Architecture in the image of urbanism: the arcology and the new urban artifact
student: Caleb White advisor: Annette Fierro
Introduction: Soleri’s world and aspirations
Introduction: Soleri’s world and aspirations Paolo Soleri’s 1973 book Arcology is subtitled “The City in the image of Man”. There are at least two implied meanings of this subtitle which can both be viewed as critical statements about our existing cities. The first, implies Soleri’s aversion to the urban model which was and is increasingly pervasive across the globe. Soleri saw his “arcologies” as a more humane alternative to this homogenized and capital driven model. The second meaning hints at the qualities of the arcology itself - an analogy to the body of man as an autonomous and self reliant entity. Both of these interpretations are embodied in the research of this thesis - they frame the two key questions to be explored:
Fig. 1 Soleri’s 1973 book, Arcology, The City in the image of Man. 1
1_ To what degree can we use urban autonomy to resist the
political and physical homogony of our current urban model specifically the capitalist model of ecumenopoly? 2_ Is it possible to replicate the necessary networks, infrastructures, and qualities of the city using only the tools of architecture - is the arcology imagined by Paolo Soleri a viable urban model?
1. Soleri, Paolo. Arcology, the City in the Image of Man. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1969. Print. cover image.
4
One of the primary catalysts for Soleri’s development of the Arcology was the runaway growth of the city in the era of the suburb. Described by the term “ecumenopoly”, credited to urban planner and architect Constantineos Apostolou Doxiadis, Soleri warned of this phenomena - the growth of urban areas into an agglomeration of continuous and pervasive city-scape that could span continents.3 This has, to some extent, come to pass. The I-95 corridor in the east coast of North America represents a nearly complete chain of urbanism on a variety of scales and intensities from Portland Main down to Miami Florida. The causes for this uncontrolled growth and its association with the capitalist model of urbanism will be explored further in this piece. Paolo Soleri’s arcology is imagined as a city of immense building proportions. Rather than sprawling across the land, consuming valuable natural landscapes and possible agricultural areas, the arcology would condense the external urban networks of a typical city into a dense architecturalized urban structure. Soleri called this process of densification “miniaturization” referring in part to the operations of a cell, where centers of activity and function exist in a dense inter-connected state, all within the unifying cell membrane.4
Fig. 2 The Ecumonopoly v. the Arcology. The case for “miniaturization”.2
5
2. Soleri, Paolo. Arcology, the City in the Image of Man. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1969. Print. p. 2 3. IBID p. 2-6 4. IBID p. 13
6
the question of autonomy: refusal, resistence, and self-sustainence Conversely, the sprawling urbanism of ecumenopoly tends to spread these functions of the city. Zoning differences between essential and related functions of the city, i.e. where people live and where they work, are purposely segregated under outdated assumptions of lifestyle and the nature of our work. The networks of this urbanism become stretched and strained - thus the strife of the urban commuter, clogging highways and forcing an ever expanding urban infrastructure. This also produces an excess of redundant services, city functions, and public amenities. The diagram to the left describes the essential differences between these two urban models. The model of ecumenopoly, whose networks and associations between essential parts of the city are distributed across the urban surface, must be focused on permeability and infrastructure to allow for this constant renegotiation of its parts and their associations. The arcology, however, is centrally focused on the user. As the networks that are typically external are internalized into a singular and dense structure - the distances between them are reduced and the user finds all the functions of the city at their doorstep - this is the effect of miniaturization that Soleri refers to. The arcology contains all the city functions that exist in a mega city today. It is a hyper-dense urbanism made up only of architecture, the infrastructure has been removed and the essential connections that make up a users needs and desires have been compressed. This self sustaining urbanism is autonomous from its surroundings and from other cities or networks. Everything that its inhabitants need is available to them within the arcology. This is a model that does not rely on suburbs or commuter neighborhoods to feed their workplaces - it is a living and working environment. This describes the essence of “autonomous urbanism”. This conception of urbanism is one that exists and has existed in a multitude of forms. Through a series of case studies we can elucidate some of the conditions under which we have been able to produce or inadvertently produced this “autonomy”. But first, it is important to clarify what we mean by autonomy, if for no other reason than that this term has been used under a number of agenda’s both within and outside of the architectural profession. The definition of autonomy which architects might be most familiar with is that of formal autonomy. Pier Vittorio Aureli defines this as “the autonomy
Fig. 3 Existing model of external and diffuse urban networks versus the “miniaturized” and internalized networks of the arcology. 5
Fig. 4 3D New Jersey, a self sustaining arcology for one million.6
5. Soleri, Paolo. Arcology, the City in the Image of Man. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1969. Print. p. 13 6. IBID p. 30-70
7
of architectural form from political, social, and commercial significations.”7 He also aptly says that this is the “refusal to reform the existing world”8 by the architectural profession. This paradigm of the profession emerged in a climate of increased commercialization of architecture which has only continued into the “post-modern” era. This represents an alignment of the profession with its more capitalistically inclined natures, rather than those of altruism and the public good. This only works to support the theory of the larger “retreat into conformity” of the left into the fog of contemporary capitalistic pursuits rather than critical discourse of the greater good. 9 On the opposite end of the spectrum, the second definition of autonomy is that of political autonomy. Which, as Cornelius Castoriadis describes, “is the establishing of a relationship between individuals and their knowledge different from the one inherited from previous periods”.10 More specifically, within the modern era (referred to as the critical period) political autonomy meant the resistance to unchecked capitalistic thinking. However, as Aureli is careful to point out, resistance to capitalist thinking in the modern era came in two quite different forms: the pursuit of autonomy for and the pursuit of autonomy from the means of capital. This distinction may seem trivial but it elaborates the divide between the Marxist perspective arguing for the workers rights to have equal legitimate control over the means of capital and those who would argue for entirely separate means of governance outside of the bounds of free market capitalism.11
Fig. 5 An example of the physical barries that make up the tools for urban autonomy.
Fig. 6 A map of the area encompased by the Berlin wall.
The final definition of autonomy is the one that most closely relates to Soleri’s work, though the terms of all three definitions could be found within the Soleri’s arcologies. This is the idea of autonomy as an urban quality - as an urbanism which is deliberately closed off from the networks that surround it which attempts to establish its own internal networks of transportation, residences and working environments. This is a phenomena that Soleri aspired to and that we have seen develop under a series of particular political and economic scenarios. Through a collection of case studies, we will establish what the circumstances were that produced this autonomy, what were the qualities of the urbanism created by it, and most importantly what are the possible models of urban autonomy that we can learn from.
