Greenwich Works
Product brochure
Stakeholders
4-45 Critical Observer How is the project rooted in broader context? Prospective Tenant What kind of dwelling is offered?
8
Real estate developer What is the economic opportunity?
18
Contractor How is the building made?
30
Planning Authority What value does the project add to the city?
40
Bibliography
47
Critical Observer
Alongside the rise of new economy since mid-1970s, an economic regime that demands impermanence, uncertainty and dynamism has emerged. The shift from manufacturing to service-driven economic growth rewards precarious and fragmented episodes of employment, ideologically substituting the permanently employed „company man” of mid-20th century into a self-entrepreneur, who takes workations instead of vacations, is ought to embrace dynamism over stability. The workers of this economic arrangement are incentivized to stay flexible, run microenterprises, and just generally remain “available” for working on-demand. Meanwhile, their rights and legislative mechanisms of stability have been continuously eroded, as employment regulation is often seen as a hindrance to economic growth. This shift has implications not only in the workplace, but even more so away from it – in the domestic environment of workers. As Mauritizo Lazzarato (2006: 136) has pointed out, the 20th century worklife division can no longer be taken for granted, as “precariousness, hyperexploitation, mobility, and hierarchy are the most obvious characteristics of metropolitan immaterial labour [..] This kind of working existence it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish leisure time from work time. In a sense, life becomes inseparable from work.” Particularly for the immaterial labour, the live/work balance has melted into a single continuum. Liberated from the factory floor, always connected via Wi-Fi or 4G, for many work can take place anytime and anywhere. While the contemporary workplace management practices incentivize innovation and overtime with more „fun” unorthodox working environments, for many salaried and freelance workers alike their home has become a workplace. And while architecture alone cannot offer much to the increasingly insecure and fluid lifestyle of the flexible workforce, it can envision alternative forms for programmes such as housing or workplace, or potentially a combination of the two - a fully serviced workhome. Home then is what remains constant when work gets dissolved into several parallel activities and locations. Whilst certain modes of work are inseparable from their dedicated workplace, be it a hospital ward
4,5
of a factory floor, others can increasingly be decoupled from a concrete physical environments and institutionalized relations. In fact, nowadays many jobs have been atomized into multilayered stacks of subcontractors, outsourced services and telepresence. Increasingly often one can do his or her job without remaining in a particular workplace. The project’s brief is a model for a spatial product of an affordable and social place to live and work for 900 households. It would combine the domestic and productive environments in a single housing complex. In order for it to work financially and socially, it has achieve an economy of scale and generate density of expertise among the workers. To provide the most potent setting for deploying the proposed model, London was chosen as a test site. It is a global epicentre of finance, talent, as well as inequality and fierce competition. It is a city where extreme wealth accumulation produces a mix of opportunity and risks of marginalization. Also, London is the epitome of one of the most deregulated labour markets in Europe, as well the highest real estate prices in the world, therefore it offers the most explicit backdrop for the project. Affordability and socioeconomic marginalization are two issues that underpin the emergent flexible modes of employment. In economic terms this translated to two fundamentals: driving costs down and density up. Suitable architectural basis for such parameters is the typology of mass housing. Not only has it been a vehicle for societal transformation during the past century, but also ir offers the most robust perspective on addressing a problem that is shared by a large part of the society nowadays. On a general level this project attempts to seek architecture’s position within the economy driven by global investment, where many buildings tend to be merely by-products of wealth management schemes and business plans. It investigates how a market-driven architectural project can be programmed to fulfil a certain social agenda while remaining grounded in current reality. Rather than taking a polemic position against what usually is attributed to neo-liberalism, the project accepts the current socioeconomic circumstances as a given.
“Unfocusing to see not only buildings but also the almost infrastructural matrix space in which the building is suspended, it is clear that countless repeatable formulas and recipes make the most of the space in the world. Resorts, golf courses, malls, suburbs, retail, and now entire cities like free zones are designed as “spatial products.” Currently, McKinsey consultants, World Bank yes-men, financial quants, or management specialists make space as a byproduct of econometrics or some other technical apparatus [..] But an architect can hack the protocols of the most contagious spatial products.” (Easterling, 2015)
Prospective tenant
The atomization of work
Large windows provide generous views to the outside and amount of daylight
“‘Flexibility’ is the slogan of the day, and when applied to the labour market it augurs an end to the ‘job as we know it’, announcing instead the advent of short-term contracts, rolling contracts or no contracts, and of job positions with no inbuilt security but with the ‘until further notice’ clause. Working life is saturated with uncertainty.” (Bauman, 2002: 147)
2.7 metres of clear floor-to ceiling height provides spacious premises and margin for additional technical installations.
Multiple levels for most units distinctively divide zones between home and work activities.
The transformation of capitalism in the late-20th century is characterized by the surge of flexibility, which has become the basic condition of policies and legislations in the Western political sphere. In confronting the rigid operating logic of the Fordist era, flexibility has been enforced in production, consumption, and labour relations among other aspects of social life. It underpins what is called flexible accumulation - a globalized, highly fluid and volatile mode of capital’s reproduction, whose “enhanced powers of flexibility and mobility”, while granting a greater field of “freedoms” and responsibilities, have simultaneously undermined the position and security of the majority of workforce. (Harvey, 1990: 147)
Free floor plan allows virtually infinite ways of partitioning various zones of each unit apartment
Home is where the work is Employment is not what it used to be. We work longer hours and irregular periods. Increasingly often, one is incentivized to take the role of a self-entrepreneur rather than employee. Yet, the homes we inhabit are predominantly designed as a pace for privacy and recreation; work is supposed to take place elsewhere. However, this is not the case anymore, and 14% of the UK workforce is estimated to be using their home as a one of their workplaces. What Greenwich Works offer is an innovative housing development scheme, where the needs of a workplace are embedded into a product of affordable housing. 8,9
The effects of the restructured labour relations are far reaching; they affect individual lifestyles but also echo in way the built environment is produced and utilized. This essay primarily draws on studies from the United Kingdom and London in particular, since it has been one of the cradles of neo-liberalism, and therefore a place where the deregulatory shock and the flexibility doctrine have been enforced the most. Today Britain has one of the most deregulated labour markets among the world’s developed economies. (OECD, 2013: 78) During the onset of the neo-liberal era in the mid1970s, flexibility was seen as a remedy to the looming macroeconomic problems of the Western economies, such as the prospect of financial capital migrating to parts of the world with lower labour costs. Therefore “each economic setback was attributed in part, fairly or not, to a lack of →
More than a home The estate offers a range of services to support your everyday life, work and leisure.
Meeting facilities
Cafeteria
Medical centre
Project rooms
Nursery
High speed internet
Co-working space
Gym
Secure access
24 hour reception
Laundry
Community gardens
A decent location
Co-working zone intersects with the main circulation route to individual units.
Space for your project Project spaces are generic compartments in public amenity part of the building, intended to provide home workers’ projects with adequate space and infrastructure. Weekly, monthly or yearly lease offers the best flexibility and value for your next project.
10 , 11
The initial pilot project of a workhome estate is located in Morden Wharf, a tranquil area that has been recently cleared from industry. 900 workhome units are proposed on a site facing the Thames river. With London City Airport just across, the setting provides a proximity to infrastructure and qualities that the city offers, while remaining in a comfortable distance from its drawbacks.
The right home for the right lifestyle Maisonette
Atelier
Apartment
Two level unit with double entrance door, providing the possibility to separate the unit into two separate zones.
Single level unit with direct access from the main circulation route. Ideal for walk-in clients.
Unit type that offers more privacy. Accessible via private stair from the main circulation route.
Ground floor workshop
Attic studio
Accessible directly from the outside, both - front and back of the building. Suitable for material production and service sector.
Situated on the top floor, the units offer generous ceiling height and unconstrained floor plan.
Pre-installed wall openings make division of entrances easy
Above: typical entrance situation for a maisonette unit. Double entrance doors provide an option for separating the entrance for business and residential use. Right: attic studio unit type. With 3.5 metre clear ceiling height, the unit type offers more light and volume. Pictured: photo studio. Below: ground level studio with direct access to the street. Pictured: crafts workshop.
Three sizes fit all
12 , 13
Small 110 m2
Medium 220 m2
Large 440 - ... m2
Two level maisonette, affording 1-3 compartments. Effective width: 3.8 metres. Compact bathroom and kitchenette installed on both floors.
Two level maisonette, affording 1-7 compartments. Effective width: 7.8 metres. Compact bathroom and kitchentte installed on both floors.
Two level maisonette, affording up to 12 compartments. Effective width starting from 15.8 metres. Suitable for co-living households or irregular workhomes
The fine print
Modification is welcome
Terms & Conditions
As a tenant, you are allowed to transform your unit according to the needs of your lifestyle and occupation. 1
t The leased premises are intended for residential and commercial use only
C C C C C
t Leave any time, 2 weeks notice period
build partition walls* drill holes in the walls and ceiling apply interior finishes change floor covering install additional substructures (i.e. extra ventilation or lighting) *
1
All modifications are subject to examination by the landlord in accordance with buildings technical specification. Upon terminating the lease, the unit has to be returned to its basic state.
→ flexibility and to the lack of “structural reform” of labour markets.” (Standing, 2011: 6) As a result, the ideological program of labour market flexibility was deployed on several levels – skill flexibility was supposedly allowing workers to quickly adjust their competencies, job flexibility enabled moving workers across positions and geographies with minimum cost, employment flexibility led to indeterminate terms of employment, wage flexibility allowed tweaking wage levels in accordance with the constantly changing terms of competitiveness, and so on. (Standing, 2011: 6)
advocates of flexible labour relations might cite this as an example of the free markets liberating workers from their singular, inflexible career narratives, it has also subjected them to new vulnerabilities. According to Maurizio Lazzarato, the neoliberal promise “of emancipation (pleasure, self-fulfilment, recognition, experimentation with different forms of life, mobility, etc.) has been rendered void,” and therefore “transformed into the imperative to take on the risks and costs that neither business nor the State are willing to undertake.” (2011: 93) 1
Globalization, de-industrialization, automation, increased mobility and interconnectivity have all reformed the stable, lifelong employment into an array of sequential or even parallel jobs that one is supposed to undertake during his or her lifetime. The Fordist terms of employment were characterized by far reaching time horizons, as workers could expect “life-long employment inside a company which might or might not be immortal, but whose life-span stretched nonetheless well beyond theirs.” (Bauman, 2000: 146) In contrast, the quest for labour flexibility has reconfigured work as something impermanent, detached from a certain place, and increasingly scarce, as “jobless recoveries” from the recent global financial crises have indicated. (Harvey, 2014: 108) In the United Kingdom the number of selfemployed, flexible workers is the highest than any at point over the last 40 years. It has increased steadily since the 1980s, and, reaching up to 15% of the total labour force. Furthermore, the rise of employment in the UK ever since the 2008 financial crisis has been predominantly due to self-employed workers. (Office for National statistics, 2014) While the
This is explicated by the fact that nonemploying new businesses accounted for 90% of total business growth since the year of 2000. (Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, 2015) Thus, rather than getting a job, increasingly large amount of people are resorting to self-entrepreneurialism, and generate a job for themselves, taking on the externalized risks and costs. This has alarmed the UK Parliament (2015), which in a report has concluded that:
t The leased premises are not to be sublet without the approval of the landlord t In-kind contributions to the maintenance of the estate are expected from tenants. This can be offset with a monthly payment to the cleaning fund of Tenant’s association t Any modifications in the units are to be inspected and approved by Landlord t Unit size and type allocation is a meanstested procedure
Applicable for tenures of at least one year. Short term tenures are limited to minor modifications. *
Services at the doorstep Every unit is equipped with digital management console. It enables you to control the local micro-climate, book meeting rooms, check for mail and connect with the other home workers at the estate.
The functions include:
: : : : : :
intercom change room temperature book meeting rooms
Money matters The estate offers a rent-only tenure. In additional to the government’s rental sector legislation, the charter of the Land Trust (the owner and effective landlord of the estate) implies additional tenant protection and rent controls. G The rent is pegged to the local average of the borough at a rate of 50-60 percent. G One month’s rent payable as a deposit. G Business seed funding is available in exchange for shares in tenant’s business
order food activate wi-fi jamming immediate weather forecast
Eligibility criteria R Below average earnings (£35,238 p/a)* R To receive sub-market rent, the leaseholder must be self-employed R Primarily working at the premises R No outstanding tax debts R UK Citizen / EU Citizen / registered asylum seeker / a valid residence permit / tourist visa holder. * If the annual turnover of exceeds the average annual income in the borough, a percentage of the turnover is to be paid in additional to rent to the Trust.
14 , 15
“the continued growth of this type of work raises questions about the changing structure of the UK’s labour market, and the implications of growing numbers of individuals with less predictable income and weaker job security.” 1 It is a fact that the average income from self-employment in the UK has fallen by a fifth since 2008. (Office for National statistics, 2014)
Real estate developer
The Opportunity The growing number of indeterminately employed workers presents a challenge and an opportunity to the residential real estate market - how do you develop new homes that can also be used as a workplace? Insights into labour markets indicate a shift towards more fluid continuum between “life” and “work”, in fact for many they have become inseparable. This presents an opportunity to develop a mix-use housing scheme, tailored for salaried work at home. A mix-use dwelling complex offering flexible, generously-sized units and on-
site business service provision. Moreover, the development has to offer genuinely affordable rents - it is not a matter of philanthropy as much as an existential threat. The downward pressure on middle and lower wages is posing a medium-term risk to the increasingly atomized ecosystems of outsourced businesses, which are predominantly run by flexible workforce. This project presents an opportunity to expand the real estate portfolio into a new sphere of housing that might become a standard in the medium term.
Above: view from the proposed pilot-project site in Greenwich Peninsula towards Canary Wharf.
Organization structure
Program
The three key ingredients of the model are Residential (workhome units), Workplace (project rooms, meeting rooms and tangential spaces), and Services (Retail, catering, business services, etc.)
Indicative division of 54,000 m2 building program for the pilot project in Greenwich Peninsula. Flexible floor plan allows easy re-division of the program even during the construction and postoccupancy phases.
Principal investment Medium workhome units 15%
Large workhome units 15%
GLA & Government subsidized loan
Services & retail
Rent
%
Circulaton 8%
Se
r vi
ce
s
ROI (~ 4.6%) 4% Co-working & project spaces 2% Conference & Meeting facilities 4% Admin. & public services
18 , 19
Land (lease / transfer of ownership)
Land Trust
On-site services
Re
Small wokrhome units 30% 10 %
Residential
Hybrid wokrhome units 22%
s id
e n ti
al
Third party investment
82
Workplace
Live-work spaces
In-kind contributions to maintenance
Tenants’ association
In such circumstances, inherently, one is set to take the responsibility not only for innovation and production, but also “for poverty, unemployment, precariousness, welfare benefits, low wages, reduced pensions etc., as if these were individual’s “resources� and “investments�. (Lazzarato, 2011: 51) Moreover, as Standing (2011: 45) notes, even unemployment becomes one’s own “responsibility�, as everyone is deemed “more or less employable� in the neo-liberal framework.
Insights
Self-entrepreneurship is on the rise. In 2014, about 98% of all businesses in London were small or medium enterprises (SMEs).1 As a group, it makes up a significant force not only in the business environment, but also urban regeneration. Government’s continuous efforts towards cultivating the culture of entrepreneurship and incentives for stimulating SMEs provides a stable medium and long term prospect of a growing customer base for the workhome spatial product.
There were estimated 112 co-working spaces, 34 business incubators and 16 start-up accelerators in 2014, and over half of those were established in the two preceding year.2 At the same time, due to the lack of clear legislation it is unclear how many businesses are operating from home; it is suggested by some research that over two thirds of home workers are operating in the “grey area�. What is clear, is that the number of such workers has been steadily increasing over the last decades.
Small, non-employing businesses dominate the market 3
Self-employment is on the rise 4
173%
1 Future of London. (2014). Small businesses and regeneration: what role for LAs? | Future of London. [online] Available at: http://www.futureoflondon.org.uk/2014/12/16/ small-businesses-and-regeneration-what-role-for-las/ [Accessed 16 Jun. 2016]. 2 Rethinking SME workspace. (2014). In: Rethinking SME workspace. London: Future of London. 3 Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, (2015). Business population estimates. London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills. 4 Office for National statistics, (2014). Self-employed workers in the UK - 2014. London: UK Statistics Authority. RBS group, (2013). Start ups or upstarts: self employment in the UK. 5 Office for National Statistics, (2014). Characteristics of Home Workers, 2014. London.
Home becoming a workplace 5
15%
14%
all
Sm Medium
Large
121% 97%
2000
20 , 21
7%
2015
1982
1990
2015
1998
2014
Ăś
Non-employing businesses accounted for 90% of the 1.9m increase since 2000
Ăś
Predominantly, rise in total employment due to self-employed high skill workers
I
Small businesses (up to 50 employees) accounts for 99.3% of all private sector businesses
L
Average median income for self-employed has fallen by 22% since 2008
Ăś
The number of home workers has grown by 1.3 million and the rate by 2.8% since 1998
76% of businesses did not employ anyone aside from the owner
I
Only 20% of the respondents are selfemployed because of a new business idea
đ&#x;’ˇ đ&#x;’ˇ
Home workers work in higher skilled roles and earn on average a higher hourly wage
14% of total workforce are home workers (4.2 million). Two thirds of them are self employed.
It has been pointed out by many that these conditions of work under late capitalism have served as a basis for a growing social underclass, consisting of structurally underemployed, precarious workforce. Standing (2011: 24) defines it as “precariat�, estimating that around a quarter of workforce of the developed economies is subject to precarious labour relations. Compared to proletariat (waged employees), precariat is a loose social group which is bound up in the hierarchies of subcontracted work, “efficiencies� of indefinite zerohour employment contracts, and therefore excluded from the frameworks of labour regulation and welfare provision, as they are to a large extent designed for the permanently employed. Moreover, the precariat transcends the traditional division social classes, as it consists not only illegal migrants or low-skilled workers, but also academics, IT specialists or doctors, who are all find themselves increasingly often subject to insecure employment conditions, uncertainty and various forms of socio-economic marginalization, such as increasingly tightening, means-tested welfare programs, social mobility and access to housing. During the second half of the 20th century the proportion of labour employed in manual and cognitive work has been reversed, giving rise to the service sector. (Harvey, 1990: 147) However, it can be argued that the post-Fordist modes of employment are rendering obsolete the dichotomies of mental and manual, or material and immaterial labour. According to the definition by Lazzarato (2006: 133-39) , the “new nature of productive activity� transcends these differentiations, as labour processes are increasingly interlinked and constantly readjusted. What emerges instead is “a polymorphous selfemployed autonomous work�, dismantling the direct relationship between the worker and capitalist.
Instead of a stable labour force, immaterial labour consists of “productive units� of variable size, assembled, adjusted and disassembled according to the needs of specific, often finite projects. Once the production cycle is complete, immateriallabourers dissolve “back into the networks and flows that make possible the reproduction and enrichment of [their] productive capacities.� Similarly to Standing’s notion of precariat, the overarching unpredictably and flexibility of immaterial labour leads to a state, when “life becomes inseparable from work,� as the distinction between leisure and work becomes increasingly hard to distinguish. (Lazzarato, 2006: 137)
The rise of flexible workplace
Site for a pilot project
The rise of immaterial labour and its unstable constituencies is perhaps best reflected by the transformation of workplace, and its convergence with the domestic environment. Already in the 1960s the invention of Burolandshaft, a concept for an open office landscape, devised by the Quickborner Team (a workplace management consultancy) embodied the ideals of flexibility and the post-Fordist economy. Contrary to the Taylorist principles of scientific organization of labour processes, information rather than commodity production was at the centre of the workplace. This resulted in a need to arrange the workplace in less rigid, and thus more organic way. Burolandschaft (which has become a blueprint of organization for the vast majority of workplaces of immaterial labour) prioritized information exchange between workers, and discarded hierarchic structures of spatial layouts in favour of more fluid and temporary forms of labour organization. (Fuller, 1976: 62)
Morden Wharf is a de-indrustrialized zone on the west side of Greenwich Peninsula. The site affords spectacular waterfront views and great infrastructural connectivity to London’s public as well as private transport infrastructure. In order to reduce risk and therefore drive down the financing cost, the 6.5 hectare site is to be developed in phases. The site is sliced in three parcels, each set to accommodate 300 units.
Phase 3 300 units Phase 2 300 units Phase 1 300 units
Economy of scale
Monthly Operating Income Monthly Operating Income
Income
ts project strategy. Building densely ensures hly Rent per Unit not only relatively lower development Credit Losses costs, but also the(services, required critical mass Income
of tenants for on-site business services to Gross become viable. Moreover, the collaborative potential of flexible workers increases as their density and quantity increases. While ating Expenses primary the development is intended for gement Fees those who work at home, a minor fraction of aintenance the dwellings should be rented on marketxes terms to create a diverse body of tenants, y Insurance daily routines and use types. eserve
d
Synergies
Generating sufficient scale the underlying
Cost
ating
Indicative cash flow analysis for Phase 1
parking,
subsidies.)
Monthly
Operating
Scale
Property Management Fees Property Management Fees Repairs and Maintenance Repairs and Maintenance Real Estate Taxes Real Estate Taxes Rental Property Insurance Rental Property Insurance Replacement Reserve Replacement Reserve Utilities Utilities Pest Control Pest Control Accounting and Legal Accounting and Legal
Density
Monthly
Tenure model
Operating
(NOI)
Income Expense £ 4000 p/m envisioning the homes offered
Rather than Annual Net by the estate as a product, the tenure is 100% rental. Thus, adequate home provision £ 3000 p/m becomes a service, paid for by a monthly allRate and Valuation inclusive rent. Depending on worker’s needs, lization Rate £ 2000 p/m extra costs for additional services may be uation (Offer Price) added to the monthly bill. The objective is to se Price zation Rate lock the overall rent at affordable level, which £ 1000 p/m is around 50% of market rate in the area.
Sources: Londonpropertywatch.co.uk. (2016). London Property Watch. [online] Available at: http://www. londonpropertywatch.co.uk/average_rental_prices.html sts and Loan [Accessed 2 Feb. 2016]. ncing (years) t Rate
d
£ 0 p/m Average rent Fees in SE10 1 Bedroom
Additional costs (storage, workplace, meeting facilities)
Monthly
Operating
Capitalization Rate and Capitalization Valuation Rate and Valuation Desired Capitalization Rate Desired Capitalization Rate
Property Valuation (Offer Property Price) Valuation (Offer Price)
Actual Purchase Price Actual Purchase Price Actual Capitalization Rate Actual Capitalization Rate
40 - 50%
Annual
2015
by
7 000,00 2 000,00 142 600,00 38 026,67 10 000,00 60 000,00 500,00 2 000,00 262 126,67
Loan Information
7,00% 79 144 000,00 114 080 000,00 4,86%
Annual
Debt
8 685 600,00 3 145 520,00 5 540 080,00
Total Annual Debt ServiceTotal Annual 3 824Debt 027,83 Service Service
5 000 000,00 5 109 109 080 000,00 10 000 000,00 10 50 2,500% 15 000 000,00 15 318 668,99 2 714 342,19 2 Yet, 1 109 685,64 1 3 824 027,83
Cash Flow and ROI
(before
Total Monthly Cash Flow Total (before Monthly taxes) Cash Flow143 (before 004,35 taxes) taxes)
143 004,35
Cash
Flow
(before
Total Annual Cash Flow (before Total Annual taxes) Cash Flow 1 716 (before 052,17 taxes) taxes)
1 716 052,17
Cash
Return
were 723 gradually turned into nomadic, decentralized 800,00 areas of information production; the place of work was “flexibilized” to match the kind of flexible employment models. Corporate management 000,00 practices prescribed7 workplace sharing, hoteling, 000,00 hot-desking, and2 homeworking and other 142 600,00 “innovative” 38 forms of work. All026,67 of those to a large extent allowed savings of daily000,00 operating expenses, 10 but also dissolved the traditional000,00 9-5 balance of work 60 500,00 and leisure and atomized work across space and 2 000,00 time. (Strickland, 2014) Therefore, in many ways the explosive growth of communication technology 262 126,67 and contemporary management practices have dismantled the place of work, turning it into islands of productivity, such as concentration rooms, 8 685 600,00 3 145 520,00 collaboration pods, hot desks, meeting rooms, cafes, trains, planes, beaches, and eventually workers’ 5 540 080,00 own homes, indicating that work has invaded life and vice versa, thus the distinction between the two can no longer be taken for granted. 144 080
7,00 000,00 000,00 4,86
Loan Information
