Bestand - Constructing in Existing by SHREYES GUPTA

Constructing in Existing

GUPTA

SHREYES

HSLU

Lucerne University of Applied Science and Arts Engineering and Architecture

BA Architecture - Theory Module

WS22

Core Module Constructing in Existing

Author:

Shreyes Gupta

Lecturer: Prof. Natalie Plagaro Cowee dipl. Architect ETSAM, SIA, Herrliberg ZH, Switzerland

Special coaching of Architectural Detail (Part IV): Markus Röthlisberger dipl. Architect ETH, SIA, Zürich ZH, Switzerland

Academic writing: Dr. Nina Zimnik

Assistant: Nina Hug

Cover Image shows the Details of the facade of a paper factory reinnovated to a Culture Machine. The first three chapters of this booklet acts as the supporting pillars to the final chapter of “Stance & Detail”.

l. Stances of Intervention

l.0. Introduction

Within the frame of the core module “Constructing in Existing”, at the Institute of Architecture of the Lucerne University of Applied Science and Arts, Engineering and Architecture, we have taken the book “Rewriting Architecture 10+1 actions” as a starting point for a theoretical and experimental background about possible stances while defining strategies of architectural intervention in Existing Buildings.

“Rewriting Architecture” was the result of the Tabula Scripta Research group at the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture 2014-2019.

We have summarized the text, describing the different approaches of intervention, and have illustrated each one of them, at a theoretical level, by applying the stance to different small domestic objects.

l. Stances of Intervention

I.1 Eliminate

Creation by removing

As the name suggests, to “Eliminate” (Alkemade et al., 2020, pp. 34) is the act of removing matter from a building or city, therefore maintaining the qualities of the existing while also being able to forge new spatial qualities or notice elements that were not felt before. With a fraction of the energy, intentional destruction can yield remarkable results that were unforeseen. Several examples of existing projects where matter was removed and have been successfully reformulated into something more valuable can be seen in Chapter 1 of the book Rewriting Architecture: 10+1

Figure 01 - Concrete Cube The stance has been applied to the concrete cube through selective removal of formwork, creating unique spatial qualities while still maintaining the essence of the cube. Ryan Oshimoto, Sven Leuenberger, Janani RG, Daniela Jimenez, Ema Dzigumovic

l. Stances of Intervention

l.2. Continue Comma instead of full stop

Architecture is usually thought of a beginning and an ending. It can be viewed as an evolutionary process, where the building is constantly adapting to the users in terms of space and time. Instead of a “full stop,” (Alkemade et al., 2020, pp. 68) designers and architects should develop their projects with the intention that it will outlive themselves. They should acknowledge that throughout a building’s lifespan, it will undergo multiple transitions as it evolves with the users and the times. Adapting a building provides an entirely new space to develop which further allows future changes, new uses and nurtures a different relationship with its surroundings.

Figure 02 - Broken Mug The stance has been applied to a broken mug through the art of Kintsugi; where instead of getting a new mug, the original was preserved and the history of the mug was embraced. Daniela Jimenez, Ema Dzigumovic, Ryan Oshimoto, Sven Leuenberger, Janani RG

l. Stances of Intervention

l.3. Obscure Hiding qualities

Looking back to the 1960s, the tendency of demolishing and rebuilding was seen as a loss of architecture‘s progress and aura. While building in an existing context, preservation of façade can be an opportunistic way of revitalizing the historic tissue already present on site. Rather than demolishing and building brand new, urban renewal can blend the new with the old, therefore respecting the site’s “nostalgia and historical baggage.” (Alkemade et al., 2020, pp. 102) Examples in Chapter 3 of Rewriting Architecture: 10+1 demonstrate how an intervention in an already existing site can do much more than just remodeling, it’s giving space a new purpose of being.

Figure 03 - Dice Wrapper The stance has been applied to candy wrappers; where, based on the façade, users would expect candy instead of anything else, such as dice. Ema Dzigumovic, Sven Leuenberger, Janani RG, Daniela Jimenez, Ryan Oshimoto

l. Stances of Intervention

l.4. Reconﬁgure

The whole and its parts

Construction is simultaneously temporary and permanent in nature. Materials have differing lifespans and cannot be truly returned to the earth after being constructed. One cannot return stone to a quarry nor glass to sand and, overtime buildings can lose its purpose. Although they themselves are temporary, their impact is permanent. With this in mind, the parts of a building are as important as the whole. Architecture should be both the construction and deconstruction. „Permanent fixture opens the door for permanent failure “ (Alkemade et al, 2021, p. 136).

