A Model for Housing in Buffalo? by Steve Shchurowsky

A MODEL FOR HOUSING IN BUFFALO?

A MODEL FOR HOUSING IN BUFFALO? by Stephen Michael Shchurowsky September 2012

A Special Project submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the School of Architecture and Planning of the University at Buffalo - State University of New York in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture. Department of Architecture

A MODEL FOR HOUSING IN BUFFALO? For Julia

Thank you to my advisors Joyce Hwang and Brian Carter, Professors in the School of Architecture and Planning.

Thank you to Dennis Black, Kenny Cupers, Bradshaw Hovey, Annette Lecuyer, James Rosso, Debbie Stamm, and Pat Whalen for their input and support of this academic project.

Special thanks to Shawn Wright and Jerry Young for their support and patience with this project and the process behind it.

iii

Contents

Acknowledgements iii List of Figures vii Abstract xi 1.0 Large Scale Architecture and the Urban Environment 1 1.1 Space and Place 4 1.2 Privatization of the Public Domain 6 1.3 Buildings and the City 8 Seattle Public Library 10 Seagram Building 12 The Distillery District 14 2.0 Housing 16 2.1 Habitat 67 20 2.2 8 House 24 2.3 Ellicott Dorms 28 3.0 Why Buffalo? 32 3.1 The City 34 3.2 The Medical Campus 38 4.0 Building Design 46 4.1 Massing 52 4.2 Residences 66 4.3 Physical Character 74 5.0 Where To Go From Here? 82 6.0 Appendix 88 6.1 Transcripts 90 6.2 Questionnaire Responses 96 6.3 Reviewers Comments and Self-Critique 108 6.4 Design Drawings 112 Bibliography 124

List of Figures

1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16

Disappearance of Style, Krier ‘The Architecture of Community’ Towers in the park, Corbusier ‘Towards a New Architecture’ Public Space in the fabric of the city, Krier ‘The Architecture of Community’ Images of the Seattle Public Library, courtesy OMA Figure Ground Site Plan, Seattle Public Library Covered walkway with characteristic traits, Seattle Public Library Diagrammatic Section, Seattle Public Library Images of Seagram Building Figure Ground Site Plan, Seagram Building Public plaza with seating and water features, Seagram Building Seagram Building tower, showing verticality of mullions, Seagram Building Images of Distillery District Figure Ground Site Plan, Distillery District Cobblestone intersection with characteristic traits, Distillery District Residential tower within Distillery District Diagrammatic Section, Distillery District

2.01 2.02 2.03 2.04 2.05 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14

Montreal Aerial, bing.com Images of Habitat 67 1967 Diagrammatic Plan, Habitat 67 2011 Diagrammatic Plan (showing barriers), Habitat 67 16 Variations of the Standard Unit, Safdie ‘Beyond Habitat’ Unit stacking possibilities 360 degree views from all units Street frontage at Profile O Apartments Diagrammatic Section (showing unit stacking and barriers), Habitat 67 Copenhagen Aerial, bing.com Images of 8 House, Jens Lindhe Diagrammatic Plan, creating a courtyard Diagrammatic Plan, creating a figure 8 Ground Floor Plan, courtesy BIG vii

Figures

2.15 2.16 2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 2.22 2.23

Formal manipulation, courtesy BIG Stacking programmatic layers, courtesy BIG Images of 8 House, Jens Lindhe UB North Aerial, bing.com Images of Ellicott Complex Ellicott Plan, with boundaries and access routes Ellicott dorm room plan, courtesy UB Facilities Greiner Hall dorm room plan, courtesy UB Facilities Ellicott Floor Plans, courtesy UB Facilities

3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08

Housing Supply and Demand 271 Lemon Street, Buffalo NY 450 Seneca Street, Buffalo NY The Avant Building, Buffalo NY Site location maps, bing.com Land Ownership Diagrammatic Plan Site panorama, UB Medical Campus Existing Conditions and Future Development Diagrammatic Plan

4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 4.12

Site Mapping and Programmatic Exercise UB North Campus Aerial, Building UB: The Comprehensive Physical Plan UB South Campus Aerial, Building UB: The Comprehensive Physical Plan Diagramming Public Programs Preferred 3D Massing Model Schematic Massing diagrams View looking west at the corner of Ellicott and Virginia Streets View looking North along Ellicott Street Ground Floor Plan Diagrams Ground Floor Plan View from courtyard to the Trico Building Courtyard Level Plan

Figures

4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19

Section A-A, looking North Axonometric Building Section Unit Diagrams, Types 1-3 Unit Diagrams, Types 4-7 Ellicott Street Elevation View of Covered Walkway, looking towards Virginia Street View of Interior Hallway, Upper Level East Wing

5.01

View of North West corner of building

Abstract

What can a design proposal contribute to housing, urban life, and the city? For the last fifty years, urban housing in Buffalo has been driven by policy-makers and developers. Consequently, downtown possesses a plethora of generic office and warehouse spaces, instead of a substantial and diverse housing stock. This, in turn, has created isolated neighborhoods segregated by exclusionary architecture which contribute to a growing divide between rich and poor. Simultaneously, the expansion of the middle-class suburbs has paralleled the shrinking of the formerly active downtown. A model is defined as a “standard or example for imitation or comparison.” Following research into existing conditions, investigations of significant case studies, and the design of a housing project in downtown Buffalo, this project proposes an alternative and innovative scheme for activating the urban landscape. This ‘model’ applies the lessons learned during research into the development of a design solution. These lessons indicate the activation of the street, responsiveness to surrounding context, and the development of a residential typology that could facilitate the growth of a diverse and vibrant community as pivotal to the creation of any housing development.

1.0

LARGE SCALE ARCHITECTURE AND THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT

Contemporary society is redefining urban living. Over the last half century we have witnessed numerous attempts to revive and rebuild cities in America and around the world. Society is at a crossroads because 20th century practices in architecture and planning did not adequately address the complexities of the constantly changing urban environment, while proposals for a return to traditional methodologies and planning practices do not accommodate the needs of contemporary society. Historically, the temple and the marketplace were central to societal relationships within an urban area. They acted as the religious, cultural, and economic hubs of society where people could gather, interact, pray, and trade. The buildings that framed those public spaces were integrated with the urban fabric. Buildings continue to play a major role in daily life even as the needs and desires of society change. As architects and designers, we have a profound influence not only on the design of buildings, but also for the impact those designs have on the urban environment. Although society has changed, the principles governing good design remain: designing for the needs of the individual, concern for the collective good, and the creation of place.

1.1 SPACE AND PLACE

Architecture defines space. Four walls, a floor and a roof enclose space and make it tangible. However, not all space constitutes ‘place.’ “Placemaking is the way all of us as human beings transform the places in which we find ourselves into places in which we live” (Schneekloth and Shibley 1). People decorate and accessorize spaces in order to make them places in which they want to stay. Through the customization of space people take ownership of a place.

1.01 Disappearance of style, Krier

1.02 Towers in the park, Corbusier

Society’s most memorable places contain a combination of unique characteristics and established comfort factors that set them apart from the numerous spaces of the world. During the Industrial Revolution, cities, and the buildings and spaces that composed them, were transformed by the needs and processes of manufacturing and heavy industry. Traditional cities densified, public squares were infilled with factories and houses, and pollution and overpopulation made them dangerous and undesirable places to live. Modernism responded to this disappearance of place by reinserting generic spaces into the urban landscape; blank green carpets or paved plazas filled the voids between Modernism’s iconic towers, each lacking the individual characteristics to define one space from the next. The architectural theorist Leon Krier described the shortcomings of modern developments by saying that standardized space, including buildings and design elements, “lead to uniformity and arbitrariness” (19). Both literally and figuratively, cities were in dire need of room to breathe for the health and welfare of their inhabitants, but not all space can qualify as ‘place.’ A reactionary response of returning to the roots of planning, however, does not offer solutions to the complex issues presented by the automobile, the density of most urban developments, or the pollution of modern industry.

1.2 PRIVATIZATION OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN

Characteristic places can be difficult to find. In the pre-industrial world, the temple, later the church, and the plaza, were two places that fostered human interaction. A duality of function, both economy or religion, and leisure were central to maintaining social systems. Economic influences of the Industrial Revolution transformed primarily faith-based cultures to business-centric societies. Consequently, the factory, and later the office building, replaced temples and churches as focal points within a city. Unlike religious or cultural institutions of the past, access to these â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;newâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; spaces was restricted to employees, and only during working hours. More recently, regimented public spaces, such as the mall and retail super center, transformed social interactions once again, this time to an entirely controlled environment. The majority of the population now uses their cars to go shopping at low-density retail strips, as opposed to pedestrian traffic frequenting neighborhood stores and shops. In addition, suburban flight separated peoplesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; places of work from their places of living. Houses in these developments are isolated entities, with a picket fence defining the public and private as entirely separate spheres. These single-use districts inhibit public interaction. Conversely, dense mixed-use neighborhoods foster pedestrian interaction and encourage the development of active streets, parks, and plazas.

1.03 Public space in the fabric of the city, Krier

1.3 BUILDINGS AND THE CITY

The last century has seen numerous cultural and architectural movements that have shaped cities and the buildings in them. Modernism, Post-Modernism, and New Urbanism, are three of the many responses to the various cultural needs, economic influences, and the demands of society. In order to examine these responses in more detail, a series of case studies has been selected, studied, and documented in detail in this book. Each project responds to the city in a very different way, but they all have had profound influences on their respective cities and the people that inhabit them. These case studies are: 1 project_The Seattle Public Library location_Seattle, Washington architect_Rem Koolhaas (Office of Metropolitan Architecture) date completed_2004 function_Library 2 project_The Seagram Building location_NYC, New York architect_Ludwig Mies van der Rohe date completed_1958 function_Office Tower 3 project_The Distillery District location_Toronto, Ontario architect_Various date completed_2003 function_Mixed Use District

1.04 Images of Seattle Public Library, Courtesy OMA

1.05 Figure Ground Site Plan

Seattle Public Library Seattle, Washington Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) 2004

The vision was to examine and redevelop the library typology into a 21st century device for public education and interaction. “Our ambition is to redefine the library as an institution no longer exclusively dedicated to the book, but as an information store where all potent forms of media – new and old – are presented equally and legibly. In an age where information can be accessed anywhere, it is the simultaneity of all media and, more importantly, the curatorship of their visual contents that will make this library vital.” -OMA, from “Seattle Public Library” Today, libraries, although public buildings, are segregated from society at large by highly restrictive access policies and limited public space. Koolhaas’s design contradicts 10

1.06 Covered walkway with characteristic traits

50’

200’

those traditions with the design of the Seattle Public Library. The ground floor contains large reading rooms and a grand lobby. Layered above this is a series of public reading and sitting rooms and computer labs connected by ramps, escalators, and stairs. These spaces face the street, offering views out onto the city. Carefully stuck between these undulating layers are the stacks, storage areas, and service spaces required in any library facility. This arrangement maximizes public space and, unlike standard libraries, creates a much more open learning environment as opposed to the cloistered approach designs have been based off of for centuries.

