Full_Portfolio_JaePark

Portfolio 1

Jae Park

Portfolio

Jae Park Southern California Institute of Architecture Master of Architecture The Ohio State University Bachelor of Science in Architecture 685 S.New Hampshire Ave Los Angeles, CA 90005 1+ 614.747.3268 Š 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission of copyright owner.

Jae Park

Table of Contents Statement 6 Graduate Program 2GAX (Fall)

Design Studio 8 Visual Studies I 18 2GBX (Spring)

Design Studio 30 Visual Studies II 40 3GAX (Fall)

Vertical Studio 50 Design Development 72 Undergraduate Program Fourth Year

Design Studio

92

Third Year

Design Studio

96

6

Statement Jae Park is an architectural designer pursuing a Master’s degree at the Southern California Institute of Architecture.

He received his undergraduate degree from the Ohio State University in Columbus, Oh where he also started his professional career with local architects, working at different offices and also doing freelance architectural design jobs.

He worked on variety of residential projects, specifically on renovations of older homes in the Columbus area. He participated in all phases of construction, working with contractors, engineers, and the local government branches.

7

8

Complex Morphologies Design Studio

FALL 2017 DS 1200 ( 2GAX ): Complex Morphologies Instructor: Casey Rehm Team: Jae Park, Adam Wells

Currently the discipline of architecture is in the process of being actively redefined by shifting political, social, technological, and ecological paradigms. In the 2GAX studio students explore the forefront of the discipline, leading the conversation about the next in terms of aesthetic agendas, architecture’s contemporary and future societal role, and the impact of theoretical and technological innovation on architecture’s design and communicative repertoire.

The Compositional Morphologies studio places an emphasis on advancing formal strategies beyond the current state-of-the-art. Students integrate extradisciplinary techniques and technologies into the design workflow in order to develop innovative architectures that respond to changing societal, ecological and technological contexts. Students’ design work engages issues that range from fundamental morphological transformations through rigorous 3D modeling, to the role of the image and digital sampling in the production of architectural form. These issues are explored through a highly resolved building design.

9

10

1.

1. Initial Massing. Photogrammed Soap 2. Midterm Massing 3. Final Massing

11

2.

3.

12

Site Plan

13

14

1.

1. Ground Level Floor Plan 2. Upper Level Floor Plan

15

2.

16

1.

17

2.

4-WAY SPIDER SECONDARY STRUCTURE

FACADE CHUNK

PRIMARY STRUCTURE

24” COFFERED CONCRETE

GLASS PAINTED GLASS

FIBER REINFOCED PANEL (FRP) WITH INSULATION METAL ANCHOR 4” STEEL STUD 1/2” GYPSUM BOARD

GYPSUM BOARD TERRACOTTA PANEL ANCHOR CEMENT FILLING 2” AIR SPACE MOISTURE BARRIER INSULATION PRIMARY STRUCTURE

1. Section 2. Facade Chunk

18

19

Visual Studies I Visual Studies I

FALL 2017 4200 ( 2GAX ): Visual Studies 1 Instructor: Team:

Kristy Balliet & Casey Rehm Jae Park, Adam Wells

Visualization today encompasses the development, exploration and communication of information and ideas in multiple mediums. The course will engage recent techniques related to splines, gesture interfaces and virtual reality. The course will develop critical visual literacy and review methods for generating and evaluating lines, surfaces, and volume.

20

The Animate Line Exercise 1: Gesture The gestural line will explore the potential and differences of the stroke, the gesture and the line.

In architecture and visualization these artifacts can be associated with rhythmic repetition, erratic character, structural integrity, whimsical moments and elegant form. Through gesture, drawing, building and rebuilding the project will address issues of line, surface and volume. This project will introduce methods and concepts of three-dimensional drawing (zero gravity), digital modeling, multiple realities and digital/physical fabrication. The final output is a Gesture Model.

21

22

The Animate Line Exercise 2: Composite The composite model will explore texture and surface development. The range of investigation will include subtle bumps to elaborate deformation. In architecture and visualization these tactile augmentations can be associated with rhythmic repetition, erratic character, structural integrity, whimsical moments and elegant form. Through design, testing, and refining the project will address issues of aggregation, layering, and tactility.

23

24

3D Printed Model

25

3D Printed Model

26

The Animate Line Exercise 3: Texture This exercise will focus on utilizing bottom up logic and intelligent agent based algorithms to manipulate color and matter at a granular level of resolution. As part of this exercise students will produce their own software to operate on both 2D image manipulation and generative 3D solid manipulation. Rather than utilizing off the shelf plugins, students will be tasked with codifying their personal design intention into unique algorithms. This process requires students to engage complexity theory and algorithms purposed to both simulate human forms of composition, and non-human forms of perception. All algorithms utilized will respond to specific content within their inputs to produce non-linear effects. These effects will preface formlessness and qualities of aesthetics without dependence on totalistic figurative elements.

The final forms will oscillate between illegibility and accessibility.

27

28

1.

1. Section 2. Powder Printed Model

29

2.

30

31

Man-Made Nature Design Studio

SPRING 2018 ( 2GBX ): Man-Made Nature Instructor: Team:

Elena Manferdini Jae Park, Gokay Sapan

The relationship between a commodified nature and urban inhabitation will be the silent protagonist of the 2GBX Design Studio. The interest of the class is an expanded nature in which natural and mutated visions co-exist.

The studio will firmly resist the temptation of representing nature as it would be in a traditional postcard, the projects will not yield to clean judgments about what is living or non-living, organic or technological, true or synthetic. The relationship between natural and synthetic landscapes, technological and organic languages, traditional and contemporary processes, ethical and unethical ideologies, poetic and threatening visions of nature will become the ground for the studio. Each of the three studios will have a different focus on this problem.

