Alfred Newton Richards Medical Research Laboratories and David Goddard Laboratories Buildings

Richards and Goddard Buildings; Biology Building (for Goddard Laboratories, renamed 1983)
Good

Alfred Newton Richards Medical Research Laboratories and David Goddard Laboratories Buildings

Richards Medical Research Laboratories, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Louis Kahn, 1965.

Credit

Hugh Loomis

Site overview

The Richards and Goddard complex is cluster of interconnected towers, divided into “served” (the laboratory areas) and “servant spaces” (the utilities, mechanical areas, etc.). Whereas Richards had more of a “pinwheel” type of formation, the addition of Goddard took on a more linear form. However the structural frame and stacked layout of open spaces remained key elements in the composition for both projects. The structural system, which consists of an interlocking assembly of prefabricated reinforced concrete units in the form of large Vierendeel trusses, beams, and H-plan columns, allows the corner of the buildings to be “freely dissolved” and for a “rigorous clarity” of functional structure.

Awards

Design

Citation of Merit

Civic

The Design Citation of Merit is given for the restoration of Richards Medical Research Laboratories, one of the most important projects of architect Louis I. Kahn. This National Historic Landmark building retains a high degree of integrity and prior to the renovation it had undergone no major campaigns of alteration. Plagued with functional issues from the start, the building suffered from outdated building systems and the exquisite exposed concrete and cinder block walls and ceilings became so soiled and damaged that they had been covered up. This technically challenging renovation began with a change to the primary use of the building from wet lab science research to a dry-lab with computationally intensive uses. The key technical drivers of the restoration were glazing and the building systems. The dichotomy between sustaining the Laboratories as an architectural icon and its functional and environmental performance defined it for over fifty years. The renovation has resulted in a high-performance building admired by both the users and the local architectural community.

“The designers grappled with tough questions. What do you do with a problematic building greater in concept than execution? What should be ‘preserved’? We will face these questions again and the results here are valuable to study.”
-Alan Hess, 2020 Jury member

“The project integrates systems and technology while respecting the character of the existing, rigid structure and retaining character-defining features such as the window frames for a successful final design.”

- Kim Yao, 2020 Jury chair
Client

The University of Pennsylvania 

Restoration Team

EYP Architecture & Engineering, Atkin Olshin Schade Architects

Primary classification

Education (EDC)

Terms of protection

Properties listed on the Philadelphia Register of Historic Places must get approval from the Philadelphia Historical Commission for construction, alteration, or demolition through a design review process.

Designations

National Historic Register of Historic Places (as a contributing property to the University of Pennsylvania Campus Historic District), listed on December 28, 1978

Philadelphia Register of Historic Places, October 8, 2004

National Historic Landmark, designated on January 16, 2009

Author(s)

Nelly Chang | Columbia University | 3/4/2010

How to Visit

Private university building

Location

University of Pennsylvania

3700-3710 Hamilton Walk
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, PA, 10025

Country

US

Richards Medical Research Laboratories, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Louis Kahn, 1965.

Credit:

Hugh Loomis

Designer(s)

Other designers

Landscape: George Patton (ultimately, his designs for the plaza were uncompleted)

Other designers: Dr. August E. Komendant (structural consultant); Atlantic Prestressed Concrete Co. (prefabricator); Keast and Hood (structural engineers); James T. Clark (electrical engineer); Cronheim and Weger (mechanical engineers); Fred S. Dubin (mechanical and electrical engineers); Joseph R. Farrell, Inc., (general contractor); additionally, for the construction of Goddard, United Engineers and Constructors were brought in to help complete the project.

Related News

Related chapter

Greater Philadelphia

Related Sites

Commission

1957

Completion

1965

Commission / Completion details

1957: Kahn began design work on Goddard later that year, however during the design stage, Kahn was initially recommended only as a consultant for the project due to the University’s dissatisfaction with the proceedings of the first phase of the project. 1958: Start of work. Completion: official naming ceremony held in 1960 for Richards. primary construction finishes in 1963 for Richards and 1964 for Goddard; final completion date for entire site including documentation and landscaping is 1965.