7. The Project of Autonomy. New York, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008. Print. p. 12 8. IBID p.12 9. IBID p.7 10. IBID p.5 11. IBID p.14
8
case studies of urban autonomy: barriers that liberate Probably the most clear example of urban autonomy that was produced deliberately and effectively is the treatment of post-war Berlin. When the German capital was conquered, ending the war in Europe, it was clear that the allied occupying powers, possessed by different political ideologies, could not coexist in their occupation. The communist soviet union and the capitalistic democracies of the western allied nations split both Germany and Berlin into two halves, East and West. Because of Berlin’s position in Eastern Germany an unusual border was necessary - the modern walled city. Physical barriers were used to block off West Berlin from the rest of East Germany, severing all the existing urban and regional networks to the city. This produced an instant urban autonomy.
The great irony of this urban phenomenon is that the “imprisoned” inhabitants of West Berlin had a greater degree of personal and political freedoms than their fellow Berliners living on the East side of the wall. Therefore, the idea of voluntarily imprisoning yourself by climbing the wall and sneaking into West Berlin was more preferable for some than remaining outside the wall. This unique situation was the inspiration for Rem Koolhaas’ Architectural A Association thesis. Entitled Exodus: or the voluntary prisoners of architecture, Koolhaas’ thesis attempted to rethink the spacial tools of separation used
9
to isolate West Berlin. “It is possible to imagine a mirror image of this terrifying architecture, a force as intense and devastating but used instead in the service of positive intentions.”12 Koolhaas imagined a mega-structure that would inhabit central London and provide its “voluntary prisoners” with the freedom to enact their fantasies and desires that were not permissible outside the confines of Exodus. Exodus describes for us how the idea of urban autonomy - the deliberate separation from your surroundings - could be an act of liberation and also a critical act of resistance. More broadly, however, Koolhaas suggests that Exodus is an analogy for modern urbanism in general. We often compromise our freedoms, or comforts, or essential human desires to take part in the urban collective which affords us a deeper interaction with society, culture, education, and opportunities for work. Fig. 7 Barriers that liberate, the imagined megastructure of Exodus. 13
Fig. 8 Invisible barriers, the hyper dense urbanism of the Kowloon Walled City. 14
If the urban autonomy that was West Berlin was an example of the possibility of political freedoms through separation, then the Kowloon walled city is an example of economic freedom through separation. The Kowloon walled city was an area of Hong Kong that, while under British rule, remained under control of the Chinese government. Because of this, there was no direct policing or government control over this area. Kowloon became a haven for 12. Koolhaas, Rem. Exodus: or the voluntary prisoners of architecture. 13. IBID
10
anyone operating outside of the confines of the law such as illegal mainland immigrants and gangs. Kowloon Walled city grew to become the densest populated place on Earth, with approximately 50,000 people living in a roughly .01 square mile area.15 This provided an opportunity for illegal and unregulated businesses to develop there. Many small industries operated out of Kowloon walled city, machining metal parts, processing food goods, and making cloths just to name a few. These domestic labor centers exported their affordable goods across the region, establishing networks of economy and trade. While West Berlin relied on walls to produce an urban autonomy, Kowloon’s walls were barriers of international law and jurisdiction, proving that autonomy does not have to exist behind walls. Kowloon also shows us that while it was a self sustaining urbanism with a self contained live-work environment it still retained the capacity of outside network connections for economic reasons. There are certainly levels and scales of urban autonomy which are not mutually exclusive. This frames the challenge of urban autonomy as the specific disengagement with certain surrounding networks and their purposeful fostering of certain advantageous networks.
11
14. “Kowloon Walled City.” The Wall Street Journal. Web. 05 Jan. 2016. 15. “Kowloon Walled City”. 99% Invisible. Episode 66. Web. 05 Jan. 2016
tools for an urbanism of architecture: O.M. Ungers
Fig. 12 The concentration of the “urban effect” into a series of singular, architectural, autonomous, urban acts.20
Having begun to address the first question extracted from the work of Soleri, that of autonomy, we can turn to a new set of references to address the question of urbanism made of architectural parts. Is it possible to generate an urbanism without infrastructure, one that relies only on architectural techniques to establish its internal networks of operation as well as those centers of operation themselves? Though it is difficult to imagine an architecture that takes on the scale suggested by Soleri, we have seen examples of architecture that produces an urban effect. One excellent example of this urban effect is Oswald Mathias Ungers project for the housing development at Nue Stadt. In this project, Ungers transforms the typical apartment unit into volumes that
generate “urban” areas in between. The bedrooms, bathrooms, and kitchens act as urban elements while the living spaces act almost as a public square. The corridor has been completely eliminated from the plan as the “urban” interstitial spaces provide all the circulation that is needed. Pier Vittorio Aureli, in his book The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture, “Ungers elevated the living room from just another room in the apartment to a sort of atrium (eliminating the corridor)”.16 O.M. Ungers would revisit this concept of the “urban effect” throughout his work and in different incarnations. Another of the most notable concepts in this respect is his proposal for West Berlin. In the post war era It was projected
16. Aureli, Pier Vittorio. The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2011. Print. p. 182
12
that West Berlin, behind the wall, would suffer a steady decrease in population. The worry was that under a decreasing population, West Berlin would not be able to sustain a healthy and active urbansim. O.M. Ungers proposal was called The City in the City: Berlin as Green Archipelago. Ungers imagined that the remaining population of West Berlin would be condensed into a series of autonomous architectural “islands”. This would allow each of these architectural acts to retain an adequate population density to preserve the urban quality of West Berlin and it would also create a “sea” of natural or agricultural landscape in between the islands.21 The project is in essence very similar to Paolo Soleri’s map of arcologies. It is the opposite of ecumenopoly, a series of singular, architectural, autonomous, urban acts. Rem Koolhaas, who assisted O.M. Ungers with the Berlin as a Green Archipelago project, asserted in “The City of the Captive Globe” that Manhattan was an archipelago of architectural islands. He implies that each block in Manhattan’s grid is an island of experimentation, an “ideological labratory” surrounded and separated by a sea of infrastructure, that of the city streets.22 The City of the Captive Globe is the last chapter of Delerious New York, Rem Koolhaas’s “retroactive manifesto for Manhattan”. In the chapters preceeding we are introduced to the concept of “Manhattanism”, an ever intensifying need to maximize the urban effect. The fabric of Manhattan is teeming with architectural acts of urbanism, internalizing urban effects and always seeking to increase the “culture of congestion”. This is the essence of urbanism, a perfect fertile ground to introduce an act of autonomous urbanism.
