DOCSLIB.ORG

Print Version.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Print Version.Indd Eindhoven University of Technology MASTER Undergroundscraper from ant nests to architecture Liu, M. Award date: 2015 Link to publication Disclaimer This document contains a student thesis (bachelor's or master's), as authored by a student at Eindhoven University of Technology. Student theses are made available in the TU/e repository upon obtaining the required degree. The grade received is not published on the document as presented in the repository. The required complexity or quality of research of student theses may vary by program, and the required minimum study period may vary in duration. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER from ant nests to architecture Mo Liu Undergroundscraper Graduation project Digital Architecture January 2015 Student: M. (Mo) Liu 0827301 ([email protected]) Tutor: prof.dr.ir. B. (Bauke) de Vries ir. M. (Maarten) H.P.M. Willems drs. J. (Johan) G.A. van Zoest Eindhoven University of Technology The Department of the Built Environment Architecture Design & Decision support systems UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER b ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is the result of the graduation pro- ey Heijkens, Guido le Pair, Marius Lazauskas, ject, Digital Architecture, in the Department of Arjan Kalfsbeek, Sebastiaan van Alebeek, Tom the Built Environment of Eindhoven University of Steegh and Maaike Bron. They were concerned Technology in 2014. It is not possible to finish about my design, gave me many comments and this report without the help and support of a num- helped me to finish my report. ber of people to whom I would like to express my sincere gratitude for a variety reasons. Furthermore, I want to thank several profes- sionals. Steven Ma, Bao An Nguyen Phuoc and Firstly, I would like to express the appreciation Chris Thackrey who are the tutors of Studio of to my graduation project tutors, Professor Bauke Xuberance taught me about MAYA. Mateusz de Vries and Maarten H.P.M. Willems. Their Zwierzychi and Michael Pryor are the tutors of enthusiasm, professional guidance, encourage- workshop named Iterative interpretations in Ber- ments, patience and faith from the start of my lin which taught me about the Anemone which graduation project are highly appreciated. Also, I is a plugin in Grasshopper. Giuliana Scuderi, a want to thank my third tutor, Johan G.A. van Zo- doctor in the Unit of structure in Tue, help me to est. He accepted my request to become my third solve the problems of structure. tutor without any complaint and gave me advises and feedback on the field of biology. Special thanks go to some friends. Heyi Li, al- ways taught me how to use MAYA. Xiaoru Hua Secondly, I am grateful to all the members of gave me many suggestions on my design. the graduation project Digital Architecture. They Chengxi Li and Guichen Yu cared about my pro- are Zuzka Basandova, Wouter Coebergh, Mick- cess and encouraged me during the past one iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS year. Nina Liu, my roommate, endured my short- comings in the daily life and cooked for me for several weeks because I was busy with my pro- ject. In particular, I enjoyed playing soccer with the members of my team, which was often con- sidered a welcome ‘distraction’ from the heavy workload. At last, also the most important, I want to express my gratitude to my father and mother. They al- ways give me the greatest love, support, under- standing, encouragements, patience and help, even in my time of suffering. Mo Liu January 2015 UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER iv SUMMARY This report focuses on the theory of under- will provide a new thinking for future. groundscrapers and how to use parametric way to design an undergroundscraper by simulating Seven chapters constitute the main content of the ant nest. my research, i.e. general introduction, concept of undergroundscraper, theory, ants and nests, Undergroundscraper is a new concept which is computational design, architectural design and from skyscraper, referring to the ‘high’ rise build- conclusion. ings underground. This new kind of buildings may solve problems such as population explo- sion, the shortages of earth and housing and ur- ban canyon effect which is caused by skyscrap- ers. The new design used the parametric tools to simulate the movements of ants and ant nests to get the basic form of the building. Emergence is the theoretical foundation of this design. It is used in many areas including human beings, urban, buildings, ant nests and computers. Biomimicry is the method of this design. It finds the design solutions by mimicking nature’s time tested strat- egies. Ant and their nest are the inspiration and origin of this design. The building is in a canyon with a depth of 100 meter with multi-functions. It v SUMMARY CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii SUMMARY v CONTENT vi 0. GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 I. CONCEPT OF UNDERGOURNDSCRAPER 14 II. THEORY 28 III. ANTS AND NEST 49 IV COMPOUTATIONAL DESIGN 54 V. