Issuu on Google+

urban planning • architecture • 2013

OSMAN DADI


OSMAN DADI • 2013

2


Contents 05

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

06 14 18 20 22

Greater Newburgh Area Transportation and Land Use Plan Bridgeport Corridor and Waterfront Design Guidelines Orange County Greenway Marketing and Presentations Writing Samples and Insight

27

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS, LLP

28 34 36

University of Hawaii Cancer Research Center Children’s Hospital Los Angeles San Jose District Courthouse

43

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

44 50 54 56

Menil Museum Cafe Interpretive Music Center - Houston Slab Space Wetlands Research Center and Pavilion

59

PERSONAL WORK

60 64

Vision for Houston Rail 2050 Urban Art

3


4


Regional Plan Association

5


Greater Newburgh Area Transportation and Land Use Plan 12.2011 - 03.2012 The Greater Newburgh Area Transportation and Land Use Plan is a two year project that was finished during my term at Regional Plan Association. My primary task was designing and publishing the final master plan document, including creating maps from synthesized GIS data and developing the optimal presentation for the county and its constituents. The Newburgh Area Transportation and Land Use study was implemented by the Orange County Planning Department to identify key priorities for creating integrated solutions for transportation and land use within the northeastern portion of Orange County. The multi-modal plan for transportation was intended to identify strategies for enhancing mobility while preserving quality of life.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

6

CONTRIBUTIONS AND PROCESS • Final document layout, editing, and design • Final map development • Graphic Design • Creating graphic renditions of the results of the project’s GIS analysis. In creating the final document, I utilized RPA’s report methodology. As the plan is rather lengthy, our team found it important to break the monotony of the text with frequent photographs that conveyed the context of the conditions described. Additionally, the flow of the text is highly important, and tables, charts, and maps were thus placed accordingly. As the study website was developed using black and orange as key colors, the report utilizes the same theme. The maps within the report were developed to tie together content in a graphic manifestation, and thus followed the same graphic language. I sought specifically to highlight relevant information by using bright, bold colors for the subject of the maps, while using soft, gray tones and transparencies to soften the context. Thus, roads networks are shown in gray throughout all maps; the study area and municipal boundaries are shown as well, though the coloring is muted such that the most important information stands out.

A typical page from the Greater Newburgh Area Transportation and Land Use Plan Report.


D. Evaluation of Travel Demand Model Results Intersection Analysis A set of 18 traffic analysis locations was selected for assessing the potential effects of the proposed development scenarios (see Figure 4-8). These locations were selected based upon input from Study Area stakeholders and the Study Team’s own observations and professional judgment. These 18 intersections represent key locations along important corridors and a select number of locations within the Villages. They are considered to be a representative set of locations at which the effects of the land use scenarios could be assessed, potential roadway improvement packages outlined, and broad findings generalized for the Study Area as a whole. They do not reflect the only locations that could be affected. The 18 intersections are: • Route 17K and Route 211/Union Street

Traffic Analysis Locations Figure 4-8: Traffic Analysis Locations in the Newburgh Study Area

Measuring Congestion

• Route 17K and Route 747 • Route 17K and Rock Cut Road • Route 17K and Route 300 • Route 17K/Broadway and Route 9W/ Robinson Avenue • Route 207 and Route 747 • Route 207 and Breunig Road • Route 207 and Route 300 • Route 208 and Route 52/Main Street • Route 208 and Neelytown Road/I-84 Ramps • Route 300 and Route 52 • Route 300 and Route 94 (Vails Gate) • Route 300 and Route 32 • Route 9W and Fostertown Road • Route 9W and Route 32 • Route 9W and Forge Hill Road • Route 94 and Jackson Avenue

The travel demand model produced outputs of volumes of new traffic and a “volume to capacity” (“v/c”) ratio at each of the 18 intersections. Net change

Table 4-7: 2010 Existing and 2035 Forecast Volumes and V/C Ratios Intersection Volumes Intersection Exist. BAU SGA SGB 1 NY 17K & Union St/Route 211 1,414 1,565 1,601 1,561 2 NY 17K & NY 208 2,260 2,762 2,788 2,765 3 NY 17K & NY 747 1,939 2,519 2,591 2,671 4 NY 17K & Rock Cut Rd 1,769 1,792 1,839 1,794 5 NY 17K & NY 300 3,668 4,062 4,125 3,956 6 NY 17K & Robinson/US 9W 2,235 2,445 2,324 2,439 7 NY 207 & NY 747 1,477 2,361 2,321 2,315 8 NY 207 & Breunig Rd 1,361 2,557 2,187 2,115 9 NY 207 & NY 300 3,025 3,137 3,172 3,196 10 NY 208 & Main St/NY 52 1,270 1,629 1,737 1,735 11A NY 208 & I-84/Neeleytown 1,587 2,253 2,213 2,214 11B NY 208 & I-84/Neeleytown 1,594 2,450 2,413 2,363 12 NY 300 & NY 52 2,522 2,756 2,738 2,703 13 NY 300 & NY 94 2,540 2,637 2,642 2,745 14 NY 32 & NY 300 1,793 2,565 2,483 2,340 15 US 9W & Fostertown Rd 2,012 2,264 2,285 2,192 16 US 9W & NY 32 2,719 3,047 3,043 3,003 17 US 9W & Forge Hill Rd 2,292 3,225 3,327 3,481 18 NY 94 & Jackson Ave 1,215 2,024 2,077 2,020 Notes:

72

in traffic volume is one indicator that improvements may be necessary at a location. The v/c ratio, as it is referred to, is another key metric for traffic engineers to identify locations where new volumes would cause additional congestion. The theoretical maximum capacity Volume-Capacity Ratio Exist. BAU SGA 0.87 0.97 0.99 0.57 0.70 0.71 0.48 0.62 0.64 0.97 0.98 1.01 0.88 0.98 0.99 0.75 0.82 0.78 0.58 0.93 0.91 0.46 0.86 0.73 0.90 0.94 0.95 0.64 0.82 0.88 0.59 0.83 0.82 0.52 0.80 0.79 0.96 1.05 1.05 0.98 1.02 1.02 0.63 0.90 0.87 0.88 0.99 1.00 0.67 0.76 0.76 0.58 0.81 0.84 0.51 0.85 0.87

BAU = Business as Usual; SGA = Smart Growth A; SGB = Smart Growth B.

Newburgh Area Transportation & Land Use Study

SGB 0.96 0.70 0.65 0.99 0.95 0.82 0.91 0.71 0.95 0.88 0.82 0.77 1.03 1.06 0.82 0.96 0.75 0.87 0.85

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

• Route 17K and Route 208 (Scotts Corner)

7


The Greater Newburgh Study Area.

8


Open Space Protected Land Agricultural Commercial Industrial Civic Uses Residential 1 unit/acre or less Residential 1 to 4 units/acre Residential 4+ units/acre Figure 4-2: Land Use in the Greater Newburgh Study Area.

