Page 1

Marcus is an undergraduate at Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) for B.SC Architecture and Sustainble Design. He wants to help others envision their ideas creatively and design architectural spaces that engage the senses, in a rational and sustainable manner. During free days, Marcus can be seen sketching people, places and things, taking photographs of nature and enjoying crime-fiction films and novels.

MAR CUS Q UEK Singaporean 28/02/1994 +65 96619940

EDUCA T I ON 2015 - Present Singapore University of Technology and Design Bachelor of Architecture and Sustainable Design Expected Graduation: August 2018 2016 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Global Leadership Programme 2011 - 2012 Temasek Junior College GCE ‘A’ Levels, 4 Distinctions

EX PER I EN CE 2011 - Soyainu Freelance logo, print and design consultation service provider 2012 - 2013 EcoYouth Designer for infographics, comics and exhibitions 2017 LAUD Architects Architectural Assistanct (scripting, drafting, model-making) Workshop Leads 2018 SUTD Architecture Outreach Programme (ATOP) - Drawing Workshop 2016 Figure Sketching IAP (Independent Activity Period) 2015 SUTDio-RI - Introduction to Architecture Teacher’s Assistant 2017 History Theory & Culture 1 2017 Introduction to Biology Leadership Positions 2017 SUTD “What The Hack” Hackathon 2017 Radiate 360 (Phong Thanh, Vietnam) 2015-2016 SUTDio & Energy Club 2013-2014 Ang Mo Kio Fire Station 2011-2012 Temasek Junior College House Committee

Publicity Head Garden Landscape Lead Exco Member Section Commander Decor & Publicity Captain

AW A R D S 2018 Keppel Awards of Excellence ASD Junior 2015-2017 2015

SUTD Honor’s List Freshmore, Sophomore and Junior years

SUTD Undergraduate Merit Scholarship

SKILLS Graphics Drafting Simulation Language

Adobe Suite, Clip Studio Paint, Sketching, Vray, Photogrammetry Rhinoceros, AutoCAD, Revit, SketchUp, Grasshopper, Dynamo DIVA, ArchiSIM, DesignBuilder English, Mandarin


The following projects investigate and expand upon the unique threshold between a space’s action and the human experience. Buildings are never ends in themselves: They embody the processes of connecting and separating, facilitating and prohibiting, emphasising and hiding. How then can architectural moves activate our senses to fill up any inadequacies we face from modern living?


CHROMATIC OVERLAY Colours of configurations Pg 01


AURAIN Sounds of intimacy Pg 11


VILLO Whispers of tranquility Pg 21


AGROCOVE Sprouts of solidarity Pg 31


P-NUT Frames of authenticity Pg 39


PAPER: COMMON GROUND Container Urbanism Pg 47



Colours are vivid,



and evokative

01 CHROMATIC OVERLAY Colour + Configuration Spring 2018 | Design Option Studio 1 13-week individual project Instructor: Jason Lim Teck Chye


CHROMATIC OVERLAY C olo ur s o f co nf i g ur a t io ns If arranged correctly, colours offer an otherworldly stimuli to the our senses. Chromatic Overlay is a meditative art installation, repurposed from a two-storey warehouse. A red-green-blue (RGB) skylight is cropped by plastic baffles and dividers to create colours that blend between and within volumes of space. Each of the four installations was empirically curated with physical tests and renders to offer a unique experience of colour through varying configurations. Visitors are invited to move, sit or lie within the chromatic spaces for contemplation.

Video showcase ChromaticOverlay


119 Kallang Way 2

DAYLIGHT Site allows for ample day light between:

~ July 6 7.40AM

~ November 21 6.15PM








Chapel of St. Ignatius (Precedent)

Chromatic Overlay

Polycarbonate (matte/gloss)

Polycarbonate (velvet/matte) (Chosen)

Tracing paper

Configurations of colours OR Colours shape space


Colours of configurations OR Space shape colour





BLENDING CONFIGURATION STUDY (MAXWELL) Translucent dividers No baffles

Translucent dividers Concrete baffles

Translucent dividers Translucent baffles Concrete dividers Translucent baffles


Perpendicular (Chosen)

Mixed dividers Translucent baffles (Chosen)



