Campus architecture is driven by institutional, technological, and cultural imperatives. In its first era of campus construction, Carnegie Tech embodied industrial-age technology and classical-revival culture, which found synthesis in the work of architect Henry Hornbostel. In its second era, an institution in the throes of post-war growth opted for an architecture of expediency and modernity. In the current era, a thriving information-age institution meets the new demands and aesthetics of high-technology and postmodern sensibilities for history and context. This time there has been little synthesis, but rather the decision to have it both ways, and the concurrent development of two major architectural languages for new buildings.
All buildings have private and public roles. In its private role, each building's internal functional attributes serve its immediate users. In its public role, each building contributes to the larger environment and the larger community through its relationships with other buildings and open spaces. Thus, each building assumes a public stance within what architect Michael Dennis and others have called the "public realm."
This exhibit explores the recent era of campus building at Carnegie Mellon, with a focus on the public realm. Selected projects receive individual treatment, with a look at the historical context, an investigation of the architects' creative processes, and some assessment of the results. Three of the projects are still on the drawing boards (and CAAD stations), and offer a view of things to come.
Many of these projects were first explored in two studies by CRS Sirrine, Inc.--the Long Range Campus Plan (1985) and the Junction Hollow Planning Study (1986)--which influenced campus development during the early years of this period. These projects became the substance of the campus plan that emerged from the 1987 University Center Competition, shaped campus development for a decade, and continues to govern the future of the campus. Finally, these projects made way for the Open Space Study (1995) by Sasaki Associates, Inc., which explores ways to enhance the land and the plantings that remain between all the buildings.
The new buildings give welcome definition to campus spaces old and new. They address the uneven terrain with vigor. They show ample craftsmanship in brick, metal, and glass. They have moments of Hornbostelian wit. Yet, provocative works by two world-class architects--Peter Eisenman and Pierre Zoelly--have been abandoned. Hornbostel's classical influence lies heavy at times. High-tech metal and glass curtain walls are hard for many people to love.
Not shown here are other projects of this period that have sought to restore and renew the university's historic buildings, including the remodeling of the former U. S. Bureau of Mines building into Hamburg Hall (L. P. Perfido Associates, 1986-1992); the restoration of terra cotta at Margaret Morrison Carnegie Hall and Hamerschlag Hall (Lucian Caste, 1993-1996); and the renovation of the Gymnasium (Damianos Brown Andrews, 1994-).
All of these projects are the physical legacy of Carnegie Mellon presidents Richard Cyert and Robert Mehrabian. The decade also neatly corresponds with my years at Carnegie Mellon.
Martin Aurand