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”