Housing Studio Tulane School of Architecture Fall 2018

housing studio

Tulane School of Architecture fall 2018

contents 1) Housing is a Human Right 2) Small Increases in Density Can Have Large impacts 3) Affordability is About More than Just the Rent 4) Studio Research Cover graphics by Junyang Liu

housing is

SOCIAL PERSONAL SPATIAL REGULATED POLITICAL CULTURAL ECONOMICS CONTEXTUAL RELATIONAL

1

housing is a human right 3

introduction Housing is a human right1. Housing is central to public health, education, employment, and the general well being of societies. And yet, our political and social priorities do not include affordable housing. As a result, unchecked market forces are causing people with fewer means out of areas with the highest proximity to jobs, quality schools, healthcare, parks, and opportunities for economic mobility.

This document is a summary of the Fall 2018 Tulane School of Architecture’s Housing Studio. The studio addressed affordable housing in New Orleans and focused its design efforts within Central City, a neighborhood well positioned to help meet the city’s affordable housing goals.

This studio’s work builds on the Affordable Housing research of the Albert and Tina Small Center for Collaborative Design and was led by studio faculty: Miwako Hattori, Irene Keil, Liz McCormick, Bruce Goodwin, and Emilie Taylor Welty with digital media instruction by Matt Decotiis.

5

?

public housing_Pruitt Igoe, St Louis MO. photo by Bettmann/Corbis

?

homeless encampment_New Orleans. photo by M. Hinton

what is affordable housing?

musicians village_New Orleans. photo by Tanya Lukasik

trailer home community_Canton, MS. photo by Trip Burns

?

?

7

definition that policy is based on:

30%

affordable housing

housing for which the occupant(s) is/are paying no more than 30 percent of his or her income for gross housing costs, including utilities.

-HUD definition - Department of Housing

and Urban Development

Expenditures as % of income income

9

“with affordable housing stock scarce, prices are spiking.

An estimated 12 million americans, most of them poor, now spend more than half of their earnings on housing, according to Department of housing and Urban Development (HUD) statistics.

- new york times, 2018

2

+

people who spend more than 30% of their income on housing and utilities are in a situation where housing is not affordable.

11

what is affordable for new orleans residents?

Images from Small Center’s Cost of Home Exhibit For more information on Area Median Income see endnotes3

13

areas of opportunity and Where subsidized units are

Bluest neighborhoods have the highest access to a wide range of educational, environmental, economic, and political opportunities. Grey zones have the lowest opportunities 4. Dots represent location of various rent-subsidized units in the city.

51% of new orleans renters are paying 35% or more of pre-tax income on housing

-The Data Center, Prosperity Index, April 2018

average rent in new orleans for a one bedroom is $1,400, well above the limit of affordability for median families

-The Advocate, The count: average rental price per month of a one-bedroom apartment in New Orleans, Kevin Allman July 24, 2017

Rents are increasing faster than incomes, creating social and financial pressures that affect all New Orleanians. Culture bearers, hospitality workers, and public servants, among others, are being forced out of neighborhoods that are close to jobs and transportation. Those who move to suburbs may find lower housing costs but are burdened by greater transportation costs, longer commutes, less access to opportunities, jobs, and social networks.

15

in short:

rents are rising income is flat new orleanians can no longer find affordable housing near jobs

housing NOLA estimates 33,600 units of affordable housing are needed over the next 10 years 5

17

small increases in density can have large impacts 19

OC Haley BLVD. and Central City, a brief History The studio’s sites for housing proposals were all located in Central City, near the Oretha Castle Haley Corridor.

The Oretha Castle Haley Corridor (pictured above) runs through Central City, a neighborhood rich in social, cultural, and architectural history. From its founding the corridor was a bustling area of commerce particularly for African American, German, and Jewish merchants and shoppers. At its height in the years after World War II, the Dryades Street (now called Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard) district boasted over 200 businesses, with businesses owned primarily by Jewish and African American entrepreneurs.

Green Space

Building Use diagrams by Yara Hantash

The neighborhood surrounding the corridor was built out as working class residential area in the first half of the 19th century. Development was spurred by the opening of the New Orleans & Carrollton Railway, which became the St. Charles Streetcar, along with the New Basin Canal. In the 20th century the neighborhood was home to local civil rights and social justice movements in the 1960’s.

As with many urban areas in the 70’s and 80’s, Central City experienced a period of disinvestment yet within the last few decades has seen a rebirth. Currently the OC Haley corridor is home to many of the city’s non-profits and social justice oriented organizations. The neighborhood access to transit lines, central location, and adjacency to the CBD, Warehouse District, French Quarter and their opportunities provides an ideal location for housing in the city.

21

1895

2005

density Central City was founded as a working class suburb of the city of New Orleans. Shotgun doubles, townhomes, and cottages made for dense residential blocks with mixed use development along major corridors.

Over the next hundred years the neighborhood’s fabric changed substantially with many homes neglected and demolished and others razed to make way for larger scale developments as disinvestment in center-city neighborhoods paralleled the development of suburbs.

Now the city of New Orleans faces a housing crisis with HousingNOLA projecting a need for 33,600 affordable units by 2027. Central City is well positioned to provide affordable housing opportunities, given its historic density, its proximity to jobs, and transportation, and its relative flood elevation.

Even modest increases in current density can have drastic increases

23

1900

B

A

family B:

2000 family B:

2019

B

A

family A:

shotgun double

family A:

shotgun double

family A:

shotgun single + short term rental

A

density at the scale of home One factor that has reduced New Orleans density over time is related to how many buildings there are, and also how the use of those buildings have shifted over time.

The traditional shotgun double, a mainstay of New Orleans’ housing stock, was originally designed to accommodate two families. Within the last 50 years family size has seen a sizeable decline, meaning fewer people are living in these homes; and at the same time these smaller families have been converting doubles into single family homes. More recently some home owners have been renting out the additional unit to vacation travelers leaving even less housing available for residents of the city and further decreasing the density of our neighborhoods.

25

Current density

Simon Bolivar Ave at Erato St. is representative of many of the blocks in Central City. Currently the block is over 50% vacant and has a few single and double residences.

+2

33,600 goal density

To achieve the GNOHA’s estimated goal of 30,000 affordable units over ten years each block would need to add three affordable units.

+1

+1 +4

potential density

+20 +1

+2 +8

+2 +1

+1

Blocks like this in Central City could easily accommodate a greater housing density.

Furthermore, their proximity to housing and transportation make these blocks ideal locations for additional housing.

sample block

density at the neighborhood scale Considering the Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance’s (GNOHA) estimate of 33,6000 affordable housing units needed and distributing that need across the city proportional to current neighborhood population, each Central City block would need to add about 3 units of affordable housing over the next 10 years.

There is space for more housing in Central City and neighborhoods near the core of the city, which were once more densely inhabited than they are today. Radically increased housing opportunities could be achieved by simply returning to the neighborhood density that existed 80 years ago.

source: the Data Center - Central City Statistical area info. based on data from the 2000 census and the 2012-2016 American Community Survey

In 2015 Central City’s population was: 13,543.

In 2015 Orleans Parish’s population was: 382,922.

Considering Central City’s current population as a proportion of the city total it would need to develop at least 3.5% of the affordable housing needed citywide, or 1,176 units.

Averaging an additional 3 units per block to meet GNOHA’s goal.

27

density is contextual New Orleans is a city of old and new examples of housing density

1 central city

2

3

Treme block?, and/or carl westerman project

1) French Quarter, historic density

2) St Thomas/Ninth - OJT

3) The Julian - Studio WTA 29

affordability is about more than just the rent 31

SBP’s affordable housing for veterans - Eskew + Dumez + Ripple

A local example of energy efficient affordable housing near the city’s center is the St Bernard Project’s housing for military veterans. The 50 unit project, designed by Eskew + Dumez + Ripple is the city’s first net zero multifamily housing project. Through an enhanced envelope, emphasis on passive strategies, and on-site renewables and energy storage, the project is able to achieve net-zero energy status. This reduces the electricity consumption of the entire neighborhood as well as the utility costs of the tenant.

long term affordability Any conversation about affordability and design must go beyond the initial cost of construction and project financing model to include monthly energy costs. As many New Orleanians know, a poorly insulated house can drive up the cost of living through an increased need for heating and cooling. In our hot and humid climate, design must consider energy burden as a key factor in the long term affordability of housing.

