Wendall Chin Final Degree Project-Thesis Booklet BAC by Wendall Chin



PARCEL 16

Wendall Chin Degree Project AR501 & AR502 Instructor: Marcus Martinez Expected Graduation Date: December 12, 2013 Degree: Bachelor of Architecture Final Review: November 25, 2013

Signature:

__________________________________________ Wendall Chin Date:

__________________________________________ Marcus Martinez Date:

pg. 2

TABLE OF CONTENT:

Design Bibliography .............................. 3 Project Statement ................................... 5 Site Analysis ............................................ 6 Zoning & Regulations ........................... 17 Precedent .................................................. 20 Massing Study ........................................ 23 Programming ........................................... 27 Investigative Design .............................. 33 Initial Design .......................................... 41 Final Design ............................................ 53 Structural Systems Mechanical Systems Accessibility & Life Safety

80 84 86

Closing Statement .................................. 93 Resume ..................................................... 94

pg. 1

pg. 2

DESIGN BIBLIOGRAPHY:

The strides I’ve set to enhance my professional development is learning to provide design services that impact the project design, documentation and execution. Being able to collaborate is a vital part of providing a service which is very important to developing a direct relationship with the client and the contractors. Learning the ethics of how to respond, when to take action, and who the participants that are involved. Understand the notion of the construction market materials, products and building systems based on the impact of costs. Communication has been my weakest attribute in my design career. I’ve requested to be put into a position where I have to respond outside the ofﬁce on a daily basis. I seized the opportunity to oversee the Construction Administration of a 500,000sf mixed residential project of multiple shareholders and government funded with a well renown construction company; it has forced me to communicate and convey my design intent with the associated players of the project. I’ve learned to maintain legitimate responsive action of considering legal and consistent information. A necessary skill to develop relationships as well as trust that entitles me as an exceptional design professional. This not just helped me break out of my quiet shell, but I learn to understand the associated players of what their objectives may be. Enhancing this skill and continue to do so has truly been a great experience in gaining acceptance to the design and construction industry.

The impact on globalization is due to the technologically advanced, and this is the main reason I push myself in mastering computer generated software which is essential to emerging design professionals of this era. These Building Information Modeling (BIM) software is a tool I use on a daily basis as an expert user in managing the ﬁle, modeling, detailing and coordinating information. With this tool, I’m able to process information faster on a daily basis in in providing responsive construction services and deliveries between design team, contractors, engineers, and clients. The goals in practice I foresee of gaining professional experience in the future are leading the construction administration business side of management. Understand process of what’s desired, needed and/or required by the contractors as well as maintaining the clients’ best interest for a fast pace construction schedule. Most importantly, develop good relations in the construction industry along with fellow designers, contractors, engineers and developers.

pg. 3

pg. 4

PROJECT STATEMENT:

The Urban Sky Center is a stack of elevated public “open” space that engages the urban context in a collection of three open space types; a plaza, an enclosed vent space and a recreational roof deck in the form of a golf driving range. Located at Parcel 16 at the intersection of Columbus Avenue and Clarendon Street, one of twenty-three air right sites above Interstate 90 highway that splits the Boston neighborhoods of the Back Bay and South End districts. The site is largely a series of bridge conditions that frame the pike below. The northern edge of the site has a public park which conceptually expands south to Columbus Avenue. The site’s adjacency with the Back Bay Station, identiﬁes the site as a transit hub. Therefore the urban edge streetscape creates that language of spatial connectivity at the street level that must communicate between indoor/outdoor common spaces to not only accommodate the site as a passage, but a destination, a contribution to the public realm as a collection of recreation spaces. The elevated multifunctional indoor space is transformable to meet the desired programmatic demands for large sporting, community, social or special events. For the top tier of the rooftop open space forms interconnected views of how individuals interact with the city skyline. These modes of outdoor and/or indoor open spaces is intended for all users as the space is only successful as the people who occupy the space; in which to not dictate the design intent, but to design for opportunities. The future of the Urban Sky Center will inﬂuence society to be more active within the built environment.

pg. 5

pg. 6

SITE ANALYSIS: Massachusetts, Boston, Back Bay Parcel 16

pg. 7

STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

0’

500’ 250’

1000’

LOCUS MAP: CITY OF BOSTON CIVIC VISION FOR TURNPIKE AIR RIGHT SITES The City of Boston’s civic vision is to populate these air right sites in efforts to stitch the gap amongst the districts that’s separated by the highway Interstate-90. (“A Civic Vision For Turnpike Air Rights in Boston”, by Boston Redevelopment Authority, Thomas M. Menino.)

pg. 8



  

 





 







 



 



 





 





  

     

 

  

 

Winter Solstice December 21

Fall Equinox September 21

Summer Solstice June 21

Spring Equinox March 21

EXISTING SITE PLAN OF ANNUAL SUN|SHADOW STUDY Scale: Not to Scale 9:00am 12:00pm 3:00pm 6:00pm



STREET ELEVATION - NORTH OF COLUMBUS AVENUE

pg. 9

KEVIN LYNCH SITE ANALYSIS PATH - From low to moderate and high volume of trafﬁc at street level; whether its public transportation, vehicular trafﬁc or pedestrian circulation; these paths enable users to access the site.

