YU KONO
DEFERENTIAL FORM
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE, 2017 Rice University
ABSTRACT
The giants of the Tech industry have emerged as a significant presence in the Bay area of San Francisco. Many of them are located in the suburban regions of Silicon Valley where they are in the process of building large, symbolic corporate headquarters. The Silicon Valley sites of these headquarters lack the public amenities of traditional cities that are deemed highly desirable to their workforce. A solution has come in the form of a private mass transit system that shuttles tech employees between their workplace in the suburbs and their homes in city of San Francisco. Reversing the usual center to periphery commuting patterns of the last fifty years, the “Google Bus” system has inevitably lead to gentrification throughout the Bay area with the worst effects being in the City of San Francisco where a doubling of median house prices over the past five years has led to a 2016 total of $1,500,000. As an alternative solution, this thesis attempts to bring the qualities of San Francisco to the suburbs eliminating the demand at the root of a wasteful and unnecessary transit system and runaway gentrification. Given the resources these tech campuses have accumulated, they are able to transform the corporate headquarters as a type into a model of public, mixed-use, corporate campuses that can produce the amenities sought miles away in traditional urban fabric. Open to the cities that surround them, these new mixed use campus’s can create an alternative to the suburb environment in the form of dense urban living with a walkable pedestrian street-scape and public open space.
2
Yu Kono
TABLE OF CONTENTS
01
Isolated & Autonomous Entities
02
Suburban Cupertino, CA
03
Re-Arranging Apple Campus & the City
04
Deferential Form as an Urban Strategy
05
Urban Aggregates
06
Site Analysis
07
Buildable Sites & Developments
08
Articulation
09
Stevens Creek Neighborhood
04-07
The growing prominence of tech giants & company towns
08-11
San Francisco (Desired Urban Fabric) vs Cupertino (Lack of Urban Fabric)
12-17
To Diffuse & To Deploy
18-25
Non-Deferential Forms vs Deferential Forms
26-33
Designing of the Deferential Forms
34-45
Cupertino, CA
46-55
North; East; South Grouping
56-63
The Articulation of an Urban Facade & its Virtual Space
64-75
A Transformed Thoroughfare
Deferential Form
3
01 |
4
Yu Kono
ISOLATED & AUTONOMOUS ENTITIES
The growing prominence of tech giants & company towns
Deferential Form
5
PRESENCE OF TECH GIANTS The tech world thrives on the principle of growth, and this aspiration for growth over other competitors has inevitably lead to the emergence of tech giants. These tech giants have developed platforms that is not for the people, but to maximize growth in the marketplace1. “You start in a garage, take over half a floor in a crummy office park, then take over the full floor, then the building, then get some venture capital and move to a better office park. Suddenly you’re Google, and you have this empire of office buildings along 101 2.” THE LARGEST COMPANIES BY MARKET CAP 2016 3
Apple Inc $582 B
Amazon $364 B
Facebook Inc $359 B
Google $556 B
Microsoft Corp $452 B
ISOLATED ENTITIES These Tech Headquarter campuses are built or will be built, all residing in the urban fabric-less area of Silicon Valley. Acting as objects that portray a symbolic meaning for the company name, they are built an enormous container infilled with workstations ultimately making them isolated entities. There is no regard to how a building of this magnitude can benefit its neighboring context but instead establishes a scale-less entity. Striving also for uniqueness, the forms are hyper-specific to its function and company brand that will without a doubt cause difficulty in adapting or transforming for future purposes.
Apple Inc Cupertino, CA
1
2 3
4
6
Yu Kono
Facebook Inc Menlo Park, CA
Google Mountain View, CA
Rushkoff, Douglas. Throwing rocks at the Google bus: how growth became the enemy of prosperity. Portfolio, 2017. Rogers, Adam. “If You Care About Cities, Apple’s New Headquarters Sucks.” Wired, Conde Nast, 8 Nov. 2017, www.wired.com/story/apple-campus/. Desjardins, Jeff. “Chart: The Largest Companies by Market Cap Over 15 Years.” Visual Capitalist, 12 Aug. 2016, www.visualcapitalist.com/chart-largest- companies-market-cap-15-years/. Thanks to Amazon, Seattle is now America’s biggest company town Mike Rosenberg-Ángel González - https://www.seattletimes.com/business/ amazon/thanks-to-amazon-seattle-is-now- americas-biggest-company-town/
COMPANY TOWNS
“GOOGLE BUSES”
As an example for how much real estate these tech giants take up, Amazon will be used as an example. Located in the heart of Seattle, Washington Amazon occupies 19 percent of all Class-A office space in Seattle, which is equivalent to 43 other companies combined for the same amount. Inevitably, this expansion across the city has turned the city into a company town 4.
However, many of these large tech companies are located in the suburban regions of California’s Silicon Valley largely for its massive size. But with the demand to live in the city, a Google Bus (which is generalizing the term for a corporate bus) would transport many of these tech employees from San Francisco to work in the suburbs of Silicon Valley and return them back home to the city.
Occupies 19 percent of all Class-A office space in the city of Seattle
43 Other Companies in occupying Class-A offices to match
“The Valley: Map Reveals Corporate Bus Routes for Tech Workers” Google bus route from silicon valley to san francisco
GENTRIFICATION Because majority of the employees are seeking to live in the city and not the suburban regions where the companies are located, it has led to the issues of Gentrification. With very little living spaces remaining in San Francisco, there has been a rise in eviction rates. There is this missing element of an urban fabric that a city has that is lacking in the cities of Silicon Valley and this is one of the reasons for the rise in gentrification. So instead, why not bring the urban fabric to the cities where the tech giants are located as opposed to only a tech campus to the city? With how much real estate these tech campuses take up, they can be a model for how massive campuses can be Diffused and Deployed into the city to create an urban fabric that is found in San Francisco.
Deferential Form
7
02 |
8
Yu Kono
SUBURBAN CUPERTINO, CA
San Francisco (Desired Urban Fabric) vs Cupertino (Lack of Urban Fabric)
Deferential Form
9
MARKET STREET THOROUGHFARE IN SAN FRANCISCO This urban fabric that tech employees are seeking can be found at a major thoroughfare in San Francisco, called Market Street. The urban fabric found in Market Street takes on trafficcalming efforts to allow more control of the roads and ability for more pedestrian traffic and experiences. The urban fabric is the public pedestrian streetscape that is being prioritized despite the major thoroughfare running through the center of downtown. The density within San Francisco also contributes greatly to the development of Market Street as an urban fabric to be sought for.
San Francisco_Market Street Thoroughfare
Market Street_View 01
URBAN FABRIC(LESS) CUPERTINO, CA Cupertino, a city in California’s Silicon Valley, is recognizably considered to be the home to Apple, has an uncommon downtown. Zooming into the downtown area, there is a complete lack of urban fabric in this region. There is a clear crossroad at the heart of the city but there is literally just a series of enclaves placed around the axis. We can also see that Apple’s two campuses have established a very strong presence in Cupertino’s “downtown,” rendering this city to become basically a company town.
Apple Campus Buildings Downtown
10
Yu Kono
Market Street_Aerial
Market Street_View 02
Market Street_View 03
Stevens Creek Blvd
De Anza Blvd
THOROUGHFARE | STEVENS CREEK BLVD In contrast to Market Street in San Francisco, one only experiences, through a vehicle, an expansive pass-through road with no regards to its context.
THOROUGHFARE | DE ANZA BLVD It can be seen similarly in the North to South axis as well. In "De Anza Blvd_View 06," the drive through experience is the same as the rest of the thoroughfare despite having Apple Campus residing adjacent to it.
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 01
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 02
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 03
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 04
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 05
Stevens Creek Blvd_View 06
De Anza Blvd_View 01
De Anza Blvd_View 02
De Anza Blvd_View 03
De Anza Blvd_View 04
De Anza Blvd_View 05
De Anza Blvd_View 06
Deferential Form
11
03 |
12
Yu Kono
RE-ARRANGING APPLE CAMPUS & THE CITY
To Diffuse & To Deploy
Deferential Form
13
APPLE CAMPUS 01 | Infinite Loop 5 Sobrato Development Company Cupertino, CA 1993
APPLE CAMPUS 02 | “iBuilding� 6 Foster + Partners Cupertino, CA 2017
EXPANDING INTO AN UN-ADAPTABLE ENTITY The first Apple headquarters consists of a Primary building that is approximately the size of six (6) blocks along with thirty (30) collections of scattered buildings. Then with the need to expand, Apple Campus 2 was designed and built which had to seek out a large amount of land that is primarily exclusive. Analyzing Apple Campus 2 specifically, the campus sits on a 177 acre site with an enormous ring that is over 1100 ft in diameter. However, all of the various programs are scattered around the site. The building itself is this homogeneous infill of open workspaces that adds up to 2.9 millions sq ft for 13,000 employees.