A recent study by American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) and Energy Efficiency for All showed that low-income households in New Orleans spent a significantly higher portion of their income on utility bills than median income families. Though the cost of electricity in Louisiana is currently the lowest in the country, the amount of income spent on energy bills is disproportionally high. In large part, this is due to severe income disparities as well as the low-quality building stock seen in Louisiana. Emphasis on the lifetime cost instead of initial costs could play a significant role in reducing the tenant energy burdens as well as occupant health and building longevity. In the New Orleans su-tropical climate, moisture management is essential for occupant health and wellbeing. Energy efficiency strategies in housing include many issues that can be addressed by good design such as proper orientation and passive strategies, insulation and infiltration (air leakage) control, moisture management as well as efficient fixtures and appliances.

Until recently, Louisiana featured the highest tax incentive for installation of solar panels. Other sustainable technologies demonstrated during the hurricane recovery period include geothermal by Global Green and the Pontchartrain Park CDC. 33

research

precedents context sites zoning design

studio proposals for increasing density and providing transformative affordable housing in New Orleans’ central city

35

faculty and students ARCH 3031 bruce goodwin (01)

miwako hattori (02)

Liz mccormick (03)

Aaron Kazanoff Alexander Alves-Pingani Ana Chu Noriega Anna Deeg* Anne Davis Caroline Griffis Catherine Bateman Graham Gewirz Jason C. Malat Jacob Silbermann Luna Eaton-Sharon Mark Schaupp Mollie Serafini

Colette Vetter Eli Fisher Isabella Zannier Trejo Jeremy Baudy Kareem Elsandouby Kate W. Katz Laura MuĂąoz Sanchez Lauren Jennings Madeleine A Capozzoli Maddison Wells* Thea Fries Yara Hantash Zachary Speroni*

Alexandra Satre Caroline V. Garfield* Danelle Martin Eitan Albukrek Francesca Heston Griffin Daly Isabella Ordway James Rennert* Jorge Blandin Milla Julia Leibowitz Ksenija Madzarevic Zachary Levy

All students and faculty involved in the studio are listed on this page. *Projects included in this booklet are a small sample of student work.

ARCH 6031 emilie t welty (01)

irene keil (02)

Aize Li Brandon Surtain Casey Last Chewys M. Parra Paulino Hannah L. Boyd* Henry Brereton Jessica Tolbert Jonathan Lewis Ryan Snyder Seneca Gray*

Austin B. Hogans Chenbo Xing Emma Olson John Hausladen Junyang (Leo) Liu Kalyn Faller* Lucy Satzewich* Mengning Lan Michael J. Heitz, Shanelle N Reese Taylor J. Scott

37

studio sites

Site 1 – 1239 S. Rampart St. Area: approx. 20,900 sq. ft

Site 4 – 1810 Oretha Castle Haley Area: approx.. 15,900 square feet

Site 2 – 1630 Baronne St. Area: approx. 20,100 square feet

Site 5 – 1122 Oretha Castle Haley Area: approx.. 12,000 square feet

Site 3 – 1826 S. Rampart St. Area: approx.. 21,300 square feet

studio brief Through a semester-long housing design project, the studio explored mixed use, multi-family housing designs in New Orleans’ Central City neighborhood.

Students researched site zoning and regulatory overlays and investigated design at the scale of of dwelling units, and urban form along with strategies for organizing and accessing units in a multi-family building.

Students researched local issues, selected a specialized affordable housing program (such as Senior Housing, Permanent Supportive Housing, Workforce, etc) and crafted a position for their programatic vision for the site.

The projects consist of 20-35 apartments according to site constraints and programatic positions, with other non-residential programs on the ground floor as appropriate to individual sites and housing options. As seen in the short sampling of projects that follow, students exlored massing and site strategies, dwelling units and their aggregation, non residental program development, and material ideas.

39

Baronne St. Transitional House Zach Speroni Studio: Miwako Hattori In New Orleans, 1,300 people experience homelessness each year and many struggle to escape the vicious cycle of life on the street. Baronne St. Transitional House is a multifamily affordable housing situated on the corner of Baronne and Euterpe St. The proposed project takes people off the street into temporary residence where they obtain life skills, counseling, and feel a sense of community. About half way through the semester, I visited the New Orleans mission located two blocks from the site. While this is only a temporary residence for homeless people, it was incredibly enlightening to hear not only their stories but what formerly homeless residents value the most in housing; this became the focus of the project.

That site visit informed the building as not just an arrangement of residential building, but a building in which the core would be the communal spaces designed to serve the residents.

It was interesting to hear from a formally homeless employee of the mission that bringing yourself out of homelessness and back into the working class is a multiple step program and sometimes people need a lot of support through this process.

Targeted to a sensitive user group like formerly homeless, the building supports a progression from coming off the streets to eventually re-entering back into the workforce and market rate housing through its vertical progression residents follow during their transition. That progression as one moves up through the building is accompanied by specific support spaces including financial guidance class space, and mental health counseling services as well as designed spaces for studying or working and a space for mediation and reflection.

VD BL Y LE HA C

ST

CH

AR

LE

S

O COMMERCIAL

C U LT U R A L

BUILDING TYPE

MAJOR ROADS

BU

S

ST

R

EE

TC

A

R

B

U

S

1/ 4 M IL E

GREEN SPACE

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

1/64”-1’-0”

41

P U B L I C T R A N S P O R TAT I O N

ZONING AND SITE REQUIREMENTS

HU-MU

0’

E

0’

B A C K YA R D :

NN

0’

C O R N E R S I D E YA R D :

RO

0’

I N T E R I O R S I D E YA R D :

BA

F R O N T YA R D :

ST

.

SETBACKS

OTHER REQUIREMENTS P E R M I A B L E S PA C E :

10% OF LOT AREA

M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T:

40’

PA R K I N G

1 PER DWELLING UNIT

S I T E S P E C I F I C AT I O N S

LOT SIZE:

20,100 SF

BUILDABLE AREA:

20,100 SF

M A X S Q U A R E F E E T:

80,400 SF

EU

ZONING SCENARIOS

TE

RP

E

ST

.

Creating accomodating spaces for for indivudals who are in differnt phases of re-rentry presents itself with many challanges. This proposal seperates each floor of the building corresponding to how long residents have been off the street. The ground floor includes ammenities, retail and resident services. Financial services provide residents with skills needed to balance a paycheck, filing taxes, getting federal documents such as social security and assisting in finding employment. Mental health consuling focuses on addressing drug and alcohol dependancy, mental health disorders, and social behavior. Also curating designated spaces for studying and working, and a space for reflection and mediation provides the residents with additional ammenties. The second floor, which houses residents who have been off the streets from anywhere between a day to six months. This floor provides a support staff and office space to keep residents who may face addiction problems on track and focused on their goal of re-entry. With smaller, more efficient studio units, the focus is on bringing residents out of their room into the supportive shared spaces such as the community room, courtyard and garden. The third floor, which is for residents who have been in the building from six to twelve months, provides more spacious units, getting the residents familiar with having closer to a market rate unit.

Providing more ammenty space such as a open terrace gives residents incentive to progress through the building and re-enter back into the workforce and market rate housining.

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

43

ZACH SPERONI

BARONNE ST. TRANSITIONAL HOUSE

45

COMMUNITY ROOM

COMMUNITY ROOM

Project Information Total Square Footage: 22,100 sf Units: 22 units FAR: 1.2 Gross to Net Ratio: .63

B

OFFICE

B

OFFICE

E U T E R P E S T.

COMMUNITY ROOM

GARDEN PARKING

MEDITATION ROOM COURTYARD OFFICE

STUDY SPACE LOBBY

B

COMMUNITY ROOM LAUNDRY

SOCIAL SERVICE

FINANCIAL SERVICE

CONVENIENCE STORE

B A R O N N E S T. A

PLANS 1’-0”=1/16”

FL2 0-6 MONTHS

Baronne st. Transitional House - zach Speroni

2 BEDROOM 850 SF

FL3 6-12 MONTHS

STUDIO 400 SF

2 BEDROOM 850 SF

1 BEDROOM 450 SF

UNIT PLANS 1’-0”=1/8”

47

SINGLE MOTHERS IN CENTRAL CIT CHILDREN IN CENTRAL CITY LIVE ONLY WITH THEIR MOTHER = 52%

NEW ORLEANS PARISH = 39.6%

UNITED STATES = 20%

semi permanent affordable housing for single mothers Kalyn Faller Studio: Irene Keil Central City, New Orleans suffers from an epidemic of single mothers that is more than two times the national average. These mothers deserve to be designed for. This propossal aims to tackle an affordable housing option for this specific user group.

