Jacob Russo Architecture Portfolio by Jacob Russo

jacob russo design portfolio

Jacob Russo russo.jacob7@gmail.com 917-716-3362

Education 08.2009-05.2014

Carnegie Mellon University Bachelor of Architecture Deanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s List: fall 2010 and spring 2014

01.2013-05.2013

Temple University, Tokyo, Japan Study abroad program

09.2004-06.2009

NYC Lab School for Collaborative Studies

05.2012-Present

Preservation Green LLC, NY, NY LEED coordinator for LEED NC gold project Design development Some construction management

08.2011-05.2014

CMU SoArch Wood Shop TA and monitor for student projects Facilitated shop activities and safety Equipment maintenance and repair

10.2010-03.2011

Intelligent Workplace, CMU Team Leader for U.S. D.O.E. CBEI models Integrated facade system concept design

05.2010-08.2011

Ogawa | Depardon Architects, NY, NY Summer intern Model making, prototyping, cad

Work Experience

Related Experience 08.2013-Present

Biogenous, Pittsburgh, PA Waste-to-Energy systems concept design R&D Customer development

01.2008-07.2009

Whitney Museum of American Art, NY, NY Community Advisory Board Youth Insights intern Participated in 2008 Biennial Mentored children, organized public programs, created exhibition tours

06.2008-08.2008

Solar1 Green Energy, Arts, and Education Center Green energy research Gardening at Stuyvesant Cove Park, NYC

09.2005-12.2008

Yeshiva University Museum, NY, NY Design Within Reach program Industrial, graphic, toy, and apparel design

06.2007-08.2007

Museum of Modern Art, NY, NY In the Making: Summer at MoMA program Learned design and communication principles

Contents:

vertical farm | market hall

1-8

archipelaGROW

9-14

boathouse | filter

15-20

tea time

21-24

DMC

25-32

bio_logic

33-36

LOCAVORACIOUS

37-62

vertical farm | market hall SITE: East Liberty, Pittsburgh, PA YEAR: Spring, 2012 TIMELINE: 12.5 weeks This proposal for a new East Liberty Market Hall aims to engage the public through the creation of an indoor farm. The market provides a variety of produce grown on site with the use of hydroponic and aeroponic farming techniques. The aeroponic modules and hydroponic terraces are housed inside a central vertical farm, around which shoppers can circumambulate. The farm tower and perimeter columns and walls hoist up an undulating space frame roof system that modulates light and water. The roof is able to span significant distances, maintaining an open floor plan for the market. Unique branching columns provide extra support where it is needed and are epicenters for gathering spaces. Produce that is ready for sale is temporarily stored in pods around the market for easy access by the customers. This project aims to provide an alternative from the other grocery stores in the Market District and reduce the distance from farm to table.

Fitting in and standing out

GO VERTICAL!

Southeast elevation

Section thru farm tower

View from main entry

View from cafe

archipelaGROW COMPETITION: One Prize 2013 TEAM: Matt Adler, Yeliz Karadayi SITE: New York Harbor, NY YEAR: Summer, 2013 TIMELINE: 4 weeks

Nestled in New York City’s Upper Bay, this intervention aims to prepare the area for the next super storm. The series of islands are comprised of underwater triangulated lattices, connected by floating pods at various intersections. The result is the introduction of ArchipelaGROW, NYC’s first parametrically expandable storm surge diversion system. The lattice network is the skeleton for an artificial reef, promoting plant and shellfish growth. Over time the reef will be abundant enough to take on the most severe storm surges and has the potential to expand or contract as necessary. Governor’s Island, Ellis Island, and Liberty Island are important parts of the archipelago, acting as programmatic hubs from which to access the new islands. Thus, archipelaGROW has a dual identity: the above-water program encourages recreational water activities and the cultivation of plant life. Underwater, the zones below the islands become protected, where new aquatic life can thrive.

