the commons at kensington a transformationpages.uoregon.edu/chan/kansas commons.pdfby the...

The Commons at Kensington a transformation

The Commons at Kensington project brief

1.0 Purpose/Goal In broad terms, the purpose and goal for this proposed project is the transformation of a 10-acre property located in Kensington, Kansas. The eventual end product is conceptual in nature and dependent on a number of variables that are forseeable yet undefined to date. The existing property is currently the residence of an aging Kansas couple with their own set of needs and accompanying goals for the property. In addition, the direct successor to the property is the sole heir of the previ-ously mentioned couple. This specific individual has a similar yet independant set of needs and goals for the existing property. The designer / landscape architect for this project also represents a role in this generational representation as the sole male grandson of the current residents of the property. The three entities make up the project team and will often be referred to in this document as the primary, secondary and tertiary team members. Relative to the three entities designated here, the ultimate goal is to eventually place the property in a receivership as a non-profit foundation.

Project Team Duane & LeAnn Smith current residents & owners of the property Kent Smith heir to the property / project manager Joel Smith grandson of current owners / project designer & landscape architect

This planned metamorphosis while perceived drastic is actually on ongoing event. This specific piece of land began as a common ground for the indigenous population as well as plants and animals of the high plains. During the great western expansion movement, this segment of terra firma moved into official ownership from a western perspective. Now the next great transitiion takes place as it once again prepares to change hands - potentially back into the grasp of a broader population. The follow-ing quote by George A. Batchelder is taken from the Museum of Western Expansion at the Jefferson National Expansion Monument in St. Louis and serves as a literary and spiritual guide for the project.

Think of it young men, you who are “rubbing” along from year to year, with no great hopes for the future . . . lay aside your paper collars and kid gloves. Work a little. Possess your soul with patience and hold on your way with a firm purpose. Do this, and there is a beautiful home for you out here. Prosperity, freedom, independence, manhood in its highest sense, peace of mind and all the comforts and luxuries of life are awaiting you . . .

2.0 Historical Perspective 2.1 History of the Region & Accompanying Township The region commonly referred to as the Midwest is a diverse geographic site. The following states are are traditionally identified as midwestern states: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. 1 The Midwest is a often perceived as a cultural crossroads. Starting in the early 1800’s easterners moved there in search of better farmland, and soon Europeans bypassed the East Coast to migrate directly to the inte-rior: Germans to eastern Missouri, Swedes and Norwegians to Wisconsin and Minnesota. The region’s fertile soil made it possible for farmers to produce abundant harvests of cereal crops such as wheat, oats, and corn. The region was soon known as the nation’s “breadbasket.”

Most of the Midwest is flat with a combination of wooded areas to compliment its short and tall grass prairies – the majority having been converted to farm ground. The Mississippi River has acted as a regional lifeline, moving settlers to new homes and foodstuffs to market. The Midwest has a reputa-tion for its severe climate – with 140 degree temperature swings as the norm. The winter can provide temperatures of 30 below with the wind chill and summers are know to climb over 110 degrees. As a result, Midwesterners have an intimate relationship with the weather and its resulting effect on the land they rely on.

figure 1

1.0 Purpose/Goal

2.0 Historical Perspective

The Kensington at Kensington Project Brief

Midwesterners are praised as being open, friendly, and straightforward. Their politics tend to be cautious, but the caution is sometimes peppered with protest. The Midwest gave birth to one of America’s two major political parties, the Republican Party, which was formed in the 1850’s to oppose the spread of slavery into new states. At the turn of the century, the region also spawned the Progres-sive Movement, which largely consisted of farmers and merchants intent on making government less corrupt and more receptive to the will of the people. Perhaps because of their geographic location, many midwesterners have been strong adherents of isolationism, the belief that Americans should not concern themselves with foreign wars and problems.

