#+pod jilly raleigh
Title: +pod Audience: Residents and Carlton Community Location: Housing Commission Towers - Carlton Time/Date: Saturday, march 29, 10:30am-1pm Duration: 2.5 hours
Intervention Summary This intervention is a prelude to an ambitious architectural project aiming to crowd-fund an affordable housing revolution, focusing on the infamous Housing Commission tower complex in Carlton.
3 _ Introduction
Jillian Raleigh
Project The +POD project seeks to reinvent the current affordable housing system in Australia: one of segregation and subjugation, funded by involuntary donation (read: taxation).
The project proposes a model of crowdfunded equity and benefaction to achieve the reinvigoration of existing housing infrastructure, creating an integrated, empowered community. Intervention The intervention is a critical preliminary to the community engagement phase of the project (refer PROJECT STRUCTURE in IMPLICATIONS), and seeks to form a primary research base for the project, gathering raw data that will inform the design response.
The intervention is a survey of two substantially segregated communities: one within the affordable housing system, and the other on the periphery. Less an ‘intervention’ than an exercise in observation and listening, the survey is comprised of prompting phrases requiring short answers, designed to gauge: a. the aspirations and frustrations of commission residents; b. the perceptions of affordable housing and its local manifestation amongst the noncommission community.
4 _ Introduction
Jillian Raleigh
Pragmatics PART A WHAT resident survey WHO housing commission residents WHERE grassed area between the Carlton Primary School and the Uniting Church, corner of Palmerston and Drummond, Carlton WHEN Saturday, march 29, 10:30am-1pm HOW prompt cards requesting short responses from participants, designed to elicit specific complaints and aspirations
“MY HOME IS” “I WANT MY HOME TO BE”
“AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS” “PUBLIC HOUSING IS” “COMMISSION TOWERS ARE”
PART B WHAT community survey WHO non-commission residents, business owners, general public WHERE public transport nodes and shopping precinct, Lygon Street between Elgin and Faraday, Carlton WHEN monday, march 31, 10:30am-11:30am HOW prompt cards requesting short responses from participants, designed to ascertain public perception of or engagement with affordable housing, in particular the Carlton housing commission complex
5 _ What/Who/Were/When/How
Jillian Raleigh
http://candychang.com/i-wish-this-was/
6 _Precedent
Jillian Raleigh
Precedent The intervention draws on a simple, but brilliantly engaging work by American artist, Candy Chang. “I Wish This Was” is one of Chang’s many fill-in-theblank works, in which the community is asked to respond with an aspiration for a particular space in the city. This intervention attempts to emulate the engaging and aspirational quality of “I Wish This Was,” albeit in a much more intimate context: in order to engage a community less likely to participate in a model reliant on autonomy and initiative, survey responses are delivered to a witness, rather than anonymously. http://candychang.com/i-wish-this-was/
7 _Precedent
Jillian Raleigh
INTERVENTION LOCATION MAP
0
PART A commission resident survey PART B non-commission resident survey existing pedestrian corridors
Location Map
8 _Site
Jillian Raleigh
50
100m
Site The intervention is located at various nodes on the periphery of the project site, deliberately within view of the Commission towers to emphasise the immediacy of the affordable housing issue.
The intervention is located primarily to maximise contact with target participants: the commission residents in the case of Part A, and noncommission residents and local business owners in Part B. The specific locations are also deliberately areas of neutral, public territory - for instance, not in the centre of the commission complex, or on the door steps of Carlton - to avoid any disrespect of or invasion of privacy. Both location and methodology have been selected with a view to maintaining respect for participants. Part A is located on a principle axis of pedestrian traffic from the Commission complex to the local Lygon Street shopping precinct.
Part B is located at public transport nodes surrounding the project site and within the Lygon Street shopping precinct.
9 _Site
Jillian Raleigh
PART A park near the housing commission
10
opposite approach
PART B lygon street shopping precinct
11 11_Site
Jillian Raleigh
no images of PART B methodology due to particpant requests not to be photographed.
participant expanding on survey prompt.
Materials PART A eggs name tag butter survey cards brown sugar pens vanilla plain flour table carrots table cloth pecans napkins cinnamon cream cheese FREE CAKE sign icing sugar friend to crit you on technique lemon juice dark chocolate cocoa PART B survey cards pens
courage
Methodology PART A 1. bake a carrot cake/brownies/other delicious treat 2. place table in public territory, preferably adjacent to a busy pedestrian thoroughfare. 3. arrange survey cards and cake on table. 4. put on a non-threatening, non-proselytising smile 5. commence interception of survey participants! PART B 1. approach the service counter of a local business 2. deliver spiel (similar to PART A: refer REVIEW OF TECHNIQUE)
13 _Materials & Methodology
Jillian Raleigh
SAMPLE OF SURVEY RESPONSES: PART A
SAMPLE OF SURVEY RESPONSES: PART B 14
Review of Technique
Avoid exacerbating cultural dissimilarities and deterring an already reluctant audience: wear inoffensive clothing and little or no makeup.
