Breuer, Marcel

New York City Landmark: 2002

Beginning in the 1940's, New York University embarked on a campaign to further develop their campus - then located in University Heights in the Bronx. Marcel Breuer, already a famed architect by that time, was commissioned to design several buildings. He was asked in 1956 to develop a comprehensive design for the replanning and new construction of the campus. Five buildings were constructed from Breuer's plan, with Begrisch Lecture Hall being the most radical.

Begrisch Hall, composed of reinforced exposed concrete, is a building that mirrors the form and function of its interior. Used as a lecture hall, Breuer has revealed the steep theater and the aisle steps of the interior in the design of the structure as a whole.
The building features two sidewall trusses that appear to sit just barely on the ground, even as they support two cantilevered upward slopes that form the theater section of the lecture hall. The sidewall trusses are the only element of the building that actually touch the ground, so the hall has the feeling of hovering over the land. The building is entered through a small exterior staircase or an enclosed walkway coming from an adjacent building.
The main facades of the building, east and west, are decorated with separated panels of concrete in trapezoidal shapes. Each panel is textured so that the grooves of the exposed concrete run in different directions. The north and south facades are simply faced in a simpler exposed concrete. Because of the unusual shape of the sloping cantilevered wall, there is an underside of the building that is quite exposed on the exterior. This facade has a highly textured pattern of grooves following the facade down to the ground. This area also exposes the form of the interior lecture hall stairs that it is supporting.
Begrisch Hall is a brutalist style of building - the term brutalist coming from the French "beton brut" refering to exposed, unfinished concrete.

Breuer began his master plan for the University Heights campus in 1959. While the planning was not officially finished until 1970, Begrisch Hall was completed in 1961.

Prior to implementing the university's new building campaign, the prominent buildings on the University Heights campus were designed by Standford White. The main focus of these buildings was the famed Gould Library. For over 50 years these buildings were uncontested, and the university made an effort for subsequent designs on the campus to blend in rather than attract any attention away from the Classical White structures. This philosophy changed radically when they commissioned Breuer - an architect known for refusing to conform to Classical standards of design or order - to plan five new structures on the campus. These radical new buildings were set completely apart from White's older designs, and made a clear statement that the campus was launching itself into a new modern era.

Begrisch Hall uses many of the modernist techniques seen radical and unique at the time. Breuer's use of the brutalist method of exposed concrete as the only facing of the building was a favored technique of his, but still wholly uncommon in most designs up to that time. The strange trapezoidal shape of the lecture hall, using side trusses and sloping cantilevers to form the odd, asymmetrical quality of the building, was exemplary of the modernist movement.

Given that Begrisch Hall was constructed on a campus previously populated with Classical designs by Stanford White, this modernist building certainly made a social statement. Breuer exhibited an unwillingness to cooperate with the current atmosphere of the campus or design buildings that would contribute to the general aesthetic already put in place by White's earlier buildings. His new design for the campus was almost like an assault on the current buildings on the campus and the brutalist style of Begrisch Hall could not help but make a bold statement. By commissioning Breuer to plan their new building campaign, New York University was knowingly thrusting themselves into the modern aesthetic.

Begrisch Hall holds its status as an important building of the modernist movement. It's unique design and brutalist qualities continue to give the lecture hall significance as an architecturally interesting and important structure. Already a famed architect at the time of the hall's design, Breuer's fame has not waned, and his designs are still lauded.

National Register of Historic Places: August 2008; Washington, D.C. landmark: June 2008

The building was originally designed as the federal headquarters for the Department of Housing and Urban Development to accommodate 6,000 employees. In the summer of 1963, initial negotiation began with Marcel Breuer, Herbert Beckhard, and Nolan-Swineburne & Associates. In 1964, Breuer et al. received tentative approval for the building design and landscaping. Construction broke ground in July 1965 and was completed in 1968. Significantly, the project was $3 million under budget, illustrating that federal architecture could be cutting-edge and affordable. Upon opening, the building was immediately heralded as a success by architectural critics and politicians. Breuer’s original landscaping for the six-acre site was not fully implemented until 1976. His plan called for a flagstone paved plaza, concrete lampposts, bollards, and a monumental sign.

