CAPITATIVE ALTERNATIVE URBAN COALITION
1
GABRIEL ELBERG
2
CAPITATIVE Finale Project book Undergraduate architecture thesis 2019 By Gabriel Elberg Guided by: Dr Arch Dikla Yizhar Arch David Robins Arch Ziv Leibu Technion Israel institute of technology Faculty of architecture and town planning
Special & BIG thanks to my parents, friends and wife for all the good advice, help and support along the way.
3
4
CAPITATIVE ALTERNATIVE URBAN COALITION
5
6
“Space is not a scientific object removed from ideology or politics. It has always been political and strategic. There is an ideology of space. Because space, which seems homogeneous, which appears as a whole in its objectivity, in its pure form, such as we determine it, is a social product.� - Henri Lefebvre
7
Abstract
In the last few decades, Israel has experienced a
used as a new urban renewal tool.
sharp increase in land and property values especially in high demand areas, widening the gap between
The chosen site of this project is located at the
the average income and the ability to raise equity
Florentine neighborhood, in Tel-Aviv. The area is
capital and pay mortgage payments1. Due to uprising
known for its high density, low rise workshops
public pressure, the government has been looking
and urban street culture. These days, several
for fast planning solutions. These strategies often
new residential projects are under construction,
come at the expense of the city needs, impacting the
changing the character of the surroundings6. This
environment and housing quality2.
reality creates a field holding different interests and stakeholders, colliding one with each other.
The strategy I will focus on can be described as a “Planning Deal”. Due to lack of financial resources
The purpose of this project is to demonstrate how
by the Municipality, planning deals are made
the CAPITATIVE model can form an alternative
between the Municipality, which owns the land
urban coalition. This new field embedding a broader
and controls the regulations, and the developers,
spectrum of interests and collaborations between
which holds the funds3. Neglected city areas are
different players. Ultimately, such collaboration may
demolished and local communities are pushed out,
shift the weight towards a more affordable and
being replaced by stronger populations. The power
sustainable model of urban renewal planning.
balance and relationships between the municipality and the developers are the dominant factor defining the Urban Coalition, ruling the planning culture nowadays . One way of challenging Urban Coalition is through a housing cooperative model. An independent association of a people, united by their own free will, forming a community, that allows them to provide their economic, cultural and social needs5. This study aims to examine how the housing cooperative concept, applied at various scales, can structure an alternative “urban coalition”, and be
8
1. Paz-Frenkel, 2013 2. Alfasi, 2018 3. Margalit, 2013 4. Izenberg, 2013 5. Negbi, 2017 6. Kampinski, 2016
9
Content 8 Abstract 12 Introduction 22 - I. Theoretical background 24 -Between urban renewal & local coalitions 32 - From Cooperative to CAPITATIVE 40 - Florentine workshops area
50 - II. The CAPITATIVE 52 - The local players 58 -Mapping & program assembly 66 - Site division & program
72 - III. Between Scales 74 - Urban scale 76 - Block scale 84 - Building scale 96 - Dwelling scale
110 - Conclusion - Co-op is MORE 114 - Bibliography 10
11
Introduction
In the last few decades, Israel has experienced a
is treated as a complex one. Meaning: land and
sharp increase in land and property values, especially
housing are limited in quantity, there is no infinite
in high demand areas, widening the gap between
land. Due to that fact, questions regarding land uses
the average income and the ability to raise equity
and housing, ownership and renting, plays a major
capital and pay mortgage payments1
role in culture, society and politics.
(fig.1-2).
