Marbles On Glass: A prefabrication approach to balancing subsidized and market rate housing

GROUND PLAN 1’-0”=1/8”

marbles on glass: A pre-fabricated solution balancing market rate and subsidized housing

deAlex Alaimo design4portfolio William Rockwell May 19 2011

Contents: comparative case study:

quinta monroy vs phipps apts top floor of duplex

floorr off simplex ssimp i

possible finished plan ‘a’ (3 bedroom duplex) (1 bedroom simplex w/ storefront)

circulation unit 1

unit 2

botoom floor of duplex

storage

built wall

spura six unit:

switchback

EX EEXPANSION XP PA AN NSSIO ON N SSPACE SP PA AC CEE

BEDR ROOM R O

LIV VING V

BEDRO RO ROOM

EX EEXPANSION XPA PA AN A NSI SIO ON N SSPACE SP PA AC CE C

BEDROOM

BEDROOM

KITCHEN

STUDY 780 SQFT 3 BAY 2ND FL PLAN FOR 3BR

seward park renewal area site analysis spura forty unit midterm:

LCD LES playroom playro

kitchen

bed bed bed

dining living

kitchen

2 BEDROOM DUPLEX two rich NYU students

spura forty unit final:

hi-LO 1/4”=1’-0” 1BR 1/4” 1’ 0”

Pre-fabrication systems are essential in the implementation of architecture specifically when dealing with low cost housing solutions. The ability to cut costs while allowing for the duplication of units make the approach worthy. This semester explored methods in designing on many scales all with prefabricated, units, structural components, rooms in mind. The problem with prefabrication is its tendency to seem ultra repetitive lacking character. Although prefabricated system is designed to be manufactured and assembled anywhere on earth each system can be tailored to a specific site and population group.

The role of the architect has always been debated when it comes to prefabricated systems. I advocate the architect is still an architect not an engineer when it comes to these systems. An understanding of human behavior, structural systems, environmental factors, domestic living, materials and aesthetics are all still necessary and should be carefully considered in prefabricated systems. It is a challenge to an architect to address all these issues and make the prefabricated dwelling feel like a home.

The range of possibilities of prefabricated systems is far extending. Applications such as disaster relief, in formal settlement relief, luxury housing and affordable housing can all be dealt with. Housing is especially relevant in the prefabricated discussion because of the repetitious nature.

This semester looked at several renditions of a prefabricated idea using a lens of many scales from the individual bathroom, to the bedroom, to the unit and to the amalgamation of units into buildings and complexes.

PHIPP’S II CONSTR

PHIPP’S I CONSTRUCTED

SUNNTSUDE GARDENS CONSTRUCT

Case Study: Phipps Garden Apt’s an

Phipps

common evolution original farmland Phipps Apt vs Quinta Monroy

vernacular crisis: SLUMS/ HOUSE

great depression 1920

1930

Franklin Roosevelt President

us federal housing program 1940 major chilean eathquake

1950

Above are section to the same scale and a timeline marking relevant political events influencing public housing in both Chile and the US. Chile vulnerability to earthquakes make it a hotbed for innovations in housing. Also graphed is the amount on novelty undergone by both projects from their inception. Meaning Phipps has see gradual change over a long time and Quinta has seen rapid change in a very short time.

1960

porocity: SUNNYSIDE/ PHASE I QUINTA MONROY

rule of Augusto Pinochet

1970

QUINTA MONROY CONSTRUCTED

nd Quinta Monroy

infill: PHIPPS GARDEN APARTMENTS/ PHASE II QUINTA MONROY

exapansion: on: n: P PHIPPS GARDEN APARTMENTS II/ MONTEREY MEXICO

chilean housing policy 1980

1990

2000

2010

Case Study: Phipps vs Quinta floor of simplex

fire escape

storage

circulation

4

4

5 1/2

3

4

4

4

Plan comparison: Phipps this page

QUINTA MONROY FLOOR PLANS + ELEVATION

top floor of duplex

SCALE: 3/16”=1’-0”

Plan comparison: Quinta Monroy this page

top floor of duplex botoom floor of duplex

built wall

floor of simplex

floor of simplex

floor of simplex

botoom floor of duplex

botoom floor of duplex

unbuilt portion

top floor of duplex

top floor of duplex

possible finished plan ‘b (2 beedroom duplex) (2 beedroom simplex)

possible finished plan ‘a’ (3 bedroom duplex) (1 bedroom simplex w/ storefront)

unfinished plan (800 sqft duplex) (600 sqft simplex)