Ancient Greek and Romans understood the architectural element as valued parts as well as a whole and were masters of recontextualization. They have left behind countless examples of spolia, extracting elements of disused architecture and stitching old and new parts into a new tapestry of construction.

The built structure should sample and remix in a circular economy. Fundamentally, the construction typologies need to be designed more flexible. The scarcity of material and the environmental impact of the building industry need to be considered.

Figure 04 The stance has been applied to a LEGO which is a prime example of both the parts vs the whole. A LEGO construction isn’t dismantled and then binned, each individual piece holds value and the potential to be reconfigured again and again. Shreyes Gupta, Isobel Harrison, Dorotea Kokošková, Belal Ismail, Layla Emmenegger

l. Stances of Intervention

l.5. Repurpose From the inside out

Will a structure turn into a burden or an opportunity if something is no longer needed, after it no longer serves its intended purpose, or when we outgrow its purpose? Since there are sound structures already in place, new forms might be detrimental since they serve as containers for activity.

Not only is adaptive reuse a fundamental part of sustainability, but architecture can also benefit from its former memory as a palimpsest, adding value, meaning and beauty. Architects must listen to the community and regenerate the existing alongside locals to create a celebrated ad hoc space. It’s important to highlight an intelligent, measured approach during the act of salvation. Maximum social effect can be achieved with minimal but specific architectural invention.

One generally values the contents of a vessel over the vessel itself, in the same way as an empty gin bottle can become a soap dispenser if one chooses to see its innate value. Likewise, ignored space can be reinterpreted and given a new lease of life: schools to housing, factory to nightclub, church to restaurant.

Figure 05 The stance has been applied to a Skis and a snowboard repurposed as a bench. Isobel Harrison, Dorotea Kokošková, Shreyes Gupta, Belal Ismail, Layla Emmenegger

l. Stances of Intervention

l.6. Densify Expand inwards

With our ever-growing population, there is a tendency to expand outwards. This act of urban sprawl interferes with pristine nature combined with a sense of isolation for its inhabitants. Alternatively, to develop a close-knit environment within confines, protecting Nature from the endless occupation of territory due to urban sprawl is a valuable way of consolidating the built environment. Space is a valuable finite resource and a “shortage of space is always transformed into a wealth of relations between people and use.” (Alkemade et al, 2021, p. 204)

Densification demands us to think “not in terms of quantity, but quality, whereby the focus shifts from square metres to the intelligence and functionality of space”. The existing’s functions and structures and the addition should share and speak to each other, and benefit from their close proximity in “a pure form of the tabula scripta”. (Alkemade et al, 2021, p. 204)

The celebrated urban writer and activist who championed community within the built environment speaks of “lively, diverse, intense cities contain the seeds of their own regeneration, with energy enough to carry over for problems and needs outside themselves” (Jacobs, 1961).

“By building between, behind, and on top of existing buildings” (Alkemade et al, 2021, p. 204), it results in valuable spatial connections, with increased opportunity for human interaction, fostering a sense of community. Relational densification, the creation of interconnected, multifunctional spaces, should be employed at both the urban scale and human scale.

Figure 06 The stance has been applied to a glass which seems to be full, however, more density and therefore enrichment can still be added. Layla Emmenegger, Shreyes Gupta, Isobel Harrison, Dorotea Kokošková, Belal Ismail

l. Stances of Intervention

l.7. Copy Building on blueprints

Copying is synonymous with plagerism and is generally frowned upon as a ‚cheap‘ mimic rather than a valued form of design. But, in the 2018 Venice Biennale, the Victoria and Albert Musuem’s „A world of Fragile Parts“ questioned this in an attempt to „raise the stigma of the copy as a powerful tool of cultural and ceative production... to disseminate culture“, as a way to document and preserve and idea.

We must rethink what it means to copy. Is it inherently a negative thing? Where do we draw the line between a copy and an interpretation? Generations of architects have developed sucessful architectural schemes by referencing past work and reworking similar concepts, as design is a public body of knowledge. „The process of multiplication though duplication, reference and remaking turns an individual exception into something more collective“ (Jacob, p. 251). The phenomenon of vernacular architecture is also a form of copying, where repeated forms, language and constructions prevail and are improved and adapted over generations within a territory.