Fig. 9 A city of “negatives and possitives”, the conceptual model of Nue Stadt. 17
Fig. 10 A single apartment plan in Nue Stadt. 18
Fig. 11 A plan of multiple apartments. 19
13
20. Aureli, Pier Vittorio. The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2011. Print. p. 179 21. IBID. p.178 22. Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New ed. New York: Monacelli, 1994. Print. p. 294
automatic architecture: the political and physical homoginization of the city
critical of context: three phases of urban homoginization In his book, The Architecture of the City, Aldo Rossi describes the transition from the medieval city typology to the industrial city of the Modern era. In three parts he elucidates the process of the “political and physical homogenization of the city”. This homogenization represents the urban effect of the waning critical period in the late modern era and the complete “retreat into conformity” in the post modern era.23 Our cities have been shaped by our capitalistic ideology. This fact is not in itself the problem, but the capacity for us to create innovative urbanism and architecture that engages new issues and concerns of our society or that proposes alternate lifestyles all together is severely limited by the rigid urban model that we have adopted and which goes largely unquestioned. The following will explain in three phases how the urban model in question became so ubiquitous and how its link to the capitalistic model has linked our urbanism to our politics. The first phase of the political and physical homogenization of our cities occurred at the dawn of the industrial revolution. The medieval city model relied on one particular programmatic relationship that defined its essential qualities the coexistence of the work place and the home. This is often referred to as the cottage industry, or the domestic economy. This spatial alliance was the first quality of the medieval city to be questioned in order to maximize procuction.24 Fig. 13 The first phase of the homogenization of the city, the severing of the relationship between where we work and where we live.
23. Aureli, Pier Vittorio. The Project of Autonomy. New York, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008. Print. p. 6 24. Rossi, Aldo. The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1982. Print.p. 158
16
With the severing of ties between the workplace and the residence, there was an obvious next step that would allow a new level of production and ever more advanced manufacturing - the consolidation of individual work places into the factory. This era saw the rise of many building typologies in addition to the factory - all working towards efficiencies of scale and specialization. This era saw the rise of “workers’ housing”, or more broadly, the idea of mass rental housing. Within the factory another important classification was beginning, the distinction between those who are involved with production versus those who are involved with administration (also known as labor and management). Along with this distinction the development of zoning was beginning to allow these emerging class structures to also be reflected outside of the factory and in the neighborhoods of the city.25 Fig. 14 The factory and the mass rental housing were two key architectural typologies that emerged in the second phase of the homogenization of the city.
17
25. Rossi, Aldo. The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1982. Print.p. 158
The third phase of the city’s transformation involved the development of means of transportation both private and public that would allow the workers to live farther away from their places of work. This accelerated the growth of cities at a more rapid rate as the fringes of the city could now be developed for new residential areas. This also began to stretch urban networks and generate redundant services and systems within the city. The most notable class development of this phase was the newfound capacity to consolidate places of industry. This separated those who could afford to take transportation from more desirable neighborhoods to work from those who relied on nearby housing and thus had to live in neighborhoods nearer to centers of industry. 26
Fig. 15 In the final phase of the city’s transformation, both public and private means of transportation allowed the city to grow to a much larger scale.
26. Rossi, Aldo. The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1982. Print.p. 159
18
automatic architecture: “Manhattanism” and its new comodification Rem Koolhaas, in his “retroactive manifesto for Manhattan”, Delirious New York, describes the phenomenon of “Manhattanism”. This frenetic urban attitude involves the maximization of the urban effect on a given site, resulting in the “culture of congestion” through a host of paranoid-critical maneuvers which attempt to alleviate congestion but instead reify and intensify urban growth. The architectural mechanisms that have developed as a result of this “Manhattanism” is referred to as “automatic architecture”. The principles of automatic architecture also serve the dual role of maximizing the profitability of a given parcel in the city. As represented by the drawing below, the imagined role of the high rise in this teeming urbanism is that of land multiplier - every parcel can be endlessly replicated into the sky, providing Manhattan with an unending supply of virgin land to be developed.
Fig. 16 The 1909 theorem, an unending supply of virgin land to be developed.27
27. Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New ed. New York: Monacelli, 1994. Print. p. 83
19
There are three principles of “automatic architecture”, the first is the extrusion of the city grid. The city grid restricts development in two dimensions while encouraging growth in the third. A simple vertical multiplication of the outline of a given parcel seeks to maximize the returnable monetary value of a site. This is the essence of the commodification of urbanism. This describes the novel condition introduced by the skyscraper of arranging entirely different programs and even programs at odds with one another into the same high rise, perhaps only separated by a few inches of floor. Koolhaas explains, “By denying the dependence of one floor on any other, the Vertical Schism allows their arbitrary distribution within a single building”.28 The relationship that would exist if these programs shared a single street is entirely void when these programs are placed in the highrise - they become indifferent to one another. The third principle is the lobotomy, the intentional disconnection between the program on the interior of the building and the facade on the exterior. This is the undermining of the western architectural tradition of communicating the interior activities of a building by their reflection on the facade. As Koolhaas puts it, “the ‘honest’ facade speaks about the activities it conceals”. Within the extruded volumes of the Manhattan high rise, activities and programs are constantly in flux. Therefore, it is necessary to sever the relationship between the interior and the exterior of the building, creating a uniform facade to unify the entire building.29
28. Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New ed. New York: Monacelli, 1994. Print. p. 83 29. IBID. p. 100
20
asset urbanism: the newest mechanism of automatic architecture Though the inflation of property values is not new to Manhattan there is a particularity to the most recent urban strategy to maximize profitability on a given site. Asset urbanism is the global phenomena of a comodified urbanism where luxury residential property is developed and sold as a capital commodity rather than a residence. Its combination with the principles of Manhattanism has generated a barrage of supertall residential tower projects, especially along 57th street in midtown Manhattan. The growing trend of asset urbanism is already inflating an over-saturated and expensive New York residential market, making Manhattan an increasingly inaccessible market for the average New Yorker to live in.
Fig. 18 Two recent examples of asset urbanism. From left to right, 111 57th street by SHop Architects and 432 Park Avenue by Rafael Vinoly Architects.
Fig. 17 From left to right, the extrusion of the city grid, the vertical schism, the lobotomy.
