Julia Gielen ’20 MArch Columbia GSAPP

CONTENTS . &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

JULIA GIELEN

SCHOOL: GSAPP PROGRAM: M. Arch YEARS: 2017-2020

OLD SPRING 2020

& INVISIBLE

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Anna Puigjaner COLLABORATOR: Emily Tobin

OLD & INVISIBLE PROFESSOR: Anna Puigjaner COLLABORATOR: Emily Tobin LOCATION: Lima, Peru SEMESTER: Spring 2020

While longer life expectancy is celebrated as one of the great

triumphs of development, in low and middle income countries, the rapid aging transition can be a double-edged sword. Peru faces a rapidly aging population in a context of high poverty and inequality, limited resource availability, deteriorating family support, and inadequate social protection. Protecting the rights of older people therefore poses a special set of challenges.

In order to address an aging population in Lima with specificity, we decided to work in the barriada of Villa el Salvador. Originally just a dusty plain, Villa el Salvador became home to some of the city’s poorest residents in 1971. In that year, 4,000 homeless families occupied the piece of vacant land and worked with the government to develop a livable neighborhood. At the time there was no electricity, no wells, no schools and no houses. However today, with the combined effort of the community and the government, el Salvador is home to 600,000 people, many of them in multi-story consolidated homes, seeing literacy and electrification rates well over the Peruvian average and other signs of communal success. To achieve this success, the military divided up the land in a gridded formation and organized the lots so that groups of several blocks formed a “residential unit” and shared a central plaza. Although this intervention from the top may seem intrusive, the intention of the collaboration was always to provide a formwork so that the neighborhood could continue operating in its own right.

This tessellation of public squares served as an entry point to our project. Houses, shops, kitchens, and other programs messily obey the neighborhood grid lines. Amidst the congestion, the central squares offer release, providing space for the children. Although the arrangements vary, the intention is clear, and young people from each residential unit gather in these spaces to use the playing fields, schools, daycares, circus tents and playgrounds that occupy the squares.

Our project occupies the perimeter of one of these public squares to reintroduce lost connections between the elderly population and younger generations. Taking a stance of simplicity and monumentality, we allow the community to engage with our space as a formwork.

This approach evokes the collective memory of the neighborhood and the participatory process of Villa El Salvador’s founding.

Programs that prioritize the elderly population are placed along the perimeter and, by appropriating these programs to the band, we create intergenerational moments of pause. Adjacencies between a rich central plaza and this new boundary create friction between all generations passing through, seeing, and occupying the space. Placement of elderly programs directly against traditionally youthful spaces disrupts the functionality of each space enough, so that participants engage with one another rather than just focusing on their own activities.

Young parents in 1971, these founders now make up the 27,000 elderly in Villa el Salvador. They were determined to provide a home for their children, working tirelessly with others in their community. And now, although physically and mentally aging, they remain active through a continued promotion of urban planning, desire to work, practice of surveillance, and their memory of the neighborhood they created. Despite this involvement, the sense of community diminishes as conditions improve and neighbors can no longer bond over attaining fundamental services. Our project responds to this loss by reintroducing intergenerational relationships and restoring the sense of community that built Villa el Salvador.

BRICK

INSTITUTE

SPRING 2019

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Robert Marino

BRICK INSTITUTE PROFESSOR: Robert Marino LOCATION: Newburgh, NY SEMESTER: Spring 2019

Researching the site of

Newburgh, I was struck by the significance of brick on and around the site. The Hudson River Valley in general has a rich history of success largely due to brick making, and our site along the Quassaick Creek was a participatory force in this success. These towns, with their rich clay perfect for brick construction, helped to fuel the building market in New York City as well as their own local markets.

Although much of this history has disappeared, as brick factories have been torn down and brick roads have been paved over, the memory is not lost.