PUBLIC

SEMI-PRIVATE

PUBLIC

At the street level, the façade, composed of angled metal and glass surfaces, creates partially covered walkways and enclosed public spaces. These spaces create a secondary street that provides shelter for the pedestrian passing by as well as people entering or leaving the facility. (Figure 1.06) The public spaces both inside the building and framed around its perimeter become central to integrating the design with the surrounding context.

PRIVATE SEMI-PUBLIC SEMI-PRIVATE SEMI-PUBLIC SEMI-PRIVATE SEMI-PUBLIC PRIVATE PUBLIC SEMI-PRIVATE 1.07 Diagrammatic Section 11

10’

100’

1.08 Images of Seagram Building

1.09 Figure Ground Site Plan

The Seagram Building New York City, New York Ludwig Mies van der Rohe 1958

Located in the heart of Manhattan, the Seagram Building, a 38 story tower that houses the headquarters of the Seagram Corporation, is considered a predecessor to many subsequent skyscrapers. Consequently, it has had a major influence on city planning. The design of the building is based on a simple column grid, creating nearly identical floor plans which are adaptable to any program. Extensive glazing, combined with large curtain wall panels and a narrow floor plate, allow plentiful daylight deep into the floors, and the elevation of the ground floor on pilotis express a freedom of space and openness of the structure. Each window mullion is detailed with an applied miniature I-beam, stretching the full height of the structure. Mies used this ‘decorative’ element to express both verticality and the structural system hidden within. 1.10 Public plaza with seating and water features 12

50’

200’

At the time of development, most new construction was maximizing usable space by filling a site corner to corner. Unlike those ‘edge-to-edge’ developments, the tower was set back from Park Avenue by a large public plaza. This space served two primary purposes. First, it separated the ‘private zone’ of the office building from the ‘public zone’ of the street, thereby acting as an intermediate buffer zone. Second, it allowed the building to ‘breathe’ in the dense New York City environment - allowing additional light to hit the building and air improved air circulation. The square in front of the Seagram Tower is still a daily hotspot for locals and tourists alike throughout all hours of the day. The benefits of increased light and air at the street level were so profound at the time that city planners referenced the Seagram Building as a template while writing the 1961 New York Zoning Regulation Code.

1.11 Seagram Building Tower, showing verticality of mullions 13

1.12 Images of Distillery District

1.13 Figure Ground Site Plan

The Distillery District Toronto, Ontario Various Architects 2003

Planners and architects in Toronto embraced their industrial heritage through an ambitious adaptive reuse project encompassing a former distillery site close to the center of the city. The 13-acre site, which is on the eastern side of the city, was made up of 19th century factories, mills, and warehouses. These buildings were

200’

50’

Of major concern in contemporary city planning are abandoned industrial sites which occupy prominent land. Mills, grain elevators, and daylight factories are just a few of the many structures which were once central to a city’s economy. Many of these sites have been underutilized and left to rot and decay for years, whereas they hold unlimited potential for redevelopment.

redeveloped between 2001 and 2003 to create a new art, theater, and entertainment district. Ground floor retail and restaurants maintain the historic character, highlighting

50’

1.14 Intersection with characteristic traits

200’

cobblestone streets, brick facades, and iron railings and windows. New residential developments, situated in high rise condominiums set back from the streets and scattered throughout the site, do not intrude on the existing character of the site. Additionally, new developments that adjoin existing structures incorporate a consistent palette of materials and colors, blending the new and the old.

PUBLIC PRIVATE

SEMI-PUBLIC

PUBLIC SEMI-PUBLIC

SEMI-PRIVATE

1.16 Diagrammatic Section

PUBLIC

1.15 Residential tower within Distillery District

Sectionally, lower levels are designated as public spaces, whereas upper levels are reserved for private residences or offices. In plan, commercial programs and public spaces are located around a central intersection. (Figure 1.13) Non-retail commercial programs are arranged around the district’s perimeter, providing necessary amenities without disrupting an active street life, while transit stops link this development to the surrounding context. The result is a vibrant art and shopping community that continues to grow rapidly. The surrounding areas are experiencing a dramatic increase in investment and subsequent redevelopment and construction, a byproduct of the Distillery District’s success.

PRIVATE PUBLIC 15

10’

100’

2.0

HOUSING

Architects have the opportunity, as well as the responsibility, to develop residential models that address the needs and desires of a new urban population. Housing in cities can have an even more profound impact on the urban environment than large scale architecture alone. High rise developments attempted to provide enough housing for an increasing demand. Standardized housing types strove to create a minimum standard of living for all people, and suburbs offered respite from overcrowded and often dirty urban centers. Consequently, todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cities are often inhabited by the extremes of society, the rich or the poor, while the vast majority of the population relies on fringe suburban developments to meet their housing needs. The following three projects look at various responses to the issues that complicate urban housing: 1 project_Habitat 67 location_Montreal, Quebec architect_Moshe Safdie date completed_1967 function_Housing Complex 2 project_8 House location_Copenhagen, Denmark architect_Bjarke Ingels Group date completed_2010 function_Mixed Use Residential Complex 3 project_Ellicott Dorms location_Amherst, New York architect_Davis, Brody, and Associates date completed_1974 function_Mixed Use Academic and Dormitory Complex

2.01 Montreal Aerial

1000

2.02 Images of Habitat 67

Habitat 67 Montreal, Canada Moshe Safdie 1967

In 1967, Moshe Safie was granted the opportunity to develop a theoretical housing complex as part of the Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fair in Montreal. Created as part of an exhibition, Habitat 67 was free of many traditional constraints on housing projects, such as developer or resident desires. Instead, he was able to focus on standardized mass production methods, innovative structural systems, and unprecedented high density unit arrangements. The resultant building, which resembles stacked lego blocks in a pyramidal form, consists of 148 individual residential units, all of which are still occupied. Habitat was envisioned as part of a larger complex, but although never fully realized, the existing complex contains a majority of the primary elements from Safdieâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s scheme. He envisioned a central pedestrian street as a means to link an expansive complex and act as a gathering space for the residents. The pedestrian street, which often 20

Water

Automobile

Pedestrian Seated Views

Hard Boundary Soft Boundary Water Feature Pedestrian Street 25

2.03 1967 Diagrammatic Plan

100

2.04 2011 Diagrammatic Plan (showing barriers) 21

became a deserted wasteland in other megastructural proposals, can be accessed by stairways on all four sides, cutting through and interwoven with the porously arranged units. In addition, reversing traditional insular habits, seating is located at the edges of the complex and faces outward, visually and physically connecting the complex to its surroundings. Over time, however, it became apparent that residents resented this openness, choosing to camouflage the stairways and seating areas with trees and other vegetation. What were once primary access points are now hidden, forcing visitors to enter from either end of the facility in a highly controlled fashion. (Figures 2.03 and 2.04) Another consequence of freedom of choice is the complete avoidance of the pedestrian street. Residents opt to ride the elevators from the parking garage to their residences, bypassing the street entirely. During winter, weather conditions justify this option. However, summer weather activates the secondary street level and creates a vibrant community atmosphere. Another principal design element of Safdieâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s scheme was the standardization and mass production of individual units. (Figure 2.05) Unlike the housing block, however, Safdie attempted to give each unit an individual identity through a wide variety of housing types. Of primary concern was access to daylight, individual patios, and views in at least three directions from all units. (Figure 2.07) This was accomplished by systematically stacking the sixteen unit variations on top of and around each other so as to limit shared walls and frame outward views. (Figure 2.06) This configuration required that each unit be entirely load bearing, a fact which consequently limited material choices.

2.05 16 Variations of the Standard Unit, Safdie

2.06 Unit Stacking Possibilities

2.07 360 degree views from all units 22

The location of Habitat 67 plays a pivotal role in the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s integration with the city. Although isolated, the design of the building was intended to facilitate interaction. To the south of Habitat are two more recent residential complexes which demonstrate how design can isolate residents from their surroundings. The first of the two complexes uses extensive landscaping to disguise the main entrance from the street, while the second only presents the street with service entrances. (Figure 2.08) These types of configurations can have a detrimental effect on street life in an urban area, contribute to rising crime rates, and negatively impact the psyche of residents. 2.08 Street frontage at Profile O Apartments, located south of Habitat 67

2.09 Diagrammatic Section A-A (showing unit stacking and barriers) 23

2.10 Copenhagen Aerial

2.11 Images of 8 House, Lindhe

8 House Copenhagen, Denmark Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) 2011

Bjarke Ingels Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 8 House in Denmark has been designed to integrate the complex with its surroundings. Copenhagen is experiencing a period of tremendous growth. To support the expanding population, the fringe areas of the city are being developed as new mixed-use districts. Completed in 2011, 8 House contains 500 dwelling units, 400 workspaces, and is meant to be a centerpiece for one of those new districts. Bjarke Ingels Group went through a series of design iterations to determine an appropriate solution to facilitate integration and interaction. Rather than filling the block edge to edge, they decided to leave a gap between the new building and the adjacent site to the north, creating a new plaza and offering a pedestrian access route. A second move was made to modify the traditional courtyard typology by folding the exterior shell inward to create a figure 8 in plan, thus connecting the east and west sides of the site at a central point and creating two distinct courtyards. At the central node, a public stair connecting all the floors of the 24

多

2.12 Diagrammatic Plan, creating a courtyard

2.13 Diagrammatic Plan, creating a figure 8

多

Automobile Pedestrian Hard Boundary Soft Boundary Vertical Core Commercial Zone 2.14 Ground Floor Plan, courtesy BIG 25

多

building becomes a focal point, and commercial programs meant to activate the street Penthouse Level are located on the ground floor around this center. Apartment Level Row House Level

To maximize solar exposure in the courtyards and allow the majority of Commercial residentialLevel units Pedestrian Street/Roof to have panoramic views, the figure eight form was further modified. The northern wing is pulled up, and the southern wing pushed into the ground, resulting in a mass that begins to resemble natural topography as opposed to a traditional building. A continuous pedestrian street loops from the ground level to the highest point of the complex and back down to the ground again, allowing for multiple levels of walk-up units while bringing pedestrians deep into the residential complex.

