Hortus Conclusus: Figure and Frame in a Project of Domestic Space

Hortus Conclusus

Figure and Frame in a Project of Domestic Space

University of Kentucky College of Design

Hortus Conclusus

Figure and Frame in a Project of Domestic Space

Design Studio III — Second Year Undergraduate Program

Akayla Bailey, Madeleine Cordray, Raegan Crum, Chase Faulkner, Maria Gonzalez

Morales, Meredith Lewis, Chris Marra, Allyson Middleton, Zachary Moore, Lillian

Pelletier, Maxwell Ritson, Brandon Sarrett, Miles Smith, Piper Mackenzie Spurlock

Guest Critics: Sunil Bald, George Knight, Elisa Iturbe, Cynthia Davidson,

Wallis Miller, Brent Sturlaugson, Angus Eade, Daisy Ames

Faculty: Leonardo Fuchs

Fall 2020


Contents

1.

2.

3.

4.

Food as Project

Precedent Analysis

Site Analysis

Figures and Frames — Four Projects

I. Field of Vision

II. Modular

III. Urban Food Production

IV. Versatile Integration

6

10

88

122

126

146

180

204

Studio Brief

Chapter I

Food as Project

Leonardo Fuchs

Studio Faculty

The global pandemic of COVID-19 is radically changing cities. Places of production and

accumulation loose their centrality as populations migrate to suburbs and rural areas in search of

protection and a smaller risk of contamination. The exodus of dense urban spaces creates a radical

opportunity: the creation of housing with close relationship to a ground that is framed as a locus for

commoning and food production. This studio investigates the project of domestic space in a postpandemic

city through the lens of food production and other forms of labor.

Certain parallels between the pandemic, the condition of predicament it entails, and other historical

periods can be traced. The early Middle Ages presented a continuous risk of invasion by northern

populations and a general sense of insecurity to the inhabitants of the Italian peninsula. As a

consequence, the plains became particularly unsafe and people were pushed back towards hilltop

towns, with an increasingly scattered rural population. Because public power was overthrown, local

aristocracies began to exert limited influence over small territories, but overall, this period was the

“golden age of a largely independent peasantry.” Peasants left normative estate centers to create new

subsistence farming collectives. We can learn from the expansion of farming in the Middle Ages,

which led to new types of social relationships and imagine forms of settlement as an architectural

project.

The general insecurity during the early Middle Ages resulted in the transfer of agricultural activity

from the fields to the interior of walled cities or to their immediate periphery. This factor was crucial

for the rise of the kitchen garden, which provided inhabitants with essential foodstuffs and aromatic

herbs used as medicines. With the phenomenon of the enclosed garden, hortus conclusus, unlike the

gridded systems preordained by the state, the landscape was instead left to the casual combination of

individual, or figural initiatives.

Studio Brief

The studio speculated on the possibilities of other forms of domestic space and shared labor for the

production of food. The final goal was to design, both as a studio and individually, a housing project

for a post-pandemic condition that can strive for semi-autonomy of horticultural production over

time. The initial program encompassed a low-rise housing complex with units for inter-generational

living; spaces for food production at an horticultural scale; a market for the exchange of surplus. The

class was challenged to design their own program and to discover which elements of the program to

refine through research on food production strategies.

Students analyzed a series of canonical and non-pedigreed precedents. The selection of precedents

included housing projects and designs that aim to build communities around hourticulture. In the

first weeks of the semester, the precedent analysis coalesced in a virtual exhibition, in which students

shared the results and learnings of their research with the four other second-year studios. After the

precedent analysis, the studio focused on investigating the site, a 15-acre plot located between the

University of Kentucky campus and downtown Lexington. The site is currently a parking lot for

10.000 cars: a relentless grid of parking spaces is the site’s only spatial definer.

The notion of figure and frame served an an important animator for the designs. The studio worked

in four groups to define the common design strategies for each quadrant of the site and each group

developed the strategies and massing of the framing architecture, being invited to think the frame

as the structuring element of a building. This underlying structure became a necessary part of the

architectural designs. It also served as an opportunity for the students to work across courses and

integrate the expertise gained in their first semester of structures class into their projects. Furthermore,

the students were fostered to project the notion of the frame beyond material, as an abstract apparatus

for food production. A conceptual, ideological, social and immaterial form of structure.

While the frame could be understood as a contingent structure of a project, the figures were designed

as individualized parts, which, within that structure, could have the capacity to subvert its logic.

Figures could be cognized as elements of exception, which operate in a supplementary form to a

framing set of rules. Despite the definition of a whole, the individual designs that would take place

consecutively could be transformed, “rejecting a rearrangement of elements in hierarchical order”

toward a form in which “the part is independent within the frame of the totality”. The students were

encouraged to think across scales in their design process, coordinating their individual projects with

their group’s strategies and the studio scope.

In the unprecedented semester of Fall 2020, this group of 14 students from University of Kentucky

was invited to imagine, through their architectural projects, the conditions of possibility for other

forms of settlement and being in the world.

Precedent Analysis

Chapter II

Housing and Food Production

Moisei Ginzburg, Narkomfin

Nomadish Grün, Prinzessinnen Garten

Lillian Pelletier & Chase Faulkner

Aldo Rossi, Gallaratese

I Like Design Studio, Food Villa Market

Akayla Bailey & Madeleine Cordray

Le Corbusier, Unité d’Habitation

FramLab, Glasir

Alejandra Gonzalez & Raegan Crum

Affonso Eduardo Reidy, Pedregulho

Peter & Minke van Winkerden

Chris Marra & Allyson Middleton

Adalberto Libera, Horizontal Housing Units

Towerhouse, Maynard Architects

Meredith Lewis & Max Ritson

Mies van der Rohe, Lafayette Park

ABF Labs, Food Farm Tower

Zachary Moore & Brandon Sarrett

Michiel Brinkman, Justus van Effen Complex

TAA Design, The Red Roof

Piper Spurlock & Miles Smith

Narkomfin Building

Moisei Ginzburg

Moscow, Russia

Chase Faulkner and Lillian Pelletier

In a residential building each unit generally does not incorporate the importance

of shared spaces. The Narkomfin Building establishes communal hierarchy by separating

living quarters and public utilities. This connection is significant in building the

communal typology.

