Issuu on Google+

Selected Works

Andrew Cunningham


2

1

4

6 3

5


Andrew Cunningham ARCunningham.com

B. Arch 2012 M. Arch 2013


4 // chapter title


Table of Content

Resume

Masters Thesis

Air-Rights Research Parallel Transit Corridor TOD Hybrid Building

Urban Design Research GIS Walkability Study

Senior Thesis

Future Use Building

Built Work

International Students and Scholars Institute

6

12 20 24

42

52

64 section title // 5


Andrew Cunningham

ARCunningham.com

EDUCATION

425.753.6656 cunningham.andrew@me.com 703 Bellevue Ave. E, Apt 317 Seattle, WA 98102

Masters: M. Arch, Bachelors: B.S. Arch,

Northeastern University, Northeastern University,

Boston, MA Boston, MA

2012-2013 2006-2012

Study Abroad: Sustainable Transit

Delft University of Techology

Delft, Netherlands

2012

Study Abroad: Architecture

Academic Intitiatives Abroad

Rome, Italy

2010

PROFESSIONAL Architectural Design Intern: Northeastern University, Boston,MA Facilitated concept designs, feasibility studies, schematic designs, construction documents, and finish schedules for the needs of the Universities 2.5 million sq. ft. campus. Conducted field measurements for as-build documentation. Generated renderings of projects for clients. Managed client communication and relations.

Fall 2011

Urban Design Intern: Massachusetts Port Authority, Boston, MA Responsible for updating the port-wide basemap and creating graphics for office presentations and documentation. Assisted with creating presentations for potential real-estate investors. Conducted feasibility studies for LEED certification process of existing port properties. Observed infrastructure planning and development process.

Fall 2009

Architectural Drafting Intern: Stantec, Kirkland, WA Participated on project team for medium to large franchise clients. Assisted with communal CAD drafting and red-line work. Produced additional graphics for assisting with client presentations and communication.

Summer 2008

6 // chapter title


COMPETITIONS Boston Pedestrian Study: Downtown Boston Business Improvement District, Boston, MA

2012

Herculaneum Archeological: Hewlett Packard Humanities Institute, Naples, Italy

2010

Frugal Architecture Competition: Bruno Zevi Foundation, Rome, Italy

2010

Interests

SKILLS Photoshop

Kerkythea

Architecture

Illustrator

Podium

Art & Photography

InDesign VRay

Biking

Autocad FormZ

Hiking

Revit

Mac OS X

Transit

Sketchup

Windows 7

Urbanism

ArcGIS Microsoft Office Google Earth

Volunteering

iWork & iLife section title // 7


Air Rights CSX Beacon Park Rail Yard

Charles River

1

Boston University West

2

Boston University East Kenmore Square

3 4 5 6

8

7

9

10

Fenway Park

Fenway

Tim Glickman

Parcel 1

Katherine Murphy

Parcels 16-23

Allison Marschilok

Parcel 18

Rachel DeBaun

Parcel 9-10

Pablo Juarez

Parcel 4-6

Haiyang Xu

Parcel 8

Frank Delledera

Parcel 12

Chris Gallo

Parcels 21-22

Drew Cunningham

Parcel 8

Boston Air Rights Parcels | Spring 2013 | Northeastern University Graduate Program of Architecture | Master’s Degree Project | Tim Love 8 // chapter Masterstitle Thesis

11

12


Financial District

Boston Public Gardens

Boston Common

Back Bay

South Station

Chinatown Bay Village Hancock Garage

13

15 14

Prudential Center

16

17

Copley Place

18

19

20 21

22 23

South End

I-93

section Research title // 9


Thesis Research History of ‘Air Rights’ Air - Rights projects are believed to have originated in the 13th century in medieval Roman law. It is commonly thought that the Ponte Vecchio, a bridge with many shops in Florence, Italy, which dates back to the 14th century was the first air rights project in history. The famous architect Le Corbusier discussed the concept of raising residential and commercial activities above transit in his 1815 book ‘Towards a New Architecture’ and ‘Ville Pilotis’ .

after the construction of the Interstate Highway System. Many air-rights projects were constructed simultaneously with the interstate below them. Examples include the George Washington Bus Terminal and Apartments in NYC, the Prudential Building in Chicago, an the Prudential Center in Boston, MA. Projects that Could Not Although Air - Rights projects are incredibly successful at creating value above existing infrastructure, a number of proposed development projects in the recent decades have failed to be constructed. There seem to be three main categories that are standing in the way of projects being completed successfully: 1. Political/Community 2. Technical Issues 3. Financial Issues. While these are all obstacles that are difficult to overcome, the public sentiment in Boston and around the nation is growing in favor of air rights projects.

