Memory Makes the Metropolis: A Study of Collective Memory and Identity in Architecture by Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis: A Study of Collective Memory and Identity in Architecture Mia Daniela Mazariegos

ARCH 5020 & ARCH 5991 April 2020 Prof. Randal Vaughan Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for The Bachelor of Architecture Degree, Auburn University College of Architecture, Design, and Construction

Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the previous 4 years of rigor, encouragment and education that Auburn brought me. Thank you to all the CADC professors who challenged me and influenced my explorations more than they will ever know. Thank you to my family for their support over these insane 5 years. I love you all. And finally, thank you to the true heroes of my time in Dudley: my cohort. From late nights in studio to friends for life, I could not have asked for a better group to spend 5 years with. This project was driven forward by the support of my peers. We are truly the best class that Dudley has ever seen and deserve to be remebered forever. Corona Class 2020.

Table of Contents Research

Abstract

A Reflection on Memory

Pennsylvannia Station History

Case Studies

Site & Programming

Site Analysis

Choosing a Site

Proposal for Penn

Final Drawings

Bibliography & Image Index

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Research

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Abstract The way we remember events, buildings, and people has been the focus of many discussions on memory and the psychology that surrounds it. Collective memory has a far more significant value than just existing as the consistent thoughts of a whole culture. This paper works to clarify the role of collective memory in creating identity and the way we it affects the language and narrative of a city. The research on memories (individual and collective), identity in architecture, and preservation will ultimately determine the significance of collective memory on an urban architecture.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis

A Reflection on Memory

Introduction When we look back on these times we are living in, it will be with a gentle fondness. Most of our recollections as human beings is tinted with nostalgia and a desire to continually feel those pleasant experiences again. Naturally, we all have our own trauma and darkness that we remember just as strongly as if we were still living in it. Our remembering is heightened through crisis and warped through pain. And somehow, no matter any personal circumstances, the general population seems to remember certain times periods and decades in very pointed ways. This has explained the basis of all memory, both individual and collective. The ability our brains hold to remember emotions, colors, sounds, smells and feelings is astounding, as well as its ability to completely block out other moments. I am fascinated with remembrance and its progression in our lives and out through our actions. Memory can start to affect our culture, knowledge and ultimately our history. Memory is essential in the progression of our society, as well as in the way we design architecture. The spaces we value the most are those that carry feelings and emotions of the past and allow for new moments to be

created. This paper will look at the value of memory in architecture by analyzing the proliferation of collective memory in society. Once we understand how memory functions within an individual and is then translated outward into their community and environment, we can argue for its integration into new architectural design. Emphasis falls on retaining the spirit of what has been built in the past and giving it a new, contemporary body. An understanding of memory will require a comparison of personal and collective memory to better understand how one affects the other. This thesis is being developed in conjunction with a design proposal that that considers the memories and characteristics of a famous New York building in an attempt to retain the spirit of what has been built in the past and giving it a new, contemporary body. Because of its location in New York, as well as its characteristics as a highly dynamic metropolis, New York City will also be examined through the lens of memory and identity in architecture. I will thoroughly examine the basis of all memories, determine their role in the identity of architecture and what value their preservation has in our rapidly changing society.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

In order to properly argue these ideas, the definitions of a few terms need to be clarified. Memory is understood to be recalling and recreating moments of the past. It exists purely in the individual or collective mind. The former refers to a person’s unique upbringing, pasts, and experiences while the latter refers to the ideas understood by a group, passed from one generation to the next. Existing as an opposition to memory is history. I will define history as the event that occurred, existing objectively and only for a singular moment. Everything that occurs past the initial moment becomes memory, and the historical event stands frozen in time, completely unchanging. History can be recollected through memory, but within chronological time it can never exist again. Without memory, history ceases to exist. The progression of memories being passed down is what delivers power and meaning to historical events; without them, we have no perspective, bias, cultural understanding, or emotional connection to the events.