The basic needs of single mothers include affordability, child care, nutrious food options, and furthing adult education programs. All of these resources can be found on the 1630 Barrone Street Semi Permanent Housing for Single Mothers.

This point access, double bar building provides 35 flexible units of independent living quarters ranging from 2-3 bedrooms allowing for the independence that single moms want. This housing scheme is supported with communal ammenties such as a day care, GED prep center, laundry, lounge, vegetable garden, and a shared kitchen and dining area that bridges the Liberty House Residential program for homeless women ages 16-24 who are pregnant

WE BELIEVE: That single motherho and designed for. T affordability, nutritiou education are the are of communal living p bedrooms, promoting While the communa center, laundry, loung dining area provide t mothers need. This af to the support that al WE SERVE:

Catholic Charities counseling case management advocacy referrals educationaltogether. meetings. All two bar buildings

PREGNANT of these resources promote, the MOMS safety, well-being, of the children and their parents.

The specific massing strategy holds the cornerWE of Barrone and PROVIDE: Euterpe while celebrating the entrance of the day care and adult education. Residents enter on the more private street of Euterpe PRIVATE LIVING being met with the shared urban farm garden before heading to their respective circulation core. The street front facades encourage privacy with an operable wooden louver system, while the courtyard facades further the vegetation and green New Orleans Mission built in planters and vertical gardens. attributes by offering Family Center 4 month long

Communal living ishousing highly encouraged on this site. Mothers transitional caseautonomy managementin their living units, but can feel safe as have enough their children grow up in a safe environment with others.

PERMANENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LE MOTHERS IN CENTRAL CITY, NEW ORLEANS

NTRAL CITY LIVE ONLY WITH THEIR MOTHER = 52%

ARISH = 39.6%

= 20%

WE BELIEVE: That single motherhood is an epidemic that should be supported and designed for. The basic needs of child care, child safety, affordability, nutritious food options, and the furthering of adult education are the areas in which we aim to invest in. This proposal of communal living provides private living spaces varying from 2-3 bedrooms, promoting the independence that single mothers want.

While the communal amenities such as the day care, GED prep center, laundry, lounge, vegetable garden, and a shared kitchen and dining area provide the resources and support in which all single mothers need. This affordable housing proposal is just the beginning to the support that all parents and children deserve.

SEMI PERMANENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WE SERVE: SINGLE MOTHERS IN CENTRAL CITY, NEW ORLEANS Catholic Charities counseling case management CHILDREN IN CENTRAL CITY LIVE ONLY WITH THEIR MOTHER = 52% advocacy referrals educational meetings.

NEW ORLEANS PARISH = 39.6%

WE BELIEVE: That single motherhood is an epidemic that should be supported and designed for. The basic needs of child care, child safety, affordability, nutritious food options, and the furthering of adult education are the areas in which we aim to invest in. This proposal of communal PREGNANT living provides private living spaces varying from 2-3 bedrooms, MOMS promoting the independence that single mothers want.

While the communal amenities such as the day care, GED prep center, laundry, lounge, vegetable garden, and a shared kitchen and dining area provide the resources and support in which all single mothers need. This affordable housing proposal is just the beginning to the support that all parents and children deserve.

PRIVATE

MOMS WITH KIDS <18

WE PROVIDE:

UNITED STATES = 20%

LIVING

WE SERVE:

Catholic Charities counseling case management advocacy referrals educational meetings.

New Orleans Mission Family Center 4 month long transitional housing case management

PRIVATE LIVING PREGNANT MOMS

MOMS WITH KIDS <18

WE PROVIDE: PRIVATE LIVING PRIVATE LIVING

m for ages gnant en

SHARE KITCHEN + DINING

New Orleans Mission Family Center 4 month long transitional housing case management

Baronne Street Housing 18-24 month shelter counseling advocacy referrals

1630 Barronne Street Site -affordable housing for single mothers until their child/children are 18 y/o -day care center 1630 Barronne Street Site -adult GED prep center -affordable housing for single mothers until their child/children are 18 y/o Baronne Street Housing -shared laundry -day care center 18-24 month shelter -adult GED prep center -shared counselingkitchen -shared laundry

Liberty House Residential program for homeless women ages 16-24 who are pregnant and/or have children

advocacy referrals

-shared kitchen

CONTEXT, RESEARCH, AND ANALYSIS

GED CENTER

LAUNDRY/LOUNGE

SHARE KITCHEN + DINING

GED CENTER

LAUNDRY/LOUNGE

VEGETABLE GARDEN

VEGETABLE GARDEN

49

STORE STACK

TOWER PARK

CORNER BLOCK

6,660sf

23.8%

COMMERCIAL:

1,875sf

60.6%

RESIDENTIAL:

12,150sf

43.4%

RESIDENTIAL:

19,900sf

4,785sf

11.3%

AMMENITIES:

N/A

0%

AMMENITIES:

7,125sf

1,152sf

2.7%

CIRCULATION:

288sf

1%

CIRCULATION:

500,sf

4,000sf

9.4%

PERMEABLE:

6,950sf

RESIDENTIAL:

25,800sf

AMMENITIES: CIRCULATION: PERMEABLE:

16%

UNITS:

24 units (18)1,000sf (6) 1,300sf

HEIGHT:

40’

PARKING:

TOWER PARK

COMMERCIAL:

COMMERCIAL:

UNITS:

STORE STACK

HEIGHT:

Street Parking (14 spots)

PARKING:

TOWER PARK

Unit Efficiency=43%

CORNER Floor Area RatioBLOCK (FAR)=2.39

Unit Efficiency=20% STACK FloorSTORE Area Ratio (FAR)=1.57

15,300sf

COMMERCIAL:

3,588sf

44.5%

RESIDENTIAL:

34,080sf

15.9%

AMMENITIES:

1,872sf

4.2%

CIRCULATION:

666sf

1.5%

4,140sf

9.3%

1.2% 34.2%

22 units (18) 750sf (4) 1,600sf

PERMEABLE: UNITS:

82’

36 units (24) 740sf (12) 1,360sf

HEIGHT:

Street Parking (14 spots)

40’

PARKING:

Unit Efficiency=33% Floor TOWER Area RatioPARK (FAR)=2.51

Street Parking (14 spots)

Unit Efficiency=57%

ROW HOUSE VILLAGE Floor Area Ratio (FAR)=2.49

6,950sf

COMMERCIAL:

6,660sf

23.8%

COMMERCIAL:

1,875sf

COMMERCIAL:

3,588sf

RESIDENTIAL:

25,800sf

60.6%

RESIDENTIAL:

12,150sf

43.4%

RESIDENTIAL:

19,900sf

44.5%

RESIDENTIAL:

34,080sf

AMMENITIES:

4,785sf

11.3%

AMMENITIES:

N/A

0%

AMMENITIES:

7,125sf

15.9%

AMMENITIES:

1,872sf

4.2%

CIRCULATION:

1,152sf

2.7%

CIRCULATION:

288sf

1%

CIRCULATION:

500,sf

CIRCULATION:

666sf

1.5%

PERMEABLE:

4,000sf

9.4%

PERMEABLE:

4,140sf

9.3%

HEIGHT: PARKING:

24 units (18)1,000sf (6) 1,300sf 40’ 14 spots on site

Unit Efficiency=43% Floor Area Ratio (FAR)=2.39

ZONING SCENARIOS

UNITS:

HEIGHT: PARKING:

8,892sf

37.7%

6 units (6) 2,025sf 24’ Street Parking (14 spots)

Unit Efficiency=20% Floor Area Ratio (FAR)=1.57

PERMEABLE: UNITS:

HEIGHT: PARKING:

15,300sf

4.2%

8.1% 76.9%

COMMERCIAL:

UNITS:

16%

PERMEABLE: UNITS:

24’

PARKING:

STORE STACK

37.7%

6 units (6) 2,025sf

HEIGHT:

14 spots on site

8,892sf

ROW HOUSE VILLAGE 4.2%

1.2% 34.2%

22 units (18) 750sf (4) 1,600sf 82’ Street Parking (14 spots)

Unit Efficiency=33% Floor Area Ratio (FAR)=2.51

PERMEABLE: UNITS:

HEIGHT: PARKING:

8.1% 76.9%

36 units (24) 740sf (12) 1,360sf 40’ Street Parking (14 spots)