The basic plan shape of the building is an elongated “X” with a central core curving out into diagonal wings. The ends of each wing have no windows and are veneered in granite. The building is ten stories high, has two basement floors, and a garage under the front entrance plaza. The ground floor is set back fifteen feet behind the columns, creating an arcade space around the base of the building. Flagstone paving is used continuously from the plaza into the lobby space.

The main structural window-walls are made out of precast concrete that rests on cast-in-place concrete “trees.” The concrete trees were cast in plank-lined steel forms and retain the wood’s texture, which provides a visual contrast to the smooth upper massing.

The HUD building is located in Southwest D.C., in the area of L'Enfant Plaza, which was part of D.C.'s first urban renewal program in the 1950s. During this program, a series of modern movement office buildings were constructed alongside one another. I.M. Pei designed the preliminary urban plans, as well as the buildings that comprise L'Enfant Plaza. Breuer's design for the HUD building stands out as a different form of modernism, set against the surrounding rectangular office buildings.

The HUB building was the first federal building to utilize precast concrete and poured-on-site concrete for structural and aesthetic purposes.

The Housing and Urban Development Act was passed in 1965, and in its passing, created the United State Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The HUD building was erected in the city’s first urban redevelopment area, in Southwest D.C. The placement of the headquarters was intended to symbolize the federal government’s commitment to its urban redevelopment projects, and “[embody] the values promulgated by HUD itself.”

While at the time of its construction, and in the years immediately preceeding its opening, general consensus saw the HUD building as a modern, innovative, and "urbane" project. It was a builing for Washington, D.C. to be proud of, and President Lyndon Johnson said that it was "bold and beautiful." However, public opinion of the building and the Schwartz plaza have changed. When Breuer's building was up for designation in 2008, Washington D.C. citizens attacked the building for being out of context, irrelevant, and hostile to pedestrians. Although the HUD building was designated that year, many of these public opinions remain.

The Geller House is a one-family one-story home. Large floor-to-ceiling windows punctuate the façade, which is composed of stained wood and fleidstone. Only to the home’s doors has color been applied. The roofline is butterfly-pitched and is in contrast to the flat Long Island topography.
The Geller House, when designed and constructed, was situated on a corner lot that had a 456’-0" front along Ocean Avenue and 221’-0" sides. That lot was subdivided between 1963 and 1967; the new lot retains the 221’-0" sides but has a frontage which has been reduced to 245'-0". The main house Breuer designed and built for the Geller family is 77’-0" x 67'-0". The house is set back 59'-0" from Ocean Avenue and 120’-0" from the rear of the property. The house was originally set back 60’-0" from either of the side property lines and took up ten percent of the total property. From the ground to the highest point of the roof beams, the house reaches 15’-0" and is one story tall, with a cellar.
Set on the same lot as the main house, the garage is 80’-0" x 20’-0" and, also one story tall, reaches a height of 12'-0". The garage is set back 34’ from Ocean Avenue and 77’-0" from the rear. It was originally set back 140’-0" from both sides of the lot although, after the lot was subdivided, it now sits just 25’-0" from one adjacent lot. Situated on a corner lot, the placement of the garage provides the main house with increased privacy.
The main house has a total of 2,284 square feet. It has five bedrooms, three full bathrooms, one fireplace, a child’s play area, one kitchen, a living/dining area, and a wash room (complete with a laundry sink, tub, and washing machine). Breuer designed the layout of the home so that similar functions would be situated near each other. One enters the house through the main hall. Two small coat closets are situated to the left and right of the front door. A set of French doors in the hall open to the rear porch, which was screened-in in August, 1992. A classic feature of Breuer’s “bi-nuclear” house, the hall serves as the dividing space between the home’s daytime and nighttime areas. Walking to the right from the front hall, one enters the nighttime area, where the three children’s rooms, playroom, bathroom, master bedroom, and master bathroom are located. Two doors in the playroom lead directly to the front and back yard. The children’s rooms do not have doors and open directly into the playarea which has floor-to-ceiling windows. The openness of the design creates the illusion of a larger space than which actually exists; it also promotes an enhanced sense of freedom for the children to move about in their home.
The dining room and living room are the first two rooms to the left of the entry hall. The two rooms are separated only by a bookshelf. A fireplace is situated in the living room, furthest from the dining room. Floor-to-ceiling windows allow a great deal of light to enter the living room.
The kitchen is adjacent to the dining room and the two rooms are separated by sliding panels that allow food and dishes to be passed between the two rooms. The utility room is adjacent to the kitchen; it is also adjacent to the maids room and bathroom. The utility room was designed to be extremely functional and efficient, with an ironing board that could be unfolded from a built-in cabinet. The kitchen and utility room are separated by walls of structural glass. The Geller House bathroom walls are also all constructed using structural glass. A service entry is located in the utility room, which leads to an outdoor path which connects the main house to the garage/guest house.
The garage/guest house is located just northeast of the main house. It has a total living area of 1,200 square feet. Upon entry to the guest house, bedrooms are located to both the left and to the right. A door leading to a small full bathroom is located directly in the entry area. A storage room is located adjacent to the guest quarters and has its own exterior entry. The garage (carport) is located adjacent to the storage room.
In August 1967 a swimming pool was installed behind the house (see photo).
In 1992 a pool cabana was added to the property in proximity to the pool. That same year, the back porch was screened-in.