During the first part of the studio, students will work on a series of strategic, programmatic, and urban exercises related to contemporary models of mixed use development, as well as forms of markets and natural landscapes.

During the first part of the studio, students will do research on both historical and contemporary architectural precedents

while building a brief for the design project, researching the program, site, zoning and building code, environmental concerns, and long term development strategies for the site. During the second part of the studio, the class will design the expansion and redevelopment of the existing Flower Market facility between Maple Avenue and Wall Street, south of 7th Street, in Downtown LA. The 2GBX Studio will be divided into three sections. The site and overall program will be consistent across the studios. There will be a shared structure, schedule and spirit that will actively promote interaction and exchange. However, differences in the overall project approach and massing strategies among studio sections is both anticipated and desired to add an active awareness of different yet interrelated points of view within a particular segment of contemporary architectural practice.

Topiaries and Types

32

Ground Level Floor Plan

33

Typical Plan

34

Elevation-South

35

Section

36

Elevation-North

37

Axon

38

Renderings

39

Renderings

40

Big Picture Visual Studies II

Spring 2018 ( 2GBX ): Visual Studies II Instructor: Ryan Tyler Martinez & Casey Reas Team: Jae Park, Gokay Sapan

The 2GBX Visual Studies seminar is the second VS in the first year of the M.Arch II program. It introduces Processing, a flexible software sketchbook and language for learning how to code within the context of the visual arts, and advanced 3D modeling in Zbrush and Rhino for the production of architectural representation through the development of digital techniques. Beginning with the fundamentals of Processing, the course will examine the notion of “Regularity and Random”, “Growth, Form, and Simulation”, and “Emergence” in both two and three dimensions. Students will be required to constantly work between code and output, gaining familiarity with the constraints and advantages of the software.

Later in the semester students will work in teams of two and will be introduced to Fiber Mesh, a geometry instancer that lets you populate the surface of polygon meshes with an arbitrary number of primitives either randomly or uniformly placed. Fiber Mesh lets you quickly populate large-scale environments, including grass savannas, forests, rocky landscapes, and debris trails. As a final deliverable for the class, teams worked with other teams to create large pictorial landscapes using the combination of their output from Processing, spherical envelope volumes in Rhino and Fiber Mesh surface textures in Zbrush.

41

42

Big Picture Exercise 1 Processing The 2GBX Visual Studies seminar is the second VS in the first year of the M.Arch II program. It introduces Processing, a flexible software sketchbook and language for learning how to code within the context of the visual arts, and advanced 3D modeling in Zbrush and Rhino for the production of architectural representation through the development of digital techniques. Beginning with the fundamentals of Processing, the course will examine the notion of “Regularity and Random”, “Growth, Form, and Simulation”, and “Emergence” in both two and three dimensions. Students will be required to constantly work between code and output, gaining familiarity with the constraints and advantages of the software.

43

44

Big Picture Exercise 2 Spherical Envelopes Later in the semester students will work in teams of two and will be introduced to Fiber Mesh, a geometry instancer that lets you populate the surface of polygon meshes with an arbitrary number of primitives either randomly or uniformly placed. Fiber Mesh lets you quickly populate large-scale environments, including grass savannas, forests, rocky landscapes, and debris trails. As a final deliverable for the class, teams worked with other teams to create large pictorial landscapes using the combination of their output from Processing, spherical envelope volumes in Rhino and Fiber Mesh surface textures in Zbrush.

45

46

1.

1. Field Composition 2. 2.5D Brushes

47

2.

48

1.

1. Island Composition 2. Island Composition #2

49

2.

50

51

Competitions Vertical Studio

FALL 2018 ( 3GAX ): Competitions Instructor: Team:

John Enright Jae Park

This studio will take on the topic of the Architectural Competition as a starting point to develop architectural strategies that span scale, location, and program. To accomplish this the studio will partake in three actual competitions, all five weeks each. The competitions are progressively larger in scale, but all are manageable smaller projects. We will discuss the value of architectural competitions, and we will have invited speakers to discuss their own experiences with them. Along the way students will be able to bridge their work across the three competitions, and thereby see the three as related, progressive, investigations of their own work. The threepart project breakdown of the semester is seen as an advantage, the ability to re-tool, re-direct, and re-do earlier versions of form, strategy, and approach. The typical 15 week semester of the singular project is thus pedagogically questioned in this studio. The Architectural competition has a long history, at least 2500 years. From the Acropolis, to the Disney Concert Hall, history is replete with examples of significant buildings that were the result of competitions. Of course history is also full of examples of non-winning competition entries as well, some of which became more

well known that the winning entries (Loos’ Chicago Tribune comes to mind). Some would say that the idea of the competition is abusive, counter to thoughtful manners of procuring an architect, one that by its very nature creates abuses of labor and feeds the professions worry of relevance. Whether we see competitions as a useful means to illicit the best architectural work a culture can produce, or an abusive system of exploitation of architects and designers – we can probably agree that the architectural competition is most likely here to stay. If nothing else, the Guggenheim Helsinki competition of a few years ago and its over 1,700 entries shows us the amount of interest that competitions can still produce. On the other hand, what in the creative endeavor is not competition? We complete in all manners of ways, and to pretend that our ideas, concepts, and work is not compared, contrasted, weighted, debated, and ultimately judged to one another’s is not realistic and most likely naive. In that light, the idea that healthy competition is a positive endeavor is the spirit in which we will approach the three projects.