PART I: The Highly Dynamic City Memory is heightened and endangered in the urban landscape. Human interaction transforms cities into cultural creations and allows for history to permeate the realm of human activity. Through social acts of remembering we see how “cities are palimpsests; that memories and histories, both collective and individual, become layered in the very fabric of the urban environment”1. Memory cannot be limited, as remembering is an action or process; cities are equally dynamic, not static, passive recipients of the action they are subject 1 House, Danielle. “Mapping Memory: The Spatial and Psycho Geographies of Memory Sites.” (London: University London, 2011), 2

to. Change is one of the constants of city life. Lewis Mumford spent a career seeking to capture ‘the city in history’ and proposed a vision of the city that had an “equally essential function as a storehouse of memory, a durable stratum of experience upon which to lay a new foundation for urban life in times of change and crisis”2 . Modernity is characterized by rapid change, and cities are extreme modern social spaces because of the speed at which they transform. The rapid growth of a metropolis is an endless source of urban discourse. The built environment has a relation to its social group through its unique adaptation. This can be seen in places such as informal settlements and cityscapes. We start to see how a city has been transformed to fit the culture of the inhabitants through its uses, though not all cultural aspects have a built representation. Niches and programs have been carved out of the existing construction to the point of predictability. Through this, new construction is used to better fit the needs of the city. In present day however, this method has been swung to the extreme and new development has taken a stance of temporality as we lean heavily towards consumption versus compassion. Change occurs to immediately better the urban experience, supposedly filling a need of the inhabitants. We are constantly interacting with the new as it becomes more familiar, while also longing for a past that has gone and barely existed. Methods of development and construction determine the longevity of the building and emotion is useless because of its inability to produce a profit. In a world where mass consumption dominates all else, the result is a temporary and fleeting architecture. These ephemeral buildings are not expected to transcend our lifetimes, much less hold a history that can speak to our culture years from now. The construction and design have no relation to our society, further than filling an immediate economical need. American investors Bastéa, Eleni, Memory and Architecture (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2004), 24

Memory Makes the Metropolis

count on the impermanence of the urban landscape, waiting for built forms to lose value in order to tear them down and build anew. This rapid change has not allowed for a lasting city portrait to be made nor is there a fixed point that memory can align itself. New York architecture has been plagued with this lack of identity within its rapid redefinition of streets and cityscapes in the last 50 years. Critics argue that the last great era of New York architecture took place in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s. This was a time of rapid technologic advancement and it was displayed in the new architecture. From new construction methods to new program that required a built structure, New York was defined by creation attempting to keep up with modernization. With the destruction of Penn Station in 1962, the architecture of New York was challenged with valuing history or following the advancement of the city. Every new development since then has been the next generation of highly contested space, never quite as satisfactory as the city itself. As soon as change occurs, inhabitants of a city are immediately reminded of the past and the way things used to be. Living in such a city means being as much about the new as the old. Penn station will be used as a reference of a last great architecture whose memory has long outlasted the building form, holding its place in history for all New Yorkers.

Introducing the Personal Narrative Memory is the specific way in which individuals relate to time, involving the remembering and recreating of past events. As we discuss the memory of the individual, we will inevitably come across the word ‘narrative’. Narrative

concerns an individuals own experiences and emotions, using them to create a social aspect for memory. Narrative implies that a person’s memories exist to be shared with a person outside of themselves; it makes remembering a social act. Personal memory does not work in parallel to collective memory, but rather is interconnected in the phenomena. Both narrative and memory are constructed. As a person continually remembers and recreates past events, the memory changes even though the event is understood to stay the same. As the person changes, so does their retelling of the memory in response to the reaction from their audience as they determine how the story should be told. This kind of learning is part of the process of identity construction3, further discussed in the architectural response. Within psychology, memory has been divided into three basic types: episodic memory (the memory of a specific personal event or a sequence of events), semantic memory (the memory of general facts or occurrences), and procedural memory (the continuing knowledge of how to do something like ride a bicycle, cook a meal, or use a keyboard). Narratives are present in episodic memories but do not hold well within procedural memories. Both children and adult slowly learn how to narrate, what is acceptable to narrate, and what is worth remembering; again, this adds to our identity. As we build our ability to remember, memory is rooted in its own stability but can be aided through external objects. There is an unclear relationship between objects, materials, and memories and this discussion will determine what aspects affect our personal narratives. Objects in general relate to time and how objects can stabilize memories “outside the remembering persons or collectives [and] may act as catalysts for the production and interpersonal adjustment of memories”4. With the presence of objects, it becomes easier to remember and develop 3 4