Accept non-standard survey responses: allowing participants to intuitively respond may be more informative than the original format.
LISTEN to participants rather than lecture: you are not in the business of educating the community, particularly at this stage of the engagement process.
Be considerate in your choice of words: language is critical to establishing an equal relationship between you and the participant, which is in turn essential to unencumbered dialogue.
Structure your pitch to rapidly allay fears of any malign or evanglising intent. after 5 or 6 attempts at prioritising different bits of information, the following structure proved the most effective: 1. disarm suspicion by identifying yourself and your purpose: “hello, i’m a student at the university of Melbourne and i’m doing a project on community housing” 2. signal involvement is simple and very brief: “would you mind answering two quick questions? the first asks what you think of your housing now and the second asks what you’d like your housing to be” 3. introduce the cake as bait if necessary, particularly if the potential participant looks fit to escape! Consider the appropriateness of intervention methodologies. several common techniques rejected on technological and social grounds: 1. provocative signage addressing segregation initially considered, but abandoned due to failure to demonstrate respect for a group already marginalised) 2. #towernow failed utterly, due to a (partly anticipated) lack of engagement with social media.
Bake a diabetic-friendly treat (an unfortunate oversight in the case of several of my elderly participants)! 15 _Technique
Jillian Raleigh
lonely not safe (particularly for children)
good
poorly maintained/ not clean
too small
MY HOME IS
satisfactory
more parking better appliances (kitchen/heating)
no change
better maintenance
more space (a backyard)
stronger community
safer community stability housing
I WANT MY HOME TO BE
Raw Data PART A Responses are categorised according to theme to provide clarity.
Though the sample size (26 participants) is too small for any proper statistical analysis, the survey responses yield critical information relating to existing conditions and priorities of commission residents.
PART B Due to a very small sample size (11 participants), hence the qualitative, not quantitative treatment of results. Responses from non-commission residents and business owners reveal important trends in perception:
1. affordable housing is a social imperative, but is currently unattainable: 30% of household income is seen as too high. 2. the commission housing community is to blame for the lack of integration into wider community. 3. lack of employment is the main cause for housing stress. 4. commission towers are aesthetically offensive, but necessary for public housing to remain economically feasible: aesthetic or practical amenity is a secondary concern. The participants displayed a general awareness of the affordable housing issue, but no knowledge of the specific circumstances or challenges confronted by the housing commission community.
17 _Raw Data
Jillian Raleigh
english not as a primary language
english as a primary language
LANGUAGE
female male
GENDER
<20 years
>50 years
20-50 years
AGE
Analysis Primary language and age, rather than ethnicity, is of interest, having implications in the methods used for community engagement: older residents will likely respond better to an analogue information campaign, and communications (nonverbal and verbal) will have to be made in several languages. Gender of participants is also of interest, albeit secondary; gauging the receptiveness of women to engagement is critical, as women are often the drivers of change in the domestic environment non-spatial
private space
public space
SPATIALISATION OF RESPONSES
Despite often relating to abstract notions of community and security, the majority of negative responses are, at least in part, the consquence of spatial conditions, a crucial observation that validates a spatial solution.
Thus the survey confirms the axiom that good architecture and urban design are critical to good housing.
19 _Analysis
Jillian Raleigh
Observations The intervention provided a precious glimpse into the current affordable housing model as manifest in the Carlton housing commission. Participants both consciously and unconsciously revealed crucial empirical data omitted from official statistics and reports. TRUST Participants seemed initially suspicious of the survey, and sometimes reluctant to comment on record, perhaps suspecting some sort of link with a public authority or an official organisation. Introducing myself as a student seemed to dispell this anxiety.
The “MY NAME IS” card, intended as a trigger for a sense of ownership, was therefore not promoted as strenuously as the other prompts, though not abandoned completely: approximately 20% of participants completed a “NAME” card. The instinctive suspicion is perhaps due to my obvious position as interloper, but may also be symptomatic of the punitive nature of the current affordable housing system: a certain wariness of the potentially detrimental consequences of complaint. ASPIRATION Some misunderstanding arose over the request for a personal opinion or aspiration, with many participants retreating to a pragmatic response.
Even so, the humble and practical pattern of the responses may indicate that the desire for stability and basic amenity eclipses any wild consumer ambition.
The enduring and sometimes resigned tone of responses confirm the statistics, that housing commission residency is more often a permanent condition, rather than the temporary situation envisaged by the original conceivers of the scheme.