European Velo Stops

Pointview of the Fjords, Norway

Great Kemeri Bog Visitor Center

52

53

Competition I European Velo Stops The project began with the idea of dividing the public space, the path, from the private, the velo stop, which also provides the views out to the landscape. By putting down a single flat wall, each program pieces are thought to be simply clipped on to a wall and carved out in various orientations and forms to provide different spatial experience and interesting relationships between the programs and views. The velo stop has two distinct sides; on the path side, the wall becomes completely flat, with the fireplace being the only opening in the entire surface but on the opposite side, the carved out spaces create a much more animated form and interactive environment. The wall separates the users of the velostop from the path and provides a private but open space for the visitors. For more program requirements, the wall simply needs to extend out and the same procedures can be repeated to carve out more spaces to adjust to the requirements. There are multiple foldable and retractable systems within the building, which can be used according to the users need. The idea of poche takes place in plan as well as in section and is further emphasized by the use of materials, which are concrete and ipe. Concrete is used for the wall and the ceiling, which are

the static elements, and ipe is used for the programs that are attached on to the wall.

The simple and subtle design allows for the velo stop to be placed in any parallel position along the path at any point.

Aerial

54

55

Concept Diagram

Renderings

Axonometric

56

57

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Plans

58

Elevation: Path

Elevation: Program

Section

59

60

61

Competition II Great Kemeri Bog Visitor Center This proposal for the The Great Kemeri Bog Visitor Center investigates the understanding that the enjoyment of nature is a transitory experience from interior to exterior, as one progresses from more urban areas to the natural environment. In this manner, the project is focused on the movement of visitors from the entry road, through the parking area, and towards the bogs.

It is made up of multiple geometries that give a strong sense of movement and directionality throughout the site with its form and landscape, integrating the building with the path to the boardwalk.The geometries suggest a kind of flow that gathers visitors from the parking space, on the east side of the site, then “funnels� them onto the path towards the boardwalk, using soft curves that provide flawless circulation. As the visitors travel throughout the site, these forms would become multiple pavilions, which host different programs, and a mix of pavement

and landscape that contain various vegetations. When seen from above, the roofline resembles a crack in the forest, which also emphasizes the flow of circulation with its form. The path begins to organize the program on each side and the project maintains a fairly narrow profile, surrounded by the trees, which further accentuates the directionality provided by the geometries. The parking space is very much regularized for maximum usage of space. The project becomes a part of progression towards the boardwalk by providing a smooth transition and flawless circulation from one side of the site to the opposite.

Aerial

62

Plan

63

64

65

View A

View B

View C

View D

66

Elevation: Path

Elevation: Program

67

68

1.

1. Cafe Render 2. Exhibition Render

69

2.

70

Competition III Pointview of the Fjords, Norway The objective of the present competition for students of architecture and young architects, Viewpoint of the Fjords (VOF), consists in proposing a space for contemplation and admiration of the environment that will produce an exchange between landscape and spectator. A space where nature plays a key role.

Landscape observation is the fundamental purpose of this architectural space. It must appreciate the virtues of the location and experiment new ways of contemplation.

Thanks to its privileged location, this new proposed space will become an international reference point for all visitors of this natural attraction.

VOF aspires to become the new meeting point for visitors and nature, a new place of understanding and an information point for hikers. In here, observation will become a unique sensory experience.

In a country so full of world-famous iconic images, this new space for contemplation must become an architectural reference for Norway.

VIEWING BOX

VIEW: SKY SITE PLAN

Unlike the typical views of the site the visitors get currently, this project looks to provide rest stops that adapt and explore new types of openings that view the fjords in a creative way. The typical views of the site consist of the view from the ground, the boat, and the top of the mountain. Moving away from those kinds of views, the building is essentially divided into three rooms that create unique openings in each area- one that views the sky and the tip of the landscape, the second that aligns with the waterline, and the third that views the underwater conditions of the site. To allow for these types of openings, half of the building would be submerged underwater and all the rooms are connected by stairs and tunnels in an interlocking manner.

The project acts as a rest stop for the visitors that are on boats, particularly kayakers, and it is only accessible from the water. It is also prototypical; it could be placed throughout the fjords at the coastline, each with its unique openings that adapt to the environment around it.

Instead of the usual ways of viewing the fjords, this project aims to provide new ways of looking at what already exists in the site, exploring new types of views that may go unseen otherwise.

DIAGRAM

POSSIBLE LOCATIONS

1. NEW VIEWS

Traditional way of viewing fjords

2. Orientation

New ways of viewing fjords

Box

Rotate according to the topography

Seperated into three rooms

Views out to the fjords

VIEW: WATERLINE

VIEW: UNDERWATER

PROTOTYPE:V1

V2

V3

V4

SECTION: V1

71

72

Design Development Design Development

Fall 2018 ( 3GAX ): Design Development Instructor: Herwig Baumgartner, Brian Zamora Team: Jae Park, Adam Wells, Sam Flower, Juan Villarreal, William Maya, XingXing Li

This course investigates issues related to the implementation of design: technology, the use of materials, systems integration, and the archetypal analytical strategies of force, order and character.

The course includes a review of basic and advanced construction methods, analysis of building codes, the design of structural and mechanical systems, environmental systems, buildings service systems, the development of building materials and the integration of building components and systems. The intent of this course is to develop a cohesive understanding of how architects communicate complex building systems for the built environment and to demonstrate the ability to document a comprehensive architectural project and stewardship of the environment. A series of built case studies will be presented by the instructors along with visiting professionals in the field who are exploring new project delivery methods. These case studies will be shown in depth with construction photographs, 3d renderings, and technical drawings and details.

Pertinent specific topics for the course will be highlighted in each presentation, with a focus on the evolution of building design from concept to built form.