Linde, Charlotte. “Memory in Narrative.” The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. (2015). 2-3 Guggenheim, Michael. “Building Memory: Architecture, Networks and Users.” Memory Studies 2, no. 1 (January 2009): 40

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

memories that have a clear correlation. This serves as an introduction to object dependent memory. For Pierre Nora, who is one of the better-known proponents of a Halbwachsian theory of memory, this increasing dependence on things, or what he calls ‘lieux de mémoire’, is a sign of losing ‘real’, non-object-dependent memory: ‘If we were able to live within memory, we would not have needed to consecrate lieux de mémoire in its name’5

Object dependent memories begin to turn the object of the present into one of the past. For the memory to function, we are transported back to the event in history and the object that helped us remember ceases to exist in the present. This process can only be followed by the individual and would be very difficult to explain to others because of the very personal nature of the experience, but we all understand the process. Because of its subjective nature, the environment/ public starts to become arbitrary as the whole process takes place in the mind of the individual. The whole process is much like story telling for the mind and thus can be easily translated into verbal storytelling and sharing.

Collective Memory The link between memory and history is better understood when we look at the memories of a group or population. This term collective memory, coined by Maurice Halbwachs, exists within a society as a result of the framework in which the group is situated6. It was the first understanding of memory that exists and lives outside of an individual. Because of collective memory we are capable of sharing an understanding of history, allowing us to sustain it further than 5 6

Guggenheim, Michael. “Building Memory: Architecture, Networks and Users.”: 41 Christina Simko, “Collective Memory”, Sociology, 2019, 2

a single event that happened in the past. I will argue that collective memory is a carrier of history. The study of memory cannot exist without focusing on the collective as well. Collective memory is as much a reflection of society as the mind is. A pioneer of the psychological study of memory, Fredrick Bartlett described the process for him as “remembering is the act of reconstructing the past out of both what is in the head and what is outside in the world. It is not the retrieval of stored replicas of the past”7. Memories need to be built up each time they are needed, from an interaction of the personal mind and the outside world. This act naturally involves other people and paces into the recreation process. Whether intentional or not, most individual memories are liked to a much larger group memory. Personal memories are selective and distinctive, but they overlap and include various common experiences and shared emotions. Alongside whatever personal significance memories have, they also include an interpersonal significance8. Typically, this is an uncommon understanding of memory, one that doesn’t polarize individual and collective memory. Already, then, we create a feel for the kind of multidimensional space in which studies of social memory phenomena can operate, and in which a notion of true “collective memory” marks not a metaphysically distinct set of socio-cognitive systems that differ from “individual memory” on some single discoverable criterion, but rather a region in this space in which the cases of shared remembering under investigation score more highly on more of these relevant dimensions. It could tum out that few real-world cases occupy these further reaches, in which enduring, cohesive, purposive groups collectively reconstruct emerging versions of the shared past that differ significantly from any mere juxtaposition of individual memories.9

This understanding of collective memory is a reinforcement of the previous Coman, Alin. “Collective Memory from a Psychological Perspective.”: 127 John Sutton, “Between Individual and Collective Memory: Coordination, Interaction, Distribution,” Social Research, n.d. p.30 9 John Sutton, “Between Individual and Collective Memory: Coordination, Interaction, Distribution,” p.32 7 8

Memory Makes the Metropolis

definition of history; history is only the objective event that happened, the significance and meaning of events are passed down from generation to generation as part of collective memory. Collective memory is especially united in traumatic, shameful or patriotic events i.e. World War II, 9/11 and national holidays. The sociology of collective memory is, therefore, an attempt to understand how a group maintains its order and how social change occurs. We must acknowledge collective memory as part of a nation’s political reality. Representations of the past are framed by national agendas and influence the tide of politics in the present day. On a global scale, memories have been reconfigured to suit the present as a way of refashioning the past. But while the politics of memory have been a point of intellectual and political debate in the past, this argument focuses on the anthropology of collective memory, from its conception to its ultimate use in the urban landscape. We are in a unique situation within the timeline of memory, where past remembrances are not solely dependent on the human mind anymore, but instead can be recalled and stored through technology. Shared life experiences no longer define what residual traces of memory we can keep. The planetary proliferation of electronic media has altered the possibilities of memory recall and input across the globe: moments in time can be recorded, stored, then ‘brought back to life, restaged, or replayed’. Individualized access to the Internet has changed practices of remembering. Digital forms of communication (email, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Skype, blogging) offer new venues for memory sharing beyond conventional boundaries of nation, culture, and community. Transported through cyberspace, bits of ‘digital network memory’ reside in virtual timescapes, where temporal records can be speeded up or brought to a standstill, creating parallel universes of memory, time, and space.10