20 _Observation
Jillian Raleigh
S
LITERACY Many particpants found the prompt phrases confusing, causing me to reflect on how my language and presentation style was more suited to a more social-media-savvy (read: hipster) audience. Such bias is difficult to redress without resorting to the bureaucratic language of existing housing surveys, but an effective mode of communication must be developed prior to launching the engagement process if the project is to be successful.
The occasional lack of English as a primary language, and the relatively poor literacy of some participants also posed an obstacle, signalling the need for a multi-modal, multi-lingual approach to engagement, and reinforcing critical role of communication.
CULTURE Some participants, particularly migrant women, seemed reluctant to interact with me, perhaps for reasons of cultural protocol.
However, despite my anticipation of an obstructive cultural dissimilarity, the majority of participants reacted in a very positive â&#x20AC;&#x201C; if slightly bemused â&#x20AC;&#x201C; manner to the intervention. The offer of cake, while probably culturally a little peculiar for some participants, instilled an informal, amicable atmosphere to the interaction, compared to a clip-board-brandishing approach.
21 _Observation
Jillian Raleigh
Implications The empirical observations just described have siginificant implications for the originating crowdfunding proposal, particularly in relation to the community engagement methodology and design process.
ENGAGEMENT While community engagement is obviously a critical component of the project (refer PROJECT STRUCTURE), the specific elements of engagement are arguably a primary potential source of failure. Critical themes of TRUST, LITERACY, ASPIRATION and CULTURE will become the pillars of the engagement process, emerging as objectives guiding the project team. For instance, the project team will:
1. strive gain the trust of the community (both commission and non-commission residents) 2. facilitate the participation of all literacy levels 3. encourage aspiration: hope, not consumerism 4. integrate culturally-appropriate methods of engagement. To achieve these objectives, the project team must implement tangible strategies (refer TANGIBLE ELEMENTS OF ENGAGEMENT).
1. HYBRID organisational structure (collaboration between technical and non-technical: bewteen designer, community, government and investor representatives. also refer DESIGN TEAM MEMBERS) 2. PHYSICAL location for the design team (establishing a project base contributes to accessibility) 3. ACCESSIBLE via a plethora of means (analogue and digital, to facilitate full participation) 4. RESPONSIVE to contributions (especially criticisms) 5. CONSISTENT methodology (regular and comprehensive communication, rational progression of project) 6. COMPRESSED schedule (to avoid loss of momentum) 22
ENGAGEMENT
DESIGN CAMPAIGN
BUILD
PROJECT STRUCTURE hyrbrid physical
accessible
ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
consistent
compressed
responsive
TANGIBLE ELEMENTS OF ENGAGEMENT The strategic elements are drawn from a community engagement precedent in Chile: the New Masterplan in 90 days for earthquakedevastated Constituci贸n. http://brickstarter.org/conversation-rodrigoaraya-tironi-asociados/
23 _Implications
Jillian Raleigh
potential corporate investors potential donors
GENERAL PUBLIC
DESIGN TEAM COMMISSION RESIDENTS
government departments
DESIGN ADVISORY COUNCIL
potential private investors
PROJECT NETWORK
community support professionals
embedded government representative
business & marketing experts
architects NON-TECHNICAL
design advisory council representative
& TECHNICAL
principle contractor
urban designers
DESIGN TEAM MEMBERS
24
The relationship between stakeholder groups is also fundamental to the success of the project (refer PROJECT NETWORK). The nature of these connections are substantially established during the initial phase of the project: community engagement. The formation of a DESIGN ADVISORY COUNCIL is proposed to aid in the establishment of strong, productive relationships. Again based on the Constituci贸n precedent, the council will be comprised predominantly of elected community representatives, with ancillary government and investor delegates, in order to maintain the model of community empowerment. Integration of the general public - another formerly excluded stakeholder group - is envisaged as the project progresses beyond the initial engagement. The council will concentrate channel stakeholder contributions and provide a conduit for communication with stakeholder groups.
DESIGN The design process of the project must also respond to these themes, authentically and discernably adjusting according to both community influence and the principles of good design. For example, the design must reflect the observed permanent or semi-permanent condition of affordable housing, and prioritise the improvement of basic amentity so frequently quoted as lacking. In essence, the design must be embedded in the social and environmental context.
25 _Implications
Jillian Raleigh
Reflection The intervention proved to be much more than an elementary exercise in data gathering. Aside from the significant implications for +POD project implementation methodology, the interaction with participants initiated a dialogue that - while currently stifled by bureaucracy and predjudice is an essential prologue to the affordable housing revolution proposed. From a design perspective, the intervention provided a genuine insight into the needs and aspirations of a community inaccessible to many architects, and has intensified the motivation to create positive change.
Challenging to both execute and emotionally confront, intervention in the form of interaction is thoroughly recommended to all architects: bake a cake and get out on the hustings.
26
27