ECOLOGICAL
the contemporary high rise: an
reevaluation
© 2014 Camden Wade ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
“ Architecture is a hazardous mixture of omnipotence and impotence. Ostensibly involved in
Shaping the
world, for their thoughts to be mobilized architects depend on the
Provacations
of others...Architecture is by definition a
Chaotic Adventure .�
- Rem Koolhaas
Thesis
By Camden Wade
5th Year Undergraduate Department of Architecture Newschool of Architecture & Design 2013/2014 Academic Year
A thesis presented to the undergraduate faculty of the Newschool of Architecture & Design In partial fullfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Architecture
This thesis is an investigation of a current issue within the field of architecture and urban planning that I feel is relevant to the profession. All speculations within this document are based on ontological assumptions with research backing claims in order to ensure that the accuracy and authenticity of this investigation is as high as possible. Any concerns or issues with these speculations are encouraged in order to better my research and ultimately my design solution.
Abstract Dense urban environments are an experience in this life that are unlike any other. The typically constant vibrancy combined with the massive collection of buildings creates a unique and distinct urban character for each and every city. The ways in which cities are designed results in an urban experience that varies greatly from one to another due to the native characteristics each possesses. Although each city is unique in its own right, one key component remains the same; the public realm and the private developments have always been approached as separate entities. Why has this urban demarcation of public versus private resulted in an architectural approach that includes primarily either one or the other? Why has the public realm been doomed to the streets segregated from the buildings that make up the city in which they call home? High rise buildings are infamous for this contextual design flaw and this thesis explores how both realms can coexist through “collective design.�
Approval A thesis presented to the undergraduate faculty of the Newschool of Architecture & Design
Approved By: ____________________________________________________________________ Undergraduate Chair: Leonard Zegarski Date
____________________________________________________________________ Studio Instructor: Luisa Schultz Date
____________________________________________________________________ Peer Reviewer: Leigh Pfeiffer Date
“ It’s lonely at the top if you Forget all the People you met along the way and fail to acknowledge their Contributions to your success.
”
- Harvey Mackay
Acknowledge I would not have produced this thesis without the dedication, love, and support that people have showed me throughout the years.
I would like to give a thank you to the countless teachers, mentors, and counselors that have helped me along the way throughout my academic career. Without all of your help I would not be the person I am today. Shout outs to my classmates, friends, and most importantly parents Pam, Jay, and Cathy and godfather Eric for your selfless support because I would not be where I am today without you all being there for me.
Modernism No More Precedents Given Precedence What is a Hybrid? How Do They Operate?
The Hunt:Research
Thesis Standpoint High Rises and the City Why No Adaptation? Collective Design a Must
The Angle:Thesis
Introduction The Urban Migration Evolution of Downtowns History of Skyscrapers Architects & the High Rise
Foreplay
44 46 64 66
30 36 38 40
16 18 22 24 26
Where’s 12 28 ? 42
Form Generation The Hybrid Components Architectural Illustrations Back Matter
The Urban Infiltration
Humanizing the High Rise Vernacular Topologies The Urban Stratification The Urban Unification Conceptual Process
142 156 188 222
110 112 116 118 124
What’s the Big Idea?
80 82 86 92 94 100
108
Fragmented Development Cars Reign Supreme Lack of Zoning Regulation Houston and Suburbia Downtown Analysis Tunnel Loop Analysis
76
Houston, We Have a Problem
010 011
140
FOREPLAY
Conceptual Sketch
014 015
Current Mixed-Use
Proposed Hybrid
INTROVERTED
Program Relationships
Intro
EXTROVERTED
Most Mixed-Use Projects Consist of a Primary and Secondary Program Where Both Operate as Separate, Introverted Entities
Program Relationships
With Numerous Public/Private Program Uses Existing in Close Proximity, Programs Become More Permeable and Interact With Each Other
Capitalist Based
SELF
Architectural Approach High Rise Architecture is Famous for its Autonomous, Individual Approach to Their Design as If They Are the Only Buliding in the City
Architects and Developers Design Their High Rises as Individuals, But They Are a Part of a Much Larger Urban Context Which Needs to Be Addressed Just as Importantly as the Building Itself
Thesis Problem
What is a For almost half of a century, American society has turned its back on the city in search of our constitutional Building? rights for our pursuit of happiness. Not only did this “American Dream” lead us to the suburbs where our personal lives would exist separated far from our business lives, but it also led our country into pursuing an urban ideology that we never considered would be one that came with an expiration date. Fast forward decades later and our nation’s citizens are now returning back into its
HYBRID
urban cores. According to James Goettsch (2012), the term urbanism nowadays is synonymous with the high rise and since our cities are growing exponentially, the future of architecture lies with this building typology. With the birth of the modernist architectural movement, the high rise was able to reach unprecedented new heights which allowed for a newfound level of density amongst our cities. Although these modern high rises
016 017
Aquo quat unturit aces inullacerro te perupta speditaerore prae nihillaces acerspiet asimillabor molupid ebiscienis voluptatium facium esequiam dolecuste imaximi nitatem intiore hentium a et is acimoluptaes es cusae. Berrovid et unt ratia conetur iaspicae simus, et fugit, sum as ex est, corernam quae aut earum repero ventis posaeri cor mos sanis doluptatis earum quasita tionsecabo. Nam ullorer orerferis dolo ditem restrum rerum, ide sit atur? Nate sum eost, ulpa que inulpa volupiet volorio. Poribus ilitend eliquiant lamenihil ipid eum hit, is delis as alignie nihicia turiber oribus, voluptaquid mo quaes inci nonseque consedigenis dolo to molendae perestectio. Obitiae rerum et lab ipiscium fuga. Lum re pe quos doluptas sin cum facipsam faccati con ratur, nostem hicid quibus re suntus ex eicium imagnimus comnistrunt eaquodi ut qui dem dus, imus seceptae venia volut estorem quid ma doluptate de non re porum fuga. Nem aut eum expelia quia aut est quodi oditiis dolupiet verit, am, nobist ad ute nonsequam re re volumquatur? Fugitas voluptatati utem ipsam quossequiae re
TransAmerica Building, San Francisco: Taken by Author
clad in glass and steel exist in abundance in our cities, they still pose a problem as to how they relate to the contextual urbanity that surrounds them (Bharne, 2011). Architecture is greatly in tune with our capitalist economy and much of the problems we face within this typology today is a direct result of this correlation between our privately funded projects interacting with the public realm in which they are a part of and need to integrate into. With millions of square feet being added to a city’s urban environment with each constructed building, these projects contribute large amounts of program to a city with many of them not including functions in which the public can interact with. It is this public interaction with architecture that seems to be one of the key missing links wihin our downtown environments leaving the citizens banished out to the streets with the vehicles. This large gap between the public realm and privately funded architecture is one that greatly impacts our urban realms across the nation and a re-approach to this design issue is fundamental to ensure and nuture the growth of our nation’s urban environments. As a result, this thesis proposes to investigate how these massive structures can be reevaluated to better foster a vibrant and contemporary urban lifestyle for the citizens of the cities in which they represent while also representing the city in which they reside in a relevant manner.
Current
POPULATION
rd
Most Populated Country in the World
1 Birth Every
Seconds 1 Death Every
Seconds 1 International Migrant Every
Seconds Net Gain 1 Person Every
Seconds
Population
DENSITY
#3 Chicago urban core (pop: 9,504,753)
Seattle
of the US Population Lives in a Metropolitan Area
#1 New York City urban core (pop: 19,015,900) #4 Philadelphia urban core (pop: 6,086,538)
Cleveland
Salt Lake City
Denver
Phoenix
#2 Los Angeles urban core (pop: 12,923,500)
Unlike many of the other developing nations around the globe, the United States continues to expand in population. Since the majority of our country is vast prarie lands with dramatically fluctuating temperatures and more extreme living conditions, the density of our large cities continue to grow due to the more desireable location in which they are in where existing infrastructure allows for the ease to do so.
Miami Houston #5 Dallas-Fort Worth urban core (pop: 5,819,500)
Tampa
0
1 10 100 1k 10k 100k
Estimated
POPULATION
018 019
in 2050
121 38%
?
Growth in Population and Public Infrastructural Needs
5 438,000,000 82% Estimated
DENSITY Seattle
in 2050
80%
Salt Lake City
Million More Projected American Citizens
1 Out of Every
People Will Be an Immigrant
+ 4 Million
#3 Chicago urban core (pop: 13,140,000)
of the US Population Continues to Live in a Metropolitan Area
of the Nation’s Growth Will be From Immigrants and Their US Born Children
+ 7 Million
+ 2.7 Million
#1 New York City urban core (pop: 26,280,000)
#4 Philadelphia urban core (pop: 8,760,000)
Cleveland
Denver
Phoenix
#2 Los Angeles urban core (pop: 17,520,000)
+ 4.5 Million This estimation in which our national population increases by thirty eight percent by 2050 is based on analyzed data trends. It also shows what would happen to our nation’s cities if eighty percent of our society continues to live in urban cores as they are predicted to do so. As a result, the needs of our currently strained cities are only predicted to get worse in the upcoming years with issues requiring action.
Miami Houston #5 Dallas-Fort Worth urban core (pop: 7,884,000)
Tampa
+ 2 Million
0
1 10 100 1k 10k 100k
Population Per Square Mile
AN CONDITION URBAN CONDITION
URBAN CONDITION
PRIVATE
Current
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
Current
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
The Current Urban Philosophy Most Cities Adhere to by New Urbanists Focuses PrimarilyUrban on the The Current Philosophy Public’s Most Cities Adhere to by New Urbanists Focuses Primarily on the Public’s
STREETSCAPE STREETSCAPE Experience
The Current Urban Philosophy Most Cities Adhere to by New Experience Urbanists Focuses Primarily on the Public’s
PRIVATE
PUBLIC PUBLIC PRIVATE
PRIVATE
STREETSCAPE PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
The current relationship between the urban public realm and the private architectural occurs Therealm Current Urban Philosophy primarily on the ground level Adhere by Most Cities to by New clearly separatingUrbanists both from each Primarily on the Focuses other. This can only function properly Public’s for so long before an increase in population and lifestyle force our cities to address this by beginning Experience to think about a holistic approach where both scales are considered within a design.
PUBLI
GROUND LEVEL GROUND LEVEL
of Public Programs and Ac
In 2050, Will the Be Enough for the Public?
020 021
of Public Programs and Activities of Land to Use to Do So
In 2050, Will the
GROUND LEVEL
Be Enough for the Public?
PRIVATE
of Land to Use to Do So
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
Be Enough for the Public?
PUBLIC
of Public Programs and A
PRIVATE
PUBLI PUBLIC
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
in Order to Enhance Both Realms Through an Integrated Approach
PRIVATE ATE
Contemporary Design Needs to Bridge this Architectural and UrbanDesign Needs to Contemporary Bridge this Architectural and Urban
DISCONNECT DISCONNECT
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
DISCONNECT
of Land to Use to Do So
PRIVATE
PRIVATE ATE
of Public Programs and Activities of Public Programs and Activities Contemporary Design Needs to Bridge this Architectural and Urban of Land to Use to Do So of Land to Use to Do So of Public Programs and Activities
PRIVATE
of Land to Use to Do So
PUBLI
in Order to Enhance Both Realms Through an Integrated Approach in Order to Enhance Both Realms Contemporary Design Needs to Through an Integrated Approach
PUBLIC
Bridge this Architectural and Urban
Since the beginning of America, our nation’s citizens lived and worked in the urban environments that we constructed. The main reason as to why this has been the case for centuries is because America’s downtowns have been the central hub for our needs. These lifestyle necessities range from the economical and commerce, all the way down to the entertainment and arts. However, American society truly embraced the urban lifestyle after the industrial revolution when new construction technologies allowed for the modern high rise to be born (Forbes, 2011). The density that came hand in hand with these downtowns caused Americans to be fascinated by this new urban lifestyle creating an environment that was greatly sought after and embraced by society. A century after life blossomed in the cities, this American urbanity began to decline after World War II. When the US military’s draft uprooted most American families by sending their young men and husbands to war, the need for housing in the preceding years dropped significantly due to
Downtown Chicago circa 1900
Downtown
the increased amount of soldiers fighting abroad. When these veterans arrived back home after duty, a tremendous need for new and quick housing led to the growth of suburbs where land was cheap and plentiful rather than the cities where housing would have taken longer to construct newer, larger buildings (Forbes, 2011). For decades, American families lived peacefully out in the suburban outskirts in blissful ignorance of
how they were structuring their lives around an unsustainable lifestyle. It was not until after this realization that Americans began to comprehend that it was our responsibility to preserve our planet for future generations to enjoy. Steps needed to be taken in order for our society to build itself upon a sustainable lifestyle and this proved attainable by our populations once again moving back into the urban environments where existing infrastructure and walkability will function more realistically to reduce our dependence on vehicles and ultimately fossil fuels (Forbes, 2011). According to the United Nations, it is predicted that over 60 percent of the world will live in urban environments by 2030 (United Nations, 2002). It is through this urbanization where cities are beginning to adapt new business models where a large increase in their capacity for population densification is a much needed approach in order to house a dramatic increase for
the needs of these people. Now since cities only have so much capacity for infrastructure and land use horizontally, the only viable solution to address this urban condition is for our cities to increase the demand for building vertically (Ali et al., 2008). Since this shift is taking place across the globe, a new breed of urban issues and design considerations are required for our downtowns’ redevelopments in order to build our projects upon a foundation that will allow for long term urban prosperity. As a result, when we have dense congregations of people living and working in close proximity of each other, high rises have, “both a physical and social impact on their urban environments, [and] their location and design must assure that the impact not be negative” (Ali et al., 2008). Now before I explore the problems that high rises are experiencing in our current urban environments, a brief explanation of the history of the skyscraper is essential because knowledge of where they’ve been in the past is fundamental before I can propose where it needs to be in the future.
Downtown Chicago, 1907
022 023
the Flatiron Building, 1903
Although this architectural approach is one that is nothing new to cities across the world with high rises and skyscrapers having existed in our society for almost a century, a brief historical recap of this typology will provide insight into the ways in which design philosophies have been successful and flawed over the years. Chicago, Illinois was ground zero for vibrant urban life back in the 1830s with increasing population creating a desperate need for urban density. Due to the fact that it was the first structure of its kind to use steel in the frame, the Home Insurance Building
Skyscraper the Home Insurance Building, 1885
Thesis
built in 1885 standing only ten stories tall became known as the first “skyscraper� of its kind (Schleier, 1986). During this time, New York City was also becoming one the United States’ most prominent metropolises with construction barely keeping up with demand. Built in 1903, the Flatiron Building was revolutionary due to its tapering building footprint to roughly six feet, six inches in length. This twenty three story tall feat in engineering proved
the Seagram Building, 1958
the Downtown Athletic Club, 1930
024 025
the first modern zoning restrictions on skyscrapers in Manhattan (White, 2010). It was this project that caused cities to begin to realize architecture can affect the urban environment for its citizens. The Athletic Club(1930) was one of the pioneers in the hybrid building typology when it was first opened to the public and housed numerous programmatic functions from sports areas, a bowling alley, mini golf course, a gym, restaurants, and a hotel. This project led by example that a hybrid of functions within a single building could be a vibrant “city within a city� type project (Fernandez et al., 2011). Completed in 1958, the Seagram Building in New York City was the first modernist skyscraper designed by Mies van der Rohe. This international style was influential with its use of steel, glass, and reinforced concrete where ornamentation was stripped away to streamline the functionality of a design and represents many of the modernist skyscrapers today (Powell, 1999). With this it allowed for the exterior of a buiding to not bear structural loads which allowed for floor to ceililng glazing on the exterior.
the Equitable Building, 1915
that engineering technologies allowed for more flexibility of form than originally thought (Terranova, 2003). The Equitable Building also located in New York City was built in 1915 and at the time, it was the largest office building in the world with 1.2 million square feet of space. Due to the fact that this thirty eight story project had no height setbacks and sunlight was being restricted from the streets, it was the project that caused
The fact that our cities consist of hundreds or even thousands of these high rises would lead us to the assumption that architects have been at the forefront of designing these massive structures and shaping our cities. Unfortunately reality paints the picture that it is actually quite the opposite. Now many architectural theorists and urbanists have opinions as to why this is the case with these projects, but I speculate that the issue lies within the identity that this typology is considered by society and its designers. According to the authors of the Urban Handbook, the problem lies within how our society views these projects because they are currently seen as a potential threat to the city because they endanger the diversity of both the architectural and social realms of a city rather than a fundamental necessity to urban density (Firley and Gumble, 2011). As a result of these negative connotations associated with this typology, architects and designers in the past fifteen years have become skeptical of this large scale thinking and have focused their efforts on
Chinese Development
Architects
more manageable, minute tasks. Projects that take only a few years to design and construct tend to be more of interest to our community rather than high rises that take sometimes decades to see a design manifestation. Since this is the case, it has resulted in our cities consisting of poorly designed high rises that lack visionary ideologies beyond just the individual project itself. Winy Maas speculates the reason is because the innovative architects
Linked Hybrid, Steven Holl Architects
the Hearst Tower, Foster & Partners
001 027 026 002
sooner that we come to this realization the better. These global observations should cause us to come to our senses and return back to this big project and big idea thinking. Architects need to stand tall and fight back for this new responsibility because whether we like it or not, it is our obligation to society to address this urban disconnection that occurs from our buildings. If this change in thinking within our design community does not take place sometime soon, the future of our cities could be jeopardized due to the fact that this innovative and holistic thinking from the large to the small scale is not incorporated into these projects. It is frightening to think about how grim the future of our urban environments could be if this continues because, “Without a larger directive, there can be no intelligent city design, there can be no good urbanism� (Maas, 2009). The time is now for us to act in order to ensure that the future of our cities, our buildings, and most importantly our citizens are ones that are beneficial to our lives and future generations rather than detrimental.
