Christopher DiStasi

Urban Planning and Design

Christopher DiStasi Masters Candidate, City and Regional Planning University of Pennsylvania

Table of ContentsA bit about me 1

Projects

Jackson Heights, New York 2

Willow Park, Philadelphia 6

Mantua, Philadelphia 10

Yorktown, Philadelphia 16

A few sketches 20

1

A bit about meIn my suburban New Jersey hometown, diversity was scarce, and

autocentric development failed to promote the sort of chance encounters – the incidental exchange of ideas – that afford members

of disparate communities a wider view of the world and its possibilities. Now, as an urban design student in the City and Regional

Planning Program at the University of Pennsylvania, I am working to promote exactly what my hometown lacked: a built environment that

encourages exchange, fosters diversity, and builds social capital.

I come to urban design from a background in social research and community engagement, and I will always bring to my work the

skills and perspectives I gathered in those fields. I am enthusiastic about design that builds from systematic qualitative and quantitative

research and from intense collaboration among all stakeholders, especially the public. For cities and their communities, I believe

that the graphic language of design can be a potent tool to build momentum for change. The designer’s work can catalyze reflection,

deliberation, and action by bringing to light our varied images of the city, its inhabitants, and its future.

The work that follows is a sample of what I have produced since I began graduate school in September 2014. The designs, research,

and ideas presented are meant to be just the beginnings of important conversations about the futures of each of the sites considered.

Thank you for taking a look.

Master planning process, In progress

Jackson Heights, New York

3

Jackson Heights

New York City

In the second semester workshop at PennDesign, small groups of students undertake a master planning process for an assigned geography. These pages provide a sample of materials produced in the first half of the planning process.

As the project is ongoing, this sample largely lacks materials relating to recommendations and implementation.

I personally produced all materials on these pages using applications including ArcGIS; Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign; and Rhino.

Zoning

Residential R1-R9

Industrial M1-M3

Commercial C4, C8

Parking and vacant land

Parks

Public facilities

Industrial and utilities

Mixed use, Commercial

Residential, low to high density

Park

Land use

Five elevated lines run along the neighborhood’s southern border, about a 15 minute ride to Manhattan.

Two major elevated highways create a barrier along the neighborhood’s western and northern edges.

Far from the subway, northern areas are served primarily by buses, but travel times to the south are often long.

Only one major east-west street in Jackson Heights has a dedicated bike lane.

The neighborhood has less park land per resident than most other New York neighborhoods. It is entirely built out.

Subway lines

Highways

Bus routes

Bike lanes

Build-out and parks

5

Major corridors

Common building typologies

Although the road on all three of these avenues is about seventy-four feet wide, they feature drastically different arrangements. Roosevelt and 36th are separated by one block; while the former is defined primarily by the elevated train, the later is relatively calm and open. Thirty-fourth, redesigned under the city’s GreenStreets program, accommodates auto and bicycle traffic as well as a median.

Wide road beds on Northern and Astoria Boulevards make these areas less inviting to pedestrians and waste space that could be more productively used. Revised arrangements provide bike lanes buffered from traffic by three feet of paint and a parking lane. Also, a new median on Northern can serve as a pedestrian refuge and stormwater capture site. Despite reduced sidewalk width, pedestrian comfort is maintained by sidewalks’ increased distance from auto traffic.

Typically full block development with shared courtyard

More common to the south

Four to six stories

Typically full block development with shared alley for parking

One to four units

More common to the south

Often full street development

No shared space

Common throughout the neighborhood

Roosevelt Avenue

Northern Boulevard

Garden apartments Garden houses Attached residential

37th Avenue 34th Avenue

Astoria BoulevardExisting Existing

Possible greening and transit improvementsPossible greening and transit improvements

Jackson Heights

6

WILLOW PARK, PHILADELPHIALong-range neighborhood vision, Fall 2014

Existing conditions at the site

The proposed park is anchored by the Willow Steam Works, which will be visible from Reading Viaduct Park.

7

WILLOW PARK, PHILADELPHIA

The final project in PennDesign’s first semester Urban Design course calls for a long-term neighborhood vision for several underused blocks just north of Center City, Philadelphia. As a part of that group project, I reimagined the abandoned Willow Steam Works site as an iconic anchor, connecting the neighborhood visually and programmatically to the future Reading Viaduct Park and Center City. I also imagined what the narrow, curved Willow Street might feel like as a commercial corridor.

