Liquid Infrastructure

liquid infrastructure MHM

proyecto de fin de carrera

Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey + Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP Advisors Diana García Cejudo Pedro Mendoza Hernandez

Submitted by Monica Muñoz Rodriguez Hugo Fernando Gómez Saldaña Moises Abraham Cortez Vite

How will we live together?

+

preface

How will we live together?

This thesis is the result of concerns and questions that we seek to answer and represent with our personal interests and identified concerns, in relation to issues that we believe should be considered as part of our responsibilities as architects and individuals that are part of a society.

Esta tesis es el resultado de inquietudes y cuestionamientos que buscamos responder y representar con nuestros intereses personales y preocupaciones identificadas, en relaciรณn con temas que creemos deben ser considerados como parte de nuestras responsabilidades como arquitectos e individuos que forman parte de una sociedad.

Chapter one

Introduction

How will we live together?

The project is located in Mexico, in the city of Queretaro.

The principal premise that gave rise to the development of this thesis was the Venice Architecture Biennale 2020 and its theme “How will we live together?”.

Looking for an answer to this question, we made an analysis and research of different topics that seem relevant to us to better understand the City of Queretaro and its opportunity areas, so that through the application of the project, we would be able to answer this question in an specific site within the urban context.

El proyecto está ubicado en México, específicamente en la ciudad de Querétaro. La principal premisa que dio pie al desarrollo de esta tesis fue la Bienal de Venecia y su tema “How will we live together?.

Buscando responder esta pregunta realizamos un análisis e investigación de diferentes temas que nos parecieron relevantes para entender de mejor forma la ciudad de Querétaro y sus áreas de oportunidad, para que a través de la aplicación del proyecto podamos ser capaces de responder esta pregunta en un sitio específico. dentro del contexto urbano

water

Chapter two

Currently the overexploitation of the aquifers is carried out at a point where water has to be extracted 300 meters underground, instead of the 75 meters which was the normal level. In the case of the Querétaro valley aquifer, it is being exploited 3 times more than it is recharged; according to the territorialization strategy of the Urban prosperity index in Querétaro, the Q500, if the tendency goes on like this, the aquifer will dry out by 2025.

The recharge of groundwater occurs at high levels of topography, due to its characteristics from the nonclay soil. In Querétaro, the recharge spaces are now urbanized, so they became non-permeable, dragging the water to low levels of topography, which are also urbanized.

Another problem caused by the low recharge of the Querétaro valley aquifer is flooding, because of the alterations in the base level of the water currents. The base level of the rivers is permanent; by extracting so much water from the aquifer, the terrain has lost resilience and the spaces that were filled with water, now are settling, causing subsidence and therefore flooding.

Actualmente la sobreexplotación de los acuíferos se realiza en un punto donde se debe extraer agua a 300 metros bajo tierra, en lugar de los 75 metros el cual era el nivel normal. En el caso del acuífero del valle de Querétaro, este está siendo explotado 3 veces más de lo que se recarga; de acuerdo con la estrategia de territorialización del índice de la prosperidad Urbana en Querétaro, el Q500, si esta tendencia sigue de esta forma, el acuífero se secara para el 2025.

La recarga del agua subterránea ocurre en altos niveles de topografía, debido a sus características del suelo (suelo no arcilloso). En Querétaro, los espacios de recarga ahora están urbanizados, por lo que se volvieron no permeables, arrastrando el agua a bajos niveles de topografía, que generalmente están urbanizados.

Otro de los problemas generados por la poca recarga del acuífero del valle de Querétaro son las inundaciones, ya que se han producido alteraciones en el nivel base de las corrientes de agua. El nivel base de los ríos es permanente; al extraer tanta agua del acuífero el terreno ha perdido resiliencia y los espacios antes rellenos de agua se están asentando, produciendo hundimiento y por ende las inundaciones.

Water

200 liters

per person - 1 day

MA LER

WATER CONSUMP

PTION SUM CON R E V RI

T I ON F

RO M

LERMA RIVER CO NSUMP TION

AQU I FE

R

ABSORPTION

400 000m3/DAY ABSORPTION

RESERVA E L

JURICA PO NIEN TE

WATER IN QUERETARO

Lerma 60% Aquifer

TÁN GAN

40%

O

PEÑA COL ORA DA ABSORPTION A BSORP TION

ABSORPTION

S

ZONA MIC ROC UEN CA

4 absortion zones 1 inside the city

water and agriculture Food and agriculture are the largest consumers of water, requiring around one hundred times more than we use for personal needs. Up to 70 % of the water we take from rivers and groundwater worldwide goes into irrigation, about 10% is used in domestic applications and 20% in industry.

Agricultural land used worldwide has remained steady for over 30 years, while world population has increased exponentially.

