This blog post will be set up as per the crit, but largely focusing on an introductory statement, then briefly discussing where I am currently and what I plan to look into following Thursday’s discussions.
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
STAVA – Spatial Tactics Against Violent Apathy
STAVA investigates the interaction between the national transport infrastructure of HS2, and the local social infrastructure of Mexborough Allotment Society (MAS). There are multiple uses of the term infrastructure in my scheme, from the obvious and previously mentioned, to the subversion of an existing legal infrastructure. The term is omnipotent, and should be considered overarching over every design move in the project, regardless of scale or impact.
Autonomy, initially, comes in the form of ‘MAS’; an independently managed allotment society who remain elusive within Mexborough, they do not seem to form part of the general constituency in their group capacity, yet are the last of an autonomous craft that Mexborough has; the last of its working class soul.
STAVA is about the demonstration of resilience against violence enacted by an autocratic authority through the liberation and the use of existing infrastructures; no propositions to develop a new, magic problem solving network will be seen, yet uncovering, strengthening and reconnecting existing networks is the entire driving force for the project.
Regarding architecture in the conventional sense, STAVA draws upon an existing typology; the DIY shed and the ecology that surrounds it. There will be no beautifully drawn 1:5 masonry details, the overarching concepts may have been designed and proposed by an architectural professional, yet the implementation will be left to those on the ground; designed tactics over strategy. Spatially, the interventions are at a relatively small scale, ranging from a single portable shed to an allotment site. However, the effects and ideology stretches across Mexborough, and the re-connection of a town is what drives STAVA.
Urban investigations cannot be separated from socio-political ambitions in this project; each urban intervention explores politics and social involvement at different scales; from an entire housing estate subverting the processes of the local authority to making good a single allotment plot, each move strengthens an existing infrastructure and through this, gears up for a climactic demonstration of resilience against apathy, the planning policies that it enacts, whilst been mindful of the governmental power behind HS2.
CURRENT INVESTIGATIONS
The project is currently developing the intervention aspect to the scenario. The seeds (beg the pun) have been sown for these interventions for a while, but I am now looking at them in more than a narrative developing capacity. The overarching concept for them all is the liberation and exploitation of an existing infrastructure.
What you will see on the wall are as follows (hopefully), embellished with my verbal presentation :
- INTERVENTIONS: 4no. spatial designs: (Names below are not finalised)
- Open Day
- Seed Takeaway Object
- York Street Plot remediation
- Protest Towers
- MAPS: 2no. maps demonstrating my proposed site for the major intervention
- CONCEPT: Major intervention early concept sheet showing concepts, research and sketches.
Each intervention responds to one of the following key themes:
- Leftover/unused space
- Spatial and urban resilience
- Liberation of an existing infrastructure
This part of the blog will be quite sparse, as this will constitute most of my presentation on the day.
ASSUMPTIONS
- HS2 Phase 2b will eventually achieve Royal Assent and be constructed.
- Autonomy doesn’t exist in the sense of total disconnection from all around it: Any autonomy retains a relational aspect.
- My reading of certain documents (mainly the Allotment Act of 1908) is accurate.
- The information that I have received from residents and locals is relatively accurate (although even if it isn’t, all it does is back up that HS2 have been less than transparent with those who it will affect.)
There is a catalyst at the beginning of the narrative of the daughter of one of the allotment owners starting a Facebook group to bring ‘MAS’ into the digital age. At this point, I have to prioritise drawing other spatial interventions, so this will not be seen on the wall.
NEXT DRAWINGS (investigations) TO DO:
Simultaneous temporal map: A birds eye (not OS) style map containing every intervention, actors, agents, ecologies, logistics etc. in a phsyical form (people walking, cars etc.), all showing within a temporal aspect. This will help tighten the currently loose narrative and ensure that realism is applied throughout.
Revised timeline and narrative: I had every intention of producing this for the crit, however time got away from me. I need to investigate Act 1, 2 and 3 in a relational manner.
Interrogate the before/during/after: Can I liberate the use of the viaduct? How is the rest of the site developed after construction (and what assumptions do I make regarding demolition)? Is the post-construction even within the remit of this scheme, and if not, why not? What is the relationship between the allotment site and the contractors on site?
Infrastructural/logistics strategy: All contained with CE and US, this will add another layer of realism and richness to the scheme, determining exactly how materials get to site, how materials/earth etc. is removed from site, who is involved in the construction, where are the designs drawing done (which sounds trivial but is important for my typology), how are the materials acquired (as they stolen from leftover Shimmer materials (see photos), or are they bought my the Shimmer Association?) etc.
FAR, FAR more detailed design: The relevant construction drawings, sections, drainage details etc of the major shed development. I don’t mind the earlier interventions not having details etc. (as I think I’ve justified it enough to not be a ‘cop out’), but the major intervention warrants the involvement of an architect, and therefore a full detailed set of drawings which (even if they are simply guidance/tactic drawings for those who are constructing it on site) which provide enable the ‘builders’ agency, are important. The architect provides drawings as a means of working in collaboration with the society, not providing drawings for them.
I’m sure there’ll be far more to add to this list, but these are the gaps in the drawings that jump out at me immediately.
I am excited about this project.
I hope you enjoy my presentation and please feel free to ask anything, get a marker and draw on my sheets, propose new ideas or simply tell me something doesn’t work. I need this project to work, I want this scheme to mean something for Mexborough.
Infrastructures of Autonomy 