Single Building as the Urban Catalyst

THE SINGLE BUILDING AS THE URBAN CATALYST

BY

MATIAS S. LA SERNA

COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE

Submitted in partial fulfillment of therequirements for the degree of

Master of Science in Architecturein the Graduate College of theIllinois Institute of Technology

Approved _________________________Adviser

Chicago, IllinoisMay 2012

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank everyone who supported me. I could not have done this

without the support of my parents and siblings who encouraged me every step of the way.

I would also like to thank my advisors, who pushed me to my limit.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF SYMBOLS ...........................................................................................................x

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER1. CURRENT STATE OF THE SITE .....................................................................1

1.1 Condition of Site ..............................................................................1 1.2 Breakdown of Urban Fabric ............................................................3 1.3 Site Context and Current Conditions ...............................................5 1.4 Site Documentation ..........................................................................6 1.5 Current Urban Zones and Uses ........................................................8

2. SITE HISTORY AND CITY RESPONSE ........................................................19

2.1 Failure of Public Housing ..............................................................21 2.2 Urban Response .............................................................................22 2.3 Urbanism and the Political .............................................................24

3. FILLING THE VOID .......................................................................................29

3.1 Defining Urbanism .........................................................................29 3.2 New Urban Ambition .....................................................................31 3.3 Interrupting the Rhythm of Single-Use Housing ...........................33

4. INVERTING THE STRATEGY .......................................................................37

4.1 The Sudden Architectural Interruption ..........................................37 4.2 Program Strategy ...........................................................................40 4.3 Claiming the Entire Site .................................................................41 4.4 Program and Organizational Strategy ............................................42 4.5 Complete Program .........................................................................45 4.6 Concept Model ...............................................................................46 4.7 Plans, Sections, Elevations, Model ................................................47

5. PROGRAM AS MICRO-URBANISM .............................................................58

v 5.1 Athletic Field as a Void ..................................................................58 5.2 Density Along State Street .............................................................59 5.3 Section and Program Relationships ...............................................60 5.4 Program Flexibility ........................................................................61 5.5 Architecture as Agent of Democracy .............................................61 5.6 Renderings .....................................................................................63

6. URBAN RESPONSE ........................................................................................72

6.1 Setting the Stage ............................................................................72 6.2 Urban Alteration .............................................................................73 6.3 Urban Chain of Events ...................................................................74 6.4 New Urban Identity ........................................................................75 6.5 Urban Possibilities .........................................................................77

7. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................81

8. FINAL BOARDS AND DRAWINGS ..............................................................83

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..............................................................................................................88

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1.1 Urban Context ..........................................................................................................2

1.2 Urban Void ...............................................................................................................4

1.3 Site Context ..............................................................................................................6

1.4 Documentation .........................................................................................................7

1.5 Residential Areas ...................................................................................................11

1.6 Business Areas .......................................................................................................12

1.7 Schools ...................................................................................................................13

1.8 Worship Areas ........................................................................................................14

1.9 Government and Civic Areas .................................................................................15

1.10 Public Transportation ...........................................................................................16

1.11 Urban Decay ........................................................................................................17

1.12 New Housing Developments ...............................................................................18

2.1 Robert Taylor Homes .............................................................................................20

2.2 Citys Response to Filling the Void ........................................................................23

2.2 Legends South Master Plan ...................................................................................24

3.1 Imagined vs. Reality ..............................................................................................30

3.2 Zones of Intensity ..................................................................................................32

3.3 Preliminary Study Models .....................................................................................35

3.4 Preliminary Study and Urban Context ...................................................................35

3.5 Focused Intention and Urban Fill ..........................................................................36

4.1 Urban Ambition .....................................................................................................39

vii

4.2 Program Strategy ...................................................................................................41

4.3 Filling the Site ........................................................................................................42

4.4 Organizational Strategy..........................................................................................44

4.5 Program ..................................................................................................................45

4.6 Concept Model .......................................................................................................46

4.7 Plan. Lower Level. 1/128:1 .................................................................................50

4.8 Plan. Ground Level. 1/128:1 ...............................................................................51

4.9 Plan. Second Level. 1/128:1................................................................................52

4.10 Plan. Third Level. 1/128:1 ................................................................................53

4.11 Plan. Fourth Level. 1/128:1 ...............................................................................54

4.12 Section A1. 1/128:1 ...........................................................................................55

4.13 Section A2. 1/128:1 ...........................................................................................55

4.14 Section B1. 1/128:1 ...........................................................................................55

4.15 South Elevation. 1/128:1 ...................................................................................56

4.16 North Elevation. 1/128:1 ...................................................................................56

4.17 East Elevation. 1/128:1 .....................................................................................56

4.18 West Elevation. 1/128:1 ....................................................................................56

4.19 Final Model ..........................................................................................................57

5.1 Athletic Field as Void .............................................................................................59

5.2 Density Along State Street .....................................................................................59

5.3 Section-Program Relationship Diagram ................................................................60

5.4 Program Flexibility ................................................................................................61

viii

5.5 Architecture as Agent of Democracy .....................................................................63

5.6 Interior Rendering A ..............................................................................................64

5.7 Interior Rendering B ..............................................................................................65

5.8 Interior Rendering C ..............................................................................................66

5.9 Interior Rendering D ..............................................................................................67

5.10 Interior Rendering E ............................................................................................68

5.11 Field Rendering A ................................................................................................69

5.12 Field Rendering B ................................................................................................70

5.13 Field Rendering C ................................................................................................71

6.1 Exterior Perspectives .............................................................................................73

6.2 Urban Alteration .....................................................................................................74

6.3 Urban Chain of Events ...........................................................................................75

6.4 New Urban Identity ................................................................................................76

6.5 Final Context Model A ...........................................................................................78

6.6 Final Context Model B...........................................................................................79

6.7 Final Context Model C...........................................................................................80

8.1 Thesis Abstract .......................................................................................................83

8.2 Site Analysis...........................................................................................................83

8.3 Urban Strategy .......................................................................................................84

8.4 Interior Strategy .....................................................................................................84

8.5 Field Strategy .........................................................................................................85

8.6 Structure, Elevations, Plans ...................................................................................85

ix

8.7 Plans .......................................................................................................................86

8.8 Sections ..................................................................................................................86

8.9 Perspective A ..........................................................................................................87

8.10 Perspective B .......................................................................................................87

xLIST OF SYMBOLS

Definition

Degree

Feet

Inches

North

Section Cut

Symbol

xi

ABSTRACT

An identified strip of land in Chicagos South Side has left an unmistakably

large void within the grid of the city. Current city plans call for single-use and low

density spaces to eventually fill the enormous void bounded by State Street to the east,

and Federal Street to the west. Resisting the current pattern of architectural and urban

segregation, this alternative proposes an ambitious plan to fill an entire block with a select

and diverse range of program to invigorate a depleted urban area while simultaneously

creating an identifiable architectural landmark. The sudden interruption of single-use

occupation reclaims the architectural potential of a site burdened by its troubled past and

serves as the catalyst to stimulate ambitious and diverse urban growth.

Necessarily occupying the entire site for the urban development of the city, the

building is faced with the challenge of expanding to fill the tremendous void imposed

by the grid with as few program members as possible, all the while preserving the

richness of urban overlaps otherwise afforded in tighter urban settings. The result is

a single building that is both mindful of the independent needs of its occupants while

simultaneously creating and maximizing shared spaces within the overlaps, generating

program opportunities and interactions not otherwise afforded in a system of architectural

fragmentation.

