YouthCare Visioning Studio

YOUTHCARE VISIONING STUDIOUW AWB Student Chapter 2012

UW College of Built EnvironmentsThe College of Built Environments at the University of Washington, Seattle devotes its resources to the tangible improvement of built and natural environments. The four departments at the College include architecture, landscape architecture, urban planning and construction management. Collaborative research efforts and courses are becoming more common, but this studio was unique as an interdisciplinary design studio arranged by students themselves.

Studio TeamAdam Stoeckle, Master of Architecture student, 2-year

Erin Feeney, Master of Architecture student, 3-year

Jay Ranaweera, Master of Architecture student, 2-year

Michael Gilbride, Master of Architecture student, 3-year

Sam Kraft, Master of Architecture student, 3-year

Virginia Werner, Master of Landscape Architecture and Master of Urban Planning student

Brian Gerich served as faculty adviser, providing invaluable advice, structure, and motivation to the efforts of the studio

YOUTHCARE SERVICE NETWORK

VARIOUS RESIDENCES

YOUTHCARE MAIN OFFICE

ORION CENTER

NEW SITE 2 - S. Alaska Street and MLK

NEW SITE 1 - 17th and YESLER

YouthCareSeattle YouthCare is a nonprofit committed to engaging with homeless youth to stabilize their lives through social services and housing. This collaborative, interdisciplinary studio team worked directly with YouthCare to explore the vision for a new transitional housing facility that provides housing and services in a single facility, adding to their existing network of services.

AWBThe Seattle professional chapter of Architects Without Borders (AWB) provided support for the studio through the involvement of Brian Gerich and representation at design reviews. Architects Without Borders-Seattle provides ecologically sensitive and culturally appropriate design assistance to communities in need.

SUBHEADING

UW Architects Without Borders - Student Chapter4

STUDIO TIMELINE

MARCH 2011IDEA FOR A STUDIO BEGINS

APRIL 9, 2012CLIENT WORKSHOP 1

AUGUST 26, 2011FIRST MEETING WITH YOUTHCARE

WINTER 2012INDEPENDENT STUDIES TO PREPARE FOR STUDIO

goal #1provide design services to an under-served community

goal #2explore the use of alternative building materials in an urban context

goal #3work together to develop ideas as a collaborative, interdisciplinary group

goal #4complete the requirements of a comprehensive studio (study building systems)

goal #5have fun4

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 5


MAY 11, 2012DESIGN BUILD PROJECT AT ORION CENTER

JUNE 4, 2012FINAL REVIEW WITH CLIENT

MAY 4, 2012MIDTERM REVIEW

Introduction

SUBHEADING






UW Architects Without Borders - Student Chapter

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 7





Research

SUBHEADING


YOUTH HOMELESSNESS

The Youthcare studio felt it was necessary to research youth homelessness to better understand and serve our clients. We quickly found that youth homelessness is the result of many profoundly complex societal problems, the majority starting with the family but spanning to global economics.

Despite historical initiatives and legislature passed at the federal and state levels, youth homelessness remains a serious issue. With the onset of the 2008 recession, youth homelessness has increased dramatically. The primary cause for this increase is the inability of a financially struggling family to support their older children. In addition, neglect, abuse, residential instability, and family conflict are large contributors to youth homelessness. Furthermore, unemployment, crime, limited funding, and a lack of access to education, support, and resources continually perpetuates the homelessness of youth.

http://blog.endhomelessness.org

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 9

The services and organizations that do exist, like Youthcare, are always at capacity and working hard to take care of the day to day. However, many of these organizations are also looking to innovate their approaches to the larger patterns of youth homlessness. One innovation that we looked at is the “Foyer model”.

“Foyers are integrated learning and accommodation centres providing safe and secure housing, support and training for young people aged 16 - 25.” www.foyer.net

www.goodshepherds.org

The Foyer model approaches youth homelessness by focusing on the assets and energy of the youth in order to support and facilitate a transition to independence. Foyers provide housing, education, and training in exchange for a commitment to support the community through their behavior and work. In many cases the buildings and the services they provide become a beacon and landmark in the area and help bring the youth out of the shadows and into society.

