INCLUSIVE DWELLING: a place of ability, mobility, and play

The following is a Master’s Research Project presented to theUniversity of Florida School of Architecture in partial fulfillmentof the requirements of the degree of Masters of Architecture.

University of Florida :: 2010

MRP Committee :: 1st Chair - Professor Mark McGlothlin 2nd Chair - Professor Bradley Walters

Sarah Lissa Scott

INCLUSIVE DWELLING: a place of ability, mobility, and play

DEFINING THE HOUSE

Dwelling + Making Place ……………………17 Case Study B: Stratified Horizontality ……25 Case Study C: Modules of Utility …………29

DEFINING ACCESSIBILITY

Environments of Ability …………………………3 Case Study A: Radical Mobility………………1 1

DEFINING THE PLACE

Analyzing the Landscape ……………………35

Regional History…………………………………47

Case Study D: Florida Vernacular …………53

AN INCLUSIVE DWELLING Family + Function ………………………………59 Experimental Charrette…………………………71 A New House for Hunter………………………89

This book and the degree it represents are the culmination of many years of hard work, fueled by an intense and growing passion for architecture - and all the inherent frustration, exhaustion, and eventual gratification that it brings. This has only been possible through the love, support, and encouragement of so many significant people in my life. I am infinitely grateful to be surrounded by such amazing individuals, and these words are inadequate to express how you have changed my life.

To my family, thank you for a lifetime of unconditional love, acceptance, and support, and for teaching me to be who I am. Mom, thank you for always encouraging me to follow my dreams, even when they took me all the way across the world. Dad, thank you for inspiring me to make things and be creative, and for teaching me how a building is really made.

To Chris, thank you for being exactly who you are, and for loving me for who I am. Thank you for always being there, even when you weren’t actually here, and for reminding me that there is life after architecture school.

To my committee, thank you for scaring me with numbers, and for always balancing a sense of humor with the practical criticism that I so desperately needed.

To my wonderful friends, thank you for being a shoulder to cry on, and listening to me even when I didn’t make any sense. Thank you for always being honest and helping me become a better designer. Thank you for keeping me sane.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

March 1, 2009: Vehicles collide. Two children die. Ayounggirlisleftparalyzed. A family’s lives are changed in an instant.

An opportunity arising from this tragedy, this project has undertaken the exploration of the notion of an inclusive environment for a person of disability. The criteria for such as environment as been identified, questioned, and reapplied to a dwelling place in the undulating forest landscape southwest of Micanopy, Florida.

While this project seeks a solution to a very specific situation, the need for a universal method of design is recognized as a wider social imperative. The term disability has become defined not merely as a physical human condition, but as a complex interaction between a person, society, and the environments they occupy. In this way, the built environment can be as much a cause for disability as a physiological impairment. Architects have an ethical responsibility to provide solutions that transcend mere accommodation to provide a more inclusive environment that fosters a sense of ability and independence equally for all who occupy. For this exploration of such an environment, the parameters of a universal design have been defined for a child: Hunter Davis. Hunter is a brilliant and creative ten-year-old girl whose life was changed forever by a car accident that left her paralyzed from the chest down. She is now reliant on the use of a wheelchair

to move through the world. This single event has changed not only her mode of mobility, but has also significantly altered the daily patterns of living for the entire family. Together, these new requirements for mobility and functionality rendered their former house obsolete. While an immediate renovation was necessary and has already been completed, the design of this inclusive dwelling place was undertaken as a more permanent solution to her family’s needs.

Seeing disability not as a burden of design but as a generator of possibilities, a system of adaptable modular wall elements was developed based on her abilities and can be adapted as she grows. The dwelling is organized by a rationalization of these modules but is modified by shifts in the landscape, resulting in unexpected spatial sequences and visual connections between and through the layers of the house to the surrounding landscape, which unfold to bring a playful dynamic to this place of dwelling. By sculpting the house to be inclusive of Hunter and the needs of the whole family, an intimate sense of connection with their dwelling place can develop.

This is the pursuit of a house that provides possibilities for Hunter to grow and learn and play unencumbered by her surroundings. A house which takes into account the transient relationship between a family and their place of dwelling, and all the daily rituals and patterns of living that occur within. A house that is designed and built as an inclusive place of dwelling – a place of ability, mobility, independence, love, and play.

INTRODUCTION

DEFINING ACCESSIBILITY

Environments of Ability Case Study A: Radical Mobility

dis·a·bil·i·ty (n) 1. [ADA definition] a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individuali 2. lack of adequate power, strength, or physical or mental ability; incapacity 3. anything that disables or puts one at a disadvantage

In the United States as of 2004, an estimated 32 million adults and 5 million children are classified as being moderately or severely disabled.ii The origin and nature of physical impairment varies greatly: mobility, sensory, and cognitive limitations that can be either present at birth or acquired later in life. However, physical ability is only one part of defining disability. From a sociological standpoint, the notion of disability is more than the measure of physical or mental capabilities of a person. Negative attitudes and exclusion by society – whether intentional discrimination or not – are in many ways responsible for defining if a person is able to engage freely and independently with the civilized world. The term disability has become defined not merely as a physical human condition, but as a complex interaction between a person, society, and the environments they occupy. In this way, the built environment can be as much a cause for disability as a physiological impairment.

During the 1970s, a new human rights movement began, which sought to improve the quality of life of people with disabilities. This included efforts to mandate basic civil rights,

i Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990ii U.S. Bureau of the Census

including equal employment, housing, transportation, and education opportunities, but one of the main objectives was to address issues of accessibility in the built environment. During the next two decades, significant legislation was passed in the United States to improve these conditions, culminating in the most familiar of these laws: the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This law covers a broad range of discrimination issues, including employment, public services and programs, public buildings and transportation, and telecommunications. One of the most important contributions this law made was implementation of specific standards of design for the built environment which meet the needs of various disabled users.

These standards of design are incorporated into the building codes, requiring that all new public buildings and substantial renovations conform to them.iii Many people have certainly benefited from these standards, and America continues to move closer to a more accessible built environment. However, the law requires only a bare-minimum solution to accessibility. This approach has too often resulted in tacked-on or segregated accommodations for people who have a disability, rather than integration of accessibility as a primary concern of the design process. Another problem with this method of enforcement is that buildings that were completed before the law was enacted as well as residential buildings are not required to update in order to conform to these standards of accessible design. Because of this, a large portion of the built environment remains inaccessible.

iii ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities

DEFINING ACCESSIBILITY Environments of Ability

- Equitable Use: the design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities - Flexibility in Use: the design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities - Simple and Intuitive Use: use of the design is easily understood, regardless of the user's experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level - Perceptible Information: the design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or user’s sensory abilities - Tolerance for Error: the design minimizes hazards and adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions - Low Physical Effort: the design can be used efficiently and comfortably with a minimum of fatigue - Size/Space for Approach/Use: appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use regardless of user’s body size, posture, or mobility

An alternative to this approach is the concept of universal design. This design methodology seeks to create environments that are fully usable by people with a broad spectrum of abilities, ages, and preferences. In essence, the goal is for everything to be accessible to everyone at all times.iv This is of course an idealized notion that can be difficult and nearly impossible to achieve. However, by striving to achieve this kind of environment, universal design is able to be inclusive rather than exclusive. This philosophy of design exceeds mere adaptations to accommodate physical disability, and instead takes an active approach in seeing design as an opportunity to create space that can recreate ability.

Principles of Universal Designv:

iv Covington & Hannah; Access by Designv The Center for Universal Design; Universal Design Principles

The need for a universal design must be recognized as a social imperative. While advances in modern medicine and assistive technology are working at the scale of the individual to improve physical and mental impairments, architects and urban planners have an ethical responsibility to provide solutions that transcend mere accommodation to provide a more inclusive environment. Rather than segregation or limitation, such spaces can foster a sense of ability and independence equally for all who occupy them.

Throughout the process of this thesis, the criteria of an inclusive environment such as this have been identified and explored, seeing disability not as a burden of design but as a generator of possibilities. While maintaining an attitude of inclusiveness, the primary focus for this project has been to define and implement the specific design criteria for a person who uses a wheelchair. These needs are further investigated and refined by the needs of a growing child of limited mobility.