In my project, I aim to pay homage to this history through the use of brick in new and inventive ways. Brick defines everything: the water, the walls, the floors, the walkways, and the rhythm of the entire project. The project itself required the redirection of water on the site and space for necessary nature center program.

To organize these spaces, I developed a system of structural brick walls along a series of arcs. The gestural arcs used to develop the form allowed for a smooth redirection of the water, and for interesting spaces along the way. Eight structural walls provide support for the four spaces and the water. The spaces include a welcome center and cafe, a permanent office space for the Quassaick Creek Alliance, bathrooms for hikers, and a small lecture hall to fit a classroom of students. These eight walls are made six wythes thick, with brick of standard size.

Meanwhile, in order to portray the structural integrity of the design, nonstructural walls are two wythes thick, with a custom brick much larger than standard size. These walls are inset from the structural walls and contain varying levels of transparency so that from certain angles they begin to dematerialize. This system of varying brick sizes, thicknesses, and openings, create a space that provides interesting lighting effects and textural qualities, while also referencing the history of the site.

YOUNG

OLD HOME

FALL 2018

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Daisy Ames COLLABORATOR: Lena Pfeiffer

YOUNG OLD HOME PROFESSOR: Daisy Ames COLLABORATOR: Lena Pfeiffer LOCATION: South Bronx, NY SEMESTER: Fall 2018

I

n visiting the site in the South Bronx we noticed young children outside playing, students walking with friends, and other evidence of young people in the neighborhood. In addition, we had a particular interest in providing thoughtful living conditions for the growing elderly population and believed this project to be an opportunity to address both of these populations simultaneously. Our housing project aims to re-imagine multigenerational living spaces in a way that facilitates mutually beneficial relationships between this variety of age groups. The project provides both apartments and row house units to provide functional spaces for all ages. These homes are situated among green spaces for the residents and connected by an indoor/ outdoor walkway, called the network.

The network was created to provide an accessible and interesting space for the elderly to walk and stay active.

However, throughout the design process, this network became much more than that. The indoor walkway connects nodes on the site, allowing for residents to quickly walk across the site in a weather controlled space. These nodes contain mailboxes and other community spaces to bring the residents together so that they may meet, interact, and hopefully form relationships with their neighbors. And, when the weather permits, the pivot doors lining this network allow for a blurring of the indoor walkway out into the park spaces and gardens. The flexibility yet rigidity of this network was designed to encourage residents to cross paths and form relationships with their neighbors.

Units also offer a certain amount of flexibility for residents that have a wide variety of attitudes about how they would like to live and families with structures that are constantly changing.

Large towers provide studio and 1-bedroom apartments for the elderly and young professionals working on or around the site, and are placed at the commercial corner to block noise. Row homes offer wheelchair-accessible units for the elderly on the ground floor. Above, floors vary between large family units over multiple floors, to single floor 3-bedroom units for roommates.

By adjusting accessibility to the staircase built into the form, the connectedness of these floors can quickly change.

In summary, this project provides easily accessible, sizable spaces for the elderly: both in the ground floor units of the row homes and in the elevator accessible towers. Among these units, accommodations are made to provide living spaces for young roommates, couples, and families. These separate spaces are arranged on the site among the uniting network of walkways, parks, and community spaces so that the residents may meet, interact and eventually benefit from forming relationships with each other.

Row Houses arranged along the Network

Communal Spaces formed by methods of subtraction

DN

UP

UP

UP

DN

DN

UP

UP

DN

DN

UP

UP

DN

UP

UP UP

Row House Plan Options

Tower Plan

A BRIDGING

LIBRARY

SPRING 2018

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

PROFESSOR: Erica Goetz

.

A BRIDGING LIBRARY PROFESSOR: Erica Goetz LOCATION: DUMBO, Brooklyn SEMESTER: Spring 2018

W

ithin the hollow spaces of the cavity wall, the Bridging Library is a place of both public grandeur and quiet, intimate study. The main reading room operates as an extension of the sidewalk, and its soaring glass atrium provides constant daylight; providing a space to feel engaged in both reading and the city. Inspired by the nooks in The Bibliothèque Nationale reading room by Labrouste, my library seeks to create the same sense of intimacy and splendor for the library goers of Brooklyn.

Around the atrium, the program is organized as a series of thickened walls connected by bridging spaces. The thick concrete vertical wall to the east encapsulates personal reading nooks and small meeting rooms, providing views both inwards and outwards with oblique cuts through the space. Embedded in the rear vertical wall, adjacent to the existing building, is the circulation, utilities and a multi-story bookshelf: decorating the west wall of the atrium and accessible by slender catwalks. The children’s and teen’s reading rooms are housed inside trussed bridges that span between the two larger walls, creating enclosed communal spaces dedicated to providing young children with a space to sit and read.

The library explores the idea of bridging both literally and figuratively. It first provides physical bridges of communal space, creating an exciting and dynamic atrium and public reading room. And, in a more figurative sense, the general circulation of the building terminates in a large flexible learning space, piercing through the length of the building to provide fantastic views across the river, visually bridging Brooklyn to Manhattan. This project uses these elements to explore the role of reading in the city, intimacy and vastness, and Dumbo and a more traditional learning space.

Conceptual Layering

Conceptual Layering

LIVE & PLAY

HOUSING

FALL 2019

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Bryony Roberts

LIVE & PLAY HOUSING PROFESSOR: Bryony Roberts LOCATION: Jackson Heights, Queens SEMESTER: Fall 2019

Jackson Heights, Queens boasts a rich, authentically Hispanic ,

Latin X, and South Asian community that has thrived for decades.

Community representatives fight to maintain this cultural pride as pressures of misguided progress and gentrification threaten other NYC neighborhoods. These pressures, and the desire to design intelligent ways around them, combined with the studio initiative to design for universal childcare, creates a unique and important challenge.

My project takes on an attitude about shared space at various scales, and how it innately provides opportunities for shared labor, in the context of this rich cultural pride in Jackson Heights. It combines affordable housing with childcare in a way that invites residents to get involved in their children’s play.

Institutionally, the Universal Childcare plugs into the existing school system in the area and adds the missing link for ages 0-3,.

However, the building also including spaces of play for children of all ages living here.

The design provides 32 units with private entries, bedrooms and bathrooms, and a small living space. However, every unit shares a kitchen, laundry room, dining room, powder room and open space for play with one other unit. This set-up will prove useful in a community that has many multi-generational families all living together. However, it is also a set up that reinforces this attitude about shared space leading to shared labor at the family scale. Combining these programs with a neighbor not only allows, but invites families to lean on each other for help raising their children while also creating more affordable living.

At a larger scale, each 16 units share a central courtyard dedicated to play. Jackson Heights struggles with lack of green space, and these courtyards provide safe, surveyable spaces for children to play freely.

Finally, at the largest scale, two residential buildings flank the central childcare institution. During the day, while older children are at school, 0-3 years olds attend childcare here in this building: utilizing both the 4 story building at the center and the bridge space connecting the residential buildings. In the evenings/on weekends, children and adults living in the building link through this central bridge and childcare space, removed from the street but connected to one another.

Shared Domestic Space

Private Domestic Space

Play at Daycare Level

Play at Bridge Level

Shared Space Study Model

FRAGMENTED

PANORAMA

FALL 2017

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Stephanie Lin

FRAGMENTED PANORAMA PROFESSOR: Stephanie Lin LOCATION: Lower East Side, Manhattan SEMESTER: Fall 2017

W

hen the project for a pier along the east side was introduced, and I walked along the East River looking for a site, I was intrigued by an entertainment space I found in the Lower East Side. At the start of East River Park, nestled into the hillside is an old theater. The theater was built in 1941 and flourished throughout the mid 1900s, but closed in 1973 and has been neglected ever since.

