Page 1

Melissa A. McDonald Portfolio Urbanism, Architecture & Research Projects Canada, Ontario, Ottawa, Carleton University Portfolio Completed Using: InDesign


1

Table of Contents Figure # Fig. 1

Page # Page 2

Istanbul Studio Urban Design Site Infrastructure Layer Site Plan

Fig. 2

Urban Exploration

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

Istanbul Traffic Istanbul Model

Design Studio

Site Analysis

Site Context and Parks Urban Patterns and Proposals Key Destinations and Means of Travel

Housing Studio

Housing Design

Site Model Context Render

City-Core Studio

Urban Design

Site Render Plans

Fig. 3 Fig. 4

Fig. 5 Fig. 6 Fig. 7

Fig. 8 Fig. 9

Fig. 10 Fig. 11

Research

Super-Structure Research Inspiration Image 1

Inspiration Image 2 Inspiration Image 3 3D Grid Super-Structure Collage Sub & Super Structure Design Project

Fig. 13 Fig. 14 Fig. 15 Fig. 16 Fig. 17

Page 8

Mega-Structure Research Precedent Project 1

Precedent Project 2

Fig. 12

Fig. 18 Fig. 19


2

Istanbul Studio Urban Design

This portion of the Istanbul studio was focused on urban design. The precedents for figures 1 and 2 were equity and place. The site was located on the waterfront of the city of Istanbul. The site’s use was industrial with old train yards, shipping docks and storage containment. The purpose of the redesign was to utilize the site for a new purpose, as a team we chose to make it into an extension of the city, but one that takes on the principles of equity and place in its architectural design and in the urban design. It was to be a place to go to and a place to be from, a place to work and a place to play. The entirety of the site was commercial use at grade making the ground level accessible to the people, making the site equitable. It was to be a place where the ground was open for people to move and be, yet unlike modernist towers in the park the design would incorporate low buildings with street frontage and internal courtyards making spaces for shops, venders, activities, installations, tea gardens and other social spaces. The waterfront became accessible to all people with a walk-way that extended more than half the site, rather than making it private property for only those who can afford it to enjoy. It was equitable because it gave the waterfront back to the people.

No rt h

Site Infrastructure Layer (fig. 1) Istanbul, Kadikoy Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop & Rhinoceros 5 Collaboration with: Laura Elliott & Lindsay Campbell

Site Plan (fig. 2)

Istanbul, Kadikoy Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop & Rhinoceros 5 Collaboration with: Laura Elliott & Lindsay Campbell


3

Istanbul Traffic Map (fig. 3) Turkey, Istanbul Adobe Illustrator & Arcmap

Urban Exploration

This portion of the Istanbul studio was focused on exploring a city not North American nor European, through online information, given information and given data. The precedents for figures 3 and 4 was water, specifically the Bosporus, and how the city reacts to it and how it is integrated into the city life. The exploration of Istanbul and the Bosporus lead to analyzing movement. The movement through, on, over and under the Bosporus characterized the city as one with the water ways it surrounds.

Istanbul Map-Model (fig. 4)

Turkey, Istanbul Adobe Illustrator, Arcmap, LED Lights & Laser Etching


4

Design Studio

Site Context and Parks (fig. 5) Ontario, Ottawa, 1011 Wellington St West Adobe Illustrator, Rhinoceros 5 Collaboration with: Brendon Fraser and Lina Hassan

SITE CONTEXT AND PARKS This map for 1011 Wellington Street West includes parks, areas of foliage, streets, sidewalks and buildings within a 600meter radius of the site. There are 7 parks within the 600meter radius. The site is zoned TM11.

