The tragedy of Flint, Michigan's water crisis seems to worsen with every newly uncovered detail. As a manmade public health crisis provoked by willful denial and compromised safety standards, the entirely preventable poisoning of Flint's water supply with lead stands not only as a failure to care for the citizens of one city, but as a dreadful harbinger for the U.S.'s deteriorating infrastructure networks.
Like any concerned citizen, Filnt-based architect Kurt Neiswender sees this as a call to action to help any way he can. Kurt joins us on the podcast this week to discuss how architects might apply their skills to improve such a monstrous situation, and address the real limitations the profession has when it comes to these scenarios.
Listen to episode 54 of Archinect Sessions, "Dispatch from Flint":
Shownotes:
In doing background research for this episode, reporting from the Detroit Free Press, the New York Times, and CNN were exceedingly helpful in providing explanatory timelines for how things got so bad.
Some photos from Kurt documenting the spaces now occupied by bottled water in Flint:
Should the children of Flint be resettled?
Kurt’s article in Young Architects Forum, about the impact of water in Flint.
Clarence A. Perry's neighborhood unit diagram
More thoughts on Flint: Michigan's ongoing budgetary problems mean other cities could soon be in crisis too
Ball State Architecture Professor Olon Dotson's talk on "4th world" aging infrastructure Olon Dotson ↓
Trailer for Michael Moore's "Roger & Me" ↓
26 Comments
The idea of a million dollar prize is at once too large and too small. It's too large because cursory approaches to solving a problem that big is not worth that much money. It's too small because this is more complex than any robotics competition. If you're going to award a team for solving a systemic problem at that scale, you'll need to pay them more for their time. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of the competition with some serious cash connected to it. It's just that giving money to the team with the most compelling (my words) may not be quite the right process.
Instead, add another 2-3 million and divvy the money up between a number of selected teams to support site engaged (you gotta be in it to win it) research and problem solving. A residency requirement of some type would help to ensure commitment to the problem and the residents of Flint. No winners, just options and solutions. Think of it as a new practice model. You can even vary the types of team structures that are awarded the ideas contract to increase the likelihood of a range of approaches and solutions.
IMHO, the competition/contract I'm suggesting must be a lengthy full time effort due to the long term complexities embedded in the problem. We all know that the "easy" solution is to replace the pipes and move on. But the costs associated with these replacements are going to create a burden over the long term that will need to be resolved through economic solutions that also fulfill the needs of the community.
Flint short term health relies on water, as does it's long term resilience.
Spot-on, Marc
I think one of the necessary immediate pro-tem necessity is to bring and implement filtration system into the receiving as well as at the treatment.
First and foremost, the lead pipes that are corroded needs to be replaced and needs to be done NOW ! They took too long to get at the situation. The HSW issue needs to be addressed right now.
While the dialog on the greater picture beyond Flint needs to be solved, the pressing truth is Flint, Michigan doesn't have the time to wait on us to solve all the nation infrastructure problems and the politics. That will take decades if not centuries. By then, Flint, Michigan would be shut down and evacuated by Federal quarantine mandates and then the whole city would be erased. The entire infrastructure completely removed, all buildings razed. EVERYTHING to be restored to a greenfield status which literally means that before resettlement back into that area will be permitted.
A real solution needs to be solved and addressed NOW so safe drinking water can be restored. While, filtration systems will help in the meantime as it would filter the lead if you have 5+ stage filtration implemented at water input into the house and at the sinks at least a 3 stage or greater water purifier installed. These would have to be replaced on a 1-3 month level from what I can tell.
The lead can be in the grey water but the drinking water would need to be restored.
The only correct solution is to replace the lead pipes with new pipes that complies with all regulations today which definitely means no lead. They restored water back to clean source. Now, before they can use Flint river or any other source, they need to correctly do it and implement a more robust treatment and filtration system so lead levels would be well within compliance.
The problem now with lead is the corroded pipes that needs to be replaced. No try to fix the lead pipe. It has to be replaced.
Residential interior pipes will likely not be an issue after about 6 months to a year at that point as the lead is filtered & pushed out of the system.
The biggest problem is they can't afford to wait on broad schemes. They need precise engineered solution because it was an engineered disaster so it needs an engineered solution by real engineers.