Land Use in the Greater Newburgh Study Area.

potential housing units or the amount of commercial square feet that can be built on it under current zoning, accounting for ecological constraints and parking needs. Depending on the commercial establishment type allowed in each zone (e.g. industrial, retail), the potential square footage of each commercially zoned prop-

It is important to note that the buildout methodology does not make any specific accommodation for provision of water supply or wastewater treatment infrastructure. For the purposes of this analysis it is assumed that adequate water supply and wastewater treatment is either available or would be made available to

essential pieces of infrastructure but could not address these challenges within the scope of this study. A build-out can be unconstrained by time or population and economic conditions (i.e. what amount of development would occur based simply on what the zoning permits) or constrained by a time factor or other socio-economic factor (i.e.

9


The Study Area boundary for the Newburgh cluster.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

10

The chart conveys different buildout scenarios all together, by municipality.


REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

Study Area Buildout Footprints by parcel showing Existing Developed, Smart Growth A, and Smart Growth B Buildouts.

Smart Growth B Buildout Smart Growth A Buildout Existing Developed

11

Figure 4-5: Study Area Buildout Footprints by parce


C. Existing Transportation Network Regional Roadway Elements

Two major interstate highways cross in the center of the Study Area, adjacent to Stewart Airport and the major commercial areas in the Towns of Newburgh and New Windsor. Interstate 87, the New York State Thruway, is a north-south roadway that links the New York City metropolitan area with upstate New York. Interstate 84 is an east-west roadway that links southern New England and the Boston metropolitan area with Scranton, PA Existing Northside Bus Route and points west. A third major highway Existing Southside Bus Route corridor, NY Route 17 (future I-86), is just south of the Study Area, but as it undergoes major investments to bring the Figure 3-1:in Existing Transit Routes in Area. the Newburgh Ar Existing transit routes the Newburgh Study roadway to Interstate Highway standards, transfer to PATH or ferries to Manhattan Ro it is becoming an increasingly important trade corridor linking Orange County and or to the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail for hu connections to Jersey City. the New York City metropolitan area to ser A ferry and a shuttle bus from New York State’s Southern Tier. Newburgh to Beacon Station, across “pu the Hudson River in Dutchess County, of provide transit connections to Metroand North’s Hudson Line. The Hudson Line no provides direct service to Poughkeepsie ser and Grand Central Terminal. Additional service to the Port Two commuter rail services link the Authority Bus Terminal on Manhattan’s Study Area to the metropolitan core: west side is provided by Short Line Bus/ Metro-North’s Port Jervis Line and Coach USA. Short Line Bus and AdironMetro-North’s Hudson Line. The Port Ste dack Trailways also offer intercity bus Jervis Line is primarily a single-track rail by services throughout the Lower Hudson line that begins in the western portions Po Valley, notably to employment centers in of Orange County at the Pennsylvania Jer White Plains, and to destinations in Long Ro state line and makes a sweeping arc over Island, Connecticut, and upstate New the northern tier of the County, turning pri York. due south within the Study Area and and Local bus routes link the City of continuing across the State line (becoming pas the NJ Transit Main Line) to its terminus Newburgh to surrounding neighboran hoods but have more limited service in Hoboken. Port Jervis Line riders can bas in the Towns because of the difficulty transfer at Secaucus to other NJ Transit of in attracting sufficient riders from that rail services on the Northeast Corridor, air

Regional Transit Elements

Ai

OSMAN DADI • 2013

12


Northside Route Southside Route Mid-Valley Route Newburgh-Beacon Shuttle Figure 5-7: Proposed Mid-Valley Bus Route

current local bus service is operated by two vehicles each providing service every 120 minutes. The portion of the route covered by both vehicles (Broadway and the commercial corridor along Route 300) effectively provides service every 60 minutes. Service is offered Monday through Saturday with weekday service operating between 6:55 AM and 5:30 PM, while Saturday service operates between 8:30 AM and 5:30 PM. In the proposed short-term service recommendation, the portion of the

service indicated by the “red” and “blue” routes in Figures 5-5 and 5-6 would be operated by three vehicles instead of two, allowing for 90-minute headways on each route, or effectively 45 minutes on the overlapping portion of the routes on Broadway and in the Route 300 commercial corridor. A fourth vehicle would operate the “purple” route shown in Figure 5-7 on 90-minute headways. The service plan developed for the ShortTerm Transit Recommendations suggests increasing the span of service to the hours

of 6:00 AM and 9:00 PM on the weekdays and 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM on Saturdays. In the short term, operations of the Newburgh-Beacon Shuttle between Newburgh and the Beacon Metro-North Railroad station should be improved via discussions between regional stakeholders, Orange County, the service operator, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and the New York State Department of Transportation. Changing traffic patterns at Stewart Airport, opportunities to provide better access to emerging

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

Proposed Mid-Valley bus route in the Newburgh Study Area.

13


Bridgeport Corridor and Waterfront Design Guidelines 05.2012 - 06.2012 The Bridgeport Corridor and Waterfront Design Guidelines aim to apply a uniform set of form based zoning policies to the North Main and State Street Corridors, and several vacant industrial sites along the Yellow Mill River, Pequonnock River, and Johnson’s Creek waterways. The goal is to redevelop these corridors and waterfront areas to become urban, walkable, and dense amenities to the City of Bridgeport.

CONTRIBUTIONS • Comparable guidelines and site analysis. • Design guidelines, including zoning and building codes. • Document layout, editing, and design

DESIGN GUIDELINES SUMMARY SHALLOW LOT WITH REAR OR SIDE PARKING

OSMAN DADI • 2013

14

The intent of the shallow lot guidelines is to provide the maximum building street frontage while accommodating parking in means that are attractive and conducive to walking and density. Many sites along Main Street and State Street are limited by a parcel depth of 100 feet or less. The guidelines recommend developers to seek creative ways to accommodate parking while making sidewalk space attractive for pedestrians. Rear parking lots are recommended; side parking is allowed up to a maximum of 64’ in width provided the lot is adequately screened with foliage 90% opaque year round at least four feet tall. Shared parking between properties is recommended where feasible. Sidewalk space is 16’ wide in addition to on-street parking 8’ wide; this zone accommodates creative streetscape with street trees at 25’ intervals. Buildings frontages must have an 80-90% transparency on the first floor, typically accommodating retail space. On property adjacency to residential zones, buildings must be setback from the property line at least 15’ and screened with the L3 landscape treatment of a 6’ foliage barrier with trees spaced at 30’ intervals.


SHALLOW LOT WITH REAR OR SIDE PARKING

15’ setback zone from nearest residential property, with L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing) Building height under 45 feet, setbacks at third level 8’ on street frontage. Street Parcel Line 16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided.

Street facing parking lots will be screened to the sidewalk by 4’ tall 90% opaque foliage and streetscaping. Building setback 8’ from sidewalk.

Typical axonometric, 100’ parcels.

Building height under 45 feet, setbacks at third level 8’ on street frontage.

16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided. Street Parcel Line 15’ setback zone from nearest residential property, with L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing)

Parking to the rear of the building, buffered from Residential zone by L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing)

Typical sections.