Due to
uprising public pressure, the government has been looking for fast planning solutions. These strategies
These two approaches collide when financial capital,
often come at the expense of the city needs,
wanting to maximize profit, “passes� through a
impacting the environment and housing quality.
certain land unit, intervenes and continues onward,
Such fast planning solutions are characterized by
towards the next investment opportunity. In some
the removal of bureaucratic barriers, accelerated
cases, due to the gap between the developers
planning processes and generous financial incentives
in
given to the private developers in return for fast
organization, and the local residents are left with
development2. The city residents are left with no
little power to influence the process4 (fig.3).
choice but to stand aside while their influence over
The same cultural and social values that were first
their day to day environment is dramatically reduced.
spotted by economic forces has an investment
terms
of
capital
strength,
knowledge
and
opportunity may disappear later on. The discussion over housing can be seen through two major views. The first one is to outlook housing
However, there is little discussion over the need to
as a basic human right. Dwelling is not only a roof
develop new planning models that will narrow the
to sleep under, but a social and cultural tool for
gap between private investments and the local
constructing the fabric of society, community and
residents’ rights and needs. The city, by its nature,
human relationship. Each individual has the right
keeps changing and growing. Having said that, is
to dwell in an honorable manner. On the contrary,
there another way of action? The solution might
the second approach sees housing as a tradable
be a planning strategy that will assemble a wider
economic product5. As of today, the housing market
range of active players.
in Israel covers 7% to 12% of the average gross domestic product. Ownership over land and dwelling units are conceived by the public as an investment tool that will give high returns in the future and as an opportunity for social mobility. Unlike other type of economical investments and products, Housing
12
1. Paz-Frenkel, 2013 2. Alfasi, 2018 4. Izenberg, 2013 5. Negbi, 2017
fig.1 above-left: Graphs indicating the changes in the housing market. fig.2 left: Graph indicating the rising % of equity and mortgage payment through to years 2015 and 2016
13
This study aims to examine how the housing cooperative model and its values can be applied at various scales, in order to articulate an alternative “urban coalition� and an alternative urban renewal tool. A method that amplifies the control of space and program by multiple players. Enabling condensation of urban areas while offering wellness and highquality dwelling for both local and new residents.
Urban Coalition: unformal coalition, which grows between Politicians, Developers, Officials and residents in order to promote their interests in shared projects. The urban coalition represents the sum of interests of its players by its time of occurrence. Housing Cooperative: An independent association of a people, uniting for their own free will, forming a community.
14
Fig.3 above: The influence radius of the individual over his living space
15
In his work, Stan Allen proposes to examine the planning processes not as a whole, but by dismantling its parts in order to better understand the complexity of large mechanisms and planning flows7
(fig.4).
In this work, I make use of Allen’s
“field condition”
point of view to better analyze
the different players and interests that affect the planning decisions. One way to examine the complex “field conditions” of the urban fabric, is by analyzing the way the urban renewal deals are made nowadays. Due to the lack of financial resources, “planning deals” are made mainly between the Municipality, which controls the land-use and regulations, and the developer, which holds the funds. In the process, neglected city areas are demolished and replaced by a new urban fabric3. Furthermore, in most cases, local communities are pushed out and replaced by newer and stronger populations due to the rise in land values and living costs . It’s in the developer interest to draw wealthy population,
therefore
the
architectural
models
often aim to that end, resulting in isolated types of dwelling disconnected from its place and fabric. As stated, the “planning deals” play a major role in the city fabric of life3.
3. Margalit, 2013 7. Allen, 85
16
The power balance and relationships (formal and informal) between the different interests and stakeholders participating in the “game” are the building blocks of the “urban coalition” . That is the structure that stands behind the formation of the planning deals. Fig.5 above: The potential influence radius of the gruop. Fig.4 left: mechanisms and planning flows
17
The purpose of this study is to propose a systematic
The following research, summarizes the relevant
workflow that defines the different setups and
theoretical background regarding the creation of
constellations of potential urban coalitions in a given
an urban coalition, the role of planning deals in
area, resulting in a new planning deal, set on a wide
nowadays planning and the housing cooperative
and steady basis.
values which construct the basis for social and economic cooperation. The Second part, describes
In order to build and define the workflow, the
the systematics workflow that defines and analyzes
potential site requires a variety of players, intense
the area’s properties and opportunities. In the
urban development and complex field conditions.
last part, the workflow is tested at various scales,
For these reasons, the chosen site is located at the
emphasizing in the cooperative opportunities and
Florentine neighborhood, in Tel-Aviv, one of Israel’s
coalition driven decisions, from the dwelling unit,
most popular and attractive urban areas. The site
through the shared and public spaces and up to the
spans over 14,000 sqm, and it contains different
block and the urban scale.
