Rossitsa Kirilova portfolio
MSAAD ‘12 Columbia GSAPP
Rossitsa Kirilova portfolio
MSAAD ‘12 Columbia GSAPP
Contents Professional work:
Stephen Yablon Architecture, New York, USA, 2012-2015
4
Creda Studio, Sofia, Bulgaria, 2004 - 2010
Competitions
40
Academic Work:
52
Columbia University GSAPP, Master of Science of Advanced Architectural Design, 2011- 2012; UniversitĂ Degli Studi Di Firenze, Florence, Italy, 2007 - 2008 University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Sofia, Bulgaria, 2002 - 2009
Other work:
Written, GSAPP Graphic, GSAPP Fabrication, GSAPP Drawing, UACEG
110
Rossitsa Kirilova
Professional Work at Stephen Yablon Architecture: Jefferson Art Walk
6
Planned Parenthood - Queens
12
United Nations School
22
at Creda Studio: Mountain View Apartments
24
Dikov Residence
32
5
Jefferson Art Walk July 2013 Study Concept & Project Development Revision, Diagrams, Renders Stephen Yablon Architecture New Jersey, USA
Jefferson Art Walk is a study for the redevelopment of a former industrial neighborhood in South Orange, NJ. The project proposes a mix of public, commercial, and artoriented spaces as a way to revitalize the blighted neighborhood.
My responsibilities included redeveloping the master plan, design of the elevations, and preparation and design of the presentation plans, diagrams, renderings.
Existing Factories New Building
Factories to remain & new construction
Public Space Wetlands River Site plan diagram
Select factories are to be adapted, with new insertions framing the new street. The site is re-imagined as a striation of activators and speeds - from the railway to the South, followed by the new pedestrian-friendly street, and framed to the North by the previously covered river, now transformed into a linear leisurely park. Site plan
Typical floor program
The axis of the street connects a series of public spaces from South to North: a pedestrian passageway through a former factory; a main plaza connecting with the railway station; a smaller square towards the river; and a wetlands park and Community center.
Residential Artists’ Lofts Entries Commercial Community Parking Building
Street level program
Programmatically, the first floors are proposed as affordable artists’ lofts that can completely open towards the street, and commercial spaces; while the upper floors house market-priced apartments. Section through Artist’s Lofts
Professional work 7
Apartment Buildings
The living units open up towards the street with balconies or roll-up windows to activate the street. The ground level artists’ lofts, together with designated places for art and pockets of open-ended public space create the “Art Walk”. The treatment of the buildings’ facades breaks down the scale to create a varied backdrop for the city walk.
Typical Apartment view
Typical Apartment plan
Artist’s Loft plan
Artist’s Loft view
Street activation: looking North
Typical elevation
Typical plan
Typical elevation with main public space
Professional work 9
Public Spaces
The “Art Walk� runs parallel with the linear park of the uncovered river. The green and urban reinforce and activate each other, creating a dynamic that enhances the neighborhood.
Wetlands linear park view
Jefferson Art Walk: night view towards main public plaza
Jefferson Art Walk: aerial view 11
Planned Parenthood Queens 2013 - 2015 All phases of design; Architectural Designer / Assistant Project Manager Stephen Yablon Architecture Queens, NY, USA
A former warehouse is transformed into the first Planned Parenthood clinic in the borough of Queens, New York. Unique challenges faced the design: limited choice of locations, leading to less than optimal spaces to fit a vast program; privacy and security concerns, on top of a tight budget and compliance with a number of codes.
My responsibilities in this project included test fits; design from concept through development and construction documents; code, ADA, NFPA 101, and Article 28 compliance; detailing; coordination with consultants; material selection and specification, presentation material preparation, meeting management.
The tension between public and private enforced a “thickening� of the border between building and street - in terms of security, access, and of visual privacy.
Section of original warehouse
The program develops as a gradient of publicness from the street to the back of the lot - with the communication elements and public spaces at the front, recovery rooms and treatment rooms deep into the back.
New section First floor plan
Professional work 13
Patient Spaces
The clinic interior aims at reinforcing an idea of multiplicity of choices, as well as provide a feeling of comfort and safety for the patients. Color is used strategically as an inexpensive way to give interest and identity to the spaces, and serves as an orientation device. LED coves highlight the main interior volumes with warm colors. Surrounding them, a gradient of cool colors - from blue to green - covers the periphery wall.
Recovery room view: the wall treatment forms individual zones for each patient.
First floor color diagram
Typical clinical corridor and rooms
Interior details from construction documents
Recovery room section: skylights bring daylight into the space
Professional work 15
Circulation
The clinic circulation is followed by the color light coves and opens up towards the waiting areas. The egress stairs serve as main communication stairs. Glass walls, doors, and color encourage the usage of the stairs.
Ceiling details - color light cove
Clinical corridor view - from Waiting Area
Stair details - construction documents
Stair West view
Professional work 17
Details & Construction
Interior details: construction documents
Construction: Main Waiting Area
Construction: Exterior
Professional work 19
Public Spaces
The main waiting spaces at the building are bathed in daylight with maximized window openings, while translucent glass protects the privacy within. The seating layout is separated in smaller zones and gives a number of seating options in order to evade the institutional feeling of most clinics’ endless rows of chairs.
First floor Waiting Area
Main Waiting room view towards Check-In Desk
Waiting room ceiling details construction documents
Main Waiting room view - rendering by others
Professional work 21
United Nations International School May 2013 RFP response, winner Concept Development, Hand Sketches Stephen Yablon Architect New York, USA
This winning proposal for the United Nations School examines the possibility of creating an activator for the campus by the treatment of the peripheral wall, while at the same time opening up the building itself onto the surroundings. The proposal is left intentionally sketchy and hand drawn - to demonstrate an initial concept and potential, not a fixed solution.
Hand sketches from the RFP Response Professional work 23
Mountain View Apartments 2006-2010 At Creda Studio Sofia, Bulgaria
A project for a group of residential and mixed use buildings adjacent to the University of National and World Economy in Sofia.
My involvement in this project included design from concept to development and construction documents, details, construction administration, coordination with consultants.
25
Internal Street
The buildings are carefully positioned around an internal street as to provide light, air and views towards Vitosha mountain. A children’s playground at the south end of the internal street activates the space. Cars are parked in an underground level, at the same time sparing as much space as possible for the planting of trees. A restaurant is located in the ground floor of building one. Several shops line the street in buildings 2 and 4.
Site plan
Interior street - the car level is sunk down to ensure better sun exposure and views to the apartments.
Buildings 1 & 2
Building 2, East facade
Building 5, rooftop view
Professional work 27
Plans and Sections 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ТОПЪЛ ПОКРИВ посипка хидроизолация битумна 3 пласта арм. цим. замазка мин. 4 см фолио фибран 8 см 13,45 пароизолация ст. б. плоча
+15.26 14
14
%
+14.50
Кота Било +14,50=615,30
член 93, ал. 2, 22,55 кв.м.
10
+14.50
3
Кота Било +14,50=615,30
+14.20 70
1.60 2.70
16 15
17
4.50
31
96
3
20
6 20
18
14
53
2.60
1.60
2.45
20
18 18
3 17 1.60
2.99
2.61 81 6
18 18
17 3 1.60
2.85
2.61
10.00 6
81
2.85
+2.42
1.60 2.61
685
2.85
+2.93
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. замазка 9 cм ст. бет. плоча
2.85
СПАЛНЯ
15
16
18
ЕТ ПЛАМЕН БО
проектант
16
60
31
55
2.20
2.29
ръководителпроект
Хидроизолация по детайл!
2.50
инж.Борислав Бойчев
2.26 1.55 7 17
10 88
1.05
5
20 5
3.15
В Пл
ЕЛ
Кота нула 0,00=600,80
арх.Дора
проектанти
к. к. к.
арх . Дора Костова арх .Пламен Кирилов
инвеститор
85
50
3.15
2.01
2.10
88
17 88
2.60
20 85 50
3.15
"ТРАНСЛОГ" А
обект
ЖИЛИЩНА Група в упи Х м. "Ст. град", Рн Студ
10
10
3.55
2.30
10
20 5 50
25 60
2.55
+0.50
1407 София, бул."Черни връ
1.25
1.25
ВК
инж. Ралица Кирилова
±0.00
мазе
2.205
2.20 1.05
1.05 5
3.55
2.30
ОВ
С Констр. 24
2.34 2.34
±0.00
1.15
2.26 1.15
1.33
+0.08
+0.08
1.25
съгласували:
81
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см 6
+1.25
±0.00
2.70
2.70
2.70 22
7
17
2.65
странична рег. линия
18 18
3 17
1.175
БАНЯ,WC
2.61
теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
24
2.32
+0.08
±0.00
23
23
23
±0.00
2.65
7 10
6
2.85 2.84
+1.25
24
КУХ.БОКС
теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+1.25
80
63
6
54
2.85 2.07 24 54
2.85 2.07
1.51 29
+4.10
1.17
24
+1.25
2.30
дренаж
20
80 18
18
24
6
2.07
2.25
6
2.60 2.07 54
1.51 2.07
1.34
СПАЛНЯ паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
1.34
18
2.07
ВХОДЕН ВЕСТИБЮЛ теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+5.28
19
2.07
КУХ.БОКС
БАНЯ,WC теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. замазка 9 cм ст. бет. плоча
1.34
3.53
3.53 2.89 23
СПАЛНЯ паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+6.95
+4.10
+2.59
3.39
3.21 5
2.93
2.70
ВХОДЕН ВЕСТИБЮЛ теракот теракол цим. замазка 3,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+5.78
18
Хидроизолация по детайл!
