Combinatory Urbanism by Olivia Lau

Combinatory Urbanism Designing for Diversity Olivia Lau B.Arch. Final Project 2011

Olivia Lau Combinatory Urbanism | Designing for Diversity Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute School of Architecture B.Arch. Final Project 2011 Final Project Professor : Mark Mistur Permanent Committee Member : Thomas Mical IN>Form|PER<Form EcoLogics: An Architecture of Complicity and Consequence 2

Combinatory Urbanism | Designing for Diversity Table of Contents PrĂŠcis and Thesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Research Genealogy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Precedents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Eco-Logics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Initial Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 MTA Subway and Bus Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Coral Reef System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Speculative Synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Urban-River Edge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Hudson River Piers 54 to 40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Complex Ecologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 The Edge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Programmatic Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Re-envisioning a Waterfront Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Conceptual Composition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Design Investigations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Design Explorations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Operational Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Filtering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Folding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Faceting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Combinatory Urbanism Manifestation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 View Corridor Massings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Project Proposal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Critique and Reflections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Image Credits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

PrĂŠcis The contemporary urban landscape is being transformed by

developments that produce suburban homogenization. Corporate chains are impacting small businesses while new families are demanding a privatization of the city that manifests as enclosed, manicured residential neighborhoods. These resultant city-suburbs are

autonomous from the urban context, operating as small utopian places that stifle diversity instead of encouraging interaction between various parties and spaces.

Figure 1.1 : Battery Park City in Lower Manhattan operates as an enclosed suburb within the city.

Designing for diversity employs a multiplicity of forms and functions to produce a heterogeneous system of related experiences. Three ideas form the framework for investigation and inform this system:

1) the potential for merging private development with a vibrant

and accessible public realm; 2) the reinvention of the city edge as a place that mediates between the city, sky, and water; and 3) the integration of ecological

and synthetic systems.

The design strategy adopts a mixed-use program, joining residential, commercial, cultural, and public facilities and spaces into a

combinatory urbanism at the edge between the city and its river

to produce a more connected spatial condition. In order to ensure

a more democratic space, the design must encourage open spaces and prevent the over-commercialization that is characteristic of suburban homogenization. While residential areas can expose socio-economic division and conflict, open spaces, markets, cultural institutions, and public facilities promote integration and cross-cultural mixing. Achieving heterogeneous spaces requires the design to be culturally appropriate and responsive 5

to the local contexts.

The assemblage of various components to form a whole is most

provocative at the city edge, where restrictive parameters demand creativity for urban redevelopment in a manner that creates a diverse setting with specific influences and responses to the natural boundary systems. The edge simultaneously denotes the

physical limits of the built environment and allows for boundless opportunities to connect with light and air. The boundaries at the

edge create a tension where the reintegration of diversity would be polemical. The implementation of new architecture requires the

edge to expand, enticing people out from the center and toward the periphery. Here, spaces can open to expose occupants to the exterior, visually pulling them up and out of the project. As

the

proposed

architectural

network

varies

programmatically, it creates a place that

formally

and

reconnects its

occupants to both an emerging urban culture and the natural environment. At an edge that has been historically derided as void of a rich ecology, the design strategy incorporates the local habitats, exposing a vibrant

ecosystem to the public.

Thesis A heterogeneous system of experiences can revive diversity, contrary to the manner in which most cities are currently being transformed by suburban homogenization and autonomous building forms. The vertical and horizontal expansion of the urban edge condition of Manhattanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s west side will produce a simultaneously

dense

and

porous

urban

construct that entices users to reconnect with the urban setting and its natural open edge. By filtering movement and views through a public waterfront, and by strategically capturing and integrating diversified programs both on the surface and above it, a multiplicity of built forms will reinvigorate the public and programmatic realms.

Figure 1.2 (opposite page): Just one example of the current conditions along Manhattanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Hudson River edge that needs a strategy for revitalization. 7

Research Genealogy Cities are characterized by difference and multiplicity, and this unprecedented level of complexity has increased the demand for built forms that provide higher levels of performance.1 Farshid Moussavi

Density and diversity are qualities the built environment must strive towards. Diversity is, on one hand, necessary and inevitable

because, as density forces various groups together, their differences in status and worldviews will limit them from agreeing on everything. On the other hand, diversity is desired by those who inhabit the city. What makes cities interesting and even beneficial is that they are different â&#x20AC;&#x201C; different from each other, different from the non-city, and different in regards to the elements contained therein.

thought-provoking.

Diversity is

The ethos of the city demands the multiplicity of diversity. As designers, we cannot consider architecture as separate and independent from its cultural context. Numerous cultural forces compose a nonphysical â&#x20AC;&#x153;siteâ&#x20AC;? which interacts with architectural design within the city. Farshid Moussavi posits, Architecture can no longer afford to structure itself as an instrument that either reaffirms or resists a single, static idea of culture. [. . .] As a function rather than an instrument of contemporary culture,

architectural forms need to

vary in order to address its plurality and mutability.2

Since the cultural context informs the built environment, which in turn sets up conditions that affect how people inhabit society,

and architecture are then constantly in flux.

culture

1 Moussavi, Farshid. The Function of Form. edited by Daniel Lopez et al. New York : Actar and Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2009. p. 7. 2 Moussavi, p. 9. 9

This process of constant change is subverted when the environment becomes homogenized Kyong Park,

through globalization. According to

The urban ecology of globalized capitalism also results in a homogenization of the built landscape and the elimination of the distinction between suburban and urban landscapes,

specifically through the suburbanization of the city. The conglomeration of the landscape into repetitive and iconic spaces lends a sense of familiarity and comfort, creating a belief and practice that home could be anywhere and everywhere and, therefore, nowhere. The homogenization of the landscape, therefore, complements the movements of capital and labor. Like a malignant cancer, it destroys unique urban cells that are native to particular regions, thus promoting a single type of urban cell that is designed to accommodate homogenized labor and capital.3 As the world has become more accessible, people have been tempted to absorb everything, thus becoming nothing. Now that the formation of suburbs is no longer novel, people are beginning to move back to the cities. But these people still carry the suburban desires of sterilized, picturesque spaces. Those who aim to infuse the city with their suburban ideals are subject to what Michael Benedikt

calls “place machismo” – that is, the advocacy and embrace of spaces that he considers unpleasant, among them “same-everywhere suburbs and shopping strips.”

The monotony that results reinforces “environmental

stoicism” by trying to placate various groups and desensitizing them from the built environment.4

3 Park, Kyong / iCUE. “The Urban Ecology of Globalization.” Urban Ecology: Detroit and Beyond. edited by Kyong Park / iCUE. Hong Kong : Map Book Publishers, 2005. p. 178. 4 Benedikt, Michael. “Environmental Stoicism and Place Machismo : A Polemic.” Harvard Design Magazine, Number 16. Winter / Spring 2002. p. 1. 10

Figure 2.1 : Is this a New England suburban street - or Bergen Street in Brooklyn, NY?

Such homogeneous monocultures cannot contribute to the vibrant

democracy that true public spaces do enhance via an ‘agonistic’ approach. According to the agonistic approach, public spaces are

always plural and the agonistic confrontation takes place

in a multiplicity of discursive surfaces. […] While there is no underlying principle of unity, no predetermined centre to this diversity of spaces, there always exist diverse

forms of

articulation among them and we are not faced with the kind of dispersion envisaged by some postmodernist thinkers. Nor are we dealing with the kind of ‘smooth’ space found in Deleuze and his followers. Public spaces are always striated and hegemonically structured. A given hegemony results

from a specific articulation of a diversity of spaces and this means that the hegemonic struggle also consists in the attempt to create a different form of articulation among public spaces.5 Chantal Mouffe In order for architecture to articulate diverse spaces and forms, it must respond to informative

parameters on the site. The urban-

river edge contains physical qualities with restrictions that can provoke creativity and design. The edge is inherently polemical,

simultaneously suggesting limits and boundlessness. Historically, it has been a place of abandonment, offering a place for renewal and the creation buildings.6

of opportunities for new communities and new

5 Mouffe, Chantal. “Artistic Activism and Agonistic Spaces.” Art&Research: A Journal of Idea, Contexts and Methods, Volume 1, No. 2. Summer 2007. 6 Adams, Phillip. “Foreword.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press. 2005. p. xii. 11

Manhattan’s waterfront edge has continually proven to be such a place for change and diversity. The New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan describes it as:

historic, encompassing buildings dating to the 1700s and

archaeological sites that go back even further; brawny, home to maritime industries and the largest port on the East Coast; sporty, laced with biking trails and dotted with boat launches; peaceful, with parks that offer places for quiet contemplation as well as active recreation; and natural, inhabited by hundreds of species of birds and fish.7 Since 1992, the Department of City Planning has been working to reinvent New York’s shoreline to promote

public access and

productive activities. Waterfront activities were classified into four categories: the Natural Waterfront, the Public Waterfront, the

7 Department of City Planning City of New York. “Introduction.” Vision 2020: New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan. March 2011. p. 6.

Working Waterfront, and the Redeveloping Waterfront. Citywide

strategies for the Natural Waterfront included improving water quality, designating Special Natural Waterfront Areas (SNWAs) with

large concentrations of wetlands and other natural resources, and initiating the Harbor Estuary Program (HEP) to improve the environmental quality of the Hudson

River Estuary.

The Public Waterfront is comprised of networks of greenways,

waterfront parkland, and public access from privately-owned waterfront sites. Today, the Manhattan Waterfront Greenway encircles the entire island of Manhattan, providing paths along the entire city edge. The Hudson River Park Trust oversees the completion of the 550-acre Hudson

River Park on Manhattanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s west side. Waterfront Access Plans (WAPs) customize the public-access requirements

of a particular waterfront area to the specific conditions of that site, encouraging a seamless continuity of public walkways along the waterfront that could be developed by multiple property owners over time.

Figure 2.2 : Hudson River Park at Charles Street, part of the Public Waterfront.

While the shipping industry no longer dominates New York’s river edge,

the Working Waterfront is still essential to the city’s economy. The

designation of six Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas (SMIAs) protects and supports sufficient waterfront land to accommodate existing industrial, maritime, and municipal uses, as well as attract future investments. Many Industrial Business Zones (IBZs) are located on the city waterfront. Rail connections at major terminals have been developed along the Hudson River by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Cruise liners that enter New York Harbor support the city’s growing tourism industry.

The Redeveloping Waterfront has emerged through rezoning selected areas of waterfront land, affecting approximately 3,000 acres of land throughout the entire five boroughs. Rezoning actions often facilitated development by changing non-residential areas to

mixed-use, or lower-density developments to higher-density.

But contextual rezoning has also replaced higher-density residential districts with lower-density ones, requiring new developments to be in scale with their surroundings. Furthermore, brownfield cleanups have improved formerly dormant and blighted land, attracting private investments to these properties.

The Department of City Planning has drafted a comprehensive waterfront plan, called Vision 2020, to fully realize the opportunities along the river edge. Its goals include: • expanding public access to the waterfront and waterways on public and private property for all New Yorkers and visitors alike; • enlivening the waterfront with a range of attractive uses integrated with adjacent upland communities; • supporting economic development activity on the working waterfront; • improving water quality through measures that benefit natural habitats, support public recreation, and enhance waterfront and upland communities; • restoring degraded natural waterfront areas, and protecting wetlands and shorefront habitats; • enhancing the public experience of the waterways that surround New York; • improving governmental regulation, coordination, and oversight of the waterfront and waterways; and • identifying and pursuing strategies to increase the city’s resilience to climate change and sea level rise.8 8 Department of City Planning City of New York. “Vision 2020 Citywide Strategies.” pp. 20-21.

By synthesizing different urban strategies that approach these goals, this project becomes just one manifestation of a new combinatory urbanism. It emerges, as Petra Kempf proposed, “by isolating and overlaying individual components of the city.”9 The

natural conditions of the site – what Kempf defines as climate,

terra, and topographia – form the base for an urban intervention.

The guidelines and rules put forward by political, economic, and social bodies are adaptable as individuals and groups interact and separate. Boundaries shift as different forces within the city – identified as aggregated, energy, exchange, expansion, exploration, fields, and reduction – emerge and disappear. Transportation and

communication offer limitless connections for goods, information, and people.

Figures 2.3 and 2.4 : Composites of Kempf’s diagrams. “Cosmological Ground” (above) overlays the factors of climate, terra, and topographia. “Legislative Agencies” (below) superimposes the entities of administrative agencies, the executive assembly, and the legislative body.

9 Kempf, Petra. You Are the City: Observation, Organization and Transformation of Urban Settings. Baden, Switzerland : Lars Müller Publishers, 2009. p.11.

Precedents

Figure 2.5 : rendering of SHoP Architect’s design for the East River waterfront

SHoP Architects East River Waterfront SHoP’s design for the revitalization of the East River Waterfront seeks to draw the city fabric to the East River. It is a gradual evolution of the area, weaving new public interventions among the old, including an improved esplanade, pavilions under the FDR Drive, and piers for recreation, community, and maritime activities. By creating a flexible plan, the design can support the growth of diverse urban communities along the river’s edge.

Figure 2.6 : rendering of reiser + umemoto’s proposal for the East River corridor

Reiser + Umemoto East River Corridor Reiser + Umemoto’s continuous frontage along Manhattan’s East River is linked to various inland zones yet contains distinctly different systems, spaces, and ways of occupation. A hierarchy of scale signifies a hegemonic structure in developing the section of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive. The global use of the FDR Drive defines the limits of the new park. Proposed local zones establish intimate and long-term uses of segments of the waterfront park. An intermediate scale of public amenities creates political spaces. This structure of programmatic elements enhances the continuity at the water’s edge. 16

Figure 2.7 : rendering of MVVA’s approved design for piers near the Brooklyn Bridge along the East River

Michael Van Valkenburgh Brooklyn Bridge Park Brooklyn Bridge Park is described by Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates (MVVA) as “a highly dynamic threshold where two different but codependent ecosystems - river and city - meet.” Manmade landscapes encourage new site ecologies in a heavy-use urban setting. Edge complexity is created ecologically through the diverse habitats on the site and spatially through the various ways that people can occupy the different types of edges.

Figure 2.8 : view of hard and soft surface conditions at Yokohama International Port Terminal

Foreign Office Architects Yokohama Port Terminal The terminal is an extension of the urban ground, providing a continuous surface of open public spaces at the city waterfront. The lines of circulation are systematically transformed into a folded and bifurcated surface that can host different parts of the program. The folded surface produces two different spatial qualities: the continuity of exterior and interior spaces, and the continuity between different levels of the building.

Eco-Logics An initial exploration of eight different systems created the framework for a research-based design. Natural and synthetic systems at various scales were analyzed for the kinds of relationships they form with their surroundings. In many cases, the systems were informed by their context, shaping according to the physical parameters of their environments. These systems then perform in such a way as to alter the surrounding conditions. These relationships allow the systems to be considered “eco-logics” – operations that are influenced by and impart influences on their contexts. The systems are classified as either natural or synthetic; those natural systems are than organized by scale.

Initial Systems Natural Systems | Small Scale Rhizopus Fungus The Rhizopus is a fungus commonly found on rotting fruit, vegetables, bread, and other foods. Its mold spores are produced within the sporangium sac at the head of each filament. The filaments stem from a root-like rhizoid. This fungal system is an ecologic because Figure 3.1 : microscopic view of a rhizopus fungus it is produced under certain environmental conditions and then alters its growth surface. The microscopic components gather to form a visible surface.

Figure 3.2 : A spiderweb is constructed within the negative space among flowers.

Spiderweb A spiderweb is a frame system of non-sticky radii and sticky circular threads. This allows the spider to travel along safe paths while its prey are caught in the web. The constructed system is an ecologic because it depends on the surrounding environment for form and shape. The visible network is formed within negative space.

Natural Systems | Human Scale Coral Reef The system that we identify as the coral reef is composed of colonies of polyps that secrete calcium carbonate to form hard exoskeletons. On top of the polyps live symbiotic algae that provide an additional food source through photosynthesis. The coral reef is an ecological system since it is formed under certain environmental conditions - in shallow, clean tropical waters and mediates the coastal environment by preventing wave erosion. This system of diverse components is spread over different zones to form a whole surface. Rock Formations in a Cave Within a cave, dripwater deposits limestone on the ceilings, forming stalactites. The dripwater can then fall onto the cave floor, depositing any residual limestone to form stalagmites. Eventually, the stalactites and stalagmites can combine into columns. This process is an ecologic because it depends on dripwater from the above environment for form and shape. Spatial variation is determined over time by these rock formations.

Figure 3.3 : A coral reef community populated by diverse colonies

Figure 3.4 : Rock formations shape the cavernous space.

Natural Systems | Large Scale Glacier A glacier is divided into three zones: the accumulation area, where snow adds to its mass; the equilibrium area, where the amount of snowfall equals the amount of snowmelt; and the ablation area, where melting and evaporation occurs. A glacier is an ecologic system that is created by climate and then reshapes its surrounding environment. The slow movement transports materials and carves away at the landscape.

Figure 3.5 : A glacier leaves its trail as it moves through the landscape.

Figure 3.6 : satellite view of the Himalayas

Himalayan Mountains The Himalayas are composed of different zones that have varying climatic conditions. These zones include vegetative plains and marshes; subtropical, deciduous, and evergreen forests; and alpine shrubs and grasslands. The Himalayan mountains are an ecologic because the varying altitudes and longitudes throughout the range determine what grows and who lives there. These varying conditions create diversity in the plant and animal communities.

Synthetic Systems

Figure 3.7 : diagram of the light path within a camera

Figure 3.8 : detailed MTA map of Lower Manhattan

Camera A camera is a system of components that manipulates a light path. Light enters the lens and is reflected by a mirror up through a prism and out to the photographerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s eye. When the photograph is taken, the mirror moves so light can reach the film. This mechanism is not an ecologic because it is autonomous from its environment, taking only a static image of the surroundings. Metropolitan Transportation Authority Subway and Bus Systems Subway lines service commuters by running primarily north-south in Manhattan. The distances between subway stations vary as they are placed near areas of interest. Bus lines service commuters to and from areas not immediately near the subway. The average distance between bus stops is about two city blocks. These ecologic systems respond to the urban environment. The frequency of service is determined by demand. Proximity to the subway produces vibrant neighborhoods. These networks of services produce different pulses of activity. 21

Of the preceding eco-logic systems, the MTA subway and bus systems and the coral reef system were selected for more in-depth analysis. These systems would then be used as external informants whose logics could produce a more complex project connected to its site.

MTA Subway and Bus Systems The Second Avenue subway line was planned in 1929 in anticipation of the development of the Upper East Side. It is slated to open in 2015 in answer to the demand for more subway service in the now heavily congested area. Manhattan’s Upper East Side is currently only serviced by the 4-5-6 line. It is not uncommon for commuters to wait for multiple trains to enter and leave the station before being able to board a train during rush hour. The operation of the Second Avenue line is a testament that burgeoning areas demand more service and thus lead to the construction of new lines. The Number 7 line extension was planned more recently, in 2007, to help redevelop Midtown West. In accordance with the “build it and they will come” mentality, the extension seeks to encourage businesses in the area by providing convenient service. The implementation of this new transportation line can lead to the growth and renewal of the neighborhood.

Figure 3.9 : rendering of a typical Second Avenue T line station, from FXFOWLE Architects

Figure 3.10 : rendering of terminal station for the No. 7 line extension at Eleventh Avenue/34th Street, from Dattner Architects

Inwood Hill Park

Cloisters Museum

Fort Tryon Park

Fort Washington Park

Highbridge Park

Key Jackie Robinson Park

existing subway line and station Riverbank State Park City College

proposed subway line

St. Nicholas Park

bus line and stops Marcus Garvey Park

riverfront greenway

Columbia University

Morningside Park Jefferson Park

project site

Riverside Park Museo del Barrio Museum of the City of NY

Mt. Sinai Medical Center

Gracie Mansion

Guggenheim Museum

Carl Schurz Park Central Park

Metropolitan Museum of Art

Complex transportation networks connect areas of Manhattan to each other and to areas across the Hudson and East rivers. A greenway rings the entire island, allowing people to walk and bike at or near the riverfront. These networks can connect the project site back to the larger city context.

Museum of Natural History

Whitney Museum

Hunter College Rockefeller University

Riverside South Development

Lincoln Center Fordham University John Jay College

Hudson River Park

Time Warner Center / Columbus Circle

Museum of Modern Art

DeWitt Clinton Park

Rockefeller Center

St. Patrick’s Cathedral

Intrepid Museum

Javits Center Expansion

United Nations

Grand Central Terminal

Times Square Bryant NY Public Library Park

Port Authority Bus Terminal

Javits Center Macy’s Herald Square

Hudson Yards

Empire State Building

MSG / Penn Station

Madison Square Park Baruch College

Peter Cooper Village

Gramercy Park Chelsea Piers Stuyvesant Square Park

Union Square

Washington Square Park

Cooper Union

St. Marks Place

New York University

SoHo Historic District

Columbus Park BMCC

Nelson Rockefeller Park

City Hall

Pace University

World Financial Center

Figure 3.11 : Manhattan’s subway and bus systems in relation to various areas of interest, urban parks, and the greenway encircling the island

Battery Park City

World Trade Center

South Street Seaport Trinity Church

Battery Park

Wall Street

Stuyvesant Town

Tompkins Square Park

East River Park

Natural Systems | Large Scale

Natural Systems | Human Scale

Coral Reef System

Glacier The coral reef’s feedback relationships operate in a multi-scalar • ecologic | is crea logic. The corals offer surfaces for the growth of algae cells, which and then reshape in turn provide nutrients to the corals. These nutrients environment Coral Reefare essential to • The slow moveme the building of the reef structure, the geometry of which separate materials and car clear, clean waters from sedimentation carried by waves. The former landscape. condition is more favorable to the growth of algae because it facilitates photosynthesis. Thus, the cleaner, more tepid waters allow more algae to grow, which allows the reef to expand and continue Himalayan Mountains Rock the Formations Cave separating waterin aconditions. This zone also promotes greater • ecologic | the varying altitudes and • ecologic | depends on dripwater longitudes throughout the range biodiversity other marine life. from the above among environment for form determine what grows and who lives

and shape • Spatial variation is determined over time by these rock formations.

OUTER REEF SLOPE

REEF TERRACE

sediments accumulate Maximum Temperature (for limited periods of time) : 104 deg. F

there • These varying conditions create diversity in the plant and animal communities.

REEF FRONT ZONE

several meters wide

REEF CREST

up to 50 meters wide 20 - 3 exposed at low tide zone

0 ft.

10 ft.

Optimal Temperature : 84-73 deg. F 20 ft.

Typical Minimum Temperature : 64 deg. F 30 ft.

Lowest Minimum Temperature (Japan) : 52 deg. F

230 ft.

Figure 3.12 : Coral reef geometry logic; distance and temperature scales shown in diagram. 24

ecolo

• forme

Chelsea Piers

cipation n 2015 he now

Glacier • ecologic | is created by climate and then reshapes its surrounding environment nutrients are absorbed • The slow movement transports by coral polyp and materials and carves away at the metabolized algae produce landscape. nutrients via photosynthesis

ayan Mountains g altitudes and hout the range s and who lives there nditions create ant and animal communities.

Synthetic Systems

Union Square

tentacles trap prey

stem

ONT E

REEF CREST

Washington Square Park

METABOLISM Metropolitan

METABOLISM

Camera • not an ecologic • It is autonomous from its metabolized taking only a static nitrogenenvironment, is image of the surroundings. used by algae

METABOLISM

Prolonged

METABOLISM

and may l Transportation Authority Subway and Bus calcium carbonate is excreted to build and fortify exoskeleton Figure 3.13Systems : Symbiotic relationship between coral polyps and algae, at the microscopic scale

SoHo Historic District

REEF FRONT ZONE

REEF FLAT ZONE

REEF 20 - 30 meters to overCREST 1,000 meters wide

up to 50 meters wide exposed at low tide zone of greatest biodiversity

Under stre • high li New York• increa University• tempe • disrup • excess coral poly

up to 50 meters wide exposed at low tide

ISLAND

REEF TERRACE

several meters wide

BMCC

Nelson Rockefeller Park

City Hall

World Financial Center

Battery Park City

World Trade Center

Trinity Church

East River Park

Battery Park

ecologic

• formed under certain environmental conditions

Wall Street

Speculative Synthesis The logics of the MTA systems and the coral reef system are transposed onto a section of the Hudson River Piers. This investigation offered an initial look into the pier ecology and the opportunity to apply a largescale strategy onto the site. The logic of the MTA subway system is translated into a network of spaces with specified Satellite locality. View Architectural form expands outward where the piers are most underdeveloped. More programmed spaces can be inserted in this hubs, inverting the pre-existing conditions of active and static spaces.

Wooden Piers

Speculative Synthesis : Hudson Ri

The logic of the MTA subway system is translated into a network of spaces with specified locality. Architectural form expands outward where piers were most underdeveloped. More programmed spaces can be inserted in these hubs, inverting the pre-existing conditions of active and static spaces.

Piers framed by t form spaces for i and external disc

The geometric logic of the coral reef system is translated into built form. The structure nearest the pierhead can mitigate water current activity and reduce the debris and sedimentation traveling upstream from reaching inland. The water between the piers becomes cleaner and allows marine life to thrive.

Figure 3.14 : synthesis diagram IN>Form | PER<Form

: Interim Review 26

The logic of the MTA bus system is translated into a linear sequence of activity with small but frequent pulses of activity at the bulkhead. The geometric logic of the coral reef system is translated into built form. The structure nearest the pierhead can mitigate water current activity and reduce the debris and sedimentation traveling upstream between piers becomes cleaner Wooden Piers from reaching inland. The waterPier 40 Parkthe Development and allows marine life to thrive.

ve Synthesis : Hudson River Piers

Piers framed by the two systems form spaces for internal reflection and external discourse.

Piers framed by the two systems form spaces for internal reflection and external discourse

The logic of the MTA bus system is translated into a linear sequence of activity with small but frequent pulses at the bulkhead.

oral reef ilt form. erhead activity and mentation aching inland. s becomes fe to thrive.

10.13.2010 : Olivia Lau

Urban-River Edge

The notion of the edge conjures notions of the extremity, the fringe, the margin, the brim, the brink, the verge, the perimeter, the circumference, the periphery. It invokes, in the same breath, notions of limits and boundlessness. And sometimes the edge is a no-man’s land, a place of abandonment. Then, of course, it’s an invitation to renewal. There’s nothing like a wasteland to create opportunities for new communities. And new buildings.1 Phillip Adams

1 Adams, Phillip. “Foreword.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. xii - xiii.

The west side of Manhattan is a continually changing edge condition Since colonial times, the edge has expanded and contracted both into the river and back towards the city. The original natural edge hovered around what is today Eleventh Avenue, at points being further out to the river and at other points being pushed back into the current city. But it never extended past what is today West Street. In 1873, both rigid piers and soft edge conditions formed the west side. From the 1900s onwards, the urban-river edge became hardened throughout. The piers have shifted up and down, even being constructed at different angles over time. It is a dynamic edge condition in which the boundary between city and river has been redefined several times throughout history. When one stands within the city streets and looks out to the Hudson River, one experiences the view corridors. From inside the city, people are surrounded by â&#x20AC;&#x153;urban wallsâ&#x20AC;? - buildings that define the street edge and create densities of built forms. The feeling of density is replaced by visually experiencing light and air at the edge. The view corridors can be classified in two ways: those corridors that provide direct views looking from the city straight to the river, and those corridors that provide oblique views looking diagonally from the corner of one city block to the far corner across the street. They provide unobstructed sightlines to the water, and this project seeks to maintain the visual openness at the river. West Street is a traffic boundary that separates the city from the Hudson River Park. As an urban highway, it discourages pedestrians from walking across into the waterfront. While there are medians that offer a small place of refuge between the two vehicular traffic flows, this project allows pedestrians to more easily access the waterfront from the city. An MTA bus line runs westwards along Christopher Street, up West Street for one block, and re-enters the city along 10th Street. The bus stop at the junction of Christopher Street and West Street can connect the site back to the larger city transportation systems - not only the MTA buses and subways, but also the bike paths and potential water transportation. An inoperable water taxi stop is located on Pier 45, across from 10th Street. By reviving the maritime activity at this pier, commuters could easily connect between water and land transportation.

1873

1686

Pier 54

- temporary events - flat, open asphalt paving

1924

1951

Pier 53

- NYC Fire Department fireboat house - after future relocation, same as Pier 52

Pier 52

- NYC Sanitation Department facilities - after future relocation: - rocky shoreline beach - open lawn - recreational boating areas Gansevoort Street

Pier 51

1996

- playground - viewing scopes

W. 12th Street

Pier 49

- pile fields

reet

1th St

W. 1

Pier 46

- synthetic lawn - seating - pile fields

Stre

rles

Cha

MTA Bus

Pier 45

- open lawn for sunbathing - inoperable water taxi stop - shade structures and seating

MTA Bus

reet

er St

toph

Chris

Pier 42

- pile fields

Morton Street

Pier 40

- athletic fields - fishing (south side) - historic steamship (north side) - cruise ships (north side) Clarkson Street

W. Houston Street

Figure 4.1 : indexical site drawing, showing the historical pier outlines, view corridors, and vehicular traffic flows

25’ 0’

100’ 50’

200’

14th

Stre

Hudson River Piers 54 to 40 (from North to South)

Pier 54 • temporary events • open with no greenspace Figure 4.2 : view from the Highline

Pier 53 • NYC Fire Department fireboat house • after future relocation, same as Pier 52 Pier 52 • NYC Sanitation Department facilities • after future relocation • rocky shoreline beach • open lawn • recreational boating areas

Figure 4.3 : view looking at the fireboat house from the Hudson River Park Promenade

Figure 4.4 : view of the edge condition

Pier 51 • playground • viewing scopes

Figure 4.5 : view looking back into the city from within Pier 51

Pier 49 • pile fields

Figure 4.6 : view looking north from the Hudson River Park Promenade 32

1873

14t

1686 1924

Gansevoort Street 1951

1996

W. 12th Street

50’ 25’

h . 11t

200’ 100’

Figure 4.7 : indexical site drawing, north part 33

Stre

tre

Hudson River Piers 54 to 40 (cont.) (from North to South) Pier 46 • synthetic lawn • seating • pile fields Figure 4.8 : view looking across flat synthetic lawn and back into city from within Pier 46

Pier 45 • open lawn for sunbathing • inoperable water taxi stop • shade structures and seating

Figure 4.9 : view looking at shade structures toward river from within Pier 45

Pier 42 • pile fields

Figure 4.10 : view looking at pile fields from the Hudson River Park Promenade

Pier 40 • athletic fields • fishing (south side) • historic steamship (north side) • cruise ships (north side)

Figure 4.11 : view looking at Pier 40 building from the Hudson River Park Promenade

1873

1686

1951 s harle

Stree

1924

Chr

r Stre

he istop

Morton Street

1996

Clarkson Street

W. Houston Street

50’ 25’

200’ 100’

Figure 4.12 : indexical site drawing, south part 35

Complex Ecologies Estuary Ecology From the southern tip of Manhattan to Troy, NY, the Hudson River is technically an estuary. Within this estuary, fresh water from the true river mixes with salt water from the ocean, resulting in dynamic and nutrient-rich habitats filled with biodiversity. The fresh water tends to flow above the denser salt water, but tidal movements can mix and homogenize the water. The Hudson River Estuary contains characteristics of both the ocean, such as tidal movements, and the river, such as directional water flow.

Figure 4.13 : diagram of typical estuary conditions; the project incorporates conditions such as emergent wetlands, beaches, and a tidal pond into the natural waterfront. Similar to the coral reef zones, where the greatest biodiversity is found between the land and the reef crest, the greatest biodiversity within an estuary is found in the emergent wetland zone, between the upland and subtidal zones.

River Fluvial Processes The Hudson River flows south towards the ocean. As the water moves downstream, it shapes the edges of the shoreline. Some parts of the land are eroded and smoothed out as the river carries sedimentation away. Other parts begin to build up when that sedimentation is deposited in a process known as accretion. Natural harbors are carved out while land protrusions interrupt the river flow, creating areas of stagnation and turbulence. For the most part, the Hudson River has a laminar flow - the water moves in parallel layers, creating smooth conditions on the water surface. 36

Figure 4.14 : The river flow shapes the natural edge through accretion and erosion.

Figure 4.15 : Where the river has carved out a natural harbor, the water does not follow the laminar flow of the river. Where land protrusions interrupts the river flow, it becomes more turbulent.

Figure 4.16 : Laminar flow around an island shows that the island edges are eroded and smooth as the river moves along them. Those edges that the river does not move along are more rough. 37

barnacles

Pier Ecology Historically decried as a lifeless waterfront, further investigation into the Hudson River reveals a rich ecosystem of benthic organisms, micro-organisms, migratory fishes, and bottom-dwellers. The benthic organisms attach themselves to the piers and are often exposed at low tide. Shipworms in particular situate themselves on wooden piles and eat through the wood, slowly destroying the traditional piers. Migratory fish weave through the piers, but are met with a hard wall at the bulkhead. This wall creates a scouring condition that discourages organisms from approaching the edge where the river and the city meet. Similar to the coral reef structure, the physical conditions of the piers shape the diversity of ecological communities that inhabit the riverfront. A proposal for underwater structures that filter sedimentation from the water, offer surfaces for organisms to grow on, and create more organic conditions for fish to travel through will advance the development of the Hudson River ecology.

shipworms

tunicates

phytoplankton

zooplankton

copepods

lionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mane jellyfish

striped bass

American eel

oyster toadfish

oysters

lined seahorse

blue crab

sea robin

flounder

mud snail 38

Tidal Cycle : 24 hours and 50 minutes â&#x20AC;˘ (2) high tides and (2) low tides occur

Mean High Water Level : approx. 5 ft. from streetlevel

Mean Low Water Level : approx. 9.5 ft. from streetlevel

Silt Bed : approx. 31.5 ft. [variable] from streetlevel at bulkhead

Figure 4.17 : map of ecological communities at the pier edge

The Edge

Figure 4.18 : typical flat park condition of a pier

The western edge of Manhattan is an isolated place, separated from the urban fabric by the urban highway of West Street. The bike path provides another linear boundary of traffic. The riverfront park and promenade are obscured from view by groves of trees and bushes. The entire site is flat - park greenspaces are elevated only a few inches above the promenade.

Figure 4.19 : bike path that encircles Manhattan is isolated from the riverfront park 40

Benthic organisms that live on the pile fields can be seen as the Hudson River tide moves throughout the day. While the pile fields may appear to be barren objects in the water, they are actually home to diverse communities of organisms

Figure 4.20 : pile fields must be maintained because they are inhabited by a variety of organisms, including the barnacles seen here

Despite the existing flat and striated conditions, the edge of Manhattan promises to be an inspiring site. Its openness to light, air, and water can help form a vibrant public realm. Living and working communities can transform the riverfront into an edge that is active during both day and nighttime.

Figure 4.21 : pedestrian path and greenspace are striated along their own parallel tracks 41

Figure 4.22 : isolated zones of the park (left), promenade (center), and piers (right)

Figure 4.24 : Hudson River Park is a mostly flat and hard surface

Figure 4.23 : looking out to the river from the city, the view corridor creates a sense of openness at the water

Figure 4.25 : pockets of greenspace appear disconnected from the park promenade and the city

Figures 4.22 - 4.27 illustrate various conditions from outside and inside the project site. In particular, the project will address the isolated zones, the flat and hard surface, and the hard edge at the waterfront.

Figures 4.26 and 4.27 : the edge is simply a metal rail and a hard concrete wall that separate the people and the city from the water and its ecologies

Programmatic Considerations

Urban peripheries are not a single type of place and we have choices in what sort of places we wish to make. This should be governed by the relationship of any given site to the wider urban structure, the balance of uses that have already been established across the urban area and the need to improve networks of movement.1 John Montgomery

1 Charlesworth, Esther. â&#x20AC;&#x153;City Edges.â&#x20AC;? City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. quote by John Montgomery. p. 6.

Re-envisioning a Riverfront Community South of the site lies Battery Park City (BPC), a mixed-use district that has gradually been built-up since its inception in the 1970s. After the construction of the World Trade Center, ninety-two acres of landfill were transported to the Lower Manhattan’s waterfront. BPC was extended to the pierhead on this landfill, and today the neighborhood operates as an enclosed suburb within Lower Manhattan. Although the community contains multiple programs, they are separated as individual hubs. Commercial activities remain on the ground floor while residences are elevated above them in extruded, singular towers. The buildings are simply extruded autonomous forms, “hardly more than a misplaced suburban import dressed in brick to match other suburban imports straight from the office park.”1 1 Stern, Robert A.M. et al. “Battery Park City.” New York 2000: Architecture and Urbanism Between the Bicentennial and the Millennium. New York : Monacelli Press, Inc., 2006. p. 194.

Battery Park City Program Survey Total 92.6 acres = 4,033,656 sq. ft.

Cultural • 30,000 sq. ft. museum • 82,000 sq. ft. museum addition • theatre • memorial • classrooms • resource center • library • history center • gallery space • offices • cafe • event / catering hall • 25,867 sq. ft. memorial space

Parks 28.0 acres = 1,219,680 sq. ft. 30% of project • (4) playgrounds • community ballfields • community gardens • picnic tables • public art and sculptures Residential 38.1 acres = 1,659,636 sq. ft. 42% of project • (4,687) apartments • (3,230) condominiums • retirement living building Commercial 8.7 acres = 378,972 sq. ft. 9% of project • 609,840 square foot commercial center • 152,460 square foot public plaza • 457,380 square foot programmed area • 8,500 square foot atrium with retail, restaurants, and seating • 13,000 square foot event / theatre space • (763) hotel rooms 48

Community • public marina • sailing school • yacht club • public elementary and intermediate school • public high school with community center • public library • private library • global community outreach center Streets 17.8 acres = 775,368 sq. ft. 19% of project

By adopting much of BPCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s program, this proposal demonstrates a different formal approach to similar functions. A mixed program fosters diversity by offering a variety of recreational and commercial activities to attract all types of people. Different residential types create a varied twenty-four community. The project investigates a new way to connect a mixed-use program at the edge back into the city. The river edge itself is maintained as a public amenity, creating spaces for both residents and visitors.

ets 1 Stre

l s.f. tota f o 9%

0.3% ace % p S t .7 Evenarium 2 % u t Es l 4.5 etai R l a ci mer Com % l 1.5 Hote 7% g 8. Livin t n e rem Reti

13 ums i n i dom Con

ts 19 men t r a Ap

s Park

Figure 5.1 : breakdown of BPC programs and the percentage of the districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s total square footage they occupy 49

.6%

.7%

l s.f. tota f o 0%

Conceptual Composition The coral reef system (pp. 24-25) and the estuary (p. 36) are divided into vertical and horizontal zones. Using these ecological habitats as informants, the project is also divided into zones. The private upperscape world is elevated above the public landscape. The public zone itself is split into pier areas and upland areas. The pier areas contain light programs, mostly recreational, that hover above the water. Tidal flooding can transform spaces like an amphitheater, separating the performance area from the audience at high tide.

PIER AREAS

Dining Area

Condominiums

Hotel

Exercise Gym

Apartments

PRIVATE

Occupancy Rooms Conference Rooms Concierge

PUBLIC

Playgrounds

Leisure Lawns Seating

Amphitheater Performance Area

Seating

Tidal Flooding

Food Market Playgrounds

Restauran

Shading

Swimming Pools

Figure 5.2 : conceptual reconfiguration of mixed-use program

Offices

Senior Housing

Recreational Lawns - Badminton - Shuffleboard - Basketball - Tennis - Bocce - Ultimate Frisbee - Lacrosse - Volleyball

Picnic Tables

Rowboating

UPLAND AREAS

Chess & Checkers Tables

Observation Pools Kayaking

Fishing

Water Taxi Stop

Cafes Pubs

UPLAND AREAS

Auditorium

or Housing

grounds

er Taxi Stop

Cafeteria

Lounges/Study Areas Classrooms School

Gymnasium

Food Market

Offices

Trees Promenade Paths

Bike Paths

Restaurants

Retail Shopping

Library Reading Areas Circulation Desk Cafes Pubs

UPPERSCAPE

Offices

WEST STREET

Book Stacks

LANDSCAPE

ER AREAS

The upland areas hold heavier programs that are mostly commercial. Programs are embedded within the landscape and can be pushed underground. The landscape itself moves across West Street and into the city, connecting the urban world with the project.

Cinema Ticketing Lounges Concessions Screening Rooms

Parking

CITY

Design Investigations

[A]n element means something that enters into a composition as a part of a constructed unity and fits into a formula; but this nomenclature also means a principle, the foundation of a theory that determines a discipline.1 Ernesto Rogers

Designing for Diversity Principles: • merging private development with a vibrant and accessible public realm; • reinventing the city edge as a place that mediates between the city, sky, and water; and • integrating ecological and synthetic systems.

1 Shane, David Grahame. “Three Urban Elements.” Recombinant Urbanism: Conceptual Modeling in Architecture, Urban Design, and City Theory. quote by Ernesto Rogers. p. 155.

Design Explorations Iteration 1

Figure 6.1 : aerial view of Iteration 1

This initial design exploration organizes horizontal and vertical forms along the site. The piers are bridged to create more surface area for buildings and public space. The towers in the middle of the site are designed to be primarily residences, interconnected by a series of bridges. The northern end of the site will hold an ecological research facility while the southern end will hold a cultural center. Parts of the buildings are elevated to allow access views through the site and out into the river. Figure 6.2 : view of northern end of site 54

Figure 6.3 : view of interconnected towers 55

Iteration 2

Figure 6.4 : aerial view of Iteration 2

Similar to Iteration 1, horizontal and vertical structures are mixed in this exploration. Walkways connect public spaces diagonally across pools, which will serve as ecological habitats. The network of bridges connecting the towers form more of a meshwork. Again, the northern and southern ends of the site will hold two disparate facilities; the project edge will create a gradient that connects the two anchor buildings. Figure 6.5 : view from north end and tower looking south 56

Figure 6.6 : view of mat building hovering over ecological pool habitat 57

Topography Intervention

Figure 6.7 : aerial view of Topography Intervention

In critiquing the current site conditions as a flat, uninspiring public space, a topography has been designed that varies the landscape. The geometric pools are remnants of the pier edges that the topography builds over. Where the landscape breaks in the middle, it will actually dip down into the river, allowing people and aquatic organisms to mix. Figure 6.8 : view of elevated topography at the edge of a geometric pool 58

Figure 6.9 : view of land bridges that separate geometric pools from each other and from the river

Figure 6.10 : view of landscape where it will slope down into the water

Figure 6.11 : view looking back into the city from the pierhead 59

Iteration 3 Horizontal and vertical structures and the varied topography are combined. Parts of the buildings are elevated above the landscape and water habitats to visually draw people to the river and create covered public spaces that still have access to light and air. In designing for the future, the topography mediates the river tides, allowing water to seep into the water habitats at some areas while only allowing the river to graze the landscape in other places. Figure 6.12 : Tidal motion of the river estuary will cause the water to rise throughout the day.

Figures 6.13 and 6.14 : During high tide, water will run over the landscape at low points and into geometric pools, sometimes moving underneath buildings that hover over the pools.

Figure 6.15 : Varied topography will allow water to pass at some areas and block water off at other places. 60

Figure 6.16 : Vertical structures are separated from more mat-like buildings along the site.

Figures 6.17 and 6.18 : The vertical towers are elevated above the landscape and connected at their bases by a level of bridges.

Figure 6.19 : Vertical towers form a dense community that is seemingly separated from the rest of the site.

This iteration, presented at the end of Final Project 1, introduces new ideas about landscape on the site. The edges and pools, however, remain too rigid and reminiscent of the original pier outlines. The buildings, though varied in form, create an arbitrary fractured condition. The public landscape desires more natural edge habitats while the programmed buildings require a systematic organization that relates back to the city.

Operational Systems

fil-ter-ing : 1 : subjecting to the action of a filter

2 : removing by means of a filter 3 : passing or moving through or as if through a filter 4 : coming or going in small units over a period of time

fil-ter

fold-ing :

capable of being folded into a more compact shape

fold

1 : to lay one part over another part of 2 : to clasp together 3 : to bend into 4 : to become doubled or pleated

a porous article or mass through which a gas or liquid is passed to separate out matter in suspension

fac-et-ing : the act of making a facet

fac-et

1 : a small plane surface 2 : any of the definable aspects that make up a subject or an object 3 : a smooth flat circumscribed anatomical surface

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Filtering, folding, and faceting surfaces and forms within the project achieve a variety of spatial and tectonic conditions. These operations were investigated through physical models and diagrams.

Filtering Conceptual Filtering Model Solids are suspended between two planes, filtering the intermediate space. Basswood components of varying widths were cut into modular lengths of one inch, two inches, or three inches. The longest modules bridged the space between two sheets of clear acetate, acting as structural members. The other modules were affixed on one end to either sheet, eliminating any sense of top or bottom, right or left. The clear acetate provokes the idea that space flows around the solid components from all directions. At the urban scale, movement and views can be filtered through a field of solids.

Figure 7.2 : detailed view of basswood solids 64

Figure 7.1 : basswood solids suspended between clear planes

Performative Filtering Model

Figure 7.3 : strips create pockets of spaces

Translucent strips undulate and overlap to create different spatial conditions. Modular strips of white tracing paper were arranged in the same direction but offset by varying distances. The paper was then physically manipulated so that its microtexture would produce a range of opacities that filter light. At the urban scale, overlapping forms can filter light through to the public surface.

Figure 7.4 : light is filtered through translucent strips

Hybrid Filtering Model Solids are suspended behind translucent screens as a hybridization of formal and performative filtering. The basswood components form densities that create true opacities between the screens. The slits of each tracing paper sheet are offset from the other, allowing some light to pass freely into the interstitial space and forcing it to filter through the second screen. At the urban scale, a combination of tectonics can filter movement, views, and light.