The Chelsea Foyer at the Christopher has small living spaces and generous communal spaces to encourage mixing.

www.goodshepherds.org

SUBHEADING


YOUTH HOMELESSNESS - TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

Housing strategies for homeless youth include:-Group Homes-”Housing First” or rapid re-housing: prioritized by King County-Permanent supportive housing-Employment-focused housing-Transitional housing: short term, typically 18-24 month. It is intended to bridge between living on the street or in emergency shelters to permanent, stable housing. The concept of transitional housing began in the early 1990s and it has expanded ever since. In 2004, over 7,000 transitional housing programs existed.

haiti

anco

nsor

tium

.com

“To be successful, housing must be enhanced with intensive case management services, school, meals, job training, and money management and other life skills training.” - City of Seattle

Important to the success of any housing program are:-issues of scale-level of independence vs. support-community networks-fit within the fabric of the local community-safety and stability

Gaps in services:-funding for programs typically ends at age 24, making support and resources scarce for young adults who are unable to live independently-there is a bottleneck of facilities and staff that limits the number of youth able to enter-much of the transitional housing available requires sobriety

Local services:-King County receives $19 million in annual funding for its “Continuum of Care” through the McKinney Vento Homesless Assisstance Act-King County has a “10 Year Plan to End Homelessness” that proposes new dormitory style housing for youth and young adults-Housing providers in the Seattle area (focus area indicated): Archdiocesan Housing Authority (women), Cedar House (mental illness), Church Council of Greater Seattle’s Home Step (low-income stable), Dove House, Friends of Youth’s New Ground (transitional), Goodwill Development Association’s Aridell Mitchell Home (transitional), ROOTS (emergency shelter), United Indians of All Tribes, Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle’s Harder House (transitional group home), YMCA Young Adult Services (transitional and permanent), and YouthCare.

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 11

PROJECT PROGRAM

This program was developed through research on existing transitional housing projects and based on conversations with YouthCare. The comprehensive studio requirements for the Architecture Department recommend a 30,000 SF building,

which was easily met with this program. Each project takes a unique perspective on program relationships, layout, and square footage based on the following.

LIVE

LEARN

SERVICE

SUPPORT

transitional housing: 12,550 sq.ft size number type a (180sq.ft) 1800 sq.ft 10 bedstype b (150sq.ft) 3000 sq.ft 20 beds type c (125sq.ft) 1250 sq.ft 10 bedstotal 6050 sq.ft

common spaces conference 1200 sq.ft 4kitchen 400 sq.ft 1exercise 4200 sq.ft 1bike storage 400 sq.ft 1laundry 300 sq.ft 1total 6500 sq.ft

education and employment: 9,700 sq.ft classrooms 2700 sq.ft 3computer lab 1200 sq.ft 1�ex space/ lounge 4000 sq.ft 2studio/workshop 1800 sq.ft 2

o�ces, sta� lounge and conference room: 610 sq.ft

service spaces: 11, 340 sq.ft mechanical 3000 sq.ftelectrical 1500 sq.ftcirculation 3840 sq.ftbathrooms/storage 3000 sq.ft

TOTAL : 34,200

SUBHEADING


NEW HORIZON YOUTH CENTRE - London, United Kingdom - Adam Khan Architects

Recommendations:- Example of “non-institutionalized space” in the form of creative expression space, privacy nooks, and conversation spots- Solid material palette for sense of permanence and durability

The New Horizon Youth Centre is an organization that assists youth in the transition to adulthood. The youth centre addition adds a series of spaces to an existing youth homeless shelter. Different configurations of seating and surfaces allow for different levels of privacy and sociability. Window nooks or group seating tables reiterate the available choice in experience. Several elements are made out of solid materials in order to express permanence and durability.

Privacy nookStudy area

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CASE STUDY

YouthCare 13

Exterior view Creative Expression Space

The architects were focused on avoiding institutional space by creating a sense of home and flexibility. A space on the top floor acts as a place for intense expression or emotion. It is clad in slightly shifting wooden planes in order to express warmth and security.

Sources:- http://www.adamkhan.co.uk/- http://www.architecturetoday.co.uk/?p=9175

SUBHEADING


OUTSIDE IN - Portland, Oregon - Clark Kjos Architects

Recommendations:- Similar program of housing and services in one facility- Aesthetic intent to make building approachable with enclosed outdoor spaces, dynamic massing, and “urban materials.”

The headquarters for Outside In is a 31,000 square foot building that contains counseling services,

employment services, a clinic, kitchen, dining space, and housing. The design for the main headquarters of Outside In was focused on making the building approachable. This goal was accomplished by breaking up the building in different sections and expressing each one differently. Other approachable elements include the exposed structure, the angled walls, and “urban materials.” The mural and street art further ensures a non-institutional building.

Entrance Dynamic massing of building facade

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CASE STUDY

YouthCare 15

Entrance atrium Entry outdoor space

The courtyard creates a private outdoor space for the youth while also allows the opportunity to be opened up to the public. For the interior of the building, a two-story lobby acts as the internal, central hub of the building.

