Adam Vermeersch - Master's Thesis - A Culmination of Influences

Adam Michael Vermeersch

A Culmination of InfluencesErecting Architecture in the City

Adam Michael VermeerschUniversity of Detroit Mercy

[email protected](586)-489-7485

2

A Culmination of InfluencesAdam Michael Vermeersch

Master of Architecture ThesisUniversity of Detroit Mercy

School of ArchitectureProfessor Claudia Bernasconi

AR 5100, 5110, 5200, 5210

Erecting Architecture in the City

4

To all the people who have helped me along the way, especially my wife, Irina,

my freinds, collegues, and teachers. You all have taught me alot about and I thank you for you guidance and pa-

tience durring this testing time.

ii

1. Intent 2. Precedent Studies3. Research Zoning Marginalized Space: PoleTown East Productive landscapes4. Proposal for Intervention5. Narrowing the Focus Purpose Design Criteria Masterplan6. Building System7. Apprentice Workshop

1 . 0 0 12 . 0 0 53 . 0 1 33 . 0 1 73 . 0 2 94 . 0 3 75 . 0 4 15 . 0 4 25 . 0 4 35 . 0 4 56 . 0 . 5 57 . 0 6 1

Table of Contents

1.001

This Semester I have been exploring the idea of control. I began with definitions for control, authority, and restriction and used these as criteria for finding examples of restricted developments. In an attempt to better understand these environments also looked for examples of unrestricted development. This examination of varied examples of regulated (zoned) and unregulated communities across the globe has revealed a few commonalities within each development type that can be compared and contrasted to one another which I hope will offer future insight as this project develops. Starting with an analysis of the regulated community developments, which are regulated by the practices of municipal zoning, one finds that they have many positive aspects. These communities offer there residents an environment of quality construc-tion which provide safety and ease of access to the amenities and services of the de-velopment. Unfortunately these types of developments require massive amounts of capital to produce and often acquire a monotonous tonality. The regulations imposed on the community stifle the ability of the residents to explore creative and innovative means of development and do not offer them the ability to exhibit any form of personal expression within the system that has been established, creating a homogenous atmo-sphere. In contrast, the unregulated developments, which use other conventions to de-termine land usage, appear to be lively, community centered spaces that see creative and innovative usage of the available land, residual waste materials, and finical capital as beneficial to the community at large. This is necessitated by the fact that these communities have are normally dealing with insufficient reserves of these commodities in terms if the number of residents they need to provide for. The need to employ these different methods of land use and construction serve their purpose but result in compli-cations were accessibility and quality of construction are concerned. The lack of safety

Intent

1.002

caused by these less than ideal methods of development is exacerbated by the types of illegal activities which are attracted to the environmental conditions these developments offer. Each type of development offers its residents beneficial and detrimental aspects in terms of living, but a macro-analysis the development types reveals that these develop-ments are not only products of their organizational systems. These systems are only one of the type influences that affect the developments that occur within the communities. I have identified two additional type influences that guide the development of an architec-tural intervention. They are:

1. Project imposed Limitations – This influence involves financial and program-matic limits set by the client that commissions a project. These are both quan-tifiable and qualitative as they address the financial and programmatic needs of the project as well as the desire for the intervention to have cater to specified cliental and have a particular feel.2. Contextually imposed conditions – The influence involves the physical reali-ties of the site and immediate area surrounding it. Adjacencies to other inter-ventions, existing structures on the sight, potential environmental hazards/benefits, and geological issues are all issues.3. Agency imposed Restrictions – This influence involves the organizational sys-tem that must be worked within to gain approval from the agency that oversees the development of the property. Zoning guidelines, building codes, and proce-dural requirements must all be fulfilled in the prescribed way to gain the Agen-cy’s consent to build and eventual inhabit an architectural intervention within a regulated development. Informal agreements, public consensus, economic factors, and social hierarchy tend to dictate the manifestation of architectural interventions in unregulated systems.

While I am interested by all of these influences, I am most intrigued by the Agency imposed Restrictions which forcefully guide the building process. While they provide a law-ful means to ensure safety standards and vision for development these restrictions inher-ently possess aspects which restrict freedom, inhibit creativity, and exclude difference. I intend to research the type influences that act on development, giving special attention to the Agency imposed Restrictions to investigate if the current method of zoning and land

RestrictionsConditions

Limitations

Restrictions

1.003

use practices could be enhanced by relaxing their grip on the building process. I intend to use the information available through research and observation of both restricted (zoned) and unrestricted communities to see how they have developed and isolate some of the benefits and detriments of each type of development to begin to speculate what a hybrid of the two development types might offer the urban fabric of Detroit. It is my assumption that the present day conditions that we develop and plan within are so overly saturated with the restrictions and ubiquitous failures left by the zoning practices that ravaged Detroit’s communities and lead to the evacuation of the city are stifling the potential for growth in areas that have the most need. Areas where regulations are relaxed offer insight on how development can foster innovative responses that satisfy the needs of those that create them. By disarming the power of the zoning ordinances, we allow for the creation of synthetic and hybrid development typologies to occur. Places of this nature could offer insight on how to design efficient-ly utilized space that which encourage inclusive collaboration and a greater sense of community. I intend to use this research as a vehicle to explore how synthesizing charac-teristics of the regulated and unregulated developments might serve as a catalyst for development in within Detroit. The resultant hybrid ordering system could offer a po-tential solution to the negative aspects of either organizational system and promote the growth of a lively, creative, and innovative area composed of cost effective, cre-ative built environments of a high caliber of construction which explore the potential results that can be realized by synthesizing regulated and unregulated development typologies. It is intended that these developments would seek to be inclusive in that they would cater to the residents, remaining in the city and those who might one day arrive.

2.005

This is the Oak Cliff Neighborhood of Dallas, TX before (bottom) and after (top) a guerrilla demonstration effort by Jason Robert’s Better Blocks sought to break every rule possible in the course of one weekend one weekend to show the possibilities of the space and how pedestrians could reclaim the area. Their effort are being mimicked in many other areas of the country.

Precedents

2.006Photo courtesy of Urbanlandscapes.info

2.007

This is the Gabriel’s Warf, London after a Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper interven-tion by Urban Space Management revitalized the space and transformed it into a multi-functional area. The intervention was a series of small scale improvements which are enacted incrementally to encourage entrepreneurial investment, activity, and community creativity. In this case the interventions were done by a set designer.

