In providing a haven for the seekers of truth, and
producing the citizens, leaders, and innovators of the future, our universities
are extremely important to us, and we hold them to very high standards.
Although we associate all universities with many of the same values – such as
education, innovation, and culture – each university has a different character
and a different way of pursuing these goals. In its mission statement, the
University
of
Texas
at
Austin
asserts that it is “an enduring symbol
of the spirit of
Texas
,” and strives to stay true to that heritage in the way it functions and the
values it holds. However, the University also endeavors to remain true to
another, older tradition – that knowing “the truth will make you free.” UT
affirms its commitment to this intellectual tradition in its mission “to
achieve excellence in the interrelated areas of…education…research, and public
service.” Also explicit in this goal of excellence is UT’s dedication to its social
responsibility, and the University reaffirms this in its core purpose of
“transform[ing] lives for the benefit of society.”
Collegiate architecture needs to clearly reflect and
promote its university’s goals, and how well a style of architecture does this
for UT should be the touchstone in creating a new master plan. Paradoxically,
good architecture often seems invisible to those closest to it. It stands, ever
present, in the background of our experience as life flows in, through, and
around it, but we seldom take notice of this quiet giant. However, as soon as
change is proposed, everyone is up in arms, ready to defend or tear down the
new style of a building that, in a few months, may slowly fade again to
invisibility. Regardless of style, whether florid Gothic or stripped Modernism,
good architecture “should meld seamlessly into what’s already there.” In a sense, this is what makes a building invisible – its ability to blend so
closely into its physical and “spiritual” surroundings that it becomes an
organic part of the whole. For collegiate architecture, this means blending
with the values of its institution to become an integral thread in the fabric
of the university itself, instead of a physical environment separate from the
character of the university. However, this goal is more difficult than it
seems. Our universities and their architecture must integrate the past with the
future to create an environment that “serves our architectural heritage, the
adjacent environments, [and] the broad goals of The University.” For the
University
of
Texas
, I see this goal
manifested in architecture that connects us with our past, is comfortable,
useful, and inspiring in our present, and respects the University’s civic
responsibility to take the campus in a sustainable, socially conscious
direction into the future.
With respect to the first of these dimensions, a sense of
age, of historical presence, and of continuity through time is something I
always feel when stepping onto UT’s campus and the feeling that I, and many
others, value about college campuses in general. The idea that so many have
studied here before, walked through the same courtyards, stayed in the same
dorm rooms, and felt the same pangs of self discovery is inspiring, and makes
me, as a student, feel that I am part of a greater community that stretches
through time and space. Upon entering a university, we become participants in
an intellectual and educational tradition, and campus architecture, by
“play[ing] a large role in the shared experiences, academic rituals, and
memories of all members of The University community,” facilitates that feeling of participation.
This close tie between the sense of age in architecture
and current, personal experiences is one reason an older style
would work better than something relatively new, like
Modernism or Postmodernism. Though
Modernist buildings may be beautiful and well
designed, they do not exude that invaluable sense of age, and I would imagine
such a collection of buildings would not inspire the same feelings of belonging
to a tradition as an ancient campus such as Oxford or even as our younger
university. Therefore, continuing with the style of Mediterranean architecture
that rings true to the stated goals of the University and to me, as a new
student, seems appropriate.
Mediterranean style architecture, which includes Spanish
influences, is a particularly good match for UT Austin, not only resonating
with the history of our university, but also the environment of our city. The
Mediterranean style of architecture is especially evocative of an important
connection to an intellectual tradition: with a bit of imagination, our red
tiles and limestone can be related back to a city-state of the Italian
Renaissance. A cultural rebirth that originated in
Italy
, the Renaissance saw a
rediscovery of classical thought and the creation of Humanism, which shifted
the focus onto man, his abilities, and his accomplishments. The mission of UT is similar to the goals of Renaissance humanists, encouraging
discovery in its scholars and, as declared in its mission, striving to “expand
knowledge and human understanding [and]…to seek the truth and express it.” The Humanists saw this struggle to gain knowledge and understand the world as
“the highest and noblest form of human activity,” which again resonates strongly with the ideals set forth by the University. Additionally, Italian city-states were essentially self-contained
communities, distinct from, and yet part of, the surrounding area. The University
can be thought of as an intellectual city-state, an academic community that has
its own character while fitting naturally into its context.
Mediterranean architecture reflects all of the values of a
Renaissance city-state, and using this style of architecture on campus would
clearly connect UT to its intellectual tradition. Another consideration is the
likeness between the climates of
Texas
and
Italy
. The two are
similar in the extreme crispness of the blue sky and often brutal heat, so it
only makes sense to use the red tiles roofs, creamy limestone or golden bricks,
and recessed porches that are best suited to such an environment. Mediterranean
style roofs stay cooler than other kinds because air is able to circulate both
above and below the tiles, which helps the roof shed heat more quickly.