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 59 VI. CONCLUSION 86 APPENENDICES 88 UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER vi 0.GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 0.1 Theme The theme of this graduation project, ‘Digital Ar- puter system to assist in the creation, modifica- chitecture’, has been developing rapidly during tion, analysis, or optimization of a design.[1] CAD the past decade. It is generally considered that software is used to increase the productivity of Digital architecture, which is a broad concept, the designer, improve the quality of design, im- refers to aspects of architecture that features prove communications through documentation, digital technologies, using computer modeling, and to create a database for manufacturing.[2] programming, simulation and imaging to create Today, CAD software is used in all aspects in ar- both virtual forms and physical structures. It con- chitectural design. Some only can create two-di- tains many new theories of digital techniques mensional drawings, while others are capable of including Computer-Aided Design (CAD)/ Com- highly sophisticated three-dimensional models, puter-Aided Manufacture (CAM), Building In- renderings and animations. formation Modelling (BIM), and parametric and generative design. Building Information Modelling (BIM) is a process involving the generation and management of Computer-aided design (CAD) is the use of com- digital representations of physical and functional Fig. 1 Vienna University of Ap- plied Arts, Masterclass Hadid, Parametric Semiology: Se- mio-field. Project authors: Magda Smolinska, Marius Cernica, and Monir Karimi. UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER 2 Fig. 2 Parametric Semiology: Se- mio-field, differentiation of public vs. private as parametric range. Fig. 3 Parametric Semiology: Se- mio-field, master-plan with pro- gram distribution. 3 GENERAL INTRODUCTION characteristics of places.[3] BIM covers the whole ital architecture, especially fabrication and Pro- process of a project life-cycle from planning to totyping. Laser-cutting and three-dimensional building. It is not only used for designers and printer are the common tools to translate digital planners but also supporting cost management, models to physical objects. These machines constructing management, project management make a more fluid process than traditional ap- and facility operation. proaches. Parametric design is a new term of the logic of digital design thinking which focuses on a log- ic of associative and dependency relationships between objects and their parts-and-whole re- lationships.[4] It expresses the parameters and rules that together, define, encode and clarify the relationship between design intent and design response. The word ‘Parametric’ is from mathe- matics and refers to the use of certain parame- ters or variables that can be edited to manipulate or alter the end result of an equation or system. Parametric design is not a new concept and has always formed a part of architecture and design. The consideration of changing forces such as climate, setting, culture, and use has always formed part of the design process.[5] Digital tools and machines are also used for dig- UNDERGROUNDSCRAPER 4 Fig. 4 Laser-cutting in TU/e Fig. 5 Full-size model printed by D-Shape printer 5 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 0.2 Background With the development of society, human beings of new urban infrastructure may either coexist face increasingly more problems. From the end or conflict with improvement of the urban envi- of 19th century, the population explosion be- ronment. Architects are seeking new methods to came one of the most serious problems. Increas- solve these problems. Therefore, underground ing population and the developing needs and as- buildings get into the field of vision. Underground pirations of humankind for our living environment space is available almost everywhere, which may require increasing provision of space of all kinds. provide the site for activities or infrastructure that The world’s population is becoming more urban- are difficult or impossible to install above ground ized at an unprecedented pace. There were 21 or whose presence aboveground is unaccept- mega cities with the populations of more than able or undesirable. Underground buildings may 10 million people by the year 2000, as predict- either be developed by open excavation in soft ed earlier. The shortages of earth and housing strata or soil, the top of which is subsequently make many governments feel overwhelmed. covered to get the space below, or created by At the end of 19th century, high rise buildings excavation in hard strata or rock. Despite under- were widely built and they were considered as ground buildings face big challenges such as the best way to solve these troublesome issues.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PDF Download First Term at Tall Towers Kindle