Sources:- http://www.ckarch.com/main.html

SITE VISITS


Geographic Information System (GIS) Site Selection Criteria:

- Parcel of 30,000 square feet or more- Vacant Land- Appropriate Zoning- Non-steep slope sites

Other Site Selection Criteria:

- Proximity to public transportation- Proximity to commercial areas/jobs- Proximity to other YouthCare facilities- Diverse site types (constrained vs. open)

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SITE VISITS

YouthCare 17

Early visit to Columbia City site

Early visit to Yesler site

MATERIALS


We felt like the architecture could be an opportunity for education and innovation. That was the theme of the program and the motive behind the creation of the studio.

This led us to explore alternative materials. The materials themselves could provide learning opportunities about the trajectory of architecture and construction in a post-petroleum world.

http://www.modcell.com

http://www.modcell.com

Straw Panels--These prefabricated timber with straw infill panels are the structure and insulation as one and

are applicable for small and large scale projects

A section through a bioswale design

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

MATERIALS

YouthCare 19

http://www.greenpublicart.com http://www.nordicewp.com

Cross Laminated Timber--It is like plywood on steroids. These panels can span up to 50 feet and are able to speed up construction time much like pre-

cast panels or SIPS, but without the toxic substances or embodied energy.

Green Walls/Living Walls/Vertical Gardens--Blank walls become living, respirating works of art or ecologically

performative components of the building systems.

Polycarbonate roofing--a lightweight and low cost roofing solution that allows lighter structure and maximizes diffuse daylighting of interior spaces.

6” SOIL

SEDUM TILES

ROOT BARRIER

DRAINAGE LAYER

ROOF MEMBRANE

FILTER FABRIC

ROOF DECK

WATER RETENTION FABRIC

Typical green roof section


SYSTEMS

Different systems work simultaneously and cyclically to create the experiences we have in and around buildings. Each system can be analyzed separately, but they work together to support the building and its inhabitants.

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 21

SYSTEMS

Natural Systems - Hydrological cycle - waterSun - energyWind - airEarth - site and water

Built Systems - Hydrological cycle - rain water harvesting, gray and black water Sun - daylighting, solar harvestingWind - natural ventilation

Social Systems - Education/trainingSupportWorkLive


SYSTEMS: WATER

Gray water - any used water that is carrying a very low amount of organic material. This includes water from bathroom sinks, washing machines, and showers.

Black water - water from kitchen sinks and toilets is considered black water because it likely carries a lot of organic solids and must be more extensively treated and or filtered. This is the most difficult to treat on-site.

Rain water - As a rule of thumb, each inch of rainwater will provide .55 gallons of water per sq.ft. of roof1” rain = .55gallons/sq.ft. of roof

Seattle average annual rainfall: 38”

Yesler Site12,980 sq ft x 38“ rain/year x .55 = 271,282 gal/ year

Daily indoor per capita water use is 69.3 gallons.

Installing more efficient fixtures can lower daily per capita water usage to 45.2 gallons (saving 35%).

40 youth at 45.2 gallons per day: 650,000 gallons per year10 staff at 10 gallons per day: 25,000 gallons per year

Total indoor building usage: 675,000 gallons per yearDoes not include outdoor usage

Rain water- can be stored and used for irrigation. Can be filtered through green roofs and green walls and combined with gray water to be treated and re-used.

General Approach:• Conserve water use with efficient fixtures• Harvest rain water for supplementary uses• Create a system that cycles and treats gray water and

black water if appropriate• Employ green roofs, green walls and constructed

wetlands to hold and filter water appropriately• Minimize the waster stream exiting the building to the

city infrastructure

Columbia City green wall diagram: This is a schematic diagram of a possible configuration

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 23

SYSTEMS: WATER

N

BIOSWALE

EXTENSIVEGREEN ROOF

~50,000 gal./year

~430,000 gal./year

~70,000 gal./year

170,000 gal./year

340,000 gal./year

~50,000 gal./year

BELOW-GRADE RAINWATER CISTERN

BELOW-GRADE GRAYWATER CISTERN

GREEN WALLS (drip irrigated)

COMMUNITY GARDEN

GRAYWATER REUSE

SITE WATER

GRAYWATER TREATMENT PLANTERS

GRAYWATER PRE-TREATMENT

Columbia City water systems diagram: This is a schematic diagram of a possible configuration


SYSTEMS: AIR + LIGHT

General Approach:• Use building orientation and shape to maximize

natural ventilation and sunlight• Operable windows allow for individual control of

ventilation and comfort and are therefore ideal for living spaces and offices

• Ventilate with a dedicated outside air system to insure fresh air for all spaces

• Use the envelope to mitigate glare and maximize use of daylight

Other Considerations• Consider heat recovery ventilations system (HRV)

that recovers heat from exhaust air providing energy savings.

