Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Georgia Manning Report Author • Department of Architecture Christina Bollo Assistant Professor • Department of Architecture ARCH 484: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STUDIO | SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE & ENVIRONMENT FALL 2024 OAKRIDGE Acknowledgments This architectural design studio would not have been possible without the dedicated time, support, and feedback from Oakridge city staff and community members. The entire studio would like to thank the following parties and individuals for their assistance and contributions to the final project proposals and subsequent completion of this report. Rick Zylstra, Community Development Director   Bryan Cutchen, City Mayor James Cleavenger, City Administrator Site Property Owners and Agents: Nancy Evanson, Property Owner Steve Ness, Property Owner Jennifer Lloyd, Realtor Oakridge Museum Volunteers: Dirk “Poncho” Tarman, Dianna Wellman-Hadley, Bud Rice, & Lori Shafer This report represents original student work and recommendations prepared by students in the University of Oregon’s Sustainable City Year Program for the City of Oakridge. Text and images contained in this report may not be used without permission from the University of Oregon. Contents 4 About SCI 4 About SCYP 5 About City of Oakridge 7 Course Participants 7 Course Description 8 Executive Summary 9 Introduction 12 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studies 29 Urban Infill Proposals 42 Elk Meadows Development Proposals 52 Conclusion 53 Appendix A: Group 1 Proposal – Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord 59 Appendix B: Group 2 Proposal – Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning 64 Appendix C: Group 3 Proposal – Miles Hagen, Kit Renk 71 Appendix D: Group 4 Proposal – Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe 77 Appendix E: Group 5 Proposal – Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards 83 Appendix F: Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas 91 Appendix G: Group 7 Proposal – Madison Coultrap, Ying Thum 4 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge The Sustainable Cities Institute (SCI) is an applied think tank focusing on sustainability and cities through applied research, teaching, and community partnerships. We work across disciplines that match the complexity of cities to address sustainability challenges, from regional planning to building design and from enhancing engagement of diverse communities to understanding the impacts on municipal budgets from disruptive technologies and many issues in between. SCI focuses on sustainability-based research and teaching opportunities through two primary efforts: 1. Our Sustainable City Year Program (SCYP), a massively scaled university- community partnership program that matches the resources of the University with one Oregon community each year to help advance that community’s sustainability goals; and 2. Our Urbanism Next Center, which focuses on how autonomous vehicles, e-commerce, and the sharing economy will impact the form and function of cities. In all cases, we share our expertise and experiences with scholars, policymakers, community leaders, and project partners. We further extend our impact via an annual Expert-in-Residence Program, SCI China visiting scholars program, study abroad course on redesigning cities for people on bicycle, and through our co- leadership of the Educational Partnerships for Innovation in Communities Network (EPIC-N), which is transferring SCYP to universities and communities across the globe. Our work connects student passion, faculty experience, and community needs to produce innovative, tangible solutions for the creation of a sustainable society. The Sustainable City Year Program (SCYP) is a yearlong partnership between SCI and a partner in Oregon, in which students and faculty in courses from across the university collaborate with a public entity on sustainability and livability projects. SCYP faculty and students work in collaboration with staff from the partner agency through a variety of studio projects and service- learning courses to provide students with real-world projects to investigate. Students bring energy, enthusiasm, and innovative approaches to difficult, persistent problems. SCYP’s primary value derives from collaborations that result in on-the-ground impact and expanded conversations for a community ready to transition to a more sustainable and livable future. About SCI About SCYP 5 The City of Oakridge, Oregon, is a vibrant community nestled in the foothills of the Western Cascade Mountains, with a population of approximately 3,500 residents within city limits (nearly 5,000 when including nearby Westfir and surrounding areas). Surrounded by the extensive Willamette National Forest, the city provides ample opportunities for activities such as hiking and mountain biking, with nearly 500 miles of trails and five rivers in its vicinity. Oakridge’s elevation (1,200-1,700 ft.) results in a favorable climate, characterized by over 300 sunny days annually, while avoiding the fog of the valley and the heavy snowfalls of higher elevations. Governed by a council-manager system since 1972, Oakridge residents benefit from a robust and supportive municipal administration. The City offers a comprehensive range of services, including street maintenance, water, wastewater, and park utilities, as well as police, fire, and emergency medical services. Additional municipal services include library access, economic development, planning and zoning, and general administrative support. Funding for city operations is derived from property taxes, franchise fees, and other revenue sources, with special projects financed through grants and loans. About City of Oakridge 6 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge In the past decade, Oakridge has secured nearly $11 million in grants and loans for community projects and maintains an annual budget of approximately $10 million. The citizens of Oakridge cherish their history and cultural heritage, celebrating it through a variety of events and activities throughout the year. The long-standing Tree Planting Festival pays homage to Oakridge’s timber town roots, while the Concerts in the Park series offers free performances at the Banner Bank Amphitheater in Greenwaters Park. Additionally, Oakridge features four art galleries, three nearby hot springs, and is conveniently located just 25 miles from Willamette Pass Ski Resort. The Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area, approximately 35 miles away, further enriches the community’s cultural offerings with its vibrant arts scene, including music, theater, and access to the University of Oregon. The City of Oakridge is committed to fostering a safe, livable, and sustainable environment for its residents while promoting economic development and community engagement. As part of its ongoing planning initiatives, Oakridge is exploring various strategies to enhance its sustainability and growth, ensuring that the community continues to thrive for generations to come. The partnership between the Sustainable City Year Program and the City of Oakridge is supported by local stakeholders, enabling University of Oregon students and faculty to collaborate on projects and provide recommendations to address city- identified challenges and opportunities. This SCYP and City of Oakridge partnership is possible in part due to support from U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, as well as former Congressman Peter DeFazio, who secured federal funding for SCYP through Congressionally Directed Spending. With additional funding from the city, the partnership will allow UO students and faculty to study and make recommendations on city-identified projects and issues. 7 UNDERGRADUATE ARCHITECTURE STUDENTS Ana Amador Fuentes Liv Anderson Madison Coultrap Erin Davis Caleb Galas Miles Hagen Ben Keigwin Maryclaire Lane Alaia Lucas Georgia Manning Oliva Nord Liam Ogzewalla Kit Renk Leyton Richards Ying Thum Emma Watanabe Course Participants ARCH 484: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STUDIO This course guides students through design projects requiring comprehensive and integrative study over a wide range of project options. Course components include individual criticism, group discussions, lectures and seminars by visiting specialists, and public review of projects. Course Description The course explored various dwelling typologies that fall under middle-density housing and looked at multiple strategies to integrate new dwelling types into established Oakridge neighborhoods. Students outlined their design intentions and goals for each project site to support their ideas. Many common themes emerged across projects such as individuality and autonomy, contextualizing new designs, and strengthening community relationships. Key findings underscore the need for a shared architectural language between new and existing buildings in Oakridge. The proposals also outline a series of strategies to create degrees of privacy. Diverse housing typologies are recommended to connect back to these degrees of privacy and promote differing residential experiences. With the goal of introducing new housing types into a city primarily comprised of single-family dwellings, architecture students designed middle-density housing for the City of Oakridge. 