Chinese Community
have left these large scale projects to do their own smaller feats leaving the buildings that have the most impact on a city in the hands of the inexperienced (Maas, 2009). The fault of this issue lies within our design community and the fact that the problem stems from the mindset of this generation’s designers. This typology and the large scaled projects that come with the density are only going to become more common in our society and the
THE ANGLE :THESIS
030 031
Thesis Position Capitalism is one of the fundamental principles on which our nation’s economic system has been grounded upon since its genesis. Not only has this system resulted in our country obtaining some of the highest wealth across the globe due to the possibilities for extreme financial success within our free market, but it has also been the primary component as to why our country is in its current condition of urban disarray. With developments in our cities being entirely funded by private corporations or investors, it results in an urban system in which our city blocks exist entirely for the purpose of those individuals’ or corporations’ maximizing their return on profit. Not only does this type of economic approach to architecture provide an autonomous approach to an entity that belongs to a much larger collective, but it also causes this typology to be much more self-involved in the design process. In turn, this leads to a disconnect between the urban(public) and architectural(private) realms.
032 033
Topic This thesis is exploring how the building typology of high rises has interacted with the cities in which they belong to in order to gain a better understanding of the relationships that the two have generated between each other. With the architecture itself being comprised mainly of a private developer or group of developers whose main concern is maximizing their own profit, these projects end up being very individually minded in the way that their own project’s needs and requirements take precedence over the surrounding city’s wants and needs. This thesis proposes to address this relationship where the current norm of rather having to design one or the other(public/urban or private/ architectural) is questioned to produce a project in which both realms are mutally benefitted by an architectural response that is comprised of both.
034 035
Thesis This thesis is an ecological re-evaluation of the modern high rise to address the disconnect that exists between the urban(public)/architectural(private) realms.
Shanghai Downtown Core
After this lineage of skyscrapers and varying degrees of architectural design and construction that they embodied, in the 1980s new discussions began to occur surrounding the designs of skyscrapers. Urban planners began to explore and analyze the conditions of cities in search of the possible reasons as to why the majority of its citizens abandoned them for the suburbs. It was only after this quest for the culprit that they discovered the answer lied within these high rises. A conclusion that there, “has been an evident neglect of the human factors in urban design at the expense of
the City
Beijing Cityscape
Thesis
livability and quality of life” caused designers to reevaluate how these projects functioned within a city (Ali et al., 2008). The thought as to why these projects were so isolated from their surrounding urban environment caused designers to challenge this typology and question why this was the case. Robert Powell discusses this change in thinking beautifully when he states, “Since height was no longer considered to be a problem, designers focused more
036 037
Aquo quat unturit aces inullacerro te perupta speditaerore prae nihillaces acerspiet asimillabor molupid ebiscienis voluptatium facium esequiam dolecuste imaximi nitatem intiore hentium a et is acimoluptaes es cusae. Berrovid et unt ratia conetur iaspicae simus, et fugit, sum as ex est, corernam quae aut earum repero ventis posaeri cor mos sanis doluptatis earum quasita tionsecabo. Nam ullorer orerferis dolo ditem restrum rerum, ide sit atur? Nate sum eost, ulpa que inulpa volupiet volorio. Poribus ilitend eliquiant lamenihil ipid eum hit, is delis as alignie nihicia turiber oribus, voluptaquid mo quaes inci nonseque consedigenis dolo to molendae perestectio. Obitiae rerum et lab ipiscium fuga. Lum re pe quos doluptas sin cum facipsam faccati con ratur, nostem hicid quibus re suntus ex eicium imagnimus comnistrunt eaquodi ut qui dem dus, imus seceptae venia volut estorem quid ma doluptate de non re porum fuga. Nem aut eum expelia quia aut est quodi oditiis dolupiet verit, am, nobist ad ute nonsequam re re volumquatur? Fugitas voluptatati utem ipsam quossequiae re
8 Spruce Street, Lower Manhattan: Taken by Author
on the link between skyscrapers and the urban landscape, in order to make the buildings part of the environment” (Powell, 1999). Since this was a legitimate concern for cities and urban planners, architects all over the world began to attempt to address this fundamental problem within the skyscraper typology. Gone are the days when the frustrated architect is able to sit in his office and draw pretty pictures of his project with no consideration for the surrounding environment. If history has taught us anything, it is that architectural design is a dynamic theoretical approach to the needs of an ever changing society and what may be effective in one era definitely will not be as successful in the next. As a result, our cities are currently inhabited by, “Many contemporary or modern skyscrapers [that] are part and parcel of the same bad strategies that emptied out downtowns and created bad pedestrian environments” and we are at a pivotal point in history as to how we react to this condition (Halbur, Tim and Negrete, Victor et al., 2011). This critical issue causes this designer to raise the question, “How can we solve these design problems when all we are doing is proposing the same solution that caused those issues originally to arise? Architecture and urbanity are both crucial components that are synonomous with each other and good design requires for both to be taken into consideration for the betterment of both parties.
No Adaptation Thesis 1903s Approach
to High Rise Ecology
?
2013s Approach
Through the Modernist Movement Buildings Focused on the Bare Necessities of its Programmatic Elements and Little More
to High Rise Ecology Today’s Approach is Similar With More Sustainable Features Being Added on, But the Building’s Approach to Ecology Between Itself and the City Remains the Same
Ecological Issues
Cities today are part and parcel a result of design strategies that were implemented decades ago that were proven flawed. Even though these design issues have been unveiled, many designs currently try to resolve urban issues that exist because of this condition by approaching it the same way. Our urban environments are extremely dynamic entities that consist of a delicate balance of public and private uses and a reevaluation is crucial to ensure a prosperous
future. Winy Maas discusses this beautifully when he states, “The urban environment is fundamentally different than it ever has been before, but we are still trying to physically define it in the same way” (Maas, 2009). Not only does this approach not address the current issues that occur within our cities between existing high rises and the urban environment, but these issues are only increasing in number with each passing project that continues
Downtown Chicago: Taken by Author
Downtown San Diego: Taken by Author
001 039 038 002
architectural object of the high rise is approached because it can no longer be only viewed as an autonomous, isolated entity within a larger urban context. The primary reason as to why this shift in thinking should be the case is because it is entirely a part of the environment that it exists within and should respond to it as such (Moneo, 1978). This is significant because it essentially means that architecture needs to begin to consider the needs and aspirations of the city that it is bound by more by thinking collectively rather than only considering the needs and wants of either realm individually. Even though this re-thinking of the way we approach development would be more difficult initially, the benefits to our society at every scale would be almost immediately witnessed. To approach this issue, the first step is that, “the old definitions must be modified to accommodate an idea of type that can incorporate even the present state� (Moneo, 1978). It is through this modification of old definitions that a new theoretical framework is born to meet the needs of the 21st century city.
Hancock Building, Boston: Taken by Author
embodying those ideals. Although this is no easy feat, architecture has not adapted to better suit our lifestyle changes that have occurred over the past decades within the needs and wants of our contemporary society. Since the design and construction of the very first high rise back in the 1900’s, the ways in which people, both public and private users, interact with them has not changed whatsoever. This comes down to how the
“ Collective Current
CAPITALIST
” Proposed
COLLECTIVE
Design
Driven Design Wealthy Developers Require Maximum Square Footage for Private/Leasable Space to Increase Profits While Giving Little to No Program for the Public/Small Business Owners
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Could We Design a High Rise That Gives Less Square Footage Towards Private/Single Developers’ Program and More for the Public/Small Business Owners?
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Economical Issues
Current
Proposed When it comes down to what current trend of high rise programs exact area my thesis is going to is to limit those uses to as few as focus on to address this disconnect possible. Even though this makes Programmatic Programmatic Design between our buildingsDesign and their it simpler from a design and cities, the exploration begins at the development standpoint, it creates root of the problem itself: how does a programmattic monotony that Modern Design Planning for even the public urban realm interact with makes that project’s success Norms Require Tenants Before That Allow Construction Allows the private architecturalBuildings realm? The more dependant on the fluctuating for Maximum Architects to Flexibilityfrom of the the root of this interaction stems market success. Rem Koolhaas Engage the Interiors to Ensure During the economical realm of architecture explains as to why this Program has Process risen as Many Different Design and Programs Could Result in a More and that is, why do people interact to be such an issue within our Inhabit Post Efficient Building with buildings? The use ofConstruction the building cities today when he states, “The is what draws people to it and the permanence of even the most
GENERIC
?
SPECIFIED
realize this situation where currently the modern skyscraper is grounded in the private realm and that there is a need for it being re-evaluated from its interaction with the public realm (Fernandez, 2008). By approaching this typology from this perspective these projects them become a “city within a building” where urban design and planning strategies can actually apply to a project due to the complex interaction of programmatic elements within it. This economical approach in turn would not only benefit the project itself and aid its success, but also the success of the city in which it resides.
San Francisco: Taken By Author
frivolous item of architecture and the instability of the metropolis are incompatible” (Koolhaas, 1995). A crucial way in which this instability could be more dampened by a project is through the introduction of a multitude of developers bringing different programs. This would be beneficial to both the urban and architectural realms in two key ways that high rises rarely achieve. The first factor is that the huge financial burden of a high rise building would be lifted and distributed among more developers funding it. This would in turn allow for a more economically resilient building because it would not become vacant when a single business or corporation goes bankrupt. Secondly, this economical approach also provides the urban community with a diversity of uses within a single project encouraging the people’s activity and also ensuring that the project will be a contributing member to the local urban community. Architects now
Fifth Avenue, Manhattan: Taken by Author
040 041
THE HUNT: RESEARCH
Follows
FUNCTION
- Louis Sullivan (Father of Modernism)
”
Viable
“ FORM
Current
Proposed
COLLECTIVE
CAPITALIST
Design
Driven Design Wealthy Developers Require Maximum Square Footage for Private/Leasable Space to Increase Profits While Giving Little to No Program for the Public/Small Business Owners
Obselescence
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Current
Proposed
SPECIFIED
GENERIC
Programmatic Design
Programmatic Design
Modern Design Norms Require Buildings That Allow for Maximum Flexibility of the Interiors to Ensure as Many Different Programs Could Inhabit Post Construction
Modernist vs. Contemporary Diagram
A CITY WITHIN
Could We Design a High Rise That Gives Less Square Footage Towards Private/Single Developers’ Program and More for the Public/Small Business Owners?
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
?
044 045
Planning for Tenants Before Construction Allows Architects to Engage the Program During the Design Process and Result in a More Efficient Building
URBAN
The famous quote of “Form follows funtion” Louis Sullivan a by Building is a statement that embodies the modernist movement of architecture that originated around the 1920s. It was through this international style of architecture where ornamentation was stripped from buildings and simplicity of form was brought to the forefront of architectural design to the point where buildings essentially only appeared as a result of what
people were doing inside of them. Not only did this approach architecture and thetoHybrid result in a more simplistic architectural form, but its approach to the design of the program or use inside the building, Because of Its Scale, Urban was just as basic as well. Since this Planning Strategies was the case, a generic viewpoint to Should Be Applied to a Hybrid Due to the programmatic elements thatMixing a the Various Uses Within a building is made up of wasof taken in Building That Would Normally Occur order to provide the bare essentials Within the City that they would need. The flexibility of the program to be able to adapt to multiple configurations within the same
typology was the primary concern in order to ensure that the building would be able to be configured to whatever the tenants needs would be post construction. This architectural movement however fails at a very crucial factor when it comes to the built environment: change. Steven Holl discusses this crucial issue when he states, “Urban densities and evolving building techniques have affected the mixing of functions, piling one atop another, defying critics who contend
CURRENT
Urban Program Market Needs
that a building should look like what it is” (Fernandez, 2013). It is through this ability of architecture to change to the future needs of an urban environment that will ensure its future success as well as that of the city in which it is a part of. The capitalist free market is a very elusive and difficult system to try and predict its outcomes, but a developmental model that begins to produce a safety net that adds a sort of protection between
FUTURE ?
Urban Program Market Needs Due to the Constant Fluctuation of Market Needs within a City, It is Difficult to Determine the Progammatic Needs our Cities Will Have in the Future
Known Programmatic Needs of a City’s Current Condition are Required for Architecture to Meet Them
Economic Flexibility Diagram
architecture and the economy that fills and investors to re-think their NOISY to its leases is one that is much needed. business models when it comes WIth cities that failed because of architectural development. SOCIALIZING SERENE this free market existing today such Although it is difficult to try and CONTEMPLATIVE VIBRANT as Detroit, Michagan, the design address theCOLLABORATING needs and wants of our community’s eyes have opened to a society fifty yearsCONNECTIVITY down the line with INTRAPERSONAL legitmate developmental flaw. What a project that we are designing happens when a city whose entire today, an architectural movement PERMEABLE PAUSE program and economy is dedicated that begins to attempt to provide REFLECTIVE INTERACTION LOITERING to an industryNETWORKING that no longer exists or some fore-thought as to how a high SEMI-PUBLIC SEGMENTED ACTIVE goes bankrupt? This is definitely the rise will be used in the future by its COMMUICATION MEANDERING CLOISTERED case with Detroit and the automobile inhabitants is one in which a more CIRCULATION INTROVERTED industry and it is causing urban planners more properous future for our urban RELAXATION
RESERVED
TRANSPARENT
INDIVIDUAL
OPEN
COMPARTMENTALIZED
E
CLOSED OFF RELAXING
BREAK
COMMUNITY
DYNAMIC
EXTROVERTED
the development of our designs. Our cities are dynamic organisms and the programs of our projects that cater to the needs of those cities should be able to respond to those fluctuating needs of the market that they are driven by. Architecture truly is a creature of our capitalist economy and at the end of the day its sole purpose to exist is to serve the needs of the community and the individuals that make it up. As a result, architecture has the requirement to take this need of programmatic adaptation as well as diversity into consideration for the future benefit our nation’s cities. Modernist Manhattan High Rise: Taken by Author
environment will be achieved. With the future program that our cities will be needing being a topic that is shrouded in mystery, a building typology that allows for multiple program uses within a single project will allow for the diversity and flexibility that the contemporary urban environment requires. Gone are the days when a single project has a single use because this approach to architecture results in a city that becomes less friendly to the pedestrian experience and as a result follows a more unsustainable urban model. The mantra of form follows function can no longer apply to where the current status of our profession is because how can the form of a project follow the function of its spaces when in the future, who knows what program will be consisting within that space. The field of architecture in the past was not as insightful when it came to the future uses of their spaces and the time is now for our nation’s designers to begin this thought process early on in
Downtown Detroit: Taken by Author
046 047
Study :
Chinese Community
Musuem Plaza is a revolutionary project that challenges conventional high rise development. The project began with a project seeking to implement a large art gallery and ended with a mixed use project attached with program specifically used to fund this main art attraction. This project is significant due to the fact that it consisted of large amounts of both public and private program balanced in a unique hybrid execution that I will explain more in depth in
the upcoming chapters. It is this delicate balance between the two that can make or break a hybrid building and this development pushes the norms within this typology. Due to site constraints, the public realm is elevated to its “island� 24 stories above where art permeates into all aspects of both the public and private realms truly acting as the heart of this development physically, financially, and ecologically.
048 049
REX Architects
A
Site Plan
MUSEUM PLAZA
C
A Musuem Plaza is a revolutionary project that challenges conventional developments th project seeking to implement a large art gallery and ended with a mixed use projec program specifically used to fund this attraction. This project is significant for my thesi that this project consisted of large amounts of both public and private program. C balance between the two that can make or break a hybrid building and this develop current norms within this typology. Due to site constraints, the public realm is elevated stories above grade where art permeates into all aspects of both the public and pr acting as the heart of this development physically, financially, and ecologically.
Background
Project Description
Size: 354,000 Sq. Ft. Lot Area: 1,530,000 Sq. Ft. Design Parti: Programmatic Rationalization Spatial Organization: Public Realm Elevated Key Site Factors: Located Within River’s Flood Plain Vicinity Map
Ohio River
MUSEUM PLAZA
Lousiville
Vicinity Map
Location: Louisville, Kentucky Site Plan Latitude: 38 North Climate: Warm, Temperate Year Designed: 2005
Public Art Gallery
t. 00 Sq. Ft.
matic zation ion: alm Elevated to ous Programs
Parking
27.3%
800 spaces
Within Ohio 0 Year Flood
Living
27.4%
419,220 sq. ft.