Between 1928 and 1929, Moisei Gizburg designed the communal residential

apartment, Narkomfin building, for workers of the People’s Commissariat of Finance in

Moscow, Russia. The building was constructed with fifty- four units intended to house

around two hundred people. Each unit was associated with a different level of family

structure, correlating ‘K’ to larger, nuclear families and ‘F’ with individuals or young

couples. As a result, accommodations within each unit were provided, meaning that type

K quarters would have a small kitchen, bathroom, and living area integrated into the cell

while the rest of the residents in type F rooms were required to access a shared kitchen

located in a separate structure from the main housing block, but remained with a small

bathroom and living area. Non-communal structures, like the kitchens provided to larger

families, were attempted to be hidden. This is emphasised clearly in the structure of the

apartment building as the shared environments are truncated away from the residential

block and joined by a singular bridged walkway.

This typology was studied during the rise of socialism. Ginzburg focused on

collective housing units as a platform integrated within nature. He achieved this design

goal through the structure’s main design: the first floor is elevated using posts that raise

the residential block. This reference to classical architecture is supposed to represent

trunks of trees. He continues this connection to nature by allowing each living space to

have the ability to open up to the outdoor environment. Windows in each unit can retract

to make open air circulation and make nature more accessible in this urban setting.

Because communal areas were important to this project, one can see how circulation

plays a significant role in the society and structure of the building.

The apartment block contains a rooftop garden. As a result, the joint effort of

upkeep of these plants allows for the successful use and integration of the joint kitchen

spaces located in the separated communal block. This creates an atmosphere of join effort

producing a small scale self sustaining living environment.

This platform integrated into nature gives ideas on what communal spaces

should be. The unique style of vertical circulation of individual units gives families

their own sense of privacy, while also sharing the connecting communal kitchen. These

communal environments allow Gizburg to establish the connection between spaces and

nature.

Type F Apartment Unit

Type K Apartment Unit

Narkomfin Building

Vertical Circulation

In- Door Public Corridor

Out- Door Public Corridor

Hortus Conclusus: figure and frame in the project of domestic space

Narkomfin Building

Plan

Section A

Section B

Type F Isometric View


Prinzessinnengarten

Nomadisch Grün

Berlin, Germany

Chase Faulkner and Lillian Pelletier

The idea of an urban garden generally takes on the form of a vertical structure

or within a highly dense city sprawl. However, the concept of a non-permanent and

mobile site provides the ability to act upon social changes within the city itself. The

garden’s atmosphere generates a vibrant community and overtakes a previously unused

space.

An organization called Nomadic Green launched the Prinzessinnengarten

project in the summer of 2009 at Moritzplatz in Berlin, Germany. The goal of the garden

is to temporarily transform unused urban spaces such as building sites, parking lots, and

rooftops into small growing areas. This is made possible by the mobility of the project

itself. By having transportable vegetable plots, they are able to transition and take over a

space quickly and efficiently to start the process of food production.

The significance of a mobile garden in an urban environment allows the

flexibility of changing where the garden is more accessible to the community. Based

on the changing of seasons, demographics, and society impacts gives a garden like this

adaptibility.

The location of this project sits at center point for many residential buildings

and social groups. As a result this garden center encourages community building and

cultural interchange. Since this program is not reserved for expert food production, many

inexperienced citizens take part in experimenting and learning as a part of the program’s

mission to inform the public about living a healthier lifestyle. Many local vegetables are

grown to either be harvested by nearby residents or sold in small market set-ups within

the site, including seating areas to eat and enjoy the fresh produce.

The mobile qualities of the garden allows the project to overtake unused spaces

and provide a network of community spaces for citizens of Berlin to explore these cultural

interactions through food production.

Urban Planters

Small Crate Exploded Isometric

Mobile Planter Exploded Axonometric

Prinzessinnengarten

Crop Diversity

Versatile Vegetation Production


Aldo Rossi, Gallatese


Aldo Rossi (1931-1997) was an Italian architect well known for his very austere

architecture and design. This approach was known to be neo-rationalistic by his

contemporary critics.

The Gallaratese is a housing block and is a non-descriptive building type designed to later

change its function. Gallaratese is located in the North West suburb of Milan, Italy. It is

part of a larger residential quarter. The Block is a 440-unit residential complex designed

in response to the housing crisis of Milan. Gallaratese features a clean, rational design

with simple architecture colonnades, balconies, and oversized circular columns. The two

blocks are organized in a repetitive pattern and connected at two different levels, with

public staircase frames by two sets of oversized cylindrical columns. The public area is

Aldo Rossi, Gallatese

located on the lower ground floor in a linear fashion and access to the flats above is made

through balcony corridors that run along with the public space. The public corridors act

like rooms in itself with degrees of transparency that define open/ closed spaces. The

machines on each floor that service the building are represented between the various

types of rooms. Each residential unit inside is accessible from a gallery, while an open

arcade, Aldo Rossi as minimalist (1931-1997) and was unadorned an Italian as architect the rest well of the known structure, for his occupies very austere the ground

floor. architecture and design. This approach was known to be neo-rationalistic by his

contemporary critics.

The Gallaratese is a housing block and is a non-descriptive building type designed to later

change its function. Gallaratese is located in the North West suburb of Milan, Italy. It is

part of a larger residential quarter. The Block is a 440-unit residential complex designed

in response to the housing crisis of Milan. Gallaratese features a clean, rational design

with simple architecture colonnades, balconies, and oversized circular columns. The two

blocks are organized in a repetitive pattern and connected at two different levels, with

public staircase frames by two sets of oversized cylindrical columns. The public area is

located on the lower ground floor in a linear fashion and access to the flats above is made

through balcony corridors that run along with the public space. The public corridors act

like rooms in itself with degrees of transparency that define open/ closed spaces. The

machines on each floor that service the building are represented between the various

types of rooms. Each residential unit inside is accessible from a gallery, while an open

arcade, as minimalist and unadorned as the rest of the structure, occupies the ground

floor.



Site Plan

Gallaratese Site Plan


Gallaratese Circulation

Order of machines and public gallery (A + B);

the machine domains serve as both a mediator

and a seperator between the public gallery at the

ground floor and the units on the upper floors.

Order of rooms in housing blocks (C); due to

the linear architecture, all habitation is arranged

towards the front faceing the landscape garden

viewed by the windows on the East facade.