Original Brief

Commission brief: In the postwar, the desire to expand the University of Pennsylvania’s medical facilities and improve the image of the University as an innovative and modern research institution prompted a large-scale building initiative. Major funding for these new projects was undertaken through the leadership of Dr. Norman H. Topping, Vice President for Medical Affairs, and he would continue to play a large role in the development of the new Medical “wing.” The commission for a new building to house five different departments including “physiology, microbiology, research surger, public health, and the Johnson Foundation” (Brownlee 324), was officially approved in 1956, and G. Holmes Perkins, then Dean of the School of Fine Arts, and Sydney Martin, a University Trustee proposed two architects to design the new building. One was Louis Kahn, the other Eero Saarinen. Saarinen was ultimately given the commission of a women’s dormitory (Hill House) instead, and in February 1957, Kahn was officially presented the commission by the University President Gaylord Harnwell. Design brief: A planning committee composed of various faculty members whose departments were to share the new space was to give input on the design. The committee’s own initial design plans were traditional for laboratory spaces – the standard double loaded corridor with modular bays that allowed for flexible configuration of spaces. Kahn rejected this, believing that researchers needed both physical and “psychological” contact with each other (Museum of Art Bulletin, 1961, v.28, n.1, p. 4) and instead planned for a more open, studio-like layout, and having the spaces stacked in a tower instead of being linear. Another primary concern was having proper exhaust, due to the noxious nature of research being performed. Thus the creation of “servant” and “served” spaces, with three “servant” towers with smaller exhaust stacks clustering around a “service” tower with four large air-intake ventilation stacks. Construction history: Finished much over budget, and with tension building among faculty members over the configuration of the space which became a major source of tension between client and architect, Kahn was forced to make many compromises in design, especially in the second phase of the project. These concessions would severely affect the performance and comfort of the buildings, including elimination of shading devices and reduction of insulation, and the usage of cheaper building materials in Goddard. By the time of its completion in 1965, not only had the building size been reduced, but the exterior plaza space had been also scaled back in size.

Significant Alteration(s) with Date(s)

A substantial restoration project completed in 2018 addressed issues present since the building was originally completed, making it functional for current day use. This project received a 2020 Modernism in America Award.

Current Use

Primarily used as research and teaching facilities for the Penn Medical and Biology departments. Despite minor alterations and additions, the overall integrity of Kahn’s building design has been preserved.

Current Condition

As a whole, the site is in relatively good condition, though noticeable wear can be seen on the exterior and interior. Goddard is in worse condition than Richards, however, having been built of cheaper materials, and the masonry units and concrete have deteriorated more rapidly over time. Interior components, such as the partitions have been adjusted to accommodate necessary space, while secondary elements such as shading devices and paint have been added to the structure.

Technical

An important person behind one of the United States’ first major precast concrete building was Kahn’s structural consultant, Dr. August E. Komendant who specialized in this new type of reinforced construction method. The result is a structural, machine-like system that is expressive of the function of the space, and allowed for a column-less space of 45’ x 45’ on a nine-square grid to be used for the primary studio-labs. These labs were supported on a precast concrete assembly. Major components include H-columns on the perimeter of the floor-plates instead of at the corners (which allowed for more natural light to be brought into the spaces through large plate-glass windows) and Vierendeel trusses which provided an articulate, open space for the organization and distribution of the mechanical and plumbing systems. This precast assembly was assembled floor by floor, with pretensioned beams and crossbeams secured to each other by post-tensioned cables. This new system was a step forward not only for architecture, but also for the construction industry, which had to coordinate a new system of highly-precise assembly with complicated equipment, and a new process of “mass-production” on site (Leslie, 2005, p. 115) was created.

Social

The building project became an international symbol for the University of Pennsylvania as a modern research institution. Its solid volumetric form, seamless integration of disparate parts and materials into a monolithic sculpture, towered over its surroundings. Its novel construction methods and design, in contrast to its neighboring predecessors, reinforced the new identity and future direction that Penn and the architectural community on campus wanted to take. It was to be a premier, forward-thinking, institution.

Cultural & Aesthetic

Praised for its ”moral honesty,” (Architectural Record, April 1963, p. 26), structural clarity and ingenuity, the Richards and Goddard complex was a clear reaction against the International Style, defined by the thin glass membranes of the curtain wall systems exemplified by the PSFS building in Philadelphia. Although Perkins, in nominating Kahn, had desired to move the school away from the traditional Beaux-Arts style, Kahn did not discard his Beaux-arts background completely. Kahn was a long-time admirer of Classical structures like Trajan’s Forum and other historical monuments such as San Gimignano , and the primal materialistic quality, geometric simplicity and symmetry reflect his training and personal experience. However, not all critics appreciated the lyrical purity and beauty of the structure, especially to those working inside, many of whom found the building to be “ugly” and unimpressive, especially from the interior. The problems of solar gain and ventilation, lack of adequate laboratory space, contributed to the criticism of the building, both at its time and even today (see article in the Daily Pennsylvanian, January 28, 2009).