8 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Executive Summary Although the City of Oakridge does not currently allow middle- or high-density housing, the city is eager to diversify its housing options. The introduction of middle-density housing could create more affordable housing options that could encourage the current population to stay in Oakridge and attract new residents to the city. More affordable housing could incentivize job opportunities to the area; at this time 75% of the population commutes out of Oakridge for work. The final student proposals were split between two sites that Oakridge city staff deemed open for future development. The first set of proposals focuses on infill projects in uptown Oakridge along East First Street. These recommendations introduce mixed use development that could provide unique commercial and residential opportunities for city residents. The second set of proposals focuses on the opportunities for neighborhood development on Bugle Loop, on the edge of the city. The lot, referred to as Elk Meadows, is currently privately owned. Site design for Elk Meadows emphasizes neighbor-to- neighbor interaction. The proposals for both sites draw on taxonomy research conducted to suggest solutions for a series of design issues. Students in the architectural design studio partnered with the City of Oakridge to explore various strategies to create housing density within the city. The goal of this collaboration was to provide thorough recommendations that can be used to garner public support for a change in the city zoning code. Students sought to inspire support by designing middle-density housing options to help Oakridge residents envision themselves in these various housing typologies. Introduction 9 FIG. 1 View of Elk Meadows from Bugle Loop. Photo Credit: Georgia Manning 10 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 2 View of the corner of Oak Street and East First Street in Uptown Oakridge; one possible infill site. Photo Credit: Madison Coultrap 11 Introduction FIG. 3 Map of site divisions for taxonomy studies off West Second Street and Teller Road. Credit: Christina Bollo, Course Instructor, Department of Architecture, University of Oregon As this course was also designed to be a housing bootcamp, each student spent eight weeks exploring various middle- density taxonomies or dwelling types in the context of Oakridge before beginning their final proposals. Each of these two-week taxonomy studies produced patterns that ultimately informed the final proposals, making them not only valuable research but also insightful suggestions for the City of Oakridge. Such studies consisted of explorations of three middle-density housing taxonomies: duplexes, row-houses, and walk-up apartments. These are all dwelling types that show up in the final proposal developments but were first studied individually on a separate site in Oakridge on West Second Street and Teller Road off OR-58. The site for these projects was split into 100-foot by 50-foot parcels, as seen in Figure 3, one for each student to design. This allowed students to place their projects in the context of Oakridge and surrounding buildings without yet thinking in terms of the final design. 12 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studies DUPLEXES Duplexes are the least ‘dense’ of middle- density housing as this typology is defined by two dwelling units sharing one lot. When describing their ideas for duplexes in Oakridge, there was a heavy overlap in design goals among students. Many students focused on balancing community and privacy, creating autonomy, individuality between the two units, physical and acoustic privacy, and creating positive neighbor-to-neighbor interactions. The following section explores one method of achieving some of these principles, with adequate mention of important alternatives taken by others in achieving similar goals. FIG. 4 Ground floor plan of duplex with a 2 bed-1.5 bath unit. Credit: Erin Davis 13 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studies The project shown decided to stack the units vertically to maximize feelings of autonomy on the sight. This common design strategy allows all residents to have access to views and light in every direction promoting feelings of ownership over the site. Some students, instead, designed side-by-side units with the same goal of promoting ownership. In this approach, each set of residents could easily identify distinguish their space from their neighbors both on the interior and the exterior. FIG. 5 Second floor plan of duplex with a 3 bed-2.5 bath unit. Credit: Erin Davis 14 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 6 North and East duplex elevations. Credit: Erin Davis This was also accomplished by making entrances to both units visible from the street as shown in Figure 6. This was a common choice throughout the designs as many sought to foster individuality between the two units. Some students instead designed the duplex to have one external door that led to a vestibule inside the building that then split into two separate units. This strategy instead aimed to contextualize the duplex in Oakridge and have it appear from the street as a single-family dwelling while also promoting neighbor-to-neighbor interaction. 15 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson FIG. 7 Section cut through the length of the duplex showing interior spaces. Credit: Erin Davis FIG. 8 Section cut through the width of the duplex showing interior spaces. Credit: Erin Davis The figures above show a common strategy found to maximize acoustic privacy, which consists of stacking like spaces. This means that noise from gathering spaces won’t filter into private spaces like bedrooms below. For units situated side by side instead of vertically stacked, this strategy was implemented by placing indoor gathering spaces along the shared wall between units to preserve the acoustic privacy of private dwelling spaces such as bedrooms and bathrooms. 16 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge ROWHOUSES The rowhouse projects were an exploration in designing three attached dwelling units side-by-side. These units all share walls between them as is the definition of the rowhouse taxonomy, sometimes also referred to as a townhouse. Because these dwellings are all attached, they present the unique design problem of receiving no daylight along the longest sides of each dwelling unit. While some students had sites that allowed for daylight along the side of one rowhouse (the end condition), many students were to design all three of their rowhouses with no opportunities for light on the main walls in any of the units. This presented a common focus among students of designing to maximize daylight and indoor/outdoor connection in these units. This was coupled with various design goals regarding individuality, personability, and creating balance between private and public spaces. The project shown below creatively combines many strategies used by students to achieve these ideas. 17 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson FIG. 9 Floor plan of middle unit’s first floor condition including below grade parking and split floor living space. Credit: Ying Thum FIG. 10 Floor plan of side units’ ground floor condition including on grade entry and parking. Credit: Ying Thum 18 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 11 Floor plan of middle unit’s split level front entrance and upper bedroom space. Credit: Ying Thum FIG. 12 Floor plan of side units’ second story. Credit: Ying Thum 19 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson FIG. 13 Floor plan of middle unit’s split level front entrance and upper bedroom space. Credit: Ying Thum As shown in Figures 9-13, to promote ideas of individuality, many students designed one of the three rowhouses to have a different layout, be that an extra floor or an inverted floor plan. This helps to compose a building exterior or façade where each unit is identifiably its own. In this project, each unit is unique, as the center unit has a unique floor plan, and the other two units distinguish themselves from each other by having differing lighting conditions. 20 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 14 Site plan of the rowhouses including lot lines and outlines of surrounding buildings. Credit: Ying Thum As shown in Figure 14, one unit is up against another building and therefore has limited opportunities for daylight on the side, and the other unit is the end condition of the series of rowhouses, so code dictates no limitations in windows along that length of the building. 21 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson FIG. 15 Section cut through the length of the middle unit showing the relationship between the split levels and the below grade parking. Credit: Ying Thum FIG. 16 Section cut through the length of a side unit showing the unique roof form and the relationship between parking and entry. Credit: Ying Thum 22 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Outdoor space was a major focus for student designers, and Figures 15 and 16 show a common way in which private outdoor space was created. Parking off an alleyway in the back often created the issue of leaving behind little backyard space, so some projects created outdoor space as part of the rowhouse itself with balconies, as shown on the front of the side rowhouses in Figure 16. Another solution taken by students, as was done in the middle unit (Figure 15) here, is This project along with some others took a different approach to daylighting. As shown in Figure 14, this student carved into the massing of the rowhouses to create light wells. This strategy provides an opportunity to design windows on a façade that will be up against another building given that the building steps to instead create parking within the rowhouse itself, leaving ample backyard space for the residents. Some students instead sought to shorten their rowhouses and build up in order to leave space for parking and a private backyard behind the rowhouses. This strategy was also done with consideration to daylighting as it meant that natural light from both ends of the rowhouse would penetrate deeper into the building, lighting more of the space. back from the property line at least five feet. Despite not building up to the property line on both sides, the other side rowhouse was designed to match and the light well windows can be seen in Figure 17 where the roofline breaks up and indicates a stepping back from the property line. FIG. 17 Side elevation showing the side unit with the unattached end condition that allows for more window placement as well as the carved out light well. Credit: Ying Thum 23 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson FIG. 18 Rowhouses’ front elevations showing the interior-exterior connections at all levels. Credit: Ying Thum FIG. 19 Rowhouses’ back elevations showing garages and access to shared outdoor space. Credit: Ying Thum 24 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 20 Perspective sketch of a view of the rowhouses from the street. Another variation of this daylighting strategy used commonly throughout the designs was the decision to break up the massing of the three rowhouses to create opportunities for windows along the sides of the rowhouses. Alternatively, one could also break up the roof line by raising it in one place or another and clerestory windows could be added. These windows would not be able to provide much in the way of views for the residents but would increase natural light into the space. A small example of both strategies can be found in this project. Figure 19 shows where the change in roof line created opportunities for windows in the middle unit on either side of where the roof hits its peak and begins to slope back down. These windows are even more effective than skylights as they do not generate as much heat gain from direct overhead sunlight. Figure 20 shows how the strategic choice to stagger the masses of the rowhouses and have the middle unit set farther back allows for opportunities for windows on the sides of the units that are set closer to the street where they extend beyond the middle unit. Many students used creative massing to maximize sunlight and views with various combinations of these strategies. 