In Queretaro, agriculture and industry’s water consumption is more than 60%, while the land this use occupies is nearly 40%. The economically active population that agriculture employs is aroun 1%.

46

8

44

7

42

6

40

5

b

38

4

36

3

34

2

32

1

a 1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

b - world population (billions)

a - % agricultural land (worldwide)

Visualizing these data, we can conclude that traditional agriculture has a really high environmental cost that.

37.5%

62.5%

HOUSING

Water consumption Qro.

AGRICULTURE & INDUSTRY

Water consumption Qro.

62.8%

99%

Water consumption Qro.

37.2%

oTHER

Land Qro.

AGRICULTURE Land Qro.

Water consumption Qro.

99%

oTHER

Economically active population in Qro.

1%

AGRICULTURE

Economically active population in Qro.

1%

rainwater 900

900

The analysis of rainwater in Queretaro includes data from 2000 to 2019.

800 It contains the precipitation millimeters per month. (one millimeter is equivalent to one square meter). F 700

800

700

600 rom this data we can conclude that the months of June, July, August and September are the four months of major precipitations, ranging from 107mm 500 to 126mm. The data also shows that rainwater is not constant year by year, 400 there is always a drought every 5 to 7 years, Which the following years but become years of floods.

600

500

400

300

300

200

200

100

100

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

annual rainwater in queretaro (cubic mm)

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Jan 0 1 15 6.4 19.1 4.8 17.3 1.6 0 10.7 39.5 0.1 6.7 4.9 6.2 9 5.8 0.7 9.2 7.5

Feb 0.9 10.3 11.3 0.2 0 5.5 0.3 20.5 6.3 0.8 139.9 0.1 53.8 3.8 1.6 14.9 3.3 2 10 2.3

Mar 0.2 3.7 1.2 0.3 28.5 15.2 7.9 7.2 1.4 4.2 0.9 8.4 10 5.9 11.3 110.1 28.2 20.9 2.8 4.6

Apr 2.3 15.9 28.5 9 9 5.5 17.1 39.9 3.4 1.2 22.1 3.7 4.9 7.4 17.2 28.3 26 17.7 24.1 2.7

May 37.1 34.9 13.7 18.4 58.4 6 105.4 25.8 23.3 40.7 11 7.5 20.4 41.2 71.7 94.1 71.7 29.6 39.5 11.9

June 105.2 111.2 63.6 98.1 181.3 11.8 31.4 127.8 96.3 88.3 86.2 131.8 110.5 89.2 202 128.9 132.1 83.2 161.8 104

average

7.412

8.217

9.033

13.6

36.16

107.27

Chapter one

MONTHLY rainwater in queretaro (cubic mm)

July

Ago

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dic

53.1 124.8 118.9 151.9 117.4 134.5 87.3 187.4 187.3 59.4 204.4 62.3 138 159.3 114.5 96.9 131.1 107.9 31.4 57.3

83.8 122.6 73.7 173.5 94.6 137.2 166.3 100.9 213.8 77.4 79.4 74.5 113.8 116.6 96.5 85 207 92.2 71.7 57.2

58.4 65.1 108.4 273.8 146.3 50.9 86.4 86.5 106.5 125.8 130.7 56.7 94.4 203 154.6 96.3 69.3 168 110.2 66

16.3 48 73.5 69 39.2 60.6 51.6 29.9 3.4 63 2.9 24.4 7 64.3 77.2 60.5 38.8 67.4 58.6 78.1

15.4 48 32.1 2.6 1.3 2.4 15.2 10.7 0 2 0 2.8 27.9 55.4 10.2 25.9 30.3 1.3 31.1 9.2

0 9.5 1.2 0.1 3.4 0.6 4 1 0 16.5 0.1 0 2.5 29.3 10.3 6.9 6.5 1.8 3.8 10.2

116.07

109.261

107.367

47.344

15.788

4.9

Total 372.7 595 541.1 803.3 698.5 435 590.2 639.2 641.7 490 717.1 372.3 589.9 780.3 773.3 756.8 750.1 592.7 554.2 411

607.15

7.42 mm

Jan

4.94 mm

8.21 mm3

Feb

Dec

47.34 mm

9.033 mm

Nov

Mar

monthly rainfall

Oct

47.34 mm

Apr 13.6 mm

Sept

May

107.36 mm

36.16 mm

Aug

June

109.06 mm

127.17 mm

July 116.07 mm

monthly rainwater average

900

900

800

800

700

700

600

600 900

900

500

800

800

700 400

700

600

600

500

400

300

300 500

500

400 200

400

300

300

200

100

100 200

200

100

2000

2000

2001

2001

2002

2002 2003

2003 2004

2004

2005

2006

2005 2007

2008

2006 2009

annual rainwater in queretaro (cubic mm)

2007 2010

2008

2011

2012

2009 2013

2010

2014

2015

2011 2016

2012 2017

2018

100

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2019

Chapter one

annual rainwater in queretaro (cubic mm)