Кота Корниз +10,00=610,80
+8.91
+8.38
49
+3.17
кухня фитнес зала
СТЪЛБИ моз.плочи 3 cм хастар 1 cм ст. бет. плоча
КУХ.БОКС теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
2.67
1.60
2.85
2.61 81 29
+4.10
+0.28
±0.00
КУХ.БОКС
+4.10
+1.25
+0.42
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+9.80
+6.95
теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+5.44
деф. фуга по детайл
пицария основен салон
+9.80
2.50
уличнорег. линия
+3.17
+3.97
СПАЛНЯ
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. замазка 7 cм ст. бет. плоча
+9.80
+6.95
1.51
18
50
+3.50
теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
СПАЛНЯ паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см 5 18 6
+3.82 +3.67 +3.49
+3.82
БАНЯ,WC
БАНЯ,WC теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. замазка 9 cм ст. бет. плоча
КУХ.БОКС теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
54
18
35 3 17 24
+6.95 24
6
+6.95
КОРИДОР 1.07
КУХ.БОКС теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+8.29
2.67
81
1.05
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
8
+5.09
+9.80
18
1.60
2.99
2.61
теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
СПАЛНЯ
+6.71
+12.40
24
+9.80
24
6
+9.80
КОРИДОР
+8.00
ТОПЪЛ ПОКРИВ
31
31
31
16 15
3 17 55 2.60 20
20
18 18
3 17
БАЛКОНИ теракота (гранитогрес) хастар цим. замазка с наклони 5 cm ст. б. плоча 18 см
посипка хидроизолация битумна 3 пласта цим. замазка с наклони мин. 4 см фолио фибран 8 см пароизолация ст. б. плоча
ЕТАЖНА ПЛОЩАДКА
моз.плочи 2 cм хастар 1,5 cм изр. цим. замазка 3,5 cм ст. бет. плоча
1.05
Кота Корниз +10,00=610,80 +9.56
+12.71
+12.25
КУХ.БОКС теракот теракол цим. замазка 4,5 cм шумоизолация 1 см ст. бет. плоча 18 см
1.85
+10.99
+12.71 +12.40
ТОПЪЛ ПОКРИВ посипка хидроизолация битумна 3 пласта арм. цим. замазка с наклони мин. 4 см фолио фибран 8 см пароизолация ст. б. плоча
1.70
ТОПЛИ ТЕРАСИ гранитогрес теракол арм. цимент.замазка 3.5 cm полиетилен дренаж. слой от калибр. речен чакъл Ф 1015 mm геотекстил за дренаж хидроизолация битумна 23 пласта заустена в сифоните(воронките) арм. цимемт. замазка с наклони от 3 6 cm топлоизолация фибран 8 cm пароизолация стоманобет. плоча
2.30
посипка хидроизолация битумна 3 пласта арм. цим. замазка с наклони мин. 4 см фолио фибран 8 см пароизолация ст. б. плоча
70
+13.43
49
ТОПЪЛ ПОКРИВ
Жил. сграда №1, с ма за хранене , гаражи и прил
подобект: 4.40
1
2
4.40
3
4
5
6
7
чертеж
8
фаза
9
TП
мащаб
M 1:50
Building 1 section - D.O.B. drawings
НАДЛЪЖЕН Р част
арх
дата
черте
коре
МАРТ '07
+15.37
+15.37
+14.81
+14.81
З
Е
Ж
Г
Д
В
Б
А
Building 1 section - D.O.B. drawings
ТОПЪЛ ПОКРИВ
площ по чл. 93, ал. 2 0,85х1,5=1,275
+13.21
площ по чл. 93, ал. 2 6,2х0,19=1,178 м кв
ТОПЛИ ТЕРАСИ
33 3 1218
18
3
+12.40
4.50
17
+12.58
гранитогрес теракол арм. цимент.замазка 3.5 cm полиетилен дренаж. слой от калибр. речен чакъл Ф 1015 mm геотекстил за дренаж хидроизолация битумна 23 пласта заустена в сифоните(воронките) арм. цимемт. замазка с наклони от 3 6 cm топлоизолация фибран 8 cm пароизолация стоманобет. плоча
+12.71
0,85
+12.60 +12.25
12
0,19
+12.71
70
70
70
+13.37
Кота Било +14,50=615,30
+14.50
посипка хидроизолация битумна 3 пласта цим. замазка с наклони мин. 4 см фолио фибран 8 см пароизолация ст. б. плоча
60
2.45
БАНЯ,WC
3.50
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. зам. 7 cм ст. бет. плоча
Кота Корниз +10,00=610,80
+10.00 +9.80
20
БАЛКОНИ
54
18
24
+9.80
24
38 20
2.45
1.80
ДНЕВНА паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
1.05
+10.99
теракота (гранитогрес) хастар цим. замазка с наклони 5 cm ст. б. плоча 18 см
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. зам. 7 cм ст. бет. плоча
+6.95
+6.95 2.10
24
20
БАЛКОНИ
53
18
24
6
81
1.05
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
75
2.85
WC
ДЕТСКА СТАЯ
2.07
1.60 2.61
2.85
+8.63
+8.00
теракота (гранитогрес) хастар цим. замазка с наклони 5 cm ст. б. плоча 18 см
2.85
WC
9.80
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. зам. 7 cм ст. бет. плоча
2.85
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
+4.10
+4.10
24
20
БАЛКОНИ теракота (гранитогрес) хастар цим. замазка с наклони 5 cm ст. б. плоча 18 см
2.85 2.08
1.60 2.61
2.85
теракот } 1,5 cм теракол цим. зам. 7 cм ст. бет. плоча
2.85
въздух абонатна
+0.50
ОВ
С Констр.
ВК
17
2.10
10
2.30
1407 София, бул."Черни връх"41, тел. 862 21 86
арх . Дора Костова арх .Пламен Кирилов
инвеститор
73
к. арх. Р. Кирилова к. арх. С. Симеонов к. арх. О. Дорева
"ТРАНСЛОГ" АД
ЖИЛИЩНА Група в упи ХІV2027,2028, кв. 172, м. "Ст. град", Рн Студентски,София
3.22
подобект: север 2
3.10
строителна линия
82
З
1.61
строителна линия север 4
4.24
Е
1.11
Ж
5.25
Г
2.87
Д
2.75
В
2.75
Б
2.75
А
2.87
арх.Дора Костова
проектанти
обект 84
инж. Дарина Христо
инж. Камен Златаре
ЕТ ПЛАМЕН БОРИСОВ
ръководителпроект
2.20
1.50
3.15
3.22 5
0,00=600,80
инж. Атанас Пунев
В План.
проектант
1.05
7
1.58
2.30
инж. Ралица Кирилова
ЕЛ инж.Борислав Бойчев
28
2.50
2.50
2.51
2.62
2.59
4
1.25
2.10
2.16
дренаж
+0.08
±0.00
20
±0.00
+0.20
Хидроизолация по детайл!
+0.14
Рампа
саморазливна мин. замазка ст. б. настилка 10 см баластра трамб. терен
съгласували:
24
6
+1.25
18
8
+0.595
2.20
22 60
+0.14
2.30
2.30
паркет 1.8 см гланц. цим. замазка 3 cм шумоизолация 1 cм ст. бет. плоча 18 см
81
1.05 1.05 46
20
20 18
±0.00
1.42
WC
ДЕТСКА СТАЯ
+0.60
7
Хидроизолация по детайл!
+2.93
+2.30
хумус 15 20 см чакъл речен 12 см мембрана за защита от корени геотекстил битумна хидроизолация 3 пласта пароизолация циментова замазка за наклон стоманобетонна плоча
настилка теракот хастар арм. замазка 4 см геотекстил 2 пласта хидроизолация битумна, заустена арм. замазка 36 см, с наклони 1 пласт пвц фолио 4 см фибран пароизолация ст. б. плоча
53
18
24
6
81
1.05
ДЕТСКА СТАЯ
2.08
1.60 2.61
+5.15
2.85
+5.78
Жил. сграда №1, с магазин, заведение за хранене , гаражи и прилежащ подземен гар
чертеж фаза
TП
мащаб
M 1:50
НАПРЕЧЕН РАЗРЕЗ ББ част
арх
дата
МАРТ '07
чертеж
10/12
корекции
West View
Buildings 2 & 4
Building 3
Building 5
Professional work 29
А
Б
В
Г
Д
Е
Ж
77
58
1,20
80
77
3,18
3,11
18
3,22
73
2,94
60
35
81
1,49
46
35
14,07
17
82
35
26
6,66
З
A
6
6
150 160
75 240
71
71
балкон 4,53 кв. м.
77
30
30
56
2,27
60
36
75 240
1,03
67
60 55
K24
1
120 240
балкон 2,71 кв. м.
60
30
30
1,10
60
120 160
1,10
60
53
53
2
5
30
30
30
K7
5
стая 13,95 кв.м.