1CHAPTER 1

CURRENT STATE OF THE SITE

The specific location of the site in the Bronzeville neighborhood of Chicago,

Illinois is bounded by 43rd Street to the north, 47th Street to the south, and in between

Federal Street to the west and State Street to the east. The larger urban context is

defined by the Illinois Institute of Technology and US Cellular Field to the north, and the

University of Chicago and the Museum of Industry to the southeast. A unique condition

to the site is a direct result of the sites history. After the destruction of the Robert Taylor

Homes, the absence of the notorious housing projects leaves an enormous footprint along

the Chicago South Side. The demolition of the housing developments created a unique

urban fallout that is analyzed below.

1.1 Current Condition of Site

The site is best described by its complete absence of any architectural presence.

The void is enormous, and there is an immediate need to fill a site that is occupied only

be a visible strip of nothingness. With the mass demolition of existing housing, the

area has exchanged an identity of notoriety for an identity of emptiness. The current

state of the site provides an opportunity to establish a new identity, and to invigorate a

neighborhood with an architectural solution that introduces new community stakeholders

that influence the surrounding neighborhood, as well as creating a chain of events that

spills south to fill the voided blocks to define the depleted zone. With the extreme level

of vacancy currently defining the area as shown in Figure 1.1, it becomes apparent that

bold action must be taken to positively invigorate the community.

2Figure 1.1 Urban Context

SiteIIT U. Chicago Museum of Industry1000 ft White Sox

31.2 Breakdown of Urban Fabric

As shown in Figure 1.2 on the following page, the tremendous void left by the

towers presents an immediate need to fill a barren site. The empty strip of land between

Federal Street and State Street begins at 43rd Street to the north all the way down to

Garfield Boulevard to the south, spanning an impressive seventeen blocks.

The giant void imposed on the seventeen block strip is also characterized by the

Chicago superblock. With the demolition of the Robert Taylor Homes, discussed in

greater detail in Chapter 2, an identifiable strip shares a unique relationship with the city

at large that is visually amplified by the enormity of lot sizes that march southward along

State Street, often comprising of lot sizes that could be broken up into four smaller blocks

in order to be re-integrated into the Chicago grid.

Likewise, yet another restriction imposed on the site is the placement of the Dan

Ryan Expressway. This multi-lane freeway is a main artery of the city that runs north

to south, effectively isolating the site from the neighborhoods on the western side of

Chicago, and is explained in further detail in Section 1.3.

The complete lack of architecture has become the defining feature of a territory

once occupied by the brutal presence of the massive towers. Now, with those towers

gone, the only reminder of their existence are the absurdly large lot sizes that yearn for

an ambitious and dense infusion of urbanism to reclaim an architectural language that

creates a new point-of-interest. A new node that can be plugged into the greater urban

fabric is a necessary step in the process of integrating a blighted neighborhood back into

the context of Chicago urbanism. With great attention paid to this highlighted zone, a

single building can act as a catalyst to stimulate new opportunities to fill the void.

4Figure 1.2 Urban Void

Urban VoidIIT U. Chicago Museum of Industry1000 ft White Sox

51.3 Site Context and Current Conditions

In Figure 1.3 on the following page, a closer look at the site gives us a better

understanding of the current conditions surrounding the site in question. The Dan Ryan

Expressway, a multi-lane interstate that serves as a major artery serving the city is shown

in purple. Running north to south, this river of infrastructure isolates the site from

western portions of the city, with access points limited to every fourth block, specifically

at 43rd Street and 47th street. Its enormous presence imposes itself as a barrier,

ominously separating the Bronzeville neighborhood from much of the city.

The site is sandwiched between Federal Street to the west and State Street to

the east. While State Street is the main avenue that links the site to the city, Federal

Street functions as a service road, as it is interrupted at points due to new and projected

construction. Just north of the site is a small park, and the greater area around the site

is mostly row houses and modest residential apartments. The site is also served by the

Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), with the El Red Line stop at 47th Street. The Green

Line stops at 43rd and 47th, connecting the site to the rest of the city.

Yet, the most glaring quality of the site is the vast emptiness that remains from

the heavy footprint of the housing projects that once occupied and dominated the

neighborhood. The vast empty acreage is a result of the desire to impose the Chicago

superblock onto the site, breaking up the implied fineness of a city grid in an attempt to

create Le Corbusien towers in the park. Now, with the towers gone, all that remains are

four blocks of uninterrupted emptiness stretching from 43rd Street to 47th Street; an echo

of failed social policy visible only by swaths of dead grass and the absence of numbered

streets bisecting the land.

61.4 Site Documentation

In Figure 1.4 on the following page, we can see panoramic and 360 views of

the site. The location of each view is denoted by the dashed circle on the aerial site

photo indicating the point of documentation. The site, mostly vacant, is surrounded by

intermittent buildings, some of which are boarded up and decayed, as well as the Zenos

Colman Elementary School to the south and McCorkle Elementary School to the east.

A gas station and an abandoned locksmith building round out the neighboring lots, and

Figure 1.3 Site Context

1000 ft

Federal Street43rd Street

Dan Ryan Expressway

State Street47th Street Michigan Avenue

Site Red Line Green Line

7a few new recent residential buildings have emerged along State Street to the north. A

more complete breakdown of the wider urban context is described in section 1.5.

Figure 1.4 Documentation

81.5 Current Urban Zones and Uses

A large majority of the buildings in the greater urban area surrounding the site are

residential. These dwellings mostly consist of modest row houses that line the blocks, as

well as a few apartment complexes, as shown in Figure 1.5 on page 11. The conditions of

the homes vary, and there are few dwellings immediately surrounding the site.

There are also a few businesses as well as industrial zones in the neighborhood.

The small businesses are mostly concentrated along 47th Street, as shown in Figure 1.6

on page 12. Likewise, a large industrial factory can be found along Federal Street just

south of the site.

In Figure 1.7 on page 13, a detailed diagram identifies the location of the

educational facilities in the surrounding neighborhood. The light green areas represent

the elementary schools, while the green and dark green areas represent local high schools

and post-secondary facilities, respectively. McCorkle Elementary school is immediately

to the east of the site, and the currently decommissioned Zenos Colman Elementary

School to the south. This building is currently serving as an administrative building for

Chicago Public Schools with the possibility of reintegration in the future. The area as

a whole is currently undergoing transformation, and some of the schools are being re-

programmed to accommodate anticipated growth.

Also consistent with the history of the Bronzeville neighborhood, there are a high

number of religious buildings surrounding the site. As shown in Figure 1.8 on page 14,

there are many houses of worship scattered evenly around the neighborhood, supporting a

variety of religions and denominations.

There are also a few buildings serving civic functions, and even fewer serving

9government responsibilities throughout the region, as shown in Figure 1.9 on page 15.

Amenities such as libraries, public gathering spaces are few and far between, isolating the

neighborhood.

As briefly mentioned in Section 1.2, the site has access to the CTA with an El

Red Line stop at 47th Street, as well as Green Line stops at 43rd and 47th. In addition to

the train stops, There are also bus stops at key corners surrounding the site on 43rd and

47th Street, as shown in Figure 1.10 on page 16.

The neighborhood is also the tragic victim of much urban decay. For the

purpose of this research, decay is defined as buildings that have been set for demolition,

abandoned, or characterized by multiple boarded windows and/or doors. As evidenced

by Figure 1.11 on page 17, the neighborhood has been seriously blighted. Many housing

developments toward the north of the site have been demolished, and likewise many

buildings along 43rd and 47th streets have been boarded and abandoned. Likewise, the

vast clearance of land that makes up the site and the strip of land to the south of the site is

the direct result of the demolished housing projects that once defined the neighborhood.