The theater sits at a crossroads of the shifting East River and different paths of New Yorkers using the park, with panoramic views of Brooklyn, the Williamsburg, Manhattan, and Brooklyn Bridge, and other surrounding context. In my project, I hoped to frame these panoramic views of the river, the surrounding bridges, and the cityscape, while also attracting more performers to use the inventive theater complex and bring life back to the site.

In order to make the form, I interpreted the existing theater as a semi-circular shape. I then used a series of circles and semicircles to form the theaters and circulation spaces. These shapes are then repeated to carve away the coast and bring water into the entertainment experience. The elevation of these seating spaces was carefully considered so that some spaces flood during high tide, some allow the water to trickle along the bottom tier of seating, and others remain dry to provide a more permanent performance space. At the same time, I choreographed the orientation of the semi-circular theater shapes so that they could provide users with fragmented views of the river and surrounding context. In this way, performers and audience members can experience different combinations of views, sound, and water while using the theater complex in its wide variety of possible arrangements.

Park Level

Building Level

VAULTED

POOLSCAPE

FALL 2017

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Stephanie Lin

VAULTED POOLSCAPE PROFESSOR: Stephanie Lin LOCATION: 14th Street, Manhattan SEMESTER: Fall 2017

M

y subway entrance is meant to play with the idea of losing and finding the man-made systems of Manhattan’s underground world. Although we are all users of this underground space, we tend to lose a sense of awareness of these networks as we design around them. Through my subway entrance, I hope to bring attention to the complexity of our underground world, creating a hybrid of these systems using water, light and the delivery of people to the subway.

In order to elevate the experience of these systems, I chose to utilize vaulted spaces. These spaces both mimic the style of underground tubes while also increasing the acoustic experience of the running water. Preliminary studies allowed me to explore how these vaulted geometries could intersect at oblique angles, creating an interesting sequence of major spaces. In addition, more slender versions of this vaulted geometry were added to connect major spaces and also serve as places of revelation. In these instances, users can look through cutouts in the walls and floors to find actual underground utilities running parallel to the space.

I chose to use running water to add a secondary layer of complexity to the subway entrance. At certain points this water crosses into the space in the form of waterfalls, water spouts, streams, and pools. As users of the subway entrance meander through the space they may be inclined to discover these points of intersection between the major subway system and the secondary water delivery system.

Lastly, I chose to excavate three voids through the space serving as systems of light. In two cases, these voids extend upwards to the street level creating light wells into the major spaces. In the third case, this void serves as a horizontal light well feeding light through all four of the major vaulted spaces.

GREENPOINT

THEATER

FALL 2018

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Sarrah Kahn COLLABORATORS: Maine Ke, Zhibin Li, Haoming Li

GREENPOINT THEATER PROFESSOR: Sarrah Kahn COLLABORATORS: Maine Ke, Zhibin Li, Haoming Li LOCATION: Greenpoint, Brooklyn SEMESTER: Fall 2018

For this project, my team combined ideas of transparency and opacity, solid and void, and traditional and flexible to create a new and exciting theater along the East River.

In our project, more traditional theater spaces occupy the street side, indicated by heavy Ramon Grey Gold Honed stone. This thick stone shields the large auditorium, practicing studios, and back of house space. Inversely, the flexible spaces occupy the waterfront park side of the building, indicated by 40 foot glass walls, both inviting people into the building along the north side, and sending them out to the park. This flexible space allows opportunity to host events in an indoor space with views to the waterfront park and Manhattan skyline beyond.

Within this space is the Black Box Theater, wrapped in a unique rusted metal , serving as ornamentation to this grand space, and mediating the joinery of glass and stone. Finally, a large sweeping roof sits atop the structure, uniting the building and providing a unique and recognizable cue visible from both Brooklyn and Manhattan.

In this class, students were challenged with integrating building systems, facade systems, and project concepts in a way that far surpasses the typical studio project. We produced structural drawings, RCPs, riser diagrams, sustainability strategies, roadmaps, and other construction documents.