Projects that Could The concept of “Air Rights” was first utilized in the United States atop railroad property, but has also been utilized with roadways and other buildings. While the concept had been around since antiquity, it was not until trains were electrified, that Air Rights projects became feasible. The first notable project within the United States was Grand Central Station and adjacent blocks in New York, New York. Another push for air-rights developed what is not // 79

10 // chapter Masters title Thesis


section Research title // 11


Thesis Research Development

on end Clar

Dar t

e Stre

t

e Stre

uth

tmo

t

ree n St lsto Boy

Hu

nt in

e

gt on

Av en

ue

u ven ts A

uset

sach

Mas

12 // chapter Masters title Thesis

what is // 37


1 188 ce: Sour

Timeline

The

Bosto

las n At

Copley Place (1983) 1 185 ce: Sour

2013 Hancock Garage (1976) and Prudential Center (1964)

5 177 Sourc

e: Th

e Bo

ston

The

; Atlas

Bosto

Librar

las n At

y of

; Bo

sto

n Pu

Lib blic

rary

ress Cong

1980 City blocks removed for rail yard

1957 City blocks infilled

1881 Railroads

1851 Wetlands

1775 what is //title 29 // 13 section Research


Project Economic Studies

TOTAL

easible

ce were e scale of the es. The llion sq ed and Railroad 414,000 ff ramp, These e if the

address at are ver, the fit into ocated. have a Users 90 and without

ites to major When expand as their me time

Total square footage over I-90 PRUDENTIAL CENTER 18.5% HANCOCK TOWER AND GARAGE 12%

COPLEY PLACE 16.8%

Total square footage 38.5%

27%

Ground floor square footage over I-90

20%

47%

21.8%

Ground floor square footage

what is // 51

14 // chapter Masters title Thesis


Architecture Techtonics -Utilities -Code -Right of Way

Urbanism

Connectivity -Pedestrian -Urban Fabric -Mitigation

Neighborhood -Zoning -Density

Urban Morphology

Regional -Infrastructure -Connectivity

Construction Logistics

Urban Redevelopment Sustainability

Structure

Density (FAR)

Program ‘Cost Premium’

Transit

Subsidy Opportunity Development

Development Threshold

Value

Market Land Ownership -Ground Lease -Code

Property Value Funding Economic Feasability

section Research title // 15


Left A perspective view of the cooridor park on Parcel 17. Below A groundfloor site plan for the development.

16 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Mortgage Crisis Mortgage Crisis Recession Recession

Dot-com Recession Doc-Com Recession

Gulf War Recession Gulf War Recession

Parcel 17 used pre-case 8% concrete panels that 8% were placed over the highway and railroad tracks to create its deck. The tower on Parcel 6% 6% 16 was the0% most complicated deck design and utilized a lightweight concrete deck. 4% One particular hurdle for the project 4% related to the deck of the ground floor of Parcel 16’s Columbus Center tower. The tower 2% -2% was difficult 2% on the parcel to construct largely due to site conditions. Because the street is 0% 0% particularly low at this site, it was impossible for transfer beams to be constructed under the deck and still maintain clearances for the -2% -4% railway. -2% highway and The design required the ground floor deck to be 1965 hung from the 1970 transfer -4% beams by tensile columns. The transfer beams -4% 1965 1970 1975 1965 1970 1975

Iranian Energy Crisis Iranian Energy Crisis

deck weathering and associated structural impacts). At this price, for Parcel 16 alone, the decking cost premium is equivalent to approximately $24 million. However, after the price of steel began to steeply climb after 2005, the cost of the deck increased. Each parcel had a unique deck condition and design. The decking strategy for Columbus Center was therefore unrepeatable and somewhat inefficient. The differing deck conditions were necessary to address different site conditions for their respective parcels. Parcel 18’s deck was the simplest to construct with single beams spanning from caissons to form the deck of the parking structure above.

