Architectural History of a Farmingdale State College Building: Roosevelt Hall

Background

Campus view shows the construction of the activities building Theodore Roosevelt Hall. The date is November 11, 1964. Reference: Cavaioli, Frank J. (Fig. 1)

[endif]--The building to be studied is Theodore Roosevelt Hall at Farmingdale State College. The reason why I chose this building was because of its unique circular form on campus. The building was name after US president Theodore Roosevelt when it was finished in 1965 (See Fig. 1). The structure was built by the office of Max O. Urbahn, architects. Roosevelt Hall counts with an entrance lobby, 400-seat little theater, disability center room where people can request extended time for tests, game room, multipurpose room, a mini conference room, the campus activities board, The Islander newspaper, the veterans office, the student union, flab factory or workout room, student government association, back state theater, loft lounge and it used to have a convenience store and food place, but it was replaced by a campus tour room. Roosevelt Hall used to be the place for graduation ceremonies and sports tournaments until Nold Hall was built. A big lawn area is also adjacent to the building where major campus events take place. The building is an iconic piece of architecture on campus due to its circular form that differentiates it from the rest of the rectangular-like buildings.

Six architectural theories will be applied to Roosevelt Hall. These theories explain categories of public space, cultural responsiveness, whether it is a good fit, time, fixed fixtures spaces and self-images in design. These theories will be analyzed in order to see whether they relate to the building and make it successful. These architectural theories are the following: “The American Public Space” by J. B. Jackson, “On the Cultural Responsiveness of Architecture” by Amos Rapport, “Goodness to Fit” by Christopher Alexander, “Space-Time” by Robert Sommer, “The Anthropology of Space: An organizing model” by Edward T. Hall and “The House as a Symbol of the Self” by Clare Cooper Marcus. Some recommendations for the improvement of the building will be provided as well.

The American Public Space, J. B. Jackson

J. B. Jackson argues in his writings “about the ways that everyday experiences and the totality of natural and built environments act together to create a sense of place. He claims for the ways that public space should be viewed as places that create a venue for a diverse and fragmented society to seek solace and enhance the transmission of a common set of experiences”. He adds that public spaces are those dedicated to all citizens for their use and enjoyment and maintained by public authority. “This tell us nothing about the different ways in which we use and enjoy them, nor about the different types of public involved”. Some people prefer being in places where public is not too numerous because it makes them feel uncomfortable. This theory proves that some individuals go to public spaces for privacy and for individual experience- a sequence of emotions, perceptions, sensations, of values to themselves. We can see this pattern at Roosevelt Hall. The building, although created as a center for campus life, it is not perceived as a place for “togetherness” or massive public meetings by some people, rather it is sometimes seen as a place for privacy and individual experience. It is easy to see students studying or eating by themselves. Sometimes there are people taking naps on the benches. They enjoy the quiet and tranquil place. J. B. Jackson also states “the people who go there are not necessarily unfriendly, merely they do not associate every public space as social, but that there are special places for that.” Roosevelt Hall is perceived by some as that public space for privacy and individual experience. Alicia Femoyer, a Student Activities Associate says “there is not much traffic of students anymore. There used to be food in this building and a bar in the 70’s”. But nowadays, the building is not usually crowded; as a result, some people like to use it for private studying or a private-friend meeting. The Campus Center is the official place for community activities and the place to be seen.

On the Cultural Responsiveness of Architecture, Amos Rapoport

Rapoport argue in his theory “that traditional architectural approaches to the problems of building users have not been effective, primarily because the values and preferences of architects have become unresponsive to the needs and aspirations of human beings in particular society in general”. He implies that design solutions have not been functional because architects are no longer concerned with creating responsive architecture that addresses the cultural values of people. Responsive environments are those that can be changed and manipulated as culture changes such as flexible and adaptive environments. “The qualities of the built form will differ for different cultures, as they relate to certain parts of the culture, particularly its core.” Roosevelt hall has not been culturally responsive because it has not changed in order to accommodate a different culture of people: ages, ethnicities, beliefs, sports, majors, etc. Younger people would prefer more sophisticated buildings such as the renewed library to hang out. Athletes need bigger indoor fields to practice their sports and there is a need for a bigger interfaith room on campus. For example, the campus ministries room at Roosevelt Hall is too small to accommodate the high number of students of different faiths on campus. The school keeps growing and bigger spaces are being needed. But Roosevelt hall is becoming less of a Student Union said Alicia Femoyer, a Student Activities Associate. “The building is creating more offices. There used to be a food place and convenience store that used to attract more students. Students look for food. Student Activities is planning to move to Conklin Hall near the Campus Center”. Alicia Femoyer also explained that the building is not complaint with building codes and regulations which makes the structure unsafe.

