Material Re-sourcing: A Systematic Approach to Re-creation Within Urban Decay

Material Re-sourcing: A Systematic Approach Towards Recreation of Urban Decay Derek S. Mills Thesis Advisor: Timothy Gray The fascination with sustainable housing design is evident, but the purity of Architects objectives, like my own at the beginning of the thesis project, is where we can see a large disconnect between objective and outcome. Architects have the opportunity, the passion, education, and skill to affect a community at a much larger scale than one prototype house. Architects today are seemingly more worried about completing that first innovative house in order to make their name; most likely without any regard to the actual place or person it will be built for. There is also a huge disconnect between how Architects design and how they see their design through multiple uses. Why don’t we design for reuse, it’s obvious that a buildings sustainability is fake if all of its constituent parts do not have a future. Designing for reuse includes the understanding of how materials work, are assembled, unassembled, and thus reassembled into a new manifestation. It’s designing with a conscience, understanding that every move is interconnected in some way. Like, how materials, assemblies, sub-assemblies, and whole architectural pieces can be displaced, refurbished, reused, and reclaimed. Creating new sustainable materials to be only used once is ludicrous, evidently the building sector hasn’t realized that just because we are using a green material or using a green rating system does not mean we have created a sustainable design, these things are just band-aids for what we lack in Architectural honesty.

Thus, it became evident that creating new housing geared around sustainability, affordability, while designing with a conscience would create success in the thesis process. It was very important to study the housing market from a social, economical, and governmental viewpoint in order to frame opportunities for an architectural impact on low to middle income housing retrofits. It was the understanding of the intellectual and critical spaces between and amongst the social, economical, and governmental viewpoint, representing both the gaps and overlaps of the perception of urban decay that influenced the overall direction.

One major realization presented itself after a conversation with Antoine, a local resident, which became the epitomizing, turnkey moment for the creative project.

This moment in time framed my perspective on how Architects, like myself, have the opportunity to engage and construct ourselves in a manner that is better suited for people. During this conversation with Antoine there was an intellectual connection that was more based from the perspective of a casual interaction between like-minded, passionate citizens. I came into the conversation with my own preconceptions about the affects of urban decay, what I knew to be true and what I thought to be true; but left with a memorable personal connection that goes far beyond any purely academic conversation. Being that the conversation was directed towards the feelings and objectives through the eyes of Antoine, and where he perceived his community moving, I was able to discuss my design knowledge as a “person” and not as an “Architect.” Amazingly this realization formulated a new way of thinking for how I want and should, present, illustrate, construct, and engage my design knowledge without all the Architectural organization undertones. My basic conclusion from this turnkey moment was that, Architects should reconsider

1 2

3 4

Method 1: Architectural Transfer The first method can be described as the exact extraction of architectural components to be implanted onto or in an existing host community house. In this method the goal is to promote a 100% material re-use, the scale of transfer is variable and can range from a bathroom vanity to a whole room-including stud framing, windows, siding, and roofing.

Method 2: Architectural Soft Demolition The second method can be described as the extraction of material resources, “soft demolition,” for reuse. In this method the goals are to: prolong the materials life, to create new architectural interventions that use anywhere from 25% to 85% reused materials, and to decrease the amount of waste generated from the demolition of buildings. The material revenue generated from this process can help in recreating new architectural pieces, as well as, aid in rehabilitating the existing housing stock.

Method 3: Architectural Band aid The third method can be described as the repairing or scabbing effect. In this method the goal is to rehabilitate partial areas of existing housing stock either through a componentized system, or through new enclosure types.

Method 4: Architectural Implant Lastly, the fourth method can be described as a new manufactured piece of architecture that can give life back to existing housing. In this method the goal is to create a system that can act as a plug n’ stay unit that redefines the viability of existing housing. It is vital to understand that this method is promoting the use of local industry in order to revitalize housing stock.

MATERIAL RESOURCING: ABANDONED JOISTS SINGLE PANED WINDOWS C JOISTS:INDICATORS:SYSTEMATIC MET

D LOTS GARAGE RAFTERS PORCH CONCRETE STUD FRAMING CEILING THOD FROM 100% RE-USE TO 100% NEW

B U S S H E L T E R

2

C O N C E P T

7 5 %

R E U S E D

THE DESIGN PURPOSEFULLY USED THE VARIEGATED LUMBER TO HIGHLIGHT THE AMOUNT OF URBAN DECAY

Method 2: Architectural Soft Demolition During the thesis process four scales of architectural interventions were investigated, all of which in some way, besides just the reuse of materials, are trying to harness a sense of overall sustainability. The application of the second method can be seen through these architectural studies.

Benches: The benches were designed with reuse in mind; the concept was to create interesting seating options that could be created from extracted dimensional lumber.

Bus Shelter: The shelter design grounded itself between the opposition of the gritty, variegated sized lumber, along with the smooth internal enclosure created by glass. The design purposefully used the variegated lumber to highlight the amount of urban decay, and to show how the material can be reassembled into an architectural intervention that is evocative and sculptural. The internal enclosure has a false sense of smoothness due to the opposition of reused materials size, color, texture, against the new glass top and back panel.

2

C O M M U N I T Y

P A V I L L I O N

6 5 %

CREATED BY THE INVERSION OF A TYPICAL GABLE ROOF SHIFTED BY-LATERALLY

R E U S E D

Green House: The green house design focused on how to reuse out dated single paned windows in order to create a community building. The building itself was generated through the study of window sizes within the community, and then configured the “found” windows in order to create a collage of urban waste. Once again the purpose is to reuse the urban waste in order to create sustainable community solutions.

Pavilion: The Pavilion design was derived from the idea of how to create a community building that also displays sustainability. The goal was to show how simple architectural gestures could benefit a whole community. The creation of the Pavilion stemmed from how to reuse roofing materials.

The basic exoskeleton used 2 x 6 rafter framing with new steel connection plates, the enclosure used salvaged roof planks, polycarbonate panels, and 1x1 wood for screen. The roof form was created by the inversion of a typical gable roof shifted by-laterally, this intentionally created a roof surface conducive for collecting rainwater. The composition of reused materials in opposition to new materials helps in establishing a hierarchy between the two; the purpose is to exploit the differentiation between new and reused materials.

2

The overarching objective for the project was to create scales of architectural interventions, and policy that could impact an Indianapolis neighborhood struggling to sustain itself. The assessment portion of the project helped guide the policy making, and the architectural design stemmed from the methodologies created. The purpose was to recognize design solutions that could address the growing challenge of housing the world’s population; to use design innovation, socially progressive approaches towards sustainable design, and solutions that address our current housing challenges in regards to urban decay. The thesis explored how the methods, and the architectural interventions could increase the wealth of the community and possibly guide the neighborhood into a more cohesive, self sufficient, and educated network of humane design. The culmination of the thesis project embraced the humility that architects are not the answer but are part of the solution. For me the project reinvestigates the role of the architect, how we can be less like an organization and more like individuals that create meaningful design. It’s the realization that Architects should formulate a new way of thinking for how we want and should, present, illustrate, construct, and engage our design knowledge without all the Architectural organization undertones, and thus become influential people pursuing humane design.