5 6
14
Yu Kono
Apple Campus 01 Infinite Loop Photographed by Michael Rymer Apple Campus 02 "iBuilding" Photographed by Noah Berger
Fitness Center
Fitness Center
Transit Center
179’ - 8”
Also leading to 1 of 9 entries of the ring Transit Center
179’ - 8”
Also leading to 1 of 9 entries of the ring
800,000 sq ft 580’ - 11”
800,000 sq ft 580’ - 11”
Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs Auditorium Auditorium
Research Facility
Research Facility
Parking Garage
Central Plant
+ Site sq ft 177 acres + Research Facility 300,000 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Site sq ft 177 acres
+ Central Plant 72,100 sq ft of Building Footprint
Parking Garage
Central Plant
+ Fitness Center 50,000 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Research Facility 300,000 sq ft of Building+ Footprint Steve Jobs Auditorium
14,500 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Central Plant + Associated Parking Garage 72,100 sq ft of Building Footprint
511,000 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Fitness Center+ Site sq ft + Ring (Main Building) acres Footprint 50,000 sq ft of177 Building 757,195 sq ft of building foot print Building Footprints :: Acres of Land + Research +Facility + Steve Jobs Auditorium 22% Coverage of site 14,500 sq ft of300,000 Buildingsq Footprint ft of Building Footprint
+ Associated Parking Garage 511,000 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Associated Parking Garage + Central Plant 511,000 sq ft of Building 72,100 sq Footprint ft of Building Footprint
+ Ring (Main Building) 757,195 sq ft of building foot print
+ Ring (Main Building) Center 757,195 sq+ ft Fitness of building foot print
50,000 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Building Footprint to Site Ratio 22% Coverage
14,500 sq ft of Building Footprint
+ Courtyard Space to Site Ratio 12% Coverage
+ Building Footprints :: Acres of Land + Steve Jobs Auditorium 22% Coverage of site
0
0
100 200
100 200
400
400
Deferential Form
800
800
15
Air & Light Shaft
710,000 sq ft LEVEL 03 - 04 Open Plan Workspace
Core
720,000 sq ft LEVEL 02
Open Plan Workspace
07 08 06 Restaurant tSpace
09
05
760,000 sq ft
Transit Center
01
LEVEL 01 Open Plan Workspace
INSUFFICIENT LIGHTING 2,900,000 sq ft of workspace for 13,000 employees
04
Four (4) stories standing at 76’ - 0” + two (2) basement levels for parking
02
03
1,817,370 sq ft of Building Footprint (Including Courtyard)
APPLE CAMPUS 02 | HOMOGENEOUS PLANS
16
Yu Kono
0
100 200
400
The building width is almost 200’ thick therefore requiring an array of lightwells to achieve sufficient 800 lighting within the workstations.
76’ - 0”
APPLE CAMPUS 02 | DEEP SECTION
Ground L
76’ - 0”
Ground L
Ground L
Ground L Parking Tunnel
Parking Two (2) Levels
Parking Two (2) Levels
Atrium with a Restaurant
Loading Dock
Parking Tunnel
Parking Two (2) Levels
Parking Two (2) Levels
Atrium with a Restaurant
Loading Dock
TO DIFFUSE AND TO DEPLOY
1,060,175 s q f t Apple park
757,195 s q f t (Building Footprint) Offices
364,500 s q f t Amenities
0
100
200
400
0
100
200
400
511,000 s q f t Additional Parking Structure
For scale comparison, the ring is larger than the Pentagon. While the new Apple Campus will hold 13,000 employees, that is only half the number of employees that work at the Pentagon. Also, despite the size disparity, the Pentagon was also able to resolve the issue of long distance travel from one end of the building the opposite, an issue that Apple neglected in the design. How do we DIFFUSE and DEPLOY a massive symbolic object to create an urban fabric in Cupertino instead of it being an isolated entity in the city? The strategy is to re-arrange Apple Campus 02 and DIFFUSE it using Conceptual architecture to create deployable forms. These forms will be referred to as Deferential Forms, which is a form that is to be perceived and is subservient to the space that it is implying. In addition to re-arranging Apple campus 2, affordable housing is considered for the tech employees and residences of the city.