Flow
on
300 800,00 3,00 200 000,00 Further on, around the 1990s, cognitive workplaces 1
7,00% 79 144 000,00 79 114 114 080 000,00 4,86%
Cash
Cash
©
8 685 600,00 3 145 520,00
Income Annual Net Operating Income Annual Net Operating 5 540 080,00 Income
Cash Flow and ROI Monthly
22 , 23
sheet
Expenses Monthly Operating Expenses Monthly Operating 262 126,67 Expenses
Total Annual Operating Income Total Annual Operating Income Total Annual Operating Expense Total Annual Operating Expense
ROI Total
7 000,00 2 000,00 142 600,00 38 026,67 10 000,00 60 000,00 500,00 2 000,00
Down Payment Down Payment 5 000 000,00 Loan Amount Loan Amount 109 080 000,00 Total cost for Projected rent for Acquisition Costs and Loan Acquisition Fees Costs and Loan Fees 10 000 000,00 1 bedroom equivalent space at workhome in Greenwich Works Length of Financing (years) Length of Financing (years) 50 SE 10 Annual Interest Rate Annual Interest Rate 2,500% Initial Investment Initial Investment Investment 15 Initial 000 000,00 Mortgage PaymentMonthly (PI) Mortgage Payment Monthly (PI) Mortgage 318Payment 668,99 (PI) Annual Interest Annual Interest Annual Interest 2 714 342,19 Annual Principal Annual Principal Annual Principal 1 109 685,64
Total
Total
723 800,00
Net Operating Income (NOI) Net Operating Income (NOI)
perating perating
tion
Income Gross Monthly Operating Gross IncomeMonthly Operating 723 800,00 Income
300 1 800,00 3,00% 200 000,00
Monthly Operating Expenses Monthly Operating Expenses
Legal
Income
Number of Units Number of Units 300 Average Monthly Rent per Unit Average Monthly Rent per Unit 1 800,00 % Vacancy and Credit Losses % Vacancy and Credit Losses 3,00% Other Monthly Income (services, Otherparking, Monthlysubsidies.) Income (services, parking, subsidies.) 200 000,00
Cash on Cash Return (ROI) Cash on Cash Return 11,44% (ROI) (ROI)
11,44%
000 080 000
000 318 714 the most important 109
000,00 000,00 000,00 50 2,500 000,00 668,99 342,19 development in this 685,64
regard has been the surge of collective working 824 co-working spaces. Started027,83 in the early 2000s as a product of counterculture – i.e. hackerspaces for like-minded individuals to work on short term 143 projects, the collective working spaces have 004,35 become the standard for the growing population 1 716 052,17 freelance workers with no permanent workspace. 11,44 (Moriset, 2014: 2) Thus, co-working spaces are →
3 or
Vertex42.com http://www.v ertex42.com/ExcelTemplates/rental-cash-flow Rental Cash Flow Analysis Worksheet Rental © 2015 Cashby Flow Vertex42.com Analysis http://www.vertex42.com/ExcelTemplates/rental-cash-flow-analysis.html Worksheet © 2015 by Vertex42.com http://www.vertex42.com/ExcelTemplates/rental-cash-flow-analysis.html -a
Project delivery
Sample order form The development is a spatial product that can be replicated elsewhere with minimum design effort, and therefore additional expenditure. The order form is the first contact point between the client and developer to identify the type and scope of the project.
Optimised for speed The project delivery process is geared towards time and cost saving in order to achieve affordable rents for the end-user as well as minimise development costs. Pre-approval of offsite manufactured building elements, avoidance of construction underground, and phasing among other strategies are used to minimise complexity, risk and thus financing costs for the project.
24 , 25
Concept development
Site selection
Pre - development
General concept for the project is devised by the Client, taking into account the specifics of labour market in the chosen area, and determining the strongest sectors of the local and regional economy.
Identifying the property that fits the requirements defined in the concept development phase.
Model selection form developed into a project sketch. The Product is fine tuned to fit the selected site. The design complies with the London Plan, current Building Regulations and Nationally Described Space Standards (where applicable), pre-approved, and have support, of the Mayor of London.
Design development
Pre-leasing
Construction contract
Aligning the sketch project to the requirements of the Local Authority.
Limiting risks and potential vacancy rates by identifying tenants early. Identifying key service providers and anchor tenants.
On-site contractor is identified and contractual relationship established.
Site acquisition & survey
Foundation work
Off-site fabrication
Acquiring the lease or ownership rights of the chosen site. Surveying the ground and underground conditions.
Foundation of is prepared according to the design project.
Building elements are fabricated off site. “Just in time” delivery schedule is created for the construction process.
Onsite assembly
Operation
Decommissioning
The building is assembled on site in accordance with the delivery schedule. Manual adjustments, finishes and finalizing works are conducted on-site to complete the building.
The project operates in accordance with the initially agreed rental rates and servicing commitments. Any renegotiation possible only upon an agreement with all stakeholders.
Once the building has reached the end of its effective life-span, it is either refurbished in accordance with the corresponding needs of the time or disassembled and fed back into the circular economy.
Location
Phasing
Delivery
¨ Zone 1 ¨ Zone 2 ¨ Zone 3 ¨ n/a ¨ Dense urban fabric ¨ Sparse urban fabric ¨ Light vehicle access ¨ Heavy vehicle access ¨ Land owned
¨ Project developed in phases ¨ No phasing
¨ Within 6 months ¨ Within 12 months ¨ Within 18 months ¨ Within 24 months
§ Plot size: ____________________ m2 § PTAL Value: __________________ § Height restriction _____________ § Other restrictions _____________
¨ Land leased
Purchase option ¨ Bare structure ¨ Building shell with envelope ¨ Full product with interior finishes ¨ Full product with servicing ¨ Lease of ready-built product
Height
Target GFA
Envelope
¨ ≤ 2 floors ¨ ≥ 4 floors ¨ ≥ 8 floors ¨ ≥ 16 floors ¨ ≤ 30 floors
¨ ≤ 500 m ¨ ≥ 1000 m2 ¨ ≥ 2500 m2 ¨ ≥ 5000 m2 ¨ ≥ 10000 m2 ¨ ≥ 25 000 m2 ¨ ≥ 50 000 m2 ¨ ≥ 100 000 m2 ¨ ≥ 200 000 m2
¨ Linear slab ¨ Point tower ¨ Interlinked towers ¨ Perimeter block ¨ L-shaped slab ¨ Parallelogram ¨ Zigzag ¨ Stepped ¨ Irregular
General style of finishes
Embedded technologies
Special functions
¨ Austerity chic ¨ Creative hub ¨ Contextual blend ¨ Post-modern corporate ¨ Vernacular ¨ High-tech
¨ Warm water collectors ¨ Photovoltaic cells on the roof ¨ District heating ¨ District CHP plant ¨ District energy storage ¨ Underground heat storage
¨ Helipad ¨ Swimming pool ¨ Oversize atrium ¨ Panorama lift ¨ Data centre § Other ______________________________ ______________________________
Program
Amenities
§ Target amount of units _____________ § Target amount of residents _________ § _______ % of large units § _______ % of medium units § _______ % of small units § _______ % of oversize units ¨ Maisonette units ______ % ¨ Atelier units ___________ % ¨ Apartment units _______ % ¨ Attic studio units ______ % ¨ Ground floor units _____ % ¨ Commune units _______ %
¨ Reception ¨ Co-working space ¨ Meeting rooms ¨ Project rooms ¨ Conference centre ¨ Auditorium ¨ Nursery ¨ Kindergarten ¨ Health clinic ¨ Social club rooms ¨ Gym ¨ Laundry ¨ Workshop
¨ Storage ¨ Outdoor assembly space ¨ Playground ¨ Sports field § Other _______________________________ ¨ Community garden ¨ Decorative garden ¨ Vegetable garden ¨ Tree coverage _______ % ¨ Grass coverage _______ % ¨ Gravel coverage _______ % ¨ Hard surface coverage _______ % ¨ Resident parking spots _______ ¨ Visitor parking spots _______
2
Contractor
→liquid environments, where individual productive units are working on different projects, while sharing the facilities and occasionally feeding from each other’s expertise. Apart from critical mass of potential collaborators and flexible pricing plans, the co-working space offers no antidote to the pitfalls of flexible modes of employment; if anything, most co-working spaces are merely a new market opportunity to cater to the needs of precarious workers and finite projects.
An axonometric fragment of building’s envelope showing the key structural components and dimensions.
Housing the flexible worker population
3000
3000
3000
3000
Off-site construction
0 800
60 00
0 800
44 00
60 00
0 800
The vast majority of components of the project are manufactured off-site and pre-approved. This make the approval process for the whole project quicker, and thus manufacturing (part of construction) may start sooner, minimising time spent on the building site.
Accelerating the construction schedule The vast majority of the model’s components are manufactured off-site. It is a closed ecosystem of prefabricated and pre-approved elements of architecture which include the load bearing structure, building envelope and indoor finishes, even bathrooms and kitchenettes that are delivered in a pre-assembled state. This technology minimizes on-site time and therefore construction costs, while delivering superior precision and component quality.
