s p r a w l i s t h e c i t ya corporate campus for the post-urban future

Since the height of the American postwar era, the corporation has maintained a special relationship with the suburb by way of the expansive, semi-autonomous corporate campus. But even ��������������� ����������������������������������������the ubiquitous sprawl of the last half century, it has been and ���������������������� ���������������������������������of exurban incongruity. As cities cope with spatial and programmatic incongruities of their own, the corporate campus offers a valuable, if unlikely, precedent for re-imagining the post-urban city, especially in cases where an existing, dense urban core does not exist or is untenable. And in return, the asymmetric economics and geographies of the urban condition offer an opportunity to re-imagine corporate architecture.

post-urban - (adj) 1. a period in which the image of the city as a contiguous spatial and cultural construct is made subordinate to the scale and asymmetries of the metropolis. 2. a period in which the programs and typologies of the urban and exurban merge, creating a form of juxtaposed urbanism characterized by programmatic and spatial incongruity.

corporate campus - (n) 1. grounds, maintained by a corporation, which resemble a campus. 2. a building or group of buildings including a landscape component which maintains a programmatic and spatial distinction from its surroundings. 3. grounds formed into a self-referencing association, intended to convey a corporate ideal or image.

Digital collage of Paris and one of its suburbs, approximately 14km from the

central city.

Digital collage of Boston and one of Orlando’s six waterparks.

Composite map of Boston metro population density and buildings with 0 residential population;

this is one example of urban incongruity.

South Boston seaport and surrounds; consider the programmatic, spatial, and economic asymmetry in

the contemporary urban condition.

Variable population density; note the areas of 0 residential population at the

city core (Census data, 2010).

Buildings which report 0 residential population; note the concentration at

the city core (Census data, 2010).

The qualities and limitations of the corporate campus make it a vehicle for critically evaluating the post-urban city.

The post-urban condition is shaped by juxtapositions of scale, public/private space, land-use, and program (zoning);

drawing from both urban and suburban typologies.

Digital collage of Assembly Square Mall, Somerville, MA and the Cigna corporate campus (with landscape).

Digital collage of South Boston seaport and Ikea, Charlotte, NC (with parking).

Paris

Suburb

Perform comparative analysis (via collage/diagrams) to explore site density, program, occupancy, etc. of various precedents; compare density and program of suburban models to a potential site in the urban core.

Conduct literature review to establish a vocabulary of inquiry, to ���������������������������������������������������������the campus as hybrid of cosmopolitan and exurban culture/form.

Compile an index of relevant precedents from c. 9th century CE to thirty-year master plans out to 2030 CE; a broad survey of the typology of corporate architecture is essential to understanding its spatial relationships encompassing landscape, urban, and suburban form.

Explore the contemporary variety of program within the corporate campus using interviews, video recording, and diagrams.

��������������������������������������������������(graphically and through writing) related to the thesis development; this website will also be used to coordinate criticism and comments with the thesis panel throughout the thesis development.

The corporate campus is in a unique position to exploit the spatial and programmatic incongruities of the post-urban condition due to its scale and heritage of self-referencing organization.

The corporate campus is a hybrid of cosmopolitan culture and variable-density development.

The semi-autonomy of the corporate campus relies on the optical and spatial juxtaposition of landscape and building.

������������������������ �������������������������������itself is a zone of requisite programmatic variety, increasingly required to satisfy a culture of options for a relatively captive audience.

ABSTRACT

METHODS OF INQUIRY

TERMS OF CRITICISM

Boston

Waterpark

Somerville

Cigna

South Boston

Ikea

building in census block reporting residential pop.

building in census block reporting 0 pop.

0 residents/sqmi

> average Manhattan density

building in census block reporting 0 pop.

post-urban corporate campus

hybrid

juxtaposition

cosmopolitan

insular

object

landscape

incongruity

programmatic scale

organization

workforce

density

variety

zoning

policy

spatial

economic

asymmetry

open space

typology context

public parkgardensparking lot

low-riseno landscape warehouseterminal

overlooking landscapepublic/private landscapeinstitutionmansion

objectsurrounded by landscapemuseumbig-box

urbanenclosed yardinstitutionresidential

groupopen yardcollegecorporate

high density (if residential)linear landscapes���������������residential

production-orientedinterstitial spacesindustrialself-storage facility

assembly-orientedassembly spaceindustrialtraditional market

medium-rise densitystreetsurban typologytransit-oriented development

semi-detached/detachedyardsmetro-edge residentialsuburban typology

privateparkgardensparking lot

superblock

manor, set-back

manor

courtyard block

campus

towers

factory

factory yard

blocks

house

restricted areaproposal by:

Matthew Schexnyder, MArch CandidateBoston Architectural Collegematthew.schexnyder@the-bac.edu

thesis website:

http://posturbanfields.net/

Landscape architect, professor, and author, Louise Mozingo recently noted that the exurban corporate campus represents a “parallel manifestation of decentralization, specialization, and concentration” indicative of the dispersal of the American post-war city. In others words, the suburban corporate campus is a derivative of sprawl itself and continues to represent the pairing of cosmopolitan, technocratic culture and the semi-autonomous organization of the periphery. For this reason, the corporate campus provides a vehicle for exploring the consequences of sub-urbanizing the post-urban city.

