All posts by Megan Elizabeth Shrout

Becca Newburg’s Design Development Peer Review

November 13, 2015 Megan Elizabeth Shrout Leave a comment

Overview

Creating a multipurpose building for the Greenpoint community through reuse of the existing transport washing station is Rebecca’s main intent in her design project. First, extending the walls of the corner closest to the intersection to complete the rectangular shape of the station also generates the apparatus bays necessary to house the fire station. A transparent seam between the new construction and historical brick accentuates this new addition. The station’s large footprint is utilized by incorporating multiple public programs and organized by historical paths reestablished within the station’s interior as well as continuing throughout the rest of the site. The fire station’s more privatized areas are raised using the current structural columns; creating easy access to the apparatus bay when fire service is required. Visually separate flying trusses above the roof are to support any new additions as well as create an additional public realm underneath.

Presentation of Work

Rebecca speaks very confidently and presents her decisions regarding her design well.

Each individual drawing segregated her boards. Plans read the clearest. Line weights were well pronounced and dedicated areas with precision of her hand drawings. Sections were a little unclear; although the section cuts were, and any building behind them was very hard to discern. What I found to need the most explanation was the many colors used to envelope the elevations. There were many and what they represented was lost. Adding a color key or labeling of their respectability would make their intent easier to read (The colors were not discussed in the presentation either).

The Review

After Rebecca’s presentation, the reviewers focused on industrial and civic values in critiquing her design. Considering the majority of her building is pre-determined through the existing wash station and most interventions require new structure to accommodate the relevance of her structural systems is impertinent to her design. Rebecca’s largest intent in the reuse of the station is for the public’s interest, and to best serve the community the reviewers engaged at the prospects of creating a desired community space.

Although most of the critique followed on the idea of emphasizing current design proposals, which would be fame oriented, the intent is to emphasize the structural and civic implications not emphasize the design itself.

“Bedrooms need windows.”

To meet code, each individual bedroom needs one door and window. It would also create a healthier environment for the fire fighters by adding natural lighting into their private rooms. More lighting would be accessible if the mezzanine like floor encompassed the space instead of crossing through it. I believe that even in keeping its current design, if other means of lighting (mentioned later) are enhanced in the interior, the bedrooms could stay in their location in order to not interfere lower level programs.

Accentuate Existing vs. New Renovation

Rebecca’s interstitions are new and enhance the existing setting. Show how they improve the current situation by emphasizing their difference. The reviewers recommended that in drawing, Rebecca’s renovations be poched while the old was hard lined.

Strengthen/Emphasize Gestures

The reviews admired the gesture of renovating the existing building along with the site and wanted Rebecca to increase her efforts on this front. It was called a “pretentious site.” Trying to understand what was meant, I believe that the reviewer was trying to explain how the building wants to assume a greater importance. The large pathway that connects the street to the park was remarked as an important gesture of “giving the street back” to the public. They recommended enlarging it to accentuate the connection between the street and the inlet. In enlarging the opening, this invites the public into the building while also adding natural lighting into the interior.

Though within the same building, the station and public quarters are separate (separated by the aforementioned pathway). To continue the connection the pathway creates within the building, the roof between the fire station and public areas should also be emphasized. This could be instituted by intervening with the roof itself above the pathway’s opening. Rebecca already has occupied open levels above to interact with the existing roof. Interacting with design to emphasize the difference between the areas that have more interventions (the fire station part) vs. the eastern public realm by adding another transitional seam as she did between the apparatus addition and existing building would continue her efforts in expressing new vs. existing in a singular approach.

“Making a Clear Site Plan Should Be Next Step”

The multiplicity of pathways are excessive and created too small of exterior recreational spaces. Not much was discussed regarding any advised changes to Rebecca’s site within the critique otherwise. To make the design whole, I recommend emphasizing the public access way down to the water’s edge, and not to focus on a continuing line of other historical pathways. Not dismissing them, but by continuing each pathway through another is where the divisions create insufficient plots of land to use. Trees could replace lesser important paths to continue the form of any division used within the building as they could form linear qualities as well as vertical divisions.

“Support Looks Questionable”

Can the existing columns support the additional loads? I personally know with being in Rebecca’s section that she has continuously been monitoring the existing building’s ability to hold the new renovations. Considering the question arose very strongly in discussion, the means for displaying its ability to withstand intervention is crucial. By addressing the size of the columns within plan or perhaps wall section it would display knowledge of the forces acted upon the structure. A load diagram using the flying trusses would also show their importance and how the building functions structurally.

