COOPERATIVE RE-DEFINED A proposal for productive housing in the suburban landscape of the Leie river by galan.andrada

International Master of Science in Architecture KU Leuven, Faculty of Architecture, Campus Sint-Lucas Ghent

COOPERATIVE RE-DEFINED A proposal for productive housing in the suburban landscape of the Leie river

Master Dissertation Project Student: Andrada Galan Acadmic promotor: Martino Tattara Co-supervisor: Maarten Gheysen Academic year: 2018- 2019

@ CopyrightKULeuven International Master of Science in Architecture KU Leuven, Faculty of Architecture, Campus Sint-Lucas Ghent Master Dissertation Project Student: Andrada Galan Acadmic promotor: Martino Tattara Co-supervisor: Maarten Gheysen Academic year: 2018- 2019

FOREWORD

This project is the result of a year long cooperation between several people who stood beside me and never stopped believing in this project. I would like to allocate a few words of gratitude for the members of my own Cooperative. To my coordinator, Martino Tattara- for taking the time and dedication for each and every one of us, inspiring us to always strive for improvement. This year has thought me a lot about the world from the unique perspective of thinking outside the traditional models of living and working- none of these would have been possible without his guidance. Thank you. To my co-supervisor- Maarten Gheysen for the very productive discussions that thought me what I needed to know and feel about Kortrijk- making me profoundly attached to the context that I choose to work with. To my family- for their never-ending support even from kilometers away. You have never felt closer. To my partner- for his love, patience and several cancelled plans that I will hopefully make up for. To my friends from UAUIM for their very creative input in times of trouble and my friends from KU Leuven for their support along the way. And most importantly, to my Mother- you will forever live in my heart as I strive every day to make you proud.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to explore the cooperative model as a form of living with the potential to become a tool of densification within suburban territories. This research is motivated by current contemporary issues depicting a present society in which the fractured relationship and segregation between humans living, working and occupying the natural landscape has led to a present housing crisis. Moreover, these phenomena have consequently created problems such as scarcity of resources and irresponsible use of space, congested mobility- all which currently impose an urgent thread to the existing environment. In order to answer to these challenges, this research seeks alternative means of living and production framed within the cooperative organizational model and placed within a physical landscape that supports the potential of this proposition. The cooperative is illustrated in this proposal as a means to create a community of people living and working together, sharing resources, capital and knowledge within a built settlement system meant to activate the territorial capital on a larger scale. This system is imagined to adjust to the peripheral territories of West Flanders- where the connection to the natural environment, the accessibility of free, open and unrestrained space and the need to enrich the public use of land in a matter that responds to the requirements of a cooperative organization. The Cooperative Re-defined is a new kind of cooperative that proposes the hybrid function of living and working within juxtaposed, adjoined and separated spaces- creating a variety of relationships that will re-connect the house to the working space and will extend carefully into the natural landscape protecting the environment and encouraging responsible growth.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I: THE COOPERATIVE MODEL Part 1: A brief history of cooperation

Part 2: Cooperative housing 2.1 membership and organization 2.2 land occupation and home ownership 2.3 urban planning policies 2.4 spatial organization

10 14 16 20 25

Part 3: Hybrid forms of cooperation

3.1 production 3.2 living and working 3.3 conlusions

32 34 38

CHAPTER II: LIVING IN FLANDERS Part 1: Housing and ownership 1.1 historical overview 1.2 alternative ownership models 1.3 land accesibility

42 43 44 50

Part 2: Economic tissue 2.1 productive cities 2.2 socio demographic factors 2.3 productivity and production 2.4 conclusions

52 55 60 64 67

CHAPTER III. ON THE BANKS OF LEIE RIVER Part 1: Human landscapes 1.1 housing 1.2 use of river 1.3 local forms of production

Part 2: Natural landscapes 2.1. land use 2.2. water use

CHAPTER IV: COOPERATIVE RE-DEFINED

Part 1: Reflections 1.1 designing a demographic 1.2 space- scale- activities 1.3 productive homes typologies

Part 2: Urban proposal

138

CHAPTER 1: THE COOPERATIVE MODEL

Part 1: a brief history of cooperation Part 2: cooperative housing 2.1 membership and organization 2.2 land occupation and home ownership 2.3 urban planning policies 2.4 spatial organization Part 3: hybrid forms of cooperation 3.1 production 3.2 living and working 3.3 conlusions

PART I. A BRIEF HISTORY OF COOPERATION*

Notes: * this subchapter is written in cooperation with Janne Aerts and Thông Nguyễn as part of the Master Dissertation Program at KU Leuven “Home for Flanders” 20182019, under the guidance of tutor Prof. Martino Tattara (International Co-operative Alliance n.d.) 1

Gates, J. (1998) The Ownership Solution, London: Penguin 2

Carrell, Severin. Strike Rochdale from the record books 3

Rothschild, J., Allen-Whitt, J. (1986) The Cooperative Workplace, Cambridge University Press 4

The cooperative model represents a form of legal organization based on membership admission with the purpose of taking shared ownership of goods that would be distributed and used commonly amongst its members. Within the specialized literature, one accepted definition of the cooperative reads as it follows: “A cooperative is an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned and democratically-controlled enterprise. Which not only provides economic opportunities, but also offers a wide range of services”. 1 The concept of “co-operation” or “cooperating” is deeply rooted since the beginning of the first primitive forms of social interaction. Within tribal organizations and later in Roman times, the practice of distributing resources and tasks amongst the dwellers was part of what made forms of human organization evolve over time and later to the first practices of economy and trade. Within the European landscape, models of cooperation manifested as early as industrial times in the relationship between worker and employer and circulation of profit on the market.2 In the 18th century, Scotland was one of the first countries to operate under this structure of sharing in the oatmeal distribution sector to factory workers through the Fenwick Weavers’ Society. 3 Later on, the most poignant moment in history is recognized as the officialization of the cooperative as an economic model. The Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers, founded in 1844 as a consumer cooperative based in Rochdale, England functioned as a commonly shared store with food items to be distributed and sold at an equitable price to workers, who normally could not afford such products. In this context, the Rochdale pioneers formulated the fundamental rules of cooperative organization, which would later apply to different types of cooperatives, including the housing sector. The Rochdale cooperatives would thus function according to the following considerations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Voluntary and open membership Democratic member control Member economic participation Autonomy and independence Education, training, and information Cooperation among cooperatives Concern for community

Since these principles were established, societies around the world who adhered to the cooperative model, functioned under the ideology that ownership of resources or land should be awarded according to an equitable and democratic voting system. The 19th century was a time when several such societies began

Fig. 1 The Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers, founded in 1844 as a consumer cooperative based in Rochdale, England

Furthermore, the industrial boom came with a series of problematic aspects. The industrial revolution brought an extremely large number of people to the city. Because of this the workers struggled to live in decent conditions. In that regard, cooperative societies functioned as organisms of protecting workers’ rights and looking into offering social and financial help in regards to their life in the newly urbanized industrial centers. This was mostly possible since these aforementioned societies were comprised of members of the worker class itself. In fact, one of the most important principles of cooperative organization is that the mechanism of cooperative organization lies in the hands and ownership of the people, it is meant to serve with any share value proportional to how much each member is willing to contribute to the common assets.5 The 20th century became a period of placing the cooperative model into a more theoretical framework that expanded into socio-economic and philosophical fields of research. In Marxist theories6, cooperative movement is seen as a tool to overthrown capitalistic control through means of appropriating both political institutions and resources between all members of society. This prompted ideas like working in cooperation for the sake of attaining an equitable way of sharing and benefiting from common resources and knowledge. Factory workers would ban together in production cooperatives7 in order to form “villages of co-operation”8- social organizations where the community would fight poverty by becoming self-governing. Initiatives of growing their own food and manufacturing their clothing and housing materials became a historical movement that started different forms of cooperation in society: from producing to living all together.

Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2008) Social Enterprise as a Socially Rational Business, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research 5

Cliff, T., Cluckstein, D. (1988) The Labour Party: A Marxist History, London: Bookmarks 6

Socialist philosophers on the likes of Robert Owen and Charler Fourier wrot extensively on the reimagining of utopic models of cooperative housing for factory workers. These models functioned as machineries for communitarian living and social exchange. 7

Doug Peacock. “Social strife: The birth of the co-op”. Cotton Times, understanding the industrial revolution. p. 2. Archived from the original on 25 July 2008. Retrieved 10.03.2019 via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Worker_cooperative#cite_ note-4 8

PART II. COOPERATIVE HOUSING

Fig. 2 The Phalanstery by C. Fourier (19th century) â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Characteristics of Housing Cooperativesâ&#x20AC;?. Retrieved 2 May December 2018 9

According to < https://www. realtymyths.com/wifferenttypes-housing-cooperatives/> Retrieved 31.01.2019 10

The cooperative housing model is a non-profit form of agreement between several individuals that collectively become co-owners and administrators of a building or a group of buildings. 9 This form of occupation is membershipbased, with membership granted by way of a share purchase in the cooperative. This share purchase gives the members the right to one vote on issues that require collective decision making on the part of the cooperative association. If a shareholder has more than one entity, he still has one vote within these meetings. Since the cooperative owns the building, the land and the communal areas it makes this an affordable way of housing. In a broader context, cooperative housing is split into four categories10: 1. Tenant Ownership Organizations: land occupation is based on a lease system freehold basis while the buildings are owned by the cooperative and its members 2. Tenant Co-Partnership Housing Organizations: the cooperative owns both the land and the buildings either in the form of a lease or freehold system, distributing the living units to its members 3. House Mortgage Organizations: the cooperative lends capital for its members to build their own houses/apartments in the regards that members have the obligation to manage the building process â&#x20AC;&#x201C; thus the cooperative functions more as a credit lending form of organization 4. House Construction Organizations: which spend the capital in the name of the members for building houses and the houses are standardly awarded to the members with the initial investment recovered in the form of loans that members have to pay for.

Throughout the history of architecture, there have been several movements, settlements and utopian thinkers that have worked on this form of ownership. The first notable cooperative projects date back from the 19th century in the context of Industrial Revolution. The project for the Phalanstère from the architect Charles Fourier11 encompassed a building where 500-2000 people could work together for the mutual benefit as early as 1820. The Phalanstère worked on the basis of using the inner courtyard model as a place of shared social space and encounter between members and as a tool of exerting forms of control amongst inhabitants who shared similar economic background and production activties. Cooperative housing in the United States

“Fourier imagined a utopian way of life where labour, leisure and libertinage would intertwine in harmony, “a new society founded on the emancipation of the passions and proclaiming the triumph of sensual pleasure.” Charles Fourier, “Selections Describing the Phalanstery,” in The Utopia Reader, ed. by Gregory Claeys and Lyman Tower Sargent (New York: New York University Press, 1999), 192 via http://jessicaf-angel.com/phalanstere accessed 9.03.2019 11

Pricem, Matlack G- “A pioneer in Apartment House Architecture- Memoir on Philip G. Hubert’s Work” Architectural record v. 36 1914 pg.74 12

The Cooperative Housing model spread in the form of various housing experiments in the United States- where it is worthy to mention the works of French born architect Philip Gengembre Hubert (1830-1911). A faithful follower of the communitarian socialist ideologies of Charles Fourier, Hubert had spent his childhood as part of the Phalanster based residency- La Colonie in Condé-sur-Vesgres with his father as resident architect 12 of the unit (1832). As an architect, Hubert started his practice in the United States as part of the firm Hubbert & Pirsson13, achieving a body of work beyond the completion of high rise apartment units. In fact, Hubert’s work is considered as pioneering contribution to cooperative forms of living and devices to sustain collectively shared forms of ownership. On the background of housing prices increasing in the New York of 1881s and an influx of families pressured to leave the city center due to the present time housing crisis14, affordability of owning a single-family house for the long term was far from being a reachable goal for many inhabitants of the city. In this context, Hubert came with a living form of organization, which is the Hubert Home Clubs- forms of hotel inspired living accommodation based on a joint-stock scheme. This scheme alludes to the idea of collective ownership split between several families through contribution of shares that would grant membership within the cooperative.15 This meant that the members would benefit from improved socio-economic living conditions, such as centralized facilities- used and distributed equitable and at more affordable price as opposed to private ownership. Hubert designed eight such Home Clubs16 based on the jointstock scheme. They were completed in the span of seven years, from 1883 to 1890 and occupied public land, so that housing would attain a lower rent price compared to the privately owned apartments and homes. The apartment buildings of these ‘Clubs’ functioned as example of sharing not just capital, but resources for collective habitation. The units where built without a kitchen and offered flexible spatial solution, allowing the inhabitants to combine or split spaces or design the interior of their apartment. 17

as seen n. 12 above

Tattara, Martino, Home for Flanders Master Thesis Design Studio 2018-2019, KU Leuven, Campus Sint Lucas 14

Courtney, Thomas B. The Law of Private Companies (2nd ed.). p. 26. 15

Hubert, Pirsson, and Hoddick, “New York Flats and French Flats”, Architectural Record, vol. 2, n° 1 16

Alpern, Andrew. Luxury Apartment Houses of Manhattan: an Illustrated History. Dover Publications, Inc., 1992. 17

Fig. 3 The Chelsea Hotel (1883-1885) -part of Hubert Home Clubs in the United States

Fig. 4 Kraftwerk1 Swiss cooperative, a contemporary model of cooperative housing in Europe

Resources such as energy and water where shared collectively- though a centralized body of heating, coordinated garbage disposal units, central cooling of drinkable water and package delivery facilities, along with shared cooking and dining areas. These building resources were thus used in a collective way so that consumer expenses became lower and living more affordable. By using a shared ownership scheme, capital that put together from each member’s share would go into maintenance works. 18 The most well known example of such model is the project for The Chelsea Hotel in New York.

