By Shawna Hammon
Lecture –
“Staying Together: Complementary Architecture”
Real estate for
iconic, stand-alone buildings is quickly becoming limited especially in older
cities where the fabric is so tightly knit.
So more and more often we are renovating existing buildings by
integrating new program into the existing shells of structures that are sometimes
landmarks or icons for the cities in which they reside.
Prentice Women’s
Hospital by Bertrand Goldberg in Chicago is one example of this. A long time battle has been waged over
whether or not to tear this gem down to make way for new medical research
facilities. Northwestern University,
which owns the building, believes demolition is the most economic solution and
seems to be winning the battle. Preservationists
believe Goldberg’s landmark structure should be preserved and built around. Architects from around the country have spoken
up against this demolition, some even proposing alternatives. Gang Architect’s went to the drawing board when
demolition became a serious possibility.
What Jeanne Gang brought back was a floating, scalloped tower that
showed opponents that it is possible to preserve this icon while still
providing the much needed program. This
debate has demonstrated that preservation and renovation are going to become
more common place in the coming generations of architectural development as we
strive to protect some of our most distinct icons while making space for our
increasingly urban population.
 |
| Prentice Women's Hospital & Gang Architects' Proposal |
With this debate
very much on my mind, I went to Amsterdam during independent travel. It was here that I noticed a very distinct
vernacular among the canal houses – they all possess roughly the same
characteristics – narrow, tall facades crowned with a richly ornamented gable
top with a hoist beam. I thought it
might be interesting to incorporate Cedric Price’s six strategies for existing
buildings – reduction, addition, insertion, connection, demolition, and
expansion - in this vernacular. I
wondered how each of these would change the function of the vernacular or
enrich it. These diagrams are the result
of this study:
 |
| Six Strategies applied to Amsterdam Vernacular |
Reduction – The canal
house no longer relates to the adjacent façade.
Although one could argue that they didn’t share the same cornice lines
or datum to begin with, so I’m not sure if much is lost or gained with this
move.
Addition – This is
a parasitic approach to finding additional program, but because of the compact
site this move will change the feel of the street since it overhangs the
sidewalk so significantly.
Insertion – This move
is similar to reduction, except new program has been inserted into the
vernacular. In this case, a portico on
the piano nobile was been added to engage privately with the street-scape.
Connection – This
move attempts to maintain the façade, but allows for expansion between
buildings or a simple connection for families that may own multiple houses on a
block.
Demolition – The façade
is completely change and is no longer a part of Amsterdam’s vernacular. The major characteristics that identified it
as part of this vernacular are completely lost; this move detracts from the
neighborhood. Preservation of these key
characteristics is paramount for this vernacular.
Expansion – This is
the reality we are facing as our population continues to grow and become more
urban, our only choice is to grown upward while still respecting the historic
fabric of our surroundings. This move is
reminiscent of Jeanne Gang’s proposal for the new medical research facility, a
move I expect we will start to see more often as we preserve our past.
 |
| Cedric Price - Six Strategies |
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment