Rockefeller University Modern Campus Landscape: Daniel Kiley, 1958

by Kristina Nugent

In the early 1950s, the trustees of the Rockefeller Institute aimed to transform their formerly small, private medical research institute into the premier medical University campus in the nation. The first President was named in 1953, Detlev Bronk, who recognized that in addition to recruiting top faculty and students, the University campus itself needed to be envisioned as “a sanctuary. . . as a counterpoint to the starkness and tumult of the city; and provide a refuge where one is aware of nature’s rhythms, so that there will be a flourishing spirit and imagination.”[1] As University President, Bronk argued that, “Science should be recognized for the beauty of its spiritual undertaking. I believe that science benefits from being carried on in a lovely setting.” [2]

From the very beginning, Bronk lead the search for a team of architects to design the new campus and ultimately chose the architect Wallace K. Harrison to design the new buildings, and Harrison then suggested Daniel Kiley to lay out the grounds to further enhance the new buildings and overall campus setting. 3 Initially, Kiley refused the commission to work on the new University in New York City, claiming that he was already involved in several major projects at the time including the Dulles Airport in D.C., Independence Mall and the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. According to Rockefeller University’s horticultural consultant Lulu Leibel, “Kiley met with Bronk for only 15 minutes to tell him no, but there was in immediate rapport between the two men. The meeting went from fifteen minutes to five and a half hours,” and by the end of the meeting, Kiley was so impressed with Bronk’s energy and vision that he reconsidered his initial stance and enthusiastically accepted the commission.[4]

Image

The site is almost never a big, blank slate waiting for your creative genius; it is a set of conditions and problems for which one seeks the highest solution. I always start from a functional base – Kiley, 2000.[5]

Initial Site Study

Starting in 1958, Kiley began his initial site investigation of the grounds that were to become the Rockefeller University campus. Kiley’s design process, in his own words, “[Began] with the site itself. . . [I took in] in all of its attributes with an open mind.”6 He was confronted with the Beaux-Arts layout of the research campus which was completed ten years after the Rockefeller Institute’s inception in 1905 when, “Institute researchers moved from rented laboratory space on 50th and Lexington into the just-completed Founder’s Hall, situated on 13 acres of East River bluff between 64th and 68th Streets, the only open tract left in a neighborhood of tenements and breweries.”7 The original campus landscape included two linden trees that were planted outside of Founder’s Hall in 1905, two elms about which Olmsted Brothers was consulted were planted in 1908, and at least four rows of London plane trees, including those along the main entry, were planted between 1910 and 1915. Early campus photographs show a tree line west of the buildings; this was the eastern edge of a tree-line frame for the rest of the property.[8]

Considering the site in its existing condition, Kiley adapted the original plan and decided to leave many of the major axial elements intact and add new transitional elements that would bridge the historical with the modernist buildings that Harrison was designing. In Kiley’s own words, “When I go onto a site, often I have an immediate understanding of, and reaction to it. It speaks to me right away. Once [I saw] the physical aspects, the second consideration is the programme. How will the land be used? When? By whom? The programme is an outgrowth of the third, all-important ingredient in the design process: the client.”[9]

Bronk called upon Kiley to experiment, “with the translation of various classic elements into a modern spatial sensibility,” that would complement the nature of the scientific research conducted on-site, as well as provides a setting for a new community of graduate scholars.10 Kiley also looked to the architectural work of Harrison, who acknowledged that the historic campus plan and the few buildings that occupied the land closest to the river provided him with just enough land to create, “a little city planning out of nothing.”11 Harrison’s designs reflected the traditional spatial arrangement of the campus by retaining the central axis that leads upward through the campus gate on York Avenue to Founders Hall, and forms the climax of the spatial arrangement upon which the other campus buildings are symmetrically positioned to the north and south.12 This axial design element, while essential to Harrison’s arrangement of the new campus buildings, became the primary organizational scheme for the Kiley’s campus landscape. Kiley’s aim was to design a landscape to weave the old and new elements of the Rockefeller Campus together, and he accomplished this by drawing from Classical landscape orders: the alleé, the path, the bosque, and the lawn, but by applying them in a decidedly modern way.[13] He articulated the campus spatially by working from the existing row of mature London plane trees, “over 80 feet tall, 50 to more than 100 years old,” along the northern end of the central axis and planted new trees to form three additional alleés, one that reached northward, and two that reached south along the upper and lower portions of the campus, respectively.[14]