0’

500’ 250’

1000’

EDGES - The property edges respond to the paths that create street walls of mid-rise to high-rise buildings. These urban edges identiﬁes the building types which then identify the districts.

0’

500’ 250’

1000’

DISTRICTS - The zones of these various building types and spacial features create a sense of identity. From corporate buildings, shopping centers, retail spaces, residential neighborhood and recreational open spaces; these spaces attract the public realm of activating the spaces.

0’

500’ 250’

1000’

NODES - The nodes are community infrastructure for the people. Guided by design for the people and used by the people, these open spaces form a place of gathering. Humans are social beings in which these places are ideal for social interactions at all levels; for large groups, intimate settings, or a retreat from the inner city.

0’

500’ 250’

1000’

LANDMARKS - The sense of way finding. These local landmarks in the heart of Back Bay identifies the city of Boston nation wide. From the John Hancock Tower, the Prudential center, and Newbury Street as well as Boylston Street. The special events that take place in the area, annually, monthly, weekly or daily, creates this sense of community camaraderie that is identified by these renowned landmarks. 0’

500’ 250’

pg. 10

1000’

EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE CONTEXT PROGRAM ADJACENCY AT STREET LEVEL

PROGRAM LEGEND     

pg. 11

NODES: URBAN “OPEN” SPACE

E. F. C.

OPEN SPACE CATEGORIZATION Operations: • all year • seasonal • monthly • weekly • daily • events

pg. 12

Features: • water fountain • garden/green space • parking lot • dog park • sport activity space • playground • festivities

Access: • street level • below grade • elevated space

Context: • commercial • neighborhood • religion • body of water • expressway • public transit

EXISTING URBAN “OPEN” SPACE ANALYSIS A. COPLEY SQUARE • all year • events • water fountain • garden/green space • festivities • street level • commercial • religion • public transit

B. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE CENTER • seasonal • water fountain • street level • commercial • religion • public transit

C. PETER’S PARK • all year • garden/green space • dog park • sport activity space • playground • street level • neighborhood • public transit

D. SoWa OPEN MARKET • seasonal • weekly • festivities • sport activity space • parking lot • street level • neighborhood • expressway

E. PRUDENTIAL CENTER PLAZA • seasonal • events • garden green space • festivities • elevated space • commercial • public transit

F. TITUS SPARROW PARK • seasonal • events • garden/green space • sport activity space • playground • street level • neighborhood • religion

G. DCR’s HATCH MEMORIAL SHELL • special occasions • garden/green space • street level • body of water • expressway

H. PARCEL 16 • below grade • commercial • neighborhood • public transit • expressway

pg. 13

PHYSICAL SITE MODEL Scale 1:80

pg. 14

pg. 15

pg. 16

ZONING & REGULATIONS ZONING DISTRICTS CITY OF BOSTON Map 1 Boston Proper http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/zoning/ zoning-code-maps As amended Effective: March 14, 2012



Article 13 - Table B: Dimensional Regulations

The site’s zoning regulations is zoned for either B-4 or B-8 in which the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 4.0 or 8.0. The concluded constraint that was set for the design in meeting between B-4 and B-8 is a FAR of 6.0.

pg. 17

OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT 

 

     

  

  

 



  

  

 

  





CITY STREET WALL F.A.R. STUDY

FAR 1.0 - 46,000 sf

pg. 18

FAR 6.0 - 276,000 sf - Street Wall complies









HEIGHT LIMIT & SETBACK

FAR 4.8 - 220,800 sf - 20% Minimum Open Space Required

FAR 6.0 - 276,000 sf* - Relocate 20% Minimum Open Space - 15'-0" Setback is unnecessary

pg. 19

PRECEDENT STUDY:

BOSTON UNIVERSITY FITNESS AND RECREATION CENTER Boston, Massachusetts (http://www.bu.edu/ďŹ trec/)

The transformable multifunctional space of the ultimate athletic facility has a great deal of amenities and common spaces. This facility has a menu of athletic programs that offers variety to the students.

AROMA GOLF RANGE Koreatown, LA, California (http://www.aromaresort.com/golf.aspx)

A triple decker golf range practice facility, also a spa for the luxurious life style. Located in the urban city, this multipurpose golf range also serves as a parking lot.

PEABODY ESSEX MUSEUM Salem, Massachusetts (http://www.pem.org/)

The common areas are multifunctional open space which creates opportunities in utilizing the space.

pg. 20

NEW MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART New York, NY (http://www.newmuseum.org/)

The street wall and urban edge study of how the building responds to the surrounding context. How it creates its own language of its shape and materiality that separates itself from the norm. Signifying its own identity

SOLIDS vs. VOIDS DIAGRAM

VIEW FROM SOUTH OF BOWERY STREET

STREET ELEVATION: URBAN EDGE DIAGRAM

SCREEN VISIBILITY DIAGRAM

VIEW FROM BALCONY

pg. 21

pg. 22

MASSING STUDY:

STREET ELEVATION - EAST OF CLARENDON STREET EAST

STREET ELEVATION - WEST OF CLARENDON STREET pg. 23

SURROUNDING SITE CONTEXT

SITE PROPERTY

STREET WALL ON PRIMARY FRONTAGE

URBAN EDGE STREET WALL

PRIMARY FRONTAGE CONTINUITY BAR

BUILT ENVIRONMENT 100’ HEIGHT THRESHOLD

FAR 6.0 MASSING STUDY

pg. 24

MASSING DECONSTRUCTION 1.