KHORA Each receptable is a saturated colour field gradient

Varied ratios

Internal Reflection

Gradual Mixing by reflecting off baffles


Diffusion of Mixed Colours

Parti wall contrast

SPECTRA Duality of distinct and continuous bands of colours


End Refraction

Value Threshold

Perceptual Contrast: Band vs interiors


AURORA A genealogy of the additive effects of colour

Addition of colour produces unique tones

Most Tinted

Least Tinted


CHROMA Diffusion of colours through facing portals

Diffusion of light through portals

Key viewing angles


Intimacy is perceived when

& sings

nature comes in


02 AURAIN Aural + Rain Spring 2017 | Core Studio 2 5-week individual project Instructor: Jackson Tan


AURAIN So und s o f i nt i m a cy

Aurain responds to the noise pollution at Orchard, by funnelling rain to create new sounds. The curved geometry contains the interior soundscape, producing a healthy dose of reveberation. Each programme is designed around the visitors’ psychoacoustic needs. The gentle pinches and lifts of the roof allude the experience of hiding under a large blanket. By day, it is an urban parkscape; by rainfall, it generates an alluring symphony.



WHITE NOISE (LIBRARY) By falling at different heights into a pool, the rain makes a fountain-like melody at multiple frequencies which improves learning and concentration.



PINK NOISE (GALLERY) As rain hits the concrete roof at the other bifurcation, it generates a low, consistent droning that masks the exterior vehicular noise and puts visitors at ease.


From shapes and colours, architecture is found but spaces are incomplete without the element of sound. SECTION AA’




The in-between

open spaces are VILL






03 VILLO Village + Flow Spring 2017 | Core Studio 2 7-week individual project Instructor: Jackson Tan





W hi s per s o f T r a nq ui l i ty In response to the damages from excessive air-conditioning, this MoMA pushes what is means to be open yet cooling. The pitched roofs and louvres are strategically positioned to catch high levels of wind, which passively cools the interior.


Programmes are contained in blocks with assisted ventilation, and are bridged by a naturallycooled atrium. By alternating programmes with open spaces, one can enjoy some breathing space before reengaging in the enigmatic world of modern art.




LOFTY ATRIUM Between programmes, visitors encounter an open-aired atrium. The louvred blocks surrounding the sky bridges create three strata that resemble small villages. The sharp turns and folding roof create unique views along each path.



KEY SMOKE MODEL FINDINGS VENTURI TUBE Increase wind velocity without additional load

LOUVRES Direct air without losing much speed

45 DEGREE AIRWELL Angles within 45 degrees preserve speed


CFD ANALYSIS With Autodesk Flow Design




THROUGH A SYMBIOSIS When plants replace t astructure king Dwellings & become dwellers



04 AGROCOVE Agrotechnology + Cove Fall 2017 | Core Studio 3 12-week individual project Core Instructor: Thomas Schroepfer Energy Instructor: John Alstan Jakubiec


AGROCOVE Spr o ut s o f So l i d ar i ty To resolve both aging in place and food insecurity, Agrocove proposes a new housing typology that integrates urban farming as career and lifestyle alternative for eldery or estranged residents. The estate relates to the park connector, inviting the public to take self-guided tours along the E-deck. Crop plots are complementary to the commercial programmes - for instance, an ingredient terrace is paired with a cafe, and a medicinal grove for a polyclinic. The four blocks’ tapered egg geometry improves solar gains for plants and ventilation and shading for residents. Stormwater is retained as it cascades through the planter balconies into the canal.




The e-deck has undulating edges that resemble cliffs and bays, providing a variety of extroverted and introverted spaces respectively.


THE DINE SPINE All units incorporate the spirit of urban farming with an ingredient garden in the kitchen, and a compost site the dining yard. The kitchen, dining and yard are arranged linearly in an semi-external corridor called the ‘Dine Spine’. The hydroponic mesh is a diagrid of structural pipes that receive nitrated water from a rooftop fish tank, and provide sunshading to North-facing units.



Framed moments are...

transient representations of

RE 37


05 P-NUT Peanut Gallery Fall 2017 | Core Studio 1 5 week individual project Core Instructor: Kenneth Tracy



F r a m es o f A ut henti ci ty This gallery is a social experiment to capture the fleeting moments of the passerby in a shophouse’s five-foot walkway. Specatators on the bleachers cannot anticipate when a passerby will appear in their peripheral vision, which heightens their sense of awareness. This shophouse is made of two ‘leaves’ of costus curvibracteatus. The lower leaf forms the bleachers and stairs. The upper leaf twists to form a bench and an elevator. The transition from a rectangular façade in the front to a leaf-like structure responds to the hardscape and softscape and parallels the transformation from pretence to authenticity.