Need for Natural Lighting

The building’s size would not allow for much light penetration even if the majority of the walls were replaced with glass. The reviewers recommended interior courtyards that allow light to access interior floors from an open roof source. Implementing such a suggestion would also help to designate areas on the occupiable roof(s).

Conclusion

The reviewers as well as myself believe Rebecca has developed a “good system of intervention.” The main weaknesses in her design were the need to continue the strength of her current operations. By emphasizing differences in new vs. existing and the connections made in the public realm within the site, the design would reach stronger clarity. Any gestures made have been solid so far and only need to be pushed further to express the desired intent.

Featured Image: Artscape Wychwood Barns by DTAH, 2011

Maintenance facility from 1913 converted into mixed-used public center.

Project Statement

The Public’s Interface: Design Development Review Statement

November 1, 2015 Megan Elizabeth Shrout Leave a comment

From the site of the Bushwick Inlet surrounds a seeming opposition of historic brick clad buildings and new glass encased high towers coexist with little effort. Using the client’s, the People’s Firehouse, intent to reestablish firehouse 212 and the historical ties a units had to its community the new building’s design needed to connect history with modern firefighting conventions.

The apparatus bay, being of the public’s largest interest in fire stations, faces the Bushwick Inlet Park. By situating it between the public Monitor Museum and the private firehouse, the apparatus bay intertwines the two social settings. The museum lines the northern street to pull attention from the southern park and commuters, while the formerly segregated fire house sits further within the park for proximity to the water’s edge for shore fire rescues and to engage the community as pedestrians cross between the building and its dock.

The form frames the existing corner created by intersecting streets to act as an intermediary between the park and urban conditions. This wedged shape visually draws attention inwards to explore the history and practices of this particular site. From the building complex, the views open towards the park, inlet, river, and Manhattan skyline to further bridge environmental interior and exterior qualities and the people experiencing them.

The existing boundaries that informed the building’s design are extusing retaining walls. These walls designate three separate areas united by a singular pathway; each treated individually to allow for multiple uses from a secluded shelter using trees, open freely sloping land for large events or games, to a strict stepping condition for plays or lectures.

Using the complex as a transitional space between urban contexts relates to the backdrop of ongoing evolution of the cityscape. The connection is further anchored to the site by the apparatus bay’s intervention between private and public spaces to reintroduce the community to the historical relevance they had on fire station 212.

Featured Image: Sustainable Design Review Interface Model

by Megan Shrout

Peer Design Review

David Ackerman’s SD Peer Review

October 18, 2015 Megan Elizabeth Shrout 1 Comment

Overview

David Ackerman’s form from the fire station resonates from the extruded vectors from existing site context such as buildings and street orientations. Using three main vertices, the building developed into a series of regulated shapes that gave it distinction among its rectangular counterparts while maintaining relevancy to the site. The interior spaces are divided into public and private and then given geometry by continuing the designating vectors into the complex. Using this system, he extended the created form on the eastern side of the building to design the Monitor Museum. This gesture integrated the museum while allowing the privatized portions of the fire station to remain secluded.

Presentation of Work

The board was clean and efficiently used space. His most relevant drawings were centered on the board, which allowed for an easier read of his design intent. His conceptual diagram of a site map with three bright lines clearly demonstrated this, but considering its importance felt confined. Giving this powerful statement more room to breathe would help to ground his concept and therefore the rest of his drawings established by these controlling vectors.

Some of the line drawings were hard to read. The line weights could have used more contrast; the white paper of the board emphasized the outliers but any interior work required closer examination.

As for the student’s presentation, Dave was well prepared to present the process of his work and to showcase his current design. This was portrayed in his ease with interacting with his reviewers as well as addressing the drawings on his board when referencing any context in his speech. To improve his oral presenting I would recommend speaking up. His speech seemed muttered from speaking low and quietly, also making it difficult to hear (I must give some credit however because the reviewers also spoke very quietly so the critiques seemed very privatized).