30 , 31
Site preparation
Permits & approvals
Construction
Permits & approvals Site preparation
Construction Manufacturing
Handover
Handover
Time Saved
Key facts & Figures
Reproduction
54,000 m2 — gross floor area of the pilot
The prefabricated system can be reused for further developments of the same product. The basic formula of typical floor plan + terminus containing service functions and vertical circulation offers a range of possible permutations - a perimeter block, L-shaped half-block, a linear slab or tower.
project Phase 1 9 stories — the height of the Phase 1 45% — the amount of building’s electricity demand to be met by photovoltaic installation 8 metres — the width of a structural bay 16,4 metres — the depth of the envelope
Flexibility is also indoctrinated in the domestic environment, and the ongoing housing affordability crisis in London reveals it in great depth. As austerity politics have been rolling back the availability welfare services, also the general consensus of what constitutes for a “normal” standard of living is being reduced too. The inherent expectation of high home ownership rate ever since Margaret Thatcher’s “right to buy” policy was implemented in the early 1980s has only served one generation of the time. Nowadays most housing in London is unaffordable as uneven distribution of wealth, insufficient supply of affordable housing and the influx of global investment has resulted in a situation where an average salary is no longer sufficient to rent a whole home or even make a down payment for a mortgage.2 Meanwhile, affordable housing supply has systematically fallen behind the projections. This has pushed many to accept sub-standard accommodation offered by the private rental sector, often diminishing the value and the qualities that home can offer. Yet, the free market has stepped in with “innovative” modes of habitation, such as collective living arrangements, which effectively extend the model of co-working space to co-living. In such scheme, one can rent a room or a part of it in shared living quarters for a long or short duration of time. This kind of rediscovery of collective living is no longer relatable to students, but also wageearning professionals in their 30s and 40s, whose monthly income does not permit other options of tenure. In early 2016, one of the largest developments of this kind was opened in London. The Collective Old Oak is an 11 floor complex, in which 550 compact living cells are complemented by a range of communal spaces, event rooms and a roof terrace.
2 For instance, in a 31 m2 studio type apartment in a refurbished central London house can reach a market price of £950,000. (The Guardian, 2014)
Components & Quantities for a single structural bay The combination of off-site fabricated reinforced concrete columns and hollow core panels provides most flexibility at an affordable price.
Item
Category
Name
Dimensions
Quantity
L1
Load bearing structure
Hollow core reinforced concrete slab
6000 x 2000 x 200
16
L2
Load bearing structure
Hollow core reinforced concrete slab
4400 x 1000 x 200
15
L3
Load bearing structure
Structural downstand flanged beam
l = 8000 h = 400 w = 300
3
L4
Load bearing structure
Structural downstand L-beam
l = 8000 h = 400 w = 300
5
L5
Load bearing structure
Structural column
h = 3000 a = 400 x 400
12
E1
Envelope
Composite outdoors floor panel
1880 x 1180, h = 220
2
E2
Envelope
Composite outdoors floor panel
2700 x 3950, h = 220
2
E3
Envelope
Composite outdoors ceiling panel
2700 x 3950, h = 250
2
E4
Envelope
Composite outdoors ceiling panel
1880 x 1180, h = 250
2
E5
Envelope
Reinforced glass balustrade
l = 3950, h = 1100
2
E6
Envelope
Front door composite facade panel
1370 x 2100 x 2850
2
E7
Envelope
Composite facade panel
220 x 2300 x 2850
2
E8
Envelope
Composite facade panel type A
8000 x 3000 x 400
2
E9
Envelope
Composite facade panel type B
8000 x 3300 x 400
1
P1
Partition wall
Steel frame partition wall panel
1200 x 3000 x 150
C1
Circulation
Monolith concrete stair
h = 3000 a = 400 x 400
U1
Utilities
Kitchenette & bathroom block
4400 x 1500 x 2850
1
U2
Utilities
Kitchenette & bathroom block
4700 x 1500 x 2850
1
L1
2 1-2
L2 1 P1
L3
L4
L5
2
E1
3 E7 E2 4 E3 E4
E5 E5
C1
E6
Above: typical composite facade panel. Upon assembly, all the machinery and envelope elements are integrated into the unit. U1 U2 E9
32 , 33
E8
1. Built-in rolling sun shade. Electrically operated by light and heat sensors embedded in the panel / manually operable via a remote.
2. Low-e coated double / triple glazed window. Facade opening 75%, U ≤ 0.7 W/m2K 3. Decentralized mixed-flow heat recovery air exchange unit for ventilation, peak heating and cooling loads.
4. The outer layer is aluminium sheeting, yet other finishes are possible. The closed part of the panel is insulated by 200 mm XPS thermal insulation, U ≤ 0.35 W/m2K
Typical section
E 1-7 gallery block
E8 facade panel
E8 facade panel
C1 staircase
E9 facade panel
Upper level plan U1 bathroom / kitchenette block
E 1-7 gallery block
P1 partition wall panels
E8 facade panel
P1 partition wall panel
C1 staircase
Panel joint type A Lower level plan
Panel joint type B
U2 bathroom / kitchenette block
P1 partition wall panels
E8 facade panel
E9 facade panel
1 P1 partition wall panels
C1 staircase
2
Typical details 1 Facade buildup: 3 mm aluminium cladding 200 mm expanded polystyrene insulation 65 mm steel frame 15 mm fibre board 2 rubber seal 3 120 x 160 mm integrated sun shade 4 aluminium window frame, double / triple glazed panel depending on orientation
34 , 35
5 Floor build-up: vinyl floor surface 30 mm concrete screed layer 75 mm expanded polystyrene 200 mm hollow core concrete panel 6 Gallery floor build-up: 50 mm fibre concrete boards 25 mm drainage gap waterproofing layer
120 mm extruded polystyrene insulation 40 mm rigid insulation 200 mm hollow core concrete panel 7 Balustrade: 25mm reinforced glass
3 4
5
6
7
Typical plans 1 A 90-degree corner terminus, offering two core positions - central and peripheral. The central core is more suitable for organizing smaller amenity spaces (i.e. project rooms), while peripheral core (2) affords a large, uninterrupted space, more suitable for larger bits of the program (i.e. conference hall or co-working space)
1
2
3
4
8
3 An irregular corner terminus, offering the core configurations as the previous one - central and peripheral (4), while allowing flexibility of various angles. 5 Typical upper floor plan. Gallery access to every unit. 6 Typical lower floor plan: units accessible via stairwells leading to upper of lower floors, where they connect to the gallery. 7 Typical ground floor plan: each unit has direct access to the outside, both front and the back. 8 Parallelogram envelope configuration, aligned to the plot parameters of Phase 1 development (see Real Estate Developer)
9
9 Triangular envelope configuration, aligned to the plot parameters of Phase 2 10 Rectangular envelope configuration, aligned to the plot parameters of Phase 3 5
10
6
7
36 , 37
In many ways, such project is hardly an exception but rather an indication of things to come. Globally spreading multi-billion companies such as WeWork (one of the leading providers of co-working spaces) has reached a market capitalization of $10 billion in 2015, and is set to roll out a new co-living service the following year. Branded as “WeLive”, it will be deployed in world’s cities and allow residents to have a seamless experience of working and living on a pay-as-you go basis. (McAlone, 2015), (Kessler, 2016) Unlike the architectural innovations in co-housing during the early decades of the Soviet Union where collectivism was a prerequisite for a society that is ought to function via highly orchestrated routines, the 21st century communal living developments seem to be the free market’s response to the increasingly indeterminate lifestyles and marginalized incomes. While undoubtedly there is a potential in discovering new ways of life in togetherness, the currently offered co-living is more a push for the workers to surrender their privacy and individual lifestyles in favour temporary, spatially compromised and liquid modes of existence, that are often marketed as youthful and progressive.3 Yet, perhaps there is an alternative to the spatial austerity, and it is possible to provide affordable and suitable housing for the flexible workers without resorting to the alibi of communality to justify sub-standard living unit sizes. A radical embrace of cheapness can act as a design and development strategy, capable of producing mass housing with adequate space and service provision at affordable cost. Perhaps there is an architectural formula for an “H&M” of flexible workers’ housing. 3 Within the trajectory of the current state affairs, it appears that the endgame for the atomized and flexible workforce is a perpetual tenure in co-working/co-living spaces, where full catering, domestic services, and adequate spaces are provided in exchange of a subscription fee. Similarly to the 20th Century constructivist’s experiments in co-living, best epitomized by projects such as the Communal House of the Textile Institute in Moscow, designed by Ivan Nikolaev in 1931, the co-working/living spaces would be radically optimised machines for living and working in. For instance, the use of ramps instead of stairs was meant to provide extra work out for the students, and Nikolaev allegedly proposed to inject ozone gas in the air supply system in order to modulate student’s mood and induce sleepiness during night time. In the context of this, it is not hard to imagine similar behavioural tweaks employed and analysed by big data algorithms today, optimizing and monetising resident’s every move, while a five star rating system would effectively be a nudging tool cultivating “good” behaviour of the nomadic, precarious tenants. On-site staff would ensure that tenants are always serviced, while perpetuating a sense of an upbeat home – same books on the same shelf at every location, never opened.