Kansas itself has a unique and colorful history. In addition to vast herds of bison, native people historically inhabited this area. The tribes of the region included the Arapaho, Comanche, Kansa, Kiowa, Osage and Pawnee. In fact the name Kansas is a Siouan Indian word and comes from the tribal name Kansa, which means South Wind People. Spanish explorer Francisco de Coronado, in 1541, is considered the first European to have traveled this region. Sieur de la Salle’s extensive land claims for France (1682) included present-day Kansas. Ceded to Spain by France in 1763, the territory reverted to France in 1800 and was sold to the U.S. as part of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Lewis and Clark, Zebulon Pike, and Stephen H. Long explored the region between 1803 and 1819. The first permanent white settlements in Kansas were outposts—Fort Leavenworth (1827), Fort Scott (1842), and Fort Riley (1853)—estab-lished to protect travelers along the Santa Fe and Oregon Trails. The Kansas Territory was established by the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The Kansas-Nebraska Act became law on May 30, 1854, establishing the Nebraska Territory and Kansas Territory. 2 The most momentous provision of the Act in effect repealled the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and allowed the settlers of Kansas Territory to determine by popular sovereignty whether Kansas would be a free state or a slave state. Just before the Civil War, the con-flict between the pro- and anti-slavery forces earned the region the grim title of Bleeding Kansas. John Brown is a romanticized historical figure from that time. Brown is immortalized through the famous John Steuart Curry mural at the Kansas State Capital titled Tragic Prelude. 3 In 1861 Kansas entered the Union as a free state. Subsequently, the Homestead Act of 1862 provided a dramatic catalyst for the growth of Kansas. The act provided that a settler could claim up to 160 acres (65 hectares) of land, provided that he lived on it for a period of years and cultivated it. This was later expanded under the Kinkaid Act to include a homestead of an entire section. Hundreds of thousands of people claimed these homesteads, sometimes building sod houses out of the very turf of their land. Many of them were not skilled dryland farmers and failures were frequent. Germans from Russia who had previously farmed in similar circumstances in what is now Ukraine were marginally more successful than the average home-steader. The population of Kansas exploded as wave after wave of immigrants turned the desolate prairie into productive farmland. Today Kansas is one of the most productive agricultural states, leading the nation in wheat production. Today, wheat fields, oil-well derricks, herds of cattle, and grain-storage eleva-tors are chief features of the Kansas landscape. In addition to its reputation for wheat production, Kansas also raises corn, sorghum, oats, barley, soybeans, and potatoes. Kansas has a sizeable contribution to petroleum production and additionally mines zinc, coal, salt, and lead. Interestingly enough, it is also the nation’s leading producer of helium.

Specific to this project is the community of Kensington, a Kansas township that lies at the west edge of Smith County. An important feature of the township geographically is its relationship to the 100th Merdian. In the late nineteenth century a line of longitude was established in the United States that represented the boundary between the moist east and the arid west. The line was the 100th Meridian, one hundred degrees of longitude west of Greenwich. In 1879 U.S. Geological Survey head John Wesley Powell established the boundary in a report of the west that has carried to this day. The line was not solely selected for its neat round number - it actually approximates the twenty inch isohyet (a line of equal precipitation). To the east of the 100th Meridian, average annual precipitation is in excess of twenty inches. When an area receives more than twenty inches of precipitation, irrigation is often not necessary. Thus, this line of longitude represented the boundary between the non-irrigated east and irrigation-necessary west. Kensington lies just the east of this symbolic line. Shortly after Powell’s point of geological demarkation, the town of Kensington would also be estab-lished. Local townships of Cedar and Germantown existed but on November 7th of 1887, the railroad laid tracks between these two establishments. In December, the trains started running the route. Shortly after the railroad was established, The Kansas Town and Land company entered into a land deal with George Boyd and purchased a 40-acre track north of the railroad, laid out in blocks with lots to be sold to those who wished to settle in this new town. The name of Kensington was given to the new town by the president of the Chicago Kansas Nebraska Railroad Company who chose it in honor of his native city of Kensington, England.. 4 Over the years, Kensington would grow, in both prosperity as well as population. The railroad linked this remote section of America with the rest of the country. In addition to agriculture, a notable history of manufacturing also benefited by access the to rail system: feed mills, a mattress factory as well as a lawnmower manufacturer to name a few. Banks, shops, and opera house and a threatre would eventually come and go. Those years would certainly be thought of as the golden years of Kensington with only the Bank remaining from that era. As the

figure 2

figure 3

figure 4

2.0 Historical PerspectiveThe Kensington at Kensington Project Brief

rail system declined (the depot ceasing operations in the 1950’s) the prosperity reached a plateau and has since entered into a downward spiral. In turn the population has steadily decreased following a trend of regionization. As the family farm has suffered, opportunities for the following generation has been compromised. This continu-ing trend has resulted in the erosion of smaller farming communities and growing regional centers. In many cases, school consolidations and closures are the final step in the death of the community. To date, Kensington has been able to avoid what one might consider to be inevitable, but the future creeps ever closer.

