Thesis Research by Amy Groome

BRIDGING THE TRANSIENT GENERATION CO-LIVING HOUSING IN SAN FRANCISCO THESIS 2017

AMY GROOME

SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA

CONTENTS 04

STATEMENTS

CASE STUDIES

SITE: CONTEXT + ANALYSIS

CRITERIA MATRIX

PLAN PROTOTYPES

ACCESSIBILITY APPLICATIONS

CODE

THESIS FOCUS + GOALS

RELATED RESEARCH

THE WELL BUILDING STANDARD

WORKS CITED

PROJECT STATEMENT For my thesis project, I am designing a four-story 21,803 sq. ft. former boutique hotel to address housing needs in the Financial District of San Francisco. Similar spaces have been developed in cities around the world, including London and New York where the populations of generation X and Y are increasing at a rate exceeding the housing market. The co-living space will provide residents with a social, community lifestyle, and also engage the surrounding community and tourists.

THESIS STATEMENT Human behavior research and sociology inform a design that encourages community interaction and addresses the needs of individual residents. The Well Building Standard establishes a set of guidelines for a community space that serves a highly transient, active demographic in the city. Clear wayfinding and brand identity make short-term residents feel at home and in control of their environment, and creates a clear separation between public and private environments.

CLIENT

MILLENNIALS / GENERATION Y

1.IN-HOUSE AMENITIES: Millennials and Gen-Y apartment

seekers are demanding more resources at their fingertips. + Fitness Centers + Laundry facilities + Convenience stores + Green space and gardens

2.SECURITY: Young adults leaving home want to feel safe. + Well-lit sidewalks + Controlled access entries + Security technology

3.ACCESS OVER OWNERSHIP OF GOODS: Millennials report preferring to spend on experiences rather than on material goods and real estate. + Event spaces + Proximity to downtown + Focus design on social spaces

4.SUSTAINABILITY AND HEALTH: People today want to invest in

% WILLING TO PAY MORE

their health and environmentally conscious goods + services. + Well Building Standard + Sustainablity as a selling point BRAND TRUST HEALTH BENEFITS NATURAL INGREDIENTS

ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY SOCIAL VALUE

The Nielson Company Global Survey on Purchasing Drivers

CASE STUDY 1 THE COLLECTIVE OLD OAK

Firm: PLP Architecture Location: London, United Kingdom Built: 2016 Size: 52,493 SF Target Group: Young Professionals ages 21-35 Amenities: + Rooftop Terrace + Communal Kitchens and Lounges + Gym + Restaurant + Spa + Laundrette + Co-Working Space

In big cities such as London,“co-living appeals to millennials who are settling down later and remaining commitment-free and ‘transient’ for longer than any previous generation” (Mairs). The co-living spaces that are popping up in cities around the world are a hybrid of student housing and hotels. The Collective Old Oak is the world’s largest co-living block with 550 bedrooms and numerous amenities. Communal living areas are used for events and parties to encourage a community atmosphere. CEO of the company behind The Collective, Reza Merchant, explained to Dezeen Magazine that “experiences are what people value above material possessions,” in today’s market (Mairs). Due to this shift in values, co-living spaces focus more on shared experience than individual amenities.

The11-storey facility is laid out with communal lounges, kitchens and bathrooms on each floor. Two apartments, called “twodios,” share a small kitchenette, and there is a larger communal kitchen shared by 30-70 residents on each floor.

“Twodio” Studio Plan (The Collective)

“Twodio” Units Common Areas

Typical Level Circulation

CASE STUDY 2

CARMEL PLACE MICRO-LIVING

Firm: nArchitects Location: Manhattan, New York City Built: 2016 Size: 35,000 SF Target Group: Young Professionals ages 21-35 Amenities: + Den + Communal Kitchens and Lounges + Gym + Public Roof Terrace + Retail + Laundry

The Carmel Place development was the winning proposal in the adAPT NYC initiative with the goal “to accommodate the city’s growing small household population” (nArchitects). The design uses modular construction, and is broken up into four 11’-wide towers. Each module apartment is pre-fabricated then hoisted into place by a crane. TERRACE 1061 SF

LOBBY

849 SF

GYM

1749 SF

BIKE STORAGE 354 SF

GREEN ROOF 1331 SF

RETAIL 525 SF

TENANT STORAGE DEN/ STUDY 324 SF

LAUNDRY PATIO bUILDING AXON

The site is composed of 55 loft-like rental apartments, ranging in from 260-360 square feet each. 40% of the 55 rental units at Carmel Place are dedicated for affordable housing. The modular apartments have accessible restrooms, loft storage, and a small balcony with an 8-foottall sliding window. Micro-Apartment Plans

CASE STUDY 3 WELIVE APARTMENTS

Firm: WeWork/ WeLive Location: Crystal City, DC Built: 2016 Size: ~25,000 SF Target Group: People in their 20s and 30s Amenities: + Self-serving convenience store + Communal Kitchens and Lounges + Gym + Fitness Center + Laundry/ Arcade + Library

The co-working company, WeWork, has begun designing co-living developments in big cities. A 12-floor old office building in Crystal City was renovated to accomodate 216 residential units and plenty of living ammenities. The micro-units are broken up into “studio, “studio+” and “studio max” and range from 300-660 SF. Private Units Common Areas

“NEIGHBORHOOD” STAIR

CIRCULATION AND ZONING

The residential zone is divided into three “neighborhoods” consisting of three floors each. Each neighborhood shares a community chef kitchen and its own unique amenity space. “The thinking is that residents will naturally self-identify and organize near people with similar hours, hobbies and lifestyles” (McFarland). The neighborhoods are connected by an internal stair and share the same color and finish palette. Residents describe themselves as “more experience-oriented than possession-focused,” and thus sacrIfice space and personal belongings for community engagement and social activities.

