peg case study: new housing for new orleans

FvFlat Vertical

OrganizationPros and Cons18

The flat vertical typology, mainly used for hous-ing, has proved to be an EFFICIENT ORGANI-ZATION of individual cells.

CirculationPros and Cons20

2.0m7.0m

9.0m

Dwelling units/acre

Floor area/plot size

Units related to the ground

Isometric

Plot Plan

Access to unit

Unit aspect

Single detached

Facade per unit (sqm)

8

0.23

100%

private on ground

quadruple

132

10 story slab block

90

~1.78

common elevator

single

36

10%

The linearity of the flat vertical typology en-ables the use of LINEAR CIRCULATION SYS-TEMS, both horizontally and vertically.

OrientationPros and Cons22

NEW ORLEANS21 June, 21 December2957'15.984"N

observer

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

6:00h

6:52h17:05h

20:04h

N

S

SE

north

SW

W E

NENW

The linearity of the flat vertical allows for an OPTIMAL ORIENTATION of the envelope to-wards the south, to maximize ecological per-formance.

No mans landPros and Cons24

FV :

Moisei GinzburgApartment Building1928

BUT:Historically the flat vertical has proven to have a problematic connection with the ground, leaving vast, arid, public open spaces that in most cases become NO MANS LAND due to unclear property ownership.

Identity and Orientation

BUT:The uniformity of the floor plan leads to the creation of a homogeneous population and to A LACK OF IDENTITY AND ORIENTATION.

Pros and Cons26

FV :

Team XToulouse Le MirailApartment Complex, Toulouse, France1960-1964

Toulouse Le Mirail, riots, 2005Pros and Cons28

Magnolia Projects31

FV : Magnolia Projects

The Magnolia Projects, officially the C.J. Peete Projects, was among the largest Housing Projects of New Orleans and first all-black public housing federally founded in the United States (after the constructionof the all white St. Thomas). It housed approximately 2,100 people in 1,400 units distributed in 41.5 acres.

Completed in two phases (1940-41 and 1954-55), it became famous nationwide for its legendary violent-crime rates (one of the highest murder rate in the United States).

Site Analysis30

In New Orleans, MAGNOLIA PROJECTS is a classic example for a flat vertical public hous-ing project which has become one of the most problematic sites in the country in terms of crime rates since its construction between 1941-1955.

New Orleans

I nt r a

c oa s

t al W

a te r

w ay

L a k e B o r g n e

L a k e P o n t c h a r t r a i n

M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r

Mi s s i s s i p p i R i v e r

G u l fO u t l e t

seliM420

32

MAGNOLIA

Site Analysis

L a k e B o r g n e

L a k e P o n t c h a r t r a i n

M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r

Mi s s i s s i p p i R i v e r

G u l fO u t l e t

seliM420

9th WardGusteMAGNOLIA

LafitteIberville

CalliopeCalliope 2St. Bernard

St. Thomas

New OrleansSite Analysis34

Magnolia Progects is part of a NETWORK of rather similar housing projects in new Orleans, all suffer from similar socio-economic issues.

New Orleans - environmental analysis

observer

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

6:00h

6:52h17:05h

20:04h

N

S

SE

north

NEW ORLEANS21 June, 21 December2957'15.984"N

SW

W E

NENW

TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

0

10

20

60

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

27

Sep Oct Nov Dec

Temperature, C

Windspeed, m/s

Insolation, kWh/m/day

RelaIve Humidity, %

TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY

SUN ANGLE DIAGRAM

Site Analysis36

-4.00-1.25-.50

0.51234

tototototototototo

-1.25-.500.512348.5

Elevation in meters(0 reflects sea level during normal conditions*)

*When using this map, take into account thatsea level rises during & after hurricanes

Site Analysis38

New Orleans

FV : POST KATRINA FLOODING

map made as part of: Exposing New Orleans,an urban analysis of post-Katrina New Orleansby: Anthony Fontenot, Jakob Rosenzweig, Anne SchmidtFall 2005Princeton University

New OrleansSite Analysis40

FV : RACIAL DISTRIBUTION

map made as part of: Exposing New Orleans,an urban analysis of post-Katrina New Orleansby: Anthony Fontenot, Jakob Rosenzweig, Anne SchmidtFall 2005Princeton University