2013

2020

2025

2030

2050

Inspiration in nature: red mangrove tree

Super storm without aGROW

Super storm with aGROW

aGROW in 2050

Concept sketch

View from aGROW

boathouse | filter

TEAM: Leeyan Shun SITE: Allegheny River, Strip District, Pittsburgh, PA YEAR: Fall, 2012 TIMELINE: 13 weeks This project focused on a kayak recreation facility that promoted clean water and a healhy river through a performative building envelope. To achieve water filtration via the envelope, we came up with a system that would allow rainwater to flow along and down into a wetland surrounding the building. The wetlands are aerobic and contain limestone; we were also interested in exploring limestone and casting for our facade panel that would be the facilitator of the filtration process. Essentially, the envelope became a composite structure, comprising of a base tensile cable net that holds thin, lightweight limesone components. The tool bits used for prototyping the component created micro ridges on the surface of the component. This was achieved through careful CNC toolpathing and allowed for an increased contact period between the water and the panel, which in turn would theoretically increase filtration efficiency. For the final mold, we used a wax mold because it is easy to tool (cut) and does not require a mold release agent, and hydrocal for the casts for its quick drying quality and its strength.

staff lounge

entry/ reception

outdoor deck

cafe

 main circulation axis covered collonade

 green roof







anaerobic wetlands

Section thru boat storage

Section thru lounge

WATER FILTRATION CAREX ACUTIFORMIS PLANT LIFE

SCHOENOPLECTUS LACUSTRIS

OTHER ORGANISMS SPARGANIUM ERECTUM

NYMPHEA ALBA

REVERSE OSMOSIS SAPROPHYTIC BACTERIA

ALGAE SEMI-PERMEABLE MEMBRANES

ALGAE SCRUBBER

THIN-FILM COMPOSITE MEMBRANES

NANOCOMPOSITE MEMBRANES

MICRO-ORGANISMS

CARBON FILTERS BIOREMEDIATION

BIOAUGMENTATION

ZEOLITES

ORGANIC

SYNTHETIC

PHYTOREMEDIATION

RHIZOFILTRATION

ION-EXCHANGE BEADS

NONWOVENS

LIMESTONE

STONE MATERIAL RESIN

ACTIVATED CARBON

MAGNETIC





Component rendering 

   





RIDGES ON SURFACE SLOW DOWN WATER FLOW AND INCREASE NEUTRALIZATION TIME

Tensile model using Processing

3D printed prototypes

tea time

SITE: Akihabara, Tokyo, Japan YEAR: Spring, 2013 TIMELINE: 2 weeks small journey from a river to land to paper through bamboo for tea

DMC

TEAM: Max Park, Esra Aras SITE: Harvard Square, Cambridge, MA YEAR: Spring, 2011 TIMELINE: 2.5 weeks In thinking about how the public experiences media, we were intrigued by how information becomes layered and more or less resolute through movement. The objective of this project is to create a layered media experience by situating our proposal for a digital media center on top of the existing subway station at Harvard Square. The introduction of a pixelated concrete panel (prototyped using a 3-axis CNC router and Rockite) emphasizes the changing of media resolution through layering. It acts as a curtain wall facade held by steel columns on the interior with a layer of glass enclosure in between. As commuters and passersby move under and around the media center and through the amphitheatre space, media is perceived vertically from above and below ground and horizontally through the layers of the DMC. On the interior, an open floor plan is maintained for a media gallery space. The result is a gradient of light across the interior modulated by the facade.

Conceptual sketch

Interior

Section thru subway entry

view into subway

wide

COURTYARD

flan

ge stee

l fou

nda

tion

UP entry to MEDIA CUBE

escalator

SUBWAY ENTRY DN stairs to subway

escalator

information

Ground level plan

viewing screen

view towards brattle st

information hub

viewi

ng sc

reen

view towards mass. ave

DMC level plan

Model and component

bio_logic

TEAM: Edwin Cho, Kat Duerr, Zheng Geng YEAR: Fall, 2013 TIMELINE: 9 weeks This project explores the intersection between architecture and biology. We focussed on the logic of the stalked jellyfish, an underwater creature that attaches to rocks with its stalk and captures food with opening and closing tentacles. We were interested its movement and aimed to translate it to a responsive component that could potentially modulate light, wind, or water. Rapid prototyping was integral to our discovery process, as we moved from heat bending to fishing wire to shape memory allow and back to fishing wire to open and close the piece. Our final model used a light sensor, arduino and a stepper motor to open and close the fiberglass component based on varying lighting conditions.