Typical Lot Depth 100’ Street Parcel Line

Building setback 8’ from sidewalk.

Street facing parking lots will be screened to the sidewalk by 4’ tall 90% opaque foliage and streetscaping.

15’ setback zone from nearest residential property, with L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing) 16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided.

Typical plan.

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

Opportunities for shared parking between parcels are encouraged.

15


DEEP LOT WITH BUILDING OVERHANG Many sites along the corridors may be too small for shared parking while allowing for the maximum developable area. The guidelines encourage developers to seek creative means to accommodate parking requirements while maximizing density and walkability. This strategy introduces the concept of parking accommodated beneath the rear of a building in lots that are great than 100’ in depth or where feasible. The parking tucked under a building must be screened in an aesthetic manner, ideally behind the main buildings while serving as the primary buffer between the mixed use zone and residential neighborhoods. Sidewalk space is 16’ wide in addition to on-street parking 8’ wide; this zone accommodates creative streetscape with street trees at 25’ intervals. Buildings frontages must have an 80-90% transparency on the first floor, typically for retail space. The upper floors of a building can accommodate roof terraces for residential uses. Adjacent to residential zones, parking lots must be screened with the L3 landscape treatment of a 6’ foliage barrier with trees spaced at 30’ intervals.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

16

STATE STREET TRAFFIC AND PARKING STRATEGY

STATE STREET TRAFFIC AND PARKING STRATEGY State Street can be configured in a multitude of ways; however, the guidelines recommend that the focus stays on a narrow right of way for automobiles that maximized on-street parking, widens sidewalk/pedestrian/treescape space, and potentially provides for frequent crosswalks, builbouts, and protected bike lanes. The total sidewalk space is held at 16, accommodating street trees and landscaping, while retaining a 90% ground level transparency for retail and commercial space. Two lanes of traffic provide access to two lanes of on-street parking. Several parking spots can be occupied by landscaped bulb-outs for additional tree coverage.


DEEP LOT WITH BUILDING OVERHANG 15’ setback zone from nearest residential property, with L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing) Building height under 45 feet, setbacks at third level 10’ on main street frontage, 8’ on side street frontage Street Parcel Line 16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided. This strategy allows expanded parking by placing it beneath the building on the first floor at the rear, creating a buffer to residences.

Cosmetic breaks in facade at maximum 60’ intervals. Building setback 8’ from sidewalk.

Typical axonometric, deep parcels.

This strategy allows expanded parking by placing it beneath the building on the first floor at the rear, creating a buffer to residences. Building height under 45 feet, setbacks at third level 8’ on street frontage.

16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided. Street Parcel Line L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing)

Typical section.

Typical Lot Depth over 100’ Street Parcel Line Building setback 8’ from sidewalk.

Cosmetic breaks in facade at maximum 60’ intervals

L3 landscape treatment (6’ foliage boundary with 30’ tree spacing) 16’ Sidewalk Zone with street trees spaced at 25’ intervals. 90% transparency at first floor Street Frontage. On street parking provided.

Typical plan.

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

Parking tucked under rear of building; Residential floors wrap around terrace courtyard area

17


Orange County Greenway 09.2011 - 05.2012

PROCESS

The Orange County Greenway Compact is an effort being led by Orange County and Regional Plan Association to absorb communities within Orange County into the Hudson Valley Greenway Compact. Regional Plan Association has been tasked with creating the supporting documents and mapping. The compact provides funding and resources for communities that follow sustainable smart growth.

The Comprehensive Plan analysis demonstrates Orange County’s sophistication in creating priority growth areas around major urban centers in the county. Several municipalities have successfully incorporated, independently, many of the provisions of the Greenway Compact, and can be brought into the program through adoption of the act. These maps convey potential greenway and trail connections intended to link urban areas identified by the priority growth areas. The key premise is to preserve agricultural and natural land while creating policies and identifying areas for sustainable smart growth.

CONTRIBUTIONS • Existing Comprehensive Plan research and analysis, including transportation plans, growth plans, community land use and zoning policies. • Priority Growth Areas assessment. • Policy Compilation and analysis • GIS Mapping assistance • Trail network development

OSMAN DADI • 2013

18


Municipal Comprehensive Plans were analyzed to determine each community’s existing compliance with the Greenway Pact, then mapped below. A land cover map (left) shows Orange County’s Priority Growth Areas overlayed onto potential greenway and trail connections.

Crawford

Newburgh

Walden Montgomery Montgomery Village

Newburgh

Maybrook

City

Wallkill

New Windsor

Otisville

Cornwall-On-Hudson Hamptonburgh

Middletown

Washingtonville

Goshen Village

Port Jervis

Greenville

Goshen

South Blooming Grove

Chester Minisink

Monroe Chester

Florida

Highland Falls Kiryas Joel

Village

Woodbury

Warwick Warwick

Tuxedo

Village

Map Key: Community partially fits Greenway criteria Community does not fit Greenway criteria Community not reviewed; more information necessary

Greenwood Lake

Highlands

Harriman

Monroe

Unionville

Community generally fits Greenway criteria

Cornwall

Blooming Grove

Wawayanda

Tuxedo Park

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

Mount Hope

Deerpark

19


OSMAN DADI • 2013

20

A planning framework diagram utilized in the Windsor, CT RFP.


Marketing and Presentations CONTRIBUTIONS

09.2011 - 05.2012 The Centers program at Regional Plan Association sought out urban design and placemaking projects within the Tristate region. My role lay in presentation strategy and graphic design, such as planning framework diagrams and mapping.

• Comparable guidelines and site analysis • Design guidelines, including zoning and building codes • Document layout, editing, and design • Planning framework diagrams • Additional graphics • Presentation materials We first identified sites and land most conducive to potential development, and categorized them by development type. I suggested a “rail station alternative” siting, as the current station location with its closer proximity to Windsor seemed a better suited to transit oriented development. The diagram is masked in grayscale, while utilizing bright colors to bring out information. Red and yellow tones represent development, while blue tones are conducive to transportation linkages and civic areas.

B. BUILD-OUT AS USUAL

C. SMART GROWTH BUILD-OUT

These series of images were used to convey the different buildout patterns and consequent land use stemming from growth policies that advocate controlled or uncontrolled growth. Increased connectivity and efficient land utilization occurs in the circumstance C.

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

A. EXISTING CONDITIONS

21


Writing Samples and Insight Regional Plan Association, a not-for-profit non-governmental organization, allows its research staff many opportunities to contribute to ideas in transportation and urban policy, including spotlight articles and blog postings. I utilized the opportunity to present my thoughts regarding the funding decisions of Maryland’s Inter-County Connector (ICC), and design proposals for the future California High Speed Rail Corridor in the San Francisco peninsula.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

22

A google map was created with the article to help New York readers understand the geography of projects discussed in the article. The ICC is shown in purple, rail projects in green, HOT lanes as orange, and toll collection as a dollar sign.