21
automatic architecture: cities under a single roof One building type that seems to be a reoccuring theme in Manhattan is the proclaimed “city under a single roof”. Rockefeller Center took on this aspiration and even today we see developments like Hudson Yards aspiring to this architectural urbanism. These projects seem as though they would be an ideal model for us to study in our attempt to generate the urban effect using architectural techniques and to produce an urban autonomy with this new urban model. However, these projects are more akin to existing models of automatic architecture and suffer from some of the same zoning and program issues that the capitalistic ecumenopoly model does. To examine this typology we will analyze another development that claims to be a “city under a single roof”. Time Warner Center was imagined as an architectural urbanism. In
Fig. 20 A perfect example of the “The Vertical Schism “, a diverse program exists within the building, however, there is little to no interaction between them.
fact, SOM describes the project as “one of New York’s most notable mixed-use developments” . . . “it exemplifies the concept of a “city within a building”. One will find, however, that the building is an exemplification of all of the tenants of automatic architecture. Its overall massing is essentially an extrusion of the city grid, and the
cuts through the massing only serve to further address the street grid. Additionally, even though we find that there is a diverse list of programs included within the development their inter-relationship could only be described as unrelated to one another. The building includes residences, offices, retail, and even a performance space. This sounds like it would make for an active urban experience, however, each program group has independent elevator access from one another, meaning that most users of any of the programs will not encounter any of the other program groups. Not to mention, that because of the cost of living in the Time Warner Center,
22
Daigrams of Autonomy Time Warner Center - Columbus Circle residential hotel office performance retail
570,200 SF 347,000 SF 1,743,000 SF 81,000 SF 658,000 SF
total:
3,400,200 SF
residential
20%
office
hotel
51%
10%
performance
retail 2%
17%
Fig. 19
it is very unlikely that any of the building’s residents would work in any of the shops,
The overall massing of the Time Warner Center is an extrusion of the city grid.
performance spaces, or offices within the building. Therefore this building could not support the live-work model. The building’s distinct programatic volumes are also conceled behid a unifying curtain wall - a perfect example of “the lobotomy”.
Fig. 21 The Time Warner Center also exemplifies “the lobotomy” with a glass curtain wall system that unifies the disparate program volumes.
23
automatic architecture: the hysteria of J.G. Ballard’s High-Rise J.G. Ballard’s 1975 novel High Rise describes a proto-arcology whose residents, stratified in vertical zones by class and wealth, segment into violent, warring factions. They commit casual acts of brutal violence and murder in order to challenge or defend their reified social positions in the high rise. The building plays an antagonistic character in the novel, representing a nascent cynicism of the capacity of architecture to fulfill our utopian desires in the post- Pruit Igoe urbanism of the 1970s. The novel can be read as a warning to the presumptions of those who hold too much faith in the heroic capacity of architecture. However, it can also be read as a criticism of the outdated urban policies that separated the residents by class within the building. The building became a physical representation of the societal inequities that go unseen in the flat urbanism of our day, but when compressed into the architectural urbanism of the “city under a single roof” they are too savage to ignore. With this new urban model, there is required a new social contract, that lacks the dehumanizing qualities of the old one.30 Fig. 22 J.G. Ballard and his novel, High Rise.
30. Ballard, J.G.. High-Rise. New York, New York: Liveright Publishing co. 1975. Print.
24
25
the map and the diagram: a methodology and a project proposal
methodology: design practices for an urban autonomy
04. combine island drawings 03. “identify islands” 01. mapping existing networks
02. isolate individual networks
01. diagrams of autonomy
02. evaluate program
overlapping islands present the strongest opportunity for autonomy zones of highest difference
06. hyperdrawing
03. define programatic relationships 04. define internal networks
priorities of adjacency and frequency of interaction based on frequency of use and shared common programs
05. generate parametric spacial model
spacial model must be able to grow or shrink to fill network cavities
The proposed design methodology consists of two parallel operations. The first, involves the mapping of existing urban networks (transportation, open spaces, zoning, property value, etc.) and from these maps determining the voids or “islands” of the virtual archipelago. These overlaid maps help determine the most eligible areas for an autonomous urban development. The second of these exercises is the development of the diagrams of autonomy. Relationships and associations are developed between the program elements to determine the internal networks of the arcology. This is developed into a parametric spacial model. When the parametric spacial model interfaces with the layered maps there can then be a productive redrawing of the existing urban networks and the internal networks of the diagrams of autonomy. This will happen within the medium described as the “hyperdrawing”. This drawing is the delineation of the permeable layer that separates the existing urbanism from the autonomous urban development - demarcating which programs of the arcology are for residents and which relate to the urbanism that surround it.
28
proposed project: the Manhattan arcology The proposed project is a densely populated, richly diverse community of individuals who make goods and provide services at a small scale. Through collaboration and shared capital and infrastructure costs these workers can find new agency in a Manhattan that has become unaffordable and unlivable for a particular socio economic strata. This community would also be home to the consensus New Yorker who prefers the diversity and heterogeneity of New York’s past to its gentrifying and singular present.
home
01.
residence
02.
work
work
1:1 ratio
home
work
home
n:1 ratio
the new domestic economy light industry coworking spaces digital fabrication and rapid prototyping design studios digital economies informal economies
1_ the fourth industrial Ongoing developments in robotics and computation have given us the revolution: capacity to digitally fabricate things which before would have required elaborate industrial processes. This allows for the small scale intermixing of residential spaces and light industrial spaces.
2_ affordable housing: The current trend of granting height variences for developers who subsidise affordable housing projects could be replaced by an incentive for developers to invest in the infrastructure for this live - work arcology. This, paired with a city government subsidy allowing the use of underutilized city land could make this arcology economically viable.
3_ the livable city: By offering affordable spaces for light industry and afforadable acompanying housing, this live-work arcology could attract start up companies and new design and manufacturing firms that would otherwise have no chance to take root in Manhattan. This allows the city to develop underitilized land, start up companies to aquire affordable urban work spaces, but also provide affordable housing whithin Manhattan rather than exporting it to other boroughs.
29
mapping existing networks: property value This map depicts the average property value by block of the Borough of Manhattan, darker regions being a higher value that lighter ones. By mapping the property values in this way, we can then separate the layers by stata (shown right). By viewing these layers separately, we can see the property value layers as an archipelago of similarly valued areas for intervention.
30
$500,000 to $1,000,000
$8,000,000 $12,000,000
$4,000,000 $8,000,000
$2,000,000 $4,000,000
$1,000,000 $2,000,000
$500,000 $1,000,000
$500,000 $1,000,000
$400,000 $850,000 $1,500,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $8,000,000 $12,000,000
31
the archipelago of commodity
$600,000
residential property value by block
$200,000
mapping existing networks: proximity to subway stations This map depicts a path from each building in Manhattan to their nearest subway station. The areas that share a nearest station could be considered to be related because of their collective resource. This also helps us determine areas of Manhattan with less access to transit, which may be more prone to an autonomous development.