The Project

The building has a very monumental quality to it. It is very capable to stand out among the rectangular and even curved buildings in the area. This strength was disregarded in the site’s own planning. Some of the topography lines appeared manipulated, however they did not display any of the intent expressed by the proposed building. Since vectors are such a strong element in David’s design, I’d recommend extending them to create pathways as well as manipulate the landscape. On Friday, our landscaping critiques emphasized this idea of dunes for projects that had strong lineal designs. I believe these could be introduced to Ackerman’s site plans. Either the dunes could be used as the linear pathways or in symbolism to the forms taken on by the building. Platforms could rise above indentations of the ground or created by intersecting pathways could show prominence of his idea to build from (and extrude) from linear conditions.

To further the intensity of the vector-al concept, this lineage could be expressed within the building so it is not lost upon entering. Structure could flow along the strongest length of wall to help preserve the original intent. A great example of this is from I. M. Pei’s National Gallery of Art’s East Wing. The corners that are hard to place program into could be used as open interactive spaces such as a lounge. It would increase the functionality of a sharp corner while also using the concept of these intersecting vectors that formed the corner, as the space is one of an integrated commons.

The strength of this concept is yet again promising as the availability to use the vector that formed the museum could be used to connect the public plaza to the Monitor Museum (as the critics also recognized). In David’s design, he restricted access to the museum to help initiate a pedestrian circulation that would bring the community into the fire station’s public side to access the museum. This intention was well thought out but not implemented. The idea of a progression through the spaces to integrate the public with both programs shows David recognized the client’s desire to reunite the community with its fire service. By creating a pathway directly from/to the plaza and the museum, both programs generate a larger interest and therefore the pathway (or vector) is also emphasized.

The Review

First comment: With any project that choses strong vectors, we must recognize that these indications of site may not always be there. Site Changes; taking lineage from another building or street may be lost when the street is manipulated or the building replaced. To create more independence from these exterior conditions, indication of the vector-al presence within the site is important. This comment was expressed through the entire session. David’s vectors are essential to his project, so emphasize them and make sure they cannot be denounced.

As the site itself develops, do not forget to also develop the spaces directly adjacent to the building produced, namely the plaza. The plaza itself is a space created by intersecting lines of roadway. It serves as a crucial space between public and private relations; the entrance to the site. Developing the programs associated with this space will help to further address how the rest of the land should be laid out.

“Use vectors to create pleasing spaces.” The reviewers now focused on the unusable spaces conduced by these vectors. Tight spaces within the angular conditions where the forms intersected are unwelcoming to both pedestrians and much use. By repositioning the separate forms to intersect at different points, the spaces could at least become more inviting even if retaining the same form.

David Ackerman’s reviewers focused most of their criticisms on the functionality of created spaces and the understated expression of his concept. The building’s shape indicates there is a strong underlying condition that influenced it, but the interior and the landscape both are ignorant of this expression.

Conclusion

David Ackerman’s presentation shows strong design intent. Although the concept needs further expression in later renditions, it was powerful at this stage and promises easily recognizable extensions from his current design. The building was well thought out, but lacked the power that the exterior conditions conveyed. Focusing on the strength of the vectors give to the exterior forms of the complex and integrating them with both interior and site context will strengthen and improve the intentions that brought the vectors into prominence in the first place.

Photo Credit: National Gallery of Art’s East Wing Imaginative Sketches by I. M. Pei

Assignment Posts, Project Statement

The Public’s Interface: SD Project Statement

October 3, 2015 Megan Elizabeth Shrout Leave a comment

The form frames the existing corner created by intersecting streets to act as an intermediary between the park and urban conditions. The bay also acts as a transitional form for the public by utilizing the truss height required for the large span as a path for people to go from the museum to the firehouse, enabling both programs to unite in one experience.

Photograph by Megan Shrout

Assignment Posts, Final 1500w

Developing to Preserve Urban Forest

September 27, 2015 Megan Elizabeth Shrout 1 Comment

Submission to Journal of Urban Design

Thesis Statement: In order to preserve the enriching qualities of life that an urban forest contributes, building projects need to design with the existing trees in their site and not only integrating new ones.

Post World War II we have experienced rapid population growth in urban areas, and with it our focus has been drawn away from green space to make room for incoming generations. Our cities have been slowly depleting what is left of parks and street trees that quietly reside among the tall skyscrapers and apartment complexes. Recently our governments have began to implement protection policies for the foliage after realizing the benefits of maintaining what is left of their natural landscape. However these policies hold little weight over the high demands of living within an urban context, so the rational of construction needs to develop around the existing “roots” in order to preserve the enriching qualities of life that an urban forest contributes.