2.2 History of the Designated Property

The project site is represented by six generations and over 100 years. For sake of context, the his-tory begins in Ohio. In 1878, Jospeh Ball (maternal great-grandfather of LeAnn Smith) sold his livery stable, equipment and horses and moved to a location near to the current township of Cedar, Kansas (then called the Clifford Vicinity). He filed a claim on 160 acres and constructed a primitive dugout to live in (albeit a rather luxuious one, having a wood floor) The property was approxiately 6 miles southwest of the current town of Kensington. Later that year his wife Sarah came out by train with their six children. (9 months to 11 years in age) She arrived in Hastings, Nebraska after three days and three nights on the train. Joseph met her there and they journeyed on to their home – an eighty-mile trip by wagon that took two days and one night. When they finally arrived and Sarah saw the dugout home for the first time, she was quoted as saying, Oh Joe, are we to be buried alive! Three years later they upgraded their house when Joseph built a larger part-dugout, part sod-house a short distance from the original house. They would live on this property until 1907 when they would move to the site of the current property in Kensington. During those three decades they would raise ten children (four more were born after arriving in Kansas). In addition, Joesph was appointed as Postmaster for the Clifford Vicinity and operated the office from their home. With a full farming schedule, much of the duties fell to Sarah. She had no regular hours and people would regularly come to their house for mail. As an anecdote and to hint at the resiliency of these early settlers, it’s worthy of noting that in addition to the burdens of his own farming operation, Joseph, on more than one occasion would walk to Abilene, Kansas (a distance of 150 miles) and work his way back home on harvest crews. On November 7th of 1905 additional land around the town of Kensington was platted and the plot designated as C368 was purchased by C.A. Ball. (Joseph and Sarah’s only son - the 6th of their 10 children) At this time, the land was surrounded only by cornfields with only one house between the property and the railroad tracks a mile away. C.A. (Clarence) built a two-room house for himself and his wife, Maude. The ten-acre parcel would also welcome his parents to the property when in 1907, Joseph and Sarah would build a house a the lower west end of the propery above the creek. They would live there for the rest of their lives with Sarah passing away in 1926 at the age of 79 and Joseph passing away two years later at the age of 85. In 1908, Theo Ball was born to C.A. and Maude, their only child. She would live her childhood and early adulthood in the house until she married J.A. (Jesse Andrew) Smith in 1934. After they were married, they moved to the family farm 2 1/2 miles north of Kensington. After the death of her mother in 1947, Theo, her husband and their only child, LeAnn moved back to Theo’s family home. (C.A had passed away in 1943 at 69) They would remodel the house, adding additional rooms to the home. Over the years, outbuildings, grain bins and a barn had been added west of the house. The total acreage of the property at that time was nearly ten acres. 5 In 1956, their daughter LeAnn would marry Duane Smith (no relation) and move to Smith Center, the county seat 13 miles to the East. In 1959, They would have their only child, Kent. During his childhood Kent would spent weekends and the much of the summers in Kensington with his grandparents on the family property there. Duane and LeAnn would remain in Smith Center until 1982. Their son, Kent had moved away to col-lege, married (Patricia Sollner) and had a son, Joel Andrew (named after his maternal great grandfather, Jesse Andrew that year. Coincidentally, that same year Duane and LeAnn would move back to Kensington where they would build their current residence located on the family property. (a short distance to the northwest of J.A and Theo’s home) The house they built was an energy-efficient earthen home. While the house took advantage of pre-stressed concrete and modern technologies, it should be noted that a little over one hundred years after her great grandmother complained about being buried alive, LeAnn would relive the experience. In the time between the move from the farm in 1947 and the addition of the house, parts of the original property had been parceled off and sold with new neighbors pushing beyond the city limits as well. 6 – 8 The Wagonblasts would build a home to the north of J.A. and Theo and a home and a worksho p (the Weims’ and the Ratliffs respectfully) were located to the North of Duane and LeAnn by the time their built their home. In the twenty-four years since the completion of Duane and LeAnn’s home, a progression of develop-ments occurred relative to the property and the family. The previous record of grounding that had occurred with previous generations has to date been broken. Kent and Patricia moved on to Nebraska where three additional daughters were born (Danielle, Natalie and Breck) and eventually away from the Midwest all together with a move to Bellingham, Washington. Their own children are now moving away, scattered between Washington, Oregon and Massachuesetts. In 1986, J.A. would pass away at the age of 82 leaving Theo in the initial family home of the property. She would remain there until moving to an assisted-living residence in Kensington in 1997. Theo would spent the final five years of her life