Mercklé, Pierre. Charlesfourier.fr, www. charlesfourier.fr/spip. php?article707 accessed 8.03.2019 18

Cooperative Housing in Europe Only 37% of Swiss own a house, in Zurich 9% of tenants own a permanent dwelling. As attractive as private ownership is for the stability that comes when one does not fear eviction and has control of a lifetime over its lease, the same kind of advantages make for vulnerability in front of land speculation and an increase of discounts on the market race.according to Andreas Hofer for “More than housing : cooperative planning - a case study in Zürich” 19

The cooperative model spread across the ocean as well. In more recent times, the European crisis is characterized by a lack of affordability in terms of housing and land occupation. In the context of shifting market economies, many individuals find themselves out of the traditional sphere of housing and in need of alternative and cheap forms of occupation- that do not imply the long-term costs and commitments that come with owning private land.19 The cooperative becomes relevant in this context as it opposes private ownership functioning within the rent-based system. Its aim is to stabilize the rental housing market, protecting inhabitants against the market speculation. 20 Such problems where extensively understood by countries like the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and Switzerland where there is a clear differentiation between cooperative housing and traditional forms of occupation. For example, the success of the Swiss cooperative model, in comparison to most of these countries, derives from certain historical conditions that lead to the search for alternative housing models. Presently, Switzerland is acknowledged as a laboratory for cooperative housing21, the result of a history where political, social and economic events have shaped a nation of collectivtiy and participation. Currently, the housing stock based on short-term tenancy lead to the existence of 172.000 Swiss22 cooperative units, out of which 25% of them are entirely nonprofit, belonging to municipalities, foundations and legal organizations. Furthermore, these units cover up half of the non-profit rental stock in the country, given that 52% of the population is active in the rent based system. 23 There are some lessons to be learned from the Swiss cooperatives, since it works as an example of how capital and resources are distribuited and used in an equitable and sustainable manner. This European example demonstrates how one nation can benefit from housing policies through the relationship with land occupation24 and administration as a tool for regional planning development. In the Swiss case, the most important factor that promoted cooperativism on the housing market was the partnership between co-ops as organizations and organs of the public administration, municipalities and governments.

Hugentobler, Margrit “More than housing : cooperative planning - a case study in Zürich”, Basel 2016 21

Boudet, Dominique “The Renaissance of Zurich’s Housing Cooperatives” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich, April 2018 20

Via https://www. housinginternational.coop/ co-ops/switzerland/, Accessed 11.04.2019 22

as seen n. 21 above

Boudet, Dominique as seen n. 20 above 24

2.1. Membership and Organization

building servicing, repaying interest on any initial loan, paying for the maintainance cost of the building and shared spaces, saving up for future developments

potential members

rental contract +

gathering capital membership fee

cooperative membership

instilled policies on distribution of occupation

co-owners and shareholders control of common assets

Fig. 5 Scheme that summarizes the functioning and membership within a cooperative

Kurz Daniel, “City and Cooperatives, a HousingPolicy Symbiosis” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018 25

Bridger, Jessica “The Kalkbreite Co-op Complex & Zurich’s Cooperative Renaissance” retrieved December 2018 26

Kurz Daniel, as seen n. 25 above 27

Davidovici, Irina “Ideology and Collective Life: Zurich’s New Cooperatives” “within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018 28

As a form of organization, cooperative housing functions on a basis of clearly established rules that link membership status to housing occupancy. Depending on the case, country or period of time, these rules can adapt and change, yet in general acceptance into a cooperative housing is voluntary along with the decision to rent out apartments within a building. This means that membership is given democratically to anyone, regardless of social and economic status, on the condition that they rent an apartment within the coop.25 In many cases, a family or an individual become part of a cooperative following a screening process conducted by the board of members, which can take form into an interview and meeting with the future occupants, followed by legally accepting them as part of the organization. Each cooperative can design its own rules of occupancy distribution depending on the given context. In Switzerland, for example, cooperatives have based their equity trust that grants membership according to the size of the apartment (sqm) and the use of the capital for financing. In that regard, what made the model successful were also instilled policies on distribution of occupancy. According to these policies, when a family or an individual chooses to rent a housing unit within the co-op, they are awarded one room more than the number of people comprising the household 26. At the same time, if a family has members moving out, the remaining ones are re-distributed to a smaller size apartment. 27 This kind of laws ensure efficient space consumption and draw in enough occupants to avoid phenomenon such as urban sprawl. After the process of granting membership and paying an established fee, the tenants become not just co-owners, but shareholders entitled to their right to control the administration of the co-op on a system that is based on democratic vote. At the same time, they have to comply with certain rules of occupancy28 and internal safety mechanisms that create a system of feedback within the community, avoiding conflicts and maintaining the long-term survival as a housing organism.

In most cooperatives, the members are allowed the use of common spaces such as living rooms, kitchens, laundries etc. with the condition that they support maintenance works and care for the conditions of these shared spaces. In terms of organization, each cooperative must find means to financially support itself since the early stages of establishment. In some cases, like Switzerland, cooperatives are established with the minimum of seven members29 who are entitled, by law, to apply for a city grant or any form of legal financial assistance. The capital that they acquire as developers is used for financing the initial building expenses that come with creating a cooperative. Furthermore, its existence as a non-profit housing model means that the rent charged for the apartments does not constitute a source of profit on investment and is strictly used to the general wellbeing of its members, as opposed to pushing through neo-liberal agendas present on the market speculation. Overall, the economic survival of this model is based on self-financing, built and run on equity deposits with added membership fees that come when adhering to a cooperative.30 The capital accumulated from the tenants is poured into building servicing, repaying interest on any initial loan, the management and maintenance costs of the building(s) and saving up in order to finance future developments. When a resident leaves a co-op, their equity share is returned and adjusted according to the inflation rate31, yet immune to land speculation in protecting against the fluctuations of the housing market. What is most advantageous about this system is that the rental price is lower than in the case of traditional forms of rent present on the housing market. Rent control at an affordable price is achieved through alternative means of land occupation, such as the type of land that is built on, the conditions in which land is acquired and additions through time that can ensure stability of land prices 32. In some cases, acquiring or renting land from the Municipality influenced the low prices of the rented apartments within the cooperative.

Hugentobler, Margrit as seen n. 21 above 29

Kurz Daniel, as seen n. 25 above 30

Boudet, Dominique as seen n. 20 above 31

Glaser Marie Antoinette, Hilti Nicola â&#x20AC;&#x153;More than housing : cooperative planning - a case study in ZuĚ&#x2C6;richâ&#x20AC;?, Basel 2016 32

2.2. Land Occupation and Home Ownership

Fig. 6: Zurich Development at the end of the 19th century

Fig. 7: The Freidorf Housing Estate- architect Hannes Meyer

As it is often the case with establishing a housing organization, before the actual construction of the living units any cooperative is responsible to acquire, in a form or another, land used for occupation by the future inhabitants. As a nonprofit organization, it is associated in many instances with acquiring land through alternative means of ownership outside the private market. Conducting a study case on the history of Switzerlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s housing stock, has led to the conclusion that cooperative housing can exist on the border that separates home ownership from land occupation and where the use of land can become a tool for regulating urban development within the city and its outskirts. This is however, the result of Switzerlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history since industrial times, periods of socio-economic transition, political ideologies and a collective community spirit that manifested in times when housing was in crisis. In order to understand the relationship between land ownership and housing cooperatives it is important to understand the history of Switzerland through an analysis of Zurichâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s past. Throughout the history of Zurich, there was a transition from private ownership to cooperative housing. Since the beginning of the 19th century, Swiss cities were faced with spatial growth and difficult conditions imposed by large-scale factories and industrial developments. The effects of industrialization were felt in the relationship between house and work, pushing the working class to develop a form of living that was affordable in relation to habitation and space, creating a spirit of solidarity and help within the community.

The first cooperative (Zurcher Bau und Spargenossenschaft) established on Swiss territory functioned under the slogan to “save up and build” 33 a strategy meant to avoid market speculation and provide affordable housing for groups of middle to low income workers and their families. In the next decades, Swiss cities were affected by a state of crisis marked by a rise in criminality and unsanitary conditions in the urban centers with many families choosing to leave the city in favor of relocating to the outskirts. This meant that municipalities would be subjected to a loss in taxation revenue34 and shrinkage of the most productive urban cores. At this time, cooperatives were developed as a strategy for attracting inhabitants through forms of financial aid supported by both municipalities and federal governments. These forms of financial aid materialized through the initiative of municipalities to lend cooperatives cheap, agricultural land, which they possessed through an 18th century expansion of the city35 in order to build without assuming the financial difficulties of land ownership. This strategy lead to the formation of a legal framework in the use of land for cooperative and marked the first architectural projects exploring the ownership model though a competition-based system. The new housing policy was described as aiming for “the needs of the people over the need for luxury”36 - according to Hannes Meyer. The architect developed one of the first large scale co-ops in Switzerland- outside of Basel (1919-1923). In terms of urban development, during this time there was a need for reconstructing the outskirts of Zurich, which appealed through different urban forms such as the garden city model, or the picturesque urbanism of the curved urban street.37 Between the 1930 and 1970, cooperative projects faced a challenging landscape with fewer building sites available for usage, which lead the municipality to offer only long-term contracts (over sixty years) which instilled a certain stability to cooperative occupation. The year 1970 marked a shift caused by the emergence of youth revolting38 against the housing crisis and the increased prices of living within the Swiss city centers. This created the need for the urban archipelago as a form of detachment from the conservative39, older models and the gaining popularity of flat sharing forms of living. Further transformation of the urban morphology of cities such as Zurich in the 1980s occurred as the formerly developed industrial sites were converted to financial centers with an oversaturation of the market space40 that private investors competed to gain capital. This had the unfavorable consequence of a new housing crisis, leading rents to become even harder to afford and the imminent manifestations and protests of the city dwellers. Fortunately enough, the 21st century brought about a more stable climate for the housing sector. The contemporary period is mostly characterized by a more clearly defined policy of land occupation by cooperative housing.

Davidovici, Irina as seen n. 28 above 33

Kurz, Daniel, as seen n. 25 above 34

Davidovici, Irina as seen n. 28 above 35

http://cms.bauhaus100.de/ de/damals/koepfe/direktoren/ hannes-meyer/, retrieved December 2018 36

Hofer, Andreas “Housing Typologies for a PostIndustrial Society” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018 37

Davidovici, Irina as seen n 28 above 38

Architect Hans Widmer, writing under the pseudonym P.M. published the bolo bolo utopic manifesto as a form of revolt on the work Machine of capitalistic economy and its effects on hindering the freedom of the individual for the sake of production. The spatial model of the bolo bolo was a primitive form of cooperative housing which served as inspiration for the Karthago cooperative (1982)a project encouraging the youth to envision alternative forms of housing and living in cooperation. 39

Boudet, Dominique as seen n. 20 above 40

Fig. 8 Neubühl, Zürich, Genossenschaft Neubühl, 1932

Fig. 9 20th century: Youth revolts against the housing crisis in the city of Zurich

Fig. 10 The bolo bolo manifesto served as the utopic representation of cooperative living in the 1980s.

The present system is based on the partnership between co-op members and the organs of public administration, in the position to sell or rent land to these organizations. This exchange allows cooperatives to use affordable leased land on the condition that it would be occupied for a long-term period contract.41As a side observation, such long-term contracts are associated with the idea that to a certain extent, cooperative housing is mostly directed at occupants who wish to live within these units for a longer period of time, attached to a certain permanence within their life spent in a cooperative. What is to be learned from this brief history is that detachment from land ownership is possible on the level of regional policies if and when inhabitants and municipalities work in support of each other for the sake of equitable development. For cooperative housing in general context, if an external stakeholder- such as Municipal power- is in possession of land, they have the option to lease it to co-ops with the conditions that the projects would include urban development stipulations 42 according the city’s own agenda for development. Once instilled, the stakeholder offers the financing to cooperatives that would occupy, yet not possess land. Henceforth, the co-ops pay an annual interest rate for land use, which after the expiration of the contract, the site and the buildings would pass in the stakeholder’s possession, as they are still the owner.43 This system effectiveness is ensured by its immunity to land speculation, allowing the co-op to start a building project closely supervised by the municipality and to further avoid land cost from becoming a stimulus to land utilization. In terms of profitability, the municipality or other stakeholders involved benefit from cooperating with the inhabitants. By offering loans to cooperatives, municipalities save long-term social costs that would normally go into sustaining the population from low-income categories. By investing in the affordable housing market with the offering of subsidies and cheap land to build on, the state avoids costs on living assistance based on offering tax money. This means that cooperative housing is not a form of social housing, yet it is an affordable one. In many countries in Europe, social housing depends on offering governmentsubsidized apartments to people from low-income groups who cannot afford rental costs.44 These costs are supported by the state, along with an investment on living assistance, which uses expenses from public taxes as financial aid. In the cooperative model the rules concerning occupancy are not related specifically to financial status. Membership is a voluntary act that comes with renting apartments that are not specifically designed for the poor categories. That being said, cooperatives are still a form of affordable housing. For example, within the Zurich landscape social housing comprises under 1.3 percent of municipal provided apartments, out of which 210 000 apartments are integrated within cooperatives but not as a separated entities45. They are intermixed with other typologies allowing for social diversity and integration.

