Marc Francl '20 MArch Columbia GSAPP

9

PIER 55 /

5

FOREST FARMS /

11

DUMBO LIBRARY /

27

FUSILLI JOINT /

63

L.A. GARAGE WORKS /

85

ELB REBUILD /

21

BRONX ARTS /

43

QUASSAICK CENTER /

67

MANAUS DIALOGUES /

109

PORTFOLIO

2

F O R E W O R D

PORTFOLIO

To me, architecture has always been an innately social practice. The strongest architecture is that which communicates fluently not only with its occupants, but also with its community. My interest in architecture stems from this intersection. Where the tectonics of a building and the public sphere in which it exists overlap. It is my belief that the public and social spaces of a city are its most important cultural grounds, and by proxy, the architecture of these spaces holds an invaluable place in the urban fabric. This belief, along with endless inspiration from GSAPP’s faculty and students, makes up the common thread that runs through my body of work.

With these themes in mind, I’ve chosen to introduce my portfolio with an essay written for Galia Solomonoff’s Art and Social Infrastructure seminar. The essay deals specifically with the privatization of New York’s public sphere but also addresses the increasingly complex role of the architect and our responsibility to the society we serve.

MARC FRANCL M.ARCH COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP 2020 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

3

PIER 55

P I E R 5 5

4

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP SPRING 2020 ART & SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE GALIA SOLOMONOFF

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

PIER 55

New York City is a place of constant change and growth. Perhaps nowhere is this development more dramatic than along the western flank of Manhattan, were projects like Hudson Yards and the Highline have completely reshaped the city. Now, one more name can be added to the list of hyper-designed, hot-spots that have driven the real-estate boom of the once much grungier neighborhood. Pier 55, or as it has been cleverly branded ‘Little Island’ is the newest addition to Hudson River Park. A 2.4-acre pier just off the Chelsea shoreline, replacing the dilapidated Pier 54. The park, built up from 132 tulip-shaped concrete piles, will consists of hills, lawns and walking paths as well as over 100 species of trees and shrubs and a 700-seat amphitheatre for year-round performances. The controversial park is a microcosm for the issues and factors that shape many parts of New York City today and lies at the confluence of private wealth and public space, sleek design and environmental impact. This essay will seek to unpack these issues through an analysis of Pier 55 and try to understand what precedent the project sets for the future of the public sphere of the city.

To begin we must start with an overview of the history of Hudson River Park itself. Hudson River Park comprises the stretch of seawall along the western coast of Manhattan from Chambers street in the South to 59th street in the North, including many piers and buildings that project out into the river itself. It was created in 1998 by Governor Pataki and Mayor Giuliani through a city state partnership. The main goal of the project was to transform what was largely post-industrial and derelict waterfront and its piers into a continuous strip of green park that would include bike lanes, walking paths, and recreation areas. Initially the park was projected to cost around 300 million and be completed by 2003. That numGSAPP 2020

5

PIER 55

ber obviously began to grow significantly as years went on. The city and state have now spent about 330 million on the park with the federal government contributing 110 million.

The park is still only 70 percent finished, and almost no government capital has been offered since the 2008 financial crisis.

6

There are many piers in the park that still need to be finished, including Pier 40 (which was damaged during Sandy) and Pier 57 both of which are slated for the commercial development which is meant to help finance the park’s maintenance. There are also Pier 26, Pier 97, and 15 blocks of esplanade between 29th and 44th street. The estimated cost for completing the public portions of the park is 175 million. It is important to keep all these numbers in mind when we look at the Pier 55 proposal. The Little Island budget is anything but ‘little’. With an initial budget of 35 million, the project is now costing 250 million dollars.

How did this happen and who is paying for it?

More importantly, can this budget be justified for a single pier when it could more than pay for the completion of all public portions of the entire park?