Construction details can be found in "Technical" section.

Marcel Breuer was introduced to Bertram Geller through contractor Gordon Roth. Commissioned just after World War II, Marcel Breuer designed the Geller house to meet the needs of modern American family living. The Geller family consisted of Bertram and Phyllis and their three sons, the eldest of whom was seven. Geller had specific ideas about how the home for his wife and children should be designed, but Breuer found those ideas to be very “child un-friendly” and thus convinced Geller to adopt a design concept which could better accommodate a growing family. The home Breuer proposed to build for Geller was “bi-nuclear.” Breuer’s bi-nuclear concept, consistent with Breuer’s background, is rooted in the Bauhaus. The concept consisted of two elements which have been joined, roughly in the shape of an “H.” The center of the “H” divides the daytime and nighttime uses: separating “…presentable spaces from the necessarily chaotic domain of children.” House & Garden, in 1947, referred to this house as a “complete departure” from the old fashioned bungalow, where bedrooms radiated at random from the main living rooms.” Breuer, when talking about his residential designs, spoke primarily about their “convenience of operation” and how design facilitates family living; the Geller house was designed with much consideration given to this convenience.

Construction: Both the main house and the garage/guest house were constructed using Western framing. Some of the main house façade was constructed using masonry although stained redwood panels were used for the majority of the exteriors of both the garage and main house and also for the interior garage walls. The sills, posts, plates, and braces were also constructed from wood (fir) and were all, with the exception of the exterior garage wall bracing (which was 1”x6”), were 4”x4.” The main house interior walls were constructed of weld board while the interior of the garage was constructed of wood. The studding of all interior walls was 2”x4” on 16” centers. The wooden walls were protected from the pipes with rock wool insulation. The foundation of the main house was constructed of 8” thick concrete which was sunk 4’ below grade. The footing for the main house foundation walls was earth. No piers were used for construction of the main house. The garage foundation was constructed of concrete and stone. Because the garage was set on a sand base, concrete footings and piers in addition to stone walls were used in foundation construction.
The floors of the Geller house are constructed of 6” thick concrete; the garage floor was reinforced with ½” rods set 6” on center.
All roofs are flat and were constructed using asphalt and gravel. Rafters are 2”x10” and are spaced 16” on center. The main house was constructed to use dry wells to dispose of roof water, while the garage was designed to use a copper leader to do the same.
The main house has one chimney, which was constructed of tile.
Until 1974 when the property was connected to the Village sewer system, the Geller house had one cast iron cesspool, the diameter of which was 5” and which fell ¼” per foot. The cesspool was situated 15’ from the main house. The Geller house was also constructed with two cast iron soil pipes, three of which extended above the roof.
Corresponding to the 1967 addition of the swimming pool, a dry well was installed on the property. In 1992, a one story pool cabana was erected on the property.

