Rudolph, Paul

Purchase College, SUNY

Added by Liz Waytkus, last update: October 26, 2011, 4:55 pm

Purchase College, SUNY
Purchase College Campus, source: Architecture for the Arts, Museum of Modern Art, date: 1971
Location
735 Anderson Hill Road
Purchase, NY 10577
United States
41° 2' 55.5288" N, 73° 41' 57.6096" W
Identity of Building / Site
Primary classification: Education (EDC)
Secondary classification: Public Services (PBS)
Federal, State, or Local Designation(s) and Date(s):

None

History of Building/Site
Original Brief:

Founded in 1971, Purchase College, State University of New York (SUNY) is one of sixty-four colleges and universities that make up the largest public university system in the United States. The State University of New York system was written into law in 1948 by Governor Thomas E. Dewey and was dramatically expanded by Nelson A. Rockefeller during his four terms as Governor from 1959 to 1973. "Rockefeller saw a grand panorama of prize-winning buildings spread across the state that would offer the best assortment of learning environments anywhere. Students could choose among them and, within their architecturally outstanding walls, grow under a cadre of superior educators wooed from the best universities" (Bleeker 168). To do so, Rockefeller created the State University Construction Fund (SUCF) in 1962 in order to meet the increased demand for higher education resulting from population growth. The Fund, initially lead by a three-person board of trustees, one overall architect and one general manager, streamlined governmental procedures and allowed for construction of State University facilities to be expedited. Private architects and contractors, who had previously been reluctant to take on State work, now were afforded control over design and a "climate essential to the creation of good design and good architecture" (Drexler 5).

The addition of a State University for the arts, initiated in 1967, was of special interest to Governor Rockefeller. Edward Larrabee Barnes was selected as the master planner, and unique to all of the SUNY campuses, a roster of the most gifted and highly regarded architects were chosen to design a structure on the campus. The architects selected included Philip Johnson and John Burgee, Paul Rudolph, Venturi and Rauch, Gunnar Birkerts & Associates and Gwathmey, Henderson & Siegel. With buildings amid construction, Purchase opened in the fall of 1971 in portable classrooms and the original clapboard farm house on the 500-acre site.