    FIRST TERM AT TALL TOWERS PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Lou Kuenzler | 192 pages | 03 Apr 2014 | Scholastic | 9781407136288 | English | London, United Kingdom First Term at Tall Towers, Kids Online Book Vlogger & Reviews - The KRiB - The KRiB TV Retrieved 5 October Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. Archived from the original on 20 August Retrieved 30 August Retrieved 26 July Cable News Network. Archived from the original on 1 March Retrieved 1 March The Daily Telegraph. Tobu Railway Co. Retrieved 8 March Skyscraper Center. Retrieved 15 October Retrieved Retrieved 27 March Retrieved 4 April Retrieved 27 December Palawan News. Retrieved 11 April Retrieved 25 October Tallest buildings and structures. History Skyscraper Storey. British Empire and Commonwealth European Union. Commonwealth of Nations. Additionally guyed tower Air traffic obstacle All buildings and structures Antenna height considerations Architectural engineering Construction Early skyscrapers Height restriction laws Groundscraper Oil platform Partially guyed tower Tower block. Italics indicate structures under construction. Petronius m Baldpate Platform Tallest structures Tallest buildings and structures Tallest freestanding structures. Categories : Towers Lists of tallest structures Construction records. Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. Download as PDF Printable version. Wikimedia Commons. Tallest tower in the world , second-tallest freestanding structure in the world after the Burj Khalifa. Tallest freestanding structure in the world —, tallest in the western hemisphere. Tallest in South East Asia. Tianjin Radio and Television Tower. Central Radio and TV Tower. Liberation Tower. Riga Radio and TV Tower. Berliner Fernsehturm. Sri Lanka. Stratosphere Tower. United States. Tallest observation tower in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESERVATION CHICAGO the New York Life Insurance Building
    2 0 0 6 PRESERVATION CHICAGO Chicago’s Seven Most Threatened Buildings The New York Life Insurance Building Address: 39 South LaSalle Street Date: 1894 Architect: William Lebaron Jenney Style: Chicago School Skyscraper CHRS Rating: Orange National Register: Not Listed Overview: George Orwell said in Animal Farm that all animals are equal, except some animals are more equal than others. The same could be argued that in Chicago, depending on how much clout one has, some Landmarks are more equal than others. Based on some recent proposals for downtown skyscraper projects, a separate and unequal set of standards has revealed itself regarding how the Commission on Chicago Landmarks considers changes to existing Landmarked buildings and Landmark Districts. Case in point is the current redevelopment plan proposed for the New York Life Building, one of William LeBaron Jenney’s seminal early skyscrapers. History: William LeBaron Jenney revolutionized world architecture with the development of the first skyscraper, the Home Insurance Building in Chicago in 1884. His pioneering use of the steel skeleton frame, rather than the thick heavy masonry bearing walls that were then the norm, set the standard for modern high-rise construction that is still in use today. With the demolition of the Home Insurance Building in 1931, the New York Life Building became the last remaining example of Jenney’s early steel frame skyscraper construction and is the closest link with the ground-breaking technology of Jenney’s Home Insurance Building. Furthermore, the role of Chicago as the “insurance broker to the West” cannot be understated, and this building serves as a key link to that history.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractious Firsts Carol Willis, Founding Director, the Skyscraper Museum the Tallest Building in the World Today, the 828-Meter B
    Fractious Firsts Carol Willis, Founding Director, The Skyscraper Museum The tallest building in the world today, the 828-meter Burj Khalifa, as well as the one perhaps on its way to 1,000-meter height, Jeddah Tower, are bearing-wall structures – much like the first and tallest of New York’s early skyscrapers, the 1874 Tribune Tower. Thick walls (either of 19th-century brick and stone or 21st-century reinforced concrete) hold up these buildings – not a skeleton of steel, the major material and method of skyscraper construction for most of the 20th century. When the CTBUH organized the October 2019 conference “First Skyscrapers/ Skyscraper Firsts,” they fell victim to confirmation bias*. Implicit in the call for papers was a definition of “skyscraper” as a tall building constructed of steel. This was made clear in the initial emphasis on Chicago’s Home Insurance Building as the putative “first skyscraper.” When the steering committee adamantly rejected the proposal that vying presenters debate the priority of a single building in the history of the type, the conference title was adjusted to the plural: First Skyscrapers/ Skyscraper Firsts. This conceptualization is still a problem. The idea of a “first’ in the evolution of a building type that evolved from so many simultaneous forces and factors is unsound. Advances in technologies – whether the metal skeleton, passenger elevators in office buildings, or curtain walls – represent one aspect in the fairly sudden appearance of buildings of nine or ten stories in the early 1870s. But also key were the dynamics of urbanization – cities’ burgeoning populations and competition for expensive land and prime locations.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Planning Code