As a result of this blight, many new housing developments are beginning to

emerge as the city attempts to fill the tremendous void imposed. In Figure 1.12 on page

18, we see the pattern of small clusters of low-rise housing filling the void, as well as

proposed construction. As a part of the federal HOPE VI program, the development of

Legends South will attempt to refill the strip of land with modest and low-rise housing.

This is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2.

However, in spite of the initiative to create more housing, a more thorough

redevelopment must be considered. According to the Mari Gallagher Research and

10

Consulting Group, the neighborhood in question is a designated food desert (et al. 2006,

19). The nearest supermarket is outside of the analysis boundary, making it exceptionally

difficult for any current or future residents to have access to fresh food. Likewise, while

there a number of schools and churches, there are no outdoor fields on the campuses of

these schools for organized sports within the community.

When the full context of the community is examined, it becomes apparent

that any new development should consider the economic, civic, cultural, and urban

requirements for an area that is severely lacking the societal infrastructure necessary for

prolonged development. By only addressing the needs of housing, the citys proposed

development, which is further discussed in Chapter 2, focuses heavily on a single issue

without fully addressing the systemic issues that will remain after the construction.

11

Figure 1.5 Residential Areas

Residential

12

Figure 1.6 Business Areas

Business

Industrial

13

Figure 1.7 Schools

Education - Primary

Education - Secondary

Education - Higher

14

Figure 1.8 Worship Areas

Worship

15

Figure 1.9 Government and Civic Areas

Civic

Government

16

Figure 1.10 Public Transportation

Train line

Train stop

Bus stop

17

Figure 1.11 Urban Decay

Decay

18

Figure 1.12 New Housing Developments

Housing Construction

Housing Projected

19

CHAPTER 2

SITE HISTORY AND CITY RESPONSE

After the post World War I boom, Chicago incurred a significant population

increase, which saw many new Chicago residents with a sudden need for housing.

During this time, the city grid of Chicago was altered in order to accommodate the

need for high density housing while maintaining racial segregation. The Dan Ryan

Expressway was constructed, physically separating the predominantly white Bridgeport

neighborhood from the predominantly black neighborhood of Bronzeville. Multiple

high-rise housing projects lined up the Bronzeville neighborhood, effectively eliminating

any opportunity for integrated housing within the city, and preserving the city within a

city moniker that would come to define the Chicago black-belt.

Obvious sociopolitical problems aside, the formation of the South Side

superblock, caused by the citys political desire to preserve racial segregation on the

citys South Side, radically disrupted the Chicago city grid and posed many architectural

and urban dilemmas as well. The introduction of the Dan Ryan Expressway, a necessary

piece of infrastructure for the cities growth and accessibility, ruthlessly isolated parts of

the South Side from the rest of the city. The construction of the Robert Taylor Homes,

shown in Figure 2.1, the nations largest housing project, covered large expanses of land

while leaving much green space around each individual building. While the buildings

themselves were high in density, they lacked the programmatic variety found in other

neighborhoods in Chicago. Likewise, the buildings contextually ignored the surrounding

neighborhood. This is compounded by the superblock lot sizes for the buildings. The

Robert Taylor Homes did little to preserve the street edge, and lacked the defensible

20

space necessary for a safe urban environment. The lack of programmatic diversity

coupled with an architectural solidarity demonstrates an urban irresponsibility. This,

along with public policy provided a disastrous mix that virtually ensured the failure of the

public housing that lined the South Side of Chicago.

Figure 2.1 Robert Taylor Homes (Anon 2010)

21

2.1 Failure of Public Housing

The failure of the Robert Taylor Homes dealt a blow to the influence of

architectural modernism. This led way to the political assumption that housing the poor

was simply not worth the effort or political capital. According to Michael Sorkin, in his

essay, The End(s) of Urban Design:

This outcome is yet another triumph for neoliberal economics, the now virtually unquestioned idea that the role of government is to assure prosperity at the top, an idea that has produced [...] the most obscene national income gap in history [...] Urban design has acted as an enabler in this precisely because of its ostensible divorce from the social engineering of planning, nominally expressed in its circumspect scales of intervention and re-sensitized approach to the physical aspects of urbanism. (2007, 9)

Sorkin raises a valid critique of the failure of urban designers to challenge

political opposition with thorough solutions that integrate users into the wider urban

context while providing an array of possibilities, diversity, and intensity of program.

By removing the process of design from the political sphere, modern architecture has

allowed itself to shoulder a disproportionate amount of blame on issues that emerged

largely from corrupted social policy. A criticism perhaps well earned due to the design

community defaulting on a social responsibility to create urban environments for the

benefit of all citizens. Sorkin continues to state that urban design becomes more focused

with real-estate prices (ibid) rather than social policy, further ensuring the inequality gaps

that eventually manifest themselves into the physical architecture that line the streets

of neoliberal cities across the country today. What results is a policy that pushes the

architecture, and an architecture that reinforces the policy under the assumption that the

free market knows best; all the while the social and fundamental needs of urban design

22

necessary for an inclusive and productive community remain largely ignored, and the

previous inhabitants are physically pushed to the edge of society.

2.2 Urban Response

A result of the designers exodus from the public sphere of urban planning was the

emergence of new actors who stepped in to fill the void in social policy, which led to the

reactionary condition that we currently see. Today, the citys response to replace the vast

strip of land once occupied by the Le Corbusien towers in the park is to introduce low-

rise and mixed-income communities. According to the Legends South plan, headed by

Michaels Organization, the new developments will:

Include nearly 2,400 new rental and home ownership units and will remove the former super block configuration imposed by the former Robert Taylor Homes. This extraordinary development will stretch for two miles through the very heart of Bronzeville; Legends South will extend from 39th Street south to 55th Street and from Federal Street east to Prairie Avenue (et al. 2010).

This project, funded by the federal HOPE VI program, identifies the enormous

strip of land left by the removal of the Robert Taylor Homes, and proposes to fill them

with modest housing, as demonstrated in Figure 2.2 on the next page. This single-use

solution does nothing to address the severe lack of urban necessities discussed in Section

1.5. It ignores the need for civic and public spaces as well as the need for a social

infrastructure that creates urban areas of intense interaction by the inhabitants. Rather,

it focuses solely on the issue of housing and fills the area by repeating itself for a vast

stretch of land. While it does create a mixed-income environment, it still maintains

the neighborhoods dependence on other areas of Chicago for needs that stretch beyond

the realm of housing alone, which will not be enough to transform the area. A much

23

more inclusive solution is still necessary to revitalize a completely depleted strip of the

Chicago grid.

Figure 2.2 Citys Response to Filling the Void

24

2.3 Urbanism and the Political

Additionally, the single-use strategy of housing defaults on a social responsibility

to adequately provide for all members of society. Sorkin continues his criticism of urban

design (or the lack thereof) by addressing the rise of New Urbanism:

The New Urbanism substitutes sprawl for slum as its polemical target, and its ideal subjects are members of the suburban upper middle class whose problem is a mismatch between existing economic privilege and inappropriate spatial organization...Whats missing is an idea of justice, a theory that addresses not simply the re-configuration of space but also the redistribution of wealth. The reduction of urbanism to a battle of styles is a formula for ignoring its most crucial issues. For example, there is no doubt that the neo-traditionalist row houses that have replaced the penitential public housing towers being demolished in so many American cities represent a far more livable alternative. But it is equally clear that the net effect of the HOPE VI program behind this transformation is the cruel displacement of 90% of the former population and that arguments about architecture obscure the larger political agendas at work. (2007, 16)

Figure 2.2 Legends South Master Plan (Anon 2010)

25

Sorkin articulates a crucial disconnect between the world of architecture and

the world of social policy. While the new development will surely provide more eyes

on the street, defensible spaces, and traditional Chicago architectural styles, it will

also fundamentally ignore the broader issues at play. It continues a tradition of solving

issues of poverty and lack of access by removing the poverty rather than empowering

it. It continues to link progressivism and liberalism as a political ethos with modern

architecture. The desire of New Urbanism to continue an architectural language of

traditionalism posits the idea that the failure of the Robert Taylor Homes was due to

modernism, and therefore liberal social policies by association.