URBAN EDGE STREET WALL RELATION 3.

STREET ELEVATION - NORTH OF COLUMBUS AVENUE pg. 25

pg. 26

PROGRAMMING: Exploration of the additional program responds to the surrounding urban context. Consideration of the infrastructure below, activation of the open plaza space at street level, and connection to the city skyline; the site has great opportunities to create a place of destination and an open ﬂow space. The process of accessibility and circulation, public and private zones, multi-purpose spaces, indoor versus outdoor attractions and maintain daily operations throughout the course of the seasons. Implementing activities that can enhance the public realm of the site.

PROGRAM LEGEND     

STACKED PROGRAM CONCEPT

pg. 27

A.1

2 H'

3.5

%.#4'0&10 564''6

5 M'

20'

+06' 4

56# 6

19' +06' 4

56# 6'Á

11'

SI PLAN DIAGRAM - URBAN PASSAGE CROSS CONNECTION SITE Scale: 1:80 pg. 28

'Á 9 '5

      

     PROGRAM MASSING PROGRESS - NORTH EAST AERIAL VIEW

    

 

   

PROGRAM MASSING PROGRESS - SOUTHWEST AERIAL VIEW

  

   

  

PROGRAM MASSING PROGRESS - SOUTHEAST AERIAL VIEW

pg. 29

EXISTING CONDITIONS - SITE CONTEXT PROGRAM ADJACENCY AT STREET LEVEL

   

PROGRAM MASSING PROGRESS COMMUNITY CENTER & RECREATIONAL SPACE pg. 30

  









PROGRAM CONCEPT - ELEVATED OPEN SPACE

pg. 31

pg. 32

INVESTIGATIVE DESIGN: Natural Ventilation

Sports complex designed to harness the wind loads of its surrounding context in naturally ventilating the building in efforts of sustainability and the environment. The wind rose study of the area has exposure to constant wind flow caused by the wind tunnel effect of large buildings (ideally in dense metropolitan areas) and an underpasses vehicular interstate. With the City of Boston’s master plan of filling in the parcel air-rite site, it’ll create a under-passing tunnel; therefor, the building has potential of an innovative creation in adaptive wind driven thermal comfort. During the construction between 1968-1976 of the John Hancock Tower designed by I.M. Pei & Partners had encountered a major issue in apprehending the wind loads of the site. The force of the wind due to numerous storms had shattered many large glass planes in which became a design flaw and had to be replaced by a more resilient glass panel design. With this historical content and value of the wind studies, there’s a great possibility that this wind wall effect will have an effect on Parcel 16.

(source: Boston Public Library) July 1973, 2,472 windows had shattered caused by series of storms.

pg. 33

MONTHLY DIRECTIONAL ROSE WIND DIAGRAM

Winter|Spring

(source: windďŹ nder.com Wind Direction Distribution Boston Logan Airport)

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

Fall|Winter

Summer|Fall

Spring|Summer

January

pg. 34

HIGH-RISE STREET WALL

t tree

art S

Stu

e ve nu sA bu lu m

Stre

eley

Berk

n St

endo Clar

t tree

S uth tmo

Dar

reet

ANNUAL WIND IDEOLOGY DIAGRAM Scale: Not to Scale

HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE

pg. 35

SKETCH OF HARNESSING THE WIND THROUGH A TURBINE DESIGN. Scale: Not to scale

pg. 36

AXONOMETRIC WIND TUNNEL EFFECT DIAGRAM

pg. 37

STUDY MODEL - WEST AERIAL VIEW

STUDY MODEL - SOUTHEAST AERIAL VIEW pg. 38

The wind tunnel effect is created by street walls along the edges of the paths that redirects the travel of wind movement, thus has the opportunity to harness that energy. The vertical slotted design directs the winds apprehensive direction in relation to the buildings mass; but not only does it identifies the contour separating the different programs at different levels, it’s purpose is to direct the air flow into the spaces. At ground level it harnesses the air flow from the I-90 Interstate. The mid section (body of the building) has fin like louvers to intake the wind flow from the north of the site and funnels around the perimeter of the building into the space and out the shaft dampers within the courtyard; also to generate the hidden mechanical penthouse space below the rooftop golf range.

DESIGN CONCEPT SKETCH

Support

Outdoor Outd oor Acti Activity vity

Internal Program

Swimming Pool

Internal Program Gymnasium Field

Circulation

Support

Obstacle Course Support Indoor Jogging Track

Internal Program

Gymnasium

COLUMBUS AVE.

STANHOPE ST. Outdoor Activity

MBTA BACK BAY STATION INTERSTATE - 90

PROGRAM SECTIONAL Scale: Not to Scale pg. 39

pg. 40

DESIGN INTENT: Urban Open Space

,1*0 *#0%1%- 619'4

/+:'&Ă 75' 4'5+&'06+#. 619'4 9 9 4'6#+. 52#%' 2156 1((+%' #6 564''6 .'8'.

