Author Archives: jordan yule

Jordan Yule – A3 (Individual Design)

(Fig 1.) Matrix 2) Adjusted for livability and the particulars of the Vancouver context.

(Fig. 2-4) Site Context: Kitsilano.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Fig. 5-7) Site: Recently “pedestrianized” portion of Waterloo Street between 4th and 5th avenues, separating the east and west portions of Mcbride Park.

 

 

 

 

 

(Fig. 8) Precedent: Villa Verde. Constituciòn, Chile.

 

(Fig. 9-14) Design Development

(Fig. 15-17) Design: “Customizable Kit House Village” – Modularity based on a grid of 20’x20′ parcels of “platform-land”, composed of 5’x5′ spatial organization squares. Outdoor and indoor space is adjustable according to need.

Jordan Yule – A2 (Typologies)

At this stage in the project, designability rearranged some priorities on my initial matrix. It is true that rent and accessibility influence affordability most substantially. However, within a field of designable priorities that reach beyond finance into well-being, I felt that spatial flexibility was a primary factor in developing a typology.

Though there is tremendous value to shared community space, I wanted to develop a typology that provided private exterior space for each individual resident. Not as an additional ornament, but as an essential room in their living routine. For creativity, entrepreneurship, agency, and dignity. Collective space could be developed at a wider scale once the individual space was established. My inspiration for this idea was the affordable-housing development called “Villa-Verde” in Constitución, Chile.

Jordan Yule – A1 (Affordable Housing Building Analysis)

Density Theorising

These sketches demonstrate the basic and uncontextualized economics that informed our initial idea of affordable housing. Surely, the more units on a site, the cheaper each unit? However, once contextualized in contemporary capitalist society, with land speculation, this is not necessarily the case. We maintained the simplified economic response for this initial assignment.

It is however true that social and ecosystem connection can mitigate costs.

Once ideas were developed individually; Vicky, Tarea, and I collectively brainstormed. We established a model to prioritize our ideas according to the personal finances of the affordable-housing resident. The most substantial expense was understood to be rent, which was prioritized above the rest. The second was found to be “accessibility” (meaning proximity and connectivity to amenities, goods, services, and transportation). Once again, these were not necessarily contextualized within the realm of designability, so priorities would change once design became a factor. This initial stage of prioritization was represented in the matrix below.