Figure 7.5 : field of basswood solids between translucent screens

Figure 7.6 : detailed view of solids and slits within the screen 66

Linear Filtering Models

Figure 7.7 : strips move over solid that is one level high and under elevated solid

Translucent strips filter over and through spatial conditions created by the varying placements of solids along a linear edge. Basswood components were cut into modular lengths of one inch, two inches, and three inches. These modules were arranged systematically into one-level, twoFigure 7.8 : strips move around solids that are level, and three-level tiers. Where two levels high and stop where solids are three the basswood was only one level levels high high, the tracing paper strips moved over the solid. Where the basswood was two levels high, the strips moved around it. Where the basswood was three levels high, the strips stopped at its face. At the urban scale, the tidal motion of the estuary can be filtered into the city.

Figures 7.9 and 7.10 : iterations of linear filtering 67

Sectional Filtering Model Solids vary in their composition and are systematically arranged in three levels along an edge condition. This model investigated if density and multiplicity could be created with a prescribed set of rules. Varying crosssections and lengths produce a field conditions of repetitive difference. A translucent plane of acetate further obscured those solids beneath the top layer. At the urban scale, space and views can be filtered in three dimensions.

Figure 7.11 : translucent plane filters views of solids underneath

Figure 7.12 : varied solids hover above translucent plane

Figure 7.13 : solids beneath translucent plane show sectional variation

Figure 7.14 (opposite page) : space and light are filtered through solids and translucent plane

Folding As a critique of the current flat conditions of the existing site, the project places a folded surface on the public landscape. In the flat condition, buildings appear as autonomous forms dotting the edge. The folded landscape integrates commercial and community buildings with the public world. People can walk above the programs embedded within the folds. A level boardwalk provides paths for pedestrians and bicyclists, splitting and coming back together at various points along the waterfront. The folded landscape also serves to create a public world that breaks the boundary of West Street. At the south end of the site, the landscape folds up to form pedestrian bridges that cross over West Street and either step down or slope down to the city blocks. Along this edge, the folded surface is at least six feet high, blocking the sight of most cars from people walking along the level boardwalk. A B C D E F G Composite Figure 7.15 : elevations of folded surfaces (A-G), isolated and then superimposed upon each other; elevation A shows the surface along West Street while elevation G shows the surface closest to the river. The level boardwalk stretches along multiple elevations.

1/5 1/5

2/5 2/5

1/5 1/5

3/5 3/5

2/5 2/5

1/5 1/5

Figure 7.16 : breakdown of greenspace along waterfront, moving from the south end (upper left) where it is mostly hard surface to the north end (lower right) where it is mostly soft surface 70

1/5 1/5

2/5 2/5

3/5 3/5

2/5 2/5

1/5

2/5

At the north end of the site, the project proposes to elevate West Street, mirroring the elevated pedestrian path of the nearby High Line. As the urban highway is lifted, the landscape folds into the city street. The folded surface is created with wooden planks, smoothing the transition between the level boardwalk and the folded planes. The folds are broken up in the north-south direction according to the view corridor lines that are extended out to the river. Each of these sections is then subdivided between the edge of West Street and the edge of the Hudson River. Greenscape softens the wooden surfaces in a systematic organization according to the desired proportions of hard and soft surfaces. Where the landscape is a continuous hard surface in the transverse direction, it folds up to the pedestrian bridges. The landscape is mostly soft near the elevated West Street; the greenscape draws people into the project from the city streets.

2/5

1/5 1/5

2/5 2/5

3/5 3/5

1/5 1/5

2/5 2/5

1/5 1/5

Faceting The private upperscape world hovers above the public waterfront. In order to bring natural sunlight down to the landscape, the buildings are faceted according to the solar angles on the site throughout the year. The upperscape is divided into three zones, moving from the upland areas and out to the pierhead. The first zone hovers above the folded landscape between West Street and the original hard edge of the waterfront. The second zone is elevated between the original edge and the edge of the short piers. The third zone stretches above the edge of the short piers and the pierhead. Three different sets of angles are used within these different zones. Within the first zone, the angles facet the buildings to allow more sunlight to reach the ground, highlighting it as the public realm. Within the third zone, the faceting angles create more shadows, making the landscape at the pierhead appear more private.

60.6

52.9

60.6

31.1

52.9

Living

Living Learning

60.6

52.9

Living

52.9

Working

Living

Learning

Figure 7.17 : Zone One of faceting solar angles 67

27.9

58.6

56.3

58.6

Living

56.3

58.6

Living

58.6

Living Working | Living

Learning

Figure 7.18 : Zone Two of faceting solar angles 65.3

15.7

Working | Learning

Living Learning | Living

Figure 7.19 : Zone Three of faceting solar angles 72

58.7

Living | Working

Living

Working | Living

Amphitheater

Living Working

Learning | Working Learning

The building facets also provide tectonic opportunities for the expression of the facade. Where the building surface remains straight, the facade is pushed back to express the slab and to offer occupants access to light and air. Where the building surface is faceted, the facade becomes tighter and wraps the building edge.

Learning

Living | Learning Living

Living

Living | Working

Working

Living Living

Working

Living | Working

Living

MTA Bus

Living

Water Taxi Working Visiting MTA Bus

Figure 7.20 : site plan marking upperscape zones: Zone One in yellow; Zone Two in orange; and Zone Three in red 60.6

60.6

Living

31.1

60.6

52.9

Living

52.9

Living

Working

58.6

Living

58.6

Living

56.3

Living

23.1

23.3

Living

Working

Living

58.6

Living

58.7

Living

58.6

Living

Working

58.7

Living

Combinatory Urbanism Manifestation

Architecture transcends site and program, but to transcend is also to engage, expand and exploit them to a new condition of inextricable mutual cooperation and more. To speculate toward an architecture of continuity, one that creates a complicity between site and program with the ultimate objective of linking the human enterprise, and ‘being’ itself, with site operations and programmatic purpose, requires a bi-directional approach. The inner structures and ecologies on the one hand and external influences and intention on the other must be integrally considered, not opposed. to Bind them together performatively - it is critical first to identify real conditions, and then to interrogate them, in order to inform the process of harnessing eco-logics in the design and creation of built ecologies.1 Mark Mistur

1 Mistur, Mark. “IN>Form | PER<Form >> Eco-Logics: An Architecture of Complicity and Consequence.” 2011. PDF file.

View Corridor Massings The view corridor lines from within the city, as well as the layering of historic pier outlines, serve as informants to derive the geometry of the upperscape buildings. By extrapolating points of intersection among these sets of lines, the buildings are tectonically connected to each other and to the urban fabric. There are three types of intersection that are used: intersection of view corridor lines with each other intersection of view corridor lines with historic pier outlines intersection of historic pier outlines with each other

Figure 8.1 : Shard and fold geometries were generated from the intersection of the view corridors and pier outlines. 76

Figures 8.2 - 8.4: thin forms that bend and overlap at the intersection points

Figure 8.5 : view of massings from south end

Shards, bends, and folds are used in this iteration. A thick bar typology hovers over the edge between the city and the river. Thick shards extend out above the pier field. A building above the bar folds in reaction to the existing towers at the city edge. Where the building hits the ground, it obscures part of the view corridor. This narrowing of the open view from within the city, as well as the immense thickness of the buildings and the covering of the entire waterfront, makes the project appear too heavy for the intentions of creating public access to light and air.

Figure 8.6 : view of massings from north end

Figure 8.7 : aerial view of massings 78

This iteration focuses on creating folded buildings within the view corridor lines. The buildings are much thinner than the iteration on the opposite page - truer to the width of buildings at a real urban scale. The buildings sit on the ground between the view corridor lines, leaving views out to the river completely open. The buildings also do not occupy or cover the entire public waterfront, allowing more light and air to reach the ground. The folded geometry investigated here was further developed as the final project.

Figure 8.8 : view of massings from north end

Figure 8.9 : aerial view of massings

Figure 8.10 : view of massings from south end 79

Project Proposal The project is composed of the landscaped public realm and the elevated private realm. River habitats and ecologies are woven into the public realm. The natural edge is shaped both by the water flow and the tidal motion of the estuary. In the project plans [Figures 8.13 8.15], the level of the Hudson River at low tide is indicated in blue. Where the high tide would rise and create wetland and beach conditions, these areas are indicated in light blue. There is a combination of soft natural edges that meet the river and hard concrete edges that are separated from the water. The private realm is shown in dashed lines above the ground. The buildings are constructed as faceted megastructures, large and dense in scale and shaped by the view corridor lines, as in Figure 8.1. The programs within these buildings are classified as living (residential), working (office), and learning (school). Punctures through the buildings create porosity to allow light and air to reach all occupants.

Figure 8.11 : Looking through the view corridor at Christopher Street, the proposed private buildings are obscured behind the existing urban fabric.

Figure 8.12 : aerial view of project proposal, from W. 11th Street above Pier 46 (left) to Clarkson Street and Pier 40 (right) 80

Amphitheater

The networks of diverse spaces and experiences offered throughout the project serve to counter the suburban homogenization that has been transforming the city into pockets of secluded neighborhoods. By creating physical connections across the boundary of West Street and into the city, and by integrating recreational, commercial, and community activities on the surface and embedded within it, the riverfront edge becomes open to the public and the city. The private buildings contain mixed-use programs that attract a diversity of occupants to the upperscape world. Unlike the autonomous forms of the suburban world, these buildings are connected to each other physically and to the urban fabric conceptually.

Living Working

Learning | Working Learning

Learning

Living | Learning Living

Living

Working

Living | Working

Living Living

Working

Living | Working

Living

MTA Bus

Living

Water Taxi Working Visiting MTA Bus

Living

Figure 8.13 : overall project plan; more detailed plans on pages 83 and 85. 81

[1]

An amphitheater spans between an island and a built-out pier. The space between the performance stage and the audience will be flooded during high tide.

