground ▸ Constructs the Site itself Scale of building similar to 88,000fsqft) size of a suburban block around 630' x 224'. Third ﬂoor = Houses and roof terraces (approx. Intended Program: 140,000sqft)

Apartment Units Parking Garage

Mountain Dwellings Elevation, PLOT = BIG + JDS, Copenhagen, Denmark

First ﬂoor = Retail, recreation, Circulation through building and public spaces (approx. (approx.. 19,000sqft) 120,000sqft) Second ﬂoor = Offices Total = approx. 367,000sqft and health care (approx.

Housing + Exterior Yards Oﬃces and Health Retail and Public Space

S UB UR B I A AS L A N D FOR M

R E -IM AGIN IN G S UB UR B I A

End.

Fall 2021 | ARCH 817 | Grant Alford Kansas State University | College of Architecture, Planning, and Design