Image

... I tend to call out the axis with lines of trees, blocks of planting or special paving. Sometimes connection is about linking two similar elements, at other times it requires integration of heterogeneous components … the creation of a lucid transition between the outer contextual shell and the inner realm brings attention to the nature of the design itself –Kiley, 2000.[15]

Axes

Classical landscapes, such as those surrounding the Estates of Versailles and Vaux-le-Vicomte were Kiley’s inspiration for creating axes framed by trees that reach infinitely into the distance, by means of a relatively simple, sweeping spatial gesture.[16] In Kiley’s own words, referring to Le Nôtre’s Parc du Sceaux: “The great beauty of it was the fact that it was so simple, just a canal of water, double rows of Lombardy pines.”[17] The axes of Rockefeller University function in a similar way to draw the buildings and pathways into a grand expression of space that promotes an efficient circulation system, but one that transcends the mundane act of walking from one building to another on the campus into a powerful, sensory experience.

Trees

Orderly rows of trees function to shelter, border, and establish spatial intervals within the campus landscape. The trees are organized to frame pathways and axes but also serve to create a physical boundary between the city and the campus. The use of rows of trees was Kiley’s primary design strategy for the University, and he intended for them to, “. . . anchor the landscape structure and act both as a wall – a vertical plane that gives volume – and a meting out of the site rhythm with the repetition of individual trunks.”18 While the lines of trees and rows of hedges give the impression of order and proportion, Kiley was less rigid in his application of a perfect geometry. As one landscape architectural historian noted, “Kiley’s north-south alleés suggest symmetry, but that symmetry is by design hardly ever perfect, and he rarely centers anything. The distance of the tree lines to walk edges varies. Both sides of the gravel-lined walk may be curbed with thin granite, but the green on one side is provided by grass, on the other by ivy; or one side is grass and the other a clipped hedge or a mix of ericaceous species. This ‘asymmetric symmetry,’ and a restrained palette of materials that might be considered both classical and modern help structure what Kiley called continuity.”[19]

With this more lenient application of measured geometrical planting, the University campus appears formal, but more inviting and adaptable to changes over time. However, as another landscape architect observed, “The different dimensions and what they do and how they affect, when you pick trees and place them so many feet on center, this is very important, whether they’re ten feet, twelve feet, fifteen feet or eighteen feet on center. Just like the windows in the Palazzo Farnese. Those things are what make it wonderful or not, the spatial proportion.”[20] It is perhaps due to the inherent flexibility of the underlying classically-proportioned arrangement of the vegetation that allowed even the most formally geometrical design elements of Kiley’s landscape to, along with careful maintenance, retain its form even as the plants are growing and changing over time. One example is how when the line of cryptomeria Kiley planted on the upper level’s east side failed, “he replaced them with London planes – tree for tree – resulting in spacing 17 of 20 feet on center, close even by his famously tight standards. Thus today, while spacing within each London plane row is fairly consistent, it curiously ranges from 17 to 35 feet depending on the row.”[21]

Paths and Paving

In some of the most interesting places on the campus, the axes and paths interweave to provide directional indicators as well as visual inspiration. The pathways of Rockefeller University are predominately constructed using a “four-foot-wide marble-slab walk on a bed of marble chips.”22 The spatial sequence is delineated through the materials themselves: marble slabs that lie gently on the crushed stone provide a feeling of floating above the surface of the ground while visitors make their way down the path. Further strengthening the sense of movement and circulation along the pathways, is the relationship of the paving to the vegetative edging materials. Kiley bordered the pathways “by lines of trees, hedges, and stone walks that converge upon the central lawn.”23The sequence of progression along the paths is further guided by the repetition of plant materials that establish a sense of movement that parallels the experience of traveling by foot through the space.

Image

Orthogonal Geometries: Lawns

Kiley’s use of precise rectangles of lawn and ivy is one of his most overtly modernist gestures within the campus landscape. Whereas traditional campus lawns stretch organically across the terrain, the grass lawns of Rockefeller University are deliberately shaped, orthogonally contained, and edged with stone. The lawns act as a controlled form of open space that mediates between the strong vertical – and horizontal -directionality of the trees when they are applied in combination with the allees and pathways that reach towards the horizon. In his words, “long grassy lawns, of ivy and vinca, of low hedges of cotoneaster and yew, of ericaceous beds augmented with viburnum, spirea, or cherry laurel – making terraces so flowing, tranquil and expansive that one can forget the site’s topography.”