evolution SCIENTIFIC CLASSIFICATION Kingdom: Animalie Eumetazoa (Animal Metazoan) Phylum: Cnidaria (Corals, Sea Anemones, Jellyfish) Class: Staurozoa (Stalked Jellyfish) THE DEBATE Fusion of the Anemone and the Medusa Signs Relating to the Anemone: - Appearance - Bottom dwelling characteristics Signs Relating to the Medusa - Does not have the same life cycle of a polyp - 1847: first described medusa with an apical alongation - Tentacle structure and predating method CONCLUSION Currently classified under the Scyphozoa evolutionary class - Medusa during the warm summer months - Bottom dwelling polyps during the colder months Due to changing climates/environments. the stalked jellyfish came about as an adaptation to survive

the diagraM of anatoMy detailS Interradial Septa Gastric Cirri SECTION THROUGH JELLY ARM

Funnel-Pits Containing Longitudinal Nucleus MUSCLE- ALLOWS FOR CONTRACTION

Longitudinal Muscles

Eleutherocarpidae Transverse Partition Spanning Between Gonads

Longitudinal Muscles

Funnel-Pits Containing Longitudinal Nucleus Gastric Cirri

Gonads

Outer Chamber

Interradial Septa

Cleistocarpidae

analySiS drawingS

analySiS drawingS of SeCtionS

These drawings show sections through the jellyfish highlighting the various layers of its stalk.

SECTIONS THROUGH STALK

MOUTH

THROUGH THE CENTER SUBSTRUCTURE (MUSCLES)

SUBSTRUCTURE (MUSCLES)

COVERING

Sections Through Stalk STALK SECTIONS THROUGH

ECTODERM

SECTION THROUGH STALK

ENDODERM

MESOGLEA

CLOSE MOUTH Close TO to mouth openOPENING ing where WHERE calyx begins CALYX BEGINS

THROUGH

Through The Center THE CENTER

heating plaStiC teSt

bottle and Coffee filter teSt

GASTROVASCULAR CAVITY BASAL DISC

Cup and wire teSt i

Cup and wire teSt ii

CLOSE TO MOUTH OPENING WHERE CALYX BEGINS

SiliCone and wood teStS with nitinol

plaStiC and wire teSt i

Controlled experiMentS

weaveS , and SySteMS .

theSe

SetS of explorationS further Continued the Controlled SySteM of uSing different lengthS , weaveS , and widthS to aChieve different typeS

of reaCtionS when tightened .

the SuCCeSS in thiS exploration CaMe through the diSCovery of SpeCifiC weaveS that began to MiMiC the phySiCal and

MeChaniCal nature of the Stalked JellyfiSh .

2 2 .5"

explorationS Made uS realize that very thin filMS /

Matrix 4 | Split

theSe

More CoMpliCated ShapeS , forMS ,

MeMbraneS of SiliCone would be the better direCtion to go beCauSe the SiliCone enCloSing the whole SySteM only Made it Stiffer .

all the baSiC paraMeterS that we had to underStand before delving into

Split Depth

aS the nitinol tightened .

Matrix 3 | Zig-Zagged from Center

Matrix that began to touCh up on

explorationS teSted the Maleability of a SiliCone exCloSed

SySteM and the full range of reaCtionS along the whole SurfaCe of the SiliCone

1.5"

theSe

Continued

that were derived froM a SiMple

teStS explored the relationShip between SiliCone and the nitinol twined

wooden SpineS .