The astronomical budget of the project has a couple different causes that will also help us understand how the project came to be. In the beginning, the board of the Hudson River Park trust approached billionaire Barry Diller and his wife Diane von Furstenburg (who were also the single largest charitable donors to the highline) asking them to help finance the original 35 million dollar pier proposal. When Mr. Diller and Mrs. Furstenberg became involved, they hired Thomas Heatherwick, who proposed a new design. This represents the first overlap of private funding with the public sphere, whereby means of his control of the finances, Barry Diller governs how the pubCOLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

PIER 55

lic park will be designed. But we will return to this later on. The new design proposed by Thomas Heatherwick is incredibly expensive because it requires each concrete pile to be built of custom cast concrete units, meaning that each piece is unique and therefore more expensive. Furthermore, unlike other pier restoration projects, it does not use the existing piles of the old pier for its foundation. This on its own was enough to drive the price of the project well over its initial budget but when the project began to face legal challenges the price skyrocketed even higher.

The City Club of New York, a group which advocates for responsible urban land use, successful sued the Hudson River Park Fund and Mr. Diller. They cited lack of transparency throughout the development of the project and claimed that a proper assessment of the environmental impact of the pier on the sensitive river estuary underneath it was not done.

A lengthy legal battle followed which resulted in Mr. Diller pulling funding, which effectively killed the project. The City Club pursued actions in three different courts against Mr. Diller and the Pier project. This is an enormously expensive undertaking for an organization that, until a few years ago, had suspended its activities due to lack of money. So where was the money for this legal battle coming from?

The City Club of New York was actually being privately funded by Douglas Durst, one of New York most prominent real-estate moguls. Mr. Durst was a former board member of the fundraising arm of the Hudson River Park Trust called Friends of the Hudson River Park.

When a Madelyn Wils was appointed chief executive of the Hudson River Park trust, her and the Chairwoman Diana L. Taylor directed the fundraising arm of the trust (Friends of Hudson River Park) to focus on new wealthy donors instead of advocacy, and in the pro-

cess, they pushed Mr. Durst off the board.

In this case, environmental sensitivity and transparency of process were really just trivial buzzwords used to distract us from the reality of the situation. The fate of this public park, meant to serve the entire city, was in fact being decided by a battle between the egos of two billionaires. Mr. Durst was likely supporting legal action against the pier solely because the Park Trust approached Barry Diller privately and therefore Mr. Durst wasn’t granted to opportunity to developed it himself.

Because of Mr. Durst, the project was dead in the water. That was until Governor Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio helped broker a deal.

Both the Governor and the Mayor were adamant supporters of the project, and together pledged to complete the 4.5 mile long park and protect its river estuary, if City Club would drop the lawsuit and Mr. Diller would return to the project. The government has not yet pledged any funding to the completion of the river but says it will work with the fund, the City Club and other community leaders to find a way forward. Because of this, the project is back on track.

The story of Pier 55 reveals a concerning truth about the nature of public spaces in our city. It raises several issues about how and why public projects get privately funded, built and designed and the repercussions that this has on the space itself and the community it is meant to serve. The privatization of the public sphere is a common occurrence in New York. Deborah J. Glick, the assemblywoman whose district includes much of the lower part of Hudson River Park, raised concerns about the cultural island, citing both the environment impact and the slippery slope of privatization.

She says: “I always thought that it was a very generous offer,”, referring to Mr. Diller’s gift.

But, she said, “I thought that a new pier in a sensitive part of the estuary in days of climate change was very wrong headed. I was also concerned that large private money resulting in the control of design and programming was not a particularly democratic notion.” This is in reference to the fact that while Barry Diller was to be financially responsible for park maintenance for 20 years after its completion, he was also responsible for hiring those who would create the programming for the performance spaces of the pier as well as the fact that he was responsible for choosing the architect. When Barry Diller became involved with financing the project, he automatically gained creative control over the projects design and its programmatic mandate. Simultaneously, the hiring Thomas Heatherwick, who’s work includes The Vessel at Hudson Yards and who is known for his upscale and trendy designs, signals the beginning of a shift in the project. It becomes less of a functional recreation space for the community but more of a spectacular and performative tool, meant to draw not only crowds, but also investment to the surrounding area. This is likely also the reason for Governor Cuomo and Mayor De Blasio’s strong support of the park, not to mention that building a park always looks good on a political campaign.