According to “Gemeinnutziger und Siedlungen ed stadt Zurich”Zurich Verlag 2007 41

Claus, Sylvia “The Impressive Development of Housing Cooperatives in Zurich” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich, April 2018 42

Davidovici, Irina as seen n. 28 above 43

Hugentobler, Margrit as seen n. 21 above 44

Kurz, Daniel as seen n. 25 above 45

2.3. Urban Planning Policies

Fig. 11 The city of Zurich- built on a strategy of densification in and outside the urban centers Kurz, Daniel, as seen n. 25 above 46

Regusci, Nicola â&#x20AC;&#x153;Import Zurich: cooperative housing: new ways of inhabitingâ&#x20AC;?, May 2015 47

In order to encourage cooperative housing in the direction of regional planning, municipalities can develop a series of strategies meant to attract these organizations into the long-term plan to shape the city. A well structured development plan allows municipal organs to exert a general control of what is built in relationship with preserving the heritage of cities and encouraging a responsible future development.46 In the case of Zurich, there are three main courses of action that define how public organs have used cooperative housing in the agenda for regional urban planning: 1. financial asistance 2. policies on densification 3. use of architecture competitions By introducing a legal policy concerning affordable cooperative housing, the Municipality established a basis of self-financing of 6% and mortgages approved for housing that can be covered up to 94% on the condition that the city allows for at least one delegate to join the cooperative board of members, along with the rest of the tenants.47 This ensures a certain degree of control in the decision making that the municipality can weight in. Most of these decisions concern how the cooperative contributes to the regional planning development in the sense that these projects can influence local economies, activate public spaces within the neighborhood, house a number of social living units for low-income groups and more of such similar capacities. Based on this system more of such organizations were formed and gained capital for extensive development while contributing to urban development.

Furthermore, land acquisition and occupation serve as a tools to densify the city and its growing periphery. In the Swiss case it followed a pattern of using land through different strategies; most of them could be split into three main categories: 1. Development of the peri-urban through agricultural land occupation. Mostly in the case where cooperatives are seeking to densify the former garden cities49 and further explore their social and spatial potential.

Schmid Peter, ZĂźrich: Cooperative Housing in Switzerland and Zurich, 5th/6th February 2012 48

Schmid Peter , as seen n. 48 above 49

Boudet Dominique, as seen n. 20 above 50

2. Occupation of disused industrial land. In the cases where former industries left behind land which was suitable for housing conversion (non-polluting industries). 3. Demolishment of interwar buildings. In the case of housing which was no longer living up to contemporary regulations and laws. In some cases, demolishment would lead to displacement of users50 and the occupation with cooperative housing buildings. All of the three patterns are characterized by both advantages and disadvantages, yet all of the three result in shaping or extending the city in a way or another. In the case of peri-urban development, Zurich was met with suburban growth which sought the potential to establish new centers and question the condition of the former urban core of the city. By implanting cooperative housing within the garden city neighborhoods new spatial conditions and neighborhood functions emerged showing how the development of the peri-urban can influence the city on a large scale. In the case of using formerly occupied industrial lands, the strategy poses problems in terms of land pollution and viability for housing units. The approach represented a challenge in having the capital to convert such sites for building apartments. In the third case of demolishment of existing housing stock, the solution is partially viable and not without negative effects. It has to be pursued in a way that does not lead to gentrification and displacement of former occupants and where the build fabric can be preserved and used as much as possible. 3. In contemporary society land scarcity has become a concerning problem for cooperative housing. Most of the former industrial plots had been occupied, hence the only solution is to look into renewal strategies on existing buildings, additions and renovations meant to house more occupants within economical and sustainable parameters. Public organisms have the power to control such projects in terms of additions and renovation with the tool of architecture competitions still at use in many European countries. By instilling architecture competitions as a tool of assessing the co-op projects51, the city not only encourages young planners to become involved, but also build on the genius loci of its growing neighborhoods and solidify the cooperative as a form of sustainable architecture.

Kurz, Daniel, as seen n. 25 above 51

Fig. 12 Zurich plan with the marked location of cooperative housing

Fig. 13 Zurich plan with the marked location of cooperative housing, peripheral agricultural areas meant for development and dissused industrial areas where some cooperatives are developed peri-urban development industrial sites development

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Co-operative architecture entails reorganizing an organized form of existence. It alternates phases of organization and of spontaneity by letting the collective subject implicitly co-operate with architecture and foster explicit co-operation among its individuals.â&#x20AC;? 52 Rosa Luxemburg

2.4 Spatial organization

This subchapter will focus on a series of study cases to demonstrate how spatial organization functions in a cooperative project. In that regard, it is important to critically assess whether the cooperative has the potential to translate into spatial form the ideology behind its principles. Ideas like participation, cooperation, use of common resources and a certain denouncement of what is personal property to a life of sharing resources with others- are one of the most important aspects that sustain the idea behind cooperative living. From an architectural standpoint, there are a series of elements that give character to the model of cooperative housing, as they reflect the idea of collectivity within domestic labor.

“ Rosa Luxemburg’s theory of dialectic of spontaneity and organization argued that the two are not separable or separate activities, but rather different moments in the same political process; one cannot exist without the other. See Rosa Luxemburg, The Rosa Luxemburg Reader, ed. Peter Hudis and Kevin B. Anderson (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004).” via http://thecityasaproject. org/2013/05/hannes-meyerco-op-architecture/ accessed 10.03.2019 52

The Individual Cell The configuration of the individual living cell has defined in a broader sense several typologies of cooperative buildings. This is reflective in the separation between private areas and collective spaces, where the individual cell is part of a larger system in which energy consumption has to be limited and distributed efficiently. The joint stock scheme translated throughout time in several projects on the level of the private unit from systems that combine centralized heating of apartments (Chelsea Hotel, Hubert) to the first experiments that extracted the kitchen from the individual cell, prompting the first kitchenless apartment. (Howland, Deery and Owen in 1885). In these examples, the individual cell is shaped differently according to the context. In some instances, it emulates the suburban terraced house floating in a sea of garden courtyards (plan for five cottages by Howland, Deery and Owen), to the patio house with the inner courtyard to ensure exposure to natural light (Hemgarden, Stockholm 1921). These examples incorporated a central facility where the pursuit of domestic labor was realized in cooperation. In other cases, the individual cell is reduced to a room or an enfilade of rooms for sleeping and reading, which become part of a compact floor plan for the whole cooperative block (Zollhaus, Enzmann Fischer). This is perhaps the most common typology- perpetuated since early 20th century (Hemgarden, Stockholm 1921) in the form of deep floor plan configurations. In the Topolobampo colony53, the individual unit of the apartment hotel was described as “reduced to the minimal cost” 54, and “perfected to the highest possible excellence” 55, - similar to the ideology behind Switzerland’s first cooperative housing schemes, promoted during Hannes Meyers’ administration of the Bauhaus. In more recent examples, the individual cell became in majority compact. In several Swiss cooperatives, the elongated and narrow apartment layouts create alternative solutions for bringing natural light to the darkest corners and distributing the sanitary units in order to allow for larger rooms to benefit from the light.

Katscher, Leopold. “Owen’s Topolobampo Colony, Mexico.” American Journal of Sociology 12, no. 2 (1906): 145-75. http://www.jstor.org/ stable/2762382. 53

Hayden, D. (1982). The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. MIT Press. 54

Hayden, D as seen n. 54 above 55

Added to this typology, is the transition from more rectangular apartment layouts with generally one side opening to the exterior to organic, polygonal shapes. This typology allows for moments of intended narrowness in the individual unit that distribute the functions without the use of walls. This is an efficient solution in ensuring that bigger families can co-habit separately and together at the same time, while the apartment experience opens to unexpected corners, angles and views into the landscape. Collective Facilities Hayden, D as seen n. 54 above 56

Hayden, D as seen n. 54 above 57

WOHNEN, M. (2019). Home - MEHR ALS WOHNEN. [online] Mehralswohnen.ch. Available at: https://www. mehralswohnen.ch/ [Accessed 26 May 2019]. 58

The principle behind an organization where shared facilities are centralized in the core of the establishment is enrooted in the ideas promoted by Fourier, when imagining the socialist model of the Phalanstery. Several 20th century cooperatives from the United States demonstrate such principles. For example, Hubert’s Chelsea Hotel incorporated collective living spaces and places of social interaction: kitchens, wine cellar, lobby area, entertainment salons and a collective rooftop facility used as a “at-home” 56, clinic for the health of the cooperative families. Similarly, the New Mexico 1886s colony Topolobampo founded by the utopian socialist Albert Kimsey Owen was the first project that imagined a nursery incorporated within the community housing, where children would benefit from trained education until primary school. 57 In many other examples, the apartment units are generally grouped around this collection of shared spaces which include several facilities: gardens, libraries, dinning rooms, kitchens, laundry area and parlors which in a centralized scheme allowed for luxurious private units. (Howland, Deery and Owen). More recent projects translate the use of collective facilities through a more public character of the floor plan. In the Swiss case, several projects make use of the ground floor plan with a mix of functions that encourage activities outside the private apartment, mostly based on cooperation between neighbors; from communal kitchens and canteens, ateliers and workshop areas, kindergartens and small businesses owned by the members of the cooperative themselves. Spatially, these common rooms and public services can translate to atrium-like rooms, some inspired by the squatter movement occupying and sharing the large scale industrial buildings, which became communal living rooms for everyone living there. In the Mehr als Whonen 58 project the typology of the cluster shows how individual spaces could ‘float’ supported by a plinth of shared activities. The cluster is usually equipped with the minimum necessary for private functions (bedrooms and bathrooms) while the shared activities such as cooking, reading, and entertainment become celebrations of the common way of life.

Fig. 14 The Chelsea Hotel-1-9 floor plans for individual units, shared facilities within the building included: parlors, laundries, libraries and a rooftop health facility, 1884. architect Philip Hubert

Fig. 15 One of the first experiments with centralized domestic labor-inventing the individual unit without a kitchen, 1885, architects: Howland, Deery and Owen

Fig. 16 Block of individual cottages within cooperative organization- the central area is used for centralized housekeeping facilities, 1885, architects: Howland, Deery and Owen

Fig. 17 HemgĂĽrden in Stockholm, cooperative of 60 units with a collective kitchen within the glass roof of the central courtyard

Fig. 18 Partial site plan for the Mexico colony of Topolobampo comprising residential hotels, row houses self standing units and cooperative facilities, 1885, architects: Marie Howland, Albert O. Owens and John Deery

Fig. 19 Competition entry for the Zollhaus competition, Zurich 2015, Enzmann Fischer Architects

Fig. 20 J. Winkler, Der Architekt Hannes Meyer: Anschauungen und Werk (Berlin: VEB Verlag fĂźr Bauwesen, 1989)

PART III. HYBRID FORMS OF COOPERATION

This part of the chapter will look into creating a synthesis of the first two parts in order to set up a strategy for a reinvented Cooperative project. The Cooperative model- as it was defined in the first part of this chapter, has the flexibility to span across multiple forms of human organization- thus there are multiple types of Cooperatives : Consumer Cooperatives, Worker Cooperatives, Purchasing and Producing Cooperatives, Social and Housing Cooperatives, Political Cooperatives etc. It can be thus observed that these categories refer to human activities related to economic, social and cultural practices59 – housing and economic trade are perhaps the most prevalent models of cooperation. This can only mean that from the earliest of times, humans felt the need to collaborate in relation to their home and work. Furthermore, is there a possibility to imagine hybrid systems of Cooperative organization? These systems would use the benefits of collectivity in sustaining a dual role: collective domestic habitation and collective economic activities. Both roles are in direct relationship to sharing resources, space and capital, which we have learned from the Swiss model that is possible as long as there is a denouncement of private ownership. (In the Swiss case, private ownership of land). Furthermore, the research will focus on using the Cooperative model on the scale of sharing resources and capital, when living and working practices are in relation with each other. This will lead to reimagine the Cooperative as a living-working hybrid system with implication in the architecture of the domestic space. As previous studies sought an understanding of Cooperative Housing, the following research will attempt to redefine hybrid forms of Cooperation between Housing and Working, similarly to principles explored by various architects, thinkers and utopians such as Fourier and Hubert.

Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2009) “Cooperative Social Enterprises: Company Rules, Access to Finance and Management Practice”, Social Enterprise Journal, 5(1) via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Worker_cooperative#cite_ note-1 accessed 9.03.2019 59

3.1 Production

see n. 50 above

Business Studies, Lesson 9, Co-operative Society

see n. 61 above

T.M. Thomas Isaac, Richard W. Franke, and Pyaralal Raghavan, “Democracy at Work in an Indian Industrial Cooperative. The Story of Kerala Dinesh Beedi,” Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998. 63

https://cooperer.coop/ accessed 10.03.2019 64

see n. 61 above

Specialized literature 60 defines the work cooperative as a form of organization in which ownership and administration fall into the hands of the workers, who fill in the position of owners at the same time. In other words, these cooperatives function based on a group of individuals, motivated to start a business built on joint ownership of shares and working together through a common economic interest.61 This ownership of shares, regardless if it varies from one person contributing with one share, or another with multiple shares grants one vote to anyone who is part of the board of members within the cooperative (joint-stock ownership, see Hubert model of cooperative) The decision to join a Cooperative for Working is not motivated by increasing economic profit, but by the decision to gain support through sharing individual resources (territorial and/or captal) with a group in order to better make use of them and draw benefits from cooperating with others. 62 There are forms of production and businesses that use this model of cooperation to secure employment by ensuring membership to all workers. 63 Since Cooperative organization is based on mutual benefit and collective support through securing capital, the scheme allows for young entrepreneurs to rely on a secure form of income, while implementing various business schemes. These cooperatives secure membership and help start-ups establish a network of connection through the help of more experienced members. Forms of production such as the Micro-enterprise “combine to form one multi-activity enterprise whose members provide a mutually supportive environment for each other.” 64 There are several steps for implementing BEC schemes which start from allowing members the opportunity to develop a business plan for a product or a service while exploring the market and establishing a list of clients. This is followed by the involvement of the Cooperative, which offers an employment contract to the young entrepreneur on the basis that the Coop receives 10% of the sales from the business plan, while building up the production scheme in collaboration. In final stages, the business becomes profitable and the entrepreneur becomes a full member of the Cooperative, with rights to vote and influence management while the 10% shares from his savings are donated to the organization. 65 What the co-op does in this case is to offer training, support and cover for social insurance policies for every member/employee. The more profitable a business is the better are the membership benefits. There are certain advantages that Cooperative Production can offer.