There are two types of dimensional considerations for an accessible environment: horizontal and vertical clearances and bodily limitations. Horizontal dimensions are primarily determined by the mobility achieved through the use of the wheelchair. Vertical clearances are also affected by this, but are affected more by the mobility of the upper body, particularly the reach of the person’s arms. The following list represents a limited synopsis of the various requirements for wheelchair accessibility as outlined in the ADA Accessibility Guidelines.vi vi ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and FacilitiesImages: [altered] McMorrough; Materials, Structures, and Standards

Wheelchair Accessible Design:

groundplane: zero-step entry 1:12 maximum slope ramps barrier-free and usable spaces fullyaccessiblecirculationroute smooth,durablefloormaterial

thresholds: 36” minimum door width lever-type door handles adequate clear approach space 42” minimum hallway width

verticalsurfaces: lowered worksurfaces and counters adequate knee and toe space at worksurfaces adjustable storage systems lower window sill height crank-type window controls panel-type light switches grab bars with reinforcement in bathrooms switches, outlets, etc within arm reach

Rem Koolhaas - Maison á Bordeaux Bordeaux, France; 1998

Designing for a wheelchair-bound man, Rem Koolhaas [Office for Metropolitan Architecture] challenges conventional ideas of accessibility with the Maison á Bordeaux in France. Rather than designing simply to overcome a set of limitations, this house was built for both physical and psychological needs. In commissioning the house, the man said to Koolhaas, “contrary to what you would expect, I do not want a simple house. I want a complex house, because the house will define my world...”i Circulation through the house produces varied and surprising scenarios, compounded by spatial transformations of a moving room.

Built into a hill, the house is conceived as three houses stacked together, each one taking on a different spatial and material character. The lowest level contains the kitchen, dining, and family room: spaces that Koolhaas considers to be the most intimate life of the family, leading him to carve them into the hillside as a series of caverns. A disengaged volume of caretaker and guest houses sits across from the main house, separated by an entry courtyard that contains a driveway ramp spiraling up from the road below. The intermediate floor, which connects to the garden at ground level, is a transparent glass box suspended between the masses above and below. This space contains the living area, which is half enclosed and half an outdoor room, looking out over a 180 degree view of i Office for Metropolitan Architecture website

the city and river in the valley below. The top floor is reserved for the individual bedrooms and is divided into two separate volumes that are accessed independently: one for the couple and one for their three children. The concrete shell of the upper mass is punctured by circular windows that provide specifically directed views of the landscape at eye level for both standing and sitting postures.

The three levels of the house are connected by four means of vertical circulation, dividing the various occupants into multiple itineraries of movement. Two independent staircases lead from the lowest level up into the separate bedroom areas for the children and parents. A third stair is used primarily by guests and connects only the entry to the living space on the middle floor. The last and most unusual of these is a 3x3.5m hydraulic elevator platform, which connects all three floors. The platform is his personal ‘station’ and provides complete wheelchair accessibility to all spaces of the house except the children’s bedrooms. Its intermediate positions provide limitless access to all the things he would need – from a three-story wall holding books, files, and artwork to a wine cellar at ground level. Its presence transforms the organization and performance of the various rooms that it occupies along its vertical itinerary. Koolhaas said of the house:

“The movement of the elevator continuously changes the architecture of the house. A machine is its heart.”ii

The material and structural components of this house are

ii Riley; The Un-Private HouseImages: Riley; The Un-Private House & www.oma.eu

DEFINING ACCESSIBILITY Case Study A: Radical Accessibility

equally as surprising as the spatial itineraries. The top floor is wrapped in cast concrete, and seems to defy gravity as its mass hovers over the glass enclosure of the living area below. To achieve this, conventional columns were all but abandoned and those that were left were shifted beyond the boundary of the house, offsetting half the load of the house on a shelf beam underneath the concrete mass. The other portion of the mass is balanced precariously on one circular load-bearing wall that wraps a spiral stair. A steel roof girder brings structural balance to the structure by suspending the load from above, and is then tied into the ground by cable that is pulled in tension by a counter weight buried in the ground. In his book Informal, engineer Cecil Balmond describes the give-and take approach to defying gravity:

“the idea of launch came to mind, to energise the building as momentum ... The weight of the box is both supported from the ground and hung up in the air, in plan and in elevation the exaggerations deny any conventional reading of balance.”iii

The ideas taken from this case study are twofold: celebration of mobility and access, and multiplicity of family itineraries. Too often are wheelchair accessible designs relegated to bare-minimum adaptations that are either tacked on or hidden away, almost as a nuisance. In the design of this house, Koolhaas instead saw opportunity in the celebration of wheelchair mobility, making the specialized lift-room a

iii Balmond; InformalImages: Riley; The Un-Private House

prominent element that continually changes the dynamic of the surrounding spaces. Other considerations of accessibility are breathed into the house effortlessly, giving the client in the wheelchair an environment of inclusiveness; one which does not merely accommodate minimally but instead shapes itself around the range of needs of the entire family. By creating three distinct means of vertical circulation, a myriad of possible itineraries exist for the different members of the family, providing intimate connections between the spaces of the house and its occupants.

DEFINING THE HOUSE

Dwelling + Making Place Case Study B: Stratified Horizontality Case Study C: Modules of Utility

dwell (verb) to linger toremainforatime to live in as a resident tofastenone’sattention tocontinueinagivenconditionorstate to exist in a given state

In its simplest form, to dwell means to physically reside in a particular place for an extended period of time. However,by examining the varied definitions, it is clear that the actofdwelling ismuchmorethanaphysicalaction. It isalsoamental state: a psychological or emotional connection withaplace,thing,or ideathatrequiresadeepercontemplation.Thus, to dwell involves a simultaneous process of personalreflectionandlingeringmeditation,andisdirectlyassociatedwithintangiblefeelingsandmemories.

Exemplaryof this threadof thought is thewritingof Frenchphilosopher Gaston Bachelard in his book, The Poetics of Space.Hisinterestinarchitectureliesnotinitsphysicalform,butinthewaysthathumanexperiencesandperceptionsofspaceaffectandshapetheenvironmentsweinhabit. Bachelardsuggeststhat through our memory and imagination, we constructintangible mental boundaries that can either reinforce orcontradict thephysicalboundariesof the spaceswe inhabit.“The sheltered being gives perceptible limits to his shelter.Heexperiencesthehouseinitsrealityandinitsvirtuality,bymeansofthoughtanddreams.”iFurthermore,he asserts that

i Bachelard; The Poetics of Space

this oneiric inhabitation has the ability to superimpose spaces of the past with the present. In this way, our memories and experiences of past houses can arise in the context of any new house: “...it is because our memories of former dwelling-places are relived as day-dreams that these dwelling-places of the past remain in us for all time.”ii As a result, the images that arise from these memories and dreams contribute to a deeply personal understanding of the act of dwelling.

German philosopher Martin Heidegger similarly championed the idea that human inhabitation of space is the combined experience of the physical body in space and the mind’s virtual occupation. Heidegger’s definition of human dwelling can be described as an enlightened understanding of being-in-place:

“The way in which you are and I am, the manner in which we humans are on the earth, is Buan, dwelling.”iii

Using the etymological genealogy of an ancient word for ‘building’ [bauen] Martin Heidegger arrives at the conclusion that the act of building is equivalent to the act of dwelling, and that mortal human existence - being - is dwelling. In this way, our occupation of the earth has brought about the creation of both structures and systems of cultivation specifically as a means to an end: to dwell in the natural environment. The notion of place is at the root of this philosophy of being. Being and place are bound together so that being emerges

ii Bachelard; The Poetics of Spaceiii Heidegger; Poetry, Language, Thought

DEFINING THE HOUSE Dwelling + Making Place

"...there's no place like home..." - Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz

only through place; and place, through being. Thus, a place is where being can happen. Continuing the lineage of meaning in language through time, he concludes that to dwell means to preserve and spare; this preservation is humankind’s protection of the ‘oneness of the fourfold’: earth, sky, mortals, and gods.

Heidegger goes on to analyze the thingness of a constructed object and its inherent power to initiate the creation and recognition of both place and space. He argues that the qualification of thingness depends on a structure’s ability to gather the fourfold, creating an identifiable intersection of the four realms – creating a place – in which the fourfold is both admitted and installed, thus housing/guarding/preserving the fourfold. “To preserve the fourfold, to save the earth, to receive the sky, to await the divinities, to escort mortals - this fourfold preserving is the simple nature, the presencing, of dwelling.”iv Thus, in order to really create a place of dwelling, a house must be a creation of space that both respects and brings about the unity of earth, sky, mortals, and gods.

