DI: What is the main principle, idea and inspiration behind your design?
: The idea behind this work is rather simple: make our shared public spaces more humane. Take the space of transit, for example. We live in an area where depending on public transportation as a primary means of mobility has become increasingly problematic. Due to the lack of funding sources and the inefficiency of our local and regional transit lines, public transportation, primarily in the form of buses, is often a very real physical barrier to goods, services, employment, education, and leisure activity for the citizens of Detroit. Recent stories concerning progressively worsening transit scheduling, the lack of regional coordination and rider protest marches have only heightened the criticism.
In addition to being a very tangible barrier, dependence on public transportation is an increasingly deleterious symbolic barrier as well. “Bus stops advertise the transit system to the public. A stop that looks dirty or neglected, or whose waiting passengers look hot, cold, wet, confused or vulnerable sends a devastating message: you’re lucky you don’t have to ride the bus.”
In short, the use of public transportation is typically read as being “without means”, especially in Detroit, where stops are indentified by small, nondescript metal markers mounted high upon an equally nondescript lamppost or free-standing pole placed in disturbingly close proximity to motorized traffic with little to no regard to the discomfort and danger such proximity might cause the rider. The connotation is that the people, place and service of public transportation are at best, secondary considerations in the economic and environmental operations of the city. We wanted to change that.
DI: What has been your main focus in designing this work? Especially what did you want to achieve?
: Door Stops bring the citizen back into a position of prominence in the decision-and place-making process by giving her/him the tools to make desires visible. A very small tool, yes, but one that addresses a number of immediate and long-term, tangible and intangible concerns; one that begins small but has the ability to aggregate into a larger, cumulative impact. It is functional art/architecture that is mobile, cultural and above all, local; aimed at spurring a larger discussion about public space and returning design considerations to the discussion about urban development.
Door Stops are simple; they’re constructed from reused, salvaged, donated and/or repurposed materials – doors, metal studs, castors and signage plastic – that would otherwise find their way on to vacant lots and impromptu garbage dumps, not to mention overburdened city landfills. The doors are infused front and back with large displays of public art in the form of murals depicting life in the city as interpreted by local area artists – with a focus on artists from the community where the seats will be placed – making for an easily identifiable, safe and pleasant waiting area for transit riders. Additionally, as these “leftover” spaces abound in the public sphere, we’ve designed the structures to be mobile; to move from location to location as determined by riders and residents. Should there arise a need for seating at different locations due to change in service or traffic patterns, the seats can be relocated accordingly with little effort. In this, each piece can more quickly respond to the needs as determined by its residents than the bureaucracy of the city can allow. Available for relocation and reuse in various conditions – open spaces, vacant lots, parks, backyards, neighborhood festivals, outdoor markets, etc. – the seats serve both riders and residents around the city. Further, we’ve also designed them to be easily replicable, allowing for other designers and artists to contribute to the citywide project using our primary framework. We ultimately expect this additive element to lead to a myriad of variations of seats installed around the city. As functional architecture, these structures provide the tangible benefits to riders of weather protection, location identification and respite. As pieces of public art, they provide opportunities for local artists to contribute their work to a constantly changing civic landscape. Together, as both artistic and architectural object, the seats create an interactive, community-driven narrative by providing an opportunity for artists, riders and residents to create their own public spaces, lessening the problematic symbolism accorded to public transportation and the residents who use it; a choice that ultimately comments on the state of transportation and the quality of the public realm.
DI: What are your future plans for this award winning design?
: We’re in the process of soliciting funding for the next phase, which we envision will include solar panels to power aligned uses – power cell phones, computers, lighting, heating and perhaps LED message boards for scheduling update.
DI: How long did it take you to design this particular concept?
: The concept was devised rather quickly – one evening over a few beers at a local bar. The prototyping and fabrication took a bit of time, perhaps a month or so, primarily due to other commitments.
DI: Why did you design this particular concept? Was this design commissioned or did you decide to pursuit an inspiration?
: Well, as mentioned above, we decided to do this because it was needed. That is primarily our charter: we see something, we do something. The Detroit Community Design Center focuses on providing ethical, participatory, socio-economically sensitive, aesthetically innovative and implementable design and planning solutions to public, private and institutional clientele in primarily, but not exclusively, under-served urban communities. Our method of engagement comes from, is relevant to, and vigorously engages the community in which our work is placed.
DI: Is your design being produced or used by another company, or do you plan to sell or lease the production rights or do you intent to produce your work yourself?
: We are open to all opportunities to scale up or do similar work anywhere, with anyone.
DI: What made you design this particular type of work?
: In the recently curated Cooper Hewitt traveling exhibit entitled Design For The Other 90 Percent, Dr. Paul Polak cites a sobering statistic: The majority of the world’s designers focus all their efforts on developing products and services exclusively for the richest 10 percent of the world’s customers. As shocking as that statement may appear, with specific respect to the practice of architecture the numbers are even worse. Architect and professor John Gavin Dwyer echoes data verified in other studies and publications when he states that, quite simply, the architecture profession has failed to create a way to deliver design that's accessible to the other 98 percent. There’re a cornucopia of reasons for the current state of affairs, beginning with the fact that most people don’t know or understand what it is that architects do and ending with the general belief in the public sphere that design is too expensive and has little to do with the lives of everyday people; all of which is understandable given how the profession currently operates.