Guggenheim, Michael. “Building Memory: Architecture, Networks and Users.” Memory Studies 2, no. 1 (January 2009): 39

In the example of Penn station, we see this spread in the famous images that define our ideas of Penn Station today. These iconic images have been recorded and reproduced in attempts to keep the old building alive. Most people have a specific image in their head when Penn station is mentioned, regardless if they have an attraction or experience with the iconic station, thought they might be unaware of its origin. The accessibility and commonality of these images speaks to the degree of which these images permeate the collective memory of a nation. From discussion of individual memory, we begin to understand that objects do not have memories of their own but can be catalysts for individuals or collectives. It is a distinguishing factor between objects that simply exist in time and those who live within time. Because memories can be altered, objects that hold a memory can be considered active or inactive. Architecture can function as a link between new ways of life in the present and future as well as the past by referencing forms within the collective memory. Here we pose a question of how we articulate memory and identity in a changing metropolis. Identity can start to be found in the culture of a social group, as discussed earlier in the essay. The relationship between a social group and the built environment is a complex one. They can include social links and aspects of cultural identity that have no built form. An analysis of Sao Paulo and its complex borough by Elisabetta Andreoli determined that a sense of identity was established using typology, decoration of facades and multiple use of public spaces11. In a slum type neighborhood, lacking traditional architecture, identity still existed through relations between inhabitants and their surroundings. The urban landscape is not limited to built architectural forms but is shaped through the social backgrounds. Madge, James, and Andrew Peckham. “Identity and Memory in the Modern Metropolis”. Narrating Architecture: a Retrospective Anthology. (London: Routledge, 2006), 415

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

We experience architecture through our body, but we process and narrate that experience through our mind. Man can identify with a place, by presupposing that a place has ‘character’ or attributes which make it distinguishable. The relationships between character and architecture live within our memories, specifically the experiences held in a space. A specific architecture is distinguished from the rest and has a unique presence in the environment because of our memories, but we define the purpose of architecture as the following. The basic act of architecture is therefore to understand the ‘vocation’ of the place. In this way we protect the earth and become ourselves part of comprehensive totality. What is advocated here is not some kind of environmental determinism. We only recognize that man is an integral part of the environment, and that it can only lead to human alienation and environmental disruption if he forgets that. To belong to a place means to have an existential foothold, in a concrete everyday sense.12

This definition assumes that architecture has an overriding central purpose and is more than just simply an aggregate of all its contents (factors and considerations). The essence of architecture cannot be surmised because of its constant change, but character can be attached to a place by the inhabitants. The character of a place is specific to the individual’s values, so while a greater value exits within the collective, each person’s reasoning is unique. Our sensitivity to built forms do not hinge on a universal appreciation of history belonging to the built form, only on our experiences with the space. However, having the compassion to consider the history is the moment we transition over from a culture of purely consumption. This will be discussed through the lens of historic preservation below.

Linde, Charlotte. “Memory in Narrative.” The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2015): 3

Preservation in the Modern World Preservation unites the ideas of memory and history through a tangible action. Preservation is inherently related to collective memory. Within the US, the preservation movement’s overall goal “is to revalue and re-present the past through saving, maintaining, and/or reconstructing historic structures and artifacts”13. The current movement emphasizes plurality in preservation meant to include structures that represent various cultures and time periods and not just elite architecture. It’s a fine line distinguishing the value that comes from social history and culture, but in order to move forward, we need to preserve from both sides. A leading urban sociologist argues that the past has different meaning for different people, all equally valid in social terms, but had no interest in design; the beauty of buildings should only be left for contention by estheticians14. We understand preservation as saving structures that have significant links to historic events and figures, but currently the focus has shifted to include preserving the built environment. This is a change in collective memories as communities value people and events less and value the objects with which they interact more, exactly as they are. This begs the question, what is the shared memory of places if not the historical events? History is better assimilated in its context when expressed in the form of cultural narratives. We find value here when we address these narratives as part of our patriotism. The pattern in the US is characterized as being more dynamic and democratic than other countries, but still tainted by permeating commercialism. Within the context of preservation, history can seem either incredibly heavy or incredibly light. Things are sacred in the collective memory, even if they are not uniform across the country. Milligan, Melinda J. “Buildings as History: The Place of Collective Memory in the Study of Historic Preservation.” Symbolic Interaction 30, no. 1 (2007): 106 14 Hayden, Dolores. The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995: 5 13