Circulation

A-

B-

C-



Gallaratese Unit Plan + Section


Typical Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

South Elevation


Unit Plan


Unit Axon



Food Villa Market

I Like Design Studio

Akayla Bailey and Madeleine Cordray

There are four elements we as humans need to survive: food, water, shelter,

and land. These elements, being of the utmost importance, must work together to help

provide and maintain life. Over the course of history, structures have been established to

house these resources, providing easy access to communities. Throughout this precedent

study, a marketplace, known as the Food Villa Market, will be analyzed on how its food

production and spatial conditions go hand in hand to affect the community.

The Food Villa Market is located off of a major road called Ratchapruek Road,

which is an extension of the Bangkok area in Thailand. This road serves a connection to

residential areas and Bangkok’s Central Business District. The structure was designed by

the I Like Design Studio, which included members, such as Narucha Kuwattanapasiri,

Unnop Tupwong, Somchoke Uthansai, Chanon Kuwattanasiri,Teerapat Sukumolchan,

and Montree Utakrue. This specific project began in 2013 and was completed and open

to the public in 2015.

The structure is 4000 sqm and includes materials, such as wide flange steel,

metal sheet steel roofing, steel wall cladding, polished concrete floors, and artificial wood

vendor stations. The building itself is meant to improve the traditional Thai market and

represent the root of production: food production farms. The large open interior and sliver

of wall abstraction towards the ground plane allows for it to play with the inside versus

outside complex. There is also a translucent facade that allows natural lighting during

the day and a glow to escape at night. The form of the overall building was inspired by a

combination of the general shapes of differing types of food production farms.

The Food Villa Market provides a variety of fresh produce, retail, and other

items, meant to become the new standard Thailand marketplace. The disorder and freedom

of representation to the food vendors is intentional to the project to give it that local

Thai market feel. It attracts people throughout the community to come provide income to

their local producers and enjoy a common space.

The market provides a functional space to form communal connections and explore

varieties of production. This is where the figure and frame concept comes into play.

The frame design of the open spaces provides a simpler means of developing the internal

figure of the building. People are thus able to share experiences and contribute to local

production, developing the figure of the area.

Section Perspective

Perspective Section of the open interior

Food Villa Market



Open Plan

Plan drawing of the common spaces

Food Villa Market

0 5 15 30



Unité d’Habitation - Le Cobusier

Raegan Crum and Alejandra Gonzalez

The project designed by Le Cobusier contains thick concrete pillars which give

access to pedestrians. These pillars also offer parking units for cars and bicycles which at

the same time provide support to the entire building from below.

The building is located in a large park in the city of Marseille, France. It was

completed in 1952 by Le Corbusier. The main focus was to have a communal living space

where residents could shop, assemble and entertain themselves.

Unite d’habitation contains numerous apartment types to accommodate different

living styles. The entire complex contains 337 apartments, varying to suit families of

1-8 people. The building’s capacity is 1,600 residents.

In the corridors of floors seven and eight, there are different public areas such

as a shopping center, a bakery, a liquor store and a pharmacy. Additionally, it contains a

laundry and cleaning service, a barbershop and a postal office. On the same floor, there

is a restaurant that provides special features for residents along with a small hotel. Finally,

on the rooftop, there is a kindergarten school, a nursery room, and a small pool. Furthermore,

on the top floor there is a terrace, a gym and a small garden.

The goal of this site is to blur the boundaries between public and private spaces.

The numerous communal spaces promote friendship and comradery, breaking the normal

rules of living spaces. By expanding the typical living frame, Le Corbusier implies

motion and involvement.



Interior Street


SHOPPING CENTER PERSPECTIVE

“casier à bouteilles”

CORRIDOR


Typical Duplex Unit

UNIT FL

Unité d’Habitation Marseille

OOR PLAN


Glasir

Raegan Crum and Alejandra Gonzalez

Glasir: Vertical Farms by FramLab

In 2018, the creative company FramLab designed vertical farming

units in Brooklyn, New York that can be placed anywhere throughout

the neighborhood. This project is called Glasir, as the units imitate

small greenhouses. The structure of the concept is designed to resemble

nature-- trees specifically. The units are highly customizable and can

be placed anywhere. Frequent locations of the units are along sidewalks,

between buildings, and on rooftops.

The system uses aeroponics to produce crops, instead of the typical

soil environment. Aeroponics is a farming technique that suspends

the roots of the crops while enabling a mist (a nutrient-rich solution)

to cultivate the produce. Hence, these aggregate units represent small,

moist greenhouses.

These units are constructed of wooden frames and glass slabs.

The glass components are vital to imitate the well-known image of

greenhouses. Moreoverm, Framlab decided on wooden frames to further

imitate natural trees.

One of the key points of this porject is to blur the lines of private

and public space. The house often defines what is “public” versus what

is “private.” The goal of these vertical farms is to encourage community

between citizens and residents. Having a farm that is communal promotes

involvement and a sense of identity among surrounding residents.


Section of Support and Unit

Support of Planting Boxes

Glasir

Plan of Planting Boxes

Plan of Units in Street Context


Glasir


Rooftop Perspective

Pedregulho

Affonso Eduardo Reidy-Brazil

Allyson Middleton and Chris Marra

The Pedregulho is a apartment comples that was bulit for the lower income class of

Rio de Janeiro. Affonso Eduardo Reidy is the architect of this building and a few other

buildings arounf it. There is 272 unit in the seven story building apartment. The first

and second floors are studio apartments. The third floor is a sidewalk that is held up

by piltos all though out it. There is two other builds that he built which are used for a

school/health center and another apartment building.

The food producation in this builfing is that evrey apartment building as a kitchen.

There used to be a super market when it was first built where food was sold. This build

and the building around it created a community with the lower income class. There is

now more houses and apartment buliding around it and not as many shopping places.

The school is still there but the health center is not there anymore.

in conculsion this building played a big part in how the community bult around it. if

this building was not here then there would not be a big as a community around it.

Childern would not have a school close by if he did not build a school near by.


Exploded Axon

Roof

6th and 7th floor

duoplex apartment

4th and 5th floor

duoplex apartment

3rd floor

1st and 2nd floor

studio apatments

Apartment

Buildings

School/Health Center

Project Title

Cross Section


Adalberto Libera unità orizzontale Tuscolano

“Horizontal housing units”

Meredith Lewis and Max Ritson

Adalberto’s “Horizontal Unit”, located in the Tuscolano neighborhood of

Rome, Italy was originally an expirmetnal housing complex. Built for the community

just after WWII the whole complex consists of 3 building types to house around 1000

people. The first being the one floor courtyard style house, the multistory building

with balcony access, apartment style, and the services block housing.

