Tag Archives: community

Transforming the Built Environment: What are our ethical responsibilities to communities as architects?

When stepping into the AIA Annual Conference at the Javits Center in NYC this year, I began to question the theme of the conference, a “Blueprint For Better Cities.” The expansive expo center sprawled out on three levels with thousands of booths promoting their products, from software to interiors to exteriors, but the one thing missing was representation from community groups or visible connection to the place of NYC.

Of course, the Javits Center adequately represents the grand nature of NYC amidst the building boom currently happening in Hudson Yards. It is hard to imagine anything but extravagant wealth when passing by the $150 million stairway to nowhere, aka the “Vessel” being constructed across the street. In a time of such great wealth disparity, what role do architects play in gentrifying our cities and creating safe public spaces for those without wealth and privilege? I believe architects continue to have a large impact on the growth of our cities and it is important to check our ethics as professionals on the impacts made in communities that may not be represented. The AEC industry seems to be expanding in exponential ways and defining our cities at a faster and faster pace, so conversations on equity and inclusion need to be brought to the forefront. Even though my first impression walking into the AIA conference at the Javits Center was not one of equity and inclusion, there were some great speakers bringing the conversation back to these important topics.

DESIGNERS ADDRESSING EQUITY IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
One session on Architectural Activism included a panel with Deanna Van Buren of Designing Justice + Designing Spaces, Bryan Lee of Colloqate, and Michael Ford of Hip Hop Architecture. These designers are addressing equity in the built environment and setting new standards for the profession.

Byran Lee reminds architects to think about the communities’ cultures when designing and not to perpetuate systems of oppression. Architects have the ability to change the built environment and also be advocates for the communities in which they work. Laws that allow the victimization of marginalized communities need to be challenged. Public spaces which should be the democratic spaces available to all people are made unsafe to communities of color because of ambiguous laws around vagrancy and other systems of oppression. Understanding the needs of communities in which you are working in paramount. Architects can start by supporting marginalized communities through youth education, advocacy for groups with less priviledge, and equitiable policy and placemaking.

Michael Ford has been working on the youth education component of architectural activism. Hip Hop Architect facilitates youth camps that introduce design, architecture, place making through the expression of hiphop culture. The camps provide an opportunity for youth of underrepresented populations to learn about the architectural practice and reinvision the future of our built environment. A factor in the lack of diversity in architecture is lack of accessiblity to the field, and this program strives to provide that support to youth.

Deanna Van Buren talked of her work around restorative justice and restorative economics, exploring alternative to prisons and addressing the root causes of mass incarceration. Restorative justice is statistically proven to build empathy and decrease recurring offenses by 75%, while allowing for reconciliation and healing. Deanna reiterated that prisons are the worst form of architecture, created to express the harm that we are doing on another. Altnernatives presented were popup resources villages that provide services to isolated communities and peacemaking centers that use Native American practices for healing communities that have experience the trauma of violence and racial oppression.

Many speakers recalled quotes from Whitney Young Jr when talking about equity in the architecture profession, especially from his poignant speech regarding equity at the 1968 American Institute of Architects Conference in Portland. A well quoted statement was “[A]s a profession, you are not a profession that has distinguished itself by your social and civic contributions to the cause of civil rights, and I am sure this has not come to you as any shock. You are most distinguished by your thunderous silence and your complete irrelevance.”

LANGUAGE AROUND ETHICAL AND EQUITABLE DESIGN
I would argree that the profession as a whole still struggles with its social and civic contributions, even though there are some great leaders as mentioned previously. Currently, the trend in most large cities is gentrification resulting in loss of community connections and a huge housing crisis. Do the ethics of architecture speak towards our professional responsibilty to provide for the well being and safety for all within the communities in which we design for? In the AIA Code of Ethics, the only somewhat relevant bylaw I found was “In performing professional services, Members should advocate the design, construction, and operation of sustainable buildings and communities.” Perhaps the lack of language around ethical and equitable design is why it seems so lacking within the built environment. There needs to be a shift.

Large firms may promote their community work by supporting employees to volunteer a couple days of the year, or provide pro-bono design services. This approach is too compartmentalized and does not build the disruptive change needed to challenge systems of oppression in our built environment. These one-off gestures of pro-bono work can easily be perceived by communities as a savior complex instead of community building. The factors that push architects to design without community in mind needs to be resisted by the industry. Rather, more efforts need to be made so our ethical responsibilities to the public outweigh the profit driven interest groups’ needs that are currently prevalent in our industry. The sustainability movement has started to touch on some of our ethical responsibilities for healthier spaces, but these efforts are not preventing people from losing their homes, connection to place, civic amenities, and much more. There is much work to be done. To promote equity and inclusion for all when designing spaces, I believe we must work on our role as architects to listen, learn, be humble, engage, teach, and provide support and advocacy that serves the communities in which we are working.


