fall 2006
ARC 394:
Vertical Studio: The Child in the City
Instructor:
Simon Atkinson
Introduction
The small American town and city formed a tight spatial, economic, and social grouping. People chose to live close to the action. There developed a business marketplace of one-on-one communication, where law and politics were always close to hand. This would soon be overlaid by shops, small gathering places, post office, library, and later the possibility of buildings for culture and the arts. Much of this pattern stayed in tact with the introduction of the street trolley, allowing all to engage in the street life of the city.
The breakdown of this way of life has many causes: the search for nature and land speculation; the building of highways; the ubiquitous automobile; the promotion of suburb; increased crime and dereliction in the inner city; new needs and forms of business; etc. The sense that the suburb was best for family and child has remained throughout.
It might appear surprising that life is now coming back into the city at a rapid pace. The demand for apartments in or near to downtown for a new class of young, well educated professionals has grown rapidly. Why is this the case? They want to be where the action is, so, in turn, have stimulated the growth of restaurants, bars, health spas and gyms, grocery stores, and possibly even some office development (GSDM may not be representative, but they located on 6th St. in response to an in-house survey). Older persons are also moving back to the central city, taking advantage of access to a wider range of facility, including education, clubs, and health care.
Areas once deserted, or land-banked as car parking lots, are now sprouting an array of strange, sometimes interesting, apartment-types, interspersed with new facilities and people places, and even the associated development of urban transit. For example, in the case of Austin's west side downtown, there are a good variety of housing types, improved connections, particularly buses, close access to a range of work places and urban facilities, with the added bonus of Town Lake and ease of access to airport and university. But where are the children? Not one to be seen in this all-adult world, where it would appear that you have to be "carded" as 18 to get into the exclusive zone we call "city". Why do we still equate child with suburb? It would appear that we are still in a mindset where anyone wishing to have, or adopt, a child must move from downtown to a more benign world. The generally poor performance of inner urban schools has not helped, but it may be that there is not enough of an environment with the child in mind, a world they can adopt on their terms. The seriousness of this position requires thought, for if we can attract people back to a total lifestyle in the inner city, our saving of land and energy resources could be significant.
The Studio
This studio is about the world of, and architecture for, the child. It is a careful look at a client group and their needs, but also, in a sense, an overlaying to, and the challenging of, existing urban architectural contexts, to let in and gain benefit for this group currently missing from urban society.
We will aim to identify the world of the child growing up in the city, the degree to which space might be shared or separated from adults, and what an architecture informed from the perspective of children might be like. We begin, however, our investigation outside the city with a short design inquiry considering the imagination and invention of children, and the building of an appropriate architectural envelope to meet those needs.
There are two main projects, the first engaging urban ecology and adventure, the second designing a community of learning. In the first, we will formulate an interpretive map of "child space", and place within it, a facility becoming a domain of children that at the same time is a "living machine" offering environmental education. The second project will design a new morphology for a part of the city that anticipates an increase of density, supported by improved facility and transit. You will then house a range of educational facilities in this matrix, and site and design one of them in detail. It is suggested that the first year students design a community-based preschool, while those of more advanced standing design an urban elementary school. Each of the main projects, particularly the last, offers scope to engage technology, construction, and the consideration of materials within your design process. The last project will be taken to a fine level of detail.
Program
Studio offers a design laboratory for serious engagement in design thinking, and the development of architectural performance. Full attendance is expected, as is participation in discussions, reviews, and field trips. Most sessions will begin with an informal seminar. I view almost everything as architecture, so our work ranges from the scale of the city to the capturing of a particular moment of pleasure and beauty at an intimate scale. Architecture is also collaborative, so each project will have a part where you will be designing with others. Architecture is also subject to critical review and discussion, which will take place on a continuous basis.
Project 1: The seven worlds of the child -- 2 weeks
Project 2: Safe Haven, an architecture of ecology and adventure, -- 5 weeks
Project 3: head Start, an experimental urban school, -- 7 1/2 weeks.
Background Reading
Dudek, M. (2000). Architecture of Schools: The New Learning Environments. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Gehl, J. & Gemzoe, L. (2001). New City Spaces. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press.
Haar, S. & Robbins, M. (2002). Schools for Cities. Princeton: Princeton Architectural Press.
Patkau, J. (1995). Investigations into the Particular. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, College of Architecture & Urban Planning.
Sanoff, H. (1994). School Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Weston, R. (1991). Schools of Thought: Hampshire Architecture 1974-1991. Winchester, England: Hampshire County Council.