Façade of Many Faces: A Hybrid Skyscraper
A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Architecture
In the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning
March 16th by:
Rachael Green B.S. Architecture, University of Cincinnati, 2018 Minor in Sociology, University of Cincinnati, 2018
Committee Chairs:
Edward Mitchell Vincent Sansalone
ii
Abstract:
Skyscrapers of the late 19th century looked vastly different than they do today.
Historically, the skyscraper began as a single form extrusion containing a single
program. Throughout history the skyscraper took on many new forms. Zoning and
setback laws of the 1960’s changed the way that the skyscraper looked and was
thought about. There has always been a race and desire to have the tallest skyscraper
in New York City, and as technology developed it allowed for skyscrapers to be built
taller. New York City would become one of the most prominent cities for the skyscraper
as well as one of the most iconic skylines.
As new heights were reached there was a split from the once ornamental and
sculptural skyscraper. Both in past and present day New York City there is an emphasis
on designing the tallest and most slender skyscraper. As previously mentioned with the emphasis on height, there was importance placed on the glass tower. Over time this led to the skyscraper becoming an ambiguous and aesthetically standardized building.
Office towers and apartment buildings look the same and offer no indication as to what the skyscraper contains. Newer developments have taken over historic parts of New
York City and are alien to the architecture surrounding it. While the technology has enabled these skyscrapers to expand, people and historic architecture is forgotten.
This thesis explores the historic and theoretical development of the skyscraper and how to challenge the current entire glass clad skyscraper. Through façade articulation, program, section, relationship to the ground and character, this skyscraper will become a place in which every person can have it all. Through the relationship of
iii both public and private spaces, the skyscraper will transform from an ambiguous, glass tower into something that represents the history of New York City.
iv
v
Table of Contents
Abstract ii
Table of Contents v
List of Illustrations vi
1. Introduction 1
2. Early Development and Theory 4
3. Chicago School 11
4. Frank Lloyd Wright 16
5. European Theorists 19
6. Cinema and the Skyscraper 24
7. City within a City 28
8. Hybrid Skyscrapers 31
9. New York City and the Skyscraper 40
10. The Site 49
11. A New Typology 52
12. Conclusion 63
Bibliography 65
vi
List of Illustrations
Figure 1: Kings View of New York, Richard Rummel – Illustration courtesy of Dobraszczyk, Paul. Future Cities: Architecture and the Imagination. London: Reaktion Books. 2019.
Figure 2: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss – Illustration courtesy of Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Figure 3: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss – Illustration courtesy of Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Figure 4: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss – Illustration courtesy of Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Figure 5: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss – Illustration courtesy of Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Figure 6: Construction of the Wainwright Building by Adler & Sullivan. Archive at University of Missouri.
Figure 7: Details of the Wainwright Building. Archive at University of Missouri.
Figure 8: Wainwright Building. Archive at University of Missouri.
Figure 9: The Illinois Building by Frank Lloyd Wright. The Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Archives. The Museum of Modern Art, Avery Architectural & Fine Arts Library, Columbia University, New York.
Figure 10: Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper by Mies van der Rohe. MoMa Photography Collection, New York
Figure 11: Cartesian Skyscraper by Le Corbusier. http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/corbuweb/morpheus.aspx?sysId=13&IrisObj ectId=5752&sysLanguage=en- en&itemPos=51&itemCount=215&sysParentName=home&sysParentId=65
Figure 12: Still image of the cathedral tower. Lang, Fritz, director. Metropolis. Universum Film (UVA). 1927.
Figure 13: Section drawing of Lang’s film Metropolis. http://socks-studio.com/2012/08/15/about-metropolis/
Figure 14: Original cover illustration by Madelon Vriesendorp for Delirious New York by Rem Koolhaas.
vii
Figure 15: Dutch Pavilion by MVRDV for the 2000 World Expo. Diagram by MVRDV.
Figure 16: The Downtown Athletic Club. Photo courtesy of Delirious New York by Rem Koolhaas.
Figure 17: The Unit Building by Raymond Hood. Photo courtesy of Delirious New York by Rem Koolhaas
Figure 18: The Galleria by David Spector. Architectural diagram courtesy of 50 Hybrid Buildings by a&t Research Group. Pg. 69
Figure 19: New York City skyline. Photo courtesy of https://buildingtheskyline.org/revisiting-1916-i/
Figure 20: Photo of the Chrysler building and its crown. Photograph by author.
Figure 21: Photo of the entrance of the Chrysler building. Photograph by user Wally Gobetz, via flickr.
Figure 22: Historic photo of the Manhattan skyline in 1896. Library of Congress.
Figure 23: Photo of Manhattan skyline in 1931. Photograph by Irving Underhill, via Library of Congress.
Figure 24: Photo of Manhattan skyline in 1999. Photograph by Richard Berenholtz, via Photographynewyok.
Figure 25: Projected Manhattan skyline in 2022 including new supertall skyscrapers. The Skyscraper Museum, New York.
Figure 26: Site plan. Drawn by author.
Figure 27: New development and waterfront. Drawing courtesy of Friends of Bushwick Inlet Park
Figure 28: Watercolor collage. Drawn by author.
Figure 29: Axonometric section and façade study. Drawn by author
Figure 30: Plaster cast study by author.
Figure 31: Plaster cast study by author.
Figure 32: Plaster cast study by author.
Figure 33: Plaster cast study by author.
viii
Figure 34: Axonometric program studies. Drawn by author.
Figure 35: Program diagram. Drawn by author.
Figure 36: Axonometric section and façade study. Drawn by author.
1
Introduction
Figure 1: Richard Rummel’s 1911 illustration entitled Kings View of New York showing the future of architecture and transportation in New York City
2
The skyscraper has taken society to new heights both figuratively and literally.
Skyscrapers have long been considered an economic status symbol among cities.
There has been and continues to be a competition to have the tallest building in the city, showcasing who and what the city strives to be. Over time they have been streamlined, adapting to new technologies, new ways of thinking and to new aesthetics. They are a way for cities to become denser, containing floors of housing in a single footprint.
Currently cities are a high density cultural and architectural mecca, one that is expanding both up and out. Many cities are growing in population, seeing relocation for jobs and other opportunities. But even with these benefits, the architecture does not seem to match. Buildings are getting taller and are seemingly more aesthetically standardized. This high density of housing is causing units to become smaller and denser with an emphasis on size rather than human needs. People are living hundreds of feet in the air and the best feature that can be offered at these heights is a view. Even with these remarkable views, there does not seem to be a connection to the city beneath it. The towers that are occupied lose their sense of place, isolated in the sky, disconnected from the city and its people. It creates a barrier between not only place and people, but also a barrier in human interaction. How can people be brought together through different programs all located in a single building entity? What does it mean and look like to live, work, and play above the city below?
To truly know the skyscraper and how it has transformed historically, the tower typology must be studied throughout time. What were the catalysts politically, socially, and materialistically to create such a change? The ever-present, translucent, flat, extruded form of current skyscrapers has created ambiguity within the tower itself and
3
now looks to give unique identity back to the skyscraper through facade and crown
articulation. This paper will explore the historical significance of the skyscraper and how it can transform a new tower typology within New York City. The final design will focus on Rem Koolhaas’s theory of a “city within a city” as a way of bringing the city towards
the sky, offering up a multi-level extension of New York City that utilizes and explores
multiple programs within a single skyscraper. In Delirious New York Koolhaas mentions
that buildings are no longer designed, but instead are extruded forms ultimately decided
upon by a developer.1 This thesis looks to challenge the ever-present extruded form of the skyscraper, transforming the now translucent, flat skyscrapers into a tower that respects the history of the city while exploring programmatic façade articulation. It aims to remove the ambiguity that has been created within these towers, giving unique identity back to the building.