• Double skin facade systems offer energy savings and better control of shading, ventilation and acoustics, but have higher upfront costs and maintenance must be carefully considered

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 25

SYSTEMS: AIR + LIGHT

N

NARROW FLOOR PLATE WITH WINDOWS

SOLAR SCREEN(on south facade)

TRANSLUSCENT DAYLIT CORE

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OPPORTUNITY

HOUSING ORIENTED FOR PASSIVE COOLING

OPERABLE PANELS FOR VENTILATION

Passive Systems


SYSTEMS: ENERGY

General Approach:• Use tight and well insulated envelope to maintain

thermal comfort with minimal energy• Employ heat recovery system to save energy• Adjust heating system to the different occupancies

and intensities of the residential, learning, and office spaces

• Consider ground source heat pump and solar thermal water as potential sources of heat

• Radiant heat is efficient and effective and may be appropriate

Other Considerations• Radiant heating is slower to respond to rapid

temperature fluctuations• The most appropriate type of ground source heat

pump (vertical, horizontal, or pond) will depend on the particular characteristics of the site

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 27

SYSTEMS: ENERGY

N

HYDRONIC RADIANT FLOOR AT FLEX

RADIANT BASEBOARD HEATERS PER ROOM

HEAT RECOVERY

AIR INTAKE

EXHAUSTAIR

SUPPLEMENTARY HEAT SOURCE (boiler)

FLAT PLATE SOLAR HOT WATER

Active Systems

SUBHEADING






UW Architects Without Borders - Student Chapter

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 29





Studio

RELATIONAL MODELS


DescriptionThis introductory exercise emphasized relationships. Without a site or a fully established program, the construction of physical models focused on materials, connections, and spatial strategies as a means to explore essential relationships in the project. During the studio discussion of the models, a variety of relationships between the youth and staff, client and public, building and site, were shared and common themes were established.

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

RELATIONAL MODELS

YouthCare 31

Essential relationships expressed:-haven or shelter function of housing-terrain as undulating or unstable-need for individual expression-ambiguity of entrance-projections and voids-consistency of materials vs. form-diverse opportunities for stillness-evidence of hand-made/natural vs. machine-made-enclosure vs. spilling out-built meeting living culture-folding, spiraling, continuity-assembly vs. reduction-embedded in context vs. safe oasis-privacy, security, comfort-flexibility-progression, hope-iconography-precarious/unexpected moments-navigating landscape-constructed/intentional vs. constructable/changeable-connection to landscape-prospect and refuge-responsibility and structure vs. playfulness

WORKSHOPS


Workshop GoalsAs part of our research, we conducted two sets of workshops with the managers and staff of YouthCare, and the youth at the Orion Center.

These workshops consisted of collaborative exercises to get ideas and feedback from the youth and staff regarding how they view their current space, and what they would

Managers and Staff at Workshop 1

want in a new space. Another goal was to understand the relationships between staff and youth at the different levels of housing, and see how those relationships affect the physical space they occupy. This feedback was very valuable for us as we developed our projects.

We also discussed design/build ideas for our studio, as well as opportunities for future work with YouthCare.

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

WORKSHOPS

YouthCare 33

Workshop 1 Introduction Board

Managers and Staff at Workshop 1

Virginia and Erin running Workshop 1

Workshop 1: What works, what doesn’t? focused primarily on identifying the current benefits, drawbacks, strengths, and weaknesses of the YouthCare homes and centers.

Workshop 2: Ideas for the future featured a dot exercise to identify priorities and a board game to stimulate conversation about function proximities and relationships.

Studio Timeline

May

June

Apr

ilM

arch

4/9 Workshop 1: What works, what doesn’t?4/23 Workshop 2: Ideas for the future

3/30 UW students meet with YouthCare staff

UW students get organized

5/11 Build Days!5/12

UW students share final project with YouthCare

UW students work on new building design

UW students plan design/build project and work on new building design

Our Process

Who We AreCOLLEGE OF BUILT ENVIRONMENTS

LIVING

LEARNING+ listening

designing

drawing

testing

Virginia Jay Erin Adam Sam Michael

WORKSHOPS


Workshop Findings

The following questions and answers represent the cumulative knowledge of the managers, staff, and youth.