[2]

At low tide, a beach condition and its natural edge will be exposed. People will be able to walk into the beach from the built-out pier. At high tide, the beach will be flooded, and the original hard edge of this area will separate the public from the water.

[3]

This area is entirely covered during high tide. When the river recedes, some water becomes trapped in this tidal pool.

[4]

Recreational courts are spread throughout the project site, creating a continuity of activity at the edge. Here, an ultimate frisbee court is partially covered by the upperscape building. Ultimate frisbee is a popular sport among city high schoolers, so the court is within close proximity of the learning program in the upperscape.

[5]

The project elevates West Street at the north end of the site. As the urban highway is lifted, removing the vehicular traffic from view, the landscape folds underneath and into the city streets. The public waterfront extends back into the urban fabric, allowing people to move between the edge and the city.

[6]

Although the islands are located on the public level, they are accessible only by those who occupy the upperscape that hovers over them. This creates a differentiation within the lower world: the land directly connected to the city is the truly public surface, while the islands are privatized but remain open to light and air.

[7] [9]

Urban constructs require exchanges between different types of people and activities. The programs in the upperscape are connected by skybridges, allowing people to more easily move between buildings and functions. The fully shaded bars [7] indicate fully enclosed skybridges that connect the same program within the same building. The bars that are partially shaded [8] indicate partially enclosed skybridges - perhaps with an overhead covering, but open sides - that connect different progams within the same building. The bars that are not shaded [9] indicate skybridges that are fully open and connect different programs between different buildings. Figure 8.14 (opposite page) : project plan of the north end of the project, from W. 14th Street to Bank Street/Pier 49 82

Amphitheater

[1]

[2]

[3] [4] Living Working

Learning | Working Learning

[5] Learning

Living | Learning Living

Living

[6] Living

Working

Living | Working

[7] [6]

[8] Living Living

[9] Working

Living | Working

Living

[10] The elevated buildings are supported by large structural cores. The buildings are faceted to soften their edges and bring more sunlight down to the ground. The structural cores are wrapped in a faceted skin to soften the edges that come down to meet the landscape. The faceted skin can then fold into the folded landscape surface at the waterfront edge.

[11] The pedestrian bridges on the south end of the site rise sixteen feet above West Street, allowing cars and trucks to pass underneath as people walk between the edge and the city. The bridges split into fingerlike extensions that either step down or slope down to the city blocks. The wood of the folded landscape is continued across these pedestrian bridges.

[12] In order to preserve the open views of the view corridors, the landscape is punctured at the pedestrian bridges. People would walk up the sides of these voids to access the bridges.

[13] The landscape folds up towards West Street, offering spaces underneath that could be occupied. These spaces become embedded buildings that offer public, commercial, and community activities, such as a library, a cinema, and a diversity of food and retail establishments. They are indicated by dotted lines beneath the landscape surface.

[14] The proposal revives the water taxi stop at Pier 45, connecting water transportation with land transportation offered by the MTA bus stop across West Street.

[15] Urban stairs allow people to physically access the water at the built-out pier. At high tide, small recreational boats and kayaks can move across between the built-out pier and the island. At low tide, a hard surface is revealed so that people can walk across to the island.

[16] The public boardwalk is a flat path embedded within the folded landscape surface. The existing promenade runs along the site as a single pathway. This proposal splits the boardwalk at different points along the site, creating a network of pathways that allows people to move in multiple ways. Whereas the existing site separates pedestrians and bicyclists, the proposal offers all people access to the waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge. 84

Figure 8.15 (opposite page) : project plan of the south end of the project, from W. 11th Street to Clarkson Street/Pier 40

[13]

[A] Living

[10] [A] [13]

Living

[12]

[11]

[13] [12]

[11]

[13]

[16]

[13] [11] [12]

Living

Water Taxi

[14]

Working

Visiting MTA Bus

[15]

[16] [16]

[13]

Living

[12] [11] Living

[19] [19] [19]

Figure 8.16 : schematic section [AA], located on Figure 8.15

The buildings are faceted to let sunlight reach the public surface. The building edges that have not been carved by the solar angles are expanded to express the slabs and offer occupants access to light and air [17]. The edges that have been faceted wrap tightly around the slabs and interior spaces [18].

Figure 8.17 : final model showing the expression of the slab and the faceted surfaces 86

[17]

[20]

[18]

In trying to achieve the density of an urban construct, the project buildings are constructed at a monumental scale. Punctures in both the horizontal [19] and vertical [20] directions create porosities in these megastructures. Within the residential buildings, these punctures are organized within clusters of living units, serving as communal open spaces for groups of families.

Figure 8.18 : final model showing a few punctures through the megastructures 87

Critique and Reflections Although the thesis is called a â&#x20AC;&#x153;final project,â&#x20AC;? it can be further developed, expanding upon critiques that have been received throughout the design process. The most striking elements are the project buildings, which appear aggressive towards both the city of Manhattan and towards New Jersey across the Hudson River. They are too large for the urban scale of the surrounding site. Reflecting on prior ideas about multiplicity, the building elements could be reduced in size and increased in number. The punctures require a systematic organization, relating to the interior units and the views out to the river. This private upperscape realm is much less developed than the public landscape realm. Further development would require a detailed design and organization of the interior programs The proposed landscape and upperscape appear as two distinct realms. The project can continue to stitch the two realms together as well as back into the city. In section, a gradient of public and private programs would soften the connections between the landscape and the buildings. In plan, stronger gradients between the programmed landscape and the city would further obscure West Street as an urban boundary.

Figure 8.19 : view looking into the city from the proposed island between Pier 45 and Pier 42; more punctures are required to show the desired porosity within the buildings 88

This thesis has helped me to develop an approach to dealing with urban boundaries: the infrastructural boundary of West Street, the ecological boundary of the existing hard waterfront edge, and the programmatic boundary between public and private activities. It reveals that architecture can affect both the public and private worlds by creating a diversity of spatial experiences as people occupy and use the project in different ways. The ground can be simultaneously open to the public and programmed for activities. The river edge no longer needs to be a hard concrete wall topped with a metal rail. Instead, natural ecologies and habitats can be maintained at the waterfront and enlivened for public use. Buildings can be shaped by factors on the site, eliminating the tendency to create singular, autonomous objects. The public and private elements - landscape and building - developed in this thesis can make connections between the city and the project, stitching the edge back into the urban fabric.

Figure 8.20 : view looking into the city from the pier fields at Pier 46; a more developed model would show the faceted skin surrounding the structural cores of the buildings

Figure 8.21 : view looking into the city between Piers 46 and 45; the foreground shows where the tidal motion of the river would move along the natural edge, while the background shows the view corridor punctures through the landscape

Figure 8.22 : detail of Figure 8.16, showing a pedestrian bridge over West Street and an embedded building within the folded landscape 89

Sources Image Credits Figure 1.1: dvisible magazine. “Exploring our Creative World >> Archive >> It’s Not Easy Being Green.” 27 Oct 2007. <http://dvisible.com/2007/10/27/its-not-easy-buildinggreen/> Figure 2.1: Jeremiah’s Vanishing New York. “Bobos on Bergen.” 6 Oct 2010. <http:// vanishingnewyork.blogspot.com/2010/10/bobos-on-bergen.html> Figure 2.2: photographs courtesy of Elliot Mistur, compiled via Adobe Photoshop by Olivia Lau Figures 2.3 and 2.4: Kempf, Petra. You Are the City: Observation, Organization and Transformation of Urban Settings. Baden, Switzerland : Lars Müller Publishers, 2009. Figure 2.5: SHoP Architects. “SHoP Architects >> Projects >> All >> Locations >> New York City >> East River Waterfront.” <http://www.shoparc.com/#/projects/all> Figure 2.6: reiser + umemoto. “reiser + umemoto - East River Corridor Project.” <http:// www.reiser-umemoto.com/> Figure 2.7: Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, Inc. “Michael Van Valkenburgh Assoc. >> Projects >> Urban Design & Campus Planning >> Brooklyn Bridge Park Master Plan.” <http://www.mvvainc.com/project.php?id=86&c=urban_design> Figure 2.8: Picasa Web Albums. “Picasa Web Albums - japanezgirl514’s Gallery.” 12 May 2009. <http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/TMb4rqeoNzQPBSSBEq612A> Figure 3.1: Mycology Online. “Zygomycetes.” <http://www.mycology.adelaide.edu. au/gallery/zygomycetes/> Figure 3.3: DOI Office of Insular Affairs (OIA). “OIA’s Coral Reef Initiative.” <http:// www.doi.gov/oia/Firstpginfo/coralreef.html> Figure 3.4: High Desert Wanderer. “Indiana Wandering - Marengo Cave.” 3 Aug 2007. <http://highdesertwanderer.com/archives/844> Figure 3.5: The Physical Environment. “Glacier.” <http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ ritter/glossary/E_G/glacier.html> Figure 3.6: Geographic Guide: Globe Images. “Himalayas, Mount Everest.” <http:// www.globe-images.net/himalayas.htm> Figure 3.7: Ratty, Brian D. “How the SLR Camera Works.” <http://www.photo-seminars. com/BasicPhotography/lesson2.htm> Figure 3.8: Long Island Vision. “Lower Manhattan Transit Map.” <http://www.livision. com/maps.asp> Figure 3.9: FXFOWLE Architects, LLP. “Second Avenue Subway in New York, NY.” <http://www.fxfowle.com/projects/transportation/second-ave-subway.php Figure 3.10: Dattner Architects. “Projects >> Infrastructure >> No. 7 Subway Line Extension.” <http://www.dattner.com/> 91