# of Weaves

Matrix 2 | Angled

# of Weaves

Matrix 1 | Straight

# of Weaves

theSe

Width

Length

plaStiC and wire teSt ii

STALKED JELLY MODULE

JACOB, EDWIN, KAT, ZHEN

ELEVATION

PLAN

AXO

SECTION

PLAN

LIGHT SOURCE

LIGHT SENSOR

LIGHT SOURCE

ARD

MOTOR

POWER (batteries)

ANCHOR

LOCAVORACIOUS: Envisioning the Future of Urban Agriculture in NYC Undergraduate Thesis

SITE: Stuyvesant Town, New York, NY YEAR: 2013-14 TIMELINE: 2 semesters

Abstract The integration of an agriculturally productive landscape in urban spaces can radically change the way we consider food production and consumption in megacities and allow them to become “locavoracious”. The idea of continuous productive urban landscapes is not new; it is the notion that urban agriculture can contribute to more sustainable and resilient food systems while also benefitting the urban realm. This thesis aims to address the possibility of “farming” in multiple planes of the built environment—not only ground or roof but also façade—creating a new dynamic landscape for urban food production. A megacity is an urban agglomeration with over ten million residents. In 1950, there were only two: New York City and Tokyo. Today, there are 23 and by 2050 there will be 37. A major driver of this thesis is to reconsider how megacities of today and the future should produce and consume their food. The design strategy, located in Stuyvesant Town, Manhattan, attempts to create a multidimensional landscape for agricultural production that bridges the gap between three major components of urban architectural tectonics: the façade, the roof, and the ground. The integration of these key components is essential to creating an urban topography that maximizes available growing space and seamlessly blends infrastructures and flows. The goal is to use Stuyvesant Town as a proof of concept. Seeing as it has abundant open space and available, essentially homogenous, rooftop space, it will inform the development of future productive landscapes that encompass larger areas and even whole cities. Ideally, the principles and tectonic strategies envisioned for Stuyvesant Town will be applicable to other sites and will become a new paradigm for the creation of cities.

LOCAVORACIOUS lo·ca·vore /ˈlōkəˌvôr/ noun 1. a person whose diet consists only or principally of locally grown or produced food vo·ra·cious /vəˈrāSHəs/ adjective 1. wanting or devouring great quantities of food.

STUY TOWN TIMELINE

1947: First families move in. Blacks, singles and unmarried couples are excluded.

1950: First black family admitted.

Mid-1980s: Rents average $475 for a one-bedroom.

2001: Some apartments rent at market rate. Some tenants of unregulated apartments pay more than $3,000/month.

2006: Met Life sells Stuy Town-Peter Cooper to Tishman Speyer for $5.4B

}

1943: Robert Moses convinces Met Life to build a complex for veterans returning from WWII.

THE OTHER BIDDERS

LeFrak Emir of Qatar

Safra

Rothschild

Durst

Simon Glick

Rudin

Roth

Church of Eng. Singapore

families

students

original tenants

1980s

to be cooka consistent may be too in farming.

The increasing new demographic of students and young professionals are most likely to be want quick and cheap and even healhy food but are also less likely to be involved in farming. Students maybe be more open to a shift in social interaction in the living environment with the introduction of urban agriculture.

young professionals

original tenants 1947

Families are most likely ing every night and want source of fresh food but busy to play active role

2013

Some original are eager to see new change in Stuy Town and are open to the idea of agriculture. Some are active within the community with regards to evolving policy and would be key players in the implementation and logistics of the process. ?