percentage of private and municipality owned land. Furthermore, the area is known for its high density, low rise workshops and urban street culture, making it one of the last areas with active craftsmanship workshops9. These days, several new residential projects are under construction, intensively changing the character of the surroundings8. In this situation, the site embeds different interests and stakeholders, often colliding one with each other but also bringing forth collaboration potential, enabling the opportunity to construct a coalition that embeds a broader spectrum of interests between the local players: Craftsmen, business owners, developers, the municipality and new and local residents. All play a major role in the future of the site.
8. Kampinski, 2016 9. Boso, 2019
18
In case of one successful urban coalition, that can serve as a demonstration effect, new types of planning deals and workflows can be established, resulting in a new paradigm of the urban fabric and a better understanding of the interest’s map and stakeholders, shifting the weight towards a more considerate from of urban renewal planning CAPITATIVE.
19
20
21
I Theoretical background
The following chapter discusses several definitions and
major
issues
development
of
regarding the
the
proposed
theoretical workflow
-
CAPITATIVE. It starts by describing in depth the main concepts of urban renewal and the ruling paradigm and its conflicts as presented by different researches. The second part, describes the main structure of a housing cooperative, its social and economic features, its drawbacks and values. The last part covers briefly the site’s background, history and properties.
22
Between urban renewal & local coalitions From cooperative to Capitative Florentine workshops area
23
Between urban renewal & local coalitions Urban renewal is a process of investing planning resources in the development of failing areas and neighborhoods. These areas are conceived by the municipality and market forces as having growth potential. Different urban renewal strategies aim to intervene and change public perception, image, market value and physical state of the urban space4. By definition, these processes affect the living fabric of the city life, the areas where people live, work and build their social stability, in many cases, for generations. By modifying the field7 in which theses social, economic and physical balances occur, urban renewal creates a new complex reality, made of different interests and stakeholders often colliding one with each other (fig.6). The major urban renewal paradigm ruling today aims to create attractive conditions for strong groups of population; both economically and culturally, in order to set in motion, the development of failing areas into prosperous ones3. This concept of renewal, best known as “gentrification” , has multiple problematic outcomes. The local “weak” residents are to be pushed out due to the rising market value of the area. Another outcome is the fundamental change Gentrification: the transformation of a working-class or vacant area of the central city to a middle class residential and/or commercial use Creative Class: A posited socioeconomic class identified by American economist and social scientist Richard Florida. According to Florida, the creative class plays a major role in the economic development of neglected urban areas, especially in the U.S.
24
of the structural and physical characteristics of the area, for better or worse.
3. Margalit, 2013 4. Izenberg, 2013 7. Allen, 85
Fig.6 above: The various field conditions concerning development processes.
25
In her paper, Efrat Izenberg, an urban renewal and planning researcher, suggests to observe the urban renewal process by examining two main types of relationships that leads to inherent conflicts4:
Market and municipality
Municipality and residents
The urban market represents the municipality
On one hand, the municipality is tied up to the
perception of the public space as an exchange
market forces in order to execute its goals, while on
product and forges its relationships with the
the other hand, it is tied up to the public which it is
private sector. Lack of financial resources leads the
meant to serve and by which it’s elected through
municipality to relay on private capital. The private
democratic elections. The local interests of those
sector invests resources in urban projects. In return,
who live and work in the different parts of the city
it expects the city to prepare the right conditions for
may be other than maximizing the land market
the development of the urban space. Izenberg claims
value, colliding with the development goals of the
that the dynamic mentioned here puts the city in
municipality.
a state of “planning chaos�. Meaning, while urban renewal projects are advancing, there is no vision nor control over the benefits for the public.
