Challenge of Simplicity

CHALLENGE OF SIMPLICITY ROLEX LEARNING CENTER - SANAA

BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN FUNDAMENTALS OF ARCHITECTURE Academic Year: 2014-2015 PFG - Final Graduation Project 7-7-2015

Supervised by Professor PEDRO PABLO ARROYO Designed by WALA SAHLOUL 21361216

1 23 4 5 6

SANAA PROJECTS

Kunstlinie Theater and Cultural Center Kanazawa Museum of Contemprorary Toledo Museum of Art Onishi Hall Flower House Okurayama Apartments Seprentine Gallery Pavilion Toyota Aizuma Hall Rolex Lerning Center Hiroshi Senju Museum K aruizawa

DESIGN

03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 21

CONCEPT Introduction Function Steel Structure The Undulating Slab Spaces Roof

25 27 31 33 34 37

Field Trip First Horizon Second Horizon Third Horison Program Relation with Nature

39 40 41 42 43 44

LANDSCAPE

46

STRUCTURE

CONCEPT Introduction Columns-Steel Concrete Sandwich Arch and Slab

61 63 64 65 67

Geometry Form Finding Curvature Arches Development Shell Geometry

68 69 70 71 73

ANALYSIS Shell Analysis Shell Geometry Vertical Elements Deformation

75 76 78 80

FLOOR PLANS

Design & Structure

Roof Picture Plan Ground Floor Picture Plan Basement Picture Plan

TOPOGRAPHY 104

90 92 94 96

98 100

6

REFERENCES BOOKS & MAGAZINES

WEBSITES

1. Elcroquis 2004 2. Elcroquis 2007 3. Elcroquis 2010 4. AV-SANAA 2007-2015 5. Landform Building architecture's new terrain 6. Informal

1.http://www.arcspace.com/features/sanaa/rolex-learning-center/ 2'ammi3((khe^qe^Zkgbg`\^gm^k'^iÜ'\a 3.http://www.archdaily.com/53536/rolex-learning-center-sanaa-by-iwan-baan/24^iÜ&lZgZZ-01-106019/ 4.http://www.archilovers.com/projects/30672/rolex-learning-center.html 5.http://www.dezeen.com/17/02/2010/rolex-learning-center-by-sanaa/ 6.http://3dmeans.com/tag/rolex-learning-center/ 7.https://ukumar88.wordpress.com/20/12/2012/rolex-learning-center-sanaa/ 8.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolex_Learning_Center 9.http://phaidonatlas.com/building/rolex-learning-centre/3639 10.http://www.eikongraphia.com/?p=2647 11.http://art.ingphi.ch/#/rolex-learning-center/102.jpg 12.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v57KDwRpJVk&list=PLUNMB_ERdOXxFWbaCgXm_JYtqVu PgMpvK 13.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2W-EwuO-FU&index=2&list=PLUNMB_ERdOXxFWbaCg Xm_JYtqVuPgMpvK

INTRODUCTION This project sums up all my educational experience, Concepts and ideas that I have learned and admired, Analysis and discoveries that I can actually develop in my own country, something that has the process of complexity to reach the simplest modern result. and how structure analysis is very important to make the design challenge done.

The key of how this project is real ? gives me a hug motivation to know more and understand how this type of projects can be solved and built with this heigh results.

SANAA The work based on two main points Technical: by Creating my own structure plans and other drawings, that you cannot Ûg] bg Zgr k^\hnkl^ pa^g rhn Zk^ searching for this project Graphical: by using japanese concepts , such as the folding book which inspired from the traditional japanese screen system, Second taking longitudinal sections to create the topography of the project inspired from japanese landscape maps, third is X ray poster, wich is related to over labbing sections in painting such as japanese map , fourth bento box and how it is Related to SANAA's Projects.