Goodness to Fit, Christopher Alexander

Alexander explains the notion of fixed “design methods” in his writings. “He outlines for the basis of searching a true balance for patterns of physical objects that support and enhance the human condition in the built form.” The form is that which we decided to shape while leaving the rest of the world as it is. The context is part of the world which puts demands on the form. Fitness is the relation of acceptability between form and context. When we design we want to satisfy the demands of the two by putting them in contact. Distinguishing good or bad in our own lives is part of everyday social behavior. The concept of good fit, although positive in meaning can feed on negative instances. When we talk about bad fit we speak about a recognizable and describable feature of an ensemble. We are able to point at it and describe what works and what does not work. The circular form of Roosevelt Hall helped define the purpose for which it was built. It was the center for campus activities and student government (See figure 2). Although the circular form made it stand out from the other rectangular buildings, it fulfilled its purpose of creating spatial diversity on campus. I believe this building is a good fit on campus. The circular form expresses community unity and interaction (campus life). Whereas the rest of the buildings are academics, administrative, etc. Roosevelt hall was for student out-of-class interaction.

Aerial view 1990. Looking north from Melville Road. The large circular building in the left foreground is Roosevelt Hall, home of the Student Government Association and student activities. Reference: Cavaioli, Frank J. (Fig. 2)

Robert Sommer, Space-Time

Summer argues in his theory that “the dimension of time should be as important to the designer as the three-dimensional world. That only through an understanding of time can the designer appreciate the dynamic nature of built form. People experience architecture through a constant changing temporal continuum not necessarily through a static media”. He implies that time in the built form (architecture) is not static, it is a constant movement (dynamic). And that this understanding of time can vary from culture to culture and architectural intent. He also adds that the concept of time is built in our percepts. That we perceive something with the knowledge that it is there now and that it is different in our minds from something we saw in the past or something we may see in the future. “The newness of perception does not contradict the idea that I see something as “an old building” or as a design that is ahead of its time”. When we see Roosevelt Hall and we enter it, there is a perception of “old building”; the flooring seems remote, the walls need to be reconstruct, the organization of spaces, the misplaced ceiling tiles, the absence of traffic of students. All these features are visually perceived as outdated.

“Time is major constituent of architectural experience”, says Sommer. The past, present and future influence people’s reaction to the built form. As well as physical dimensions, color, material and style. Buildings can be programmed to link us to the past, the present and the future. Such is Roosevelt Hall, although it seems outdated, it takes us back to the past; the exterior brick siding, the light blue interior concrete walls, the color, textures, organization of spaces, and others take us to that dimension. I believe the school is trying to emphasize the continuity and traditions of student activities on campus by keeping Roosevelt Hall the way it stands. Although it may sound like a good thing, it is static and not changing as time goes by.

The noted psychologist Kurt Lewin wrote “The life-space of an individual includes his future, his present, and his past. Actions, emotions, and certainly his morale at any instant depend upon his total perspective”. Amongst the attributes of environmental experience are the followings: duration, tempo, sequence, chronicity and familiarity. The duration is the length of time we spend in a city, the tempo is how quickly people move or events pass, sequence is when certain ways produce contrasts that make the building surprising and exciting. Chronicity is when people visit a building several times, and it can be perceived differently. And the last one familiarity, it occurs when a new visitor and an old resident may share the same space and their experiences are different. The people who work at Roosevelt Hall may not feel the same about the building than those new to the building. And even those who share the building may have a different opinion of the structure itself. It is because of familiarity and also due to the length of time they have spent in the building. These new visitors can also be a valuable piece of data for designers because they can tell us what needs to be adjusted and how the building can be improved.

The Anthropology of Space: An Organizing Model, Edward T. Hall

T. Hall explains in his writings “the ways physical environments are experienced at the level of personal senses; by a person, by small cluster of people, by the inhabitants of cities, and at the level of human culture.” He investigates how a person sees the spaces and what they see through their senses. He provides a rationale of what social processes are shaped by architectural spaces. He introduces the term proxemics as the interrelated observations and theories of man’s use of space. Specifically, the fixed-feature space is one of the fundamental ways to organize activities of individuals and groups. It includes material manifestations as well as hidden. Buildings are assembled according to cultural norms. We can see this fixed-feature space organization at Roosevelt Hall and how every space demands a particular behavior. The building is divided for different functions: offices, gym, theaters, lobby, game rooms, accessibility aid office, sanitation and others. It is apparent to see how every space is unique. For instance, the people who use the mediation room at Roosevelt as opposed to those who use the little theater. The meditation space demands a certain behavior because it is a sacred place and it may have religious iconography. Contrary, to the little theater where there are live performances and entertainment. All these spatial organizations govern man’s behavior.