Energy Crisis Recession Energy Recession

Case Study: Columbus Center deck maintenance costs (mitigation of

OPEC Recession OPEC Recession

2%

Nixon Recession Nixon Recession

4%

were then able to be located on the 2nd floor so that the ground floor could be flush with street level and highway clearances maintained. Another hurdle for the project resulted from the John Hancock Insurance Corporation. After the sale of the air-rights to the Columbus Center developer it was discovered that the land adjacent to the highway associated with Parcel 16 reverted back to the John Hancock Insurance Corporation in the event of a sale. When this was discovered, the John Hancock Corporation was in the process of selling its properties and exercised the right to this land. This was a difficulty for the project in 1975 1990 that the tower1980 on Parcel 16 1985 could no longer to terra and that 1985 1990 1995firma2000 2000 2005 the tower 2011 1980be anchored 1980 1985 1990 1995 2005 2011

Duration ofofColumbus Duration Columbus US Recession Center Development Center Development

US GDP Growth US Recession

US GDP Growth case studies // 191

case studies // 187


Caption Proposed Rendering of Columbus Center

section Research title // 17


campus building directly abuts the highway. Air rights projects must address the grade change between the at grade elevation on the Southern side and the adjacent building on the Northern side. The railway tracks at this site are not electrified, though clearance must be kept in-case they are electrified in the future.

Mountfort St.

Cummington Mall

Section Typologies Boston University: At Grade

pe 2: Bowker Overpass

e Bowker Overpass also is another allenging air rights site. The overpasses nnot bear any additional load, so all structure st be independent of the overpass. This ates a gap that must be present for an pansion joint. Overpasses are rarely level nditions, and create a geometric issue that utting air rights projects must address.

Eastbound

Westbound

12’

12’

50’

48’

48’

Eastbound

12’

12’

110’

18 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Ipswich St.

Interstate 90

Newbury St.

Westbound

// design

Conrail Tracks

156 // design

40’

48’

Bowker Overpass: Sloping Grade


must be independent of the overpass. This creates a gap that must be present for an expansion joint. Overpasses are rarely level conditions, and create a geometric issue that abutting air rights projects must address. Also, due to the spans of the highway, all spans and footings must be located on median or adjacent terrafirma.

Massachusetts Ave: Narrow Valley Type 4: Chinatown The Chinatown and South End air rights sites pose another problem due to their large size and long spans. These sites have been recommended to have intermediate streets to break up the blocks. Furthermore, these sites have retaining walls. Retaining walls occur all along the Pike. Although they may not be the same condition, they are necessary factor for mitigating the elevation changes on each side of the highway. Thus creating a problematic factor that air rights projects must address when considering construction.

Westbound

Eastbound

12’

12’ 100’

40’

Marginal Rd.

Interstate 90

Chinatown: Wide Valley

MBTA Tracks

Hearald St.

160 // design

Eastbound Westbound

12’ 110’ 162 // design

12’ 92’ section Research title // 19


Parallel Transportation Corridor

Downtown Typical Light Rail Distribution Light Rail with Downtown Subway Typical Streecar Streetcar with ‘light rail’ segment Unsucessful Streecar with long distances

400’ length 20 // chapter Masters title Thesis


Business School Science Center Cambridge Street

Beacon Yards Stadium Commonwealth Ave. Landsdowne High Rise Mass Ave

Parallel Transit section Corridor title // 21


Boston Population Density (2010) 22 // chapter Masters title Thesis

5

m

/ 00

/m

1,

0 00

/m

2,

0 50

5

m

/ 00

/m

5,

0 00

/m

00

1

0 0,

/m

00

2

0 0,

/m

00

3

0 0,

/m

00

4

0 0,


47, 57 57 47, 47, 57 47, 60 60 47, 47, 60

Station Spreadv Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Aveune Aveune Aveune

.34 .34 mi. mi. .34 mi. 3 min. 3 min. 3 min.

Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Aveune Aveune Aveune

Transit Connections

Fenway / Landsdowne Fenway Fenway //Landsdowne Landsdowne Street Street Street

.38 .38 mi. mi. .38 mi. 3 min. 3 min. 3 min.