You can't fix Flint's infrastructure issue by looking at the national big term solution. As for the political and bureaucratic system.... I don't know if there is a real solution to that as these problems are simply about money and wasteful spending and spending just to spend and not get anything done. We have this kind of problem because there is never enough money to pay our dream solutions but always enough money to think and study and brain storm. We almost never have enough at one time to implement such. This is a pervasive problem everywhere.
I am not sure that I can say or speak or even dream of knowing all the problems but it all comes to $$$.
If Architects mobilized like this...
Justice for Flint
#architectssoslow
Marc, that's why competitions, for issues of this magnitude, irritate me.
Ken,
It's all the damn transmitting autocad files to printing service business. They all close at 6pm and on weekends. It just slows us down.
In all honesty, I thinks it's ok to move slower. Despite the social investment they can generate concerts of this scale are still relatively short blips in the timeline. The role of the architect and the competition could be one of long term impacts that are spatial and ideally economic.
But it's not about assembling a group of "recognized" or "qualified" people to discuss what the criteria for winning the project would be. The competition in this case is telling the whomever the selection group is (Flint ideally) how they intend to assemble a group to solve short and long term problems that have been exposed by this crisis- with the caveat that they must be on the ground.
This isn't a situation that can be properly resolved by competition gimmicks. This is a situation that requires a coherent competent professional team that are selected through QBS and taken over the time necessary to do the job right.
Competitions on Flint's case basically will amount to gross negligence because the time frame a competition would set will cause a lot of issues to be overlooked in a ram cram solution.
Right now, they need to get the lead level down in the water. This would require a system wide removal of at least 90% of the volume of lead pipes in the system. Using lead testing, they can trace back to the point where the key problematic pipes. Once the lead pipes are removed, the lead levels will drop off. Especially when they replace lead pipes with new modern pipes that meets current EPA and state "EPA" standards as would be used in new infrastructure. They would have to get at that, TODAY, not 6 months from now to get started. Right now, they should be identifying the source areas where the lead is highest and study the documentations of the water line infrastructure. They should already have this documentation noting the pipes and usually the type of pipes. They may require reconnaissance to identify pipes where the type is not known.
Bottom line: Flint needs to get the city water back to safe levels being priority #1.
There isn't anything that can really be done to stop political issues like what faced Flint from happening ever again. This dialogue had happened before many times before and problems always resurfaced even in the same city where a problem occured before. The reason is, the same people familiar with the issue will never be around and when there is a change in the people, there is an inherent loss of history about issues that happened in the past.
Hell, there is lapse of knowledge about the City of Astoria prior to the 1980s. While there is certain broad knowledge, there is a lack of knowledge of details because no one is around from the period. Most issues prior to the 1960s, there is no one around knowledgeable about the details of issues from those times because they are all dead.
Same kinds of issues will resurface in the future. You can't change the symptoms that lead to the issues in Flint, Michigan. The problem has been money oriented.
If any city including Flint undergoes these same kinds of financial issues, will always lead to some sort of means to cut costs and in turn may sacrifice HSW for it. That can not be fixed because there is a constant competing interest and every voted elected official and even the paid staff are under the presiding pressure to keep the city/town solvent. They have a fiduciary duty to keep the city in business and when there is pressure to cut cost or the city becomes insolvent then these issues will always occur. Almost always, HSW is sacrificed before insolvency. An issue that happens all to often.
Honestly, I don't think there is a absolute possibility to prevent issues of this sort of nature (not just regarding city water) such as this from ever happening again. Unless you can guarantee that every city will forever always have an abundant supply of money for everything they need and wish to have.... this risk will always occur.
History has taught us this time after time after time.
"When you have extreme conditions like that, the answer's not for government to sort of float in and to say what the solution is and to in a way impose it on people.
But that paradoxically, even though the needs are obvious, a thing becomes even more important to systematically involve people who live these realities, In trying to figure out what's the most strategic way to respond."
-Edgar Pieterse in Urbanized
I'd contend that the role of the designer is to come in while the pipes are being replaces in order to envision how Flint can recover- with systemic involvement of people.
Apparently Architects could have been involved in a "timely" response.
Could've, if they actually cared more about people and communities, rather than appearances and profit.
One of the things I told principals in my firm, I was growing weary of waiting to be asked to solve problems, that we were too reactive, as opposed to proactive. I want to look at problems, find answers and push solutions; if that means engaging the communities affected to solve them, or in conjunction with local and state government.
