AN NCHOR FOR ROOKLYN S NEW ULTURAL ISTRICT A … · TEN Arquitectos Mexico City/New York, NY Perspective (opposite page) Elevation (below) Comp V12 #4F Winter_Comp V12 #4F Winter

Koolhaas and Diller+Scofidio had beenbrought on board, and they’ve been workingto develop a master plan ever since. All thewhile the LDC has been attempting to bringin tenants so that construction projectscould begin.

Last year, the BAM LDC found an anchortenant, and this past spring that anchor ten-ant found an architect to design its newhome, with a scheme that should satisfy theconceptual demands of the master plan.Enrique Norten, of TEN Arquitectos of Mex-ico City, won the invited competition todesign the Brooklyn Public Library’s Visualand Performing Arts Library (VPA), a 150,000square-foot structure, budgeted at a pro-jected $75 million, that is intended tobecome a central destination in the BAMcultural district.

The Brooklyn Public Library, the coun-try’s fifth-largest library system, whose cen-tral branch is situated a little more than a

38 COMPETITIONS Winter 2002

director Harvey Lichtenstein calls for therenovation of several existing buildings inthe area, and the construction of a varietyof new structures, ranging from retail tolive-work to mixed-use, on a collection ofparcels of land currently home to four park-ing lots. In 1999, Lichtenstein left BAM itselfin order to chair the BAM Local Develop-ment Corporation, the organization doingthe nuts-and-bolts work of securing fundingto create the district.

Initially, the BAM LDC had commissioneda planning study from Skidmore, Owings &Merrill, but as BAM LDC president JeanneLutfy said, as she and her colleagues beganto think on a larger scale they "wanted tobring on a team that could sort of take it toanother level from a creative standpoint,who could really explore with us how—notonly from a conceptual standpoint, but alsofrom a physical and massing standpoint—tocreate a cultural district?" By 2000 Rem

AN ANCHOR FOR BROOKLYN'S NEW CULTURAL DISTRICTA Library Competition Breaks the Mold

by Michael Berk

For the past four years, a team of prominent architects hasquietly been drawing up a master plan for the redevelopmentof a section of downtown Brooklyn’s Fort Greene neighbor-

hood as a cultural district, offering a wide variety of visual andperforming arts experiences to the public, along with live-workspaces and support services and resources for artists. That masterplan, the brainchild of former Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM)

Comp V12 #4F Winter_Comp V12 #4F Winter 7/28/16 1:04 PM Page 38

39Winter 2002 COMPETITIONS

mile down Flatbush Avenue to the southeast,has been suffering from a space crunch forseveral years. As Elisabeth Martin, theLibrary’s director of planning, design, andfacilities put it, "We have a wonderful flag-ship here at Grand Army Plaza…but withinabout 25 years of its construction and open-ing in early 1941, we’d maxed out our spacein this building. It just won’t allow us togrow the collections and services in the waythat we need to." Lichtenstein and formerLibrary executive director Martín Gomez,who began discussions about the problem,found that the needs of their respectiveinstitutions made for a good fit, and cameup with a plan to find space for the Libraryin the new arts district.

Having completed renovation projects onseveral of the Library’s branch locations,along with a very successful privately fundedrenovation of the Central Library’s YouthWing in 2000, Martin began drawing up acomplex program for the potential newspace. Martin envisioned something thatwould be more than a conventional library,including extensive network infrastructureand support for new media facilities.

Since both the Library and the BAM LDCwere concerned with making a significantarchitectural statement (on its proposed sitethe building would function as a gatewayfor the BAM cultural district as a whole), andthe project would eventually be funded witha mix of private and public money, Martinbegan looking for ways to run a competition.Noticing an advertisement in ArchitecturalRecord, she applied for the NEA’s New PublicWorks grant, and in 2001 won a $50,000award to fund the process.

A number of major firms were invited toenter the competition; in the end, four—TENArquitectos, Architectures Jean Nouvel, ofParis; Rafael Viñoly Architects PC, of NewYork City; and Huff + Gooden, of Charleston,South Carolina—agreed to submit schemes.

Though it was understood that this com-petition was taking place very early in theprocess, at a conceptual stage, ElisabethMartin presented the competitors with awell-developed program, clearly outliningthe Library’s spatial needs and objectives. Inorder to keep the proceedings as fair as pos-sible (and to level the playing field betweensmaller firms and those with access to

“Martin envi-sioned some-thing thatwould be morethan a con-ventionallibrary, includ-ing extensivenetwork infra-structure andsupport fornew mediafacilities.”

