ANTONINO SAGGIO

FIVE MASTERWORKS BY LOUIS SAUER

An Unconventional American Architect

LULU.COM

English translation by Sally Pitt, November 2009To Bill Durkee architect of spirit who died too earlyPublished in July 2009 by Lulu.com in Raleigh NC, USAIsbn: 978-1-4461-4559-3

On Louis Sauer by this Author

Louis Sauer Un Architetto Americano (Ocina, 1988)Cinque Lavori Di Louis Sauer. Relazione Con Il Contesto E Ricerca Espressiva

Di Un Architetto Americano Fuori Dalle Mode, L'Architettura cronache e storia, No. 407, September 1989

Lintervento Nella Citt Edicata. Residenze Di Louis Sauer, Edilizia Popolare, May-June 1991

Louis Sauer, Rinnovo Urbano A Philadelphia, Costruire in Laterizio, No. 8, March-April 1989

Case Ad Alta Densit. Ammassati E Felici. Louis Sauer, Costruire, No. 77, October 1989

Absorbing Venice. Low-Rise High Density Housing By Louis Sauer. in: G. De Carlo, C. Occhialini Ilaud, Territory & Identity, Maggioli, Santo Arcangelo Romagna, 1998

Architettura E Modernit Dal Bauhaus A La Rivoluzione Informatica, (Carocci 2010)

2.

I n d e x

F o r w a r d 5 B i o g r a p h y 5D e s i g n P h i l o s o p h y 9T h e F r a n k e l H o u s e 1 1C o n t e x t R a p p o r t 1 7S o c i e t y H i l l 1 8P e n n s L a n d i n g S q u a r e 2 3T h e H o u s i n g P a c k a g e 2 8U r b a n D e s i g n 3 3N e w m a r k e t 3 5C i n c i n n a t i C o n c o u r s e 4 1A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d L a n d s c a p e 4 7G o v e r n o r s G r o v e 4 8A R e a l i s t A r c h i t e c t 5 1S a u e r i n t h e A r c h i t e c t u r a l D e b a t e 5 5B i b l i o g r a p h y 5 9

3.

4.

Louis Sauer, Pittsburgh 1983 and in a portrait by Guido Ruzzier, Baum-holder, Germany 1955.

F o r w a r d

Louis Sauer is known in the US as one of the greatest hous-ing experts. He achieved national fame when many of his in-novative designs were built in Society Hill, the historic colo-nial neighborhood in Philadelphia. The quality, variety and reasoning behind his creative solutions for the renewal of large areas of old and derelict urban context were the exem-plars for those who followed him in this field.

The five designs included in this book are selected from the period (1961-79) when Sauer practiced in Philadelphia. During these 17 years he designed and built a vast amount on different scales and in diverse sectors primarily in the East of the United States. During these 17 years, his work consisted of 250 architectural and urban design commissions that included 127 residential projects of which more than half have been built. His work, for which he has received many awards, has frequently been profiled in American and Euro-pean magazines. His work is exceptional for its variety and wealth of solutions. Some examples are his modernistic forms, intelligent understanding of the history of the locale and the requirements of diverse urban scales.

The five works I am presenting in this publication give a picture of his outstanding design and the ingenuity of his so-lutions when faced with diverse design challenges and scales. These are specifically targeted at defining the architects role in the environmental transformation process.

B i o g r a p h y

Louis Sauer was born in June 1928 in Forest Park and grew up in Oak Park, an elegant suburb of Chicago, where many of Wrights prairie houses were built alongside the dig-

5.

nified dwellings of the late 19th century. After doing poorly in pre-medical studies at DePauw University in Greencastle Indiana, he changed to art history and painting at the Penn-sylvania Academy of Fine Arts. Then he did his first degree at the Illinois Institute of Technologys Institute of Design (Moholy-Nagys the New Bauhaus) in Chicago under the tutorship of Gerhard Kallmann and Konrad Wachsman.

Conscripted for military service in Europe, he became a committed professional photographer. He worked for a pe-riod in Naples for the World Council of Churches to liaise with the American Consulate in Naples for helping refugees and escapees acquire USA visas. This may well explain his exceptional insights into problems that proved useful to him in his professional activities later on.

In the summer of 1956 he went to Venice for a summer course organized by Congrs Internationale dArchitecture Moderne and many of the architectural professors came when CIAMs Dubrovnik conference was finished. It was a moment in which the crisis, that would bring at the end of CIAM in 1959, started to be manifest. He stayed in Venice for over six months and became conversant and familiar with the Venetian open space configuration that became for him a

6.

Carlo Scarpa in the Studio, portrait by Sauer, Venice 1956.

constant source of inspiration. At the CIAM course he formed contacts with his Italian and non-Italian colleagues (later he set up a partnership with Giancarlo Guarda, whom he met on that occasion), presented a display of his photos and as-similated the citys architecture. In this period he continued to take photographs (see for example the Carlo Scarpa por-traits). Returning to the United States, he attended the Uni-versity of Pennsylvania under the tutorship of Louis Kahn and got his Master of Architecture in 1959. Between 1961 and 1964, he made his name nationally by winning the first prize from the Progressive Architecture Annual Design Awards Program in 1964, and then more than sixty Annual Deign Awards Program from national and local associations.

An important recognition of his work came when he was elected Fellow of the American Institute of Architects in 1973. His extensive professional activities started with his partnership with William Winchell, his association with A. De Vito from 1967 to 1969 and finally in Louis Sauer Associ-ates where, among other architects, Cecil Baker also worked. In 1971 he initiated Peoples Housing, Inc. in Topanga, Cali-fornia and served as a Director (with D. Marshall and S. Kerpen) in this architectural corporation that specialized in the advancement of low-income and special-needs housing. His most notable achievements from his Philadelphia prac-tice are 256 townhouses (Golf Course Island) in the new town of Reston, 108 apartments (Spring Pond) in Corning, 1,445 social homes in New Haven, Rochester, Yonkers, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington DC, 182 apart-ments (One Lytle Park) and equipping a city water park in Cincinnati, 422 homes (Harbor Walk) in downtown Balti-more and many projects in the neighborhood of Society Hill in Philadelphia, among which stand out 103 apartments and townhouses (Penns Landing Square) and a shopping mall (Newmarket).

7.

41, 8

8

23, 35

In parallel to his professional activities, Sauer was, for many years, professor at the University of Pennsylvania, vis-iting professor of Critical studies at Yale, MIT, the Universi-ties of Texas, Wisconsin and Washington University. After he closed his Philadelphia office in June 1979, he became Head of the Department of architecture at Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh, then professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder where he conducted urban design re-search. In 1989 he became the director of urban design in the planning office of Daniel Arbour Associates in Montreal. Among his distinguished work there, is the master plan for a new community - Bois Franc - which is under construction adjacent to Montreal (500 acres - 202 hectares - 8,000 dwell-ings).

Sauer retired from practice in 1997, moved to Austra-lia in 2000, and presently is a visiting professor at the Royal Melbourne Institute of technology (RMIT).

8.

Golf Course Island, Reston, Virginia 1965-1967.Harbor Walk, Baltimore, Maryland 1976-1980.