1,10
30
35
K35
K37
23
80
80
80
1,10
1,39
80
12
4,63
4,03
4,03
1,07
12
70 207
12
12
80 207
80
3,80
4,79
6,00
2,20
2,20
балкон 7,15 кв. м.
4,90
12
12
80 207
дневна с трапезария 25.42 кв.м.
12
1,77
кухн.бокс 5,17 кв.м.
2,08
12
80
88
3,16
стая 13,86 кв.м.
2,93
3,48
19
12
15
1,28
70
1,62
1,62
1,47
K38
87
60
25
1,31
1,31
25
10025 207
28
31
K2
18
18
K8
25
25
25
19
2,00
WC 2,09 кв.м.
1,15
60
1,12
70 207
2,32
ателие 2 101,66 кв.м.
антре с коридори 7.14 кв.м.
1,05
2,16
12
баня,WC 5,45 кв.м.
K1
7,35
2,59
6,00
3
2,20
1,55
1,63
баня,WC 2,89 кв.м.
K26
3
1,25
1,55
1,55
Ш1
2,24
1,55
2,35
детска стая 13,65 кв.м.
3,10
70 207
12
80
64
2,60
10
45
K9
K3
2,60
18
18
5
2,85
5
2,85
80
1,25
+8,29
90
5
5
25
+6,95
80
80
12
1,15
1,15
балкон 8,78 кв. м.
K39
56
12
10
10 12
12
3,00
ап.4 90,22 кв.м.
1,00
70
25
25
25
4
47
7
5
K4
25
5
общи части 20,56 кв.м. 25
5
1,10
90
1,00
4
40
10
K27
10
спалня 14,50 кв.м.
80
80
3,50
12
60
12
12
3,98
70 207
24
3,50
3,50
балкон 3,38 кв. м.
1,85
80
19,78
5,87
3,75
2,55
кухн.бокс 4,86 кв.м.
25 45
25
K40
16
K30
50
25
5
30
K5
71
25
25
25
25
75
K10
баня,WC 4,09 кв.м. 1,64
1,88
2,33
2,55
1,83
1,85
80
3,35
дневна с кът за хранене 18,22 кв.м.
12
антре 5,92 кв.м.
80
15
1,50
преддверие 3,54 кв.м.
10
80
3,75 4,10
5
1,37
5
70
6
2,17
кухн.бокс 4,41 кв.м.
1,56
ап. 9 83,40 кв.м.
антре 6,53 кв.м.
1,43
65
29,09
3,85
2,50
13
75
6
8
75 240
17
35
61
1,04
1,99
1,25
1,11
1,11
21
0
1,0
1,25
K28
80
детска стая 13,26 кв.м.
80
12
12
11
80
K12
3,33
29
58
3,08
70 207
3,33
2,25
92
92
1,25
+8,63
92
1,25
1,45
2,11
WC 1,95 кв.м. 1,80
Ш6
+6,95
1,45
25
25
48
43
43
2,01
общи части 18,88 кв.м.
29
3x16,76/29
1,94
1,94
+8,13
Ш1
балкон 2,93 кв. м.
140 160
0 10 7 20
K41
12
0
1,0
65
12
30
30
12
12
19
25
4,26
80
балкон 6,46 кв. м.
K6
K31
2,50
3,30
3,73
3,73
***
70 207
80
преддверие 1,91 кв.м.
5
K11
дневна с кът за хранене 19,47 кв.м.
70 207
12
12
3,60
3,85
3,85
3,85
2,05
баня,WC 3,45 кв.м.
1,98
спалня 12,02 кв.м.
30,61
6
7
37
37
25
25
K42
7
59
1,72
Ш4
1,55
Ш3
2,40
2,40
70
1,60
1,97
WC 2,17 кв.м. 1,80
мокро 2,01 кв.м.
K17
100 207
16
25
25
7,05
K13
33
50
7
Б
72
28
1,20
80
18 12
60
46
75
1,30
52
80 160
30
3,65
12
3,04
25
1,80
30 2,59 12
2,17
12
1,35
1,45
1,20
2,41
1,61
4,24
1,11
31
60
14
75
1,19
1,20
2,11
1,59
21
80 240
12
4,50
30
80 180
1,50
2,78 80 6 12 12
70 207
60 55 1,23 70
10
12 74 1,00
12 2,03 12 1,95
1,61
5 18 1,55 1,61 2,03
Ш8 29
21
80 2,12 25
* 77 70 12 12 53 4,17
220 180
4,35 6,41 30 1,44 6
12 12
9x16,8/29
29 29 29 29 29 29 1,69
155 160
6,66 30
8x16,8/29 26 81 70
1,69 25 1,89 12 4,40 30 1,44 6
100 207 80 207
В
6 91
В 80 240
41 6 1,14 30 1,35 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 1,53
Ш 11
80 240 12
30 4,14 80 207 80 207
1,50 70 16
12 2,36 12
6,73 80 240
30
97
185 160 30 4,14 12 2,36 12 2,15 4,58
1,32
30
*** 255 180
Ш 12
25 1,40 75 94
2,87 5 25
30 3,34
1,50
39 70 8
12 1,83 12 2,22
66 12 67 80 76 12
80 207 250 180
12 5,37 30 1,50
7x16,76/29
Ш 13 1,39 12
80 240
1,30 29 29 29 29
90 240
7x16,76/29
1,30
1,75 1,35 25
15
29 29 1,35 41 70 6
1,68 1,78 57 45 3,79
80 207 80 240
1,18 12 4,30 30 1,50
1,30 20
18
3,04
2,97
98
60
ап. 10 104,60 кв.м.
12
17
60
60
12
входен вестибюл 9,80 кв.м.
12
27
2,85
2,40
1,47 1,60
K14
3,04
60 55
2
145 160
Ш14
29 29 29 29 29 29 1,00
18 12 12
19 1,00 39
5 18 Ш 15 1,55 12
70 207 160 160
Б
30 80
стая 12,74 кв.м.
70 207
80
38
20
20
7
8
40
40
12
70
K43
10
K32
1,20
1,13
15
12
баня,WC 5,10 кв.м.
1,08
K15
1,19
1,19
2,30
12
12
12
76
балкон 8,42 кв. м.
75
8
1,82
3,00
1,23 1,58 1,30
4,47 30 1,15 1,15
12 47 75 8
80 240
70 207
2,89 12
80 207
12 4,47
1,55
71
12
4,20 1,55
K33
2,35
2,19
80 207
12
1,0 0
56
69
49
30
60 2,89 12 2,93
70
55 80 99
99
12
1
155 180
60
80
12
12
12
70 207 62
80
88 12
1,09
1,27
63
5,77
6,34
62
62
K44
66
2,26
1,00
9
4,9
2,26
2,26
3,28
K23
8
6,2
4,04
кухн.бокс 5,28 кв.м.
Ш7
4,27
спалня 12,69 кв.м.
1,48
5,09
дневна с трапезария 23,53 кв.м.
80 207
***
дрешник 5,45 кв.м.
3,89
5,77
62 80 8
12 2,93 2,02
1,75
25 5,17 30 1,48 6
80 240
25 12
25 1,66
3,01
226 180
12 3,30 30 1,54
K34
49 1,70 23 25 22 45 75 33 12 76 1,20
9
71
71
K45
30
30
0
30
75 240
1,0
9
15
40
1,34
K36
120 180
балкон 2,14 кв. м.
1,10
45 160
1,10
170 160
2,59 2,30 3,40
A
35 55 1,40 75 17 40 35 2,92
3,22 73 3,11 82
35 2,87 3,67 4,44 3,85
64 1,70 70 45 75 20 1,01 1,20 1,64
1,61 4,24 1,11
15,18
А
Б
В
Г
Д
Е
Ж
З
ВК
TП
Жил. сграда №1, с магазин, заведение за хранене , гаражи и прилежащ подземен гараж
арх ОКТОМВРИ '06
дата
част
5/12 корекции
чертеж
РАЗПРЕДЕЛЕНИЕ ЕТАЖ 3 кота +6.95
M 1:50
мащаб
фаза
чертеж
подобект
"ТРАНСЛОГ" АД
к. арх. С. Симеонов к. арх. О. Дорева к. арх. Р. Кирилова
ЖИЛИЩНА Група в упи ХІV2027,2028, кв. 172, м. "Ст. град", Рн Студентски,София
инвеститор
арх . Дора Костова арх .Пламен Кирилов
проектанти
арх.Дора Костова
1407 София, бул."Черни връх"41, тел. 862 21 86 ръководителпроект
обект
инж. Дарина Христова
инж. Камен Златарев
ЕТ ПЛАМЕН БОРИСОВ
инж.Борислав Бойчев
проектант
инж. Атанас Пунев
В План.
ОВ
инж. Ралица Кирилова
С Констр. ЕЛ
съгласували:
Зидариите се изпълняват с керамични тухли, при външни стени топлоизолацията се полага отвън.
Забележка: Отворите по фасади са дадени за завършени фасади. Зидарските размери са с луфт от по 1 см от всяка страна. За вътрешните отвори на врати са дадени столарските размери. Зидарските размери са с луфт от по 1 см от всяка страна. Вратите се оставят с зидарски размер на 2,08 от кота готов под.