The whole site is geometrically confined to two roads and is surrounded by

one wall enclosing it all together. There is only one single entry through the service

block. The housing is all alligned perpendicularly with the perimeter lines. In the

middle is where the central multistory building is, being the only vertical aspect in

the unit. Adalberto became infatuated with the “cellular logic” style of housing from

his trip to Morroco in 1951 so he applied that to his housing. Each house surrounding

the courtyard and running perpendicular to the outside walls all are geometrically

shaped as “L’s” to fit a patio, living, and open area to be able to see each individuals

courtyard. Creating more of a community feel and being confined to ones own space

in their homes as well. Each group of 4 houses attach to two side streets 2,70 m large,

which then all lead to the main open courtyard of the neighborhood. The spaces

within the complex are imtended to jump from the main public void to semi public

with a gradual passage from the exterior city areas to the semi-public space of the

central void through the small residential pathways.

The scale and proportions are very unusual for Rome, escaping from the

forkloristic image usually entailed. Adalberto received his inspiration from casbahs

in Morocco. An Arabic origin style word, often used to refer to buildings in a citadel

or keep-style form. While on a trip in Morocco in the 1950’s Adalberto was so infatuated

with what he saw that helped him become inspired to start the housing project.

The Casbah-style buildings show an incredible amount of detail and care in balance

of open and interior closed spaces.

While designing the main housing for the Horizontal Unit in Tuscalano,

Adalberto Libera applied his knowledge of the Casbahs and framed his neighborhood

based on it. Forming open and closed off interiors and exteriors with a great

balance in between.


Site Plan- Horizontal Units, Tuscalano


Plan 01

Unit Cluster


Tower House

Meredith Lewis and Max Riston

The relationship between Frame and Figure in this project is part of why it is so successful.

The Frame allows the family and community to interact with the outside garden by

creating sections that open up to the outdoors in multiple ways. The Figures that occupy

the house are able to go from section to section and have a different experience. Combining

indoor and outdoor recreation allows the figures to create relationships that contribute

to the community.

Tower House, designed by Maynard Architects, combines nature and housing into a small

village-like plan. The concept of this “village” is to bring back the sense of community

within the neighborhood and encourgae people to come together. Each individual section

has its own function, but they all come together to create an environment for community.

The largest building on the site is where the main living quarters are. There are bedrooms,

bathroooms, a living room, and a kitchen that opens up to the outdoor garden.

The other pieces are more specific to the family, and they include a study, a play room,

and a library. All of these have sliding glass doors that lead to the outdoors.

The kitchen having easy access to the garden encourages the family to use the fresh produce

that they have grown daily. The front garden is easily accessible to the neighbors and

community, and they are encouraged to stop by and visit. They also can help out with the

gardening and plant new crops if they wish. Towards the back of the garden, there is a

fence that creates a sense of privacy, but can also be opened up to be more in touch with

the neighbors and community. When the fence is open, there is no distinct line between

the private and public space, which is what the designers wanted.

The deisgn of the house allows growth and expansion. If the family wants to expand,

they can add more sections to the village to accomadate for a larger family. Also, this

opens up the ability to split up the village into distinct zones if they ever wanted to allow

other families or have visitors. Finally, the site can be easily added onto. Another family

can build directly across the garden, and open up the possibility for even more community

based living.


Tower House

perspective from garden

looking into village


Tower House

section from

garden view


Lafayette Park

Zachary Moore & Brandon Sarrett

Lafayete Park by Mies van der Rohe puts the regular, orthogonal figures of

urban housing into the irregular, natural frame of a greenway and park. Mies clearly used

this to his advantage in order to soften the harsh edges and corners of his architecture by

hiding them behind several trees and bushes. He also clearly cared about the residents’

view of the surrounding vegetation which is why the facades of each townhouse are made

almost entirely of windows. However, the extreme regularity of the houses serve to disadvantage

the resident’s interaction with the surrounding nature other than the fact they are

geographically next to it.

Mies’ work also does very little to promote human interaction as there is next to

no communal space indoors. This is remedied by the landscape design of Caldwell which

does its best to provide plenty of communal space outdoors as well as promote interaction

through the design of the greenway paths and general layout of the park. The interiors

are precisely designed to get the most out of the space, which is evident by how compact

it is. Although not ideal, this makes perfect sense given the projects nature as an urban

housing development replacing a “slum”. As for its relation to food systems, this is not

something to be emulated; small kitchen spaces and lack of communal gardens or dining

locations (though it certainly has the space for it) leave something to be desired. As a housing

project, it does its job efficiently and not without character.

Lafayette Park is the collaborative design of Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig HIlberseimer,

and Alfred Caldwell intended to provide modern urban housing in Detroit. The

development is made up of four main parts, The Pavillion, the Towers, the Town and

Court Houses, and the parklands (dubbed the “Lafayette Plaisance”). The Pavilion, which

provided the design for the almost identical East and West Towers, feature a two storied

lobby and 22 total stories. The Towers only differed in their narrower window size and

addition of a ventilator unit in their lower portions. There are 186 units for the Townhouses

with the majority of them being two-story, three bedroom. The houses utilize lots

of window space for views of the parklands around them, and minimize the view of vehicles

due to the houses being raised from the ground. The Plaisance, designed by Caldwell,

acts to seperate the townhouses from the towers and provide a vast amount of greenspace.

It also serves to frame the space into which the residences themselves are placed.

Full Bleed Opening Drawing


Figure and Frame

The regular, orthogonal figure of Mies’ architecture within the irregular natural frame of the park.

Figure and Frame

The regular, orthogonal figure of Mies’ architecture within the irregular natural frame of the park.