“Establishingaterritoryforhabitation, physicalandmetaphorical, istheprimebasisofarchitecture, and therefore house-building.” v

The complexity of the human act of dwelling has been the generator for an equally complex evolution of the idea of the iv Heidegger;Poetry,Language,Thought v Moore, et al; ThePlaceofHouses

dwelling-place. For Heidegger, the act of building alone is an act of dwelling regardless of function or aesthetics. However, the buildings which carry the most significance in our dwelling on the earth are our homes. The most intimate relationship a person can have with a building occurs within the home, where most of the rituals of our daily lives are carried out and a sense of belonging and security is easily felt.

home (noun) a house, apartment, or other shelter that is the usual residence of a person, family, or household the place in which one’s domestic affections are centered a dwelling place or retreat any place of residence or refuge the place or region where something is native

The innate human desire for shelter and security led to the first dwelling. This prehistoric architecture was the beginnings of the house – the primitive hut. From this first act of dwelling, the relationship between a house and the family that resides in it has been in constant flux throughout the history of human dwelling. A house once had a sense of continued family history, occupied by multiple generations and passed down from one to the next. The modern American concept of home is conceived now less as tangible heritage, and takes on a more nomadic nature; moving from one dwelling place to another more frequently. In the past few decades, this has become as often as every three years for American families.vi

vi Sudjic and Beyerle; Home: the Twentieth Century House

The single-family house is often symbolic of success, wealth, and happiness - part of the American dream. It acts as a shell that contains the debris of everyday life; embodying the taste, values, status, and social relationships of its inhabitants as distilled within a particular time and place.

The evolution of dwelling places has been influenced by many factors, but the two most significant divers are improvements in materials and methods of construction as well as changes in the structure and daily life of a typical family through the centuries. Moreover, the modern house is a structure that must be capable of adapting to the growth of a family and keep up with the demands of modern life, adapting to the permanent state of transition that characterizes our transient technology driven existence.

The evolution of the house in many ways can be illustrated by the evolution of the idea of room. The definition of rooms in dwellings has continuously evolved through the history of architecture, relating directly to the ways people have occupied space and performed the tasks of daily life. In the simplest forms of ancient human dwelling, human habitation occurred primarily within the open spaces of the natural landscape, and enclosed shelter was used comparatively infrequently. Shelters were often found spaces such as caves, or were built as a singular space that was then internally zoned at the periphery for the different needs of living. As society

and the culture of living changed and became exponentially more complicated through the millennia, the balance of our relationship to natural space and enclosed space shifted, with more and more time being spent within the confines of our built environment. As the needs for privacy, security, and these changing patterns of living evolved, the internal zones within a place of dwelling became increasingly separated and enlarged.

The efficient arrangement of such self-contained rooms within a house is dependent primarily on the adjacency and connections between these various functions, resulting in a rather limited number of practical variations of adjacency. Considerations of climate, topography, available resources, and construction technology have resulted in the development of typologies that become characteristic to a certain region. In most places in the United States, the distinction of these individual typologies has become increasingly impossible as house types are transplanted from one region to another with minimal adaptation. An extreme result of this can be seen in suburban sprawl and isolated developer-planned neighborhoods that have grown exponentially throughout the second half of the twentieth century. Unfortunately, these have often resulted in bastardizations of typologies that values cost- and time-efficiency over aesthetic and spatial value, giving the suburban space an overall mediocre uniformity.

The notion of a distinct space defined by function – a room – emerged as early as 2200 BC, as discovered in an archaeological excavation of the Minoan people, a Bronze Age civilization in Greece.vii In the following millennia, rooms became more distinctly defined by the enclosure of a specific function or group of functions, with the spaces capable of being individually closed off for both privacy and climate control. These function-rooms began simply as spaces for cooking, eating, sleeping, washing, socializing, etc, but over time as our ways of living became more complicated these spaces required more specificity, and ultimately this led to aggregations of rooms for entirely separate functions.

Frank Lloyd Wright is commonly attributed for the dissolution of the self-contained room.viii His development of an organic architecture in the early 1900’s led him to discard many barriers that were commonly placed between rooms. The result is a more open definition of space that relies still on modulating space for different functions [rooms], but uses transitions from one space to the next that are much more subtle and achieve a sense of connectivity. Reinforcing this inter-connectivity, the spaces of his open-plan houses were pulled apart out into the landscape, reconnecting domestic space with natural space. Wright’s sophisticated understanding of space became a significant influence on architectural practice, and was continually developed by subsequent generations – particularly the Modern movement of the early twentieth century.

vii Wikipedia viii Moore, et al; The Place of Houses

Looking to break from the traditions of the past and find new forms for new technologies and materials, modernist architects such as Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe began to push the concept of open space to the next level. They created spaces that all but abandon discrete rooms in favor of a singular space that molds itself to the required functions. Le Corbusier succinctly clarified this notion in his definition of the ‘five points of architecture’ in Towards a New Architecture: pilotis, free façade, free plan, ribbon window, and roof garden.ix By utilizing pilotis to lift his structures, cumbersome structural walls became unnecessary, thus freeing the space of the plan to be configured as the architect desires without concern for load-bearing walls. Thus the idea of the free plan with interconnected open spaces that are defined by a free facade that is disengaged from structure. By creating dwellings as experiments in exploring the notion of the house as “a machine for living in”, he defined a new vocabulary of architectural expression.

Throughout the last century, the house has been the preferred playground for architectural experimentation, though not without due criticism. As issues of social housing and responsible city growth became more prominent in modernist thinking, the house was deemed by many to be a frivolity of the wealthy. Despite these underlying moral dilemmas, the house has continued to serve as the incubator for architectural innovation.ix Le Corbusier; Towards a New ArchitectureImages: drawing by Frank Lloyd Wright drawing by Le Corbusier

Richard Neutra - Tremaine House Montecito, California, 1948

In his book Uncommon Ground, David Leatherbarrow writes about a tendency that arose in modern architecture in the second half of the twentieth century: the definition of space through manipulation of horizontal planes.i Throughout the post-war years the notion of open plan spatial definition, as pioneered by architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier, became the basis of experimentation in house design. Changes in both building technology and dwelling practices had reduced the need for walls to be fully load-bearing. By freeing the wall from its structural duties, spaces that conventionally would be completely separated by solid walls could have more subtle transitions from one space to the next, bringing a sense of connectivity to this new type of free plan. The solid wall was dissolved into columns and frames, became transparent, or designed as temporary and movable. Additionally, walls often became eroded from the middle, leaving behind only traces of vertical separation at the ceiling and floor. One such element that became nearly ubiquitous in mid century modern architecture is the low platform for seating.

While these remnants of walls were certainly adequate for defining space, the addition of shifts in the horizontal planes reinforced these subtle spatial thresholds. The floors of different interior and exterior spaces became plates that

i Leatherbarrow; Uncommon Ground: Architecture, Technology, and Topography

sometimes shifted below and sometimes floated above the datum of the natural ground. Leatherbarrow describes this in geological terms: “…settings of this sort were set within a tectonic equivalent to (sub)terranean strata, as if sedimentary geology had been taken as the building’s model, with its layers variously hollowed out so that its newly awakened laminae could be inhabited.”ii The ceiling plane was also often stratified in this way by shifting the height to reveal the layers of structural members, bring light and air in, and further define the interconnected spaces.

One architect in particular that mastered these ideas of a horizontally-driven definition of space is Richard Neutra. In his many houses, he experimented with subtle manipulation and layering of both the roof and floor planes, often juxtaposing simplicity in one with complexity in the other. One example that crystallizes his mastery of this idea is the Tremaine residence.iii In this house, the ground plane is a single uninterrupted terrazzo surface, unbroken at the edges of rooms. Additionally, the transition from inside to outside is unmarked by a change in elevation, suggesting a continuity of interior to exterior. In contrast to this, the roof is composed of many layers of beams and surfaces, which effectively capture light and natural ventilation.