Form Generator
Office
17.6%
269,280 sq. ft.
Hotel
16.9%
258,570 sq. ft. Form Generator
Culture
PRIVATE
Public Gallery Plan
Public Plan
Section C
PRIVATE
Program Concept
Form Generator
Section C-C
Program Concept
Museum Plaza is Considered a Graft
10.8%
165,240 sq. ft.
PUBL
Condos
Art Museum
Hotel
10.8%
165,240 10.8% sq. ft.
Program Concept
PRIVATE PRIVATE
Urban Relationships
Various Programmatic Elements Grounded Together Through Elevated Public Realm
PRIVATE
GROUND PLANE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
A C
PRIVATE
A
PRIVATE
C
PRIVATE
Form Generator
Private Program Implemented as Podium for Urban Realm Above
Section C
GROUND PLANE Urban Relationships
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
Various Programmatic Elements Grounded Public Plan Through Together Elevated Public Realm Museum Plaza is Considered a Graft Hybrid Due to the Fact that Programmatic Elements are Each a Distinct Element within the Overall Form
Hybrid Classification
Private Program Implemented as Podium for Urban Realm Above
Public vs. Private Analysis
16.9%
U of L
16.9%
258,570 17.6% sq. ft.
Culture
Art Museum
Condos
419,220 sq. ft.
Size: 354,000 Sq. Ft. Lot Area: 1,530,000 Sq. Ft. Office Design Parti: Programmatic Rationalization 269,280 sq. ft. Spatial Organization: Hotel Public Realm Elevated to Link Various Programs 258,570 sq. ft. Key Site Factors: Located Within Ohio Culture River’s 100 Year Flood Plain 165,240 sq. ft.
U of L
roject Description Hotel
Office
269,28027.4% sq. ft.
Hotel
17.6%
Latitude: 38 North Climate: Warm, Temperate Living Year Designed: 2005
050 051
Program Analysis
Condos
27.3%
Office800 spaces Location: Louisville, Kentucky
ackground
Condos
Parking
Con
419,220 sq. ft.
Office
27.4%
Study :
Chinese Community
The Essence Financial Building is OMA’s second high rise in Shenzhen with another design competition win under their belt. This project is innovative most notably as a result of its edge condition structural core. Rather than designing the conventional central cored high rise, OMA located this on the periphery in order to maximize unobstucted floor plans. This freedom of flexibility will allow numerous office configurations to help meet the demands of a contemporary
office lifestyle. In order to reduce afternoon solar heat gain which would normally be glass, this core was located on the western facade. The facade of this project also reduces glazing square footage and heat gain while providing dynamic articulation. A private terrace is located on the 24th floor which allows for spectacular views of Shenzhen while also giving the project a unique architectural character.
ESSENCE FINANCIAL BUILDING
O.M.A.
052 053
Project Location
By Camden Wade
The Essence Financial Building is OMA’s second high rise in Shenzhen with another desig win under their belt. This project is innovative most notably as a result of its edge condition Rather than designing the conventional central cored high rise, OMA located this on th order to maximize unobstucted floor plans that will allow numerous more flexible office co help meet the demands of a contemporary office lifestyle. This core was located on the w in order to reduce unwanted solar gain in the afternoons on the building’s glazing as we thermal mass that will radiate the afternoon heat back into the interiors overnight to re needs for the morning conditions. A private employee terrace is located on the 24th floo for spectacular views of Shenzhen while also giving the project a unique architectural ch
Background
Location: Shenzhen, China Latitude: 22 North Climate: Humid, Subtropic Year Designed: 2006
ESSENCE FINANCIAL BUILDING
Project Description
Dashen Bay Dadong Bay
Vicinity Map
Shenzhen
Egong Bay
Vicinity Map
Size: 1,000,000 Sq. Ft. Lot Area: Unknown Design Parti: Structural Reconfiguration Spatial Organization: Core Shift to Exterior to Maximize Plan Key Site Factors: Overlooks Shenzhen Business District
Program Distribution
Optimise
Elevated Private Terrace
uctural configuration anization: re Shift to Exterior to ximize Unobstructed Plan ctors: erlooks Shenzhen Golf b Within Shenzhen iness District
Private Viewing Deck
Form Generator
Conventional Centra
Program Distribution
Optimise
Private Viewing Deck
Form Generator
Building Section
Implemented Periphe
Structural System
Form Generator
Building Section
054 055
Clubhouse
Offices
3% 25%
29,000 sq. ft.
Essence Office
ouse
258,000 sq. ft.
Leisure
21,520 sq. ft.
2%
Mintaian Office
12%
Offices
20%
Monolith Hybrid
Classification Due to Stacking of Program within Form
121,500 sq. ft.
Implemented Peripheral Core
Canteen
2% 9% 87,000 sq. ft. re
Lobby & Min taia OCommercial ffice n s Leisu
Offices
Canteen
2% 9% 87,000 sq. ft.
Parking
Lobby & Commercial
Structural System
Parking Structural System
Self Shading Facade Reduces Solar Gain on Southern Facade
n
Hybrid Classification
Self Shading Facade Reduces Solar Gain on Southern Facade
Maxi on No to Ma
The Size of Window Openings Increases Down the Building in Proportion to the Decrease in Solar South Penetration Elevation
North Elevation
PUBLIC
GROUND PLANE
Urban Relationships
25%
250,000 Lobby sq. ft.
Facade Analysis
GROUND PLANE
Urban Relationships
tee
The Size of Window Openings Increases Down the Building in Proportion to the Decrease in Solar Penetration
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
Can
Maximized Glazing on Nothern Facade to Maximize Diffused Light
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PRIVATE Public vs. Private Analysis
25%
250,000 sq. ft.
20%
h Club 205,500 sq. ft.
17,500 sq. ft.
205,500 sq. ft.
17,500 sq. ft.
Program Analysis
Conventional Central Core
Implemented Peripheral Core
12%
121,500 sq. ft.
Essence Offices
Structural Analysis
Mintaian Office
South Elevation
Study :
The Landmark Towers designed by Buro Ole Scheeren are a mixed use combination of programs located in the Kuala Lumpur City Center District in Malaysia. This project consists of three primary programs of premium offices, high end residential units, and a luxury hotel. With the difference in the storefront materiality on the ground levels, this design feature not only invites the public into the high rise, but it also projects its vibrant urban activity back into the city itself allowing an
effect that I have labeled “Urban Transparency.” It is through this visual connection that the building is able to display and invite the urban interaction that it requires. Also a hybrid, this high rise has a formular expression similar to that of Museum Plaza’s. This project is successful how it relates to its urban context while also providing ample square footage for private developments to generate a profit and validate its construction.
056 057
Site Location
TOWER
The Landmark Towers designed by Buro Ole Scheeren are a mixed use combination of pro in the Kuala Lumpur City Center District in Malaysia. This project standing at 880 feet tall c primary programs of premium offices, high end residential units, and a luxury hotel. The sig project to my thesis lies within how this project address the urban realm at the ground difference in the storefront materiality on the ground levels, this design feature not only inv into the high rise, but it also projects its vibrant urban activity back into the city itself allow I have labeled “Urban Transparency.” This project is one of the most successful projects I’v when it comes to how it relates to its urban context through encouraging interaction w while also providing ample square footage for private developments to generate a profi
Background
Straits of Malacca
Project Description
Size: 1,750,000 Sq. Ft. Lot Area: 68,300 Sq. Ft. Design Parti: Urban Transparency Spatial Organization: Programmatic Stacking Key Site Factors: Within City Center District
LANDMARK TOWER
South China Sea
Kuala Lumpur
Indonesia
Vicinity Map
Location: Malaysia Latitude: 3 North Climate: Tropical Year Designed: 2010
Ground Level Rendering
“ V H R Diffe Pre P
Sto
Gro Fa Sho R
Urban Transparency
Building Elevation
Podium Section
Podium Concept Diagram
dium Section
Section
Urban Transparency
6%
Residential
6%
“Sky Level” 60,500 Houses sq. ft. Various Uses for the Hotel, Offices, and Residents with the Residential Difference in Materiality Presenting the Unique sq. ft. Program Behind242,000 it
60,500 sq. ft.
Residential
30%
30%
222,500 sq. ft.
Luxury Hotel
23%
222,500 sq. ft.
Luxury Hotel 222,500 sq. ft.
23%
Offices
23%
Luxury Hotel 222,500 sq. ft.
Offices
20%
193,600 sq.
193,600 sq. ft.
106,500 sq. ft.
for Commercial Ground Floor Breaks the Parking Public Commercial Public Commercial Facade of the Project 96,800 sq. ft. 106,500 sq. ft. 106,500 sq. ft. Storefront Glazing used Showing Vibrant Public for Commercial Realm Within These Ground Floor Parking Breaks the Floors to the Parking City Program
20%
193,600 sq. ft.
Storefront Glazing used for Commercial Public Commercial Ground Floor Breaks the 106,500 sq. ft. Urban Transparency Facade of the Project Facade of the Project 96,800 sq. ft. Showing Vibrant Public Showing Vibrant Public Parking Realm Within These Realm Within These 96,800 sq. ft. Floors to the City Floors to the City Program
11% 10% Urban Transparency
11% 10%
3
242,000 sq.
Public Comm
Offices
20% 20% Storefront Glazing used
193,600 sq. ft.
Offices
30%
242,000 sq. ft.
Luxury Hotel
242,000 sq. ft.
6%
6
Residential
058 059
“Sky Level” Houses Various Uses for the Hotel, Offices, and Residents with the Difference in Materiality Private Commercial Presenting the Unique 60,500 sq. ft. Program Behind it
sparency
60,500 sq. ft.
Program Analysis
“Sky Level” Houses Various Uses for the Hotel, Offices, and Residents with the Difference in Materiality Presenting the Unique Private Commercial Private Commercial Program Behind it
11% 96,800 sq. ft. 10%
1
Program
rban Relationships
PUBLIC GROUND PLANE
Section
Section
Urban Relationships
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
Five Story Tall Vehicular Parking Garage lies at the Heart of Podium Urban Streetscape Experience is Brought into the Tower with Bars, Cafes, Retail, etc.
Public vs. Private Analysis
Urban Connection Diagram
Five Story Tall Vehicular Parking Garage lies at the Heart of Podium
PRIVATE
Urban Streetscape Experience is Brought into the Tower with Bars, Cafes, Retail, etc.
PRIVATE
PRIVATE Five Story Tall Vehicular Parking Garage lies at the Heart of Podium
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
Program
Five Story Tall Ve Parking Garage the Heart of Po Urban Streetscape Experience is Brought into the Tower with Bars, Cafes, Retail, etc.
PUBLIC
GROUND PLANEGROUND PLANE Urban Relationships Urban Relationships
Study :
The urban analysis that I chose to investigate for one of my case studies is within Manhattan Island. New York City is arguably one of the best cities in the nation as a result of its rich history and in an influential position when it comes to the creative arts and design. I truly enjoyed the experience of the dense urban lifestyle but I also felt like something was lacking when it came to the pedestrian experience. High rises cluttered the city’s grid for miles each providing its
own programmatic chemistry to the urban environment while little public space was given back to the pedestrians within the dense urban fabric outside of Central Park. Dense congregations of people littered the streets at every turn in an environment feeling similar to that of a rat in a maze. I investigated how this city operated from a public standpoint in order to better my understanding of why this feeling might be the case.
Located in the Heart of Manhattan Island
060 061
Vicinity Map
The urban analysis that I chose to investigate for one of my case studies is within Manhattan Island. New York City is arguably one of the best cities in the nation as a result of its rich history and influential position when it comes to the creative arts and design. The reason that I chose to study this city is because when I visited this massive architectural wonderland this summer, I truly enjoyed the experience of the dense urban lifestyle but I also felt like something was lacking when it came to the pedestrian experience. High rises cluttered the city’s grid for miles each providing its own programmatic chemistry to the urban environment while little public space was given back to the pedestrians within the dense urban fabric outside of Central Park. This caused me to investigate how this city operated from a public standpoint exploring why this might have been the case in order to draw conclusions from my observations.
New Jersey
MANHATTAN ISLAND
Queens
Vicinity Map
Location: NYC, New York Latitude: 40 North Climate: Humid, Continental Year Designed: 2010
Project Description
Size: 1/2 Mile x 2.5 Miles Lot Area: 843 Acres Design Parti: Urban Entanglement Spatial Organization: Sprawled Park Space Key Site Factors: Located In the Heart of Manhattan Island
Manhattan High Line Park: Taken By Author
Background
Central Park Edge Conditions
For my in whic private city. Su For my sidewa in whic block, private occurs city. S itsidewa lead in the block, massiv occurs public it lead heart in the o fascina massiv periphe public condit heart grid, a fascina the cit periph where condit other. grid, a the ci where other.
Central Park Edge Condition Central Park Edge Condition
PU PU
High Line Edge Conditions
PR PR
High Line Edge Condition
Concep
Public Space Metadiagram
062 063
For my analysis of Manhattan Island, the area in which I begin my study is the public and private relationships that occur within the city. Sure this experience occurs on every sidewalk that lines every street within every block, but I investigate how this interaction occurs at a much grander scale. As a result, it lead me to the world famous Central Park in the heart of the island. Not only does this massive expanse of public park enhance the public realm immensely, but since it is in the heart of the city it creates very unique and fascinating edge conditions around the periphery of this project. Since this edge condition is a rectilinear shape within the city grid, a very abrupt stop is created between the city and the park(private and public) where one essentially leaves one to enter the other.
Condition
ondition
PUBLIC
Realm
New York City is a very compl multi-faceted urban environment tha take decades to try and compreh Horizontal Expression complexities within an investigation. of my study was to notice the relat between the public and private ments located here on Manhattan order to get a better understanding way one of the most successful Am cities is organized. It is after this diagr Realm ic process where I can begin to und the minute relationships that some o scattered public venues may sha conclusion of this study has ended posing the question as to whether o more integrated approach of publ and plazas into the city grid might be successful execution of these space than quarantining each off from eac Conceptual Conclusion resulting in the citizen choosing either of a public space or a private with v
PRIVATE
Conceptual Conclusion
the area in which I study was the High Line linear park and Central Park. Although this experience occurs on every sidewalk that lines every street within every block, I investigated how this interaction occurs at a much grander scale in public parks. Because this expanse of the public realm supplies alot of public activities, its location in the center of the island creates very unique and fascinating edge conditions along the periphery. As a result, a very abrupt stop is created between the city and the park(private and public) where one essentially leaves one to enter the other.
Vertical Expression
Space Metadiagram For my analysis of Manhattan,
Capitalist Based
SELF
Architectural Approach High Rise Architecture is Famous for its Autonomous, Individual Approach to Their Design as If They Are the Only Buliding in the City
Hybrid
Architects and Developers Desig Their High Rises as Individuals, But They Are a Part of a Much Larger Urban Context Which Needs to B Addressed Just as Importantly as the Building Itself
...
What is a
HYBRID
Building?
The hybrid building is a typology that has existed since its introduction in the 1880s. Its genesis was a result of the metropolitan pressures of increasing prices of land values with the constraint of the urban grid providing strict guidelines for development (Fenton, 1985). With the horizontal development standards that had worked up until that point in time, a new approach to architecture was required and the result was by the urban fabric moving itself skyward. Buildings became
constructed higher than ever before which then began to result in a single use for buildings which was the current norm at the time. Not long thereafter, the realization came of that single programmattic use not being able to apply due to the massive scale of these projects. Multiple uses were then integrated into a single project which created a unique built environment that had not existed before. Years later, zoning laws began to be enacted
Tour Signal, Paris
Campus Center, Miami
064 001 065 002
activating the building, its individual uses, and the surrounding urban fabric” (Fernandez, 2008). Since this typology is so successful in these situations, more and more of these projects are beginning to be integrated into our nation’s urban fabric in order to bring our nation’s citizens back to their urban cores. This programmattic deficit was one of the original problems that drove Americans away from their urban cores and designers are beginning to become more aware of this key component. Programmattic assemblage has a couple of options in the hybrid where the juxtaposition of programmatic elements can be achieved either vertically through the superposition of functions on top of each or through the horizontal expansion of uses with the integration of multiple programs along the same floor as each other (Fernandez, 2011). Due to the fact that there are only a few ways in which the architect chooses to organize and relate these different uses together, hybrids typically fall into one of three categories as to how they can execute this.