PRODUCT
HOUSING RIGHT
26
These two complex relationships create inherent conflicts occurring in the urban area. The developer that shapes the urban field is driven by its own profit considerations but not necessarily affected by the outcome of his creation. The local resident/ user is much more affected by the outcome; economically and, socially, for better or worse (fig.7). By their day to day experience, the local residents build a more organic and intimate relationship with the urban area. Another conflict exists between the local players themselves. Space can be measured by its market value, but that is not the only way. The local residents, consciously or unconsciously, are invested in their shared living space. For that reason, there is a gap between the “use� value and market value4. On one side stands the accommodation interest, which embeds stability, security and control. On the other side stands the accumulation interests. The ability of the individual to have private capital, land and ownership over land for him and future generations4.
Fig.7 above: The forces movment in urban renwal areas. 4. Izenberg, 2013
27
One way proposed by Izenberg to untangle these conflicts is to strengthen the local players, driving them to develop a rich local economy that bonds the local capital to its place. Instead of exterior intervention, controlled by exterior interests, the local community can establish sets of networks that in turn allow urban renewal but in a more controllable and sustainable manner. “Right to The City”
(fig.8)
is one theoretical idea
that leads towards that goal. Organic organizations, urban coalitions, which are formed in order to gain control and influence. This paradigm sees the use value of the urban space as a main factor in the city life. The local players have the right to take an active role in shaping their living environment.
Fig.8 above Right to The City: An idea proposed by Henri Lefebvre in 1968, in the book “Le Droit a la ville”. https://www.learning.uclg.org/publicspace-right-city
28
New urban coalitions, consisting of local players, can have significant weight in the decision-making process. Bringing forward new balance to the urban renewal paradigm. From planning deals made exclusively between the municipality and the private developers into new planning deals which considers a wider spectrum of stakeholders.
Fig.9 above right: “Interests Cube”, containing foreign desires and an Emerging “local Interests Cube” made of local desires.
29
“So you think you’ll keep all the existing structures?” - “I do. It’s part of what gives a revitalized area like this its charm that the hipsters like.” - Randy Marsh
30
31
From Cooperative to CAPITATIVE
The coalition concept, as described by Margalit Talia, urban renewal and planning researcher, provides planning opportunities not only at the urban level, but also at various other scales, defining the relationships at the site level and even the dwelling units. To better understand the economic and social structure required for such coalitions to grow, this study examines the value and operation of the housing cooperative, as presented by Aviv Negbi in her master thesis about the housing cooperative. In short, a Housing Cooperative is an independent association of a people, united by their own free will, forming a community. Their purpose is to satisfy their economic, cultural and social needs. The
ownership
over
the
business-enterprise
is shared and the decision-making process is democratic5. Each
member
receives
one
“share�
equal
in
value to one housing unit and one voting voice. No cooperatives are identical. These social and economic enterprises differ one from another by the level of economic, social, function and shared space. The collaborative properties are defined by the community needs.
5. Negbi, 2017
32
Fig.10 above: The general structure of cooperative housing
33
Cezch - 17%
EU - 10%
34
Norway - 15%
Poland - 27%
Sweden - 27%
?
Fig.11 full spread: The percentage of co-housing projects in the housing market
35
While the housing cooperative is a useful communal initiative, allowing influence over its living space does not come without drawbacks. Establishing a collective community requires significant effort and collaboration from its members. The social structure has to be built on stable economic, cultural and legal agreements. For that reason, only few top bottom cooperatives manage to hold through the years5. Housing cooperatives thrives most of the times when they are constructed by middle class members, having the knowledge and time but need the economic collaboration in order to establish a higher living quality. Another issue is at the accumulation desires of the individual. If the cooperative is to last, a separation of powers has to be made. Meaning, none has rights over the dwelling unit, for it belongs to the community. In most cases there is no legacy to pass for future generations*. Despite the challenges, the Housing Cooperative values
of
collaborations,
organization
and
communal responsibility can constitute the basis for local urban coalitions, operating at different, yet connected, scales. A network of coalitions, consisting of different players with different interests at each level, is at the core of the demonstration through this work. *There are multiple issues related to the question of ownership and legacy at cooperative housing that I will not further go into detail here. These are more economic and legal issues than architectural ones. 5. Negbi, 2017
36
Above left: Spreefield community meeting in a multifunctional space located in the building Right: R50 Familiy apartment and shared balcony
37
“Where no satisfactory, affordable property is available, independent citizens are taking matters into their own hands and founding building cooperatives, which now play a forward-looking role in modern housing� - detail [konzept: gemeinsam wohnen]
Brutopia 38
E3
R50
Spreefield 39
Florentine workshops area
The Florentine neighborhood was constructed in 1927 by David Abarbanel and Shlomo Florentine, an Israeli developer. The neighborhood was built originally for middle-class residents combining a mixuse program of small workshops, light industry and commercial uses10. In the late 60s’ Florentine original residents started to move out of the area, leaving the neighborhood neglected for 30 years. Through time, Florentine became one of Tel Aviv’s most attractive young areas, Mostly due to the low rent prices and rich urban culture. Nowadays,
the
neighborhood
is
considered
a
“hotspot” for private developers8. Several new residential
projects
intensively
changing
are the
under
construction,
character
of
the
surroundings. More than 30 new projects are being developed at different stages, aiming to attract young middle-high class residents and families.