This is not to say that the house is without walls; he carefully controls the placement of walls to both ensure privacy and control views within the house and out into the landscape. He ii Leatherbarrow; Uncommon Ground: Architecture, Technology, and Topographyiii Neutra; Richard Neutra, 1950-1960: Buildings and ProjectsImages: Neutra; Richard Neutra, 1950-1960: Buildings and Projects

DEFINING THE HOUSE Case Study B: Stratified Horizontality

achieves a sense of depth with the various vertical surfaces by a thoughtful juxtaposition of material textures. Similar to Shigeru Ban’s Furniture House series, Neutra also utilized the wall as a thickened container, holding bookshelves, desks, seating, and other furniture and storage. His careful arrangement of these vertical elements allows the spaces to focus toward the exterior spaces, reinforcing the open relationship of spaces on the interior and the connection with the landscape.

In the Tremaine house, spatial definition based on the roof plane is not limited to the boundaries of rooms. Micro-settings within rooms for different functions are implied vertically by as many as six or seven strata within the plenum space: “Differentiated ceiling elements in combination with movable and built-in furnishings define separate settings in and outside the building, even though the floor is basically uniform and walls are largely inconspicuous.”iv Such implied boundaries of space were further reinforced by changes in material: rough to smooth, wood to concrete, etc. The thermal microclimate of spaces was also orchestrated on both the interior and exterior by using a radiant heating and cooling system in the concrete floor. In the summer cold water is run through it to cool the spaces, and hot water is used in the winter.

There are many lessons taken from Richard Neutra’s architecture, but his delineation of space through a stratification of horizontals is the primary interest. His manipulation of space relies on constructing the boundaries between spaces

iv Leatherbarrow; Uncommon Ground: Architecture, Technology, and Topography

in an open plan as subtle shifts in the relationship between the floor and roof planes. As applied to a house for an individual in a wheelchair, the relationship between ceiling, plenum space, and roof as an indicator of spatial boundaries becomes much more important, because vertical shifts in the ground plane can be barriers to free movement if not properly controlled.

By layering the plenum with exposed structural components, contrasting materials, and generous openings for natural light between the strata, the spaces in the Tremaine house are sculpted into infinite internal zones, thus encouraging the interlock of the daily rituals of a family with the patterns of the land: “When one tries to envisage the daily patterns of use in a house such as this, one gets the sense that the range of internal microclimates sustained a kind of migration through the plan that paralleled passage through the whole place. The schedule and direction of this migration followed the path of the sun…”v

v Leatherbarrow; Uncommon Ground: Architecture, Technology, and TopographyImages: Neutra; Richard Neutra, 1950-1960: Buildings and Projects

Shigeru Ban - Furniture House series: FH 1 - Yamanashi, Japan, 1995 FH 2 - Kanagawa, Japan, 1998 FH 3 - Kanagawa, Japan, 1998 Bamboo FH - Great Wall at Shui Guan, China, 2002 Sagaponac FH - Long Island, USA, 2006

“The boundaries between structure and furniture, permanent and temporary have been redrawn.”i

Shigeru Ban’s ‘Furniture House’ series uses a modular system of construction based on a prefabricated wood unit that simultaneously serves as the utilitarian functions and structural support of the dwellings. The units are fabricated off-site and require minimal labor and skill to install in mere days, rather than the much lengthier timeframe of conventional assembly methods. This could be a very cost- and time-efficient system of construction when applied as a mass production building method.

The idea for the system developed as part of one of his paper tube structures: a library pavilion for a poet’s collection of books. The bookcases that he designed are disengaged from the lattice of paper tubes and steel cables that make up the building’s structure, but they are placed at the exterior perimeters of the spaces, and were made to be both water resistant and insulating. He then realized that the bookshelves themselves could be easily modified to support the weight of

i Davies; Key Houses of the 20th Century: plans, sections and elevationsImages: www.shigerubanarchitects.com

the roof, and the vertical paper tube supports were actually redundant. He soon developed a system that could satisfy the purposes of function, structure, and enclosure. Built of plywood and later laminated bamboo, the resultant furniture modules are 2.4m high x 0.9m wide x a depth ranging from 0.45m to 0.69m depending on function.

Ban’s first experimentation with these modules began in 1995 with a series of minimal houses in Japan. The first of these is in the city of Yamanashi overlooking a distant view of Mount Fiji. It is composed as a tidy square plan of compact volumes encased vertically between a completely flat concrete and plywood floor and a framed wood roof, which are separated and supported by prefabricated plywood modules. Completely abandoning conventional interior walls, Ban clusters these units together to simultaneously define the spaces and create both interior and exterior finishes. The remaining wall surfaces between the modules consist of operable or fixed glass panels. The combined effect is that space contained by a set of thickened walls, which absorb the furniture, storage, and other various ‘machines of living’ into the vertical periphery of the rooms. Thus freeing the horizontally occupied space of the rooms from the addition of much furniture and retaining a purity of volume.

With each new iteration, he continually improved on the system’s structural and insulating capabilities. In the next two variations of his Furniture House system in Kanagawa, Japan, he began to experiment with the addition of a second

DEFINING THE HOUSE Case Study C: Module of Utility

story to the system of structural furniture modules separating flat plates. With these, the modules expand their functional vocabulary to become the container for the vertical circulation through the houses. By allowing these thickened wall units to become the surfaces of the spaces, a clarity of function and volume is achieved through a simultaneity of purpose. He abandons the flat plate roof of the first house and creates new roof forms for the two structures that act are more disengaged as umbrellas over the spaces. In the last decade, two other iiFurniture Houses were also built that continued to improve the design of the modular system, but are not elaborated here.

The primary interest of this precedent is the notion of vertical absorption of the clutter, furniture, and machinery of daily life into thickened wall systems. When applied to the design of a dwelling for an individual in a wheelchair this allows for many benefits: accessible storage, adaptability of worksurface heights, and most importantly, clear floor space. In spaces designed for wheelchair users, the elimination of as many obstructions as possible from the floor surface is ideal for free navigation through the spaces. Because the storage and functional spaces can be spread along the entire length of the walls in this kind of system, a person in a wheelchair will be able to access much more within the comfortable range of adult arm motion. Furthermore, the possibility of adjusting the height of shelves and worksurfaces can maximize adaptability to both the range of motion of a growing child in a wheelchair as well as standing individuals.

Images: Davies; Key Houses of the 20th Century: plans, sections and elevations

DEFINING THE PLACE

Regional History Case Study D: Florida Vernacular Analyzing the Landscape

“It is not necessarily what remains visible to the eye thatmattersmost,butthoseforcesandeventsthat undergrindtheevolutionofaplace.”i

In his essay entitled “Four Trace Concepts in Landscape Architecture”, landscape architect Cristophe Girot outlines four modes of discovery for a place of intervention: landing,grounding,finding,and founding. The process of understanding a landscape begins with landing, the intuitive first impressions of an unknown place, which rely on all the senses and tend to be generative throughout the entire project. Grounding involves obtaining a deeper and more complete knowledge through numerous visits, which is then supplemented by the process of finding, through research and extensive investigation. The result of this process is founding, which culminates in the transformation of the existing place into something new. This interconnected process of discovery suggests a concentrated, multisensory personal interaction with a place, which is critical in obtaining a holistic knowledge of a particular context. Despite personal memory and interaction with both the town of Micanopy and the seventeen acres of the Davis family property, this thesis has undertaken this deliberate process of discovery of place so that the design can be fully imbued with the history of the place and its climate, culture, hydrology, pedology, geology, ecology, etc

A total of seventeen acres, the site for this project was once part of a larger tract of family land that was divided and

i Girot; “Four Trace Concepts in Landscape Architecture”

DEFINING THE PLACE Analyzing the Landscape

inherited by two siblings: Mitchell Davis and Deborah (Davis) Mixson. Located to the southwest of the downtown area of Micanopy, Florida, and just north of the Marion County line, the Davis property is an undulating landscape of forest and wetland. It is densely populated by hammocks of oak and pine, and can be divided into four primary zones: the narrow winding driveway working its way south, a plateau to the west, a hillside sloping down toward the east, and a transient pond-wetland that forms the southern and eastern edges.

This area of land is a geologic result of the Karst topography of the region, and has had an unpredictable history. Just to the south of this property is a sinkhole, which drains the surface water of a larger area of the landscape. Much like nearby Paynes Prairie, this sinkhole has occasionally become blocked, creating an extensive pond ecosystem. During the time the family has lived on this land, the ephemeral pond once maintained significantly high water levels. Currently, the sinkhole pond has receded to beyond the edge of the Davis property, but remains a thriving ecosystem.

Several generations of the family have occupied this land, and share it as a common zone of occupation. Structures have been added and modified over the years, giving the different family groups a compound style space for dwelling in this landscape. The number of people and locations of the different households in the family have changed many times as the family has grown, and thus the living situations are in a constant state of transition.