T. Hall suggests “architects are almost totally unaware of the fact that people carry around with them internalizations of fixed-feature space learned in early life…the problem facing us today in designing and rebuilding our cites is understanding the needs of large numbers of people”. Some people were raised living in big spaces and they have carried that notion of space throughout their lifetime and it is hard for them to get used to a different pattern. This theory can be applied to Roosevelt Hall, the majority of spaces are small: the workout room, student activities offices, ministry rooms and others. Many Americans are used to spacious places and the building does that respond to that cultural need.

The House as a Symbol of the Self, Clare Cooper Marcus

Clare Cooper explains in her writings that “it seems as though the personal space bubble which we carry with us and which is an almost tangible extension of ourselves expands to embrace the house we have designed as ours…she urges designers to investigate his or her own biases and to begin to understand how present self-images are being unconsciously concretized in design.” She implies that our personal space that we carry since we are born can be symbolized in the design and can be an image of ourselves. These are important data to understanding human being psych. There appears to be a strong correlation between the styles one selects and his or her self-image. The symbolism of the things we do, how we live and the houses we live still there, even this is translated to our places of work. The offices at Roosevelt hall are decorated in a personal way symbolic of the self whose space it was. The majority of the offices had different personalities touches. One had flowers on her desks, a neon shirt hanging on the wall. Others had their school certificates mounted on the walls perhaps they were symbolic of confidence and achievement. Edward Laumann in a study explains that the presence of certain symbols and objects are clues to status and attitudes.

Theory Analysis

The building is successful in some aspects and others it is not. It is successful because it is a public space that is trying to tell us what Farmingdale State College was like some years ago and it takes us back to the past. It also helps students to have some isolation time for self-experience and privacy. The building can also allow for personnel who work there establish a self-image space in their offices, that reflects their attitudes and understandings of life, something that is very important in the design process. However, the building is not successful because it no longer responds to the growing demand of space students need. The theory on the “On the Cultural Responsiveness of Architecture” by Amos Rapoport explains that the built form needs to be culturally responsive to society in general and I believe Roosevelt is lacking that important feature. Also, the building is not compliant with building code and regulations which makes the building unsafe. The theories helped me understand why Roosevelt Hall was designed the way it was designed. The theories gave some insight as to why the building is fixed and it has not been able to change as time changes. The theories also taught me how a building can be perceived by newcomers and old residents, something I would not have known had not I read these theories.

Recommendations

Roosevelt Hall can improve its interior to accommodate the campus body by adding a convenience store and food place in the building. I believe remodeling the interior of the building will be necessary in order to make it compliant with building codes and regulations, but it will be expensive. Also, remodeling the interior will make it more appealing and perhaps increase the traffic of students. This will make the building “culturally responsive”. Roosevelt hall needs to expand in order to meet the demands of the growing study body. The building can also organize quiet study rooms for those who prefer quiet places.

Conclusion

Theodore Roosevelt Hall is a building located at Farmingdale State College. The six theories of public space, cultural responsiveness, good fit, time fixed-features and self-images were applied to the building in order to determine whether the building is successful or not. The theory of “The American Public Space” by J. B. Jackson explains that public spaces are places for society to seek solace and enjoyment, but he emphasizes that space for those who individuals who want privacy and individual experience. The theory proved that Roosevelt Hall is a place that some people have chosen for isolation and privacy. The theory “On the Cultural Responsiveness” by Ammos Rapport suggests that architecture has become unresponsive to the needs of society. This theory applies to Roosevelt Hall because the building is not culturally responsive to the needs of people on campus. The theory on “Goodness to fit” by Christopher Alexander explains fitness is the acceptability between form and context and I believe Roosevelt Hall is a “good fit” because of its circular form. It also creates spatial diversity on campus. Robert Sommer on his writings of “Space-Time” states that only through an understanding of time, can the designer appreciate the dynamics nature of the built form. This dynamic can differ from culture to culture. This theory applies to Roosevelt Hall because the building takes us back to the past because it makes us feel that we have entered into an old building. Edward T. on his “The Anthropology of Space: An Organizing Model” explains the physical environment are experienced at the level of personal senses. He introduces the fixed features as a means to space organization and how every space demands a determine behavior. This theory applies to Roosevelt Hall because every space there is organized according to function and every space demands a different pattern of behavior. Lastly, the theory on “The House as a Symbol of the Self” by Clare Cooper Marcus, he suggests designers to understand how self-images are being translated in design. It is easy to see how the offices at Roosevelt hall have different personalities reflecting the attitudes of the people who work there.

![endif]--