дрешнициподоветеракота стени и таванилатекс
тераси подове гранитогрес стени шпакловка, оцв. фасаген таванимин. мазилка
Бани и тоалетни подоветеракота стенифаянс при кухн. нареждане до 8 см под тавана таванипр. мазилка
Кухни и кухненски боксове: подоветеракота стени фаянс при кухн. обзавеждане до 1,40 м от готов под нагоре шпакловка, латекс тавани шпакловка, латекс
Спални и детски стаикакто дневни
Дневни: подовепаркет/ лам. паркет стени и тавани шпакловка, латекс
Апартаменти: входни вестибюли, антрета и коридори подоветеракота стени и таванишпакловка, латекс
Общи части: подовегранитогрес или моз. плочи стени и тавани шпакловка,латекс
ОБРАБОТКА НА ПОМЕЩЕНИЯТА:
Dikov Residence 2008-2010 As lead architect in Creda Studio Bistritsa, near Sofia, Bulgaria
Situated in a small lot, this onefamily house had to be small but accommodating the family’s changing needs; to be well situated in the lot, take advantage of the views, and maintain a compact volume for thermal efficiency.
The steep terrain makes the roof the fifth facade, viewed from the entrance. The slope allows for a convenient interlocking of living and service rooms with access at grade.
33
Site and Plans
1
865,50 866,00
2
3
4
6 6
865,50
C
866,00
2
B
7
7,5% ,00
866,00
865,00
867
The plans allow for future development and expansion according to the needs of the family.
Site plan
8
866,50
0,00=869,55
867,00
867.00
869.03
3
867.83
A
869,50
867,50
868.83
868.60
3
867,00 867,50 868,00 868,50
867,25
869,00
868,00
7%
868,50
1
11,90 %
The slope allows for a convenient placement of both living and service rooms at grade - the garage is easily accessible via a ramp to the North. Over it, the terrace of the living room is overlooking the garden from above. At the South edge, the same level connects with the terrain.
Diagram
866,025
The size and slope of the terrain, along with the client’s wishes for a climateeffective house dictated the design. Using these constraints as a tool, the design of the house was developed. The main body of the house is oriented towards the best views and sun, while the roof pitch assumes a full South exposition in order to place solar panels. The volume of the house had to be compact to avoid thermal loss.
altitude 871,00 870,50 870,00 869,50 869,00 868,50 868,00 867,50 867,00 866,50 866,00 865,50 865,00 864,50
869,00
2 4 5
869,50 870,00
1
870,50 871,00
870,50
LEGEND 1 pathway 2 garage 3 steps 4 gazebo 5 well 6 rainwate 7 septic p 8 thermop
A 2
3
4
A
1
1
C
2
C
3
C
4
4
C
3 2
***
4
3
B
B
***
2 B
B
1
1
6 9
1
6
8
7
1
5
7
1
9
1
5
A
A
8 A
A
A
2
3
4
2
A
1
3
1 living room 2 dining room 3 kitchen 4 guest room 5 foyer 1 living6 room bathroom 2 dining7 WC room 3 kitchen 8 closet 4 guest9 exterior room fireplace 5 foyer 6 bathroom 7 WC 8 closet 9 exterior fireplace
First floor plan
4
1
2
3
Ground floor plan
4
A
1
C
C
5 1
B
B
-3.45
1
1 -3.45 4
-4.55 -2.92 2
3 A
1
2
A
A
3
4
1 garage 2 cellar 3 sauna 4 boiler 5 gym
Professional work 35
Details The roof detail had to solve the selfimposed problems of geometry and rainwater run-off. For reasons of energy efficiency the terraces are structurally independent.
Detail study Detail study, South-West facade
-bitumen roof covering -waterproofing two layers -wood sheating 2,5cm -truss 10x12cm
-bitumen roof covering -waterproofing two layers -wood sheating 2,5cm -truss 10x12cm -reinforced concrete beam 25x40cm
tin plating
21 05 1 5 15 8 3 12 2 15 05 8 15
-wood fillet -xps insulation 2cm -reinforced concrete 15x42cm -veneer 0,5cm -xps insulation 8cm -mineral plaster 0,5cm
405
10 18
34 5 34
5
25
10
-xps insulation 5cm -reinforced concrete beam 25Ń…50cm -veneer 0,5cm -xps insulation 8cm -mineral plaster 0,5cm 1 05 5 12 65 8 7
-xps insulation 5cm -brick wall 12cm -brick filling 6cm -veneer 1cm -xps insulation 8cm -mineral plaster 0,5cm -wood louvre 6x1,5cm reinforced concrete beam 18x50cm
mineral wool 12cm reinforced concrete slab 14cm gypsum rendering 1,5cm latex paint
52
4
18
65
75 55 9 5
14
18
4
2 15 14 25
12
18
8
233
xps insulation 4cm roller blinds
detail 2 M1:5
05 1
parquet 1,9cm hydrophobic plywood 0,5cm panel heating 7cm reinforcing grid XPS insulation 4cm sound insulation 1cm reinforced concrete slab 14cm suspended ceiling porous strip
41 1
15
15
25
8
05
roller blinds
4
26
40
14
15
flooring "Werzalit" mounting grid "Werzalit" waterproofing stucco tilt 4.5-2.5cm reinforced concrete 14cm screeds 1cm mineral plaster 0,5cm
stainless steel profile 4x4cm stainless steel profile 4x4cm glass railing
1.05
1.445 1.41
63 77
REHAU pvc profile 70x40/60/100 14
195
18
reinforced concrete column D30cm
31
4
detail 3 M1:5
Professional work 37
Construction
Competitions
Yona on The Beach: Far Rockaways MoMa PS1, with Stephen Yablon Architecture, New York, 2013
42
House of Fairy Tales: Hans Christian Andersen Museum, solo entry, 2013
44
41
Far Rockaways April 2013 Proposal to the MoMA PS1 call for ideas, selected entry Concept & Plan Development, Animation Direction & Execution Stephen Yablon Architecture New York, USA
1
2
4
5
Stills from the “Yona on the Beach” animation. Full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4D6FKc3l1I
The Far Rockaways MoMA PS1 call for ideas resulted in a 3 minute video animation titled “Yona on the Beach”. The proposal investigates the applicability of Yona Friedman’s utopian project in today’s context of rising sea
levels and climate change. Friedman’s speculative project is re-imagined as a highly realistic and pragmatic solution. The houses are lifted up on a oil-rig type of structure, letting the force
of the ocean run its course beneath the residential layer above. The project is meant as a provocation and critique of the current building practices in beach communities in the U.S.
3
6
Professional work Competitions 43
Andersen House of Fairy Tales November 2013 Competition Solo Entry Odense, Denmark
Hans Christian Andersen is considered the father of the modern fairy tale. The real fascination of his work is not in creating worlds in their own magical bubble, but in blurring the line between those worlds and the everyday. Many stories take place in
mundane settings of his contemporary Denmark, but even when he takes us to fantastical settings one still keeps a sense of reality, allowing the fairy tale to transcend into the everyday world and stay with the reader.
45
Concept
Exhibition concept diagram
In turn, The House of Fairy Tales aims to do the same. It tells the story of Andersen’s life and work, in the form of a timeline, developed along a single exhibition path, and interrupts the timeline to take a closer look at a number of fairy tales. The fairy tale spaces follow the main narrative chronologically or thematically, revealing connections, relationships, and new meaning behind the fairy tales - not only that of the curator’s vision, but open also to the interpretation of the visitor. The circulation path is introverted and closed to the outside, while the fairy tale spaces are looking out, projecting onto the city and the garden. From inside the fairy tale expositions, projections, screens take advantage of the views towards Odense, making it a part of the “stage”. The footprint of the new building leaves maximum possible space for Lotze’s garden. Part of the program is tucked underground, and a slope and earthworks form the entrance to the building ~3 meters below the level of the street.
View towards Odense
Site specific prints and projections incorporate the views into the exhibition. Illustrations - characters; projections, screens
Interactive “stage set”
Fairy tale space concept diagram
Fairy tale space open towards city Timeline - open to the inside
Timeline path and Fairy tale spaces relationship - section diagram
#20514
Transversal section
#20514
Plan
Longitudinal section
#20514
#20514
Competitions 47
Visitors’ Experience The circulation paths of the exhibition define the public space of the lobby that flows directly into the garden. The massing for the administrative program, classrooms and cinema is adjacent to the public lobby, and the existed listed buildings are now opening onto a courtyard. Lotze’s garden is addressed as a public space within the city, towards which the lobby attaches itself. The garden’s vegetation creates a gradient from open space to a forest-like enclosure from West to East, with the lower vegetation towards the ex Thomas Thriges Gd.
Main inner courtyard Opposite: exploded axonometry
A greater diversity of vegetation, allowing for different textures, colors and layering throughout the seasons, should be selected. The beginning of the exhibition from the lobby is a ramp, dedicated to the Age of Andersen, leading up to the level of the House of Birth. There, in between the existing buildings, are the spaces of the first fairy tales - chosen for a period of time or permanently. A new courtyard echoes the semi-open space of the lobby and reveals the elevations of the existing buildings.