By Osman Dadi, Research Associate, RPA December 21, 2011 On November 22, 2011, the InterCounty Connector opened in central Maryland, finishing a long-anticipated link between I-270 and I-95, two of state’s busiest thoroughfares and paralleling a third, I-495. The completed highway, hotly debated since the late 1960s, fulfills a campaign pledge of Maryland Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., the one-term Republican governor defeated in 2006. The new road showcases the very best (and most expensive) in highway design. The road, also known as the MD-200, is a wide six lanes with smooth curves, large medians and large buffer zones with tall, noise-attenuating walls. Electronic information panels and toll collection gantries occur frequently. Bridges across major streams are long, straight, and wide; road overpasses are similarly generous, appearing to be sized to accommodate 10 or more lanes with 25-foot clearances. Along a portion of the route, state engineers and consultants even added a wide, 500foot twin tunnel capable of accommodating four lanes plus shoulders in each direction to mitigate disruptions to a nearby residential suburb. Despite its size and expense, or in fact because of it, the project might end up causing more traffic problems than it solves. Its planning and construction highlight the risks of concentrating limited infrastructure funds on one form of transportation. These are challenges the tri-state region faces as well, as limited transportation dollars are doled out among road, bridge, maintenance and mass-transit projects, such as in the Tappan Zee Bridge replacement, where some have proposed cutting a long-planned transit component. In Maryland, the new road is without a doubt a quicker alternative for drivers who can afford to avoid the parallel, free route, I-495. Travel savings amount to roughly 15-20 minutes in each direction when traffic is light. The state aims to attract 30,000 daily commuters on average by June 2012. But these time savings will likely be short-lived, as development around the highway, as well as driver choices, fill the road with more cars. Powerful development interests have already begun transformational plans, such as the 2,200-acre Konterra project in Prince George’s County where the eastern end of the ICC meets I-95. This underscores what all major studies said about the ICC before it began construction: The new road won’t relieve congestion on I-495 as intended, and following the concept of induced demand, the ICC will actually increase traffic at several key points in the state highway network as it generates new automobile trips and, over time, sprawl.

Additionally, the ICC has already strained budgets, both private and public. The cost of the highway, with two short eastern segments still unfinished, is $2.56 billion for an 18mile route. It has some of the most expensive tolls per mile in the nation at $4 for the length of the route at peak hours and lower, variable rates at other times. Effectively, this translates into an $8 round trip per vehicle at the peak, on top of the high costs of driving and gasoline. Yet tolling doesn’t come close to covering the road’s cost, so the state has doubled tolls and lowered maintenance on all other statewide facilities, including toll bridges more than 100 miles away. Finally, there are the many opportunity costs. Gov. Ehrlich borrowed a decade’s worth of money from the state’s future federal transportation funds. Thus, the debt undertaken by the state of Maryland in building the highway effectively stalled three viable and long-planned statewide rail projects-- the Purple Line in lower Montgomery County, the Corridor Cities Transitway along the upper I-270 corridor in Montgomery County, and the Red Line subway in central Baltimore. The Purple Line is especially significant, as it is planned on a route between two of Montgomery County’s most important business and community centers, Bethesda and Silver Spring, and would directly provide a parallel alternative to congested I-495 and some ICC users. Additionally, the route connects two branches of the busiest subway line in Washington. The ICC, on the other hand, is routed through fringe suburbs, and doesn’t provide travel alternatives to congested urban areas in lower Montgomery County. The combined cost of those transit lines was in the range of $3 billion to $4 billion, or roughly the same as the cost of the ICC and new high-occupancy toll lanes on I-95 in Baltimore. The expected number of users, though, was very different. The three rail projects were expected to handle 105,000 to 155,000 passengers a day, compared with the ICC’s predicted 30,000 to 40,000 commuters. As seen on a map, it’s clear that the ICC is simply one segment of the long-discussed outer beltway around the greater Washington, D.C., area, a planning concept now generally discredited but still not discarded. Some say the ICC could have been built sooner and at lower cost. But looking forward, one thing is apparent: Drivers in Montgomery County and on I-495, commuters in Baltimore, and residents elsewhere in the state will be mired in congestion, traffic, and cost, with few alternatives, for potentially decades to come.

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

ONE EXPENSIVE HIGHWAY CAN’T SOLVE A STATE’S WORTH OF TRAFFIC WOES

23


REMAKING THE SAN FRANCISCO PENNINSULA CORRIDOR WITH A BICYCLE EXPRESSWAY By Osman Dadi, Research Associate, RPA January 12, 2012

OSMAN DADI • 2013

24

Accommodating high-speed rail trains in the San Francisco peninsula has been a contentious topic because of potential noise and visual impacts on the surrounding communities. Recently, the California High-Speed Rail Authority announced its support for a “blended approach” that would utilize the existing Caltrain corridor. But what if a solution could be found that ensures grade separation between trains and automobiles while also opening up dramatically enhanced commuting options for bicyclists?  This proposition allows another incredible opportunity for the Peninsula that would benefit all communities: integrating a grade-separated bicycle expressway into that new infrastructure. The benefits of a separated cycle expressway are many: just as cars on interstate highways are able to travel faster, without stopping for traffic lights, and thus also in a safer means, an expressway for cyclists would allow bicyclists to do the same. The new route would pass over main roads, eliminating vehicular conflicts and allowing fast travel times. Exits spaced out at quarter or half mile intervals would connect into the existing on street bicycle corridors, creating a network between them. The route would allow bicyclists to bypass some of the busiest arterial roads, reducing conflicts with automobiles and hereby helping automobile traffic move faster, while making the experience safer for cyclists and drivers alike. Just as I-280 and US-101 act as the primary automobile highways along the Peninsula, and Caltrain the primary rail corridor, a bicycle expressway would fill a similar role for bicycles. It would provide a new, direct, and fast grade separated route for workers utilizing bicycling and transit as their primary means of commuting, as well as a dedicated route for recreational bicyclists. The San Francisco peninsula is known for many things, among them a workforce driven by innovative ideas (especially in Silicon Valley), great weather nearly all year round, a culture that largely embraces healthy and environmentally friendly lifestyles, and strong support for biking. The bicycle network of the Bay Area, while quite extensive, is simultaneously also quite disconnected. Particularly in the central Peninsula, there are few dedicated off street bicycle corridors, and routes on streets are frequently disconnected to each other. Thus, there is presently no direct means for a bicyclist to traverse many portions of the Peninsula without mixing into automobile traffic, itself a dangerous proposition given the high speed nature of main routes like El Camino Real or the Expressways around San Jose.