We are naturally inclined towards nature, if not for the intrinsic beauty it possesses, at least for the life bearing support it provides. Urban forests increase emotional health to the surrounding public by providing an escape from the built environment and invite social interaction. The aesthetic quality trees provide also has monetary value, increasing commercial office values by 7% and home values by 15% (“Local Economics”). In Portland Oregon, properties increase their worth from $3,500 to $22,000 when streets are tree-lined (Jaffe, 2012). Retail values also rise as the public spends more time and money (up to 12% more) and travel greater distances to businesses with trees. As a matter of fact, consumer ratings increase steadily in proportion to the presence of trees according to (“Local Economics”). Urban trees provide many other benefits to those living within a city: improved air quality by absorbing CO2 and other pollutants, reduced temperatures by limiting the amount of sunlight reaching absorbent materials such as asphalt, and reduced infrastructure costs by retaining much of potential flood waters (Jaffe, Planning Department).

“Urban deforestation compares with what’s going on in the world’s rainforests,” Ed Macie, and urban specialists with the U.S. Forest Service stated (Cray, 2007). Cities everywhere are realizing the cost for depleting their urban canopies. One of many programs initiated in the U.S. is the Million Trees Initiative being tackled by cities such as New York, Denver, and Los Angles to plant one million new trees in order to rebuild their urban forest. Although the support for these campaigns is admirable, their efforts will not be seen for decades. It takes about 30 years before a young tree can mature into having these aforementioned benefits (Bell, 2005). A mature tree, for example, reduces pollution by over 70% compared to a young sapling (Cray, 2007).

Figure 1: Bosco Verticale by Stefano Boeri, 2015.

Photo Credit: Residenze Porta Nuova

Many architects have been conceptualizing ways in which to regain greenery in urban contexts. Aspiring designs of tree cladded skyscrapers line magazines, journal entries, and green competitions but not our skylines. Just like mountaintops, the environment becomes less and less suitable for life with increased elevation. Beyond the varying weather extremes and intense winds, maintenance of green life becomes greater, and the benefits begin to outweigh the costs (De Chant). Some buildings today have been successful in implementing their sustainable designs in such works as House for Trees by Vo Trong Nghia Architects or Namba Parks by The Jerde Partnership, but the only high-rise to encase itself with trees has been Bosco Verticale by Stefano Boeri [Figure 1]. Square footage comes at a premium within city limits; being able to grow over 75,000 square feet worth of forest in a building with a two-acre footprint (if laid flat, the green space would account for one-third of the land occupied (“Vertical Forest”) makes Bosco Verticale noteworthy. These projects help to promote nature in a sprawling city but their influence on our current environment is limited even if these constructions are successful like Boeri’s design.

It is inevitable that cities invade their green spaces in order to accommodate increasing populations; it can be seen throughout the history of civilization. In order to preserve the urban trees that benefit us today (while our advances in green architecture promote future growth) we must start designing accordingly. By developing around existing forestry, as we develop around the existing infrastructure, we can preserve the heritage and qualities that a preexisting tree gives to the site.

This design approach has been frequently rejected due to difficulties that arise during the construction process and environmental factors the tree manifests. The majority of roots around a tree are located within the top six inches of soil, creating a large area in which foundation cannot be placed in order to preserve the tree. The tree itself then bears maintenance beyond fertilization and watering: leaf clean up, bug control, and removal upon death. These are unwanted factors that discarding the tree would solve.

Figure 2: San Blas Municipla Healthcare Center by Estudio Entresitio, 2010.

Photo Credit: Archdaily

It is worth recognizing the solutions to these inherent difficulties instead of disregarding the increased values trees add to a property/business. By raising the flooring or decking around the roots of the tree, the flooring can be extended to nearly encompass the trunk while variation in floors required by this adaptation create visual differences often sought between spaces. As for leaf and bug control, separating spaces (like Estudio Entresitio’s Municipal Healthcare Centers [Figure 2]) around the tree(s) allows for visual experience trees provide and the option to physically separate from any of their inherent environmental nuisances. Removing the tree may become costly, but a well-aged tree within a city can be prosperous if the timber is sold for reuse (such as in furnishing). Working with pre-existing trees “add(s) a further architectural dimension to the urban design (Bell, 2005).”