2.008Photo courtesy of pps.org

2.009

This is the concept that BIG proposed for the Tojhuset development in Copen-hagen, DK. They found a formula to calculate building height in the city ordinance and used the mathematical construct to develop an abstract form for the proposed devel-opment. The knowledge of the ordinance and clever thinking allowed the ordinance to literally shape the building in a unique way.

2.010Photo courtesy of http://archidose.blogspot.com/2011/02/bigs-peaks.html

2.011

Using the hillside shanty towns in Tijuana, Mexico as precedent, Teddy Cruz, designed this mixed use residential unit in the neighborhood of San Ysidro, California, which is just outside of San Diego. He see the intervention as the framework for future developments in the neighborhood. Mr. Cruz lofted the residential component of the development above a communal loggia to place more importance on the need for public space. This space is used for festivals and as a market.

2.012Photo courtesy of http://www.stylepark.com/db-images/cms/article/img/

v312131_958_480_232-31.jpg

3.013

Before going any further an understanding of what brought about regulated development is necessary. William A. Fischel’s research into this matter explains how American cities evolved from system that relied upon informal agreements that direct-ed the usage of privately owned property to a system that choose to rely upon the public policy of zoning to regulate the use all land within the built environment. Regulation of land use is a historical idea when looking at America in a broad sense. Many eighteenth- and nineteenth-century American cities were laid out in great detail by their founders. Zoning was not a needed convention during this period of the country’s development because the methods of transportation available to the popu-lation served as a predominate mode of separating the functional uses of land. Urban residents not having efficient means to travel great expanses of space were forced to live in close proximity to their places of work. The lack of flexibility in choosing their dwelling caused them to enact informal land used covenants and nuisance laws to protect the values of their homes and the character of the neighborhoods that they lived in. Residents worked in collaboration with one another to both preserve the identity of the city and protect their investment in the real-estate investment that is their home. The dynamic of urban life began to change when the electric street car began servicing the city streets of America. For the first time in history, those that worked in the city were afforded the option of residing else ware, in exclusively residential dis-tricts, as long as they were willing to incur the additional cost of commuting to work on a daily basis. As the street cars radiated out from the core of the city, apartments and retail establishments followed. These types of developments were naturally seg-regated from the residential districts, which began to in fill the areas between the ra-dials, for two reasons. Firstly the political power asserted by the informal covenants

Zoning

3.014

and nuisance laws established by the developers of the residential areas restricted the implementation of the street car infrastructure and the creation of these types of devel-opments inside the residential zones, which directly affected the second criteria for their segregation, the intrinsic need for these types of developments to be in close proximity to the street car lines. It was these informal agreements allowed residents to continue on in a similar fashion without the intervention of zoning. Just as the street cars had allowed residential and retail developments to escape the confines of the city core, it restricted industrial and manufacturing development from following. The street car system was not equipped for moving heavy materials or noxious chemicals; these land use types were restricted to the areas in direct proximity to the wharves and railheads. Zoning arose due to the interdependence of land use that arose after the dawning of the 20th century and the need to deal with the incompatible uses of land by means other than the traditional nuisance laws and private covenants that helped mitigate development disputes. The idea of zoning entire municipalities was imported from German cities, who had adopted the practices in the 1870’s. Zoning was not instituted because if the electric street car that emerged in the 1880’s, or even the personal automobile that followed in the 1910’s. The need for zoning arose as American cities began shifting from a transportation system based on fixed rail street cars system to a transportation that had more flexibility, which included motorized buses and trucks. These two modes of transportation liberated previously restricted de-velopment types which began invading the residential districts which were thought to be protected by the covenants and nuisance laws. Motorized passenger bus liberated the development of apartments from the con-fines of the street car tracts. The flexibility of this mode of transportation was use at first to supplement the services provided by the street car companies, into areas that had previ-ously been hard to gain access to. Eventually apartment developers discovered that they no longer needed to follow the tracks of the street cars. They could instead forge out in to the residential districts where land was cheaper and profit was greater, and the services provided by the street car’s buses would follow. Motorized trucks liberated industrial and manufacturing developments for the proximity of the wharves and railheads. With the need to be located close to their supply

3.015

points removed they also became free to permeate the barrier of the residential dis-trict, and benefit from the low-cost land available, adding to their profitability by reduc-ing their overhead. These invasions in to the residential district by nonconforming land use develop-ments caused a serious disturbance within the residential districts. The stakeholders of these established communities feared that their investments would lose some of their value. The homeowners began voicing the opinions and concerns they had about these invasive businesses, publicly, and set the wheels in motion that would eventually usher in the age of municipal zoning. It is for this reason that the single family household has been the paramount concern of zoning practices in America form their inception. The usage of covenants by large-scale developers during pre-zoning years be-came problematic. The developers were able to control development within the region covered by the covenant, but they were powerless to prevent the encroachment of nonconforming land use types on the periphery of their developments, which detoured home buyers from moving in. After failing to control the character of their environment through informal agreements, private covenants, and nuisance laws, home owners and developers chose to forgo incurring the additional cost associated with purchasing the additional land that was needed to safeguard their developments, and choose to pay the political pric-es associated with perusing the regulatory measure generated by the public policy of zoning ordinances. These developers understood that this course of action would come with its drawbacks. Zoning opened them up to the possibility that some of their land parcels may incur a loss of value, but on a whole developers believed zoning was beneficial in that it “would maximize the aggregated land values, and stabilized values at each loca-tion, but would not maximize values everywhere.” With this understanding of zoning, developers actively promoted its institution on the municipal level, and hoped that the losses to some of their investments would be outweighed by the renewed trust and faith homeowners would have for the stability of investments in real-estate because of the protections afforded by the regulatory device. ** The goal of this research is to develop an architectural intervention that ben-efits from my research. I’ve learned from the research and experimentation to a de-

3.016

velopment that is in Detroit, as it is a great place to experiment with development types. Obviously I can’t use the whole city so I want to select a site that is between a growing ac-tive community and a stagnant or decaying one. I want to explore at the scale that occurs between that of a building and a neighborhood. And I think it should be mixed use in nature.