Planning authority
1. Description of the proposal 1.1. Site
address Morden Wharf, Greenwich Peninsula, London, SE12 1.2. Connectivity to infrastructure The site is adjacent to A 102 motorway and therefore has excellent vehicle accessibility. Nearest metro station is North Greenwich (Jubilee Line), situated within 12 minute walking distance from the site. 1.3. Building program The proposal aims to develop the proposed site into a live-work residential estate. Divided in three subsequent phases, it will deliver 900 residential work home units in total, generating 170,000 square meters of floor area. Co-working zones, meeting room facilities, workshops, project rooms, a cafeteria among other support functions will be available not only to the residents, but also to the general public. 1.4. Building use The built form is based on a typology of multi-apartment housing block, yet each of the units are purposed for a dual function – residential and commercial. This includes building use classes A1, A2, A3, B1, C3, C4, D2, and Sui Generis 1.5. Employment The project provides permanent employment for approx. 8 service sector employees – 2 security guards, 4 administrative & maintenance staff, 2 receptionists. Moreover, each of the 900 residents is also allowed to conduct business on their premises. 1.6. Hours of opening It is expected that the site will be actively used 24 hours a day. 1.7. Site area The total site area is 6,5 hectares, and is divided in three equally distributed development phases, starting with the parcel on the north. 1.8. Industrial and commercial processes The entrepreneurial activity on site is limited to immaterial production and small scale light industry (Building use class B1). 1.9. The case for pre-approved building model As the housing affordability crises in London (as well as other major European metropolises) is soaring, providing cheap and adequate models of housing in the shortest amount of time becomes crucial. The 170,000 square metres of floor space will be assembled from prefabricated elements, its program is pre-planned and adjusted to the planning requirements. Therefore, after the successful completion of the pilot project in Mordern Wharf, a pre-approval license will be sought for the system to be deployed within the borough for further developments to shorter the overall development time.
40 , 41
Cheapness as an architectural strategy In the current era of macroeconomic austerity it seems that both the paradigm economy and the principle of economizing have become a fundamental design parameter. Increasingly often the value of architecture tends to be predominantly evaluated on economic terms, such as cost per square metre, expected investment return, running costs, carbon footprint, and impact on place branding. The 2008 global subprime mortgage crisis put an end to the widespread “irrational exuberance” of mainstream architecture, but more importantly, it brutally explicated the obvious - i.e. that nowadays the production of built environment is almost exclusively dependant on the volatile dynamics of global finance, and most buildings are conceived as vehicles of investment, in one way or another. While this might be associated with international hotel chains and speculative residential developments in the emerging economies, it stands no less true even for affordable housing – for instance, since 1988 housing associations in Great Britain are allowed to issue bonds in the global financial markets in order to raise capital for their operations. (Affordable Housing Solutions, 2010: 26) Yet, some identify a potential in the overall economization of the profession, and claim that attempting to engage with the profession on economic terms might hold an emancipatory potential. Alejandro Zaera-Polo (2010: 20) has pointed out that
“it may be precisely in the articulation between value, economy, and style in architecture that we can find the opportunities to retrieve political agency within a market driven economy.” He calls for a full engagement with the market economy, drawing an analogy to low-cost airlines which by lowering prices and stripping their services to the basics have removed class distinctions from the cabin and significantly enlarged their customer base, enabling unprecedented access to vast geographic regions for large parts of the population. Along the same lines, he suggests, architecture should seek a new equilibrium between value and cost in order to regain its relevance within the current political and economic conditions. Among contemporary architects, perhaps the best known engagement with the economy in very practical terms is to be found in the work of the French duo Lacaton & Vassal. Often trying to do less, do nothing, or do more, their work is characterized by brokering space, time and cost as fundamental design parameters. In their work they allow “regulations and standardised systems to determine the form the building in a radical manner.” (Vandeputte, 2011: 105) The application of economy in Lacaton & Vassal’s buildings unfolds in terms of allocation of space, which is recognized as the key resource and also an opportunity for manipulation. This is well exemplified, for instance, as a strategic oversupply of “surplus space”, intended for indeterminate use or further expansion in projects →
m2 nts
136 stories 330,000 m2
5 x 28 storeys 330,000 m2
2. Support required from
→ such as Nantes School of Architecture as well as several social housing projects. The additional cost is then offset by the use of standardized construction elements and untreated surface finishes.
planning authorities
2.1. The
m2 nts
84 storeys 210,000 m2
case for unlocking density regulation According to the London Plan (revision of 2011), the maximum density allowed on the site would be 65 u/ ha (PTAL Zone 1), making it one of the lowest possible, and therefore making it unfeasible to develop the site. It is based on public transport accessibility index, an algorithmic map which represents the proximity of public transport in London. However, it must be questioned to what extent the current density regulatory framework is applicable to a relatively new type of dwelling – the workhome. If a significant part of resident’s salaried work takes place at home or in a few minute walking radius from home, it can be argued that the daily commute becomes a less determinant factor in permitting the right density for a site. Therefore, it has been proposed to unlock the allowed density on the site to an equivalent of PTAL Zone 6, effectively increasing the development capacity to 185 u/ha.
5x ~15 storeys 210,000 m2
constraints
eople (GFA: 75,000 m2)
2.2. Subsidized
Floor area distributed within he entire site
Floor area distributed in one 50 x 50m tower
4 stories 330,000 m2 6700 - 9000 residents
136 stories 330,000 m2 900+ units
30 storeys 75,000 m2
ts
Floor area distributed 15-20 floor heignt 5 x 28 storeys 330,000 m2
2 x 15 storeys 75,000 m2
422 units
Permitted
Permitted density up to 65 units per hectare (PTAL Zone 1a)
3 storeys 237,000 m2 4500 - 6000 residents
42 , 43 d zone. Therefore: not be used for residential purposes rking unviable
Possible
Maximum permissible density up to 185 units per hectare (PTAL Zone 1a)
84 storeys 210,000 m2
loan and rent credits The project converts a brownfield site into a multiuse residential neighbourhood. More importantly, Parking area requirement it is a pilot project for a new model of residential (approx. 1 car per unit) development that reflects the current sociopolitical transformations of the British and European economy in general. As the proportion of flexible workers with indeterminate employment prospects increases, many are forced to convert their home into a partial workplace. However, most housing design criteria hardy addresses this tendency. See chapter (Real estate developer, Insights) for more detailed explanation. Therefore, the developer will seek to secure partnership with the Borough that would enable preferential financing of the project in the form of a low-interest repayable grant. Rather than a subsidy payment, this should be seen as an investment in strengthening London’s labour force and economy, and avoiding the implosion of middle and lower level workforce due to the rising cost of living. The development will bring in a large number of high-skilled jobs to a deprived part of the Borough, and will bring significant intangible benefits to the promotion of Greenwich among the creative industries of London and beyond, now largely absent in the area.
A more radical example of architecture pursuing cheapness within the free market economy can be found among the products of Chinese company Broad Group, and its subsidiary Broad Sustainable building (BSB). T30A, its flagship model, is an entirely factory-made building component system that allows to erect low-energy, earthquake-proof high rise buildings in extremely short time spans – i.e. building from ground up a 30 storey hotel with all the finishes in 15 days. Effectively, it is a spatial product that can be ordered and configured by filling out a questionnaire that fits on a single A4 sheet. BSB offers to ship it to anywhere in the world. While this product might be primarily designed to keep up with the rapid rates of urbanization in world’s megacities, it also once again reminds the value of offsitemanufactured building elements. Technically it is possible to rapidly produce decent dwellings at a fraction of cost when compared to speculative developments which are built by traditional means.
5x ~15 storeys 210,000 m2
There is no maximum height restriction in London. 236m of Canary Wharf is taken as a reference.
80m buffer zone from the A102 highway should be establshed.
In that sense, in spite of the failures and criticisms of the 20th century mass housing, industrial fabrication as an idea of the bygone era may nevertheless help addressing housing affordability crises of today. Already decades ago, small scale residential units in factories such as Daiwa House Group in Japan were being produced in fully automated facilities, in less than five hours per unit (Knaack, 2012: 96). When combined with flexible, just-in-time production techniques and the growing computing power, as well as the ability to coordinate processes as they take place, off-site fabrication can offer a path towards affordable, decent homes with customized floor plans at a fraction of cost.