De Rotterdam, Netherlands
which segregated the placement of various programmatic elements and the hybrid once again fell to the wayside. Fast forward to today and the segregationalist urban planning policies are being re-evaluated with a rekindled interest arising yet again towards the hybrid typology. Through its implementation of multiple uses both public and private, these projects are beginning to gain common recognition as a “way of
Proposed
SEGREGATED Current
SEGREGATED
Architectural Program Interaction
INTEGRATED
Proposed
Architectural Program Interaction
INTEGRATED
Architectural Program Interaction
Architectural Program Interaction Why Can’t
Program Be Reconsidered
Architectural Program in Today’s Society Has a Very Architectural 2-Dimensional Program in Today’s Approach to the Society Has a Very Way2-Dimensional in Which People Interact Approach to the Which WithWay theinBuildings
Why Can’t Where Interaction ProgramOccurs Be at a More Reconsidered 3-Dimensional Where Interaction Level to Occurs at a More Better Adapt to Individual 3-Dimensional Level to Programmatic Better Adapt toNeeds Individual Programmatic Needs
Kinds
?
Graft Hybrid
Graft Hybrid
Fabric Hybrid
Typologies Typologies
Each the Eachofof the Project’s Various Project’s Various Programmatic Programmatic Elements are ElementsWithin are Expressed Their Own Form Expressed Within That Attached to Theiris Own Form the Building
That is Attached to the Building
Monolith Hybrid
HYBRID HYBRID
Monolith Hybrid
People Interact With the Buildings
Fabric Hybrid
G
Current
Programmatic Programmatic Elements Are Elements Are Stacked Into a Stacked Into a Continuous Form Continuous Form Where Form Does Not RevealWhere Form Does Not Reveal Function
Function
Volumetric Infill of the City’s Gridded Fabric is Incorporated into the Programmatic Volumetric Infill of the City’sElements of the Project
Gridded Fabric is Incorporated into Categories theHybrid Programmatic Elements of the Project
Although the entire purpose of the hybrid is to break free from the shackles of the architectural typology, this architectural approach can be broken up into different categories based on their formular expression. When it comes to this architectural execution, there are numerous ways in which a multitude of various programs can be integrated together within a single project. It is through the acceptance or rejection of the functional expression of the
architecture that categorizes these hybrids into the three main types that currently exist within the architectural community. As mentioned earlier in this publication, the modernist manifesto comes back into the equation and can be chosen to be embraced through the visual expression of the program or ignored by the cloaking of them. The first kind of hybrid building that exists is known as the fabric hybrid. The fabric hybrid is
Monolith_Hancock Tower, Chicago: Taken by Author Graft_111 First Street, New Jersey
001 067 066 002
public and private uses is implemented which, in turn, creates a more dynamic urban experience throughout the entire building where users who would not normally interact mingle. Keeping on track with the rejection of the functional expression of architecture is the next category known as the monolith hybrid. The monolith is famous due to its monumental impact on the city due to its massive scale. These most commonly mimic the urban realm of a single block hidden behind their monotonous form. Through its efficiency in ability to accomodate the most diverse amount of functions, this category has displayed the greatest amount of versatility within the hybrid typology. With the last hybrid type comes the only category that embraces the functional expresion of modernism: the graft hybrid. The stacking and welding of various programmatic elements each unique in scale and footprint together creates this category. In both plan and section, the various functions can be easily determined due to the different proportions that each are made up of (Fenton, 1985).
Fabric_Scala Tower, Copenhagen
characterized by most importantly its rejection of the functional expression of architecture by masking its internal uses through the building’s architectural form (Fenton, 1985). This category is significant because due its integrated juxtaposition of program, it allows for the most innovative arrangements of program within the hybrid typology. This configuration category is distinct because a three dimensional interaction of various
Mixed
Hybrids
Current Mixed-Use
?
Proposed Hybrid
INTROVERTED
Program Relationships
Most Mixed-Use Projects Consist of a Primary and Secondary Program Where Both Operate as Separate, Introverted Entities
EXTROVERTED
Program Relationships
With Numerous Public/Private Program Uses Existing in Close Proximity, Programs Become More Permeable and Interact With Each Other
Mixed Use vs. Hybrid Diagram
Capitalist Based
SELF
Hybrid buildings, up until Joseph Fenton’s catalogue about the subject in 1985, have been Architectural Approach considered a part of the mixed-use High Rise Architecture is category. Consequently, Fenton Famous for its Autonomous, challenged this joint merging and Individual to Their argued that these buildingsApproach require Design as If They their own classification altogether. Are the Only in the City He argued that “there was Buliding a distinct difference between the hybrid building and mixed-use, in that the individual programs relate to one another and begin to share intensities” (Fernandez,
2008). This is significant because as the diagram above explains, mixed-use buildings approach the various programmatic elements as Architects and Developers Design separate entities and segregates Their High Rises as them from each other creatingIndividuals, But They Are a Part of introverted characteristics. This a Much Larger Context is far from the objective of the Urban Which Needs to Be Addressed Just as hybrid building because the entire Importantly as the Building Itself essence of the hybrid is to create an urban environment within a building due to the interactions between all the various programs.
but that they are together in a melting pot of programmatic functions. The reason as to why these hybrids are considered their own typology is due to this very fact that they go beyond the simple feat of various programs and begin to investigate how these differing programs in user classifications of public or private can find common grounds to function harmoniously. The success of the hybrid lies on how this conglomeration of relevant uses for the urban community as well as the private developers’ can interact with and compliment each other in a way that is mutually beneficial.
Collaborative Cloud, Berlin
When this introverted nature is introduced into a project, it breaks up the programs into isolated areas of the project severing any ties at all between the public and private. These interconnected elements stand individual in function, but are a part of a greater collective whole within the project itself and require a certain level of interaction between them to coexist efficiently. Fenton continues on to elaborate that, “hybrid buildings stand differentiated from other multiple function buildings by scale and form� (Fenton, 1985). The scale that he speaks of in this situation is that of the requirement of the hybrid buildings to follow the dimensions of the city block within the orthogonal grid. In essence this describes that these projects are only considered hybrids when are combined altogether within a single building on a single lot. Rather than being a collaboration of multiple buildings within a district, it requires that these uses not be segregated between each project individually
Manhattan Mixed-Use Streets: Taken by Author
068 069
$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $$ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Current Proposed
Proposed
GENERIC SPECIFIED
Programmatic Design Programmatic Design
gn
dern Design ms Require dings That Allow Maximum xibility of the eriors to Ensure Many Different grams Could abit Post nstruction
? City Within
SPECIFIED
Programmatic Design
Modern Design Norms Require for Planning Buildings That Before Allow Tenants for Maximum Construction Allows Flexibility of the Architects to Interiors to Ensure Engage the as Many Different Program During the Programs Could Design Inhabit Post Process and Result in a More Construction
Planning for Tenants Before Construction Allows Architects to Engage the Program During the Design Process and Result in a More Efficient Building
Efficient Building
A CITY WITHIN URBAN a Building
URBAN
and the Hybrid
Because of Its Scale, Urban Planning Strategies Should Be Applied to a Hybrid Due to the Various Mixing of Uses Within a Building That Would Normally Occur Within the City
and the Hybrid
Because of Its Scale, Urban Planning Strategies Should Be Applied to a Hybrid Due to the Various Mixing of Uses Within a Building That Would Normally Occur Within the City
Hybrid Urbanism
Due to the programmatic interactions of the hybrid typology, careful consideration should be taken with the design due to the fact that a mixing of program at this level would normally only occur at the street level within the urban environment. Since these programmatic elements would normally be much smaller in scale than those which would be occurring in separate buildings along the street level, a more fine tuned approach is needed to ensure the project’s
success. This approach to high rise architecture is so effective due to the fact that they, “include a wide range of functions to allow a certain level of self-sufficiency in response to a dislocated location” (Fernandez, 2008). Due to the fact that high rise projects these days are considered individually to begin with, hybrids capitalize on this approach by ensuring self-sustainability within the project rather than existing as an
PUBLIC/PRIVATE
Interaction Occurs Due to This Mixing of Program, Public and Private Interactions Occur Frequently Resulting in Similar Edge Conditions to That of a City
Program Edge Conditions Diagram
070 071
Vertical
Sparking theparasite on a a city. a new breed of ecology is brought architectural to the table where an interaction When this design methodology of users between the urban public is implemented into a project, it of Downtown Houston realm and the architectural private brings on issues and concerns that realm begins to have the possibility to your typical high rise would not coexist within the walls of what would require. Based off of their sheer normally be considered a privitized scale, these architectural design development. The borders between solutions superceded the realm of architecture and enter the realm of public and private which are normally black and white in our current society, urban planning (Fernandez, 2011). begin to become blurred and greyed Hybrid buildings are essentially in a unique environment where public urban planning under one roof because the usual edge conditions boulevards and parks can begin to be introduced and integrated into an of the public street realm meeting privitized architectural proposal. the private architectural object begin to occur in programmatic boundaries between these uses that occur elevated and within the project. Since these conditions are Programmed Building Programmed Building so unique to only the characteristics of this architectural typology, these various programmatic elements “feed on the meeting of the private Consists and public spheres” where theDowntown Proposing a Hybrid Primarily of Office Typology in and “intimacy of private life and theBuildings Downtown Will Activity Occurs Provide Uses For All During the Day But sociability of public life find anchors Hours of the Day After Work Day Activating the the City Shuts in development in the hybrid Hours Project Beyond Just Down the Work Day Hours buildings” (Fernandez, 2011). With this balancing act of user groups,
URBAN REVIVAL
Houston
?
Tour Signal, Paris
MULTIPLE
SINGLE
Sparking the
URBAN REVIVAL
of Downtown Houston
Houston
Revitalise
SINGLE
Programmed Building
?
MULTIPLE
Downtown Consists Primarily of Office Buildings and Activity Occurs During the Day But After Work Day Hours the City Shuts Down
Programmed Building
Proposing a Hybrid Typology in Downtown Will Provide Uses For All Hours of the Day Activating the Project Beyond Just the Work Day Hours
Hybrid Activity Diagram
With the American suburban movement that took place after World War II, many of our nation’s urban environments began to deteriorate when the mass movement of citizens occurred taking them out to the peripheries of our cities. When this mass exodus took place, the American downtown was left to the wayside leaving urban planners and architects scratching their heads trying to figure out ways how they could once again bring these citizens
back to the downtowns that their ancestors once thrived in. Many various approaches have been executed successfully in cities all across the country in their attempts to create social destinations for these people to congregate and interact and one of the more recent developments to rise to the occasion is the hybrid building typology. The way in which these projects are successful in doing so is through the permeability of these
072 073
“Defragging Houston” Urban Metamodel
projects with the public citizens. It is through this permeability that allows them to become more accessible from the city through public uses while the private programs allow the services of the project to extend the timetable of these buildings to twenty four hours a day of activity (Fernandez, 2011). Constant, twenty four hour activity is no new introduction to many urban environments nowadays, but when this commotion takes place entirely within a single building, impressions of what our society thought architecture could achieve will be forever changed. Where the hybrid typology becomes so unique in regard to its other high rise structures is that these projects which would normally be active at a single time of the day become social hubs of frequent activity. This is a result of the multitude of introduced programs which allow for it to be unrestricted from the typical typology shackles of being dominated by only public or private rhythyms. With these newfound possibilities of all around activity, the real design challenge stems from the designer’s, “talent to negotiate congestion, to stack complementary functions and to create connection versus segregation” (Fernandez, 2009). Within these large projects lies the true design challenge for the architect because the success or failure of this typology lies in the delicate balance of what, when, where, and why interaction does or does not occur inside the building.
Cross Pollination Current
Proposed
SEGREGATED
Architectural Program Interaction
INTEGRATED
Architectural Program Interaction Why Can’t Program Be Reconsidered Where Interaction Occurs at a More 3-Dimensional Level to Better Adapt to Individual Programmatic Needs
Architectural Program in Today’s Society Has a Very 2-Dimensional Approach to the Way in Which People Interact With the Buildings
Program Interaction Diagram
Graft Hybrid
Fabric Hybrid
Volumetric Infill of the City’s Gridded Fabric is Incorporated into the Programmatic Elements of the
element where there is potential Programmatic Elements Are for both planned and unplanned Each of the Stacked Into a Project’s Various activities for the inhabitants. Continuous Form Programmatic Where Form Does Elements are Through this integrated natureNot Reveal Expressed Within Function Their Own Form hybrid, this interaction of of the That is Attached to creates a hub of activity the programs Building within a city where architecture creates and encourages this trans-programmatic interaction of varying user groups. The hybrid is a building that takes advantage of its opportunity to make an impact on an environment by looking
Monolith Hybrid
HYBRID
The hybrid feeds on the meeting of the architectural and urban Typologies realms due to the interactions between the intimate and peaceful nature of the private programs and the vibrant, sociability of the public programs. These uses allow for the cross pollination of different programs in specific designated locations throughout the hybrid. This is significant because it validates that activity of the project will create an urban environment within an architectural
074 075
“Integrating Uses” Programmatic Metamodel
for, “unexpected, unpredictable, intimate relationships, encouraging coexistence and is conscious that unprogrammed solutions are the keys to its own future” (Fernandez, 2011). Although a hybrid building is a typology all of its own, Fenton describes how there are subcategories within it in regards to how the different programs relate to the others within the building. The first category known as the thematic combination, cultivates dependancy between the different programs by them all containing a common ground and singleness of function (Fenton, 1985). An example of this would be a court house being located near a city hall within a building where they would both cater to the same user category. Disparate program combinations are the contrary where completely different programs would exist within a building such as office spaces and a church. Since these uses do not directly cater to the same person within the project, they each rely on those user groups to specifically use them for that distinct purpose. “The mixing of uses in a hybrid building generates a potential which is transferred, as in a system of interconnected vessels, to those weaker activities so that all involved are benefitted” (Fernandez, 2011). An effective analogy to describe the programs of a hybrid building is similar to that of a sports team; each teammate plays an individual position in the game, but they all work together to achieve a common goal.
Houston
Downtown’s Lack of Density
Houston is a prime example of the typical American city. Lars Lerup, an urbanist and Houston native describes this condition when he states, “The city is a creature of the market, the same market that was invented to create an even playing field to remedy the vagaries of both social and economic justice”(Lerup, 2011). With development driven entirely by profitmaximizing developers with no formal zoning regulations to regulate the buildings’ size, uses, or environment, this
city center suits the perfect picture of an urban system that is entirely based on capitalistic development laws. With the quantity of land not being an issue for this city, urban sprawl has been a large factor in the planning of this area and it is a large result as to why the city is in the current state of extreme suburban sprawl that it is. The reason as to why this is the case is because the, “concentration on projects(subdivisions, malls, etc.)
and design. Councilwoman Eleanor Tinsley states this change in thinking from their organization when she states, “Our emphasis has changed. As our economy and population growth have slowed, we are concentrating more on the quality of life.” One of the main aspects in which Houston is focusing on their quality of life is through the development and encouragement of a more localized lifestyle. As a result of this shift in urban planning and thinking, the future of development in Houston is looking bright with sustainable urbanism finally in the crosshairs. Downtown Ground Level: Taken by Author
has led to a failure to engage the context of the entire region, best demonstrated by the sprawling of these same projects”(Lerup, 2011). With the inefficiency of the public transport that currently exists within the city as well as the low mixing of uses within the projects throughout the Downtown, it is evident that sustainability has not been on the forefront of this city’s mind(Firley and Gimbal, 2011). When this sustainable approach to urban planning and design is not applied to a city, it creates an urban environment that does not operate as efficiently and effectively for the people that inhabit it. This in turn only exacerbates the existing condition of urban disarray creating a vicious cycle where new development is continually being grounded upon shallow roots. After decades of the city following this unsustainable urban development problem, the city’s government is beginning to realize the error of their ways and are calling for a change to their urban planning
Downtown Houston: Taken by Author
076 077
Thesis Intervention
SITE
Texas Texas
Downtown Houston
Downtown Houston
Central Business District
Central Business District
078 079
Industrial Office Commerce Single Family Residence Multi Family Residence
Urban Land Uses
Urban Bayous & Green Spaces
10
45 59
Major Urban Roadways
Y A
PL
LIVE
W
OR
K
Fragmentation
Houston’s Programmatic Locations
Houston is the third largest so as to avoid potential conflicts Air Ozone city in the United States and yet has between incompatible uses(in the density of that similar to a city denser cities resolved by zoning) that has half of its population. What and simultaneously ignores the th is that this city has this translates into overall functioning of the city” Worst Air been designed and encouraged as (Lerup, 2011). The main issue with in the United States a pro-sprawl environment where the Houston is that the majority of the Due to Smog various uses that the Ranked average citizen jobs are located in the downtown Routinely Among the requires are fragmented and can be a core yet few to no people live Ozone Citiestwenty miles of where they great deal away from each other. ThisPolluted within in the U.S. condition is quite unique compared to are employed. Not only does this some other examples due to the fact nurture dependence on vehicles, that, “sprawl usurps the in-between but it also results in abnormally
8
POLLUTION MOST
080 081
Air Ozone
8
th
Sprawl Ozone Pollution
LIVE POLLUTION
Worst Air in the United States Due to Smog Routinely Ranked Among the Ozone Polluted Cities in the U.S.