8. Kampinski, 2016 10. Raziel, 2008
40
41
The entire neighborhood area spans over 353 dunam and hold today about 7620 residents. The site that was chosen for this project spans over 14,000 sqm at the west of Florentine. The area is known for its high density, low rise workshops and urban street culture, making it one of the lasts areas with active craftsmanship workshops9 (fig.13). Furthermore, the site contains different percentage of private and municipality-owned land, spanning from 4% to 94% belonging to the municipality11. All around the site, new residential projects are being constructed
(fig.12).
Despite the rapid development,
there is an opportunity to construct a coalition which embeds a broader spectrum of interest between the local players rises: craftsmen, business owners, developers, the municipality and new and local residents.
Fig.12 right: Site status and the distribution of land ownerships at the site 9. Boso, 2019 11. Municipal data, Tel Aviv-Yafo
42
43
Tel-Aviv & Florentin
44
Fig.13 all spread: the site’s workshops and businesses distribution
surrounding area site 45
46
“If the neighborhood were to lose the industries, it would be a disaster for us residents. Many enterprises, unable to exist on residential trade by itself, would disappear. Or if the industries were to lose us residents, enterprises unable to exist on the working people by themselves would disappear.� - Jane Jacobs
47
48
49
II The CAPITATIVE
The following chapter presents the CAPITATIVE workflow, system
demonstrating
along
the
the
planning
decision-making process
and
its
outcomes, as shown in the architectural project. Initially, groups of site’s local players are being defined. The groups are distinguished by its players state and ambitions regarding the future of the site. The second part describes the mapping method conducted at the site, resulting in the assembly of potential building programs to be developed later on.
50
The local players Mapping and program assembly Site division & program Between Scales
51
The local players
The conclusion from a series of interviews conducted with the local shop-owners
(fig.14)
is that the shop
owners’ group can be divided into 3 general subgroups: first, shop owners who are interested in selling their properties. This group sees the property value in the market as an opportunity to improve their financial and social status. Some of them are waiting for several years for the opportunity to make the sell but are tied-up by mixed land ownership. The second sub-group are the shop owners who do not wish to sell for various reasons; some of them feel connected to the area and the way of life in it, while some other fear to lose the business and its character. The third sub-group are the renters, and as such, they do not own the plots but do own different local handicraft shops and businesses. This sub-group may be the most vulnerable to change. Some of them are family business running for more than 20 years. In the case of eviction, there is no guarantee that a similar urban space is available today.
Fig.14 right: the local players views and motivations.
52
53
Observations made on the site shows that what initially looks like a neglected urban space isn’t so at all. It is my believe that due to the small plot division existing in the site and the physical dense structure of the area, a small local economy has developed and sustained through the years. A web-like connection, formal and informal, allow the businesses and workshops to function. The carpenter, after purchasing the wood from the local storehouse, passes the furnisher to the furnisher and then to the upholster. It can be said, that this type of dependent relationships between the different players allowed the local economy to keep going, considering the difficulties of small-scale workshops in our time.