Lafayette Park

Lafayette Park

Typical Plan

0

5

10

15

ft

0

5

10

15

ft



Lafayette Park


Justus van Effen Complex

Piper Spurlock

Michiel Brinkman - Rotterdam, Netherlands

Located in the city of Rotterdam, the Justus van Effen Complex is a residential area initially

developed for the city’s port workers, designed by Dutch architect Michiel Brinkman

in 1922. It became known as the culmination of Dutch functionalism. Brinkman

took inspiration for this complex from several factories he had worked on in the past,

taking note of how the space can best be utilized for all the people who would be using

it. In the few drawings of the Justus van Effen complex that remain, Brinkman similarly

indicated the anticipated delivery routes for mailmen and sketched out flows of garbage

collection, energy supply, and foot traffic. The focus that makes the intended patterns

of circulation present in this design possible is a wide, raised gallery that wraps each

housing block and ties the entire complex together. The walkways present in front of the

units not only connect all of the complex together, but also inspire a sense of unity for

the residential area that had not been attempted in architecture at this time. While the

windows on each building were specially sized to indicate the functions of the rooms—

larger, horizontal windows for the living rooms and smaller, recessed windows in the

bedrooms, for example—the arrangement of the building blocks resulted in a sequenced

layout of public spaces. The configuration of the strips of buildings yields a multitude of

different spatial forms from street space to small, medium, and large courtyards connected

by a well-thought out system of architecturally differentiated gates and openings

between the strips of buildings. Brinkman’s main goal was to improve the overall wellbeing

of his building’s residents. To better fulfil this ideal, he turned to the rich possibilities

of new construction methods. He used the newfound popularity of reinforced concrete

to build the stairs, the raised gallery, the balustrades, and the modern central burner

under the bathhouse. The considerate design of the Justus van Effen Complex, enabled

by technological innovation, is present in all its smaller components. The apartment

buildings all wrap around a bathhouse in the middle of the complex, which has now

been converted to a gallery and reception space.

Precedent Analysis


Block Plan

Precedent Analysis

Block Section and Typical Units


Precedent Analysis


The Red Roof

Miles Smith

Quang Ngãi, Vietnam

The Red Roof, designed by TAA Design, a firm based in Vietnam, is a residential space

that includes rooftop gardening. Located in Quang Ngãi, Vietnam, the rooftop garden

answered the question pertaining to easy, accessible gardening in its humid climate.

Built in 2019, it’s a recent, and excellent example of combining a garden space within a

housing unit and offers intriguing study towards how it can promote gardening for other

homes.

Vietnam is a country heavily reliant on farming, and with it being more of a cultural

norm in the country, it’s with no surprise that such design was created to combat flooding

that is common in Vietnam. With the structure having a rooftop garden, it allows the

ability to connect nature with the inhabitants, allowing a cohesive meshing between two

different worlds.

Located within a heavily populated and condensed area, yard space was heavily limited.

Opting out on having a backyard space, opening the opportunity to include a rooftop

garden, it created its own identity for its design. Comparison to the other spaces around

the village, they have large backyards that come at different sizes from the fencing.

Not only from the ecological advantages to the space, it also helps promote community

gardening around their village. The structure sticking out like a sore thumb in comparison

to the rest of the residental spaces in the village, it offers its own attraction towards it.

The design of the rooftop garden allows easy water runoff that can be used for the crops

planted, on top of being heavily energy efficient for fighting things like humidity in such a

climate like Vietnam. The materials used in the structure also adds to its efficiency opting

for a terracotta instead of metal shingles. The slope of the roof created from the planters

created easy access to the gadens, and creating an opportunity to have more gardens in

the village.



In this top view, the interaction of the space is prominent throughout

the residental space.

The Red Roof

The ability to combine both a private space with a more public

garden space allows for the area to be unique in its own way.


Site Analysis

Chapter III - Territorial Scale


IL

IN

MO

TN

Hay Milk Grains

Eggs Vegetables

Fayette County

x 2x 6x

Kentucky State Census of Agriculture

OH

WV

VA

NC

Image found on wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USA_Kentucky_location_map.svg



15

14

2

15 3

14 13

2

3

1

6 4

16

13

1

6 4

7 5

16

11

12

7

5

8

11

Urban Areas

Urban Areas

12

10

1 - Lexington

2 - Georgetown

3 - Paris

410

- Winchester

5 - Nicholasville

6 - Versailles

1 - Lexington

2 - Georgetown

3 - Paris

4 - Winchester

5 - Nicholasville

6 - Versailles

7 - Wilmore

8 - Richmond

9 - Berea

10 - Danville

11 - Harrodsburg

12 - Burgin

7 - Wilmore

8 - Richmond

9 - Berea

10 - Danville

11 - Harrodsburg

12 - Burgin

13 - Lawrenceburg

14 - Frankfort

15 9 - Cynthiana

16 - Mt. Sterling

Hortus Hortus Conclusus: figure figure and frame and frame in the project in the project of domestic of domestic space space

9

8

13 - Lawrenceburg

14 - Frankfort

15 - Cynthiana

16 - Mt. Sterling

Rural Areas

0 2.5 5 mi

Rural Areas

0 2.5 5 mi

Hortus Hortus Conclusus: figure figure and frame and frame in the project in the project of domestic of domestic space space

Urban and Rural Areas - Fayette and Neighbouring Counties

Key

Train Routes 0.45 mi 0.9 mi 2.7 mi

- Urban Boundary

Fayette County Train Routes

- PDR Farms

Hortus Conclusus: figure and frame in the project of domestic s

0 0.8 1.6

(mi)

- Site

- Major Roads

- County Line

This map shows the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR)

farmland in Fayette County. PDR farms are areas where the

local government have purchased the development rights in

order to preserve them as farmland indefinitely.

.4 1.2 2.4m

County Maps

Hortus Conclusus: Train figure Lines and frame in Fayette in the County project of domestic space

Key

- Urban Boundary

- PDR Farms

- Site

- Major Roads

- County Line

0 0.8 1.6

This map shows the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR)

farmland in Fayette County. PDR farms are areas where the

local government have purchased the development rights in

order to preserve them as farmland indefinitely.

(mi)

.4 1.2 2.4m

County PDR Farms Maps

Key

- 0-850 Housing Units

- 850-4000 Housing Units

0

0.8

1.6

(mi)

- Site

- Major Roads

- County Line

This map shows the density of housing in Fayette county by

number of units in a given area. The densest housing areas

tend to be just outside or inside the “donut” of New Circle

Road. Our site differs from this, being more in the center.

Hortus Conclusus: figure and Housing frame Density in the project of domestic space

Scott County

West Fayette

Redd Road

Woodford County

Urban Service Area

Helm Place

Jessamine County

H1 Zoning

National Register District

Early Stone Buildings of

Fayette County

Historic Districts in the Lexington- Fayette County, Kentucky

Rural Service Area Land Management Plan

0.5 mi 1 mi 3 mi

Fayette County and the City of Lexington is

known for their preservation of historic sites

throughout the area. In the county, there is

five National Register Historic Districts, three

pre- historic National Register archeological

sites, and one local Historic Landmark found in

the Rural Service Area. Throughout the whole

map not labeled, there are also individual sites

that are on the National Register of Historic

Places. Helm Place is the only site that falls

under the Historic District zoning in the rural

service area. Also labeled in the map is stone

houses in Fayette County. Preservation is

important to the area surrounding our site

and this will be considered in the next steps of

designing.