Topographical Considerations

The topography becomes most evident during the procession up and through the central axis approaching Founder’s Hall. The abrupt grade change between the two campus levels was more efficiently addressed with stairs and “. . . steeply angled cuts instead of gentle slopes that would require more square footage.”[24] This solution allowed the courtyards and walkways of the upper level to maintain a central mall of lawn bordered by trees, whereas on the lower level, the topographical variations are addressed more frequently such as in the wandering pathway around Caspary auditorium. The topographical changes are frequently used to juxtapose the vegetation; the height of the rows of trees that stretch linearly across the site and the berms that occupy the eastern gradient of planted vegetation, creates a visual corridor that reinforces a sense of continuity within the upper portion of the campus landscape.

Satellite Areas

Outdoor rooms evolved according to specific conditions … Inspired by the peristyles of Oxford and the tactility of the gardens within Asian compounds to reinforce the idea of an urban oasis, and as in ancient walled gardens founded upon the notion of paradise on earth, to provide a sensory experience enough to envelop visitors – Kiley, 2000.

Discrete spaces that become “outdoor rooms,” were influenced by Japanese architectural forms, which do not rely on “walls,” or exclusively physical frames to establish spatial boundaries. These spaces are defined from the ground upward. Starting with paving materials to offer texture, spaces are articulated in such a way to reinforce the cloistered nature of the space, and encourage serenity and contemplation.

Image

Lasker Fountain: Water as a Strategic Design Element

The Lasker Memorial fountain, which borders the parking structure on the north end of campus, uses water, which is both collected in a rectangular pool and actively emerges from upward-streaming jets along the north wall, is both a reference to the Classical and ancient religious tradition of incorporating water as a ceremonial feature, and a functional design element that tempers the noise from the nearby road, and provides an intriguing visual display to enhance the views from the Abby Aldrich dining platform above.[25] Additionally, the ginkgo trees was set in the corner of the wall adjacent to the fountain “as punctuation,” but also, “their thrusting branches and stark habit are almost sculptural in maturity,” and recalls the modernist design strategy of Mies van der Rohe’s design for the German Pavilion, in Barcelona, Spain, completed for the Expo in 1929. According to Marc Trieb, “In Mies’s privileging of spatial flow, space does not stop at the ostensible boundary of the house but continues, merging with the site,” and this “diminished sense of enclosure tested the limits of architectural and spatial practice at the end of the 1920s.”[26] The use of a shallow, rectangular pool of water and the introduction of a curvilinear, vertical statue, using natural materials rather than polished stone, reveals Kiley’s interest in and influence by modernist spatial configurations.

Image

Philosopher’s Garden

This area of campus, situated across from the Lasker fountain and Caspary Auditorium is perhaps the most eloquent expression of Kiley’s design intention of creating a “soothing sense of calm seclusion,” similar to the Japanese walled- gardens that Kiley admired.27 The garden and terrace area is slightly sunken, and one section is paved with the same marble slabs used in the pathways above, and given the same treatment: placed in a bed of crushed marble so as to float above the ground surface. The terrace is lined with five marble benches, and Kiley’s original design for the patio was to enclose the space with “double rows of European hornbeams,” however, these were removed as recently as five years ago in order to increase the amount of sun that is able to filter into the terrace area through the ever-denser canopy of trees overhead.28 The second element of the garden is an articulated orthogonal pool with four vertical water jets, semi- enclosed on the campus side by a row of five trees, and on the street side by an eight-foot wall covered in Boston Ivy.

Restoration

The problem –and simultaneous advantage -of a work of landscape architecture is that nature evolves and transforms the landscape over time. The most significant change within the campus’s landscape since Kiley’s original design had

resulted from a reduction of light as a result of the growth of the canopy overhead, as well as the construction of new buildings since the initial design was carried out. Excessive shade was problematic in the case of the Philosopher’s Garden, and while the resulting space after removal of the European hornbeams is not in keeping with the original design, it affords students and staff with a space that better complements the kind of activities that occur there. Additionally, the growth of tree roots has proven an additional challenge as paving materials are being compromised, which is visible in several locations, especially the London Plane Trees.