figure 6

figure 7

figure 8

figure 5

2.0 Historical PerspectiveThe Kensington at Kensington Project Brief

there. The house remained empty, until it was sold to the current owners, Gordon and Juanita Reneberg in 2000. While, the Renebergs themselves are distance relatives, this remaining portion of the property facing Adams Street is essentially no longer a part of the property. The East boundary of the acreage begins at what is commonly referred to as the alley. Over the years, the place customarily thought of as the family center gradually moved to the house that Duane and LeAnn occupied. Holidays and visits from the grandkids and great grandchildren would often culminate at the underground house at 210 N. Lincoln. (It should be noted that there are actually no signs for streets outside the official city limits.) Before moving to Washington in 1993, Kent, Patty and their children were only 100 miles to the north and as a result, they would travel to Kensington frequently, often leaving the grandkids there throughout the summers. It’s safe to say the property in Kensing-ton was as close to home as a place could be without actually living there. Memories of summer harvest, fishing with Grandpa and raising chickens with Grandma are an integral part of the memory certainly shared by the older grandkids. 9 To this day the connection back to Kansas is strong. While actual time on the property is less frequent, the symbolic link to it remains for the recent two generations.

3.0 Contemporary Context 3.1 Residential Aspect The property as it stands today is a grouping of approximately 10 acres once again. 4.5 acres host the house, the garage and shop, miscellaneous outbuildings, grain bins, barn, chicken coop and 2 acres of cultivated land. In addition, there are two acres to the west of the dirt road identified as Garfield Street that are cultivated as well. 10 -– 12 The total acreage of the property increased in the summer of 2006 when Duane and LeAnn pur-chased an adjoining 3.5 acres above the creek that is referred to as the Nonamaker property. Relative to purpose and goals, there are no identifiable plans for the existing property. Most of the buildings would remain accompa-nied by their current role and/or potential as new storage space. Duane often talks about the potential of a guest house to house out-of-towners during the counties active hunting season. (more so now with a modular home left on the newly-acquired property.)

3.2 Base for Accompanying Agricultural Business

The project site is in fact the core to a much large collection of land. The property serves as the business center for an additional 400 acres of agricultural land: 160 acres referred to as the West Place, 160 acres called the Hasty Place and and addition 80 named the Center Eighty. All three of these plots of land are separate from the town site as well as from each other. All are two miles north of town on a dirt county road and separated by two to three miles between them. This land is currently being farmed by a younger local farmer. Nonetheless, true to all farming families, there is a connection to that land as well even though no one actually lived there and few structures are to be found. Despite the physical separation, a symbolic connection remains. There are no immediate changes regarding the farming operation as well. The farmer, Darren Grauerholz continues to work the land in a cooperative method. The crops range from wheat, soybeans and alfalfa. While the operation often utilizes no-till procedures it primarily relies on industrial agriculture methods.

3.3 Midwest location for Graphic Design Offices

In the summer of 2005, the secondary team member officially designated the Kensington property as the location for an addition office for his graphic design offices. While the office is more of a ghost office than a separate independent office, it nonetheless was unveiled as the Midwest offices. It should be noted that the business name also changed from Designsmith (itself a derivative of the Midwestern blacksmith influences) to Migrant creative. 13 There was a growing need to re-establish a presence in the Midwest to attract clients in the region. In addition, the following statement serves as the offices mission statement and design philosophy. While it certainly supports the conceptual need for two offices, it should be underscored that equally impor-tant was the desire for the designer to travel back to Kensington more frequently while maintaining a business. In the case of this individual, contrary to customary speculation, the connection to the property is growing stronger as time passes. The trips back to Kansas grow now beyond the historical singular summer visit. While premature, the possibility of splitting equal time between Bellingham and Kensington is a consideration.