General Assessment

Before completion of the Richards/Goddard complex, critics from around the world were already heralding the project as the vanguard of the Modern Movement and a solo exhibit in 1961 by MOMA highlighting Richards seemed to solidify not only the building’s place in history, but also Kahn’s. Most articles praised the technical rigor, and simultaneously ignored its interior, which could not be completely defended, especially to the scientists who had to work in the building. In spite of its numerous problems, the building was a huge step forward not only technologically and stylistically, but also conceptually in the way that psychological analysis and human connection to the building itself and to each other were explored in the design. Furthermore, the typology of the sterile research laboratory and other programs of its type, were “elevated in status” (Cooperman, NHL nominations draft, p. 35). The legacy of the building project was immediately apparent, especially in Kahn’s work, where major themes of “served” and “servant” spaces and the overall tectonics of the building and material expression continued to be explored and played out to a certain degree of finesse, most notably as seen in the contemporaneous project of the Salk institute and Exeter Library. Similarly, the Richards and Goddard buildings would also continue to inspire other architects around the world such as Robert Venturi, Richard Rogers, Renzo Piano and Tadao Ando in their design processes. Also, worthy of note, is the that the Richards and Goddard building is the first of Kahn’s buildings to be named a National Historic Landmark, despite not having met the requisite 50 years generally required to be considered.

References

Articles:

Anon. “Logic and Art in Precast Concrete: Medical Research Laboratory, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA,” Architectural Record, v. 126, no. 3, September 1959, pp. 233-238.

Anon. “A Theory for the Future,” Architectural Forum 112:1, January 1960, pp. 138-140.

- - - -. “Form Evokes Function,” xi 75, no. 23, June 6, 1960, p. 76.

Anon. “Art Serves Science,” Architectural Record, v. 128, August 1960, pp. 149-156.

Anon. “Medical Research Buildings,” Arts and Architecture, August 1961, v. 78, pp. 14-17, 28.

Banham, Reyner. “On Trial 1: The Situation: What Architecture of Technology?” Architectural Review v. 131, no. 780, February 1962, pp. 97-99.

Cooperman, Emily T. “National Historic Landmark Nominations Form,” May 2008.

Dixon, John Morris and James T. Burns, Jr., “Kahn’s Second Phase at Pennsylvania. New Biology Building,” Progressive Architecture 45, no. 9, September 1964, pp. 208-13.

Fitch, James Marston, “A Building of Rugged Fundamentals,” Architectural Forum, July 1960, v. 113, n.1, pp. 82-87.

Huxtable, Ada Louise, “In Philadelphia, An Architect,” New York Times, June 11, 1961.

Scully, Vincent, “The Precisionist Strain in American Architecture.” Art in America, v. 48, no. 8, 1960, pp. 46-53.

Wilder, Green, “Louis I. Kahn, Architect, Alfred Newton Richards Building, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1958-1960,” Museum of Modern Art Bulletin, 1961, v. 28, n. 1, pp. 3-23.

 

Books:

Brownlee, David and David G. De Long, Louis I. Kahn: In the Realm of Architecture, New York, Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1991.

Giurgola, Romaldo and Jaimini Mehta, Louis I. Kahn, Boulder, CO, Westview Press, 1975.

Klaus-Peter Gast, Louis I. Kahn, Boston, Massachusetts, Birkhauser Verlag, 1999.

Latour, Alessandra, ed., Louis I. Kahn: l’uomo, il maestro, Roma: Kappa, 1986.

Latour, Alessandra, ed, Louis I. Kahn: Writings, Lectures, Interviews, New York, Rizzoli International Publications, 1991.

Leslie, Thomas, Louis I. Kahn: Building Art, Building Science, New York, George Braziller, 2005.

McCarter, Robert, Louis I. Kahn, New York, Phaidon Press, 2003.

Ronner, Heinz and Sharad Jhaveri, Louis I. Kahn: Complete Work, 1935-1974, Basel, Birkhauser Verlag, 1987.

Rosa, Joseph, Louis I. Kahn, 1901-1974: Enlightened Space, Koln, Taschen, 2006.

Scully, Vincent, Louis I. Kahn, New York: George Braziller, 1962.

Wiseman, Carter, Louis I. Kahn: Beyond Time and Style, New York, W.W. Norton, 2007.

 

Film:

"My Architect: A Son’s Journey" / a film by Nathaniel Kahn. New York Video, 2005.