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Control is the hardest decision for those in the field, divided between wanting to involve/encourage grass-roots activism while also maintaining a professional status. Preservation will never rise above the politics, seeing as people will never all claim the same history. This extends to public history relating to class, race and gender. Preservation calls for an inclusive interpretation of social history, as well a greater appreciation for everyday environments. Our urban landscape is not stagnant in its culture and neither should our restored, preserved and memorialized buildings be. We can call this open mentality a social solidarity, as people recognize their social histories and acknowledge others, in an attempt to anchor collective memory.

Responding Architecturally The big question still exists: how can we translate memory into a visible aspect of architecture? Memory is such an elusive process that varies from individual to individual. The experiences and interactions held in a space define the lasting impression it holds in a person’s memory. Social history is as important as the history belonging to the physical elements of a city. The relationships within a city of its inhabitants can arguably define more if its identity than anything else. By studying these “elements of a social history of urban space to connect people’s lives and livelihoods to the urban landscape as it changes over time… communities and professionals can tap the power of historic urban landscapes to nurture public memory”15. Take Penn Station for example; it is nationally revered and remembered long after its demise. The majority of the population never physically experienced the space, yet its place in our collective memory is very prominent. From actual usage to viewed photographs of the building, 15

Hayden, Dolores. The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995: 8

everyone has a way to understand the importance that Penn station held in New York’s history. The value that a population places on a space may differ in substance, but the history can be passed down regardless. How than can the experiences of many affect the design of a space in a single way? Penn Station arguably had more social history than physical construction history. The building did not symbolize any massive feat of construction or new vernacular. However, its popularity stemmed from the social hub it provided residents and commuters of New York City alike. The value the building added to the pedestrian traffic and public transportation of the urban landscape is more prominent in our memories than the specifics of the beaux arts architecture. Penn Station was a place for interaction and a symbol of the growth of cities and populations. This isn’t to say that the architecture did not make it a landmark; but however popular the building was, its program embedded itself in our memory through its relatability. Considering the social history of a city opens the architectural response to more then just the four walls of a building. Every element in the city is part of a wider urban landscape. The public space becomes a stage for remembering and the interactions that take place are the catalysts. Spaces can recreate the ideal opportunities to recollect past experiences and allow for the creation of new ones. Architectural spaces then serve as a backdrop for these opportunities. However, memories can be abstracted to influence the tangible architecture. Individual components of architecture can capture the importance of the history associated with the memory; examples might include refashioning the materials and lighting of a space.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Correlating the history and memory together leads to identity construction in through design. Architecture serves as certificate of identity by representing the thoughts of its own people, thereby creating distinctive architecture in various periods and locations. The individual characteristics of design can create symbolism in architecture. A person’s surroundings should convey importance by “making beings experience their existence with profound meaning and purpose, thereby helping them strongly remember who they are”16. Personal artistic expression does not guarantee identity, nor does renovating specificity. Identity is most closely associated with interpretation of architecture, or the way it can be understood and adapted to the layman.

Conclusion Both memory and history function clearly enough, and we know the basis of each element. Modernity will continue to change the built environment, but we know how to maintain an identity within a culture. Understanding the anthropology related to memory makes it clear that “personal memory’s affective tone and influence means that, in addition to its causal links to the past, it also has forward-looking functions, as both psychologists and philosophers have argued”17 and ultimately unites the collective agenda. Personal narratives can be complied to create a singular narrative, implicating the identity-maintaining and directive functions of personal memory. When it comes to the process of memory, we can find its roots distributed across social, material, and institutional resources.

Pallasmaa, Juhani. “Tradition and Modernity, the Feasibility of Regional Architecture in Post-modern Society.” Architectural review 183, no. 1095 (1988): 130 17 John Sutton, “Between Individual and Collective Memory: Coordination, Interaction, Distribution,” Social Research, n.d. p.36 16

As we look towards the future of our link between history and memory i.e. collective memory, we see the need to value history, both social and physical. Memory will outlast the built form, but history can continue to be passed down through new presentations. Urban identity comes the moment we react to change by remembering a vanished city.