Amongst these, it is pivotal to note that working in cooperation secures control over the working life of people who desire to pursue their passions and become their own boss, yet do not have the sufficient individual capital to withstand fluctuating market conditions. Similar to the housing cooperative, they foster a sense of belonging and oppose isolation of the individual dweller/worker. For people who desire to produce and work within different scales of economy, yet lack the skills or the trainship to do so, the Cooperative offers support and guidance to set up any form of production independent from external conditions (such as needing to find a supplier or a delivery system for products). Another similarity with the Housing Cooperative derives from asking a question which will further be explored through this body of work. What would be the extensive effects of a reinvented Cooperative that protects people from both real estate speculation and business instability, securing the productive and reproductive needs of living? If what is to be learned from the Swiss model is that Cooperative Housing protects inhabitants from the effects of market speculation and the Business Cooperative Model protects workers from the market fluctuation of changing economies, is it possible to assume the benefits of a hybrid between these two types of organization?

3.2 Living and Working

Throughout history working has been intermixed with various forms of housing. There has always been a sense of cooperation and mutual dependency between the working space and the living space. “A Brief History of the Workhome.” A Brief History of the Workhome « The Workhome Project. Accessed March 11, 2019. http:// theworkhome.com/historyworkhome/# 66

Holliss, Frances, as part of the phD study for Design for home-based work at London Metropolitan University 67

see n. 67 above

The architecture of the living home that intermixed production with living existed ever since pre-industrial times in an incremental way of improvisation for the working spaces. In European history, the interference of domestic life with means of production was often seen in the home of the merchant who would incorporate an atelier at the ground floor level of their house, opened to the street and to the incoming clientele. A logical enfilade would follow the transition from public spaces to the private retreat of type home; from the exhibition rooms, to smaller negotiation spaces and to the sleeping annex for employers or servants.66 This leads to the belief that there was far more complexity in the nuances of public-private transition of space behind even the most incremental additions to the domestic homes. Since the 19th century was the background for several working cooperatives that would form for the first time in the weaving industries (see Fenwick Weavers Society) the home of the textile producer incorporated large working spaces in the forms of workshops with certain spatial qualities linked to generous natural light and storage areas.67 In opposition to the merchant’s work home, in the case of textile producers the working spaces were usually located on the top floors of the building pinpointed in the facades through large-scale openings and each Workhome reflected the social status of the business and the prestige of the worker. 68 Once the industrialization phenomenon began to affect cities and sustain jobs for working class families, the economic scale of work based production diminished to the necessity of fighting poverty through manufactured goods. Families were working at home only to produce self-made objects, foods and clothing within the household needs 69. A progressive dissolution of the domestic space in relation to working began to manifest, as the home turned into the place for retreat and raising a family, while work shifted to the mechanized life behind the brick walls of urban factories. Yet this was not the end of home based economies of production as many people chose to maintain incipient forms of micro-economies through back-of-the yard workshops where working was a multi-generational pursuit between family members. The 20th century brought about a period of social and economic reformwhere engineers, architects and urbanists were confronted with the undesirable effects of postindustrial societies; overcrowded cities and unsanitary conditions drove the attention to the suburban and peripheral areas. Ebenezer Howard’s plans for the Garden Cities are proof of an emergence of a clear separation between living, working and leisure within the urban settlements.

Fig. 21 Silkweavers’ workhomes source: http://theworkhome. com/history-workhome/#

Fig. 22 Plan for shop keepers’s home in London, 2005 source:Holliss, Frances. “Space, Buildings and the Life Worlds of Home-Based Workers: Towards Better Design.” Sociological Research Online 17.2 (2012): 1-37. Web.

see n. 58 above

Holliss, Frances. “Space, Buildings and the Life Worlds of Home-Based Workers: Towards Better Design.” Sociological Research Online 17.2 (2012): 1-37. Web. 71

seen n.48 above

Zoning plans of organization were adopted by countries in Europe, where housing plans imagined suburban neighborhoods for workers and their families, often situated in the growing outskirts of the cities. In Zurich, plans for the 'siedlungen' typologies emerged as housing cooperatives implemented a formula to protect inhabitants from market speculation and ensure economic means of habitation. The typology for hybrid forms of living and working was in continuous decline 70 with the few exceptions of service based and food economies (the local butcher or baker) and a segment of illegal workers within slum-based dwellings. In contemporary society, there is an existing pattern both within urban centers and suburban areas of domestic adaptability according to the micro-economy of production based activities. In the suburban especially, many families decide to incrementally change their single house dwelling typology of living in order to adapt the small business that they run within their own back yard. These businesses are often spatially conceited behind the façade of the domestic suburban home, their existence is frequently based on the word-ofthe-mouth advertisement within the neighborhood community.71 It is however, important to pinpoint that this dimension of incremental home and production based activities translated into architectural typologies through various projects in history. Hubert’s Home Clubs demonstrated how the emergence of the cooperative apartment within communities of artists and makers of Manhattan created a scheme of affordability for both habitation and economic practices. Later on, several modernist projects tackled the intellectual home based work in the typology of the urban house with a practice-oriented office or artistic pursuits. Moreover, the 21st century architecture is driven towards models of alternative housing that accommodate the possibility to work from home and self-govern the domestic production. There is a significant number of contemporary cooperative projects in countries like Switzerland, where experimenting with office-based areas and spaces of consumption within the building, creates new spatial and social relationships in similar ways in which common living units are shared between different inhabitants. In these cases, (see Zoolhaus project) the cooperative members pursue production-based activities from their homes in order to acquire shares 72 for contributing to the cooperative source of capital. This would perhaps mean that in the case of cooperatives for working and living, economic activities of service and production can generate the necessary profit to sustain domestic facilities.

Fig. 23 The Doctorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Home: La Maison de Verre, architect Pierre Chareau- source: https://bertrand-benoit.com/blog/lamaison-de-verre/

Fig. 24 The Furniture Designerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Home: Eames House source: https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/graphic-design-in-thewild-a-visit-to-the-eames-case-study-house-perfect-flyerincluded/

3.3 Conclusions

Cooperation and shared ownership can dissipate the difficulties that come with privately owning a home and sustaining a productive activity; if socioeconomic constraints of private ownership are eliminated in favor of mutual administration of space and activities, there would be considerably more freedom in dwelling occupation and working pursuits. In the way cooperatives have been used as a tool of protecting dwellers from the unstable effects of market speculation, cooperatives can also become a tool to protect workers from the market fluctuation of production-based economies. In concluding this three part chapter, there is a set of principles which can be put in two main categories, that combined create the framework for a potential reinvention of the cooperative project. 1. Davidovici, Irina as seen n. 28 above 74

thoughts on cooperative housing

Cooperative housing is an example of how capital and resources are distributed and used in an equitable and sustainable manner. On a system that is based on share-contribution membership, each member has a democratic decision within the community; allowing for a group of people to come to a mutual understanding in designing a home according to their needs.By sharing spaces and facilities, many of the economic constraints that come with private ownership hindering the comfort of a house can be avoided and even improved. Cooperative housing takes the “little” one individual can offer and through means of mutual support and collective contribution is able to offer “a lot” to everyone in pursuit of a better life. Moreover, cooperative housing can enable the separation between land ownership and housing occupation. Within the collaboration between municipal sectors offering affordable public land for sale and/or on a lease to the cooperatives 74, the building plots are economically occupied without the restraints that come with owning land. This approach is beneficial for both the Municipality, which invests less on social housing and avoids loss of taxation revenue and for the inhabitants who are offered a sustainable solution for building homes through the use of affordable territorial assets. On larger scale, cooperative housing can become a tool for regional planning as a device through which municipalities regulate and foster spatial growth in respects to existing urban tissues. This is mostly important for the development of suburban and even rural areas, on the boundary that affects the way cities are expanding. Cooperative housing is a tool of densification within the landscape and if implemented rationally can make use of natural resources and certain assets that these suburban areas can offer for the socioeconomic development of communities.

the cooperation between work and housing

In the contemporary world of scarce resources, the sharing economy challenges the way space is used as a provider of services and in consequence, how the architecture of the domestic is about to change and make room for new, reinvented typologies. Working from home models for living have a positive impact on the large scale of cities as they sustain macro and micro economies (quote) while offering people from all age groups, incomes or possibilities a chance to produce things in a domestic environment, while becoming a part of the local service circuit within a community. The cooperatives for working can become an example of how a group of people engaged in the pursuit of economic production of goods and services can benefit from working in cooperation. These models encourages startup economies by offering a platform of support to anyone who is looking to attain the skills and feedback to build a personal system of production. Framed on the scale of the domestic space, the cooperative for working has the potential to become a reinvented typology in which the hybridization of housing spaces with workplace areas sustains a healthier way of life. This kind of architecture mediates between functions that have conflicting demands in terms of public- private interaction and separation, noisy/quiet boundaries, issues of safety and health- yet it has the power to formulate a potential response to the current changing times.

CHAPTER 2: LIVING IN FLANDERS

Part 1: housing and ownership 1.1 historical overview 1.2 alternative ownership models 1.3 land accesibility Part 2: economic tissue 2.1 contemporary productive cities 2.2 socio demographic factors 2.3 productivity and production 2.4 conclusions

PART I. HOUSING AND OWNERSHIP

Fig. 25 The Swiss territory described as decentralized vs. the Belgian urban sprawl

How can the cooperative model be implemented in a context that is fundamentally based on private ownership of the home, resources and surrounding land? Bervoets, Wouter, Marijn Van De Weijer, Dominique Vanneste, Lieve Vanderstraeten, Michael Ryckewaert, and Hilde Heynen. "Towards a Sustainable Transformation of the Detached Houses in Periurban Flanders, Belgium." Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability 8.3 (2014): 1-29. Web. 1

Bervoets, Wouter, Marijn Van De Weijer, Dominique Vanneste, Lieve Vanderstraeten, Michael Ryckewaert, and Hilde Heynen. as seen n. 2 above 2

Within the Flemish landscape housing and ownership are the result of political and capitalistic forces controlling through the long standing promotion of home ownership and a significant lack of legal framework for urban interventions1. Even before the war, the development of the Belgian housing stock took the form of scattered suburban, rural and semi-rural areas, where neighborhoods of detached single-family residences function as a symbol of division, differentiation, limitation and imposition of privacy and ownership. The effects of this sprawled distribution within the landscape lead to a unsustainable pattern of living: the oversized dwelling, the excessive consumption of resources2, mobility issues and a fractured relationship with nature are some of the future consequences of a highly privatized system of housing. Yet there is a certain appeal in the emergence of the suburban Belgian landscape, a land attractive in accesibility and outside the market speculation where a vast majority chooses to live its life, away from the dense and chaotic city centers. Another important aspect regarding housing and ownership in Belgium is the present lack of implementing forms of collective housing and cooperative initiatives, unlike other European countries. Belgium was mostly linked with projects for factory workers in the socialist spirit of the phalanstery and some examples of existing garden cities. Contemporary architecture in Belgium has just awoken to the possibility of change within the housing stock and only few emerging cooperative examples exist within the country. This research will focus on home ownership in Flanders investigating the existing context and its potential for change.

1.1 historical overview

During the 19th century industrialization period, which in the Western European country of Belgium occurred at an accelerated pace, a majority of cities were faced with sanitary conditions of living. The emergence of the overcrowded slums and the formation of coal mining cities3 lead to searching for a strategy to resolve the effects of uncontrolled urbanization through what Pascal De Decker calls an ‘anti-urban’ attitude .4 In that regard, the Catholic and Liberal political parties implemented a personal agenda that needed to ensure economic growth by offering accessible mobility to the working centers, yet keeping the population contained into housing units in the rural and peripheric parts of the country5. These series of policies would influence the attitude of Belgian inhabitants towards the idea of private ownership for the next centuries, until the very present time.6 Private ownership in itself is the polar opposite of collectivity and cooperativisim and Belgium solely implemented one dominant pattern of habitation: the single-family suburban home. This model is far from the co-ownership apartment complexes which, were implemented in other countries within the same historical context. As it was mentioned, the attachment to private ownership came as a consequence of a series of legal actions and development plans, which the state had actively pushed for since 1869 . Through the heavy development of the railway network and later tram lines and road networks for automobiles, along with social benefits offered for commuting, the relationship between housing and work became more and more fractured, while the emergence of satellite villages and scattered peripheries separated the home from any other urban facility. With the rise of the social welfare state in the 20th century7, private house construction started to flourish and privatization became more than part of the political scheme to control the masses, but a national ideology about living and occupying the land. The stimulation of private ownership came through a series of legal actions that offered cheap suburban social housing, along with tax exemptions and accessible loan policies for everyone who was looking for a home. With easy access to housing and available land, the working class became divided, as each worker would acquire and personalize his individual house, generally on an isolated parcel, with a garden and an oversized dwelling. According to the state8, this was the 20th century solution to the housing crisis- the promotion of the suburban housing program. However, what started as a series of laws and policies, translated into a way of life and eventually resulted into a massive fragmentation of the territory, where patches of sprawled settlements would be disconnected from both urban centers and the fringed landscape. Within these neighborhoods, the sense of private property became so strong that the desire to own a house lead to the absense of any form of collectivity in regards to living and resources. In essence, the Belgian home was a product of mass consumtion through the imposition of a certain ideal of living.

De Decker, P. (2011). Understanding Housing Sprawl: The Case of Flanders, Belgium. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(7), pp.1634-1654. 3

4 The railway system was officially completed in 1884 informing a dense system that connected the villages for workers with the factories and industrial centers from the urban cores of the territory. By the end of the 1890s approx. two million workers commuted every day. 5

De Decker, P.

