GATE

Site Panic

So as I'm trying to decide on a site... I'm confronted with deciding what attributes my site and the surrounding area are necessary to make my project sucsessful. This is what I'm thinking...

- urban fabric
- an area IN NEED of community revitalization
(i'm wondering what this may actually entail - low unemployment rate? high crime rate? how do I know that it's in need?)
- proximity to art community (i.e. museums, galleries, art schools, art stores, etc...)
- easily accessable area (walking or T - i don't want people to have to drive here.)
- a location which can attract visitors (possibly easily seen by roadway or waterway.)

Macro: Boston. Micro: Allston? Revere? ????

Artist Village

updated program...

Housing: 33,700 sf.

Apartments:
One bedroom. Two bedroom. Family. (10 units of each)
A place for self expression & individuality.
Open studio apartment.

Communal Space:
Lobby, workrooms, laundry, flexible rooms, common areas, & cycle storage.
Buffer between private apartments and public mixed use space.
Awareness between tenants to promote socialization.

Mixed Use: 7,125 sf.

Market (day):
Sell Art. Teach Art.
Artist residents as well as city residents gather to sell, teach & promote their craft.

Entertainment (night):
Celebrate Art.
Space converts in the evenings. Individual activities like theater or movies or integrated activites such as dancing.

Outdoor Space:
Connect to Art.
Would help to draw in the urban community. Connecting housing and mixed use program.

Merchant/Artist Village

Okay, so new idea.

I think I'd like to do a Merchant/Artist Village. I'm really liking this one.

I've gone back to my original thinking that habitation is a huge part of establishing (or, in this case - revitalizing) a community. But it is definately not the only part.

I think that a merchant/artist village could really be successful. Art is about self expression right? What about community expression? Can we have both? How can this individuality impact positively and not be considered a contributor to the individualist society? These are the things which I think could be explored here.

As discussed, there is the issue of communal spaces and activities and those of individual nature which challenge it. I think that this village could be a great way to explore this.

In a historical context, I guess this organization could resemble the industrial period when mill and factory communities were organized through the major program of the mill/factory itself with connection to the housing of its personnel and their activities. Of course, here, the artists and merchants are not "workers" but rather a staple in engaging people with this program.

Program:

Mixed Use

• market (day) - food, crafts, art...
• entertainment (night) - concerts, interpretative dance?, interactive performances, comedy, movies
• flexible space - neighborhood meetings, art classes, exhibits...

**this also touches upon an earlier idea of trying to make neighborhoods safer and more active through day&night program.

Housing

• merchant/artists - (would explore individual apartments but also the public spaces of the complex.) - maybe considered low income??
• maybe their individuality shows in the design/look of their apartment and adds a positive impact to this community

Program Panic

So I've been thinking a lot about program. In doing so.. I have revisited my "thesis" and the problem which I need to solve.

Thesis: Architecture should evoke community.

Problem: Disconnect (from society). Loss (of identity). Rejection (of public space).
- most importantly; the individualist society.

I think that in order to successfully address this problem of the individualist society, it is necessary for me to incorportate both individually and communally based program. This way, users will be able to understand the contrast and combination of the two, but benefit from the "community" which it creates/evokes. I think that the goal, which would promote "community", is for users to grow/change/(get/give) support, togethor. When I say togethor... I don't necessarily mean that you do not have any privacy in your affairs, but rather that you are aware of the commitment, progress, and changes going on with other users. Awareness of others in a social network and the engagement between users within that network are the social influences that I think can comprise this community.

There are a few different types of program which I am thinking of.