06 COMMON GROUND Container Urbanism Spring 2018 | Paradigms of Adaptation Individual Essay Instructor: Calvin Chua

“Containers resemble other infrastructure in their ability to provide structural integrity and volumetric space. Rather than being something to be adapted, containers have an adaptive nature. What container urbanism offers is a new infrastructural paradigm that allows architectural production to become in sync with the pace of contemporary lives.“ This essay discusses the role container urbanism in today’s society, through the context of the Common Ground - a shopping mall in Seoul, South Korea.


Following the Korean War, South Korea experienced rapid industrialisation with a focus on physical and human-capital development. [1] For Seongsu Dong, it was the shoemaking shops, factories and car making R&D and repair facilities that established themselves due to the low rent. However, by the 1980s, these industries experienced a dip in sales due to competition from large departmental stores, resulting in many small businesses closing. Consequently, the presence of low rents and abandoned factories attracted the young generation to create new cultural nooks by painting murals and repurposing abandoned warehouses as hipster cafes and boutiques. [2] Seongsu Dong had become a new trendy destination, earning itself the nickname of ‘the second Hongdae’ [3] - a reference to the vibrant shopping belt in the West. The Issue of Gentrification However, while Seongsu Dong had become more successful in drawing crowds, especially students from the neighbouring Konkuk University, it faced the same problem of gentrification as Hongdae. [4] The growing popularity in the region meant that developers were keen to purchase land in Seongsu for high-end developments. This meant that land rents were rising, potentially driving the existing industrial business owners and aspiring young entrepreneurs out of business. Yim Dongkun, a professor in the department of geography at Seoul National University, said that “The more hip the areas become, the higher the land values rise, which leads to the displacement of those who actually made the place ‘hip.’” [4] Seongsu might indeed become Hongdae in both the good ways and the bad. Seongsu certainly warrants remaking, if for no other reason than to slow down gentrification from cultural proliferation. Yet it calls for a solution that preserves the existing cultural vitality that was created by both the shoemakers and the café and boutique entrepreneurs, rather than a complete redevelopment. There is a need to simultaneously limit and promote culture. The Megastructure Paradigm Megastructure may be the paradigm needed for Seongsu as what it needs above all is a service framework where start-up businesses could plug in for as long as they need. Anchor stores (such as Timberland and Vans) were placed in the Common Ground to generate business for smaller retailers; the latter would use the infrastructure as a testbed for their business strategies. The architectural vocabulary of shipping containers is prefabricated and provisional, and therefore bears striking similarities to the Metabolic megastructures, which Reyner Banham described as ‘various arrangements of habitable containers beyond the control of the


architect’ [8] The flexibility of such a model allows for businesses to come and go freely while preserving the unplanned and spontaneous vitality that so distinguish Seongsu. It is unclear whether the infrastructural framework and the policies provided by Kolon Industries was intended to slow the process of gentrification. Moreover, as it was completed in 2016, there is limited data on its effect on the surrounding urban fabric. Nevertheless, both infrastructure and policies can theoretically slow down gentrification. Their effects can be summarised into three categories: concentration, inhibition and attraction. All these solutions aim to slow cultural growth in industrial Seongsu as growing popularity is the primary cause of land speculation, while developing its own cultural niche. (1) Concentration. Through branding and integrated design, the Common Ground ensures that cultural events, especially those sponsored by large multi-national brands are contained within the complex. The following was mentioned by a representative from Urbantainer about integrated design in the Common Ground in an Archello article, “The tight integration of specialists from different fields made possible a deep integration between brand concept and space design. Common Ground’s essence ‘Creative Connection’, connecting people with people, brands with people and brands with brands, is the basis for a cultural program with sharing and exchange as the centre point. This requires open spaces that allow multifunctional usage scenarios. Another important design decision that merges the overall space experience together and creates a street culture feel, is the fact that the properties of modular construction like trusses and jointing areas between modules were not hidden, but on the contrary emphasised by interior design elements.” [9] The shopping space consists of two centers: “Street Market” and “Market Hall,” both connected by a courtyard. Food and beverage options can be found in the food trucks parked in the courtyard, and in the third-floor terrace market. [7] This composition create unique spaces that express the vendors’ individualities. At the same time, the consistent use of the colour blue and the industrial aesthetics provides visual consistency in a space where an array events are conducted every year. This mirrors the Metabolic idea of transient containers within a permanent framework, which Reyner Banham described as a relationship between the ‘massive, even monumental, supporting frame,’ and ‘various arrangements of habitable containers beyond the control of the architect.’ [8] In this case, however, the containers are not physical things, but activities. The result is a spontaneous and random commercial and cultural landscape concentrated within the Common Ground. This diverts the attention of