We operate under the belief that successful design solutions are a result of a neutrality and the freedom from prior preconceptions. Preconceptions are often misconceptions. Migrant recognizes the role of the designer as mediator – counseling and directing clients from a vantaage point between that of the sender and the receiver. However, to be successful this position is never constant. We travel back and forth along the path of communication – assuming the role of the client to better understand the message that must be truthfully conveyed and in turn spending time as the audience to accurately assess the power of the message. We are commissioned by the sender but honor the reciever. We are neither here nor there. We are Migrant.


3.0 Contemporary Context


figure 9

figure 10

figure 11

figure 12

figure 13M I G R A N T ®

4.0 Future Use of the Site 4.1 Continued Role as residence for current owners, Business Center and Midwest Offices for Migrant

As stated in section 1 of this document, the future of the property is speculative. As stated in the previ-ous section, there are no immediate plans for change by the current owners. It’s likely they will continue to serve as their family home, a business center for the farm operation as well. In addition, the secondary team member will continue to use the site as a midwest branch of his design practice. 14 While a common conceptual purpose and goal might be foreseeable, it is certainly dependant on ever-changing variables.

4.2 Place of Rendevous for Descendents

At some point in the future, like their predessors, Duane and LeAnn Smith will move on to ancestral status and the property will pass down to Kent and Patricia Smith. With the clearly stated connection to the land so strong, it is unlikely that the properties will be sold to another independent party. Because Patricia also has property in the county of her own to inherit, it further strengthens that position. At a minimum, the design offices would continue and the property would remain as a remote source of income from the agricultural component of the land. It would also symbolically if not physically remain as a gathering point for descendents. Given this scenario, it is possible that the land would be divided into equal family members, incorporated and the yearly board meetings could serve double duty as a time of family reunion.

4.3 Non-Profit Educational Center

A more ambitious future for the property would broaden it’s purpose and goal as initially stated and ultimately put it back into the hands of a wider public as well. In this scenario, the property would become an education center grouping a wide variety of resources and dividing into the following en-compassing categories: agriculture, the arts and architecture. While separate in discipline, all facets of the center would be joined by the notion of sustainability and man’s connection to the land.

4.3.1 Experimental Agriculture Lab

Ideally, in the coming years, agriculture will evolve and naturally move away from its current reli-ance on industrial agricultural methods. With that as a goal, the center would adopt a role as an experi-mental site for new agricultural methods. With informal relationships currently being pursued, extended experimentation by other research entities could be pursued here as well. 15 In itself, this goal presents the first of many problematic variables. As it is now, the farm land now supports an additional family as well as the current residents. While a future generation might not be dependent on the income, the cooperative farm family does and drop in income that might accompany the experiments is an issue that would need to be addressed.

4.3.1 Artist Retreat / Workshops The second role of the center would be as a gathering place for artists and their audience. Literary, performing and visual artist would be given space on the property to produce work for extended periods of time throughout the year. The actual selection of artists and authors would be determined by an inde-pendent advisory board. The expectations and activities of the artist-in-residences would vary, but ideally a public display or presentation of their work would result at the conclusion of their residency. For visual artists, the potential for a stipend and/or materials are a consideration as well. Models for such artist or author-in-residence are varied. 16 In addition, graphic design workshops might be held as well with models for those available as well. 17 There is potential for a letterpress and/or screen printing lab that could be both integrated into the design workshops as well as serve as a source of publicity for the center itself. While retreats and workshops similiar to this are duplicated aroung the country, this center will be unique in it topically focus on the land and its relationship to man.

4.3.1 Architectural and Systems Studio The final component of the center would focus on architecture as well an peripheral disciplines relative to planning, engineering and energy systems. The center would be a studio for advanced studies in architecture, supporting residencies for graduate students from around the country. Projects would be hypothetical in many cases but additionally could be used to add future structures and development on the site. In all cases, the potential to integrate into local school is high. This segment specfically would be desirable for design/build ventures in local shop classes. Again, there are models for this as well. 18

4.0 Future Use of the Site



figure 14

www.brokenlimb.orgwww.csanr.wsu.eduwww.landinstitute.orgmore to be added figure 15

www.artistcommunities.org/ kohler.htmlwww.ucrossfoundation.orgwww.bemiscenter.org/ residency/index.htmlwww.archiebray.orgwww.songandword.comwww.landinstitute.org/vnews/ display.v/ART/3d10ac4f88953more to be added figure 16

www.highgrounddesign.comwww.bielenberg.comwww.willoughbydesign.comwww.architecturalrecord.com/ projects/residential/archives/ 0310willoughby.aspmore to be added figure 17

www.ruralstudio.comwww.sustainableabc.commore to be added figure 18

5.0 Naming and Graphic Design

Nomenclature affiliated with the site is hypothetical and directly related to section 4.3. To date the naming has been the sole venture of the secondary member of the project team. While it is independent from the planning and landscape architecture been provided by the tertiary member of the team, there is a conceptual syntax within the naming and identity for the site.