Similarly, the light color of the limestone reflects, rather than absorbs, heat
from sunlight. Porches, another feature, shade the building during part of the
day and help keep the main walls out of direct sunlight. Like the limestone,
this prevents the building from absorbing as much heat and also provides a
shaded walkway for students. All of these characteristics make Mediterranean
style architecture appropriate for the climate of
Texas
.
How appropriate architecture is to its environment,
what Ruskin calls “the expression by man…of the lands that gave him birth,” is an important way to judge a style. Where a Gothic-style quadrangle of the
University of Chicago – too gray, too cold – or the later Italian,
Venetian-style façade of Rice University –
too formal, too stiff – would simply look out of
place, the rugged beauty of Mediterranean style blends into, and complements,
Austin’s environment better than any other. Against the sharp blue of the sky,
the red roofs and yellow exterior strike a color chord in the purest sense,
since blue, red, and yellow make up the primary colors. The colors play off of
one another, each making the others brighter and sharper. If you place the
green of an oak tree into the picture, the colors just ring with brilliance in
the
Texas
sun.
Additionally, the use of ornamentation in Mediterranean
style
architecture works well for the University and
Austin. Though minimally ornamented on the general façade, the decoration under
and around the eves, doors, and windows gives a building character. However,
the decoration is able to do this without creating overwhelming excess, as in
Gothic architecture, or insisting on an absolute lack of ornamentation and
warmth, as with Modernism. Therefore, Mediterranean style architecture is the
most fitting for UT’s architecture because of the strong historical,
educational, and environmental connections it has.
Though an outside appearance that resonates with the past matters
a great deal, the second way that architecture reflects the goals of the
university – how we interact with our buildings in the present – is arguably
one of the most important aspects of architecture. The design of a building can
change how we feel inside of it – creative or confined, inspired or depressed.
We need to pick a style of architecture that feels natural and that makes every
member of the University community feel comfortable. Characteristics of this
style include the use of natural light and the creation of open space to
facilitate a connection with nature and a sense of community.
Natural light is one aspect of this style and it should be
incorporated into the design
of our buildings whenever possible. Not only would
this relieve the often “penitential” atmosphere found in the Modernist feats of RLM and Jester, but it also would
open up the building to nature. This helps the user of the building feel less
confined and better able to learn in a friendlier, natural-feeling
environment. Important to note is that the advantages
of natural lighting are not purely psychological: studies have shown “benefits
in worker productivity and health related to daylight in buildings.”
However, it is not always as easy as simply adding more
windows. The
Texas
sun can be fiercely unfriendly, and direct, August sunlight both hurts the eyes
and heats up buildings. Our architecture must find ways of diffusing and
reflecting the light, such as in the Blanton museum’s atrium, without
compromising the design of the building. Methods of accomplishing this range
from putting specially designed, light-diffusing screens over windows, to using
types of glass that reflect the light differently, to changing the angle of the
windows themselves.
Another facet of natural design is the construction of
numerous open spaces to promote a sense of community around campus, which in
turn facilitates a feeling of inclusion in the campus’s intellectual tradition.
As Robert Berdahl, former president of the University and contributor to UT’s
most recent master plan, insists, the ideal campus is “an academic community in
which social and intellectual ideals would be inseparable from its
spatial forms.” The open spaces, incorporating a great deal of nature into their designs, would
act as places for inspiration, connection, relaxation, and discussion.
According to
Hawthorne
,
it is from these spaces, “from the ‘grassy quadrangles, where cloistered walks
have echoed to the quiet footsteps of twenty generations,’” that the college campus takes on its character. This links back to the idea of
a university’s continuity in time, as well as the continuation of the tradition
of learning. We want our architecture to be inclusive, to encourage
participation in the tradition of learning, and to integrate nature into the
campus environment.
The third way that architecture can advance the mission of the
university is to show the way toward a sustainable, socially conscious future.
In a time when the detrimental effects of humanity on the environment are
becoming more and more clear, it is crucial that we start building with an eye
on the environment, considering how we can change the way we construct and
maintain our buildings to make them more environmentally friendly. The
University’s mission also includes the responsibility “to serve as a catalyst
for positive change in
Texas
and beyond.” Therefore, the third component of my architecture master plan is the use of
“green,” sustainable architecture, and this could be implemented in the materials
we use in our buildings, the way we light our buildings, and the way in which
we power the campus.
To make our campus architecture greener, we can consider
the types of materials we use in construction.
There are many alternatives to traditional “virgin”
materials – those that are often not quickly renewable – that still offer the same structural and
aesthetic characteristics. For example, there are competitively priced
alternatives to conventional wooden floors that still look as sophisticated,
but that are made from renewable resources. We can also use engineered and
recycled wood in the construction of our buildings, as such materials
“drastically minimize the amount of waste created in processing the raw
materials…[and can be made using] waste wood and entire trees, regardless of
species, shape, and age.” Using alternative materials would not only be beneficial for our environment,
but it could help our economy as well. Research has shown that there are
several options for alternative and local materials that would not only reduce
the environmental impact of construction, but also foster the local economy.