Dates: Commission / Completion:Commission 1967 (c)/ Founded: September 1971 (e)/ Completion 1979 (a)
Architectural and other Designer(s): Master Planner: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1968 Great Court, Post Office & Library: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1973 Performing Arts Center: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1977 Visual Arts: Norman Fletcher, The Architects Collaborative, 1977 Roy R. Neuberger of Art: Philip Johnson and John Burgee, 1972 Humanities: Venturi and Rauch, 1973 Social Sciences: Venturi and Rauch, 1978 Natural Sciences: Paul Rudolph, 1976 Dance: Gunnar Birkerts, 1976 Music: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1978 Student Activities A & B: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1972 Residential Complex A: Gwathmey, Henderson & Siegel, 1973 Residential Complex B: Gwathmey, Henderson & Siegel, 1976 Health and Physical Education: Edward Larrabee Barnes, 1973 Service Buildings: Gwathmey, Henderson & Siegel, 1972 Theatre Arts: Never Realized Landscape Architect: Peter G. Rolland & Associates Electro-Mechanical Engineers: Segner & Dalton Acoustical Consultants: Bolt Beranek & Newman Transportation Consultants: Voorhees & Associates, Inc. Soils Consultants: Fred N. Zercher & Associates
Others associated with Building/Site: Governor: Nelson A. Rockefeller Chancellor: Enest L. Boyer President: Abbott Kaplan Acting General Manger SUCF: William A. Sharkey
Significant Alteration(s) with Date(s): Type of change: Dance Building Restoration Date: 2007 (c) Persons/organizations involved: Robert Siegel Architects Circumstances/reasons for change: The renovations to the Dance Building included the replacement of the entire skylight glass, roof drainage and perimeter waterproofing and interior renovations including new resilient flooring, lounge area seating, painting and ADA accessible doors on the main floor and from the Plaza. Type of change: Student Services Building (new) Date: 2006 (c) Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency:The State University Construction Fund, Design: Hom & Goldman Circumstances/reasons for change: The Student Services Building is part of a campus master plan prepared by Hom + Goldman. The design of the building was a key factor, as this single structure became the focal point of the entire campus. The glass and brick building has a two-story atrium with a one-stop-shop for student services and a multi-media conference center. The new facility houses the admissions office, exhibition space, executive administrators and the President of the University. The building was utilized to create a new centralized campus center, by developing a courtyard, which bridges over the existing roadway, and relates to the new library addition also designed by Hom + Goldman Architects. Type of change: Fort Awesome Residential Complex (new) Date: 2006 (c) Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency: DASNY (Domitory Authority of the State of New York), Design: Einhorn Yaffee Prescot Acrhitects & Engineers, Contractor:J. Kokolakis Contracting, Inc Circumstances/reasons for change: Fort Awesome is a 96,000 square feet, four story, brick building with an entry courtyard as well as a lower level retail. The construction of the dormitory will bring our total campus housing population to approximately 2600 beds, in an effort to meet current and projected campus goals. The constuction of Fort Awesome is the first step towards the development of a campus "Commons." The Commons is intended as the setting for new retail and public programs, attracting students, faculty and the surrounding community. Type of change: Mall/Plaza Deck Rehabilitation Date: 2007 - Present Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency: The State University Construction Fund, Design: San Fanandre Justin Architects, Contractor: MPCC, Project Manager: Sayim Malik Circumstances/reasons for change: The work includes removal and replacement of the existing waterproof membrane, deck drains and piping as well as original trees, landscaping and tile pavers. New pavers will differ from original, smaller tile and the site will receive new site furnishings, landscaping and lighting. Type of change: Library Restoration/Addition Date: 2008 (c) Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency: The State University Contruction Fund, Design / Kevin Hom + Andrew Goldman Architects P.C., Contractor: Summit Construction Services Group, Inc. Circumstances/reasons for change: Located in the center of the Campus plaza, the Library, one of the originally designed buildings by Edwards Larrabee Barnes, has received a $6.9 million rehabilitation. The project included a major reworking of the Library’s internal circulation, relocation of the building’s entrance, new accessible elevator and ramp, new Information Commons, new Reading and Reference Rooms, a high-density storage area, and three new Computer Labs. The interior finishes have been updated along with new furniture.In an attempt to revitalize the Library’s main entrance and presence on the Plaza, the entrance has been relocated to the opposite side of the building. This shift, opposite our new Student Services Building, has generated a new center of campus activity for academic and social interaction on the plaza. The new entrance structure utilized a glass curtain wall system to create a transparent, light filled entry space during the day, while allowing the light to radiate outwards onto the plaza in the evening. The new built-in Circulation Desk area helps welcome visitors to the Library while a new stainless steel and terrazzo staircase, grants access down to the main floor or up to the 2nd floor’s new Reading Room. Type of change: Visual Arts Exterior Envelope Date: May 2010 (c) Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency: State University Construction Fund, Design: Robert Siegel Architects Circumstances/reasons for change: This project will address the ongoing leaks and exterior envelope issues of the building and increase the building's energy efficiency. The scope of work includes replacement of all the existing exterior windows and doors, flat membrane roofs, and repairs to the sloped copper roofs. This includes the replacement of the existing glass monitors over the studios, faculty offices on the second floor, and modifying the existing Maass Gallery facade to open the gallery to the Plaza. New ‘Green Roofs’ are planned for a large portion of the bldg. and egress doors will be equipped with new automatic door openers. Due to the size and complexity of the project, the work will be done in multiple phases. Type of change: Visual Arts Program Study Date: May 2011 (e) Persons/organizations involved: Design: Peter Gisolfi Architects Circumstances/reasons for change: To execute a comprehensive program study of the School of Art & Design, located in the Visual Arts Building at Purchase College. The investigation will address the project scope and project budget, as well as assess overall feasibility of rehabilitating the structure for adaptive reuse in a manner consistent with all applicable codes, regulations, and accreditation standards. The investigation will address all aspects of the Building’s operations, management and use as a contemporary collegiate academic facility. The Program Study for the Visual Arts building will examine the current and future department programs space allocation and future growth needs. The Visual Arts building is an existing space designed in 1977 and in need of upgrades to the academic spaces as well as major mechanical systems. The program study will help guide renovations to meet current learning space needs and future program growth. Type of change: Humanities Restoration Date: July 2011 Persons/organizations involved: Lead Agency: State University Construction Fund, Design: Kliment Halsband Circumstances/reasons for change: The Humanities Building, located on the south side of the central plaza, houses all programs associated with the Humanities department, including Journalism, Cinema Studies, and the College Newspaper. The building, which pre-dates changes in environmental health and safety regulations, energy conservation and ADA requirements, has not had a significant renovation since it was built. Its spaces also have not been adapted to pedagogical developments that have taken place since 1973. The project will address renovation of building interiors, mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems. It also includes replacement of the existing windows. The renovation will include hazardous materials abatement and bring it into compliance with construction and accessibility codes. The building will also meet the requirements to achieve a LEED Silver rating. The Program Study for the Humanities Building Renovation at the SUNY Purchase was commissioned by the State University Construction Fund and SUNY Purchase College to develop a program for the renovated building. The purpose of the program study is to verify findings in the July 2008 Space Utilization Study conducted by Perkins Eastman and collect additional information to develop a final program for the renovated Humanities Building.
Current Use: Purchase College continues to operate as a four-year public college for the State University of New York system. The college remains dedicated to a mixture of arts and liberal arts programs and maintains a body of roughly 4,000 students.
Current Condition: The Purchase College campus is in relatively good condition with water infiltration and damage currently being addressed by capital projects. Completed in the 1970s, the fifteen original buildings remain with the exception of a Theater Arts building that was never realized. Five additional complexes have been erected on the site including the Student Services Building, "Fort Awesome" Residential Building, The Student Center/Children's Center, Alumni Village Residential Complex and the Commons Residential Complex. Of all the new structures, the new Student Services Building and the Library addition cause the greatest interference with the original campus design. The Student Services Building obstructs the south-facing pastoral view from the mall and construction of the new building required an entrance relocation of the Henry Moore sculpture "Large Two Forms". Although the recent restoration plans attempted to be considerate of the original design aesthetic and intent of specific structures, the need for additional space has compromised the overall design and circulation plan.
General Description:

Designed as a "city within the country", architect Edward Larrabee Barnes created the master plan for Purchase College in 1967. The campus plan included a collection of buildings clustered around a plaza, surrounded by fields and meadows. In addition to Barnes, seven major architects were brought in to design the individual buildings. “The Purchase campus is organized around a paved mall 300 by 900 feet and is oriented from east to west. The design uses covered arcades flanked by trees to define pedestrian access to academic buildings on the north and south side of the campus. The mall serves as a raised pedestal for those buildings which by their function are areas of common use” (Drexler 8). Primary access to the buildings and the mall is one level up on the east-west axis.