Patio

In terms of program, 8 House is not designed as a single use project. Rather, the integration of commercial programs was central in the design process. Unlike traditional neighborhoods where programs are arranged side by side, BIG stacked them vertically in 8 House like a layer cake. The lowest level is the commercial zone, above which are row houses, followed by standard apartments, and finally penthouses. The elevated street follows the row houses and penthouse levels, allowing for residents to enter and leave their apartments without using centralized elevator cores. This development is one of several new programs reforming the urban landscape around Copenhagen. Many of these projects are sensitive to the historic character of the city and are attempting to develop a new architectural language that responds to the historic while simultaneously providing for an automobile-driven culture.

2.15 Formal Manipulation, courtesy BIG 26

Penthouse Level Apartment Level Row House Level Commercial Level Pedestrian Street/Roof Patio

2.16 Stacking programmatic layers, courtesy BIG

2.17 Images of 8 House, Lindhe 27

2.18 UB North Aerial, bing.com

2.19 Images of Ellicott Complex

Ellicott Dorm Complex Amherst, New York Davis, Brody, and Associates 1974

Major university campuses represent a unique type of urban environment. Within their boundaries are self-contained cities, featuring places of residence, work, play, and shopping. In addition, their populations are inherently diverse â&#x20AC;&#x201C; featuring students and young adults from all over the globe, faculty and professors with families, and administration and support staff. The University at Buffalo has three campuses: an historic campus nestled between residential neighborhoods, a growing downtown campus, and the primary campus in suburban Amherst. The Ellicott Dormitory Complex on UB North Campus houses over 3200 students, contains classrooms and study spaces, and is the main dorm complex for the university.

parking lots, isolating the residents from their classes or social spaces. This requires the complex to have a larger supply of services strictly dedicated for residents in lieu of shared ammenities.

Automobile Pedestrian Views Hard Boundary Soft Boundary Communal Space Ground Floor

2.20 Ellicott Plan, with boundaries and access routes 29 Secondary Ground Plane

Dormitory Level (typ.)

Ellicott is separated from the rest of the campus by its location on the north side of Audubon Parkway and a series of parking lots wrapping the dorm structures. In the original campus plan, a series of buildings was intended to link the dorms to the rest of the campus. Those buildings, however, were never built. The development consists of 38 buildings broken up into six quads with buildings ranging from two to nine stories in height. Initially, the intention was for the complex to be home not only to students, but to faculty as well. Each quad was also meant to have a specific academic focus. Today, no faculty live in the complex, and although classrooms remain, they are not themed to a specific area of study. Most students must take a bus to get to their classes, even those on the same campus. Although the distance is walkable, weather conditions and safety concerns influence the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; decision making. Each quad of the complex is arranged around a series of courtyards. The residences that surround these courtyards are two, three, and four bedroom units which share bathrooms and shower facilities. Younger students accept this lack of privacy as part of the college experience, but older students avoid these arrangements. The lack of diversity in residential options compromises the ability of the Ellicott Complex to provide for the majority of students. Recently, UB completed construction of a new dorm building,Greiner Hall, built just south of the Ellicott Complex. This new development is designed to accommodate the requirements and expectations of more students, featuring en-suite living arrangements and slightly larger residential units. In addition, Greiner Hall begins to provide a link between Ellicott and the rest of the campus. The ground floor is lined with living-learningâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; spaces, shops, and other amenities for students which begin to activate 30

2.21 Ellicott Dorm Room Plan, courtesy UB Facilities

2.22 Greiner Hall Room Plan, courtesy UB Facilities

the walk between the Ellicott Complex and the rest of the campus. This building symbolizes a fundamental shift in campus planning, as it represents a desire to meet the changing needs of students similar to urban developments that respond to changes in population. Automobile Pedestrian Views Hard Boundary Soft Boundary Communal Space Ground Floor

Secondary Ground Plane

Dormitory Level (typ.)

50â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

2.23 Ellicott Floor Plans, courtesy UB Facilities 31

200â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

3.0

WHY BUFFALO?

3.1 THE CITY

In the last fifty years, Buffaloâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population has declined from over 500,000 to under 250,000 people. The migration of industrial cornerstones like Bethlehem Steel to more profitable markets and the decline of the shipping and grain industries, coupled with the flight of urban inhabitants to the suburbs, has left the city lacking the vibrant urban life that was characteristic at the turn of the previous century. However, Buffalo is currently in an ideal position to rebound following the last half century of decline. Three factors contribute to this assertion. First, there are national and international indications of a return to urban living â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the reversal of the suburban movement. Second, Buffalo has an infrastructure, albeit dated, of both buildings and roadways capable of handling a far greater population. And third, the City, along with the University at Buffalo and significant Medical Institutions, has already developed and begun to implement a plan to build a new Medical Campus downtown. (Queen City Hub Plan, Building UB: The Comprehensive Physical Plan, BNMC Masterplan)

$1000+ per sf

Avant Building, Delaware Avenue Homes

$500-1000 per sf $100+ per sf

Fruit Belt, Buffalo East Side

3.01 Housing Supply and Demand (existing supply shaded in grey)

Over the past 50 years, the City of Buffalo has lacked substantial residential development. According to statistics, the housing stock that does remain is the oldest in the nation, with 60% of urban housing having been constructed before 1940 (Sam Magavern, Co-Director of the Partnership for Public Good and UB Law Professor). Not only does this figure indicate a lack of new housing to support growth, it also highlights the condition and costs to upkeep these homes. Buffalo winters are harsh, taking a toll on siding, windows, and roofs. Residents are forced to spend disproportionate amounts of time and money just to upkeep these older homes. With a large percentage of the population below the poverty line, 28.7 percent from a 2008 Partnership for Public Good report, repairs can seldom occur â&#x20AC;&#x201C; resulting in the rapid demise of the existing housing stock.

3.02 271 Lemon Street, Run down Buffalo home

The houses that do exist are disproportionately suited to the needs of the community. In the city there is an abundance of low-value housing and a limited selection of high-end housing, both of which are occupied. (Figure 3.01) In the middle there is a significant gap between supply and demand, forcing residents to look elsewhere for accommodations.

3.03 450 Seneca Street, New development Buffalo home 36

In 2005, studies were done that indicated downtown Buffalo could support one thousand new residential units. (Zimmerman/Volk Associates, “Residential Market Potential”) Since that time, those units have been constructed and subsequently filled. Another study in 2011 indicated that the city could support an additional 4000 units on top of those previously constructed – hinting at a potential turnaround in Buffalo’s declining urban population (Robert Shibley, UB School of Architecture and Planning). These figures, although promising, do not take into consideration the University at Buffalo’s plans to create a Medical Campus downtown, eventually to be home to 10,000 students and 2,000 faculty. To date, the school has completed several smaller projects and recently hired the architecture firm HOK to design the new Medical School, which will bring 600 students and 400 faculty directly downtown on a daily basis beginning in 2016. Undoubtedly, a percentage of these populations would seek to relocate closer to their place of work or study, further increasing the need for additional housing within the city.

3.04 The Avant Building, Hotel, Conference Center, Condos, and mixed use development on Delaware Avenue downtown

3.05 Site location maps 37

3.2 THE MEDICAL CAMPUS

The Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, home to many area hospitals, research, and academic institutions, is located just north of the Central Business District. The campus is flanked on the east and west by residential neighborhoods, the Fruit Belt and Allentown, respectively, and lies adjacent to the Theater District to the south, as well as a mix of commercial, residential, and academic institutions along Main Street to the north. The campus, located at the terminus of Route 33 downtown, was selected as one of several key investment areas in Buffalo’s “Queen City Hub Plan” from 2003. The University at Buffalo intends to figure prominently in the development of this Medical Campus and the economic future of the city. To complement the existing institutions, building is already underway for a series of new developments, including the completed renovation of the M. Wile Building, and construction of the new Education Opportunity Center, to be opened in 2013. There are also plans for expansion of Women and Children’s Hospital and an addition to Roswell Park Cancer Institute. The construction of a new Medical School for UB is the next step toward the larger goal of relocating the rest of UB’s Health Sciences to the Medical Campus downtown – a plan which could bring as many as 10,000 students and 2,000 faculty members to the site daily.