Bourbon County

http://fayettealliance.com/wp/wp-content/

uploads/2011/03/Historic-Areas-and-Rural-Settlements.pdf

Athens

Clark County

Boone Creek Middle

Reaches

Boone Creek

Madison County


Road Network of Lexington,

0.3 mi 0.6 mi 0.9 mi



Roads of Lexington

Site

e

Site

UK

UK

Highways

ghways

Highways

Main Roads

Main Roads

0 0.8 1.6mi

Main Roads Main of Roads Lexington of Lexington (Left) / Urban (left) / Urban and Rural & Rural Maps Maps (Right) (right)

0 0.8 1.6mi

Main Roads Main of Roads Lexington of Lexington (Left) / Urban (left) / Urban and Rural & Rural Maps Maps (Right) (right)

Urba

in Roads

Highways and Roads

12

17

8

15

4

18

6

7

2

1

9 10

14 16

3

13

11

5

etown Road 3)Tates Creek Road 4)Newtown Pike 5)Nicholasville Road 6)North

imestone 8)Versailles Road 9)Eastland 10)Hamburg Pavilion 11)Richmond Road

d 13)South Broadway 14)UK Blue Route 15)Red Mile 16)Southland Drive

Georgetown Road 3)Tates Creek Road

17) Night Georgetown Leestown 18)Northside Connector

4)Newtown Pike 5)Nicholasville Road 6)North Broadway 7)North Limestone 8)Vers

avilion 11)Richmond Road 12)Leestown Road 13)South Broadway 14)UK Blue Route 15)Red Mile 16)Southland Drive

onnector

0.15 mi 0.3 mi 0.9 mi

Lexington Bus Routes

Hortus Conclusus: figure and frame in

Hortus Conclusus: Public figure Transport and frame Lines the in Lexington project of domestic space

Figure ground maps surrounding the site

0.075 mi 0.15 mi 0.45 mi


Site Location in Downtown Lexington

0.0375 mi 0.075 mi 0.15 mi


Site Analysis

Chapter III - Site Scale


Perspective Drawing


Site Plan

0 200ft


Main Intersection

Buildings/Roads

9 ft

17 ft

Parking Spot

Parking Grid

Black Walnut Tree

Vegetation Areas

Site Diagrams

11:00 am

http://weather.uky.edu/windrose.php

2:00 pm

N

8:00 am

W

E

5:00 pm

S

Wind Direction/Intensity

Solar/Wind Flow

8:00 pm

Bus Stop

Public Transportation

Bus 24: Old Frankfort Pike

Bus 13: S. Broadway

Bus 21: Keeneland Airport

Bus 58: Night Versailles - S. Broadway

Bus 8: Versailles Rd

Ticket Booth

Circulation Density


Parking Grid and Property Line Flow

Visible Grid


Hortus Conclusus: figure and Invisible frame Grid in the project of domestic space

Bluegrass Arms

Residentia

W Maxwell St.

Historic Pleasant Green Missonary

Lexington Fire

Department Station

No. 3

Perspective Image

Prespective Site Perspective Image

l

Water tower

W High St.

Patterson St.

Rupp Arena

Asphalt/Dirt



Site Analysis

Chapter III - Site Model


Isometric View of Model

x 2x 6x



Close up View pf Model


Figures & Frames - Four Projects

Chapter IV


Site Quadrants

Four Projects


Field of Vision

Raegan Crum, Alejandra Gonzalez, Meredith Lewis

Group 1 is located in the bottom right corner of the Rupp Arena Site. The most

provoking concept of our design is visibility. Visibility can be defined as the state of being

able to see or be seen. Most importantly, though, visibility is the degree to which something

has attracted general attention. Our goal was precisely that-- bring attention to food

production.

The strategy we developed was implementing belts of communal and private spaces, all

focused on the center of our site. Here, fields of corn, tomatoes, squash, potatoes, and

many more form a maze. Along these crop fields, we have placed a physical barrier: a

breeze-block wall. Along this wall, visibility is both manipulated and maximized.

It is crucial to Group 1 that residents can easily make the visual connection from

crop to home. This is why we have implemented a centripetal focus on agriculture itself.

The crops that will be grown here were chosen because they grow well in Kentucky. They

also offer a variety of nutrients for our residents.


Site Plan Oblique

Site Plan Oblique

Field of Vision

Field of Vision

Field of Vision



Food Production Strategies

Field of Vision

Field Crops of Vision



Field of Vision

Field of Vision

Location of Crops




Group’s Project Title

Group’s Project Title

Market Groundfloor



Market Mezanine


Frames and Food Production Diagrams

Field of Vision

Location of Figures and Commoning Programs

Hortus

Hortus

Conclusus:

Conclusus:

figure

figure

and

and

frame

frame

in

in

the

the

project

project

of

of

domestic

domestic

space

space

Wall Functions

Funcito

Wall Funct

Field of Vision

ns of Wall

ion Locations

Tool Lockers

Composting

Large Storage

Gates

Glass

Void



Plan: food production, landscape and architecture

Field of Vision

Field of Vision



Perspective 01 (Colored)

Perspective 02 (Colored)



Drawing Title

Field of Vision



Modular

Akayla Bailey, Zachary Moore, Max Ritson, Piper Spurlock

While studying and reviewing precedents and perspective ortho drawings exploring

the space and ground of our site and how we may portray it from an arial point

of view, we decided to maintain the logic of the grid from the original parking lot in our

project. The goal of our project is to use the grid and versatile modules to maxize efficiency

in order to create a self-sustainable community. Additionally, this system serves to make

the process of growing, harvesting, and selling crops very readable and easy to learn for

newcomers. We wanted to focus on three main points of perspective in our project: community,

market startegies, and transportation of goods. By self-referencing and making

connections across our site, we can infer and link aspects of housing and growing together

to help bridge gaps between our goods and the people in our community. Both the

plants in the boxes and the people in their homes being protected and moved around as

a community combine and make a deeper connection to our site and its crops as a whole

between spacing and living. The grid and modules within it serve to create an underlying

logic that brings the different parts of our site into a coherent whole which is greater than

the sum of its parts. Having started with a parking lot grid filled with the “boxes” of private

cars, we have transformed our site into something wholly new while still maintaining

the logic of the grid and modules within it.


