DARE to Build, Chalmers University of Technology
Created on 29-07-2022
DARE to build is a 5-week (1 week of design – 4 weeks of construction) elective summer course offered at the Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering at Chalmers University of Technology. Through a practice-based approach and a subsequent exposure to real-world problems, DARE to Build aims to prove that “real change can be simultaneously made and learned” (ACE135 (Dare to Build - Architects) Course Syllabus 2021, 2021; ACE160 (Dare to Build - Engineers) Course Syllabus 2021, 2021). The identified challenge that this course aims to tackle is the increasing need for effective multidisciplinary teams in the fields of architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) in order to tackle the ever-growing complexity of real-world problems (Mcglohn et al., 2014), and the subsequent lack of a strong pedagogical framework that responds effectively to this challenge. The two main foci of the DARE to Build pedagogical model are (1) to train students in interdisciplinary communication, to cultivate empathy and appreciation for each field’s contribution, and to sharpen their collaboration skills, (Tran et al., 2012) and (2) to expose students in practice-based, real-world design problems, through a problem-and-project-based learning (PPBL) approach, within a multi-stakeholder learning environment (Wiek et al., 2014). This multi-stakeholder environment consists mainly of the municipality of Gothenburg, through its different branches and services (Stadsbyggnadskontoret, Park och Naturförvaltningen etc.), local/regional housing companies (Familjebostäder, Bostadsbolaget), professionals/collectives operating within the AEC fields (ON/OFF Berlin, COWI etc.), and local residents and their associations (Hyresgästföreningen, Tidsnätverket i Bergsjön etc.)
Design & Build through CDIO
The design and build studio model that DARE to Build adopts, functions as the connecting element between the two foci; by showcasing that “building, making and designing are intrinsic to each other” (Stonorov et al., 2018, p. 1), students are encouraged to translate theory into practice and reflect on the implications of their design decisions, and subsequently on their role as AEC professionals, in relation to local and global sustainability, from feasibility within a set timeframe to the intangible qualities generated or channelled through specific design decisions in specific contexts. This hands-on learning environment is organised through the CDIO framework (conceive, design, implement, operate), with a heavy focus on the “implement” part. CDIO has been developed over the past years as a reforming tool for engineering education, and is grounded on three main goals: (1) acquire a thorough knowledge of technical fundamentals, (2) sharpen leadership and initiative-taking skills, and (3) become aware of the important role research and technological advancement can play in design decisions (Crawley et al., 2014). Therefore, design and build, combined with CDIO offers a well-rounded experience that aspires to fully equip future professionals for assuming a well-informed and confident role within AEC.
Course structure
DARE to Build projects are initially developed during the autumn semester as student projects of the “Design and Planning for Social Inclusion” (DPSI) studio. Supported by a strong network of stakeholders, this studio employs co-creation and co-evaluation methodologies to address a set of reality-anchored projects, the ideas for which are co-developed between the studio leaders and the aforementioned stakeholders. Students work closely with the stakeholders throughout the semester and after the completion of the studio, one project is selected to become the DARE to Build project for that year, based on (1) stakeholder interest and funding capacity, (2) pedagogical opportunities and (3) feasibility of construction. During the in-between months, the project is broken down and re-worked, mainly by the teaching staff, with the occasional contribution of the original DPSI student team and professionals with relevant expertise to each project. The purpose of this is to establish a number of parameters and guidelines, in order to facilitate the 1-week design process for the DARE to Build.
The course addresses master-level students from 5 different master programmes offered at the Architecture and Civil Engineering Department. During the building phase, this group of students is usually joined by a team of 10-15 local (to the extent that this is possible), summer workers, aged between 16-21 years old, employed by the stakeholders (either by the Municipality of Gothenburg or by a local housing company). The aim of this collaboration is both to have a substantial amount of workforce on site and to create a working environment where students are simultaneously learning and teaching, therefore enhancing their sense of responsibility. DARE to Build has also collaborated -in pre-pandemic times- with RICE University in Texas; 10-15 bachelor level engineering students would join the course as an abroad educational summer experience.