1 Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York. Monacelli Press, 1994. Pg 82.
4
Early Development and Theory
Figure 2: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss in the Metropolis of Tomorrow depicting the future of New York City
5
“Between the colossal inanimate forms and those mote-like creatures darting in
and out among the foundations, there is such contrast, such discrepancy in scale”.2 In
The Metropolis of Tomorrow, Hugh Ferriss breaks down the city and its buildings into
three parts: cities of today, projected trends, and an imaginary metropolis. Each section
dealing with information regarding how cities impact the design of skyscrapers and vice
versa.
In the first section titled Cities of Today, Ferris catalogues the parts that make up
cities and skyscrapers in the twentieth century. Ferriss states that cities of today are not
built as a conscious design. Buildings are built for the era they are constructed in rather
than forecasting what design could be in twenty to twenty-five years. All over New York
City there are districts and areas that are frozen in time, they remind the people
inhabiting and visiting them of the past, rather than the future. The skyscrapers are
mountainous, looming over the street with little connection to the top of the buildings.3
He states that people are most familiar with the façade of the building, not the form or the building crown. This necessitates asking the question, “what is the most important or significant part of a skyscraper”?
Ferriss divides the skyscraper into three parts: the base, shaft, and crowning member. Both the base and shaft at times can be one singular material, creating no delineation between the two. More historic architectural styles have a prominent concrete base in which the “shaft” or main part of the tower sits. Many skyscrapers are recognizable by just looking at the façade. The color and texture informing onlookers what building they are looking at or about to enter. The building façade becomes an
2 Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2005. Pg. 15. 3 Ferris. Pg. 20.
6
iconic and notable part of the building. It could be said though that the crown of the
skyscraper should be the most iconic piece of the structure.
The crown of a skyscraper is generally the most detailed and prominent part of
the building, many saying that it is the most beautiful part of the building itself. Ferriss
states that buildings of the 19th century and beyond are lacking, “many people believe
that the novel forms which are just now emerging are devoid of beauty”.4
Ferriss notes that with each new era of architecture, there is a new style associated with it. The styles generally do not move across time and straddle different eras. Each building, each tower is locked in time, each with its own idea of beauty and importance. Gothic architecture became one of the most notable styles that seems to penetrate more than one era of architecture, becoming a rarity to the general rule. But as more modern buildings emerge, traditional styles become repressed and complex forms evolved rather than simple concepts and ideas.5
But in this battle between the façade and the crown, which is more important,
and which is more beautiful? This depends on the person’s point of view. Buildings are
recognizable both through photographs as well as in person, but the parts or design of
the building that is memorable changes depending on where and how it is perceived.6
Distance away from the skyscraper changes the person’s field of vision, making the crown of the building recognizable ten blocks away rather than on the sidewalk situated at the base of the building. When a person is looking at a photograph of the Chrysler building in New York City, the art deco crown becomes the shining beacon of the
4 Ferris. Pg. 60. 5 ES Thesis. The Designer’s Responsibility - Reflecting on Humanism and Ecology in Architecture. August 23, 2018. 6 Ferris. Pg. 28.
7 skyscraper. At the sidewalk level, the entrance is equally impactful. The black base with multi story entrance with art deco styled windows and details greets guests as they enter. Both the crown of the building and the entrance exhibit the same design traits, but in very different ways. Both are notable but look vastly different at the same time.
Posing the question, “Do skyscrapers want to be designed so that the building as a whole, looks similar, no matter where a person is viewing it from”? Does there want to be an emphasis on highly detailed facades that become recognizable at any location?
Could a building be entirely made up of building crown detail, each one articulating a different program?
Figure 3: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss in the Metropolis of Tomorrow showing setbacks, crowning members, and the future density of New York City
8
In Ferriss’s second section titled Projected Trends, he begins to speculate about
the emerging nature of the skyscraper. He writes that this is the beginning of the “lure of the city” predicts that there is a trend towards centralization. Ferriss does not specify what is becoming centralized, whether that is buildings, people, or structure, but can be assumed he means all three.7 Centralization gives way to the idea that these towers
must be built taller and taller to accommodate a growing population. Along with
centralization there is a desire for these towers to have connections to light and air
through the use of terraces and greenery that bring elements of rural living to the city,
creating a hybrid between drastically different ways of life.
Figure 4: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss in the Metropolis of Tomorrow showing setback laws and centralization
7 Ferris. Pg. 59.
9
In Ferriss’s third and final section titled An Imaginary Metropolis, he begins to examine the future of the tower and the meaning of these buildings for the inhabitants of the city. Ferriss imagines a city where the towers and buildings are not stacked and not close together, giving room to the people and those who inhabit the buildings. He imagines people living thousands of feet in the air, surrounded by natural elements.8 He puts an emphasis on greenery, with an abundance of plants open to terraces that connect the occupants to nature within the city. He foresees a new take on zoning laws where these mega tall structures are surrounded by shorter buildings. Ferriss does not imagine cities of the future to be utopian but instead places an emphasis on design and the people who inhabit the structures.
Figure 5: Drawing by Hugh Ferriss in the Metropolis of Tomorrow depicting spaced out buildings
8 Ferris. Pg. 110.
10
Even with Ferriss view on utopias, there is strong representation for them and
how they work. Many future social projections are utopian communities, cities, and
societies that possess a nearly perfect quality of life. Within these utopias sits the
buildings and their architecture. There is a relationship between architecture and
utopias that ties the architecture to society, workforce, and marketplace that it is
situated in. But what countless books, movies, and theorists have shown, is that there
are vast problems with utopias. Some of the main problems concerning utopias is within
its traditional definitions around an ideal place or building, a perfect blueprint for the
future9. Generally, they are a new place or state and are closed off from those places that embody the social and political realities of the time. Sir Thomas More’s idea of a
self-contained community is an island10.
9 Pinder, David. Visions of the City. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. 2011. Pg 15. 10 Pinder. Pg 16.
11
Chicago School
Figure 6: Construction of the Wainwright Building by Adler & Sullivan, the first utilization of the steel frame
12
Louis Sullivan is considered the “father of the skyscraper” and the “father of modernism”. His famous quote of “form follows function” would be one of the most influential sayings of modern architects. He was at the forefront of architecture when skyscrapers transitioned from being supported by the strength of their walls to the open grid of a steel framework.11
In The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered, Sullivan breaks down the components of an office building in particular, and tall building in general to five conditions.12 The first is the below ground level, that contains all the mechanical units that power the building. The second is the ground floor that houses retail or restaurants.
The skyscraper is required to have a single entry for all who inhabit, work, or visit the building. The third condition is the second story that is accessible by stairways and has a more open plan to see down into the building and outside the building itself. The fourth condition is the most repetitive tiers upon tiers of floor plates, stacked one upon another infinitely until the program is met. The fifth and final condition is the top. It is nothing extraordinary in nature but simply the final tier that allows for mechanical and other systems to loop back down13.
Many skyscraper theories were prevalent in the twentieth century as architects took a more serious look at the typology. Sullivan offers his view on each argument.
Like many other architects, he describes the skyscraper as a column, consisting of a base, middle and top.14 This idea is the same as Ferriss and his views of the metropolis of tomorrow. The second argument was that the skyscraper should be symbolic. Its
11 Sullivan, Louis. “The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered”. Lippencott’s Magazine, March 1896.Pg. 1 12 Sullivan. Pg. 1 13 Sullivan. Pg. 2 14 Sullivan. Pg. 6
13
influence would be by nature and beauty within the holy trinity. Both of these arguments
seemed to show a lack of distinction, a lack of ornamentation.