73

74

75

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 INSTRUCTORS: HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

TEXTURED FRP WATERPROOFING SLOPED RIGID INSULATION

CONSULTANTS: JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

STEEL MULLION

MOUNTING CLIP

MULLION CAP

CONCRETE ROOF MTL DECK EPS CANT STRIP MTL FLASHING MTL STUD GYP BOARD

CLOSURE PLATE STRUCTURAL STEEL

GLAZING

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

STEEL STAND OFF

CLOSURE PANEL

FRP INTERIOR FINISH

TERRACOTTA PANEL

LOCATION:

STEEL MOUNTING CHANNEL

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010 WATERPROOF MEMBRANE

REVISIONS: MULLITON CAP

DESC.

NO.

INSULATION

DATE

SECONDARY STRUCTURE

STEEL MULLION GLAZING

MTL. STUD FRP PANEL STAND OFF STEEL MOUNTING BRACKET

DRAWN BY: SF SCALE:

WATERPROOF MEMBRANE INSULATION

N/A

STRUCTURAL STEEL

TITLE: TOP DETAIL

01 A6

Details

TOP DETAIL

SHEET:

01

A5

A6

TRANSITION DETAIL

Details

76

77

3D PRINTED TERRACOTTA PANEL GLASS FIBER REINFORCED GYPSUM

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

HANGER STEEL PLATE

INSTRUCTORS:

STANDOFF

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER SINGLE CARRIER RAIL BRIAN ZAMORA BACKER ROD WITH CAULK

L SHAPED STEEL EXTRUSION CANT STRIP WATERPROOFING COLLAR

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

STANDOFF CLEAT ANGLE

MTL STUD WALL

STEEL PLATE

INTERIOR GYP BOARD

STEEL I-BEAM HANGER WIRE METAL STUD FIBER-REINFORCED POLYMER PANEL WATERPROOF MEMBRANE

TEXTURED FRP PANEL

ADAM WELLS GYPSUM BOARD JAE PARK BATT INSULATION JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER STEEL I-BEAM WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI L SHAPED STEEL EXTRUSION STEEL PLATE

PANEL MOUNTING CLIP & STAND OFF WATERPROOFING EXTERIOR GYP BOARD INSULATION

CONSULTANTS:

C SHAPED STEEL EXTRUSION

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

EXTERIOR

INTERIOR

METAL STUD WALL

SECONDARY STRUCTURE

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

GYPSUM BOARD

02 A18

PA

FIBER-REINFORCED POLYMER PANEL WATERPROOF MEMBRANE GYPSUM BOARD METAL STUD WALL BATT INSULATION

LOCATION: FLOOR FINISH SUB FLOOR

STEEL I-BEAM

INTERIOR METAL STUD WALL 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

INTERIOR GYPSUM BOARD

CONCRETE CURB RUBBER GASKET

CONCRETE PAVER FINISH

REVISIONS: NO.

DESC.

EXTERIOR L SHAPED STEEL EXTRUSION

DATE

PEDESTAL FOR PAVER

INTERIOR

STEEL PLATE STANFOFF

WATERPROOFING COLLAR

WATERPROOFING

FINISHED FLOOR SUBSTRATE LAYER

SLOPED RIGID INSULATION

FLEXIBLE RUBBER FLASHING

CONCRETE TRANSFER SLAB

DRAWN BY: SF JV SCALE:

N/A

TITLE:

CONCRETE TILES FLASHING CAP RAISED FLOOR PEDESTALS RIGID INSULATION

CONCRETE SLAB

BOTTOM DETAIL

01 A4

BOTTOM DETAIL

SHEET:

A4

CONCRETE COLUMN

01 A18

Details

2D Details

FAC

78

79

APPLIED STU DESIGN DEVEL FALL 201

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

INSTRUCTORS: INSTRUCTORS:

HERWIG BAUMG BRIAN ZAMO

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

A

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

1

C

B

D

TEAM NAM GROUP 0

E

20

1

ADAM WEL JAE PAR JUAN VILLAR SAM FLOW WILLIAM M XINGXING

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

CONSULTANTS:

CONSULTANTS: AUDITORIUM

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

JAMEY LYZ MATTHEW ME

2

3 4

BATHROOM

5 BATHROOM

ENCANTO PARK

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

CAFE

1

UP

LOCATION:

6 ENTRANCE SECTION A

SECTION A

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

LOCATION:

2

SECTION A

7

751 ENCANTO DUARTE, CA

SECTION A

REVISIONS: LOBBY

DESC.

NO.

REVISIONS:

DATE

UP

8

DRAWN BY:

SCALE:

DN

JP

UP

DRAWN BY:

3

1’=3/32”

SCALE:

TITLE: GROUND FLOOR PLAN

SHEET:

Plans

DESC.

NO.

READING AREA

01

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

A13

SCALE: 1’=3/32”

A13

JP

1’=3/32

TITLE:

01

TOP FLOOR PLAN

A14

SCALE: 1’=3/32”

TOP FLOOR

SHEET:

A14

STEEL FRAMING:

STRUCTURAL SYSTEM DEFINITIONS POST AND BEAM:

TRUSS SYSTEMS:

SPACE FRAME:

GRID-SHELL:

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

Post and beam steel frame structures have a skeleton of steel connected by bolts or welds that act as the support for the rest of the building. A column and beam frame can be braced or continuous.

Pros: 1. Its construction is simple and easily expandable.

2. It has high vertical load stability, efficient storage per square foot.

3. It has a relative short construction time.

Cons: The initial cost tends to be slightly higher per square foot than other frame types.

The difficulty of constructions increases when the size of the building increases.

Precedent: North Star Construction Square House.

81

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 INSTRUCTORS: HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

A truss is essentially a triangulated system of straight interconnected structural elements. The individual elements are connected at nodes; the connections are often assumed to be normally pinned. The external forces applied to the system and the reactions at the supports are generally applied at the nodes. The truss supports roofs, floors and internal loadings such as services and suspended ceilings.