Written by Hali Knight Assoc. AIA, Designer

Assessing a Historic House in Springfield, Oregon

Owning, maintaining, and providing active use within a single family settlement era house is not a typical mission for a public parks agency. One such property is the Reynold & Eva Briggs House located in the northeast corner of the Dorris Ranch Living History Farm, in Springfield, Oregon, currently stewarded by Willamalane Parks and Recreation District (WPRD). Compounding the unusual situation is that the area is a historic site, a working farm, and a public park. In addition the property’s history, age, material, and conditions of the house add further complexity to the stewardship role. In order to guide the WPRD with long-range decisions regarding the Briggs House, the District sought an up to date exterior and interior condition assessment and potential rehabilitation options in support of current and future park programming needs, including as a source of income derived from continued residential use. The Briggs House has not been occupied since its last resident left in 2009.
Briggs-House

THE ASSESSMENT
The property, The Dorris Ranch Living History Farm, was listed as a National Register of Historic Places Historic District on June 22, 1988. While the Briggs House is located on the ranch property, it sits outside the boundaries of the historic district.

As researched by University of Oregon historic preservation students, the settlement era house is one of the five oldest houses in the Springfield area and one of the city’s few remaining examples of box construction from the Homestead era. The oldest portion of the house—the two-story volume and its eastern wing—was originally constructed by George Thurston in 1872, and later served as the home of caretakers Reynold and Eva Briggs. Once vernacular in the Willamette Valley, the house exhibits a Gothic-influenced upright-and-wing style of construction and was expanded in the 1890’s to accommodate the changing needs of its residents.

Typical of early homestead sites, the Briggs House was constructed without a foundation. The original substructure that continues to support the house consists of partially hewn wood posts on stone piers set directly on the ground surface. Utilizing the box-construction method, 1-inch by 11-inch boards were set vertically and connected to the 7-inch by 9-inch sill plate and ledger plate above the posts to create a “box” form without the use of other framing members. Two-inch by 4-inch roof rafters were then set above the top ledger plates. Floor joists, the original board-and-battens wall siding, and roof panels were added to the house after its basic skeletal structure had been completed. The original wall siding was replaced with weatherboards at an unknown date. Portions of this siding were later replaced with shiplap in the 1890’s, and the entire exterior was later covered with T-111 siding in the 1970’s.
Briggs-House

REHABILITATION CHALLENGES
After discussing the main program activities that take place on Dorris Ranch with Willamalane Parks and Recreation District staff, PMA recognized the primary challenge to any rehabilitation options was the balance between maintaining the historic character of the house and meeting all the code requirements mandated by a rehabilitation, including public access, universal access, and mechanical, electrical, energy, and plumbing upgrades. Previous studies undertaken by Restore Oregon on similar settlement era houses indicated that a balance must be reached between preserving the essence of the house while changing and modifying other portions of the house and property to achieve programming needs. Complicating the Briggs House options are siting of the house within an active area of the park, the two story volume, the lack of an adequate structural foundation, and accommodating large classroom needs within original tiny floor plans. Every room of the historic property has an established spatial function and are tiny in size. Any rehabilitation option must consider that all rooms in the house would be “flexible” and be used as needed for a variety of purposes.

THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF HISTORIC STATUS
Willamalane Parks and Recreation District currently stewards the Briggs House as a historic property by maintaining and protecting the property from encroachment by nature, animal and pest infestation, and unsafe use by park visitors. Inclusion of the property within the district as a contributing resource has both pro and con impacts. Inclusion within an expanded boundary of the current National Register Dorris Ranch Historic District could prove beneficial in finding financial sources to help with a rehabilitation although the available funds are likely insignificant when evaluated against the full cost required to upgrade the Briggs house to a public structure. On the other hand, including the property in the district may prove problematic for WPRD as it may limit, or make more difficult, viable and creative rehabilitation options that would not be approved by the local jurisdiction having authority.
Briggs-House

It is generally agreed that house museums (properties that are preserved as homes to be visited by the public) are not financially prudent uses to retain historic properties. Recent studies conclude that a compromise must occur between balancing original historic character with up to date and flexible programming space to achieve viable long-term solutions for unique homestead-era properties.

Written By Marion Rosas / Designer and Peter Meijer, AIA, NCARB / Principal