Blossom - Community Garden & Pavilion

BLOSSOM Community Garden & Pavilion RISD Department of Architecture Spring 2011 1

RISD Department of Architecture

Project Made Possible by:

Architectural Design

Mr. Louis Yip, Pui-O Corporation

Spring 2011 Donors: Proposal designed and constructed

Mr. Louis Yip, Pui-O Corporation

by 72 RISD students under the

Luke Charitable Foundation

guidance of the following faculty:

RISD Department of Architecture The Pawtucket Foundation

Silvia Acosta, Coordinator Adrienne Benz

Material Donations:

Hansy Better

JR Vinagro Corporation

Jawn Lim

Heritage Park YMCA

Enrique Martinez Jason Wood

Special Thanks To:

Wilbur E. Yoder

Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island Sharon Partridge Thomas Mann Aaron Hertzberg Douglas Hadden The Pawtucket Times Wilbur E. Yoder

2

Index Introduction

4

Site

6

Proposal

8

Construction

18

Final Review

36

Acknowledgments

42

3

INTRODUCTION The Rhode Island School of Design gives first year architecture graduate and sophomore undergraduate students a unique opportunity to design and build a structure at full scale in the Architectural Design studio.

The course teaches analytical thinking and building through the material act of construction, allowing students to explore the relationship between drawing, modeling, and building.

The semester is organized around a single project with two interrelated phases. The first phase involves the exploration, organization, and definition of a proposal within a specific site. Students develop site analyses and conceptual investigations to inform the design process. The second phase teaches through material studies, detailing and full-scale construction.

Architectural elements are integrated into the given site, culminating in a fully articulated built structure.

The semester requires an enormous amount of discipline, communication, coordination and teamwork.

Working collaboratively, students combine their individual skills to solve complex architectural issues.

4

5

6

SITE This year, the studio was asked to construct a community garden and public event pavilion at 333 Roosevelt Avenue in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Located a short distance from downtown, 333 Roosevelt Avenue has the potential to engage the Pawtucket community.

The area is influenced by the close proximity of City Hall, William E. Tolman High School, the Sandra FeinsteinGamm theatre, and Slater Mill, leading a diverse group of visitors to the Roosevelt Avenue site.

333 Roosevelt Avenue brings together three distinct groups: the Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island, the Heritage Park YMCA: Early Childhood Education Center, and Roosevelt Community Housing. Integrating the divergent expectations of these groups became a determining factor in the design. The intervention sites itself on the available green space, simultaneously addressing the needs of gardeners and visitors.

Prior to the intervention, the site consisted of a small community garden, used by elderly members of the Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island, with a clearing in the trees adjacent to the Blackstone River. A parking lot separates the pavilion site from the garden.

7

PROPOSAL

Architectural Design is the first course in the Department of Architecture studio sequence in which students are expected to work collaboratively. Working in six assigned sections, the studio began with seventy-two individual site proposals. As the construction phase of the studio neared, the seventy-two projects were compiled into eighteen, and then six, which were presented to representatives of the constituent communities for feedback, leading to the final design.

To develop the final proposal, the studio worked via a series of twelve-hour charrettes to compose a master plan and project timeline. The built proposal began with a set of construction drawings, scale models, and detailed studies that were then brought on site to use as a working reference. The proposal and construction represent the combined efforts of seventy-two undergraduate and graduate students. The studio emphasized material considerations of construction and detailing of the final design through drawings and full-scale mock ups.

8

9

10

To develop the final proposal, the studio worked via a series of twelve-hour charrettes to compose a master plan and project timeline. The built proposal began with a set of construction drawings, scale models, and detailed studies that were then brought on site to use as a working reference.

11

12

Overall Site Plan

8’

24’

40’

13

1.

3.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

2.

4.

6.

5.

6.

4’

14

12’

20’

1.

1.

3.

2.

2.

4.

3.

4.

4’

12’

20’

15

The proposal and construction represent the combined efforts of seventy-two undergraduate and graduate students. The studio emphasized material considerations of construction and detailing of the final design through drawings and full-scale mock ups.

16

A sequence of experiential renderings were developed to simulate the entrance sequence.

17

18

Northeast View of the Community Pavilion 19

20

CONSTRUCTION Full-scale fabrication gives students the opportunity to develop hands-on skills and gain practical experience. Such a project necessitates a constant and flexible exchange of ideas, an efficient and collaborative design process, and a strict construction schedule. With only six weeks to complete the project, management has become an integral part of the studio experience.

Responsibilities were divided between construction, model building, design details, and drawing documents. With such strict deadlines, teams needed to react quickly and creatively to issues as they arose. Challenges like these provide the real world experience that solidifies an understanding of the relationship between design and construction.

21

Ease of construction and maintenance were a major consideration in the group proposal, not only due to the challenges of coordinating a large group of students, but due to the condition of the site itself. With a significant elevation change and a ground composed of a combination of contaminated soil and infill, the site required extensive preparation.

Continued drawing and model making efforts were necessary throughout the construction process. Once site preparation was complete and construction began in earnest, members of the drawing and model-making teams had to outpace construction teams in the production of documents and the resolution of details.

22

Throughout this process, the design evolved in response to details that required an understanding of the entirety of a full-scale structure.

Maintaining a fluid line of communication between drawing, model-making, building and observation has been an essential challenge of the construction process. It has also necessitated that every student be a conscious participant, continually integrating direct experience with an awareness of the entire project.

23

24

Construction of the garden and community space tested every facet of the architectural imagination. It provided a crash course in the team-based challenges involved in executing a project from a preliminary design to the built environment. In this way, it models many of the challenges of the architectural profession, and has thus proved to be an invaluable learning experience.