According to a recently published Davis Report entitled Time To Rethink Design, in the consumer-based market of objects, design today has become a visual and quantifiable pollutant, responsible for the proliferation of unnecessary artifacts that respond to no real need. The overwhelming majority of designed products are simply variations on a theme; a practice increasingly referred to as design with a little d. Currently, traditional programs are producing, in fact, over-producing designers who compete in the little d marketplace, ultimately impacting the lives of, at best, 10 percent of the population. However, recent trends suggest that designers today are looking to do something more substantive, more meaningful. They want to practice design with a big D, to design lifestyles, service industries, businesses and environments. In other words, they want to make a difference. There’s a new social and ethical imperative at work in the field and the expansion of design beyond the production of consumable desire into the areas of social, economic and environmental justice will be one of the driving forces of the 21st century.
Today, architects have at their disposal tools here-to-fore unimagined for doing work. A plethora of NUBUS and GIS software programs, laser, parametric and rapid-prototyping technology, an explosion in sustainable research and material production and more are now easily at our disposal. And while architecture is currently employing these tools to reach great aesthetic heights, I believe such might be used to ameliorate depths as well. I am not alone in such considerations. The resurgence in socially-responsible, socially-conscious design is due in large part to groups of students and practitioners who are appalled by the widening gap between the haves and have nots, some in the field have leaped back into the arena of problem-solvers with great enthusiasm. Empowering people and designers to take direct control over their environmental and professional development, the resulting work has been both impressive and promising. Labeled as social entrepreneurs by some, design activists by others, this loose group of designers has mashed the issues of accessibility, affordability, mobility, sustainability and aesthetics into a small, but exciting field of design activism. The projects of these broad-minded, multi-talented designers are impacting and improving lives, preserving local cultures and providing hope for the future in this country and all over the world. Their efforts bring balance to the perception that architecture is only concerned with the object by drawing attention to the kind of design that has the inherent ability to transform and in some cases, actually change lives. We want to be a part of that group, the group that is looking to conflate design, justice, and social entrepreneurship.
DI: Where there any other designs and/or designers that helped the influence the design of your work?
: There are a several whom I find inspiring in the work they’re doing. They are, in no particular order, practitioners like Buckminster Fuller, Frank Lloyd Wright, Tim Brown, Alastair Parvin, Bryan Bell, Public Architecture, Architecture for Humanity, Luyanda Mpahlwa and Anna Heringer, writers & thinkers like Thomas Fisher, Alastair Fuad-Luke, Jeremy Till and John Cary, as well as educators like the late Samuel Mockbee, Dan Pitera, Maurice Cox and Emily Politin at Project H Design.
DI: Who is the target customer for his design?
: The 300,000 daily transit riders of the City of Detroit
DI: What sets this design apart from other similar or resembling concepts?
: Price, materials, process and above all else, reason de entre
DI: How did you come up with the name for this design? What does it mean?
: That one was easy. Everyone is familiar with the door stop, the little wedge jammed in the bottom of the door to keep it from closing. Well…this was a play on that. We have doors. They’re at the bus stop. The rest was easy…
DI: Which design tools did you use when you were working on this project?
: The entire project is designed to use readily available materials and tools also. We wanted it to perhaps inspire others to create their own version of the door stops all around the city. So, we used nothing that isn’t typically available in one’s home – drills, wrenches, pliers, hammers, a friend or two, etc.
DI: What is the most unique aspect of your design?
: Price, materials, process and above all else, reason de entre
DI: Who did you collaborate with for this design? Did you work with people with technical / specialized skills?
: Our list of collaborators is long, and it keeps growing, Currently, it includes local artists Erik Howard, Chazz Miller, Jessica Harris, Mollie Decker, Rosa Maria Zamarron, Michael Sklenka, Gordon Soderberg, Molly Landis, Dennis Thom, Paul Mungar, Ryon P. Gonzalez, William Wey, Nicole Lapointe, Jessica Rowland, Bree Hietala, Kevin Boyd, Vanessa Cronan, Bradley Bailey and a few others who, for various personal and-or professional reasons, prefer to remain anonymous.
DI: What is the role of technology in this particular design?
: Not much. We routed a few of our parts, but found the doors and seats were not as uniform as we believed early on, we needed to be more flexible in the production so we do most of the work custom in shop.
DI: Is your design influenced by data or analytical research in any way? What kind of research did you conduct for making this design?
: We just read the paper. At one point, it seemed there was an article a day about the poor quality of the service and the problems associated with transit travel. There were sick outs by drivers, town forums for riders and a plethora of ancillary events all pointing in this direction. And that does not include what could be seen and experienced firsthand just being a resident of the city. This project was a no-brainer.
DI: What are some of the challenges you faced during the design/realization of your concept?
: Funding is always a challenge, although with this effort we were able to secure most of our materials at minimum or no cost at all. Space was a challenge, as we needed a place to store material, assemble and keep completed units. Our office simply was not equipped to do so. Surprisingly, we had a bit of trouble finding artist to participate; however, all of the above were settled relatively smoothly, if not quickly.
DI: How did you decide to submit your design to an international design competition?
: We routinely submit to local, national and international competitions; however, this competition was especially inviting as it recognizes design in a numerous categories, many of which are not typically found in other, similar competitions and certainly not highlighted by most American professional organizations.
DI: What did you learn or how did you improve yourself during the designing of this work?
: We learned that we have found our happy place. We plan to do more design and social justice work in the future.