Unit Efficiency=57% Floor Area Ratio (FAR)=2.49

TE RP

SI C

EU TE RP

ES TR EE T

HO RE ST RE ET

OPERATIONAL DIAGRAMS

OPERATIONAL DIAGRAMS

CORNER SITE IN

19,812 SQUARE FT

SI C

T EE ES TRE

RP TE

OPERATIONAL DIAGRAMS

RP

ES TR

BAR ONN

ET

CORNER SITE IN

19,812 SQUARE FT

TE

T ES TR RP EU

RP

C

4. PUSH FRONT BAR CELEBRATING ENTRANCE

EE

1. CORNER SITE IN ES TRE ET CENTRAL CITY

TE

ES TR

EE

T

CENTRAL CITY

BAR ONN

SIC

HO R

C

EU TE

HO R

ES TR

EE

T

CENTRAL CITY

19,812 SQUARE FT

CORNER SITE IN EXTRUDE MASS FOR CENTRAL CITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING

C

BAR ONN

ES TRE

ET

EXTRUDE MASS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

2. EXTRUDE MASS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

EXTRUDE MASS FOR CUT INTO TWO BARS AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREATING COURTYARD

W

5. INSERT POINT ACCESS CIRCULATION

CUT INTO TWO BARS CREATING COURTYARD

W

ZONING DIAGRAM TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: TOTAL # OF UNITS: UNIT SQUARE FOOTAGE: FLOOR AREA RATIO:

CUT INTO TWO BARS PUSH FRONT BAR PERMEABLE SPACE=10% CREATING COURTYARD CELEBRATING ENTRANCE

W

ZONING DIAGRAM

3. CUT INTO TWO BARS CREATING COURTYARD

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: TOTAL # OF UNITS: UNIT SQUARE FOOTAGE: FLOOR AREA RATIO:

MAXBAR HEIGHT=40’ PUSH FRONT PERMEABLE SPACE=10% CELEBRATING ENTRANCE

ZONING DIAGRAM

6. BRIDGE TWO CARS WITH SHARED KITCHEN 156’

MAXBAR HEIGHT=40’ PERMEABLE SPACE=10% PUSH FRONT INSERT POINT CELEBRATING ENTRANCE ACCESS CIRCULATION

TOTAL SQUARE 127’FOOTAGE: TOTAL # OF UNITS: UNIT SQUARE FOOTAGE: FLOOR AREA RATIO:

51

KALYN FALLER

HOUSING FOR SINGLE MOTHERS

53

FIFTH FLOOR PLAN

ZONING DIAGRAM

GED PREP CENTER

TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: TOTAL # OF UNITS: UNIT SQUARE FOOTAGE: FLOOR AREA RATIO:

PERMEABLE SPACE=10% UNIT TYPE A

UNIT TYPE B

UNIT TYPE C

40%

43%

17%

RESIDENTIAL 60%

MAX HEIGHT=40’

49,889 SF 35 UNITS KITCHEN 830SF SHARED - 1280SF 2.52

PROGRAM D

SHARED KITCHEN

GED PREP CENTER

DAY CARE

CIRCULATION

12%

6%

5%

7%

GARDEN 10%

BUILDING

PERMEABLE SPACE

90%

10%

11

HU-RM2 SHARED KITCHEN APPLIANCES

127’

156’

COUNTER TOP KITCHEN APPLIANCES

11. ROOF TOP GARDEN

THIRD + FOURTH FLOOR PLAN

HU-MU UNIT TYPE C 10

9

9. SHARED KITCHEN 10. ELEVATED CIRCULATION

EE

T

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

2

RO NN ES TR

UNIT TYPE B

8

BA

UNIT TYPE A

3

1

4

7

SHARED KIT

5

6

EU

TE

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

RP

ES TR

EE

1. GED PREP CENTER 2. DAY CARE 3. LAUNDRY ROOM 4. HARVEST/STORAGE ROOM 5. MAIL ROOM 6. LAUNDRY AND LOUNGE 7. VEGETABLE GARDEN 8. PLAY SPACE

T

BARONNE STREET ELEVATION

SHARED KITCHEN

DISTRIBUTION

UNIT TYPE C

UNIT TYPE A 40%

UNIT TYPE B

UNIT TYPE C

43%

17%

RESIDENTIAL 60%

UNIT TYPE A

SHARED KITCHEN

GED PREP CENTER

DAY CARE

CIRCULATION

12%

6%

5%

7%

GARDEN 10%

BUILDING

PERMEABLE SPACE

90%

10%

UNIT TYPE B

SHARED KITCHEN APPLIANCES

UNIT TYPE A

COUNTER TOP KITCHEN APPLIANCES

UNIT TYPE B

UNIT TYPE C

DAY CARE

GED PREP CENTER

SHARED KITCHEN

UNIT TYPE A

UNIT TYPE B

UNIT TYPE C

40%

43%

17%

RESIDENTIAL 60%

GED PREP CENTER

DAY CARE

CIRCULATION

12%

6%

5%

7%

GARDEN 10%

PERMEABLE SPACE

90%

10%

TCHEN APPLIANCES

UNIT TYPE A

SHARED KITCHEN

BUILDING

COUNTER TOP KITCHEN APPLIANCES

UNIT TYPE B

UNIT TYPE C

55

In 2016, New Orleans Coroner Jeffery Rouse announced to the city council that for the first few months of the year more people in New Orleans died from opioid-related overdoses than homicides.

HARM REDUCTION

4 out of 5 heroin users start with prescription painkiller

A set of strategies aimed at reducing negative consequences associated with drug use and a movement for social justice built on a belief in, and respect for, the rights of people who use drugs.

HO

We need to keep people alive so they can even consider recovery.

OH

O

NALOXONE

N

DR JESSIE GAETA, CHEIF MEDICAL OFFICER AT SPOT BOSTON

O

NALOXONE

‘HOUSING FIRST’ PRINCIPLES

S homelessness

‘level of stability’

housing

Drug-use supervised monitoring, safe injection, and needle exchange DIRECT ACCESS TO HOUSING INDIVIDUALIZED SUPPORT SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY INTEGRATION

You came for needles, now can you help us with health, drug treatment and housing... A needle exchange program’s superpower is that it’s an amazing engagement strategy, and supervised use and monitoring programs have the same effect

Access to overdose reversal medications like Naloxone and Narcan Increased engagement of marginalized people in health care and rehabilitation

InSite Vancouver, the first legal supervised injection site it North America treated 768 overdoes last year alone and make 460 referrals to recovery programs.

DANIEL RAYMOND, POLICY DIRECTOR AT THE HARM REDUCTION COALITION, NEW YORK

Architecture in Epidemic: Housing For The Opioid Crisis Lucy Satzewich Studio: Irene Keil Government strategies to create affordable housing have changed a lot over the years. Starting in the 1930’s, the government just built, owned, and maintained the housing itself. Much of this “public housing” still exists, but the government hasn’t built any more of it since 1974. In the 1970’s, the government started giving subsidies to families to find their own housing from private landlords. These are the “Section 8” vouchers.

excluding one new emergency shelter, requires sobriety as a condition for housing. Sobriety is a primary consideration for housing leaves already marginalized individuals with no access even temporay housing and its social service amenities. In applying a ‘housing first’ principles in conjunction with ‘harm reduction’ principles this scheme offers collective housing units for 30 drug users as well as an overdose prevention site to be used by the public.

Housing workers in New Orleans and across North America are working to create housing and social service programs to combat the danger juncture where the housing crisis meets the opioid crisis. With permanent housing difficult to obtain shelters that reached capacity. The New Orleans Mission, along with every other supportive housing service in the city

This housing model has been derived from researching conversations between health care workers, urban planner and architects in Vancouver, Toronto, Seattle, Portland and engages with a linage of similar sites and programs that have exhisted in Europe since the 1980s.

OPIOID DEATHS KILL APPROXIMATELY AMERICANS A DAY THE NEW YORK TIMES, 2017

90

A LOT OF OVERDOSES ARE PREVENTABLE

8-40

6-7

4-5

2-3

1

1122 OC HALEY

OVERDOSES REPORTED IN NEW ORLEANS IN THE LAST YEAR Louisiana Physicians write more opioid prescriptions per year than there are residents NOPIOIDS LA

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

57

ZONING SCENARIOS

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

59

LUCY SATZEWICH

HOUSING FOR DRUG USERS

NALOXONE SAVES LIVES

61

Project Information Total Square Footage: Units: 30 FAR: 53 Gross to Net Ratio: 142

A

B

Ground Floor Plan

Section ‘A’ Section ‘A’

Section ‘B’ Section ‘B’

63

Mediating Neighborhood Scales James Rennert Studio: Elizabeth McCormick Sited on the border of the Central Business District and the Central City neighborhood, this project mediates the high-rise, dense fabric of the CBD and the smaller residential fabric of Central City. Adjacent to the Ponchartrain Expressway and the New Orleans Mission, this project works with an existing organization to provide permanent supportive housing for formerly homeless individuals.