D e s i g n P h i l o s o p h y

At the root of his architectural works, especially residential, Sauer observed a distinct difference between what is on the inside of a building and what is on the outside. For him, a residential building has a dual reason for existing and so re-sponds to two worlds - to two environments. It needs to dig-nify the internal domestic environment as well as fit into the external citys contextual environment to which it rep-resents social value. The configurations of the two environ-ments, always different, led him to refine the designs for his works; for example, the contrast between the private and public areas mainly determines how the space is laid out. In following this idea, the architect develops specific plan types - such as a courtyard typology, with which in many of his projects, the courtyard becomes the center stage for the or-ganization of the house and the symbolic hub of home life.

The difference between the interior and exterior is, also, symbolically and psychologically the driving force behind his skillful management of the front facades that are often unre-lated to the organization of the internal space. His facades are often treated as a membrane that shrouds the building. They are designed, built and conceived to comply with the rhythms, lifestyles and proportions of the street context, the public world, rather than to the interiors idiosyncratic do-mestic world of privacy.

The architect, on some occasions such as redeveloping existing townhouses, does not alter the existing facade at all even if large scale restructuring would so allow. In the Buten House, for example, the total restructuring of the interiors spaces, levels, circulation and the inclusion of an courtyard garden around which the new environments gravitate, does not correspond to any manipulation of the front facade. While its interior is adapted to a domestic layout, its existing

9.

front facade is retained so that it will fit into the modest resi-dential street on which the building is located and remain incognito of the dramatically different interior. The same way of working can be found in the houses Sauer designed for himself. For example, in Pittsburgh, a large detached family residence built at the end of the 19th century was completely restructured by removing its interior central staircase. This gave rise to a spatial void of three floors that provided a ver-tical space on which to place the functions of the various lev-els, the matrix of the entire internal architecture.

However, given the opportunity the exterior architecture bursts into forms and volumes that have an invigorating ef-fect on the outside, especially in suburban flatlands or in natural environments. This is the case in much of Sauers ar-chitecture amongst which the Frankel House is particularly significant.

10.

The courtyard, Buten House, Philadelphia 1964.

T h e F r a n k e l H o u s e

The house is in Margate, New Jersey, in an area of detached houses on individual building plots parallel to the beach. From the project site it was only possible to get a glimpse of the sea despite being only two properties away. For Sauer, this radically modified the data of the architectonic problem. The idea stemmed from an open L shape opening in the direction of the sea. In the development of the design this shape was changed but not abandoned. The geometric L form defines the open space inside the house that runs verti-cally through three floors with a skylight at the roof, thus, it becomes the functional and spatial magnet of the dwelling. A water pool is adjacent to the entrance and adjacent to the liv-ing room are two gardens, one internal, the other external, and a study. The staircases and galleries of the upper levels overlook the ground level and enliven it by cast shadows. The result is a highly introspective house where memory of the initial idea is present in the invention of an extraordinar-ily effective natural and artificial space.

11.

Lenard Frankel House (left) and the William Frankel House (right), Margate, New Jersey 1968.

12.

The outside aims to explicitly dispute the banality of the context and the rules imposed by the legal dimensions of the property. A powerful game of volumes is launched into space. The house, together with the adjacent one (a relative) designed by Sauer, creates an urban sculpture bringing life to the exterior through a set of asymmetrical volumes that rein-force the surprising contrast with the interior. However, also in this case, the intention is not to directly reveal the mecha-nism on which the spaces are articulated but to introduce forms of abstract play to the context.

In this project, Sauer demonstrates that his design phi-losophy does not come from scant expressive language but stems from a careful assessment of the symbolic, spatial, functional, distributive and aesthetic design qualities.

13.

Entry water pool & dining room (p. 12) and Street view,Lenard Frankel House, Margate, 1968.

14.

View to living room from kitchen

15.

The Lenard Frankel House, Margate, New Jersey

The house is located on a plot near the ocean, however, the sea is only partially visible but enough to get a glimpse. The request for privacy by the clients and the site location were key in the architects decision to converge the daily functions in an internal space that became the symbolic and spatial hub of the house. On the left of the entrance, there is a small pond to collect the water from a small waterfall; to the right is a garden. The dining area and kitchen are separated from the living room by a second internal garden. A den is adjacent to the living room, which extends vertically over two floors.

There are two staircases to the upper floor that are connected by a gallery running above the lower space. The bedroom windows are fixed on niches that push open to the outside diagonally thus eliminating the view of the other residences. This provides a view of the sea. On the third floor there is studio where the roof is used as a belvedere terrace. Picture at page 11 shows on the left the Lenard Frankel House and at the right the William Frankel house designed by Sauer at the same time.

Detached residence of 4100 sq.. ft (380 sq. m)Messrs. Frankel

16.

Hamilton House, New Hope, Pennsylvania 1962-1996.

C o n t e x t R a p p o r t

Sauers modus operandi would appear to abandon one of the modern architectural postulates and be nearer to the more fashionable school of today. In reality his expressive research is measurable by the choices that distance him from many of the Modern Movements formulations (analytic decomposi-tion of functions and consequent exposure to the outside by the individual parts). However, he commits to a path that leads to a greater awareness of the relational implications be-tween the project and its surroundings. This path, which re-jects the mimetic type of short cuts and purely formalistic research, has shown his original ability to resolve the rela-tionship between the new and the pre-existing which is espe-cially stimulating because it is articulated in a contemporary expressive language. The physical features of the context of-fer Sauer some of the materials to be used in the design (see for example the Hamilton House built on an ruined mill). The materials provided by the context are not given but are found by extrapolating only the salient aspects from the re-ality. Between the physical context and how it is used in the architectural projects design, there is a pause in understand-ing its potential to transform itself and take shape in the con-text reality through the new project.

Sauer focuses on certain aspects of reality discarding others. Hence, he accomplishes a synthetic and non-analytic work driven by his artistic intuition and not by cataloging. His dominating creativity and his synthetic and selective abilities come into play in this sieving exercise.

His working formula could be summed up as context interpretation and reinvention meaning he interprets the reality of the context and reinvents the forms, rhythms and patterns to enhance the potential for it become a new natu-ral architectural form.

17.

16

S o c i e t y H i l l

At Society Hill, a heritage neighborhood in Philadelphia, Sauer demonstrated his ability to set up a dialogue between his projects and the historical context. The federal style fa-cades of the buildings in the neighborhood are clearly based on a three level division - these being the base of the building at street level, an elevation that unites the horizontal floor levels and the windows of equal width and a cornice right below the roof.

Sauer articulately responds to this organization in his projects by exploiting continuity themes but also by adding

18.

Locust Street Town-houses, Philadelphia 1968-1969.McClennen House, Philadelphia. 1965-1966.Penns Landing Square, Philadelphia 1968-1970.

dynamic motifs. On the one hand, he accepts that by intro-ducing new architecture into an existing block he has to ad-here to the rules and on the other he modifies the federal ar-chitectural division into three subdivisions accepting only two of the three elements. Breaking down the federal tripar-tition, allows its implicit static equilibrium to be substituted with the dynamics of modern architecture.

Lombard Condos, built without base or cornices are made up of two symmetrical parts that join the upper and lower parts of the building to create a powerful dynamism in

19.