25

26

27

The process of construction was one of teamwork and cooperation between students. It was that collaborative effort that allowed for the development of solutions when confronted with a problem.

28

29

Many elements of the design presented unique challenges during construction and demanded new sets of solutions.

30

Construction resumes after a brief hail storm.

31

32

33

34

35

FINAL REVIEW Presentation by Harley Nalley, Margaux Fischer, Camila Morales, Kyle Kiser, Eugenia Yu, and Jessica Luscher.

Selected Quotes: Harley: When we first started the project, all we knew is that we had a lot of 2 x 6’s to work with. Some people may have been skeptical. After all, how much can you do with a 2 x 6? Well, let me tell you something. There’s a whole lot of jelly in those donuts.

Harley: So what is this site like? We have a river with heavily treed banks running through an industrial city. The natural world and the constructed world converge. But, though a human construct, is industry not natural? By nature, people embrace growth. We are opposed to the idea of loss and decay. We want to create a sense of communion with our neighbors and with the world around us. We want to operate efficiently and amiably with one another. We want to be constructive.

Margaux: Our mission was to create a dynamic space for these communities to meet, to learn and to play together. The more we talked with the people around the site, the more we realized the potential for our intervention—the Kindergarteners needed a space to graduate, the Church deacons wanted to hold meetings outdoors, the daycare teachers wanted a space to eat lunch.

36

37

Margaux: Soon the programmatic components took hold, more than just a garden, we needed a large outdoor gathering space for friends to meet, we needed a promenade for children to play, and perhaps as a testament to the communion we were looking for, we needed a long table for families to break bread together.

Camila: The garden orientation was strategically placed as to take full advantage of the sun orientation and allow for the growth of a variety of Chinese vegetables that are used weekly for a communal meal. This north-south orientation quickly began to dictate the direction of the grain of the garden.

The garden was designed as a multi-purpose structure that would house not only the planting beds but also have an open aired pavilion that would allow for rainwater collection, tool storage as well as gathering moments where the community could enjoy the ‘fruits of their labor.’

Kyle: Just as the program is meant to enhance community, each element is meant to hold a community of functions to better facilitate the complex intersections of program prevalent in the garden Eugenia: In our consideration of layered use, the lattice of columns are more than a structural necessity—they are a programmatic gain. They are frames as well as curtains—dividing space, shielding space, defining space. While holding space between a roof and a floor. This continuity lives in the form of our work. Not one of us could perform anything on site without the action of someone before us. The roof needs the roof joists, the roof joists need the roof beams, the roof beams need the columns, the columns need the floor beams, the floor beams need the concrete forms, the forms need the ground. For us, we need the rock ramp and the floating table. Each is an element and a connection.

38

Jessica: Compared to projects done solely in studio, the project we built here has a much higher degree of reality. Suddenly, our structure went from model to full scale, you can walk through it. We realize how much detail goes into one joint. We have built something for a community; we have interacted with and gotten feedback from people who are not architects, but people will be directly affected by our work. This is not simply about designing something interesting, but about making something meaningful that will be used by a group of people, something that is permanent, that will evolve over time and be added to by others in the future.

Jessica: We learned to articulate our ideas, to make connections, to listen, and discuss options with an open-minded, proactive approach. Working with others and discovering where you stand within a group, and then realizing that you can influence that position, is an incredibly important part of being a designer; our synergy as a studio allowed the 70 first years to accomplish what a twelve person advanced studio could not.

39

40

41

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout the design and construction process, we had the great privilege of working closely with the Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island and Heritage YMCA. Since the initial site visit, we immediately understood the incredible potential of this proposal, and every day since we worked to produce a project that we can be proud to share.

The care and consideration that have gone into the design and construction of the garden and community pavilion at 333 Roosevelt Avenue ensure that it will serve a diverse group of users for years to come. We greatly appreciate this opportunity to implement the design proposal at full scale. RISD hopes to continue its relationship with the city of Pawtucket as the Architecture Department continues to develop its design-build program.

We acknowledge the generous support and contributions made by Mr. Louis Yip, The Pawtucket Foundation, The City of Pawtucket, Sharon Partridge and the Hertiage Park YMCA, and the Congregation of the Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island. Your donations have been instrumental to the completion of the project. It has been an invaluable resource to have such engaged and interested supporters. Thank you.

Sincerely, The Students of Architectural Design 42

43

Silvia Acosta

RISD Architectural Design 2011

44

Mariana Botero Dodo Chiang Max Dehne Peter Durrant William Johnston Catherine Kao Kyle Kiser Ki Bbum Lee John McCampell Julie Sylvester

Jawn Lim

Sam Anderson Andy Bahari Eliot Bassett-Cann Jim Bogle Sheri Fabian Margaux Fischer Elias Gardner Dan Jiao Myn Kang Sonny Lee Elizabeth Rossiter Claire Watson Jeana Antle Julia Bowlin Luna Chen Benjamin Crocker Alex Diaz Dinithi Iddawela Burce Karadag Nicholas Moore Harley Nalley Andrew Salter Yuan Sun Nicole Wiznitzer

Adrienne Benz

Kuzina Cheng Beau Johnson Lissy King Dan Laster Jeong Lee Jessica Luscher Farhan Mian Marisa Paz Jessica Shimazu Karl Sippel Natanial Vice Kun Wu

Enrique Martinez

Hansy Better

Alexander Dale Maryam Dashti Brett Dunnam Julia Florenz Jungmin Kim Jacob Miller Adam Molinsky Camila Morales Myunggeun Song Shalini Vimal Burgess Voshell

Jason Wood

Royce Bixby Sifan Cheng Carlos Gamez Melissa Hauser Giles Holt Dongseop Lee Edward Mead Susannah Stopford Peeraya Suphasidh Mykel Terada Eugenia Yu