“NEIGHBORHOOD” STAIR

VERTICAL CIRCULATION AND ZONING

CASE STUDY 4 SAETTEDAMMEN

Architects: Theo Bjerg and Palle Dyrebord Location: HillerĂ¸d, Denmark Built: 1972 Size: 322,917 SF (3 Hectares) Target Group: Families Amenities: + Community Kitchen/ Dining Hall + TV Room + Playroom + Laundry + Sauna + Central commons

Denmark pioneered the concept of co-housing as early as 1972. Coliving encouraged a social lifestyle that was especially beneficial in child development. Saettedammen’s co-housing community consists of 27 independent residences divided between nine houses. Private residences vary from 1,500 to 1,940 square feet and are flexible by design. A simple bearing ceiling beam spans the entire home to allow residents to move non-load-bearing walls according to their changing needs.

Open / Public Semi-Public Private SITE PLAN

The site plan is organized as townhouse units around a large “commons.” The community is ‘inwardly oriented” in order to be separate from the public, but be open within the community. Common areas are flooded with natural light, while private residences look out upon the commons with fewer windows for privacy.

LOCATION

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA

SITE

8 MISSION STREET, SAN FRANCISCO Amenities/Landmarks:

Across the street from the iconic Ferry Building which holds a weekly farmers market and houses small restaurants and cafes. The old building is known for its elegant interior arches, steel trusses, and overhead skylights.

Neighboring the San Francisco Railway Museum which has its own green rooftop space and historic streetcars. Located near the heart of the Financial District, a hub for banks and corporate offices.

CULTURE:

Mission street drag is a more â&#x20AC;&#x153;artsyâ&#x20AC;? scene with the Academy of Art University, Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, Cartoon Art Museum, Timothy Cummings Art Gallery, and SF Camerawork hosting pop-up photography exhibitions. The SoMa area is home to many co-working spaces and iconic tech companies. Salesforce, voted #1 largest Tech Employer in San Francisco by the San Francisco Business Times, is just a block away.

SITE

ANALYSIS + CONTEXT

Demographics of South of Market (SoMa) neighborhood:

Average household size is 1.9 people as compared to 2.3 people city wide + Only 19.9% of households are married-couple families + Only 30.4% of SoMa residents are California born

San Francisco Census 2010:

+ Largest percentage of the population (10.9%) were ages 25-29 + Median age of 38.5 + Second to largest race in the area is Asian-specifically Chinese + 56% of the residents are non-family households, with 38.6% living alone. + Renter-occupied housing units are 64.2% of all housing in the city

Access to transportation:

+ Ferries at the San Francisco Ferry Terminal leave for Sausalito, Oakland, and Alameda + Embarcadero Bart Station and San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) are only two blocks away. + The F Market Streetcar runs along the Embarcadero.

DI IL BU

Y RR

E SU AN

R PA

-4

ADERO 1

EMBARC

WELLNESS AND EXERCISE: + Walk Score of 94: Daily errands do not require a car + Bike Score of 84: There are flat, dedicated biking lanes along The Embarcadero. The site is adjacent to two bicycle friendly roads, and Steuart Street connects to a network of trails that lead into Sue Bierman Park nearby.

FE IL

RK PA

AN M

Y RR

E SU

-4

ADERO 1

EMBARC

Transportation Legend: Bike + Pedestrian Friendly MUNI Station BART Station

Street Car Ferry Station

BUILDING ANALYSIS

WINDOWS + NATURAL LIGHT THREE OUT OF FOUR EXTERIOR WALLS HAVE WINDOWS WITH NATURAL LIGHT AND VIEWS. RESIDENTIAL UNITS SHOULD LINE THESE WALLS.

COLUMN GRID

A REGULAR COLUMN GRID COULD DICTATE INTERIOR ZONING/ ORGANIZATION.

CIRCULATION

THE TWO STREET-LEVEL ENTRANCES DO NOT LINE UP, BUT INSTEAD CREATE CIRCULATION AROUND A CENTRAL AXIS.

SUN + WIND + CLIMATE San Francisco is famous for its “microclimates” which cause patches of the city to have different weather conditions. The East Bay region is typically warmer than the Pacific coast West side of the city. Temperature ranges from 5060 degrees Fahrenheit. Wind speeds range from 5-26 mph with the strongest currents coming from the North East waterfront.

Sunlight is often blocked in the morning by a blanket of fog that creeps in from the Pacific West. The site has optimal access to Eastern sunlight facing the Bay.