Existing Conditions

17 14

12 16

11 7

8 6

10 5 3

2 1

BUFFALO

TIAL

s Building

3.06 Land Ownership Diagrammatic Plan 40

At the core of this development is a 4.5 acre plot of land which is currently used as a surface parking lot. Bordered by Goodell Street to the south and Ellicott Street on the west, this plot figures to be pivotal in the future development of the BNMC as a whole – as it is situated at the southern end of the campus spine. Across Ellicott Street to the west is the historic Trico Building, an invaluable site which could be reused for a variety of purposes, including offices, laboratory space, or residences. To the south is the renovated M.Wile Building, fully occupied by UB and poised to be a cornerstone of future academic development. On the east is a low-income residential development, the McCarley Gardens. Although currently occupied, the owner, St. John Baptist Church, has plans to relocate the residents to new homes within the Fruit Belt to the east and sell the property to UB for future development. In Building UB: The

PUBLIC

BUILDING

UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO

ROSWELL PARK

PRIVATE

KALIEDA HEALTH

BUFFALO NIAGARA MEDICAL CAMPUS

HAUPTMANN WOODWARD

ST. JOHN’S BAPTIST CHURCH

CITY OF BUFFALO

PROPERTY

CIVIC MANUFACTURING

COMMERCIAL

HEALTHCARE OFFICE/RELIGIOUS

RESIDENTIAL

EDUCATION

COMMUNITY

RELIGIOUS

RESIDENTIAL

1 Church

7 BNMC Innovation Center

2 FNUB Parking Lot

8 BNMC Parking Lot

14 UB Bioinformatics and Life Sciences Building

3 FNUB M. While Building

9 McCarley Gardens Apartments

15 City of Buffalo Parking Lot

13 Roswell Park Cancer Institute

4 UB Education Opportunity Center

10 St. John Baptist Church and Community Center

16 Hauptmann-Woodward Medical Center

5 NOSNEVETS, LLC Manufacturing

11 St. John’s Tower Senior Home

17 Roswell Park Parking Lot

6 Trico Building

12 Roswell Park Parking Ramp

18 Roswell Park Cancer Institute

3.07 UB Medical Campus (View from BNMC Innovation Center across Ellicott Street to the east, buildings from left to right - UB Bioinformatics and Life Sciences Center, St. Johnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Tower Senior Home, M. Wile Building)

Comprehensive Physical Plan, this site is considered for development as a mixed-use academic campus â&#x20AC;&#x201C; potentially the future location of the Health Sciences Campus. Similar to the eastern edge, the northern side is also in transition. One block north along Ellicott Street are Hauptmann Woodward Institute and the UB Bioinformatics Building, both prominent centers of research at the BNMC. However, between these buildings and the 4.5 acre site is the northwest corner of the McCarley Gardens Housing Complex. When the site was developed in the mid-1970s, Virginia Street, which runs east to west, was cut off and re-routed around the housing complex. Along with the redevelopment of the rest of the McCarley Gardens site is a proposal to relink Virginia and create a park surrounding the newly recreated thoroughfare. In my design proposal, I incorporated one of the test fits for McCarley Gardens, as well as this plan for the McCarley Park along Virginia Street.

Medical Office Building

Women and Children’s Hospital -Opening TBD -Shepley, Bufinch, Richardson, and Abbott Architects

-Opening TBD -Kideney Architects and Ciminelli

Hauptman-Woodward UB Medical School

-HOK Design -Expected Completion Date, August 2016

-Completed 2005 -Cannon Design’s Mehrdad Yazdani

Trico Complex

Ellicott Street Linear Park

Bldg. #10 Bldg. #9

- nArchitects - Partially completed to date

Bldg. #3 Bldg. #7 Bldg. #2 Bldg. #8

Bldg. #1

UB Education Opportunity Center

-Opening 2013 -Holt Architects

-Comprised of 7 separate buildings assembled from 1923 to 1989

CONVENIENCE STORE/MINI-MART

5 MINUTE WALKING DISTANCE

BAR

BNMC BOUNDARY

RESTAURANT

SITE UNDER STUDY

FAST FOOD ENTERTAINMENT

50’

500’

Gates Vascular Institute and Clinical Translational Research Center Kaleida Health Skilled Nursing

-Cannon Design -Opened 2011 -Cannon Design -Opening 2012

UB Center for Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life Sciences

Roswell Park Cancer Institute

The surface parking lot, indicated by a red dot inside a white circle on the opposite page, at Ellicott and Goodell is a vastly underutilized piece of land which could be a prominent feature of future development. Conversely, if developed as a mixed use complex in the more immediate future, the site could be the catalyst that influences future development on the adjacent sites. It is with this intention that I began investigations into the design of a model housing solution for Buffalo.

-Clinical Service Center 2013 Completion Date -FXFOWLE facade design

McCarley Park -Constructed 2006 -Francis Cauffman Architects

UB 2020 Plan - nArchitects

- Potential Location of Future Life Sciences Campus for UB

M. Wile Building

-Constructed 1924 -August Esenwein and James Addison Johnson Architect

3.08 Existing Conditions and Future Development Diagrammatic Plans 45

4.0

BUILDING DESIGN

INGTO N

WASH

EET

STR

MAIN STR

GOOD ELL STR EET

4.01 Site Mapping and Programmatic Exercise

48 ENUE

EET

OAK STR

STREE T

AN AV

MICHIG

ELM

NORT H

ELLICO TT STR

VIRGINIA STREET

“No one size fits all.”

- Bob Shibley

“The University created its own urban situation...”

- Syracuse University Student

“SoCal and UB South were pretty much in walking distance to anything that was necessary, or was located across the street from a metro line so it was all accessible”

- University of Southern California and University at Buffalo Student

One of the first investigations that preempted design was a series of mapping exercises to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the surrounding neighborhoods. To the west, Allentown is a tightly woven residential neighborhood intermixed with shops, restaurants, bars, and galleries. It consists of a diverse housing stock that is in high demand. The Fruit Belt, to the east, is a demographically stratified residential neighborhood ravaged by years of declining economic standing - consisting of a housing stock that is primarily over fifty years old, with many vacancies and empty lots. Unlike Allentown, there is a lack of commercial activity starting in the Fruit Belt and extending throughout most of Buffalo’s east side. In their current state, these two neighborhoods are physically separated by the Medical Campus. The central business district to the south lacks a residential presence and significant retail options. To the north, Main Street is devoid of street life up to Canisius College. Although drastically different, these areas share one common trait - they are divided from each other by the current design of the Medical Campus, preventing them from benefitting from each other’s strengths. In addition to mapping these areas, a series of local interviews highlighted the specific needs and desires of key players on the Medical Campus. The transcripts of these interviews can be found in Appendix 6.1. Those interviews indicated a need for new housing in the area and the support infrastructure necessary for a Medical Campus to succeed downtown. Among the infrastructural developments desired was a grocery store, gymnasium, and parking facilities. To focus on the needs of residents, a national survey (see Appendix 6.2) was used to discover the desires of a student population. Their primary concerns centered on shopping and entertainment in close proximity to their places of residence.

One desire that was universal among students and professionals was the need for retail facilities, and in particular a grocery store. The closest food markets to downtown require residents to drive. By contrast, the stores that are located across from UB South, including a Tops Market and various other restaurants and stores, provide vital resources to students, faculty, and the neighborhood that are within a reasonable walking distance. Whether the interviewees were familiar with UB or not, a shopping center to purchase food and other daily goods was a primary desire. Another major priority was the interconnectivity of the urban landscape. At the University of Pittsburgh, for example, the relationship of the campus to the urban fabric was essential to the daily life of the student, allowing the city to provide entertainment options, services, and housing. And at Boston University, students found all their needs met by the University owned facilities that surrounded academic buildings within a ten minute walk.

4.02 UB North Campus

On the two existing campuses of the University at Buffalo, the needs of students, faculty, and staff are met in different ways. On the North Campus in Amherst, the isolated nature of the development creates a condition where the University must provide all basic services for the residents. It also limits interaction with the community and the positive impact those students could have on the surrounding economy. Conversely, UB South Campus is directly tied to the neighborhood, and as a result the University does not need to supplement the facilities already in place. Downtown Buffalo around the Medical Campus is lacking in the support infrastructure to provide for future development. To provide for the incoming mass of students, faculty, researchers, and support staff, the urban environment needs to prepare itself.

4.03 UB South Campus

ACADEMIC

LIBRARY EXHIBITION CLASSROOMS BOOK STORE

Using the knowledge gained from these exercises, this project proposes a series of programmatic focuses. They include an academic centered program, an active ’24hour’ street presence, traditional ‘9-5’ businesses and retail, and support amenities for the residents and the community. The programs were then located on the site in places that could best take advantage of adjacencies with the surrounding context.

24/7

PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL AMENITIES

CAFE RESTAURANTS BARS 24 HR CONVENIENCE COFFEE SHOP BAKERY NEIGHBORHOOD/COMMUNITY AMENITIES

9-5

BIKE RENTAL GROCERY STORE LAUNDRY BARBER BANK FEDEX/KINKOS PHARMACY

INTEGRATED

DAY-CARE GYM PARKING BIKE PARKING TRASH/RECYCLING

ENTERTAINMENT AUDITORIUM

STUDENTS [350] UNDERGRADUATE GRADUATE RESIDENTS

Along the west edge of the site is a new Linear Park, which stretches from Goodell Street to the South to High Street to the north. This has been designed to increase pedestrian activity along the ‘spine’ of the Medical Campus. In an attempt to increase interaction with the new Linear Park, restaurants and cafes (24-hour programs) are located along the western edge of the site. The future academic campus to the east is serviced by retail, a grocery store, and parking access (9-5 programs). Goodell Street to the south is an exit ramp for the Kensington Expressway, and a major thoroughfare for the city. A book-ended theater, auditorium, and mixed-use space creates a visible street presence, while providing a source of entertainment for the residents as well as future students. To link the complex with the academic institutions to the north and east, classrooms, a library, and exhibit space are located along the edge of the site facing the new McCarley Park and reconstructed Virginia Street. Other programs, such as a day-care and gym, are unique in that they provide a necessary service to the residents, but also a valuable amenity to the community. An interior courtyard provides shelter and security for the day-care, and semi-private access to the gym for the residents. It also maximizes street frontage while bringing visitors physically into the heart of the building.

PUBLIC [400] FACULTY STAFF OTHER

COMMUNAL

[Shared public spaces, laundry facilities, bathrooms, showers]

PRIVATE

[Private entrances, private outdoor space, in-unit laundry and kitchen, storage]

4.04 Diagramming Public Programs, organizing specific programs into groups prior to locating them on the site

4.1 MASSING

Using square footage calculations and the information accumulated from the previous exercises, it was possible to develop a series of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;test-fitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; design studies to understand the implications of form and scale on the urban environment. This series of studies led to the most desirable outcome based on a matrix of qualifying categories, which included maintaining a consistent scale with the surrounding buildings, creating a continuous street edge, and allowing extensive daylight and air to reach all the residential units. The resultant form was then refined at a more detailed level. Some of the preliminary forms drew influences from standard building typologies, such as a tower-podium form and courtyard building, in addition to site constraints and context. These massing options were modified to be more responsive to the needs of the Medical Campus â&#x20AC;&#x201C; among them, a continuous street presence, a restriction on height based off the surrounding buildings, and the creation of an interior courtyard to allow light and air deep into the block. This study concluded that the most responsive form was a modified courtyard typology.

