definitely Paul Rudolph. Kicked off a whole generation of imitation projects integrating transportation with Brutalist modernism.. inspired many a parking garage.. in turn probably inspired by megaformish/archigramish mentalities in the early-to-mid 1960s.
In short, it screams "urban renewal". Boston City Hall, Albany's state capital complex, etc etc ;-)
oh man i did a parking garage like that for studio back in the day when i was a bleeding heart libby hippie. thank GOD my professors straightened me out (or did they ?) :(
if you're interested in more contemporary versions of the same thing (Rudolph was very mid-century and that one project dates from the early-mid 1960s, if I recollect correctly) check out some of the dutchies like NL Architects and Monolab, or even OMA and UNStudio on a good day. Zaha also went in this direction once or twice.. also Morphosis with their Hudson Yards proposal.
The underlying problem I have with this approach is the lack of programmatic flexibilty it implies. Instead of morphing infrastructure into generically useful forms that could solve an array of problems, they assume that there is a single right answer - say, office buildings above roads - to use as a basis for what basically comes down to a frightfully expensive exercise in stacking programs (or programmatic recombination, if you want to get fancy about it). In that sense, it becomes, to my eye, self-indulgent.
If you want to do this, go back to archigram and try to build your whole city - or at least a varied porton of it - on top of the highway AND give that neighborhood the flexibility it needs to grow and evolve as a living urban form.
in hk, this is a protype, we build residentials above highways, train stations, subway... in fact, the biggest poverty developer is the subway company!
there are also much older precedents than the megastructures stuff from the 60s... some of corbusier's projects from the 30s, particularly algiers... and some even older stuff... the key reference is reyner banham's "megastructure: urban futures of the recent past", which i believe even has this image on the cover...
Meh, the disco tracks are awesome. Not a fan of the "easy listening."
Two major problems with these schemes (well, three) are these:
What happens when you have to service or rehab these buildings. Do you have to shut down the highway and trains? What kind of logistical nightmare would that create?
In the rare event that it does occur, what is the min and max estimations of casualties? How long would it take to repair? How would you divert traffic?
What's not addressed is space for turning radii of vehicles traveling at 40 mph on off/onramps. But I'm no Civil engineer, and I think that is rather paranthetical to Rudolph's purpose, as retro as it may be.
Anyone recognize this image?
It looks kind of Glen Small(ish) but i am pretty sure it isn't after checking his website. Perhaps it was even created for this record.
Just curious...
Very megastructure(y)
Via Pitchfork Media
Pretty sure it's Paul Rudolph's Study of Lower Manhattan Expressway ... see: http://pichaus.com/illustration-modern-paulrudolph-usa-@1b7ebf77769da843d8fbb811b48d1d00/
definitely Paul Rudolph. Kicked off a whole generation of imitation projects integrating transportation with Brutalist modernism.. inspired many a parking garage.. in turn probably inspired by megaformish/archigramish mentalities in the early-to-mid 1960s.
In short, it screams "urban renewal". Boston City Hall, Albany's state capital complex, etc etc ;-)
oh man i did a parking garage like that for studio back in the day when i was a bleeding heart libby hippie. thank GOD my professors straightened me out (or did they ?) :(
thanks all
namhenderson,
if you're interested in more contemporary versions of the same thing (Rudolph was very mid-century and that one project dates from the early-mid 1960s, if I recollect correctly) check out some of the dutchies like NL Architects and Monolab, or even OMA and UNStudio on a good day. Zaha also went in this direction once or twice.. also Morphosis with their Hudson Yards proposal.
The underlying problem I have with this approach is the lack of programmatic flexibilty it implies. Instead of morphing infrastructure into generically useful forms that could solve an array of problems, they assume that there is a single right answer - say, office buildings above roads - to use as a basis for what basically comes down to a frightfully expensive exercise in stacking programs (or programmatic recombination, if you want to get fancy about it). In that sense, it becomes, to my eye, self-indulgent.
If you want to do this, go back to archigram and try to build your whole city - or at least a varied porton of it - on top of the highway AND give that neighborhood the flexibility it needs to grow and evolve as a living urban form.
in hk, this is a protype, we build residentials above highways, train stations, subway... in fact, the biggest poverty developer is the subway company!
is the album any good?
there are also much older precedents than the megastructures stuff from the 60s... some of corbusier's projects from the 30s, particularly algiers... and some even older stuff... the key reference is reyner banham's "megastructure: urban futures of the recent past", which i believe even has this image on the cover...
all the paul rudolph you could wish for in this flickr stream (including this image):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73172555@N00/1430119145/in/set-72157624214425598/
kelvin's stream is a goldmine.
mdler... I need another listen before I render a verdict. You can listen to it here and decide for yourself.
Meh, the disco tracks are awesome. Not a fan of the "easy listening."
Two major problems with these schemes (well, three) are these:
What happens when you have to service or rehab these buildings. Do you have to shut down the highway and trains? What kind of logistical nightmare would that create?
In the rare event that it does occur, what is the min and max estimations of casualties? How long would it take to repair? How would you divert traffic?
Also, where does all the exhaust end up?
UG, think they answered most [some] of that here.
What's not addressed is space for turning radii of vehicles traveling at 40 mph on off/onramps. But I'm no Civil engineer, and I think that is rather paranthetical to Rudolph's purpose, as retro as it may be.
Also, didn't Steve Holl propose apartment buildings on top of the highline way before the highline was the Highline?
link
Btw, we gotta get a better link system. I'm sick of ctrl c ctrl v 'ing everything in sight. Can't Archinect just do some html scripting to solve that?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.