MOST
high levels of air pollution. It is a result of this very sprawl that Houston is in the current state of urban fragmentation because of the sobering fact that for a city of its magnitude, there is very little to no urban presence or lasting vibrancy within its urban core. This fragmented condition is significant because the fault of this falls in the laps of designers and planners whose lack of vision and afterthought caused it to be so.
WORK
Downtown’s Separation: Taken by Author
LIVE
Automobile
Houston’s Intricate Interstate Network
With the fragmentation of programmattic development within the city of Houston, this leads to a lifestyle for the average citizen that depends heavily on the use of their vehicle to carry out their day-to-day activities. As a result, freeways and streets are only getting wider to try and keep up with the needs of so many commuters that constantly drive to where they need to go. Houston has some of the most strict parking regulations in the nation primarily due to the fact that
the use and dependance of the automobile has been nurtured since its development. “Here the road replaces the city, the house supplants the block, and a highly mobile community rather than a local pedestrian community is the norm” (Lerup, 2011). A fitting title could be “Houston: A City on the Move.” As a result of this heavy vehicular use by its citizens, Houston then begins to face an entirely new issue of where to keep these cars.
Downtown’s Private
TUNNEL SKYBRIDGE
The
DAILY
Private Tunnels For Workers Are 7 Miles Long and a Fragmented System Only Open During Business Hours Creating a Quasi-Public Realm
?
42 6,000
Average Downtown Worker Commutes
Private Skybridges Connect Various Buildings Within Districts Which Allow Business Workers to Circulate Above Grade off of the Street Level
Systems
Location of Activity Above and Below Grade Results in a Non-Existent Street Level Realm
?
Worker Commute Diagram
082 083
Miles To/From Work
Average Downtown Worker Spends $
Downtown’s Developers
SELF
Architectural Approach
a Year Commuting To/From Work
Due to No Formal Zoning Laws, Developers Have Essentially Built the Entire Downtown With Each Project Only Linking to Its Own Developer’s Buildings
With Multiple Developers all Building Projects, the Entire Downtown is Made Up of Fragmented Groups of Buildings Unconnected to the Majority of the City
LIVE
WORK
Strict
PARKING
City Code Requires
85% 15%
Than Residents
of Overall Parking is On-Street Spaces of Overall Parking is Above Grade Garages
Parking Infographics
>_
MORE PARKING
Pedestrian WIDE WIDE
Within Within thethe Downtown Downtown Core Core Wide Wide Streets Streets Discourage Discourage Walkability Walkability By By Making Making it Difficult it Difficult for Pedestrians for Pedestrians to to GetGet Anywhere Anywhere
100’ 100’
Vehicular Vehicular Streets Streets
On Grade On Grade Within Within Downtown Downtown
WALKABILITY WALKABILITY
For For Pedestrians Pedestrians inin the the City City
Pedestrian Walkability Diagram
When a city encourages the use of the automobile as much as this, it can lead to issues for the very people that they are trying to keep there. Because Houston is “predominantly motorized and individualized, pedestrian and public experience is limited The Theto interior spaces” and the vehicle dominates the majority of the urban public realm (Lerup, 2011). One of the significant ways that the Downtown does this through isWorker the Average Average Downtown Downtown Worker ample use of on grade surface parking Commutes Commutes
DAILY DAILY
42 42
lots throughout. Not only does this developmental approach result in a much less dense urban environment, but it also creates a city in which the walkability for the pedestrian is significantly elongated (Kunstler, 1994). When this occurs, the pedestrian experience is intruded by the vehicle to the point where people would much rather drive from one location to another within the Downtown city limits. This condition drastically affects
Miles Miles To/From To/From Work Work
the vibrancy of the city’s streetside public realm and only further promotes the lifestyle that is using the heavy vehicular use as a crutch. In addition to the use of vehicles encouraged by the development, Downtown Houston’s light rail line is pathetically integrated into the surrounding urban fabric also discouraging local citizens to even try and commute without owning a car. The pedestrian public realm is noticeably more vacant than one would expect from a typical city and when the work week ends, the city seems as if it were almost uninhabited by the countless citizens that abide around its fringes. When the vehicle is pushed to prominence within a city, the pedestrian experience begins to be compromised and a shifting in this design mindset is imperative to ensure that the Downtown will not become an automotive wasteland. If this developmental stategy continues, who knows where this vicious cycle will take the urban environment of the Downtown.
Lack of Street Storefront: Taken by Author Surface Parking Lots
084 085
Downtown’s Private
TUNNEL SKYBRIDGE
Private Tunnels For Workers Are 7 Miles Long and a Fragmented System Only Open During Business Hours Creating a Quasi-Public Realm
?
Systems
?
No Zoning
Private Skybridges Connect Various Buildings Within Districts Which Allow Business Workers to Circulate Above Grade off of the Street Level
Location of Activity Above and Below Grade Results in a Non-Existent Street Level Realm
Downtown’s Developers
SELF
Architectural Approach Due to No Formal Zoning Laws, Developers Have Essentially Built the Entire Downtown With Each Project Only Linking to Its Own Developer’s Buildings
Strict Downtown Houston is a very unique urban creature unlike any other in the United States at its scale. The reason as to why this outrageous accusation is the case is due to the fact that, “the separation of land uses is impelled by economic forces rather than mandatory zoning” (Lerup, 2011). Although this sounds like an impossible fact to occur within a city that is the third largest in our nation, this situation is a large reason as to why the Downtown core has turned out the way it has.
PARKING
>_
With Multiple Developers all Building Projects, the Entire Downtown is Made Up of Fragmented Groups of Buildings Unconnected to the Majority of the City
When an entire Downtown’s fate is left up to whatever the developer withCity theCode most money chooses to do Requires with it, the autonomous approach to privatized development only becomes worse than a typical Residents urban approach. TheThan urban realm becomes almost entirely an Parking afterthoughtof in Overall this situation and is On-Street Downtown Houston only further Spaces proves that this is and was the of Overall Parking case. Although no formal zoning laws are enacted and enforced is Above Grade Garages
MORE PARKING
85% 15%
TUNNEL SKYBRIDGE
Private Tunnels For Workers Are 7 Miles Long and a Fragmented System Only Open During Business Hours Creating a Quasi-Public Realm
?
byDowntown’s a larger government Developersauthority, the city has achieved a similar effect through its implementation of land useArchitectural regulations. Approach These land use regulations are significant for Due to No Formal the city because they essentially Zoning Laws, Developers Have are a privitized market response Essentially Built the Entire Downtown With Each Project for the municipality to try and Only Linking to Its Own Developer’s achieve the same thing. One of Buildings the main perks for these land use regulations and deed restrictions is that they allow for much more flexibility for the developers with rules and regulations that can be more adapted to the specific Strict environments in which they are in. In addition to this adaptation, these deed restrictions are also different than zoning laws because they have the ability for them to be changed over periods of time (Lewyn, 2005). With these lack of regulations being the case, in theory it would be possible for a petrochemical refinery to be located directly next to a housing development, and it is up to developers to consider whether or not that would be a
Private Skybridges Connect Various Buildings Within Districts Which Allow Business Workers to Circulate Above Grade off of the Street Level
Systems
Location of Activity Above and Below Grade Results in a Non-Existent Street Level Realm
?
Urban Pedestrian Stratification
086 087
Downtown’s Private
15%
SELF
>_
City Code Requires
MORE PARKING
85% 15%
Than Residents
of Overall Parking is On-Street Spaces St. Joseph Skywalks W. Dallas Tunnel
E. McKinney Tunnel W. Walker Tunnel
of Overall Parking is Above Grade Garages
Court Tunnels North Travis Tunnel N. Louisiana Tunnel Tunnel Loop S. Louisiana Tunnel
Underground Pedestrian Tunnel Network
PARKING
With Multiple Developers all Building Projects, the Entire Downtown is Made Up of Fragmented Groups of Buildings Unconnected to the Majority of the City
Undergound Tunnel Plaza: Taken By Author Underground Tunnel Programs: Taken By Author
financially responsible feat to attempt (Lerup, 2011). With these conditions taken into consideration, it creates an urban environment where little to no entity is regulating development with a collective vision of the city being considered. One of the results of such an issue is with the existence and expansion of the privatized tunnel and skybride networks. Since these privatized networks consisting of programs and uses that would typically exist on the street within the public realm, it creates a Downtown where, “class is literally inscribed in the towers, the street, and the tunnels below:
vertical integration with lateral separation� (Lerup, 2011). Because these networks of pedestrian traffic and circulation exist both above ground and below, the street level urban experience which is typically assumed to be bustling with activity, is robbed of this normality almost leaving an empty, ghost townlike perception. One of the main downsides of this urban model for development is that many of the amenities for the public realm of the city(which would normally be controlled and implemented by a government authority) are left to be funded and built by the private developers sector within their projects. This large reliance on the private sector for the development of public space and program causes the city to be almost entirely privatized within these areas that would typically be completely public. As a result, this ends up creating a city that essentially closes down after hours (Lewyn, 2005). When privately funded public space is created, a lack of
088 089
as a Result
280’ Small Grid is 65 Feet Shorter Than Other Downtown Lot Sizes in Most Cities Such as Los Angeles or Chicago
space devoted to the public realm twenty four hours a day exists and in reality, that isn’t public space at all. Privately owned public spaces are relatively new nuances to the urban environment and can be elusive because their effectiveness is still yet to be determined. They are unique primarily due to the fact that, “many spaces are nothing more than empty strips or expanses of untended surface, while others have been privatized by locked gates, missing amenities, and usurpation by adjacent commercial activities” (Kayden, 2000). According to Kayden’s analysis of New York City, over 41% of the 503 public spaces were of minimal effectiveness to the urban environment (Kayden, 2000). Is it time for a re-evaluation of these private-public spaces? Could there possibly be a new breed of entirely public space that begins to coexist within a privately funded architectural object? Although these types of private-public areas exist within Downtown Houston,
Houston’s Strong Economy Leads to a Need For Large Floor Plates in Order to Meet Programmatic Needs of Buildings Which Results in Entire Lots Being Developed (90%+) With Little to no Public Space on Ground Level
very few of them actually are located on the street level and are permeable to the public. Lot coverage by these buildings is high where a large percentage, if not all, of the buildings’ footprints take up the majority of their lots. There are many contributing factors to this such as small lot sizes and a booming economy, but the main negative aspect of these abnormally high lot coverages is that the pedestrian realm at the street level is doomed to the sidewalks, sandwiched between the many cars and buildings lacking any storefront usage (Firley & Gimbal, 2011). Typical Downtown Full Lot Development: Taken by Author
Downtown Grid Size
Lot Development Percentages
LOT COVERAGE
SMALL
Growing
...
Downtown’s Development in Relation to the City: Taken by Author
When a city is founded upon an outdated urban model of development, it should be of high priority to the planners and architects to begin to address this issue. However, when this city is the third largest city in the U.S. and had been the second fastest growing city in the nation a couple years past, this is cause for alarm because of the serious ground needing to be covered. Not only does this mean that a shifting in design strategies should take place, but
also that this re-thinking needed to have occurred yesterday. Exponential increases in a city’s population strain not only that city’s infrastructure but also the amenities and public space needs that those citizens will require as a result of that spike. Because of this growth, huge strides need to taken by designers to ensure that this growth begins to take place in a more centralized urban location where expansion occurs in a more prosperous area.
090 091
Light Railwas Ridership Houston the is the 2nd
HIGHEST FASTEST
inGrowing the United States Per City RouteStates Mile in the United in 2012 Average Daily Ridership Increased
172%
in the First 10 Months
+0
LIVE 2011
WORK 2012
Only 7.5 Miles Exist of a Mile Large Population With
73 MINIMAL
610
Rail Line Proposal By 2025 Houston’s Urban Sprawl Results in a Large 10 Memorial Park
Existing
60%
Proposed
59
59 45
SUBURBAN
Downtown Core
Culture by Its Citizens
10
of Its Growth Over the Last Decade Occurred at least
20 MILES
Outside the Urban Core Texas Medical Center
SUBURBAN
University of Houston
45
URBAN
Light Rail Expansion
nd
+ 34,625
PUBLIC POPULATION
Annual Population Growth
TheImmense Increase of An
Suburbia
Houstonian Suburban Sprawl
Density is a term that has almost been non-existent in the vocabulary of Houston up until the last decade or so. With consistent growth primarily residing in the urban fabric’s outskirts, the city is expanding growth outwards at an alarming rate. Houston is a city almost entirely made up residents living in the suburbs currently because for the area, “sprawl has become the solution to the development equation� (Lerup, 2011). Numerous causes can be held responsible for this suburban condition,
but none are more significant than the urban disarray of its Downtown. When an urban core cannot satisfy the needs of the people in which it exists for the sole purpose for, the inhabitants begin to search outside the urban fabric for places in which they can do so. When planners noticed this increase in single family home popularity back in the post war era, they catered to it and promoted the sprawl by building more roads and highways
Large Population With
MINIMAL
Houston’s Urban Sprawl Results in a Large
SUBURBAN
Culture by Its Citizens
60%
of Its Growth Over the Last Decade Occurred at least
20 MILES
Outside the Urban Core
SUBURBAN
out to the urban fringe. Stephen Klineberg, a sociologist at Rice University, discusses the issue stating, “The city of Houston covers 620 miles...You could put inside the city limits of Houston simultaneously the cities of Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, and Detroit.” With these statistics, it provokes the question, “How have designers allowed for sprawl to get this bad?” When there are ample amounts of land, little zoning regulation, and a booming
URBAN
economy, these conditions created the perfect storm for such extreme levels of suburban sprawl. Since planning was forced to take the back seat before, it is time for designers to begin to fix this issue for future urban prosperity. For my thesis, instead of choosing to ignore this obviously popular lifestyle choice of suburban culture that the citizens have chosen, I am finding characteristics that exist currently within the suburban home and merging them with those of the Downtown core’s high rise.
Suburban Sprawl Diagram
+0
092 093 2012
2011
Downtown
Downtown Houston’s Skyline
With these afformentioned urban problems that the city of Houston has been founded upon, there is no other place than Downtown Houston that needs a design intervention more. Downtown Houston is unique because as opposed to a typical urban core, “The constant 24/7 activity block of the traditional city does not exist in the tattered fabric�(Lerup, 2011). As a result of these urban problems, Downtown is currently in redevelopment to address these development issues and keep its
elusive inhabitants there to begin to live a more localized lifestyle. The urban landscape is unique in its own right because it pushes the high rises to prominence as autonomous, unconnected elements from the public realm(Firley and Gimbal, 2011). Although this is a serious design flaw within the high rise typology, Houston creates an urban core that causes this urban disconnect to become even more pronounced. Due to many factors
Downtown Figure Ground
094 095
Theater District
Downtown Development Land Use
Historic District Sports/Conv. District Skyline District
Downtown Transit Lines
096 097
Existing Transit Proposed Transit
Downtown Green Spaces
that I will delve deeper into in the upcoming pages, the design approach to the developments within Downtown Houston are grossly inefficient and unsustainble when it comes to the urban and architectural relationship. One fact of the Downtown Houston core is that it houses the second highest number of Fortune 500 company headquarters against New York City (Firley & Gimbal, 2011). When the scales of both of these cities are compared, it is a shocking surprise to notice that the office space uses in these buildings comprise a large portion of the building uses in the Downtown. When this condition of a low mixing of uses exists within a downtown, it creates a monotonous programmattic environment where vibrant pedestrian activity throughout all hours of the day ceases to exist. Due to the city’s strong economy, the need for high rise projects that extend from sidewalk to sidewalk increases with little to no uses being given to the public in the form of plazas, parks, and/or program (Firley & Gimbal, 2011). The government has noticed this issue and recognizes that there is a need to promote sound growth through the construction of various uses and is critical to the long term economic health of the city. Since this is the case, it creates the perfect environment for a hybrid building to intervene for the citizens of Downtown Houston and the time is now to spark this urban revival to ultimately foster a better urban experience for its citizens.
CITY HALL PUBLIC LIBRARY
TOYOTA CENTER
ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL
CONVENTION CENTER
CITY HALL ANNEX
MAIN STREET
WORTHAM THEATER
MINUTE MAID PARK
DISCOVERY GREEN
MARKET SQUARE
Wortham Theater
Built in 1987, this theater is home to the Houston Ballet and the Houston Grand Opera. Made up of two theaters, the Brown Theater has 2,423 seats and the Cullen Theater consists of 1,100.
098 099
Minute Maid Ballpark
Built in 2000, this ballpark is home to the Houston Astros whose main architectural feature is a retractable roof above the field which allows for outdoor playing when favorable weather permits.
George R. Brown Convention Center
Built in 1987, this convention center services the city of Houston with over 1,800,000 square feet of exhibit halls and convention space.
Discovery Green Park
Toyota Center Stadium
Built in 2003, this indoor arena is home to the Houston Rockets of the NBA. The stadium seats 18,023 fans for basketball, hockey, or concerts.
Downtown Significant Buildings
Opened in 2008, this 11.78 acre public park is located across the street from the convention center. It consists of a lake, bandstands, and venues for public performances and numerous recreational facilities.