Modular

Modular




Modular

Modular



TO BE PLANTED IN CONTAINERS

RADISH

PEAS

CUCUMBER

CANTALOUPE

CARROTS

ARTICHOKES

WATERMELON

CORN

LETTUCE

Modular

Modular

TO BE PLANTED ON GROUND

KALE

ZUCHNNI

TURNIP

POTATOES

PUMPKIN

CELERY

BEET

BROCOLI

CABBAGE



Flow path

Modular


- Shops

- Piloti

- Entrance

- Canopy

- Fields

- Alleys


Unit Modules

1/2 1/4 1/8 1/161/32

Modular

Frame Modular Building


Elevated Unit Townhouses Module

Modular

Modular

Frame Building


Typical

Plan Oblique

Floor Plan

Modular

Frame Building

Modular



Perspective Perspective Section Section of Units

Modular



Section

Modular



View from Collective Gallery

Modular

View from Fields


Unit Axon

Site Isometric

Modular

Figural Modular Townhouses


Townhouse Plan Plans

Modular



Townhouse Perspective Sections

Modular



Hydroponic Plantation System

Modular

Figural Townhouses


Axonometric

Unit Axon

Modular


Modular

Horticultural Education and Storage

Axon Cut

Modular



View Perspective from Entry

Modular

Horticultural Education Modular and Storage


View Perspective from Courtyard

Modular

Horticultural Education Modular and Storage


Urban Food Producation

Allyson Middleton, Brandon Sarrett, and Chris Marra

To unify living with the natural environment, Group III thought about what was

essential to live, how food can be grown coinciding with apartment living, and broke the

residents and crops down into categories. The main focus was to create a community,

provide the needs of various people, and bring them together to live in unity while still

maintaining the desired privacy.

Various fruits and vegetables are essential to the human diet. Some crops that

contain Vitamin A and C are tomatoes, blueberries, and grapes. Other crops such as

potatoes and carrots provide the necessary vitamin B needed for a balanced diet. After

intricate research, the necessary amount of food needed to be consumed per day was

calculated. This provided the essential information to determine the area needed to be

designated to production, and the quantities of each crop.

To intertwine living in an urban environment with the agricultural atmosphere,

food will be produced all around the residential units. Having greenhouses to frame the

common spaces on the upper levels allows for a distinction between spaces while incorporating

food production. Trees in the courtyards will be apple trees to provide privacy,

create shaded areas, as well as produce delicious fruits. Vines are an essential part of the

crop fields because our research concluded that the yield of vine crops is much higher

than all other types.

Thinking about the people who live in urban areas and their needs, the residents

were split into two groups. The Family category contains single individuals, a parent(s)

with children, elderly, and young couples. The College Student category contains a variety

of unit layouts, varying in number of roommates. Since the site is in Lexington, KY, a

SEC college town, providing a different living situation for students is essential to the area.



To get our numbers for the food space and the unit space we based it off on having

200 people. The 200 people are ether living in the site or buying from the market. The

greenhosue will hold most of the food for the site and market with having many different

options. The landscape and the vines are to help shape and feed the site.

Greenhouse

13,374 Plants for 153 People

16,213lbs of Food for 153 People

15,300 Square Feet for 153People

Fields

536 Plants for 153 People


3,825 Square Feet for 153 People

Courtyard



2,960 Square Feet for 153 People

Total

22,085 Square Feet



Urban Food Production


Tomatoes

Tomatoes are common and can be used in many different meals. One Tomatoes

has vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Snap Beans

Snap Beans are good snack food. Ten snap beans had vitamin A and C, calcium,

iron and magnesium.

Broccoli

Broccoli are a common vegetable and can be used in many different meals. One

medium broccoli has vitamin C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Greenhouse

Carrots

Lettuce

Peppers

Potatoes

Carrots are a common vegetable to have in the house and easy to snack on. One

carrot has vitamin A, vitamin B-6 and potassium.

Lettuce is good for different types of food and can come in bulk. One head of

lettuce has vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Peppers are easy to take care of and has varity types. One pepper has vitamin A

and C, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Potatoes can be used in all kinds of meal and is nice to have in the kitcken. One

potatoes has vitamin A and B, and potassium.

Basil

Basil is used in all kinds of meals and is nice to have in the kitcken. vitamin A and

C and iron.

Fields

Apple Trees

Blueberries

Apple Trees are easy to plant and take care of. They also don’t need to be replanted.

One apple has vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium

Tomatoes are common and can be used in many different meals. One Tomatoes

has vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Grapes

Grapes vines are easy to take care of and have more then one use. One grape has

vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Courtyards

Cucumbers

Cucumbers are easy to take care of and don’t take up alot of room. One cucumber

has vitamin A and C and magnesium.

Squash

Squash vines are easy to take care of and have more then one type of squash. One

squash has vitamin A and C, calcium, iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.

Zucchini

Zucchini vines are easy to take care of. One zucchini has vitamin A and C, calcium,

iron, vitamin B-6 and magnesium.


Site Plan Oblique Site Plan Oblique


Urban Food Production Urban Food Production

Hortus Conclusus: Hortus figure Conclusus: and frame figure in and the project frame in of the domestic project space

of domestic space

Cluster Breakdown

Single Families

College Students

Seniors


Vegitation Locations

Greenhouses and Productive Fields


Unit Plan 01


Unit Plan 02


Plan Oblique 01


Plan Oblique 02


Plan Oblique

This plan oblique highlights the green spaces such as the open grass fields, water features, and courtyard trees.

The upper greenhouse shape has the purpose of framing the space to draw focus towards the courtyard.


Unit Plan

This unit plan pictures two different unit types which hold two different types of people and provides different

options for living. Residents will have a common kitchen, and a a common living space, so they have the option

for privacy and the option to interact with neighbors.