The experience of seeing a SANAA building is visceral. This experience is despite the ephemerality of appearance achieved by Sejima Zg] GblabsZpZ Zg] bl ebmme^ k^]n\^] nihg Ûklm glimpse by anticipation, or by knowledge of previous works. Whether a glass and concrete garden emerging from a meadow in an Alpine city;The Japanese culture, and the architecture that emanates from it, has been wilfully misunderstood by Western critics, practitioners and clients due to a historical cultural hegemony, and the fetishization of Japanese cultural forms and products by the West, and throughout CZiZg l fh]^kg ablmhkr P^lm^kg Zkmblml% Zk\abm^\ml Zg] hma^kl aZo^ ZiikhikbZm^] CZiZg l i^k\^bo^] remove to promote their own ideas.The idiosyncratic appearance of published works in the West and the lack of rigour in the critical analysis of the works is indicative of this wider cultural phenomenon and a cause for concern.

SANAA is a prime example of this, and we can analyse their work to identify the wider cultural blln^l'L:G:: l phkd ni mh ma^ \hfie^mbhg h_ their Learning Center in Lausanne, Switzerland, on the edge of Lake Geneva, has been mischaracterised, mislabelled and misunderstood.

The projects, typically critically described as fbgbfZe % k^Ûg^] % ikblmbg^ % k^]n\mbo^ Zk^% Zl Stan Allen argues, “at odds with the effect of their more recent built works, which operate more assertively within the public realm, Although they work with simple forms, SANAA sidesteps the essentialism of those architects who appeal to minimalism as a reductive resistant formal eZg`nZ`^' Ma^ ^__^\m h_ L:G:: l _hkf Zg] detailing is instead to create an architecture that is light and ephemeral, and continually changing with different situations of perception.

1

SANAA PROJECTS

Kunstlinie Theater and Cultural Center - Almere -the netherlands 1998- 2007

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

03

Kanazawa museum of contemprorary Japan 2004

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

05

Toledo Museum of Art - USA

2006

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

07

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

09

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

11

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

13

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

15

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

17

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

19

North Scale 1:1000 Wall Transparent Opaque Area Floor Open area Courtyard Roof Corridors Different in level

21

!"#$%&'

@

ANALYSIS

CONCEPT

CONCEPT Introduction !"#$ #L6#/'#*,#$ 12$ -##'*+$ .$ ?GHGG$ %&'()'*+$ '-$ 3'-,#/.(7$ !"'-$ #L6#/'#*,#$ '-$ )#-6'5#$ 5"#$ #6"#0#/.('54$12$.66#./.*,#$.,"'#3#)$%4$?#8'0.$.*)$H'-"'X.;.$.*)$'-$('55(#$/#)&,#)$&61*$ 2'/-5$+('06-#$%4$.*5','6.5'1*:$1/$%4$9*1;(#)+#$12$6/#3'1&-$;1/9-7$

@B

Function !"#$%&'()'*+$'*,(&)#-$.$(./+#$*&0%#/$12$3#/4$)'22#/#*5$6/1+/.00.5',$#(#0#*5-7$!"#$6/18#,5$ %/'#2$'*,(&)#-$.$%.*9:$/#-5.&/.*5:$,.2#:$('%/./4:$)#6./50#*5.($122',#-:$-#0'*./$/110-:$(#,5&/#$ ".((-$.*)$.$%119-"167$!"#-#$./#$.//.*+#)$./1&*)$5"#$(.*)-,.6#$.-$'2$'5$;#/#$21&*):$.*)$*15$ .$0#5',&(1&-(4$#*+'*##/#)$6'#,#$12$./,"'5#,5&/.($)#-'+*7