    Print San Francisco Planning Code ARTICLE 11: PRESERVATION OF BUILDINGS AND DISTRICTS OF ARCHITECTURAL, HISTORICAL, AND AESTHETIC IMPORTANCE IN THE C-3 DISTRICTS Sec. 1101. Findings and Purposes. Sec. 1102. Standards for Designation of Buildings. Sec. 1102.1. Designation of Buildings. Sec. 1103. Standards for Designation of Conservation Districts. Sec. 1103.1. Conservation District Designations. Procedures for Change of Designation and Designation of Additional Significant and Sec. 1106. Contributory Buildings. Procedures for Designation of Additional Conservation Districts or Boundary Change Sec. 1107. of Conservation Districts. Sec. 1108. Notice of Designation. Sec. 1109. Preservation Lots: Eligibility for Transfer of Development Rights. Construction, Alteration or Demolition of Significant or Contributory Buildings or Sec. 1110. Buildings in Conservation Districts. Applications for Permits to Alter, Permits to Demolish, and Permits for New Sec. 1111. Construction in Conservation Districts. Sec. 1111.1. Determination of Minor and Major Alterations. Sec. 1111.2. Sign Permits. Sec. 1111.3. Review by the Planning Department. Sec. 1111.4. Scheduling and Notice of Historic Preservation Commission Hearings. Sec. 1111.5. Decision by the Historic Preservation Commission. Sec. 1111.6. Standards and Requirements for Review of Applications for Alterations. Sec. 1111.7. Standards and Requirements for Review of Applications for Demolition. Sec. 1113. Standards of Review for New and Replacement Construction in Conservation Districts. Sec. 1114. Modification of a Decision of the Historic Preservation Commission. Sec. 1115. Appeal. Sec. 1116. Unlawful Alteration or Demolition. Sec. 1117. Conformity with Other City Permit Processes. Sec. 1118. Unsafe or Dangerous Conditions. Sec. 1119. Maintenance Requirements and Enforcement Thereof. Sec. 1120. Enforcement and Penalties. Sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Properties Identification Report
    Section 106 Historic Properties Identification Report North Lake Shore Drive Phase I Study E. Grand Avenue to W. Hollywood Avenue Job No. P-88-004-07 MFT Section No. 07-B6151-00-PV Cook County, Illinois Prepared For: Illinois Department of Transportation Chicago Department of Transportation Prepared By: Quigg Engineering, Inc. Julia S. Bachrach Jean A. Follett Lisa Napoles Elizabeth A. Patterson Adam G. Rubin Christine Whims Matthew M. Wicklund Civiltech Engineering, Inc. Jennifer Hyman March 2021 North Lake Shore Drive Phase I Study Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... v 1.0 Introduction and Description of Undertaking .............................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 NLSD Area of Potential Effects (NLSD APE) ................................................................................... 1 2.0 Historic Resource Survey Methodologies ..................................................................................... 3 2.1 Lincoln Park and the National Register of Historic Places ............................................................ 3 2.2 Historic Properties in APE Contiguous to Lincoln Park/NLSD ....................................................... 4 3.0 Historic Context Statements ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EMPIRE BUILDING, 71 Broadway (Aka 69-73 Broadway, 1-5 Rector Street, and 51-53 Trinity Place), Borough of Manhattan
    Landmarks Preservation Commission June 25, 1996, Designation List 273 LP-1933 EMPIRE BUILDING, 71 Broadway (aka 69-73 Broadway, 1-5 Rector Street, and 51-53 Trinity Place), Borough of Manhattan. Built 1897-98, [Francis H.] Kimball & [G. Kramer] Thompson, architects; Charles Sooysmith, foundation engineer; Marc Eidlitz & Son, builders. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 21 , Lot 6, and the portions of the adjacent sidewalk on which the described improvement is situated. ' On September 19, 1995, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Empire Building and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No . 3) . The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. The hearing was continued to December 12, 1995 (Item No. 1) . The hearing was subsequently continued to January 30, 1996 (Item No . 1). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. Nineteen witnesses spoke in favor of designation, including Councilwoman Kathryn Freed and representatives of Manhattan Borough President Ruth Messinger, the Downtown Alliance, New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, Municipal Art Society, New York Landmarks Conservancy, Historic Districts Council, Fine Alts Federation, and Landmarks Committee of Community Board 1. A representative of the mortgagee attended the first hearing but took no position regarding the proposed designation. No one spoke in opposition to designation. The Commission has received several letters and other statements in support of designation, including a resolution by Community Board 1. Summary The richly decorative, neo-classical Empire Building was commissioned in 1895 by the Estate of Orlando B.