Simultaneously, the existing peninsula Caltrain corridor is slated for a much needed change. The present line has not been significantly upgraded for several decades, but has been planned for large scale electrification for many years. When the California High Speed Rail plan was announced between San Francisco and Los Angeles, an opportunity arose to couple that electrification project with a broader reconstruction that also accommodates high speed rail service by expanding, electrifying, and grade separating the corridor. The configuration of the new route, though still undecided, will likely be elevated on an embankment, elevated on a structure, or (if communities along the route are willing to help fund it) trenched.  The benefits of grade separation and electrification alone are enormous: eliminating grade crossings allow faster train speeds, eliminate noise pollution from train horns, and electrification removes diesel fumes and noise. Additionally, automobile conflicts with trains are eliminated, also making it safer and faster for drivers to cross the railway. Ideally, a new bicycle route would be directly integrated into the new Caltrain system, making it extremely easy and efficient to bring your bicycle onto a train, thus extending the reach of that transit system. As a hypothetical example, two cars on the north side of each train (the direction of travel is irrelevant) could be designated bicycle cars, and feature extra room for bicycle storage. Where on current trains bringing bicycles on board requires you to carry them up train stairs and through the carriage doors, this process would be dramatically simplified with level boarding. The northern part of each platform would be designated bicycle loading zones, similar to how we have zones for boarding people with wheelchairs; these would in turn connect directly into the expressway. Thus, a train rider could complete a journey to destinations that are beyond convenient walking and bus distances by connecting to the cycle expressway at the station and biking the remaining distance safely. A critic might ask: how much more would such an addition cost? Do we really need to add a bicycle expressway?  Adding a new easement would cost more, yes, but the benefits would be equally numerous. Considering that a rebuilt corridor is already slated to cost several billion dollars (regardless of whether HSR is adopted), adding a bicycle route would add only a small fraction to the grand total, yet would provide a dramatically new and fast means to traverse the Peninsula. A new route would dramatically extend the reach of the Caltrain network, providing another means for transit riders to access locations out of walking distance from stations. Since the region is going to rebuild the Peninsula rail corridor anyway, it should be built completely and properly, with the greatest needs of the metropolis factored in. If a bike sharing network is ever introduced in the Bay Area, it would likely make extensive use of the new cycle expressway. The peninsula has unfortunately become the most


even for the next century. Adding a route would benefit the Peninsula tremendously, helping add to the vibrant discourse of ideas that frequently stem from this portion of the country.

REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION

contentious area for accommodating the planned California High Speed Rail line. The debate has largely failed to recognize the incredible potential of reconstruction to change mobility options in that entire region. Failure to integrate biking into this critical piece of infrastructure would mean that the entire Peninsula will miss an opportunity to add new travel means - or anything similar--to the region for decades, possibly

25


26


Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects

27


University of Hawaii Cancer Research Center 10.2009 03.2010 – 07.2010 The University of Hawaii Cancer Research Center, located in Honolulu, is approximately 149,000 SF and consists of two buildings, the Wet and Dry research facilities, connected by a breezeway and elevator tower. The project was undertaken with the local Hawaiian firm Shimokawa + Nakamura Architects; the Zimmer Gunsul Frasca team, as a subcontractor to the local firm, was in charge of core-and-shell drawings, exterior, and structure of the project. The existing Jabsom Campus is built around a circular green courtyard. The main entrance to the campus is off Ilalo Street, and parking is accessible primarily from adjacent properties to the west. A new fire lane and service road is developed in the ZGF design in order to facilitate loading access. Additionally, the building preserves as much of the courtyard as possible within the buildable area.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

28

CONTRIBUTIONS AND PROCESS COMPETITION AND PRE-DESIGN • 3D Existing Site and Context Modeling in Sketch-Up • Scheme C Preliminary Design and Sketch-Up Modeling During the competition phase of this project, I spent roughly one week in pre-design, where I created a Sketch-Up model of the existing buildings on the Jabsom Campus, and also created models of an alternative Scheme C.

100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN • Cartoon Set development • Elevations development and strategy • Programming Strategy • Structural Grid management I spent roughly two and a half months in the Schematic Design phase of the Cancer Research Center, working with the team to develop the cartoon set, finalize the program layout, and develop the elevations. My

3D Sketch-Up Model of the Cancer Research Center in Schematic Design. Elevations were my responsibility.


supervisor Hieu Phan and I worked closely. As the building footprint is extensive, including eleven exterior elevations, we divided the building into three sections to clarify drawing sets. I spent several days creating the Sketch-Up model of the building, used to create high quality renderings of the building’s future appearance. At the end of Schematic Design, I shifted to working with the structure.

floor plans as the structural grid continued to shift and finalize, and fire stair design to accommodate changes. Additionally, I worked through technical parts of the curtain walls and elevations, including enlarged plans and sections of the design of the curtain wall structure. My effort in this stage concluded with the development of the physical model, where I created the breezeway area.

50% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT • Core and Shell Design and Drawing Management • Floor Plan management • Fire Stair Design management • Grand Staircase Design Management (including implementation in physical model) • Development of the physical building model • Curtain Wall and Roof Details, Enlarged Sections

The Cancer Research Center in the context of its site. The development of the 3D site model had been my responsibility.

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

Through 50% Design Development, I worked closely with the team on structure, core and shell drawings, and stair management. I continuously updated the cartoon set,

29


OSMAN DADI • 2013

30


ALL DRAWINGS

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

Various curtain wall enlarged plans and sections I created for the 50% Design Development package.

31


Enlarged Sheet A1.34, Third Floor, Stair 2, 1/8” = 1’-0”. Our team was tasked with creating core and shell drawings of the building. Configuration of this fire stair was my responsibility.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

32

Sample Grand Staircase Elevator Elevation (scaled to half-size). These drawings were my responsibility.


ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

Final Model of the University of Hawaii Cancer Research Center. I had been responsible for creating the staircase tower.

33


Children’s Hospital Los Angeles 11.2009 – 03.2010 The Childrens Hospital Los Angeles Phase III expansion is a seven story, 480,000 SF facility located in Los Angeles, California. The construction administration team consisted of the Project Manager, Project Assessor, and coordination staff for document control, scope, M/E/P, interiors, medical equipment, and other management. As a member of ZGF’s CHLA construction administration team, I utilized the opportunity to provide general support.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

34

CONTRIBUTIONS • Construction Administration • CCD and RFI Responses • Drawing Database Management I managed a seven year drawing database in Microsoft Access, including updating all catalogs of RFIs, CCDs, ASIs, and documented changes to the permit drawing set. Additionally, I responded to several RFI, CCD, and OSHPD requests from the contractor, clarifying the procedures and details in constructing areas of the project. Construction Change Directive (CCD) 612 addresses details in the construction of a waterproof exterior entry area. Using plans from the drawing set and some axonometric sketches from the staff, I created enlarged sections showing the portion of the entry area in the context of a curb, a seismic joint, a threshold (doorway), a storefront, a drain channel, and at the base of the wall and mechanical fan enclosure.

Partial site plan and enlarged axonometric sketches (shown for reference only, scaled to a quarter the original size).


ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

Enlarged sections at curb, seismic joint, storefront, and base of wall. These have been scaled to half the original size.