The timeline for each year’s DARE to Build project evolution can be schematically represented through CDIO (adapted from the courses’ syllabi):
Conceive: Developed through a participatory process within the design studio Design and Planning for Social Inclusion, in the Autumn
Design: (1) Teaching staff & co. sets design and material parameters, (2) student participants detail and redesign some elements of the original project, as well as create scheduling schematics, building site logistical plans, budget logs, etc
Implement: The actual construction of the building is planned, executed and finished. All necessary building documentation is produced in order to sustain an informed and competent building process
Operate: The completed built project is handed over to the stakeholders and local community. All necessary final documentation for the operability of the project is produced and completed (as-built drawings etc).
During both the design and construction process, students assume different responsibilities, in the form of different roles, in daily rotation: Project manager, site supervisor, communications officer, and food & fika (=coffee break) gurus. Through detailed documentation, each team passes on to the next day’s team everything relating to the project’s progress, the needs and potential material deficits. Food and collective eating is an important aspect of connecting with each other and an effective team-bonding activity throughout the course.
Learning Outcomes
The learning outcomes are divided into three different sets to fit with the overall vision of DARE to Build (adapted from the course syllabi):
Knowledge and understanding: identify and explain a project’s life cycle, relate applied architectural design to sustainability, describe different approaches to sustainable design
Abilities & Skills: be able to employ co-creation methods, design and assess concrete solutions, visualise and communicate proposals, apply previously gained knowledge to real-world projects, critically review architectural/technical solutions, work in multidisciplinary teams
Assessment & Attitude: be able to motivate different proposals on a scientific and value-based argumentation, to combine knowledge from different disciplines, to consider and review conditions for effective teamwork, to further develop critical thinking and reflections on professional role
The context of operations: Miljonprogrammet
The context in which DARE to Build operates, is the so-called “Million Homes Programme” areas (MHP, in Swedish: Miljonprogrammet) of suburban Gothenburg. The MHP was an ambitious state-subsidised response both to the rapidly growing need for cheap, high-quality housing that defined post-war Swedish urban life, but also to the firm belief that intensified housing production would be relevant and necessary in the future (Baeten et al., 2017; Hall & Vidén, 2005). MHP was a plan to provide one million dwellings within a decade (1965-1974) and subsequently Sweden became the country that provided the highest number of dwellings per capita in the world (KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2017). During the peak years of the Swedish welfare state, as this period is often described, public housing companies, with the help from private contractors built dwellings would target any potential home-seeker, regardless of income or class. Rent subsidies were available based on income and number of children, so that in theory everyone could have access to a modern, full of cutting-edge -at the time- amenities, suburban life and income segregation could be avoided(Places for People - Gothenburg, 1971).
The long-term perspective of MHP also meant profound alterations in the urban landscape; inner city homes in poor condition were demolished, entire new satellite districts were constructed from scratch triggering “the largest wave of housing displacement in Sweden’s history, albeit firmly grounded in a social-democratic conviction of social betterment for all” (Baeten et al., 2017, p. 637) . However, as the oil crisis of the late 1970s hit and economic growth was abruptly halted, what used to be attractive, modern areas, were gradually neglected and became on one hand second-class homes, shunned by the majority of (white) Swedish home-seekers, and on the other an affordable option for the rapidly increasing number of immigrants arriving in Sweden between 1980-2000, which resulted in a high level of segregation in Swedish cities (Baeten et al., 2017).
Nowadays, the MHP areas are home to multi-cultural, mostly low income, immigrant and refugee communities. The media narratives of the past decades have systematically racialised, stigmatised and demonised the suburbs and portrayed them as cradles of criminal activity and delinquency, laying the ground for an increasingly militirised discourse (Thapar-Björkert et al., 2019). The withdrawal of the welfare state from these areas is manifested through the poor maintenance of the housing stock and the surrounding public places, the diminishing public facilities (healthcare centres, marketplaces, libraries etc), facts that are often individualised and attributed to the “culturally different” inhabitants and the unwillingness of people to work in these areas due to the “highly unsafe” environment. In recent years, the gradual (neo)liberalisation of the Swedish housing regime has provided room for yet another wave of displacement, albeit this time with no social criteria. The public housing companies that own MHP stock have started to market their stock to potential private investors through large scale renovations and paired with law reforms that allow private companies to reject rent control, MHP areas are entering a phase of brutal gentrification (Baeten et al., 2017).
Notable DARE to Build projects
Gärdsåsmosse uteklassrum: An outdoor classroom in Bergsjön conceptualised through a post-humanist perspective and constructed on the principles of biomimicry, and with the use of almost exclusively natural materials.