Second Street Town-houses, Philadelphia 1969-1970.Lombard Condos, Philadelphia 1974-1978.

19

a poor quality residential street. In Second Street, there are again buildings without base or cornices where the openings that are arranged asymmetrically reinforce the continuity of the backdrop of the street and allow the urban scene to emerge. In Locust Street, a strong base without cornices al-lows the central body of the building to be articulated in towers which shape the horizon, dilate the scale of the pro-ject and fit into a context characterized by three residential towers. In Penns Landing Square Square's Spruce and Front Street facades, there is no base, the central body of the buildings figuratively encroaches the street and has an upper compact band matching the building on the other side of the river. In all of these designs, the architects language con-cerns the dynamics of the form while linking up with the formal elements of the neighboring architecture. In this way, he formally solves the difficult problem of introducing new forms and a contemporary aesthetic into an already settled context of a heritage neighborhood.

20.

19

18

18,24

21.

The Delancey Street Facade (right), the 2nd Street Facade (above), the Delancey Street Facade (below and next page) Penns Landing Square, Philadelphia

22.

P e n n s L a n d i n g S q u a r e

The architecture of this project, which should be looked at in more depth, is set in a continuity-discontinuity context. It invites careful study, not only of the building but also of the city, its diverse environments and situations that are screened by the interpretative choices of the new architecture. Re-search of the buildings dynamic and temporal features, dear to the Modern Movement, has found a solution able to effec-tively fit into the city grid. The block on which the site is lo-cated borders onto four streets with different characteristics.

The buildings on Delancey Streets south side are of dif-fering heights and its facades give the impression of typical early Federal row houses. Along Second Street, on the pro-ject sites west side, the buildings become a continuous back-drop. Spruce Street, on the sites north side, is characterized by a park-like setting with three residential towers designed by I. M. Pei that were built when the neighborhood was be-gan its redevelopment. Finally to the East is Front Street, that overlooks the Delaware River and a covered expressway that runs parallel to it. On these two sides, the site overlooks large open spaces and not the narrow Delancey and Second Streets.

The existing facades on Delancey Street compliment the facades designed by Sauer where his individual residential buildings are highlighted and scanned through the terraces along the street. The repeated effect of the incrementally de-tached volumes, compliment the character of the surround-ings while offering a very different solution.

Instead the faade on Second Street is a wall only bro-ken by openings. It reinforces the backdrop of the street and heralds the volumes of the main entrance on the corner.

Sauers first choice in dealing with the two large-scale remaining sides, of Spruce and Front Streets, was to dilate

23.

22

21

the facades height both materially and, above all, in its com-position. Materially inclining the roof inwards and getting planning permission to elevate the building to the same level as the historical building on the adjacent block have reached this goal. From a formal point of view, the architect designed the facades in such way as to achieve a very strong and co-herent composition. The windows are grouped together in the same way as the entrances in large apertures that break up the wall but strengthen its identity. The integrity of the

24.

Views of Spruce Street Facade, Penns Landing Square, Philadelphia 1968-1970.

surface is achieved by the compact band running along the top of the building while the apertures that contain the en-trances rhythmically mark the attachment at ground level.

Hence, the architecture of these two facades, at a large scale, stems from the apertures large wall openings and, at a small scale, from the spatial articulation of the entrances to the individual apartments. At ground level there is a gate, steps from the street to the first floor of the townhouses and a small external semi-private porch.

Regardless of the different exterior and interior architec-ture, the continuity of the street front is maintained whereas in the interior areas there is freedom in the layout of open space. The buildings are arranged in such way as to achieve alternate narrowing and broadening of the spaces including

25.

26.

narrow pedestrian paths of around 6'-0'' (1.83 m). Here the contrasts of light and shade, buildings and voids and semi-public and private areas follow on from each other.

The source of these architectural alternations is Sauers love of Venice where a small calle leads to a campo that in turn leads to another calle, fondamenta or smaller campo repre-senting a great wealth and continuity of urban fabric. While the projects external space is coherent with the urban struc-ture of Philadelphia street network and the streets of Society Hill, the inner world of Penns Landing Square creates a dif-ferent city with different spaces and values.

27.

Plans of the Front and Spruce Street Townhouses and interior walkways.

T h e H o u s i n g P a c k a g e

The basic instrument used to create the project (above all the challenge of achieving high density within the limit of three-storeys), was the invention of ahousing package of super-imposed units. There are five fundamental ideas underlying this solution (they are at once technical and distributive, planimetric and formal):

- The package is based on two structural bays of 14'-0" (4.27 m) to form modules of 28'-0" (8.53 m) arranged along the grid, which decides the size of the project in construc-tional and spatial terms. The linear aggregation permits both the alignment of the home-units as a continuous row on one of the outer fronts as well as enabling them to be staggered independently from each other inside the perimeter.

28.

Plans of the Delancey Street (above) and interior walkways dwellings, North is at the top, Penns Landing Square, Philadelphia 1968-1970.

- Within the homes, the different surface areas of the units (860 sq ft to 1450 sq ft or from about 80 to 135 sq m) is achieved by extending into the space of the adjoining struc-tural bay, where necessary, and so forming either units on one floor only, or on two floors in two bays, or in one bay on one floor and two on the floor above. The flexibility in the size of the units also stems from the decision to locate the staircase along one front orthogonally positioned in relation to a bay. The result is that the units are organized through a division into a service belt (stairs, entrance, bathroom) and a served belt (living-room, dining-room and bedrooms). - The service-served organization is also functional in terms of density. The served front of one row faces onto the service front of another. This enables the fronts of the paral-lel rows of housing to be brought much closer together, en-suring the high densities required, but avoids an 'introverted' building. Moreover the served front is oriented south to op-timize the exposure to sunlight. - The actual functionality of the system is guaranteed by its L-shaped layout which gives an extra front compared with rectangular layouts. On the ground floor, where the problem of light is greater, the served front opens onto the inside of the 'L' towards the private garden. On the upper floors the built masses are stepped back so that part of the surface area becomes a terrace. In this way, instead of being based on the typical functionalist approach which has a stan-dard cell aggregated along a layout to form a model building (itself multiplied x times to create the neighborhood), the project is based on a triad consisting of cell-housing package-building. The package contains within itself the home-units and system of distribution, and the single packages are not constructed by a system of distribution on a higher scale. Hence it is the various aggregations and combinations of the housing package that enable the complex to be organized to

29.

meet the requirements and characteristics of spaces, internal planimetric links and external relations with the city.

The housing package makes it possible to achieve an ar-ticulation of internal spaces based on the contraction and di-lation of interiors in a sequence of contrasts of light and shade, solids and voids, public and private ambits. It is the key instrument that allowed the great complexities that were reached in this project. Some details of Sauer's design may not convince everybody, but I feel whoever believes that the road of architectural research must pass through housing will find this project absolutely essential.

30.

Site plan, Penns Land-ing Square, Philadelphia 1968-1970.

31.

