91视频

As Portland State University’s Center for Public Interest Design (CPID) seeks to help alleviate the city’s housing crisis, it has garnered contributions from professional architects.

鈥淎rchitecture and design usually only serve the wealthy,鈥� said Todd Ferry, a research associate for the CPID. 鈥淲e wanted to figure out how we can take our ideas to benefit underserved communities.鈥�

A coalition including the CPID started the Partners On Dwelling (POD) Initiative. Fourteen teams signed on to create prototype housing pods that could help alleviate homelessness in Portland. The goal was for the pods to be able to be mass-produced easily and occupy a relatively small space.

鈥淭he idea behind them is that these would be longer-term transitional housing,鈥� Ferry said. 鈥淪o these would be somebody’s home for an extended amount of time.鈥�

The pods are very small. The largest of the designs is just 8 feet by 12 feet while the tiniest is 6 feet by 8 feet. The tallest stands just 10 feet, 8 inches.

They lack almost all amenities. There is no electricity, heat or running water.

What the pods lack in creature comforts, they make up for in functionality. The houses are heavily insulated, and their small sizes help trap body heat. The tiny homes also have bedding and a variety of design features that help address challenges faced by the homeless. One pod includes a dry sink. Another structure features bunk beds and a second entry to allow multiple people to sleep. The pods also are designed to allow for storage and to be locked for security.

In addition, the pods’ sizes allow significant flexibility for location.

鈥淔aith organizations were interested, and 6-by-8 (units) could fit on a parking spot and use the organizations’ infrastructure,鈥� Ferry said.

The hope is that these structures could be used in a village setting, similar to other encampments like Right 2 Dream Too or Hazelnut Grove. One such 鈥渢ransitional village鈥� for up to 14 women is already in the works at 2221 N. Argyle St. The project is currently receiving public input.

The pods were built in a fashion to require minimal, simple maintenance. Pod residents would be responsible for cleaning and maintaining the structures. In a village setting, a communal infrastructure of bathrooms, showers and sinks can be used.

A large effort was invested in making the structures aesthetically pleasing.

鈥淧art of this is about changing perceptions,鈥� Ferry said. 鈥淲e are hoping that people would be willing to have these near where they live.鈥�

Another big issue was keeping construction costs to a minimum. Each design team was given $2,000 through the mayor’s office to produce a prototype. Some teams invested their own money or raised additional money through GoFundMe websites to push the average amount spent to $3,000.

They were built fast. The project began with a design charette attended by nearly 100 designers, social workers, activists and houseless individuals on聽Oct. 1. The prototypes were on display by Dec. 5 on a parking

lot at Northwest Glisan Street and Park Avenue.

The time and design parameters posed a variety of challenges for project teams.

鈥淲e usually do these enormous projects with unlimited budgets (in class),鈥� fourth-year architecture student Heather Peterson said. 鈥淭his was the first time we have been pulled down to earth. It was a great dose of reality.鈥�

One of the biggest challenges Peterson’s team faced was bringing light into the structure and giving the occupant a sense of separate living and sleeping spaces.

鈥淲e used a strip of polycarbonate to allow in filtered light,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e wanted to make something that had elements of luxury that you wouldn’t normally see in a structure like this.鈥�

Each team used different features like small porches to maximize the space they had to work with and make the structure more than just a place to stay for the night.

鈥淔or our team, we thought it was important to give the people enough space that they could make it their own,鈥� said Reid Weber, a project assistant on SERA Architects‘ team.

The teams also spoke to homeless individuals to see what elements they wanted in the structure.

鈥淭hey said they tend to have a huge rat problem,鈥� Weber said. 鈥淲e made the floor as durable as possible. We used a wire mesh to stop rats from getting in.鈥�

Even items such as insulation had to considered carefully with potential residents in mind.

鈥淭hey said that staying dry was a big concern,鈥� Weber said. 鈥淲e used a rigid insulation to (keep the unit) drier.鈥�

Heat was a big focus of LRS Architects‘ pod. Team members focused on the idea that it would be maintained with almost no resources from the person living in it.

鈥淲e wanted to make it as close to a passive house as possible,鈥� said Kelsy Colvin, a project manager for LRS Architects’ team. 鈥淲e designed it so it could be heated off of body heat.鈥�

The architects found that many of the techniques used for their pod projects can be used elsewhere.

鈥淚 think one of the unique constraints was looking at how you move these,鈥� said Scott Mooney, an architect with SRG Partnership. 鈥淗ow wide it can be and how tall can it be before you can’t get it on flat bed on a freeway. Those ideas are useful in context of prefab houses. How those elements get from A to B and how those elements are transported to another site.鈥�

The pods nevertheless have significant drawbacks, according to Stuart Emmons, vice president of strategic development at Blokable, a company focused on modular stackable housing.

鈥淭hese pods are what they are,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t’s better than staying outside. That’s fair enough; I get that. It’s dry.鈥�

Emmons has focused on housing solutions for the homeless for much of his career. He said that the space needed for a pod could be a significant hurdle for use in Portland’s core, where property is so valuable. However, he acknowledged that the pods can be a part of the overall solution.

鈥淭hese aren’t the only solution, but it is one solution,鈥� Ferry said. 鈥淭here are going to be many solutions to solve this problem.鈥