Case Study: Phipps vs Quinta

SECTION DIAGRAM: LAYER VS. MODULE SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”

Communities within complex diagram Phipps above, Quinta below

QUINTA MONROY

PHIPPS GARDEN APARTMENTS

typical floor plan

ground floor plan

SCALE: 1/16 =1 -0

NROY LONGITUDINAL SECTION

Unit type diagram in section and plan. Phipps is stacked same unit on every level while quints has all 1-2 bedrooms below in 3 bays and other 2 bay 2 story units above.

Case Study: Phipps vs Quinta phipps Clarence Stein Queens NY USA 1931

free-market

dynamic-debtless

(private rental)

(subsidized build to own)

attract working class tenants

qunita monroy

replace housing for existing ad hoc tenants

revitalize industrial area

elemental Iquique Chile 2005

resolve chilean housing deficit (earthqaukes) ‘case studies’ in housing typolgies

$

$

PROVIDE QUALITY HOUSING

+ =

quality = (space/ unit) longevity economy (cost/unit) quantity

density 2.25 >1.72

472 units = 2.25 units/ 1000sqft 210, 000 sqft site coverage: =90300sqft/210000 sqft= 43%

site coverage one large court with 4 peripheral courts

maximize profit via quality

43%

=$

93 units = 1.72 units/ 1000sqft 54, 000 sqft

courts as social spaces

10 unique unit types

=

site coverage: 93 units x 250sqft =23000sqft/54000 sqft= 43% 2 unit type developed into 93 unique types

4 court plazas

minimize debt maximize quality

Above is a Venn diagram outlining the overall similarities and differenced between the architects approach for each project. Some interesting commonalities existed such as percentage of open space . Below is diagrams from the architects both went through similar typology studies and rejections before settling on a solution.

My understanding is public housing is a contunuous evolution of experiments each building upon each other.

STRUCTURE: INFILL VS. FRAME

STEEL COLUMNS (TYP) STEEL BEAM

CONCRETE COLUMNS/ WALL (TYP)

10X3 WOOD FLOOR JOISTS 24” O.C. (TYP)

2X8 FLOOR JOISTS 24” O.C. (TYP) DOUBLE WYTH MODULAR BRICK BEARIN MASONRY WALL, STANDARD 4 1/2” REINFORCED CONC SLAB STEEL ANGLE HEADER

16X6X8 CONC BLOCK STACKED FILLED W/ CONC AND REBAR

HORIZONTAL MODULE

VERTICAL MODULE

cross ventilation

bad 6 story units phipps NO OPPOSITE OPERABLE FENESTRATION

better 4 story walkup units phipps SOME CONTINUITY

best quinta monroy simplex/duplex MULITPLE FENESTRATION AND CONTINOUS

Above are structural and ventilation diagrams at the same scale. Phipps uses a bearing wall with the span supported by columns. Quinta uses poured concrete and CMU to infill and has a very short span using lumber.

As for ventilation the 6 storey phipps has the worse cross ventilation as it has exposure to two perpendicular faces. The 4 storey walk up unit has better ventilation however Quinta’s units have the best and shorted distance between fenestration for cross ventilation.

Case Study: Phipps vs Quinta Typical brick work in Phipps Garden Apartments

richness in brickwork/ patterns

COMMON BOND (AMERICAN) PATTERN (5) RUNNING COURSES (1) HEADER COURSE

CLOSER BRICKS ROWLOCK SILL

ROWLOCK COURSE

speaks with ‘brick vernacular’ of Queens

“stacked b

Elevation comparison: both used a stacked pattern at times, Phipps has intricate brick detail while Quinta expresses its functionalism and its end user custom-tailor generates its charm expressing the individual.

bond”

Quinta Monroy expression of economy

both use masonry to economize facade

richness in individual families unit customization

speaks with ‘barrio vernacular’ of Iquique

Seward Park Urban Renewal Area: site analysis connecting two worlds divided by a bridge PROJECT 2

site and program anaysis

PROJECT 3

1 bedroom 2 bedroom

circ

3 bedroom

1 bedroom 2 bedroom

3 bedroom

shared

circ

REQ’D OPEN

%+4%7.#6+10

.1$$;

#4'#

#26 70+6 616#.