Two houses have been constructed here over time. Both originally arrived to the property as mobile homes. As the size of the family grew and their needs changed, additions were made to the homes and other structures were added to the complex. An extensive canopy of oaks marks the immediate territory occupied by the family. Beyond the houses, the southern edge of the property slopes down toward the water collected at the sinkhole, increasing in vegetation density as it approaches the boundary of the ephemeral sinkhole pond.

Forming the eastern edge of the property, a basin was left as a wet and fertile hollow of land by the receding pond. Much of the level ground in this area is saturated for most of the year, with the water breaking the surface as a small creek running through the valley, collecting the surface water of the surrounding landscape. The indentation of wetland is nearly forty feet lower in elevation than the crest of the hill and makes up almost half of the property, with the 100 year flood line slicing nearly two-thirds of the land away.

The northern portion of the hill that divides plateau from wetland is relatively steeply sloped, and is now closely packed with a dense canopy of trees and thick undergrowth. The southern part of the hillside has a much more gradual incline has been cleared of most of its tree canopy. It now sustains a prairie-like condition with tall native grasses and shrubs thriving on the sloping sediments left by the receded water. The plateau to the west is a more regularly maintained area of land, creating a central clearing for the existing houses.

The history of the town of Micanopy is the story of a small pioneer town in north central Florida.i Known human occupation begins with the Native American tribes that have inhabited the area for approximately twelve thousand years. The first European encounters with these native people in Florida occurred in the early sixteenth century, when Ponce de Leon and other Spanish explorers scoured the peninsula to discover and exploit the riches and resources of the land. In Alachua County, it was Hernando de Soto who first made contact with the local division of the Timucua Native Americans known as the Potano tribe as he was passing through in 1539. Throughout the next century, several Spanish missions were established and explorers continued to survey the region. Eventually, they began to take advantage of one of Alachua County’s most valuable resources: Paynes Prairie. What is today known as Paynes Prairie has been hunted and cultivated for thousands of years by the native tribes.

The Prairie is an expansive fertile grassland that occupies a shallow basin, which is the geologic result of the regional Karst topography. Groundwater gradually dissolved the layers of underlying bedrock to lower the prairie to the elevation of the local aquifer, resulting in a wet marshy basin that drains into the Alachua Sink at the north rim. Occasionally, this sinkhole has become blocked, resulting in the periodic formation of a lake. In 1640, Spanish colonist Don Francisco Menendez took interest in the roughly 12,000 acre expanse of grasslands and turned it into the first cattle ranch hacienda in Florida, which i McCarthy; Micanopy, Florida: an Illustrated History Webber; The Eden of the SouthImages: Rajtar; 101 Glimpses of Historic Micanopy

was tended by native Potano workers and became known as Rancho de la Chua after the Potano name for the nearby sinkhole, meaning ‘jug’.

At the turn of the eighteenth century, a group of Creek Native Americans migrated from Georgia and the Carolinas, and a tribe known as Oconee settled the area, resulting in the end of both the ranch and the Potano people. By the end of the 1700’s, these Creeks living in the Alachua County region became known as Seminoles, infamous for their hostility, and moved north to the edge of Lake Tuscawilla following a fifteen year period of flooding and sudden draining of the prairie basin. There they created the village of Cuscowilla, which was located near the site of present-day downtown Micanopy. During this time, Florida had been traded to Britain. In 1774, William Bartram began a three-year journey through the southeast, collecting and drawing new plant specimens and writing about his observations as he traveled and lived with various Native American tribes. He had previously been on a similar

DEFINING THE PLACE Regional History

expedition with his father, who was England’s official botanist in the New World. In April of his first year of exploration, William visited Paynes Prairie – which he called the ‘Alachua Savanna’ – as well as the village of Cuscowilla, where he was welcomed by Cowkeeper, the leader of the Seminole tribe. His writing preserves detailed descriptions of the landscape and wildlife of the area as well as the native people and buildings of the village:

“The town stands on the most pleasant situation that could be well imagined or desired, in an inland country; upon a high swelling ridge of sand hills, within three or four hundred yards of a large and beautiful lake, the circular shore of which continually washes a sandy beach ... terminated on one side by extensive forests...and gradually retires with hommocky projecting points, indenting the grassy marches, and lastly terminates in infinite green plains and meadows, united with the skies and waters of the lake.”ii

Spain regained control of Florida in 1784, and settlement was slow to increase in the Alachua region during the next forty years due to the combination of war, intimidating native peoples, and relative inaccessibility. Immigrants of this period consisted primarily of Seminole Indians, runaway slaves, and white adventurers drawn by the mild climate and the fertile lands of Paynes Prairie. In the early years of the nineteenth

ii Bartram and Harper; Travels

century, US troops engaged in battle with the Seminoles, causing them to abandon the area. Soon after, white settlers from throughout the South took the place of the native people, erecting Fort Mitchell and populating the surrounding land with settlements. In 1817, a Spanish land grant was given to Don Fernando de la Maza Arredondo, which covered an area of more than 289,000 acres and included Paynes Prairie and the nearby villages. After Spain ceded Florida to the US in 1821, part of this land became the first permanent non-coastal settlement in Florida under the direction of Edward Wanton, for whom the settlement was named Wanton’s Town. However, because it had served as the capital town for the

Seminoles, it was more popularly called Micanopy after the head chief of the Alachua group of Seminoles, although he had moved the tribe to the south and was not present in the town itself during the time of this settlement.

Throughout the nineteenth century hostility grew between the Native Americans and the fledgling United States, fueled nationally by the Indian Removal Bill of 1832 and locally by the Treaty of Payne’s Landing two years later, both of which called for the removal of Native American tribes from the Florida territory. A military presence was brought to the town with the Second Seminole War; the settlement was burned and Fort Defiance was established nearby, which was also later burned and rebuilt as Fort Micanopy. In the second half of the 1800s, nearly all of the Seminoles had been relocated, and in 1845 Florida officially became the 27th of the United States. American settlers seeking new opportunities flooded the region, building a thriving community in Micanopy. During this time, several businesses, churches, schools, and a factory were established, bolstered by local agricultural industries. A stage coach line brought passengers along with mail and newspapers irregularly through the growing town.

This prosperity came to a halt during the Civil War, during which Florida was briefly part of the Confederate States of America, but soon after the war commercial and industrial expansion resumed in the town and it was incorporated in 1880 with a total of six hundred residents. The prosperity of the town grew even more when a branch of the Florida Southern railroad was

extended into the town at Micanopy Junction, strengthening the already robust citrus industry. In the 1890s, a series of hard freezes eradicated nearly all of the orange groves, shifting the agricultural economy to livestock and farming of other crops.

During the early twentieth century, the population of Micanopy had bloomed to nearly 2,000 and the town continued to develop by adding many new businesses, churches, banks, hotels, schools, along with an electric plant and telephone services. However, the growth of this small town was nothing compared to nearby Gainesville, which had become home to the University of Florida in 1906. In 1924, Gainesville was connected directly to Micanopy when another railroad spur was added and road was extended across Paynes Prairie, bringing further economic prosperity to the town. Growth was again interrupted in the 1930s and 40s by both the Great Depression and World War II, leaving only 720 residents. By the 1960s, many of the historic buildings had been abandoned, and were readapted as art galleries and artisan studios. Thus the city began its transformation from a self-sufficient frontier town into an artisan community.

Today, the historic town appears much the same as it did during the peak of its prosperity, and because of this has been chosen as the backdrop for several films, including Doc Hollywood in 1991. Micanopy has become a tourist destination, with numerous antique stores, Paynes Prairie State Preserve, and the annual Fall Harvest Festival as its primary attractions.

Haile Homestead at Kanapaha Plantation Gainesville, Florida; 1860

The Haile Homestead was built in the 1850s as a Sea Island cotton plantation when Thomas Evans Haile moved his family from South Carolina to Alachua County in 1854. He was the son of a wealthy plantation owner in Camden, South Carolina, and had inherited a large part of his father’s gold fortune. The land they purchased was one of several tracts of land purchased by the family in the 1850s. This land, now southwest of Gainesville, was originally part of the Spanish land grant made to Don Fernando de la Maza Arredondo in 1817.