Technical: Marcel Breuer paid great attention to all details of the Geller House. One of the most prominent technical features that Breuer incorporated into the home’s design was the butterfly-pitched roof, which eliminated gutters and drains at the roof edge. This roofline also addressed the technical problems with flat roofs which, which were common by the late 1940’s. The design incorporated a new edging detail “…made with standard metal coping sections applied on the job without soldering or welding…” and that would keep the edge much more watertight than earlier designs. The roof also incorporated tar and gravel to allow for inside drainage.
The layout of the home was designed, similar to many of Breuer’s residential homes, with the potential for its expansion: in this instance, the garage could eventually become an additional bedroom and bathroom.
The full-height windows on both sides of the living area were frosted on the lower sections so that both light and privacy could be incorporated into the space. These glass walls were double thickness, providing insulation and eliminating heat loss. Outside the house, horizontal louvers in front of the upper panels further reduce glare inside the living room from glare from the sky and helped to create a more even distribution of daylight. Smaller technical details that Breuer incorporated into the Geller house were a dishwasher, washing machine, gas dryer, and a television-radio-phonograph console. Breuer even designed the dishes and linens. The walls, doors, and any uncarpeted floors were lacquered so that they would be washable and resilient to any damage the children may cause them.
The garage was designed so that there would be a two-foot space between the sidewalls and the ground so that snow that blew could also be blown out. There is a wall grille in the rear of the garage which provides ventilation to the adjacent storage room.
Unlike many residential mechanical/electrical systems during the 1940’s, Marcel Breuer designed the Geller House to have a centralized mechanical/electrical system. The “mechanical core” of the home was located in a small 4’ x 7’ room situated directly off of the children’s playroom. The home was warmed using radiant heat. Floor coils were grouped in four sections of the home and could be adjusted using a thermostat. Automatic controls helped to adjust heat based on the penetration of sunlight and to shifting winds.

The Geller House is not only one of Breuer’s earliest American works, but it is his first realized building upon his split from Gropius, the architect with whom Breuer had previously designed many buildings. As World War II came to a close, many architectural periodicals held design competitions to “…propose family houses that could be put up quickly and cheaply – also, to some extent, as a contribution to the potentially desirable aim of re-establishing ‘family values.’” Breuer’s bi-nuclear plan for the Geller house was built in response to such a competition held by California Arts and Architecture entitled ‘Designs for post-war living.” At the time the Geller House was constructed, there was a ban on residential construction on Long Island. Despite this ban, Breuer was permitted to build the house because it “…was regarded by the U.S. government as an experimental prefabricated house – one, conceivably, that could be adopted on a large scale after the war. Its bi-nuclear plan was seen to be ideal for the postwar family.” When it was constructed, “modern” houses did not exist in the suburbs; it paved the way for a wave of subsequent modern homes in suburban areas and, specifically, in Long Island.
The Geller House was important because it was constructed of “brand new thinking, realized in wood and stone.” It has been planned so that two generations can live closely with each other, without getting in each other’s way.
The Geller House is also socially significant for the dramatic impact that it had on Herbert Beckhard. Beckhard regards the Geller House as a catalyst for his chosen career as an architect and as an inspiration for the way that he thought about architecture.

In 1947, House & Garden magazine awarded the Geller House “honorable mention” in a design competition and acknowledged it as “…one of the most successful modern houses built since the war.”

Design brief: According to Marcel Breuer, there was no time to decide upon the building’s design ahead of his selection. (New York Times, “Whitney Museum Finds a New Home” June 18, 1963.)
 The initial program requirements included:  3991sf of service and work space; 29,817 sf of gallery and exhibition space; 2,926 sf of office space, 1,050 sf of library space; 1,584 sf of lounges and meeting rooms, 950sf of supply closet and coat check space; 1,500 sf of lobby space.  The building committee consulted Philip Johnson on building costs.  He confirmed that $50 per sf was reasonable and the total cost was estimated at $1,598,100.  The finished building had a gross floor area of 82,000 sf; net gallery area 26,700 sf; sculpture court 3,100 sf, storage area 21,500 sf, office space 12,200 sf.

