Kresge Auditorium, Building W Fariborz Maseeh Hall, Building W1. Media Lab Complex, Building E One Portland Street. Samuel Tak Lee Building, Building 9 renovation. Simons Building renovation, Building 2 Mathematics. The David H. Theater Arts, Building W University Park expansion Massachusetts Avenue. New House Renovation, Building W Kresge Auditorium, Building W16 A well-loved resource and highly active venue, Kresge Auditorium has undergone a meticulous historic restoration to stabilize its landmark features, improve visitor comfort, and enable the building to better serve the community.
Status Complete. Completion Date Themes and priorities Renovation and renewal. Image credits Photographer Christopher Harting. School or Unit Division of Student Life. Use Student Life. Scope 42, gsf.
In concrete and reinforcement of edge beams near each main support was replaced. At the same time standing seam copper roofing was put in place and remains to this day. From eye level, the attenuation of the form to three points gives a slender reading to the expansive container. The entry brings visitors into an elongated lobby on the level midway between the main auditorium and the smaller theater below.
Additional spaces on the lower level include rehearsal areas, a lounge, dressing rooms, and a carpenter shop. Though acoustics did not drive the overall form of Kresge, it shaped interior modifications that optimize the experience of performances and allow simultaneous events.
The stage in the main auditorium floats on a fiberglass pad that deadens potentially disruptive vibrations from transferring to the theater below. Oak wall grating with absorptive backing, polychrome fabric seats and an array of curvilinear suspended panels calibrate the sonic environment. Even with these interventions, the domed form is legible from the interior. Critical response was strongly divided.
Most national design and construction periodicals followed the planning process, most with great enthusiasm. Yet the completed project faced strong detractors who criticized it for failing to relate to context, having structural shortcomings, and being an inappropriate form for an auditorium [3].
A Architectural Record article explicated the functional success of the building but found the austere material palette lacked warmth [4].
For more information, check out the numerous articles on ArchDaily that feature Saarinen's work. Kevin; Roise, Charlene K. Cambridge: MIT Press, Pg You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Rigid reinforced edge along the perimeter beams defining the roof and large, solid transparent facades. A second non-structural layer, with the average thickness 6. The project had to face numerous tests, both during and after construction. The roof, originally intended to be supported only by three major carriers, required the addition of vertical structural pillars behind the glass, as the deflection of the edge beams was higher than expected.
Both the chapel and the auditorium were not well accepted by the public at the time, which you received with much criticism, highlighting the negative aspects of its construction. These drainage through the roof in the auditorium. The shape of the roof and edge beams caused the water to flow naturally to the three support points. Due to inadequate mixing in concrete filled deck, in the original roof began to leak water, and soon to pass to the walls.
This last fault was quickly fixed by replacing the existing roof with a new copper resisted until In the building was again renovated. Continuous filtration of water through the years has caused other problems such as corrosion of reinforcing steel structural frame, until a complete structural renovation was necessary in In the dome construction has been used reinforced concrete and copper plates.
On the facades glass curtain walls were placed. The auditorium stands on a round concrete coated with red brick. Finding the right material for the lining of the dome of double curvature represented a challenge.
At first it was thought marble tiles and plates coated copper lead, but were rejected for reasons of budget and performance issues. In the thermal motions had left their mark on the building, numerous cracks and delamination, turning the original roof unusable.
0コメント