Epilogue 3. Relation to neighbouring
developments
3.1. Affordable
housing Greenwich Peninsula is at the forefront of London’s real estate development spree. There are several residential developments in the vicinity of the site. Most are targeted to middle and upper middle class market segments, offering a fraction of affordable housing, both rental and owner occupied. Enderby Place, a 770 unit mix-use development on the north edge of the site offers 20% affordable units (154 according to the latest plans). The proposed project offers 100% affordable (50 - 80% of market rate for the residential part of each unit’s the floor area), socially rented units.
Whether or not salaried labour will become subsidised by the universal basic income, or the promise of automation will finally deliver the Keynesian 15-hour working week, the return to the idealized 20th century modes of stable employment and regulation seems unlikely. Likewise, the intensifying relationship with technology and the ability to be present at various places, real and virtual at the same time suggests that the separation between “life” and “work” is unlikely to be reversed.
3.2. It
is fully acknowledged in the project’s territorial planning strategy to blend the public and private outdoor spaces with the promenade stretching across the rightof-way promenade.
3.3. The
growing residential density of the previously industrial area opens opportunity for a localized energy grid where sharing and storing of electricity may become viable. The construction of Low Carbon District Energy Centre on the east side of the site provides an opportunity for integrated district heating solutions for the project. The developer will seek an operator to take on the energy centre and build in future capacity to serve other developments within the vicinity of the project.
Accordingly, the lifestyle of pluralized employment and the threat of precarity must be addressed both on architectural as well as political and economic dimensions. Architectural models are needed to rethink the configuration of what normally constitutes housing, and how flexible work might impact the recommended space standards. For instance, in the 2010 London Housing Design Guide, there is almost no mention of workspace at home, apart from an optional “bedroom” or space for a desk. (Mayor of London, 2010) However, most importantly, it is not only an issue of affordability but also suitable provision of adequate institutional infrastructure. According to ONS (2014), the amount of workers who work at home has been on the increase over the last decades. Moreover, as Holiss (2015:148-9) argues, most of those who work at home are doing it “under the radar”, as most institutional frameworks are disadvantageous or even forbidding (i.e. work is not allowed in most social housing, owner occupied homes are subject to capital gains tax if a business is registered in the same address, standard dwelling design not taking into account the mix of personal and professional routines and so on). Even if home is just one of the workplaces, it might be worth considering standardising this practice as an incremental step to deal with the new reality of flexible working practices. 44 , 45
Bibliography 4.14 Live/Work proposals submitted to the council without a defined Maintaining Privacy internal configuration are unlikely to be registered, including any applications for ‘shell’ development’. Planning applications should Overlooking could be an issue with employment uses being mixed include a description of the breakdown of employment and residential residential. Live/Work should be designed to ensure thaton 10.0 withPlanning conditions Live/Work development floorspace within each units unit for with a detailed configuration shown privacy is retained. If this cannot be achieved it may be necessary to floorspace plans. implement screening measures to minimise overlooking to an 10.1 acceptable The appropriate standard. use of planning conditions, to enable proposals
5.5
4. The case for revising the
Source: Hillingdon Local Development Framework Planning and Transportation Group, (2006). Live / Work Accommodation Supplementary Planning Document. London.
regulation of live-work housing
which might otherwise be refused, is considered to be of paramount
importance when assessing Live/Work development in the borough. Servicing arrangements
5.6
4.1. Current
regulations During the last decade, live-work type of building use has been often associated with the manipulative efforts of real estate developers to circumvent planning controls. Meanwhile, the unclear nature of “work” has resulted in a situation where it is hard if not impossible to regulate the kind of activities that take place on a live-work development. For instance, London Borough of Hillingdon Supplementary Planning Document (2006) outlines a number of arbitrary regulations regarding live-work homes. In other cases there is no regulation at all, for instance there still no legal building use type in the United Kingdom that would account for a live-work situation, as planning in the United Kingdom is based on mono functional classification. Similarly, municipal taxation, bank interest rates, utility companies’ offerings among other frameworks are often resulting in unfavourable terms for those whose primary workplace is home. As a result, a significant portion of home workers are in one way or another operating in a legal grey area.1
Live space Theis fundamental characteristics of Live/work development such as most Some Live/Work unitscan will vary require deliveries andgiven collections toofmade A minimum 35 sq m of location and size between any scheme and therefore appropriate of ‘liveable’ will be certain periods of the day. that these arrangements aboveatthe appropriate conditions willTo beensure considered in each case.spacedo required work not spaceimpact upon the residential amenity it will be necessary for
servicing arrangements to be agreed alongside any development
10.2 proposals. The use of planning conditions, as described in this section of the statement are considered to meet the main tests of need, relevancy and enforceability (as prescribed by Government Circular 11/95) for 5.7 Refuse storage conditions. Live/Work developments will require adequate facilities for the
least 65% of the of household andthe commercial waste. To ensue thatAt sufficient 10.3 storage In order to maintain mix of uses within Live/Work development floor space should as refuse storage is provided on a Live/Work site it will be necessary for following intended, the Council will normally impose some or all of the be workspace siting, layout and design of refuse storage facilities to be agreed as conditions which will be attached appropriately to A minimum of 50 sqm ofrefuse storage standards for planning part of an application. For appropriate functional work space will permissions for Live/Work refuse storage the Hillingdondevelopments: waste strategy team should be
contacted.
be required
The premises shall be used solely as a Live/Work space and for residential part of aconfiguration Live/Work unit is considered to be use. 5.8 FiThe gure Conceptual model of live-work no1: other purpose including for residential or employment •
•
inappropriate for family accommodation and planning conditions may therefore be attached to permission to restrict the occupancy of units. The work element of all Live/Work schemes shall only be used Live/Work units should contain no more than two bedrooms and a for ofpurposes within class B1 and class A2 space (Townwilland total three habitable rooms. Private usable amenity not Country Planningbe(Use Classes) 2005, in association with the specifically required as part of Order Live/Work proposals.
residential element of the unit.
Point 6: • Key The residential element of each Live/Work development shall not Tobe discourage Live/Work being used or occupied otherused thanfor in family connection with the approved accommodation, development should contain no work element Live/Work of the development
4.2. The
more than two bedrooms and a total of three habitable rooms.
• •
C5
Applicants will be required to provide further details of management supervision as part of their application. Note: Bathrooms, kitchens, storage cupboards and hallways are excluded from the definition of habitable rooms. Habitable rooms exceeding 20 sq m are counted as two habitable rooms.
Applicants will be required to provide adequate access on-site, including car parking and facilities for pedestrians, cyclists and the disabled.
Guide to the Use Classes • The premises shall not be occupied by children O r dages e r of (12Emonths ngla n16 d years ) and of age.
WORKHOME
between the
pure
town planning
11
13
USE CLASS
DESCRIPTION
PERMITTED CHANGE
USE CLASS
DESCRIPTION
PERMITTED CHANGE
USE CLASS
DESCRIPTION
PERMITTED CHANGE
A1
Shops, post offices, travel agencies &
No permitted change*
B1
a)
Offices, other than a use within
B1(a) change to C3
Permitted change to C4
Class A2 (Financial and
residential**
Professional Services)
Up to 500 sqm
C3
Use as a dwelling (whether or not as a sole
Research and development of
permitted change to B8
by:
products or processes
Over 500 sqm no
a)
Light industry
permitted change*
SHOPS
ticket agencies, hairdressers, funeral directors & undertakers, domestic hire
BUSINESS
shops, dry cleaners, internet cafés,
b)
sandwich bars (where sandwiches or other cold food are to be consumed off
c)
the premises)
A2 FINANCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
19
Financial services: banks, building
Permitted change to A1
societies & bureau de change
(where there is a ground
Professional services (other than health
floor display window*
B2 GENERAL INDUSTRY
General industry: use for the carrying
Up to 500 sqm
out of an industrial process other than
permitted change to B1
one falling in class B1
or B8 change to B1 only
employment agencies
B8
provide in a shopping area: betting shops (where the services are provided
Use for storage or distribution centre
Up to 500 sqm
including outdoor storage
permitted change to B1 Over 500 sqm no
STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION
principally to visiting members of the
permitted change
public)
A3 RESTAURANTS AND CAFES
Restaurants & cafés (i.e. places where
Permitted change to A1
the primary purpose is the sale and
or A2*
consumption of food and light refreshment on the premises) - this excludes internet cafés which are now A1
C1
PUBS AND BARS
C2
Hospital, nursing home or residential
need of care (other than those within
A2 or A3*
C3 dwellings)
the premises)
C2a
Hot food take-aways (i.e. premises
Permitted change to A1,
SECURE RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS
where the primary purpose is the sale of
A2 or A3*
and consumption of alcoholic drinks on
A5 HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY
accommodation and care to people in
Permitted change to A1,
hot food to take-away)
single household
C4
Shared dwelling houses occupied by only or main residence, who share basic
D1
Clinics & health centres, crèches, day
NON-RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS
D2 ASSEMBLY & LEISURE
No permitted change*
nurseries & day centres, museums, public libraries, art galleries & exhibition halls, law courts, non-residential education & training
No permitted change
swimming bath, skating rink, gymnasium, or area for indoor or outdoor sports or recreation (not involving motor vehicles or firearms)
SUI GENERIS
Casinos permitted
including (not exhaustive): theatres,
change to D2
nightclubs, casinos, retail warehouse clubs,
Otherwise no permitted
institution, detention centre, secure
amusement arcades, launderettes, larger
change
training centre, custody centre, short
HMOs than C4, petrol filling stations and
term holding centre, secure hospital,
motor car showrooms
residential accommodation, including use as a prison, young offenders
secure local authority accommodation or use as a military barracks
No permitted change
for deregulation, a new building use type This pilot project should serve as a test case for reconsidering building use type classification. Home working should be re-regulated as a common form of dwelling. As a working definition, it is being proposed to invent a building use class C5 which would stipulate the planning, safety, space provision, economic among other parameters of workhome housing.