Fenway Fenway / Landsdowne //Landsdowne Fenway Landsdowne Street Street Street

High Rise High High Rise Rise

.5 .5 mi. mi. .5 mi. 4 min. 4 min. 4 min.

High Rise High High Rise Rise

64 64 64 Commonwealth Commonwealth Commonwealth Avenue Avenue Avenue

.25 .25 mi. mi. .25 mi. 2 min. 2 min. 2 min.

Commonwealth Commonwealth Commonwealth Avenue Avenue Avenue

Stadium Stadium Stadium

.25 .25 mi. mi. .25 mi. 2 min. 2 min. 2 min.

Stadium Stadium Stadium

Beacon Yards Beacon Beacon Yards Yards

Cambridge Street Cambridge Cambridge Street Street

.21 .21 mi. mi. .21 mi. 2 min. 2 min. 2 min.

Beacon Beacon Beacon Yards Yards Yards

70 70 70

Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge Street Street Street

Science Center Science Science Center Center

Busness School Busness Busness School School

.21 .21 mi. mi. .21 mi. 2 min. 2 min. 2 min.

Science Science Science Center Center Center

Busness Busness Busness School School School

Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Aveune Aveune Aveune

Fenway Landsdowne Fenway //Landsdowne Fenway / Landsdowne Street Street Street

High High Rise Rise High Rise

Commonwealth Commonwealth Commonwealth Avenue Avenue Avenue

Stadium Stadium Stadium

Beacon Beacon Yards Yards Beacon Yards

Cambridge Cambridge Street Street Cambridge Street

Science Science Center Center Science Center

Busness Busness School School Busness School

Alignment Distances

.6 .6 mi. mi. .6 mi. 4 min. 4 min. 4 min.

1 1 1

Parallel Transit section Corridor title // 23


TOD Hyrbid Buildings Case Study: Landsdowne Place Landsdowne Place is a mixed-use hybrid building that provides both transit-oriented development while connecting the Fenway cultural district with Kenmore Square. Bridging over an 8 lane interstate-highway and 2 MBTA train tracks at a distance of 150’, the proposed development creates. There are multiple connections to the surrounding context, and distinctive entrances for the multiple program uses. Lastly, the building has its own station along the Parallel-Transportation Corridor. The building has its own Light-Rail station to provide direct connection to the building amentities as well as mobility and connection for the surrounding neighrbohoods.

24 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Parcel 8


TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 25


Site Axonometric

26 // chapter title


Program Axonometric

section title // 27


28 // chapter Masters title Thesis


TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 29


Floor 3

30 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Floor 4

Floor 5


Floor 6-15

Floor 16-22

TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 31


Building Section

32 // chapter Masters title Thesis


Landsdowne St.

Light Rail

MBTA Commuterrail

I-90 Eastbound

I-90 Westbound

TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 33


Building Section - Longitudinal Interstate 90

34 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Hotel Tower

Hotel Program

Office Space

Parking Garage

Sky Lobby


TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 35


Renderings

36 // chapter Masters title Thesis


TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 37


Ground Floor Structure Grid

70’

70’

44’

38 // chapter Masters title Thesis


55’

55’

35’

TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 39


Structure Axon

Foundation 40 // chapter Masters title Thesis

Floor 3 - Hotel Structure Transfer


Floor 5 - Office Structure Transfer

Floor 22 TOD Hybrid section Buildings title // 41


Urban Design Research Restructuring our Urban Infrastructure In alignment with the goals of improving urban sustainability, contemporary Urban Design encourages walkable neighborhoods. However, often times the existing conditions of our urban structure discourages pedestrianism to the point where automobiles are the only practical form of personal transportation. Although there are many forms of sustainable transportation, fossil fuel based transit must be reduced. Structuring our urban infrastructure to encourage walking as a primary means of transportation has the ability to both reduce fossil fuel consumption and improves urban vitality. It is necessary to re-shape the existing built environment in a manner that encourages alternatives to the automobile. Pedestrianism is the ultimate sustainable transportation.

