City Analysis + Massing Models

city analysis + massing models

lower east side manhattan new york , new york

trevor wellman explorations studio book number 3

trevor wellman architecture intern

+

graphic designer

book produced for marc 520 explorations

318 park central e , apt 601 springfield , missouri 65806 twellman02@gmail . com +1.417.213.2475

city analysis + massing models

lower east side manhattan new york , new york

trevor wellman explorations studio book number 3

city

+ s i t e a n a ly s i s

city

+ s i t e a n a ly s i s

essex street

delancey street

s i t e l o c at i o n 106,530

suffolk street

t o ta l s q . f t .

l o w e r e a s t s i d e m a n h at ta n

public areas

native - born poverty

traffic

15%

50%

foreign - born poverty

15%

50%

commercial

average rental cost

mid - rise buildings

high - rise buildings

$400

$2,000

image analysis + resultant stategy

low - rise buildings

high-rise buildings

shopping

commercial

work

community

reside

home

public access

social int

ential

teraction

private residential

transport

vehicle dominant

pa r k

live / work

pedestrian dominant

r e s ta u r a n t

environmental impact

program distribution

program distribution

the warhol museum component

sq. ft.

lobby / tickets / coat check auditorium / film screening 200 seats open gallery project space administration / curatorial restrooms subtotal mechanical 4% museum gsf circulation 10% museum gsf m u s e u m t o ta l

2,500 3,000 40,000 2,500 1,500 400 49,900 1,996 4,990

50,000-60,000 a c c e p ta b l e

56,886

essex street market permanent stalls flexible stalls eating area restrooms administration m a r k e t t o ta l

r e s i d e n t i a l a pa r t m e n t t y p e s micro units 1 bedroom 2 bedroom 3 bedroom laundry

15,000 15,000 5,000 400 500

30,000-40,000 a c c e p ta b l e

individual sq. ft.

325 650 850 1,000

quantity

150

80

60

20

recreation ( indoor )

lobby / mail restrooms bike parking

bike maintenance / storage subtotal mechanical 4% residential gsf circulation 10% residential gsf r e s i d e n t i a l t o ta l 190,000-210,000 a c c e p ta b l e t o ta l g r o s s s q . f t

35,900

270,000-310,000 a c c e p ta b l e

48,750 52,000 51,000 20,000 750 2,500 1,500 300 1,500 400 178,700 7,148 17,870 203,718

296,504

essex street market

the andy warhol museum

residential + community

19%

12%

69%

sq . ft .

sq . ft .

sq . ft .

50,000-60,000

30,000-40,000

190,000-210,000

270,000-310,000 total sq . ft .

+ museum

+ market

residential

o v e r l a p p i n g t o c r e at e i n c r e a s e d s o c i a l c o n n e c t

+ market

overlapping can introduce live/work housing types

c a n h e l p d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n p u b l i c + p r i vat e

residential

residential

c a n b e s e pa r at e d i n t o d i f f e r e n t housing types

types can be connected to mix d i f f e r e n t c u lt u r a l b a c k g r o u n d s

below are words that can be associated with the given component type museum

public

+

+ +

h o w c a n o v e r l a p p i n g s pa c e s a f f e c t o n e a n o t h e r ? w h at c a n h a p p e n i n t h e center of them all?

e d u c at i o n a l

market

public

open

residential

p u b l i c c o m m u n i t y s pa c e s

social

major commercial hub

p r i vat e r e s i d e n t i a l

community-based

social

encouraged social connect

pedestrian oriented

community-based

open vs. closed

e n v i r o n m e n ta l

r e s i d e n t - i n i t i at i v e

live

open

e n v i r o n m e n ta l

c u lt u r a l ly d i v e r s e

closed

entrepreneurship

affordable options

contrasting

local-support

e n v i r o n m e n ta l ly f o c u s e d

i m a g i n at i v e

expressive

pedestrian-driven

influential

pedestrian focused

resident-support

supportive

small businesses

community influenced

/

work

e a r ly m a s s i n g m o d e l s

e a r ly m a s s i n g m o d e l s

concept model massings

concept model massings

max height 80 ft .

de resi mar

tial

ket

,0 310 00- . ft.

0 , 0 sq 27 tot

00

al

se mu

um

l o w e r e a s t s i d e m a n h at ta n

community within residential f o c u s e s o n c r e at i n g a d i v e r s e r e s i d e n t i a l c o m m u n i t y w i t h a va r i e t y o f h o u s i n g o p t i o n s , c e n t r a l c o u r t ya r d s , a n d p r o g r a m s t h at h e l p e n c o u r a g e i n t e r - r e s i d e n t i n t e r a c t i o n .

c e n t r a l c o u r t ya r d s

h o u s i n g va r i e t y

s pat i a l va r i at i o n s

live/work housing

massing model site plan with program

public vs . private

program on massing

public

p r i vat e

open

closed

void

solid vs . void

solid

open vs . closed

urban shopping corridor c r e at e s a m u lt i - t i e r e d p e d e s t r i a n - o r i e n t e d c e n t r a l a x i s t h at h o u s e s l o c a l s t o r e s r a n g i n g f r o m s ta r t - u p s t o l o n g - t e r m p r o d u c e s ta n d s . a l s o o f f e r s i n d o o r c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e l o w - l i n e pa r k u n d e r d e l a n c e y s t r e e t .

m u lt i - l e v e l s h o p p i n g

s t o r e va r i e t y

-

local

interior lowline connection

contrasting residential

massing model site plan with program

public vs . private

program on massing

solid vs . void

void

solid

open vs . closed

public

p r i vat e

open

closed

public environmental access f o c u s e s o n b r i n g i n g a n e n v i r o n m e n ta l ly c o n s c i o u s m i n d t o t h e c i t y . a d d s g r e e n e r y a n d s t o r m w at e r m a n a g m e n t s y s t e m s . r e s i d e n t i a l t o w e r s f o c u s o n v i e w , p u b l i c s pa c e , a n d g r e e n e r y .

c i t y i n t h e pa r k a p p r o a c h

smaller buildings

i n t e g r at e g r e e n i n t o b u i l d i n g

l ay e r s a d d d y n a m i c s

massing model site plan with program

public vs . private

program on massing

solid vs . void

void

solid

open vs . closed

public

p r i vat e

open

closed

critic review

what they said:

The critics told me to make sure that I have a clear path for the discovery of my structure system and directly relate that into the Andy Warhol Museum as well as the theories he has with his art.

They said that the massing models and other projects seem like two separate entities They should relate with each other and flow directly.

Include more context in the drawings to show how the models interact with the surrounding context.

The concepts have good play with the urban context, but should also have a greater connection to the theories of Andy Warhol and his Artwork.

They liked the paper relief study models I was working on from the early conceptual model chapter and that they better represent the playfulness and lightness I was trying to go with for the structural prototype. my reaction to what they said:

I agree with everything that they mentioned. It was a good critique overall with a slightly bumpy start (common for many first critiques in a series). I do believe that I should look more closely at the theories of Andy Warhol’s artwork, but should not let it dictate the entirety of the site. I also like the early conceptual models I was working with before more than the ones presented. They take my building’s proposed wooden structure into consideration more than a simple box or diagonal shape. Overall, it went pretty smoothly for a mid-crit project, minus some moments of a lack of motivation.

book number 3