@A

Function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

@D

Steel Structure !"'-$'-$.$-'06(#$-'*+(#$-51/4$%&'()'*+$;'5"$.$-5##($-5/&,5&/#$#L6.*)'*+$13#/$.$CDB0$M$CEC0$ /#,5.*+&(./$-'5#7$>1;#3#/:$5"#$2(.5$NO$-(.%$-&661/5'*+$5"#$-5##($-5/&,5&/#$(#.3#-$5"#$+/1&*)$ .*)$+#*5(4$.-,#*)-7$!"#$13#/3'#;$P(#25Q$-"1;-$5"#$,1*-5/&,5'1*$12$5"#$(.*)-,.6#:$2/10$NO$0.5$ -(.%$51$-5##($2/.0#7 !"#$-&%-5/&,5&/#$'-$2/##J,&/3#)J-&/2.,#$NO$-"#((7$R5-$5"',9*#--$'-$STT00$.*)$5"#$(./+#-5$-6.*$ '-$.%1&5$UT07$5"#$+#10#5/4$12$5"#$-"#(($)#/'3#-$2/10$.$0#5"1)$12$2'*'5#$#(#0#*5$.*.(4-'-$-1$ .-$51$%#$.$2/##$,&/3#)$-&/2.,#$-"#(($;'5"$('55(#$(1.)$5/.*-0'--'1*$%4$%#*)'*+$013#0#*57$R5$&-#-$ .$"1((1;$-(.%$51$/#)&,#$5"#$-5/&,5&/#$-#(2J$;#'+"5$.5$#3#/4$6./5$#L6#,5$5"#$2##5$12$5"#$-"#((:$ ;"#/#$(./+#$.L'.($21/,#-$,1*,#*5/.5#7

<C

The Undulating Slab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

<<

Spaces G%13#$5"#$6('*5"$-(#*)#/$-5##($,1(&0*-$.//.*+#$1*$.$DMD0J+/')$-&661/5$5"#$-5##($%#.07 !"#$%.-',$-4-5#0$21/$5"#$&*)#/+/1&*)$2(11/$'-$.*$NO$-(.%$-5/&,5&/#7$V.(($,1(&0*-$/#-'-5$3#/5',.($ 21/,#-$ .5$ 61'*5-$ ;"#/#$ 5"#$ -"#(($ (.*)-$ .*)$ ,1(&0*-$ 1*$ .$ CA0MCT0$ +/')$ -&661/5$ .$ STT00J5"',9$NO$-(.%7$!"#$6(.*#$12$5"#$+/1&*)$2(11/W-$-(.%$2&*,5'1*$.-$.$5'#$.-$;#(($/#-'-5'*+$ 5"#$"1/'X1*$5"/&-5$.$-"#(($-5/&,5&/#$6./5',&(./(4$,.&-#-7$$$$

<B

Introduction

Roof Y&%(',$ Z$ [&'#5$ -6.,#\$ V'5"'*$ 5"#$ 16#*$ (.*)-,.6#$ -0.((#/$ -,.(#$ ./#.-$ ./#$ ,/#.5#)$ %4$ 6./5'5'1*-:$('+"5$;#((-:$.*)$6.5'1-$6(.,#)$'*$,(1-#/$6/1L'0'547$!"#-#$-6.,#$2##($01/#$6/'3.5#$ .*)$,/#.5#$61,9#5-$12$]&'5$X1*#-7

<A

FIELD TRIP First Horizon b'#;!"#$&*)&(.5'*+$-(.%$.*)$(./+#$('+"5$;#((-$122#/$ 3'#;-$51$5"#$_.9#$.*)$-&//1&*)'*+$./#.-7$`/10$ %#(1;:$3'-'51/-$,.*$-##$0.*4

5"#$3'-&.($-6.,#$ 3'#;#/-$.*)$3'-&.($/#(.5'1*$ a&')('*+ ,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1* ".(2$,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1* <D

Second Horizon

Third Horizon

Y".-'*+ c/##*$ -6.,#-$ ./#$ ,.65&/#)$ ;'5"'*$ 5"#$ 6#/'0#5#/$ 12$ 5"#$ %&'()'*+7$ !"'-$ ,1&/54./)$ ".-$ )'22#/#*5$]&.('5'#-$.*)$-#/3#-$51$./5',&(.5#$5"#$ 3./'1&-$ 6/1+/.00.5',$ )'-5'*,5'1*-$ 12$ .,5'3'54$ %.-#)$X1*#-$;'5"'*$5"#$_#./*'*+$O#*5#/