Quality is more important than orginality. The manufacturing of a mass (re)produced object is a compliment to the original and its creator, for the purpose of the object to be enjoyed by many at a more affordable price. Although, with each production one could repeat both its positive and negative attributes at scale. Le Corbusier said „mass production demands a search for standards. Standards leads to perfection“ (Le Corbusier (1924) Mass Produced Buildings). He notes the importance of copying as a primary motivation to create flawless design solutions.

Figure 07 The stance has been applied to a plastic cup – a copy of a drinking glass. The copy is of no less use, it just serves a different one. Belal Ismail, Isobel Harrison, Dorotea Kokošková, Shreyes Gupta, Layla Emmenegger

l. Stances of Intervention

l.8. Overlay Symbiothic spaces

When constructing, replacing the old with the new can result in loss of materials, functionality and history.

The biological process of ‘symbiosis’ describes the co-existence of organisms who mutually benefit from each other, which is an interesting idea to consider in the built environment. In architecture we should look at “overlaying” the existing and the new so that they too coexist and have a mutually beneficial relationship. The addition of a further layer with a logic of its own can add to the appreciation of and enhance the existing.

In addition, we should also consider the overlay of the physical and the virtual world. Our lives are increasingly happening in the virtual world so architects of the physical world may consider virtual architecture more seriously as it can complement the existing or even replace it.

Overlaying and adding is appropriate if the underlying layer is not overwritten but improved with a new layer with an identity of its own.

Figure 08 The stance has been applied to a concept model showing a certain grid, which can be used for multiple purposes. Pierre Gadalla, Ciara Lawless, Avantika Verma, Gianluca von Felten

l. Stances of Intervention

l.9. Reimagine Look again

Designing environments is part of the everyday life of architects, and new habitats are created. It is their responsibility to create a legible and accessible design that is also understood by people. Is that even possible? It is a huge challange as ‚Jim van Os‘ said that we only perceive five percent of the real reality and that the other 95% is based on individual perception.Our built environment is open to numerous interpretations. Since we all perceive the environment differently, the challenge lies with the architect. How can a design be made accesible to the general public by the architect?

One approach could be the dialogue with inhabitants during the planning of a project. Because if residents are involved in the design process, it is highly likely that they feel responsible for the place and take care of their own environment. Another way is to create a new vision and narrative for the future with a place that is being questioned. Re-imagining a place and creating new rituals can help the place to transmit new perceptions to its inhabitants. In conclusion, the challenge for the architect is to fundamentally examine the space that people use and having an innovative approach and reimagining architecture. This means that technical and design intentions should be integrated in the needs of the users and reinterpret existing spaces.

Figure 09 The stance has been applied to a concept model showing a city and the negative around the existing open spaces, which can be used for a new ritual. This brings the potential of usable spaces to the centre of attention and allows them to be reimagined. Ciara Lawless, Pierre Gadalla, Avantika Verma, Gianluca von Felten

l. Stances of Intervention

l.10. (Re)start

Over and over and over

Everything in nature follows a cycle. Due to evolution and constantly changing circumstances, some organisms perish. As civilizations fade away, new ones emerge. Likewise, not all transitions in architecture can be predicted. Sometimes systems fail, and only then can they be rethought and redesigned. Applying new knowledge and adapting to new demands or opportunities are at the heart of Restart. In many cultures, Fire is seen as a force that can only be destructive. However, forest fires are vital for growing and renewing forests and grasslands.

The chapter proceeds with an interview with ZUS [Zones Urbaines Sensibles], an interdisciplinary design firm and their idea of ‘Permanent Temporality’ - creating an opportunity to start things afresh, time and again.

Restart also involves overcoming disasters and leveraging adversity to reveal a location’s potential and make room for new structures. It represents the very “essence of architecturedesigning and directing change.” (Alkemade et al., 2021, p. 340)

Figure 10 The stance has been applied to a concept model displaying a candle holder having a second wick running along it below, receiving the melted wax from above which hardens to create a second candle with embedded flower petals. The hollow stalk must be opened, so that it can be ‘Restarted’. Gianluca von Felten, Avantika Verma, Pierre Gadalla, Ciara Lawless

l. Stances of Intervention

l.11. Abstain Active passivity

Architects are trained to design and build, although in the same way as when going to the doctor, they might tell that it is fine and that there is no need for any medicine. Architecture should be the same. When there is time to observe, and look very precisely, sometimes it is better to do nothing, to abstain. An intervention doesn’t always end up as an improvement. In the meantime, architects have to hold themselves back and have a “radical mind shift”.

“Abstaining” may be the most difficult action from all the previous as it requires a great mental effort and responsibility on behalf of an architect.