Within these conditions and other architectural theories, Sullivan thought about a
more “beautiful” architecture, a more ornate architecture that was grand.15 He mentions
that skyscrapers, “must be tall, every inch of it tall, the force and power of altitude must
be in it the glory and pride of exaltation must be in it. It must be every inch a proud
soaring thing, rising in sheer exultation from bottom to top it is a unit without a single
dissenting line, - that it is the new, the unexpected, the eloquent peroration of most bald,
most sinister, most forbidding conditions”.16 Sullivan was supporting an architectural
typology all its own, something that would not only stand the test of time but would also
stand uniquely on its own with regards to an American architecture.
Sullivan’s ideology was put into practice in 1891 in the Wainwright Building. This
building was one of the first and most influential of the modern office skyscrapers. The
design perfectly showcased Sullivan’s theories. The building was composed of a base,
middle and top, a prime representation of a column.17 Sullivan emphasized the vertical in the detailing and setbacks of the windows. Unlike the later evolution of simple geometric forms characteristic of Mies van der Rohe and Le Corbusier, Sullivan
indulged in ornamentation. He added a layer of sophistication by using organic
decorative elements and influences.
15 Sullivan. Pg. 2 16 Sullivan. Pg. 3 17 Sullivan. Pg. 5
14
Figure 7: Sculptural details of the Wainwright Building showcasing Sullivan’s ornamentation
15
Figure 8: The Wainwright Building completed showcasing Sullivan’s ornamentation and vertical emphasis
16
Frank Lloyd Wright
Figure 9: Frank Lloyd Wrights proposed mile high skyscraper “The Illinois Building”
17
Frank Lloyd Wright in 1923 stated that, “the skyscraper, never more than a
commercial expedient…has become a threat, a menace to the welfare of human
beings”.18 Yet, at the very end of his career he developed an opinion, theory, and
designs on skyscrapers. The theory stems from his career-long work while the actual
designs came later. Wright only had two towers built, but he theorized and designed
“The Illinois”, a mile-high spire of a skyscraper. He intended for this skyscraper to be a mixed-use building that would spread urbanism up rather than out. The intent behind this ideology was to free up the ground plane and eliminate the need for other tall skyscrapers in the vicinity.19 This tower would be viewed as a beacon, recognizable at
any point in the city. While Rem Koolhaas would later write that, “it’s impossible to plot
culture”.20 Wright fully indulged in an effort to make a highly personal, though original
idea of a world that, for him, embodies an American ideal.
Wrights bold and ostentatious design for the mile-high skyscraper expresses a
desire that is a part of the current skyscraper typology. For as long as skyscrapers are
constructed, there has always an emphasis on building taller and taller. Architects and
developers alike have strived to have the tallest skyscraper in the world, relying on and
pushing technology and materials to their limits. In the pursuit of the tallest skyscraper,
bottleneck skyscrapers became a prominent typology allowing for taller and taller
buildings. The height of a skyscraper was not only just about creating something
symbolic that would draw attention to a certain city or architect, but also an economic
18 The Lyncean Group of San Diego. Frank Lloyd Wright’s 1956 Mile-High Skyscraper – The Illinois. May 9, 2020. https://lynceans.org/all-posts/frank-lloyd-wrights-1956-mile-high-skyscraper-the-illinois/ 19 he Lyncean Group of San Diego. Frank Lloyd Wright’s 1956 Mile-High Skyscraper – The Illinois. May 9, 2020. https://lynceans.org/all-posts/frank-lloyd-wrights-1956-mile-high-skyscraper-the-illinois/ 20 Koolhaas. Pg. 85
18
symbol. Building tall buildings must meet demand, and so they are located in highly dense cities, like New York City or others where the costs of land values and
construction necessitates height. But with this focus on the economics of construction are the building’s inhabitants being considered? Or is there too much emphasis on
building the latest and greatest object instead of how and what the building contains?
Technology is driving the advances of these buildings, but there must also be a focus
on people.
19
European Theorists
Figure 10: Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper competition in 1921 for Berlin by Mies van der Rohe
20
Mies van der Rohe was the pioneer behind the idea that when it came to
buildings, less is more. He was a pioneer of the modern glass skyscraper. He believed
that buildings should have clean, simple lines, and translucent panels. His early work
was mostly in glass boxes, only a few stories tall. But in the 1920’s he began to take
these ideas and translate them into the skyscraper. His submission for the
Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper competition of 1921-22, became a pivotal moment not only
in Mies’s career, but also in the world of skyscrapers.21 It was a new take on
modernization as well as a response to metropolitan architecture.22 He would be
credited with creating at the time an unprecedented skyscraper typology, a fully glass
tower. He based it all on the idea that a supporting steel skeleton would free up the
exterior walls, since typically they were load bearing, and would allow for a translucent
exterior. He would later refer to this concept in architecture as “skin and bones”.23 He
invented and challenged the skyscrapers that were being built at the time, stating, “only
skyscrapers under construction reveal the bold constructive thoughts, and then the
impression of the high-reaching steel skeletons is overpowering”.24 He furthered his
intent of this new skyscraper through his drawing representation. Juxtaposing dark
buildings surrounding a light, bright, translucent building that stood like a clear gem
amongst the dark foreground. Even though his building is encased in glass, it did not
21 MoMa. Ludwig Mies can der Rohe. Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper Project, Berlin Germany. 2020. https://www.moma.org/collection/works/787 22 Phaidon. How Mies Invented Modern Architecture. 2020. https://www.phaidon.com/agenda/architecture/articles/2014/march/19/how-mies-invented-modern-architecture/ 23 Phaidon. How Mies Invented Modern Architecture. 2020. https://www.phaidon.com/agenda/architecture/articles/2014/march/19/how-mies-invented-modern-architecture/ 24 MoMa. Ludwig Mies can der Rohe. Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper Project, Berlin Germany. 2020. https://www.moma.org/collection/works/787
21
reveal what lay inside. The all-glass façade gave no clues as to what and how many
types of programs were held within the walls.
Even though Mies created a new vision of the glass tower that has influenced
skyscrapers for years, his aesthetic could be criticized for removing all character from
the tower. While the towers grow and grow and have no exterior articulation, it becomes
hard to distinguish one from the other. A criticism of today’s skyscrapers designs would
be that there is only a focus on creating a smooth, translucent tower. There is little
articulation on the façade of the building that gives any indication of the program that it
contains. A glass tower could be an office building, apartments, or any other number of
programs. The glass, blank, flat façade of today’s skyscrapers shows no programmatic
connection or interest. Mies created a new skyscraper typology and launched the ever-
present glass skyscraper that we see today. Many to all skyscrapers around the world
are being built in this style. They convey only a sense of ubiquitous modernity and bland
transparency.