Simply put, by ignoring the political power structure that oppresses, exploits,

and displaces, the introduction of New Urbanism as an architectural strategy looks to

the dollar value of real-estate prices as proof of the success of conservative social

policy. This, of course, ignores the reality on the ground, which belies its very success.

If success were to be measured instead by the inclusion of low-income earners within the

envelope of the city, then surely this strategy would be viewed as a resounding failure.

By displacing a large majority of low-income earners and once again physically pushing

them to the fringes of the city (or beyond the city completely), the failure to adequately

house and provide services and access to certain communities within the city accelerates

the transition of a liberal democracy into a society of neo-feudalism. And it is our tacit

approval, as urban designers, that makes us complicit in the act.

The end result of this proposal will not revitalize the community, it will cleanse

it. It will not empower a community, it will replace it. It will not address poverty, it

will remove it. It will not contain the footprint of the city, it will expand it. Once this

26

gentrification is complete, the displaced will be removed from the equation, and moved to

the suburbs.

This passing of the buck allows for other outside actors to prey upon these

members of society for financial gain. The mortgage bubble that led to the historic

financial collapse of 2008 was caused in large part by predatory lending practices to

low-income families and sustained by rampant evidence of fraud and illegal foreclosure

practices. (Paltrow 2011) The return of the robber baron, the CEOs of mortgage

companies such as Countrywide (Jenkins Jr. 2011) who intentionally and knowingly

sold toxic loans to sub-prime borrowers, while pocketing millions in the process is

yet another example of the failure to adequately accommodate every member of society,

and the departure of the urban designer in the field of policy. Since 2000, the number

of suburban poor has skyrocketed by 53% (Luhby 2012). And according to the Pew

Research Center, the median net worth of African American families fell 53% from

2005 to 2009, with their Hispanic minority counterparts faring even worse (Kochar et

al. 2012). Of course, these record setting trends are evident in the physical make-up of

our cities. Poverty is pushed to the fringes, and access to the spoils of urban activity is

limited while excess wealth is concentrated in the core.

Nowhere is this fact of wealth consolidation more evident than in this strip of

blighted land in the South Side of Chicago. As previously shown in Figure 1.4, the decay

of Bronzeville is visible in the absence of architecture, but also in the juxtaposition of the

site when compared to the robust and tourist friendly area found within the loop and more

established neighborhoods.

So if there is to be any new construction at this site, the discussion cannot simply

27

revolve around architectural styles. A much broader, politically motivated and socially

empathetic solution must arise. A deeper debate must be had where the ambition of

architecture must be matched by the compassion of the political class. A discussion

where the calls for traditionalism and historic vernacular cannot dominate the debate,

but rather a discussion where the ability of architecture to stimulate and invigorate urban

activity prevails. Designs for this site that focus on the singular issue of housing will

miss an opportunity to engage the disenfranchised, and it will fundamentally ignore the

acute level of access inequality that pervades not only this area, but many American cities

today.

New solutions should not only match the grand architectural vision of the CIAM

meetings, but also be aware of the current political inertia that prefers hegemony to

plurality. New solutions should push toward a less hierarchical concentration of power

in order to encourage spaces that are participatory and inherently democratic, where the

architecture is defined not by the form or elements of style, but by the activity that occurs

within. A new architectural order has the opportunity to condense activity and form a

power structure that is local, community driven, and cooperative.

A solution for this site provides an opportunity to not only address the conditions

that are unique to the South Side of Chicago, but to also establish an architectural

language that can be used in discussions across the country in neighborhoods facing

similar problems in regards to the lack of access and opportunity.

A new solution should balance the line between the prototype and the

specific. Large moves and ideas of integration, diversity of program and interaction,

intensification, and urban immersion can and should be replicated. While moves such as

28

pedestrian and vehicular access, orientation, store frontage, and other detailed issues are

unique to the specific conditions of the given site.

29

CHAPTER 3

FILLING THE VOID

After the failure of the Robert Taylor Homes, the immediate reaction was to

restore the original street grid, and to introduce a new mixed-income, low density housing

to replace the superblock as discussed in Chapter 2. While the Legends South proposal

will create more livable spaces, a full scale rejection of high density buildings should be

challenged. A vilification of the dense urban environment is collateral damage, and large

buildings with diverse programs and properly choreographed interactions should not

be lost in the wake of urban renewal. Redevelopment should take full advantage of an

opportunity to re-define, re-assess, and re-evaluate the shortcomings of social policy and

to give a collective identity to a struggling neighborhood.

3.1 Defining Urbanism

Urbanism, as a field, is a term that seems to take on new meaning by each

member who takes it upon himself or herself to define the discipline. Alex Krieger looks

to the definition of territory and describes urbanism as spheres of action (2006, 65)

where multiple activities occur in close proximity to one another. As a starting point,

this definition gives tremendous insight into the thinking of designers who wish to view

architecture as the social condenser that favors interaction and participation in favor of

privatization and seclusion.

Richard Sommer, however, takes an opportunity to define urbanism by critiquing

what the field has become. He argues that designers often render environments as

urban and full of activity rather than examining the broader urban social context to

30

discover what the public at large can bring to a site (2007). Without first documenting

the necessary sociological or empirical research, he argues, the images produced of

intense activity are the result of a non-reality based urbanism. A designer cannot simply

create images of exciting interactions and assume that those conditions will occur. It

is therefore necessary to understand what a site has, and what a site can sustain when

creating urban environments. A failure to understand these forces at play can disable

the architect and render him or her as a defeated dreamer, a designer who imagines the

impossible without first understanding the probable. It is also necessary to understand

not only what a building can do for a neighborhood, but also what a neighborhood can do

for a building. Without first critically examining the limits of access (both economically

and politically), imposed often by a larger social agenda, the ambition of design is often

reduced to the renderings of Pruitt-Igoe, where the vision of community and utopia are

contrasted bitterly to the reality of gross inequality and neglect, as shown in Figure 3.1

below.

Figure 3.1 Imagined vs. Reality (Newman 1996)

31

In addition to defining urbanism as realms of activity, other definitions address

broader implications at a political level. Margaret Crawford, in her essay Blurring

the Boundaries; Public Space and Private Life, demonstrates how the public at large

often annex private spaces in order to assemble. She claims that In everyday space,

differences between the domestic and the economic, the private and the public, and

the economic and the political are blurring (1999, 35). Of course, these spontaneous

bursts of public gathering are often disrupted, discouraged, or even declared illegal and

dangerous on account of preserving private property, effectively dismantling popular

support and squashing social discourse. Yet, it is this very spontaneous gathering of the

public that many urbanists wish to create; spaces where human involvement enhances,

intensifies, informs, and defines the experience of urban activity.

With so many different interpretations of what is and what is not urbanism,

perhaps the definition of urbanism is best defined by its malleability. A definition that is

so loosely constructed, that it requires a Supreme Court ruling of I know it when I see

it. Yet, it is this plastic definition that affords urbanism its greatest strength. It assures

that the field is a living discussion, absorbing the ideas of newcomers and changing to

meet the needs of its participants. It provides an opportunity for urbanism to be specific

to the site and context and to the desires of the city.