developers away from the industrial and café/ boutique regions of Seongsu, thereby keeping their land values low. The Common Ground was built near the Konkuk university area which lacked the art and cultural facilities that other areas of Seoul have to offer. “The opening of Common Ground as culture & shopping platform has created a landmark for young people with plenty of opportunities for participation.” [9] These students can enjoy the same diverse cultural activities as their Hongnik University counterparts do in Hongdae without the risk of gentrification. The temporal nature of these cultural events, and the influx and efflux of brands, also inflates their perceived valuation, contributing to Seongsu’s trend of alternative culture. (2) Inhibition. In addition to having transient components, the Common Ground’s inability to expand physically highlights the flaws of the Metabolic movement. Dr. Meike Schalk from the KTH Royal Institute of Technology summarised Banham’s view succintly, “He sees a conceptual approach and basic contradiction in the marriage of a technocratic attitude, as in Walter Gropius’ total architecture, and modernism’s fascination with indigenous cultural artifacts and built forms, whose designs appear self-generated and ‘natural.’” [10] The design of whole environments does not allow for a-formal interventions, and hence the extensibility and adaptability of a building is only visual. This limitation is evident in the way the Common Ground was constructed, where the containers were not designed to be modules that can be added or removed. Rather, the containers were modified by truncating their lengths, replacing their ends or removing the interior walls - to fit within an overarching architectural composition. As mentioned earlier, the language of two buildings and a courtyard is necessary to create unique spaces, while the containers themselves make the complex appear extensible without physically fulfilling it. As a result, the Common Ground is unable to spontaneously expand and contract. It cannot offer a retail experience that is similar to a street market, where the natural market forces dictate the presence and absence of stalls. At the same time, its operation is unlike a shopping center as there is a degree of informality in the way the stores are set up. Many visitors have found the selection of goods both limited and pricey, [11] as it deviates from their expectation of existing retail types such as street markets and department stores. “The refashioned containers now holds shopping spaces for some 56 fashion and lifestyle brands. It’s not a large mall by any means but what does make Common Ground unique is that the mall features newer and independently owned brands and businesses. Instead of focusing on global or exclusively luxury

brands, Common Ground features lesser known brands that are up and coming. “ [12] If retail spaces were mapped to Maki’s classification of collective form, the Common Ground lies in between groupform (street market) and compositional form (shopping center), with a stronger leaning to the latter. The compositional, non-expandable component of the Common Ground means it cannot be on par with Hongdae (a street market) as an agent of commercial and cultural proliferation. But unlike Hongdae, land speculation is contained, thereby preserving the surrounding landscape. Perhaps the move to limit physical expansion was done strategically to ensure that any associations with the hipster culture are not diluted by scale. (3) Attraction. The Common Ground’s concept of sharing and communication influenced the design conditions for vendors. There is strong support from Kolon Industries for young designers, lifestyle brands, accessory makers and social businesses, which make up about 70% of all retail spaces. Young entrepreneurs also do not pay large deposits or rents, but a commission of their sales. The Common Ground also offers consultation for sales and marketing for small businesses, thereby making it both a business incubator and a shopping mall to test business ideas. The success of this programme caught the attention of the Creative Innovation Economy Centre of the Korean government who used the Common Ground as the future model of retail development. [8] This friendly, businessoriented environment makes it easier for small businesses to establish in the Common Ground as opposed to industrial Seongsu, thereby keeping the land speculation there low. The Common Ground has become a semi-formal, controlled alternative to repurposing warehouses, and an entrepreneuriallyattractive one at that. To summarise, Fumihiko Maki had mentioned that megastructures are “a large frame containing all the functions of a city, mostly housed in transient shortterm containers.” [13] It provides macro-level urban control while allowing for flexibility and individual expression at the micro-level needed to preserve authenticity and cultural vibrancy. The Common Ground is a successful first step in realising the megastructure ideal, as it has shown potential in controlling the commercial and cultural growth, while allowing parts of it to flourish spontaneously. The incorporation of containers is an effective strategy to achieve this megastructure quality while extending the existing architectural hipness of Seongsu-Dong.