Managers and Staff Dot Exercise at Workshop 2

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

WORKSHOPS

YouthCare 35

Where do the youth like to spend most of the their time inside? Why?The different residential settings facilitate different kinds of hanging out. Some managers said the youth prefer the living room and dining rooms, and smoking areas, while others said the youth prefer spending time in their bedrooms, and hang out in the laundry room. Some managers noted that this was because they simply just did not have a good gathering space. When it is nice outside, the youth like to be on the front porches. The youth at the Orion Center liked spending time playing video games on the couches.

Where do the staff like to spend time inside, or would like to spend time, and why?The staff also like to hang out in the kitchen, and at the administrative offices. They voiced opinions that they need to have a space that is dedicated to a gathering space, because being in the offices is disruptive to those working.

What is your favorite thing about the building you work in? Least favorite?Favorite things included: the old houses have character, outside patios, individual rooms for residents, front porch, built-in benches, commercial kitchen at Orion Center, flexible spaces can have many uses.Least favorite things included: old houses need a lot of maintenance, lack of studio apartments, lack of office space, lack of game room/common space, shared office space, no place to eat/lack of common space for staff, no “decompression” space for staff, and not enough small meeting rooms. Managers and Staff playing Board Game at Workshop 2

WORKSHOPS


What spaces are best, or would be best, for interacting with the youth in a professional capacity?The offices and small meeting rooms - but many are shared and do not allow for the needed privacy. Outdoor spaces are also good.

What spaces are best, or would be best, for interacting with the youth socially?Similarly, outdoor spaces are good for social interaction, as are the kitchens, and it’s also really good to have offices on public corridors - it facilitates interactions. Social living spaces, such as living rooms, would be good. Small individual counseling spaces are also good for social interactions.

Orion Center Youth Board Games at Workshop 2

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

WORKSHOPS

YouthCare 37

What is the outdoor space like at your place of work? Does it work well or poorly? What would your ideal outdoor space be like for a new YouthCare facility that combined housing, counseling, offices, education, and training programs?In general, the managers agreed that having programmed outdoor space, a green buffer space, and more parking were needed for a new facility. The housing element needs to be screened from view from nosy neighbors, especially in the residences where transgender youth live (this has been a problem in the past). The managers also expressed that the outdoor spaces for sunbathing, playing volleyball, and barbecuing are popular, and those should be incorporated into the semi-public spaces in the project. Gardens and p-patchs were also desired.

What issues do you have at your facility related to security and visibility? What are ways to mitigate that?Need to have offices or staff areas that look onto common space for the youth, like the Orion Center has windows that look into the main room from the upstairs offices, creating a visual connection. Stairwells and hallways, and bathrooms, are often places that are unmonitored where bullying occurs, so making those spaces more open and visible would help prevent some of the intimidation among the youth and make them feel more safe and secure. While they need privacy from the neighbors, they also need to be friends with the neighbors - the idea that the more eyes on the street, the more secure it will be.

Managers and Staff playing Board Game at Workshop 2


SITES - Yesler

One site selected for the project was chosen as an urban typology with easy access to downtown. Downtown was viewed as both an asset and a potential detriment to the well-being of the youth. This corner site is located on the corner of 17th Avenue and East Yesler Way. It is approximately 15,500 square feet and zoned for Neighborhood Commercial and a 40 foot height limit. Currently, the site is a vacated auto shop.

East Yesler Way

17th Avenue

Also, this site is adjacent to the Langston Hughes Performing Arts Center, a small commercial area, a vocational school, and a public park. The closest transit routes for the site include the following bus lines: 14, 27, 984, 987.

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 39

SITES - Yesler


SITES - Columbia City

This site was selected for the project for the purposes of exploring a large site in South Seattle. This corner site is located at the intersection of South Alaska Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Way South. It is approximately 30,000 square feet and zoned for Neighborhood Commercial and a 40 foot height limit. The site is in a small mixed-use area surrounded by the Rainier Vista affordable housing development and single family homes.

Previously, the site included a gas station, resulting in the ongoing remediation of the site’s soil. The closest transit options include the Columbia City light rail station across the street and the 8, 9, and 42 bus lines.

S. Alaska Street

Martin Luther King Jr. W

ay South

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 41

SITES - Columbia City

CONTEXT MAPPING


“Make a map, not a tracing... What distinguishes the map from the tracing is that it is entirely oriented toward an experiment in contact with the real. The map does no reproduce an unconscious closed in upon itself, it constructs the unconscious. It fosters connections between fields...”