5 6

2 3 4

700

Gym Rooftop Terrace

960

6 5, 7

1,200 270+

Lounge Cafe Reception

Kitchen

2, 3, 4

1 1, 4 1, 3

600 170 450 Y Y Y

Y Y Y

Y Y

N N

Y N

N N

L L

M M

H M

Y N

Y Y

SQ .F O OT N E ED S AD J AC E N CI ES PU B L IC AC DA C ES YL S I G HT PR /V I I E VA W CY S

500

Individual Room Laundry Room

MB I

M: medium N: no

Y: yes

L: low Shared among ~8, easy to clean surfaces High efficiency machines, solid surface finishes Accommodates ~8

H: high

Less than 50 occ. if only one exit. Outdoor furniture

Security considerations Storage, showers, acoustics, durable finishes

Shared among ~8, comfortable and inviting High traffic area, durable furniture and material

BUILDING PROGRAMMING

5,450.75 SF PER FLOOR ~6 SUITES PER FLOOR

PROTOTYPE RESIDENT FLOOR PRIVATE ROOMS

SHARED AREA

FLOOR 01

PRIVATE ROOMS

CAFE

FITNESS

RECEPTION

FLOOR 02-04

PRIVATE ROOMS

KITCHEN

LOUNGE

PLAN PROTOTYPES SCALE: 1/8”=1’0”

14' - 10"

KITCHENETTE

SINGLE RESIDENCE

14' - 0"

LIVING

34' - 9"

487 SF

31' - 5" 15' - 6"

LIVING

19' - 11"

LIVING

11' - 0"

KITCHEN 5'

5' - 0"

9' - 4"

CONNECTED SUITES 974 SF

4 4' - 0"

4' - 0"

2' - 0"

4' - 0"

12' - 0"

4' - 0"

2' - 0"

14' - 0"

2' - 0"

LAUNDRY 644 SF

15' - 0"

30' - 0"

5' - 0"

14' - 0"

15' - 0"

5' - 0"

30' - 0"

12' - 0"

KITCHEN

168 SF

LOUNGE 450 SF

28' - 0"

12' - 0"

0' - 6"

30' - 0"

25' - 0"

1' - 9"

CAFE

1,140 SF

14' - 8"

18' - 0"

RECEPTION 264 SF

2' - 0"

50' - 0"

1' - 0"

12/3/2016 10:30:18 AM

24' - 0"

GYM

960 SF

WaTer SUpplY, drain pipeS and eXpoSed SUrFaCeS under lavatories must be insulated or otherwise configured to protect against contact. There should be no sharp or abrasive surfaces. This is particularly important to prevent burns and other injuries to people who have may have decreased sensation in their legs. One solution is wrapped pipes (Fig. 4). A recommended design solution is to install a removable protective panel under the lavatory (Fig. 5).

610

ACCESSIBILITY PLUMBING

oor has closer and no latch)

BOBRICK PLANNING GUIDE Fig. 4 Lavatory clearances.

C: If 31 max Lavatory height 785

32 min

de approach.

then 24 min Knee clearance

Fig. 7c Perpendicular Transfer.

815

610

48 min Recommended 4 max

Controls are required to be located on control ICC/ANSI 1220 wall. The horzontal placement must be within Controls 102are required to be located on control C: Kneespace not of the 15 inches (380mm) of the centerline wall. The horzontal placement must be within for ages 5 and the opposing wall. 15 inches (380mm) of the centerline of theseat located onrequired under if 30 x 48 inches seat located on the opposing wall. 15 max (760 x 1220mm) clear floor space for parallel 380 15 max approach available 380

34 max

held er head ble from s. See e 25b ernate 18 min 455 er hose 18 min ICC/ANSI h and 455 8 min Knee clearance stub ICC/ANSI accessible Toilet compartment. Fig. 9 Large Wheelchair 205 on.

3-6

36 min

Side wall 915

48 max 1220

33-36

840-915

38 min

mmended

965

38 min 965

16-18

865

Side wall Side wall

760

Allowed lavatory 30 min

30 min

60 min Grab bar required 1525 if seat not provided (ICC/ANSI requires seat)

525

Hand-held shower head and rectangular shower seat available from others. See Figure 25b for alternate shower hose length and water stub location.

11 min 280

Hand-held shower head and rectangular shower seat ICC/ANSI 405 See Figure 25b for alternate shower hose length and water stub location. 27 max

16available min from others.

685

Back wall

30 min 760

Grab bar required if seat not provided (ICC/ANSI requires seat)

Fig. 24a Standard Roll-in Type Shower compartment. n Type Shower compartment.

9 min

760

0 min

8 min

Fig. 23e Grab Bar Locations 205 Fig. 23e Grab Bar Locations

Wall-mtd. Place toilet lavatory bowl as far forward as possible and cut out pipe protection panel Floor-mtd.around toilet bowl

150

Side wall

Bottom of panel should be as high as possible and still conceal and protect pipes

1525

230

6 max

30 min

685

785

with a maximum of 5 pounds of force (lbf) min 56 min nd other operable parts must have a shape thatC: 591500 1420 e tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the min e mounted at 34 inches (865mm) minimum591500 inch Wide Roll-in Shower compartments. finish floor. Lever-operated mechanisms, compartments. are acceptable designs. If a door has a closerRectangular or shower seat Extendseat grab bar available from others Rectangular shower nimum opening and closing requirements. if no seat provided Back wall

To top of gripping surface

60 min

C: When 31 max Lavatory height

Fig. 23d control Locations. control Locations.