The Rockefeller Campus landscape receives partial funding from the Mary Lasker Charitable Trust’s “Salute to the Seasons,” which has helped sustain the kind of long-term maintenance required for the campus landscape.29 Also, Payette Associates, a Boston-based architectural firm, was hired to evaluate the Rockefeller University campus and conducted a detailed review of campus history and its growth. In a University Press release, President Levine assured that, “The new space plan will ensure that the university’s future expansion is sensitive to that history, especially with respect to the landscape design of Daniel Kiley.”[30]

Reception

Daniel Kiley has been regarded by many architectural historians and the public alike, as one of the premier modern American landscape architects who practiced from the 1950s up until his death in February 2004 at the age of ninety-one. Kiley demonstrated a talent for designing landscapes that were appropriate for their setting and purpose, as well as remarkable outdoor places to inhabit. “He transformed landscape into modern space,” said Chicago landscape architect Peter Schauldt who worked for Kiley in the 1980s.31 His contribution to the profession far exceeded his work on the Rockefeller University campus and consists of nearly thirteen hundred – around two-thirds of which were realized – projects ranging from corporate campus designs to mid-century shopping mall landscapes, numerous designs for university campuses, and several renowned residential landscapes during the course of his long career.[32] Kiley’s first design that won him recognition among the professionals of his field was for the Miller Estate in Columbus, Indiana (designed in 1951), which became the first work of modernist landscape architecture to earn recognition on the National Register of Historic Places in 2001, under the multiple property submission entitled “Modernism in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Art in Bartholomew County, Indiana, 1945-1965.”[33]

Course of Preservation

Regardless of the design intentions, landscapes evolve over time and additionally become laden with meanings derived from the human uses that are assigned to them. While architects who are responsible for designing landscapes are equipped with conceptual design strategies, designers themselves cannot be certain whether or not they have created a space that is well-used and enjoyed by its visitors. Landscape Architect Laurie Olin provides a sympathetic explanation of the difficulty in preserving Modernist Landscapes:

Must one always have to choose between the polar opposites of total change or no change? Are there other choices? … Much remains of quality from the past, yet much that is absolutely new and of the highest quality is also produced and coexists beside, with, or around exemplary buildings, spaces, and landscapes? Designers are agents of change. They are optimists, believing that they can make the world better in some way through their work, but with that said, A low value is commonly attached to physical environments in general and to those of the recent past in particular … the actual decline, destruction, or disappearance of most landscape does seem invariably to begin with physical neglect and lack of maintenance. In addition to abandonment, landscape designs can be destroyed by unsympathetic alterations, the degradation of context, and tee development of a social situation that leads society to attack the setting in an effort to eradicate or displace the perceived problem.[34]

The fact that the physical landscape is teeming with layers of meaning and historical significance is an observation that, in itself, is not a revelation. There were inherent limitations in the concept of planning a campus for the Rockefeller University, but Dan Kiley’s design seemed to weave both the practical needs of the University to ensure logical growth, while also communicating the more imaginative and visionary aspirations of the campus to symbolize the larger utopian desires that underlie its physical realities. The Kiley landscape is foremost about people, and their shared experiences and philosophies that are defined within the context of its discrete outdoor spaces. More so than the campus buildings, the campus landscapes gives meaning, richness, and context to the lives of the individuals who reside and work on the Rockefeller campus. The idea of the campus landscape can more aptly be described as creating a sense of “place” for its inhabitants, which by definition: are “localities used for a special purpose,” and also, “physical environments and surroundings,” that become the larger settings for human life, especially in terms of psychology and the construction of memory.[35] From their necessarily human dimension, landscapes attain meanings that transcend their physical shells and become places that serve an essential, ongoing human function.

A preservation solution for the Rockefeller Campus, in that sense, would allow for the adoption of flexible guidelines to protect Kiley’s original design for the campus landscape from unsympathetic alterations while also balancing the changing needs of the University community and the necessary future expansion of the University by allowing for sensitive changes to occur. Additionally, an official maintenance plan should be adopted to carefully assess the inevitable –and occasionally undesirable – growth of the trees and vegetation in order for changes and substitutions to be made appropriately. Yet, restoring the physical resource is of little consequence if it is not relevant and appreciated by the campus community. The focus in “preserving” the landscape should be on fostering appreciation for the essential outdoor settings that nurture the daily activities and spiritual needs of the modern-day students of Rockefeller University.

© Kristina Nugent and Ephemeral Urbanity, [2013 – present]. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kristina Nugent and EphemeralUrbanity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

1 Campus tour and meeting with Rockefeller University horticultural consultant Lulu Leibel, December 4, 2007.

2 Walsh, John. “The Rockefeller University: Science in a Different Key,” Science. 150 (Dec. 24, 1965): 1692-1695.

3-4 Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture II : Making Postwar Landscapes Visible. The Cultural Landscape Foundation, National Park Service Historic Landscape Initiative, Catalog of Landscape Records in the United States at Wave Hill. Washington, DC : Spacemaker Press, 2004, 73.