5.1 Origins of Name Numerous names were considered during the initial stages. C368 was a consideration as a homage to the orginal townshop plat. Variations of the family name or historical place names such as The West Place were also considered. Even more ambigious words such as fulcrum were a part of the editing process. Dur-ing the initial stages, research was done on utopian communities. One in particular was established by the French reformist, Jules LéRoux, whose move to Neuchatel, Kansas (100 miles the East of Kensington) in the 1860’s resulted in the short-lived outpost called lé Etoile du Kansas. (The Star of Kansas) After much consideration, the resulting name was established as Kensington Commons or The Commons at Kensington. This name draws heavily from two separate influences. First is the a hypothetical and metaphorical refer-ence terminology coined by Drs. Frank and Deborah Popper. In their research, the New Jersey Professors developed their bold new idea for a Buffalo Commons in their 1987 book, From Dust to Dust. (www.gprc.org/Buffalo_Commons.html) Their continuing research showed that hundreds of counties in the American West still have less than a sparse 6 persons per square mile -- the density standard Frederick Jackson Turner used to declare the American Frontier closed in 1893. Many have less than 2 persons per square mile. Their predictions relative to the regionalized shift in population continued to come true today. In addition, an even greater influence was the book, For Commons Things by Jedediah Purdy. While the entire book establishes a consistent milieux for this project, two particular quotes from pages 26 and 40 respectfully ring most true.

Today the future consumes the past at an unprecedented rate, and the present provides no stable place to stand.

A rich culture helps people say what their work is for, what its purposes are . . . . presents us standards of excellence that are independent of us and dignify our work when we satisfy them . . . .

Purdy’s own reference to the term commons, was borrowed from ecologist, Garrett Hardin who stated that the commons was traditionally identified as “. . . an unfenced region of a pastoral community, where everyone is free to graze livestock, raise crops, or gather wood.”

5.2 Visual Representation of Commons Identity While hypothetical, the name was also part of a subsequent investigation into a loose branding exer-cise that attempted to establish a graphic identity for the site and project. The result is ongoing but is pre-sented here as helpful historical context and as an attempt to establish a visual image for the project. Initial concepts focused on the site as it relates to the golden mean. Prior to the sale of the J.A. Smith properties, the barn held an abstract, yet ambient position as it relates to the fabled sacred proportion. 19 (The impor-tance of the barn itself will be introduced later) Later variations were less representational and attempted to focus more specifically on an accurate depiction of the golden rectangle. 20 Most recent studies have departed from a representation use of the golden proportions, instead utilizing them in a mark that also includes a referential index for the 100th meridian. 21 While the final identity has yet to be determined, conceptually its influences are valuable as they relate to section 6 of this document.

5.3 Conceptual Poster Tryptich As stated in the previous section, the barn has always held an momentous position in this project. Realis-tically, the barn that C.A. Ball built in the early 1930’s remains as one of the few structures yet on the current property. As a result it effectively serves as a physical artifact that spans 125 years and conceptually links the lives of Joseph and Sarah Ball, C.A. and Maude Ball, Theo and Jesse Smith, LeAnn and Duane Smith, Kent and Patricia Smith as finally, Joel, Danielle, Natalie and Breck Smith. In addition, it should be pointed out the specific siginficance the barn played in the childhood of the secondary member of the team. As a child, the barn (particularly the second story haymow.) was a spiritual retreat in itself – a retreat from mundane routines, a haven for daydreams and essentially the center of the universe in a boys’ then-small world. As such, it is only fitting that early on the barn rose to the top of the hierarchy when visualizing the project.