3.017

Just as it is important to understand how the Agency imposed Restrictions can influence the architectural intervention that this research will eventually propose, it is equally important to understand how the other type influences will affect its develop-ment. To understand how the contextually imposed conditions will influence any inter-vention, it becomes necessary to select a site in to which the intervention will be placed. Intuitively I suggested locating this intervention in between adjacent active areas, in an area of decay with the intent of revitalizing the surroundings. After analyzing some of Data Driven Detroit’s aerial maps of the city of Detroit which illustrated trends in population, population density, population change between 2000 - 2010, housing condition, and vacancy rates, I decided to investigate the area of Poletown East as a possible place to situate the intervention. This neighborhood is roughly 1 sq. mi. in area and is situated to the southeast if the I-94 and I-75 interchange. It is surrounded active areas on all sides. To Its north are the industrial areas of the General Motors Cadillac Assembly Plant aka the Central In-dustrial Park and Milwaukee Junction. To the East lies the Gratiot corridor, an active re-tail thoroughfare. To the South is Eastern Market and the Dequindre Cut, a pedestrian/bike trail that leads to the city’s river walk. Finally, to its west lie the bustling areas of Midtown, The Detroit Medical Center, the College for Creative Studies, and Wayne State University. One third of the neighborhood of Poletown is devoted to manufacturing and in-dustry while the other two thirds of are composed of residential with pockets of retail mixed in. Driving through the neighborhood gives you the impression that this neighbor-hood has seen better days. Its blocks are devoid of house in places, and the blocks that do have homes foster vacant and scrapped out homes and the burnt remnants of what used to be homes alongside those that are occupied and maintained. The retail area of

Marginalized Space: Poletown East

3.018

this neighborhood exhibits the same character as the residential part, only on a slightly large scale. In addition to, or maybe because of, the ravaged housing stock and the vacant lots is the overwhelming feeling that this place is being overrun by natural forces. The vacant lots, that used to be houses and schools, have taken on a wild pastoral quality reminiscent of a wooded prairie or an abandoned farm. Intrigued by this place I began researching its his-tory, perhaps to gain some semblance of understanding as to how this could happen. What I found was interesting to say the least. John J. Bukowczyk’s article entitled” The Decline and Fall of a Detroit Neighborhood: Poletown vs. G.M. and the City of Detroit” paints a detailed history of the events that al-lowed this neighborhood to grow and prosper only to be ripped apart by two interstate de-velopment projects during the 1950’s and 60’s before receiving a deathblow that demol-ished the most vibrant portion of the community, destroying a church, and driving most of the reaming residents off to the suburbs in the 1980’s with the construction of an auto plan. Poletown began growing in the 1860’s as German-pole immigrants started settling around the industrial areas located along Gratiot and E. Cannfield. They were attracted to this place because of the cultural commonalities that existed between them and the Ger-mans who already inhabited the area and the industrial work availability of industrial work. As their numbers swelled, they pushed north. The opening of the Chene Street railroad, a street car line, in 1889 accelerated this movement as it granted them access to the “polish” city of Hamtramack, which lay further north and offered additional industrial employment. When the Beltline Railroad, which connected the Detroit and Milwaukee railroads to the Grand Trunk Western railroad, was completed in 1900 it formed an industrial district that would come to be known as Milwaukee Junction. It was in this area that a burgeoning

3.019

1860 1890 1914 1955

3.020

1967 1978 1981 1985 2012

3.021

automotive industry started to take root, amongst the other industries. The growth of this industrial area acted as a magnet to the auto industry for the next 30 years and tying the fate of the industry and the neighborhood of Poletown together. The indus-tries need for works grew, and so did the number of polish residents, but their numbers were also supplemented by new immigrant groups. Southern blacks, Eastern European Jews, Appalachian Whites, and Carpatho-Russians joined the rank-and-file workers of the neighborhood. Tensions between the poles and these new immigrants flared at times, but the community was drawn together from time to time when disputes arose between the works and factory management. Following World War I the industry jobs began drying up and the resident saw better opportunities in the surrounding suburbs. The neighborhood began showing signs of decay as early as the 1950’s. The changes in the economy and the viability of the neighborhood were exacerbated by a series of public policy decisions which would mark Poletown for demolition.

3.021

3.022

The first disaster was the decision to lay the I-94 expressway through the neigh-borhood in 1955. This decision devastated the neighborhood. It demolished a large portion of the retail along Chene and split the neighborhood and some of its parishes in two. This was followed up with the decision to establish the Detroit Medical center over top the old-est part of the polish settlement in 1956 and the 1967 decision to split the neighborhood a second time with the erection of the 1-75 Expressway. These attacks on Poletown from the City of Detroit, were done under the guise that it was better for the city, but the neigh-borhood saw no up-side. “Their city services deteriorated, crime mounted, and vacancies, abandonment, arson, and decapitation became a general problem.” As if to add insult to injury the City of Detroit, noticing the decline in the area began to broker a deal with General Motors that would wipe and semblance of the healthy neigh-borhood that was pole town off the map. The most vibrant portion of pole town was the portion to the north that was secluded from the remainder when I-94 was laid. It unlike the rest of the neighborhood was well maintained and healthy, but the City of Detroit had other

3.022

3.023

plans. The economic climate in the city was getting worse and the City needed to keep the auto industry within the city if they were going to survive. In response to this pre-dicament they offered up the vibrant portion of Poletown, through eminent domain and help form the Department of Housing and Urban Development, to G.M. so that they could build a modern Assembly Plant near the Milwaukee Junction rail yard. The Poletown resi-dents were furious and fought tooth and nail. With the help of Ralph Nader they took the issue all the way to the Supreme Court in hopes that the decision would be overturned. The decision came back in favor of the City and G.M. and most vibrant portion of the city and the Church of the Immaculate Conception were demolished in 1981. The neighborhood, which was devastated by the four occurrences of eminent domain in the span of 30 years, went into a downward spiral since the demolition of its northern portion. Crime, blight, and vacancy devastated the remaining potions of neigh-borhood, which is now referred to as Poletown East.