The main volume of the building is approximately 81 feet wide, 125 feet deep and 97 feet high.  The building is stepped away at and below grade, creating a void approximately 28 feet wide and 11 feet deep between the sidewalk and the building that is crossed by an entry bridge.  The building progressively moves back towards the street in three steps as it rises.  Breuer described it as an inverted ziggurat.  Next to the main volume on the south side is a smaller secondary volume, approximately 12 feet wide and 97 feet high, the upper portion of which slopes back away from street.  It contains the main stair as well as space for the museum’s restoration service.  This secondary volume is made of exposed concrete. The building is constructed primarily of concrete and clad with granite panels.  Split slate flooring is used throughout large portions of the building. Precast concrete coffers are hung above the second, third, and fourth floor galleries. An array of circular light fixtures hangs above the lobby.  The main façade, which faces west along Madison Avenue, has one large trapezoidal window which protrudes from the building at approximately 20 degrees.  The north façade has six smaller windows which have a shape similar to the large window. The building is set off from the townhouses on the block by two thick concrete walls, one on south side of the building and the other on the east side.  The south wall has “break though” panels which allow the main building to be connected to adjacent buildings on the block. The building has two floors below grade.  The lowest is primarily used for storage and service.  The next floor up contains a restaurant, gift shop and public restrooms.  The ground floor primarily contains a lobby.  The second, third, fourth and fifth floors are primarily gallery space.  Most of the space with was added (connected) to the museum by Gluckman Mayner Architects is contain in buildings that have maintained their townhouse appearance.  However, a tall masonry building was constructed behind the building at 33 East 74th Street at that time to provide a physical connection between it and the main building.  This new construction has a minimal presence from the street.

Name(s) of surrounding area/building(s): The Whitney is located within walking distance of the “Museum Mile” section of 5th Avenue including:  El Museo del Barrio at 104th Street; Museum of the City of New York at 103rd Street; Jewish Museum at 92nd Street; Cooper-Hewitt National Museum of Design at 91st Street; National Academy Museum and School of Fine Arts at 89th Street; Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum at 88th Street; Metropolitan Museum of Art from 82nd to 86th Streets; Goethe House German Cultural Center at 82nd Street.
Visual relations: Many have noted the similarity between Breuer’s Whitney and Frank Lloyd Wright’s Guggenheim as both share the rough form of an inverted ziggurat.
Functional relations:The Whitney was expanded into the building located at 33 East 74th Street as well new construction between the two buildings in 1998.  The annex includes a library, archives and offices.  The building at 943 Madison Avenue contains storage and administrative space for the museum and previously contained the museum’s “Store Next Door,” The museum also operates the “Whitney Museum of American Art at Altria” which is located at 120 Park Avenue at 42nd Street, New York, New York 10017.

A comprehensive architect’s report detailing the design was prepared in November 1963.  It notes that the north and south wall was reinforced concrete bearing walls.  The east and west walls act has deep concrete trusses that span the 81 feet between the bearing walls.  The precast concrete coffers, arrayed in a two foot by two foot grid provide power and lighting over the galleries.  The ceilings are 12 feet 9 inches above the 2nd and 3rd floor galleries and 17 feet 6 inches above the 4th floor gallery.

The design of the museum was in part a response to the state of modern art at the time.  Breuer purposely minimized the use of windows to better showcase the work within.  The galleries can accommodate the large sculptures that were emerging at the time.

commission brief:

In 1966, VP Joseph Stewart approached New Haven mayor, Richard Lee, about purchasing what was viewed as a “pivotal” piece of land in the Long Wharf Redevelopment Area. The site, as it occupied an important tract of land at the intersection of Interstates 91 and 95, would mark the gateway to New Haven. Thus, Mayor Lee was much concerned over the choice of architect. He insisted that anything built on the site should have an architectural presence and be built by a master.