Shaped in a cruciform shape, the largest building on the campus is the Performing Arts Center located on the west-end of the campus. The unadorned minimal facade is composed of the gray-brown brick and includes four theaters ranging in size from a 1400-seat concert hall to a 200-300 seat black box theater. The structure is accessible from the parking lots on either side of the complex through a mall underpass. The underpass links the theaters to the academic campus as well as the underground mall access area. A grand two-story lobby provides a common area for all four theaters and circulation to the mall.

Immediately to the left of the Performing Arts Center is the Music Instructional Building. Designed by Barnes, the building includes individual practice and private instruction rooms, rehearsal and classrooms space along with a large lecture hall and a recital hall.

The Purchase College Dance Building was the first facility in the United States to be constructed solely for the study and performance of dance. Designed in 1970 by Gunnar Birkerts and Associates, it houses 14 studios and a 270-seat Dance Theater Lab. “A single two-story academic level relates the large studios and smaller supporting spaces. The studio-corridor wall is opaque on the lower portion and above is sloped glass. Inside the studios the wall slope expands the space while admitting daylight reflected from the slope above the offices. The building was pulled away from the arcade to create a green area and natural light for the administrative offices, and also to expose the building to pedestrians” (Drexler 34). The design for the Dance Building was based on a successful collaboration with the Dean and Purchase faculty based upon their experience and consultations with other academic and professional institutions devoted to the teaching of dance (Marlin 154). The garden wall has a sloped top toward the inside.

“The Natural Science Building is designed to have semi-private and fixed elements facing south on the common court. The laboratories are grouped around a central riser system and placed toward the north for future expansion. Support activities, such as offices and tutorial labs, are placed at the perimeter” (Drexler 33). The building includes a central lecture hall and planetarium room. The exterior design features a juxtaposed curvilinear amphitheater and an undulating rectilinear roof line.

“The Venturi and Rauch designed Social Science Building occupies the full width of the site at the arcade to preserve the design concept of the campus plan. The south elevation is dominated by a large two-story window that brings light from above the arcade down into the first floor lobby. The east facade, together with that of the Humanities Building, forms the facade of the campus core and is developed as a single plane with small openings in a regular rhythm to enhance its scale. The west facade expresses the programmatic complexity of specified classrooms and generalized laboratory spaces, and achieves a smaller scale appropriate to the function as entrance and outdoor sitting space. Internally on the east side of the building is organized into offices, seminar rooms and reading rooms and into classrooms and labs on the west side” (Drexler 30).

The second structure designed by Venturi and Rauch with assistance of Gerod Clark, Arthur Jones, Denise Scott Brown and David Vaughan is the Humanities Building. Organized in three zones the east zone contains small scale spaces; the west zone contains medium sized spaces; and the interior zone contains large scale spaces, which do not require windows and have the highest degree of acoustical sensitivity. A large open-air arena is reminiscent of Alvar Aalto’s own studio in Munkkiniemi Finland (von Moos 166).

Designed by the team of Philip Johnson and John Burgee, the Neuberger Museum of Art was founded when Roy Neuberger donated his famous American Art collection in the fall of 1968. The Neuberger Museum of Art was the first building completed on the campus and initially provided classroom and studio space as well as functioning as a museum. In 1974 Philip Johnson suggested the design was intended to resemble a crankshaft and included identical 60-foot wide blocks that have shifted on a vertical access revealing similar exterior and interior spaces.

The Visual Arts Building is symbolized by an envelope of light which allows large interchange able studios and shops to receive maximum north light. The building varies in height and is set back on the east and west elevations to lend interest to the pedestrian walk and to respond to the human scale. The main open space court abutting the arcade acts as a social and cultural focus and features a two-story exhibition space above. The roof terrace over the shops responds t the landscaped cemetery space and the experimental studio and sculpture studio have their own work-study court connecting to research beyond the building (Drexler 25).

On the center of the mall is the Barnes designed Library Building and campus Post Office. The Library recently received a $6.1 million renovation and included a major reworking of the Library’s internal circulation, new Information Commons, new Reading and Reference Rooms, a high-density storage area, and three new Computer Labs. Entrance to the building was relocated from the west to the east end of the building (facing the new Student Services Building) and by way of a glass and primary colored facade, features a new accessible elevator and ramp.

The two Student Activities buildings located at the terminus of both east and west-side arcades are relatively minor structures that provide a transition from the academic court to the residential living space. The structures include indoor and outdoor dining space as well as offices and student union space.