While striving to meet the density of the CBD, this projects seeks to maintain the individuality afforded by a single family residence in Central City to mediate the differing scales.

Physically pulling circulation systems away from the massing allows for a personal entry sequence, while a communal courtyard fosters a neighborhood of its own while encouraging interaction between residents.

The ground floor includes supportive services open to the public, as well as a cafe that provides workforce reintegration opportunities.

In order to mitigate the noise (80+ db) and air pollution from the adjacent expressway, the units stagger and orient views towards the downtown skyline, allowing for light infiltration while reducing noise pollution.

Finally, in response to the adjacent church and physical placemaker St. John the Baptist, the massing steps back and allows for communal views oriented to Central City. The project seeks to provide a sense of dignity often overlooked in affordable housing developments, and aims to respectfully increase density in Central City while maintaining the neighborhoodâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s character and scale.

Project Information Total Square Footage: 25,000 sf 35 studio units FAR: 2 Gross to Net Ratio: 0.64 el dw g

lin ge ed

ch oa pr ap th pa

Typical Central City Dwelling Entry sequence of Path, Approach, Edge, and Dwelling

g

lin

el dw ed ge

pa

ch

oa pr

ap th

Typical Unit Appropriated Entry Sequence

Unit Agglomeration Borrowing CBD Density

65

JAMES RENNERT

MEDIATING NEIGHBORHOOD SCALES

Fenestration Appropriation

Adjacent Expressway

Appropriated Fenestration

Laundry

67

LGBTQ Youth national statistics

homelessness 30% seeking housing identify as LGBTQ 25% of homeless LGBTQ youth are not seeking help with housing 68% experienced rejection by their family 43% forced out by legal guardian

Queer Youth Permanent Housing Seneca Gray Studio: Emilie Taylor-Welty This project is a critic of urban housing typology and architectural representaion by proposing new approaches through queer theory. The clientel are homeless queeridentifying youth since: • • • •

40% of all homeless youth in America identify as LGTBQ This is disproportionate to the <10% of all American youth that self-identify as LGBTQ 68% cite family rejection of their identity as a factor leading to their displacement 25% of homeless LGBTQ youth do not seek professional housing services

Housing and queer experiences historically and presently in New Orleans can be approached through 4 key lenses: • • • •

Youth - intentional clients 13-25 years of age Refuge - human right for safe shelter Gathering - community Memorial - tragedy and remembrance

A successful building would incorporate all of these aspects in it’s aestheitcal appearance and programatical layout. For representation of the building, ispiration was derived from a study of LGBTQ illustration artists. Often queer artists depict humans and “reality” with non-accurate color. This is spins the “otherness” applied by discrimminatory society members, and turns it into an artistic reclaimation of dymanic pride.

REPRESENTATION

69

Building Footprint = 12,320 SF

Scheme 5

Scheme 1 historical

less-vulnerable Extra Open Space = 3,928 SF

Building Footprint = 13,440 SF Extra Open Space = 2,808 SF

Building Footprint = 12,320 SF Residential = 23,520 SF

1-3 Stories - continuation of historic fabric - intimate community - inefficient use of space

Extra Open Space = 3,928 SF Program = 11,760 SF 1 : 2DU = 21 Units Residential = 23,520 SF 2-4 Stories Program = 11,760 SF 1 : 2DU = 21 Units

Scheme 3

2-4 Stories

max story allotment

Building Footprint = 6,160 SF Extra Open Space = 10,088 SF Program = 1,120 SF 4 Stories - higher open space : built ratio - allows for 2 units of other commodity

Scheme 5

less-vulnerable

Scheme 4 no height limit

Building Footprint = 12,320 SF Extra Open Space = 3,928 SF

Building Footprint = 560 SF Extra Open Space = 15,688 SF

Residential = 23,520 SF

42 Stories

Program = 11,760 SF 1 : 2DU = 21 Units

- broken maximum height - high isolation - largest extra open space

ZONING SCENARIOS

2-4 Stories

VULNERABILITY ENVIRONMENTAL--BEHAVIOR STUDY

YOUTH

REFUDGE

M

GATHERING

MEMORIAL

South Saratoga

South Rampart

COMMUNAL + INDIVIDUAL FORTIFICATION

Erato

Clio

Within New Orleans, Covenant House is the only service organization specifically for homeless minors <25 years of age. Central City is already home to the LGBT Community Center of New Orleans, as well as to the Youth Empowerment Project (YEP) – a community-based education mentoring and employment program for underserved young people. The site is within a two-block radius of two senior living complexes, fortifying it as an intergenerational neighborhood.

Through a methodological study of space + behavior, I crafted a housing concept consisting of courtyard-facing porches to reduce vulnerability for LGBTQ youth clients through strengthening internal communal spaces and maintaining the individual’s right to private solace. All are oriented toward one of two communal courtyards with two nodes of communal internal program (rather than toward the street). An adjacent walkway is added to avoid foot traffic on personal porches but maintain the proximity, like an elevated sidewalk. The communal spaces between the units also receive a porch, carved out to uphold the integrity of the courtyard by offering more to the courtyard from otherwise interior spaces. The courtyard areas will store water below the grass, funneled from the roof through the façade system. The façade relfects and celebrates the dynamic diversity of the residents.

It is prudent to design with future projections in mind to keep the clients safe from environmental displacement, in otherwords, environmental justice is social justice. Sea level is expected to rise 24” by 2050, surpassing the 18” first floor level required. Therefore the first floor of units are raised to 42” to accommodate the sea level rise on top of the standard 18”.

CONCEPT

71

Seneca Gray

Queer Youth Permanent Housing

73

eneca Gray | Prof. Emilie Taylor-Welty | ARCH6031 | F18 | Final Review

CI

RE

YOUTH

REFUDGE MASSING STRATEGY

Project Information Total Square Footage: 29,580 SF GATHERING MEMORIAL Units: 40 FAR: 1.2 Gross to Net Ratio: 1.3 (NET = 22,400 SF ) South Saratoga

South Rampart

DIAGRAMS Erato

Clio

CO

CH6031 | F18 | Final Review

CIRCULATION

IRCULATION

FOURTH FLOOR PLAN

CIRCULATION

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

RESIDENTIAL

ESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL

OPEN TO BELOW

THIRD FLOOR PLAN

OPEN TO BELOW

REFUDGE

OPEN TO BELOW

MASSING STRATEGY

COMMUNAL

MASSING

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

OMMUNAL MEMORIAL

COMMUNAL UPPER COURTYARD OPEN TO ABOVE

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

OPEN TO BELOW

OPEN TO BELOW

CIRCULATION

RESIDENTIAL

COMMUNAL

OPEN TO BELOW

C

PROGRAM

Clio

B

A

PROGRAM

PROGRAM

GROUND FLOOR PLAN - SCALE: 1’ = 1/16”

75

44%

23% of workers in central city work in

accomodations & food service 2613 family households

Neighborhood: Central City Zoning: Historic Urban Mixed-Use

6401 total households Average rent:

19,072 13,543

87%

2012-2016

Population

2000

2012-2016

Black Population

2000

79.7%

26.4% 2012-2016

Vacant Housing Units

2000

2012-2016

Renter Occuplied

Residents make between 30% and 80% AMI

$638 83.7%

72.5% 21.2%

2000

of Central City residents do not own a vehicle

$32,614 49.8%

2000

$37,139

45.9%

2012-2016

2000

2012-2016

People Living In Poverty Average Household Income

Identity: Reinterpreting a neighborhood remnant wall Caroline Garfield Studio: Liz McCormick Site: 1810 Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard This project is about humanizing workforce housing through incorpating a remnant wall of OC Haley history as a collective canvas for the residents. The Residents hold the power to curate the wall, which is an armature for residents to express their identity and facilitate neighbor-to-neighbor collaboration.

The building program is focused on housing for low income working individuals because 23% of central cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s working people work in accomodations and food service and make between 30% and 80% of the AMI. The building design aims to create a sense of pride for the residents through design elements that retain teh sites history and foster a sense of individual and collective ownership.