In the words of G Van Istendael through the work of De Decker “…because for many the deepest sense of existence on Belgian earth: his own house.” 6

In the early 20s the establishment of several organizations such as the Housing Fund for Large Families and The National Housing Company for Small Rural Houses (NMLK) offered housing to large families by enabling cheaper and governmentapproved housing loans with a regressive rate afferent to the number of children the household would have. According to De Decker, the offered homes came with cheap land, where the poor worker could self-sustain its family by growing a vegetable garden. This model of living became a tool to control and domesticate the labor classes and ensure political stability of the Catholic parties. 7

De Decker, P.

Fig. 26 Belgian housing typology- the row house dwelling on narrow, elongated allotments

Fig. 27 The emergence of the suburban single family house

1.2 the emergence of the radiant periphery

These historical events demonstrate how ownership models influence the territory on a physical and spatial level. The occupation of the rural periphery became a form of economic leverage for the state9, which designed an entire industry meant to amass suburban home ownership in the form of an economic activity for housing constructors (from the factory, to the employer and to the advertiser of traditional rural values imbedded in urban looking houses). The urbanization of the periphery was thus promoted as the alternative to the crowded, unsanitary city – a new way of living that accentuated the separation from any forms of labor. In terms of spatial consequences, the effects of unregulated construction and lack of any urban policies affected both the urban and the rural Belgium landscape. In the urban areas of Flanders, the effects of population growth and industrialization lead to low quality slum-based housing and a lack of green, open spaces which pushed people to invest even more into the suburban home, the DNA of a growing nebular periphery 10 . The Flanders periphery in itself is the result of dispersed urbanization at the border between the urban centers and the large agricultural zones where the territory appears in the form of a semi-rural landscape without a clear spatial structure. It is a cumulus of ‘villages’ or neighborhoods with potential to evolve and transform, yet stagnate into a kind of isotropic condition.11 In his research, Bruno de Meulder paints the picture of the typical Flemish suburban. In his words these ambiguous spatial entities are hard to distinguish from one municipality to another, as they keep the same functional structure: “…the roadside shops, the overcrowded main roads between centers, the primary school next door to the old village church, with a solicitor's office, a pharmacy and a doctor's surgery nearby. The do-it-yourself store is always there in a side-street, handy for the next extension to the house.” 12 The architecture of these homes is reflective of the mental and physical imposition of private ownership. Their language retains the urban character although they are built in the countryside in the form of terraced type housing units, keeping the front at the street and a vastness of agricultural land in the ‘backyard’. The terraced type leaves rooms for some flexibility since the neighboring plot could be filled with a similar home for the grown-up children, or sold in order to make ends meet. Subdivision of the land plot was and still is a common solution in the case of this typology .13 Other common typologies involved the popularized single family detached dwelling with garden both in the front and in the back, the kind of housing reminiscent of the English garden districts that infiltrated the Flemish landscape at some point in time. In terms of functions, the suburban housing would be representative for incremental transformation according to family practices. With an informal entrance to the back, the house places the living room to the rear14 (reversed

De Decker, P.

De Meulder, Bruno. "Patching up the Belgian Urban Landscape." New Territories. Situations, Projects, Scenarios for the European City and Territor. Officina Edizioni/ IUAV, Q2 Quaderni Del Dottorato Di Ricerca in Urbanistica; Venezia, 2004. 47-68. Web. 10

De Meulder, Bruno, as seen n. 10 above 11

De Meulder, Bruno, as seen n. 10 above 12

De Meulder, Bruno, as seen n. 10 above 13

The introduction of catalogues for housing typologies became a tradition when one family would choose to move to the countryside and built its own dwelling. One of the most known such documents was the Album de plan types d'habitations a la bon marche, issued by the Office of Work in the early 20th century. 14

Fig. 29 Farmette typology

Fig. 28 Detached house in Knokke

from the traditional type, where it faced the street) and a back garden that follows the elongated shape of the plot. The back of the house constitutes the general place for incrementally built annexes and extensions according to the family’s needs: from bathrooms, kitchens, storage spaces, garages, conservatories and kennels to an actual working space for small scale production. In fact, some of the intriguing transformations of the suburban dwelling involve bringing in the labor dimension to housing, paradoxically in a context where living is separated from the actual work by complex lines of infrastructure and commuting. These Flemish houses with working ateliers are used in some parts of the country to launch small businesses and companies where working is usually kept as a multi-generational family affair- generally covering all sorts of hands-down production and services with a separate access from the street, surrounding the private house and leading to the back access in the working space. In some cases, the productive dimension of the suburban home can be completely conceited from the street. A jewelry maker, chocolate artisanal, artist or writer are some examples of ‘hidden’ labor behind the façade of a generic suburban detached home. De Meulder, Bruno, as seen n. 10 above 15

The lucrative dimension is also present in the housing typology through the farmette model. Characteristic for suburban and rural landscapes, the farmette is a particular reinvention of the lifestyle in the suburban, having little to do with the actual farm house type 15, yet involving the lucrative dimension of large plots of lands to cultivate vegetables and cereal or to raise animals. It is usual a rather functional expression of living in a dispersed landscape, always placed in the amalgamation of various neighboring typologies, row houses and detached homes.

1.2 alternative ownership models

Fig. 30 The familistere of Laeken (1880) Jean-Baptiste André Godin

Much of Flanders’ housing stock and the large-scale urban morphology are the result of policies aimed at encouraging the idea of privatization. Yet within this landscape- which still has the beauty of possibility, the idea of cooperation and collectivity has the potential to encourage a positive change towards a future ideology more focused on sharing resources and territorial capital. The cooperative model first appeared on the Belgian territory in close relationship with industrial development and the emerging need to house workers and their families. The relationship between housing and labor appeared in socialist ideas promoted by Fourier and infiltrated the country in the form of initiatives supported by the industrialist thinker Jean-Baptiste Godin. A supporter of Fourier, Godin developed a large-scale project with residential units and factories- the Familistère de Guise, which in 1880 was converted into the Cooperative Association of Capital and Labor 16 . Afterwards, Godin decided to extend the project to Belgium, by implementing the cooperative worker housing scheme to the site of a cotton factory in the northern part of Brussels, the region of Laeken. Similar to the utopia imagined by Fourier, the Laeken cooperative was a four-level construction containing 72 houses with a central covered courtyard and circulation cores located at the corners of the ensemble. 17 Amongst the shared facilities, the families would use vegetable gardens, workshops, laundries and a refectory. 18 As it was indeed a model of collectivity at the border between the relationship housing-work, the familistere itself was an example of capitalistic social control and a tool to monitor the working class. In 1919 another model of cooperative housing was implemented through the establishment of the Société Nationale des Habitations et Logements à Bon Marché (National Agency for Affordable Housing, SNHLBM) .19

Le Familistère de Guise. (2019). Le Familistère de Laeken à Bruxelles. [online] Available at: https://www. familistere.com/fr/decouvrir/ une-architecture-au-servicedu-peuple/le-familistere-delaeken [Accessed 20 Apr. 2019] 16

Le Familistère de Laeken à Bruxelles, as seen n. 16 above 17

Le Familistère de Laeken à Bruxelles, as seen n. 16 above 18

Co-operative Housing. (2019). Belgium Archives - Co-operative Housing. [online] Available at: https:// www.housinginternational. coop/co-ops/belgium/ [Accessed 20 Apr. 2019] 19

Co-operative Housing. (2019), as seen n. 24 above 20

Co-operative Housing. (2019), as seen n. 24 above 21

The organization tackled the need to build 200.000 new units to solve the current housing shortage, hence its mission was to gather and administrate the cooperation between factory workers in the form of financial aid for cooperative social housing.20 This period marks the shift from cooperative housing associated with labor (when focus was put to housing workers and boosting the industrial economy) to the social dimension of cooperation. The developed projects drew influence from the garden cities in England and in a way became regional planning tools of reshaping the growing periphery of Brussels. Between 1921-1922 cooperative members could become tenants within these units, which always had available stock for new members. In the spirit of cooperative housing, shared facilities included public buildings (schools, hospitals, commercial centers) and cultural facilities meant to encourage a sense of community (libraries, sports facilities, community centers). These units were developed on affordable land and built within reasonable costs for materials.21 In the cases of cooperatives in garden cities situated within the suburban parts of the country most of the projects represented the physical alienation between living and labor, as the detachment from the polluted urban centers was meant to guarantee a healthier life. Within the contemporary Belgian landscape, cooperative organization shifted towards a social approach to housing, ensuring affordable construction for underprivileged families and individuals. These programs are heavily dependent on welfare state programs thus their success comes from the economic fluctuation of national economy. At times the cooperative system suffered from lack of funding from the state- given the political instability and the division between municipalities and region. One of the present challenges for the cooperative housing in Flanders is the increasing demand for housing, the on-going attachment for private market and issues concerning administration of energy consumption and reduced costs.

Fig. 31 Chantier no 4 denomme L'Entonnoir (1926) Rue des Ibis

Fig. 32 Contemporary cooperative project -Brutopia, stekke+fraas, 2015, Brussels

1.3 land accesibility

Occupation of the suburban has always been promoted as an increase in the quality of life 22 within the Flemish housing market and it justified in some ways the mass population influx in the semi-rural outskirts of the large cities. Without antagonizing the peri-urban occupation, it is worth to see the potential behind the supporting Flanders policies concerning the semi-rural land and perhaps imagine that these policies could better serve the cooperative use of land ownership and occupation as opposed to what happened so far in the Belgian landscape. 22

De Decker, P.

Immoweb.be. (2019). [online] Available at: https:// www.immoweb.be/nl/zoek/ grond/te-koop/gent/9000 [Accessed 19 Apr. 2019]. 24

Immoweb.be

CavailhĂ¨s, J. and Thomas, I. (2012). Are Agricultural and Developable Land Prices Governed by the Same Spatial Rules? The Case of Belgium. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, 61(3), pp.439-463. 26

1. Peri-urban land is outside the pressure of market speculation. Ever since the 19th century the unification and liberalization of the labor market influenced homeownership within suburban areas. Laws, regulation and social aid schemes23 were designed to encourage housing within the semi-rural parts of the country; henceforth the price of urban land kept increasing while the nonurban and agricultural land were always kept outside market speculation. According to market studies 24, the price of non-urban land becomes cheaper proportionally to the distance from the urban centers a trend that is present in the contemporary market. In fact, the average land price/ m2 in large cities like Brussels, Ghent and Antwerp can vary from 300.000 euros to 600.000 euros whereas land prices in peripheral, medium sized municipalities the average land price varies between 270.000 and 400.000 euros. 25 Also, the value of urban land is generally more exposed to market fluctuations than peri-urban land. In the case of agricultural land, any subdivision would result in an additional increase on the market price 26, which means that housing on large scale agricultural plots-like the case of the farmette- is more affordable than buying urban land which one third smaller. 2. Peri-urban land is on the border of natural landscape and human settlements. The ideology behind the Flemish housing is that many aspire to raise a family around a pleasant environment and the attachment to the garden house is imbedded in the national living tradition.

In that regard, housing in the peri-urban benefits from the proximity to natural environment and various landscapes from forests, to fields, pasture lands, lakes and rivers- ensuring a general sense of happiness an improved quality of living. In many cases, however the privatization of the housing plot and any lack of collective initiative concerning natural resources produced actual fractures in the relationship with the landscape and the construction of the standardized Flemish housing typology rarely takes into account the topography or other natural constraints of the surrounding environment. The house with the garden, remains however a positive element in this sense. 3. Peri-urban land had the possibility of expansion, according to various needs. Suburban land meant for housing development is in general of larger surface than urban land and more accessible in price. Moreover, it is also a land where housing can co-exist with alternative functions; from home based productive activities, domestic labor and potentially public functions which could polarize the generic Flemish village and open the potential for more collective oriented development.

PART II. ECONOMIC TISSUE

Fig. 33 Productive landscape in West Flanders: the horns of present and past factories as the symbolic image of the territory

according to Creative SpIN Final Report, in cooperation with URB ACT “Connecting Cities, Building Successes” for Local Action Plan Kortrijk 27

Thompson, A. Linda. (2016). Unemployment paradox: the story behind West Flanders’ low jobless rate | Flanders Today. [online] Flanderstoday.eu. Available at: http://www.flanderstoday. eu/business/unemploymentparadox-story-behind-westflanders-low-jobless-rate [Accessed 17 Apr. 2019] 28

Previous subchapters have focused on housing policies and the emergence the Flemish sprawled territory. In this context housing has become part of a decentralized system where the relationship between living and working has been fractured in time, due to specific historical conditions. This subchapter will further focus on the productive aspect of living and the potential of existing productive cores within West Flanders. According to the strategic plan of West Deal of the Province West-Flanders and Strategy Eurometropole 2014-2020)27 there is a current initiative which focuses on developing regions where the industry of creative pursuits, manufacturing and local productive initiatives have the potential to grow and polarize local communities. This could be the answer to the current state of labor since sustainable development agendas encourage economic growth on the basis of nonpolluting industries, which work on a system of ethical means of production. For the region of West Flanders there is a great potential in that direction- since its economic development is based on a majority of manufacturing companies and on several home-based productive activities spread along the territory. However, this field of development faces current global pressure and an ongoing shrinkage in demographic tendenciessomething which can be defined as a ‘labor crisis’. In the present situation of West Flanders, the ‘labor crisis’28 boils down to a flourishing market of economies with potential in terms of production, yet incapable of finding a sufficient demographic willing to work and live within these areas. This is a paradoxical aspect in itself, given that the young Flemish aspire to the suburban way of life and the typical West Flemish have an innate passion for production and manufacturing. Alas, one can raise the question of why is this territory facing challenging productivity levels and how the cooperative organization could potentially change this landscape?