+ Pentagon | Houses 26,000 Employees + Apple Campus | Houses 13,000 Employees
RE-ARRANGING APPLE CAMPUS 02
Deferential Form
17
04 |
18
Yu Kono
DEFERENTIAL FORM AS AN URBAN STRATEGY
Non-Deferential Forms vs Deferential Forms
Deferential Form
19
SALK INSTITUTE
40' - 0"
Louis Kahn San Diego, CA 1965
403' - 0"
SLICED POROSITY BLOCK Steven Holl Architects Chengdu, China 2012
768' - 0"
CCTV HEADQUARTERS OMA Beijing, China 2012
20
Yu Kono
SALK INSTITUTE 7 Louis Kahn San Diego, CA 1965
Apple Campus 2 is an example of a Non-Deferential form. The creation of this space relies on the enclosed circular form; that a circular reading of the form directly correlates with the circular space inside. The Salk Institute is also Non-Deferential even though the space is the primary idea for the building and is not fully enclosed.
NON-DEFERENTIAL FORMS
7
Salk Institute "West Campus" Photographed by Ashen + Allen
Deferential Form
21
CCTV HEADQUARTERS 8 OMA Beijing, China 2012
CCTV HEADQUARTERS OMA Beijing, China THEME | Privileges space that destablizing the image of a governmentally controlled building
A CONTINUOUS LOOP
CHALLENGING A POLITICAL IMAGE
The perceived form is a continuous loop that implies a volume of space that is to be conceived. The form is irregular in contrast to the Salk Institute, which relied on its symmetry. However, the chosen edges along the perimeter defines the implied geometry; thus bringing back the direct relationship between the form and the space.
The CCTV Headquarters privileges space to destabilize the image of a governmentally controlled building. Government buildings are traditionally robust and symmetrical. However, the CCTV takes on many interpretations of the form depending on where the viewer is located in the city.
DEFERENTIAL FORM 8
22
Yu Kono
“CCTV Headquarters (OMA) (Reinvención del rascacielos como un bucle).” Enlace Arquitectura, 16 Feb. 2015, enlacearquitectura.com/cctv-headquarters-oma-reinvencion-del- rascacielos-como-un-bucle/.
SLICED POROSITY BLOCK 9 Steven Holl Architects Chengdu, China 2012
SCHISM BETWEEN FORM & SPACE Sliced Porosity Block establishes a strong schism between the space that is shaped first and the form. This schism allows the form to take on highly functional and pragmatic concerns while the defined space remains primary. The formal slicing enhances the reading of the implied volume of space. This project is also a mixed-use building suggesting that the relationship between programs within the form do not exist, making the internal programs generic. The genericism of the program foreshadows the potentials of adaptability.
DEFERENTIAL FORM
9
Sliced Porosity Block : Chengdu Buildings Photographed by Shu He
Deferential Form
23
CCTV Headquarters "Continuous Loop"
INCOMPLETE OPEN CUBES SET Sol LeWitt 1974 The absence of the volume is more significant than the form that is actually present.
ROOT FORM FOUND IN CONCEPTUAL ARCHITECTURE
24
Yu Kono
1500'-0"
DOUBLE NEGATIVE Michael Heizer Nevada, USA 1969 Double Negative by Michael Heizer is also a great example at a much larger scale, where it demonstrates what it means to perceive a form that cannot be fully seen at the human scale.
Deferential Form
25
05 |
26
Yu Kono
URBAN AGGREGATES
Designing of the Deferential Forms
Deferential Form
27
330’ - 0� Generic City Block
PRIMITIVE
3 Sided Unit TYPE 1
3 Sided Unit TYPE 2
2 Sided Unit
3 Sided Unit TYPE 1 w/ Cap
3 Sided Unit TYPE 2 w/ Cap
2 Sided Unit w/ Cap
4 Sided Unit
VARIOUS SIDED URBAN AGGREGATES These forms are designed to create a series of blocks that can be easily aggregated similar to the traditional method of urban aggregation onto a city grid. This ability to aggregate reproduces qualities that the tech employees are lacking to find in Cupertino, which is a dominant pedestrian street like San Francisco. This strategy is what will bring a city to the city and not a isolated entity to the city.
28
Yu Kono
120'
50'
330'
[0] 120'
Original State
Original State w/ Cap
THIN SECTIONS
[1]
Horizontal Displacement [1]
Horizontal Displacement w/ Cap [1]
The 50’ section of these urban aggregate units allows for sufficient amount of lighting needed through the building. The thin section also allows flexibility for the units to transform programmatically between housing to office and vice versa.
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT
115'
[2]
Horizontal Displacement [2]
A horizontal displacement logic disintegrates the form while still maintaining the primary reading of the space over the form; which brings an opportunity for programmatic diversity within a unit through a larger floorplate that was 50’ wide in section to now 115’.