The Residential Complex designed by Gwathmey, Henderson & Siegel represents a “U-shaped building complex encloses major outdoor open space providing transition from meadow to campus plan. The open-ended space to the south is in response to the location of future residential areas. The dormitory organizes student living accommodations initially into eight groups with entrance points at the corners of the main structure or along it as defined by its intersection with academic facilities (Drexler 41). The encircled dining hall is organized vertically and horizontally and modulated volumetrically (Arnell and Bickford 48-49).

The Health and Physical Education Building is located on the east side of the campus, on axis with the mall and the Performing Arts Center. Set back from both residential complexes the building has a glass-covered central hall and front them with rows of trees. The arcades are like the thread which makes it possible to string beads into a necklace” (Drexler 9-11).

"Insofar as any architectural concept is an assertion of a particular order and purpose, it will have the limitations peculiar to its own nature. the most obvious limitation of this concept is the linear configuration automatically imposed on each building abutting the arcades, regardless of the particular academic discipline it is meant to house. Since the building sites are sufficiently wide, in practice the limitation has only a minor effect on internal circulation: of the ten buildings concerned, only four have corridors longer than might have been the case with a different site configuration. Two of the buildings are set back from the arcade, and three, where they abut it, do not occupy the full width of the site, so that there is no loss of variety in this respect. Similarly, there were no planning restrictions on floor heights, distribution of building masses, or the design of entrances. On the other hand, all buildings use the same gray-brown brick, gray glass, and gray metal trim. And with one exception (Natural Science) all of them have hard-edges crisp contours in keeping with Barnes' theater and library groups dominating the mall.

Overriding these inherent and self-imposed limitations is a cardinal advantage: the arcades and the narrow sites reassert the primacy of the street, which is the distinctive experience made possible by a community of buildings. The arcades are an indispensable part of the composition: it is not enough simply to line up the buildings on either side of the mall and front them with rows of trees. The arcades are like the thread which makes it possible to string beads into a necklace (Drexler 9-11)."

Construction Period:

1971-1979

Original Physical Context:

The Purchase College campus was designed in the rural north-west section of Westchester County on the Connecticut boarder. Located on a former dairy farm, the Purchase College campus sits on a 500-plus acre estate settled in 1734 by Judge Thomas Thomas. The original farm site, built in the 1920s and occupied by the Chisholm family as a working farm until 1967, remains as an Administration complex on the campus.

Evaluation
Technical Evaluation:

The overwhelming unifying source of Purchase College was the use of the red-brown brick for the entire campus. The brick along with an anodized bronze aluminum glazing system give the campus the feel of a single design intention. Similar to many modern structures, the repetition of a common material such as the brick along with the use of prefabricated products, facilitate an efficient and cost effective solution to design.

Social:

Conceived shortly after the phrase ‘urban design’ was coined at Harvard in the late 1950s, the design for Purchase College speaks not only to the most cutting-edge concepts in campus design but to the theoretical struggle that faced the architecture, planning and design fields of the time. Barnes’ design was based on a rational and orderly composition that placed importance on social interaction, open space and the idea of a dense, urban village. Centering all structures at the core of the 500-acre campus allowed for open space and the rural qualities of the site to be preserved. This also allowed for a walkable campus, one in which prominence was given to pedestrians and cars were limited to the periphery of the site.

Cultural & Aesthetic:
The design of Purchase College is a excellent example of 1970s urban design and campus planning concepts. The complex is often described within the Brutalist architectural style for its rough and block-like appearance. The use of brick as the dominant material was described at the time as "masterly" and functions as a unifying element across the individually designed structures. The 1983 issue of Abitare highlights the design accomplishments at Purchase College and state, "the spacious halls [of the Performing Arts Center] inside allow the designer to create vast surfaces without break, and to lend significance to the architecture solely by means of the interplay of elementary volumes, in a quest for characteristic forms of the expression of the minimal."
Historical:

The development of a State University for the Arts in New York State was quite notable for its time and was eagerly awaited by the press and students alike. Described in publications across the world, Purchase College was an anomaly of cutting-edge design created by great architects, not only for the public good, but in celebration of artistic achievement. Purchase was unique in that it was a complete design of a college campus and not a piecemeal approach to growth and additions. In 1971 the Museum of Modern Art featured an exhibition of the campus design entitled, Architecture for the Arts” the State University of New York College at Purchase. Throughout its forty-year existence, the campus design as well as its origins have been widely discussed and debated. Recently, the campus was featured in the Academy Award winning film Black Swan and as the backdrop of a Vogue China photo-shoot. In a 1997 Neuberger Museum of Art exhibition catalog entitled, Urban Suburban: The Architecture of Purchase College, curator Paul Goldberger states, “the architecture of Purchase stands as evidence that society places the arts at its center, not at its periphery. A government does not build a campus such as this one for an activity it considers trite.”