PART II: The Context No matter how long you have been here, you are a New Yorker the first time you say That used to be Munsey’s, or That used to be the Tic Toc Lounge.… You are a New Yorker when what was there before is more real and solid than what is here now. Colson Whitehead, “City Limits”

The project proposal exists in New York City. This metropolis is characterized by its ability to change itself so rapidly, exceeding residents’ needs for convenience and style and making the population wistful of the grit that came with old New York. In my research, I have come across the word nostalgia a lot when referring to the feelings of residents. This new wave of urban nostalgia is promoting sentimentality in a healthy way. Urban landscapes are under the threat of being overly planned, uniform and commodified “leaving less room than ever for the unexpected qualities and encounters that generate a sense of place, those interactions that Jane Jacobs eloquently called a ‘sidewalk ballet’.” A study of the city would be a study of the rhetoric of loss and of the forms of remembering that shape the way we think about cities. Within the timeline of

Memory Makes the Metropolis

the demolition of New York City, Penn station stands out as a very vulnerable point. I chose this event in New York’s history because of the collective memories associated with the building. At its time of demolition, Penn Station was in very rough condition, after not having been maintained well in its last few years. Commuter use had also gone down because of modern changes in methods of transportation. However, its grandeur and monumentality within the city scape seemed to overshadow all the problems with its structure and use. Residents of New York remembered the shiny, polished version of the station, regardless of how much they interacted with reality of the building. Individual memories trigger a sense of nostalgia for the building, whether they are true or false. Every image of Penn station can speak to the drama of the space, appealing to the emotions of New Yorkers who long for this nostalgic architecture again. This false representation became the new collective memory, proving the value of images in maintaining our history. Using these famous images was an integral part in coming up with a new design for my project site.

The Architecture in Response The Penn station that exists now can be split into two parts: Madison Square Garden with its underground tunnels and the new James A. Farley Post Office construction. SOM has developed an expansion of Penn station that breaks the ground plane in the middle of the post office, known as the Moynihan Train Hall. The memory of an old construction with its remaining footprint and the new train hall are sites of memory for New Yorkers. My exploration will be in creating a new piece of that development, introducing a place to reflect on the

old and new using time. As an extension of the transit center, a site two blocks down from Penn Station will be turned into a vertical hotel; this hotel will be designed for transient stay, continuing the constant movement overflowing from the transportation hub. These three sites develop a Penn Complex, each location with its own characteristic that reflects on the greater qualities of Penn Station. The new hotel development will be a place of reflection of the bustle of New York City while capturing some of the motifs that residents remember from iconic Penn Station images.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Pennsylvannia Station History

Passenger traffic begins to decline after WW II 1950s

1912 Constructed

City passes a landmarks preservation act 1965

1963 Aove ground station is demolished

Fg. 2

Senator Moynihan champions plan to rebuild train station 1990s

1999 Legislation passed to rebuild replica train hall

2017 First phase completed on Moynihan Train Hall

2022 Second phase to be completed

Fg. 3

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Historic Images of Penn Station

Fg. 4

Fg. 5

Fg. 6

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Case Studies Columbia College

The building’s orifinal facade was designed in 1913, though later replaced with a glass system in 1958. The failing glass system was then approved by the Landmarks committee to be turned into a replica of the original contruction. Designed by Gensler, the glass was imprinted with tiny birds that together make up the design of the old terra cotta facade.

Fg. 7 618 S Michigan Ave. Original facade

Fg. 8 New ceramic printed glass from 2010

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Glass Farm by MDRDV

Fg. 9 Traditional Dutch farmhouse with paneled windows and a pitched roof

Fg. 10 Glass Farm by MDRDV is a dramaticized farmhouse

The traditional Dutch farmhouse was reimagined in this new glass contruction. The original proportions were enlargened and the facades printed onto glass walls to give the illusion of an old building. Breaks in the facade allow for moments of refelction on the reality of the conctruction. The new scale and temporality of the facade make the user fel as if he were a child amongst the city.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Site & Programming

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Fg. 11

“New York is ephemeral- we can chronicle an ever changing city through faded memories and fogotten artifacts”

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Midtown Manhattan

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Site Analysis

Landmarks

Subway Entrances

This area of New York is also known as the Garment District and is heavily visited. Penn Station is only one of many famous buildings/landmarks that populate the surrounding areas. The are is easily accessible by subway. Entrances cover most major corners. The bottom analysis maps shows the heavy concntration of retail and commercial programs.