32
33
mapping existing networks: urban void analysis This map is akin to the noli map in that it maps the solid -void spaces of the city. As was previously mentioned, O.M. Ungers characterizes the “urban effect� primarily through an understanding of the void spaces that allow users flexibility of use and circulation to the programed and private spaces. This map also serves to highlight possible underutilized urban areas that could be potential sites for an autonomous urban development. The densest developed areas of the city are represented as dark blue, while the areas of the least density and with the most voids are represented as light blue and white. From this map, it is evident that the most ideal potential sites for the development could be along the periphery of the island, where the density of Manhattan becomes frayed.
34
35
central park
bryant park
inwood hill park
highbridge park
fort washington park
marcus garvey park
madison square park
hudson yards
battery park
36 Riverside Park
Hudson Yards Queens Midtown Tunnel
Chelsea Park
Peter Cooper Village
Holland Tunnel Exit
Manhattan Bridge / Chinatown
mapping existing networks: all combined layers This layered map contains a synthesis of the desired neighborhood qualities for an autonomous development (property value, transportation proximity, and urban void areas). Of the many possible sites, the Queens Midtown Tunnel site is the ideal choice. The site lies within one of the reduced property value areas (described on the previous property value map). This is not specifically because the site would be more affordable, but rather that these areas of reduced property value appear to have a common attribute that limits the residential value of the surrounding blocks. In this case, the entire neighborhood borders the longtime properties of the Con Edison elictrical provider for Manhattan. Additionally, the Queens Midtown Tunnel entrance and exit has created a significant barrier in the area, limmiting its development.
37
Fig. 24 The under-utilized area surrounding the tunnel.
vacant lot
waterfront
queens midtown tunnel entrance
38
mapping existing networks: under-utilized urban areas As previously described, the site’s development has been stifled by the
Fig. 23 The selected site: the area adjacent to the Queen’s midtown tunnel.
proximity to formerly industrial heavy sites as well as the existence of the Queens Midtown Tunnel entrance and exit. Additionally the elevated Highway, Franklin D. Roosevelt drive, inhibits the neighborhoods’ view and access to the East River. All of these factors that contribute to the decreased property value and the under developed areas surrounding the tunnel entrance are relative assets in the search for a suitable site for an autonomous urban development. Under-utilized urban spaces near infrastructure could provide the perfect mix of undervalued property and the necessary adjacency to urban networks.
The development will occur over the tunnel entrance and exit, the
traffic will remain unimpeded. The sectional proximity to this highway traffic could allow for the transportation of goods and products to and from the development. There is also a small park adjacent to the tunnel entrance. This park and the amenities that it provides the surrounding neighborhood will be preserved or replaced within the development. The existence of this park next to a public infrastructure asset is also telling of the amount of publicly owned land within this under valued area, there is an opportunity to partner with the city government in an attempt to augment public assets with new forms of urbanism that let no space go to waste.
39
Bryant Park
U.N. Gardens
Robert Moses Playground
Glick Park Madison Square Park
The Water Club Gramercy Park Asser Levy Rec Center
Struyvesant Park
40
eas t
rive
r
AMC Loews Kips Bay
mapping existing networks: daily use programs After identifying the site the next step is mapping out the existing urban
Fig. 25 existing daily use networks
networks. In the design of the autonomous urban development the goal will be to maximize the internal networks by providing as many of the daily, occasional, and rare programatic needs of the users as possible. Not all the needs can be met within the arcology, however, and it is important to identify what existing networks will remain, and those that will be internalized. Shown to the left are existing links from the site to daily use programs that a resident might frequent. The obvious ommision from this map is the livework network, which is the first programatic relationship that will be internalized in the autonomous urban development. Other daily use programs include grocery stores, cloths and houseware retailers, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, parks, plazas, and areas for exercise.
residence
02.
work
03. 04.
daily use
01.
retail exercise
grocery, home goods, clothing, etc. parks, gyms, running paths
05.
public spaces
plazas, parks
06.
entertainment
theaters, bars, performence venues
41
New York Public Library
grand central station
The Morgan Museum
post office
33rd street station St Vartan Cathedral
42
eas
Tisch Hospital
t ri
ver
East River Ferry
mapping existing networks: occasional use programs The occasional-use program group, which is represented on the map to
Fig. 25 existing occasional-use networks
the left, includes cultural institutions like libraries, museums, galleries, and performance spaces. This grouping also includes regional transit such as the subway, railroad, and ferry terminals. While transit may seem like a daily use program, from the perspective of someone who has left behind the commuter lifestyle for the live-work arcology this would be an occasional to rare use program as most of their daily needs would be met within the arcology. Medical facilities, dentists, clinics, and pharmacies are also considered occasional use programs as are community facilitis such as civic spaces, city government
07. 08. 09. 10.
occasional use
services, and even the post office.
43
medical facilities
hospital, clinic, pharmacy
regional transportation
train, subway, car rental, ferry
cultural institutions
museums, performance spaces
community facilities
meeting spaces, community centers
FDNY Engine 21
ver
Tisch Hospital
eas
t ri
FDNY engine 16 tower ladder 7
44
mapping existing networks: rare use programs The rare use programs are the programs that users of the arcology would
Fig. 25 existing rare use networks
not need on a daily, weekly, or even monthly basis. These are programs like emergency services (fire, police, and ambulence), hospitals, and airports.
11. 12.
rare use
These are all programs that will likely not be internalized into the arcology but that will remain external links of the arcologies users.
45
emergency services
police, fire, rescue
global transportation
train station, airport, sea ports
diagrams of autonomy: outlining a new urban model
diagrams of autonomy: scales of autonomy As was detailed in the description of the methodology, there are two parallel exercises that are important to the design of the autonomous development. The first, which have been shown in the previous pages, are the mapping exercises. These are foccused on establishing in two parts, the urban qualities which might best foster an autonomous development, and the existing networks within that area which the autonomous development will selectively plug in to. The second and concurrent exercise is the development of the diagrams of autonomy. This phase is where the new architectural urbanism is developed in an ideal way - isolated from the qualities of the site, allowing for speculation as to the new modes and configurations of urban living. It is important that these two operations take place in parallel, allowing for a maturation of both the mapping techniques and the diagrams of autonomy before their ultimate synthesis. When the parametric spacial model developed through the diagrams of autonomy interfaces with the layered maps there can then be a productive redrawing of the existing urban networks and the internal networks of the diagrams of autonomy. This will happen within the medium described as the “hyperdrawing”. This drawing is the delineation of the permeable layer that separates the existing urbanism from the autonomous urban development - demarcating which programs of the arcology are for residents and which relate to the urbanism that surround it.