LEGEND

600m Radius

Foliage Park Spaces Buildings Focus Property: 1011 Wellington St. West

Site Analysis

Streets and sidewalks

The studio was focused on the economics of a mix-use building both residential and commercial. The precedent at the beginning of the project was site analysis. The site analysis focused on context in a 600meter radius to the site. Analysis: the building uses in this area are mostly retail at grade and apartments or offices above; this is due to the traditional main street zoning placed on Wellington St West. On each side of the site are restaurants, one of which is a cafe and the other is an outdoor restaurant. There are many other restaurants within walking distance around the site (see fig. 7). There are apartment towers on the street including one 13 story building which is one of the tallest buildings in the area. 1 to 13 floors is the range of building heights within a 250meter radius of the site (see fig. 6). The site is within a 600meter radius of a major transit stop, which places the site in an area which the city plans to further densify the built form. There are also a number of buses going through the area, making it accessible via. public transit. The analysis was used to determine the best type of building and the best use for this area in Ottawa.

N SCALE: 1:3 000

6

Key Destinations and Means of Travel (fig. 7)

Urban Patterns and Proposals (fig. 6)

Ontario, Ottawa, 1011 Wellington St West Adobe Illustrator, Rhinoceros 5 Collaboration with: Brendon Fraser and Lina Hassan

Ontario, Ottawa, 1011 Wellington St West Adobe Illustrator, Rhinoceros 5 Collaboration with: Brendon Fraser and Lina Hassan URBAN PATTERN AND PROPOSALS MAP This map shows the urban pattern of the buildings and the future/current proposals within a 600meter radius around the chosen site. The urban pattern in this nieghbourhood (Hintonburg) is mostly 1-4 stories with the exception of some taller apartment buildings and the church down the street from the site (as seen in view 5). The LRT Confederation Line will be built to reach Tunney’s Pasture, and will therefore travel within 600meter radius of the site.

600m Radius

SITE CONTEXT AND PARKS

LEGEND 1-4stories 5-9stories

A

10->

This map shows the key destinations within a 600 and 250 meter radii of the site. The map depicts bike paths using green lines. The pink circle is the mass transit node. The blue dots are food stores. The yellow dots are community buildings. The purple dots are schools. The red dots are restauants. The transit node consists of mass transit bus routes and the North-South O-train line; it will include East-West O-train line in 2018. In 2018 the Trillium O-Train intersection with the Confederation Line will be within a 10minute walking distance from the site, therefore the site will recieve immense amounts of pedestrian traffic. Meat Press 600m Radius LEGEND

LCBO

Future/Current Proposals Foliage

SuzyQ Doughnuts

Transit Node (Future LRT and existing O-Train)

Mac’s Convenience

Focus Property: 1011

Bike Paths

Wellington St. West

Destinations:

Streets and sidewalks

B

Food Stores Community Buildings Schools Restaurants

Marche Hintonburg Market

C

C

Buildings Foliage

250m Radius

D

Chinese Take Out

Focus Property: 1011 Wellington St. West

Streets and sidewalks

E

Devonshire Community Public School SimplyRaw Express Hintonburg Community Center

F

TacoLot

Wellington Eatery

Ottawa West Community Support

10Fourteen

Ottawa Public Library Rosemount

The Hintonburg Public House

N SCALE: 1:10 000

Subway

N

Connaught Public School École Élémentaire Catholique Saint-François-D'Assise

8

7

SCALE: 1:3 000


Housing Studio

Context Render (fig. 9)

Ontario, Ottawa Adobe Photoshop, Rhinoceros and V-Ray Collaboration with: Brendon Fraser

Site Model (fig. 8)

Ontario, Ottawa Wood shop Collaboration with: Brendon Fraser

Housing Design

Housing studio was focused on rehabilitation of an old facade and to design housing in the city core. The precedents were to make mixed income housing, and design it as visitable units with accessible units or design all of it to be accessible housing. The design concept was to create a floating form. The form would appear to have been separated from its base and lifted into the air. To do this we scaled up the top portion of the building and scaled down the middle portion. We gave the materialistic impression that the middle was invisible using glass as the exterior facade. The top portion was given similar material to the historic facade to make it appear to have once been connected to it. We designed it this way to give the impression of something heavy that was once connected to the ground, has been lifted up above the ground and then sits a home in the sky. The glass facade also reflects the museum of natures glass addition as seen in fig. 9. The height at which the glass facade stops and the top heavy part begins is also the height of the museum of nature. It was designed this way to associate with the museum of nature. The black columns were to represent a form separation, between the top and bottom part of the structure. The columns represent what would be left between the top and bottom parts of the building as if t was pulled apart.