-A Thousand Plateaus, Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari

This mapping exercise to enhance understanding of the two selected sites was focused on four areas of documentation: • temporal spatial systems• sociocultural systems• ecological systems• infrastructural systems

Martin Luther King Jr W

ay

S Alaska Street

Topography in Columbia City

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

Major Institutions

Multi-Family

Neighborhood/Commercial

Single Family

RAIN

IER AVE S

M L KIN

G JR

WAY S

S GENESEE ST

38TH

AV

E S

S ALASKA ST S ALASKA ST

0 0.1 0.20.05Miles

Major Institutions

Multi-Family

Neighborhood/Commercial

Single Family

RAIN

IER AVE S

M L KIN

G JR

WAY S

S GENESEE ST

38TH

AV

E S

S ALASKA ST S ALASKA ST

Land use in Columbia City

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CONTEXT MAPPING

YouthCare 43

Hig

hway

I-5

15th

Ave

. Sou

th

Beao

cn A

ve.

Mar

tin L

uthe

rKi

ng Jr

. Way

S.

Link

Lig

ht R

ail

+

SITE

Rain

ier A

ve.

Sout

h

50th

Ave

. Sou

th

Lake

Was

hing

ton

Blvd

.1/4 mile01000 ftSpatial Edges / Regions

Spatial Edges and Regions of Columbia City

COLUMBIA CITY

CONTEXT MAPPING


Refugee Women’s Alliance

Rainier Beach Family Center + Proposed Rainier Beach Community Center

Community Art

Boys & Girls Club

Rainier Valley Cultural Center + JazzEd program

Filipino Community Center SE E�ective Development (housing and economics)

Neighborhood House education and technology

Rainier Valley Historical Society

Columbia City Public Library

Diverse cultural servicesRainier Community Center

Consejo substance abuse counseling

Royal Esquire’s Club (Black social club)

Southeast Youth & Family Services

Cultural and social resources in Columbia City

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CONTEXT MAPPING

YouthCare 45

0.15 mi

0.15 mi0.15 mi

0.15 mi

Transportation at Columbia City site

Politics at Columbia City site

Density at Columbia City site

Gathering at Columbia City site

COLUMBIA CITY FOOD

Columbia City Bakery

Full Tilt Ice Cream

Local food culture in Columbia City

COLUMBIA CITY

CONTEXT MAPPING


Langston Hughes Performing Arts Center

Boys and Girls Club

Youthcare on Yesler

Yesler Terrace Communtiy Center

Seattle Vocational Institute

Pratt Fine Arts Center

Wood Construction Center

Gar�eld High School

Washington Middle School

Seattle University

Douglass Truth Library

half mile radius: 10 min walk

Coyote Central

Half-mile radius from Yesler site

YESLER

HOME OF HOPE

ORION

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

YOUTHBUILD

YouthCare network and Yesler site

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CONTEXT MAPPING

YouthCare 47

1” = 500’

Food Access within .5 mile

YESLER

CONTEXT MAPPING


Visual Evidence

1 Keiro Nursing Home

2 Seattle Dojo

3 Japanese Congregational Church


5 Seattle Royasan Buddhist Temple


1 4

5

6

2

3

Japanese culture near the Yesler Site

1” = 200’

Japanese Ownership or Service

Japanese culture around Yesler site

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

CONTEXT MAPPING

YouthCare 49

Visual Evidence


2 Seattle Dojo



5 Seattle Royasan Buddhist Temple


1 4

5

6

2

3

Japanese culture near the Yesler Site

1” = 200’

Japanese Ownership or Service

YESLER

DESIGN BUILD


When the UW Architects Without Borders - YouthCare Studio was first organized with the intent of serving the non-profit organization YouthCare, we set out to provide them with both a short-term design/build solution as well as a long-term architectural visioning study to help them expand their services and capabilities as an organization serving the homeless youth in Seattle.

http://blog.endhomelessness.org

To achieve our short-term design/build solution, the YouthCare studio discussed the needs of the organization with both the staff and the youth served by YouthCare, and were given the opportunity to design a much-needed storage solution for the YouthCare’s Orion Center located in Downtown Seattle.

DESIGN GOALS FOR YOUTHCARE

STORAGE DESIGN

REPURPOSING OF MATERIALS

MODULARITY

EASE OF CONSTRUCTION

LOW-COST

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

DESIGN BUILD

YouthCare 51

Milk Crates - Repurposing of Materials Modularity of Shelving Units

The concept for the storage system consisted of four main aspirations: repurposing of materials, replicability and ease of construction, modularity and low-cost. While touring the Orion Center, the team was inspired by the reusing of empty milk-crates as storage boxes. Using this concept of designing with repurposed materials, the design team was able to propose a relatively low-cost storage solution using empty milk crates.

DESIGN BUILD


changes on a table saw to cut the individual components of the framework.

