Chicago homeless housing

peter_j

The New York Times recently spoke to Stanley Tigerman and Helmut Jahn about their current projects building housing for the homeless. The NY Times has an unfortunate habit of deleting articles after a week so I'll extract a few choice paragraphs here, as I think they are worthy of continued discussion :

SOCIAL IMPROVEMENT WITH ARCHITECTURE
By ROBERT SHAROFF

[Chicago], which is often described as one of the world’s great architecture capitals, also has a strong tradition — dating back to 1889 when Jane Addams founded the Hull House settlement community — of innovative housing projects aimed at improving the lives of the disadvantaged.

These two traditions, architectural and social improvement, continue today in two projects by leading architects under way in the downtown area.

The first is the Near North SRO by Helmut Jahn, a 96-unit project aimed at homeless people. (The project uses the phrase supportive housing, a social services term for housing that provides access to services like mental health assistance and vocational guidance, in addition to shelter.)

The second project is a new home for the city’s largest and oldest homeless shelter, the Pacific Garden Mission, by Stanley Tigerman.

Both projects symbolize what some say is Chicago’s leading role in housing the homeless and indigent.
...

Of the two projects, Mr. Jahn’s is furthest along. The building... is being developed by Mercy Housing Lakefront, a division of Mercy Housing, a nonprofit group that owns and manages about 19,000 units of supportive housing nationwide.

Cindy M. Holler, director of Mercy Housing Lakefront, said one of the advantages of the building is the way it challenges traditional notions of what housing for the homeless should be. “Some very poor people are going to get beautiful views of downtown Chicago here, and that’s O.K.,” she said.

Charles Hoch, professor of urban planning at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a member of Mercy Housing Lakefront’s board of directors, went even further. “The building is a stigma smasher,” he said, “We are borrowing the cachet of Mr. Jahn to send a message to the larger society and that message is that homeless people have value, they have a role to play in society.”
...

The units in the five-story building average about 300 square feet, and all are equipped with private baths and kitchenettes. Although finishes are basic, the overall feel is closer to a hip hotel than the numbing blandness one associates with subsidized housing. (In fact, a little too hip, according to Ms. Holler, who said Mr. Jahn’s original color scheme of bright primary colors was toned down after research revealed the colors might be upsetting for some residents.)

...

Mr. Tigerman’s Pacific Garden Mission project has a somewhat more complicated program. Pacific Garden, a faith-based nonprofit organization that began in 1877, currently has two locations, one for men and one for women and children.
...

“We’re the oldest continuously operating rescue mission in the United States,” said David McCarrell, president of the mission. “Our goal is to take the overall man and create a new person who can be a contributing member of the community.”
...

“Part of the building’s mission is to give the homeless a sense of security and to improve their self-esteem,” Mr. Tigerman said.

...

“It creates a whole new area where people can work and learn skills and go out and become marketable,” Mr. McCarrell said.

...
Mr. Tigerman said the project came along at the right time for him. “I no longer care about working on suburban villas for princes and princesses,” he said. “I’d rather retire than do more of that. These are people who have real needs. It gave me a great feeling to do this.”
NYT 04.11.06

All sounds pretty good to me, though it was a little saddening that some think the sexy factor of having a big name architect designing your project was going to alter society's views of the homeless. Is the Bilbao "star architect" solution really suitable for the problem of homelessness? Would they not have considered lesser known architects with a better understanding? Though I guess one advantage of having famous architects working on such projects is that it sets an example for architects that admire them to follow.

Anonymous

Sad state of affairs if we follow the "hero architect" without questioning or demanding a degree of social/human contribution. While on the other hand, we don’t bother to look for those who have given meaning to their profession by committing themselves to improve the living conditions of the “majority world”.
Is sexy an acceptable term used by architects to disguise the more appropriate term shallow?

peter_j

I think there is something very peculiar going on with the cult of the "star architect". Some have gained a celebrity status that brings anything they touch instant unquestioning media coverage. Their celebration rides on glossy magazine photos of 'sexy' buildings. I don't think the buildings or the architects are necessarily shallow, but the coverage of them often is. This comes from someone who wades through a lot of bad online articles about these heros and their buildings.

N

The cult of the "star architect" sometimes seems as if it was created by architects themselves, so I think it's hard to say that it's mainly the media or just the publishers of said glossy magazines and newspaper articles.

No matter the circumstances, and I'm no Machiavellian, the ends justifies the means. There are few architects of any standing whether they be "stars" or not, who would do such projects and get any recognition for the work they do. I don't think it's a completely shallow act seeing as at the end, the organisation is helping others. Whether the homeless individuals actually appreciate the "sexiness" of it is another thing. But, as it has been said, it is a little disingenuous to claim that it takes an architect to smash a "stigma" about the value (or lack thereof) of the homeless. I think it's a sad, sad day for societies around the world when only an architect, and not the individual regardless of profession cannot see that there shouldn't be a stigma in the first place! The tone of some parts of the article are particulary disingenuous.

Mr. Tigerman said the project came along at the right time for him. “I no longer care about working on suburban villas for princes and princesses,” he said. “I’d rather retire than do more of that. These are people who have real needs. It gave me a great feeling to do this.”

Yes, wouldn't it be great if all architects could just throw their collective hands in the air and sigh "I no longer wish to work for my wealthy patrons" and turn to doing projects for non-profit organisations. I know I've said that the ends justifies the means, but I thought that last quote was a little over the top. An architect can't bite the hand that's fed him and given him the acclaim which has then given him this opportunity to give back to the community.