3.2 New Urban Ambition

It is therefore necessary to create spaces that encourage and assist zones of

participatory democracy; spaces where activism and discussion are allowed in order

to bring all members of society to a single area. Urbanism, in this instance, should

32

be measured not on the real-estate value, but by the cohesion of many interests into a

common form. It is the overlap of public participation with private interests. It is at

the point of this overlap where an alchemy occurs, where the activity is measured by its

intensity rather than the action, as shown in Figure 3.2, where the green overlap indicates

a point of increased activity.

A new urban order should seek to break down the hierarchical structure that

pervades our cities today where private institutions are given preeminence over civic

and public needs, and instead encourage what political and social theorist James Holston

Figure 3.2 Zones of Intensity

33

describes as spaces of insurgent citizenship, (1999) where the congregation of the

public challenges the conceit of property of and ownership. These spaces will then

encourage a sense of urban ownership, and ownership will be exhibited by occupying

the site. This in turn gives a depleted area a unique opportunity to reinvent itself by

establishing social independence so that it can create a new node of activity that plugs

itself into the wider Chicago context, paradoxically integrating the community back into

the city. By challenging the accepted hierarchical power structure that favors real-estate

value and property rights over necessary social functions, an ambitious design can create

a landmark that gives an architecturally barren sight a new identity, and an opportunity to

create a chain of events that fills the vast empty strip with a dense architectural language

that intensifies urban activity rather than avoiding the obligation.

3.3 Interrupting the Rhythm of Single-Use Housing

Strategically, the site demands massive occupation. The tremendous void

imposed on the Bronzeville neighborhood, as well as the city at large, leaves a large

and assuming feeling of despair and emptiness. It is an out-of-place and devastating

plot of nothing. The abandonment not only characterizes the immediate site, but also

radiates outward, affecting the surrounding blocks, with boarded and distressed buildings

occupying the neighboring plots.

The site simply requires something big, something ambitious, something daring,

something polemical, something extraordinary. It must stop the Chicago Housing

Authoritys desire to fill the area with modest housing and instead support an alternative

of intense architecture; an intense architecture that produces even more architecture.

34

Early attempts at filling the site highlight the difficulty of reconciling the need to

fill the massive void with the inevitable troubles reached when approaching the bigness

theorized by Rem Koolhaas. The result is a building that is so absurdly large, that it

becomes a struggle just to create enough program to fill the object. The brutal size of the

building approaches the critical mass that Koolhaas speaks about in his essay of Bigness,

where the building competes rather than cooperates with the context. It simply grabs too

much responsibility and reduces its own ability to influence its surroundings by absorbing

all of the architecture that could possibly exist within the neighborhood. A building with

this level of mass consolidates so much invented program that it becomes difficult to

integrate such an object into the larger landscape. As shown in Figures 3.3 and 3.4 on

the next page, a building beyond a certain scale becomes unmanageable, and as Koolhaas

understood, reaches a point where it does not add to the city, but rather it becomes the

city (1995).

It is this competition with the city, or rather, replacement of the city that rendered

these first attempts insufficient for the purpose of this exercise. While bigness is

certainly a worthy topic for research, the central premise for this thesis is the ability of a

single work of architecture to act as a catalyst for sharp urban renewal. If any solution

were to focus on a single building absorbing multiple blocks, then the ability for the

single building to act as the agent of change becomes drastically diminished, as it allows

for less opportunity for an urban response to radiate outward from the initial point of

impact. Initial solutions relied heavily on the desire to colonize the entire area, and

as shown on the following page, acquired a mass so large that it reached the point of

absurdity.

35

Figure 3.4 Preliminary Study and Urban Context

Figure 3.3 Preliminary Study Models

36

As a result, later attempts focus squarely on the ability of one building, with

limited program, to fill an entire block with the focus and clarity of program and overlaps

displayed in Figure 3.2. Later designs exhibit the express desire to preserve that richness

so that it may cascade outward and encourage more dense and diverse architecture for

later development. This is demonstrated in Figure 3.5 below, where the concentrated

effort of the lone building sets the foundation for more ambitious architecture to occupy

and reclaim the expansive plots of emptiness that remain without the single building itself

resorting to an absurd level of bigness.

Figure 3.5 Focused Intention and Urban Fill

37

CHAPTER 4

INVERTING THE STRATEGY

As previously discussed, the city of Chicago has taken the position of reclaiming

the entire site by introducing modest architecture that solely focuses on the need for

housing without addressing many of the neighborhood needs previously discussed

in Chapter 1. And, just north of the site, this process has already begun with many

row houses beginning to emerge. The alternative suggested in this thesis proposes an

interruption of this pattern so that a new order of architecture may follow.

4.1 The Sudden Architectural Interruption

In his essay, Whatever Happened to Urbanism?, Rem Koolhaas discusses the lack

of proper urban strategies and theorizes that:

If there is to be a new urbanism it will not be based on the twin fantasies of order and omnipotence; it will be the staging of uncertainty; it will no longer be concerned with the arrangement of more or less permanent objects but with the irrigation of territories with potential; it will no longer aim for stable configurations but for the creation of enabling fields that accommodate processes that refuse to be crystallized into definitive form; it will no longer be about meticulous definition, the imposition of limits, but about expanding notions, denying boundaries, not about separating and identifying entities, but about discovering unnameable hybrids; it will no longer be obsessed with the city but with the manipulation of infrastructure for endless intensifications and diversifications, shortcuts and redistributions the reinvention of psychological space. Since the urban is now pervasive, urbanism will never again be about the new, only about the more and the modified. It will not be about the civilized, but about underdevelopment (1995, 961-971).

This rejection of architectural segregation lays down the framework for a new

urban possibility. By shifting the discussion away from the topic of housing, and back

38

to the sphere of urban activity and staging, a new opportunity emerges to redefine the

neighborhood by infusing diverse program and creating amplified zones of interaction

and uncertainty. By addressing the implicit needs of a neighborhood defined by mass

vacancy and a lack of resources, a new ambitious architectural work can create a new

source of civic pride that unites, engages, and integrates into the city. This strategy will

be in sharp contrast to the citys desire to isolate program uses and functions without

seizing an opportunity to condense many functions into a site anxious for a chance to

redefine its identity.

By interrupting the pattern of single-use housing, the introduction of a large

object that stages uncertainty while demanding community interaction will dramatically

alter the contextual landscape of the Bronzeville neighborhood of Chicago. A large

building will create a sphere of influence that will radiate outward, encourage more dense

environments, and provide the impetus to create a system of activity that will logically

consume the remaining plots of land during further development.

It is this desire to create an identifiable strip of architecture that pushes the design

and influences the architecture of the buildings that follow. Figure 4.1 diagrams the

shift of context, and illustrates an opportunity to reclaim the ambitious experiment of

architectural size without succumbing to the ills of poor social policy. The dramatic

scope and size of new development is of similar grandness of the once towering objects

that lined the South Side of Chicago, yet the architecture is defined by the inverse of

the current strategy of single-use occupation and modesty. Instead, the interjection of a

bold new strip creates a new landmark, and gives a new definition to the area by creating

a node that gives new meaning to an area currently identified as being between other

39

Figure 4.1 Urban Ambition

40

areas rather than first having its own identity. This liberation of program provides an

opportunity to create mixed-use zones with aggressive architectural moves that create a

density and diversity to address multiple issues rather than one. This in turn gives the

area the chance to define itself rather than maintain a parasitic relationship to the rest of

the city where economic, civic, and social needs are dependent on outside sources.