4.05 Preferred 3D Massing Model

CATEGORY

1-D

1-A

1-B

1-E

1-C

1-F

TYPOLOGY CLASSIFICATION

Perimeter Building

Full Block Courtyard

Mat Building

Urban Topography

High-Rise

High-Rise Hybrid

HEIGHT

13 Floors [~160 ft.]

9 Floors [~110 ft.]

5 Floors [~65 ft.]

8 Floors [~100 ft.]

22 Floors [~300 ft.]

12 Floors [~135 ft.]

520,000 sf 85,000 sf - sf

400,000 sf 110,000 sf - sf

430,000 sf 155,000 sf 147,000 sf

SIZE Residential SF Mixed-Use SF Parking SF PROS Perimeter Context Spatial Conditions Program Size Code Restrictions

770,000 sf 120,000 sf 100,000 sf Continuous street wall along Ellicott and Goodell Responds to scale context of existing McCarley Gardens Terraced levels create exterior occupiable spaces Meets Green Code requirements

Environmental Conditions

CONS Perimeter Context Spatial Conditions Program Size Code Restrictions Environmental Conditions

Continuous street wall along Ellicott and Goodell N. Oak facade fails to account for future development Floor plates too deep for residential units Exceeds residential requirements of program calculations

780,000 sf 96,000 sf - sf

760,000 sf 90,000 sf - sf

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Responds to scale context of existing McCarley Gardens Courtyard creates interior occupiable space Ideal square footage of program breakdown Meets Green Code requirements

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Residential program along N. Oak responds to existing surrounding

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Responds to McCarley Gardens and Trico Complex Terraced levels create exterior occupiable spaces

Continuous street wall along Ellicott

Iconic tower functions as landmark

Responds to scale context of existing McCarley Gardens Elevated passageways lnk towers

Meets Green Code requirements

Step up maximizes daylight exposure to units

Courtyards allow light and air into the core of the building.

Step up maximizes daylight exposure to units

Exceeds residential requirements of program calculations, lacks parking

Floor plates too deep for residential units Lack of parking program, insufficient residental program

Floor plates too deep for residential units Exceeds mixed-use program requirements

Exceeds residential requirements of program calculations, lacks parking Exceeds restrictionss of Green Code

Only 60% of site occupied

Only 80% of site occupied

Does not respond to context of Trico 1 or McCarley Gardens

2-A

2-B

2-C

Perimeter-Courtyard Hybrid

Modified Matt Building

Courtyard-Tower Hybrid

14 Floors [~170 ft.]

9 Floors [~110 ft.]

14 Floors [~170 ft.]

750,000 sf 110,000 sf 50,000 sf

480,000 sf 96,000 sf 125,000 sf

800,000 sf 90,000 sf - sf

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Responds to existing context and anticipates future growth Terraced levels create exterior occupiable spaces Fulfills program requirements

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Responds to Trico 1 context

Courtyard brings light and air to the interior of the building

Courtyards compensate for deep floor plates

Courtyard compensates for deep floor plates

Does not respond to context of Trico 1 Parking component vents into courtyard Exceeds residential requirements of program calculations

Does not respond to context of Trico 1 Parking component vents into courtyard

Does not respond to context of McCarley Gardens Parking component vents into courtyard Exceeds residential requirements of program calculations, lacks parking

Continuous street wall along all perimeter faces Responds to existing context and anticipates future growth Terraced levels create exterior occupiable spaces

Extends Burton Street through to N. Oak

Meets Green Code requirements

Parking component vents into courtyard

4.06 Schematic Massing Diagrams, Massing studies 1-A, 1-B, and 1-C were completed first, investigating three distinctly different massing scenarios. Using those as a template, three additional studies were undertaken. 1-D attempts to fuse the courtyard typology and matt building form to create a seemless transition from the Trico Complex to the McCarley Gardens site. 1-E fills the entire site and undulates across the property like a mountain, while incorporating punctures like a courtyard building. 1-F moves away from the tower-podium typology by creating a series of towers that break the site into smaller pieces. These six studies were then used again to inform three final investigations. Study 2-A, which would ultimately be the final decision, creates a continuous exterior perimeter while leaving the courtyard open. Option 2-B further develops option 1-E to use the majority of the site. Option 2-C attempts to merge a courtyard building with the tower-podium typology.

4.07 View looking West at the corner of Ellicott and Virginia Streets

4.08 View looking North along Ellicott Street

The ground floor is dedicated to commercial programs around the exterior, with parking in the center. The northern end is raised and cantilevered, allowing a ramped condition to exist from McCarley Park into the center of the complex. This elevated interior area, accessible via the ramp, is the first of two interior courtyards. Around the perimeter of this space are classrooms, access to the library, a gym, and a day care. These programs are publicly accessible, but thrive in a controlled environment due to safety and accessibility concerns. The gym forms the southern boundary of this northern courtyard, and as such, acts as a buffer zone between a public and private courtyard. The southern courtyard is surrounded by residences and access points to the upper floors. Both courtyards areShared Public Space punctured by openings overlooking the street, deforming the continuous ring commonly

Covered Walk

Emergency Exits

Linear Park

Shared Public Space

Linear Park

Covered Walk

Residential Access

4.09 Ground Floor Plan Diagrams

Residential Lobby

found in courtyard buildings. These openings allow light and air to enter into the courtyard and create a series of occupiable spaces for gardens and rooftop patios for the public programs below.

Residential Access

Parking Access

Above this courtyard level are the primary residential floors. (See Figure 4.14 for a Sectional View) The residences are broken up into three primary masses. At the southern end, above Goodell Street, is a tower, reflecting the verticality of the M. Wile building across the street and book-ending the complex. On the eastern and western Emergency Exits are two residential legs. These masses step back from the lower levels to facades Parking Residential theLobby upper floors, featuring a series of residential unit typologies designed universally Parking Access for all user groups. At the northern end are two cantilevered rows of residential units overlooking the new park and the rest of the medical campus.

Support Space

Parking

Public Access

Public Program

4.10 Ground Floor Plan

ELM STREET NORTH OAK STREET ELLICOTT STREET

INIA

VIRG

STRE

EXHIBIT/GALLERY

LIBRARY

FUTURE UB ACADEMIC BUILDING (5-7 STORIES)

CLASSROOM

WASHINGTON STREET

LOBBY

CLASSROOM

BUFFALO BIKE SHARE

STORAGE

TALKING LEAVES BOOK STORE

A RESTAURANT

RESTAURANT

NORTH OAK CO-OP

24 HOUR CONVENIENCE

SPOT COFFEE

LAUNDRY

LOBBY

MAIL ROOM

LOBBY

FUTURE UB PARKING STRUCTURE (3-5 STORIES)

CAFE BARBER/ SALON PUMPERNICK 'N PASTRY SHOP

PHARMACY

FEDEX/ KINKOS

FUTURE BNMC DEVELOPMENT (CURRENT TRICO #1 SITE)

FLYING BISON BREWERY

BANK

JUICE BAR

WHISKEY BAR

DELIVERY/ SERVICE

THEATER 1

MECHANICAL

TRASH/ RECYCLING

AUDITORIUM/ CINEMA

LOBBY

MEETING THEATER 2

OFFICES

FUTURE UB ACADEMIC BUILDING (5-7 STORIES)

BLACK BOX THEATER MEETING

GOODELL STREET

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

CLASSROOM

LIBRARY CLASSROOM

SERVICE

CLASSROOM

LIBRARY CAFE

CLASSROOM

RESTAURANT [PATIO]

CLASSROOM

PLAYGROUND

DAY CARE

POOL

LOBBY ADMIN

GYM/ FITNESS CENTER

LOBBY

LOCKERS

STUDY SPACE

LOCKERS

RESIDENTIAL OFFICES

TRASH/ RECYCLING LOUNGE

LOBBY

4.11 View from Courtyard to the Trico Building (opposite) 4.12 Courtyard Level Plan (right)

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

4.13 Section looking North

+123’

TYPE 5

+111’

TYPE 4

+99’

+87’

TYPE 4

TYPE 3

+75

TYPE 3

+63’

+51’

TYPE 3 TYPE 2

TYPE 3

TYPE 1B

RESTAURANT RESTAURANT SECTION A-A 1/16” = 1-0” 25'

50'

100'

CLASSROOM PARKING

+39’

TYPE 2 CLASSROOM

+27’

+15’

0’

4.2 RESIDENCES

The housing units were designed while remaining conscious of the balance between public and private space, individual and shared amenities, and concerns of privacy between residents. A residential complex built on a medical and academic campus first and foremost caters to students. However, it was deemed inappropriate to offer ‘dormitory’ residences in an urban environment so as to avoid the insular nature of the traditional dorm complex and the inflexible nature of the typology. The primary users of the medical campus would be upperclassmen and graduate students. These are students who are interested in more private modes of living, not dorms with shared bedrooms, bathrooms, and common spaces. Consequently, the complex features a percentage of residences designed around the principles of shared living. These units, ranging from 600 to 1600 square feet in size, feature private bedrooms for two, three, or four occupants, but share small living, eating, and bathing facilities. (See Figures 4.14, 4.15, and 4.16) The larger of these units have small patios overlooking the interior courtyards, and all of them are arranged on the lowest two residential levels – the least private of the complex. In addition to the lower two levels, these units comprise the entirety of the residential tower – five floors of two and three bedroom units. Above the lower two levels are six floors of ‘wrap-around’ apartments. These units, all accessed off two primary floors, maximize space using a long and narrow two story design which wraps either under or over their respective access floor. This gives every unit views both into and out of the courtyard, allowing maximum daylight penetration and cross ventilation. The lower of these two groups of units projects beyond the facade, creating occupiable rooftop patio space for all of these ‘private’ residences. The upper level wraps in two directions, creating exterior patio space between each unit and allowing natural light into the hallway corridor. Figure 4.19 shows a view down this upper hallway. 67

1a 4.14 Axonometric Building Section, Unit Callouts correspond with Figures 4.15, and 4.16

On top of the western wing and at a height above the neighboring buildings there is a series of loft residences. These are compact in size, limited to only 300 square feet, and maximize minimum accommodations in an urban environment by capitalizing on location, public amenities, and views. Two level loft units are also located along the northern edge of the site, similarly capitalizing on views over the park and campus. It is the intention of this project to include all demographics, economic classes, and ages as potential residents of this complex. Society typically categorizes units based on square footage requirements and cost, however, there is actually a spectrum of users that can live in a given space. For example, an individual could chose to occupy one of these units, and be living in apparent wealth. Or, a family of four could live in the same space, and be considered middle class. Likewise, a family of five or more could live in the same space, and be classified as poor. It is not a distinction of class as much as it is an economy of means based off the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capabilities. By incorporating various unit types, all of which are versatile in their design potential, the complex can be viewed as a collective living solution. Potentially, any individual, regardless of age, demographic, occupation, or wealth could find an accommodation suitable for him or herself on this site.