Winner

TEN ArquitectosMexico City/NewYork, NY

Perspective(opposite page)

Elevation(below)



Brooklyn Library

greater financial and personnel resources)Martin kept the submission requirementsreasonable. Each competitor was required tosubmit five boards and a single scale model,built on a template provided by the Librarythat—in the interest of clear comparisons—fit into a corresponding scale model of theBAM cultural district as a whole.

"We gave them volumes of informationexpressing our performance goals for thebuilding," said Martin, "but the program wasdesigned as a descriptive program ratherthan a prescriptive program…absolutely itwas meant to encourage creativity andvision from the architects. We talked aboutour vision, and suggested adjacencies thatwe thought would work, but we didn’t man-date them, and in the end, everyone blockedand stacked the building differently."

While the program set out space require-ments for the VPA’s traditional and newmedia collections, offices, research facilitiesand so forth, it also made some atypical

demands. The architects were required toinclude a black-box theater, extensive publicspace within the building, network infra-structure throughout the building, and pro-visions for a multimedia lounge/cybercafespace, to be open to the public 24 hours aday, seven days a week. Given its projectedfunction as a resource center for the BAMcultural district and the local community ofartists, Martin and her colleagues envisioneda building that was more than a library, abuilding without clear precedent, at leastlocally.

But as Terence Riley has pointed out, theVPA does fit into a developing building type.Several examples of this sort of multi-usebuilding, combining research library, galleryand museum spaces, and workspaces for artpractice under one landmarkable roof havebeen built in Europe and Japan since theearly 1970s; but this building type—knowngenerally as a "mediathèque"—has not yetfound wide acceptance in the US. The para-

Winner

TEN ArquitectosMexico City/NewYork, NY

Aerial view(left)

Section(opposite, above)Night perspective(opposite, below)

“The programwas designedas a descrip-tive programrather than aprescriptiveprogram...”



digmatic mediathèque is Richard Rogers andRenzo Piano’s 1971 Pompidou Centre inParis (which as a very large-scale structure,encompassing a wider variety of functionsthan is currently typical of the form), whilethe most visible recent examples are Sir Nor-man Foster’s 1993 Carre d’Art in Nimes,France, and Toyo Ito’s 2000 Mediathèque inSendai, Japan.

The building had not only to satisfy theLibrary’s needs, but also to function as anintegral element of the proposed culturaldistrict, and of the Fort Greene neighbor-hood itself. Transparency was a key goal—Martin emphasized that the building shouldreinforce urban interconnections, reachingout to the district and to the surroundingcommunities. BAM, which made its reputa-tion presenting the sort of touring avant-garde theatrical, multimedia andperformance work which would otherwisebe seen in Manhattan, is located in a primar-ily African American neighborhood, whichhas at times seen it as somewhat of an out-sider. Given that the area has been rapidlygentrifying, the Library and LDC were veryinterested in finding a building design forthe VPA that would be inviting to the com-munity at large, in order to build connec-tions between the cultural district and theneighborhood itself.

The site itself—an elongated, triangularplot of land, currently home to a nurseryand a parking lot—made it clear that thebasic shape of any building that could satisfythe program’s square-footage requirementswould approximate the shape of the site,giving it something of a built-in identity.



Brooklyn Library

And since the VPA building will eventuallyshare its site with a theater, to be con-structed directly to the north, the programcalled for the architects to envision thespace between the two structures as a publicplaza. Even given these demands, the fourcompetitors managed to come up with fourhighly divergent schemes, which made foran animated two-day discussion.

The jury included a mix of architects,scholars, and representatives of both theLibrary and the BAM LDC. Frederic Bell, FAIA,executive director of the AIA, New YorkChapter; Elizabeth Diller, AIA, principal ofDiller+Scofidio; Thomas Hanrahan, AIA, deanof the Pratt Institute School of Architectureand principal of Hanrahan + Meyers, Archi-tects; Harvey Lichtenstein, chairman of theBAM LDC, Jeanne Lutfy, president of theBAM LDC; Elisabeth Martin, AIA, director ofplanning, design and facilities at the Brook-lyn Public Library; Siobhan A, Reardon, act-ing executive director of the Brooklyn PublicLibrary; Terence Riley, AIA, chief curator ofarchitecture and design at the Museum ofModern Art; and Dr. Lucille Cole Thomas,vice president of the board of trustees at theBrooklyn Public Library.

The jury chair was Margaret Helfand,FAIA, past president of the AIA, New YorkChapter, and principal of Helfand MyerbergGuggenheimer Architects.

The jurors met in a two-day session; thefirst day each firm delivered a one-hour pre-sentation to the assembled panel, afterwhich there was an initial discussion of theschemes. The jury reconvened the followingday.