150

To top of gripping surface

840-915

To top of

405-455

b bar available from others provided 6 max

33-36

840-915

33-36

12-18 27 min 34C: max 305-455

6 max

17-25 Toe clearance depth

430-635

surface Fig. 5gripping Protective Panel under Lavatory.

n Vestibule.

150

840-915

Clear floor space

ck wall

6 max Toe clearance

33-36

To top of gripping surface

1015

Side wall Side wall

280

75-150Vertical grab bar 18 inches (455mm)ICC/ANSI long (ICC/ANSI) ICC/ANSI 4860max min Wheelchair turning space 1220 1525

40 max

685

230

11 min

75-150

3-6

865

27 min

9 min

16 min 405

ICC/ANSI

27 max 685

The 2010 ADA Standards allow control location to extend to corner

48 max 1220

Above grab bar

Fig. 24b control Locations (with Seat). Fig. 24b control Locations (with Seat).

ACCESSIBILITY DOORS + STAIR

THE CODES GUIDEBOOK FOR INTERIORS

37 15 E G

4 37

BA Y

41 R 37 EA

40 37

AIN

39 37

37 47

67 37

37 37 66

7 37

P SOU

P 61

N YA

P SALI 77 RED 37

MUO P

PIER 38

PIER 40

MUO 8 37

37 37

93 01

SLI

M-2 N

MB-RA

KIN

SALI

MB-O

U BL

M-2

MUO 787 3

WMUO 37

SALI

R 75 A 37 P

SLI

SB-DTR SPD

SLI WMUG

MUO

PIER 36

MUO

RIS

PIER 34

PIER 32

WMUG

PIER 28

MUR

73 37 SB-DTR

SSO

M-1

MUR MUO

P 759 3

16 37

MUR

I-8

1 75

17 37

C-3-O

00 13 37

M-1

WMUG SALI

AR 14 37 T E U S

E AH

M-1

5 75 3WMUG

PIER

RH DTR

TIN

PIE

MUG

12 37

P M-1

PIER 30

RH DTR

MUO

C-3-S

MUO

C-3-S

MUR

MUG

09 35 E

ZONING:

NCT

WMUG

C-3-S

SALI

MUG

MUG NCT

RED 37

N SO 0 8 35 SSIE JE

RED-MX

OAK

WMUG

E EV

11 37

RED

WMUG

MUR

FELL

09 37

RED-MX

27 RED

SLR

1 70

POLK

S VAN NES

081 2

DRUMM

10 37

RC-4

TB DTR

California has adopted the 2012 IBC, IFC, IRC

LESA LECH WA HAYES

DAVIS

C-3-S

MUG

WMUG

C-3-O(SD)

H TE

E 3 5 RN 37 THO

C-3-O(SD)

O AT

RC-4

MUR

C-3-O

FRONT

1 72

GROVE

C-3-G

C-3-O(SD)

RED NAT

ODLET N B GO

035 4

C-3-O(SD)

FULTON

NCT

C-3-S

RSD

N VE

SIO

C-2

C-3-O(SD)

C-3-G

STATEWIDE CODES: 078 8

C-3-R 06 37

MCALLIST

035 1

035 3

C-3-G

026 3

C-3-O(SD)