Penns Landing Square

Sauers densest and most demanding project is in Philadelphia on 2.31 acres or 0.93 hectare (100,634 sq ft or 9,348 sq m) block in the center of Society Hill. There are 103 dwelling units that exploit the low-rise high-density approach and achieves a residential density of 44.6 d.u. per acre (163 inhabitants per acre or 402 inhabitants per hectare). The importance of the construction, not only concerned meeting the demands of high residential density but also of setting it within the existing urban fabric using the formal choices and characteristics of the open spaces. For Penns Landing Square, the numerous versions hypothesized by Sauer in seeking an optimal solution for the construction are attested to in the blocks external perimeter and its homogenous building-street rapport with the one in existence. In the project the continuity of the constructed perimeter is interrupted only between Spruce Street and Second Street establishing an open space opposite the square in front of Peis three towers. This, at the same time allows for underground passage of the utilities that run diagonally at this point. On this

corner is the main entrance to the complex while other entries are at the two extremities of Delancey and Spruce Streets. Access to the underground garage is at the lower part of Spruce Street. The service areas are arranged on three levels and accessible from the street and also from inside.The perimeters continuity was also reinforced by the use of the same brick for all buildings and by the same black aluminum borders for the windows.The complex has different types of dwellings. The largest ones are 18 townhouses and they are located along Second, Spruce and Front street. All have a garden, a terrace, a garage.. Playing with the volumes and doubling the heights characterize the interiors of these residences. The smallest dwelling are located on Delancey Street and inside the complex 85 apartments have different floor areas from 860 to 1450 sq ft (80 to 135 sq m) and one, two or three bedrooms.. They are organized in an housing package that has two two equal structural bays of 14'-0" (4.27 m). Within the package, the different areas of the apartments are achieved by extending into the adjoining structural bay to a greater or lesser degree. The system may be extended to the

32.

following floor by forming apartments on one floor only or on two floors in two bays or in one bay on one floor and two on the floor above. The systems high level of flexibility stems from the module used for the entrances: whatever the size of the apartment and the floor on which it is developed, the private

entrance is always on the ground floor. The same entrance stairway serves as a distribution element not only from the ground to the first floor but also beyond that if the apartment has more levels. As a consequence, and this is the unavoidable compromise, the entrance front is blinded and thekitchen only gets light from the dining-living area.The fact that the served area of the row house gives on to the served

front of the parallel row allows for a planimetric layout which does not have the sole advantage of its exposure to the south of the served areas of the apartment but allows the fronts to be closer to achieve the required densities.

103 dwellings, 376 inhabitants2,31 acres (0,93 hectares)d.u. 163 inhabitants per acre 402 inhabitants per hectare91338 Corporation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1968-1970

U r b a n D e s i g n

While Sauer was assimilating a conception of the architect's work rooted in the functionalist tradition (hence practical adherence to a theme, an attempt to influence society through architectural design, a scientific conception of the gradual accumulation of understanding as opposed to the academic and formalist concept of the single splendid ges-ture), he also had an idea of urban space that was opposed to the functionalist concept.

He rejected the separation of building from ground (with isolated volumes suspended on an even level surface, con-tinuous and laid out as a garden, of the Charter of Athens), replacing it with the idea of an interwoven fabric. The ground is no longer a surface on which to rest volumes but a whole to be designed carefully as a compact whole, in which spaces, streets, buildings, gardens and paved areas all inter-act. His designs are governed by a homogeneous grid, but the grid empties, opens and closes to create a continuum of relationships between the various parts and evoke the small pathways, sudden surprises, the atmosphere and values of the historic city, but applying new techniques and modern standards.

The second idea is closely bound up with the first. After this phase, Sauer forcefully engages his design with the re-sults of his research into the specific context, within which each architectural design is to be created.

Context is a necessarily ambiguous term, because it indicates the specific morphology of the site but also its his-toric and cultural stratifications.

The consequence of this is decisive: designing no longer means laying down models that can be inserted in a variety of different contexts (as the great masters long thought), but the study of methods, i.e. techniques of design that are

33.

flexible and adaptable. From model to method means using the scientific approach of functionalism at a much higher and more complex level: to aim at diversified solutions and their flexibility, to leave the architecture free in planimetric and volumetric compositions, to adhere to the programs and in-terpretations that everyone has of the context.

Now Venice may well have offered Sauer a source of forms, styles, colors, atmosphere, materials and so forth, and also a help to understanding, like few other cities in the world, precisely two key facts: firstly, how urban space can be based on a continuous fabric (though articulated in a vari-ety of ways) and, secondly, how architecture, especially housing, can concretely create this fabric, based on a con-tinuous series of variations within a set of guidelines like, for example, low rise/high density.

Sauer is an architect who takes great care of the spatial and formal wealth of architecture, of the coherence between the functional needs and the space solutions as well as valu-ing locational contexts and expressive choice. This modus operandi also appears when he is confronted with large-scale urban design. Among his many designs, the Newmarket in Philadelphia and the project Cincinnati are especially inter-esting. In Society Hill, he designed in an important neigh-borhood block, organized spaces in order to reconcile the connection between the Head House square and the river. This was achieved by distancing the glass cubes of the new shopping center from the square to augment the surprising and vitalizing effects of the new architecture without disturb-ing the existing urban context (as requested by the city). In Cincinnati he created an urban open space environment from his memories of Wrights Midway Gardens (Chicago) and the ruins of Greek cities (Delphi) where his forms and spaces linked the city to the river and resulted in a symbolic leisure area.

34.

N e w m a r k e t

The site is located in one of the neighborhoods strategic po-sitions. Originally, it was an agricultural market for products transported on the Delaware River and has been brought back to life by Sauers diligent work. It fulfilled an important role between the Head House Market and the river.

The external perimeter was designed according to the sites different urban settings without, however, following a continuous contour of the area as in the case of Penns Land-ing Square. The entrance from Second Street was resolved through a gradual fading in and out of the historical context of the square and the new construction. For this purpose a series of careful design choices were made.

The first choice was to narrow the entrance space by constructing a building on one side its sides. This building

35.

36.

did not appear to belong to the new work since it was de-signed using similar forms and materials to those of the for-mer industrial factories instead of forms from the new work. (This construction illustrates the extent of Sauers expres-siveness. In order to achieve his goal, he simulates the former building adapting it to his own aggressively modern build-ings).

Despite the apparent commercial disadvantage, the sec-ond choice was to step back the Newmarket buildings by around 20 meters from the street to create a linking space and avoid violently intruding the building upon the old his-toric facades lining 2nd Street.

On the one hand, these decisions, as a whole, have solved the problem of bringing the new into contact with the old. On the other hand, by narrowing the front and distanc-ing the new buildings, visitors coming from the neighbor-hood marvel at the vivacious modern architecture.

A series of paths lead off from the small entrance square. The visitor can explore the complex, perceive the space in various ways and end up at the last square that accesses the river. This square, despite its large surface area, appears smaller due to the number of ponds and the layout of the pe-destrian paths. The different levels and continuous segments of staggered spaces and paths bring to mind a theatre and in fact a stage designer was consulted to propose solutions. The idea of a living stage where the actors are the customers fits with Sauers vision, i.e. to see and be seen on an urban stage.