Visit: https://www.chalmers.se/sv/institutioner/ace/nyheter/Sidor/Nu-kan-undervisningen-dra-at-skogen.aspx
https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/cowi/pressreleases/cowi-hjaelpte-goeteborgs-stad-foervandla-moerk-park-till-en-plats-att-ha-picknick-i-2920358
Parkourius: A parkour playground for the children and teens of the Merkuriusgatan neighbourhood in Bergsjön. A wooden construction that employs child-friendly design.
Visit: https://www.sto-stiftung.de/de/content-detail_112001.html https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/familjebostader-goteborg-se/pressreleases/snart-invigs-bergsjoens-nya-parkourpark-3111682
Conclusions
Within such a sensitive and highly complex context, both DARE to Build, and Design & Planning for Social Inclusion aspire to elevate Chalmers University of Technology to an influential local actor and spatial agent within the shifting landscape of the MHP areas, thus highlighting the overall importance of academic institutions having strong, multi-faceted and direct connection with the “real-world”.
Even though participation and co-creation methodologies are strong in all Design and Planning for Social Inclusion projects, DARE to Build has still some ground to cover. The critical months that follow after the selection of the project and up to first week of design within DARE to Build, is a time when a project may change direction completely in order to fit the pedagogical and feasibility criteria. This fragmented participation and involvement, especially of those with the least power within the hierarchy of stakeholder, risks resulting in interventions towards which local residents have no sense of ownership or pride, especially in a context where outsider intervention or top-down interventions is met with increased suspicion and distrust.
Overall DARE to Build is an important study case in the way in which design and build and context-based education are performed and can inform future similar activities within academia.
E.Roussou. ESR9
Read more
->
Marmalade Lane
Created on 08-06-2022
Background
An aspect that is worth highlighting of Marmalade Lane, the biggest cohousing community in the UK and the first of its kind in Cambridge, is the unusual series of events that led to its realisation. In 2005 the South Cambridgeshire District Council approved the plan for a major urban development in its Northwest urban fringe. The Orchard Park was planned in the area previously known as Arbury Park and envisaged a housing-led mix-use master plan of at least 900 homes, a third of them planned as affordable housing. The 2008 financial crisis had a profound impact on the normal development of the project causing the withdrawal of many developers, with only housing associations and bigger developers continuing afterwards. This delay and unexpected scenario let plots like the K1, where Marmalade Lane was erected, without any foreseeable solution. At this point, the city council opened the possibilities to a more innovative approach and decided to support a Cohousing community to collaboratively produce a brief for a collaborative housing scheme to be tendered by developers.
Involvement of users and other stakeholders
The South Cambridgeshire District Council, in collaboration with the K1 Cohousing group, ventured together to develop a design brief for an innovative housing scheme that had sustainability principles at the forefront of the design. Thus, a tender was launched to select an adequate developer to realise the project. In July 2015, the partnership formed between Town and Trivselhus ‘TOWNHUS’ was chosen to be the developer. The design of the scheme was enabled by Mole Architects, a local architecture firm that, as the verb enable indicates, collaborated with the cohousing group in the accomplishment of the brief. The planning application was submitted in December of the same year after several design workshop meetings whereby decisions regarding interior design, energy performance, common spaces and landscape design were shared and discussed.
The procurement and development process was eased by the local authority’s commitment to the realisation of the project. The scheme benefited from seed funding provided by the council and a grant from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA). The land value was set on full-market price, but its payment was deferred to be paid out of the sales and with the responsibility of the developer of selling the homes to the K1 Cohousing members. Who, in turn, were legally bounded to purchase and received discounts for early buyers.
As relevant as underscoring the synergies that made Marmalade Lane’s success story possible, it is important to realise that there were defining facts that might be very difficult to replicate in order to bring about analogue housing projects. Two major aspects are securing access to land and receiving enough support from local authorities in the procurement process. In this case, both were a direct consequence of a global economic crisis and the need of developing a plot that was left behind amidst a major urban development plan.
Innovative aspects of the housing design
Spatially speaking, the housing complex is organised following the logic of a succession of communal spaces that connect the more public and exposed face of the project to the more private and secluded intended only for residents and guests. This is accomplished by integrating a proposed lane that knits the front and rear façades of some of the homes to the surrounding urban fabric and, therefore, serves as a bridge between the public neighbourhood life and the domestic everyday life. The cars have been purposely removed from the lane and pushed into the background at the perimeter of the plot, favouring the human scale and the idea of the lane as a place for interaction and encounters between residents. A design decision that depicts the community’s alignment with sustainable practices, a manifesto that is seen in other features of the development process and community involvement in local initiatives.