Type 1a -

Communal Residence over courtyard 1600 SF 4-8 Occupants 4 Private Bedrooms Shared Bathrooms and Common Room

Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Type 1b -

Communal Residence over courtyard 1125 SF 3-6 Occupants 3 Private Bedrooms Shared Bathrooms and Common Room

Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

4.15 Unit Diagrams, types 1a-3

Type 2 -

Communal Residence 600 SF 2-4 Occupants 2 Private Bedrooms Shared Bathroom and Common Room

Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Type 3 Upper Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Lower Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Cantilevered Private Residence 1125 SF 2-4 Occupants 2 Bedrooms ‘Wrap-around Units’ access off fifth floor

Type 4 -

Private Residence 1250 SF 2-4 Occupants 2 Bedrooms ‘Wrap-around Units’ access off eighth floor

Upper Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Lower Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Type 5 -

Single Level Loft Residence 300 SF 1 Occupant Top level views

Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

4.16 Unit Diagrams, types 4-7

Type 6 -

Lower Level Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Dual Level Loft Residence 675 SF 1-2 Occupants Loft bedroom above North facing views of park

Upper Level Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Type 7

Upper Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Lower Floor Unit Plan 3/32” = 1’-0”

Private Residence 2000 SF 2-4 Occupants 2 Bedrooms North and South end condition with city or park views

4.3 PHYSICAL CHARACTER

This project attempts to define an aesthetic character that is representative of the programmatic uses and is responsive to the character of the surrounding buildings. The ground floor of the complex is wrapped in a secondary envelope, a perforated screen, which serves multiple purposes. Primarily, it functions as a protective shield to the commercial storefronts behind it. This creates a secondary street, punctured at multiple locations to link Ellicott to the building, offering a protected walkway for shoppers, students, and residents as they walk the city in the heat of summer and the windy cold of winter. Secondly, it functions as a solar shield for the ground floor uses and two levels of residences above. Thirdly, it creates an aesthetic character that defines the commercial aspects of the building and creates a distinctive character on the street. The residences above are drastically different from the street level. A uniform faรงade is broken by large punctures through to the interior of the courtyard. On a smaller scale, individual units project from the faรงade, creating a textured surface that is direct contradiction to the continuous surface of the Trico and the M. Wile Buildings. However, the repetitive character of the units, duplicated every fifteen feet, is reflexive of the column grid structure of daylight factories that surround the site. In addition, this patterned faรงade, while not modular, helps to break the massiveness of the building into visibly manageable elements. Because large scale projects can overwhelm the streetscape in the urban environment, finding ways to minimize this effect is essential to design.

4.17 Ellicott Street Elevation

ELLICOTT ELEVATION 1/16” = 1’-0”

+123’ +111’ +99’ +87’ +75’ +63’ +51’ +39’ +27’ +15’

+/- 0’

4.18 View of Covered Walkway, looking towards Virginia Street

4.19 View of Interior Hallway, Upper level East Wing

5.0

WHERE TO GO FROM HERE?

This project is intended to be a model for future development. Every city, neighborhood, and site is different. Therefore, it is impossible to create a typology that can be duplicated and succeed under these varying conditions. However, a template for production is a model that can be repeated. By remaining conscious of surrounding context, both aesthetic and economic, maintaining awareness of the target audience and user groups, and through the incorporation of design elements and programs that enhance not only the residentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lives but also serve to better the surrounding communities, any design can have a positive and profound impact on the urban environment. It is pivotal to remember that architecture is not on an island; it is part of the fabric of a greater whole. Every building, street, and sidewalk plays a significant role in forming the places that make up our cities. Unless the city as a whole prospers, the individual work cannot be considered a success. This document is designed to be a catalyst for conversations regarding development in Downtown Buffalo. As the City embarks on the plans laid out in The Queen City Hub Plan, The Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus Masterplan, and UB 2020, it is imperative that the planners and architects responsible for future development maintain an open mind about urban living and housing in the downtown corridor. There are countless solutions to reach an end. However, only those that consider the implications of their designs on the city as a whole will help the city, and its residents, to prosper.

I will close by revisiting one of the first paragraphs of this book: a model is defined as a â&#x20AC;&#x153;standard or example for imitation or comparison.â&#x20AC;? The design proposed in this thesis project is an alternative scheme to the trends that are prevalent in housing development â&#x20AC;&#x201C; large scale, with a focus on activating the street, responsiveness to the surrounding context, and the development of a residential typology that could facilitate the growth of a diverse and vibrant community. By incorporating these techniques into the design of a major project in downtown Buffalo, it is possible to create a model that will influence future developments not only here, but in similar environments across the county.

5.01 View of North West corner of building

6.0

APPENDIX

6.1 TRANSCRIPTS

6.11 Conversations with Pat Whalen (Chief Operating Officer of the BNMC since 2008) What were the goals of the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus?

- - - -

Get the separate entities to start talking. Create collaboration based on the conversations. Co-locate assets to the 120 acre footprint of the Medical Campus. Create private sector spin-offs based on the research of the Medical Campus.

What is the status of the Innovation Center?

- - -

An â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Innovation Center 2â&#x20AC;&#x2122; is needed. Using Trico 6 is out of the question, too much space to fill the entire building. Housing is needed for the entrepreneurs that work in Innovation Center 1 and will work in Innovation Center 2, similar to Art Space on Main Street.

On Trico 6?

- - - -

Comprised of multiple additions; not all of which are on the same level. Floor plates are not aligned. Not suitable for lab space or residential - too much toxic spillage currently in the building to make it feasible. Floor plates cannot support the loads required for parking. Feasibility study indicated that offices are the only logical build out for the space, which is not needed in the city.

On Housing?

Housing is mandatory for many reasons, first because it does not exist, and second it would dramatically reduce the need for parking on the campus.

On Land?

Land is of vital importance on the Medical Campus, so density is a major concern and aspect of any future plan.

6.12 Conversations with Debbie Stamm (Assistant Dean, OME UB) - 4 years undergrad, 4 years grad, then residency - Undergraduate students typically live on UB North - Medical Students choose to live close to their places of Clinical and Residency appointments, usually between North and South Campus and then downtown. - Students tend to stay where their Residency occurs, not move to another city.

How does the UB Medical Program work?

- It is surprising that UB to date has not provided accommodations for medical students on or around South Campus. - â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Newâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; housing that is UB owned would be a massively advantageous recruiting tool when targeting future students. - Most Medical Students are directly out of Undergraduate Studies, not older students returning to school.

Thoughts on Housing on and off Campus?

On Space?

Shared spaces for students and faculty would be good for interaction.

6.13 Conversations with James Rosso (Office of Medical Admissions, UB) What are the plans for the Medical School moving forward?

- Currently UB accepts around 145 applicants per year. - The schedule currently indicates UB will move the Medical School officially to a new home downtown in August of 2016. - At that time UB is intending to accept 180 students, meaning the school will grow from around 600 students in total to over 700 students.

How do students currently fulfill Clinical requirements?

- Clinical rotations send students to 8 area hospitals, 3 of which are currently on the BNMC campus and Women and Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Hospital will be moving downtown soon.

What are your primary concerns with a new Medical School on the BNMC?

- Of a major concern on a downtown campus is space for gathering and interactions between students and faculty. - Safety - A supermarket or convenience store will be essential to fulfill the roll that Tops currently suits across from UB South.

6.14 Conversations with Bob Shibley (Dean, School of Architecture and Planning, UB) - Studies in 2005 indicated Downtown Buffalo could support 1000 new housing units. Those units have been built and filled. - Study in 2011 indicated downtown could support an additional 4000 housing units.

What housing can Buffalo support and what does it need?

- Variety is key, including loft spaces, single family homes, and other multiple modes of occupancy. â&#x20AC;&#x153;No one size fits all.â&#x20AC;?

What housing is needed in Buffalo?

- Residents of the gardens will be relocated into new homes (2 and 3 family buildings) within the Fruit Belt a few blocks away from the current location. This will infill vacant land; and has already been started by Dr. Michael Chapman of St. John Baptist Church.

What are the plans for the McCarley Gardens site?

- Development (residential specifically) is key between investment areas in the city in order to strengthen businesses and provide a population base to work and buy in those investment areas. The Medical Corridor and the Theater District are two of those areas.

How do the Strategic Investment Areas in the city shape development?

6.15 Conversations with Dennis Black (Vice President for Student Affairs, UB)

What do student look for in housing?

- Students look for choices; specifically dorms or communal style living in their first two years, then apartments and additional privacy as they grow older. - Options on campus as well as off are important. - â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Packageâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; living comes with amenities; such as security, proximity, food, parking, furniture, fitness center, and study space.

How should dorms and other housing developments be created?

- Ground floor programs such as in Greiner Hall are usable by all students; dorms should not be isolated communities.

What about housing at the new UB Med School?

- The Unversity does not intend to provide housing for all students at a new Medical School downtown, instead relying on the surrounding neighborhoods to support the influx of residents. However, it may be necessary for UB to provide some housing to get things moving.

What impact can the BNMC have and how can that be accomplished?

- The existing Medical Corridor has existed for years and has not facilitated growth. There must be a change in design for new developments to have a greater impact on the surrounding communities.