On the riverside, the building is articulated in a com-pletely different way from the way he designed the building facing Head House Square on Second Street. Facing the river, his architecture is compact and homogeneous and could be seen as a great wall holding back the water. This idea was presented in a previous project and in Penns Land-ing Square design was presented yet again even if its effect

37.

was not fully achieved due to an outsized entrance space. Sauer considers merchandise and its colors and forms as the materials giving character to the building exteriors. The vari-ous building forms are made of superimposed plain cubes to create articulated volumes, fully transparent in order to make the merchandise stand out and attract the visitors. The mod-ule supporting the glass panels is smaller to allow it to be as-sembled by two workers and to enlarge the perceived size of the buildings.

In order to realize the purposes strictly linked to the functional and urban plan of the building in this project, Sauer expresses himself in an open and unbiased way that he had never touched on before. What strikes one most about the project is how effectively it has been set in the urban con-text. The buildings are revealed and hidden by manifesting and adapting themselves thanks to an intelligent understand-ing of the location, its needs and trends and not through a pastiche or passive solution.

38.

39.

40.

Newmarket, Philadelphia

After in-depth economic feasibility analyses, the combination of residences and business activities, on which numerous previous projects were based, was considered impractical. The areas land value was too high to allow the building of residences which would meet the real estate markets demands. For this reason, the entrepreneur decided to construct the maximum commercial cubic area allowed, 48,400 sq ft (4,500 sq m) as opposed to the original 21,530 sq ft (2,000 sq m)and to only place the residences on one side of the block on Lombard Street.In this block, Sauer has designed, for the same entrepreneur, two very important projects like those at Newmarket and Lombard Condos and the three residential buildings, the Twin Houses on Pine Street, the Grant House and the Morrison House on the corner between Pine Street and Front Street. The construction is composed of a series of completely transparent volumes that are laid out in an articulated space sequence that connect neighborhood's Head House Square and the river. A square at the main

entrance distances the new construction from the historical context. A series of smaller and enclosed precincts of different heights depart from this square and meet in a second square with ponds and water games a water fall.From the point of view of a business program solution, the guiding idea of the project originated from the eastern bazaar. Here visitors walking the narrow paths, are constantly exposed to the merchandise. The density increase due to the narrowing of the paths is adopted to positively reinforce customer response. Despite the complex and difficult design story the architecture maintained the validity of the original idea. The project represents a careful and calibrated urban construction. The contemporary architecture is revealed and hidden within a block characterized by important historical architecture.

Shopping Mall of 48,400 sq ft (4,500 sq m)Head House Venture Corporation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1974-1976. Demolished in 2002

C i n c i n n a t i C o n c o u r s e

This project is an example of urban renewal, that attests to an understanding between a city administration, whose de-sire is to improve its environment, and an architect able to realize this objective resulting in a project of spatial inven-tion. The urban structure of Cincinnati has evolved in a simi-lar way to many other North American cities. The original urbanization began close to the river and developed through a commercial and residential structure that lived off river trading. In the 50s, during the urban renewal planning and at a time of general disinterest in past threads and businesses, an expressway was built which completely isolated the city

41.

42.

from the water. The problems this created were increased by the location of a sport stadium, its parking lots along with an area of industrial deterioration.

At the beginning of the 70s, the city administration de-cided to relink the urban fabric of the city to the river by promoting new uses for river edge. Sauer was initially a con-sultant, then the designer in charge of the new layout that gradually took over the new areas development and was ev-ermore ambitious. In a long process of combining architec-tural inventions with technical abilities, the architect solved the innumerable problems that arose by turning them into opportunities of success. The adopted strategy can be subdi-vided into five of his strategic points to:

1. Create a bridgehead between the city and the project area by identifying and adding value to a small park on the city side of the expressway.

2. Build a new automobile and pedestrian bridge over the expressway that connected the city to the new site.

43.

44.

Cincinnati ConcourseThe new project is linked to the town center by a two level bridge that passes over an expressway. One for pedestrians and one for traffic. From the car you can see the river and access a belvedere with trellises. These make the space dynamic, bringing to mind the city bridges and screening out a small industrial building. The area for drivers to stop is just one aspect of how Sauer, by including John Zeisels sociological study on territorial use, devised various ways of using the space. From this parking area there is access to a two level underground car park. There is parking for 225 cars and elevator access. The bridges pedestrian walkway ends in an open terrace. From here its possible to access the lower levels. The descent is marked by trees, geometric concrete sculptures and enlivened by the water. The first lower level is on the same level as the belvedere and the tree lined concourse. Continuing on down among the different water pools, one arrives at the lowest level where the largest water pool, focus of the project, is situated. On one side, the pool is bordered by a triangular amphitheater and a canon through which the water spurts into the pool. On the other side, there are four triangular water chimneys and steps over which the water cascades.

This area can be used all year by different people. One can play with the water spurting from the canon, climb the cascade steps and enjoy a landscape of green areas, water and river. The architecture interweaves these features in an extraordinary way.

Urban design along the riverD. Brossart - Project Architect Cincinnati, Ohio, 1973-1976

45.

3. Construct a multistory residential building at the end of the bridge.

4. Provide parking in an underground and an elevated area.

5. Provide incoming pedestrians with a variety of urban settings and a tree lined avenue (concourse) that establishes a future utilization axis along the river.

Within this setting the architect played with water, a ma-jor theme, attracting people, energizing the environment and symbolically linking the new spaces to the river. Forms with an effective plasticity were chosen for the buildings and ob-jects in the new area in order to underline the manmade as-pects of the surroundings. While in Newmarket the sites pe-destrian sequence and the composition of the building ele-ments were to some degree inspired by traditional Japanese architecture and landscape, this Cincinnati project was strongly influenced by Greek architecture. From the ruins of ancient Greek cities and particularly from Delphi, Sauer dis-covered plasticity and the revelation of the primitive strength of volume. This inspiration together with his reading of The Idea of Space in Greek Architecture by Martienssen opened up to him the rules of Greek urban design.

The different heights and surfaces from which the build-ings rise play a strongly dynamic role in the composition of the whole. Their sacredness is not directly disclosed but the strength of the volumes comes from an oblique interpretation where shadows and light reveal the power of plasticity of the forms. These ideas translate into an architecture that is not only highly successful in terms of space but also in social terms. A place where the different territories are carefully studied and planned and where people go in all seasons of the year to enjoy their leisure time and renew their rapport with the river.

46.

A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d L a n d s c a p e

When working in contact with nature, Sauers figurative ar-chitecture comes to light. For example, the orographic undu-lations on which the Reston buildings are laid, the sloping roofs and vertical chimneys at Governors Grove, the land-scape easily seen through the bridge that joins the two sides of the house in the Reed House and the creation of axes for the future growth of the Cripps House structure. In these cases, linguistic elements of his architecture appear as the diagonal matrices in the planimetry layout, the tailoring of the volumes, the aerial links with breezeways and cantilever roofs between the separated blocks and the strongly con-trasting roof inclinations, which are not present, when he works in developed contexts. These elements find their rai-son dtre through the connection of the works in natural ar-eas where a slight rise, a wood or a stream or sunlight are the

47.

Reed House, Great Barrington,1967-1969.

elements that Sauer can use to interpret and relate to the context. At times this formal play seems to be less convincing strong or original as compared to when he is dealing with urban built-up contexts where he seems to be more inspired to catch the deep implications of the site and transform them into a new architecture. Yet at other times his work seems to be free, inspired and of great beauty in the open natural con-text.