The lane is complemented by numerous and diverse places to sit, gather and meet; some of them designed and others that have been added spontaneously by the inhabitants offering a more customisable arrangement that enriches the variety of interactions that can take place. The front and rear gardens of the terraced houses contiguous to the lane were reduced in surface and remained open without physical barriers. A straightforward design decision that emphasises the preponderance of the common space vis-a-vis the private, blurring the limits between both and creating a fluid threshold where most of the activities unfold.
The Common House is situated adjacent to the lane and congregates the majority of the in-doors social activities in the scheme, within the building, there are available spaces for residents to run community projects and activities. They can cook in a communal kitchen to share both time and food, or organise cinema night in one of the multi-purpose areas. A double-height lounge and children's playroom incite gathering with the use of an application to organise easily social events amongst the inhabitants. Other practical facilities are available such as a bookable guest bedroom and shared laundry. The architecture of its volume stands out due to its cubic-form shape and different lining material that complements its relevance as the place to convene and marks the transition to the courtyard where complementary outdoor activities are performed. Within the courtyard, children can play without any danger and under direct supervision from adults, but at the same time enjoy the liberty and countless possibilities that such a big and open space grants.
Lastly, the housing typologies were designed to recognise multiple ways of life and needs. Consequently, adaptability and flexibility were fundamental targets for the architects who claim that units were able to house 29 different configurations. They are arranged in 42 units comprehending terraced houses and apartments from one to five bedrooms. Residents also had the chance to choose between a range of interior materials and fittings and one of four brick colours for the facade.
Construction and energy performance characteristics
Sustainability was a prime priority to all the stakeholders involved in the project. Being a core value shared by the cohousing members, energy efficiency was emphasised in the brief and influenced the developer’s selection. The Trivselhus Climate Shield® technology was employed to reduce the project’s embodied and operational carbon emissions. The technique incorporates sourced wood and recyclable materials into a timber-framed design using a closed panel construction method that assures insulation and airtightness to the buildings. Alongside the comparative advantages of reducing operational costs, the technique affords open interior spaces which in turn allow multiple configurations of the internal layout, an aspect that was harnessed by the architectural design. Likewise, it optimises the construction time which was further reduced by using industrialised triple-glazed composite aluminium windows for easy on-site assembly. Furthermore, the mechanical ventilation and heat recovery (MVHR) system and the air source heat pumps are used to ensure energy efficiency, air quality and thermal comfort. Overall, with an annual average heat loss expected of 35kWh/m², the complex performs close to the Passivhaus low-energy building standard of 30kWh/m² (Merrick, 2019).
Integration with the wider community
It is worth analysing the extent to which cohousing communities interact with the neighbours that are not part of the estate. The number of reasons that can provoke unwanted segregation between communities might range from deliberate disinterest, differences between the cohousing group’s ethos and that one of the wider population, and the common facilities making redundant the ones provided by local authorities, just to name a few. According to testimonies of some residents contacted during a visit to the estate, it is of great interest for Marmalade Lane’s community to reach out to the rest of the residents of Orchard Park. Several activities have been carried out to foster integration and the use of public and communal venues managed by the local council. Amongst these initiatives highlights the reactivation of neglected green spaces in the vicinity, through gardening and ‘Do it yourself’ DIY activities to provide places to sit and interact. Nonetheless, some residents manifested that the area’s lack of proper infrastructure to meet and gather has impeded the creation of a strong community. For instance, the community centre run by the council is only open when hired for a specific event and not on a drop-in basis. The lack of a pub or café was also identified as a possible justification for the low integration of the rest of the community.
Marmalade Lane residents have been leading a monthly ‘rubbish ramble’ and social events inviting the rest of the Orchard Park community. In the same vein, some positive impact on the wider community has been evidenced by the residents consulted. One of them mentioned the realisation of a pop-up cinema and a barbecue organised by neighbours of the Orchard Park community in an adjacent park. Perhaps after being inspired by the activities held in Marmalade Lane, according to another resident.
L.Ricaurte. ESR15
Read more
->