1 Described in detail in Holliss.L, (2015). Beyond live/work. Andover: Routledge Ltd., pp. 148-9
amenities such as kitchen or bathroom
Cinema, concert hall, bingo hall, dance hall,
4.3. Case
Permitted change to C3
between 3 – 6 unrelated individuals, as their
HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION
Uses which do not fall within any use class,
Use for a provision of secure
Please note permitted development rights may not apply in all cases for example due to Article 4 Directions or conditions placed on planning consents. This summary provides a guide to the Use Classes Order in England and is not a substitute for professional town planning advice. No liability can be accepted for reliance on this guide alone. Guide is correct as of 30 May 2013. Listed uses are examples only and are not comprehensive. ©Pure Town Planning Limited 2013
46 , 47
up to six people living together as a
instruction & church halls No permitted change
where they provide residential
drinking establishments (i.e. premises
up to six people living together as a single household and receiving care
c)
centres, places of worship, religious
school, college or training centre
Public houses, wine bars or other where the primary purpose is the sale
No permitted change
a single person or people living together as a family, or
guesthouse, where no significant element of care is provided
RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS
A4
Use as a hotel, boarding house or
HOTELS
building contains one or multiple dwellings)
b)
Over 500 sqm permitted
or medical services): estate agents & Other services which it is appropriate to
DWELLINGS
or a main residence and whether or not
historic dimension The medieval English city was very much based on working at home. Industrialization and the following planners’ attempts to introduce functional zoning as means of bringing order to the chaos of the industrial city, the dwelling was separated from workplace. To a large extent, this separation underpins most the urban planning logic today.
* Two year flexible change to A1, A2, A3 or B1 available up to 150 sqm ** Subject to prior notice process, some excluded areas, change must occur before 30 May 2016
puretownplanning.co.uk
Affordable Housing Solutions, (2010). Affordable Housing Development Models. p.26. Aureli, P. (2013). Less is Enough: On Architecture and Asceticism. Strelka Press. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Beanland, C. (2015). Facebook is planning a company town - would you want to live there?. [online] The Independent. Available at: http:// www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgetsand-tech/features/facebook-is-planning-a-newcompany-town-but-would-you-want-to-liveso-near-work-10101888.html [Accessed 27 Jan. 2016]. BROAD Group, (2015). BSB Configuration Guide. V. 1502. Crinson, M. (2007). In the Bowels of the Fun Palace | Mute. [online] Metamute.org. Davidson, L.P. (2005). “A Service Machine”: Hotel Guests and the Development of an Early-Twentieth-Century Building Type. In Perspectives in Vernacular Architecture, Vol. 10, Building Environments (2005), pp. 113-129 Easterling, K. (2015). IIRS. e-flux journal, (64). Fuller, B. (1976). Bürolandschaft: A science of office design?. In: F. Dufly, C. Cave and J. Worthington, ed., Planning Office Space, 1st ed. New York: The Architectural Press Ltd. Greater London Authority, (2013). A Fairer London: The 2013 Living Wage in London. London: Greater London Authority. Gottschalk, O. (1979). Flexible Verwaltungsbauten. Wiesbaden: Bauverlag. Harvey, D. (1990). The condition of postmodernity. Oxford [England]: Blackwell. Harvey, D. (2010). The enigma of capital. Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press. Harvey, D. (2015). Seventeen contradictions and the end of capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hillingdon Local Development Framework Planning and Transportation Group, (2006). Live / Work Accommodation Supplementary Planning Document. London. Holliss.L, (2015). Beyond live/work. Andover: Routledge Ltd. Horowitz, S. (2011). The Freelance Surge Is the Industrial Revolution of Our Time. Kessler, S. (2016). From WeWork To WeLive: Startup Moves Members Into Its First Residential Building. [online] Fast Company. Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/3055325/fromwework-to-welive-company-moves-membersinto-its-first-residential-building [Accessed 27 Jan. 2016]. Kitching, J. (2015). Tracking UK Freelance Workforce Trends 1992- 2014. International Review of Entrepreneurship, pp.21-34. Knaack, U. (2012). Prefabricated systems. Basel: Birkhäuser. Lash, S., Picon, A. and Crawford, M. (2009). Agency and Architecture: How to Be Critical? (Scott Lash and Antoine Picon, in conversation with Kenny Cupers and Isabelle Doucet. Comments by Margaret Crawford). FOOTPRINT, [online] 3(1), pp.7-20. Lazzarato, M. (2006). Immaterial Labour. In: P. Virno and M. Hardt, ed., Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, 1st ed. Univ Of Minnesota Press.
Lazzarato, M. (2012). The Making of the Indebted Man. Amsterdam: Semiotext(e). Mathews, S. (2005) The Fun Palace: Cedric Price’s experiment in architecture and technology. In Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research (2005) Volume 3 Number 2. Mayor of London, (2010). London Housing Design Guide. London: Mayor of London. McAlone, N. (2015). $10 billion WeWork is betting the farm on its new co-living venture — and that could be a problem. [online] Business Insider. Available at: http://uk.businessinsider.com/ weworks-bets-on-welive-2015-10?r=US&IR=T [Accessed 27 Jan. 2016]. Moriset, B. (2014) ‘Building new places of the creative economy. The rise of coworking spaces’, proceedings of the 2nd Geography of Innovation, International Conference 2014, Utrecht University, Utrecht (The Netherlands). OECD, (2013). OECD Employment Outlook 2013. Paris: OECD Publishing. Office for National statistics, (2014). Self-employed workers in the UK - 2014. London: UK Statistics Authority. Office for National Statistics, (2014). Characteristics of Home Workers, 2014. London. RBS group, (2013). Start-ups or upstarts: selfemployment in the UK. Schittich, C. (2007). In detail: Cost-effective building. Basel [etc.]: Birkhäuser. Standing, G. (2014). The Precariat. London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. Strickland, S. (2014). Booz Allen Hamilton’s CFO: The Savings From Flexible Office Space. [online] WSJ. Available at: http://blogs.wsj.com/ cfo/2014/02/28/booz-allen-hamiltons-cfo-thesavings-from-flexible-office-space/ [Accessed 27 Jan. 2016]. The Guardian, (2015). Chinese construction firm erects 57-storey skyscraper in 19 days. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/ world/2015/apr/30/chineseconstructionfirm-erects-57-storey-skyscraper-in-19-days [Accessed 27 Dec. 2015]. Till, J. (2012). Scarcity contra Austerity. Places Journal. UK Parliament, (2015). The self-employment boom: Key issues for the 2015 Parliament. Vandeputte, T. (2011). Economy and Excess: Three Recent Projects by Lacaton & Vassal. OASE, (85), pp.101-110. Zaera-Polo, A. (2010). Cheapness: No Frills and Bare Life. Log, (18), pp.15-27.
This brochure is a supplementary material to Master’s Thesis at TU Delft’s Design as Politics graduation studio. Author: Matīss Groskaufmanis Mentored by: Bas Gremmen, Salomon Frausto, Wouter Vanstiphout Special thanks to: Blazej Czuba, Martins Duselis, Mike Emmerik, Michael Tjia Published: June 2016