The house reflects traditions from their South Carolina heritage, but the typology was adapted to the climate of Florida and cracker housebuilding techniques. An adaptation of a four-square Georgian house, the main floor is composed of four equal rooms with shard fireplaces that are separated by a central hallway, with two smaller rooms added onto the sides.i The kitchen was located in a separate building behind the house, and the second floor contained an additional two rooms. Shading is provided to the south by a large porch, which is disengaged from the columns supporting the roof in reference to South Carolina architecture. The entire house is lifted from the ground to combat ground moisture and allow air to circulate underneath. It is covered by a steeply pitched roof to easily shed the abundant rainstorms of Florida.

i Haase; Classic CrackerImages: Haase; Classic Cracker

DEFINING THE PLACE Case Study D: Florida Vernacular

Possibly the most unusual aspect of this house are the words written on the walls. As a method of recording their lives, the members of the Haile family would inscribe the surfaces of the rooms to document the status and events of that space. Personal observations, names of visitors, growth charts of children and grandchildren, recipes for household solutions, inventories of linens, silverware, china, business records and prose can all be found, tracing back to 1859 with the name of young Benjamin Haile written in the Trunk Room.ii

Representative of the regional vernacular of Florida Cracker, this house provides a useful model of climatic adaptation that can be gleaned for appropriate responses to the natural patterns of light, air, water, as well as the daily human rhythms of a particular place and people. In order to apply these methods to the design of a house for Hunter without relying on a picturesque simulation of the regional vernacular, a reevaluation of the merit of these methods is necessary. A reinterpretation of the forms and techniques that were used in historic houses such as this can easily accommodate contemporary technology, needs, and aesthetics of a modern family.

ii Historic Haile Homestead at Kanapaha Plantation websiteImages: Haase; Classic Cracker

AN INCLUSIVE DWELLING Family + Function Experimental Charrette A New House for Hunter

Through the process of this master’s research project, a deeper understanding of universal design, dwelling, as well as the regional history and landscape has manifested in the design of a new dwelling place for Hunter Davis and her family. Hunter is a brilliant and creative ten-year-old girl whose life was changed in an instant when she, her sister Hailey, her brother Owen, and her mother Tiffany were in a car accident that took the lives of her siblings and left Hunter paralyzed from the chest down. Thankfully, Tiffany had minimal physical injuries, and Hunter miraculously recovered from her myriad injuries, having endured numerous surgeries and spending months in the hospital. She has retained an optimistic and determined attitude throughout the process of her rehabilitation - she is one tough kid. However, due to her spinal cord injury, she is now reliant on the use of a wheelchair to move through the world.

This single event changed not only Hunter’s mode of mobility, but has also significantly altered the daily patterns of living for the entire family as well as the size and structure of the family itself. Together, these new requirements for mobility and functionality rendered their former house obsolete. This thesis has explored the design of a new dwelling place, which was undertaken as a permanent solution to her family’s needs. However, an immediate renovation of their home was necessary and has already been completed, giving them a more comfortable, accessible, and healthy space to live in.

AN INCLUSIVE DWELLING Family & Function

The small mobile home in which the has family resided for many years before the accident was completely inadequate to provide a person that uses a wheelchair proper care, dignity, and freedom of mobility that is deserved: narrow passages and doorways were to be impossible obstacles for proper navigation, and carpet flooring impeded smooth rolling of wheels. The limited clear space of the rooms also would have made for uncomfortably cramped movement. Additionally, due to mold problems and inadequate ventilation, poor indoor air quality prevented the house from being a healthy environment.

Through the expertise, hard work, and generosity of friends and family, the mobile home was stripped down to its bare shell and completely rebuilt to create a living space adequate for wheelchair accessibility. Two existing sheltered porches were enclosed to add much needed square footage to the home. All narrow doorways were replaced with 3’ doors and positioned with adequate clearance for their operation. The kitchen was completely reconfigured using donated cabinets and customized surfaces, creating a much more efficient space for cooking and eating. A lowered counter and sink area is included in this new kitchen design specifically for Hunter’s use.

The other utilitarian spaces were also significantly upgraded. By widening the space of the bathroom and adding a roll-in shower and pedestal sink, Hunter can now easily enter and make full use of the space. Connected with the bathroom is a

new laundry room that is also widened enough for wheelchair entry.

Generous donations from companies and individuals in the community were given in the form of time and labor as well as raw materials: concrete, lumber, etc. Many elements of this renovation were made possible by these donations. One such project was a porch with an ADA compliant ramp added to the entry of the home. Connecting this ramp to the driveway, a concrete pad was poured and a sidewalk was extended towards the adjacent house to connect this household to the newly forged household of Hunter’s Aunt, Sarah Davis, who now resides in her childhood home with her fiance Chris Ebeling and their respective children.

This renovation is an adequate solution to the immediate problem of accommodation, and has significantly improved their quality of life. However, the house remains as an adaptation. Behind the internal veneer of new materials and finishes still lies the structure and form of a mobile home. For this reason, a new house has been developed for the family that transcends mere adaptation. By taking an inclusive approach to the design, Hunter’s disability is seen not as a burden of the design, but rather as a generator of possibilities.

By incorporating the specific patterns of dwelling of the Davis family, this new house can take into account the transient relationship between a family and their place of residence. Because Hunter is my god-sister and has been

very much part of my family since her birth (though we have no true kinship by blood), I am able to bring to the design a more intimate understanding of their family history and the complex interdependence of the different households. This was a useful resource in determining appropriate forms and functional relationships for Hunter’s new house.

Through both my own personal knowledge and conversations with the different members of the family, a general program for the house was developed according the specific needs and desires of the family. Appropriate spatial strategies and sustainable technologies were also identified in response to the regional climate and topography of the local landscape.

“To inhabit a house means to go through a mutual process of molding in which house and inhabitant become adapted to one another.” i

In order to produce a symbiotic relationship between a dwelling and its occupants, the creation of the house should be from the inside out, putting a critical emphasis on function. The act of dwelling implies a repetition of habit. A space can only become indwelt through the daily rituals of occupation. In this way, we are intimately connected to the places in which we dwell through the social and behavioral patterns that occur within them. These patterns of living become deeply rooted early in life, and are thus connected to the childhood home.

i Heynen; Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern ArchitectureImage: made with www.mindmeister.com

spatial concepts: built into the landscape open volumes, interconnected levels spatial definition through thickened walls containing functional utilities subtle negotiation between groundplane & roof/plenum varied peripheral outdoor spaces (courtyards, porches, etc) ramp system of circulation sustainable concepts & technology: generous sunshading greywater recycling rainwater collection natural + filtered light solar water heating solar energy collection other passive cooling strategies

interior spaces: • family room - central space • open kitchen + dining space • study + reading room • play space • master bedroom + bath • guest bedroom + bath • Hunter’s bedroom + bath • laundry + pantry • lots of built-in storage

outdoor spaces: • porches and screen rooms • family gathering space • roll-in pool + exercise space • firepit + seating • handbike trail • carport + workshop • vegetable garden

Gaston Bachelard’s description of this connection is particularly appropriate to illustrate the importance of memory and experience to patterns of dwelling:

“…the house we were born in has engraved within us the hierarchy of the various functions of inhabiting. We are the diagram of the functions of inhabiting that particular house, and all the other houses are but variations on a fundamental theme.”ii

Based on the ingrained patterns of the Davis family, an exploration was necessary to define the variations of functional relationships and adjacencies as well as possible patterns of circulation between the spaces of the new house. This provided clues to determining the best synthesis and arrangement of function and space for an efficient and accessible place of dwelling. A five foot module of measure was defined in order to begin proportioning the spaces so that they maintained adequate width for wheelchair accessibility. Even in these early stages of programming the space, possible relationships to the landscape and built exterior spaces also began to emerge.

ii Bachelard; The Poetics of Space

As a way to begin investigating the organization of Hunter’s new house, parameters were established for a generative charrette. This produced multiple variations of a dwelling by variably combining a set of landscape relationships and organizational strategies as a matrix of partis. The strategy for each design followed a specific process of development, and resulted in a set of six houses that maintain a clear relationship to one another while responding uniquely to the objectives of the project with a varied formal gesture. The spatial definition of these houses is defined primarily through the use of thickened interior walls much like the Furniture House modules developed by Shigeru Ban. These thickened walls consume many of the utilitarian functions of the house. A flexible and playful relationship between the groundplane and the roof/plenum produces a varied envelope of volume that relies on the subtle shifts and breaks in these planes to manipulate the occupation of the spaces.

