Developing an Argument (Rough)

Rem Koolhaas, in “Kill the Skyscraper” in Content, argues that the skyscraper, originally invented as a social condenser, has slowly devitalized social performances throughout history and ultimately lost its programmatic heterogeneity in the form of a high-rise model made up of the repetition of stacking of the ground floor.  Matthew Soules, in his recent Log publication, references 432 Park Avenue as the extreme endpoint of this condition, using Rafael Vinoly’s own term “constant object” to define the building as “an object as devoid of differentiation as possible.” Soules attributes the evolution of the skyscraper to finance capitalism, suggesting that it was amplified the asset function of architecture dramatically. As the asset of architecture grows, it displaces its initial intent of pure inhabitable shelter and a direct physical experience. The skyscraper has become a commodity because of its increase in land value, and therefore needs to be reassessed on how it can increase value without decreasing its role as a social condenser.

The current model and its process of maximizing space and therefore maximizing profit, is the very process that rejects the opportunity for disruptive innovation in an architectural solution. Disruptive innovation in the field of business is defined as an innovation that creates a new market and value network that eventually disrupts or displaces a current model. Therefore, to disrupt the current model of the skyscraper, it is important to consider architecture as an asset and how its value may be increased while simultaneously increasing its role as a social condenser to displace the current model.

This project aims to be disruptive by generating an architecture that incorporates elements of the city back into the fabric of its architecture to increase its value as a commodity and increase its role as a social condenser. With one of the most valuable commodities of New York City and Brooklyn being land use, the tower intends to embed an extensive amount of both public and private outdoor spaces into the framework of the tower. This combination or exchange of program between residences and outdoor space increases their individual values while allowing the tower further vertical growth, increasing its overall value and generating panoramic views of Manhattan. The intertwining of green spaces will create a diversity of living experiences currently unobtainable in the area and the public green spaces will bring a liveliness and connectivity to the site.

The development of multiple systems that create a new interiority of urban elements and a diversity of unit types in an architectural form allows the tower to create a heterogeneity of experience and program. These multiple dimensions translate to systems to produce differentiation. The multiplicity of this organizational system resembles a biological organization where systems act in conflict and connection to one another and ultimately lead to the health of that organism.

The roles and interiorities of the mentioned architecture are generated through the application of a disruption in structure using minimal surfaces to produce structural elements and spatial qualities. The zero-mean curvature and aggregation of the unit cell of the minimal surface allows for its own embedded structural logic. The goal is that this system can be implemented in such a way to reduce material usage and remove the necessity for a typical structural core.

These ideas are all currently in the works and this description is a means to continually build on an argument.