Transcription

ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESINTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this section of the master plan document is to form a basis for the architecturalcharacter, composition, and typology of future buildings, groups of buildings and exterior spaces on theUniversity of Georgia campus. This portion of the document aspires to be both a "mirror" and a "lamp."The buildings already existent on the Athens campus were observed, documented, and analyzed in thecourse of preparation of this study. Thus the suggestions for future architectural interventions madeherein attempt to reflect the best architectural traditions evident on campus.While many aspects of the University of Georgia's campus make it one of the most memorablecompositions of buildings and open spaces to be found in the nation, it is not the purpose of thisdocument to replicate the historic core in order to create a new architecture of empty nostalgia. TheUniversity of Georgia campus forms a collection of buildings from many different time periods and ofvarious styles. There is not a unique "University of Georgia style" per se, rather the notable buildingsbuilt over the course of time, reflect both the needs of the moment and the traditions of architecturecompatible with the context of the Athens campus.It is hoped that the insights gleaned from a reading of this section will enable the campus community tobetter recognize and understand the architectural traditions of the campus, while simultaneouslyforming a touchstone for architects, landscape architects, planners, and other design working on futureprojects. Since innovation is always understood relative to some context, the traditions suggested bythis portion of the document are intended to "light the way" for future projects.UGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 1 OF 32

EXISTING UGA BUILDING STYLESVERNACULAR/GEORGIAN/NEO-CLASSICALBelow are some examples of Vernacular/Georgian/Neo-Classical building styles found on the UGAcampus and a brief indication of their characteristics.Examples- Old College- New College- Phi Kappa Hall- Chapel- Demosthenian HallObservations- Domestic scale – unassuming character with exception of the Chapel- Generally more wall than window- Visual tension between proportions of opening and wall (i.e., the proportions of the wall areoften more dominant than the proportions of window)- Architectural elements are often integral to the building’s construction- Vertical bay structure and vertically oriented openings- Spartan vocabulary, restrained use of ornament- Pragmatic elements modulate facade (e.g., downspout, chimneys, entrances)- Facade is not overly “deep” except when a portico element is added to recognize entryNew CollegeOld CollegePhi Kappa HallUGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ChapelDemosthenian HallARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 2 OF 32

EXISTING UGA BUILDING STYLESBEAUX-ARTSBelow are some examples of Beaux-Arts building styles found on the UGA campus and a brief indicationof their characteristics.Examples- Peabody Hall- Memorial Hall- Business SchoolObservations- Monumental scale compatible with domestic core of campus- Range of proportion of window to wall- System of ornamentation may not be directly tied to constructional technique, rather it is tied tobroader cultural ideals related to building type (i.e., you know it is a “library” by its appearance,but what you see may or may not directly be related to how it was built)- Use of sophisticated proportioning systems- Division into 3 parts vertically and horizontally – clear hierarchy of parts- Facade is “sculpted” in 3 dimensions as if carved from a block of clay- Preference for symmetry, however complex overlapping local symmetries are sometimes usedto produce localized picturesque effects- Generally incorporates historical referencesPeabody HallFine Arts BuildingUGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 3 OF 32

EXISTING UGA BUILDING STYLESMODERN AND TRADITIONALBelow are some examples of Modern and Traditional building styles found on the UGA campus and abrief indication of their characteristics.Examples- Library- Fine Arts Building Additions- Sanford HallObservations- A more monumental scale- Recognition of frame construction techniques in aesthetic of vertical surface- Often more window than wall or an equivalent proportion of window and wall- Facade is “layered” as a series of flat, planar surfaces composed within the constraints of amodest dimension.- System of ornamentation is restrained, however attempts to relate constructional techniques tocultural ideals related to building type (i.e., you know it is a “library” by its appearance, and youhave an idea of how it was built)- Draws inspiration from history and ideas of contemporary lifeMain LibraryUGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 4 OF 32

EXISTING UGA BUILDING STYLESMODERN AND CONTEMPORARYBelow are some examples of Modern and Contemporary building styles found on the UGA campus and abrief indication of their characteristics.Examples- Chemistry Annex- Georgia Museum of ArtObservations- Vertical surfaces are less likely to be designed as “facades”- Overall massing dictates form – buildings less likely to participate in campus space making- Openings are “slots” or “zones” where wall surface is omitted rather than an incised opening- Character of building is particular to the whim of the architect, client, or donor- Building does not necessarily communicate an idea of what it is or how it was built- Unclear hierarchy of parts- Scale is indeterminate- Abstract form preferred over forms of “traditional building” (i.e., roofs, walls, doors, windows,are replaced with horizontal planes, vertical planes, and various kinds of apertures)- Preference for asymmetrical massing and the picturesque over symmetry- Notion of the Zeitgeist prevails, history and tradition are devalued – draws little upon immediatephysical contextChemistry AnnexGeorgia Museum of ArtUGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 5 OF 32