The issue raised by Deborah Glick is a complicated one. While a new park is certainly a positive thing, and something New York City needs, the process by which the park is created is also important. Should the community for whom the park is being built not have more control over the park itself? Furthermore, because the park is privately funded, The Trust and the government have little control over how the money is allocated. Would it not be more responsible to use this money to help complete the construction of the entire HudGSAPP 2020

7

PIER 55

son River Park instead of a single pier with Barry Diller’s name on it? This sentiment is echoed by Andrew Berman, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. He says: “We’re not criticizing the generosity of Mr. Diller, but it does seem a little curious that there’s this vast pool of largely private — but also public — money for this addition to the park,” he said. “I know Pier 54 was always supposed to be replaced, but this is vastly grander than what was planned. How can we claim that there is not private or public money for completing the parts of the park that need to be done?”

8

The answer to this question makes the issue ever more complex as it involves the role of art, design and architecture. The architect is often thought of as being at the whim and mercy of the client. However, in this case, the power of design is the driver behind the funding and the impact of the project. Barry Diller would never donate 250 million dollars towards a park if the design was not sleek, seductive and admittedly quite impressive.

This highlights the power and influence that architects and design can have although we might not know it While it has been impossible to find the money to finance the Hudson River Park, it was easy to find hundreds of millions of dollars to fund a relatively small but provocative pier. How is this possible? The first and most obvious reason, is because wealthy people often desire to leave their name and legacy on something beautiful or admirable.

While it is a generous and noble cause, it is not a totally selfless act. The second reason is that the architect Thomas Heatherwick did not just design a park, he designed a choreographed and curated experience that not only draws tourist but generates income for the city by means of increased land value of the surrounding property. Whether this is interpreted COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

PIER 55

in a negative or positive light is up for debate.

To some this will be a beautiful green getaway from the city that serves the whole community but to others, like Jerry Saltz, the pier is more of a hyper-designed theme park than a greenspace. He writes: “Pier 55…presents [itself] as neo-liberal and egalitarian, open, not about class, money, privilege, or elitism. Yet these are the exact things that they’re about!

These things are in constant operation on these sites; they’re just camouflaged by scenic views, architectural features, surveilled supervision, planned group seating, monitored selfies spots, and other theatrical dramatics.”

Or, as Jason Farago wrote in the New Yorker, “A privately funded fantasia in a city whose public infrastructure is crumbling.” Perhaps this represents a simple difference in opinion, or perhaps we have become accustomed to the curated and tailored design of our public spaces. Perhaps we have come to expect it or desire it. In either case, we can agree that architecture as an art from can elevate a park or pier from simple green space to become something more. Whether that something more is considered culturally enriching and valuable to the community, or elitist and inaccessible, is up for debate. In reality it is likely both in some combination. But regardless, the responsibility of the architect lies in navigating this balance and producing something that is both beautiful and universal. As architects we need to serve both client and society as best we can, no matter how difficult this balance may be.

The example of Pier 55 illuminates the role of architecture as it exists in the overlap between art form, community advocate, profit maker and political tool. There is no simple answer about how to best combine these factors. But the Little Island does set a precedent about the way architecture and public space

are negotiated in New York City and there is a warning sign to be warry of. Privatization of the public sphere is already a widespread phenomenon and in a city as crowded as New York, the public needs to be increasingly vigilant and involved in how public space is created. Beautiful and privately funded designs are an easy sell to the government, but it is the public for whom these spaces are designed and therefore it is to the public that these spaces should be held accountable.

9

GSAPP 2020

FOREST FARMS

FOREST FARMS

F O R E S T

10

F A R M S

“Students are asked to create a waterfront structure, as an augmentation of the city’s surface, in order to achieve a dynamic landscape, cityscape, and building interface that engages the East River and plans for future city rhythms: reaching out into the water, yet tied back to the land into the living system of the city. The X-Pier will be the first one along the East River Park, in stark contrast to the highly developed West edge of Manhattan, which counts 36 programmed, usable piers compared to 9 along the East River, with Pier 107 as the only remaining pier that protrudes into the East River north of East River Park.