A strong desire is created while playing Jenga Game to remove this block of wood until the tower collapses due to its removal. One needs to think twice on when to stop removing the blocks to avoid collapse and let the tower keep its qualities.

Figure 11 The stance has been applied to a concept model which is aboutwhen to stop acting in order to preserve it. Avantika Verma, Gianluca von Felten, Pierre Gadalla, Ciara Lawless

30 .

Il. Reveries of Experimental Intervention

The Existing: Flatiron Building

The Flatrion Building, originally know as the Fulller building, was erected in 1902 with steel frame construction in New York City designed by Daniel Burnburn and Frederick Dinkelberg. This skyscraper is one of the city’s oldest standing examples of highrise construction. The Flatrion building was the tallest structure in New York City upon its completion, soaring 285 feet.

The steel structure is clad in heavily ornate lime stone and glazed terracotta, in the Beau-Arts style, with Italian and French renaissance elements. The façade of the structure was also intended to include a clock face, but this was never completed. Initial public sentiment was not favourable; many detractors described it as a “monster” and a “disgrace to the city”; one even went so far as to refer to it as a “stingy piece of the pie.”

Curiously, the building’s façade was designed using the three components of a classical Greek column: base, shaft, and capital. While the “shaft” or main body of the structure is made of light brick and has several undulations on the façade that serve as “viewpoints,” the base is constructed in beige limestone and features windows that are plated in copper. The region of the captial is adorned with arches, columns. cornicing and a flat roof with balustrades.

The buildings enduring appeal aided in the surrounding neighbourhood’s transition into a prominent area for tourism. Like most skyscrapers, its use was and continues to be largely privatised, with shopfronts at street level, apartments and offices.

Figure 12 Front perspective of the Flatiron Building

1. 3. 5. 2. 4. 6.

Il. Reveries of Experimental Intervention

Genius Loci Quality depiction of the Existing

1. The main materials can be seen on the “Capital” part of the building: terra-cotta and limestone and the inﬂuence of the Beaux-Arts that show on the detailed ornaments around the windows.

2. The characteristic slender corner of the Flatiron building is emphasised with motifs of prestigious classical architecture. The stone arches are replaced with columns, separated by horizontal elements.

3. The corner of the building is further accented by two sculputured ﬁgures made of terracotta, two cherubs “observing” the city around them.

4. The entranceofthe buildingis heavily glazed, seenas a window into the project. Such a welcoming transparency is in stark contrast its heavy facade.

5. Shown here is a historic construction phtotograph. Its steel structure allowed for a fast construction, irregardless of its unusual triangular plan. The monolithic nature of the construction is seen to be an falsity. Due to its close relationship with the streetscape, one must note its affect traffic has on the building’s perception. The building was built in a time when horse and carriage and early cars shared the road, when road and pavement weren’t so clearly defined as it is today.

6. Another triangular structure protrudes out of the building’s footprint, as a glass and steel pavillion. Today, it is a gallery space as the building’s only ‘public’ feature. The building becomes a means of distributing culture to each pedestrian.

Il. Reveries of Experimental Intervention

Allowing the city to breathe

By removing elements of the architecture, it can offer a building to the public. This intervention eliminates glazing, and floor slabs of the Flatiron Building in order to blur the division between indoor and outdoor space. This approach provides much needed green spaces to the city of New York, under the canopy and shelter of the famous structure of this iconic monument. Here, the locals could enjoy an oasis of vegetation among the dense, concrete jungle - to sit, meditate and play. It is important to note this involves the removal of its current function as shop fronts. Here, we prioritise the public realm, over consumerism. In line with the analogy of viewing the building as a column, the Flatiron Building can be divided into three distinct parts: base, shaft and capital. The modification is solely on the base part, to highlight it as one entity. The removal of two floor slabs acts to maximise light within this new space, giving the opportunity for trees to flourish.

Now, the hard border has been redefined as a fluid edge. The building and ones interaction with it has been transformed by the simple act of elimination.

Shreyes Gupta, Daniela Jiménez, Pierre Gadalla, Isobel Harrison, Gianluca von Felten Figure 13 The first three stories from the Flatiron Building were removed to provide green spaces to the city.

Ill.