Pedestrian Analysis
Walker St. and Milam St. Site Perspective: Taken by Author
The site location that was chosen for my thesis intervention is located in Downtown Houston in the heart of the business district. Office buildings are the primary programmatic component within a two block radius of the site creating an environment where a hybrid building with numerous different uses is a highly desired component for the urban fabric. This lot is said to be one of the most expensive and infulential lots left in Downtown Houston due to its centralized location
in the densest part of the city and consequently has the most potential for a successful high rise project. Located blocks away from the prominent theater district and municipal district with a strong public presence amongst the parks and buildings, a rich programmattic chemistry would serve this nearby community perfectly. Office buildings in the surrounding lots are a minimum of 500 feet with the highest, Wells Fargo Plaza to the
Project Site Location
100 101
Surrounding Tunnel Network
southwest, being 1,000 feet tall. Not only do these densely congregated lots provide the immediate context with thousands of employees and a daily basis during the week, but it also means that these large amounts of people require many different uses that they would currently have little to no options to find places to do so. With Downtown Houston needing new uses integrated into their buildings badly, this lot is the perfect location for such an intervention due to its centralized location as well as an existing large number of users in the surrounding context. One of the most significant aspects of this lot and the nearby infrastructure is that it is surrounded by an intricate network of underground pedestrian tunnels that connect a great deal of the high rises and parking garages underground throughout the entire downtown. The lot is located in an area referred to as the “Tunnel Loop� due to the fact that it is encircled by these pedestrian tunnels which radiate out to the urban fabric from this location at the heart of this well-connected network. This underground pedestrian culture is significant in Downtown Houston and is a very unique, semi-public urban condition to this city that is heavily used by office workers as well as tourists. It is crucial for this project’s success to integrate into this popular existing network in order to meet the people where they are currently at within the tattered urban fabric of the city.
Site Site
Site Location in Central Business District
Site Location in Urban Context
Site
Site
Site Site
Southwest Lot Perspective
Northeast Lot Perspective
001 103 102 002
Site Site
Site
Underground Pedestrian Tunnel Location
62,500 Sq. Ft. Site Parameters
Lot District Location
Sk
yli ne
Dis tri ct
Site
Dis tri cts Summer Sun Angle
Prevailing Summer Winds
83
62,500 Sq. Ft.
Site
Winter Sun Angle
37
Prevailing Winter Winds
Downtown Climate Information
Int e
rs ec
Ga r
tio
de
nZ
on
e
nD ist ric t
001 105 104 002
Site Site
Underground Pedestrian and Vehicular Access
Site Site Public Transit Lines and Stops
Summer Sun Angle
Wells Fargo 83 Plaza
001 107 106 002
Pennzoil Place
Shell Plaza
J.P. Morgan Chase Winds Prevailing Summer Bank
Significant Buildings
Bank of America Plaza
El Paso Corporation
Center Point Energy Plaza
Winter Sun Angle
Site
Prevailing Winter Winds
37
Theater
Civic
Civic Civic
Office Buildings
Theater
Civic Residential
Parking Hotel Shopping Hotel
Surrounding Land Use
Parking
WHAT’S THE BIG IDEA?
Humanizing
PEDESTRIAN
High Rise Design
High Rises Are Infamous For Their Massive Intimidating Scale to the Pedestrians That They are Designed For
Through the Pixelation of the Form With Modular Elements, the Massive Scale of the High Rise is Brought to a More Relatable Human Scale
Human Scaling Diagram
Another stigma high rises are famous for is the banishment of The Urban building occupants to the elevators Interaction With High Rises Consists to get anywhere within the project. Mainly on the Floors of Not only does this approachBottom create the Projects With Commercial Uses a built environment that tramples on For Pedestrians the pedestrian experience, but it also cultivates an unhealthy and restricting occupant experience. This thesis tackles this head on by proposing alternate routes of circulation giving Ecology way to a “walkaable high rise.� Given this newfound walkability throughout The Project is Located in the
the high rise, human scale is crucial and is adressedPedestrian through Interaction Will Be the use pixelation. Rather than Enhanced Through the Design of a approaching a six hundred foot Public Elevated Promenade and tower as an entire facade, areas Public Park That at Ground of erosion in which the Begins pedestrians Level are located, are comprised of smaller eleven by eleven foot modules that are designed at a much more relatable human scale. This concept as a result creates a building truly designed around the people that use it. A Connection to These Tunnels Will
110 111
>_ Development Strategy Diagram
A Connection to These Tunnels Will Be Made to Integrate Into the Pedestrian Urban Fabric as Well as Create Non-Existing Public Tunnel Entrances
“Building Pixelation� Concept Model
The Project is Located in the Heart of a Fragmented Network of Underground Privitized Pedestrian Tunnels
?
Vernacular The Traits of a Houston’s
SUBURBAN
Environment Suburbs Are Experienced By Users as With Their Interaction Occuring Via The Surrouding External Space
The Urban Planning of Suburbs are In an Organic Format Where the Layout Resulsts in Fluid Circulation of Both Cars and Pedestrians
URBAN
ARCHITECTURAL
Suburban Characteristics Diagram
The Traits of Houston’s
Just as with any design project, a thorough and in depth analysis of the site and the unique characteristics of the area in which Environment the project is located is fundamental to a design Urban Planning project’s success. When thisThe study was of Urban Cores are In an Grid Format conducted by myself, I came to the Where the Layout Resulsts in Rigid realization that there is a tremendous Circulation of Both and amount of suburban sprawlCars within Pedestrians the city of Houston. As stated before, more than half of all citizens live at least twenty five miles away from the URBAN downtown. Since this is the case, I
URBAN
The Traits of the
chose to focus my research on the characteristics of the Houstonian suburb to see what characteristics they possess. Instead of bypassing this significant evidence like most Urban Cores Are have in Downtown Houston, I chose Experienced By Users With Their to not ignore that the people Interaction Occuring Via The enjoyed and wanted what these Internal Atrium developments offerred. Spaces This led to a design that contained a hybrid of characteristics from both those of a Downtown high rise as well as those ARCHITECTURAL of a Houstonian suburb.
ARCHITECTURAL
112 113
The Traits of Houston’s
URBAN
Environment Urban Cores Are Experienced By Users With Their Interaction Occuring Via The Internal Atrium Spaces
The Urban Planning of Urban Cores are In an Grid Format Where the Layout Resulsts in Rigid Circulation of Both Cars and Pedestrians
URBAN
Downtown High Rise Characteristics
URBAN
ARCHITECTURAL
The Traits of the
Organic Circulation
+
Hybrid Environment
=
High Rise Typology
Houstonian Suburb
URBAN
ARCHITECTURAL
This Combination of Both Native Topologies is a High Rise Whose Form is Bound By the Rigid Urban Grid With Pedestrian Circulation Similar to That of a Suburb Eroding Away the Form Organically
Houston’s Bank of America Center Lobby: Taken by Author
Externalized Spaces
+
Downtown’s Square Urban Grid Provides the Lot Dimensions of the Project Requiring Development to Follow Such Rigid Constraints
PRIVATE The Traits of the Hybrid Environment Downtown’s Square Urban Grid Provides the Lot Dimensions of the Project Requiring Development to Follow Such Rigid Constraints
URBAN
+
Organic Circulation
=
This Combination of Both Native Topologies is a High Rise Whose Form is Bound By the Rigid Urban Grid With Pedestrian Circulation Similar to That of a Suburb Eroding Away the Form Organically
High Rise Typology
ARCHITECTURAL
Proposed Hybrid Topology Diagram
+
Externalized Spaces
“Topological Hybrid” Concept Model
114 115
Stratification Urban Pedestrian Vertical
STRATIFICATION SKY
STREET
Urban Pedestrian
ACCESSABILITY
Downtown Houston’s Pedestrian Urban Realms Are Currently Vertically Segregated Through the Use of Streets, Tunnels, and Skybridges
PRIVATE
This Pedestian Segregation Occurs Both Publically and Privately Between All Layers of Separation
PUBLIC TUNNEL
Downtown’s Urban Segregation Proposed Existing Pedestrian Vertical
UNIFICATION
PRIVATE/SEMI-PUBLIC
Urban Pedestrian
ACCESSABILITY
One of the most unique Instead of the citizens only having characteristics of Downtown Houston’s the option to walk across the street My Project Aims toto get somewhere, developers By Implementing a urban fabric is the location of their Bridge the Gap Public Promenade Between These have allowed another alternative That Extends pedestrians within the urban context. to Three Levels of Through All Three Vertical Pedestriando so which never requires Levels, Rather than the majority of SKY the public fora Collective that Disconnection and Integration is Achieved running around on the sidewalks Unify Them Throughperson to be seen outside. While this Walkable PUBLIC alongside the sea of high rises likeCirculation a is a more comfortable alternative STREET PUBLIC typical American downtown, Houston’s during the summer months, it street life is almost entirely non existent. creates a downtown environment The primary reason as to why this has where the urban realm is stratified TUNNEL TUNNEL occurred is due to the implementation andPUBLIC diluted amongst a network of of both skybridges and tunnel networks privatized tunnels and skybridges throughout the downtown core. with little to no public presence.
Downtown High Rise
TYPICAL
Downtown High Rise
PROPOSED
Pedestrian Skybridge Level
Podiums Are Typically the Primary Location For Public Interaction Where the Tower Meets the Ground
Pedestrian Tunnel Level
Podium Ecology
116 117
Pedestrian Tunnel Dropdown The Proposal Challenges This Approach By Extending This Interaction Skyward Into the Tower Itself
Street Level
Pennzoil Place Analysis
Podium Ecology Street Level Entrance
Pedestrian Skybridge Level
Wells Fargo Streetside Analysis
TYPICAL
Urban Pedestrian Vertical
STRATIFICATION SKY
Urban Pedestrian
ACCESSABILITY
Downtown Houston’s Pedestrian Urban Realms Are Currently Vertically Segregated Through the Use of Streets, Tunnels, and Skybridges
This Pedestian Segregation Occurs Both Publically and Privately Between All Layers of Separation
PRIVATE
Unification
STREET
PUBLIC
PRIVATE/SEMI-PUBLIC
TUNNEL Proposed Pedestrian Vertical
UNIFICATION
SKY STREET
Urban Pedestrian
ACCESSABILITY
My Project Aims to Bridge the Gap Between These Three Levels of Vertical Pedestrian Disconnection and Unify Them Through Walkable Circulation
By Implementing a Public Promenade That Extends Through All Three Levels, a Collective Integration is Achieved
PUBLIC
TUNNEL TUNNEL
PUBLIC
PUBLIC
Proposed Project’s Design Solution
Downtown High Rise Downtown High Rise As stated before, with these Instead of proposing a high rise fragmented networks of tunnels and that continues this deterioration of skybridges connecting high rises to Downtown Houston’s public realm, Ecology Ecology each other and parking garages this proposal aims to bridge the throughout the urban core, Houston’s gap and stitch together these three public realm begins to be dominated regions of the urban fabric between The Current Norm My Proposal Sinks in Downtown the Tower and by the privatization of its activities. the street, tunnel, and skybridge Design is a Tower Podium and Podium Underground in Instead of having a great deal of networks. The way in which this is Located on Grade Order to Achieve Isolating Greater Pedestrian the public’s activities located on the achieved is with an extension of the Pedestrians From Connections Into Each Other at the the Project as Well streets with mixed use developments, high rise’s podium which supplies Street, Tunnel, and as the Surrounding Skybridge Levels Urban Fabric the majority of these commercial uses the public realm with much needed exist underground in a tunnel network program well beyond just the hours that only operates with the work week. of the typical work week.
TYPICAL
“Urban Integration” Concept Model
118 119
TUNNEL TUNNEL
Downtown High Rise
TYPICAL
Ecology
Ecology The Current Norm in Downtown Design is a Tower and Podium Located on Grade Isolating Pedestrians From Each Other at the Street, Tunnel, and Skybridge Levels
Pedestrian Tunnel Level
My Proposal Sinks the Tower and Podium Underground in Order to Achieve Greater Pedestrian Connections Into the Project as Well as the Surrounding Urban Fabric
High Rise Lobby & Street Level
Downtown High Rise & Tunnel Connection: Taken by Author
Downtown High Rise
Adapted Tunnel Integration Diagram
PUBLIC
Pedestrian Tunnel Level
High Rise Lobby & Street High Rise Tower & Level Dropdowns Private Program
High Rise Podium & Urban Connection
Wells Fargo Plaza Tunnel and Plaza: Taken by Author
120 121
High Rise Lobby & Street Level Street Level
One Shell Plaza Tunnel Dropdowns: Taken by Author
Pedestrian Tunnel Level Pedestrian Tunnel Level
Podium Ecology
Adapted Podium Ecology Diagram
TYPICAL
ADAPTED
Podium Ecology
Podiums Are Typically the Primary Location For Public Interaction Where the Tower Meets the Ground
The Proposal Challenges This Approach By Extending This Interaction Skyward Into the Tower Itself
PRIVATE
Pedestrian Tunnel Level
High Rise Tower & Private Program
Street Level
Pedestrian Skybridge Level Aqua Tower Analysis: Taken by Author
High Rise Podium & Urban Connection
High Rise Podium & Urban Connection
Chicago’s Trump Tower Analysis: Taken by Author
Street Level
High Rise Tower & Private Program
High Rise Podium & Urban Connection
Hearst Tower Analysis: Taken by Author
Pedestrian Tunnel High Rise Tower & Level Private Program
122 123
Process
124 125
MAXIMIZED ACCESS
The initial massing exploration was approached from a perspective that mainly accentuated and focused on the idea of the public realm’s interaction being maximized. The way in which this would take place was through the form of pixelation and erosion in conjunction with a ramp-like circulation system. Although this objective was achieved, square footage throughout the tower was severly compromised and needed another iteration to pursue further.
ADDITIVE APPROACH
Due to the nature of the previous exploration eroding away too much of tower, the next approach was taken in the opposite manner, where the urban integration and ramp would be an additive element to the form rather than a subtractive. This however caused issues within the design regarding circulation and programattic configuration so an alternate route needed exploration.
ACCESS OPTIMIZATION
001 127 126 002
Instead of an “urban ramp” that erodes away on two sides or adds on pixelation through a single spiral, a single spiral route was continued with this iteration in the form of erosion rather than addition. This route allows for increased circulation efficiency while not compromising too much square footage at the same time. Now that the bottom half “urban infill zone” was for the most part optimized, attention was needed more so at the tower above.
TOWER EROSION POCKETS Within this model, the “urban ramp” steepness and erosion radius was explored to witness formular developments in addition to the tower being addressed. Due to the programattic necessities of a hotel and residences on the north and south sides, pockets were subtracted to explore how these voids could shape these communal ammentiy areas. The infill zone ramp however resulted too steeply and the tower lacked a correct scale of erosion.
COMBINED VARIATIONS
The route taken with this model was one of pure experimentation. Due to the fact that previous iterations were not producing the desired results, a completely fresh approach was taken where linear strips of erosion were subtracted from the form to service the varying needs of both the urban infill zone and the tower. Flat platforms occured along the infill zone which resulted in too much square footage subtraction while the tower floorplates remained too large for efficient housing and hospitality.
INTERNAL EROSION
With preceding building model iterations consisting mainly of externalized erosion, the idea of internalizing this action of subtraction leaving a hollow-like shell of program as the result was a fresh one to me. This act was taken to allow for more efficient housing and residences with thinner floorplates, but as I witnessed thereafter, this left the infill zone with floorplates that were far too small for the uses required.
HYBRID EROSIONS
001 129 128 002
Although thinner floorplates were achieved with the last model, little daylight and wind penetration would have occurred so an externalized erosion experiment was conducted at the top while leaving an internalized subtraction at the infill zone. This however resulted in severe structural conflicts where a lighter, hollowed out base supported a heavier, solid tower. Programattic influences also were not as efficient within this model.
PROGRAMMATIC OPTIMIZATION
Continuing with the hybridized erosion as the model above, requirements of thinner floorplates at the tower with larger, more gradual ramps resulted in this finalized conceptual model. An internalized erosion at the tower’s top with an open air roof allowed for the needed light and wind and privacy for the hotel and residences, while an externalized erosion for the “urban ramp” allowed larger floorplates to service more square footage heavy programs while maintaining “urban transparency” between the public and their city.
Now that the bigger idea thinking of the project’s conceptual generation and implementation had been resolved, a transition from the macro scale development to the micro was the next step. Beginning the exploration of the high rise’s building form from the last massing model created, it was required to delve deeper more into the details of the project from a functionality and square footage perspectived analysis. Due to the fact that a large amount of square footage was going to be required for the high rise to perform to its programattic expectations, this was a fundamental aspect that needed careful consideration and fine tuning. During the analysis of this massing exploration, it was apparent that the square footage of the project had been severely compromised by the erosions of the building’s form. Although aesthetically the project seemed to be successful, functionally it had not worked due to the fact that such little square footage had been dedicated to the private programs within the urban infill zone.