So cynical...
And nice move on problem seeking (old and corny phrase, but still).
This is a public infrastructure problem with a public infrastructure solution. Give a team of qualified engineers a fat fucking pile of money and the problem goes away.
Of course, the real problem is the 'fat fucking pile of money'. After all, these are poor brown people! What we really need is another tax cut for the donor class, who can then donate token sums of money to a "competition", resulting in some great proposals which can be discussed over drinks at the Met--sure to impress all your friends!
At this point, there won't be a competition. Instead, it is a slow starve into oblivion/new market potential. And if there is a competition later, it won't be for the current residents.
This entire situation is incredibly depressing. It's not like they need to split the atom. We know how to get clean drinking water to people! Yes, its expensive and no expense isn't a germane argument against spending the money! I know I'm preaching but clean water is a human right.
It is indeed.
Pockets of poverty are the problem. social stratification causes crime, exacerbates poverty, and results in neglected infrastructure. The only way to realistically solve condensed poverty and poor infrastructure is to allow for a more free movement of people which means a more heterogeneous socio economic urban fabric. This is a zoning problem!
Heterogeneous? Isn't a concentration of poverty vs one wealth a heterogeneous condition?
Diverse socio economic neighborhoods are what is needed. This means not having concentrations of either.
Oh. homogenous. And of course zoning leads to this and lovable wages.
No. heterogeneous. The condition now is a collection of homogenous zones that lack economic diversity and hold strong geographic borders (physical or implied). I am saying that we need to create communities that are NOT based on socio-economic class. Communities that are diverse in a non-gentrifying way. What we have now is a society that is a physical manifestation of an economic cast system. "lovable wages" are not going to magically appear. They are a result of economic development and supply and demand of labor, but a mixed socioeconomic demographic will ease the isolation of poverty and the neglect that follows. The concentration of poverty is the main issue here. Poverty will always exist, but to decentralize it is the first step imo towards at the very least, allowing for a psychological freedom from the oppressiveness of a poor and neglected community. Also, to spread the tax rev and infrastructural development amongst a more diverse population/area rather than a geographic hording that is taking place.
So they zone for poverty? I'm not clear on that connection.
Secondly, Flint isn't just a small burb next to Detroit, it's 100k plus, with its own suburban structure. So, if you create social culturally diverse communities across an entire city, it become homogenous.
Poverty will always exist, but to decentralize it is the first step imo towards at the very least, allowing for a psychological freedom from the oppressiveness of a poor and neglected community. Also, to spread the tax rev and infrastructural development amongst a more diverse population/area rather than a geographic hording that is taking place.
Is this a suggestion to redistribute poverty by actually moving people to clear space for stronger economic portfolios? If so consider
1- How well that is working in Detroit. With all the talk about renewal, it focuses on 10sq miles of the city- creating the heterogeneity you are working against.
2- Where would you move the disadvantaged? Are you suggesting the suburbs? How will you convince those municipalities to adopt this plan?
3- Assuming you are suggesting moving people (please correct me/clarify your intent) Your notion of freedom was disproved by Mark Fried in the 50's.
In Detroit the only people moving are generally upper-middle class whites moving into high poverty black areas (the "7.2 SQ MI") and middle class blacks moving to the suburbs from the "neighborhoods" (everywhere not the 7.2); i.e. the mobile are moving. In the 7.2, there was so much poverty that even with an influx of wealthier residents, it has barely changed the overall demographics, instead has just created pockets of wealth. In terms of displacement, I would argue the middle class (mostly blacks, but not exclusively) have been displaced by rising rents more so than the poor. Low income housing has generally stayed consistent; it's the market rate stuff that has seen the rents increase and made areas (buildings) unaffordable. I think the real problem in Detroit is what George N'Namdi calls "psychological gentrification" or the feeling of no longer belonging in a place that was once yours. That's something "heterogeneity" (whatever that is) will not fix and probably make worse.
Thanks for the specifics, although I'd argue that psychological gentrification happen some time ago.
Good question - I've lived in Detroit for 12 years and have definitely seen it change over that time. It's lost some of its "funk" as George would say. I can't say what it's like for residents who have lived here longer than I have. I think most would agree however that psychological gentrification has definitely accelerated in the last five years.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.