37 V TE

6 02

Y RR FE DG BL

P 023 3

023 5

C-3-O

026 2

C-3-R 05 37 SSIE

034 7

034 3

034 9

DALE

C-3-G

034 8

029 2 C-3-O

028 9 C-3-O 02

023 2

023 6

076 5

RC-4 034 4

GATE

BREEN

TURK

034 5

034 6 GOLDEN

LARKIN

LTO DR CAR POLK

RED WO

DODGE

076 4

034 0

033 9

033 8

033 7

033 6

074 1

ELM

EDDY

033 0

033 1 RC-4

032 7 P

ELLIS

031 3 C-3-R

031 4

032 6

032 5

033 2 P

033 3

HYDE

033 5

WILLOW

032 3 RC-4

032 2

032 1

OLIVE

032 4

TRINITY

HARLE

ADA

OFARRE

CLAUDE

MABEL

IDEN031

0306

031 5

031 6

031 7

031 8

031 9 RC-4

032 0

MYRTLE

GEARY

030 9MA

026 7

026 8

028 8

028 7

023 7 RNIA

026 1 C-3-O

020 2

020 3

023 1

023 0

CALIFO

026 0

TON

CLAY

C-3-O

023 8

023 9

026 9

C-3-R 029 3 029 4

030 7

030 6

030 5

030 4

030 3

029 6

029 7 POST

025 9 C-3-O

027 0

028 6

MEACH

030 2

C-3-R 029 5

SUT TER

029 8

STOCKT

030 1

CEDAR

RC-4 029 9

030 0

028 5

028 4

028 3

024 0

P 025 8

027 1

RC-4

028 2

028 1

028 0

027 9

HEMLOC

027 6

025 7 C-3-G CCB

027 2

027 3

027 4

027 5

GRANT

BUSH

025 5

025 4RM-3

RM-4

025 6 RM-3

POWELL

RC-4027 7

027 8

FERN

WORTH

PINE

TAYLOR

025 0

025 3

025 2

LEAVEN

HELEN

025 1

024 5

024 6 RM-4

024 7 RM-3

024 8

024 9

ENTO

MASON

SACRAM

024 3

CCB

024 1

024 2

020 1

020 0

019 9 WASHING

BAT TER

RM-4 024 4

022 6

022 5 P

022 4

022 3

022 2

PIE

RC-4

020 4

022 9

021 9

RM-3 021 3

022 1

OMERY

RM-3 022 0

C-3-O 022 8 022 7 MONTG

021 6

RM-3

021 2 RM-3 RC-4

020 8

P CVR 020 9

P 021 0 0211 CRNC

RH-2 021 4 021 5 RM-4

ZONING MAP TRO 8 021

019 0

PIE

017 1

017 2

019 8

020 6

020 7

016 8

016 7

017 3

019 7

019 6

CRNC 019 5

019 4

019 3 CVR

019 2

C-2

SANSOM

018 8

7 018RM-3

RH-3 018 9

017 9 CRNC

019 1

017 5

017 6

CCB

016 6

RH-3

018 2

N JACKSO

RM-4 017 7

RM-4 017 8

RM-1

NCD 018 3

GOYNE

WALL

018 4

RM-4

014 0

014 1

C-2 017 4

PACIFIC

CYRUS BUR

MORRELL

015CH LYN

NCD

015 8

KEARNY

015 9 RM-1 RH-3 RC-3 018 0 018 1 RH-3 RH-3

RH-3 015 7

RM-2 015 6

016 1

P 016 0

VALLEJO

016 5

016 4

PIE

RM-4

NCD 016 3

016 2

ADWAY

013 7

013 6

014 2 C-2

014 3 P

BRO

CCB

RM-2 014 4

014 5

014 6

014 7

014 8 P

SITE + ZONING BROADWAY AY BROADW

VALLEJO

NCD

GREEN

013 5

013 4 RM-1

DAVIS

WHITE

RM-2 014 9

015 0

015 1 RH-2

013 2 RM-1

013 1 NCD

013 0

012 9

012 8 RH-2

RH-2

VALLEJO

015 2

011 3

RM-1 013 3

HAMLIN SHARP

012 5

RM-2

012 7

GREEN

0114

011 5

011 6

011 7

FRONT

EASTMA MOORE

012 0 RH-2

RH-2 012 6

010 2

NCD

011 8

011 9

CODE WARNER 2 RH-3 L 012 O RUS SEL DELGAD

010 1 RM-2

010 0

009 9

009 8

RM-2 012 1

FILBERT

009 7

ALLEN

BE 4T

MUO 03 38

TERRY A FRANCOIS

0.5 Mile MB-RA Scale 1:12,000 when printed at 11” x 17”

San FranciscoBusiness) Zoning Map 02 01 C-2 (Community 14 04 03 • C-2 buildings are required to support active, pedestrian-oriented 07 08 06 05 C-3-G, C-3-O, C-3-O(SD), C-3-R, C-3-S, CCB, CRNC, CVR, M-1, M-2, C-2, commercial uses on MB-RA, MUG, MUO, MUR, NC-2, NC-3, NCD, NCT, RC-3, RC-4, RED,the RED-MX,ground floor. Uses can include a restaurant, 13 12 11 10 09 RH DTR, RH-1, RH-2, RH-3, RM-1, RM-2, RM-3, RM-4, RSD, SALI, SB DTR, SLI, SLR, SPD, SSO, entertainment, retail, or community space. TB DTR, WMUG ZONING DISTRICTS INCLUDED IN THIS MAP:

The Zoning Map of the City and County of San Francisco is established by sections 105 and 106 of the Planning Code, a part of the San Francisco Municipal Code. Zoning Use Districts are established by sections 201, 702, 802, and 902 of the Planning Code.This map incorporates Board of Supervisors’ ordinances enacted through April 2016.

Disclaimer: The City and County of San Francisco (CCSF) does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, completeness or usefulness of any information. CCSF provides this infomation on an “as is” basis without warranties of merchantibility or fitness for a particular purpose, and assumes no responsibility for anyone’s use of the information.

NAMED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS IN THIS MAP:

Broadway NCD, Folsom Street NCT, North Beach NCD, Pacific Avenue NCD

SoMa NCT CITY PLANNING:

PRESIDIO

GOLDEN GATE

S H E E T

PARK

ZN01 WEBSTER 20160101

Northeast Waterfront San Francisco Planning has a list of plants recommended for creating habitat and saving water for the specific address. Recommended species include Box Elder, Yarrow, Bentgrass, Berkeley Sedge, and 60+

CODE

BUILDING + OCCUPANCY USE GROUPS

OCCUPANCY FACTORS

OCCUPANCY LOAD FLOOR 1

TRAVEL DISTANCE

OCCUPANCY LOAD FLOOR 2-4

SPRINKLERED?

Suites Laundry Kitchen Lounge Cafe Lobby Gym

Residential (R-2) Business (B) Business (B) Assembly (A) Assembly (A-2) Assembly Assembly (A-3)

Laundry Cafe Lobby Gym Total

7 67 66 20 160

Suites Kitchen Lounge Per Floor Total

3 Each 18 Total 2 27 47 141

Assembly

Suites Laundry Kitchen Lounge Cafe Lobby Gym

200 Gross 100 Gross 100 Gross 15 Net 15 Net 15 Net 50 Gross

250’-0” 300’-0” 250’-0”

A B R-2

Yes

MAX DEAD END CORRIDOR 44”

OCCUPANCY LOAD ROOF DECK

PLUMBING REQUIREMENTS

R-2 1 Restroom per unit = 24 Floor 1 (A) F: 2 M: 2

REQUIRED EXITS

FLOOR DIAGONAL:

Two exits required on each floor due to occupancy less than 500.