The X-Pier seeks to re-imagine Manhattan’s precious waterfront - from the Brooklyn Bridge to East 15th Street.”

-Christoph Kumpusch

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP FALL 2017 STUDIO TEI CARPENTER

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

11

FOREST FARMS

FOREST FARMS

Forest Farm is about reconnecting with nature both physically and philosophically. Located in East River Park, between Houston and Delancey street, Forest Farms is conceived as a means of educating and engaging the Lower East Side community about sustainable and adaptable urban agriculture/aquaculture as well as the ecosystem of the East River through the practice of kelp farming.

The project was conceived to have two different lives. As built it functions to as a kelp aquaculture farm.In its a second life in the not so distant future, it becomes a reed bed infrastructure for a newly developped kelp forrest containing oyster and muscles. It acts as a natural stormsurge break.

The Project will improve water quality within the East River, and foster conditions for the restoration of the river’s damaged ecosystem while the kelp crop is processed on site, producing fertilizer for community gardens within New York City. The kelp farm and the community garden that accompanies it will be run and maintained by the Lower East Side community and more specifically will be a part of an agricultural education program (edible schoolyards) run through Baruch high school adjacent to the site.

12

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

13

GSAPP 2020

FOREST FARMS

FOREST FARMS

16

17

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

FOREST FARMS

FOREST FARMS

18

19

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

ELB REBUILD

ELB REBUILD

E L B

20

R E B U I L D

For this particular assignment, each student was asked to re-interpret their chosen building through an analytical model. It is up to the student how they will disect their building. The model could highlight the building structure, function, program, etc. Having chosen the Elbphilharmonic Building by Herzog de Meuron in Hamburg, I was interested in the blunt dichotomy expressed by the materiality of the design. The building boasts a new light and ethereal glass form sitting on top the dense brick base of an existing warehouse. For my model I chose to investigate how flipping this material dichotomy might change the expression of the building. It was particularly challenging to attempt to mimic the building’s delicate curvature in concrete and so I chose to photograph the formwork used in the model’s construction as testament to the process.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP FALL 2017 ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING AND REPRESENTATION

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

21

ELB REBUILD

ELB REBUILD

22

23

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

ELB REBUILD

ELB REBUILD

24

25

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

D U M B O

26

L I B R A R Y

“This studio begins from the premise that the program of a library must include both a component for the storage of information and a component for the use of that information. In whatever media or quantities, this collection of information is a constituent part of a library-the word library referring to both the collection and the space that contains it. A library is, in that sense, doubly a material instantiation of the values of a given institution or society. In the first instance in the forms of the objects collected, and in the second in the form of the building that houses them and facilitates their use. Precisely because most individuals today carry devices that enable access to quantities of information orders of magnitude greater than those held by the largest libraries only a few decades ago, the deliberate collection and dissemination of that information is essential to the formation of common knowledge.�

-Emmett Zeifman

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP SPRING 2018 STUDIO EMMETT ZEIFMAN

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

27

DUMBO LIBRARY

28

DUMBO LIBRARY

A library in 2018 should be place not only to store and use knowledge, but also a place where knowledge is produced. With this idea as the driving force behind its design, my library will adopt the existing site building in order to create a live/work residency for artists and researchers as part of an annual scholarship. Residents will live and work on site, conducting researching in conjunction with the library and the themes of its special collections.

This new type of branch library institution will focus on providing unique research opportunities to residents as well as engage the community through workshops and exhibition events. To accomplish its design goal, the building has been designed in three parts:

29

1) The Mountain (Storage): Where knowledge is stored. This is where the book stacks of the library are contained as well as the auditorium in an opaque concrete volume.