Jan 2000 2001 2002 2000 2003 20042001 20052002 2006 20072003 20082004 2009 2005 2010 20112006 2012 2007 2013 20142008 20152009 2016 20172010 20182011 2019

Feb 0 1 15 6.4 19.1 4.8 17.3 1.6 0 10.7 39.5 0.1 6.7 4.9 6.2 9 5.8 0.7 9.2 7.5

Jan

Mar 0.9

Apr 0.2

2.3

May 37.1

Feb 10.3 3.7 15.9 Mar 34.9 1.2 13.7 011.3 0.9 28.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 9 18.4 1 0 3.7 28.5 10.3 9 58.4 15.2 11.3 5.5 15 5.5 1.2 6 0.3 7.9 17.1 105.4 6.420.5 0.3 7.2 0.2 39.9 25.8 1.4 23.3 19.1 6.3 0 3.4 28.5 0.8 4.2 1.2 40.7 4.8 5.5 22.1 15.211 139.9 0.9 8.4 0.3 3.7 17.3 0.1 7.97.5 10 20.4 1.653.8 20.5 4.9 7.2 3.8 5.9 7.4 41.2 0 1.6 1.4 11.3 6.3 17.2 71.7 110.1 0.8 28.3 94.1 10.714.9 4.2 3.3 28.2 26 71.7 39.5 2 0.9 20.9139.9 17.7 29.6 2.8 0.1 24.1 39.5 0.1 10 8.4 2.3 4.6 2.7 11.9 2012 6.7 53.8 10 average2013 7.412 8.217 9.033 3.8 13.6 36.16 4.9 5.9 2014 6.2 1.6 11.3 MONTHLY 2015rainwater in 9queretaro (cubic 14.9 mm)110.1

June 105.2

Apr111.2 63.6 2.3 98.1 15.9 181.3 11.8 28.5 31.4 127.8 9 96.3 9 88.3 5.5 86.2 131.8 17.1 110.5 39.9 89.2 3.4 202 128.9 1.2 132.1 22.1 83.2 161.8 3.7 104 4.9 107.27 7.4 17.2 28.3

July

Ago 53.1

May 124.8 118.9 37.1 151.9 117.434.9 134.513.7 87.3 187.418.4 187.358.4 59.4 6 204.4 62.3 105.4 138 25.8 159.3 114.523.3 96.940.7 131.1 107.9 11 31.4 7.5 57.3 20.4 116.0741.2 71.7 94.1

Sep 83.8 58.4 122.6June 65.1 73.7 105.2108.4 173.5 273.8 111.2146.3 94.6 137.2 63.650.9 166.3 86.4 98.186.5 100.9 213.8 181.3106.5 77.4 125.8 11.8130.7 79.4 74.5 31.456.7 113.8 127.894.4 116.6 203 96.3154.6 96.5 85 88.396.3 207 69.3 86.2 168 92.2 71.7 131.8110.2 57.2 66

109.261

110.5 107.367 89.2 202 128.9

Oct

Nov 16.3 48 73.5 53.1 69 124.8 39.2 60.6 118.9 51.6 151.9 29.9 3.4 117.4 63 134.5 2.9 24.4 87.3 7 187.4 64.3 187.3 77.2 60.5 59.4 38.8 204.4 67.4 58.6 62.3 78.1

July

138

47.344 159.3

114.5 96.9

Dic 15.4 Ago 48 32.1 83.8 2.6 1.3 122.6 2.4 73.7 15.2 10.7 173.5 0 94.6 2 137.2 0 2.8 166.3 27.9 100.9 55.4 10.2 213.8 25.9 77.4 30.3 79.4 1.3 31.1 74.5 9.2

15.788

113.8 116.6 96.5 85

0 9.5 1.2 0.1 3.4 0.6 4 1 0 16.5 0.1 0 2.5 29.3 10.3 6.9 6.5 1.8 3.8 10.2 4.9

Total 372.7 595 541.1 58.4 803.3 65.1 698.5 435 108.4 590.2 273.8 639.2 641.7 146.3 490 50.9 717.1 372.3 86.4 589.9 86.5 780.3 106.5 773.3 756.8 125.8 750.1 130.7 592.7 554.2 56.7 411

Sep

94.4

607.15 203

154.6 96.3

Oct

Nov 16.3 48 73.5 69 39.2 60.6 51.6 29.9 3.4 63 2.9 24.4 7 64.3 77.2 60.5

Dic 15.4 48 32.1 2.6 1.3 2.4 15.2 10.7 0 2 0 2.8 27.9 55.4 10.2 25.9

0 9.5 1.2 0.1 3.4 0.6 4 1 0 16.5 0.1 0 2.5 29.3 10.3 6.9

Total 372.7 595 541.1 803.3 698.5 435 590.2 639.2 641.7 490 717.1 372.3 589.9 780.3 773.3 756.8

200 liters per person - 1day

SCIENCE AND EDUCATION WATER IN QUERETARO

400 000m3/DAY 40% LERMA

“It is not that we all 60% haveAQUIFER the vocation to be a scientist, but we can support the system so that our country evolves in this area; instead of leading Mexico to intellectual suicide and brain drain, we must turn Mexico into a 4 ABSORPTION ZONES 1 INSIDE THE CITY knowledge society, where we all participate in this activity, since it requires great support to be carried out efficiently, and to be seen the result reflected in a benefit for all Mexican society.”