The end of the exhibition lands on top of the ticketing office, where the visitors can choose to go on the upper level to the library. The coffee shop and gift shop are located on ground floor, opening towards the lobby.
Exhibition ramp
Fairy Tale space
Circulation diagram
Skin
Exhibition ramps and spaces configuration
Ground Floor and Administration massing Garden and Lobby
#20514
Competitions 49
Academic Work
Summer 2011: California High Speed Rail, San Francisco Mission Bay station
54
Spring 2012: The Dictionary of Received Ideas, New York
68
Fall 2007: Ponte Verrazzano, Florence, Italy
90
Winter 2009: Opera House, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
98
53
California High Speed Rail summer 2011 Critics: Nanako Umemoto, Jesse Reiser Selected for Abstract publication The California High Speed Rail project proposes the whole length of the rail as a coherent system, using the catenary as the operating element. It arrives in a place and reacts to the existing conditions with a different configuration, while amplifying the existing conditions. San Francisco Mission Bay station sits a block away from Mission Channel, a remnant of the former Mission Bay, directly connected to San Francisco Bay. In it is situated the only floating home community in the city. The strip of water still attracts many of the animal and plant species typical for the bay, that are rarely seen in the city itself. Amplifying these conditions, the High Speed Rail multiplies the water edge into the area of the city, allowing for the plants and water to infiltrate the urban tissue and attract in turn the fauna that comes with it.
55
Precedent to System Precedent Study Hangars D’Orly
Section
Inverted V corrugation
Detail of horizontal section: corrugation
System
elevation
axonometry
plan no urban condition speeding - linear
rural linear
urban planar
dense urban vertical stacking
The system takes the form of the catenary that spreads throughout the length of the California High Speed Rail, and changes its configuration according to the urban condition. The corrugation of the catenary acts as structure, skin, MEP, and space-defining element at the same time, and can hold program in its thickness. In the Mission Bay station, the corrugation complicates in the form of the inverted V corrugation, allowing for greater stability and incorporating a window system in the structural skin itself. Academic work 57
San Francisco Mission Bay San Francisco stops: Mission Bay and Transbay Terminal
residential use
The Mission Bay station of the California High Speed rail is in a leisureoriented location in the city of San Francisco. It is close to an university campus and the China Basin channel - a remnant of the former Mission Bay. Along that stretch of water still live many of the species that were attracted there by the former bay. The only community of floating homes is situated in the channel. To amplify these conditions, the proposal is for multiplying the channels in order to also multiply the city’s connection with the water, to create conditions for more floating homes, and to incorporate the water into the future campus.
commercial use
parks and open public spaces
Site plan with new canals and floating homes
Academic work 59
Organization
Underground level: High speed rail level
To connect the new Mission Bay station to its context, the public plaza spreads along the length of the stations and reaches down towards the High Speed Rail level. An intermediate level negotiates between the urban level and the two rail levels. Above the platforms, the retail and food program of the station is develops on mezzanines, formed by the corrugation, suspended above the tracks and platforms.
Roof lines
hotel
bus, park
offices
hanging program: retail, food court rail intermediate level
High Speed Rail sloped plaza
Sections
bus stop, park
a Longitudinal section
hotel
The catenary system bifurcates to form the stacked tunnels. Reaching the station, the system unweaves to form the flat platforms on both levels and the roof, and then spans vertically to form the tower of the hotel.
Transversal sections a
b
c
d
b
c
d
additional program
e
f
rail level
g
h high speed rail level
e
f
offices
intermediate level
g
h
Outside-In
Bird’s eye view
The elements of the system serve as structure and skin at the same time, as well pockets for use of the program in the vertical condition, and for the installation, in the horizontal condition. The platforms and additional program are formed by the corrugation. The additional program is suspended above the platforms by the bifurcation of the corrugation.
Interior Rail and suspended program
Academic work 65
Dictionary of Received Ideas spring 2012 Critic: Enrique Walker Studio partners: Belen Gandara, Tanita Choudhury, Giovanni Fruttaldo Selected for Abstract publication
The Dictionary of Received Ideas identifies architectural received ideas - things that were first proposed as a solution to a problem, but then repeated when the problem was no longer present, depleting the move of meaning. Using the dictionary as a design device precludes pre-conceived ideas. A new meaning and concept is found in the process, one that most likely has not been anticipated. From that moment, the received idea is no longer important - it is removed as a scaffold for the design process.
69
Manual OUTERWEAR
Each received idea is traced in its development in order to determine what was lost since it was first conceived. A manual sets the rules for designing a true copy of the received idea.
Outerwear The first explored manual is the Outerwear: a building with a decorative skin, that looks as structure. Genealogy and manual by Jing Xien.
3
5
The opaqueness of the façade cannot be less than 5% or greater than 50%.
The coverage of the outwear of the building should be Maximum 95% to Minimum 45%. 5% of total façade area should be the building entrance.
a user’s manual
5% of total facade area is Entrance
95% of total facade area
5% opaqueness
6
50% opaqueness
4 No openings of the facade can be greater than 5 times the smallest one.
L
S
45 % of total facade area
L > 5S S = Smallest opening of the facade L = Largest opening of the facade
The material of the performing building structure should not be the same as the material of the façade structure.
S
L
Elevation
Elevations
Enlarged elevation detail
PERFORMING STRUCTURE
2
Performing Structure to support the entire building
The performing structural system should not be same as the façade structural system.
1 The performing building structure cannot be an exterior structural system supporting floor plates. The minimum distance between the edge of the horizontal floor plate and the vertical performing building structure is 5’
Building Envelope
Building Performing Structure
Building Plan
Building Section
Building Envelope
Building Performing Structure
MATRYOSHKA Matryoshka The second explored manual is the Matryoshka: a building within a building. Manual by Eduardo Rega Calvo.
RECEIVED
HOST
Outermost layer of the Matryoshka. Construct a volume (out of floor, walls and roof), that is exposed to the exterior elements. Can be perforated.
Roof: Uppermost plane or planes (in case of pitched)
GUEST
vertical enclosure
1
a user’s manual
The guest must be replica of the host at a smaller scale.
Floor
An inner layer of the Matryoshka. Construct at least one volume (out of floor, walls and roof), smaller than, and inside the host architecture. Can be perforated.
2 Roof: Uppermost plane or planes (in case of pitched)
Wall x 4 or other
Floor
There must be at least 1+n guests. They cannot interpenetrate
The first guest cannot be smaller than 50% of the host Any two guests cannot be smaller than 50% of each other.
Section Perpective
33
Section Perpectives
55
The host and guest The host and guest >60cm >60cm architectures can only architectures can only touch each other one touch each other onon one their faces. The rest of of their faces. The rest of of faces between host thethe faces between host and guest must have and guest must have at at least 60cm separaleast 60cm of of separation. tion.
>60cm >60cm
>60cm >60cm
>60cm >60cm
There may perforations both There may bebe perforations both Guests and Host. The logic onon Guests and Host. The logic of of their patterns must identical, their patterns must bebe identical, perforations must misbutbut perforations must bebe misaligned in orthogonal views. aligned in orthogonal views. Ratio between solid and void Ratio between solid and void Guests can’t be mobile. must of 2:1. must bebe of 2:1. pattern there must In In thethe pattern there must bebe at at least 2+n perforations. least 2+n perforations.
6
6 Guests can’t be mobile.
6 Guests can’t be mobile.
Elevations Elevations
44
The Guest and Host The Guest and thethe Host must have structural must have structural integrity, and enough integrity, and enough re-resistance piled sistance to to bebe piled or or hanged from each other. hanged from each other.
6 Guests can’t be mobile. The guest’s outer surface (the The guest’s outer surface (the addition sides that addition of of thethe sides that areare The Roofs of bothmust be touching host) notnot touching thethe host) must be guests and hosts are protected by the host in at least protectednot byaccessible. the host in at least 50% total surface. 50% of of it’sit’s total surface.
7
7
7
The Roofs of both Elevations Elevations guests and The hosts are Roofs of both not accessible. guests and hosts are not accessible.