- Mixed Use; market (day) & entertainment (night)
market- communal
theater - individual time
- Community Center
counseling - for individual support
classes, activities - to promote social engagement
* although I do not want this to become a catch-all of program
** I feel like it may be risky to consider a program which already has a
"community" connotation attached to it.
- Education
group learning - classrooms set up to induce group thinking
individual learning - classrooms set up to induce individual learning
- Housing
social spaces - set up to induce social interaction
living space - set up as private for the individual

What I am seriously considering now is a Wellness Center which incorporates a few of the program ideas of above... (I guess, in a way, it is kind of like a "community" center w/out the strings attached).

this would include...
- physical and mental wellness
- each broken further down into both individually and comunally based program

Physical
fitness - indiv. workouts & exercise classes
diet - nutrionist & cafe
clinical
education (classes/workshops)

Mental
clinical
support - babysitting, career center
stress management - massage, spa, meditation....
activites/entertainment - fundraising, movie night, summer camp ...

(i.e. Physical; fitness. indiv = personal workouts. communal = classroom exercise)
Mental; support. indiv= one-on-one counseling. communal = group therapy)

I don't know if this combo/contrast of individual/communal program is enough of a gesture at opposing individualist society and restablishing community.

I don't know if this would be enough to make people give a shit about interacting with others and being aware of their presence or if they would just as easily crank up their ipods & drown out socialism. What is it that I really want them to think.. feel.. be aware of ??

Is this still a catch-all? Is this the 9th floor where people eat clams w/ boxing gloves.? Or in this case... where the mentally distressed get counseling, a facial and a washboard abs?

aaahhhh....

Reconstructing the Community.
Urban Renewal & its Social Influences.

Problem Statement: rejection. disconnect. loss.

• We have become an individualist society which is slowly rejecting (intended use of) public spaces and ignores our context.
• We are becoming disconnected with society and humans themselves.
• We have experienced a loss of identity and groupings within our context.

Architectural Intentions:

• Create public spaces which induce and/or suggest human activity.
• Diverse grouping of program to promote socialization.
• Break down of territorality.
• Preservation and/or tranditional program/approach.

Project Statement:

• Urban renewal through social, economical, and architectural revitalization.
• Focus on "disconnected" city neighborhood. (i.e. Boston; local, personal)
• Recreation of the lost sense of community.

Program Outline:

• Housing for diverse groupings.
• Mixed use to promote diversity, extended day use, and economic revitalization.
• Preservation & Tradition to promote deeply "rooted" community.

I like this picture specifically because it is void of human presence. It forces your mind to grab the clues which suggest human existence and create the scenes you'd like to see here. Can’t you see the people sunbathing... hanging out their laundry... conversing with eachother across their rooftops? Hopefully they’re not absent because this is an unsuccessful community… maybe they’re just inside having tea and crumpets.

1.3.9.

*

Architecture should evoke community.

***

The built environment should encourage social interaction. Architecture should compel people to serve common needs. Built form should connect to its context in a way which either induces or suggests activities of a society.

*********

The built environment should not only gather members of a social network, but entice them to perform either individual or shared activities. Architecture shouldn’t force social situations but should make us aware of one another’s presence. It should entice use and should read as so even in human absence. Architecture should always render spaces which are not owned but are shared. It should generate sensitivity toward an individuals affect on (and existence within) a social framework. Architecture should create feelings of commonalities and combined efforts which drive the “social machine.” It should allow individuals to feel that they always have a role in this machine (even if it alters) – the shopkeeper, the customer, the nosey neighbor, the teacher, the student, the delinquent, the child, and the parent. This environment should allow for both a crossing and a connection of social networks which we may adhere and revisit for support when our role in society seems trivial in contrast. Community can identify us while architecture can embody it.

Modernism & Design Tools: A Personal Manifesto.

Let’s redefine Modernism!

Like most things, Modernism has evolved and continues to do so. I believe that what is considered to be Modern architecture correlates with the time period at hand. I like to think of the Modern Architecture of the early 1900’s: when cities were sprouting up all over the U.S., rooted with buildings erected from sleek steel and glass. These buildings were the product of the latest innovative machinery and of mass production. These buildings harbored offices and workshops which harvested the very kind of new thinking that helped to construct it. Building projects gave jobs to those struggling during the Depression and offered new opportunities, hope, and inspiration to city dwellers. This was a time when Modernism meant new materials, new ideas, new ways of thinking, new opportunities, and SOLUTIONS to the problems at hand!

Now… it seems that Modern Architecture has continued on this path of “out of the box” thinking… but with a more disfigured motive. It seems that it has become a rat race to see who can conceive the largest, loudest, most expensive, and (dare I say) outlandish creations. Don’t get me wrong here - I do appreciate the movement, the style, the new thinking and all its potential – but within reason, you see. It just seems that we should be more concerned in the meaning of this architectural style which we deem as “Modern”, what we do with it, and the problems it may solve.

Let’s rethink this stereotype that Modernism has been branded with. Let us remove the criticisms that have been thrown at Modernism like childish taunts: meaningless, offensive, un-contextual. Let’s design on a new path which solves problems concerning space, environment, housing, community, etcetera without trying to be iconic.

Form vs. Function

A concept we remember from the birth of our architecture careers. Does one drive the other? This lies in the hands of the designer. Architecture = Art + Function. A balance of these two tools is essential in producing a successful structure. We must adhere to our primal instincts as both human and architect to shelter our bodies, store our belongings, LIVE, WORK, EAT, SLEEP and BREATHE. It seems that modern architecture does not always care about these instincts. It is like a caged beast, - placid and beautified when sedated with reason but ugly and dangerous when free, devouring function without remorse. We must strive for a BALANCE of both! Form and structure can be beautiful – even in simplicity. So many of us, myself included, have become captivated by the sexiness of curved surfaces, the sleekness of steel cladding, and the translucency of glass curtain walls that we have come to define as Modern Architecture. But if it is a home with inoperable windows, an office with minimal daylight, or a museum where we can’t hang a painting on its crooked walls –we have contradicted ourselves. With a balance of both these concepts – we may keep the modern style which we have become entranced by!

Rhyme or Reason

We all remember our early days in studio critiques where we were faced with what I like to call “reasoning with architecture.”… “Why did you draw this?”... “Where did this curve come from?” We quickly learned NEVER to respond with “because I like it.” It seems that things, including architecture, that have clear reasoning harvest clear understanding. So how do we explain these hollow cantilevers, abstract voids, hallways to nowhere, and random walls that modern architecture has adopted? Even if the reason is... to NOT have reason... at least it has substance.

It seems that Modernism has become an art form where far more is left for interpretation than is created. There is no shame in the pure appreciation of creation: a sculpture for its fluid form, a painting for its intricate brush strokes, or even a blade of grass for its cellular composition. We should not feel guilty or uneducated to be disappointed by empty galleries, silent symphonies, and blank canvases.

The reasons behind design are endless and boundary less as long as the intent is clear.

Icon or Eye Sore?

Here, we must separate the interpretations of Architecture as an icon. Yes, it can be iconic – but in what way? Obviously, in the case of Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim in Bilbao, this is iconic in its representation of location. Our minds have been branded with this image in its connection to Bilbao. I think we can all agree that it is also iconic in its appearance. Its sleek clad skin, sensual curves, and gargantuan form are a beacon which beckons you to come and discover what lies within. But creating an architectural icon does not mean that we must sacrifice these other design tools in order to force a strong opinion to be formed. These structures can be representational of a movement, a style, a structural system, a material… anything, really!

To create the iconic is not to create the famous. It is to create the representational.

You CAN teach an old dog new tricks…

The most interesting and respected modern architectural approaches have come about by considering context. This can be site or structure. The works which are polite to its surroundings are thorough, detailed, clear, and thus – polite to its inhabitants. Modern approaches do not necessarily need to be new in its entirety. Links to history and that which is already established help us to form better opinions and ideas on the “Modern.”

What better way to participate in the modern thinking of reuse and revitalization than to use a historic structure as a host for Modern design?!

The analysis and criticism of Modernism can help us to identify the role and importance of design tools. We must go forth and use them wisely.