New Orleans

POPULATION MIX

2005BEFORE KATRINA

67.5%BLACK

WHITE42.7%

WHITE28%

2006AFTER KATRINA

1950 1990 2010

$180

$135

$65

2005

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

Population vs. Average Price per Square Foot

BLACK47%

FV : POST KATRINA

Hurricane Katrina (2005) left New Orleans in a major lack of housing solutions due to the vast damage created by the storm. One of the results of the hurricane was the rise of real estate values causing the exclusion of a large part of the com-munity, mainly the black, poor part, from the city center. The population was reduced to half of its original size. The lack of

affordable housing created a different social and ethnic mix. The percentage of the black community was reduced signifi-cantly. Within the site, 70% of the population is under the poverty level. The average household income of the Magnolia Project population was less then 13,000$.

What are effects of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans population and housing situation?

Site Analysis42

HOUSING:

Households, 2000 188,251

Persons per household, 2000 2.481-person household 33%2-person household 28%3-person household 16%4-person household 12%5+ person household 11%

Median rental costs, 2008 $908

Median household income, 2007 $37,348Median household income, New York $45,343

COSTS:

Median house or condo, 2008 $194,300Townhouses $192,638Detached houses $320,426Mobile homes $60,229

2-unit structure $222,3373/4-unit structure $312,5385-unit structure $370,148

Population, 2000: 484,674Population, 2006: 223,000Population, 2008: 336,644

Loss of residents between 1970 2000: 108,000

Growth of suburbs between 1970 2000: 293,000

Population change between 2000 - 2006: -53.9%

Hope VI

When planning pundits discuss the future of New Orleans, New Urbanism is the dominant concept.

NEW URBANISM, as the architectural strategy of Hope VI, argues for a renewal of urban fabric by suggesting:> Density reduction> Contextual continuity> Social mix> Low-Rise building typology

The FINANCIAL SYSTEM behind Hope 6 and the New Urbanism agenda is of a combination of subsidized housing units for low-income families with free market housing, keeping a general low density.

> The execution of the projects is done by private developers due to the lack of capital.> The developer oftentimes cuts the number of units receiving a federal subsidy.> Only a small portion of the tenants displaced from the old hous-ing projects eventually move back into the replacement housing project.

THE RESULT: Low-density neighborhoods in American city cen-ters that according to market pressures do not sustain the principal of socio-economic mix and do not offer a sustainable solution for the need of housing.

Site Analysis44

What stands behind the agenda of HOPE VI?

Hope VI proposal for the development of the siteSite Analysis46

Can NEW URBANISM provide the answers for post-Katrina New Orleans?

FV : HOPE VI PROPOSAL FOR THE SITE

Hope VI Statement: The proposed redevelopment of the CJ Peete public housing site will decrease the concentration of low-income families by creating a viable mixed-income co mu-nity that is integrated into the greater Central City neighbor-hood. The redevelopment plan creates a safe and walkable neighborhood for its residents, which is centered around a

school and community center. The diversity of housing types contribute to the viability of the development.

Hope VI proposal for the development of the site

49Density and Socio-economic aspectsSite Analysis

48

$12,

895

MEDIAN HOUSEHOULD INCOME, 2008

$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%

% OF POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LEVEL

51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%

In 2008, the poverty threshold for a single person under 65 was US$11,201; the threshold for a family group of four, including two children, was US$21,834

100%

% OF UNITS WITH A MORTGAGE

39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

105.

6

POPULATION PER HECTARBEFORE KATRINA

52,6

27.2

57,1

67.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

63.5

NEW URBANIST PROPOSAL

52,6

27.2

57,1

63.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

112.

8

STUDIO PROGRAM

52,6

27.2

57,1

112.

8

36,5

47,5

49,2

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

105.

6


52,6

27.2

57,1

67.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

63.5


52,6

27.2

57,1

63.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

112.

8

STUDIO PROGRAM

52,6

27.2

57,1

112.

8

36,5

47,5

49,2

105.

6


52,6

27.2

57,1

67.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

63.5


52,6

27.2

57,1

63.5

36,5

47,5

49,2

112.

8

STUDIO PROGRAM

52,6

27.2

57,1

112.

8

36,5

47,5

49,2

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%

% OF POPULATION BELOW POVERTY LEVEL51

%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

We propose a HIGHER DENSITY as an an-swer to the lack of housing in post-Katrina New Orleans.