35


San Jose District Courthouse 08.2009 - 09.2009 Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects was chosen to take part in the design of four courthouses in the state of California, including a District Courthouse in San Jose. Scheme C, shown here and which I worked very closely with Braulio to develop, was selected, and is currently under construction. The 69,500 SF site owned by the county; an additional 10,600 SF owned by the Valley Transportation Authority allows for a combined parcel of 80,000 SF. Based on codes, the maximum allowable height is approximately 223-242 feet tall. Structures within 100 feet of historic landmarks cannot deviate by more than one story from immediately adjacent historic buildings. In no circumstance can they exceed 70 feet within this zone. In this scheme, courtrooms are arranged to be perpendicular to each other, and the judges chambers are organized in a suite. Thus, each courtroom will receive the maximum possible amount of glazing on at-least one face. The newly formed atrium then provides a dramatic presence on St. James Street. Court Administration can be stacked over the court rooms on a seventh level. If necessary in the future, this space can be converted into four additional court rooms, an additional judges chamber, and an additional jury room. This design also maintains a direct pedestrian connection to both the rose garden and to St. James Park.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

36

Courtrooms Jury Rooms and Court Support Secure Holding Areas Judges Facilities (private access only) Court Services and Staff Support (first level) Waiting Areas Dependency, Family, and Drug Justice Partners Administrative Facilities Dependency and Drug Clerks Probate and Civil Grand Jury Facilities Child Waiting Facility Sheriff Operations Office Self Help Center Mechanical Areas Circulation


SITE ANALYSIS PARCEL

CONTRIBUTIONS AND PROCESS

Primar • Own • Appr

• SketchUp Modeling of all schemes (including shown) • Programming and Building Layout • Presentation Graphics and Materials Over a span of two weeks, I worked to develop one of the proposals for the Courthouse. Due to the L-shape of the site, ZGF proposed two linear schemes; however, I thought it wise to work on an alternative which configured courthouses at a right angle. In doing so, and by placing other required facilities on a third side, I discovered the potential for a multistory atrium for the building that would allow light into the waiting areas, create a grand presence on the primary access street, and also allow the maximum penetration of light into the courtrooms. Public circulation would best be suited where the atrium, public space, and mixed court facilities were situated closest to each other. Utilizing these ideas, I developed a strong proposal which moved forward as one of the alternatives in the final presentation bid for the project. I coordinated the program layout for this scheme to minimize height, and helped develop the final 3D model that was utilized in animations. Ultimately, ZGF won this competition and SITE ANALYSIS developed a variation LOCATION of my original concept.

City Limits

VTA 20’ setback

Expand • Addi • Own Auth • Com appr

SITE ANALYSIS PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

• Conn Dow and O • Majo car, w on N • Pede and t First

• San Jose is the third largest California city • The project parcels are part of the Downtown Core and subject to specific design guidelines and SITE ANALYSIS RELATIONSHIPS zoning ordinances

Site

• Xxxx Civic • St Xxxx Ja • Servi along Nort • Deta Hwy and e on D

Bus Service Zone

Downtown

Public Zone

Automobiles and other vehicles gain primary access to the site from CA Hwy 87 along St. James St. Pedestrians can access the site from the adjacent Downtown Superior Court and Old Courthouse. Most visitors arriving via automobile will park in and walk from a parking structure on North Market Street. Transit users and other pedestrians will access the site from the transit mall on North First Street. Service and loading zone areas will be designated along Devine Street and North Market Streets, away from pedestrian usage. Detainee Buses will arrive from Hwy 87 along St. James Street and enter a secure sallyport on Devine Street. As the new courthouse will be operating in tandem with existing civic buildings directly south, there is a civic building relationship along St. James St, as well as an urban park and plaza relationship along North First Street

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

Rose Garden

37


PROGRAM SYNTHESIS An early sketch conveys the layout of the ground floor, sallyport, public courtyard, and main entry area.

scan; original size || Osman Dadi || 2009-2010 Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects || Los Angeles, California ||

OSMAN DADI • 2013

38

Arranging the courtrooms perpendicular to each other and stacking them creates a dramatic presence on St. James Street.


PROGRAM SYNTHESIS A sketch showing the typical layout of upper floors.

scan; original size

An extra floor can be accommodated with court adminstration if necessary.

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

36 || Osman Dadi || 2009-2010 Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects LLP || Los Angeles, California ||

39


PROGRAM SYNTHESIS

Duke

OSMAN DADI • 2013

40

The layout of the courtrooms allows a south facing seven story public atrium consisting of circulation and waiting areas.


A grand entryway is developed to the southeast.

PROGRAM SYNTHESIS

ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA ARCHITECTS

This strategy creates judges suites, and allows maximum light penetration into the courtrooms.

41


Rice University School of Architecture


Menil Museum Cafe 01.2011 - 05.2011

PROCESS

The Menil Café was produced collaboratively within the Rice Building Workshop, a subset of the Rice School of Architecture led by Professors Nonya Grenader and Danny Samuels. Our RBW studio of ten graduate and fifth year students created three schemes for the museum proposal, of which two were advanced to a final design selection phase. The scheme below presents the second option, known as “Scheme C,” which I worked on for approximately three months. The renderings shown were developed as a team within the studio. This proposal was ultimately dropped in favor of the alternative, “Scheme A.”

This scheme occupies the open lot to the east of the bookstore. Visitors approach the café from the path connecting the West Alabama parking lot to Sul Ross Street or directly from the sidewalk on Sul Ross. A system of heavy walls supporting an expansive roof defines this scheme. The continuous wall on the building’s eastern edge forms the backdrop for activity in the café and outdoors. A linear skylight connecting the roof to this wall washes it in indirect sunlight, illuminating board-formed concrete texture. The other “heavy” north/south walls respond to the two ways of moving through the site: the faster axis parallel to the path and the slower east/west axis tying the bookstore to the café. A series of lighter walls perpendicular to the heavy walls reinforce the porosity of the north/south axis. Outdoors, the roof forms a deep overhang above seating areas, but allows indirect light through a steel shade trellis. While the walls and roof shelter protect occupants from harsh western sunlight, the openness of spaces between walls and through the shade trellis celebrates views of both the Menil Collection and the greenery of the open lawn behind the bookstore.

CONTRIBUTIONS • Schematic Design • Design Development • Site Programming • Interior Design and Lighting • Roof Design and Layout • Building Plans and Sections, including final drawings • Wall Sections and Details Development • Final Model

text used with permission from the Menil Cafe Booklet.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

44


A bove , Pe Scheme rspe ct i veCloviewed o king No rtheas from Sul Ros s Street from thet Menil Museum.

Ri c e B ui l d i ng Wor ks ho

4’

8’

16’

Scheme C Site Plan.

Si te Pl an: 1 ” =5 0 ’-0 ”

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

Scheme C

0’

Ri ce B uil ding Works h o p

25

45


bookstore bookstore

Conc D ianize g rasm :apP im a r y wa lls o rg a nize s pa c e . DiD a giara m:mPri mC ary wal l sept p ce. pt g ra : Primary wal lorganize siagra orga arce. onc ept D m: P r sim r y wa lls o rg a nize s pa c e .

Views from Cafe Views from Cafe

Views from Cafe Views from Cafe

Views from Cafe.