Section Perpective Section Perpective
7 The Roofs of both guests and hosts are not accessible.
Academic work 71
Outerwear: From Rules to Concept
Rules The site is extruded upwards and the resulting volume is carved for light. Following the 50% rule of outerwear coverage, the inner surfaces of the carvings are treated as outerwear, while the outer surfaces are left solid. Patches of outerwear on these solid faces fulfill the remaining surface of the requirements.
extrusion
outer surfaces
carving for light
outerwear
program
public space
internalized public space, fragmented program
Concept This operation resulted in an unified internalized public space that negotiates between the fragmented conditions below and above and intensifies their connections. The horizontal condition of outerwear allow for the unified public plaza to be suspended and not touch the sides of the volume.
hanging public level
Academic work 73
Configuration
Fragmentation The carvings for light give the organization of the spaces. The big opening brings the city in and forms the area of the internalized public space above it. This plaza spills down towards the fragmented artists’s studios and forms the spaces of the auditoriums and the administration. The auditoriums and public path take advantage of the opening and are turned towards it, while the administration is positioned towards the more private zone. Above, the museum towers, autonomous and specialized, communicate visually between each other through the screen of the outerwear. The hanging public level negotiates between the two fragmented conditions.
axonometry
exhibition towers auditoriums, administration
hanging public level
artists’ studios
exploded axonometry
Academic work 75
Below and Above Public Path
hanging public plaza
The public path connects the city to the elevated public space above the big opening. The path itself develops behind the opening, taking advantage of it. The spaces of the auditoriums and the administration are positioned along the path.
auditorium
The slanted public plaza is treated as a unified stepped space. On its main level land all the escalators from the towers above and the elevators from below. administration
auditorium
artists’ studios
exhibition tower
exhibition tower
exhibition tower exhibition tower
exhibition tower
hanging public plaza
Academic work 77
Towers and Section
MEP
Structure and Circulation The circulation and structure and the installations of each tower forms two helixes and occupies the perimeter, leaving maximum area of exhibition space. Each tower has alternating floor heights, preconditioned by the different span of each side of the tower and therefore of the span of the escalator.
plan
structure, circulation
exhibition towers
hanging public plaza
auditorium
administration
auditorium
artists’ studios
Academic work 79
81
Matryoshka: From Rules to Concept screen
poché
Rules The cube is defaced by extruding the sides in a different livable poché creating different conditions on each side. The consecutive guests are scaled down, rotated, and hung from each other inside the guest.
screen
poché
poché
The openings of each face is identical to the openings on the corresponding faces of both guests.
guest 2
guest 1
host
museum
theatre
performing arts school
Concept &Â Configuration This operation resulted in an internalized public space that while separating the program, connects its parts and intensifies their connections. Having a sequence of public conditions and a series of programs, the fragmentation and connectivity gives a new organization to the program.
fragmentation of 3 cultural institutions re-organization of the institutions museum
school
theatre
rentable spaces
museum research center
theatre auditorium
museum permanent collection
museum temporary exhibitions
experimental theatre auditorium
performing arts school
theatre foyer
Academic work 83
Horizontal in-betweens
Section and Site museum permanent collection
museum storage
performing arts school
garden
museum research center
experimental theatre
theatre auditorium
rentable spaces
Academic work 87
Verrazzano Pathway 2007 Projct partner: Karolina Słocińska Università degli studi di Firenze Critic: Prof. Cremonini Florence, Italy
The brief for the project suggested duplicating the existing Verrazzano bridge in Florence. Instead, we proposed to turn the new bridge into a pathway, turning attention to certain aspects of the city that have been more or less forgotten: the river Arno itself, greenery in the city, open public spaces for idle walks and/or jogging. å Thus, the “bridge” begins at the existing ponte Verrazzano runs along the river, connects two of the ancient watch-towers of the city, and reaches Piazza Santa Croce. There, it ends with a theatrical flight of stairs for contemplation of the piazza and the church.
91
River to City Itinerary A pedestrian bridge, incorporating greenery and shade departs from Verazzano bridge and forms an itinerary connecting several neglected parts of the city. It departs from the existing Verazzano bridge, stops at Teatro dell’Acqua, connects the old watch towers Torre della Zecca and Porta San Niccolo; crosses the river once more at Ponte alle Grazie and finishes with a viewing platform at Piazza Santa Croce.
Itinerary through Florence To Porta San Niccolo
The module of the bridge reintroduces greenery into the city; - creates new points of view towards well-known landmarks; - creates more pedestrian space in the most crowded streets in the city; - by night, activates the space with light and projections.
Light and water diffusion brings awareness and emphasizes the contact with the river.
Ponte Verazzano view
The bridge connecting Torre della Zecca and Porta San Niccolo
Section
Plan
Elevation Ponte Verazzano view
Academic work 93
City
Day and night views from the inner city section of the pathway.
Academic work 95
Pedestrian bridge day view
Pedestrian bridge night view
Opera House 2008-2009 Diploma project Instructor: Prof. Blagovest Valkov Plovdiv, Bulgaria
The Plovdiv Opera House is located in an otherworldly forest on an island in the Maritsa river. The building has to blend in, rather than overcome its surroundings, and use the forest as a natural ‘filter’ for the minds of opera-goers.
The forest is infiltrated and activated by the wandering columns that in places carry additional functions and blur the boundaries of the opera house, leading towards it.
99
Concept
The island forest
The field of columns spreads into the forest, carrying activities.
The Opera is situated on a neglected island in Maritsa river. Being close to the water and to the city center, the island is perfect for a cultural park that would also rekindle the connection between the city and the river.
In this field of trees the Opera house acts as a center in a field of activators - columns, dispersed throughout the island, carrying various activities and infrastructure, concentrating to shape the Opera House itself in the area of the island closest to the city center and overlooking the river.
The columns infiltrate the forest, activate the island and blur the boundary between the island and the building. The vertical elements also shape the interior
The columns blur the boundaries between the forest and the building and reinforce the capacity of the park to act as a filter for the minds of the visitors. Similar vertical elements shape the ceiling of the interior of the Opera with the silhouette of the mountains.
Site plan Academic work 101
The Forest for the Trees
South-East
Towards the tip of the island the columns concentrate to form the building of the Opera House. The trees make way for a large public space open to the river and the city center. The field of the columns turn the building into an immersive environment, one with the surroundings. Towards the entrance
1 auditorium 2 foyer 3 wardrobe 4 cafĂŠ 5 orchestra 6 stage 7 stage pocket 8 tickets 9 dressing room 10 choir 11 decor workshop 12 decor storage13 loading dock 14 restroom 15 museum 16 director 17 secretary 18 meeting room 19 office 20 press-meeting room 21 technical 22 lodge 23 balcony 24 rehearsal choir 25 rehearsal soloists 26 rehearsal orchestra 27 library 28 costume storage 29 costume workshop 30 orchestra dressing 31 orchestra 32 instruments storage 33 parking
A A -1.90 -0.89
14 14 9 9
-1.90
13
-0.89
14 9 9 10 14
13
11
11
10
B
10
-0,89
B
11
10
-0,89
9 9
9
9
9
10 9 9 9 9 9 9
10 9 9 9 9 9
11
12
12
7
14 14
-0.92
B
10
-0.89
7
-0,89 -0,89
10-0.89
B
14
14
-0.92
77
6 6
7
8
8
3
3
-2,02
-1,32
-1,32
14
5%
-2,02
1
5% -1,40
1
±0,00
-2,02
-2,02
-1,40
-1.76 -1.76
5%
14
2
2
A
±0,00
0
A
4
5 5
5%
4
-1.76
-0.05 -0.05
1414
-1.76
-0.23
-0.23
5 5% %
7
5
15
10
20m
Floor plan
0
5
10
15Academic 20m work 103
22 LODGE 23 BALCONY 24 REHEARSAL HALL CHOIR 25 REHEARSAL HALL SOLOISTS 26 REHEARSAL HALL ORCHESTRA 27 LIBRARY 28 STORAGE WIGS, COSTUMES 29 WORKSHOP WIGS, COSTUMES 20m
29
5
14
27
+7,47
0
25
0
4
5
33
10
10
26
15
15
14 14 28
20m
0храна
А
A
Visitors’ Experience
-3.89
30
+4,98
4 +4.47
+6.70
23
+6.70
Interior views
А
2
21 A
Underground and Second levels
Inside, the columns give way to their counterpart - a suspended ceiling echoing the nearby mountains.
14
22
22
+2.23
+4,86
22
22
+4,36
+4.36
+6,70
14
-3.85
широк английски двор
Near the building the column field densifies and merges with the trees, again dispersing to open the public space.
2,76
-4.17
5
-4.17
32
31
7
7
21
14
7
24
The visitors can enter the building from a pedestrian bridge near the Opera house, through the forest from the back, or via the vehicular connection.
View from the entrance - the columns merge with the trees and create an immersive environment.