Container Urbanism Within the design community, containers have been heralded as the ideal modular prefab resource, and it is not hard to see why. Beyond the image of trendiness, cargo containers are cheap, eco-friendly compared to concrete and are readily available in surplus in ship yards due to their short 10-year life span and high disposal costs. Prefab modular construction with containers saves 50% time, 15% costs, reduces CO2 emissions by 60% and enables the recycling of 90% of the modules, according to representatives of Urbantainer when describing the Common Ground.[8] The popularity of the cargo container led to the rise of container urbanism, a term coined by Dr. Mitchell Schwarzer, professor of visual studies at California College of the Arts, for this design movement. [14]

Schwarzer claimed that container urbanism was popular in two distinct periods: late modernism and the 2000s.[14] In late modernism, container urbanism sought to break down the monolithic masses that were defining cities, into flexible modular masses as epitomized by the Japanese Metabolists and British Archigram. In new millennia, the second phase of container urbanism is associated with an increased citizens’ participation, global commerce and the DIY phenomenon. Containers were treated with artistic interest, and as agents that provided flexibility and vitality. From the first period to the next (note that they are separated by the 1960s and 1970s), there is a change in emphasis from the infrastructure that frames the containers to the container units themselves and from the appeal of mass production to the allure of informal interventions. Containers carry a variety of positive, sometimes contradictory connotations. The container is a symbol of international mass consumerism, or a ‘cosmopolitan building block’[15] due to its international presence in the logistics supply chain, while ironically, carrying the message of ‘eco-consciousness’ and ‘change’ that is often associated with counterculture and bottom-up DIY initiatives. When put together, containers create spaces that both the indie creatives and the multinational corporations can relate to. The Common Ground’s retail model, which involves both anchor stores and start-up businesses reflect these infrastructural associations very well. The combined synergy of the infrastructure and policies accentuates the way the Common Ground leverages on the social benefits of counterculture while reaping the economic benefits of globalisation. Consequently, many countries are eager to replicate both the infrastructural and policy models to provide a cheap means of stimulating cultural and economic growth. This container movement in Seoul has only started to gain momentum. Just one year after the Common Ground was built, Under Stand Avenue was constructed near Seoul Forest Station (West of Seongsu Dong). Established and funded by Lotte Duty Free, it consists of eight stands, including spaces for youths who want job training and mothers looking for additional income. The decision to build another container structure near 51

Seongsu Dong was perhaps a deliberation to capitalise on the hipster culture and at the same time, reduce the effects of gentrification – this time at the Western end of Seongsu, rather than the East. It seems that containers are capable of handling different types of complex cultural spaces (a commercial typology that combines retail, food, entertainment, and in the context this paper, some form of social initiative), from the business incubators in the Common Ground to the positive consumption stands in Under Stand Avenue. However, in using containers to develop event-centric spaces, several questions must be answered. Are the applications of containers limited to informal, everyday urbanism as portrayed by the Common Ground and Under Stand Avenue? How might containers fare as tools for urban redevelopment? Within the infrastructure paradigm, the main challenge of adapting service infrastructures – whether it is a waterway, a railway or highway, has primarily been the issue of scaling down to the individual. The Seoul Metropolitan Government has readily involved citizens to develop programmatic functions that divide these infrastructures into zones that tailor to different demographic needs or to the specific cultures of each Dong. To all adaptive reuse project, I question: what do we make of these interventions ten years down the road when the urban conditions have changed? And to the infrastructural paradigm, how can ascertain that an adaptation considers the human scale? Containers resemble other infrastructure in their ability to provide structural integrity and volumetric space. Rather than being something to be adapted, containers have an adaptive nature. What container urbanism offers is a new infrastructural paradigm that allows architectural production to become in sync with the pace of contemporary lives. Apart from the actual construction, the most significant time-saving factor for container architecture comes from the ease of transportation across long distances. This allows for an almost instantaneous fabrication of buildings, thereby responding to vagarious nature of cities. For example, containers can become an effective tool for urban resilience in the form of makeshift urban disaster relief shelters. Or, in the face of gentrification, a shopping-cultural complex like the Common Ground can be readily disassembled and reassembled elsewhere. Therefore, containers are easily deployed and redeployed in changing urban conditions. At the same time, container urbanism becomes a means to facilitate the actions of individual agents, without the need for government action. Schwarzer claimed that, “containment has an especially long history with the promotion of individuality — as understood through inner life. The noun “container” derives from the verb “to contain,” which defines the action of holding or enclosing.”[14] This act of containment offers protection for both the physical being, and as seen in the Common Ground – the vitality of a culture or the trajectory of a business, from external social forces. In my opinion, containment is the powerful phenomenological concept