Constructing in Existing Case Study

Ill. Constructing in Exising

Wohnüberbauung Lokomotive Agnesstrasse 10, 8400 Winterthur

“Wohnüberbauung Lokomotive” by Knapkiewicz Fickert Architekten, is a residential redevelopment in Winterthur, Switzerland. Due to the de-industrialization of Winterthur in the late 1980s, large production areas close to the city center collapsed. Therefore the project‘s site, a former Swiss Locomotive Factory, was converted to 120 new residential units with at least 25 types. The architecture firm won a design competition in 2001, thus beginning the redevelopment in 2005 and finishing in 2006.

The project’s main architectural stances are “Continue” and “Overlay”. Being that the main driver in the project‘s intervention was to layer in a new program (residential) without disturbing the existing spirit of the old industrial factory. To not overshadow the rich history of the building, but rather emphasize and celebrate it by building on exactly the same footprint. Furthermore, the preserved foundry hall‘s structural grid was used as a reference for the new residential volumes to continue building off of. Thus, overlaying two different types of construction, materials, function, age, side-by-side — contrasting one another.

Figure 14 Image of foundry hall with pre-exisiting steel structure in the middle and new residential volumes to the left and right.

1. 3. 5. 2. 4. 6.

Ill. Constructing in Exising

Quality Depiction

1. This undershot is a steel connection between the column and catwalk. Due to the connection being made of the same material as the column, it gives the illusion that it was once originally part of the Locomotive factory. The only indication that it wasn‘t is how delicate it attaches itself to the column, with just two thin welded points.

2. This is a detail shot of the openings in the skylight in the foundry hall. Its purpose isto ventilate the building by allowing hot air that naturallyaccumulatesneartheceilingtoescapewhilealsoletting natural light in. Furthermore, the skylight acts as a reminder of the site‘s industrial past as it is made of the same steel and glass material typology.

3. This threshold is in the foundry hall and separates the public area from the ground-floor residents‘ entrance area. If you were to leave the new residential volumes as a flat façade, the existing steel columns would have created an awkward, liminal space. However, this was mitigated by pulling the apartments‘ entrances out and layering it with other functions (such as storage, water drainage, and stairs) to convert it into an intriguing and pleasurable threshold.

4. This picture shows the existing façade of the old hall on the left and the new residential building on the right. The new façade is a modern interpretation of the existing one. The intervention on the roof illustrates the old and the new belong together (overlay). In addition, the roof intervention harmonizes with the vertical grid on the existing façade, which makes the whole project coherent.

5. The close-up shows a painted checkboard on the floor of the existing foundry hall. Simplified with an overlaying intervention that has added value because it brings with it a great quality of inhabitation. It livens the interior of the existing hall for the residents.

6. The photograph shows the façade of the preserved part of the hall. The pedestal is made of concrete and the statics are solved withthe steel construction. The spaces in betweenare made with bricks. This detail is intriguing because it shows what could be preserved from the existing hall and what was added in order to have the entire building element again.

Shreyes Gupta, Ryan Oshimoto, Gianluca von Felten, Dorotea Kokoskova, Ema Dzigumovic

IV. Design Project Stance & Detail

Shreyes Gupta

Design Studio: (Building Inventory extended Plagaro Cowee Natalie)

Additional coaching of Architectural Detail: Markus Röthlisberger dipl. Architect ETH, SIA, Zürich ZH, Switzerland

IV. Design Project - Stance & Detail

The Tesseract

box in a box

Shreyes Gupta

Design Studio: Plagaro Cowee Natalie

In 1657, a factory for paper production was established in Cham, Switzerland. The Papieri, or Paper Factory, was built on the banks of the Lorze River to meet the water needs of the paper industry. From its inception until the nineteenth century, the paper mill changed hands frequently, even after a year. However, it was relocated from Cham to Italy in 2011 because paper production was less expensive in Italy, and it has since been empty and partially used for various other purposes.

The former Papieri Cham factory is being converted into residential, working, and living spaces. The inventory is a key player in this process, and solutions that work with rather than against the existing object are sought.

Figure 15 - The Existing This is the perspective view of the paper factory from ground level with expanding views to undergroind and large volume showing the existing

1. 2. 3.

IV. Design Project - Stance & Detail

Project Depiction

The Existing vs. The Intervention

Shreyes Gupta

Design Studio: Plagaro Cowee Natalie

1. Part 1 depicts the factory’s front facade and the large volume that has been densiﬁed with cultural boxes inside with its access from outer steel facade and an open air theater outside for recreational and public gatherings.

2. Part 2 depicts the city’s welcoming facade, which has been overlaid with a steel megastructure that evokes the industrial era. The structure serves primarily as a structural support for the roof having appartments. It also serves as a backbone for public movement, with stairs and lifts, and provides a seating area away from the road.