04. combine island drawings 03. “identify islands” 01. mapping existing networks
02. isolate individual networks
01. diagrams of autonomy
02. evaluate program
overlapping islands present the strongest opportunity for autonomy zones of highest difference
06. hyperdrawing
03. define programatic relationships 04. define internal networks
priorities of adjacency and frequency of interaction based on frequency of use and shared common programs
05. generate parametric spacial model
spacial model must be able to grow or shrink to fill network cavities
48
diagrams of autonomy: scales of autonomy home
residence
02.
work
03. 04.
daily use
01.
work
1:1 ratio
home
work
home
n:1 ratio
the new domestic economy
retail
light industry
grocery, home goods, clothing, etc.
exercise
coworking spaces
parks, gyms, running paths
digital fabrication and rapid prototyping
05.
public spaces
plazas, parks
design studios
06.
entertainment
theaters, bars, performence venues
digital economies
08. 09. 10. 11. 12.
rare use
07.
occasional use
informal economies
medical facilities
hospital, clinic, pharmacy
regional transportation
train, subway, car rental, ferry
cultural institutions
museums, performance spaces
community facilities
meeting spaces, community centers
emergency services
police, fire, rescue
global transportation
train station, airport, sea ports
1 - 250
500 - 1,000
4,000
20,000 +
inhabitants
inhabitants
inhabitants
inhabitants
live work units added daily programs
added occasional programs
49
hierarchical nodes
diagrams of autonomy: hardware and software Within the “homogonized” city that we have previously described, it is important to specify the mechanisms that have allowed this homoginization to occur. This will be the focus of the first intervention of the diagrams of autonomy. Though these mechanisms may be different for various incarnations of the modern industrial city, the most common and indeed ubiquitous mechanism of the homogonized city is the grid. The gridded pattern of the city describes both the infrastructure of the city (the streets, the water, electrical, sewer, public transportation, et cetera) but also the parcelization of the sellable area of the city which has the potential to be changed at a much more rapid rate in response to economic forces. A useful analogy for us to consider in regards to this relationship is the relationship between a computer’s hardware and software. The gridded infrastructure of a city can be viewed as hardware (the computers physical parts, circuits, and chips) whereas the architecture and fluctuating program of a city could be viewed as its software (the coding or programs that are loaded onto the hardware). This analogy has its limitations, but it is a valuable abstraction when attmepting to construct the “urban effect” in an architectural urbanism. The important distinction to be made is the difference between the stability of the fixed shared spaces and services that could replace the grid and the flexibility of the programmed spaces that attatch to it.
hardware
Fig. 25
software
Infrastructure as “hardware” of the city, where the parcels are software that can be loaded and reloaded.
50
Fig. 26 Three potential “softwares” occupying the same “hardware”: residential, commercial, and civic.
51
diagrams of autonomy: replacing the hardware Redefining the “hardware” of the city is the first step to describing an alternative urban model. The relationship between the existing hardware and software of the city was previously alluded to through the tenants of autonomic architecture, as described by Rem Koolhaas. The first axiom of automatic architecture is the extrusion of the city grid. This economically driven assumption is that the first design priority on every site in Manhattan is to maximise the sellable land on the given site. And while density of program and population is an essential quality of the urban effect, simple extrusion of the architecture serves to neutralize the diversity of program within the high rise rather than internalize the urban effect. This neutralization was described in the second axiom of automatic architecture - the vertical schism. This was the notion that programs defined within the highrise are indifferent to one another as they are all separated by floors - they do not have the same relationship as if they were sat next to one another on the street. This relationship can be renegotiated by allowing the infrastructure itself (the street) to gain a third dimension without the isolation that occurs within the high rise typology. The coil (shown in figure 29) is a geometry that can increase the urban density by adding stacks of program but retain the connection to the street. If you were to imagine a long continuous road that wraps around the perimeter of a Manhattan block and increased its elevation slowly and gradually you could imagine a continuous urban street allowing pedestrians to move vertically. This “corkscrew” geometry enables density on a given site, but forces continuous adjacency of the programs that are built vertically - truly “streets in the sky”.
Fig. 29 Traditional grid “hardware/software” urban relationship. (left) and the proposed “coil” hardware, opening the third dimension (right).
Fig. 28 The first and second axioms of automatic architecture, the extrusion of the city grid (left) and the vertical schism.(right) 29
Fig. 30 Elevation of a “coil” piece. The vertical street is a “tissue” of interconnected surfaces allowing for movement in each direction.
52
Fig. 27
The aspiration to foster the “urban effect” in multiple levels by making “streets in the sky” is not a novel concept. From the nearby Tudor City project on 2nd avenue to the work of Team 10, the Smithsons, Raymond hood, et cetera, multiplying the activity of the urban surface has been a recurring urban strategy to address density and to critique the high rise typology. This way of thinking is inherently tied to the idea of the small business, the solitary residence. The notions of the homogeneous city that were described by aldo Rossi are here reverse engineered and the typologies of the factory, mass workers housing, and (pertaining to our current time and place) the idea of the large scale corporate office tower are all questioned.
(left)The 1909 theorem, the replication of”virgin” land to be developed.27
53
27. Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New ed. New York: Monacelli, 1994. Print. p. 83 29. IBID. p. 100
manhattan arcology: the applied diagrams of autonomy and the urban artifact
manhattan arcology: the application of the diagrams of autonomy Having outlined the new urban model of the continuous street, the coil, we can now revisit the site. The intention for the deployment of these coils on the site is to first address the existing urban infrastructure. The tunnel and the existing streets would remain operational and untouched, while a new layers of urban activity, work, and residences would exist above the existing urban fabric. In this way, the coils take on the shape and proportions of the blocks but they deform as needed to maximise the internal area of the coils. Additionally, certain layers of the coils bridge to one another to allow pedestrians to move across the layers of the coil above the ground plane - unifying the entire structure. In addition, each of the coils hosts certain amenities that belong to either the residents of the arcology or the general public depending on its ease of access, its proximity to the ground plane, and its function. The primary structure and the coils themselves can be viewed as public infrastructure (like the street), to be inhabited by individual owners. One possible realization of this project is through a partnership between the city and private developers. As was previously mentioned, current New York City code allows for developers to fund affordable housing or pay for its’ subsidy in other boroughs in exchange for height variances in the development of luxury central park towers. Rather than allowing this structural inequality, the city could allow the money for the developer’s variance to be used in support of the infrastructure of the arcology. This would create a built-in mechanism to combat inequality through zoning and legal variances. The city benefits by fulfilling its mandate to provide affordable housing, and by finding a productive use for certain underutilized urban areas.
Fig. 31 Site Plan. Showing the deployment of the coil typology on the site.