Fig. 34 Spatial structure in the distribution of productive centers in West Flanders

The region of West Flanders with: 1. city of Kortrijk and 2. city of Bruges 3. towards metropolitan area of Lille, France 4. towards Gent and Antwerp 5. the course of Leie river

2.1 productive cities

Fig. 35 Located on the strategic route that links the Flemish region to the Mteropolitan Area of Lille in France, Kortrijk is one of the most productive cities in the south of West Flanders

Kortrijk is one of the flourishing cities of West Flanders, with decades long tradition of manufactured based activities, which make it an exemplary case for the contemporary condition of labor and housing. For Kortrijk the biggest issue to adress concerns a population that is facing an imminent loss of young workforce and an increased aging demographic and brain drain problems. The particularity of this area comes from a blend of historic and demographic conditions that have led to a way of living focused on the emergence of home-based production activities with power to activate local economies in this part of the country. Geographically, the Flemish speaking city of Kortrijk is located in the South of West Flanders covering a surface of 80 km2 and a population of 75.000 inhabitants.29 This classifies it as a medium-size regional establishment surrounded by several small sized satellite municipalities, in an area where 280.000 people live full time.30 With its proximity to the French border and accessible routes that link Kortrijk to the flourishing triangle of Ghent-Antwerp-Brussels (through the E17 highway), this area has the potential to establish strategic partnerships and complement the economy of the region. In that regard, Kortrijk is included in the metropolitan area of Lille in Northern France- an ingrowing urban pole and the center of the Eurometropolis line Lille â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Kortrijk â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Tournai.On behalf of this urbanized axis, Kortrijk is open in borders to several international companies with production activities around the territory. From an historical perspective, the development of Kortrijk throughout time has led to the present spatial structure of the city and more importantly to its relationship with the surrounding, suburban villages.

according to Creative SpIN Final Report as seen n. 1 above 29

according to Creative SpIN Final Report as seen n. 29 above 30

according to Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk, 26 april 2007, Definitieve goedkeuring door de Bestendige Deputatie van de Provincie WestVlaanderen 31

as seen n. 31 above

Rooses, M. and Cauwelaert, F. (1913). “Vlaanderen door de eeuwen heen “ Amsterdam: Elsevier. 34

LEFEVRE 1963 via Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk 35

according to Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk, 26 april 2007 36

as seen n. 36 above

Additionally, this territory is vastly characterized by the aforementioned settlement sprawl and a certain attachment to housing within rural areas -outside the urban core. In Kortrijk’s case, the disposition of these housing settlements has been influenced by the emergence of the first productionbased activities, which gave particularity to territorial occupation. The formation of the incipient urban core first began in the year 1300 in the form of a medieval walled fortress32 which has kept until present times the structure of some morphological elements, such as access roads (Leiestraat, Rijselstraat and Tournai Street) and some public squares. Three centuries later, the territory began to flourish in terms of economical assets, with the development of linen industry33 while spatially, it continued to expand its borders to the southeast with the construction of harbor points along Leie river. During the 17th century reign of Louis XIV the first neighborhoods were built in the form of scattered ‘small hooves and worker homes’34 without any form of spatial organization. In the words of Lefevre: “The homes are becoming quite disorderly anywhere put down: in full field, in the vicinity or on any distance from the roads; in one word: everywhere. Not some emptiness, not a place where the houses are less accumulated; the whole region gives the impression of one vast residence.” 35 This was the first spatial manifestation of a sprawled, decentralized territory. By the 18th century, the city was further developed in terms of infrastructure and the spinal banks of Leie became poles of emerging trade activities. The rise of the periphery The first formation of suburban territory in the surrounding villages of Kortrijk area appeared in the shape of small groups of buildings clinging to the main roads that connect Menen and Tournai to the urban core. The first villages formed in connection to the system of valleys and ridges36 where the largest density of occupation occurred on the bank of Leie Valley, since the river became a spatial coordinator for the first human settlements in the area. The process of building infrastructure lines and paved roads lead to the establishment of villages like Bissegem and Harelbeke, which started with a linear expansion following the course of the river and continued to grow in time as satellite municipalities. This ribbon development continued throughout the 19th century, when the first traces of industrial landscapes began to emerge. The emergence of production in and outside the periphery influenced the economic and spatial development of Kortrijk, since the railway network and the excavated Bossuit-Kortrijk canal37 enabled the river to become a means of transporting industrial goods within and outside the territory. By the 1960s, the development of infrastructure transformed mobility as a pivotal element within the territory.

Fig. 36 Historical evolution of Kortrijk from the Medieval settlement to the satellite expansion of its borders

Significant number of households were formed within the suburban, where the typical Belgian inhabitant would transition to permanently raise a family, while most of the work-related affairs would transition to permanently raise a family, while most of the work-related affairs would make him depended on commuting to the urban center of Kortrijk. On behalf of the catholic political party, the government subsidized loans in order to encourage ownership policies for private individual single family dwelling. Via E. Melgaard., G. Hadjimichael., M. Almeida. and L. G. W. Verhoef. (2007). COST C16 Improving the Quality of Existing Urban Building Envelopes. IOS Press. 38

as seen n. 31 above

In the 1970s the construction of the E17 highway and several other important lines redefined mobility as the main factor in separating functions in and outside the urban center. The relationship between housing, production and recreation was thus subjected to a tangible spatial separation and the suburban village became the expression of a particular lifestyle: the conglomerate of over-sized single-family dwellings, visibly disconnected from the natural landscape. The allotments would take the form of separated entities, housing enclaves where the dream was to own a house with a garden, in order to reach a certain quality of life. Belgian laws such as De Taeye (1948) 38 were actively pushing the agenda for such a lifestyle and the spatial consequence was the diffused suburban in the rural landscape. Legally, these suburban neighborhoods are included in municipalities where production-based activities are concentrated in business parks around sprawled industrial centers. Around the Kortrijk-MouscronTournai railway line39 a conglomerate of factories were established after the industrial revolution. The main areas of production thrived from the flax industries, with subbranches into textile companies, clothing, design and more technological fields of production: construction materials and automobile industries. In the 20th century, these industries evolved into various textile sectors (confections of fabrics and such) concentrated along the infrastructural lines and on the banks of Leie. Moreover, these industries polarized neighborhoods of houses for factory workers forming the 19th century belt around the city.40 Moreover, this landscape of productive activities retains the quality of the surrounding natural landscape. The present peripheries of Kortrijk consist of agricultural fields, forests and water systems. Thus, these rural settlements thrive from both means of industrial production and agricultural based economy. In more recent times, there is an alternative practice which sustains the income of the several local household. The home-based production practice has become a tool to partially ensure an income, as inhabitants have incrementally adapted their homes into personal offices or ateliers of smallscale production. The formation of such home based production activities transformed the West Flanders villages into small poles of activity. Each village functions as a satellite core within itself, with a series of ribbon shaped facilities that accompany the housing units: bakeries, restaurants, schools, university campuses, cinemas, cemeteries and food markets were built in order to further polarize living in the suburb. What is, however, a problem in itself is that in the remaining space between these villages- there is a series of residual open spaces with punctual residential areas where lack of accessibility, public spaces or connection to the natural landscape have

Fig. 37 Rural settlements outside the urban centers-the farmette as tha housing typology and the garden as the symbol of domestic labor

Fig. 38 The Leie river became the backbone of productive activities since early 18th century

In the contemporary Kortrijk the existing morphological elements (from housing, production zones and recreational functions) are faced with a challenging landscape. There is the excessive urbanization of the city center, where an impending lack of open green and public space makes for a questionable future growth on one hand, and on the other the stagnation of the peri-urban areas- where villages and zones of intensive labor- from industrial parks , microeconomies and agricultural fields are disconnected from the settlements that lack in what ties together a community. There is an intense sense of privacy and an attachment to the ownership of the suburban home by a population which is considerably shrinking and losing its young workforce. However, there is still potential for change. Present initiatives are undertaken by Municipalities and organizations such as the likes of Leiedal41 or Budafabriek42 to develop the areas within and around the city, with attention to encouraging productive activities based on manufacture and knowledge trade of the arts and crafts. Moreover, there is attention given to creating public spaces and using natural elements, such as the valley of Leie river, as polarizing centers within the territory. The region is also acknowledged as an education core with a campus for the Catholic University of Leuven and two additional university colleges, hosting a number of 10.000 students43 , with particular focus to industrial production and design. With all of these aspects in mind; there are still problems that affect the productivity of the area and their cause stems from the existent demographic condition.

Leiedal.be. (2019). Intercommunale Leiedal. [online] Available at: https:// www.leiedal.be/ [Accessed 26 May 2019] 41

Kortrijk. (2019). Budafabriek. [online] Available at: https://www. kortrijk.be/adressen/ budafabriek [Accessed 26 May 2019] 42

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 43

2.2 socio demographic factors

West-Vlaanderen Ontcijferd Sociaaleconomisch profiel van de provincie - editie 201 44

Belgium Population 2019. (n.d.). Retrieved from http:// worldpopulationreview.com/ countries/belgium-population/

According to the present demographic data44, Kortrijk is currently one of the most populated municipalities of West Flanders, housing a number of 75.000 inhabitants. However, on the level of Belgium, it is considered to be a middle-sized establishment, in comparison to larger municipalities like Brussels, Ghent or Antwerp.

as seen n. 42 above

Steunpunt Data and Analyse Steekkaart demografie 2016 Demografische fiche KORTRIJK 47

as seen n. 44 above

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 49

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 50

Following the course of the Leie river, which crosses through the densest part of Kortrijk, reaching neighboring suburban villages, the population density decreases significantly. The rural municipalities of Menen, Wevelgem, Bissegem, Harelbeke and Waregem (where a significant number of industries and productive companies are currently active) generally amass to a population of under 40.000 inhabitants45 which classifies as a middle to low density establishment category. According to the World Population Review, general trends in the demographic fluctuation for this part of West Flanders report an increase in only 1.4 % of population, which is lower than in Flanders (+3.9 %) and the number of people over the age of 65 will increase sharply with 28.5 % between 2007-2025. 46 One of the major current problems with impact on production, hence on economic growth and on housing occupation is the decrease in population and increase in elder inhabitants. For Kortrijk, the highest number of inhabitants are aged between 36-59 years old (24.509 which covers 32% of the inhabitants), while the lowest category of inhabitants is aged between 18-25 years old (7.610 which covers only 10% of the inhabitants). 47 The total number of elderly inhabitants aged between 60-79 years old, is of more than 15.000 inhabitants. 48 Implications on productive activities Due to both an on-going brain drain and the shrinkage in demographic the region is currently incapable of retaining its young workforce. The city is recognized as an academic center, with the campus of KU Leuven and two university colleges in the area, henceforth the general trend is that young inhabitants pursue these universities in order to specialize in the offered program of industrial design and engineering sciences and after leaving their studies very few choose to remain. The majority prefers to move where better career opportunities are in sight (mostly in the powerful economic centers of Brussels, Gent or Antwerp).49 For start-ups, companies and industries which are established in and around Kortrijk this is highly challenging. The shrinkage in young population means not only the loss of work force, yet the incapacity to amass enough skilled professionals to carry on largescale production activities. There are also not enough opportunities within the creative fields to attract young professionals from the fields of design; arts and crafts- what this region has aspired to develop towards50 hence this affects the loss of younger inhabitants.

Fig. 39 Total population of West Flanders, according to each municipality, since 1st of January 2014

Fig. 40 Expected population growth, municipalities of West Flanders, I January 20141 January 2024

Fig. 41 Population density, municipalities of West Flanders, January 1st, 2014

State of the population Fig. 42 Evolution of the number of 0-19 year olds, 20-64 year olds and the number of 65 year olds and older

Bervoets, Wouter, and Hilde Heynen. "The Obduracy of the Detached Single Family House in Flanders." International Journal of Housing Policy 13.4 (2013): 358-80. Web. 51

On the other hand, it is important to acknowledge a traditional tendency into housing and occupation that is spread across all Belgian territories. Several sociologic studies51 have researched into the lifestyle and choices of Belgian inhabitants which spend the academic years of their lives followed by the starting working period of their 20s living in the city centers, until reaching the age when most opt out for starting a family and owning a house. In general, there is a population migrating from the urban centers to suburban areas and in West Flanders in particular, this population is highly implicated in various productive pursuits. While the population is currently suffering shrinkage; there is still a growing demographic that earns an income from living in the suburban; where their home has been incrementally transformed into some kind of business or productive pursuit. However, this trend is highly dependent on the productivity and production characteristic for each region.

Fig. 43 Population statistics for the municipality of Kortrijk- 2017

2.3 productivity and production

Fig. 44 The status of microeconomic enterprises and production activities in Kortrijk 2008-2014

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 52

according to Creative SpIN Final Report

In order to further tackle what caused a labor crisis within the West Flanders region, it is important to understand the market of productivity and production, focusing on the study case of the region of Kortrijk.

according to Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk, 26 april 2007, Definitieve goedkeuring door de Bestendige Deputatie van de Provincie West-Vlaanderen 54

according to Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk, as seen n. 54 above 55

From the perspective of employment levels, the rate is currently rising and 72.7% of the population of working age (20 - 64 years) is known to be employed within local businesses and industries.52 The average employment rate in the city centers in 2016 was of 67.8% 53, while the unemployment rate (April 2018) is decreasing and amounts to 6.7% in the West Flemish cities of Kortrijk, Roeselare and Bruges who know the lowest unemployment rate of all urban centers.54 The job ratio (119.3) in Kortrijk is at its highest of the thirteen central West Flanders cities (where the average is of 104) given that this statistic represents the number of jobs that exist per 100 inhabitants on the working age spectrum (20 - 64 years). Moreover, in the case of Kortrijk, the incoming work commute is higher than the average of the center cities (65%). On the level of unemployment, for the area of Kortrijk it was reported in 2018 a rate of 6.7% and it amassed to the lowest level within the region of West Flanders.55 It is thus important to realize that Kortrijk functions as an employment hub within this region. Moreover, what gives particular character to Kortrijk and beyond is the field of production and the general attachment to a certain kind of labor, which intertwines industrial activities with local manufacturing practices. The people of West Flanders are widely recognized for the pursuit of productivity, whether influenced by the local flax and textile industry or by various creative pursuits. The general tendency is to either work for an actively established personal business or an industrial park- all of which justify these low levels of unemployment.