In Le Corbusier’s planning of cities as well as buildings, he combined functionalism with daring sculptural expression. Le Corbusier expressed his design for skyscrapers in the Cartesian skyscraper. It was both modern and rational, two pivotal
points of Corbusier’s design style. He would use this skyscraper type to inform his work
on the Radiant City. The Cartesian skyscraper was cruciform in shape. The thought and
intent behind the cruciform plan were to enable all those living there equal access to
light and air. Even though this was good in theory, the building form was symmetrical
22
about two axes and did not inflect towards the sun and its one axis. The cruciform
shaped tower was shaded and did not receive direct light on the north façade.25
Figure 11: Le Corbusier’s Cartesian skyscraper
Using what he had learned through the Cartesian skyscraper, Le Corbusier
morphed and formed a new skyscraper typology that would become more successful
and achieve what he had originally set out to do. The new form that was introduced was
referred to as the “chicken claw”. This new building typology was used in several
applications across Europe including plans for, Anvers-Rive-Gauche, Barcelona,
Buenos Aires, and New York City.26 The thought that this form would give way to
making everything more alive, true, harmonious, diverse, and more architectural. This
25 Corbusier, Le. Works: Gratte-ciel Cartesian, 1937. 2020. http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/corbuweb/morpheus.aspx?sysId=13&IrisObjectId=5752&sysLanguage=en- en&itemPos=52&itemSort=en-en_sort_string1%20&itemCount=215&sysParentName=&sysParentId=65 26 Corbusier, Le. Works: Gratte-ciel Cartesian, 1937. 2020. http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/corbuweb/morpheus.aspx?sysId=13&IrisObjectId=5752&sysLanguage=en- en&itemPos=52&itemSort=en-en_sort_string1%20&itemCount=215&sysParentName=&sysParentId=65
23 form launched the modern techniques of skyscraper building. Another huge part of this form was to oppose the current American skyscrapers. Showing that there was more than one way to look at skyscrapers outside of the typical pyramidal forms and needle like terminations, for example the Chrysler Building in New York City. With his form being a singular extruded shape, he was in opposition to the traditional American skyscraper that emphasized a base, shaft, and crowning member.
He incorporated his idea of the skyscraper into the planning of a city. Le
Corbusier stated that, “the whole urban scene is one of wasted opportunities and inefficiency”.27 He planned and formulated the “perfect” city plan. He even went as far to write that, “The city of to-day is a dying thing because it is not geometrical. To build in the open would be to replace out present haphazard arrangements, which are all we have to-day, by a uniform layout. Unless we do this there is no salvation”.28 With existing cities and infrastructure this is not feasible and seems unrealistic in the grand scheme of things. Both repetition and uniformity eliminate design freedom and flexibility.
It eradicates any kind of social or cultural interaction that could influence building design. Buildings become nothing more than just a piece of a city-wide development.
27 Corbusier, Le. The City of To-Morrow and its Planning. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. 2018. Pg. viii 28 Corbusier, Le. Pg. 175
24
Cinema and the Skyscraper
Figure 12: Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis showing the prominent cathedral tower
25
The modern architectural concern about the skyscraper are technical and aesthetic. The sheer scale of the skyscraper and its ambiguous relationship to the city have provoked utopian projections. The skyscraper can represent a utopian ideology, one that states that a place or space is perfect. Utopias are subject to problems in that they can lack vitality, interest, and history that cities and building accrue over time.
Utopias aim to be a symbol for where it is located. Utopian architecture is slated with good intentions but rarely achieve their social ambitions and often end up being dystopian in nature. They can create separation and oppression between people and places. This social problem that New York City is facing when it comes to the skyscraper has been represented in cinema. The city’s supertall skyscrapers for the wealthy, leave the rest of New York City wondering what is going to happen to the way they live and work
Throughout cinematic history, New York City, has inspired science fiction movies.
From the 1927 science fiction classic Metropolis to Blade Runner, skyscrapers have been featured. The buildings and cities in these science fiction movies draw upon extreme political and social depictions. Skyscrapers are often represented as utopian structures that demonstrate “endless enthusiasm to appropriate the whole universe of functions and become an autonomous organism”.29 In movies the skyscraper is depicted as this mega tall, sleek building. Conditions at the ground are less than ideal often depicted as dark and gloomy where the complete opposite is seen at the top of the skyscraper, high among the clouds. Wealthier citizens are able to afford better
29 Tangerstad, Erik. The Medieval in the Modern: The Cathedral and the Skyscraper in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis. Visby, Sweden: Gotland University Press 10. 2008. Pg. 1
26 conditions with views, large units, and fine materials, while those who live closer to the ground are middle- and lower-class citizens who occupy cramped units and gloomy conditions.
The cities and skyscrapers of movies are often a depiction of government and social injustice. They consider and incorporate current societal trends. They predict the new normal. Many science fiction movies showcase an imbalance of power, taking what is promised to be utopian and turning that into a dystopian narrative. Fritz Lang’s
Metropolis, depicts the “inequality and social tension around the modern skyscraper”.30
The film was a benchmark for shaping science fiction films. In Metropolis there is an emphasis on the built environment as a representation of the social structure of the city.
There is a relationship between the skyscraper and the cathedral, an idea where the future meets the past.31 Metropolis called into question how the skyscraper and city architecture will look like in future society.32 In the film the wealthy are located in the tops of skyscrapers, the middle class in lower floors, although they are not featured much or at all in the film, and the lower class who live below ground in poor living conditions. Metropolis used the cathedral as a marker for future cities as it calls into question the tension created by the skyscraper apparent in the social distribution in the film.33 The film shows the “inequality and social tension around the modern skyscraper of tomorrow and ends with reconciliation and renewed spirit of community on the stairs to the medieval cathedral”.34 Metropolis calls into question whether architects can look
30 Tangerstad. Pg 1. 31 Tangerstad. Pg 10. 32 Tangerstad. Pg 19. 33 Tangerstad. Pg 18. 34 Tangerstad. Pg 19.
27 to the past for answers to current and future problems surrounding the architecture of the city and the skyscrapers that inhabit it.
Figure 13: Section drawing depicting the separation of class in Lang’s film Metropolis. Those who were wealthier were situated above ground while the working lower class was situated below ground in harsh conditions
28
City within a City
Figure 14: Flagrant Delit by Madelon Vriesendorp that served as the original cover of Delirious New York by Rem Koolhaas. The illustration depicts not only the double life of the skyscraper but also showcases how all eyes were on these iconic buildings and exhausted from symbolism
29
The skyscraper acts as a utopian device.35 The skyscraper allows for an unlimited number of sites within a single urban environment. But for years before the invention of the elevator, these tall buildings could not be realized and only in the 20th century do they become the site of utopian visions. Rem Koolhaas argues that a skyscraper, standing hundreds of feet in the air, offers a means of escape from the buildings that make up the city’s older fabric. He states that, “the elevator is the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy: the further it goes up the more undesirable the circumstances it leaves behind”.36The shear height of the skyscraper removes itself from any social or economic problems it leaves behind at the ground.
Rem Koolhaas states that, “new buildings of the mutant kind strive to be a city within a city”.37 Hybridization is the new craze, multiple programs within a single built entity. Koolhaas is in a favor of this type of design, criticizing the current state of New
York City and the buildings that occupy its skylines. He states that, “architecture is no longer the art of designing buildings so much as the brutal skyward extrusion of whatever site the developer has managed to assemble”. 38 The design of the tower gets lost in between the economic development folds. Money is driving the design, not intent or the people who will inhabit it.
Koolhaas expresses and talks about what life will be like inside these towers in the future, conveying that “New York City has become a city of grotesque and inexplorable multiplication and extrusion”.39 He was looking at an example of a hundred
35 Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York. Monacelli Press, 1994. Pg 83. 36 Koolhaas. Pg 82. 37 Koolhaas. Pg 89. 38 Koolhaas. Pg 88. 39 Koolhaas. Pg 87.
30 story skyscraper as a mammoth, looming structure that would contain the life of a great city. Bringing culture up through the buildings almost creates a city within a city.40 He begins with the ideas surrounding this new building type. He begins with breaking down the program based on the floor number. As well as being able to perfectly control the living environment. Koolhaas states that in the future there could be “perfect control of the atmosphere that can change to fit the needs of the people living there”.41
If the focus of architecture shifts to thinking about super tall mini city towers, what becomes of lower and shorter multi story buildings? What is their role in this all and how does it contribute to the culture created in the city and in the towers? Koolhaas begins to look at this problem and says that these shorter buildings are needed in order to be convinced of the need and scale of mega skyscrapers. The structures and the programs that it supports, is still an ideal projected world. There is still a need for non-skyscraper buildings.