General Assessment:
Created by the most talented American architects and championed by Nelson Rockefeller, the country’s most generous Governor, Purchase College set the bar high for the importance of public architecture and the world of the arts. Master planner Edward Larrabee Barnes’ design based on Thomas Jefferson’s historic University of Virginia campus, is notable not for its individual buildings but for its overall campus plan. Built during the apex of modern architecture, Purchase College signifies the arc of campus planning in the United States during a time in which funding for education and public services were at its highest. Although relatively intact, Purchase College has recently experienced a number of major renovations and additions. The most significant alteration has been the addition of the Student Services Building on the eastern end of the mall. The addition, which closed off the view from the mall of the surrounding landscape and the relocation of the beloved Henry Moore sculpture, is similar in its destruction and criticism to the Stanford White Library on the mall at the University of Virginia. The State University Construction Fund and the campus facilities offices have done a relatively good job in their stewardship of the campus and the restoration of its parts. A heritage site plan is currently in place to oversee the renovation of the original farm buildings but an overall plan that takes in the significance of the 1970s campus plan should be put into place. Purchase College, its designers, its champions and its ideology speak to the development of public architecture in the twentieth century as well as the unique rise and development of the State University of New York system. As Paul Goldberger continues in his 1997 exhibition statement, “it remains an achievement unequaled in American public architecture since - a collection of buildings of the highest intent, designed to create a place in which the teaching of the arts would be nurtured and honored. Architecture has rarely been given so laudable a mission, so clearly a place in which to prove that it can matter. At Purchase College a government expressed faith in architecture, and in the context of the attitudes of the 1990s, that attitude alone defines this project as historic, and makes it impossible to view it as anything less heroic.”
Documentation
Text references:

Drexler, Arthur. Architecture for the Arts: The State University of New York College at Purchase. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1971.

Bleeker, Samuel E.. The Politics of Architecture: A perspective on Nelson Rockefeller. New York: The Rutledge Press and Nelson Rockefeller Collection, 1981.

von Moos, Stanislaus. Venturi, Rauch & Scott Brown: Buildings and Projects. New York: Rizzoli, 1987.

Marlin, William, ed. GA Architect 2: Gunnar Birkerts and Associates. Japan: A.D.A. EDITA Tokyo Co., Ltd., 1982.

Arnell, Peter and Ted Bickford ed. Charles Gwathmetey and Robert Siegel: Buildings and Projects 1964-1984. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1984.

Building with Brick: New York State University. Abitare. April. Volume 213, p.80-87, (1983).

Authoring
Recorder/Date: Liz Waytkus / 2011
Additional Images
Purchase College, SUNY
Purchase College Drawing, Source: Architecture for the Arts, Museum of Modern Art, date: 1971
Purchase College, SUNY
Purchase College Drawing II, Source: Architecture for the Arts, Museum of Modern Art, date: 1971
Purchase College, SUNY
Campus Map, Source: http://bulletinboardprogram.org/RESEARCH.html

Orange County Government Center

Added by Michelle Ann Taylor, last update: June 21, 2012, 1:03 pm

Orange County Government Center
Orange County Government Center, source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Orange_County_Government_Center.jpg, date: 04-16-2006
Location
255-275 Main Street
Goshen, NY 10294
United States
41° 24' 20.6676" N, 74° 19' 4.026" W
Identity of Building / Site
Primary classification: Administration (ADM)
Secondary classification:
Federal, State, or Local Designation(s) and Date(s):

None as of February 2011.
It has been nominated for National Trust for Historic Preservation's "America's 11 Most Endangered Historic Places" for 2011.

History of Building/Site
Original Brief:

The Orange County Government Center was originally designed as three interconnecting buildings each with its own purpose. The buildings surround an open courtyard that allows light into the interior spaces and also acts as the main entrance to all three buildings. The largest building, located at the north-east portion of the complex,was designed as the adult and supreme court for the County. West of this building, running parallel to Main Street was the juvenile court. The legislative branch of the County Government was housed in the southern most building.

Dates: Commission / Completion:Commissioned: 1963(c) Completed: 1971(e)
Architectural and other Designer(s): Architect: Paul Rudolph Project Architects: William Bedford and James Brown Structural Engineers: Lev Zetlin Associates, Inc. Foundation or Soils Engineers: Orange County Highway Department Mechanical and Electrical Engineers: Caretsky and Associates Acoustical Consultants: Cambridge Acoustical Consultants General Contractor: Corbeau-Newman Construction Corporation
Others associated with Building/Site: Project commissioned by the Orange County Board of (New York)
Significant Alteration(s) with Date(s): In 1997 (c) the main judicial building which housed the adult courts and local supreme court was declared "unfit" for occupation and replaced by an addition to the North of the original structure. The original judicial building was not demolished.
Current Use: The buildings house all three branches of the County Government, the Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, and Judicial Branch. The local Department of Motor Vehicles also occupies the space.
Current Condition: Orange County government officials have cited multiple leaks and mold throughout the structure. In the summer of 2010, County Executive Edward Diana proposed complete demolition of the building to be replaced by a $114 million government center on the same site. Mr. Diana's proposal was not supported by the County for lack of funding but as of January 2011 Orange County has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP). The County is currently requesting proposals for the most cost-effective way to provide facilities for the County government whether through renovation OR demolition of the existing structure. One of the primary concerns stated by the Mr. Diana is the need for more offices and space for the various government departments which are currently located throughout the County. Mr. Diana and others argue that the current structure is too small and expensive to fit the County's current needs. In September 2011, the government center was closed due to damage sustained by Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee. The Orange County Legislature votes on building a new government center on May 3, 2012.
General Description:

The Orange County Government Center is often considered "a concrete Brutalist classic" (Foster) comprised of three interconnecting concrete buildings with similar massing and forms. Each building is three stories tall consisting of a series of concrete boxes, or blocks, stacked upon one another and cantilevered out by concrete beams, each extruding mass is further defined by its fenestration. The individual boxes vary in size but are uniform in their style and use of floor to ceiling single panes of glass. Portions of the structure appear organic: some blocks are smallest on the first floor and grow with each succeeding story so that it appears that the building is growing like a tree from the ground. Other facades have a heavier orientation caused by blocks and stories that appear to merge and lose form.