2#4-+0) )#4#)' #&,#%'06 61 /$6# %1//76'4 .+0' 14#0)' .+0' '064#0%' 4#/2 61 +06'456#6'Ă 9'56 #6 564''6 .'8'. /+:'&Ă 75' 4'5+&'06+#. 9 4'6#+. 52#%' #6 564''6 .'8'.

411(612 )1.( 4#0)' 5;56'/

$#%- $#; 56#6+10 '064#0%' %1746;#4& $75 6'4/+0#.

4'6#+. 52#%' 9 176&114 &+0+0)

176&114 2.#<# (14 564''6 8'0&145 8'0 27$.+% 75'

+06'456#6'Ă '#56 9'56 $170& $'.19 564''6 .'8'. /$6# 14#0)' .+0' (4#/+0)*#/ .+0'

pg. 41

DESIGN CONCEPT SKETCH

DESIGN GUIDELINES: - VERTICAL vs. HORIZONTAL - TRANSPARENT vs. OPAQUE - PLANER vs. RECESSED - PUBLIC vs. PRIVATE - CONTINUOUS vs. TRANSITION - INDOOR vs. OUTDOOR

EXOSKELETON STRUCTURAL DESIGN STRATEGY

pg. 42

WEST WING FACADE STUDY

EAST WING FACADE STUDY

EXPLODE AXON - EXTERIOR WALL DETAIL

pg. 43

PLAZA DESIGN CONCEPT

pg. 44

pg. 45

A.1

E' 2412'46; .+0'

56#0*12' 564''6

-8' - 4" -4' - 4"

-7' - 10" 72

5VQTCIG 5(

4GVCKN 5(

.QCFKPI 5(

%1.7/$75 #8' $15610 /#

4GVCKN 5(

5VQTCIG 5(

-10' - 0"

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

3.5

4GVCKN 5(

%.#4'0&10 564''6

.QCFKPI 5(

-2' - 0"

5VQTCIG 5(

#VTKWO 5(

5VQTCIG 5(

4GVCKN 5(

5VQTCIG 5(

5 5VQTIG 5(

5VQTCIG 5( 1HHKEG 5(

9QOGP 5(

-'; 2.#0

-4' - 0"

4GEGRVKQP &GUM 5( 4GVCKN 5(

% % 9QOGP 5( % % %QQMKPI %NCUUTQQO 5( /GP 5(

+557#0%'5

% % /GP 5(

+06' 4

20' 72

19' % % %NCUUTQQO 5(

+06' 4

18'

%QOOWKV[ %GPVGT .QDD[ 5(

-1' - 0"

16.5' &0

16'

5GEWTKV[ 5(

$CEM $C[ /$6# 5(

56# 6'Á

17'

15.6'

. %1

$7 7/

' 07 8' 5 #

56# 6

'Á 9

'56

' # 56

%JGEMGT

%JGEMGF $[

15' 14.8' 0' - 0"

64#

14' 10

05+6

4#+.

564''6 .'8'. (.114 2.#0

13.3' 13' Á

&TCYKPI 5ECNG

12'

2TQLGEV 0WODGT

,QD 0Q

11' Street Level 1 1/16" = 1'-0"

STREET LEVEL PLAN - OPEN PLAZA Scale 1:80 A

A.1

F' 1 72

5VGCO 4QQO 5(

%1.7/$75 #8' $15610 /#

/GP 5(

H' 9QOGP 5(

/GP .QEMGT 5(

,CPKVQT %NQUGV 5(

9QOGP .QEMGT 5(

&0 12'0 61 $'.19

3.5 72

5VQTCIG 5(

4 12'0 61 $'.19

9QOGPU 9GNNPGUU 5(

L' 5 12'0 61 $'.19

)[OPCUKWO 5(

M' -'; 2.#0

% % 1HHKEG 5(

/WNVKRWTRQUG 4QQO 5(

12'0 61 $'.19

% % 1HHKEG 5(

+557#0%'5

20'

7 % % 1HHKEG 5( &0

19'

72 &0

12'0 61 $'.19

% % 1HHKEG 5(

18' 17' 16.5' 16'

15.6'

% % #EVKXKV[ 4QQO 5(

15'

%JGEMGF $[

%JGEMGT

14.8' 14' 10

5'%10& (.114 2.#0

13.3' 13' &TCYKPI 5ECNG

12' 11' 1

pg. 46

LEVEL 2 PLAN - INDOOR OPEN GYMNASIUM Scale 1:80

Level 2

,QD 0Q

2TQLGEV 0WODGT

F' 1 )QNH 5KO 4QQO 5(

)QNH 5KO 4QQO 5(

G' %1.7/$75 #8' $15610 /#

)QNH 5KO 4QQO 5(

%QOOQP 5RCEG

9QOGP 5(

)QNH 5KO 4QQO 5(

/GP $CT 5( 5(

)QNH 5KO 4QQO 5(

J' -KVEJGP 2TGR 5(

3.5

(TQPV &GUM 5(

K' )QNH 4CPIG 5(

L' 5 M' -'; 2.#0

6 4QQHVQR )QNH (KGNF 5(

+557#0%'5

20'