0’ 0’

4’ 4’

8’ 8’

0’ 16’16’ 0’ 4’

4’

8’

8’

Scheme C

Entry sequence.

i c e Bui ldi ng Workshop pc eR Bu il d i ng Workshop

Adjacent green space.

16’

Scheme C

Entry Seq u ence Entry Seq u en ce

quenece Sequ nce

e n t Gre e n S pac e Adjac e netnGre e neS e Adjac Adjac t Gre n pac S pac e Adjac e n t Gre e n S pac e

Scheme C Scheme C

Primary walls organize space.

bookstore bookstore

16’

2727

27

27

West El evatio n: 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

North Elevation.

N orth El evatio n: 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

0’ 30

OSMAN DADI • 2013

8’

16’

Ri ce B ui l di ng Workshop

South Elevation.

S ou th Elevation : 3/ 32”= 1’-0”

Scheme C

46

4’


Floor Pl an: 3 /3 2”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

Scheme C Floor Plan.

0’

4’

8’

16’ Ri ce B ui l di ng Workshop

West Elevation.

West Eleva t io n: 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

N orth E leva t io n: 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ” 0’ 30

4’

8’

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

26

16’

47

Ri ce B ui l di ng Workshop


S ou th Elevation : 3/ 32”= 1’-0”

Scheme C

Section at kitchen. S e c tion A: 3/ 32”= 1’-0” 0’

4’

8’

16’

Ri ce B u il ding Works h o p

31

Section at serving counter.

Sec tion B : 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ” Sec tion B : 3 /3 2”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

Section at bathroom and entry corridor.

Sec tion C: 3/3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ”

0’

Sec tion C: 3 /3 2 ”= 1 ’ - 0 ” 32

0’

32

OSMAN DADI • 2013

8’

16’

Ri ce 8’ B ui l di ng Workshop 16’

Ri ce B ui l di ng Workshop

Section at Cafe seating area with skylight. S e c tion D: 3/ 32”= 1’-0”

Scheme C

48

4’ 4’


Model perspective looking north from Sul Ross Street.

Top , Mod e l Pe rsp c t i ve l o o k i ng N o r t h f ro m S ul Ro s s St re e t

A b ove , M o d e l Pe rs p e c t i ve l o o k i n g N o r t h e a s t

R i c e B u i l d i n g Wo r ks h o

Model perspective looking southeast. A b ove , M o d e l Pe rs p e c t i ve l o o k i n g S o u t h e a s t

Aerial perspective from Menil Collection, 1/8”=1’-0”.

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

i c e B u i l d i n g Wo r ks h o p

49


Interpretive Music Center - Houston 08.2008 - 12.2008

PROCESS

The Interpretive Music Center is situated on a north facing L-shaped infill site in Midtown Houston. The center’s purpose “revolves around the study, performance and promotion of the works of contemporary musical artists, works that remain relevant, influential and significant across generations of interpreters and listeners.” The 12,000 square foot program consists of an exhibition gallery, general multipurpose space, performance space, administrative office suite and supporting library, gift shop & bookstore, lobby, courtyard, and basement mechanical space.

The IMCH solution explores the flexibility of an infill site by creating a courtyard in the rear using an interior light well, thereby allowing light to enter into the main building from the front and rear. The scheme evolved as a cube over a void, the former containing the primary program. A core connects all levels while dividing the cube into primary and secondary spaces. The building language is repeated in the lateral direction, creating terraces overlooking the event spaces. As the site faces north, the primary source of light is from the back of the building, allowing the building to be lit from the interior and draw people in. The rear facade is open to the courtyard; the front facade contains a mechanical light filtration system that provides insulation from humidity. A spiral staircase ties the interior spaces together.

An early sketch of the main performance space.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

50

67 Osman Dadi 2009

Model detail showing primary event spaces and grand stair.

Transverse building section.


Sunlight filters into the light well from the rear of the project, creating a dramatic silhouette effect.

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

The principal facade of the IMCH, at 1/4”=1’-0”.

51


1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown Basement

Floor Plan, 11 feet below ground level.

79 Osman Dadi 2009

Rice University School of Architecture 80

79 Osman Dadi 2009

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown 1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ 79 Osman Dadi 2009 scale shown

OSMAN DADI • 2013

52

Ground Floor Plan.

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown

1/16”:1’ original scale

79 Osman Dadi3/128”:1’ 2009 scale shown

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown

Third Floor Plan, 25 feet 4 inches.

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown 1/16”:1’ original scale

79 Osman Dadi3/128”:1’ 2009 scale shown 83 Osman 82 Dadi 2009 Rice University School of Architecture

Fourth Floor Plan, 32 feet.


A cross section of the model with light well and building program.

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown

Second Floor Plan, 14 feet.

1/16”:1’ original scale

79 Osman Dadi3/128”:1’ 2009 scale shown 81 Osman Dadi 2009

Primary building section.

75 Osman Dadi 2009

1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown

Fifth Floor Plan, 48 feet 8 inches.

1/16”:1’ original scale

79 Osman Dadi3/128”:1’ 2009 scale shown Rice University School of Architecture 84

An early light study.

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

shows light well/courtyard to right, main spaces center a spiral staircase connects all levels 1/16”:1’ original scale 3/128”:1’ scale shown

53


Slab Space 08.2007 - 12.2007 The Slab Space project, conducted during the Architecture 301 studio, aimed to “transform the “slab” into an affective surface for a medium-high density residential resort community on the edge of urban Houston,” by utilizing concepts of morphogenesis, computation, and modeling in digital format

PROCESS

Phase 1: The Spine and Rib system.

PHASE I A simple spine and rib system was created by first folding an 8” x 2” slip of paper to create a simple unit. Three or more of these units create a spine that can torque and bend in many different directions. Ribs are created by binding two spines with connectors. A stable superstructure evolves once three spines are built into a rib system.

PHASE 2 My partner and I merged our rib and spine systems and created two different superstructures: a lateral typology and a tower typology. In the lateral system, the units are versatile spaces, while the ribs provide all structure and circulation. The tower system utilizes the same concept, but vertically.

Phase 2: Lateral typology with circulation system deployment.

PHASE 3 The lateral proposal from Phase 2 was applied to develop an urban resort and retail community for young adults in Houston. The superstructure includes a diverse array of different retail and residential uses. Open spaces provide zones for public activity.

Phase 3: Habitable spaces are added to the rib and spine system.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

54

Phase 3: Final superstructure.


hs shown, respective to units dering

ign shown dering

Circulation network diagram.

NODES INTERIOR ARTERIALS

PARKING NODES PARKING ACCESS

LIGHT RAIL NODES LIGHT RAIL ACCESS

RAIL STATIONS LIGHT RAIL ACCESS

CONVENTION NODES EXTERIOR ARTERIALS

3D modeling of circulation system, facing north.

RICE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

Rice University School of Architecture 42

55


Wetlands Research Center and Pavilion 08.2006 - 10.2006 The students in our Architecture 201 studio, with Professors Doug Oliver and Jim Ray, were to independently create a research and display pavilion intended for the study of wetlands ecosystems and the promotion of public awareness of environmental conservation.