The volumes or the building result from Rudolph's interpretation of Mies Van Der Rohe’s concept of "implied space” (Schmertz, 83). Highly articulated plans published at the time of construction reveal Rudolph's clear, almost mathematical, approach to space, light and structure. Both exterior and interior forms and materials are designed to play with natural light and shadows; high ceilings and large windows take advantage of the large open space surrounding the structure. Interior spaces are further complimented by the open and deliberate courtyard in the center of the structure.

The Government Center has a total square footage of 250,000sq.ft (not including exterior spaces), more than 80 roofs, and 300 inoperable windows.

Construction Period:

Completed 1973 (c)

Original Physical Context:

The town of Goshen is comprised mostly of low-rise structures from the 18th and 19th Centuries. The Orange County Government Center is located along Main Street on a 24 acre parcel. The building is surrounded by an ample parking lot which is further enclosed by an expansive and rolling lawn. The large open space surrounding the building contribute to Rudolph's intended use of light on and in the building.

Evaluation
Technical Evaluation:

The Government Center has a concrete frame and exterior complimented by large windows of single pane glass. Rudolph utilized a rough textured concrete technique similar to that which he first used on Yale University's Art & Architecture building.

The project's structural engineer, Lev Zetlin, created a structure comprised of parallel beams five feet wide and two feet deep that are placed 18 feet apart and span 40 to 50 feet.

The building was carefully designed to hide the mechanical functions of the building; the air condition ducts and lighting connections were incorporated into the structure of the building and removed from public view.

Social:

In the 1960's the Orange County Government Center represented not just a county but a new approach to governing that county. The Orange County Government was historically run by individual town supervisors but in the 1960's the County aimed to create a more cohesive and unified type of Government and implemented the position of County Executive. The Orange County Government Center was commissioned as a physical representation of the County's new approach to government and community.

Paul Rudolph was considered an innovative and idealist architect in the 1960's and the Orange County Board of Supervisors enlisted his services to represent the forward-thinking approach that they embraced. Rudolph was commissioned to create a new, and avant-garde image for the town of Goshen.

Cultural & Aesthetic:
Rudolph credited Ludwig Mies van der Rohe as his inspiration and creative source for the Orange County Government Center, although reviewers, critics and historians often credit Le Corbusier as a point of reference in the development of the Brutalist style. The Government Center is a Brutalist building that defied the glass box aesthetics of corporate modernism current at the time. The building is notable not only for its unique massing and use of textured concrete but also for its deliberate employment of natural light. Light plays on the rough texture of the building, the strong extruding volumes of the block forms, the open courtyards and the interior space through the use of large single pane windows.
Historical:

From its point of completion in 1971, Rudolph's Orange County Government Center has elicited strong opinions from architects, historians, journalists and County residents. Anecdotal evidence from local newspapers repeatedly admonish the building, often referring to it as "the ugliest building in town," (Bernstein). The current County Executive, Mr. Diana, shares these sentiments and has repeatedly announced since his election in 2002 that if he conducted a county survey "the building would be demolished tomorrow," (Bernstein). Other local residents disagree and are actively fighting for the building's preservation, such as the local chapter of the League of Women Voters. These efforts are also supplemented by more prominent groups such as the Preservation League of New York State, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the Paul Rudolph Foundation.

In academic circles the building is often cited as an exemplary structure of Brutalist style. Richard Hull, a local historian of Warwick and a professor of history and civilization at New York University, considers the building unappreciated and a victim of neglect (Johnson). And Columbia University's Director of of the Historic Preservation Program, Andrew Dolkart, considers the building's use of space and light to be "beautiful" and admired Rudolph's design because he "broke away from the doctrinaire modernism of the glass towers," (McKenna).

Although there were complaints from the beginning regarding leaky roofs, from a utilitarian perspective the Orange County Government Center sucessfully served the needs of its constituents for many years. In the late 1990's however the Supreme Court building was considered unfit and was closed permanently. And in more recent years the now well-established County government is seeking a larger space to accommodate a more consolidated administration.