STUY TOWN

demand for local food

A Brief History of Ag

The practice of agriculture is over 9,000 years old and has developed over thousands of years from early cultivation to the huge agribusiness complex of today. Some of the earliest sites of planned sowing and harvesting of plants included the Fertile Crescent of India, Western Asia, and Egypt (1). Agriculture was propelled into the machine age in the 18th C. with the invention of the threshing machine (2), used to separate grain from stalks and husks. Horse drawn harvesters were introduced in the 1830s, which allowed for faster harvesting. Horses were later replaced by steam traction engines (4). The early 20th C. brought the introduction of the self-propelled harvester (5,6), allowing for greater efficiency and mobility. The modern combine (7) is an ideal harvester, effectively perfecting the process of earlier harvesters (combining reaping, threshing, and winnowing into a single process). The modern agricultural process has been honed over hundreds and thousands of years, but what does the future hold? Should agriculture continue to exist in the same form as it has for so long? How we obtain our food is heavily reliant on how we live. For centuries we lived in close proximity to acres upon acres of arable land but that is no longer the case. Today, there are more people living in urban areas than in rural areas. By 2050, the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urban population is expected to increase to 6.3 billion people. With so many people living in cities, what will our combines do (8)? We must begin to think of a new paradigm for agriculture. Why should we be confined to the ground plane? If we are to live in cities we must be able to live sustainably. Thus, the city is our new landscape--our new field. And our new combine? We may not currently have the machines avaiable to harvest our vertical and rooftop farms, but we can start by doing it ourselves. The metropolis is the Fertile Crescent of the 21st century. So let us begin how they began: by hand. 41

Rise of the Megacity A megacity is an â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;urban agglomerationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; with over 10 million residents. In 1950, the world had only two of them: New York City and Tokyo.

1950 In 2012, global megactities reached a total of 23 including Sao Paolo, Lagos, Mexico City, Dhaka, and Shenzhen.

2012

2025 The United Nations predicts that by 2025 the world will host nine new megacities in Asia, making 37 total. 8 out of the 9 will be in the developing world. This will have a huge impact on how these cities obtain their food. With land increasingly being used to build on, where will the populations of these megacities grow their food? The rising sizes and populations of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cities is a major incentive to start to integrate agriculture with urban life. 42

Why Did They Care?

A LOOK AT SOME OF HISTORY’S UNBUILT URBAN VISIONS AND THE FEARS THAT BEGOT THEM Garden City, 1902, Ebenezer Howard

POLLUTED AIR

Tokyo Bay, 1960, Kenzo Tange

FOREIGN INVASION

Plug-In City, 1964, Archigram Broadacre City, 1934, FLW

SLUMS + OVERCROWDING WASTE OF RESOURCES

‘Throughout history, architects and planners have dreamed of “better” and different cities--more flexible, more controllable, more defensible, more efficient, more monumental, more organic, taller, denser, sparser or greener. With every plan, radical visions were proposed, ones that embodied not only the desires but also, and more often, the fears and anxieties of their time.... A better city for the future always seems to imply a redefined relationship to “nature” and the environment, a relationship whose form--whether it requires sprawl to embrace wilderness or compression to minimize impact--depends on the broader ideology it embodies.’ -Amale Andraos

Dome Over Manhattan, 1960, Buckminster Fuller

Agricultural City, 1960, Kisho Kurokawa

DISORGANIZED TRAFFIC

SPRAWL

Brasilia, 1957, Lucio Costa

URBAN CHAOS

Radiant City, 1935, Le Corb

INFLEXIBILITY

Stuyvesant Town fits into this framework as it too was a product of the fears and anxieties of its time. The neighborhood was created in the 1940s so returning WWII veterans could have a peaceful place to live within the urban chaos and inflexibility of the urban condition of New York City at the time. The plot of land, which was filled with slums + overcrowding, was effectively wiped clean and resurrected as the neighborhood that stands today. Today, the new anxiety of feeding the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s megacities can lead to new visions of Stuy Town as a productive landscape for urban agriculture.

The island of Manhattan has an area of just under 34 square miles and a population of about 1.6 million people. The average American eats almost 1 ton of food per year, which for Manhattan means 1.6 million tons of food every year. The amount of land required to produce Manhattan’s diet is a wopping 5,065.5 square miles (or 3,241,920 acres)--150 times the land area of the island itself. Even if all the buildings in Manhattan used their rooftops to produce food, there would still be a “food layer” of 656 feet on top of every building. So the question is: WHAT CAN WE HOPE TO DO TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE? There is no single answer but we can start by re-examining the way we relate to food in the city.