5


6

City-Core Studio Urban Design

City-Core studio was focused on redesigning a site in the core of the city of Ottawa. The precedents being sustainability, connectivity and creativity. The site was the Ottawa Civic Hospital, as during this period it had plans to move to a new location. As a team we explored the re-use of specific structures with heritage value, designed the layout for integrated housing types, made a destination in the center of the site with a market and plaza and at the southern end of the site with a park and library.

Plans (fig. 11)

Ontario, Ottawa, Ottawa Civic Hospital Adobe Illustrator Collaboration with: Charles-Étienne Déry & Cole Peters

Site Render (fig. 10)

Ontario, Ottawa, Ottawa Civic Hospital Adobe Photoshop, Rhinoceros 5 & V-Ray Collaboration with: Charles-Étienne Déry & Cole Peters


Research

7

Super-Structure

What if a city had a 3D-Grid creating layers of city on city? What if when one looked up there were layers and layers of city above you? I have named this idea: the 3D-Grid. Issues the 3D-Grid concept addresses are: lack of space, urban sprawl, loss of potential tax revenue, architecture, seismic forces and physical infrastructure. This city would be a city in pursuit of bettering itself by using its maximum potential of air space. The 3D-Grid would improve the use of space, increase tax revenue, create new architecture and urban technological systems and improve seismic resilience. The topography of a city would assist in shaping the 3D-Grid. The concept of the 3D-Grid can encompass an entire city. By increasing the density of the city in a creative approach of city layers, the city’s air space above buildings would decrease by means of sup and super structures. I was inspired by metabolist architecture of the 60s in Japan, and the manner in which metabolist design was organic in growth (example metabolist projects figures 12 and 13). Metabolism’s form of a city is very different from the 3D-Grid. A metabolist city is a similar to modern architecture but with replaceable pieces and sub and super structures, while the 3D-Grid creates an integrated urban form not restricted by height or length with replaceable pieces and sub and super structures. Inspirational Image 3 (figure 14) is what city the ambition of layers upon layers might look like, yet seen in an image from 1913. Figure 14 shows what layers of traffic would appear to look like in a layered dense city. In figures 15 through 17 I explored how this 3D-grid of sub and super structures might be accomplished. Figure 15 is looking at the 3D-grid; the gray columns are sub-structures meant to hold up the rest of the city. Figure 16 is a collage of a city with low rise buildings next to mid-rise; the collage of colors added to the image explore what it might look like if a super structure was built on top of the low rise to match the height of the mid-rise. Figure 17 is a project involving sub and superstructures and how they might stand alone without a dense city base; the colors represent different uses (e.g. yellow-residential, red-commercial).