form

pedestrian infrastructure, and investments could be made to improve the overall state of walkability. Furthermore, it was concluded that development around transportation nodes is light and not well structured. Ideally development around the transportation nodes would be dense and well laid-out to

encourage pedestrianism. The relationship between pedestrianism and public transit is highly symbiotic. Public transit depends on pedestrians as trip generation, and pedestrians depend on Public Transportation for increased mobility.

of

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software has the opportunity to address walkability concerns, evaluate existing infrastructure, and assess the condition of our built environment. In this case study, simple GIS techniques were used to identify assets of existing infrastructure, perceived and real barriers to pedestrianism, and ultimately to make recommendations on infrastructure investment opportunities. The research concluded that it is incredibly difficult to improve existing infrastructure in urban environments, but that there was a decent level of existing infrastructure in the neighborhood. The existing neighborhood is highly fragmented in pockets of acceptable 42 // chapter Urban Design title Research

Above An artists illustration of the 50/50 vision.


Above A pedestrian only street near Downtown Crossing in Boston, MA

GIS Walkability section Study title // 43


GIS Walkability Study Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Boston, MA

44 // chapter Urban Design title Research


Transit Connections

T

T

T

T 5 & 10 minute Population Density walk radius

High School

1500 - 2000

Middle School

Elementary School

0

2000’

Schools

1001 - 1500

1000’

501 - 1000

GIS Walkability section Study title // 45


Population Density

Population Density

High School

1500 - 2000

Middle School

0

2000’

Schools

1001 - 1500

1000’

501 - 1000

Elementary School

46 // chapter Urban Design title Research

GIS | ENVR 5260


Sidewalk Infrastructure

Population Density

High School

1500 - 2000

Middle School

0

2000’

Schools

1001 - 1500

1000’

501 - 1000

Elementary School GIS Walkability section Study title // 47

GIS | ENVR 5260


Perceived Road Barriers

Population Density

High School

1500 - 2000

Middle School

0

2000’

Schools

1001 - 1500

1000’

501 - 1000

Elementary School

48 // chapter Urban Design title Research

GIS | ENVR 5260


Neighborhood Fragmentation

2000’

0

1000’

Infrastructure Improvements - Crosswalk improvements - Sidewalk replacement

GIS Walkability section Study title // 49

GIS | ENVR 5260


Infrastructure Investment Areas

2000’

0

1000’

Infrastructure Improvements - Crosswalk improvements - Sidewalk replacement

50 // chapter Urban Design title Research

GIS | ENVR 5260


GIS Walkability section Study title // 51


Comprehensive

Ancilary Program

Design Studio

Conference Small Meeting

Service

Sequence

Public Realm

Seminar

03

Classroom VMS Space

Progra

Primary Program

Leased Space

lle Ga

e

nt Pri

Floor 5

-Leasable Office Space -Conference Room

ry

***Auditoirum

Wifi Lounge

Ma fe Ca

Reception

rd ya urt Co try En

p ho

S ine ch

01

Entry

a Lo gD

din

Kendall Square Cambridge, MA

02

rag Sto

k oc

Site Plan

Senior Thesis: Future Use Buildings T STAGE

Floor 5

-Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Auditoirum

Floor 3

-VMS Space -Classrooms -Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Seminar Space

Floor 3

-VMS Space -Classrooms -Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Seminar Space

Floor 2

-VMS Space -VMS Administration -Leasable Office Space -Wifi Lounge -Gallery -Seminar Space

Floor 1

-Retail -MBTA T-Stop -Bike Storage -Lobby -Reception -Cafe -Kitchen -Print Shop -Fabrication Shop -Loading Dock

52 // chapter Senior Thesis title


Internal Courtyard Perspective

Street Perspective

Future Use section Buildings title // 53


Ground Plan

Reception Retail Space

Retail Space

MBTA Station Cafe

VMS Storage

Print Shop

54 // chapter Senior Thesis title

Loading Dock

/ Fabrication

Bike Storage

Machine Shop


Second Floor Plan

Conference Room VMS Leasable Space

VMS Leasable Space

Administrative Offices

Gallery

Atrium

VMS Leasable Space

VMS Leasable Space

VMS Leasable

Space

VMS Leasable

Space

Future Use section Buildings title // 55


Courtyard Rendering

56 // Internal chapter Senior Thesis title Courtyard Perspective


A

C

C

B

B

A

Section A A

1/8” = 1’-0”