of an imagined boundary where people or ideas can internalise and regulate themselves, similar to how a body wrapped in skin undergoes homeostasis. Therefore, containers allow individuals to find themselves through containment. I propose that the success of container urbanism can be measured by how well the ideas of deployability and containment are used. While the Common Ground is not deployable, it has capitalised on its temporal nature to establish an informal culture. At the same time, it uses the concept of containment to attract businesses, concentrate culture, inhibit both from flowing out of the complex, all of which are theoretically successful strategies described earlier. It should be noted that much of its commercial success lies in the fact that the complex is privitised, as Kolon Industries is incentivised to maximise profits. It seems logical to assume that the commissions received from start-up business do not form the bulk of the revenue stream; instead, a bulk of the profit comes from leasing event spaces. This imperative fosters a collaboration between the operator and vendors to generate high traffic and a cultural niche to attract multinational companies. The collaboration, which takes the form of the business incubator, is therefore incentivised. While the deployable and containing nature of containers make their applications limited to informal contexts such as emergency dwellings and complex cultural space, it offers adaptability to the changing urban conditions and cater to the individual’s needs respectively, thereby making the cargo containers an effective urban regeneration tool. Paired with the right policies and stakeholders, container interventions can also become economically self-sustaining.






9 10




Image/ Illustration Credits 1 2

Plans and Sections. Urbantainer, 2016. Redrawn by author Container dimensions. “Shipping Containers for Storage.” Mr Box. Accessed April 24, 2018. https://

Bibliography 1





Yim, Seung-hye. “City, Artists Fight against Gentrification in Seoul.” Korean JoongAng Daily. December 22, 2015. Accessed April 24, 2018. http:// aspx?aid=3013056 Song, Michael. “The Box Park from London to Open Shop in South Korea.” Koogle TV. October 12, 2015. Accessed April 24, 2018. news/the-box-park-from-london-to-open-shop-insouth-korea/. “Kolon Industries - Introduction.” Kolon Industries. 2010. Accessed April 24, 2018. http://www. Shin, Kyungsub. “WORLD’S LARGEST CONTAINER ARCHITECTURE COMMON GROUND.” Urbantainer - Portfolio. Accessed April 24, 2018. http://www. Banham, Reyner. “Megastructure. Urban Futures of the Recent Past”. Thames and Hudson, London:, 1976, p. 8 Acessed April 24, 2018. Urbantainer. “Common Ground.” Archello. https:// Schalk, Meike. “The Architecture of Metabolism. Inventing a Culture of Resilience.” Arts 2014 3, no. 2 (June 13, 2014): 279-97. Accessed April 24, 2018. doi:10.3390/arts3020279. Various Authors. “Common Ground.” Tripadvisor. Accessed April 24, 2018. https://www.tripadvisor. Ho, Stewart. “Seoul Experiences: Common Ground near Konkuk University.” One Guy’s Blog of Eats, Cooking, and Travels. December 29, 2015. Accessed April 24, 2018. https://whatsstewin.blogspot. sg/2015/12/seoul-experiences-common-groundnear.html. Maki, Fumihiko. “Investigations in Collective Form.” A Special Publication. The School of Architecture, no. 2 (June 1964). Accessed April 24, 2018. https://library. pdf. Schwarzer, Mitchell. “The Emergence of Container Urbanism.” ContainerOne. January 09, 2018. Accessed April 24, 2018. general/emergence-container-urbanism/. Kotnik, Jure. Container Architecture: This Book Contains 6441 Containers. Barcelona: Links International, 2008.

Kim, Kwan S. “THE KOREAN MIRACLE (1962-1980) REVISITED: MYTHS AND REALITIES IN STRATEGY AND DEVELOPMENT.” Kellogg. November 1991. Accessed April 24, 2018. files/old_files/documents/166_0.pdf. Tanaka, Erika. “The Brooklyn of Seoul? A Tour of the Authentically Hip Seongsu-dong.” Here Now. March 13, 2017. Accessed April 24, 2018. https://www. Koehler, Robert. “Exploring Seoul Seongsu-Dong Style.” Seoul Selection. June 3, 2015. Accessed April 24, 2018. http://magazine.seoulselection. com/2015/06/03/seongsu-dong-style/ 52

Through a symbiotic relationship










In the spirit of investigation, we formulate conclusions that are personal and meaningful.


MAR CUS Q UEK +65 96619940 Thank you. More works and publications at:

2018-07 Architecture Portfolio  

Marcus Quek

2018-07 Architecture Portfolio  

Marcus Quek