The fact that the jury included botharchitects and non-architects was not to bea problem: "The discussion never got soeffete that it wasn’t inclusive of the entiregroup," said Helfand. "The architecture itselfwas speaking to so many issues that wecould just talk about those issues."

Terence Riley felt that the librarians wereparticularly well equipped to discuss archi-tecture: "I think librarians are well aware,not just of space and functional needs, butof the ambience that makes a library great.They know that just solving problems func-tionally doesn’t necessarily meant a buildingwill be a great library."

"It was one of those very difficult com-petitions, where all of the contestants hadvery different positions. It was a very robustdiscussion…no two projects were similarenough that one cancelled out the other,and none of the positions taken were done



Brooklyn Library

so in a less than convincing way," said Ter-ence Riley. "It’s not often that you invitefour architects, and you get four schemeswhere you would love to build any one ofthem," said Martin. "They’re all different, andthey’re all extraordinary."

Jean Nouvel’s entry opened much of thebuilding’s street level to a pass-throughpublic space, usable as an open-air gallery,which he described as an "urban hall." FacingFlatbush Avenue, the building’s facade wouldbe defined by a glittering brise-soleil of mir-rored panels, behind which art pieces, mes-sages, or advertisements for events could behung. Thomas Hanrahan remarked that Nou-vel had treated the library "almost as theprogram of an art museum," bringing to theproject an extremely elegant handling oflight. Terence Riley pointed out that of allthe entries, Nouvel’s "had by far the mostlegible kind of appearance. You could look atthe building and sort of logically read its ele-ments." For Riley, the "urban hall" wouldhave been a "real bonus." Several of the

jurors agreed with Riley, finding Nouvel’shandling of adjacencies and distribution ofspaces clear, elegant, and workable.

Nouvel’s scheme, a stately wedge toppedby a cylindrical tower (perhaps a massingresponse to the neighboring WilliamsburgBank building, the tallest structure in Brook-lyn), gave the building something of the lookof an ocean liner. Jury chair MargaretHelfand felt that Nouvel’s building, whilevery dramatic, was perhaps too "dressed-up"a solution for its Brooklyn neighborhood: "Itwas a very urban scheme…but a little moreformal in ways that didn’t feel quite asappealing as Norten’s scheme for the com-munity."

Rafael Viñoly made what was perhapsthe boldest sculptural statement of any ofthe competitors. His scheme, a dramaticwedge that arcs up from grade at the south-ern apex of the site, sweeps up in an arc overthe plaza to overhang the theater buildingto the north, culminating in a top-floorreading room offering dramatic views of

Finalist

Rafael ViñolyNew York, NY

View to entrance(opposite page,above)

Aerial view(opposite, below)

Perspective(right)

“Rafael Viñolymade whatwas perhapsthe boldestsculpturalstatement ofany of thecompetitors.”



Brooklyn Library

Manhattan. Viñoly brought the building’spublic spaces to the upper floors

"Everybody in the world wanted to beable to go up into that building and go up tothat top and have that view of Manhattan,"said Terence Riley. "And there was some-thing about the structural form that was soingenious that you really wanted to embraceit." Viñoly’s relocation of the public spaces tothe upper floors did pose potential securityissues, and though all the jurors wereimpressed by the arcing building’s aestheticengagement with the surrounding buildings,the fact that the reading rooms actuallyvaulted over the plaza and neighboringbuilding to the north were seen by some asless effective in establishing a working spa-tial relationship with the neighborhood.

Elisabeth Martin had asked that thearchitects consider the building’s virtualpresence as well as its physical structure,and of all the competitors, Huff + Goodenwent the furthest in incorporating the vir-tual, using a "digital core" of network andnew media services as an organizing princi-ple of equal weight to the "archival core" oftraditional collections. The South Carolinafirm’s scheme addressed the building’s the-oretical concerns very clearly—Thomas Han-rahan felt that their scheme had "the mostdynamic and intricate web of spaces ofall…with a really dynamic circulationamong the spaces, almost as if their

scheme was making the complexity of theweb really visible."

Of particular interest to the jurors waswhat Huff + Gooden referred to as the "Ver-tical Stage." This concept used several meth-ods—including a transparent envelope thatrevealed circulation paths within the struc-ture, a variety of glass elements, and a hostof electronic and video projection treat-ments—to create a highly animated facadeon Flatbush Avenue. Their public plaza evenfeatured a two-story high projection screen,displaying a publicly available web browser.

If anything, Huff + Gooden’s envisioningof the building may have been too compre-hensive, in that they attempted to handle all

of the VPA’s virtual and public space require-ments within the building envelope. "Theiruse of the public space did not jump out asthe strongest point of their scheme," saidTerence Riley. "Their public space was reallyinside the building…it made something ofthe interior that the others didn’t."