2 x MAGNOLIA

Surrounding Context

RESIDENTIAL

SCHOOL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING

RESIDENTIAL1-2 FAMILY HOUSING


Site Analysis50

Site Plan Site Analysis

Program distribution

400 x 1

bedroom

(360sq

f)

400 x 2

bedroom

(480sq

f)

200 x 2

bedroom

(540sq

f)

40 x 2 b

edroom

(600sqf)

40 x 3 b

edroom

(720sqf)

200 x tr

iplex 2b

dr (600s

qf)

80 x dup

lex 2bd

r (600sq

f)

40 x dup

lex 3bd

r (720sq

f)693,600sqfPROGRAM

SITE

(64,437sqm)

2,366,000sqf(219,800 sqm)

FV : PROGRAM DISTRIBUTION

The original program of the Magnolia Projects was composed of 1400 residential units in flat vertical buildings: 400 X 1 bdr (360sqf), 400 X 2bdr (480sqf), 200 X 2 bdr (540sqf), 40 X 2 bdr (600sqf), 40 X 3 bdr (720sqf), 200 X triplex 2 bdr (600sqf), 80 duplex X 2 bdr (600sqf), 40 X 3 bdr (720sqf).

Site Analysis52

400 x 1

bedroom

(360sq

f)

400 x 2

bedroom

(480sq

f)

200 x 2

bedroom

(540sq

f)

40 x 2 b

edroom

(600sqf)

40 x 3 b

edroom

(720sqf)

200 x tr

iplex 2b

dr (600s

qf)

80 x dup

lex 2bd

r (600sq

f)

40 x dup

lex 3bd

r (720sq

f)693,600sqfPROGRAM

SITE

(64,437sqm)

2,366,000sqf(219,800 sqm)

Program Distribution

TOWER

0%

0%

0.78

50%

20m

1.64%

50,700 sqm

1.36

50%

53%

0.93

33%

BARCELONA

100%

12m

31.96%

60.200 sqm

2.1%

0,23

44.0%

0%

25m

2.27%

19,200 sqm

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

CONNECTIVITY TO STREET GRID

% OF PRIVATE ENTRANCES

FACADE/FLOOR AREA RATIO

NORTH/SOUTH FACACE

BUILDING DEPTH

STREET GRID

AMOUNT OF FACADE

0%

1.16

98.5%

SUPER THIN

0%

10% 0% 50% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100%

7m

1.72%

74,900 sqm

0.70

100%

33.1%

KARL MARX COMPLEX BLOCK STRUCTURE

33% - 55%

11.5 m

0%

45,300 sqm

55%

1.28

ca. 50%

NEW URBANISM

100%

6m

20.14%

82,600 sqm

70%

1.8

ca. 50%

LEVITTOWN

100%

5,5m

12.27%

116,200 sqm

NEW ORLEANS

100%

55%

8m

14.82%

88,200 sqm

HILBERSEIMER

0%

0.60

0%

10 m

14.64%

38,900 sqm

96.5%

Site Analysis54

Prototypes> What would be an ideal distribution of the program on the site?> Is it possible to have an ideal distribu-tion?

Program Distribution

100 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100100 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

0%

100%

33 - 55%

55%

0%

70%

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE VS. % OF PRIVATE ENTRANCES

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

% OF PRIVATE ENTRANCES

100%

Site Analysis56

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

-

100 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100100 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

NORTH/SOUTH FACADE VS. FACADE FLOOR AREA RATIO

33.1%

98.5%

96.5%

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

1.36

0,23

1.8

0.60

0.70

33%

50%

78%

50%

FACADE/FLOOR AREA

NORTH/SOUTH FACADE

FV : PROGRAM DISTRIBUTION - EVALUATION

Different alternatives for the distribution of the original Mag-nolia Projects program lead to the conclusion that while the ecological performance of the flat vertical typology is very high comparing to other building typologies, it performs poorly in parameters that relates to the organization of the ground level, such as its connectivity to the street grid and the percentage

of private open space in the site. Other typologies that lack the ecological performance of the flat vertical, performs better on the ground.

HybridsAlternative Solutions58

WHAT IF?We argue that the hybridization of two good typologies can lead to a better per-forming envelope both ecologically and so-cially.