One of this project aims is to try and propose a workflow that will enable urban renewal while considering the existing fabric and even amplifying it.
54
55
56
57
Mapping and program assembly
In order to better understand the capabilities of the site, the potential players and the opportunities for an emergent local project I mapped potential intervention spots existing in the site with a simple “Urban Index”
(fig.15).
The index is composed of three
general categories; • Site features: the first category defines the physical properties and limits of the selected plots, allowing a better understanding of the relationships of the selected area with the surroundings. • Parties: the second category maps the interests and stakeholders relevant to the site. The coalition, made up by its players, have a major role in the development of the project and its characteristics. • Cooperative Sharing: the third category copes with the type of economical partnerships in the project.
Fig.15 right: the urban index that was developed for the project
58
INDEX
59
Each category stands on its own and yet have a direct influence on the others, affecting the possibilities available for development in the project. By examining these categories, one can better understand the possible urban coalition, its motivations and orientation while maintaining some freedom and space within the definition of each category (fig.16).
60
Due to the complex program emerging from the coalition, an additional step is needed in order to translate the index properties into quantitative definitions: How much space is private and how much is shared? How much belongs to the public? How many workshops stay on site and how many are to be evicted? And so on.
Fig.16 all spread: the site research and resulting urban coalition using the index. Fig.17 all spread: quantitative definitions
61
62
63
One major issue arises regarding some of the
It is important to say that the quantitative
more qualitative by nature questions. Some of the
assumption is not meant to be an iron rule,
categories are more human dependent and are
but serve more as a guideline. Its goal is to be
difficult to quantify. In order to bypass this drawback,
addressed as a flexible but rational tool that sets
a series of questionnaires and ranking methods shall
the basis for the program development and later
be conducted, giving the planners data they can rely
on for the architectural form. Along the planning
on and compare. Having said that, other parts can be
process one can go back and update its assumptions,
quantified. The floor area ratio (FAR) that fits the site,
challenging the division of the program until the
the market value of one built sqm in the area, the
right equilibrium is reached.
ratio between residential and commercial areas on site, and so on.
Fig.18 all spread: five possible building programs
64
The use of the method described here resulted in the indication of five possible building programs, each different from another, emerging from the site physical location and the structure of the urban coalition participating . (fig.18)
65
Site division & program
After a series of iterations made on the site, I have
Most of the plot’s dimensions on the area spreads
decided to further develop the No. 4 coalition. The
between 6 to 10m in width and 12 to 15m in long.
chosen site is 1200 sqm and is located on the west
In order to find a grid that will allow to keep the
edge of the selected urban area. Coalition No.4
original dimensions of the site and create a module
was selected due to its location and possible urban
unit that will allow to arrange the program, it was
coalition: local shop-owners, housing cooperative
decided to divide the plot into 8m X 12m grid.
residents and municipal land ownership and uses.
That matrix allows to create a variety of spaces
The land ownership allows, in my opinion, a more
with different sizes while keeping the structural
challenging program to emerge, mixing functions
foundation of the building. Furthermore, allowing
such as affordable housing, office areas and local
the option for future expansion and change.
public functions that otherwise were less possible on the free market.
66
On the same area of 64 sqm, different programmatic combinations can be defined
(fig.20).
Not only the
mass is defined by the module but also the voids in which the social and shared life occurs. Alongside the form finding process, the module allows control over the FAR ratio, the mass/ void balance and the space used for the mix programs.
Fig.19 left: grid devision of the project site and the base module. Fig.20 above: programatic combinations
67
Driven by the grid, a series of modular spaces were made, functioning as prototypes: starting with a small dwelling unit of 48 sqm to a bigger family unit of 192 sqm . (fig.21)
Fig.21 right: base modules.
68
69
70
The use of the grid and module gives the planning flexibility regarding the distribution of the program in the building . (fig.22)
Fig.22 all spread: program distribution through the project
71
III Between Scales
The CAPITATIVE cooperation method is addressed at different scales, from the small relationships between dwellers to the big urban picture. Each scale has its own properties, range of influences and set of players. Yet, all scales are connected and driven by similar values. Decisions made at one scale can expose hidden planning opportunities, therefore an iterative process has to be made.