7 19' 18'

8 17' 16.5' 16' 15.6'

14' 10

%JGE

%JGEMGF $[

15' 14.8'

5+:6* (.114 2.#0

13.3' 13' &TCYKPI 5ECNG

12' A.1 1

2TQLGEV 0W

,QD 0Q

11'

Level 6 1/16" = 1'-0"

LEVEL 6 PLAN - ROOFTOP OPEN GOLF RANGE Scale 1:80 A

F' 1 12'0 61 $'.19

%1.7/$75 #8' $15610 /#

2 -KVEJGP 5(

$CT 5(

.QWPIG 5(

3.5 4

K' $CT 5(

)QNH 4CPIG 5(

L' 5 M' 1RGP 6Q $GNQY

-'; 2.#0

+557#0%'5

20'

7 19' 18'

8 17' 16.5' 16' 15.6'

9 15' 14.8'

%JGEMGF $[

14' 10

'+)*6* (.114 2.#0

13.3' 13' &TCYKPI 5ECNG

12' ,QD 0Q

A.1

11'

Level 8 1/16" = 1'-0"

LEVEL 8 PLAN - MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE Scale 1:80 pg. 47

2TQLGE

Roof Level 128' - 0" Level 8 116' - 0" Level 7 104' - 0" Level 6 92' - 0" PH-Roof 88' - 0" Level 5 80' - 0" Level 4 68' - 0" Level 3 56' - 0" Pool Level 50' - 6" Level 2 44' - 0"

Street Level 26' - 0"

Underpass Level 0' - 0"

WEST WING - CLARENDON STREET ELEVATION Scale 1:40

Roof Level 128' - 0"

Level 8 116' - 0"

Level 7 104' - 0" # "

Level 6 92' - 0" PH-Roof 88' - 0" "

Level 5 80' - 0"

Level 4 68' - 0"

Level 3 56' - 0" !

Pool Level 50' - 6"

Level 2 44' - 0"

Street Level 26' - 0"

&'( )

&'( "

Underpass Level 0' - 0"

WEST WING LONGITUDINAL SECTION Scale 1:40 pg. 48

Roof Level 128' - 0" Level 8 116' - 0" Level 7 104' - 0" Level 6 92' - 0" PH-Roof 88' - 0" Level 5 80' - 0" Level 4 68' - 0" Level 3 56' - 0" Pool Level 50' - 6" Level 2 44' - 0"

Street Level 26' - 0"

Underpass Level 0' - 0"

EAST WING - COLUMBUS AVENUE ELEVATION Scale 1:40

11'

12'

13'

14'

15'

16'

17'

18'

19'

20'

Roof Level 128' - 0"

Level 8 116' - 0"

Level 7 104' - 0"

Level 6 92' - 0" PH-Roof 88' - 0"

Level 5 80' - 0"

Level 4 68' - 0"

Level 3 56' - 0"

Level 2 44' - 0"

! ""

Street Level 26' - 0"

%&' (

%&' )

Underpass Level 0' - 0"

EAST WING LONGITUDINAL SECTION Scale 1:40 pg. 49

NORTHEAST PERSPECTIVE

SOUTHWEST AERIAL VIEW pg. 50

MASSACHUSETTS TURNPIKE WEST BOUND PERSPECTIVE

COLUMBUS & CLARENDON INTERSECTION PERSPECTIVE pg. 51

pg. 52

FINAL DESIGN: Final Review November 25th, 2013 Design Critics: Marcus Martinez Karen Nelson Kyle Sturgeon Ian Taberner Amna Ansari Emily Paparella

Structural Consultant: Amir Mesgar Mechanical Consultant: Bruce Macritchie

pg. 53

pg. 54

pg. 55

 

    

 

 pg. 56

The elevated open spaces of the Urban Sky Center stitches the urban fabric of the city. From the high commercial district of Back Bay to the high end residential brownstone of the South End district.

BUILDING GROSS SQUARE FEET Area Site Street Level 3539 SF 16262 SF Level 2 28561 SF Level 3 28561 SF Level 4 28561 SF Level 5 17991 SF 7382 SF Level 6 7481 SF 3727 SF Level 7 7481 SF 3727 SF Level 8 7481 SF 3727 SF 164481 SF

EAST WING WEST WING

EAST WING WEST WING WEST WING EAST WING WEST WING EAST WING WEST WING EAST WING

pg. 57

56#0*12' 564''6

2 2 45 0' #*

%1 STREET LEVEL EL 40 Scale 1:40 pg. 58

5 $7 / .7

' 07 ' #8

%.#4'0&10 564''6

16 16

PLAZA OPEN SPACE - PUBLIC USE

241)4#/ .')'0& 2.#<# 2#6+1 4'6#+. /$6# 64#05+6 .1$$; (4106 &'5 %1//10 #4'# 4'%4'#6+10 1((+%' %10('4'0%' .1%-'4 );/0#5+7/ .'#40+0) .#$14#614; -+6%*'0 59+//+0) 211. 4700'45 64#% 9'+)*65 %#4&+1 ;1)# &#0%' /7.6+Á(70%6+10#. /'%*#0+%#. .1#&+0)