6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES

Masonry “Suite” Style for Freshman year. Wood framed “Apartment” Style for the remaining three years. Wood framed apartment for on campus, masonry apartment off campus. - University of Hartford and SUNY Buffalo Student I started in dorms that were composed of brick and block, and got nicer(included amenities dishwasher full fridge etc..) and more square footage per person. University of Hartford and SUNY Buffalo Student Single dorm room with 1 roommate, single dorm room alone, apartment style dorm, and then an off-campus apartment. - University of Pittsburgh Student Freshman- 2 person dorm room on an all girls floor, in a 4 story co-ed building Soph- 4 person dorm room, 1 common room and 2 bedrooms (2 people per room) Junior and Senior- Split level house owned by the school - Union College Student Split Double Dorm, Dorm Suite (2 rooms and a lounge), off campus house, off campus apartment. - Syracuse University Student There were 3 dorms I stayed in. The first was a suite with 2 rooms connected by a hallway to a shared bathroom. 2 people stayed in each room. The second was 2 rooms, 1 with 1 person (smaller) and 1 with 2 people (larger) again connected by a hallway to a bathroom. The last was apartment style. There was a combined kitchen/ living great room with 2 bedrooms off of it. 1 bedroom had 1 person (smaller) and the other had 2 people (larger). - NJIT Student

Briefly describe the housing accommodations you lived in and if they changed from year to year?

Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve lived in a dorm with one roommate for my freshman and sophomore years. I then transitioned into a single dorm room for the rest of my time at UB. - UB Student First year: freshman dorm with one roommate and two suite mates where we shared a bathroom. There was a communal kitchen for about 65 students. Second year: freshmen dorm (RA role) in a single room and shared communal bathrooms with 50 freshmen students. Third year: upperclassmen apartment (RA role) with one suite mate with a kitchen and bathroom as shared spaces. Fourth year: freshman dorm (RA role) with one suite mate, shared bathroom. - Pratt Institute Student UHA was urban but also separate. You could live it either way. UBâ&#x20AC;Ś semi integrated with the city if you only look at location and access to public transit. -University of Hartford Student BU literally owns everything for two miles on Comm Ave., so yeah, pretty integrated. - Boston University Student Technically the University is located in the City of Syracuse but as a private institution we are very isolated from actual city life. Just about everything you need can be found on campus and if its not, we tend to go into the suburbs more than into downtown. - Syracuse University Student

Was the campus urban, was it isolated, was it integrated with the city?

Totally isolated. Mainly a commuter campus, parking structures everywhere, they’re trying to make it otherwise by forcing incoming students to live on-campus. There are pockets of cultural activity that sort of ignore ASU all together. - Arizona State University Student Downtown is easily accessible via subway. - UB Student I wouldn’t say Syracuse is urban...It was slightly integrated with the city but there is a large social divide. The university created its own “urban” situation next to the urban center of Syracuse. - Syracuse University Student It was urban, but also isolated. As soon as you stepped off campus there was nothing but the projects and deserted row homes. The city center was accessible by a light rail, on campus. The light rail took approximately 15 min and did not run after 12 am. - NJIT Student The campus was urban but not very integrated with the city. It was very easy to tell where the city ended and the campus started. - Pennsylvania College of Technology Student

What types of amenities did the school provide around the housing?

We had everything a “normal” campus had -- student union, eateries, etc. -- and most of the stuff on Comm Ave. is BU-owned. Even if it wasn’t BU owned, pretty much anything you could think you need, you’d find in a short walk. - Boston University Student

It varied with proximity to campus. In my earlier years, it was possible to get to a bank, mail room, gym, and 2 different types of cafeterias without going outside. A computer labs and the student union were really short outdoor walks. -University of Pittsburgh Student The school didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t provide anything except overpriced bookstores and cafes. There were local supermarkets, restaurants, and bars nearby. - Syracuse University Student Barely anything. We had a gym, a library, and a campus center with a foot court and a dining hall. On Rutgers, a neighboring campus, there were a few fast food places and another dining hall. - NJIT Student The school provided restaurants on the ground level and a dining hall. There is also a mail room that receives packages, but does not send packages. In most buildings, there were study lounges and one study center where tutors were provided free of charge. Within the dorm, there were also classrooms and office spaces on the second, third, and fourth floor of the dormitory. On the second level, there is a fitness center, an aerobics room, and several community lounge areas. There is also a bus that runs directly to the center of the dormitory complex and provides transportation to both campuses. - UB Student Residential life had common areas such as lounges and studio space for art projects (Pratt is an art school). Studio spaces and lounges werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t great, seemed like a place were old furniture was thrown in. Each building had laundry rooms in the basement levels. It was convenient having a convenience store but the variety of products was not great, small selection. I also enjoyed having a gym right in the center of our campus. - Pratt University Student 100

What were some amenities or attractions that the school did not provide but were absolutely necessary to your life?

Bowling alley, shopping area. a walk/bike path into the surrounding community. - University of Hartford Student Does a hockey rink count? Although we had one of those. I mean, that and a liquor store, but obviously they werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t going to own one of those. - Boston University Student Pitt was really convenient because of how integrated the campus was with the city. restaurants, clothing shops, convenience stores were all intermingled within the campus, and they placed a lot of school-sponsored dining facilities all over the place. museums and concert halls and movies were all around the campus as well, so I never really had to travel far to find something to do. - University of Pittsburgh Student Wal-wart, movie theater (there were on campus movies every weekend which were just out of the theater but not on dvd yet), BARS. - Union College Student Grocery stores. Thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not one within a mile walk of campus. - Arizona State University Student The grocery store - 10 min by car. Light rail + Path into New York City. An off-campus local pub with plenty of room for everyone to meet. - NJIT Student SoCal and UB were pretty much in walking distance to anything that was necessary, or was located across the street from a metro line so it was all accessible. - USC and UB Student

101

The dormitory did not provide a pharmacy within reach and the closest is CVS which closes at unusually early hours. - UB Student

The school provided most of the amenities that were absolutely necessary. It would have been great to have larger student lounges, like a student union or something like that. Nearby amenities like a bookstore or movie theater would have been great. Pratt University Student At Hartford-I got by for 2-3 years without a car...no need to add anything. Here in Buffalo-relocate Pearl St. to Amherst or maybe move part of UB South Campus into the Statler-what a way to integrate with the city more! (increase ridership on the metro services) - University of Hartford and UB Student Honestly? I feel like BU had pretty much everything I could need, at least close by. Boston University Student Definitely a grocery store. - University of Pittsburgh Student It would have been nicer if there was a Wal-mart or target closer to campus. - Union College Student I think the University provides nearly everything we need aside from things like clothes, shoes etc. which can be found at the mall or on Marshall Street, which is just a short walk away. The only thing that I would change would be the fact that things are priced for their convenience. A gallon of milk is $5 on campus instead of $2 or $3 at Wegmans. - Syracuse University Student 102

If you could have added one type of, facility, building, or amenity close to or in your place of residence what would it be/have been?

A grocery store, such as Wegmans, that had a larger selection of fresh and local produce. - UB Student Speaking of dorms specifically I think they should have fully functional lounges, not lounges converted into rooms, and study spaces. Dorm rooms aren’t appropriate for studying. A snack bar is nice too. - Syracuse University Student Grocery store! If you didn’t have a car, you were forced to eat the same crap every single day and if you ran out of detergent, too bad. - NJIT Student A student union where different student life events could take place would be great such as: gym, late night cafeteria, tv lounges, studio spaces, etc. - Pratt University Student

At your school what types of food were provided?

I took the bring your own for cost savings, but it was nice having something across the street if you wanted it(and the variety..fast burgers, subway, Chinese, Avacados , and Zetti’s...also walking distance to a grocery store. - UB Student There are about half a dozen dining halls in different dorms, along with standalone fast food-type stuff in the Union and along Comm Ave. And there’s a disgusting amount of convenience stores and coffee shops. - BU Student Overall, not the healthiest options. I wish there had been more opportunities for fresh veggies and fruit. - Union College Student

103

They offered “sun dollars” that you could use in a lot of the local businesses in the area; i.e. parents would deposit money into these accounts and students would buy food. - Arizona State University Student Cafeterias, and Campus Cash is accepted at some local grocery stores and restaurants. - UB Student Fast food, all terrible. The dining hall was inedible. There was a pub, but it also served fast food. The only healthy place was the salad bar which was part of the dining hall. - NJIT Student For the convenience of having things close at both USC and UB many times food not from a dining hall was consumed. More from the cafes and food shops for sure. At UB I did have a meal plan that was all dining dollars and campus cash, so I did not have to go to the dining halls with that. Thank God because I like to live and would die from awful food. - USC and UB Student We had one main full-service cafeteria, a pizza shop, one convenience store and two coffee shops. - Pratt University Student

95% of my undergrad time I used my meal plan for campus food. Grad I think I used campus dining twice. - University of Hartford and UB Student

104

How often did students use ‘campus’ food amenities? (for example, did you eat at the dorm cafeterias every day as freshman and then never step foot in the place again afterward)

I pretty much ate campus food all the time, unless I was at my job, because I was broke and it was free. Plus, BU’s food was disgustingly good. - BU Student As a freshman and sophomore, I ate most of my meals from the various campus cafeterias and food suppliers. When I switched to the apartment style living, I used something like “campus cash” to pick up coffee or sandwiches or bagels from the same places, because they were so conveniently located near my classes / study areas / computer labs, but took the bus to get groceries at a real grocery store every week. - University of Pittsburgh Student It all depends on your meal plan. If you have a full dining hall meal plan, people generally eat all 3 meals in the dining hall (mostly freshmen). You can get a joint dining hall/ SUpercard Meal plan in which case you usually eat dinner in the dining hall and then breakfast/lunch somewhere on campus. If you have strictly SUperCard, you generally eat lunch on campus and then make food for other meals. This plan allows you to get groceries in all of the convenient stores. Regardless, dining halls are still a go to, even for people who live off campus. - Syracuse University Student Hardly ever. I’ve never had a meal plan. - UB Student Unfortunately all the time because it took too much time to get in the car and go to the grocery store. Most people didn’t have cars on campus and as architecture students, time was precious. Nobody ate in the dining hall after freshman year. It was all fast food (think Subway everyday). - NJIT Student In residence campus food amenities were often used as not everyone always had access to a kitchen. Students purchased a student card (packed with between $750105