14.6
1
2
12.4
8
18.9
11.35
Acoustics study
3
15.0
9.59 9.94
+6.70
6
19.5
3x17.6/28
+4.58
3x17.6/28 3x17.6/28 3x17.6/28
27.99; ∆S=5.61м
5.16
7.79
5%
18.16; ∆S= 10.99м
17.20; ∆S=7.42м10.26; ∆S=13.5
-2.02
auditorium volume= 4800m³ Vnorm=5-8m³/spectator; 631 spectators Vmax= 5048m³, Vmin= 3155m³
echo - 1/20s delay. Vsound= 343,14 m/s =>
∆Smax=17.157
Academic work 105
+27.38
+23.76
+18.88
+21.55
34
+18.06
7
+17.05
+16.58
+14.36
+14.05
+10.91
+6.70
+6.70
+6.70
2 foyer Âą0.00
+4.36
6
1 5%
-2.57
-1.02 -2.02 -2.02 -4.17
5
-0.89
1.12
-2.57
+4.86
+4.58
Âą0.00 -0.80
+11.24
7 -9.89
+11
+8
+4
+0
1 auditorium 2 foyer 5 orchestra 6 stage 7 stage pocket 9 dressing room 11 decor workshop 12 decor storage 15 museum 19 office 25 rehearsal soloists 27 library 33 parking
1.97
+15.34 +12.91 +11.34
7
27
28
19
19
9
9 33
-4.18 -5.71
section AA +27.10
5
0
15
10
20m
+20.25 +17.14
+11.32
8.51
4
4.10
15
0.00
9 Âą0.00
25 19 9
12
11
-0.55
33
0
5
10
15
20m
Other Work Written: Universiada Hall: Post-Communist Identity, GSAPP MVRDV: A Brief Anthology of Diagrams, GSAPP
112 114
Fabrication: AlphabetiChair, GSAPP
118
Graphic: Representational Theory and Technique, GSAPP
119
Drawings: Nudes, UACEG Sketches
120
111
Universiada: Bulgaria’s Post-Communist Identity summer 201, Metropolis Critics: Enrique Walker, Christohper Cowell
Under the communist regime in Bulgaria, architecture was centralized - the client was the state, the offices were the state appointed architectural organizations. Perversely, this meant that architects had a great freedom - the freedom to create independently from clients - especially in the post-Stalinist period, when the regime became less restrictive. The lucky few, allowed in the architectural bureaus of the time, were exploring modernist architecture, almost totally protected from intervention. At that time, in 1961, was built “Universiada” hall - a small sports and events venue. It has a typical modernist sensitivity and is communicative with its surroundings, the transparent glass curtain wall and the columns visibly connecting the outside to the inside, covering a portion of the square. If it bears any communist connotations they are merely coincidental. But with the fall of the regime everything associated with it fell out of grace; so much so that the value of every piece of good design from the previous era was nullified. In the public eye, modernist architecture slowly became equal to communism - clean lines, concrete, white or gray stucco - all began to bear a negative connotation. A new, unwritten manifesto emerged - it suggested a purge from the old regime through the use of color, sinuous forms, aluminium and reflecting glass. The public was liberated not only from the political, but also from the architectural dictatorship. So when capital picked enough momentum in the 2000’s, it was time to bring Universiada Hall in the new era. It was done without the approval of the original architects, Atanas Barov and Ivan Tatarov , still alive at the time, and depending entirely on investor’s concerns. What change did this entail? Replacing the materials, the pattern of the glass curtain wall, closing off the in-between space defined by the columns, but barely improving the interior and the technology. The openness of the transparent glass, the movement of the columns from the outside-in, inviting the passers-by to do the same, the welcoming in-between space under the cantilevered foyer were erased. Instead, the building is now defending itself from the outside with reflecting glass and aluminium enclosures, not letting even a glance inside or an undesirable under its volume. The image of the democratic regime turned out far more repressive than the image of the dictatorship. How did it come to such a per ver sion of meaning? Was the language of the original truly so lost on the public and the investor? As a reminder for the limited capability of architecture to convey clear messages, the radical change in its meaning had nothing to do with the form - it was brought through the political act. The associations that the aesthetics carried were too heavy to be overcome by the simple beauty or communication of the object. But even if we accept that as understandable in these conditions, one cannot help but wonder - where did the guardedness and repressiveness of the “free” image come from?
Obviously, there are three par ties to blame here. On one hand is the client - in this case, an unnamed company representative with no interest in public space or architectural value. On the other - the architect that ‘designed’ the renovation, reduced to a simple executor of the investor’s wishes, and the governing bodies that allowed such a disrespectful altering of the original project. The fiscal concerns and corruption that dictated each par ty’s par ticular actions could be easily guessed. Also obvious is the problem of the client, barely familiar as to what the architects’ function really is. Given all the above, the renovation could be seen as an apt metaphor for the condition of the society that allowed it and therefore just. The wider issue is what these changes stand for, what this condition is. At the root of these alterations lie the alterations that the society underwent after the fall of communism. The effor t to overcome the past mutated into a desire to obliterate it, to destroy any reminder of it. Out of this was born a desperate desire to emulate Western culture as if that would integrate Bulgaria with the Western world and would mask our shameful identity. And the newfound freedom allowed for this - people (investors and architects included) were able to see first-hand the countries on the other side of the Iron Curtain and what they were building. As if confounded in the face of such exoticism, it was all taken at face value - what was translated locally were corporate use of materials, façade systems, phenomenological form-making.
As a result, the now ill-favored materials of Universiada had to be modernized, the retrograde cur tain wall pattern had to go, the cantilevered space was a missed opportunity for square footage. What was once communicative and responding to the human scale now looks as a franchise of a corporate fortress; the transparency of yesteryear now returns only as a bleak reflection of the city around it. The texture of the coarse stucco was replaced with the evenness of the aluminum panels - just as the many, that were trying to subvert the regime and to kindle a political discourse, were replaced with a servile, passive society that settles for whatever it gets without opposition. The friction, however repressed, is replaced with the smoothness of the path of least resistance. Ultimately, the renovation of Universiada hall stands for a loss of identity and a desire to appear abreast with the times without the understanding or will as to what has to be really changed; for an apparent update of governing regime that masks the lack of real change. The façade and cladding, just as the name and status of the government, are replaced as eyewash, concealing the fact that the inside operates in essentially the same way; the internal doings are still done in shortcuts while the misguided effor t is focused on the skin-deep appearance. However, as opposed to the public in Bulgaria who are facing far more tragic consequences, at least architects can appreciate the irony that while wanting to appear modern, the result of the renovation of Universiada is more reminiscent of the worst examples of post-modern architecture of the 80’s - coincidentally, the last years of the communist regime in Bulgaria.
Universiada Hall before
Universiada Hall after the renovation
Other work 113
MVRDV: A Brief Anthology of Diagrams spring 2012, Architecture: The Contemporary Critics: Bernard Tschumi
“A world of numbers turns into diagrams”
Early in their architecture career, Winy Maas, Jacob van Rijs and Nathalie de Vries of MVRDV systematized and gave a name to the set of constraints that architecture has always dealt with – the Datasape. Influenced by Koolhaas, they saw the restrictions of architecture as helping rather than impeding the process of design, and those restrictions - as a landscape of information, as a device that helps to overcome their received ideas, discover new possibilities and comment on reality. What their first projects demonstrated is a set of clear ideas and concepts, derived from the over arching projects of density, urbanity, heterogeneity. Many have argued that these projects are simplistic and cynical, that they are built diagrams, but it cannot be denied that they intrigue with their ability to take that simple idea and push it to an extreme, turning it upside-down. Their use of diagrams has been especially questioned. And cer tainly, the diagram, derived from the datascapes, seems like solving too much, but is that really the case? Far from being the one-liner they are accused of being, their early projects hold their principal agenda of urbanity and density, and the first one - Berlin Voids - set the tone for their entire career. Here they argue that the heterogeneity of the city cannot be manifested in a block of sameness and that there no longer exist an ideal house, but an array of ideal houses. This condition of the contemporary city creates an array of typologies of housing condensed in a single mass in order to achieve the unexpected and encourage social interaction between the neighbors. The volume is fragmented in order to create voids of tension, where the social interaction could occur. Thus, “the neighbor is not hidden, but present”. Although secondary, here and in some of their first projects (as the porter’s lodges in Veluve National park), still can be witnessed a level of care for composition – a composition searching for the slightly absurd, but a composition nonetheless. If Berlin Voids was formed out of criticism and just a dose of numbers, the office for a broadcasting company, Villa VPRO (1993), was the first building to demonstrate the extensive use of data and the datascape as generator for the design. This resulted in an open plan collection of spaces derived from an analysis of the “villa”, adjusted to the flexibility and informality required by the clients. The architectural language is more submitted to the internal organization, manifesting it with a different type of glass for each space, and to the desire to blur the boundary between inside and outside. The datascape served as a mediator between the data and the design process, informing it, but not solving it: “the limits are the starting point”. Since, the datascapes, visualizing the various restrictions, have played a major role in the design. In the WOZOCO residential building (1994) those restrictions formed the initial volume, which presented a problem – having no place in the overall volume
for the last 13 apartments that the brief demanded, they simply cantilevered them from the volume. As they explain the process, they star ted with a model (a diagram in its own right - one that has never been accused of so much as the drawn diagram) which demonstrated the way the constraints influenced the spatial organization - the datascape had served as a heuristic device to discover an unconventional scheme. This simple idea was overlaid with the concerns for customization, heterogeneity, and economy, to produce a building that is derived from pragmatism, but speaks of matters beyond it. In turn, the Dutch Pavilion, Hannover 2000, demonstrated the buildability of ultimate heterogeneity and disjunction bet ween the levels of a mul tis tor y building - a project inherited (again) from Koolhaas and made possible in the first place for the imagination through the notorious diagram in Life magazine in 1909. For MVRDV, this diagram was not just a model for thought, but a real possibilit y. The s tack ing of f ields of program was a preoccupation in their 3-D city and thus the pavilion became a small-scale test of 3-D planning. The Silodam projec t continues the operation of Berlin Voids, voids being another over arching concept, closely related to density. This time they mixed not ideal houses, but socioeconomic circles as represented by the prices of the units, grouped in mini-neighborhoods, connected by public paths. Here again the differences are brought together in a single volume, manifested directly on the
façade. The process of design was a remarkable negotiation with the users, in which diagrams were crucial in making decisions between the multiple parties and as a tool to push the idea of a social mix as a statement of equality rejecting the “apartheid” and the social “stratification” schemes.
public levels, more programmatic variety, synerg y, ef f iciency, mix, more social encounters, urbanity, possibilities for architecture.”