Pros: 1. Stable dimensions will not expand or contract with moisture content.

2. It is environmentally friendly and 100% recyclable.

3. It has the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any building material.

Cons: 1. Prone to rusting. It needs special plastic coating for lasting longer.

2. The initial investment for steel is generally steep.

Precedent: San Francisco International Airport.

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

A space frame is a rigid, lightweight, truss-like structure constructed from interlocking struts in a geometric pattern. Spaces frames can be used to span large areas with few interiors supports. It provides great freedom of expression and composition as well as the possibility to evenly distribute loads along each rod and external constraints.

Pros: 1. It achieves complex geometries with a lowest structural weight.

2. The inner highly hyper-static system provides an increased resistance to damages caused by fire, explosions, shocks and earthquakes.

3. Space frames are modular and made of highly industrialized elements designed with a remarkable dimensional accuracy and precise surface finish.

Cons: 1. Its high efficiency in conducting heat is not good news for energy retention.

2. Steel frame constructions work on supporting structures, like drywall, etc.

Precedent: National Aquatics Center.

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI CONSULTANTS:

A steel grid-shell is a structure which derives its strength from its double curvature and is constructed of a grid or lattice. Large span steel grid-shells are commonly constructed by initially laying out the main lath members flat in a regular square or rectangular lattice, and subsequently deforming this into the desired doubly curved form.

Pros: 1. Steel grid-shells are stable for the double curvature.

2. The using of material is efficient comparing to other structure types.

3. It has flexible forms for the out-of-plane bending forces.

Cons: It’s labor inefficient for the massive workloads.

The cost is expensive. The complex form limits its application into the roof.

Precedent: Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Facility.

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

80

CONCRETE FRAMING: POST AND BEAM:

A concrete frame is a common form of structure, comprising a network of columns and connecting beams that forms the structural ‘skeleton’ of a building. This grid of beams and columns is typically constructed on a concrete foundation.

Pros: 1. It contains superior compressive strength and tensile strength.

2. It has superior fire-proof capability as compared to steel.

3. It ends rigid members with lowest apparent deflection.

Cons: It requires mixing, casting and curing, all these can change its final strength.

To cast concrete, various forms are utilized and these are relatively expensive.

Precedent: Jubilee Church.

FLAT PLATE:

The flat plate is a two-way reinforced concrete framing system utilizing a slab of uniform thickness, the simplest of structural shapes. A flat plate is a one- or two-way system usually supported directly on columns or load bearing walls. The floor allows great flexibility for locating horizontal services about a suspended ceiling or in a bulkhead. The economical span of a flat plate for low to medium loads is usually limited by the need to control long-term deflection and may need to be sensibly pre-cambered or prestressed.

Pros: 1. Simple formwork and suitable for direct fix or sprayed ceiling.

2. No beams can simplify under-floor services.

3. Minimum structural depth and reduced floor-to-floor height.

Cons: Medium spans. Limited lateral load capacity as part of a moment frame. May need shear heads or shear reinforcement at the columns or larger columns for shear. Long-term deflection may be controlling factor.

Precedent: Burj Dubai.

LOCATION: 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

LATERAL FORCE RESISTING SYSTEMS: CONCRETE SHEAR WALL:

Concrete shear wall is the vertical element of the horizontal force resisting system. It is a structural member used to resist lateral forces and parallel to the plane of the wall.

Pros: 1. The curved shapes often used for concrete shells are strong structures.

2. Shell allowing wide areas to be spanned without the use of internal supports, giving an open, unobstructed interior.

3. The use of concrete as a building material reduces both materials cost and the construction cost.

4. As concrete is relatively inexpensive and easily cast into compound curves.

Cons: 1. Concrete domes have issues with sealing caused leaking through roof and wall.

2. Seamless constructed concrete leads condensation on the inside of the shell.

Precedent: National Commercial Bank.

MOMENT FRAME:

Moment-resisting frame is a rectilinear assemblage of beams and columns, with the beams rigidly connected to the columns. By virtue of the rigid beam-column connections, a moment frame cannot displace laterally without bending the beams or columns depending on the geometry of the connection.

Pros: In moment resisting frames, the joints or connections, between columns and beams are designed to be rigid. This causes the columns and beams to bend during earthquake. So, these structural members are designed to be strong in bending.

Cons: It is the costliest to execute in all lateral force resisting systems.

Precedent: Kaiser Permanente Design-Build Parking Structure.

BRACED FRAME:

Structural Systems

A braced frame is a structural system designed to resist wind and earthquake forces. Members in a braced frame are not allowed to sway laterally. Most braced frames are concentric, which means members intersect at a node, the centroid of each member passes through the same point.

Pros: The braced frames are very strong and will be resistant to lateral deflection since any lateral force will go directly into the braces as tension or compression.

Cons: Portal frames are very susceptible to story drift during lateral loading conditions such as wind or seismic forces.

Precedent: John Hancock Building.

REVISIONS: NO.

DESCRIPTION The project is a library located in 777 Encanto Pkwy, Duarte, CA. The site is a public park surrounded by several residential communities. Its typology is transferring several artistic soaps into digital model. By taking advantages of the fascinating soap texture and compelling geometry, the library has an enchanting out-look and attentive spatial experience. This project provides an interesting opening for an entrance bridging a small mass with several large cores. This bridge allows for interesting out-door space in-between several small masses. It has an interior courtyard that opens up to the rest of the park, better connecting the facility with the surrounding communities. The unit, dynamic form has more advantages for creating flexible and intriguing interior space. The structure of the facade utilizes the steel grid-shell frame combined with lateral braced frame.

The material of the floor plates above ground level is coffered concrete. The structure of basement is concrete shear wall system.

