anchor
Architecture for Homeless
Students at Vancouver's Emily Carr University were given the task of designing 64 square-foot living spaces for homeless citizens that would have a price point of $1,500 each. Great idea, in theory, but proving to be a failure in reality. CTV
6 Comments
i'm a big fan for design that serves the underserved, but unfortunately, this is an example of a great design exercise that is faulty in terms of realistic execution.
While it is commendable that the students and professor(s) spoke to the homeless and certain agencies to inform their design, did they have the similar foresight to identify what policy makers would agree to implement? (which of course is an uphill battle full of bureaucracy - but their choice of this programme necessitates such a dialogue).
The designers have to think beyond the physical imprint/aesthetic and initial monetary expense. They need to illustrate how they plan on addressing the challenges of execution and lifespan
ie: Have they realistically thought about whether communities would welcome clusters of these structures? Especially if these living spaces are "temporary" - thus accelerating their rate of decline? Where would the funding to maintain or regulate these structures come from?
The entire premise and promise of this project is completely counterintuitive. Why?
Simply put, temporary shelters for the homeless should NOT be in the scope of work of architects, architectural students, architectural institutions, etc. In fact, we should flat out refuse to even entertain the idea of designing shelter for the homeless.
Design for the homeless:
1. is an ACCEPTANCE of the existence of homelessness; and
2. is ANTICIPATORY of the future existence of homelessness.
Design for the homeless can therefore can only succeed through the PROMOTION of homelessness as a condition.
In response, architects:
1. must NOT ACCEPT the condition of homelessness; and
2. must NOT ANTICIPATE the future condition of homelessness.
We must NOT PROMOTE homelessness through its acceptance and anticipation.
In relation to homelessness, architects should serve no greater function than acting as community members with social conscience and moral responsibility. It is predictable that the amount of effort, time and money that has been spent (re. wasted) by architects, architectural students, architectural institutions, etc. on the design, facilitation and implementation of homeless shelters would have achieved far greater impact if that effort, time and money had been spent:
- addressing the legislations that encourage the condition of homelessness;
- addressing the primary causes of homelessness, such as mental health, addictions, etc.;
- addressing the lack of low cost housing, affordable loan programs, free legal services, etc.; and
- assisting those individuals and organizations that aim to abolish the condition of homelessness.
Stop wasting the effort, time and money on creating something that in the end is counterproductive from what is trying to be achieved. The intentions of design for the homeless are good, I know, but the outcomes are contrary.
what's the point in building for the homeless if they will still be homeless when they get this "building?" Formally speaking, from much of what I have seen in projects of this scale, I like the work of the homeless themselves more than this stuff. They are much more creative at incorporating non-shipping container found objects, recyclable materials and the like in a direct, functional way. There's no reason you need this little box to have the same plywood surface everywhere, for example. It's time we accept the heterogeneity of the down-and-out opportunist nomadic ethic. As architects, many of us could be living there soon.
onlinematt - HOMELESSNESS is a fact. By designing shelters for the homeless, the students were in fact addressing the issue, which isn't ADDRESSLESSNESS, but the lack of shelter. Even if the result fell short of success, the initiative itself is commendable.
I believe roho got it right in pointing out the very significant challenge of what to do with such shelters once they're designed and produced. Unfortunately I have no ready solutions to this problem to offer.
it is an ethical idea to try to resolve the problems of urban dwellings for socially marginalized population, which have been dealt with in modernity by a number of respectable architects like karel teige. in fact, there is an interesting documentation titled 'the minimum dwelling' written by him, which you might want to check out. also, prof. horden built a micro compact home with well organized spatial division, which has similar dimensions as this homeless shelter. in seoul, the mayor just released initiatives to cope with similar problems not specifically for the homeless, but for the typology called 'zzok-bang' which is the cheapest rentable form of dwelling available in the city. it is ackowledged that the problems of these people are not just economical, but more importantly psychological so technical improvements i.e. fire safety, bath, heating are to be augmented by rehabilitation programs i.e. medi-care, hygienics, counselling and so forth. for pictures,
http://www.moneytoday.co.kr/view/mtview.php?type=1&no=2008111916411088146&outlink=1
http://www.ytn.co.kr/_comm/pop_mov.php?s_mcd=0103&s_hcd=&key=200811191900095047
architecturally, a small interior space or cell can be an interesting topic of discussion, but when it is tied to the utilitarian function to serve the homeless, it becomes depressing right away so maybe it could be a good exercise to think about 'intent' or 'formal investigation' in relation to historical associations we can make with a small room. one of the main utilitarian problems to solve with a small space is how to organize all the stuffs and the life. likewise, if we think about who might use a cell, all kinds of people will come to mind. monks, prisoners, students, patients, perverts, lovers, deads, yourselves, corbu... so the intent and symbolic meanings associated with the cell and what sort of atmosphere we can create with it become interesting spatial investigative and generative tools for larger spaces.
chicagoski,
If you (like these student) choose to address homelessness in this way, you are making a concious choice to ACCEPT and PROPOGATE the condition of homelessness itself. Your theoretical stance is unashamedly immoral. Homelessness IS a fact, but I do NOT ACCEPT homelessness.
What would be more commendable for these students is that they stop and think for more than two seconds. A far more creative and effective solution would be to think outside the box to generate a way to resolve and end homelessness, not continue its condition. With the intention of helping, you and your student friends are doing the exact opposite.
Stop and think for a second about why you do something. I am guessing that the student project was brought into being through the avenue of self-motivation and self-interest, not for the interests of a dude on the street with nowhere to go because of local and federal politics.
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.