4.2 Program Strategy

The architecture of this building should set the standard of mixed-use program in

order to serve as the epicenter of new urban development. In Figure 3.2, we discussed

the Zones of Intensity that emerge when adversarial uses are forced to interact with

one another. The resultant product is an area that enables collisions, creating a cocktail

of program where distinct uses are allowed, and the mixing of program ingredients create

unique flavors that assume the qualities of converging zones.

Yet, as we observed in Figures 3.3 and 3.4, the copious insertion of program to fill

the entire area assumes too much responsibility and yields an architecture that competes

rather than cooperates with its surroundings. So, in terms of the scale and objective

of the single building, the challenge that emerges is the ability to create a building that

fills a large site with a limited amount of program while still preserving the richness and

intimacy of the overlapping zones.

While earlier solutions relied heavily on inserting absurd amounts of program

in order to fill an enormous site, a more responsible solution should impose reasonable

limits of both program and lot size so as to allow for the development of the remaining

strip of land. Likewise, the challenge imposed by limiting the program presents the

41

challenge of filling an entire block while maintaining the intensity that emerges in tighter

urban settings. In Figure 4.2 below, the desire to preserve the street edge and claim the

entire block is at odds with actual scope of the single building.

4.3 Claiming the Entire Site

With Figure 4.2 firmly in mind, we understand the need to fill the entire site so

as to preserve the desired overlaps. In order to achieve this, program is pushed to the

Figure 4.2 Program Strategy

42

edge, with the greatest emphasis placed on the State Street to the east, as this is will be

the main point of entry for the building. By introducing a void, the building can follow

a courtyard typology, without resorting to the insertion of extra program. Likewise, the

void establishes the tightness desired in Figure 4.2 while still occupying the entire city

block.

4.4 Program and Organizational Strategy

With the fill strategy settled, the program of the building should limit itself by first

addressing the explicit needs of the Bronzeville community. While the citys proposal

focuses squarely on the needs of housing, this alternative submits the inverse, with

emphasis on providing zones of economic stability and communal spaces of interaction

and neighborhood involvement. By combining social needs and civic functions with

commercial interests, the new building condenses adversarial functions to create

new zones of integration. As shown in Figure 4.3, three major zones will represent

Figure 4.3 Filling the Site

commercial

commercial

commercialpublic-private

public-private

pub

lic-p

rivat

e

commercial

public-private

commercial

public-private

43

commercial interests and provide storefront space along State Street. By providing areas

for anchor tenants, the stability of the building is secured, allowing for the intermittent

space to be defined by the interior zone of public use, which acts as the adhesive that

binds different functions together.

Furthermore, civic zones overlap these commercial areas, allowing excess

occupation to influence the public area and define the use. Considering the presence of

many schools within the area as discussed in Chapter 1, the civic zones proposed include

a community library, art and dance studio spaces, a community garden, a gym, and an

athletic field with seating for 3,000 people. These civic functions not only compliment

the neighboring elementary, middle, and high schools, but also address a lack of resources

that many of these schools face. By giving many schools the access they currently lack,

not only does the new building become the cultural center of the neighborhood, but it also

guarantees optimum usage by making itself available to the widest possible audience.

Additionally, areas marked as public-private are designed as flexible office

spaces to the north and south of the building, with night classes and lecture spaces

above. These zones are designed for occupation for local businesses which allow for

local stakeholders to interact with the building, while simultaneously benefiting from the

run-off of neighboring zones and assisting the urban qualities presented in the building.

In Figure 4.4 we see the three dimensional representation of the ideas presented in the

previous diagram. The marquee tenants are given storefront space along State Street,

while local business interests flank the north and south of the building. These spaces are

rendered as blue blocks on the digital diagram below, and civic and social functions are

best represented as the purple and green zones that complete the objects form.

44

Figure 4.4 Organizational Strategy

45

4.5 Complete Program

In the Figure below, a complete breakdown of program uses are shown with

estimated areas:

Figure 4.5 Program

Program

CommercialMarquee Tenants 3 @ 125000 375000Flexible Office Space 12 @ 2000 24000

Recreational/AthleticBasketball 7500Weightroom/Gym/Flex 3500Lockers 3 @ 3000 9000

AcademicLibrary/Computer Lab 40000Lecture Hall 4500Night Classrooms 3 @ 2000 6000

Social/CulturalFlexible Gathering Space (Interior Urbanism) 40000Classroom 7500Music Studio 3500Dance Studio 7500Flexible Art Studios 4 @ 7500 30000Community Garden 10000

General/AdministrativeAdministrative Offices 2 @ 3000 6000Security 2 @ 1000 2000

Outdoor Space/Urban ExtensionFootball/Soccer Field + 3000 Seats 100000Parking/Drop off 100 spaces 60000Concessions/Gates 15000Fieldhouse Utilize Existing 4500Outdoor Garden Spaces Utilize Rooftop Space

ServiceMechanical/Electrical Estimated 4000Elevators Estimated 200Toilets Estimated 2000Storage Estimated 500Janitor Closets Estimated 400

Estimated Total 755500

* Service Spaces should be assumed to utilize existing space*Circulation assumed to be 20% of given program*Spaces should be combined where feasible

46

4.6 Concept Model

Figure 4.6 shows the conceptual overlapping of civic and cultural spaces

(modeled as black and white images) and their relationship to commercial areas.

Figure 4.6 Concept Model

47

4.7 Plans, Sections, Elevations, Model

The plans are illustrated in Figures 4.7 through 4.11, starting with the Lower

Level Plan. Figure 4.7 shows the Lower Level, which is 16 below grade, and has 100

parking spaces that directly serve the soccer and football field. There are also stairs

and elevator cars that puncture the parking structure and bring the user to the Ground

Level. Additionally, there are two locker rooms that serve the home and away teams

for the athletic field. Seating for the field provides 3,000 seats for an athletic field that is

designed to serve the many schools that surround the building that currently do not have

home fields.

In Figure 4.8, the Ground Level acts as an extension of the street, bringing

activity into the entrance, while having three distinct zones for marquee tenants,

which have been rendered as a shopping store, a coffee shop and sandwich shop, and a

restaurant. The interior street is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5, where images

diagram and demonstrate the ability of the building to absorb multiple program activities.

Flexible office spaces flank the building to the north and south, and the ticket gates and

concessions area are on the west side of the building lead users to the seating area of the

field. There is also a lecture hall and a library that touch down at the western corners of

the building.

Figure 4.9 shows the Second Level, where the interaction between social and

commercial becomes more apparent. Some of the commercial buildings puncture this

level, but they are juxtaposed by the social zones that allow for classrooms, studios, a

gym, and flexible spaces for local businesses.

On the Third Level, as shown in Figure 4.10, we continue the trend of social

48

spaces gaining more prominence and occupying more space. The library is the most

prominent program member at this level, and studio spaces and the gym are present

toward State Street. Administrative offices line up the south of the building, as well as

outdoor spaces.

On the Fourth Level, there are outdoor reading spaces for the library, classrooms

and a community garden, and additional administrative offices, as shown in Figure 4.11.

Figures 4.12 and 4.13 show Sections A1 and A2, respectively. These two cuts

from east to west show the relationship between the athletic field, seating areas, and

the interior flexible space. Likewise, the compactness of the commercial and social

areas overlook the flexible space and have views to the athletic field as well. Section

B1, as shown in Figure 4.14, demonstrates the multi-use functions of the building, as

many different uses are juxtaposed by their proximity. The benefits of these sectional

relationships are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5.