The 9â&#x20AC;&#x2122;7â&#x20AC;? brick wall left on site was part of the businesses that once densely populated the boulevard. It is now tagged with a colorful mural of positive, powerful woman. Inspired by the sense of identity and culture that the wall possessed, this design preserves it symbolically by extending the wall to be a central part of the apartment building. The wall, like street art, would be constantly alive and changing. The designed scenario would include resident meetings every few months to discuss what the wall will be. The bricks from the original brick wall on site would be incorporated into the front facade of the building, dispersing the memory of the wall at the main street.

Aerial model of site

1:4000

Central city context map, showing community assets in walking distance in yellow

1’ = 1/32”

Felicity

125’-9”

27’6”

Polym

ynia

1951 SANBORNE MAP REVEALS THE WALL THAT EXISTS TODAY

17,749 SQFT

1810 Oc Haley

Oc Ha

ley

131’

Historic Sanborne map of the wall

Site Plan

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

77

VERNACULAR REINTERPRETED ATRRIBUTES: Individual units with a VERNACULAR REINTERPRETED vertical emphasis + more individualized circulation + long narrowunits unitswith + smaller ATRRIBUTES: Individual a units vertical emphasis + more individualized circulation + long narrow units + smaller GROSS: 41 160 units

WALL REVEAL ATTRIBUTES: dense breaks height restriction + heights morph to context on street WALL REVEAL front + Courtyard encompassing the wall ATTRIBUTES: dense breaks height restriction + heights morph to context on street GROSS: 56950 front + Courtyard encompassing the wall

NET: 28000 GROSS: 41160

NET: 42712 GROSS: 56950

UNITS: 25 NET: 28000

UNITS: 39 NET: 42712

UNIT TYPES: UNITS: 25 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 COMMERCIAL: 7890 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, UNITS: 39 3 br 1300 sqft UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, COMMERCIAL SPACE: 6690 3 br 1300 sqft

PARKING: 25 spaces COMMERCIAL: 7890

PARKING: 30 COMMERCIAL SPACE: 6690

FAR: 2.3 25 spaces PARKING:

FAR: 3.2 PARKING: 30

FAR: 2.3 FAR: 3.2

WALL REVEAL ATTRIBUTES: dense + breaks height restriction + Courtyard GROSS: 56950 NET: 42712 UNITS: 39 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft COMMERCIAL SPACE: 6690 PARKING: 30 FAR: 3.2

VERNACULAR REINTERPRETED ATRRIBUTES: Individual units with a vertical emphasis + more individualized circulation NET: 28000 UNITS: 25 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft COMMERCIAL: 7890 PARKING: 25 spaces FAR: 2.3

VERNACULAR REINTERPRETED

INFILL

ATRRIBUTES: Individual units with a VERNACULAR REINTERPRETED vertical emphasis + more individualized circulation + long narrow units + smaller ATRRIBUTES: Individual units with a units vertical emphasis + more individualized circulation + long narrow units + smaller GROSS: 41160 units NET: 28000 GROSS: 41160

ATTRIBUTES: Bays to break up the INFILL facade ATTRIBUTES: Bays to break up the GROSS: facade 48,000 NET: 36,000 GROSS: 48,000 UNITS: 26 NET: 36,000

UNITS: 25 NET: 28000

UNIT TYPES: UNITS: 26 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br COMMERCIAL: 7890sqft 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300

UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 UNITS: 25 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 COMMERCIAL: 7890 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft PARKING: 25 spaces COMMERCIAL: 7890 FAR: 2.3 PARKING: 25 spaces FAR: 2.3

PARKING: 25 spaces COMMERCIAL: 7890 FAR: 2.7 25 spaces PARKING: FAR: 2.7

INFILL ATTRIBUTES: INFILL facade

NET: 36,000 GROSS: 48,000 UNITS: 26 NET: 36,000 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br UNITS: 26 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br COMMERCIAL: 7890 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft PARKING: 25 spaces COMMERCIAL: 7890 FAR: 2.7 PARKING: 25 spaces

Ammenities within walking distance of site (1/4 mile)

1:4000

Ammenities within walking distance of site (1/4 mile)

44% 44%

Bays to break up the

ATTRIBUTES: Bays to break up the GROSS: 48,000 facade

1:4000

23% of workers in central city work in

of Central City residents do not own a vehicle

HUMU HUMU

accomodations & 23% of workers in central city work in food service accomodations & food service

2613 family households 6401 total households

Average rent:

19,072 19,072

13,543 13,543 2012-2016

Average rent: 72.5%

87%

2000

72.5%

21.2%

26.4%

2012-2016

21.2% 2000

26.4% 2012-2016

households with no people under 18 SPLIT

33666 GROSS: 41556 27.3%NET: 22 21.8%UNITS: NET: 33666

50-64

TYPES: UNITS: 22 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 21.8%UNIT sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

Residents make 50-64 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 brbetween 1000 COMMERCIAL: 7000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

30% and 80% AMI Residents make between

$638 $638 83.7%

83.7% 2000

79.7% 79.7%

2012-2016

PARKING: 25 units COMMERCIAL: 7000

30% and 80% AMI $37,139 $32,614

FAR: 2.3 25 units PARKING:

49.8% 49.8% 2000

FAR: 2.3

45.9%

Population

2012-2016

Population

Black Population 2000

2012-2016

Black Population

Vacant Housing Units 2000

2012-2016

Vacant Housing Units

Renter Occuplied 2000

2012-2016

Renter Occuplied

People Living In Poverty 2000

$32,614

$37,139

45.9% 2012-2016

SPLIT ATTRIBUTES: natural light through middle of building + courtyard GROSS: 41556 NET: 33666 UNITS: 22 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft COMMERCIAL: 7000 PARKING: 25 units FAR: 2.3 2000

ATTRIBUTES: natural light through middle of building + courtyard SPLIT 18-34 ATTRIBUTES: natural light through mid-

2012-2016

People Living In Poverty

2000

2012-2016

Average Household Income 2000

2012-2016

Average Household Income

SPLIT ATTRIBUTES: natural light through middle of building + courtyard SPLIT ATTRIBUTES: natural light through midGROSS: 41556 dle of building + courtyard NET: 33666 GROSS: 41556 UNITS: 22 NET: 33666

UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 UNITS: 22 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

PARKING: 25 units COMMERCIAL: 7000 FAR: 2.3 PARKING: 25 units

Oc

FAR: 2.3

Oc H ley aley

UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 COMMERCIAL: 7000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft

Ha

INFILL ATTRIBUTES: Bays to break up the facade GROSS: 48,000 NET: 36,000 UNITS: 26 UNIT TYPES: 1 br 650 sqft, 2 br 1000 sqft, 3 br 1300 sqft COMMERCIAL: 7890 PARKING: 25 spaces FAR: 2.7

2000

87%

households with no people under 18

41556+ courtyard 27.3%GROSS: dle of building 18-34

Historic Urban Mixed-Use 1810 Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard HistoricCity Urban Mixed-Use Central 1810 Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard Central City

2613 family households 6401 total households

FAR: 2.7

79.3% 79.3%

of Central City residents do not own a vehicle

ZONING SCENARIOS

Sequential Vignettes: experiencing the wall

Synthesized massing plan diagram

Identity.

Process massing

1810 Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard Through the reinterpretation of a neighborhood remnant wall, residents express their human identity

WALL

PUNCH

EXTEND

ROTATE

SLICE

SHIFT

Throughout the design process, the wall was the centerpiece.

The series of operative massing diagrams above show how design decisions were made to emphasize the wall and create a quality living experience for the residents. Some key elements were a central courtyard open to the public, central outdoor circulation, and shifting wall angles to optimize sunlight. The top vignette diagrams show the approach to the wall, from far to close. The experience of the wall from different vantage points was important to the project.