This study of precedents will include a collection of campuses and buildings which relate to the exurban corporate model. With-in this survey, the case studies can generally be divided into three sub-categories: conceptual, typological, and programmatic.

Conceptual: Consisting of unbuilt work, the conceptual case ������������������������������������ �������������������������corporate campus. These projects are concerned with metropoli-tan issues, encompassing the city and areas of variable density within the peripheries. By framing larger contexts of urbanism and its relationship to sprawl, these theoretical projects provide insight into the post-urban condition of the city. Establishing a position on the post-urban condition is essential to understanding the potential of the corporate campus (and/or its re-evaluation) as a model of urban settlement.

Typological: The typological case study is a noteworthy example of the corporate campus within the exurban context. The corpo-���������������������������������������� �������!��"�����typological case studies will, hopefully, provide a lens for under-standing the variety and similarity within the corporate complex form. This disambiguation is also a tool for analyzing the image of the form as it exists in situ and how it might exist in a new urban setting.

Programmatic: The most architecturally-oriented of the case �����������������������!����������������������������� ����-culation, function, and formal organization, the programmatic precedent highlights the basic relationship of components ne-cessitated by the corporate program. Additionally, the program-�������������������������������������� ������ ���#�����typology by providing innovative or unique shifts in form and/or organization.

At the heart of every corporate campus is the corporate headquarters. If the campus is essentially self-referential, then it is the campus centerpiece building and its attendant landscape which is often the spatial and programmatic anchor of the campus. But whereas the program of the campus is typically dedicated to a particular industry, the internal program of the headquarters is quite diverse. In a way, the relative isolation and specialization of the corporate campus requires a broad range of programs to cater to the needs of the corporate workforce.

Program Activities: Corporate headquarters, production space, �������������� ������ ������������������������������������public interface, amenities.

Typology/Scale: Corporate campus with focus on primary building.

Campus Area: 49 acres

Masterplan Floor Area: 776,880 square feet

Project Floor Area: 100,000 square feet

PRECEDENTS

PROGRAM

The diagram (above) shows the tandem evolution and cross-pollination of the prototypical campus forms. The plans are aligned to their respective centers of gravity. Over time, the campus has not only grown larger, but the relationship between building and landscape has become more complex.

General Motors Technical Center

Architect: Eero SaarinenClient: General MotorsLocation: Warren, Michigan, USAStatus: Completed, 1956Size: 330 acre campus (w/22 � � ���������������$��%&� buildingsBudget: 100 million USD (1956)Scale: MasterplanContext: SuburbanProgram: R&D, engineering, design, manufacturing, amenitiesOccupancy: 16,000 engineers, designer, techniciansOrganization: Campus organized � � ������������*��������� lake)Circulation: VariedMaterials: Steel, glass, panelized metal cladding, glazed/ masonryStructure: SteelFaçade: Transparent, limited opaque

GM Technical Center provides the ideal precedent for examining the post-urban condition. In the most basic sense, it is emblematic of the frustrations and disappointment of our early adventures in suburban sprawl; it is hard to separate the architecture from value judgments regarding that condition. However, the campus is actually a hybrid of urban and suburban culture. While isolated within a suburban landscape, the campus itself is a bastion of cosmopolitan culture (educated management and researchers from the city).

Rolex CenterArchitect: SANAAClient: École Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneLocation: Lausanne, SwitzerlandStatus: Complete, 2010Size: building, 400,000 sf; 136 acre campus, 65 buildingsBudget: building, 122 million USDScale: BuildingContext: University campus, suburbanProgram: Laboratory, library, multipurpose hall, workspace, amenitiesOccupancy: building, 600 seat hall, 860 workspaces; campus, 11,000 occ.Organization: topographical, open with voids set in rectangular planCirculation: OrganicMaterials: Concrete. Glass, grey carpetStructure: Reinforced concrete, structural slabFaçade: Glazed curtain wall

Although often compared to a landform, the building is essentially the Modernist object in a landscape. Set on a manicured, green lawn, the building is not dissimilar from the corporate estate. In this case, the building itself assimilates the spatial functions of both courtyard campus and landscape. And like the centerpiece building of the corporate campus, the Rolex Center establishes an iconic image of the institution. It exists as a hybrid of the suburban campus and the cosmopolitan program.