5-6 Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon . Dan Kiley : The Complete Works of America’s Master Landscape Architect. Boston; New York : Bulfinch Press, 1999, p. 13.
7 Brown, Brenda J. “The Poetry of Passages: Dan Kiley’s Design Forms the Green, Modernist Heart of Rockefeller University in Manhattan.” Landscape Architecture 6 (2004): p. 102-113.

8-10 Brown, Brenda J. “The Poetry of Passages,” 103.

11-12 Newhouse, Victoria. Wallace K. Harrison, Architect. Rizzoli: New York, 1989, 176.

13 Trieb, Marc. “Dan Kiley and Classical Modernism: Mies in Leaf.” Landscape Journal, 24
(2005): p. 2.

14 Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture, 74.

15 Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon. Dan Kiley : The Complete Works, 40.

16 Obituary, New York Times, February 25, 2004, F1.

17-18 Bleam, Gregg in Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture, 78.

19 Trieb, Marc. “Dan Kiley and Classical Modernism: Mies in Leaf.” Landscape Journal. 24 (2005): 1-12.

20 Bleam, Gregg in Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture, 74.

21-24 Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon. Dan Kiley : The Complete Works, 29.

25 Campus tour and meeting with Rockefeller University horticultural consultant Lulu Leibel, December 4, 2007.

26 Trieb, Marc. “Dan Kiley and Classical Modernism,” 8.

27 “A Designer’s Designer, Dan Kiley Cast a Long Shadow, Appreciations by his Associates and Friends.” Landscape Architecture. 94 (2004): 117.

28-29 Campus tour and meeting with Rockefeller University horticultural consultant Lulu Leibel, December 4, 2007.

30 “Master Space Plan to Support Scientific Expansion.” News&Notes. [Rockefeller University] 12 (2001): 7-8.

31 Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon. Dan Kiley: in his own words : America’s master landscape architect. London: Thames & Hudson, 1999.

32 Tomkins, Calvin, “The Garden Artist,” The New Yorker. New York. 71 (1995): 136.

33 Hilderbrand, Gary R. The Miller garden: Icon of Modernism. [Landmarks Series] Washington, DC: Spacemaker Press, 1999, 3.

34 Olin, Laurie, “Preserves Some, Yes, but also Improve, Add To and Let Some Go,” in Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture, 74.

35 Donlyn Lyndon and Charles W. Moore, Chambers for a Memory Palace, (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1994), 3-5.

More References:

1. Books and Publications:

Asensio Cerver, Francisco. The World of Landscape Architects [World of Environmental Design Series; v. 10], Barcelona: [Arco Editorial Board],1995.

Charles A. Birnbaum, et. all. Preserving Modern Landscape Architecture II : Making Postwar Landscapes Visible. The Cultural Landscape Foundation, National Park Service Historic Landscape Initiative, Catalog of Landscape Records in the United States at Wave Hill. Washington, DC : Spacemaker Press, 2004.

Cooper, Guy. Gardens for the Future : Gestures against the Wild. New York : Monacelli Press, 2000.

Hilderbrand, Gary R. The Miller garden: Icon of Modernism. [Landmarks Series] Washington, DC: Spacemaker Press, 1999.

Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon. Dan Kiley: in his own words : America’s master landscape architect. London: Thames & Hudson, 1999.

Kiley, Daniel Urban and Jane Amidon . Dan Kiley : The Complete Works of America’s Master Landscape Architect. Boston; New York : Bulfinch Press, 1999.

Kiley, Daniel Urban, et al. The Oakland Museum : A Gift of Architecture. Oakland, Calif. : Oakland Museum Association, c1989.

Saunders, William S. Daniel Urban Kiley : The Early Gardens. New York: Princeton University Press, 1999.

Treib, Marc. The Architecture of Landscape, 1940-1960. Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002. __________ Garrett Eckbo: Modern Landscapes for Living. Berkeley : University of California Press,1997. __________ Modern Landscape Architecture : A Critical Review. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1993. __________ Settings and stray paths : writings on landscapes and gardens. New York : Routledge, 2005.

Turner, Paul V. Campus: An American Planning Tradition. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1984.

Warren T. Byrd and Reuben M. Rainey eds. The Work of Dan Kiley : A Dialogue on Design
Theory. [Proceedings of the First Annual Symposium on Landscape Architecture. [The University of Virginia, School of Architecture, Division of Landscape Architecture, Campbell Hall, February 6, 1982]. Charlottesville: The Division of Landscape Architecture, 1983.