KARL MARX HOF [= 100% private ground] +SUPER THIN [= 100% north/south orientation]

LEVITTOWN [= 100% private ground + good facade ratio + 70% private access] +HILBERSEIMER[= 100% north/south orientation]


FV : HYBRIDS

A closer analysis of various hybrids of two typologies led to the conclusion that the hybridization of: The Karl Marx Hof typology and the Super Thin slab will benefit from the ideal orientation of the super thin, as well as its compact footprint and cross ventilation potential and at the same time will ben-efit from the ground solution of the Karl Marx Hof typology.

The hybridization of the private houses typology with the Hil-berseimer slab could benefit from the ground solution of the suburban typology and the ecological advantages of the flat vertical typology. In both cases the flat vertical typology will be superimposed on top of the ground level typology offering a sectional solution.

KARL MARX HOF [= 100% private ground] +SUPER THIN [= 100% north/south orientation]

LEVITTOWN [= 100% private ground + good facade/floor area ratio + 70% private access] +HILBERSEIMER[= 100% north/south orientation]


SUN DIRECTIONSTREET GRID

Alternative Solutions64

Site Strategies

Existing urban context


Site Strategies

Existing urban context


Site Strategies

Adopting the street grid


Site Strategies

North/South orientation


Site Strategies

Superimposition


Site Strategies

SCHOOL

Existing public buildings


Site Strategies

SCHOOL


Hybrids

SCHOOL SCHOOL

The existing urban context The existing urban context Adopting the street grid

Superimposition Existing public buildings Gradual housing typology

North/South orientation


EXTRUDE SOUTH FACADESREDUCE SHADING

SCHOOL

GARDEN PLOTSSCHOOL


AFFORDABLE

PUBLIC SPACEPUBLIC SPACEPUBLIC SPACE

HOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSING

AFFORDABLEHOUSING

DUPLEXTRIPLEXTOWN HOUSES

AFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSING PUBLIC

RETAILSTREET

FOYERS

PRIVATE GARDENS

PUBLIC SPACE

PUBLIC SPACE

PUBLIC SPACEMARKET RATE

HOUSING

MAGNOLIA PROPOSAL

HOUSING

MARKET RATEHOUSING

SCHOOL

AFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSINGAFFORDABLEHOUSING

Floor PlanFV Analysis86

THIN MEDIUM THICK

envelope/floor area envelope/floor area envelope/floor area 1.2 - 0.85 0.75 - 0.5 0.46 - 0.33

D = 18 - 20m D = 11 - 14m D = 9 - 10m

9.0m

9.0m2.0m7.0m

11.0m

7.0m

7.0m

9.0m

9.0m

8.0m2.0m8.0m2.0m

8.0m2.0m8.0m7.0m

7.0m2.0m

FV : FLOOR PLAN

The circulation in a flat vertical building is determined by the thickness of the slab and by privacy considerations. We iden-tify 3 main alternatives for a floor plan organization: a single loaded corridor, a double loaded corridor and a core per each 3-8 units.The corridor system is cheaper since it reduces the number of

cores. A single loaded corridor organization allows for cross ventilation but reduces the privacy level of the units. The dou-ble loaded corridor system is mainly used in thick buildings and lacks the advantage of cross ventilation. It is the cheap-est in terms of cores/unit.

Floor planFV Analysis88

External corridor

3-8 units per one core

Internal & externalcorridor

9.0m

8.0m2.0m8.0m

15.0m

30.0m

9.0m

9.0m

8.0m2.0m8.0m

8.0m2.0m2.0m

8.0m

FV : FLOOR PLAN

Dwelling Catalogue

Dwelling units/acre



Dwelling Type

Isometric

Plot Plan

Access to unit

Unit aspect

Single detached Semi detached Joint court Duplex Row house Triplex Back to back

Facade per unit (sqm)

Stacked row house Garden apartmentStacked row house 3 story walkup apartment Medium rise stacked units 10 story slab block 10 story high rise block

8 10 10 16 20 21 24

30 40 52 65 71 90 120

0.23 0.28 0.46 0.62 0.6 0.780.28

0.94 1.25 1.1 1.41 1.33 ~1.78 ~2.62

100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 33% 100%

33% 50% 33% 33% 33%

Dwelling units/acre



Dwelling Type

Isometric

Plot Plan

Access to unit

Unit aspect

Facade per unit

private on ground 50% private on ground50% private stairs

private on ground private on ground 33% private on ground67% private stairs

private on ground

common stair50% private on ground50% private stairs

33% private on ground67% common stairs

common stair common elevator common elevator common elevator

triplequadruple triple quadruple double quadruple double

doubledouble double double single single single/double

132 93 132 132 10376.894.8

76.8 76.8 60 36 60 36 33

10% 10%

private on ground

FV Analysis90


Layered sectional strategy

Circulation: double loaded corridorFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.75Building depth: 8-26mNorth/South facade: 100%