The OAS1S project by Raimond de Hullu brings sustainable architecture to city living by designing with the trees already present. The concept enables the practice of developing into green spaces without diminishing the natural aspects around the structures. Hullu’s vision regards to the surrounding inner suburbs where development is still ongoing.

Figure 3: Residential Floor Plans of Niavaran Residential Complex by Mohammad Reza Nikbackt, 2010

Although not in an urban context, Mohammad Reza Nikbackt’s primary goal in the Niavaran Residential Complex was to preserve the existing trees on the site and accommodate a large living facility [Figure 3]. The form of the building is manipulated by the trees’ context and adds a natural architectural dimension not seen in modern city developments.

Due to the vertical nature of desert tree roots in Iran, the complex was able to incorporate more trees into the plan of this building than one could in more temperate climates. This causes a larger dilemma in cities such as New York City or Chicago where square footage is at a steep premium and a tree often suffers the consequences. Implementation of new trees into the building to replace the original ones in the site is regularly seen in proposals to save retail space on the first floor. As intended, this method reduces construction costs and opens the foundation, but disregards the implications of the additional floor space now needed by the replacement trees. Deep flooring or extrusions to maintain healthy roots need to be incorporated into the design as well as wide basins for root expansion. Maintaining the original trees may increase costs initially, but the tree already has its living system established and using either a pervious floor or drainage system would give the ground below the new floor access to rain water (maintaining much desired floor space).

Methods to retain existing trees today may be costly up-front, but the continuation of a mature tree’s benefits are not to be dismissed. The growing desire to reclaim the urban forest is an indication of their prowess. If the implementation of a conservative construction process were viewed as strongly as tree restoration, new methods of inclusion would surface, making it more economical and practical in initial construction. The realization of a mature tree’s importance needs to also encompass the protection of existing ones so the impact of the city’s goals can come to fruition before their intent is lost in the minds of supporters.

Investing in urban forestry is an asset to all urban environments. Reconstructing the cityscape to adhere to more foliage in the future is important, but preserving what remains today should be a primary concern. To retain both advancing development needs as well as beneficiary factors mature trees produce, we should design with, not without, the urban forest.

Featured Image: Niavaran Residential Complex Model by Mohammad Reza Nikbakht, 2010.

Sources:

Arnold, H.F. Trees in Urban Design. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993. Print.
Baker, Scott D. “How to Keep Development from Killing Trees.” A&E Persepctives. Tree Solutions Inc., 29 March 2010. Web. 26 September 2015. <http://djc.com>
Bell, Simon, and Dominique Blom, Maija Rauyaki, Cristina Satel-Branco, Alan Simson, Ib Asger Olsen. “Design of Urban Forests.” Urban Forests and Trees. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science and Business Media, 2005. Print.
Cray, Dan. “Why Cities are Uprooting Trees.” TIME Magazine, 21 June 2007. Web. 26 September 2015. <http://content.time.com>
De Chant, Tim. “Can We Stop Drawing Trees on Top of Skyscrapers?” Archdaily, 21 March, 2013. Web. 27 September 2015. <http://archdaily.com>
Hullu, R.A. “OAS1S.” 2015. Web. 27 September 2015. <http://www.oas1s.com>
Jaffe, Eric. “U.S. Cities Are Losing 4 Million Trees a Year.” The Atlantic, 9 February 2012. Web. 26 September 2015. <http://citylab.com>
“Local Economics.” Green Cities: Good Health. College of the Environment, University of Washington, 11 September 2014. Web. 21 October 2015. <http://depts.washington.edu>
Mohammad Reza Nikbakht. “Niavavan Residential Complex.” World Architecture, Web. 26 Septmeber 2015. <http://worldarchitecture.org>
Stefano Boeri Studio. “Vertical Forest.” Stefano Boeri Architetti, Web. 21 October 2015. <http://stefanoboeriarchitetti.net>
Towbridge, Peter, and Nina Bassak. Trees in the Urban Landscape: Site Assessment, Design, and Installation. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley, 2004. Print.
“Urban Forest Plan.” Planning Department. City & County of San Fransico, 21 July, 2015. Web. 26 September 2015. <http://sf-planning.org>
Vo Trong Nghia Architects. “House for Trees.” Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, April 2014. Web. 26 September 2015.

ARCH 311w