G o v e r n o r s G r o v e

The project, in an outlying area of the City of Middletown, has beautiful vegetation and retains part of its original rural characteristics. The construction was carried out by a private builder and was promoted by the town administration and the local university with the intention of slowing down the exodus of the middle aged population. Governors Grove was meant to provide an alternative to suburban plot divisions by creating contact with the surroundings and not restricted by the artificial borders of its own back yard. The construction was achieved by the planimetric combination of four build-

48.

Cripps House, Lambertville,1962-1969.

ings. Two are linear and two are clustered. The different buildings were planned according to the diverse orographic situations and connected over the land to fit in with the height and the space sequence conceived by the architect. Precise control of the design system and the related costs al-lowed Sauer to have almost absolute control over the whole operation while maintaining sufficient funding to ensure that the buildings were finished to a high standard.

49.

50.

The project concerns 64 housing units laid out along a winding lane. On its two sides the buildings are clustered to-gether with semi courtyard like spaces facing the lane and small parking places. Larger parking areas are located in separate corrals in alignment with the linearity of the build-ings. The lane complex is perceived as giving the rural set-tlements an informal freedom by avoiding the alignment and axiality of urban contexts.

The houses blend into the landscape with no transition elements between the inside and outside. The building vol-umes are thus enclosed by the green areas of the countryside, which embrace the volumes and shape the forms via the dif-ferent heights. Sauer skillfully plays with volume composi-tion. The sloping roofs, the repetition of vertical prism chim-neys, the parts filled by compact bands in the empty lower spaces and the variety of openings interwoven in the materi-als create splendid architecture. On the one hand taking into account systematic lessons, particularly influenced by Aaltos work and on the other interpreting and transforming the themes of Connecticuts less important indigenous architec-ture.

A R e a l i s t A r c h i t e c t

In the above cases, be they concerning natural contexts, his-torical city grids, a single house or large-scale urban renewal, Sauers design solutions appear justified and natural. This is because they stem from clearly identifying the desires and hopes of the unexpressed characteristics of the surroundings and the shreds of the city and natural environment. These projects start with an accurate interpretation of context that make the buildings appear to be the only possible solution for that place. It is the naturalness of the connections that can be

51.

deceptive, making one forget that the instance of interpreta-tion from which they originate was not an aseptic or me-chanical operation but at the start of the design - a reinven-tion of place - the first and therefore, most determining stage.

The use of certain materials and potentialities, which are present but not important to the starting point, gives us a pic-ture of a substantially new architectonic subject. Sauer, like the great realists, operates by conceiving, not by following, the rules. He extols the value of the area where his projects are set and via his accomplishments gives us a more signifi-cant and truer reality than before.

In Sauers work, it is impossible to detect a constant dic-tionary or a precise evolutionary process attesting to his syn-tax.

Within the dynamic and asymmetrical order, the indi-vidual works occasionally bring to mind different influences. The interweaving of the materials and the forms of Aalto, the overlaps and purely traditional systematic structures sus-pended in space, the Miesian rigor of volumes, the axes and ways inspired by the Brutalist School and the rhythms of lo-cal vernacular be it in urban or rural settings.

The apparent eclecticism of his work does not derive from the manner architectural offices organize work by spe-cialized division as used in the great American practices (Sauer Associates never had more than thirty people) but originates from the initial project set up. For Sauer, all ex-pressive choices must be preceded by a conceptualization phase. This can be summarized in internal-external dichot-omy and must substantiate the whole project from the dis-tributive to the plastic and from the spatial to the formal choices.

This modus operandi on the one hand allowed him to be attentive to the various program components and on the other, open and flexible to formal solutions for site particu-

52.

53.

Governors Grove Middletown

This project has 64 apartments (56 two-bedroomed and 8 three-bedroomed) laid out on a zigzagging street in a rural location. Every home has parking for two cars. One near the home and the other in a communal garage. The project is based on six apartment designs combined in various package-building depending on the orography. The package aggregations determine four building types located in various ways, contributing to a tight rapport between the beautiful surroundings and the homes. The

design system allowed the costs to be contained hence, freeing up the money for combining various materials in the external finishing. This, together with the layout of the buildings, results in a systematic rapport with the context.

64 apartments of various areasHill Development Corporation,Middletown, Connecticut, 1969

larities. Sauer freely draws on the enormous assets of architec-

ture, periodically favoring one set of precedents over another and in all his works articulating an abacus of variables, changes and combinations This is the most mature basis for understanding the sense of modern architecture. He is open to the processing terms of the avant-garde period united to the traditions of less important architecture and with the op-erational comprehension of the most profound aspects of past architecture. Sauer has always displayed endless creativity and a pragmatism that is only possible within the freedom of American culture. This comes at the cost of not having a sig-nature style but, on the other hand, it allows him to create individual works of extraordinary success.

54.

S a u e r i n t h e A r c h i t e c t u r a l D e b a t e

Louis Sauer was the first architect to use the low-rise high-density approach on a large scale. He was able to demon-strate that a practical solution existed for the isolated high-rise buildings by creating interwoven settlement systems that can be built in urban gaps while maintaining a continuity be-tween the existing context, the construction of public and private areas, their paths and the accesses characteristic to residential constructions. The concrete demonstration of this option, an example of which is Penns Landing Square, is much more credible because it is exercised in the US free market full of commercial success stories. For Sauer the key element of residential design is not the unit but the housing package which contains more vertically and horizontally ag-gregated apartments and their different combinations which

55.

allows him to organize the housing complex according to the needs and features of the spaces, internal planimetric connec-tions, external rapports with the city and intensive land us-age even when heights are limited. The housing package en-velops the vertical distribution system directly linking the apartments on the upper floors to ground level. In this set-ting, the apartment is in itself no longer a study object. His definition is laid down from the start of the rapport project, which must fit in with the other apartments to establish a full system for the residential construction.

It is evident that this methodology is completely different from that adopted in the first residential studies of the mod-ernist era. In essence a triad is made up by that consists of a unit- building-site housing package that substitutes the unit and building understanding of the modernist tradition. At the same time, Sauers work is set in terms of continuity in con-trast to the architects of the Modern Movement architects. His work testifies to the trust of the social effectiveness of an architect.

The topic of residential research by the first modern ar-chitects for Sauer constitutes a starting point from which to deepen and increase the knowledge base of not only the po-etic and stylistic but also the values of the social, technical and scientific. In the international arena, there are architects who operate with the same centrality on housing problems. Neave Brown and Darbourne & Darke in England, Ralph Erskine in Sweden, Aldo Van Eyck and Herman Hertzberger in Holland, Giancarlo de Carlo in Italy and Moshe Safdie, Christopher Alexander and John Habraken in America to name but a few. Yet, when we painstakingly study their works, we notice that these designers developed housing mainly in specific aspects: formal or vernacular, technological or participative, theoretical or contextual, dis-tributive or methodological. Of course, every one of these

56.

researches has marked off a stage, maybe more exhaustive in its own area than what we find in Sauers activities. At the same time, however, there are few architects in the world that I know who have had the opportunity to achieve the most diverse, numerous and qualified housing constructions in natural and historical city contexts through effective rap-port with institutions, entrepreneurs and users. Even within a cultural and disciplinary arena of many personalities, I be-lieve that this is the first aspect that reveals Louis Sauers ex-perience.