Its facade is designed as a rain screen system composed of large terracotta panels that anchor back to the primary steel structure. These terracotta panels give us the freedom to keep the colors and textures which extracted from the original artistic soaps while also proving to be an impermeable and durable system. Overall the terracotta panels can simply be cleaned with water resulting in low maintenance and an overall reduction of cost that would arise from using a different facade system. The interior system is composed of a metal stud wall structure that connects back to FRP panels on one side and gypsum board on the other. The FRP panels also allow us to follow the many curves and bends that our interior form take. The panels themselves are quite thin which results in more usable square footage in our library spaces. The interior rooms are orthogonal spaces with punched holes and a simple shelving component providing a stark contrast to FRP and terracotta panels. Where the interior forms touch the large glass panels, a new frame is set and smaller colored glass is inserted creating interesting lighting effects for the interior spaces. Our floor system is very simple, it is composed of 24” coffered concrete with a top slab and a travertine finish. The duct work can run unseen trough the coffers and provide air through vents in the floor. It can also provide heat to the building by using a radiant floor heating system that runs unseen under the top slab.

DESC.

DATE

DRAWN BY: XXL SCALE:

N/A

TITLE: STRUCTURAL SYSTEM SELECTION SHEET:

S1

82

83

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 INSTRUCTORS:

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA Glazing solar protection and P.V. Cells

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

Self-Shading indirect illumination

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI CONSULTANTS:

Skylight condition

01

SUN ANALYSIS _ PLAN

M2

SCALE: N/A

02

SUN ANALYSIS _ SECTION

03

SOLAR STRATEGIES

M2

SCALE: N/A

M2

SCALE: N/A

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

LOCATION: 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

REVISIONS: NO.

DESC.

DATE

DRAWN BY: WM SCALE:

N/A

TITLE: ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS

04

WIND ANALYSIS _ PLAN

M2

SCALE: N/A

05

WIND ANALYSIS _ SECTION

M2

SCALE: N/A

06

WINDOW DETAIL CONDITION

M2

SCALE: N/A

SHEET:

M2

Environmental Systems

84

85 APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 LEVEL 5

7’-0”

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

LEVEL 4

Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area

3’-0”

20

7’-0”

1

INSTRUCTORS:

Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area

ADA PARKING

TEAM NAME GROUP 07 7’-0”

3’-0”

ADA SEATING

AUDITORIUM

LEVEL 3

Building Area: 4391.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 44 Reading Area

ADA ENTRANCE PATH UP

ADA CORE

CAFE

4’-0”

2.Second Floor Elevators and Fire Stairs

LEVEL 2

8’-0”

Building Area: 8212.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 82 Reading Area

4’-0”

UP

BATHROOM

Scale: 1/8” = 1’-0”

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

ADA RESTROOM

BATHROOM

ENTRANCE

LEVEL GROUND

5’-0” Area: 4098 sq2 Building Maximum Occupancy: 41 Cafe, Reading Area, Auditorium

LOBBY

READING ROOM UP

ADA CORE

UP

5’-0” 30” x 48”

LEVEL UNDERGROUND

CONSULTANTS: JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

Building Area: 20869.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 209

30” x 48”

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

01 A11

02

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

5’-0”

FIRST FLOOR RESTROOMS

ADA ANALYSIS DIAGRAM

Scale: 1/8” = 1’-0”

A11

SCALE: 1/311

READING ROOM

DN

ADA CORE

UP

ADA CORE

UP

BATHROOM

ADA CORE

UP

READING ROOM

READING ROOM

ADA RESTROOM

BATHROOM

LOCATION: 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

DN DN

DN

UP

UP

NO PARKING

READING ROOM UP

ADA CO

ADA CORE

UP

ADA CORE

UP

12’-0” MIN (VAN) 01 A11

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

01 A11

SCALE: 1/307

12’-0” MIN (VAN)

5’-0”

THIRD FLOOR PLAN

01 A11

SCALE: 1/307

7’-0”

7’-0”

3’-0”

3’-0”

5’-0” MIN

FORTH FLOOR PLAN

NO PARKING 9’-0” MIN (CAR) 01 A11

SCALE: 1/307

7’-0”

5’-0”

5’-0”

DESC.

DATE

SITE ADA PARKING SCALE: 1/26.1257

N/A

TITLE: ADA

8’-0” 4’-0”

30” x 48”

9’-0” MIN (CAR)

01

NO.

30” x 48” (762 x 1219) Area for Wheelchair

4’-0”

5’-0”

A11

20

5’-0” MIN

SCALE:

AUDITORIUM

30” x 48”

NO PARKING

5’-0” MIN

5’-0”

GROUND LEVEL PARKING Scale: REVISIONS: 1/8” = 1’-0”

DRAWN BY: XXL

5’-0”

5’-0”

1

GROUND FLOOR RESTROOMS

SHEET:

01 A11

SCALE: 1/307

SECOND FLOOR ELEVATORS AND FIRE STAIRS SCALE: 1/23.49

CAFE

01 A11

UPDISABILITY SEATS GROUND FLOOR AUDITORIUM SCALE: 1/123.57

ADA Requirements A11

5’-0”

5’-0”

NO PARKI

5’-0” M

86

87

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 EGRESS WIDTH PER OCCUPANT SERVED OCCUPANCY Occupancies other than those listed below Hazardous: H-1, H-2, H-3 and H-4 1

STAIRWAYS (Inches per occupant) 0.3 0.7

INSTRUCTORS:

OTHER COMPONENTS (Inches per occupant) 0.2

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA LEVEL 5 Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area

0.4

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

20

LEVEL 4 Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area AUDITORIUM

UP

BATHROOM

LEVEL 2 Building Area: 8212.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 82 Reading Area

