The Buildings of William Le Baron Jenney
Home Insurance Building
Portland Block 1872
This was supported by masonry walls with cast iron columns
to support the floors. The exterior was brick which was unusual since the
surrounding buildings were of planed or cut stone. Neighbouring landlords
described it as austere and mean. Certainly it is simplified from the original,
taller, more ornate design. The roof is flatter but generally the design is
practical without being revolutionary. Every office is well lit. The basement
storey is clearly separated from the upper storeys. Apart from the entrances,
the decoration is limited to colour of material, like the step-like effect on
the piers, and some shallow moulding. Apparently Sullivan considers Adolph
Cudell, one of Jenney’s draughtsmen, to be largely responsible for the design.
Leitner 1 1879
In this building cast-iron columns behind the piers, along
with timber girders, support the floors. It wasn’t the first building to use an
interior iron frame. Otto H Metz had built the Nixon Building in Chicago in
1871. It may also have been influenced by James McLaughlin’s Shillito Store in
Cincinnati in 1877. It is, however, a major step towards skeleton construction.
The widely spaced non-supporting brick piers allow Jenney to provide large
areas of glass, separated by slim cast-iron mullions which do, however, have a
load bearing function. The result is practically floor to ceiling glazing with the
minimum interruption. The brick serves to support the windows and mullions and
provide fireproofing. The minimum of ornamentation is used eg. the piers at
floor level. Incidentally the original was only five floors; two were added in
1888. The base has since been modernised. It later became the Morris Building
and, at the time of writing, is known as 208 West Monroe Building.
Home Insurance Building 1883-5
There were precedents for cast-iron construction: James
Bogards’ McCullough Shot Tower in New York City in 1855. He also built the Electric
Mill Works in 1848 and a couple of French buildings but I haven’t included them
because it is unlikely Jenney was aware of them. Certainly he knew Burnham
& Root’s Montauk but the Home Insurance Building, now demolished, is
considered to be the first skyscraper. The exterior wall is reduced to a
curtain, or envelope, which is supported throughout by the interior framing ie.
the wall not only has no bearing function but does not even support itself.
Essentially it is just a, part iron, part steel, framework covered in glass,
with vertical and horizontal bands of masonry to cover the columns and beams.
The lintels and mullions were continuous. The envelope was granite at the first
storey and brick with sandstone trim above. In fact the granite at the base of
the columns carried 18% of the total column load, a deviation from full framing
which made safer the addition of two, to the original ten, storeys in 1890. So,
in reality, the metal skeletal construction begins above the first floor. The
exterior bays and adjacent floor are supported by metal shelving projecting
from the columns. The criteria established this design, and Jenney’s work in
general, were maximum admission of natural light, economy of construction,
durability, fire-resistance and freedom in the arrangement of the internal
elements. The aesthetics of appearance
seemed to take second place hence the slightly disappointing façade which
was even described as ‘Romanesque’ as opposed to commercial. Without getting
into the argument about the term ‘functionalism’, the aesthetic that was
developing in Chicago was, as Sullivan said, ‘form follows function’. Yet this
building isn’t as visually striking as the previous Leiter building. The Home
Insurance Building is broken into horizontal bands, presumably to avoid
monotony, with each pier carrying capitals at the breaks. There is rough-hewn
masonry round the base, a grand entrance and decoration between floors.
Leiter II 1889-90
I haven’t much to say about this except the Home Insurance
Building solved the technical problems and I think this solves the visual problem
of high rise building of the time. The metal I-beams used previously as columns,
girders and associated beams are repeated, with the riveted joints, fireproof
tile cladding and concrete sub-flooring. But the commercial style is more fully
developed here. The piers are narrow enough to suggest the metal frame within
them. Ornament is sparse, economy is suggested, and the general affect is
simple and direct.
Manhattan Building 1891
The frame of the structure is carried on spread footings of
concrete reinforced with rails. The party walls facing the original buildings
on either side were not strong enough to support the Manhattan. So the
adjoining floors of the Manhattan were carried on cantilever beams fixed to
columns located on a line well inside the line of the party walls. The exterior
elevation is grey granite up to the fifth storey, pressed brick and terra cotta
above. Originally it was twelve storeys high, nine at the side. But a few years
later it became sixteen and ten. The main external feature is the variety of
window types. There are large areas of glass at the base with paired windows in
the second and third storey. In the central three bays are triple windows and,
above the third storey, bay windows. In the bays to either side these are
triangular. There are also some triple and double arched windows. The street is
narrow and densely built and so the bay windows admitted as much light as
possible. Where the building rises above its neighbours the windows become flat
to the façade and conventional. The overall affect produces an uneven and perhaps
indecisive design but at least it shows that Jenney was solving practical issues
for the occupants as well as technically innovating for the client.
No comments:
Post a Comment