3. Part 3 depicts the facade facing the river, which has been opened up to connect the inside with the outside, thereby blending culture and nature. Furthermore, the underground facade is made accessible to the river, transforming it into a functional space for a Badi & the roof has been modiﬁed for accomodation.

IV. Design Project - Stance & Detail

STANCE OF INTERVENTION

Shreyes Gupta

Design Studio: Plagaro Cowee Natalie

Densification of the existing built environment - inward expansion - could be a critical option for meeting the ever-increasing urban demands without compromising nature and open spaces. So the Papieri’s large void is densified by designing cultural spaces to meet public cultural demand, constructing dwellings on the open roof, and converting the old space into an arts and performance school. Thus, densification can assist us in viewing our living environment in terms of quality rather than quantity, shifting the emphasis from square metres to the intelligence and functionality of space.

Figure 16 shows the detail of the facade along the river. The detail includes the elevation, a vertical & a horizontal section showing the contrast between new intervention i.e. “Culture Halls“ and the existing structure.

Exterior Perspective: Shreyes Gupta Design Studio: Plagaro Cowee Natalie

Interior Perspective: Shreyes Gupta

Design Studio: Plagaro Cowee Natalie

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 01 - Concrete Cube

RG, J., Oshimoto, R., Leuenberger, S., Jimenez, D., Dzigumovic, E. (2022)

Figure 02 - Broken Mug

RG, J., Oshimoto, R., Leuenberger, S., Jimenez, D., Dzigumovic, E. (2022)

Figure 03 - Dice Wrapper

RG, J., Oshimoto, R., Leuenberger, S., Jimenez, D., Dzigumovic, E. (2022)

Figure 04 - Lego

Shreyes, G., Isobel, H., Dorotea, K., Belal, I., Layla, E. (2022)

Figure 05 - Skies and a snowboard

Shreyes, G., Isobel, H., Dorotea, K., Belal, I., Layla, E. (2022)

Figure 06 - Glass jar

Shreyes, G., Isobel, H., Dorotea, K., Belal, I., Layla, E. (2022)

Figure 07 - Plastic cup

Shreyes, G., Isobel, H., Dorotea, K., Belal, I., Layla, E. (2022)

Figure 08 - Grid

Pierre, G., Ciara, L., Avantika, V., Gianluca, von F. (2022)

Figure 09 - City model

Pierre, G., Ciara, L., Avantika, V., Gianluca, von F. (2022)

Figure 10 - Candel stick

Pierre, G., Ciara, L., Avantika, V., Gianluca, von F. (2022)

Figure 11 - Jenga

Pierre, G., Ciara, L., Avantika, V., Gianluca, von F. (2022)

Figure 12

Wirestock - stock.adobe.com (2017). Vertical photo of NewYork Flatiron Building Retrieved from https://stock.adobe.com/ch_de/372822648 (17.11.2022)

Figure 12.1

Roux, F. Flatiron Building south façade at sunset showing intricate terracotta ornaments. Retrieved from https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-flatiron-building-beaux-arts-stylesouth-facade-at-sunset-showcasing-100357555.html (17.11.2022)

Figure 12.2

Medina, J. (2016). Flatiron New York Manhatten. Retrieved from https://pixabay.com/es/ photos/flatiron-nueva-york-manhattan-1488046/ (17.11.2022)

Figure 12.3

NewYorkitecture (2015). Flatiron Buidling. Retireved from https://www.newyorkitecture. com/flatiron-building/ (17.11.2022)

Figure 12.4

Flat Iron (2017). Entrance. Retrieved from https://en.wikiarquitectura.com/wp-content/ uploads/2017/01/Flat_Iron-New_York-WikiArquitectura_14-1920x2751.jpg (18.11.2022).

Figure 12.5

George, P. Hall & Son (1905). Construction of Flatiron Building. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Construction_of_Flatiron_ Building_%282786856941%29.jpg (30.11.2022)

Figure 12.6

Harrison, H. (2012). Shattered Debris Sheer Transformation. Retrieved https:// uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5cb4a1a6f7856800c7f8238e/5f5102378edd515b5e10d79b_ Image7-p-1080.jpeg (27.11.2022).

Figure 13

Cahill, J. Flatiron Building. Retrieved from https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/ flatiron-building/9014 (17.11.2022)

Figure 14 - Foundry hall

Shreyes, G., Ryan, O., Gianluca, von F., Dorotea, K., Ema, D. (2022) .Wohnuberbauung