Inspirational Image 1 (fig. 12) City in the air Arata Isozaki, 1961

3D Grid (fig. 15) Rhinoceros 5

Inspirational Image 2 (fig. 13) Nakagin Capsule Tower Kisho Kurokawa, 1972

Inspirational Image 3 (fig. 14) City of future Corbett, 1913

Sub & Super Structure Design Project (fig. 17) Rhinoceros 5 and V-Ray

Super-structure Collage (fig. 16) Adobe Illustrator


8

MegaStructure

Utopia is a non-existent place and, as an idea, is a fictional perfection of civilization. If it were to exist what might it look like? Would it look according to its psychological description? Focusing on determining the ultimate perfection of a city and its urban, architectural and social form using new Jerusalem as the archetype I have concluded utopias urban form is an enormous structure or megastructure and its social form is unity. The basis to this megastructure study is to understand the ultimate form of a perfect city. Since it seems an impossibility for humanity to reach a perfect city, will we continue down a hopeful path of what if or shall we stop here? In ancient texts of biblical times, there were two cities with utopic characteristics, both were described as enormous structures. Babel was near the beginning and a result of disobedience toward God. New Jerusalem was the last city described in the bible. Babel had the purpose of making a name for themselves. The new Jerusalem had the purpose of being a home for God’s people. The tower of Babel is a representation of a failed effort to make a perfect place. In the end the result was rather opposite to utopia. The result was the scattering of the people across the earth, not united and not together in a large country or city. The city of new Jerusalem was however, the representation of the perfect place. The new Jerusalem was where there will be no tear, pain or death, and no people who commit abomination will be allowed to enter. The city was the place where both the dead and the living will live together again. The structures have similar properties both physically and socially or politically. They both are described as megastructures, Babel being tall, an attempt to reach the heavens and the new Jerusalem being gargantuan in scale. They both are described as having united people, united with on goal, one purpose. New Jerusalem was the paradise of paradises. It was a utopia, so much so that it alone stands as the perfect archetype of utopia. A megastructure is described as: an enormous structure or building complex entirely connected, with many uses. The word megastructure defines the urban form of the utopia archetype, the new Jerusalem. The urban form has a set portrayal as a megastructure. The word unity defines the social form of the utopian archetype, new Jerusalem. The perfect place’s social form will be unity of purpose; the place would be united to accomplish something. Unity is a oneness of people in mind and goal: a harmony of the people. It is when one sees the unity of people that then they see the producing of works, or physical representations of there unity. The importance of the social and urban archetype works is when they come into being in projects. Two main groups and movements in which megastructures are used as the urban form of organizing social and urban forms are focused on here. First is the Russian Revolution before the Soviet Union, when architects and urban planners designed projects of urban form simulating the new socialist society. The planners in Russia at the time were focusing on regional planning, organizing a city by its land-use and planning a permanent city under the new society, not under monarchy. The second is the group of young architects called Archigram, who designed radically in the 1950s and 60s according to the cultural reorientation of capitalism and rejecting modernism. Archigram’s projects were not for any specific city, rather examples of portions of a city if it might take on all the implications of capitalism and rejecting modernism in a urban’s form. Two most interesting architectural projects in these groups consist of urban megastructures and are under the frame work of social unity: Georgii Krutikov’s the City of the Future (figure 18) and Archigram’s the Plug-in City (figure 19). These projects were done in the 20th century, but in two very different contexts. The similarities are in the way that unity is necessary for either to function and how both end up with a megastructure urban form. The social and urban form the projects take are both very different but because of the unity present for them to exist and the form results in a megastructure. These two projects represent an attempt at creating a perfect place, a utopia. Georgii Krutikov’s the City of the Future (figure 18) project was designed after the Russian revolution, during the Soviet Union in 1928. The country had a communist government at the time, which had just recently started in 1922 after the 1917 revolution. The country’s state was changing from monarchy to dictatorship, where everything would be state owned. In the process of change there were architects and artist making projects expressing that change in society. They arranged society by organizing the city, by use. The change in society is represented by Krutikov’s project, the City of the Future, as a megastructure. The City of the Future was an urban project organizing the city by the social structures of the Soviet Union into a megastructure. Archigram’s the Plug-in City (figure 19) project was designed in the post-modern era, in England in 1964. The country had a constitutional monarchy as a government, with a capitalist economy. The mass-production of goods and the mass-purchasing of goods gave the society a new impression of the world, that people can buy and discard as needed. The capitalist society encourages individuality; it creates a form of unity in multiplicity. Archigram applied the societies new social concepts of consumerism to physical city forms, in their project as a progressively growing and evolving, through acquisition of new and disposal of old, megastructure. Archigram’s the Plug-in City was a project exploring the way in which capitalist culture would affect the city planning and the urban form. The Plug-in City ideas were instilled in consumerism, taking the city and turning it into a commodity. Similarities in the two projects exceeded the unity and megastructure. Most interestingly both projects ended up with housing in the sky and both were in an upside-down pyramid form (as seen in the images to the right). One was floating (City of the Future) and the other was on a sub-structure (Plug-in City). One was more of a parabola (City of the Future) and the other was straighter like a pyramid (Plug-in City). They were both intended as residential structures.s

Precedent Project 1 (fig. 18) The City of the Future Georgii Krutikov, 1928

Precedent Project 2 (fig. 19) The Plug-in City Archigram, 1964

Melissa A McDonald Portfolio  
Melissa A McDonald Portfolio  
Advertisement