    [Show full text]
  • Skyscraper Height
    Skyscraper Height Jason Barr∗ Rutgers University, Newark [email protected] Rutgers University Newark Working Paper #2008-002 Abstract This paper investigates the determinants of skyscraper height. First a simple model is provided where potential developers desire not only profits but also status, as measured by their rank in the height hi- erarchy. The optimal height in equilibrium is a function of the cost and benefits of building as well as the height of surrounding buildings. Using data from New York City, I empirically estimate skyscraper height over the 20th century. The results show that the quest for status has increased building height by about 15 floors above the non- status profit maximizing height. In addition, I provide estimates of which buildings are “too tall” and by how many floors. JEL Classification: D24, D44, N62, R33 Key words: Skyscrapers, building height, status, New York City ∗I would like to thank Alexander Peterhansl, Howard Bodenhorn, Sara Markowitz and seminar participants at Lafayette College for their helpful comments. I would like to acknowledge the New York City Hall Library, the New York City Department of City Planning and the Real Estate Board of New York for the provision of data. This work was partially funded from a Rutgers University, Newark Research Council Grant. Any errors are mine. 1 1 Introduction Skyscrapers are not simply tall buildings. They are symbols and works of art. Collectively they generate a separate entity—the skyline—which has its own symbolic and aesthetic importance. Despite the initial fears that the attacks of September 11, 2001 would cur- tail construction, skyscrapers continue to be built in large numbers around the globe (Economist, 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Empire Building Designation Report
    Landmarks Preservation Commission June 25, 1996, Designation List 273 LP-1933 EMPIRE BUILDING, 71 Broadway (aka 69-73 Broadway, 1-5 Rector Street, and 51-53 Trinity Place), Borough of Manhattan. Built 1897-98, [Francis H.] Kimball & [G. Kramer] Thompson, architects; Charles Sooysmith, foundation engineer; Marc Eidlitz & Son, builders. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 21, Lot 6, and the portions of the adjacent sidewalk on which the described improvement is situated.1 On September 19, 1995, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Empire Building and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No. 3). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. The hearing was continued to December 12, 1995 (Item No. 1). The hearing was subsequently continued to January 30, 1996 (Item No. 1). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. Nineteen witnesses spoke in favor of designation, including Councilwoman Kathryn Freed and representatives of Manhattan Borough President Ruth Messinger, the Downtown Alliance, New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, Municipal Art Society, New York Landmarks Conservancy, Historic Districts Council, Fine Arts Federation, and Landmarks Committee of Community Board 1. A representative of the mortgagee attended the first hearing but took no position regarding the proposed designation. No one spoke in opposition to designation. The Commission has received several letters and other statements in support of designation, including a resolution by Community Board 1. Summary The richly decorative, neo-classical Empire Building was commissioned in 1895 by the Estate of Orlando B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cornerstone and Abode of Our National Progress”: New York City's Skyscrapers As an American Story of Innovation and T
    History, Department of History Theses University of Puget Sound Year 2019 "The Cornerstone and Abode of Our National Progress": New York City's Skyscrapers as an American story of Innovation and Teamwork Meghan Hamel [email protected] This paper is posted at Sound Ideas. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/history theses/34 “The Cornerstone and Abode of Our National Progress”: New York City’s Skyscrapers as an American Story of Innovation and Teamwork Meghan Hamel History 400 May 15, 2019 1 Imagine this: it is July 8th, 1900, 5:03 pm; and a man named Grant just finished his day working at the New York Stock Exchange. He walks down the stairs from the top floor, and emerges from the building where the warm sun hits his face. He looks back at the Stock Exchange Building and admires its Victorian architecture but has heard rumors that a bigger and better Stock Exchange Building was soon to replace the current building. Imagining this new building makes him excited for what is to come, for the building is to symbolize America’s strength in the global financial market. To begin his commute home, he walks through the somewhat crowded streets to the Brooklyn Bridge, where he rides the elevated railway across the bridge and to his house. Now picture this same day, but in 1931. The Stock Exchange Building is much taller. Grant needs to take an elevator down to the ground floor when he leaves work. He emerges between the tall Corinthian columns where no sun hits his face. The sun is instead blocked by several office buildings that tower hundreds of feet into the sky.