5.0 Naming and Graphic Design The Kensington at Kensington Project Brief

��

��

figure 20

figure 19

��

��

0 º1 0��

��

figure 21

As a graphic designer, these initial brainstorming sessions naturally translated into graphic elements and eventually manifested themselves in a series of posters. The first poster focused on the barn itself and the possiblity of transforming it into a site-specific environmental sculpture. 22 As documented on the poster a plywood shaft (8 foot by 8 foot by 32 foot) would dissect the barn from East to West. Historic and artistic influences are documented on the work: Jules Lé Roux, Charles Fournier, C.A. Ball, Jesse Smith, Edgar Rinehardt, Nancy Holt and Donald Judd. It should be noted that on this initial poster and the subsequent edition in the series, the title was Le Star Du Kanza – a derivative of the Jules LéRoux utopian manifesto. Conceptually the shaft would serve as a minimalist retreat – a place of contemplation and pragmatically as a viewing plane for the rest of the property lying to the west. The relationship to the sun and orientation to the property were also elements that would be pursued in later posters. The second in the series focused specifi-cally on the plywood shaft. 22 This poster would serve as a diagramatic guide for the materials and assembly for the sculptural shaft itself. In third of the series, the most recent graphic identity, The Commons of Kensing-ton appears for the first time. 23 In addition to the barn, this poster serves as a a conceptual site plan for the entire propery. While in no way attempting to present a realistic placement of future structures, it does offer a guide for the potential of these areas topically. Geographic accuracy is not the emphasis in this piece nor does it include the 3 1/2 acres referred to as the Nonamaker addition. The poster series preceeded the aquisition of that property and remains unchanged in its original design. Closer inspection will show that plans for artist studios, a gallery, and guest house are among the future structures for consideration. In addition, not only are orchards and cultivated areas designated but they are also accompanied by suggested crops as well.

6.0 Mandatory Project Directives As the project proceeds, the emphasis moves to the tertiary member of the project team who by nature will be providing expertise in regards to the structures and planning for the future site. Because this project will establish a plan for the transition as well as the final design for the site, a set of guidelines / directives are documented for adherence.

6.1 Hierarchieral Allegence to Team Members While it is obvious that in the future a pattern will continue with the property passing from generation from generation. However, it is imperative that the goals of heirs never take presidence over the needs of the current owner. The primary team members have ultimate proportionate power of interdiction. As such, the secondary team member also is given a hierarchial status above that of the tertiary member of the team. Thus stated, it is the intent of this project that all parties work together to arrive at a common plan that serves cur-rent, transistional and as well as future goals.

6.1.1 Contemporary Relevance to Current Needs & GoalsRisking repetition, due to its importance, this directive is given additional emphasis. While the transis-tion between past, current and future stages share common ground, the needs of the predecessor will always have ultimate supremacy over subsequent stages.

6.1.2 Conceptual Framework and Referential Points as Defined by Secondary Team Member As the secondary team member, Kent Smith serves as the link between past and future. As such, he has articulated certain guidelines as well a mandatory directives that should be followed. Most are mere influential suggestions that drove the project from the beginning. For sake of brevity, this will be a topi-cal list only – including but are not limited to: the Arts and Crafts Movement, utopian societies, sacred geometry, relationships expressed in indigenous cultures, as well as historical approaches to landmark and place. Unlike the role of the previous friendly suggestions, the mandatory directive are just that. the following points represent the project criteria that must be adhered to: WHILE THE SUPPORTING AGRICULTURAL LAND NORTH OF THE SITE MAY BE ALTERED, CONSOLIDATED AND SOLD, THE CORE SITE (THE TEN ACRES ADJACENT TO KENSINGTON) CAN NOT BE REDUCED FROM ITS CURRENT SIZE.

THE BARN SHOULD IN SOME WAY . . . FORMALLY OR ABSTRACTLY . . . REMAIN AS THE CENTER OR MATRIX OF THE PROJECT, WITH THE CONCEPTUAL POSTER SERIES SERVING AS A REFERENCE POINT IN THE DESIGN PROCESS.

THE QUOTES DOCUMENTED IN SECTION ONE AND FIVE SHOULD ALWAYS SERVE AS A MORAL AND SPIRITUAL ANCHOR.

EXORDIUM

5.0 Naming and Graphic Design

6.0 Mandatory Project Directives


��

�

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

figure 22

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

�

��

��

figure 23

� ��

��

��

�

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�

�

0º

10

� ��

��

��

figure 24

the commons at kensington a transformationpages.uoregon.edu/chan/kansas commons.pdfby the...

Documents