40 Koolhaas. Pg 85. 41 Koolhaas. Pg 85.
31
Hybrid Skyscrapers
Figure 15: The Dutch Pavilion at the 2000 World Expo by MVRDV
32
“I like elements which are hybrid rather than ‘pure’, compromising rather
than ‘clean’, distorted rather than ‘straightforward’, ambiguous rather than
‘articulated’, perverse as well as impersonal, boring as well as ‘interesting’,
conventional rather than ‘designed’, accommodating rather than
excluding, redundant rather than simple, vestigial as well as innovation,
inconsistent and equivocal rather than direct and ‘clear’”. 42
Robert Venturi
The evolution of hybridized skyscrapers is “the child” of the late 19th century
American skyscraper.43 It began to emerge based on the advances in technology as
well as the lack of land in large cities. With architects and designers in search of land to build new projects, they began to build taller and taller structures. By the 1900’s in the age of automobiles, the car allowed for movement. It caused city populations to expand and created sterile zones within cities. Along with that zoning laws began to change, focusing on setbacks to help with mega structures and dark city corridors.44 With all this,
architects began to ask, “How do we bring people back to the city?” The automobile,
sterile building zones and new zoning laws, started to really push hybrid buildings to the
forefront of projects and aimed to reclaim the city.45 Many hybrid buildings were and are
based and designed with reiterative geometry which helps to simplify structural
systems. Many are singular form extrusions that fill the city block. Ferriss and Koolhaas
42 a&t Research Group. This is Hybrid An Analysis of Mixed-use Buildings. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain: a&t architecture publishers. 2014. Pg. 276 43 a&t Research Group. 50 Hybrid Buildings. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain: a&t architecture publishers. 2020. Pg. 10. 44 a&t Research Group. Pg. 12. 45 a&t Research Group. Pg. 12.
33 both thought that towers have become a competition for who can build the tallest tower.
These massive, closely situated skyscrapers cause problems at the ground.46 But with these simple extruded forms, comes looming buildings that create dark lighting at the bottom, a return to a problem of the past.
In a&t Research’s book, This is Hybrid, the buildings of the past were
“considered to be icons or monuments scattered through the city’s fabric and now are becoming amalgamated into the smooth anonymous containers which make it up”.47 A challenge of the twenty-first century is metropolitan density and its vertical organization.
The skyscraper must adapt to its expanding population and challenge the single program building. While hybrids have historically made appearances, the singular programmed skyscraper is still the most common. But as cities grow, there must be a way to create new public space, new cultural zones, and new urban places. The skyscraper is no longer one place, it is a conglomerate of spaces. The traditional skyscraper focused on the plan, and the stacking of floors. The hybrid skyscraper must be more considerate of the section. There is an apparent need to link the spaces and
“cross pollinate” the programs over many levels is key. The juxtaposition and placing of spaces are part of its success.
Steven Holl wrote that to combine multiple activities into one singular building is to, “distend and warp a pure building type”.48 Holl, in contrast to Mies van der Rohe, and
Le Corbusier, is interested in hybrid building forms. Exploding economies, growing populations, and increasing land values, produce hybrid programs and can activate the
46 Koolhaas. Pg 91 47 a&t Research Group. Pg. 20 48 a&t Research Group. Pg. 20
34
building, and give it life. Hybridity extends the building from the urban landscape of the city, rather than isolating it among the clouds.
In contemporary skyscraper design there is a new “verticalism” emerging. In recent years, the theory behind skyscrapers has changed into vertical urban planning.
Including adding multiple programs into one building including libraries, universities, museums, parks all mixed with office, residential and hotel. Mixing both public and private program creates a vertical representation of the way all of these programs work traditionally in a horizontal format. The resurgence of the hybrid skyscraper can be
linked to the natural progression of population, space, and technology. There is a new
sense of connection between people and buildings, as well as new ideas about public
space. In New York City the need for hybrid buildings comes from land scarcity, density,
and the limitations of urban sprawl.
The modern skyscraper has typically been a place of work. The office building
evolution involved perfecting both corporate and physical organization and creating an
efficient layout and arrangement. This design for rigid arrangement translated from the
interior of the building to the exterior of the building. Symbolically these corporate
organizations were interpreted as steel and glass rectilinear prisms. The Seagram
Building in New York City epitomized these values.49 The beauty was in both the
organization and the building. But this ideal, became mundane and the skyscraper was,
“deprived of any monumental aura, they are consumer products, not exceptional
anymore, a norm”.50
49 a&t Research Group. Pg. 23. 50 a&t Research Group. Pg. 278
35
What modern skyscrapers failed to see and compensate for was the complexity of the individual. More modern theorists have challenged the basic and outdated form.
Koolhaas saw the skyscraper as something with generic quality that allows for an endless combination of programs to exist within a single building. The Downtown
Athletic Club in New York City by Starret and Van Vleck, is the “standard bearer for hybrid buildings”.51 The Downtown Athletic Club has a simple, monolithic exterior with an interior with “urban congestion” that promoted interaction between its occupants. The floor plans shrink as the building goes up, which is logically set up doe to the program within. By utilizing the setback laws and utilizing a change in volumetric sections, the change of building program is expressed on the façade of the building. The three programs within the building; hotel, retail, and a variety of sports activities, all intermingle throughout the building.52
51 a&t Research Group. Pg. 21 52 a&t Research Group. Pg. 21
36
Figure 16: The Downtown Athletic Club by Starret and Van Vleck shown in section, plan and sketch how multiple programs were brought together and people could have it all in this hybrid tower
37
Koolhaas would go on to say that Raymond Hood was ahead of his time and that, “every businessman in the city must have realized what an advantage it would be to live in the building where his office is located”.53 Raymond Hood in the 1930’s developed the idea of combining offices, apartments, businesses, hotels and theatres in one skyscraper. Hood’s Unit Building pre-dated the blend of functions that hybrid buildings offered. He wanted to create a city under one roof, similar to a city within a city that Koolhaas would theorize in later years. The Unit building spanned three blocks on the grid of Manhattan and created a flow of interior traffic.54 It was both a vertical and horizontal hybrid building that absorbed the diversity of programs and created its own urban zone. Hood believed that all daily activities could take place in one single building. Hood was developing this typology around the same time as Le Corbusier who, in opposition to Hood, was creating more rigid, extruded forms.
Figure 17: Aerial of the Unit Building by Raymond Hood
53 a&t Research Group. Pg. 22. 54 a&t Research Group. Pg. 23.
38
Architects and designers might speculate that the future of skyscrapers and
mega towers are rooted in this idea of a city within a tower in order to create a place
that is available to all, and that can be visited by anyone regardless of social standing.
Architecture and the creation of living towers is deep-rooted in political ideology. The
a&t research group envision a tall building, “allowing itself to be penetrated by the
setting has become porous, welcoming both residents and strangers, with little regard
for status and a no-questions asked attitude”.55 Currently these tall towers that are
solely residential, are tailored for the ultra-rich who can buy multimillion-dollar residences with a view. Nothing is affordable for the modern worker. Skyscrapers have made a shift towards looking like a place that people “want to live” or that looks good in photos or magazines. But, these skyscrapers are not relatable to the people utilizing them. They lack function, originality and are less engaging.56 Newer hybrid buildings still
fall into the category of utopia as well, but they seem a little more attainable, and less
farfetched then projected utopias and society in film and architectural theory. It has
never lost sight of what the skyscraper or what future cities want to be. Although in
instances it can lose sight of the real intent behind the future of design.