Additionally, Figures 4.15 through 4.18 represent the building elevations. Varying

channel glass colors stand in front of the social and civic zones, giving the humanist

quality of truth that Koolhaas discusses in his theory of bigness. By balancing the

desire to read the building from the exterior, this building congeals competing uses

in order to create a cohesive form. The channel glass material marches upward on the

South and North Elevations, and gives a varied facade along State Street, readily helping

the building create an identity. Likewise, storefront glass gives prominent views to the

commercial areas, allowing for distinct areas of branding and honesty to the activities

occurring within those zones. Open air areas are cladded with aluminum, maintaining

the outdoor quality while simultaneously maintaining the unified whole that defines the

49

building. A result is three distinct languages speaking fluently with one another in order

to create a building that houses multiple functions that work symbiotically to support

each other.

Figure 4.19 shows the final physical model of the building. While an honesty is

maintained to characterize each zones independence, it is the coming together of separate

functions that help to create a whole that becomes greater than the sum of its parts.

50

Figure 4.7 Plan. Lower Level. 1/128:1

8

8

Program Key:

1) Library 2) Office | Retail 3) Marquee Tenant 4) Lecture 5) Technical Classroom

6) Choir 7) Visual Arts 8) Gym | Lockers 9) Lounge | Rec 10) Studio

11) Dance 12) Administration 13) Classrooms 14) Community Garden 15) Field House

51

Figure 4.8 Plan. Ground Level. 1/128:1

2 21 2 2

3

3

3

3

2 2 24 2

52

Figure 4.9 Plan. Second Level. 1/128:1

5 5 5

3

6

7

3

8

32222

1

15

53

Figure 4.10 Plan Third Level. 1/128:1

1

8

9

10

12

11

54

Figure 4.11 Plan Fourth Level. 1/128:1

12

13

13

14

1

55

Figure 4.12 Section A1. 1/128:1

Figure 4.13 Section A2. 1/128:1

Figure 4.14 Section B1. 1/128:1

56

Figure 4.15 South Elevation. 1/128:1

Figure 4.16 North Elevation. 1/128:1

Figure 4.17 East Elevation. 1/128:1

Figure 4.18 West Elevation. 1/128:1

57

Figure 4.19 Final Model

58

CHAPTER 5

PROGRAM AS MICRO-URBANISM

The defining characteristic of the single building that acts as an urban catalyst

is the intensity of activity that occurs within its own envelope. By condensing many

different program uses and accentuating their proximity to one another, we can create

areas of tight interactions that act as the epicenter of new urban development. Yet, as

discussed in previous chapters, there is an inherent challenge in creating this tightness

without resorting to the insertion of copious amounts of program. By carefully adding

voids within the building, program can be pushed to the periphery and simultaneously

occupy the entire site with only a few program members.

5.1 Athletic Field as a Void

In Figure 3.2 we examined these zones of intensity when different uses share

the same areas. Likewise, in Chapter 4, we discussed the ability of space to become

amplified when multiple uses are infused into the given area. By using the athletic

field as a void within the envelope of the building, the remaining program uses are

forced to occupy a tighter area, thereby assuring more overlaps, as different functions

of the building are forced to cooperate and share communal spaces rather than retreat

to exclusive portions of the building. This level of interaction, in essence, becomes the

standard of urban activity within the building. The introduction of the athletic field as

the void can best be examined sectionally, as demonstrated in Figure 5.1. While the field

itself demands a large footprint, other programs such as the community garden, gym, and

weekend market space are confined to a tighter setting, which preserves the urban quality

59

of intensity desired to act as a catalyst that readily defines communities in more dense

portions of the city.

5.2 Density Along State Street

A tremendous benefit of the introduction of the athletic field is its ability to

reinforce State Street as the main corridor of the Bronzeville community. Not only does

the athletic field address the need for neighborhood schools to have a field, but it also

pushes the remaining program to the perimeter of the building envelope. As shown

below, the field assists the desire to preserve an urban tightness, with multiple adversarial

functions being forced to share meaningful adjacencies with one another, promoting

positive collisions by a diverse range of users who would otherwise have no incentive to

interact with one another in the traditional urban layout currently being proposed.

Figure 5.2 Density Along State Street

Figure 5.1 Athletic Field as Void

public-privatepublic-private

commercial commercialcommercialcommercial

public-private

public-privateentrance

parkingentrance

60

5.3 Section and Program Relationships

In Figure 5.3, the relationship between the program and the organizational

strategy discussed previously in Chapter 4 is juxtaposed with the sectional diagrams

discussed on the previous page to create the building sections.

Figure 5.3 Section-Program Relationship Diagram

public-privatepublic-private

commercial commercialcommercialcommercial

public-private

public-privateentrance

parkingentrance

61

5.4 Program Flexibility

A vital component to the success of the building is its ability to perform multiple

uses concurrently. Additionally, the ability to maximize its occupancy depends on the

desire to render major portions as public utilities. The athletic field, for example, can

optimize its usefulness by being both a soccer field and football field for local high

schools and club teams, as well as be converted into an ice rink during long Chicago

winters.

5.5 Architecture as Agent of Democracy

A defining characteristic of the flexibility of the interior space is the ability to

allow surrounding zones to influence the activity that occurs on the ground level. In

Margaret Crawfords essay, she argues that:

[T]he juxtapositions, combinations, and collisions of people, places, and activities [...] described create a new condition of social fluidity that begins to break down the separate, specialized, and hierarchical structures of everyday life[.] (1999, 34)

Figure 5.4 Flexibility

62

Crawfords observation in this essay is in the ability of community members to

annex private space and render them public by setting up locations to carry out everyday

needs, such as vending space and gathering space. These attempts are often disrupted

by property owners who do not wish to share their land with their neighbors. For this

project, the idea of communal and inherently democratic space is explored in order to

invigorate a community and establish public ownership over a building that also houses

private interests. In Figure 5.5 on the following page, we see how bringing public, street-

space inside of the envelope of the building allows for both flexible space, and the ability

for ownership to oscillate between the public and private realms as need be.

While the private businesses are given three major zones along State Street,

the area just behind it is unclaimed, and is given the ability to absorb run-off activity

for large events. The space is allowed to be defined by the influence of its immediate

surroundings, such as the athletic field, the marquee tenants, and the neighborhood at

large. The space can be filled with activity during a football game with spectators or

celebrations, and it can also be rented out for private events and serve as an extension of

the marquee tenants for large events. Likewise, this space can become a weekend market

space, where community members are given the opportunity to occupy the area and claim

it for vending purposes. And, as the ultimate symbol of democracy, the space can also be

a gathering space and hold political rallies and be a voting place.

The limits of occupation of this space are endless, and allow for an opportunity

to bring the public square into the envelope of a building, transforming a single building

into a participatory experience. By bringing this action inward, the building becomes

the center of urban and civic reformation, and acts as the catalyst that encourages the

63

chain of events to spill into the remaining plots of land. It is the juxtaposition of private

interests with community involvement that generates a space that can generate an urban

experience within the building so that it may later extend that energy outward for further

development.

5.6 Renderings

On the following pages, we see the final renderings that exhibit the flexibility of

the building that enable multiple activities to occur simultaneously, as well as the ability

of the interior space to be defined by the will of the users who wish to occupy the space

and program overflow.

Figure 5.5 Architecture as Agent of Democracy

64

Figure 5.6 Interior Rendering A

65

Figure 5.7 Interior Rendering B

66

Figure 5.8 Interior Rendering C

67

Figure 5.9 Interior Rendering D

68

Figure 5.10 Interior Rendering E

69

Figure 5.11 Field Rendering A

70

Figure 5.12 Field Rendering B

71

Figure 5.13 Field Rendering C

72

CHAPTER 6

URBAN RESPONSE

The intentional insertion of a large architectural mass demands an appropriate

response. This manifestation triggers a chain of events that creates a linear zone, which

responds to the architectural object with even more architecture. This initial object

sets the stage for more ambitious architecture, and generates an architectural inertia

that can claim the remaining strip of emptiness and occupy it with dense and diverse

environments that serve the public sphere.