25 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson WALK-UP APARTMENTS Walk-up apartments are a taxonomy that, because they are smaller scale developments, are still considered middle-density housing. The element of a mostly external circulation system helps distinguish them from large scale high-rise high-density apartments. This project gave students opportunities for site design as the project combined multiple unit sizes, parking, and shared in-between spaces. The project combined three of the divided site parcels shown in Figure 3 to create a 100-foot by 150- foot site where students were tasked with designing 12 units incorporating a unit mix of 25% one-bedroom units, 25% two-bedroom units, and 50% three- bedroom units. The percentages of unit types were flexible, allowing designers to adjust them based on their specific design intentions. This was also true of the number of total dwellings built on the site. The only non-negotiable was the required minimum of one-to-one parking for residents and that the net-density for the site be at minimum 36 dwelling units per acre. Given these parameters, students independently generated several goals for the apartments including: a well-developed shared common space, outdoor connection, contextualized massing, adaptability, and a balance between individual autonomy and community building. Towards the second half of the term, site design became the biggest focus of the project. The initial projects provided students with a solid understanding of how to quickly generate a successful dwelling unit plan and moved to focus on the interaction between units at this larger scale. This became very important for both final proposal projects moving forward. 26 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 21 Apartment project poster including a site plan and ground floor plan of the two apartment buildings, second and third floor plans showing unit types used, elevations of both buildings, a site section through both buildings, and relevant site statistics. Credit: Kit Renk 27 Initial Research – Middle Housing Taxonomy Studieson The project shown in Figure 21 demonstrates multiple strategies to hit these requirements as well as create a balanced sense of individual autonomy and community, outdoor connection, shared public space, and contextualized form. A common strategy, as shown here, was to split the units into multiple buildings. This helps to contextualize the project in the City of Oakridge,, where most buildings are typically smaller in scale. This also helps residents feel a bit more ownership over their apartment as they can identify with a smaller group within the larger site. Another strategy taken in this regard is to give as many units as possible a front and back entrance. This gives residents ownership over a part of the street, but also a refuge away from the public edge towards a more exclusive outdoor resident community space. This also creates a mental connection to a typical single-family home, a more common housing type in the area. A common strategy shown here is also the limited use of three-story spaces. In most of the projects, students chose to limit their use of three-story tall spaces as it is rare to see anything beyond a single story and the occasional two- story home in Oakridge. This is not always possible when creating density of this kind but can be done strategically so as not to feel overly imposing. This project also uses bright colors and panels of natural materials to try to contextualize this new dwelling taxonomy within the city. Many projects had different ways of going about this, some used familiar roof forms, some focused-on materials, and some set up their apartment buildings in a more traditional rowhouse fashion to try to emulate a familiar single-family dwelling. An important common theme many students used is a strategy of orienting their building(s) around a shared green space to accomplish a series of design goals. Some developed this space with small playgrounds and outdoor seating to encourage residents to linger. Others left the space open to interpretation and future adaptation. The project shown in Figure 21 makes use of a centralized green space and smaller scale paved space to act as a shared backyard between residents and to encourage neighbor-to-neighbor relationships. This strategy, combined with multiple private entrances and exits to each unit, balances autonomy with community building. Finally, many sought to further balance this shared outdoor space with the creation of private outdoor spaces as well. The project above makes use of private balconies to create visual interest on the façade and to allow for personalization. External opportunities for personalization can make a resident’s home more easily identifiable to passersby on the street and allow for expression of individuality both to their neighbors and to the public. 28 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge East First Street is considered the main drive in the City of Oakridge. However, it does not receive much traffic from anyone but residents, as people passing through the area must exit OR-58 to cut through the heart of Oakridge. Despite its limited traffic, this street functions as the basis for many community events such as the annual tree lighting, the monthly art walk, and much more. Because of this, students working on the Uptown sites wanted to be cautious of disrupting established city traditions while strengthening daily community connections with the new additions. This guiding principle generated several familiar design goals as to the research above, including but not limited to preserving privacy and autonomy in a public realm, contextualizing new buildings within a pre-existing architectural language, and addressing/creating public spaces. This project also introduces new design constraints such as a code requirement that the first floor of any new building on East First Street reserves the first 25 feet from the public walkway to be used for commercial space. With this comes the added requirement of parking for commercial staff on top of the required one-to-one residential parking ratio. With these requirements also came the freedom to pick from a series of infill site options so long as the net density for the entire proposal fell between 18 and 36 dwelling units per acre. This allowed groups to focus on just a few sites that felt aligned with their design goals for the project proposal. The following sections will highlight common strategies and goals among the proposals in addressing some of the major design problems and therefore no project will be shown in its entirety. All projects referenced, however, can be found in the appendices. Urban Infill Proposals 29 As previously mentioned, the primary objective for this collaboration between the SCYP course and the City of Oakridge was to inspire public support for middle-density housing in Oakridge. The following proposals suggest a series of infill projects in Uptown Oakridge with the understanding that each project is only one possible opportunity for integrating the previously studied dwelling types smoothly into the City, all of which will not be possible until the building code changes. ADDRESSING MULTIPLE SITES Visiting Oakridge for the second time, students familiarized themselves further with the large option of sites to choose from along East First Street. Several factors were considered when selecting the sites, including the size and the current use. Some of the sites were unique in shape due to the existing buildings around them, some were open grassy lots, and others had existing parking or building infrastructure to consider along with the immediate context of the sites. Another important factor that went into choosing sites was their relationship to each other. In adding these buildings, student proposals play with changes to the composition of the street façade and the buildings that make up that composition. Maintaining a balance between the old and the new is an important consideration. All of this in mind, there was a significant overlap in the sites chosen for the three unique proposals and patterns in how they were used within the designs. 30 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 22 Site map of Uptown Oakridge from Group 1 (Appendix A) including four site proposals for infill with the current buildings shown in grey and the proposals shown in plan. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord 31 Urban Infill Proposals FIG. 23 Site map of Uptown Oakridge from Group 2 (Appendix B) showing existing buildings in gray and five infill proposals in colors corresponding with building type. Credit: Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning 32 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 24 Site map of Uptown Oakridge from Group 3 (Appendix C) showing original infrastructure in grey and white and five infill proposals in color and plan. Credit: Miles Hagen, Kit Renk 33 Urban Infill Proposals FIG. 25 North elevation of apartments on East First Street and Cedar Street. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord The unanimous decision to infill in the Southwest corner of East First Street and Cedar Street designates it as having many desirable opportunities for design. The advantage of an established alleyway perpendicular to the street allows for creative parking solutions that keep cars away from the front of the houses and therefore pedestrians. The Northeast corner of East First Street and Oak Street is also attractive due in part to its large size, but also its current use. It currently sits as a grassy lot, making it a good pick as its established use is not part of most residents’ day-to-day activities or major community events. It also is large enough to back onto an alley, giving the site street access on three of its four sides. This allows for plenty of creative strategies to tuck away parking from the public walkways or as seen in fFigure 22, an opportunity for a large outdoor space for residents. In addition to these two sites, most groups designed sites diagonally from each other in some capacity to round out intersections, but also to place residents in relation to each other. This can build community between residents without placing new developments right next to or across from each other. By spreading out their site proposals along East First Street, each group aimed to blend new and old buildings together to create a cohesive street design. The following elevation drawings from Group 1 (Appendix A) demonstrate strategies for connecting the infill sites to each other as well as the architectural language of Oakridge. 34 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 26 North elevation of apartments on East First Street and Oak Street. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord FIG. 27 West elevation of rowhouses on East First Street and Oak Street. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord These elevations demonstrate how material use, color palette, and form can create a shared architectural language while maintaining originality between designs. Not only does this shared language make the designs feel cohesive to each other, but the familiar massing and materials can make new designs that may be unfamiliar to Oakridge in their size, feel like they belong. 35 Urban Infill Proposals FIG. 28 Site plan of rowhouses from Group 1 (Appendix A) on the Northeast corner of East First Street and Oak Street. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord COMBINING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SPACES In designing for Uptown Oakridge, the biggest change from the taxonomy studies to the final proposal was the addition of commercial spaces. In some design strategies, this invokes its own housing typology, sometimes called ‘living over the store’. The three infill proposals explored an array of strategies for combining these spaces all with differing design intentions and outcomes. The following section explores one strategy from each of the groups’ proposals to show case just some of these outcomes. 36 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 29 Section and elevation drawings of rowhouses from Group 1 (Appendix A) on the Northeast corner of East First Street and Oak Street. Credit: Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord 37 Urban Infill Proposals FIG. 30 Drawings of a combination of rowhouses and ‘living above the store’ from Group 2 (Appendix B) on the Southwest corner of East First Street and Cedar Street. Credit: Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning 38 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 31 Drawings of apartments from Group 3 (Appendix C) on the Southwest corner of East First Street and Oak Street. Credit: Miles Hagen, Kit Renk 39 Urban Infill Proposals The infill site shown in Figures 28 and 29 demonstrates one strategy of integrating commercial and residential spaces which is to give them separate identities. As seen in Figure 29, one of the rowhouses on the site shares a thick wall with the commercial building but is its own building with its own identity and structure. The two structures share a language through color and window type but look otherwise independent from each other. This strategy maximizes autonomy and privacy from the commercial zone, as customers can clearly tell from architectural cues where they would transition from a public commercial zone to a residential zone and where they must respect the boundaries of the residents. This strategy is emphasized further as the entrance to the commercial space is around the corner from the residential front entrances and they both back up against the public outdoor playgrounds creating three separate zones on the site. The design shown in Figure 30 builds on elements of the last strategy. In this design the rowhouses are also kept separate from the commercial zone, but they are blended visually and physically to create one singular structure. This is done with the addition of a large flat over the commercial space that has two entrances parallel to those of the rowhouses. Like the last design, the residential and commercial entrances are on separate streets. However, in this design the rowhouse residents and the flat residents have different levels of connection to the commercial space. The rowhouses maintain a sense of physical and acoustic privacy from the commercial space while the flat is designed, in contrast, for a situation where business owners might live above their business and want to maintain a level of connection to the activity there. The flat does maintain a sense of identity separate from the commercial space however, with its visible entrance on the residential street and more private facades that share an architectural language more closely related to that of the rowhouses than the commercial space below. The final design strategy, highlighted in Figure 31, aims to fully separate the residential space from the commercial area, similar to the first design. However, like the second design, it utilizes the third dimension by building upward over the commercial space. This proposal creates a clear separation between residential and commercial space through entry points, as the apartments over the commercial space are entered from an outdoor residential community space in the back of the building. Here, the other two apartment units on the site also open onto the shared space creating an outdoor room that pulls back from the public realm and transitions residents into a more private setting. Interestingly, part of the commercial space and the outdoor dining space also opens onto this outdoor room creating a controlled interaction between the public and private spheres on this site. The distinct difference in façade between the first floor and the upper floors of the apartment complex also helps to distinguish from the street that the program or function of the two portions of the building differ dramatically. 40 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge CREATING DENSITY As students explored in taxonomy studies, middle-density housing has a range of possible building typologies within the category. There was a general goal throughout the proposals to introduce a range in typologies to the city, but ultimately each group went about creating density in different ways. Group 1 (Appendix A) for example, created the bulk of their density with apartment complexes. Of their 33 total units added to Uptown Oakridge, 23 of those units are apartment units and are either one- bedroom or two-bedroom units. The rest of the dwelling units are made up of a series of rowhouses and duplexes. Similarly, Group 2 (Appendix B) designed 11 of their 21 units to be self-contained walk-up apartment units over commercial spaces as the bulk of their density. These units range in size from two-bedroom units to four-bedroom units depending on the size of the site. In contrast, Group 3 (Appendix C) designated 14 of their 23 dwelling units as rowhouses, creating most of their density this way. This demonstrated a reliance on more compact dwelling types to fulfill the desired density of 18-36 dwelling units per acre in 4-5 sites, however each group was able to implement all three of the middle-housing taxonomies studied earlier in the term. 41 Urban Infill Proposals Because this site is on the edge of the city, its immediate context is that of newer residential construction, all of which are single-family homes. Beyond the neighborhood, surrounding the 3.6- acre lot on all sides are amazing views of the Willamette National Forest. Much of the newer construction is attractive to potential Oakridge transplants looking to take advantage of Oakridge’s unique outdoor experiences and community. Understanding this concept, students aimed to develop communities that would appeal to a diverse range of family types and residents. Many students also sought to design specifically for demographics that currently make up the majority of Oakridge’s residents, including young families, mountain bikers, and retirees, with the goal of attracting both current and potential residents. This generated many other familiar design goals seen in the taxonomy studies, including but not limited to, creating a positive relationship between residents and the landscape, prioritizing site safety and accessibility, and growing relationships between neighbors through communal spaces. This project gives students the opportunity to experiment with building placement and orientation on the site. However, the added complexity of the slope on the site created a design problem in and of itself and many groups had differing approaches on how best to shape the site to fit their design goals. As many students had previously developed dwelling units through the taxonomy studies with the intention to use them in the context of these site proposals, the groups had to strategically make the necessary changes to ensure a balance between individuality and cohesion within the development. There was also an expectation to maintain a net density on the site of 18-36 dwelling units per acre as well as the previous 1:1 parking ratio for residents. The following sections will highlight common strategies and goals among the proposals in addressing some of the major design problems and opportunities and therefore no project will be shown in its entirety. All projects referenced, however, can be found in the appendices. By demonstrating design opportunities presented by a middle- housing development, the objective of these project proposals