Another key feature of the design was its ability to be constructed with simple tools found in any woodshop or construction site. With access to a table saw, electric drill, and wood screws along with a few hardware pieces such as metal caster and metal angle brackets (both easily available at hardware stores) a team of two could easily assemble one modular furniture unit.

+ +

However, since the storage boxes needed to be easily removable, the milk crates could not be directly attached to one another. Instead, they had to be nested within an easy-to-construct framework of plywood.

The construction process of the plywood framework was carefully designed to minimize material waste and to be able to replicate with as little effort as possible. Careful attention to detail allowed for a design that achieved great structural stability as well as required a minimum number of fence

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

DESIGN BUILD

YouthCare 53

+ +

Materials and Tools Required

DESIGN BUILD


Through a series of collaborative design charrettes and by carefully listening to the needs of the client, YouthCare design studio was able to achieve its design goals while engaging both the YouthCare staff and the youth served by them.

Thank you to our Design Build volunteers Natalia Chetvernina, Ali Mohammed, and Zeke Jones!

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

DESIGN BUILD

YouthCare 55

SUBHEADING






Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

SUBHEADING

YouthCare 57





57

Projects

Youthcare Final Project: Yesler SiteSam Kraft | Michael Gilbride

YESLER LIVING/LEARNING CENTER


1/2 mile resource map around site

YESLER

HOME OF HOPE

ORION

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

YOUTHBUILD

We found two contrasting sites in Seattle that showed potential to develop a living/learning building for Youthcare. This is the Yesler site. It is the smaller of the two sites and closer to downtown. Yesler Way is a major east-west arterial that spans through many neighborhoods. This particular spot is at the top of a hill and home to a performing arts center, a fine arts school, a small commercial pocket, and a park. This place already has momentum, diversity, and an attitude that would welcome a motivated homeless youth population as a source of energy and not as a drain on property values.

Iterations of building form

Final form and programmatic relationships

Diagrams of program and systems relationships

YouthCare and Seattle

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects


YouthCare 61

dedicated outdoor air systemground source heat pumphigh efficiency boilerraised floorsmall local radiators

black watergrey waterconstructed wetlandsclean water cistern

Water system diagram HVAC diagram

Looking East up Yesler Way



The extensive program and small site led us to start with the buildable envelope. We experimented with strategically eroding the building based on solar access and a simple building parti. After many iterations, a lower plinth supporting an “L” above became the basic massing. The plinth houses the learning program, the “L” contains housing.

Basement Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Section looking North Section looking East

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects


YouthCare 63

From here we developed a diagram that organized the relationships inside the building, the movement of people and the systems that support the people. The initial diagram is about activated edges. In a natural system, edges are the most active and diverse areas. In buildings, edges are often closed, sealed, or detailed to reduce activity and movement. By pulling apart the edges where two things meet, a space forms. We filled these spaces with circulation, daylight, active HVAC and water systems. This proved to be a powerful and practical idea.

Third Floor Plan Fourth Floor PlanPlaza Level Plan

looking out on the Plaza

Jay Ranaweera | Virginia Werner

Columbia City TransitionalHousing Study


COLUMBIA CITY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING STUDY

Vert

ical

Circ

ulat

ion

Adm

inis

trat

ive

Offi

ce

Stud

io

Com

mun

ity C

onne

ctio

ns

Livi

ng U

nits

Com

mon

Spa

ce

Sem

i-Pub

lic S

pace

Mec

hani

cal

Program ConceptVert

ical

Circ

ulat

ion

Adm

inis

trat

ive

Offi

ce

Stud

io

Com

mun

ity C

onne

ctio

ns

Livi

ng U

nits

Com

mon

Spa

ce

Sem

i-Pub

lic S

pace

Mec

hani

cal

Program ConceptOptimizing the Courtyard

Maximizing Natural Illumination

Inward Looking Courtyard

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 67


View of Central Courtyard

The conceptual basis behind the Columbia City Transitional Housing study was creating a contemplative and protected space surrounded by the housing units. Each room in the building would look into the courtyard which is carefully designed to provide a feeling of intimacy and privacy.



Ground Floor Plan Hydrological ProcessesGrey-water Treatment on Site

Greywater Filtration

Rainwater Collection

Rainwater CollectionRainwater Collection

Rainwater Collection

Hydrological Processes on Site

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 69


Bioswale Within Courtyard

Special attention was paid to the hydrological processes on the site as it received a large quantity of rainwater run-off by being located at the bottom of a valley. In addition, the natural infiltration of water into the site is required to continue the soil remediation process completed recently.

The design proposes two Bioswale areas that filter rain water and grey water expelled from building uses, in order to foster environmental stewardship.