Private open space: 10%

Private entrances: 0%

Circulation: single loaded corridorFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.75Building depth: 10m

North/South facade: 100%

Private open space: 0%Private entrances: 0%

Circulation: private access on groundFacade/Floor area ratio: 1Building depth: 8-17m, 2-8m, total=34


Public interior space: 26%Private entrances: 0%

+ + +

+

+ + +

+









Circulation: private access on groundFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.6Building depth: 10m



Circulation: variesFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.75Building depth: 10-18m



+ + +

+






Circulation: single loaded corridorFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.43-0.67Building depth: 9-14m



Circulation: variesFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.375Building depth: 28m


Public closed space: 35%Private entrances: 0%

+ + +

+



Circulation: single loaded corridorFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.6Building depth: 9-18mNorth/South facade: 100%






Circulation: double loaded corridorFacade/Floor area ratio: 0.375Building depth: 14-17m



Generic Approach100

New Orleans

Buenos Aires

WHICH PARAMETERS INFLUENCE THE FORMAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FLAT VERTICAL WITHIN THE SAME CLIMATE ZONE?

Hong Kong

Addis Ababa

BrisbaneB

Spread Title102

Further Explanation of Page Heading

Since the 1949 HOUSING ACT, public housing projects were built in an organization of large complexes, concentrating populations of low-income families in one area. The Act governed the way the immense financial resources of the federal government have shaped the growth of American cities in the post-war era. It facili-tated a rise in home ownership and the build-ing of huge public housing projects that would become fixtures in many American cities.

Spread Title104


Housing projects that were built during that period have oftentimes become even worst cores of poverty and neglect characterized by high CRIME RATES and SOCIO-ECONOMIC STAGNATION.

Spread Title106


In New Orleans, MAGNOLIA PROJECTS is a classic example for a public housing complex, which has become one of the most problem-atic sites in the country in terms of crime rates and neglect, since its establishment between 1941 and 1955.

FV : Magnolia Projects

The Magnolia Projects, officially the C.J. Peete Projects, was among the largest Housing Projects of New Orleans and first all-black public housing federally founded in the United States (after the constructionof the all white St. Thomas). It housed approximately 2,100 people in 1,400 units distributed in 41.5 acres.

Completed in two phases (1940-41 and 1954-55), it became famous nationwide for its legendary violent-crime rates (one of the highest murder rate in the United States).

Spread Title108


HURRICANE KATRINA (2005) left New Orleans in a major lack of housing solutions due to the vast damage created by the storm. One of the results of the hurricane was the rise of real es-tate values causing the exclusion of a large part of the community, mainly the black, poor part, from the city center. The population was reduced to half of its original size. The lack of affordable housing created a different social and ethnic mix. The percentage of the black community was significantly reduced.

Spread Title110


Within the site, 70% of the population lived below the poverty level. The average house-hold income of the Magnolia Project popula-tion was less then 13,000$. They were forced to leave.

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

$12,

895


$ 22

,996

$21,

218

$ 18

,435 $

10,

197

$ 30

,871

$ 17

,392

$ 15

,942

76%


51%

43%

36%

66%

32%

55%

43%


100%


39%

N/A

68% N

/A

71%

N/A

54%

Spread Title112


Today, 5 years after Katrina, Magnolia Projects are being demolished and redeveloped. Resi-dents oppose the demolition.

Spread Title114


The redevelopment of the site is carried out as part of the HOPE VI initiative by private developers. The NEW URBANISM approach, advocated by the executors of Hope VI since the early 90s, argues for the creation of new, mixed income communities.

Their plan suggests reducing the amount of housing units from the original 1,400 to 460.

Spread Title116


Can NEW URBANISM provide the answers for post-Katrina New Orleans?