^.'*$#*5/4$ $b'-'51/-$.//'3#$51$5"#$0.'*$#*5#/$(1,.5#)$'*$5"#$ 0'))(#$12$5"#$_#./*'*+$O#*5#/7$!"'-$'-$5"#$"#./5$ 12$5"#$%&'()'*+$;"#/#$1*#$;1&()$0##5$2/'#*)-:$ /#,#'3#$ +#*#/.($ '*21/0.5'1*:$ .*)$ .*$ 13#/.(($ 6#/-6#,5'3#$12$5"#$(.*)-,.6#$'*-')#7

5"#$3'-&.($-6.,#$ 3'#;#/-$.*)$3'-&.($/#(.5'1*$ a&')('*+ ,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1* ".(2$,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1* EC

5"#$3'-&.($-6.,#$ 3'#;#/-$.*)$3'-&.($/#(.5'1*$ a&')('*+ ,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1* ".(2$,1*5'*&1&-$3'-'1*

Program

Relation with Nature

^&(5'0#)'.$_'%/./4$ ?5&)4$-6.,# `1/&0$/1(#L O.2# N#-5&./.*5 ?1).$21&*5.'* K22',#a119$-51/# E<

?.*..$,1*,#65$;.-$'*-6'/#)$ 2/10$5"#$0.'*$*.5&/#$!#//.'*7 >'((b.((#4O(#./'*+c/1551-

LANDSCAPE

3

Rolex Lerning Center Introduction The EPFL Learning Center in Lausanne, Switzerland is located on the north shore of Lake Geneva. It stands at the entrance to the campus in a wildflower and grass meadow. The plan of the building effectively extends this meadow, changing the floor surface from plants to bound gravel to carpet. The building is entered on foot, by crossing the meadow, which is interrupted in places by patches of concrete. The floor of the building then gracefully sweeps up from the ground, allowing access into the interior and exterior landscapes, enclosed by the walls of the building. When approaching on foot, the experience of a parkland setting is unbroken by the interior of the building, which is arranged as a series of character areas and pavilions, both enclosed and open that define the wide spaces around them.

49

The building is nothing when empty of people. “Not unlike SANAA’s renderings these projects without their people and furniture would merely seem a collection of reflections and multiple shades of white.” This has equivalence to a comment made by the relational artist Liam Gillick who describes his work as such:“My work is like the light in the fridge,” he says, “it only works when there are people there to open the fridge door. Without people, it’s not art—it’s something else—stuff in a room.”

The open spaces of the building facilitate interaction between the different departments and users of the building, the glass walls and minimal balustrading on the circulation pieces encourage unbroken visual access between spaces. Vast undefined areas of floor between programmatic elements within the plan allow unprogrammed space for working and engaging with other building users. Nodes of programmatic elements are distributed around an internal landscape, encouraging the discourse and interaction essential to successful study.

The basis for both the nodes of activity set within unprogrammed space, and the interaction between the interior and exterior space within the building footprint and its surroundings are preceded by the smaller work undertaken prior to their major commissions. The nodal points serving functions within the landscape of the building are informed by the experiments undertaken for the Field Party project; the manner of the perimeter walls may come from Sejima’s time spent in Toyo Ito’s office, and particularly It’s interest in the interface between building and city.

This leitmotif was developed by SANAA through projects such as their Moriyama House, completed in 2005, by Nishizawa. The house separates the typical functions of a home into separate rooms within an exterior landscape, engaging the day-to-day use of the house by the resident, with the day to day use of the surrounding city, by its inhabitants. This expression of the buildings’ interiors into the surrounding landscape has a clear evolution into the Learning Center, the success of the interior spaces being dependent on the landscape in which they are situated. Sejima likens the interior of the building to a landscape, using a frequent analogy of a park: We somehow imagine it like a park, with the space for the chance to start communicating.

The open spaces of the building facilitate interaction between the different departments and users of the building, The glass walls encourage unbroken visual access between spaces, vast undefined areas of floor between programmatic elements within the plan allow unprogrammed space for working and engaging with other building users. Nodes of programmatic elements are distributed around an internal landscape, encouraging the discourse and interaction essential to successful study.

Human movements are not linear like the way a train travels, but curve in a more organic way. With straight lines we can only create crossroads, but with curves we can create more diverse interactions.

Nishizawa, R.