2) The Existing Building (Production): Where knowledge is produced. This is contains the living quarters for the residents as well as their work spaces 3) The Plinth (Use) : The use and exhibition of knowledge.This volume embodies the intersection of the public and private domains of the library. It is an open flexible reading space that also serves as an exhibition space. This is where the public can engage with the work of the residents through exhibitions, reading, workshops and other activities.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

PORTFOLIO

PORTFOLIO

30

31

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

32

33

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

34

35

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

36

37

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

38

39

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

DUMBO LIBRARY

DUMBO LIBRARY

40

41

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

B R O N X

42

A R T S

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP FALL 2018 STUDIO GALIA SOLOMONOFF in collaboration with Jack Blythe

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

“Res-publica, or public good, or common wealth, denotes aprinciple where a group takescares of a common core of elements for thegeneral advantage, or well-beingof everyone involved.We will use this idea of commonwealth to determine the shared elements, public spaces, and rule-setbenefits of our housingsharedzones.Throughout evolution, whether we hunt, gather or code, humans haverelied on each other’s strength, talent, and expertise. Now that sharing cars, work spaces, living spaces, tools, child care, elder care is on the rise,what is at stake for each one of us? How can societymaximize efficiency of resourceswhile maintaining choice,allowing individuation and freedom of expression?

How do we maintain the linkbetween freedom and responsibility? How canhousing be made better,more beautiful, for more people? Our housing studio will study the current polemics of the sharingeconomy; and aim to integrate housing with contemporary culture. We will move beyond the tower-in-the-parkhousingscheme; and proposenew hybrids that amend surrounding landscapes and cultural contexts. We will aim for high density, low-rise, environmentally sound and sustainable development, with shared access to natural light, air and outdoor space. Our view is that sharingin housing, culture, sportsand education offersmany advantages, yet requires a clear understanding of responsibilities and investments in education.”

- Galia Solomonoff

GSAPP 2020

43

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

Our design focuses on sharing the housing project and the site as a whole with the community, through the integration of interconnected arts programs. These programs are composed of live/work residential units for local artists, exhibition spaces, classrooms, and mural walls created by artists and community members alike. Through a language of pixelation, these programs are broken down into a spectrum of public and private spaces, both large and small, and integrated into the residential functions of the project through a network of catwalks that connect the entire building.

44

45

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

“These programs are composed of live/work residential units for local artists,

and mural walls created by artists and community members alike.�

classrooms,

exhibition spaces,

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

50

51

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

52

53

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

54

55

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

56

57

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

58

59

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

BRONX ARTS

BRONX ARTS

60

61

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

FUSILLI JOINT

FUSILLI JOINT

F U S I L L I

62

J O I N T

Material things is a class dedicated to the exploration of model making techniques and development of skills in the school shop.

Assignments are designed to challenge students to investigate new modes of fabrication and craft. The second assignment of the class asked the students to design and build a joint of any kind. In response to this prompt, I was interested in creating a dovetail joint in which two elements slot into one another. I was inclined to achieve this with thin and curving forms but wanted to challenge the preconceptions about what materials this would be possible with. The result is a joint made of two slender and twisting concrete slates that spiral into each other, using a brass rod to lock them together.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP SPRING 2018 MATERIAL THINGS JOSH JORDAN

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

63

FUSILLI JOINT

FUSILLI JOINT

64

65

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

Q U A S S A I C K

66

C E N T E R

“Our project for the semester will involve a State of New York engineering project located on the Quassaick Creek.The City of Newburgh has an existing wastewater pipe, 48” in diameter, buried next to the creek, downstream of the Holden Dam. The creek is eroding the streambed next to the pipe. The state has decided to breach the dam with a weir, and to eventually re-direct the stream away from the pipe. The new weir will be in a portion of the streambed which is flat and spacious. Our project will involve: Imagining our own weir construction, which will, by necessity, be of cementitious construction. We will design a nature center, a program desired by the Quassaic Creek Watershed Alliance, in this location. The nature center will be fully integrated with the proposed nature trail as well as the proposed weir. In addition, a bridge across the stream will be proposed to facilitate the use of either side of the stream for the trail location.”