FV : HOPE VI PROPOSAL FOR THE SITE

Hope VI Statement: The proposed redevelopment of the CJ Peete public housing site will decrease the concentration of low-income families by creating a viable mixed-income co mu-nity that is integrated into the greater Central City neighbor-hood. The redevelopment plan creates a safe and walkable neighborhood for its residents, which is centered around a

school and community center. The diversity of housing types contribute to the viability of the development.

Hope VI proposal for the development of the site

Spread Title118


WE AGREE with the New Urbanism argument that the notion of a homogeneous society can no longer be regarded as valid in a contempo-rary design for the site.

BUT,NEW URBANISM ARGUES for a sparse distri-bution of the program on the entire site creat-ing low-density sprawling pattern.

WE ARGUE for the reestablishment of the for-mer density and its arrangement in a concen-trated manner along the edges of the site.

Spread Title120


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM

CLIMATE CONSIDERATIONS

URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> An EVEN DISTRIBUTION of the mass will lead to an organization with almost 100% of private gardens.

Spread Title122


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM


URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> New Urbanisms architectural approach im-plies a COMMUNAL STRUCTURE by arrang-ing a relatively low number of single detached housing units around semi defined public spac-es (mostly designed as parking areas) and a community center in the center of the site.

> SERVICE FACILITIES, such as retail areas, ARE NOT INTEGRATED in the plan and there-fore require car driving.

> The New Urbanism approach DOES NOT REGARD ANY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDER-ATIONS such as flooding or sun/wind direc-tions.

Spread Title124


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM


URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> By distributing the building mass along the edges of the site we create BORDER CONDI-TIONS that establish a clear definition of built and unbuilt.

> The housing mass is distributed along the periphery of the site while the empty area in the core will be enclosed and protected as a semi private NATURAL RESERVE.

> The organization of the housing mass around the site creates a CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PROJECT AND ITS SURROUNDINGS, avoiding a communal structure within the site and thus avoiding potential segregation.

Spread Title126


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM


URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> The mass is ADJUSTED to maximize energy gain by enlarging the ratio of North/South fa-cades in the ring.

Spread Title128


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM


URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> The organization of the housing mass around the site creates a CONNECTION BETWEEN THE PROJECT AND ITS SURROUNDINGS, avoiding a communal arrangement within the site and thus avoiding potential segregation.

> The THICKNESS of the ring changes accord-ing to the surrounding context.

Spread Title130


CREATING BORDER

CONDITIONS

NEW URBANISM


URBAN FORCES

RESIDENTIAL

HOSPITAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

LOUI

SIAN

A AV

E.

S CLAIBORNE AVE.

1-2 FAMILY HOUSING



SCHOOL

RETAIL

RETAIL

HOSPITAL

> The mass is PERFORATED according to programmatic consideration, the need for air, light, parking, playgrounds, etc.

Spread Title132


The new master plan of New Orleans 2030 states the goal of restoring and increasing the urban forests to reach 50% tree canopy and wetlands.

One of the goals of the plan is to enhance ur-ban green spaces as WATER-STORAGE AS-SETS.

Designating the core of the Magnolia Projects site for the return of natural conditions will help to sustain the citys climate condition and con-tribute to the cities resilience.

Spread Title134


Researchers at the University of Florida have found that:

> When wetlands comprise as little as 10% of the landscape, flooding is reduced by 60%.

> When wetlands cover 20% of an area, flood-ing is reduced by 90%.

Spread Title136


> During storms wetlands slow down flood-waters as they enter rivers and streams. By doing so, wetlands reduce flooding.> Wetlands help filter sediment and pollution from stormwater runoff before it reaches riv-ers and streams.> Slowing down the rate of soil erosion is an-other function of wetlands.

Spread Title138


Carbon cap and trade credits financially en-able the protection and restoration of local wetlands.

FV : Economic Potential

In the early years of the mitigation banking industry in Loui-siana, the majority of the transactions hovered in the range of $3,000 to $5,000 per acre; however, as time increased, credit prices did also. This upward trend is depicted in Figures 4.4 and 4.5. In the most recent years sampled (2004-2006), several transactions were recorded in excess of $20,000 per

acre. Nevertheless, a substantial number of transactions in Louisiana during that same period remained at or below the price of $5,000 per acre. This bimodal trend could be indica-tive of segregation in the wetland mitigation credit market. In fact, over the ten-year period for which Louisiana credit prices were collected, the average price was only $6,382.

Spread Title140


peg case study: new housing for new orleans

Documents