BATHROOM

ENTRANCE

LOBBY

LEVEL GROUND Building Area: 5481 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 55 Cafe, Reading Area, Auditorium

READING ROOM UP

UP

LEVEL UNDERGROUND Building Area: 20869.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 209

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

01 A9

SCALE: 1/311

02

EGRESS ANALYSIS DIAGRAM

A9 Floor Area in sq.ft

Function of Space

Number of Fixed Seats (143) Auditorium (A-1) Assembly with Fixed Seats READING ROOM

Cafe (A-2)

1275 sq ft,

Reading Room (A-3)

14089 sq ft,

Storage (S-1)

20,000 sq ft (Underground Floor)

EGRESS AND OCCUPANCY LOAD

06

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI CONSULTANTS: JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

LEVEL 3 Building Area: 4391.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 44 Reading Area

UP

CAFE

LOCATION: 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

A9

DN

REVISIONS: NO. UP

Levels Reading Area Assembly

UP

UP

BATHROOM

READING ROOM

READING ROOM

BATHROOM

DN DN

Auditorium

Total Area

L5

800

864

---

1974.77

L4

880

864

---

1974.77

L3

3027

864

---

4391.46

L2

6444

1268

---

8212.46

GF

2938

1268

1386

5481

B1

---

864

---

20869.46

UP

DRAWN BY: XXL SCALE:

UP

UP

07

UP

BUILDING AREA TYPE / SQ.FT

EGRESS

A9

SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/220

N/A

TITLE:

READING ROOM

A9

DATE

DN

UP

03

DESC.

04 A9

THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/220

05 A9

FORTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/220

SHEET:

A9Egress

1HR 1HR APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

89

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

INSTRUCTORS: HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

1HR

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

INSTRUCTORS: HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 INSTRUCTORS: HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

LEVEL 5 Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI CONSULTANTS: JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

CONSULTANTS:

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

LEGEND

12’

KEY

FIRE SPRINKLER 6’

12’

SPOT LIGHT 7” SPOT LIGHT 10”

SPOT LIGHT 10”

DESC.

EXIT LIGHT DIFFUSER

SCALE:

DRAWN BY: XXL

TITLE:

N/A

A10

3HR 3HR

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

INSTRUCTORS:

3HR

INSTRUCTORS:

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

LEVEL UNDERGROUND Building Area: 20869.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 209

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

B: (Business) Lobby

SCALE: 1/311

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

M3

M3

SCALE: 1/120 SCALE: 1/120

A1: (Assembly area) Auditorium

SHEET:

SHEET:

REFLECTED CEILING PLAN 01 REFLECTED CEILING PLAN M3

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018

REFELECTED CEILING PLAN

REFLECTED CEILING PLAN

M3

N/A

LEVEL GROUND Building Area: 4098 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 41 Cafe, Reading Area, Auditorium

DATE

REFELECTED CEILING PLAN

TITLE:

01

DESC.

DRAWN BY: XXL

SCALE:

01

NO.

DATE

LINEAR LIGHT FIXTURE 1’ x 4’ EXIT LIGHT DIFFUSER

LEVEL 2 Building Area: 8212.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 82 Reading Area

A10

REVISIONS:

REVISIONS:

LINEAR LIGHT FIXTURE 1’ x 4’

05

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

NO.

SPOT LIGHT 7”

LEVEL 3 Building Area: 4391.46 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 44 Reading Area

2HR

LOCATION:

LOCATION:

FIRE SPRINKLER 6’

2HR 2HR

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

A2: (Food consumption) Cafe E: (Educational area) Reading Rooms Egress Stair Core

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

CONSULTANTS:

40’-2” 3RD LEVEL

07 A10

23’-0” 2ND LEVEL 17’-0” 1ST LEVEL

05

A10

JAMEY LYZUN MATTEW MELNYK

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

4TH LEVEL

40’-2”

3RD LEVEL

23’-0”

2ND LEVEL 17’-0”

1ST LEVEL

LOCATION: 0’-0” GROUND LEVEL

04

A10

03 A10

-15’-0”

-15’-0” BASEMENT

SCALE:

1’=1/8”

SECTION XX

REVISIONS: REINFORCED_CONCRETE SLAB FIRE RESISTANCE ANALYSIS

A10

NO.

DESC.

DATE

DRAWN BY: XXL SCALE:

N/A

TITLE: DATE

A10

UNDERGROUND FLOOR CEILING FIRE RESISTANCE DIAGRAM SCALE:

1’=1/8”

TITLE: SECTION XX

01 SECTION XX

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

FIRE SEPARATION

SHEET:

05

TITLE:

01

DESC.

NO.

BASEMENT

SECTION SCALE: 1/144

04

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

DATE

CONSULTANTS:

751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010

REVISIONS:

DESC.

NO.

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI

LOCATION:

LOCATION:

751 ENCANTO PKWY,0’-0” LEVEL DUARTE,GROUND CA 91010

REVISIONS:

06 A10

FIRE SEPARATION DIAGRAM

A10

CONSULTANTS:

JAMEY LYZUN 55’-2” 4TH LEVEL MATTEW MELNYK

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

55’-2”

02

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

LEVEL 4 Building Area: 1974.77 sq2 Maximum Occupancy: 20 Reading Area

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

88

SECTION XX

06 A10

SOLID CONCRETE WALL FRD

07 A10

SOLID GYPSUM PLASTER FRD

A10

Fire Seperation

90

91

APPLIED STUDIES DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FALL 2018 INSTRUCTORS:

HERWIG BAUMGARTNER BRIAN ZAMORA

TEAM NAME GROUP 07

ADAM WELLS JAE PARK JUAN VILLARREAL SAM FLOWER WILLIAM MAYA XINGXING LI CONSULTANTS: CONCRETE

1. Basement

Rate

STEEL

Quantity

$250.00

49,624

Unit

Total

S. No.

CY

$12,406,000.00

2. Cores

$250.00

19,692

CY

$4,923,000.00

3. Columns

$250.00

1,966

CY

$491,500.00

4. Plinth

$250.00

6,404

CY

$1,601,000.00

$50.00

20,820

CY

$1,041,000.00

$100.00

21,617

CY

$2,161,700.00

$50.00

21,617

CY

5. Plinth Finish 6. Slab Cast Concrete 7. Slab Finishes TOTAL

Rate

Quantity

Unit

01

Total

1. Primary Steel

$9,000.00

840

TN

2. Secondary Steel

$7,500.00

1,233

TN

TOTAL

$7,560,000.00

JAMEY LYZUN MATTHEW MELNYK

UNROLLED FACADE TERRACOTTA

A12

$9,247,500.00

ENCANTO PARK LIBRARY

S. No.

$16,807,500.00

$1,080,850.00 $23,705,050.00

A2 A5 A1 A3

A4

A8

A4

LOCATION: 751 ENCANTO PKWY, DUARTE, CA 91010 A6

A7

A8

A9 REVISIONS:

02

A9

DESC.

NO.

A1

UNROLLED FACADE GLAZING

DATE

A12

A2

SUMMARY OF PROJECT COST S. No.

FACADE SYSTEM S. No. 1. Terrecotta Panels

Rate

Quantity

$450.00

33,804

2. Window Glazing

$200.00

3. Colored Glazing

$250.00

INTERIOR SYSTEM Unit

S. No.

Total $15,211,800.00

16,211

SQFT

$3,242,200.00

1,785

SQFT

$446,250.00

3. GFRG TOTAL

4. Moisture Barrier

$25.00

33,804

SQFT

$845,100.00

5. Insulation

$25.00

33,804

SQFT

$845,100.00

TOTAL

1. FRP

SQFT

$19,745,350.00

2. Interior Wall System

Rate

Quantity

Unit

Total $17,804,150.00

Item

Rate

Quantity

Unit

DRAWN BY:

Total

1

CONCRETE

$23,705,050.00

2

STEEL

$16,807,500.00

3

FACADE SYSTEM

$19,745,350.00

4

INTERIOR SYSTEM

$27,978,100.00

5

MEP

$350.00

50,869

SQFT

$50.00

50,869

SQFT

$2,543,450.00

TOTAL PROJECT COST

$300.00

25,435

SQFT

$7,630,500.00

Total Square Footage

$27,978,100.00

Cost Per Square Foot

25% Budget

$22,059,000.00 $110,295,000.00 50,500

SCALE:

AW

N/A

TITLE: CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATING

SQFT $2,184.06

SHEET:

A12

Cost Estimate

92

93

The Cube/Knowledge Museum Design Studio

SPRING 2016 ( Undergraduate ): Knowledge Museum Instructor: Team:

Jose Oubrerie Jae Park

Each Student were tasked to explore new designs for a Knowledge Museum located in the capital of Chandigargh, a city masterplanned by Le Corbusier in northern India. Students began the excercise by starting with a cube and then deforming it into 6 parts, which could become anything. After the deformation, each student extracted different architectural elements from their cubes and used it to start the project.

The program of the knowledge museum were defined by each student in their own terms and after researching throughly about India and Chandigargh, it was decided that my project would be a multi-religious building that could host different religious environment. In a country where religious conflicts had shaped so much of the culture, the new knowledge museum looks to bring them together and let them experience each others’ religion.

CONCEPT DIAGRAMS CONCEPT DIAGRAMS OPENING

Study Model: folding

BOX

REMOVE FACE

DISPLACE THE CORNERS

PUSH IT DOWN

MOVE THE CORNER BECOMES AN OPENING

LIGHT CONDITIONS

Step I: 1.DIRECT

study model.

2. EMBEDDED

2. EXTRUDED

4. REFLECTED

SITE PLAN

SCALE: 1’=1/128”

SITE PLAN

N

Step II: Dividing the Cube into 6 parts

N E

D

Step III: study model

4

Jae H. Park M.Arch Candidate

94

95

Library

Mosque

Cafe/Restaurant Hindu Temple

PERSPECTIVE

SECTION A Main Entry

Sikh Temple

Small Gallery

Multi-Purpose

Main Entry

Exihibition

Church

Front Entry

Auditorium

SECTION D

SECTION B

SECTION E

SECTION C

96

97

Glitch CONCEPT STUDIES

Design Development

Spring 2015 (Undergraduate ): Glitch Studio Instructor: Kristy Balliet Step I: Examples of Quoins

A typical Mid-Rise office building, most dominant building typology in downtown, Detroit, has been redeveloped with a “glitch” to host two types of programs. Glitch, here, is defined as a normative building element that has been transformed into something different and unique. Each student researched certain building elements such as windows, doors, and etc and were to work with them throughout the semester. Quoins were picked as the building element that I wanted to work with and after morphing the into different glitches, they were re-purposed into public spaces, outdoor spaces, and various urban spaces. They were also used break up the building in the smaller scale buildings

Step IV: quoins.

Step V: Analyzing it in the Site

Step II: Exploring the “Glitch” of Quoins and the Porch

Step III: Quoin acts as a connector between two mini buildings

Step VI: Quoins

98

99

PLAN: TYPICAL PLAN OF OFFICE SPACE

PLAN: OPEN EVENT SPACE

PLAN:GROUND LEVEL

RENDER/SECTION

e

100

LARGER SCALE MODEL VIEWS

101

SITE MODEL VIEWS

SITE MODEL VIEWS

c

13

Jae H. Park M.Arch Candidat