Fig. 32 The combined layer map, showing the existing conditions of the site
56
convention center
community gardens
public park
community center
public playground
amphitheater gallery and exhibition space
57
community gardens
A
B
C
D
1
2 3
4
manhattan arcology: the application of the diagrams of autonomy B.O. ceiling structure a b
a
B.O. ceiling structure
The residences themselves would be prefabricated and moved to the site as A needed. Each residence consists of two parts. The front part of the residence, c d which attaches to the coil and hangs from the structure, contains the kitchen T.O. floor structure and bathroom as. the water, sewer, and electrical supply comes from the coil. This part of the residence is designed to be as economical as possible. Made of standardized parts, this part of the residence would be built using the 2 3 1 A B C D same economizing industrial techniques as recreational vehicles and mobile Elevation Section homes. The back half of the residence, however, could vary based on the owner’s needs. It could be as simple as a small sitting area and sleep space, like an inexpensive studio apartment, or it could hold three bedrooms and a living space in two levels. This design maximizes the capacity of the unit to hold
Fig. b34 Site Plan. Showing the deployment of c the coil typology on the site. d T.O. floor structure
4
1
B.O. ceiling structure
coated aluminium panel mineral wool insulation steel structure 5/8� interior sheathing
a
b
Fig. 33 The combined layer map, showing the existing conditions of the site
interior finishes per user furring strips
upper
A_Section Detail
upper
1
Three Bedroom Unit_ 1600 SF
Two Bedroom Unit_ 1200 SF
One Bedroom Unit_ 500 SF
58
Studio Unit_ 375 SF
A
B
C
D
1
2 3
4
B.O. ceiling structure a b
a b
B.O. ceiling structure
A
c
c d
d T.O. floor structure
A
B
C
T.O. floor structure
1
D
Elevation
2 3
4
Section 1
B.O. ceiling structure
coated aluminium panel mineral wool insulation steel structure 5/8� interior sheathing
a
b
interior finishes per user furring strips
upper
A_Section Detail
upper
1
various functions and scales of inhabitation, but also to establish a minimum quality of life that could be very affordable. The imagined residents of the arcology are a diverse range of individuals who have a multitude of lifestyles and occupations from varied socioeconomic and ethnic origins. The intention is to establish a community of individuals that are not tenants of affordable housing, but rather who enjoy diverse and richly varied urban populations that are becoming ever more rare in Manhattan. Additionally, the aspiration is to foster a community of those who want to make - creative entrepreneurs who would otherwise be unable to afford to live and work in Manhattan.
Three Bedroom Unit_ 1600 SF
Two Bedroom Unit_59 1200 SF
One Bedroom Unit_ 500 SF
Studio Unit_ 375 SF
manhattan arcology: the application of the diagrams of autonomy There would be a large range of varied scales and types of work spaces to accommodate many different trades and practices. There would also be, however, a series of shared work amenities that small businesses would normally not be able to afford but which is possible through group ownership. For instance, each work space would have access to supply elevators that would bring goods and materials in from the below ground truck docks, but that could also take their materials and finished products to an underground automated storage facility to await distribution or simply as an overflow of storage space. This underground storage facility would utilize automated sorting drones, much like Amazon’s sorting facility. This amenity would be shared by all the work spaces in the acology, allowing materials and goods
Manufacturing_ manufacturing
shared work spaces loading docks
shared automated storage facility
Retail_ to easily move within the facility and out to distributors. The cost being shared by all the residents, this would be an infrastructure that no single entrepreneur could afford. An additional amenity provided to the workers would be a shared workshop space in the center of each coil. As was previously mentioned, new manufacturing technologies enable the arcology to house small manufacturing in a way that was previously impossible. Robotic manufacturing processes, such as 3D printing, cnc milling and cutting, as well as a host of other previously labor intensive processes allow a great deal of manufacturing to occurIndustry_ with Digital less manpower. A shared facility that the residents could use as needed sharing the maintenance and capital costs while reducing machine downtime - would allow small businesses to have the manufacturing power that only large factories used to posses. 60 Housing Units_ retail space
shared automated storage facility
Studio Unit_ 1600 SF
One Bedroom Unit_
Two Bedroom Unit_
Three Bedroom Unit_
1600 SF
1600 SF
1600 SF
Fig. 36 Exploded axonometric showing all the internal working networks.
Manufacturing_
manufa
manufacturing
shared spaces
loading docks
shared automated storage facility
Retail_
retail retail space
shared automated storage facility
Fig. 35 The network of manufacturing spaces within the arcology, each space has vertical access to the truck docks and the automated storage facility - both considered public infrastructures.
digital industry Digital Industry_
Housing Units_
Studio Unit_ 1600 SF
housing
One Bedroom Unit_
Two Bedroom Unit_
1600 SF
1600 SF
water input electrical input sewage / grey water output
Truck Loading Dock_ truck docks
Automated Storage Facility_ automated storage
61
manhattan arcology: the application of the diagrams of autonomy The plan shown below illustrates the relationship of the work spaces to the shared manufacturing workshops in the center. While each of the work spaces are designed and programmed for their specific functions (i.e. restaurant, textile design shop, custom metal fabrication, etc.) the shared work space is much more universal to allow all the inhabitants to temporarily occupy the space and utilize the machinery. As needed, bays would be assigned and reassigned to certain functions, allowing a continuous exchange of program but also allowing businesses to share the cost of this capital and to grow and reduce as needed. Another added benefit of this shared resources is the cross-pollination of ideas and business methods. Ther random intermixing of the otherwise separate programs within this shared work space may produce new and unseen ways of making things and doing business.
Fig. 37 Residence level plan. Showing the residences and the ir relationship to the park piece.
62
Fig. 38
The shared work space shown in the plan to the right also has an accessible rooftop garden space, allowing the residence to enjoy open green space in the middle of the coil. Every residence faces this green space allowing for ample light, fresh air, and views of the gardens below. Each coil has a different shared work amenity and public amenity in the center, amphitheaters, galleries, playgrounds, these are the civic and public spaces that make urban life colorful, diverse, and rich. These “urban parts”, as the shared amenities are called, pair infrastructural and essential work needs with public amenities and spaces of leisure. This is one of the most important discoveries of the project; that the “urban effect”, that has been a reoccurring theme and desire of the project, could be generated through these architectural parts which take on many functions both prosaic and practical as well as leisure focused. The blending of programmatic functions is one of the most essential urban qualities,
Work level plan. Showing the individual work spaces, as well as the shared manufacturing space.
63
64
it is a phenomenon which arises out of a scarcity of space and an economic imperative, but which becomes the cities most exotic and emergent quality. If, in the beginning of the project, we set out to combat the homogeneity of the urban environment then the conclusion that a series of heterogeneous architectural parts can produce a rich and varied urbanism seems appropriate. It is in the negotiation of these parts and their shared function that an equivalent to a “zoning” can be developed. Rather than defining through law that certain planimetric areas of a city can take on certain activities or uses, the alternative is here proposed that architecture could take on a certain physical zoning, where the spaces of the city are programmed by their form to allow for certain functions and uses. A parcel cannot be leveled and converted - preventing the instant gentrification and reprogramming of the city that we see occurring with the manipulation of zoning and variance laws today.