+06' 456 # 6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

' 07 8' # 75 /$ .7 %1

64# 05

$' +6 4#+. . 19

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á ' . #

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .#

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á ' .19 # 56

%1//70+6; %'06'4

pg. 59

pg. 60

pg. 61

9 16 16

9 2

11*

5 11* 8*

' 07 8' # 75 /$ pg. 62 .7 %1

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

LEVEL 2 40 Scale 1:40

%1//70+6; %'06'4

SPACE TRANSFORMATION FLOOR DESIGN CONCEPT

http://www.asbglassﬂoor.com/

The ASB GlassFloor is an advanced ﬂooring system with custom made surface of the glass showcase a resilient ﬂoor for sports, but can also be used for any type of function. The LED marking lines can be programmed on/off to suit the purpose of the space.

pg. 63

9 16 16

9 13 2

12* 8*

7* 7* 7*

' 07 8' # 75 /$ pg. 64 .7 %1

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

LEVEL 3 40 Scale 1:40

%1//70+6; %'06'4

INDOOR OPEN SPACE - GYMNASIUM

INDOOR OPEN SPACE - SPECIAL EVENT

pg. 65

16 16

15 15 2

5 1*

241)4#/ .')'0&

17*

2.#<# 2#6+1 4'6#+. /$6# 64#05+6 .1$$; (4106 &'5 %1//10 #4'# 4'%4'#6+10 1((+%' %10('4'0%' .1%-'4 );/0#5+7/ .'#40+0) .#$14#614; -+6%*'0 59+//+0) 211. 4700'45 64#% 9'+)*65 %#4&+1 ;1)# &#0%' /7.6+Á(70%6+10#. /'%*#0+%#. .1#&+0)

17*

' 07 8' # 75 /$ pg. 66 .7 %1

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

LEVEL 4 40 Scale 1:40

%1//70+6; %'06'4

16 16

LEVEL 5 Scale 1:40 pg. 67

16 16

1 1*

5 4

241)4#/ .')'0&

LEVEL 6 ar) (Level 7 Similar) Scale 1:40

' 07 8' # 75 /$ pg. 68 .7 %1

+06' 456 #6'

$' Ă 9 .19 '56

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

%1//70+6; %'06'4

SKY OPEN SPACE - ROOFTOP GOLF RANGE

pg. 69

16 16

18 2

5 1 1*

241)4#/ .')'0&

LEVEL 8 40 Scale 1:40 ' 07 8' # 75 /$ pg. 70 .7 %1

+06' 456 #6'

$' Á 9 .19 '56

$'4-'.'; 564''6

%' .# 5 2 '4 *0 %#

%1//70+6; %'06'4

SOUTHWEST AERIAL VIEW

pg. 71

pg. 72

pg. 73

H. E.

 A. B. C. D. E. G. H. J. K. M.

         

pg. 74

WEST WING, WEST ELEVATION CLARENDON STREET Scale 1:40

J. C. G. K.

G. M.

WEST WING, NORTH ELEVATION STANHOPE STREET Scale 1:40

EAST WING, EAST ELEVATION CAHERS PLACE Scale 1:40

C. D.

EAST WING, SOUTH ELEVATION ON COLUMBUS AVENUE Scale 1:40 pg. 75

18'

19'

B A401

T.O. Steel 136' - 0"

Roof Level 128' - 0"

56#+0.'55 56''. 9+4' /'5*

56#+0.'55 56''. 9+4' /'5* 5%4''0 9#.. 5;56'/

Level 8 116' - 0"

Level 7 104' - 0"

Level 6 92' - 0"

C A401

#.7/+07/ /'%*#0+%#. .178'4

Level 5 80' - 0"

(4+66'& ).#<+0)

Level 4 68' - 0"

Level 4 68' - 0" #.7/+07/ %746#+0 9#.. 5;56'/ #.6'40#6+0) ).#<+0) 1((5'6

%.'#4 8+5+10 ).#<+0)

Level 3 56' - 0"

E A401

D A401 52#0&4'. ).#<+0)

52#0&4'. ).#<+0)

Level 2 44' - 0"

%1.14 24'%#56 4+$$'& 2#0'.

&#4- )4#0+6' $#5'

Street Level 26' - 0"

':215'& 5647%674#. 56''. +067/'5%'06 2#+06

0) #55'/$.;

'&)' 1( 5.#$

#+4^8#214 $#44+'4 94#2 #6 %746#+0 9#.. ,#/$

':215'& 5647%674#. 56''. +067/'5%'06 2#+06

'&)' 1( 5.#$

pg. 76 #.7/+07/ %746#+0 9#.. /7..+10

18'

#+4^8#214 $#44+'4 94#2 #6 %746#

#.7/+07/ /'%*#+0%#. .178'4

#.7/+07/ /'%*#+0%#. .178'4 56#+0.'55 56''. 9+4' /'5* 5%4''0

56#+0.'55 56''. 9+4' /'5* 5%4''0

A. EXTERIOR WALL ELEVATION Scale: 1’-0” = 1/16” B. EXTERIOR WALL SECTION Scale: 1’-0” = 1/16”

56#+0.'55 56''. 4170& /7..+10

Level 5 80' - 0"