General Assessment:
In the 1960's, when the Orange County Government Center was first commissioned, Rudolph was considered one of America's most prominent working architects. The Orange County Government Center is one of Rudolph's few civic buildings and a great example of his sculptural, multi-leveled Brutalist buildings of the 1960's that played with volume, texture and the play of light. A June 1966 article in Architectural Record reviewed six of Rudolph's projects and stated "Paul Rudolph considers this building [the Orange County Government Center] his most important current project in terms of the development of ideas," (Architectural Record.) The Government Center also provided an administrative, judicial and legislative center both geographically and physically for the reorganized Orange County.
Documentation
Text references:

www.orangecountygov.com
Bernstein, Fred A., "The End of 1960's Architecture," The New York Times, October 31, 2004.
Chergotis, Pamela, "Center Renovation is Still an Option," The Chronicle, January 13, 2011.
Foster, Margaret,"NY County Debates Future of Paul Rudolph's Government Center," Preservation Magazine, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Jan 21, 2011.
Johnson, Edie, "Will It Be Demolition or Makeover for County Government Center?" The Photo News, New York, January 6, 2011.
Jordan, John, "Orange County Executive Presses Forward on New Government Center," Construction News Online, October 1, 2010.
McKenna, Chris, "Architects Legacy in Goshen's Orange County Government Center Has Its Defenders," Herald-Record, October 10, 2010.
"Paul Rudolph's Elaborated Spaces: Six New Projects," Architectural Record,USA, Vol. 139, June 1966, p135-150.
Schmertz, Mildred F., "A County Government Center by Paul Rudolph," Architectural Record, Vol. 150, August 1973, p83-92.
Sveivan, Megan, "AD Classics:Orange County Government Center/Paul Rudolph," ArchDaily, November 8, 2010.

Authoring
Recorder/Date:
Audio and Video Web References

Depicted item: Interview of residents outside the building in 2010 discussing if they like the building or not. , source: HVMediaGroup via Youtube

Yale University Art and Architecture Building

Added by Lindsey Schweinberg, last update: August 17, 2012, 12:48 pm

Yale University Art and Architecture Building
Location
180 York Street
New Haven, CT 06511
United States
41° 18' 30.564" N, 72° 55' 53.4864" W
Identity of Building / Site
Primary classification: Education (EDC)
Secondary classification:
Federal, State, or Local Designation(s) and Date(s):
History of Building/Site
Original Brief:

Commission brief: Part of the architectural patronage of Yale University, headed by A. Whitney Griswold, president of Yale from 1951 - 1963.  Whitney made Yale a premiere architectural patron of the modern architecture movement, commissioning now-iconic  buildings which include the Art Gallery by Louis Kahn, Morse and Stiles Colleges and Ingalls Rink by Eero Saarinen, the Beinecke Library by Gordon Bunshaft, the Kline science buildings and the epidemiology and public health building by Philip Johnson, and Rudolph's Greeley Forestry Laboratory and Married Student Housing.
Design brief: Walls are a rough textured concrete inside and out.  There are 37 changes in level over 7 stories.
Building/construction: To form the rough walls, concrete was poured into corrugated forms and the rigid surfaces were broken with a hammer to expose the aggregate to weathering elements;  “…Reflective micas, seashells, stones, and even branches of coral” comprised the aggregate.”

Dates: Commission / Completion:commission or competition date: June 1960, start of site work: December 1961, completion/inauguration: November 9, 1963
Architectural and other Designer(s): Architect(s): Paul Rudolph
Others associated with Building/Site: Original owner(s)/patron(s): Trustees of Yale University; A. Whitney Griswold Name(s): Beyond the assertion that this is Rudolph’s masterpiece, the building is often associated with the Deans of the YSoA, each offering a different perspective on the controversial structure.  For example, Charles Moore (Rudolph’s successor) felt no reverence towards the A+A and actively altered it toward his own architectural beliefs; Robert Stern has embraced the building as a “Bilbao of its time” (renowned and controversial) and supports its full restoration.
Significant Alteration(s) with Date(s): Type of change: renovation: Before June 14, 1969, students in the building partitioned and cordoned off interior to suit their needs.  After the June 14th fire gutted three floors of the building, the school rebuilt the interior with an eye towards fixing the functional problems of the interior, altering programmatic occupancy and original fixtures. Many contemporary critics consider -- and lament -- this renovation as an extreme departure from the original intent of the architect which is only now being “corrected” by an current renovation and will ultimately “resume its original form.”   Along the way, the interior was covered in sheetrock.  In 1971, exterior metal window shades were installed (later removing during the 2000 renovation led by SOM).  The building's elevators and electrical systems were overhauled in 1996.  Under the current renovation scheme, the building is expanding to the north to include a new library and digital media center, replacing a men’s clothing store and a tenement. Date(s): Jun 14th, 1969 Circumstances/reasons for change:Fire; Student/administrator outcry over poor functionality. Effects of changes: The interior spaces were severely altered from Rudolph’s original design and thus the building has not functioned as intended since the 1960s. Persons/organizations involved: Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (former restoration architects); Polshek & Partners of New York (current restoration architects); Robert  A.M. Stern, current dean of the YSoA (1998 - ).
Current Use: Of whole building/site: Occupied by the Yale School of Architecture.  Houses faculty offices, class rooms and design spaces. Comments:  The occupancy patterns were significantly altered by both students and administration before and after the fire of June 14th, 1969.
Current Condition: Of whole building/site: After almost 50 years of changes and neglect, the A&A is undergoing a complete restoration, a part of Yale’s $250 million pledge for construction/renovation of arts departments. Of principal components: Although I have not been able to visit yet, the building is being completely restored so I would image that there is a lot of activity on and around the site.
General Description:

Situated on the corner of two important streets in New Haven, the A+A anchors its site with its monumental slabs of corrugated concrete.  The building is seven floors with 37 changes in level.  There are two large open spaces, one serving as a gallery and meeting room on the main floor, the other housing the architecture studios on the fourth and fifth floors. Rudolph arranged the rooms around these open spaces in a pinwheel-like pattern. To give the walls a distinctive texture, Rudolph invented a new technique: workers poured concrete into ribbed forms, and then with hammers smashed the ribs to reveal the complex aggregate.

