The Science City of the Swiss Technical Institute in Zurich (ETH Hoenggerberg) was developed as a single concept in the early 1970s. The large campus on the outskirts of Zurich is characterized by a collection of mostly 5 story buildings arranged in a series of parallel rectangles, set in a parklike landscape. It is a classic example of Brutalist planning, and would likely get poor reviews from the American public that has grown to dislike the fundamental principles of modern architecture. Yet many of the people we’ve talked to on the ETH campus do not have a negative view of the plan and see substantial benefits in its conception. We’ve grown to admire a number of its features and wonder if rational design could be an acquired taste.
First of all, the simplicity of the palette and forms of the buildings tend to make them recede from one’s experience, allowing the topography, landscape and path systems to be the dominant focus. These background buildings also serve as a neutral backdrop to the more significant buildings such as lecture theaters and student centers which take on more sculptural and expressive forms, giving a sense of hierarchy to the place.
Secondly, the narrow rectangular blocks belie a surprising generosity of planning upon closer inspection. The buildings are narrow to allow natural light into all of the habitable spaces (by law in Switzerland) and have over-scaled, 10-12 feet wide corridors with stone floors. These corridors terminate in windows, and are filled with light and view. From a scientific standpoint, the facilitate the movement of large equipment and provide a virtually indestructible and resilient pathway. The corridors are flanked by linear shafts that carry all the necessary air, power and piped services to each of the spaces, lending an impression of infinite flexibility. The fire stairs are massively wide and built of precast concrete, terrazzo or stone. They encourage use and tend to limit elevator traffic. The Swiss are masters at concrete design and construction. The exposed structure is white and flawless. The buildings feel like they could last a thousand years.
Finally, the buildings are planned like a cartesian grid, defined by bands of window wall. While the grain of the window module is fine, space is assigned in massive chunks with ideal adjacencies and diverse capability. Instead of thinking about area, most space is described by the number of windows that encompass its length. It is refreshing to work in an environment in which long-term thinking is not just encouraged, but tacitly assumed.
While the critique of brutalist, modern planning is understandable on many levels, it is important to us to find the lessons that have applicability to future planning. The experience of working on the Science City campus has also increased our appreciation of some of the iconic 60’s and 70’s buildings at MIT, such as Pei’s chemistry building, which has a similar generosity of spirit in its provision of large windows, rational corridors and robust shaft systems. Next time you look at building from that era, give it a second chance and try to see what is good about rational design.
Mark Reed, AIA LEED AP is a principal at Lab Life. Science. Architecture, Inc., a Boston-based laboratory design firm.