María Portillo, Professor, researcher Cátedra Conacyt, 2019.

Years of study

95%

9.5 8.5

REMAINING AREA 25 491 Ha

NATURE RESERVE

Chapter one

7 706 Ha

literacy rate ZMQ

Queretaro

Mexico

w id

e

ico

or e

or

a

ld

M

h

K

W So

ut

India

R 0.7 H

wide

1

6.5 H R

World

LITERACY

SCIENCE AND

Mexico United States

86% 93% 99%

EDUCATION

O IC E

CURIOUS

NOTHIN G

NV

CI T

80%

64%

INDIFFERENT

Feeling about

science

LITTLE

49%

IZE

e

wid

rld

Wo

R

120+ MILLION

5.3 H

46%

o

xic

Me

.4 13

d

an

erl

itz Sw

S BOOK

rty

7%

1.1 0.4 7% %

MEX V

de

wi

ld

or

W

REaD

ove

M

8.4

in p

EXICO M N

ex

ico Mex

00

ORLD SW

Total popu lation

ion

94%

Wo rld wid e

d Finla n

Mexico

Worldwide

11 0

o

ic

ex

TEC H

9.1

ulat

E&

OOL

334

SC I ENC

SCH

Pop

PIB

OF

1443

%

70

n

20%

ca tio

30%

du

ATIO N

S AR YE

22

on

oe

ati

es t

EDUC

4.3

uc

8 to

ed

ta cc

PIB IN

LL

of

ith ou

S

3D

ge

yw

1 from

ra

ve rt

# OF SCIENTIST

370

po

ve

me

Co

tre

7 007

ex

pl e peo

in

REALIT YI

ple

n on i

eo

ucation higher ed Acces to

Of p

cati edu her Hig

%

bel

A LOT

DOES

THIN

K IT

IS

iev

e

W LO

%

78 DO ES

44%

ME

Know

DIU

86% DOE

ledge about scienc e kno wm ore abo ut s cien Im ce por tan Sc t t ok ien no ce wb is asi im cs po cie rta nce nt in ev ery W ou da ya ld stu cti vit dy ies ac ar ee rb as ed in sc ien ce Wa nt to

M

YE

S

S

k in Th M

ed eas

DOES

r Inc

86%

ico

ex

is

inte

fa

d

sc

ca es

nc

a dv

ms

lai

ce

cc

tifi

ien

tifi en

sci

in

in

cien

nce

scie

h be

e ev

ng

lli

li Be

t in res

t in s

Trus

This graphic divided into three axes shows data about science and education in Mexico, its contrast worlwide, and citizen concerns about this topic.

Nature reserve

Chapter one

Currently the overexploitation of the aquifers is carried out at a point where water has to be extracted 300 meters underground, instead of the 75 meters which was the normal level. In the case of the Querétaro valley aquifer, it is being exploited 3 times more than it is recharged; according to the territorialization strategy of the Urban prosperity index in Querétaro, the Q500, if the tendency goes on like this, the aquifer will dry out by 2025.

The recharge of groundwater occurs at high levels of topography, due to its characteristics from the nonclay soil. In Querétaro, the recharge spaces are now urbanized, so they became non-permeable, dragging the water to low levels of topography, which are also urbanized.

Another problem caused by the low recharge of the Querétaro valley aquifer is flooding, because of the alterations in the base level of the water currents. The base level of the rivers is permanent; by extracting so much water from the aquifer, the terrain has lost resilience and the spaces that were filled with water, now are settling, causing subsidence and therefore flooding.

Actualmente la sobreexplotación de los acuíferos se realiza en un punto donde se debe extraer agua a 300 metros bajo tierra, en lugar de los 75 metros el cual era el nivel normal. En el caso del acuífero del valle de Querétaro, este está siendo explotado 3 veces más de lo que se recarga; de acuerdo con la estrategia de territorialización del índice de la prosperidad Urbana en Querétaro, el Q500, si esta tendencia sigue de esta forma, el acuífero se secara para el 2025.

