May 31, 2019

Lawrence Room 206, Thursday, June 6, 2019

Setup: 12:30 to 1:45 pm, Review: 2:00 – 6:00 pm

Version 1.0

According to the United National High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), there are over 68.5 million forcibly displaced people in the world today, increasing annually and believed to be the greatest number in history, surpassing the previous benchmark of the second world war.  It’s generally believed that whenever possible integration of displaced communities into existing building settlements is a superior approach. However forcibly displaced people may be unexpectedly caught out in the open with few possessions, traumatized, disoriented, ill, underfed and seeking food and water. Survival may depend upon speed and initiative, where an improvised, if imperfect shelter will save lives in time or fail to do so. Temporary settlements do become longer term in cases where other options may not yet be available and prospects for them are indefinite. Addressing indeterminate circumstances is therefore a context for the explorations of the studio.

In the near term, recovery from ill-effects of forcible displacement are complex. They may include physical, psychological or moral injury, the need to regain cultural, religious and social practices, to have agency over their surroundings,  to feel and be secure, and to establish some economic, material and social empowerment. They raise new challenges regarding the role of an architect as partner and facilitator in collaboration with others that the studio hasn’t directly addressed and that is an important part of a more comprehensive approach. They do translate, however, into a shelter design and community layout approach that is flexible, responsive to site conditions, cognizant of its limits, and seeks to examine what innovation may be plausible within a system of rapid deployment that in other situations may need to be more scalable.

The program has been to focus more narrowly on 16 family units for 80 occupants as a whole: a particular number units and size population group identified as a “Community” by the UNHCR that share common facilities, resources and open space. The emphasis has been to limit the scope of study to:

1. Improvisational structures deployed at the outset of a forcible displacement.

2. Transitional more fully featured shelters with some secondary support shelters for longer-term recovery and health.

The study of light-weight fabric architectural structures has also been made with reference to two possible systems: 1.  as a structural material using tensegrity or tensioning principles or, 2. stretched over a rigid frame. We have examined specific site conditions on three windy oceanfront state parks near Coos Bay. Given the area’s historical connection to boatbuilding, the methods of the studio have made reference to the techniques of traditional boatbuilding and sailmaking. The reference to these traditions has also been inherited from offerings of the studio in previous years due to the distinct lessons gained by studying wood joinery and construction in boatbuilding as well as tensioning, the use geometry and form finding in sailmaking.

The detailed media requirements for the final review were established in penultimate Exercise 5. Given the specific review room, Lawrence 206,  it appears now necessary to hold each person to the limit of 7’ linear feet of floor space with a recommendation of plots 42” wide and from 60” to 72” (max) length. The format of the plots or tiling of them is at individual discretion. Bring all models from the term to the review to help engage in a reflective discussion. During the review itself, each studio participant should be prepared to concisely describe:

1. The population group or community served.

2. How their narrative impacts your approach.

3. Three to five distinct features of your design.

4. A key question that may help to advance the discussion.

Consider the final review as an opportunity to learn from the issues and potentials that visiting critics, peers and others will see and that may expand your own view, rather than it be limited to an evaluation of your merits, and enjoy the exchange of ideas. As time allows, reflect on caveats and implications for your own design process. To bring closure to the studio exercise, during the exit interview, it would help to gain your perspective on implications, if any, for serving a significant larger displaced community within a larger area site.

Review Critics:

Vanessa Abin-Fuentes

Nancy Cheng (2 – 3:45  pm & 5:15 – 6:00 pm)

Diana Davis-Sikora

Jenna Fribley
Maria Paz Gutierrez
Michael Geffel
Tom Hahn
Emily Scott
Nate McCoy