In the end, Enrique Norten’s schemeproved the best fit for the neighborhood.The jurors felt that his scheme most skill-fully handled the VPA’s relationships withneighboring structures, and Norten’s treat-ment of the plaza to the north, partiallyenclosed within the skewed "V" shape of thestructure, did a great job of defining anexterior public space to match the elegant



Brooklyn Library

playfulness of his building’s interior spaces.His plaza, which includes access to the VPAvia a staircase that doubles as outdooramphitheater seating, makes a dramaticsculptural gesture, but at the same time,according to Margaret Helfand, "isn’t overlyintentional in appearance…it can fill thepurpose, and still feel ad hoc."

Norten’s scheme, according to ThomasHanrahan, was "probably the most sophisti-cated urbanistically…a really interestingseries of indoor and outdoor spaces thatengaged the other buildings, and FlatbushAvenue, and really best engaged the plannedbuilding to the north."

Norten was very successful in integratingthe site’s exterior public spaces with thebuilding’s interior public spaces. His buildingprovides public access from both the south-ern apex and the northern plaza, bringing asculptural structure down to human scale atstreet level. Norten situated many buildingservices (including the collections) belowgrade, reducing the building’s bulk andopening up the plan for gallery spaces, read-ing and multi-use use rooms, the 24/7 café,and the theater.

Terence Riley appreciated "the ingenioussectional way in which the public space notonly flowed in from the apex point up tomeet the public space within at the top ofthe flight of steps that becomes the theaterin the rear…it was as if two hands, were

reaching to touch each other at one point atthe center. It goes very well with Koolhaasand Diller’s intentions, to make a publicspace of the building. It was a real, appropri-ate reminder that this is not just a free-standing building, but part of this com-munity of artists that we’re trying to build."

Elisabeth Martin felt that Norten’sscheme successfully negotiated the needs ofthe buildings various constituencies, withstrong appeal as a destination and gatewayto the BAM district, as a home for thelibrary, and as a resource for area artists. "Itwas particularly skillful," she said, "in theway it appealed to emerging artists…this isnot a glitzy building. It’s transparent, but ithas varying levels of transparency. It had areal capacity to delight, welcome, andinspire."

Now that the Library and BAM haveselected a designer, they are busy working tosolidify funding for the project. Meanwhile,Norten and TEN Arquitectos have been hiredto continue the design process. Constructionis projected to begin in 2005, which shouldprovide an adequate amount of develop-ment time given the currently difficultfundraising climate. And Norten’s scheme,inviting and architecturally exciting as it is,should prove very useful as a fundraisingtool.

From December 20, 2002 through Febru-ary 24, 2003 the four projects will be onpublic display at the Urban Center on Madi-son Avenue in New York City, in an exhibitcoordinated by the Architectural League andthe Municipal Art Society.

Michael Berk is a free-lance writer living andworking in New York City.

Finalist

Rafael ViñolyNew York, NY

Model(opposite, above)Section(opposite, below)

Cafe(right)Footprint and per-spective(right, below)

"It was particu-larly skillful,"she said, "inthe way itappealed toemergingartists…”

-Elisabeth Martin



Project Credits:

Huff + Gooden Architects:Mario Gooden and Ray Huff, Principals-in-ChargeProject Team:David Thompson/Misti Moser/Sal PirroneDavid Pastre/Anthony Nolan/Sandra Doyle/Anthony CarmolaAssociate Architects:Gruzen Samton , LLPPeter Samton, Administrative PartnerJordan Gruzen, Resource PartnerAlfreda Radzicki, Project ManagerStructural Engineering:Arup New YorkLeo Argiris, PartnerMechanical / Electrical / PlumbingEngineering:Arup New YorkRaymond Quinn, Associate PrincipalDigital Model: Robert ZinnWeb Design: Slicker Inc.



Brooklyn Library

Finalist

Huff + GoodenCharleston, SC

Competition boards(opposite page andthis page)



Brooklyn Library



Brooklyn Library

Finalist

Huff + GoodenCharleston, SC

Competition boards(opposite page andthis page)



Brooklyn Library

Finalist

Jean NouvelParis, France

Floor plans(right and above)

Pedestrian perspectives(opposite page)





Brooklyn Library



Brooklyn Library

Finalist

Jean NouvelParis, France

Tower plan(opposite, left)Section and elevation(opposite, right)

model perspective(above)

Elevation(right, middle)

Section(right, below)


Documents

AN NCHOR FOR ROOKLYN S NEW ULTURAL ISTRICT A … · TEN Arquitectos Mexico City/New York, NY Perspective (opposite page) Elevation (below) Comp V12 #4F Winter_Comp V12 #4F Winter