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

79

CAROLINE GARFIELD

IDENTITY: REINTERPRETING A NEIGHBORHOOD REMNA

ANT WALL

81

Project Information Total Square Footage: 26,050 Units: 24 FAR: 1.1 Gross to Net Ratio: .7

1 bedroom with den 600 sqft

Unit types

2 bedrooms 875 sqft

3 bedrooms 1150 sqft

Facade detail with repurposed historic bricks from mural

Oc Haley elevation with repurposed bricks

Typical upper floor plan

The wall: in transition

Ground floor plan

The wall: a place for climbing

The wall: a place for movies

83

Total Number of People Experiencing Homelessness by Type 600K 549,928

553,742

500K 401,061

400K

408,150 355,212

369,081

300K 194,716

200K

184,861

100K

86,132

95,419 39,471

40,056

35,686

40,799

0K Overall

Households

Individuals

People in Families

Chronically Homeless

2016 Unsheltered Homeless

2017 Unsheltered Homeless

2016 Sheltered Homeless

2017 Sheltered Homeless

“Temporary” Supportive Housing

Veterans

Youth

Maddison Wells Studio: Miwako Hattori In the city of New Orleans a lingering issue that was exacerbated by Katrina is the chronic homelessness and housing access issues facing our population. The homeless population can often be found under the interstate in either tents or makeshift partitions. This research has found that during natural disasters and states of emergency, architects have often turned to bamboo and other sustainable resources to create quick, replicable, affordable housing.

This proposal explored non-traditional building materials as a way to approach affordability in the New Orleans housing market.

As architects we have a civic duty to help all that we potentially can and an environmental duty to incorporate and maintain the natural resources produced by the Earth. Keeping these obligations in mind, this design envisions a housing facility that contributes to and embodies the sense of community in the city while remaining in touch with nature. Not only is the building spatially sectioned by and based off of the small scale of a tent, it also includes outdoor green spaces on every floor and is constructed of “temporary” materials such as, bamboo and a translucent polycarbonate.

Greenery

Density

Small Medium Large

Public Green Space

Public Transportation

Bus Freret

Streetcar

Program

Residential Commercial Other

St. Charles

Jackson-Esplanade M. L. King

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

85

ZONING SCENARIOS

This diagram shows communal circulation and arrival spaces. The circulation in the building Interactive Spaces Diagram (not including courtyards) is intended to incite residents to interact with one another and the outside community that Shared/Communal may be using theSpace building down below. The first floor is almost entirely pulbic so that the Circulation residents of the building would feel like a part of the rest of the community. The upper floors have several communal spaces that encourage residents to form their own communities within the building.

Interactive Spaces Diagram (not including courtyards) Shared/Communal Space Circulation

Interactive Spaces Diagram

(not including ofcourtyards) the site. A 15 ft by 11 ft grid This greenery diagram depicts the The massing above was derived from the maximum buildout removed to be replaced by either outdoor green spaces on each floor was then used to divide the massing. Afterwards, cubes were Shared/Communal Space circulation or exterior arrival spaces. Each cube initially represented one â&#x20AC;&#x153;tent-sizedâ&#x20AC;? room. and how they vissually connect Circulation with the floors below.

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

87

Maddison Wells

“Temporary” Supportive Housing

Project Information Total Square Footage: 48,832 Units: 30 FAR: 3.45 Gross to Net Ratio: 1.38

89

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Site

Bus Lines Bus Stops Bike Paths Proposed Bike Paths St. Charles Street Car

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Site

Bus Lines Bus Stops Bike Paths Proposed Bike Paths St. Charles Street Car

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Site

Bus Lines Bus Stops Bike Paths Proposed Bike Paths St. Charles Street Car

URBAN CONTEXT Site Schools Grocery Stores Cultural Centers Places of Worship

URBAN CONTEXT Site Schools Grocery Stores Cultural Centers Places of Worship

URBAN CONTEXT Site Schools Grocery Stores Cultural Centers Places of Worship

URBAN CONTEXT Site Schools Grocery Stores Cultural Centers Places of Worship

UNCLAIMED LAND Site Paved Unpaved

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

UNCLAIMED LAND Site Paved Unpaved

UNCLAIMED LAND Site Paved Unpaved

BUILDING HEIGHTS Site 0-9m 10 - 14 m 15 - 24 m 25+ m

91

MAX BUILDOUT MASSING UNITS: 51 HEIGHT: 40’ GROSS SF: 48,049.2 OPEN SPACE: 10.7% BUILDING EFFICIENCY: 69.9%

ZONING SCENARIOS

HISTORIC DENSITY MASSING UNITS: 4 HEIGHT: 36’ GROSS SF: 10,558.71 OPEN SPACE: 50.3% BUILDING EFFICIENCY: 97.2%

DENSITY BONUS MASSING UNITS: 30 HEIGHT: 40’ GROSS SF: 31,809.02 OPEN SPACE: 10.2% BUILDING EFFICIENCY: 52.4%

PARKING SUSPENSION MASSING UNITS: 26 HEIGHT: 40’ GROSS SF: 27,106.1 OPEN SPACE: 31.5% BUILDING EFFICIENCY: 69.3%

Site

Schools Grocery Stores Cultural Centers Places of Worship

GEOMETRY DIAGRAMS | 1’ = 1/128”

Zoning Analysis: 1810 OC HALEY HU-MU HISTORIC URBAN NEIGHBOORHOOD

PERMITTED USE: MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING AND DAY CARE SITE AREA: 17,796 SF BUILDABLE FOOTPRINT: 16,016.4 SF MIN LOT AREA: 700 SF (1ST) 560 SF (2ND) MIN LOT WIDTH: 25’ MAX TOTAL FLOOR AREA: 5,000 SF (COMMERICAL USE) MAX BUILDING HEIGHT: 40’ AND NO MORE THAN THREE STORIES MIN PERMEABLE OPEN SPACE: 10% OF LOT AREA MIN FRONT YARD: 0’ BUILD-TO LINE MIN INTERIOR SIDE YARD: NONE MIN CORNER SIDE YARD: NONE TO A MAX OF 5’ MIN REAR YARD: NONE OFF-STREET VEHICLE PARKING SPACES: 1 PER DU 1 BICYCLE SPACE PER 5 DU

10%

40’ OP

EN

SP AC

E

The juxtaposed geometries of OC Haley Boulevard converge around GEOMETRY DIAGRAMS | 1’ = 1/128” three masses, with circulation connecting these separations.

PROJECT DIAGRAMS

EXPLODED AXONOMETRIC | CONVERGING CIRCULATION

93

ANNA DEEG

Converging Geometries

95

Converging Geometries Anna Deeg Studio: Bruce Goodwin The need for contextual affordable housing is paramount in a culturally rich community such as Central City, historically a core piece of the civil rights movement and place of music history. Alongside cultural renovations and redevelopments, new construction must approach context with care.

Often in affordable housing design and development the drive to cut upfront costs can come at the expense of a quality of life for the residents of the development. This project is designed to unite affordability and desirability. Because of its infill conditions, all the units are single loaded, allowing for optimized light and ventilation. All circulation is exterior and unconditioned, saving expenses and providing outdoor social space.

Within Central City, Oretha Castle Haley Boulevard is a main axis of commercial and cultural activity, as well as public transportation. With the cost of living displacing many residents to the suburbs who work within the city (around half of roughly 44,000 low-wage workers in Jefferson Parish commute into Orleans), this project is situated directly on OC Haley and along multiple public transportation routes to fill the void for affordable workforce housing located to optimize job accessibility.

P’ A’

Project Information Total Square Footage: 35,700 SF Units: 20 FAR: 2 Gross to Net Ratio: 55.4%

B’

SECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE SECTION A

FOURTH FLOOR PLAN | 1/16” = 1’ 0”

SECTION B

UNIT PLAN A | = / ” 615 SF 12 UNITS P’

A’

B’

SECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

SECTION A

THIRD FLOOR PLAN | 1/16” = 1’ 0”

SECTION B

UNIT PLAN B | = / ” 930 SF 4 UNITS

P’

A’

B’

SECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

SECTION A

SECOND FLOOR PLAN | 1/16” = 1’ 0”

SECTION B

UNIT PLAN C | = / ” 948 SF 2 UNITS

A’

P’

1

B’

1 4 4

2

4

5

3

UNIT PLAN D | = / ” 972.5 SF 2 units

SECTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

SECTION A

FIRST FLOOR PLAN | 1/16” = 1’ 0” 1 | COMMERCIAL 2 | LOBBY 3 | DAYCARE 4 | SERVICES 5 | BIOSWALE 6 | RETENTION BASIN

6

SECTION B

97

Mobile Supportive Housing Hannah Bannister Studio: Emilie Taylor-Welty Mobile Supportive Housing is grounded in the radical idea that everyone deserves a home. There are currently 600 people in New Orleans who sleep unsheltered each night, many beneath the Pontchartrain Expressway. Twenty Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) complexes are needed to address homelessness in the city. Building on a Modernist tradition of applying systems, structures, and technologies to address housing and quality of life issues for all people, this projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design ideas extend beyond the confines of this one site to imagine new modes of home. The core of the project is based on the idea of permanence in affordability, community, and mobility.