Figures 4.14 - 4.16: photographs courtesy of Google Earth Images, overlaid with diagrams by Olivia Lau Figure 4.17: diagram © Olivia Lau, with images from: [barnacles] The Dominion. “Gooseneck Barnacles.” <http://www. dominionpaper.ca/images/2712> [shipworms] Audubonmagaine.org. “Biofuel’s Holy Grail: shipworms?” 9 October 2008. <http://magblog.audubon.org/biofuel%E2%80%99s-holy-grailshipworms> [tunicates] AboutUtila.com. “Photo Gallery - Deep Blue’s Photos of Utila, The Bay Islands, Honduras.” <http://www.aboututila.com/PhotoGallery/DeepBlue/ PGDeepBlue01.htm> [phytoplankton] Ripple the wide open space. “phytoplankton escaping!” 29 July 2010. <http://katilifox.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/phytoplankton-escaping/> [zooplankton] Glen Waverley 1958. “herstory.” <http://www.lisaroberts.com. au/content/herstory/1949-1959/1958.php> [copepods] Hudson Regional Health Commission. “Hudson County Mosquito Control.” <http://www.hudsonregional.org/mosquito/program.htm> [lion’s mane jellyfish] Scuba Diving Magazine. “Scott Leslie of Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia.” <http://www.scubadiving.com/photos/how/scott-leslie-annapolisroyal-nova-scotia> [striped bass] Coastal Things. “Saltwater Fish Gallery.” <http://www. coastalthings.com/salt_water_fish.htm> [American eel] Maryland Field Trip Notes. “Maryland Field Trip Identifications.” <http://siera104.com/sections/Biology/ecotrip.html> [oyster toadfish] NYC Department of Parks and Recreation. “ParKids NYC.” <http://www.nycgovparks.org/kids/index.php?page=library&section=fish> [oysters] MRRI | NOAA CSC. “ACE Basin Species Gallery: American Oyster.” <http://www.dnr.sc.gov/marine/mrri/acechar/specgal/oyster.htm> [lined seahorse] Samford University. “Lined Seahorse, Hippocampus erectus.” 6 May 2003. <http://www4.samford.edu/schools/artsci/biology/vertzoo-03s/ pages/148.htm> [blue crab] Florida Museum of Natural History. “Ichthyology Department: Alligator Gar.” <http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/gallery/Descript/AlligatorGar/ AlligatorGar.html> [sea robin] Wikimedia Commons. “File: SeaRobin LongIslandSound1. jpg.” 4 October 2009. <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SeaRobin_ LongIslandSound1.jpg [flounder] Flounder.tv. “flounder.tv.” <http://www.flounder.tv/img/upload/ flounder-600.jpg> [mud snail] Granite Bay Flycasters. “New Zealand Mud Snails.” <http://www. gbflycasters.org/conservation/projects/New%20Zealand%20Snails/New%20 Zealand%20Snails.htm> Inside front cover; Figures 1.2, 3.2, 3.11 - 3.14, 4.1 - 4.13, 4.19 - 4.27, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1 - 6.19, 7.1 - 7.20, 8.1 - 8.22; spreads pp. 2 - 5, 8 - 9, 18 - 19, 28 - 29, 44 - 45, 46 - 47, 52 - 53, 62 63, 74 - 75, 90 - 91; inside back cover: © Olivia Lau.

Bibliography Able, Kenneth W. and Janet T. Duffy-Anderson. “Impacts of Piers on Juvenile Fishes in the Lower Hudson River.” The Hudson River Estuary. edited by Jeffrey S. Levinton and John R. Waldman. New York : Cambridge University Press, 2006. pp. 428 - 441. Adams, Phillip. “Foreword.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. xii-xiii. Battery Park City Authority. “::: Battery Park City Authority :::.” <http://www. batteryparkcity.org/page/index_battery.html> Benedikt, Michael. “Environmental Stoicism and Place Machismo: A Polemic.” Harvard Design Magazine, Number 16. Winter/Spring 2002. Bone, Kevin, editor. The New York Waterfront: Evolution and Building Culture of the Port and Harbor. New York : The Monacelli Press, Inc. 1997. Charlesworth, Esther. “City Edges.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. 2-10. Department of City Planning City of New York. Vision 2020: New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan. March 2011. Ellingsen, Eric. “Showing Crack.” Envisioning the Bloomingdale: 5 Concepts. edited by Clare Lyster. Chicago : Chicago Architectural Club, 2008. pp. 105-110. Explore Himalaya Travel & Adventure. “Himalaya Ecology.” <http://www.explorehimalaya.com/himalaya_ecology.php> Fien, John. “#15 Beyond The City Edge.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. 234-244. Foreign Office Architects. “Foreign Office Architects | Projects | Yokohama International Port Terminal.” <http://www.f-o-a.net/#/projects/465> Hudson River Park. “Home.” <http://www.hudsonriverpark.org/index.asp> iPay, Ltd. “Rhizopus.” <http://www.mold.ph/rhizopus.htm> Kempf, Petra. You Are the City: Observation, Organization and Transformation of Urban Settings. Baden, Switzerland : Lars Müller Publishers, 2009. Long Island Vision. “Lower Manhattan Transit Map.” <http://www.livision.com/maps. asp> Lyster, Clare. “Empty Urbanism.” Envisioning the Bloomingdale: 5 Concepts. edited by Clare Lyster. Chicago : Chicago Architectural Club, 2008. pp. 115-117. McMillan, Cliff. “Hudson River Park: Urban waterfront renewal for New York City.” The Arup Journal, Feb 2006. Merriam-Webster. “Facet.” <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/facet> Merriam-Webster. “Filter.” <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/filter> 93

Merriam-Webster. “Filtering.” <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/filtering> Merriam-Webster. “Fold.” <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fold> Merriam-Webster. “Folding.” <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/folding> Metropolitan Transportation Authority. “MTA Capital Construction - 7 Subway Extension.” <http://www.mta.info/capconstr/7ext/> Metropolitan Transportation Authority. “MTA Capital Construction - Second Avenue Subway.” <http://www.mta.info/capconstr/sas/index.html> Metropolitan Transportation Authority. “mta.info | Maps.” <http://www.mta.info/ maps/ > Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, Inc. “Michael Van Valkenburgh Assoc. >> Projects >> Urban Design & Campus Planning >> Brooklyn Bridge Park Master Plan.” <http://www.mvvainc.com/project.php?id=86&c=urban_design> Mistur, Mark. “IN>Form | PER<Form >> Eco-Logics: An Architecture of Complicity and Consequence.” 2011. PDF file. Moran, Mary Ann and Dooley S. Kiefer. “The Westway.” The Hudson River Ecosystem. edited by Karin E. Limburg et al. New York : Springer-Verlag, 1986. pp. 131-154. Moran, Mary Ann and Karin E. Limburg. “The Hudson River Ecosystem.” The Hudson River Ecosystem. edited by Karin E. Limburg et al. New York : Springer-Verlag, 1986. pp. 6-39. Mouffe, Chantal. “Artistic Activism and Agonistic Spaces.” ART&RESEARCH: A Journal of Ideas, Contexts and Methods, Volume 1, Number 2. Summer 2007. Moussavi, Farshid. The Function of Form. edited by Daniel Lopez et al. New York : Actar and Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2009. pp. 7-36. National Snow and Ice Data Center. “All About Glaciers.” <http://nsidc.org/glaciers/> Nieuwenhuys, Ed. “Construction of a spider orb web.” January 2006. <http://www. xs4all.nl/~ednieuw/Spiders/Info/Construction_of_a_web.html> NOAA. “NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program: Coral 101.” <http://coralreef. noaa.gov/aboutcorals/coral101/> Park, Kyong / iCUE. “The Urban Ecology of Globalization.” Urban Ecology: Detroit and Beyond. edited by Kyong Park / iCUE. Hong Kong : Map Book Publishers, 2005. pp. 176-187. Perlman, Janice E. “#10 Megacities And The Urban Century: Shrinking World, Growing Cities.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. 168-177. Ratty, Brian D. “How the SLR Camera Works.” <http://www.photo-seminars.com/ BasicPhotography/lesson2.htm> reiser + umemoto. “reiser + umemoto - East River Corridor Project.” <http://www.reiserumemoto.com/>

Rois, Juan Manuel. “Territories of Disinvestment: Towards a New Urban Fabric.” Envisioning the Bloomingdale: 5 Concepts. edited by Clare Lyster. Chicago : Chicago Architectural Club, 2008. pp. 113-114. Shane, David Grahame. “Three Urban Elements.” Recombinant Urbanism: Conceptual Modeling in Architecture, Urban Design, and City Theory. England : John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2005. SHoP Architects. “SHoP Architects >> Projects >> All >> Locations >> New York City >> East River Waterfront.” <http://www.shoparc.com/#/projects/all> Solcomhouse. “Coral Reefs.” <http://www.solcomhouse.com/coralreef.htm> Sorkin, Michael. “#14 From New York To Darwinism: Formulary For A Sustainable Urbanism.” City Edge: Case Studies in Contemporary Urbanism. edited by Esther Charlesworth. Burlington, MA : Architectural Press, 2005. pp. 226-233. University of Wisconsin Eau Claire. “Cave Formations.” <http://www.uwec.edu/jolhm/ cave/caveform2.htm>