Horizontal Displacement w/ Cap [2]
Deferential Form
29
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT LOGIC APPLIED TO THE VARIOUS SIDED URBAN AGGREGATES The Horizontal Displacement Logic is applied to each of the various sided Urban Aggregates to form a series of Urban Aggregate Units that can be seen as a system to bracket and imply space.
Horizontal Displacement [1]
[1]
[2]
[1]
[2]
[1]
Horizontal Displacement [2]
[3]
[4]
[3]
[4]
[2]
3 SIDED
30
Yu Kono
3 SIDED
2 SIDED
Horizontal Displacement [1]
[1]
[2]
[1]
[2]
[1]
Horizontal Displacement [2]
[3]
[4]
[3]
[4]
[2]
3 SIDED w/ cap
3 SIDED w/ cap
2 SIDED w/ cap
Deferential Form
31
PAIRING | Mirroring Process
PAIRING | LEVELS OF CONNECTIVITY OF SPACES
In order to pair a unit with another unit to begin a larger aggregation, the adjacent unit to be paired with must be mirrored. The mirroring process allows for a seamless alignment of the two units that will either cleanly align the voids or walls.
By pairing these systems of units, a level of connectivity of the spaces can be achieved depending on the number of sides a unit has. This level of connection of the spaces is what also helps to establish order in the city as opposed to the street grid creating the order.
Least Connective Unit A
Unit B before being Mirrored
32
Yu Kono
Unit B
4 Sided
+
4 Sided
3 Sided
+
3 Sided
3 Sided
+
2 Sided
2 Sided
+
2 Sided
Unit B
Most Connective
PAIRING | STREET DEFINING
PAIRING | FIGURE VOID TRANSITIONS BETWEEN UNITS
The horizontally displaced extensions then serve to create a formal connection of two units to create a larger floor plate. This larger floor plate has an advantage of creating a unique spatial type between pairings. It is also able break the 330’ city grid to become a superblock, which establishes more prominence in using space to establish order.
A Figural Void is inserted as a transitioning element between units. It becomes a prominent element between the pairings allowing it to hold the most important program/amenity of attraction. But it is also a referential element that can be traced back to complete the image of the space that is conceived by the unit forms.
Deferential Form
33
06 |
34
Yu Kono
SITE ANALYSIS
Cupertino, CA
Deferential Form
35
1 mi
4950'
4620'
330'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
4290'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640' 330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
Stevens Creek Blvd 2970'
De Anza Blvd
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950' 4290'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
PRIORITY 01 | AGGREGATING ALONG CUPERTINO'S CROSSROADS
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
Stevens Creek & De Anza Blvd Crossroads
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
330'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
4290'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640' 330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
Stevens Creek Blvd 2970'
De Anza Blvd
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950' 4290'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
PRIORITY 02 | NON-RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL RATIO
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
Residential 80%
Non-Residential 20%
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
330'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
4290'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640' 330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
Stevens Creek Blvd 2970'
De Anza Blvd
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950' 4290'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
PRIORITY 03 | EXISTING MULTI-CENTERS IN CUPERTINO
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
Residential
Multi-Centers
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
330'
1 mi
4950'
4620'
4290'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640' 330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
Stevens Creek Blvd 2970'
De Anza Blvd
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950' 4290'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
PRIORITY 04 | REPLACING THE OLDEST BUILDINGS
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
330'
660'
990'
1320'
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
4290'
4620'
4950' 330'
Built in 1960's-1980's
660'
990'
1320'
Built in 1990's
1650'
1980'
2310'
2640'
2970'
3300'
3630'
3960'
Built in 2000's
Downtown Area
ROCKEFELLER CENTER 10 Raymond Hood New York, NY, USA 1930
TO DIFFUSE & INTEGRATE A PRIVATE ENTITY The effect to achieve by deploying the system of urban aggregate units is influenced by Rockefeller Center which takes a corporate entity and deploys it onto several blocks. It creates a corporate complex to demonstrate what it means to create an ambiguity between the private and the public. Not only does the private and public become ambiguous, but it reveals a way to take what could have been a single large private entity and instead diffuses and integrates it into the city blocks. A pedestrian streetscape is thus created defined by the deployed buildings, which is made cohesive through its materiality.