La recarga del agua subterránea ocurre en altos niveles de topografía, debido a sus características del suelo (suelo no arcilloso). En Querétaro, los espacios de recarga ahora están urbanizados, por lo que se volvieron no permeables, arrastrando el agua a bajos niveles de topografía, que generalmente están urbanizados.

Otro de los problemas generados por la poca recarga del acuífero del valle de Querétaro son las inundaciones, ya que se han producido alteraciones en el nivel base de las corrientes de agua. El nivel base de los ríos es permanente; al extraer tanta agua del acuífero el terreno ha perdido resiliencia y los espacios antes rellenos de agua se están asentando, produciendo hundimiento y por ende las inundaciones.

A

B

C

1

2

3

4

5

B4

NATURE RESERVEs

in queretaro

500 m2 A typical sqare in Loma bonita looks like this. Athough some streets folow a reticular grid, there are some others that cross diagonally. Some streets are cul-de-sacs, obstructing mobility.

Chapter two

Loma bonita’s Morphology

Sidewalks and lots Most lots measure around 100 m2 and a few range from 500 to 700 m2.

Pedestrian infrastructure is very defficient.

Built area Built area is very dense, constructions occupy a very large portion of each property and there are some empty lots throughout the area.

Morphology

500 m2 A typical sqare in Jurica looks like this.

All the streets follow a reticular grid ans sqares are quite big.

Chapter two

Jurica’s Morphology

Sidewalks and lots Most lots measure around 2 000 m2 altough they range from 500 to 5 000 m2 Pedestrian infrastructure is very good, it occupies almost twice as much space as car infrastructure.

Built area Built area is not dense at all, constructions occupy a very small portion of each property and there are also some empty lots throughout the area.

Morphology

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

socioeconomic index

Chapter two

This index considers variables such as the number of people with post-secondary education, illiterate population, percentage of dwellings with cars, number of rooms per house, among others. It is very clear that Jurica is the only neighborhood with a very high index in the area.

Este índice considera variables como el número de personas con educación postsecundaria, población analfabeta, porcentaje de viviendas con automóvil, número de habitaciones por casa, entre otras. Está muy claro que Jurica es el único vecindario con un índice muy alto en el área.

Maps

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

literacy

Spaces with medium to high levels of education are scattered throughout Loma Bonita; the distinction is clear, Jurica is the neighborhood with the most stable data regarding average years of education.

Los espacios con niveles de educación medios a altos se encuentran dispersos en todo Loma Bonita; la distinción es clara, Jurica es el barrio con los datos más estables en cuanto a los años promedio de educación.

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

population density

Chapter two

The amount of population per area is shown, which varies from very high to very low density. Jurica is the only neighborhood with very low density, while Loma Bonita modifies from very high to low density; In addition, Loma bonita has an overcrowding problem combined with unoccupied homes.

Se muestra la cantidad de poblacion por area, que varia de muy alta a muy baja densidad. Jurica es el Ăşnico barrio con muy baja densidad, mientras que Loma Bonita varĂ­a de muy alta a baja densidad; ademĂĄs, Loma bonita tiene un problema de hacinamiento combinado con viviendas desocupadas.

Maps

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

irregular and closed settlements

There are several irregular settlements as well as closed residential complexes on the western area of the corridor. The fact that these types of settlements are only located around Loma Bonita is an evidence that the quality of housing on Jurica is very different.

Existen varios asentamientos irregulares, asĂ­ como complejos residenciales cerrados en el ĂĄrea oeste del corredor. El hecho de que este tipo de asentamientos solo estĂŠ ubicado alrededor de Loma Bonita es una evidencia de que la calidad de la vivienda en Jurica es muy diferente.

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

urban mobility

Chapter two

The levels of accessibility to the public transport network are represented from very high to very low. Jurica is the neighborhood with the least accessibility to the network, although there are also several areas with the same characteristics in Loma Bonita. To improve connectivity in the East-West direction is an area of opportunity.

Los niveles de accesibilidad a la red de transporte público están representados de muy alto a muy bajo. Jurica es el barrio con menor accesibilidad a la red, aunque de igual forma hay varias áreas con la misma característica en Loma Bonita. Mejorar la conectividad en dirección Este-Oeste es una área de oportunidad.

Maps

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

flooding areas

Virtually all areas adjacent to the canal are vulnerable to flooding. Without considering all the differences previously presented, Jurica and Loma Bonita are equally affected by natural phenomena such as floods.

Prรกcticamente todas las รกreas adyacentes al canal son vulnerables a las inundaciones.

Sin considerar todas las diferencias presentadas anteriormente, Jurica y Loma Bonita se ven igualmente afectadas por fenรณmenos naturales como las inundaciones.

Self-made map with data from ONU-Habitat Queretaro, 2015.

long-lasting housing

Chapter two

Housing located in floodable areas and surrounding the canal are classified as nonlong-lasting housing. On the other hand, in Jurica the least durable housing is the southern area due to its proximity with the industry. While in Loma bonita, low durability in houses match the areas with irregular settlements.