Surrounding Program

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Penn Station is the most visited transportation hub in the Western hemishphere. Choosing a site in its proximity would have to accomodate for a large transient population that moves through the area each day.

La Guardia Airport >73,000 daily passengers

John F. Kennedy Int. Airport >145,000 daily passengers

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Int. Airport >250,000 daily passengers

Penn Station >650,000 daily passengers

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Penn Station is still relevent today; this is proven by the amount of attention given to a proposal for a new train hall in the last decade. New Yorkers are eager to transform Penn Station to some if its former glory. The existing post office will be turned into an above ground station entrance and will hopefully alleviate some of the congestion of the current station.

Fg. 12 New train hall by SOM faces MSG

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Fg. 13 View down 34th Street

Fg. 14 View down the busy intersection at 8th and 34th

Fg. 15 View towards MSG down 8th Ave

Fg. 16 View down 34th Street

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Choosing a Site

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Original Penn Station

(Old)

257 W 34th St

(Reflection) Moynihan Train Station

(New)

Penn Station is surrounded by many buildings of historic significance. Many of these were considred as sites, proposing an adaptive reuse project. The decision was very difficult, as each site had its own history to acknowledge. Finally the site with the least attachment to the area was chosen; this site hosted the newest contruction. For the sake of this project, this previosly existing retail building would be torn down. The site was within walking distance to the old and new stations and along one of its subway lines.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Early designs considered the small square footage and sought to maximize the FAR. This meant that an even smaller floor plate could be extruded to skyscraper heights to justify building on this valuable street corner. Circulation would be very important to the final design.

Main Entrance

Subway Entrance

Public Plaza

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Minimun FAR requirements

Filling half the site with double the height

Doubling height again

Moving cores to the exterior to create atrium

Adding variation in floor plates and roof structure

Defining floor plates by extending past the facade

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Many images of Penn Station were studied; these images influenced many peoples memories of the old building. Some of the most popular ones were used to determine the shape and facade of the final building. These recognizable images were imposed onto the section of the proposed building. The elevation was recreated through the highly repetative floor plates. The bottom entrance and top entrance were prioritized as grand sequences in the circulation of the building. An atrium was also created and capatalized on through the roation and mirroring of the facade along the length of the building.

Fg. 17

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Fg. 18

Fg. 19

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Proposal for Penn

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

“Your one stop transient stay”

hr stay

Hotel Restaurant & Bar Spa & Gym Collaborative Space Retail

The proposal is a high-rise hotel designed for users of Penn Station and Madison Square Garden. The hotel program also includes many amenities to round out the building as the complete destination for a short stay.

Hotel floors

Amenity Hub

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Add. hotel floors

Main entrance

Circulation cores

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Site Plan

The old Penn Station, the new Moynihan Train Hall, and my proposed site create a Penn complex in Midtown Manhattan. The program was develped to fit the needs of Penn station users; commuters are encourgaed to supplement their travel at the hotel that hosts a variety of amenities.

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Ground Floor Plan

The ground floor is open to the flow of pedestrian traffic that dominates the area. The entrance to the building is located on the mezzane level one floor above. An oversized staircase structure provides a public program for the space, allowing for moments of pause within the high speed area. The mezzanine level is accessible through the staircase and is the point where the user enters the building’s circulation; elevators then take you straight to the top of the hotel.

View from intersection of 8th Ave & 34th St.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

The circultation starts at the top of the hotel. Users are encourgaed to use various programs throughout the building, emphasizing the movement down through the building’s main atrium space. Each floor is connected through the atrium, which takes up a large part of the floor plate. Once a user has utilized all the programs available, their stay is complete. Individual circulation is considered a part of the building’s overall experience.

City/Atrium Section

Memory Makes the Metropolis

The top rendering shows a typical observation floor that is dispersed throughout the building. These floors are open to create moments to focus both inward and outward from the builing. The large windows frame prominent views of the city. The atrium space at the core of the hotel can also be admired from these floors. This is one of the most public floors in the building.