PROCESS The Wetlands Research Center condenses a 200 square foot lab space, 300 square foot greenhouse with 20 foot high ceilings, and 300 square foot visitor’s area into a compact, space efficient layout utilizing two layered fields. The primary field is structural, consisting of castin-place concrete beams and columns that span the building exterior. A secondary, horizontal solar screening system provides shade to exposed areas of the building for passive climate control. The greenhouse exists as its own entity on one side of the building, whereas the visitor’s center and stacked over the research lab area on the other side of the building. Circulation is provided through a staircase at the center of the building, housing a cistern beneath it. The building uses a water cooling system that drains Front Elevation rain water from the roof into the cistern using the viewing into greenhouse sloped 1/4”:1’ scaleroof, then pumping water back over the building basswood and plastic during sunny daytime hours, thus absorbing heat while consequently cooling and dampening the interior of the greenhouse. This passive cooling system is aided by high Roof Detail performance glazingmodulating systems that provide additional water collection and temperature system 1/4”:1’ scale insulation. basswood and plastic

OSMAN DADI • 2013

56

Aerial model view showing glass roof structure over greenhouse.

View of model facing south, showing primary greenhouse facade.

19 Osman Dadi 2009 19 Osman Dadi 2009

Model view looking southeast, showing entryway and greenhouse.

View of model facing northeast and the main visitor area.

Rice University School of Architecture 20

17 Osman Osman Dadi Dadi 2009 2009 17


First Floor Plan, ink on vellum.

Typical Section, ink on vellum.

Model detail of layered roof structure and solar shades.

57


58 R

TE

R CENM NT EN ER T

VE

GO

EN

LC

RA

DE

FE

CO

FF

JE

ON

IS

RR

GA

K

OA

R C E CO OMD R LL M OC EG UN KS E IT Y

Golden W AR D

RO

AD

AR VA DA

RI

E

DG


PE CO

S

AL BL VD

BL VD ID AN SH ER

FE DE R

COLISEUM/STOCK SHOW

NU

E

A

R

10

th

/O

SA

GE

OX DE CA TU

KN

RR PE

th /12 AN ID

25th/WELTON 20th/WELTON

Downtown

A

SH

ER

Y

AR M LA

35th/DOWNING 33rd/DOWNING 30th/DOWNING

A NI OR IF IA AL RN /C O th IF 18 L / R A CT TE /C RI EN th ST C IA 16 DI N AR E IO R TR NT AU EA VE AT TH N X COLFA CO

AURARIA WEST CAMPUS

TH

29th/WELTON 27th/WELTON

/ th T 16 OU ST

INVESCO FIELD AT MILE HIGH

OR

/ th T 18 OU ST

PEPSI CENTER ETLICH CENTER

SW

CE

41

Five Points

DENVER UNION STATION

W AD

COLORADO BLVD

st

AV E

38th/BLAKE

ALAMEDA

I-25/BROADWAY

LOUISIANA/ PEARL

Personal Work UNIVERSITY OF DENVER

EVANS

COLORADO/BUCHTEL

BATES

YALE

ENGLEWOOD

SOUTHMOOR OXFORD/CITY OF SHERIDAN

59


Vision for Houston Rail 2050 04.2011 – 07.2011

it is sensible to connect them directly: the Blue, Purple, and Green lines from downtown to uptown, a modified rapid Red Line between downtown and the Texas Medical Center, and the belt Yellow line connection Uptown, Greenway Plaza, and the Galleria. These trunk routes are extended into the inner and outer suburbs while providing extensions to airports and other economic hubs. Light rail and streetcar networks complement the trunk routes by providing more localized service. The Houston regional rail system stems from a new High Speed Rail trunk route that extends northwest towards Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio; to the southeast to New Orleans and Galveston. Regional rail routes converge at a new central station in downtown. Frequent transfers between the different rail systems allow for maximum travel flexibility for a transit rider. The system is designed in a grid rather than hub-andspoke format due to the polycentric metropolitan area.

Houston was my home for five years while at Rice University. The sprawling nature of the metropolitan area is fueled largely by one of the largest, continually expanding highway networks in the nation. The city’s red line light rail corridor is nevertheless successful. I believe the current light rail extension plans are inadequate and inefficient for a city of this size. Thus, I sought to present a long term rapid transit vision for the metropolitan area that could comprehensively serve the city and provide viable alternatives to driving.

PROCESS The Houston rail system is envisioned as an extension of the current plans. Three major nodes exist at Market Square in downtown, the Galleria Center in Uptown, and the Texas Medical Center complex. As these districts are the triangulated hub of economic activity in the city, 

 

45

290





 

6





59





 



 





 

 





 

8

 















 

 







            



 290



8

 





 















  





610



 

  

 





45





  

610



145

 



45

  















59



 

 

 







 

   

    









 

245



288



610



  



 





 



         



 

 610



      

610

 



8





 





 

 







 

     



225

 45



  



 



 



 



 





 

 



     

    

 



 

  

 

         

 







 







  45

 

 





 





 

 







 



 



59



 

         

















527





  

  

 





      











 





 





   

  

      



 



 













OSMAN DADI • 2013

60







 







  





    



 













59

59



  

10

10











        



 



 





 

          

  

 

 





 

  











 

 



  







 

       





 



 





 



 



  



 



610

 



  

      

 



 

 

 











 





8

90



 

45 610



10

 









 



10

8



288



The final product is 24” x 17”.

 


A preliminary concept diagram.

PERSONAL WORK

Early network study.

61


290 8









 

 

  

  

  



10







 

 

 610













 





 





 

 

   





















 











       





 









 

59

 



 



 

      

 

 



 





  













   



 



  



    

 



610



8



 



      








  

 



 



610

  

 





45





610



145

 









59



 









10

    





 

 



 





 

  













  





   

      









        

















  











 

   

 



 

 





245

288









527







 











 59

 









         









         







 

















  

      

 















 



10











 















  

 

  

 











 

610




Urban Art From an early age, I have been fascinated with transportation systems. Growing up in the Washington, DC metropolitan area, I spent considerable time studying maps of Montgomery County, Maryland, and the surrounding Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area. Recognizing patterns in urban infrastructure over time, from the growth of the railway and streetcar cities in the early 20th century, to the subsequent demise of the central city and growth of the suburbs through freeways and road networks, I sought to recreate fictitious cities following the same growth paradigm. Shown here are just a few of over one hundred of these drawings that model highways, railways, and general urban ideas.

OSMAN DADI • 2013

64


65

PERSONAL WORK


OSMAN DADI • 2013

66


67

PERSONAL WORK


OSMAN DADI • 2013

68


CONTACT OSMAN DADI Phone: 240-449-9428 Email: osman.dadi@gmail.com

CURRENT ADDRESS 82 Farm Lake Crescent Road Chappaqua, NY 10514

PREFERRED MAILING ADDRESS 11604 Moorestown Place Gaithersburg, MD 20878


Osman Dadi