Contemporary Curtain Wall Architecture Scott Murray Princeton Architectural Press New York Contents 7 Introduction 81 Part III: Case Studies 83 Introduction 8 Part I: A History of the Curtain Wall as Concept and Construct 86 The New 42nd Street Studios 10 1: The Chicago Frame and the Dilemma of the Wall Platt Byard Dovell White 24 2: Visions of a Transparent Future New York, New York, United States, 2000 30 3: The Mid-Twentieth-Century Curtain Wall 94 Melvin J. and Claire Levine Hall KieranTimberlake Associates 48 4: New Directions and New Priorities Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 2001 100 One Omotesando 64 Part II: Performance and Technique Kengo Kuma and Associates 66 5: Curtain Wall System Design Tokyo, Japan, 2003 74 6: Building Envelope As Selective Filter 106 William J. Clinton Presidential Center Polshek Partnership Architects Little Rock, Arkansas, United States, 2004 112 Green-Wood Mausoleum Platt Byard Dovell White Brooklyn, New York, United States, 2004 118 LVMH Osaka Kengo Kuma and Associates Osaka, Japan, 2004 126 Seattle Public Library Office for Metropolitan Architecture and LMN Architects Seattle, Washington, United States, 2004 132 Terrence Donnelly Centre for Cellular and Biomolecular Research architectsAlliance and Behnisch Architekten Toronto, Canada, 2005 140 Torre Agbar Ateliers Jean Nouvel Barcelona, Spain, 2005 148 Torre Cube 222 United States Federal Building Estudio Carme Pinós Morphosis Guadalajara, Mexico, 2005 San Francisco, California, United States, 2007 154 Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vison 230 Yale Sculpture Building Neutelings Riedijk Architects KieranTimberlake Associates Hilversum, the Netherlands, 2006 New Haven, Connecticut, United States, 2007 162 Skirkanich Hall 236 The Cathedral of Christ the Light Tod Williams Billie Tsien Architects Skidmore, Owings and Merrill Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 2006 Oakland, California, United States, 2008 168 Trutec Building 244 100 Eleventh Avenue Barkow Leibinger Architekten Ateliers Jean Nouvel Seoul, Korea, 2006 New York, New York, United States, 2009 176 Biomedical Science Research Building 250 166 Perry Street Polshek Partnership Architects Asymptote Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2006 New York, New York, United States, 2009 184 ATLAS Building Rafael Viñoly Architects 257 Acknowledgments Wageningen, the Netherlands, 2006 259 Bibliography 190 Blue Tower 262 Illustration Credits Bernard Tschumi Architects New York, New York, United States, 2007 198 The Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art Steven Holl Architects Kansas City, Missouri, United States, 2007 206 The New York Times Building Renzo Piano Building Workshop and FXFOWLE Architects New York, New York, United States, 2007 214 Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies Krueck + Sexton Architects Chicago, Illinois, United States, 2007 Essay Title 8 Part I: A History of the Curtain Wall as Concept and Construct 1 2 3 The Visions of a The Mid- Chicago Transparent Twentieth Frame Future Century and the Curtain Dilemma Wall of the Wall 4 New Directions and Priorities Part I: A History of the Curtain Wall as 10 Concept and Construct 1 The Chicago Frame and the Dilemma of the Wall 1.1 Construction of the Reliance Building’s structural frame, August 1894 1.1 The Chicago Frame and the Dilemma of the Wall 11 1.2 1.3 1.2 In his 1956 essay “Chicago Frame,” Colin methods. Whereas they formerly provided Leiter Building I, Chicago, Illinois, William Rowe characterizes the frame structure as enclosure and structural support, the new LeBaron Jenney, 1879 a universal theme of mid-twentieth-century frame presented an architectural dilemma. architecture, proposing it to be the “essence Freed of its load-bearing responsibilities, 1.3 of modern architecture.” 1 The late-nineteenth- the exterior became a blank canvas. What Ludington Building, Chicago, Illinois, William century development of the frame structure— should be the character of the new wall? LeBaron Jenney, 1891 using columns and beams of concrete, iron, What type of skin should enclose the skeleton and steel as a replacement for traditional structure? Although architects and engineers solid-masonry load-bearing walls—marked a did not arrive at an immediate solution, the major transformation in architectural design curtain wall eventually emerged as a widely and construction, exerting substantial influ- accepted response. After more than a cen- ence over the commercial and institutional tury of development, the frame structure and architecture of cities, particularly Chicago, its corollary, the curtain wall, continue to where, as suggested by the title of Rowe’s dominate construction today. essay, architects and clients embraced the From his perspective in the high-modern new technology early on. From its experi- period of the 1950s, Rowe recognized the mental manifestations in the nineteenth cen- importance of Chicago’s late-nineteenth- tury to its proliferation through the present century building boom and the advancements day, the skeleton-frame structure was signifi- made during that period. In