72
Urban scale Block scale Building scale Dwelling Scale
73
Urban scale
The Urban scale, sustains the properties and connections made at the urban/ site perspective. The building program is “tailor made” for its users by its users. The different projects can “communicate” in order to better satisfy the local population needs, compensating one another.
74
75
Block scale
On the Block scale, one can examine the interaction between the different parts of the building. The co-function that is possible between different programs. The building, using the module grid, creates at the groung floor an area of combained function. The project is not withdrawn into itself, but creates a balance of functions, some facing the street and other facing the public pocket park the building envelop.
76
A A
Ground Floor Plan 77
The project maintain the flow of the existing street, integrating in it, while giving the public a place to stay. The division to small plots, maintain the rhythm of the street and the commerce in it (fig.23-24).
Fig.23 right: Isometric view on Hazerim st. Fig.24 down: Hazerim st. facades.
78
79
At the ground floor, the back of one workshop can be used for the building residents as a workspace
(fig.25).
The module units and light industrial materials used allow the residents and users to reconfiger the ground floor plan program, expanding or reducing spaces. longside the public open space, the typology of the building creates an inner patio that fulfills several purposes. first, as the center of articulation throughout the building. second, the patio contains some multifunctional spaces for the residents and other users. third, the patio serves as a buffer area between the workshops and the more commercial and public functions. Forth and last, as an open and safe community area of the residents of the building to enjoy (fig.26).
80
Fig.25 left: combined workshop Fig.26 above sometric view fo the public area and the patio
81
82
83
Building scale
(fig.27)
The ground level hosts the workshops, public functions, storage spaces, communal work areas and public open square. At the next floor the projects rise through commercial area, affordable housing and cooperative housing .
Fig.27 ll spread the building floors, sectors and movment
84
The Building scale refers to the day to day interaction between the different users and dwellers. For example, private, collective,, affordable housing and shared spaces. The program that was further developed in this project is divided into 5 parts; cooperative housing, affordable housing, workshops, commercial uses and public functions.
85
Public function
Affordable units
Commercial uses
Public area Commercial uses Workshops
Section A-A 86
Shared terrace
Cluster units
Commercial spaces
Public area Commercial uses Workshops
87
Some
units
are
owned
by
the
cooperative
community, operated by them or rented. The income is used in order to maintain the different shared areas in the building (fig.28).
Fig.28 above the cooperative community funding system
88
B B
2d Floor Plan 89
Other dwelling units combine small workshop area, Enabling to combine craftsman workshop with his dwelling unit
(fig.29,30,31).
These workshops are "quiet".
Later in the future if needed, the space can be used to expand the dwelling unit or to be used as a new unit.
90
Fig.29-30 all spread dwelling units combined with workshop area
91
92
In addition to these series of spaces, the roof is used as a multi functional open area: For commercial uses such as urban agriculture and for social uses as community events and a community garden (fig.32). Fig.31 above dwelling units combined with workshop area Fig.32 left Urban agriculture on top of the building roof.
93
Section B-B
94
The two dwelling sectors are connected by a series of open space areas, designed for multiple uses. Enabling a gradient of common areas and separeted private spaces (fig.33).
Fig.33 above building section between the two dwelling sectores.
95
Dwelling scale
At the Dwelling scale the project dive into the living dynamics of the groups themselves. The amount of shared space and functions are translated into architectural form. The dwelling units are divided into three groups that differ one from another by their complexity level of shared functions and way of life.
96
C C
3d Floor Plan 97
The
different
dwelling
units
are
a
direct
representation of the dwellers way of life. Questions regarding the definition of private space, family, community and sharing arises. Some units tent to on side of maximum privacy, while others tend to the minimum privacy for the benefit of large common areas and sense community (fig.34,35). There is no right choise. It is in my belief that one building is capable of holding different units, different definitions of the word "home" for the benefit of all.
Fig.34 above what is a house made of?