The internal topography of hills and valleys that comprise the interior space is applied throughout the design of the floor of the building, so that the curving space formed by the plan is evident also in the section of the building.

By allowing the building to curve in both plan and section, the architects are encouraging interaction between building users, by gently nudging them to the entrances, programmatic functions and circulation routes, rather than by dictating spatial orientation through routes and corridors.

When people find valleys, they tend to settle there and build villages. When they find a hill, they like to build a beautiful cafe on the hill. When they find slopes, they cover them in terraces.

Nishizawa, R.

STRUCTURE

4

CONCEPT

PLANS

CONCEPT Introduction Simultaneously with the form finding process, several structural concept were developed and examined. The greatest challenge was stabilizing the concrete shells system. Although the roof could have been used to stabilize the shells, doing so would have required multiple connections between the roof and floor plat, which would have restricted the openness of the interior space, another solution had to be found.

STRUCTURAL MODEL

63

Columns

Concrete Sandwich

The design intent was to create a floating, column-free slab. We encountered a cost problem early on, and client asked us to investigate the use of columns underneath the building as a cost-saving measure. We research this option and found that it was slightly cheaper to build with columns, but not by very much. We were thus able to eliminate this positive structure approach.

A concept for a concert sandwich was considered. This system would have consisted of two or outer layers of high-performance concrete C60/50 and one inner layer of lightweight concrete, and would have allowed us to keep the same stiffness as a monolithic concrete section while reducing the overall weight of the structure. The high sandwich system would have also allowed us to integrate the building system would have also allowed us to concrete structure. The high degree of complexity involved in coordinating and constructing this system ultimately led to reject this solution.

Steel The use of steel structure was excluded an early stage as well, as the architects desire a soffit in exposed concert.

64

65

Arch and SLab The structure concept we finally decided on combines arches and slab. Originally, only the amount of concrete reinforcement differed between the arch areas and the slab sections, but ultimately we had to vary the thicknesses of the concrete in these tow components. The reduced span of the small shell and its more advantages span-to-camber ratio enabled a sections thickness of 40cm for the small shell and 50cm for the western arch. The thickness required for arches and the zone around the Vertical load â&#x20AC;&#x201C;bearing elements at the courtyards the large shell is 89cm, whereas the standard slab thickness is 60sm, a depth sufficient to embed equipment pipes.

67

From Conceptual Design to Execution B+G ingenieure Bollinger und Grohmann GMBH

GEOMETRY

FORM FINDING Introduction

Curvature

The project combines shell , arch, and deformed slab. when discussing shell structures, the term (form finding) generally refers to the use of tools such as inverted hanging models and pneumatics to literally (find form).

SANAA's unique concept of a landscape building forced them to go beyond this classical method in order to find a balance between user needs, code requirements, design intent, and structure.

The shells are the most interesting structural elements of the ROLEX Learning Center and were the primary engineering challenge, the work was fixed on creating a shape that had better load bearing behavior than their initial design.

The curvature of the northeastern slope of the small shell (Black) should be in between the values of the blue and green line

Black: original shell geomerty 2006 Green: parabolic geometry keeping full span Orange: parbolic geometry keeping position of maximum camber

69

70

Arches Development Three issues influenced the structural design of the shells: verify cation of the section under characteristic loads, deflection, and stability. These items were analyzed considering the effects of creep, cracking, and shrinkage. The shells required analysis with non-liner finite element models using the program Sophistic. In addition to verifying the reinforcement stresses to avoid cracking, the deflection analysis was a major component of the design. Since Swiss building standards don't define a deflection limit determined based on the steel roof structure and the faรงade. The resulting long-term values of up to 220mm initially seemed high but in comparison to the span of 80meters they represent values <300/1 which is a normal value for concrete floor slabs.

71

Patio and border modification proposal 06- 06- 2006 Solution used for calculation 27- 05- 2 006 Final proposal

Development of patio geometry

Shell Geometry In addition the site had a panoramic view of the swiss alps that influenced the slope of the shells and the position of the courtyards. the image of a landscape had to be preserved both inside and out.