12'0 $+-' 4/

1800SF

BUILDABLE SITE

3.3 35%

$4

REQ’D OPEN

53(6

DENSITY (UNIT:SF) 6 UNITS= 3.33 U/1000SF 1.8 1000SF DENSITY (PR0GRAM:SITE) 5550SF= 3.08 1800SF

POSSIBLE TENANTS

POSSIBLE VARIATIONS

SENIORS

STUDIO

SINGLE COLLEGE

OFFICE

COUPLE NO CHILDREN

CONNECTED TO FAMILY’S APT

.#70&4;

1 BEDROOM /#+.

1((+%'

KITCHEN+ LIVING AREA + FULL BATH+ BED

19

12

7X7

12

10

120

144

230 50

=500SF

2 BEDROOM

SINGLE COLLEGE (UNMARRIED)

SHARED BATH

SMALL FAMILY (MARRIED + CHILDREN)

OFFICE/ WORKSPACE

KITCHEN+ LIVING AREA + FULL BATH+ BED+ FULL BATH +BED

12

7X7

12

7X7

20000SF

12

20

10

120

144 50

240

BUILDABLE SITE

SINGLE PARENT AND CHILD

144 50 =750SF

public 3 BEDROOM LARGER FAMILY (MARRIED + 2-4 CHILDREN)

ADDED HALF BATH

FAMILY + GRANDPARENT

TWO MASTER SIZED SUITES

(3) SINGLE COLLEGE AGED (UNMARRIED)

LARGER KITCHEN- ELIMINATE DINING AREA 51%+#.

KITCHEN+ DINING AREA +LIVING AREA + FULL BATH+ BED+ BED + MASTER BED+ MASTER BATH

10

180

120

26

12

7X7

12

7X7

15

12

15

310 50

120 50

120

SHARED

180 =1200SF

PRIVATE

N ref

10 8.0

8

units/ 1000sf

6

4 3.3 2

2.0

2.0

0

PR

SP

T2

T3

EC

sed

ck

blo

EC

OJ

po

er

PRE CLEARANCE ESTIMATED DENSITY 40 000SF TENEMENT STYLE BLOCK ESTIMATED TYPICAL BUILDING (5) STORY’S WITH (20) UNITS (4/ LEVEL) WITH 100X 25 FOORPTINT 2500SF

OJ

PR

pro

sup

k loc tb en em ten

PRE

UR A

%

20

1850

%

50

%

40

%

20

2 35%

40 000/ 2500= 16 UNITS/ BLOCK 2012

Low rise unit development have an array of units organized around vertical courts which allow light and air. Vertical arragement allows for communities to develop. Also an ‘undeveloped’ space can be offfered to tenants as incentive to develop thier parcel or the space can be sold to the complex or to another unit, in an effort to diversify and justistify the income divisions.

“develop sense of property and ownership to encourage a ‘sustainable culture’ �

DENSIT (UNIT: SF): 16(20)= 320 UNITS = 8 U/1000SF 40 (1000SF) COVERAGE 20% OPEN BACK YARD 80% BUILDING 0% OPEN PARK

DENSITY (PR0GRAM:SITE) 45,850 SF= 2.29 20,000 SF

DENSITY (UNIT:SF) 200 UNITS= 10.00 U/1000SF 20 (1000SF)

8 20%

COVERAGE 20% TOWER 30% BUILDING 50% OPEN PARK

The lower east side has gone through many changes. It has always been a nieghborhood for immigrant communities. In an effort to reileve non quality housing, superblocks and high rise low income towers were developed. This now leaves the old low rise infilled block contrasting a half empty super block conatining high rise. Both these typolgies have their problems and hopefully a solution will be able to harmonize the existing opposition while improving on the modern idea of housing. The solution should make the area desible to live again.