-Robert Marino

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP SPRING 2019 STUDIO ROBERT MARINO

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

67

QUASSAICK CENTER

68

QUASSAICK CENTER

Quassaick Center is a nature center in the Quassaick Creek water shed, acting as a bridge, weir and visitor meeting point for tourists. The goal of the nature center is to intertwine personal experience of the site with the flow of the river. To achieve this, visitors to the nature center are able to move through the landscape at three different datums, allowing them to explore the creek from above, below and beside the water. As visitors move seamlessly from one elevation to the next, the creek flows through the nature center. The architecture mediates the boundary between the guests and the water, delineating between areas of wet and dry, observation and procession, bringing the guest and the creek closer together in the process.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

69

GSAPP 2020

PORTFOLIO

PORTFOLIO

70

71

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

72

73

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

74

75

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

76

77

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

78

79

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

80

81

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

QUASSAICK CENTER

QUASSAICK CENTER

82

83

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

84

L. W A. O R G K A S R A G E COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP FALL 2019 STUDIO LEONG LEONG

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

“This studio will look at the relationship between architecture and the evolution of the contemporary art institution as a space of collectivity. Students will design a new contemporary art facility that challenges preconceived ideas of the institution and speculates on new forms of collectivity. The studio will explore architecture as both an aesthetic practice and a social practice.

Although the city of Los Angeles has a long history of cultivating artists, today’s thriving art community and art market cannot be disassociated from the transformation of the city itself.

The current real estate development cycle has exacerbated longstanding stratifications in the urban context historically determined by class and race. Emerging artist communities and the institutions that support them frequently find themselves at the center ofdebates around gentrification and social equity.

South Park has remained a centrla location for the ‘undercommons’ of Los Angeles. Situated in zone confined by racially restrictive housing covenants from the 1920’s to 60’s, South Park developed as a district exclusive to black business and activity, and has gradually made room for LatinX neighborhoods in recent decades. In an effert to reach a broader and more diverse audience, LACMA recently announced a community outreach initiatuve which identified several sites in South Los Angeles for development.

The Non-Institution will be sited at the South LA Wetlands Pakr, one of the proposed homes for the new LACMA site. The 9-acre site includes a former bus maintenance facility has sat empty for 30 years.”

- Dominic and Chris Leong

GSAPP 2020

85

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

An arts ‘non-institution’ needs to be a place where the community can convene freely and spontaneously. But, in a neighborhood where parks are limited and public ammenities are few, what does gathering in an informal setting look like? An analysis of the neighborhood surrounding the site found that often front yards and back yards are places for guests to welcome visitors and to socialize. Frequently they are also places of production and creation too. Garages often host workshops, auto-body repair, home studio and even band practice. Could these informal settings of socializing and working also bee considered as places for exhibition?

GARAGE AS MAKER-SPACE?

86

87

BACKYARD AS HOSTING SPACE? FRONTYARD AS EXHIBITION SPACE? WHAT DOES PROGRAMING FOR THE ARTS LOOK LIKE IN THESE SPACES? COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. Garage works is the result of the overlap of two programs: arts eduction and vocational trade education. Arts students will be able to develop their creative skills while also learning a practical trade while vocational students will be able to engage with artistic methods of manufacturing, thus honing and elevating their craft. The core of the project, where these two programs intersect, is the Garage: a multipurpose maker space both used and operated by the students as part of their education. The Garage hosts a wide range of tools and equipment typical of a workshop but also functions as the primary exhibition and gathering space of the building. Taking as precedent the smaller scale residential backyard garage, the space is intended to play host to the surrounding community. It will function simultaneously as a place of creation, education, production, gathering and hospitality.

88

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

89

PORTFOLIO

PORTFOLIO

90

91

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

92

93

The structural skeleton of the exisitng warehouse is maintained and the roof is reskinned to create a canopy that runs along the length of the project, protecting the programs underneath from sun and rain.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

Garage door in its open state

The garage space has two large operable doors that use the existing ware house as a structural framework

When the garage doors are open they become an extension of the canopy above, providing shade below.

Garage door in its closed state Existing structural frame

The project can exists in two different states.

In its formal state, the operable garage doors are closed and the programs function separately from one another: classrooms, garage and administration. The building can shift to an informal state by opening the large garage

doors, allowing the contents of the workshop to spill out across the site and inviting the community inside to gather, participate and socialize. In this second state, the previously separate programs overlap and interact with one another.