3.023

3.024

The actions used by the city to sculpt this neighborhood are unique to Poletown, which makes it an interesting place to peruse an architectural intervention based on this sort of research. By relaxing the level of control that the regulation agencies have over a place like I believe it may be possible to reverse some of the negative effect that they have had on it.

3.024

3.025

GRATIO

T

GRATIO

T

E. G

RA

ND

BLV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

Mc

DO

UG

AL

L

CH

EN

E

St. A

UB

IN

DE

QU

IND

RE

RU

SS

EL

L E. FERRY

E. WARREN

E. FOREST

E. CANFIELD

MACK

GR

AN

D B

LV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

Mc

DO

UG

AL

L

CH

EN

E

St. A

UB

IN

E. WARREN

E. FOREST

E. CANFIELD

MACK

E. GRAND BLVD

CHARLEVOIX

E. VERNOR HWY

CH

EN

E

GR

AN

D B

LV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

KERCHEVAL

ANTIETAM

E. LAFAYETTE

E. LAFAYETTE

E. JEFFERSON

BR

US

H

JOH

N R

WO

OD

WA

RD

W. CANFIELD

BR

US

H

JOH

N R

WO

OD

WA

RD

MACK

TLE

TEMPLE

I-94

I-75

I-375

E. G

RA

ND

BLV

DA

VE

.G

RA

ND

BLV

DG

RA

ND

BLV

DD

GGR

AN

D B

LV

DGG

RA

ND

BLV

D

BR

US

HB

UB

RU

SHH

NFFW. CANF

H

JOH

N R

JOH

N R

DW

OO

DW

AR

DW MACKMACK

I-94

I-75

I-375

JOH

NJ

HJO

HN

R

WO

OD

WA

WO

DW

OO

DW

AR

DD

W

BR

US

DELD

BR

US

HB

RU

SH

FIFIE

HH

EEEE

M

LELLDELDCA

T

E

St. Albertus

Sweetest Heart

of Mary

St. Josaphat

Rose of Sharon

Church

of God in

Christ

St. Stanislaus

St. Hyicinth

(Immaculate Conception)

1

2

4

5

67

8

3

3.026

GRATIO

T

GRATIO

T

GRATIO

T

VA

N D

YK

E

E. G

RA

ND

BLV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

Mc

DO

UG

AL

L

CH

EN

E

St. A

UB

IN

DE

QU

IND

RE

RU

SS

EL

L E. FERRY

E. WARREN

E. FOREST

E. CANFIELD

MACK

GR

AN

D B

LV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

Mc

DO

UG

AL

L

CH

EN

E

St. A

UB

IN

E. WARREN

E. FOREST

E. CANFIELD

MACK

VA

N D

YK

E

E. GRAND BLVD

CHARLEVOIX

E. VERNOR HWY

CH

EN

E

GR

AN

D B

LV

D

MT

. EL

LIO

T

VA

N D

YK

E

KERCHEVAL

ANTIETAM

E. LAFAYETTE

E. LAFAYETTE

E. JEFFERSON

BR

US

H

JOH

N R

WO

OD

WA

RD

CA

SS

W. WARREN

W. FOREST

W. CANFIELD

BR

US

H

JOH

N R

WO

OD

WA

RD

CA

SS

MACK

MYRTLE

TEMPLE

I-94

I-75

I-375

M-10

GRAT

GR

GRATIO

T

VA

N D

YK

EV

DK

EV

AN

DY

KE

E. G

RA

ND

BLV

DA

VE

.G

RA

ND

BLV

DG

RA

ND

BLV

DD

GGR

AN

D B

LV

D

DY

KE

DY

VA

N D

YK

E

GGR

AN

D B

LV

D

VA

ND

YK

EV

AN

DY

KE

BR

US

HB

UB

RU

SHH

JOH

NJ

HJO

HN

R

WO

OD

WA

WO

DW

OO

DW

AR

DD

W

CA

SS

W. WARRENWW RRW. WARREN

W FORESTW. FOREST

ANFIELDFIW. CANFIELD

BR

US

HB

RU

SH

JOH

N R

JOH

N R

DW

OO

DW

AR

DW

CA

CA

SS

MACKMACK

MYMYRTLE

TEMPLE

I-94

I-75

I-375

M-10

3.029

At one time Detroit was considered a world class city. It had a swelling popula-tion that was diverse in ethnicity and skill-sets. This large population was result of the success that the manufacturing and innovation sectors achieved. These sectors devel-oped many advancements that change aspects of American quality of life. The effects of the processes and products developed in Detroit by these sectors were felt locally, regionally, and internationally, touch nearly every country on the globe.

As a manufacturing City Detroit attracted skilled and unskilled labor from across the globe and the size of the city quickly expanded following the end of World War 1 to its current size. Unfortunately, this trend of growth exceeded the limits that the city could contain. Manufacturing eventually started leaving the city proper. This process was unique in that the jobs followed the city’s population, which had started an exodus to the suburbs’ surrounding the city. As time progressed the city began emptying and the once blusterous population, which topped out around 1.8 million people, dwindled, to a modest 700,000 people.

This change in population has created many problems for the city. As people left the tax base shank, which caused the quality of the municipal services to degraded. The degradation in the city’s services cause safety to become an issue and crime escalated. As the socioeconomic qualities of the city changed more discontent people left the city in search of a new place to call home. As residents departed more employment centers,

On Productive Landscapes

3.030

factories, and homes were left unattended, resulting in a patchwork of vacancy that inter-twines within the inhabited portions of the city.

Over time these abandoned properties have slowly started reverting back to their natural state. The passage of 60 years of neglect has allowed many of Detroit’s urban neighborhoods, which were once dense with people and structures, to transform into areas that look suburban or eerily pastoral. In light of the transformative effects that a shrinking population has on the built environment, the city of Detroit has evolved a unique set of cri-teria which challenge designers to think outside of the box as they attempt to plan for the revitalization of the city and its neighborhoods.

Two frameworks for redevelopment have been produced that attempt to tackle the problems posed by Detroit’s dichotomy of population and space. The first of these frameworks, leaner, greener Detroit, was released by the American Institute of Architects in 2008. Among the ideas proposed by this guiding document is the creation of a network of and urban core and urban villages that would be scattered across the city. The core and villages would be densely populated, walkable, self-sustaining communities connected via roadways and transit ways that would allow efficient and focused development to occur while encouraging the use of public transit and diverse economic and cultural populations. The AIA calls for opportunity areas and ring parks to occur in the spaces between theses urban villages and core. These areas would be reserved for future growth opportunities and possible sustainable economies.