SPURA

EXISTING POST CLEARANCE ESTIMATED DENSITY 20 000 SF 20 STORY TOWER

%

35

1960

DENSITY (UNIT:SF) 40 UNITS= 2.00 U/1000SF 20 1000SF

PROPOSED SPURA RENEWAL ESTIMATED TOTAL AREA 450 000 SF TOTAL UNITS REQ 800- 1000

10 50%

DENSITY (UNITS:SF) 900U = 2 U/ 1000 SF 450 (1000SF) ALSO PROVIDE COMMERCIAL AND CIVIC PROGRAM ELEMENTS PROVIDE PARKSPACE

20% LOW INC 10% MOD INC 10% MED INC 50% MARKET R

2 40%

alex alaimo midterm_spura40 w design4nyit 04.04.11 2.5

density: units/ sqft

density: % open to built

composite holiday in under construction

seward park

place 11x17 here

SPURA: Six- unit housing sections

scale: 1/8”=1’-0” Level 7 60' - 0"

Level 6 50' - 0"

Level 5 40' - 0"

Level 4 30' - 0"

Level 3 20' - 0"

Level 2 10' - 0"

Level 1 0' - 0"

SECTION ‘X’

SECTION ‘L’

atrium

perspective from broome st

3 bay unfinished unit

The 6 unit problem was resolved bu using a adaptable structure supporting alternately facing prefabricated room units. The corridor expanded and contracted making useful as a room at times. This design evolved into the 40 unit.

UNIT PLANS

scale: 1/4”=1’-0”

EXPANSION SPACE EXPANSION SPACE

LIVING BEDROOM

BEDROOM

BEDROOM

BATH

BATH

KITCHEN

STUDY

1BR

1 BR SIMPLEX

580 SQFT 2 BAY

ALT 2ND FL PLAN FOR 3BR

EXPANSION SPACE

BEDROOM LIVING

BEDROOM EXPANSION SPACE

KITCHEN

BEDROOM

BEDROOM

BATH BATH

2BR

780 SQFT 3 BAY

STUDY

2 BR SIMPLEX 2ND FL PLAN FOR 3BR

N ref

EXPANSION SPACE EXPANSION SPACE

BEDROOM

DINING

BEDROOM

KITCHEN

BATH

2 BR DUPLEX UPPER FL

3BR

1400 SQFT 5(+1) BAY

OPEN

BEDROOM

LIVING

1 BR OPEN

LIVING

BATH

ENTRY FL PLAN FOR 3BR

EXPANSION / COMMUNITY

2 BR SIMPLEX

EXPANSION / COMMUNITY

3 BR DUPLEX

1 BR BATH

2BR

1000 SQFT 3(+1) BAY (2 BATH)

KITCHEN

2 BR DUPLEX LOWER FL

2 BR DUPLEX

3 BR DUPLEX RETAIL

Create desirable place to live with a place residents and nieghbors are proud of. A place thats character reflects that of the community while repairing some of its probelms.

The project contained 6 units each was able to be unique by arranging the prefabricated rooms in the overall structural frames. Stairs for duplexes were added at the edges and a public stair and elevator between the units.

SPURA: Six- unit housing 3BR D

1BR S

3RD FLOOR

2BR D

3BR D

2ND FLOOR broome st

SECTION ‘X’

2BR D

LOBBY

RETAIL

MECH SECTION ‘L’

pro

1ST FLOOR

N ref

PRIVATE

PUBLIC

PRIVATE

3

p

p

y

panaramic of SPURA site

The building has an unfinished look to it as ideas of buying rights to add a pod were played with. Each owner could add value to the property by building addition to the unit. However this idea fizzled out because of New York high demand for housing. Above are floor plans, privacy diagram and perspective from Broome St.

social

BEAM

structure PREFABRICATED PANEL

CONTINUOUS POINT LOAD SECTION

OPENING FOR INFILL GLAZING/ BLOCK

individuals (units) carved out of the collective whole

individuals (units) structure the collective

collective determines form of individual units

individuals determine form of collective

eniviromental light

axon

ogram DIRECT LIGHT EXPOSURE

bed duplex bed

bed

exp

study living dining kitchen

bath ATRIUM ALLOWS MORE EXPOSURE

bed

air bath

1 bed simplex

2 bed duplex exp

bed

bed

living

dining kitchen

bath

bath living

intergration

bed

dining kitchen

ATRIUM ALLOWS CROSS VENTILATION

bath no: creates discrimination and division

living

bed

bed

retirees in 30 years?

no: creates awkward adjacencties and forced interation

20’ min

cyclical overlap

dining

seniors

kitchen 2 bed simplex

families

transplants

MULTIPLE EXPOSURES ALLOW CROSS VENTILATION

Diagrams of structure, program and ventilation and model of building.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing

Before and after of SPURA lot for the forty unit project.

hi-LO

high quality low cost subsidized/ market housing for spura three modern tenants: -college transplants -local retirees -local families create a sustainable community including all three What is the best way to create an sustainable, desiable community ? seperated vs intergrated proposal: cyclical overlap transplants expand to families: families shrink to

intergration

no: creates awkward adjacencties and forced interation

no: creates discrimination and division retirees in 30 years? cyclical overlap

families

seniors

transplants

flux

individuals (units) carved out of the collective whole ll

i

d

i

f

f i di id

l

i

individuals (units) structure the collective i di id

l d

i

f

f

ll

i

PROGRAM CONCEPT

PROGRAM CONCEPT

CLUSTER DISPERSEMENT

CLUSTER DISPERSEMENT

N N

N

N

Many ideas carried over to the 40 unit rendition of the market rate/ public housing problem. The modular system evolved into a pod and dock system. However expression of the room remained the same. Conceptually the prefabricated system became apart of the challenge to make both highly designed luxury economy units for the market rate and low cost units for the subsidized need.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing midterm 2BR

3BR upper

3 BR UPPER 3BR lower

3 BRLOWER 2BR upper

3 BR UPPER

2BR lower

3 BRLOWER

1BR

1BR

The plan design was streamlined and a wet wall developed housing the kitchen and bathroom facilities. Again a sawtooth hall connected the wet facilities to the room pods. With very few pieces a large amount a variety could be produced.

LCD ELEMENT DIAGRAM

1/4” = 1’-0”

For the midterm the many pieces for the wet wall were developed. The above diagram illustrates how the pieces could be interchanged to generate a subsidized or a ‘luxury’ apartment by the amount and quality of fixtures. Also a ‘dupulxing pod’ was developed so apartment could expand up or down a storey.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing midterm LOBBY TWO BR

ESSEX

ESSEX

WALKWAY

WALKWAY LOBBY

LOBBY

A

RETAIL / ME

STAIR

THREE BR

STAIR

ONE BR

STAIR ESSEX

ESSEX

STAIR

BUILDING SECTION/ CONFIGURATION DIAGRAMS 1/16”= 1’-0”

B

MARKET RATE

LOBBY

C

MARKET RATE

LOBBY

D

SUBSIDIZED

SUBSIDIZED

sample UNIT PLANS 1/4”= 1’-0”

kitchen bath

bed

study dining bed

living bed

2 BEDROOM SIMPLEX single parent and child

playroom kitchen

bed bed bed

dining living

2 BEDROOM DUPLEX two rich NYU students

kitchen

dining bed

kitchen

living

3 BEDROOM DUPLEX family

1 BEDROOM native les senior

n

living

bed

ref

Plans for the midterm scheme. Each building had a different ‘genetic make up’. by planning the number of rooms and what fixtures each building has the architect could potentially control what social activity happens in each building.

CAN BE PURCHASED BETWEEN TWO TENANTS AT MARKET RATE PRICES ONLY IN SUBSIDIZED BUILDINGS

LCD

URBAN STRATEGY

DISTRIBUTE INCOME BRACKET, AND TYPE OF TENANT...

ARCHITECTURE WISE DISTRUBUTE LIGHT, AIR AND PRIVACY ALL SINGLE BEDROOM SENIOR UNITS ON THE SAME LEVEL IN ALL BUILDINGS CONNECTED TO CONTINOUS WALKING TRACK

LES NEW PROJECT (S)

distrubution equation

(T S F) (L m M 2R) = 4 buildings + 3 courts local fabric (25x 100 lots)

POROSITY

designer + economic apartments

T- transplants S- seniors F- families

superblock (squeeze up to make open space)

L- low income m- medium income M- moderate income R- market rate

when distrubuted: 25’

(x)

(L) OWEST (C)OMMON (D)ENOMINATOR

(TL) (Tm) (TM) 2 (TR) (SL) (Sm) (SM) 2 (SR) (FL) (Fm) (FM) 2 (FR)

1x (building+court)

ELEVATION

25’

25’

25’

25’

25’

25’

hybrid (squeeze into local fabric)

2x (buildings+ court)

3/32” = 1’-0”

SITE PLAN 3/32”=1 ‘- 0” delancy

retail/ subsidized small business office spac space

retail/ restaurant

lobby A

???

