Space & Sanity - another new building type?

Refering to:
Goren, Suzanne and Rivka Orion. "Space and Sanity". Archives of Psychiatric Nursing VIII, no. 4, August 1994: 237-244.

This paper is the start of consolidating a better idea for my final design. It's difficult to find any real architectural precedents for my design as the building type for psychiatric health has changed and merged into more of a generic hospital type over the years. The large, isolated insane asylums of the past have largely disappeared as a place for psychiatric patients, and replaced by smaller community-based institutions, 'clubhouses', acute care wards in large general hospitals, or the street...
The building type I am more interesting in is the one suggested in the paper by Suzanne Goren - a hybrid of a community village, domestic dwelling and day clinic.

Historically, insane asylums reflected the assumption that insanity required buildings of surveillance and control. The designs cut residents off from the rhythms of everyday life.
During the 17th and 18th century, a significant exception to this was the village of Gheel in Belgium during the 17th and 18th century where pilgrims came in hope of a miraculous cure from insanity. They were taken in and cared for by local families clustered around a central infirmary.

Another innovation was seen in Wolfheze, The Netherlands during the 1970s where the barracks-like buildings of the traditional psychiatric institute were replaced by small scale, cottage-based designs with the ideal that this would promote normalcy.

• They were promoted as surroundings in which one could dwell - that is, experience the essence of being a human being through life, work and leisure. 
• The architecture opposed traditional institutional architecture with it's domestic emphasis and the separation of patients and staff lives. 
• Each house provided personal space, privacy and small shared spaces for eating and socialising. 
• No space was allocated for nursing stations, treatment rooms, therapist offices or staff housing

In 1981, the Wolfheze model was replicated in Israel, built on the grounds of Kfar Shaul, a traditional asylum on the site of a former Arab village, as the Intramural Rehabilitation Project (RRP). Characteristics:

• houses are small, made of common building materials of the area (stone), similar to houses found in surrounding villages - asymetrically spaced, open onto a curving treelined street
• no gates, no special locks, bars on windows
• staff do not enter without permission
• no space set aside for staff
• patients are selected if they have chronic illness which has cost them their place in society, if active traditional therapy is no longer feasible, and if they are unable to fit into a rehabilitation program designed to prepare them to return to the community
• once accepted, they have a lifetime membership - if they have to leave temporarily to be hospitalised, their place is kept for them on their return
• patients 'live within an architecture of normality...they live in a house and deal with the things in the house...they are hosts and the staff are visitors'
• everyone works, either in a sheltered workshop or  in maintaining the group's home
• they recapture autonomy and dignity