3000) that they could use for food & books. Campus food was decent, but expensive. Healthy alternatives were made less expensive and the fast food price was high. University of Guelph Student Most freshmen students used campus facilities. Upperclassmen had kitchens in their dorms or off-campus housing and did not use the facilities frequently. - Pratt University Student

106

107

6.3 REVIEWERS COMMENTS & SELF-CRITIQUE

108

Reviews throughout the semester injected various ideas into the project which helped to shape the final project. At the final presentation many comments and critiques were made of the overall design, however two stuck out as more pivotal than the rest. The first was the question of creating a courtyard building in Buffalo, and the second was the use of the term ‘model’ within the design. These two topics sparked debates among the all in attendance which broadened the scope of the project to what one reviewer called, ‘thesis-worthy.’ The debate over the typology of the building form was a continuing discussion throughout the semester. Bradshaw Hovey, in particular, was concerned with the creation of a courtyard in a city like Buffalo. In his opinion, any development strategy that removed people from the street was a risky plan. Buffalo already lacks a significant urban population to populate retail street frontage at the level of other major cities. Contrarily, the reason behind creating a courtyard building was to provide restricted access to private spaces and create varying degrees of public access to better serve the residents and specific programs. The gymnasium and day care, two prominent ‘public programs’ within the design, take advantage of the privacy of a semi-public courtyard, creating an area where the internal programs of those two spaces can spill out into the public zone without interrupting street life. In addition, the substantial amount of street frontage and numerous public programs directly facing Goodell and Virginia Street provide significant attractions for residents and visitors alike to populate these newly developed commercial corridors. The second topic centered on the use of the word ‘model’ in the title of the project. The scope of this project was limited to one site; however, it was always the intention that the design was not isolated to one particular location. Rather, as has been

109

mentioned numerous times in this document, the lessons learned and design strategies implemented on the site within the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus could be applied to any site within the city, or any city for that matter. The potential for the agglomeration of the design was intriguing to the reviewers on multiple levels. First, it posed to idea of infilling vacant land throughout the city. Second, it generated the discussion of form, and the concept of stylistic elements ‘growing’ at key locations around the city as the population demanded. And third, it raised the question of how to deal with site specific issues in the design process. Meaning; “Was the form developed because of the design strategy or in spite of it.” The intention of the project was to propose a series of guidelines and principals which could govern development on this, or any site. Because of that, each site would determine the final form of the building for that particular location, resulting in various façade treatments, structural systems, public programs, and organizational strategies. This project, therefore, is a ‘model’ which future development can evolve from, not duplicate. The project is a representation of design ideas integrated with urban planning and a very personal relationship with the city of Buffalo. There were elements of the project which could be further developed to create a more convincing proposal; however, the overall methodology would not change. Among the areas which could be improved is the design of individual spaces. The units, for example, are relatively generic. The strategy for the building offers numerous options for individual spaces, but none of them are developed to a complete level. In addition, the relationship between public program and the city could be developed further. A more in depth analysis of the market values, strengths, weaknesses, and needs could define more suitable programs to activate the streetscape. And finally, issues of snow removal, water drainage, solar access, and sustainable traits were minimally considered in the design process. By

110

developing these areas more completely, the building may have begun to evolve in a different direction as more conditions were applied to the design process.

111

6.4 DESIGN DRAWINGS

112

INIA

VIRG

ELLICOTT STREET

NORTH OAK STREET

ELM STREET

Ground Floor Plan

STRE

EXHIBIT/GALLERY

LIBRARY

FUTURE UB ACADEMIC BUILDING (5-7 STORIES)

CLASSROOM

WASHINGTON STREET

LOBBY

CLASSROOM

BUFFALO BIKE SHARE

STORAGE

TALKING LEAVES BOOK STORE

A RESTAURANT

RESTAURANT

NORTH OAK CO-OP

24 HOUR CONVENIENCE

SPOT COFFEE

LAUNDRY

LOBBY

MAIL ROOM

LOBBY

FUTURE UB PARKING STRUCTURE (3-5 STORIES)

CAFE BARBER/ SALON PUMPERNICK 'N PASTRY SHOP

PHARMACY

FEDEX/ KINKOS

FUTURE BNMC DEVELOPMENT (CURRENT TRICO #1 SITE)

FLYING BISON BREWERY

BANK

JUICE BAR

WHISKEY BAR

DELIVERY/ SERVICE

THEATER 1

MECHANICAL

TRASH/ RECYCLING

AUDITORIUM/ CINEMA

LOBBY

MEETING THEATER 2

OFFICES

FUTURE UB ACADEMIC BUILDING (5-7 STORIES)

BLACK BOX THEATER MEETING

GOODELL STREET

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

CLASSROOM

LIBRARY CLASSROOM

SERVICE

CLASSROOM

LIBRARY CAFE

CLASSROOM

RESTAURANT [PATIO]

CLASSROOM

PLAYGROUND

DAY CARE

POOL

LOBBY ADMIN

GYM/ FITNESS CENTER

LOBBY

LOCKERS

STUDY SPACE

LOCKERS

RESIDENTIAL OFFICES

TRASH/ RECYCLING LOUNGE

LOBBY

LIBRARY ROOFTOP

Fourth Floor Plan

Fifth Floor Plan

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

Sixth Floor Plan

Seventh Floor Plan

Eighth Floor Plan

Ninth Floor Plan

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

Tenth Floor Plan

E W

25’ 25'

50'

100’ 100'

200’ 200'

Section A-A

+123’

TYPE 5

+111’

TYPE 4

+99’

+87’

TYPE 4

TYPE 3

+75

TYPE 3

+63’

+51’

TYPE 3 TYPE 2

TYPE 3

TYPE 1B

RESTAURANT RESTAURANT SECTION A-A 1/16” = 1-0” 25'

50'

100'

CLASSROOM PARKING

+39’

TYPE 2 CLASSROOM

+27’

+15’

0’

Virginia Street Elevation

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

+123’

+99’ +87’ +75’ +63’ +51’ +39’ +27’ +15’

+/- 0’

VIRGINIA ELEVATION 1/16” = 1’-0”

25'

50'

100'

200'

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

+111’

Goodell Street Elevation

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

+123’ +111’

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

+99’ +87’ +75’ +63’ +51’ +39’ +27’ +15’

GOODELL ELEVATION 1/16” = 1’-0”

+/- 0’

Ellicott Street Elevation

ELLICOTT ELEVATION 1/16” = 1’-0”

+123’ +111’ +99’ +87’ +75’ +63’ +51’ +39’ +27’ +15’

+/- 0’

1. Banham, R., Megastructure : urban futures of the recent past. 1st U.S. ed. Icon Editions1976, New York: Harper and Row. 224 p. 2. BIG Bjarke Ingels Group., B. Ingels, and Dansk arkitekturcenter., Yes is more : an archicomic on architectural evolution2009, Köln: Evergreen. 397 p. 3. Bristol, K.G., The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. Journal of Architectural Education, 1991. 44(3): p. 8. 4. Coleman, A. and King’s College (University of London). Design Disadvantagement Team., Utopia on trial : vision and reality in planned housing1985, London: H. Shipman. viii, 219 p. 5.

Cordell, T., Utopia London, 2010.

Costa, L., Brasilia’s Superquadra2005, Munich: Prestel Verlag. 108.

7. Evenson, N., Le Corbusier: the machine and the grand design. Planning and cities1969, New York,: G. Braziller. 128 p. 8. Holston, J., The modernist city : an anthropological critique of Brasília1989, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. xiv, 369 p. 9. Hou, J., Insurgent public space : guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities2010, New York: Routledge. xii, 276 p. 10. Hunt, D.B., Blueprint for disaster : the unraveling of Chicago public housing. Historical studies of urban America2009, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. x, 380 p. 11. Jacobs, J., The death and life of great American cities. Modern Library ed1993, New York: Modern Library. xxiv, 598 p. 12. Kayden, J.S., New York (N.Y.). Dept. of City Planning., and Municipal Art Society of New York., Privately owned public space : the New York City experience2000, New York: John Wiley. 349 p. 13. Koolhaas, R., et al., Small, medium, large, extra-large : Office for Metropolitan Architecture, Rem Koolhaas, and Bruce Mau. 2nd ed1998, New York, N.Y.: Monacelli Press. xxxi, 1344 p. 124

Bibliography

14. Krier, L., D.A. Thadani, and P.J. Hetzel, The architecture of community 2009, Washington, DC: Island Press. xxiii, 459 p. 15. Kubo, M. and R. Prat, Seattle Public Library, OMA/LMN2005, Barcelona: Actar. 162 p. 16. Le, C., Towards a new architecture1976, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 269 p. 17. Lynch, K., T. Banerjee, and M. Southworth, City sense and city design : writings and projects of Kevin Lynch1990, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. ix, 853 p. 18. Morrish, W.R., S. Schindler, and K. Swenson, Growing urban habitats : seeking a new housing development model2009, Richmond, Calif.: William Stout Publishers. 255 p. 19. Newman, O., Defensible space; crime prevention through urban design1972, New York,: Macmillan. xvii, 264 p. 20. Paetzold, H., City life : essays on urban culture1997, Maastricht Amsterdam: Jan van Eyck Akademie ; de Balie : Distribution, Idea Books. 171 p. 21.

Safdie, M., Beyond Habitat1971, Cambridge, Mass.,: M.I.T. Press. 244 p.

22. Schneekloth, L.H. and R.G. Shibley, Placemaking : the art and practice of building communities1995, New York: Wiley. 263 p. 23. Various. BNMC Masterplan Update. CKS Architecture and Design, Gamble Associates Architecture and Urban Design. 2010. 24. Various. Building UB: The Comprehemsive Physical Plan. Published by the University at Buffalo. Beyer Blinder Belle Architects and Planners LLP. 2009 25. Various. The Queen City Hub Plan: A Regional Action Plan for Downtown Buffalo. Published by the City of Buffalo. 2003. 26. Whyte, I.B., Modernism and the spirit of the city2003, London ; New York: Routledge. ix, 259 p. 27. Zimmerman/Volk Associates Inc. Residential Market Potential, Downtown Buffalo Study Area. City of Buffalo, Erie County. 2004 125