remains to be the inspiration of public support for code reform in Oakridge. The following proposals suggest site and unit designs for a neighborhood development off Bugle Loop on the Northeast edge of the city. Each of the following proposals is only one explored opportunity for the integration of a middle- density housing community into Oakridge, none of which are possible without public support for a change in the building code. 42 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Elk Meadows Development Proposals SHAPING THE SITE Site design is by far the most important part of the proposals for this site. Because so many of the students’ design goals were centered around community interaction and the natural landscape, the site design is where creative patterns and design strategies emerged. It is also where the most design challenges occurred as the topography of the site is dramatic in slope and a depression on the side of the lot is prone to collecting and holding stagnant water. The current topography for Elk Meadows can be seen in Figure 32. Students took different strategies to site intervention, some choosing to alter the topography or slope of the site, while others took a more hands-off approach for the sake of maximum site preservation in construction. Furthermore, the current site owner had an idea of where the road through the site should be located which the students were instructed to follow as is shown in Figure 33. FIG. 32 Graphic showing original site contours before student interventions. Credit: City of Oakridge FIG. 33 Proposed parcel divisions of Elk Meadows showing the location of the road, Velvet Lane, through the site. Credit: K & D Engineering Inc. 43 Elk Meadows Development Proposals The project shown in Figure 34 is unique in its pattern of side streets added perpendicularly to Velvet Lane and was intentionally hands-off in respect to site intervention as they sought to preserve greenery on the site. The dwelling units on the east side of the site orient their entrances to the side streets, forming small housing communities on each of the four streets. The outdoor common spaces in the Northwest corner of the site announce themselves as distinctly public in their distance from the smaller dwelling streets and in their proximity to Bugle Loop. The rowhouses act as a privacy gradient on the site as they are situated on a larger street between the private duplex and triplex streets, but oriented away from the series of gathering spaces towards the main road and each other. FIG. 34 Site map from Group 4 (Appendix D). Credit: Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe 44 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 35 Site map, site section, and street section from Group 5 (Appendix E). Credit: Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards 45 Elk Meadows Development Proposals The proposal shown in Figure 35 also aims to preserve the natural state of the site, demonstrating in the site and street section cuts how to work with the slope to do this. The concentration of buildings towards Velvet Lane and Bugle Loop also keeps most of the site edges preserved. Similarly to the last proposal, the use of additional streets to change the orientation of the buildings alters the degree of privacy for the rotated dwellings, only this time creating a public facing dwelling instead of private dwellings that rotate in towards each other and away from Bugle Loop. The range of public and private facing dwellings on the site is one strategy used to attract a diversity in residents as the residential experience of the site differs significantly dwelling to dwelling. The placement of the community playground space between dwelling entrances also indicates the goal to attract a variety of resident types, each to different parts of the site. 46 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge FIG. 36 Site map from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas The proposal shown in Figure 36 also contains dwelling types ranging in privacy, although on this site, the dwellings facing Bugle Loop have a more private experience, compared with the buildings on the east side of the site which are all situated around a shared green space. This design strategy creates two distinct residential zones, one facing in and one facing out. However, even on this site, some dwellings on the loop utilize long driveways to rotate the dwellings sideways creating within the larger tight-nit community on the site, an added degree of privacy. 47 Elk Meadows Development Proposals FIG. 37 Site map from Group 7 (Appendix G). Credit: Madison Coultrap, Ying Thum The proposal in Figure 37 is similar to Figure 36 in its creation of two separate residential zones but is unique from the other proposals in its water management. This site map addressed the issue of stagnant water on the site by redesigning the contours of the landscape to create a swale running north south through the site. This rock-lined drainage system would collect and drain water from the site, appearing in dry seasons as a dry creek bed. The accompanying bridge over the swale acts as another way to distinguish between the two residential zones as well as being an interesting and functional design feature. 48 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge CREATING A SHARED LANGUAGE When designing a series of buildings in a shared space, there is a balance to maintain between individual identity and cohesion. This is exacerbated in housing design as it is also important to promote identity between units of the same type, often within the same building. The following elevation studies from Group 6’s project proposal highlight a few strategies used to create a community of dwellings all which are identifiably their own yet look as though they belong both in the development and in the city of Oakridge. FIG. 38 Digital model of a portion of the neighborhood proposal from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas FIG. 39 Front elevation of side-by-side duplex units from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Caleb Galas FIG. 40 Front elevation of a six- unit apartment complex from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Liv Anderson 49 Elk Meadows Development Proposals FIG. 41 Front elevation of side-by-side duplex units from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Erin Davis FIG. 42 Front elevation of stacked duplex units from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Erin Davis FIG. 43 Front elevation of a triplex from Group 6 (Appendix F). Credit: Liv Anderson While some projects intentionally matched the material and colors of their buildings, varying only in form, other proposals chose to create a shared framework of guidelines that all the buildings could work within in order to feel related to each other but still unique. For example, the project shown above worked with varying shades of browns, blues, yellows, and oranges as well as differing sizes and directions of lap siding as a material language for the dwellings. All the buildings also share pitch roofs, although they vary in complexity and material, to create a basis for form within the development. Many proposals used some variation of these strategies to create a shared architectural language in their development, choosing what would be the same between dwellings and what would vary building to building. This project also used a familiar strategy of changing material and/or color on the building façade in order to indicate entrances to separate dwellings within the same building, promoting individuality. This can also be done by changing the roof form over a dwelling entrance or pushing the entrance into the mass of the building to demarcate it as important to the eye. 50 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge CREATING DENSITY Like in the Infill sites, students aimed to present a range of middle-density housing typologies to the city with these proposals. This site contains 3.64 acres of land, so to design for a net density of 18-36 dwelling units per acre and achieve design goals often synonymous with complex site design, students used different strategies to create density in Elk Meadows. Group 4 (Appendix D) for example, only used duplexes, triplexes, and rowhouses in their site design, rowhouses being the most prevalent typology among their 27 total dwelling units. Group 5 (Appendix E) was unique in its use of duplex and triplexes to create most of their density on the site. Their 37 total dwelling units break down into 27 dwelling units in triplexes, 6 dwelling units in duplexes, and the four remaining dwelling units in a single walk up complex. This proposal chooses to sacrifice net site density for the sake of their design intentions. Despite this, the proposal still creates the 10 dwelling units per acre density reached instead rather effectively because of the use of triplexes. In contrast, Group 6 (Appendix F) reached a net density of 22.63 dwelling units per acre in their proposed development. Their 43 total units on the site break down into 20 duplex dwelling units, 9 triplex dwelling units, and 14 apartment dwelling units. This project still has the bulk of its density in smaller building complexes yet supplements these dwellings with three apartment buildings, to increase density. Finally, Group 7 (Appendix G) has a similar number of units to the last proposal, 44 total units, yet their proposal is unique in that it contains only rowhouse and apartment style housing units on the site and does not choose to utilize the duplex or triplex housing typology like the first three proposals mentioned. On this site, 24 of the total dwelling units are rowhouses and the other 20 dwelling units are in walk-up apartment buildings. The last two proposals demonstrate the need for apartment style dwelling units to reach the required net density on the site, yet from there the two projects take different approaches in diversity of typology and building mix. While both proposals were successful in creating density, their different approaches to design problems outlined in previous sections led the projects to achieve differing design goals and outcomes with the same density. 