As hybrid buildings have evolved so has the thinking of what they should include.
As technology has advanced there has been a need for a response to both social and
cultural changes. In many projects outlined in a&t research group’s book about fifty
hybrid buildings, many are studied, designed, and programmed in section. The section
provides the most interest and shows that the building is a mini city.57 Many of these
55 a&t Research Group. Pg 10. 56 ES Thesis. The Designer’s Responsibility - Reflecting on Humanism and Ecology in Architecture. August 23, 2018. 57 a&t Research Group. Pg 28-30.
39 skyscrapers have specific programs that pull from a set of activities that are found within the city, allowing for culture and people to push upwards.
Figure 18: The Galleria by David Specter. A New York City example of a hybrid skyscraper incorporating living space, office, retail and civic
40
New York City and the Skyscraper
Figure 19: New York City skyline and its Art Deco towers that were a result of the 1916 zoning codes and setback requirements
41
Before the 1880’s building taller was technologically out of the question but after
this period, skyscrapers emerged with new social and technological advancements. The
skyscraper revolution took shape in New York City. As New York City began to recover
from the Financial Panic of 1873, its land values began to drastically rise.58 There was a
need for land and office space, especially in lower Manhattan. Higher rent and higher
profits meant that buildings would have to be built taller, and house more businesses
and people. Skyscrapers emerged as a source of profit in the growing real estate market, rather than an object of beauty. Building taller was made cost-effective. The supply and demand for taller buildings in New York brought forth a new building typology, the skyscraper.
As New York City skyscrapers began being built, there was a difference in determining the limits of a building height. There were four factors that determined the limits of skyscraper.59 The first type was structural, determined by the limits of
technology and engineering. The second was determined by the developer who
calculated what would give the greatest amount of return on investment. The third was
economic height that focused on the affordability of the building as well as how that
building affected the city. The fourth was symbolic. The first three factors of height were
concerned with investment, time, and money. Symbolic height was more concerned
with the architectural components of the building.60 While a skyscraper might be too tall
from an economic sense, it could bear a symbolic role.61 It created a recognizable
58 Barr, Jason N. Building the Skyscraper: The Birth and Growth of Manhattan’s Skyscrapers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2016. Pg. 145 59 Barr. Pg. 146 60 Barr. Pg. 146 61 Barr. Pg. 147
42 building within the city that would become a symbol not only for the city but for the developer. Symbolic height produced the race for the tallest skyscraper. It was also used to show economic strength and serve as an icon for the city.
These symbolic buildings, icons across New York City, at first were viewed as wasteful. Putting an ornamental crown on a skyscraper that could not be used for revenue, reduced profits and was not ideal. Money drove the design of skyscrapers rather than a want for architectural wonder. It came down to a debate between what was best economically or for society. The Empire State Building, similar to the Chrysler
Building, was built tall for social rather than for economics. The Empire State Building was too tall, “wasting” resources on a part of the building that could not be occupied.62
But the developers were trying to win a height contest. Even though it was deemed wasteful to do this, it has become a symbol of New York City. A person can see the crown on the Empire State Building and know immediately what country, state, and city they are looking at. The benefit that society receives seeing these monumental buildings, outweighs the economic loss.
In the late nineteenth century into early twentieth century, hybrid buildings came into being. There had been an emphasis on single programmed skyscrapers, which would continue to be the leading skyscraper typology. But inevitability there was an acceptance for buildings with overlapping functions. This typology was emerging within dense metropolitan areas and originate due to sharp increases in land prices and the rigidity in urban layout. Even with the quiet emergence of the hybrid skyscraper, there was segregation laws impeding the mixing of people and spaces.
62 Barr. Pg. 146
43
In the 1900’s, as New York City grew upwards, it grew without regulation,
meaning that the building being built were erected with no guidelines, no architectural restrictions. The design of the skyscraper was up to the discretion of the architect. Many skyscrapers were being modeled after the Greek column with its tripartite system of base, shaft, and capital.63 Before the 1916 Comprehensive Zoning Plan, skyscrapers
generally took up the entirety of the plot, and were single, straight, extruded towers with
detailing and ornamentation. As buildings were built taller and taller, and were
occupying the whole land plot, things became crowded. The 1916 law provided better
conditions for people working and living in the skyscrapers, as well as the society who
occupied the city. It created three distinct major types, use, bulk, and height.64 The most
prevalent part of the regulations was the setbacks from the street line. There were
height rues that stated how tall a building could be before it had to set back from the
street line.65
63 Barr. Pg. 162 64 Barr. Pg. 163 65 Barr. Pg. 168
44
Figure 20: The Chrysler building crowning Figure 21: The entrance of the Chrysler member that was a result of the 1916 building showing Art Deco detailing as well setback laws. The crown also became a as showing that the entrance similar to the symbol in the New York City skyline crown, is a symbol of the building
The 1916 code brought on a boom of more ornate building in Art Deco and
Beaux Arts style.66 But by the 1940’s, after the Great Depression and World War II, skyscraper architects took on a new approach. Changes to zoning codes in 1961, lead to an emphasis on the glass box. Le Corbusier and Mies Van der Rohe influenced the process and saw these modern buildings as a “utopian machine”. They were focused on the creation of skyscrapers that were slender towers of glass.67 The new code removed the setback rule and allowed for skyscrapers to return to rectangular, extruded towers,
66 Barr. Pg. 168 67 Barr. Pg. 169
45
but instead of masonry the towers were now black curtain walls made of glass. The
glass allowed for lighter building construction that needed less steel and offered better light and views.68 This focus on glass and light construction reduced the symbolic potential of the older buildings, and the unique identity of the New York skyline.
As New York City moves into the twenty-first century, there is new emphasis on supertall skyscrapers that take advantage of the remaining air rights and provide added amenities to the user.69 The current skyscrapers still cater to the ultra-rich.70 Providing
luxurious living spaces and top tier amenities, all why spending and vying for the top
spot with the tallest tower. Along with this competition to make the tallest skyscraper, to
defy the odds, little is thought about how it affects the neighborhood it is located within.
New York City has seen push back from its residents in certain neighborhoods due to
the towering heights of built and proposed skyscrapers.
E. B. White stated that, “Manhattan has been compelled to expand skyward
because of the absence of any other direction in which to grow. This, more than any
other thing, is responsible for its physical majesty. It is to the nation what the white
church spire is to the village – the visible symbol of aspiration and faith, the white plume
saying that the way is up”.71 New York City’s skyline has always been symbolic and
recognizable. New York City due to its location and density has no other way to grow
other than up, explaining why throughout history and currently the city searches out the
newest technology to build higher and higher as the population steadily increases.
Skyscrapers hold the key to an economic problem of where to house millions of people
68 Barr. Pg. 169 69 Barr. Pg. 173 70 Barr. Pg. 173 71 Barr. Pg. 184
46
in a city that has nowhere to expand horizontally. But where the skyscraper has been a
solution for New York City, it has also created its own problems. Skyscrapers tend to
cater to the wealthy and furnish them with high end materials. The New York City
skyscraper cuts off its culture at the ground level and generally does not incorporate it
into the building. The skyscraper is a stand-alone object housing people generically. It is sterile and lacks any kind of societal interaction.72
For the past twenty years the New York City skyline has changed dramatically.