Projects were designed and drawn with the help of practicing professionals in NYC. Architects, structural engineers, and energy consultants collaborated with my team to help us put together an effective, exciting, and feasible proposal.

structural system

NEWARK SPRING 2019

FOOD CAMPUS

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSOR: Craig Schwitter COLLABORATORS: Nika Teper, Lena Pfeiffer, Lucy Navarro & Krista Wiryomartono

NEWARK FOOD CAMPUS PROFESSOR: Craig Schwitter COLLABORATORS: Nika Teper, Lena Pfeiffer, Lucy Navarro & Krista Wiryomartono LOCATION: Newark, NJ SEMESTER: Spring 2019

T

he Newark Food Campus aims to incorporate waste, energy, water, and transit in a full-circle, decentralized way. With the creation of a vertical farm along side residential and commercial infrastructure, the Newark Food Campus will work to process food waste and water into energy, grow and distribute produce, and provide public outdoor space for residents.

By improving mobility and catering to the pedestrian rather than the car, our project hopes to improve the quality of life for local residents and serve as a model for future development of Newark. We achieve this through the creation of a pedestrian bridge, inclusion of traffic slowing urban techniques, and thickening of walkways and sidewalks across the site.

This project was meant to focus on systems integration at a regional, neighborhood, site, and building scale. Program, circulation, and interior and exterior systems were constantly being considered and reconsidered at these different scales as new findings about efficiency, size, and money (among other things) were discovered.

Our project proposal thoughtfully combines these systems in a holistic way. The energy efficiency and regional popularity of urban gardens allowed us to embrace this program on a campus level. The urban garden provides food to the waterfront restaurants and farmer’s markets in the park. All food waste, from residential buildings and commercial buildings alike, is collected and vacuum piped to our urban garden and energy building. This building pre-processes the food waste and water collected from the site and from neighborhood drop-off points and sends it through two large anaerobic digestors. These digestors then convert this waste into energy that powers the urban garden and contributes towards much of the energy use on site, completing the cycle.

As a team, we wanted to not only understand and create a full-circle system but showcase the components in a way that celebrates this kind of environmentally and energy conscious thinking. Integral parts of the system are purposefully exposed so that the public can become informed and excited about this kind of sustainable design.

Full-Circle Approach

MAKING

AT GSAPP

2017-2020

. &. Invisible . .

Old

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .VI Studio . .

. . Institute . .

Brick

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Advanced . . .IV Studio . .

. . Old. Home . .

Young

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .III Studio . .

Core

.A Bridging . . Library . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Core. II Studio . .

.Live .& Play . Housing . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . V Studio . .

Advanced

.Fragmented . . Panorama . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Vaulted . Poolscape . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Core. I Studio . .

.Greenpoint . . Theater . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . III.

.Newark . Food . .Campus . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Building . . Tech . V.

.Architectural . . .Drawing . .& Representation . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . of . Section . .

Seminar

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Visual . . Studies . .

. . .Things . .

Material

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . . Geometries . . . .

Transitional

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

. . in. the. Making . .

History,

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. Technological . . . Studies . .

.

PROFESSORS: Joshua Jordan, Joshua Uhl, Farzin Lotfi-Jam, Marc Tsurumaki, Tal Schori, RustamMarc Mehta,

ADR 1

ADR 1

Seminar of Section

Material Things

Transitional Geometries

Transitional Geometries

Transitional Geometries

Transitional Geometries

History, in the Making

History, in the Making

History, in the Making

History, in the Making

NOTE:

This book will be printed.

This book is an infinite book. It has no start and no end.

Each project is a product of its time and place, and should be considered as such. Connections between projects can be made but are not forced. Any section can be your cover.

JULIA GIELEN

SCHOOL: GSAPP PROGRAM: M. Arch YEARS: 2017-2020