98
Fig.35 above blocks of "house" shifting from private to public
99
Affordable unit
100
The
simplest
dwelling
unit is the affordable housing unit. tend to be the most private one of all units (fig.36).
Fig.36 above unit scheme
101
Cooperative standard unit
This of
group fully
dwelling
is
made
functioning units
that
have decided to share one with another the more “public” area of their units (balcony and garden). That’s in order to maximize the size of the shared space at their disposal (fig.37).
102
Fig.37 above unit scheme
103
Cooperative cluster unit
104
The
most
complex
group is the cooperative cluster unit. The cluster operates has one big apartment,
made
of
smaller dwelling units. Each dwelling unit is reduced to its minimal private space (bedroom, bathroom) leading to a semi-public space (living room) that is open to the public shared area that contains
the
kitchen,
open spaces of working and studying, and a large and wide public space for different community activities (fig.38). Fig.38 above unit scheme
105
Section C-C Cluster units
106
a
107
108
109
Conclusion Co-op is MORE
The proposed workflow is not site specific although the output is site specific by definition, tailor made for the area’s need. By systematic analysis and the planning process the same workflow can be tested on other sites, with different properties and players, leading to a totally new result driven by another type of urban coalition.
110
The architectural challenge is finding the way in
By challenging the paradigm ruling todays urban
which the different factions can co-live on the same
renewal planning, a more balanced method can be
building together while keeping a degree of freedom
created. On one side, by enabling urban renewal
and privacy. Over-controlling the borders of spaces
processes, while on the other side by keeping the
can cause the formation of a gated community,
local fabric of the urban space.
closed in its own area. The definition of spaces has to be clear yet open to some degree, offering social and economic opportunities for developing relationships,
collective
activities
and
mutual
growth of the forming community. The CAPITATIVE process and values can be seen as the activator which influences the multiple level of day to day life driven by its architecture, offering spatial and urban opportunities that otherwise may have stayed hidden. It may be the opposite of today’s cultural atmosphere but it is my belief that local players can find common ground and benefit from the power of collective effort.
Gaining back the power to influence our living area, creating a flexible community that is open to change and yet has strong local foundation.
111
112
113
Bibliography
1. Margalit Talia, “Planning Deal”, in The Planners: Directions in the Israel Planning Discourse, ed. Tali Hatuka & Tovi Fenster, (RESLING publishing, 2013), 179-204. 2. Izenberg Efrat, “Urban Renewal”, in The Planners: Directions in the Israel Planning Discourse, ed. Tali Hatuka & Tovi Fenster, (RESLING publishing, 2013), 77-93. 3. Negbi Aviv, Dwelling Cooperatives in Israel: Challenges and Opportunities, Dwelling Cooperative, (The Technion Libraries, 2017), 18-21. 4. Allen Stan, “Field Condition”, in Points + Lines, (Princeton Architectural Press, 1985). מס’ המשכורות הדרושות לרכישת: “מתרחקים מהחלום,פרנקל- עינת פז.5 .2013 ,12 דצמבר, מדור נדל”ן, כלכליסט,”135-דירה עלה ל ,2018 , אוגוסט, הזמן הזה,” “אל מעבר לערינו העגומות, נורית אלפסי.6 /https://hazmanhazeh.org.il/cities מבשר הפינוי בינוי במערב:” “קבלו את “בית המחוגה, ציפה קמפינסקי.7 2016 ,30 יולי, מדור אדריכלות,נט- אקס,”פלורנטין מסע וירטואלי במעבדת פלורנטין לחקר: “בונים פה, ציפה קמפינסקי.8 2017 ,19 אוקטובר, מדור אדריכלות,נט- אקס,”התחדשות עירונית אזור התעשיה הזעירה בפלורנטין עתיד: “עיר ללא מלאכה, נמרוד בוסו.9 2019 ,14 פברואר, מדור אדריכלות,נט- אקס,”להימחק ,” “אל תנסו למחוק את שכונת פלורנטין, יפה רזיאל.10 2008 ,29 ינואר, מדור חופשה,Y-net .2019 ,יפו- עריית תל אביב,GIS מערכת מידע עירונית.11
114
115