Royals Business Park

Architect: KCAP and Maccreanor Lavington ArchitectsClient: London Development Agency, Development Securities plcLocation: Royal Docks, London, UK Status: Ongoing, 2008Size: 50 acre campus; 3,550,000 ft2 � � � ���#�������Budget: ?Scale: MasterplanContext: Suburban, infrastructural, transitional+����<�� = ���#�������������� mixed-use, housing, retail, leisureOccupancy: 10,000 jobs (est.), 1,800 homesOrganization: Aggregated, elongated � � � �����������>@%J���� 220 yard siteCirculation: VariedMaterials: VariedStructure: VariedFaçade: Varied

The Royal Docks area represents a mix of tax incentive policy and reduced regulation which aims to regenerate (or in this case, create) the urban condition through public/private development rather than a long-range strategic plan. Operating within an “urban enterprise zone”, Royals Business Park is the result of a public initiative for speculative, private development. This neo-liberal approach to urban regeneration offers the business park with cultural amenities as a means to a civic-minded urbanism.

Clockwise from top: 1. context and density, 2. promotional image from campus opening, 3. aerial view soon after

opening, note central water feature, 4. emphasis on landscape and campus organization, 5. exterior, 6. interior,

draft room, 7. drafting and administration building, 8. National Historic District site plan.

Clockwise from top: 1. context and density, 2. industrial site w/ suburban adjacencies, 3. existing, low-density site,

4. proposed cultural center, 5. proposed plaza, 6. emphasis on public landscape and recreation, 7. remaining images:

program diagrams and site plans.

Mies van der Rohe’s Chicago Convention Center

(unbuilt)

Swiss landscape Object-landscape hydrid

Villa Capra, c. 1591

Chateau de Marly, c. 1686

University of Virginia, c. 1825

Stanford University, c. 1890

Connecticut Life, c. 1957

Apple Campus 2, c. 2013

Plan of Saint Gall, c. 9th Century

University of Oxford, c. 1700

Harvard University, c. 1850

Nela Park, c. 1911

GM Technical Center, c. 1956

plan

section

superstructure landscape

structure

voids

hybrid

mass

glazing

+ =

Googleplex, c. 2003

Rolex Center Analysis

Matthew Schexnyder, MArch Thesis Proposal, Boston Architectural College, Spring 2012

Use Categories Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d D

evel

opm

ent A

rea

Loca

l Ind

ustri

al S

ubdi

stric

t

Wat

erfro

nt M

anuf

actu

ring

Sub

dist

rict

Wat

erfro

nt C

omm

erci

al S

ubdi

stric

t

Analysis

Banking Post Office Banks and post offices everywhere.Community Center

Day care Daycare and manufacturing do not mix.Library

Place of worship Churches everywhere.Art gallery

Auditorium, theatreMuseum

Public art No public art in manufacturing.Dormitory, fraternity No dorms anywhere.

College, universitySchools

Entertainment and recreationFitness center The WM subdistrict has a fitness center. Funerary uses Do not die here.

Clinical laboratoryOther health care uses No healthcare.

Executive suites View the waterfront over a light industrial complex.HotelMotel Those belong on the interstate.

Artist' mixed use Where do we put the artists?General, light manufacturing

Office uses Corporate campus.Golf driving range But the campus will not have a golf course.

Open Space Just open space is better than a golf course.Outdoor place of recreation for profit Look at the open space, do not make money.

Stadium The stadium belongs in Fenway.Data centerCourthouse

Penal institution This one is pretty obvious.Solid Waste transfer station See previous comment.

Research and development uses R&D is welcome, but not in residential zones.Mobile home Those do not belong in the city.

Single family home, detached/semi-detached Those belong in the suburbs.Other residential uses You can live over there.

Small restaurant People have to eat.Adult bookstore Those still exist?

Bakery Bakeries everywhere.Local retail

Garden supply retailService usesWarehousing

Trade usesTransportation uses No stations here.

Gas station/carwash Very suburban.Parking, surface/garage Not zoned for parking, but there is a chance.Waterfront service uses

industrial warehousesdistribution warehousesequipment lot/parking

convention center scalemaximum lot coverageno landscape

building abuts entire lot perimeterenclosed/private landscapeapparent spatial density

multi-use buildingprivate/public landscapelow spatial density

self-referential contextmix open/closed landscapes����������

no clear organizationbuildings and variable landscapespicturesque

no buildingsopen/green spacepastoral or wilderness

four use categories: Waterfront Commercial, Waterfront Industrial, Neighborhood Development Area, Local IndustrialFAR all uses: 2.0max height all uses: 65’ (low to mid-rise)

existing structures

maximum FAR (actual)

pasture

WCWINDALI

park

campus

manor

courtyard compound

super block

This thesis will deliberately explore the exurban campus typology ��������������������Q������������������������� ���������������which do not have any inherent “urban density” and thereby expose the asymmetric nature of the post-urban city. Despite the existence of some ambitious urban plans for the district, South Boston’s industrial seaport zone offers this type of situation. The incongruous nature of the site as it is and how it is being marketed makes it prime grounds for exploring alternative spatial and programmatic potentials. This proposal will consider two primary lots (currently with zero population and some existing, single-story warehouse construction) for exploring the ������������ �������������������������������������������variable urban conditions. Also, this site can accommodate the practical need for a contiguous campus which is compatible with ���������������������������������� ���������!����

Bekaert, Geert, Andrew May and Xaveer de Geyter Architects, et al. After-Sprawl: Research for the Contemporary City. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2002.

Bell, Michael and Sze Tsung Leong, eds. Slow Space. New York: Monacelli Press, 1998.

Betsky, Aaron, “Nothing but Flowers: Against Public Space,” in Slow Space, edited by Michael Bell and Sze Tsung Leong, 456. New York: Monacelli Press, 1998.

Deplazes, Andrea, “The Campus as Location and Strategy: Thumbnail Sketches of Science City,” in Campus and the City: Urban Design for the Knowledge City, edited by Kerstin Hoeger and Kees Christiaanse, 35. Zurich: gta Verlag, ETH Zurich, 2007.

Eckhout, Bart and Steven Jacobs, “(Dys)functionalism in a Post(sub)urban Landscape,” in Multiple City, edited by Sophie Wolfrum and Winfred Nerdinger, 34. Calbe: Jovis, 2008.

Fishman, Robert, “Beyond Utopia: Urbanism After the End � �\������]����^_���\�����`����\���<�{��������������|��������in Modern Space,” Urbanitats, No. 7, Centre of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona, Barcelona, 1998.

}������\�������������~����������!�|������= ���!�������<�Routledge, 2007.

Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York. New York: Monacelli Press, 1978.

��������_�����= ���� ���������������������������������!�Content. Koln: Taschen, 2004.

Lampugnani, Vittorio Magnago, Jacqueline Burckhardt and Novavartis, et al. Novartis Campus: A Contemporary Work ����������!�=��������<������\�����%JJ�!

Mozingo, Louise A. Pastoral Capitalism. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2011.

NBBJ, Change Design: Conversations about Architecture as Ultimate Business Tool. Atlanta: Greenway Communications, 2006.

=������+������!�{���������\�����!�=���������_���<������\�����2005.

{�����_���������������������!� �̂�<�\������� ���������!]�Architecture Design, Vol. 78, No. 1, January/February 2008.

Glaeser, Edward. Triumph of the City. New York: Penguin Press, 2011.

Venturi, Robert, Denise Scott Brown and Steven Izenor. Learning from Las Vegas. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1977.

SITE

REFERENCES

cam

Campus 85 Fargosite

south boston waterfront districtpopulation 0

area .07 sq mi urban density 0/sq mile

Boston, Massachusetts, USAfounded 1630

urban population 4,032,484urban area 1,774 sq mi

urban density 2,273/sq mile node

downtown/financial district population 0 area .06 sq mi pop. density 0/sq mi

South Station

ICA/Trade Center

Design Center

Fort Point

South Boston

landmark/nodeseaport district

population 0 area .05 sq mi pop. density 0/sq mi

landmarkmarine industrial park

population 207 area .04 sq mi

pop. density 5,175/sq mi

districtfort point district population 389area .07 sq mi

density 5,557/sq mi

districtsouth boston neighbiorhood district

population 1793area .06 sq mi

density 29,883/sq mi

landmarksouth boston waterfront district

population 0area .07 sq mi

density 0/sq mi

Convention Center

boston ave. urban population density (2,273/sq mi)

If we follow the site zoning by rights, �������������������������������������

������ ������������<��������������� �����place of worship, small restaurant, open ��������������. Though unlikely, the corporate campus is actually compatible

with the existing urban zoning.

Isolated landmarks, districts, nodes emphasize the spatial and programmatic incongruity of the seaport area. Due to this incongruity, the proposed site is not integral to the image of “the city”. It is, in fact, post-urban: compatible neither with the image of the city center nor the density of residential South Boston.

Aerial view of the industrial seaport, with overlays of the site (shaded) and the footprint of Boston Common (dotted

line). Boston Common not only provides a scaled comparison, but also offers an analogy to the proposed campus. The

city greenspace is an example of urban incongruity which is considered, generally, as an asset.

Zoning AnalysisPotentials of Site and Precedents

Landmarks/Districts/Nodes

conditional

allowed

forbidden

Matthew Schexnyder, MArch Thesis Proposal, Boston Architectural College, Spring 2012