Mobile Supportive Housing is to be maintained through a Housing First program. Once a person has shelter, they may begin to be connected to services that provide resources to

reach personal goals. After a time, some people wish to move away from permanent supportive housing. However, many people choose not to move for many reasons, including rent prices. This prevents people who need the support that PSH can provide from receiving aid.

In response to the problems of PSH, Mobile Supportive Housing suggests that people can choose to design and build their own homesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;thus exercising choice in their housing selection while learning transferrable trade skillsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and then, if desired, can dismantle these homes and move them elsewhere.

In this way, this project goes beyond designing an affordable home to include the creation of systems of agency, choice, empowerment, and access.

Site from O.C. Haley Sound from highway

Site from beneath Expwy

26 annual traffic incidents at intersection of Calliope and O.C. Haley 5 annual traffic incidents at intersection of O.C. Haley and Clio St.

Site from Pontchartrain Expwy

Site from Calliope

CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS

Service Jobs Government jobs Manufacturing jobs Professional service jobs

99

Maximum Buildout #1

# of units: 30 # of stories: 7 # of parking spaces: 11 FAR: 5.2

Pros: Large units, large retail space, enclosed public amenities Cons: Height does not match surrounding context, less green space

Minimum Buildout #1

# of units: 6 # of stories: 2 # of parking spaces: 2 FAR: 1.2

Minimum Buildout #2, no parking

Max #2: No density restriction, with parking

# of units: 45 # of stories: 7 # of parking spaces: 17 FAR: 5

ZONING SCENARIOS

Pros: Many units, many people housed Cons: Smaller units, height does not match surrounding context, fewer public amenities, less retail space

Pros: Large units, buildings match scale and rhythm of context, green space Cons: Fewer units, fewer people housed, less retail space

# of units: 18 # of stories: 3 # of parking spaces: 0 FAR: 3

Pros: More 1st level green space, better relationship to street Cons: Fewer units, fewer people housed

85â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Ca

llio

pe

St.

Maximum Envelope

WikiHouse Construction Open source architecture Flat-packed to site, deconstructable

Kasita

Jeff Wilson Homes craned into place, move easily

Customization limitless

Lack of customization

Plywood

Steel frame, prefab units

Finishes deconstructable?

Is the material durable?

Where does it move afterward?

.

O.C

lvd.

ey B

Hal

Exterior Courtyard

Access

Sound Attenuation

Dom-Ino House Le Corbusier Fixed in place

Rosa F. Keller Building Woodward Design Build

Permanent Supportive Housing

Customization possible

Supportive programming

Open frame, loads shifted to columns instead of walls

Central courtyard provides central outdoor space

Precedents + PROJECT DIAGRAMS

Primary Circulation

Permanent Structure

101

Providing Agency

YOUR NAME

Building Skills Co-design your home

PROJECT TITLE So you need a house

Home pieces are CNC milled on ground floor

Build home with community and construction nonprofit Live in your home!

Apply for a residence space

Choose a predesigned home

Choose a pre-built home

Move to another part of the network!

Building Equity Get involved with in-house counselling, health services, and job training

Deconstruct your house and take it with you!

Move to another part of the network!

Want to move?

Or donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t!

Move house to land owned by a Community Land Trust!

Stay connected to network and services if you want

103

Sell your house!

Move elsewhere!

Circulation cores extend past 7 stories for future expansion

There are currently 50 units.

They may move in and out.

3 Currently empty units become communal spaces

2

1

10

Permanent Unit

11

Laundry DN

12

Design-Build Unit

13

Potential DesignBuild Unit

14

Service Mech. Elevator 15

16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Second Floor Plan A

10

RRs and Vending

Meeting Rooms

11

16’ 0”

Workshop Lobby

Workshop

12

Management Offices Bike RR Storage

13

CNC Mill

Housing Lobby

Courtyard

Dumpster

14

Service Mech. Elevator 15

Truck Drive 16

1

2

3

Ground Floor Plan

4

5

N

6

7

8

9

Project Information Total Square Footage: 50,000 s.f.

Units: (50) 16’ x 32’ unit spaces FAR: 5.2 Gross to Net Ratio: 1:3

105

semester sequence Many thanks to the guest speakers, designers, and tour guides who informed the semester’s investigation

scott bernhard

Andreanecia Morris

Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance “Housing NOLA”

Tulane School of Architecture “Concepts of Dwelling”

Project Tours

Casius Pealer

Tulane’s MSRED Program “Affordable Housing 101”

DW 2+

Digital Workshop 1 DW 2

by Matt Decotiis Qgis Context Model Massing

site documentation, models + case study analysis

The Beacon E+D+R, Hussein Alayyan The Julian Studio WTA, Tracie Ashe, Natan Diacon-Furtado

by Matt Decotiis RHINO Grasshopper FAR

initial exercises EX 1 + 2

by Liz McCormick Solar Analysis with grasshopper

King Rampart, CCWIV, Carl Westerman

multi-family, mixed-use affordable EX 3

adapting a program + issues analysis

part 1

part 2

Massing and Unit and Circulation Site Strategy SchematicsDevelopment

n

shawn Preau EDR, “Affordable Net Zero SBP Veterans Housing Case Study”

Jim Remlin Sherwood Engineers, Atlanta “Site and Water Management”

DW 3

by Matt Decotiis Sectional Perspectives Animated Linework

DW 3+

by Matt Decotiis Renderings V-RAY

housing design part 3

Non Residential Program and Site Development

part 4

Detail and Material Development

part 5

Final Presentation Graphics 107

Endnotes: 1. The right to housing is recognized in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed by the U.S. in 1948 and Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights signed by the U.S. in 1966. for more information see ‘Housing is a Human Right’ from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. accessed on the American Bar Association website on 14 February 2019: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/ homelessness_poverty/2013_Midyear_Meeting_Right_To_Housing/housing_as_a_right_fact_sheet. pdf 2 Thrush, Glenn. “As Affordable Housing Crisis Grows, HUD Sits on the Sidelines”, New York Times, July 27, 2018.

3. Data from New Orleans Data Center.

A note about AMI and statistical areas from the Small Center Cost of Home exhibit: Area Median Income is a way of making HUD’s income categories make sense across a big, economically diverse, country. AMI provides a starting point for grouping individuals and families into the percentages that are used to determine eligibility for programs and services.

To understand AMI it’s also important to understand Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The MSA groups a central metropolitan area (at least 50,000 people) with its surrounding suburbs and small towns that are tied together economically to determine the “Area” part of Area Median Income. What this means is that neighborhoods in New Orleans with quite low median incomes are combined with neighborhoods in Metarie with higher median incomes. Therefore what constitutes affordability for an area is often far above an urban neighborhood’s reality of affordability.

4. Base Map and dot locations are sourced from the HousingNOLA’s 10 Year Strategy and Implementation plan, see pages 30 and 48

<?>. About Housing Nola: In early 2014, the Foundation for Louisiana’s TOGETHER Initiative convened an affordable housing group of residents and non-profits to develop strategies for improving housing policies and increasing equity in New Orleans. The result was HousingNOLA: a community-led housing process that would seek address the housing needs of New Orleans over ten years. The Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance (GNOHA) was chosen by the group to manage the initial HousingNOLA process, assisted by fair housing advocates, developers and City officials – in partnership with civic, neighborhood, business, and philanthropic leaders. GNOHA is a collaborative of home builders and community development organization advocating for the preservation and production of affordable housing. (from housingnola.org)

Additional readings: The New Orleans Prosperity Index, The Data Center. April 2018 Finger, Davida, “Public Housing in New Orleans Post Katrina: The Struggle for Housing as a Human Right”, The Review of Black Political Economy, 17 September 2011 Mobley, Sue. “Cost of Home”, Exhibition Publication, Small Center web access: http://small.tulane.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/DigitizedCOH_ReducedSizePDF. pdf What is Affordable Housing Guidebook - Center for Urban Pedagogy. web access: http://welcometocup.org/Store?product_id=16

thanks: Special thanks to all the reviewers and speakers who informed the students work, to the Albert and Tina Small Center for Collaborative Design, and to the Tulane School of Architecture and the Center for Public Service for supporting the studio.

Thanks also to Courtney Castleman for work on this booklet and the studio exhibit.