La vivienda ubicada en zonas inundables y alrededor del canal se clasifica como vivienda no durable. Por otro lado, en Jurica la vivienda menos durable es la zona sur debido a su cercanĂ­a con la industria. Mientras que en Loma Bonita, la poca durabilidad en vivienda coincide con las ĂĄreas de asentamientos irregulares.

Premises

Chapter two

The differences between Loma Bonita and Jurica are evident and very contrasting, despite being practically neighbors they are oblivious to the situation that each one lives; however, even with their notable differences, they share common problems, one of them being flood areas and thanks to previous research it is known that water scarcity is also a problem in the area and very soon in the state of Querétaro.

Returning to the biennial question “How will we live together?” and applying it on the site we try to answer it by establishing 3 premises.

The first is the “How”, we believe that actions on an individual scale can have an impact on an urban scale; the second is “Live”, natural resources are necessary and we make use of them but we must be aware that these common goods must be available to everyone, but they have a limit, so being aware of the natural balance must be a way of lifetime; the last premise is “Together”, all individuals are different from each other, therefore a society can be full of contrasts, Jurica and Loma Bonita is an example, understanding that an individual problem or interest can become a collective concern can generate a more empathetic society.

We believe that with these three premises we can achieve community and achieve positive repercussions at different scales.

Las diferencias entre Loma Bonita y Jurica son evidentes y contrastantes, a pesar de ser prácticamente vecinos son ajenos a la situación que cada uno vive; sin embargo, aún con sus disparidades notables, comparten problemas en común, uno de ellos son las áreas de inundación; además, gracias a la investigación previa se sabe que la escasez de agua también es un problema en la zona y muy pronto en el estado de Querétaro.

Retomando la pregunta de la biennal “How will we live together?” y aplicándola en el sitio se trato de darle respuesta estableciendo 3 premisas. La primera es “How”, creemos que las acciones a escala individual pueden lograr un impacto a escala urbana; la segunda es “Live”, los recursos naturales son necesarios y hacemos uso de ellos, pero se debe ser consciente en que estos bienes comunes deben estar disponibles para todos, pero tienen un límite, por lo que ser conscientes del equilibrio natural debe ser una forma de vida; la última premisa es “Together”, todos los individuos son diferentes entre sí, por ende una sociedad puede estar llena de contrastes, Jurica y Loma Bonita es un ejemplo, entender que un problema o interés individual se puede convertir en una preocupación colectiva puede generar una sociedad más empática. Creemos que con estas tres premisas podemos lograr hacer comunidad y lograr repercusiones positivas a diferentes escalas.

Premises

how

actions

urban scale

human scale

actions

actions

conscious conscious

live

conscious

individual

togheter

interests

interests

interests interests

interests

colective concern

ourselves

conscious

natural equilibrium

actions

Chapter three

design principles

01

Borders become paths Let’s erase our borders.

Cities with socioeconomic differences generally have physical and social barriers. These barriers must be understood as catalyzers of opportunity where nodes originate and promote social convergence.

Difuminemos nuestras fronteras.

Las ciudades con diferencias socioeconómicas generalmente tienen barreras tanto físicas como sociales. Se deben de entender estas barreras como focos de oportunidad donde se originan nodos que fomentan la convergencia social.

02

Science think tank Let’s understand science as an everyday activity and not as an elite one.

Considering the situation in Queretaro regarding water, it is imperative to find a space for people to experience alternatives and solutions related to science as part of their day to day.

Chapter three

Entendamos la ciencia como una actividad cotidiana y no de élite.

Considerando la situación en Querétaro respecto al agua, es imperativo encontrar un espacio para que la gente experimente alternativas y soluciones relacionadas con la ciencia como parte de su día a día.

Design principles

Cultuurpark Westergasfabriek, Gustafson Porter + Bowman

Fam skyscraper, Food 2189.

03

the green lung Let the city breathe.

Cities have absorbed green spaces, leaving the last ones to the benefit of few.

Given its circumstances, Queretaro needs an active green space, democratic and that follows the climate agenda.

Dejemos que la ciudad respire.

Las ciudades se han comido los espacios verdes, dejando los últimos que quedan para el beneficio de pocos. Dadas sus circunstancias, Querétaro necesita un espacio verde activo que sea democrático y responda a la agenda climática.

04

resilient floodable areas Let’s prepare for times of crisis.

The historical maximums have been exceeded, affecting citizens, and leaving those already vulnerable more vulnerable. This highlights the need for spaces that could be adapted seasonally to rains.

Chapter three

Preparémonos para tiempos de crisis.

Los máximos históricos han sido superados, afectando a los ciudadanos, y dejando más vulnerables a los ya vulnerables. Esto deja en evidencia la necesidad de espacios que se puedan adaptar por temporadas ante las lluvias.