Construction Period:
Original Physical Context:

Name(s) of surrounding area/building(s): Yale University; Chapel Street is a Shopping/Dining/Residential street, York Street is lined primarily with Yale buildings from Chapel Street to Lock Street.
Visual relations: The A&A is on a corner lot, which was a main concern of  Rudolph.  It also lies across York Street from Louis Kahn’s Yale Art Gallery which is “flat and glassy,” to use Huxtable’s words.   The building also references the collegiate gothic of Yale through its heavy stone massing and towers, which might act as abstract spires.

Evaluation
Technical Evaluation:

To give the walls a distinctive texture, Rudolph invented a new technique: workers poured concrete into ribbed forms and then smashed the ribs to reveal the complex aggregate.  The multiple changes in level are also a rather innovative approach to organizing interior space, not relying on monolithic floor slabs but embracing a dynamic internal plan.

Social:

The A&A was designed to hold a combined art and architecture curriculum, including graphic design and city planning.  Previously, all of these were housed separately in the Yale Art Gallery, Weir Hall and Street Hall on Chapel Street.  "It is the hope that the placing of these disciplines under one roof will help restore them to a sense of unity," explained Architectural Record magazine. But shortly after the building opened, artists complained that their studios were wholly inadequate, being too small and providing a glaring southern light instead of a glowing northern.  This student unrest has proven to be the mythic arsonist of the A+A fire.  As the Times put it in Rudolph’s obituary, the students rejected the A+A as “a symbol of the University's antipathy toward creative life.”  As Branch writes, “the fire came on the heels of the closing of the city planning department, a division of the School of Art & Architecture that had become increasingly politicized. Says Johannes Knoops, who has interviewed numerous people about the fire, “I don't know who did it, but I certainly believe it was in response to the closing of the city planning department.’
Therefore, the A+A is a site of considerable social unrest of the 1960s, besides being a polemic about architecture.  Here architecture was perceived as a symbol of the institutionalized status quo of Yale, and thusly suffered because of this controversial symbolism.

Cultural & Aesthetic:
Paul Goldberger calls the A+A a “dynamic sculptural building,” a “disciplined formal statement, free of the wild eccentricities of many sculpturally active buildings yet in the view of many critics possessing a drama that seemed, to many, to be almost a summary statement of modern architecture.”   So while this heavy concrete building seems to belie the lessons of “glassy” modernism, it actually achieves a fruitful dialogue with early modernism by embracing a certain monumental aesthetic.  Although to many, it belied the functionalism of modernism, favoring a monumental statement over a truly functional university building. Canonical status: The A&A is one of the most controversial and important buildings built after World War II.  Right before its inauguration, Ada Louise Huxtable of the Times called the A&A’s rough concrete walls “3-D,” in stark contrast to the “flat, glassy surfaces of the current American architectural look [modernism].”   This was recognition of the way in which Rudolph’s design was a departure from what had been the status quo of campus architecture up to this point. At the inauguration Huxtable reported, “For six months, the word has gone around that this is the architect’s architecture at the highest level.  Even on a campus rich in big-name architectural experiments, it stands out.  It has set some kind of a record for being visited, photographed and discussed by the profession during construction. In a field torn by polemics, architects at opposite esthetic poles are united in praise” and predicted that the building “will set trends nationally and internationally. It will surely be one of the most influential buildings of this decade.”   Major architecture magazines in the U.S. and abroad featured the building prominently, and the American Institute of Architects gave it a First Honor Award.  Thus the A+A was hailed as a groundbreaking work, a departure from the international “glassy modernism” towards a new “brutal” modernism.
Historical:
General Assessment:
Although the form of the building seems rather unique, Rudolph seems to be drawings on a number of architectural sources.  As branch writes in his Yale Alumni piece on the A&A, “the earliest versions of the building were rational and regular, in keeping with Rudolph's functionalist training at Harvard. But as the design progressed, other influences began to come to the fore the heavy concrete "brutalism" of Le Corbusier, the Swiss-born modernist who had abandoned the International Style for a more expressionistic approach; and the spatial complexity of the work of Frank Lloyd Wright.”   Indeed, there is an obvious connection to Corbu’s beton brut; Rudolph’s concrete is certainly rough, enough to rip clothing fabric at times.  But there is also the connection to Wright and the flowing internal spaces of this buildings, especially the Larkin Building in Buffalo. Paul Goldberger believes that the A&A was “Rudolph’s attempt to add his own heroic statement to those of the modern masters who had come before him.”
Documentation
Text references:

The Paul Rudolph archive is housed at the U.S. National Archives

Authoring
Recorder/Date: name of reporter: Daniel B.F. Fox  e-mail:dbf2112@columbia.edu
DOCOMOMO US
P.O. Box 230977
New York, NY 10023
Terms of use | Contact | Privacy Policy | Credits
© 2014 DOCOMOMO US Syndicate content Google+