Land area needed to feed Manhattan by current U.S. production efficiecy standards.

x150 45

33.77 sq mi

Manhattan’s Hungry!

the breakdown other veg. crops

vegetables

eggs

poultry pulses alcoholic bevs. fruits

starchy roots

stimulants

oilcrops

meats

23 miles

STRATOSPHERE The majority of the land used to produce food for Manhattanites is dedicated to vegetable products, either for direct human consumption or for feedstock. Almost as much land is necessary for fruits and starchy roots, and less than a fifth of the land is dedicated to meats, poultry, eggs, oilcrops, stimulants, pulses and alcoholic bevereages..

If all that land was stacked up into one thin tower, it would be approximately 23 miles high, reaching all the way into the Earth’s stratosphere--probably not the best idea. So, maybe Manhattanites cannot grow all of their necessary food “on-site” but we can begin to develop a better relationship to our food and the processes by which we acquire it--a more visible process that can in some cases be closer to home.

The Vision

“gridlocked”

impervious

adaptable

pervious

currently, we have a SYSTEM OF CONSUMPTION fed by independent sources

we must strive for a SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION with internal interdependencies 47

? food waste

water waste

the REALITY: concrete jungle

food2energy

clean water

the VISION: productive landscape

TYPOLOGIC ANALYSIS

WINDOWFARMS.ORG

PASONA URBAN FARM

VERTICALLY INTEGRATED GREENHOUSE

MFO-PARK

OASIS NO. 7

PNEUMATIC

PRECEDENT

CRITERIA

TYP OF STRUCTURE

TENSILE

CANTILEVER

DOUBLE SKIN

SCAFFOLD

SCALE OF STRUCTURE

WINDOW

FACADE

VOLUME

SCALE OF OCCUPANCY

NONE

BUILDING

NONE

BUILDING

UNIT

YEAR-LONG

SEASONAL

YEAR-LONG

SEASONAL

YEAR-LONG

MUTABILITY OF STRUCTURE/FORM

SEMI

NONE

SEMI

NONE

FLEXIBLE

STRUCTURAL INVOLVEMENT

NONE

MINIMAL

MAXIMUM

MINIMAL

INTEGRATION OF SYSTEMS

EASY

MED

DIFFICULT

MED

LOW

MED

HIGH

MED

GOOD

EXCELLENT

UNKNOWN

HIGH 6613 LB/YR/PCL, 400 TON/YR

HIGH (?)

EXCELLENT $9M-$32M NPV

GOOD (?)

FACADE

VOLUME

ON THE BUILDING

3 4

GROWING SEASON

BASED ON ENCLOSURE

5 6

TO SATISFY AG NEEDS

8 MAINTENANCE 9

AGRICULTURAL VIABILITY

10 YIELD

LOW 400 LB/YR/WIN

11 ECONOMIC VIABILITY 1

GOOD

MED

POOR

HIGH (?)

EXCELLENT (?)

MED

TENSILE

WINDOW

NONE

SEASONAL

NONE

EASY

LOW

GOOD

LOW

POOR

CANTILEVER

FACADE

UNIT

YEAR-LONG

SEMI

MINIMAL

MED

EXCELLENT

MED

GOOD

DOUBLE SKIN

VOLUME

BUILDING

FLEXIBLE

MAXIMUM

DIFFICULT

HIGH

UNKNOWN

HIGH

EXCELLENT

SCAFFOLD PNEUMATIC

LOW

MOST LIGHT

WARM

CHARD, PEAS + BEANS, ROOT VEGES, BEATS, POTATOES. REQUIRE MORE WATER

CATFISH (80OF, 2-4 LB EACH) LARGER FISH = MORE WATER

MODERATE LIGHT

COOL

SPINACH, ARUGULA, HERBS, LETTUCE, SCALLIONS. REQUIRE LESS WATER

TILAPIA (60O-80OF, 2.5 LB) KOI (50O-80OF, 2 LB EA.) MEDIUM FISH = LESS WATER

LARGER TANKS IN THIS AREA (6’ DIAMETER)