The once recognizable, iconic skyline of the city has recently been dominated and
changed by a new generation of supertall skyscrapers. Many of the supertalls being
built in New York City are residential buildings for high end buyers.73 New York City’s
high-end housing is overstimulated, these supertalls creating an inflation in the number
of high-end units. But what this leaves behind is a skyline blocking those down below,
those who cannot afford high-end prices. New York City is currently looking at housing
stock that is forty percent unsold, that is typically selling to buyers from out of town
looking to buy a second, third of fourth home. Between the high price aimed at a limited
clientele, the average New Yorker, if they still exist, is upset at the loss of the old city.
They see units being sold to people who do not occupy the city.74
New York City has been known for its skyscrapers on the cusp of technological
achievement, but as these supertalls are built, it is leaving more and more people
wondering when it is going to stop. It’s not just about the price anymore, it is about the
72 Herzenberg, Michael. Part 1: What’s Behind the Supertall Skyscraper Boom Changing NYC’s Iconic Skyline? Spectrum News NY1. January, 6th 2020. https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all- boroughs/news/2020/01/06/what-s-behind-the-supertall-skyscraper-boom-changing-nyc-s-iconic-skyline- 73 Herzenberg. 74 Herzenberg.
47
way that affects the entire culture and look of the city. The construction of these towers
is creeping north towards Central Park.75 New Yorkers are worried about the shadows being cast on that great public space and fear that the tall building expansion will
change the views and escape from the city that the park offers. New York City
neighborhoods are being surprised by the new skyscrapers and are not aware of the
new tower until construction starts.76 People are being left out of the conversation, not
being allowed to be a part of the new development of these skyscrapers. New
technologies have allowed these towers to be built taller and taller, leaving behind the
once historical and monumental look of stone and brick.
75 Herzenberg. 76 Herzenberg.
48
Figure 22: Manhattan skyline 1896
Figure 23: Manhattan skyline 1931
Figure 24: Manhattan skyline 1999
Figure 25: Projected Manhattan skyline 2022 featuring new supertall skyscrapers
49
The Site
Figure 26: Site plan of site location and new development
50
Manhattan has a high population density of people and businesses. In recent
years there has been a surge across the East River into Brooklyn. Downtown Brooklyn
has become a hive of activity, especially for the younger population, becoming a trendy
place to live, eat and socialize. Brooklyn has good transit connection to Manhattan via
the subway and ferry. But as urban sprawl from the city and Brooklyn moves north and
east of downtown Brooklyn, transit is harder to come by and is not as frequent.
The Brooklyn neighborhood of Greenpoint sits directly east across the river from the East Village. Greenpoint is home to a large Polish American community and recently has evolved into and appealing, hipster community that includes artists and
musicians. Many of the buildings are occupied with art and music studios. Greenpoint
has seen recent development due to proximity to the East Village, Gramercy Park and the Flatiron District on the island of Manhattan. There is currently high-rise development
that lines the East River, and the area has become a new high-end arts and culture
district. The city currently has a plan to develop a streetcar connector that would
connect Brooklyn and Queens.77 Greenpoint already has a subway station connection
that connects to several other major lines that run into Manhattan. New ferry
connections have been created with the new development. Greenpoint is working
towards becoming a new hub of activity with the influx of business and transportation
lines.
Historically, Greenpoint was considered a working-class neighborhood, the home
to jobs in manufacturing and industry. The neighborhood has a large Polish population
and is often referred to as “Little Poland”. Many homes are multi-generational or have
77 Bindelglass, Evan. Nonprofit Wants 17-Mile Streetcar Linking Brooklyn & Queens. January 6, 2016. https://ny.curbed.com/2016/1/6/10849238/nonprofit-wants-17-mile-streetcar-linking-brooklyn-queens
51 been passed down through the family. Sadly, as time has gone on, Greenpoint has seen gentrification, displacing the place people call home. The neighborhood of
Greenpoint has been family oriented.
In 2005, Greenpoint underwent a zoning change that would bring more residents, schools, parks, and retail to the district. But, as the changes were implemented, many residents saw the historic Greenpoint that they had grown up with, vanish. Even with new development, there is still a desire to refurbish and maintain the historic buildings in the neighborhood. The rich history of Greenpoint makes visitors and residents alike feel,
“as if they’re traveling into the past, yet enjoying modern day comfort.78
Figure 27: Current development and plan for garden and park space along the East River in Greenpoint
78 Helmreich, B. William. The Brooklyn Nobody Knows: An Urban Walking Guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. October 4, 2016. Pg. 5.
52
A New Typology
Figure 28: Watercolor and collage study of exterior of skyscraper and corresponding views into New York City from Greenpoint
53
As the new era of skyscrapers emerge, the desire to have the tallest tower is still
relevant. There continues to be an emphasis on glass and light construction. While the
buildings continue to grow taller there is also a desire to have the slenderest
skyscraper. As technology pushes skyscrapers to their farthest limits, the skyscraper is
still called into question of whether it is good for the people it serves. This design for a
new skyscraper typology looks at the history of the place as well as takes into consideration the following attributes: relation to the ground, façade, section, program,
and overall character.
The skyscrapers connection to the ground is one that is physically connected but
is not personally connected due to its overwhelming height. The first few floors have a
brief connection, but as the building extends the connection is non-existent. Those who
inhabit apartments in upper floors of the skyscraper, are disconnected from others. The
only point of connection between others is the corridor and core of the building. While
there is a human disconnect, there is a connection to the sky and view.
Generally speaking as one ascends a skyscraper the program becomes private.
The interaction between public and private spaces goes away. This spacial interaction
aids in the disconnect from the ground and lower floors. In this hybrid skyscraper design
there will be a focus on interaction between people, spaces and the ground. This
relationship will be challenged in section and façade articulation. The main focus will be
to connect people at greater heights while still offering them the sought after views of
the city. These views and experiences will be more accessible to the every day New
Yorker, rather than just the upper class.
54
Historically, before skyscrapers were entirely glass façades, they were clad in brick or stone and created a beautiful texture for the building. While they did have texture on the exterior, there was some ambiguity behind the materials. The design of the skyscraper incorporated setbacks or terracing that not only fulfilled the zoning code but also could be a symbol of the program changing inside. Skyscrapers in the 1900’s were characterized and symbolic due to its top crowning member. The top crowning member acted like a beacon in the New York City skyline and was the buildings most prominent feature. The crown of the building has the most texture and the most expression on the surface of the façade. It is important to ask the question of what does the future of skyscrapers look like?
By looking historically and taking into consideration the critique of all glass façades, this design proposal for a new skyscraper will emphasize façade articulation. It merges and melds historic building aesthetics with new building technology. The beauty that was limited to the building’s crown will be developed on the entire building. The crowns from New York City’s most prominent skyscrapers such as the Empire State building, the Chrysler building, and the Metropolitan Life Insurance company will serve as nodes connected to the façade that will be the apartments for the building. The materials, colors, and textures of current buildings in Greenpoint will dictate the façade condition. The façade will blend buildings of the past to create a skyscraper that is not only unique but considers the city and neighborhood.
The most interesting and meticulous spaces of the skyscraper can be seen in its section. It shows the relationship of its interior spaces and how they interact. It shows the connection between private and public space. In this design, the section will be
55
mindfully considered. The design aims to transform the more rigid and standardized
floor plate and create a building that is not only functional but also sculptural in its section.