UNIT SECTIONS 1/4” = 1’-0”

WALKWAY ABOVE

retail/ restaurant

lobby b

WALKWAY ABOVE

essex

25’

X-SECTION 1/8” = 1’-0”

‘organic’ garden

retail/ restaurant

lobby c

playground

lobby d

retail/ restaurant

broome

n ref

alex alaimo midterm_spura40 w design4nyit 04.04.11 1.5

The project was titled LCD LES for the finding and designing lowest common denominator necessary to live. However the overall urbanism was poor and this became the focus for the second half of the semester.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

BATHROOM 1/4”=1’-0”

D

h

Interior perspective showing material differentiating using characters from the Naked City. Below is a plan and section of the bathroom. The bathroom for the final project was designed to replace all the options from the midterm further streamlining the design.

3BR 1/4 1/4”=1’-0” 1 0

2BR 1/4”=1’-0”

1BR 1/4”=1’-0”

GROUND PLAN 1/8”- 1’-0”

SECTION 1/8”- 1’-0”

Unit axons and plans. Like the bathrooms the units also were streamlined and duplexes were eliminated saving space in the final design. A movie theater/ auditorium was added along with retail spaces for the public amenity.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

Plans of overall complex and enlarged upper floor.

D

ARCHDESIGN4

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

Perspective collage depicting life in the complex. Attempting to show life in a prefabricated complex can be rich and lively. To the right is the ground plan showing the residential lobbies, retail spaces, auditorium and planting.

The overgrown planting attempts to contrast the rigid prefabricated elements. The open corridor became the focus of the amalgamation.

SECTION 1/2”-1’-0”

Construction section showing the use of a three layer floor, insulation, ceiling system allowing for the exposure of the overhangs with insulation. Also the construction difference of the on site construction of the wet wall and dock made of concrete and off site pre fab light gauge steel wall, floor and ceiling system of the pods which are shipped and assembled on site.

PERSPECTIVE/ SECTION

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

STRUCTURAL CONCEPT ASSEMBLY OF PREFABRICATED PANELS

Axonmetric of structural components and how they work with each other.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final SUSTAINABLE CONSIDERATIONS REDUCED CONSTRUCTION WASTE -PREFABRICATED PANELS REDUCED ENERGY FOOTPRINT -REDUCED USE ON CONC/ HEAVY STEEL ORIENTATION OF MAJORITY OF UNITS TO SOUTH CROSS VENTILATION

SUMMER SUN 74

INSULATED ENVELOPE

WINTER SUN 23

SHADING/ DAYLIGHTING

ACTIVE FLOOR-CEILING HVAC

SUSTAINABILITY SECTION

ONION FLATS

1/4”- 1’-0” STRUCTURE

SUSTAINABILITY SECTION

ONION FLATS

SECTION/ STRUCTURE

1/4”- 1’-0”

Sustainable considerations, pre fabrication allows for waste reduction which is a large sustainable factor. Also the staggering aides with shading in the summer as well as reducing glazing as to not lose energy in the winter and summer.

ELEVATION X-SECTION 1/4”- 1’-0”

Section elevation and model photos. To generate a individual feeling to the complex exterior finishes could be varied. A palette of wood siding, concrete fiver board and metallic panels were used to add distinction to either the room or the unit. This strategy also reflected the fabric of ethnicity in the area and became representative of the fabric of the neighborhood.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

In line with the concept of prefab the model was designed and assembled in the same way. Using only about 5 base pieces with some variations the entire residential complex built without the aid of glue.

A key design component was the cross alley through the building creating a continuity seen in the photo on the bottom right.

SPURA: Forty- unit housing final

DELANCEY CINEMA AND

AUDITORIUM

CB3 MEETING MONDAY

6/6

NOW PLAYING

THE DC

The Suffolk street elevation attempted to be conscience of the existing community and to hopefully integrate the alien form of the prefab units into the richly diverse community. Elements like the existing chain link fence and existing 25’ lot were used to localized the design.

WIC ‘Y’ MART

DO OR DINE

LIME JUNGLE

SUFFOLK ST ELEVATION 1/8”- 1’-0”