View of atrium from open observation floor

View up the atrium from the ground floor

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

View into lobby

Lobby Plan

While the circulation is open to the user as they navigate the various programs, the starting point is always the lobby. This grand space is reminicent of the grand spaces in Penn Station, with floor to ceiling windows overlooking the entire city. Motifs of Penn Station’s facade have been etched into the glass. This space exists for a moment of pause and refelction on the city/Penn Station and its history before entering the program of the building.

Memory Makes the Metropolis

View down from roof elevator into lobby space

View into mezzanine circulation entrance level (w/ train hall in background)

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Typical Hotel Floor Plan

The typical hotel floor plate houses 4 rooms per floor. The atrium still remains the central aspect through all types of floor plates. The public programs are concentrated in the middle section of the hotel; each program is visible from the floor above or below, creating an interaction hub in the center of the building.

Observation Floor and Balcony Plan

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Restaurant Floor Plan

Bar Floor Plan

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

View from observation balcony ontp MSG and train hall

Memory Makes the Metropolis

The elevator ride up the side of the buidling to the top lobby entrance is descriptive of the entire project; a moment to physically reflect on the old and new Penn station below, as well as a time to revisit memories and histories of the Penn complex. This hotel inserts itself into the experiences of travel and entertainment for commuters of the area alike.

2020 | Undergraduate Thesis | Mia Mazariegos

Bibliography Bastéa, Eleni. Memory and Architecture. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2004. Coman, Alin, Adam D. Brown, Jonathan Koppel, and William Hirst. “Collective

Simko, Christina. "Collective Memory". Sociology. (2019) doi:10.1093/OBO/9780199756384-0215 Sutton, John. “Between Individual and Collective Memory: Coordination,

Memory from a Psychological Perspective.” International Journal of

Interaction, Distribution.” Social Research, n.d. https://doi.

Politics, Culture, and Society. May 26, 2009.

org/10.1107/s0108768107031758/bs5044sup1.cif.

Guggenheim, Michael. “Building Memory: Architecture, Networks and Users.”

Linde, Charlotte. “Memory in Narrative.” The International Encyclopedia of

Memory Studies 2, no. 1 (January 2009): 39–53.

Language and Social Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2015):

doi:10.1177/1750698008097394

2-10. doi:10.1002/9781118611463/wbielsi121

Hayden, Dolores. The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1995. House, Danielle. “Mapping Memory: The Spatial and Psycho Geographies of Memory Sites.” London: University of London. Press, 2011 Madge, James, and Andrew Peckham. Narrating Architecture: A Retrospective Anthology. London: Routledge, 2006. Milligan, Melinda J. "Buildings as History: The Place of Collective Memory in the Study of Historic Preservation." Symbolic Interaction 30, no. 1 (2007): 105-23. doi:10.1525/si.2007.30.1.105. Pallasmaa, Juhani. “Tradition and Modernity, the Feasibility of Regional Architecture in Post-modern Society.” Architectural review 183, no. 1095 (1988)

Memory Makes the Metropolis

Image Index Fig. 1, 4, 5, 6 Stettner, Louis, Raphael Picon, and Adam Gopnik. Louis Stettner. Penn Station, New York. Farnborough: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2015. Fig. 2, 18, 19 Robinson, Cervin. https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/ny0411.photos Fig. 3, 12 Empire State Development, courtesy of SOM. https://www.som.com/projects/ moynihan_train_hall Fig. 7, 8 https://www.aiachicago.org/dea_archive/2015/columbia-college-chicago-618-s.-michigan-facade/ Fig. 9 https://pxhere.com/en/photo/231248 Fig. 10 MDRDV. https://www.mvrdv.nl/projects/119/glass-farm Fig. 11 http://www.giuliaagostinelli.com/photography/new-york-now-and-then.html

Fig. 13, 14, 15, 16 Google Maps data. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Pennsylvania+Stati on/@40.7506347,-73.9953629,16.71z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c259ae15b2adcb:0x7955420634fd7eba!8m2!3d40.750568!4d-73.993519 Fig. 17 https://i.pinimg.com/originals/19/bb/15/19bb152b62f6b120a16d866aaaa72b96.jpg