51 Elk Meadows Development Proposals The uptown Oakridge and Elk Meadow middle-housing proposals collectively address a series of design challenges and opportunities generated by the introduction of new housing typologies to the City of Oakridge. The common design goals emphasize themes of identity and autonomy, contextualization, and community building. The studio’s proposals reinforce the importance of creating a shared architectural language using form, material, and color to connect sites or buildings to each other while giving them room to have their own identities. Visual language has the power to connect various building typologies in Oakridge by drawing from the existing architecture. Furthermore, the proposals highlight the importance of building orientation as a tool for creating privacy and separating various activity zones from residential and commercial to public and private and support affordable housing alternatives. 52 Fall 2024 Introducing Middle Housing in the City of Oakridge Conclusion 53 Group 1 Proposal – Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord Appendix A Group 1 Proposal – Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord 54 Appendix D up le x Ea st F ac ad e Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t Ea st Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t S ou th Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Fi rs t F lo or Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se co nd F lo or Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” D up le x Si te P la n Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /1 6” �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� � � �� � ��� �� �� ��� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � � �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� � �� � ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� � �� �� �� �� �  �� �� � �� �� �� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� ��� � �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � �� �� �� �� �­ �� �� �� ­�� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � 1 D U PL EX D N U P UPDN W/DW/D DW DW D W UP 66 0. 8 FT 2 62 7. 7 FT 2 66 0. 8 FT 2 UP U P DW D W W/DW/D 55 Group 1 Proposal – Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord 1, 55 7. 6 FT 2 UP U P D W W/D W /D DW W/D D W W/D D W A pa rt m en ts N or th F ac ad e Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t W es t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t N or th Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” O ne B ed U ni t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” A pa rt m en t S ite P la n Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /1 6” Tw o Be d U ni t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” 2 A PA RT M EN TS �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � �� � ��� � � ��� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � � �� �� ��� �� �� � � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� ��� �� � �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� � � ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � � �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� ��� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� �� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� � �� ��� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� � � �� �� ��� �� ��� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� � �� �� �� � ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� ��� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � �� � 56 Appendix UP UP U P U P UP Ea st 1 st S t Cedar St Oak St Ash St Pine St Hazel St Co m m er ci al S t Ea st 2 nd S t Hazel St Cedar St Oak St Ash St Pine St Co m m er ci al S t Ea st 1 st S t Ea st 1 st S t Si te 1 Si te 2 Si te 3 Si te 4 To ta l Di m en si on s 12 5 x 95 ft 11 5 x 80 ft 14 0 x 14 5f t 14 0 x 14 5f t - Ac re s 0. 27 0. 21 0. 47 0. 47 1. 42 Bu ild in gs 2 1 1 2 6 Un its 4 8 15 6 33 1 be d un it 0 4 6 0 10 -0 .3 % 2 be d un it 0 4 9 0 13 -0 .4 % 3 be d un it 4 0 0 6 10 -0 .3 % N et De ns ity - - - - 23 Pa rk in g 4 11 24 6 1: 1. 4 G ar ag es 3 0 0 6 9 St al ls 1 11 24 0 36 � �� � �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� � � � � � �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� � �� � �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� � � �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� � � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� � ��� ��� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� ��� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� ��� ��� � �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� ��� � � �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� � � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� ��� � �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� � ��� ��� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � ��� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� � � �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � ��� � �� �� �� � �� �� �� � � �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� � � �� �� �� �� ��� � �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� ��� � ��� �� � �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � ��� �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� � ��� �� � �� �� ��� �� �� � �� �� � �� �� �� ��� �� � �� �� � ��� �� � �� ��� � �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� ��� ��� �� ��� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� � � � �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� � � �� ��� �� Si te M ap Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /1 8” 57 Group 1 Proposal – Alaia Lucas, Olivia Nord UP UP U P U P UP A p ar tm en ts N or th F ac ad e Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t W es t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t S ou th Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” O ne B ed U ni t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” A pa rt m en t S ite P la n Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /1 6” Tw o Be d U ni t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” 3 A PA RT M EN TS D W DW W/D O A KR ID G E FA RM ER ’S M A RK ET 1, 10 9 FT 2 D W W/D DW �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� � �� � � �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� � �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� � � �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� ��� ���  � �� �­ �  �� � �� �� � ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� ��� � �� �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � � �� ��� ��� ��� �� ��� �� � 58 Appendix UP UP U P U P UP 1, 40 9 FT 2 DN A pa rt m en ts W es t F ac ad e Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t W es t Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se ct io n Cu t S ou th Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” A pa rt m en t S ite P la n Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /1 6” Fi rs t F lo or Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Se co nd F lo or Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” Th ird F lo or Sc al e: 1 ’ 0 ” = 1 /8 ” 4 R O W H O U SE S �� �� �� ��� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� � �� �� � �� �� ��� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� �� � �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� � �� � �� ��� �� �� ��� �� �� �� ��� � � �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� � �� ��� �� �� � �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �  �� �� ��  �� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� ��� �� ��� �� � �­ �� �� �� �� � ��� �� �� �� ��� �� �� �� �� �� �� � �� �� �� ��� �� �� � �� �� �� � � �� ��� �� �� �� ��� �� � �� �� � �� �� �� � �� �� � � �� � � �� �� � 59 Group 2 Proposal – Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning Appendix B Group 2 Proposal – Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning 60 Appendix B S IT E 3 S IT E 5 S IT E 2 S IT E 4 S IT E 1 O A K R ID G E U PT O W N S IT E PL A N - 6 0 ’= 1 .0 ” TO W N H O U S E LI V IN G O V ER C O M M ER C IA L S PA C E R O W -H O U S E 1S T S T. 1S T S T. OAK ST. CEDAR ST. PINE ST. HAZEL ST.U rb an I n fi ll i n O A K R ID G E In E ss en ce O ak ri d ge I s. .. O ak ri dg e is a ti gh t- kn it co m m un ity w ith a s ep ar at e re si de nt ia l a nd c om m er ci al s ph er e. T he re si de nt s lo ve to fi nd a re as on to g at he r, ye t s ee m to li ve o n th e ed ge s of th e m ai n ci ty c en te r th er ef or e w e in - te nd to re co nn ec t p eo pl e in to th e pu bl ic s ph er e by in tr od uc in g m or e ho us in g op ti on s w ith in th e ci ty ’s ce nt er U nd er st an di ng th at p eo pl e in O ak ri dg e m ig ht b e ap pr eh en si ve a bo ut m aj or c ha ng e in th e he ar t o f t he ir ci ty , i t’s im po rt an t t o bl en d th e re si de nt ia l a dd iti on s so th at th e sp ac e fe el s ne ith er s tr ic tl y co m m er - ci al o r re si de nt ia l, bu t a c om bi na ti on o f b ot h th at in te rl oc k in a c om fo rt ab le w ay . R es id en ts w ill th en b e ab le to li ve o n th e ed ge o f t he p ub lic s ph er e an d su rv ey th e da ily g oi ng s on in O ak ri dg e w hi le b ei ng a s in vo lv ed o r un in vo lv ed a s th ey w is h. SI T E 1: H A ZE L & 1 ST LFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM A Si te S iz e: ~ 50 00 s qf t C om pl ex 2 : 1 F LA T A B O V E A S TO R E 1 S TO R Y 3 B ED 2 B AT H 1 PA R K IN G S PA C E 1 C O M M ER C IA L LO A D IN G S PA C E ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT C om pl ex 1 : 2 T O W N H O U S ES 2 S TO R IE S 2 B ED 3 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT E A C H Fl oo r P la ns 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ S IT E PL A N 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ Fl oo r 1 Fl oo r 2 N O R TH /S O U TH F A C A D E A N D S EC TI O N EA S T/ W ES T FA C A D E A N D S EC TI O N C om pl ex 1 C om pl ex 2 61 Group 2 Proposal – Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning SI T E 2: C ED A R & 1 ST ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM ALFA RO OEM ALFAR O OEM Fl oo r 2 Fl oo r 1 Fl oo r 1 Fl oo r 2 Fl oo r 3 Si te S iz e: ~ 50 00 s qf t C om pl ex 2 : 1 F LA T A B O V E A S TO R E 1 S TO R Y 2 B ED 1 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T ~8 0 0 S Q FT C om pl ex 1 : 2 T O W N H O U S ES 2 S TO R IE S 3 B ED 3 .5 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT E A C H C om pl ex 1 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ C om pl ex 2 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ S it e Pl an 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ N O R TH /S O U TH F A C A D E A N D S EC TI O N EA S T/ W ES T FA C A D E A N D S EC TI O N C om pl ex 1 C om pl ex 2 62 Appendix B SI T E 3: C ED A R & 1 ST Si te S iz e: ~5 00 0 sq ft C om pl ex 2 : 1 FL AT A B O V E A S TO R E 1 S TO R Y 2 B ED 2 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T ~8 0 0 S Q FT C om pl ex 1 : 3 R O W H O U S ES 2 S TO R IE S 2 B ED 2 .5 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT E A C H Fl oo r 2 Fl oo r 1 N or th /S ou th F ac ad e an d S ec ti on Ea st /W es t Fa ca de a nd S ec ti on Si te S iz e: ~5 00 0 sq ft C om pl ex 2 : 2 FL AT A B O V E A S TO R E 1 S TO R Y 2 B ED 2 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT E A C H C om pl ex 1 : 2 F LA TS O V ER S TO R E 1 S TO R Y 2 B ED 1 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 2 0 0 S Q FT E A C H ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM ALFAROOEM A L F A R O OEM SI T E 4: P IN E & 1 ST S it e Pl an 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ Fl oo r P la ns 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ C om pl ex 1 C om pl ex 2 C om pl ex 1 C om pl ex 2 S it e Pl an 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ Fl oo r P la ns 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ Fl oo r 1 Fl oo r 2 N or th /S ou th F ac ad e an d S ec ti on Ea st /W es t Fa ca de a nd S ec ti on 63 Group 2 Proposal – Maryclare Lane, Georgia Manning ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM ALFAR O OEMALFA RO OEM SI T E 5: O A K & 1 ST S TR EE T Si te S iz e: ~ 15 00 0 sq ft C om pl ex 2 : 3 T O W N H O U S ES A B O V E A S TO R E 2 S TO R IE S 3 B ED 2 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~1 5 0 0 S Q FT E A C H 1 LO W ER C O M M ER C IA L S PA C E C om pl ex 1 : 3 R O W H O U S ES 2 S TO R IE S 2 B ED 2 .5 B AT H 1 C A R P O R T EA C H ~8 0 0 S Q FT E A C H C om pl ex 1 C om pl ex 2 Fl oo r 2 C om pl ex 1 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ 1s t st re et Oak street S IT E PL A N 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ C om pl ex 2 1 6 ‘-1 .0 “ Fl oo r 1 Fl oo r 3 Fl oo r 2 Fl oo r 1 N O R TH /S O U TH F A C A D E A N D S EC TI O N EA S T/ W ES T FA C A D E A N D S EC TI O N 64 Appendix C Appendix C Group 3 Proposal – Miles Hagen, Kit Renk 65 Group 3 Proposal – Miles Hagen, Kit Renk 1ST ST POST OFFICE CITY HALL 30’ 90’ 210’ OAKRIDGE URBAN INFILL PROJECT DWELLING TYPES: ROWHOUSE, DUPLEX, APARTMENT COMMERCIAL TYPES: MARKET STALLS, RETAIL, RESTAURANT, OFFICE TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 28 TOTAL SITE AREA (5 PARCELS): ~44700 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~27 UNITS PER ACRE KIT RENK & MILES HAGEN | ARCH484 | BOLLO | FALL 2024 SITE PLAN + GROUND FLOOR PLANS SCALE: 1” = 60’ EXISTING BUILDINGSSITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5 SHARED OUTDOOR SPACE “Our main goals are to achieve sustainability, community, visual diversity and the creation of work-live relationships, which we feel are properties best associated with urban infill. Infill will give Oakridge an opportunity to liven up a space rich with potential that is not currently being met. It will also give us the opportunity to build up rather than out, in order to reduce sprawl. The uptown shops and other commercial and public spaces will experience an increase in use, and the intermingling of commercial and residential spaces will improve relationships between Oakridge’s residents. Residents may also gain opportunities to work where they live, keeping business local and opening up opportunities to improve the local economy. A livelier uptown will also generate greater appreciation for Oakridge’s public spaces and encourage the improvement of them, something that current residents have been hesitant towards in the past. Our intentions for this infill project are to utilize existing empty plots while improving the commercial spaces they may replace. We will also create a diversity in housing types and unit sizes so that there is an array of resident types throughout uptown, and the space feels inviting and shared equally. Our designs will remain visually diverse and colorful, to further develop the existing playfulness that downtown Oakridge already holds. Our infill project will be accessible to all of Oakridge’s residents - families, older folk, and young adults alike - as well as achieve desired sustainability by focusing our efforts on building up, rather than out.” PERSPECTIVES DUPLEX, SITE 2 ROWHOUSES, SITE 1 PI N E ST CE DA R ST OA K ST AS H ST BE EC H ST AL DE R ST 66 Appendix C S I T E 1 DWELLING TYPE: 2 BED 2.5 BATH SPLIT LEVEL ROWHOUSE COMMERCIAL TYPE: MARKET STALLS NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 2 SITE AREA: ~4900 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~18 UNITS PER ACRE BASEMENT FLOOR GROUND FLOOR FIRST UPPER FLOOR TOP FLOOR SECTION BB SCALE: 1” = 8’FLOOR PLANS SCALE: 1” = 8’ A B B A ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1” = 8’ NORTH EAST WEST ROWHOUSES SECTION AA SCALE: 1” = 8’ 67 Group 3 Proposal – Miles Hagen, Kit Renk SITE 2 DWELLING TYPE: 3 BED 2 BATH DUPLEX NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 2 SITE AREA: ~3200 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~27 UNITS PER ACRE D U P L E X FLOOR PLANS SECTION BB SECTION AA ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1” = 8’ SCALE: 1” = 8’ SCALE: 1” = 8’ B B A A NORTH SOUTH WEST GROUND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR EAST SCALE: 1” = 8’ 68 Appendix C FLOOR PLANS SCALE: 1” = 8’ GROUND FLOOR SECOND & THIRD FLOOR THIRD FLOOR ELEVATION SCALE: 1” = 8’ NORTH EAST B B S I T E 3 APARTMENTS DWELLING TYPE: 1 & 2 BED MULTISTORY APARTMENTS COMMERCIAL TYPE: RESTAURANT NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 10 SITE AREA: ~12500 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~35 UNITS PER ACRE SECTION AA SECTION BB SCALE: 1” = 8’ SECOND FLOOR AA 69 Group 3 Proposal – Miles Hagen, Kit Renk S I T E 4 DWELLING TYPE: 3 BED 2.5 BATH ROWHOUSE COMMERCIAL TYPE: RETAIL NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 6 SITE AREA: ~12300 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~21 UNITS PER ACRE ROWHOUSES GROUND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR THIRD FLOOR BASEMENT FLOOR A A B B FLOOR PLANS SCALE: 1” = 8’ SECTION AA SECTION BB SCALE: 1” = 8’ EAST WEST ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1” = 8’ 70 Appendix C S I T E 5 ROWHOUSES DWELLING TYPE: 3 BED 2 BATH SPLIT LEVEL ROWHOUSE COMMERCIAL TYPE: OFFICE NUMBER OF NEW DWELLINGS: 8 SITE AREA: ~11800 SQ FT NET DENSITY: ~30 UNITS PER ACRE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1” = 8’ SO UT H (1S T) SO UT H (A LL EY ) SECTION AA SCALE: 1” = 8’ FLOOR PLANS SCALE: 1” = 8’ GR OU N D FL OO R FI RS T UP PE R FL OO R FI RS T UP PE R FL OO R TO P FL OO R SE CO N D UP PE R FL OO R GR OU N D FL OO R TO P FL OO R A A 71 Group 4 Proposal – Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe Appendix D Group 4 Proposal – Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe 72 Appendix D MAPLE GROVE ARCH 484|ECOLOGICAL HOUSING DESIGN CHRISTINA BOLLO ANA AMADOR FUENTES, LIAM OGZEWALLA, EMMA WATANABE Maple Grove is a 3.5 acre tract. We kept the essence of our project within the people of Oakridge and provided a range of affordablility in our mixed-type dwellings, therefore creating inclusive housing welcoming people from all economic backgrounds. With this in mind, our team prioritized designing for small families and the elderly, which is a prevalent population of Oakridge. For our site, we included three middle housing unit types-duplexes, triplexes, and rowhouses. With the existing nature and beautiful views, our team chose to prioritize and perserve the greenery, compromising for many green/outdoor spaces. Our site includes spaces such as an urban garden and gazebos for gathering spaces. Our overall site plan resembles the venation pattern of a leaf as the central road is the stalk, or the main vein, and the alleyways for the Duplexes and Triplexes being the secontary veins. FIRST FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECOND FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION B SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION A SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION B SECTION B SECTION A SECTION A DUPLEX 73 Group 4 Proposal – Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe No . 1 4 No . 2 0 No . 1 6 No . 2 2 No. 1-3 No . 2 5 No. 10- 12 No. 7-9 No. 4-6 No . 2 6 No . 2 4 No . 2 3 No . 1 3 No . 1 5 No . 2 1 No . 1 7 No . 1 8 No . 1 9 No . 2 7 DWELLINGS PARTI PEDESTRIAN PATHS SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/20” = 1’-0” SITE SECTION SCALE: 1/20” = 1’-0” SITE SECTION DUPLEX TRIPLEX VELVET ROAD 74 Appendix D NUMBER OF DWELLINGS: 27 TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 161,000 ONE GARAGE PER DWELLING FIRST FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECOND FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION A SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION A SECTION A ROWHOUSES TRIPLEX SECTION A SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECTION B SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” FIRST FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” SECOND FLOOR SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0” 75 Group 4 Proposal – Ana Amador Fuentes, Liam Ogzewalla, Emma Watanabe RO WH OU SE F RO NT F AC AD E 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” RO WH OU SE B AC K FA CA DE 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” TR IP LE X FA CA DE B 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” 76 Appendix D TR IP LE X FA CA DE A 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” DU PL EX F AC AD E B 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” DU PL EX F AC AD E A 1/ 8” = 1 ’- 0” 77 Group 5 Proposal – Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards Appendix E Group 5 Proposal – Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards 78 Appendix E 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 23 3 23 3 3 ������������������������ ������������������ ���������������������������� �������� ���� ���������� ������������� ��� ��������� �� ����������� ��� ��������� �� ���� ����� ������ �������������� � ����� ������������������ �� ������������� ��������� ������������ ����� ������������ ����� � ��������� ������ �� ��������� � ������������� ������ ����� ��������� ����������������������� �������� ������� ��������� ���� ��������������������� � � ���������������� �� ������������������������ �������� ������������ ������������� �� ��������������������������������� ������������ �� ���� ������������������ ����� ������������������� ��������� ������ ��� ������� ��� ����������� ��������� ��� � BUGEL VILLAGE SITE SECTION SITE PLAN BUILDINGS 13 DWELLINGS 37 BEDROOMS 86 PARKING STALLS 37 APPROX POPULATION 90-120 PERSONS SITE SIZE 3.6 ACRES NET DENSITY 10 DWELLINGS PER UNIT ACRE STREET SECTION ���� � �� �� ������� �������� �������� ���� � ������� ���������������������� ����� �� ����� ��� ���� ������������� � ��������� ����������������� ����� �� ��� ���������������������� ���� ���� ����������� ����� ���������� � � ������� ������ ����������� ����� � �������������������������� ��� ���� ����� ������ ����������� ����� � � ����� � �������� ��� �������� ������ ����������� ����� � ��� ����� ���� ������ ������������������� ����� ������ ����� ���������� �������������� ���������������� � ������ ����������������� ��� ���� ��� ����������� ���� ���� ��������� ������ ���������������� ����� ��� �� ���������� �� ��� ����� � �������� �� ������ ������������������ �������������� ������������ �������������������������� ���� �������������� ��� ������� � �������� ������������� ������ ����� ������ ���� ���� �� 79 Group 5 Proposal – Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards A B C BUILDINGS 13 DWELLINGS 37 BEDROOMS 86 PARKING STALLS 37 APPROX POPULATION 90-120 PERSONS SITE SIZE 3.6 ACRES NET DENSITY 10 DWELLINGS PER UNIT ACRE �������� �������� 80 Appendix E HI GH S ID E TR IP LE X LO W SI DE T RI PL EX SL OP ED T RI PL EX �� �� �� � 81 Group 5 Proposal – Ben Keigwin, Leyton Richards POD TRIPLEX POD LEX BUILDING DRAWINGS ������� BUGEL LOOP 82 Appendix E ELK MEADOWS - 2OO8 PROPOSED PARCEL DIVSION 11 PARCELS OAKRIDGE PARK VISION SITE PHOTOS A B C 83 Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas Appendix F Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas 84 Appendix F UP UP ELK MEADOWS ARCH 484 I Christina Bollo Liv Anderson I Erin Davis I Caleb Galas 3.4 acre site in NE Oakridge Net Density: 22.63 units/acre 1 : 1 parking to unit ratio 43 units total: 10 duplexes 3 triplexes 2 quad apartments 1 6 unit apartment SITE PLAN 1/20” - 1.0’ 85 Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas DUPLEX UNIT Caleb Galas 4 bed dwellings 2,150 SF per dwelling Lot Size: 6,100 sf SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 1/8” - 1.0’ ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” - 1.0’ KEY PLAN 1/80” - 1.0’ FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ THIRD FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ 86 Appendix F DN DN UPUP APARTMENT Liv Anderson 6 two bed units, stacked 3,342 SF complex 13,770 SF lot 1ST FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ 2ND FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ SITE KEY PLAN 1/8O” - 1.0’ ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” - 1.0’ NORTHEAST - SOUTHWEST SECTION 1/8” - 1.0’ 87 Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas D N U P TRIPLEX Liv Anderson 3 bed flat over 2 one-bed flats 1,170 SF each 5,000 SF lot 1ST FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ 2ND FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ SITE KEY PLAN 1/8O” - 1.0’ ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” - 1.0’ NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 1/8” - 1.0’ 88 Appendix F SIDE BY SIDE DUPLEX Erin Davis 2 bed townhouses 1244 SF each 5000 SF lot UPUP DNDN 1ST FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ 2ND FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ SITE KEY PLAN 1/8O” - 1.0’ ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” - 1.0’ NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 1/8” - 1.0’ 89 Group 6 Proposal – Liv Anderson, Erin Davis, Caleb Galas STACKED DUPLEX Erin Davis 1200 SF 2 bed flat 1500 SF 3 bed flat 5000 SF lot DN UP 1ST FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ 2ND FLOOR PLAN 1/8” - 1.0’ SITE KEY PLAN 1/8O” - 1.0’ ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” - 1.0’ NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 1/8” - 1.0’ 90 Appendix F 91 Group 7 Proposal – Madison Coultrap, Ying Thum Appendix G Group 7 Proposal – Madison Coultrap, Ying Thum 92 Appendix G EA ST / W ES T SI TE S EC TI O N 1 / 20 ’ = 1 ’0 ” SI TE S TA TI ST IC S ▪ N U M BE R O F D W EL LI N G S: ◦ 44 U N IT S IN T O TA L ◦ RO W H O U SE S: ▫ 24 T O TA L D W EL LI N G S ◦ A PA RT M EN TS : ▫ 2O T O TA L U N IT S ▪ N U M BE R O F PA RK IN G S PA C ES : ◦ 44 U N C O VE RE D S PA C ES IN T O TA L ▫ 1 PA RK IN G S PA C E PE R D W EL LI N G ▪ O VE RA LL S IT E SI ZE : ◦ 3. 61 4 A C RE S ◦ 43 ,5 61 .7 S Q . F T. / A C RE ▪ N ET D EN SI TY C A LC U LA TI O N : ◦ TO TA L SI TE : 7 2 D W EL LI N G S PE R A C RE A PA RT M EN T C O M M U N IT Y ST AT IS TI C S: BR ID G EW A TE R G RO VE M A D IS O N C O U LT RA P & Y IN G T H U M A RC H 4 84 | C H RI ST IN A B O LL O | F A LL 2 02 4 A PA RT M EN T A S EC TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T A S EC O N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T B SE C TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T B SE C O N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T A E LE VA TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T A G RO U N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T B EL EV AT IO N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T B G RO U N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T A A PA RT M EN T BA PA RT M EN T C O M M U N IT Y PE RS PE C TI VE BR ID G E PE RS PE C TI VE ▪ N U M BE R O F D W EL LI N G S: ◦ A PA RT M EN TS : ▫ 20 T O TA L U N IT S ▫ 5 - 4 U N IT B U IL D IN G S ▪ N ET D EN SI TY C A LC U LA TI O N : ◦ A PA RT M EN T A : ▫ 82 D W EL LI N G S PE R A C RE ◦ A PA RT M EN T B: ▫ 72 D W EL LI N G S PE R A C RE RO W H O U SE C O M M U N IT Y ST AT IS TI C S: ▪ N U M BE R O F D W EL LI N G S: ◦ RO W H O U SE S: ▫ 24 T O TA L D W EL LI N G S ▫ 4 - 3 U N IT B U IL D IN G S ▫ 2 - 6 U N IT B U IL D IN G S ▪ N ET D EN SI TY C A LC U LA TI O N : ◦ RO W H O U SE A : ▫ 62 D W EL LI N G S PE R A C RE ▫ RO W H O U SE B : ▫ 74 D W EL LI N G S PE R A C RE UP U UP UP P U O PE N T O BE LO W O PE N T O BE LO W RO W H O U SE A S EC TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE A S EC O N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE B S EC TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE B S EC O N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE A T H IR D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE B T H IR D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE A E LE VA TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE A G RO U N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE B S EC TI O N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE B G RO U N D F LO O R PL A N 1 / 8’ = 1 ’0 ” RO W H O U SE C O M M U N IT Y PE RS PE C TI VE PA RK P ER SP EC TI VE RO W H O U SE A RO W H O U SE B SI TE P LA N 1 / 20 ’ = 1 ’0 ” U U UP P P U PU P P U U U U P P UP P U P P U U U UP P P U PU P P U U U U P P UP P U P P U U U UP P P U PU P P U U U U P P UP P U P P U GAME TIME R R GAME TIME RR GAME TIME GAME TIME ES SE N C E ST AT EM EN T TH IS N EI G H BO RH O O D IN O A KR ID G E IS N ES TL ED IN T H E W IL LA M ET TE N A TI O N A L FO RE ST . I T IS D ES IG N ED T O S ER VE O A KR ID G E’ S M A IN D EM O G RA PH IC S, IN C LU D IN G A G RO W IN G M O U N TA IN B IK IN G C O M M U N IT Y, Y O U N G F A M IL IE S, A N D T H E EL D ER LY C O M M U N IT Y. T U C KE D A W AY FR O M T H E M O RE A C TI VE P A RT O F TO W N , T H IS C O M M U N IT Y W IL L BR ID G E TH E G A P BE TW EE N S O C IA L A N D P RI VA TE R EA LM S IN O A KR ID G E. N EE D IN G TO F U RT H ER A C TI VA TE T H EI R C O M M U N IT IE S, H AV IN G A V ER SA TI LE H O U SI N G M IX W IT H C O M M U N IT Y RE A LM S IN B ET W EE N W IL L EN C O U RA G E TH IS N EE D ED G RO W TH . T H U S, IN C O RP O RA TI N G A M IX O F RO W H O U SE S A N D L O W R IS E A PA RT M EN TS C A N A LL EV IA TE T H E N EE D ED D EN SI TY IN C RE A SE W H IL E ST IL L C RE A TI N G C O M M U N A L SP A C ES W IT H IN T H E N EI G H BO RH O O D IT SE LF . A C TI VA TI N G T H E EX TE RI O R O F TH E SI TE F A C IN G T H E M A IN R O A D EN C O U RA G ES IN TE RA C TI O N B ET W EE N A LL R ES ID EN TS O F TH E N EI G H BO RH O O D A N D E X TE N D S A N IN V IT A TI O N T O T H E EX IS TI N G R ES ID EN TS IN N EA RB Y N EI G H BO RH O O D S. W IT H M O RE IN TI M AT E C O M M O N S PA C ES S PR EA D T H RO U G H O U T, T H E SI TE IS IN TE N D ED T O E N CO U RA G E IN TE RA C TI O N W IT H IM M ED IA TE N EI G H BO RS . T H U S, A S EN SE O F EA SE C A N B E C RE AT ED B Y H AV IN G D A ILY IN TE RA C TI O N A M O N G ST IM M ED IA TE N EI G H BO RS , W H IL E ST IL L G A IN IN G A N O V ER A LL S EN SE O F SE C U RI TY T H RO U G H O U T TH E EN TI RE C O M M U N IT Y. W IT H T H E EX IS TI N G S IT E C O N D IT IO N S, A C C ES S TO W A TE R A N D D RA IN A G E IS A N EC ES SA RY F EA TU RE T H AT T H IS N EI G H BO RH O O D W IL L H IG H LI G H T, C O N N EC TI N G B A C K TO O A KR ID G E’ S PR O XI M IT Y TO N AT U RE . AS N AT U RE IS A F O C A L PO IN T O F O A KR ID G E’ S C O M M U N IT Y, C A PT U RI N G V IE W S FR O M A LL P U BL IC R EA LM S IS A P RI O RI TY F O R BU IL D IN G A W EL CO M IN G A N D P O SI TI V E CO N N EC TI O N T O T H E SU RR O U N D IN G L A N D SC A PE . A PA RT M EN T 1 FA C A D E M O D EL 1 / 4” = 1 ’0 ” A PA RT M EN T 2 F A C A D E M O D EL 1 / 4” = 1 ’0 ” SI TE M O D EL 1 / 20 ” = 1’ 0” Marc Schlossberg SCI Co-Director, and Professor of Planning, Public Policy and Management, University of Oregon Nico Larco SCI Co-Director, and Professor of Architecture, University of Oregon Megan Banks SCYP Director, University of Oregon Lindsey Hayward SCYP Assistant Program Manager, University of Oregon Grace Craven Report Coordinator Danielle Lewis Graphic Designer SCI Directors and Staff