112’-4”

112 '-3

7/8 "

EXIT DISTANCES: 38’-6” Minimum

10/30/2016 10:26:21 AM

95' - 10 21/32"

CODE

TABLES - EGRESS

INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE 2015

CODE

FIRE PERFORMANCE R-2 FIRE SEPARATION:

TABLE 707.3.10 FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING FOR FIRE BARRIER ASSEMBLIES OR HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES

THESIS FOCUS RESIDENT + COMMUNITY

“Had a zookeeper been asked to construct an enclosure suitable for man, writes John Cacioppo, his instructions would have warned him of the ‘obligatory social gregariousness of our species’. Instead, more of us live alone in small apartments, work at home, and shop and socialize online” (Griffin 9). Even though new technology has enabled people to become more “connected” virtually, social isolation and chronic loneliness have been on the rise as a global epidemic. The percentage of households occupied by one person more than doubled from 6% in 1972 to 12% in 2008, and a study by The Mental Health Association in Great Britain found that “48% of people are getting lonelier in general” (Griffin 9). Careers and educations are pulling young individuals away from families and the communities in which they grew up, leading to a rise in ‘anomie,’ the sense of not belonging to a community. Studies in psychology and sociology have shown that the need to belong is both inherent and fundamental (Carvallo 697). Eighty-two percent of people are uncomfortable without close relationships, and suffer from both mental and physical health ailments as a result (Carvallo 698). Co-living spaces have been popping up in cities such as London, New York, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco to both address increasing housing demands, and to provide a “social lifestyle” for young, single workers. Small living quarters, called “microunits,” keep rent affordable and an emphasis on shared community amenities encourages residents to socialize and form relationships. This co-living space will engage the surrounding community and tourists on the street level, and continue the sense of neighborhood culture on residential floors. Theories in Sociology provide guidelines for arranging space to avoid social isolation and stress, and The Well Building Standard acts as a framework for resident’s physical and mental well being.

GOALS

RESIDENT + COMMUNITY All fine architectural values are human values, else not valuable. - Frank Lloyd Wright

1.GOAL: Encourage community interaction and social engagement among residents.

OBJECTIVES: + Provide shared spaces on all floors with room to accommodate everyone. + Keep individual rooms minimalistic and small.

2.GOAL: Design an environment that relieves stress.

OBJECTIVES: + Collaborate with a sociology professor to implement theories of human behavior and address psychological needs. + Implement the Well Building standard.

3.GOAL: Engage members of the surrounding community

OBJECTIVES: + Incorporate a street-level community area such as a coffee shop or retail area. + Apply ADA accessibility provisions. + Apply site and community research

4.GOAL: Appeal to Millennials and Generation Y

OBJECTIVES: + Apply research from generation studies to cater to personality traits and values. + Specify modern appliances and technology to accomodate the modern day worker. + Provide amenities such as a fitness center and cafĂŠ.

5.GOAL: Maximize space in minimal dwelling units OBJECTIVES: + Apply methods seen in Scandinavian design to achieve simplicity and efficiency. + Compartmentalize elements in individual resident dwellings.

RESEARCH

TERRITORIALITY: ROBERT SOMMER STUDY OF TABLE ARRANGEMENT AND INTERACTION

ACTIVE DEFENSE: People choose seats toward the center of a table or the aisle, and face the door.

RETREAT: People choose end chairs toward walls and face away from the door. * Shape of space: irregularly shaped area is difficult to protect, while a compact circular or square area makes defense easier and lessens tensions (Sommer 42).

“Not only must form follow function, but it must assist in every way” (Sommer 5).

COHABITATE: A large sociopetal room that orients everyone toward the

center makes it difficult for people to retreat. This setting can be seen in intimate living rooms, Native American Teepees, and Japanese huts built around the hearth (Sommer 51).

SOCIOPETAL ARRANGEMENT VS SOCIOFUGAL ARRANGEMENT

Hearth

Japanese Tea Ceremony

Outward-Facing Seats

Native American Hut

Lecture Hall

SOMMERâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S FOUR TERRITORIAL ZONES PUBLIC: Courtyards and parks which provide the freedom of access but not necessarily of action. HOME: Regular patrons feel a sense of control and intimacy over a neighborhood cafe. People like to claim local territory.

INTERACTIONAL: Where social gatherings may occur. This territory has clearly marked boundaries and rules of access and egress.

PERSONAL: The most private and inviolate areas belonging to the individual. * When a community room is placed adjacent to a claimed territory, often the members of that territory will take it over. For a space to be shared it should be equidistant from all users.