According to Veerle De Mey in her description of Kortrijk she notes that: according to Creative SpIN Final Report 56

“Entrepreneurship is really baked into this region. People have always reinvented themselves; that’s really what is particular about this region. When business is bad, we’ll try something else instead.” 56 The character of production is one of the reasons that could appeal for attracting young employers into this area and potentially lead to reversing the present condition of the labor economy. Most of the capital asset in Kortrijk and neighboring municipalities is a result of different sectors of economy and production, which function based on the present active economies. In the landscape of peripheral Kortrijk, there is a pattern of occupation where the distribution of economic poles is mixed with housing areas. This happens extensively on the scale of low-density village settlements, where economy is primarily directed at two main sectors: 1. zones of industrial production 2. micro-economic enterprises and service providers In the case of micro-economic enterprises, this field is mostly composed of small and medium sized businesses, where an average of 63% companies have less than 100 employers. 57 Since the economic structure in the region is based on academic training in the fields of industries and design, there is a stable tradition in the establishment of many micro-enterprises in the area within the fields of industrial design, textile, and fashion manufacturing and technological fields of practice. 58 In and around Kortrijk, there are 1.895 registered businesses in the field of creative industries and they amount for 2.922 workers (2016). 59 These economies do not exceed in terms of employers-which can constitute a problem as the average micro-economy enterprise is of a small size and contains 1.54 employers/business. Located within zones of low density, typical Flemish villages, these enterprises still support the pivoting potential that productive industries have in the region. As a forward-looking statement, this branch of economic practice supported by young inhabitants opting for start-up initiatives can mark a shift from polluting global industries 60 to new practices, which can polarize communities on a larger scale. Another aspect which characterizes this field of production is the substantial diversity of different productive pursuits- out of which there is a considerable number of home-based productive activities in the form of small businesses. In these cases, the company structure is based on a multi-generational affair, kept within members of the family.

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 57

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 58

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 59

according to Creative SpIN Final Report 60

Urbact.eu. (2019). Creative SpIN Final report | URBACT. [online] Available at: https:// urbact.eu/files/creative-spinfinal-report [Accessed 26 May 2019]. 60

Urbact.eu. as seen n. 60 above 61

According to a recent study, there are 7.454 of active companies in Kortrijk divided between four main sectors: Primary sector Secondary sector Tertiary sector Quaternary sector

149 companies 1.342 companies (458 industries, 884 construction) 5.447 516

What is important to note is the contribution of the secondary sector of economy- mostly related to producing finite goods through means of industrial technologies and manufacturing techniques. In the territory of Kortrijk and in the peri-urban areas the majority of production poles are composed of industrial zones and construction-based economies- which are either strategically concentrated on the banks of Leie River or sprawled in the territory. These industries have an important contribution to the growth of the area along with the Tertiary sector (service-based enterprises). Furthermore, in recent years there is an increase in the employment sector related to knowledge and skill-intensive services which reached a value of 61.4% in Kortrijk (at the end of 2015)60, making it the highest percentage in the province. This could potentially indicate that there is an increased demographic more and more interested in alternative means of production and economic development- perhaps based on a series of practices within the creative means of production. The research below shows the main types of economy within the micro and macro enterprises that are active in the territory of Kortrijk- as it is worthy to mention a a growing tendency into the future transformation of Kortrijk towards an innovative center for various craftmanship activities and creative industries. 61

2.4 conclusions

The centuries long based attachment to private property and home ownership has led to both physical and ideological fragmentation amongst people living in the urban and suburban territories. The effects of sprawled settlements have impacted mobility- thus the infrastructure network, which became a long thread in the separation between home and work, home and public space and home and natural landscape. There is a severe division in how the house relates to its surrounding environment and how people have lost a sense of community, yet gained a belonging to a universal way of lifeprotected within the walls of the large home and its generous back gardenrarely opened to the neighbor next door. The status of home ownership in Flanders has concerning effects as the growing demand for housing cannot be solutioned through detachment and separation or the further privatization of the oversized living unit. The on-going tradition of starting a family and owning a home has been encouraged by national policies on land ownership and the price of land, which has always been more affordable in peri-urban areas, the suburban context outside any Flanders urban core. The suburban has become a condition in itself as there is no clear separation between urban centers and the start/end of the suburban and beginning of rural areas. Spatially, this has led to urban forms of housing built in open neighborhoods. Here, the land is outside the speculation of market pressure- an on-going problem in the urban areas- hence most of the private housing stock is located within these areas. Socio-economic factors- in West Flanders productive areas like Kortrijk are faced with a rather growing economy based on manufacturing, design, creative industries, technology and multimedia start-ups. These activities have the potential to lead to economic growth and future development, yet the on-going brain drain caused by the aging demographic and the loss of young work-force is affecting the start-up ratio. Moreover, aquiring land and the available space for such productive activities represents a challenge in itself for anyone who wants to make a living within this part of the country. Thinking about alternative means to respond to such challenging aspects leads to the idea of encouraging a way of life based on collaboration and fostering a sense of belonging. Reaching such goals could formulate a way to reinvent the house and labor, so that they resolve the negative effects of spatial and mental fragmentation, the demand for housing and the aging demographic. The cooperative model in Belgium is yet to become a popular one and, in some cases, it has failed in addressing the needs of a very traditional demographic, one which has been infused with certain ideologies throughout the fragmentation of Belgium. Yet the cooperative housing has the power to accommodate and resolve issues related to land prices, market pressure, accessibility to acquiring a home and the improvement of oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life that comes when domestic labor and resources are administrated and catered collectively by a community. Moreover, cooperatives are means to organize labor and economy in a way that everyone can have access to production, start up a business and learn from the shared knowledge and resources within its community.

CHAPTER 3: ON THE BANKS OF LEIE RIVER

Part 1: Human landscapes 1.1 housing 1.2 use of the river 1.3 local production Part 2: Natural landscapes 2.1. land use 2.2. water use

PART I. HUMAN

Leie river as a polarizing element fo

N LANDSCAPES

or housing and productive activities

1.1 housing

The detached home on the banks of the river

The row housing typology with neighboring agricultural plots

The farmette- house with near by shed

The suburban block- initiatives to privatize the river banks

1.2 use of river

Shiping and transport

Cycling

Art installations

Leisure

Leie river as a polarizing eleme

ent for housing and productive

1.3 local forms of production

The industrial park

Agricultural production

The factory- textile industries

The factory- construction materials

Home of the Hairstylist

Home of the Horsesaddler

Home of the Shoe Maker

Home of the Designer- front and back of the yard production

PART II. NATURA

Leie river as part of the regio

AL LANDSCAPES

onal natural landscape system

2.1. land use

Agriculture

Natural reservations

Forests

Pasture lands

2.2 water use

River banks

Lakes

Creeks

Wetlands

CHAPTER 4: COOPERATIVE RE-DEFINED

Part 1: reflections 1.1 designing a demographic 1.2 space- scale- activities 1.3 productive homes typologies Part 2: on-site proposal

PART I: REFLECTIONS

1.1. designing a demographic

In the context of Kortrijk and its surrounding municipalities, there is an existing productive spirit that animates the inhabitants and gives character to the potential of what is understood as Flemish traditional way of living and working. The Leie River productive Cooperatives are designed to adjust the attachment to family life and making-of lasting things within the frame of the spatial, natural and economic advantages that suburban living can offer. The villages accommodate young makers in the fields of art, crafts and technology- both graduates of the local university program- specialized in Industrial Design and Media and any inhabitants who are looking to find support in launching a start-up business in cooperation with family friends and fellow entrepreneurs, lovers of hands-down type of production and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;making-ofâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; things. These people would have the linkage to the Belgian multi-generational approach to production, from the business handed down from father to son, or they would be starting their own family while nurturing a business that would grow and secure a means of production for their growing children. What would be produced? From the fields of design, advertising, multimedia, arts, crafts to the technological fields of computer programming, Internet and Robotics- the Cooperatives aspire to cover these making-of necessities in terms of space, functions and relation to housing units. The cooperative way of organization will offer the opportunity to share spaces; from storage, garages to meeting rooms and ateliers- in a spirit that enables mutual cooperation, exchange of ideas, combinations of different types of production and social interaction between the members. These opportunities will satisfy a broad range of necessities from gaining actual profit from hands-down making and selling the product or service to the basic household need of that family member who asks for a longer working table to practice his hobby. As the cooperative is an alternative way of habitation, the productive settlements will shelter people who are interested in innovation, both in terms of housing and in terms of production. Keeping the qualities of the free, unrestrained suburban space, yet drifting away from the isolation of the oversized, detached Belgian home, these inhabitants will live in the spirit of cooperation and support to foster social and economic growth. The co-ops will include a variety of common spaces, administrated and sustained by these organization from working areas, ateliers, gardens to domestic spaces for cooking, laundry, living rooms, libraries and party rooms. There would be places of privacy and retreat within oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s space and places of encounter for the collective benefit of all the families living here. The cooperative model gives people the required architectural space for living in cooperation in order to equitably foster a personal sense of living and production.

1.2 space- scale- activity

An inventory of activities based on the most needed productive economies in Kortrijk and surroundings

I. Creative services • interior design • industrial design, prototyping, 3D printing • multimedia service • architecture • furniture design • fashion design • painting II. Local manufacturers: furniture maker mechanics woodworker bread maker construction materials- bricks clothing makers acessory making III. Food industries • • • •

cooking micro- farming fishing gardening

IV. Office for service providers-consultancy V. Retail of produced goods V.I Technologies •

robotics and computer programming

1.3 productive homes typologies

Present context shows a disconnected relationship between the village and the river- the houses form a physical barrier structured by the road, without any spatial connection to the landscape.

The proposed scheme contains housing patterns connected through mobility lines to the river, allowing for a permeable spatial connection

housing and production

river village buffer zone with public facilities

Proposed connection system pedestrians and bikes mobility vehicles mobility

creating a system that reflects different relationships between living and working in close proximity

this system will be close influenced by the nature and scale of production, by the context and by the availability of space and resources

all three typologies are based on the idea of sharing resources for production, storage, meeting rooms and public spaces in the spirit of cooperation

100

101

TYPE A: The live-with 62 cooperative

Forms of organization: the micro-enterprise Spatial characteristics: mixed living and working spaces, one entrance, use of doble height spaces Employment: from 1 to 3 employers Type of activity: I. Creative Industries II. Office for service providers consultancy V.I Robotics and computer programming Needed spaces: â&#x20AC;˘ office â&#x20AC;˘ studio â&#x20AC;˘ multifunctional space Site characteristics: compact urban tissue, accesibility to infrastructure and urbanized agglomerations

terminology partially inspired by Holliss, Frances, as part of the phD study for Design for home-based work at London Metropolitan University 62

102

housing + production

103

duplex ground floor 225 sqm

duplex upper floor 86 sqm

104

apartment typologies

layout possibility

single or couple apartment 50 sqm

apartment for family with one child 87.5 sqm

2 3

apartment for larger families 137.5 sqm

2 3

105

shared playground

shared garden

cooperative housing

shared garden

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

106

cooperative housing

shared garden

cooperative housing

shared multifunctional hall

cooperative housing

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

gound floor of the strip

107

shared playground

shared garden

cooperative housing

shared garden

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

108

cooperative housing

shared garden

cooperative housing

shared multifunctional hall

cooperative housing

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

upper floor of the strip

109

elevation of the strip

110

15 m

111

axonometric view

112

view from the apartment with office based working space

113

TYPE B: The live-adjacent62 cooperative

Forms of organization: the making-of business, the small arts & crafts hub Spatial characteristics: a degree of spatial separation between living and working functions, separate accesses for different functions, the back-of-the-yard enterprise Employment: from 3-10 employers Type of activity: I. Creative Industries II. Local manufacturers V. Retail of produced goods VI Robotics and programming Needed spaces: 1. storage space for cars and materials; garage and storage 2.working spaces: office, studio, atelier, workshop, transforming, multifunctional space, 3. negotiation/meeting space: consulting room 4.public space for marketing: showroom, gallery terminology partially inspired by Holliss, Frances, as part of the phD study for Design for home-based work at London Metropolitan University 62

Site characteristics: accesibility to infrastructure, space for storage and materials, opportunity to open to the public, cheap land for sustaining a growing business

114

housing production housing

115

ground floor 625 sqm

second floor 375 sqm 5m

116

apartment typologies

layout possibility

single or couple apartment 50 sqm

2 6

apartment for family with one child 87.5 sqm

1 1

apartment for larger families 137.5 sqm

2 3 1

117 5m

cooperative hou

cooperative housing open market by river

pocket garden

production

pocket garden

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

118

production

pocket garden

using

cooperative housing pocket garden

production

pocket garden

cooperative housing pocket garden

pocket garden

production

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

gound floor of the strip

119

pocket garden

cooperative hou

cooperative housing open market by river

pocket garden

production

pocket garden

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

120

production

pocket garden

using

cooperative housing pocket garden

production

pocket garden

cooperative housing pocket garden

pocket garden

production

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

upper floor of the strip

121

pocket garden

15 m

elevation of the strip

122

123

axonometric view

124

greenhouse view with working space for clothing makers

125

TYPE C: The near by62 cooperative

Forms of organization: the large scale manufacturing, farming, food industries Spatial characteristics: large degree of spatial separation between living and working, mostly due to noise or determined agriculture land, inspired by the farmette Employment: 10+ employers working together Type of activity: I. Creative Industries II. Local manufacturers V. Retail of produced goods III. Food industries Needed spaces: garage and storage

