To PIDPR Workshop Spring 2013 participants

Please upload your posts on your PIDPR project (updates on your progress). Your first post is due February 25 (second post due March 25 and third and final post due April 22). Also please post a poster (a graphic summary of your work-in-progress final project or an image relevant to your final project.


Winner’s Announcement and PIDPR Symposium


Winner’s Announcement and PIDPR Symposium

December 9, 2012, DETROIT, MICHIGAN

Bryan Bell, co-founder of SEED, founder and executive director of Design Corps, Raleigh, North Carolina, and one of the leading voices in Public Interest Design (PID) movement, presented a lecture on PID and sat on the PIDPR symposium discussion panel, as part of the PIDPR 2012 Competition, which was hosted by [gD]³ & PIDPR group. The symposium focused on PIDPR and was attended by students and faculty from area schools and by local Detroit area professionals.  The symposium was held on November 28 at Lawrence Technological University (LTU) in Southfield, Michigan.  The symposium panelists included Bryan Bell, Gina Reichert (co-founder of Design 99, Detroit), and Scott Shall (founding director of International Design Clinic).  The panel discussion was moderated by Professor Joongsub Kim of LTU, and director of [gD]3, and PIDPR group and Detroit Studio. The panel dialogue was passionate and informative, with a lot of back and forth conversations between the panelists and the audience throughout the symposium and even after it ended. A number of students asked the panelists how they can get started in PID, how to fund it, and the like.

Bryan Bell was the primary juror for the PIDPR Competition. He deliberated from the Detroit Studio, a community outreach program of LTU, for one day, November 29. He stated at the end of his deliberations that several of the entries included interesting ideas or approaches, and that many of the entries have great potential.

The top three prizes represent many different approaches to PIDPR. Each entry stands in contrast to the other winning entries. The jury stated that each winning entry demonstrated something valuable.  The jury also stated that all of the entries, not just the winning entries, can be catalysts for a continued conversation of the possibilities for PID.


Winning Entries

First Place Winner:

Project: “Reinvention of a Detroit Icon”

Team: Andrew Sommerville and Alex Gormley


Second Place Winner:

Project: “North End”

Team: Marissa Zane and Eric Blyth


Third Place Winners:

Project: “Redline”

Team: Dina Elawad and Youngjin Song

Project: “Igniting Detroit”

Team:  Regina Stack and Diana Chan

Project: “Abandoned Buildings”

Team: Jia Liu and Mohammad Al Omran

Project: “Solutions at the Root”

Team: Brendan Cagney and Angele Dmytruk


About [gD]³ & PIDPR Competition


Students and professionals around the world are invited to participate in the PIDPR International Competition. PIDPR aims to expand the discipline of architecture by challenging the traditional definition and boundaries of the architectural profession, and by exploring alternative design practices. [gD]³ investigates the goals, theories, principles, methods, and values of PIDPR. Through the application of public interest design practice, through collaboration with local stakeholders and via digital networking to engage a worldwide audience, [gD]³ proposes an alternative practice model to fully articulate public interest design and research. [gD]³, through the PIDPR Competition, seeks design projects that explore new and innovative ways of practicing architecture to empower and assist disadvantaged groups around the world. A distinguished group of experts in the field of PIDPR will judge the competition.


Competition Sponsors

NCARB (National Council of Architectural Registration Boards)


Biography of Competition Juror


Locomotive City, part 2


The image above shows the massive impact railroad construction had on Chicago and other industrial American cities such as Detroit at the turn of the century. The systematic construction – primarily railroads and industrial sites to dispose and extract material goods, rail yards to facilitate the movement of trains, and railway stations for passengers – significantly disrupted existing roads and local boundaries of the traditional city.

Chicago’s new railway system presented significant challenges as it confronted changing physical and social dynamics within the city. Fueled by global capital, the sheer quantity of infrastructure required for the extraction, processing, and transfer of material goods splintered established neighborhoods apart into urban enclaves while heightening socio-economic disparity between these neighborhoods.

Following World War Two as manufacturing industries and demand moved elsewhere, many railway companies closed down and its rail yards fell into abandon. Large swaths of rail property remain in many parts of the city as remnants of the city’s industrial past, physically barring access between neighboring urban enclaves and increasing the socio-economic disparity among different neighborhoods. The contrast between the relatively wealthy North Chicago and the impoverished South Chicago reflects the striking difference in income inequality and cultural groups.

In light of the current financial crisis that has prompted cities to cut back on typical wasteful development and investigate ideas of re-use and re-appropriation, can former industrial sites open up questions about their potential transformation and uses? Can these sites be re-purposed for the public benefit?


Photo Credit: Commercial Club of Chicago, 1909

RedLine – Stations


RedLine – Stations

By studying the nearby programs in Downtown Detroit, we were able to make a map of the programs that were within walking distance that each station could contribute to.  By using this information we were able to develop a system to bring in more life to the city.  We also incorporated several public services within the station in order to improve the city life for the residents.

Station to Station

Station to StationBeyond the new elevated Redline, we want to create hubs of activity at each existing station by creating a transitional space that can add to the programs in near by locations.  Because the stations structure varies slightly, the approach for each station is unique.