The second frame work to be produced that addresses the issue of rebuilding De-troit evolved out of the Detroit Works Project and its Long Term Planning effort. This frame-work which is now called Detroit Future City seems to have expounded upon the concepts contained within the AIA Document and begins flushing out some of the details of how

3.031

these urban villages might occur. The DFC document begins prescribing multiple tactics that might be employed within some of these areas that can aid in reshaping the fabric of the city. In digesting both of these documents and supplementing them with informa-tion I have acquired from my research on zoning and collaboration development for my thesis work, I came to the realization that much of the land that the city owns occurs in fragmented parcels that are dispersed throughout the city. Many of these properties reverted back to the city because the former owner was unable to pay the taxes on the properties. As this land is aggregated, by the various agencies who hold them, it be-comes increasingly difficult for the people in need of this land to purchase parcels that were in proximity to one another. This problem is being addresses though the creation of the Detroit Land Bank Authority, but still poses a hurdle to people hoping to buy land within the city. As an extension of this problem, most of the city owned property that has gone up for auction in the past has been acquired by people, who are not always residents, that are looking to speculate on the land. They buy large amounts of potentially produc-tive land, for rock bottom prices, and sit on it while it degrades even further. These auctions are intrinsically flawed. This practice of selling to people that have no intention of inhabiting the property in any foreseeable future inhibits the process of redeveloping the city. It robs the neighborhood of potential inhabitants and the city of additional tax base. With this problem, I see some potential avenues that the city might look to miti-gate this problem, should they decide to peruse a formal organization for the city as prescribed by the AIA’s Leaner, Greener Detroit and DFC . My recommendations could be utilized in either the urban villages or the areas of opportunity that occurs between them, but I would like to discuss their implementation for the opportunity areas, which could become the sites for the productive landscapes of Detroit’s future.

3.032

I fell that these areas are prime spaces that could be responsibly re-occupied via either initiatives similar to the Homesteading act of 1862, which helped America populate the Midwestern states, serve as testing sites for innovation in new urban typologies as is occurring in Taos, New Mexico with the introduction of the Sustainable Development Test-ing Site Act, or act as a proving ground for the unconventional ownership and development practices perpetuated by housing cooperatives across the globe. The idea that the city is auctioning of its land to people that have no intention to inhabit or improve seems to serve as a superficial solution to a deeper problem. It might behoove the city to supplement this approach with the inclusion of an urban homestead-ing initiative. An initiative such as this would encourage repurposing of some of the more sparsely populated districts of the city through the granting of unused parcels of land to individuals who would inhabit and improve them. The idea for this type of intervention is an old one in this country. The Homestead-ing Act of 1862 was signed during the revolutionary war by Abraham Lincoln. This Law made acquiring land in the US attainable for people of every social group and ethnicity the ability to make a living off of the land. These rights were extended to any American who had not raised arms against the United States and even extended to former slaves and new im-migrants. The act allowed for un-appropriated lands to be obtained in the territories to the west for free after the completion of three steps. Perspective land owners only need to file and application, then construct a dwelling measuring 12 x 14 (units were negated from the original document) and grow crops for a minimum of 5 years, before finally filing a deed to claim 160 acres of surveyed government land. If the claimant wished to expedite these processes he could shorten the period to 6 months by paying $1.25 an acre. The physical conditions of the plains frontier presented great challenges to the homesteaders but those who persevered reaped the benefits afforded them by their hard effort. As a precedent, initiative such have this have reemerged recently in some counties in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska who are looking to bolster their communities by giving away

3.033

free plots of land to applicants who will build a home and inhabit it for a number of years .Similarly, Muskegon, Michigan recently began an initiative to combat its high unemploy-ment rate. It offers fledgling manufacturing businesses to potential to acquire 5 acres for the creation of 25 jobs. It also incentivises the creation of more jobs by granting more land. 50 jobs gets you 12 acres of free land, 75 jobs 20 acre, and a 100 jobs 30 acres. The sparsely populated areas of Detroit might be used in a manner such as this. Obviously it is inconceivable to grant 160 acres at this day in age; however, the granting of parcels ranging from an acre to 1 acre is not. I think that instead of selling of pieces of the city to those who will not occupy them, the City should grant excess parcels to emboldened modern-day homesteaders who will cultivate the property for a period of 5 year, make working on their parcel as well as improving the land with a dwelling of mod-erate size( maybe a minimum of 600 square feet) easier to do trough deregulation, and allow for the creation of stronger community networks. In contrast to the current process a homesteading initiative would encourage the construction of dwellings, the redevelopment of social systems and cultural growth, and create activity in the fallow areas of the city. Homesteading has always required that the clamant inhabit them for a number of years before they would officially receive the deed, which means that there would be new residents paying property taxes and possibly creating taxable revenue off of the land. A program such as this would only intensify the rate at which former residents, artist, fabricators, and immigrants are repopulating the city and hopefully mitigate the gentrification of these areas while allowing for innovation and reinvestment to occur while slowly improving its tax base. The grants would be advertised at universities and trade schools across the globe, in addition publicizing it on the internet and in major pub-lications. The selection for those that are granted could proceed like a fellowship that asks for potential applicants to submit an application. This application could ask for a