MEDIUM TANKS IN THIS AREA (4’ DIAMETER) vegetables asian greens mesclun

SUNLIGHT quantity (hrs/day)

tolerate longer periods of shade

spinach arugula herbs lettuce mustard greens scallions

3-4

chard peas + beans root veges: beats, potatoes, carrots

4-5

quality

tolerate some shade but require proper sunlight in the middle of the day

LEAST LIGHT

COLD

ASIAN GREENS, MESCLUN. REQUIRE LITTLE WATER

KOI (50-O80OF, 1 LB EA.) TROUT (<60OF, 1 LB EA.) SMALLER FISH = LEAST WATER SMALLER TANKS IN THIS AREA (2’ DIAMETER)

require most sunlight and do not grow well in shade

MOST LIGHT

WARM

CHARD, PEAS + BEANS, ROOT VEGES, BEATS, POTATOES. REQUIRE MORE WATER

CATFISH (80OF, 2-4 LB EACH) LARGER FISH = MORE WATER

APRIL

LARGER TANKS IN THIS AREA (6’ DIAMETER) JULY

MODERATE LIGHT

COOL

SPINACH, ARUGULA, HERBS, LETTUCE, SCALLIONS. REQUIRE LESS WATER

TILAPIA (60O-80OF, 2.5 LB) KOI (50O-80OF, 2 LB EA.) MEDIUM FISH = LESS WATER

OCTOBER

MEDIUM TANKS IN THIS AREA (4’ DIAMETER) LEAST LIGHT

COLD

ASIAN GREENS, MESCLUN. REQUIRE LITTLE WATER

KOI (50-O80OF, 1 LB EA.) TROUT (<60OF, 1 LB EA.) SMALLER FISH = LEAST WATER

JANUARY

SMALLER TANKS IN THIS AREA (2’ DIAMETER)

rooftop rainwater collection

scaffold water pipe

system shell water cistern water pump water pipe hydropnic planter fish breeding tank air pump water pump fish tank nutrient tank

system components

water management

indoor farm

unaltered apartment

Window Retrofit Below is an exploration of how to reconsider the windows and interior space on the Southern facades. In contrast to the window box greenhouses, a larger greenhouse could take up the length of the facade, replacing the windows with an open facade that houses a larger greenhouse. The greenhosue windows would have algae photobioreactor modules installed within them to help facilitate the composting processes in the building.

process exploded axonometric of farming floor

algae photobioreactor

(courtesy of the biogenous project)

These plans show some typical apartment layouts of two bedrooms, which make up the majority of the apartments (along with 3 bedrooms), and five bedroom apartments on the first floor, the layout of which presents an interesting opportunity for integrating some of the growing program into the internal processes of the building.

sowing|germination| cleaning|prep|storage waste process|compost The final design proposes to replace some of the two bedroom split floors with the five bedroom layout, but instead of keeping the two bedrooms on the South facade, which do not receive any southern light anyway, introduce an interior space to house some of the secondary program associated with the system. Those who lived in these apartments would play an active role in the food production of the building.

POST SANDY

land

W E T L A N D S

F I L T R A T I O N

A Q U A P O N I C S

water

O Y S T E R B E D

R E C R E A T I O N

F A R M I N G

energy

A L G A E

C O M P O S T

M E T H A N E

H Y D R O E L E C T R I C

B I O E L E C T R I C

If you look back in time, it is interesting to find that the area that is now Stuy Town was a tidal creek in 1609 and became landfill in the 1800s. Why not give back some of that land to the water? If we create a softer transition between land and water, we can begin to introduce the new program and help mitigate storm surges and the effects of the next superstorm. flood zone 0-3 feet 3-6 feet 6-18 feet

SANDY FLOOD

SUPERSTORM X

1865 hydrology: tidal creek

1609

marsh

meadow

made land

create a softer transition between stuy town and the east river

+ +

There is the opportunity to use Stuy Townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proximity to the East River and the Con Edison power plant as an asset. The potential to introduce new program, infrastructures, and productive systems is immense.

AQUAPONICS

APARTMENTS

EGRESS CORE

APARTMENTS

FARMING

AQUAPONICS

ALGAE CULTIVATION

AQUAPONICS OYSTER BED

WETLAND