Objectives:- create a dwelling place that is given form through a sensitive response to both the natural landscape and climate- reinterpret and integrate lessons gleaned from the regional vernacular as an appropriate response to climate- address the transient relationship of interior and exterior spaces- maintain a module of measure sufficient for full wheelchair accessibility throughout the design

AN INCLUSIVE DWELLING Experimental Charrette

1

1

4

4

2

2

5

5

3

3

6

6

experimental house 1:axial + embed axial :: of, pertaining to, characterized by, or forming an axis; situated in or on an axis [axis: an imaginary line, in a given formal structure, about which a form, area, or plane is organized]

embed ::tofixintoasurroundingmass;tosurroundtightly orfirmly;implant

experimental house 2:axial + disengage axial :: of, pertaining to, characterized by, or forming an axis; situated in or on an axis [axis: an imaginary line, in a given formal structure, about which a form, area, or plane is organized]

idisengage :: to release from attachment or connection; loosen; unfasten

experimental house 3:axial + encapsulate axial :: of, pertaining to, characterized by, or forming an axis; situated in or on an axis [axis: an imaginary line, in a given formal structure, about which a form, area, or plane is organized]

encapsulate :: to surround, encase, or protect as if placed in a capsule; envelop; enclose

experimental house 4:cluster + embed cluster :: a group of the same or similar elements gathered or occurring closely together; accumulate; aggregate

embed ::tofixintoasurroundingmass;tosurroundtightly orfirmly;implant

experimental house 5:cluster + disengage cluster :: a group of the same or similar elements gathered or occurring closely together; accumulate; aggregate

disengage :: to release from attachment or connection; loosen; unfasten

experimental house 6:cluster + encapsulate cluster :: a group of the same or similar elements gathered or occurring closely together; accumulate; aggregate

encapsulate :: to surround, encase, or protect as if placed in a capsule; envelop; enclose

There were many lessons learned through the successes and failures of the generative house charrette, and a renewed focus was brought to the design methodology in a second series of house variations. This phase of experimentation combined the ideas gleaned from the first set of houses with a more site specific strategy of spatial definition. Selected spatial ideas and methods of relating the house with the topography were taken from the charrette houses and further explored through the development of several additional variations of the new Davis house.

After creating the many variations of dwellings developed for this thesis, a synthesis was reached with the final variation. By refining and carefully controlling the numerous spatial and organizational ideas gleaned from early variations, the form of a house emerged which is sculpted to be inclusive of Hunter and the needs of her whole family. Organized by the rationalization of a modular system of wall components and modified by organic shifts in the landscape, the house unfolds in a playful dynamic of unexpected spatial sequences and visual connections between and through the layers of space and out to the surrounding landscape.

Contained within a large volume to the south are the social spaces of the dwelling. This volume begins level with the plateau to the west, meeting the ground with an entry porch and carport. Two entries - one for visitors and one for family - flank the kitchen and other utility spaces. As it begins to hover out over the open hill, the volume vertically expands and selectively contracts to form the main living area and an expansive screened porch on the south edge.

The private areas in the house are nestled into the treeline to the north, providing a more intimate connection with the forest. Smaller private porches extend into the landscape, engaging the ground more directly to provide pockets of solitude within the canopy of surrounding trees. The master bedroom, guest bedroom and Hunter’s bedroom are all connected through a common core of individual bathrooms.

AN INCLUSIVE DWELLING A New House for Hunter

The organizational and functional parti of the house is a simple gesture: the private areas of the house are separated from the social spaces though the insertion of exterior rooms into the center of the house. The wedge insertion of outdoor space is divided into two courtyards. The larger of these to the west is a level extension of the plateau which is shaded by the canopy of a beautiful old oak tree. The second is a smaller courtyard encapsulated within the house. Two interior spaces which mediate between private and public occupy this central zone of the house, interacting directly with the two courtyards: a play space and a study space.

Circulation through the spaces of the house can take on many different patterns depending on the needs and preferences of the different members of the family. A primary route weaves across and between the layers of the house, and secondary connections are made through the exterior porches. Shifts in the groundplane are negotiated with a series of ramps that transition one space to the next. Within the house, their slope is maintained at 1:20 to provide an easier route for Hunter to use more frequently. Ramps on the exterior provide a little more of a challenge at a slope of 1:12, which can help to increase her strength and endurance with regular use.

“The essential existential ground of floor, wall, and roof is the relationship between inside and outside. Just by being what they are, the floor, wall, and roof automatically create an inside in the midst of an outside, though in different ways: the floor, through above and beneath; the wall, through within and around; and the roof, through over and below.”i

The strata of the house are manifested in three systems: canopy, wall, and ground. The floor planes are composed through subtle horizontal stratification of smooth concrete planes. The layers of the canopy are overlapped and broken to allow light and air into the space. A more intimate spatial definition of micro-settings within the larger spaces is further defined by manipulating the underside of the plenum. This dynamic relationship between canopy and ground is augmented through the insertion of vertical composite walls which playfully orient themselves primarily along an east-west directionality.

The composite walls mediate between the strata of the canopy and groundplane to stitch them together, and because of this are composed of three layers which take on unique tectonic and material properties. In the middle is a modular system of wall elements that were developed for this house. These modules are divided into two groups by function: enclosure and containment. The group of modules that provide enclosure are those that negotiate the edges between interior

i Thiis-Evensen; Archetypes in Architecture

and exterior spaces, and therefore carry the insulation and exterior finishes. The second group of modules was designed as a system of containment. They absorb storage, machines, and furniture into the thickness of the walls. This allows the debris of life to be easily organized and displayed or hidden. Additionally, by stretching the functional elements along a wall, more clear floor space can be achieved in the adjacent spaces, giving Hunter more unencumbered access to all the functions and storage of the house.

The other two components of the composite wall assemblies are the structural elements of the canopy and ground systems. The canopy contributes a tectonic wood assembly which sets up the module of measure for the spaces as well as the layers of the plenum. Rising into the composite walls from the carved layers of the ground are structural walls of concrete which act simultaneously as a structure, retaining walls, and a textured finish material. The modular wall elements are engaged with the columns and structural concrete walls, and thus the arrangement of the modules is dictated by the lineaments of the dynamic structural grid. By composing the structure, enclosure, and container modules into a composite vertical assembly, the spaces of the house are wrapped with edges that are activated by the ability to be multifunctional.

The overall form of the building fuses elements of regional vernacular with modern spatial ideas. The Florida Cracker architecture of north central Florida provided a useful model of climatic adaptation and was evaluated and gleaned. Appropriate responses to the natural patterns of light, air, water, as well as the daily human rhythms of the people are all uniquely adapted to the region. Rather than relying on a picturesque simulation of vernacular methods of building, a reevaluation of the merit of these methods was necessary to reinterpret the forms and building methods to accommodate contemporary technology, materials, spatial aesthetics, and social patterns.

The form of the house arises from a process of appropriate formal responses to the local climatic conditions and landscape. In this way, the architectonics are driven by necessity and combine practical craft with a poetic expression of space to fuse utility with beauty. By orchestrating the basic functional elements to both collect and repel water, wind, and light, a sense of craftsmanship and poetics can be introduced into seemingly ordinary aspects of architecture. Thus, a complete synthesis of ecology, landscape, culture, and history with the modern methods of architecture was essential in forging a regional identity for the architecture that transcends mere simulation to bring a sense of place to this house for Hunter.

For the tropical hot-humid climate of Florida, there are several priorities for architectural response to climatei, but the two

i Lechner; Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Design Methods for Architects

most important are to protect the building from the intense summer sun and allow natural ventilation to both cool and remove excess humidity. In order to provide refuge from the penetrating rays of the sun, the orientation and form of the house was manipulated so that the tectonic canopy would provide a maximum amount of shade and breeze while also effectively lighting the interior with sunlight from the north.

Because the latitude of Micanopy is so near to the equator, solar radiation is particularly aggressive in the summer but allows for a comparatively mild winter. To adapt to these conditions, complete shading to the south was achieved through the use of architectonic devices and vegetation. To minimize the direct infiltration of the low, slanted early morning and late afternoon sun - which brings with it significant radiant heat gain in the summer - the segments of the house are stretched along a longitudinal axis with minimal exposed glass to the east and west. Elongation in this direction not only allows for efficient shading, but it relates the dwelling physically and psychologically to the daily navigation of the sun across the sky.