RESEARCH

SENSE OF BELONGING “GENERATION Y” AND LONELINESS THE TRANSIENT GENERATION: Gen Y has been referred to as a

generation of “nomads,” unwilling to settle down. This restlessness has lead to the “problem of modern loneliness” (Wired Magazine)

THE RISE OF LONELINESS:

+ We no longer live in the same village for generations + Face-to-face connections have been replaced with social networking + Relationships are formed and replaced more easily today A 2015 Study Conducted by Brigham Young University found a 30% rise in mortality in response to chronic loneliness and isolation (Fortune) The death rate in the United States rose last year for the first time in a decade (Fortune)

ENVIRONMENT AND COGNITION: WILLIAM ITTELSON PERCEPTUAL NEIGHBORHOODS: More than simply a marked zone; residents must perceive a set of units as a neighborhood and also perceive themselves as part of the units. TWO PARTS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD:

1. A social neighborhood which comprises the area in which an individual lives and interacts, and in which he involves himself with respect to finding friends and participating in community activities. 2. A physical zone, distinguishable on a map from the surrounding area.

MASLOW’S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS: LOVE + BELONGING

THE NEED TO BELONG: ROY BAUMEISTER BELONGINGNESS HYPOTHESIS: “human beings have a pervasive

drive to form and maintain at least a minimum quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal relationships” (Baumeister 497).

BELONGING AND MOTIVATION: “people prefer achievements that are validated, recognized, and valued by other people over solitary achievements” (498). NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF SOLITUDE: + Maladjustment/ stress + Lack of motivation

+ Eating Disorders + Behavioral pathologies/ depression

SMALL GROUPS AND CULTURE CREATION: GARY FINE IDIOCULTURE: Small group culture; a system of knowledge, beliefs,

behaviors, and customs shared by members of an interacting group to which members can refer and employ as the basis of further interaction.

GROUP DEVELOPMENT: Groups need common goals, comparable memberships, and similar environments.

WAYFINDING

IMPORTANCE AND STRATEGIES Successful placemaking and wayfinding designs transcend time because they “link different people toether, even if they do not share a common language or destination” (Gibson 46). SPATIAL ANXIETY: “someone experiencing trouble in finding their way may experience increased blood pressure, headaches, feelings of desperation and weariness” (Hidayetoglu 50). IT ALL LOOKS THE SAME TO ME: The modern era has brought an “increased modularity of interior design” causing spaces within buildings and even among neighborhoods to seem “endlessly repeated, resulting in spatial perception and wayfinding problems” (Hidayetoglu 51).

COGNITIVE MAP: We all use a variety of strategies when navigating space. Most often, people envision a two-dimensional map and rely on landmarks along the way. Before identification signs are designed, it is crucial to develop a clear plan and circulation.

ARCHITECTURAL DELINEATION: Visual cues such as change in ceiling height, flooring, and thresholds implicitly direct visitors. SEGMENTATION: When navigating, we need a break or landmark approximately every 100 yards.

PROGRAMMING A strong central axis, a network of districts, landmark focal points, and underlying grids have been used in planning for centuries. It is imperitive to consider wayfinding during early plan programming. Symbols on the plan call out key identification signage

PRELIMINARY CIRCULATION + SIGNAGE PLAN (Calori 57).

Projected circulation pathways

COLOR: + Hierarchy of value + Color associations and psychological effects + Site context and brand Contrast is crucial for legibility

Red dominates because color values are not harmonious

SUGGESTED SUSTAINABLE SIGNAGE MATERIAL + 3Form Ecoresin + Paperstone + EverGreen Fabric

THE WELL BUILDING STANDARD CONCEPTS + OBJECTIVES

1.AIR: Optimize and achieve indoor air quality. Strategies include removal of airborne contaminants, prevention and purification + Ventilation Design + Prohibit Smoking Indoors + VOC reduction in paint, flooring, furniture and finishing + Entryway walk-off system + Antimicrobial high-touch surfaces + Operable Windows

2.WATER: Optimize water quality while promoting accessibility + Access to drinking fountains; at least one dispenser located within 100 feet of occupied floor space

3.NOURISHMENT: Encourage healthy eating habits + Availability and promotion of fruits and vegetables + Food allergy and nutrition labeling + Proper hand washing facilities with paper towel dispension and liquid soap + Sugar and ingredient restrictions in food service facilities + Gardening space (1 square foot per occupant)

4.LIGHT: Minimize disruption to the bodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s circadian rhythm; improve energy, mood and productivity

+ Circadian lighting design + Shielding of lamps with high luminance + Glare reduction and shade controls + Specify surface materials with a high LRV + Window access for 75% of occupants

5.FITNESS: Utilize building design technologies and knowledgebased strategies to encourage physical activity + Wayfinding promotes stair use + Stair width no less than 56â&#x20AC;? between handrails + Artwork, daylighting (skylight), aesthetic appeal of stairs + Fitness programs and bicycle shares + Outdoor pedestrian amenities (bench, drinking fountain, plaza, public art...) + Building address has a walk score of 70+ + Shower and changing facility

6.COMFORT: Create an indoor environment that is distractionfree, productive, and soothing

+ Comply with ADA standards for accessible design + An acoustic plan that separates loud and quiet zones + Thermal considerations + Separation of living/working zones from kitchens and public restrooms which produce odors + Sound barriers and acoustic materials

7.MIND: Support mental and emotional health + Display of resources for wellbeing, subscription to magazine + Meaningful integration of public art + Celebration of place and culture + Biophilia and human-nature interactions + Access to privacy + Ceiling height proportional to room dimensions + Wayfinding plans to provide spatial familiarity

