We are at a unique moment in global history. Against the backdrop of social and economic upheaval, there is growing awareness that our current systems and lifestyles disempower us and are not sustainable. The world’s resources are finite and inequitably distributed. People throughout the world are embracing their inner activist and demanding the right to shape their own destinies

Newman, Mike

Ramaswamy, Rashmi

English

Mike Newman

Rashmi Ramaswamy

Crossref

Where We Stand

Kansas State University

Oz Volume 35 Article 4 1-1-2013 Where We Stand Mike Newman Rashmi Ramaswamy Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/oz  Part of the Architecture Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Newman, Mike and Ramaswamy, Rashmi (2013) "Where We Stand," Oz: Vol. 35. https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5853.1513 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oz by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact cads@k-state.edu. 16We are at a unique moment in global history. Against the backdrop of so-cial and economic upheaval, there is growing awareness that our current systems and lifestyles disempower us and are not sustainable. The world’s resources are finite and inequita-bly distributed. People throughout the world are embracing their inner activist and demanding the right to shape their own destinies. This global shift and desire for change has unleashed creative energy around “what” we do or make and “how” we define what we do. As shapers of the built environment, architects are directly engaged in physically mak-ing this world, and hence our work has the potential to affect significant change. This is the context for most public interest design practices in the world today.In the spectrum of practices rang-ing from pro-bono studios within larger firms, and mission-driven for-profit firms, to non-profit commu-nity design centers, and university-led design programs, our practice, SHED Studio, occupies the niche of a mission-driven, for-profit design firm. We began our firm with the core value of social change and the desire to serve those living in under-resourced communities who are not traditionally represented.We use design as a tool for engage-ment, so that communities can own and frame the issues and con-sequently design solutions that are more complete and innovative in response to the complexity of the is-Where We StandMike Newman and Rashmi RamaswamySHED StudioCase StudyEnglewood Food, Fitness and Health Master Planning andGrowing Home Farm and Job Training CenterProject PartnersCenter for Urban Transformation (CUT)Teamwork EnglewoodGrowing HomeSHED StudioCenter to Reduce Obesity in Chicago ChildrenDesigns for DignitySHED started working in the Engle-wood neighborhood of Chicago in 2006, assisting Growing Home, an organization providing job training and employment opportunities in the urban agriculture sector. The neighborhood was one of several communities in Chicago that had received funding to develop a stra-tegic plan to enhance the quality of life of its residents. Englewood is a neighborhood with a predominantly African-American population, and the residents were concerned with the lack of both quantity and diver-sity of access to fresh, nutritious, affordable, and culturally appropri-ate foods. Additionally, they were concerned with the negative impact to individual and family health from increasing rates of heart disease, obesity, and asthma, to reduced at-tendance and performance at school and jobs. Thus, one of the focal points of the plan identified a desire to de-velop a green agricultural district in the neighborhood, and to pro-mote healthy lifestyles that included physical fitness, good nutrition, and better use of health-care resources. SHED began by re-envisioning the agricultural district as a “necklace” of farms that flanked an abandoned, elevated railroad track, which would become a community park. The con-cept sparked the imagination of the community and the city, and eventu-ally became an organizing factor for various projects in the neighborhood.In 2008, SHED partnered with the Center for Urban Transformation (CUT) to conduct a planning process to capture the community’s vision and to assist in fleshing out the food, fitness, and health goals in the Qual-ity of Life Plan. We engaged a vari-ety of people within and outside the neighborhood in an interactive con-versation to generate ideas, obtain valuable input, and build consensus about various projects that would seed future efforts. A work-plan docu-ment and schedule was developed at the end of the process and local sub-committees were formed.Various ongoing efforts anchored the plan, including community gardens and the Growing Home Farm. Subse-quent projects fit into the work-plan, including a food business center, proposed by CUT, Growing Home, and SHED, and a design for a park along the elevated railroad.SHED also worked on the design and master plan of a new urban campus for the Growing Home Farm and Job Training Center in sues. We strive to look at each project, not by isolated cases within them, but as part of a big picture of the problem we are trying to solve, and understand how the root causes can be addressed. We engage neighbor-hood residents in defining the vi-sion, designing the project, creating a template linking local actions, and contributing resources to implement the vision, using a multi-level process which is more robust than typical participatory design practices. With our clients as partners, we re-imagine economically devastated neighbor-hoods with vacant lots and dilapidat-ed buildings as areas of fertile, green, productive activity, full of potential, and build the human and physical “infrastructure” to under-grid this vision. We have used strategies to involve people with the process of city-making, ranging from direct par-ticipation to creative interdisciplin-ary interactions so each person can set the agenda and design solutions. This has led us to re-imagine every part of the city as having the potential to be a thriving center of productive life, instead of urban blight.Over time, working with people in marginalized communities, where limited resources have to leverage other opportunities, and the need for people to focus on program im-plementation, limits their ability to creatively frame issues and design solutions, we have learned the com-plexity of what goes into undertaking a public interest design project. The Growing Home project is a case study that illustrates this.17Englewood. The first phase, com-pleted in 2009, is a small but packed 27,000-square- foot site full of grow-ing fields, hoop houses, a building to accommodate classrooms and administrative spaces, as well as community amenities such as farm stands, recycling, and composting areas. This site functions as the After a period of observation, re-finement, and feedback from staff and community, phase two, a 40,000-square foot site focused on production, commenced in 2010. Site construction was complete in 2012 and growing has now commenced. After the expansion site has been in operation for a period of time, main hub for future phases and re-lated food entrepreneurial ventures. SHED partnered with Designs for Dignity, a non-profit donating pro-bono interior design services, in pursuing design issues and finding donations such as furniture, lighting, and equipment to design a lovely interior to the urban “barn.”funding