3.034

bulleted five year plan, a list of skills that would help the potential homesteader cultivate their land, and proof of financial responsibility. Opening a homesteading initiative to applicants across the globe would allow Detroit to once again become a global city of innovation. The multitude of perspectives and skill sets would encourage the innovation of development practices and allow for the potential of collaboration. In addition to a diversity of skills and perspectives, opening the application process to the international community would encourage the importation of amenities that these international residents are accustomed to from their cultural homes. This would cre-ate micro economies that are based on newly established cultural enclaves. Another way that the city might approach the redistribution of the lands it owns is including a provision in its zoning ordinance that allows for groups of innovative tinkers to legally test out their otherwise illegal methods of land improvement. If they were to include an article like that of the 2011 Sustainable Development Testing Site Act from New Mexico they could allow these areas to become catalyst sites for innovative ideas for sustainably repopulating space within the urban context. As defined by the articles of the act a sustainable development refers to a live-in environment composed of structures and systems that inherently produce utilities and life-support systems free of existing conventional grids and disposal systems. These types of developments hope to produce on site energy, reuse materials discarded by modern day society, produce organic food and fuel, minimize the needs for drawing ground water from the ground, and minimize the need for sewage treatment facilities. Until recently this was an illegal act but due to the tenacity and persistence of Ar-chitect and Activist Michael Reynolds, it is currently possible for residents in New Mexico to apply for a permit that would allow them to explore the possibilities of how their dwell-ings might work for them, on sustainable development test sites. On these sites they build creations they call Earthships. The shell of these dwellings crafted from discarded tires packed with earth, cans, bottles and mud plaster. Other materials are added to the shell to

3.035

make it function like a home, but these dwellings also allow their creators to harvest water and energy from the elements, moderate their living climate using thermal mass, treat their waste water, and provide food for them all while looking incredible. It might benefit the City of Detroit could take a page out of Taos’s book by in-stituting a program such as this. With the creative abilities of Detroit’s resident, educa-tional institutions in the area, and the shear amount of discarded modern-day materials Detroit could greatly benefit for the conclusions that might be drawn from a program such as this. Findings from a program like this might allow for the all of the productive landscapes in the city to be removed from the municipal grid. A final avenue the city might peruse as a means of redistributing the under utilized portions of the city could be by easing the use of the housing cooperative as a potential ownership model for development. This model differs from that of single family home, condominiums, and rental properties in that the collection of properties essentially become assets of a company who then sells shares of itself to those who wish to reside within them . When a portion of the cooperative is sold to a person that person helps in caring for the maintenance of the property, shares in the taxes for the development, and has the potential to share in the success or failure of the co-op as a whole. This model for ownership provides those using it to curate the members of their community, mitigating the risk that incur, internally govern the way that their develop-ment grows and utilizes their collective funds, and affords them more capital to have their voice be heard more influentially. In suggesting these alternatives to the sale of publicly owned land at auction it is not my intent that only one of the methods might be use, but rather that a combi-nation of these methods might be inter laced with in an area that would allow for the mixing of perspectives, experiences, people, and skills. It is my position that a respon-sible way for Detroit to reinvest in its land assets is by responsibly investing the human

3.036

capital that presently and eventually inhabits its street. By curating its residents instead of selling parts of itself for a few hundred bucks the city could benefit and rise from the ashes anew. The inclusion of new tenants, new ideas in the areas of production, development, and lifestyle, combined with those persistent residents who refuse to depart the city that has been unable to offer them the same quality of life they were used to in years past could allow for the emergence of more successful communities within the productive landscapes of Detroit.

4.037

The final influence to take into consideration is the project imposed limitations. This area of influence predominantly deals with the programming of the intended intervention. It is my intent that these architectural interventions cater to the current residents as well as those in the surrounding areas and those that might one day move into the area: in short I want the programing to be inclusive in nature. Being that the area is a marginalized space, it is rightly home to a litany of illegal activities that are perpetuated by a number of marginalized populations. Observations of the area has allowed me to generate a partial list of potential underground activates that might take place within the area. This list of activities can be used to deduce a series of potential clientele that the intervention will cater to. Re-search into these marginalized groups of people will offer programmatic requirements that might fulfill the needs of the population and provide a reason for them to engage with other types of people, in an attempt to assist them in rejoining the population at large.

Proposal for Intervention

4.038

Activities that take place outside the law SkateboardingUrban exploring/TrespassingUrban Agriculture/FarmingLoiteringRaveStreet RacingParking in Handicap SpacesNarcotics – production and sales ProstitutionArsonMoney launderingExtortionScalpingSmugglingPedaling – food truck, water bottles, newspapersPanhandlingGraffitiRavesPosting of flyers/Wheat PastingOperating without a certificate of occupancyConstruction without permitsDog/Cock FightingDumpingMurder/Violent Crime/TheftCraps/Three Card Monty/Illegal GamblingAfter Hours BarsInsurance FraudImpeding the flow of trafficPlaying in the Street

Agents that operate outside the lawHomeless

Gang/ 1% Motorcycle ClubsDrug Dealers/ Suppliers

SlumlordsYouth Culture

ScrappersUrban Gardeners

Street ArtistsPromoters

Car Clubs/Bike ClubsGamblers

SquattersStreet Performers

4.039

Youth

Street Performers

Homeless

Scrappers

UrbanGardeners

Artists

Requirements

Mentoring

Collaboration Space

Food

Storage

Legal Help

Mental Help

Medical Help

Dietary Counseling

Creative Outlet

Job Training

Tools

Display Space

Tutoring

Socializing Space

Access to Computers and Internet

Communication Training

Housing

Mailing Addresses

041

Rather than trying to complete a project that focuses on all of the subcultures identified through my observations of Poletown East, a more realistic project would focus predominantly on one subculture. This approach allows for two things. First it better understand on the group can be achieved. This understanding will be critical to initial layout and organizational decisions for the intervention. Secondly, a more thor-ough understanding of the group will expose programmatic requirements that can be expounded upon to incorporate a diffusion of inclusionary aspects into the design. This will allow the project, which will be specifically designed for one subculture, to serve other subcultures within the community at large.

Narrowing the Focus

042

Purpose: Ideally this intervention will create an environment that allows for the re-tooling of the skills possessed by Detroit’s underground economy and subcultures and the pooling of acquisitioned resources and talents. The intervention itself will be a collectively crafted space that is focused on inclusion and collaboration. It is intended to be a place that fa-cilitates the transmission of skills and ideas that can help the community cultivate their environment and the talents held by those who occupy the space. It construction will draw from the traditions of bricolage, industrial fabrication, and adaptive reuse, mainly of local assets, to create the shelter, tools, and products that will allow for the collaboration of the people, their thoughts, and actions for the betterment of the community.

Ideal tenants:

Primary Scrappers and Salvagers &

DeconstructorsArtists

MechanicsCarpenters

SecondaryUrban GardenersCommunity OrganizationsCommunity ActivistsEtc.