    [Show full text]
  • The Architecture and Artistic Features of High-Rise Buildings in USSR and the United States of America During the First Half of the Twentieth Century
    E3S Web of Conferences 33, 01032 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20183301032 HRC 2017 The architecture and artistic features of high-rise buildings in USSR and the United States of America during the first half of the twentieth century Svetlana Golovina1, and Yurii Oblasov1* 1Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Vtoraya Krasnoarmeiskaya str. 4, St. Petersburg, 190005, Russia Abstract. Skyscraper is a significant architectural structure in the world's largest cities. The appearance of a skyscraper in the city's architectural composition enhances its status, introduces dynamics into the shape of the city, modernizes the existing environment. Its architectural structure which can have both expressive triumphal forms and ascetic ones. For a deep understanding of the architecture of high-rise buildings must be considered by several criteria. Various approaches can be found in the competitive development of high-rise buildings in Moscow and the US cities in the middle of the twentieth century In this article we will consider how and on the basis of what the architectural decisions of high-rise buildings were formed. 1 Introduction High-rise buildings in the USSR were difficult to realize for a long time. The reasons for this were in the devastating consequences of the October Revolution and World War II. As a result, the first high-rise buildings in Moscow were erected in 1947-1957. For the Soviet Union, this became a symbolic and breakthrough event. The architecture of high-rise buildings in Moscow has become a new state symbol. This architectural style in the late Soviet architectural criticism was called "Stalin's Empire." High-rise architecture in the US was created from the middle of the XIX century.
    [Show full text]
  • Justification for 'Scrapping the Sky'
    10.2478/jbe-2019-0004 JUSTIFICATION FOR ‘SCRAPPING THE SKY’ A COMPREHENSIVE INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SKYSCRAPERS/HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS FROM AN URBAN DESIGN PERSPECTIVE Tamas Lukovich Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Szent Istvan University, Budapest, Hungary Abstract: The magic ‘vertical’ has always been a spiritually distinctive preoccupation of architecture throughout history. The paper intends to examine, from a series of perspectives, if the high-rise in principle is a good thing. The focus is on urban design implications, however engineering challenges and their design solutions are inseparable aspects of the problematic. It is also to further demystify some ideologies still attached to their widespread application. It concludes that there is a new awareness evolving about high-rise design that is superior to previous approaches. Keywords: changing high-rise definitions, historic height contest, symbolic messages, technical challenges, urban design ideologies and myths, density and form fundamentals, high-rise typology, vertical eco-architecture 1. INTRODUCTION: THE PHENOMENON, AIMS AND DEFINITIONS According to Giedion, our attitude related to the vertical is rooted in our subconscious mind. Among the infinite number of directions and angles, it is separated as a single one that becomes a baseline and reference for comparison. It makes the main endeavour of architecture, i.e. the victory over the force of gravitation, visible. [1] Therefore, building vertical structures has almost always had a spiritual importance and has often been a symbolic event over the history of mankind. However, it seems that there are still some myths around the justification of high-rise buildings or skyscrapers, even among professional planners and architects.
    [Show full text]
  • 90 West Street Building
    Landmarks Preservation Commission May 19, 1998, Designation List 293 LP-1984 WEST STREET BUILDING, 90 West Street and 140 Cedar Street (aka 87-95 West Street, 21-25 Albany Street, and 136-140 Cedar Street), Borough of Manhattan. Built 1905-07; architect, Cass Gilbert. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 56, Lot 4. On March 10, 1998, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the West Street Building, and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No . 1) . The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. Five persons, including a representative of the owner and representatives of the New York Landmarks Conservancy and the Municipal Art Society, spoke in favor of designation. There were no speakers in opposition to designation. A statement supporting designation has been received from Council Member Kathryn Freed. Summary The West Street Building, one of three major Downtown office buildings designed by Cass Gilbert, was built in 1905-07 for the West Street Improvement Corporation, a partnership headed by Howard Carroll. Carroll was president of two asphalt companies and vice-president of his father-in-law's Starin Transportation Company, which had major river shipping interests. Although today separated from the Hudson River by the landfill supporting Battery Park City, the site of the West Street Building originally had a highly visible location facing the waterfront along West Street. Carroll conceived of his project as a first-class skyscraper office building for the shipping and railroad industries. In addition to Carroll's companies, the building soon filled up with tenants including major companies in the transportation industry.
    [Show full text]