#
1
Refined Conceptual Model #1
Refined
URBAN INFILL ZONE
179,785
130 131 3,380 Square Feet of Public/5,212 Private Program 2,736 Square Feet of Public/6,520 Private Program
Square Feet of
Private Program
109,636
2,900 Square Feet of Public/9,544 Private Program 4,033 Square Feet of Public/7,164 Private Program 3,696 Square Feet of Public/9,876 Private Program
Square Feet of
Public Program
3,851 Square Feet of Public/9,573 Private Program 4,028 Square Feet of Public/9,540 Private Program 3,696 Square Feet of Public/9,180 Private Program 1,868 Square Feet of Public/9,068 Private Program 2,012 Square Feet of Public/8,084 Private Program 2,300 Square Feet of Public/7,508 Private Program
Urban Infill
Zone
2,228 Square Feet of Public/7,984 Private Program 3,500 Square Feet of Public/6,688 Private Program 3,696 Square Feet of Public/7,164 Private Program 2,348 Square Feet of Public/9,492 Private Program 4,316 Square Feet of Public/7,960 Private Program
Urban Infill
4,104 Square Feet of Public/7,880 Private Program
Zone 2,564 Square Feet of Public/9,564 Private Program
2,996 Square Feet of Public/9,132 Private Program 3,908 Square Feet of Public/9,372 Private Program 13,280 Square Feet of Private Program 11,268 Square Feet of Public Program 10,452 Square Feet of Public Program 10,476 Square Feet of Public Program
Based on the previous refined conceptual design, the square footage of the design had to be re-evaluated in order to provide the privatized programs with their required floor areas. This crucial fault required for the scale of the erosions throughout the high rise to be reconsidered in order to reduce the amount subtracted from each floor. After the scale was reduced for the erosions, a significant increase in the square footage dedicated towards the private programs was noticed allowing for the required programs to exist within the perscribed locations. One main design feature which allowed for this to happen was by redesigning the structural core for the project by breaking it up into three separate entities. This is significant because it allows for the design to serve both the public and private programs more effectively while also reducing its overall footprint throughout the entire high rise. In addition from a structural standpoint, this creates a more viable structural solution to the design scheme due to the subtractions of large portions of the high rise’s massing.
#
2
Refined Conceptual Model #2
Refined
n
URBAN INFILL ZONE
244,335 Square Feet of
Private Program
78,241
132 133
3,038 Square Feet of Public/8,438 Private Program 3,638 Square Feet of Public/7,626 Private Program 3,662 Square Feet of Public/10,914 Private Program 4,166 Square Feet of Public/9,614 Private Program 1,979 Square Feet of Public/11,369 Private Program
Square Feet of
Public Program
3,098 Square Feet of Public/10,182 Private Program 3,225 Square Feet of Public/10,550 Private Program 3,837 Square Feet of Public/10,226 Private Program 2,078 Square Feet of Public/11,697 Private Program 3,380 Square Feet of Public/10,476 Private Program 4,322 Square Feet of Public/9,602 Private Program
Urban Infill
Zone
2,350 Square Feet of Public/12,294 Private Program 2,366 Square Feet of Public/12,849 Private Program 2,157 Square Feet of Public/13,490 Private Program 3,442 Square Feet of Public/11,773 Private Program 1,578 Square Feet of Public/13,349 Private Program
Urban Infill
2,560 Square Feet of Public/12,223 Private Program
Zone 2,654 Square Feet of Public/11,697 Private Program
3,096 Square Feet of Public/11,768 Private Program 1,644 Square Feet of Public/13,144 Private Program 2,076 Square Feet of Public/12,424 Private Program 2,939 Square Feet of Public/8,630 Private Program 7,334 Square Feet of Public Program 7,622 Square Feet of Public Program
With this last and final conceptual design scheme produced, a smaller, more micro scaled refinement took place. The “urban ramp� erosions were again more finely tuned to produce a more pedestrian friendly internal environment that would be more relateable to the human scale and ultimately a more comfortable environment for the occupants. Optimization of this major design element is crucial in order for the complex circulation system of escalators and elevators to coexist in a more efficient manner. Since these service programs for both the public and private sectors, their integration into the tower is fundamental to the project’s success. Partial erosions on the exterior of the massing were also implemented in order to articulate its fenestration while also providing balconies and terraces for the supporting programs. Adjustments along various parts of the facade were also redesigned to allow for increased natural light penetration in areas that required such and vice versa for those that did not.
#
3
Refined Conceptual Model #3
Refined
URBAN INFILL ZONE
226,285 Square Feet of
Private Program
124,138 Square Feet of
Public Program
134 135
3,196 Square Feet of Public/6,896 Private Program 2,376 Square Feet of Public/10,697 Private Program 1,103 Square Feet of Public/13,729 Private Program 1,693 Square Feet of Public/10,948 Private Program 1,604 Square Feet of Public/10,901 Private Program 3,132 Square Feet of Public/9,517 Private Program 1,332 Square Feet of Public/12,469 Private Program 2,222 Square Feet of Public/12,299 Private Program 2,376 Square Feet of Public/12,577 Private Program 3,068 Square Feet of Public/11,013 Private Program 1,239 Square Feet of Public/12,842 Private Program 2,582 Square Feet of 11,434 Private Program 1,692 Square Feet of Public/11,392 Private Program 3,225 Square Feet of Public/10,288 Private Program 2,283 Square Feet of Public/11,662 Private Program 2,152 Square Feet of Public/11,344 Private Program 2,510 Square Feet of Public/10,715 Private Program 3,544 Square Feet of Public/10,245 Private Program 1,527 Square Feet of Public/11,943 Private Program
7,769 Square Feet of Private Program 5,605 Square Feet of Private Program
26,930 Square Feet of Public Program
54,352 Square Feet of Public Program
136 137
138 139
THE URBAN INFILTRATION
Form To represent the sequencing of the major moves made during the design process, a comprehensive story had to be told to display this process. The following is a series of diagrams portraying the story of the main gestures made to generate the building’s form with the rationalities and conditions that drove them
142 143
TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT TACTIC The typical Downtown Houston high rise consists of tower on podium maximizing square footage. A larger podium is the norm with lot development taking up 100% of the site resulting in no open space beyond the streets
144 145
SQUARE FOOTAGE OPTIMIZATION
Square footage is taken from the podium and distributed into the tower to narrow the floor plate. In order to preserve the square footage and the corresponding profits, the height of the tower is increased a good amount
STREET LEVEL OPEN SPACE
The building’s podium is pushed underground to allow for street level public space. Due to the fact that the majority of Houston’s high rises develop around 95% of their lots, this is a much needed design intention
146 147
MAXIMIZED TUNNEL INTEGRATION
By locating the building’s podium below grade, this allows for maximum integration into Downtown’s existing pedestrian tunnel system. The project is at the heart of the tunnel network that extends in all directions which connects the majority of Downtown’s high rises
ON GRADE DROPDOWN ENTRANCES
At the tower’s street level base, the north and south ends erode to allow on grade entrances into the public tunnel plaza inside. These dropdown entrances increase the public’s awareness of a semi-private underground tunnel culture while providing much needed commercial program
148 149
“ URBAN RAMP ” EROSION
From the underground plaza, the “urban ramp” erodes away the form and extends the podium skyward along with the streetside experience. With the design of this “urban ramp” the stratified urban fabric of Downtown Houston is unified through the “street, tunnel, sky” design concept
PUBLIC SKYPARK
A public skypark is created at the terminus of the “urban ramp.” This unique design feature brings the public realm of Downtown Houston to all new heights while providing the necessary program in conjunction with the library expansion’s entrance
150 151
SKYBRIDGE CONNECTIONS
Skybridges extend out from various levels along the “urban ramp� connecting the nearby office buildings to the public vertical promenade. This takes what is an existing privatized element in their downtown and uses it to unify the urban fabric rather than fragment
TOWER SKY COURTYARD
A vaulted sky courtyard is created to allow for single loaded corridors for the hospitality and residential programs. This design feature results in increased passive design for the unique, privatized programs creating a more pleasant built environment for the inhabitants
152 153
COMMUNAL AREAS CREATION
Erosion punches through the tower at specific locations on the north and south facade corners for each program. These openings provide the communal ammenties for the hospitality and residential areas as well as passive design strategies for the high rise
ENVIRONMENTAL ECOLOGY The functionality of the building’s program and conceptual ideas are important, but the way the design interacts with its surrounding environment is fundamental. Natural elements integrated in conjunction with natural vegetation throughout a design result in a more healthy and sustainable project for the occupants
PM
AM
154 155 12
270°
285°
300°
315°
330°
345°
N
15° 30°
255°
45°
240°
60°
225°
75° 210° 90° 195° 105° 180° 120° 165° 150°
135°
270°
285°
300°
315°
330°
345°
N
15° 30°
255°
45°
240°
60°
225°
75° 210° 90° 195° 105° 180° 120° 165° 150°
PASSIVE CONSIDERATIONS With both the programattic requirements and the existing site constraints being taken into account, environmental considerations are also crucial for the design. Passive systems allow for the high rise to coexist more efficiently within the natural elements of sun and wind that is unique to each climate
135°
Program Directly in conjunction with this formular exploration lies the program that this high rise is made up of. Due to the hybrid nature of the programattic components that the project consists of, a delicate balance of uses had to be achieved. All programs here are uses that are currently specified by Downtown Houston as much needed assets to the city in the future as well as others that were proposed by myself to further benefit the surrounding community and urban fabric
Building
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
156 157
URBAN INFILL
Program Placement
Adapting
124,138
Square Feet
This district houses the urban infill district where the numerous uses are allowed based on Downtown’s market needs from anything from a church to a movie theater
PERFORMING ARTS
Program Placement
Culturing
63,678
Square Feet
This district houses multiple smaller performing arts venues that the city currently needs allowing for the nearby theater district to expand its borders to the central business district
EDUCATIONAL
158 159
Program Placement
Learning
69,546
Square Feet
This district houses a vocational school or charter school where students have the ability to learn in a centrally located campus as a part of the Houston skyline.
LIBRARY EXPANSION
Program Placement
Reading
87,456
Square Feet
This district houses the expansion of the Downtown’s central library which is currently located two blocks west of the project. Located at the terminus of the “urban ramp” and the public sky park.
HOSPITALITY
Program Placement
Staying
152,777
Square Feet
This district houses a five star hotel that includes numerous rooms as well as communal ammenties and attractions for its inhabitants hundreds of feet in the sky.
RESIDENTIAL
Program Placement
Living
160,164
Square Feet
This district houses multiple modes of apartments ranging from studios, all the way to three bedroom units diversifying their demographic to ensure consistent lease activity.
PROGRAMMATIC
REA
STAYING
TOWER ZONE
LIVING
Relationships & Locations
URBAN INFILL ZONE
DIN
LEA
G
RN
ING
CUL
TUR
ADA
PTI
ING
NG
TOWER
TOWER TOWER TUNNEL TOWER
0 10 30
70
0 10 30 150
0 10 30
70
150
0 10 30
70
0 10 30 150
0 10 30
70
150
TUNNEL TUNNEL TUNNEL
70
150
70
150
STRUCTURAL
162 163
Proposed Building
PROGRAM
To allow for the high rise’s complex form, peripheral and central cores were required with a brace frame system at the tower merging into a series of supercolumns that unify and separate based on erosion locations through the infill zone
CIRCULATION
To service both the entirely privatized and publicized programs, peripheral and central circulation cores were proposed. The “Urban Ramp” also provides a tertiary route allowing access to public and private programs throughout the infill zone
Public . Private As a result of this hybrid building program with multiple varying uses, public/private programattic relationships are a large design factor within the project. Conscious design decisions had to be made whether or not to isolate or collaborate these two opposing realms based on user group similarities. Programattic placement is crucial in order to ensure that proper sequencing, flow, and hierarchy allow for the uses to coexist within the high rise efficiently
PUBLIC/
Ecologies
164 165
Urban Infill Program Extends Up the Vertical Podium Promenade Which Program Erodes Away the Form
FUTURE ?