Design principles

Central park, New York.

Enghaveparken Floodable Park, Tredje Natur and Platant.

05

dignified neighborhoods Let’s democratize cities Inequalities in a city create friction, by dignifying sectors of the city, it is democratized. This is why the city must have the same accessibility and offer the same opportunities to its inhabitants, regardless of their socioeconomic level.

Democraticemos las ciudades Las desigualdades en una ciudad crean fricciones, al dignificar sectores de la ciudad, ésta se democratiza. Es por esto que la ciudad debe tener la misma accesibilidad y brindar las mismas oportunidades a sus habitantes, sin importar su nivel socioeconómico.

06

productive landscape Let’s learn to take advantage of the green.

Cities have become disconnected from rural production areas, making their inhabitants increasingly oblivious to the individual’s connection to their ecosystem. Implementing productive landscapes generates positive benefits for a community.

Chapter three

Aprendamos a aprovechar lo verde Las ciudades se han desconectado de las áreas de producción rurales, haciendo a sus habitantes cada vez más ajenos a la conexión del individuo con su ecosistema. Implementar paisajes productivos genera beneficios positivos para una comunidad.

Design principles

Citizens, Brookfield properties.

New York City (Steady) State, Michael Sorkin.

Chapter three

master plan strategies

01

offset

a.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

b.

a. Pre-existing water canal b. Flood areas Relocating affected housing in new resilient typologies

02

Reserve Extention

a.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

b.

a. Water dikes Redirection of heavy water flow into absortion areas. b. Modified water canal morphology Canal’s section goes from gray hard infrastructure to landscape. c. Resilient public space Floodable areas that can modify its use during rainfall and flood. d. Secondary water canal Redirection water flow into an artificial canal that delays water flow.

03

delay

a.

a. b.

d.

a. Water dikes Redirection of heavy water flow into absortion areas. b. Modified water canal morphology Canal’s section goes from gray hard infrastructure to landscape. c. Resilient public space Floodable areas that can modify its use during rainfall and flood. d. Secondary water canal Redirection water flow into an artificial canal that delays water flow.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

c.

04

boost-prexistence

b. c.

a.

a. Support informal dynamics.

Building up on existing community spaces. b. Extension of pre-stablished flows.

Spread pre-existing commercial uses. c. Empty lots as possibilities Floodable areas that can modify its use during rainfall and flood. d. Upgrade existing infrastructure Improve educational program by complementing it with mixed uses.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

d.

05

The relocated

a.

a.

a.

b. a. Resilient housing complexes Relocate inhabitants flood areas to adjacent lots b. New typologies on empty lots Increase density and diversity on medium-size voids.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

b.

06

connecting green

a.

b. a. a.

a. Boost sub-utilized open spaces Locate green spaces and reactivate is program. b. Green networks Experience landscape as a continous flow between both neighborhoods.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

b.

07

flows and junctions

a.

a.

c.

a. Perpendicular conectivity Propitiate transversal crossings by generating clear paths. b. Stimulate movement Public transportation routes, pedestrian and cyclist lanes. c. Intersections as magnets Identify main crossings as catalysers for other uses.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

c.

08

landscape as joints

a.

a. b.

a. Open experiences Landscape can be utilized freely by everyone b. Landscape as identity Soft actions through the corridor define flows by segments. c. Connecting joints Landscape creates a continous journey all over the corridor, diluting physical barriers.

The size of these volumes is merely illustrative

c.

WATER AS A COMMON GOOD

Water as a resource has been categorized from different perspectives, as a public good, as an economic good and as a common good. From the perspective of human rights, the basic access to water and sanitation has been recognized as a fundamental human right.

The assumption of water as a common good entails to consider it as a world heritage, which must be managed based on the criteria of solidarity, mutual cooperation, collective access, equity, democratic control and sustainability. Which are clearly incompatible with any commercial approach, that is by its very nature, imbued with short-term expectations of private profit and personal gain.

Serrano L., GarcĂ­a A., MarĂ­n G. (2012) El agua no es una mercancĂ­a.

landscape Interventions as catalysts for

research & education center elinor ostrom Nobel in Economic Sciences

Common pool resources (e.g. water) Community management as a viable solution

community organization co-living developments

Water treatment, floodings and food productivity.

RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER

00

project location

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m 200 m 200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

Self-made map with data from CONAGUA.

200 m

200 m

Maximum water elevation level (2 year return period)

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m 200 m 200 m

200 m

200 m

200 m

Self-made map with data from CONAGUA.