The admittance of light within the spaces is carefully controlled through the interaction of the shade canopy and the window modules. The light itself becomes a material of building, revealing the tectonic details as well as the spatial dynamics of the structure. Its interaction with the elements of the architecture breathes life into the spaces, in rhythm with the natural diurnal and seasonal patterns of the sun. Similarly,

shadows have also become a means for revealing architectonic articulation and the passage of time.

“The quality that we call beauty … must always grow from the realities of life, and our ancestors, forced to live in dark rooms, presently came to discover beauty in shadows, ultimately to guide shadows towards beauty’s ends.”ii

Japanese author Jun’ichirō Tanizaki suggests in his book In Praise of Shadows that for Japanese culture, the beauty of a space lies primarily within its shadows and thus objects of antiquity were suited to this darkness with material qualities of muted luster. He describes this darkness as “a pregnancy of tiny particles like fine ashes, each particle luminous as a rainbow”iii He argues that an appreciation of this quality of shadow is lost in Western culture, and, sadly, this may be true of modern American civilization.

In the design of Hunter’s house, the role of this kind of darkness and shadow became integral in creating an ethereal quality of light within the spaces, which must be contrasted with darkness to be perceived. The generous overhangs of the canopy cast the entire house under its deep shadows, and the surfaces are carefully broken to allow light to selectively penetrate the spaces. Through manipulation of the plenum space between the layers of roof and ceiling, the light is sculpted more delicately. More intimate micro-settings are ii Tanizaki; In Praise of Shadowsiii Tanizaki; In Praise of Shadows

further defined within the larger spaces through variations of ceiling texture and height. In some areas rafters are exposed, while other spaces have a planar ceiling that either projects downward as a flat surface or lofts into the plenum space.

“… movement of air on the heated and perspiring skin is of all things the most comforting.”iv

To contend with the high temperatures and humidity of the hot and humid Florida climate with minimal use of mechanical methods of cooling, the house is oriented to capture the prevailing summer breeze from the south, and lifted from the ground to bring those breezes under the house to reduce moisture. The modular system of windows are constructed so that some of the window modules are operable to take advantage of natural airflow. They can be manipulated at will to respond to the surrounding conditions, allowing the space to breathe adequately throughout the cycles of both day and year. Convection and natural pressure patterns draw the air easily through the space, allowing the body to be cooled by evaporation. Concerns for water were also identified and considered in the design of this house. Because it is a necessary finite resource needed to sustain life, it must be collected and stored by the built environment rather than merely dissipated and wasted. In the context of this Florida landscape, water takes on three pertinent forms: groundwater, rainwater, and humidity. The

iv Fry and Drrew; Tropical Architecture in the Dry and Humid Zones

efficient collection, distribution, and protection from water are all essential aspects of design in this hot and humid climate, as are the associated sustainable implications associated with water. Manipulations of the canopy and groundscape work together to respond to the daily deluges of summer rainfall by not only repelling its entrance from the interior, but also by diverting and storing it to satiate the needs of both the occupants and the associated gardens. Thus, the presence of water is be an integral part of the language of the architecture, and the collection and use of water becomes an architectural element itself.

Below the main volumes of the dwelling spaces, a series of spaces are carved into the hillside to provide functional and accessible outdoor spaces. The hill is sliced and renegotiated to create an elevated vegetable garden that is raised to a more comfortable height for Hunter’s use. A stabilized grass terrace and roll-in pool slide beneath the southern volume of the house to shelter a workshop space and the water collection cisterns.

The integration of this dwelling place within the landscape manifests a variety of relationships, creating moments which variably embed, extend, and disengage from the datum of the hillside ground. These physical relationships with the natural landscape are reinforced through the spatial and visual interactions that occur across and between the layers of space within the house and in the surrounding landscape. The connection to and perception of the landscape changes through the different spaces of the house. From the south screened porch, the perception is that of hovering above the ground below. From the pool beneath this porch, the house seems embedded within the landscape. From the private spaces to the north, the house seems completely enveloped by the surrounding canopy of trees, connecting the spaces of the forest as extensions of the interior bedroom spaces.

The two central courtyard spaces also define distinct relationships with nature. The west courtyard extends the ground of the house outward onto the plateau, and is defined vertically by the extensive canopy of a mature oak tree. The second courtyard encapsulates a pocket of outdoor space within the house, extending the perception of the horizon into the interior.

Throughout the various rooms of the house, selective views are framed either as panoramas or glimpses. By varying the heights of these glimpses, the perception of the landscape is experienced uniquely by Hunter from her wheelchair posture and eye level.

Throughout the process of this master’s research project, the challenges of designing this house have proven to be much more complex than first expected. The multiplicity of issues at stake when designing a house are further compounded by the high expectations that are commonly applied to personal places of dwelling. A house is after all a place where a family spends the majority of their life.

“[a house must] stage and frame the play of daily life through a choreography of arrivals and departures, through complex spatial interactions between different rooms, and through a careful directing of the gaze.”i

This project has explored a broad range of issues in the pursuit of defining an inclusive dwelling, but this extensive investigation has just barely scratched the surface. Because the intention of this project was to explore the possibility of building a new house for Hunter, the development of this house may not end here. Through further reflection, modification, and refinement, it may be possible for a variation of this dwelling to be constructed as their new place of dwelling. Whether or not this comes to fruition, the process of this project has cultivated a wealth of knowledge and experience which will certainly continue to resonate in my professional development as an architect.

This is only the beginning.

i Heynen; Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture

CONTINUED INVESTIGATION

ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities. www.ada.govAmericans with Disabilities Act of 1990. www.ada.gov

Bachelard, Gaston. 1969. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press.

Balmond, Cecil, Jannuzzi Smith, and Christian Brensing. 2002. Informal. Munich: Prestel.Bartram, William, and Francis Harper. 1958. Travels. New Haven: Yale University Press.Covington, George A., and Bruce Hannah. 1997. Access by Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Davies, Colin. 2006. Key Houses of the Twentieth Century: Plans, Sections and Elevations. New York: W.W. Norton.Fry, Maxwell, and Jane Drew. 1964. Tropical Architecture in the Dry and Humid Zones. New York: Reinhold Pub. Haase, Ronald W. 1992. Classic Cracker: Florida’s Wood-Frame Vernacular Architecture. Sarasota, FL: Pineapple Press.Heidegger, Martin. 2001. Poetry, Language, Thought. New York: Perennical Classics.Heynen, Hilde, and Gulsum Baydar. 2005. Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture. London: Routledge.Leatherbarrow, David. 2000. Uncommon Ground: Architecture, Technology, and Topography. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Lechner, Norbert. 1991. Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Design Methods for Architects. New York: Wiley.Le Corbusier, and Frederick Etchells. 1946. Towards a New Architecture. London: Architectural Press.McCarthy, Kevin. 2008. Micanopy, Florida: an Illustrated History. Gainesville, FL: Nature Coast Pub. Co.

McMorrough, Julia. 2006. Materials, Structures, and Standards. Gloucester, Mass: Rockport Publishers.Moore, Charles Willard, Gerald Allen, and Donlyn Lyndon. 1974. The Place of Houses. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.NC State University, Center for Universal Design. 1997. Universal Design Principles. www.design.ncsu.eduNeutra, Richard Joseph, William B. Gleckman, and Willy Boesiger. 1959. Richard Neutra, 1950-60: Buildings and Projects. Zurich: Girsberger.Office for Metropolitan Architecture. “Maison a Bordeaux”. www.oma.euRajtar, Steve. 2008. 101 Glimpses of Historic Micanopy. Charleston, SC: History Press.Riley, Terence. 1999. The Un-Private house. New York: Museum of Modern Art.Sommer, Robin Langley, and Balthazar Korab. 1997. Frank Lloyd Wright. New York: Barnes & Noble Books.Sudjic, Deyan, and Tulga Beyerle. 1999. Home: the Twentieth-Century House. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.Tanizaki, Junichiro. 1977. In Praise of Shadows. New Haven, Conn: Leete’s Island Books.Thiis-Evensen, Thomas. 1989. Archetypes in Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press.US Bureau of the Census. www.census.gov

Webber, Carl. 1994. The Eden of the South. Micanopy, FL: Micanopy Pub. Co.Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia. “Room”. www.wikipedia.org

REFERENCES CITED

in loving memory of Hailey & Owen