Classroom and auditorium spaces

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

98

99

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

100

101

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

102

103

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

104

105

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

L.A. GARAGE WORKS

106

107

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

M A N A U S

108

D I A L O G U E S

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY GSAPP SPRING 2020 STUDIO RIVERA in collaboration with Julia pyszkowksi

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

MANAUS DIALOGUES

“In the studio we will travel to Manaus, in Brazil, and beyond it, by boat. The two million people city is located in the mid-way of the Amazonas river and is the hub of a network that extends from the Andes to the Atlantic. Manaus grew after becoming a free industrial zone by the military dictatorship, in the late 60s, and its economic and urban development evolved in total disarticulation with its natural potentials, neglecting the relation with the river. Despite that, the riverfront is still an alive setting, where people and products arrive and leave, contact point among the vernacular and erudite knowledge, among the forest and the urban. A place of contrasts and conflicts.

Manaus will be our entry to the Amazonia, and we will have the relation with the river as our focus.

We will explore notions of time, community and local knowledge, in the search for singular qualities that address questions such as environment, development, social justice, sharing, among others. We will design buildings, public spaces, infrastructures, or a combination of these, that will address what it means to be in Amazonia and what our contribution can add to these populations. We will reflect on the destruction of the forest and murder of indigenous populations. We will consider sustainability, economy and culture. We will think about how things are global and local at the same time. We will not deny contemporary civilization as we know it, neither adopt cynicism as a discourse. We will avoid the naïve and the picturesque. By investigating another reality, our aim is to bring new perspectives that help us to place ourselves in the world.

We will be humble enough to listen to the local culture and ambitious enough to raise new questions. We will dream, experiment, and dig ourselves into the Amazonas river mud.”

- Pedro Rivera

GSAPP 2020

109

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

110

111

Our project begins by seeking to understand the challenges faced by indigenous communities living in the city of Manaus. What is the impact of a predominantly portuguese speaking city on indigenous culture, identity and language? Perhaps more than in any other culture, language plays a fundamental role in the propagation of indigenous knowledge. Indigenous tribes have a rich tradition of oral history and story-telling that is central to their culture and is inextricably linked to language. Because memories, traditions and knowledge are often passed on orally, both social and spatial organization within a community are central to the culture and its identity.

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

Mapping different indigenous ethnic groups across the city shows a huge diversity of population. Especially concentrated around the outskirts of the city in neighborhoods like Taruma-acu, Cidade Nova and Santa Etelvina. Many, if not all of the indigenous in these communities are faced with economic challenges, discrimination, little to no political representation and the pressure to fit in and hide their cultural identity. Language is a crucial part of this identity and every effort to document language, promote its transmission to younger generations is an effort to valorize the identities of the individuals who speak them .

ETHNICITIES

There are 19 different indigenous languages spoken in Manaus. Again the high concentration and variety of these languages are spoken in the predominantly indigenous neighborhoods on the outskirts of the city.

112

113 LANGUAGE

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

WHAT DOES LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION MEAN IN AN URBAN CONTEXT?

Further investigation of the city found that there are already several efforts being led to strengthen indigenous communities in Manaus and revitalize languages. These existing efforts represent a vital resource to the indigenous community of Manaus that our project wants to tap into.

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

Our project proposes a network of community centers, focused on the strengthening and adaptation of urban indigenous culture through language revitalization. It will aim to counteract the loss of indigenous cultural identity in the urban context, promote visibility and support the fight for political representation. By providing audio/ visual recording and broadcasting programs, education, archive and gathering spaces, the network will allow interaction and coordination between different indigenous groups as well as cross-cultural community exchange. The existing initiatives already present in the community will find a home within the space, making the community center a beacon that draws together support for indigenous groups while simultaneously broadcasting their knowledge and narratives across the Manaus network and potentially throughout the Amazon at large.

116

117

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

120

121

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

122

123

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

124

125

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

126

127

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

128

129

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

130

131

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

132

133

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

134

135

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

136

137

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

138

139

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020

MANAUS DIALOGUES

MANAUS DIALOGUES

140

141

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

GSAPP 2020