However, if we want to gain a deeper understanding of the originality of his position, we have to refer to the most intimate reasoning behind his architecture. We have already noted his way of design starting from a preliminary concep-tualization of the raison dtre of the work in the physical context and the goals and characteristics of the program.

Sauer has taken this modus operandi partly from Louis Kahn by combining the social, methodological and scientific interests of the Modern Movement tradition and expressing it in the language of modern tradition.

On the one hand, his pursuit to gain a deep understand-ing of the nature of the work places him in the groove of Kahns mindset whereas on the other hand it differentiates him from the other architects. The latter inspired by Kahn to a greater or lesser degree strongly influenced the American architectural debate. Sauer does not recognize himself as be-longing to the committed professionalism of the highly pres-tigious Giurgola or Moores reversal of modernism in his celebration of late Roman architecture or Venturis glorifica-tion of daily life. He, especially, does not relate to styles and trends because for him the issue is another: giving life to an architecture reflecting social needs, location and pro-moting projects in merit of their economic and human as-pects. Hence, the problem of formally recognizing design and

57.

style as the signature of a designer is utterly foreign to him. However, this approach does not lead him to an anonymous architecture lacking in meaningful background. Sauer is convinced that contemporary buildings must display a mod-ern sensitivity on an abstract, asymmetrical and mainly dy-namic composition of forms. However, these forms must not be conceived and motivated by the internal rules of personal style. For example, originality as stylistic grammar does not bestow value on the architecture. It is the overall result of the design choices, how they enhance the context of the location and interpret the basis for the program that creates value.

Within this complex and circumstantial, though disci-plined effort lies the most salient feature of Sauers work. This is what make him so original in a world of architectural research where the sectional, albeit gratifying, aspects of the architects work are too often celebrated.

58.

B i b l i o g r a p h y

Monograph

1 - PL, LS, SS, LC, CG, HH, MH, BH, FH, WC, PM, AC, AT, HE, WH, NC, GI, SP, GG, OH, SE, OM, S1, CH, JH, RH, S2 -Masahiro Yoshida, Works of Louis Sauer: Low-Rise Housing, Toshi-Jutaku, Janu-ary 1980.

Books () and Magazines

2. Mitchell Ronda, Louis Sauer, in A.Morgan e C. Naylor, Contemporary Archi-

tects, St. Martin Press, Chicago e London 19872, pp. 787-790.

59.

AC Addison Court (1, 57, 64)AT Atrium Court (1)BT Buten House (1, 57, 70)CG Canterbury Gardens (1, 8, 32, 38, 47,

49)CI Cincinnati Concourse (4, 17)CH Cripps House (1, 64, 73)FH Frankel House (1, 42, 43, 48, 54, 57)GG Governors Grove (1)GI Golf Course Island (1, 57, 59, 60, 61,

62, 63)GT Grundy Tower (22)HE Head House East (58, 1)HH Harmony House (1, 11, 45)HW Harbor Walk (6, 15)JH J.Hamilton House (1, 50, 57, 71)JP Johnston Prison (57)LC Lombard Condos (1, 8)LH Lambertville House (41, 55, 57)LS Locust Street Townhouses (1, 36)

MH McClennen House (1, 56, 57)NC North Crossing I (1, 57)NM NewMarket (24, 29, 33)OH Oak Hill Estate (1, 32)OM Orchard Mews (1)PM Pastorious Mews (1, 66, 67)PL Penns Landing Square (1, 3, 7, 12,

13, 16, 23, 26, 31, 37)QV Queen Village (44)RH Reed House (1, 39, 42, 46)S1 Sauer House I (1, 68)S2 Sauer House II (1)SE Seascape (1, 28)SP Spring Pond Apartments (1, 21, 45,

51, 52, 57)SS Second Street Townhouses (1, 8, 13,

18)WC Waverly Court I (1, 57, 64, 69, 71WH Warburton Houses (1, 32)WS Western Savings Bank (29)

The work listed below is a selection from Sauers practice 1961-1979. The bibliography is reproduced from Antonino Saggios monograph Louis Sauer Un Architetto Americano, Officina Roma 1988. For updated listing of writings by and on Louis Sauer please refer to http://www.arc1.uniroma1.it/saggio/LousiSauerCV.pdf

3. - PL - Enrico Cambi, Michele Di Sivo, Giovanna Steiner, Tipologie resi-denziali in linea, BE-MA, Milano 1984, p. 58. 4. - CI - Charles Hoyt, More Places for People, McGraw-Hill, New York 1983, pp. 104-107. 5. Peter Burgess, The Role of the Architect in Society, Carnegie-Mellon Univer-sity, Pittsburgh 1983, pp. 63-78. 6. - HW - Alfred De Vido, Architects achieves design variety using standard-ized townhouse construction, in AA.VV. Designing Your Clients House, Whitney Library of Design, New York 1983, pp. 138-141. 7. - PL - Antonio Alfani, Giorgio Di Giorgio, La casa unifamiliare urbana, Dipartimento di progettazione architettonica e urbana, Roma 1983, pp. 172-183. 8. - SS, CG, LC - John Macsai, Housing, John Wiley and Sons, New York 1982, pp. 504-505, 510-511, 548-551. 9. Stefani Ledewitz, Developing a studio on making values explicit, in M. Comerio, Teaching Architecture, Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Washington 1981, pp. 147-151. 10. Andrea Dean, Evaluation: futuristic gesture in historic Society Hill, AIA Journal, June 1981, pp. 42-49. 11. - HH - Enrico Cambi, Benedetto Di Cristina, Giovanna Steiner, Tipologie residenziali a schiera, BE-MA, Milano 1980, p. 104. 12. - PL - Carlo Melograni, Marta Calzolaretti, Piero Ostilio Rossi, Ranieri Valli, Case basse ad alta densit, Edilizia Popolare, November-December 1980, p. 54. 13. - PL, SS - Low-Rise in America, Process Architecture, April 1980, pp. 68-69, 110-112. 14. James Morgan, An essay on the work of Louis Sauer, in Toshi-Jutaku, January 1980 (op. cit.1) pp. 68-69, 110-112. 15. - HW - Mary Lorenz, Design process, problems and social science research, in AA.VV., User Needs Research Practices of Designers, Skidmore, Owings and Merril, Boston 1979, pp. 5-8, 24-25, 30-33, 35-44. 16. - PL - Peters Paulhans , Entwurf und Planung: Stadthauser, Georg Callwey, Munich 1979, pp. 12, 46-47, 110. 17. - CI - Architectural Record, June 1979, pp. 107-112. 18. - SS - Milfred Smertz, Housing and community design for changing family needs, Architectural Record, October 1978, pp. 97-104, 122-123. 19. Gerald Allen, Alternative for low-rise housing design, Architectural Re-cord, October 1978, pp. 113-128. 20. Louis Sauer, in Whos Who in America, Marquis Whos Who Inc., Chicago 1977, p. 2750.