I personally produced all materials on these pages using Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator, as well as Rhino.

Northern Liberties

Old City

Franklin Square

Center City

Callowhill

Proposed Reading Viaduct Park

Willow Park

Willow Street

9

Infill development on Willow Street will emphasize its narrow, curvilinear arrangement, establishing a sense of enclosure that will privilege pedestrian traffic.

Existing conditions at the site

WILLOW PARK

10

Development plan, Spring 2015

Vacancy comes in many forms. Most empty lots in this neighborhood are maintained by the

Horticultural Society; others have been co-opted as yards. And although only a small percentage of

homes are vacant, they are distributed widely.

MANTUAPHILADELPHIA

p l a n n i n g f o r

11

In this project, the objective was to analyze current conditions in the neighborhood, establish a narrative, and propose plans that respond to a hypothetical developer’s intentions.

In Mantua, vacancy is common. But not all vacant lots are equal, and development will not come to a majority in the foreseeable future. Ninety percent of empty lots are well-maintained -- many as yards for adjacent buildings. Interventions in Mantua should target the small, dispersed number of derelict buildings and lots, especially close to major neighborhood resources.

I produced all materials on these pages using ArcGIS, Adobe Illustrator, and Rhino.

Center CityUniversity City

Mantua

12

LAND USE

BUILDINGQUALITY

VACANT LAND

MANTUA

13

SITING DEVELOPMENT in strategic locations

AGENDA

New construction can serve the neighborhood best by strengthening the existing residential corridors that current residents use most often traveling to transit, commercial corridors, parks, and the local school.

40 NEW UNITS with off street parking

MANTUA

Likelihood that residents will use a road to walk to major destinationsSelected development sites are highlighted in purple.

Raster analysis produced using ArcGIS.

14

PRIORITIES

Seamless integration with row home fabric (porches, small setbacks)20’ wide units when possible

Typical structure

35’10’10’

30’-45’

20’

BUILDING TYPOLOGY andTYPICAL SITE ARRANGEMENT

alternatives

PREFERRED DESIGN- Attached and detached

single-family homes- Individual driveways- Lowest density

PARKING LOT OPTION- Row homes- Shared parking lot mid-block- Medium density

SHARED ALLEY OPTION- Row homes and attached

single-family homes- Each with its own driveway- Highest density

PROS- Large back yards- Driveway is personally

programmable space- No hidden public space

PROS- Large back yards- Longer stretches of unbroken

street wall

PROS- Street wall is highly intact

CONS- Street wall is broken often

CONS- Large parking lot is uninviting- Unclear who will maintain lot

CONS- Large areas of hidden semi-public space- Unclear who will maintain- Small back yards

50’20’20’ 20’ 20’10’ 10’

20’

MANTUA

15

One of Mantua’s strong residential streets. Porches and the absence of setbacks establish a dense and communal atmosphere into which new development should integrate seamlessly.

16

YorktownPhiladelphiaSite plan analysis, Spring 2015

17

250 ft 500125

In this project, the objective was to analyze the site’s plan, condition, and history.

Built in the 1960s, Yorktown provided suburban-style homeownership for black families at a time when they were typically excluded from suburban markets. Yorktown was designed to face inwards -- away from neighboring disinvestment and decline. But, despite its important history, its inward orientation today exacerbates problems related to the condition of city properties and the sense of communal identity.

I produced all materials on these pages using ArcGIS, Illustrator, Photoshop, and Rhino.

Yorktown

Center City

18

Lookinginward

away fromthe city

61%of residences face

cul-de-sacs

13% faceeast-west streets

27% facenorth-south streets, all of them behind parking setbacks

Adjacent lots often face opposite

directions.

Yorktown

19

Most homes turn their backs and brick walls to the major north-south arterials.

20

A few sketchesVarious projects

21

Attached home near Cedar Park, West Philadelphia

First floor plan

Longitudinal section

Southelevation

N

Christopher DiStasi Masters Candidate, City and Regional Planning University of Pennsylvania