When deciding how to light our buildings, we should
consider using natural light. It has the benefit of a more natural feeling
environment, as mentioned earlier, as well as the benefit of lowering lighting
costs. When constructing a building, the architect’s decisions about “building
orientation, form…and the position and size of windows have a significant
impact on the level of daylighting and the eventual energy consumption of the
finished building.” If designed wisely, a building can use enough natural light to reduce the need
for artificial lighting. Additionally, window glazes can prevent heat exchange,
thus lowering heating and cooling costs.
In addition to using alternative materials and
natural light, it would also be beneficial to utilize alterative energy
sources. Solar energy has the benefit of being “a free, non-polluting energy
source that is easily captured,” and solar water heaters can be used as an environmentally friendly way to heat
buildings. Additionally, the University could look into using alternative
energy, such as the city of
Austin
’s
Green Choice Renewable Energy Program, which gathers clean, renewable energy
from wind turbines, solar power, and landfill gas. As a university and as part
of
Austin
, it
should be our goal to live up to our social responsibility by making ourselves
the campus equivalent of a hybrid car in a world of Hummers.
Though the propositions of a Mediterranean style,
with its emphasis on useful and comfortable design and a sustainable building
plan, may sound interesting, it might be difficult to imagine how these
characteristics could be combined to create a unified style of architecture,
and equally difficult to imagine this
architecture 
actually integrated into UT’s campus. To
help make
these ideas more concrete, I’ve created a model that incorporates
all three characteristics into a cohesive whole.
The most obvious feature of this
building is its Mediterranean feel. We can see this in the redtile roof,
recessed porch with columns, and use of
limestone. As mentioned
before, this
style is well suited for the hot climate of
Austin
, since it helps to keep the building
cool. Additionally, by evoking the spirit of an Italian city-state, the style
would resonate both with the university’s intellectual tradition and with its
goal of excellence.
Less obvious perhaps than its outward
style is the comfortable and useful design of this building. These features,
which deal largely with the way one feels inside of a
building, are
more difficult to replicate ina model. Though experiences are difficultto
capture, we can imagine the way these windows around the eves would illuminate
the building with natural light. Similarly, we can think about what it would be
like to have a class discussion in the courtyard. Both windows and courtyard
promote a feeling of
openness and inclusion.
The final, and probably the most subtle,
characteristic of this building is the use of sustainable materials. Since cork
trees grow back in as few as seven years, they are considered a renewable
resource, and the cork flooring used inside has the added advantage of
maintaining a
consistent
temperature throughout the year. Instead of using stone, which is very cold
during the
winter, the University could use cork, which stays a
much warmer 70 degrees all year long. Additionally, the windows under the eves
can be used to reduce the need for artificial light in this building. Finally,
the solar panels on the roof can help the building produce its own energy.
When applied to all of the buildings on campus, these
stylistic choices – a Mediterranean style, useful design, and sustainable
technology – will be
the most
appropriate for the
University
of
Texas
. However, it’s
important to consider whom this architectural style will affect. The
architecture of a university needs to satisfy a diverse group of people: on the
one hand, it must represent the goals of the university, but it also must be
comfortable and usable to the students who interact with it every day. Though
not part of the immediate University community, the outside world has standards
as well. As Goodheart suggests, “our society expects its colleges (and its
architects) to be both guardians of tradition and incubators of originality…we
expect them to stand for both the old and the new.” It is then necessary to develop a master plan that is able to speak to all
three of these groups. Mediterranean architecture connects the University with
its intellectual heritage, incorporates students into this intellectual
tradition, and satisfies society’s expectation of architecture and a university
that preserves the past. However, green, sustainable architecture addresses
society’s insistence on originality as well as UT’s self-declared social
responsibility of promoting positive change. Blending the two while addressing
students’ needs for natural, usable design creates a campus that is vibrant,
dynamic, and resonant, just like the community that evolves around it. This
community is what we have at the
University
of
Texas
, and this style
of architecture is what we need.
Word Count: 2,613
Words Added: 530
Picture Sources
1. Oxford – http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~bump/oxford/NewCollege/cloisters.jpg
2. CS Building – http://www.furmans.info/pics/2005/BostonCity/14.htm
3. Rice – http://www.infomotions.com/gallery/houston/Images/P4020050.jpg.
4. The University of Chicago – http://www.aviso.net/chicago/higherlearning/universityofchicago/.
5. UT Building and Sky – Picture by the author
6. Blanton atrium – http://static.flickr.com/56/139412165_adf05a409e_m.jpg
7. Honors Quad http://www.utexas.edu/student/housing/index.php?site=1&scode=4&id=153&flash_vr&menu=10#
8. Cork – http://www.habitusnyc.com/
9. Laminated wood – http://www.plexwood.nl/site/english/
10. Wind turbines – http://www.austinenergy.com/images/windturbine.jpg.
11. Second Life building – Picture by the author
12. SL columns – Picture by the author
13. SL windows – Picture by the author
14. SL courtyard – Picture by the author
15. SL tile floor – Picture by the author
16. SL solar panels – Picture by the author