60.

21. - SP - David Mackay, Wohnungsbau im Wandel, Gerd Hatje, Stuggart 1977, pp. 86-89 22. - GT -Architectural Record, May 1977, pp. 130-131 23. - PL - Toshi-Jutaku, May 1977, pp. 43-45. 24. - NM - Ann Ferebee, 37 Designs and Environment Projects, R.C. Publica-tions, Washington 1976, pp. 62-65. 25. Charles Kahn, The Application of the Social and Behavioral Sciences to Envi-ronmental Design, National Science Foundation and The School of Architecture, University of Kansas, Lawrence 1976, pp. 34-35. 26. - PL -Wohnhauser in Philadelphia, Usa, Baumeister, December 1976, pp. 1072-1075. 27. Andrea Dean, Evaluation: working toward an approach that will yield lessons for future designs, AIA Journal, August 1976, pp. 26-28. 28. - SE - Record Houses of 1975, Architectural Record, May 1975, pp. 102-103. 29. - NM, WS - Progressive Architecture, April 1976, pp. 76-79. 30. Beth Dunlop, Post-Renaissance Philadelphia, AIA Journal, March 1976, pp. 42-43, 48-49. 31. - PL - Housing: High-Rise vs. Low-Rise, Progressive Architecture, March 1976, pp. 48-51. 32. - OH, WH, CG - Elizabeth Kendall Thompson, Apartments, Townhouses and Condominiums, McGraw Hill, New York 1975, pp. 84-85, 86-87, 100-101. 33. - NM -Architectural Record, December 1975, p. 107 34. James Morgan, How to work with developers and actually enjoy it, Ar-chitectural Record, April 1975, pp. 111-118. 35. Charles Deasy, Design for Human Affairs, John Wiley and Sons, New York 1974, pp. 20-21. 36. - LS - House and Home, May 1974. 37. - PL - A dynamic new partner, House Beautiful, May 1974. 38. - CG - Connecticut Architect, November December 1974, p. 17. 39. - RH - Shed-roofed complex for work and play, House Beautiful, Special issue Vacation Homes, 1974, pp. 95-97. 40. Donald Conway, Social Science and Design Research report, The American Institute of Architects, Washington 1973, pp. 59-61,140-149. 41. - LH - The mood is natural, House and Garden, Fall-Winter 1972-1973, pp. 66-67. 42. - RH, FH - Architecture and Urbanism, November 1973, pp. 46-49, 146-148. 43. - FH - Spaces open to interior garden, House and Garden, estate 1973, pp. 132-135

61.

44. - QV - Annual Awards, Progressive Architecture, January 1973 45. - SP, HH - Plywood Design Awards, American Plywood Association, Ta-coma 1972, p. 11. 46. - RH - Family room spectacular, House Beautiful, November 1972, pp. 112-113. 47. - HA, CG - Closer to home: Harmony House and Canterbury Gardens, Progressive Architecture, May 1972, pp. 106-111.48. - FH - Baumeister, n.3, 1972, p. 224. 49 - CG - AIA Journal, November 1972, p. 72. 50. - JH - Helmut Jacoby, New techniques of Architectural Renderings, Praeger, New York 1971, pp. 54-55. 51. - SP - Usa 1971, lArchitecture dAujourdhui, August-September, 1971, pp. XL-XLI. 52. - SP - House and Home, August 1971, p. 61-63. 53. Whos going to live here anyway, Progressive Architecture, May 1971, p. 106. 54. - FH - Record Houses of 1971, Architectural Record, McGraw Hill, May 1971, pp. 54-55. 55. - LH - Tune in with texture, House and Garden, Fall-Winter 1968-1969, p. 60-63. 56. - MH - Society Hill gossip: the McClennen House, Progressive Architecture, June 1969, pp. 100-103. 57. - JH, BH, MH, FH, AC, WC, PW, GI, SP, NC, JP, LH - Works and Methods of Louis Sauer, Toshi-Jutaku, January 1969, pp. 73-78. 58. - HE - Design Awards Program, Progressive Architecture, January 1969, pp. 116-117. 59. - GI - At Reston, a contemporary townhouse, House Beautiful, estate 1968, pp. 224-225. 60. - GI - Stadthauser ohne Stadt, Baumeister, January 1968, pp. 18-21. 61. - GI - Instant city townhouse, Better Homes and Gardens, Fall-Winter 1967-1968, pp. 22-29. 62. - GI -Architectural Record, May 1967, pp. 58-61 63. - GI - Clustered houses at Reston, House and Garden, May 1967, pp. 130-131. 64. - AC, WC, CH - Louis Sauer, LArchitecture dAujourdhui, January 1967, pp. 39, 41, 55-56. 65. - SH - Houses architects build for themselves, Greater Philadelphia Magazi-ne, April 1966, p. 60. 66. - PM - Six Philadelphia architects, Arts and Architecture, April 1965, pp. 16-23.

62.

67. - PM -Twelfth Annual Design Awards, Progressive Architecture, January 1965, pp. 164-165. 68. - S1 - George OBrien, The New York Times Book of Interior Design and Decoration, Farrar Straus and Giroux, 1964, pp. 154-157. 69. - WC - Bernard Rudofsky, Streets for People, American Heritage Publish-ing, New York 1964, p. 243. 70. - BH -Two rows linked: the Buten House, Progressive Architecture, August 1964, pp. 128-134. 71. - JH, WC -Eleventh Annual Design Awards, Progressive Architecture, January 1964, pp. 100-105, 110-113. 72. Alexander Crosby, Report on Philadelphia, in AA.VV., The Housing Year-book , The National Housing Conference, Washington, 1963, pp. 9, 17. 73. - CH - Tenth Annual Design Awards, Progressive Architecture, January 1963, pp. 92-93

On Society Hill

Edmund Bacon, Design of Cities, Thames and Hudson, London 19742..

AA.VV., Philadelphia Story, Progressive Architecture, April 1976. Suzanne Stephens, Twenty five years (almost) after the chines wall, Progressive Architecture, April 1976. Stephen Kliment, Fall an rise at Society Hill, Progressive Architecture, June 1973. Bradley Maule, Newmarket Before & After, 29 February 2008 www. http://www.phillyskyline.com/archive_0802b.htm Richard Longstreth, The Difficult Legacy of Urban Renewal, Viewpoint, CRM: The Journal of Heritage Stewardship, National Park Service, US Dept of the Interior, Washington DC, Vol 3 No 1 Winter 2006, p 6 Robert Wagner, Review: Old and New Architecture: Design Relationship, Jour-nal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 40, No. 2, May, 1981, p 149 Andrea 0. Dean, Evaluation: futuristic gesture in historic Society Hill, AIA Journal, American Institute of Architects, Washington, D.C., June 1981, pp 42-49

63.

ITool Book Series

Lo Strumento Di CaravaggioRoma a-Venire

Quindici Studi RomaniDatemi Una Corda E Costruir

The IT Revolution Thoughts On A Paradigm ShiftFive Masterworks By Louis Sauer

Urban Voids

Published By Lulu.Com in July 2010all right reserved

Copy of this book can be bought at

http://stores.lulu.com/ninos

64.