will be sought to construct a “tower of power” to generate electric-ity through the use of solar photovol-taics and wind turbines. A green roof and solar hot water heating system will also be installed.The eventual goal for the organiza-tion is to develop more satellite grow-18New Horizons GardenCommunity involvementing sites and to become completely economically self-sustaining.Where We StandCommunityWe use the design process to help community groups bring the knowl-edge that they already have to the table, and to participate in not only framing the solution, but also in fram-ing the issue that they are trying to solve. Thus, the broader the commu-nity representation, the more likely it is that the issue fully represents the complexity of the situation. However, we often find that it is difficult to obtain such diverse representation, due to scheduling, vested interests, and other limitations. We try to ad-dress this by having numerous occa-sions for community participation, but often this still doesn’t capture all aspects. Our approach is to be prepared to move the issue and its design solution forward, while at the same time being open to the fact that another aspect may need to be incorporated.EducationWe believe that it is not critical for public interest design to be taught at architectural schools. Rather, it is more important for architecture students to develop their design capabilities, and understand that there are a variety of approaches to providing design services. Part of the design instruction should include strategies on having dialogues with clients to obtain critical information, spark the client’s imagination, and discuss tactics to meet budget while satisfying program—all of which are important, regardless of whether the client and project are part of the public interest design sphere.Working Within BudgetsWorking with clients, very small budgets, and limited resources, we often find that we are trying to skim so much cost off the top, that it com-participate in discussions with ac-tivists and community organizers engaged in figuring out how to solve the social needs of a community. We participate both as architects and as activists, with the understanding that we are each capable of wearing multiple hats. By being involved in the open discussion, we are often part of the energy that develops and promises the quality and practical viability of the solution, as well as diminishes its potential to excite the imagination and create magical moments. At these times, we struggle with whether we should advise the client to defer the project until they can raise more finances, or work with what they have, understanding that even the limited solution has a role in serving their social mission. We have found that the most successful approach is to maintain an open dia-logue with the client about the level of compromise they may be making, thus allowing them to make a more informed decision. Sometimes this results in an increased budget, other times we carry forward with the lim-ited funds, and occasionally we are able to mobilize the organization to leverage salvaged or donated materi-als to stretch the budget.CharrettesWe use design charrettes in a variety of ways in the design process. Using them to generate ideas is like flying without a safety net. One has to be truly open to the possibility that genu-inely good ideas can emerge just by stepping back and providing com-munities with design tools to create their own solutions. In such situations, the role of architects is to understand the essence of these ideas, and to use our unique training to translate them into spatial solutions. Sometimes, the dynamic in a group is electric and several ideas pour forth. However, there are also occasions in which the group is not “vibing,” and ideas are not being generated. At these times, we roll up our sleeves and lead the group through structured visioning and input processes that enable them to engage with the issue to the best of their capacity. This leads, at the very least, to obtaining buy-in and at best, to complete engagement.Architects and ActivismIn our firm, we see our role as archi-tects requiring us to show up and generates solutions. This occasionally leads us to play roles which are not strictly architectural; for example we have run meetings, helped write business plans, and contributed in other ways, which has led us to have a much broader definition of what the field of architecture entails. We appreciate that this method is not the best fit for everyone, but feel that 19Discussions with activists and community organizersGrowing HomeNew Horizons Garden Growing Homeby demonstrating this free-wheeling approach to architecture, we pres-ent this as one of the options in the buffet of architectural practices. In this guise, we are often activating and developing projects as part of a broader group.Collaboration We deeply believe in collaboration, and have an appreciation of the rich-ness that can emerge from a col-laborative design process. Often we are very lucky to see this excitement come to fruition. However, collabo-ration is not easy. It requires a lot of finesse to work with different, often disparate, visions and unite them into one cohesive design. Additionally, it takes a lot of patience to work with the different schedules and design processes of the collaborators and to have faith in the collective’s capabil-ity to deliver a complex solution that will meet the client’s needs better than a singular vision. Is this always true? Sometimes, our design skills are equally utilized in designing the collaborative process as they are in presenting our design vision.Roadblocks and Moving ForwardIn our efforts to participate in push-ing through the roadblocks, we have seen both success and creation of new ordinances that change the baseline, and also situations where there is no way forward. We feel that when the community vision hits a roadblock, it is useful to reframe the issue from another place. There are times that we participate in advocacy groups that help shift opinion around the issue, times that we create art exhibits that raise consciousness, and other times we participate in a similar project at a different location that doesn’t have the same barriers, to demonstrate the viability of the vision.Desires, Designs, and InnovationWe have found that the cultural con-text of a solution is more important to the community than a new innova-tive solution. For example, a commu-nity may prefer to have its affordable housing look like everything else on the block, firstly to ensure that it is of comparable quality, and secondly to ensure that its inhabitants are not discriminated against. Is innovation important in this situation, or is it more important to offer the tried and true solution? We adopt a +1 ap-proach to design, which means that while we locate the solution within a community’s comfort zone, we also encourage them to innovate in at least one way, thus changing their baseline to develop a more effective solution. These innovations may oc-cur in the realm of sustainability, aesthetic appearance, or spatial and programmatic layouts that depart from the conventional solution. We thus bring the community forward in development and innovation.

https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1513&amp;context=oz

Where We Stand

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

Kansas State University