200 m

200 m

MAXIMUM WATER ELEVATION LEVEL (50 YEAR RETURN PERIOD)

co-living developments

08

user and site analysis

a.

b. c.

polygon a

polygon b

polygon c

08

general criteria - Polygon a

675 habitantes 0 - 14 años 15 -29 años 30 - 59 años 60 + años

h2 cos 0.6 cus 1.8 h max:

37.78% 27.85% 33.48% 0.89%

7.225 Ha Área total de polígono (Incluye circulaciones viales y peatonales)

h6 cos 0.4 cus 2 5 stories

typologies: 80 m2 180 units

675

908

2202

Habitantes en 2010

Habitantes en 2020

Habitantes en 2010

inhabitants

relocated

h6

Location on Master plan

2202

908

population growth projection

year

a.

h6 cos 0.4 cus 2 h max: 5 niveles

2020

5 stories

Public program on floor includes: sharedlevel program on floor level cos 0.4 Shared 45 program includes: units (4 in total) 2 m2 shop every • cus A 40 housing - Dining area • typologies 1 800 m2 and storage : 80for m2 rainwater - Rainwatertreatment filters and storage Community garden 180 units • 1 800 m2 for community gardens and shared dining - Local shops

2050

01

site

+ 2.0

a.

+- 0.0

b. c.

a. Pre-existing Nature reserve b. Proposed pedestrian, cyclist and public transportation connection, previously a pedestrian bridge. c. Connection with Pinos street

The selected site is located on one of the proposed connections between Loma Bonita and Jurica from the Master Plan. On point “c” it connects with Pinos, which is one of the busiest perpendicular streets in Jurica and the one people from Loma Bonita use the most to get to the bus stops located on Paseo Jurica.

From the area “a” to the north, the interventions on the nature reserve aquire a different character since the proportion of unbuilt area increases drastically.

02

landscape

(a.) Cacti, (d.) Trees a.

(a.) Cacti, (b.) Production

a. Plaza- This plaza works for itinerant community events. b.. Cacti- Cactuses that operate as a “buffer� through the complex, framing certain spaces which later will be used. c. Production- Production of vegetables and temporary cultivation. d. Trees- Leafy canopy trees that will provide shade for a future (Pirul, mesquite, ahuehuete, huizache). e. Flooding buffer

e.

We visualize landscape as a detonator of the program.It takes different angles and usages trhough time, allowing flexibility in the spaces.

It is insterted in a first phase as the series of strategies mentioned in this page The buffer works when the level of water in the waterway overflows. It has small bushes, grass covers and shore plants that allow visual permeability, and avoid erosion.

03

zoning

a. b. c.

d.

a. Food production and trade b. Scientific and educational program c. Recreational program d. Flooding observatory

Area “a” was chosen for the commercial program due to its proximity to busy streets in Loma Bonita. Since part of its program includes vertical food production, it is next to area “b” which involves research and cultural activities.

Area “c” is the only part of the program that is located on the edge of the water canal, therefore its program will be completely related with its water flow.

Meanwhile, area “d” is the area that will relate with residential flows the most, its program includes multipurpose rooms for cultural and sports clases and children’s playgrounds.

04

visual connections

a. b.

a. Pedestrian and visual connections b. Visual connetions

b.

b.

b.

a.

This strategy is divided in two parts: The first part corresponds to flows; Two circulation connections are created, which link the housing and some interventions in the master plan to the complex and the reserve.

The second part corresponds to the visuals; The complex opens into 3 visual connections that are linked to the nature reserve.

05

spine

a. d.

b. c. d.

a. Food production and trade b. Scientific and educational program c. Recreational program d. Flooding observatory

Union of volumes with correlated program through circulation axis. The volumes that are not connected though the axis can work independently from the rest of the program.

06

landscape taking over

a. b. c. d.

a. Food production and trade b. Scientific and educational program c. Recreational program d. Flooding observatory

In this strategy the landscape adapts to the building, it does not only generates the program, but it also explodes the program that is inside the building

general axonometric

07

general massing

ground floor

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

2nd floor

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

rooftop

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

1st floor

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

water canal section

street section

4m

3m

0.75

planter/raingarden

pedestrian +cycling

green buffer

dra

0.5

ainage

3.5 m

3.5 m

bus lane

bus lane

3m

0.5

0.75

pedestrian +cycling drainage

green buffer

3.5 m bus stop

rainwater strategies education center

low maintenance green roof

rainwater is pumped to filter when needed, evaporated when not

retention pond raingarden

porous paveme storage tank

rainwater is collected, filtered and scattered through perforated pipes

porous street section 0.12 m

Porous pavement

0.05 m

Filter layer of washed aggregate

0.40 m

Crushed rain rock

coliving 0.30 m

Angular rock

rain garden section 0.15 m

Pond

0.50 m

Loamy sand

0.40 m

Sand and carbon source

0.10 m

Angular rock

0.10 m

Gravel

0.10 m

Collecting pipe

low maintenance green roof green roof naturally removes pollutants from rainwater

raingarden

raingarden

ent storage tank