THE APPLICATION OF AMERICAN CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESTO THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIAThe planning principles exhibited on American campuses are truly a unique art form. While thetraditions of campus planning in the United States are closely related to attitudes concerning buildingand the landscape developed between the 16th and 19th centuries in England, France, and Italy, theapplication of these principles to the built form of the university is an art form, which evolved principallyin this country. The close relationship between built form and the landscape is a characteristic ofcampus planning that is the taproot of this art form. From Thomas Jefferson’s University of Virginia, toSaarenin’s Cranbrook Academy, this tradition remained unbroken until the Second World War.One of the most readily identifiable characteristics of this tradition was the creation of exterior spaces,which could be likened to interior rooms. In the diagram illustrated in Figure 1, a prototypical room isdrawn alongside a university quadrangle of similar proportions. Nearly everyone is familiar with thesense of enclosure and protection afforded by a room’s bounding surfaces – walls enclose space;windows admit light and air while permitting views to the exterior world; doors permit access; andtypically there is some element of focus within the room, perhaps a hearth. It is readily evident thatevery element performs a role supporting the larger notion of “room.” That is, walls alone do not theroom make. The interdependency of elements and the specialized tasks they play relegate elements ofthe room to hierarchical roles in the overall composition. That is a door to the room will serve to frame aview of the room’s principal feature – the hearth, and all along the corners of the room will besubservient to both the former and later elements.Likewise, the exterior room of a campus quadrangle has features, which might be seen as analogous tothat of a traditional interior room. The library may dominate the composition in much the same manneras the hearth, while a pair of buildings axially disposed across the quadrangle from this principal featuremight serve the same threshold purposes as that of a door. One might readily see that a successfulcomposition of a college quadrangle requires that the buildings operate in concert with one another.Sometimes buildings are called upon to play more assertive roles that of a “hero,” like the library, or thematching buildings forming the campus threshold. The heroic buildings, however, require substantialamounts of good “soldier” buildings to form the backdrop against which these more assertive buildingsmight be seen.In planning and building a new campus or on a portion of an existing campus it is very important tounderstand the role that individual buildings are required to play. Too many heroic structures would belike a room full of guests all talking at the same time. Too few heroic buildings would be like a partywhere none of the guests ever arrived — a bit of a bore. In planning a successful campus composition,one seeks to strike a balance between the “heroes” and the “soldiers.” Experience has shown that everytrustee, donor, president, dean, every department chair, or faculty member, usually like to view their“new building” as aspiring to be a “hero.” And, while much might be said of the heroic nature of thecommon foot soldier, it is recommended that the creation of heroic buildings on college campuses belimited to those building types which embody and relate the most universal and lofty aspirations of theentire institution — churches, libraries, places of assembly, etc.UGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 6 OF 32

Main LibraryMain LibraryFigure 1UGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 7 OF 32

CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGYTHE EDGE-DEFINING TYPEThis building type often performs the role of the common foot soldier, but it may also take on heroicassignments. The generic configuration of the type is that of an elongated rectilinear volume. Mostoften entry is achieved on the center of one of the long faces, however edge entries, or entry from oneof the narrow elevations is also possible (see facade guidelines). This building type commonly aligns itseaves and ridgelines, not the gable end, to the quadrangle thus reinforcing the geometry of this exteriorroom. A central corridor gives access to the rooms. Typically the corridor is double loaded, however insome instances a single loaded corridor may serve the needs of the program. The length of this buildingtype may vary from 120 feet to 300 feet, while the width of the type is generally in the neighborhood of45-90 feet. When this type exceeds the 90 foot width dimension natural lighting and ventilation of theinterior spaces becomes impossible. Thus, depending upon the actual intended use of buildings of thistype, care should be given to the width of the block.There are a variety of methods for distributing this type in a campus plan (Figure 2).-Illustrates this building type located as a central element on the long side of a campusquadrangle – the building performs both the role of edge definer and central focus.Much the same might be said about the positioning of the type in this configuration, howeverbecause the building alone forms the edge of the narrow side of a long quadrangle, it tends totake on a more heroic dimension.In this instance the type is paired to form both the wall to the quadrangle as well as a thresholdto the campus.The final illustration of this type in context is interesting because it presents its end elevation tothe major quadrangle of the campus while forming the edge of a new quadrangle behind thefirst building discussed in this drawing.Examples of this building type on the UGA campus are Old College and New College, at otherinstitutions, Nassau Hall, Princeton and Old East and Old West at UNC Chapel Hill. The type mightaccommodate housing, classrooms, laboratories, administrative activities, and a wide variety of otherfunctions. It is typically the most prevalent variety of building to be found on college campuses. Thistype along with the Centralized Type form the two essential building blocks of campus architecture fromwhich all other types might be derived.UGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 8 OF 32

End ElevationFaçadeVariation48’ – 70’120’ – 300’Typical PlanPlan in ContextFigure 2UGA DESIGN & CONSTRUCTIONSUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL REQUIREMENTS & STANDARDSAPRIL 30, 2018ARCHITECTURAL CAMPUS PLANNING PRINCIPLESPAGE 9 OF 32

CAMPUS BUILDING TYPOLOGYTHE CENTRALIZED TYPEThis building type is often associated with a heroic posture within a campus plan, however, the typemight defer to other buildings depending upon its specific context. The general configuration of the typeis that of a compact rectilinear volume, however other platonic forms are also associated with this typecircular, octagonal, or other centralized form. Entry is most often achieved on the center of one of thenarrow facades and the type most often presents its gabled end to the quadrangle thereby gaining acertain amount of visual attention. Generally the type houses one large open space internally — oftenconceived of as a space of assembly. The dimensions of the type vary dramatically and should bedetermined based upon a mitigation of the concern