North ElevationTypical Apartment Unit and Façade Components

Passive Cooling in Summer

Active Heating in Winter

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 71


Ground Floor PlanThird Floor Plan

The building surfaces facing the interior courtyard consist of a series of sun shades depending on inci-dent solar radiation. If additional privacy is needed, the facade contains wooden shutters that can be closed to cover the apartments while also creating an ever changing envelope in the courtyard.

Each living unit also feature operable windows that can be opened into the courtyard, allowing natural ventilation in the summer.



Plants Used in the Landscape DesignOrange Sedge Golden Fountain Sedge Tufted Hairgrass

Paper Birch Pacific DogwoodQuaking Aspen

Red Osier Dogwood Evergreen Huckleberry

Tree

sSh

rubs

Gra

sses

Star JasmineVine

s

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

YouthCare 73


WINTER SPRING SUMMER FALLWINTER SPRING SUMMER FALL

Seasonal Considerations in Plant Selection

The design of the landscape elements focused especially on the interactive nature of plants with the occupants. Plants were chosen not only for their suitability to the regional climate, but also based on how they can interact with the human senses of touch, smell, sight and sound.

For example, the paper birch trees in the court yard invite occupants of the space to touch the peeling bark of the tree trunk, while the rustling sound of the grasses can create a sense of calm and assurance.

Adam Stoeckle | Erin Feeney

YouthCare Living and Learning Center

YOUTHCARE LIVING AND LEARNING CENTER


HOUSING

SERVICES

HOUSING

SERVICES

RESIDENT

NON-RESIDENT

YOUTHCARE FACILITIES

CITY-WIDE NETWORK

VARIOUS RESIDENCES

YOUTHCARE OFFICE

ORION CENTER

NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

HOUSING

SERVICESCity Valley Columbia City

Concept

This project began with the team placing priority on the role of this new living and learning building in the context of YouthCare’s existing facilities. The role imagined for the new building was that it would act as a gathering place at the scale of the city, the valley, and Columbia City. At each scale, homeless youth are using the living and learning program as a common point of transition to and from other YouthCare facilities and different levels of independence.

Housing Supportive

HousingTransitional

Housing

Learning Learning

Transitional Space

PrivateHousing

Supp

ort

Supp

ort

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

COLUMBIA CITY

YouthCare 77

Thus, the program and conceptual framework for the project reflect the basic massing of the project. The massing is based on a programmatic block of living, another of learning, and then a space in between that acts as a place of transition. This place transitions the youth programmatically from living to learning spaces and experientially from the more public experience of the street to the more private experience of the residences.



The final form of the building strongly reflects the conceptual intent. Classrooms, a community partnership space, a YouthBuild workshop, and conference room comprise the ground floor of the learning block, with staff office space above. A commercial teaching kitchen and community garden anchor the southern tip of the living block, functioning as a learning space, while a dining space above the kitchen functions as a related living space for the residents.

Section Looking North

Section Looking West

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

COLUMBIA CITY

YouthCare 79

The living block is broken down into four levels of housing. Each level, the layout changes to reflect an increasing sense of independence. The ground floor includes dormitory-style rooms that use the common kitchen and shared bathrooms. The floor above houses units with a shared kitchen and bath in a group of four individual rooms. The upper two floors are studio apartments, each with their own kitchen and bath.

Ground Floor Plan Second Floor Plan Third & Fourth Floor Plan

N



A major aesthetic component of the project are the vegetated walls that reflect a new iconography inspired by the painted green wall of the Orion Center. Functionally, this wall is linked to the rainwater collection system and the adjacent community garden.

Perspective of the community garden and green wall

Introduction

Research

Studio

Projects

COLUMBIA CITY

YouthCare 81

Window nooks throughout the building provide varying experiences of privacy while visually tying together the building masses of living and learning. One example is a coffee service window at the corner facing the Link Lightrail stop, connecting the barista training program with the surrounding community.

Perspective of the entry showing the coffee service window Perspective of the entry showing the coffee service window

82

AWB STUDIO TEAM 2012

THANK YOUYouthCare

Melinda Giovengo, Ruth Blaw, Liz WallManagers, staff, and youth

Architects Without BordersBrian Gerich

UW Department of ArchitectureDavid Miller

Alex AndersonUW Department of Landscape Architecture

Ben SpencerCollege of Built Environments, Office of the Dean

Abby CrossenBernhard Endowed FundOur wonderful reviewers

Rob CorserSusan Jones

Rob PenaBlake PalmerSusan Kemp

Carter WoollenMark Johnson

Michael Elliason

Documents

YouthCare Visioning Studio