043

Building spacesSawmillForgePaint boothWelding area

Storage space Dedicated master’s studio spaceGroup training spaceMeeting space

Deconstruction/Salvaging techniquesCarpentry and ConstructionGeneral Mechanics and Customization

Metal Working and FabricationWheat PastingSilk ScreeningMolding and 3-D artGardening

`Creation - Tinkering, Customization, and ModificationCollaboration, Inspiration, and Gathering of people and ideas

Collection, Dismantling, and Organization of materialsExhibition and ExchangeTeaching and Training

044

3. Denato – Master Carpenter – Self employed Makes cabinets, mill works, gallery installations, and fishing lures Needs – Work space in the city Wants – to work with salvaged materials and to open a small saw mill Has – Technical knowledge and tools

1. Moses – Backyard mechanic Fixes up junkers for profit and helps out neighbors with their cars as a second job Needs – Work space that is not his garage at home Wants – to focus on mechanics Has – Technical knowledge and tools

2. June – experimental photography – recent graduate Wheat pasting, lithographs, mixed media art, molding, and photography Needs – Clients and equipment Wants – to work teach and continue honing her craft Has – Technical knowledge and tools

4. Bree – Artist and Curator – skilled organizer, people person, and very creative Needs – an outlet for her creativity and way to connect with the community Wants – A space to show the works she discovers Has – Talent in organizing and getting things done

5. Celeb – Unemployed - Makes ends meet by salvaging metal from the abandoned buildings and the trash Needs – a place to store materials and a job Wants – to stop breaking the law and to find a steady source of income Has – a truck, a box of tools, and the drive to survive.

045

Building Types: Red - Depot and Drop off –

Orange - Exhibit and Exchange -

Yellow - Gather and Collaborate -

Blue - Training centers -

Violet - Dedicated Studio spaces -

Storage of materials and trucks Community Item Drop Off Teaching deconstruction techniques

StoreGallery

Community outreachAdministration offices

Mechanical – metal working, fabrication, and general mechanicsCarpentry – Construction, furniture making, etc.Mixed Media – Print making, Wheat Pasting, Molding, Fabrics

Three to four spaces

Identifying a population of users and assessing their needs facilitated the master planing of the industrial buffer zone which is to occur between the industrial area to the west of St. Aubin and the residential are to the east.

046

Storage of materials and trucks Community Item Drop Off Teaching deconstruction techniques

StoreGallery

Community outreachAdministration offices

Mechanical – metal working, fabrication, and general mechanicsCarpentry – Construction, furniture making, etc.Mixed Media – Print making, Wheat Pasting, Molding, Fabrics

Three to four spaces

McDOUGALL

CHENE

St. A

UBIN

DEQUINDRE

E. WARREN

E. FOREST

YY

MDOO

McDOUGALL

StAUUBIN

B

DEQEQU

DEQUUI E FOREST

E. WAARRENARRENE WE WA

CHENE

CHENEE

CHENE

McDOUGALL

SAU NE

HE

HC M

DDMM

DDLLL

A

CCCCHHHHEEE

BB

T

WA

047

CO-OP SKILL POOL & TRAINING CENTER

• THE ARCH THAT TRAVERSES ST. AUBIN RESTRICTS FREIGHT TRAFFIC FROM USING THE ROAD AND ALLOWS THE CEILING CRANE WITHIN THE BUILDING THE SERVICE BOTH SIDES

• HOUSES THE MAJORITY OF THE CO-OPS TOOLS AND SERVES AS AN ARENA FOR THE EXCHANGE OF SKILLS

• GIVES CO-OP APPRENTICES A PLACE TO STORE THEIR WORK AND TOOLS

MAIN MATERIALS STORAGE DEPOT

• REPURPOSES THE ABANDONED DRY STORAGE FACILITY THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL HOUSE AND TRAINING CENTER

• ALLOWS THE CO-OP AMPLE STORAGE SPACE TO STORE THE MATERIALS IT SCAVENGES FROM ITS SURROUNDINGS FOR USE IN LATER PROJECTS

APPRENTICE ROW• OFFERS WORKSHOP SPACE TO FLEDGLING COMPANIES INTERESTED

IN WORKING IN THE AREA ON THE CONDITION THAT THE OFFERED APPRENTICESHIP POSITIONS GO TO MEMBERS OF THE CO-OP

• WORK SPACES ARE ARRANGED TO FOSTER COLLABORATION AND THE EXCHANGE OF SKILLS AND IDEAS AMONGST THOSE WORKING IN THE SPACES

• INCLUDED IN RENT IS MEMBERSHIP TO THE CO-OP, WHICH ALLOWS THE RENTER TO CONTINUE ADDING SKILL SETS TO THEIR ARSENAL

048

ARTIST MARKET AND COMMUNITY MATERIALS DROP OFF

• UPCYCLES THE DILAPIDATED CHENE-FERRY MARKET • MARKET PROVIDES SPACE TO CO-OP ARTIST TO SELL THEIR

MERCHANDISE • BECOMES A COMMUNITY COLLECTION POINT FOR UNWANTED

MATERIALS • ACTS AS A DECONSTRUCTION AND SALVAGING CLASSROOM FOR THE

CO-OP

CO-OP SCHOOL HOUSE• PROVIDES THE CO-OP WITH A FACILITY TO HOLD FORMAL TRAINING

SESSIONS THAT WILL AID THE MEMBERS IN THEIR ENDEAVORS• PROVIDES EVENT SPACES AND RESOURCE SPACES FOR THE CO-OP

MEMBERS AND OFFICE SPACES FOR THEIR BOARD OF DIRECTORS• CREATES A PUBLIC EVENT LANDSCAPE WHICH ALSO INSULATES

THE GROUND FLOOR USING EARTH FROM THE EXCAVATION OF THE BLOODY RUN INDUSTRIAL BUFFER

COMMUNITY COLLABORATIONSPACE

• REUSES ABANDONED STORE FRONT ON CHENE AVE.• PROVIDES MEETING SPACE FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND

THOSE THAT WANT TO COLLABORATE WITH ONE ANOTHER• ENCAPSULATES A COURTYARD CREATING AN EXTERIOR EXHIBITION

SPACE USING UPCYCLED INDUSTRIAL MATERIALS AND EARTH FROM THE EXCAVATION OF THE BLOODY RUN INDUSTRIAL BUFFER

049

• 9 FLOORS @ ~ 45,000 sq. ft. =

~ 400,000 sq. ft. OF STORAGE SPACE

EXISTING LOADING DOCKS

050

STORAGE

SKILL EXCHANGE

WORK SPACE

CIRCULATION AND REQUIRED SPACES

051

WORK SPACE


052

STORAGE

SKILL EXCHANGE

WORK SPACE

EXHIBITION AND EXCHANGE

MEETING SPACE

ADMINISTRATIVE SPACE

PUBLIC SPACE


DECONSTRUCTION, SALVAGING, AND COMMUNITY DROP OFF

053

STORAGE

SKILL EXCHANGE


DECONSTRUCTION, SALVAGING, AND COMMUNITY DROP OFF

054

SKILL EXCHANGE

EXHIBITION AND EXCHANGE

MEETING SPACE

ADMINISTRATIVE SPACE

PUBLIC SPACE


6.055

Rather than setting out to design a building from scratch, it was decided that it might be more benefi cial, to design a system that future tenants could use to construct their own spaces. The idea was to guide the creation of the spaces the would need, rather than giving them a fi nished product. The system that follows came to fruition following an analysis of the building materials that were readily available in the area. The ultimate goal was to design a building system that could be erected from a simple kit of parts, using unskilled labor. It was also important that the system allow for easy expansion and refi nement in the future. The system works by laying out a grid of foundation support at intervals. These supports have a connection system within them that allows for various structural supports (timbers, wide fl anges, utility poles, etc.) to be bracketed in place, between these supports panelized walls and trusses, for roofi ng support, made of locally sourced materials, either new or reclaimed, would be fi tted. In addition to the system are a set of guidelines that assisted in the design for the next phase of the project, the build out of the Apprentice Workshop.

Building System

6.056Foundation Details

6.057Panelized Wall Details

6.058Roof and Mezzanine Details

6.059

Re-maker’s Space Construction Guidelines

0. Use the example diagrams for construction guidance or alter them to your liking.

1. No more than 6 total bays may be used to construct space

2. Collaboration and ingenuity are encouraged but safety is para-mount. So test your ideas and if they work share them with your neighbors

3. When including transparent wall material do so as much as pos-sible to the south, keep the to around 50% of the total wall to the east and west, and to the north limit their use.

4. A mezzanine of at least a 6 foot wide is required in each work-shop to facilitate collaboration and exchange between workshops. This mezzanine must be constructed before the addition of the fourth bay.

5. As these spaces focus on the act of remaking and collaboration, we encourage you to use as much found material in the making of the space. If you can’t fi nd it make it from what you can. You your neighbors and the co-op as a resource to add the skills you need to your toolbox.

7.061

The final piece of this project is the development of the design of one portion of the master plan. The Apprentice workshop was selected to explore and detail further as it easily allowed for the addition of other programmatic elements and it had the ability to be influence most by the ideas of the research. The workshop consists of simply simple volumes and uses an architectonic language that is familiar to the locality. The overall design for the workshop evolved over time as the system and rules, which were developed prior, became better understood. The apprentice workshop is basically an in fill project that begins to slowly reactivate a portion of the Poletown neighborhood. Initially the intervention begins as two preeminent rammed earth structure and a grid of columns. The decision to used rammed earth as the material for the initial buildings was an attempt to capitalize on the excavated soil that would result from the day lighting of the Bloody Run River. When the river eventually gets excavated there will be a lot of excess ground that will need to be used or moved. Using this material in the construction of the workshop is both efficient, economic, and responsible. As materials are collected, deconstructed, and organized, the workshop tenants may decide that additional spaces are needed. These Spaces can be erected using the pre-established the grid, rules, and the connection details. This idea is that over time as the workshop tenants require more space they can erect more space for themselves and grow the cooperatives assets. For this reason it was important to understand how the complex would grow over time. One possible growth trajectory for the apprentice workshop is diagramed to the right. It starts at the top left and progresses in sequence to the bottom right. The thick black lines denote the rammed earth walls of the permanent constructions, the blue denotes mezzanine spaces and the green denotes ground floor space

Apprentice Workshop

7.062Growth Diagram

7.063

After discovering how the work shop would grow it then became possible to create a set of plans and rendering that would bring life to the project. When the workshop is completed it will consist of four freestanding building that weave trough a under utilized block in the Poletown Neighborhood. It is bound by St. Aubin to the south-west, Warren Ave. to the north-west, Dubios to the north-east, and E. Hancock to the south-east. The community material drop off point is to the south-west of the block and is accessed by way of St. Aubin. From this point deconstructed materials flow across the ally to the storage area, where they can be accessed by via the corridor by the workshop tenants. This corridor also facilitates access to each of the workshop spaces and the tool library. Further east along the block, across the other ally and bike path is a community building that houses a architects office, a community clinic, and a meeting space for community organizations and the tenants of the workshop to hold meeting and collaborate in.The flow of materials,skills, and people amongst these spaces are diagramed below.

7.064

N

7.065

N

7.066

N

7.068Exterior view allong bike

Path and Alley

7.070Corridor Artist Market

7.072Collaberation Session

in Community Meeting Space

7.074Building a Workshop

7.076Community Material Drop Off

7.077Interior Rendering of a Workshop

7.078

Work CitedBukowczyk, John J. “The Decline and Fall of a Detroit Neighborhood: Poletown

vs. G.M. and the City of Detroit.” Washington and Lee Law review. 41.1 (1984): Print.

Fischel, William A. “An Econimic History Of zoning and a Cure for Its Exclusion-ary Effects.” Diss. Dartmouth College, 2001. Print.

“Poletown East Neighborhood in Detroit, Mi .” City-data.com. N.p., 25 2012. Web. 14 Dec 2012. <Http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Poletown/East-Detroit-MI.html>.

Adam Michael Vermeersch

A Culmination of InfluencesErecting Architecture in the City

Adam Michael VermeerschUniversity of Detroit Mercy

[email protected](586)-489-7485

Adam Vermeersch - Master's Thesis - A Culmination of Influences

Documents

Transcript of Adam Vermeersch - Master's Thesis - A Culmination of Influences