Health and Human Services Logo

  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services | National Institutes of Health

Biologics Regulation and ResearchThe People and Work of Buildings 29 & 29A

Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Swan, Jeremy (NIH/NICHD) [C]

Saved on

compared with

New Version 4

changes.mady.by.user Swan, Jeremy (NIH/NICHD) [C]

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Dive
preface
classgrid-row grid-gap
Dive
classgrid-col-6

Modernism’s simplistic and streamlined design concepts, coupled with the advent of new and cheaper building materials created an era of architecture in the 1950s and 60s that was both practical and economical. In relation to research and academic institutions, buildings/campuses were being designed to fit the current needs of researchers and workers, rather than serve as a lasting tangible tribute to an institution or idea. These architectural advancements, coupled with the directives of both the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, to both improve and expand federal architecture in the nation’s capital and across the U.S., gave birth to a new era of largescale, planned campus facilities in Modern building and landscape design:

Dive
classgrid-col-6

“The design of Federal office buildings, particularly those to be located in the Nation’s Capital, must meet a two-fold requirement. First, it must provide efficient and economical facilities for the use of Government agencies. Second, it must provide visual testimony to the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American government.

Landscaping is included as an integral part of the design of any building and appropriate instructions are given in this respect during the design stage to contract architects and engineers. As part of these instructions, the architect is told to make his design in keeping with the motif of the community.”"

  • —Rivas-Camp 2002

The evolution of the modern research facility did not occur overnight, rather it was an evolution through trial and error. A key element to designing a successful research space was not only ensuring proper allocation of space, but also allowing for both expansion/conversion of working areas and easy collaboration among researchers. Architects and designers took cues from earlier projects of the late 1950s–1960s where buildings were often designed with floor plans that were considered too narrow by the inhabitants and with spacing between floors and utility corridors that was viewed as inherently insufficient. An excellent case study in this evolving design theory can be seen in the work of Louis Kahn. Louis Kahn’s 1962 Richards Medical Research Laboratories located at the University of Pennsylvania is known as a Landmark Modern building, however, the facility’s design exhibits an inefficient use of space, which isolates researchers from each other. Kahn learned from his design limitations at Richards and applied these lessons in his design of the iconic Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. Kahn worked with famed Polio researcher Jonas Salk to create design concepts that are utilized by lab designers even today. At the Salk Institute, Kahn was charged “to create spacious, unobstructed laboratory spaces that could be adapted to the ever-changing needs of science” (Fiederer 2017). Kahn utilized large, well-lit spaces constructed out of lasting materials that could be easily cleaned and manipulated for the needs of researchers. In addition, Kahn incorporated landscaping elements to both enhance the design of the campus as well as serve a function.

...
Return to top