2. Periodicals:

“A contemporary Palladian village [Dan Kiley, Landscape Architect].” Architectural Forum. 109 (1958): 126-131.

“A Designer’s Designer, Dan Kiley Cast a Long Shadow, Appreciations by his Associates and Friends.” Landscape Architecture. 94 (2004):116-125.

A “village” design for a college campus [Dan Kiley, Landscape Architect]. Progressive Architecture. 39 (1958): 88-[101].

Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio. Progressive Architecture. 30 (1949): 49-53.

“At the University of New Hampshire, a competition-winning student union [Dan Kiley and Ronald Gourley, architects]”. Architectural Forum. 98 (1953): 132-133.

Brown, Brenda J. “The Poetry of Passages: Dan Kiley’s Design Forms the Green, Modernist
Heart of Rockefeller University in Manhattan.” Landscape Architecture 6 (2004): 102-113.

“Campus Design: A New Focus on People” Architectural Record. 154 (1973): 145-160.

“Campus of Many Spaces” Architectural Forum.132 (1970): 34-39.

“Campus Planning” Architectural Record. 143 (1968): 148-164.

“Clarity, cohesiveness, good detail: IBM Education Center (Poughkeepsie, N.Y.) [Dan Kiley, Landscape Architect]”. Architectural Record. 126 (1959): 199-204.

“College buildings and planning” Architectural Record. 145 (1969): 145-160.

“Designing the Campus,” Architectural Record. 139 (1966): 165-188.

Eckbo, Garrett, Daniel U. Kiley, and James C. Rose. Landscape Design in the Primeval Environment. Architectural Record. 87 (1940): 73-79.

Eckbo, Garrett, Daniel U. Kiley, and James C. Rose. Landscape Design in the Rural Environment. Architectural Record. 86 (1939): 68-74.

Eckbo, Garrett, Daniel U. Kiley, and James C. Rose. Landscape Design in the Urban Environment. Architectural Record. 85 (1939): 70-77.

“Focusing University Development” Progressive Architecture 47(1966): 242-243.

Gill, Brendan. “Portrait: Dan Kiley” Architectural Digest. Los Angeles: Mar 1993. Vol. 50, Iss. 3; p. 34

Montgomery, Roger. “Center of Action.” Architectural Forum 132(1970): 65-68, 70.

Muschamp, Herbert. If Not Utopia, What is it? The World by Kiley.
New York Times (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Mar 1, 1996. p. C29 (1 page)

Obituary, New York Times, February 25, 2004.

Oppenheimer, Andrea. “Modern Master.” Landscape Architecture. 86 (1996): 74-79.

“People want planned outdoor space [Dan Kiley, Landscape Architect]”. House and Home. 5 (1954): 141.

Roe, Maggie. “Dan Kiley in His Own Words: America’s Master Landscape Architect,” Landscape Research. Abingdon: Jul 2000. Vol. 25, Iss. 2; p. 256-60.

S.L.. “Preservationists Worry About Lincoln Center Renovation,” Architectural Record. New York: Mar 2005. Vol. 193, Iss. 3; p. 34.

Silver, Nathan. “Translating the Root Form for Today’s Campus” Progressive Architecture 47 (1966): 156-175. Smith, Herbert L. “Campus of many spaces.” Architectural forum 132 (1970): [34]-[39].

 “The air-age acropolis: The U.S. Air Force Academy [Dan Kiley, Landscape Architect].” Architectural Forum. 110 (1959)158-165.

Tomkins, Calvin. The Garden Artist. The New Yorker. New York. 71 (1995), p. 136, 147-8.

Treib, Marc. “Dan Kiley and Classical Modernism: Mies in Leaf.” Landscape Journal. 24 (2005): 1-12.

Walker, Peter. “Pioneer Profile of Daniel Kiley.” The Cultural Landscape Foundation. http://www.tclf.org/pioneers/kiley.htm.

Walsh, John. “The Rockefeller University: Science in a Different Key.” Science. 150 (Dec. 24, 1965): 1692-1695.

Wurster, William Wilson. “Campus planning.” Architectural record 126 (1959):160-167.

3. Archival Materials:

Harrison, Wallace K. (Wallace Kirkman), 1895- Architectural drawings and papers, [ca. 1930-1980]. Avery Architectural Drawings and Archives, Columbia University.

© Kristina Nugent and Ephemeral Urbanity, [2013 – present]. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kristina Nugent and EphemeralUrbanity with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Advertisements