Plan Axometric- Lower Level


Plan Axometric- Upper Level


Plans


Auditorium Plan


Perspctive


Ubran Food Producation


Perspective Perspectives Cross Section




Model Photographs




Versatile Integration

Madeleine Cordray, Chase Faulkner, Lillian Pelletier, Miles Smith

Quadrant II is situated in close proximity to a historic neighborhood of Lexington,

nestled amongst a wall of vegetation, and a flow of traffic. With access to the immediate

community and outstretched ones, ideas of versatility, cohesiveness, and productivity can

attract a figure of interpersonal relationships. Establishing a frame based on logic and research,

allows for intentional spaces that can then be made figural. Our group developed

this process through ideas of a grid and how that grid creates invisible public and private

boundaries. These ideas are dependent on the inhabitant, whether that be a resident, a

guest, or a form of produce. Understanding the natural variables and dimensions of the

site, we were able to design a more free flowing set of residential units. These units can be

divided amongst the area, yet create unique, shared spaces throughout. With these split

massings, parts of the lower levels can become restaurants and produce stands, encouraging

guests from the neighborhood. Our quadrant is also capable of transitioning between

the outside community and other quadrants through the Lexington public transit, located

across the street. The front and back facade conditions contribute to displaying, yet concealing,

the moments within them, thus creating a relationship between public and private

spaces that become interchangeable.

Figural Frame

Figural Ground

Integration


Harvest Needed (lb)

Row Length (ft)

4000 lb

3000 lb

2000 lb

1000 lb

0 lb

Potatoes

3750 lb 3750 ft


Rhubarb

600 lb

600 ft

Cucumbers

1200 lb

1000 ft

Winter Squash

900 lb

900 ft

Garlic

150 lb

600 ft

Peas

450 lb

1125 ft

Sum. Squash

1500 lb

1000 ft


Lettuce

900 lb

1800 ft

Onions

1200 lb 1200 ft

Lima Beans

450 lb

1800 ft

Tomatoes

3600 lb

3600 ft

Peppers

450 lb

750 ft

0 ft 1000 ft 2000 ft 3000 ft 4000 ft


Harvest Needed (lb)

Row Length (ft)

4000 lb

3000 lb

2000 lb

1000 lb

0 lb

Potatoes

3750 lb 3750 ft


Rhubarb

600 lb

600 ft

Cucumbers

1200 lb

1000 ft

Food

Winter Squash

900 lb

900 ft

Garlic

150 lb

600 ft

Peas

450 lb

1125 ft

Sum. Squash

1500 lb

1000 ft


Lettuce

900 lb

1800 ft

Onions

1200 lb 1200 ft

Lima Beans

450 lb

1800 ft

Tomatoes

3600 lb

3600 ft

Peppers

450 lb

750 ft

0 ft 1000 ft 2000 ft 3000 ft 4000 ft


Production Strategies

Harvest Needed (lb)

Row Length (ft)

1200 lb

600 lb

Cucumbers

1000 ft

Rhubarb

600 ft

4000 lb

900 lb

Winter Squash

900 ft

3000 lb

2000 lb

1000 lb

0 lb

Potatoes

3750 lb 3750 ft

Peas

150 lb

Garlic

600 ft

450 lb

1125 ft



900 lb

Lettuce

1800 ft

Lima Beans

450 lb

1800 ft

Tomatoes

3600 lb

3600 ft

Peppers

450 lb

750 ft

Sum. Squash

1500 lb

1000 ft

Onions

1200 lb 1200 ft

0 ft 1000 ft 2000 ft 3000 ft 4000 ft



Sustainable Crop Production [150 people]

4000

3750

3600

Potatoes

3750

3225

3600

Tomatoes

Harvest Needed [lbs]

2450

Summer Squash

1000

1200

Onions

1675

1500

Cucumbers

1000

1200

900

900

Winter Squash

0 1125

2250

3375

4500

Row Length [ft]

3:1

Plant Density [plants:ft]

2:1 1:1


.85:1


900

1800

Lettuce

675

600

600

Rhubarb

750

450

Peppers

1125

Peas

225

1800

150

Lima Beans

600

0

Garlic

0 450 900 1350

1800

.75:1 .5:1

.4:1

.375:1


Ju


Janu

Start Seeds Indoors

December

Plant Seeds / Transplant

Harvest

November

Rhubarb

Garlic

Peppers

Cucumbers

Summer Squash

Potatoes

October

September

August


Peas

ary


February

Lettuce

Lima Beans

Winter Squash

March

Onions

Tomatoes

April

May

June

ly


Food Production Site PlanStrategies

Fayette County PDR Farmlands

2

1

The outlines in Fayette County represent the Purchase of Development Rights, or PDR farmlands.

This is Kentucky’s Agricultural Conservation Easement program run by the local government. The

city purchases farm owners’ development rights, through PDR, to preserve the vital farmland and

its high-quality soils.

1

2

Communal Block

Residential Block

3 Market



PDR Farm Boundary Overlay

3

2

2

N

0 10ft 20ft 30ft 40ft


Site Plan

2

1

1

2

3

Communal Block

Residential Block

Market



3

2

2

N

0 10ft 20ft 30ft 40ft



Massings

Walkways

Vegetation

Sun / Wind

Circulation

Lounging




Communal Floor Plans Block Plans

Level 2

10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Figure Ground: Versatile Communal Integration Block

Level 3

Hortus

Hortus Conclusus:

Conclusus: figure

figure and frame

and frame in the

in project

the project of domestic

of domestic space

space

Communal Block Section

Perspective Section



Figure Ground: Communal Block



Facade Perspective


Figure Ground: Communal Block



Detailed Plans


Figure Ground: Market


Perspective Section


Figure Ground: Market


Plan Oblique


Figure Ground: Residential


Ground Floor Plan



N

0 10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Second Floor Plan



N

0 10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Third Floor Plan



N

0

10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Ground Floor Plan



N

0 10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Second Floor Plan



N

0 10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Third Floor Plan



N

0 10 ft 20 ft 30 ft


Detailed Unit Plans

One person unit

1

2

5

3

4

0 4 ft 8 ft 12 ft 16 ft 20 ft

Two person unit

1

4

2

5

4

3

0

4 ft 8 ft 12 ft

16 ft

20 ft



Three person unit

4

4

3

2

1

5

4

1 Entrance

2 Kitchen

3 Bathroom

4 Bedroom

5 Living Area

0 4 ft 8 ft 12 ft 16 ft 20 ft


Perspective Section



0

4 ft 8 ft 12 ft 16 ft 20 ft


Axonometric




Perspective




Perspective




Model Photographs





Hortus Conclusus: Figure and Frame in a Project of Domestic Space

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?