Section B B

1/8” = 1’-0”

Section C C

1/8” = 1’-0”

Future Use section Buildings title // 57


Auditorium Ancilary Program

Parti

Public Realm

Seminar

01 volume 01 volume

PHASE

02 axis

02 axis 03

Classroom VMS Space Leased Space

03 voids

Program Diagram

Floor 6

I. 04 connections

Floor 5

-Leasable Office Space -Conference Room

02

lle Ga

e

nt Pri

ry

***Auditoirum

Wifi Lounge

Ma fe Ca

Reception

rd ya urt Co try En

p ho

Par ti

S ine ch

Sequence

Small Meeting

Service

rag Sto

01

Entry

Floor 5

a Lo

gD

din

k oc

T

03 voids 03 voids

Par ti

Site Plan

04

Conference

Primary Program

Program

|12

ehensive

n o

I.

04 connections

STAGE

04 connections

Floor 5

-Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Auditoirum

04|12

Floor 4

Comprehensive

Design Studio

II.

0 4 |1 2

05 terracing & south

06 surface

Comprehensive

Design Studio

Floor 3

-VMS Space -Classrooms -Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Seminar Space

II. 05 terracing & south 05 terracing & south

Floor 3

06 surface

06 surface

Floor 3

-VMS Space -Classrooms -Leasable Office Space -Conference Room -Seminar Space

Floor 2

07 rendering 07 rendering

III.

Floor 2

-VMS Space -VMS Administration -Leasable Office Space -Wifi Lounge -Gallery -Seminar Space

III.

Floor 1

-Retail -MBTA T-Stop -Bike Storage -Lobby -Reception -Cafe -Kitchen -Print Shop -Fabrication Shop -Loading Dock

Floor 1

IV.

58 // chapter Senior Thesis title

IV.


Future Use section Buildings title // 59


60 // chapter Senior Thesis title g

Bracing

tain wall

-0”

1/2” = 1’-0”

Section Detail - Curtain Wall

6” steel round column

2’-0” x 2’-0” diffuser

15” Return duct

15” Supply duct

4 1/4” Fire life plumbing line

1” Acoustical tile in 2’-0” x 2’-0” ceiling tile grid

24” Castellated beam with 16” openings

15” I-beam girder

7 1/4” concrete on 3 1/2” steel decking

9” Relieving angle

1/4” Radiant polyeurethane tubing embedded in 2” lightweight concrete

Subfloor, 1/4”

Finished floor, 1/4”

Stone veneer

Cavity

Vapor barrier

4” Rigid insulation

EPDM waterproof membrane @1/4”:1’-0”

Parapet

Wall Section


gs

e

ion wall

ing

g tile grid

Future Use section Buildings title // 61

Compacted gravel

Poured in place concrete slab on grade

Existing foundation wall

New column and 5/8� gypsum sheathing

Existing load-bearing masonry wall


Elevations

North Elevation

1/8” = 1’-0”

South Elevation

62 // chapter Senior title 1/8” =Thesis 1’-0”


North Elevation South Elevation

1/8” = 1’-0”

South Elevation Future Use section Buildings title // 63


ISSI Office Redesign Northeastern University, Boston, MA Staff Offices + Student Cultural Space

Sp Room 412 4 Drawer High Density File 5 Drawer High Density File

Room 407 2 Drawer File Cabinet 3 Drawer File Cabinet 4 Drawer File Cabinet

64 // chapter Built Work title

16’ 24’ 32’

72’ 90’


4 Drawer File C

Conference R

4 Drawer High 5 Drawer High

FURNITURE PLAN 1/16” = 1’-0”

Recep

2 Dr 3 Dr

ISSI section Renovation title // 65


Proposed Renovation

Classroom

Classroom

Storage

Mailbox

66 // chapter Built Work title


& Design

Classroom

ISSI section Renovation title // 67


Interior Photos

68 // chapter title


section title // 69


70 // chapter Built Work title


ISSI section Renovation title // 71


72 // chapter Built Work title


ISSI section Renovation title // 73


74 // chapter Built Work title


ISSI section Renovation title // 75


Thank you for taking the time to review my portfolio.


Portfolio