The Armstrong Rubber Company’s program requirements were as follows: two or three floors of administrative office space, assumed by Armstrong Rubber Co. to be placed near the turnpike, and a one or two story high-ceiling space for the research and development laboratories to be relocated to New Haven from West Haven.

design brief:

Armstrong Rubber Co. initially anticipated two or three floors of administrative space at the front of the site and a research and development structure of one to two story to be located at the rear, as the testing of tires to the point of destruction made a noticeable amount of noise. That the site selected lay below the roadbed grade posed a design dilemma, as this would render the originally low building plan unimposing to passing vehicular traffic. Mayor Lee suggested that the building be constructed as a 10-18 story tower – Armstrong Rubber Co. disagreed. Marcel Breuer, architect, proposed a two-story research and development structure at grade with administrative offices “hanging” above, leaving a 2-story gap. The client viewed the commission of the building as their way back into the public eye. The only point in the design process during which Armstrong Rubber Co. requested a design change from Breuer was in regards to the tower’s height. Breuer willingly conceded. Though some supporters of Breuer may have urged for more reluctance on his part to compromise his vision, others attribute his ease to his recognition of Mr. Stewart’s responsibility to shareholders, in maintaining minimal costs. Considering this within the framework of Modern architecture, Breuer’s response seems actually appropriate, as the Modernist architect was driven by careful functional analysis and demanded efficiency in structure as well as affordability in creation. The completing feature of the building, the sign, reveals a moment of teamwork between City Planning officials and the Breuer design team. Breuer’s design initially called for a three story stand-alone sign – a rooftop sign was never planned, as this would damage the buildings distinctive silhouette. However, a sign of this scale was against signage ordinance. By including a small storage space at the sign’s base, the “sign” could be deemed a “gardening shed” and thus a structure, able to be built to any height desired.

The Armstrong Rubber Co. /Pirelli Tire building is a fantastic embodiment of the design ideals held by a master Modernist architect, Marcel Breuer. The entire building is a composite of steel structure for the 4-story tower and long-span concrete T-beams for the two-story high-ceiling test area. Between these two parts of the building is a 2-story gap, giving the tower portion the illusion of suspension. Enveloping the entire building are pre-cast concrete panels of varying scale and design, depending on the function they enclose. Breuer preferred concrete as a building material, as he viewed it as universal – it serves both architectural and structural functions of the building. The pre-cast concrete panels are modeled in a form which Breuer termed crystalline. This form provided protection from the sun (a Breuer preoccupation) and gave the façade a tremendous physicality and depth. The end result is a continually changing impression of the building, depending on the day, the season and the weather.

building/construction: Breuer exploited concrete’s ability to be cast into an endless variation of forms. Because of this, one material could fulfill the needs of structure and aesthetics. The concrete panels, which were pre-cast, were made of white cement with a dark aggregate that was exposed via light sandblasting.

The original setting for the Armstrong Rubber Co. /Pirelli Tire building was an expansive greensward. In being provided this space, the building was set apart as a sculptural work in addition to a functioning building.

The Armstrong Rubber Co. /Pirelli Tire building exemplifies Breuer’s employment of concrete as both a structural and an architecturally aesthetic material. Whereas steel is structural and must be then covered for beautification, Breuer recognizes the sculptural ability of concrete and utilized this capacity to move his buildings beyond the role of mere containers for human activity to seemingly living creatures themselves. The façade has a tremendous physicality and strength, thanks to the deeply molded panels. Most technically astonishing is Breuer’s decision to suspend the office tower above the research and development wing. One can read through the concrete the massive trusses used to carry this load at the attic story of the tower.

The Armstrong Rubber Co. /Pirelli Tire building was intended to act as a beacon for the town of New Haven. To achieve this, the city was cognizant of the need for an architect on the forefront of architectural practice – Modernism was the style du jour. Breuer designed the Armstrong Rubber Co. /Pirelli Tire building to mark the entrance into the city and announce New Haven’s rebirth as a city of culture.

In the tradition of masterful artistic works, the Armstrong Rubber Co./Pirelli Tire building has become more increasingly appreciated as a result of its well publicized impending demise. Many recognize now how typical of the Modern movement Breuer’s building is – its affinity for standardization, its construction in concrete, its minimalist ornamentation, its compositional massing. While typical, however, it is also, individually, exquisitely successful.
Unfortunately, the building was allowed to become the poster child for last-minute advocacy. Modern architecture is, seemingly by the day, losing major contributions to the movement; the Armstrong Rubber Co./Pirelli Tire building escaped in an amputated state. Its story has thus become a lesson in advocating for Modern architecture.