WORKS CITED CASE STUDIES

“Carmel Place (My Micro NY).” nArchitects, http://narchitects.com/work/carmel- place/. Accessed 10 November 2016. Mairs, Jessica. “World’s largest co-living complex promises residents ‘everything at their fingertips.” Dezeen. N.p., 28 April 2016. Web. 12 November 2016. http://www.dezeen.com/2016/04/28/collective-old-oak-common-co- living-plp-architecture-willesden-junction-london-housing/. McFarland, Matt. “This new apartment is like a college dorm for grown-ups.” Washington Post. N.p., 2 May 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/innovations/wp/2016/05/02/wework-wants-to-be-your-landlord-and-it- has-some-fresh-ideas-. Accessed 13 November 2016. “New York to Complete First Prefabricated “Micro-Apartments” this Year.” ArchDaily. N.p., 24 February, 2015, http://www.archdaily.com/602157/new-york-to- complete-first-prefabricated-micro-apartments-this-summer. Accessed 10 November 2016. Sættedammen. http://www.xn--sttedammen-d6a.dk/. Accessed 06 November 2016. “Sættedammen.” The Library of the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, http:// www.arkitekturbilleder.dk/bygning-S%C3%A6ttedammen-478. Accessed 06 November 2016. Schoenauer, Norbert. 6,000 Years of Housing. W.W. Norton & Company, 2003. The Collective. The Collective Partners LLP 2015, https://www.thecollective.co.uk/ coliving/old-oak. Accessed 10 November 2016.

WORKS CITED

BUILDING CODES + SITE INFORMATION Harmon, Sharon. The Codes Guidebook for Interiors. John Wiley & Sons, 2011. International Building Code 2015. 2016 ICC, http://codes.iccsafe.org/app/book/ toc/2015/I-Codes/2015%20IBC%20HTML/index.html. Accessed International Code Council.International Code Council, INC. 2016, http://www. iccsafe.org/. Accessed O2 October 2016. “Planning Guide for Accessible Restrooms.” Bobrick. 5 March 2016 ,http://www. bobrick.com/documents/planningguide.pdf. Accessed 23 October 2016 “San Francisco Property Information.” San Francisco Planning Department, v 4.1, 2016, http://propertymap.sfplanning.org/. Accessed O2 October 2016. SFGOV. City and County of San Francisco, http://sfgov.org/open-gov. Accessed O2 October 2016. “South Of Market (SOMA)...” City-Data 2016,http://www.city-data.com/ neighborhood/South-Of- Market-San-Francisco-CA.html. Accessed 02 October 2016. The Well Building Standard. International Well Building Institute. 2016. https:// www.wellcertified.com/node/7/download/ e26192f5c2be6959d36a88d7169e368c. Accessed 23 October 2016

WORKS CITED

HUMAN BEHAVIOR + WAYFINDING RESEARCH Baumeister, Roy F., and Mark R. Leary. “The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation.” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 117, no. 3, 1995., pp. 497- 529doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497. Brüssow, Sven ;Frankenstein, Julia; Hölscher, Christoph; Ruzzoli, Felix. “The Language of Landmarks: The Role of Background Knowledge in Indoor Wayfinding.” Center for Cognitive Science, vol. 13, no. 1, 2012, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22806666. Accessed 19 September 2016. Calori, Chris. Signage and Wayfinding Design. John Wiley & Sons, 2007. Carvallo, Mauricio, and Shira Gabriel. “No Man is an Island: The Need to Belong and Dismissing Avoidant Attachment Style.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 32, no. 5, 2006., pp. 697709doi:10.1177/0 146167205285451. Entis, Laura. “Chronic Loneliness Is a Modern-Day Epidemic.” Fortune Magazine, Time Inc, 22 June 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/06/22/loneliness-is-a- modern-day-epidemic/. Accessed 21 November 2016. Fine, Gary Alan. “Small Groups and Culture Creation: The Idioculture of Little League Baseball Teams.” American Sociological Review, vol. 44, no. 5, 1979, pp. 733–745. www.jstor.org/stable/2094525. Gibson, David. The Wayfinding Handbook. Princeton Architectural Press, 2009. Griffin, Jo. “The Lonely Society.” Mental Health Foundation 2010, https://www. mentalhealth.org.uk/sites/default/files/the_lonely_society_report. pdf. Accessed 03 December 2016. Hidayetoglu, Lutfi. “The Effects of Color on Indoor Wayfinding and the Evaluation of the Perceived Environment.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 32, no. 1, 2012, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0272494411000624. Accessed 19 September 2016. Ittelson, William H., City University of New York. Environmental Psychology Program, and City University of New York. Center for Research in Cognition and Affect. Environment and Cognition, Seminar Press, New York, 1973. Ng, Eddy S. W., Schweitzer Linda, and Lyons Sean T. “New Generation, Great Expectations: A Field Study of the Millennial Generation.” Journal of Business and Psychology vol. 25, no. 2, 2010: 281-92. http:// link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10869-010-9159-4. Accessed 19 September 2016. Sommer, Robert. Personal Space; the Behavioral Basis of Design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J, 1969.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS JILL KIECOLT, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Sociology: Virginia Tech LIS RUSSO Design Strategist: Gensler LAUREN SHAW Senior Designer: WeLive JOE WALSH Senior Project Manager: Related Companies, San Francisco