Throughout these projects, the datascapes serve also as a device to obstruct stylistic preferences and formalism. A major purpose of both datascapes and diagrams is also rhetoric, to persuade that the design was as if inevitable, claiming the objectivity of the authors. In that discourse, the image is explained as a pure consequence. Even as it cannot be entirely so, it surely comes from an attitude that places the image secondary. The argument for complexity and contradiction involves not a desire to symbolize, but to provide a framework that would serve the above, where the image is a result, often left to the user to decide. That is achieved not in the way the billboard should signify the user’s program, but as a way of customization – a whole different concept. The desire to create a composition, still somehow present in Berlin Voids, is suppressed to the maximum, resulting in somewhat awkward language.
This argument is at the bottom of each of their early concepts and projects. The clarity of the idea is in contrast with the study that in itself demonstrates a tendency to favor quantity and a desire to reach a level of production as big a s the a spir ations of the pr oposal. T he mos t a r chi tec tu r al pr omise is held into the above quote and the questions in the end, that are left open for interpretation:
For that they have been criticized many times, but that same characteristic can be seen as an innovation, (or a continuation of a lineage within a new formulation) - a challenge of the idea of aesthetic beauty as a notion that relies on the familiar. That gives an aspect of absurdity and humor to their designs that turned into a trademark.
“How can we organize this three- dimensional world? How can we live, or, as some might say, how can we survive in the third dimension? What tools, what infrastructure will lead to this city? What conditions?”
In order to achieve the quasi-absudity and humor the use of diagrams has been crucial - the kind of “Dutch” diagram between rhetoric tool and architectural proposal, negotiating between concept, organization, constraints and form. The “abstract machine” serves to test, assess, and communicate relationships to a constraint, between programs, to compare. But it primarily serves to test the limits of the constraint, to search for the operable boundary between the absurd and the viable that MVRDV have occupied since their early work. The datascapes and diagrams were tools for challenging the imaginable and establish the edge between “kitsch and art, between populist and elitist that sharpens architectural language and ambition”, for “mixing functions and incorporating differences”. This project of density and urbanity lead to compelling formulations outside the well-known and tested. It could be said that they juxtapose types in an almost post-modernist way within an argument (and ,for the most par t, an architectural vocabulary) that is almost modernist, with a strong belief that society can be made, created. Where the essence of their concepts and agenda can be found is their grand, utopian schemes of their publications. The first -the 3-D city of KM3 - is a study of “Density as opposed to zoning as a two-dimensional approach: (3-D zoning creates) more
Other work 115
In that light, is MVRDV’s strength not in giving answers, but in asking questions – as the best of their buildings leave open ends, ques tion mar k s for future use and appropriation? MVRDV delved more into the answers to the above questions in their latest publication, Ver tical Village (published in 2012). The concept of 3-D planning is fur ther elabor ated as s t ack ing of elements where everything is close to everything and the circulation is in the more flexible public space in-between. What is different from the 3-D city is a move towar ds deter mined , f ixed volumes – types – and a copy-paste sensibility (present since the first projects - “pasting” trees on balconies and so on) to bring every par t of the city closer to every other part, that paradoxically, and as they themselves have pointed out, brings an alarming sameness within the difference. What is more, the desire to connect every thing negates an aspect that creates difference and heterogeneity by virtue of the very disconnections that occur in actual cities. Ve r t i c a l V i l l a g e i s a n a s s e m b l y of typologies where the single unit loses its impor tance. Architecture becomes “a pars pro toto, a testing piece” for the grander scheme. The single architectural
work becomes a part of an entity where every piece is as absurd as possible in order to create as many juxtapositions as possible. In that scheme a building begins to speak about its program, to symbolize it. Where KM3 offered an open field of possibilities, Ver tical Village demonstrates a series of types, a changed attitude towards the architecture piece as an object, almost an icon, beginning to symbolize. A testing piece for the concept in Ver tical Village is the House of Culture and Movement, Denmark (2010) – a winning competition proposal together with Copenhagen-based ADEPT. It is a part of a cultural block of three buildings. As in the Ver tical Village, the main building is an assembly of 7 “ideal elements” within a box volume. Each element has an assigned program: theatre, health, food, zen, exhibition, fitness and administration. The in-between spaces serve for circulation, but also as flexible spaces for changing program. In this small scale this creates a different condition than the theoretical formulation: an inner instability of stacked elements in friction with each other, contained within the stability of a transparent box. Another project within the agenda of density is the Future Towers, Pune, India, (2011). It is a mega-block in a hexagonal grid that combines over 1000 apartments ranging from studios to “villas”. It aims at creating connections with the city, but the attempt at permeability in the ground floor is not properly scaled and in effect, the towers act as a wall. A desire to be iconic creeps in: “The hill shape structure with its peaks, valleys, canyons, bays, grottoes and caves adds identity to the city ...”. Paradoxically, a neglect of the image condemns the project: what was a “useful” image of heterogeneity before is now replaced with a monolithic block – precisely what their early works and writings criticized. The mix of the housing units is an echo of the early projects, but this proposal fails to meet this agenda. Many other projects completely forget this concept; the inclination towards the iconic is best manifested in the project for the Comic book and Animation Museum, Hangzhou (a winning competition entry from 2011). The museum occupies a number of spheric volumes, each containing a large exhibition room, where the visitors walk on the circular perimeters. As innovative this idea is, it cannot overshadow the fact that the volumes are shaped like the dialogue balloons of comic books. The spaces and the image are no longer open-ended and controllable by the user, but symbolize the program in a manner one would expect from anonymous architects in Las Vegas, but not from the authors of Villa VPRO.
A similar search for the icon can be seen in the Pushed Slab office building, Paris (2010) - another project of an urban void. The voids before were a form of criticism, carrier of heterogeneity, and an internalized social space that creates tension. Here they are still the latter, but not the former, and serve primarily as visual connection. The building works as a conventional office building; the void is the only moment of interest, and it is taken over by a purely vain, superficial move. In their words, “the slab is pushed until it breaks” - an action demonstrated in the physical model-diagram. The only function of the “torn” slabs of floors is to create an unusual image – the very opposite of their professed ideology. It is exactly the need to justify the move with an image of hands pushing and tearing that testifies for a desire to mask the fact that they are, indeed, after an image, and they are not comfortable with that. However, what remains puzzling is that the “opening” was not designed, but is literally created by this action. Has the abdication of design been slowly conditioned by the use of diagrams? Or is it not an abdication, but an inability to design? There is undoubtedly also a desire to keep the trademark of absurdity and a seeming non-importance of the image, as a consequence of the “objective” process. The f ine edge they were occupying in their search for new formulations gave way to an approach of originality for the sake of originality that took over the depth of the explorations and made them fall on the wrong side of that thin line. As they love and follow (in a very Dutch
way) the market as individual expression of desires they submitted to is tactics their originality became their advertisement. The lack of criticism that conditions this submission can be blamed on a culture of over-production and on specifics of office practice, and those certainly contribute to the changed sensibility, but there is evidence of something more symptomatic. Most telling is the comparison between two diagrams that demonstrate a claim for “objectivity” and an abdication of design: the 3-D garden (1998) and the Pushed Slab mentioned above. Both are an oversimplification of the design, a dumbing down of the concept to the point where they explain it as if it created itself. Both exemplify a simple operation: stacking, and pushing and tearing. But in the first case, that produces something new, a ver tical forest, suspended on the simple volume turning it in a completely unfamiliar concept. In the second case, the product speaks only of the operation that produced it. The actions of choice already have different connotations. The stacking of houses with threes is an exploration: what does it mean to have trees hanging in the air, to provide that landscape in the sky for each dwelling, can density be achieved in such a way? The pushing of slabs is preoccupied only with the object itself, not with the ramifications of the action or the concepts of the city. What is more worrying is that this preoccupation can be sensed in the Vertical Village - their ultimate space for speculation of density and urbanity. T h u s , t h e d i a g r a m t u r n s i n t o a s y m b o l , a n i co n , a n d p r o d u ce s t r u e buil t diagrams, stripped of complexities of urbanity, contex t, social specificity, adaptability. It can be concluded that if their early period is the MVRDV-modernism: constructing a better society, questioning reality, leaving loose ends, allowing for running room; then now they are in their MVRDV-post-modernism: emphasizing the importance of the object, of the symbol, of the type. Rather than look back and pose questions, project towards the future, their recent projects aim to close the open ends, to give premature answers to the question “What’s next?”.
Other work 117
The AlphabetiChair fall 2011 Critics: Brigite Borders, Mark Bereak Partners: Joanne Hayek, Marianne Quiros
The Alphabetichair is a foldable chair in the shape of a letter, each chair being different as a consequence of the different letter. The chairs are easy to storage, hang, and access. The pattern on each chair is customizable.
THE WRITE. FOLD. MEASURE. HOPP. MODEL. MILL. SAND. FIX. DRILL. CUT. SPRAY. ASSEMBLE. UNFOLD. SIT.
Representational Theory fall 2011 Critic: Michael Young
The course, as an “archeology of representations”, sought precedents of representation prior to the digital era, through which to redraw and reconstruct our own projects, gaining or revealing a new aspect of it. Here, the California High Speed Rail project is re-imagined through John Hejduk’s drawing.
Other work 119
Drawings 2008 UACEG, Sofia
Other work 121
Other work 123
Other work 125
rossi.kirilova@gmail.com 347•393•8555 New York, New York