1. storage space for cars and materials;

2.working spaces: studio, atelier, workshop, transforming, multifunctional space, machinery spaces 3. negotiation/meeting space: consulting room 4.public space for marketing: showroom, gallery, public square, food market, restaurant, the cooperative cantine

terminology partially inspired by Holliss, Frances, as part of the phD study for Design for home-based work at London Metropolitan University 62

Site characteristics: accesibility to infrastructure, space for storage,materials and machinery, opportunity to open to the public, cheap land for sustaining a growing business and agriculture practices

126

housing

production

127

ground floor 375 sqm

second floor 155 sqm 5m

128

apartment typologies

layout possibility

single or couple apartment 80 sqm

apartment for family with one child 180 sqm

apartment for larger families 165 sqm 1

129

exhibition hall

clothing atelier

furniture maker

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

130

toy manufacturer

woodworker

cooperative housing

tea pavilion

cooperative housing

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

gound floor of the strip

131

exhibition hall

clothing atelier

furniture maker

125 m

150 m

175 m

200 m

225 m

132

toy manufacturer

woodworker

cooperative housing

tea pavilion

cooperative housing

25 m

50 m

75 m

100 m

upper floor of the strip

133

15 m

elevation of the strip

134

135

axonometric view

136

factory view with space for furniture makers

137

PART II: ON SITE PROPOSAL

138

139

Site A: Menen, 30.000 sqm

Site B: Harel

140

lbeke, 37.700 sqm

Site C: Bissegem 40.650 sqm

141

Site A: Menen, 30.000 sqm

142

Site B: Harelbeke, 37.700 sqm

143

Site C: Bissegem 40.650 sqm

144

axonometric view of the detailed site C

145

2019 initial context

2024 renovation of factory -conversion into manufacturing school-

2030 the state finances the built up of the first cooperative houses for the users of the school

146

2038 the scale of production grows -the cooperative builds additional homes for workers-

2040 addition of linear parks -agriculture and orchards-

2048 multiple cooperatives working together on a village scale

147

the three typologies united in a compact system

148

149

150

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“A Brief History of the Workhome.” A Brief History of the Workhome « The Workhome Project. Accessed March 11, 2019. http://theworkhome.com/history-workhome/# “The Characteristics of Housing Cooperatives”. Retrieved 2 May December 2018 < https://www.realtymyths.com/wifferent-types-housing-cooperatives/> Retrieved 31.01.2019 Alpern, Andrew. Luxury Apartment Houses of Manhattan: an Illustrated History. Dover Publications, Inc., 1992. Belgium Population 2019. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/belgiumpopulation/ Bervoets, Wouter, and Hilde Heynen. "The Obduracy of the Detached Single Family House in Flanders." International Journal of Housing Policy 13.4 (2013): 358-80. Web. Bervoets, Wouter, Marijn Van De Weijer, Dominique Vanneste, Lieve Vanderstraeten, Michael Ryckewaert, and Hilde Heynen. "Towards a Sustainable Transformation of the Detached Houses in Peri-urban Flanders, Belgium." Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability 8.3 (2014): 1-29. Web. Boudet, Dominique “The Renaissance of Zurich’s Housing Cooperatives” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich, April 2018 Bridger, Jessica “The Kalkbreite Co-op Complex & Zurich’s Cooperative Renaissance” retrieved December 2018 Business Studies, Lesson 9, Co-operative Society Carrell, Severin. Strike Rochdale from the record books Cavailhès, J. and Thomas, I. (2012). Are Agricultural and Developable Land Prices Governed by the Same Spatial Rules? The Case of Belgium. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, 61(3), pp.439-463. Charles Fourier, “Selections Describing the Phalanstery,” in The Utopia Reader, ed. by Gregory Claeys and Lyman Tower Sargent (New York: New York University Press, 1999), 192 via http://jessica-f-angel.com/ phalanstere accessed 9.03.2019 Claus, Sylvia “The Impressive Development of Housing Cooperatives in Zurich” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich, April 2018 Cliff, T., Cluckstein, D. (1988) The Labour Party: A Marxist History, London: Bookmarks Co-operative Housing. (2019). Belgium Archives - Co-operative Housing. [online] Available at: https://www. housinginternational.coop/co-ops/belgium/ [Accessed 20 Apr. 2019] Courtney, Thomas B. The Law of Private Companies (2nd ed.). p. 26. Creative SpIN Final Report, in cooperation with URB ACT “Connecting Cities, Building Successes” for Local Action Plan Kortrijk Davidovici, Irina “Ideology and Collective Life: Zurich’s New Cooperatives” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018 De Decker, P. (2011). Understanding Housing Sprawl: The Case of Flanders, Belgium. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(7), pp.1634-1654. De Meulder, Bruno. "Patching up the Belgian Urban Landscape." New Territories. Situations, Projects, Scenarios for the European City and Territor. Officina Edizioni/ IUAV, Q2 Quaderni Del Dottorato Di Ricerca in Urbanistica; Venezia, 2004. 47-68. Web. Doug Peacock. “Social strife: The birth of the co-op”. Cotton Times, understanding the industrial revolution. p. 2. Archived from the original on 25 July 2008. Retrieved 10.03.2019 via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Worker_cooperative#cite_note-4 E. Melgaard., G. Hadjimichael., M. Almeida. and L. G. W. Verhoef. (2007). COST C16 Improving the Quality of Existing Urban Building Envelopes. IOS Press. Gates, J. (1998) The Ownership Solution, London: Penguin Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk, 26 april 2007, Definitieve goedkeuring door de Bestendige Deputatie van de Provincie West-Vlaanderen Glaser Marie Antoinette, Hilti Nicola “More than housing : cooperative planning - a case study in Zürich”, Basel 2016 Hayden, D. (1982). The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. MIT Press. Hofer, Andreas “Housing Typologies for a Post-Industrial Society” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018

151

Holliss, Frances, as part of the phD study for Design for home-based work at London Metropolitan University Holliss, Frances. “Space, Buildings and the Life Worlds of Home-Based Workers: Towards Better Design.” Sociological Research Online 17.2 (2012): 1-37. Web. http://cms.bauhaus100.de/de/damals/koepfe/direktoren/hannes-meyer/, retrieved December 2018 https://cooperer.coop/ accessed 10.03.2019 https://www.housinginternational.coop/co-ops/switzerland/, Accessed 11.04.2019 Hubert, Pirsson, and Hoddick, “New York Flats and French Flats”, Architectural Record, vol. 2, n° 1 Hugentobler, Margrit “More than housing : cooperative planning - a case study in Zürich”, Basel 2016 Immoweb.be. (2019). [online] Available at: https://www.immoweb.be/nl/zoek/grond/te-koop/gent/9000 [Accessed 19 Apr. 2019]. Katscher, Leopold. “Owen’s Topolobampo Colony, Mexico.” American Journal of Sociology 12, no. 2 (1906): 145-75. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2762382. Kortrijk. (2019). Budafabriek. [online] Available at: https://www.kortrijk.be/adressen/budafabriek [Accessed 26 May 2019] Kurz Daniel, “City and Cooperatives, a Housing-Policy Symbiosis” within “New Housing in Zurich: Typologies for a Changing Society”, Zurich , April 2018 Le Familistère de Guise. (2019). Le Familistère de Laeken à Bruxelles. [online] Available at: https://www. familistere.com/fr/decouvrir/une-architecture-au-service-du-peuple/le-familistere-de-laeken [Accessed 20 Apr. 2019] Lefevre 1963 via Gemeentelijk Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Kortrijk Leiedal.be. (2019). Intercommunale Leiedal. [online] Available at: https://www.leiedal.be/ [Accessed 26 May 2019] Mercklé, Pierre. Charlesfourier.fr, www.charlesfourier.fr/spip.php?article707 accessed 8.03.2019 Pricem, Matlack G- “A pioneer in Apartment House Architecture- Memoir on Philip G. Hubert’s Work” Architectural record v. 36 1914 pg.74 Regusci, N. (2016). ZURICH. [Place of publication not identified]: DPR-BARCELONA., May 2015 Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2008) Social Enterprise as a Socially Rational Business, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2009) “Cooperative Social Enterprises: Company Rules, Access to Finance and Management Practice”, Social Enterprise Journal, 5(1) via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_ cooperative#cite_note-1 accessed 9.03.2019 Rooses, M. and Cauwelaert, F. (1913). “Vlaanderen door de eeuwen heen “ Amsterdam: Elsevier. Rosa Luxemburg, The Rosa Luxemburg Reader, ed. Peter Hudis and Kevin B. Anderson (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2004).” Rothschild, J., Allen-Whitt, J. (1986) The Cooperative Workplace, Cambridge University Press Schmid Peter, Zürich: Cooperative Housing in Switzerland and Zurich, 5th/6th February 2012 Steunpunt Data and Analyse Steekkaart demografie 2016 Demografische fiche KORTRIJK T.M. Thomas Isaac, Richard W. Franke, and Pyaralal Raghavan, “Democracy at Work in an Indian Industrial Cooperative. The Story of Kerala Dinesh Beedi,” Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998. Tattara, Martino, Home for Flanders Master Thesis Design Studio 2018-2019, KU Leuven, Campus Sint Lucas Thompson, A. Linda. (2016). Unemployment paradox: the story behind West Flanders’ low jobless rate | Flanders Today. [online] Flanderstoday.eu. Available at: http://www.flanderstoday.eu/business/unemploymentparadox-story-behind-west-flanders-low-jobless-rate [Accessed 17 Apr. 2019] Urbact.eu. (2019). Creative SpIN Final report | URBACT. [online] Available at: https://urbact.eu/files/creativespin-final-report [Accessed 26 May 2019]. http://thecityasaproject.org/2013/05/hannes-meyer-co-op-architecture/ accessed 10.03.2019 West-Vlaanderen Ontcijferd Sociaaleconomisch profiel van de provincie - editie 201 Wohnen, M. (2019). Home - MEHR ALS WOHNEN. [online] Mehralswohnen.ch. Available at: https://www. mehralswohnen.ch/ [Accessed 26 May 2019]

152

IMAGE SOURCES

Figures 1-44 are strictly used for academic purposes and their legal rights belong entirely to their respective authors as it follows: Fig 1 https://www.rochdalepioneersmuseum.coop/event/rochdale-pioneers-workers-education-wea-class-1908/ Fig 2 https://richviewutopia.wordpress.com/2016/02/10/charles-fourier-aerial-view-of-a-phalanstery-c-1814/ Fig 3 https://www.nyc-architecture.com/CHE/CHE001-ChelseaHotel.htm Fig 4 https://www.stuecheli.ch/en/projects/housing-development-kraftwerk-1/ Fig 6 https://fineartamerica.com/art/drawings/tourism?page=18 Fig 7 https://www.dezeen.com/2018/11/12/hannes-meyer-second-bauhaus-director/ Fig 8 https://www.bmiaa.com/the-co-op-principle-hannes-meyer-and-the-concept-of-collective-design/ Fig 9 https://www.bild-video-ton.ch/bestand/objekt/Sozarch_F_5107-Na-11-038-014 Fig 10 http://bolo.cnr.ch/ Fig 11 Hugentobler, M., Hofer, A. and Simmendinger, P. (n.d.). More than housing. Fig 12 personal plan archive of Andrada Galan Fig 14 https://www.wqxr.org/story/life-and-times-chelsea-hotel/slideshow/ Fig 15 Hayden, D. (1982). The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. MIT Press. Fig 16 Hayden, D. (1982). The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods, and Cities. MIT Press. Fig 17 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-plan-by-Howland-Deery-and-Owen-in-1885-for-a-block-ofindividual-freestanding_fig2_263423340 Fig 18 Katscher, Leopold. “Owen’s Topolobampo Colony, Mexico.” American Journal of Sociology 12, no. 2 (1906): 145-75. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2762382. Fig 19 Hugentobler, M., Hofer, A. and Simmendinger, P. (n.d.). More than housing. Fig 20 https://cargocollective.com/bmotylinska/VITRINE-CO-OP-2016-WARSAW Fig 21, 22, 23, 24 “A Brief History of the Workhome.” A Brief History of the Workhome « The Workhome Project. Accessed March 11, 2019. http://theworkhome.com/history-workhome/# Fig 25 De Decker, P. (2011). Understanding Housing Sprawl: The Case of Flanders, Belgium. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(7), pp.1634-1654. Fig 26, 27, 28, 29 De Meulder, Bruno. "Patching up the Belgian Urban Landscape." New Territories. Situations, Projects, Scenarios for the European City and Territor. Officina Edizioni/ IUAV, Q2 Quaderni Del Dottorato Di Ricerca in Urbanistica; Venezia, 2004. 47-68. Web. Fig 30 https://atelier-arc.eu/projets/infos/anciennes-usines-godin-0 Fig 31 http://www.lelogisfloreal.be/brochure-75ans.pdf Fig 24 https://www.archdaily.com/641278/brutopia-stekke-fraas Fig 32 De Decker, P. (2011). Understanding Housing Sprawl: The Case of Flanders, Belgium. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 43(7), pp.1634-1654. Fig 33 https://www.hullabaloo.be/stroom/transfo-zwevegem Fig 34 Stad Kortrijk 2018 https://www.kortrijk.be/ Fig 35, 36, 37, 38 https://www.kortrijk.be/ruimtelijke-ordening Fig 39,40,41 West-Vlaanderen Ontcijferd Sociaaleconomisch profiel van de provincie - editie 2015 Fig 42, 43 Stad Kortrijk 2018 https://www.kortrijk.be/ Fig 44 OMGEVINGSANALYSE Stad Kortrijk 2018 All images and visual material used beyond Chapter III are part of the personal archive and produced by Andrada Galan as part of the International Master of Science in Architecture at KU Leuven, Faculty of Architecture, Campus Sint-Lucas Ghent, Master Dissertation Project.

153

154

155

156