6.1 Setting the Stage

The insertion of dense and mixed-use architecture breaks down the hierarchical

structure that currently defines our cities. It adds to the poly-centric ideals of urban

planning, and it returns public influence to the architecture of the city. This architectural

mass plugs into the grid of the city, and creates integration within the whole by first

establishing independence of the parts. By establishing economic, public, and social

independence, the Bronzeville neighborhood will have less incentive to rely on other

parts of the city in order to exist. And, paradoxically, this independence generates interest

for other city dwellers to visit and interact with the community, thereby integrating and

mixing many different users into a single area.

As was discussed in Chapter 5, the building itself acts as a microcosm of urban

activity, providing the framework for multiple activities to occur within the building

envelope. A desired result of this building then becomes the ability for that interior

activity to spill outward and influence its surroundings. As we see in the following

73

renderings, the buildings size interrupts the current landscape of the neighborhood, and

sets the stage for more ambitious development to claim the remaining empty lots.

6.2 Urban Alteration

In addition to the immediate surroundings of the building, we see the greater

context of empty lots that surround the building to the south. This alteration demands

Figure 6.1 Exterior Perspectives

74

bigger solutions than the modest housing efforts currently being proposed by the city.

6.3 Urban Chain of Events

As has been previously discussed, the strip of emptiness that consumes the

Figure 6.2 Urban Alteration

75

Bronzeville neighborhood is enormous. By creating the single building that enables more

aggressive construction, dense projects can follow the initial building, as diagrammed in

Figure 6.3 below.

6.4 New Urban Identity

With the urban catalyst already in place, the remaining plots have an

obligation to service the remaining needs of the community in order to contextually

respond appropriately in the radically altered landscape. In doing so, the Bronzeville

neighborhood will create a new identity. Instead of being a vast void set between other

points of interest, the new development will become a dense and linear articulation of

architectural ambition that aims to mix different uses while setting the framework for new

urban environments. Figure 6.4 demonstrates the new identity given to a once vacant

area.

Figure 6.3 Urban Chain of Events

76

Figure 6.4 New Urban Identity

Site White Sox IIT

U. Chicago Museum of Industry

1000 ft

Public - Private Commercial

77

6.4 Urban Possibilities

Small, single-use housing, as previously discussed, only satisfies the need for

housing, and does nothing to encourage the mixing of activities, nor does it create

diverse and democratic spaces. However, large objects that aim to mix and shuffle users

inherently redistribute users influence and demand cooperative ownership of space. With

the incentive to build bold architectural works already in place, the opportunities for

growth are limitless. With the context significantly altered, new buildings are liberated

from the constraints of replicating architectural codes and styles imposed by the proposed

housing solutions.

New construction will share the boldness interjected on the community and

respond positively to the single building to create urban areas of infinite intensity. In

the following pages, the proposed alternative suggests the possibility of architectural

typologies that can claim the remaining strip of land in order to re-introduce an

architectural vision for the Bronzeville neighborhood.

78

Figure 6.5 Final Context Model A

79

Figure 6.6 Final Context Model B

80

Figure 6.7 Final Context Model C

81

CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION

The neighborhood of Bronzeville is undergoing transformation. With the

demolition of the notorious Robert Taylor Housing projects, the large strip of land is in

desperate need of radical new architecture to fully heal the wounds of failed social policy

as a means to reinvent itself.

The site, as it currently stands, is barren and empty. The shadow of the once

towering objects that soared over the region still remain despite the physical removal of

the buildings that once occupied the site. For seventeen blocks, there only remains the

plot of emptiness, with the fallout and destruction of the housing projects bleeding across

the super-blocks and affecting neighboring lots. Empty and abandoned buildings remain,

and there is little hope of repair.

Yet, the plan of action by the city of Chicago is to step away from the large, bold,

and ambitious architecture that once defined the area. Instead, in a state of panic, the

remedy proposed by the city is to insert modest, timid, and safe architectural solutions.

And while the solution may in fact be more livable, the opportunity to make the site

urban will be wasted in a moment of bashfulness.

This thesis project proposes the alternative. By addressing the civic and social

needs of the community, as well as providing for private interests, a new building can

disrupt the pattern of small and timid architecture and instead insert a building that

invigorates the neighborhood.

It instead provides opportunity, gives community members access to an

architectural landmark that serves the public sphere. Private interests are indeed

82

considered, but the public square is inserted into the envelope of the building, giving

occupants the express ability to define the usage of architecture. Ownership is

intentionally plastic, allowing zones to absorb the overflow of activity from adjacent

areas.

The building fills an entire city block, inviting users inside while extending its

architectural influence to the remaining vacant lots that surround the building to the

south. By obstructing the construction of the single-use mentality that currently seeks to

dominate the site, the single building acts as the catalyst that provides an opportunity for

aggressive urbanism to cascade to the south and integrate the neighborhood back into the

wider urban context.

83

CHAPTER 8

FINAL BOARDS AND DRAWINGS

Figure 8.1 Thesis Abstract

Figure 8.2 Site Analysis

an identified strip of land in chicagos southside has left an unmistakably large void within the grid of the city. current city plans call for single-use and low density spaces to eventually fill the enormous void bounded by state and federal streets to the east and west, respectively. resisting the pattern of architectural segregation, this alternative proposes an ambitious plan to fill an entire block between 44th and 45th streets with a select and diverse range of program to invigorate a depleted urban area while simultaneously creating an identifiable architectural landmark. necessarily occupying the entire site for the urban development of the city, the building is faced with the challenge of expanding to fill the tremendous void imposed by the grid with as few program members as possible, all the while preserving the richness of urban overlaps otherwise afforded in tighter urban settings. the result is a single building mindful of the independent needs of its occupants while simultaneously creating and maximizing shared spaces within the overlaps, generating program opportunities and interactions not possible with the status quo.

empty strip current plan urban ambition

public-privatepublic-private

commercial commercialcommercialcommercial

the.single.building.as.the.urban.catalyst.thesis.2012

Site White Sox IIT U. Chicago Museum of Industry1000 ft

residential businessindustrial

education - primaryeducation - secondaryeducation - higher

worship

civicgovernment

train linetrain stopbus stop

decayhousing constructionhousing projected

84

Figure 8.3 Urban Strategy

Figure 8.4 Interior Strategy

Site White Sox IIT U. Chicago Museum of Industry1000 ft Public - Private Commercial

commercial

commercial

commercialpublic-private

public-private

pub

lic-p

rivat

e

commercial

public-private

commercial

public-private

public-privatepublic-private

commercial commercialcommercialcommercial

85

Figure 8.5 Field Strategy

Figure 8.6 Structure, Elevations, Plans

program key:

1) library 2) office | retail 3) marquee tenant 4) lecture 5) technical classroom 6) choir 7) visual arts 8) gym | lockers 9) lounge | rec10) studio11) dance12) administration13) classrooms14) community garden15) field house

north elevation

south elevation

west elevation

east elevation

structural diagram

8

8

2 21 2 2

3

3

3

3

2 2 2 24

86

Figure 8.7 Plans

Figure 8.8 Sections

5 5 5

3

6

7

3

8

32222

1

15

1

8

9

10

12

11

12

13

13

14

west section

north section A

north section B

master plan

public-privatepublic-private

commercial commercialcommercialcommercial

public-private

public-privateentrance

parkingentrance

87

Figure 8.9 Perspective A

Figure 8.10 Perspective B

88

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anon. Legends South - Hansberry Square. IRM Interstate Realty Management