CURRENT
Urban
Urban Program Market Needs
Market Needs
Internal Street Plaza
Known Programmatic Needs of a City’s Current Condition are Required for Architecture to Meet Them
Building Program Concept Model
Private Program
Due to the Constant Fluctuation of
Market Needs within Public “Urban Ramp” a City, It is Difficult Program to Determine the Progammatic Needs our Cities Will Have in the Future
Internal Segregated Atrium
Internal Segregated Atrium
NOISY
Internal Street Sectional Detail
SOCIALIZING
SERENE
VIBRANT
CONTEMPLATIVE
RESERVED
COLLABORATING
CONNECTIVITY
INTRAPERSONAL
INDIVIDUAL
SEMI-PUBLIC
NETWORKING
SEGMENTED Library District CLOISTERED
INTROVERTED Performing
INTERACTION PAUSE INTERACTION LOITERING
MEANDERING
CIRCULATION
Arts District COMPARTMENTALIZED
CLOSED OFF RELAXING CONSTANT
PRIVATE
Shopping District
Programmatic Breakdown
QUIET
COMMUICATION
Structural Core
ISOLATEDSTRUCTURE
RELAXATION
BREAK
ACTIVE
Elevated Public Park at the End of the Vertical Broadway
OPEN
COMMUNITY
Vertical Broadway Erodes Away the Form of the High Rise Lined With Adaptive Urban Infill Program
DYNAMIC
PUBLIC EXTROVERTED STREET LEVEL
UNRESTRICTED TUNNEL
Public vs. Private LEVEL
Podium Erodes at the Lot’s Eastern and Western Corners to Bring in the Public’s Street Level Connection as Well as Underground Tunnel System
HECTIC
CIRCULATION EXPOSED PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE
Public/Private Word Association Diagram
REFLECTIVE
Cultural District
Educational District
TRANSPARENT
PUBLIC
Residential District
Hotel District
PRIVATE
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
More Fixed and Permenant Program Lines the Inner Core of the Tower
DETACH
PUBLIC/PRIVATE
Program Adjacencies
Residential program is the most privatized program component of the project. Placed at the upper tower quadrant of the high rise, distance allows for more serene and personal space
166 167 Ecological Fluctuations
PRIVATE
Hospitality program is also located in the tower form. This placement allows for private separation while still encouraging public access and interaciton due to a more transient based user group
The public library expansion is placed at the middle of the project where the tower and urban infill zone base meet. Due to its fully public access, it is located directly adjacent to the public sky park in the project
A vocational school separates the public library from the semi-public performing arts venues. This placement allows for the privatized program to act as an ecological buffer between
Performing arts theater venues here serve a semi-public user group. This program allows for a transition between the fully public podium below and school above
The fully public access urban infill program is located at the base of the project. This allows for maximized integration into the existing tunnel network surrounding the site
PUBLIC
2 226 226,28 P 226,285 Priva 226,285 Private Pr1 226,285 124 Private Progra 226,285 124,13 Private Program 226,285 P 124,138 Private Program 226,285 Public 124,138 Private Program Public Pro 124,138 Private Program Public Program 124,138 Public Program 124,138 124,138 Public Program
PUBLIC/
Floor Plate Relationships
Throughout the “Urban Infill Zone” a public/private relationship is shared between varying programs on each and every floor plate. Not only does this configuration result in a unique experience for the users, but a vibrant, dynamic environment is created
Square
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square
Square Feet of
Privatized Program Placement Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Peripheral Tower Vertical Circulation Urban Infill Zone Vertical Circulation
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Public Program Public Program
Curtain Wall Where Square Feet of Erosion Occurs “Urban Ramp”
Public Program Placement
3,1 of Priv
3,196 Square Feet 2,3 of Public/6,896 of Private ProgramPriv
3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,1 of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697 of Private ProgramPrivate Program Priv 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,6 of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729 of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Priv 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,6 of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948 of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Priv 3,196 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 3,1 of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948 of Public/10,901of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Private ProgramPriv 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,3 3,132 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPriv
3,196 Square Feet 2,2 1,332 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPriv
2,222 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 2,3 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPriv 2,222 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 3,0 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299 of Public/10,901
Pub 124,138 Private Program 226,285 Public P 124,138 Private Program Public Progr 124,138 Private Program Public Program 124,138 Public Program 124,138 Public Program 124,138 Public Program Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
168 169
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Square Feet of
Public Program
3,196 Squ of Public Private P
3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Squ of Public/6,896 of Public Private ProgramPrivate P 3,196 Square Feet 1,103 Squ 2,376 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P
3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,693 Squ 1,103 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697 of Public/13,729of Public Private ProgramPrivate Program Private ProgramPrivate P 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,604 Squ 1,693 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729 of Public/10,948of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Private ProgramPrivate P 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 3,132 Squ 1,693 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public Private Program Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 3,196 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,332 Squ 1,103 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697 of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public Private ProgramPrivate Program Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 3,196 Square Feet 2,222 Squ 2,376 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet of Public/6,896 of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public Private Program Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 2,376 Square Feet 2,222 Square Feet 1,103 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 2,376 Squ of Public/10,697of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 1,103 Square Feet 2,222 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 3,068 Squ 2,376 Square Feet of Public/13,729of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public/12,577of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 2,222 Square Feet 1,693 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 1,239 Squ 3,068 Square Feet of Public/10,948of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public/12,577of Public/11,013of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate P 2,222 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 1,604 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 3,068 Square Feet 2,582 Squ 1,239 Square Feet of Public/10,901of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public/12,577of Public/11,013of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramProgram 2,222 Square Feet 3,132 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 3,068 Square Feet 1,692 Squ 1,239 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet of Public/9,517 of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public/12,577of Public/11,013of Public/12,842 of Public of 11,434 Private Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Private P Program 2,222 Square Feet 1,332 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 3,068 Square Feet 1,239 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet 3,225 Squ of Public/12,469of Public/12,299of Public/12,577of Public/11,013 of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private of Public/11,392of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate Program Private ProgramProgram Private ProgramPrivate P 2,222 Square Feet 2,376 Square Feet 3,068 Square Feet 1,239 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet of Public/12,299 3,225 Square Feet 2,283 Squ of Public/12,577of Public/11,013of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private of Public/11,392 Private Program of Public/10,288of Public Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramProgram Private Program Private ProgramPrivate P 2,376 Square Feet 3,068 Square Feet 1,239 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet 3,225 Square Feet of Public/12,577of Public/11,013of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private 2,283 Square Feet 2,152 Squ of Public/11,392 of Public/10,288of Public/11,662 Private ProgramPrivate ProgramPrivate ProgramProgram of Public Private Program Private ProgramPrivate Program Private P 3,068 Square Feet 1,239 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet 3,225 Square Feet of Public/11,013of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private 2,283 Square Feet of Public/11,392 2,510 Squ 2,152 Square Feet of Public/10,288 Private ProgramPrivate ProgramProgram of Public/11,662 Private Program of Public Private ProgramPrivate Programof Public/11,344 Private ProgramPrivate P 1,239 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet 2,582 Square Feet 2,283 Square Feet of Public/12,842of 11,434 Private of Public/11,3923,225 Square Feet 3,544 Squ 2,152 Square Feet 2,510 Square Feet Private ProgramProgram Private Programof Public/10,288of Public/11,662of Public/11,344of Public/10,715of Public Private ProgramPrivate Program Private P Private Program Private Program 2,582 Square Feet 1,692 Square Feet 3,225 Square Feet
URBAN
Sectional Detail
The “Urban Ramp” is where the street level experience extends skyward with public program supporting the cascading levels. Skybridges connect to this vertical promenade using an existing Houston condition that segregates the urban fabric to unify it
Passive Shading Facade System
Structural System Publicly Accessable “Urban Ramp”
Curtain Wall Attachments to Columns
Curtain Wall Erosion Enclosure
Internal Private Program
170 171
Facade Through the use of the pixelation concept, the facade is broken up into modular units all articulated around the program that they house in addition to their orientation for passive means. The concept of erosion lead to a building elevation that appears like the facade fragments as it approaches the ground while eroded chunks persist containing the “urban ramp�
FACADE
Locations
172 173
HOSPITALITY Residing in the tower area of the high rise, the hospitality program orients primarily northward. The facade’s modularity is the densest in this area in order to prevent heat gain from the low morning and afternoon solar heat gain while also providing privacy for the occupants
Prominent Vertical Facade Element Reduces East/West Solar Exposure
Reduced Horizontal Facade Element Due to Northern Solar Exposure
RESIDENTIAL
174 175 Also located within the tower region of the design, the residential program orients primarily southward. Because of this, the facade modularity is dense with deep overhangs both vertically and horizontally to shade from the Houston sun. These overhangs also serve as balconies for the residents
Prominent Vertical Facade Element Reduces East/West Solar Exposure Prominent Horizontal Facade Element Reduces Southern Solar Exposure
Private Balconies Allow Residents to Connect With the Outdoors
LIBRARY EXPANSION The library’s expansion is located at the peak of the urban infill zone with numerous double height spaces throughout. Because of this programattic scenario, the facade’s density responded by becoming more fragmented and open for natural light exposure for the readers
Larger, 2 Story Tall Spaces Fragment the Facade Into Larger Elements
Both Vertical and Horizontal Louvers Vary in Depth Due to Orientation
EDUCATIONAL
176 177 The vocational school is located in the heart of the urban infill zone. With this program consisting primarily of classrooms and meeting rooms, the facade’s modules are reconfigured to consist of two which correlate directly with the dimensions of a typical classroom
Larger, 2 Module Proportions Function With Classrooms’ Scale Better
Both Vertical and Horizontal Louvers Vary in Depth Due to Orientation
PERFORMING ARTS With the small theater venues located at the base of the high rise, the largest, triple height spaces are required here. This results in a porous louver system that reflects the program within creating a facade elevation that appears to fragment and erode as it approaches the ground level
3 Story Tall Spaces From the Theater Venues Are Reflected by the Facade’s Articulation
Less Dense Louver Configurations Allow For More Natural Light in the Vaulted Program’s Spaces
178 179
FACADE DETAIL
Chunk Model
180 181
Chunk Model Front Corner View
Chunk Model Top View
Chunk Model Top Left View
182 183
Chunk Model Top Right Ramp View
Chunk Model Bottom Ramp View
Chunk Model Bottom Left View
184 185
Chunk Model Bottom Left Ramp View
Chunk Model Top Right Ramp View
Chunk Model Top Right View
186 187
Illustrations
188 189
SITE PLAN
190 191
SOUTHWESTERN ELEVATION
192 193
SECTION
Rooftop Garden Reduces Urban Heat Island Effect and Creates Biological Diversity
Rooftop Garden Provides Panoramic Views of Houston
Photovoltaic Panels Provide an Alternate Form of Renewable Energy
Central Atrium Improves Daylighting and Natural Ventilation
Direct East and West Facades Contain Peripheral Cores Reducing Solar Heat Gain That Would Normally Occur With Glazing Here
Eroded Areas Within the Tower Provide Communal Areas for Residents and Hotel Guests
Deep Overhangs and Louvers Reduce Solar Heat Gain on Facades Through Passive Shading
Light Colored Roofing and Balconies Results in Greater Natural Light Diffusion and Reduced Heat Absorption A Sky Public Park is Proposed Providing Elevated Access for the Public’s Recreation
Use of Vegetation Throughout Purifies Houston’s Polluted Air
Skybridges Attach to Surrounding Office High Rises Providing Direct Access into the Public “Urban Ramp”
Balconies Allow Occupants to Have Access to the Outdoors
The “Urban Ramp” is Fully Accessible to the Public and Extends the Urban Realm’s Street Level Experience Skyward
High Perfomance Envelope Increases Building Efficiency
Street Level Grass and Vegetation Reduces Stormwater Runoff
Skylights Are Located at Ground Level For the Underground Podium Program
Public Plazas at the Street Level Allow for Open Space Which is Scarce in Downtown Houston A Sunken Public Podium Creates Urban Permeability Between the Project and Surrounding Context
SECTIONAL
The Underground Podium Integrates the Project into the Context and Bridges the Gap Between the Stratified Layers of the Urban Fabric
Existing Network of Pedestrian Tunnels Are Integrated into the Project’s Underground Podium
NORTHEASTERN ELEVATION
196 197
200 201
TOWER COMMUNAL AREA
202 203
PUBLIC SKYPARK
204 205
STREETSIDE ENTRY
206 207
Facade Section Detail Rendering Public Street Level Dropdowns into the Tower’s Tunnel Level Program
Tunnel Convergence Commercial Level
Basement Sunken Podium Commercial Level
SUNKEN PODIUM
Rooftop Garden for Residents and Hotel Guests
More Prominent Vertical Louvers Exist on Northern Oriented Facades to Mitigate East and Western Sun
Deeper Overhangs and Louvers Exist on Southern Oriented Facades for Passive Shading
Curtain Walls are Located Where Erosions Occur for the “Urban Ramp”
Facade Patterning Varies to Express and Cater to Programattic Components Inside
Tower Floor Plates Are Thinner in Order to Provide Single Loaded Corridors for the Residential and Hotel Programs
A Public Sky Park Gives the Citizens a Panoramic View of Downtown Houston and Beyond The Lower Half Referred to as the Urban Infill Zone Consists of Two Varying Programs of Public and Private Intertwining and Rotating Up the Project The “Urban Ramp” Extends the Street Level Public Realm Skywards While Also Providing a Secondary Form of Circulation for Pedestrians
Skybridges Attach to Surrounding Office Building High Rises Giving Employees Direct Access into the “Urban Ramp”
A Concrete Encased Steel Brace Frame Structural System Supports the Tower Portion of the Project to Allow for a Core-Free Central Atrium
Columns Rest Underneath the Brace Frame System Where Transfers Join Two Together Where Erosions Occur to Allow “Urban Transparency” for the Public Looking Out and Vice Versa
Peripheral Cores House Circulation for the More Privitized Residential and Hotel Programs Within the Tower
A Central Core Houses Circulation for Both Public and Private User Groups Within the “Urban Infill Zone” Up to the Public Sky Park
Stairs Along the Sidewalk Descend to Bring the Public Realm Down to the Tunnel Level Podium Converging at the Base Pedestrian Tunnels on all Sides are Implemented Integrating the Project into the Existing Network Throughout Downtown Houston
SITE PLAN
Escalators on the North Side Ascend Upwards Beginning the Circulation of the “Urban Ramp”
Site Model
210 211
Western Perspective
Southern Perpective
Site Plan Perspective
212 213
Southern Aerial Macro
Western Contextual Closeup
Western Aerial Closeup
214 215
Southeastern Perspective
Eastern Contextual Perspective
Northeastern Aerial Perspective
216 217
Presentation
218 219
220 221
WHO DONE IT?
Literature
224 225
Bibliography
1) Goettsch, James, (2012). How Tall Buildings Meet the Ground is as Important as How They Meet the Sky. . (e.g. 2), pp.1 2) Bharne, Vinayak, (2011). Humanizing High-rise Urbanism: Design Strategies and Planning Tools. CTBUH. IV (1), pp.20 3) United Nations, (2002). “Future World Population Growth to be Concentrated in Urban Areas”, United Nations Population Division Report, New York, NY: United Nations. 4) M. ALi and A. Aksamija, (2008). Toward a Better Urban Life: Integration of Cities and Tall Buildings. CTBUH. 1 (1), pp.2 5) Forbes, Thomas (2011). Downtown Revitilization in the United States. [ONLINE] Available at: http://thomasforbes.hubpages.com/hub/ DowntownRevitalization. [Last Accessed October 22, 2013]. 6) Powell, Robert (1999). Rethinking the Skyscraper: The Complete Architecture of Ken Yeang. 1st ed. United States: Thames and Hudson Ltd. 7) Schleier, Merill (1986). The Skyscraper in American Art, 1890–1931. New York, US: Da Capo Press. ISBN 0306803852. 8) Terranova, Antonino. Skyscrapers. White Star Publishers, 2003 ISBN 888095-230-7 9) White, Norval; Willensky, Elliot & Leadon, Fran (2010). AIA Guide to New York City (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195383867., p.39
10) CTBUH (2013). “Chrysler Building - The Skyscraper Center”. Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat.
226 227
11) Maas, Winy, (2009). Visionary Cities. 1st ed. Rotterdam, Netherlands: NAi Publishers. 12) Firley, Eric and Gimbal, Julie, (2011). The Urban Towers Handbook. 1st ed. Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 13) Halbur, Tim and Negrete, Victor et al. (2011). Skyscrapers and the World of Tomorrow. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.planetizen.com/ node/51164. [Last Accessed October 12, 2013]. 14) Fernandez, Aurora and Mozas, Javier, (2008). ‘Verticalism Studio’. In: Javier Arpa (ed), Hybrids I. 16th ed. Spain: Architecture. pp.139. 15) Fernandez, Aurora and Mozas, Javier, (2011). ThisisHybrid. 1st ed. Spain: a+t Publishers. 16)
Moneo, Rafael, (1978). On Typology. Oppositions. 13 (1), pp.23-44
17) Koolhaas, Rem, Mau, Bruce, and Werlemann, Hans, (1995). S, M, L, XL. 2nd ed. New York, New York: Montacelli Publishing Inc. 18) Lerup, Lars, (2011). One Million Acres & No Zoning. 1st ed. London, England: Architectural Association Publications. 19) Fenton, Joseph, (1985). Hybrid Buildings. Pamphlet Architecture. 11 (11), pp.5-41 20) Lewyn, Michael. How Overregulation Creates Sprawl (Even in a City without Zoning). Wayne Law Review, Vol. 50, p. 1171, 2005; GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 170. 21) Kayden, J. (2000). Privately Owned Public Space. (p. 1). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. 22) “Urban Sprawl.” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 2008. Retrieved April 10, 2014 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www. encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045302857.html 23) Kunstler, James Howard. 1994. The Geography of Nowhere: The Rise and Decline of America’s Man-Made Landscape. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Illustrations
1) “Downtown Chicago Circa 1990” ©http://www.retrosnapshots.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9 df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/p/i/pitt44.jpg 2) “Downtown Chicago 1907” © http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/06/24/article-23471221A70FDDF000005DC-350_964x341.jpg 3) “The Home Insurance Building 1905” ©http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/Home_ Insurance_Building.JPG/230px-Home_Insurance_Building.JPG 4) “The Flatiron Building, 1903” © http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2010/11/17/4241264/FlatironBuilding.jpg 5) “The Equitable Building, 1915” ©http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Equitable_ Building_%28Manhattan%29.jpg 6) “The Downtown Athletic Club, 1930” © https://sp1.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.607990661394271337&pid=15.1 7) “The Seagram Building, 1958” © https://sp2.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.607986851770204546&pid=15.1 8) “Chinese Development” © http://www.vagabondjourney.com/travelogue/wp-content/uploads/ empty-high-rise-china.jpg
9) “Chinese Community” © https://sp2.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608013506338555770&pid=15.1
228 229
10) “The Hearst Tower, Foster & Partners” © http://media.glassdoor.com/m/97/8e/a9/af/hearst-tower.jpg 11) “Linked Hybrid, Steven Holl Architects” © http://media-cache- cd0.pinimg. com/736x/13/05/8e/13058e51fec24008da7ca897d7552d4b.jpg 12) “Beijing Cityscape” © https://sp2.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608044198171774218&pid=15.1 13) “Shanghai Downtown Core” © http://www.luxurytopics.com/chest/gallery/city-of-the-future-shanghai-/ luxury-destination-travel-vacation-shanghai_11.jpg 14) “Case Study: Museum Plaza” © http://rex-ny.com/work/museum-plaza/ 15) “Case Study: Essence Building” © http://www.oma.com/news/2013/oma-to-build-essence-financial-buildingin-shenzhen 16) “Case Study: Landmark Tower” © http://www.archdaily.com/227940/landmark-tower-buro-ole-scheeren/ 17) “Case Study: Manhattan Analysis” © http://cursosdeinglesnoexterior.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/nova-yorkaerea.jpg 18) “De Rotterdam, Netherlands” © http://www.oma.com/projects/1997/de-rotterdam 19) “Campus Center, Miami” ©http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_X9uQOPu_oJU/TQay3DdJEEI/ AAAAAAAAMYE/6cV9T7qCUmQ/s400/1288991851-cc-section-ew.jpg 20) “Tour Signal, Paris” © https://sp3.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608055382265168327&pid=15.1 21) “Fabric_Scala Tower, Copenhagen” © https://sp1.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608049760155469553&pid=15.1
22) “Graft_111 First Street, New Jersey” © http://www.archicentral.com/wp-content/images/street-view.jpg 23) “Collaborative Cloud, Berlin” © http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/12/ collaborative-cloud-by-Buro-Ole-Scheeren1.jpg 24) “Tour Signal, Paris” © https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608047230413701328&pid=15.1 25) “Downtown’s Lack of Density” ©http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/imgjet/I0000_zREFuYrCNI/s/600/600/ TRTH1012.jpg 26) “Houston’s Intricate Interstate Network” © http://media.culturemap.com/crop/f8/91/800x600/downtown-Houstonskyline-at-dusk_103425.jpg 27) “Houstonian Suburban Sprawl” © http://www.nysun.com/pics/5903.jpg 28) “Downtown Houston’s Skyline” ©http://mariebuiphotography.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/ houstonlandscape.jpg 29) “Houstonian Suburb” © http://www.2mrealty.com/images/houston_area_suburbs_850.jpg
230 231
Dense urban environments vary greatly due to the native characteristics they possess. Although each of these cities are unique in their own right, one key component remains the same; the public realm and the private developments have always been approached as separate entities. Why has this urban demarcation of public versus private resulted in an architectural approach that includes primarily either one or the other? Why has the public realm been doomed to the streets segregated from the buildings that make up the city in which they call home? High rise buildings are infamous for this contextual design flaw and this thesis explores how both realms can coexist through “collective design.