73

September 2005 Monolithic shell

December 2005 Sandwich structure

January 2006 Optimized Sandwich Structure

Shell Analysis

ANALYSIS

The Building undulating floor plate is constructed out of two concrete shells combined with a series of eleven arches. unlike typical shell structures that make up the roof of the building, these shells constitute the floor plate of the building, these shells constitute the floor plate of the interior spaces. a steel roof supported by a 9 meter square column grid rests on top of this primary concrete structure.

75

A5

Shell Geometry The large shell spans up to 85 meter, with maximum camber of 4.85 meters. in contrast to the small shell, it has a disadvantageous span to comber ratio (1/h=18). seven load bearing arches span between the courtyard. the (slab zone) of the brg shell has less curvature and therefore a higher percentage of the load is transferred to the arches Through bening moments. in addition, it was necessary to place three vertical load bearing elements under the shell in the southern area to guarantee sufficient stability and to limit deflection.

D4 D5A A6 D5b

A7 D1

D6

D7

A1 A8

A2

A9

D2 A3

D3

A4 76

Finite element models of the big and small shell

D7

A9

Vertical Elements The first vertical element is an elevator core, which was necessary to fulfill; building code requirements, the second is a wall underneath the western side of the southern arch, which allows the arch to finish in a counter curvature, the third element is a column stabilizing the diagonal arch of the longest span. it was important to have a strong asymmetry in this arch in order ro preserve the view from the northern part of the building to the alps in the south

78

Deformational map As the Design of the shell Geometries developed, they give careful consideration to the follwing: Location and geometry of the courtyards, so that load bearing arches could be established between them.

Optimization of the arch geometry toward parabolic and symmetris sections.

Reduction of the shape imperfections Avoidance of counter curvatures at the shell bearings. (in order to maintain a smooth transition between the shells and surrounding flat areas, the shell geometry was separated from the finished floor at the shell bearings).

Finite element models of the big and small shell

80

CONSTRUCTION

00

Reinforcement The large quantity of reinforcement required by the arches promoted us to consider using steel pipes instead of standard reinforcement bar (rebar). This alternative was ultimately rejected due to cost. In addition, welding the steel pipes on site would have been needed to guarantee the same section of inertia required to achieve enough structural stability, To handle the high amount of reinforcement in the arches and to assure sufficient gaps within which to pour and vibrate the concrete, it was decided to use rebar with a diameter of up to 50mm. Rebar of such large diameter cannot be connected in the typical overlapping manner, so we studied alternatives. The high cost of screwed sockets turned our attention to welded joints. The welded joints were executes on-site with the aid of a perforated socket that was placed around the end of the rebar, stabilizing their position during welding.

83

Full â&#x20AC;&#x201C; scale structural mock-ups were realized on-site to assure the feasibility of the solution. Both shells generally have low curvature are only subject to compression.

We placed the maximum number of the welded joints in these compression zones in order to reduce the number of weak points in the structure. During construction the 50mm-diameter rebar was sensitive to temperature fluctuation. The bars had been fixed on both end of the shells and connected by welded joints. In the heat of the sun, they would dilate and lift several centimeters off the formwork. to avoid this problem, the rebar was covered with wet rags to cool and contract them before the concert was poured.

Organize /Optimize / Simplify / Materialize Fabian Scheurer Fabian Scheurer is a founding partner of designtoproduction, a consulting practice specializing in the connection between digital design and fabrication.

The project had two phases: the first was to break down this landscape shape into the geometry of the individual wooden pieces needed to fabricate the formwork. the second was to provide the formwork contractor with the actual machine data to fabricate each of the 10,000 wooden cleats, so we were given the system, devised by Bollinger + grohmann and the general contractor losinger construction, determining what the basic geometry would be and how the formwork boxes would constructed, and from this input we outputthe detailed specifications for every single wooden piece. it was a rather long project. it took about half year to get it sorted out, but in the end all the pieces fit together.

85

FLOOR PLANS

5

88

ROOF

90

92

GROUND FLOOR

94

96

Basement

98

100

TOPOGRAPHY

6 104