On May 30th, the 5 Borough Studio will participate in the street program at the Ideas City Festival, a three-day event in and around the New Museum in New York.
As part of the Institute for Public Architecture’s booth, we will present our work from last summer including our investigation “What is Home?” and together with the IPA and our “fellow fellows”, we will continue the discussion asking “What is Public?”. Stop by any time on Saturday May 30th between 10am and 6pm.
Images from the exhibition closing event of Total Reset in Sugar Hill with 500 “postcards from home” collected over the…
The Food District at Weinland Park is an initiative of the Community Economic Development Corporation of Ohio (CEDCO) to build…
The Long Island Railroad and Metro North trains are an untapped resource, when it comes to exploring new opportunities for…
“9×18″ (after the dimensions of a regulation-size city parking spot) is a project by Sagi Golan, Nathan Rich and Miriam Peterson that evaluates and reimagines current laws around parking tied to affordable housing. In doing so, the trio provides a comprehensive roadmap (literally) to what can change and how. See this article on Architizer that describes their research and design approach.
Aershop: Hydro-Genic City, 2020 TLS/KVA from RiverFirst on Vimeo. TLS/KVA: River First Group1 Lilly Shiyao Samarth Celine from Shiyao Yu…
How to tell the story of a design in a movie? Here are 2 examples using a variety of different graphics as an animated diagram.
PORT: Architecture + Urbanism -Carbon T.A.P, winning entry for the WPA 2.0 Competition
MVRDV – Almere Oosterwold
Project Architect: Mario Pani Project Images Location: Mexico City, Mexico Size: 431,000 Sq Ft Site Location Program The program distribution…
Project Architect: Barry J. Hobin & Associates Architects Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada Size: 17,384 sqm Upload by: Maria Agustina Santana…
Project Name: Plan de Vivienda del Centro Historico
Project Developer: Empresa Metropolitana de Habitat y Vivienda
Location: Quito’s Historic Downtown Center
Size: 470 units
Uploaded by: Cristina Bustamante
The objective of the project was to preserve Quito’s historic downtown residential character. Since 1534 Quito has been a dynamic city that combines all aspect of the city in one; it has brought together the city’s residential, commercial, cultural, and industrial function in every single block. Through time, the colonial downtown’s commercial and cultural character has taken over its residential function. In 1990, 53,000 people lived in the downtown area, by 2000 the number had gone down to 50,982 and by 2010, only 40,587 people inhabited the extensive residential areas in the downtown. It was projected that by 2022, the number would go down to 26,727 if measures were not taken. The project “Plan de Vivienda del Centro Historico” intended to revitalize the colonial city by preserving and adding value to existent structure by creating a sustainable housing market and to preserve the city’s original residents, a low income population.
The project proposed the rehabilitation of 6 blocks in 2 different traditional neighborhoods of the colonial downtown, San Sebastian and San Diego. It developed 470 housing units, 52 retail spaces, 15 storage units and 213 public parking spaces. The project included the improvement of public spaces through interventions in streets and sidewalks, development of plaza areas, the construction of a pedestrian bridge as well re-routing traffic in several streets in the developed areas. The projects rehabilitated traditional courtyard houses, which housed an average of 15 units organized around a central courtyard. Traditionally, this used to be a single family house but the new development opted for the transformation of its various rooms into independent housing units connected through a central corridor. The project adapted existing structural conditions of the colonial downtown residences to the city’s current housing shortage and today’s housing needs of families. Furthermore, it anticipated the return of downtown’s inhabitants and their necessities.
In its original form, colonial houses organized its spaces around a central courtyard which was intended to act as the family’s gathering area; the first floor was assigned for the public spaces such as dining areas, kitchen and living room and consequently, the second floor was designated as the private areas. Similarly, the rehabilitation of the project assigned a public program in the street level and its residential program to the higher levels. In this way, the first floor functions as a source for social collectivity between the housing units and the city while offering its inhabitants a space for social encounters that lead to a sense of belonging and of communal ownership of public-private spaces. This area offers a variety of programs such as coffee shops, retail spaces, small manufacturing, and community spaces such as day cares; these are completely open to the public during daytime hours but have a restricted access during night time. Furthermore, its organizational structure of units arranged around a central corridor provides a source for casual encounters that add up to a sense of collectiveness.
The rehabilitation areas are well-supplied with tram stops that connect the colonial downtown with the rest of the city. Furthermore, the plan added bike lane that connected the neighborhood to the already existent lane as well as a bike-sharing station in one of the projects. The units are part of a supported network of urban resources, including schools, churches, open plazas and services both within the project and in its proximity.
The project “Plan de Vivienda del Centro Historico” is part of a governmental effort to recover the downtown’s residential character. Through public-private partnerships the plan rehabilitated city-owned properties, acquired privately owned units through agreements with owners, and created partnerships with small building owners. The government was seeking developers that would invest with the 60% of the project’s cost while the city contributed with the remaining 30%. The rehabilitation developed full units of 1, 2 and 3 bedrooms, intended to serve different family needs as well as all income possibilities. The units’ price ranged from $30.000 to $55.000. Furthermore, the plan intended more than just the rehabilitation of housing, it was meant to incentivize people to buy property in thecolonial city. Therefore, the city’s government gave $10.000 bonus for people who bought units up to $40.000 dollars. Additionally, the city facilitated low-interest loans for people interest in buying a unit in one of the rehabilitated areas through a government banking agency. Finally, as part of a collective project, the city offered a $15.000 bonus for anyone in the developed area interested in fixing their property’s façade. This project lead to a comprehensive development of chosen areas of the colonial city as a result of a housing project meant to serve a low income population.