Fig. 39 Typical coil 3D section. Showing the heterogeneity and variety of use throughout the section. And the “urban object” that takes its form from the many functions that it carries.
Fig. 40 3D section model. Showing a series of work spaces, the shared manufacturing space, and the tunnel entrance beneath.
65
Fig. 41 3D section model version 1. In this scheme, the ramps connecting the live spaces and the work spaces are parallel.
Fig. 42, 43 Figure 42 (bottom left) shows a close up of the parallel ramp condition. Figure 43 (bottom right) shows the residences and their relationship to the public park piece that sits below.
66
Fig. 44 3D section model version 2. In this scheme, the live ramps and the work ramps rise at opposing slopes so that the occasional intersections can provide a connection between the two sets of ramps.
Fig. 45, 46 Figure 45 (bottom left) shows a moment of intersection between the live and work ramps. Here there is an opportunity for stepped seating, planters, and a public space with a view to below. Figure 46 (bottom right) shows the interconnected ramps from the exterior.
67
the urban artifact: the urban object and the shared functions of the architectural city Each of the coils contains a different set of shared amenities and infrastructures depending on the programs within the coil, their relationship to the ground plane and the relationship to the general public. For instance, the coils that are primarily concerned with manufacturing and design contain shared production spaces and green spaces in the center of the coil. On the other hand, the coils that have a higher amount of retail and food service have an outdoor amphitheater and plaza space because there is a higher degree of interaction with the general public (shoppers, restaurant goers, etc.). However, the goal within each of the coils is to produce a community through a common relationship to these common amenities and infrastructures.
Fig. 47 Site section showing the various functions of the urban parts and the diversity of the shared amenities and infrastructures.
manhattan arcology: the vertical street The importance of the heterogeneity and diversity of use within the arcology has already been emphasized but another important quality of the “urban effect” is the street life. The public pedestrian space between programs is a defining quality of many cities. The criticism of the homogeneous city is not a criticism of the street. The aspiration within the arcology has always been an intensification of this quality - the natural intermixing and varied use of the stree. In these two images, the desire was to depict how the qualities of the Manhattan street could also inhabit the coils, but because of their unique geometry, they could extend vertically, on many levels - emphasizing the concept of the “vertical street”.
Fig. 49 One of the public areas within the network of “vertical streets”
Fig. 48 An outdoor market inbetween two of the coils.
70
71
72
manhattan arcology: a conclusion The utopian vision of Paolo Soleri, to create extremely dense. self-sustaining, self-contained urbanisms was never fully realized. His work on Arcosanti is forever in process, the mass exodus of the city halted and people didn’t flock to Soleri’s experiment in the way that he had hoped. More broadly, the idealistic and heavy handed proposals of all the architects and urbanists that proposed megastructures were found to be not only impractical, but counter to much of our understanding of how cities work. The temptation for architects to scale up their solutions in response to their new understanding of our global crisis was to great to resist. Rather than working at the effective scale of the user - the human, designers began to address the scale of the city. Redesigning whole populations with a resolution that at best could be considered diagrammatic. If this project were to be misunderstood it could be condemned for all the same reasons. It could be viewed as a regurgitation of an unresolved desire for the architect to expand their scope beyond their means and to make a flailing effort at creating an urban panacea. This however was not the author’s intent. If there are a few lessons to be gleaned from this project they are to be emphasized one last time in conclusion. The primary inspiration for this project has not been to expand the scope of the architect to the scale of the city but rather to condense the qualities of the city to the scale of architecture. The desire to produce the “urban effect” within architecture is not a new one within our profession but it is one which this thesis has sought to revisit. Secondly, the application of the megastructure within this project ultimately took a back seat to the concept of the urban object - the architectural form that takes on many functions and forces a hybridity in its uses. This was also linked with the idea that form could act in the place of zoning - that architecture itself could inscribe the footprint of urban activities - the user then occupying and re-negotiating the architecture could imbue it with life and vitality (“the urban effect”). Finally, the greatest flaw of our current urban model is not in the particulars of its form, it is in the particulars of its governance. The misuse of zoning and land use code to stratify cities based on wealth and socio economic status is not only detrimental to those who are the victims of its inequity but also to the character and quality of the city itself. We all lose the opportunity to live a rich and diverse lifestyle when, as is increasingly the case around the world, we attempt to commodify our urban areas and when we prioritize its economic capacity over its’ capacity to foster life.
Fig. 49 The “thick urban tissue” of the arcology, the urban effect at many levels.
73
Bibliography Aureli, Pier Vittorio
The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2011. Print.
Aureli, Pier Vittorio
The Project of Autonomy. New York, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008. Print.
Ballard, J.G. Castoriadis, Cornelius Bratton, Benjamin Easterling, Keller
High-Rise. New York, New York: Liveright Publishing co. 1975. Print. Philosophy, Politics, Autonomy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. Print. “The Stack.” Log 35 (2015): 129-59. Print. Enduring Innocence. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 2005 . Print.
Fuller, R. Buckminster, and Jaime Snyder
Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. New ed. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller, 2008. Print.
Gargiani, Roberto
Rem Koolhaas, OMA: The Construction of Merveilles. Lausanne: EPFL ;, 2008. Print.
Koolhaas, Rem
Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New ed. New York: Monacelli, 1994. Print.
Mieville, China
The City and The City. New York, New York: Random House inc. 2010. Print.
Rogers, Richard George, and Philip Gumuchdjian Rossi, Aldo Soleri, Paolo Soleri, Paolo, and Lissa McCullough Soleri, Paolo
Cities for a Small Planet. Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1998. Print.
The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1982. Print. Arcology, the City in the Image of Man. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1969. Print. Conversations with Paolo Soleri. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2012. Print.
The Sketchbooks of Paolo Soleri. Cambridge, Mass.: [MIT], 1971. Print.
74
Soleri, Paolo
The Omega Seed: An Eschatological Hypothesis. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor/ Doubleday, 1981. Print.
Soleri, Paolo, and John Strohmeier
The Urban Ideal: Conversations with Paolo Soleri. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Hills :, 2001. Print.
Spyropoulos, Theodore
Adaptive Ecologies: Correlated Systems of Living. London: Architectural Association, 2013. Print.
Wall, Donald
75
Visionary Cities: The Arcology of Paolo Soleri. New York: Praeger, 1971. Print.