56#+0.'55 56''. 4170& /7..+10

#.7/+07/ %746#+0 9#.. /7..+10

52#0&4'. +057.#6'& ).#55

#.7/+07/ %746#+0 9#.. /7..+10

C. TYPICAL SECTION DETAIL EXTERIOR CURTAIN WALL AT SLAB EDGE Scale: 1’-0” = 1/2”

D. SECTION DETAIL EXTERIOR PRECAST PANEL TO CURTAIN WALL Scale: 1’-0” = 1/2”

+057.#6'& &7#. ).#55 52#0&4'. +057.#6'& ).#55

+057.#6'& &7#. ).#55

L'- SECTION TYPICAL EXTERIOR CURTAIN WALL AT SLAB EDGE DETAIL

&7#. +057.#6'& ).#55

&7#. +057.#6'& ).#55 52#0&4'. +057.#6'& ).#55

Level 2 44' - 0"

E. TYPICAL PLAN DETAIL EXTERIOR ENVELOPE Scale: 1’-0” = 1/2”

52#0&4'. +057.#6'& ).#55

56#+0.'55 56''. (.#5*+0)

56#+0.'55 56''. (.#5*+0) #+4 ^ 8#214 $#44+'4 /'/$4#0'

24'%#56 2#0'. 9 '/$'& %100'%6+10 61 5647%674' #+4 ^ 8#214 $#44+'4 /'/$4#0' $#%-72 4+)+& +057.#6+10 .+)*6 )7#)' %1.& (14/ (4#/+0)

24'%#56 2#0'. 9 '/$'& %100'%6+10 61 5647%674' $#%-72 4+)+& +057.#6+10 (+4' 4#6'& );257/ 9#.. $1#4& %'+.+0) #55'/$.; .+)*6 )7#)' %1.& (14/ (4#/+0)

'&)' 1( 5.#$

#+4^8#214 $#44+'4 94#2 #6 %746#+0 9#.. ,#/$ (+4' 4#6'& );257/ 9#.. $1#4& %'+.+0) #55'/$.;

EXTERIOR PRECAST PANEL TO CURTAIN WALL DETAIL - SECTION

':215'& 5647%674#. 56''. +067/'5%'06

pg. 77 +057.#6'& &7#. ).#55

24'%#56 %10%4'6' 4+$$'& 2#0'.

NORTHEAST PERSPECTIVE

SOUTHWEST AERIAL VIEW pg. 78

MASSACHUSETTS TURNPIKE WEST BOUND PERSPECTIVE

COLUMBUS & CLARENDON INTERSECTION PERSPECTIVE pg. 79

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS:

    



  STRUCTURAL SYSTEM - NORTHEAST AERIAL



   



   

 





STRUCTURAL SYSTEM - SOUTHWEST AERIAL pg. 80

A.1 A.2

 F' 1

The Urban Sky Center structural base is over designed for the likes of supporting the base of the building. Adopting the structural grid system at the columns, beams and girders as the basis of load transfer from the Urban Sky Center’s structural column locations. Placement of pile caps on Stanhope Street and Cahers Place to support the ends of the building.

2 H'

 

  

3.5 4



5 L' M'

The long span above the plaza free of columns is designed with the structural truss system that transfers the load to each end of the design to allow the open volume of space.

21' 20' 8 19'



  17'  



18'

16'

15'

10 14' 13' 11

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - STREET LEVEL PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

11'

12'

13'

14'

15'

16'

17'

18'

19'

20'

21' T.O. Steel 136' - 0" Roof Level 128' - 0" Level 8 116' - 0" Level 7 104' - 0" Level 6 92' - 0" PH-Roof 88' - 0" Level 5 80' - 0" Level 4 68' - 0" Level 3 56' - 0" Pool Level 50' - 6" Level 2 44' - 0"

Street Level 26' - 0"

Underpass Level 0' - 0"

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - EAST WING SOUTH ELEVATION COLUMBUS AVENUE Scale 1:40 pg. 81

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5 J' 4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - LEVEL 2 PLAN N Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

12'

pg. 82 11'

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - LEVEL 4 PLAN N Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - LEVEL 7 PLAN N Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

12' 11'

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS - ROOF PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64” pg. 83

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS: The golf range has the opportunity to create a topographical landscape to accommodate the height requirements needed to sufﬁce the mechanical systems. East Wing and West Wing are treated as two separate systems. The enclosed mechanical shafts allow riser duct works to support each ﬂoor. Proper louver and air ventilation to support the retail spaces at street level. As for the MBTA Back Bay Station exit, it will be naturally ventilated.

  

  

SECTION AXON FROM COLUMBUS AVENUE

pg. 84



MECHANICAL SYSTEMS WEST WING BUILDING SECTION Scale 1:40



 



MECHANICAL SYSTEMS - WEST WING LONGITUDINAL BUILDING SECTION Scale 1:40 pg. 85

A A.1 A.2

H' 56

21' 20' 19' 18' 17'

ACCESSIBILITY & LIFE SAFETY

15' 14'

LIFE SAFETY - STREET LEVEL PLAN N Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

A A.1 A.2

The plaza is accessible from all around the site. The intersection of Columbus Avenue and Clarendon Street point of elevation is at Street Level height as it gradually ramps downward around the perimeter of the building to an approximate 8’-0” drop at the intersection of Cahers Place and Stanhope Street. The plaza space hovering the freeway maintains the Street Level elevation height which is easily accessible from the primary street frontages.