Figure 29: Axonometric section and façade study
56
Figure 30: Cast plaster section study
57
Figure 31: Cast plaster section and texture study
58
Figure 32: Cast plaster section and texture study
Figure 33: Cast plaster section and section study
59
As the design of this skyscraper takes on a more articulated façade and multiple programs, the relationship between the spaces will play an important role in carrying the hybrid typology both in and out of the building. The section of the building will emphasize intersecting spaces that begin to mesh varying programs together. There will be a transportation connection at the base of the building that will connect transient people to other amenities within the skyscraper. The section will begin to blend programs together and offer unique views looking in on the interior and out towards the city. Since the building will not be clad entirely in glass there will need to be a different way of getting light into the space and core of the skyscraper. This design will use sculptural light wells that will bounce the light into the building. The intent is to create ethereal spaces that not only stand on there own but connect with other programs and spaces. The section of this skyscraper will explore the line between public and private space.
In this design there are several things to consider when selecting the program of the building. What are the surrounding conditions? Who is this building going to cater to and provide for? The building wants to be a place where its inhabitants and its guests have a place to live, work and play. The design will take the pieces of the city fabric that make up the culture of its population and push it vertical. A key component to the success of this city within a city skyscraper is the issue of privacy. Each program included in the building falls within a public, private, or semi-private or public space.
While designing it is important to consider those factors and how residents and visitors move through the space and what they have access to. The typical design of a skyscraper is to create vertical slices, multiple floors tall that house a certain program.
60
So as someone ascends the building, they go through different places such as retail,
restaurants, living or working. But there could be an issue with residential privacy if this intent were taken.
This design challenges the typical look and methodology of the skyscraper. As
the spaces of the skyscraper begin to intersect, there is a focus on natural light,
circulation, and program proximity. The skyscraper will include apartments, office space,
retail, restaurants, garden and open courtyard space, artist studios, and a grocery. The
programs are not just located in one location in the building. They intertwine, occur at
different heights and are next to different programs in different configurations. Using
multiple programs in a building and having them not all be in one place only, begins to
create spaces within the building that people would maybe not congregate near
otherwise.
Figure 34: Axonometric program and façade studies
61
Figure 35: Axon and section diagram study of program distribution
62
The multi-use skyscraper drives home the idea that anyone can really have it all,
an idea that has been more reserved for the upper class. While all these programs can
be found within Greenpoint, the location at the waterfront brings these amenities much
closer to the new development of Greenpoint while incorporating important attributes of
the neighborhood. By incorporating several different programs, it would create a place
that provides everything someone could need. It would promote both cultural and social
interaction.
While this skyscraper is a hybrid building, its character and design would stand alone. It allows for the neighborhood to be extended and house more people and amenities, but it also does something else. It takes architecture that is important to the people, to the families who live there and creates a vertical representation of the city and neighborhood they grew up in. By taking the facades, details, crowning members that make up the area and mesh them together into one skyscraper, it gives Greenpoint a symbolic building in the skyline. It gives Greenpoint an iconic building that when viewed from across the river in Manhattan, from Queens or anywhere else, it will automatically be recognized as Greenpoint.
63
Conclusion
Figure 36: Axonometric façade and section study
64
Architecture at its very core strives to cater and help the people that it serves.
The skyscraper of today is, “deprived of any monumental aura, they are consumer
products, not exceptional anymore”.79 As cities change and develop, so should the
skyscraper and it must adapt to future conditions. The skyscraper must forego its once
singular program and take on a new identity, an identity that has been around for some time, that needs to be pushed to the forefront of skyscraper development. The creation of a hybrid skyscraper that incorporates architectural context from its site, as well as programs that might not be accessible in the area, can start to create a narrative between those who are permanent and transitory. In cities it is important to incorporate lifestyles and culture from any and all people and create a more diversified tower.
New York in recent years has been deemed a place that is not being built for the
people of New York City and instead built for those who use New York City as a
second, third or fourth home. The creation of this hybridized, sculptural skyscraper gives
those who call Greenpoint home, a place that is a part of the culture of the
neighborhood as well as a place to call their own.
The city has always been a place where a skyscraper can become iconic and
solidify its place within a larger context. When the building considers and embodies the
neighborhood in which it is built, it becomes a symbol for that area. As the skyscraper
changes and adapts to an ever changing market and technological advances, it must
look forward, but it also must look to the past.
79 A&T Research Group. This is Hybrid An Analysis of Mixed-use Buildings. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain: a&t architecture publishers. 2014. Pg. 278
65
Bibliography: a&t Research Group. This is Hybrid An Analysis of Mixed-use Buildings. Vitoria- Gasteiz, Spain: a&t architecture publishers. 2014. a&t Research Group. 50 Hybrid Buildings. Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain: a&t architecture publishers. 2020.
Barr, Jason N. Building the Skyscraper: The Birth and Growth of Manhattan’s Skyscrapers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2016.
Barr, Jason M. Skyscraper Bottlenecks (Part 1) The Elevator. February 10, 2020. https://buildingtheskyline.org/tag/the-illinois-skyscraper/#
Bindelglass, Evan. Nonprofit Wants 17-Mile Streetcar Linking Brooklyn & Queens. January 6, 2016. https://ny.curbed.com/2016/1/6/10849238/nonprofit-wants-17- mile-streetcar-linking-brooklyn-queens
Corbusier, Le. Works: Gratte-ciel Cartesian, 1937. 2020. http://www.fondationlecorbusier.fr/corbuweb/morpheus.aspx?sysId=13&IrisObjec tId=5752&sysLanguage=en-en&itemPos=52&itemSort=en- en_sort_string1%20&itemCount=215&sysParentName=&sysParentId=65
Corbusier, Le. The City of To-Morrow and its Planning. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. 2018.
ES Thesis. The Designer’s Responsibility - Reflecting on Humanism and Ecology in Architecture. August 23, 2018. https://esthesis.org/the-designers-responsibility- reflecting-on-humanism-and-ecology-in-architecture-apil-k-c/.
Ferris, Hugh. The Metropolis of Tomorrow. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2005.
Helmreich, B. William. The Brooklyn Nobody Knows: An Urban Walking Guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. October 4, 2016.
Herzenberg, Michael. Part 1: What’s Behind the Supertall Skyscraper Boom Changing NYC’s Iconic Skyline? Spectrum News NY1. January, 6th 2020. https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2020/01/06/what-s-behind-the- supertall-skyscraper-boom-changing-nyc-s-iconic-skyline-
Herzenberg, Michael. Part 2: The Loopholes That Help to Send NYC Skyscrapers into the Clouds. Spectrum News NY1. January, 7th 2020. https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/changing-skyline-of-new- york/2020/01/07/sky-s-the-limit-ny1-the-loopholes-that-sent-nyc-s-luxury- skyscrapers-into-the-clouds
66
Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York. Monacelli Press, 1994.
MoMa. Ludwig Mies can der Rohe. Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper Project, Berlin Germany. 2020. https://www.moma.org/collection/works/787
Phaidon. How Mies Invented Modern Architecture. 2020. https://www.phaidon.com/agenda/architecture/articles/2014/march/19/how-mies- invented-modern-architecture/
Pinder, David. Visions of the City. New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. 2011.
Sullivan, Louis. The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Lippencott’s Magazine, March 1896.
Tangerstad, Erik. The Medieval in the Modern: The Cathedral and the Skyscraper in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis. Visby, Sweden: Gotland University Press 10. 2008.
The Lyncean Group of San Diego. Frank Lloyd Wright’s 1956 Mile-High Skyscraper – The Illinois. May 9, 2020. https://lynceans.org/all-posts/frank-lloyd-wrights-1956-mile- high-skyscraper-the-illinois/
Warekar, Tanay. Mapping Greenpoint’s Ongoing Explosion of Development. May 10, 2018. https://ny.curbed.com/maps/greenpoint-brooklyn-development- construction-nyc-map