10
44
Yu Kono
The View From Above New York Photographed by George Steinmetz Agentur Focus
The diffusing and deployment of a corporate entity onto several city blocks (6 city blocks)
Deferential Form
45
07 |
46
Yu Kono
BUILDABLE SITES & DEVELOPMENTS
North; East; South Grouping
Deferential Form
47
PHASE 1_2020 | NORTH CONTEXTUAL BUFFER & SITE
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Buildable Site
48
Yu Kono
Buildings to Demolish
Contextual Buffer
PHASE 1_2020 | NORTH GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Housing
Apple Offices
Deferential Form
49
PHASE 2_2030 | EAST CONTEXTUAL BUFFER & SITE
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Buildable Site
50
Yu Kono
Buildings to Demolish
Contextual Buffer
PHASE 2_2030 | EAST GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Housing
Apple Offices
Deferential Form
51
PHASE 3_2040 | SOUTH CONTEXTUAL BUFFER & SITE
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Buildable Site
52
Yu Kono
Buildings to Demolish
Contextual Buffer
PHASE 3_2040 | SOUTH GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
Housing
Apple Offices
Deferential Form
53
54
Yu Kono
Deferential Form
55
08 |
56
Yu Kono
ARTICULATION
The Articulation of an Urban Facade & its Virtual Space
Deferential Form
57
De Anza Blvd
Stevens Creek Blvd
NORTH GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
NORTH DEVELOPMENT ALONG STEVENS CREEK BLVD
58
Yu Kono
Stevens Creek Blvd
EAST GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
EAST DEVELOPMENT ALONG STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Deferential Form
59
De Anza Blvd SOUTH GROUPING DEVELOPMENT
SOUTH DEVELOPMENT ALONG DE ANZA BLVD
60
Yu Kono
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 Ground Level
OFFICE FACADE TYPE
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 Ground Level
HOUSING FACADE TYPE
Deferential Form
61
URBAN AGGREGATE UNIT | OFFICE TYPE
UNIT 1
UNIT 4
3 SIDED
3 SIDED
# of Rentable Floors 12 Floors
# of Rentable Floors 12 Floors
Rentable Sqaure Footage 196,000 sq ft
Rentable Sqaure Footage 196,000 sq ft
UNIT 2
UNIT 5
3 SIDED
3 SIDED
# of Rentable Floors 12 Floors
# of Rentable Floors 12 Floors
Rentable Sqaure Footage 175,000 sq ft
Rentable Sqaure Footage 175,000 sq ft
UNIT 3
UNIT 6
2 SIDED
FIGURAL VOID
# of Rentable Floors 12 Floors
Apple Store Visitors Center Steve Job's Auditorium
Rentable Sqaure Footage 120,000 sq ft
62
Yu Kono
URBAN AGGREGATE UNIT | HOUSING TYPE
UNIT 1
UNIT 4
3 SIDED
3 SIDED
12 Floors
12 Floors
1,000 s q ft per person 196 Units
1,000 s q ft per person 196 Units
UNIT 2
UNIT 5
3 SIDED
3 SIDED
12 Floors
12 Floors
1,000 s q ft per person 175 Units
1,000 s q ft per person 175 Units
UNIT 3
UNIT 6
2 SIDED
FIGURAL VOID
12 Floors
Retail Public Fitness Center Movie Theater Restaurants
1,000 s q ft per person 120 Units
Deferential Form
63
09 |
64
Yu Kono
STEVENS CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD
A Transformed Thoroughfare
Deferential Form
65
UNIT
UNIT 2
4
UNIT
UNIT 2
3 MIRRORED
MIRRORED
UNIT 6
UNIT 4
UNIT 1
FIGURAL VOID
MIRRORED
Housing Superblock
Office Superblock
Pedestrian Streetscape
Office Superblock
UNIT 2
66
Yu Kono
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
1
6
2
MIRRORED
FIGURAL VOID
MIRRORED
UNIT 5
UNIT 4 MIRRORED
UNIT 4
EAST DEVELOPMENT ALONG STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Deferential Form
67
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ALONG STEVENS CREEK BLVD
68
Yu Kono
Deferential Form
69
APPLE'S GLASS CUBE IN RELATION TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
70
Yu Kono
Deferential Form
71
PUBLIC AMENITIES CUBE IN RELATION TO APPLE DEVELOPMENT
72
Yu Kono
Deferential Form
73
IMPLIED VIRTUAL SPACE "APPLE PARK"
74
Yu Kono
Deferential Form
75
YU KONO
p :: 859-327-6552 e :: yurkono@gmail.com
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE, 2017 Rice University