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5 J' 4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9

The building’s perimeter and entry points reﬂects relative to its site surrounding height elevation to allow an easily accessible transition in-out of the building. Along Stanhope Street has the opportunity for vehicles to enter the site at grade which reﬁnes the urban concept of the “open” space.

17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

12'

pg. 86 11'

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 2 PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

A A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 3 PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

12' 11'

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 4 PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64” pg. 87

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 5 PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

pg. 88

12' 11'

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 6 PLAN AN (LEVEL 7 PLAN SIMILAR) R) Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64”

A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

LIFE SAFETY - LEVEL 8 PLAN AN Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64”

12' 11'

A A.1 A.2

F' 1 G'

2 H' 56

3.5

4 K'

5 L' M'

21' 20' 8 19' 18' 9 17' 16' 15'

10 14' 13' 11

12' 11'

LIFE SAFETY - ROOF PLAN N Scale : 1’-0” = 1/64” 64” pg. 89

PHYSICAL MODEL: Scale: 1’-0” = 1/32”

CLARENDON STREET AERIAL VIEW

pg. 90

pg. 91

pg. 92

CLOSING STATEMENT:

Public open spaces are a vital part of the urban planning. It’s difficult to envision how the space will be utilized, but can be beneficial to the built environment. Its importance of promoting social interaction is essential to the human nature of dependent living. It has the ability of increasing urban communities and support local businesses. Create design options for the users the opportunity to define the space. By investigating the daily patterns that coexist, areas of interest that attracts activity by popular demand, location relevant to neighborhood development, we as designers can formulate the potential programmatic strategies of the public open spaces.

pg. 93

RESUME:

pg. 94

165 Davis Avenue, Apt. #2 Brookline, MA 02445 617.953.5466 wendall.chin2@gmail.com Began my innovative design career in the automotive industry, I altered to pursue my passion in the design and construction of Architecture. Highly motivated and meticulous design professional with a conscientious collaborative work ethic. Intuitive dynamic ability to perform under immense pressure. CORE COMPETENCIES:

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:

• Exceptional drafting and rendering ability. • Keen understanding of construction materials and components. • Proficient knowledge of academic research facilities and sports complexes. • Advanced application with: Autodesk Revit Google SketchUp AutoCAD Adobe Creative Suite: Photoshop InDesign Illustrator • Proficient application with: 3D Studio Max Bluebeam PDF Revu Microsoft Office Suite: Excel Word PowerPoint

ADD Inc. - Boston, MA Present

06/2012 -

Design Coordinator 2

Design staff for urban setting, mid-rise, mixed-residential consists of market rate and affordable units. • Assisted with detailing and development of exterior building assemblies • Coordination with engineering disciplines • Assisted bid/negotiation efforts and extensive VE options • Development residential planning modules based on accessible guidelines for kitchens and baths • Supporting role for CA during construction Goody Clancy - Boston, MA 06/2012

06/2007 -

Design Intern 1

Design staff and administrator of design projects with institutional buildings for private and state agencies, including residential halls, dining facilities, laboratories, gymnasiums, and admissions center. • Production drafter and BIM (Building Information Modeling) throughout the design and construction phase • Coordinate with project team and consultants of IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) • Marketing proposals of producing conceptual and photorealistic renderings for graphic presentations and booklets • Administrative tasks of documentation management • Conduct site planning, site analysis and preliminary investigations of space • Research codes and accessibility of existing and new development JT Motoring - Boston, MA 05/2006

03/2003 -

Automotive Technician EDUCATION: Boston Architectural College Bachelor of Architecture Candidate Anticipated Graduation - 2013

Hands-on experience with the innovative automotive technology of high performance products. Ingenuity and precision to achieve vehicle’s maximum potential. COMMUNITY DESIGN: Boston Chinatown Neighborhood Center - Boston, MA 09/2011

04/2011 -

Project Leader

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: NCARB Intern Development Program Enrolled - 2011 Nominated for BAC Portfolio of the Year Award - 2009

Provided community design services for BCNC with the goal of designing and allocating space to best serve the local community. • Promoted collaboration between the internal departments • Developed, conducted and lead design workshop presentations • Set expectations with clients in meeting project schedule • Maintained client rapport SELECTIVE PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: • • •

•

NBF|ACDC - Parcel 24 North: Design assist throughout DD, CD, VE, Bid/Negotiation, and CA of a mid-rise mixed-residential building at the tail end of the Boston Greenway. Gerding Edlen - Boston Warf Tower: Exterior envelope design team of designing canopies, assisted vertical and horizontal details of a mixed-residential tower. Boston University - Admissions Reception Center: Production BIM Project Digital Lead for the design phase and construction renovation of an “International Style” historical landmark. Produced presentational renderings, animations and physical modeling. SUNY - Institute for Human Performance Expansion: Production BIM Drafter for the design and construction of the institutional research facility; also managed administrative tasks.

pg. 95