fact, he equates cant not only for its technical achievements the relationship between his contempo- and widespread dissemination but also as raries and the city of Chicago to that of the a catalyst for new conceptions of architec- High Renaissance architects and Florence, tural form. One of the most influential ideas Italy. The rebuilding effort in the years fol- derived from the frame structure is the lowing the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, which modern curtain wall. [1.1] devastated the central business district, was Historian Carl Condit called the inven- remarkable. Within twenty years, the down- tion of skeleton-frame construction “the town Loop area was rapidly redeveloped most radical transformation in the structural with taller and taller buildings for which the art since the development of the Gothic city’s architects methodically explored radi- system of construction in the twelfth century.” 2 cally original methods of construction. This The importance of this new technology intense effort was driven in part by a popu- extended beyond the physical frame; it lation explosion: at the time of its incorpora- allowed, perhaps even obligated, architects tion in 1837, the city had four thousand to reconsider the essential character of inhabitants; by 1850, there were thirty thou- the exterior wall. Traditionally responsible sand; and by 1890, it surpassed one million.3 for a wide range of aesthetic and technical The city was quickly becoming an epicenter tasks, the outer walls of a building were of commerce and culture. As density and directly implicated by innovative structural land values increased, the economic Part I: A History of the Curtain Wall as 12 Concept and Construct 1.4 Second Studebaker Building, Chicago, Illinois, Solon Spencer Beman, 1896 1.5 Gage Group Buildings, Chicago, Illinois, Holabird and Roche, 1899 1.4 1.5 benefits of building taller were obvious. The three Gage Group Buildings were Financial demand converged with the com- designed to maximize daylighting for the mercial availability of elevators and advance- client’s millinery workers. Sullivan was ments in structural framing, leading to the responsible for the design of the more elab- emergence of the skyscraper, which in turn orate facade of the northernmost building, had remarkable consequences for the which in its articulation suggests a multi- building enclosure. 4 story curtain hanging from the cornice. [1.5] The work of a group of architects active A comparative study of two late-nine- in the 1880s and ’90s—who later became teenth-century Chicago office buildings— known as the Chicago School—defined this the Monadnock Block (1891) and the Reliance era of experimentation.5 Notable buildings Building (1895)—is useful in understanding from this group are quite numerous and the impact of the frame structure and the include William LeBaron Jenney’s Leiter eventual emergence of the curtain wall. Building I (1879), in which timber girders Among the many remarkable aspects of and floor joists were supported by a grid these two very different buildings is the fact of cast-iron columns, a common construc- that they were both designed by the office tion method at the time. [1.2] A unique of Daniel H. Burnham and built within five strategy was used at the exterior, however, years of one another. Considered together, where instead of a bearing wall, iron columns the Monadnock Block and the Reliance 1.6 located just inside the enclosure carried Building illustrate an important shift in Monadnock Block, gravity loads at the floor perimeter. These the concept of structure and skin. Chicago, Illinois, columns were clad in non-load-bearing A prolific architect and planner, Burnham Burnham and Root, brick piers, kept consistently narrow to maxi- was also responsible for overseeing the 1891 mize the floor-to-ceiling windows. Also planning and construction of the 1893 1.7 designed by Jenney was the ten-story Home World’s Columbian Exposition, and his office Monadnock Block; Insurance Company Building (1885), con- produced influential city plans for Chicago, typical lower-, middle-, and upper-floor plans sidered by many to be the first modern sky- Washington, D.C., and San Francisco. 6 scraper, as well as the Ludington Building Burnham always worked with a junior part- 1.8 (1891), one of the first all-steel structures. ner, and the common perception was that Monadnock Block [1.3] Later steel-framed buildings, such Burnham handled the business side of the as the second Studebaker Building (1896) firm while his partner directed the design by Solon Spencer Beman and the Gage process, with Burnham acting as consultant Group Buildings (1899) by Holabird and and critic.7 His first partner, John Wellborn Roche in collaboration with Louis Sullivan, Root (of the firm Burnham and Root), feature enclosures that express the underly- was the primary designer of the Monadnock ing frame structure more directly. [1.4] Block. Root began work on the Reliance Beman’s Studebaker Building is dominated Building, but following his untimely death in by large windows and iron-plate spandrels. 1891, the firm was renamed D.